Companies Reconsider Alcohol

Companies are finding alternatives to alcohol at social gatherings. The news raises issues of inclusion, and students who live on campus may find this topic relevant to their own experience.

U.K. organization Chartered Management Institute (CMI) is warning companies about the dangers of alcohol at work parties. The group’s recent survey of 1,000 managers shows that people often experience alcohol-fueled inappropriate behavior and harassment. Although work events are important for team building, particularly since the pandemic and the rise of remote work, 42% of respondents said parties “should be organised around activities that don't involve alcohol.” Companies that serve alcohol at events also open themselves up to liability because of drunk driving in addition to behavioral transgressions.

In addition to these issues, some employees don’t drink, and events designed around alcohol can be awkward. Some people choose not to drink, while others can’t because of medications, addictions, or other issues. Some people find it difficult to be around alcohol at all. What is management’s responsibility to these employees? If a company touts DEI values and belonging at work, then shouldn’t all employees be considered when planning parties?

A few companies have banned alcohol entirely. For example, Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff wrote to employees, “Alcohol is a drug, and having alcohol on a Salesforce premise is simply unfair to the Ohana [employees] who either do not want it or are intolerant of it.” He included drinking during work hours, which was more common at tech companies in the past.

Students may have a lot of opinions on this topic. Some universities are increasing “late-night programming,” alternatives for students looking for something to do without alcohol. How do students believe alcohol affects feelings of belonging on campus?

Image source.

Boarding School Admits Responsibility in Suicide

In a written statement one year after a student’s death by suicide, a New Jersey boarding school took responsibility for its role and committed to action. Some call the admission “rare,” which is true, and “courageous,” or taking action despite risks, and I disagree. The statement announces a settlement with Jack Reid’s parents, so its liability is already determined. In other words, administrators suffer few risks by confessing what is obvious.

Statements at the time of his death are typical. After a trigger warning pop-up, we see condolences, vigils, counseling, and other support, and a separate message to alumni.

The recent message, under a tab labeled “Anniversary Statement,” describes a clearer picture about the circumstances surrounding Reid’s death. He was bullied, the victim of a false rumor. News reports say he was called a rapist and was subjected to cruelty as a result.

Providing specific examples of how the school failed Reid and the community is rare in settlement messages and a big step forward. Although the statement isn’t signed by anyone in particular, which would have been a nice touch, the school identifies specific missed opportunities in the third and fourth paragraphs.

The statement is a good model. During the bullying, school officials lacked both accountability and compassion for what was happening to Reid, and they admit this failure. The school is already vulnerable, so why not allow leaders to admit vulnerability. The statement also expresses humility by identifying wrongdoings and the willingness to learn from mistakes.

But is it courageous? The specific examples may open opportunities for more criticism, which is a risk, but the lack of action at the time is fairly obvious. Despite Reid’s complaints, little or nothing was done. A lead bully was suspended but for unrelated reasons. Then, all students saw him return to school—back to Reid’s same dorm. Reid died by suicide that night.

---

We experienced the tragic loss of Jack Reid on April 30, 2022 and through great sorrow, came together in meaningful ways as a community. The Special Oversight Committee of the Board of Trustees conducted a five-month review of the circumstances surrounding Jack’s death by suicide, and produced a summary of findings that were shared with the community in December 2022.

April 30, 2023

The Lawrenceville School and William and Elizabeth Reid, parents of Jack Reid, have reached an agreement in the wake of the tragic loss of Jack, a Fourth Former in Dickinson House, who died by suicide on April 30, 2022. Jack was universally regarded as an extremely kind and good-hearted young man, with an unwavering sense of social and civic responsibility and a bright future. We continue to mourn this loss.

As we seek to improve as a community, we have examined our role and take responsibility for what we could have done differently. Lawrenceville’s top priority is the physical, social, and emotional health, safety, and wellbeing of our students. We recognize that in Jack’s case, we fell tragically short of these expectations.

Jack was a victim of bullying and other forms of cruel behavior at Lawrenceville over the course of a year, including in the form of false rumors in person and online. When these behaviors were brought to the attention of the School, there were steps that the School should in hindsight have taken but did not, including the fact that the School did not make a public or private statement that it investigated and found rumors about Jack that were untrue. There also were circumstances in which the involvement of an adult would have made a difference.

