The Letter: Susan Fowler and Uber

There is a letter that is being read across the industry this week, and the letter is the post: the account that Susan Fowler published on her blog on Sunday, the story of her year at Uber, the roughly two thousand nine hundred words that described the harassment and the indifference, the document that did more damage than any outage or any scandal so far. The letter arrived on February 19, and by Tuesday it was everywhere: the engineers sharing it, the press covering it, the executives responding to it, the board hiring the lawyers. The letter is the February 2017 story, and the story is the lesson: the employee who spoke, the company that was exposed, the culture that is now under investigation.

The letter is the subject of this article: what Fowler described, why it spread so fast, how Uber responded, and what the episode teaches about leadership and human resources.

1. The Letter

The letter is the record, and the record is the year: the site reliability engineer who joined Uber in November 2015, the manager who propositioned her, the human resources team that dismissed her complaint, the twelve months that followed, the resignation in December 2016. The letter is the February 19 publication: the post titled Reflecting on one very, very strange year at Uber, the roughly two thousand nine hundred words, the names and the dates and the messages, the detail that made it impossible to wave away. The letter is the moment: the employee who wrote it all down, the industry that read it, the company that had to answer.

The letter is also the pattern: the story that was not isolated, the reports that were ignored, the manager who was kept, the review that punished the reporter, the year that ended with the resignation and the move to Stripe in January. The letter is the February 2017 meaning: the account that landed like a report from inside the machine, the machine that could not deny it. The letter was the beginning, and the beginning was the reckoning.

2. What She Described

The description is the evidence, and the evidence is the detail: the manager who made the advances on the first day of the team, the messages that were shown to human resources, the response that called the manager a high performer, the warning that the engineer would be fired if she complained. The description is the reporting: the complaint that went to human resources, the case that was closed, the manager who stayed, the team that was told to let it go. The description is the process: the meeting with the director, the promise that the manager would be spoken to, the outcome that changed nothing.

The description is also the escalation: the reports that went higher, the human resources leaders who reviewed the case, the finding that there was no problem, the suggestion that the engineer was the difficult one. The description is the February 2017 lesson: the systems that are supposed to protect, the systems that protect the company instead, the employee who learns that reporting is the risk. What she described was the pattern, and the pattern was the problem.

3. The Retaliation

The retaliation is the confirmation, and the confirmation is the review: the performance review that came after the complaint, the rating that was lowered, the manager who wrote it, the pattern that was now clear. The retaliation is the year: the projects that were taken away, the team that was shuffled, the engineer who kept working, the notes that she kept, the documents that she saved. The retaliation is the record: the accounts of the other women who came forward, the reports that matched, the stories that had been told in private, the silence that was finally broken.

The retaliation is also the exit: the resignation in December 2016, the move to Stripe in January 2017, the decision to write it all down, the post that followed in February. The retaliation is the February 2017 lesson: the cost that the reporter pays, the price that the company pays later, the math that never works out in the end. The retaliation was the proof, and the proof was the post.

4. Why It Spread So Fast

The spread is the speed, and the speed is the medium: the post that was shared on Twitter, the engineers who retweeted it, the journalists who covered it, the news cycle that grabbed it on Monday and held it through the week. The spread is the timing: the industry that was already asking questions about Uber, the DeleteUber campaign from January, the scrutiny that was already on the company, the letter that arrived with the audience waiting. The spread is the specificity: the messages and the dates, the names of the systems, the detail of the daily work, the account that read like a field report.

The spread is also the recognition: the women who recognized the pattern, the engineers who recognized the culture, the readers who shared it because it was true, the companies that read it because it could be them. The spread is the February 2017 lesson: the writing that is precise, the story that is credible, the audience that is ready, the post that becomes the news. The letter spread because it was believable, and it was believable because it was specific.

5. The Culture and the Values

The culture is the context, and the context is the machine: the Uber that grew at any cost, the fourteen core values that were posted on the walls, the value called Hustle that was praised above all, the growth that was celebrated, the pressure that was constant, the behavior that was excused. The culture is the record: the employees who were pushed, the metrics that ruled, the aggressiveness that was rewarded, the reviews that were brutal, the turnover that was high. The culture is the January backdrop: the DeleteUber campaign, the fares that were cut during the taxi strike, the drivers who were hurt, the goodwill that was spent.

The culture is also the question: the values that are written, the values that are lived, the gap between the posters and the practice, the leadership that sets the tone, the example that comes from the top. The culture is the February 2017 lesson: the company that celebrates the hard edge, the edge that cuts the people inside. The culture was the soil, and the soil was the problem.

6. The Response

The response is the statement, and the statement is the tone: the email that Travis Kalanick sent to the staff, the word that he used, abhorrent, the apology that he made, the investigation that he ordered, the message that the company would look into it. The response is the sequence: the statement on Sunday night, the acknowledgment that the story was painful to read, the promise that the behavior would not be tolerated. The response is the pressure: the board that had to act, the investors who were watching, the customers who were reading, the employees who were waiting.

The response is also the lawyers: the board that hired the former United States Attorney General Eric Holder, the firm Covington and Burling, the investigation that was announced around February 21, the mandate to review the culture and the practices, the report that is yet to come. The response is the February 22 meaning: the investigation that is just beginning, the findings that are pending, the company that is now officially under review. The response was the start, and the start was the scrutiny.

7. What It Means for HR

The meaning is the lesson, and the lesson is the function: the human resources team that is supposed to protect the employee, the human resources team that protects the company instead, the complaint that is managed, the reporter who is managed out. The meaning is the pattern: the manager who is too valuable to lose, the case that is closed to avoid the trouble, the review that punishes the accuser, the exit that follows. The meaning is the industry: the technology companies that copied the model, the start-ups that grew without the processes, the reporting chains that fail the reporters.

The meaning is also the fix: the investigations that must be independent, the outcomes that must be documented, the retaliation that must be punished, the culture that must be measured, the leadership that must own it. The meaning is the February 2017 lesson: the human resources function that is judged by the cases it handles, the trust that is built by the handling, the letter that every company should read as a warning. The HR lesson was the point, and the point was the post.

8. The Leadership Lesson

The lesson is the culture, and the culture is the leader: the values that are set at the top, the behavior that is tolerated, the message that is sent by every promotion and every silence, the company that becomes the example. The lesson is the January context: the DeleteUber campaign, the fares that were capped during the New York taxi strike, the travel ban protest, the customers who deleted the app, the brand that was already strained when the letter arrived. The lesson is the sequence: the campaign that tested the trust, the letter that broke it, the investigation that must rebuild it.

The lesson is also the practice: the leader who responds quickly, who apologizes plainly, who investigates independently, who changes the incentives, who understands that the culture is the product. The letter is the February 2017 story, and the story is the lesson: the employee who wrote the truth, the company that had to answer, the investigation that is just beginning, the culture that will be judged by what comes next. The letter was the mirror, and the mirror was the management.

Tags

#leadership #management