The Current Uptake of Digital Technology - Research Paper Example

Social Media Immediacy and the Challenges and Opportunities for Communications Professionals Executive Summary When dealing with the social media crisis, many companies are caught flatfooted and do not even have a say in anything that place within the society. Instead, they always gamble with the future of their companies instead of looking for easier ways of handling the situation and engaging with their community. The important part is to establish new mechanisms that will boost the way things happen as well as generate new methods of working with the team needed to attain the growth of the company’s portfolio. If a crisis is handled well, it could be an opportunity to boost the company’s position amongst investors. The stakeholders must be assured too that the company is able to handle its issues within the shortest time possible. That will encourage them to boost their investments and endorse the company to others willing to engage in similar activities. This report will examine the impact that social media crisis has on a company and look for different ways of turning around the crisis into an opportunity that plays into the best practices within the society. Introduction The current uptake of digital technology has become part of a talk that has made many companies wonder how to relate to their clients. With more than one billion people using Facebook, and more than 400 million tweets shared, the strength of digital media is rife everywhere in the world. The whole world is aware that sharing of information and consumption rates have all gone up, and crises are bound to occur. It has been noted that on average, it takes 21 hours before a company can present a meaningful response to deal with a crisis. In close to 18%, companies took more than 48 hours. This shows that companies may be losing out because most of the crises spread within an hour and could reach an average of 11 countries within the first 24 hours. Such figures are quite disturbing especially given the fact that use of social media has reached new heights over the past decade. Communication professionals understand that new platforms of disseminating information have arisen from these new means of communication, creating new ways of disseminating content, fostering engagement and creating better understanding of the needs of their targeted audience as they build new relationships. The use of social media has been seen as an essential communication tools since it has dissolved most traditional boundaries present in previous interactions. In any case, the use of social media has had a positive influence in creating a closer proximity between a host of brands and consumers. In the same way, social media has also brought new challenges that have made companies more vulnerable to potentially injurious situations. The fact that social media uses real-time communication makes things worse since it only takes minutes before spreading to reach the masses. Social media is a tool that can stop the crisis before it gets out of hand. The impact of social media in many companies will form the basis of this report as it aims to examine the main means of using social media to avert a crisis. Crisis: No single definition has been universally accepted to meet the main definitions of the term crisis. In essence, the definition that one picks will depend on the literature. However, a common way of defining it is by terming it as an activity that describes a surprise, short response time and threatening event that affects a company. Crisis is an unstable state within which a decisive aspect of change is imminent and the change could be positive or negative (Fink 1986: 15). Further, a crisis mainly depends on the way the framing of issues and how this affects the stakeholders who interpret it. If the stakeholders will believe that the organization has a crisis, then the crisis will exist and vice versa (Combs & Holladay 2011: 118). Social media: As a collection of web 2.0 technologies, social media is one of the fastest growing communication avenues characterized by participation, conversation, connectedness, openness, communities and conversations (Coombs & Holladay 2011: 121). This source of information connects millions of people from different parts of the world as they work on improving the content shared across different platforms. Ott and Theuniseen provide four main strategies companies can use when engaging on social media: presence, absence, omnipresence and attendance. The use of absence, presence and attendance shows that a company is merely aware of the social media platform but does not have any participatory form of interaction with the audience. The omnipresent strategy shows that the company is already having an interactive dialogic participation with its clients from various parts of the country or globe depending on the company type (Ott & Theuniseen 2015: 98). Many will not think that the omnipresent strategy is good, but it is seen as the best when working towards dealing with an online reputation scare (Wigley & Fontenot 