Crisis Communication Plan

I just read a crisis PR plan that someone paid $12,000 for. Journalists got 14 mentions. Reddit got zero. This plan was written in 2025, not 2015. Most are still museum pieces. They go deep on traditional media (which is still important) but miss the platforms where your reputation can be shredded much faster. Here's what I would've added to this strategy (ecommerce, founder-led brand big on socials): 1. LLM audit → Does your brand show up in ChatGPT responses? Citations? What's the framing like? You need a pre-crisis benchmark so you can track recovery. 2. Reddit watch list → Map your brand and category subreddits. Save them in the plan. Reddit conversations move fast and can amplify quickly - you can't afford to discover this during a crisis. 3. TikTok strategy → If your plan just says "monitor socials" it's useless. Who's watching your TikTok? Who drafts DM responses? Does your official statement go up as a video or text post? These aren't nice-to-haves anymore. 4. Influencer protocol → If you work with creators regularly, they belong in your stakeholder matrix. I've seen too many founders scramble when their usual influencer partners suddenly go quiet during a PR storm. The media landscape has REALLY shifted. Your crisis planning needs to catch up.

In 2011, the Amazon Appstore failed on launch and Jeff Bezos was furious. It was my fault, and I handled one aspect of recovery so poorly that one of my engineers quit. I still regret it 14 years later. Please learn from my mistake. The main lesson is that when you are leading through a crisis, it can feel like it is all about you. It isn’t. It is about: 1) Solving the problem 2) Guiding your team through it The product issue was that there were some pretty simple bugs, and we solved those problem well enough that I was eventually promoted. Where I failed was in guiding my team through the crisis. My leadership miss was that I neglected to encourage and support the engineer who had written the bad code. He did a great job stepping up and supporting the effort to fix the problem, but shortly afterward, he resigned. During the crisis, I failed to make clear to him that we did not blame him for the launch failure despite the bugs. I imagine that left room for him to think we blamed him or that he didn’t belong. It is also possible that others did blame him directly and that I was too caught up in the crisis to realize it. Both instances were my responsibility as the leader of the team. His resignation taught me a valuable lesson about leading through a crisis: No matter how bad the situation is, your team must be your first priority. If you make them feel safe, they will move heaven and earth to fix the problem. If you don’t, they may still fix the problem, but the team itself will never be the same. As a leader, here is how you can give them what they need: 1) Take the blame and do not allow others to be blamed. In some bug cases after this we did not release the name of the engineer outside the team in order to protect them from judgment or blame. 2) Separate fixing the problem from figuring out why it happened. Once the problem is fixed, you can focus on root-causing. This lowers the risk of searching for answers getting confused with searching for someone to blame. 3) Realize that anyone involved in the problem already feels bad. High performers know when they have fallen short and let their team down. As a leader you have to show them the path to growth and success after the crisis. They do not need to be beaten up on- they have taken care of that themselves. 4) See crises and problems as growth opportunities, not personal flaws. Your team comes with you in a crisis whether you like it or not, so you might as well come out stronger on the other side. As a leader, the responsibility for a crisis is yours in two ways: The problem itself and the effect it has on the future of the team. Don’t get too caught up in the first to think about the second. Readers- Has your team survived a crisis? How did you handle it?

🇬🇧 Worth checking out the updated #RESIST framework designed by the UK government in order to embrace information threats more fully. 🔹A pragmatic approach focused on perceptions and a full-blown model for any institution developing its own strategic communications methodology 👉🏼RESIST Counter‑Disinformation Toolkit : a structured framework for government communicators to identify, assess and respond to disinformation. 👉🏼The toolkit frames disinformation as a risk not only to communications per se, but to policy outcomes, national security, international reputation, and democratic legitimacy. 🔹It provides checklists, matrices (ex : for prioritisation: does a message harm ability to deliver services? does it affect vulnerable audiences? etc.) and guidance on measurement. ♻️ A 6️⃣ step approach : 1️⃣ Recognise: identify possible instances of mis/dis/malinformation, check the techniques (fabrication, disguised identity, rhetoric, symbolism etc) (FIRST indicators). 2️⃣ Early Warning: Monitor the information space for signals of emerging threats, vulnerabilities, target audiences, relevant narratives. 3️⃣ Situational Insight: Turn monitoring data into actionable insights : what’s happening, who is vulnerable, what narratives are evolving, what the context is. 4️⃣ Impact Analysis: Assess the potential damage: what are the objectives of the threat actor, the reach, the likelihood, how does it affect your priorities/responsibilities. Use structured analysis rather than just “gut feeling”. 5️⃣ Strategic Communication: Decide whether and how to respond. Not all incidents merit a public response — some may self-correct. If you respond: ensure the truth is well told, choose appropriate channels/audiences, embed resilience building, engage partnerships. 6️⃣ Tracking Effectiveness: Measure output vs outcome; track metrics (reach, behaviour change, attitude change) and learn from each response. Underlying principles 🔹A government communications function must support resilience: of institutions, public trust, policy delivery. 🔹Communications is a proactive posture : pre-bunking, shaping narratives is as important as reactive posture (debunking). 🔹Partnership matters because information threats do not respect organisational boundaries : across gov departments, with civil society, academia, media, international partners 🔹Focus on audiences & vulnerabilities: recognising that some audiences are more exposed (due to digital skills, language, socio-economic factors) and that those vulnerabilities shape how to tailor prevention/response. How this could apply to other nations 🔹 a structured framework to impart discipline & consistency in detecting and responding to threats. 🔹 helps build an institutional capacity 🔹 supports the shift from reactive (respond when scandal/hit) to proactive risk management

