- The ERG Movement
- Posts
- The Strategic Shift: Building High-Impact ERGs Without the 'Commerce' Pillar
The Strategic Shift: Building High-Impact ERGs Without the 'Commerce' Pillar
A comprehensive guide to refuting the traditional 4C model (specifically the Commerce pillar) and the rebranding to BRG
Maceo Owens
October 22, 2025
The Core Challenge: Why 'Commerce' and 'BRG' Undermine Success
Employee Resource Groups are foundational to internal culture, belonging, and engagement. However, many programs adopt the "4C Model"—Community, Culture, Career, and Commerce—or rebrand as Business Resource Groups (BRGs) to secure executive buy-in.
This framework, particularly the requirement for ERGs to drive direct revenue (Commerce), fundamentally dilutes the core purpose of these groups, creates operational risk, and leads to volunteer burnout.
We’re challenging the push to turn ERGs into business units. ERGs don’t need to generate revenue or be renamed BRGs to prove their value.
The Objective: To establish ERGs as essential people-centered cost centers that deliver critical business value through employee engagement, retention, and stability—not through revenue generation. Additional context on our series of newsletters on this topic can be found here.
Part 1: The Business Case for People-First ERGs (Nine Critical Wins)
1. Securing the Foundation: Protect the Core Mission of Belonging (Reason #1)
The Problem: The primary purpose of an ERG is to build internal community and shape company culture for its members. When "Commerce" (revenue generation) is given equal weight as a pillar, the core function becomes an afterthought, forced to compete for attention and resources.
The Result: ERGs shift from being spaces of belonging and culture-building to unpaid, transaction-focused business units.
2. Defining True Value: ERGs as Essential Cost-Avoidance Centers (Reasons #2 & #3)
ERGs as Infrastructure: ERGs are People-Centered Cost Centers, similar to Legal, IT, Learning & Development (L&D), and HR. Their value is measured in risk reduction, retention, and cultural stability, not sales.
The Inconsistency: Functions like L&D and Employee Engagement often have large budgets based on utilization and internal value. Asking ERGs (powered by unpaid volunteers) to generate revenue sets an inequitable and unsustainable standard that paid departments don't face.
The Real Business Value: ERGs are internal brand ambassadors and trust agents. Their value is expressed through cost avoidance (e.g., higher retention, faster onboarding, lower burnout), which directly impacts profitability.
3. Maximizing ROI: Increase Volunteer Retention and Engagement (Reasons #4 & #5)
Unqualified Consultants: Lived experience is crucial for community, but it is not the same as subject matter expertise in product development or marketing. Asking ERG leads to advise on external campaigns exposes the company to risk if their feedback leads to product or campaign failure. They are not certified, insured, or scoped for consulting.
Volunteer Motivation: Most ERG leads join to build belonging, mentorship, and connection—not to hit ROI targets. Requiring commerce turns a purpose-driven volunteer role into an unpaid consulting gig, leading to resentment and burnout.
4. Upholding Integrity: Ensure Ethical and Strategic Clarity (Reasons #6 & #7)
The Ethics of Exploitation: Tying an employee's right to community and resourced support to their ability to make the company money is ethically questionable. It suggests employees only "deserve" connection if their identity can be commercialized.
Desperation, Not Strategy: The drive for "Commerce" often stems from Program Managers struggling to articulate the value of community, leading to a fear-based, reactionary strategy to appease skeptical executives. This focus prioritizes optics over operational integrity.
5. Proactive Risk Mitigation: Reduce External Reputational Exposure (Reason #8)
Increased Vulnerability: In a climate of DEI scrutiny, rebranding an ERG as a "Business Resource Group" and tying it to external commerce repositions the program directly into the political crosshairs.
No Protection: Untrained volunteer leaders are suddenly thrown into high-stakes territory, where a well-intentioned overstep can lead to legal, political, or reputational fallout (e.g., brand controversy). Executives will rarely defend a vague "business alignment" in the heat of controversy.
6. Ensuring Compliance: Eliminate Wage, IP, and Unionization Risk (Reason #9)
Legal Risk | Description | Compliance Trigger |
"It’s Giving Union" | Positioning identity-based groups as strategic advisors for external decisions blurs the line, potentially leading members to believe they have authority over internal workplace conditions (acting like an unauthorized bargaining unit). | Perception that the group is advocating on behalf of a protected class to management. |
Wage & Hour Violations | If non-exempt (hourly) employees perform any structured or expected ERG work outside of scheduled hours, the company is required to track and compensate that time under the FLSA. | Any required ERG activity performed off the clock by hourly employees. |
IP and Liability | If a volunteer ERG lead contributes a commercially successful idea (product, campaign, vendor), the lack of clear contracts or role definitions can lead to disputes over intellectual property ownership and credit. | Unpaid contributions that are later commercialized by the business. |
When faced with common objections, shift the conversation from revenue to internal stability and risk mitigation.
Pushback Statement | Strategic Response | Key Principle |
"We need ROI to prove impact." | "Our ROI is high: retention and risk mitigation. We are a cost-avoidance center, similar to Legal or L&D. Pushing volunteers to generate revenue creates massive legal exposure (e.g., wage and IP risks) that directly costs the business." (Reference: Reasons #2, #3, #9) | Measure Value, Not Price. |
"The name BRG makes us sound grown up/maturing." | "The ERG name is more authentic to our purpose of 'Belonging.' A premature rebrand signals to our members that 'community wasn't enough,' which weakens engagement and increases volunteer burnout. Maturity is in our structure, not the label." (Reference: Reasons #1, #5) | Structure Over Semantics. |
"Our Execs love the Commerce Pillar." | "We need to focus their attention on risk. The 4C model is catchy, but it forces us to prioritize a weak 'Commerce' pillar over protecting the business from significant legal and reputational risks. Furthermore, it distracts from what members and ERG leaders actually want (Connection, Growth, Giveback). We are proposing a strategic narrowing of scope that reduces risk, which is an easy pivot for executive sponsors to accept from us as the SMEs." (Reference: Reasons #7, #8) | Lead with Expertise. |
"We’ve had success with the Commerce Pillar." | "Those successful commerce projects should be celebrated as high-value bonuses, but we cannot make them the program baseline. Basing our core strategy on bonuses leads directly to volunteer burnout and forces the program away from its core mission." (Reference: Reasons #4, #5) | Bonuses vs. Baselines. |
Part 3: The CGG Framework: A Human-Centered Alternative
If you must use "pillars" to structure your programming, organize them around Member Goals, not corporate objectives. This ensures alignment with the employee experience.
The three top reasons employees join and engage with ERGs are the foundation of this model:
Goal | Description | Business Alignment (ROI) |
Connect | To meet people, network, and build authentic community. | Retention & Engagement: Reduces isolation, builds cross-functional relationships, and promotes cultural stability. |
Grow | To learn new skills, expand perspective, and develop professionally/personally. | L&D Pipeline: Supplements formal Learning & Development, improves peer mentorship, and accelerates internal mobility. |
Give | To give back, pay it forward, and contribute to meaningful causes (mentoring, volunteerism). | Purpose & Loyalty: Increases employee satisfaction, aligns employee values with company mission, and boosts employer reputation. |
Note:
Nothing in this email should be considered legal advice. I’m sharing general insights based on ERG best practices and industry experience. Always consult your organization’s legal team when making decisions about employee groups, compensation, or policy interpretation.
The “4C Model” is a registered trademark. All references are for critique, commentary, or educational purposes only and do not imply endorsement or affiliation
Reply