Crisis Response Strategy the Managing Director of a Small Chemical Company - Case Study Example

MAKING DECISION Name: Instructor: Institution: City: Date: Table of Contents Introduction 3 The Response Strategies Likely to be utilized 3 Why the Chosen Strategies? 7 The Best Media to Communicate the Crisis 8 Conclusion 9 References 10 Introduction Handling crises is one daunting task that organizations have had to deal with. The occurrence of a crisis is a phenomenon that leaves not just the organizational stakeholders confused, but also the general public (Carroll, 2013, 94). It is critically important, therefore, that the best approach is taken whenever a crisis happens to ensure that the best possible response strategy is employed. Whereas the genuineness of the causative agents of the crisis is an important aspect under such circumstances, most organizations would resort to protecting their reputations at the expense of anything else (Coombs, 2002, 177). They do so by absolving themselves of any blame as regards the crisis at hand. This is where the Coomb’s Situational Crisis Communication Theory (SCCT) comes in. This paper, therefore, discusses the best possible crisis response strategy the Managing Director of a small Chemical Company would adopt considering the case study at hand. The paper also goes ahead to discuss the reasons as to why the given strategies are of essence in response to the case study presented in particular. The best media to be used by the Managing Director in communicating the crisis is also discussed towards the tail end of the paper. The Response Strategies Likely to be utilized From the information provided regarding the case study, there are so many benefits that the chemical company seems to have brought to the local surroundings. Whereas this is no excuse to defend the company against any blame regarding the crisis, it is worth being critically put into consideration (Jorgensen, 1994, 349). This is what shall constitute much of the Managing Director’s company’s reputation cushioning strategy (Benoit, 2015, 133). In so doing, the Diminishment Posture would be widely employed by the Managing Director. S/he may, as well, utilize the Rebuilding Posture to some extent in their response. To begin with, as the Managing Director of the company, I would employ one main approach under the Diminishment Posture i.e. excusing. Due to the severity of this second onsite leak, it would be more devastating for the Managing Director to claim that no serious injuries were reported. This, therefore rules out the possibility of adopting the justification approach under the Diminishment Posture. In this regard, therefore, the Managing Director would state categorically in no uncertain terms that it was never the company’s intention to cause the onsite leak. As a matter of fact, the company has been operational in the area for the last 40 years within which only two cases of leakage have occurred. As the MD, I would, by all means, attempt to explain how the accident was out of control under the circumstances. I would explain how, under similar circumstances, any other company would still have ended up with similar consequences. I would put it quite clearly that given the company’s past Corporate Social Responsibilities, particularly to the surrounding community, it would never have been its intention to cause or allow such kind of harm to happen. By all means the company would have done everything possible under its powers to prevent such a leakage from happening if it only had known it was coming. The other approach I’m likely to use as the Managing Director is the Compensation strategy under the Rebuilding Posture. It should be noted that two main devastations have occurred as a result of this leakage i.e. three employees have been critically injured and the fish stock in the nearby river have been killed by the spilt formaldehyde. It would, therefore, not be right to ignore these two aftermaths. Even though the accident might truly not have been as a consequence of the company’s carelessness, it remains the responsibility of the firm (Coombs, 2002, 168). As the MD, therefore, I would, on behalf of the company, offer to take care of all the medical bills incurred during the hospitalization of the three victims. As if this is not enough, the company would give some tokens to these victims after they shall have healed as a form of compensation. This will not only help to restore the company’s reputation as a responsible chemical firm, but it will also help to ensure that the victims do not think of seeking some legal redress against the company (Fronz, 2011, 70). It is also notable that the spill has led to the formaldehyde entering the nearby river and killing the available fish stock. In response to this, therefore, the Managing Director would strongly consider redirecting some of its compensation funds towards the cleaning of the river. Environmental conservation is critically important for any firm of this kind since such firms are the custodian of most environmental pollution incidences (Carroll, 2013, 102). In its rebuilding posture, the company would channel some of its resources, including the human resource, towards cleaning the river. I would also set up a crisis team to not only ensure that the rebuilding process happens as efficiently as possible, but to also carry out a thorough inquiry into the possible causative agents of the leak. In ensuring that preventive measures are put in place to prevent the recurrence of such accidents, determining the possible causes or risk factors comes in handy (Coombs, 2004, 283). The crisis team would be adequately financed so as to ensure its initiatives are properly run without any predicaments. Of importance, however, is the fact that the findings of this team shall be extremely fundamental in putting preventive measures in place (Coombs, 2004, 292). The Bolstering Posture would as well be worth adopting in this circumstance where the reminding approach would be used. It is an undeniable fact that if this company were absent in this locality, no such accident would ever have happened. In fact, it would have been completely unheard of, at least in this locality. This, therefore, shows how the buck starts and stops with the company. Whereas this is undisputable, it is also a fact that so many other positives have been accrued as a result of the company’s presence in the village. It would, therefore, be completely unfair to have all these benefits eroded by the occurrence of this crisis (Coombs, 2002, 181). In my attempt to protect the company’s image, I would take this opportunity to communicate this to all the stakeholders e.g. the local villagers, the government, the health monitoring stakeholders, among many other stakeholders. This would be the best opportunity to communicate such company’s past positive deeds as the creation of employment to over 1000 people many of whom are from the local