"There can't be a crisis today, my schedule is already full."
Henry Kissinger

It is increasingly recognized that the success of organizations depends on their culture. All organizations, being composed of people, have a distinctive culture, shaped by the way their members act and work. Agreed-upon values ​​and unspoken codes of conduct are integral to this culture.

Culture spreads and takes root through the process of communication, both formal and informal. Not all cultures lead to success. In general, those organizations that base their actions on an ethical and transparent culture are the ones that best achieve their goals.

When we talk about transparency, we're not just referring to codes of ethics, financial information, and accountability. An ethical culture begins from within, by recognizing the unique value of each employee and discovering and developing their talent. A transparent company is an organization that has nothing to hide, nor does it close itself off, but rather seeks the opinion of its multiple stakeholders: employees, shareholders, customers, suppliers, neighboring community and civil society organizations to evaluate its management and improve its actions and processes.

At the same time, It is based on shared values ​​and goals, Not through imposed or empty rhetoric. These companies achieve greater employee engagement, improve productivity, and build a strong reputation, which attracts talent and boosts business.

Conversely, organizations that do not pay attention to values ​​or do not practice the values ​​they state and have opaque management practices, inexorably face crises of different natures that, in general, could be avoided with clear management practices.

No organization, no matter how prestigious or positive its image, is exempt from the threat of a crisis.

In a critical situation, the organization's daily operations cease to function as they had been, and it becomes necessary to establish new rules, new agreements, and bonds of trust. It is up to those involved to transform the crisis into an opportunity for change. To this end, organizations can prepare themselves by anticipating these crisis situations, analyzing them, documenting them, training for them, and learning from the experience. Numerous communication strategies can be implemented to prevent crises, mitigate their effects, and learn from their lessons.

What to do

• Having a code of ethics internalized by all members of the organizationThe code of ethics should clearly state the organization's values. These values ​​should be few, realistic, and tailored to each organization. To be credible, they must be practiced daily by leaders. Only in this way can the internal stakeholders become aware of, internalize, and adopt them. This is why it is so important to "test" them in challenging situations before adopting them, to ensure they will be applied rigorously. If possible, the code of ethics should include mechanisms for simulating dilemmas or conflicts of interest to exemplify the expected conduct of members of the organization, or establish mechanisms for reporting irresponsible behavior or actions that violate corporate conduct standards.

• Review the organization's risk map and stakeholder map annuallysince the criticality varies from year to year, according to the evolution of the organization and socio-political and market factors.

• Develop a crisis manual. It is usually used in the short term, that is, when a crisis erupts. It is recommended that the manual include the organization's core values. A crisis committee should be created. It is recommended that this committee be composed of a representative from each area of ​​the organization: legal, production, sales, administration, human resources, communications or public relations, IT, logistics, among others. External advisors in areas deemed necessary can be added. There must be ongoing dialogue and good rapport among the committee members.

It is advisable to have alternate members available to replace those who are excused from their work responsibilities during a crisis or who may be directly involved in it. Training for all members, both regular and alternate, is essential, especially in communication skills. The ability to speak, to know when to be silent, and to listen are fundamental. Furthermore, instruction in oral and written communication should be provided. All official information from the organization must originate from the crisis committee; therefore, it is necessary to designate spokespeople.

• Design the strategy and implementation of concrete actions during the crisis.

• Working with the systems teamThey should be indispensable allies since they are the ones who have the tools to protect information networks. Consider creating a dark site for sensitive information, accessible only with a password.

• Develop a network of facilitators, This network consists of a group of individuals with recognized communication skills who act as a link between the company and its employees. It serves as an agent of change and dissemination, organizing circulating information according to the established internal communication guidelines. Members of this network are chosen for the recognition and respect they receive from their work teams, as they are positioned as opinion leaders.

For this reason, the network plays a fundamental role in the cascading dissemination of information issued by the crisis committee and helps to minimize the rumors that often abound in crisis situations. As a team with a specific role, the network requires guidance and training in communication and in the particularities of its function, within the organization's internal communication strategy.

