Google Admits Sexual Harassment Incidents

It’s been quiet until now, but Google has fired 48 employees for sexual harassment. A New York Times article exposed a number of high-profile departures dating back to 2014, including Andy Rubin, who developed the Android.

Rubin was paid $90 million when the company asked for his resignation, but executives never told the entire truth: that Rubin left because he was accused of sexual misconduct. Instead, then-CEO Larry Page, complimented him: “I want to wish Andy all the best with what’s next,” and “With Android, he created something truly remarkable—with a billion-plus happy users.” Rubin denies the claim and the circumstances of his termination.

In addition to this situation, the Times article cites a number of relationships between senior-level managers and employees. An email from CEO Sundar Pichai and the VP of people operations to staff acknowledges the 48 departures, including 13 “senior managers and above.”

Hi everyone,

Today's story in the New York Times was difficult to read.

We are dead serious about making sure we provide a safe and inclusive workplace. We want to assure you that we review every single complaint about sexual harassment or inappropriate conduct, we investigate and we take action.

In recent years, we've made a number of changes, including taking an increasingly hard line on inappropriate conduct by people in positions of authority: in the last two years, 48 people have been terminated for sexual harassment, including 13 who were senior managers and above. None of these individuals received an exit package.

In 2015, we launched Respect@ and our annual Internal Investigations Report to provide transparency about these types of investigations at Google. Because we know that reporting harassment can be traumatic, we provide confidential channels to share any inappropriate behavior you experience or see. We support and respect those who have spoken out. You can find many ways to do this at go/saysomething. You can make a report anonymously if you wish.

We've also updated our policy to require all VPs and SVPs to disclose any relationship with a co-worker regardless of reporting line or presence of conflict.

We are committed to ensuring that Google is a workplace where you can feel safe to do your best work, and where there are serious consequences for anyone who behaves inappropriately.

Sundar and Eileen

Image source.

Discussion:

• Should Google have been more transparent about the previous departures? Why or why not?

• Should the executives say more in the email about the specific departures mentioned in the Times article? Why or why not?

• Assess the email for audience analysis, objectives, tone, organization, and style. What works well, and what could be improved?

• Which leadership character dimensions does Pichai demonstrate and fail to demonstrate?

Megyn Kelly Terminated from NBC

NBC Today Show host Megyn Kelly said she thought it was acceptable to wear blackface for Halloween. Kelly might need to brush up on the history of blackface, which started in minstrel shows in the 1800s. Then, like now, blackface reinforced racial stereotypes and was terribly demeaning to black people.

Kelly apologized on the show, but people were still upset. Her colleague, Al Roker, said “she owes a bigger apology to folks of color around the country.” NBC waited two days, but insiders say she will be terminated.

Here’s the full text of her email to NBC staff:

Dear friends & teammates –

One of the wonderful things about my job is that I get the chance to express and hear a lot of opinions. Today is one of those days where listening carefully to other points of view, including from friends and colleagues, is leading me to rethink my own views.

When we had the roundtable discussion earlier today about the controversy of making your face look like a different race as part of a Halloween costume, I suggested that this seemed okay if done as part of this holiday where people have the chance to make themselves look like others. The iconic Diana Ross came up as an example. To me, I thought, why would it be controversial for someone dressing up as Diana Ross to make herself look like this amazing woman as a way of honoring and respecting her?

I realize now that such behavior is indeed wrong, and I am sorry. The history of blackface in our culture is abhorrent; the wounds too deep.

I’ve never been a “pc” kind of person — but I understand that we do need to be more sensitive in this day and age. Particularly on race and ethnicity issues which, far from being healed, have been exacerbated in our politics over the past year. This is a time for more understanding, love, sensitivity and honor, and I want to be part of that. I look forward to continuing that discussion.

I’m honored to work with all of you every day.

Love,

Mk

Image source.

Discussion:

• What’s your view of Kelly’s original comments?

• Assess Kelly’s email. Do you find her apology meaningful, insincere, or something else?

• Did NBC do the right thing by firing her? Why or why not?

• We await a statement from NBC. Draft one on behalf of the company.

• Which leadership character dimensions are illustrated by this situation?