We’ve all seen how quickly a single moment on social media can spiral. One tone-deaf comment, one AI-generated response that misses the mark, or just a slow internal handoff and suddenly, your brand is trending for all the wrong reasons. When I started building our AI-First Mindset™ transformation program, I knew we couldn’t just focus on opportunity. We also had to prepare leaders for risk and that includes public-facing crises fueled by speed and automation. That’s why I developed a new module focused on building a social media crisis management plan designed for today’s AI-powered workplace. We cover the essentials: • How to build a clear, flexible crisis communication plan • The best crisis management tools to monitor and respond in real time • How to define team roles across marketing, legal, leadership and tech • And how to account for AI-powered systems that can escalate issues if not handled properly In a world where content and backlash move at machine speed, your people need clarity. That starts with a plan that’s actually usable and practiced before the pressure hits. This isn’t about fear. It’s about preparation. AI adoption comes with incredible potential, but it also changes how we manage trust. A good crisis response needs to e part of your broader AI change management strategy. If your team is using AI but hasn’t revisited your crisis plan, now’s the time. Stay tuned for practical guidance on creating crisis plans that perform under pressure. #DigitalCrisisStrategy #CrisisCommunication #CrisisResponse #DigitalCrisis #SocialMediaCrisis

I’ve been reflecting on how CISOs communicate with the board and one truth keeps resurfacing: Most boards aren’t asking, “Did we patch CVE-2024-51209?” They’re asking, “Are we going to lose revenue if our supplier goes down?” It’s a subtle but critical shift. And most security teams are still stuck in the old language. I recently reviewed a case where a global chipmaker lost over $38M. Their dashboards were clean. Their policies were signed. Their SLAs were airtight. But behind the scenes, a payroll vendor had been breached for 8 months undetected. The real problem? Security was reported in checkboxes, not consequences. And when the breach hit, no one could answer: What happens next? Who owns the response? How fast can we act before it hits the press? What really struck me was how often I see this same pattern. Boards get dashboards, not direction. Heatmaps instead of decisions. Alert volume instead of operational risk. And this matters. Because if you can’t show the business how security connects to uptime, revenue, trust... Someone else will call your budget non-essential. Why This Matters: - Boards want clarity, not controls. - Leadership speaks the language of operational consequences, not hygiene. - Risk needs to be translated, not reported. What’s Next? It’s time to lead differently. Bring decision-ready clarity to the boardroom. Frame security in terms of financial exposure, ownership, and response speed. Because in 2025, leadership doesn’t come from tools. It comes from trust, alignment, and the courage to speak the language of business. I’d love to hear from CISOs and execs what’s the one question your board keeps asking that your dashboards don’t answer? Drop a comment or DM me. #CyberSecurity #BoardAlignment #CISO #DigitalTrust #OperationalRisk #CyberLeadership #RiskManagement

