Right at the end of the past winter semester, a business story broke about a company in my area in West Michigan that had public relations implications. In an employee meeting, the CEO of furniture company MillerKnoll told employees to quit worrying about not getting a bonus when they asked about how to stay motivated. Instead, she implored them to commit to meeting an internal corporate financial goal.
She famously told her team to “leave pity city.”
An employee had recorded this message and shared it on social media. It went quickly viral, reaching 7 million views quickly with numerous comments. The story earned more media mentions than a typical new product release, including national outlets like the summary with perspective on the incident in the Wall Street Journal as well as a series of articles in local media leading up to a reported apology by the CEO in Crain’s Grand Rapids Business.
I don’t know if the MillerKnoll PR team was involved or listened to with regard to crafting the messaging for the initial meeting or the subsequent apology. But there are certainly some PR lessons here.
A primary lesson is that internal communications can quickly go external. MillerKnoll is not the first and won’t be the last to experience a window opened on what they think are internal deliberations. All internal communications should be planned considering the impact on reputation if it is seen externally.
Related, employees can’t be isolated. First, employees are also members of the community and may also be customers and/or investors. Even if they are not, those other stakeholder groups increasingly care about and make decisions based on how employees are treated by corporate management. In a talent shortage, potential employees may wonder if they want to bother applying for a job at a company where the leadership communicates in harsh and insulting fashion.
There is a lot of published advice on executive apologies and lots of research on what makes them effective. Suffice it to say apologies have to be sincere, address the reason for the offense, be meaningful and often action based. In this case, the CEO said she was sorry for how employees reacted—but not for what she said and what that implies about her view of employees and their concerns. This is especially true in this case when the CEO told employees not to worry about their bonus when she received nearly $5 million in salary, stock options and non-equity incentive compensation and other perks, according to the MillerKnoll 2022 proxy statement (see page 32).
The central issue in this whole story is about employee motivation. Employee motivation—as well as retention and engagement—are primary concerns of CEOs everywhere, especially post-Covid. Motivation is not done by chastisement or shame. Making company ‘needs” paramount and diminishing the legitimacy of personal concern is not a wise plan. Asking employees for commitment after negating your own commitment to them is set up for failure.
At the time this incident was getting social media and news media spotlight, I was reading papers and grading a final exam in my graduate course in Communication Management. I was reminded about some of the readings we discussed in the section we did on internal communications and performance. The 2021 Edelman Trust Barometer showed that after the pandemic, employees are considered the most important stakeholder for long-term success, replacing customers, that 78% of employees surveyed have anxiety about losing their job, and 43% say their employer doesn’t take seriously employee burnout.
The Axios 2023 State of Essential Workplace Communications shows that management and employees are not in sync in terms of how things are communicated to them. 77% of leaders think the communication they provide has the context to help employees do their jobs well, whereas only 46% of employees agree.
One research study we dove into showed a complex model that essentially showed the importance of internal public relations in achieving employee engagement. Briefly, internal communication satisfaction (made up of feedback, information, climate and media) will positively affect both perceived organizational support and perceived employer attractiveness. Those two things are key determinants of employee engagement, which in common terms means employees who work with vigor and dedication.
Another article we reviewed in a section on communication and leadership demonstrated the importance of a “communicative” leadership style, defined as “someone who engages employees in dialogue, actively shares and seeks feedback, practices participative decision making, and is perceived as open and involved.”
A CEO who pays attention to all of the above would not have had to mention “pity city” in the first place.
Reviewing this situation also made me thing about all of the interesting and practical topics my graduate students wrote papers about. There were papers on executive communication coaching, communication competence, transformational leadership, communication management and the ethic of care, the communication role in organizational culture and employee performance, and more.
All of this shows that leadership is more than having authority and insisting on something. Communication is more than just distributing information. An educated public relations or communications professional should be at the right hand of a CEO to ethically and strategically consider both communications and actions with regard to employees.


