When I'm short of time and have just a few seconds to describe what emergency information is, I use the following: first, it's communicating to our audiences what they need to know to protect themselves, family, property and the environment ... and second, what the authorities need to communicate to help ensure these audiences adopt the right behaviour (shelter, evacuate, prepare ...) ... that's pretty easy ... two parallel streams ... more often then not converging ...
There are trends that come and muddy the waters a bit though ... with the growing use of social media ... PIOs and organizations now engage in multiple, simultaneous "online conversations" with diverse audiences ... you have to prepare to be heard (see previous posts) but that's the broad picture ... and there's a second current trend that might appear to be in opposition to the pluralistic nature of emergency information in the social media age ...
Our friend Gerald Baron has recently reflected on this: http://emcrisiscomm.blogspot.com/2009/11/warning-messages-risks-of-wimpiness-and.html
... sometimes you need to be very direct and adopt a "command voice" ... telling precisely (if not ordering) your audiences what to do ...
The Hurricane Ike example in Galveston is telling .... the famous "leave/evacuate or you will die" message that came from local/state and federal officials ... what impact did it have?
Are there better ways to ensure your audiences hear you?
Can those two trends ... the social media conversations ... and the more direct command ... be reconciled ?
I'd say ... use both approaches ... talk to people who'll listen to you because of an existing relationship or your organization's credibility ... but that can only get you so far ... we still can't ignore the 10 per cent of die hards who won't abide by your suggestions ...
if more direct, authoritative messaging is necessary ... use it ! ... and this type of messaging particularly plays well in traditional media (take it from a former reporter ... )
in the end, it probably won't change much ... but our collective conscience might be a bit better off !
As always, comments are welcome !
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
Thursday, November 12, 2009
How soon is now?
I'm the son and the heir ... of a fast changing world (sorry Morrissey !) where the need for immediate communications responses to emerging incidents and crises is overtaking many other considerations.
But how soon is too soon? In a world where an airline gets criticized (in some corners) for taking 13 minutes to respond to one of its planes landing in the Hudson River, do you still have time to take a breath and analyze things before reacting?
First, you need to be able to find yourself in that position and that means a robust social and web monitoring program ... that's just the start though. Once info starts flowing in at the onset of a crisis or incident, what guides your response? How do you determine the when and the how, or even the if?
I think all crisis communications plans should have a couple of elements built in that will help you avoid a misguided or too early of a response. The first is a quick analytical tool that will help you determine if you should respond at all.
I'm a big fan of the US Air Force's blog and social media engagement matrix http://www.globalnerdy.com/2008/12/30/the-air-forces-rules-of-engagement-for-blogging/
I've adapted it for our own purposes on the project I'm currently working on and it's very useful tool ... one can use it pretty quickly ... but i believe that the result of its analysis can be interpreted in many ways ...
I think the second "check" in your response scheme should be someone in your organization, either in your comms team or your executive, that can quickly validate your thinking before you go ahead and effectuate your response.
Not in an approval sense but more like a sounding board. Now, i believe that these two measures would not add much time to your response but would help ensure your organization's reaction was measured, on-target (right messages for right audiences) and effective.
I'll come back to a point I've made a few times in this blog. Social media are one set of tools for a crisis response ... they are not an end in themselves and should not overtake your capacity for a thoughtful approach despite the requirement for an immediate response.
Look forward to your comments ... thanks
But how soon is too soon? In a world where an airline gets criticized (in some corners) for taking 13 minutes to respond to one of its planes landing in the Hudson River, do you still have time to take a breath and analyze things before reacting?
First, you need to be able to find yourself in that position and that means a robust social and web monitoring program ... that's just the start though. Once info starts flowing in at the onset of a crisis or incident, what guides your response? How do you determine the when and the how, or even the if?
I think all crisis communications plans should have a couple of elements built in that will help you avoid a misguided or too early of a response. The first is a quick analytical tool that will help you determine if you should respond at all.
