Tag Archives: crisis communications

Speaking with Authenticity: Lessons from the ‘Phillies Karen’ Viral Drama

Posted on by
Reply

The rules of crisis communication have changed drastically over the last decade. Crisis communication and reputation management have quickly become must-haves due to the nature of digital devices. Incidents that would once blow over in a day or even hours can snowball, fueling endless media coverage and content. Today, a story can be instantly amplified on social media; however, it can also stoke up misinformation, creating a crisis or viral drama of its own.

As caught on camera during a recent Philadelphia Phillies game, a fan demanded that a father give her a home run ball, causing a stir on social media. The father took the ball back from his young son and handed it to the woman, who proceeded back to her seat, ball in hand. The incident stirred a public manhunt to find the ‘Phillies Karen’ in question. Multiple misidentifications ensued. Interestingly, a recent study from Science reported that misinformation travels “farther, faster, deeper and more broadly than the truth.”

A comprehensive, thoughtful and tested crisis communication plan, as well as a commitment to speak with authenticity to set the record straight, are two key elements to navigate any crisis or national outrage. Here are lessons from the ‘Phillies Karen’ incident worth noting.

Get the Facts Straight to Avoid Premature Conclusions

In the case of the viral Phillies incident, social media rumors led to the false identification of a school administrator and later, a Red Sox fan, causing viral online condemnations. Both the school and the individual quickly took to social media to set the record straight, each releasing timely, clever and light-hearted, prepared statements and responses.

“The woman identified on social media as ‘Phillies Karen’ is not and has never been, an employee of the Hammonton Public Schools … Anyone who works for our school district, attended as a student or lives in our community would obviously have caught the ball bare-handed in the first place, avoiding this entire situation.”

“I’m not the crazy Philly Mom (but I sure would love to be as thin as she is and move as fast)… and I’m a Red Sox fan.”.

The falsely accused school and individual swiftly jumped in to provide clear, concise and witty posts to mitigate risk. The statements and responses provided detailed feedback on their lack of involvement.

Effective crisis communication and reputation management hinge on getting the facts straight. Viewers count on their favorite news sources and social media platforms for the latest headlines, and from there, often make quick assumptions.

During times of crisis, it’s important to align internally on key messaging before releasing any information on behalf of a brand or individual. Once an incident is on the radar, be ready to monitor for media coverage and social media mentions, and stay alert for inbound media requests as they arise.

Have a Plan and Respond Authentically

Crisis communication plans and strategies are essential for managing crisis incidents and allow brands and individuals to get ahead of potentially business damaging premature conclusions.

Incident management requires a strategic yet thoughtful approach. In addition to respecting the gravity of each situation, brands and individuals must look to protect their reputations and share the facts while staying true to their brand voice and values.

Responding with authenticity can defuse a crisis. When a predicament hits, brands and individuals can be adversely affected, even if they’re not at fault. False accusations and other misinformation can quickly diminish trust in a company or personal reputation, causing inconvenience, damage or disruptions if not corrected.

A prompt crisis communication response that is truthful and genuine without bias can be crucial for managing false news and other propaganda, as well as mitigating risk. Brands and individuals must look to set the right tone based on the incident, while also ensuring that their brand messaging and positioning are reflected.

In the case of the Phillies Karen, both parties showed integrity and accountability while also staying true to their brand voice. Their respective statements were factual, with a bit of humor sprinkled in to match the severity of the situation.

So, while memes come and go and headlines fade away, damage to a brand or personal reputation can stick around. Don’t get caught up in the internet’s next big drama—brands and individuals must have a crisis communication plan and strategy ready to mitigate potential crisis or national outrage.

Navigating Verbal Missteps: Warnings from the Reality Show “Big Brother”

Posted on by
Reply

George Orwell’s novel “1984” first introduced the concept of “Big Brother,” a totalitarian surveillance state watching your every move, to the lexicon in 1949. And in 2000, CBS launched its own spin on the concept with the reality show “Big Brother.” Equal parts social experiment and competitive event, “Big Brother” follows a select number of contestants, referred to as houseguests, as they compete to win $750,000 while living together in a house isolated from the outside world.  

Many reality shows may tout an up-close-and-personal glimpse at their stars, but little offer as much access to participants in real time as Big Brother. Since the show’s premiere, CBS has provided viewers with a 24/7 live feed of the contestants living in the house. At any point in the day, save for certain competitions or ceremonies restricted for the episodes, someone can hop on Paramount Plus to watch houseguests hang out, strategize and often, say the wrong thing.  

