Messages About Twitter Purchase

After a month-long saga, Elon Musk, the wealthiest man in the world, has an accepted offer to buy Twitter. The news release illustrates a positive message, which, like most, is also persuasive. I’ll also acknowledge that the news is not viewed positively by all.

Twitter’s news release includes the following quotes:

Bret Taylor, Twitter's Independent Board Chair, said, "The Twitter Board conducted a thoughtful and comprehensive process to assess Elon's proposal with a deliberate focus on value, certainty, and financing. The proposed transaction will deliver a substantial cash premium, and we believe it is the best path forward for Twitter's stockholders."

Parag Agrawal, Twitter's CEO, said, "Twitter has a purpose and relevance that impacts the entire world. Deeply proud of our teams and inspired by the work that has never been more important."

"Free speech is the bedrock of a functioning democracy, and Twitter is the digital town square where matters vital to the future of humanity are debated," said Mr. Musk. "I also want to make Twitter better than ever by enhancing the product with new features, making the algorithms open source to increase trust, defeating the spam bots, and authenticating all humans. Twitter has tremendous potential – I look forward to working with the company and the community of users to unlock it."

Some users promise to leave Twitter, concerned that losing controls the company implemented over the past several years will create an unsafe environment. More conservative groups tout the move. The Wall Street Journal editorial board wrote that “it will be fascinating to watch Mr. Musk try to break Silicon Valley’s culture of progressive conformity.”

Musk’s early moves will be particularly interesting to watch. Will he reinstate former President Trump’s account? The president said he won’t return to Twitter regardless. Will employees leave in droves, which could be a problem in a tight labor labor? CEO Parag Agrawal tried to quell fears in an all-hands meeting:

This is indeed a period of uncertainty. All of you have different feelings and views about this news, many of you are concerned, some of you are excited, many people here are waiting to understand how this goes and have an open mind ... If we work with each other, we will not have to worry about losing the core of what makes Twitter powerful, which is all of us working together in the interest of our customers every day.

These messages illustrate the uncertainty Agrawal acknowledges. Unlike Musk, he demonstrates compassion and humility. How the news affects Twitter’s culture—both for employees and its users—remains to be seen.

Image source.

New Messaging About COVID-19 Protection

U.S. health officials are changing course on COVID-19 messaging. At first, groups like the CDC and experts like Dr. Fauci persuaded all citizens to isolate, wear masks, and get vaccinated. Now that infection and hospitalization rates have declined, messaging is focusing more on individual choice. Those who favor less government intervention have been encouraging a more personal approach from the start.

This strategy complicates communication for doctors, who might now ask patients about their personal goals and risk tolerance before recommending actions. For example, a second booster shot may not be best for everyone. I wonder whether doctors have the skills and will take the time for these conversations. I also wonder whether friends, family, and community members will engage with each other in new ways to support different choices. I’m hopeful but weary.

Image source.

Amazon Insults an Employee

Amazon’s Staten Island, NY, warehouse is the company’s first to unionize. The vote is momentous and could start a wave of activity in other Amazon facilities.

Similar to their response at other facilities, for example, Bessemer, Alabama, company leaders used aggressive tactics to fight the union. In this case, the employee leading the effort, Christian Smalls demonstrated all the markings of a courageous leader. But a leaked email from the general counsel shows the company’s response to him personally:

“He’s not smart, or articulate, and to the extent the press wants to focus on us versus him, we will be in a much stronger PR position than simply explaining for the umpteenth time how we’re trying to protect workers.”

“Not smart” is insulting and obviously inaccurate. “Articulate” is also highly inaccurate—and stings with racism. Amazon underestimated its employees, but the battle is not over.

Amazon is trying to get the decision overturned. Company leaders might demonstrate vulnerability and humility at this point instead.

image source.

Boeing's Scant Statement on Crash

As we wait for details about the plane crash in China, Boeing has issued a statement. The plan was a Boeing 737—not the Max that caused two crashes in 2019 and 2020. Still, the company has suffered greatly, taking longer than expected fixing problems and doing PR damage control in the meantime. This latest situation doesn’t help the company’s reputation.

At the same time, this crash is highly unusual, taking place during descent, during which only 3% of plane crashes occur. In addition, this plane had been operating for six years without issue. Both black boxes were found, so investigators will find more information. But, sadly, knowing the reason for the crash won’t change the fate of 132 victims and their loved ones.