2010: 188). Social media immediacy: challenges and opportunities Many people following the trend of the new media understand it as a double-edged sword that could be harmful or full of opportunities for its users. It has the capability of threatening a company’s existence and that creation will require to be handled in the best time possible. This will only be possible if the professionals understand that the power of social media can be dealt with from a stable platform. This will only work if the company will work on meeting its goals as discussed below. Using social media as an opportunity Many people will not realize this, but a social media crisis can occur as an opportunity. The way a company chooses to treat the crisis will determine how well it will play out. The idea is to make the best use of what is present to avoid any aspect of negative effect on an organization. Sellnow et al. state that making crisis an opportunity could be dangerous but it could play out as the company wishes (2011: 3). The important thing is to generate the required positive impacts that will allow the management to work towards creating a better brand for the company. The important thing is to create an effective management process that will lead to a better reputation for the company as well as assist the stakeholders to improve on the perception of the company during and after the crises (Wigley & Zhang 2011: 8). Having the right conversations and being open has become a good way of dealing with the issues in the company, mitigating the cases of negative trends common in many areas. Ott and Theuniseen argue that the omnipresent strategy, that is a strategy that shows that the company is already having an interactive dialogic participation with its stakeholders on social media, is seen as the best when working towards dealing with a reputation scare (Ott & Theuniseen 2015: 98). This means that companies have to always be interactive on social media as they look for different ways of making their companies benefit from their presence in these platforms (Wigley & Zhang 2011: 8). Challenges associated with the use of social media Gruber, Smerek, Thomas-Hunt and James (2014: 164) note that the accelerated nature of sharing information has been good and bad for the many companies that have a global or even national presence. The sharing of information across the many stateless countries within the social platforms has made it very easy for the disparate individuals to come together and organise themselves in a way that appreciates their contributions to the rest of the world (Mukherjee 2014: 180). In many settings, the use of Twitter has been seen as a powerful way stakeholders talk to their organisations, and solutions, therefore, need to emanate from the same platform. Trigger or facilitator In many instances, the internet can be a trigger or a facilitator of any crisis. Gonzale-Herrero and Smith note that the use of the social media can be a cause for new crises or a platform that will add more information to the stakeholders (2008: 152). It will also facilitate the same crises and send it to the mainstream media at a faster pace. This accelerated nature of spreading the news could be bad for the many companies that have a global or national presence (Gonzale-Herrero & Smith 2008: 145). The potential of the social media is higher than the traditional one as it can provoke a crisis and propagate it in several other areas without containment. It will involve the organization’s resources in meeting the needs that will provide the unfiltered sources of negative information as shared (Gonzale-Herrero and Smith 2010: 147). Power of stakeholders The sharing of information across the many stateless countries within the social media platforms has made it very easy for the disparate individuals to come together and organise themselves in a way that appreciates their contributions to the rest of the world (Mukherjee 2014: 180). Coombs argues that the power of social media is very strong and has a very huge potential, based on a company’s perception to create a crisis (2011: 15). Negative word of mouth In certain areas, the impact has been critical in making the spread of the news in many parts of the world. In the world, it is very critical that the sharing of information should be disconnected from the rest of the society. In many settings, the stakeholders have to make better utility of their position to reduce the issues of dissatisfaction. The use of social media for revenge is common amongst many of the consumers who choose this as a way of getting back at a company for bad services (Gregoire, Salle and Tripp 2014: 174). Time It has been noted that on average, it takes 21 hours before a company can present a meaningful response to deal with a crisis. In close to 18%, companies took more than 48 hours. This shows that companies may be losing out because most of the crises spread within an hour and could reach an average of 11 countries within the first 24 hours (Laufer 2010: 49). Such figures are quite disturbing especially given the fact that use of social media has