COMM THEORY - ATTRIBUTION THEORY/CRISIS/COVID

Crisis Communication & Emergency Response 1

The Application of Crisis Communications: Theory, Management, and Response

Leon Lewis Jr.

Ball State University

August 15, 2016

Related Topics: Public Relations, Crisis Management, Emergency Management, Crisis Communication, Homeland Security

Crisis Communication & Emergency Response 2

Contents

Abstract…………………………………………………………………………………………………….3

1.0 Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………………...4

2.0 “Crisis” Defined: An Overview……………………………………………………………………...5

2.1 Crisis Management vs Crisis Communication……………………………………………..6

2.1.1 Crisis Management……………………………………………………………...6

2.1.2 Crisis Communication…………………………………………………………..7

3.0 Situational Crisis Communication Theory (SCCT)………………………………………………..8

3.1 The Crisis Situation (Clusters)……………………………………………………………...9

3.2 Crisis Response Strategies (Postures)……………………………………………………..10

3.3 Matching Crisis Situations to Crisis Response Strategies……………………………….11

4.0 Crisis/Emergency Response Command Structure………………………………………………..12

4.1 The National Incident Management System (NIMS)………………………………….…12

4.2 The Incident Command System (ICS)…………………………………………………….13

4.3 Crisis Communication and The Public Information Officer (PIO)……………………..16

5.0 Best Practices for Handling the Media and Public………………………………………………..16

6.0 Conclusion…………………………………………………………………………………………...18

Bibliography……………………………………………………………………………………………...20

Crisis Communication & Emergency Response 3

Abstract

Crisis communications play a critical role in crisis management and emergency response. Due to current

events involving such incidents as terrorist attacks, mass shootings, chemical facility accidents, etc., the

application of effective crisis communication is of dire importance in protecting an organization from

reputational damage while simultaneously addressing the concerns of the public. Serving as an effective

crisis communication strategy, Coombs’ Situational Crisis Communication Theory (SCCT) attempts to

resolve the issues which emerge as a result of a given crisis. In this analysis of crisis communication and

management, the role of SCCT as a communications strategy for Public Information Officers (PIOs)

within the emergency response team will be examined. In understanding how to implement SCCT into

this component of the crisis management continuum, PIOs will gain an invaluable public relations tool by

which to address the media and public in crisis situations.

Crisis Communication & Emergency Response 4

1.0 Introduction

In wake of the events surrounding September 11, 2001 attacks, the relevancy of crisis

communications among emergency response personnel in addressing public concern and outrage has risen

to vital importance (in the 21st century) regarding situations of high unpredictability, threat and

uncertainty. As it is the duty for emergency responders and political leaders alike to address and inform

the public, the issue of crisis communication poses a challenging and daunting task in an attempt to return

the day-to-day affairs of the masses to a state of normalcy (Boin, 2003). Derived from a multidisciplinary

approach, crisis communication utilizes the principles of management, psychology, and rhetorical theory

for the purpose of establishing crisis response stratagem and post crisis communication. Functioning

within the larger scope of crisis management, the activities involved in the crisis communication process

attempts to establish “protective factors” for its intended audiences by providing clarification of “the

specific event, the identification of consequences and outcomes, and the provision of specific harm-

reducing information to affected communities in an honest, candid, prompt, accurate, and complete

manner” (Reynolds, 2005). In doing this, the power obtained by the general public from wielding

information is now utilized as a community resource, in contrast to it being accessed by only a narrow

and privileged segment. This, in turn engenders a sense of trust and cooperation among the larger

population by allowing them to make informed decisions surrounding actions which must be taken on

their part as countermeasures to ensure their safety on both an individual and communal level. Likewise,

for organizations that fear reputational damage, they will be able to present their account of the crisis,

their degree of accountability, and an opportunity to apply the required corrective actions (if needed) to

the public. In this analysis of crisis communication, the application of Situational Crisis Communication

Theory (SCCT), as it relates to Public Information Officers (PIOs) in times of crisis will be examined.

Allowing for the proper preparation and planning of crisis communication, SCCT enables the Public

Information Officer to create an accurate assessment of a situation by matching the extent of crisis

severity with its respective response. Moreover, the assessment obtained (generated through SCCT)

Crisis Communication & Emergency Response 5

allows one to obtain an accurate estimation of the type of damage (i.e. public safety, financial, and

reputational) created by the given crisis.

