More Lessons from the Volkswagen Cheating Scandal

Volkswagen is finally reaching out to its customers with a “goodwill package” for those who own cars equipped with the software designed to cheat emissions tests. The package, outlined in full-page newspaper ads, includes a $500 gift card, another $500 card that can be redeemed at Volkswagen dealerships, and three years’ worth of free roadside assistance. They still haven’t said how they’ll fix the emissions problem so they’re hoping this offer will buy time with customers stuck driving cars with significantly lower resale value that continue to violate emissions standards.

Volkswagen is finally reaching out to its customers with a “goodwill package” for those who own cars equipped with the software designed to cheat emissions tests. The package, outlined in full-page newspaper ads, includes a $500 gift card, another $500 card that can be redeemed at Volkswagen dealerships, and three years’ worth of free roadside assistance. They still haven’t said how they’ll fix the emissions problem so they’re hoping this offer will buy time with customers stuck driving cars with significantly lower resale value that continue to violate emissions standards.

Many VW customers and dealers must be wondering why it took the company two months simply to apologize and ask for patience. Meanwhile, the news continues to get worse, involving many more vehicles in both the United States and Europe.

The latest revelations about problems in Europe came from a whistleblower – a company engineer who, according to news reports, alleged that employees manipulated tests for carbon dioxide emissions and fuel economy on diesel- and gasoline-fueled cars. The New York Times reported that internal investigations have been hampered by employees’ “ingrained fear of delivering bad news to superiors.”

In response, Volkswagen is offering an amnesty program for workers covered by collective bargaining agreements. (The offer does not include top management.) Of course, the company can’t protect employees from possible criminal charges, but they are promising that employees who come forward with information by the end of November will not be fired or face damage claims.

While this is unusual, it may be the only way Volkswagen can overcome a culture of secrecy and obtain the information it needs. We’ve seen this in other crisis situations, where employees knew of significant problems but did not come forward out of fear they would lose their jobs or face other repercussions. This meant top management was blind-sided by problems it might have been able to address.

Every senior executive should be concerned about a company culture that discourages employees at all levels from reporting problems. Frankly, the more layers of management a company has, the less likely it is that concerns will make their way to the top.

That’s why it’s so important for company leaders to regularly leave the executive suite and talk with hourly employees. That can take the form of periodic plant visits, town hall meetings, or random invitations for groups of employees to have coffee with the CEO. It’s also important to clearly articulate a process for employees to report concerns to risk management, compliance, human resources, or whatever department is appropriate within your organization. Anonymous reporting should always be an option, whether that’s by using old-fashioned suggestion boxes, a hotline or online channels.

Then, management must make a commitment to determine whether the concerns raised have any legitimacy. If employees don’t believe their concerns are taken seriously, they will stop voicing them.

You can’t fix a problem unless you’re aware of it. Now is a good time to remember Ben Franklin’s admonition, “An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.”

Can Amazon Defend its Reputation in Light of Powerful Personal Stories?

A weekend New York Times article about the demanding work environment at Amazon has sparked significant conversation in both traditional and social media, not to mention those in “real world” offices everywhere. Many have commented on the impact of “purposeful Darwinism” in which the only survivors are those willing to work incredibly long hours and sacrifice their personal lives for the company’s increasingly ambitious goals.

It’s the individual stories, mostly anonymous, that resonate – a woman with breast cancer and another who gave birth to a stillborn child, then were placed on “performance improvement plans” for not “giving their all” to the company. Parents of young children learned that colleagues had sent negative feedback to their bosses because they didn’t consistently put in the same long hours. Another former employee “cut back working on nights and weekends” to help care for a dying parent, then was told she was “a problem” because she wanted to transfer to a job with less pressure.

In response, Amazon Founder and CEO Jeff Bezos claimed the article painted an unfair picture of his company. But his denial felt like too little too late. His first mistake was declining to be interviewed for the story. Even more importantly, he did not have a good counter to the portrayal of what he described as “a soulless, dystopian workplace.”

How can an organization protect its reputation when anonymous employees or former employees make damaging claims?

First, of course, you have to do the right thing. But even when you do everything right, someone can still make accusations. That’s when it’s helpful to be able to point to policies in place to prevent those bad things from happening. How different would the story have been if Bezos had been able to tell the New York Times about specific policies? What if he had said, “We allow employees to take up to four weeks of paid leave for personal or family health reasons…” or “We have a procedure in place for any employee to appeal an unfavorable performance review and here’s how that works.”

Instead, Bezos sent a memo to employees after the story appeared asking them to contact him directly if they knew of “stories like those reported.” If Amazon’s culture is anything like what’s portrayed in the article, I wouldn’t expect a flood of emails.

Meanwhile, while consumers will continue to shop at Amazon, how many talented job seekers will line up to work there in the future?