Toyota's Messages as Intercultural Comm Examples

Toyota’s messages about executive changes are good examples of how these announcements vary by culture. CEO and President Akio Toyoda (the family name spelling) has served in the position for 13 years. Unlike Reed Hastings, who served for 25 years at Netflix and also announced his move to chairman this week, Toyoda wasn’t a company founder, but his grandfather was, so his tenure is important. And yet, we see what looks like fanfare compared to the Netflix announcement. Here are the communications, and I’ll comment below:

• TMC Announces Changes to Executive Structure. A webpage includes links to other communications and handy “current” and “new” tables showing changes.

• Toyota Times News Special Live Broadcast. For more than an hour and a half, outgoing and incoming executives discuss the decision.

• Passing Toyota's Presidency Baton from Akio Toyoda to Koji Sato. Another page includes remarks from the incoming and outcoming CEOs, transcribed from the video.

Here are a few ways the remarks differ from typical U.S. messages, and I’m sure that students will find more:

• In the introduction and in his remarks, Akio Toyoda says the decision was “triggered by Chairman Uchiyamada’s resignation.” This is a way for the outgoing CEO to save face—as though his removal is based on a board opening.

• He also demonstrates humility and vulnerability in ways we don’t typically see from an outgoing U.S. CEO. He mentions, “I was appointed president immediately after our company’s fall into the red due to the global financial crisis,” and “Following that, our company faced a series of crises that threatened our survival, such as the global recall crisis and the Great East Japan Earthquake.” Although the financial crisis and earthquake were out of the company’s control, the recalls were self-inflicted, and I’m surprised to hear him remind the press. At the same time, that crisis was early in his tenure and rather unforgettable, including testimony on Capitol Hill.

• Toyoda also says, ”There was a time when Mr. Sato was struggling with what he should convey at a Lexus dealer convention.” Toyoda advised, “Rather than try to be like me, I want you to value your individuality.” Toyoda tells the story to illustrate Sato’s “love” for company products. Still, I wonder whether a U.S. CEO would reveal such a vulnerability—”struggling” was the translation—of an incoming executive.

• Twice in his short speech, Toyoda mentions Sato’s “youth,” and he says, “Being young is itself a key attribute.” This comment would be highly unlikely in the U.S., where age discrimination laws might cause older executives to immediately call their lawyers. (Also surprising: Toyoda is 66, while Sato is 53.)

• Only once do either of the executives mention EV, which is arguably the real reason Akio Toyoda is stepping down. He has resisted the move to EV and, as a result, Toyota is behind other car companies. In his closing remarks, Sato refers to “accelerating the shift to electrification”—a funny, but translated and probably unintentional car reference.

Boeing CEO Explains Quarterly Results

In a message to employees posted on the company website, Boeing CEO David Calhoun wrote, “We delivered a solid fourth quarter,” but the numbers say something different. According to a Wall Street Journal article, “The aerospace company’s fourth-quarter profit and sales both fell short of analysts’ expectations,” although they improved from the third quarter.

Calhoun is doing what any good CEO would do: spin the news, convey confidence, and keep employees motivated. Focusing on the future, the subtitle sums up the message, “Steadily building momentum.” Calhoun starts by thanking employees, and a short video shows fourth quarter achievements. The message doesn’t mention the $663 million quarterly loss or the $5.01 billion loss in 2022 but instead focuses on “more than $3 billion in free cash flow.”

Calhoun acknowledges, “we have more work ahead to drive stability in our operations and within the supply chain.” But, overall, the bad-news message sounds positive. And maybe it is good news, considering the 737 Max history and that the stock lost nearly 39% in the past 5 years.

The full message is below. Side note: The Wall Street Journal reports, at some point in his communications, Calhoun said he expects operating margins to be “bouncy” this year, an odd term for a plane manufacturer. Will they be turbulent?

