Tag Archives: Strategic Vision

A Public Relations Strategy For Big Food

Public Relations, , , , , ,

The folks that brought you the tobacco lawsuits of the 1990s are back and they have found a new industry to target – food makers.  Over the past month publications such as the New York Times, Los Angeles Times and others have been reporting on lawsuits against food makers.  Also, we have seen stories pop up in the media alleging deceptive advertising by food makers (the food inside the package is not as tasty looking as the food on the package). Indeed the very lawyers who handled the tobacco lawsuits are behind these lawsuits.  One of the lawyers even admitted that they have been looking for a new industry to target.  This should not come as a surprise.  I remember working in Florida at the time, the late Governor Lawton Chiles had legislation passed to go after the tobacco industry.  The original legislation was worded so that any industry that the State of Florida wanted to go after could be subjected to a lawsuit.  The lawyers were very clear that they had the liquor and food industries in their sites.  The tobacco industry believed in a strategy of litigating until the lawsuits went away.  They were slow to counter the public relations war that was being waged against them.  Food makers would be wise not to repeat this mistake.  What should the food industry do?

First the food companies need to do training on crisis communications.  They need to prepare themselves for the lawsuits that are coming.  Chances are if they haven’t been served yet, they will be.  A crisis communications plan needs to be laid out from whom will be the public face of the company to talking points that will be laid out.  In this day of social media, companies need to include a social media component for their crisis communications plan.

Once the lawsuits are filed and the other side begins their public relations war – be charges of deceptive advertising to a charge that a certain food made someone obese, food companies need to go on a public relations offensive.  Lawyers will advise saying nothing but look at how well that advice played out for the tobacco companies.  They need to point out how they meet every requirement set by the federal government and state governments in the manufacture of their products.  They need to call out the lawsuits as frivolous and bring up the comments made by the lawyers that they are looking for industries to target.  Trial lawyers make great villains especially when they are on record saying they are targeting an industry to make money off of it.  They need to put the plaintiffs and their attorneys on trial in the media.  (Remember the outrage over the lawsuit against McDonalds where the lady spilt her hot coffee and sued not only McDonalds but the cup maker as well because there was no warning that coffee could be hot?) Finally in their rebuttals, they need to point out how these lawsuits are costing consumers because the price for food products are affected by the lawsuits and also outline the products that are being targeted and why consumers will be the losers. 

Next food companies must do an outreach and education program with other industries and companies.  It needs to be pointed out that today it is the food industry, tomorrow it will be another industry unless these lawsuits are stopped.  Bringing other industries and businesses into the battle helps with the public relations war because ultimately every industry from airlines to alcohol to even toy makers can be affected because the lawyers will target one of them next.  Working with other companies will allow for pressure to build on state legislatures and even the federal government in dealing with tort reform.  Short term, working with other industries will create pressure to keep state governments and the federal government from joining the lawsuits as they did the tobacco lawsuits.

In fighting lawsuits, the food industry is facing seasoned pros in both litigation and publicity.  These lawyers defeated the tobacco industry and won the public to their cause through savvy use of the media and publicity.  They are seeking now to do the same to food makers.  Food companies can avoid the fate of tobacco companies by not being caught sleeping and preparing for the upcoming public relations battle now.

The Difference Between Press Releases and Media Pitches

Public Relations, , , , ,

I am often asked how press releases differ from media pitches.  It seems everyone has heard of a press release and believes they need one for their public relations campaign.  But beyond that they are not sure what a press release does and how it differs with a media pitch.

A press release is an announcement of certain news – a product launch, book release, special event, or promotion.  It is written to receive media mention.  The headline needs to be written in a way that commands attention but isn’t seen as a sales gimmick.  The first paragraph of the press release is the most critical.  That paragraph should be the guts of the press release with the who, what, when, where, and why in it.  With cutbacks in the media it is usually the first paragraph that gets picked up if any of the press release is picked up.  After that first paragraph there should be a quote and some follow-up information included, as well as a link to the website from the business, non-profit, or author the press release is coming from.  More and more press releases are being used for a viral affect with social media and free online press websites available to post a press release.

