Crisis Guru

Question:

Dear Crisis Guru:

How do you deal with a committed, dedicated, effective, and successful antagonist? They get all the media attention they need. Some, maybe many of our employees, seem sympathetic to the issues being raised.

Executive Vice President
Full-Service International Consumer Firm

Answer:

Dear EVP:

You have many options in situations where there is a committed, dedicated, and successful antagonist, but they must be carefully evaluated. Everything you do has the potential to energize the attack and risk mobilizing others to join your critics. Operating decisions and communications choices should be focused on reducing the energy of the attack, and managing its emotional impact on company officials, employees, and key constituencies. Focus on solving the underlying problem. Here’s a sequence of actions I would suggest.

Objectively evaluate the problems brought to your attention. The simplest solution may indeed be exactly what the critic is suggesting, or some version of it.
Objectively evaluate whether the issue is really a public relations problem. It could be an operations issue looking to avoid an operations solution. Assess objectively the emotional impact the continued practice, behavior, or policy is having versus, if possible, negotiating a solution. Every attempt should be made to deal with this person directly, even involving them in whatever solution strategy evolves.
Set a top management tone that is open, helpful, cooperative, respectful, disciplined, and focused on constructive resolution.
Avoid third parties. They all have agendas of their own and will disappear instantly if some adverse information surfaces or they are attacked as a price for defending you. More often than not, they will serve as an “off-the-record” back channel information source for the news media and your opposition.
It might be better, as a solution emerges, to establish some sort of credible, temporary oversight process that can independently validate the company’s honest attempts to resolve the situation.
Communication about the situation should relate candidly to the problem alleged, the company's approach to dealing with it, the involvement of outside entities as collaborators and overseers, and how this process will prevent similar situations from reoccurring.
Re-establishing customer and public trust requires less in the way of typical public relations techniques and more direct response and actions that demonstrate sincerity, honesty, integrity, and willingness to compromise.

If you want your story widely told, you better know the ending before you start marketing the beginning.

This more direct approach reduces the visibility options of critics and can produce the kind of result that will encourage other dissatisfied customers work seriously with the company to solve their problem before going public.

Cordially,
Jim Lukaszewski




Back to Commentaries
CRISIS GURU #9 Real Time Answers to Real Time Questions In his Crisis Guru Commentaries, Jim Lukaszewski provides real answers to real questions about your most critical communications problems and issues. To submit a question, please direct it by e-mail to crisisguru@e911.com. Be sure to include your full name, affiliation, address, and telephone number. All published questions will be identified by title and industry only. Your confidentiality will be protected. TODAY’S TOPIC: COUNTERACTING PERSISTENT, EFFECTIVE ACTIVISTS Question: Dear Crisis Guru: How do you deal with a committed, dedicated, effective, and successful antagonist? They get all the media attention they need. Some, maybe many of our employees, seem sympathetic to the issues being raised. Executive Vice President Full-Service International Consumer Firm Answer: Dear EVP: You have many options in situations where there is a committed, dedicated, and successful antagonist, but they must be carefully evaluated. Everything you do has the potential to energize the attack and risk mobilizing others to join your critics. Operating decisions and communications choices should be focused on reducing the energy of the attack, and managing its emotional impact on company officials, employees, and key constituencies. Focus on solving the underlying problem. Here’s a sequence of actions I would suggest. Objectively evaluate the problems brought to your attention. The simplest solution may indeed be exactly what the critic is suggesting, or some version of it. Objectively evaluate whether the issue is really a public relations problem. It could be an operations issue looking to avoid an operations solution. Assess objectively the emotional impact the continued practice, behavior, or policy is having versus, if possible, negotiating a solution. Every attempt should be made to deal with this person directly, even involving them in whatever solution strategy evolves. Set a top management tone that is open, helpful, cooperative, respectful, disciplined, and focused on constructive resolution. Avoid third parties. They all have agendas of their own and will disappear instantly if some adverse information surfaces or they are attacked as a price for defending you. More often than not, they will serve as an “off-the-record” back channel information source for the news media and your opposition. It might be better, as a solution emerges, to establish some sort of credible, temporary oversight process that can independently validate the company’s honest attempts to resolve the situation. Communication about the situation should relate candidly to the problem alleged, the company's approach to dealing with it, the involvement of outside entities as collaborators and overseers, and how this process will prevent similar situations from reoccurring. Re-establishing customer and public trust requires less in the way of typical public relations techniques and more direct response and actions that demonstrate sincerity, honesty, integrity, and willingness to compromise. If you want your story widely told, you better know the ending before you start marketing the beginning. This more direct approach reduces the visibility options of critics and can produce the kind of result that will encourage other dissatisfied customers work seriously with the company to solve their problem before going public. Cordially, Jim Lukaszewski
The Lukaszewski Group Inc. 100 South Bedford Road, Suite 340, Mount Kisco, NY 10549 U.S.A., 914.681.0000-Office 914.681.0047-Facsimile 203.948.7029-24/7 Copyright © 2009, James E. Lukaszewski. All rights reserved. Permission to print one copy for personal use is hereby granted by the copyright holder. Reproduction of additional copies without written permission of the copyright holder is strictly prohibited.