U.S. Presidential Candidates Go Social

President Obama and Republican contender Mitt Romney are using social networking to boast their campaigns. Today, the Obama campaign is releasing a new platform called "Dashboard." Katie Hogan, spokesperson for the campaign, described the purpose of Dashboard:

"Dashboard is our online field office - a hub for campaign volunteers and supporters to communicate with each other and become members of neighborhood teams. . . .

"Supporters can use the tool to set goals, communicate those goals, and see what other supporters are doing. Supporters who want to be engaged can go to Dashboard, message other supporters in their area, and have a conversation about how to get started. It provides a good volunteer experience online that is directly tied to our field operation goals."

Built into the system is a keen focus on setting goals and friendly competition among neighborhoods. With a Facebook-like interface, volunteers are expected to use the site easily.

Since the fall, Mitt Romney's campaign has used a different home-grown system, "MyMitt."

Images via Raw Story and Signal News.

Discussion Starters:

• If you supported one of the candidates, would you use his social network? Why or why not?
• Why would both campaigns create their own platform rather than use Facebook as their main tool for volunteers?
• Consider signing up for both sites. What differences do you notice? Which is more effective for what purposes?

Retailer CFO Loses Job Over Social Media Posts

Maybe this is why so few CFOs use social media. Women's clothing retailer Francesca's fired its CFO today for his tweets and Facebook posts that revealed too much about the company.

Francesca's issued a press release announcing the decision but didn't mention which posts, specifically, were of concern. However, the statement said that Gene Morphis had "improperly communicated Company information through social media." Below are two examples of Morphis's Facebook posts.

 

In another post, Morphis criticized co-sponsors of the Sarbanes–Oxley Act, a law that defines financial reporting standards: 

"Audit committee. Damn you Paul Sarbanes! Damn you Michael Oxley!"

Discussion Starters:

• What should be the social media guidelines for corporate CFOs? Should they differ from guidelines for all employees?
• Was the Board right in terminating Morphis?
• What could have been done to prevent this situation?

JPMorgan Chase Loses More than $2B

JPMorgan Chase is trying to explain how the bank lost $2 billion and may lose another $1 billion as it settles a trade. In just six weeks, the bank's Chief Investment Office, a group that invests extra assets to hedge risks, lost this extraordinary amount of money.

In a conference call, Jamie Dimon, CEO of JPMorgan Chase, called the situation "self-inflicted":

"We're accountable, and what happened violates our own standards and principles about how we want to operate the company. This is not how we want to run a business."

Liz Rappaport, a Wall Street Journal reporter on PBS NewsHour questioned the terminology that Dimon used, specifically that the Chief Investment Office was intended as an "economic hedge." According to Rappaport, this was an "unclear thing to say": a hedge typically is used to protect against a specific investment, but "exactly...what this group actually hedges against is unclear, and the fact that this was such a large and outside position in one direction, and they got caught...flat footed with it, also doesn't sound like a hedge-it sounds like a bet." The distinction is important: did the investments hedge against risk or create more risk for the bank?

Rappaport also said that this wasn't really a "rouge trader" situation, as we saw at UBS in September 2011. Rather, at the center of the controversy is a London trader nicknamed the "London Whale" for his large investment positions. Unlike the UBS situation, the Chief Investment Office's trades were apparently "run up the flag pole," according to Rappaport.

Discussion Starters:

• What do you see as the distinction between a "hedge" and a "bet"? 
• How do you assess Jamie Dimon's response to the situation?

Jimmy John's Will Rehire Employees Who Put Up Posters

Sandwich restaurant Jimmy John's had disappointing news this week: a federal judge ordered the company to rehire and pay lost wages to six employees. The employees were fired after they posted 3,000 notices implying that sandwiches could be made by sick workers.

The employees claimed that if they called in sick but couldn't find a replacement, they feared being fired. In the court decision, the judge ruled that, by removing the posters, Jimmy John's violated workers' rights under the National Labor Relations Act. This decision was based on a labor dispute under way at Jimmy John's: a union held an election to organize workers and, although the union was narrowly rejected, it filed unfair labor practices, claiming that Jimmy John's interfered with the election process.

The union perspective is that the workers were terminated "for blowing the whistle on company policies that expose customers to sandwiches made by sick workers." 