2.0 "Crisis" Defined: An Overview

Originating from the Greek word ‘krisis’, translated to mean ‘decisive moment’, the word “crisis”

has assumed a multitude of definitions in an effort to describe the phenomena. Orgizek (1999) defines a

crisis as confusion, a trial, a break, or an opportunity (Ogrizek, 1999) whereas Cloudman (2006) asserts

that crisis is “the state of uncertainty resulting from a triggering event that disrupts an organization’s

routine activities” (Cloudman, 2006). Providing the most functional definition to date, Lagadec (1984)

denotes the most critical and relevant characteristics of the given construct within this statement,

“Crisis: a situation in which numerous organizations are faced with critical problems, experience both sharp external pressure and bitter internal tensions, and are the brutally and for an extended period thrust to the center stage and hurled against one another….all in a society of mass communication, in other words, in direct contact with the uncertainty of being at the top of the news on radio and television and in the press for a long time.” (Ogrizek, 1999)

Although no universal definition on what constitutes a crisis can be agreed upon among scholars,

general characteristics defining the phenomena have been noted. Within the domain of Public Relations,

in particular a crisis communications context, Wekesa (2013) lists four defining characteristics,

1. A crisis is perceptual. Defined by the perceptions that are held by the stakeholders about the crisis, it is the organization’s responsibility to alter its crisis communication based on their beliefs.

2. A crisis is unpredictable. While the nature of a crisis can be anticipated, this is not the same as in the instance of something being unexpected.

3. A crisis disrupts stakeholder expectations. A crisis can disturb the operations of an

organization, causing a interruption in expectations.

4. A crisis disrupts organizations. Having severe impact on operations, a crisis should naturally be taken with the utmost seriousness (Wekesa, 2013).

Moreover Kent (2010), in reference to the works of Coombs, provides an alternate definition for

the meaning of a "crisis" which expounds on its unpredictability and threatening nature to organizations.

Crisis Communication & Emergency Response 6

Expanding on this definition and its relationship in the area of crisis communications, Kent Cites

Coombs’ 1999 book, Ongoing Crisis Communication: Planning, managing, and responding, he notes two

distinct definitions,

• "A major occurrence with a potentially with a potentially negative outcome affecting an organization, company, or industry as well as its publics, products, services, or good name";

• "A major unpredictable event that has potentially negative results. The event may significantly damage an organization, its employees, products, services, financial condition, and reputation." (Kent, 2010)

It is through the summation of these definitions that commonalities indicative of the construct

known as a ‘crisis’ can one form the basis for implementing crisis communication strategies within the

larger scope of crisis management. Generated from the unpredictability and uncertainty resulting from

crisis, the possible formation of three related threats, (public safety, financial loss, and reputational loss)

can take place and must be addressed. The application of effective crisis communication seeks to address

these threats and lessens the impact it will have upon the affected organizations, stakeholders, and the

general public.

2.1 Crisis Management vs Crisis Communication

In the event of a crisis, the terms “crisis management” and “crisis communication” are

occasionally mistakenly used interchangeably. However upon further examination of both terms, it

becomes obvious that crisis communication is a component of the larger crisis management process. This

section provides clarification on the meaning of the two definitions, and the capacity in which they

perform within an emergency response scenario.

2.1.1 Crisis Management

As a critical component to organizational functioning in times of emergency and crisis, Crisis

Management is a corrective procedure devised to mitigate or lessen the damage a crisis (by proposing

strategies for and the preparation for and handling crisis events) can impose on an organization and its

stakeholders. Centering around several components: crisis prevention and preparation, formal crisis

management plans and teams, actions during a crisis, media relations, internal/external communication

Crisis Communication & Emergency Response 7

with key publics, and post crisis activities (Gainey, 2006), these activities, which are condensed into

three distinct phases, are intended to manage the elements of the involved threat utilizing a sequential

series of steps,

1. Precrisis. Comprising of actions designed for the preparation or prevention of a crisis, the precrisis phase designs then implements a crisis management plan, in addition to conducting tests to determine the effectiveness of the crisis management plan/team.

2. Crisis Response. In the steps taken by the management team after the crisis occurs, this phase of Crisis Management deals with public relations and the dissemination of information to various publics/audiences. This phase involves two parts, an initial crisis response and reputational repair and behavioral intentions.

