Corporate Secrecy Sometimes Leads to More Questions

Everyone keeps secrets, but sometimes corporate secrecy draws suspicion, particularly from lawmakers.

For instance, sealed settlements in lawsuits over alleged safety defects in the Jeep Grand Cherokee recently caught the eye of federal investigators (latimes.com 8/02/01). The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has now launched a probe into the scope of alleged problems with the vehicle and whether the company should have notified federal authorities sooner.

No manufacturer wants its patented formulas publicized, nor do companies enjoy having their problems splashed across the covers of major newspapers. Certainly, individuals and organizations are entitled to privacy. But where does the line between privacy and secrecy get drawn?

There is no easy answer to that question, though, perhaps, the answer lies in addressing the issue of interpretation. Given the numerous questions about the safety of Sport Utility Vehicles posed during the past months, few people may be surprised to learn that even innocent actions to protect privacy could be viewed instead as attempts to squelch the truth. How an act is interpreted by an audience-rather than the act itself-can have serious consequences.

Interpretation-determining the importance or significance of a message-is a crucial component in the communication process. Remember that your actions, regardless of intention, are always open to interpretation by your audience. Therefore, choose carefully your response or action. How you interpret an action is not enough; think of how your audience will interpret it.

For more information on interpretation and the communication process, see Module Two, pp. 26-27.