Crisis communication resources to help you protect your revenue, reputation, and brand.
Effective crisis communications when “it” hits the fan.
Effective crisis communications when “it” hits the fan.
Our blog is filled with deep resources to help with your crisis communication needs. Whether you are writing a crisis communication plan, seeking the best media training tips, or digging for case studies on crisis situations, you’ll find it here. Our goal is to give you all of the public relations resources you need to protect your revenue, reputation, and brand.
For those of you who love DIY and taking on a challenge, we’ve worked really hard to give you a good road map to follow. However, sometimes the fastest option is to bring in a pro. If that’s the case, we’re fully vaccinated and we’re ready to meet your needs, anywhere and anytime.
If you need help with your crisis communications plan, we’re ready to help.
When you need media training for your spokespeople, give us a call.
Anytime your organization needs a great keynote for your conference, we’d value the opportunity to serve you.
We invite you to:
(Writer’s note: Every day in March we’ll have a fresh, free, new article on this topic. If you’d like to dig deeper, you may wish to purchase a recording of the teleseminar called Social Media & Crisis Communications. Here is your purchase link.)
By Gerard Braud
As you look at crises, recognize that some crises are sudden, while others are smoldering crises. A smoldering crisis has the potential to get worse with time. You also have the ability to defuse a smoldering crisis and make it go away before it ignites.
From the perspective of the media, you can make the crisis look like a non-story. The way to make your story a non-story is to show competence, communicate in a timely manner and communicate quickly. Let’s look at two case studies.
The first case study was during the 2008 presidential elections. CNN had pegged a county in Colorado as the biggest battleground, barometer county in the country. This county would be the next Dade County, their election process would be the next hanging chad, and the spokesperson would be the next Catherine Harris.
Critics claimed was that the county was ill equipped to handle pre-election day early voting. There could be problems with the voting machines and how the votes are counted.
From a crisis management standpoint, we worked with election officials to make more voting machines available. From a crisis communications standpoint, we were up at the crack of dawn as new voting machines were put in place. Sure, we could have issued a statement… and we did. We made the decision to use YouTube to show the voting machines being set up. Seeing is believing. The voters appreciated it and the media appreciated it. Since the media didn’t want to send camera crews out at their cost at the crack of dawn, we made it easy for them to visually cover the story by using your video on YouTube.
In the process, we showed that the county was competent and going the extra mile. In the end, the media gave up their harsh predictions and took their negative news coverage elsewhere. Social media played a strong role in making a negative story go away.
Add to your to-do list to take the time to be ready to use YouTube by making a YouTube Channel now. Make sure you have an iPhone, iPad or other similar smart device that allows you to quickly shoot and post videos. You may need to learn some basic video editing skills as well.
Along the lines of making a story go away with social media via YouTube, allow me to present my case for the Tiger Woods story. When Tiger Woods had his late night accident at the end of 2009, in his own driveway, it raised a lot of questions. I’ve long said that if you don’t tell your story, the media will think you are hiding something and they will go digging. I also constantly emphasize that you need to be ready to make a statement within one hour of the point at which a crisis goes public. Is it likely Woods, after an accident, would issue a statement quickly? Not likely. An athlete of his stature has “people” and a public relations team. I would expect the team to at least have a statement ready for the first news cycle. Instead, days went by before Woods issued a statement, leading to swirling rumors.
According to the Braud belief system, the power of social media, and especially YouTube, could have done wonders for Woods. When a celebrity goes into hiding, they have something to hide. When they hide, the media go looking for a story. I think a short YouTube video that said, “Hi, this is Tiger Woods. Last night, after a late night playing cards with the guys at my country club, I was involved in an embarrassing car wreck, in of all places, my own neighborhood. I hit a fire hydrant, then pulled forward abruptly and hit a tree. To say the least, this is embarrassing. I appreciate your concern and appreciate your understanding if I let this short video suffice as my statement for now.”
Without seeing and hearing from Tiger, rumors of a marital spat and girlfriend turned into a sex scandal with more than a dozen girlfriends. There is a good chance the bigger story would never have been explored if Woods had come forward and let us see him early.
