Lenskart, one of India’s largest omnichannel eyewear companies, recently faced significant public attention following a controversy linked to an internal grooming or style guide document that circulated on social media.
The document, which was widely shared online, raised concerns regarding the treatment of religious symbols in workplace appearance guidelines. Specifically, it triggered debate around whether certain forms of religious expression were being treated differently from others.
While the company clarified that the document was outdated and not reflective of current policy, the issue had already gained momentum across digital platforms.
See this post on our Linkedin Account
Trigger Event: Policy Interpretation and Public Perception
The controversy originated from:
- Circulation of an alleged internal grooming guideline
- Public interpretation that certain religious symbols were restricted
- Questions raised regarding consistency and neutrality in workplace policies
A public commentary by a known writer amplified the issue, bringing it into mainstream discussion. At this stage, the matter transitioned from an internal policy discussion to a broader public debate.
Escalation Dynamics: From Policy Issue to Viral Controversy
The situation evolved rapidly through multiple stages:
Stage 1: Document Circulation
- The document gained traction on social media
- Initial concerns were raised regarding policy interpretation
Stage 2: Public Debate
- Discussions expanded to themes of identity, inclusion, and workplace expression
- Users began sharing opinions and interpretations
Stage 3: Company Response
- The company clarified that the document was outdated
- It confirmed that employees are allowed to wear religious symbols
- A revised style guide was issued allowing cultural and religious markers
Stage 4: Secondary Narratives
- Claims from some current and former employees suggested inconsistencies in implementation
- These narratives contributed to continued public skepticism
Stage 5: Viral Amplification
- Social media saw a surge in visual content
- Videos of individuals breaking eyewear products and calling for a boycott emerged
- The issue transitioned into symbolic and performative expressions
At this stage, the controversy expanded beyond policy into perception and sentiment.
Key Risk Dimensions Identified
From a risk management perspective, this case highlights multiple interconnected risks:
1. Reputational Risk
- Negative sentiment spread rapidly across digital platforms
- Brand perception shifted due to perceived inconsistency
- Boycott calls amplified visibility of the issue
Reputation risk became the most immediate and visible impact.
2. Policy and Governance Risk
- Internal documentation that was outdated or unclear created ambiguity
- Lack of alignment between documented policy and perceived practice led to confusion
- Absence of proactive disclosure increased interpretational risk
3. Communication Risk
- Initial response focused on clarification rather than anticipation
- Timing of communication influenced public perception
- Messaging did not fully address underlying concerns for some stakeholders
4. Social Media Amplification Risk
- Digital platforms accelerated the spread of narratives
- Visual content increased emotional engagement
- Multiple viewpoints created a self-reinforcing cycle
5. Employee Experience Risk
- Claims from employees highlighted potential gaps in policy implementation
- Perception of inconsistency impacted credibility
- Internal alignment became a point of external scrutiny
Risk Amplification Factors
Several factors contributed to the scale of the controversy:
- Sensitivity of the topic involving religion and identity
- Rapid dissemination of unverified or partial information
- Participation from multiple stakeholders including customers, employees, and influencers
- Transition from text-based discussion to visual viral content
These factors created a feedback loop that sustained the issue.
Organizational Response and Control Measures
The company took several steps:
- Public clarification regarding the status of the policy
- Issuance of a revised and transparent style guide
- Acknowledgment that earlier communication may have caused discomfort
While these steps addressed the policy dimension, the broader challenge remained managing perception and trust.
Lessons in Risk Management and Governance
This case provides important insights for organizations:
1. Proactive Policy Governance
- Regular review and updating of internal policies
- Clear documentation aligned with current practices
- Anticipation of potential sensitivities
2. Consistency Between Policy and Practice
- Ensuring uniform implementation across locations
- Monitoring adherence through internal controls
3. Strategic Communication Framework
- Early and transparent communication
- Addressing both facts and stakeholder concerns
- Maintaining clarity and consistency in messaging
4. Social Media Risk Preparedness
- Monitoring digital sentiment in real time
- Rapid response protocols for emerging issues
- Managing narrative through factual communication
5. Multi-Stakeholder Sensitivity
- Recognizing diverse stakeholder perspectives
- Aligning policies with cultural and social contexts
Building a Reputational Risk Management Framework
Organizations can strengthen resilience through:
- Establishing Reputation Risk Committees
- Creating Policy Review Boards for sensitive areas
- Developing Crisis Communication Playbooks
- Implementing Real-Time Monitoring Systems
- Conducting Employee Feedback Audits
These mechanisms support early detection and structured response.
Conclusion
The Lenskart case illustrates how a localized policy issue can evolve into a large-scale reputational challenge in a digital environment. The speed and scale of escalation highlight the importance of integrated risk management across policy, communication, and governance.
In today’s environment, managing risk is not limited to compliance. It requires alignment between internal practices and external perception, supported by structured governance frameworks.
Building Practical Capability in Reputational Risk Management
To manage such complex scenarios, professionals require structured training in risk identification, governance, and crisis response.
Programs offered by Risk Management Association of India and Smart Online Course focus on:
• Reputational risk and crisis management frameworks
• Policy governance and internal control alignment
• Social media risk monitoring and response
• Stakeholder communication strategies
• Real-world case-based learning
These programs help professionals build the capability to manage evolving risks in dynamic environments.
