How well do leaders demonstrate character in their communications? Blog by Amy Newman, senior lecturer emerita, Cornell University; author of Business Communication and Character (11e) and Building Leadership Character
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer signaled his resignation from the highest court and followed up with a formal letter. The letter is typical for anyone who quits a job. The first paragraph confirms the news and timing, and the second paragraph is a brief, positive reflection about the job.
Product recalls are classic bad-news messages. A recent example comes from Mushie & Co, makers of FRIGG silicone pacifiers. As we typically see, the company “voluntarily” recalled products after receiving more than 200 reports of “the silicone nipple detaching from the plastic shield of the pacifier.” No injuries were reported, but of course, the flaw presents a choking hazard for babies.
The company “volunteered,” but company leaders had little choice because of the danger and because the regulating government agency would likely demand a recall if they didn’t take action. Still, they demonstrate accountability despite the costs.
In addition to news reports, two main sources provide information about recalls:
The messages offer similar information about product styles, dangers, and refunds. What we don’t see in these messages is a company apology; instead, this genre of business communication is essentially a template with the sole purpose of providing consumers with needed information.
Peloton was hot during the pandemic, barely keeping up with demand for bikes and treads. But sales have tumbled as consumers became more price sensitive and competition increased. The Sex in the City HBO reboot, And Just Like That, and Billions Season 6 episode didn’t help when they killed off lead characters during or after a vigorous workout on a Peloton bike. Company shares tumbled 76% in 2021.
CNBC reported that Peloton is pausing production, but Co-Founder and CEO John Foley denies the claim. In a statement (posted on the website as a “note” sent internally), Foley criticizes an internal leak and subsequent “speculative articles.” His tone is firm when he writes about legal action against the “leaker,” a warning to other employees. Trying to get ahead of more bad news, Foley admits that layoffs are possible, while complimenting the team. He chooses positive data to present: the number of users, workouts, and churn rate. He doesn’t include negative data about revenue or stock price.
The note is part defense and part cheerleader, as Foley props up employees—and the company—against a turbulent time in the company’s history. He demonstrates some integrity, humility, and vulnerability, but his leadership will continue to be taxed in the weeks ahead.
Foley’s full message follows (with the giant logo as it appears on the website):
We have always done our best to share news with you all first, before sharing with the public. This week, we’ve experienced leaks containing confidential information that have led to a flurry of speculative articles in the press. The information the media has obtained is incomplete, out of context, and not reflective of Peloton’s strategy. It has saddened me to know you read these things without the clarity and context that you deserve. Before I go on, I want all of you to know that we have identified a leaker, and we are moving forward with the appropriate legal action. But moving forward, I want to take a moment to talk about some of the changes with you directly.
As a public company that is in a pre-earnings “Quiet Period”, we are limited in what information we can share. However, we issued a pre-earnings press release earlier this evening about our preliminary Q2 results, in order to offer an initial and more accurate picture of our business performance.
As you have heard me and other leaders say over the past few months, we are continuing to invest in our growth, but we also need to review our cost structure to ensure we set ourselves up for continued success, while never losing sight of the important role we play in helping our 6.2+ million Members lead healthier, happier lives.
In the past, we’ve said layoffs would be the absolute last lever we would ever hope to pull. However, we now need to evaluate our organization structure and size of our team, with the utmost care and compassion. And we are still in the process of considering all options as part of our efforts to make our business more flexible.
This team is made up of some of the smartest, most passionate, hard-working and KIND people I have ever met. You have each painted your masterpiece at Peloton in your own way, and your contributions matter. They always have, and they always will.
I am SO proud of everything we have accomplished together, and it pains me we are faced with these tough decisions. I know this is difficult, and I want to thank you for your patience as we work through these times together.
Rumors that we are halting all production of bikes and Treads are false
Notably, we’ve found ourselves in the middle of a once-in-a-hundred year event with the COVID-19 pandemic, and what we anticipated would happen over the course of three years happened in months during 2020, and into 2021.
