We are in the midst of a crisis that has hit us hard. Some of us have been seriously affected by the loss of health or even life, with the added sorrow of loneliness, without the comfort of the closeness of loved ones. To all of us, because we have changed our way of living, of working, of relating to others. We have felt fear and uncertainty has been the companion of our confinement. We still do not know when it will return and what the new normal will be like.

This surprising status is an extraordinary challenge for those who manage organizations. They have to make decisions in an uncertain environment, they are responsible for work, they suffer from the dramatic consequences of the crisis, they do not know how to stop them.

The problem exceeds their capacity and the solutions are beyond their reach. But they still have to lead. And in these moments, communication within and outside your organization becomes decisive. With headquarters closed and people confined, communication can be a bond of union, a bond that builds trust.

There is much written about crisis communication. But it is true that no two crises are alike. Not even two organizations are identical in the way they go through the same crisis. It depends on the industry, the management style, the corporate culture; and it depends a lot on whether the crisis will brush past us or take us to the ICU. In all this variety of circumstances there are some communication principles that can be valid in a general way. I would mention five.

1. Leadership

Communication accompanies and supports leadership. You cannot communicate well if you do not lead well, if you do not make the right decisions, in time and in the right way. The most important thing in a crisis is that people feel that someone is at the helm of the ship and will steer it through the storm. That there is someone at the wheel. This is complicated in cases like the current one, because there is little margin to make decisions on complex matters, in which too many variables have an influence; there is a lot of uncertainty, everything is open. But leadership is always necessary, even now.

At present, leadership means applying health protection measures to business in an honest, rapid and rigorous manner; it implies closeness to the members of the organization; it requires planning, even if it is possible and conditioned; it requires serenity and also the ability to ask for forgiveness when mistakes are made. It communicates well when it governs well.

2. Anticipation

It is often said that communication works when it is proactive, not when it is merely reactive. The crisis makes it difficult for us: it explodes, it catches us unawares, it evolves unpredictably. Even in these situations, it is important to regain the initiative, to look up, to think about what is to come. We must anticipate the questions that will arise, the concerns and needs of the people, and respond as far in advance as possible.

Again, uncertainty does not allow us to give certainties, but it does allow us to think ahead and prepare the ground so that, when the time comes, the decision can be made. The communication work consists of anticipating questions to help define the answers. Is my business prepared for the return? Will I return to a safe place? What will the new normal be like for us? How will the changes affect me? Anticipate.

Transparency

Provide reliable information on a regular and frequent basis. It is said that a crisis is actually the interruption of the communication flow: it is like when we lose the radio or television signal, or cell phone coverage. I don't know what's going on anymore, I'm lost. That is why it is important that communication helps organizations to be source constant source of information.

It is necessary to tell, tell and tell, the good and the bad, the positive, the negative and the neutral. One might think that with messages of optimism, people will remain calm. Not at all. People are reassured if they know they are being told the truth, if they know what to expect.

Transparency also prevents the circulation of hoaxes, which emerge by exploiting the shadows of a non-transparent communication policy. We have seen it in these days: especially through the networks, half-truths, unverified data , alarmist statements are spread. The virus of hoaxes is answered with the vaccine of abundant and rigorous information.

4. Clarity

Clarity is not the same as transparency. The latter consists of telling what we know. The former is about being understood. It changes the focus: what is important is not what I say but what the other understands. That is why, in situations like the ones we live in, we must try not to be buried by millions of fragmentary data . It is important to tell what is relevant, to focus on what is essential.

In the case of the pandemic, we have seen great discussions about the data and the way to present them. Sometimes, a poorly presented graphic can lead us to the wrong conclusions, while a good one financial aid can help us to find our way through the jungle. Communication is there to clarify, to give context and meaning to data. Journalists in their editorial offices, but also those who communicate for governments and organizations have the same goal in their work.

5. Listen to

We have talked about the need to maintain the flow of information, to provide abundant and contrasted information. But there is no communication without listening. During crises, the most important audience of an organization are the employees themselves, those who are in some way part of the organization. As work in a university, I think of the professors, the students, their families.

Communication also consists of listening to them, knowing their concerns, collecting their requests or suggestions. The same applies to companies and institutions. And, more generally, it happens with citizens, the first audience of those responsible for public management . If we know and understand their questions, we will find the answers.

Leadership, anticipation, transparency, clarity and listening. If we consider these principles valid, to know if we are communicating well we would have to ask ourselves: are we making the right decisions, at the right time, in the right way? Are we anticipating questions as much as possible, to reassure those who listen to us?

position Do we show closeness to our audiences? Do we listen to them? Do we listen to their perceptions, concerns, needs and questions? Do we provide rigorous and abundant information, without leaving room for fake news? Do we express ourselves clearly and simply? Do we help to provide context and horizon with our information? Do we transmit serenity without paternalism?

Communicating well does not cure diseases, but it reduces fears and dissolves hoaxes. And, above all, it generates confidence in those who govern and in managers. The best thing that could happen to us in this crisis would be to strengthen trust in institutions, in organizations, among ourselves. I doubt that this is happening so far, but there is still time.

This article was originally published in The Conversation. Read the original.