Don't blame the media in a crisis

Presidents, Prime Ministers and CEO's are given to blaming the media during a crisis.  It doesn't work because crises are news and there are hundreds of leading journalists, commentators and broadcasters who must get the facts to satisfy the ever-increasing public demand.

Don't blame the media.  They are doing their job and if you are not involved in a crisis, you would expect them to give you the news. All too often journalists are blamed for being too intrusive.  But, if they don’t give us the facts, we soon ask why.

Of course the media is interested and if they can’t get it immediately, they will go somewhere else.   They must have a spokesperson to lead their story.

The prospect of taking the high ground and doing the interview or press conference may strike terror into the heart of most corporate leaders, however it must be one of their early priorities.   There seems to be a mind-set in some management circles that by providing the media with facts early on, they are going to be accused of mayhem.  It is just the opposite.  Every fact that is provided in the early stages will release the pressure from both the spokesperson and all the internal stakeholders. 

In the case of one therapeutic products company during an escalating product recall, the leading network “warrior” interviewer demanded he spoke to the Chief Executive so he could get the news “right from the horse’s mouth”.  He shouted down the phone that there would be hell to pay if the company didn’t come good and give the network the story.  “I will stand outside your plant with the company name in the background,” he shouted, “and tell the story as I see it until you submit”.  

The CEO was experienced in media interviews and took on the task of meeting the “warrior”.  His organisation’s image and, to a degree, his reputation, was on the line.  Certainly there was going to be some difficulty in getting the message across and there will be traps and perhaps his words will be twisted, but he must tell the story. 

The CEO met the “warrior” and turned the setback into a springboard.  Questions were asked about the quality of the product and its future in the market place.  The CEO positioned the product as essential and vital to saving lives and identified the problem in the product recall as being controllable and the company as being in control of that problem.  He offered cool, clear and instant advice to the public about how to get advice or information on the situation and by the end of the interview, he had total clarity on the company’s confident approach to managing the situation.   He retained the initiative throughout and was never outmanoeuvred.  The sad end to this story of investigative dynamics was that the interview was never used.  Was it too good to be true or too true to be good?        

For the uninitiated, a period of media attack can be disastrous.  A barrage of cameras, microphones and tape recorders coming at you from every angle.  How do you avoid being ambushed by the early questions and how do you contain the situation without looking like you are on the defensive?   You understand what the media will want well before an incident occurs.  You plan, prepare and practice.

The Radio and Television News Directors’ Association in the US was surveyed on media expectations of an organisation during a crisis or disaster.  They wanted to find out how television stations covered an incident.  They  also interviewed people from the public relations industry who had been involved in a crisis.  The most important responses were to the question of “when a crisis occurs, how often does your organisation want updated information?” The most frequent answers were “constantly”, “immediately” and “as soon as possible”.  Respondents to the research also wrote “as soon as new developments warrant the public being informed”.  

Don't blame the media.  Have a plan to respond when they come and communicate your core message from the start of any critical incident. Move to the high ground with your spokesperson and be seen as the centre of information. Work with the media to win and hold the high ground.

Crisis apology from CBA - from CAN'T to CAN.

At last, under the threat of a Royal Commission, the Commonwealth Bank's Chief Executive has apologised unreservedly for its multi-million dollar financial planning scandal. In such high-profile corporate crises, "no comment" is no win. It is only a few days ago when a spokesperson for the Bank said "the CBA does not comment on rumour and speculation".

The Bank's highly-promoted brand slogan, "Can", categorically became "Can't" in their initial response to this critical and escalating disaster. When a strong brand and reputation need the protection of an early executive response, it is essential that the top management come out fast, loud and clear. And in this case, the Australian Treasurer, Joe Hockey, says the Bank did not act quickly enough to address the problem. And he should know. His own mother-in-law was affected by the scandal.

Public outrage must be managed fast, particularly in this age of social media igniting rumour and innuendo. Malaysia Airlines. Costa Concordia. BP oil spill. All criticised for early failure of a corporate message strategy to key stakeholders.

Corporate crisis communications pre-planning is central to the management of how an organisation delivers information to others during a critical event. This process should identify:

• who are the stakeholders who will be seriously affected by the event and must receive information immediately?
• what is the message strategy (not the media strategy but the central message strategy for all stakeholders)?
• how will the messages be delivered with pace and priority?
• who is the most appropriate spokesperson at the top of the organisation? If it's a major negative event, it has to be the CEO.  There is no hiding place.

