I vaguely recall a scene in some Hindi film where the hero and heroine are having an intimate discussion about where their relationship is heading. The hero, trying to be smart alec’ish and funny, suddenly starts speaking some of what he has to tell his lady, addressing the audience. This, understandably, annoys the hell out of the heroine and she storms out of the place in disgust before giving our man an ultimatum, ‘When you’re speaking to me, look at me and speak only to me!’.
I was really fascinated by the director’s vision who conceptualized this scene. What exactly was he thinking? What was he trying to prove with this scene?
But, when I read Cisco’s ambitiously titled ‘Internal Memo‘, published in their official blog, this scene came to my mind, almost immediately.
It happened with Nokia too, earlier, days before they announced that Microsoft partnership.
At least in Nokia’s case, we were given to believe that the memo was ‘leaked’. Shortly after the leak, there were questions on its authenticity but then it was quickly proven to be authentic. In Cisco’s case, there is no leak – the ‘internal memo’ was broadcast to the world with this message,
Transparency is a key tenet of Ciscoâ??s culture, and given Iâ??ve received a few media inquiries today as to the nature of the message, Iâ??m sharing the letter in its entirety below.
This is an interesting twist to the gool ol’ ‘Internal Memo’. So, here are some observations/questions, as usual.
1. Who is this ‘internal memo’ talking to? Cisco sent this memo to its employees first, presumably a day before it was made public. Day one seems alright, but on day two, when Cisco employees notice that the whole world is party to its ‘internal memo’, what would…or…what should they go through, in terms of the memo’s purpose and intent? In simple terms, at point does it warrant to be called ‘internal’ memo, if it the ultimate objective was to use it as a PR tool to speak to the world?
2. Are these memos planned in advance as an employee-only memo + to-the-world memo? If they are planned for this dual audience, then I’m sure the way it is articulated and the way it is worded will be massively influenced by the latter – the fact that it is meant for the entire world. Doesn’t that dilute the impact of the employee communication?
3. Agreed – these days, it is mighty difficult to keep anything under wraps. ‘Everything worth a leak, will be leaked and in double the time’ could be a new law from Murphy. So, amidst such difficult communication constraints, how should CXOs communicate seemingly-difficult messages to employees? Regardless of the method used, I presume the intention would first be to win the confidence of the employees and bring them in one side. But sharing the same content to the rest of the world may counter that intent.
4. This are indeed tough times for confidential communication from CXOs. So, is the way to counter this is by treating the world-at-large as an extended employee set and talk to all of them? That begs the question, isn’t there a difference between your own employees and your other, external stakeholders anymore?
The point is, these days, Human Resource heads send employee memos by the droves – some of significant importance and most of operational banality. None of those get leaked to the world, in most cases. Fair enough – they are not of interest to other, external stakeholders. So, if the crux of a CXO-level communication is of interest to assorted parties including employees and other, external stakeholders, why not articulate two different versions that read largely the same, but the employee-facing communication be worded in such a way that it specifically aims to win the confidence of the group that matters the most to the organization?
It all amounts to the same thing – I understand, but at least you have got a differently worded memo that addresses directly your employees. And the fact that you took the effort to word it differently from what you propose to post on your blog and share with your other stakeholders shows your intention and the kind of importance you accord to your employees.
Sharing an ‘internal memo’ to the world, in the name of transparency, seems more like compromising the trust your employees have placed on you/your organization. When there are small ways you can prove your intent better (by writing 2 different versions – doesn’t matter if both get ‘leaked’ – your intent is what perhaps matters), why not try those, instead of treating your employees as just another group among all your stakeholders?
Pic courtesy, Anaklia_2001 via Flickr.