Tag Archives: emergency management

Do you really believe you can predict all crises?

15 Thursday Oct 2015

Posted by in Cases, Crisis

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , ,

Deepwater Horizon

A few days ago I read an interview of a well-known expert on crisis communications, who said that «All crises are predictable. If they are predictable, then they can be planned for» and I am afraid I have to disagree. To be honest, I tend to agree with the great Danish physicist and Nobel laureate,  Niels Bohr, who said “Prediction is very difficult, especially if it’s about the future”.

The role of all the crisis management professionals and communications experts includes the horizon scanning identifying potential threats and issues which should be analyzed and then integrated into a crisis management plan. A thorough horizon scanning will definitely bring on the surface issues that might harm the reputation and endanger the business continuity of an organization. If we could find out all issues then we could establish all the necessary processes and plans to deal with them. But, it is not so simple, is it? If, in a perfect world, we could know all potential threats then there would be no crises, which means in this case that a crisis is predictable…!

For the sake of discussion, let’s say that our scanning has covered all the potential threats and we now work on a painstaking crisis management plan. I strongly believe that our plan would be complete and very detailed. If that’s the case, we have done what’s necessary in order to deal with any issue. But this is not really what happens in the real world.

Organizations with extensive experience in crisis management, detailed environment scanning that covers all aspects of operations and  very experienced staff have been caught off guard by situations that went out of hand. The BP’s 2009 Sustainability Report says: “Our goal of ‘no accidents, no harm to people and no damage to the environment’ is fundamental to BP’s activities. We work to achieve this through consistent management processes, ongoing training programmes, rigorous risk management and a culture of continuous improvement.” Does anyone believe that BP had no plan to deal with a disaster at an offshore drilling unit like the Deepwater Horizon in 2010?

There are two elements that make a crisis unpredictable. The first one is the element of surprise and the second one is the indeterminable factor. We all have read numerous reports about crises that came as a surprise to top executives, communication professionals, investors, and academics alike although they were expected and they could be avoided. Several organizations are caught by surprise because either they do not really believe that a crisis might really occur or they suffer from a cry-wolf syndrome and they make a wrong assessment at the crucial moment.

The indeterminable factor could be anything… Any unexpected change at the political, environmental, economic, social level or just a human mistake could undermine any crisis management plan.

A crisis is not always inevitable or predictable. A crisis is a situation that has to find us prepared and ready to deal with  issues that go beyond any plan or even our imagination.

The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author, and they do not reflect in any way those of his various affiliations.

Crisis communications under “rain and fire” – Part II (or Why crisis communications in natural disasters should interest us…)

13 Sunday Sep 2015

Posted by in Cases, Crisis, Media

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , ,

hurricane-katrina

Following the post «Crisis communications under “rain and fire” (Part I) » I was asked by several people why a communications or PR professional should be interested in crisis management of natural disasters such as the Hurricane Katrina and the fires in Greece in 2006. My response was that the main characteristics of the two cases apply to crises that might affect a company.  Let’s see these characteristics:

  • There were casualties
  • There was a strong reaction of public opinion
  • There was lack of preparedness
  • There was a lack of coordination at both operational and communication level

I remind you that the Bhopal disaster, the gas leak incident in India, considered the world’s worst industrial disaster, had a death toll of thousands of people and it was not the result of a natural phenomenon.

After this small introduction let’s see some lessons learned from the «Crisis» and «Post-Crisis» phases of the crisis management in Hurricane Katrina and the fires in Greece.

«Crisis» phase

The crisis management in both cases showed the internal malfunction of administration in both countries. Internal conflicts and personal agendas prevailed at the expense of public interest. If the crisis management team is unable to have smooth internal communication, it is almost impossible to lead to coordinated actions, both at operational and communications level. The failure to achieve internal cooperation reflects negatively on the external environment.

Conclusion: The crisis management team must be functional with good cooperation and communication among the members of the team.

During the research of the two cases I realized the importance of the leadership, the credibility of political discourse and the openness towards the public. The leadership of the American president during the crisis had the following phases: absence, optimism, lack of coordination and finally shift of responsibility. The reassurance by President Bush during the first hours of Hurricane Katrina proved a huge communication mistake that followed the American government for some time. On the other hand, the presence of the Greek Prime Minister with evident sorrow in the area of the fires expressed the public sentiment reducing extreme reactions. However, the allegations of Greek Ministers that the fires were part of an organized plan to destabilize the country was a PR stunt which crashed along the way setting credibility issues got the Greek government. As we saw in a relevant quantitative research, part of the Greek public opinion believed these allegations even thought they were never justified. Passing responsibility (blame game) is a common practice but it can be extremely negative for the credibility of the crisis management team.