As geopolitical risks continue to evolve and intensify, it is essential for communication leaders to adapt and respond effectively to these challenges.   Recent geopolitical crises have underscored the importance of proactive and strategic communication. According to the AXA Future Risks Report 2024, geopolitical instability is now the second most concerning risk for experts globally, up from third place in 2023. At the same time, disinformation and misinformation on these crises, mainly led by technology, are expanding their potential consequences. This progression highlights the growing impact of geopolitical events on businesses and the need for robust communication strategies. Here are some key insights and thoughts I wanted to share:   👉 Anticipate and Listen: Setting up an infrastructure for listening and scenario planning is crucial. By strengthening our social listening and predictive capacities, we can better anticipate crisis and understand the different perspectives that exist around geopolitical issues. As one Chief Communication Officer (CCO) mentioned in the latest European Communication Monitor (ECM) report, "We need to be prepared every day to react, and at the same time, we have to be very clear about the frames in which we want to react."   👉 Consolidate and Connect: Strengthening internal discussions and nurturing a network of communication experts with diplomatic skills is vital. In a decentralized company, this helps in ensuring that our communication as a Group is sensitive to the nuances of different geopolitical contexts. As another CCO pointed out, "You also need experienced communicators in different countries who not only have a view of their country but also understand that even in a global company there is a global view that is not necessarily congruent with the view of each country.”   👉 Navigate Ambiguity: In a fragmented and polarized world, managing corporate communications means carefully choosing what to say and how to say it. This involves balancing business perspectives with stakeholder expectations and navigating the contradictions that arise from intensifying geopolitical risks.   👉 Engage Proactively: The expectations of stakeholders, including consumers and employees, are evolving. There is an increased demand for companies to take a stand on geopolitical issues. As highlighted in the ECM report, 58.6% of CCOs agree that the geopolitical context has a very concrete impact on business, and companies need to consider this evolution.   On a more specific note, the AXA Future Risks Report 2024 also reveals that 91% of experts believe insurers have a crucial role in safeguarding against emerging risks. As Chief Communications Officer, this is something I truly believe in, and I am grateful to rely on a network of very professional heads of communications, in all AXA entities, to help us spread the word, build resilience and strengthen trust during uncertain times!

🚨 The Email That Made 200 Employees Panic The subject line read: “We need to talk.” That was it. No context. No explanation. Within minutes, the office air felt heavier. You could hear chairs creak as people leaned toward each other, whispering: 👉 “Did you see the mail?” 👉 “Do you think layoffs are coming?” 👉 “Why would he say that without details?” The silence in the cafeteria was louder than usual that day. Coffee cups stayed untouched, half-filled. Some stared at their screens, pretending to work, but their fingers hesitated above the keyboard. One manager later told me it felt like “a ticking clock in the background you can’t turn off.” What was meant to be a simple one-on-one call turned into an organization-wide anxiety spiral. Productivity dipped. Trust cracked. By evening, HR’s inbox was full of panicked questions. ⸻ 💡 When I stepped in as a trainer, the leader admitted: “I just didn’t think one line could create so much fear.” And that’s the truth: Leaders often underestimate the power of their words. A vague message is like sending a flare into the sky—everyone sees it, no one knows what it means, but everyone assumes the worst. We worked together on Crisis Communication Frameworks: • Lead with clarity: “I’d like to connect regarding Project X progress this Friday.” • Add emotional context: “No concerns—just a quick alignment call.” • Close with certainty: “This will help us stay on track as a team.” The difference? Next time he wrote an email, instead of panic, his team replied with thumbs-up emojis. Calm replaced chaos. ⸻ 🎯 Learning: Leadership isn’t just about strategy—it’s about how you sound in the small moments. One vague sentence can break trust. One clear message can build it back. If your leaders are unintentionally creating chaos through unclear communication, let’s talk. Because the cost of poor communication isn’t just morale—it’s millions. ⸻ #LeadershipCommunication #CrisisCommunication #ExecutivePresence #LeadershipSkills #CommunicationMatters #Fortune500 #TopCompanies #CXOLeadership #FutureOfWork #OrganizationalExcellence #StorytellingForLeaders #LeadershipDevelopment #CorporateTraining #ProfessionalGrowth #PeopleFirstLeadership