In addition, on April 30, when the student who previously had been disciplined for bullying Jack was expelled for an unrelated violation of School rules, the School allowed him to return to Dickinson House largely unsupervised where students gathered, including some who said harsh words about Jack. School administrators did not notify or check on Jack. That night, Jack took his life, telling a friend that he could not go through this again. The School acknowledges that bullying and unkind behavior, and actions taken or not taken by the School, likely contributed to Jack’s death.

In the ensuing months, the School undertook an investigation of the circumstances leading up to Jack's death. Reflecting on those findings, and discussing them with the Reid family, we acknowledge that more should have been done to protect Jack.

Today's multi-faceted settlement with the Reids is aimed at honoring Jack, taking appropriate responsibility, and instituting meaningful changes that will support the School’s aspirations of becoming a model for anti-bullying and student mental health.

Over the past year, we have focused on four broad lines of action: training and educational programs, House culture and healthy socializing, the structure of our Dean of Students office and disciplinary protocols, and general health and wellness. In addition to efforts undertaken over the past 12 months, we are planning the following:

• Lawrenceville will contract with a specialist on school bullying to help construct policies and training to identify and effectively address the behaviors that lead to bullying and cyberbullying.

• Lawrenceville will contribute to the Jack Reid Foundation, a foundation established by the Reid family focused on education and prevention of bullying.

• Lawrenceville will hire a Dean of Campus Wellbeing. This will be an endowed position focused on the variety of student mental health issues educational institutions face.

• Lawrenceville faculty, professional staff, and students will participate in trainings and workshops to raise awareness and promote better understanding of adolescent mental health.

• Consulting with outside experts as needed, Lawrenceville will continue to review and make improvements to its emergency response protocols and crisis response plans; it similarly will review the safety training it provides to faculty and staff to assure it aligns with best practices.

• Lawrenceville will make a recurring gift to a mental health organization to support research and best practices for suicide prevention in school environments.

There is, of course, nothing that will ever make up for the tragedy of losing this promising and beloved young man. But it is the hope of all of us that Jack's memory is honored.

Bed Bath & Beyond Communicates Bankruptcy

After years of closing stores, Bed Bath & Beyond communicated its decision to file for bankruptcy and what it means for customers. Messages follow typical bad-news announcements.

A short message on its website, shown here, thanks loyal customers. Perhaps the most important part is that stores are still open: the company needs to sell its remaining inventory.

An email to customers, below, conveys the news upfront, expresses appreciation, and answers questions customers might have. In three of the four bullets, we see “we expect,” communicating uncertainty that might be off-putting to customers with outstanding merchandise, gift cards, or orders. But bullets are clear (use those coupons fast!), and the separate section for registries make sense for worried brides and grooms and shower planners.

This is a sad ending for a former Fortune 500 company with 1,530 stores in 2019. Despite changing consumer preferences and other issues, critics say the company’s demise was caused, in part, by bad management decisions. But none of that matters now; the time for accountability is long gone. Instead, as they should, messages focus on the nostalgia that, for better or worse, kept Bed Bath afloat longer than some expected.

---

To Our Valued Customers:

Earlier today, Bed Bath & Beyond Inc. filed for voluntary Chapter 11 protection.

We appreciate that our customers have trusted us through the most important milestones in their lives – from going to college, to getting married, to settling into a new home, to having a baby – and we wanted to reach out to you to explain what this means.

Our stores are open and serving customers. However, we have initiated a process to wind down operations.

What This Means for Our Customers

We wanted to make you aware that several of our programs and policies may be changing soon. As of today:

• We expect to process returns and exchanges in accordance with our usual policies until May 24, 2023, for items purchased prior to April 23, 2023

• We expect Gift Cards, Gift Certificates, and Loyalty Certificates will be accepted through May 8, 2023

• We will no longer accept coupons or Welcome Rewards+ discounts beginning April 26, 2023

• We expect all in-stock orders placed online both prior and after our bankruptcy filing to be fulfilled at this time

Registry
Your registry data is safe. You can still view your registry at this time. We expect to partner with an alternative platform where you will be able to transfer your data and complete your registry. We will provide details in the coming days.

We Are Here for You
For Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) and additional information, please visit
https://restructuring.ra.kroll.com/bbby. Stakeholders with questions can email
BBBYInfo@ra.kroll.com or call at (833) 570-5355 or (646) 440-4806 if calling from outside the U.S. or Canada.

Thank you for your loyalty and support.