Boeing CEO Updates Employees on 4th-Quarter Results

• Steadily building momentum

CHICAGO, Jan. 25, 2023 —Boeing President and CEO Dave Calhoun shared the following message with employees today addressing the company’s fourth-quarter results:

Team,

We delivered a solid fourth quarter. As we report our financial results today, I want to start by saying thank you. Together, we’re making important strides and steadily improving performance. Your resilience and hard work are building momentum, and we’re well on our way to restoring the operational strength we expect of ourselves at Boeing.

We generated more than $3 billion in free cash flow in the fourth quarter, driven by progress in our performance and strong demand. This helped us generate positive full-year free cash flow for the first time since 2018, an important metric in our recovery.

Our teams across the enterprise delivered on several key milestones and I encourage you to watch some of our fourth-quarter highlights in the video below. [omitted]

While we have made meaningful progress, challenges remain and we have more work ahead to drive stability in our operations and within the supply chain.

This will be another important year for us as we look to steadily increase our production rates, further improve performance, progress in our development programs and deliver on our commitments. Through it all, we will keep safety, quality and transparency at the forefront.

We’re proud of how we closed out 2022, and despite the hurdles in front of us, we’re confident in our path ahead. Demand is strong and our portfolio is well positioned. We have a robust pipeline of development programs, we’re innovating for the future and we’re increasing investments to prepare for our next generation of products.

Thank you for all you do to support our customers, our company and each other. I am proud of our team and excited about our future.

Dave

FDA Suggests Less Lead in Baby Food

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued guidance for baby food manufacturers, and the messages serve as good examples of reports and persuasion:

• Action Levels for Lead in Food Intended for Babies and Young Children: Draft Guidance for Industry. This is a text report that students could analyze for organization, writing style, evidence, data visualization (or lack there of), etc.

• Federal Register Notice. This legal-sounding document explains how to submit comments, either by “electronic submission” or “written/paper submission,” an archaic-sounding process. People also can order paper copies of the draft guidance, something you might do in 1970: “Send two self-addressed adhesive labels to assist that office in processing your request.”

Several times, on the website and within in each document, the agency reminds us, “Contains Nonbinding Recommendations Draft-Not for Implementation.” The agency further describes the “guidance”:

In general, FDA’s guidance documents do not establish legally enforceable responsibilities. Instead, guidances describe FDA’s current thinking on a topic and should be viewed only as recommendations, unless specific regulatory or statutory requirements are cited. The use of the word should in FDA guidances means that something is suggested or recommended, but not required.

The approach attempts to involve industry and consumer groups, who likely have a lot to say about the FDA’s data and recommendations. In the introductory website text, the agency says it considers the goals “achievable by industry when control measures are taken to minimize the presence of lead.” We’ll see whether others agree. Already, one consumer group weighed in, saying the guidance “doesn’t go far enough,” while Gerber and other companies are “reviewing” the proposal.

M&M Acknowledges "Polarizing" Spokescandies

M&M explained the decision to eliminate “spokescandies”—cartoon images of the candy. The situation is delicate: Fox News anchors criticized the company’s “woke” M&Ms, and Tucker Carlson seemed particularly offended by Purple, which a Mars Wrigley spokesperson explained in September:

“We’re really excited about Purple because she’s designed to represent acceptance and inclusivity. We want her to be known for her earnest self-expression, keen self-awareness, authenticity, and competence.”

The company acknowledged but didn’t quite strike back against the controversy—or criticism of the previous push for inclusivity in January (see press release). This tweet downplays the original campaign (“We weren’t sure if anyone would even notice”) and jokes, “even a candy’s shoes can be polarizing.”

After backlash from the initial campaign, the spokeperson also tried to shake off the controversy: “We were thrilled to a large extent because it reminded us how iconic our brands are—that people care so deeply about M&M’s and the characters.”

I’m curious how students assess these comments. The company took a stand—and then seemed to back off. After the initial push for “fun,” the tweet reads formally in parts (“take an indefinite pause from the spokescandies”). Maybe students can think of a more creative way to retire the candies, one that demonstrates more accountability and courage. Could Maya Rudolph have done something funny?

