By Jerry Azevedo, partner with Hermocillo-Azevedo Strategic Communications LLC
The reputation of an organization cannot be unbound from the reputation of its leader. And vice versa.
Steve Jobs was the spirit of Apple. Kenneth Lay was the embodiment of Enron. William Mullholland stood for the personality of the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power.
Though a leader’s influence on an organization’s reputation is deep and complex, their responsibility in a crisis can be simply stated: “The buck stops here.”
Another phrase applies when issues or decisions never reached the senior executive level before exploding into crisis. For the public, it is enough that the controversy happened “on their watch.”
For crises that are poorly managed, the cumulative damage of the initial crisis and a poorly-managed response can be enough for the leader’s job to be at risk.
Savvy leaders understand that they are ultimately accountable for both the successes and failures of their organizations, especially during times of crisis and upheaval. As the public’s trust in “institutions” (especially governmental institutions) continues its decades-long decline, the stakes for leaders in safeguarding their district’s reputation have never been higher.
Some years ago, we advised the leader of a public university system where a technology procurement was facing delays and massive cost overruns. Even though he didn’t oversee the IT department, some lawmakers called for this leader’s resignation. In short, the “buck stops here” mentality frequently overshadows actual lines of responsibility.
We took this assignment because we understood that the leader had built strong relationships within his organization and established a clear mission and shared set of values for how they would achieve this mission. This fact enabled us to mobilize campus leaders and appointed board members to take a firm stand against these resignation demands, which ultimately went nowhere.
In another case, we declined an opportunity to advise a county whose senior leaders were under attack from community groups and the local news media. Our assessment was that there was a deep lack of trust with their elected board and members of the public. These strained and broken relationships made even incremental progress to address the controversy virtually impossible. Editorials in the local newspaper ultimately called for the county executive’s resignation and that of another executive.
For general managers, fire chiefs and other senior leaders of special districts, the relationship between the reputation of leader and their organization is no less intertwined than it was for Steve Jobs and Apple. And that connection is strongest during times of controversy or crisis, which can come at any time from any direction.
Investigative reporters. Ex-employees. Union representatives. Challengers for elected board positions. Unhappy customers. Public watchdogs. Each of these could launch an attack on a special district.
All wield two powerful tools to make their attack: California’s Public Records Act (PRA) and the Internet/social media. Together, these tools enable the collection of a special district’s most sensitive information and the ability to broadcast that information to the community with a biased and critical slant.
In our experience, there are six key factors in a leader’s ability to protect their organization’s reputation and maintain public trust through a crisis, most of which happen long before a crisis hits:
- Establish clear mission and values: When a crisis unfolds, an agency’s mission and values become its touchstones. Values frequently revolve around customer service, transparency and acting with integrity. Invariably, no agency sets out to make an error or break the public’s trust. That is why organizations fall back on their core mission of “why we exist.” It is the leader’s job to ensure that its words and actions are aligned with the mission and values.
- Empower (and demand) the organization to live its mission: Having a clear mission and set of values is not enough. If district staff knows “why we exist,” they must also know the “how we live” our mission in their everyday work. Effective leaders empower, enable and encourage staff to realize the organizational mission in their individual way, whether they handle billing, field operations or media relations. It’s important to note that the vast majority of “reputational crises” fall under the category of “mismanagement,” which often occurs when mission and values become unclear.
- Integrate the district’s operational areas: Crisis communicators confront one constant in organizations in crisis: siloed units that fail to communicate with each other. Integrated organizations that consistently communicate can identify and address issues at the earliest stages, long before they grow into a crisis. Even the best leaders – on their own – cannot see or hear everything or conceive of every potential problem on the horizon. Establishing a weekly or monthly meeting of unit leaders can be an effective tool for scanning the horizon.
- Encourage candid input from within and outside the organization, and act on it: Critics often have had negative prior experiences with the district, either as an insider or an outsider. Leaders should build pathways to true engagement. Not only can this build goodwill during times of crisis, it can also alleviate issues before they hit crisis stage. Consider conducting “town halls” or forming a “kitchen cabinet” to listen to diverse perspectives.
- Build sincere relationships with the media: If your first conversation with a reporter is mid-crisis or responding to a PRA request, half the battle has been lost. Effective leaders make it a priority to develop relationships with reporters, editorial staff, publishers, and radio hosts so they understand your district and the work you do. Show them your “best days” so that when a crisis strikes, journalists can work from a well-informed viewpoint and give leaders the benefit of the doubt.
- Plan: Experienced leaders understand that crises are inevitable, even for well-run districts. Rather than deny their occurrence, leaders should demand that their organization identify the people and protocols that should be followed in the event of a crisis. Although it takes time away from everyone’s day job, crisis planning exercises lead not just to better preparation, but better operations, as everyone understands what it takes to prevent the reputational damage that a crisis can have on the district.
Of course, when a crisis arises, a different set of leadership skills come to the fore: decisive action, the ability to establish and convey a clear narrative and charting a course for what comes next. The ability for a leader to manage a crisis, however, is established in the everyday management of their agency and long before the crisis hits.