ScenarioYour company has been doing well from a profit standpoint, but it has come under fire for a lack of diversity on
Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2022 9:05 am
ScenarioYour company has been doing well from a profit standpoint, but it has come under fire for a lack of diversity on the governing board (all but one member presented as white). To counter the lack of diversity on the board, five voting members have been removed and replaced by people who are from a variety of racial and ethnic backgrounds. While this is seen as a positive move by members of the board and by the public, there have been communication problems in the company. A memo that should have gone out to say thank you to the board members being replaced did not go out, and the memo that did go out went to the board only and announced the new members (this is how the existing members of the board found out they had been fired). This has caused serious blowback on social media, as a few of the fired members (Johnathan and Dale) have taken to social media to express that after many years of working with the company, they found out they were fired by being asked to congratulate and welcome new people. Since they were well known and liked by other people in the company, many people have responded saying how unfair it is and vowing to “get to the bottom” of what happened.Making the situation worse is the fact that one of the new board members is the daughter of an existing board member. The parent was present during discussions and interviews regarding whether her daughter would be given a position on the board, and this has run into very complicated legal and ethical territory. While her actions were legal in the United States (they would be illegal in Europe), the question of whether they are ethical is one for your group to determine. Based on meeting minutes, she clearly advocated for her own daughter over more “qualified” candidates, and an employee (Marie) who initially commented on the fired board member’s status update have learned of this situation and called it unethical and created a narrative that may or may not be true (you don’t know how involved the person was).As a group, you will need to craft multiple documents here.The first, is a press release statement regarding the lack of communication (apology) and focused on the reasoning for the change. This will be released to both the employees of the company and the media.The second, is a series of social media releases (you can use multiple apps for this) – often called a social media campaign – to combat the narrative that the appointed board member’s (Isabel) only qualifications for the job was her relation to Marie. You need to counter that narrative and present an opposing one. You are free to make Isabel as qualified as you like in your response.The third, and final, is a memo to either Johnathan or Dale (both will get them, but it is your choice who to address it to) that tells them that they are to stop saying negative things about the company in public and on social media in an aggressive and threatening manner. Their participation in the conversation has inflamed tensions and made matters worse for everyone. While firing them isn’t really an option because of the circumstances and how much additional attention it would focus on the company, they could be demoted or fined. You need to use the traits of the negative letter here to make this work. Get the nod, stay positive, explain how things are being handled internally (make up details as you see fit), and close with a positive as well, but make sure they understand how serious this is.
Scenario
Your company has been doing well from a profit standpoint, but it has come under fire for a lack of diversity on the governing board (all but one member presented as white). To counter the lack of diversity on the board, five voting members have been removed and replaced by people who are from a variety of racial and ethnic backgrounds. While this is seen as a positive move by members of the board and by the public, there have been communication problems in the company. A memo that should have gone out to say thank you to the board members being replaced did not go out, and the memo that did go out went to the board only and announced the new members (this is how the existing members of the board found out they had been fired). This has caused serious blowback on social media, as a few of the fired members (Johnathan and Dale) have taken to social media to express that after many years of working with the company, they found out they were fired by being asked to congratulate and welcome new people. Since they were well known and liked by other people in the company, many people have responded saying how unfair it is and vowing to “get to the bottom” of what happened.
Making the situation worse is the fact that one of the new board members is the daughter of an existing board member. The parent was present during discussions and interviews regarding whether her daughter would be given a position on the board, and this has run into very complicated legal and ethical territory. While her actions were legal in the United States (they would be illegal in Europe), the question of whether they are ethical is one for your group to determine. Based on meeting minutes, she clearly advocated for her own daughter over more “qualified” candidates, and an employee (Marie) who initially commented on the fired board member’s status update have learned of this situation and called it unethical and created a narrative that may or may not be true (you don’t know how involved the person was).
As a group, you will need to craft multiple documents here.
The first, is a press release statement regarding the lack of communication (apology) and focused on the reasoning for the change. This will be released to both the employees of the company and the media.
The second, is a series of social media releases (you can use multiple apps for this) – often called a social media campaign – to combat the narrative that the appointed board member’s (Isabel) only qualifications for the job was her relation to Marie. You need to counter that narrative and present an opposing one. You are free to make Isabel as qualified as you like in your response.
The third, and final, is a memo to either Johnathan or Dale (both will get them, but it is your choice who to address it to) that tells them that they are to stop saying negative things about the company in public and on social media in an aggressive and threatening manner. Their participation in the conversation has inflamed tensions and made matters worse for everyone. While firing them isn’t really an option because of the circumstances and how much additional attention it would focus on the company, they could be demoted or fined. You need to use the traits of the negative letter here to make this work. Get the nod, stay positive, explain how things are being handled internally (make up details as you see fit), and close with a positive as well, but make sure they understand how serious this is.
Scenario
Your company has been doing well from a profit standpoint, but it has come under fire for a lack of diversity on the governing board (all but one member presented as white). To counter the lack of diversity on the board, five voting members have been removed and replaced by people who are from a variety of racial and ethnic backgrounds. While this is seen as a positive move by members of the board and by the public, there have been communication problems in the company. A memo that should have gone out to say thank you to the board members being replaced did not go out, and the memo that did go out went to the board only and announced the new members (this is how the existing members of the board found out they had been fired). This has caused serious blowback on social media, as a few of the fired members (Johnathan and Dale) have taken to social media to express that after many years of working with the company, they found out they were fired by being asked to congratulate and welcome new people. Since they were well known and liked by other people in the company, many people have responded saying how unfair it is and vowing to “get to the bottom” of what happened.
Making the situation worse is the fact that one of the new board members is the daughter of an existing board member. The parent was present during discussions and interviews regarding whether her daughter would be given a position on the board, and this has run into very complicated legal and ethical territory. While her actions were legal in the United States (they would be illegal in Europe), the question of whether they are ethical is one for your group to determine. Based on meeting minutes, she clearly advocated for her own daughter over more “qualified” candidates, and an employee (Marie) who initially commented on the fired board member’s status update have learned of this situation and called it unethical and created a narrative that may or may not be true (you don’t know how involved the person was).
As a group, you will need to craft multiple documents here.
The first, is a press release statement regarding the lack of communication (apology) and focused on the reasoning for the change. This will be released to both the employees of the company and the media.
The second, is a series of social media releases (you can use multiple apps for this) – often called a social media campaign – to combat the narrative that the appointed board member’s (Isabel) only qualifications for the job was her relation to Marie. You need to counter that narrative and present an opposing one. You are free to make Isabel as qualified as you like in your response.
The third, and final, is a memo to either Johnathan or Dale (both will get them, but it is your choice who to address it to) that tells them that they are to stop saying negative things about the company in public and on social media in an aggressive and threatening manner. Their participation in the conversation has inflamed tensions and made matters worse for everyone. While firing them isn’t really an option because of the circumstances and how much additional attention it would focus on the company, they could be demoted or fined. You need to use the traits of the negative letter here to make this work. Get the nod, stay positive, explain how things are being handled internally (make up details as you see fit), and close with a positive as well, but make sure they understand how serious this is.