Away Fires CEO Steph Korey After Months-Long Search for Her Replacement
daringfireball.net
daringfireball.net
Edit: someone pointed out that the OP adds an additional perspective that isn't just copying what was said in the WSJ article, so we'll switch back to that from https://www.wsj.com/articles/online-luggage-startup-away-say.... Thanks!
Edit: well I take it back. Gruber seems to taking his usual tack when covering anything outside the Apple beat, ie. pure speculation and opinion of the sort everyone posts on Twitter but at 500 words. And with a big "they are an active sponsor of my site but I am impervious to bias" disclaimer at the top.
> What I think happened is that once Jen Rubio and the board — who were already plotting Korey’s ouster — became aware of the story, and the all-in-on-outrage-culture/startups-are-toxic angle it was taking, they simply let it happen without pushing back whatsoever. No vast conspiracy necessary — just let it happen.
Tells you all you need to know IMO. It’s never OK to yell at someone at work.
Edit: If you're downvoting me, let me know when you think it's OK to yell at someone at work and where you work so I can never work there.
I've definitely caught a verbal beatdown from people that sounded perfectly calm and reasonably quiet the whole time.
1. It is appropriate to yell at someone when the immediate safety of yourself or another person is threatened.
2. If you accept (1), then the presence of yelling is a much narrower filter than the presence of conditions under which yelling is appropriate. Due to your stated belief that yelling is never appropriate, you see those filters as equal.
3. With (1), I have given you conditions under which I think it is appropriate to yell at someone. Those conditions are never present at my current place of work. So if, based on only those facts, you were to disqualify my place of work as one where you would work, your filter would be too wide.
> Disclosure: Away has sponsored 21 episodes of my podcast, The Talk Show, in the last three years, and they are on the schedule for an upcoming episode. The following is what I’d write if they never had and never would sponsor my show or website.
It’s a <500 employee company. The plight of tens of thousands of Amazon or Uber employees and contractors is much more relatable, more people are likely to know someone who has worked in those environments.
Some small startup company with a CEO with hubris isn’t exactly news.
This was a prominent Instagram brand. It has all the trimmings of the Silicon Valley Startup: they make suitcases but talk about themselves as a "travel company" with lofty missions, they "value transparency" but not when employees actually use it.
This kind of story continually happens, at Uber, at WeWork, at Zenefits, at Riot Games, at Nest, and at startups I've worked at too. The more we bring these stories to light, the better working conditions will be at these places.
EDIT: Someone pointed out below that the company is actually in NYC, not Silicon Valley. Still, this style of startup culture exists all around the world.
Is this really the generally held consensus with the public? I certainly don't believe this, but I work here so I'm biased.
I think most people think Silicon Valley is full of overpaid engineers churning out things nobody actually wants - there's a reason the show Silicon Valley was such a hit.
Also a fun fact - Mike Judge (creator of Silicon Valley) actually worked in the Valley for a bit after college. He felt like people here were just ridiculous - the basis for the show is largely rooted in his own experiences working here.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Judge#1985%E2%80%9397:_Ea...
There are a large enough number of people here who believe it that they continue to start startups and play startup-dressup, talk about changing the world, and elevate the world's consciousness or whatever. The number of applications to Y Combinator every year is growing, not shrinking.
[0] https://www.businessinsider.com/google-x-astro-teller-hbo-si...
TBH Hollywood / film /tv does not have a good track record in portraying us do they.
The sociopaths showed up in the 90s and have been there since. At this point it's mostly Wall Street with pseudo-progressive window dressing.
The Techlash, dating to about 2017 (see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platform_economy#Post_2017_bac..., I also consider Tim Bray's "You Might be Evil" blog post from September 2017 a watershed, https://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/201x/2017/09/20/Tech-is-E...), is one of the occasional reversals in popular sentiment for technology and innovation.