Communicating with employees, customers, shareholders, government, media or regulators is an essential part of deescalating a crisis situation. This requires strategic pre-planning, constant monitoring and feedback. As the crisis develops, it is vital that communication is analysed and that the receipt of central messages to key audiences is confirmed.  This is now more important than ever with social media driving messages further and faster from the hub of the incident through the organisation nationally and internationally.

In a round of recent executive exercises with 10 sites in Asia, one common factor kept feeding back to our facilitator in the hot debrief - "our communication of key messages to stakeholders was too slow - we needed faster approval of corporate messages and clearer pathways to our key audiences".

Without doubt, "no comment" is no win. Early communication allows those who are affected to know what is happening and that it is being managed effectively.

Catastrophes and best practice crisis management

Regarding the recent terrible flooding crisis in the UK, I have just returned from that country and seen first hand the devastating flooding as torrential rain has caused the worst weather in UK’s history, with much of the Somerset area that I saw looking more like an inland sea.

As The Guardian newspaper quoted then - “public anger has risen as inexorably as the filthy waters in thousands of homes.”  The Prime Minister, David Cameron, took a while to get there which presented the question in the court of public opinion of “why has he taken so long”?  Once there, he seems to have been very community active but he could have learnt a lot from the early leadership stance of then Premier, Anna Bligh, to the floods in Queensland, Australia. She walked and talked to the community from the start. Leadership spokespeople in crises must arrive early and say and make things happen.

2014 will see the timely launch of a new British Standard for Crisis Management for both business and government organisations and most applicable for strategic response to major events such as floods, fires, riots, explosions, critical accidents and major product disasters. 

The new Standard will be aimed very much at executive management and those with strategic responsibilities in developing crisis management capability within their organisation. To quote the British Cabinet Office Public Available Specification facilitated in advance of the new Standard, "crises present organisations with complex and difficult challenges that may have profound and far-reaching consequences, sometimes irrespective of how successfully they are seen to be managed.  These consequences can be very damaging, especially where it is perceived that the organisation failed to prepare for, manage or recover from a crisis."

This is very relevant as countries and organisations around the world develop their crisis management capability at a more high-level context to respond to catastrophes. Malaysia Airlines and the Malaysian Government are experiencing this level of executive response under the microscope regarding their missing 777 aircraft where airline officials and government leaders are presenting information with very mixed and misleading messages.

2014 Crisis Management Imperatives

In 2014, crisis management has moved further forward to support risk and resilience management. The unexpected crisis, both for government and corporations, has become a high priority. While hospitals, fire fighters and law enforcement response organisations continue to upgrade their capability, many executives and senior managers are not prepared either intellectually or emotionally to face rapid, escalating tragic events such as major accidents, corporate collapses, infrastructure failures, massive product recalls or acts of terrorism.

Even though some organisations have been through a major crisis, management avoids talking about the subject, often because they equate crisis with bad management and events like that do not happen on their watch.

The most rapid advancement in crisis management preparedness is the speed of communication. CEOs and managers at every level need to know and share information rapidly. In today's world of instant media coverage and social media commentary, if an organisation doesn't get its message out clearly and distinctly at the beginning of a crisis, someone else will take the high ground. The moment of control will be lost.

Then why are some organisations better able to take control of a crisis rapidly? The key elements are:

* The CEO and CFO have a commitment to crisis management and contingency planning for response to
threats that can harm the organisation's personnel, property and reputation.
* Divisional, subsidiary and affiliate management develop similar contingency plans in their areas
of responsibility consistent with the organisation's policies and procedures established by senior
management.
* There is a clear identification and measurement of threats.
* Executive teams, divisional teams and site teams are trained and ready.
* The plan is tested, validated and current.

The crisis best practise organistions I work with understand that these are bottom line issues. They recognise that crisis management planning is a resilience strategy. They understand that uncontrolled crises can cause high employee turnover, interrupted workflow, massive asset damage, lawsuits, loss of market share and, in a corporate environment, a detrimental effect on share price.

Make 2014 the year to ensure that your people and your plans are functionally up-to-date. Take advantage of new technology to share information rapidly. Make sure your human resources, legal, risk, corporate governance and corporate affairs processes are linked with your executive rapid response. Err on the side of over-disclosure - credibility is the key to perception.

