There are several different theories in PR on how handle a crisis. Some are dealt with military precision, while others snowball into an even larger debacle. Although I believe the circumstances dictate the best way to handle a PR crisis, there should be a pre-meditated plan that is ready should the worst-case scenario occur.

Do I Need A Plan B?

Yes! Seems obvious, doesn’t it? However, some argue that if you put enough time and preparation into Plan A, you shouldn’t need a Plan B. In fact, having a secondary plan can look like a lack of confidence in your primary plan. It’s a very simplistic way to view things. There are always variables outside your control that could derail your campaign, or at least cause a glitch. Not to mention, the entire realm of possible events, miscues, or stumbles that aren’t directly tied to the campaign but can cause just as much damage. A backup plan is an excellent way to patch a campaign back together if it breaks, or it can act as a safety net but it’s not a panacea. Can you even prepare for such spontaneity?  How can you cover every angle?

You can’t, or at least you shouldn’t. Having a contingency plan for every possible situation is a waste of time and resources. Yet, that doesn’t mean you can’t be as prepared as a boyscout. The trick is action…swift, transparent action. The longer you remain inactive after a bump in the road, the worse it gets. Not addressing the problem quickly and appropriately can make the smallest crack into the largest canyon.

1. Identify the mistake or problem
2. Have a meeting with the PR department or firm
3. Act

Cleaning Up A Crisis

In recent news there have been a couple situations that, at least in my opinion, were PR disasters. I want to know whether you think they were handled well and/or what you would have done differently.

• Penn State – Jerry Sandusky, a coach for Penn State’s football team, has been accused of several count child sexual abuse. Since the issue has become public, two school board members were found guilty of perjury and duly fired, the head coach of the last several decades was fired for ‘moral misconduct’, the school attempted to sweep the scandal under the rug, more victims come forward every day, yet, no clear statement has been made by Penn State.
• Herman Cain – This Republican Presidential Candidate was accused of sexual harassment by several women. After denying any knowledge of these suits, Cain’s story continued to change. He admitted to some of suits but continued to proclaim his innocence.

Related articles

• Penn State Scandal: Jerry Sandusky Cited As Case Against Same-Sex Parenting By Anti-Gay Speakers (VIDEO) (huffingtonpost.com)
• Shop Talk: Scandals Hit Penn State, Herman Cain (npr.org)

In a recent article from The Wall Street Journal, The Case Against Corporate Social Responsibility, Professor Aneel Karnani argues the premise that companies have an inherent duty to get involved in social issues is flawed. As society looks to companies to address these problems, the real solutions may be ignored.

“Companies that simply do everything they can to boost profits will end up increasing social welfare. In circumstances in which profits and social welfare are in direct opposition, an appeal to Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) will almost always be ineffective, because executives are unlikely to act voluntarily in the public interest and against shareholder interests,” says Professor Karnani.

He adds that, by engaging in social issues, managers are sacrificing profits and essentially imposing a tax on shareholders. Therefore, Corporate Social Responsibility conflicts with creating better corporate governance, since the managers’ job is to act in the shareholders’ interest.

Clearly, Professor Karnani views this as a mainly financial issue and suggests that the only way CSR could work is with strict regulations, such as watchdogs and punitive actions for unacceptable social behavior. However, the professor’s point of view sparked a large response in defense of CSR.

Thomas Lyon, the director of the Erb Institute for Global Sustainable Enterprise at the University of Michigan, agrees there should be consequences for unacceptable behavior, but feels CSR is essential to the business world. He replies, “The heart of his [Professor Aneel Karnani] argument lies in the assumption of a neat separation between markets and politics. In this idealized world, politics can be counted on to deliver the regulations needed to rein in corporate greed and malfeasance. Then corporations can safely be left in the hands of managers whose sole interest is maximizing profits. The problem with this perspective is that government failure is just as common as market failure.”

Lyon feels the amount of lobbying between special interest group and the government has gotten out of control. The groups receive special treatment allowing a breakdown in regulation. Basically, Lyon says, corporations are the reason for government failure by blatantly ignoring any regulations imposed on them. He insists corporate political activity become a large part of CSR. However, Mr. Lyon and Prosser Karnani don’t mention the essential aspect of corporate responsibility and its benefits.

The essence of CSR in business is what’s known as the triple bottom line: People, Planet, and Profit. This strategy requires mutual benefit between corporation and non-profit, authenticity, and credibility. CSR is a powerful way to maintain a good corporate reputation but is not a silver bullet. It has become a widely accepted strategy by both corporations and consumers.

