Comments on: Think Twice Before Pressing the “Send” Button to Send an Email to Professor Galloway

By: Jean-Francois Belisle

Jean-Francois Belisle — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 15:28:50 +0000

Nice to hear from you @Muhammad. Personally, I partially agree with your first sentence. I think that the “firmness” portion of arrogance is a a must need when teaching MBA classes in Top Business Schools, the other portion is sometimes too much. Also, the fact that it was the first class pushes forward this kind of answer from Professor Galloway to ensure firmness. Concerning your last answer, even though the email is well-written, it clearly shows that the student doesn’t understand the rules of the institution, and as I said before, he has nothing to gain out of that email.

By: muhammad

muhammad — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 03:28:48 +0000

It is almost necessary to be arrogant to become successful, cherished professor in the US!

The email of the student, however, is horrible by itself and deserves such a response. This is called ” an excuse that is uglier than the sin” in the Middle Eastern culture.

By: Jean-Francois Belisle

Jean-Francois Belisle — Sun, 07 Mar 2010 15:31:34 +0000

@Elizabeth. I totally agree with your point that sending to every other students is adding “fire” at the expense of the student. However, the student’s idea to send the email to the Professor was indeed, either “naive” or “arrogant”, he had nothing to gain by sending this email. Concerning, how NYU should react, I think it all depends on the reputation the University wants to have. NYU is in the worldwide Top 15 for its MBA (ranked 11th in the US for its MBA according to US today), which is excellent, and Professor Galloway has been hired by the University especially to teach MBA courses. Concerning Professor Galloway reputation, he is well-known in New York for this kind of behaviour and he is building a reputation out of that like you mentioned, so there is no need to “light fire”. @Cyril. Quite interesting point you are making and this could be related to what is labelled as the “Proteus effect”, that is, the idea that an individual’s behaviour might change when he represents someone that is different from his real-self (i.e. an enhanced or ideal-self, individuals controlling avatars such as in World of Warcraft (WoW) or Everquest are good extreme examples).

By: Cyril Bernier

Cyril Bernier — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 19:53:52 +0000

Gilles comment is really interesting indeed.
It’s true for email but it’s also true for all presences on the social networks, chats, or any others virtual places, where people can “play” a different life, and express more freely with minor backfiring. But that can be a dangerous game.
However for some, it’s a way to bypass their shyness.

The “forwarding” let everyone knows what are the rules in his class. That’s harsh, but the feedbacks are instructive.

By: Elisabeth

Elisabeth — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 13:16:30 +0000

I don’t think there was anything wrong with the student’s e-mail. (I do think there was much wrong with his behaviour.) He asked a simple question, seeking to understand.
What was appalling was Professor Galloway’s answer: it was stunningly arrogant. And highly inappropriate, considering that he is a professor, a teacher at a business school. What makes it worse is that he sent the e-mail to each and every student, not just directly to the student who sent the original e-mail. That is not only rude: I’m wondering why he is still employed? This is an example of exemplary behaviour? Allowing this professor to humiliate this student in public? Nice. Makes me wonder what sort of leader this business school is trying to produce: probably the type I have despised all of my professional life and whose arrogance nearly brought the world economy to its knees in 2008.
I’m thinking that Professor Galloway enjoys his reputation and, by sending that e-mail, he was aware of what he was doing to his brand: he was making himself more notorious, and, I imagine he thought, more interesting. In my eyes, all he succeeded in doing was try to build himself up at the expense of a much younger and more inexperienced person. In other words, the Professor is a bully. An obnoxious mean bully.
He would have been a bigger man, and more of a leader, had he taken the student aside and explained how the student’s behaviour was inappropriate (which it was, no question), which is essentially captured in the last paragraph of the Professor’s e-mail.
Yes, he would have been a bigger man. But we all know that bullies are not big men: they are lost little boys trying to build themselves up at the expense of others. And hiding behind cowardly e-mails.

By: Bob

Bob — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 04:37:40 +0000

I linked to your posting from fb and it sure is getting a polarized response! LOL I just find the story soooooooooo interesting.

By: Jean-Francois Belisle

Jean-Francois Belisle — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 21:52:34 +0000

@Bob, thanks for commenting. Always nice to hear from you. It seems like the “WOW effect” is what Professor Galloway is trying to show to his students whatever this “WOW effect” is perceived as positive or not.

@Gilles. Really nice comment. I like your last sentences that can be related to at least two concepts. First, even though your email is different from your personal brand, it puts your brand into play anyway, it can even more destroy your personal brand if it contrasted your actual personal brand, just think about Tiger Woods SMS to his lovely ones, what a self destruction. Second, for the different personality provoked by anonymity or “sense of” is common as you mentioned. YouTube comments are a great example where you most of times see people bashing each other without knowing who they are. I personally think that even though this is perceived as a different personality, it is mostly a part of the individual’s personality that is generally hidden because of social constraints.

By: Gilles Bahda

Gilles Bahda — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 19:41:13 +0000

Hi Jean François,
this anecdote is really interesting and shows how different can be the outcomes of our online behaviours. When professor Galoway qualifies, with a teasing sense of humour, the student as « an anonymous student », he underlines the impersonality of an email communication. Indeed, they are people who adopt some kind of different manner when they send an email. They express themselves differently and speak with their interlocutors not as the same way as they would have spoken face to face or even by phone. Some people reveal to be more arrogant and less polite by email because of this anonymity. We can suppose that the student would have adopted a different way of speaking to express his disapointment if he had been face to face with professor Galoway. I’m thus thinking to the lesson: every time, you send an email your are putting your personal brand into play. This statement is a fact but is there another danger due to the shift of behaviour that we were described : is the personal brand you are putting into play when you send an email reflect your actual personality? Is there a specific danger of e mail communication as a media coming from this divergence?

By: Bob

Bob — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 13:19:22 +0000

WOW- terrific post JF! So interesting.

I would be over time, Galloway’s actions are going to morph into a “legend” story with additional “details.” Although, quite frankly, I don’t know what else could make the story more interesting from an embellishment point of view.