A media pitch is written to get specific media coverage from a reporter.  It is written and geared in a story format.  It is often tied to a news story.  I recommend a two paragraph media pitch.  The first paragraph should list the issue or news story, as well as, critical questions that should be asked or addressed by the reporter.  The second paragraph should include your expertise in being able to address those questions, as well as, how you would answer the questions.  You want the pitch written concisely, with a good soundbite in your answer.  With media cutbacks, reporters and producers love pitches that are written as a news story that they can incorporate into their story and the interview with you.  Media pitches generate the hard media coverage and interviews that brands, authors, and celebrities crave in a public relations campaign.

Why You Should Hire A Public Relations Agency

Public Relations, , , ,

One of the age old questions about public relations has always been, do I need an outside public relations service provider or can I do it in house or by myself?  This question has never become more meaningful than in this age of Google, the 24/7 news cycle, and social media.  The answer is yes for a variety of reasons.

The first reason that comes to mind is cost in money and time.  In business everything revolves around the bottom line.  In this alone it is smarter to retain a public relations agency.  Public relations is not just press releases, press conferences, and media appearances.  It also includes the social media aspect of maintaining a company’s blog, Twitter and Facebook page.   This would require several salaried people.  In terms of salary alone, you are losing out as with a retainer with a public relations agency you have a team of professionals on your account that handle each aspect of that public relations campaign.  For small and medium sized organizations the savings is even greater.  Not only are you saving money, you are saving time and remember time is money.  There are not enough hours in the day for a small or medium sized business to do everything that needs to be done.  And time away from your core business means lost opportunities.  In retaining a public relations agency, you have their team assigned to your account handling your social media, your media coverage, your branding, and your press releases while you do what you do best – run your business.

Just as you go to a doctor or a lawyer because of their expertise that is yet another reason to hire an outside public relations service provider.  Just as you are the expert in your field, the personnel at a public relations agency are the experts in their field.  They bring their expertise in writing, in social media, media relations, branding, and special events to the plate.  They know public relations.  They know how to position a client for the maximum exposure.  They have the contacts with the media.  They know which reporters will cover which topics and also how to package a story that the media wants.  Many people think of an interview in terms of sales, it isn’t.  If a reporter suspects someone is just trying to sell them something through their story it will never see the light of day.  An experiences public relations expert knows how to package a story so that it is newsworthy to the reporter while still being of marketing benefit to a client.

Public relations agencies know to think of all public relations contingencies including when disaster strikes a client and how to begin planning for any event.  Businesses always have a plan for when a crisis strikes in how to handle things except in the terms of publicity.  Working with an agency means a preliminary crisis communications plan has been developed beforehand that can then be altered to fit the crisis.  Agency personnel have the skills and experience to objectively evaluate your business, clearly assess its strengths and weaknesses, and figure out how to use them in crisis communications.

Public relations agencies are familiar with and use all of the public relations tools available to generate attention for their clients. These tools include pitches, press releases, media kits, media interviews, seminars, webinars, social media, ezines, and more.  Many people don’t know the difference between a media pitch and a press release.   A press release has a definite format and conventional style. It’s written in a journalistic tone and is on specific news be it a new hire, a new product launch, or any specific related news.   A media pitch, on the other hand, has the main objective of catching a reporter’s attention — enough to want to call you for an interview, product demonstration, or whatever call to action you’ve indicated. It has all the most important information, but not all the details. It isn’t a complete story. Rather it’s a teaser for a story.   A public relations agency knows the difference and how to use both to their client’s benefit.  Finally many unless they are with a public relations agency don’t understand the importance of a media kit.  A media kit includes information on a company, product or service, includes FAQ’s, bios of key company personnel, pictures that can be used in news stories, and a sampling of previous media coverage.  It is essential to any public relations campaign.  Unknown to many is the fact that if you don’t have a media kit, most of the major media won’t touch you.  The major media grades potential guests and interviews on a scale of 1 to 10 without a media kit, you don’t get beyond one.  A public relations agency knows how to develop and constantly maintain a media kit.

There are other reasons to work with an outside agency.  By bringing in someone from the outside you are bringing in someone who can be more objective and doesn’t have the emotional commitment and blinders that an owner or company employee has.  A public relations agency tends to be more creative in developing story ideas and teasers to induce the media and can think outside the corporate box.  An agency constantly monitors the news and often sees opportunities that others don’t.  For example our company represented a marriage counselor and when the Eliot Spitzer story broke, went into pitching mode to have our client discuss why powerful men cheat which resulted in coverage on CNN, HLN, and Oprah.  An agency knows how to make use of the news to a client’s benefit.

