Since 2000 the UK has seen its fair share of disasters and disruptive challenges – floods, terrorist attacks, industrial disputes, protests and animal diseases – all of which have brought about major changes to how the UK perceives and prepares for disaster.

Disasters have a habit of occurring at the most inconvenient times, with little or no warning, usually on a Friday at 5pm or just before a Bank Holiday weekend. They may be large or small but one thing may be guaranteed: a disaster can and will destroy a company’s or service’s reputation if that organisation has not prepared itself to respond effectively and efficiently to a threat. A recent example is the UK government’s mismanagement of the foot and mouth outbreak in 2001, which has left a legacy of mistrust as to the government’s ability to handle such a crisis.

When a disaster strikes only you can protect your company’s reputation. You may not be able to control the initial event but you can certainly prepare your company’s response in such a way that it will limit any damage. Think back to 11th December 2005 and the explosion at the Buncefield oil refinery in Hemel Hempstead. The businesses and offices surrounding that plant found themselves in the middle of an incident they could not control and for which they were not responsible. However, their customers still expected their goods to be delivered and services provided.

What is reputation? Can you identify your reputation? That is not as easy as you may first think. Just because your company is doing well, sales are up and repeat orders are increasing, it doesn’t mean you can relax. Reputations do not manage themselves; you need to understand how your reputation is perceived and how to protect it. Is it just the product? Is it the company name? Is it a member of your staff?

Virtually anything you say or do can either improve or destroy a company’s value on the market. A good reputation may serve to improve sales of goods and services. A bad reputation would, obviously, result in the opposite. Who could forget Gerald Ratner’s comment that his company’s product was “total crap” and that a decanter and glasses on a silver tray, sold by his company, cost as little as a prawn sandwich and probably wouldn’t last as long. By devaluing his brand he managed to destroy the company’s and his own reputation, resulting in his resignation and a change in the company name. Such PR gaffs are the things of nightmares.

To maintain a company’s reputation, it needs to build trust among its customers and staff. To limit the risk of harming this hard-earned reputation, the company must be able to communicate risks to its customers and staff in a sympathetic manner, allowing for their beliefs and cultures. To do this, the company needs to understand how their stakeholders perceive and understand this risk.

A certain risk may be perceived differently by different people; what is a risk to one person may not be to another. We tend to overestimate sensational risks like flying and contracting new-variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (or mad cow disease) and tend to underestimate common risks like driving a car or crossing the road. These attitudes to risk are forged by many factors such as:

  • Cultural and social factors
  • Lack of personal control over a risk
  • Personal experiences, good or bad
  • Lack of experience
  • Peer group and parental pressure
  • Uncertainty as to the probabilities or impact of exposure to the risk
  • Infrequent but massive accidents
  • No visible benefits
  • Benefits go to others

All of these attitudes contribute to shape the way people to whom you are responsible may interpret and understand and act upon new risks. Being aware of what can influence your stakeholders’ perceptions of risks will help the company develop an effective communication strategy.

One thing we do not do well in this country is communicate risk to the public/consumers. There is a fear, especially among the emergency services and government, that giving the public information about significant risks will cause panic. I cannot think of one example where the public has gone into panic mode when given information about such a risk. It is, in fact, usually quite the opposite. If the public believes there is a risk that threatens their safety and security, they seek out as much information as possible from whatever sources are available. The purpose of communicating risk is to explain the reasons behind a risk-based decision, giving the public sufficient information in order to make an informed decision.

Businesses tend to make assumptions as to what they think their staff and customers may want to hear, or should hear, without thinking about the consequences. Treat your stakeholders intelligently, and remember they have access to the internet and other information sources, consumer watchdogs and activist groups. Don’t attempt to hide anything, as they are likely to find out. The best thing to do is to work as if everything you say or do is in public.

A good reputation is a valuable asset and one that is well worth protecting. But it will not manage itself. Begin by understanding your stakeholders’ perception of risk and develop a communication strategy to help you to communicate with stakeholders before and during an incident. Work as if everything you say or do is in public. Do that and trust will follow.

Source: Global Emergency Management

© Copyright 2002-2006 by newbusiness.co.uk