MikLin Enterprises, which owns Jimmy John's, will appeal the decision.

Discussion Starters:

• What is your perspective of the posters? What is the company's perspective?
• How does this case relate to comments in social networking sites, a hotly debated topic for the National Labor Relations Board?

GSA Overspending Scandal: "Aggrieved by the Gall"

The General Services Administration (GSA) is under investigation for spending $823,000 at a Las Vegas conference in 2010.  The GSA is responsible for purchasing products, transportation, and office space for other government agencies, and ironically, is charged with developing cost-containment policies.

Martha Johnson, head of the GSA as of February 2010, has resigned amid the controversy.  In her testimony to Congress, Johnson admitted that the Western region training conference "evolved into a raucous, extravagant, arrogant, self-congratulatory event that ultimately belittled federal workers and would stain the very work that other committed staff and I were preparing to do." She also said that "[T]he expensive planning for that conference was well under way when I entered GSA, and I was unaware of the scope" and that she was "extremely aggrieved by the gall of a handful of people to misuse federal tax dollars, twist contracting rules and defile the great name of the General Services Administration."

Johnson's strong statement was in sharp contrast to that of Jeffrey Neely, a GSA executive who evoked his Fifth amendment right not to answer any questions. As reported by CNN, Rep. Elijah Cummings of Maryland criticized Neely specifically:

"'In one e-mail...Mr. Neely invited personal friends to the conference, writing, and I quote -- and this is simply incredible -- quote: "We'll get you guys a room near us, and we'll pick up the room tab. Could be a blast." End of quote. He then went on and wrote this -- "I know I'm bad, but as Deb and I often say, why not enjoy it while we have it and while we can. Ain't gonna last forever." End of quote. Well, Mr. Neely, it stops now.'"

Included in the evidence of the overspending scandal is this video, showing a GSA employee's joke about perks and then an award given to that employee at a GSA dinner at the conference.

Discussion Starters:

• Review the steps for ethical decision making. Which would have helped these administrators re-think their choices?
• How do you assess the GSA employee's video and award? Is this incriminating, just office fun, or something else?
• Grammar Check: The section above about Rep. Cummings has a quote within a quote within a quote. Is it punctuated correctly?

Facebook Wants You to Use Its Email

Facebook has a new program on the horizon: your timeline address will now be your email address. Unless you already have a @facebook.com email, you'll be assigned one.

Facebook describes the change for consistency:

"Starting today, we're updating addresses on Facebook to make them consistent across our site. Now, the address people use to get to your timeline and send you email on Facebook will be the same."

Clearly, Facebook is continuing to push its email application, previously called messaging. Speculation is that Facebook is trying to match the integration of Google+ with Gmail. Also, a recent study showed that people are more likely to use the Internet for email (85%) than for social networking (62%). Despite early reports of its demise, email remains a frequent tool for communication.

Discussion Starters:

• Do you use Facebook email? Would you if you were assigned an email address? 
• What's the value of email to Facebook? How has the company's "messaging" strategy evolved? 

Few CIOs Use Social Networks

Despite their companies' increasing use of social media, CIOs are not at all active on social networking sites. TechCrunch calls this group "a little anti-social" and describes the results of a study by harmon.ie:

"...only about 10 percent of CIOs in the top companies - Fortune 250 and and Global 250 - actively use public social networks. Within that group, only four CIOs write blogs, and more than one-third either do not have LinkedIn profiles, or have profiles with fewer than 100 connections."

We could explain the data by saying that CIOs hire people to manage the social networking for them or that they are active on intranets rather than on the public web. But Mark Fidelman, lead author of the study, explains the issue:

"These 250 CIOs are charged with transforming the world's largest enterprises, yet our analysis shows that most have relatively little experience using the kinds of tools that are needed to drive that change."

Fidelman also says, "If CIOs are charged with building a social business, shouldn't they have a social presence?" He also suggested to Information Week that "CIOs who don't get social might not be CIOs next year."

On a more positive note, harmon.ie identified the Top 25 Social CIOs in the Fortune 250. The top five include CIOs of technology companies (no surprise) SAP, Google, and Microsoft, but also includes CIOs of the Corporate Banking division of the Royal Bank of Scotland and Mexican petroleum company Pemex.