We worked quickly and diligently to meet the demand head-on at a time when the world really needed us, in large part thanks to how hard you worked every day. We feel good about right-sizing our production, and, as we evolve to more seasonal demand curves, we are resetting our production levels for sustainable growth.
This past quarter, our churn rate was 0.79%. This means that our Members are sticking with us, again thanks to your brilliance and continued innovation. Connected fitness provides the convenience people need to stay active and centered and will continue to be a key part of the future of fitness. In fact, just a few days ago, we recorded our highest ever number of daily workouts -- over 2.9M workouts.
I want to acknowledge that this does not answer all of the questions I am sure many of you have right now. But, I did want to share what we could at this time.
I know there is a lot of noise and anxiety in our environment right now, which is why I wanted to take this moment to provide some additional context for you all as we navigate the next few weeks together.
John
During the height of 2020 COVID-19 lockdowns in England, Prime Minister Boris Johnson hosted a party. An email (below) from his private secretary invited more than 100 staff members to "bring your own booze!" to the lawn party held at Johnson’s residence. Between 30 and 40 people gathered, despite restrictions until a week and a half later, when only six people were allowed to gather. This wasn’t the only party: another was held in December during lockdowns.
A video of the House of Commons shows political leaders criticizing Johnson; some are calling for his resignation. Johnson says he considered the party a work event. The culture of this setting is so different from U.S. government meetings, where it would be inappropriate to respond to speeches.
Here is Johnson’s response to the criticism. He uses several persuasive tactics: apologizing (with a British “s”), empathizing, and taking responsibility. He tries to demonstrate several character dimensions: compassion, humility, and accountability, particularly. We’ll see what happens next.
I want to apologise. I know that millions of people across this country have made extraordinary sacrifices over the last 18 months.
I know the anguish they have been through—unable to mourn their relatives, unable to live their lives as they want or to do the things they love.
I know the rage they feel with me and with the government I lead when they think in Downing Street itself the rules are not being properly followed by the people who make the rules.
And though I cannot anticipate the conclusions of the current inquiry, I have learned enough to know there were things we simply did not get right and I must take responsibility.
No 10 is a big department with a garden as an extension of the office which has been in constant use because of the role of fresh air in stopping the virus.
When I went into that garden just after six on 20 May 2020, to thank groups of staff before going back into my office 25 minutes later to continue working, I believed implicitly that this was a work event.
With hindsight I should have sent everyone back inside. I should have found some other way to thank them.
I should have recognised that even if it could be said technically to fall within the guidance, there are millions and millions of people who simply would not see it that way, people who have suffered terribly, people who were forbidden from meeting loved ones at all inside or outside, and to them and to this house I offer my heartfelt apologies.
All I ask is that Sue Gray be allowed to complete her inquiry into that day and several others so that the full facts can be established.
An Amazon warehouse in Illinois and a candle factory in Kentucky seem to be the companies hardest hit by a devastating tornado. Although an easy target for critics, Amazon, and particularly CEO Jeff Bezos, probably could do more. Twitter comments called out his response as a “template” and “corporate line.” One wrote, “Literally a day late and a dollar short.” Further damaging his reputation as a compassionate leader, and by unfortunate coincidence, Blue Origin, Bezos’s company, launched six paying passengers into space on the day of the tornado.
Perhaps nothing Bezos said would have been right, or enough. In a news conference, Illinois Governor J. B. Pritzker said he “implored” Amazon “to stand up for this community to make sure that the families get whatever they need in this community, and they’ve offered to do so.” I have not found statements from Amazon about what that support might include.
The Kentucky factory, Mayfield Consumer Products, was “destroyed,” according to the website landing page. The CEO posted a brief statement, promising more information once known and promoting a victims’ fund. We see character and culture in both company responses.
