The headline on this article seems suggestive of some kind of endemic "workplace issues," but it seems like the "issues" are a single controversial hire that got fired as soon as the accusations...
The headline on this article seems suggestive of some kind of endemic "workplace issues," but it seems like the "issues" are a single controversial hire that got fired as soon as the accusations came to light and a refusal by Tim Cook to wade into the Israel/Palestine crisis by issuing a statement. These hardly seem to rise to the level of endemic problems with the internal culture.
[...] This is the crux of the article, to me. Apple is, after all, a company. I use their products and am typing this from an iPad, but companies exist to make money. They will use their power to...
“Apple’s secrecy works great for protecting our customers and our products, but it hinders inclusion and diversity,” says an anonymous employee. “There’s a lack of education around what is confidential versus what is your protected speech and you should speak up about.”
[...]
The culture of secrecy has bled over into many aspects of Apple’s culture. But employees say it is enforced more through norms than through rules. “The habit of secrecy is self-enforcing once established,” an anonymous employee says. Most of the time, problems are escalated internally and quietly resolved without the public ever finding out.
This is the crux of the article, to me. Apple is, after all, a company. I use their products and am typing this from an iPad, but companies exist to make money. They will use their power to silence critics and snuff out dissent.
Keeping your employees from feeling safe to talk about workplace issues is an excellent way to keep them scared to speak out.
Isn't this the case in all companies? If someone sexual harasses a coworker, they go to their manager who gets HR involved, and they handle it internally with the hopes of avoiding a lawsuit. If...
Most of the time, problems are escalated internally and quietly resolved without the public ever finding out.
Isn't this the case in all companies? If someone sexual harasses a coworker, they go to their manager who gets HR involved, and they handle it internally with the hopes of avoiding a lawsuit. If they succeed, then the public never finds out. How else would we expect it to be handled?
In theory, that should work. But if the public never finds out and it keeps happening over and over again, it points to a systemic problem within the company. Yet no one outside of the company...
In theory, that should work. But if the public never finds out and it keeps happening over and over again, it points to a systemic problem within the company. Yet no one outside of the company knows. Why does this matter? Because we’ve seen time and time again that public pressure or embarrassment is sometimes required to make changes at a company-wide level.
But what is there to be embarrassed about internally? This seems like an assertion that where there’s no smoke there must be fire. I doubt the types of cultural problems we saw at Uber would stay...
But what is there to be embarrassed about internally? This seems like an assertion that where there’s no smoke there must be fire.
I doubt the types of cultural problems we saw at Uber would stay under wraps if there was any there there. I’d say the kind of culture of constant leakage and industry-wide scuttlebutt is itself indicative of a noxious environment and being able to maintain an aura of mystery would probably suggest the opposite.
One of the reasons bad companies get bad reputations is not just because people inside aren’t talking, they have high churn and lots of former employees complaining as well.
I fully agree that it's not a great system and there needs to be a better way. Sorry if "How else would we expect it to be handed?" seemed like I meant that I agreed it was a good way to handle...
I fully agree that it's not a great system and there needs to be a better way. Sorry if "How else would we expect it to be handed?" seemed like I meant that I agreed it was a good way to handle it. I didn't intend that. My point was just that this seems like the same thing that all companies do, so I'm not sure how it's Apple-specific? It doesn't seem at all related to the secrecy they have surrounding their product development as the quote implies.
It didn’t come across that way at all. I think Apple’s general secrecy makes it a lot harder for people to know where the line between “this is covered by my NDA and if I speak out about it,...
It didn’t come across that way at all.
I think Apple’s general secrecy makes it a lot harder for people to know where the line between “this is covered by my NDA and if I speak out about it, they’ll sue me into oblivion” and what you are allowed to talk about. Secrecy is instilled into Apple employees from day one in a way it doesn’t seem to be in other companies.
The headline on this article seems suggestive of some kind of endemic "workplace issues," but it seems like the "issues" are a single controversial hire that got fired as soon as the accusations came to light and a refusal by Tim Cook to wade into the Israel/Palestine crisis by issuing a statement. These hardly seem to rise to the level of endemic problems with the internal culture.
[...]
This is the crux of the article, to me. Apple is, after all, a company. I use their products and am typing this from an iPad, but companies exist to make money. They will use their power to silence critics and snuff out dissent.
Keeping your employees from feeling safe to talk about workplace issues is an excellent way to keep them scared to speak out.
Isn't this the case in all companies? If someone sexual harasses a coworker, they go to their manager who gets HR involved, and they handle it internally with the hopes of avoiding a lawsuit. If they succeed, then the public never finds out. How else would we expect it to be handled?
In theory, that should work. But if the public never finds out and it keeps happening over and over again, it points to a systemic problem within the company. Yet no one outside of the company knows. Why does this matter? Because we’ve seen time and time again that public pressure or embarrassment is sometimes required to make changes at a company-wide level.
But what is there to be embarrassed about internally? This seems like an assertion that where there’s no smoke there must be fire.
I doubt the types of cultural problems we saw at Uber would stay under wraps if there was any there there. I’d say the kind of culture of constant leakage and industry-wide scuttlebutt is itself indicative of a noxious environment and being able to maintain an aura of mystery would probably suggest the opposite.
One of the reasons bad companies get bad reputations is not just because people inside aren’t talking, they have high churn and lots of former employees complaining as well.
I fully agree that it's not a great system and there needs to be a better way. Sorry if "How else would we expect it to be handed?" seemed like I meant that I agreed it was a good way to handle it. I didn't intend that. My point was just that this seems like the same thing that all companies do, so I'm not sure how it's Apple-specific? It doesn't seem at all related to the secrecy they have surrounding their product development as the quote implies.
It didn’t come across that way at all.
I think Apple’s general secrecy makes it a lot harder for people to know where the line between “this is covered by my NDA and if I speak out about it, they’ll sue me into oblivion” and what you are allowed to talk about. Secrecy is instilled into Apple employees from day one in a way it doesn’t seem to be in other companies.