Corporate readiness for crisis

The crisis you don’t expect or plan for will be the one that’s likely to cause the most damage.  And while a lot of pundits believe that a good manager is automatically a good crisis manager, it is important to understand that many managers cannot cope with the stress, pressure and abnormal behaviour that occurs during a crisis. 

Most normal management behaviour is reversed.  One minute you are managing a business, the next minute you have to manage a crisis.  Different skills under different pressures.

How many managers can move rapidly from the normal pace of a business meeting to the hectic, urgent demanding pace of life and death decisions, evacuation, emotional trauma and split-second timing?

Containment is the key.  Managers who are prepared, rehearsed, educated, trained and aware are those that can make the transition when crisis hits and contain the situation.

If there is a single, critical feature to being prepared for crisis, it is in treating crisis management and recovery as an ongoing process.  Seeing it as an integral part of the company’s everyday business activities, not merely as a plan that is created, approved, then shelved until needed. 

It is a process that has the whole company - from site management to CEO and Board - trained, tested and involved in a crisis management plan that is integrated seamlessly across the whole organisation. And regularly monitored, reviewed and audited, just like any other quality control policy that is demanded by compliance factors in today’s business environment.

To achieve this, there are a number of critical features of a crisis plan that facilitates  speedy business resumption. Whether the crisis is an oil and chemical spill or explosion, a tainted food product or charges of business corruption, a crisis management and recovery plan must: 

•     Have tactical decisions made at the  crisis location, and quickly. (This is where the public focus will be  initially.)
•     Localise the response, while maximising corporate and strategic assistance.
•     Provide training and support to give staff the skills and confidence so they can manage the early
  stage of a crisis, and back them up with appropriate technology.
•     Create a tailor-made plan around uniform standards, company-wide.
•     Develop realistic simulation and training exercises.
•     Start planning for recovery before a crisis occurs.
•     Instil a company-wide recognition of the potential impact of a crisis.

What fundamentally distinguishes crisis-prepared, from crisis-prone organisations, is their overall cultural view of crisis management and recovery. 

Strategic actions, technical and structural response, communication initiatives and psychological support have to be part of an integrated management plan and process that immediately puts the organisation in charge of its own destiny.

This process must be a crisis management corporate preparedness program of total commitment by its executives and staff to key stakeholders.

Sporting venue crises

While drugs in sport represent an escalating crisis for many sporting bodies, sporting venues also have a need for crisis management planning.  Thousands of people gathered in arenas, stadiums or theatres can be a crisis waiting to happen.  The ineffective evacuation management of these people in an emergency can turn the reputation of a sport or theatrical production into a horrific, memorable event that affects gate sales for many years to come.   

Emergency planning at the tactical level needs to be supported by strategic crisis management that provides an orderly and efficient planning process to identify, quantify, reduce and control significant high-level threats to protect the organisation and its future.

The British tragedy at Hillsborough was a terrible tragedy involving thousands of people in a mass of confusion and terror that was being televised live as it happened.  Five thousand Liverpool football fans watching a semi-final at the Hillsborough stadium were, because of over-crowding, put into a position of being unable to get through turnstiles.  The crowds were re-directed into a tunnel which forced them to an area that was virtually caged off.  Emergency gates were not open and crowds were pushed up against wire caging.  Many people were killed and injured and the media turned the tragedy into an even greater tragedy by printing dreadful pictures of victims’ suffering in the crush.   Rumour and innuendo related to the drunken state of the fans and the difficulty the police had to face in dealing with them.   In fact, the crowd was a victim of lack of planning and bureaucratic bungling.

The South Yorkshire Police did have a plan for re-routing the crowds, but the plan, rather than protecting people, was very much aimed at protecting the football ground from being invaded by people.  There was not a plan it seems for a major crisis of panic and chaos.      

In another sporting incident in Australia, a peaceful, annual international sailing classic, turned into one of the world’s most serious rescue operations in yachting history.  The Sydney to Hobart Yacht Race is held annually after Christmas.   

The yachts sailed out of picturesque Sydney Harbour on a sunny, beautiful day, but as they made their way along the East Coast of Australia, a shocking storm hit the 115 boats.  Winds of 80 knots whipped up huge waves. The yacht race became a race for survival as a huge rescue operation was mounted by the Australian Maritime Safety Authority.   

