These posts are written to encourage thoughtful consideration of the entire range of communication strategy, plans and effectiveness. They’re based on my experiences in actual responses, as well as drills, exercises, tabletops and crisis communication plan reviews.

Feel free to share,  comment or contact me directly.  I value your input!

The Danger of Being Unprepared

What happens if you’re not prepared when a crisis strikes? What will happen if you simply haven’t got around to crafting a crisis communication strategy, plan or process? What could go wrong? First of all, remember that 99% of the time, no preparation is enough preparation. This is not an excuse to defer the important work you have to do. It is, however, the main reason you never get around to it. There is no daily fee charged for delaying.

But don’t forget the other 1% of the time: When you need to communicate RIGHT NOW, but you can’t because you haven’t prepared. Here’s a list of what will go wrong should you be caught unprepared when you really, really should have been prepared.

No communication strategy

Most likely, your organization’s leadership daily chooses to delegate the responsibility for stakeholder communication to others. This includes marketing, public relations, government relations and employee communications. These tasks are daily delegated to ‘experts’ to carry out. There may be corporate-level emphasis on some specific functions, likely marketing more than others. CEO’s seldom reach their rank because they are good at public relations; they get there because they are good at management, growth strategies, finance or investor relations. Or they had the idea that got the company started. Or they inherited their position.

One thing for certain, it is the rare and special CEO who lies awake at night thinking about crisis communication. They delegate it and they expect it to be done. Then they ignore it. When was the last time you were called into a meeting to help your executive leadership understand the public impact of a possible decision, and to ask your advice on how to deal with it? If you’ve had this happen to you at all, you and your organization are fortunate.

Now imagine that something very bad has happened. Operators are under stress, costs are suddenly going through the roof, regulators are concerned, customers are cancelling orders, shareholders are asking questions, and reporters are calling…. It is suddenly not a good day. Everyone asks; ‘Where’s our public affairs person?’ Someone remembers your name. You are called in and told; “Make it better!”

Congratulations, your newly coined strategy is ‘make it better’. But you don’t have direction, buy-in, support or attention. As quickly as it turned to you, leadership’s focus has now switched away from you as they focus their efforts on operational areas that have always held their attention, not stakeholder communication.

Your responsibilities? Great. Your authority and resources? Small. You’re in the worst possible place to be. You’ve been given responsibility to immediately provide immensely important stakeholder communication. The leadership of your organization has charged you to save their proverbial bacon and your career is on the line. A crisis communication strategy not only identifies risks and actions, it also identifies authority, resources and recourse. Without this you will be spinning your wheels alone.

You might attempt to outline a basic plan: Listing of risks/events, affected stakeholders, likely concerns, key actions and messages, dissemination plan and resource list. You might even get it done. But you’ll likely not get it approved, let alone implemented. It won’t be approved because everyone is too busy and distracted. You won’t get it implemented because nobody will be willing to make such a decision under stress/threat/risk.

Your only recourse will be to implement it anyway, and risk the wrath of reluctant responders for what you did. But even if you manage to implement a last-minute strategy, you’ll likely find that you can’t get staff dedicated to support you and you can’t get people to respond to any of your requests. Everyone in your organization has gone into crisis mode. Email in-baskets are instantly overflowing. Everybody now has two jobs to do: their normal one and their crisis one. Without an accepted, approved and implemented crisis communication strategy and plan, you are not on their list.

The cost of this failure? Your organization is being labeled more non-responsive with every moment that goes by without information. Affected stakeholders are deciding whom they will trust to give them information, and your organization isn’t on their list. They’re starting to listen to people telling them what to do, and your voice isn’t being heard. They’re starting to worry about their safety, jobs, homes and future, and you’re not helping them. Good will is going away, and it is going away for good. Minutes wasted in failing to communicate early in a response become hours expended later to regain a voice and stakeholders’ trust.

No priority for response communications

In addition to failure to plan and subsequent performance issues, you will likely face a persistent and pernicious problem: perpetual lockout from important deliberations, decisions and actions.

