By Edward Segal
In today’s hyperconnected world, crises spread rapidly through social media, amplifying misinformation and shaping public perception. This article outlines how leaders can regain control by responding immediately, activating tailored crisis plans, and rigorously testing teams. Effective digital-age crisis management hinges on speed, strategic communication, and preparedness across borders and platforms.
From cyberattacks and disinformation campaigns to tariffs and supply chain disruptions, responding to crisis situations in the digital age is both harder and easier than ever before, thanks to the double-edged sword of social media.
The bad news is that anyone with a smartphone or computer can instantly try to shape, distort or define the public narrative about an unfolding situation—or try to create a fake crisis. These messages and videos can, in turn, create a crisis for companies and organizations. Rumors, false claims and emotionally charged narratives can quickly hijack public conversations and perceptions. Posts that go viral can create or escalate a crisis, put pressure on leaders to react, and force leaders to fight two crises at the same time: the real event, and the public’s perception of it.
The good news is that social media platforms can also be powerful tools that enable business executives to communicate strategically, efficiently, and effectively with the public and stakeholders. Posting messages and videos on these platforms can set the record straight about disinformation and misinformation and reclaim the narrative about a crisis. For European multinational organizations, this ability to communicate directly with diverse multilingual and cross-border audiences is especially important.
The First Step: Control the Narrative
In the digital age, speed is the first form of leadership. Company officials need to treat social media and other digital tools as the first step in managing and communicating about a breaking or developing crisis. This is critical in interconnected European and global markets where news cycles and the expectations of stakeholders can move across borders in an instant.
Which is why executives need to respond at once at the first sign of a crisis and do their best to answer these basic questions:
- What happened?
- Who does it affect?
- When did it happen?
- Where did it take place?
- Why did it happen?
- How did it happen?
- How are we going to respond?
- When and how will we provide updates?
Business leaders should not wait to post their messages or videos until they are able to answer any or all of the questions. Simply telling people that you know that you are aware of the crisis and will provide updates about the situation can be enough to assert authority and control of the narrative. But the longer executives wait, the more likely it is that others will fill the vacuum and take control of the narrative.
Step Two: Activate Crisis Plans and Teams
While the first messages and videos are being prepared and posted, companies should activate their crisis management plans and teams. It is just as important for the plans and teams to be ready on a moment’s notice as it is for organizations to immediately take steps to control the narrative about the crisis. If executives do not have the plans and teams in place, they should remedy the situation now. Otherwise, officials will be spending valuable time trying to get organized to respond and address the crisis.
Frequently testing crisis management plans and teams helps guarantee they will work when needed. For multinational corporations that operate in multiple regulatory settings, their crisis plans should account for differences in jurisdictions, laws, and expectations.
Corporate executives can be lulled into a false sense of security about their readiness to respond to a crisis by assuming their companies need only one crisis management plan. That is a big mistake because, like a suit, one plan will not be a good fit for every crisis. Indeed, an organization’s response to a cyberattack will be different from how it reacts to litigation, strikes, or the death of its CEO. When a disaster, scandal, or other emergency that is not accounted for in a basic plan occurs, organizations will waste valuable time scrambling to figure out how to manage it.
Even companies in the same industry or profession could face different sets of challenges than their competitors. Customized crisis plans should include tailored messaging for those impacted by the different emergency situations. Depending on the nature of the company, different plans should be prepared to account for the potential of various crisis scenarios for different variables.
- The nature and extent of the crisis. Is it confined to one office or multiple offices and manufacturing facilities?
- Who is affected by the crisis, whether they are employees, customers, stakeholders, or the public.
- The age and size of companies. Older and larger businesses often have more layers of management—and red tape—to navigate when responding to a crisis. Younger and smaller companies, on the other hand, may have fewer experienced executives, but could be nimbler when reacting to a crisis.
- The degree to which companies test their crisis management plans—if they have them—to ensure they will work when needed. The less they practice their plans, the less likely it is that their plans will work when a crisis strikes.
- The resources that organizations need in order to respond to a crisis—and what outside resources they need, and how quickly they can access them. The fewer in-house resources companies have, the more likely it is that they will have to obtain those resources outside of the company—which could take more time.
- Who has the authority to activate the plans, and how quickly team members can be reached. The fewer the levels of red tape—and the sooner that crisis team members can be contacted—the better.
Step Three: Test Plans and Teams
The degree to which companies test their crisis management plans—if they have them—can help ensure the plans work when needed. There are many ways to test the plans, including thought and tabletop exercises, computer simulations, and field exercises.
When and how crisis management teams are appointed can determine how well they work together. Waiting until a crisis strikes to appoint a team means they will not have been tested to ensure that they would work well under pressure or that personality and other conflicts could prevent them from working well as a team.
Crisis management in the digital age is more than responding to events. It’s about maintaining trust across borders, culture, and information environments. Because a crisis can be created at lightning speed, executives and their staffs cannot afford to be complacent or take anything for granted about their readiness to respond to the next crisis. The same technology that can create and accelerate a crisis can also establish and reinforce stability—if business leaders are ready to use it strategically and without delay.
Edward Segal