Racist Comments on a Ryanair Flight

People are calling for boycotts of Ryanair because staff didn’t address a passenger’s racist comments on a flight from Barcelona to London. The man went on a rant towards a 77-year-old, Jamaican-born, British passenger, calling her an "ugly black bastard” and “a stupid ugly cow."

The passenger tried to get the woman to move to another seat: "I don't care whether she's f------ disabled or not. If I tell her to get out she gets out." He also threatened her: “If you don't go to another seat, I'll push you to another seat.” The woman’s daughter said she was taking her mother on a trip after her husband had died.

Although other passengers tried to silence the man and called for him to be removed from the plane, staff seemed to do very little. Even after the incident was reported, the company posted a meager response on Twitter.

Later, the company also said, "As this is now a police matter, we cannot comment further."

Image source.

Discussion:

• What could be Ryanair’s rationale for not removing the man from the plane? Was it the right decision?

• Why didn’t Ryanair say more after the incident? What, if anything, should the company leaders have said?

Marriott Labor Strikes

More than 8,000 Marriott employees are going on strike to fight for higher wages and more input into decisions that affect them. Represented by the union Unite Here, workers represent 23 hotels across the country, and the number may grow.

A Marriott International spokesperson told Skift:

“We are disappointed that Unite Here has chosen to resort to a strike at this time. During the strike our hotels are open, and we stand ready to provide excellent service to our guests. We continue to bargain in good faith for a fair contract. While we respect our associates’ rights to participate in this work stoppage, we also will welcome any associate who chooses to continue to work.”

The GM of a Westin property told guests they would put their sustainability program “in effect for all guests for the duration of the work stoppage. Your room will be cleaned every third day of your stay, and any additional cleaning services you would like are available on request.”

According to the article and online reviews, guests are noticing. As one wrote, “The normal services you associate with a hotel were severely reduced, along with the attention provided with a RC [Ritz-Carlton] stay, were no longer available.”

Unite Here is negotiating with Marriott for three improvements:

(1) Wages high enough so that workers do not have to work multiple jobs to earn a living wage; (2) a voice in determining how much automation and what kind of automation makes its way into the hotel industry; and (3) better measures for workplace safety.

Marriott image source. Striker image source.

Discussion:

• If successful, the strike could inspire more hospitality workers to join the union. Is that a good result? Why or why not?

• What’s your view of the employees’ requests: not enough, reasonable, outrageous, or something else?

• What leadership character dimensions are demonstrated or not demonstrated by this situation?

Teacher Recommendation Letters Influence Harvard Decision

Details about Harvard’s admissions process are surfacing during the trial about how the university’s “race-conscious” decision policy may adversely affect Asian-Americans. The entire guidebook for admissions decisions in 2014 was entered into evidence.

This week, Harvard revealed that white students typically receive “somewhat stronger” recommendation letters from teachers and guidance counselors than Asian-American students, which affects each group’s “personal rating.” The personal ratings on based on characteristics such as kindness, courage, and leadership. When writing letters, reviewers are asked to assess “consistent testimony of an applicant’s unusual effervescence, charity, maturity, or strength of character.”

Back in 1990, the US Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights criticized Harvard’s practice of using a personal rating and admissions officers’ stereotypical comments of Asian-American students. The same issue seems to be presented here, with comments from teachers and guidance counselors.

Image source.

Discussion:

• How valuable do you think teacher and guidance counselor letters of recommendation are in the admissions process? How much weight should they carry in the overall decision?

• By definition, the personal rating includes subjective evaluations. Should universities try to avoid subjectivity in the admissions process? Why or why not?

Woman Fired for Racial Profiling

A woman refused to let a black man into her apartment, and she was subsequently fired from her job. Hilary Mueller is shown on video, taken by D'Arreion Toles, asking to see his key fob and questioning who Toles was going to visit in the building. Toles eventually moved past Mueller, who followed him to his apartment door.

When the video was posted, it attracted more than 5 million views. Toles included the captions, "to be a black man in America" and "this is America in 2018." Complicating matters, Mueller called the police after the incident. Also, Mueller’s husband posted a video condemning her behavior. They have been separated for more than a year.

Mueller’s employer, real estate firm Tribeca-STL, also saw the video and terminated her employment. An ABC report includes a statement from the firm:

"The Tribeca-STL family is a minority-owned company that consists of employees and residents from many racial backgrounds. We are proud of this fact and do not and never will stand for racism or racial profiling at our company."