Or maybe the company didn’t have to say or do anything differently, as a Forbes writer suggests? Or maybe a candy company should just make great, classic candy and not try to “bring people together”?

New Zealand PM Resignation

Jacinda Ardern’s announcement of her resignation as the prime minister of New Zealand is a good example for students to analyze. In addition to the obvious discussion about delivery skills and script writing, Ardern demonstrates several character dimensions, for example, humility, vulnerability, authenticity, and integrity. Her decision also raises issues of gender roles, as this opinion article explains.

Netflix Messages About Leadership Change

Netflix published two messages about new CEOs. One is written by Reed Hastings, who founded Netflix and reigned as CEO for the company’s first 25 years. He leaves on a high note, which a letter to shareholders acknowledges: “2022 was a tough year, with a bumpy start but a brighter finish.” Subscribers were lagging but increased recently as Netflix implemented a new ad subscription model and launched a few popular shows.

Students could compare the Hastings blog message to that of the company in the letter to shareholders. The former focuses on the leaders (and compares Hastings’ trajectory to that of Bill Gates and Jeff Bezos into board chair positions). The latter includes typical quotes from the new co-CEOs.

I expected a bit more heart from a founder, but his goal may be to downplay the move. Both messages emphasize the planned succession—as though the news is not significant at all. And maybe it’s not. The real story Netflix wants to tell is about the recent turnaround.

Image source.

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.

Layoff Communication Should Be Driven by Compassion

A Wall Street Journal article describes HR’s debate about the best way to communicate the bad news of layoffs, and I’m reminded about my own experience. When I worked as an HR director for a company in the 90s, we laid off people a few at a time—for more than a year. It was a dreadful process and left people on edge for months at a time (death by a thousand cuts). Years later, a guest speaker for my crisis communication class at Cornell said her company’s philosophy was, “Cut fast and cut deep.” It seemed both harsh and more humane at the same time.

We did layoffs on Fridays, so employees had the weekend to cool off and talk with their families rather than gripe to coworkers. Today, Wednesday seems to be the magic day to give employees a chance to talk with HR. (We also had some employees—mostly tech—clear out their desks immediately, with security tagging along, an embarrassment to everyone involved.)

New technologies offer more realistic ways to connect with far-flung and remote workers. A face-to-face meeting may still be best for bad news, but Zoom is a reasonable alternative. Why fly someone across the country to fire them? (Cue scenes from one of my favorite business movies, Up in the Air.)

The article offers other sound advice for employers:

• Communicate before layoffs to prepare employees. (We kept people in the dark, although some could have seen the “writing on the wall,” as we said.)

• Train managers so they don’t make it all about them, for example, by saying, “This is so hard for me.” (At the same time, Yahoo! training slides were leaked years ago, and the company took a lot of heat.)

• Provide at least a month of severance pay and waive employee stock-vesting cliffs in exchange for signed separation agreements, although some companies offer more. (Companies have a sliding scale based on level and time with the company.)

• Consider outplacement assistance. (Typically only for certain levels.)

This leaves many decisions unsettled. How are senior managers treated differently? What’s the timing of messages? Typically, a general email and town hall precede individual conversations. How do those take place? What’s communicated to so-called “survivors”?

I don’t look back fondly on my time communicating layoffs—developing spreadsheets and training managers about the process. I’m embarrassed about how decisions were made and communicated. This article recommends transparency, which was an issue back then, but it makes no mention of compassion, which is the greater concern and would drive transparency and other character displays, such as accountability. I’m glad to see the conversation among HR people. It’s better today than the old “pink slip” days before my time. But companies are driven by employees’ public backlash on Twitter, Slack, Blind, and other sites—not by their own leadership character.

Image source.

George Santos Resume

In case you didn’t see it, here’s the resume of now U.S. Representative George Santos. Although we’ve been hearing for weeks about his fake jobs at Goldman Sachs and Citi and his fake education at Baruch, it’s quite shocking to see it all in print.

