FAU and Rutgers – How Not to Handle a Crisis

Organizations faced with crises such as the recent ones at universities can and should use a “holding statement.” This is a tool that allows the organization a brief limited amount of time to assemble the parties involved, gather the facts and determine as much about the evolving crisis as possible all within a few hours prior to making another public statement. 

Strategic communications planning and mind-mapping messages could have in both of these situations provided a more comprehensive and “common sense” approach to the situation had they been conducted in advance. In cases, the universities’ “punishment” evolved and changed as more facts of the case were discovered, or more “heat” was placed on them by the media, alumni, the community and state officials.

In the Florida situation the professor, who is now on administrative leave for his protection now says that he is a devout Christian, that he never told anyone to actually “stomp” on a picture of Jesus and that the student “threatened him” at the end of the class session and the student and others who witnessed this event should have been separately interviewed (crisis investigation) for their sides of the story prior to making or announcing any decisions about “punishment.” If this investigation occurred it is hard to discern from the punishment, which has been reversed and from the statements from the university during the evolving crisis.

This investigatory approach provides the best information available from those interviews to the President and Dean, who ultimately must make the decisions. By the way, we have yet to hear anything one way or another from the FAU President.

The latest information from the professor is that he “took this exercise from an instructor’s manual,” yet this nugget of information comes weeks later in a follow-up article. Such information as his devoutness toward Christianity, his use of this manual, and the alleged threat against him by the student could have been revealed in a crisis investigation.

A good reporter following this story would most assuredly ask: “Why a picture of Jesus and not Buddha or Mohammed or Joseph Smith, for that matter?” So, this question also should have been a part of the interview process.

The lessons learned from such behaviors as this is not that hard to decipher: intercultural courses, which are potentially controversial in this day and time anyway should be thoroughly reviewed in advance by the crisis team as to what exercises will be used The findings from this analysis should be a part of the strategic crisis communications planning and mind-map messaging process in crisis planning at the university, especially if such a potentially controversial exercise will be conducted.

It also would be prudent to advise all the students before engaging such an exercise that they can opt out and suffer no consequences from that decision. Neither of these tactics curtails academic freedom, at least not in my book as a former adjunct professor.

Yes, such an approach requires a crisis management team to be engaged, advised, informed and willing to take the time to explore all such possible crises during advance crisis planning yet the outcome can be significantly beneficial to all parties.

As it is, FAU suffers now from a major crisis miss step and continues to be national news with the infamous Bill O’Reilly and his producers at Fox News touting their success at getting this issued resolved.

Whether they did or not, when a university hits the national news with such an issue it can’t mean anything but continuing problems, bad PR and public perception until it is resolved or some other university comes up with another crisis.

Now, about that holding statement. An empowered, thoughtful and experienced crisis management team would most likely issue immediately a “holding statement” such as this:

“We have just learned of this issue as of (insert time) today. We are thoroughly investigating this situation including interviewing all parties identified to ensure we have a complete understanding of the facts of the situation before making a decision on how we will handle this. The student’s and professor’s accounting of the situation along with others, who may have witnessed the incident, will be taken into account in any decision we make. I am sure that you can understand that we want to understand as much about this situation as possible and that you will be patient with us. We will be issuing a statement this afternoon at (insert time) when we expect to provide you a more detailed and further update. Thank you.”

At the very least, this “common sense” response makes it clear that the university is serious about getting an investigation underway quickly, gathering the necessary facts, and seeing all sides are considered in making any decisions.

This statement should go out immediately to the traditional and social media and posted prominently on the university’s web site.

It might even behoove the University’s President at this late date to step forward and acknowledge that the situation was not handled well and that the university has learned the following lessons (and then articulate them). Frankly, it wouldn’t hurt for the President to apologize to all parties and the public even now. If I were a regent at this University I would be insisting on this.

The public, students, parents, the community and the alumni can be forgiving when a statement is sincere and humble and well intentioned.

Just as Ward Churchill made the University of Colorado infamous for the wrong reasons; FAU now has some claim to such fame.

Rutgers

In the situation at Rutgers, the university officials obviously thought that a few games suspension and a fine would satisfy everyone. I hope all athletic directors and coaches that watched this tragedy unfold and how the poor handling of the crises led to the coach’s firing learn something valuable from this incident.