In the process of presenting my case for a YouTube video for Woods, some have indicated that Woods may have actually been injured, perhaps by his wife hitting him with a golf club. I don’t know the facts about any possible visual cuts to Tiger’s face, but even if I have to shoot the video with a bandage on my face, I would do it and explain the bandage in the video.
The Tiger Woods case study has evolved over the years, but regardless of the facts today, we can consistently observe that saying nothing made the news coverage worse.
Let’s also take a minute to talk about how social media works better for celebrities, than it does for many companies. Celebrities have fanatical fans. Celebrity fans want to follow
celebrity tweets, Facebook fan pages and YouTube channels. A manufacturing company or other business may be able to attract some fans, but you don’t have the same advantage as celebrities for reaching out via social media in either good times or bad. Let’s face it, do you think I really want to sign up for the fan page for a chemical plant? For more thoughts on people wanting to follow you, please visit my article about being a social media hypocrite.
In our next article, we’ll look at one big oil company and how they attempted to use social media during their crisis.
(Writer’s note: Every day in March we’ll have a fresh, free, new article on this topic. If you’d like to dig deeper, you may wish to purchase a recording of the teleseminar called Social Media & Crisis Communications. Here is your purchase link.)
By Gerard Braud
It is critical to pick the right tools for crisis communication and your crisis communications plan.
The right fit for crisis communications includes your official website, and a mix of crisis communications channels, placed in a priority and used according to that priority. That priority needs to be established during the planning stages of writing your crisis communications plan. That priority needs to be established on a clear sunny day, when emotions are low, anxiety is low and everyone has clarity of thought and purpose. That priority needs to be tested during crisis communications drills, so that everyone in the organization will trust the crisis communications plan and not second guess the plan on the day of your crisis.
Generally my priorities are:
1) Talk to the media on site (If there are media onsite)
2) Post information to your official website
3) Send an e-mail to all employees with a link to the website and a complete text of what is said on the website
4) Send an e-mail to other important stakeholders
5) Post short messages to your official Facebook & Twitter pages with a link to your primary website
6) Post a YouTube video with your official statement
During the planning stages, let me establish the fact that size matters. By size, I mean the size of your communications team. The organizations that use my crisis communications plans vary in size. The Internal Revenue Service has a huge staff of communicators across the U.S. There are global organizations that have employees all over the world, but some have only one or two people on their global communications staff. There are national retailers with a staff of two. There are manufacturing companies that have no communications staff at all. Therefore, when I say size matters, which tools you use and in which priority you use them is directly dependent upon how many people can help you during a crisis.
If a company has only one communicator on staff, it is difficult to do the basics of a news conference, web statement post and e-mail, and still have time to deal with social media. If a company has no trained communicator, they may have difficulty getting a statement on the web and updating social media at all.
Since so many companies have no trained communicators on staff or because they have only one or two communicators, every crisis communications plan I write is created with a failsafe mechanism. This mechanism takes into account that the person executing the plan may have zero training. I have colleagues in the communications world who disagree and believe that plans should be written for communicators only. That is a flaw, first because is failure to recognize some companies have no designated communicators. Secondly, it is a failure to realize that, in some crises, the communicator may be out of pocket and unable to execute the plan.
Your plan must be so thorough that it dictates that you sequentially do everything that a seasoned, senior communicator would do in a crisis. At the same time, it must be so clearly written that anyone who can read and follow directions can execute it. This is a much more difficult plan to write because it must be thorough, yet simple, while at the time not being simplistic.
When I first set out to write such a plan, the first draft took 150 hours and the second draft took another 100 hours. At 250 hours of writing, I tore it down with the goal to make it easier to execute yet impossible to screw up. That plan now has 1,500 hours of development in it and guess what? It is a living plan, which means it continues to evolve and grow.
I consider plans that state only standard operating procedures to be too simplistic and dangerous. This is because there are no mandates to take action in the plan and there are no timelines that must be met in the plan. You can find them online just by searching for crisis communications plans. Many universities use these flawed plans. On the day of the Virginia Tech shooting on April 16, 2007, the university had just such a plan.