Discussion Starters:

• Do you find this news alarming? Why or why not?
• What advice would you give CIOs who want to be more active in social networks? Where should they concentrate their efforts? Would your advice vary by industry?

Emails in Facebook Dispute Revealed

Paul Ceglia, of StreetFax, is claiming a 50% stake in Facebook (reduced from 84%). The claim is partly based on email interactions between Ceglia and Mark Zuckerberg, who was contracted to work on Ceglia's StreetFax site in 2003.

Zuckerberg's attorneys take issue with the emails themselves, which are produced in Microsoft Word, rather than within a native-format email program. The attorney's motion to dismiss the case called the emails "an obvious indicator of fraud," stating that "Ceglia simply typed text into a Word document and declared it was the text of emails with Zuckerberg."

An email dated February 4, 2004, refers to the launch of Facebook: "The site looks great." But the time stamp is 10:30 a.m., before Facebook went live that afternoon. According to the Facebook team's motion, "This exchange is a historical impossibility."

The Wall Street Journal provides more information about the situation and doubts Ceglia's credibility:

A ThomsonReuters article analyzes the situation and also agrees with Zuckerberg's defense. In the piece, the writer provides six rules for "What not to do if you're suing a Facebook billionaire," including Rule 1: "Don't leave a version of the contract between you and the billionaire on your parents' computer unless that version matches what you've presented to the court."

Discussion Starters:

• Read the ThomsonReuters analysis. With which of the writer's claims do you agree?
• What other examples of emails becoming public have been in the news in the past year?
• In this situation, Zuckerberg's emails may help him defend the case. But in other situations, public email is embarrassing and damaging. How can you avoid this happening to you?

Political Campaigns to Your Email: Spam or Free Speech?

Brace yourself for email from the presidential candidates. Although the 2003 CAN-SPAM law (Controlling the Assault of Non-Solicited Pornography and Marketing) restricts how companies use email addresses, political candidates are exempt, according to a Fox News report:

"'Political communications are not spam. Political communications are a demonstration of free speech in America,' said Stuart Shapiro, president of iConstituent, a Washington, D.C.-based firm which uses state-generated email lists to send messages on behalf of clients on all sides of the political spectrum.

"'There is a tenet in government that is based on communicating with our constituents, and email is one of the most effective ways to do it,' Shapiro said. 'People look forward to it and want it.'"

"People look forward to it and want it"? Shaun Dakin, president and CEO of The National Political Do Not Contact Registry, disagrees: "Politicians love the fact that their perceived freedom of speech is more important than voters' privacy." To be fair, voters offer their emails on voter registration cards, so perhaps they do want to be contacted. On the other hand, do people realize that providing an email address is optional? This is clear on some registration cards but not on others. Also, do people know that, in nine states, emails can be sold to political campaigns and organizing groups?

Discussion Starters:

• What's your assessment of this story? Do you believe it's wrong to sell voters' email addresses, or is this simply an example of politicians' free speech?
• Look at two or three voter registration form online. (Search images.google.com.) What advice would you give to the form designer who wants to make it clear that email addresses are optional? Would you also include an explanation of how email addresses are used (and that they could be sold)? Why or why not?

#McDStories Turns Ugly

McDonald's started the Twitter hashtag #McDStories to encourage people to post their thoughts about the company. The campaign started well enough with @McDonald's initial tweets:

But the social media promotion quickly turned into a "hashtag horror show." The hashtag made it too tempting for people to tweet their worst views of the company, such as these:

Where did McDonald's go wrong? Rick Wion, the company's social media director, explained his perspective:

"Last Thursday, we planned to use two different hashtags during a promoted trend -- #meetthefarmers and #mcdstories.

"While #meetthefarmers was used for the majority of the day and successful in raising awareness of the Supplier Stories campaign, #mcdstories did not go as planned. We quickly pulled #mcdstories and it was promoted for less than two hours.

"Within an hour of pulling #McDStories the number of conversations about it fell off from a peak of 1600 to a few dozen. It is also important to keep those numbers in perspective. There were 72,788 mentions of McDonald's overall that day so the traction of #McDStories was a tiny percentage (2%) of that.

"With all social media campaigns, we include contingency plans should the conversation not go as planned. The ability to change midstream helped this small blip from becoming something larger."

