Cecilio Pedro

CRISIS
A crisis (from the Greek κρίσις - krisis;[1] plural: "crises"; adjectival form: "critical") is any event that is, or expected to lead to, an unstable and dangerous situation affecting an individual, group, community, or whole society. Crises are deemed to be negative changes in the security, economic, political, societal, or environmental affairs, especially when they occur abruptly, with little or no warning. More loosely, it is a term meaning 'a testing time' or an 'emergency event'.
Crisis is the situation of a complex system (family, economy, society) when the system functions poorly, an immediate decision is necessary, but the causes of the dysfunction are not known.

a) situation of a complex system – simple systems do not enter crises. We can speak about a crisis of moral values, an economical or political crisis, but not a motor crisis.
b) poor function. The system still functions, but does not break down.
c) an immediate decision is necessary to stop the further disintegration of the system.
d) the causes are so many, or unknown, that it is impossible to take a rational, informed decision to reverse the situation.

Crisis has several defining characteristics. Seeger, Sell now, and Ulmer say that crises have four defining characteristics that are "specific, unexpected, and non-routine events or series of events that [create] high levels of uncertainty and threat or perceived threat to an organization's high priority goals." Thus the first three characteristics are that the event is

1. unexpected (i.e., a surprise)
2. creates uncertainty
3. is seen as a threat to important goals
Venette argues that "crisis is a process of transformation where the old system can no longer be maintained." Therefore the fourth defining quality is the need for change. If change is not needed, the event could more accurately be described as a failure.
Apart from natural crises that are inherently unpredictable (volcanic eruptions, tsunami etc.) most of the crises that we face are created by man. Hence the requirements of their being 'unexpected' depends upon man failing to note the onset of crisis conditions. Some of our inability to recognise crises before they become dangerous is due to denial and other psychological responses that provide succour and protection for our emotions.
A different set of reasons for failing to notice the onset of crises is that we allow ourselves to be 'tricked' into believing that we are doing something for reasons that are false. In other words, we are doing the wrong things for the right reasons. For example, we might believe that we are solving the threats of climate change by engaging in economic trading activity that has no real impact on the climate. Mitroff and Silvers [5] posit two reasons for these mistakes, which they classify as Type 3 (inadvertent) and Type 4 (deliberate) errors.
The effect of our inability to attend to the likely results of our actions can result in crisis.
From this perspective we might usefully learn that failing to understand the real causes of our difficulties is likely to lead to repeated downstream 'blowback'. Where states are concerned, Michael Brecher, based on case studies of the International Crisis Behavior (ICB) project, suggested a different way of defining crisis as conditions are perceptions held by the highest level decision-makers of the actor concerned:

1. threat to basic values, with a simultaneous or subsequent
2. high probability of involvement in military hostilities, and the awareness of
3. finite time for response to the external value threat

CRISIS MANAGEMENT
Crisis management is the process by which an organization deals with a major event that threatens to harm the organization, its stakeholders, or the general public. The study of crisis management originated with the large scale industrial and environmental disasters in the 1980s.[1] Three elements are common to most definitions of crisis: (a) a threat to the organization, (b) the element of surprise, and (c) a short decision time.[2] Venette[3] argues that "crisis is a process of transformation where the old system can no longer be maintained." Therefore the fourth defining quality is the need for change. If change is not needed, the event could more accurately be described as a failure or incident.
In contrast to risk management, which involves assessing potential threats and finding the best ways to avoid those threats, crisis management involves dealing with threats before, during, and after they have occurred. It is a discipline within the broader context ofmanagement consisting of skills and techniques required to identify, assess, understand, and cope with a serious situation, especially from the moment it first occurs to the point that recovery procedures start.

