By Dee Grano, Vice President of Public Relations
When we encounter an organization that has a potential crisis on their hands, it very rarely mirrors the hypothetical scenarios prepared in the manual. Inevitably there exists a “sticky wicket,” something that throws a wrench in the works, interrupts usual processes or gives leadership pause. These circumstances can include the involvement of a partner organization, the presence of a high-profile donor or a police investigation.
While these circumstances may not change the outcome of what the organization does, it can impact the conversation and lengthen the decision-making process.
So, what are some things to think about when this happens?
Remember the goal of the original plan.
Anticipation of the inevitable glitch is no excuse to not have a plan in place for the most important or likely scenarios. It’s in the in-depth planning process that priorities are determined and overarching goals are established. A good crisis plan is more than a list of “to dos” and “to whos.” It is a mission-informed, decision-making structure that guides the organization when the unthinkable happens.
What are the issues or circumstances that determine when your organization should say something, regardless of whether or not you want to do so personally?
Recognize when your planning starts spinning… but not that kind of “spinning.”
When too many people get involved in the high-stakes response planning process, discussion stops being fruitful, and the path forward becomes harder and harder to see. At this point, your team’s wheels start spinning. Stakeholders with different views on what to do start repeating themselves, while you feel important preparation time slipping away.
At this point, it’s sometimes helpful to take the reins and talk about options for different teams to work on: “It seems like our conversation has stalled out, so let’s decide which two scenarios are the most realistic and create talking points for each response strategy. Email your drafts to me in 30 minutes.” This helps get you out of the meeting room and gives those who feel most passionately about a certain direction time to put their ideas on paper.
Stop the story and be prepared to comment or apologize, if necessary.
In the little bit of planning time you have, you will likely get a clear picture of the facts of the crisis. If your organization is at fault and media interest is likely (or they are already camped out at your doorstep), making a public apology might be the best way to turn a one-week story into a one-day story. In other words, a news story that packages the issue, cause, apology and correction is better than, “We asked __ for comment and they didn’t respond. We’ll keep on top of this story to bring you the latest.” Getting your message out efficiently decreases the likelihood that someone else (think a disgruntled employee or uninformed stakeholder) will beat you to it.
Being prepared to apologize does not mean you have to call attention to an issue that has not raised public interest. It is acceptable to wait and see what the media interest is and make a decision from there. If the media requests information, you and your leadership can ask them to submit questions and decide whether an in-person interview or public statement is the best way to deliver your message.
It is possible your organization’s legal team may advise against making a public statement, in the event the issue goes to litigation. In that case, it’s your job to advise your leadership to consider the impact of a publicly perceived gloss over, cover-up or failure to respond. The truth is usually less painful.