Lessions from the BP Disaster. One year later.

Well we sit here today on the first anniversary of the the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. I believe future PR generations will be well served by paying close attention to what took place and what lessons we can learn from this unmitigated disaster. While we all know that BP was not solely responsible for this disaster, for better or for worse the blame fell onto their shoulders.

One thing emerged from this event and that it was that BP did about as bad a job at crisis management as an organization can do. It was obvious from day one that they did not have an appreciation of the extent of the problem and some of the initial comments by BP senior executions, like the CEO wishing to 'have his life back', really put the effort into disrepute from the beginning. BP seemed stuck to the plan when they should have realized that the first rule of crisis communications is that the plan goes out the window almost immediately.

There are so many lessons that can be learned from the BP explosion one year on that an entire book could be written and barely begin to scratch the surface. I think one thing that because obvious to future planners is when people are hurting as a result of something your company shares responsibility for, NEVER complain about how tough it is on you. Somehow a millionaire CEO is not going to find much sympathy from a group of people whose very lives may be ruined.

Also, realize that your plan, no matter how great you think it is and no matter how many times you may have rehearsed it, is totally useless. Look it over one last time and then toss it aside and be ready to move with the ever changing conditions that exist. Only a foolish captain would let waves better his boat.

Lastly, ignore the advice of the lawyers. Lawyers will tell you to shut up, say nothing, admit no wrong and show no empathy. This is wrong. This is always wrong and all it does is to stir resentment and anger and makes a bad problem worse. The model today is Southwest who when faced with a problem took a financial hit and made progressive steps to addressing and resolving the matter. Take a look at how quickly that issue has receded from the headlines. They get it! It is a shame most companies don't.

Crisis Communications in Action: One Good, One Bad

I noticed this week that there are some people out there who are getting public relations and more specifically crisis communications and there are some groups out there who just don't get it. First of all, for those who read my blog you know that public relations is not a reactive tool. Just like you don't wait for market trends to develop to begin research on new products, you should not be waiting for events to develop before you start burning up the e-mails and phone lines.

First, the good news is that all is not lost when it comes to good crisis communications and public relations. We all saw on the news last week the Southwest flight which had to make an emergency landing due to a structural failure in one of its planes. The financially prudent move would have been to keep as many planes in the air and check them as they came in for regular maintenance. Instead what Southwest did was pull all the flights from the Boeing 737 flight which matched the one with the cracks. This caused a lot of flight cancellations but surprisingly very little passenger upset. Most people would prefer to fly safe and by doing this Southwest should come out much stronger than it might have when he went in.

The opposite happened when the United States began its bombing offensive against Libya. The political and moral issues are one thing but the President seriously dropped the ball when he did not address the reason behind it for a solid week. During both wars in the Gulf the two President Bushs' were on television that night explaining that the action was underway and why the action, in their view, was necessary. During times of crisis, it is important to be out and in front of the issue and shaping the dialogue. By bunkering down you let the events take a life of their own and you lose control of the situation.

Communications professionals have been fortunate to see two distinctly different examples of crisis communications, one of which clearly proves the model that in order to come out of a crisis alive and, stronger than what you went into it, you need to take affirmative action. The best course of action works in all areas of communications but especially during crisis. Stay on top of things, stay in front of the situation and be open and as honest as possible to your target audience. If done well, the crisis will quickly pass, if not, it will fester and grow worse and inflict a great degree of harm. As your mother once said, take your medicine, even if it doesn't taste good, it will make you feel better!

Why aren't we using social media better than this?

There were a few instances during the past few weeks that had me shaking my head. Now some of you who know me think that I am a completely opposed to social media in any and all formats. That is a total and complete falsehood. I don't fall in love with items because they happen to be new, I become interested in items because I perceive they offer a distinct competitive advantage.

