Text messages warn students, spread crisis response advice
In May of last year, Boston residents were plunged into the midst of their own crisis when a major water pipe burst, disrupting water service and potentially contaminating public water sources. Luckily for residents, local officials were prepared, and spread the word quickly using various technologies combined with word of mouth.
One of the strongest responses came from nearby Tufts University, which chose to focus on the use of text messaging to keep students and faculty informed. In an article for the KevinMD blog, Tufts teacher Lisa Gualtieri, PhD, ScM, described the tactics used:
While Tufts considered preparing messages in advance, it didn’t seem possible to anticipate every situation. Instead they created “Strunk and White” guidelines for crisis communication. Their three guiding principles for creating initial messages are:
What is happening
What you need to know
Where to go for more information
Messages must be succinct because of cell phone screen size and to increase the likelihood people read them, avoid jargon and abbreviations, and be composed for easy conversion into speech. While the Tufts community is tech-savvy, they are aware that not everyone is connected all the time therefore some messaging includes spreading the word. For many emergencies, especially life-threatening ones like violent criminal incident or tornado warning, content is pre-scripted by Tufts using sources such as the Massachusetts Department of Public Health.
Other public offices used Twitter and Facebook to great effect, but Tufts maintains an actual phone listing of students, and, with the chances of a college student being more than one square foot away from their cell phone being approximately zero, that technology makes for a very powerful crisis management tool.
——————————-
For more resources, see the Free Management Library topic: Crisis Management
——————————-
When a social media based crisis hits, the strongest tool in your crisis management arsenal is…social media.
Sounds great, but what the heck does it mean? What it means is that you go straight back to where you took the damage with your apology, amends, or solution. Facebook users formed a group to protest a new product? Your video response is going right on their page.
In a recent blog post, the pros at Position 2 gave a solid set of tips to take this idea further:
Have Seasoned Social Media Experts Handle a Crisis: Having a junior intern handle your social media activities simply because ‘they get social media’ may not always be the best approach. A well assembled social media disaster management team, comprising of a community manager, a PR and a senior management representative, ensures that your company is always prepared to successfully handle an unforeseen situation. Besides managing large amount of content and conversations online, the disaster management team will know a) when to respond b) what to say c) how much to say and d) when to remain silent. Social media experts know how to handle crisis without breaking sweat; and this is vital for restoring your company’s image online.
Turn Crisis into Opportunity: Yes! A PR crisis can be converted into positive online buzz. The most apt example in this case involves fashion retailer Gap and how the company turned its logo debacle into a social media opportunity. Instead of playing the blame game after their own version was severely criticized across Facebook and Twitter, Gap smartly decided to offer its fans the chance to redesign its logo online. By doing this, the company a) acknowledged the problem b) made customers feel involved c) shifted the focus from the actual issue by converting it into an exciting social media campaign and d) managed to improve its reputation.
Talk about it: By apologizing on Facebook or tweeting that you’re sorry, you have managed to mollify disgruntled fans; what next? Believe it or not, your customers want to hear what happened. Discussing the ‘what’ and ‘how’ of the situation shows that the PR representatives and social media experts are doing more than just their job. Using a personal, human voice when communicating via social media channels re-establishes trust with customers, making them believe that your company has more than just an organizational presence. Talking about an issue not only promotes trust and commitment, but also leads to a favorable brand image.
While a lot has changed, the fact that audiences still appreciate direct and genuine conversation remains the same. Even if you have nothing more complex to say than, “we screwed up, this is the sequence of events, this is what we’ve done to prevent it,” the honest communication will help to create a valuable connection.
——————————-
For more resources, see the Free Management Library topic: Crisis Management
——————————-
In crisis management, the media is a double-edged sword. While they can be a great help in transmitting your desired message, journalists are in the business of delivering subscriptions (or, more likely these days, page views) and want a scoop regardless of whether it damages your reputation or not.
In a recent article for EvanCarmichael.com, PR pro Georgina Dunkley gave her advice on how to make sure the relationship between business and media is beneficial to both parties:
Maintain a relationship with the journalist – if you have promised a statement or an interview with a journalist by a certain date or time, then ensure that you get it to them in that time. You will certainly lose brownie points for not supplying the right detail to them for the deadline. If you work within their parameters they are certainly likely to be fairer with you.
Nurture the journalist relationship – most journalists will write a balanced story, provided they have been given sufficient insight into the crisis. In this case, all that you can hope for is a balanced argument which puts forward both sides of the story. Once the story has aired contact the journalist and thank them for the piece. This is a great way to form a relationship with a journalist for when you have some good news to share.
