Summary:
In a world of instant information, organizations or individuals seeking to preserve/present their image, social capital, or brand perception must know how to properly respond to crises. It is not a matter of "if" but "when" a crisis will occur. Ulmer, Sellnow, & Seeger provide a thorough balanced approach to crisis management by focusing on the potential each situation provides for those involve to renew, grow, and progress in the public eye. They train readers on techniques and approaches to resolve crises in a manner than may benefit the interests of the company in the long run. The authors main goal is to change readers' view of crises and adapt their responses.
The first section of the book focuses on how to respond to a crisis. The authors discuss subjects related to defining and framing a crisis, managing uncertainty, and leading out in the discussions publicly.The second section categorizes crises, and shows various responses based on the type of crisis. The third section focuses on how to decrease the likelyhood or damage of a future crisis or through organizational learning, risk communication, and ethical communication. The authors introduce their theory, "the Discourse of Renewal" in the final chapter, after providing a solid foundation for such through the text.
Though primarily focused on corporate crisis communication, the principles in the book could be applied to administrations struggling with a broken educational system, including frustrated instructors or students.
Citation-worthy:
"Crises are most often described as destructive, threatening, and negative events without any redeeming value. Consequently, communication following a crisis is often defensive and negative. In this case, organizations deny responsibility for the crisis, look for scapegoats to attribute responsibility, minimize the extent or impact of the damage, take a rigid legalistic approach, or say nothing at all. These types of responses have resulted in a declining confidence in our public and private institutions. Current crisis communication theory has effectively categorized strategies organizations employ to preserve their images and reputations" (Ulmer, Sellnow, & Seeger, 2011, p. XIII).
"We suggest that an organization experiencing a crisis also take the opportunity to learn from the event, communicate honestly and ethically, work to minimize harm for those most directly impacted by the crisis, and develop a prospective vision for the organization to move forward. This approach, which we describe as the Discourse of Renewal, suggests that organizations should enact strong, positive ethical core values and effective crisis communication principles to guide their crisis responses" (Ulmer, Sellnow, & Seeger, 2011, p. XIII).
"Crises are not intrinsically negative forces in society… Crises can actually lead to positive outcomes. We see crises as opportunities for learning and improvement, viewing them as they are perceived in Chinese culture,where the symbol for crisis in the Mandarin language is interpreted as dangerous opportunity (see Figure 1.1)" (Ulmer, Sellnow, & Seeger, 2011, p. 3).
"In a classic study, Hermann (1963) identified three characteristics separating crises from other unpleasant occurrences:
1. Surprise
2. Threat
3. Short response time" (Ulmer, Sellnow, & Seeger, 2011, p. 5).
"We offer the following description as a working definition of organizational crisis:
And organizational crisis is a specific, unexpected, and nonroutine event or series of events that create high levels of uncertainty and simultaneously present an organization with both opportunities for and threats to its high-priority goals" (Ulmer, Sellnow, & Seeger, 2011, p. 7).
"Corporate apologia ... Research on corporate apologia was initially conceptualized as the speech of self-defense (Ware & Linkugel, 1973). Hearit (2001) defines an apologia as not exactly an apology but rather 'a response to criticism that seeks to present a compelling competing account of organizational accusations' (p. 502). In this case, crises are created by an accusation of wrongdoing. Hearit and Courtright (2004) explain that apologetic crises 'are the result of charges leveled by corporate actors (e.g., media or public interest groups) who contend that an organization is guilty of wrongdoing' (p. 210). Corporate apologia provides a list of communication strategies that the organization can use to respond to these accusations. These communication strategies include: 'denial, counterattack, differentiation, apology, and legal' (Hearit, 2006, p. 15). These strategies are primarily defensive and are designed principally for an organization to account for its actions after a crisis" (Ulmer, Sellnow, & Seeger, 2011, p. 16-17).
"Image repair theory... Benoit (1985) developed a comprehensive theory of image repair. Image refers to how the organization is perceived by its stakeholders and Publics. Similar to corporate apologia, Benoit (1997) explains that "the key to understanding image repair strategies is to consider the nature of attacks or complaints that prompt such responses" (p. 178). He suggests that two components of the acts are essential. First, the organization must be 'held responsible for an action' (Benoit, 1997, p. 178). Second, 'that [action must be] considered offensive' (Benoit, 1997, p. 178). Benoit's (1995) theory contains a list of 14 impression management strategies. Five major strategies include denial, a vision of responsibility, reducing the offensiveness of the event, corrective action, and mortification. Each strategy can be used individually or in combination (Sellnow & Ulmer, 1995; Sellnow, Ulmer, & Snider, 1998). Consistent with corporate apologia, Benoit's image repair strategies focus on how organizations respond to accusations or account for their actions after being accused of a transgression. An effective response is designed to repair the organization's damaged image or reputation.
