How to write a crisis public relations plan?

Introduction: Behind every event, there is a truth that is different from what is obvious at first glance.

"Knowing" and "doing" are two different states. Knowing how to respond to a corporate crisis and actually planning responses are two different concepts.

In the public relations industry, after a crisis breaks out in a company, PR people verbally propose corresponding solutions, which is an expression of ideas. But in the actual operation process, the people and things involved in crisis public relations are of various kinds. Therefore, in order to ensure that the ideas can play a full role in subsequent practice, it is particularly important to write a successful crisis public relations plan.

1. The planning logic of crisis public relations

When a crisis occurs, that is, problems occur in the enterprise, the logic that follows is very simple: find the problem and solve it.

The logic seems simple, but in actual operation, it is not as simple as imagined. First of all, as for the problem itself, the problems that cause crises in different companies are not the same. Therefore, the corresponding solutions also vary greatly. Therefore, the author will analyze in detail how we should analyze problems when facing them.

1. Learn to analyze problems: The last straw that breaks the camel's back is not the essence of the problem

Many times, problems are not as simple as they seem. When dealing with this, public relations professionals need to avoid this "one-size-fits-all" way of thinking that "what you see is what you get." Therefore, analyzing the problem is not as simple as imagined.

When a crisis breaks out in an enterprise, the contradictions are manifested in front of all public relations personnel. But the actual cause of the problem is not the incident itself, the incident may just be the fuse. It’s like every time we eat a meal, we feel full after taking the last spoonful of rice, but we are not full because of the last spoonful of rice. What breaks the camel's back is not the last straw, but all the straws that came before it.

When a problem occurs, if a company's public relations professionals only develop solutions based on the problem itself, the results achieved will often be unsatisfactory.

Every time a problem breaks out in an enterprise, its triggering factor is not a single intentional cause, but a combination of many complex factors. Therefore, analyzing a problem means analyzing it in a “pulling out the layers of silk” manner.

For the same problem, everyone has different perspectives, experiences, and knowledge accumulation, so the perspectives on the problem will also be different. Through multi-degree analysis, we can dig deep into the problem from shallow to deep, identify the most "core" contradictions in the problem, and thus resolve the crisis.

For example, in the case of the broken guitar on United Airlines, after the incident fermented, it was no longer a problem with the guitar itself, but a problem with the overall system of United Airlines. Dave also protected his rights in his own way. If you keep dwelling on your guitar problems, they may never be solved.

Therefore, when analyzing a problem, we look at it from multiple angles and analyze it from the shallower to the deeper. Of course, everyone has different ways of analyzing problems. Here, I will explain my own logic for analyzing problems for reference only.

① Analyze the problem of the incident itself: Although the "last straw" is not the key, it is the "boundary"

First of all, after the problem breaks out, the cause of the problem will definitely be used as one of the bases for planning crisis public relations solutions. This is beyond doubt.

Secondly, even after a problem breaks out, the cause of the problem may not only be what is seen immediately. However, if the company's problems broke out in this incident, then the problems that broke out in this incident can serve as the "limit" of the company's self-supervision.

In fact, simple surface problems are not difficult to solve. If there is a problem with the product, just solve the problem; if there is a problem with an employee's remarks, just apologize for it; if there is a problem with a certain practice of the company, it is also acceptable to give a reasonable explanation for it or to apologize directly.

But many times, if a company only does these things, you will find that the problem is not only not solved, but may cause greater conflicts. Therefore, doing these things is not the end of solving the problem, but just the beginning.

②, "Remove" the descriptive content of the problem itself and analyze the "opposing elements" of the problem

After the basic issues of the incident are resolved, the next step is to explore the essential content through the phenomenon of the problem. In fact, many times, too much textual description of an event may obscure the key to our analysis of the problem. But the key contradiction that caused the problem is actually also hidden in the outbreak of the incident.

Therefore, an advanced way to analyze a problem is to describe in words the events that triggered the crisis and then refine the core contradictions that caused the problem. For example, there may be conflicts between the brand and the audience's interests caused by the product, or the audience's dissatisfaction with the company's attitude due to service problems. In these incidents, the problems with the product itself are the direct content that the public can see. The issues of audience trust and audience interest protection caused by the product problems are the essential "opposing elements" of the incident.

The identification of “opposing elements” is actually the process in which the company, in its self-awareness, transforms the “individual cases” caused by the incident into “phenomenal” content. This is also a reasonable attitude to ensure that the company encounters as few crises as possible in its subsequent development.

③. Return to the enterprise itself and discover your most fundamental problems

When a corporate crisis breaks out, no matter how absurd and unreasonable the reasons for the crisis are, the company must start from its own problems and explore the essence of the problem when analyzing the problem.