reached new heights over the past decade. Companies that do not have a profound way of dealing with issues within the workplace have been caught flatfoot, and more than 53% of the companies have been unable to regain their share prices to the pre-crisis level (Laufer 2010: 49). Examples of social media crisis A bad example of how to handle the issue of social media crisis is GermanWings. The first time they tried to handle the issue of the failed communication on the missing flight was unsuccessful, and even their team was not well positioned to talk in a unified voice. They did not respond within three-four hours after the crisis occurred. It was not in a position to offer any form of convincing communication that would provide the stakeholders with an assurance that everything was under control. They did not keep the world updated regarding the events of the day. They were expressing grief yet they could not tell three hours later where the plane was. It was a poor reaction that made so many people angry over the seemingly unreasonableness amongst the management on the issues regarding their major stakeholders (“Germanwings crisis management” Appendix 1). A good show of how to handle the social media crisis can be seen in the way DKNY responded to a mobilization where a photographer was protesting against DKNY’s use of his photos on its window’s displays without permission. To respond to the Facebook post, DKNY explained that the photo had been used accidentally and that it would donate $25000 to the YMCA as a way of showing their sincere gratitude. The post received numerous comments, and the photographer was willing to accept the mistake and the donation. It was a quick and strong message that was successful in neutralizing a crisis that could have harmed the store’s reputation (“DKNY” Appendix 2). Applebee’s response to a crisis that erupted in social media played out awfully and made more enemies for the restaurant than friends. The server that took a photo of a pastor’s comment on receipt and sent it to Facebook was apparently fired for her actions, and Applebee became defensive about the whole issue. More than 10,000 comments were received and the company continued reposting the same issue moments later rather than responding the issue bugging the stakeholders. That made it look bad in the world of social media, making its response a big failure (“Applebee’s” Appendix 3). Kitchenaid is a good example how social media crisis should be handled with speed and honesty. It is a show of how good a company can rekindle its image after a disastrous tweet was made on its twitter page rather than to a personal page. The head of the brand was quick to accept the mistake, apologised to the president about the insensitive tweet made regarding his grandmother, and stated publicly that the one who posted the tweet would no longer be part of their social media team. That was so quick, honest and neutralizing enough for the company’s brand (“Kitchenaid” Appendix 4). Best practice Tinker, Dumlao and McLaughlin note that the expanding nature of the social media emergency communications especially in the American public has become one of the most important aspects of dealing with issues within the society (2009: 25). In dealing with crisis communication, the best way of handling it is by looking at the link between the organization and the public prior to the crisis and the way this will change the outlook after making better choices in the future as the society handles this communication process. The stakeholders must be assured that the response is going to minimize such cases in the future and consider a variety of issues that will maintain the company’s image and reputation at all times (Coombs & Holladay 2011: 117). Social media crisis needs to be part of what a company wants to deal with at all times. It must be a position that lessens the impact of the crisis to all involved stakeholders, and creates a strategy that will bring about a change in the society. It must be a proactive aspect that will involve the engagement of all the important aspects of the society while at the same time monitoring and scanning the internet to detect any warnings that could place the company’s reputation in danger. Response systems When working on dealing with the crisis, it is important to have a pre-crisis response system that allows the company to make the best choices. This will involve listening to what people are saying online and making changes based on what one hears. It allows the PR team to monitor and scan the messages given prior to the crisis and the initial source of the problem (Coombs & Holladay 2011: 117). This gives way to preparations that allow the PR team to update and integrate the concerns into future drills. This will require a quick and responsive method that will create the accuracy required to build trust with the stakeholders (Sellnow, Ulmer, & Seeger 2011: 197). Germanwings did not have a way of dealing with issues openly, hence the mixed reactions. The dark site was just a start, and that failed the stakeholders a lot. Creating immediate source of