The answer to whether you need an outside public relations vendor is quite simple.  Yes.  An outside public relations agency saves money and time, they have the expertise, they know how to employ the tools needed for your public relations campaign to succeed and having them do the public relations allows you to do what you do best – your business.

Branding Opportunities For Burger King

Branding, , , , ,

The business news dominating the final week of summer is Burger King acquiring the Canadian fast casual restaurant Tim Hortons known for its doughnuts and coffee.  The acquisition will make Burger King the third largest fast food restaurant in the world.  The new company will move their corporate headquarters to Canada (where the taxes are cheaper than the United States) while the Burger King division will continue to operate from Miami, Florida.  Burger King definitely went their way in making this move.  The announcement that the corporate headquarters would be moved to Canada drew a social media outcry and legislators looking to see if they could halt the deal.  It also offers branding opportunities for the company.

So what now for Burger King in terms of branding the new company and crisis communications over the social media and regulatory outrage?

  1. Burger King needs to remember that much of the outrage over its move to Canada is posturing by legislators during an election year and inflamed by social media. As a corporation, Burger King has a fiduciary responsibility to make money for investors and save on costs.  The move is doing this.  Further, the company can argue that just as its customers go to Burger King because of the value cost, so too is the corporation moving to Canada for the same reason.
  2. To further assure investors that this is a wise move, the company needs to promote the backing and blessing this acquisition received from Warren Buffet with the backing of Berkshire Hathaway which is considered the gold standard to Wall Street.
  3. The company needs to publicize that by going to Canada where the taxes are lower, it is able to keep expenses down which means unlike some of its rivals, it can keep the costs passed on to the consumer lower.
  4. Burger King needs to introduce the Tim Hortons brand (that makes up 62% of the Canadian coffee market far outstripping Starbucks in that degree which makes up only 6% of the Canadian market) to the United States market that is largely unfamiliar with the brand. This means telling the brand story of quality and always hot coffee.  Further the story of Tim Hortons’ baked goods as a contrast to the dominant Dunkin Doughnuts and Krispy Kreme in the U.S. market needs to be explained.  The selection and quality is argued to be better.  This means utilizing social media, television advertising, and community relations accentuating the new brand.
  5. Co-branding needs to be done with Burger King and Tim Hortons, as a one stop-shop for the breakfast need to the coffee fix to a burger on the go, very much as Tim Hortons co-branded successfully in the past with Cold Stone Creamery; KFC does with Taco Bell; and Dunkin Doughnuts does with Baskin Robbins. People must begin to see Burger King and Tim Hortons as one and the same.
  6. The restaurant industry is constantly changing. Burger King with this acquisition must now determine who it is competing with – the McDonalds and Wendys of the world or the Five Guys and Starbucks’ clientele. 

The acquisition of Tim Hortons was a whopper of a deal for Burger King with Wall Street reacting positively.  Now if the company can explain its move in a way people can understand and relate too and brand the company in the public’s mind successfully, Burger King will be poised to be a branding and industry winner in one fast swoop.

The Need For Branding In The Services’ Industry

Branding, , , ,

One of the most frequent comments we hear is, “We are a service oriented company and not a product based company and therefore branding doesn’t make sense for us, or it just won’t work.”  We hear it from lawyers, medical service professionals, and those in the financial industry all of the time.  Nothing could be further from the truth. Service oriented companies are in greater need of creating brand centric experiences for their current and potential clients than product based clients.

Today, almost all companies are selling a commodity in the eyes of the consumer. You sell moisture wicking shirts or coffee to go… so do lots of other companies. You sell legal, accounting, or chiropractic services… so do tons of other companies who all claim to be very good at it. Which means the consumer is now looking for a way to differentiate between you and your competitors. But most service oriented brands aren’t providing their target audience with much help here.

The smart companies have realized that their brand DNA and their brand values – the emotional experience they want their target audience to have whenever they interact with them – is the only real way to differentiate themselves from their competitors. If their brand is created correctly, it allows them to stand out from the pack and give their potential clients a reason to choose them over the competition.