Bed Bath & Beyond | buybuy BABY

PRIVACY POLICYUNSUBSCRIBEVIEW ONLINE

Please add bedbathandbeyond@email.bedbathandbeyond.com to your address book.
Please do not reply to this email. Contact us here.
©2022 Bed Bath & Beyond Inc. and its subsidiaries. All rights reserved.
Corporate Headquarters - 650 Liberty Avenue, Union, New Jersey 07083

Southwest Comms and Disruption

After technical issues that caused outsized delays in December, Southwest communicated little, trying to downplay more service disruptions yesterday. The first tweet, shown here, responded to a customer complaint. The second tweet accurately describes the issue as a “pause,” a term a New York Times article repeats, based on the time period. But the impact on passengers was significant: 1,820 flights (43% of the airline’s daily flights) were delayed. A silly gif with moving clip art appeared in the second message for no reason.

On the Southwest website, a short “Operational Update” tries to shift blame to a supplier: “a vendor-supplied firewall went down and connection to some operational data was unexpectedly lost.” Later, a “Travel Advisory” apologized to customers and gave options for no-fee rebooking and standing by—and a list of phone numbers for assistance.

Critics say Southwest’s “outdated” technology might cause more problems until a systemwide upgrade is possible. One communication strategy is to manage customer expectations in the meantime. Telling people to expect delays might ease some pain; of course, that could lead to fewer bookings, but that may likely happen anyway. Passengers will need to be reminded about other benefits of traveling with Southwest.

New Conventions for Layoff Messages

Guidelines for communicating layoffs are shifting, which may have implications for other bad-news messages. A Wall Street Journal article discusses which day of the week (now Wednesday instead of Friday), how deep to cut, how much severance to offer, and how to decide who goes.

The most obvious shift is away from the business communication wisdom of delivering bad news in person. Why call remote workers into the office only to fire them?

We could say the same for other types of bad news: cutting bonuses or benefits, giving a “below-expectations” performance review, or ending a project. Maybe the best wisdom is to follow communication norms. If a weekly one-on-one meeting is in person, then that would be an appropriate place and time to talk about negative customer feedback. The medium might raise bigger questions about typical communications. If the most typical communication is by text, then, maybe a text is best, but why is that the most typical way of communicating?

Of course, timing is an issue, so these regularly scheduled meetings might not be ideal. Then, what’s the secondary way to communicate? By phone? By email? The decision also depends on the severity of the news—a career-ended change or a minor setback? The guiding principle in articles seems to be that employees could complain publicly; perhaps a better guide is compassion—being humane and prioritizing employees’ feelings over our own reluctance to give bad news.

Back in 2015, in the 9th edition of Business Communication, I softened the “indirect style” recommendation for bad-news messages—adding a “buffer” and giving reasons before the main point. Research hasn’t supported this organizational strategy, and corporate messages that follow this “soften-the-blow” approach are ridiculed. Employees typically know when bad news is coming—or they should if managers have been doing their job.

In the past, faculty spent too much time worrying about sequence within a message; this is a non-issue in articles about layoff message like the Wall Street Journal’s. Companies need to worry more about the sequence and timing of multiple messages, which are often posted online because they wind up there anyway. No spoiler alert, but Episode 3 of Succession on HBO, Season 3, is an interesting example.

Image source.

Cornell Messages About Trigger Warnings

Cornell University’s Student Assembly voted unanimously for faculty to include trigger warnings, but the Administration rejected the mandate. Business communication students can analyze the Cornell students’ resolution and the university’s email response.

The student resolution states: “Urging university officials to require instructors who present graphic traumatic content that may trigger the onset of symptoms of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) to provide advance notice to students and refrain from penalizing students who opt out of exposure to such content.” Evidence includes research about PTSD and discussion about the value of advanced warnings. The resolution concludes: “Student Assembly implores all instructors to provide content warnings on the syllabus for any traumatic content that may be discussed, including but not limited to: sexual assault, domestic violence, self-harm, suicide, child abuse, racial hate crimes, transphobic violence, homophobic harassment, xenophobia.”

In the Administration’s response, President Martha Pollack and Provost Michael I. Kotlikoff reject the recommendation because it “would infringe on our core commitment to academic freedom and freedom of inquiry, and are at odds with the goals of a Cornell education.” They link to the university’s value of “Free and Open Inquiry and Expression” but acknowledge that certain warnings are “common courtesy” and that “contextualizing” content may be appropriate.

Conservative news organizations supported the Administration and criticized students for the proposal. With its own evidence, The Wall Street Journal editorial board wrote an opinion piece, not missing a chance to denounce DEI efforts: “Cornell’s position is good news, but these bad ideas will recur as long as the diversity, equity and inclusion bureaucracy governs academia, pushing the notion that honest speech and debate are traumatic. If universities want to reclaim real intellectual openness on campus, they have to help students get comfortable with being uncomfortable.” Cornell’s Administration might agree with the last part of that argument.

