Singapore. (27 July 2010. 2350 hrs). Yoshinoya has responded to the incident by stating that it was an "isolated incident" and that the mistake was made by a "part-time trainee". In their press statement Yoshinoya reiterated that their company follows "stringent standard operating procedures" and that they endeavour to "provide products and services that meet the highest expectations of their customers".
Initial response to Yoshinoya's statement has been negative with many STOMPers accusing the company of using the part-time trainee as a scape-goat. A closer look at Yoshinoya's Crisis Communication plan reveals a major flaw - failure to understand the difference between Traditional Media vs New Media.
In the former, a statement of this nature would have been acceptable as reporters would have used the facts to write their story. However, as Yoshinoya had chosen to respond via the New Media (and rightly so), a modified form of statement would have been necessary. In this case, the response from Yoshinoya should have been directly addressed to the STOMPer that raised the issue, as this would have allowed Yoshinoya to more adequately address his "outrage".
Once again, as I mentioned in my research paper, PR Professional must understand the New Media before they can effectively serve their clients.
Singapore. (24 July 2010. 2000 hrs). Today Yahoo News reported that a Hindu Temple has come under scrutinity by the authorities for the alledged misuse of funds. Essentially, the Chief Executive of the temple has been accused of making questionable payments to contractors and vendors without consulting the management committee. A quick analysis of this incident reveals that it is unlikely to evolve into a crisis as it appears to be the act of an individual.
To illustrate some key lessons, let us assume that we have been hired by the accused to help develop a Crisis Communication plan.
Firstly, in situations where criminal proceedings are likely, it is imperative that the Crisis Communicator work closely with the client's lawyer in crafting and releasing any statements. This is essential as any statement made by the client can, and may be used, against the client during the trial.
Secondly, unlike the usual Crisis Communication plan (which is designed to protect the image, reputation and brand of the organisation), this Crisis Communication plan is designed to achieve certain limited objectives set by the client. Once these objectives have been determined, it is then the role of the Crisis Communicator to (a) identify the Stakeholders to be reached to enable the attainment of these objectives; (b) the channels via which to reach them; and (c) the appropriate theme and messages.
In cases like this, my advise to the client would be to look beyond the crisis and position himself for recovery. To do this, my advise would be to position himself as "a person of character" who is "willing to accept his mistakes" (assuming he is at fault) and take his punishment.
Singapore. (23 July 2010. 1950 hrs). It is now Day 6 and media and stakeholder interest in the incident has faded for now. It is therefore timely for us to pause and reflect on the key lessons that we can learn from this incident:
a. The Importance of Open, Timely, Broadly Communicated and Internet Presence. In my opinion, this incident could have been contained and isolated if the MHA PR Dept had adopted a Crisis Communication plan that had the above 4 characteristics. Their failure to be open and provide timely updates, led to speculations of police cover-up, while their failure (or decision) not to communicate the facts using their MHA website (internet presence) further stoked stakeholder anger over the incident.
b. Need to do a Stakeholder Analysis. The inability of the press statement and comment by the Minister for the Environment to stem the anger, showed that the MHA PR Dept had misunderstood stakeholders' concerns. A thorough Stakeholder Analysis would have revealed that the main issue was one of "abuse of authority". A simple statement of fact that there are "measures in place to prevent an abuse of authority" would have, in my opinion, stopped the crisis from building up. While I do not have empirical evidence, I feel that the incident would have affected the morale of the police force. A proper internal communication plan to internal stakeholders would therefore have been essential to ensure that the police continue to carry out their duties professionally.
c. Framing the Incident. The manner in which the incident spiralled out of control shows the importance of using the initial press statement to frame the crisis. Without a proper "frame" the incident went in many tangents including political ones.
Singapore. (22 July 2010 2359 hrs). Well, it is Day 5 and the MHA has continued to remain silent on the incident. If we do not hear from them by now, it is safe to assume that they do not intend to bow to public pressure.
As I reflect on the Crisis Management plan executed by the MHA, I cannot help but wonder if any conscious efforts were made to "communicate" with their internal stakeholders. In the midst of this incidence, the police officers still have to perform their duties. Being humans, I am certain that they will be affected by the public's comments one way or another.
Hence, as part of stakeholder analysis, an effective Crisis Communication plan must consider this stakeholder group, identify the issue facing them and communicate the right message.
Singapore. (20 July 2010 0900 hrs). The crisis continues with a Member of Parliament (MP) questioning the arrest of the photographer at yesterday's parliamentary sitting. Responding to the MP's query, the Minister for Environment and Water Resources replied that he photographer was arrested for safety issues and not privacy issues. It is interesting to note that the response came from the Minister for Environment and Water Resources and not the Minister for Home Affairs.
Once again my take is that the MHA's PR Dept has failed to do a proper stakeholder analysis. As a result, the Minister's (albeit the wrong spokesperson) response once again failed to address the correct stakeholder concern about the possible "abuse of authority."
In addition, as I advocated in my research on the perfect information environment, other cases of alledge police misconduct is coming to light. A comment by "Shawn Tan" was posted on 20 July 2010 at 0857 hrs citing his own personal experience.
Singapore. (19 July 2010. 1100 hrs). The print edition of The Straits Times reported the incident today. While the report was factual and carried both sides of the story, the report still left doubts in the mind of readers on the possible abuse of authority. Yahoo News followed up on their earlier report stating over 1,500 comments were received with the majority expressing outrage over the arrest.
One of my key takeaways is that the police statement addressed only the arrest and that the concerns of other stakeholders were not addressed. As part of the Crisis Communication plan, the PR Dept of MHA should have done a stakeholder analysis to identify key stakeholders and their issues and concerns. The Press Statement should then be tailored to address these concerns.
My assessment is that netizens are concerned about the possible abuse of authority and the MHA's Press Statement should have taken the opportunity to reassure stakeholders that the police had in place the necessary measures to prevent abuse.
RSS Feed