2010 crisis communication analysis

Running head: 2010 Crisis Communication Analysis 1

Question Seven

Pick TWO recent crises (both occurring in 2010, and both being notable in the amount of media

coverage they received). The two recent crises should demonstrate how well crisis

communication was conducted by the organization and how poorly crisis communication was

handled. Compare and contrast the crisis communication and, using significant scholarship,

analyze why and how one organization got it right, and one didn’t. For the organization that did

not handle a crisis correctly, make suggestions as to how they should have conducted their

communication (again, using relevant scholarship). Be sure to analyze the crisis from the

beginning circumstances to any conclusion that you believe “ended” the crisis communication.

Explain your reasons and support your reasons with appropriate references.

Denise Aguilar

CCOM: 9999_91

March 7, 2011

2010 Crisis Communication Analysis 2

Abstract

In Public Relations, “Hard” Crises are the types of crises that receive the most coverage. The

publics want to know what happens during a crisis due to personalization factor. Each crisis can

be either preventable or accidental. How the crises affect the public has a large impact on the

perception of a company. The company’s reputation is also dependent on the company’s Velcro

effect, use of organizational memory, intraorganizational crisis history within their organization,

and extraorganizational crisis history within their industry. In 2010, two crises occurred where

the CEO ultimately had an impact on the company’s reputation. Carnival Cruise Splendor and

British Petroleum Deepwater Horizon oil rig explosion both were notable for the effective and

not so effective crisis communication. How each company managed their reputation before their

crisis, their crisis management plans, and how the company resolved the crisis will be analyzed

in relation to their public relations efforts.


2010 Crisis Communication Analysis

A crisis in Corporate America creates different kinds of effects among their constituents.

The crisis can affect the constituents’ way of life. It can alter the person’s present situation into a

new reality. For example, when oil spills occur in the ocean, local residents lose their livelihood

and wildlife. Alternatively, when malfunctions happen on a ship, passengers are usually left

without electricity, hot food and running toilets. A crisis can reveal where in the organization is

the weakest. In International Crisis: Insights from Behavioral Research, Charles F. Hermann

(1972) noted that in Organizational Crisis, it is “a threat to central organizational goals, short

decision-making time, and surprise”(Nikolaev, 2010, as cited in Coombs & Holladay, 2010,

p.266). Through the resolution of the crisis, the company can use the opportunity to change their

image and repair their weak points or allow the crisis to ruin their reputation. In Thirty Common

Basic Elements of Crisis Management Plans: Guidelines for Handling the Acute Stage of

“Hard” Emergencies at the Tactical Level, Alexander G. Nikolaev (2010) emphasized “Crisis is

a period when the efficiency of the public relations structures of the organization is tested under

extreme circumstances” (as cited in Coombs & Holladay, 2010, p.263). The company’s crisis

management plan when applied in a crisis will show if it needs to be adjusted or changed to

resolve their issues. Pointing out the weak spots in crisis plans is important because if the

company has endured past crises, those crises will be recalled to the current one. In the Impact of

Past Crises on Current Crisis Communication, W. Timothy Coombs (2004) mentioned that an

organization will encounter all of its own past crises when they are handling a new one (as cited

in Coombs & Holladay, 2010, p.209). As a result, it is important for an organization to learn


from their past crisis management mistakes so that their past will not have a dire impact on their

reputation.

When a history of crisis happens to an organization and effects their reputation, according

to W. Timothy Coombs and Sherry J. Holladay (1996) in Communication and Attributions in a

Crisis: An Experiment Study in Crisis Communication, that is called intraorganizational crisis

history. The same as when an organization experiences a crisis and a different organization

suffers through a similar crisis that is termed as extraorganizational crisis (Elliot, 2010, as cited

in Coombs & Holladay, 2010, p.206). Each “hard” crisis that occurs within an organization will

always be compared to past crises within that organization or others. The media will display past

discrepancies of the industry for hard news. Nikolaev (2010) stated, “Hard crises are industrial

accidents, natural disasters, terrorist acts…”(as cited in Coombs & Holladay, 2010, p.264). Hard

crises are when media and the public contact the organization to retrieve information about the

crisis. For instance, the increased media coverage on General Motor’s bankruptcy case was

considered a hard crisis because the media and other institutions desired information from this

organization. It is important for an organization to have a good relationship with the media

because that relationship will benefit both parties in times of crisis. In Open Door Public

Relations: A New Strategy for the 1990’s, James Hoggan (1991) agreed that an organization

should not only include the media when a crisis occurs but establish a relationship in advance

that can help in the event of a crisis (as cited in Horsley & Barker, 2002, p.408). Establishing a

relationship with the media during pre-crisis will benefit the organization in the event a crisis

occurs.


