Accusation and Defense of Brett Kavanaugh

On the final days of interviews with Brett Kavanaugh to become a Supreme Court Justice, a woman has accused him of sexual assault when they were teenagers, more than 30 years ago. Professor Christine Blasey Ford wanted to stay anonymous, but she is now known as the one who claims Kavanaugh assaulted her at a Georgetown Preparatory School party when she was 15 and Kavanaugh was 17. She revealed her allegation in a letter to her congressman. Dr. Blasey believes that she would have been raped if Kavanaugh weren’t drunk. Both will testify on Monday.

For leadership and business communication students, let’s look at the arguments on both sides. Here is some of the evidence presented so far:

• Twenty-four women who attended private school with Dr. Blasey supported her in a signed letter “to attest to her honesty, integrity, and intelligence.” (For some letter-writing history, read the defense of Professor Avital Ronell and the subsequent explanation.)

• Dr. Blasey passed a polygraph test, but critics say the test is imperfect for proving truthfulness.

• Although Dr. Blasey doesn’t remember some details (for example, whose house they were at), trauma experts say this is typical for people who experience such a trauma.

• Kavanaugh denies the incident: “I categorically and unequivocally deny this allegation. I did not do this back in high school or at any time.”

• Mark Judge, Kavanaugh’s roommate at the time, said, “I have no memory of this alleged incident." Dr. Blasey claims he was in the room during the incident. Judge also said, "It's just absolutely nuts. I never saw Brett act that way.” He also said they were raised in Catholic homes that didn’t tolerate such behavior and that Kavanaugh was “brilliant” and not “into anything crazy or illegal.” Judge wrote a book, Wasted: Tales of a GenX Drunk, about his time at Georgetown Prep.

• Kavanaugh’s high school yearbook has become public and is “raising eyebrows,” as MSNBC and CNN both report. The yearbook includes captions such as “Do these guys beat their wives?” and “100 kegs or bust,” indicating a party culture. Mark Judge’s yearbook page, shown here, includes a quote: “Certain women should be struck regularly, like gongs.”

The FBI and/or congressional investigation is a nearly impossible task. Does this evidence help?

Cover image source. Yearbook image source.

Discussion:

• Which of these evidence points do you consider most and lease relevant to the question of whether Kavanaugh sexually assaulted Dr. Blasey?

• What biases might you bring to the analysis? Think about your own assumptions and how they might affect your interpretation.

• What advice would you give to members of Senate Judiciary Committee as they decide what happened and, ultimately, whether Kavanaugh should be elected to the highest court position.

Changes at Riot Games

Following allegations of sexism, Riot Games has apologized and is making changes. A long report by Kotaku placed blame mostly on the fast company growth and sexist working environment.

Trying to shed its “bro-culture” stigma, leaders have acknowledged that the company could be more inclusive. In a long statement last month titled, “Our First Steps Forward,” the company starts by apologizing to “to all those we’ve let down.” The statement then lists steps the company will take around inclusion initiatives, staffing, training, and so on

In a more recent statement, the company announced hiring a “leadership and strategy expert,” Frances Frei, who had also worked with Uber. The statement includes this quotation from Frei:

“After spending time with Riot’s leadership and many others across the organization, it became clear that Riot is truly putting everything on the table and committing to evolving its culture. In my interactions with Rioters, I’ve seen extraordinary levels of engagement on these issues across the company. Every Rioter with whom I’ve met truly cares about inclusion, which means real change is possible. Riot isn’t interested simply in fixing problems on the surface, it has the ambition to be an industry leader and to provide a roadmap for others to follow. I share that ambition and am eager to help Riot navigate this process.”

Frei image source.

Discussion:

• Read Kotaku’s report. How credible do you find the investigation and reporting? What could increase the credibility?

• Assess Riot Games’ statement. Who is the audience and what are the communication objectives? How do the organization, writing style, and tone affect your assessment?

• Now assess the statement about Frei. What’s your view of including Frei’s statement? What else, if anything, should be included in the statement?

