The Damage is DONE !!!!

While I agree with you to an extent... "each employee needs to have a
certain level of responsibility and be trustworthy and competent enough to
carry out decisions associated with their level of responsibility".

This is true and if it's a large company, you would hope to have "management" that is competent to review and carry out the decisions to insure the integrity of the company. The management would also know who and where the "testimonials" came from and that they were valid. You would possibly have a legal department that would insure everything is also valid.

However, I doubt that this is the case with Hostbreak. I suspect it is a small company and the management is small or only consists of one or two people that make most of those types of decisions (if I'm wrong, then the preceding paragraph applies).

We're not talking about micro-managing anything... we're talking about a level of responsibility that impacts the reputation of the company. Why would anyone in business rely on just an employee or a contractor (web designer) to just stick something out there on their website without a thorough review of the material? Why would a responsible "employee" use such tactics in the first place? Whether it's the "owner" or officer of the company or a manager... there is still someone that has the responsibility to insure that the business interests are ethical or suffer the consequences. Even newspapers have "Managing Editors" that review and authorize everything before it's allowed to be printed. These editors must insure that the impact of the articles are true and correct and uphold the overall reputation of the newspaper and the company that published the newpaper. The same should be true in this case.

To blame someone else ("the web designer") for something like this is just as irresponsible as the false testimonial that was published in the first place. All in all... the damage is done... their reputation has been damaged... and they will suffer the consequences, no matter who they wish to blame. Even Enron management and employees can tell you this.

Jim F

> I completely agree that the head of the company is ultimately responsible
> for the actions of the employees. However, each employee needs to have a
> certain level of responsibility and be trustworthy and competent enough to
> carry out decisions associated with their level of responsibility. If the
> manager/CEO has to follow them around and check (micromanage) everything
> they do, what does he/she need them for? It would be
> easier/quicker/cheaper to just do it. If the employee is neither
> trustworthy enough nor competent enough to carry out the level of
> responsibility and duties of the position, then maybe the manager/CEO
> needs to find another employee. Harsh, but the web designer probably
> should have thought of all the consequences, both personal and to the
> company, before making such a decision that compromised the integrity of
> the employer. That kind of "loyalty" no employer needs.