These arise from time to time, and are not generally irrational. The Luddite movement, the Fundamentalist-Modernist Controversy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamentalist–Modernist_contr...), numerous examples in Bernhard J. Sterns' excellent "Resistances to the Adoption of Technological Innovations" (1937) (https://archive.org/details/technologicaltre1937unitrich/pag..., retyped as Markdown: https://pastebin.com/raw/Bapu75is), various back-to-land movements (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Back-to-the-land_movement), notably the 1960s-70s commune movement in the US, and others.
See for comparison, "Foggy Bottom" (US State Dept.), "Hollywood" (film industry), "Nashville" (country music), "White House" (US Office of the President, or United States), "Pentagon" (US Department of Defence), "10 Downing Street" (UK / UK Prime Minister), "Westminster" (British Monarchy), "Berlin" (Germany), "Moscow" (Russia), Rome ("The Vatican" / "Catholic Church" / "Pope"), "Vegas" (gambling industry), "Wall Street" (finance), "Madison Avenue" (advertising), "Fleet Street" (British press), "Detroit" (US, sometimes global, auto industry, also R&B music), "Kitchen" (cooking/food generally), "Danish" (pastry), "Napa" (California wine industry).
Cheddar, denim, burgundy, champagne, parmesan, dalmatian, italic, duffel, lyme (disease), chihauhua, torquois, jalapeno, paisley, sherry, port, chantilley, marathon, hamburger, pilsner, balaclava, varnish, limousine and lesbian are all words originating from place names, most with generally generic descriptions (attempts at appellation notwithstanding).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metonymy
Also Synecdoche:
I dispute that. I've never seen it used in that way.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/09/books/review/the-code-mar...
Numerous other examples can be found. The meaning is often implicit, e.g.,
"Silicon Valley Needs Regulation"
This includes my own cohort of Silicon Valley professionals. A recent Stanford study involving nearly 700 “elite technology entrepreneurs”
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/11/opinion/silicon-valley-re...
"Silicon Valley Learns Washington’s Language (and Vice Versa)"
Big Tech’s presence in the capital is unmistakable, and its interests intersect with more and more issues, says David McCabe, a tech policy reporter.
Discussion is of Google and Facebook (both in the geographical Silicon Valley), but also:
All eyes are on Amazon and, more specifically, on its second headquarters in Northern Virginia.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/04/technology/personaltech/s... That is, "Silicon Valley" is "elite technology entrepreneurs".
The notion that the only portion of the tech sector which requires regulation is that bounded within Santa Clara County, or Santa Clara - San Mateo, or the SF-OAK-SJ MSA, is clearly absurd.
Tim Harford at the BBC:
"Silicon Valley stands for cutting-edge technology, bold ideas that change the world."
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-49742270?intlink_from_url=...
etc., etc., etc.
Also I always thought Westminster referred to the parliament, not the crown which would more typically be referred to by Buckingham palace.
And again: the key is that the language usage is metaphorical, rather than literal.
I think from the most reader's POV, whether this is a 500 or 500K-people company makes no difference, it's just a number next to the word "employees". The actual amount doesn't register emotionally, so the story is the same regardless of size. And it's easier for reporters to find a small company with problems, especially now that public displays of hubris are a somewhat popular startup marketing strategy.
Amazon and Uber are just sad, this is entertaining in the individual drama sort of way. Plus the abusive boss get kicked out in the which gives readers a happy ending.
I don't think it is farfetched to consider that, if the Verge had been working on the article since (let's call it) early October, it may have been just inconvenient but brutal timing. It sounds like they were making plans to replace Korey since the Spring of this year. I could easily see the Away board aiming to delay the leadership change until after the holiday season (Q1 2020). Bad press like the Verge article or a CEO shakeup in the middle of a shorter-than-usual holiday shopping season sucks for a B2C retail company. Moving up the start date of the new CEO they've already vetted and recruited earlier this year seems to me like Away's only opportunity to save their shopping season.
