Crisis I

HANDLING THE VARIOUS STAKEHOLDERS:- (government and investors)
The government is also the regulator for several organisations. Thus, organisations have to rely on the government/regulators for product approval, distribution, et al. Goes without saying, the government needs to be adequately informed about the company to take the right decisions it is supposed to. If questions are raised about the quality/safely of the company’s products/services, officials directly in charge of charge of knowing about these must be getting questioned from within the government organisations or from the people. To inform them in prior of any potential lapse in safety/quality of products/services will keep the organisation from attracting their ire for making them seem incompetent in the eyes of the media and the public

• Once government/regulator comments, the topic is sure to be covered by every kind of media. The issue can snowball into a major political story and have undesirable impact on the business and the reputation of the company, so the company must ensure the government/regulator is not caught off guard
• Middle of a crisis is the worst possible time to try to form new relations within the government. It is extremely important that an organisation invests in a ‘strategic government affairs plan’ well in advance – way before a crisis hits. If the government perceives the company to be trustworthy and credible from the get go the latter would have better chances of resolving a crisis, because cooperation from the government is essential in such situations
• Good relationships with government can also help a company stop a crisis from unfolding by virtue of early detection of issues. Keeping the government informed about any safety issue that may arise will help them prepare ahead for risks associated with it. If something goes wrong and media/public start questioning the government, a lot of time that would’ve gone into explaining can saved as the government already knows and us prepared. It also makes the government look more efficient by not appearing to be clueless about a crisis situation. However, the company must contact the government as soon as the crisis hits – before the government feels the need to contact the organisation – and tell them how the company is planning on handling it. That would build more trust between the two parties and also let the government know the company is determined to keep them in the loop and is not deterred in the face of a crisis

Investors want to keep updated about the financial health of the organisation they’re putting their money into. Whenever a crisis hits, they’d want to know how it’s affecting the profits of the organisation and what the organisation is doing to protect the its goodwill
• They need to be brief about the crisis. The crisis management team can make them a part of tabletops so that investors are prepared to face the media and responses from all of them are uniform and coherent
• The organisation must be honest with investors about revised numbers due to the impact of the crisis on business. The organisation must ensure the revised version is totally transparent and not subject to change, because more than one revision tend to elicit doubts in the mind of investors
• The organisation must be modest with their numbers in a crisis situation. Often we have a bias towards how well our organisation is doing and how quickly it will recover from a crisis. We need to take such as into account while predicting numbers that investors must be aware of
• To increase transparency and answer any questions investors might have after seeing the revised numbers, the company must set a meeting of the investors with the sales and analyst teams. The teams must also take into consideration any advice from the investors that are likely to improve the numbers