Crisis management consists of: * Methods used to respond to both the reality and perception of crises. * Establishing metrics to define what scenarios constitute a crisis and should consequently trigger the necessary response mechanisms. * Communication that occurs within the response phase of emergency management scenarios.
Crisis management methods of a business or an organization are called Crisis Management Plan.
Crisis management is occasionally referred to as incident management, although several industry specialists such as Peter Powerargue that the term crisis management is more accurate. [4]
A crisis mindset requires the ability to think of the worst-case scenario while simultaneously suggesting numerous solutions. Trial and error is an accepted discipline, as the first line of defense might not work. It is necessary to maintain a list of contingency plans and to be always on alert. Organizations and individuals should always be prepared with a rapid response plan to emergencies which would require analysis, drills and exercises.[5]
The credibility and reputation of organizations is heavily influenced by the perception of their responses during crisis situations. The organization and communication involved in responding to a crisis in a timely fashion makes for a challenge in businesses. There must be open and consistent communication throughout the hierarchy to contribute to a successful crisis communication process.
The related terms emergency management and business continuity management focus respectively on the prompt but short lived "first aid" type of response (e.g. putting the fire out) and the longer term recovery and restoration phases (e.g. moving operations to another site). Crisis is also a facet of risk management, although it is probably untrue to say that Crisis Management represents a failure of Risk Management since it will never be possible to totally mitigate the chances of catastrophes occurring.
-------------------------------------------------
Types of crisis
During the crisis management process, it is important to identify types of crises in that different crises necessitate the use of different crisis management strategies.[6] Potential crises are enormous, but crises can be clustered.[6]
Lerbinger[7] categorized eight types of crises 1. Natural disaster 2. Technological crises 3. Confrontation 4. Malevolence 5. Organizational Misdeeds 6. Workplace Violence 7. Rumours 8. Terrorist attacks/man-made disasters