The Virginia Tech plan had not been updated in five years, which means it wasn’t a living plan. It contained no names or contact information for anyone. It had no pre-written statements. The directions were so simple that the entire plan looks like it could have been written by a freshman PR student on their first day in class. The plan simply listed standard operating procedures.
Meanwhile, the thorough yet simple approach I advocate embeds the standard operating procedure with a list of chronological steps to take. It has specific instructions to communicate at specific time intervals. It includes a statement within one hour or less of the onset of the crisis, and again at the beginning of the second hour of the crisis, if it is an ongoing crisis.
Take a moment to add to your to-do list time to review your plan and ask yourself if your plan is a simplistic list of standard operating procedures that can only be executed by a trained communicator. If it is, add to your to-do list the need for a major re-write.
If you have questions, I welcome your phone call. I’m at 985-624-9976. My two-day workshop to write and complete your crisis communications plan is the fastest way to get what you need.
(Writer’s note: Every day in March we’ll have a fresh, free, new article on this topic. If you’d like to dig deeper, you may wish to purchase a recording of the teleseminar called Social Media & Crisis Communications. Here is your purchase link.)
By Gerard Braud
Your first choice when “it” hits the fan should be to use the crisis communications channels that you have the greatest control over, that reach the broadest audiences, and that offer you the greatest stability.
Many people think you can’t control the media, but I have a long track record of controlling the media with spokespeople that I have put through a thorough media training class.
Good media training means going far beyond developing three key messages. I think the three key message system is bull. Simply giving an executive three bullet points and asking them to talk and ad lib about those issues as much as possible in an interview is often a recipe for disaster. Many are not naturally gifted at filtering their words on the fly. Many might hit the bullet points, but phrase their answers in a negative nature, rather than in a positive sentence structure.
Ask yourself, why would you ask a spokesperson to completely ad lib an interview with bullet points, when you could achieve better results by giving them time to internalize, carefully worded sentences with a positive sentence structure?
I believe that the key to successful media training is being able to tell a deep story. The story should be filled with quotes from the minute your spokesperson opens their mouth. The spokesperson should be trained to end each answer in a place that creates a cliffhanger, and generates a question that they want to be asked. To that extent, you control the message, you control the questions, and therefore you also control the media.
I’ll get to my priority list of tools later, but first let’s look at a case study that shows the dangers of depending upon social media and why it is a bad fit.
Have you ever gotten the smiley whale page on Twitter? It’s the page that says Twitter is over capacity. If you are depending upon Twitter to handle your crisis communications and Twitter is over capacity, you are screwed. In a crisis, chatter increases on both land based and cell phone networks, as well as on social media sites. Making social media a high priority is a bad idea because the probability exists for those tools to fail you when you anticipated that you would need them the most.
The next reason I think social media is a bad fit is because the sites and profiles are so very easy to hack. This happened to Burger King recently.
Their entire account was hacked. Read more about it in one of my previous articles.
Beyond the straight Twitter hack, in seconds someone can create a profile with a name that is similar to your profile, causing confusion for the social media audience. Additionally, security is low on social media sites. Virtually everyone I know who uses Facebook has received a direct message from a friend who is allegedly in London, has been allegedly mugged, and who is allegedly asking you to wire money to them because their credit cards and cash have been stolen. This is a hack. The hacker uses deductive reasoning to determine a password.
How many of us have received a Tweet from a friend tells us they made an extra $500 last week and that I can too if I link a website? Or a friend sends a link that says someone has posted a compromising picture of you online. Those messages all came from Twitter accounts that had been hacked. My point is some social media is a bad fit because it is vulnerable to failure and the fix is beyond your control.
Take out your to-do list and schedule time to evaluate which forms of communications are a bad fit and which forms of communications are the right fit.
By Gerard Braud
The doctor’s resume was impressive. It demonstrated a successful practice, plus a history of research and teaching. The ABC News program 20/20 wanted to do a story about the doctor’s research. The teaching hospital selected me to be the media trainer.
After the best research possible, to prepare, I called the public relations department at the doctor’s hospital.
“What exactly does this person do?” I asked.
“We don’t know,” said the public relations director. “That’s why we hired you.”
“Hum? This is going to be a challenge,” I thought.
