Contents
On February 19, 2017, Susan Fowler publishes a post of about 3,000 words about her year as an engineer at Uber. It is shared 22,000 times on Twitter. The company, founded in 2009 by Travis Kalanick and Garrett Camp and valued at $3.5 billion as early as 2013, is at that point considered one of Silicon Valley’s great success stories. By June 20, 2017, Kalanick is no longer CEO. An example of the Team Principle of the Bad Apple.
A Complaint and a Justification
Situation
In her post, Susan Fowler wrote that her manager had propositioned her for sex. She said she had reported it to HR. According to her account, HR did not want to take action against the man because he was considered a high performer.
Connection to the team principle
The Team Principle of the Bad Apple states: a single destructive attitude drags the whole team down if no one confronts it. The decisive part of this case is the second half. According to Fowler’s account, the behavior did not go unnoticed. It was reported – to the very office set up for that purpose. The answer, as she tells it, was essentially: he’s a high performer. With that, one individual’s behavior becomes a message about the house rules. Everyone on the team learns from it what counts here and what doesn’t.
215 Complaints
Situation
Uber had the allegations investigated by two law firms. Perkins Coie reviewed 215 complaints. In the week before June 13, 2017, 20 employees were fired; 57 cases were still open at that point. The second investigation was led by former US Attorney General Eric Holder. His team conducted more than 200 interviews with current and former employees.
Connection to the team principle
The number is the real news. Where 215 complaints have to be reviewed, it is no longer about one bad apple. Research has its own image for this. In a 2010 meta-analysis, Jennifer J. Kish-Gephart, David A. Harrison and Linda Klebe Treviño pulled together the evidence on what drives unethical decisions at work: the individual, the specific situation and the environment – in the words of their title, “bad apples,” “bad cases” and “bad barrels.” In terms of the image: the barrel matters, not just the apple. Remove only the one person and leave the environment as it is, and you will soon find the next one.
Thirteen Pages of Recommendations
Situation
On June 13, 2017, the 13-page list of recommendations from the Holder investigation was published. The board of directors had unanimously adopted all of them two days earlier. Among other things, they called for shifting some of Kalanick’s responsibilities to a new chief operating officer, bringing independent members onto the board and appointing an independent chair. Executives were to be required to report harassment and discrimination immediately. Diversity was to be factored into the performance reviews of senior managers.
Connection to the team principle
If you read the recommendations as an answer to the question “Who confronts destructive behavior?”, the pattern is clear. Almost every point creates a place where such behavior can – and must – be confronted: independent oversight. Leaders with a duty to report. An evaluation that measures more than results. The document treats the problem as one of structures, not of individual mindsets.
The Resignation
Situation
Also in February 2017, a video had surfaced in which Kalanick berated an Uber driver who was complaining about falling fares. Kalanick apologized in an email to staff, writing that he needed to grow up. On June 13, 2017, he announced an indefinite leave of absence. He cited his grief over his mother, who had died in a boating accident in May, and his wish to work on himself as a leader. On June 20, five major investors, including Benchmark Capital, demanded his resignation in a letter. Kalanick stepped down as CEO. He was succeeded by Dara Khosrowshahi. In 2017, Susan Fowler was among the “Silence Breakers” whom Time magazine named Person of the Year.
Connection to the team principle
This article does not call Travis Kalanick the bad apple, and it says nothing about his motives. What is documented is the sequence: the allegation that a behavior had not been confronted in an individual case became an issue for the whole company, then for the investors, and then the trigger for a change at the top. In the end, the cost of not confronting it lands at the very top. Those who lead are responsible not only for their own behavior but also for what is tolerated on their watch.
Key takeaways
Key Lessons
- Check your exceptions. Who on your team gets a little more leeway with the rules because the results are good? That is where your risk lies.
- Measure not only what someone delivers but also what they leave behind in the team. Make it an explicit part of your evaluations.
- Treat the first complaint as a test. How you handle it determines whether there will be a second one – or whether people keep quiet and leave.
- Make sure there is a body that can push back against you, too. Independent oversight is not a vote of no confidence but a safeguard.
- When something goes wrong, look at the barrel. Ask: What have we tolerated, rewarded or overlooked?
Summary
At Uber, according to Susan Fowler’s account, reported misconduct was not pursued because the person involved was considered a high performer. The investigations that followed reviewed 215 complaints and led to dismissals and to a set of structural recommendations; after a letter from major investors, the founder finally stepped down as CEO. As a counterexample, the case illustrates the second half of the Team Principle of the Bad Apple: what matters is not whether destructive behavior exists but whether someone confronts it – even when the numbers look good.