This article reflects on examples from 2015.
Accidents happen and mistakes can have serious consequences. How should a company respond, and what can it do to protect trust? A sincere apology can be an important part of the response, but only when the words are supported by information and action.
A personal response
In August 2015, managing director Ad Kornet apologised on behalf of crane company Peinemann after the crane accident in Alphen aan den Rijn. In a video, he offered an apology, explained the background and next steps, and thanked the emergency services and others for their support.
What struck me was the directness of the presentation. It was not a polished production: it was a person speaking plainly. The response felt personal, sincere and informative. Whatever the eventual findings about the accident, that human approach made it easier to listen to what he had to say.
Credibility is essential to an apology. The people receiving it need to believe that you mean it. That is also why an apology demanded by somebody else may have less effect. At the time, professor George Maat was seeking an apology from RTL over its reporting about his presentation of MH17 photographs. It raised a communications question: how much can an apology repair if the audience doubts the sincerity behind it?
Show that you understand the impact
A crisis does not have to involve a national disaster. In another example from that summer, beach restaurant Parnassia faced criticism after an employee asked a person with ALS to leave the terrace because he was not ordering a drink. The story spread across social media and prompted strong reactions.
The owner’s initial response played down the incident as a misunderstanding. He later apologised and supported that apology by donating a day’s turnover to the ALS foundation. According to the reporting at the time, the man and his wife accepted the apology.
The difference was not simply the word “sorry”. The response recognised that something had gone wrong and included a concrete gesture.
Explain what happened and what comes next
A quick apology may be enough when you accidentally spill coffee on a colleague’s desk. For an organisation dealing with a serious incident, people generally need more.
A complete response should explain what is known about the event and how it happened, recognise the situation of those affected, and describe what is being done to put things right or prevent a repeat. A statement without that substance can sound hollow.
Providing all the answers immediately is not always possible. Facts may still be under investigation, and some details may not yet be available. Be clear about those limits instead of filling the gaps with speculation. Explain what is known, what remains uncertain and when people can expect another update.
Follow the apology with action
In June 2015, the Dutch state lottery, Staatsloterij, used a full-page advertisement to apologise following a court ruling about misleading communications. Its response did more than acknowledge the criticism: it also presented six new guarantees.
From a PR perspective, that combination was interesting. The organisation used the moment to explain how it intended to act differently and what people should be able to expect from it. Whether that approach rebuilt trust would need to be measured; an apology alone is not evidence of reputational recovery.
The broader lesson is that words and behaviour need to match. A crisis response is stronger when people can see the organisation listening, learning and taking responsibility for the next steps.
For more on preparing a clear response, read our five fundamentals of crisis communication. Our media training helps spokespeople practise communicating under pressure. Contact Progress Communications to discuss your communications preparation.
Linda
More news ›