Phrases and Lack of Transparency in Crisis

Gap between PR-theory and Practice: Still Space for Improvement

 

 

 

 

Depending on the communication strategy managers, politicians or celebrities alike phrase their words highly different: Those who deny responsibility, instrumentalize figures to present their innocence, those who want to put the crisis into perspective, work with terms of unsecurement (“possibly”, “I believe”, etc.) and those who apologize, don´t shy away to express also verbally emotions like sadness or shame.

And: Phrases that hide the own involvement (ie “The accident took place due to ….”, “There were losses”) are still pretty popular – not really a signal for transparency.

These are the results of a recently published study from Belgium after having analyszed 179 audio-visual, on average 4-minutes-long crisis statements. The researchers point also to a gap between theory and practise when looking at the well known PR academies. There each student learns a lot about diverse communication strategies in the case of crisis. But what that exactly means in terms of wording for the speakers involved is not taught and not described anywhere.

Fannes/Claeys/Van Gorp, “Phrasing Crisis Communication: How are Distinct Crisis Response Strategies Put Into Words?”, in: Business and Professional Communication Quarterly, I-26, 2024.

 

From the practice:

Everybody knows – at least in theory: the accurate wording is essential in the case of crisis. That´s why I am particularly engaged to support my clients in advance by so-called crisis communication workshops. And the need is tremendously high: there are a lot of crisis plans in a lot of drawers, though, but much rarer the management is prepared for challenging communication moments and has trained any potential crisis interview with an external trainer.

For me a role model how to communicate properly in cases of crisis is Carsten Spohr, CEO of Lufthansa Group, in his 2nd press conference after he has been informed that the crash of a German Wings civil flight in 2016 was due to the copilot´s wish to commit suicide. Almost perfect and breath-taking how Spohr takes responsibility for the worst case ever “Employee kills 150 customers” by utilizing it to present Lufthansa as the best airline company with the best staff all over the world.