The CEO of U.S. mortgage company Better.com announced via Zoom that 900 employees, about 15% of the company, were being laid off. Vishal Garg invited people in the exiting group to the call and then dropped the news: “If you’re on this call, you are part of the unlucky group being laid off. Your employment is terminated effective immediately.” In a way, the Zoom call replaces an email typically sent to all employees before they meet individually with an HR representative.
The video is circulating on YouTube, and we hear one employee’s reaction as she watches: “You’ve gotta be kidding me. After all we did for the company! . . . I can’t believe this. This is not real.”
Certainly, this doesn’t reflect well on the company, particularly because it’s right before year-end holidays. News articles also question Garg’s management style and financial dealings. After the layoffs, he was quoted accusing employees of “stealing” from their coworkers by being unproductive. Reports also mention an email sent to staff, including, "You are TOO DAMN SLOW. You are a bunch of DUMB DOLPHINS... SO STOP IT. STOP IT. STOP IT RIGHT NOW. YOU ARE EMBARRASSING ME.” In addition, Garg faces lawsuits claiming fraudulent activity and misappropriation of funds.
History aside, CNN describes the Zoom call as “short and emotionless.” At times, Garg focuses more on himself than on employees. He said, “This is the second time in my career I'm doing this, and I do not want to do this. The last time I did it, I cried.”
I will give him credit for taking responsibility during the call, saying it was his decision. He also scheduled a call instead of, say, sending an email. He demonstrated accountability and some courage, but Garg lacked compassion. Overall, I’ve seen worse, for example, layoff by text message.
UPDATES: Garg wrote an apology about how he handled the situation. Although he uses the words “I apologize” and describes some of the impact on employees, the audience doesn’t seem quite right. He writes about the future, which includes employees who are staying but not the 900 who were on the Zoom call.
The Better.com board of directors announced that Garg will take some time off. Perhaps his worst crime is that the video went viral; he should have predicted that.
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.
In a blog post, Robinhood announced a “data security incident.” Business communication students will notice several examples of downplaying the situation, including giving numbers of people affected more significantly (310) but no numbers for the total.
Language seems intentionally complex, for example, “The unauthorized party socially engineered a customer support employee by phone and obtained access to certain customer support systems.” In other words, someone called a Robinhood employee and impersonated another employee. The employee fell for this deceit without seeking proof.
Robinhood seems to take no responsibility and identifies no plans for future action to prevent a similar “incident.” The chief security officer provides template text: “As a Safety First company, we owe it to our customers to be transparent and act with integrity. Following a diligent review, putting the entire Robinhood community on notice of this incident now is the right thing to do.”
Toy company Hasbro announced the death of Chairman and CEO Brian Goldner. The press release is typical, quoting leaders and touting Goldner’s contributions to the company. Goldner was with Hasbro for more than 20 years and served as CEO for more than 13, so his death is significant.
Interestingly, the company statement doesn’t include a cause of death. A Wall Street Journal article mentions Goldner’s prostate cancer diagnosis in 2014 and his recent leave of absence.
Visionary CEO Transformed Hasbro into a Global Play & Entertainment Leader
PAWTUCKET, R.I.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Oct. 12, 2021-- It is with deep and profound sadness that Hasbro announces the passing of beloved leader and longtime Chairman and CEO Brian D. Goldner.
This press release features multimedia. View the full release here: https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20211012006149/en/
Brian D. Goldner (Photo: Business Wire)
Rich Stoddart, Interim CEO, said “Since joining the Company more than two decades ago, Brian has been the heart and soul of Hasbro. As a charismatic and passionate leader in both the play and entertainment industries, Brian’s work brought joy and laughter to children and families around the world. His visionary leadership, kindness, and generosity made him beloved by the Hasbro community and everyone he touched. On behalf of the Hasbro family, we extend our deepest, heartfelt condolences to his wife, daughter, and entire family.”