Boeing’s statement is the bare minimum. The company follows its typical communication protocol, saying as little as possible and coming from no one in particular. I understand not taking responsibility at this point, but how about a little more compassion and authenticity? I wonder what lessons company leaders learned in the past two years about communication and character.

Boeing Statement on China Eastern Airlines Flight MU 5735

CHICAGO, March 26, 2022 – Boeing today released the following statement:

“We extend our deepest condolences for the loss of those on board China Eastern Airlines Flight MU 5735. Our thoughts and prayers are with the passengers and crew, their families and all those affected by this accident. Boeing will continue to support our airline customer during this difficult time. In addition, a Boeing technical team is supporting the NTSB and the Civil Aviation Administration of China who will lead the investigation.”

Contact
Boeing Communications
media@boeing.com

LinkedIn Gives Options for Employment Gaps

In a new feature, LinkedIn gives users 13 ways to describe reasons for employment gaps. In a blog post, a senior product manager at LinkedIn explained the rationale:

“According to a recent survey, more than half of professionals have taken a career break. Yet for far too long, the possibility of embarking on a career break has been overshadowed by stigma, which 60% of people believe still exists. . . . 46% of hiring managers believe candidates with career breaks are an untapped talent pool.”

Recruiters have business reasons to be more open-minded about time away from work. The “Great Resignation” and tight labor market left openings that employers need to fill.

LinkedIn’s survey found that 51% of employers are more likely to contact candidates who “provides context” about a gap. Of course, what LinkedIn doesn’t say is that 49% may be less likely or just as likely to follow up. Still, we may be seeing more compassion about personal challenges, including breaks for mental health reasons, family responsibilities, and illness.

If this feature is used widely, it could normalize work breaks and reduce the stigma of taking time off. Personal reasons are personal, but revealing them may encourage applicants to be more vulnerable and authentic—to trust that employers won’t judge them harshly and to present themselves genuinely, “warts and all.”

To explain a gap is to take a risk but so is not explaining a gap. In this case, an employer may think the worst, and applicants have no chance to include their own voice.

More Companies Eliminate the Annual Performance Review

For many years when I worked for large companies, I was responsible for the annual performance review process: identifying competencies, creating forms, training managers, and tracking those yearly conversations that were often painful for everyone involved. Since then, more and more companies are eliminating the annual review.

The tight labor market seems to be the biggest impetus for the recent wave. With more frequent reviews, managers can increase antsy employees’ salaries, hoping to retain talent. However, companies are cautious because more frequent reviews may set expectations that employees will always get an increase. Instead, managers have other retention tools, such as increasing benefits and giving one-time bonuses.

This recent news reminds me of a 2016 article. But at that time, the impetus was to increase feedback. When an annual process exists, some managers rely too heavily on that one meeting in lieu of giving feedback when needed throughout the year. Eliminating the review also reduces anxiety and ends a rating system that some see as inaccurate or unfair.

Of course, the best feedback is ongoing. Ideally, managers and their reports have a relationship where either can initiate a conversation at any time to encourage accountability and improved performance.

Image source.

Tesla Accuses SEC of Harassment

In a letter to a U.S. District judge, an attorney for Tesla describes how the SEC tries to “muzzle and harass Mr. Musk and Tesla.” Tesla claims that the SEC monitors Elon Musk’s Twitter, yet hasn’t distributed settlement funds to shareholders.

We see strong language throughout the letter, for example, “gone beyond the pale,” “formidable resources,” “endless, unfounded investigations,” “broken its promises,” and “police.” The last paragraph reads as follows:

“Enough is enough. Mr. Musk and Tesla write in the hope that the Court can bring the SEC’s harassment campaign to an end, while ensuring that the SEC finally delivers, at long last, on its commitment to Tesla’s shareholders and this Court.”

The letter is an example of persuasive communication, with the lead strategy emotional appeal. Although logical arguments are included, the language and medium emphasize what the company perceives as irrational. We get the sense that Musk is personally targeted. We’ll see whether the letter gets the desired results.

Encouraging Humility

David Axelrod, a New York Times opinion writer, weighs in on President Biden’s first State of the Union address, scheduled for March 1. The article, “Mr. President, It’s Time for a Little Humility,” criticizes the president’s previous news conference in which he “energetically sold a litany of achievements” without acknowledging “grinding concerns that have soured the mood of the country.”

In addition to humility, which is defined at recognizing one’s own and others’ limitations, Alexrod is encouraging compassion—caring for yourself and others. He makes good arguments for being positive, while avoiding a “doom and gloom” speech like one of President Carter’s.

