Disneyland Employees Speak Out

Disney employees are on screen in a New York Times op-ed video, "I Work at the Happiest Place on Earth. Why Can’t I Pay My Rent?" A 30-year concierge and a cosmetologist are featured more prominently. One is currently living in her car, and another says, tearfully, that she has spent time in her car. Both say they love their jobs, but along with 75% of Disneyland employees, they can't afford to pay "basic expenses every month." Data comes from a questionnaire and report, "Working for the Mouse."

The argument is for Disney to pay a living wage, and the call is for citizens to vote for an Anaheim proposal that affects Disneyland employees and some local hotel workers. In the video, one claim is that real wages have declined because of inflation—what $15 per hour bought seven years ago isn't the same today.

Business leaders who are fighting the measure say that the increase would hurt jobs. One local Chamber of Commerce member argued, "We estimate 3-4,000 jobs lost over next year or two by companies having to absorb this new increased cost. They're going to reduce hours and reduce jobs."

Senator and former presidential candidate Bernie Sanders is also featured in the video. He is proposing a bill he calls "Stop BEZOS" to tax Amazon and other large companies for public assistance received by their employees. The idea is for companies with 500 or more employees to pay the government back for support paid to their employees who cannot survive on earned wages.

Image source.

Discussion:

• How well does the video make the case for higher wages? Which are logical and which are emotional appeals? What evidence is presented?
• Assess the credibility of the questionnaire and report, "Working for the Mouse." From your assessment, what makes the report both credible and questionable? In what ways does the report reflect business communication standards, and in what ways does it fall short?
• Research the impact of raising wages on industry, for example, this Cornell report. What's your view of this argument? It's a complicated question because of different industries, locations, labor supply, rates, etc.
• In what ways do the employees featured in the video demonstrate courage? What risks did they take in appearing on screen?

Can You Identify Fake Facebook Pages?

A New York Times article asks readers to spot deceiving Facebook accounts based on posts. In the example below, which is from a fake page? 

If you guessed the one on the right, you are correct. The best indicator, according to the article, is the poor word choice and grammar at the top of the post: "live" should be "leave," and "End of the story" is atypical English and should read "End of story." Particularly to identify Russian posts, look for missing or misused articles (a, an, the). 

But some posters are getting more clever. In the example at right, we see that text is lifted from another source, so the writing style and grammar sound like native English. 

I just re-read 2017 Facebook guidelines about spotting fake news. Interestingly, the advice doesn't include looking carefully at grammar, proofreading, and punctuation. 

Cover image source.

Discussion:

• In a way, aren't we giving into our biases if we assume that posts with poor grammar are from international sources that lack credibility? How do you reconcile this approach to spotting fake news?
• How confident are you in spotting posts from credible sources? Under what circumstances have you been fooled in the past? 

Nike Takes a Chance on Kaepernick

Former National Football League quarterback Colin Kaepernick will be the new celebrity face of Nike's "Just Do It" campaign. Kaepernick was the center of controversy when players were both complimented and criticized for "taking a knee" to protest racism and promote social justice.

Nike and Kaepernick already had a sponsorship deal, but this new contract extends it. The deal may be "awkward," to use The New York Times's phrase, because the NFL has not been able to stop player protests, to the dismay of President Trump and others.

Also, Kaepernick hasn't played in the league since 2016 and has an active grievance, accusing the league of conspiring to prevent him from playing.

But neither Nike nor Kaepernick are shying away from the message. The first ad shows Kaepernick with the caption, "Believe in something. Even if it means sacrificing everything."

As part of the deal, Nike will contribute to "Know Your Rights," Kaepernick's foundation to "fight oppression of all kinds globally, through education and social activism.

Discussion:

• What risks is Nike taking with this contract? Do you believe the campaign will be well received, divisive, or something else?

• Nike didn't respond to The New York Times for comment about the story. Should the company include a comment or make a statement? Why or why not?

• What leadership character dimensions are illustrated by this story?

In-N-Out Responds to Boycott

Eric Bauman, chair of the California Democratic Party, called for a boycott of In-N-Out Burger for donating $25,000 to the GOP, but the company had a strong defense. Bauman tweeted to his 11,000 followers:

“Et tu In-N-Out? Tens of thousands of dollars donated to the California Republican Party . . . it’s time to #BoycottInNOut — let Trump and his cronies support these creeps . . . perhaps animal style!”

But Bauman didn't get support from his party. A spokesperson said, "It was his personal tweet and doesn’t reflect party policy. That said, he is giving force to a sentiment many people feel right now. Which is that, in this era, with the stakes so high, engaging in things like personal boycotts is a way for people to effect change.”