The media training class began as normal, with the doctor being recorded on camera for a baseline interview, to evaluate the spokesperson’s natural strengths and weaknesses. The baseline interview is usually followed by a critique and suggestions for good key messages that will help guide the interview.
There was just one problem. After the baseline interview, I still had no idea what the doctor was saying. No matter how I tried to get the doctor to simplify the information, we were getting nowhere, until the fourth hour.
Yes, it was four hours into the day when I sketched out a simple diagram with a cause and effect explanation. I presented it to the doctor and asked, “Is this what you do?”
“That’s perfect,” The doctor responded.
“Then why didn’t you say that four hours ago?” I asked.
“Well what would my peers think?” the doctor replied. “I don’t want to dumb it down.”
“The goal of this interview is to put butts in your waiting room and money in your pocket,” I replied. “We’re not here to impress your peers. We’re here to talk to potential patients.”
Many medical professionals fall into this same trap. They are afraid to “dumb it down.” The truth is, you don’t need to dumb it down, but you need to simplify it.
With that said, let us examine three great rules for more effective media interviews.
Rule #1: Don’t talk to the media, but rather talk to the media’s audience.
Spokespeople mistakenly put reporters on a pedestal. The reality is, most reporters are generalists who know a little about a lot and can make an audience think they are smarter than they really are. Don’t try to talk at a high level. Besides, the reporter isn’t your audience.
Your audience is made up of the people at home. Research tells us the average person watching television has a 6th grade education and the average person reading a newspaper or other written source has an 8th grade reading level.
This means that anything you say must be said at a 6th grade level if you want to be a great communicator. You don’t win prizes for using big words. Additionally, never give too many details.
Many spokespeople shun this advice, saying they don’t want to “dumb down” their information. The best mindset you can adopt is the same one learned through diversity training, which is to respect all people and to be inclusive of all audiences.
Also remember, when you use big words and technical terms, often the reporter has no idea what you are saying. Which leads us to the second rule, based on how little most interviewers know about your topic.
Rule #2: You should always know the first words that will come out of your mouth.
The goal is for you to know two great sentences that instantly adds context to your interview and simultaneously states a great quote.
The two most often heard complaints by spokespeople after interviews is that they were taken out of context and their best stuff was left on the cutting room floor. That will never be the case when you follow this rule. These first two sentences become a verbal headline.
Many spokespeople reject this rule. First, they don’t believe you can know what to say without knowing the question they will be asked. Secondly, they don’t want to sound scripted or rehearsed.
Here is a confession from my 15 years as a journalist, combined with a revelation from 20 years as a coach to spokespeople. Think back to your last media interview. While you were talking, were you partially wondering what the next question would be? Confession: when I was a reporter and my guest was blabbing, I was wondering what my next question would be, because their answer was rambling, full of jargon, too detailed, or lacking quotes.
The revelation is that both the reporter and guest are wondering what their next question is and no one is concentrating on the current answer. This creates an amazing opportunity. Your pre-planned answer will provide context to all you believe about your subject, it will be quotable, it alleviates the jitters about not knowing what to say, and it becomes a preamble to eventually answering the question you were specifically asked.
Furthermore, when written for the mouth and ear, and used in daily conversation following your media training, your pre-planned sentences become internalized and never sounds rehearsed. In fact, you will sound spontaneous and natural.
Rule #3: Talk about the benefit you bring to your patients and not the scientific details. Focus on what’s in it for them and work to manage their expectations.
If you think details are important, do a quick self-examination. When you read the newspaper, do you read every story? No. Of the stories you read, how often do your read until the end? Often you don’t. Chances are you read the headline and the first few paragraphs.
So, if you are not interested in everyone else’s details, what makes you think people want to know your details?
Finally, remember that media training is designed to let you mess up in private so you’ll be great when the real interview happens. In a career where perfection is expected, it takes humility to subject yourself to training. But the most effective communicators train at least once a year and before every interview.
##30##
About the author: Gerard Braud is the author of Don’t Talk to the Media Until… 29 Secrets You Need to Know Before You Open Your Mouth to a Reporter. He is a media training expert who helps spokespeople communicate more effectively. Braud has appeared on TV more than 5,000 times and been quoted in more than 500 publications around the world.