Though houseguests are made aware they are being filmed continuously via live feed, several houseguests have been recorded on camera making racist, homophobic or sexist comments. Consequently, some have been forced to leave the show and navigate long-lasting consequences.   

Houseguest Rylie Jeffries landed in hot water online for his treatment of fellow contestant and “showmance”, Katherine Woodman, in the season currently airing. When host Julie Chen asked him about some of the declarations he’d made in the house after he was voted out, his response was, “I can’t believe y’all heard that.”  

Just like other Big Brother houseguests of seasons past, anyone can turn into a headline overnight. It’s a story becoming increasingly common – an executive or employee makes an insensitive comment and puts themselves and their company in the hotseat. You may think it can’t happen to you, but who knows? Here are a few lessons to take from Big Brother contestant missteps:  

  1. Always assume someone is listening: Big Brother houseguests are required to wear microphones at all times. Every conversation, no matter how benign, is recorded for the audience to hear. While this kind of 24/7 surveillance once seemed unbelievable, social media has opened the floodgates and provided individuals with a platform to expose public slip ups. Social media is riddled with countless comments calling for the employment or other personal details of individuals caught in hot-mic moments or who may have said something controversial publicly. 
  1. Understand how you want to be perceived: Contestants are frequently shown saying one thing in diary confessionals, only to be shown saying and doing something completely the opposite in the house. This sort of flip-flopping may be understandable in the context of a game, but it won’t always fly in the real world. People want to connect with brands and companies that align with their values and when individuals representing the company’s stated mission fail to reflect them, it can breed frustration.  
  1. Utilize your communications team: Big Brother contestants spend their time in the house with no contact or input from the outside world. No one is there to guide messaging or consider public perception. Companies don’t have to be at the same disadvantage. The right communications team will anticipate crisis situations before they happen, working with leadership and serving as a resource for the wider team.  

100-plus cameras may not be following your every move, but the court of public opinion is. It no longer takes signing up for a reality show to launch your public misstep to virality. We can learn from these houseguests’ mistakes and use it for smart and effective communications that strengthen relationships with audiences.  

The Velvet Rope is Gone. Today’s Executives Must Be Aware of the Public Eye and Act Accordingly

Posted on by
Reply

Executives behaving badly, particularly CEOs, is nothing new. But in an era where anyone with a phone is de facto paparazzi, every Instagram story becomes Exhibit A in the court of public opinion. It’s become clear C-suites can no longer operate exclusively behind closed doors. Corporate leaders, once protected by layers of privacy, PR and legal gatekeeping, are now finding themselves subject to a bright, unrelenting, and at times, unforgiving spotlight.

The expectations for executive conduct haven’t necessarily changed, but the surrounding environment and the stakes certainly have. When an executive, particularly the CEO, says one thing and does the opposite, it erodes trust quickly. For example, a CEO demanding that employees endure daily office commutes, only to work remotely from St. Barts, sends a very clear message to employees and the public that they see themselves as an exception to the rule.

Additionally, we’ve entered into an era of “optics-driven accountability.” Perceptions will shape the narrative faster than the facts will surface – and boards need to recognize that as well as the value a good comms team can bring to play in these situations. Just a screenshot, a caption and a handful of internet sleuths with time on their hands have the power to shape a narrative.

Of course, this brings to mind the recent viral incident of Astronomer CEO Andy Byron caught on the jumbotron at a Coldplay concert in Boston, embracing the company’s head of HR, Kristin Cabot. The moment raged across social media, quickly raising questions about an alleged affair. It also continues to generate endless mimicry and judgment of a CEO engaging in such a public display with an employee. The company’s board quickly launched an investigation, and Byron resigned shortly after the incident. No crime was committed, but all the same, the company was thrust into uncomfortable optics of blurred boundaries that CEOs regularly cross and a storyline that quickly outpaced the PR team’s ability to contain it.

This is far from the only case. California Governor Gavin Newsom famously dined, indoors, at French Laundry, amid one of the strictest COVID lockdowns in the country. The public became outraged by the perceived hypocrisy of being stuck at home, FaceTiming friends and family and ordering DoorDash while a public figure sidestepped the very rules he imposed. Again, countless headlines, social media posts and memes followed.

On a slightly smaller scale, a CEO of a Florida-based insurance company made headlines this July after his wife’s social media posts highlighted their extravagant lifestyle – luxury cars, private planes and yachts, designer bags, clothes and jewelry. While there was seemingly no misconduct, the posts ignited a social media firestorm and drew widespread media attention. The backlash quickly escalated, with consumer advocates and even elected officials weighing in. Many Florida homeowners, already grappling with rocketing premiums and shrinking coverage options, found the display as emblematic of a deeper disconnect between wealthy executives and the public.