When making a purchasing decision about a service, the way most consumers make that decision is fundamentally and psychologically the same as whether or not they decide to buy from Starbucks. Yes, at Starbucks you walk out with a product and at a law firm or financial planner you walk out with advice. But at both, you are buying the experience they create for you, the relationship that is provided to you and how you believe that will make you feel.

That is all brand, and although we might not like to admit it, to the consumer, the baristas are really no different than the accountants at an accounting firm or associate at a law firm. They create and reinforce the emotional connection with the client.

Now a consumer goods company does have the extra advantage of selling a tangible product through which they can demonstrate their brand – in the product itself, its packaging, and the point of purchase experience. This is all the more reason that companies that don’t sell something tangible, need to ensure they have clarity of brand and their entire internal team shows it to the outside world consistently. They have one less avenue of opportunity for demonstrating how they are highly unique and relevant for their target audience – ultimately why a potential customer should choose them.

Sadly, we see way too many “service oriented” companies out there that say their brand is all about integrity and reliability, or some other overly used and vapid term. Please understand this just positions you and makes you sound all the more like a commodity. Think of it – would you buy from a company that said, “Well… we’re not so into integrity or reliability.” Of course not! It is assumed that you will have integrity and be reliable, otherwise I would never work with you.

That’s why it is so important for “service oriented” companies to go through a process that mixes science and art to clarify their brand DNA and brand values – ways in which they can truly and consistently be unique. Then they need to roll it out to their entire team in such a way that empowers them and encourages them live up to those brand standards every day.

Strategic Public Relations Plans are ESSENTIAL for Businesses

Public Relations, ,

As Warren Buffet once said, “it can take 20 years to build a reputation and only five minutes to ruin it.”  This is a lesson that businesses learn over and over again.

Of course, everyone wants a good reputation. But how do you get one – and more importantly, maintain it? Companies often enlist the help of a public relations firm for a crisis plan or issue management. Others know they need to be ready for a “problem,” but don’t believe it’s “that much of a concern right now.” When companies talk about building their brands, they usually mean “good news marketing,” launching products/programs and supporting sales.  They never think of galvanizing their brand against disaster before a crisis hits home. It’s easy to get complacent. No one ever imagines, “today will be the day that that disaster hits.” When that day arrives, however, the strength of a company’s reputation is its best protection.

The closest thing to reputation protection that appears on a balance sheet is termed goodwill. Having a reservoir of goodwill can make all the difference and sustain a company through bad times.

Public relations is used every day to tell concrete stories that provide credibility and create a positive reputation. Step by step, reputation is built on goodwill that emanates from reliable products, excellent service, and sound business practices across the board – not from fluff.

Public relations strategies and tactics should be major elements in any plan to build positive relationships with the stakeholders who determine your organization’s success. While there are multiple key audiences including stockholders, boards of directors, regulators, legislators and other influencers, it’s worth mentioning several ideas for fostering quality reputations among three all-important groups.

 (1) Employees: Employees should be your biggest fans. If they don’t believe the talk, they won’t do the walk. Too often, internal communications are tagged on as an afterthought. Put employees front and center, involve them in your communications plans and company initiatives and make them your best ambassadors. They are your greatest testimonial.

(2) Media: It’s amazing how many corporate leaders have never met the reporters in person who cover their companies. Knowing reporters is the best way to build credibility in the good times and get a fair hearing during a crisis. It’s easy to do. Have a proactive media outreach program. Tell your good news stories; be an industry thought leader. Don’t have your first interaction with a reporter be when a crisis develops.

(3) Clients: Organizations need to fall in love with their clients; it’s that simple.  Engage them.   In today’s business world, clients want a constant engagement and interaction.  This means everything from easy-to-understand product information and engaging social media programs to excellent, around the clock customer service and valuable website tools.

 Toyota worked diligently to regain its reputation following the “gas pedal” crisis; Chances for recovery were strong based on its reputation prior to the crisis. Arguably, BP had a steeper road because it lacked much of the goodwill upon which to draw.

 

Top leadership needs to pay attention to inculcate the values, culture and programs for an organization to build and nurture its reputation. Indeed, it may be a CEO’s most important contribution.

