Honest Email Auto-Responses

The New York Times published a series of automated email responses that let senders know why the receiver will take a while to reply or will not replay at all. Each explains a mental-health reason, for example, vacationing or recovering from a miscarriage. Some are funny, like this one:

Thanks for your email—but unfortunately, I’m rocking in a corner somewhere trying to find my inner peace. As soon as I’ve found it, I’ll be back at work, so please bear with me.

Alain Sobol, Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt

Generally, I like the idea. The responses are honest and demonstrate integrity, vulnerability, and authenticity. A few of the examples might be “TMI” (too much information), but that’s for each receiver to decide.

Students can draft their own responses, but I’ll add a word of caution: these shouldn’t be overused. How much senders will tolerate depends on the situation and relationship. If an email is important, the sender needs alternatives, which I don’t see in the NYT examples. A time estimate or someone else to contact would be appreciated.

Image source.

Boris Johnson's Resignation Speech

British PM Boris Johnson’s resignation speech is a lesson in delivery skills. Johnson reads a script and yet sounds natural—he uses conversational language and comes across as authentic.

Johnson resisted calls for his resignation, both at this point and previously, when lawmakers believed other transgressions were cause for him to leave office, for example, holding parties that violated Covid guidelines. The “final straw" was when Johnson hired someone who faced sexual misconduct charges. Although Johnson denied knowing about the claims, he later admitted that he did know. Two high-ranking officials resigned, followed by several others.

The speech, 6.5 minutes long, begins with his decision and the “will of the Parliamentary Conservative Party” that a new leader should be instated. He then highlights successes during his tenure, including Brexit, Covid actions, and supporting the Ukrainian people during the war. Expressing regret, he concedes that “no one is indispensable.” At the same time, he acknowledges that some people will be “relieved” and, with colloquial language says, “Them’s the breaks.”

Ending with gratitude for the job, lawmakers, and the public, Johnson leaves on a positive note about the future of the United Kingdom. Despite issues of integrity throughout his time as PM, Johnson does the right, if not obvious, thing in the end.

Lizzo Apologizes for Ableist Slur

Singer and songwriter Lizzo apologized to fans and critics, many of them on TikTok, offended by the term “spaz” in her new song, “GRRRLS.” One tweet explained the controversy:

@lizzo please re-release “grrrls” without the ablist [sic] slur. That word is not kind to disabled people. Your music is global and you have a voice folks listen to. We are trusting and asking you to release it without the slur.

Others mentioned their surprise because the singer “champions women, plus size people and others whom society treats poorly, Lizzo preaches inclusivity and should do better.”

Lizzo responded with an apology that demonstrates accountability and authenticity. She admitted the mistake, announced a new version, and highlighted her own identity. The apology could have been improved by recognizing how the term is offensive and harmful. Regardless, fans seemed to appreciate the response and, overall, the apology was effective.

Musk's Meeting with Twitter Employees

A summary of Elon Musk’s meeting with Twitter staff gives us a window into a typical “all-hands meeting.” Employees who ask questions demonstrate courage—and humility.

Of course, in this case, employees are most concerned about their jobs if/when Musk’s acquisition of the company is final. A Wall Street Journal article describes his stance:

Regarding layoffs, Mr. Musk said anyone who is a significant contributor shouldn’t have anything to worry about, according to people who viewed the meeting. “Right now, costs exceed revenue,” he said, according to the people. “That’s not a great situation.”

Likewise, this isn’t a great response for worried staff. How do they know whether they are “a significant contributor”? Doesn’t everyone believe that they are? As one person tweeted, “still not sure if I need to start packing my bags.” The company might lose good people in the meantime—people who don’t want to stick around to see what happens.

As expected, Musk was asked how he views freedom of speech. Musk distinguished between freedom of speech and “freedom of reach,” giving the example of “walk[ing] into the middle of Times Square and deny[ing] the Holocaust" but not allowing that to be promoted. "So I think people should be allowed to say pretty outrageous things that are within the bounds of the law, but then that doesn’t get amplified. It doesn’t get, you know, a ton of reach."

