By now, everyone has heard about the Astronomer CEO and head of HR whose alleged extramarital affair became not only public, but a viral social media event. When the couple were caught on a kiss cam at a Coldplay concert, an awkward moment collapsed into a PR crisis for the company. A lot has been written about the expectations of leaders, the always-on cameras in our pockets, and the ability of non-employees to determine the fate of organizations.
Why leadership is not a person, but a decision
What is equally interesting is what came next. After the resignations of both, the company could have tried to return to business as normal with public silence. Instead, they flipped the script—using the same influence of the public to re-establish the trust that had been broken. Gwyneth Paltrow (ex-wife of Coldplay’s Chris Martin) released a statement as Astronomer’s temporary official spokesperson. In a video on the company’s official X channel, she gives a tongue-in-cheek sober response: “We are thrilled with all the new-found interest in data workflow automation.”
The video on X has been seen (at the time of this writing) more than 37 million times. It was risky, but also a bit revolutionary. After all, there are two instances of one lesson here. With the advent of social media, companies no longer control the narrative. From customer reviews on Amazon to highly-paid influencers, it is the non-employee who establishes brand quality, customer expectations and corporate values.
Follow the followers. In the past, “personal indiscretions” were either ignored (not great) or handled quietly behind closed doors (barely better). Management worked through an HR process and official employee handbooks and a trained professional assessed the misstep—and the consequence.
No more. Private companies are held accountable by the public. Their performance is discussed and graded by not only management or employees, but customers, competitors, and even everyday TikTok users. It’s not as simple as “cancel culture.” It’s actually a reflection of a pre-social media phenomenon identified by psychologist David Kelley in the 1990s, called “exemplary followers.”
To call them followers is a bit counterintuitive. They aren’t really at the back of the crowd taking direction; they are more like the presidents of die-hard fan clubs so large they can make or break a brand. They are outspoken and decisive. They are confident in the value proposition an organization has professed and they will hold accountable—swiftly and loudly—leaders who breach their trust.
The Gwyneth Paltrow comeback trick: brilliant, but…
Can companies use these followers to reinstate trust? When the comedian and actor Roseanne Barr made derogatory comments about Valerie Jarrett, a former Obama administration top official, the television network kept the show but fired Barr. The public was initially outraged and that judgment could have spilled over into an indictment of the whole organization. But instead there, like here, the prompt firing was used to signal to the public that the values professed were intact. The scandal was turned into an opportunity to prove reputational integrity.
The BBC pointed out that in this case, the breach of trust was isolated to two executives and choices in their personal lives. Like Roseanne Barr, the offending act was unrelated to any official role in the company. Had Astronomer made light of a misstep by the organization itself—for example, a data privacy breach—a tongue-in-cheek approach would have almost certainly backfired. And as awkward as extramarital affairs are, it did not impact personal data confidentiality or reflect historical racial prejudices. In those cases, swift action and sober messaging is the only appropriate response from management.
With the Paltrow message, Astronomer could acknowledge bad behavior without being part of the problem. They could admit embarrassment without risking indictment. And in an ingenious move, they could leverage their infamy for increased brand recognition.
Leaders should choose their values, but they can’t change them
For leaders, this means that their personal lives are public, and acting badly means they risk not only public shame but personal careers. On the upside, many former restraints of high-profile leaders are gone. There has been unequivocal progress.
More broadly, leaders don’t have to break apart their public-facing identity and the private one. But it also means that the collapse of that distinction results in an always-on accountability. Values are not written into press releases, they are demonstrated by leaders who live them. And if they don’t, companies may find that the only way to survive that breach is to learn to lead… by following.