area. The local area has a total population of about 3000 people. Employing about 1000 people only means that the company sustains the livelihood of about 0.33% of the local population. This benefit cannot just be underestimated, and must be communicated to the stakeholders in an attempt to protect the company’s reputation. Why the Chosen Strategies? The strategies chosen to communicate the response to the crisis are founded on quite some substantial grounds. The reason for employing the excusing approach, for example, is basically to exonerate the company from any accusations of irresponsibility. It should be noted that the aspect of responsibility of a company, as perceived by the general public, is very critical in damaging or otherwise the reputation of that company (Carroll, 2013, 83). It is, therefore, of essence to respond by confirming that the company had absolutely nothing to do with the cause of the leak so that not even the company’s management can be pointed fingers at. The compensation approach, on the other hand, is necessary so as to help restore the affected employees’ confidence in their employer. The benefits of not compensating these victims far much outweigh the setbacks. By compensating these employees, it only helps to reaffirm the company’s ability to stand with her staff in times of difficulty (Coombs & Hallday, 2012, 105). This, however, is not to mean that the company is responsible for the occurrence of the accident. In communicating the company’s response to this crisis, therefore, I would make this emphasis so it is not mistaken to mean acknowledgement of its wrongdoing. The reminding approach, on its part, is essential in informing the public as well as other stakeholders about the company’s past positive deeds to the society (Coombs, 2004, 279). In fact, for those people who did not know what the company has been previously engaged in in matters Corporate Social Responsibility, this would be the perfect way to educate them. This strategy is also important in communicating to the public and other stakeholders that the company’s existence is not only to male profits at the expense of the local people’s welfare (Sellnow & Seeger, 2013, 56). In setting up a crisis team, the company would be reiterating the fact that it is treating this accident with the seriousness it deserves. A crisis team is instrumental because handling such an issue may not necessarily be easy if a special group of experts is not put in place (Coombs & Halladay, 2012, 111). Moreover, by carrying out investigations on the causes of the leakage, this strategy would see to it that the crisis team comes up with recommendations. Based on these recommendations, the company would then be able to put necessary steps to prevent a similar accident from reoccurring in future (Coombs & Halladay, 2012, 136). Environmental conservation is one responsibility that such chemical companies as this are tasked with. Whether a visible or invisible environmental impact has occurred, it is absolutely necessary that any company that deals in production supports environmental conservation programs (Carroll, 2013, 129). This response strategy, therefore, would be critical in reminding the stakeholders that the company is not only there for profits, but to negate the undesirable effects of its production processes. The Best Media to Communicate the Crisis As a manager, I’m well aware of the fact that quick response in times of crises is very important in confirming to the public and other stakeholders that the management is indeed in control of the company’s operations. It would, therefore, be prudent that communication is made to these stakeholders the soonest time possible. The case is located in a small village where the company is located. The likely immediate victims of the leak are the local residents. In this regard, therefore, much of the communication done should target this group of people. Because of this, the best media to use to deliver the messages regarding the crisis response strategies in such rural areas would be the use of radio (Coombs & Halladay, 2012, 153). Radio has been, for the longest time, and still is the main mode of communication in the rural areas. By using this media to communicate the response strategies, a wider reach will be achieved. Moreover, having spent on many crisis response strategies, it would only be economical for the company to try and cut its spending as much as possible. The use of radio as is well known is relatively a cost – effective form of communication with a wider reach especially in rural areas. A bit of print media may also be used for the bigger stakeholders such as the regulatory bodies as well as the government. In most cases, such large bodies tend to pass their communication through the print media. Conclusion Having discussed quite a number of crisis response strategies to be adopted by the Chemical Company, it is evident that a lot of finances will definitely be involved. Whereas some of these financial outflows were originally not planned for, their ultimate intended result of restoring the company’s reputation is the most prudent thing to do. In conclusion, therefore, the protection of the company’s image should be the most important thing for any manager at any given time. The case of this small Chemical Company would not, therefore, have been any different. References Arnold, W. E. (1980). Crisis communication. Dubuque, Iowa, Gorsuch Scarisbrick. Benoit, W. L. (2015). Accounts, excuses, and apologies: image repair theory and research. Carroll, C. E. (2013). The Handbook of Communication and Corporate Reputation. New York, NY, John Wiley & Sons. http://nbnresolving.de/urn:nbn:de:101:12014121610593 Coombs, W. T., & Holladay, S. J. (2012). The handbook of crisis communication. Chichester, U.K., Wiley-Blackwell. Coombs, W.T. (2004). A theoretical frame for post-crisis communication: Situational crisis communication theory, in M.J. Martinko (ed.), Attribution Theory in the Organizational Sciences: Theoretical and Empirical Contributions. Information Age Publishing, Greenwich, CT, pp.275–296. Coombs, W.T. & Holladay, S.J. (2002). Helping crisis managers protect reputational assets: Initial tests of the situational crisis communication theory. Management Communication Quarterly, 16, 165–186. Fronz, C. (2011). Strategic management in crisis communication a multinational approach. Hamburg, Diplomica-Verl. Jorgensen, B.K. (1994). Consumer reaction to company-related disasters: The effect of multiple versus single explanations. Advances in Consumer Research, 21, 348– 352. Lin, Y.-H. (2007). Testing the effects of apology and compassion response in product- harm crises in situational crisis communication theory. Thesis (M.A.)--Michigan State University. Dept. of Advertising, Public Relations, and Retailing, 2007. Sellnow, T. L., & Seeger, M. W. (2013). Theorizing crisis communication. Chichester, U.K., Wiley-Blackwell. Read More