I'm a big fan of the US Air Force's blog and social media engagement matrix http://www.globalnerdy.com/2008/12/30/the-air-forces-rules-of-engagement-for-blogging/
I've adapted it for our own purposes on the project I'm currently working on and it's very useful tool ... one can use it pretty quickly ... but i believe that the result of its analysis can be interpreted in many ways ...
I think the second "check" in your response scheme should be someone in your organization, either in your comms team or your executive, that can quickly validate your thinking before you go ahead and effectuate your response.
Not in an approval sense but more like a sounding board. Now, i believe that these two measures would not add much time to your response but would help ensure your organization's reaction was measured, on-target (right messages for right audiences) and effective.
I'll come back to a point I've made a few times in this blog. Social media are one set of tools for a crisis response ... they are not an end in themselves and should not overtake your capacity for a thoughtful approach despite the requirement for an immediate response.
Look forward to your comments ... thanks
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
Is it time to review how PIOs work and JIC structure?
I've just finished reading a couple of very interesting blog posts by some very influential bloggers:
Jonathan Bernstein http://bernsteincrisismanagement.blogspot.com/2009/11/taking-advantage.html
and Gerald Baron http://crisisblogger.wordpress.com/2009/11/10/searching-and-monitoring-more-important-and-more-powerful-than-ever/
The main takeaway: social media is creating new imperatives for crisis communications specialists, PIOs and emergency managers. In a world of instantaneous information where you audiences know as much as you do ... where there's an abundance of information (often misleading or inaccurate) ... the main function of a Joint Information Centre or PIO no longer has a long-term strategic framework behind it.
Fact is, with so much information floating around in the social media universe, being heard and recognized as a source of authoritative information becomes the primary concern. At the speed the information flows, that cannot be done through traditional media ... certainly not only through them ...
Our plans have to include capability to respond immediately to emerging incidents ... the only way to do that is with pre-approved, very specific messaging ... and the ability to get it out quickly on all sorts of platform.
Which begs the question? how do you know what's going on in the social media universe during an incident? How robust is your monitoring cell?
Do you still need as many strategists? or should you have more social media and web monitors/contributors?
As someone who's currently planning communications related to security for a huge event in June 2010 ... the largest security event next year ... those questions are very relevant to me ...
Any insights out there ?
Jonathan Bernstein http://bernsteincrisismanagement.blogspot.com/2009/11/taking-advantage.html
and Gerald Baron http://crisisblogger.wordpress.com/2009/11/10/searching-and-monitoring-more-important-and-more-powerful-than-ever/
The main takeaway: social media is creating new imperatives for crisis communications specialists, PIOs and emergency managers. In a world of instantaneous information where you audiences know as much as you do ... where there's an abundance of information (often misleading or inaccurate) ... the main function of a Joint Information Centre or PIO no longer has a long-term strategic framework behind it.
Fact is, with so much information floating around in the social media universe, being heard and recognized as a source of authoritative information becomes the primary concern. At the speed the information flows, that cannot be done through traditional media ... certainly not only through them ...
Our plans have to include capability to respond immediately to emerging incidents ... the only way to do that is with pre-approved, very specific messaging ... and the ability to get it out quickly on all sorts of platform.
Which begs the question? how do you know what's going on in the social media universe during an incident? How robust is your monitoring cell?
Do you still need as many strategists? or should you have more social media and web monitors/contributors?
As someone who's currently planning communications related to security for a huge event in June 2010 ... the largest security event next year ... those questions are very relevant to me ...
Any insights out there ?
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
What's going on?
Now, I'll not make it a habit of bashing public health officials ... well, not too much ... but what's going on?
Just yesterday, the province was saying that it will have immunized 2.2 million Ontarians by the week-end ... wow ! great numbers ... probably all the priority people ... right ?