Monitoring activity and recognizing failure are critical for social media campaigns. As Wion says, "As Twitter continues to evolve its platform and engagement opportunities, we're learning from our experiences." True enough: trending on Twitter can be a dangerous game.

Discussion Starters: 

• Why do you think #meetthefarmers was successful but #McDStories was not?
• Should McDonald's have anticipated this outcome and not introduced the hashtag, or was the reaction too hard to predict?
• Wion talks about having a contingency plan. What do you think that entails? How should companies prepare for social media campaigns that fail?

QR Code Use Stuck at 5%

They're fun and cute, but will people use them? Marketers have tried pushing QR codes but haven't had resounding success, according to Ad Age. 

Some of the failed attempts are humorous. The barcodes are designed to be scanned by a mobile app to open a web page, but marketers have chosen  a few odd uses. A MillersCoors QR code linked to a website where holiday partiers could easily get a cab, but as Ad Age reports, "The effort assumed that revelers still had enough dexterity to aim a phone and get a clear shot."

Other failed attempts include QR codes on places out of cellular reach: Red Bull's ad in a subway car and United Airline's ad in an in-flight magazine.

The most successful campaigns seem to provide more information, for example, Macy's codes on clothing led to video descriptions by designers, and Home Depot codes on plants led to more information about what items can be placed together.

This is a good lesson in how we can get carried away with technology that's new and inexpensive without having a strategy for how to best use the technology for communication. For now, marketers are still learning.

Image source.

Discussion Starters:

• Have you used a QR code? For what purpose? How do you think they're best used?
• Imagine that you run an office supply store. How could you use codes to provide product information or offer better service for customers?

Letter to Former HP CEO Revealed

In June 2010, Mark Hurd, former CEO of Hewlett-Packard,  received a letter claiming sexual harassment of a contract employee, Jodie Fisher. Hurd resigned from HP on August 6, 2010. As one article described the unveiling, "This Is The Letter That Got Mark Hurd Fired As CEO Of HP." 

An HP shareholder requested that the letter be made public as part of a lawsuit to, according to The New York Times, "investigate corporate wrongdoing and waste associated with the relationship and Mr. Hurd's resignation." Now the president of Oracle, Hurd lost his court appeal to keep the letter confidential.

All Things D received the letter, which describes in eight pages of uncomfortable detail some of Hurd and Fisher's interactions. An attorney working for HP also compiled a timeline of emails that describe more of their communications. The publicity and detail are more than a little embarrassing for all involved. Read the full letter. Download the letter.

 

 Discussion Starters:

• Imagine that you own HP stock. How might you feel about this letter becoming public?
• If you were on Oracle's Board of Directors, how would you respond to this news? What, if anything, would you say to Mark Hurd?
• This is a good time to remember that email is always discoverable. What can you do to protect yourself against your emails becoming public?

Apple's Anti-Leak Social Media Policy Gets Leaked

Although many social media policies are available online, until yesterday, Apple's was not. Last month, an Apple employee was fired ("sacked" to the British) for Facebook posts that the company claimed violated its social media policy. Now, that internal policy has mysteriously been leaked. 

One analysis of Apple's policy compliments the conclusion, which is sound advice for anyone:

In sum, use your best judgment. Remember there may be consequences to what you post or publish online including discipline if you engage in conduct that Apple deems inappropriate or violates any Apple policies. If you're about to post something and you are concerned whether you are following these guidelines or any Apple policy, please discuss it with your Leader or HR before posting.

But the attorney takes issue with what the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) may call the right to concerted activity:

Respect the privacy of your coworkers. Blogs, wikis, social networks and other tools should not be used for internal communications among fellow employees. It is fine for Apple employees to disagree, but please don't use your external blog or other online social media to air your differences.

Recent cases brought by the NLRB have criticized employers for terminating employees who may be engaging in protected concerted activity (or the right to organize). Read about an NLRB case. Image source. 

Discussion Starters:

• Compare Apple's policy to another available online. What differences do you notice, and how do you account for them?
• What was the policy where you worked recently? Did you find that people generally followed the policy or worked around it in some way? 

FedEx's New Sustainability Ad

FedEx's new commercial conveys its "Sustainable Solutions" in an animated story of "how a shipping giant can befriend a forest." The spot was Advertising Age's Creativity Pick of the Day.