Certainly plans were in place to assist the yacht race in rescue should some of the boats get into trouble, but no in-depth plans were in place to deal with mass havoc caused by wild seas, snapping masts and the tossing of many of the crews into the sea.    Thirty fixed wing aircraft and five Navy and Air Force aircraft, together with police and rescue helicopters, were joined by Australian Navy warships.    Six people were killed and crews were injured.  

The world watched through CNN and BBC television as the massive rescue took place.  In one particular piece of television coverage, a live camera on one of the yachts showed the intensity of the waves smashing on to the deck as the mast was snapped and one of the yacht’s personnel was swept over the side.              

The emergency plan for this race was without doubt responsible for saving many lives, but the investigation that followed asked the question of whether the race should have been abandoned earlier when it was known that the weather was going to develop to a critical situation. 

 Questions about the experience of the crews and the capability of individual crew members for dealing with the intensity of severe weather conditions were reviewed by coronial and yachting officials.  There was long legal discussion about whether the yacht race should have been cancelled.

Clearly the yacht race today has greatly improved plans for managing the worst case scenario, obviously providing contingency plans for response to threats that could harm people and the future of this sport.

Crisis agenda control - your organisation must be heard

Do you want the head of a SWAT team, a fire chief, or a corporate watchdog from a government agency speaking publicly on behalf of your company? Very often, many different outside service organisations and government departments can be involved in a crisis response.

 These groups can dominate your organisation’s location and, if not effectively managed, can become the face of your company, at the same time as dictating the mainstream of messages coming out of the event.  It is important to ensure that an organisation’s crisis plans incorporate ways and means of dealing with outside support groups working in the same response.    

In the response of TWA Flight 800 that was bound for Paris and literally crashed into the sea near Long Island, more than 50 disaster and emergency services operations and government agencies came together to initially deal with the disaster.  At least 20 agencies went on to investigate the event, deal with the pollution caused on the coastline, counsel friends and relatives, and work towards recovery.

The mayor of New York became intensely involved in advising next of kin, problems of environmental pollution and getting the message out to the US and international public.  The Coastguard was involved in underwater salvage.  Other Federal officers from a number of agencies were involved in the complex range of investigations.

This disaster became a major news item across the US for several months as many families and members of the public believed the handling of the whole situation was a crisis in itself.  Many of the post-incident evaluation sessions emphasised the need for greater collaboration between emergency services and government authorities.  All these organisations have their separate response plans which eventually need one common planning and communication thread.

Eric Jacoby Jr., Director of the New York State Emergency Management Office,  indicated there will be a number of changes in local government crisis management procedures following the response to the TWA Flight 800 crash.  He is working towards a greater linking of disaster and emergency policies for future crisis planning.

Reading the reports from the Contingency Planning Exchange Incorporated, it identified what TWA had to face was far more than an emergency. 

It was:

·        dealing with distraught families

·        managing an emotional public

·        coping with a huge press response

·        managing rumour and innuendo

·       coping with a large number of government enquiries

·       management of collecting evidence and finding the cause

Agendas run high in crises.  Political agendas, personal agendas, corporate agendas, emergency agendas, legal agendas.  In TWA’s case:

• New York’s Mayor, Rudolph Guiliani, was concerned about notifying victims’ families, the environmental damage and telling the public.
• The Coast Guard was concerned about recovering evidence from the water and dealing with retrieval of bodies and managing the area of water where the wreckage was located.
• The New York Police Department were concerned about the huge security problems at JFK.  In addition to the normal airport traffic, there were literally hundreds of other people making enquiries.
•  The FBI was concerned about the federal and international implications of terrorism.   
•  Lawyers from around the United States wanted to represent the families and the businesses affected.

There were in fact 21 agencies involved in the investigation, cleaning up the beaches, security of the airport, investigations at the airport, counselling grief-stricken families.  Twenty one agencies who were dealing with the crisis management team at TWA.  Something like 2,000 people.  Five hundred media representatives set up operations at the airport and coastguard stations. 

The importance of crisis planning and communication was emphasised in all the post-incident evaluations. 

Planning and communication - two areas in which TWA was - quote “woefully inadequate” - said Mayor Guiliani on US television.  

TWA received criticism from many fronts.  As a result of much of the criticism and the Gore Commission for the US Congress, changes have been made to future crisis management strategies.

Pre-empt the worst case scenario for your organisation. Take control of the agenda in a crisis and make sure you are heard early and continually throughout the crisis response.