• Overall, how well is Riot Games demonstrating accountability? What other leadership character dimensions are demonstrated?

Disneyland Employees Speak Out

Disney employees are on screen in a New York Times op-ed video, "I Work at the Happiest Place on Earth. Why Can’t I Pay My Rent?" A 30-year concierge and a cosmetologist are featured more prominently. One is currently living in her car, and another says, tearfully, that she has spent time in her car. Both say they love their jobs, but along with 75% of Disneyland employees, they can't afford to pay "basic expenses every month." Data comes from a questionnaire and report, "Working for the Mouse."

The argument is for Disney to pay a living wage, and the call is for citizens to vote for an Anaheim proposal that affects Disneyland employees and some local hotel workers. In the video, one claim is that real wages have declined because of inflation—what $15 per hour bought seven years ago isn't the same today.

Business leaders who are fighting the measure say that the increase would hurt jobs. One local Chamber of Commerce member argued, "We estimate 3-4,000 jobs lost over next year or two by companies having to absorb this new increased cost. They're going to reduce hours and reduce jobs."

Senator and former presidential candidate Bernie Sanders is also featured in the video. He is proposing a bill he calls "Stop BEZOS" to tax Amazon and other large companies for public assistance received by their employees. The idea is for companies with 500 or more employees to pay the government back for support paid to their employees who cannot survive on earned wages.

Image source.

Discussion:

• How well does the video make the case for higher wages? Which are logical and which are emotional appeals? What evidence is presented?
• Assess the credibility of the questionnaire and report, "Working for the Mouse." From your assessment, what makes the report both credible and questionable? In what ways does the report reflect business communication standards, and in what ways does it fall short?
• Research the impact of raising wages on industry, for example, this Cornell report. What's your view of this argument? It's a complicated question because of different industries, locations, labor supply, rates, etc.
• In what ways do the employees featured in the video demonstrate courage? What risks did they take in appearing on screen?

Twitter Denies Shadow Banning

"Shadow Banning" was a big topic at yesterday's Senate Intelligence Committee hearings with Facebook and Twitter. Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey denied the claim that tweets are suppressed based on political ideology. But he did admit that candidates' tweets were affected in search results.

In a blog post, Twitter executives explained the definition of shadow banning and denied the practice. The post also explains how search results are ranked:

• Tweets from people you’re interested in should be ranked highly
• Tweets that are popular are likely to be interesting and should be higher ranked
• Tweets from bad-faith actors who intend to manipulate or divide the conversation should be ranked lower

The executives confirm a technical issue that prevented Republican politicians tweets from showing up in searches, but they write, "some Democratic politicians were not properly showing up within search auto-suggestions as result of this issue." Like Dorsey, they don't specify numbers affected on each side.

Cover image source.

Discussion:

• Assess Dorsey's response to Representative Joe Barton's questions. How well did he respond? How do you assess his delivery skills?
• How well does Twitter take responsibility in the blog post?
• How well does the blog post explain the situation and defend the search results?

Nike Takes a Chance on Kaepernick

Former National Football League quarterback Colin Kaepernick will be the new celebrity face of Nike's "Just Do It" campaign. Kaepernick was the center of controversy when players were both complimented and criticized for "taking a knee" to protest racism and promote social justice.

Nike and Kaepernick already had a sponsorship deal, but this new contract extends it. The deal may be "awkward," to use The New York Times's phrase, because the NFL has not been able to stop player protests, to the dismay of President Trump and others.

Also, Kaepernick hasn't played in the league since 2016 and has an active grievance, accusing the league of conspiring to prevent him from playing.

But neither Nike nor Kaepernick are shying away from the message. The first ad shows Kaepernick with the caption, "Believe in something. Even if it means sacrificing everything."

As part of the deal, Nike will contribute to "Know Your Rights," Kaepernick's foundation to "fight oppression of all kinds globally, through education and social activism.

Discussion:

• What risks is Nike taking with this contract? Do you believe the campaign will be well received, divisive, or something else?

• Nike didn't respond to The New York Times for comment about the story. Should the company include a comment or make a statement? Why or why not?