Making excuses and blaming others (customers) is the most undesirable approach.

Many times, when problems arise, some employees or leaders not only fail to find ways to solve the problems, but instead blame their breadwinners in meetings. This kind of bad attitude and value system needs to be strictly eliminated within the company or in public.

In fact, no matter what reasons the audience uses to bring crisis to the company, the incident itself is only a fuse, and the problem still occurs within the company. For example, if a crisis is caused by a product problem, the problem will be reflected within the company as a quality supervision issue or lax product quality control. If the problem arises during negotiations, the problem will be reflected within the company as poor employee service awareness or an imperfect corporate service system.

In fact, every problem is not as simple as it seems. Behind every matter, there is a truth that is different from what is obvious at a glance.

2. Develop a solution

A thorough analysis of a problem is actually for the purpose of better solving it. The essence of crisis public relations strategy is to solve problems faster and more effectively.

Different levels of crisis public relations planning will have different levels of ability to solve different problems. In essence, they are all aimed at resolving current conflicts and protecting corporate interests as much as possible. Even better, if the crisis can be used to strengthen corporate value or fix loopholes.

The formulation of solutions to problems requires taking the problem as the core and developing corresponding communication or marketing strategies. If we just invest more, ignore the problem itself, and make some superficial plans, it will ultimately be nothing more than a fearless self-entertainment.

Based on the problem itself, the plan actually includes two aspects: implementation of the plan and content dissemination.

①. Plan implementation: refers to the formulated plan that can actually solve the problems that have already occurred.

This part is where the core contradictions are resolved. It is often said that solving problems requires novel approaches or unique ideas. But many times, if we only pursue these "exquisiteness" in form and ignore the problems that exist in themselves, it is a futile and unsatisfactory approach.

②. Content dissemination: This means that after a planned solution can actually solve a problem, it is necessary to disseminate relevant content through dissemination channels to increase the practicality and influence of the solution. This step is also an important way to effectively maintain the relationship between the company and the audience.

If the implementation of the plan is regarded as the foundation of the entire crisis public relations strategy, then content dissemination is an important "means" to make the strategy effective. Public relations refers to public relations; crisis public relations means that there is a crisis in the relationship between the company and its audience or the target of oppression. What is most needed at this moment is to solve these problems in a correct and precise way. The importance of communication at this time is particularly critical.

2. The written structure of the crisis public relations plan

As for the crisis public relations plan with strong functionality, it is actually different from other forms of documents because it emphasizes the effectiveness of the content. But even for a crisis public relations plan that focuses on content, a clear and accurate content expression format can save a lot of trouble in determining and executing subsequent plans.

Therefore, the content format of a qualified plan mainly includes the following sections:

1. Cover or title

Just state the meaning plainly and directly indicate the crisis public relations plan for a certain event.

2. Introduction of events or background

Regarding the content of the event or crisis, it is sufficient to use words to clearly describe its entire development context. When describing the incident, be careful not to add personal emotions and use accurate words. The original and current losses caused to the company at the beginning of the incident need to be clearly stated objectively.

This part serves as the basis for subsequent analysis and problem solving.

3. Event Analysis

Event analysis is also the problem analysis section mentioned above.

The entire content requirements have been stated above and will not be elaborated here. In the process of analyzing the problem, it is necessary to adhere to the writing logic from shallow to deep. In addition, the conclusions of the problem analysis need to be logically consistent, and one must avoid a self-righteous attitude.

4. Program planning

According to the problem, formulate corresponding solutions step by step. During the description process, the planner needs to sort out his or her writing ideas, either from the shallower to the deeper, from the inside out, or from the near to the far, etc.

When solving a problem, use a clearer "line of thought" as the baseline for writing, and then formulate relevant plans, the entire copy content will appear more integrated.

5. Practical measures

This part refers to the description of the content that is put into practice based on the planned content. During the writing process, the writer needs to clearly describe the actual operability index of the content. If unrealistic operations appear in this part, it will directly affect the tone of the entire plan.

6. Summary of the solution

Make a logical summary of the entire plan and make reasonable expectations for the possible effects. In addition, some key steps are emphasized.

In fact, there is also a cost budget for the implementation of relevant measures in the crisis public relations planning program. However, due to the different nature of the incidents and different handling plans, there are great differences in budget composition and price, so they are only briefly mentioned at the end of the article.

No matter how well a company manages its crisis, crises will still come. The difference is that doing a good job of risk prevention and elimination can ensure the stability of the overall structure of the enterprise to the greatest extent. When risks arise, corporate losses can be minimized and the corporate structure will not collapse.

Author | Xiao 5

Text | PR Home