The California Republican Party also disputed the call:

“I have no idea what possessed the California Democrat Party chairman to attack a California institution like In-N-Out, especially considering the fact that the organization gave more money to Democrats than Republicans recently. I’m sure he got many angry phone calls from Democrats who have benefited from In-N-Out’s generosity, and that’s why he not only went dark following the tweet, but forced the party’s spokesperson to distance the party from the comments.”

In response to the charge, In-N-Out defended its giving and other practices.

Image source.

Discussion:

• Like the Facebook employees' call to join a FB group, calling for a boycott is one way to get attention. In this case, is a boycott a good strategy? Why or why not?
• Analyze In-N-Out's statement. How well does the company defend itself against the boycott?

Facebook Memo from Conservative Employees

Reminiscent of last year's Google memo titled "Google’s Ideological Echo Chamber," a group of politically conservative employees at Facebook wrote a memo titled "We Have a Problem With Political Diversity." The message is similar: employees who hold conservative views do not feel included at the company.

The memo emphasizes two major points:

• "We are a political monoculture that’s intolerant of different views."
• "We do this so consistently that employees are afraid to say anything when they disagree with what’s around them politically."

The writer includes some evidence, and business communication students may want more. The end of the memo, which is much shorter and less divisive than Google's, includes a call to action: for interested employees to join a Facebook group, now showing 1422 members.

Discussion:

• Assess the memo for organization. Are the headings clear and parallel? What are the strengths, and what could be improved?
• Now assess the evidence. Which facts and examples do you find most and least convincing? What additional evidence would improve the arguments?
• What's your view of the employees' approach? Do you find the memo and call to join a Facebook group an effective choice for the company? What could be some alternatives? 
• In what ways is this situation an example of diversity and inclusion at Facebook?
• In what ways does the memo demonstrate courage?

Louis C.K. and Steve Wynn Are Back

Comedian Louis C.K. showed up unexpectedly at a comedy club in New York and performed his usual act. You may remember that five women accused Louis C.K. of sexual harassment, for which he wrote an apology, admitting to the acts the women described. Since then, he has been out of the spotlight.

Comedy Cellar owner Noam Dworman said the crowd responded positively and gave him a standing ovation as he took the stage. Dworman acknowledged the risk he took in having Louis C.K. perform:

“I understand that some people will be upset with me. I care about my customers very much. Every complaint goes through me like a knife. And I care about doing the right thing. . . .[but] there can’t be a permanent life sentence on someone who does something wrong.”

Some business leaders accused during the #MeToo movement are also trying to make a comeback. Steve Wynn, for example, has started an online art gallery featuring paintings by Picasso, Warhol, and others. When asked whether Wynn's history would have a negative effect on his venture as an art dealer, his lawyer, Michael Kosnitzky, said he, "didn’t believe so." Kosnitzky also said that Wynn still denies the charges and believes “people should look at the totality of the man.”

Image source.

Discussion:

• What do you think factored into Dworman's decision to allow Louis C.K. to perform? Did he do the right thing?
• Louis C.K. didn't include any material about sexual harassment or his apology. This would have demonstrated his vulnerability. What would have been the benefits and drawbacks?
• What's your view of Steve Wynn's attempt to reinvest himself as an art dealer?
• Wynn's name doesn't appear on the website. Do you think that's the right decision? Why or why not?

Archbishop Calls for Pope's Resignation

As more allegations of sexual abuse within the Catholic church become known, the most senior levels of the organization are facing new challenges. Last week, Pope Francis wrote a letter chastising abusers and calling on the Church to do better. Today, a former senior Vatican, who was an ambassador to the U.S., accused the pope of knowing about and covering up abuse cases since 2013. He is calling on the pope to resign.

The situation involves Archbishop McCarrick, who resigned as cardinal in July. McCarrick is accused of sexually abusing seminarians, and the Pope is accused of "rehabilitating" him rather than disciplining him and removing him from his position. 

Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò explains his reasoning in documented "testimony," including this segment:

Image source of Pope Francis and Archbishop McCarrick.

Discussion:

• Should the pope resign? Why or why not? How does this situation compare to corporate examples? Consider the hierarchy and relationships.
• In what ways is this situation a matter of integrity?
• Viganò uses the word parrhesia. What does this mean, and how does this relate to business communication?
• Which other leadership character dimensions are illustrated by this situation?

School Policy for "Natural" Hair

An 11-year-old black girl was sent home from school because her hair didn't fit guidelines for "natural" hairstyles. Over the summer, Christ the King Parish School in Terrytown, Louisiana, established a new policy, published in its handbook, banning hair extensions, which Faith Fennidy was wearing.

