How to Communicate in a Crisis

For any land trust, large or small, credibility is the ultimate coin of the realm. After all, “trust” is in our names and inherent in our mission. All nonprofits rely on supporters believing that the staff and board of the organization are trustworthy. Land trusts depend on absolute confidence that we will act in accordance with our mission and will do so “in perpetuity.”

In today’s world in which bad news travels fast and so much depends on public perception, being prepared to handle a communications crisis is more important than ever.

Reputation damage can come in many forms, from a simple misunderstanding or factual inaccuracy that reverberates in the media echo chamber to a self-inflicted wound if some real impropriety was committed. A disaster, like a storm or a fire that wipes out your office, can require fast action on the communications front to ensure that everyone knows your organization will recover. Or we might find our work or organization judged by the questionable actions of others — “guilt by association” through a partnership, for example. And while we often find ourselves applauded by the communities where we work, sometimes we come across someone who is determined to undermine our credibility to advance his or her own agenda.

How to Prepare

The first step to handling a potential communications crisis is to be well prepared. When things go wrong or accusations are flung our way, we can better withstand the heat of an uninvited spotlight by having already established good communications fundamentals.

Establish strong relationships with the media. Take steps to get to know not just the reporter, but the editors and the publisher. If your interactions with them are positive 99% of the time, they will listen more closely to you if and when a crisis hits. Always take their calls. Be prepared, consistent and credible in your dealings, and spurious attacks will be less likely to gain traction.

Build your identity and brand with the mission as a cornerstone. If people already identify your organization with doing positive work, that will put any negative story in perspective.

Keep your communications channels in good working order. A crisis often requires a quick response and the key tool is your capacity to respond—via email, social media, direct mail as well as other media outlets (newspapers, radio, TV). Don’t forget internal channels—sometimes a problem festers into a crisis thanks to an unfortunate failure to communicate well among staff, board and other stakeholders.

Establish your credibility — with members, landowners and the media. Being forthright should be standard operating procedure.

Be a good listener. Train yourself to really listen and understand how other people view the world and view your work. Develop a network of people whom you can trust to give you feedback when you want a check on your own concerns (or lack thereof).

Do the right thing, even when it’s uncomfortable. Sounds simple to say, but some- times an organization might seek to avoid controversy by doing the wrong thing (overlooking an easement violation) or try to “spin” something they want to do that is not quite right, like bowing to pressure from a donor or accepting a sizeable donation that creates a conflict of interest.

Recognizing Risk

Handling communications well involves developing your sense of risk. Anytime you choose to speak publicly, there’s some risk that either your words will be misinterpreted or that your message will be unwelcome by some part of the audience. Even silence will be interpreted in many different ways. How do we assess and manage that risk?

One key is to understand your audience — those who support you, but also those who don’t. Use your listening skills to keep apprised of other points of view. Communications crises often arise because we fail to understand how something we do will be perceived by others.

Most land trusts work hard to seek out and understand their supporters — after all, it is that conservation-minded community that fuels our work. Find ways to engage members of the community who don’t always agree with you, and make a point of understanding why.

Consume the news. Know what’s going on in your community in order to put your organization’s work and issues in perspective. Our tendency is to focus exclusively on conservation issues — but the community as a whole may have other priorities and timing matters.

Then, armed with a strong sense of the community in which you work, make a habit of playing “what if ” and ask yourself what might go wrong with every move you make. Think through how what you do or what you say will be perceived by different audiences. And then make an educated assessment of any potential communications risks. I like to pose the following questions:

What’s the risk?

• What’s the worst that could happen?
• How likely is it that the worst-case scenario would come to pass?

How might it unfold?

Figure out the potential source and trajectory of a communications problem. Might it come from an awkward story in the local media? Would it emerge in the context of a public meeting? An announcement from law enforcement or other public agency? Would it likely grow out of social media chatter? From stakeholders grumbling among them- selves? Is there one particular source who might create a public relations problem?

What are your options?

With risks assessed and a sense of how potential bad news might play out, list the different ways you might mitigate any identifiable risks. But don’t just focus on the potential negatives — there can be a silver lining in a crisis, an opportunity to tell your story a different way to a closely listening audience. Shape the narrative; then aim to make it the dominant public storyline.

What’s the plan?

Make a plan and ensure that everyone is well-prepared to implement it. The elements of the plan will depend on the specific situation, but will likely include a clear and controlled message delivered consistently with appropriate transparency.

When a situation goes awry—whether we created the problem or have it foisted upon us — we are often judged primarily by how well we respond. By being prompt, transparent and consistent, we maintain or even enhance our credibility. Experts in crisis communications, like Daniel Diermeier at Northwestern University’s Kellogg School of Management, speak in terms of an organization’s “response capability.”

“I like response capability because I think you want to activate it even if something hasn’t reached a crisis yet,” Diermeier says. “The biggest mistake executives make in a reputation crisis is trying to get their name taken out of the spotlight rather than becoming known for how well they handle the situation. Think about this more as an opportunity to leave a lasting impression that shapes you or your company’s reputation for the next years or for the next decades.”