Mr. Goldner, 58, joined Hasbro in 2000 and was quickly recognized as a visionary in the industry. He was appointed CEO in 2008 and became Chairman of the Board in 2015. He was instrumental in transforming the Company into a global play and entertainment leader, architecting a strategic Brand Blueprint to create the world’s best play and storytelling experiences. Through his tireless work ethic and unwavering focus, he expanded the Company beyond toys and games into television, movies, digital gaming and beyond, to ensure Hasbro’s iconic brands reached every consumer. The culmination of his pioneering strategy was the 2019 acquisition of independent entertainment studio eOne. Mr. Goldner served on the Board of Directors of ViacomCBS and was the Chair of the Compensation Committee. Mr. Goldner and his wife Barbara were passionate advocates for improving systems of care for vulnerable members of society.
Edward M. Philip, Lead Independent Director of Hasbro’s Board of Directors, said “Brian’s passing is a tremendous loss for Hasbro and the world. Brian was universally admired and respected in the industry, and throughout his over twenty years at Hasbro, his inspiring leadership and exuberance left an indelible mark on everything and everyone he touched. A mentor and friend to so many, his passion and creativity took Hasbro to new heights. Our love and thoughts are with his wife, daughter, and family during this extraordinarily sad time.”
So many products are delayed these days. In an email to a customer, Lands’ End acknowledged further delays and blamed the issue on labor shortages and high demand. On a flight I took recently, the pilot also mentioned staffing issues (causing us to sit on the plane for a hour waiting for a gate to clear).
I like the transparency. We all know about worker shortages since the pandemic, and it seems logical to name the problem as it is. In normal times, we might see this as a company’s excuse, but the problem is so systemic that no one company can be blamed.
I also appreciate Lands’ End’s usual conversational style. Although I wish the customer were given a timeframe, at least the message is easy to understand.
The editors of 220 medical journals wrote to inspire climate change action. In an open letter, the authors cite “catastrophic” health results of a degrading environment, particularly affecting ”countries and communities that have contributed least to the problem and are least able to mitigate the harms.”
The letter, below, is a good example of persuasive writing. We see a mix of emotional appeals, logical arguments, and credibility to encourage world leaders to do more. However, the writing doesn’t meet standards for organizing business messages. Business communication students could restructure the writing to make the organization more explicit, improve readability, and surface main points.
The UN General Assembly in September, 2021, will bring countries together at a critical time for marshalling collective action to tackle the global environmental crisis. They will meet again at the biodiversity summit in Kunming, China, and the UN Climate Change Conference of the Parties (COP26) in Glasgow, UK. Ahead of these pivotal meetings, we—the editors of health journals worldwide—call for urgent action to keep average global temperature increases below 1·5°C, halt the destruction of nature, and protect health.
Health is already being harmed by global temperature increases and the destruction of the natural world, a state of affairs health professionals have been bringing attention to for decades.1 The science is unequivocal; a global increase of 1·5°C above the pre-industrial average and the continued loss of biodiversity risk catastrophic harm to health that will be impossible to reverse.2, 3 Despite the world's necessary preoccupation with COVID-19, we cannot wait for the pandemic to pass to rapidly reduce emissions.
Reflecting the severity of the moment, this Comment appears in health journals across the world. We are united in recognising that only fundamental and equitable changes to societies will reverse our current trajectory.
The risks to health of increases above 1·5°C are now well established.2 Indeed, no temperature rise is “safe”. In the past 20 years, heat-related mortality among people older than 65 years has increased by more than 50%.4 Higher temperatures have brought increased dehydration and renal function loss, dermatological malignancies, tropical infections, adverse mental health outcomes, pregnancy complications, allergies, and cardiovascular and pulmonary morbidity and mortality.5, 6 Harms disproportionately affect the most vulnerable, including children, older populations, ethnic minorities, poorer communities, and those with underlying health problems.2, 4
Global heating is also contributing to the decline in global yield potential for major crops, falling by 1·8–5·6% since 1981; this, together with the effects of extreme weather and soil depletion, is hampering efforts to reduce undernutrition.4 Thriving ecosystems are essential to human health, and the widespread destruction of nature, including habitats and species, is eroding water and food security and increasing the chance of pandemics.3, 7, 8
The consequences of the environmental crisis fall disproportionately on those countries and communities that have contributed least to the problem and are least able to mitigate the harms. Yet no country, no matter how wealthy, can shield itself from these impacts. Allowing the consequences to fall disproportionately on the most vulnerable will breed more conflict, food insecurity, forced displacement, and zoonotic disease—with severe implications for all countries and communities. As with the COVID-19 pandemic, we are globally as strong as our weakest member.