Students might enjoy reviewing his resume, finding errors and other ways to improve his employment communication. For example, the summary and list of skills at the top are jargony and sound like boiler plate; I’m surprised to see so little tailoring to a political position. Students will find other issues, for example, unparallel bullets, an odd page break, misaligned spacing, a lower-case i, missing periods, a missing end parenthesis, and acronyms that readers might not know.

Another fun discussion with grammarians in your class: I’ve avoided writing “Santos’s resume” as did The New York Times. The paper titled the article, “The Résumé of George Santos.” I chose the modifier form instead. And I’ve given up on the accent marks in résumé because I rarely see them in business job descriptions.

Messages About FAA Outage

A Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) outage delayed flights Wednesday morning. As we might expect, the agency posted minimal web communication. With the heading FAA NOTAM Statement, we see a series of updates that apparently only I read: they don’t seem to have any particular audience. But the last message addresses the main concern—that the outage was not caused by a cyberattack.

For his part, Pete Buttigieg went public. In an MSNBC interview, he reassured the public that systems were back online. He also said, "When there's an issue on the government side of the house, when there's an issue with FAA, we're gonna own it, we're gonna understand it, and we're gonna make very clear what's needed in order to fix it and go after that plan." In case you were wondering, he said, “Our number 1 priority is safety.” I was hoping for something a bit more original.

Airlines were left to communicate with their customers. Students could compare airline messages to see how they handle the bad news and how easily customers can find information about flights.

United: I found this message under the tab “Travel Issue” at the top of the page. The following paragraph began that page, with more links and resources following.

“The FAA has lifted their nationwide ground stop and United has resumed operations. Customers may continue to see some delays and cancellations as we work to restore our schedule and should check the United app or united.com for the latest information about their individual flight. United has activated a travel waiver for any customers who need to change their plans, including offering refunds for customers who no longer want to travel. Customers who would like to receive a refund can visit united.com/refund to submit their request.”

American: I clicked on “Travel Information” and scrolled half-way down the page to find this “Travel Alerts” tab. But the link led to issues other than the FAA outage.

Delta: I see no information about the outage. Maybe if I searched for a scheduled flight, I would get a targeted message, but nothing is apparent on the website. However, I do see this generic message at the top of the homepage, which might be an established part of the site.

For how long should airlines keep issue-specific information prominently on their site? Why did United choose to call out the FAA? These and other topics about airline flight communications would make good class discussions.

Email for Editing

Here’s a fun email—from a publishing company!—with obvious errors and other issues for students to fix. Also, I’m not an accounting professor. I’m guessing Wiley outsourced this research and the communication.

Dear Amy, 

Due to the holiday's, we decided to extend the deadline of this survey to 1/15/23, for anyone interested to give us their feedback.

As an Accounting professor, we know you are constantly looking for ways to optimize your curriculum. We would love to get to know more about the resources you leverage to build your curriculum and your challenges and needs of teaching material for your Accounting courses. Your feedback would go a long way to help us create products and services to better support our Accounting instructors.  

• The survey should take approximately 15 to 20 minutes to complete. 

• Upon completing the survey, your email will be entered into a random drawing for 1 of 10, $50 Amazon.com gift cards.  The random drawing will take place the week of 1/16/23, where winners will be contacted via email. You will also receive a code for 20% off one book on Wiley.com. 

• The survey will remain open until 1/15/23.

Follow this link to the Survey, if you are interested to give us feedback:
Take the Survey

Or copy and paste the URL below into your internet browser:
https://wiley.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_5oSZeObx6LcRbAq?Q_DL=Z28LxciSPjK2660_5oSZeObx6LcRbAq_CGC_3xI24GCcnaZf9jE&Q_CHL=email

Send an email to [omitted]@wiley.com if you have any questions.

