From scenario planning to real-time crisis management, I’ve spent nearly 30 years helping clients prepare for and navigate challenges. But lately, in this fast-paced, interconnected and socially minded world, the game has changed. The stakes are higher than ever and the issues—and the appropriateness of the responses—are more complex and far-reaching. Over the past year, we have been helping our client partners explore and redefine their issues management protocols and we have learned a lot along the way.
First Generation Issues Management: Internal Intent
For decades, organizations communicated what, when and how they wanted to and, barring any major issues or crises, it often worked out in their favor. They planned for issues and scenarios they could anticipate (e.g., product recalls and malfunctions, employee lawsuits, natural disasters) and often avoided communicating about anything outside of those parameters. It was a reactive and risk-focused approach.
Second Generation Issues Management: Select Scenarios
As communications channels evolved and Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) became the driving force behind organizational transparency and accountability—everyone started to expect more from companies. And they wanted to hear from them too. Leading companies started taking a holistic and integrated approach to communicating about societal issues, engaging with stakeholders and being transparent and accountable for their actions. They often narrowed the focus of their issues to go deep on one or two causes. This approach allowed companies to raise awareness of the things that matter most to their stakeholders, create goodwill and thought leadership in areas adjacent to their core customers and maintain/elevate their relationships with stakeholders.
Issues Management Today: Proactive Perspective/POVs
The priority has shifted from preparing for issues and proactively engaging around a select issue or two important to your company. Organizations are expected to have a point of view on any issue that anyone inside or affiliated with an organization has a personal or vested interest in. From social and political controversies to environmental and ethical issues, the lines between business and societal issues have become increasingly blurred. And it has created a divide within organizations on how and when to comment on issues that go beyond their core operations.
Organization leadership is being pressured from all sides—and even one vocal contributor can command action and attention. Very rarely is it the communications team driving the need to comment on an issue. The driver is a leader within the organization who has an interest in a particular issue and/or is feeling the pressure from someone else, a member or a shareholder. The pressure is enormous to respect the input of an individual or a select group of individuals while balancing the risk of alienating other employees and stakeholders. And the expectation to engage, whether real or perceived, is always lingering.
As external issues continue to mount, and companies receive pressure from their stakeholders (employees, members, constituents, shareholders, media, etc.) to weigh in on the latest controversy or global crisis (recent examples include the war between Israel and Hamas, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, reversal of Roe vs, Wade, and the humanitarian crisis in Haiti, to name a few), the best way to protect the organization is to establish a plan and have it in place before an issue arises so they can quickly assess the situation and set things in motion. An established process also gives leaders and communicators a protocol to reference when being pressured to respond immediately to external crises. Even today, the landscape of expectations for companies is changing. The pendulum is swinging from companies providing statements on every major issue to only the ones where they’re providing relief, support or service.
When advising our clients on how best to prepare for external pressures that go beyond typical scenario planning, we start with the following:
- Define the universe (political, U.S. or global social unrest, environmental and geopolitical issues)
- Establish a customized issue response process and workflow
- Socialize the process internally to get buy-in from decision makers, organizational leadership and those who will be part of the activation team
- Train those who will be part of the process, so they know how it works, understand their roles and responsibilities and are ready to engage fully when the time comes to activate the plan
- After every activation, convene the participants to review how it went and adjust the plan as appropriate
- Annually—review the process to make sure it is up to date and still works for the organization, adjust as necessary
- Train/refresh activation team regularly
What should I do?
Without a response process in place to guide your leaders and communicators, your organization is at risk for issuing a hasty or impulsive statement that has the potential to impact your reputation. If you don’t already have a process in place, please consider doing it soon.
If you have any questions or are interested in developing a customized issue response process and workflow for your organization, feel free to reach out to me directly at jen.young@curastrategies.com and be on the lookout for the next in this series, which will focus on the critical role of planning and establishing an issues response workflow.
Jen Young
Senior Vice President
CURA Strategies