Natural crises
Natural crises, typically natural disasters considered as 'acts of God,' are such environmental phenomena as earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, tornadoes and hurricanes, floods, landslides, tsunamis, storms, and droughts that threaten life, property, and the environment itself.[6][7]
Example: 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake (Tsunami)
[edit]Technological crises
Technological crises are caused by human application of science and technology. Technological accidents inevitably occur when technology becomes complex and coupled and something goes wrong in the system as a whole (Technological breakdowns). Some technological crises occur when human error causes disruptions (Human breakdowns[6]). People tend to assign blame for a technological disaster because technology is subject to human manipulation whereas they do not hold anyone responsible for natural disaster. When an accident creates significant environmental damage, the crisis is categorized as megadamage.[6] Samples include software failures, industrial accidents, and oil spills.[6][7]
Examples: Chernobyl disaster, Exxon Valdez oil spill
[edit]Confrontation crisis
Confrontation crisis occur when discontented individuals and/or groups fight businesses, government, and various interest groups to win acceptance of their demands and expectations. The common type of confrontation crisis is boycotts, and other types are picketing, sit-ins, ultimatums to those in authority, blockade or occupation of buildings, and resisting or disobeying police.
Example: Rainbow/PUSH’s (People United to Serve Humanity) boycott of Nike
Crisis of malevolence
An organization faces a crisis of malevolence when opponents or miscreant individuals use criminal means or other extreme tactics for the purpose of expressing hostility or anger toward, or seeking gain from, a company, country, or economic system, perhaps with the aim of destabilizing or destroying it. Sample crisis include product tampering, kidnapping, malicious rumors, terrorism, and espionage.[6][7]
Example: 1982 Chicago Tylenol murders
Crises of organizational misdeeds
Crises occur when management takes actions it knows will harm or place stakeholders at risk for harm without adequate precautions.[6]Lerbinger[7] specified three different types of crises of organizational misdeeds: crises of skewed management values, crises of deception, and crises of management misconduct.
Crises of skewed management values
Crises of skewed management values are caused when managers favor short-term economic gain and neglect broader social values and stakeholders other than investors. This state of lopsided values is rooted in the classical business creed that focuses on the interests of stockholders and tends to disregard the interests of its other stakeholders such as customers, employees, and the community
Example: Sears sacrifices customer trust[clarification needed]
It has 4 stages -precrisis -acute -chronic and -conflict resolution
Crisis of deception
Crisis of deception occur when management conceals or misrepresents information about itself and its products in its dealing with consumers and others.
Example: Dow Corning’s silicone-gel breast implant
Crises of management misconduct
Some crises are caused not only by skewed values and deception but deliberate amorality and illegality.
Workplace violence
Crises occur when an employee or former employee commits violence against other employees on organizational grounds.
Example: DuPont’s Lycra[clarification needed]
Rumors
False information about an organization or its products creates crises hurting the organization’s reputation. Sample is linking the organization to radical groups or stories that their products are contaminated.[6]
Example: Procter & Gamble's Logo controversy
-------------------------------------------------
Crisis Leadership
Erika Hayes James, an organizational psychologist at the University of Virginia’s Darden Graduate School of Business, identifies two primary types of organizational crisis.[8] James defines organizational crisis as “any emotionally charged situation that, once it becomes public, invites negative stakeholder reaction and thereby has the potential to threaten the financial well-being, reputation, or survival of the firm or some portion thereof.” [9] 1. Sudden crisis 2. Smoldering crises
Sudden crises
Sudden crises are circumstances that occur without warning and beyond an institution’s control. Consequently, sudden crises are most often situations for which the institution and its leadership are not blamed.
Smoldering crises
Smoldering crises differ from sudden crises in that they begin as minor internal issues that, due to manager’s negligence, develop to crisis status. These are situations when leaders are blamed for the crisis and its subsequent effect on the institution in question. [9]
James categorises five phases of crisis that require specific crisis leadership competencies.[9] Each phase contains an obstacle that a leader must overcome to improve the structure and operations of an organization. James’s case study on crisis in the financial services sector, for example, explores why crisis events erode public trust in leadership. James's research demonstrates how leadership competencies of integrity, positive intent, capability, mutual respect, and transparency impact the trust-building process. [10] 1. Signal detection 2. Preparation and prevention 3. Containment and damage control 4. Business recovery 5. Learning
Signal detection
Si Sense-making: represents an attempt to create order and make sense, retrospectively, of what occurs. Perspective-taking: the ability to consider another person's or group's point of view.
Preparation and prevention
It is during this stage that crisis handlers begin preparing for or averting the crisis that had been foreshadowed in the signal detection stage. Organizations such as the Red Cross's primary mission is to prepare for and prevent the escalation of crisis events. Walmart has been described as an emergency relief standard bearer[citation needed] after having witnessed the incredibly speedy and well-coordinated effort to get supplies to the Gulf Coast of the United States in anticipation of Hurricane Katrina.
Containment and damage control
Usually the most vivid stage, the goal of crisis containment and damage control is to limit the reputational, financial, safety, and other threats to firm survival. Crisis handlers work diligently during this stage to bring the crisis to an end as quickly as possible to limit the negative publicity to the organization, and move into the business recovery phase.
Business recovery
When crisis hits, organizations must be able to carry on with their business in the midst of the crisis while simultaneously planning for how they will recover from the damage the crisis caused. Crisis handlers not only engage in continuity planning (determining the people, financial, and technology resources needed to keep the organization running), but will also actively pursue organizational resilience.

Learning
In the wake of a crisis, organizational decision makers adopt a learning orientation and use prior experience to develop new routines and behaviors that ultimately change the way the organization operates. The best leaders recognize this and are purposeful and skillful in finding the learning opportunities inherent in every crisis situation.
Crisis Management Model
Successfully defusing a crisis requires an understanding of how to handle a crisis – before they occur. Gonzalez-Herrero and Pratt found the different phases of Crisis Management.
There are 3 phases in any Crisis Management are as below 1. The diagnosis of the impending trouble or the danger signals. 2. Choosing appropriate Turnaround Strategy. 3. Implementation of the change process and its monitoring.
Management Crisis Planning
No corporation looks forward to facing a situation that causes a significant disruption to their business, especially one that stimulates extensive media coverage. Public scrutiny can result in a negative financial, political, legal and government impact. Crisis management planning deals with providing the best response to a crisis.[11]
-------------------------------------------------

