Liz Horgan – Exam Answers

COMM 633
Strategic Crisis and Issues Management
Grayson/Summer 2009

Short Answers

1) Despite recommendations of full disclosure by many crisis managers, there are

instances when an organization should not publicly share information
immediately upon the occurrence of a crisis, or, in some cases, ever. Provide
specific examples of those types of information. Where in the crisis
communications plan as outlined by Coombs should reminders about that
information appear? Information that should not be released includes
proprietary corporate information, the names of victims until families are
notified, personal information about employees, and time sensitive
information that may compromise resolution of a crisis.

Examples of what not to provide would include the secret recipe of KFC
chicken, social security numbers of employees, personnel records of victims.
In the case of the Gaffney serial killer, details about the investigation and the
information being used to track and apprehend the suspect were knowingly
withheld – presumably facilitating capture and for the greater good of public
safety.

Reminders about such information should be put in the “Proprietary

Information Section” which is about ½ way through the steps of a
comprehensive crisis mgmt. plan; it occurs after the first action stage when
in a crisis.

2) According to Fearn-Banks, what are two “insurance” policies and/or effective

crisis prevention tools? Having both strong community relations programs
and a people centered corporate culture can pay significant dividends. Good
relations can help in preventing crises from happening (listening and acting
on issues/problems before they escalate) and can lessen the severity of a crisis
if it does occur.

3) Provide five examples of corporate publics. Employees, Stockholders,

Customers/Clients, Suppliers, Board Members

4) Outline the benefits and drawbacks of using multiple spokespersons during a

crisis.
 The benefits of using multiple spokespersons are as follows:
 one spokesperson is not exhausted by 24/7 responsibility,
 the responsibility of communicating is shared with an objective of having
each spokesperson message to optimal audiences
 if crisis occurs in diverse locations, having an on-the-ground local
presence can support messaging (coordinated) and can be helpful
 using technical experts as part of the spokesperson team can add
credibility and add to overall response
 may make sense if the #1 choice of a spokesperson, the CEO for ex., is a
poor speaker, looks terrible on tv, or has other media problems.

The disadvantages of using multiple spokespeople:

 messaging risk: there is the risk of conflicting statements, emphasis on
different organizational values or conflicting explanations
 confusion regarding who is in charge, both within the media and with
various stakeholders. Having one person speaking for the organization is
unifying and, if done well, can give a sense of coherence to an otherwise
chaotic situation.
 information gaps – difficult in crisis to gather accurate information, let
alone make sure with multiple spokespeople that it is coordinated
effectively and in a timely manner.
 Time delays can result in informing multiple spokespeople. Any delay
can mean the message is co-opted by someone else.
 Decision making is more difficult.

5) If the decision is made to proactively provide information about a crisis to the

media, is it preferable to reach out to one or more reporters known to be fair in
their coverage, or is selective leaking likely to worsen or even create a new crisis?
If you are proactively „breaking the news‟, then a key factor in controlling
the message would be to reach out to reporters you have relationships with
and who are „fair‟. This can do two things, first can build goodwill between
you and the chosen reporters that might be helpful later on, and secondly can
improve the chances that the information will be presented accurately, fairly
and in the best possible light.

While selective coverage may have worked several decades ago, today‟s
environment of instant communications is different. Journalism is highly
competitive – the story is about the story, and the reporter is not much of a
factor from the public‟s point of view. Favoritism of media could become
part of the story itself, fanning more angles and drawing more attention to
the event. It could be used to taint the organization‟s reputation, of not
operating totally above board, and could become another nail in the
reputation coffin.
6) Per Fearn-Banks, the essential role of crisis communications comprises what two
elements? Provide dialog between the organization and it‟s publics before,
 during and after a negative occurrence, and provide strategies and tactics to
minimize the damage to the reputation/image of an organization.

7) Describe the criteria used to evaluate stakeholder salience when engaging in a

reputational threat assessment. Reputational threats exist when there is a gap
between how an organization wants to be perceived and how stakeholders
actually do perceive the organization. The following criteria should be used
and prioritized based on:

 Power- how strong is the stakeholder, how able are they to disrupt
organizational operations?
 Legitimacy-will others view the reason for conflict as serious or
meaningful?
 Willingness to Confront-how important is it to the stakeholder and what
energy will they put into dealing with the issue.

8) Is the Internet the optimal means of communicating with internal employees

about a crisis that occurred after-hours? Why or why not (if the latter, in addition
to any shortcomings of the Internet, please also describe a preferable
communication channel). No, the Internet is not the best way to communicate
to employees after hours. The Internet is for public consumption, where
anyone can get information. Employees are important stakeholders, a
functional public, and have different informational needs and desires than
other groups.

It would be better to us a phone tree, where each manager is notified and

then passes on information to key personnel that he/she manages, who then
call others down the line and so on until every employee is contacted
personally. This is a first step in establishing or re-establishing the sense of
“we” as the crisis unfolds, and is important in making sure employees feel
valued. Once employees have all been contacted, updates can be done
through Intranet, meetings, closed-circuit video conferencing, billboards,
even PA systems if appropriate.