Rises above 1·5°C increase the chance of reaching tipping points in natural systems that could lock the world into an acutely unstable state. This would critically impair our ability to mitigate harms and to prevent catastrophic, runaway environmental change.9, 10
Encouragingly, many governments, financial institutions, and businesses are setting targets to reach net-zero emissions, including targets for 2030. The cost of renewable energy is dropping rapidly. Many countries are aiming to protect at least 30% of the world's land and oceans by 2030.11
These promises are not enough. Targets are easy to set and hard to achieve. They are yet to be matched with credible short-term and longer-term plans to accelerate cleaner technologies and transform societies. Emissions reduction plans do not adequately incorporate health considerations.12 Concern is growing that temperature rises above 1·5°C are beginning to be seen as inevitable, or even acceptable, to powerful members of the global community.13 Relatedly, current strategies for reducing emissions to net zero by the middle of the 21st century implausibly assume that the world will acquire great capabilities to remove greenhouse gases from the atmosphere.14, 15
This insufficient action means that temperature increases are likely to be well in excess of 2°C,16 a catastrophic outcome for health and environmental stability. Crucially, the destruction of nature does not have parity of esteem with the climate element of the crisis, and every single global target to restore biodiversity loss by 2020 was missed.17 This is an overall environmental crisis.18
Health professionals are united with environmental scientists, businesses, and many others in rejecting that this outcome is inevitable. More can and must be done now—in Glasgow and Kunming—and in the immediate years that follow. We join health professionals worldwide who have already supported calls for rapid action.1, 19
Equity must be at the centre of the global response. Contributing a fair share to the global effort means that reduction commitments must account for the cumulative, historical contribution each country has made to emissions, as well as its current emissions and capacity to respond. Wealthier countries will have to cut emissions more quickly, making reductions by 2030 beyond those currently proposed20, 21 and reaching net-zero emissions before 2050. Similar targets and emergency action are needed for biodiversity loss and the wider destruction of the natural world.
To achieve these targets, governments must make fundamental changes to how our societies and economies are organised and how we live. The current strategy of encouraging markets to swap dirty for cleaner technologies is not enough. Governments must intervene to support the redesign of transport systems, cities, production and distribution of food, markets for financial investments, health systems, and much more. Global coordination is needed to ensure that the rush for cleaner technologies does not come at the cost of more environmental destruction and human exploitation.
Many governments met the threat of the COVID-19 pandemic with unprecedented funding. The environmental crisis demands a similar emergency response. Huge investment will be needed, beyond what is being considered or delivered anywhere in the world. But such investments will produce huge positive health and economic outcomes. These include high quality jobs, reduced air pollution, increased physical activity, and improved housing and diet. Better air quality alone would realise health benefits that easily offset the global costs of emissions reductions.22
These measures will also improve the social and economic determinants of health, the poor state of which may have made populations more vulnerable to the COVID-19 pandemic.23 But the changes cannot be achieved through a return to damaging austerity policies or the continuation of the large inequalities of wealth and power within and between countries.
In particular, countries that have disproportionately created the environmental crisis must do more to support low-income and middle-income countries to build cleaner, healthier, and more resilient societies. High-income countries must meet and go beyond their outstanding commitment to provide US$100 billion a year, making up for any shortfall in 2020 and increasing contributions to and beyond 2025. Funding must be equally split between mitigation and adaptation, including improving the resilience of health systems.