As with most relationships, the one between business and reporter is based on honesty and good etiquette. Cause a reporter to take a reaming at the office for missing a deadline, and you’ve likely made a powerful enemy. Pass on an exclusive interview explaining your side of a crisis situation, and guess who will be ready to write up your next charity event?
——————————-
For more resources, see the Free Management Library topic: Crisis Management
——————————-
Still no substitute for human interaction when thing go wrong
Be human and be humane: It’s easy to get defensive and hide behind “no comment” or your lawyers. But when tragedy strikes – your audiences (employees, community, customers, etc.) want to see and hear from you. They don’t expect you to be perfect, but they do expect you to genuinely care about what happened and how it impacts them. They want to hear from a real person who is being honest and forthright with them.
This quote, from a Business 2 Community article by marketing expert Drew McLellan, has only been made more true over recent years by the rise of the Internet and true mass communication. While more than happy to read press releases or generic news via Twitter and its kin, when people feel threatened or upset the human touch is invaluable.
The actual speaker does not have to be the CEO, but it should be someone fairly high up in the organization who is personable and able to stay on-message during potentially stressful media appearances or interviews, and this speaker should remain as the face of the company throughout the crisis and recovery.
Funny enough, it is technology that has spurred and nurtured a return to this “human touch” thinking by encouraging the mass sharing of video. No longer do you have to wrangle an interview on a major network, or pitch countless local stations in hopes of having your statements aired. Now all it takes is a free YouTube channel to ensure that stakeholders see and hear your spokesman exactly as intended.
——————————-
For more resources, see the Free Management Library topic: Crisis Management
——————————-
Good start, bad finish for TSA’s crisis management
If you haven’t heard about the latest TSA debacle, the basics are that 24-year-old Olajide Oluwaseun was able to penetrate airport security at New York’s JFK International, including federal checkpoints, and board a Virgin America flight to LAX using an expired boarding pass belonging to somebody else. Although he was caught by Virgin staff in the air, he was not detained at his destination, and only days later was caught again attempting to board a Delta flight bound for Atlanta, at which point he was arrested by the FBI.
Obviously, it’s embarrassing for the TSA to have it once again be proven that its much-touted security checkpoints can be breached with little more than expired boarding passes with no ID to match, but the organization actually came a hair’s width from completing a solid crisis management move before committing a major no-no.
Lucien G. Canton did a great job of describing the situation in a post on his “Canton on Emergency Management” blog:
One could blog for several days on all the things that went wrong but I’m always more interested in how organizations respond to mistakes than in the mistake itself. In this case, TSA freely admits that “…TSA did not properly authenticate the passenger’s documentation.” They further promise, “…disciplinary action is being considered for the security officers involved and all appropriate actions will be taken.”
Accepting responsibility for your mistake and promising corrective action is always a good crisis communication move. However, TSA then proceeds to blow it by trying to minimize the problem by saying, “…it’s important to note that this individual received the same thorough physical screening as other passengers, including being screened by advanced imaging technology…” In other words, “we screwed up but it didn’t really matter.”
That’s the last message you want to send to a wary and sensitive public.
Now, think of this situation in terms of your own business. Would you be ready to respond if you woke up to publicly humiliating information about your company printed on the front page of the Los Angeles Times?
The best way to defend is to be prepared, so get that crisis response planning in gear.
——————————-
For more resources, see the Free Management Library topic: Crisis Management
——————————-
As a customer service manager, I am called upon to train others on the subject. In my search for continuous learning, I happen to run across an article by Pivot Point Solutions, based on President Obama’s Executive Order to improve customer service. What a lot of people don’t know is that, although the Executive Order is important, the government is so big that implementing that order can take years. Think of it more as a somewhat grandiose statement made by the CEO that the company is going through a transformation of some kind as a response to the economy. Same thing–different words.
What a lot of people don't know is that, although the Executive Order is important, the government is so big that implementing that order can take years.
Although the anonymous author of the article was taking a few potshots at the political system and saw this customer service plan as something business has been trying to implement for years, I saw it as an opportunity to look at what others think is impossible and look hard at those choices. It also might surprise the author to learn that many agencies involved have already implemented such reforms before the order came out. In fact, when the order came out, I looked to see where I could annotate that we were already doing this and make note of things we needed to explore further.
Admittedly, government is not really a business, but in many ways it should operate like one.