• What leadership character dimensions are illustrated by this story?

In-N-Out Responds to Boycott

Eric Bauman, chair of the California Democratic Party, called for a boycott of In-N-Out Burger for donating $25,000 to the GOP, but the company had a strong defense. Bauman tweeted to his 11,000 followers:

“Et tu In-N-Out? Tens of thousands of dollars donated to the California Republican Party . . . it’s time to #BoycottInNOut — let Trump and his cronies support these creeps . . . perhaps animal style!”

But Bauman didn't get support from his party. A spokesperson said, "It was his personal tweet and doesn’t reflect party policy. That said, he is giving force to a sentiment many people feel right now. Which is that, in this era, with the stakes so high, engaging in things like personal boycotts is a way for people to effect change.”

The California Republican Party also disputed the call:

“I have no idea what possessed the California Democrat Party chairman to attack a California institution like In-N-Out, especially considering the fact that the organization gave more money to Democrats than Republicans recently. I’m sure he got many angry phone calls from Democrats who have benefited from In-N-Out’s generosity, and that’s why he not only went dark following the tweet, but forced the party’s spokesperson to distance the party from the comments.”

In response to the charge, In-N-Out defended its giving and other practices.

Image source.

Discussion:

• Like the Facebook employees' call to join a FB group, calling for a boycott is one way to get attention. In this case, is a boycott a good strategy? Why or why not?
• Analyze In-N-Out's statement. How well does the company defend itself against the boycott?

Facebook Memo from Conservative Employees

Reminiscent of last year's Google memo titled "Google’s Ideological Echo Chamber," a group of politically conservative employees at Facebook wrote a memo titled "We Have a Problem With Political Diversity." The message is similar: employees who hold conservative views do not feel included at the company.

The memo emphasizes two major points:

• "We are a political monoculture that’s intolerant of different views."
• "We do this so consistently that employees are afraid to say anything when they disagree with what’s around them politically."

The writer includes some evidence, and business communication students may want more. The end of the memo, which is much shorter and less divisive than Google's, includes a call to action: for interested employees to join a Facebook group, now showing 1422 members.

Discussion:

• Assess the memo for organization. Are the headings clear and parallel? What are the strengths, and what could be improved?
• Now assess the evidence. Which facts and examples do you find most and least convincing? What additional evidence would improve the arguments?
• What's your view of the employees' approach? Do you find the memo and call to join a Facebook group an effective choice for the company? What could be some alternatives? 
• In what ways is this situation an example of diversity and inclusion at Facebook?
• In what ways does the memo demonstrate courage?

Louis C.K. and Steve Wynn Are Back

Comedian Louis C.K. showed up unexpectedly at a comedy club in New York and performed his usual act. You may remember that five women accused Louis C.K. of sexual harassment, for which he wrote an apology, admitting to the acts the women described. Since then, he has been out of the spotlight.

Comedy Cellar owner Noam Dworman said the crowd responded positively and gave him a standing ovation as he took the stage. Dworman acknowledged the risk he took in having Louis C.K. perform:

“I understand that some people will be upset with me. I care about my customers very much. Every complaint goes through me like a knife. And I care about doing the right thing. . . .[but] there can’t be a permanent life sentence on someone who does something wrong.”

Some business leaders accused during the #MeToo movement are also trying to make a comeback. Steve Wynn, for example, has started an online art gallery featuring paintings by Picasso, Warhol, and others. When asked whether Wynn's history would have a negative effect on his venture as an art dealer, his lawyer, Michael Kosnitzky, said he, "didn’t believe so." Kosnitzky also said that Wynn still denies the charges and believes “people should look at the totality of the man.”

Image source.

Discussion:

• What do you think factored into Dworman's decision to allow Louis C.K. to perform? Did he do the right thing?
• Louis C.K. didn't include any material about sexual harassment or his apology. This would have demonstrated his vulnerability. What would have been the benefits and drawbacks?
• What's your view of Steve Wynn's attempt to reinvest himself as an art dealer?
• Wynn's name doesn't appear on the website. Do you think that's the right decision? Why or why not?