Edit to add Tweet from Verge Staff:
> Away knew we were reporting on this for months
Maybe? How concerned is the bulk of their potential customer base aware of any goings on in the leadership of the company? What is the latest developments at the C-level of the company who supplied your canned corn or bike tires?
As a result, the VCs probably waged a backchannel PR war to pressure Rubio to support Korey's firing.
So when the executive’s name unexpectedly popped into #Hot-Topics the morning of May 16th, 2018, employees knew something was wrong. She’d found out about the channel from Erin Grau, the head of people... “I thought, Damn, she’s gonna see us talking about some stupid stuff, but whatever,” recalls a former marketing manager named Emily*. She hoped Korey would at least find the conversations funny.
That hope evaporated the next day when Korey began calling people into a room one by one. There, flanked by the company’s head of people and general counsel, she told six people they were being let go. “You’ve been discriminatory,” employees remember her saying. “... you no longer have a job at this company.” Emily, who is a person of color, was shocked. “That was jarring — three white people telling me I was racist,” she says.
The articles specific wording is: " But employees say she pointed to two comments that called out “cis white men.” "
Calling out 'cis white men'? As though it's just a normal thing to do, because, you know, those terrible 'straight white men'?
Can you imagine if that statement read 'calling out those gay blacks'?
The lack of self awareness among those staffers at least on this issue is shocking.
It's definitely racist, and definitely a fireable offence.
Obviously, black->white/white->black racism is quite different, but it's still racism in the worst way.
Here's another maxim for you: live by the sword, die by the sword. If you want people to be treated equal, stop singling out groups (e.g. "ignorant white yuppies") and playing identity politics.
I encourage you to tell the legislatures about your wise "two wrongs" wisdom. I bet they'll empty out the prisons immediately!
Jesus left us a variety of maxims. I must admit, however, that we didn't study the Gospels in my kindergarten.
I vehemently disagree; racism is at its worst when groups who are institutionally powerful use racism to oppress groups with relatively little institutional power. To assert otherwise is to be willfully blind to the lived experiences of people who are oppressed, at best. I won't go into what it suggests at worst.
Obviously it is only racist if a white person complains about three black people tell them something, never the other way around. Equality is a one way street!
https://www.theverge.com/2019/12/5/20995453/away-luggage-ceo...
Youch. Sounds like a cult. All work conversations in a channel where the CEO can eavesdrop and bust in for spurts of berating and micromanagement.
Ideally you'd encourage supposedly "private" conversations then snoop on those.
If you think you're in this situation now -- please: leave. I've since learned that these things are a dime a dozen, and by and large they go up in flames. And in the rare cases when they don't, it's still not worth it. In the worst case at the end of it you'll be burned out, emotionally exhausted, struggling with aggravated anxiety/depression/PTSD, not to mention the damage done to your personal relationships.
This kind of shit is literally abuse, and as such can do actual and severe damage to your life. Don't put up with it. Life is too short, and there's a lot more at stake than your time and labor. There are plenty of companies to work for including startups that won't do this to you.
Maybe I've just been in more normal, staid companies; but in my opinion all the higher-ups at this company need to be fired or the employees need to stage a mass walkout.
It should not be a surprise to anyone that all they had to offer is spin and marketing-speak.
I remember pretty clearly when I first started seeing "the game", which is the politics that course through an organization like the wind through a mountain forest. It can be pretty heady at first, it is like wearing the special sunglasses in "They Live", but for me I also "saw" some things that weren't actually there at all. And acting on what I think I saw resulted in modest embarrassment and some awkwardness.
So with experience, I learned to take what I saw with a bit of skepticism and to figure out ways I could "test", without revealing what I suspected to be true, whether or not something was what was actually going on.
That test for Gruber was apparently the belief that you "cannot" hire a new CEO from another large company in the short amount of time that Away did it, so the "truth" (or what is "really" going on) is that the Verge story was cover for the swap and distracting from the distasteful element that a woman in technology was being forced out and a man coming in to replace her.
