To act or react when an issue is bubbling

When faced with organisational issues, leaders are presented with two options: take action or react.

Nothing to see here

Many leaders are quick to select the "let's prepare a reactive response" strategy because, perhaps most obviously, if you don't proactively say anything people might not find out.

Leaders choosing this strategy may consider the issue to be minor or insignificant, unavoidable, accidental or attributable to someone else. They may have even acted promptly or proactively to resolve the matter.

Issues aren't always easy to explain simply either, so talking about them could generate unnecessary noise, create misunderstanding, or spark misinformation.

Legal advice may even affirm the decision to remain tight-lipped. However, while legal teams have a very important role to play in navigating regulations, complex legislation, and immediate commercial interests, the legal book does not always align with an organisation's reputation needs. 

This conflict can often create tension between corporate affairs and legal teams.

Truth and trust

Admittedly, saying nothing is far easier than developing a thoughtful, proactive communications approach to a problem. An approach that effectively guarantees people will hear about it. 

However, trying to avoid short-term discomfort can lead to longer term pain, because, when stories break (tomorrow or many months from now) and leaders are forced to react, organisations quickly shift from the front foot to the back foot – from managing an issue to managing a crisis – and important scene-setting messages can become diluted or entirely lost. 

Initial transparency failures can also make an organisation appear malevolent and disingenuous. Perception is reality, as they say.

In theory, by understanding risk, anchoring response principles in organisational values, and communicating proactively and transparently to the right stakeholders, a more accurate narrative can be shaped up front. These authentic actions can also help to build trust and showcase a genuine commitment to doing the right thing

Unfortunately, earning trust isn’t always simple or swift in practice. 

Trust is built over time, based on a combination of capability and character, and at its crux, is about one's confidence in the unknown. It's no coincidence that scientists, experts, first responders, and medical professionals are turned to as trusted sources and advisors during a crisis.

Put simply, a long-term focus on trust and reputation will improve organisational resilience during challenging periods (e.g. times of crisis). 

It also makes good everyday business sense, by enabling:

1. stronger relationships with employees, customers and stakeholders

2. improved customer experience and satisfaction 

3. improved employee engagement, collaboration, innovation, productivity and satisfaction

4. positive word-of-mouth and increased loyalty.

Decisions decisions

Issues come in all shapes and sizes and never occur in a vacuum, so choosing the most effective communication strategy may feel like a crippling task, no matter how prepared you are. But it doesn’t have to be.

To determine an appropriate way forward, it is vital to understand the context of the issue within and outside an organisation, and to weigh up the consequences.

To do this, the following elements should be considered: 

1. Breadth of impact (e.g. people, environment, business) 

2. Intensifying factors (e.g. low baseline of trust or credibility) 

3. Diminishing factors  

4. Regulatory and legislative requirements

5. Legal obligations.

A way forward

It is never black and white, particularly in the face of escalating pressure and complexity, but adequate monitoring, planning, and scenario testing over time will hasten and improve communications decision-making. 

It all starts with assigning real commercial value to reputation, developing values-led response principles, and creating mutual respect and understanding between legal and corporate affairs teams.

---

*Note:

• CRISIS: Poses a significant threat, requires immediate action, and often involves intense scrutiny. The negative consequences of a crisis can be significant and long-lasting, particularly if handled poorly.

• ISSUE: Requires attention or resolution, but it is typically manageable, with a lower immediate impact. If left unaddressed or managed inadequately, an issue can escalate into a crisis.