(Nicolette Aliano) Dani is the CEO of an event planning and organizing company called “Bellerose Exhibits and Events” (DuBrin, 2019). The company coordinates all aspects of events and event planning. Recently, Dani has been noticing that staff are “too gentle” when criticizing each other. Dani feels that colleagues have been too polite when pointing out mistakes or short-comings, rather than being brutally honest. In order to change this, Dani sends out a company wide email to establish a “frontstabbing” approach to criticizing others. Essentially, Dani hopes to cultivate an open and honest environment for employees and leadership to bring issues to other’s attention (DuBrin, 2019). The day after this initiative began, Brock, an exhibits designer asked Dani for feedback on a neon sign he had added to a booth. Dani initially said the sign would work for a retro image, but immediately followed with telling Brock that his design was a distraction. Brock seemed upset, asking “was it really that bad?” Dani then criticized Katrina, an administrative assistant, telling her she had let her appearance slide recently. Dani told Katrina her hair was messy, she had bags under her eyes and her clothes were chosen at random. Dani ended the comment with “what is wrong with you?” (Dubrin, 2019). Katrina told Dani she was being harsh and informed her she had some personal issues that had been ongoing over the past few months. During a strategy meeting, an employee brought up concerns regarding the safety of the parking lot. This employee was called “close minded” and “failing to see the bigger picture” by the Chief Financial Officer, Cheryl. Finally, Dani was victim to this new “frontstabbing” when she mentioned her new vision and five year plan for the company. In response, the Chief Technology Officer asked Dani if she was smoking medical marijuana and if she was hallucinating (DuBrin 2019).

What suggestions might you make to Dani and her staff so that candid feedback to each other does not trigger interpersonal conflict?

I think there needs to be a balance between the candid nature of this criticism and maintaining professionalism. Mentioning the bags under someone’s eyes and telling them they look messy is not only uncalled for, but it is unprofessional. Dani could have approached this employee by asking if everything was okay and giving the employee a safe space to open up if she chose to do so. Dani could have then followed that by mentioning that Katrina’s appearance had changed recently. There would be no need for further commentary other than to kindly mention to Katrina what the expectations are for dress code (if in fact her “messy hair” and “bags under her eyes” were really worth mentioning). Otherwise, perhaps offering Katrina a personal day or ensuring there is nothing the company can do to assist her with whatever is going on would help to mend the issue. The other comments made in this case could’ve also been approached with more professionalism, especially asking Dani if she was smoking marijuana or hallucinating. That is highly unprofessional and offensive. The CTO could have asked Dani if she had short-term goals in mind, or supported her vision in some way.

How helpful does the new candid feedback at Bellerose appear to be?

No one mentioned above in this case study has taken the feedback well or been motivated to incorporate it. It has come across as offensive and rude rather than strictly candid. As stated above, the feedback is crossing the boundaries of professionalism and giving employees the leeway to essentially say whatever they want to each other, which is not going to help in creating a trusting and comfortable environment. If anything, this could turn employees against each other and potentially lead to some folks quitting. I would not want to stay at a company where the bags under my eyes were pointed out to me, or where I was asked if I was hallucinating because of a vision I had for the business. The communication strategy Dani created is not effective and should be immediately revised before further damage is done to colleagues.

respond to this persons discussion and no less than 100 words