Remember that other people your organization are not communicators, so they are not considering communication risks or issues when they make decisions. Most people regularly feel that their specific function in an organization is one of the most important functions. A crisis response often breaks this, but it does so by edict: everyone is told what is the most important objective, and everyone focuses on the elements and tangents of that named objective.

Without development, review, acceptance and implementation of crisis communication strategy, stakeholder communications default to lower and lower priority, attention and resourcing. Not only will you will not be at the table, over time you will be moved further and further away from the table. You will struggle for attention and resources from people who spend less and less time considering your needs.

Then, when stakeholder communication isn’t on the thought horizon, someone under stress will make a bad decision about a public-facing action. Response needs will suddenly be apparent and response plans will be activated. But without a priority on crisis communication, response efforts will turn inward. Decisions will be made in a vacuum, and not communicated with a worried public. Reporters will be shunned, TV crews will be turned away for ‘security reasons’. Community meetings will be cancelled due to ‘schedule conflicts’. Media will be told there’s no time for questions. Activists will be arrested, badly. People will be told that solutions are too technical to explain, and to ‘just trust us’.

Credibility and trust fly away, at the hands of people who should care the most; they just don’t know they should. It isn’t a priority.

Communicators not mobilized in time

Since response communications aren’t seen as a priority, response communicators often aren’t on the callout lists. Instead of being notified immediately when an incident occurs, you may be notified late, or not at all. It may take someone at a higher level of the organization who has worked with communicators before to realize you need to be brought into the response.

Unless you’ve been able to enforce a strong communication process into your organization’s response plans, producing accurate and timely communication products is going to be challenging enough without any additional delays in notification.

If you haven’t been able to enforce a strong communication process and priority into your organization’s response plans, you will always be in this position, having less time to produce stakeholder communication product. The delay will only exacerbate what will already be a very difficult process. Consider delayed notifications as an additional cost for ineffective planning and implementation.

No response communication staff structure

If you haven’t thought out what you will need to do during a response, particularly during the first few hours of a response, you won’t know who, or how many, staff resources you need. If you don’t know whom you need, you won’t have their contact info handy to mobilize them. If you could effectively mobilize them, you won’t be able to make clear, concise task assignments based on qualification.

The result? A lack of communication resources; you will be overwhelmed with tasks, time demands and deadlines.

Only careful planning can prevent this dilemma. It’s not enough to know what communication products are going to be needed; you have to know who will produce them; those individuals will need pre-approved templates to use and they will need to know any necessary approval flow and distribution plans. They need to be available, up-to-speed and capable of actually helping you.

If you haven’t identified needs and staff resources, quantified staff member capabilities and assigned specific roles, you won’t have any staff to help you. If you do mange to mobilize staff, they’ll likely spend their time waiting for you to tell them what to do, or you will have staff taking the wrong actions and doubling your workload.

No statement template preparation

It is very difficult to be creative under stress, a constant in response communication. You may think you are good at ‘winging it’ under pressure, but you won’t be.

In the early response, when the greatest demand for information is matched with the least amount available, we all need prepared statements that will frame the few facts we can confirm with statements of commitment and caring. If you’re having to write as you go, two things will happen: You’ll be too late because you’re waiting for ‘a bit more’ information, or you will forget to frame the facts in a context that will give you an opportunity to continue the conversation later.

Templates aren’t generated to shield your organization from scrutiny; they’re designed to welcome it by focusing on your strengths. They aren’t written to hide bad news in a bunch of ‘feel good’ commentary; they’re written to frame truth in context with the response efforts. Well-written templates allow you to maximize use of verified facts while welcoming stakeholders wanting more. Finally, prepared templates ensure that you are able to actually communicate at all, since they are already approved for your use. Which leads us to…

No approvals

Remember that stress reigns throughout a response. Placid coworkers become panicked, mellow supervisors become manic. Communicators become tongue-tied and attorneys become obdurate. The challenge of gaining content approval during normal times is multiplied in a crisis.

And that is if you can even find someone to approve content. Often, all key decision makers are in transit – either to the office or to a plane, on a plane or in a vehicle. Cell phones don’t work in congested command spaces, laptops are left at home, and IT is scrambling to match bandwidth to appliances while leadership waits to receive anything from anyone. Email inboxes explode, text messages multiply all by themselves, phones aren’t heard, or aren’t answered. And your approvers disappear into the ‘fog of war’.