In addition, should establish a relationship with the media because organizations do not

want outsiders to speak on their behalf. By organizations not establishing a relationship with the

media, journalists and the like will speak to people outside the organization who will give them a

story. Those stories will send mixed messages and in a time of crisis consistency in the

organizations message is imperative. In Are They Practicing What We Are Preaching? An

Investigation of Crisis Communication Strategies in the Media Coverage of Chemical Accidents,

Sherry J. Holladay (2010) stated that frustrated journalists (who are unable to interview

management as a primary source) are likely to turn to other sources like employees or victims of

a crisis (as cited in Coombs & Holladay, 2010, p.163). Their messages may conflict with the

organization’s message, therefore, only heightening the severity of the crisis. Spokespersons of

the organization need to provide consistent information in an accurate and timely manner to

reduce damage to the organization’s reputation. In Oil Industry Crisis Communication, Michelle

Maresh and David E. Williams (2010) emphasized, “crisis planning experts typically suggest an

organization speak with one voice to the media and stakeholders”(as cited in Coombs &

Holladay, 2010, p.297). Effective media relations can positively influence the press coverage

because organizations can frame the crisis to change the perceptions of the public and

stakeholders while protecting the organization’s reputation (Holladay, 2010, as cited in Coombs

& Holladay, 2010, p.177). As a result, appearances in the media by the CEO or a spokesperson

are important because it will demonstrate the level of concern the organization has about the

crisis. In Toward a Synthesis Model for Crisis Communication in the Public Sector, J. Suzanne

Horsley and Randolph T. Barker (2002) emphasized, “Television appearances can be very

important in defusing a situation because the majority of Americans turn to television as their


primary source for news” (p.412). In addition, organizations should have video materials ready

for news sources to use included in their crisis management plan. In Using Broadcast Television

to Control a Crisis, Jim Wexler (1993) emphasized that 90 percent of Americans depend on

television as their primary source of news and that organizations in a crisis should include B-

rolls and video footage for the media (Nikolaev, 2010, as cited in Coombs & Holladay, 2010,

p.268). Preparing for a crisis before it occurs can preserve the reputation of a corporation. Crisis

communication practitioner’s main goal is to protect the reputation of an organization.

When the reputation of the organization has repeatedly been under scrutiny within one

organization, the use of organizational memory is crucial because they can use past experiences

to assist future crises. In Effective Crisis Communication: Moving from Crisis to Opportunity by

Robert R. Ulmer, Timothy L. Sellnow and Matthew W. Seeger (2007), the authors noted that

crisis-susceptible organizations use of organizational memory can help organizations “track its

own history and utilize it as similar situations emerge”(Maresh & Williams, 2010, as cited in

Coombs & Holladay, 2010, p.296). Therefore, in crisis management, organizations need to

establish resources towards their crisis history data for future assistance in decision-making.

One of the organizations that did learn from their crisis history is Carnival Cruise line. On

November 8, 2010, around 6 a.m. Carnival Cruise Splendor’s seven-day sail to the Mexican

Riviera experienced an engine room fire due to a crankcase split. The fire was extinguished in

the engine room without injuring any of the passengers. However, on the ship, the passengers

food inconveniently spoiled, the air conditioning was unable to function, and the entire ship was

dark— only dimly lit with emergency lights and sunlight in sparse locations (O’Connor, 2010).

Therefore, the 4,500 passengers and crewmembers had enough power only for cold water and


limited toilet use. Crewmembers on the ship notified the passengers about the fire using the PA

system. As a result, all the passengers where informed of what happened on the ship.

Carnival Cruise Splendor was 200 miles south of San Diego, California when the engine

room fire killed the power off the ship. Unfortunately, air conditioning, Internet service, and hot

water were no longer in use. Carnival knew that the public would scrutinize the way they handle

this fire because lives were at risk. Accordingly, Carnival offered free drinks and entertainment

to all their passengers to keep them happy while the U.S. Navy re-supplied the ship with food

and two tugboats pulled the ship back to U.S. shores (Watson, Spagat, & Dillon, 2010).