Thank you and sincere regards,
The Wiley Accounting Team

Steve Jobs Email Blast from the Past

We get a window into executive decision making with Internal Tech Emails. This 2005 thread starts with Google Co-Founder Sergey Brin telling his team that Steve Jobs called, angry about Google “recruiting from the safari team.” Without ever hitting the caps key, Brin described Jobs as “agitated” about at least one potential hire away from Apple. In addition to losing staff, Jobs was concerned about Google developing a search engine to compete with Safari, but Brin assured Jobs that this wasn’t in the works.

The email thread includes other Google execs jumping in to explain that they were, in fact, trying to recruit a high-profile employee from the search team—and that the hire might bring additional employees as well. At some point, an HR leader, Arnnon Geshuri, weighs in: “We are careful to adhere to non-compete agreements if we have established these with any company.  However, it is the staffing organization's practice to aggressively pursue leads that come from our employees and bring the best talent onboard.”

But, as the conversation continued (and after few more calls from Jobs), we see the team shift. They agree not to pursue more candidates without pre-approval from Apple if the prized employee came on board.

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.

Making Sense of Big Numbers

On a recent “No Mercy, No Malice” podcast episode (NSFW), Scott Galloway compares Meta’s spend on Reality Labs—$1 billion per month—to what he considers better investments.

In Business Communication and Character, I suggest that students compare data to concrete objects to help people understand the magnitude. Galloway offers several suggestions to put the expense into context—and to show how Mark Zuckerberg might put the money to better use than building a doomed Metaverse. One is to “pay the entire cost of attendance for every undergrad in the University of Texas and California systems.”

Of course, his point is how much money is being wasted. For students, it’s a good example of making numbers more relevant to an audience.

Image source.

"Embellishment" vs. Lying

New York Representative-elect George Santos misrepresented himself during his campaign for Congress and is facing calls to resign. The story is relevant for students finding the line between “putting their best self forward” and lying during a job search.

Santos now says, “My sins here are embellishing my resume. I’m sorry.” But his claims are clear fabrications in several cases. What’s interesting about the situation is how easily his claims could be verified. The New York Times simply contacted Goldman Sachs, Citigroup, and Baruch College, and none could verify his employment and graduation claims.

In his position paper, he claimed to be “a proud American Jew.” He also said he is “half Jewish” and a “Latino Jew” and claimed that he has Holocaust and Ukrainian heritage, which has not been supported. Now he clarifies: "I am Catholic. Because I learned my maternal family had a Jewish background, I said I was Jew-ish.”

Santos also defended himself during an interview. He said, “I didn’t outright lie,” but he did admit that he used “a poor use of words” and included “a little bit of fluff.” He blamed “elitist” outlets like The New York Times for referring to his customer service experience as “odd jobs,” which forced him to inflate his experience.

His justification raises an issue about how students can handle their own vulnerability. Business communication faculty encourage students to explain how their experience relates to a prospective job. Some students downplay their experience, so we ask them to highlight the relevance to an employer. But none of us would encourage students to include experiences they didn’t have.

We’ll see whether his colleagues vote for him to stay or leave.

Image source.

Jan. 6 Committee Report

After almost two years of investigative work, the U.S. House committee complete its report about the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol. As we might expect, the report has some features we teach in business communication classes.

The 845-page report starts with a list of contributors and a “letter of transmittal”—language I saw in old textbooks when I started teaching in 2004. Next, we see a few “forward” statements from elected officials, which seem like political posturing, until we get to the six-page table of contents. Students will recognize that the headings are descriptive but aren’t quite parallel: some are full sentences, while others are phrases. Bias—or persuasion—is clear in the heading choice, for example, “The Big Lie,” and an all-caps quote, “JUST CALL IT CORRUPT AND LEAVE THE REST TO ME.”