3. Post Crisis. During this phase of the continuum, the organization stakeholders, are returning to a

state of normalcy where follow-up communications and reputation repair may be initiated (Coombs, Crisis Management and Communications, 2007). Although there is no longer a feeling of immediate threat, ongoing communication as it relates to the discoveries learned as a result of the crisis along with procedures and policies for the future prevention of a crisis may be addressed.

Serving as a means of evaluation in the activities involved in crisis management (in order to

observe what is effective and what items needs improvement), serve as a learning experience for crisis

management teams. It is through these activities that teams will discover ways in which organizations

can make improvements on the prevention, preparation, and response resulting from a crisis which are

critical to the effective operations within an organization. As a subset of crisis management, crisis

communication facilitates the actual correspondence between the organization and its public, thus making

the Public Relations practitioner an essential part of a crisis management team. Those involved in the

crisis communication process must not only be able to disseminate facts over a public platform, but also

handle and answer questions from the news media, as well as inform the public about on given incident in

a way that is timely, concise and factual towards its audience.

2.1.2 Crisis Communication

Crisis communication is defined as the correspondences that take place between the organization

and its audience before, during, and after the crisis (Gainey, 2006). As a primary function of crisis

management, crisis communication conveys the information relevant to its audience, defines the crisis at

Crisis Communication & Emergency Response 8

hand, and places it in a context then conveys the organization’s stance to its various publics (Cooley,

2011). Moreover, being essential to an organization’s survival, the ability to effectively communicate in

the event of a crisis not only enables organizations to recover from its aftereffects, the advantage of

effective crisis communications also allows for the analysis of various dangers and consequences that can

be used to plan and enact future corrective actions (Wekesa, 2013).

As a primary theme of Public Relations, crisis communication is devised with both the avoidance

and/or recovery of a crisis as the ultimate objective. It is also the primary means in which organizations

are able to manage stakeholder perceptions, thus enabling the defense and preservation its reputation

(David, 2013). Utilizing community leaders’ efforts as a potential resource to inform and alert the public

during specific incidents (Centers For Disease Control, 2012), crisis communication accounts for the

majority of communication activities of any organization or agency facing a crisis. Overall, the

management of crisis within organizations and society in general would not be complete without a

communications component that not only takes action in correcting the issue at hand, but one that

contains an effective crisis communications which articulates, “warnings, risk messages, evacuation

notifications, messages regarding self-efficacy, information regarding symptoms and medical treatment,

towards it intended audience” (Reynolds, 2005). While the nature of a crisis may assume variant forms, it

is important to note that these disparate events also demand their own unique forms of management along

with communications to regulate the flow of information.

3.0 Situational Crisis Communication Theory (SCCT)

Developed and refined by Coombs, Situational Crisis Communication Theory (SCCT), is

comprised of three elements: the crisis situation, crisis response strategies, and a system for matching the

crisis situation with the crisis response strategies (Coombs, The Development of the Situational Crisis

Communication Theory, 2008). As a result, crisis planners are able to identify the factors which pose

threats to the reputation of an organization then utilize them to determine the most appropriate

communication strategies to be implemented during a crisis response endeavor. In addition to

Crisis Communication & Emergency Response 9

determining crisis response, SCCT (Figure 1) strives to outline post-crisis communications in an attempt

to apply crisis response strategies to alleviate any reputational damages. Being an important tool which

addresses the needs of planners who are responsible for the creation and implementation crisis

management plans, SCCT permits the crisis management team to accurately analyze a given crisis

situation then, based on its findings, enables one to appraise the extent of the reputational threat imposed

by the crisis. In doing so, crisis planners are able to pinpoint the elements responsible for the threats to

reputation (initial responsibility for the crisis, crisis history, and the relation between history and previous

reputation) and use them to establish the appropriate communication strategies to be utilized in a crisis

response effort.

3.1 The Crisis Situation (Clusters)

In a crisis situation, it is the place of the crisis management team or organization to determine the

extent of accountability that will be incurred during the assessment of threat process (Table 1).