These incidents, and others like them, highlight a new reality: C-suites are as visible outside the office as they are inside. They are now part of the story whether they intend to be or not. Choices matter – behavior in and outside the “office” – can signal values, and intent. And in a world full of corporate messaging, actions often speak louder than an entire comms team.

So, what is company leadership to do?

Encourage executives to practice conscious transparency. This doesn’t mean living ascetically; it just means living in alignment with the company and personal values. For example, if the company just laid off staff, don’t post a video calling it a “difficult decision” from the luxury penthouse. If customers and employees are making sacrifices, don’t show off excessively. If the brand stands for integrity, make sure executive conduct reinforces it.

Lean into the expertise of your comms team. Reputational equity is as valuable as financial equity. Consumers latch onto brands, and leaders, that align with their values. Executives should work with their comms teams to make sure the optics they present as an individual are in line with the company’s mission. Experienced communications teams can help identify risks early and direct leaders away from avoidable reputational mistakes. Quiet counsel, ones that operate behind the scenes, can prevent public missteps that can put executives – and the company – in the media hot seat.

The velvet rope is gone. Individuals with cameras, notepads and press credentials are no longer the only means for a story taking hold. The court of public opinion is in control and armed with its own tools to take a story viral.

The Secret to Great Public Relations: Client Candor

Posted on by
Reply

This July marks the start of Kimball Hughes Public Relations’ 30th year in business. Reflecting on the agency’s history along with my own 22-year run as a PR professional, I’ve thought a lot about some of the most valuable PR lessons, for agencies and organizations that hire them. The one I keep coming back to is this: stop selling. And I’m talking to the clients. 

Of course, agencies of all kinds, at least in the beginning, need to sell clients on hiring them. Meanwhile an interesting, frequent and largely unspoken parallel exists where clients—for- and non-profits alike—continue to sell themselves to their agencies well after contracts are signed.  

What I mean is this: As the agency employees meet with subject matter experts or hold meetings with leadership, the organization will present its products, services, market position and even its executives as the best, most innovative, most insightful people and products within their space. While some of that may be (hopefully) true, there’s a bit of salesmanship involved. Put another way, if you aren’t telling your PR team about concerns, pain points, missteps or potential obstacles, you are setting up your messaging partners as well as your organization for potential disaster.  

Could This Be a Problem? 

My favorite example, now 20 years in my professional rear-view window, was when I worked with a large multi-national company. They faced no challenges, and every employee was the best and the brightest professional to be found. During our initial discovery, I asked if there were any areas of concern, topics to avoid or past issues that might create complications with the media. Nothing. The horizon was wide, bright and full of promise, or so I was told. In fact, their leadership team seemed put off by my question. 

Months later, I received a call on a Friday afternoon. One of their executives had been convicted of a crime almost one year prior, and on the upcoming Monday this executive would be in court for sentencing. Could this be a problem, asked my contact from within the company? Emphatically, yes, I responded.  

Because this executive had not worked for the client at the time the charges, and the later conviction, came down, the company’s name had not been connected to the scandal. This executive was not on the list of media-facing representatives of the company, so none of this came to light during discovery. Senior leadership had not been forthcoming, and our team didn’t know this executive was even employed by the client.  

I spent the weekend scrambling to pull together a crisis communications strategy. And while the executive’s conviction led to wall-to-wall media coverage, the client was not mentioned. The media couldn’t imagine, given his crime, that anyone would employ him. But he was a childhood friend of the CEO who helped him with a job while he awaited sentencing. The press simply didn’t investigate his work history post-conviction and LinkedIn wasn’t wildly adopted at the time.  

Because the client wanted to present everything in the most positive light possible, they missed an opportunity to better protect the company, its employees and its customers. In the above example, disaster was averted by dumb luck. In the interconnected, all-online world of today, I don’t believe such a near miss would again be possible. 

Honest Assessments Matter 

No one wants to start a new relationship with dirty laundry. Many a first date has probably tanked a potential relationship by employing absolute candor. While not recommended for a first date, absolute candor is mission critical when onboarding a public relations agency. PR professionals are only as effective as the information clients provide. By failing to share information about challenges, concerns or potential obstacles, clients tie the hands of their agency partners to do their jobs effectively. PR partners are best positioned to help protect client reputations from unnecessary harm, but only if they know the messages to amplify as well as sensitive areas to avoid or plan around. 