The CEO Gerry Cahill held an immediate press conference in San Diego, California,

where he apologized and offered a full refund to all the passengers, including reimbursement of

travel expenses and a free future cruise within the next 2 years. What Carnival did right in this

crisis was that, they extinguished the fire in the engine room before any damages were done to

the passengers or any other part of the boat. Then, the CEO— Cahill made a statement to the

public right after the incident occurred instead of making an appearance on his own time. Cahill

showed remorse for the situation and remediated it with giving his passengers a compensation

package. This includes: a full refund (mini bar, spa, gift shop purchases), future free cruise of

the original ticket price within the next two years, refund of transportation to the pier (plane, car,

or bus), and overnight stay at a nearby hotel with daily stipend. Maresh and Williams (2010)

noted, “Compensation is a way for an organization to accept blame for the crisis but make a

reimbursement to those who were affected, either supply wise or monetarily”(as cited in Coombs

& Holladay, 2010, p.287). They way Carnival handled this crisis was comparatively different

compared to past crises. In 1999, Carnival Cruise Tropicale also had an engine room fire. While


everyone aboard the ship was safe, Carnival did not offer a full refund for the unpleasant

circumstances. Instead, Carnival only offered a 25 percent refund to the passengers. In addition,

in 2006, Carnival Cruise Star Princess also had a fire, however, it was not caused by the engine

room, but by a cigarette. That fire by the cigarette enflamed about 150 rooms and 1 passenger

died due to smoke inhalation. The passengers on the Star Princess did receive a full refund for

the cruise and airfare, but they only received a 25 percent future credit for a future cruise

(Walker, 2010).

Even though Cahill stated during the press conference that the challenges on Carnival

Cruise Splendor were the worst they have ever encountered in the 35-year history, it appears that

Carnival has encountered fires on a ship before. However, the most important fact from the

Carnival Cruise Splendor is that everyone on that ship was safe and no one was injured. As a

result, Carnival was able to protect their reputation. Within an organizational crisis perspective,

Carnival’s crisis was internal.

Through intraorganizational crisis history, Carnival Cruise Splendor crisis occurred

within one organization, they learned from their past mistakes and arose from this crisis as the

model of what to do when another cruise experiences engine failure or an internal problem (not

externally like a hurricane or pirates). The public was able to forgive the organization of the

crisis because it was an accident. Coombs and Holladay (1996) suggested “Publics attribute

greater casualty to an organization when the crisis is a transgression that when it is an accident,

since the organization seemingly has more control over a transgression than an accident”(Elliot,

2010, as cited in Coombs & Holladay, 2010, p.207). Carnival Cruise Splendor crisis is attributed

as an accident. Sherry J. Holladay (2010) provided,


People will assign little responsibility to the organization when the crisis is perceived to

stem from a technical accident such as faulty parts (pipes, hoses) or malfunctioning

equipment that could not be detected by normal means or by visual inspections. People

will attribute the greatest blame to the organization (assign the most crisis responsibility)

when they perceive the crisis was preventable (as cited in Coombs & Holladay, 2010,

p.165).

The way the public perceives the crisis is dependent upon crisis history and the organization’s

reputation. When a history of crisis becomes liable to the reputation of the organization, it is now

a hazard to the organizations current crisis. In Helping Crisis Managers Protect Reputational

Assets: Initial Tests of the Situational Crisis Communication Theory by Coombs and Holladay

(2002), the authors proposed the term “Velcro effect”, which suggests, “A history of crisis

compounds the reputational threat posed by the current crisis. A previous history of crisis will

lead people to assign greater blame (responsibility) to the organization” (Holladay, 2010, as cited

in Coombs & Holladay, 2010, p.167). Carnival Cruise Splendor was at fault because of the fire

in the engine room. Although it was an accident, due to previous crises of the same cause,

Carnival should have identified the cause to prevent an engine fire from occurring again.

However, the organization’s reputation was not damaged because Cahill immediately spoke to

the public about the unfortunate turn of events, apologized to the passengers about the

inconvenience, and offered a better compensation package compared to others in the past.

Horsley and Barker (2002) suggested, “If a company is at fault, its spokespersons repair the


company’s reputation much faster if they apologize, accept responsibility, and show

remorse”(p.409). However, displaying the CEO as the spokesperson is not always ideal. An

organization must be flexible with their crisis communication plan to maintain good public

relations. Horsley and Barker (2002) indicated “Organizations whose workers have strong

communication skills and understand their role in a crisis will win a public relations battle,

especially if the battles is played in an atmosphere of continuous, open communication”(p.428).