Your approval trail leads nowhere. About the time you do find someone, the burgeoning command structure moves them up or down the command chain. So you wait, already late and watching seconds, minutes, or hours go by. The phones ring with media questions. Your organization’s social media accounts fill up with comments and a pervasive theme emerges: Your organization is choosing not to communicate. Every minute without released information is verification of this; suspicion becomes conviction, and conviction leads to condemnation. Without recourse and without a voice, you watch your task shift from communicating facts to defending inaction. And there is nothing harder to defend.

Unauthorized messaging

At this point it is almost inevitable that someone will say something to break the cycle. A responder may tell a friend, who tells a friend, who calls the media. A spouse may write a post on Facebook. Or an instant expert, retired fireman, or ex-employee will become available for interviews. And the information available veers away from accurate facts, to suspicions, impressions, suppositions, recollections – anything but truth.

This dynamic is inevitable in the best of responses, but it can be moderated by quick and continuous release of factual information and context from response officials who have been authorized to speak for the response. If you fail to provide information when your stakeholders need it, others fill the vacuum. They often have neither the capability nor the concern for accuracy Wrong information is presented in a sensationalist, biased manner. Opinions and agendas parade as facts. Graphic, sensationalist imagery is used without regard to privacy or propriety. The end result at best is a public lumbering off after misinformation. At worst, desperately needed trust is squandered, accurate information is overridden by false information, and false information leads to public harm, reputation damage and loss of trust in response efforts.

No distribution capability

Assume that you managed to scribble up a brief update statement, by some miracle an approver dropped by on their way to the restroom, and your statement was actually approved for distribution!

Now what? You may not have access to your organization’s distribution tools, so you only have your personal or work email accounts. You can’t send the release to your list serve or a commercial distribution vendor; that’s another level of review, approval and action by people other than yourself. They likely aren’t available, either because they’re on their way to the response or off-shift; crises never happen during regular work hours. And you don’t have a contact list of key stakeholders ready to use anyway.

Your best option may be to go outside to the gathered media to share the information you have, or to post it on your Twitter account. In either case you’ve generated an ‘exclusive’, not on the basis of relative value of each outlet, but on their availability. And you’ve missed the most important people to share the information with. Without preparation, your critical audiences will likely be neglected, and they may become… critical.

The solution?

There’s only one: Prepare now. Count this blessed 99% time as an opportunity to get ready for the brutal 1%.

Interested in more information?  Contact me!

Policy Without Perspective Can Ruin Your Reputation

Here’s an example of how policy without perspective can ruin your reputation, courtesy of the Vermilion Parish School Board, in Louisiana.  Take your pick of the following headlines:

Watch and read KATC’s full coverage of the Vermilion teacher incident

  • “He did exactly what he was hired to do. He followed the procedures completely.”

Teacher handcuff video leads to death threats, investigation

  • “His job is to make sure we have an orderly meeting,” Fontana said. “He knows what the law is. He knows what our policy is…The officer did exactly what he is supposed to do.”

Teacher handcuffed, arrested after questioning school board about superintendent’s contract

  • School Board President Anthony Fontana said in an interview that the security officer did nothing wrong. “He was just doing his job,” he said.

YouTube carries a video of the incident:

Communicators, providing perspective is our job.

At the end of the day, a local School Board issue became a national issue.  Why?  Because policy was followed to the letter.  What went wrong?  Nobody considered the public repercussions from perfectly enforced policy.

Any policy that touches the public needs to be carefully reviewed to ensure that it accomplishes the desired result.  In this case, the School Board’s policy to keep order at public meetings should have been reviewed to be sure that enforcement wouldn’t sabotage overall Board objectives.

School Boards and their elected/appointed officials depend on public support to accomplish their mission-critical objectives.  They depend a harmonious relationship with dedicated teachers.  They depend on qualified leadership.  In this event, enforcing policy at a meeting has sabotaged all these relationships.

