Case Study: Should Companies That Fire Shoot First

That Fire Shoot First Module 7 Case Study Abstract Blobbing and tweeting on social media websites have pros and cons for an organization. Companies utilize blobs in order to promote their products and services along with relaying information about the company to the general public. Employers often encourage their employees to participate in various forms of social media. However, management should be aware of the risks and impact to the company’s reputation should the employee publish something that puts the company s a negative light.

Keywords: blobbing, social media, reputation Tests CEO Leon Musk was right when he flogged about impending layoffs Just before announcing them to company employees Blobbing and tweeting can have both positive and negative impacts on the image and reputation of a company. The use of social media sites, such as Backbone and Twitter, allow employers to encourage their employees to participate in blobs in an effort to promote their brand. Some companies even use these websites as a tool to publicize the operations of the organization.

By establishing and maintaining their win company website and blob, businesses are able to control the messages, both positive and negative, that are posted. (Deadlock,2008) In an effort to intercept negative posts from the media and disgruntled employees, Tests Motors CEO Leon Musk announced on the company’s website blob that in order to maintain positive cash flow, the organization will layoff a significant amount of its workforce.

The focus of the company will be developing and improving its product line while ensuring sufficient capital.

Leon Musk stated that “we had to say something to prevent articles being written that were not accurate. (All, 2008) Cake Financial, an investing advice company, published on their company blob immediately after reducing its workforce that it was an “extremely sad day for all of us who have to say goodbye to a group of great people. ” (Deadlock, 2008) The company’s CEO, Stephen Carpenter, had drafted the blob and waited until after personally speaking with the employees before publishing the post.

Carpenter wanted to make sure that there were no discrepancies as to what and why the layoffs happened.

In a statement to the New fork Times, Carpenter stated that “our whole company is built on the idea of reinsurance in investing, so that was a reason why it was important for us to do it. ” (Interrelationships, 2009) Employees responsibility when blobbing about their company Employees have a responsibility to be careful about what they publish on social media websites about their company. Privacy laws and regulations related to internet use vary by state.

Depending on the nature of the content, the employee could be possibly incriminating him/herself by disclosing private information. From an employer standpoint, employee blobbing could negatively impact the reputation of he business if the appropriate policies and procedures are not in place. The employer may also be at risk if the employee publishes information relating to trade secrets, financial issues, or other business related matters.

(Welch & Shift Employees should be careful if they publish negative comments about their employer, its customers, and its vendors.

Employers typically have zero tolerance Ninth this type of behavior as it can be considered a form of harassment in which the company may subject to legal ramifications (Victor, 2013) The employee risks losing heir Job and tainting their reputation within the workplace, which may lead to difficulty in obtaining and retaining future employment. The entertainment industry has taken advantage of the posts made on social media blobs. For example, radio stations in the Boston area make prank phone calls on the air referencing previously posted, negative comments regarding clients.

The radio personality will reference the content of the blob in an effort to scare or provoke the person being franked. Nile these skits may seem comical to the station listener, the effects of the actual prank call may cause harm to a company or an individual.

Employees who blob about their companies do not have an ethical responsibility to disclose their identities Employees posting comments about their employer online do not need to display their name. When employees publish positive comments about their company and its culture, others may ignore the remarks as they may consider the opinions biased.

If the employee publishes their name in association with the company, the prospective customer may feel overwhelmed and smothered by knowing the same person is using social media, in addition to traditional methods of advertising, to sell their product or service. On the contrary, when employees publish negative comments about their employer, it make spark a wave of unwanted publicity for the company. Loping a policy for handling communication of sensitive issues, inside and outside, the company Deleting or retracting online posts that have been published can be impossible.

Therefore, companies should develop an internet policy for handling communication of sensitive issues both inside and outside the organization. Nile the company may want employees to express themselves, guidelines should be established. Some of the areas that need to be addressed in a formal, written policy Include: (Queering) a. Personal use and abuse of company property and resources b. Appropriate use of organizations name Applicability of existing company policies .