Financing should be through grants rather than loans, building local capabilities and truly empowering communities, and should come alongside forgiving large debts, which constrain the agency of so many low-income countries. Additional funding must be marshalled to compensate for inevitable loss and damage caused by the consequences of the environmental crisis.
As health professionals, we must do all we can to aid the transition to a sustainable, fairer, resilient, and healthier world. Alongside acting to reduce the harm from the environmental crisis, we should proactively contribute to global prevention of further damage and action on the root causes of the crisis. We must hold global leaders to account and continue to educate others about the health risks of the crisis. We must join in the work to achieve environmentally sustainable health systems before 2040, recognising that this will mean changing clinical practice. Health institutions have already divested more than $42 billion of assets from fossil fuels; others should join them.4
The greatest threat to global public health is the continued failure of world leaders to keep the global temperature rise below 1·5°C and to restore nature. Urgent, society-wide changes must be made and will lead to a fairer and healthier world. We, as editors of health journals, call for governments and other leaders to act, marking 2021 as the year that the world finally changes course.
FG serves on the executive committee for the UK Health Alliance on Climate Change and is a Trustee of the Eden Project. RS is the Chair of Patients Know Best, has stock in UnitedHealth Group, has done consultancy work for Oxford Pharmagenesis, and is chair of the Lancet Commission of the Value of Death. The other authors declare no competing interests.
This Comment is being published simultaneously in multiple journals (appendix). This full list of journals, as well as a further list of supporting journals, can also be found on the BMJ website.
After resisting action despite consumer product warnings, Peloton has conceded and is recalling two models of its treadmills. One child died and more than 70 people were injured, so the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) recommended the recalls a month ago.
In the company statement, CEO John Foley admitted the mistake:
The decision to recall both products was the right thing to do for Peloton’s Members and their families. I want to be clear, Peloton made a mistake in our initial response to the Consumer Product Safety Commission’s request that we recall the Tread+. We should have engaged more productively with them from the outset. For that, I apologize. Today’s announcement reflects our recognition that, by working closely with the CPSC, we can increase safety awareness for our Members. We believe strongly in the future of at-home connected fitness and are committed to work with the CPSC to set new industry safety standards for treadmills. We have a desire and a responsibility to be an industry leader in product safety.
The CPSC said the decision came after “weeks of intense negotiation and effort.” Peloton will suffer financially: the company has stopped selling the treads and is offering a full refund of more than $4,000 for the products. But executives may have spared themselves and the brand some reputation damage if they had acted earlier.
After a shooting at an Indianapolis facility, FedEx posted a statement on its website. At the top of the home page is a notice: “We are deeply shocked and saddened by the loss of our team members following the tragic shooting at our FedEx Ground facility in Indianapolis. Read more.”
The company posted two additional statements on its website under “Newsroom”:
“Honoring Our Team Members in Indianapolis” lists employees who were killed.
“Frederick W. Smith Message to Team Members on Indianapolis Tragedy” is a message from the Chairman and CEO.
Each message is heartfelt and opposes violence with such phrases as “Violence of any kind has no place in our society or our workplace” and “senseless act of violence.” But the company is avoiding any mention of guns and the two longer messages don’t mention that the victims were shot. The only reference is in the title and body of the first statement: “shooting” is used twice.
The cause of death is important to include, particularly so that FedEx deflects responsibility. This is also an opportunity for CEO activism, as we have seen from other CEOs recently. However, FedEx is not entering this highly charged political conversation at this time.
Frank Bruni is right his article, ”When You Don’t Have Trump to Hide Behind: There’s now space for other scandals. Witness the Lincoln Project.” I’ve been missing hearing about improprieties with the shadow of Trump for the past four years. Now trouble at the Lincoln Project, a political group started in 2018 by Republicans to prevent the re-election of the former president, has come to light.
The issue raises questions of integrity. As the organization criticized the former president for his actions, 21 young men accused one founder of sexual harassment, while organization leaders knew of but did nothing about their complaints. In addition, questions linger about whether group leaders misused funds for personal gain.