A lot of uncertainty remains for Twitter employees. It’s difficult to know how sincere the meeting was. As this employee cartoon suggests, employees expected that the meeting, although billed as confidential, would be leaked. Still, the format was probably useful for employees to hear directly from Musk, which is the point of these meetings, whether in person or virtual.

Netflix's New "Culture Guidelines" Push Back on Employees

Netflix is letting employees know—before they’re hired—that they might find some content “harmful.” In the website “Jobs” section, the company writes “Culture Guidelines” to promote its culture and help applicants see whether the company is a fit.

Recently, Netflix added a new section called Artistic Expression. As a Wall Street Journal article explains, the company faces pressure that all technologies face and had a recent reckoning with comedian Dave Chappelle’s “The Closer,” which caused employee protests (and the CEO to regret his handling of the situation). Netflix is also facing subscription cancellations and increasing competition, so maybe the leadership team believes it can’t afford to censor content that maintains current and attracts new users.

The language, below, is probably innocuous enough, although “harmful” is a strong word. Trouble ensues when specific situations arise. How the company handles those in the future will be interesting to see.

---

Artistic Expression

Entertaining the world is an amazing opportunity and also a challenge because viewers have very different tastes and points of view. So we offer a wide variety of TV shows and movies, some of which can be provocative. To help members make informed choices about what to watch, we offer ratings, content warnings and easy to use parental controls.

Not everyone will like—or agree with—everything on our service. While every title is different, we approach them based on the same set of principles: we support the artistic expression of the creators we choose to work with; we program for a diversity of audiences and tastes; and we let viewers decide what’s appropriate for them, versus having Netflix censor specific artists or voices,

As employees we support the principle that Netflix offers a diversity of stories, even if we find some titles counter to our own personal values. Depending on your role, you may need to work on titles you perceive to be harmful. If you’d find it hard to support our content breadth, Netflix may not be the best place for you.

Twitter's New Privacy Notice

Like most people, I ignore privacy notices, those jumbles of legalese in small print with too few headings. But Twitter’s latest is well designed and written in an authentic voice with conversational language. I can’t say whether previous notices were similar, but this one covers what users might care about and walks the reader through each part.

The notice starts with an engaging introduction that speaks to the reader: “Before you scroll, read this.” Six main points are up front, and each section leads with a user’s question, for example, “Seriously — what happens with my data?”

I wish more companies would write privacy notices this way. But then, people might actually read them.

Business Attire Trends

A New York Times article describes new approaches to what people wear to work, which could influence what students wear on interviews and on their first day at the office. Since the pandemic, new language has emerged: “business comfort,” “workleisure,” and “power casual.” Dress is more relaxed, with more elastic waistbands and stretchier fabrics. The article author says that trends follow the economy: in bad times, people dress up to impress recruiters and managers, while in good times (tight labor markets like today), people tend to dress down.

This advice for recent grads seems reasonable for now:

J.T. O’Donnell, a former human-resources executive and founder of the career coaching platform Work It Daily, said she would not recommend that job applicants or recent graduates automatically buy interview suits these days. While that may work for some industries, like banking and consulting, she said, job candidates should research potential employers on social media to get a sense of how people at the company dress, then “dress slightly higher than what their proclaimed style is.”

“It can be very easy to say right now that they’re lucky to even have me walk through the door, so I just don’t care about my appearance right now,” Ms. O’Donnell said. But “you do want to not be wrinkly, have stuff tucked in, look like you made an effort.” She advises job hunters to wear clothing suitable for visiting their grandmothers.

In addition to reducing stress, the new attire may reflect students’ authenticity—who they are and what they like to wear. Both are good results of new clothes instead of the black/gray/navy suit-costumes of the past.

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.

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

Will Smith's Apology

The 2022 Academy Awards ceremony was eventful, with Chris Rock referencing Jada Smith’s appearance and her husband, Will Smith, hitting Rock on stage. Jada Smith has spoken openly about having alopecia, a hair loss condition. Rock’s joke clearly hit a nerve with her husband.