PR Strategy For The Beleaguered Airline Industry

Crisis Communications, , , ,

Airline disasters are down in 2014 compared to this time in 2013. But you would never realize this based upon media reports. First there was the hype over the disappearance of Malaysia Airlines MH370. Then the same airline lost another plane two weeks ago – shot down over Ukraine by Russian-backed separatists. Then the FAA banned flights to Israel for a short period after the terrorist group, Hamas, shot rockets near the Tel Aviv airport. Compounding this, just last week there were stories about the crash of an Air Algérie plane with 116 people perishing and a TransAsia Airways turboprop fall in Taiwan. Indeed based upon these stories, many consumers believe that air travel is becoming more dangerous not less. Add to all of this, the general consumer dissatisfaction about the quality of service provided during flights, that many consumers believe is reflected in these hyped about air disasters, and you have an industry desperately in need of public relations.

In developing their public relations strategy, the airline industry needs to be addressing their key stakeholders – consumers, regulators, and employees. While the first thought is to reassure the public, overlooked with airline disasters is that the regulators will come in to assess the industry as a whole and conduct hearings. Let’s not forget also, the fact that this is an election year. Many an ambitious and pontificating politician would love to grill airline executives and develop their own sound bite proof plan for friendly skies. Finally, employees cannot be ignored as many are wondering what will be the response by the industry to these stories.

So what should the airline industry do?

  1. Stress how safe it is to fly. As mentioned in the beginning of the article, air disasters as a whole are down in 2014. The airline industry needs to stress this through a publicity campaign with a series of television commercials stressing the safety of airline travel compared to other modes of transportation, particularly automobiles. In these commercials the industry should mention the advances in technology that have been made that ensure even greater safety when traveling the skies. Some of the new technologies should be highlighted. A newspaper and social media campaign with the same message should be done in conjunction with the television commercials.
  2. Individual airlines must stress their own records of safety. Many airlines have seamless air safety records. These airlines should use this time as an opportunity to highlight their safety record and lack of air mishaps. This can be done through stories of satisfied travelers providing testimonials to information garnered from annual reports.
  3. Be proactive by discussing what additional and new safety precautions the industry and individual airlines are doing in the aftermath of these highly publicized disasters. Too often, an industry waits for regulators and politicians to address a crisis before providing their solutions. This is a time for the airline industry to be a step ahead and discuss how they are going beyond what is legally required with more comprehensive safety measures.
  4. Address employees. Often employees are forgotten in any crisis response and are an afterthought in a public relations campaign. The airlines need to make sure that all employees know what is being done to address consumer concerns about safety and service issues, as well as, what is expected from them.
  5. Recreate the flying experience. Lately, consumers complain that a flight is nothing more than a glorified bus drive in the air. The flying experience has lost its meaning. The complaints about service are mirrored in what the public thinks about airline safety, particularly after the latest air disasters. Airlines must work to create a quality experience for the customer from the moment they step on the plane to the moment they pick up their luggage. By doing this, consumers will believe that the quality of service they receive during a flight is also reflected in how the airline is ensuring safety during the flight.

Addressing concerns about airline safety now will go a long way to reassure the public and regulators that the skies are indeed safe. Beyond that it will go a long way in bolstering the airline industry’s overall image not only in safety but in service.

CEOs Under Attack? A Lesson in Corporate Communications from GM & Apple

Communications, , , , , ,

First it was Matt Lauer on The Today Show asking General Motors’ CEO Mary Barra if she could handle being a mother and CEO and was she selected as the CEO of General Motors because the company wanted a “maternal presence”. Next it was Apple’s Tim Cook on CNBC, being publicly outed as a gay man. The social media response towards the media was that of outrage and disgust with these incidents. Yet in both incidents the media stood by the interviews.

Why is this? What should corporate communicators learn by this and put into practice in response?

The first question is easy to answer. Despite strides made by women and minorities, the corporate boardroom is still largely dominated by white men whose ages range from the 50s to the 60s. The corporate mindset is to not shake things up and interviews are about the company not about the CEO’s personal life. Likewise despite the transformation in America regarding the LGBT community, the corporate boardroom remains largely untouched in this category. Yet this is changing, as is the concept that a CEO’s personal life is largely not part of a company’s story.

