Open Season at Microsoft

Microsoft are in the headlines again, this time for a court battle between the company and its UK CEO.

Simon Negus was hired by Microsoft to succeed Gordon Frazer, but was fired last year on the grounds of sexual harrassment.

It looks like Microsoft are dragging up everything they can to defend the company's good name against Negus' wrongful dismissal claim.

Microsoft alleges that Negus sexually harassed a succession of senior female colleague, but were apparently unable to prove any of the allegations. At one point, they brought up the example of a corporate party which was "a 'throbbing mass' of drunken punch-ups, sexual liaisons and 'outrageous behaviour' among senior members of staff, all fuelled by an unlimited supply of neat vodka and Jagermeister", according to The Telegraph.

If you lock a child in a sweet shop for the night, are you going to punish them for being sick?

OK. So, Simon Negus has been up to no good, according to The Telegraph's rather jumbled account of events. You see, The Telegraph's article takes two different stories; one about a wild party and one about Simon Negus, and twists them together so it's hard to tell what Negus is alleged to have done and what other people, completely unrelated to the case, are alleged to have done. It certainly portrays Negus in an interesting light.

But whatever the 'truth' is, there is a far more important question: Who decided to provide unlimited free drinks at a corporate event?

Here's what we think really happened, and it is hinted at in the closing comments of the article:

"Mr Negus has vehemently denied the claims and is counter-suing the computer company for harassment and wrongful dismissal.

He claims Mr Frazer saw him as a threat and wanted him out of the business, telling Mr Negus that he and his team were not 'true Microsoft people'."

Our reading-between-the-lines view is that Microsoft hired Simon Negus into a culture that encourages this kind of unruly and inappropriate behaviour, and when he didn't fit in, they used that against him in court. It's like luring your little brother into trouble and then telling your parents what he did.

In a situation like this, you really can't single out one person. Unless, of course, you need a scapegoat, in which case it's open season after a party like that.