As of this writing, both the company website and its Twitter feed are unavailable.

Discussion:

• Explain how this incident is an example of racial profiling.

• Do you agree with the firm’s decision to fire Mueller? Why or why not?

• In what ways did Mueller demonstrate and fail to demonstrate integrity and humility?

Harvard Admissions Case In Progress

The class action lawsuit against Harvard University has begun, with the defendant’s arguments focused on the value of diversity. The university is charged with discriminating against Asian-Americans based on its “race-conscious” policy.

In the closely watched case in Boston, the plaintiff argued that Harvard’s system of rating students on academic achievement, athletic ability, extracurriculars, and personality encourages skewed ratings in the last category based on race. The plaintiff attorney said, “Diversity is not on trial here,” and instead explained that Asian-American applicants are admitted at lower rates than they would be based on their academic achievement.

Harvard sent letters to students in underrepresented states if they scored well on their PSATs. But the encouragement to apply varied based on race. White students needed at least 1310 on the verbal and math sections in these states; however, nationwide, Black, Hispanic, and Native American students needed at least 1100. For Asian-American students, the threshold was higher: 1350 for females and 1380 for males.

Harvard defended its practices, claiming the university “cannot achieve educational goals without considering race.” The defendant’s attorney gave the diverse courtroom as an example of the benefit of the university’s policy. Also in defense, a representative from the NAACP said, “A colorblind approach means that you close your eyes to the full lived experiences of applicants.” Part of Harvard’s defense is that people cannot be separated from their race—it is part of the whole of who they are.

Harvard image source. Harvard library image source.

Discussion:

• What’s your view of Harvard’s admissions policy?

• How might you have been advantaged or disadvantaged by affirmative action practices in applying to school or to jobs? How, if at all, does your experience factor into your perspective?

• The plaintiffs argue that Harvard is secretive about its approach. What is the value of keeping an admissions policy private, and how could this privacy be harmful?

Brené Brown on "Who You Are at Work"

An interview with Brené Brown, a researcher at University of Houston, reminds us to bring our whole selves to work. According to Brown, we need all of ourselves to solve problems.

Brown encourages people to create a culture where people can lose their armor, which she considers most damaging to relationships. When people protect themselves rather than allow themselves to be vulnerable, they miss opportunities for connection.

Brown defines vulnerability as “the willingness to be ‘all in’ even when you know it can mean failing and hurting.” She says vulnerability means risking emotional exposure when you don’t know the outcome.

The interview reminds me of a Deloitte study that identified ways employees “cover” themselves to fit in. For example, people change their appearance, avoid discussions that would reveal political and other affiliations, and avoid associating with people who are like them.

Like Brown’s conclusion that leadership is key to enabling employees to be themselves at work, 53% of respondents in the Deloitte study said their leaders expected employees to cover.

Discussion:

• How is “armor,” as Brown defines it, similar to ways of “covering” identified in the Deloitte study?

• What are the benefits of protecting ourselves in this way? What are the negative consequences?

• When have you avoided vulnerability? In retrospect, how did the decision turn out? Would you do something differently today?

• What can leaders do to create a culture when people can be themselves at work?

Facebook Policy Executive Sat Behind Kavanaugh

Joel Kaplan, Facebook’s vice president for global public policy, sat behind his friend, Brett Kavanaugh, during the charged hearings to determine whether he would win support as the next Supreme Court justice. Because of his position at Facebook, employees questioned his loyalties and whether it was appropriate for him to be so visible during the judge’s testimony about whether he sexually assaulted a woman as a teenager.

His appearance was a “surprise” to employees, and hundreds wrote about their concerns on Facebook’s intranet site. One employee wrote, perhaps expressing the sentiment of Facebook’s liberal employees:

“Let’s assume for a minute that our VP of Policy understands how senate hearings work. His seat choice was intentional, knowing full well that journalists would identify every public figure appearing behind Kavanaugh. He knew that this would cause outrage internally, but he knew that he couldn’t get fired for it. This was a protest against our culture, and a slap in the face to his fellow employees.”

