A Crisis Like No Other Requires Novel Solutions

As we prepare to bid farewell to this most extraordinary and terrible of years, there is an inevitable desire to try to make sense of it all. Is it — as some suggest — a warning shot of the catastrophes to come from climate change or some as yet unimagined threat? Will it bring about a reassessment of public policy in countries around the world? Certainly, left-leaning politicians think that their time has come and that the public will embrace tax-and-spend policies. Or is it just one of those things — like earlier plagues and pandemics that have in fact been more commonplace than we realised until we were in the midst of one — that has no broader significance? 

Among those who would appear to be in this last camp is Financial Times columnist Janan Ganesh, who this week wrote: “The world has amazingly little insight to show for its year of anguish.” Evidence for the argument that lessons of how to deal with the virus are hard to come by is abundant even within the U.K., where the devolved governments of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland at times appeared to go out of their way to distance themselves from Boris Johnson’s decisions with slightly different policies — and have ended up in pretty much the same place, constantly striving to get ahead of events. In the words of another columnist (Daniel Finkelstein of The Times) politicians of all stamps, and many commentators, to boot, have been suffering from “an illusion of control.” He wrote: “But we aren’t setting the agenda, the virus is setting the agenda. We aren’t in charge, the virus is in charge.”

On a day that saw the U.K.’s government impose still more restrictions on still more people — while simultaneously hailing the approval of the vaccine developed by Oxford University and manufactured by AstraZeneca — it is difficult to argue with this viewpoint. This is certainly not business as usual. Nor is it politics as normal (and you could certainly argue that more than one government missed a step by insisting on confronting the pandemic alone rather than recruiting political opponents in a national — or even international — battle against a common enemy.) So it follows that the way that businesses and political leaders deal with the situation should not follow the established crisis playbook. We have already seen a rapid move toward digital operations and remote working that may or may not persist once the pandemic passes. But plotting a path to recovery for individual businesses and for whole sectors and countries is going to require a great deal more. As has been recounted in this space before, business advisers have spent a lot of time trying to persuade executives to prepare for a future characterised by the military term of VUCA (volatility, uncertainty, complexity, ambiguity) used to describe the situation at the end of the Cold War. And so far many appear flummoxed by it.

The problem, according to nDemand Consulting, a crisis management firm based in Atlanta, Georgia, is that much of the current discourse largely regurgitates mindsets and methodologies that were underwhelming as the macro-economic climate became more complex and were entirely antiquated when the coronavirus took everything a stage further. Novel challenges like the coronavirus demand commensurately fresh ideation, suggests the firm, which has advised federal agencies and heads of state, corporations and start-ups deal with threats in Africa and beyond.

Principals Kiya Dowdy Frazier and Oscar Frazier offer three modern crisis management techniques that, while somewhat counterintuitive, might just provide the necessary insights. They are:

1. Gaining trust isn’t enough. Gaining marketplace trust, building relationships and even securing leads require radically different approaches in the world of the pandemic and beyond. People have grown weary of misinformation and contradictory statements from those in positions of authority and are perhaps more jaded and doubtful now than ever before. When there is a lack of understanding, or there are credibility concerns, fear and defensiveness take over as the default operating system and individuals put their guard up, they say. To counter this, they suggest a reframing. The ability to gain trust isn’t entirely futile, they claim. Rather it’s the method of connecting with people that requires change. “The first step now begins with ‘me too.’ Far beyond trust, today’s recalibrated marketplace mindset requires relatability and authenticity on a critical mass scale.” Many are facing the exact same challenges, whether related to the virus or otherwise. So leaders need to be empathetic, approachable and forthcoming about their own challenges and experiences. “That level of vulnerability — demonstrating that you are just as concerned and affected as the person you’re meeting — are highly effective ways to build trust.”
2. Data management falls short. Collecting and analyzing data to drive decision making internally within the organization is no longer enough. Today, transparency about what that data “means” is paramount and represents both a gift and curse of data. While everyone is apt to share good news, even a simple, unintentional oversight or dulling of data can have costly implications. In today’s highly competitive marketplace, there are fewer chances to “get it right” and even make up for what we’ve done. Not just curating and managing data, business owners must be spot on with interpreting the data and reporting it. Indeed, the ability to leverage data analytics for both short-and long-term modernization is key to survival. Naturally, the first step is clearly communicating key findings. But companies often miss the second and third pieces: helping the audience, whether internal or external, make sense of everything, as well as following up with a clear plan of action to mitigate risk, resolve current issues and position themselves for a stronger future. It is one thing to provide data, it is very different to provide data with actionable tactics. 3. Messaging methodologies miss the mark. Validation-driven micro-communication is now key. Rather than just asserting positioning and talking points, organizations need to demonstrate the impact of their messaging in as specific terms as possible. Everything a leader conveys to the masses needs to be demonstrated with results and reference points people can access. The ability to effectively and efficiently communicate virtually and remotely via digital solutions is no longer an option, but rather an imperative. Organizations must be ever-mindful that there is increased awareness of — and desire for — community, connection, humility and social responsibility that should now underpin most, if not all, communications in this post-pandemic era. Companies must also make concerted efforts to control their message across all platforms, including social media, where information (and misinformation) spreads quickly.

Kiya Frazier says: “The very thought of the word ‘crisis’ tends to spur a sense of panic. Even so, it’s wise to take emergency situations head-on and with a laser focus. Any crisis management plan that tries to take on too much, or otherwise veers away from the actual and core crisis at hand, is one that’s likely to fall short at best or, worse, fail altogether.”

Oscar Frazier adds: “When people panic, they tend to inflate or deflate factual data to fit their own needs, desires, agenda or gut instincts. This is the single biggest mistake a company in crisis can make, since processing data objectively is key. Situation analysis requires taking a cold, hard look at realities and making even the most difficult — if not painful — of decisions to get back on a recuperative course.”

With a new year about to begin, we all have an opportunity to see how our leaders manage the continuing effects of the virus and the aftermath. Future generations will be able to judge whether lessons were learned or whether this episode is consciously or otherwise consigned to the backwaters of history.