Crisis Response Paper: Analyzing a Corporate Crisis

Crisis Response Paper: Analyzing a Corporate Crisis

Topic: Toyota (recalls of automobiles)

After a major disaster or crisis, a company often has to defend itself against the negative stories about it in the media and present itself and its response as positively as possible.

You will review and analyze your chosen company’s crisis response; asserting and giving evidence of the three most effective OR ineffective techniques/strategies that worked/did not work to repair the company’s reputation.

Formatting Requirements

1. Cite all sources using APA Style.

1. 5 paragraphs; 4 pages (not including Works Cited page, which can be a fifth page)

1. 12 point Times New Roman or Calibri font, double spaced

1. 1-inch page margins for top/bottom and left/right

Structure of this five-paragraph essay/analysis

Introduce your company and crisis; provide enough detail about what happened so that your reader understands the crisis. End paragraph one with a thesis. It must articulate your three claims as to why the company effectively or ineffectively managed the crisis. See “Thesis Guidelines” below.

Thesis Guidelines

You must assert a thesis—one sentence—arguing your three claims articulating why the company effectively or ineffectively managed its crisis (NOTE: Each strategy claim—you’ll have three total—consists of both ACTION and ASSERTIVE RATIONALE as to why it was effective or ineffective)

Example: “Johnson & Johnson effectively managed its crisis in the following ways: first, Chairman James Burke became the company’s spokesperson and gained media support through his open, candid communication; second, the company responded quickly by preemptively recalling Tylenol nationwide; third, the company’s adherence to its corporate credo implied selflessness and financial sacrifice to ensure public safety.”

Each of the three internal paragraphs must start with a topic sentence that reiterates one of your claims from your thesis sentence. The paragraph then must include evidence and analysis of why the company’s action was either effective or ineffective. The evidence must be an explanation of the company’s response (and why that response was needed); the analysis must include a crisis communications expert.

Concluding paragraph restates your thesis and briefly discusses how the company fared in the long term (i.e. did the company recover from the crisis; what are the long-term consequences; etc.).

Breaking down the tasks of writing this paper—READ CAREFULLY

1. Read and review the information sources on your chosen crisis.

Understand what happened, how it happened, and the consequences. You cannot understand a corporate response without understanding for what a company is held responsible.

Analyze Deeply

GUIDING QUESTIONS to help you analyze:

For example, look at how the company describes its actions. What kind of language does it use? How does it describe itself?

a. What is the response (document/website/video) trying to persuade you to think?

b. How does the company’s response refer to the crisis itself? Indeed does it directly refer to it? Are there uses of euphemisms? Does the response avoid mentioning the crisis or the reason for its response?

c. How does the language influence the impression you get of the company?

d. How does the company describe itself and its response to the crisis?

e. What ‘story’ is the company trying to tell?

f. What kinds of images does the company use in its response materials—why? How do these images affect how you feel about the company?

g. Can you find a primary message being communicated? If so, how and why does the company focus on this message?

h. Are there glaring mis-steps in the company’s communications after the crisis?

2. Now that you have analyzed the company response, connect its response to Coombs and other pertinent readings.

For example: What do the company’s words/actions/messages attempt to do for the company?

· Justify itself in some way?

· Place blame on another company, organization, or person?

· Highlight its generosity and responsibility? Making it seem as if compensation was the company’s idea?

· Demonstrate a commitment to improving its practices?

· Remind stakeholders of the good the company has done?

· Focus on the good the company is doing in this crisis?

· Focus on the repair efforts and thus de-emphasize the damage?

· Show positive images?

3. Now, decide on the company’s three most effective OR ineffective responses.

Craft an essay that makes a strong claim that either (a) asserts the three most effective responses/actions or (b) asserts the three most ineffective responses/actions, giving specific evidence of why those actions were effective or not effective. Make sure to use specific evidence to back up your claims.

Write a structured “essay”/analysis that has the following:

1. INTRODUCTION: The introduction sets up the context of this analysis. This includes briefly outlining what happened, the purpose of the response, and a thesis statement.

2. ASSERTIVE CLAIM/THESIS: A strong thesis in the introduction paragraph must assert what you are going to argue in your analysis.

3. “TOPIC SENTENCE-DRIVEN” PARAGRAPHS: Body paragraphs must each have a strong topic sentence that asserts one thesis claim.

4. UNIFIED PARAGRAPHS: All body paragraphs must only use evidence that supports the topic sentence claim—no topic drift.

5. PARAGRAPHS THAT USE RELIABLE OUTSIDE SOURCES to contextualize argument.

6. PARAGRAPHS THAT USE DETAILS/DATA/SPECIFICS as evidence to support topic sentence claim. Don’t just summarize data from your sources: give examples, analyze them, and explain how and why your chosen company uses them as a crisis communication strategy.

7. CONCLUSION that ECHOES & ELABORATES: Conclude by echoing your thesis statement and discussing briefly whether your company’s response has been effective. Go forward from the crisis and assert/explain how the company is affected now, in the wake of the crisis and repair attempt.