information will be a good way of dealing with the stakeholders. They all want to be informed when dealing with the crisis, and hiding information will only escalate the issues. Being immediate and honest will save the company a lot of trouble. The company must humanize its response to be at par with the concerns of the clients, and openly work on answer that will boost the company’s position. Germanwing failed here because it was not open enough. KitchenAid however was apt in telling the truth. The establishment of a divide between the business and the crisis will be a good way of ensuring that things run as expected (Coombs & Holladay 2011: 117). Seeking endorsement from the stakeholders will be a good way of handling the situation. This will sell the company’s ideals and show the world that they have created a humane relationship with all stakeholders, hence the appropriate means of handling it is by involving those who sponsor most of their activities (Sellnow, Ulmer, & Seeger 2011: 198). This will restore confidence and generate more support. Therefore, instead of waiting for the damage to be done, it is important to safeguard the situation in advance and make better usage of the time accorded to make a response when it is needed (Coombs & Holladay 2011: 116). Having a two-way communication aspect will be a big boost for the company. This will harness all the energy that could negatively affect the company and turn it into some useful source of positive news. Openness and transparency is a good way of dealing with such communications as shown by KitchenAid (Coombs 2011: 196). The open communication will also allow the response to be directly linked to the source of the crises rather than deflecting the entire process while denying responsibility. This allows the management to learn to separate business and crisis, making it easier to continue providing the much-needed assistance and distraction using the better aspects of the company (Sellnow, Ulmer, & Seeger 2011: 199). Conclusion It is important to realise that the immediacy necessitated by the growth of social media across the world has made it more complex to deal with crises. The impact that social media has during the handling of any crisis is hard to ignore and underestimate. It is one of the tools, if strategically used, can leverage the company’s ability to survive any attack. It is a position that ought to meet the immediate goals of the company while strengthening its resolve to handle stakeholder relationships in the future. The maintenance of separate crisis management and social media handling is outdated. The important thing right now is to meet the core goals of the society while handling and dealing with all situations in the organization. It is a position that now requires all the energy to make things right. The best strategy will be the one that benefits the company and its stakeholders. Communications managers should work hand in hand with all stakeholders involved to secure the company’s reputation. References Auer, M.R. (2011) “The policy sciences of social media”, The Policy Studies Journal, vol. 39, no. 4, pp. 707-736. Coombs, T.W. & Holladay, S.J. (2009) “Further explorations of post-crisis communication: effects of media and response strategies on perceptions and intentions,” Public Relations Review, vol. 35, pp. 1–6. Coombs, T.W. & Holladay, S.J. (2011) “An exploration of the effects of victim visuals on perceptions and reactions to crisis events”, Public Relations Review, vol. 37, pp. 115–120. Coombs, WT. (2011) Ongoing Crisis Communication: Planning, Managing and Responding, Thousand Oaks: SAGE. Fediuk, T.A., Coombs, W.T. & Botero, I.C. (2010) “Exploring crisis from a receiver perspective: understanding stakeholder reactions during crisis events”, in Coombs, W.T. and Holladay, S.J., Handbook of Crisis Communication, Wiley-Blackwell, Malden, MA, pp. 635-56. Gregoire, Y., Salle, A. & Tripp, T.M. (2015) "Managing social media crises with your customers: The good, the bad, and the ugly", Business Horizons, vol. 58, pp. 173-182. Gruber, D.A., Smerek, R.E., Thomas-Hunt, M.C. & James, E.H. (2015) "The real-time power of Twitter: Crisis management and leadership in an age of social media", Business Horizons, vol. 58, pp. 163-172. Jin, Y., Liu, B.F. & Austin, L.L. (2011) “Examining the role of social media in effective crisis management: the effects of crisis origin, information form, and source on publics crisis responses”, Communication Research, pp. 1-21. Kaplan, A.M. & Haenlein, M. (2010) "Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of social media", Business Horizons, vol. 1, pp. 59-68. Laufer, D. (2010) "Charting a course through crisis", BizEd, vol. 4, no. 5, pp. 46-50. Liu, B.F., Austin, L. & Jin, Y. (2011) “How publics respond to crisis communication strategies: the interplay of information form and source”, Public Relations Review, vol. 37, pp. 345-353. Macnamara, J. (2010) “Public relations and the social: how practitioners are using, or abusing, social media”, Asia Pacific Public Relations Journal, vol. 11, pp. 21-39. Mukherjee, S. (2014) "The Use of Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn etc. as Strategic Tools for Crisis Communication", International Journal of Management and International Business Studies, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 175-180 Ott, L. & Theunissen, P. (2015) "Reputations at risk: Engagement during social media crises", Public Relations Review vol. 41, pp. 97–102 Pace, K.M., Fediuk, T.A. & Botero, I.C. (2010) “The acceptance of responsibility and expressions of regret in organisational apologies after a transgression”, Corporate Communications: An International Journal, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 410-427. Romenti, S., Murtarelli, G. & Valentini, C. (2014)"Organisations conversations in social media: applying dialogue strategies in times of crises", Corporate Communications: An International Journal, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 10-33. Sellnow, TL, Ulmer, RR, and Seeger, MW. (2011) Effective Crisis Communication: Moving from Crisis to Opportunity, London: SAGE. Strander, I. (2011) "Effective Use of Social Media in Crisis Communication: Recommendations for Norwegian Organisations" dissertation for the degree of MA Corporate Communications & Public Relations, University of Leeds. Tinker, T.L., Dumlao, M. & Mclaughlin, G. (2009) "Effective Social Media Strategies During Times of Crisis: Learning from the CDC, HHS, FEMA, the American Red Cross and NPR", The Strategist, pp.25-27, 39. Wigley, S. & Fontenot, M. (2010) “Crisis managers losing control of the message: A pilot study of the Virginia Tech shooting”, Public Relations Review, vol. 36, pp. 187-189. Wigley, S. & Zhang, W. (2011) “A study of PR practitioners’ use of social media in crisis planning”, Public Relations Journal, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 1-16. Appendix 1 Germanwings crisis management (source: http://niklevantis.com/crisis-communication-management-oasis-desert-germanwings) The company’s first reaction was unsuccessful. You would expect from trained professionals to have done better (every aviation company should expect such crises). Their initial response was to release a statement announcing that despite media reports, the company could not confirm the reported crash. It was an honest statement but someone would expect to be followed by more information very soon. That didn’t happen, for at least 3-4 hours.      The company also lacked of a unified voice. While their website displayed the first statement and their social media posts were explaining that the company had no evidence of a crush at that time, the logos had already been changed to a b/w version expressing deep sorrow. On the one hand Germaniwings was not able to confirm the event, but on the other it was already expressing grief. Apart from the early logo change gaff, the initial statement stayed published for too long. You cannot expect a serious company not to know after two or three hours where their plane is. After all, the flight would have arrived to its destination after three hours. You cannot continue to be unaware of such an important situation for too long, otherwise the whole management will make themselves seem like fools. The first reaction is very important, as it is the company’s only chance to address a message that will reach the concerned publics without the involvement of media. The company’s website could hardly bear the increased traffic the first few hours after the event, but visitors that were looking for information only got a b/w logo, and a “we don’t know anything yet” statement. Appendix 2 2. DKNY (source: http://melissaagnes.com/dkny-the-perfect-example-of-how-to-avoid-a-social-media-crisis/) DKNY: After a photographer realised that DKNY were using his photos in a window display without his permission,  he mobilised his community to share a post asking DKNY to donate $100,000 to a local YMCA in lieu of compensation. DKNY responded quickly by way of an apology. They explained that the Bangkok store involved had accidently used the ‘mock-up’ photos and they promised to donate $25,000 to the YMCA. The photographer accepted it was an honest mistake and thanked them for the donation. DKNY’s quick and strong response successfully defused the situation before a social media crisis erupted. The DKNY social media issue that never escalated Brandon Stanton, of Humans of New York, posted the following to his Facebook Fan page: Within a few short hours, DKNY posted the following post to their Facebook fan page: Crisis well-averted, DKNY, props to you and your team! Now how bout you? Are you confident that your team is able to avert a social media crisis by promptly and appropriately responding to an online issue or problem? Update: Unfortunately, the attacks continued for DKNY, though not for the “stolen picture” incident, but rather for their lack of donating the full 100K to the YMCA. Read my update on this issue and discover what to do when the court of public opinion becomes the bully. Appendix 3 How not to handle a social media crisis: Applebee’s What happened: A pastor who had eaten at an Applebee’s restaurant crossed out the