Kaplan defended participating, referring to their 20-year friendship, and CEO Mark Zuckerberg said he didn’t violate any company policies by attending, although he did say he would not have made the same decision. Employees wanted to hear from COO Sheryl Sanberg about Ford’s accusations, and she was not forthcoming, according to a Times article. But she did comment on Kaplan’s attendance:

“As a woman and someone who cares so deeply about how women are treated, the Kavanaugh issue is deeply upsetting to me. I’ve talked to Joel about why I think it was a mistake for him to attend given his role in the company.”

Cover photo source.

Discussion:

• Read additional Facebook messages in the Times article. How would you summarize employees’ concerns?

• What’s your view of Kaplan’s attendance? Consider the “optics” in addition to company policy.

• Some might say that Kaplan was being authentic by sitting behind his friend. Do you agree with this view? Why or why not?

• Which character dimensions are illustrated by this story?

British Rail Company Apologies

Great Western Railway is tripping over itself apologizing for thousands of canceled and late trains. Apologies by British train organizations are so common that a web designer created a site, https://www.sorryfortheinconvenience.co.uk, to chronicle statements, now totaling more than 420,000.

A look at the railway’s Twitter feed shows two failures but no apology. Maybe the organization is catching on: over-apologizing isn’t a good strategy. At some point, customers just want problems fixed.

Discussion:

• How can a leader know when the organization is apologizing too much?

• Take a look at the GWR Twitter feed. How would you advise the organization to improve its communications?

• What leadership character dimensions is GWR demonstrating and failing to demonstrate with its apologies?

Kavanaugh and Ford Demonstrate Vulnerability

During the Senate Judiciary Committee hearings, Judge Brett Kavanaugh and Dr. Christine Blasey Ford both displayed emotions for the media to analyze and compare.

A New York Times article reports, “Kavanaugh's show of both fury and tears was a cry from the flip side of the #MeToo movement.” We saw an angrier Kavanaugh than during his Fox News interview, perhaps a reaction to President Trump’s disappointment in his mild manner.

A CNN article recalls a 2005 interview when President Trump said, "When I see a man cry I view it as a weakness. I don't like seeing men cry." The article also concludes,

“Judgments on Kavanaugh's emotional performance will likely depend on each viewer's perspective, but he demonstrated the wider latitude that men in politics have today to show their emotions. However, were he a woman, he would likely be dismissed as overwrought, even hysterical, which helps explain why the witness who testified before him, Christine Blasey Ford, was far more composed and restrained.”

The Times article describes Ford’s presentation: “[H]er voice cracking but her composure intact.” In another Times piece, “The ‘Tight Rope’ of Testifying While Female,” the writer confirms, “She teared up in her testimony — her voice cracking — but she did not openly cry or break down.” That article also cites her asking for caffeine and telling a joke: “These are all codes for ‘she is displaying proper expectations of femininity.’”

Gender experts and other reporters also noted the contrast. Referring to Kavanaugh’s tears, Alicia Menendez of PBS said, “If he were a woman, we’d be questioning if she were unhinged.”

Both demonstrated vulnerability and risked emotional exposure. Despite the public backlash, Ford came forward to tell her story. And Kavanaugh responded by displaying emotions often viewed negatively for a man. However, overall, reports of his anger seem to overshadow the tears.

Kavanaugh image. Ford image source.

Discussion:

• What’s your view of the emotional displays during the testimony? How do you think gender differences factored into how each was judged?

• Have you ever cried at work? Which emotions are seen as appropriate, and which are discouraged? Should we be more open to both anger and sadness in the workplace?

Are U.S. Campuses Coddling Students?

A new book, The Coddling of the American Mind: How Good Intentions and Bad Ideas Are Setting Up a Generation for Failure, explores the impact of political discourse on U.S. college campuses. The book is an expansion of an Atlantic article in which Jonathan Haidt, one of the book authors, disputed “trigger warnings” and other anxiety-avoiding tactics.

The authors are clear that harassment and discrimination are wrong, and that students who experience them should report the incidents. But, according to a Bloomberg article, we may lose the ability to communicate with each other:

“They worry about the What worries him is the looseness of the term ‘bias’ and the idea that students are urged not to work out their concern with the alleged perpetrator but to report it directly to the authorities.”

