By James Donnelly, Senior Vice President, Crisis Management, Ketchum
Crisis simulations are misunderstood. Let’s set the record straight -- a simulation is not a panacea for improving an organization’s complete crisis management capability.
Certainly, simulations bring some benefits. A greater appreciation for reputation management is gained. Commitments to improve coordination among departments are made. Crisis plans get tweaked. And strategic insights are uncovered for prescribed scenarios. Good results, all.
However, without a broader learning and improvement program in place, these exercises soon become distant memories of an intense workshop . . . and nothing more. Crisis plans don’t always get updated with key learnings gleaned from a simulation. Sometimes, real crises emerge and echo the elements of the mock exercise -- and companies stumble through many of the same mistakes. Other times, a team tested through simulation becomes marginalized when a real crisis happens and top management suddenly takes control. (Unfortunately, we too often witness senior managers who sponsor and invest in simulations, but do not participate nor benefit from the exercise’s key learnings themselves.)
Thus, to truly improve the ability to manage crises, the company must focus on changing mindsets and building behaviors. Simulations are a part of this equation, but a gold-standard capability cannot be achieved solely through a “lightning in a bottle” exercise.
Therefore, some of the most overlooked opportunities in crisis management are choosing the right learning program to fit your needs. In order to improve the total ability to manage crises, you must consider the following elements when designing your learning program:
- Goal-setting: pinpointing the areas for improvement
- Programming for learning and improvement: orchestrating programs that improve capabilities
Goal-Setting
You need to know what’s broken before applying a fix. While simulations can help companies identify barriers to success, they can’t fix problems such as a lack of role clarity, organizational silos, or individual skill gaps among key crisis managers.
As general rule, if an organization is trying to identify gaps in its crisis-response capability, a simulation is probably the best bet. When the objective is to improve organizational or individual skills, a more holistic learning program should be considered. Refer to the following guidelines:
A simulation is good for the following:
- Testing the effectiveness and usability of a crisis plan
- Ensuring comprehension and familiarity with a new crisis plan
- Gauging an organization’s information-sharing, leadership and response capabilities
A more complete learning program may be better for these:
- Understanding the mindset of effective crisis managers
- Improving the skills of individual crisis-management team members
- Helping managers learn behaviors that contribute to success in managing crises
- Equipping crisis managers to evaluate threats and make good decisions
- Examining proven best practices
- Enhancing teamwork
- Promoting a more focused approach to specific types of situations
Programming for Learning and Improvement
Simulations need to be designed to achieve specific goals and therefore, they come in many shapes, sizes and flavors. Too many to enumerate here.
When focusing on broader learning programs, too many of us default to the standard seminar. And let’s face it -- there are plenty of seminars available on crisis management. Unfortunately, the participant is often left head-scratching over how to operationalize anecdotes about the 25-year-old Tylenol case.
Real on-the-job impact and a modification of attitudes, skills or behaviors can only come through learning and improvement programs that include three distinct phases:
- Conditioning: It begins with an advanced assessment and individual reflection. Conditioning includes some prework that helps orient participants by stimulating some thinking on crisis management. This phase allows crisis managers to uncover strengths and weaknesses and “marinate” on a few provocative and challenging questions, to be best engaged in the learning to come. (Note: Simulations rarely include this conditioning phase. “Be ready for anything, brush up on your crisis plans and prepare to be challenged” is a common prelude to a simulation. This is probably the wrong approach for some organizations, especially those with inexperienced staff in crisis management. This approach may leave participants feeling overwhelmed, vulnerable and determined to avoid future real crisis-management situations.)
- Active Learning: The phase during which experts teach and coach. Most current crisis-management learning programs provide basic tactical guidance (e.g., control the flow of information, verify facts, and communicate quickly and often). This is a mistake. Active learning should target the improvement of the mindsets and behaviors of crisis managers. This allows successful crisis managers to analyze specific situations, design strategies to respond, and lead teams in efficient implementation. This builds confidence and makes it easier for the participant to recall what’s necessary when a real crisis occurs. For this type of active learning, storytelling, realistic cases, visual examples and a lot of practice (including smaller real-world exercises) are all required to embed information in a participant’s long-term memory, where it could actually be recalled in a crisis.
- Sustainment Program: A campaign to prolong learning and facilitate improvement. Just like a simulation is not a magic pill, a more robust learning intervention on its own isn’t enough. Even the best “training” alone won’t eradicate a skill deficiency and measurably improve performance. New behaviors must be coached and sustained long after the learning event has concluded. (Note: A sustainment plan should include regular content refreshers, regularly scheduled simulations to keep everyone sharp, and, importantly, consideration of other factors affecting the crisis team’s ability to perform.)
In summary, simulations have not shared the spotlight adequately with other forms of well-crafted learning programs, some of which provide better opportunities to improve a crisis-management capability. Organizations must choose the right types of learning solutions to achieve identified goals.
Ketchum and Stromberg Consulting have collaborated on the Executive Crisis Management Academy (ECMA) -- the most comprehensive program ever offered on the subject. For more information contact James Donnelly
james.donnelly@ketchum.com.
Keywords :