Having said that, I am surprised at the limited or perhaps the miss directed scope we see when it comes to social media. We see people who offer updates on every little element that is going on in their lives with no filter regarding how appropriate or interesting it may be. We see organizations stumbling over each other to be the latest on Twitter or Facebook with no idea regarding why they wish to do so. One thing we do not see, is organizations forming a quick strategy about how to deal with social media for those times when computing will fail them,

Case in point was last week's Facebook outage. While I am sure we would all find it somewhat funny to think of this happening, one of the most sensible things for Facebook to do would be to go on some other outlet, or via e-mail, notify their base that the site was down and would stay down for some time. What they did end up doing is reverting back to the good old days and send out e-mail updates to the news media. While I somewhat chuckle at the idea of Facebook using Twitter to announce they couldn't bring their web site up, it would have been a most most effective way of reaching their target audience and, in my opinion, a means that would not have caused a great deal of long term harm or embarrassment to Facebook.

Social Media is a great tool. The great weakness of social media is that most agencies and communications practitioners are offering poor advice on how to use it. The advice I am hearing is similar to saying, "paint each house purple." When it comes to social media, the need should match the organization and not the other way around. Also some of the great potential for social media is being ignored. Why isn't it being better developed as a crisis communication tool? Given that Crisis Comm is about getting the right message to the right people as soon as possible, the big question we need to answer as corporate communications professionals today is why are we looking at social media as an entertainment tool and not a strategic communications one?

The Crisis in Crisis Communications Part 2/Crisis Management

While I don't like to revisit old topics, I do find that crisis communications is one that deserves a review due to upcoming events. As I write this from the east coast of the US we sit waiting to see if Hurricane Earl is going to be a major event, a major pain in the butt or fizzle out all together. Sadly, events like this often do far more damage to emergency plans than helping.

First off, when a major natural event, assuming it can be forecast, is announced, we are treated to the 24 hour media cycle in full wrath of God type mode. This will be a disaster of biblical proportions etc. etc. Of course 9 out of 10 times the event can not live up to the hype and people feel almost cheated. Public officials of course will meet in a comfortable locations with lots of bottled water and ample fresh food and calmly go through their preparedness forms as if all events will simply roll out slowly and smoothly.

If there is one lesson that can be learned from Hurricane Katrina and the spill in the Gulf of Mexico, it is that there is no crisis plan that can simply be opened and followed. I find it humorous that people think that by sitting in a conference room and thumbing through a 3-ring binder they are prepared for an emergency situation. In fact the best thing to do is gather all of those binders, put them in a nice pile, strap on some explosives and blow them up. I use this metaphor because that is essentially what will happen in a true crisis.

All too often management believes that crisis are about containment and "staying on top of the situation." Trying to stay on top of a crisis is much like trying to stay on top of a bucking bronco without benefit of a bridle. The worst thing and, quite possible, the most dangerous, is that managers believe that by conducting drills or having a plan means they are ready for a crisis. This would be laughable were it not so tragic.

One year before Hurricane Katrina, city, state and Federal leaders in the Gulf region did an emergency drill of a fictional Hurricane Pam. The fictional hurricane followed Katrina's path almost to within 25 miles and its wind speeds were only 10 miles per hour stronger. The levee breeches and the failure to evacuate New Orleans were all anticipated and predicted. Yet when the storm became more than an exercise the following year, all agencies were completely unprepared. They froze, panicked and when one element of their plan fell apart they tossed the entire plan out the window and became totally reactive.

The other great example is NASA. The space agency had a great legacy of running disaster scenarios that tried to anticipate everything from a rocket disaster to men being stranded on the moon. Amazingly they predicted both the Challenger and Columbia disasters. But at some point senior management decided that it was bad for morale at NASA to think bad things and killed the project. So rather than have a check list of things to look for and avoid, NASA went blindly into each project and had multiple failures, each of which could have been avoided had some crisis review been conducted.

So then what do we do? How do we prevent the next crisis from becoming a disaster? Well the first step still works so stick with it. That is to plan, as best that we can, for an upcoming event. Granted we can not see it all, nor can we anticipate every possible outcome. But we shouldn't try too. We should also plan on how will we manage the event. In this case we need to practice keeping our cool, keeping open the channels of communication. We need to think both long term, AND short term. Ideally they will not oppose each other but we must be prepared for the eventuality they do. Lastly, we need to take action. This can be anything from a prepared statement stating an intention to investigate, (always a sensible and reasonable action item) to a full blown media offensive designed to get our message to key stakeholders and audiences.