Only communicators can provide perspective

Only communicators are used to living on ‘the outside’.  We deal with stakeholders every day, so we are the ones who can provide perspective.  One of our roles within our organizations is to protect policy makers on ‘the inside’ from the people on ‘the outside’.   But this doesn’t mean that our ‘insiders’ can set policies or procedures that impact the ‘outsiders’ without careful review.  And we are the ones who need to review them, using our ‘outside’ perspective.

In this event, all the negative national attention was the result of a policy to have law enforcement officials remove people from public meetings.  Due to lack of proper perspective in casting the policies, the Vermilion Parish School Board’s local issue about the Superintendent’s compensation has become a negative national story.

  • Tone deaf policy and enforcement has led to death threats and national scrutiny.
  • Media is noting every negative fact of this issue, from apparent sexism to avoidance of media calls.
  • Teachers are outraged.  The Louisiana Association of Educators has denounced the actions.
  • The public who matter to this School Board – local parents and voters – are embarrassed and disturbed
  • A single action in accordance with policy has alienated virtually every stakeholder group

What about policies of your organization?  How do you know what to look for?

  • Any policy that leads to public impact should be carefully examined.
  • Use ‘the outside’ perspective to review proscribed actions.
  • Modify policies or procedures to prevent public outrage.
  • If policies or procedures can’t be changed for safety reasons, be ready to immediately explain and defend them.

What does hindsight suggest in this case?

  • Removing people from public meetings is fraught with consequences – none positive.
  • Pervasive video capability ensures that any physical actions taken will be portrayed in the worst possible light
  • Video is capturing expressions of disapproval or shock from bystanders as well – your incident’s own Greek chorus
  • A trained moderator could have acknowledged concerns and moved on to other petitioners
  • At worst, the meeting could have been adjourned – a local issue but not a national one!

What would YOU do?  Leave a comment below!

This issue is further examined in my post: A brave new world – lessons for communications

Interested in more information?  Contact me!

Don’t Fight the Last War

Don’t look in the wrong direction!

Responders easily look in the wrong direction for planning. They tend to focus on past responses and ask past-tense questions: What happened last time? What could we have done better? As a result, Command strategy is built on best practices, policy and process – but all from past experiences. Truly effective response strategy includes both looking backward, to be sure we’re incorporated lessons from the past, and looking forward to be sure we’re ready for future events.

The danger of looking backward instead of looking forward

A major university narrowly escaped impact from a hurricane that decimated major portions of their city. University leadership determined that the campus was intact and utilities were working, so they announced a resumption of classes only three days after the hurricane.

When the reopening announcement was made, campus communicators were flooded with irate comments protesting the insensitivity of the leaders in expecting students back so quickly. Students’ homes had been destroyed, streets were still flooded, vehicles and busses remained inoperable and many students were still dealing with trauma. Still, the campus reopening decision was announced resulting in great detriment to their reputation as well as poor attendance by returning students.

Why was this decision made? Partly due to a previous major storm, when campus leadership waited more than a week to reopen. In that instance, they were criticized for slow recovery and reopening. In the true spirit of looking backward, lessons learned from the previous storm, along with the university’s resolve to portray stronger leadership, combined to forge a wrong decision.

Past performance is important and learning from past experiences is critically important, but the world moves on. Events themselves are unique, so rote decisions based on past data can be damaging. In this example, communicators had to deal with their university’s self-induced stakeholder relations crisis on the heels of a natural disaster. The natural disaster was unavoidable; the self-induced crisis was completely avoidable.

Looking forward

Communicators are uniquely positioned to influence Command decisions because our core ethos is different. Communicators are always looking forward. In a sense, we’re pseudo-marketers: As marketers create a need for consumption, communicators identify a need for information. Our product is not widgets, but words. We want to identify information needs and respond to them with communication products. We are by profession looking forward, not behind. Our work is always in front of us, always new and always changing.

We are the people in the room who can help focus Command on the importance of NOW to counter the influence of THEN. In the case of the university, the issue should have been on current realities and sensitivity to current conditions, not the rote reflex to prevent what had happened before. The university had been blessed with minor damage, mostly free of the storm impacts.  They even had water and power. But a look up from their past practice and out their windows would have revealed the real, current issues to be addressed before their decision was made. Communicators’ input would have captured this current reality, not the past one.