If you are considering hiring a public relations agency, the most valuable advice I can offer is to be absolutely candid about the good and bad; what you want to talk about and the issues that keep leadership (and maybe HR) up at night. There is power in doing so, and complete transparency can create an extremely productive partnership to both promote and protect hard-won reputations.

Diddy’s Silence Spoke Volumes: Why Secrets Are Toxic to Crisis Public Relations

Posted on by
Reply

When a brand or a public figure waits too long to tell the truth, they rarely escape the gravitational pull of a crisis unscathed. Whether it’s the ENRON scandal of 2001, Bernie Madoff’s 2009 arrest or the failed 2017 Fyre Festival, one common thread rings true; you can only evade the truth for so long.

Making recent headlines is Sean “Diddy” Combs’ ongoing public downfall. After decades of alleged abuse and misconduct from multiple sources, Combs is facing mounting legal and reputational crises. The musician and producer’s situation is a worst-case scenario from a PR perspective; a stream of headlines that could have been prevented with a wider perspective and proactive approach.

Don’t Let the Crisis Define the Timeline

In May 2024, CNN released a video of Combs from 2016 that showed a violent interaction with his former girlfriend Cassie Ventura after she filed a lawsuit against him in 2023. Allegations quickly began to accumulate, each one painting a more tainted picture than the last. CNN’s video was a turning point for Combs’ case in terms of his reputation and control of the narrative. What could have possibly been one or a few headlines became a viral cultural moment. For months, hundreds of allegations surfaced and by October 2024, an attorney announced he was representing 120 accusers with sexual misconduct allegations against Combs.

For PR to be effective, you cannot allow third parties, in this case the media, to define the narrative. This is paramount. Crisis teams are brought in to either diffuse or help to ensure a factual story, rather than lighting more fires. To do so, public relations professionals need every detail, every time stamp and every skeleton out of the closet from the very start.

Get the All the Facts Out

Secrecy is a dangerous thing in public relations. A slow cadence of new details like in Combs’ situation keeps a story alive and slowly tears down public trust. Letting the PR team know the details, and what might be out there waiting to be found, can give these professionals the tools they need to take a bit of the wind out of the media storm that just won’t seem to quit.

Speaking to your PR team could be viewed similarly to speaking with an attorney insomuch as all the details, warts and all, need to be shared with the PR team, with whom should have a non-disclosure agreement, up front. Being transparent and thorough with the crisis team early on, no matter how difficult, will help businesses avoid a slow leak of damaging stories and details. Sometimes the situation is simply bad, as in the case of Combs. Even in these scenarios, there can be a benefit to taking some measure of responsibility and trying to shape the narrative; not with spin, but with facts and taking a measure or responsibility. While doing so may not mitigate the public’s interest, it can sometimes allow you to get everything out at once which can, in some instances, shorten the lifespan of media coverage and attention. Once a crisis team is equipped with the full scope of a problem, they can work with business leaders to shape a fact-based narrative around it and try to develop a reasonable plan through the situation. Rarely can one avoid or go around a situation like Comb’s without some obvious reputational damage, even under the best of circumstances.

The Value of a Crisis Team That Knows the Right Questions

A good crisis team asks hard questions. They map out worst-case scenarios, poke holes, identify risks and prepare messaging that anticipates the next batch of headlines. They can only do so if they are brought into the room before the cameras start rolling, footage leaks and lawsuits multiply. In Combs’ case, every new, salacious detail draws more coverage and confirms what many had already assumed about the man. That’s the cost of self-preservation. Had his team had the full picture earlier, it may have been less of a sensational story, or at least less frequently publicized, and more focused on accountability.

In Combs’ case, his actions and behaviors have been further reinforced by past tragedies and altercations like his involvement in and reaction to the Heavy D & Puff Daddy Celebrity Charity Basketball Game stampede and the East Coast vs. West Coast hip-hop rivalry that allegedly contributed to the deaths of Tupac Shakur and The Notorious B.I.G. A crisis team will consider how a company’s past mistakes might be uncovered and rehashed in the media as a current crisis unfolds.

Secrets Don’t Age Well

While Combs’ case is particularly extreme for many reasons, any global brand or a public figure could find themselves in a crisis that plays out in the media. And when speaking with a crisis PR team, it is critical to lay all the facts out early. Anything left unsaid can quickly be found by the media, the courts or random sleuths on the internet. Owning the story and being forthcoming with information might not prevent backlash, but it does allow a crisis team the time and details necessary to manage a situation with clarity, compassion and some measure of control to ensure the client’s side of the story is told with care.