-------------------------------------------------
Examples of successful crisis management
Tylenol (Johnson and Johnson)
In the fall of 1982, a murderer added 65 milligrams of cyanide to some Tylenol capsules on store shelves, killing seven people, including three in one family. Johnson & Johnson recalled and destroyed 31 million capsules at a cost of $100 million. The affable CEO, James Burke, appeared in television ads and at news conferences informing consumers of the company's actions. Tamper-resistant packaging was rapidly introduced, and Tylenol sales swiftly bounced back to near pre-crisis levels.[23]
When another bottle of tainted Tylenol was discovered in a store, it took only a matter of minutes for the manufacturer to issue a nationwide warning that people should not use the medication in its capsule form.[24]
Odwalla Foods
When Odwalla's apple juice was thought to be the cause of an outbreak of E. coli infection, the company lost a third of its market value. In October 1996, an outbreak of E. coli bacteria in Washington state, California, Colorado and British Columbia was traced to unpasteurized apple juice manufactured by natural juice maker Odwalla Inc. Forty-nine cases were reported, including the death of a small child. Within 24 hours, Odwalla conferred with the FDA and Washington state health officials; established a schedule of daily press briefings; sent out press releases which announced the recall; expressed remorse, concern and apology, and took responsibility for anyone harmed by their products; detailed symptoms of E. coli poisoning; and explained what consumers should do with any affected products. Odwalla then developed - through the help of consultants - effective thermal processes that would not harm the products' flavors when production resumed. All of these steps were communicated through close relations with the media and through full-page newspaper ads.
Mattel
Mattel Inc., the toy maker, has been plagued with more than 28 product recalls and in Summer of 2007, amongst problems with exports from China, faced two product recalls in two weeks. The company "did everything it could to get its message out, earning high marks from consumers and retailers. Though upset by the situation, they were appreciative of the company's response. At Mattel, just after the 7 a.m. recall announcement by federal officials, a public relations staff of 16 was set to call reporters at the 40 biggest media outlets. They told each to check their e-mail for a news release outlining the recalls, invited them to a teleconference call with executives and scheduled TV appearances or phone conversations with Mattel's chief executive. The Mattel CEO Robert Eckert did 14 TV interviews on a Tuesday in August and about 20 calls with individual reporters. By the week's end, Mattel had responded to more than 300 media inquiries in the U.S. alone."[25]
Pepsi
The Pepsi Corporation faced a crisis in 1993 which started with claims of syringes being found in cans of diet Pepsi. Pepsi urged stores not to remove the product from shelves while it had the cans and the situation investigated. This led to an arrest, which Pepsi made public and then followed with their first video news release, showing the production process to demonstrate that such tampering was impossible within their factories. A second video news release displayed the man arrested. A third video news release showed surveillance from a convenience store where a woman was caught replicating the tampering incident. The company simultaneously publicly worked with the FDA during the crisis. The corporation was completely open with the public throughout, and every employee of Pepsi was kept aware of the details. This made public communications effective throughout the crisis. After the crisis had been resolved, the corporation ran a series of special campaigns designed to thank the public for standing by the corporation, along with coupons for further compensation. This case served as a design for how to handle other crisis situations.
-------------------------------------------------