The recent news on AWS center in the Middle East going down because of the war made me relive my experience decades ago! I once helped build what we proudly called a best-in-class disaster recovery architecture. We did everything right—on paper. ✔️ Business Impact Analysis done ✔️ RTO & RPO agreed with stakeholders ✔️ Sophisticated tools deployed ✔️ DR site fully provisioned We were confident. Almost too confident and then came the day that tested everything ! A dual power supply failure hit our primary data center. Within minutes, 300+ servers went down abruptly. What followed was worse than downtime: Critical application databases got corrupted AND THEN The DR site also got corrupted ! Real-time transactions came to a complete standstill. With every passing hour, we lost millions of dollars in revenue. In that moment, all our architecture diagrams, tools, and planning meant one thing: NOTHING —because the system didn’t recover !!! What this experience taught me: 1) Testing isn’t real until it’s brutal Table-top simulations give comfort. Full-scale failover drills expose truth. Test like it’s already failing: -Simulate real load -Introduce chaos scenarios -Assume components will fail unexpectedly 2) DR is not a technology problem—it’s a systems problem We focused heavily on tools. We underestimated dependencies. Ensure: -End-to-end recovery (infra + app + data integrity) -Isolation between primary and DR (to avoid cascade failures) -Backup validation, not just backup completion 3) Communication is your real recovery engine In crisis, confusion spreads faster than outages. Build: -Clear SOPs for business continuity -Pre-defined escalation paths -Regular cross-team drills (not just IT—include business teams) 4) Leadership presence changes outcomes War rooms are intense. Fatigue, panic, and noise creep in. As a tech leader: -Your presence brings calm -Your clarity drives prioritization -Your energy keeps teams going Sometimes, leadership is less about answers… and more about Stability 5) Assume your DR will fail—and design for that This was the hardest lesson. Build layers: - Immutable backups - Offline recovery options -“Last resort” recovery playbooks Because resilience is not about one backup plan. It’s about what happens when that backup plan fails... Have you ever seen a #DR plan fail in real life? How often do you run full-scale disaster recovery drills? What’s the one thing most organizations still get wrong about resilience? Curious to hear real experiences—those are always more valuable than frameworks. #DR #disasterrecovery #drill #test #BCP #leadership #technology #resilience

I started my career in crisis comms. It was brilliant training for leadership. Whether you’re a founder, CEO, or leading a team of any size, a comms crisis will happen at some point. - A product misstep - A rogue tweet - A customer issue  - A story that hits like a curveball  What matters most is how you respond. So here’s my 6-step plan for dealing with a crisis: → Stay calm: panic spreads. So remember to take a beat and step back, before you go forward. → Move quickly, not blindly: gather facts, speak to key stakeholders, and understand the ripple effect of each action. → Be transparent: communicate openly and early, don’t leave a vacuum. → Assemble your crisis crew: a small trusted group, internal and external, with each person having clear roles. → Have a plan: even if it’s to do nothing for the time being, silence can be strategic - but only if it's intentional. → And finally, remember it’s (usually) not personal, but reacting emotionally often makes things worse, so contain things as best you can and move forward. Bad crisis comms can compound a crisis. Measured, strategic management of the situation usually calms everything down.

The “Eternal Struggle”: PR vs. Legal – And how to bridge the gaps. There’s an old adage in corporate crisis management: You’re either at the table, or you’re on the menu. And nowhere is this more evident than in the frequent tug-of-war between PR teams and legal departments during a crisis. I’ve been on both sides of this debate—as a former lawyer and now a public affairs advisor. Here’s the truth: the “say nothing, do nothing” approach that worked 30 years ago will destroy a company’s reputation today. But going rogue with an unchecked PR strategy can tank a future legal or regulatory case just as fast and may get you fired. So how do we navigate this proverbial minefield? Here’s how to bridge the gap: 1. Understand the Stakes - Legal’s priority: Protect the company from lawsuits, fines, and regulatory action. - PR’s priority: Protect the company’s reputation in the court of public opinion (where your customers, investors, and employees live). Both priorities are 100% valid—and both are existential risks. 2. Build the Crisis Playbook Collaboratively - Pre-plan messaging for likely crisis scenarios before the heat is on. - Agree on who leads which part of the response and when. This can be tough, but dedicate the time. - Include Legal in your media training—they’ll thank you when it’s time to deliver tightly-worded, low-risk statements under pressure. 3. “Be at the Table” - Legal needs to respect PR as more than a “spin machine.” PR shapes reputations that can directly influence jury pools, regulators, and decision-makers. - PR needs to recognize legal’s expertise in risk avoidance. Reckless comments can lead to billion-dollar costs. The key: If both teams collaborate early, they can find solutions that protect both reputation and the bottom line. 4. Manage the Message - Words matter: Even a single phrase can change the narrative. Use legal-approved, precise language that aligns with PR’s strategy. - Stay human: A robotic, overly cautious response (“We are investigating and will provide updates soon.”) simply doesn’t work anymore. - Own what you can: Show accountability where it’s safe and strategic. 5. Play the Long Game The court of law and the court of public opinion don’t always operate on the same timelines. But public perception often shapes the legal and regulatory outcomes. - Losing trust with customers can lead to more aggressive scrutiny from regulators. - Winning public support can soften legal blowback or even help settle cases faster. Bottom Line: The PR vs. Legal conflict doesn’t need to be a zero-sum game. The best organizations recognize that reputation and liability are two sides of the same coin, and build a unified approach to protect both. When you’re in a crisis, it’s not just about avoiding mistakes. It’s about showing leadership when it matters most. And leadership starts with getting PR and Legal on the same team. What’s your take? Drop your thoughts and “war stories” below.