Apple recently removed an app that protesters had been using in Hong Kong to track the movements of police and law enforcement, prompting an outcry from observers who sayOpens a new window that chief executive Tim Cook abandoned his own ideals and those of the company in order to protect the business.
In an internal memo to employeesOpens a new window , Cook gave his reasons for yanking the app, called HKmap.live, from the App Store: “Over the past several days we received credible information, from the Hong Kong Cybersecurity and Technology Crime Bureau, as well as from users in Hong Kong, that the app was being used maliciously to target individual officers for violence and to victimize individuals and property where no police are present.â€
This is the latest iteration of tech’s consistent dilemma — caught between law enforcement and the interests of users, the major players consistently have been forced to make decisions about whether to cooperate with authorities or protect the privacy and rights of users.
Cook tried to address this concern in his memo, defending his decision as a user-protection choice. “National and international debates will outlive us all, and, while important, they do not govern the facts. In this case, we thoroughly reviewed them, and we believe this decision best protects our users,†he wrote.
While there have been some strong critical piecesOpens a new window about Apple’s decision, let’s break down what Cook’s decision can teach us about leadership style.
Anticipation is key
Cook knew that his decision would spark backlash, and he addressed some of the potential concerns before they came up. That kind of communication style shows he’s in touch with the debates underway, and that he’s taking them to heart rather than dismissing them as irrelevant. That’s an excellent leadership communication technique, and it can be applied in almost any office.
Maintain orientation
When issuing a message about a controversial issue, it’s easy to get caught in a defensive crouch. Rather than focusing on the potential critics or even the authorities in Hong Kong, Cook made clear in his message that his concern was for users. That seemed to imply a sense of clarity about the company’s priorities rather than a potential caving to the business demands of the moment.
Inconsistency will raise red flags
As others have pointed out, the trouble with Cook’s decision is that it seems to reflect a a break with Apple’s policy on coordinating with authorities.
In the past, Apple has rejected demandsOpens a new window from US officials to release user data, earning it a fair amount of credit for its commitment and adherence to its ethical standards. But Hong Kong, where China wields influence, is different than the United States.
Not complying with Chinese demands could run the company the risk of losing the Chinese market, whereas in America, Apple can continue to operate freely even after rejecting the FBI’s request for assistance.
That’s the problem with making standards part of the business identity: When you fail to hold them up, it’s especially disappointing — not just for users, but employees, too.