Several character dimensions are illustrated in these examples. We might say that students demonstrated courage with their resolution, and the Administration demonstrated integrity by being consistent with university values. Some might believe Administrators lack compassion for students and are failing to hold faculty accountable, while others might say the university holds everyone accountable for inquiry and learning. It’s complicated and could lead to a good class discussion.

Zuckerberg Frames Layoffs in the “Year of Efficiency”

Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s note to employees is a study in bad-news messages. In a 2,188-word message note posted on Meta’s news site and his personal Facebook page, Zuckerberg explained his strategy for the “Year of Efficiency.” This frame for operational changes is good for investors, who are concerned with financials, but not for employees who will be laid off.

In the first paragraph, Zuckerberg reiterates Facebook’s initial mission of “building the future of human connection,” and he identifies two broad goals: becoming a better technology company and improving financial performance. He doesn’t wait too long—the third paragraph—to confirm layoffs, which are obvious from the start. With some compassion, he acknowledges “uncertainty“ and “stress” and identifies the timeline, so people know what to expect. In the fourth and sixth paragraphs, he writes:

This will be tough and there's no way around that. It will mean saying goodbye to talented and passionate colleagues who have been part of our success. They've dedicated themselves to our mission and I'm personally grateful for all their efforts. We will support people in the same ways we have before and treat everyone with the gratitude they deserve. . . .

I understand that this update may still feel surprising, so I'd like to lay out some broader context on our vision, our culture, and our operating philosophy.

Zuckerberg outlines additional changes, including hiring freezes, technology investments, and more in-person time, which may not be popular either. Students could analyze evidence Zuckerberg provides for his claims, for example, “leaner is better,” “flatter is faster,” and working in-person improves performance. For the in-person claim, he does acknowledge, “This requires further study, but our hypothesis is that it is still easier to build trust in person and that those relationships help us work more effectively.” Still, this could be a contentious issue, and he could offer external research to support his points. But perhaps academic research would have less credibility than the internal data, which he uses for his other claims.

Zuckerberg demonstrates some humility and highlights changes based on employee feedback:

I recognize that sharing plans for restructuring and layoffs months in advance creates a challenging period. But last fall, we heard feedback that you wanted more transparency sooner into any restructuring plans, so that's what I'm trying to provide here. I hope that giving you a timeline and principles for what to expect will help us get through the next couple of months and then move forward as we implement these changes that I believe will have a very positive impact on how we work.

The post illustrates a CEO’s difficult decisions and how he communicates them to employees. These changes are in addition to last year’s layoffs—13% of the workforce—which Zuckerberg mentions towards the end of the long post. Despite his communication efforts, uncertainty prevails—not only in employees’ wondering who will have a job in a few months but in whether the metaverse vision will be as successful as Zuckerberg hopes.

Lesson Learned: Don't Use AI in Sensitive Situations

The Office of Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion (EDI) at Peabody College, Vanderbilt University, used ChatGPT to generate an email about the Michigan State campus shooting, and it wasn’t received well. This story illustrates issues of accountability (administrators taking responsibility), but failing compassion in a time of tragedy and failing integrity (consistency).

The email referred to “shootings,” which is not accurate. Otherwise, it sounds like boilerplate, but not that much different from typical emails a campus community receives in these types of situations. Compare that email to one sent from the vice provost and dean of students, which sounds more emotional but is still common.

Perhaps the only giveaway was a line at the bottom:

(“Paraphrase from OpenAI’s ChatGPT AI language model, personal communication, February 15, 2023.”)

On the one hand, I admire the writers’ honesty, doing what faculty are increasingly asking students to do: to identify whether and how they use AI for their writing. But of course, the choice reflects poor judgment.

Student backlash was swift and fierce. Using words like “disgusting” and “sick and twisted,” students called on administrators to “Do more. Do anything. And lead us into a better future with genuine, human empathy, not a robot.” A senior said, “Would they do this also for the death of a student, faculty, or staff member? Automating messages on grief and crisis is the most on-the-nose, explicit recognition that we as students are more customers than a community to the Vanderbilt administration. The fact it’s from the office of EDI might be the cherry on top.”

University officials responded quickly. In a follow-up email to students, an EDI dean wrote, “While we believe in the message of inclusivity expressed in the email, using ChatGPT to generate communications on behalf of our community in a time of sorrow and in response to a tragedy contradicts the values that characterize Peabody College. As with all new technologies that affect higher education, this moment gives us all an opportunity to reflect on what we know and what we still must learn about AI.” Could ChatGPT have written that too?