Consequently, this degree of responsibility will ultimately serve as an indicator as to what degree of threat

Crisis Response Strategy

Perceived Control Crisis Responsibility Organizational Reputation Potential Supportive Behavior

Severity Performance History

• Crisis History • Relationship History

Situational Crisis Communications Theory Model

Figure 1: The Situational Crisis Communications Theory Model (SCCT) was developed as a means of matching crisis types with the appropriate crisis response strategies (Coombs, 2008)

Crisis Communication & Emergency Response 10

does the crisis impact the reputation of the organization along with the appropriate crisis response

strategies required for its resolution. It is within the crisis situation component, that several “clusters” are

noted (Cooley, 2011),

The victim cluster. This includes instances of natural disaster, rumors, workplace violence, product tampering. In addition to people, a company can be perceived as a victim of the crisis.

The accidental cluster. In this cluster, challenges, mega-damage, technical breakdown accidents and recalls are included. Also noted in this cluster is the organization does not have crisis intentions in its actions.

The preventable cluster. Incidents within this category include human breakdown accidents and recalls, misdeeds within the organization with or without injuries, organizational misdeed and misdeed among management. The company deliberately places people at risk, takes inappropriate actions, or participates in the violation of laws and regulations.

3.2 Crisis Response Strategies (Postures)

The second component of SCCT deals with crisis response strategies. Used in instances of the

repairing of reputation, diminishing negative affect, and the prevention of negative behavioral intentions,

the response strategies shown in this component places emphasis on the victims’ perception of an

organization in assuming their rightful responsibility in their part of the crisis (Coombs, The Development

of the Situational Crisis Communication Theory, 2008). In a series of response types, this component is

further categorized by the following response strategies,

Deny posture. Options in this strategy involves attack the accuser; the crisis manager or organization confronts the individual or group claiming an error in the organization, denial; the crisis manager or organization denies the existence of a crisis, and scapegoat; the crisis manager or organization places the onus of blame on another group outside of the crisis.

Diminish posture. The following strategies in this includes, excuse; the crisis manager or organization denies the intent of any wrongdoing and claims a lack of control of the events causing the crisis, and justification; the crisis manager or organization attempts to minimize perceived damages incurred by the victims.

Deal posture. A tactic the places emphasis on the expression of compassion, options in this posture are comprised of these strategies: ingratiation the organization or crisis manager laud their stakeholders and/or reminds them of their past good work of the organization, concern crisis manager express concern for their victims, compassion; crisis manager or organizations attempt offer monetary and other gifts to their victims, regret; the organization or crisis manager expresses guilt about the crisis, and apology; The organization or crisis manager assumes full responsibility for the crisis (Coombs, 2008).+

Crisis Communication & Emergency Response 11

3.3 Matching Crisis Situations to Crisis Response Strategies

The final component of SCCT involves a system for pairing the crisis situation with one of its

corresponding crisis response strategies. Matching the organization’s response strategy to the magnitude

of the crisis situation (Table 1), SCCT theory maintains that as the chances for reputational damage

increases, the organization or crisis managers must assume a heightened responsibility for the crisis and

Rumor: Use any of the denial strategies

Natural disaster: Use instructing information

Workplace violence: Use instructing information

Product tampering: Use instructing information

Product recall, technical error, megadamage, and accidents: Use excuse and or justification

Product recall, technical error, megadamage, and accidents: If there is a negative crisis history,

relationship history and/or severe damage: Use any of the deal strategies

Organizational misdeeds: Use any of the deal strategies

When victims occur: Use the concern crisis response strategy in combination with other recommended

strategies

greater concern for its victims (Cooley, 2011). As determined by the reputational damage, crisis

responsibility, and crisis situation, the chosen response strategies are based according to the perception of

acceptance of responsibility for a crisis by an organization or crisis manager (Coombs, 2008).

Predicting that organizations confronted by crisis have an increased risk of reputational damage

due to the possibility that the burden of blame is attributable to the company itself, the SCCT model

attempts to extend the foundation of crisis communication theory by identifying the nature of a crisis,

then by determining the proper response strategy based on crisis severity. Drawing from theories such as

attribution and neoinstitutional theories, SCCT relies on relevant matching points when a link between

Table 1: List of Crisis Response Recommendations

Table 1: List of Crisis Response Recommendations. Source: The Development of Situational Crisis Communication Theory by T. Coombs (2008)

Crisis Communication & Emergency Response 12

crisis type and crisis response can be noted. As a model that seeks to correspond the two (crisis and

response), SCCT presents itself as an attractive solution to crisis management in the protection of the

public, financial, and reputational status which can incur due to the effects of a crisis.

4.0 Crisis/Emergency Response Command Structure

In the event of the occurrence of a crisis such as a chemical facility accident, terrorist attack, or

natural disaster, the successful deployment of management in such instances rely on the participation of

multiple jurisdictions, sections of government, and varying emergency response agencies. Due to the

events over recent, increased attention to crisis/incident response extending across jurisdictional levels

and coordinated on a national level has been established with the objective of improving cooperation and

coordination among public and private agencies. Resulting from this need arose entities such as the

National Incident Management System (NIMS) and the Incident Command System (ICS).

4.1 The National Incident Management System (NIMS)

Through an inclusive approach to crisis/incident management by federal, state, and local

responders, the National Incident Management System (NIMS) was created by the United States Federal

Government under Homeland Security Presidential Directive #5. Establishing a series of protocols and

procedures uniform across emergency responders at every level of government, NIMS is composed of six

components: command and management, preparedness, resource management, communications and

information management, supporting technologies, and ongoing management and maintenance (Pichtel,

2011). Adaptable to any incident, NIMS is a flexible emergency response system designed to coordinate

multiagency and multidisciplinary responders across jurisdictions. In addition to the feature of flexibility,

the NIMS structure allows for scalability, thereby meeting the needs of the crisis management team in

handing the incident. Providing an organized and practical approach in guiding departments and agencies

across various levels of government, the National Incident Management System (NIMS) manages and

Crisis Communication & Emergency Response 13

Includes a combination of assessment, planning, procedures and protocols, training and exericises.

The presence of a standardized communciation system emphasizing a common use of terminolgy across jusidictions.

Includes personnel, equipment and supplies used in the support of incident management objectives.

Designed to allow for efficeint and effective incident management, coordination through a standardized incident management platform.

This includes 2 componenents: the National Integration Center (NIC) and Supporting Technologies.

coordinates non-government agencies in the collaboration of the management of incidents involving

threats and hazards of disparate sources, magnitudes, localities, or varying levels of difficulty with the

goal of protecting public safety, property, and the environment.

4.2 The Incident Command System (ICS)

Designed to manage issues in response to a crisis, the Incident Command System (ICS) is a crisis

management strategy which integrates and facilitates equipment, personnel, procedures and

communications within a unified organizational structure (Centers For Disease Control, 2012). Intended

to enable the process of domestic incident management to operate efficently, ICS (Figure 2) is organized

to assist in crisis management activities in five primary areas: command, operations, planning, logistics,

intelligence and investigations, finance and administration. Considered an essential structure for crisis

management, the Incident Command System facilitates the recognition and classification of the principle

concerns connected with the crisis/incident without compromising any component of the command

system. The Command Staff and leadership structure of the ICS is listed as the following positions,

National Incident Management System Components

Preparedness

Communication

Resource Management

Command and Management

Ongoing Management and Maintenance

Table 2: Displays the six major components of the National Incident Management System which work together to create a comprehensive structure for crisis management.

Crisis Communication & Emergency Response 14

Incident Commander. The Incident Commander is the person who assumes command of all operations

at the scene of the incident. Responsible of the management for all activities which take place during a

crisis, they oversee the activities of Safety, Liaison, and Public Information Officers.

Public Information Officer. The Public Information Officer disseminates communications among the

media, public, and other agencies. Releasing information about an occurrence to the news media,

incident personnel, and other agencies and organizations, the Public Information Officer may have

additional supporting Public Information Officers representative of other emergency response agencies or

jurisdictions.

Safety Officer. The Safety Officer supervises incident operations and guides the Incident Commander on

all the concerns related to the safety of an operation. This also includes the health and safety of

crisis/emergency responder personnel.

Incident Commander

Public Information Officer

Safety Officer

Liaison Officer

Operations Planning Logistics Finance/Admin

Figure 2: The Incident Command System organizational structure. Command Staff underneath the Incident Commander are separated into Public Information, Safety, and Liaison Officers (Pichtel, 2011).

Command Staff

Sections

Crisis Communication & Emergency Response 15

Liaison Officer. The Liaison Officer connects other agencies from governmental and non-governmental

organizations, along with those of the private sector. Their responsibility includes offering input on their

agency’s policies, the availability of resources, and other concerns related to the incident.

In managing the ICS functional areas, the Incident Commander typically assigns one or more

section leaders to operate within the four areas of the organizational structure,

Operations. The Operations Section of the Incident Command System controls the “on-scene” tactical

operations in order to meet the incident objectives as established by the Incident Commander.

Planning. The Planning Section collects, evaluates, and circulates incident information to the Incident

Commander along with other incident management personnel.

Logistics. The Logistics Section completes all the service and support needs regarding the incident. This

includes the provision of services, personnel, and materials in order to effectively respond to the incident.

Finance/Administration. The Finance/Administration Section includes the tracking of financial matters

regarding the incident. Dealing with the financial reimbursement to individuals, agencies, and

departments, this section becomes extremely relevant when confronting issues that result in a Presidential

Declaration (Pichtel, 2011).

The National Incident Management System (NIMS), along with the Incident Command System

(ICS) allows for the management of agencies spanning multiple jurisdictions, levels of government, and

emergency responder types. Coordinated on a national level with the objective of improving

communications and crisis across both public and private agencies, the installation of such a crisis

management system within our infrastructure enables the crisis response/management process to

successfully be set into motion without any complications which may further compound a crisis.

Crisis Communication & Emergency Response 16

4.3 Crisis Communication and The Public Information Officer (PIO)

Requiring the need for trained communicators to tactfully defend and clarify an organization’s

position in the face of criticism, threat, and uncertainty provoked by a crisis, the crisis communication

aspect of Public Relations may encounter a hostile and enquiring press in an attempt to provide accounts

for the nature of the mishap, its origins, and the corrective actions being taken in response to the incident.

In addition to representing the organization in times of crisis, duties of the public information officer

includes the development of guidelines for the distribution of communications and defining a set of

procedures to follow in times of crisis. As the face an agency or organization, one of the public

information officer’s unending tasks is to institute a functioning relationship between the organization,

media, and the public by keeping the lines of communication open and promptly answering questions in

addition to and conducting press conferences to announce major news releases or to deliver critical

information in relation to a crisis. Often serving as the buffer, and the designated spokesperson of

information, the role of Public Relations, as it relates to crisis communications has expanded as the

prevalence of crises have become more common in our society.

5.0 Best Practices for Handling the Media and Public

In the event of a crisis, the Public Information Officer is obligated to the organization and public

to disclose information in a complete, timely, and accurate approach. Sharing any information to the

media regarding the cause, magnitude, and resources committed to managing the crisis, it is the duty of

the PIO to galvanize awareness and inform the stakeholders and public on new developments. In this

section, the seven best practices for PIOs are listed as follows,

Understand the value of a crisis management plan. Effective crisis management plans offers the

response team an essential outline for the preparation, predetermination of best practices, and efficiency

in the event of a crisis (Cloudman, 2006). The establishment of a crisis plan should contain an action

plan, a summary of policy and procedures, and a list of key people containing the names of employees,

Crisis Communication & Emergency Response 17

media, and other stakeholders with accurate contact information that is periodically updated in advance.

Furthermore, organizations with crisis management plans are two to three times faster to recover with less

human and financial costs than organizations without one set in place (Cohn, 2000).

Become the sole authority for all communications. Positioned to conduct all crisis communication

activities, the PIO has the advantage of ultimately controlling and coordinating the flow of information

that is presented to the public though media outlets, government officials, etc. thus making it the

“official” source of information for the crisis (Amber Alert, 2006). As the sole resource for information

regarding a crisis, those operating from within this position must first deliver all communication

directives to its subordinate agencies and secondly explain those directives to officials and other decision

makers for their approval (Doob, 1995).

Address the problem immediately. Quoted by Adolf Hitler’s Minister of Propaganda Joseph Gobbels,

“Whoever speaks the first word to the world is always right”, meaning that communication must reach the

masses ahead of its competing communication sources (Doob, 1995). With the advent of social media

platforms, citizen-journalists are capable of generating parallel (often conflicting) narratives of an

incident before the “official” crisis communications are established. The timeliness of an organization’s

response denotes credibility, as the transmission of timely and accurate information to the public is the

best countermeasure for dealing with competing sources (Amber Alert, 2006).

Acknowledging accountability. An organization accepting accountability on their part in a crisis can

impact public perception based on the organization’s response. Contrary to the belief of “good vs bad”,

public perceptions are not formed by the errors made, but in their visible efforts to correct the crisis

(Cohn, 2000). Conversely, this perception can shift unfavorably if the crisis is either denied, not admitted

to, or not corrected.

Controlling rumors and misinformation. Rumors and misinformation can (and will) emerge during a

crisis. In the attempt to gather information for a newsworthy story, news media, and other journalists will

Crisis Communication & Emergency Response 18

collect their data from a variety of sources thereby causing the proliferation of rumors and other

misinformation to spread quickly. It is the duty of the PIO to monitor such information released to the

public in order to counter potential problems that may arise during the crisis communication process.

Avoid the “no comment” response. By saying this, it leaves the organization (or individual) susceptible

to two things, 1) it presumes the admission of guilt in the public’s perception, and 2) it relinquishes

control of the narrative to other entities (Fink, 1986). In the event of a crisis and the organization is

viewed as culpable to the public, it is best practice to present the facts concerning the incident, followed

by immediate corrective actions.

Utilizing social media platforms to supplement traditional crisis communications. As an emerging

tool for organizations to communicate with journalists and the public alike, a 2004 study estimated that

half of all organizations have integrated the use of the internet during times of national crisis (Taylor,

2005). Recently, in the era of social media, this has changed the landscape of crisis communications, as

anyone with internet access (through PC, tablets, or smartphones) can communicate to an audience of

millions. Allowing crisis managers to communicate with tremendous speed, social media as a medium

for crisis communications cannot be overlooked as a viable resource for crisis communications due to its

features of immediacy through instant sharing, global reach (hundreds of millions of people use social

media worldwide), and its ease of availability (Husain, 2014).

6.0 Conclusion

As a vital component to crisis management and emergency response, crisis communications

delivers pertinent information to the public occurring before, during, and after a crisis. With the goal of

either recovering from a crisis to avoiding it altogether, the effective use of crisis communications strives

to convey, notifications, warnings, and other information associated with the crisis. This is best

exemplified through the implementation of a crisis management plan in which crisis management teams

should have established within in every organization. While a crisis management plan provides a series

Crisis Communication & Emergency Response 19

of generalized protocols by which to handle a crisis, crisis communications (and crisis communications

theory) forms the heart of any communications (and responses) which can transpire either internally

within the crisis management team or externally with the media and general public. Coombs Situational

Crisis Communication Theory (SCCT) refines the flow of crisis communications by creating a structured

response strategy (postures) based on crisis severity (clusters). Used as an analysis tool for crisis

management teams, SCCT specifically targets the precipitating elements posing a reputational threat on

an organization or individual then generates a suitable response strategy to ameliorate the given issue.

While crisis communication is applicable to a diverse range of settings and scenarios, due to

events affecting national security and public safety as highlighted by the media, its applications for

emergency responders on a local, state, and national level (through NIMS) demonstrates a desperate need

for crisis communications in the form of the Public Information Officer (PIO) to keep its public aware of

any current or future issues which can arise. In doing this, the achievement of public awareness along

with any corrective actions undertaken by emergency personnel will assist in facilitating the confidence

and cooperation between the government, its officials, and the public.

Crisis Communication & Emergency Response 20

Bibliography

Amber Alert. (2006). Amber Alert Best Practices Guide For Public Information Officers. Washington, D.C.: United States Department of Justice.

An, S.-K. (2009, January 12). How do the news media frame crises? A content analysis of crisis news coverage. Public Relations Review(35), 107-112.

Birch, J. (1994). New Factors Response in Crisis Planning and Response. Public Relations Quarterly, 39(1).

Boin, A. (2003, September/October). Public Leadership in Times of Crisis: Mission Impossible? Public Administration Review , 63(5), 544-553.

Brown, J. (2013). PR and Communication in Local Government and Public Services. London: Kogan Page Limited.

Centers For Disease Control. (2012). Crisis Emergency & Risk Communication: 2012 Edition. Atlanta , Georgia, USA: Centers For Disease Control.

Cloudman, R. (2006, September 1). Crisis communications preparedness among U.S. organizations: Activities and assessments by public relations practitioners. Public Relations Review(32), 367- 376.

