Company: Pinnacle Consulting (fictitious), a strategy and public policy advisory firm with 1,200 employees and clients across government, corporate, and social sectors.
Background
Pinnacle Consulting has built its reputation on being “apolitical, evidence-based, and trusted by all sides.” The firm advises state governments, multinational corporations, and NGOs—often on the same policy issues from different angles. Neutrality isn’t just a value. It’s a business necessity.
Ministers and mining executives sit in Pinnacle’s waiting room on the same day. The firm’s currency is credibility—the belief that its analysis is untainted by ideology or allegiance.
The situation
Raghav Singhania, a senior manager in the Public Policy practice, posts a long, impassioned LinkedIn article supporting a controversial new environmental regulation. The post is well-written, data-driven, and clearly reflects his personal conviction.
It also directly contradicts the position of one of Pinnacle’s largest clients—a mining conglomerate that has hired the firm to argue against the very regulation Raghav is defending.
Within 24 hours, the post goes viral. It gets 12,000 likes, 800 comments, and is shared across industry groups. Several comments tag Pinnacle Consulting, asking: “Is this your firm’s official position?”
The client calls. They are furious. “How can we trust your advice when your own employees are publicly campaigning against us?”
Internally, employees are divided. Some applaud Raghav for “speaking truth to power.” Others are embarrassed, saying he’s jeopardised the firm’s credibility. A few point out that his LinkedIn profile says “Views are my own”—which, they argue, should be enough.
Raghav defends himself: “This is my personal account. I posted on my own time. I have a right to my opinions. If Pinnacle wants to muzzle me, that’s a free speech issue.”
The dilemma
Should HR intervene and ask Raghav to take the post down—protecting the client relationship and the firm’s neutrality, but potentially violating his freedom of expression? Or stay out of it—upholding his right to personal opinions, but risking client trust and the firm’s apolitical brand?
What’s really at stake
This is a test of where personal identity ends and professional representation begins. In an era where employees are encouraged to have “personal brands” and “authentic voices,” can companies still expect them to self-censor on sensitive topics?
And when does an employee’s LinkedIn post stop being personal and start being a liability?
What HR leaders said
Debjani Roy, chief people officer (part-time), Valeur Fabtex
“Individual freedom of speech and boundaries of expression are definitely important in today’s world. However, when one joins an organisation, you’re entitled to your own expression outside official hours—but those opinions should not intervene on official matters.
In two organisations I was associated with, we had specific HR guidelines and a designated spokesperson entitled to speak to media or anybody outside on behalf of the organisation, especially on issues sensitive to clients, internal policies, or future plans.
If someone was passionate about speaking on an issue that overlapped with the organisation’s stand, they had to apply to management. They had to submit a disclaimer stating they would be bound by specifics, wouldn’t go into facts and figures, and wouldn’t transgress. That was an undertaking made public and submitted upfront.
This gave management leverage to act if something went against them, whilst ensuring the employee felt morally obligated to act within limits and knew what was permissible. Such practices managed to control embarrassing situations when it came to client confidentiality.
Today, curbing expression is difficult. Therefore, it’s important to have boundaries, which can only happen by entering into an agreement with the employee. Then it’s a win-win for both parties.
Chandrasekhar Mukherjee, senior HR professional and advisory board member
“Although there’s freedom of speech, once an employee joins an organisation they should never comment on anything contrary to the views and business model of the organisation. If you really feel very strongly and passionate about something sensitive and must speak at all, do so after putting in your resignation.
As a CHRO and key management personnel, if I get drunk in a hotel and misbehave with someone, it will spoil the reputation of the organisation because I’m carrying the badge of my organisation. If I’m CHRO of a company and get embroiled in some malpractice and am put behind bars, the news headlines will only say ‘CHRO of XYZ organisation arrested,’ not my name.
Even in school, if a student is reprimanded or blacklisted, parents and teachers highlight how the misbehaviour has put the family’s name or the school’s name to shame. The individual student’s name doesn’t matter then.
There’s a limit to freedom of speech. When an employee joins an organisation, they sign up for all that comes with the company, including its values.
Gopalji Mehrotra, CHRO, Acme Group
“Pinnacle Consulting would do well in holding onto its position of being ‘apolitical, evidence-based, and true to all sides’ rather than be cowed down by one client—because reputational cost is much higher than a client’s fee.
The same principle is furthered by not fettering Raghav in stating his personal opinions, which is tantamount to impinging on freedom of speech. Yes, there are rules of conduct for professionals in public companies, but he’s not in violation of any in this situation. HR should not feel the need to take any action.
It would serve Pinnacle best if they put out a statement supporting freedom of speech and calling out that they’re being true to their proclaimed values of being neutral and respecting all evidence-based opinions—which actually represents all their clients’ business interests best.
And yes, here’s the disclaimer: this opinion has been expressed in my personal capacity only (as learnt from this case)!”
Your turn
What would you do? Share your response in the comment box or share on LinkedIn with #HRKathaCaseInPoint
