Companies frequently prioritise efforts that boost positive publicity while neglecting proactive planning for unforeseen challenges. Who wants to report missed sales targets or that they are quietly addressing ethical misconduct by senior management?
In our experience, we’ve encountered many prominent individuals and brands who haven't prioritised a balanced approach to communication efforts. This is why public relations is sometimes seen as "spin doctoring." And the service is only procured right in the middle of the crisis. Due to this limited perspective on factors influencing perception, it's crucial to continually review and plan against risk factors.
This proactive approach informs business goals and enhances stakeholder management, transparency, accountability, and reporting. In this article, we’ll explore and discuss why risk preparedness and resilience should be integral to daily operational meetings, and why they should form regular agenda topics in every executive and management meeting.
Warren buffet, said “We cannot afford to lose reputation. Even a shred of reputation. Let's be sure that everything we do in business can be reported on the front page of a national newspaper. In our case, on social media too.
According to several studies, it only takes seven seconds of meeting/encountering someone for them to form a solid impression of you. Some further suggest that people determine trustworthiness within 10 seconds.
Not enough time to talk about your experience or engage meaningfully. Perhaps unfair, but also very true – consider a time when you misjudged someone based on their demeanour or speech patterns. The same swift judgements apply to organisations and brands.
Recent history looks at how the public has reacted to brands such as H&M and Clicks for their racist depiction of African hair and people in their ads. While one suffered damage to their property, declining stocks and celebrities severing ties with them it also highlighted two critical issues and often overlooked issues:
This was further evidenced in their reissued press statement to sound sincere. If your stakeholders find it difficult to understand your values or the voice you represent, which in every regard of the society we live in must be inclusive then you have a problem. The role of strategic communications should never be unbundled or applied differently within units of an organisation.
What happens internally must apply externally and vice versa. Stakeholders at every level of the value chain aren’t passive anomalies who only consume your product or service.
In H&M’s case if talent diversity and openness were valued as central to company culture this would have been avoided. Company culture is a critical element of Public relations strategy. Your employees like customers are your public and that relationship is invaluable! In Clicks’ case, even when they have correctly categorised products as professional haircare vs natural haircare, consumers are quick to anger because they are known to repeatedly make these “faux pas.”
This was reflected in a recent post by a social media user questioning why specific products were categorised under professional and local ones which are used in salons under natural. All things considered, their reputation neither evokes shock nor surprise because when it matters most of their stakeholders question their values. This shouldn’t happen and it can be prevented.
Questions to ask yourselves:
The age-old saying "prevention is better than cure" holds true, yet the communications department often finds itself undervalued and treated as an afterthought. This stems from a perception that crises are rare, isolated incidents that happen only in exceptional circumstances.
However, this viewpoint overlooks the proactive role that strategic communications can play in mitigating risks and fostering resilience within an organisation. Crisis can originate from seemingly innocuous internal issues that escalate, such as gossip or even a single tweet. Recently, Dischem faced a significant challenge when a social media user raised concerns about a product she purchased abroad, suggesting it might be counterfeit when compared to what was purportedly sold in Dischem stores.
Dischem’s social media team promptly responded to avert these damaging claims showing responsive issues and community management. But even then, they faced criticism for removing the product from their online catalogue citing “no stock” raising suspicions. This incident highlights a potential disconnect between Dischem's merchandising team, their social media handlers and the public information available about their products.
The core issue lies in communication gaps: the need for better coordination between teams and clearer, transparent information to the public. In this case, internal stakeholders must know the products they are handling and be able to clarify and inform customers about grey products, which was the case here.
While Grey products are not illegal, they do not offer the same experience or utility as the original product.
At the heart of this episode is once again the importance of cohesive internal communication and proactive risk and issues preparedness. You cannot effectively manage something you are not prepared for. Thinking people won’t know/ find out about internal matters that impact them and their pockets is a risk!
And should be addressed frequently to inform the relevant parties so they do not respond incorrectly, ultimately creating a bigger issue that could have been avoided with truth/transparency.
Questions:
Trust is the firm belief in the character, ability, strength, or truth of someone or something. While trust cannot be bought or sold, it remains the cornerstone of any business relationship or transaction. Why else do we ask people we trust for their opinions or if we have bought from Mr. X or know Mr YX before we invest our time or money in them or their business? Edelman’s 2024 trust barometer reports that business is the most trusted institution in the world ahead of government/politicians and media – based on ethics.
This makes sense when you think about all the times politicians have gone against their word betraying constituencies. In what has been a very politically charged year, we have seen many people feeling this way about their chosen political representatives and with the latest damaging VBS mutual bank findings implicating many, you must ask in light of the allegations have either of the accused built strong enough brands built on values that they can be considered beyond reproach by the overall public?
Once you have a reputation to uphold and maintain your words and actions must go hand-in-hand.
Occasionally, a brand or individual with a tarnished image can astonish the public with a remarkable turnaround. Of the millions of case studies available in professional life, businesses and business units must always ask themselves three non-exhaustive questions to measure the extent trust exists in their organisations:
Whatever the answer you arrive at, it is important to strategise and build proactive plans that can shift your brand or company out of crisis management response. Strategies such as outrage, deflection, spinning and using semantics or technicalities to address scrutiny are temporary solutions that ultimately resurface in time.
Efforts in reputation management should encompass not only strategies for building and safeguarding an image but also for restoring it when it comes under scrutiny. Our clients are always encouraged to consider amongst other factors timing, tone, audience and the socio-political environment following a negative event – something many in the VBS matter have not done.
Abraham Lincoln refers to reputation as the shadow of the tree - the tree being you - make sure your shadow sticks, as in today's world of no communication barriers everything will, sooner or later, come under the spotlight.