This is a precarious time for universities, as faculty grapple with how to use AI tools and what policies best serve students and academic goals. Using AI as a starting point for such a sensitive message may never be acceptable, and it’s certainly too soon now. Faculty will have a difficult time enforcing AI policies if they use tools in ways that contradict the spirit of their own guidelines.

Do Better than “CFBR” for Social Support

A WSJ article describes the increased use of “CFBR,” meaning commenting for better reach, a way to elevate a social media post. A popular way of giving laid-off employees more visibility during their job search, the approach raises questions of authenticity and true compassion.

Hootsuite’s definition makes it sound careless:

CFBR, or Commenting For Better Reach, is a popular comment used on platforms like LinkedIn and Facebook.

Since most social media algorithms favor content with high engagement, “commenting for better reach” is a way to offer an organic boost to a post you think should have more exposure. When you comment on someone else’s post, that post is more likely to show up in your followers’ feeds.

This tactic may be effective, but it’s a little spammy. If you want to take a more thoughtful approach, we recommend leaving an authentic comment that engages with the post’s content—or even resharing that post with your followers.

Typing CFBR may be the “Good luck!” of social media posts despite heartache shared in the original post. I wonder how students view and use the comment. Maybe they can find better ways to support their peers.

Image source.

Fetterman Admits Depression

Newly elected Senator John Fetterman went public about his depression, and his wife is contributing to the messaging. Months after his stroke and a tight run-off election, Fetterman’s health may be a more prominent news topic than he would like. His decision illustrates character dimensions of vulnerability and courage—and offers opportunities for compassion. According to news reports, reactions are favorable, overall.

John Fetterman’s wife, Gisele, tweeted this note and the official statement from the senator’s office. The message is short and, despite the unfortunate line spacing error, says what it needs to say.

Gisele Fetterman also tweeted, “Thank you for sharing your personal challenges and being so vulnerable with us over the past couple of days. This one felt really important to pass on.” She posted the anonymous note:

I just wanted to say this: today I went to therapy for the first time in my life. It’s been over a decade since I was diagnosed with depression, but I never wanted to ask anyone for help with it. But seeing that one of the toughest people I’ve ever talked to did the same thing today reassured me that I was making the right choice.

Students might see positive results from being vulnerable despite the risks. In a pinned tweet, Giselle Fetterman wrote, “Pennsylvania, the spouse of your new senator is a formerly undocumented immigrant. Thank you.”

Campus Communications About a Shooting

In the most recent gun violence tragedy, a man shot and killed three Michigan State University students, injured five more, and then shot himself. Although this may be a difficult class discussion, students can learn about crisis communications from the incident.

MSU Communications

The day after the shooting, Interim President Teresa K. Woodruff posted a video to the “Spartan” community. In some ways, her presentation is classic crisis communication with the typical sympathy to the families and friends; gratitude to locals, colleagues, and President Biden; encouragement for everyone to feel and to heal; and information about classes, counseling, and events. The presentation is also classic academic with metaphors and a Henry Wadsworth Longfellow quote. Woodruff sounds formal and scripted, starting with “Dear Spartans and Friends.” She plays it safe, giving no comment about the political controversy about guns.

A Chronicle article is titled, “‘We Have a National Crisis’: How Michigan State Responded to a Mass Shooting,” but it’s misleading. The article quotes an associate professor of education; the quote is not an official university stance and illustrates the problem with individuals speaking to the press. Students can debate whether the university should take a stand and whether now is the appropriate or effective time.

From at least Tuesday at 9:30 p.m. until Wednesday at 9 a.m. ET, the entire MSU home page is an “alert” shown here.

On the "emergency” page, we see a series of messages from the “Shelter-in-place order” to “Property assistance information.”

Other University Communications

Emails like this one from Cornell University central administration and this one from a dean are typical. In these types of situations, universities tend to reach out to their own students. Students may have friends at MSU and, even if they don’t know someone affected, a shooting incident, understandably, makes people in similar situations feel unsafe. Campus security is always questioned. Perhaps students can compare Cornell’s message to ones they may have received.

Press Conference

Local leaders and police officials held a press conference, which serves as an example of crisis communication and handling public questions. Of course, students will have comments about delivery, style, and other aspects of presentations skills.

