Just respond to criticism when important. Responding to all worker criticism isn’t practical or fitting. Deciding if, when, and how to respond requires judgment. The affect ability to the depths of the circumstance. Presidents should cooperate with HR and be logical to assess the accompanying:

•        Who is the employee?

What is their remaining with the organization? What may be their destinations in posting? Moreover, what are they searching for in a reaction? A representative who stands up in the wake of being ignored for advancement. He may not be responsive to a valuable trade. Then again, a worker on favourable terms who uses online networking to raise honest to goodness. He worries about another corporate approach may offer the CEO. An opportunity to clear up and bring the representative locally available.

•        Is a CEO reaction prone to attract significantly more regard for the issue?

Getting more consideration isn’t really a terrible thing. However, it is critical to consider.  This activity and Stoppelman’s Twitter reaction opened up the scope. The representative’s post has been prescribed 3,400 times and has gotten about 1,400 remarks. Also, the story was taken by outlets including Forbes, Fortune, and Business Insider. It touched off a worldwide discussion on the lowest pay permitted by law. Moreover, by corporate online networking approaches, and the right to speak freely. While the CEO’s reaction likely attracted more understanding regarding the first post. Not responding may have sent the wrong message.

•        Is the representative’s claim really precise? If not, should the CEO redress it?

What is the danger of releasing the deception uncorrected? False explanations on the web can do severe reputational harm. Learning that such a claim would start broad unease over the worker base. The CEO stopped it from developing in any way. Be that as it may, if the lie has not been broadly seen. It doesn’t against affect the organization’s fame, or is plainly over the top in nature, numerous organizations will pick not to answer.

•        What stage was the post on?

Does it offer implicit securities to keep discourse productive? Some web-based social networking channels are bringing down hazard than others. Official boss survey destinations like Glassdoor are guided by group governs and are thoroughly observed. These destinations permit criticism of CEOs and other open figures, however, restrict dangers, provocation, and despise discourse coordinated at them. They additionally offer direct informing, which CEOs can use to respond to representatives secretly as opposed to openly. Chiefs may not wish to respond to protestations on individual web journals or industry chatrooms, where there is constrained observing.

In the event that the choice is to answer to representative criticism. CEOs ought to recall that a reaction over online networking isn’t only a reaction to the basic worker — it’s a message to everybody who goes over it, including potential investors, clients, and representatives.

At the point when online discussions are certain, they can make CEOs obvious, open, and agreeable. At the point when not really positive. They can furnish CEOs with significant worker viewpoint and an opportunity to make shared comprehension.