1. Speech Class
Speech ClassPlease read the case study: “ American International Group Bailout Bonus
Controversy” on page 61 and 62 in your textbook. In your own words, as you read the
chapter, see if you can (1) narrow down the main problem – was it the fact that bonuses
were given, the size of the bonuses, or did something else cause the public outrage?
Determine which of the four communication styles best fits DeSantis based on his letter.Go
to www.wsj.com or www.nytimes.com and search “ AIG” or the names of the individuals
mentioned in this case study for aIDitional information.Discuss your comments in2
paragraphs.Page 2Please read the case study: “ An Engineer’ s Experience With Listening”
on page 97 and 98 in your textbook. In your own words, as you read this chapter, see if you
can (a) evaluate LeMessuirer’ s listening skills on a scale of 1 (poor) to 5 (excellent), (b)
determine whether he was guilty of poor listening and why. Discuss your comments in 2
paragraphsPage 3Please read the case study: “ Hook’ em Horns Gesture Causes Problems at
2005 Inauguration” on page 121 and 122 in your textbook. In your own words, as you read
this chapter, see if you can determine (a) who was the most responsible for the
misunderstanding – Bush, his advisors, or the people from other countries and why. Which
of the four (4)types of gestures would best describe the hook’ em horns sign. Discuss your
comments in 2 paragraphs. Page 61 and 62American International Group Bailout Bonus
ControversyIn the spring of 2008, a global economic crisis resulted in the U.S.
governmentproviding bailout monies to multiple companies in order to protect the stability
of theeconomy. American International Group (AIG) received $200 billion of these
funds.When the chief executive of AIG, Edward LiIDy, used bailout funds to pay bonusesto
41 8 employees totaling $1 65 million, cries of outrage were heard from the WhiteHouse,
Congress, and the American people (Calmes& Story, 2009). When peoplerealized that 73 of
the employees received bonuses of $1 million each and that $33.6million was paid to people
no longer employed by AIG, the cries became even louder.The reality is that the bonuses
were contractual agreements signed in 2007 before thebailout. According to LiIDy the
bonuses were paid to keep his best employees so theycould help the company get back on
its feet.The AIG bonuses were the talk of the media and the American people for weeks
asCongress held hearings and debated how to handle the situation. The New York
Timesreceived and published an interesting resignation letter from Jake DeSantis, an execu-
tive vice president of the AIG’ s ? nancial products unit. Here is a portion of his letter:Dear
Mr. LiIDy,It is with deep regret that I submit my notice of resignation from A.I.G. Financial
Products. I hope you take the time to read this entire letter. Before describing the details of
2. my decision, I want tooffer some context . .After 1 2 months of hard work dismantling the
company—
duringwhich A.I.G. reassured us many times we would be rewarded inMarch
2009—
we in the ? nancial products unit have been betrayedby A.I.G. and are being unfairly
persecuted by elected of?cials.In response to this, I will now leave the company and
donatemy entire post-tax retention payment to those suffering fromthe global economic
downturn. My intent is to keep none of themoney myself.I take this action after 1 1 years of
dedicated, honorable service toA.I.G. I can no longer effectively perform my duties in this
dys-functional environment, nor am I being paid to do so. Like you,I was asked to work for
an annual salary of $1 , and I agreed outof a sense of duty to the company and to the public
of?cials whohave come to its aid. Having now been let down by both, I can nolonger justify
spending 1 0, 1 2, 1 4 hours a day away from my familyfor the bene? t of those who have let
me down.You and I have never met or spoken to each other, so I’ d like totell you about
myself. . . . I started at this company in 1 998 as anequity trader, became the head of equity
and commodity tradingand, a couple of years before A.I.G.’ s meltdown last September,was
named the head of business development for commodities.Over this period the equity and
commodity units were consistentlypro? table—
in most years generating net pro?ts of well
over $1 00million. . . .But you also are aware that most of the employees of your ? nan-cial
products unit had nothing to do with the large losses. . . . Iand many others in the unit feel
betrayed that you failed to standup for us in the face of untrue and unfair accusations from
certainmembers of Congress last Wednesday and from the press overour retention
payments, and that you didn’ t defend us against thebaseless and reckless comments made
