When incidents occur, organizations are judged not only by what is done, but by how those actions and initiatives are communicated to diverse stakeholders. All too often the image and the reputation of an organization in crisis will be interpreted and assaulted by the media. A “prepared“ organization will have input into the kinds of messages and images portrayed.
Business Continuity Demands Well-Integrated Communications
Last minute add-ons or use of generic communications plans rarely work. They generally exacerbate a difficult situation, and have been known to actually create a crisis. Often the daily headlines and nightly newscasts really tell the story.
Lessons Learned from Audi 500
The automaker Audi discovered that when a reputation is damaged in the extreme, when the perception of wrongdoing or neglect is widespread, the result is nothing short of a disaster. In the 80’s, there were allegations of malfunctioning parts. These allegations became a public relations crisis after a national news program picked up the story.
Bridgestone/Firestone
The still unfolding story of tire separation problems cost the jobs of three top executives of Firestone, including its president, Mr. Kaizaki. As reported in the Los Angeles Times (January 12, 2001), the resignations were “a tacit admission of how badly Kaizaki and his team handled the crisis in its early days.” While the total deaths attributed to the tire problems has exceeded 100, the company had initially stonewalled the press and public.
Effective Crisis Communications
Collect and Move Information Internally and Externally
There always will be loss in a crisis. At issue is the extent of loss. And the extent, we suggest, is directly proportional to two critical factors. The first is the organization’s ability to deal with the crisis as a business issue–the ability to take swift and effective steps to bring the crisis under control.
The second factor is the ability of the organization to collect and move information internally and externally. Most organizations are able to manage the first factor. However, surprisingly few organizations are able to effectively manage the information flow.
In the mid-1990s Perrier’s bottling dilemma begged credibility and created a field day of speculation and allegations by myriad vested advocates. Initial denials by management were belatedly corrected, at significant cost to the company.
In these cases—and in countless more—there were communication gaps. The gaps were between what was being said and what was expected by those affected and the greater “public”.
That’s why the Tylenol tampering case stands out as an exceptionally well managed crisis. Management acted swiftly, decisively and ethically in its decision to recall and repackage—telling consumers, media and all its other stakeholders what it was doing and why, every step of the way.
The Plan
The enlightened management team recognizes the need for a basic crisis communications plan. Such a plan should be simple, easy to understand, and shared with line managers across the organization.
The plan should…
1. Define what is a crisis for the organization (versus a big problem)
2. Supply examples
3. Outline how information is gathered and verified
4. Present a “tiering” system to explain the action steps that should be immediately taken by the crisis management team in any ‘tier’ (by whom and how).
Not all crises are created equal, nor do they have the same consequences. So it is important to recognize and categorize various levels of crises by, for example, scope and/or consequences. By tiering, the organization is able to better manage crises because they are clearly defined and required steps are understood up front. A framework for escalation and de-escalation is also established through tiering.
5. Outline how information is moved internally and externally. This means establishing communications links across the organization. It includes a process of promptly advising all employees and key stakeholders outside the organization (neighbors, media, regulatory agencies, elected officials, customers, suppliers, bankers and investment analysts, etc.) It also means briefing adversaries if the situation is critical; better they hear from you than each other, and better you can directly tell all concerned that you have taken the right steps than rationalize why you did not.
The need to move information effectively reinforces the fact that in planning for the crisis you will have, it is important to develop advance lists of who must hear from you, who should hear from you, and who would like to hear from you. Then determine how that will be done (web site, 800 line, calls, fax messages, letters, etc.), and finally, who will be responsible.
The Team
Right People Making Right Decisions
With the plan in place – for both business and communications management – there must be a pre-selected crisis communications team that guides the process and makes key decisions. Such a team actually has three levels.
Senior Communications Officer
The top level is the senior communications officer of the organization, who by necessity sits with the crisis management team to offer counsel regarding the communications/reputation implications of all actions being considered. The role is an intense and demanding one, requiring backup support.
Support Personnel
Support personnel provide information, opinions, research capabilities, and technical expertise. Whether staff or external consultants, the second level support team is essential in a significant crisis, because events will unfold rapidly and demands for information from all quarters will be intense and frequent.
Principal Spokesperson
There is also the principal spokesperson, because it is imperative to have one, clearly identifiable ‘voice’ for the organization. The one who faces the media, who stands vulnerable and explains the organization’s actions, and describes the situation. This is not a job for the lighthearted, and great care must be taken in selecting and training the right person for the role. It is important to recognize that the spokesperson will be vulnerable and will represent the ‘face’ of the organization, making the role critical.
Depending on the severity of the situation, the spokesperson may have to be a senior officer—possibly the CEO in an extreme situation. That person, though, is always backed up by a technical expert who can respond to questions requiring details that a senior executive likely will not know.
Six Key Considerations
All organizations must deal with six key communications issues:
1. How will you reduce potential levels of concern/anxiety among your stakeholders?
2. How will you help stakeholders understand their options if your organization is in a crisis where normal operations will not resume for some time?
3. How much assurance can you really (and legally) give about your organization’s ability to regain control and continue operations in the near term?
4. How will your organization know what to do, and when?
5. How will related side issues be managed and explained to stake holders?
6. How will you select and use the most appropriate communications tools /modes?
Take a moment and complete the Crisis Probability Quotient™ for your organization. It will give a general sense of your existing vulnerability. It is a subjective tool, so jump right in and see where your organization stands. Crises will be driven by a number of factors, occurring independently, and at times simultaneously. The Crisis Probability Quotient™ chart captures some of the key ones, but do not hesitate to add others that are specific to your operation or organization.
Integrate Communications Plans Now
The cost of communicating is relatively low, especially when compared to the potential cost of a reputation damaged by real or perceived events. That is why having in place well-developed and tested crisis communications plans is so vital. Trying to ‘wing it’ when there is a situation or an allegation of wrongdoing never works. At the pace of today’s business environment, where organizations continually assure their stakeholders that they are well-prepared to handle crises, tolerance will be low and expectations high.
Recommend0 recommendationsPublished in Incident & Crisis Response
Leave A Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.