 |
| Claire Doan |
Mistake #1: Sharing information before you’re absolutely sure of the facts. The easiest way to destroy your credibility during a high-profile event is being forced to walk back information you have already shared, whether it’s “clarifying” the health effects of product contamination or stating that a swath of customer information was part of the cyber breach after all. Beyond revealing you didn’t have all the facts, the plethora of mass communications channels at everyone’s disposal means there’s no real way to “walk back” something these days. You’ll take a hit to your reputation, invite skepticism regarding whatever information you subsequently share—however accurate—and make it harder to recover after the crisis.
Do: Communicate in a timely, effective manner once you have concrete information, and underscore to critical stakeholders that you’re working diligently to resolve the issue and will provide accurate updates as you’re able. In the interim, answer questions as best you can on a reactive basis, relay information about the process where helpful—such as noting you’re reviewing the matter or cooperating with authorities—and avoid jumping to conclusions or saying something you will later regret.
Mistake #2: Assuming employee communications will remain internal. The proverbial line between internal and external communications no longer exists, thanks to platforms like TikTok and Reddit that provide a bullhorn for employees to broadcast their views and information about their employers. This reality applies as much to memos and emails as it does to in-person town halls and company-wide Zoom meetings, which can be recorded and instantly relayed to interested reporters or shared on social media. Further, while what you say is important, how you say it can matter just as much, as evidenced by the negative attention paid to companies insensitively announcing mass layoffs via Zoom and to other cringe-worthy examples.
| This article is featured in O'Dwyer's Jan. '25 Special Issue on Crisis Communications |
Do: Craft all your communications with the expectation that they’ll be seen and scrutinized by a public audience, from customers to investors to regulators. Ask yourself: If the New York Times wrote a story on what you’re sharing internally, would your messaging accurately reflect your company’s ethos and objectives? The respect and appreciation your company feels for employees should be front and center.
Mistake #3: Choosing to say nothing to key stakeholders even after you have the facts. Paralysis isn’t a good strategy. Being quiet for an unreasonably protracted period can frustrate, confuse, or disappoint important individuals and audiences and make resuming post-crisis normalcy even more challenging. In the absence of accurate information, negative public sentiment can take off even more quickly in the online realm, with mounting distrust and speculation now on display for reporters, policymakers and others.
Do: Recognize that difficult times test a company’s resilience and relationship with its key stakeholders. Focus on direct, thoughtful engagement at critical junctures with clear, accurate information. Effective, on-point communications that demonstrate openness and accountability can even engender greater loyalty.
Mistake #4: Telling a reporter “no comment” in the expectation the story will just go away. The media and the public can interpret this curt response in various ways and none of them are good: a tacit admission of culpability or guilt, an evasion of accountability, a lack of transparency and/or an indication that you don’t have a handle on the situation. This approach closes off the opportunity to build strong relationships with journalists whom you can engage down the line to share further context on ongoing challenges, your company story or positive news. Articles and news segments don’t just disappear; most media outlets archive online content indefinitely, and this information can circulate far more widely than you intend.
Do: Err on the side of engagement when circumstances permit, even on background reporting or off-the-record comments. Remember that journalists have a job and it’s not personal; their goal is to inform others and most care deeply about making a positive difference. Even sharing a high-level one-liner and making it a point to follow up with the reporter with more information would be helpful: “We launched a review and hope to know more soon, and we appreciate those who raised concerns.”
Mistake #5: Skipping a well-timed post-mortem. While the inclination to “get past” a crisis is understandable, moving on too quickly eliminates a valuable opportunity to address and learn from major, recurring problems. Offering key players a forum to provide constructive criticism also tempers their inclination to sound off internally or on social media—neither of which is a desirable outcome.
Do: Pull your working group together and pick their brains at the tail end of recovery after they’ve had their rest, giving them an organized and structured way to provide constructive feedback on communications. The frustrations, challenges and dynamics will still be fresh in their minds, as will be the lessons learned and the incentive to develop solutions. Developing these partnerships and implementing positive changes will help you better manage the next inevitable crisis when it rolls around.
Technological advances, employee activism and citizen journalism have given everyone a figurative microphone and round-the-clock platform to become active players in companies’ make-it-or-break-it moments. Using the above principles to guide your decisions can mean the difference between destroying company value and reputation—or emerging with an enhanced brand and stronger stakeholder relationships.
***
Claire Doan is Managing Director and Head of Litigation at H/Advisors Abernathy.
If you’re like a lot of people, you have been obsessed with “Love Story,” the FX series that has been airing for the past eight weeks about JFK Jr. and Carolyn Bessette. But why didn’t Kennedy use crisis PR to deal with the paparazzi, the news media and the tabloids?
Much is made of the importance of proper planning to anticipate and manage a crisis—but what matters most is understanding how decisions will be made once the crisis is underway.
Slow and procedural messaging without emotional resonance, fragmented leadership communication, overwhelming policy‑heavy language and a pervasive gap between words and observable action have repeatedly undermined corporate credibility.
New York Magazine profiles 78-year-old Peggy Siegal, who was once among the most powerful publicists in the Big Apple, in an article headlined: "The Grand Dame of the Epstein Files.”