Crisis Response Paper – Example Internal Paragraphs

Blue = strategy/action Green = rationale Yellow = Context

BP’s reputation repair was successful because it effectively used video testimonials from locals on its “Gulf of Mexico Restoration” website to authenticate BP’s restoration claims and further highlight positive results. BP needed to incorporate this strategy because, following the oil spill, BP’s CEO Tony Heyward initially attempted to publically defend his company’s role in the accident. According to the Guardian, the public—particularly in the US—accused BP of blame shifting, hiding the truth, and dishonesty (Bryant, 2011). In contrast to BP’s initial strategy with Heyward as primary spokesperson, BP’s restoration website includes videos that show residents of the Gulf Coast defending the company’s claims. For example, in the website’s first tab, “Committed to the Gulf,” are five videos showing the current condition of the Gulf Coast. Of the 15 people featured in the videos, only one is an employee of BP. The other 14 people are residents and local business people, including a fisherman, a tourism guide, a restaurant owner, and a steamboat captain. All the residents in the videos have only positive comments regarding the restoration efforts and the cleanliness of their local environment. The choice of using residents is made in attempt to make the claims seem more believable. According to Leslie Gaines-Ross (2010), “Companies need force multipliers. Ideally, these should include a network of independent third parties willing to take [their] side” (p. 75). BP tries to convince viewers that the reports being given are both authentic and unbiased by using independent third parties. The use of residents gives credibility to the claims of a cleaner Gulf Coast, as the locals used in the videos would reasonably be the most critical of BP’s work in the Gulf Coast.

Sources:

BP. (n.d.). Gulf of Mexico Restoration – Committed to the Gulf. Retrieved from http://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/gulf-of -mexico-restoration/committed-to-the-gulf.html

Bryant, B. (2011, April 20). Deepwater Horizon and the Gulf Oil Spill – the key questions answers. The Guardian. Retrieved from http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2011/apr/20/deepwater-horizon-key-questions-answered

Gaines-Ross, L. (2010, December). Reputation Warfare. Harvard Business Review, 88 (12), 70-76.

1. So, note that this paragraph includes the following:

0. A strong, assertive topic sentence that includes the action and rationale.

0. The context of the argument – what the strategy is in response to.

0. Specific evidence that includes details & data.

0. Analysis of how and why the strategy was used successfully/unsuccessfully.

Here’s another example that asserts that BP was ineffective in its reputation repair efforts:

BP’s crisis communication following the 2010 Deepwater Horizon explosion and oil spill was ineffective because the company initially chose CEO Tony Hayward as its spokesperson, and the American public perceived Hayward as arrogant, uncaring and out of touch about the spill’s effect on the Gulf Coast. Following the oil spill, Hayward made statements to the media such as “There’s no one who wants this thing over more than I do. You know, I’d like my life back” (climatebrad, 2010). Hayward also said in the days following the spill that that its impact on the Gulf environment would likely be “very, very modest” (climatebrad, 2010), and noted that the amount of oil was tiny when compared with the volume of water in the ocean (Webb, 2010). In the weeks following the spill, Hayward consistently downplayed the amount of spilled oil and its impact on the Gulf economy and ecosystem (CBS News, 1010). Hayward’s words were perceived by the American public – and especially Gulf Coast residents – as arrogant, out of touch, and callous; the New York Daily News at the time even branded Hayward “the most hated – and most clueless – man in America” (Kennedy, 2010). In news interviews, Gulf Coast residents often expressed distrust and extreme dislike of BP executives, including Hayward (CBS News, 2010). According to W. Timothy Coombs in his article “Crisis Management and Communications,” a key component of crisis team training is spokesperson training (2007). Coombs notes that a spokesperson should be trained to handle media inquiries and should follow crisis communication best practices, such as expressing sympathy for the victims of a crisis, making public safety the top priority, and providing counseling to victims of the crisis and their families. Hayward failed as a spokesperson because his comments about the explosion and oil spill were perceived by the American public as arrogant, uncaring and out of touch with the environmental and economic disaster that Gulf Coast residents were experiencing.

Sources:

CBS News. (2010, June 7). BP’s PR Offensive [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L10W8tgpPwc

Climatebrad. (2010, May 19). BP CEO Hayward Predicts ‘Very Modest’ Impact From Oilpocalypse [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dseMhu5IjHo

Climatebrad. (2010, May 31). BP CEO Tony Hayward: ‘I’d Like My Life Back’ [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTdKa9eWNFw

Coombs, W. (2011). Crisis Management and Communications. Institute for Public Relations.

Kennedy, H. (2010, June 2). BP’s CEO Tony Hayward: The Most Hated – and Most Clueless – Man in America. New York Daily News. Retrieved from http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/bp-ceo-tony-hayward-hated-clueless-man-america-article-1.178007

Webb, T. (2010, May 13). BP Boss Admits Job On the Line Over Gulf Oil Spill. The Guardian. Retrieved from http://www.theguardian.com/business/2010/may/13/bp-boss-admits-mistakes-gulf-oil-spill