Getting the balance right will be difficult. The president needs to remind people of his successes to inspire reelection, while being honest about COVID deaths, the decline of mental health, and economic challenges. As Alexrod says, “Now, he needs to find that voice by telling the story of the ordeal so many Americans have shared, honoring their resilience and painting a credible, realistic picture of how we can all reclaim control of our lives.”

We’ll see how President Biden does. Multiple speech writers will wordsmith his address. But as business communicators know, how the speech is received depends on the president’s delivery as well as his words. I’m curious how much of the president’s genuine self we’ll see—his authenticity.

Managing Hybrid Meetings

A Wall Street Journal article describes ways to “level the playing field” for remote and in-person workers. Despite high-end video and audio technology in larger meetings, employees have a tough time seeing and hearing each other and feeing included. Of course, the same applies to classrooms.

Some companies ask employees in person to log onto the meeting with their laptops, so remote workers see everyone’s face. Asking people to raise their hand to speak—whether in person or online—also gives everyone an equal chance to participate.

Companies are ramping up amenities at work, for example, childcare, gyms, and pharmacies, to lure employees back to the office. Managers continue efforts to help employees manage meeting burnout and “Zoom fatigue,” for example, block parts of Fridays.

Some of these challenges aren’t new. Too much email, information overload, and not enough actual work time are problems whether we’re home or in the office

Image source.

Language Choices

A new report has been criticized from both sides of the political aisle. Published by the American Medical Association and the Center for Health Justice, “Advancing Health Equity: A Guide to Language, Narrative, and Concepts,” is described as an “equity document.” Its purpose is to provide guidance to physicians and healthcare workers.

Some recommendations seem appropriate, while others seem impractical or, as a New York Times opinion writer called them, “absurd.” Michelle Goldberg gives an example:

“The guide suggests replacing ‘vulnerable’ with ‘oppressed,’ even though they’re not synonymous: it’s not oppression that makes the elderly vulnerable to Covid.”

Key principles include avoiding using stigmatizing and dehumanizing adjectives, avoiding generalizations, avoiding language with violent connotations, and avoiding unintentional blaming. The report suggests “people-first" language, which I suggest in the textbook—when appropriate.

I wonder how students feel about the more specific recommendations in the report: Which would they follow, and which seem silly or unnatural?

Research About Groupthink

Groupthink causes poor decision making because members come to the same conclusions, failing to see alternatives. You might think the trouble is with homogeneous teams, but a Wall Street Journal article clarifies the types of teams most susceptible to this limited thinking.

The faculty authors describe three sets of teams and ask which is “the most likely to fall prey to the pathologies of groupthink”?

• A friendly team of long-term colleagues or a new collection of co-workers who haven’t had time to form close personal bonds?

• A team composed of the usual suspects or that same team where an outsider has been brought in to provide a fresh perspective?

• A group with a confident leader who has a clear vision of how to do things or a relatively unstructured group without a strong authority figure?

In each, the second team is more vulnerable. Concepts like group identity and psychological safety are at play. Although paradoxical in some ways, a close group of friends who feel comfortable with each other are more likely to offer divergent ideas.

Throughout my career, I have tried different approaches to assigning student teams. This article makes me feel good about the times I’ve let students choose their own teams. Of course, that causes other problems, but groupthink was not likely one of them.

Language Choices

A New York Times writer explores language “on the left,” meaning political liberals. The article also helps us understand choices for business communicators and my challenges revising Business Communication and Character (11e).

The first sentence of the article includes the word “freshman,” and already I have questions. At Cornell, we have been using “first-year” as a gender-neutral term for some time. Of course, this only exemplifies the Amy Harmon’s point about changing language.

Harmon describes frustration on all political sides, including needing to adapt to changing language, skepticism about “wokeness,” and choosing semantics over action

I fear that my book, revised but not yet published, is already out of date. Did I give “BIPOC” and “Latinx” too much attention and “LGBTQIA+” too little? Should I have addressed “wokeness”? I’ll wrestle with all this in the 12th edition.

Overblown Generational Differences

Finally, a mainstream article, “The Bunk of Generational Talk,” describes exaggerated differences among age groups. Categorical thinking contributes to imagined “gaps” and tropes. With random year divisions, naming generations only reinforces stereotypes.