Videos show Fennidy crying, and critics called the policy discriminatory. But the Archdiocese of New Orleans defended the school's decision:

"This policy was communicated to all parents during the summer and again before the first day of school, and was applied to all students.

"The school offered the student's family an opportunity to comply with the uniform and dress policy and the family chose to withdraw the student; the student was not suspended or expelled."

A representative for the school also said, "We remain committed to being a welcoming school community that celebrates our unity and diversity." Fennidy decided not to return to the school.

Discussion:

• What's your view of the policy? Do you find it appropriate, discriminatory, or something else?
• How do attire policies in companies compare? What examples of similar policies have been problematic for companies?
• Read more about the situation on BusinessInsider. How well did the school handle the situation? What, if anything, could have been done differently?

Pope Francis's Letter

Pope Francis has joined the conversation about sexual abuse in the Catholic church after 1,000 victims and 300 perpetrators were identified by a grand jury investigation report in Pennsylvania. The report also revealed how the church systematically covered up the abuse over a 70-year period.

In an open letter, which is posted on Vatican News, expresses empathy early and often, for example, in this passage:

In recent days, a report was made public which detailed the experiences of at least a thousand survivors, victims of sexual abuse, the abuse of power and of conscience at the hands of priests over a period of approximately seventy years. Even though it can be said that most of these cases belong to the past, nonetheless as time goes on we have come to know the pain of many of the victims.  We have realized that these wounds never disappear and that they require us forcefully to condemn these atrocities and join forces in uprooting this culture of death; these wounds never go away. The heart-wrenching pain of these victims, which cries out to heaven, was long ignored, kept quiet or silenced.  

Pope Francis's letter follows one by Pope Benedict XVI in 2010, when abuse in Ireland became widely known.

Discussion:

• Compare the two letters. In what ways are they similar and different? How might the circumstance and timing affect each approach?
• How is the letter organized? How would you describe the tone?
• Which character dimensions does Pope Francis demonstrate in his letter?

Maryland Apologizes for Football Player's Death

University of Maryland at College Park has taken responsibility for mistakes during training that caused a football player's death. During a news conference, President Wallace D. Loh said he met with the student's parents to apologize. After the investigation, Loh concluded:

"The University accepts legal and moral responsibility for the mistakes that our training-staff made on that fateful workout day." And to the parents, "You entrusted Jordan to our care, and he is never returning home again."

Such an admission is unusual and welcome in light of cover-ups and shifting blame.

As a result of this incident, the head coach was placed on leave and another coach, Rick Court, has left the university. Court had been accused of "name calling and other intimidation," according to a Chronicle report.

Some are calling for Loh's resignation as well. Trouble started with the athletics director around the same time. Loh has publicly expressed concerns about how these situations might affect his presidency:

“That’s the sad part,” he said. “I think most presidents have to hold on for dear life. Many, many presidents have not been able to bounce back.”

Discussion:

• In what ways does Loh make himself and the University vulnerable, and how might this work in their favor?
• Did Loh do the right thing? Should he resign?
• Assess Loh's news conference. What does he do well, and what could he improve?
• How well does Loh express compassion during the news conference?

Sacha Baron Cohen: Questions of Ethics and Integrity

Most famous for this Borat movies, Sacha Baron Cohen is at it again. He has a new Showtime series, "Who Is America?," and pranks mostly people with conservative political views. Impersonating something who might favor his target's position, he gets people to make embarrassing statements and do humiliating acts.

On a recent episode, Cohen convinced a gun-rights advocate to bite on a sex toy. (I didn't watch it.) Former vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin was duped recently and wrote a scathing Facebook post, calling Cohen “evil, exploitative and sick." For her interview, Cohen impersonated someone who appeared to Palin to be a disabled war veteran.

His strategy is to make people vulnerable: by impersonating someone who appears to be a person in need or a supporter, he lowers the interviewee's defenses so they are more easily humiliated.

Cohen's stunts remind me that companies send employees to impersonate customers to get competitive data. Or maybe this is a stretch?

Cover image.

Discussion:

• What's your view of Cohen's work: mean, exploitative, demeaning, clever, funny, or something else?
• Now consider his work using two frameworks: ethical decision making and integrity. How do his interviews measure up?
• What about my analogy to getting competitive data? What are the similarities and differences? Have you been asked by a company to use this tactic? Did you comply? Why or why not? It's a common practice.