Microsoft Layoff Email

In step with other tech companies, Microsoft is laying off 10,000 employees, and CEO Satya Nadella’s email is posted publicly. I’m surprised that Nadella didn’t learn more lessons from the 2014 Microsoft layoff email a NY Magazine writer called “hilariously bad.”

Nadella starts with the vague subject line, “Focusing on our short- and long-term opportunity,” and then writes two paragraphs about challenges and opportunities that lie ahead. Mercifully, he gets to the news in the first sentence of the third paragraph. This is an improvement over the 2014 memo in which former exec Stephen Elop announced layoffs in the eleventh paragraph.

In Chapter 8 of Business Communication and Character, I write extensively about the value of putting bad news up front and the lack of research support for the “indirect style”—giving explanations first and then the bad news. In this case, I’m quite sure that employees knew what was coming, so a more direct style is more appropriate.

In these sentences, Nadella puts the 10,000 in perspective, as we teach in crisis communication. However, employees will wonder whether they are affected and when they will hear the news. Based on the industry and his first paragraphs, employees working on AI likely feel safe, but a clearer timeline for those who aren’t is always a good idea.

Today, we are making changes that will result in the reduction of our overall workforce by 10,000 jobs through the end of FY23 Q3. This represents less than 5 percent of our total employee base, with some notifications happening today. It’s important to note that while we are eliminating roles in some areas, we will continue to hire in key strategic areas.

Twice, with a paragraph in between, Nadella promises transparency:

. . . we will do so in the most thoughtful and transparent way possible.

. . . we will treat our people with dignity and respect, and act transparently.

Employees might prefer actual transparency to hearing about it.

Nadella does express compassion and explain benefits, which is useful for employees, but clearly designed for public viewing. Overall, the email reads like one always intended for a public blog.

Update: A Wall Street Journal article reported a concert Microsoft sponsored at Davos with Sting performing for about 50 people the night before layoffs were announced. The author describes it as a “bad look.” We could call it “bad optics”—or just insensitive, lacking integrity and compassion.

Image source.

Southwest Communications

This week’s debacle will make a great case study. As other airlines recovered from the storms, Southwest lagged. Here are a few communications for students to analyze and compare. For an assignment, students could act as consultants advising the company on their messaging or assessing the ethics and character issues demonstrated throughout this time.

CEO Bob Jordan’s video message. Students have a lot to analyze in this example: the apology, explanation of what went wrong, audience perspective, communication objectives, plans for the future, delivery style, etc. The persuasive video raises questions of accountability, compassion, humility, vulnerability, and other character dimensions. Students can identify which Jordan demonstrates and which are lacking.

Southwest webpage. A link to this page is prominent on the Southwest homepage. Customer can find “Travel disruption information,” including how to request a refund and locate baggage. Students can analyze how well the site is organized and how easily users can find what they need.

Employee interview on Democracy Now! What are the character and ethical issues associated with an employee defending staff yet speaking out against the company? The interviewed employee blames Southwest’s technology and says union employees have been asking for changes for years. This raises integrity issues for airline management.

U.S. Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg interview. Buttigieg gave several interviews distinguishing Southwest’s performance from other airlines that struggled but recovered. He defended the Department of Transportation’s recent push for airlines to do right by customers. Critics say the secretary is using the moment for political gain.

Snap Memo Delivers Bad News

Snap employees who avoided the 20% layoff in August just got bad news: they need to spend at least 80% of their time back in the office. The timing makes sense for the company to capitalize on employees’ gratitude for having a job. Tech downsizing might not give Snap employees who want to leave a lot of options.

I don’t see the full memo online, but here’s the bottom line from CEO Evan Spiegel:

"I believe that spending more time together in person will help us to achieve our full potential. What each of us may sacrifice in terms of our individual convenience, I believe we will reap in terms of our collective success."

Spiegel also wrote:

"We've been working this way for so long that I'm afraid we've forgotten what we've lost—and what we could gain—by spending more time together. I believe that 'default together,' while retaining flexibility for our team members, will help us to accelerate our growth and deliver on our strategic priorities of growing our community, reaccelerating our revenue growth, and leading in AR."

Business communication faculty often teach students to avoid qualifiers like “I believe” and “I think” for persuasive communication. In this case, Spiegel writes “I believe,” and it fits. This is bad news, and the qualifier softens the tone. Company leaders can’t say with full confidence that working in the office will have these certain outcomes. Without “I believe” or “we believe,” they might sound like jerks, which they might be, anyway. I don’t see a lot of compassion, at least in these excerpts.