From the audience, Smith cursed at Rock, who continued with his presentation. Later, Smith gave a tearful acceptance speech for Best Actor in a Leading Role, comparing himself to the character he played, Serena and Venus Williams’ father: they both protected their family. He apologized to his fellow nominees and the Academy but not to Rock. The next day, he posted a fuller apology on Instagram, mentioning Rock first.

The Academy tweeted a pat response, “The Academy does not condone violence of any form. Tonight we are delighted to celebrate our 94th Academy Awards winners, who deserve this moment of recognition from their peers and movie lovers around the world.” I don’t see any response from Rock yet.

The rest of the ceremony was awkward, and host Amy Schumer made a joke, “Did I miss something? There's like, a different vibe in here....” Her idea was probably to call out what was obvious.

Everyone seems to have an opinion on the situation. Was Rock’s joke about “G.I. Jane 2” over the top? Was Smith’s response appropriate? Should he have been prevented from speaking after that point? Should the Academy do more?

The situation is complex and calls us to explore issues of character, for example, compassion, courage, authenticity, accountability, and vulnerability.

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.

Advice for Resignation Emails

A Wall Street Journal article suggests ways to resign from your job gracefully. With a wave of post-pandemic departures, we’re seeing all sorts of resignation messages, some more appropriate than others. The string of emails can be disheartening for people who decide to stay, and leavers should be mindful of burning bridges they may want to walk across in the future.

A law career coach advises that people “Let it rip. Let everything out”—in a document that you don’t send. Then, send an email that respects the workplace and the people you’ll leave behind:

“For the real deal, be gracious and express gratitude. Include up to three career highlights. (Any more and you risk being seen as a braggart.) And skip the passive-aggressive jabs.”

I hadn’t thought about including career highlights, and I wonder whether coworkers would appreciate reading them. Instead, I suggest observing what other resignation emails include and following suit. Every workplace has its own norms around these types of messages.

I do agree with this advice:

“By giving your notice, ‘the power dynamic has been leveled.’ Use that new sense of control and confidence to share more authentically about yourself, not torpedo your relationships on the way out the door.”

The coach is right: you made your decision and are burdening your manager and coworkers who will pick up the slack. Now’s the time to demonstrate humility instead of rubbing it in and causing more hurt feelings.

Deception in the Hiring Process

A New York Times article surprised me. During a video job interview, someone else answered “technical questions while the job candidate moved his lips onscreen.”

All applicants present themselves in the best light. We describe our accomplishments and may push the limits of our expertise. We also “cover” parts of ourselves that we fear may be undesirable to an employer.

But having a friend interview for a candidate is out of bounds. In this example, the interviewer wondered, “What did he think was going to happen when he moved across the country and realized he couldn’t do the job?” The article concludes with a quote from a deceptive candidate who felt relieved when she didn’t get the job. Of course, that’s a better outcome than suffering the embarrassment of failure.

This situation is a clear example of integrity—misrepresenting oneself, claiming to be someone they (intentional plural) are not. Today, we have a particularly strong job market; I would hope that candidates can find a job for which they’re qualified.

Image source.

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.

Arguments in the Joe Rogan, Spotify Situation

A few musicians and podcast creators are leaving Spotify over controversy about “The Joe Rogan Experience,” a popular show that has included misinformation about COVID-19 vaccinations. Comparing messages from different points of view is an interesting look at persuasive arguments and raises issues of character. Here are a few to explore:

• Spotify’s stance is explained in this statement and may be summarized as follows from the chief executive and co-founder: “I think the important part here is that we don’t change our policies based on one creator nor do we change it based on any media cycle, or calls from anyone else.” Spotify also created a COVID information hub.

• Neil Young removed his music, which had hundreds of millions of views, and explained his rationale in a letter (since removed from his website): “I am doing this because Spotify is spreading fake information about vaccines—potentially causing death to those who believe the disinformation being spread by them.”

