Former colleague and current Examiner.com columnist, Phil Mann, recently interviewed me for his article, “The importance of workplace communications during a crisis.”
Key callout:
Donnelly argues that the employee audience is a crucial one that, in an ideal world, should be addressed first or at least simultaneously to the initial release of public information. He believes this is even more essential given the immediate access to information today via social media.
Recently, I guest lectured at UNC Charlotte, where the students continue to ask great questions, including: “At what point in your career do you know you’re a crisis management expert? When you know that your counsel is right?”
My stock answer: “I don’t have all the answers, but I’m pretty confident that I’ll make a good case for my counsel and that I’ll ask all the right questions. That’s why I can say I’m an expert.”
Allow me to expand on that:
I don’t think any experienced crisis counselor can suggest they have all the answers to every situation. There are too many judgment calls that need to be made, based only on information that is available at any given time. The best of the best can be fairly confident that they’re providing the best possible counsel. That doesn’t mean the counsel is always right.
Last November, Qantas was thrust into the spotlight for an emergency landing seemingly caused by one of its Rolls-Royce engines. Recently, the airline has faced a few more incidents involving Rolls-Royce engines.
Once again, I reached out to Australian blogger and crisis management expert Tony Jaques for more perspectives on the situation. Following is a summary of our dialogue:
J.D.: What is the media/public sentiment in Australia right now — any scrutiny pointed at the airline or the engine manufacturer? Any notable public anger or fear of flying?
Continue reading More Qantas/Rolls-Royce problems; more Jaques’ perspectives
Ketchum, my employer, recently published the latest edition of its online magazine, Perspectives. Some previous posts I created for this blog have been combined and updated for one of the key articles of the magazine.
Check out the article if you:
Like many, I was a little surprised by the initial under-reaction of Warren Buffett’s response to the David Sokol resignation. In case you missed the full story, Sokol personally bought a boatload of shares of a company that he soon recommended get acquired by Berkshire Hathaway.
Buffett responded with a rather vanilla quote in the initial press release: “Neither Dave nor I feel his Lubrizol purchases were in any way unlawful.”
Quite a flaccid response from the man who once reportedly opined: “Lose money for the firm and I will be understanding; lose a shred of reputation for the firm, and I will be ruthless.”
However, rather than rush to WordPress with a damning blog post, I decided to wait until more facts were made public. On Monday, an article by Andrew Ross Sorkin restored some of my faith in the Oracle of Omaha.