Perhaps, prior to the Jerry Sandusky fiasco at Penn State and the massive hue and outcry by the public over bullying, a university could get away with this type of “punishment” — not any more.

Mike Rice’s verbal and physical abuse of his players is fully documented on video tape. It can’t be denied or excused. Punishing such behavior by game suspension and a monetary fine simply won’t sit well with any parent and for that matter should not sit well with any of the players. There is no way other to see this behavior than “bullying” by a person in a position of authority.

As this situation evolves, we will provide further details and analysis, suffice it to say at this juncture, Rutgers officials the handling of this crisis is another textbook example of what not to do. The above information on using a holding statement to get a crisis investigation underway applies here.

www.ldarrylarmstrong.com

Another University Fails in Crisis Management 101 – Rutgers Fires Coach – Only After the Heat is Turned Up!!!

T’is the season, it must be for universities to be creating their own crises and failing to use some common sense!

The Rutgers coach is outed as abusive and the University officials decide to “suspend and fine” him. Now, after “pressure” he’s outta there.

First, we have a professor telling a student to “stomp on a picture of Jesus,” interesting that it wasn’t  a picture of Buddha or Mohammed; and now, a physically and verbally abusive coach and in both cases I am sure the schools some how must have thought they would escape outrage?

In both cases, basic crisis management has been ignored.

These are developing stories and we will give you a complete analysis of what each school did right and where they went terribly wrong in a future post.  Read more here:

http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/03/sport/rutgers-video-attack/?hpt=hp_c2

Mind-mapping crisis messages – The Situation Assessment – Article 3 in a series

Mind-mapping crisis messages – The Situation Assessment – Article 3 in a series

This is a series of articles that will help you understand the seven stages of a crisis and how to mind-map crisis messages. This process when done appropriately and successfully will ensure you will succeed in planning your messages before a crisis and better understand how you can use mind-mapping during and after a crisis. Article 3 in a series  …

What is a mind-map and how do they help communicators develop crisis messages?

Mind-mapping messages is simply a systematic way to develop clear, concise, easy to understand and deliver crisis messages in advance of the crisis occurring, as well as during and after the crisis. The goal of such messages is to simplify often technical or complex situations and ensure a speedy delivery of the message to the right audience at the right time. Mind-mapping your messages can be done prior to, during and after the crisis has occurred.

¡  There are seven phases to understand underlying information needs necessary to mind-map messages

¡  1. Advance warning or advance intel

¡  2. Situation assessment

¡  3. Communicating the response

¡  4. Operational management

¡  5. Resolution and path forward prevention

¡  6. Business continuity – recovery

¡  7. Lessons learned  – recalibrations

This article deals with the second phase – the situation assessment. When the crisis hits, and invariably they do at the least opportune time and typically not during work hours, the crisis and emergency management team assembles to assess the risk and do a situation assessment. It is during this phase that the emergency operations plan is activated.

Communications during this phase is typically between team members and observers in the field providing first hand information whenever possible from the scene. Social media such as Twitter and You Tube along with SMS texting can enhance the gathering of the field reports and intel when properly used.

Smart phones now enable us to not just communicate by voice; we can now send video and photos instantly back to the command and control center for quick assessment. I-pads and similar tablets allow the field observer to write quick reports while documenting in photos and video the situation.

During this phase, it is important to monitor social media: Facebook, twitter and YouTube channels to see what is coming in from various other sources and when needed correct mis-information. Although command and control under the NIMS way of business finds it foreign to engage such technology as a rule the social media platforms are valuable resources for intel, other site observers and can be used to shape the messages that are going out instanteously.

It is important at this stage to do the best situation assessment possible to ensure that when briefing executives, administrators and management that you have as complete an understanding of the situation as possible.

Although many organizations tend to take a standardized and even a blanket approach to communications at this stage, we suggest that careful thought be given to the chains of command, the audiences and the priority in which information is shared. The last thing that you want your university president to do is hear about a crisis situation on the main stream or social media before you have informed her.

Informing and giving notice to your local law enforcement and first responders, campus security and other officials in the call down list calls for as much clarity and completeness as possible when assessing the situation.

All your audiences, including the traditional media, will understand if you have to make corrections in the opening hours of the crisis, however when informing the various required audiences state clearly what can be verified and what can’t. Use social media as another intel source and gather as much information as possible as quickly as you can.

