Tuesday, July 27, 2010

Anthonissen, P.F.(2008). Crisis Communication. Great Britain: MPG Books Ltd.

Irrespective of how well-developed a crisis plan and how effectively it is implemented, if a company fails to effectively communicate the measures taken, stakeholders may still perceive the organization as unconcerned or uncaring. Thus, crisis management is both a question of the stakeholders' perceptions and a matter of recovery.
Organizations that have developed over time solid relationships with their stakeholders and a strong brand have higher chances of recovering after a crisis. However, brand image comprises various elements such as performance, governance, social policies, and ethics all of which fluctuate and hinge on the perceptions of diverse constituencies such as employees, consumers, investors, or public opinion who react vis-à-vis brands (Vernier, 2008).

Building relationships with stakeholders and emphasizing good will increase the chances of successful crisis management. Today, the crisis management strategies need to involve two elements that could prove to be challenging: the new media or the citizen journalism and the environment. Communities in which corporations operate expect them to be environmental friendly and thus, the former need to incorporate environmental issues into their organizational lore. Concern for the environment cannot occur in a vacuum, but rather it should be "a logical extension of an enterprise-wide culture of environmental management and stewardship that factor into an organization's overall corporate reputation and brand identity" (Oltmanns, 2008). If corporations include concern for the environment only at the moment when they are compelled by circumstances to face a crisis, they risk being perceived as insincere and disingenuous (Oltmanns, 2008). In order to integrate environmental issues into their lore, organizations should demonstrate environmental leadership (be committed to sound environmental management practices) and establish credible environmental partnerships (take active roles in the agenda and programs of environmental organizations) -- (Oltmanns, 2008).

Another factor of challenge but also of opportunity is the internet. Today's Web 2.0 changed the way organizations respond to crisis by limiting their time for preparation and by transforming disgruntled and angry voices into "experts" writing on blogs, whose credibility may not be questioned while their identity is cloaked (Bridgeman, 2008). In order to transform the challenge of the new media and of the citizen journalism into an opportunity in times of crisis, organizations should be ready to change their Q&A type of response from a decade ago into an online dialogue. Effective crisis communication in the Web 2.0 era requires that organizations apportion time and resources into engaging in dialogue with stakeholders, disgruntled consumers, but also with total strangers, supporters or detractors, etc. By engaging in dialogue with various constituencies, organizations allow them to take part in the crisis management process which, in turn renders the organizations as "caring" and "open" and may attract new consumers. Yet, it is important to note that, in times of crisis, managers from various corporate departments should be willing to engage in online dialogues and thus be prepared to regard the Web 2.0 as a medium that provides conversation and not debate (Oltmanns, 2008).
The importance that Web 2.0 and the environment play in the crisis management response should be analyzed using various case studies that could compare organizational responses from the perspective of the SCCT (Situational Crisis Communication Theory, Coombs-2002) or the Theory of Image Restoration Discourse (Benoit, 1995)and by having as units of analysis the online interaction between the organization's representatives and its stakeholders. Such a content analysis could determine the effectiveness of the crisis management response and add on the existing crisis management literature.

2 comments: