Effective crisis communication is not a matter of improvisation at the moment a problem erupts, but rather the result of long-term preparation. Caitlin Leopold, Director of External Communications at technology giant Honeywell, emphasized at Ragan’s Crisis Communication virtual conference that the key to success is creating a robust communication plan before a crisis becomes publicly known.
According to Leopold, the fundamental pillar of any strategy is building trust, which serves as a reserve that an organization draws upon in difficult times. If a company neglects its relationships with the public and partners, even the best-written manual will not save it in a crisis situation. “Trust isn’t built in the moment of a crisis. It draws on what you’ve built over time,” Leopold stated during her presentation.
Identifying Risks and Learning from Others' Mistakes
The first step to a functional system is precisely mapping the greatest reputational risks. Communication teams must identify “friction points” where the greatest pressure is likely to arise. Typical areas that can threaten a company’s stability include:
- problems and dissatisfaction of employees,
- ethical and technical issues associated with artificial intelligence,
- serious operational failures,
- misconduct or scandals by top management.
Leopold identifies monitoring current events among competitors or in other industries as a very effective tool for preparation. If another company faces a negative reaction or scandal, the internal team should ask themselves whether the same scenario could happen to them and what impact it would have on customers or suppliers. Such analyses then serve as a basis for specific scenarios in the communication manual.
Anchor Messages and Process Drills
Once risks are clearly defined, the creation of so-called anchor messages follows. These are pre-prepared statements that contain basic facts and the company’s core values. These messages allow for a response within minutes and prevent the spread of speculation in an information vacuum.
However, the plan itself must also include clear escalation paths, meaning precise procedures for who has the authority to decide and who is designated as the spokesperson for a given type of problem. The entire system must then be regularly subjected to practical drills. Without simulating real pressure, a crisis plan remains merely a theoretical document that may not stand up in live operation.