This is no longer true. Consumers are buying the story of a brand and also that of the storyteller – the CEO. Consumers expect not only to know the brand message but also the story of the CEO, President, or Chairman of the Board who communicates the brand message. This means all aspects of a CEO’s life is subject to media scrutiny. Additionally, as this happens those who do not fit the corporate stereotype of old will find they are under greater media interrogation.

Is this fair? No. But it is the nature of our society, with a far more intrusive media operating, 24/7, social media, and citizen journalists with blogs.

Corporate communicators need to understand this changing dynamic and help affect a change in the corporate culture of companies. Corporations need to recognize that society has changed. The fact that a woman can be both a CEO and mother is no different than a male being both a CEO and father. Indeed, in this post recession society, many mothers are now the primary wage winner and the father is the stay at home parent. Corporations need to reflect and understand this dynamic. As they do, the media questions will begin to change. But for this to happen, the companies must reflect in their leadership and their culture the changes that are occurring in society.

Executives need to know that their lives will be examined under a microscope. The best thing to do is address personal issues proactively. Cook’s sexual preference should never have been outed on a national interview but the better course would have been for Cook to address this long before this, very much as football player, Michael Sam addressed his sexuality. Sexuality will continue to attract curiosity until corporate cultures reflect the changes we see in society. For this to happen, corporate communications must work in tandem with the executive leadership in conveying the message and new culture.

Yes, Mary Barra and Tim Cook seemed under attack this past week. Not because of anything they had done as CEOs but rather because they don’t resemble the CEOs of old, just as America doesn’t reflect the nation it was in the 1990s. For others who will resemble Cook and Barra, following in their footsteps, the challenge must be to communicate to the media and consumers that it’s a new culture in the boardroom.

Paula Deen’s Plight. Another Foot-In-Mouth Moment

Crisis Communications, , ,

Food Network was brought down last summer, in a deposition where she admitted that she had used the ‘n’ word in the past and considered a plantation style event with African-American employees dressed in anti-bellum attire.  What made her crisis more explosive was her feeble attempts at crisis communications culminating with her appearance on the Today Show where she claimed she (Deen)was the victim and didn’t understand why African-Americans might be offended by the ‘n’ word.  Sponsors were quick to show her the exit, with even the Food Network, cancelling her show.

Just a few weeks ago, it appeared she was looking to launch a comeback when it was announced that she had formed a new company, Paula Deen Ventures that received between $75 million to $100 million from Najafi Cos., a private-equity company led by Jahm Najafi, who owns BMG Music Service and the Book-of-the-Month Club.  She was greeted by adoring fans in Miami earlier this week. 

But now in interview with People magazine, she compares herself to NFL prospect Michael Sam who admitted that he is gay.  When discussing how the scandal from last summer has affected her reputation, Deen said, It’s like that black football player who recently came out,” “He said, ‘I just want to be known as a football player. I don’t want to be known as a gay football player.’ I know exactly what he’s saying.”

She also sees a double standard in how some television personalities were able to recover from scandal – Duck Dynasty’s Phil Robertson and fellow celebrity chef, Nigella Lawson –  with little lasting damage to their brands.  She believes she is a victim of the media in that she suffered more damage than did Robertson or Lawson.

So what is Deen doing wrong in her comeback attempt?

  1. She fails to apologize or admit she may have handled the situation poorly. Some degree of contrition is required for a comeback.  The public is often willing to forgive but they must hear an apology.  Deen is unwilling or unable to do this.
  2. Deen continues to appear indifferent at best and insensitive at worst towards racial and sexual preference issues. Last year on the Today Show, she told Matt Lauer she couldn’t understand why anyone might be offended by the ‘n’ word.  Now she compares her ordeal to what Michael Sam is going through.  Sam is facing an uncertain world and reception as he attempts to break into the NFL as an openly gay player.  In many ways he is this generation’s Jackie Robinson.   For Deen to compare herself to Sam is offensive and continues to demonstrate that she doesn’t get it.  The ‘it’ being how she may have offended people.  She shows no empathy and for a brand to be trusted and recover it must show empathy. Indeed her remarks in People were as subtle as one of her recipes.
  3. She continues to appear erratic which led sponsors to dump her last year. Her recent comments reinforce this erratic impression.  Businesses don’t want to be associated with erratic.
  4. She continues to go against her brand identity. Her brand was built as a sweet grandmother.  Instead she comes across as unpredictable, bitter and mean spirited.  She mentions Duck Dynasty’s Phil Robertson, as a brand that survived and says it’s a double standard.  Deen doesn’t understand that Robertson survived, albeit with lower ratings this season, because his remarks were consistent with his and Duck Dynasty’s brand, while hers were not. Robertson was transparent, what you saw is what you got, Paula Deen isn’t transparent and people are confused as to who the real Paula Deen is.
  5. She continues to play the victim as she did when she appeared on the Today Show last summer. That is a cardinal mistake to make.   Playing the victim in a crisis, as well as, appearing insensitive is a recipe for a disaster and a failure.