Also concerning the authors is the high percentage of liberal faculty members. A recent study shows that 39% of the most elite liberal arts schools have no Republican professors. The Bloomberg writer notes the possible negative effect:

"Critics argue that the atmosphere of liberal orthodoxy increases the risk that graduates will enter the workforce without knowing how to confront political viewpoints different from their own.”

Cover image source.

Discussion:

• What’s your view? Are we coddling students, or do they need more protection and “safe spaces”?

• How would you describe the differences among discrimination, harassment, and bias?

• How might the issue of protecting people from bias contribute to sexual harassment in the workplace? How can we help people sort out problems at an interpersonal level?

Nike Addresses Kaepernick on Earnings Call

On a quarterly earnings call, Nike CEO Mark Parker addressed head on the new ad campaign with former NFL player Colin Kaepernick. Following strong first-quarter earnings and revenue growth, Parker expressed confidence in Nike’s sponsorship agreement, particularly related to social media engagement:

“How we look at it is how do we connect and engage in a way that’s relevant and inspiring to the consumers that we’re here to serve. Our brand strength ... is a key dimension that contributes to the ongoing momentum that we’re building across the Nike portfolio.”

About an ad campaign that also features athletes Serena Williams and Lebron James, Parker said,

“These are actually very inspiring athletes, and again we feel like that campaign has delivered on that message in a way that’s really connected with people around the world.”

But the stock did fall in after-hours trading after the earnings report. Analysts say investors expected more than 10% revenue growth, and they note this is the first quarter since a sexual harassment scandal hit the company.

Stock image source.

Discussion:

• The company executives tout the campaign results on social media. How much do these results matter compared to the earnings report?

• Maybe this is another example of how quarterly reports aren’t the best measure of company performance. Should we be looking longer term? Why or why not?

Papa Johns Rebranding

Papa John’s will lose the apostrophe, signaling a distancing from its founder and owner, John Schnatter. An AdAge article chronicles issues with Schnatter, starting with his blaming the NFL’s handling of players “taking a knee” and ending with his taking out an ad in a Louisville, Kentucky, newspaper, shown here. The ad reads, “The Board wants to silence me” and points to his own website, savepapajohns.com.

The final straw was when Schnatter used the “n” word and made other questionable racial comments on a conference call. Soon after, Schnatter was removed from the board of directors.

With the slogan, “Better Ingredients. Better Pizza,” the company hopes to divert attention from Schnatter back to the pizza.

Discussion:

• What’s your view of the revised company name? To what extent will the change achieve the company’s objectives?

• Take a look at Schnatter’s website. The AdAge article says, “Who’s to say whether it’s delusional . . . “ What do you think? What does Schnatter hope to achieve, and how well does the site achieve his objectives?

Google CEO: No Political Bias

Google CEO Sundar Pichai wrote an email to staff with a clear message: Google does not have a political bias in search results. Pichai is responding to President Trump’s allegations as well as his own employees’ concerns about suppressing conservative news.

In one part of the email, he writes,

“Recent news stories reference an internal email to suggest that we would compromise the integrity of our Search results for a political end. This is absolutely false. We do not bias our products to favor any political agenda. The trust our users place in us is our greatest asset and we must always protect it. If any Googler ever undermines that trust, we will hold them accountable.”

Pichai may also be defending the results of an internal email chain in which employees discussed ideas for including information in search results. Here we see some of the internal debate:

“Can we launch an ephemeral experience that includes Highlights, up-to-date info from the US State Dept, DHS, links to donate to ACLU, etc?” the email added.

Several officials responded favorably to the overall idea. “We’re absolutely in…Anything you need,” one wrote.

But a public-affairs executive wrote: “Very much in favor of Google stepping up, but just have a few questions on this,” including “how partisan we want to be on this.”

“To the extent of my knowledge, we’d be breaching precedent if we only gave Highlights access to organizations that support a certain view of the world in a time of political conflict,” the public-affairs executive said. “Is that accurate? If so, would we be willing to open access to highlights to [organizations] that…actually support the ban?”

Pichai image source.

Discussion:

• Read Pichai’s entire email to staff. Who is the audience and what are Pichai’s communication objectives? How well does he meet them? What organizational structure does Pichai use?

• How well does Pichai take and assign accountability about Google’s search debate?