Men More Likely to Be Called by Surname Only

Multiple studies show that men are more likely than women to be referred to by only their last name, while women are referred to by their full name. We are likely to say "Trump" yet "Theresa May." The studies include references to politicians, teaching faculty, and scientific researchers.

The differences are most striking in the computer science field, in which only 20% of women but almost 50% of men were referred to by last name only.

Trouble comes when, as some of this research confirms, people view those referred to by only their last names as "more famous and eminent, a judgment that could result in more awards, funding, and other career benefits."

This research reminds me of a recent New York Times article that explained how Wimbledon lists women on its board of champions. Before marriage, Chris Evert was listed as "Miss C.M. Evert." After marriage, she became "Mrs. J.M. Lloyd." Announcers refer to "Mrs. Williams," yet Roger Federer is simply "Federer" and listed on the board as "R. Federer," married or not.

Board image source.

Discussion:

• To what would you attribute the difference in how people are referred?
• Have you observed this difference yourself, perhaps in other settings? Consider working environments and Hollywood, for example.
• Do you find this research and the tennis calling significant? Why or why not?

What Is "Dehumanizing" Speech?

The New York Times reports Twitter's struggle to define what constitutes "dehumanizing" speech. Apparently, the only agreement among Twitter's team members is that the decision is "incredibly complex."

Categorization is critical, as the company has a reputation as a sometimes dark place of trolls and harassment. Yet this week, Apple, Facebook, YouTube have expunged content from Alex Jones's Infowars, which is known for spreading misinformation, including that the shooting at Sandy Hook was a hoax. You can imagine how this angered families of lost children.

In a tweet, CEO Jack Dorsey explained Twitter's decision to keep Infowars content, but employees, particularly, have not responded positively.

Twitter is in a difficult spot because, on the other hand, sites have been criticized for censoring conservative views. Del Harvey, the company's VP of Trust and Safety, wrote an email to employees further explaining the company's rationale.

Image source.

Discussion:

• How would you define "dehumanizing" speech? What character dimensions are involved?
• What persuasive strategies does Harvey use in her email to employees? Which are most and least convincing and why?
• What is your view about Infowars content? Should Twitter remove it from the site as other social media companies have done? How might your own political views factor into your thinking?

Banning Cell Phones

A Wall Street Journal article illustrates the futility of banning cell phones during meetings. Despite research that people aren't nearly as good as multitasking as they think, people can't seem to control themselves.

In a fit of frustration, Jason Brown, the chief executive of Brown, Parker & DeMarinis Advertising, told his staff, "Don’t show up at a meeting with me with your phone. If someone shows up with their phone, it’ll be their last meeting.” But laptops and watches started creeping back, and people were too worried about missing clients trying to get in touch.

New tracking tools are at least making people aware of how much time they're spending on devices. Moment, an iPhone app, and a new Google program for the Android will tell you how much time you spend on your phone every day. With this knowledge, one manager cut his time from four hours to one hour.

Moment image source.

Cellphone ban image source.

Update: The Wall Street Journal reports that France has banned cell phones in schools, kindergarten through ninth grade. The hope is to reduce distractions send a "symbolic message."

Discussion:

• How much time do you spend on your phone and other devices every day? Do you know?
• Do you view phone time as a problem for you? Why or why not?
• Part of the problem is our disconnection to other people. How have you seen this play out in a work or social environment?

Fun Funeral Ads?

Death is inevitable, and we don't like to talk about it. A UK company is trying to change that with "edgy" ads, for example, people running on a beach carrying coffins as surfboards.

The ads are causing a stir. Transport for London, which regulates the city's ads, rejected them as  potentially causing “serious and widespread offense," although officials hadn't actually seen the ads. Still, on social media, people referred to the ads as "shocking,” “vile,” “insensitive,” and “tasteless.”

The ads compare burial and cremation prices, and one offers "one-way" travel with "roasting temperatures." The ad company founder defended the approach:

“Our reluctance to talk about death is the reason funeral costs continue to spiral and why you pay far too much for writing a will or settling an estate. That’s what we seek to change.”

Discussion:

• Why do we have a difficult time talking about death?
• How would you describe the ads and the agency's strategy?
• Could the ad strategy bring about a positive change? Will the ads bring in business?
• What if these ads ran in the U.S.? How, if at all, do you think the response might differ?

Open Offices Reduce Communication

Despite wishful thinking for better communication, new research shows that open offices may reduce productivity and decrease face-to-face conversations. Researchers at Harvard found that employees used online tools, such as instant messaging and email, more frequently and reduced their in-person discussions about 72% when open office floor plans were implemented. For the study, employees wore sociometric badges to track their interactions, including audio, motion, and distance.