Open communication in times of a crisis can help reduce public uncertainty.

Transfer of information from a primary source, such as an organization to the media, is

crucial in a crisis management plan. Without communication, handling a crisis will not be

effective for an organization’s goals. The goal in terms of a crisis is to repair and recover from

the situation. Leslie Gaines-Ross (2008) provided 12 Steps to Safeguarding and Recovering

Reputation. They are: the CEO should accept responsibility, provide information (to the public),

heed your critics, develop a sense of urgency, start asking questions (to avoid future mistakes),

do a survey (for improvement in reputation), make culture change positive, objectively assess the

need for change, work with the media, follow a clear communication plan, work everyday to

rebuild a damaged reputation, and don’t repeat past mistakes. These steps help organizations fix

their damaged image. As a result, Carnival Cruise’s reputation is not at risk due to the immediate

response by the CEO. Cahill, in a sense, followed the 12 Steps to Safeguarding and Recovering

Reputation (Gaines-Ross, 2008) and used this crisis to the advantage of the organization to create

a stronger image. Cahill apologized and adjusted information to the public, therefore, explaining

and showing regret over the incident. In Crisis Management Planning and The Threat of

Bioterrorism, Hyun Soon Park, Charles T. Salmon, and Brenda J. Wrigley (2003) mentioned that


a crisis event is not only an obstacle but an opportunity for the organization to strengthen their

business practices and their reputation towards their stakeholders”(Nikolaev, 2010, as cited in

Coombs & Holladay, 2010, p.269). Ultimately, the CEO is responsible for the organization’s

reputation. When the reputation falters, the CEO’s career will be at stake.

An example of a CEO career being at stake due to their performance during a crisis is

Tony Hayward for British Petroleum (BP). Hayward’s scapegoating methods put his career at

stake, in turn, replacing him for Bob Dudley as CEO for BP. Hayward was supposed to manage

the reputation of his organization, but instead, he complained about wanting his life back and

going on vacations in crystal clear waters with his family while the Gulf of Mexico is covered in

oil. In Ongoing Crisis Communication: Planning, Managing, and Responding, Coombs (1999)

indicated, “Crisis managers are encouraged to be quick, consistent, open, sympathetic, and

informative”(Maresh & Williams, 2010, as cited in Coombs & Holladay, 2010, p.290). His

actions were contradictory to a remorseful CEO whose crisis has a high personalization factor.

This crisis affected the lives of the surrounding public in a profound way.

On April 20, 2010, one of the worst major oil spills occurred in the Gulf of Mexico. BP

leased an offshore oil rig named Deepwater Horizon, which is owned by Transocean and the

contractors involved were Halliburton— an oilfield services firm. The Deepwater Horizon oil rig

leased by BP exploded and sank two days later into the ocean, killing 11 workers and injuring

17. When the oil rig sank, the damages to the riser due to the explosion and the loss of pressure

from the well enabled the crude oil to release at an uncontrollable rate (Guidotti, 2010). The fears

of hurricane season approaching could spread the oil into other areas and not containing the oil in

the Gulf of Mexico. BP tried to stop the oil flow by repairing the blowout preventer and plugging


the oil well with a “top kill,” however, each method was unsuccessful and risky because those

solutions could cause more damage to the well. As a result, BP, among other scientists and

engineers, decided on constructing two relief wells to stop the leaking of oil and spread chemical

dispersant to break up the oil. Since April 20 until September 21, the federal government has

officially announced the permanent plug on the well.

This oil spill was the worst spill in the Gulf of Mexico since Ixtoc, 1979, a Mexican well.

Due to the BP oil spill, over 130 lawsuits were filed from property damage and loss of income

from the Gulf residents. This crisis demanded a lot of attention because of a high personalization

factor. The Department of Homeland Security declared the incident a “spill of national

significance,” because of the estimated 100,000 barrels of oil being released a day into the gulf.