Paula Deen will never be as strong as she was and this remark reinforces this point.  There will be no Paula Deen comeback like there was for Martha Stewart.  The Paula Deen brand as it was before the deposition came out last summer is finished.   What is ironic is that had she a crisis communications plan in place and followed it effectively; her brand would be as strong if not stronger than what it was.  If ever there was a case study in why crisis communications is needed and what not to do in a crisis, it is Paula Deen.

Chevron’s ‘Pizza’ Apology: A ‘Worst Case’ Crisis Management Scenario

Crisis Communications, , ,

Calvin Coolidge famously said, “you can’t improve upon silence.”  Chevron Corporation should have heeded that advice.  The company made one of the worst apologies ever to residents of Dunkard Township, a rural community in southwestern Pennsylvania after one of the company’s wells exploded with an intense and horrific fire raging for five days afterwards with one well worker dead.  Chevron’s apology was a letter with a free coupon for free pizza and a 2-liter soda.  But residents needed to act on the coupon by May 1, 2014.  The so-called apology has gone viral with outrage pouring out on social media.

Oil companies even under the best of circumstances have a negative public perception.  They are the favorite targets of consumers and politicians alike.  They make large profits (in Chevron’s case $21 billion) and never appear to lower the price of gas at the pumps.  So when a tragedy such as the explosion at Dunkard Township occurs, a crisis communications strategy is difficult and tricky.  Yet in Chevron’s apology, they reinforced every negative image that the public has and worst, double downed when the criticism began.  When the story of the free pizza began going viral, rather than admitting perhaps the free pizza gambit was in poor taste or was not being construed the way it was intended, the company began criticizing residents who felt offended and claimed all the feedback they were receiving was positive.  Beyond that, Chevron clamped down on their social media censoring any criticism that was posted.  The end result is Chevron looks both heartless and ridiculous with their crisis communications response and the brand has taken a hit on social media and consumer trust.  The longer they dig in their heels the worst the outcry will be.

What should Chevron have done?

  1. Send senior executives to be onsite during the crisis to show their concern and put a human face to the company. People expect corporations to have a public face, hiding behind press releases during a crisis diminishes the human element.
  2. Issue a strong heartfelt apology.
  3. Explain by holding a town hall meeting in Dunkard Township and through paid newspaper ads, the rigorous safety precautions they follow in their wells and what steps they are taking to ensure that such tragedies don’t happen again.
  4. Put meaning to their Facebook banner that says “oil companies should support the communities they’re part of. We agree”, by putting money into local events in Dunkard Township and establishing a scholarship in the name of the deceased well worker for high school students.
  5. Use their social media to convey their message and allow consumers to vent.

The best thing that Chevron could do at this moment is admit that the free pizza and soda came across in poor taste, and explain their commitment to Dunkard Township and all communities they are involved in.  They then should hold meetings in the community to explain what happened, apologize, and show the steps they are taking to correct the situation.  If they are unwilling to do that and stick to the free pizza strategy, perhaps make it a lifetime supply of free pizza for the town (of course this last is said in jest but shows how Chevron is having the worst of both worlds – a horrendous crisis communications strategy that is causing brand damage and distrust; as well as becoming a ridiculous punch line).

The biggest mistake brands and corporations make during a crisis is their response to the crisis.  Often it is because they have no basic crisis communication strategy in place and are caught scrambling with the story not being the crisis so much as the flawed crisis response.  The end result is a loss of confidence and loyalty in the brand that often takes years to rebuild.  Companies should look at Chevron on what not to do in a crisis.