On its website, FedEx touts its sustainability initiatives in three areas: the environment, our people, and our community. In another funny commercial, FedEx executives suggest printing on the back of used paper, but this doesn't turn out to be such a good idea.

Clearly, FedEx is trying to improve its sustainability image. A 2006 report by Roberts Environmental Center gave the company a C- rating:

On its website, Federal Express provided only minimal environmental and social
data. While their efforts to improve fuel and delivery efficiency are
commendable, their environmental website lacked any performance indicators
that would increase transparency. The corporation's partnership with
Environmental Defense is notable, and the results of this collaboration are
promising. Despite Federal Express' positive reputation for corporate
responsibility, they did not provide the information necessary to score well in
this report. It seems as though Federal Express has the appropriate data, it
need only make it readily available to the public.

Discussion Starters:

• What are the key messages in the new ad? In what ways is the ad successful in conveying FedEx's sustainability initiatives? In what ways could the messages be clearer?
• Review FedEx's "Environment" web page today. In what ways has the company addressed criticism of the Robert's Environmental Center report? In what ways could the company still improve?

12 Recent Firings Because of Social Media Posts

As an early Christmas present, Sam Fiorella gives us 12 examples of employees fired because of posts to social media sites. The line-up includes these gems: 

• Former Representative Anthony Weiner, who tweeted obscene pictures of himself, thinking he was sending a direct message to one person
• @ChryslerAutos, who tweeted the F-bomb to followers, thinking he was using his personal twitter account. Scott Bartosiewicz explains what happened in this video:

• An NBC staff member who posted a video of Bryant Gumbel looking foolish and asking questions such as "What is the Internet?" (Well, it was 1994.)

Discussion Starters:

• In these and the other situations, do you believe that the employee deserved to be fired? What are the arguments for and against termination in each case?
• Of these situations, which do you think is the most egregious? Why?
• How could some of these situations have been avoided?

Did You Check Work Email on Thanksgiving?

Good to know that I'm in the unhealthy majority: 58% of men and 51% of women planned to check email during the holidays. According to a survey by Xobni, the gender gap has shrunk from 2010, when 67% of men and 50% of women checked email.

Of the 75% who receive work-related email during the holidays, 19% of us are "thankful or relieved by the distraction," while 41% are "annoyed, frustrated, or resentful."

The survey showed age differences among those who feel "annoyed, frustrated, or resentful." Between 41% and 43% of workers aged 18-44, but only 17% of the 55+ crowd feel this way. The difference could be because of work expectations, position within the company, job insecurity, family status, or a host of other reasons. (via PC World)

Discussion Starters:

• What are your views about checking email on holidays? What are the reasons people may want to check email?
• What organizational systems (e.g., culture, management practices, performance measures) may cause people to check email?
• How could an organization prevent people from checking email on holidays? Is this a good idea?

Facebook Changes Salman Rushdie's Name

Award-winning writer Salman Rushdie had his Facebook account deactivated over confusion about his name. To prove his identity to the Facebook police, Rushdie provided his passport; however, his Facebook profile then displayed "Ahmed Rushdie," with his official first name, which he never uses.

Eventually, his profile was properly restored, and Facebook apologized. Mashable posted a series of Rushdie's tweets, showing the sequence of events.

This situation is the latest in the so-called "nymwars," a term that appeared on Twitter. Wired magazine covered the topic extensively when Google+ established a real-name policy. David Winer, visiting NYU scholar, explains Google's rationale for real names:

There's a very simple business reason why Google cares if they have your real name. It means it's possible to cross-relate your account with your buying behavior with their partners, who might be banks, retailers, supermarkets, hospitals, airlines. To connect with your use of cell phones that might be running their mobile operating system. To provide identity in a commerce-ready way. And to give them information about what you do on the Internet, without obfuscation of pseudonyms.

Simply put, a real name is worth more than a fake one.

Facebook's vice president of public policy, Elliott Schrage, provides a different rationale for real names:

Facebook has always been based on a real-name culture. We fundamentally believe this leads to greater accountability and a safer and more trusted environment for people who use the service.

For the Rushdie situation, Facebook admitted the mistake: "We apologize for the inconvenience this caused him." No further explanation was offered in the company's statement.