Also, writing “I believe” three times in four sentences is a bit excessive. A spokesperson repeated the phrase when responding to CNET about the story:

“After working remotely for so long we're excited to get everyone back together next year with our new 80/20 hybrid model. We believe that being together in person, while retaining flexibility for our team members, will enhance our ability to deliver on our strategic priorities of growing our community, driving revenue growth, and leading in AR."

In case you missed it, The New York Times ran an article about young employees “romanticizing” working in an office. Their employers are lucky that these TikTok videos are so popular.

Image source.

Handwritten Thank-You Notes

About once a year, I read an article reminding us that handwritten notes are still appreciated. The rarer they get, the more meaningful they are. One etiquette coach explains:

Handwritten notes are a differentiator. They show the person you’re thanking that you made a sincere effort to acknowledge their act of kindness or generosity.

I haven’t seen new evidence supporting these thank-you notes, but they certainly can’t hurt as long as they’re sincere. Students also shouldn’t forgo a thank-you email, for example, after an interview: an email within 24 hours of an interview is still expected, while a postal note can take a few days—perhaps after a call-back or hiring decision is made.

Experts suggest just three sentences:

• Thank the giver for the gift or act.

• Say what it means to you: how you’ll use it or how it affects you.

• Say thanks again and write something forward-looking, for example, what you’re looking forward to and how you’ll reconnect with them.

Public Talk of Layoffs

I remember when people where ashamed of being laid off. Old movies show men leaving for “work” months after they no longer had a job.

Today, people find community in discussing their fate, and they use their favorite platform—sometimes their former employer—to share their stories. Partly, the shame is lifted because of the numbers: 11,000 at Meta; 10,000 at Amazon; 3,700 at Twitter; 950 at Salesforce; and many others. In a colorful, but mostly unreadable chart, TrueUp logged 192,997 so far in 2022. (Maybe the logos could be scalable?)

The unfortunately named Blind app connects employees in several industries, particularly tech (95% of Twitter employees signed up). Students can review comments for an inside scoop just as they do on Glassdoor.

I feel encouraged by the public postings. In addition to the obvious compassion and vulnerability, the stories—good and bad about the layoff process and communication—keeps employers on their toes. Also, people are finding new jobs, and this will get easier as the market, once again, opens up.

Meta's Well-Timed Layoff Message

How clever for Meta to announce 11,000 layoffs as we watch the news for election results. Still, the news ranked highly, with a big headline on the WSJ home page.

Unlike Elon Musk’s curt email to Twitter employees last week, Mark Zuckerberg’s note is longer and posted publicly, which is smart since it would likely hit the press anyway. He follows business communication guidelines by placing the main point up front, and he demonstrates accountability and compassion in the introduction:

I want to take accountability for these decisions and for how we got here. I know this is tough for everyone, and I’m especially sorry to those impacted.

His explanation of what went wrong also demonstrates accountability—and humility: “I got this wrong, and I take responsibility for that.”

Zuckerberg describes severance and other benefits in bullets, and he expresses optimism in the future. Employees will question whether they’re affected, but I’m not sure he can say anything differently in the message because cuts are across the board. Still, people might appreciate a bit more information about how decisions were made.

People must be on edge. Zuckerberg wrote, “Everyone will get an email soon letting you know what this layoff means for you.” How soon? He also offers the chance to “speak with someone to get their questions answered and join information sessions.” The goal seems to be communication by email and mass meetings. In-person meetings are best for delivering bad news, but given remote work and scale, this method is probably the only practical way to go

Twitter Layoff Messages

Perhaps the best example of a bad-news message is a layoff memo (below), and Elon Musk’s Twitter email doesn’t disappoint. Just days after the purchase went through and after a deafening silence, the new CEO sent a short message confirming what employees expected.

The email is classic Musk: direct and decisive, without a lot of compassion. He makes the news extra painful by expressing his distrust: cutting people off from offices and systems and reminding people not to share confidential information (which at least one person did by sharing the internal email).

Layoff messages are typically softer, with more specific reasons for the decision, a rationale for who goes and who stays, more gratitude to those leaving, more information about what people can expect, and more optimism about the future of the company. They are also a chance for leaders to demonstrate their own humility and vulnerability. But that’s not Elon Musk. (That describes Brian Chesky, whose Airbnb layoff message—posted publicly—is still one of my favorites.)

The actual layoffs the next day didn’t go much better. “Confusion” prevailed as 50% were laid off, some losing access in the middle of meetings. Now Musk is left with what he called a “massive drop in revenue” and class-action lawsuits from employees.