If you’re brave enough to discuss the report in class, other report features are worth reviewing. The 193-page executive summary is unusual for a business report, which is usually about 10% of a total report. The portrait layoff and footnotes are typical for a more formal report, but the photos, used primarily for emotional appeal, are not. Depending on your perspective, the writing style is vivid, inflammatory, or something else. The report on documentcloud.org is navigable by page numbers and a clunky search, but it could be more interactive, for example, with hyperlinks from the table of contents. This is a public document, so students could analyze the audiences and communication objectives.

Justin Bieber and H&M Dispute

Justin Bieber claimed—on Instagram—that H&M created and was selling products without his approval. In addition to the post shown here, he wrote, “The H&M merch they made of me is trash and I didn’t approve it,” and “Don’t buy it.”

H&M pulled the products and explained the decision in a statement: “H&M has followed all proper approval procedures, as we have done in this case, but out of respect for the collaboration and Justin Bieber, we have removed the garments from selling.”

This story raises questions about integrity: what exactly was the process, and was it followed as agreed? I also question Bieber’s medium choice. Why did he make such a public statement? Did he already reach out to H&M privately and not get the response he wanted? We might question both parties’ accountability: how did they agree to resolve differences?

Emails to "Boost Your Career"

Wall Street Journal writers suggest sending emails to someone in your inner circle, an influencer, a VIP, a long-lost contact, and someone leaving the organization. They offer good advice for students to maintain and build relationships; even as interns, thinking about reaching out regularly is a good way to develop this habit in the future. I know someone who starts his day by sending a recognition or complimentary email to someone. It’s a kind of daily gratitude.

Of course, the trouble with these emails is being genuine, offering something without expecting anything in return. The article authors suggest avoiding tired phrases, for example, “Can I pick your bring?” As we teach in our classes, they recommend getting to the main point quickly, being brief, and making a response easy, for example, asking for a 10-minute call.

Underpinning these emails is authenticity: being yourself and sounding conversational to make a genuine connection. Although the authors don’t mention it, many of these contacts can be made on social sites as well.

---

Related: I asked ChatGPT, “How should I write an email?” and got this response—not bad for the basics!

There are a few key things to keep in mind when writing an email:

1. Start with a clear subject line: The subject line should clearly and concisely convey the purpose of the email.

2. Use a professional greeting: Begin your email with a formal greeting, such as "Dear [Name]," or "Hello [Name]," followed by a comma or colon.

3. Keep it concise: Keep your email brief and to the point. Use bullet points or numbered lists to make it easy to read.

4. Use a clear and concise writing style: Use simple, straightforward language and avoid using jargon or technical terms that may not be familiar to the reader.

5. Use proper formatting: Use paragraphs to break up your text and make it easier to read. Use bold or italic text to highlight important points.

6. Use a professional closing: End your email with a formal closing, such as "Sincerely," followed by your name and contact information.

7. Proofread your email: Make sure to carefully proofread your email for spelling and grammar errors before sending it.

By following these tips, you can write a clear, professional email that effectively conveys your message.

Image source.

Integrity Issues in Musk and Twitter Comms

Two Elon Musk/Twitter-related gems this week illustrate issues of integrity. I’m posting these in case you’re not entirely bored with Musk news and teach winter classes or are already planning for next semester.

Musk’s Poll: Musk posted a poll asking whether he should “step down as head of Twitter,” and the results are clear. The next day, he blamed bots for the results. Two days later, Musk tweeted, “I will resign as CEO as soon as I find someone foolish enough to take the job! After that, I will just run the software & servers teams.” We might call this a lack of integrity—both questioning a poll he ostensibly runs and not doing what he says he will do. In addition, Musk still owns the company, so he remains the leader until he sells, and he has no successor, particularly given the recent exodus.

Banned Accounts: Twitter banned @ElonJet, which posted Musk’s use of his private plane. Journalists and others reporting on the account, who say the data is public, had their accounts suspended. One journalist explains that, although his account no longer indicates suspension, he cannot post until he removes offending tweets. Mastodon, a Twitter competitor that’s gaining traction, also had an account suspended and explains how the platform is superior to Twitter’s. The Mastodon message illustrates persuasion—and not-so-subtle sales tactics that would be interesting to explore with students.