-------------------------------------------------
Examples of unsuccessful crisis management
Bhopal
The Bhopal disaster in which poor communication before, during, and after the crisis cost thousands of lives, illustrates the importance of incorporating cross-cultural communication in crisis management plans. According to American University’s Trade Environmental Database Case Studies (1997), local residents were not sure how to react to warnings of potential threats from the Union Carbide plant. Operating manuals printed only in English is an extreme example of mismanagement but indicative of systemic barriers to information diffusion. According to Union Carbide’s own chronology of the incident (2006), a day after the crisis Union Carbide’s upper management arrived in India but was unable to assist in the relief efforts because they were placed under house arrest by the Indian government. Symbolic intervention can be counter productive; a crisis management strategy can help upper management make more calculated decisions in how they should respond to disaster scenarios. The Bhopal incident illustrates the difficulty in consistently applying management standards to multi-national operations and the blame shifting that often results from the lack of a clear management plan.[27]
Ford and Firestone Tire and Rubber Company
The Ford-Firestone Tire and Rubber Company dispute transpired in August 2000. In response to claims that their 15-inch Wilderness AT, radial ATX and ATX II tire treads were separating from the tire core—leading to grisly, spectacular crashes—Bridgestone/Firestone recalled 6.5 million tires. These tires were mostly used on the Ford Explorer, the world's top-selling sport utility vehicle (SUV).[28]
The two companies committed three major blunders early on, say crisis experts. First, they blamed consumers for not inflating their tires properly. Then they blamed each other for faulty tires and faulty vehicle design. Then they said very little about what they were doing to solve a problem that had caused more than 100 deaths—until they got called to Washington to testify before Congress.[29]
Exxon
On March 24, 1989, a tanker belonging to the Exxon Corporation ran aground in the Prince William Sound in Alaska. The Exxon Valdezspilled millions of gallons of crude oil into the waters off Valdez, killing thousands of fish, fowl, and sea otters. Hundreds of miles of coastline were polluted and salmon spawning runs disrupted; numerous fishermen, especially Native Americans, lost their livelihoods. Exxon, by contrast, did not react quickly in terms of dealing with the media and the public; the CEO, Lawrence Rawl, did not become an active part of the public relations effort and actually shunned public involvement; the company had neither a communication plan nor a communication team in place to handle the event—in fact, the company did not appoint a public relations manager to its management team until 1993, 4 years after the incident; Exxon established its media center in Valdez, a location too small and too remote to handle the onslaught of media attention; and the company acted defensively in its response to its publics, even laying blame, at times, on other groups such as the Coast Guard. These responses also happened within days of the incident.[30]
-------------------------------------------------
Lessons learned in crisis management
Crisis as Opportunity
To address such shareholder impact, management must move from a mindset that manages crisis to one that generates crisis leadership. Research shows that organizational contributory factors affect the tendency of executives to adopt an effective "crisis as opportunity" mindset. Since pressure is both a precipitator and consequence of crisis, leaders who perform well under pressure can effectively guide the organization through such crisis.
James contends that most executives focus on communications and public relations as a reactive strategy. While the company’s reputation with shareholders, financial well-being, and survival are all at stake, potential damage to reputation can result from the actual management of the crisis issue. Additionally, companies may stagnate as their risk management group identifies whether a crisis is sufficiently “statistically significant”. Crisis leadership, on the other hand, immediately addresses both the damage and implications for the company’s present and future conditions, as well as opportunities for improvement.

"All Hazards" Crisis Management Planning
Accidents Don't Make Appointments. They Can Occur Anytime and Under the Most Unfavorable Circumstances.

Crisis!
Merely mention the word and you evoke visions of unspeakable affliction and suffering.
It seems that you can't turn on the radio, television, pick up a newspaper, magazine, or periodical any more, without reading about a crisis somewhere. Yet, by developing and implementing a well defined crisis management program, business leaders can mitigate the potentially disastrous effects of an incident.
Management is never put more strongly to the test than in a crisis situation. The objectives are immediate and so are the results. What you and those around you do or don't do will have long lasting implications. Today, individuals responsible for the management of businesses and public agencies must deal effectively with increasingly complex laws and issues or face the consequences.
What if...? You came to your office for the beginning of your work week and because of some unforseen event there were no employees, no working telephones, no functioning computers, no utilities. You're the Chief Executive. What would you do? Where would you start? Unquestionably this is a crisis. Remember, you have access to almost none of your regular business tools. If this had been an actual incident; such as many businesses experienced during the Chicago flood in April 1992, it would already have been too late to concern yourself with developing a Crisis Management Program! You've got to have a program in place to ensure continuity of operations. But, what kind of Crisis Management Program?
You might ask yourself, "What is a crisis for my firm?" For our purposes, the following definition will be used:
A crisis can be defined as any unplanned event, occurrence or sequence of events that has a specific undesirable consequence.
Natural disasters, financial manipulation, societal disruption, pollution and stringent regulations are but a few examples of potential crisis situations. The reasons for focusing on these issues may result from a commitment to protect the public, your employees, to comply with government regulations or to protect the firm from possible liabilities and litigation. The consequences for not focusing on these issues can be disastrous.
The above sampling indicates the need for a viable Crisis Management Program - an "all hazards" program. Failure to have a workable Crisis Management Program is akin to playing Russian Roulette with an automatic pistol. You don't have the luxury of pulling the trigger on an empty chamber.
You may think that its too difficult and time consuming to develop a cohesive Crisis Management Program. However, when broken down into its basic elements, a plan consists of only four parts. These are: * Compliance * Preparedness * Training & Resource Development * Information Management
Although no two Crisis Management Programs are exactly alike, these are the critical aspects of any Crisis Management Program. We will discuss each of these aspects briefly. However, before we delve into the four aspects, let's look at some basic objectives.
Ask yourself why do we need a Crisis Management Program with an "all hazards" approach? Put simply, such a program allows you to provide for: * Effective coordination of activities among the organizations having a management/response role; * Early warning and clear instructions to all concerned if a crisis occurs; * Continued assessment of actual and potential consequences of the crisis; * Continuity of business operations during and immediately after the crisis.
A brief synopsis of the common weaknesses in Crisis Management planning may prove helpful. As you read the discussion on the four basic elements, keep these weaknesses in mind. You may also want to assess your current Crisis Management Program against these weaknesses.
The most common weaknesses in Crisis Management planning are: * No systematic collection of planning information. This includes such aspects as hazard analysis, organizational information, regulatory guidance, company policy procedures and location specific data. * No systematic dissemination of planning information. You've assembled a wealth of information (or lack of) and have not shared it with the effected population - those who's responsibility it is to implement the plan! * Failure to identify and establish an incident command structure. This is a common pitfall as many planners try to fit their organization into a standard incident command system not designed around their particular needs. * No, or minimal, coordination with effected entities. Poor communications with the community, neighboring industries, identified support entities (fire, police, hospitals, etc.) can lead to confusion and chaos during an emergency. A simple issue such as who is the primary contact for offsite agencies during an emergency can cause major disruption during an incident. * Lack of, or poorly defined, Organizational Responsibilities. Failure to provide clear, concise procedures defining a person's functions, duties and tasks upon assuming their emergency organization position. This weakness can lead to finger pointing - "It's not my responsibility!" - "I though it was yours!" * Once developed the program is not or is, at best, poorly maintained. Your program was developed to meet a regulatory requirement. Heck, you never intended to test it. Why should you? You're not planning on having any accidents! There is no provision for continued evaluation and periodic update of the material. Frequently, changed material, such as telephone numbers are buried in various paragraphs throughout the plan. * The material you developed is not user-friendly. Your plan contains information - lots of it. Unfortunately, the user has to be a brain surgeon to figure out his/her role in its implementation. You did not provide simple, easy-to-use supplemental materials that can be used as a quick reference guide during an emergency. Worse yet, you didn't train anyone on the plan and their role in its implementation. * You did not disseminate the plan to the proper authorities. Failure to include appropriate parties on the distribution list most often leads to failure on their part to respond in the manner you had hoped for.
COMPLIANCE
How do you reduce the vulnerability posed by potential crises? A system that will advise you of the initiatives to be addressed is needed. This will allow you to act in a responsible manner to fulfill the purpose and intent of existing legislation.
It can also provide a framework for anticipating future legislation. An effective system for compliance can be developed only if you know what laws and regulations pertain to your operation. In order to accomplish this task, a survey of all operations should be undertaken.
The survey should include: * General Administrative Information * Management Awareness and Control Programs * Identification of Hazards/Potential Crises * Business Characterization

