User:LucasMarcktell/Crisis communication

In-crisis
The in crisis phase follows the pre-crisis phase. Within this phase the company must use the information and strategies gathered in the pre-crisis phase to react to the crisis at hand. The in-crisis phase contains two primary components which are initial critical response and reputation repair. The initial critical response must occur early in this phase as well as be precise and correct information. If the information collected in the previous phase is incorrect, the time in which the company reacts to the crisis does not matter. The reputation repair component calls for the company to take responsibility for the crisis at hand and propose sufficient reimbursement for damages done to those who are affected by the crisis.

Denial
There are two forms of denial: Simple denial which involves denying the involvement or the act, and shifting the blame, which is also known as Scapegoating. Shifting the blame or scapegoating in crisis communication refers to the tendency of organizations to blame an individual or group for a crisis in order to divert attention from their own responsibility and protect their reputation. This is a quick fix strategy but often can create long-term negative consequences for the organization itself and the individual or group taking the blame. Scapegoating can cause a decrease in trust from consumers or stakeholders and can also have a decrease in organizational reputation.

 Evasion of Responsibility  Evading responsibility is the second strategy and consists of four distinct types of evasion:


 * 1) Provocation refers to a company that argues that they were simply reacting to another offensive act. A company or individual can rationalize their behavior to be seen by others as a rational response to the initial offensive act.
 * 2) Defeasibility suggests that a company or individual will claim that they had limited knowledge or control over the crisis situation. This allows for companies or individuals to show that they did not know they were partaking in offensive behaviors.
 * 3) Accidents are a way a company can claim that the problem occurred by chance and not intentionally which could reduce the damage done to the companies reputation as they would be viewed by others as less responsible for the crisis.
 * 4) Good intentions, suggest that it was done with good intentions in mind, despite the negative outcome. The company asks others to hold them less than fully responsible based on their good intentions rather than their bad.

Reducing Offensiveness
The apologists will attempt to reduce the offensiveness of the acts committed through six strategies:


 * Bolstering involves the organization or individual who engaged in wrongful behavior to try and focus the attention of others on the more positive contributions they have made in the past.
 * Minimizing is when the party under question tries to minimize the negative aspects of a situation such as expressing confidence that it is simply a misunderstanding.
 * Differentiation is the act of comparing the wrongdoing to a similar situation that has occurred in the past and had a worse outcome than the current crisis.
 * Transcending is when a company or individual tries to attribute more favorable benefits to acts committed. This could be something such as relaying only the benefits of the actions instead of the consequences.
 * Attacking is a strategy where the accusers credibility is questioned in an attempt to have others lose confidence in the claims made by accusers.
 * Offering compensation is the final strategy that companies or individuals use to reduce offensiveness. If the people affected are willing, the responsible party can offer sufficient compensation for damages done as a result of the party's actions.

Corrective Action
The company or individual responsible for the problem that has occurred will promise to correct the problem and return to the standard it was before or they will promise to stop the problem from reoccurring in the future by implementing new standards and guidelines in order to rebuild their reputation. This is often a problem among companies where some want to correct their actions and other believe that it is an over correction and it is a sort of unnecessary admission of guilt.

Mortification
In terms of image restoration, the last strategy used is mortification where the apologist will confess to the wrongdoing and ask for forgiveness from others. The intention with strategy is that people will respect the honesty and the awareness of the apologist to recognize their wrongdoing and take responsibility. Mortification is the most direct of Benoit's strategies and is often seen side by side with corrective action strategy.