An Outie’s Perspective: If I worked in Comms at Severance’s Lumon Industries

Posted on by
Reply

Photo by AppleTV

The wildly popular Apple TV+ series Severance has many of us considering ourselves in the shoes of a so-called “severed” employee. For example, I wonder – what would my “innie” do during her workday at the fictional Lumon Industries?

Spoiler alert – if you have not yet seen the show, the premise centers on an elective surgical procedure to the employee’s brain that separates work and personal life. The severed main characters’ “innies,” or in-office versions of themselves, spend their days behind desks in the Macro Data Refinement Department of a bio-tech company called Lumon Industries.

For me, a public relations professional for Kimball Hughes PR in real life, I would think my “innie” might have some communications expertise to share with Lumon leadership, particularly on the so-called Severed Floor, designed exclusively for innies.

Communication Breakdown

At Lumon, when innies ask why they do the work they do, they are told, “The work is very important and mysterious.” The lack of transparency provided by leadership fuels the innies’ curiosity to learn more about what is really going on and results in a growing distrust of management.

As professional communicators, we always advise our clients to be transparent in both internal and external communications. In internal communications, conveniently leaving out key details or worse, lying about events or covering up incidents, can build distrust, chip away at employee morale and lead to quiet or actual quitting. Communication from the top can be a critical aspect of strengthening the company’s reputation and the trust of employees as well. At Lumon, the board communicates mysteriously through a retro public announcement-like system in a way that no one but the board’s translator can hear or understand.

Leadership should set the bar in a corporate structure and they should lead by their own actions to inspire others. Management should make it a priority to be present, relatable and accessible. For example, if a company is encouraging teams to volunteer and engage in charitable giving, leadership should step up to the plate to motivate others. If leadership is implementing a return-to-office mandate, leadership should be onsite as well and ensure they are relaying clear reasons for how the mandate will benefit the company, as well as its employees – beyond perks, like new coffee flavors or the occasional Music Dance Experience (IYKYK).

A Lesson in Crisis Management

While every Severance episode seems to present a slew of crises, the Lumon Industries PR team (assuming the fictitious company has one) was likely engaged for crisis communications services when (another spoiler alert) the innies escaped to see how their outies live at the end of Season 1.

When the main character Mark S. returns to the Severed Floor at the start of Season 2, his manager, Mr. Milchick parrots a company narrative about the innies’ escape. He explained the incident led the innies to be named heroes, inspired a review of the treatment of severed employees and resulted in a series of reforms – complete with a newspaper article and an animated internal comms video.

The Lumon PR team may deserve credit for seemingly responding to the situation proactively by engaging the media and creating messaging, but, from a professional communications perspective, it was certainly lacking. The Lumon team manufactured untruthful messaging in an elaborate effort to spin their way out of the predicament. Likely, they did not have a comprehensive crisis communications plan in place – a best practice for any business owner.

Instead, the Lumon team should have followed crisis communications best practices that center on collecting facts related to the situation and following a pre-designed plan for leadership that can help deter people from acting rashly on emotion in a crisis. Lumon leadership should not have created messaging and collateral around a lie, but instead around fact-based messaging.

Anyone who has seen the show, sees countless parallels between the fictional Lumon world and the traditional corporate workplace. Aside from the more obvious light the show shines on work-life-balance and corporate culture, it also presents a case study on corporate communications, mostly on what to avoid.

AI: How to Avoid Becoming a Cautionary Tale

Posted on by
Reply

AI will cure what ails you.

That seems to be the mantra of the 2020s. If you have a problem, it appears the solution is to implement artificial intelligence. However, AI is not a cure-all. While AI can be an incredibly powerful tool, it isn’t perfect and there are cautionary tales to consider as countless organizations incorporate AI.

Glitch in the System

Any adult functioning in the digital world knows technology sometimes fails to live up to its promise. AI is not immune to being glitchy, especially when humans fall short in their quality control roles, many of which are still evolving along with the tech. There are countless AI snafu examples that include:

  • Less than two years ago, Reuters reported on a U.S. District Judge who sanctioned two New York attorneys when their ChatGPT-built brief included six fake case citations.
  • Last spring Google was pilloried by users and media alike when its then-new AI capabilities roll-out resulted in a cascade of false information—including telling users to eat glue and rocks.
  • And Fast Company produced a cringe-worthy list of brands last summer whose AI-driven marketing efforts ranged from total failure to deeply offensive, including household names like Toy “R” Us, McDonald’s and Sports Illustrated.