Wrong, now today ... it seems we're out of the H1N1 vaccine ... and our public health officials can't even tell us how many have been or will be immunized.
Can't the messaging be consistent from day to day?
Are they listening to any risk communications experts?
Just yesterday, the province was saying that it will have immunized 2.2 million Ontarians by the week-end ... wow ! great numbers ... probably all the priority people ... right ?
Wrong, now today ... it seems we're out of the H1N1 vaccine ... and our public health officials can't even tell us how many have been or will be immunized.
Can't the messaging be consistent from day to day?
Are they listening to any risk communications experts?
Sunday, November 1, 2009
H1N1 communications ... take three
Here we go again! Years after SARS, the public perception is that of a totally unprepared, unfocused and confusing public health system in this province.
It's not so much the shortage of H1N1 vaccine that is bothering Ontarians but the confusion in the messaging still going on. For example, we now know that the shortage of the vaccine will mean that people not in priority categories won't get vaccinated for a while. Yet, there was a one-page ad in Saturday's paper from the provincial government saying that people should get the vaccine as soon as possible.
It's true that it also said that certain people would get it first but the message was clearly laid out to tout vaccination for everyone ... meanwhile, clinics are closing, people are left stranded ... and now we've run out.
Not a great confidence builder. I'm asking: where are the communication advisers to the public health experts? Are these experts listening?
Scientific and medical evidence is nice ... yes, we need to be vaccinated ... it'd be even better if the logistics were in place to make it happen a bit more smoothly ... and if messaging was adapted to reflect the current situation.
Seems to me there needs to be better coordination in messaging between the federal, provincial and local public health officials. It's been sorely lacking so far.
Thoughts anyone?
It's not so much the shortage of H1N1 vaccine that is bothering Ontarians but the confusion in the messaging still going on. For example, we now know that the shortage of the vaccine will mean that people not in priority categories won't get vaccinated for a while. Yet, there was a one-page ad in Saturday's paper from the provincial government saying that people should get the vaccine as soon as possible.
It's true that it also said that certain people would get it first but the message was clearly laid out to tout vaccination for everyone ... meanwhile, clinics are closing, people are left stranded ... and now we've run out.
Not a great confidence builder. I'm asking: where are the communication advisers to the public health experts? Are these experts listening?
Scientific and medical evidence is nice ... yes, we need to be vaccinated ... it'd be even better if the logistics were in place to make it happen a bit more smoothly ... and if messaging was adapted to reflect the current situation.
Seems to me there needs to be better coordination in messaging between the federal, provincial and local public health officials. It's been sorely lacking so far.
Thoughts anyone?
Friday, October 30, 2009
Risk communications resource
I'm currently listening to a podcast from the CDC on risk communications and its life cycle.
It's from Dr. Barbara Reynolds and is quite interesting and offers many tips for PIOs and people who deal with risk communications ...
Most of the tips are very common sense... I'd highlight one: when you have the information at your disposal and you're the natural originator of that information ... then get it out ... be the first to do so ... don't hold back because it could undermine your organization's credibility.
Again, you've got to make your voice heard among the many conversations going on simultaneously on the web and social media platforms.
Here's the link to the CDC podcast: http://www.cdc.gov/h1n1flu/
It's from Dr. Barbara Reynolds and is quite interesting and offers many tips for PIOs and people who deal with risk communications ...
Most of the tips are very common sense... I'd highlight one: when you have the information at your disposal and you're the natural originator of that information ... then get it out ... be the first to do so ... don't hold back because it could undermine your organization's credibility.
Again, you've got to make your voice heard among the many conversations going on simultaneously on the web and social media platforms.
Here's the link to the CDC podcast: http://www.cdc.gov/h1n1flu/
H1N1 communications re-visited
Another quick piece on H1N1 communications ... Heard Ontario's Chief Medical Officer of Health on the radio this morning. She did a great job putting things into perspective re: priority lists for vaccinations, supply issues and the such. That went great.