• Crosby, Stills, and Nash followed suit and posted their reason on Twitter: “We support Neil and agree with him that there is dangerous disinformation being aired on Spotify’s Joe Rogan podcast. While we always value alternate points of view, knowingly spreading disinformation during this global pandemic has deadly consequences. Until real action is taken to show that a concern for humanity must be balanced with commerce, we don’t want our music—or the music we made together—to be on the same platform.”

• Roxane Gay explained her decision to remove “The Roxane Gay Agenda” in a New York Times opinion letter. In closing, she wrote, “I am not trying to impede anyone’s freedom to speak. Joe Rogan and others like him can continue to proudly encourage misinformation and bigotry to vast audiences. They will be well rewarded for their efforts. The platforms sharing these rewards can continue to look the other way. But today at least, I won’t.”

• Bréne Brown “paused” her two podcasts and wrote that she is waiting for more information: “I’ve enjoyed the creative collaboration with Spotify, and I appreciate how the leadership has shown up in our meetings over the past week. Now that Spotify has published its misinformation policy, and the policy itself appears to address the majority of my concerns, I’m in the process of learning how the policy will be applied. I’m hopeful that the podcasts will be back next week.” As you might expect, Brown demonstrates vulnerability, including negative, personal comments she has received about the issue.

• Joe Rogan apologized in a 10-minute Instagram video, promising to “balance out viewpoints with other people’s perspectives.”

UPDATE: A video compilation of Rogan using a racial slur has emerged, and he apologized—again.

BlackRock CEO Defends Focus

Investment firm BlackRock has pushed companies to pursue a social purpose in addition to profits. The chief executive’s annual letter to investors defends this approach, which has been criticized as anti-business.

Up front in the title, “The Power of Capitalism,” Larry Fink addresses criticism head on and further explains in the letter:

“Stakeholder capitalism is not about politics. It is not a social or ideological agenda. It is not ‘woke.’ It is capitalism, driven by mutually beneficial relationships between you and the employees, customers, suppliers, and communities your company relies on to prosper. This is the power of capitalism.”

Fink states his belief clearly in the last paragraph:

“…it is more important than ever that your company and its management be guided by its purpose. If you stay true to your company's purpose and focus on the long term, while adapting to this new world around us, you will deliver durable returns for shareholders and help realize the power of capitalism for all.”

The letter illustrates persuasive communication, focusing not on emotional appeal but logical arguments. For his audience, which he defines at the beginning as CEOs, he encourages a commitment to purpose—for leaders to let stakeholders “know where we stand on the societal issues intrinsic to our companies’ long-term success.” He writes “long-term” 18 times in the letter, using repetition to drive the point home. Fink illustrates a few leadership character dimensions, for example, authenticity, integrity, and courage.

Candidates for U.S. Supreme Court Justice

Speculation abounds on the next U.S. Supreme Court Justice, but something we know for sure: it will be a Black woman. President Biden promised to fill the spot with a Black woman should a position open up during his presidency.

Several women are in the running, including Judge Ketanji Brown, shown here. Many candidates have degrees from Harvard and Yale, serve as judges, and have experience as law clerks for past and current justices.

The selection process will be interesting to watch. Like any employment situation, the candidates will be interviewed, but unlike business employment situations, they will be vetted under a microscope. After the president nominates a candidate, the Senate votes, by majority, whether to confirm the nomination. We’ll see to what extent race and gender come into the conversations.

The Supreme Court website describes the job qualifications:

The Constitution does not specify qualifications for Justices such as age, education, profession, or native-born citizenship. A Justice does not have to be a lawyer or a law school graduate, but all Justices have been trained in the law. Many of the 18th and 19th century Justices studied law under a mentor because there were few law schools in the country.

Today, it would be quite unusual for a justice to lack a law degree, and the selection process favors certain schools. Of the nine current justices, four graduated from Harvard Law School and four from Yale. Amy Coney Barrett, the most recent addition, graduated from Notre Dame.