The bottom line for the article is that meaningful change cannot be made by Executive Order unless there is sweeping reform. I believe it can–just not across the board or all at once. The article’s biggest argument is that we can’t make this change “department-wide.” I think the author means Administration-wide.
It doesn’t hurt to take a leap in the other direction and say, it can work–that we are crossing organizational lines by having an Administration directive, which may not be enough in the business world. There will be other areas we cannot change as easily as in the business world either, but it should not stop us from trying to change. Admittedly government is not really a business, but in many ways it should operate like one. Business simply wants to:
Reduce Costs
Improve Revenues
Improve Satisfaction and Retention
Perhaps the business model fits better than we think.
Improving revenues does not fit our mold exactly; however, reducing costs and improving satisfaction and retention is right up there. That is an improvement of revenue of sorts. Perhaps the business model fits better than we think.
Find those areas that will work, perhaps there is an ideal customer service plan that incorporates the President’s Executive Order.
The author of the article says, “Improving customer service in the federal government will require sweeping changes across the government…”
Across any large organization, change is difficult, and “sweeping changes” even harder to make happen, but we can focus on our own organization (one agency), and achieve the same goals. Remember, other agencies can follow, but let’s focus on us first and establish a best practice. Although changes are often stated across the entire spectrum, smaller organization can take on the ideas and implement them if they stay focused on the outcome, or the intended benefit we plan to deliver.
Trained people do not give the misleading answer; they do not give the wrong impression; they do not blame others; they do not pass the buck.
The article refers to getting rid of redundancies here, which I take to mean those processes that are repeated at various levels, adding time and frustration to our customer expectations.
Simplification is always the first task; simplify the process. Put it in as few hands as possible. Oversimplification may be the result, but you can always add to it later.
Train people to think the same way about customer service. There are reasons certain protocols are followed, and why people not involved with customer problems directly are not involved at resolving them except at a distance. Trained people do not give the misleading answer; they do not give the wrong impression; they do not blame others; they do not pass the buck.
In business, you would offer meaningful incentive; however, we have built-in incentives. Some in the government actually want change–especially those in customer service. There are always those who dislike or fear any kind of change; but they exist in any organization. Change occurs with every election–with every new Administration. Unlike some circumstances where change is normally feared, in the government environment it is expected, and changes made with leadership support will only result in rewarded efforts for positive customer service results, to include morale boosts and career incentives.
In customer service, consistency is a necessary component. Spread across local, state and federal levels we are confusing the issue. Already many of our customers do not know the system, we have changed the system in their eyes; we have given them a place to complain.
We can be empathetic, but beyond that, it is really not our jobs. We can listen and provide customers comfort since most states have automated systems and it is difficult to get through.
Granted, some state laws and regulations are the result of federal laws that have been passed and initiatives that have been issued to make the Nation's program run smoothly.
If they get through to us, they have, in fact, jumped to the head of the line to nowhere. We know the emotional issues and maybe that is the focus of another article, but for now, I want to point out that implied structure puts us in a position of authority over the states in an area we don’t belong—the customer’s perception is that they have succeeded in going over the head of the state. However, it is the state that implements the program and makes decisions based on state laws. Granted, some state laws and regulations are the result of federal laws that have been passed and initiatives that have been issued to make the Nation’s program run smoothly.
It still makes sense to customers and simplifies things to have a central authority for complaints, but that isn’t the way the system works. Even if the levels of training or staff grades vary, the basic training and process could be the same.
Ultimately states have the final say on the answer to any situation that comes from a complaint because the federal government cannot be involved in individual cases.
Ultimately states have the final say on the answer to any situation that comes from a complaint because the federal government cannot be involved in individual cases. A complaint might involve another federal agency to which we will gladly refer a client, but the final decision rests with the state or local office that took action against or on behalf of the client/customer. By the way, the clients really belong to the state. To the feds those clients are inquirers only—customers, if you like.
Sometimes it isn’t a lack of training but the perception of need for a particular service like customer service that causes it to be neglected. The lack of training only exacerbates the problem.
Customer service is one of those areas that affects the company or government agency more than anyone can see. With so many workers staying in their safe little areas, customer service is easy to neglect. With technology it’s easy to forget until you need it again. When people tire of dealing with machines–and we complain about that every time we call the phone or cable company–just not when it affects our own bottom line.