But listening to her and after weeks, if not months, of warnings and preparations by public health officials, I still can't fathom why they were not ready for the great lineups experienced at all vaccination clinics across Ontario this week.
It seems that they were totally unprepared for the scope of the public's response to the pandemic, especially after the reported deaths of teens who succumbed from the flu. Seems pretty evident that they committed the sin of putting too much stock into their own risk analysis and did not pay enough attention to public perception.
We should never forget this mantra as emergency management professionals: what we think of as risks and how we quantify them could be, and very often is, very different from what the public perceives as risks or the severity of that perceived risk.
Is there a better way for public health officials to get a more accurate feel (or pulse !!!) of what the public is thinking? How nimble does our public health infrastructure need to be to face changing expectations from the public?
I think a lot of lessons will be learned from the current H1N1 vaccination campaign. One is: don't underestimate the capacity of media coverage and social media buzz to greatly increase the number of people that might show up to get shots. And if they do show up in droves, you should be prepared.
Seems even now that hundreds of people are waiting in line ... and still no plan to make flu clinics work 24/7 for a couple of weeks ... a bit short-sighted perhaps ?
But listening to her and after weeks, if not months, of warnings and preparations by public health officials, I still can't fathom why they were not ready for the great lineups experienced at all vaccination clinics across Ontario this week.
It seems that they were totally unprepared for the scope of the public's response to the pandemic, especially after the reported deaths of teens who succumbed from the flu. Seems pretty evident that they committed the sin of putting too much stock into their own risk analysis and did not pay enough attention to public perception.
We should never forget this mantra as emergency management professionals: what we think of as risks and how we quantify them could be, and very often is, very different from what the public perceives as risks or the severity of that perceived risk.
Is there a better way for public health officials to get a more accurate feel (or pulse !!!) of what the public is thinking? How nimble does our public health infrastructure need to be to face changing expectations from the public?
I think a lot of lessons will be learned from the current H1N1 vaccination campaign. One is: don't underestimate the capacity of media coverage and social media buzz to greatly increase the number of people that might show up to get shots. And if they do show up in droves, you should be prepared.
Seems even now that hundreds of people are waiting in line ... and still no plan to make flu clinics work 24/7 for a couple of weeks ... a bit short-sighted perhaps ?
Thursday, October 29, 2009
Presentation on emergency information and crisis communications
I was invited earlier this week to give a presentation on emergency information planning and delivery and crisis communications practices in the Ontario government. The audience was a delegation of communicators from the Jiangsu provincial government in China and some municipal officials.
Although I was fairly sick, I thought I shouldn't disappoint our Cabinet Office and create an international incident by cancelling at the last minute (just kidding ... but I did feel I had to go).
I kept my presentation short and focused ... with only as much info as necessary on my powerpoint. That was helpful since we had to wait for the translator to relay our comments to the audience.
But before I developed my presentation I had to think hard about the differences in the social and political environment between Jiangsu and Ontario. Those differences really change the perceptions on communications especially when dealing with social media and the internet.
However, despite the current political system in China, the fact is the same general principles apply: social media is changing the game and expectations from citizens are increasing.
Goes back to my mantra: we (as PIOs) need to occupy the public space and take part in the many conversations that begin soon (very soon in fact) after any incident or crisis. If we don't ... our organizations and messaging become irrelevant ...
To be able to do so effectively, you need a sound crisis comms plan structured along the four Ps: procedures, people, preparation, practice.
Here's a link to my presentation on slideshare (free): http://www.slideshare.net/patricecloutier/presentation-to-jiangsu-delegation
Although I was fairly sick, I thought I shouldn't disappoint our Cabinet Office and create an international incident by cancelling at the last minute (just kidding ... but I did feel I had to go).
I kept my presentation short and focused ... with only as much info as necessary on my powerpoint. That was helpful since we had to wait for the translator to relay our comments to the audience.
