Global brands, by definition, have been doing business in Russia. Almost 400 brands have decided to suspend operations in this country because of the conflict with Ukraine. Many reasons are given but, in each case, the considerations would have been thoughtful and informed by intelligence on the ground because while many companies would have felt that their stakeholders expect a response to the invasion, they would be thinking of implications for their business in Russia after the conflict is over.

Some companies, such as Burger King, Marriott and Marks & Spencer remain operational for now because of franchise agreements but they are still stating their opposition to the actions of Russia’s government. Others, such as Nestle and P&G, say they will continue to supply the essentials supporting the ‘humanitarian aspect’ of their business. The people of Russia will still need toothpaste, water and food, and reports are already circulating of rationing in Russian supermarkets and a shortage of staples such as sugar. Humans affected by this conflict are not only in Ukraine.

Further consideration must be given to the implications of allowing capital assets to default to the Russian government. Assets such as factories and production facilities could be repurposed for military production if the government moves ahead with nationalizing assets of foreign firms that leave.

The reaction is wide ranging and is not limited to the American mega-brands like Pepsi, McDonald’s, Starbucks and Coca-Cola. L’Oreal and Estee Lauder are closing shops. Burberry and Chanel are suspending sales. Ikea and Uniqlo are now joining the movement. Technology brands, energy companies, financial services and even the big business consultancies are also cutting ties or suspending operations.

Many of these companies are still paying their Russian workers and maintaining back-office operations, sensibly considering the Russian interpretation of ‘return to work’ for when the conflict subsides. However, these actions will not satisfy those commentators, activists and stakeholders calling for complete withdrawal. Managing communication during this time will be vita—, it is a two-way discipline so listening will be as important as talking.

Of course, scenarios must be considered for the escalation of the crisis. The future involvement of China and India is still a possibility and the stance they will take could lead to an inflection point in the balance of the world economy. China and Russia are aligned against the economic hegemony of America and China would not want to see a weakened Russia and a resurgent, unified West, and yet that is exactly what Russia’s actions have created.

As many have already pointed out, there is no proven formula for the answer as to how to react to the situation. All considerations will be unique, and all must be thought through carefully. However, there are some common questions that companies must consider, questions that have been drawn from previous situations and the experts who guided their companies through the crisis.

These may seem obvious, but they do need to be considered carefully to shape your longer-term actions.

• Business: How is your business affected directly and indirectly the interests of Russia?
• Employees: How is your employee base affected directly with colleagues in the counties in conflict and indirectly with global colleagues? What are the sentiments and expectations of your workforce for action?
• Consumers: Similarly, what do you know about the desires and expectations of your consumers? Is there a risk in inaction? Is there an upside to taking a stand?
• Partners: Equally, how is your entire network of partners from supply chain to agencies impacted?
• Government: are there expectations from legislation, sanctions and other actions that will affect your business?
• Media: What is the current stance of the media in your major markets and how are they covering the corporate response to the situation?
• Investors: Is there emerging pressure from your stakeholders for immediate action?
• Future Stakeholders: And finally, what will your stakeholders of the future remember you for? Those at school and at college will be your next generation of employees, investors, customers and partners and they have greater access than ever before to news and analysis. If you act, they will see it.

Once you have a real grasp of the desires and expectations of each of your stakeholder groups, then there are two critical factors to consider:

Focus on the people not on the politics: there is no doubt that this conflict arises from political and economic ambitions but as a global brand, you must focus on the people. Roman Abramovich the owner of Chelsea football club in the UK handled this well when he declared the net proceeds from the disposal of the team would go to a foundation dedicated to helping the victims of war in Ukraine. Of course, those victims could include bereaved mothers of Russian soldiers just as much as displaced families in Ukraine.

Balance your short-term obligations with long-term implications: You will feel pressure to act now but you must try and project forward to imagine how your actions and words in this moment will affect your business trajectory over the longer term. Look back to case histories from Kosovo/Serbia/Bosnia, Vietnam, Korea and even WWII to see the long arc of implication for brand action. What you do now will be remembered and will color the judgment of what you do after the conflict ends, and this will affect your fortune in the global market.

These are difficult times for brands to navigate with a corridor of uncertainty ahead of us. Staying informed, listening to your people and scenario-planning for the mid-term are vital responsibilities of the C-suite. There are no right answers but there are right actions.