Ohio Football Coach: Another Case of Deleted Messages

Ohio State football coach Urban Meyer will forgo pay and the ability to coach three games because of his failure to appropriately handle a staff member's misconduct. A New York Times article chronicles issues with Zach Smith's behavior, including paying $600 at a strip club during a recruiting event, a domestic violence charge, and an affair with a staff member.

During a press conference, Meyer apologized, saying, "I should have done more, and I am sorry for that," and "I followed my heart and not my head."

The Times article also describes a conversation between Meyer and Smith about deleting text messages. I should count the number of stories on this blog since 2010 illustrating that deleting texts and emails fail to get the desired result. These messages are almost always recoverable, and the act of deletion makes the accused look even more guilty. 

In addition, in this situation, Ohio State officials at first failed to produce messages requested by the school newspaper. Worse, several staff knew about the request, but no one even approached Coach Meyer to retrieve them.

Image source.

Discussion:

• Once again, where are the many places deleted messages may be stored? How else can they be retrieved?
• What's your view of the strip club visits? Could Meyer reasonably argue that this is just part of the recruiting process? After all, no students were invited—only university and high school coaches. 
• Assess the press conference. How well did university officials, including Meyer, respond to reporters' questions? Did the team appropriately take accountability?

What Is "Dehumanizing" Speech?

The New York Times reports Twitter's struggle to define what constitutes "dehumanizing" speech. Apparently, the only agreement among Twitter's team members is that the decision is "incredibly complex."

Categorization is critical, as the company has a reputation as a sometimes dark place of trolls and harassment. Yet this week, Apple, Facebook, YouTube have expunged content from Alex Jones's Infowars, which is known for spreading misinformation, including that the shooting at Sandy Hook was a hoax. You can imagine how this angered families of lost children.

In a tweet, CEO Jack Dorsey explained Twitter's decision to keep Infowars content, but employees, particularly, have not responded positively.

Twitter is in a difficult spot because, on the other hand, sites have been criticized for censoring conservative views. Del Harvey, the company's VP of Trust and Safety, wrote an email to employees further explaining the company's rationale.

Image source.

Discussion:

• How would you define "dehumanizing" speech? What character dimensions are involved?
• What persuasive strategies does Harvey use in her email to employees? Which are most and least convincing and why?
• What is your view about Infowars content? Should Twitter remove it from the site as other social media companies have done? How might your own political views factor into your thinking?

Fun Funeral Ads?

Death is inevitable, and we don't like to talk about it. A UK company is trying to change that with "edgy" ads, for example, people running on a beach carrying coffins as surfboards.

The ads are causing a stir. Transport for London, which regulates the city's ads, rejected them as  potentially causing “serious and widespread offense," although officials hadn't actually seen the ads. Still, on social media, people referred to the ads as "shocking,” “vile,” “insensitive,” and “tasteless.”

The ads compare burial and cremation prices, and one offers "one-way" travel with "roasting temperatures." The ad company founder defended the approach:

“Our reluctance to talk about death is the reason funeral costs continue to spiral and why you pay far too much for writing a will or settling an estate. That’s what we seek to change.”

Discussion:

• Why do we have a difficult time talking about death?
• How would you describe the ads and the agency's strategy?
• Could the ad strategy bring about a positive change? Will the ads bring in business?
• What if these ads ran in the U.S.? How, if at all, do you think the response might differ?

Airline CEOs Defend Seat Size

American and Delta Airlines CEOs sit in small plane seats to explain the rationale and defend shrinking seat sizes. Doug Parker and Ed Bastian, both 6' 3" tall, agreed to talk to a WSJ writer, while United CEO Oscar Munoz declined.

Both CEOs say they fly coach for short trips. Bastian started a policy that Delta directors must fly coach when traveling less than three hours. Of course, as the article points out, suffering three hours in a small seat isn't quite the same as 24.

