Consider the fall of Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak, and the internet fueled social uprising that brought an end to his dictatorial leadership. Never before have we witnessed such a powerful viral movement, borne out of social unrest, finding immediate organizing and empowering capabilities via the social web. Could anyone have predicted that Facebook could bring an end to a dictator’s reign in a Middle Eastern country? Well, maybe Mark Zuckerberg would have dreamed that dream, but now that it is a reality the implications are huge. There is no hiding place for wrong doing or ineptitude. The bar has been raised on leadership once again.
Now connect this to a recent story about a legal battle involving an employee who brought suit through the National Labor Relations Board accusing American Medical Response of Connecticut of illegally firing her for posting negative things about her boss and company on Facebook. The legal ruling went in her favor and sent the message loud and clear that Freedom of Speech is alive and well when it comes to communicating displeasure with a company’s leadership or corporate malfeasance.
To be clear, there is a highly legitimate cause for concern in regards to the “malicious” misuse of social communication tools that has resulted in disastrous outcomes from defamation of character to violence and suicides. Such abuse raises the bar for individuals to adopt a new level of accountability for expressing themselves in a manner that is not slanderous, libelous, or criminal in intent. The ground rules here are far from being clear and need further exploration. While it’s clear that misleading, dishonest, and inappropriate things could be said about a company or its leadership in social forums, the fact that freedom of speech in these environments is protected enables employees who have issues (and who may find themselves in top-down, command and control leadership environments that don’t encourage upward feedback) to air them publicly. Is this a good thing? For the most part, yes (with a strong caveat of responsibility and accountability for the nature of their expression). With well run companies whose leadership is in touch with their organizations, it would be rare for an employee to feel that their only path to being heard was Facebook or Twitter. And if the complaints are unjustified, peers would probably diminish their voice accordingly. At the end of the day however, leadership will always be on the hot seat to raise the bar, act with integrity, manage responsibly, empower employees, and encourage upward feedback in ways that mitigate more drastic alternatives that would lead to “social embarrassment” or expressions of no-confidence.
