Intercom’s Pride row shows the fickleness of corporate allegiance to LGBTQI+ causes

The decision by Irish tech company Intercom to withdraw its support for Pride has understandably sparked employee discontent. Under the leadership of co-founder and chief executive Eoghan McCabe, the company has halted its backing of Pride initiatives, and pulled back from other forms of celebrating diversity, like putting up office decorations and engaging in community-organised social events. McCabe said the decision was because the company wanted to focus on its work and that “what’s really tough now is that Pride has got wrapped up, unfortunately, within some circles in kind of more divisive and political issues.”

These changes, announced in internal communications seen by The Irish Times, may leave even the most self-assured employees feeling more like the cogs in the profit machine than valued teammates.

Generally, I am sceptical about the co-opting of sociopolitical causes by those who are concerned primarily with maximising profits. The two rarely mix successfully.

However, there is something about McCabe’s decision that is more disillusioning than the usual complaints about the corporatisation of Pride - which, it’s worth pointing out, is at its root a protest movement and is by definition political.

Your top stories on Thursday

---

Inside the early morning operation to move asylum seekers from Mount Street encampment

---

Hannah Daly: Batteries are vital to ending fossil fuel dependence

---

Dave Hannigan: Grotesque Tyson-Paul spectacle the very antithesis of a real sporting event

---

The abrupt discontinuation of what was once a very public, almost zealous, backing of an event promoting LGBTQI+ equality smacks of so-called “performative allyship”. This is the variety of solidarity that is seasonal and volatile, prone to evaporate as soon as the cause in question sparks political tension or controversy, or when cost-cutting becomes a more urgent priority.

Rewind the clock just a few years and you will discover that 2019 was an exceptional year of LGBTQI+ allyship for the Dublin and San-Francisco-headquartered tech company. Its activities are meticulously listed on its website. It donated €10,000 to BeLonG To Youth Services; it facilitated the delivery of 90-minute LGBTQ+-focused DEI sessions to its Dublin and London-based branches; it had an outdoor picnic in San Francisco; a rooftop BBQ in Chicago; LGBTQ+ screenings in London; a breakfast for “LGBTQ+ employees, allies, friends and family” on the morning of the Dublin Pride parade. It “cheered on” the parade as it marched towards Merrion Square.

[ Irish tech company facing employee unrest after new policy ended support for Pride ]

[ Intercom integrates Chat GPT features into customer service platform ]

In common with other tech firms, Intercom appeared to wholeheartedly embrace the public promotion of LGBTQI+ equality. It had allocated a budget and sponsorship to InterProud, a group specially created for its LGBTQI+ employees and allies. And when Covid hit it redoubled its efforts by moving events and workshops on “the ABCs of LGBT and trans awareness” online.

Even “in the face of a global pandemic” it determinedly “carried the spirit of Pride”. After all, its website says so.

Few things scream performative allyship more than the compulsion to loudly proclaim all the ways in which you have been an exemplary ally. But in the grand scheme of things, Intercom, just like countless other businesses, might be forgiven its well-intentioned displays of solidarity.

Companies aligning themselves to causes is not just part of the corporate landscape but, in some cases, a prerequisite for selling products or services to certain demographics. Showcasing your values is increasingly important in a competitive labour market, where it can factor in the decisions of prospective employees about where to work.

The irony is that the only countries in the world in which the corporatisation of Pride might actually prove genuinely meaningful are those in which it remains illegal to wave a rainbow flag or march through the streets. In countries like Iran, Saudi Arabia, Nigeria or Yemen, corporate Pride would signal a historic shift towards the acceptance of social identities which are not just belittled but outlawed, even carrying the penalty of death.

But here, while support for Pride or even the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement can foster a vital sense of camaraderie and acceptance among marginalised employees, it somehow feels more shallow.

[ Do fund managers care about ESG? Perhaps not ]

[ Software firm makes environmental, social and governance issues that bit easier ]

The fickleness of corporate allegiance to the cause can be striking - such as when Bud Light recently pulled back from a social media promotion involving trans influencer and activist Dylan Mulvaney, after it sparked conservative-led boycotts and the company’s sales dropped by 25 per cent.

While abandoning a marketing campaign or employee initiative on the basis of a backlash - or even during a period of job losses such as those announced last year by Intercom - may be a prudent economic decision, it risks looking like a step away from publicly declared inclusivity and diversity targets. A spokesperson for Intercom told The Irish Times that “Companies that do not apply very high degrees of focus to their work will struggle. We’re deprioritising absolutely everything that does not directly contribute to our success and it’s yielding great results.”

There’s the rub - the fundamental incompatibility of activism and commercial interests.

The ending of Intercom’s corporate support for Pride highlights a moral and philosophical question: what exactly are a company’s obligations when it comes to “inclusiveness”? There is a danger of conflating workplace inclusivity with the notion that employers should financially support and invest in the diverse range of sociopolitical causes championed by their employees. This would be neither warranted nor economically viable.

Workplace inclusivity means adhering to the principle of hiring individuals based solely on their relevant skills and ability (without bias towards their age, race, sexuality, gender identity and so on), and fostering an environment where such individuals may work free of harassment and abuse. You can have rainbow flags everywhere and not be an inclusive workplace.

Still, you’d have to wonder about the wisdom of Intercom’s decision to suspend employee resource groups. Not because such a decision is “un-inclusive,” but because employee bonding and work socials can have a tangible impact on productivity – something which McCabe is apparently very keen to maximise.