I don't think that would be enough for me. Over my career I have met with a number of executive search firms, both helping them to identify good candidates, and sometimes as the candidate they were vetting for a possible move. And that experience showed me that executives are just as trigger happy as employees are for the 'right' move. That is especially true near the top because the only way you move into the 'big' seat is for the person in it to be ejected, and that can be a slow process for an aggressive person. Watching Ed Zander give up on Scott ever stepping down so that he could take over Sun he bailed and went to Motorola. It's a common story. So for me, I can see that if you talked to the right executive search firm, they might have a couple of candidates that were already 'loose in the socket' as they say. But it also can't be a "hopeless" company, like Uber seemed to be when Kalanick was clearly on the way out. But 'start up founder can't grow into the role' is a common enough reason to slot in someone who has more experience, and if it moves an executive closer to their ultimate goal, not as hard to pull off as you might think. (I'll admit it is probably easier for CTO roles than CEO roles but still)
I am not saying that Gruber is wrong, I agree it is a plausible explanation. I just don't see the evidence as being as definitive as he does.
Would have been cool for Gruber to talk to someone at the Verge before publishing his hit piece.
Also, Gruber's general purpose is whitelabeled Apple PR. His "insights" here accord with his claim that he would never let an advertiser that paid him roughly a quarter million dollars affect his views! He's a man of principle (unmentioned, the principle being gettin' paid)!
To be clear, my take on his angle is "whatever keeps approximately $60k/year of advertising checks flowing his way. Because principles."
Gross.
Korey's own words, about teaching her direct reports "accountability" by asking them to work overtime, presumably unpaid, is gross.
Korey's own actions, by forcing all employees to talk publicly in Slack channels in "the interest of transparency", and then firing those who talk about problems at the company, is gross.
If this level of irresponsibility made its way to the board, PR disaster in stow, you sure imagine they'd try to get rid of her quick.
I've worked in serious NYC restaurants for years, and made a lot of big mistakes, including serving inch-worms to celebrities. I've almost always been treated with respect and kindness when I made a mistake (save for some gentle ribbing). When I first started I had a few sternly worded conversations, but they were always respectful and very clearly delivered with the intention of building me up, not putting me down.
The one and only time I was ever shouted at was in private and one-on-one, and was a motivating factor in my putting in my notice a few days later.
Toxic culture is never acceptable, not in restaurants, or tech companies.
Well it's a good thing that employers can at least see the value in their employees, even when they gasp act human and make a mistake!
Somewhere along the line in the past 20 years, HR and senior leadership decided they were not "managers" but "therapists". We don't discuss what happened from a process and policy compliance perspective (depersonalizing it). No - we have to turn it into a holier than thou judgement session about your values and personal beliefs.
The problem is... instead of the brief burst of discomfort produced by a policy compliance discussion (which is often very impersonal), the feedback discussion becomes a very personal judgement about you by a respected authority figure that you have been conditioned to listen to. Far more painful and damaging.
I went thought something similar at a former employer, a nasty web of pseudo-therapy "coaching" to help "align me with corporate values". I had an chance to leave and I took it. 30 days later, my family commented that Dad was finally smiling again....
From an ethical perspective, HR needs to RUN from anything resembling being a therapist. No mental health professional could ethically operate under the realities of their job: they have a massive conflict of interest and policy prohibitions against client confidentiality. You should never open up to HR. Period. They're not a mental health provider.
If you're in HR and want to work as a mental health professional, quit your corporate job, get licensed, and operate in accordance with industry ethics!
> “The stuff you said was hateful, even racist. You no longer have a job at this company.” Emily, who is a person of color, was shocked. “That was jarring — three white people telling me I was racist,” she says.
