When an entity investigates itself, do you think it will find anything that could jeopardize itself? Do you believe the investigative team is swayed by their peers, shareholders, CEO, or other factors? Nah, it’s all on the up and up. For example, Activision investigated itself and found zero evidence that the company’s culture breeds harassment.
This news was found over at Ars Technica. Aparently a team within the company dug deep and found nothing that would substantiate the claims that Activision is rife with issues. Never mind, the company is embroiled in multiple ongoing lawsuits, and employees walked out demanding the company’s CEO Bobby Kotick resign.
The board of directors for the embattled game developer and publisher filed the conclusions of the findings with the SEC. Unfortunately, while the company does admit that there have been occurrences of harassment, they failed to substantiate that there was an ongoing issue the administration failed to stop:
Contrary to many of the allegations, the Board and its external advisors have determined that there is no evidence to suggest that Activision Blizzard senior executives ever intentionally ignored or attempted to downplay the instances of gender harassment that occurred and were reported. That work also has not unearthed any evidence, directly or indirectly, suggesting any attempt by any senior executive or employee to conceal information from the Board.
Apparently, those in charge at Activision Blizzard responded promptly whenever any issue arose. However, it’s hard to believe this when an independent party was not brought on to research the claims. It also raises the question about Blizzard’s board possibly playing word games. Perhaps the board thought the problems were being taken care of, but on the middle management level, they were not, and the powers that be did not follow up? Who knows. We may never know, at least not until certain lawsuits work their way through the courts.
What do you think of Activision’s self-diagnosed innocence? Let us know below.
[Source: Ars Technica] [Source: SEC.gov]