Reliance Risk

The risk of AI is becoming overly reliant on AI. Reliant on its promise. Reliant on its ease of application. Reliant on its accuracy.

Large language models or LLMs—the engines that drive most generative AI tools—train on massive content libraries. As a result, AI is prone to repeating, in whole or part, both the words and style of some of the content on which its LLM trains. These AI tools aren’t designed to violate copyright laws. Rather, they are working with what they know, and what they know is existing, written—and often copyrighted—content. The intent is to mimic human creativity with enhanced, faster output. The risk, of course, is not only plagiarism, but also inaccuracies due to AI hallucinations as well as content that, frankly, often falls short of being truly creative or distinguishing.

Both the quality and legality of AI generated content will be adjudicated in the court of public opinion, as well as courts of laws, for the foreseeable future. Meanwhile, humans are working to catch up. Plagiarism software is continually being stood-up and refined to catch the errant bot-writer. Publishers and others are setting policies for how they will handle contributed AI-generated content. And the legal industry is, most likely, viewing AI as the next asbestos as everyone considers its implications.  

Practical Realities

Learning to live with, and employ, AI is an evolving state. What business and nonprofit leaders must consider now regarding their use or incorporation of AI is this:

  • Brands and business leaders trying to position themselves as thought leaders will fail—possibly in very public ways—if they cede their expertise to the expedience and perceived accuracy of AI where content is concerned.
  • Leveraging AI as a starting point in the creative process can create efficiencies. Relying on AI to drive that process is simply lazy.
  • From courts to publishers as well as clients and consumers, much of the early AI-driven content we are seeing runs the gamut from being declared unacceptable to the merely unpalatable with limited exceptions.
  • Developing policies around how and where to apply AI in your organization is essential to avoid being left behind.
  • Closed AI—essentially a non-publicly accessible AI model—is the only practical approach to AI implementation for many businesses to protect sensitive company and/or client data.
  • A detailed dive into how and if your organization’s errors and omissions liability insurance addresses claims arising from your use of AI is most definitely warranted.
  • AI can be a remarkable improvement to one’s operational efficiency and even client engagement, but only if thoughtful guardrails are in place with humans overseeing the work and conducting frequent quality and accuracy checks.

Without question, AI is and will continue to shape the future of business. Guiding that process with high ethical standards, transparency and rigorous human oversight is required if non- and for-profit organizations are to maintain the trust and confidence of those they serve.

Communicating during a cyber crisis – What to do when the network fails

Posted on by
Reply

Two weeks ago, few people had heard of CrowdStrike outside of information technology providers. All it took was one update to be deployed to a live environment on the morning of Friday, July 19 – released before it could be properly tested – for everyone to suddenly learn how pervasive the company’s technology is throughout the world of business. It has been reported by the BBC that over 8.5 million devices were impacted by the global IT outage, including everything from self-check-in kiosks at airports to the cloud networking systems that businesses use to maintain connection with international team members.

The CrowdStrike outage is only the most recent example demonstrating how interconnected the world has become. Nine times out of 10, this interconnectivity works to our benefit in the form of a diverse global economy connected to the best minds and workforces in the world regardless of location. But that one instance when the system fails can lead to panic, business interruption, a chaotic situation and of course, a costly mess.

A massive network disconnection prompts the question, “What do we do now?”

While global outages like this may be largely unavoidable, there are best practices that businesses and individuals can follow so they are prepared for the next time the network goes down.

  • Ensure everyone knows what to do

When Kimball Hughes Public Relations works with businesses to develop communications and crisis communications plans, we prioritize working with our clients to develop steps to take in the event of a cyber-attack or major outage. When digital productivity platforms like Slack or Teams go down, most team members will fall back on another digital platform like email or text messages. But what if those forms of communication have also been disrupted? Do your team members know how to react when they become disconnected?

This is where regular review of communication policies and clear procedures for an emergency come in. These reviews are critical, and communication policies should be accessible to every office member. In addition to procedures, team leads should know who to contact in an emergency and have multiple ways of contacting them via email and telephone. This information should be stored in multiple secure locations, including in an online cloud server and a physical copy should be kept in a secure but accessible location.

  • Create back up plans for your back up plans

Because emergencies are unpredictable by their very nature, it is nearly impossible to predict which systems will go down next time. With the CrowdStrike outage, it was computers running the Windows operating system – but next time it could be Mac, Linux, or maybe even some obscure system the general public has never heard of that manages a major utility. Businesses should have contingencies for every method of communication they use. For example, if email servers go down, teams should be ready to communicate regularly over the phone. If the power goes out, team members should know where to meet in person to remain in sync and decide on next steps.