(Writer’s note: Every day in March we’ll have a fresh, free, new article on this topic. If you’d like to dig deeper, you may wish to purchase a recording of the teleseminar called Social Media & Crisis Communications. Here is your purchase link.)
By Gerard Braud
Among those listening
and fostering social media are the mainstream media. CNN’s i-
Report format is perhaps the most dominant among mainstream media, but other media outlets have their own channels for sharing photos and videos. The same is true for local media.
Because I am a regular contributor to i-Reports during weather events and natural disasters, CNN has turned to me on numerous occasions to provide live, on the air interviews. This is something each of you should be prepared to do should you experience a crisis where you work.
I first discovered the power of i-Report during an unusual snowstorm in New Orleans in December 2008. I posted a 15 second i-Report, which CNN pulled off of the web and aired going into their weather reports. It was shot with a point and shoot digital camera, then uploaded via my laptop. I was able to be on location in the snow where no reporters were and I was able to shoot and upload the video faster than any news crew could. Before any assignments editor could think about sending out a news crew, I had already done the job of the assignments editor, the reporter, the producer, the photographer and the editor. Furthermore, it cost the network nothing to have a timely news report.
CNN liked my video so much that they asked me to do a live report via my laptop web camera. Unfortunately, the live report was cancelled at the last minute because a bigger story broke on the national scene. Minutes before airtime, the body of Caylee Anthony was discovered in Florida, after months of speculation that the child had been killed by her mother, Casey Anthony. But just the same, technology placed me where they had no news crews. The media’s own social network allowed me to speak and the media listened.
Since then, my i-Reports to CNN in Tropical Storm Lee in August 2011 and Hurricane Isaac in August 2012, resulted in the network asking me to be their correspondent, providing live reports for several days. I’ll explain the technical side of how you can do this in a future article.
In the case of the Haiti earthquake in 2010 and the Japanese tsunami in 2011, CNN i-Reports allowed CNN have to have reports in the early hours of these crises. However, as the infrastructure of electricity and communications weakened and collapsed, social media tools became less effective for CNN.
There are two events that I consider as game changers in the world of social media, and especially how it brought out of reach crises to the mainstream media.
One is the January 15, 2009 miracle on the Hudson, in which US Airlines flight 1549 made an emergency landing in the Hudson River. What makes this a game changer is that New York is the undisputed media capitol of the world. No single city in the world has a larger collection of global media correspondents. Yet the first official picture used by the media was a Twitter picture taken with an i-Phone by a man who was on a ferry. He tweeted that the ferry was going to rescue survivors and he included a photo. He was there, where no other reporter could be. Additionally, he knew more about the crash than anyone at US Airways corporate headquarters. So, in this case, the company could use Twitter as a way to listen and get updates. It required the airline to proceed with caution as it attempted to verify facts. We must all be careful not to fall victim to a possible hoax or a Photoshopped image.
To verify what the airline saw on Twitter, should the airline start tweeting back? As we’ll discuss a little later, that depends on many other variables.
The second game changer was on April 16, 2007, when a gunman went on a shooting spree at Virginia Tech. That day is filled with more crisis communications lessons than we have time to cover in this series of articles. These are lessons I am happy to discuss with you in depth in another forum. On the day of the shooting, a student with a cell phone innocently stepped outside of a building and came upon police trying to storm a building where the gunman was killing 30 people. The student was so close that you could hear 26 gunshots in his video, which he immediately uploaded as an i-Report to CNN. The student took the global media and their global audiences into a place where no media should have been and where no media could go.
I think we can use these game changers as a launching point to emphasize the need for speed in crisis communications. Among the lessons that we should touch on here is that, had the university had a properly written crisis communications plan, it would have dictated communications within the first hour of the crisis. All of this was covered in a previous article. Add to your to-do list that in your crisis communications plan, it clearly needs to state that your organization will begin communicating with the outside world within one hour or less of any crisis going public.
Most crisis communications plans have no mandates at all. Most crisis communications plans, like the Virginia Tech plan on that day, are fatally flawed because they state standard operating procedures, but contain no mandates or timelines for implementing those standard operating procedures.