The one leader accused of “grooming young men online” responded in a statement:
I am so disheartened and sad that I may have brought discomfort to anyone in what I thought at the time were mutually consensual discussions. In living a deeply closeted life, I allowed my pain to cause pain for others. For that I am truly sorry to these men and everyone and for letting so many people down.
The Lincoln Project also issued an official statement. One, dated January 30, isn’t available because of a broken link on the homepage. But another, dated February 14, is below:
The Lincoln Project has retained the law firm of Paul Hastings to investigate allegations of inappropriate behavior by John Weaver as part of a comprehensive review of our operations and culture. The review process is currently underway.
We are committed to creating a positive, diverse, and inclusive workplace environment at The Lincoln Project and inappropriate behavior by anyone associated with the organization will not be tolerated under any circumstances. We have already taken decisive action to address internal concerns. Additionally, we are releasing staff and former staff from the confidentiality provisions in their employment agreements to discuss their workplace environment. Based on the findings of this review we will take all necessary action to correct any issues or deficiencies that are identified.
Concurrently, we are also working with outside counsel and professional consultants to strengthen our corporate governance, finance and operational structure, human resources, and leadership to position The Lincoln Project to further maximize our impact and lean into our important mission advancing democracy.
The Lincoln Project was founded to combat political forces who seek to undermine our democracy. We revolutionized how political action committees operate and spent $81 million last cycle to create and place more than 300 advertisements, host national town halls, conduct voter outreach, and launch a podcast and streaming video network that engaged millions of voters. Eighty percent of our funds went to voter contact and content production. Our historic results speak for themselves.
Moving forward, we have important work ahead of us and we have created a nationwide movement of Americans who support our objectives.
In order to continue fulfilling our promise to our millions of supporters and contributors, we must address any and all internal organizational issues immediately and put in place a governance and diverse leadership structure that reflects our core values and ensures we will continue to attract the best talent available.
The Lincoln Project will continue producing and distributing our popular content and commentary while these reviews are being conducted and we are operating at full capacity.
The statement start is unfortunate and squirrely. Perhaps an apology might be more appropriate? As an apology, if this is the intent, the statement doesn’t work very well. Apologies admit specific wrongdoing, acknowledge the impact, and describe positive steps planning for the future. I don’t see that here.
With economic uncertainty during the COVID-19 pandemic, Disneyland remains closed, and the company announced the end of its annual pass program. The 40-year-old program offered unlimited park visits, exclusive discounts, and other benefits.
Disney’s statement explains the reasons and offers customers ways to get a refund for existing passes. In the segment below and another for Premier Passholders, the writers use “sunsetting” three times. The euphemism is a curious choice, and I wonder why “ending” isn’t used instead. Perhaps “cancelling” sounds too harsh?
“Sunsetting” indicates phasing out, and some passholders can enjoy discounts for a limited time. But the program is clearly ending. Dictionary.com refers to a “sunset clause,” and a tech site provides this definition: “Sunsetting, in a business context, is intentionally phasing something out or terminating it.” Both have legal undertones and, in my view, should be avoided for a consumer audience.
What comes after we “flatten the curve” of COVID cases? New York Times opinion writer Charlie Warzel warns that, without a clear communication strategy for what’s next, people will distrust leaders.
Warzel cites six communication guidelines from the report of a working group at The University of Minnesota, The Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy (CIDRP).:
Don’t Over Reassure.
Proclaim Uncertainty
Validate Emotions—Your Audience’s and Your Own
Give People Things to Do
Admit and Apologize for Errors
Share Dilemma
Discussion:
How should U.S. officials communicate now? What do they need to accomplish, and how well are our current leaders meeting the challenge? In other words, do you agree with Warzel that our leaders are falling short?
Read the entire report. What other principles does the group recommend?
Analyze the report: the audiences, objectives, writing style, organization, and so on. What are the strengths, and how could it be improved?