“Increasingly we are seeing Corporate Responsibility and more specifically sustainability become a significant part of Corporate Strategy.  It is not uncommon these days to find c-level executives dealing with the issues and opportunities of Corporate Responsibility and sustainability.” Rufus Bullough, an Associate in Acre Resources Limited Corporate Responsibility and Sustainability team, says.

Eighty-three percent of U.S. consumers want more of the products, services and retailers they use to benefit causes, according to the new 2010 Cone Cause Evolution Study. 85 percent have a more positive image of a product or company when it supports a cause they care about, and 80 percent are likely to switch brands, similar in price and quality, to one that supports a cause.

These statistics prove that, while there is no guarantee, CSR can be advantageous for corporations and the world around them. Consumers support the products and services that benefit causes. Corporations are adding CSR as a core business strategy, increasing profits and their reputation. Non-profits are receiving assistance with awareness, as well as monetary resources.

As CSR progresses, regulations will likely be put in place to prevent corporate greed and unacceptable behavior. However, even with regulations in place, managers are much more likely to engage in a business strategy that, if done well, boosts more than just profits. Professor Karnani believes corporations are too self-indulgent to properly execute a business strategy where profit isn’t the only benefit. Managers see an opportunity to improve on a number of levels with CSR and consumers praise those companies. CSR is no longer a novelty. It’s an opportunity.

Related articles

• The Big CSR Debate: Is Responsible Capitalism a Farce? (blogs.forbes.com)
• Aron Cramer: The Great CSR Debate 2010 (huffingtonpost.com)
• Natalie Holder-Winfield: The Case Against Corporate Responsibility Misses the Point (huffingtonpost.com)

It doesn’t matter if Gen-Y is your target audience or the newest group of employees, it’s important to understand how they think and work. Eventually, you’ll engage with someone from Gen-Y so be prepared.

Mr. Youth and INTREPID surveyed a wide spectrum of this young generation, regarding their priorities as they lead the world through an innovative and ever-changing society. Change is only going to continue – in education, technology, business, communication – and to be successful, companies need to embrace and integrate the changes.

The survey, Millenial Inc.,  produced some unique trends within Gen-Y that will affect businesses everywhere.

• Millenials (Gen-Y) prefer to collaborate on decisions, responsibility, and even success – or failure

• “Millennials are not swayed by the “been there, done that” mantra intoned by previous generations, but are driven by ideas that move forward.” In other words, seniority is irrelevant and those whom excel in engaging and innovating will be rewarded

• Technology is vital to understanding consumers – creating customizable products and input directly from the consumer

• “Millennials are the savviest consumers ever…The truth doesn’t escape the Millennial. The only way to gain their trust is to deliver and do so consistently.”

• Social responsibility is important…but if it affects profit it’s seen as an inconvenience

• Two-way conversation and participation are invaluable

• Peer-to-peer communication, aka word-of-mouth, drives behavior as the #1 way to receive news and product evaluations

Clearly, Gen-Y does things differently than the current status-quo. However, their unique priorities and unorthodox methods have proven to be successful. For example, Facebook‘s CEO is 25 years old, yet the site has a population larger than the U.S. and is the most searched brand on the web. The key is utilizing the innovative ideas of Gen-Y and combining them with the experience of senior business execs. Use the best of both worlds.

Related articles

• Your Business Will be Run by Gen-Y – Get Over It (startupprofessionals.com)
• Entrepreneur Magazine’s Gen-Y columnist Scott Gerber Advises Unemployed Youth to Quit Job Search (prweb.com)
• Embrace the Gen-Y Stereotypes (itsjosipnotjoseph.com)

Related articles

• Social Media Management for the Enterprise: Spring Creek Group Partners with Spredfast (prweb.com)
• Popularity and influence – When numbers don’t necessarily mean the ability to change (ubervu.com)
• 50 billion reasons for marketing innovation (customerthink.com)

After several failed attempts to plug the oil leak, BP is a hot topic for negative press. News channels, social networks, environmental organizations, etc., are taking shots at BP’s misfortune.

BP is in a deep hole…and seems to be getting deeper.

This situation, while horrible, does allow for a learning experience. I think BP isn’t helping itself by coming up empty over and over again. So, let’s put our thinking-caps on and imagine we’re the ones in the line of fire.

How would you handle BP’s situation from a Public Relations perspective?

What would you do differently?

What has BP done well, PR-wise? What haven’t they done well?

Related articles

• Former BP CEO has no regrets (politico.com)
• BP failed to learn from past ‘near misses’: oil spill panel (alternet.org)
• Exclusive: Spill fund rules would shift rights to BP (reuters.com)
• BP’s lack of discipline tied to oil spill: report (alternet.org)
• Experts: BP Ignored Warning Signs on Well (abcnews.go.com)