The Role of Emotions in Crisis Management
I was reading Operational Risk’s insightful recent blog post on the role of fear in understanding and managing risk and that got me thinking about the role that emotions–fear, ego, a desire to be right, etc.–play in a time of crisis.
Larry Craig, Martha Stewart, Michael Vick and the Utah mining disaster have something in common–in all four situations, an initial crisis strategy was sorely lacking, and emotion overrode logic. These are examples of the dangers of making decisions based on emotions rather than a trusted and tested group of advisors. And while these examples focus on the individual, they are exceptionally helpful windows of how — more often than we would like to admit — crisis decisions are made in some corporations.
When you’re in the middle of a crisis, you’re expected to perform at your best–and to make the best decisions–when in reality, you are more than likely going to be at your worst. Accelerated decision-making in a fishbowl, with key markets (and sometimes the whole world) watching; too little information; too many advisors, deadlines, and options; lack of sleep; and the pressure of making life and death, bet-the-company decisions in rapid succession. It is a recipe for the highest level of stress and testiness.
That’s why it’s so important to have trusting relationships with your crisis team–investor relations, general counsel, outside litigation team, outside crisis communications team and your social media or IT specialist–prior to a crisis actually occurring. Because they’ll be there at the ready to help you make the best all around decisions. It isn’t about proving that you’re right and your adversaries are wrong. It isn’t even about proving that the public’s perception is not the reality of the situation. It’s about winning your case in the court of public opinion while preserving your legal options.
Emotion and ego are often given short shrift by senior executives–after all, going with their ego and following their gut feelings are what helped them get to the top of the ladder. Why should they abandon emotion now, in the midst of a crisis?
Because winning in the court of public opinion offers is an uphill battle. Sometimes a ‘win’ means paying smaller costs to avoid larger ones. Sometimes the cost of business and the cost of avoiding a prolonged crises is to pay the government a fine even though you’re innocent; or to take a bad news story with a 24-hour lifespan so the journalist can go after someone else; or simply to include other decision makers amongst your trusted advisors, asking the question, “What do you think?” and truly listening to their responses.
Good decisions don’t necessarily mean you won’t follow your gut feeling, or that you’ll have to surrender your company. Good decisions are, however, made when one understands all of the potential ramifications of an action, which no one person can do on their own in most crises.
But CEOs aren’t the only ones who must be aware of their emotions. Ego also applies to the lawyers (both in house and outside counsel) who insist on driving the decision making, when often there is more at stake in the marketplace than in the courtroom. Or senior level executives more concerned with making sure it is not perceived as their fault rather than in protecting the company or brand. Or the communications professional who wants the big win over what is best for the client.
Ego and emotion are good things–they’re part of the engine of success. But crisis is a different animal with different rules. It’s the ultimate team sport, and no one should play alone.
