Arrive prepared for reputation crises

Universities suffer from fires, floods... and, unfortunately, sometimes they are not spared from abuses of power and ethical or imprudent malpractices; but, the university also has a peculiar nature that responds differently to this status. The university is a community that is held together by bonds of different value and strength: personal, emotional and legal relationships, of subject labor or contractual, so the theories of crisis management have to be applied in a particular way, because the classic tools and levers of governance are not always as immediate or univocal as it would be convenient.

This is the conclusion of the book written by Yago de la Cierva, Mercedes Castelló and Paulina Guzik, three communication experts from the University and IESE Business School, graduate "management de crisis en universidades. Cases, good practices and guide of crisis". The book, published by EUNSA-University of Navarra belongs to the collection of the Center for University Governance and Reputation, an entity launched by the University of Navarra., an entity launched by the University of Navarra in 2015 to promote training and research on good governance in higher Education institutions.

management After analyzing more than forty cases of crises in universities of different types around the world, the guide (which describes the 24 most interesting cases) delves into the lessons that managers can apply before, during and after a crisis. The book analyzes, among others, crises caused by floods, hacks, sexual abuse, plagiarism, confrontations with public administrations or problems of identity and values that affected 24 university institutions in Europe, Latin America and the United States.

The success of a crisis is decided before it occurs

Digitalization and the speed with which information is transmitted has radically changed the management of crises. Today, being prepared is essential, since the classic "golden hour" that managers used to rely on to react to any problem has been drastically reduced to a mere "fifteen minutes". This means that the entire organization, and especially the crisis team, must be especially "greased" to anticipate possible problems and respond to uncertainty: cultivating emotional intelligence, reinforcing listening systems, building the confidence of the team that will make the decisions beforehand... is vital to successfully survive a reputation crisis.

In guide, the authors point out errors and good practices that they detected in the crises analyzed and that make reference letter to training and the performance of their managers. "Every crisis causes an information vacuum: if the institution succeeds in filling it, the damage can be considerably limited, as it gains the esteem of the public," they conclude. In this regard, experience shows that the role of the organization's leader is core topic to set the pace of communication: it is not advisable to get ahead of the game without having clear ideas, but neither is it wise to delay, leaving it to others to fill the information gap.

The reason for the delay: the agreement about the message

To decide the institutional position at the right time, it is advisable to mark a strategic line that looks at the present, the past and the future: the seriousness of the status, the role to be played and the actions that the public expects from the organization must be taken into account. Regarding the past, experts recommend analyzing the role in what happened and assuming what has been proven. In case of certainty of responsibility, the best thing to do is to assume it immediately, ask for forgiveness, promise not to repeat this behavior and compensate the victims. In the case of a false accusation, the institution has the moral obligation to defend itself and clarify the truth. If there is no certainty about anything, it should announce that a research and the desire to take responsibility have been initiated. Regarding the future, it is necessary to think about what must be changed in order not to repeat.

The reason that usually delays the official response is often the lack of agreement about the message. At this point the role of moderator of the leader is crucial. The institution must keep a cool head and not lose sight of the emotional connection with the victims. The researchers explain that at that moment the affected people expect to receive support and backing from the institution. Delaying the message may generate suspicion.

Communication must be proactive. This is achieved in two main ways. The first is to take the initiative: "The core topic of effective communication is to adopt an attitude of service to stakeholders: to accept the duty to inform them of everything that might affect them," they explain. They clarify that this first communication does not have to be exhaustive; it is enough that the information is verified and that the planned strategy is explained. The second way is to choose the right spokespersons and channels. This person must transmit a serene tone, security and confidence, due to his or her personality or position on organization chart. He or she must "be able to articulate the organization's message and show compassion, warmth, patience and listening," say the experts.