A Bad Advertisement Creates an Opportunity for Strategic Management Skills - Case Study Example

Introduction The case study that is being considered for this strategy analysis concerns a university newspaper that has inadvertently printed an objectionable advertisement. The case involves Pleasant Valley University and their newspaper titled “The Speaker“ (Hendry and Van Emburgh). The staff of the newspaper finds themselves in the situation of facing a potential crisis when an objectionable advertisement finds its way into the pages of the latest release, after it has gone to press and been distributed. Situation The initial problem for the staff is that an advertisement of a questionable nature has been placed within their newspaper. This situation creates a great many problems, both from external sources and internal structures. The problem occurred because of a great number of issues that have arisen from the institution of a digital method of production. Because the production is no longer fully examined before it goes to print, the advertisement was missed before final submission. The examination of different areas of the paper have no redundancy, therefore no way for the mistake of one person to be discovered is possible by a back up check. As well, when the mistake was noticed, the communications system was such that the information was not passed on to anyone who could fix the issue. In order to properly analyze the situation, it is important to look at a great number of factors. The potential problem is within the realm of public relations that must be managed properly in order to maintain the integrity of the paper and repairing any public image issues that might arise. As well, the problems within the structures of the paper, in the way it is produced and the way in which management communicates, can be managed without the collapse of the entire system that is currently in place. Analyzing the situation for strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats allows for an overview of the problems and an opportunity for growth. If one looks through the marketing structure of the campus newspaper, it is distributed throughout several locations for the benefit of the student body. Costs of the paper are offset by advertisement, and an objectionable ad might create problems with other advertisers pulling theirs in order to not be associated with the objectionable advertisement. However, the budget is such that pulling the distributed copies and reprinting without the ad might create an undo burden on the newspaper finances. The basic structure of the way in which leadership is established is strong, however the situation has created an experienced co-editor to be associated with two editors who have time constraints that effect their ability to participate. As well, the faculty advisor is not assisting in overview of the final product, thus leaving all of the room for error on the shoulders of the students. While this can be a beneficial learning opportunity, the presence of the advertisement and its potential threat to the newspaper. Production of the paper has changed as this issue marked the third which was accomplished through an all digital process. The paper is created using Adobe Pagemaker software, allowing for a visualization of the paper without a hard copy. However, this mistake suggests that the redundancy check of not only more eyes, but of a physical full copy might insure that this type of error will not result in a potential for a public relations crisis. Problem The decision that must be made is whether to take back as many papers from the distribution areas that can be found and reprint the issue without the advertisement, or to allow the paper to remain out in the public and weather whatever outcome may be a result. It is likely that many of the issues have already been taken by the community, thus nullifying some of the prevention that taking back and reprinting might have allowed. Reprinting the issue will also create a strain on the budget that the paper can ill afford. Because of a small error that could have been prevented through a more organized communication structure that wasn’t currently hampered by inexperienced and distracted leadership, the staff must now evaluate both an immediate strategy to handle the results of allowing the ad in the newspaper, and strategies to avoid any further problems in proofing their copy before it is printed. The overall problems in this situation are based on a dependency on individuals to do their jobs without the benefit of structures that create redundancy. The co-editor of the paper is new to his position, taking it prematurely because the two senior co-editors have discovered that their time is compromised elsewhere. Therefore, mistakes that can be made through oversight have a potential for disastrous consequences. As well, there appears to be a problem with communication. The error was discovered by one of the senior co-editors who then asked the other senior co-editor to pass on the information to the more active co-editor. This didn’t happen. Because the first one to notice the error left the communication to a second party, the communication never happened and the error was left unattended. The external problem that the organization is facing is that of public backlash. The advertisement is one that supports an organization that has an ideology based on the idea that the Holocaust of World War II never happened. The advertisement proclaims that no one was gassed and that the genocide of the Jewish people was a hoax (Hendry and Van Emburgh). As this type of organization is considered hateful and inappropriate, advertisers and the public will most likely take offense and the potential for action in regard to the advertisement placement might occur. Therefore, the Pleasant Valley University might have to step in to take remedial action to appease the public outcry. Alternatives There are several courses of action that the newspaper staff can take in order to create a more desirable outcome. The first action that the paper should take is to define its position on such an organization by taking back the papers that are left in the distribution area. An apology can be printed in the follow-up issue to anyone who received the copy, as well as an article that discusses the issues that the staff has with the