Organizations, particularly large ones, typically invest considerable time and resources strategizing for events that may not even happen – crises. Walk down the street in midtown Manhattan, and you're surrounded by thousands of companies that have prepared for the worst.
Crisis preparedness is a mandatory exercise for any company hoping to minimize the damage resulting from a negative event, or to prevent the crisis from happening to begin with: senior executives are media trained. Written materials are developed. A pecking order of “must calls” is created, ranging from local governments and law enforcement officials to customers and suppliers, depending on the nature of the crisis and industry.
What role does – or should – workplace communications play in a crisis?
First, a definition is in order. What’s a “crisis?” James Donnelly, a crisis management expert for the New York (and global) public relations firm Ketchum (and, for disclosure, a former colleague of mine) defines it as “a severe event that creates a firestorm of negative perceptions that can damage the reputation, valuation or viability of an organization, if not managed properly (emphasis mine).”
The highlighted phrase underscores the role sound planning and execution plays: Similar events can yield wildly different results depending on how they’re handled.
Donnelly argues that the employee audience is a crucial one that, in an ideal world, should be addressed first or at least simultaneously to the initial release of public information. He believes this is even more essential given the immediate access to information today via social media.
He continues that companies generally err when they believe they can entirely suppress employees’ social media use during a crisis, in part because of the difficulty in actually enforcing those edicts. Better, Donnelly believes, to arm employees with the best information, including how the event in question affects the employee population directly. In that context, he adds, it’s fine to discourage related Tweets or Facebook posts, but at the least those employees choosing to disregard that guideline are better armed with useful information.
I couldn’t agree more. Not every audience needs to know every nuance of information, but like it or not, in a time of crisis – and, in fact, at any time – employees are your chief ambassadors, and the people who will ultimately play a significant role in helping the company emerge from a crisis. They’re also the main audience that requires education after the fact, to help prevent the crisis event from happening again.
Consider this: If a chemical plant in New Jersey has an explosion, are you more likely to seek out – and trust – information issued by the company, or from your neighbor who works at the plant? How will you feel if your neighbor tells you, “I have no idea what’s going on. They haven’t told me a thing?”
Who will more likely embrace the challenge of helping the company rebound after a crisis subsides: a well-informed employee or one left in the dark?
Who will more likely Tweet or post accurate, on-message information – a well-informed employee or one who was told nothing beyond, “Keep quiet”?
The moral: When creating your company’s crisis preparedness plan, don’t forget employees:
· Who needs to know what information?
· How will we share that information?
· What is expected of employees during a given crisis scenario?
· What guidance will we provide?
· How will we keep employees apprised?
· How will we monitor what employees are saying and believing?
· How will we engage our employees to help us resolve the crisis?
Comments