We need to perform debriefs of past responses, create lessons-learned and apply them to our planning and practice. But our discipline should not be insular. Our plans and strategies should reinforce right thinking as well as right actions. Every event will have its own dynamics and we need to practice the discipline of avoiding fixed strategies in fluid situations. Fortunately this is a trait of communicators. We just need to remember to do it! Every response should start with a real-time reality check: What just happened, who is being affected and what are their current concerns?

Share your knowledge from looking forward

As a communicator, you need to help responders make more informed decisions:

  • Who is being impacted by the event?
  • What concerns will these impacted stakeholders have?

In this incident, students were impacted by the hurricane in every way. Some were flooded out of their homes, some were stranded in flooded neighborhoods, some had to drive through damaged and dangerous areas, some had lost their source of transportation. All had greater issues to deal with than attending class. Parents were concerned for their students. Students were afraid to drive to campus,  trying to dry out their homes, replace lost items, find missing loved ones.

A careful reflection on these external influences would have impacted the school’s reopening decision. In fact, after the fact, the resultant outrage led to additional decisions not to require attendance for the entire week. To repair their self-inflicted issue, they actually ended up allowing the same level of student absence as experienced in the prior storm!

In every response, it will be the communicator’s role to focus the response outward to affected stakeholders, and to make decisions from this proper perspective. Of all the seats at the Command table, the PIO’s is the most externally focused, hence the most sensitive to the real-time, real-people issues facing the stakeholders who hold your reputation in their hands. Don’t expect other responders to see this, in fact expect resistance to your vision. But persevere. You are unique and your perspective is powerful to protect your organization.

How does a communicator share the process of looking forward?

When you’re at the Command table, help Command Staff recognize the current realities that you can identify from your position.  Share the sensitivities you have as a communicator:

  • What are the current physical realities or response actions – What is the stakeholder impact?
  • Who is being impacted by these realities or actions – Who are the stakeholders?
  • What will affected stakeholders be concerned about – What are the issues?
  • Will planned actions placate or provoke our stakeholders?
  • How can we modify our plans for the best outcome?

Responders focus on actions without necessarily regarding their non-operational impact.  You as a communicator will have the greatest, or the only, understanding of non-operational impact. In the case of the university, they were focused on reopening an unaffected campus, not on their already affected students.

Communicators alone keep track of non-response stakeholders. Responders job assignment includes working with other responders, not the people outside the room. You alone have the greatest awareness of event stakeholders (people who are interested in your actions). University responders in the room were focused on physical capacity, not individuals’ fears or emotions. They saw the unaffected buildings but didn’t see the affected people.

Without knowing stakeholders, responders can’t possibly identify stakeholder concerns.  Communicators deal with issue identification every day, so share your expertise. Every concern on the university responders’ lists had been checked off. They knew campus grounds and buildings were safe – but they weren’t thinking about roads, buses or neighborhoods around the campus

Separated from stakeholder awareness, the best physical response decision can cause more disruption than it prevents. Only communicators can share likely impact or outrage from an operational decision. An understanding of stakeholders (students) realities would likely have led to a longer campus closure, at least more flexibility in attendance requirements.

Looking forward is important

When you’ve fully shared the non-operational impact of Command decisions, highlighted stakeholders and their sensitivities and shared likely conflict or outrage, Command staff can make a better decision about the best action. In this case, instead of being inadvertently tone-deaf, campus leadership could have been seen as sympathetic and compassionate. Strong leadership would have been portrayed with a heart.

Interested in more information?  Contact me!

Relationships from fast-food to Facebook

Managing relationships more effectively

No management degree should be offered without requiring a stint of managing a fast-food restaurant. These workplaces present unique management challenges as they combine low wages, high turnover, part time loyalty and portability. Fast food employees are starting their work career, hoping to move on and up to better work at any moment. They are learning employment skills on the job. Minimum wage is a great leveler, providing equal opportunity at a multitude of venues. With employee turnover rates commonly exceeding 100% per year, employee commitment or loyalty can be measured by Crane fly life spans.