Conclusion: Credibility with respect to communications and the main messages of the crisis management team is crucial.

“Post- crisis” phase

In the post-crisis phase, the efforts to defuse tension are followed by a learning process. The evaluation of all the actions during the crisis is crucial in order to become better. The improvement of the crisis management process requires the evaluation of correct and incorrect actions of the organization. The lessons of this kind are part of the organizational function of the organization and they are a compass for the future. In the weeks and months following Hurricane Katrina, a series of institutions investigated the reasons of the failure of the US administration to handle the crisis issuing reports that became publicly available. In Greece, there have been no official inquiries to identify errors during the crisis.

Conclusion:  Every crisis should always be a lesson learned.

This post is only a very small part of my thesis “Crisis communication by Public Administration and government organizations” which goes back in time.

The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author, and they do not reflect in any way those of his various affiliations.

Crisis communications under “rain and fire” (Part I)

08 Tuesday Sep 2015

Posted by in Cases, Crisis

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

Crisis communications in natural disasters has a vital importance for social, political and economic reasons. Both theory and experience have shown that some crises are in fact communications crises (Garnett & Kouzmin, 2007). The Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans and fires in Peloponnese in Greece in 2007 are two examples of crisis communications failure. Bureaucratic deficiencies, lack of preparation and inexperienced staff have led to communications disaster.

download

The selection of this cases was made for the following reasons:

  • There were casualties
  • There was a strong reaction of public opinion
  • There was lack of preparation by the government
  • There was a lack of coordination at both operational and communication level

Pre-crisis phase

The hurricanes in the US and the fires in Greece are natural phenomena with frequent occurrence and they cannot be considered surprising when incurring. What characterizes the two cases is the paradox that while there was awareness of the risk, both government mechanisms in the US and Greece seemed unprepared to meet the expectations and the requirements. The early symptoms of the upcoming catastrophe were disregarded.

Conclusion: The lack of preparedness and readiness are shaky foundations for crisis management.

The difference between the two cases is that the risk in Greece was permanent but not geographically specific whereas in the US there were official warnings days before the disaster for specific geographical areas in clearly defined time perspectives. What emerges through the elements of the research is that there was a strategic plan in the US to deal with natural disasters as opposed to Greece where the risk of fires seemed to be treated at the tactical level. As a result, we can distinguish a timeless deficit of preparedness by the Greek authorities to manage natural disaster crises. In New Orleans, the story could have been very different if the federal and local authorities had implemented the crisis management plans considering that both the state and federal authorities had already been on constant alert because of 9/11.

Conclusion: Preparedness and readiness are necessary in strategic and tactical level.

The appointment of unqualified people to manage crises leads to failure as it was apparent in the US during the Katrina hurricane. The failure of the inexperienced director of FEMA to meet the demands of the occasion preparing the state apparatus before the crisis demonstrates the importance of the proper selection of the right professionals.

Conclusion: Preparedness and readiness for crisis management require professional and experienced staff.

Conclusions about the Crisis and Post-Crisis phases of those two crises will follow in the coming days.

Advances in risk and crisis communication

12 Wednesday Aug 2015

Posted by in Crisis, Research

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , ,

cover

A new article related to crisis communications was published in the International Journal of Risk Assessment and Management. The title is ‘Advances in risk and crisis communication’ and the author is Sweta Chakraborty.

You may find below the abstract:

This article describes how advances in social and decision sciences have enhanced the understanding and development of risk communications. It takes into account how the public perceives and assesses risks are integral for industry communication plans. Specifically, the impact of trust on how the public will perceive risks and interpret relevant communications is evident and the effect is particularly poignant in crisis situations. It is therefore necessary to consider levels of trust in sources of information, as well as understand the post-trust environment when designing communications. Dedicated efforts to re-build trust are crucial to address both expected and unexpected operational and potential future risks. Future challenges in crisis risk communication will have their own unique circumstances, but a common thread is better pre-crisis planning involving the understanding of public perceptions of risk to deal with communication challenges that will inevitably arise.

The paper is available here: http://www.inderscienceonline.com/doi/abs/10.1504/IJRAM.2015.069019