  • Trust in teams

When teams are armed with the information they need and prepared with clear goals, a business has a better chance of ensuring resiliency during and after crisis periods.

Consider the actions of the airlines during the most recent outage. While flights were grounded and passengers were left in an information blackout, some airline teams deployed lower tech solutions. For example, some moved to writing gate and flight information on whiteboards to keep information moving and calm travelers. While this was not an ideal situation, the team was able to work with the resources they had on hand and in real time, rather than being paralyzed by the outage. This is why regular communications training can be incredibly important. Team members who know what to do with the minimal amount of guidance during an emergency have the best chance of remaining effective until the crisis passes.

When the network goes down, communication channels are usually the first to collapse. By following the above tips, businesses can be sure their teams know how to remain in contact when technology fails.

I Hate to Tell You This: The Dos and Don’ts of Breaking Bad News

Posted on by
Reply

In business, we can’t escape bad news. Whether the topic is layoffs, poor earnings, a deal that fell through or any number of business or workplace challenges, communicating a negative outcome is sometimes as difficult as living with the outcome itself. There is no silver bullet to best communicate bad news, but it is the responsibility of business owners and spokespeople to manage the impact of that bad news on stakeholders and the business.

Communicating internally

When communicating bad news to your team, it is important to remember that for some, the news can be upsetting. Keep the following in mind when communicating bad news within your business.

Do: Be clear

A bad news announcement is stressful under the best of circumstances. A confusing announcement only makes the problem worse. When communicating, take extra steps to avoid generalities and include whatever specifics can be shared to ensure the news cannot be misinterpreted. For example, rather than saying “layoffs are expected,” consider “Due to economic conditions, we are planning to reduce the number of staff in our New York office by 15% by year end. The specific roles impacted by this decision are still being considered, and we expect to know and share more details by the end of the quarter.”

Do: Provide resources

After bad news breaks, team members will have questions. Consider putting together a FAQ or other fact sheet that managers and team members can turn to for more information. Also, consider giving your team members access to leaders who may be able to best answer common questions.

Don’t: Sugarcoat the news

Don’t belittle the intelligence and maturity of your team members by utilizing flowery language. The first instinct to soften the blow of bad news can be useful, and compassion has a part to play in delivering bad news. However, being overly sweet can come off as disingenuous.

Working with partners

Bad news will usually impact more than just your business. It often impacts the businesses and clients with which you work. For example, downsizing can reduce your capabilities, leading to partner concerns about being underserviced. When planning for bad news, consider the following as it relates to your partners.

Do: Be proactive

The people and businesses that work with your company expect they will be kept in the loop about news that impacts them. If a staff reduction is planned, they should hear it from your business first — not from news headlines or via the gossip mill.

Do: Plan

Communicating with partners involves more than just messaging. It involves timing. When preparing partner-related messaging, ensure all materials are developed before an announcement. Depending on the nature of the news, it may be beneficial to communicate with partners before sharing with the public. However, the time between the two announcements should not exceed 24 hours. Any longer risks a leak and losing control of the message.

Don’t: Overshare

While being proactive is important, it does not mean a business should share every detail of a bad news announcement. Businesses need to tailor partner messaging to only include information that pertains to the partner. If a partner has questions, schedule a time to speak with them one-on-one after the news breaks.

Talking to the public

Sharing bad news with the world can create opportunities for error, misinterpretation and even crisis if not handled correctly, especially in today’s world of instant digital communication. That said, when sharing bad news businesses should work through a medium like the news media or their website. When working with these mediums, keep the following in mind.

Do: Be Transparent

Generalities and vague comments create doubt. At worst such vagary provides opportunities for bad actors to take bad news and make it sound far worse than the reality. While being open about bad news can be painful, it is far better to keep control of the facts and remain transparent.

Do: Be Responsive

Public response to a bad news announcement could include anything from a reporter on a deadline or a social media post. Regardless of the source, responsiveness is critical for managing a negative announcement. Just like transparency can help reduce the chance of misinformation about a negative announcement, responsiveness can ensure facts and truth remain at the center of the conversation.

Don’t: Lie

You will be caught. It may not be immediately, but it will happen. Misstating facts and hiding critical information are sure ways to not only lose the trust of the public but create new problems as well. This goes for guessing or speculation, too. When announcing bad news, stick to the facts.