Motivating such an ever shifting flock of employees is a constant challenge. Managers can’t offer more pay, can’t give more hours and can’t provide greater benefits, nor can they dramatically change working conditions. Any mistakes in management usually increase an already astronomical turnover rate, with employees leaving at any time for another equivalent position.

So what tools does a manager have to impact employees in this environment? Only one; they can manage their relationships better. Managers who treat employees like cogs on a gear are constantly replacing the cogs. Managers who are dismissive of employee concerns experience employee mutinies, where an entire shift just doesn’t show up. Managers who won’t listen to employees, relate to their issues or offer affirmation and support end up constantly starting new relationships instead of deepening existing ones.

A good fast food manager quickly learns the negative impact of bad relationship management. Manage your minimum-wage stakeholders without empathy and they’ll leave immediately. Implement policies badly and they’ll leave immediately. Treat them without respect and they’ll leave immediately.

High pay, good benefits and promotion possibilities make it easier to manage people poorly; employees will stay in spite of bad management if they can’t match pay, benefits or promotion potential anywhere else. It’s often said that people will stay at a bad company if they have a good manager, and this is true. It is also true that people often stay at a good company if they have a bad manager, sticking it out until they get to work with someone else.  But they’re not experiencing the relationships they deserve.

Fast food chains could do us all a favor by providing a 3-month internship for every management program graduate; you can make every known management mistake in three months at a fast food restaurant, and amply experience the fallout of poor management decisions along the way.

So what does this have to do with stakeholder communication?

Today’s Facebook-speed communication environment has created a Crane fly relationship management world.  A momentary event can damage or destroy your reputation, yet be replaced in public consciousness before you can mount a defense. Stakeholders are fractured by interests and location, news source and web access. They don’t have to invest in long term relationships with media sources, they can play the field among a multiplicity of equal media opportunities. Every stakeholder acts like a fast-food employee.

You have little to offer them to maintain your relationships. Manage your relationships with them badly and they will leave, taking your reputation with them. Manage it well and they’ll stay, allowing you the opportunity to shape their knowledge, attitudes and experience.

The same qualities that make a fast-food manager successful make a communicator successful:

  • Respect: We are worth more than what we are paid. Managers who understand this will recognize the value of their employees, maximize their strengths and carefully address their concerns. Loyalty’s price tag isn’t measured in pay, it is measured in the value granted to the individual.Communicators, understand the immense value each stakeholder brings, and treat each of them with respect. Thank them for reaching out with their concerns. Acknowledge their special needs. Be considerate of their schedules. Make their job as easy as you can. Earn their loyalty to the response.
  • Information: Minimum-wage earners aren’t mushrooms and shouldn’t be treated as such. Bottom-rung employees have the least impact on practice or policy, and are often relegated to barely-need-to-know status when it comes to decisions that can greatly impact them. Managers who care will take the time to provide the background, considerations and decision process that has led to new policies or practices. They can’t change the outcome, but they can impact acceptance.Communicators, provide all the information you can to help stakeholders understand how decisions are made. Acknowledge the negative consequences to response decisions and explain why they are necessary. Highlight why specific actions are taken – the more difficult they are, the more thoroughly they should be explained. Give your stakeholders the information they need to accept response decisions.
  • Feedback: Today, employees at every level expect to be heard. Lack of hearing is interpreted as lack of respect, or as dishonesty. Good managers keep an open door and are willing to hear criticism without defensiveness. Good listening skills lead to better understanding, and understanding always increases acceptance.Communicators, be sure you have a strong feedback loop. Be sure you are hearing stakeholder concerns, not just listening past them. Identify shared concerns and acknowledge them. Always welcome feedback or criticism. Allow time for stakeholders to process new information, and encourage their responses. Feedback given and heard leads to ownership.
  • Gratitude: A little bit of gratitude goes a long way in any job. A good manager may not be able to offer a shorter shift, better working conditions or more pay, but they can always express appreciation for work well done. With good communication, people implicitly know if they’re getting all that can be given, and a ‘thank you’ always adds value. Employees who feel valued stay longer and work better.Communicators, thank people for being there! In response communication, you are fighting to preserve or enhance your reputation with people who don’t have to be there for you to talk to. Nor do they need to do anything to help you. Yet here they are, in front of you at a news conference or community meeting, on the other end of the phone, or even on the other end of the radio, listening to what you have to say. You can’t make their lot in life easier, and you can’t make up for the mess they’re suffering through. But you can thank them for caring. Stakeholders who feel valued stick around linger.
  • Welcome: Good managers are always looking for the next employee, and they’re finding them through the ones they already have. Every person working in any job knows someone who is looking for work. Good managers draw these names out, and make it clear that good employees are always welcome. These managers are the ones who hire without advertising, land better prospects and build better teams.Communicators, always encourage your stakeholders to share your information with other interested people. Doing so is a sign of respect, of welcome and of gratitude. It tells your stakeholders that they are important to you, and so are their friends. This implicit referral increases the likelihood that your story will be shared and that other key influencers will start showing up at your workplace. You will gain the most motivated stakeholders who are seeking you out because someone they trust and respect has told them about you. And they’re coming with the heightened expectations and motivations you want.