Next: Communicating the response

www.ldarrylarmstrong.com

When a University Creates a Crisis – “Stomping on a Picture of Jesus”

When a University Creates a Crisis – “Stomping on a Picture of Jesus”

Crisis planning and management – when you create the crisis you have to resolve it quickly. We will continue to follow this story and provide an analysis.. Developing story …UNIVERSITY APOLOGIZES, REVERSES COURSE ON PUNISHING STUDENT WHO REFUSED TO STOMP ON ‘JESUS’ SIGN

The odd story about Ryan Rotela, a junior at Florida Atlantic University (FAU), and his claim that he was suspended from a class for refusing to stomp on a sign that had Jesus’ name on it, quickly spread across the nation. While the school issued an official apology over the bizarre debacle, questions still surround the incident, as the professor at the center of it, Dr. Deandre Poole, has been silent on the matter.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/03/26/university-apologizes-reverses-course-on-punishing-student-who-refused-to-stomp-on-jesus-sign/

Mind-mapping crisis messages – The Situation Assessment – Article 3 in a series

Mind-mapping crisis messages – The Situation Assessment – Article 3

This is a series of articles that will help you understand the seven stages of a crisis and how to mind-map crisis messages. This process when done appropriately and successfully will ensure you will succeed in planning your messages before a crisis and better understand how you can use mind-mapping during and after a crisis. Article 3 in a series  …

What is a mind-map and how do they help communicators develop crisis messages?

Mind-mapping messages is simply a systematic way to develop clear, concise, easy to understand and deliver crisis messages in advance of the crisis occurring, as well as during and after the crisis. The goal of such messages is to simplify often technical or complex situations and ensure a speedy delivery of the message to the right audience at the right time. Mind-mapping your messages can be done prior to, during and after the crisis has occurred.

¡  There are seven phases to understand underlying information needs necessary to mind-map messages

¡  1. Advance warning or advance intel

¡  2. Situation assessment

¡  3. Communicating the response

¡  4. Operational management

¡  5. Resolution and path forward prevention

¡  6. Business continuity – recovery

¡  7. Lessons learned  – recalibrations

This article deals with the second phase – the situation assessment. When the crisis hits, and invariably they do at the least opportune time and typically not during work hours, the crisis and emergency management team assembles to assess the risk and do a situation assessment. It is during this phase that the emergency operations plan is activated.

Communications during this phase is typically between team members and observers in the field providing first hand information whenever possible from the scene. Social media such as Twitter and You Tube along with SMS texting can enhance the gathering of the field reports and intel when properly used.

Smart phones now enable us to not just communicate by voice; we can now send video and photos instantly back to the command and control center for quick assessment. I-pads and similar tablets allow the field observer to write quick reports while documenting in photos and video the situation.

During this phase, it is important to monitor social media: Facebook, twitter and YouTube channels to see what is coming in from various other sources and when needed correct mis-information. Although command and control under the NIMS way of business finds it foreign to engage such technology as a rule the social media platforms are valuable resources for intel, other site observers and can be used to shape the messages that are going out instanteously.

It is important at this stage to do the best situation assessment possible to ensure that when briefing executives, administrators and management that you have as complete an understanding of the situation as possible.

Although many organizations tend to take a standardized and even a blanket approach to communications at this stage, we suggest that careful thought be given to the chains of command, the audiences and the priority in which information is shared. The last thing that you want your university president to do is hear about a crisis situation on the main stream or social media before you have informed her.

Informing and giving notice to your local law enforcement and first responders, campus security and other officials in the call down list calls for as much clarity and completeness as possible when assessing the situation.

All your audiences, including the traditional media, will understand if you have to make corrections in the opening hours of the crisis, however when informing the various required audiences state clearly what can be verified and what can’t. Use social media as another intel source and gather as much information as possible as quickly as you can.

Next: Communicating the response

www.ldarrylarmstrong.com

How to Create a Crisis: Why do you suppose the DHS needs 1 Billion Bullets?

Why do you suppose the DHS needs 1 Billion Bullets?

For an administration that was going to be the most “open and transparent” of any to come to Washington, the current White House and the Department of Homeland Security Secretary have chosen to create yet another crisis.

Never missing the opportunity to “pass up” a good crisis, as former Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel was known to say, the DHS Secretary refuses to answer to Congress why they are purchasing bullets, guns and armored vehicles.