While these tips will help to better manage the impact of bad news on a business, they are all focused on mitigating the potential damage to the business and its reputation. There is no way to fully negate the impact of bad news. However, by following the above tips businesses can better survive delivering bad news, and work to grow in the long term.

Sorry Seems to Be the Hardest Word

Posted on by
Reply

Giving your public relations team a seat at the table early in a situation can mean the difference between successfully navigating a potential reputational crisis and falling victim to embarrassing, costly and ruinous public backlash against your brand via social media and the press. One just needs to look at the now nearly infamous Kyte Baby incident, where CEO Ying Liu delivered a cringe-worthy and awkward TikTok apology in January, to see how harmful it truly can be to fail to consider strategic counsel from a seasoned PR advisor. This was in response to the company’s termination of an employee’s request to work remotely while her adopted newborn was in a neonatal intensive care unit.

While the underlying issue at Kyte Baby seemed connected to parental leave policies, the decision was viewed by consumers as antithetical to the company’s mission and values. Under the title of Kyte Cares, the company’s website reads in part: “At Kyte Baby, we have dedicated our company to helping babies and families find comfort for more than a decade … we understand the importance of family and recognize parents’ vital role in nurturing and supporting their families.”

The controversary swirled as enthusiastic fans of Kyte Baby’s products learned of the employee’s termination and complained to the company and online. Ironically, it was Liu’s awkward and stilted apology that brought the company out of the shadows of social media and made headlines around the world.

A Failure of Consideration

It would be a mistake to discount Liu or her decision as ill-considered. She is a working mother and entrepreneur who also happens to hold a doctorate in economics. Also, the tone of her original video apology, where she asked the employee in question to forgive “how her parental leave policy was communicated and handled,” would imply she was advised on how to respond.

What happened was a failure of consideration. A failure to consider what the decision to terminate would say about the company, and a failure to consider how Liu’s response to public backlash would be presented and received by that public.

If there was a PR professional advising her to act as she did, that person should be fired. If there was no PR professional advising Liu alongside of the company’s attorneys, then the fault lies squarely with Liu and the company’s fundamental inability to live its mission in a way its loyal customers might expect.

My guess, and it is only a guess, is this matter was seen as a legal issue and addressed accordingly. What it lacked was someone in the room, steeped in the brand’s mission and reputation, who would have played devil’s advocate both on the decision to dismiss the employee as well as gaming out any potential blowback from the apology. Had a skilled PR professional been in the room from the start, Liu would have been advised on the optics of dismissing a new mom with a sick child from a company founded to help moms navigating health issues (skin conditions related to fabrics) among their young children. Further, had a skilled PR pro spoken to Liu when her original apology was scripted and planned for wide distribution on TikTok, Liu would have been strongly advised to take a different approach.

Instead, Liu made a decision that matched the company’s (then) policy on parental leave. Liu made a legally appropriate CEO decision to follow company policy but failed to be the empathetic mom who founded the company 10 years earlier to help other moms.

Why PR Needs a Seat at the Executive Table

Liu is only the latest example of organizational leaders – C-suite and others – who failed to look beyond policy or legalese. In the same month Kyte Baby made headlines, a former account executive for Cloudflare, an IT company, recorded and posted to social media a video of her termination over Zoom by two human resource professionals she had never met and who didn’t know her. That company’s CEO also went on a social media apology tour, calling the video “painful” to watch and noting the way the matter was handled was inappropriate.

Organizations large and small make mistakes. Having trusted counsel – both legal and others – consider and review decisions that can impact the brand is vital. Moreover, the rules governing the workplace have changed and continue to evolve. Not only are people making space for their work in their homes and having to integrate that work into their lives beyond 9-to-5, but we are also in an era where the aggrieved can turn to social media and expose former employers who act in bad faith – real or perceived – to a firestorm of negative publicity. And, frankly, a lot of organizational leaders are getting it wrong.

Having a communications professional as part of the decision matrix can help. Whether in-house or an outside consultant or agency, these are trained professionals whose jobs are to consider every decision, message, social media post and internal memo through the lens of the organization’s reputation. It’s an invaluable service when you consider the alternative: Kyte Baby is navigating an ongoing boycott while trying to share positive news about their new parental leave policies. Cloudflare blew up on social media for the wrong reasons and may struggle with recruitment of vital talent as a result.

Lawyers are excellent advisors. They protect their clients in the court of law. Public relations professionals focus on reputational threats and protect clients in the court of public opinion, which is where consumers tend to decide where and how to spend their money. Both must be in the room where decisions are made.