Situational crisis communication theory" (Ulmer, Sellnow, & Seeger, 2011, p. 17).
"A third prominent theory on crisis communication is situational crisis communication theory. Coombs developed this theory by linking attribution theory and crisis response strategies (Coombs, 2007; Coombs & Halladay, 2002). His theory 'evaluates the reputational threats posed by the crisis situation and then recommends crisis response strategies based upon the reputational threat level' (P.138). The crisis response strategies in this approach or a synthesis of work on corporate, impression management, and image repair theory. He developed the list was selecting 'those [strategies] that appeared on two or more list developed by crisis experts' (P. 139). He describes for major communication approaches, including denial, diminishment, rebuilding, and the bolstering. In all, he delineates 10 crisis response strategies. The crisis communication strategies are then used according to the threat to the organization's reputation based upon 'crisis type, crisis history, and prior reputation' (Coombs, 2007, P. 141). Coombs (2007) explains the crisis type can be defined by three categories: 'victim crisis cluster, accidental crisis cluster, and presentable crisis cluster' (P. 142). The victim closer involves crisis such as natural disasters, rivers, workplace violence, and malevolence calm. Accidental crises involve challenges, technical error accidents, and technical error product harm. Preventable crises include human error, accidents, human error product harm, and organizational misdeeds. Beyond crisis type, crisis response strategies should also be selected according to the organization's crisis history and prior reputation" (Ulmer, Sellnow, & Seeger, 2011, pp. 17-18).
"Crisis history and prior reputation are important because organizations that have recurring crises or four reputations are not likely to have their messages accepted by stakeholders. Coombs's theory is based upon the idea that, after a crisis, stakeholders "assign responsibility for negative unexpected events" (page 138). Depending upon the crisis type, crisis history, and prior reputation, Coombs provides crisis response recommendations to address the attributions of responsibility toward the organization" (Ulmer, Sellnow, & Seeger, 2011, p. 18).
Defining uncertainty: "Uncertainty is the inability to determine the presence or predict the future… Crisis-induced uncertainty is quite different from the type of uncertainty people and organizations experience on a daily basis…Taleb, (2010) explains that crises often create epistemological and ontological uncertainty. He defines epistemological uncertainty as the lack of knowledge we have following a crisis… Ontological uncertainty refers to the type of uncertainty in which the future has little or no relationship to the past" (Ulmer, Sellnow, & Seeger, 2011, p. 26).
"Lessons on uncertainty and crisis communication:
Lesson 1—Organization members must accept that a crisis can start quickly and unexpectedly....
Lesson 2—organizations should not respond to crises with routine solutions…
Lesson 3—threat is perceptual....
Lesson 4 — crisis communicators must communicate early and often following a crisis, regardless of whether they have critical information about the crisis.…
Lesson 5 – organizations should not purposely heighten the ambiguity of a crisis to deceive or distract the public.…
Lesson 6 – be prepared to defend your interpretation of the evidence surrounding a crisis.…
Lesson 7 — without good intentions prior to a crisis, recovery is difficult or impossible.…
Lesson 8—If you believe you are not responsible for a crisis, you need to build a case for who is responsible and why.…
Lesson 9 – organizations need to prepare for uncertainty through simulations and training.…
Lesson 10 – crises challenge the way organizations think about and conduct their business" (Ulmer, Sellnow, & Seeger, 2011, p. 39).
"Meyers & Holusha (1986) discuss seven potential positive results that can come from a crisis:
– Heroes are born.
– Change is accelerated.
– Latent problems are faced.
– People are changed.
– New strategies evolve.
– Early warning systems developed.
– New competitive advantages appear" (Ulmer, Sellnow, & Seeger, 2011, p. 60).
"Lessons on communicating effectively in crisis situations
Lesson 1: determine your goals for crisis communication.
Lesson 2: before a crisis, develop true equal partnerships with organizations and groups that are important to the organization.
Lesson 3: acknowledge your stakeholders, including the media, as partners with managing a crisis.
Lesson 4: organizations need to develop strong, positive primary and secondary stakeholder relationships.