What accounts for the change? The authors explain, "[R]ather than prompting increasingly vibrant face-to-face collaboration, open architecture appeared to trigger a natural human response to socially withdraw from officemates and interact instead over email and IM." 

The study raises issues of certain types of cubicles, which negatively impact our need for privacy and cause distractions. Instead of open offices, the authors suggest communal lunch tables and simultaneous coffee breaks to increase socialization.

Image source.

Discussion:

• What's your reaction to this study: obvious, interesting, or something else?
• What has been your experience with open office floor plans? How did the design affect your work and interactions?
• What other ideas do you have for increasing face-to-face communication at work?

CEO Activism

Weber Shandwick's third annual report explores CEO activism, which Brian Moynihan, CEO Bank of America, defines and supports:

“Our jobs as CEOs now include driving what we think is right. It’s not exactly political activism, but it is action on issues beyond business.”

The report found that almost half of Americans "believe CEO activism influences the decisions and actions of government," and almost half of consumers "would be more likely to buy from a company led by a CEO who speaks out on an issue they agree with." Millennials, particularly, prefer CEOs to speak out on issues, and CEOs with more social media accounts have better stock performance for their company.

A Wall Journal Street writer observes that leaders rarely make a business case for issues, even if their company would benefit. Instead, they are speaking to consumers directly to change hearts and minds.

Top issues for CEOs include training, equal pay and sexual harassment, and CEOs are avoiding gun control, nationalism, marijuana legalization, and abortion."

A Forbes article offers this advice for CEOs:

• Develop an authentic voice and quick actions
• Connect your customers with your activism efforts
• Align activism efforts with a company’s mission  
• Be willing to act against your own self-interest

Discussion:

• What are the risks and rewards of activism to a CEO and to the company? How does integrity factor in?
• What examples have you seen of CEOs speaking out? How do you assess the situations? How did you feel about the gestures?
• Read the Weber PPT deck. What principles of business report writing are followed, and what could be improved?

More Research Support for Gratitude

New research, once again, illustrates the value of writing thank-you letters. A recent study shows that senders underestimate the impact of sending a letter of gratitude, which prevents them from writing one. People also worry that letters will be scrutinized and that receivers will feel awkward, but none of these perceptions align with the reality.

In their study, Amit Kumar and Nicholas Epley, at the University of Chicago, compared how "expressers" felt about writing a letter with how people felt receiving them. Receivers felt more surprised about receiving the letters and about the content, more positive, and less awkward than the senders thought they would be. Most expressers spent less than five minutes writing a letter.

Understandably, writers in the study doubted their own competence. Participants answered questions such as, “To what extent were you able to express your gratitude using words that were just right?” and “After your recipient reads your letter, how articulate do you believe they will think your expression of gratitude is?” People who received messages rated senders as more competent than senders rated themselves.

This study builds on Kumar's earlier work showing that reflecting on experiences rather than on material goods makes people feel better and act more generously toward others.

Discussion:

• Have you sent a letter of gratitude in the past couple of years? What inspired you to send it? How was it received?
• Have you thought about sending a letter but did not? What stopped you? Do the findings in this study encourage you now? The authors hope so!

When an Online Conversation Goes Bad

A new Cornell University study identifies a framework for determining when online discussions will turn ugly. By analyzing conversations between Wikipedia editors, the research team developed a computer model to predict, with 65% accuracy, when interactions would become "toxic."

People can identify these discussions with 72% accuracy. You can test whether you can identify which conversations will turn into personal attacks using an online tool.

The model analyzed politeness and other rhetorical strategies, for example, editors' use of "please," expressions of gratitude, and fact-checking. When editors used more direct questions and "you," conversations were more likely to go awry.

Cover image.

Discussion:

• How did you do on the online quiz? What did you learn from the experience?
• What is the value of this research? Consider social media sites such as Twitter. How could the model be used, and what are the potential positive and negative consequences?

Professor Fakes Offer Letter

To negotiate for a higher salary, a Colorado State University faculty member invented an offer letter from another university. At first, Brian R. McNaughton was successful: he received an additional $5,000. But the university eventually found out the truth.

McNaughton resigned and now faces criminal charges for his actions. In a long letter, he cited personal pressure and other faculty submitting fake offers for increases in salary, but the university denies this history.

A Fast Company article offers advice for whether to use this approach to negotiate for more money. Of course, the article doesn't recommend faking another offer. Still, even presenting real offers is complicated and risky.

Image source.

Discussion:

• What do you see as the possible complications and risks associated with presenting your current employer with another offer?
• Consider using another offer during the recruiting process. What should you consider before you use this tactic?