automatic 18% tip charged for parties of more than eight and wrote “I give God 10% why do you get 18” above her signature. A waitress at the restaurant took a photo of this and posted it on Reddit. She was subsequently fired for “violating customer privacy” which would have been understandable if Applebee’s had not posted a similar receipt that was complimenting them just 2 weeks prior. As news of this incident spread like wildfire and infuriated people across all social media platforms, Applebee’s responded with a short post defending their actions on their Facebook page. This quickly drew over 10,000 mostly negative comments, to which Applebee’s started responding by posting the same comment over and over again. They were also be accused of deleting negative comments and blocking users. The downward spiral continued as Applebee’s persisted to defend their actions and argue with users that criticised them. By the following day, after the original post had generated over 19,000 comments, Applebee’s decided to hide the post which only created more anger. What we can learn: Applebee’s defensive and even argumentative approach amplified the whole situation and blocking users, tagging users in repetitive posts and hiding criticism only make things worse. The bottom line? Arguing with Facebook users is always a bad idea.   Appendix 4 A social media crisis handled with honesty and speed: Kitchenaid What happened: An insensitive tweet about President Obama’s grandmother wasposted to the Kitchenaid Twitter account, instead of the personal account of a KitchenAid staff member. The tweet was quickly deleted, but many people had already seen it. The head of the Kitchenaid brand, Cynthia Soledad, took to the Twitter account just 15 minutes later and explained what had happened. She apologised to President Obama and the public and pointed out that the person who posted this will no longer be tweeting for them. What we can learn: First of all, this emphasises the importance of keeping personal and company accounts separate, but if a mistake does happen it should be addressed immediately. Time moves very quickly on social media, so companies need to take decisive action as quickly as Cynthia Soledad did. Her honest explanation and personal apology was well received and the damage to the brand reputation was limited as a result. 5.Domino’s Pizza YouTube Hoax In April of 2009, two Domino’s Pizza employees posted a “grotesque video” to YouTube which shows one male employee “violating standard health codes by intentionally contacting food with several of his orifices,” which caused a major crisis for Domino’s Pizza (Ulmer, Sellnow, & Seeger, 2011, p. 159). This crisis was a unique challenge for Domino’s Pizza because it occurred using new technology that most corporations had not planned for within their crisis response plan (Ulmer, Sellnow, & Seeger, 2011, p. 159). Domino’s Pizza ignorance to social media caused them to make several bad crisis management decisions, but once they began to accept the new technology, they were able to turn the crisis into a positive by making a series of great crisis management choices using the technology that created the crisis in the first place (Ulmer, Sellnow, & Seeger, 2011, p. 162). 5 The following are a few examples of how Domino’s Pizza originally made all the wrong crisis management decisions. First, Domino’s Pizza was ineffective in monitoring their social media, and was unable to detect the hoax video on their own; “rather, a blogger alerted the company to the condemning video” (Ulmer, Sellnow, & Seeger, 2011, p. 161). Second, because Domino’s Pizza did not realize the video was online, “the company did not provide a formal statement from Domino’s USA President Patrick Doyle until 48 hours after realizing the video was on YouTube” (Ulmer, Sellnow, & Seeger, 2011, p. 161). Third, and finally, Domino’s Pizza communicated their crisis message to the incorrect public; they used “standard press releases through traditional media venues” that “did not reach the audience of the hoax video” that were online (Ulmer, Sellnow, & Seeger, 2011,p. 162). Once Domino’s Pizza realized they mishandled the crisis initially, it was able to successfully manage the crisis by embracing social media (Ulmer, Sellnow, & Seeger, 2011, p. 162). First, “Domino’s did what it had never done before – address a crisis situation via a social media site” (Ulmer, Sellnow, & Seeger, 2011, p. 162). Second, a visible leader took responsibility for the crisis; “dressed in a shirt with an open collar,” President Doyle “read a 2-minute crisis response seated in front of a single camera,” in which he apologized for the incident and took responsibility for the crisis (Ulmer, Sellnow, & Seeger, 2011, p. 162). Third, and finally, President Doyle explained in his YouTube crisis response that in order to prevent a similar crisis from occurring in the future they were taking the hoax video very seriously and “vowed to reexamine the company’s hiring practices to ‘make sure that people like this don’t make it into our stores’” (Ulmer, Sellnow, & Seeger, 2011, p. 162). Read More