• What’s your view of the internal email discussion? What, if anything, surprises you about this discussion? It was, of course, intended to stay internal.

Amazon Employees Take Bribes to Delete Negative Reviews

Amazon is investigating its own employees for taking money through intermediaries to help sellers. Sellers report being offered and receiving confidential data, such as search key words, to help boost sales on the site.

The trouble seems most serious among Chinese Amazon employees, who work for lower salaries and may have more incentive to supplement their wages. A Wall Street Journal article describes the process:

Brokers search for Amazon employees on Chinese messaging platform WeChat and send messages asking them if they would like to provide these services in exchange for cash, according to brokers and sellers who say they have been approached by brokers.

The going rate for having an Amazon employee delete negative reviews is about $300 per review, according to people familiar with the practice. Brokers usually demand a five-review minimum, meaning that sellers typically must pay at least $1,500 for the service.

An Amazon spokesperson defended the company’s practices: “We hold our employees to a high ethical standard and anyone in violation of our Code faces discipline, including termination and potential legal and criminal penalties,” and “We have zero tolerance for abuse of our systems, and if we find bad actors who have engaged in this behavior, we will take swift action against them.”

With more than two million independent sellers on the site, competition can be fierce. Sellers have been known to encourage fake reviews and repeated clicks for higher rankings.

Discussion:

• Which principles of ethical decision making come into play in this situation? In other words, how do we know that the employees’ behavior is unethical?

• We might say that Amazon employees in China are underpaid, and that’s why they are taking money on the side. Does this justify their behavior? Why or why not?

Accusation and Defense of Brett Kavanaugh

On the final days of interviews with Brett Kavanaugh to become a Supreme Court Justice, a woman has accused him of sexual assault when they were teenagers, more than 30 years ago. Professor Christine Blasey Ford wanted to stay anonymous, but she is now known as the one who claims Kavanaugh assaulted her at a Georgetown Preparatory School party when she was 15 and Kavanaugh was 17. She revealed her allegation in a letter to her congressman. Dr. Blasey believes that she would have been raped if Kavanaugh weren’t drunk. Both will testify on Monday.

For leadership and business communication students, let’s look at the arguments on both sides. Here is some of the evidence presented so far:

• Twenty-four women who attended private school with Dr. Blasey supported her in a signed letter “to attest to her honesty, integrity, and intelligence.” (For some letter-writing history, read the defense of Professor Avital Ronell and the subsequent explanation.)

• Dr. Blasey passed a polygraph test, but critics say the test is imperfect for proving truthfulness.

• Although Dr. Blasey doesn’t remember some details (for example, whose house they were at), trauma experts say this is typical for people who experience such a trauma.

• Kavanaugh denies the incident: “I categorically and unequivocally deny this allegation. I did not do this back in high school or at any time.”

• Mark Judge, Kavanaugh’s roommate at the time, said, “I have no memory of this alleged incident." Dr. Blasey claims he was in the room during the incident. Judge also said, "It's just absolutely nuts. I never saw Brett act that way.” He also said they were raised in Catholic homes that didn’t tolerate such behavior and that Kavanaugh was “brilliant” and not “into anything crazy or illegal.” Judge wrote a book, Wasted: Tales of a GenX Drunk, about his time at Georgetown Prep.

• Kavanaugh’s high school yearbook has become public and is “raising eyebrows,” as MSNBC and CNN both report. The yearbook includes captions such as “Do these guys beat their wives?” and “100 kegs or bust,” indicating a party culture. Mark Judge’s yearbook page, shown here, includes a quote: “Certain women should be struck regularly, like gongs.”

The FBI and/or congressional investigation is a nearly impossible task. Does this evidence help?

Cover image source. Yearbook image source.

Discussion:

• Which of these evidence points do you consider most and lease relevant to the question of whether Kavanaugh sexually assaulted Dr. Blasey?

• What biases might you bring to the analysis? Think about your own assumptions and how they might affect your interpretation.

• What advice would you give to members of Senate Judiciary Committee as they decide what happened and, ultimately, whether Kavanaugh should be elected to the highest court position.

Serena Williams Controversy

Serena Williams lost the U.S. Open women’s final tennis match and criticized umpire Carlos Ramos. A Washington Post article delves into “whether sexism, conscious or not, skews the playing field.”