In this case, the first shooting happened at 7:15 a.m. and the first communications should have begun no later than 8:15 a.m. Proper communications would have likely cancelled classes and locked down the campus, in which case, the student with the cell phone would never have had the opportunity to stumble across this news event and become an i-reporter. More importantly, communications within one hour would have kept most, if not all, students from entering the campus, which would have prevented the deaths of 30 people.
For the record, the first communications from Virginia Tech came out at 9:25 a.m., which was 10 minutes after the second shooting began. Here you clearly see several compelling reasons why there is a need for speed and why you must always begin communicating within the first hour of the onset of the crisis.
This Virginia Tech cell phone video is further a game changer because the university was so oblivious as to what was happening. They waited a full five hours after the crisis began before sending forth a human to make a public statement. A human should have been making a statement within the first hour. Instead, the world was clamoring about the shooting and the story was being told from everyone’s perspective except the university’s.
For timeline purposes, let us note that Facebook was functioning at that time as primarily a tool exclusive to college students, so the outside world was limited on how much they could look in. Also at this time, Twitter was about to be launched and didn’t play a role in this crisis.
Without getting side tracked on the sins of Virginia Tech, the bottom line is the media monitor social media for breaking news, and in the case of CNN, they have a team of people who are constantly reviewing and vetting i-Reports. If you are not ready to use these tools to control the flow of information about your crisis, expect that eyewitnesses with smart phones will control more of the story than you will.
Tomorrow, I’ll teach you about the tools I use to file my live reports, even when I have no electricity in a hurricane.
(Writer’s note: Every day in March we’ll have a fresh, free, new article on this topic. If you’d like to dig deeper, you may wish to purchase a recording of the teleseminar called Social Media & Crisis Communications. Here is your purchase link.)
By Gerard Braud
Using social media for crisis communications is still our primary discussion. But we need
to discuss one additional aspect of the crisis communication planning process before we dig deeper into social media.
While every crisis is unique, how you communicate during each crisis does not need to be unique. A hospital crisis is different than an oil company crisis. Each would have unique issues identified in their vulnerability assessment. The hospital crisis may range from a wrong site surgery to a pandemic. An oil company crisis may range from an oil spill and water pollution to a refinery fire and explosion. Yet these, and every other organization, could face a crisis such as workplace shooting, a mass injury, a bomb blast, a fire, executive misconduct, embezzlement and a variety of other crises.
In the end, regardless of the crisis, effective communications must take place. Employees will be chattering and clamoring for information. Facebook, Twitter, blogs and YouTube may become social media forums for rumors and ranting. The media may be waiting for you to issue a statement or hold a news conference.
My goal for you is that you should be able to issue your first official statement in one hour or less of the onset of the crisis, if it is a “sudden” event. In the age of social media, this is really a long time, because social media chatter will start immediately. The faster the better, but never longer than an hour.
The rules are initially different in a “smoldering” crisis, such as a case of executive behavior, which may be known to internal decision makers before it is made known to the public. All of the rules are the same once the executive behavior becomes known to the outside world.
Either way, the secret to writing a great Crisis Communications Plan is to start with the end in mind. The crisis begins with what I’ll call a flashpoint. What must you do in order to issue your first critical statement to all of you various audiences in one hour or less? How do you gather the information you need? How do you craft the statement quickly? How do you get approval to issue the statement? How to you get the first critical statement out to your audiences?
If there is a school shooting, a workplace shooting, a shooting at city hall or anywhere else in any other type of business, the crisis will unfold the same way. The event will happen, a call will go out to 911, employees and witnesses will begin to communicate via e-mail and social media. Cell phone photos and video will be posted to the web. The media will arrive in about 30 minutes or less and until they arrive, they will be taking photos and videos from the Internet, Facebook, YouTube and Twitter. You will need to communicate quickly and accurate and the clock starts running right away.
Let us assume that on your best day, you can have a statement ready for the media in one hour or less. This means you have written your news release and your Crisis Management Team has marked it up with a red pen, demanded changes, and you have made those changes to their satisfaction.
