In the late hours of July 30th, Min Hee-jin provided a thorough account of the recent controversy involving allegations of sexual harassment cover-up within her company, ADOR. In her statement, she began by stating, “I would like to take this opportunity to share the facts and truth surrounding the allegations of sexual harassment cover-up in my personal capacity. I urge everyone to refrain from making baseless comments and speculations on the matter after reading this.”
The female CEO shared screenshots of her Kakaotalk conversations with the people involved and stated, “I am aware that the disagreement between myself and HYBE has taken a strange turn. I apologize for this.”She went on to explain, “I believe that this issue, which had already been resolved through HYBE’s investigation and decision, was brought up at an inappropriate time and with a distorted perspective. As a result, I felt the need to address it as both the involved parties and advertisers are facing additional harm.”
Polite Refusal or Wanted To Go But Hesitant
CEO Min Hee-jin stated that in February, director A joined ADOR and took the time to familiarize himself with the company’s members and external partners. During a meeting with advertiser C, B, who was responsible for advertising and partnerships, the idea of having a post-Lunar New Year dinner was brought up. A suggested that B join the dinner with C as they had been in charge of communication with the advertiser and it would facilitate a better understanding of the situation and potential for a long-term partnership.
During that time, B politely declined to join the dinner, stating “I feel like my presence might not be suitable for the dinner meeting”. However, A misunderstood and thought B wanted to attend but was hesitant. As a result, director A went ahead with suggesting a dinner meeting with advertiser C and choosing a restaurant as usual.
A’s Absence and B’s Report After the Emergency Meeting
On February 15th, A was informed about an urgent meeting regarding the Tokyo Dome fanmeeting while on their way to their scheduled appointment. Despite not being able to cancel the appointment, A made the decision to leave in the middle of their meal in order to attend the meeting.
A briefed B on the situation and requested that B finish the meal before visiting the store. A then went to apologize to advertiser C for having to leave early. A departed around 7 p.m. to return to the office, while B stayed to conclude the meeting. A texted B at 9 p.m., reminding them to focus on the mid-to-long-term vision when speaking to C. At 10:30 p.m., B updated A on the outcome of the dinner meeting, mentioning that they had discussed the details of their mid-to-long-term product collaboration.
◆ A provided work guidance, while B submitted a report after the conflict.
A month later, B abruptly made the decision to depart from the company following a disagreement with A over the personnel evaluation before the six-month apprenticeship program concluded. A had been providing guidance and offering constructive criticism to B in hopes of helping her successfully complete the apprenticeship program and receive a favorable evaluation.
On the contrary, B felt that A was excessively involved in her tasks. She had a feeling that A had a dislike towards her and was intentionally giving her negative performance reviews. These misunderstandings eventually escalated into a conflict and B contemplated leaving the job. On March 7th, in response to the alleged harassment and sexual harassment by A, B filed a complaint. Upon investigation by HYBE, the case was concluded on March 16th with a finding that there was no evidence to support the allegations.
Despite being dissatisfied with the investigation result, B informed CEO Min Hee-jin of her plans to resign from the company on March 20th. Upon hearing this, Min listened to B’s concerns and suggested that she and A have a conversation to clear up any misunderstandings. Min even offered to accompany B during the discussion if she felt uncomfortable being alone with A. In addition, Min recommended that B stay with ADOR by being reassigned to a new position, to which B expressed her appreciation.
◆ Did Min Hee-jin only protect the director? She actually scolded A a lot
In the revealed messages, it is evident that Min Hee-jin vehemently reprimanded director A for his error. The female CEO also conducted a thorough investigation into the matter. Min Hee-jin pointed out A’s behavior and handling of the situation, and urged him to take measures to prevent it from happening again. She stated, “Upon hearing about B’s situation, I was enraged and spent two hours on the phone scolding A.”
After discussing the situation with B, CEO Min Hee-jin also shared that she had reprimanded A. She expressed her hope that B and A could repair their relationship and return to work together in December. In response, B replied with a sad emoticon and expressed their gratitude for the CEO’s support and understanding.
In summary, CEO Min Hee-jin made an effort to hear out the perspectives of both A and B in order to gain a comprehensive understanding of the situation. She stated, “Having a good understanding of their personalities, work abilities, and the context of the situation, I was determined to resolve their misunderstandings. Human relationships are complex and challenging to navigate, and misunderstandings can arise at any moment.”
Despite the messages she revealed, the female CEO consistently strived to remain impartial and address both perspectives without any bias. There is no indication of her attempting to conceal the situation, and she even made an effort to have a personal meeting in order to gain a better understanding of her employees.
In conclusion, CEO Min Hee-jin expressed her belief that B, who is no longer with the company, is also experiencing discomfort due to the spreading suspicions, much like herself. She hopes that the unnecessary controversy and speculation surrounding those involved will come to an end and wishes for happiness for everyone, including A, B, and herself.
Leave a Reply