Given the things I've seen people post publicly on Twitter and elsewhere, I can 100% believe that racist things were being said and that the perpetrators felt they were immune to repercussions because the things being said were about white people.
https://www.employerlawreport.com/2015/10/articles/labor-rel...
Of course, it's a different NLRB than it was when that decision was made.
Also I feel like a lot of this type of stuff is coming out now towards the holiday season so that a lot of people would somewhat forget about everything thats going on now.
Sorry for the harsh words, but this demonstrates complete incompetence and zero business experience from Steph Korey all the way to the investors.
Away is clearly yet another terrible company that would have died long ago if not for VC life support.
Exception that makes the rule perhaps, but I think you might be being a bit hyperbolic.
And no, I am not being hyperbolic. Did you read the article? Employees at Away are banned from using everything above. No private Slack channels. No email. Only public Slack. I challenge you to name a successful company where that is the policy.
Today's editorial from Casey Newton is a another data point: He tries to drag Slack into the controversy by claiming that it is 'not really neutral' and that it contributed to the CEO's downfall by allowing her to so easily berate employees and create a permanent record - as if email never existed.
Key Lessons:
- Why consistent feedback builds trust - How to embrace mistakes (and share your own with your team) - Why you should let go of giving answers, and start asking questions - How to treat you staff like shit
Wait. sorry I added the last one.. and only the last one :o) Okay #TrollingDone
- wait, that last one might actually be interesting...
I went on their site, and it looks like it's just another carry-on suitcase that's durable and has a charging port. What's the big deal?
In India Rupees, that about 15,000 Rs. In India, the costliest similar suitcase, from a well regarded brand, VIP is about 10,500 Rs. ( https://www.vipbags.com/product/fairway-graphite )
Are suitcases so costly to produce? Or is the cost the cumulative effect of overheads?
15,000 Rs. is the median monthly income for many jobs in India. Especially service jobs.
What is it about Away suitcases that demand such high prices?
Romowa, Arlo Sky, Tumi, Roam, to name a few, are all much more expensive.
It's mostly just in the marketing and the fact that it's an item you don't buy often so people are willing to shell out.
They definitely still break, but when they do you can walk into the store and they hand you a new one.
I think they were pretty clearly cracking down on employee speech. Telling them what they are allowed to do on their personal accounts outside of work hours really rubs me the wrong way regardless of whether or not they are in crisis mode.
As the OP says, the timing of the PR scandal coincides too conveniently with their internal plans to replace her.
Also, I wish they’d just shut up about “transforming” travel... chill out and get back to earth, you’re just a luggage company.
I read the verge article. They put people through that kind of bullshit in NYC for 40 grand a year? Are you kidding me?
(yes, well aware that many people make less than that. But sheesh... it's the Devil wears Prada updated for 2019)
And I suspect the rise of "the apprentice" have given bullies a licence to behave badly as they saw it on the telly.
You would have to look at the compensation packages, as well, but emotionally I am sure there were many people who wanted a chance at the saddle.
Plus she could have been failing out of the COO role, or things were struggling / on-fire, and now that she's milked the role for all it's worth it was time to flee.
And Nike makes shoes and has a valuation of $150B?
You don’t need to be a “tech” company to build something worth billions.
Most people use the same luggage for years, I use mine for atleast 10 years. Where is the logic in your reply?
And as for his example of:
"If a waiter served a customer a half-eaten sandwich, I’d expect the manager to immediately berate him in front of the other staff in the kitchen — not take him aside and say “Hey, that isn’t cool.”
I would think it is highly inappropriate to berate a staff member in front of other staff. That doesn't inspire leadership. Instead you would take them aside and talk to them personally about what they had done, and talk to all staff as a whole about the need to do better and explain the importance of customer service and that a happy customer is likely to refer 2 other people, but a dissatisfied person is likely to tell 20, so we need to stop people from being dissatisfied (within reason).
In all of my roles, from retail, consulting, government, and everything else, it has never been appropriate to berate staff.