No, we are not going to hug it out.
After firing most of Twitter’s employees, Elon Musk has turned his frustrations onto one of the company’s key advertisers. Frustrated over lost ad revenues, as well as potential access to customers, Elon Musk has taken on Apple and its CEO, Tim Cook. Bloomberg reports that the billionaire founder of Tesla “attacked the iPhone maker with a flurry of tweets Monday”, as a result of a deep reduction in Twitter advertising, for the maker of the ubiquitous iPhone. Used by 1.2 billion people worldwide, according to Statista, the iPhone remains iconic in its influence, with over 50% market share in the US. Also iconic is this clap back to Elon Musk, on Twitter:
Is it all about the money?
In comparison to Apple (NASDAQ:AAPL), Twitter has about 450 million active users worldwide. In the past, prior to the Elon Musk takeover of Twitter, Apple - a company with a market cap of over $2.2 trillion, as of this writing - was one of the largest advertisers on the Twitter platform. Bloomberg reports that Apple’s ad spending was once over $100 million annually. Perhaps even more challenging than the loss of revenue for Musk is the potential loss of access to the App Store. If Twitter is somehow excluded from this platform, it will be cut off from 1.5 billion devices around the world. But how would that move be in anyone’s best interest? Are we really supposed to believe that a bitter Twitter battle is something that would be more important than commerce, revenues and profits? How badly does Musk want to win this one? And what, exactly, does victory look like?
When Disappointment Makes Discernment Disappear
If you work in sales, customer service or management, would you ever consider antagonizing one of your largest customers? Seems that serving your customers, not baiting them, is a strategy for growth. Especially if you are trying to make amends, and restore a $100 million annual income stream. Would you call your customer out into the town square for a fistfight, a duel, or a public debate? We all recognize that behavior would be counterproductive. Detrimental. Destructive, even. So why would an online brawl be a strategy for resolution? What’s really going on, inside this expression of free speech (and counter-intuitive customer relationship management)?
Perhaps there is an ulterior motive here. Perhaps a big picture play is on the table, as the New York Times suggests. “Elon is the latest chapter in a push to make App Store fees lower, and this will resurrect a topic that’s been fairly quiet over the past six months,” said Gene Munster, managing partner of Loup Ventures, a technology research firm. Musk hopes for a future in which App Store fees were reduced to around 20 percent, and he’s not alone in that hope. Additionally, Yahoo!Finance says that Musk is accusing Apple of suppressing free speech. Perhaps Apple is exercising that freedom of speech by spending ad dollars elsewhere. Some might argue that Tim Cook’s declining investment speaks volumes.
Welcome to what Twitter does best: inflaming issues, and users, by offering keyboard warriors an opportunity to blast outrage onto the Interwebs. Indignation, fury, and schoolyard petulance has become a hallmark of the platform - and that was true before Musk took it over. Social media platforms, like Twitter, are fueled by outrage, snark, bold claims, hot takes and sass. As a result, a recent study in the Harvard Business Review shows that rudeness is on the rise. In fact, over 76% of respondents report that they experience incivility at least once a month. No word on whether they are scrolling Twitter when it occurs.
Punch First, Ask Questions Later
We live in an era of counter-punching, inside the new golden rule: whoever has the gold makes the rules. For Musk, his takeover of Twitter and subsequent management “strategies” fill the pages of this site, and many others. Because somehow, somewhere, we know better - and we wonder why a genius like Musk can’t do better. Punch first and ask questions later is the exact opposite of what leaders need to do, today.
On Twitter, that punchy approach is good for engagement, if not ad revenues. Outrage and conflict gets eyeballs, at least in theory. However, it’s wise for us to remember the saying of management consultants everywhere: “In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice, they are not.”
Leaders today need to practice these four words - which can fit in a tweet, by the way - in order to create a thriving culture and a growing business. Those four words are, “I’ve thought this through.”
We lose sight of the fact that we are all connected, when we talk and tweet in a way that creates division, disservice and disappointment. You’re frustrated? Guess what: so’s everybody. Does that mean that posting your frustration is useful, productive and profitable? Is freedom of speech really just airing out your negative feelings, no matter how much pain and lost revenue comes of it?
Leadership Lessons from Elon Musk and Tim Cook
When self-expression becomes more important than self-control, we operate in a world without respect. Without boundaries. Without cooperation, and collaboration. Without an understanding that actions have consequences. For all of the non-billionaires out there, consider that there is another way to approach loss, difficulty and challenge - especially if the challenge is one you have created for yourself.
There’s a concept called “Prison Marketing”, and here’s how it works: if you want to be seen as tough, and you’re in prison, go out into the yard and punch the biggest, meanest, baddest dude you see. Pick that fight. Swing hard. Swing again. Keep swinging. Are you still alive? OK, now watch what happens. If you don’t get beat to a pulp, and you are still standing, your prison marketing worked. You are now seen as tough, rough and ready to rumble. The trouble with prison marketing? When you knock somebody down, they can always get back up. And you might not survive to find out if your strategy worked.
Twitter isn’t a prison yard, but Elon Musk just punched one of the biggest companies in the world. Why take on Tim Cook, and by extension, Apple? Seems counter-intuitive - like so many of Musk’s business strategies.
What works for one of us may not be a fit for all of us. And certainly these words aren’t going to make Elon Musk change his shirt, much less change his mind. But, luckily, we all have the ability to make different choices, especially when it comes to how we show up for the relationships that matter most. Business leaders have to ask what works, not what’s sensational in 280 characters or less. And punching your biggest customer isn’t a strategy for rebuilding a relationship. Or rebuilding much of anything, really.
