Case Study

Confronting Elon Musk? Nia vs. Tesla

19 pages
October 2025
Reference: IMD-2704

The case follows Kristin Hull, founder and CIO of Nia Impact Capital, a mission-driven investment firm in California, as she faces a pivotal decision in July 2025: Should she file a shareholder resolution against Tesla, Inc.? Hull and Nia have engaged Tesla for over five years on issues of human capital management, workplace equity and board oversight. In 2025, the stakes are higher. Tesla is facing mounting reputational, legal and operational risks, including civil rights litigation, governance controversies and product recalls, compounding the previous year’s 53% decline in profits. Now, Hull must decide between two draft resolutions: one framed in the language of social justice, the other in terms of business efficiency and governance. A third option is to total withdraw from the engagement. This decision must be made in a shifting US political and regulatory context marked by heightened scrutiny of environmental, social and governance (ESG) initiatives and a national rollback of diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) commitments. The polarized climate makes language and framing not just strategic choices but also existential ones: How can impact investors continue to advance their missions while maintaining legitimacy and influence in an increasingly hostile environment? Designed to mirror the complexity of real-world decision making, the case immerses students in an environment of competing pressures, contradictory information and media “noise.” It reflects the paradoxes impact investors face: staying true to the mission vs. maintaining strategic influence; framing issues in values-based vs. efficiency-based language; and exercising leadership amid political backlash and reputational risk. The case is suitable for courses on sustainable finance, non-market strategy, governance and leadership. It challenges students to explore fiduciary duty, rethink the role of shareholder engagement, and consider how language and framing can serve as tools of influence in turbulent times.

Learning Objective
  • Analyze the intentional use of language, tone and framing when communicating in politically charged and polarized contexts.
  • Critically reflect on paradoxes in high-stakes decision making – taking responsibility for one’s stance and suspending judgment, while recognizing that multiple, contradictory truths may coexist when one is making decisions.
Keywords
Sustainability, Corporate Governance, Inclusion, Equity, Diversity, Decision Making, Environmental Social and Governance, Sustainable Finance, Leadership, Turbulence, Gender Equality, Decent Work Conditions, Economic Growth, Peace, Justice, Strong Institution
Settings
America, United States of America
Nia Impact Capital, Finance and Insurance, Investment Management
2025
Type
Field Research
Copyright
© 2025
Available Languages
English
Related material
Teaching note
Case clearing houses
IMD case studies are distributed through case clearing houses. In order to browse the collection and purchase copies please visit the links below.

The Case Centre

Cranfield University

Wharley End Beds MK43 0JR, UK
Tel +44 (0)1234 750903
Email [email protected]

Harvard Business School Publishing

60 Harvard Way, Boston MA 02163, USA
Tel (800) 545-7685 Tel (617)-783-7600
Fax (617) 783-7666
Email [email protected]

Asia Pacific Case Center

NUCB Business School

1-3-1 Nishiki Naka
Nagoya Aichi, Japan 460-0003
Tel +81 52 20 38 111
Email [email protected]

Contact

Research Information & Knowledge Hub for additional information on IMD publications

Discover our latest research
IMD's faculty and research teams publish articles, case studies, books and reports on a wide range of topics