Crisis are almost always survivable and in some cases may work out for the best. But the require planning, calm and most importantly leadership for everything to work.

Why do crisis always happen when you don't want them too?

Well back from vacation one whole day officially and WHAM, hit with a crisis! Of course no crisis ever comes at a good time and let's be honest, how much of a crisis would it be if it happened when we wanted it to happen and when it was most convenient. But like any crisis, there is also an opportunity. There was an old legend that in Chinese or Japanese the characters which represent crisis can also spell opportunity. I don't know if linguistically that is true but from the standpoint of sentiment it is very true.

The first rule of thumb in a crisis is to maintain a level head. A crisis is obviously a serious matter and can lead to serious if not fatal damage to the brand if not handled properly. Some short term damage may be unavoidable, but the short term damage may result in longer term prosperity like the floods which provide for rich farm land. After calm has been restored, the next step is to get as realistic measurement of the scope of the matter. What happened, who was responsible, how far down the path have we gone? These are some of the questions that should be asked immediately.

At the crisis table should sit the CEO. Sorry folks, the CEO needs to be in front of this. A good CEO will see this as part of his or her job. If you're there for the good, you must be there for the bad. Second to the CEO should be the senior corp comm person. This person should be responsible for handling the day-to-day issues regarding the crisis. The formulation of the strategy, developing the message, ensuring that key stakeholders are all informed should fall to the head of corporate communications. Also at the table for informative purposes should be people like a corporate counsel, perhaps the CFO or maybe a brand manager, or the person who has day-to-day management regarding the issue.

Generally while I am loath to give the lawyers any say in standard corporate communications operations, this is the exception to the rule since there will most likely be identifiable legal ramifications, not only to the event which triggered the original crisis but also to subsequent events. Crisis management is the time when corporate communications assumes control of the ship and drives the organization clear of any harm.

One of the first and most important issues for the Corporate Communications team to do is to ensure that all communications to stakeholders are clear and in line with overall corporate objectives. The potential for distraction and confusion is high. There will be a great number of parties who will need to be communicated too and the more end points there are, the greater the potential for mixed messages and mixed messages can lead to the appearance of a cover up or cloud the facts.

A crisis will never happen when you are ready for it, when it is a good time for you or for what ever reason, when you want it too. The beauty of the crisis is that it is the one, singular opportunity for Corporate Communications to demonstrate its role in the organization and why it should be at the leadership table. Lets also not forget that a crisis often serves to bolster the role of communications by demonstrating that it should be a strategic program, planned in advance and consulted by senior management on an ongoing basis, and not just an afterthought. In this regard, a crisis can be a mixed blessing.

Any organization who values Corporate Communications, values its stakeholders and customers and brand should not only survive, but also emerge stronger than before. A company which sees communications as a task and chore, something to drive stock prices or as an ego platform for senior management will most likely receive a sharp rebuke from the market and learn a painful lesson a la BP.

Sometimes a deadline can really kill you!

The term deadline originated from the American Civil War. In the infamous POW camp at Andersonville, GA there were no real fences early on. Instead there was a line drawn in the red clay. Any prisoner who approached it would be shot dead without warning. So for those who find deadlines impossible remember that in times past, they were quite literally lethal.

I am thinking of deadlines and their nature today due to the recent flap over the Obama administration's handling of the Sherry Sherrod case. For those who don't recall her case or haven't heard of it, Ms. Sherrod is the U.S. Department of Agriculture employee forced to resign for supposedly acting in a biased fashion towards a department client some 25 years ago. There was a leaked video in which Ms. Sherrod claims she found this main to be racist and condescending towards her so she chose not to give him less than full service. Upon seeing this on Fox News the Obama administration forced her to resign.

Well the real story is coming together now and we are seeing that what was shown was actually a heavily edited video from a conservative blogger trying to not only push his own agenda but to demonstrate the Obama administration was racist. The unedited video shows Ms. Sherrod saying how she over came her feelings of anger towards this man and helped him out. In fact, she did such a good job that the man himself went to the media and called her an angel.