Lesson 5: effective crisis communication involves listening to your stakeholders.
Lesson 6: communicate early about the crisis, acknowledge uncertainty, and a sure the publics that you will maintain contact with them about current and future risk.
Lesson 7: avoid certain or absolute answers to the public and the media until sufficient information is available.
Lesson 8: do not over reassure stakeholders about the impact the crisis will have on them.
Lesson 9: the public needs useful and practical statements of self-efficacy during a crisis.
Lesson 10: effective crisis communicators acknowledge that's positive factors can arise from organizational crises" (Ulmer, Sellnow, & Seeger, 2011, p. 61).
"Suggestions for the leader as a spokesperson:
– Don't let the media push you into saying things that you do not want to say, but don't become angry with the media.
– Express concern for anyone harmed by the crisis.
– Avoid the phrase "no comment."
– If you don't have the answer to a question, say so, but indicates that you are working to find the answer.
– Don't to speak with certainty unless you're absolutely sure of all the facts.
– Be sure to point out The uncertainty of situations with phrases such as, "the situation is evolving," or, "we don't have all the facts yet."
– Don't hesitate to involve others on the crisis team when you don't know the answer" (Ulmer, Sellnow, & Seeger, 2011, p. 74).
"Benoit's Image restoration strategies
– Denial
A. Simple denial (see we did not do it.)
Be. Shifting the blame (someone else did it.)
– Evasian of responsibility
A. Provocation (we were provoked to act.)
B. Defeasibility (we did not have enough information.)
C. Accident (we did not mean for this to happen.)
D. Good intentions (see we meant to do the right thing.)
– Reducing the offensiveness of the event
A. Bolstering (see we have done some good things.)
Be. Minimization (see the crisis is not that bad.)
C. Differentiation (see others have had worse crises.) He
D. Transcendence (see we should focus on other issues.)
E. Attack the accuser (see the accuser is irresponsible.)
F. Compensation (see we will cover the cost of the crisis.)
– Corrective action (see we will solve the problem.)
– Mortification (see we are sorry)" (Ulmer, Sellnow, & Seeger, 2011, p. 76).
"Coombs's crisis response strategies
– Nonexistence strategies
A. Denial (see we did not to do it.)
B. Clarification (see we did not do it, and this is why.)
C. Attack (see those who accuse us are at fault.)
D. Intimidation (see we will sue the accuser.)
– Distance strategies
A. Excuse (we are not responsible.)
B. Denial of intention (see we did not intend for this to happen.)
C. Denial of volition (someone Else did this.)
D. Just vacation (see this crisis is not as bad as others.)
I. Minimizing injury (see no one was hurt by the crisis.)
I I. Victim deserving (see the victim deserves the effects.)
I I. Miss representation of the crisis event (see our crisis did not cause this impact.
– Ingratiation strategies
A. Bolstering (let's examine our positive aspects.)
B. Transcendence (see the real problem is much larger.)
C. Praising others (see thank you for your advice.)
– Mortification strategies
A. Remediation (see we will compensate victims.)
B. Repentance (please accept our apology.)
C. Rectification (this is how we will solve the problem.)
– Suffering (we are a victim of the crisis.)" (Ulmer, Sellnow, & Seeger, 2011, p. 77).
"Lessons on effective crisis leadership:
Lesson 1: effective leadership is critical to overcoming a crisis.
Lesson 2: new leaders should be visible during a crisis.
Listen 3: leaders should work to develop a positive company reputation during normal times to build a reservoir of goodwill.
Lesson 4: leaders should be open and honest following a crisis.
Lesson 5: leaders who manage crises successfully may create opportunities for renewal.
Lesson 6: leaders should cooperate with stakeholders during a crisis and should work to build consensus.
Lesson 7: poor leadership, including denials, cover-ups, or lack of response, can make a crisis much worse.
Lesson 8: leaders must adapt to their leadership styles and contingencies during crazies.
Lesson 9: a virtuous response to a crisis by the organization's leaders may be the most effective and generating support and renewal.
Lesson 10 Leaders have specific communication obligations for managing and learning from crises" (Ulmer, Sellnow, & Seeger, 2011, p. 78).
"Simply experiencing a negative event is not sufficient for learning" (Ulmer, Sellnow, & Seeger, 2011, p. 173).
