Top Five Predictions for 2024 (Asia)

Champion US baseball manager Casey Stengel once said, “Never make predictions, especially about the future”.

Since 2015, we haven’t been able to help ourselves.

Peering into the year, and based on work in and observations of the practice of corporate public affairs internationally, our predictions focus on the most significant trends and developments likely to affect the function and your work in it.

Our 2023 Top Five Predictions (see at the end of the Top Predictions 2024) were mostly spot on. Except our prediction that international sustainability standards would be in the market by the end of that year was stymied when the International Sustainability Standards Board decided it would instead release two standards this year.

So, buckle in. From geopolitics, Artificial Intelligence, corporate responsibility, data analytics, and the expanding role of the head of function, 2024 will be rife with challenges, excitement, and change for corporate public affairs.

1. Sustainability as a scapegoat

“If only the company kept its eye on the main game” is an admonition oft muttered with sage intent when companies with significant sustainability commitments and good ESG performance stumble financially.

Lashing ESG commitments and performance to the public square whipping post when companies stumble has been frequent in past years, and is likely to be far more frequent during this year as more corporations commit to and report on ESG performance.

Given corporate ESG has become politicised the US, including by sections of the news media, and there have been similar efforts to do so in parts of Asia, including South Korea and Australia (largely unsuccessful to date), 2024 will see many more corporate public affairs teams defending ESG commitments as good for business.

The challenge for heads of function and their senior executive peers will most likely to be to balance public positioning of the ESG expectations of stakeholders – including investment analysts, shareholders, and other significant stakeholders – with responding to political and news media pressure (much of it uninformed as to how corporations operate) for companies to ‘stick to their knitting’ and get on with the business of business.

(We note US sustainability researcher and commentator Andrew Winton wrote last year on the primacy of maximising profits for shareholders over the interests of stakeholders: “If a focus on sustainability causes failures, then are the companies that focus only on shareholder profits always successful? Of course not. The failure rate for companies is high: roughly 50 per cent of small businesses close within about five years. Even among the Fortune 500 giants, failure is the norm. Of the original list in 1955, only 60 of them survived until the late 2010s. Obsessing over shareholder value didn’t save 88 per cent of the biggest companies.” ).

2. AI and corporate reputation

As corporate public affairs teams begin voyages of discovery to use Generative AI to analyse regulatory reports, generate and edit social media and other stakeholder communication content, generate images, and contribute to stakeholder typology work, the biggest AI challenge may be managing the corporate reputation impacts of how the organisation harnesses AI.

As of today, only a human holding the pen can mitigate the significant reputation damage that can result from the corporation making decisions based on outputs of Generative AI that may be wrong, either because inputs to AI analysis and content were incorrect, or the analysis is flawed.

According to McKinsey (August, 2023), the main legal risks of companies using AI outputs are include they may infringe copyright, scrape data that are illegally sourced, invade privacy, or violate regulation are real and present dangers.

These risks are reputation risks also, and if not already there, will; be on reputation risk radars in 2024. Expect more corporate public affairs leaders to be intimately involved in internal policy discussions about how AI is used in the enterprise, and how this relates to the type of regulation being discussed in Singapore, Japan, China, and South Korea.

Then there are the ethical conundrums around the extent to which corporations disclose they are using AI in their supply chains and workflow, and how they are doing so.

Look out also for more corporate simulations focused on crises sparked by the use/misuse of Generative AI.

3. Hail to the Chief

During the past two decades, it was not unheard of that the head of corporate public affairs also doubled as the Chief of Staff to the CEO – a tough gig but executed with deft capability at international companies in Australia, Singapore, and Hong Kong.

The single executive working as head of corporate public affairs and CEO chief of staff has become more common in corporations globally, including Australia, especially in corporations operating in highly regulated industries in which social license granted by stakeholders is an essential ingredient in business success.

For companies in these industries relationships with legislators, regulators, industry associations, and other stakeholders carry considerable importance, and in some of them, there has been a business case for the head of the office of the CEO to be the head of corporate affairs to ensure the chief executive officer is the chief engagement officer also.

Although not universal, many heads of function/chief of staff executives have worked previously in ministerial or senior opposition party offices, fast-paced and high-octane environments in which socio-political nous and advanced issues management and stakeholder engagement skills are valued highly.

In Asia Pacific, there has been growth in the number of executives wearing these two corporate hats (kickstarted by the closer proximity of head of function to CEOs and boards during the COVID-19 pandemic), and we predict this year will see the dual role become even more common in corporations across the region.

4. Data analytics are here

Separate from our prediction about AI and corporate reputation – however, acknowledging some cross-over in how data is analysed – a significant number of corporate public affairs teams are this year planning to establish data analytic capabilities in the function, or to bolster existing capability.

The currency of good corporate public affairs is information that can inform decisions and be an input to early identification of business and broader stakeholder and reputation issues to be managed.

Many global corporations including some in banking and finance and resources in Australia have for the past few years established data analytic teams in the function to focus on descriptive analysis, diagnostic analytics, predictive analysis, and cognitive analysis to inform stakeholder engagement, issues management, and reputation stewardship.

Data analytics can inform functional strategy, and strategy in disciplines including internal communications, community relations, government relations and policy, and stakeholder engagement (including messaging).

Typically, a seasoned corporate public affairs executive heads the functional analytical team supported by the technical skills of a data analyst.

Generative AI can be part of the suite of analytic tools. However, it is but one option to harness.

Data can set you free in the public affairs world. Establishing/bolstering a data analytics capability is a good start on that path.

5. All eyes on Tuesday November 5: the US Presidential Election

Whatever the outcome of the US Presidential Election on November 5 this year it will, have an impact on many markets in Asia, on the evolution of free trade, and geopolitics in the Asia Pacific region.

Business has for decades said that as much predictability and consistency as possible is good for business in a world of competing values, governance, and political and economic systems. It has been commonly agreed that disruption of industries via discovery, innovation, and new business models, and new ways of governing institutions and nations, is most effective within agreed frameworks – a type of consensus, albeit contested frequently.

Debate (much of it rancorous) in the US about its democratic institutions, the pillars of its economic policy and institutions, and the future nature of its relationships with its long-term allies means policymakers in the Asia Pacific, including in business, are thinking about the implications for the region and its economies, trade outlook, and its geopolitical stability.

Boards of directors in particular are concerned with strategy and how the world economy and international framework for conducting business can be and is affected by the actions of world powers including China, Russia, the US, and the EU.

Heads of function in many organisations have taken the initiative to secure expertise (mostly external) to provide briefings and facilitate discussions with boards and senior management teams about the likely economic, political, and geopolitical policy implications of a win by the likely Democratic or Republican nominee on November 5, and what it may mean to their company, industry, and the nation.

Expect 2024 to be a US election year during which organisational demand to understand the implications of the result on November 5 will be high.