ChatGPT Got a D on My Writing Prompt

I submitted to ChatGPT, “Write an argument to convince a restaurant in St. Paul, Minnesota, to pay a living wage.” I received this response in about 3 seconds. See my notes at the bottom—and a prompt for a longer response.

There are several compelling arguments that a restaurant in St. Paul, Minnesota, should consider when deciding whether to pay a living wage to its employees.

First, paying a living wage can help to attract and retain top talent. Employees who are paid a fair wage are more likely to be motivated and engaged in their work, which can lead to improved customer service and a better overall experience for diners. In addition, a living wage can help to reduce turnover and the costs associated with training new employees, which can ultimately save the restaurant money in the long run.

Second, paying a living wage can help to build a positive company culture and reputation. Customers and community members are increasingly looking for businesses that prioritize the well-being and fair treatment of their employees, and a restaurant that pays a living wage can differentiate itself in this regard. This can lead to increased customer loyalty and positive word-of-mouth marketing, which can help to drive business.

Finally, paying a living wage can have broader social and economic benefits for the community. When employees are paid a fair wage, they are more likely to be able to afford basic necessities such as housing, food, and healthcare, which can contribute to a stronger and more stable local economy. In addition, paying a living wage can help to reduce income inequality and promote social justice, which can have a positive impact on the overall well-being of the community.

In summary, there are numerous reasons why a restaurant in St. Paul, Minnesota, should pay a living wage to its employees. Doing so can help to attract and retain top talent, build a positive company culture and reputation, and contribute to the overall well-being of the community.

I hit “Regenerate response” and got this:

Paying a living wage has numerous benefits for both the restaurant and its employees.

First, paying a living wage can improve employee morale and satisfaction, leading to a more positive work environment and lower turnover rate. When employees feel financially secure and valued, they are more likely to be motivated and committed to their work, which can result in better service and customer satisfaction.

Second, paying a living wage can also improve the restaurant's reputation and attract top talent. Customers and potential employees are increasingly considering a company's commitment to social and environmental responsibility when making purchasing and career decisions. By paying a living wage, the restaurant can differentiate itself from competitors and appeal to a socially conscious customer base.

Finally, paying a living wage can have a positive impact on the local community. When employees are paid a wage that allows them to meet their basic needs, they are more likely to spend their income locally, supporting other businesses and boosting the local economy.

Overall, paying a living wage is a win-win for both the restaurant and its employees. It can lead to improved employee satisfaction and retention, a positive reputation, and a positive impact on the local community.

Once again, “Regenerate response”:

Paying a living wage is good for businesses, employees, and the community.

First, businesses that pay a living wage tend to have lower employee turnover and higher levels of employee satisfaction, which can lead to improved customer service and increased customer loyalty. This can ultimately lead to increased profits for the business.

Second, paying a living wage allows employees to support themselves and their families without relying on government assistance programs. This not only helps to reduce poverty in the community, but it also helps to stimulate the local economy as employees have more disposable income to spend at local businesses.

Finally, paying a living wage is simply the right thing to do. It ensures that all employees are fairly compensated for their hard work and enables them to live with dignity and respect.

In conclusion, paying a living wage is a win-win situation for businesses, employees, and the community. It can improve profits, reduce poverty, and promote economic growth, while also promoting fairness and dignity for all.

My notes

• Bottom line: D, a generous grade if the assignment asked for citations, which most would. I can see how the 5-paragraph essay drives ChatGPT, and this is exactly what business communication faculty try to get students to stop doing.

• And yet, I’m surprised how good these are from a computer, and they illustrate how multiple students can enter the same prompt and receive different versions. However, they don’t meet our business writing standards.

• Overall, the arguments are sound. The main points are probably best for convincing a restaurant owner.

