Fessing Up Early Can Limit Your Company’s Image Problems

Communication professionals rarely have the time to keep up with the constant flow of academic literature. So this column helps bridge the gap between communication theory and communication practice. Drawing from fields such as organizational communication, industrial psychology, and mass media, this feature will profile the latest research and discuss its practical application.

To begin: corporate reputation. Every company has one. Whether you're a member of the Fortune 500 or the local Small Business Association, your company's reputation is one of its most valuable assets. and most vulnerable.

In recent years, we've seen countless companies and industries damaged by attacks on their reputation. Johnson & Johnson endured a high-profile scandal when cyanide was found in the popular analgesic Tylenol. Apple farmers sustained serious losses due to the Alar pesticide scare. From glass shards in baby food to exploding trucks on "Dateline NBC," the attack can come from any corner.

Some attacks are credible, some aren't. Some companies recover, some don't. What makes the difference is not the severity of the allegations, but how a company responds.

This month's Theory to Practice will profile the latest research on image repair strategies - strategies which can help your company weather the storm.

In a recent issue of Communication Quarterly, Drs. Susan Brinson of Auburn University and William Benoit of University of Missouri, Columbia, presented the following list (below) of Image Repair Strategies:

This list of image repair strategies represents a way of classifying and thinking about the range of tactics from which a company might choose. (Depending on the situation, some might not be appropriate.)

Brinson & Benoit use this typology in their case study of Dow Corning's response to the silicone breast implant crisis.

They conclude that Corning's image repair strategy initially was effective, but quickly became ineffective. Corning responded to the FDA's charges that the implants were unsafe by steadfastly denying the safety threat of the implants (which it maintains to this day), minimizing the severity of the allegations, and attacking its accuser (the FDA).

Different Types of Image Repair Strategies Denial Deny the act occurred Deny the company is responsible Denial with blame shift Evasion of Responsibility Claiming provocation Claiming lack of information or control Claiming lack of intentionality Claiming good intentions Reduction of Offensiveness Bolstering Minimization Differentiation Transcendence Attacking the accuser Compensation Corrective Action Restoring to the previous state Promise to change in future Mortification Confession Apology Asking for forgiveness Source: Brinson, S.L. & Benoit, W.L. (1996, Winter). Dow Corning's Image Repair Strategies in the Breast Implant Crisis. Communication Quarterly, 44(1), 29-41.

Corning also attempted to bolster its image by promising to conduct more research, and transcend the issue by refocusing the debate on women's compelling need for the implants.

As we all know, this set of strategies did not prove very effective. The key error lay in Corning's decision to maintain its denial in the face of mounting evidence. Corning was unsuccessful in minimizing the severity of the allegations and appeared heartless toward implant recipients in the process. Corning was also unsuccessful in counter-attacking the FDA. In fact, this strategy backfired, doing more to tarnish Corning's reputation than the FDA's. In the end, Corning found itself in the midst of a "firestorm of FDA demands and media criticism." After replacing two top executives with a damage control expert, Corning finally released its internal documents.

In this last phase of the controversy, Corning switched strategies and began to communicate mortification (by indicating regret regarding certain decisions) and corrective action (by announcing they would no longer make the implants and settling a $4.75 billion lawsuit).

What happened to Dow Corning could, in reality, happen to any company. The source of attack may be a regulatory agency, industry competitor or anonymous rumor on the Internet, but the critical factor is how your company responds.

Here are a few things to keep in mind:

You must constantly re-evaluate organizational response to a PR crisis. A response needs to continually evolve over time to effectively mitigate changing circumstances.

Sometimes a simple denial is all that is needed. When responding to an unsubstantiated rumor or allegation from a questionable source, a strong denial may be the best recourse.

Generally speaking, the "worse" the attack, the further down the list you should go. Looking at Brinson & Benoit's list, one should keep in mind that it is not a question of whether the allegations are true, but rather the likelihood of the allegations being perceived as true.

Finally, remember internal consistency is key in times of crisis. When the content of internal memorandum pitted Corning scientists against Corning management, the credibility of Corning's denial was seriously undermined.

Jennie Wong Simpson holds a Ph.D. in organizational communication and speaks on a wide variety of topics related to business communication and "layoff survivor syndrome." She can be reached at 714/424-4439.

---