ChatGPT Gets It, Why don't they?

I asked ChatGPT to write a story and create images about a company who isn't quite what they appear with a specific focus on company health and employee happiness. (I only proofread for spelling and confusing language, but I did not find any.)

Here is what A.I. came up with...

The Hollow Promise

By ChatGPT

Summit Solutions prided itself on being a beacon of collaboration, support, and diversity. Its leadership team was quick to point out the company’s commitment to employees during every quarterly meeting. It was a place, they claimed, where great ideas were valued, staff were uplifted, and everyone had a seat at the table. For Sarah, who worked as a project manager for seven years, the company initially seemed like a perfect fit. Over time, however, she discovered a stark contrast between the ideals management claimed to champion and the reality employees experienced daily.

The Thin Veneer

When Sarah first joined, she was struck by the warmth of the onboarding process. Her manager, David, welcomed her with enthusiasm, saying, “We’re a company that listens. You’ll never have to worry about your voice going unheard.” In her early years, Sarah thrived, managing high-profile projects and building strong relationships across departments.

Like any professional with a long tenure, Sarah had her share of missteps. A missed deadline here, a budgeting oversight there—none of them catastrophic, but enough to remind her that she wasn’t perfect. Still, she learned from those mistakes and consistently delivered results that earned her positive quarterly reviews.

Yet, as the years passed, the true nature of Summit Solutions became clear. Despite their rhetoric, leadership didn’t value genuine input from their employees. Whenever Sarah raised concerns or offered suggestions that diverged from David’s vision, his demeanor shifted. His responses were polite but dismissive.

“That’s an interesting perspective,” he would say, his expression unreadable. “We’ll keep it in mind for the next quarter.”

Her ideas were never revisited, and any attempts to follow up were met with passive-aggressive reminders to focus on “her primary responsibilities.”

The Illusion of Support

The cracks in management’s façade widened during a particularly stressful period when Sarah’s team was assigned a massive client project. Deadlines were tight, resources were stretched thin, and Sarah worked long hours to keep things on track. When she approached David for additional help, his response was couched in concern but laden with undertones of condescension.

“I understand it’s overwhelming,” he said, “but you’ve been in this role for a while now. I’d hoped you’d have figured out a better way to delegate by now.”

David’s comment stung. Sarah had trained and supported her team extensively, but the workload was simply too much for their capacity. Instead of offering solutions, management labeled her struggles as personal failings.

Later, when Sarah tried to document the challenges her team faced, David subtly undermined her credibility. In meetings with senior leadership, he hinted that the delays were due to “some avoidable issues” on Sarah’s end without directly blaming her.

The Stock Price Circus

Every quarter, Summit Solutions holds a company-wide meeting to discuss performance metrics. David and the executive team would take the stage, radiating optimism. Even when revenues had dipped or key clients pulled out, they framed the numbers in glowing terms.

“The market is simply repositioning,” David would explain. “Our strategy ensures we’ll emerge stronger. And we’re already seeing that reflected in the stock price.”

Behind the scenes, the finance team knew the truth: the stock price had been artificially inflated by carefully crafted public statements. The company regularly released exaggerated forecasts and selectively reported metrics that painted an overly rosy picture.

For employees like Sarah, who had stock options as part of their compensation, the game felt personal. While they were told to take pride in the “soaring” value of the company, they also bore the brunt of cost-cutting measures disguised as efficiency initiatives. Raises were frozen, benefits reduced, and workloads increased—all while the stock price yo-yoed between inflated highs and steep corrections.

The Blame Game

When Sarah finally decided to leave, it wasn’t an easy choice. Despite her frustrations, she had invested seven years in Summit Solutions and developed strong bonds with her colleagues. But the constant gaslighting, dismissive management, and the toxic culture had taken their toll. She submitted her notice and left with what she thought was dignity intact.

Her departure, however, marked the beginning of a new chapter of mistreatment. David quickly spun a narrative that painted her as a poor fit for the company. “It’s always sad to lose someone,” he told the team during a meeting, “but sometimes people just can’t align with the direction we’re moving. Sarah gave it her best, but we were already considering other options for her role.”

Sarah’s colleagues, shocked at the implication, soon began hearing rumors. “She struggled to manage her team,” one coworker claimed, repeating what David had told them privately. “Apparently, she had trouble meeting deadlines.”

The whispers grew louder over the following weeks, eroding Sarah’s reputation among those who remained. For Sarah, who had dedicated years to the company and even owned up to her past mistakes, the smear campaign felt like a betrayal.

The Cycle Continues

Sarah wasn’t the first—or the last—employee to endure this treatment. James, a veteran software engineer, had faced a similar fate. After speaking out about unrealistic project timelines, he was quietly labeled as “difficult.” When he left, management hinted that he’d been underperforming for years, despite his strong track record.

Each departure followed the same pattern: management feigned regret, subtly disparaged the former employee, and shifted the blame for any ongoing challenges to their absence. The result was a workforce that lived in quiet fear of becoming the next target.

New hires were greeted with the same hollow promises Sarah once believed. “We’re all about collaboration here,” they were told. But as they navigated the company’s convoluted dynamics, they too learned that dissent was dangerous, support was conditional, and management’s actions rarely matched their words.

A Hollow Legacy

By the time Sarah found a new role elsewhere, she had come to terms with her experience. Summit Solutions had been a lesson in recognizing red flags and trusting her instincts. She watched from a distance as the company continued its pattern, touting its values while inflating its image.

The truth, Sarah realized, was that Summit Solutions thrived on appearances, not integrity. For all their talk of empowering employees, they wielded power like a weapon. And for all their focus on stock performance, their greatest success was their ability to manipulate perception.

In the end, Summit Solutions wasn’t a place for growth or collaboration. It was a cautionary tale—proof that the loudest advocates for “values” are often the ones who betray them most.