True/False

1) The White Star Line crisis management and communications plan contemplated a
fire on board ship, but not a sinking. FALSE

2) Johnson & Johnson failed to recognize several prodromes to the Tylenol matter,
but recovered to handle the crisis well largely due to skillful media relations
practices. FALSE

3) It is possible for an organization to be viewed more favorably after a crisis. TRUE

 4) Information about a crisis reaches publics through the media more than any other
means. TRUE

5) Influencers can severely damage an organization, including stopping it from

functioning. FALSE

6) An organization cannot be found legally liable if it did not take precautions to

prevent potential crises and was not prepared to respond. FALSE

7) Stakeholders are more likely to draw upon indirect than direct experience when
crafting their personal views of an organization’s reputation. TRUE

8) Pepsi used an advertisement to declare an end to the hypodermic needles/syringes

crisis. TRUE

9) It is difficult but usually possible to replace the contributions provided to an

organization by primary stakeholders. FALSE

10) Crisis managers should focus solely on their own stakeholders, even at the
expense of public opinion experts. FALSE

Fill-in-the-Blank

1) Pepsi released to the media precise details about its bottling process in an attempt
to rebut claims that hypodermic needles could have been placed in the cans before
leaving the factories.

2) Per Fearn-Banks, a cover up makes a crisis persist.

3) A Crisis appendix is a crisis knowledge database that can contain precollected

information, templates and knowledge learned from past crises.

4) In crisis preparation, vulnerabilities typically are assessed using a combination of

likelihood of occurance and severity of damage.

5) Per Coombs (citing Mitroff), one measure of success for crisis management is the
speed at which normal operations are restored.

6) According to Fearn-Banks, the source of information most trusted by the

American people is other people.

7) According to Fearn-Banks, a company attempting to prevent a crisis must not

only do what is right; it also must tell its publics that it is doing so.
 8) An organization’s reputation is a reflection of the organization-stakeholder
relationship.

9) According to Coombs, stakeholder perceptions help to define an event as a

crisis.

10) In its simplest form, expected value is the anticipated outcome of an event
multiplied by the probability of the event occurring.

Essay

Imagine you were the head of corporate communications for the White Star Line during
the Titanic disaster. Would you have used an alternative approach to communications,
before, during and/or after the accident? If so, please provide detail.

Yes, I would have used an alternative approach to communications during the

Titanic disaster.

Before – I would have created a crisis communications plan at the very least. I
would have worked with newspaper reporters even more closely, not only to
promote the magnificent and opulent liners we were introducing, but to broaden
our relationships with our newspaper men. I would have set up a system of
communication between our ships and our home office. As part of the overall
training our captain and crew undertook prior to sailing (which did include a quick
lifeboat test), we would have practiced using the radio communication system.

During – Upon receiving the first sense of a problem regarding the Titanic, I would
have contacted key leaders in the organization (the head of White Star, Bruce
Ismay, was aboard the ship, so I would have had to contact other key people at the
Company). We would determine who our spokesperson would be, and would work
together as a team. As knowledge of the event was sketchy, contradictory and non-
verifiable, I would have made efforts to get information from the ship‟s radio and
from the other ships in the area, as we want to be the first to know what is going on
if possible. Learning that there was a significant issue, I would have been proactive
and issued a news release through my key reporters that an incident had occurred
and that White Star would provide updated information as it became available. I
would make sure that we were visible and accessible during this time of potential
crisis and uncertainty.
As information became known that the ship was foundering, I would have
announced through news releases and a public statement that we had a serious
incident and that we were highly concerned about the safety of our passengers and
crew. We would provide updates as information became available, and would craft
our messages to focus on the human element of the story, our concern for the
people. As it became apparent we had fault in this, we would issue an apology,
including that it appeared that this disaster resulted from a series of misfortunes
and errors that we had not anticipated. When it became clear what our faults were,
I would admit all of our mistakes at one time (the lack of lifeboats, crew decisions,
an inadequate evacuation plan) and again express contrition that human lives were
placed in jeopardy and highlight our concern for families and all those suffering
with the uncertainties surrounding the Titanic incident.
As the magnitude of the disaster unfolded, and the news kept getting worse, I
would have tried to redefine the crisis away from the Company and instead have the
disaster focus be on the human tragedy. I would spotlight White Star‟s commitment
to the victims and their families. I would set up a location in New York where
family could gather for the latest information and where we could provide support
to them. The location would have two areas, one for passengers‟ families, one for
the crew‟s (societal issues were…different in 1912). At the same time, I would also
reach out to influencers. I would contact the ship builder and get an expert in as
part of the White Star team to talk about the safety issues that were included in the
construction of the vessel and detail the state-of-the-art features incorporated into
the planning and building of the ship. Other examples of influencers could be
maritime officials or governmental representatives (who could speak to the
compliance of regulations by White Star, and not specifically that they did comply
with the number of lifeboats – even if, as proved, the number was grossly
inadequate).
In my communications, I would look to crafting messages that were both
consistent (avoiding contradictory statements) and tailored to each of our key
stakeholders: passengers and their families, employees (ships crew and all White
Star and IMM employees), shareholders, future customers, competitors and the
general public.

After – I would focus on rebuilding the White Star reputation. This would be an
ongoing process. I would change our PR from what it was before the disaster, of
touting opulence and the unsinkability of our ships, to one where White Star
stressed safety with luxury, and a compassionate concern for our passengers and
crew. I would publicize the steps we have taken, after analyzing the crisis, to
prevent future incidents (including any ship modifications as a protection to our
investments in our fleet of ships). I would have White Star be part of a crusade for
stronger maritime safety measures. I would gather information about Captain
Smith. As he went down with the ship, he could have been cast (if it turned out to be
accurate) in a heroic light even though he efforts were not enough to save all lives or
save the ship, and could have added a positive corporate human element to the
aftermath of the disaster.
We would not want to be seen as arrogant and negligent, as could (and did)
happen without a crisis communications plan.