A Good Apology

Sorry Watch assessors gave rave reviews to an apology from DisCon III, a science fiction convention. Sorry Watch identifies the following criteria for a good apology:

1. Use the word “sorry” or “apologize.”

2. Name the offense. (Not “what happened.”)

3. Take responsibility.

4. Show you understand the impact.

5. How will you ensure this doesn’t recur?

6. Make amends.

These suggestions align with academic research on apologies described in Chapter 7 of Business Communication and Character. (For example, see Roy J. Lewicki, Beth Polin, and Robert B. Lount Jr., "An Exploration of the Structure of Effective Apologies," Negotiation and Conflict Management Research 9 (2016): pp. 177–196).

DisCon accepted sponsorship from Raytheon, a defense contractor, and not everyone agreed with the choice. In addition to conference organizers, award recipients, who were unaware of the sponsorship, suffered harsh criticism.

The conference chair stepped up, describing what happened, acknowledging the impact, taking responsibility, and identifying future actions. Other than apologizing, amends or reparations are difficult to imagine in this situation. Mary Robinette Kowal did what she could and demonstrated several character dimensions, for example, accountability, humility, vulnerability, compassion, and courage.

---

I am Mary Robinette Kowal, and I was the chair for DisCon III. I take full responsibility for accepting Raytheon Intelligence and Space as a sponsor, and I apologize for doing so.

The decision tree that led us to this point is filled with branches that sound like excuses for my own culpability. At the root of it is simply that in accepting funding from Raytheon Intelligence and Space and partnering with them for the members’ red carpet event, I was wrong.

That choice has caused harm and damage to people: the finalists, who were unaware; the people in our communities; the members and staff of Worldcon, who trusted me to make good choices.

I am sorry that I let you all down.

DisCon III is making an anonymous contribution to an organization dedicated to peace, equal to the amount we received from Raytheon. I am also personally contributing to the same organization.

The delay in responding added to the distress that we caused. For this, I ask your forgiveness. We needed to have conversations that were slowed by post-convention travel.

For the past several days, we have read your comments in email and on social media. Thank you for sharing them with us and trusting that you would be heard and taken seriously. Your honesty and sincerity are what make our community a better place.

Future conrunners can avoid our mistakes by:

• Developing a sponsorship policy for your organization that reflects the values and concerns of our community.

• Creating a robust plan for doing due diligence on potential sponsors.

• Creating a mission and value statement against which to measure actions.

We did none of those. Our Code of Conduct says that DisCon III aims to build an inclusive community for all fans. This sponsorship did not achieve that goal.

I cannot erase the harm that my actions caused. This happened on my watch. It is my fault, and I am deeply sorry for the pain I caused.

Signed,

Mary Robinette Kowal

American Airlines Leadership Announcement

In a video and website statement, American Airlines announced a new CEO. President Robert Isom will succeed Doug Parker, who served as CEO for two decades. Parker will become the board chair.

The company statement is typical, with glowing quotes to be easily lifted into news articles. A two-and-a-half-minute video of Isom and Parker is upbeat, with each executive complimenting the other. The primary audience is employees, although the video is posted on YouTube, clearly intended for the press and public as well.

Obviously scripted, the video includes some staid language, for example, “I’m confident that now is the right time,” “with change, comes opportunity,” and “together, we will achieve great things.” What a great example to analyze with class. I wonder how students would describe the communication objectives and assess the delivery style and how well the executives achieved their purpose.

Dorsey’s Resignation Email

After co-founding and leading the company, Jack Dorsey has resigned from Twitter. He was with Twitter for 16 years and says now is the right time to create some distance from the company founders. In a email to employees, which he tweeted for transparency, Dorsey describes his confidence in the new CEO, Parag Agrawal, and board chair.

The email reminds me of “One Last Time” in Hamilton, in which George Washington explains that he won’t run again for president. Dorsey seems to know that his time is up, and he is making space for others.

He may be tired of the pressure on tech companies, including an activist investor. Dorsey also continues to serve as CEO of Square.

His email lacks some more common features of CEO resignations. I expected to see a recount of Twitter’s successes going back to the early days, but we read none of that. Perhaps Jack is, as he says, ready to move on.