People all in the Gulf region were affected by BP’s crisis. When the crisis occurred, BP did set

up a command center in Louisiana and Hayward took on the responsibility to pay for all

legitimate claims for the damages they caused (Mulkern, 2010). However, Hayward mentioned

on television that the oil spill is not their accident but it is their responsibility, Hayward began

pointing fingers at Transocean and Halliburton to diffuse liability. BP’s strategy to handle their

crisis was a Primary Strategy. In Protecting Organizational Reputations During a Crisis: The

Development and Application of Situational Crisis Communication Theory, Coombs (2007b)

noted that primary strategy includes “attack the accuser, denial, scapegoating, excuse,

justification, compensation, and apology” (Maresh & Williams, 2010, as cited in Coombs &

Holladay, 2010, p.286). Hayward tried to deny that this crisis was the organization’s problem

and then tried to blame it on another organization to take the pressure off BP. Maresh and

Williams (2010) indicated, “Simple denial occurs when an organization refuses to take


responsibility for the situation, stating that the crisis did not occur or that the organization did not

create the crisis”(as cited in Coombs & Holladay, 2010, p.286). Denying the crisis in the public

eye does not benefit the organization in any way. With a highly publicized crisis under scrutiny,

denying or trying to blame the crisis on another organization only hinders public relation’s

efforts. Horsley and Barker (2002) emphasized, “Attempts by spokespersons to blame the

incident on some other entity to take the pressure off of their company can backfire and hinder

further public relations efforts”(p.410). A CEO scapegoating the crisis onto another organization

portrays that the organization is not professional and cannot handle a crisis. It only compounds a

negative image to an already tarnished reputation.

The case of who is to blame for the oil spill is all the parties involved in the crisis. Each

party BP, Transocean, and Halliburton has a stake in the oil crisis. The Oil Pollution Act of 1990

stated, “Each responsible party for a vessel or a facility from oil is discharged”(as cited in

Robertson and Lipton, 2010) is responsible for clean up costs. At the same time, the organization

that leases the rig is primarily responsible for the crisis, which is BP. For example, when a

person leases a car and the car breaks down, it is the leaser’s responsibility to maintain the car.

Therefore, when the oil rig malfunctioned on BP, it is BP’s responsibility to pay for the upkeep.

In addition, BP should be held responsible for the crisis because they made numerous promises

to the government that the drilling would be safe and reliable. In BP’s PR Lessons by Thomas J.

Roach (2010), he emphasized, “They (BP) aggressively pursued permission to drill in the ocean,

they made promises about safety and reliability, and they caused an ecological disruption…”

(p.18). As a result, their role in this crisis is the center of it all. BP was not prepared for a leak or

a spill from drilling in the Gulf of Mexico. In BP Is Criticized Over Oil Spill, But U.S. Missed


Chances to Act, Campbell Robertson and Eric Lipton (2010) mentioned that BP and the federal

government were prepared for a crisis, “even though a plan filed last year with the government

said it was highly unlikely that a spill or leak would ever result from the Deep Horizon Rig.”

This is similar to the outlook of Titanic had when the ship was about to sail. They had some

lifeboats in case of a crisis, however, they believed that their ship was unsinkable, and the

conclusion of the story is that the ship sank and many lives were lost.

BP should have been more prepared for the occurrence of this type of crisis. Due to

Hayward’s inappropriate comments in the media, the public relations and crisis strategy BP used

needed to change. “Short-term and long-term crisis plans should be developed to help assess the

resources that would be needed and to provide ways to accommodate normal business needs

when these resources are used up”(Horsley & Barker, 2002, p.409). All the mishaps and public

blunders Hayward has said hurt the organization’s image and efforts to remediate the crisis. The

oil crisis was a story about the spill and those who were affected, but the story later became a

circus show of consistent failures on BP’s behalf.

Within Crisis Communications, one of the first rules in a crisis is to have a plan to handle

the situation. Roach (2010) stated that public relations professionals should “develop crisis

communication plans that call for preparing executives and other spokespersons to act and speak

appropriately if a crisis puts them into contact with the news media and the public”(p.19). The

spokesperson that speaks on behalf of the organization should be calm, collective, and

trustworthy, so that the public will believe what they are saying. In addition, the spokesperson

should not always be the CEO. If the CEO does not accomplish his/her job, there is no one else

to resort to but to let go of the current CEO and replace him or her, in hopes that it will be the


catalyst in repairing the organization’s reputation. Instead, an organization should have a person

specifically for public speaking in handling a crisis. When that is not enough, then the CEO can

step in to take the matters at hand. Therefore, having a plan A and a plan B will enable an

organization to succeed in times of crises.