Discussion Starters:

• What, if any, privacy concerns do you have about your own Facebook profile?
• What is your take on Facebook's real-name policy? Do you agree with it? Why or why not?
• Some people prefer to have pseudonyms online, for example, students who want to protect their identify from employers searching for them online. Is this a good strategy personally and professionally?

In Statement, Paterno Says, "I Wish I Had Done More" (and update)

Penn State's Board of Trustees took decisive action Wednesday night and fired both Coach Paterno and president Spanier in response to the sexual abuse scandal that has rocked the university. Paterno had submitted his resignation, but the Trustees decided that he would not coach another game.

Before the Trustee's decision, the legendary football coach gave an emotional farewell talk to his team and coaches and issued a statement, read here on the Tim Brando show (text below):

I have come to work every day for the last 61 years with one clear goal in mind: to serve the best interests of this university and the young men who have been entrusted to my care. I have the same goal today.

That's why I have decided to announce my retirement effective at the end of this season. At this moment the Board of Trustees should not spend a single minute discussing my status. They have far more important matters to address. I want to make this as easy for them as I possibly can.

This is a tragedy. It is one of the great sorrows of my life. With the benefit of hindsight, I wish I had done more.

I am absolutely devastated by the developments in this case. I grieve for the children and their families, and I pray for their comfort and relief.

My goals now are to keep my commitments to my players and staff and finish the season with dignity and determination. And then I will spend the rest of my life doing everything I can to help this University.

Spanier issued his own statement following the news of his termination.

Discussion Starters:

• Is Paterno's statement appropriate, given the situation? Would you expect to see something different?
• Why do you think Paterno decided to resign? Was this the right decision at the right time?
• How do you assess the Trustees' decision to fire Paterno and Spanier? Do you side with the Trustees or the protesting students?
• How do you assess Spanier's statement? In what ways is his statement appropriate or inappropriate in this situation?

Goldman Sachs Reneges on Dinner and Donation

Goldman Sachs had intended to attend a fund-raising dinner for the Lower East Side People's Federal Credit Union, a small organization that lends to the poor. But when the invitations went out, they listed "Occupy Wall Street" as one of the honorees. Goldman, identified as an event sponsor, pulled its $5,000 funding pledge and declined the invitation. (The company continues to fund the Credit Union's financial education program.)

According to event organizers, Goldman didn't want to be associated with the Occupy Wall Street movement, whose members carry signs such as, "Goldman Sachs is the work of the devil." The company has been a target of some of the demonstrations, such as this one in Boston.

"Their money was welcome, but not at the price of giving up what we believe in," said a Credit Union representative. "We lost their $5,000, but we have our principles."

Apparently, the discussion about the decision was interesting. According to one source affiliated with the event, "It was one of those email exchanges that you talk about the next day at the office." I hope the emails make the Internet rounds soon!

Discussion Starters:

• What do the Occupy Wall Street demonstrators stand for, and how does this affect companies such as Goldman Sachs?
• Do you agree with Goldman's decision about the dinner? Why or why not?
• What are the potential consequences of the company's decision?

Employee Quits Marriott Accompanied by a Marching Band

Some employees like to go out in style -- and embarrass their employees while doing it. Fed up with his job at a Marriott Hotel, Joey DeFrancesco brought a marching band with him to tell his boss that he quit. Why waste time writing a boring resignation letter to just one manager when a "Joey Quits" video can be viewed by over 2 million people within 10 days? 

According to Joey, "The working conditions in the hotel are horrendous." He had more to say to CBS News. Apparently, some of the YouTube comments were getting annoying, so he added this note, "I have another, better job already. So stop talking about that and worry about your own jobs."

A Marriott spokesperson confirmed that Joey had worked at the Marriott Renaissance in Rhode Island for three years and made this statement: 

"You know that we take employee satisfaction very seriously as a company - creating a sense of community and pride within our hotels is a top priority. The Renaissance Providence actually has a number of employee programs in place that encourage health, wellness and employee satisfaction. While this is an unfortunate way for an employee to resign, we are confident that hotel management works closely with staff to continue to find ways to make the hotel a rewarding place to work for everyone."

Discussion Starters:

• After watching the video and reading the background information, do you sympathize more with Joey or with the hotel? Why?
• How credible do you find Joey? How do you assess his credibility?
• Evaluate the Marriott spokesperson's response. What is effective and ineffective?