Of all places where training can help the most, the emphasis on customer service is highly placed because it affects the company’s image, reputation and more. It depends on extremely fluent communication. Language. Words. Tone. Attitude. Empathy. Initiative. Creativity. Difficult topics to train at best, and we think customer service is easy. Try training someone with a bad attitude to represent the company the way you want them to.
Enough of my challenge with words today. As always, you are entitled to share your opinion at anytime. More of my words on this and other topics can be found on my website. For a look at the human side of training from my Cave Man perspective, please check out my book, The Cave Man Guide to Training and Development. Happy training.
Everybody wants to be on the side of the angels. And while angel investors aren’t divine, many social enterprises labor under the mistaken assumption that they represent a ready source of capital. Unfortunately, very few social enterprises secure financing this way, and frankly, even if you could get such funds, in most cases they’re not all that desirable anyway. Here’s why:
Last month Delta Air Lines took a serious pounding to its already-tattered reputation when a YouTube video which featured shocked home bound soldiers commenting on the $200 fee they were charged for checking extra baggage (which contained government-issue weapons used to fight overseas, by the way) went viral.
Delta’s initial response was to apologize, but by simply giving lip service and refusing to actually make a change in policy, it only added fuel to the fire, creating more negative commentary and drawing harsh criticism from stakeholders. Finally, Delta saw the light and adjusted its policy to allow an additional free bag for troops, but the damage was done.
What should we learn from this? BCM President Jonathan Bernstein answered that question in an interview for the San Francisco Chronicle:
The lesson, said Jonathan Bernstein, president of Bernstein Crisis Management Inc., is that companies should let airline workers make decisions in the name of good customer service. In this case, the Delta employee who handled the fee was just following the rules of Delta Air Lines Inc.
“Then those situations never have to escalate into crises,” Bernstein said. “They (Delta) end up with a hit on their reputation that they could have avoided.”
Requiring special authorization for checking one extra bag is just plain over-bureaucratization. Flexibility is a hallmark of smart business models for good reason, and this should extend right down to those working the phones and customer service counters. With training, enabling your front-line representatives to make minor changes could save you from a major crisis.
——————————-
For more resources, see the Free Management Library topic: Crisis Management
——————————-
A new national study of nonprofit executive leadership provides a keen insight into and useful benchmarking statistics on the state of nonprofit leadership. Daring to Lead 2011 is a joint project of CompassPoint Nonprofit Services and the Meyer Foundation. The report is based on responses from over 3000 executive directors and follows similar studies completed in 2001 and 2006.
I am writing companion pieces here and at my blog at http://marionconway.com about the study. This piece discusses the results from the perspective of the Board and the other one from the perspective of Executive Directors. As always, I add my two cents along the way.
The last report, in 2006, caused quite a stir with its projection of the number of executive directors who planned to leave their position in the next five years and the need for succession planning. The magnitude of the exodus was somewhat delayed but it is definitely upon us now as 20% of the respondents were over 60. In this study 67% said they expect to leave their present position within five years. Retirement isn’t the only reason that EDs leave an organization. Planning for it remains important.
The talk is all about succession planning and developing employees to move up in the organization. But, in fact, in smaller organizations this may not be realistic. If it isn’t Boards still need to be prepared for executive turnover. The likelihood of executive turnover is much higher than most Boards realize.
I think that one of the most important things a board can do to be prepared for executive transition is to have a performance evaluation process in place. I say this because developing an evaluation process forces a board to think about what are the skills and performance criteria which they think are most important. It also causes the Board to be more knowledgeable about what is involved in being an ED of your organization. I was surprised that 45% percent of EDs said that they didn’t have a performance evaluation and an additional 8% said that their evaluation was not useful. Boards definitely need to do better in this area.
68% of EDs expressed satisfaction with their boards – not that bad a grade although it should be much higher. After all, one of the main responsibilities of the Board is to support the ED. This chart shows what EDs have to say about the areas of Board support.
An important issue for Boards and EDs is financial management. An amazing 42% of executive directors say that they don’t thoroughly understand the financial underpinnings of their organizations. At the same time boards of directors are evermore focused on financial oversight. In my experience financial management issues can be a key point of tension between a board and an ED. In addition to being a primary contributor to executive director burnout, financial instability can threaten an organization’s ability to carry out its mission and its very existence. EDs definitely need more training and development in this area and Board members with skill should think about providing skill development and not just oversight to EDs in this area. One of my favorite biographies was that of Kathryn Graham of the Washington Post. When her husband died, she became Board Chair and was ill prepared for the job. Warren Buffett was on the board and he would meet with her before each Board meeting and basically trained her on financial management. We need more Board members who are willing to step up to this task.
