By Katharine Delahaye Paine
How much communications is enough?
I feel like a journalistic Golidlocks - finding a company whose mouth is too big, and another that is too small, and still looking for one that is just right.
To all things there must be a balance. Which is why my column this month looks at two opposite cases, one in which a company communicated too little, and the other in which a company communicated too much.
First, let's look at the Boston Globe and Mike Barnicle.
This summer was one of excess in communications on too many fronts - Ken Starr's circus told me far more than I wanted to hear, I now know much more about the Russian economy than I ever wanted to know, and the media has flagellated itself beyond all reason. Popular Boston Globe columnist Mike Barnicle's suspension and eventual firing as a result of plagiarism took up thousands of columns of ink, mostly because it came on the heels of another highly publicized Boston Globe termination, that of columnist Patricia Smith.
I am not about to add to the pile of opinions on the firing, but rather will examine how the Globe handled the episode as a corporation.
Secondly, we'll look at another crisis peripherally involving a publishing empire, Conde Nast. Primarily I will focus on the building contractor, Tishman Realty and Construction, which was in the process of constructing the new Conde Nast headquarters when the scaffolding collapsed, killing a woman in an adjacent apartment building and bringing business in Times Square to a standstill.
Tishman took the tack, no doubt dictated by its lawyers, of saying as little as possible. This, of course, left the field wide open for never-reticent New Yorkers to speak their minds. It will be months before the investigation that will attribute blame for the incident is complete, but most New Yorkers will revile the Tishman name.
Katharine Paine is founder and CEO of The Delahaye Group, an international image consulting firm based in Portsmouth, N.H. If you hfave a suggestion for an Image Patrol column, you can reach her at 603/431-0111. http://www.delahaye.com
| BOSTON GLOBE | |||
| Criteria | Grade | Comments | Advice |
| Extent of coverage | D | The Globe's waffling, first suspending Barnicle, then bringing him back and eventually firing him, prolonged the agony...and the story. | Normally, I advocate swift action but in this case, there were a few too many actions. I'd have kept my mouth shut and sat on the story until all the facts were in, and then taken the high road of fairness. Barnicle may have had his fans but in the long run, the company's reputation for justice was at stake. |
| Effectiveness of spokespeople | B | Globe editor, Matt Storin, was certainly accessible to the media and a highly credible spokesperson. The problem was that Storin was only part of a larger organization - the New York Times Company - and there seemed to be little coordination of messaging between the two. | Remember that all parts of a corporation can be tainted by a crisis. Corporate and all divisions must be on the same page from day one. |
| Communication of key messages | C |
It took way too long for the Globe to come out on the side of truth and accuracy. It wasn't until Barnicle's firing that Storin announced that: "The good news is that everyone is on the same ethical page."
That should have been the positioning from day one. |
Find the high moral ground and never waffle from it. |
| Management of negative messages | D | The fact that it was the second incident at the same paper meant that every article mentioned both violations. You couldn't help but begin to wonder about the paper's credibility. | One offense and it's a minor news story. Two and it's an indication of something rotten at the top. So reporters will have a field day. Not much you can do to stop them repeating all those negative messages, but take decisive action that acknowledges the problem. |
| Impact on customers | D | From the customers' perspective this was a lose/lose proposition. One of the Globe's most popular columnists is gone and so is a good chunk of the paper's credibility. | Emphasize the commitment to credibility and find a better columnist to replace him ASAP. |
| Impact on investors | C | They were probably more afraid that the circulation would drop without Barnicle than they were about the ethical lapse. Either way, the story was bad news, but in the bigger picture of the New York Times company, not such a big deal. | Some explanation of the ultimate financial impact of Barnicle's departure might be helpful. |
| Impact on employees and prospective employees | B | Despite the turmoil, we get the sense that in the end, the Globe does care about ethics, truth and justice, and even though the episode will leave some bad feelings, I'd still take a job there. | Make sure that what you communicate to the world is in sync with what you want your employees to believe. |
| Overall score | C | Poor judgment in the beginning made a bad situation worse, but ultimately the impact was probably not as bad as it might have been. | Until all the facts are in, keep to the highest ground possible. Don't react until you have a clear plan and cohesive message. |
| TISHMAN REALTY | |||
| Criteria | Grade | Comments | Advice |
| Extent of coverage | D | The lawyers were doing all the talking and mostly they said very little. Not a shred of compassion was communicated by anyone. | Geographical location of an accident can play a major role in how much or how little exposure your crisis gets. The bigger the circulation of the local paper, the more media will be involved. |
| Effectiveness of spokespeople | F | The good news for Tishman was that the story got relatively little play outside of New York City. The bad news is that most of America's news comes from New York City. | The first law of a crisis is to show concern and compassion for the victims. |
| Communication of key messages | F | Their only message seemed to be, "Don't sue us." Tishman squandered a huge opportunity to come across as a caring and concerned citizen | When you got lemons, make lemonade. Take the opportunity of the media spotlight to communicate your commitment to corporate responsibility - unless, of course, you have none. |
| Management of negative messages | C | This might be one area where the lawyers had a positive impact. Even though both the city and the private lawyer filed lawsuits, there didn't seem to be much direct accusation against Tishman. Durst, another contractor involved, seemed to shoulder most of the responsibility. | By leaving a vacuum, which every opinionated New York could fill, Tishman lost a major opportunity to position itself positively in the wake of this disaster. Instead, everyone was free to characterize the builder however they wished. |
| Impact on customers | D | As a major corporate developer in New York, the incident couldn't have made a prospective client very comfortable. | Show how you are going to correct the problem and avoid similar ones in the future. Don't leave it to customers to speculate. |
| Impact on investors | D | Dollar signs were everywhere - estimating the potential cost of the disaster in the billions. Investors must be terrified. In the long run, by annoying the public, they will probably pay out more in claims than had they done the right thing and shown compassion up front. | The sooner you own the problem, the sooner it will go away. |
| Impact on employees and prospective employees | F | Tishman came across as nothing more than a big developer without a soul. Not exactly the type of place to attract the best and the brightest. | In a competitive job market, remember that those messages you are putting out are going to prospective employees as well. |
| Overall | F | A classic case where saying nothing and avoiding culpability backfired big-time. | One more time: First, express compassion and concern. Second, own up to your problems. Third, take corrective action. |