The writer offers the following evidence:

• Ramos still has support from the International Tennis Federation.

• London Telegraph published data showing that, for the past 20 years, men received code violation fines almost three times as often as women. The writer acknowledges that men’s games are longer, but she says this doesn’t account for the entire difference.

• An Australian newspaper criticized for what some consider a racist image of Williams boldly republished it on the cover with the headline, “Welcome to the PC World.”

The writer offers more evidence on both sides of the issue and suggests changes within the association.

Williams image source.

Discussion:

• Read more about the situation if you are unfamiliar. What could Williams and Ramos each have done differently?

• What’s your view overall? Was Williams treated unfairly? Did she react appropriately?

• How do you assess Williams’ response after the incident? How well did she recover from the so-called “outburst”?

• What leadership character dimensions are illustrated by this situation?

JD.com CEO Arrested for Sexual Misconduct

Richard Liu, founder and CEO of Chinese e-commerce company JD.com, was arrested in Minneapolis for sexual misconduct. Because of his high profile and billionaire status, Liu’s arrest was the most popular topic of conversation on social media in China last week.

Two people describe a case involving a student at the University of Minnesota, part of a joint doctoral program in business administration with Tsinghua University. Liu was released without bail and has returned to China. He denies any wrongdoing, and JD.com posted a statement in Chinese, translated by a student:

Sunday, Sep. 2, 2018

We have noticed that there are rumors and false accusations about Mr. Qiangdong Liu on Weibo (Chinese social media site, similar to Twitter) recently. We hereby declare as follows: Liu was falsely accused while in the US on a business trip, but the police investigators found no misconduct and that he would continue his journey as planned. The company will take necessary legal action against false reporting or rumors.

Monday, Sep. 3, 2018

So far as we know, Mr. Liu was arrested on Aug. 31, 2018 in Minneapolis for investigation. He was released from custody shortly. There was no accusation or bail required for the release. Mr. Liu has returned to China and will resume his business activities as originally planned.

In addition to the stock price drop and embarrassment this causes Liu and JD.com, the company may have a governance problem. Liu is required to attend board meetings in person (although he may be able to join via video or telephone). Without him, as an 80% voting rights owner, the board may be unable to make decisions for the business.

A New York Times article focuses on China’s fascination with self-made billionaires as celebrities. Online discussions featured photos of Jack Ma laughing at Liu’s trouble.

Liu image source.

Discussion:

• I don’t see a statement or press release from Liu or from the company in English. Should Liu or the company publish something at this point on the website? Why or why not?

• What should the company do now to manage through this crisis?

• How does the Chinese reaction compare to situations in the United States? Can you think of a similar situation when Americans were fascinated by a leader’s hardship?

Changes at Riot Games

Following allegations of sexism, Riot Games has apologized and is making changes. A long report by Kotaku placed blame mostly on the fast company growth and sexist working environment.

Trying to shed its “bro-culture” stigma, leaders have acknowledged that the company could be more inclusive. In a long statement last month titled, “Our First Steps Forward,” the company starts by apologizing to “to all those we’ve let down.” The statement then lists steps the company will take around inclusion initiatives, staffing, training, and so on

In a more recent statement, the company announced hiring a “leadership and strategy expert,” Frances Frei, who had also worked with Uber. The statement includes this quotation from Frei:

“After spending time with Riot’s leadership and many others across the organization, it became clear that Riot is truly putting everything on the table and committing to evolving its culture. In my interactions with Rioters, I’ve seen extraordinary levels of engagement on these issues across the company. Every Rioter with whom I’ve met truly cares about inclusion, which means real change is possible. Riot isn’t interested simply in fixing problems on the surface, it has the ambition to be an industry leader and to provide a roadmap for others to follow. I share that ambition and am eager to help Riot navigate this process.”

Frei image source.

Discussion:

• Read Kotaku’s report. How credible do you find the investigation and reporting? What could increase the credibility?

• Assess Riot Games’ statement. Who is the audience and what are the communication objectives? How do the organization, writing style, and tone affect your assessment?

• Now assess the statement about Frei. What’s your view of including Frei’s statement? What else, if anything, should be included in the statement?

• Overall, how well is Riot Games demonstrating accountability? What other leadership character dimensions are demonstrated?