by the attorneys general ofNew York and Connecticut. . . .As most of us have done nothing
wrong, guilt is not a motivationto surrender our earnings. We have worked 1 2 long months
underthese contracts and now deserve to be paid as promised. None ofus should be cheated
of our payments any more than a plumbershould be cheated after he has ? xed the pipes but
a careless elec-trician causes a ? re that burns down the house. . .page 97 and 98Problems
are often discovered and solved through listening. A fascinating problem withthe 59-story
Citigroup Center tower in New York City (formerly the Citicorp Center)came to light when a
nationally known structural engineer, William J. LeMessurier,listened to a student’ s
concerns about the strength of the columns that support thebuilding. Although the
student’ s concerns proved to be unfounded, as a result of thecall, LeMessurier discovered a
much more serious problem with the structural integrityof the building. The following story
was adapted from “ The Fifty-Nine-Story Crisis” byJoe Morgenstern (1 995).The beautiful
Citigroup tower was designed by architect Hugh Stubbins Jr., but it wasengineered by
LeMessurier and his ? rm. There were several design “ ? rsts” in this project.One innovation
was the wind braces hiIDen inside the structural skin—
instead of onepiece, two pieces
coming from opposing sides if soldered together in the center wouldbe as strong as a single
brace. The second was the “ tuned mass damper” (TMD)—
a 400-pound block of concrete
located near the top of the building that was designed to greatlyreduce the natural sway of
such a tall building. The third innovation of LeMessurier’ s wasthe placement of the four
columns on which the building rested. These massive, nine-story stilt-like columns were
located at the center of each side of the building instead ofat the corners. This made the
building appear to “ ? oat” over the church, shops, and plazaunderneath it. The student’ s
3. questions were about these columns.LeMessurier was very proud of this building, which
had won much engineeringpraise. He patiently explained to the student, who was writing a
paper on the building,that the placement of the columns was exactly correct to “ resist what
sailors call quar-tering winds—
those which come from a diagonal and, by ? owing across
two sides of abuilding at once, increase the forces on both” (p. 6). Because LeMessurier was
teach-ing a structural engineering class at Harvard, the student’ s call reminded him that
hisown students would bene? t from this information on quartering winds, as well as,
thenew wind braces he had had installed in the columns to resist strong winds.
AlthoughNew York building code required that such braces pass only perpendicular wind
tests,as background for his lecture, he calculated the strength of the braces when hit
byquartering winds. To his surprise, he found that these winds would increase the strainon
several of the braces by 40% and would increase the strain on the joints of thecolumns by 1
60%. Even this increase would be no problem for soldered joints (buta few weeks before,
LeMessurier had discovered that the steel company who builtCiticorp tower had decided to
use bolted joints—
which in most cases would cost lessyet be just as safe).LeMessurier still
was not overly worried because “ a margin of safety is built intothe standard formulas for
calculating how strong a joint must be” in structural col-umns. However, when he
discovered that the building team had de?ned the braces as“ trusses” and not as
“ columns,” he became very worried! Because trusses are exemptfrom the extra safety
margin, LeMessurier knew that there would be too few bolts inthese joints for safety under
the force of quartering winds even with the TMD designedto reduce building
sway.LeMessurier decided to ask the labs of Canada’ s Boundary Layer Wind
TunnelLaboratory to run some wind tunnel tests. The results were not encouraging.
Afterworking through each ? oor and each joint, LeMessurier determined that the thirtieth?
oor had the weakest joint: “ If that one gave way, catastrophic failure of the wholestructure
would follow” (p. 22). The likelihood of a storm serious enough to createthis disaster was
calculated to be once every 1 6 years; with the TMD calculated in,it dropped to once in every
55 years. However, the TMD required electricity, whichwould likely fail in this type of
storm! By now it was the end of July, and hurricaneseason was rapidly approaching. His
worry now escalated to panic.There was a way to correct the problem: A heavy steel plate
could be weldedaround each of the 200 bolted joints like a “ giant Band-Aid.” The joints
were read-ily accessible by simply removing the carpet and sheetrock that covered them.