The executives say that flight amenities, such as WiFi, make up for any discomfort from smaller seats. American's Parker says that customers don't complain and that the airline hasn't "done anything that makes the main cabin product less desirable than it was before." The airlines are also focused on providing larger seats for higher fares.

Another WSJ article explains what airlines consider when making seats comfortable.

Image source.

Cover image source.

Discussion:

• How does this story illustrate character dimensions such as compassion, vulnerability, and humility?
• Did the CEOs do the right thing by agreeing to participate in the article? What are the risks and benefits?
• Why would United CEO Oscar Munoz decline? Was this the right decision for him and the airline?
• What persuasion tactics do the CEOs use to convince us that flying coach is not so bad?
• Do you agree with the CEOs' assessments about small seats? What has been your experience?

Netflix Comms Officer Out After Using Racial Epithet

Jonathan Friedland, Netflix's chief communications officer, was fired after using the "N-word" at least twice at work. CEO Reed Hastings sent an email to employees explaining the situation:

“Several people afterwards told him how inappropriate and hurtful his use of the N-word was..."  “We hoped this was an awful anomaly never to be repeated.” “The second incident confirmed a deep lack of understanding, and convinced me to let Jonathan go now." "[I should]...have done more to use it as a learning moment for everyone at Netflix about how painful and ugly that word is, and that it should not be used.” “Depending on where you live or grew up in the world, understanding and sensitivities around the history and use of the N-word can vary.” “For nonblack people, the word should not be spoken as there is almost no context in which it is appropriate or constructive (even when singing a song or reading a script). There is not a way to neutralize the emotion and history behind the word in any context.”

The first incident was during a PR meeting on the topic of sensitive words. It's unclear when and how the word was used the second time.

For his part, Friedland apologized on Twitter.

Discussion:

• What's your view of the situation and Friedland's use of the word? Consider that we don't have all of the context.
• Given what little we know, should Friedland have been fired?
• How does this situation potentially demonstrate a lack of humility?

Cold Email Examples

The CEO of Mapistry, a start-up software company for storm water compliance, posted and analyzed her past emails to VCs, venture capitalists who could invest in her company. Allie Janoch disputes the claim that you need an introduction to a VC; she has had some success in sending cold emails.

Her first email, Janochs admits, says little about her company and undermines the message with self-deprecation.

She didn't get a response. Her second email, when her company had more traction, includes a specific subject, focuses on problem solving, uses bullets for important data points, and is personal.

Discussion:

• What do you consider the strength's of Janoch's second email?
• What improvements could she make?
• How does each email demonstrate humility? The first, as Janoch says, is self-deprecating. What's the potential problem with this approach? How does the second email demonstrate humility as well as confidence? How well does Janoch balance the two?

University of Oregon Apologizes for Statement About Student Death

University of Oregon leadership missed the mark in its statement about a student's death during a lake trip. Although the university offered sympathy in the original notice, the statement included language that seemed to blame the student:

It is important to point out that this tragedy is connected to an unauthorized tradition among many college students. Students from many institutions have a history of demonstrating poor life choices during visits to Lake Shasta. These activities are contrary to the values of the University and Fraternity and Sorority Organization.

When criticized for the tone and insensitivity, leaders published a new statement, which excludes this paragraph, and posted their regret on Twitter.

University officials may have wanted to use the student's death as a lesson or a warning to others. On the face of it, this strategy wasn't all bad. After all, Shasta Lake is a known partying site and has been in the news for tents and other debris left by college students. One Twitter user commented, "I think the first statement was more appropriate. Although this young man's death is tragic, bad choices have bad consequences."

Discussion:

• What's your view? Was it wrong for the university to include that statement? Why or why not?
•  If not in this statement, what should the university leaders have done differently if they did want to focus on future safety?

Japanese Train Company Apologizes for Early Departure

In the United States, we're used to late transportation services, but in Japan, early departures can be an issue—even 25 seconds early. Japan's rail system is known as "one of the most punctual railway services in the world."