The article author, a professor of public policy, provides research showing that most differences among generations are driven by factors other than generation alone. For example, beliefs about climate change have tracked fairly closely over time. He summarizes the issue well:

“Our wrongheaded thinking about generations leads us to focus on the wrong problems. Headlines about spendthrift young people, for example, distract us from the huge shift in economic policy in recent decades toward the interests of older people. We avoid facing up to a challenge like climate change by laying the blame on older generations while placing our expectations for salvation on the coming generation. Across a range of issues, manufacturing fake generational battles denies us the benefits of intergenerational connection and solidarity.”

Business Communication and Character describes ways to work and communicate across differences—not invent differences to mock and scorn.

Raiders Coach’s Language and Resignation

The New York Times described emails sent by Raiders Coach Jon Gruden that included racist, homophobic, and sexist language. In his statement, Gruden wrote a short statement on the Raiders’ Twitter account.

The statement isn’t exactly an apology, as we define it in business and corporate communication. Gruden doesn’t describe his behavior or the impact on others.

Raiders owner Mark Davis wrote an even shorter statement: “I have accepted Jon Gruden’s resignation as Head Coach of the Las Vegas Raiders.”

Critics of the decision evoke the “cancel culture,” while others believe Gruden’s comments were outlandish. In a business environment, his language would never be acceptable. The NY Times article quotes Gruden, which I’ll avoid here.

Stunning Trove of Facebook Internal Documents

The Wall Street Journal has uncovered internal emails, reports, and presentations that show Facebook’s communication struggles and contradictions. Some messages are in draft form and illustrate conflicts within the organization about how to manage apps and report on information. In one document, an employee wrote, “We are not actually doing what we say we do publicly.”

A document marked as attorney/client privileged, refers to a “whitelist,” which means that different standards apply to certain elite users. A WSJ writer explains the issue:

At times, the documents show, XCheck has protected public figures whose posts contain harassment or incitement to violence, violations that would typically lead to sanctions for regular users. In 2019, it allowed international soccer star Neymar to show nude photos of a woman, who had accused him of rape, to tens of millions of his fans before the content was removed by Facebook. Whitelisted accounts shared inflammatory claims that Facebook’s fact checkers deemed false, including that vaccines are deadly, that Hillary Clinton had covered up “pedophile rings,” and that then-President Donald Trump had called all refugees seeking asylum “animals,” according to the documents.

Other documents provide research about the negative impact of Instagram on teenage girls, including exacerbating body-image concerns and suicidal ideation. Yet, publicly, company officials have focused only on the benefits. During a congressional hearing, CEO Mark Zuckerberg said, “The research that we’ve seen is that using social apps to connect with other people can have positive mental-health benefits.” A spokesperson for Instagram told reporters that the negative impact on teens’ mental health is “quite small.”

So far, I don’t see a response from the company. This will be a difficult one to downplay, particularly with so many conflicting voices from within the company. This situation illustrates issues of transparency and integrity—inconsistency with Facebook’s stated values and public claims. Facebook might do best to acknowledge challenges and promise to do better, and then we would see whether they do.

Image source.

Popeyes Publishes Diversity Scorecard

Popeyes fast-food chain is publishing its diversity data related to marketing. The company will provide data about females and ethnic diversity among those represented in ads and members of creative teams, marketing departments, and external ad agencies.

With vivid colors and eye-catching graphics, the “scorecard” shows demographics at-a-glance. The chart is easy to understand and shows clearly where the company has more work to do. Text on the webpage admits deficiencies:

“We acknowledge our own lack of diversity and our commitment to be better, more diverse, and more inclusive. So today, we want to share our starting point.”

Text also draws conclusions for each group, for example, the ad teams:

“Our agency teams demonstrate the highest gender diversity of any pillar, but continue to lack in racial and ethnic diversity amongst Black/African-Americans.”

Popeyes’ approach is solid for improving diversity—and getting publicity. The Wall Street Journal article reflects well on the company. For the webpage, the “mandates” work well to identify targets, although they seem easily achievable. I don’t see on the webpage why diversity is important. Beyond the obvious—to increase market share—so what?

The scorecard is a good example of transparency but can be improved in other ways. A summary would give an overall percentage that can be tracked more easily over time. Also, I wonder about employees and partners who don’t identify as either male or female. Maybe that non-binary group could be represented as well.

Lego: "Everyone Is Awesome"

Lego is celebrating the LGBTQIA+ community with a new rainbow-colored set. The set will be available on June 1—the start of Pride Month. The designer explains the decision for the “Everyone Is Awesome” product:

“I am fortunate to be a part of a proud, supportive and passionate community of colleagues and fans. We share love for creativity and self-expression through Lego bricks and this set is a way to show my gratitude for all the love and inspiration that is constantly shared.”