This? x would raise the safety of the building to a once-in-every-700-years storm. How-ever,
as Morgenstern noted, “ To avert disaster, LeMessurier would have to blow thewhistle
quickly on himself. That meant facing the pain of possible protracted litigation,probable
bankruptcy, and professional disgrace” (p. 24). This would be in aIDition tothe cost of
repairs (which would be at least $1 million), the problem of evacuatingthousands of people,
and the panic all of this would create. Although the student hadbeen wrong about the exact
problem, his concern had uncovered a serious structuralweakness.Page 121 and 122Hook
’ em Horns Gesture Causes Problems at 2005 InaugurationCommunication
misunderstandings caused by nonverbal messages and gestures canbe especially serious
when multiple countries and cultures are involved. In January2005 at his second
inauguration, George W. Bush along with his wife and daughters? ashed several hook ’ em
4. horns hand gestures as the University of Texas LonghornBand marched by them during the
inaugural parade. This certainly wasn’ t the ? rst timePresident Bush had used this gesture,
nor was it the ? rst time that a student from theUniversity of Texas had received negative
press overseas for using the hook ’ em hornsgesture (Douglas, 2005). However, the heavy
media coverage of the inauguration,which was shown around the world, led to more people
and countries taking noticeand many of them expressing shock and anger.The hook ’ em
horns hand gesture began at the University of Texas in 1 955 torepresent their mascot, the
Texas longhorn, which is a breed of cattle known for itsunusually long horns (Douglas,
2005). The hand sign representing the longhorn ismade with the two miIDle ? ngers
pressed against the palm of the hand and the othertwo ? ngers pointing upward like cattle
horns. The hook ’ em horns sign looks similarto the American Sign Language sign for “ I
love you,” which you may have seen on anAmerican postage stamp except that the thumb is
extended in the “ I love you” signbut crosses the miIDle ? ngers in the hook ’ em gesture.
The palm and ? ngers generallyface away from the body in both signs.The hook ’ em horns
gesture is used by the University of Texas alumni, stu-dents, faculty, and cheerleaders as a
greeting and as a sign of respect during sport-ing events. For example, during football
games use of the sign begins when theLonghorn Band runs onto the ? eld at home games
“ in its burnt orange uniforms,hands raised with ‘ hook ’ em’ signs. Fans leap to their feet,
and soon ‘ hook ’ em’ signs ? ll the stadium to its farthest reaches” (“ Showband of the
Southwest,” 2002).Because Bush had been governor of Texas and his wife and daughters
have degreesfrom the University of Texas, the entire family feels a close connection to the
univer-sity and its mascot.The problem with the hook ’ em horns hand gesture, as well as
other gesturesused around the world is that they don’ t mean the same thing to all people
in allcountries. According to David Thomas (2008) in his book Cross-Cultural Manage-ment,
“ trying to learn all the hand gestures that exist across cultures would be
virtuallyimpossible” (p. 1 35). However, in President Bush’ s case, the gesture he and his
familyused has different meanings in other countries that are serious enough that he prob-
ably should have saved the gesture for a more private time. For example, in
Nordiccountries, the sign is viewed as a salute to Satan or devil worship. Italians use the
signto mean that a wife is cheating on her spouse. Some Africans interpret the sign tomean
that a curse is being placed on the one to whom the gesture is made, and
someMediterranean countries consider the sign to be an insult similar to the single miIDle?
nger sign used in the United States (Axtell, 2007). Although there are many othermeanings
for the hook ’ em horn sign that do not have a negative meaning—
such as inbaseball where
the sign is used to mean “ you have two outs,” you can see why someinternational viewers
felt both shock and confusion seeing the president of the UnitedStates portraying such a
sign, smiling all the while. ORDER THIS ESSAY HERE NOW AND GET A DISCOUNT !!!