You know on a clear sunny day that this will happen, so take the necessary steps on a clear sunny day to figure this out. The worst time to figure this out is in the throes of your crisis, when emotions and anxiety is high. That is why in yesterday’s article we offered the solution to hold a writing retreat so that you have both pre-written and pre-approved statements.
The Boy Scout motto is, “Be Prepared.” I’ve lived that approach every day of my life. My strategy for writing a crisis communications plan is to make it far more thorough than any plan I’ve ever seen anyone else produce. It’s in my nature to go above and beyond the ordinary. I’ve witnessed too many mistakes in too many crises to not be fully prepared on a clear sunny day for what will happen on the darkest day. It is what makes my plans unique and guarantees communications success by the organizations that hold a license to use my plans.
What I’ve learned through decades of research is that most Crisis Communications Plans are flawed. They simply state, “gather information about the crisis,” rather than going the extra mile to list specific questions that need to be asked. Yes, I can’t make that up. They really say, “gather information about the crisis.”
The plans I write have a detailed list of precise questions you will want to ask in order to a) inform your Crisis Management Team and b) begin to fill in the blanks on your First Critical Statement and get it issued. This will also help you to further customize the pre-written communications templates in the addendum of your plan, that matches the particular crisis at hand.
After you gather the initial information, you must confer with your leadership team, i.e. Crisis Management Team. So, your Crisis Communications Plan needs to contain detailed information about how you will reach the team members. Most Crisis Communications Plans are flawed. They say, contact… and then they have a long list of job titles with no names, phone numbers or e-mail addresses. What a hug flaw. Your Crisis Management Team should only be 4 or 5 people and you need to know every way that you can contact them. And it needs to be in your plan with great detail.
Once you have gathered the facts and consulted with your Crisis Management Team, you need to write you first critical statement, i.e. news release… and get approval from your Crisis Management Team. Your Crisis Management Team needs to approve your pre-written templates for fast release, without major re-writes.
If it is a sudden crisis and there are many facts that are still unknown, but base facts that are known, you should use your First Critical Statement for your first release to the media, your employees and other stakeholders. If it is a smoldering crisis, you may be able to bypass the First Critical Statement, turn to the addendum of your plan, and customize one of your more specific pre-written statements and use it as your release to all of your audiences.
Once the statement is approved, how you release it depends upon how much attention your crisis is already getting. In many circumstances, you may need to call a traditional news conference.
If a news conferences is required, I suggest you follow these steps and outline them carefully in your plan.
1) Begin reading your statement to the media, but do not give them a copy of the statement until after the news conference is over.
2) As your spokesperson begins to speak, publish the statement to your organizations primary website.
3) As soon as your statement is published to the web, e-mail the statement to all of your employees and include a link to the website in the e-mail.
4) If necessary, send identical e-mails to various stakeholder groups.
5) Make posts to social media that include a link to your statement.
Yes… there it is, the priority list. Notice social media is fifth in the suggested line of priority. In this list, tried and true beats shiny and new.
If your crisis is an event that is still unfolding, you need to prepare to issue your next statement. Your goal should be to issue your next, more detailed statement within one hour or less. Therefore, your Crisis Communications Plan must very specifically outline all of the steps you must now take.
It is for this second release that I rely heavily upon my pre-written communications templates.
How detailed should your instructions be in your Crisis Communications Plan?
1) The goal of every one of the plans I create is to be so thorough in directions that nothing is forgotten, overlooked, or falls through the cracks.
2) My goal is for the person executing the plan to read the plan as they go and do exactly what the plan tells you to do. This is a different approach than most people take, but when anxiety and emotions are high, this approach insures communications success.
3) This approach also insures that if a veteran communicator is unavailable to manage the crisis communications, that anyone who can read and follow directions can skillfully execute the plan and issue the necessary communications.
So to recap, you’ve now identified your vulnerabilities, you’ve evaluated your audiences and how they want to receive information, and you’ve studied a three part approach to writing an effective Crisis Communications Plan.
In our next article, we go deeper into our core topic of social media to assess whether it is a viable communications tool for your employer, as well has how social media may be the source of your crisis.
For client questions & media interviews
504.908.8188
gerard@braudcommunications.com
