You learn that one of your facilities has been emitting low-level toxic substances for an undetermined
amount of time. It is the companies fault due to a prior decision to deplay replacement of a faulty
system in one of your facilities; however, the issue is quickly resolved. Employees, visitors, and others
have been exposed to the chemical in a small degree. It is likely that the exposure was minimal and
likely to cause no harm.
Last year, a similiar situation occured at the same facillity. At the time, you reported it to the authorities
and the media, in learning about it, exagerated the story, blaming the company for putting people at
risk. If knowledge of the present toxic emission were unveiled publicaly, it would likely cause serious
reputational and legal damages to your organization, now that it has occured again. However, if it were
later discovered that you tried to cover it up, it could be worse. Your position on the company could be
on the line. Only you and a couple of trusted subordinates know about the emission now. Do you
proactively go public and risk the feared personal, reptuational, and legal damage or try to resolve the
situation quietly with no public harm done?
In this situation, I would definitely go public and risk the feared personal, reputational, and legal
damage, especially when the health and welfare of people are at stake.
Reality starts with
management in charge, and they are responsible for meeting with their teams and determining
the cause of the crisis.
Recognizing the problem is a crucial step before the problem can be
solved. Attempting a short-term fix addressing the symptoms of the crisis is assurance the
organization will wind up in a same or similar situation as what happened in this case.
To
understand the cause of the crisis, the leadership team must be truthful about the crisis.
Leaders
cannot solve a crisis if they do not acknowledge the crisis existence (Blythe, 2015).
When a crisis threatens the well-being of individuals or an organization, some people manages
the situation better than others.
Managers who can prevent a crisis from occurring are good at
eliminating potential damage.
A key component for effective crisis is to anticipate, and
individuals who can accurately predict future crisis or proactive of any emerging crisis
progression are best suited at protecting the core assets of an organization (Blythe, 2015).
Blythe, Bruce. (2015).
Emerging crisis management trends.
Retrieved from
http://www.cmiatl.com/?cat=11
