---

How to cope with a crisis at work through effective communication

Thanks to a variety of potential threats and uncertainty, businesses today in numerous geographical locations and across industries face an unparalleled level of challenges. In the midst of all of this chaos, it is important for organizations to control what they can, including how they communicate internally and with outside stakeholders. This article highlights key elements to keep in mind and discusses how in-house counsel or a corporate legal department should play an integral role in the development and implementation of a crisis communications plan.

Full article

Crisis communications: Controlling what you can control during a crisis

The COVID-19 pandemic remains an unprecedented challenge for millions of businesses around the world. Not in the past century, have we seen a global event that forced businesses to adapt and reevaluate basically every aspect of their operations, including employee health and safety, office space and work from home policies, supply chain, and contracts with third parties. 

We currently find ourselves in a global war against an unseen enemy, COVID-19. The Prussian General Carl von Clausewitz’s description of war as an “area of uncertainty…wrapped in fog” is as appropriate today as it was nearly 200 years ago. With most of the world approximately eight months into this crisis, the fact of the matter remains that we don’t really know what is happening or see an end in sight. For everyone involved, including businesses, this long-term uncertainty is an incredibly frustrating aspect of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Many businesses still don’t know when they can fully reopen. How much longer will business operations be significantly impacted? We still do not know where we stand in the timeline of the pandemic – if the end is still a long way off, or almost here. All plans remain contingent for the foreseeable future. 

Surrounded by this uncertainty and lack of control, many businesses find themselves in unfamiliar territory, still searching for a clear strategy forward. The best antidote for uncertainty is clarity. And the best way to establish clarity (even if you don’t have all the answers at the moment) is through a solid communications plan, which in today’s environment is among a business’ strongest asset.

If that sounds unlikely, consider the opposite: that ambiguous or incorrect communications in times of crisis can have serious consequences. A recent study from the Universities of Ottawa and Sheffield reviewed the World Health Organization’s (WHO) communication strategy in the first months of COVID-19’s global spread. The study considered “all recommendations, statements, press conferences, tools, social media posts, and guidelines released by the WHO during this period… of uncertainty, data shortages and insufficient cooperation". The authors found WHO’s communications to be haphazard, with unclear terminology, inconsistent use of social media, and contradictory advice. The WHO wasn’t alone, as organizations around the world attempted to make sense of the scope and breadth of the unfolding crisis, where there were far more questions than answers. But this particular example of a disorganized crisis communication strategy ultimately led to disjointed policy decisions by governments and other actors, which impacted business all over the world.

Let us learn from past missteps together so we don’t let this happen to you or your legal department. Clear, consistent communications are more important than ever.

Ideally, the C-suite and the general counsel (GC) should have a plan for most contingences. No one in 2019 could have predicted the exact scope or threat of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, proper crisis planning requires leaders to think strategically about a variety of possible scenarios, such as: economic downturns, acts of God, unforeseen executive succession, or major data breaches. The more thoroughly an executive team considers its various contingency plans, the easier it will be to adapt to new emergencies. The team will have a good sense of what the various risks are, what the company’s strongest resources are, and what make up the strategic priorities.

“Adapt” is the key word, of course. Risks change, but so do priorities. Most companies’ priorities changed drastically between February 2020 and May 2020. It’s also important to think creatively. One of the Association of Corporate Counsel European Chapter’s (ACC Europe) priorities for 2020 was a successful, well-attended annual conference. However, when COVID threatened to wreck the meeting plans, ACC Europe’s Board of Directors moved quickly to adapt, turning the annual conference into a new series of lunch and learn sessions on: How to prepare the legal departments for the future of business; Successfully leading remote workers; Commercial contracts’ Force Majeure clauses; Strategies for supporting lawyers’ mental health; and Mapping and managing legal and regulatory COVID-19 risks. The rationale for the change and details of the new sessions were clearly shared with all stakeholders as quickly as possible, which still resulted in a high-quality experience that was well-received by our members. 

The Canadian study outlines several examples of the WHO’s inconsistent messaging. Clearly, a successful communications plan must ensure that consistency is at its core. But what does that mean?

For me, it boils down to three fundamental things. First, the organization must identify a consistent way of communicating the message. This can be accomplished multiple ways, i.e. a spokesperson, the CEO, social media, updates on the company website, or some combination of options. However, once established, all employees and the public should be aware of who is speaking on behalf of the organization and that should remain consistent throughout the crisis. Often, a good place to start is to keep all external communications in the hands of the communications or PR team. This will also make voice and tone easier to manage, as an inconsistent tone can also skew the importance of the facts. A light-hearted social media post, with emojis and a fun photo, can diminish the significance of a serious statement. Likewise, an unnecessarily pessimistic tone can spook staff and stakeholders alike.

Second, ensure that the information being shared is true and consistent. Consistent facts (new hours of operation, new device policies, changes in staffing) may seem easy enough, but it’s surprisingly easy to send conflicting information in the middle of a crisis when everything is constantly changing. The easiest way to send ambiguous or contradictory communications is with a siloed office, where every team does its own work independently. Don’t let this happen. Teams throughout the organization must continue to communicate and update each other, funneling approved and vetted information to those tasked above to get the messages out.

Finally, identify your key stakeholders and ensure you communicate consistently with each of them. Your company’s stakeholders can include employees, the board of director, unions, outside vendors, investors, customers, media, and government officials. Make sure your communications plan accounts for all of them. Don’t leave anyone in the dark, especially if a current strategy must be changed.  This is as much a question of morale as getting the facts straight.

With few exceptions, less is not more when it comes to crisis communications! Many people are reluctant to share information that may be redundant or irrelevant: no one wants to spam their colleagues. But in times of crisis, that reticence has to go. Think of overcommunication as an effective measure against department silos: everyone will share everything with everyone else.

The “fog of war” boils down to a lack of information, and a poor sense of what information is true. An executive team needs all it can get, knowing full well that some information will be contradictory and change often and unexpectedly in the early hours and days of a crisis. The bigger the “sample size” at hand to make informed decisions, the better. 

Even if you don’t have all the answers, be transparent and show your stakeholders that you are making an effort to get it right. If you are upfront and honest about the challenges the organization is facing, that will almost always win the day versus going dark and hoping the crisis will blow over. 

For Clausewitz, a good plan was important to penetrating the fog of war. But it was the second most important element. The single most important asset was “discriminating judgment.”

Among all the officers of a company, no one embodies “discriminating judgment” like the general counsel or chief legal officer. The modern GC is a strategist, first and foremost; as the role continues to evolve during the turbulent decades to start the 21st century, when all business decisions became legal decisions, and a digitized, rapidly changing, global business landscape made regulatory strategy a top priority. Data privacy, border-crossing operations, sustainability, ethics and compliance: more and more companies are turning to legal to navigate these waters. Over 80 percent of GCs now report directly to the CEO, with an undisputed seat at the executive table. 

We can’t see far enough into the future to know when this pandemic will run its course, and we don’t always know how reliable our data are. But every company comes equipped with a specialist in crisis and agility. A communications plan, on paper, gets you only so far; discernment, agility, and leadership skills will help “win the war.” 

Conclusion

A well planned and executed crisis communications plan is an integral part to helping a business regain control of a situation both internally and externally. That said, no one is better trained and equipped to provide the necessary advice and strategic insights to navigate crises than the in-house counsel.  Organizations that proactively combine the two are likely to position themselves to emerge faster and in better shape than those who do not.