West Japan Railways (JR West) issued a statement and formal apology for the delay: "The great inconvenience we placed upon our customers was truly inexcusable.” The statement included a commitment to do better: “We will be thoroughly evaluating our conduct and striving to keep such an incident from occurring again." 

Also interesting, from a cultural perspective, is the decision process: the conductor mistakenly thought the train was departing at 7:11. Realizing the mistake but having already closed the doors and seeing no waiting passengers (although a few were waiting), the conductor decided to leave early rather than reopening the doors, which could have caused the train to be late, a far worse result.

A Sora News article explains the impact on the Japanese people:

"Being six minutes late is enough to get you in trouble in with bosses and teachers in Japan, and those who missed a transfer because they couldn’t take the 7:12 would be even later reaching their destination."

Back in 2013, I wrote about NY Metro-North's failure to apologize for a derailment that killed four people. Although the MTA has been more willing to apologize lately, this situation represents a stark contrast.

Image source.

Discussion:

• How would you describe the cultural differences—about both time and apologies—between Japan and the United States illustrated in this situation? What might account for these differences?
• What are the risks of over-apologizing?
• How does this situation illustrate accountability and integrity as character dimensions?

Tesla's Contentious Conference Call

Called "the most unusual call...in 20 years," "bizarre"—and "the best call I've heard in a long time," Tesla's earnings call is a popular news item. On balance, as one analyst said, “Needless to say, the call didn’t go well," and the evidence is in the stock price, which dropped 7.9% (5% within 20 minutes).

Here are a two highlights of CEO Elon Musk's responses to questions:

Sanford Bernstein's Toni Sacconaghi: "And so where specifically will you be in terms of capital requirements?"

Musk: "Excuse me. Next. Boring, bonehead questions are not cool. Next?"

RBC's Joseph Spak: "The first question is related to the Model 3 reservations, and I was just wondering if you gave us a gauge as maybe some of the impact that the news has had. Like, of the reservations that actually opened and made available to configure, can you let us know, like, what percentage have actually taken the step to configure?

Musk: "We're going to go to YouTube. Sorry. These questions are so dry. They're killing me."

At one point, Musk, frustrated by a question, said, "Please sell our stock and don't buy it." Candor is one thing, but I'm not sure a CEO wants to alienate investors.

CNBC host Jim Cramer is one of the opposing voices, who complimented Musk on his directness and telling the truth. He said that many CEOs are thinking what Musk said out loud. At the same time, Cramer acknowledged that this might be Musk's last call.

Image source.

Discussion:

• What's your view of Musk's responses during the call? What factors into your assessment?
• Watch Cramer's analysis. To what extent do you agree with his assessment?
• What are the risks of Musk's approach (in addition to the short-term stock price drop), and what are the potential rewards?
• Some might say Musk is being authentic. How do you see it?

MSNBC Correspondent Responds to Criticism

MSNBC Correspondent Joy Reid is trying to explain homophobic posts on her blog, which has been inactive for years:

"I genuinely do not believe I wrote those hateful things ... But I can definitely understand, based on things I have tweeted and have written in the past, why some people don't believe me."

Reid hired a security analyst to prove that her site had been hacked, saying that the breach was "part of an effort to taint my character with false information by distorting a blog that ended a decade ago.” But the investigation didn't uncover evidence. The hacking defense typically doesn't turn out well. Remember Amy's Baking Company in 2013?

On her show, "AM Joy,"  Reid apologized for past comments:

“I have not been exempt from being dumb or cruel or hurtful to the very people I want to advocate for. I own that. I did it. And for that I am truly, truly sorry.”

A Mediaite story details Reid's previous posts:

“I look back today at some of the ways I’ve talked casually about people and gender identity and sexual orientation and I wonder who that even was. But the reality is that like a lot of people in this country, that person was me.”

A Vox article acknowledges that people's views, particularly of same-sex marriage, have changed. In the end, Reid spoke about her personal development:

“The person I am now is not the person I was then. I like to think I’ve gotten better as a person over time — that I’m still growing, that I’m not the same person I was 10 or five or even one year ago. And I know that my goal is to try to be a better person and a better ally.”