documenting current efforts. Once the survey program has been developed and implemented, it must be evaluated and kept up-to-date.
This can be accomplished by reviewing actual responses and by conducting a detailed audit of each element of the business.
The survey program is the initial step, toward reducing vulnerability. Next, you must organize the operation. The management chain is critical to this process. You must ensure that all levels of management become part of the program.
This can be achieved in several ways: * Make a senior manager directly responsible to top management and the board of directors. The formal assignment of a senior manager to the position of "Crisis Management Programs, Director," or some other appropriate title, can accomplish the initial portion of this item. Additionally, you will want to establish within the individual's job description some measurement standard to evaluate performance. This goes both ways. Upper management has to take responsibility for developing measurable and attainable goals for the Program Director to achieve. * Set aside specific time for reports on crisis management preparedness issues. This can be accomplished by preparing an agenda for senior staff and board of director meetings that includes a discussion of crisis management preparedness as a mandatory item. You have to give it more than lip service though. Also, you must make the discussion substantive. Provide more than the dull and tiring statistics on reportable accidents, etc. Include all levels of personnel in the presentation process.
This can be very effective and it gets the message out to all personnel that your company is serious about crisis management preparedness. * Make crisis management planning issues part of the strategic planning process. In one aspect, government regulations, are defining strategic implications for companies. Additionally, for publicly held companies, Security and Exchange Commission (SEC), in the section of the annual report entitled, "Management Analysis and Discussion" requires a discussion of potential liabilities.
Another perspective on this issue really begets changing the "corporate culture," i.e., making crisis management preparedness a part of the way you do business. * Communicate compliance through all levels of the organization through company policy and procedures. This can be accomplished through formal adoption of policy at the highest levels of the company. Generally, this will require the approval of the Board of Directors.
It is essential, however, that companies become more aware of their responsibilities in these areas - and this is one way to build the awareness.
This discussion is limited by the space available to a brief highlight of some approaches that can be undertaken. Each company will find its situation and circumstances to be unique to its corporate culture.
Therefore, an in-depth analysis of your company's operating environment should be undertaken before developing a program or attempting to address the above items.
PREPAREDNESS
Preparedness used in the broadest context means any and all measures taken to prevent, prepare for, respond, mitigate and recover from a crisis.

TRAINING AND RETRAINING
Training of personnel is the third component of the "all hazards" approach. The training of the Crisis Management/Response Organization is one of the critical success fact4ors that must be addressed if an adequate response is to be achieved. The development of the compliance program, involvement of all levels of management and establishing preparedness is only part of the overall process. To ensure an adequate response, a trained organization is required.
A "systems" approach to preparing effective training programs should consist of:
TASK ANALYSIS: When designing an integrated training program, first determine the skills, knowledge and procedures required for satisfactory performance of each task.
LESSON DEVELOPMENT: Learning objectives are defined from the skills, knowledge and procedures developed during task analysis. Instructional plans are then prepared to support the learning objectives.
INSTRUCTION: Lessons are systematically presented using appropriate instructional methods. Instruction may include lecture, self-paced or group-paced mediated instruction, simulation and team training.
EVALUATION: Performance standards and evaluation criteria are developed from the learning objectives. Each trainee's performance is evaluated during the course and during field performance testing.
In addition to the formal training program, a program of proficiency demonstration is also needed. This can be accomplished by establishing a program that supplements the training with drills and exercises. The drill program can vary in degree of complexity.
INFORMATION MANAGEMENT
The need to establish and maintain an ongoing dynamic Crisis Management Program is essential. The crisis management process doesn't end just because you finished the crisis management plan, are in compliance, have involved management and trained the staff.
In order to facilitate planning requirements, a record of all initiatives should be retained. These records serve to document the accomplishments, requirements, commitments and reports relating to various program requirements. The identification of commitments in the areas of compliance, emergency preparedness and training is vital. The establishment of a defined information management system structure will ensure that documentation will be available when needed.
Senior management must be kept well informed. Information is a corporate asset. Information is expensive. It must be shared and managed effectively. Information management is also critical during a crisis. The need for active systems to provide information on materials, personnel, capabilities information on materials, personnel, capabilities and processes is essential. It is extremely important to have a system (and adequate back-up systems) in place that serves to identify, catalog, set priorities and track issues and commitments relating to crisis management and response activities.
CONCLUSION
In almost every instance of successful response to a crisis, management and response activities consisting of sound operating execution coupled with superior communication predominate. Operational response is essential. It is the one that saves lives, property and other assets. The ability to communicate is no less important. It's the one that saves the business.
The simple fact is: perception is reality. Public perception of your company's reaction to a crisis is as important as your operating response. Lessons learned in crises ranging from Three Mile Island to the Exxon Valdez validate the need for a dynamic crisis management program.