While most of us try to avoid crisis or try to learn how to handle them better this administration seemingly strives to create as many as possible.

Universities and colleges should be giving thought to this issue and the ramifications on their campus from those activists who see this as an issue.

You can read more about the DHS refusal at:

http://www.infowars.com/big-sis-refuses-to-answer-congress-on-ammo-purchases/

Mind-mapping crisis messages – Article 2 – Advance warnings and intel

Article 2 in a series

What is a mind-map and how do they help communicators develop crisis messages?

Mind-mapping messages is simply a systematic way to develop clear, concise, easy to understand and deliver crisis messages in advance of the crisis occurring, as well as during and after the crisis. The goal of such messages is to simplify often technical or complex situations and ensure a speedy delivery of the message to the right audience at the right time. Mind-mapping your messages can be done prior to, during and after the crisis has occurred.

This is a series of articles that will help you understand the seven stages of a crisis and how to mind-map crisis messages. This process when done appropriately and successfully will ensure you will succeed in planning your messages before a crisis and better understand how you can use mind-mapping during and after a crisis.

I have no sympathy for those communicators for whatever reason, who don’t bother to understand the value of advance intelligence and warnings in planning for a possible crisis.

Many crisis communicators and their management tend to ignore such intelligence or they claim to not have the time and resources to gather and analyze the intelligence.

There are seven stages in our crisis model, as we have previously mentioned. They are:

1. The advance warning and/or advance intel stage

2. Situation assessment  stage

3. Communicating the response stage

4. Operational management stage

5. Resolution and path forward prevention stage

6. Business continuity – recovery stage

7. Lessons learned  – recalibrations stage

Let’s discuss the first stage – advance warning or advance intel.

Certain events especially weather related incidents such as hurricanes, flooding, snow events, high winds, torrential  rains and tornadoes provide advance warning.  These types of events have very distinct phases where warnings can be issued to heighten interest, awareness and preparation.

Often times it is suggested that such events as work place violence can’t be predicted yet we would suggest that in many cases, when the facts are reviewed post incident, we have found there were clues had they been carefully observed and reported that could have at least placed the organization on alert.

During this advance stage many organizations choose not to communicate to their audiences. It is our professional opinion that this is a missed opportunity for crisis communicators to build integrity of their message and develop meaningful relationships, especially if you are using social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter or even your own website.

We recommend that you consider your current standard operating procedures and if you are not communicating during the advance warning stages that you consider doing so and that if you are not using social media you give serious consideration to integrating it into your communications program.

There certainly are those situations where you might have a complete surprise for example, a water main break, or an electrical failure, or indeed the work place violence incident that is purely random.

Even in totally unexpected situations though it is important in the planning process to have given careful thought and consideration in advance as to how and what you will communicate and who will be doing that communications. This is where mind-mapping is of great value.

When faced with issues such as water main breaks and electrical outages, which by the way often can be predicted if the situation is due to lack of regular maintenance,  the crisis communicator, who has taken the time to build integrity, credibility and trust with his/her followers or friends on social media can have a significant influence on getting the message spread quickly to inform and educate the followers or friends as to what they should do and what they can expect in the resolution of the issue.

Finally, let’s be realistic.

There are certain dates that by understanding the value of advance intelligence planning and pre-planning you can be prepared to act quickly should the need arise.

For example, the dates associated with any tragic event is a likely candidate for threats and/or terrorist actions.

The dates most likely to come to mind are the terrorist attack on 9/11 yet the anniversaries of the bombing of the Federal building in Oklahoma 4/19, or 2/28 and the Waco tragedy and others could well be anniversary dates that need to be thought about in your crisis planning process.

Another role for advance intelligence gathering is when a controversial speaker or group is coming to your campus; it is prudent to engage all your colleagues that may have experience with the speaker or group to determine and discuss any issues they faced so you know what to be prepared for.

If the CDC issues a pandemic warning, the time to thoughtful review and assess your pandemic plan and your crisis message mind-map is now.

If earthquakes are occurring even more frequently in southern California than the norm and the state advises its citizens to prepare for outages, the time to review your evacuation plans and crisis messages is now!

Thoughtful, pragmatic thinking in advance combined with a systematic planning process (mind-mapping) can help you prepare a mind-map for crisis messages in advance of the need.

www.ldarrylarmstrong.com

Next: The situation assessment stage – preparing a risk and situation assessment