But before I developed my presentation I had to think hard about the differences in the social and political environment between Jiangsu and Ontario. Those differences really change the perceptions on communications especially when dealing with social media and the internet.
However, despite the current political system in China, the fact is the same general principles apply: social media is changing the game and expectations from citizens are increasing.
Goes back to my mantra: we (as PIOs) need to occupy the public space and take part in the many conversations that begin soon (very soon in fact) after any incident or crisis. If we don't ... our organizations and messaging become irrelevant ...
To be able to do so effectively, you need a sound crisis comms plan structured along the four Ps: procedures, people, preparation, practice.
Here's a link to my presentation on slideshare (free): http://www.slideshare.net/patricecloutier/presentation-to-jiangsu-delegation
H1N1 and risk communications
Well ... It's been a while ... but now i have some time because I'm sitting home recovery from a pneumonia probably brought about by the H1N1 flu.
Now, no worries ... I'm doing fine ... but I've been reflecting on the risk communications aspects of the current pandemic. Now, my focus is primarily in Ontario and Canada, but I think that this observation applies to our US friends too.
That is, have you noticed the discrepancy between the often urgent if not alarmist nature of the messages sent by public health officials and their actual level of preparations?
I'm thinking that if you're going to scare the population into getting the flu shot ... you should be prepared for a great influx of people at the vaccination clinics ... and not have situations where people wait 4, 6 or even 8 hours in line ... some event wait longer and then are sent home without getting the shot when the clinic closes ...
And the messaging itself has sometimes been confusing ... now, should i get the seasonal flu shot if i get the H1N1 shot ? Who's really at risk?
Aren't young and healthy people actually getting sicker? Why not go to schools for vaccination clinics?
I think things will sort themselves out ... it's still a very moderate pandemic ...but I shudder to think if it had morphed into something more lethal ... how unprepared we would have been ...
Now, no worries ... I'm doing fine ... but I've been reflecting on the risk communications aspects of the current pandemic. Now, my focus is primarily in Ontario and Canada, but I think that this observation applies to our US friends too.
That is, have you noticed the discrepancy between the often urgent if not alarmist nature of the messages sent by public health officials and their actual level of preparations?
I'm thinking that if you're going to scare the population into getting the flu shot ... you should be prepared for a great influx of people at the vaccination clinics ... and not have situations where people wait 4, 6 or even 8 hours in line ... some event wait longer and then are sent home without getting the shot when the clinic closes ...
And the messaging itself has sometimes been confusing ... now, should i get the seasonal flu shot if i get the H1N1 shot ? Who's really at risk?
Aren't young and healthy people actually getting sicker? Why not go to schools for vaccination clinics?
I think things will sort themselves out ... it's still a very moderate pandemic ...but I shudder to think if it had morphed into something more lethal ... how unprepared we would have been ...
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
It's not just about tools ... twitter, facebook or others.
I'm usually on the side of proponents of the use of social media platforms during emergencies. It makes a lot of sense: engaging your audiences directly, quickly and effectively. I've modestly tried to push things along in my (limited !!!) sphere of influence.
In most cases, i hear the usual objections on the use of social media: not enough context, not enough info, need more facts ... can't respond too quickly ... they're gimmicky ... and the other chapters in a long litany of incomprehension, lack of knowledge or just plain stubbornness.
Well, that's fine! I can put forward great arguments on the use of social media as emergency info tools ... and I usually do.
Now, what I find as concerning, is the tendency by disciples of social media ... to confuse the tools (the actual platforms themselves: twitter and others) with the objectives: to inform the public and present your emergency response in the best possible light.
More important than an organization's ability to tweet ... is the foundation behind its desire to communicate quickly during emerging situations or incidents. It's grand and fine to be able to tweet, inbed social media platforms on your website and all that ... BUT ... are you prepared? What are you going to say?