Discussion:

• How could Reid have addressed the issue without the hacking defense?
• Watch Reid's video apology. How well does she handle the situation?
• People do change. Do you find Reid's comments sincere and believable? Why or why not?

Narrative Alternatives to PPT at Amazon and Google

In his annual letter, Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos wrote that he has banned PPT:

"We don’t do PowerPoint (or any other slide-oriented) presentations at Amazon. Instead, we write narratively structured six-page memos. We silently read one at the beginning of each meeting in a kind of 'study hall.'"

Nancy Duarte describes the value of a narrative or storytelling approach: "storytelling in presentations is a powerful way to grab attention, hold attention, and to change beliefs." She gives examples from our favorite books and movies, which build suspense over time. Stories are also a good way to inspire empathy and other emotional reactions. This is difficult to achieve with traditional PowerPoint bullets.

A Harvard Business Review article, "Structure Your Presentation Like a Story," provides more guidance and summarizes the approach with a graphic:

For Bezos, the narrative style means that points are connected and organized in a logical sequence with some resolution, conclusion, or outcome. GeekWire created this six-page memo in Amazon's style as an example.

At Google, CEO Sundar Pichai also emphasizes storytelling with pictures:

"Since stories are best told with pictures, bullet points and text-heavy slides are increasingly avoided at Google." 

Both executives are warning against the type of communication that is overly concise and missing context, connections, and cohesiveness. A ZDNet article summarizes some of the issues with PowerPoint and describes the now-infamous role of PPT in a U.S. disaster:

"'[B]ulletized' thinking contributed to the Challenger disaster, where 7 crew members died and a multi-billion dollar craft destroyed due to an O-ring failure. The big problem was that NASA management wasn't really listening to the engineers—and breaking issues up into bullets helped them do that."

Pichai's design approach aligns with PPT trends over the past few years. We're seeing much less text, fewer bullets, and more images, and this style follows the evolution of web design. On websites, we see many more background videos and photos and not much text, particularly on consumer websites.

Discussion:

• What are the advantages and downsides to the narrative memo? For what types of situations do you think this approach would work well? For what situations might PPT be a better choice?
• For practice, try to convert this terrible PPT presentation to one with less text and more meaningful images. Clean up the design, add charts to help your audience visualize data, and of course, correct the grammar.

Chipotle CEO Generates Excitement

After a dismal three years of food-safety issues, Chipotle saw a strong first quarter, and CEO Brian Niccol is confident about the company's future. Since the outbreaks, part of Chipotle's turnaround plan was to introduce new menu items, but they did not prove successful.

In an interview, Niccol described new plans, which may include drive-thrus, longer hours, mobile ordering, or menu items that are more thoroughly tested. But Niccol resists offering deals and breakfast, despite what Bill Ackman, Chipotle's largest shareholder, advises:

“I’ve been very clear with him: Not now, Bill and I have had a couple of really good conversations. He may have some ideas that I don’t think are the right ones now.”

Here's the earnings call webcast. In the press release, Niccol further explained the company's plans:

"While the company made notable progress during the quarter, I firmly believe we can accelerate that progress in the future.  We are in the process of forming a path to greater performance in sales, transactions, margins and new restaurants.  This path to performance will be grounded in a strategy of executing the fundamentals while introducing consumer-meaningful innovation across the business.  It will also require a structure and organization built for creativity, action and accountability.  Finally, Chipotle will have a culture that is centered on running great restaurants, putting the customer first, innovating for today and tomorrow, supporting each other, and delivering on commitments.  The future will be meaningful at Chipotle."

(Disclosure: I own a modest amount of Chipotle stock.) Image source.

Discussion:

• Assess the earnings call or press release. What business jargon do you identify? Is it too much, or is it appropriate for the situation and audience?
• Niccol is challenging Ackman's ideas, which is risky for a new CEO. How do you interpret his statement? Again, is what he says appropriate for the situation, or should he present his views differently?
• Would you say that Niccol is demonstrating courage in his statement about Ackman? Why or why not?