During an interview on the “Today” show, Savannah Guthrie asked Boeing CEO David Calhoun whether a major U.S. airline might not survive because of the pandemic. Calhoun said, “Well, I don’t want to get too predictive on that subject, but yes, most likely. Something will happen when September comes around.” He also said that “we believe we will return to a growth rate similar to the past, but it might take us three, five years to get there.”
The response angered major airline executives, who are currently negotiating for federal assistance.
Another Boeing executive defended Calhoun’s statement:
“Some weren’t keen on his sobering assessment of industry challenges ahead, but others appreciated him telling it like it is. It’s in his nature to be frank.”
Discussion:
What’s your view of Calhoun’s comment? One view is that, during a global pandemic, executives might need to be particularly sensitive. Another view is that this is a time for honest, direct talk.
What are the potential implications of his comment? Should he have avoided it?
What the entire interview. How did Calhoun do overall? What are his communication objectives and key messages?
Airbnb Co-Founder and CEO Brian Chesky wrote to employees to announce layoffs. Ask we see more and more, the company posted the message publicly on its blog, knowing it would likely go viral anyway.
In his message, Chesky announces the decision to lay off about 25% of the workforce as part of their more targeted business strategy. Airbnb is reducing investments in some services to focus on its core business.
Although he sends a mass email, Chesky tailors the last part to different groups:
To those of you staying,
One of the most important ways we can honor those who are leaving is for them to know that their contributions mattered, and that they will always be part of Airbnb’s story. I am confident their work will live on, just like this mission will live on.
To those leaving Airbnb,
I am truly sorry. Please know this is not your fault. The world will never stop seeking the qualities and talents that you brought to Airbnb…that helped make Airbnb. I want to thank you, from the bottom of my heart, for sharing them with us.
Brian
Discussion:
What’s your view of the message? Consider the audiences and objective.
It’s quite long. Is it too long or just right?
I wish that people who were staying in their current role could get a message too. It’s unclear whether that’s planned—only that they “will not receive a calendar invite.” Your thoughts?
A Forbes article calls him an “authentic leader” and applauds his video about the business. Marriott CEO Arne Sorenson begins by talking about his appearance: he is undergoing treatment for pancreatic cancer.
Sorenson gives the bad news directly: the company hit from COVID-19 is worse than the impact from 9/11 and the 2009 financial recession combined. He compares the worst quarter in the company’s history—about a 25% revenue decline—to the almost immediate 90% decline today.
Towards the end of the video, Sorenson is visibly emotional as he talks about employees losing their jobs.
Discussion:
What principles of delivering bad news does Sorensen use in the video?
How well does Sorenson balance emotional appeal, logic, and credibility in this message?
In addition to authenticity, what other leadership character dimensions does Sorenson demonstrate?
The Starbucks website has been updated regularly with news about the company’s response to COVID-19. Near the top of the page is a link to “At-a-glance: What customers need to know about Starbucks response to COVID-19.”
The big news is that stores will offer only drive-thru service for the next two weeks. In a letter to Starbucks partners (employees), the company promised 30 days of pay whether they work or not.
Discussion:
Analyze both the public website and the letter to partners. Describe the audiences and communication objectives of each.
What organizational structure is used for these bad-news messages?
What does Starbucks do well in its communications? How can communications be improved?
How well does the company balance emotional appeal and logical arguments?
In this post, you see “Starbucks response” on the company’s website and “Starbucks partners” in my text. Neither has an apostrophe. Is that correct?
Leadership Character and Communication, Amy Newman, Cornell University
Chapter 1: Business Communication and Character
Chapters 2 and 3: Team and Interpersonal Communication; Communicating Across Differences
Chapters 4 and 5: Writing, Design, and Style
Chapter 6: Neutral and Positive Messages
Chapter 7: Persuasive Messages
Chapters 9 and 10: Data, Visuals, and Reports
Powered by Squarespace.
