"Ooops. We goofed. We're sorry." These words summarize a great many crisis communications strategies. Somewhere, someone makes an uninformed decision, it backfires and the
media has a field day. What can an organization do but say "we made a mistake and we'll try to make it right"? Obviously, if the mistake costs lives - human or animal, or
irreparable environmental damage, apologizing is not enough. But there are times when a simple "oops" seems to be enough. Making mistakes is essentially very human and even the
most venerable institutions aren't immune. This month we look at two of the most venerable--and as it turns out-- most vulnerable of our nation's institutions: The Smithsonian
Institution and IBM.
Last month, the Smithsonian, one of the nation's most stellar organizations, announced the decision to close its Conservation and Research Center in Front Royal, Va. Then it
recanted after the initial decision to close the Center drew hundreds of letters of protest from scientists, donors and other concerned individuals. This activity coincided at a
time when (new) Director Lawrence Small was attempting to increase fundraising and manage more efficiently. Instead, his staff and board became increasingly bogged down in the
controversy. After nearly a month of increasingly strident protests, Small reversed his decision, and reiterated his institution's commitment to research.
In somewhat parallel circumstances, IBM, one of the nation's most respected corporations, got caught spray-painting sidewalks in Chicago and San Francisco. Well, it's not like
Chairman and CEO Lou Gerstner was out there doing the painting, but a contractor hired by their ad agency was supposed to use washable chalk, and instead used spray paint thereby
violating city ordinances in both locations. The sidewalk "art" was part of IBM's "Peace, Love and Linux" campaign, a national promotion of IBM's new Linux-based workstation.
How each of these two organizations weathered their media storms lies in the degree to which each understands its audiences. Lawrence Small ignored one of the Smithsonian's
primary audiences: scientists, scholars and academics. The first non-academic and only the second non-scientist to lead the organization, he underestimated his audience and the
vehemence of its response. As a result, he was forced to reverse his decision and communicate a lot of negative messages in the process.
IBM, on the other hand, much freer to pursue an aggressive course, perfectly understood its audience. In going after the Linux market, IBM knew it had to shed its stuffy image
and do something radically different. Nothing says radical like breaking the law and flouting authority (certainly never an option for the Smithsonian, a federal government
agency). And while IBM didn't set out to break the law or infuriate city officials, the fact that they did so caused little harm to their corporate image. The exposure was
enormous and far more people became aware of the Linux campaign than would have ever walked by the altered sidewalks.
Katharine Delahaye Paine is president of Delahaye Medialink (603/431-0111). Image Patrol is based on a subjective content analusis of major news sources covering a crisis.
Comments are not intended to criticize the work of the company in crisis, but rather to illustrate the role the media play in shaping the perceptions of various stakeholder
groups.
|
The Smithsonian Institution HQ:
Washington, D.C. 2000 Sales: $153 million 2000 Employees: 6,500 |
|||
|
Criteria
|
Grade
|
Comments
|
Advice
|
| Extent of coverage | C | The good news is that their story was pretty much a one-day, U.S.-only story. The bad news was that it hit all the media that matter: NPR, The New York Times, The Washington Post and USA Today. |
For a reporter, the next best thing to forcing a government official to admit a mistake is to write about one being forced to admit a mistake. If you have to publicly admit you goofed, expect a lot of coverage. |
| Effectiveness of spokespeople | D | Small was articulate and clear in his statements but not all Smithsonian comments were consistent. The director of Center's comments sharply contradicted other "official spokespeople," leading to a credibility gap. When asked tough questions, most people "could not comment" and hid behind standard references to manuals and policies, SOP for government agencies, perhaps. |
The head of an agency should always be the lead spokesperson, but no matter what happens, the media will always find someone else to talk. It is best to brief all personnel, even if they are NOT authorized to speak to the press. A widespread "inform and muzzle" tactic may have led to better consistency and reminded people in a newsworthy moment to let the public affairs officers do the talking. Remember that the media loves to get quotes from people you hope will remain silent. |
| Communication of key messages | C | If the message was "we're cutting costs" it was communicated at the cost of the "we're still committed to science" message.." |
While both important messages, they should have been tried out on constituencies prior to a major media announcement. Give inside audiences a day or two to digest the news, see what they believe and accept the development. Then move on to the media at large, once your ducks are in a row at home. |