Do you have a crisis communications plan? does it have a series of protocols that determine who will respond to an incident ... and how soon? does it include delegation of authority to do so?
we're now in world where a delay of 15 minutes ( as in the airline whose plane landed in the Hudson River) in responding to an incident brings you criticism ...
Let's not forget the basics: good sound crisis comms planning, prepared messaging (message mapping anyone ???), trained crisis communicators ... an experienced team that trains often ... significant executive support (that's when you get that delegation of authority) ... effective follow up and measurements ... http://http://www.hstoday.us/content/view/9638/128/
Some of you might think that we're going overboard ... it doesn't matter ... if your audiences demand a quick response of your organization ... and you stick to your existing practices ... you'll end up with egg on your faces ...
the top down strategy doesn't work ... in messaging (we now engage in conversations ... on line, thru social media ... we're not preaching from up high ...) nor does it work in the org chart sense either ...
the more of your people are empowered to respond to incidents ... with proper tools, training and support ... the better the outcomes will be ...
can we still afford to wait 6 hours to respond to media and public calls on a train quarantined in Northern Ontario on suspicions of some exotic disease ... i gather not ...
can we wait four hours to issue a basis media statement after a huge explosion in an industrial site in Toronto ... while images of conflagration and rocket-like tanks flying through the air flood social media sites?
the world is changing ... expectations are too ... it's up to all of us to keep up ... here's a useful link:http://http//webworkerdaily.com/2009/06/01/crisis-communications-for-the-social-media-age/
by the way ... are your media people available 24/7 ? ... your web folks ?
or do incidents only happen on business hours ...
As always I await comments
In most cases, i hear the usual objections on the use of social media: not enough context, not enough info, need more facts ... can't respond too quickly ... they're gimmicky ... and the other chapters in a long litany of incomprehension, lack of knowledge or just plain stubbornness.
Well, that's fine! I can put forward great arguments on the use of social media as emergency info tools ... and I usually do.
Now, what I find as concerning, is the tendency by disciples of social media ... to confuse the tools (the actual platforms themselves: twitter and others) with the objectives: to inform the public and present your emergency response in the best possible light.
More important than an organization's ability to tweet ... is the foundation behind its desire to communicate quickly during emerging situations or incidents. It's grand and fine to be able to tweet, inbed social media platforms on your website and all that ... BUT ... are you prepared? What are you going to say?
Do you have a crisis communications plan? does it have a series of protocols that determine who will respond to an incident ... and how soon? does it include delegation of authority to do so?
we're now in world where a delay of 15 minutes ( as in the airline whose plane landed in the Hudson River) in responding to an incident brings you criticism ...
Let's not forget the basics: good sound crisis comms planning, prepared messaging (message mapping anyone ???), trained crisis communicators ... an experienced team that trains often ... significant executive support (that's when you get that delegation of authority) ... effective follow up and measurements ... http://http://www.hstoday.us/content/view/9638/128/
Some of you might think that we're going overboard ... it doesn't matter ... if your audiences demand a quick response of your organization ... and you stick to your existing practices ... you'll end up with egg on your faces ...
the top down strategy doesn't work ... in messaging (we now engage in conversations ... on line, thru social media ... we're not preaching from up high ...) nor does it work in the org chart sense either ...
the more of your people are empowered to respond to incidents ... with proper tools, training and support ... the better the outcomes will be ...
can we still afford to wait 6 hours to respond to media and public calls on a train quarantined in Northern Ontario on suspicions of some exotic disease ... i gather not ...
can we wait four hours to issue a basis media statement after a huge explosion in an industrial site in Toronto ... while images of conflagration and rocket-like tanks flying through the air flood social media sites?
the world is changing ... expectations are too ... it's up to all of us to keep up ... here's a useful link:http://http//webworkerdaily.com/2009/06/01/crisis-communications-for-the-social-media-age/
by the way ... are your media people available 24/7 ? ... your web folks ?
or do incidents only happen on business hours ...
As always I await comments
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)