Opinion: Crises Need Comms Teams And Lawyers To Work Together


(MENAFN- PRovoke) If there's something weird in your neighbourhood, you know who you gonna call. And yet when an organisational crisis strikes, there are different schools of thought. Do you call the crisis communicators to manage the situation – or should lawyers lead on the response?

More often than not, the answer will be both. So why do we often find that lawyers and comms teams work completely independently during a response to a critical incident or situation? Even when brought in at the same time, comms experts and legal teams end up reporting separately to the client and are rarely – unless one or other insists on it – working collaboratively to debate and decide on strategic steps, while providing their shared client with a clear route forward that both agree on.

This can be a mistake with enormous implications, and one that we, as reputation managers, need to rethink in order to deliver the best outcome for our clients' reputations and commercial interests. Crisis situations require us to work together to provide the best advice from our distinct but complementary perspectives.

One of the most obvious areas in which lawyers and crisis comms professionals differ in approach, and therefore where they often benefit from working together, is around if, when and how to apologise. Particularly in the heat of a crisis, lawyers will often be immensely reluctant to say anything that could indicate liability, while crisis comms teams will want to get out on the front foot and minimise public backlash. Neither, however, would recommend apologising for something without knowing the facts. This is where collaboration is helpful: the communicator can advise on an empathetic, authentic piece of messaging that reassures audiences and stakeholders, with the lawyer ensuring a clear view of the potential longer-term legal implications from the outset.

In a crisis, stakeholders want to feel heard and that their concerns are valid – simply saying“it's not our fault” isn't an option. Our role as strategic advisors is to enable the correct legal (and business viability) decisions, and to advocate for the correct human decisions – which are equally as important for business viability).

Lawyers and strategic communications professionals are often thought to be diametrically opposed: lawyers moving carefully with their focus on longer-term litigation implications, with comms moving immediately into action and concerned with the immediate impact on public profile.

Neither is true, of course, and it's only when we're fully engaged as a team that comms professionals can properly understand the legal implications and lawyers can fully grasp and consider the reputational risks.

This is the case in any crisis, but it is particularly true for the types of crises that are increasingly keeping the C-suite up at night: generative artificial intelligence and deepfakes; a proliferation of data making leaks more likely and cyber-attacks more complex; the growth in expectations – among consumers, investors, employees, shareholders – of responsible business practices.

These are crises that did not exist – certainly not to the same extent – as recently as five years ago. And these changes are coinciding with the evolution, recognition and, dare I say, professionalisation of strategic communications as a core business function.

That evolution is happening side-by-side in-house and in consultancy. For example, in-house, we're seeing increasing representation as an sector on boards, in recognition that our role is not a function of marketing but a critical leadership imperative. In consultancy, there is ever-growing specialisation: for example, at SEC Newgate we have a dedicated Green & Good team to advise on responsible business expectations, as well as experts on data and generative AI, so we can better prepare clients for the next bend in the road.

Meanwhile, there's more recognition of the need for communications advice rooted deeply in business acumen. This is evidenced in the growing weight of private equity capital being ploughed into communications firms, as well as recent moves from the likes of law firm Schillings setting up a reputation management firm, Dentons and its public affairs wing, Teneo and FTI as auditors and restructuring specialists with communications capabilities, or management consultancies such as Deloitte and Accenture investing in digital and strategic communications capabilities.

In a crisis, as our clients' trusted and most-needed advisors, we're doing our job well when we ensure our client has all the expertise they need in the room. While reputation managers are building our capabilities to deliver many of those skills under one roof, we would never profess to being able to do it all. That's why we need lawyers to be part of the crisis response team from the outset, if we are to successfully protect our clients' reputations, mitigate legal risk, and ensure their businesses remain viable for the long-term.

Tali Robinson is a managing director and UK head of crisis communications and special situations at SEC Newgate, an independent global insights-led communications and advocacy consultancy.

MENAFN18112024000219011063ID1108896811


PRovoke

Legal Disclaimer:
MENAFN provides the information “as is” without warranty of any kind. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information contained in this article. If you have any complaints or copyright issues related to this article, kindly contact the provider above.