Cohn, R. (2000). The PR Crisis Bible. New York, New York, USA: St. Martin's Press.

Condon, S. L. (2014, May). Communication Media Use in Emergency Response Management. (M. P. S.R. Hiltz, Ed.) Proceedings of the 11th International ISCRAM Conference , 687-696.

Cooley, S. C. (2011, June). An examination of the situational crisis communication theory through the general motors bankruptcy . Journal of Media and Communication Studies , 3(6), 203-211.

Coombs, T. (2002, October). Deep and Surface Threats: Conceptual and Practical Impications for "Crisis" vs "Problem". Public Relations Review, 28(4), 339-345.

Coombs, T. (2006). The Protective Powers of Crisis Response Strategies: Managing Reputational Assets During a Crisis . Journal of Promotion Management, 12(3/4), 241-260.

Coombs, T. (2007, October 30). Crisis Management and Communications. Retrieved July 1, 2016, from www.facoltaspes.unimi.it: http://www.facoltaspes.unimi.it/files/_ITA_/COM/Crisis_Management_and_Communications.pd f

Coombs, T. (2008). The Development of the Situational Crisis Communication Theory. In T. L. Hansen- Horn, Public Relations From Theory To Practice (pp. 262-277). Boston, MA, USA: Pearson Education, Inc.

David, G. (2013). Considerations on Using the Situational Crisis Communication Theory in the Crisis Communication Planning Activities of the Romainan Armed Forces' Information and Public Relations Structures. Journal of Defense Resources Managment, 4(1), 159-166.

Crisis Communication & Emergency Response 21

Doob, L. W. (1995). Goebbel's Principles of Propoganda. In R. Jackall, Propoganda (pp. 190-216). New

York, New York, USA: New York University Press.

Federal Emergency Management Agency. (2007). Basic Guidance for Public Information Officers (PIOs). Washington, D.C.: Federal Emergency Management Agency.

Fink, S. (1986). Crisis Management: Planning for the Invitable. New York, New York, USA: American Management Association.

Gainey, B. S. (2006). Crisis Management Best Practices: A Content Analysis of Written Crisis Management Plans . Coral Gables: International Public Relations Research.

Gilpin, D. (2006). Reframing Crisis Managment Through Complexity. In C. H. Botan, Public Relations Theory 2 (pp. 375-392). Mahwah, New Jersey, USA: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Heidarinejad, R. (2013, September). Investigation efficacy of organizational communications on crisis management in Guilan Gas Company. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, 5(5), 265-274.

Husain, K. (2014, October). A Preliminary Study on the Effects of Social Media in Crisis Communication from Public Relations Practitioners' Views. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences(155), 223- 227.

Jackall, R. (1995). The Magic Lantern: The World of Public Relations. In R. Jackall, Propoganda (pp. 351-399). New York, New York, USA: New York University Press.

Kent, M. L. (2010). What is a Public Relations "Crisis?" Refocusing Crisis Research. In W. T. Coombs, The Handbook of Crisis Communication (pp. 705-712). Oxford, England: Wiley-Blackwell.

Lin, Z. (2013, Decemeber). Macro-Public Relations: Crisis Communication In The Age Of Internet. International Journal of Cyber Society and Education , 6(2), 123-138.

Ogrizek, M. (1999). Communicating In Crisis: A Theoretical and Practical Guide to Crisis Managment. Hawthorne, New York, USA: Aldine De Gruyter.

Pichtel, J. (2011). NIMS and the Incident Command System. In J. Pichtel, Terrorism and WMDs Awareness and Response (pp. 315-341). Boca Raton, Florida, USA: CRC Press.

Reynolds, B. (2005). Crisis and Emergency Risk Communication as an Integrative Model. Journal of Health Communication(10), 43-55.

Schultz, F. (2011). Is the Medium the Message? Perceptions of and Reactions to Crisis Communication via Twitter, Blogs, and Traditional Media. Public Relations Review(37), 20-27.

Taylor, M. (2005, February 23). Diffusion of Traditional and New Media Tactics in Crisis Communication. Public Relations Review(31), 209-271.

Wekesa, A. S. (2013, April). An Analysis of Team Effectiveness in Crisis Communication. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science , 3(7), 320-326.