The designer also explained that the characters intentionally have no specified gender.

In a press release, the company describes the purpose:

“Everyone is unique, and with a little more love, acceptance and understanding in the world, we can all feel more free to be our true AWESOME selves! This model shows that we care, and that we truly believe ‘Everyone is awesome’!”

The product is a good example of company leaders taking a stand. They might alienate some customers, but they are holding true to their values, stated at the bottom of the release:

“The LEGO Group is committed to building a diverse and inclusive workplace. It partners with Workplace Pride, Stonewall and Open for Business to help shape strategies to support employees who identify as LGBTQIA+ and allies across the company. It also supports UK-based charity, Diversity Role Models which works to educate children about inclusivity and empathy in order to build supportive and inclusive future generations.”

Questions Are Different for Women in Economics

A working paper shows that women in economics receive more and tougher questions than do their male counterparts. Researchers analyzed data from 462 presentations at seminars and job talks, when candidates present their research to prospective faculty colleagues.

Controlling for fields, types of seminars, and other factors, the researchers found that women receive 12% more questions and more “hostile” or “patronizing” questions. One concern is that woman might be discouraged from presenting their work or applying for positions, which hurts the field of economics.

The authors note that less than one percent of presenters were Black or Hispanic, so no conclusions could be drawn about how these groups are treated.

The authors acknowledge that these questions may not result from ill intent but may be a result of implicit bias or part of a more systemic male-dominated culture. Sadly, the authors say that some comments are “demoralizing,” and again, they warn of the negative impact on the field:

“Many of us have heard stories of friends and colleagues whose bad experiences in seminars have led them to re-evaluate whether a career in economics is really the best choice for them.”

Tokyo Olympics Head Resigns Over Sexist Comments

Former Japanese Prime Minister and president of the Tokyo Olympics made sexist comments about women and has resigned. This turmoil further complicates the games, which are already delayed because of COVID-19.

Yoshiro Mori said, “On boards with a lot of women, the board meetings take so much time,” “Women are competitive. When someone raises his or her hand and speaks, they probably think they should speak too. That is why they all end up making comments,” and “You have to regulate speaking time to some extent, or else we’ll never be able to finish.”

Several Japanese leaders spoke against Mori, and it’s interesting to compare their statements, particularly from companies that typically avoid public controversy. Few board members called for his resignation, but pressure was too great, including that from about 100 volunteers who quit.

In response to criticism, Mori said, “I didn’t mean it in that way, although it was said to be discrimination against women,” he said. “I have been praising women, promoting them to speak out more.” Mori also spoke of age discrimination. He is 83 years old. He said, “Old people are also doing well for the sake of Japan and the world. I feel extremely unhappy that older people are said to be bad. But it may go nowhere if I complain.”

An ABC writer calls the press conference “hastily prepared.” His apology wasn’t good enough to stave off the criticism, and he was forced to resign.

University Assistant Coach Fired Over Disparaging Comments

Assistant coach of the Mocs football program at University of Tennessee at Chattanooga has been fired. Chris Malone posted a disparaging, racist, and sexist tweet about Stacey Abrams, who is credited for gaining democratic votes in the tight Georgia political races.

University Chancellor Steven Angel posted a video to explain the decision. He covers the basics of an apology but deserves credit for using video as a medium in addition to the athletics director’s and head coach’s written statements:

Mark Wharton – UTC Vice Chancellor & Directory of Athletics
"Last night, a totally inappropriate social media post by a member of our football staff was brought to my attention. The entire post was appalling. The sentiments in that post do not represent the values of our football program, our Athletics department or our University. With that said, effectively immediately, that individual is no longer a part of the program."

Rusty Wright – UTC Head Football Coach
"Our football program has a clear set of standards. Those standards include respecting others. It is a message our players hear daily. It is a standard I will not waver on. What was posted on social media by a member of my staff is unacceptable and not any part of what I stand for or what Chattanooga Football stands for. Life is bigger than football and as leaders of young men, we have to set that example, first and foremost. With that said, effectively immediately, that individual is no longer a part of my staff."

Comparing the three statements demonstrates what each leader focuses on and, perhaps, their emotional reactions to Malone’s post. This situation illustrates accountability and integrity, but I might want to see more authenticity and vulnerability. Do we know more about these leaders as a result of this situation?