| Management of negative messages | D | While the key messages were communicated, other messages were more damaging. The fact that Small does not have a science background was frequently mentioned, and the fact that they had so clearly misread their audience was communicated in every article |
You're never going to eliminate negative messages in any crisis. Chances are that they will be repeated in every story and most subsequent stories. The best you can hope for is to keep them to a minimum by following up the messages with concrete actions. |
| Impact on customers | C | You need to listen to underwriters as well and target them just as you would members or consumers. Many would want to be associated with the Smithsonian because of its reputation for scientific research, so closing the research facilities would make anyone question the agency's commitment to science, which threatens the national repository for scientific advancement. |
Corporate underwriters want to associate themselves with the cache of the Smithsonian but they also like to invest in well-run, efficient organizations. Small's message, originating from his private-sector, cost-cutting roots didn't hurt those stakeholders much. But no one wants to be associated with an organization in crisis because it doesn't understand its audiences. |
| Impact on investors | D | It takes a great deal of immediate threat or fear to get people to call or write a letter in protest. While the Smithsonian reported some 300 letters, that probably represents ten times as many people who didn't bother to write or, worse yet, those who might have held back donations as a result. |
Every organization needs to ask itself how much effort, energy and dollars are spent listening to constituencies rather than talking at them. The more you hear and understand what your stakeholders feel and believe, the more successful an agency will be. |
| Impact on employees | D | Chances are employees are already going through some significant changes as a result of Small's arrival. Sudden changes in policy decisions probably don't help. |
You need to listen to employees as well, both in making decisions and communicating them. |
| Overall | D | Even the most venerable institutions can be vulnerable to missteps from their revered leaders. |
A little bit of internal research could have avoided a lot of "I goofed." |
|
IBM HQ: Armonk, NY 2000 Sales:
$88.4 billion 2000 Employees: 316,303 |
|||
|
Criteria
|
Grade
|
Comments
|
Advice
|
| Extent of coverage | A/F | If IBM set out to get publicity, it did a fabulous job. Not only did this hit the wires, and therefore every small paper in America but it also received widespread exposure in Canada. On the other hand, examined under crisis handling criteria that asks 'how fast did the issue disappear?' and 'how few people saw it?' it would flunk. |
This is a classic "Man Bites Dog" story and the press ate it up. A conservative, some might even say stodgy, company like IBM hires graffiti artists and gets busted by the cops in Chicago and San Francisco. It was bound to attract some attention. |
| Effectiveness of spokespeople | A | IBM's experience in crisis management was clearly evident. They took full responsibility and were willing to pay for damages. What more could you ask? |
Practice makes perfect. If you haven't had a crisis recently, you should probably practice to keep your skills fresh. |
| Communication of key messages | A | IBM communicated loudly and clearly that they were looking to appeal to a different breed of customer. |
If you're going to do something radical, having very clear and simple messages is key. In this case, the messages and strategy were so clear that most of the marketing experts quoted applauded IBM. |
| Containment of negative messages | A- | Unfortunately, it also appeared somewhat goofy that IBM hired people who didn't seem to understand the difference between chalk and spray paint. |
It never makes you look good to blame a screw-up on a vendor you hired. While you're at the helm, EVERYTHING is your responsibility. |
| Impact on customers | A | Among Linux fans, this didn't hurt at all and many more are probably aware of IBM's commitment to the Linux market. |
If you understand your audience and have clear messages that an action will communicate, you will succeed. |
| Impact on investors | B | No investor likes to see his or her company portrayed as the corporate equivalent of a teen vandal, but if they were smart, they read behind the headlines and applauded the move.. |
No one can make everyone happy all the time, Pre-briefing and one-on-one discussion in advance go a long way to mitigating problems early. |
| Impact on employees | C- | The whole thing, no doubt, embarrassed some conservative employees and surely the employees in Chicago and San Francisco took a beating. |
If possible, caution employees that something negative is coming. If you can't tip them off ahead of time, make sure you communicate loudly and frequently during any time of crisis. |
| Overall | C+ | Not sure if this was a crisis or a brilliant promotional strategy. |
A thorough understanding of your audience can turn around almost any crisis. |