"Bazerman and Watkins (2004) identify four ways in which organizations fail to learn from the failures that occur around them:
1. Scanning failures: failure to pay close attention to potential problems both inside and outside the organization; this failure could be due to arrogance, a lack of resources, or simple inattention
2. Integration failures: failure to understand how pieces of potentially complicated information fit together to provide lessons on how to avoid crises
3. Incentive failures: Fillier to provide sufficient rewards to people who reports problems and take actions to avoid possible crises
4. Learning failures: failure to draw important lessons from crazies and preserve their memories in the organization" (Ulmer, Sellnow, & Seeger, 2011, p. 174).
"If organizations are willing to devote themselves to effective organizational learning, they may experience the following four opportunities
Opportunity 1: organizations should treat failure as an opportunity to recognize a potential crisis or to prevent a similar crisis in the future.
Opportunity 2: organizations can avoid crises by learning from other organizations' failures and crises.
Opportunity 3: organizational training in planning should emphasize the preservation of previous learning in order to make organizational memory a priority.
Opportunity 4 organizations must be willing to unlearn outdated or ineffective procedures if they are to learn better crisis management strategies" (Ulmer, Sellnow, & Seeger, 2011, p. 182).
"Distinguishing risks from crisis
– Risk communication is future oriented, because risk focuses on what may happen. In contrast, crisis, by its nature come is focused on a specific event that is occurring or has already occurred.
– Risk communication is designed to avert a crisis, while crisis communication six to explain the consequences for a regrettable event.
– Risk messages are designed to speculate about what might happen based on current knowledge. Crisis messages typically focus on a non-event and speculate about how and why the event happened.
– Risk messages are designed for long-term planning. Crisis messages focus on the short-term as they seek to address the immediate problem.…
– Risk messages tend to have a personal focus…
– Risk communication has the luxury of time. Full-blown media campaigns, such as appeals for using seatbelts, can be designed and implemented over an extended period of time. Crisis messages typically take the form of news conferences, press releases, speeches, and any other available that can get the information out as quickly as possible.
– Risk messages can be carefully crafted and controlled. Crisis messages must be developed spontaneously in reaction to the crisis" (Ulmer, Sellnow, & Seeger, 2011, pp. 185-186).
"If we are to identify, learn from, and communicate responsibly about risk, we would be wise to keep the following opportunities in mind:
– Opportunity one: effective risk communication can disrupt a crisis and prevented from reaching its full magnitude.
– Opportunity to: a mindful look at outlook is essential to recognizing the risks.
– Opportunity three: risk communication must account for both hazard and outrage.
– Opportunity for: two is your social responsibility , All risk communication should be held to the standard of significance choice.
Most important, effective risk communication allows for interaction among all stakeholders in any risk situation. To maximize this interaction, risk communicators should be conscious of the various needs of diverse stakeholders" (Ulmer, Sellnow, & Seeger, 2011, p. 197).
"An ethical response to a crisis, can help bolster an organization's image and reputation and ultimately helped lead and organization toward renewal:
Opportunity 1: organizations are better able to generate a productive crisis response was if they are willing to except responsibility for any actions they may have taken to cause a crisis.
Opportunity 2: organizations that are open and honest before and during crises are better prepared to manage and recover from the events.
Opportunity 3: organizations that make humanism and care priorities before crisis are better prepared for an acting these values after they have occurred.
Opportunity 4: organizations are better prepared to avoid or manage crises if they have identified, discussed, and instituted for values" (Ulmer, Sellnow, & Seeger, 2011, pp. 109-110).
"Misconceptions of crisis communication
– Crises do not build character; they expose it.
– Crises are not inherently negative events.
– Crises require facing forward, not backward,
– Listening to stakeholders is essential.
– Agility trumps rigidity.
– The best assert crisis plan fails without positive stick all the relationships.
– Over reassuring eventually becomes a credibility killer.
–Communicate even if you can only say youhave nothing new to communicate.
– Focus less on the image and more on solution and solutions.
– Never resort to spin" (Ulmer, Sellnow, & Seeger, 2011, p. 223).
"For effective response, organizations would do well to see if these were opportunities:
Opportunity 1: organizations that bracelet crisis communication on strong positive organizational values are more likely to experience renewal.
– Opportunity 2: organizations to make significant choice of prior see in their crisis communication are more likely to experience renewals.
– Opportunity 3: organizations of books on moving beyond Chris's rather than escape and Glenn are more likely to experience renewal.
– Opportunity 4: organization that distinguish themselves as models further industries are more likely to experience" (Ulmer, Sellnow, & Seeger, 2011, p. 226).