I find this a very interesting story for several reasons. First, it shows the absolute worst aspect of the rush-rush 24 hour news cycle. Run with the story, without first getting facts checked. Second, it serves as a warning to any and all communications people that news can not be spun or managed. The best spin is always and will always be the truth. Granted it takes longer to take the truth, but I am guessing that this mistake by the administration is not what they had planned to deal with this week.

This story also shows a break down by the communications people who failed to protect their product and in effect were made to look foolish. They acted out of fear and were in a purely defensive mode. No attempt seems to be made to check on the veracity of the story and prepare a rebuttal of it. In many respects, senior management has decided that communications people exist to answer the phones from reporters and book interviews. Sadly, this incident serves to reinforce that argument.

Lastly, we have yet another example of communication people rolling over and doing what ever management wants regardless of the implications. At some point, we need to gather together and say no that is not the right way to do things and let the CEO's or department heads or whomever know they need to trust our judgment in matters regarding communication. Sadly, too many of our brothers and sisters out there seem to think we are like that cute puppy dog who is always willing to please so I am not holding out hopes a united front will appear anytime soon.

We are the front line troops in brand protection and message development. We need to say what needs to be said, even if it is unpopular. We also need to make sure that any media opportunity is just that, an opportunity. It is better to let an artificial deadline slip and be accurate than rush to judgment and make a bonehead move. Tripping the deadline can get you killed.

Don't Blame the Weatherman Because it Rained on Your Parade

I remember the late great George Carlin had a great bit on corporate success and failure. I don't recall the exact words but it was along the lines of, "Do you ever notice that we succeed and you fail?" As we all know success is the child of many parents and failure is an orphan. I think this was on perfect display at the press conference held by Steve Jobs on Friday. I would call this part press conference, part explanation, part near child-like tantrum.

Steve Jobs is well known for having a large ego and a short fuse. In that respect he is like a number of CEO's. He, and Apple of course though it's getting harder to separate the two, have been on a tremendous hot streak. Between the iPod, iPhone and iPad he has been raised to a level few non-deities ever see. Unfortunately, like a lot of diva's, the start to believe their own press clippings and really do believe that they are just an amazing and completely important person.

He made an astonishing mistake in my opinion by laying blame for this not at his own feet, nor his engineers but at everyone outside of Apple especially the media. We heard that this problem was well known within the industry and other carriers had the same problems and no one commented on them. Then he ripped into the news media for what he determined was taking a minor flaw and blowing it out of proportion. As we clearly can see, Jobs is totally tone deaf to keep his customers happy and in the long run that can't be good for Apple the organization.

In a great many respects Steve Jobs is certainly a genius. In others he is a dinosaur whose extinction time may fast be approaching. We saw that he has no interest in working with the media and that he will settle for nothing less than fawning coverage of himself, his company and his products. We also saw his ugly side when, for once, he wasn't calling the shots and showing everyone how great his products were. This is not someone who likes criticism and thinks he can control what is being said about his company without the benefit of mutually beneficial media relations. I watched him on stage and said "thank God I am not in his PR department."

In some respects he is like a lot of CEO types I have met down the line. I always remember one CEO who was interviewing me to head his PR operation. He told me before asking any questions that reporters only want creative stories so how would I pitch his company. I told him, very politely of course, that I disagreed and that the media wants to write for their audiences. I further explained that a PR strategy should target outlets his customers were likely to be influenced. I had to hold back my eyes from rolling when he looked at me and said, "reporters and customers put together don't equal half an idiot."

Needless to say I decided then to not take the job but I did enjoy the chance to try and tell a CEO how wrong he was. Of course there was no changing his mind and I could tell how furious he was that anyone dared question him. So in typical imperious fashion he cut the interview short and they hired someone within the company who wouldn't make any waves.

The lessons learned from all of this is that no company is solely about the CEO no matter how brilliant he or she is. A strategy revolving around that will eventually lead to the organizations failure. Also, it is terrible communications practice to blame the media for your own short comings. Yes the media loves to kick someone when they are down but, often, most wounds are self inflicted. Lastly, as communications people, we are responsible for protecting the company's brand and reputation and that is much more valuable that any CEO and his or her ego.