Intangibles’ impact

All these actions are intangibles, none in itself has any weight. But when they are applied in addition to the currency of actions, they multiply the weight of each one. Taking the time to offer your stakeholders the intangibles of respect, information, feedback, gratitude and welcome will multiply your message. You can build better stakeholder relationships! Try it.

While you’re at it

Principles that enhance management of employees and stakeholders can be translated to more important relationships too. How many other arenas could be impacted by applying these? As I write this I’m convicted that I owe these courtesies to everyone important in my life, Shouldn’t we offer the most we can, to those who are the most important to us?

Not a bad New Year’s resolution!

Interested in more information?  Contact me!

A brave new world – lessons for communications

Today’s lesson for tomorrow’s communicators

The world is changing ever faster. I’m old enough to remember waiting for checks to come in the mail. I remember faxing. I remember my first email, and wondering if I’d need a desktop computer for my first job. Yet more change has occurred in the past 5 years than what I experienced in the previous five decades. This change is occurring technologically, operationally and in the culture of communications.

Many organizations are adept at keeping up with, or at least in sight of, technological and operational changes and advancements. We quickly get used to GIS and we implement it on our operational planning. We discover that cell phones capture video, so we use them to film subject matter experts. We learn how to use virtual meeting technology so we use it for virtual press conferences. We’re (barely) managing the physical changes in our response communications tool belt.

But what about cultural changes brought about by same technology? What happens when someone moves our technology cheese? As an example of a communication cultural change, it is likely that your crisis communication plan and accompanying exercise objectives specify that you conduct a press conference. When information can be shared instantly using webcasts, live chats and video/photo libraries, what are you accomplishing with a physical press conference? Will anyone attend it, particularly if you don’t hold it ‘where the action is’? Your organization isn’t keeping up with cultural changes brought about by emergent technologies.

These changes in communication culture directly impact your ability to communicate even if you DO understand how to use modern platforms and technologies. Your risk is that, using new tools and technology, you can say the wrong things to the wrong people faster and more pervasively than ever before.

When communicators change their behavior to broadcast information, they also change stakeholders’ expectations of how to receive it. As an example, the ubiquity of cellphone cameras allows more people to capture images and video, as well as the ability to immediately broadcast it via different platforms, allowing any individual, event or incident to gain instant notoriety. We implicitly understand this. But the same capability changes both the photo takers and photo viewers. The ease of taking and broadcasting images increases the expectation that they will be taken, broadcasted and available to view – quickly. This is the new ‘media culture’ – instantaneous and pervasive imagery.

Have you considered the impact of the cultural changes that technology is forcing on your mission? You need to be ever-ready to identify what today’s lessons are for tomorrow’s communication needs. How do communicators spot and react to the changes that impact their world?

Gotta learn faster!

