Five months into what has been dubbed the "oversight" Congress, a myriad of companies and organizations across a wide swath of industry sectors have begun to receive investigative requests from
oversight committees. In addition to issues related to the environment, pharmaceutical pricing, executive compensation, stock option backdating and antitrust matters being looked at by Congress and
federal regulators, activist state legislatures and attorneys general have also begun reviews into a similar slate of issues throughout the country.
While many professional communicators are well-qualified to handle high-pressure scenarios, corporate oversight and investigations by a government entity require an added dimension of skill and
expertise. The reality is, investigations conducted by regulatory bodies or politicians may be simply... political. Regardless of the facts, in many cases investigations quickly become staged as
political theater.
Because of the visibility and potential legal ramifications, government inquires can affect a company's reputation, brand equity and shareholder value. While an investigation in and of itself may,
on its face, appear to be isolated, communications executives must not only weigh the short-term ramifications, but consider the damage caused by staged hearings, the potential for shareholder
lawsuits or other legal action, cascading inquires by other government or regulatory bodies and a sustained series of follow-up inquires by the media.
Because government agencies like the Environmental Protection Agency, Department of Justice, Securities Exchange Committee, Food and Drug Administration, legislative committees and
individual elected officials have a large and powerful microphone, companies and organizations facing such a challenge can take specific steps to mitigate the threat of government investigations.
A team of seasoned communicators who have worked side by side with legal and regulatory experts can add significant value by guiding organizations through intense situations. Knowing how and where
to guide reporters as they cover investigations, anticipating lines of questioning and assessing the impact of legal issues on the investment community, customers or partners are vital to navigating
these investigations successfully.
While nothing can replace the counsel of an experienced practitioner, there are a few basic considerations that may help your organization prepare for intense public scrutiny:
1. Find the facts. The media may know that your organization is the target of an investigation before you do. In the interest of capitalizing on the next news cycle, aggressive staffs
often leak a letter to the media - even before it is sent!
Quickly engage your team to gather intelligence on both potential opponents and supporters to determine what the inquiry is truly about. For example, is this inquiry part of a larger political
agenda? What are your vulnerabilities? Who else is being investigated? Are complaints stemming from internal or external concerns?
In addition, know exactly what has appeared on the public record, what your organization is compelled to provide, the links between this information and the impact it may have on various
stakeholders. In short, don't be caught off guard.
2. Craft a specific strategy. Investigations carry great risk for any organization, regardless of the industry in which it operates. Because of the high stakes - both in terms of
reputation and revenue - a public relations practitioner that recommends a rote "crisis communications" strategy does so at his or her own peril.
Well in advance of any public action, to be successful, you must know in very specific terms how you will communicate to the key audiences that lie outside the investigative arena. In many cases,
suppliers, customers, shareholders or employees hear "government investigation" and automatically assume the worst. Tell your story - your way.
Because each situation is different and can be driven by personality, politics or a set of issues beyond what may be public knowledge, the most effective strategy will be highly targeted, unique
and specialized. There is no acceptable cookie-cutter approach; in short, employing one is a recipe for disaster.
3. Prepare for the worst... and beyond. Imagine your worst crisis communications scenario, then magnify it. A misstep in testimony, a leaked document, an unsympathetic answer or the
perception of deception can quickly turn routine questioning into a marathon inquisition.
While advance preparation may not address every question posed at the outset, the right strategy can help prevent an uncomfortable line of inquiry from becoming a major ongoing liability.
4. Assess and correct. While the goal from the beginning should be to "do no further harm," the information that comes out may provoke additional questioning or hearings or pique the
interest of the media or other regulatory bodies. An effective investigation response team will constantly assess the situation, educate critical audiences and correct the record where necessary.
However, these four steps are moot if the preliminary - and most important - communications barrier has not yet been overcome: Every seasoned communicator must ensure that he or she has a seat at
the table with the core team that has been established to deal with the problem.
All too often, the public relations team is pulled in after the fact to deal with the public investigation fallout from a crisis management perspective, when in fact PR practitioners can do
wonders for preventing disaster if they are kept in the loop from the onset of the investigation. Sophisticated communications expertise utilized early in the process can help successfully turn down
the heat.
CONTACT:
Gloria Dittus is the president and CEO of FD Dittus, located in Washington, D.C. She can be reached at 202.775.1401, or at [email protected].