---

Team,

In an effort to place Twitter on a healthy path, we will go through the difficult process of reducing our global workforce on Friday. We recognize that this will impact a number of individuals who have made valuable contributions to Twitter, but this action is unfortunately necessary to ensure the company's success moving forward.

Given the nature of our distributed workforce and our desire to inform impacted individuals as quickly as possible, communications for this process will take place via email. By 9AM PST on Friday Nov. 4th, everyone will receive an individual email with the subject line: Your Role at Twitter. Please check your email, including your spam folder.

If your employment is not impacted, you will receive a notification via your Twitter email. 

If your employment is impacted, you will receive a notification with next steps via your personal email.

If you do not receive an email from twitter-hr@ by 5PM PST on Friday Nov. 4th, please email xxxxxxxx.

To help ensure the safety of each employee as well as Twitter systems and customer data, our offices will be temporarily closed and all badge access will be suspended. If you are in an office or on your way to an office, please return home.

We acknowledge this is an incredibly challenging experience to go through, whether or not you are impacted. Thank you for continuing to adhere to Twitter policies that prohibit you from discussing confidential company information on social media, with the press or elsewhere.

We are grateful for your contributions to Twitter and for your patience as we move through this process.

Thank you.

Image source.

Research About "Low-Response" People

Research about persuading people to pay NYC parking tickets has implications for business communicators—and raises questions of character. The study, published in American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, found that reminder letters get more people to pay fines, but this approach doesn’t work for everyone.

People who respond least to the “nudges,” including notices about greater fines, happen to be those least likely to pay in the first place. Referred to as “low-response” types, these folks need sterner warnings. As one author says, “It’s only when they get this legal-looking letter that says, ‘We are in default judgment against you; you may get towed.’” Most interesting, people in the “low-response” groups tend to be from historically “disadvantaged populations—lower income, less education, and higher proportions of Black or other racial groups.”

The authors acknowledge that their recommendations ”would not be based on individual characteristics (e.g., income, race, neighborhood) but only on past behavior–while statistically helping traditionally underserved populations to avoid penalties with a nonintrusive nudge. We further note that, in proposing this policy, we are not assuming that the low baseline response rates of the LRs are suboptimal. Rather, we are pointing out a lower-cost policy that could induce more timely payments from the LRs without imposing larger penalties on them.”

Still, this study raises questions about character, for example, compassion, integrity, and accountability. Am I the only one cringing at the term “low-response type” and use of “LRs”? Is it right to threaten one group but not another, even if it’s based on past behavior? True, people should pay fines, but we have deeper societal issues and inequities to consider. How do people in these groups view rules and law enforcement? Are people in lower-income neighborhoods or with cars in greater disrepair more likely to get tickets in the first place?

If, as the authors say, their proposed policy is helpful to avoid “imposing larger penalties,” why not simply eliminate fines that some people can’t afford to pay? Our local library has stopped charging late fees so they don’t discourage reading and cause a disparate impact. The authors do propose eliminating later, greater fines that have little impact and most affect people in historically disadvantaged populations. Theoretically, data can also be used for a sliding fee scale according to income level—or perhaps the value of one’s car.

The simpler takeaway for business communication students is the relevance of knowing your audience. As study authors say, NYC already has the data and can customize approaches. We do teach analyzing an audience and tailoring a message. But students may discuss the ethics of using data and taking different approaches in these types of situations.

Accommodations and Persuasion in the PA Debate

The Pennsylvania Senate Debate between John Fetterman and Dr. Mehmet Oz illustrates several interesting points for business communication students. One is the art of not answering questions, perhaps best illustrated by the first question, an opportunity to describe the candidates’ own qualifications, which they spent criticizing their opponent.

Another example is how the debate was structured to accommodate John Fetterman’s auditory processing issues, five months after he suffered a stroke. Fetterman kicked off the debate by admitting his illness and saying, “I had a stroke. He’s never let me forget that.” His speech was sometimes halting and repetitive, and he confused a few words. Repeating his doctor’s clearance, he tried to persuade voters that he is fit to serve.

Hot topics about abortion and fracking were discussed at length, with candidates balancing their party affiliations and ideals. At some point, Dr. Oz said, “I want women, doctors, local political leaders, letting the democracy that’s always allowed our nation to thrive to put the best ideas forward so states can decide for themselves.” This inspired jokes and “Inside Amy Schumer” segments that I won’t link (because they’re NSFW).

Students will find more to discuss about the candidates’ presentation skills, responses to questions, and persuasive communication.