How IBM could use its values to turn around a crisis. But will they?
As a communications strategist, I have dealt with my fair share of crises. From boycotts and staff arrests, to social media flame wars and executive gaffs, crisis communications is a discipline I have great respect for, when it’s done right. And I admit that I devour stories of corporate malfeasance. Not because I take delight in seeing bad behavior, but I am fascinated to see how the comms team with its designated “spokesperson” will handle it.
The latest example of crisis communications is the legal action around age discrimination at IBM. This New York Times story summarizes it well, but here are the relevant facts.
- Several suits, that could potentially achieve class action status, allege that IBM created a business strategy around getting rid of older employees (called “dinobabies” in an email), so that the company could hire younger millennial employees.
- The company apparently believed that younger employees would make them more competitive in areas like cloud services, big data analytics, mobile technology, and social media.
As part of the legal proceedings, a trove of previously sealed documents recently became public. This included an email that outlines a plan to:
“’accelerate change by inviting the ‘dinobabies’ (new species) to leave” and make them an ‘extinct species.’”
This story is of interest for many reasons. It is one of the first age discrimination cases to not simply get settled out of court. And it begs the question of whether age is actually relevant in innovation.
But it’s also a real-time case study of crisis communications strategy in action. Let’s take a look.
Spokesperson Gymnastics
First, let’s turn our attention to the spokesperson who responded to the Times. I commend IBM for addressing the questions. Many companies would not have done so. What crisis communications strategies can we see in play?
“Adam Pratt, an IBM spokesman, defended the company’s employment practices. “IBM never engaged in systemic age discrimination,” he said. “Employees were separated because of shifts in business conditions and demand for certain skills, not because of their age.””
My comms eye immediately went to the word, “systemic.” We are in eye of the needle territory here, a finely parsed universe where words matter, because they carry legal consequences.
I can imagine the workshopping that went into developing this message. The company cannot say that it never engaged in age discrimination – the document trove makes in clear that they did. So what can they say? That it was not “systemic.” And what does that mean? Presumably that it was not an explicit, documented, and widely understood policy to use age as a gating criterion in hiring decisions.
This could lead easily into the “few bad actors” defense. Age discrimination wasn’t a systemic problem, it was just what Joe or Mary did. And they’re gone now. Nothing more to see here.
However, the article makes it clear that hiring and firing (or relocating) based on age was in fact a business strategy, not just the work of a few rogue elephants.
How Not to Use Numbers in Crisis Communications
Another tactic that the spokesperson uses is straight from the crisis communications playbook – using numbers to show that the problem really isn’t that bad. Here, we learn that IBM
“hired more than 10,000 people over 50 in the United States between 2010 and 2020.”
10,000 sounds like a lot of people. Good on ya, IBM.
But is that actually good? Without knowing the full universe of employees in the U.S., there’s no way to know. The context is missing, as the article highlights. “The company would not disclose how many U.S. workers it had during that period.”
This suggests to me that the company knows the number, and that providing it would make the 10,000 shrink in ginormity. The rule of thumb here is that If it were a good percentage, they would have shared it.
Context is everything when it comes to numbers. As Stalin so presciently observed, “a single death is a tragedy, a million is a statistic.” Without context we don’t know which one we have on our hands here.
If you’re curious, according to the IBM Wikipedia page, the company had 426,751 U.S. employees in 2010, so 10,000 represents 2.3 percent. By 2020, they had reduced the U.S. based workforce to 345,900, 2.8 of which would be that 10,000 number. Point made.
The other thing interesting about the numbers is that they underscore this as a crisis of IBM's own making. If in fact the U.S. workforce is only 2.something percent over 50, then they aren't actually overstuffed with dinosaurs. Perhaps their innovation issues have a different root cause.
What’s Next in the Crisis Communications Plan?
I wouldn’t be surprised if we saw a splashy campaign from IBM showcasing its revered dinobabies in action. “Seasoned” employees delighted with their lot – interesting work, collegial co-workers, innovating at one of the most respected companies in the world. Nothing like an emotive bumper ad before the Stephen Colbert monologue on YouTube to burnish the brand.
A thought leadership campaign, showcasing the history of innovation would be another play, as well as an op-ed, perhaps penned by an oldster and a youngster talking about the fruitfulness of inter-age collaboration.
What I’d like to see is an activation of the company’s corporate values. Crisis communications should begin with these hoary old things that usually languish in corporate social responsibility brochures. Now is the time to dust them off.
IBM has just three values. They are:
“Dedication to every client’s success”, “Innovation that matters – for our company and the world”, and “Trust and personal responsibility in all relationships.”
That third value gives them a place to start. Internal trust is broken. If this is breaking news, I guarantee you that age discrimination is a well known and probably widely discussed issue within the hallowed halls. The company should shore this up immediately. Dinobabies, too, must deliver their deliverables, manage people, and bring value to the very clients whose success you’re dedicated to. You need them. And unlike other protected classes in HR, everyone gets old (if they’re lucky).
An aging workforce is an asset if you use it as one. So time to do some innovation that matters – especially on your policies and culture.
Crisis Communications Lessons for the Rest of Us
I applaud the Times for getting so many things right with this story. And I’m appalled at how sloppy IBM’s information handling processes are. I have been the frontline spokesperson in a crisis, and when it happens, the first questions I ask are: is it true, and what’s written down? The irony of this is that IBM offers business solutions for automating security around discoverability.
Corporation, heal thyself!
Next, it should go without saying, but clearly it needs to be said: Executives should never name a protected class of employees in email. And they definitely shouldn’t give them a clickbait-worthy nickname. You could imagine if this were not about age but about gender, sexual orientation or race. The outcry would be much louder, but same principles apply.
Finally, if someone floats a business strategy that depends on getting rid of a group of people based on a single factor, the rest of the executive team should push back hard. If they aren’t, it's a sign of advanced rot in the center of the culture.
Again, replace age with any other variable and see how it sits with you.
At the very least the executive team should know that they are opening up the business to risk through litigation. And at a higher level, they should know that innovation can come from anyone, at any age, of any race, gender, sexual orientation or other dimension of humanity. We need all of us to solve the problems we face in this world. The wisdom of age and the passion of youth included.
I hope that IBM uses this as a chance to align their policies to their values so that they can start to heal their culture. And I hope that the Times, Pro Publica, and other media outlets will continue to cover the story so well. And last of all, I hope Mr. Pratt gets some time off. Crisis communications can be very stressful.
Comentarios