• Although simplistic, the organization is easy to follow. In all versions, arguments are grouped appropriately (and differently), and paragraph organization is acceptable. However, we would encourage an introductory paragraph that includes some version of the purpose, prompt, main points, and a preview, and a more varied closing paragraph with some forward-looking nod back to the audience.

• The writing style is clear and varied, but wordy and lacks stronger subjects and verbs (there is, it is). We see several extraneous words and phrases.

• Where I would deduct the most points on a rubric would be for argument/evidence and audience analysis:

  • No citations! These responses need references to be credible arguments. I’m curious about ChatGPT because this information comes from somewhere—where?

  • No depth. Partly because they lack citations, these arguments lack depth. We see big statements without nuance or extrapolation.

  • Limited argument. Similarly, this is a logical argument, as we would expect from a computer. Although we see references to fairness, we don’t see a balance of credibility, logic, and emotional appeals. Our students would likely include a story or two to illustrate arguments about income inequality and meeting “basic needs.”

  • No tailoring to the audience. To be fair, my prompt is sloppy, asking for an argument to a “restaurant,” but restaurant owner is assumed. My prompt does specify St. Paul, Minnesota, but only the first response even mentions the location. Data specific to the region would strengthen the argument. How much? What would be the average cost increase? What are the current regulations about a living wage? Experience of other restaurants in St. Paul or similar regions would also strengthen the argument and quell concerns about businesses closing because they can’t afford to pay a living wage—or a student might provide conditions under which restaurants are more successful in how they implement a living wage.

  • No opposing arguments. For persuasive communication, we ask students to acknowledge opposing arguments to challenge their own thinking, to present a comprehensive view, and to consider the audience’s perspective and address possible resistance.

• Could students use ChatGPT as a starting point, as some use Wikipedia as a starting point for research? This idea is worth exploring, and a colleague and I may test this approach in the spring.

---

I wondered whether the length was an issue and asked ChatGPT to “Write a three-page argument to convince a restaurant in St. Paul, Minnesota, to pay a living wage.” The result is about the same but includes more acknowledgement of the audience and possible challenges. But, in my view, this confirms ChatGPT’s limitations.

Introduction:

As a restaurant owner in St. Paul, Minnesota, you are no doubt constantly facing challenges and making difficult decisions. One of the most important choices you can make is how much to pay your employees. While it may be tempting to keep labor costs as low as possible, there are many compelling reasons to consider paying a living wage to your employees. In this argument, we will outline the benefits of paying a living wage, both for your business and for your employees, and explain why it is the right decision for your restaurant.

Body:

Paying a living wage has numerous benefits for your business. First and foremost, it can lead to increased productivity and morale among your employees. When workers are paid a wage that allows them to afford the necessities of life, they are more likely to be focused, motivated, and engaged in their work. This can translate into higher levels of customer satisfaction and ultimately, increased profits for your restaurant.

Paying a living wage can also help to reduce turnover, which can be costly and disruptive to your business. When employees are paid a wage that allows them to support themselves and their families, they are more likely to be satisfied with their jobs and less likely to leave. This can save you the time and expense of constantly training new hires and can lead to a more stable and experienced workforce.

In addition to the benefits for your business, paying a living wage has numerous positive impacts on your employees and the community at large. When workers are paid a wage that allows them to afford the necessities of life, they are less likely to struggle with financial stress and insecurity. This can lead to improved physical and mental health, which can benefit not only your employees, but also their families and the community as a whole.

Paying a living wage can also help to reduce income inequality and promote social justice. When workers are paid a wage that allows them to afford the necessities of life, they are able to participate more fully in their communities and contribute to the local economy. This can help to build stronger, more vibrant communities, which can benefit everyone.

Conclusion:

In conclusion, paying a living wage is the right decision for your restaurant in St. Paul, Minnesota. It can lead to increased productivity and morale among your employees, reduced turnover, and improved physical and mental health for your workers and their families. It can also help to reduce income inequality and promote social justice in the community. While it may require some adjustments to your business model, the long-term benefits are well worth the investment.