Media Relations is crucial in times of crises. Constant communication within the first 24

hours of the crisis will shape the organizations public image. Even though, BP did react

immediately toward the oil spill by setting up a station in Louisiana, however, they did not have

constant communication with the public. By not communicating, rumors and assumptions began

to arise, especially with the delayed response from Hayward (Chen, 2010). To combat this, BP

began a 50 million dollar television campaign apologizing and how they are going to make

things right. Unfortunately, this came out two months after the crisis began. Instead of BP

pouring money into a commercial dictating their apology and what they plan to do, that money

should have been sent on monitoring the oil rigs (Helwege, 2011). In addition, the commercial

sent the message that BP only cared about their image and not the clean up of the oil spill. Even

though, the image of this organization is important, the money could have been used to clean up

the oil and that same message could have been sent during a press conference. Hayward or a PR

spokesperson should have spoken with the media in the early stages of the crisis to release

information on how the crisis will be handled. With the delay to address the severity of the crisis,

those actions only tarnished the credibility of the organization.

Before the Deepwater Horizon oil rig explosion, BP promoted themselves as socially

responsible. With Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), their new sunburst logo and slogan

(Beyond Petroleum) portrayed that they were investing in alternative energies and cared about


the environment. They realized the advantages of projecting an ethical image and how it will

benefit them in working around governmental regulations. However, that all backfired when the

oil rig crisis occurred. “Now, the stakes for BP include not just the cleanup costs but also the

firm’s ability to get regulatory approval for future drilling opportunities”(Trumbull, 2010). BP

underestimated the privileges of CSR and what is at risk when they fail to keep operations within

regulation.

However, it is not just BP that will be affected by their actions, others in the industry will

suffer because of BP. In extraorganizational crisis history, previous crises from different

organizations affect other organization within the same industry. For example, if gallons of milk

were tainted with salmonella by XYZ inc., that company’s milk will be recalled from shelves but

also other companies’ milk will be recalled because the milk in general has salmonella. In

addition, there is the possibility that more than one company may share the same cows that can

be infected with salmonella. Therefore, previous crises from one organization will affect another

organization’s reputation and bottom line.

The Deepwater Horizon oil rig explosion is not the first time a crisis has occurred or the

first time oil spills within an industry. In March 24, 1989, the Exxon Valdez accident was largest

oil spill in the United States, until the BP spill. The Valdez oil tanker crashed in the Alaskan

Prince William Sound and released about 11 million gallons of petroleum (Mulkern, 2010),

killing wildlife and disrupting the ecosystem. Exxon and BP were similar in their Public relations

efforts. For example, Exxon tried to shift the blame to the tanker’s captain, while BP tried with

Transocean and Halliburton. Exxon and BP were perceived as “avoiding the public, passing the

blame, minimizing the impact of the spill on the environment, behaving defensively, and lacking


compassion” (Horsley & Barker, 2002, p.411). However, Exxon’s spill occurred in a remote area

and the disaster ended in a timely manner compared to BP where it took months for the oil to

stop gushing. Within organizational memory, in 2005, BP’s oil refinery in Texas exploded

because of highly flammable liquid leaked onto the ground near a pickup truck that was left

running. Fifteen died and 170 others were injured (Trumbull, 2010). BP has had other accidents

that resulted in fatalities; therefore, they have plenty of experiences to learn from. Yet, they have

not applied those lessons towards future crises. They should apply their own crisis history to

avoid future complications.

BP’s reputation was severely tarnished, not simply because of the CEO actions, but also

the Velcro effect. Other organizations endured similar crises and that only compounded the

blame onto BP. In Impact of Past Crises on Current Crisis Communication, Coombs (2004)

indicated, “Performance history, crisis history, and relationship history all influence stakeholder

perceptions of an organization’s responsibility in a crisis and its overall reputation”(Maresh &

Williams, 2010, as cited in Coombs & Holladay, 2010, p.287). Oil industry crises will forever be

linked to previous crisis in similar industries. Exxon used to be the textbook example of what not

to do in a crisis but now BP is the ideal case study.

When the oil rig exploded, BP should have accepted responsibility for the crisis and not

have blamed other organizations for the explosion. Hayward, as the face of the company, should

have talked to the public immediately about the crisis instead withholding or downplaying

information. For example, “in one interview, Hayward described the spill as ‘tiny’ in comparison

to the ‘big ocean’ of the gulf””(Trumbull, 2010). By not giving accurate and timely information,

that only hurt the organization because rumors and speculations arose. In addition, BP’s public


relation’s efforts were reactive instead of proactive. They responded toward the crisis instead of

taking control of it. To handle and repair from the Deepwater Horizon oil rig crisis, BP should

have followed the 12 Steps to Safeguarding and Recovering Reputation by Leslie Gaines-Ross

(2008). These steps can help a corporation rebuild their reputation. Some of them are:

1. The CEO should accept responsibility— Hayward or a spokesperson should have

spoken to the media and apologized on the behalf of BP and for the damage this crisis

will do.