advertisement. While the financial losses will be marked, the responsible action will help to support their current advertisers that have paid for ads in this issue, while also saving both the advertising dollars for future issues from those who might pull their ads if no acknowledgement of the error is made in a timely manner. As well, the moral issues are immediately addressed, therefore allowing for the integrity of the paper to be maintained. It is possible that a future issue may have to be sacrificed, but the possibility of finding support to avoid that is far greater if proactive measures are taken, rather than if the staff waits to see the fall-out. As well, in order to create a strong position against those who would look at the staff and threaten their autonomy, a system of communication, a system of redundancy on proof reading the paper before it goes to print, and support for the less experienced editor who is carrying a majority of the responsibility, will alleviate the need for advertisers to take action or the University to step in and create change. By putting in place changes that are effective and done without waiting for others to step in will provide the newspaper with good public relations for its readership, its advertisers, and its University support. A system of e-mail documentation of every aspect of communication between the members of the staff would be the first way in which communications could be improved. Rather than an off comment to a colleague, it would be understood that if it isn’t written and recorded, it never happened. As well, a meeting that communicated everything that was known about the issue right before it went to press would allow for the entire staff to ensure that any issues had been addressed before it was printed. The design of the editor leadership structure must be examined for the current flaw that is occurring. In the current system, two editors take the position as co-editors in the spring of their junior year, which continues through the fall of that year. The editors have at that time two years with the newspaper for experience. This season of leadership, however, was interrupted when one of the leaders decided to study abroad for the spring, leaving the other to carry the load. When the second editor found his fall semester overburdened, his position was given to a the person who was to become editor in the following spring (Hendry and Van Emburgh). Thus, a less experienced staff member and the editor who had studied abroad in the spring were now in charge of the work. While the original structure of leadership was sound, the situations that led to changes in that system allowed for the possibility of such an error to be made through inexperience. Choice If the newspaper takes a proactive measure to take back as many papers as possible and reprint the publication with a retraction and discussion of the position of the paper on the reasons behind not wanting the advertisement to represent them, then integrity can be restored, even if it means sacrificing the next issue because of budgetary concerns. Other means of financial support can be explored in order to possibly run the next issue, but in taking a strong, responsible measure, the paper will save possible retraction of advertising dollars and public relations problems. The structure of the editorial staff need not be changed at this time, but should never again be compromised in order to satisfy a change in the circumstances of a student. Should a change be made, an appropriate alternative solution would be to give the position to the next qualified candidate. The structure is only good if it is implemented and adhered to without allowing for circumstances to dictated otherwise. The co-editors should be mutually responsible for implementing a system of communication and redundancies that assure that errors such as this will no longer happen. Without demanding that all communication have a written form, and that all issues be printed for hard copy examination, there will be no real change. Implementation The co-editors must come together with the staff in order to collect all the bad copies of the newspapers and put together a new paper in order to get it to production. The advantages of the digital methods of production will allow for this to be easily accomplished with the addition of a retraction and an explanation of why the papers were taken out of distribution. As well, this allows for the paper to print an article that denounces this type of hatred and propaganda in order to firmly establish that the ideologies of the offending organization are not supported by the paper. In addition, a sound strategy in handling readership, advertisers, and University administration must be designed so that when any fall-out reaches the newspaper, the staff has already contemplated an appropriate response. The error was initially found by the editor who had stepped down and given his position to the individual who was to have the position in the following spring. The first problem is that one who is not in charge, but who is ‘helping out’ provided no official record or change to the error, but simply passed it on to another editor who did not follow through on communicating the problem. Therefore, his lack of official capacity, but still present voice, created a situation where his assistance did not actually accomplish any help to the paper. If he no longer has real time to devote to his position, he should step aside and allow the structure of leadership that is in place to perform. The current co-editors must stop relying on the former co-editor, and implement changes in the way that the production is handled for the paper. While the digital process allows for a better resource for creating the publication for printing, it also creates a void in hands on proof-reading. This must be changed by the co-editors who must take responsibility for the full content of the paper, once it has passed through the hands of the news editor, the sports editor, the advertising manager, and the production manager. Without proper communication and final responsibility, it is too easy for a mistake to be missed as in this example. Works Cited Hendry, Jamie R. and Peter Van Emburgh. “Simple Mistake or Crisis?: A University Newspaper Meets the Committee for Open Debate”. The Case Journal, 2004. PDF Read More