• Protecting the organization's reputationEvery crisis signifies, above all, a loss: of ideas, of meaning, of interaction skills, of power, of authority, of consensus, and of trust. Therefore, crises have the potential to negatively impact the perception that various stakeholders have of the organization. The first to be affected is always the internal public, especially when it involves corruption by a member of the company, and the way in which the company communicates the situation to its people will be key to reducing uncertainty and demotivation.

Not every crisis is negative; it has the potential to become an opportunity for change, but only if trust is effectively managed. The valuable intangible asset of the institutional brand must be protected at all times. A good reputation is built on the consistency between the organization's words and actions over time. This consistency, in turn, fosters environments of trust that enhance the institutional image. However, when these elements are lacking and a crisis erupts, the organization's reputation can be destroyed in seconds, and rebuilding it is always difficult, if not virtually impossible.

• Communicating Although it may seem obvious, many organizations, when faced with a crisis, choose the path of misinformation and concealment, either intentionally or due to the confusion the crisis itself generates. This behavior often contributes to magnifying the crisis and damaging the organization's reputation. When a crisis arises, the only option is to confront it, communicating the truth and demonstrating a responsible attitude toward what has happened. Communication becomes an organizational responsibility toward an environment eager for explanation.

First, communication with the directly affected audiences, and particularly with internal stakeholders, is crucial. Beyond the uncertainty and demotivation the crisis may cause them, employees are the company's primary spokespeople to the community. And if they feel insecure or dissatisfied, these feelings can be reflected outside the organization.

• To have a database contact information for those potentially affected by the crisisAs we noted earlier, the map of stakeholders and the institutional references of these stakeholders change, so it is essential to have up-to-date data.

• Dealing with the crisis in the environment in which it arose. Today, every company is overexposed to the impact of electronic media. Crises are often magnified by communicating outside the relevant channels. If the problem originated online, it may be advisable to restrict responses to that medium. This is another issue the Crisis Committee will need to evaluate.

What not to do

• “Shelving” codes of ethics or adopting them merely to comply with an “imposition.” If they are adopted, it is to “live” them and for them to guide the organization's actions. Turning them into a dead letter is hypocritical and opaque, especially towards internal stakeholders, and is always counterproductive.

If the organization's leaders don't lead by example, adhering to the code and acting in accordance with the stated values, it's difficult to expect positive behavior from employees. Organizational culture is built day by day through the actions of leaders, who are closely observed and evaluated by their teams, who then act accordingly.

• Underestimation of the event. The organization must take responsibility for what happened and act accordingly. A crisis must be treated with the importance and dedication it deserves because the organization's reputation is at stake. Underestimation also involves the ability to analyze and understand the impacts the crisis has on different stakeholders. The mistake may lie in failing to consider certain impacts, minimizing them, or underestimating the importance of certain stakeholders and their capacity for influence.

• Overexposure of the event. While it's important to communicate, the topic shouldn't be over-discussed. Finding a middle ground is always advisable. Furthermore, an abundance of information can often lead to saturation or increase the perceived relevance of an event that might have remained confined to a more limited audience or sphere of influence.

• Not communicating. Remaining silent and not confronting the situation. The risk is allowing other actors or stakeholders to make their version of events public, which will always leave the organization at a disadvantage for not having responded in time or taken responsibility for the situation.

• Communicating hastily. Making mistakes in the content, form, and recipient of the message.

• Reporting without prior knowledge. The stages of the crisis communication process must be respected, but always keeping in mind the premise of the veracity of the information communicated at each stage.

• Hiding information or lying with the intention of minimizing the event.

• Showing insensitivity towards those affected.

• To evade responsibilities.

• Showing arrogance, because all of this leads to questioning the integrity of the organization and damages its image.

Having said that, the best way to deal with crises is to prevent them. Corruption crises are the first to be avoided, by incentivizing honest practices that build strong, reliable, and sustainable cultures. Internal communication plays a key role in establishing good practices that multiply through awareness and example. Only in this way, when ethics and transparency move beyond theory and are put into practice in the daily work of every area of ​​the organization, can we truly speak of ethical and transparent organizations. If, despite all precautions, a crisis occurs, the organization's strength will depend on its effective management. The real risk of a crisis is doing nothing..