Fundraising, a basic Board responsibility, does not fare well at all. This is so important – for Board members to engage actively in fundraising – I just don’t understand these consistently poor results.
There is a multistack chart showing how satisfied EDs are with their Boards in relationship with the number of hours they spend on Board work. It seemed pretty spread out to me but bottom line satisfaction peaks if it is 5 -10 hours a month. If your ED is spending more time than that on Board work per month, it probably is too much.
I highly recommend that Board members read this whole report. You will get good insight into what makes EDs tick and Board-ED relationships.
It’s accepted that there are many different effective leadership styles, but are there certain traits that tie top performers together? Executive search consultant Justin Menkes thinks so, and he’s got evidence to support his theory.
Menkes’ book is based on his work with corporate boards as they evaluate, test and consider who to hire or promote as their next CEO. Menkes, who is a consultant with executive search firm Spencer Stuart, gathered evaluations of 150 CEO candidates to isolate the behaviors that the top-performing quartile exhibited and the bottom quartile lacked. After five years of research, he found three key consistent characteristics that the best leaders display:
Realistic optimism. The exceptional leaders demonstrated an ability to understand the actual circumstances of a crisis and see a chance to excel. Managers must “have a passion for confronting reality,” Menkes writes in his book, referring to a pragmatic mindset. “You have to show you’re staring into the sun with them; you’re aware of the risks,” he says.
Finding order in chaos. This combines calmness, clarity of thought and a drive to fix the situation. It requires practice to stay clear-eyed and fearless when the world is tipping. It also requires zeal to solve a puzzle by engaging your staff.
Subservience to purpose or corporate goals. This commitment to the higher calling or the greater good can make a huge difference. Effective leaders channel staffers’ “intense reactions to recurring setbacks in a way that constructively keeps the organization moving forward,” Menkes writes in his book. By encouraging a team to come together around some important goal, it cultivates tenacity and encourages collaboration.
Because of the fact that an organization’s leaders are, by nature, at the forefront of any crisis management efforts, I very much liked the quote that said managers must “have a passion for confronting reality.” Some of the most damaging corporate incidents in memory (BP is a prime example) have been a direct result of leadership that refused to face up to and admit reality, without which it’s impossible diffuse or resolve difficult situations.
——————————-
For more resources, see the Free Management Library topic: Crisis Management
——————————-
We and our partners store and/or access information on a device, such as cookies and process personal data. This includes unique identifiers and standard information sent by a device for personalized ads and content, ad and content measurement, and audience insights.
With your permission, we and our partners may use precise geolocation data and identification through device scanning. You may click to consent to our processing as described above. Alternatively, you may click to refuse to consent or access more detailed information. You may also change your preferences before consenting.
Please note that some processing of your personal data may not require your consent, but you have a right to object to such processing. Your preferences will apply to this website only. You can change your preferences at any time by returning to this site or by visiting our privacy policy.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. These cookies ensure basic functionalities and security features of the website, anonymously.
I’m okay with functional and analytical cookies for website functionality. I agree to the use of cookies under these circumstances:
Will be used if you visit Managementhelp.org
Are necessary for the proper functioning of the website
Enable you to use the site securely
Do not collect personal information that’s not needed for personalization
Help us detect any bugs and improve our website
Collect anonymous information about your visits to our website
Are never used for remarketing
I’m okay with the functional and analytical cookies for marketing purposes and not for website functionality.
Are used to monitor the performance of marketing campaigns
Enable us to compare performance across our marketing campaigns
Are used for individual targeting
Can be used for retargeting on other partner platforms
Enable a more personalized experience
An important issue for Boards and EDs is financial management. An amazing 42% of executive directors say that they don’t thoroughly understand the financial underpinnings of their organizations. At the same time boards of directors are evermore focused on financial oversight. In my experience financial management issues can be a key point of tension between a board and an ED. In addition to being a primary contributor to executive director burnout, financial instability can threaten an organization’s ability to carry out its mission and its very existence. EDs definitely need more training and development in this area and Board members with skill should think about providing skill development and not just oversight to EDs in this area. One of my favorite biographies was that of Kathryn Graham of the Washington Post. When her husband died, she became Board Chair and was ill prepared for the job. Warren Buffett was on the board and he would meet with her before each Board meeting and basically trained her on financial management. We need more Board members who are willing to step up to this task.