2. Provide information— The public wanted to know what caused the oil rig to explode,

who was hurt, and how the surrounding region would be affected. Due to the delay from

an official spokesperson from BP, rumors and speculation began to surface. Interviews

from local residents and bloggers were the only information people had until BP made an

official statement.

3. Develop a sense of urgency— BP should have been reactive towards the crisis, in terms

of speaking to the public. The first 24 hours of a crisis are the most important to try to

diffuse the situation. “Ignoring public relations opportunities can haunt organizations

when they really need the support of the media and the public”(Horsley & Barker, 2002,

p.408). Therefore, being proactive during the first few hours of a crisis, an organization

can show ownership of the situation.

4. Work with the media— BP should have been cooperative with the media, and Hayward

should have not made inappropriate comments about wanting his life back and that this

crisis was not the organization’s fault. Comments like those should have been made


behind closed doors. In addition, those comments made by Hayward shows that he does

not care about the crisis and wants nothing to do with the recovery.

5. Follow a clear communication plan— A crisis management plan should be in place to

combat the crisis in a smooth and timely manner. All the messages released during times

of a crisis should be positive and consistent with the organization’s goals. Horsley &

Barker (2002) provided, “Many companies have not prepared crisis management plans,

and even fewer have given thought to the communication components of those

plans”(p.407). Unfortunately, most organizations do not have a crisis management plan in

place.

6. Work every day to rebuild a damaged reputation— BP should express the need to

clean up the beaches, waters, and the Gulf region, so that the residents can live the way

they did before the crisis. Every action BP makes should be to repair their tarnished

image from the oil spill.

7. Don’t repeat past mistakes— BP has made decisions towards not making the same

mistakes. For example, Hayward is not longer CEO and any oil company that wants to

drill now has steeper regulations to adhere to.

Organizations, like BP, tend to forget the impact public opinion has on an organization.

“Organizations can be hurt by the lack of responsiveness to the community in which they

operate”(Holladay, 2010, as cited in Coombs & Holladay, 2010, p.161). Therefore, by BP not

responding in a timely manner to address the crisis or the length of time it took to plug the well

contributed to the tarnished image BP has today. BP should have followed the 12 Steps to


Safeguarding and Recovering Reputation, because it covers all the aspects an organization needs

accomplish to recover from a crisis. However, there are other ways to repair an organization’s

reputation from a crisis. “In a crisis communication plan, flexibility is a must because not every

crisis is similar in scope or severity”(Horsley & Barker, 2002, p.428). As long as there is

proactive open communication from the start, an organization will most likely recover from their

crisis and their reputation will remain intact.

In conclusion, the Carnival Cruise Splendor crisis compared to British Petroleum’s

Deepwater Horizon oil rig explosion are two very different crises in magnitude and

personalization factor. People’s lives were acutely affected, for example, the constituents on the

cruise did not have the vacation they paid for, and the constituents of the Gulf of Mexico now

have an ongoing cleanup of the crude oil for years to come. Each company had enough

experience in a crisis to learn from their organizational memory. One organization did learn from

their past experiences and the other did not. As a result, Carnival Cruise Splendor is the textbook

example of what an organization should do and BP’s Deepwater Horizon oil rig explosion is an

example of what not to do. Within organizational memory, each organization could have used

the lessons learned from past crises to avoid future crises. Unfortunately, both organizations still

encountered crisis. However, how they handled them, reinforced or created a new image and

reputation for the organization and affected their industries, as a whole.

