The part for the whole: when an employee causes a communication crisis in the company

It is not only the actions of a company’s CEO that are important in preserving its reputation and avoiding a potential communication crisis. Employee behaviors, at all levels, can also be a source of reputational cracks. Entities delegate responsibilities to their employees and, on some occasions, this trust allows leeway for situations to occur that can have a direct impact on the company’s image.

When an employee acts wrongly, he can directly damage the company to which he belongs and which, because of his work, in a certain way he represents. A good communication strategy is key to minimize the negative effects of these situations, especially when they lead to a lawsuit.

Three media cases

Cases of these characteristics are more common than they may seem. In recent months, the media have echoed several incidents that perfectly exemplify this problem.

• Residencia Mossèn Homs.
  This incident took place during the pandemic and generated great commotion about it, something that was heightened by the situation of vulnerability experienced by the elderly at that time. Two caregivers recorded a video, which they later posted on social networks, in which they mistreated an elderly woman, insulting her and denying her medication. The video generated all kinds of criticism in this regard, in which the institution itself was repeatedly mentioned, causing serious damage to the reputation of the same.
• Colegio Virgen de Europa.
  A teacher records some students while changing clothes. In the media, the responsibility of the teacher in the case is pointed out, but there is also speculation about the role of the school in the events. In situations like this, the reaction of the educational institution to the alleged facts will be closely scrutinized by the entire public opinion.
• Renfe.A group of children travel Barcelona-León in Renfe to participate in an English course. On the way, their bad behavior led the controller to take drastic measures and take them off the train (with their two monitors) before reaching their destination.

All of these examples have in common that the crisis was not given directly by an impropriety or a failure of the company, but by the specific actions of its employees. Despite this, the entity is not exempt from properly managing its response and taking action in relation to the issue.

These types of situations have two main consequences. Firstly, there is a very high risk of reputational damage, an intangible that is felt by the target public and damages the entity. Secondly, on many occasions these cases lead to complaints by the affected parties, a situation that prolongs the reputational risk over time and in which justice is responsible for determining the legal responsibilities of each party.

How to manage communication in these cases

It must be taken into account that the reaction to the problem and the actions taken in response to it also communicate. Therefore, these are some of the keys in the field of communication that it is recommended to adopt in these situations.

• Trust and transparency will be key in the company’s communication. Time is against the entity once the fact is uncovered, as it must inform before even being asked for explanations, which gives it the opportunity to enhance trust with its audiences.
• Time is against the entity once the fact is uncovered, as it must inform before even being asked for explanations, which gives it the opportunity to enhance trust with its audiences.
• A communication strategy should be developed that always puts those potentially affected at the center. The company should mobilize as far as possible the means of collaboration with those affected and always adopt a position of empathy towards them, as well as review and implement protocols in relation to the alleged perpetrators.
• The company should also review and implement protocols in relation to the alleged perpetrators.
• It is not advisable to ignore the issue. In fact, it is positive to be part of the conversation and to provide truthful first-hand information.
• Finally, unity in the message is vital so that the credibility of the entity is not lost, in addition to the selection and training of the most appropriate spokespeople.

These types of cases can generate great pressure on the entity, not so much sometimes because of its direct responsibility for the facts, but because of the management of the situation and the behavior before the stakeholders. Avoiding that the entity’s name resonates more than the event itself and reducing the damage to its credibility and reputation requires good communication management in the event of a crisis of these characteristics.

If you are interested in learning more about how to manage or control the impact of reputational risks on business continuity and sustainability, we invite you to download “How to Prevent Reputational Risks with Virtual Scenarios and Automation.”