On the contrary this is exactly what I want to see from executives regardless of their political leanings. If they believe that something is a clear and direct threat to the business that they’re charged with running, they should have a fiduciary duty to speak up on it in whatever means they have available.
Following that those receiving the message can decide to continue to support the business or not. But I’d rather have that than the weasel word non answers approach that many execs take.
>But I’d rather have that than the weasel word non answers approach that many execs take.
They are free to do whatever they want, but the CEO is a representative of the company, not the company itself. I don't care one wink about what the guy handling my business expenses thinks of the POTUS. His opinion on such matters has zero value to me. It was an odd thing to do for any company which is storing sensitive data of its customers.
I agree that the CEO is not the company and should not use the company as an amplifier of their own personal beliefs or views.
That being said, I don't buy that you (or anyone, I am not pointing fingers) _don't care one wink_. Maybe you don't care on this very topic because you disagree or simply have no interest in politics. But I'm willing to bet that on another topic closer to your heart (pick your favourite), that could reflect on your views and relationship with the company.
And actually, because the voice of a CEO is globally impactful on the brand of the company, CEOs tend to be publicly rather quiet. Exceptions apply.
It makes sense that the CEO should communicate to employees the effects of politics on the company, but it's unreasonable to send this to your customers.
> Following that those receiving the message can decide to continue to support the business or not.
Actually, they could not - this is the crux of the issue. They didn't just send emails to their customers, but to their customer's employees. As an employee, I do not get to pick whether I use Expensify or not. My employer does.
Imagine your company decides to use MS services for email (e.g. Outlook Exchange). Is it OK for you to have to receive Satya's views on politics and not have a choice not to receive them (other than quitting your job)?
Following that those receiving the message can decide to continue to support the business or not. But I’d rather have that than the weasel word non answers approach that many execs take.