Spring of 2017 marked the realization by many Americans that airlines really don’t care about them. So it appeared, as cellphone videos of a passenger being forcibly dragged off an airliner became the news of the day. The airline in question was pilloried for its uncaring, greedy corporate policy and procedures that allowed an innocent passenger to be dragged off one of their planes. Images of this event were shared thousands of times, going viral before the airline could respond with any sort of initial statement. The poor communication responses led to further setbacks, and lack of communication sensitivities led to truly disastrous reputation management.

Four observations to this unfortunate incident:

  1. The obvious one: Airline booking policies need to change. What was reasonable before today’s level of real-time data isn’t reasonable any more. Even though contract language with every ticket sold allows airlines to select passengers for removal with no recourse, this isn’t going to work when everybody is a broadcaster. Facebook will accuse, prosecute and sentence you before your legal and communications teams are activated. Stakeholder sensitivities may not be apparent to security guard, but they should be clear to a communicator.
  2. The airline was blamed for actions out of their control. This may be less obvious, but it is event-critical. The airline was not the organization that committed the actions in question, but that didn’t matter one whit. They suffered the blame for others’ actions because their policies were the root cause of that action. In this case, aircraft crew apparently followed procedures perfectly; airport security was called to deal with a recalcitrant passenger, exactly according to policy. Every airline in the world should be asking their communicators to review procedures for this type of action, as well as any other human-touching activity.
  3. The responding airport security personnel followed procedures. Unfortunately, the procedure was never vetted through communicators; certainly not by anyone with any sensitivity to what enforcement actions look and feel like to the person being collared. Law enforcement agencies across the country are dealing with this dichotomy and all the body cameras in the world don’t help explain why physical force is being used. Policies need to include clear descriptions of what actions lead to which reactions. In this case, this airline, and all other airlines, suffered the consequence of poor response planning, preparation and training.
  4. Human nature had enormous impact on this event. This may be the most critical consideration for communicators. Think about it; there were scores of passengers on the aircraft, all who were perfectly content to watch a fellow passenger dragged off the airplane with attendant personal harm. Even as the attack occurred alongside them, not one person stood up to offer to leave instead. Worse than that, several people chose to film the encounter rather than offer their help, and to broadcast it with full self-righteousness. Any individual on the aircraft could have solved the problem by getting up and offering their seat instead. Nobody did. The new ‘media culture’ prevented it. What does this slice of human nature say about the likelihood that your own response efforts will be met with charitable intent?

What can a communicator learn from this event?

  1. Conduct a review of operational response plans to identify implicit communication risks.
  2. Map the likely affected stakeholders, possible outrage and the ability to broadcast it to the world.
  3. Correct operational response plans and prepare appropriate communication products to deal with an issue arising from an operationally perfect action.
  4. Make sure all response parties have the same level of sensitivity to public perception.
  5. Don’t expect any help from the people impacted by your event; human nature is to hunker down, not help out.

This event is an example of how early identification of a changing communication culture can lead to operational changes. Airlines need to require better passenger handling by airport security, overbooking policies can be changed and the process of asking for volunteers could be altered. As an example of this last point, by the time the air crew selected passengers at random for removal, every passenger on the plane had said ‘no’ multiple times: Passengers said ‘no’ to free tickets, paid hotel nights and meals, cash incentives and final pleas for consideration. Every ‘no’ increased the likelihood of security personnel coming on the plane.

You don’t get people to change their behavior under stress by asking them to reverse earlier decisions! As a professional communicator, you can help your organization learn methods to increase understanding and acceptance of your actions at every level, even on a crowded aircraft. Note: Proper attention and learning from this issue demonstrates that communication sensitivity should prompt an operational change. Communication matters!

Can your organization adapt to changing communication culture?

With this newfound focus on passenger mistreatment, several airlines were prominent in the news after this incident for their own customer service mishaps, each one for acting exactly as their operational policies specified. How long does it take to change? As demonstrated above, it can take more time than you have, even if you are looking and learning as you go. In this example, has any airline changed its booking policies since this customer service/reputation debacle?

What about your organization?  Can you rapidly adapt to the changing communication culture?  The cost of not learning can be high.

Interested in more information?  Contact me!