Each of these hard crises received a notable amount of coverage in the media. The BP oil

spill received substantially more coverage because of the impact this crisis had on millions of

people, as well as billions of animal and plant life. In comparison, the Carnival Cruise Splendor

crisis was not covered in the media for as long as the BP oil spill because the crisis was resolved


in a timely manner. Media relations during times of crises are highly crucial to maintain the

image and reputation of an organization. The media can sway public opinion about an

organization, in turn, that opinion can affect the bottom line. It is imperative for an organization

to speak to the media when a crisis occurs to portray the issue is under control. When the

organization has a crisis management plan, it can ease the handling of a crisis. For example, the

Carnival Cruise Splendor used their crisis management plan by publicly announcing the

unfortunate events and promptly compensating the passengers. Through this act, they were able

to fix the crisis quickly and without severe repercussions. On the other hand, BP most likely did

have a plan to handle a crisis, however, it was not effective and only prolonged the disaster. The

CEO denied and scapegoated the crisis onto other parties, such as Halliburton and Transocean,

and tardily apologized after much public scrutiny. This tarnished BP’s image and thus, they are

now the textbook example of what an organization should not do during a crisis.


References

Chen, S. (2010). Crisis management 101: what can bp ceo hayward's mistakes teach us?. CNN

Living, Retrieved from http://articles.cnn.com/2010-07-

27/living/bp.tony.hayward.mistakes_1_bp-ceo-hayward-professors-gulf- coast?

_s=PM:LIVING

Coombs, W.T., & Holladay, S.J. (2010). The handbook of crisis communication. New York,

NY: Wiley-Blackwell.

Gaines-Ross, L. (2008). Corporate reputation: 12 steps to safeguarding and recovering

reputation. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

Guidotti, T. L. (2010, October). Oil on the Water in the Gulf of Mexico. Archives of

Environmental & Occupational Health. pp. 181-182.

doi:10.1080/19338244.2010.503556.

Helwege, J.. (2011). The gulf oil spill: Social versus legal obligations facing bp. Scitech Lawyer,

7(3), 6-7. Retrieved February 12, 2011, from ABI/INFORM Trade & Industry.

(Document ID: 2219734911)

Horsley, J.S., & Barker. R. T. (2002). Toward a synthesis model for crisis

communication in the public sector. Journal of Business and Technical Communication,

16(4), 406-440. Retrieved February 12, 2011, from ABI/INFORM Global. (Document

ID: 208160231).

Mattera, P. (2010). Corporate Social Irresponsibility. Social Policy, 40(2), 35. Retrieved from

EBSCOhost.

http://articles.cnn.com/2010-07-%0927/living/bp.tony.hayward.mistakes_1_bp-ceo-hayward-professors-gulf-%09coast?_s=PM:LIVING




Mulkern, A.C. (2010). Bp's pr blunders mirror exxon’s, appear destined for record book. The

New York Times, Retrieved from

http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2010/06/10/10greenwire-bps-pr-blunders-mirror-exxons-

appear-destined-98819.html

O'Connor, A. (2010). Officials try to rescue cruise ship. The New York Times, Retrieved from

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/10/us/10cruise.html

Roach, T. J. (2010). Bp's pr lessons. Rock Products, 113(8), 18-20. Retrieved from

EBSCOhost.

Robertson, C., & Lipton, E. (2010). Bp is criticized over oil spill, but u.s. missed chances to act.

The New York Times, Retrieved from

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/01/us/01gulf.html

Trumbull, M. (2010). Four reasons tony hayward is apparently out as bp chief. The Christian

Science Monitor, Retrieved from http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2010/0726/Four-

reasons-Tony-Hayward-is-apparently-out-as-BP-chief

Walker, J. (2010, November 14). The splendor cruise ship fire- three reasons why you will lose if

you sue carnival [Web log message]. Retrieved from

http://www.cruiselawnews.com/2010/11/articles/fires-1/the-splendor-cruise-ship-fire-

three-reasons-why-you-will-lose-if-you-sue-carnival/

Watson, J., Spagat, E., & Dillon, R.M. (2010). Carnival ceo apologizes to stranded cruisers.

MSNBC.com, Retrieved from http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40084109/ns/travel-news/

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40084109/ns/travel-news/

http://www.cruiselawnews.com/2010/11/articles/fires-1/the-splendor-cruise-ship-fire-

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2010/0726/Four-reasons-Tony-Hayward-is-apparently-out-as-BP-chief

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2010/0726/Four-reasons-Tony-Hayward-is-apparently-out-as-BP-chief

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/01/us/01gulf.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/10/us/10cruise.html

http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2010/06/10/10greenwire-bps-pr-blunders-mirror-exxons-%09appear-destined-98819.html

http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2010/06/10/10greenwire-bps-pr-blunders-mirror-exxons-%09appear-destined-98819.html

2010 crisis communication analysis

Documents