|
|||||
From fake apologies that spread like wildfire on social media (as was the case during the Astronomer CEO scandal) to companies facing backlash for using generative AI without safeguards, recent crises have shown how quickly brand reputations can unravel in the digital age. The rapid spread of misinformation online, combined with new risks tied to emerging technologies, has left organizations more vulnerable than ever. Companies that are not ready to deal with a crisis are putting their brands, reputations, and future at risk. There are three warning signs that your workplace is unprepared for the next disaster, scandal, or other corporate emergency. 1. Theres No Crisis Management Plan Unless a crisis management plan is in place, organizations will not know what to do when a crisis strikes, who will do it, how to do it, or why it should be done. For every minute a business delays in responding to a crisis, it will find itself in a defensive position and at a loss on the steps it should take to address the unfolding situation. Just as bad as having no plan is having one that has not been updated to account for the latest risks that can threaten the organization. Take AI, for example. According to research conducted by Riskonnect, 65% of surveyed companies do not have a policy in place to govern the use of generative AI by partners and suppliers. The reckless use of AI can result in fraud, plagiarism, and violations of intellectual property laws, all of which can create the risk of litigation and a crisis for businesses. The best and most effective plans should include these major categories: When and how the plan was prepared, updated, and tested The event or development that will trigger a crisis for the company Who has the authority to activate the plan What should be done and in what order to address the crisis What needs to be said about the situation, and who will say it Who should be told about the crisis, and how they should be notified Depending on the nature of the risks that companies can face, it is prudent to create separate crisis management plans for each of the risks. That is because responding to the threat of a lawsuit will be vastly different than responding to the death of the CEO, for example. The plans should be tested regularly to ensure they will work when needed. The plans can be evaluated through tabletop, field exercises, and computer simulations. Based on the results of the exercises, the plans should be updated and strengthened. Information about the plans should be shared with corporate officials and employees so they know there are protocols and policies in place that should govern how the company will respond in case of a crisis. 2. A Crisis Management Team Has Not Been Appointed Without a team in place to implement a crisis management plan, organizations will find themselves scrambling to figure out what to do and who will do it when a crisis strikes. The composition of teams will depend on the nature and size of organizations. For large companies, a team of five to seven people will usually suffice, and could include representatives from HR, IT, legal, marketing, public relations, and the board of directors. The team should meet regularly to practice working together under deadlines and pressure, test the crisis management plan, and make necessary adjustments to the team and plan. 3. You Dont Know What To Say When Theres A Crisis Silence is not golden when a crisis strikes an organization. The longer that you remain quiet about a crisis, the more likely it is that others will fill the vacuum and take control of the narrative. At the very least, businesses should prepare appropriate generic statements that can be issued immediately and then customized and updated as necessary. For example, if a lawsuit is filed alleging sexual abuse by a top corporate executive, one example of an initial statement is that We are aware that a lawsuit has been filed and will have more to say about it at a later date. But be careful about saying anything that could create a risk for litigation or liability in connection with the crisis. Consult with legal counsel to help minimize those risks. A qualified individual should be appointed ahead of time who will serve as the public face of the company when a crisis strikes. The best spokesperson will have a background in public relations or journalism and will have gone through media training. If you dont have anyone on staff to fill this important role, then consider retaining the services of a public relations firm or consultant who could serve as the public face of your company during this critical time. When the plans and teams are activated, corporate officials should resist any temptation to micromanage or second-guess them. Team members will have their hands full dealing with the matters at hand, and any efforts to interfere with their responsibilities will make their work that much harderand could extend or worsen the crisis. After the crisis has passed, a report should be prepared on how well the plans were followed, how well the teams worked to manage the crisis, and any lessons learned that can be applied to improve the organizations response to its next crisis.
Category:
E-Commerce
Marketers are setting the cultural conversation with their successes as much as their missteps. But which campaigns are creating healthy tension? When is the right time to walk back a rebrand? Autodesk CMO Dara Treseder breaks down branding and marketing lessons from the most high-profile campaigns of 2025, giving her unvarnished opinion on everything from Sydney Sweeney to Cracker Barrel and more. This is an abridged transcript of an interview from Rapid Response, hosted by the former editor-in-chief of Fast Company Bob Safian and recorded live at the 2025 Masters of Scale Summit in San Francisco. From the team behind the Masters of Scale podcast, Rapid Response features candid conversations with todays top business leaders navigating real-time challenges. Subscribe to Rapid Response wherever you get your podcasts to ensure you never miss an episode. [Sydney Sweeneys American Eagle ad] sparked all kinds of controversy and discussion about jeans versus genes. You and I talked before about what is healthy tension and toxic tension. So was this healthy tension, toxic tension? What does the reaction mean about where we are? Healthy tension is tension that moves the brand and the business forward. Great work must always have tension. If it doesn’t have tension, it’s not great and it’s not causing conversation. Healthy tension, when it moves the brand and business forward, it goes beyond awareness to drive actual acquisition and business results. Sometimes you can have awareness and instead of acquisition, you end up with alienation. So that is where instead of it being healthy, it goes into the toxic space. I think that they checked the box on tension, they raised awareness, but was it healthy? There was a lot of alienation. You don’t need a focus group to know that in this very polarized world that we are living in, when you use the word genes, and by genes I mean, G-E-N-E-S, and then you show only one demographic, they’re going to be people with thoughts, right? And there’s going to be a lot of energy around that. You don’t need to do a focus group or spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on research to get to that point. So there were some people that felt alienated. Did the awareness overall drive acquisition? We don’t know yet. I think a good example of a brand that jumped into the conversation and drove awareness and acquisition is Gap. They had a counter ad with Katseye and that drove a lot of acquisition and Gap sales on TikTok are through the roof. So that’s an example of healthy tension. Of using the tension to help? Of using the tension in a healthy way to drive not just awareness, but acquisition. I think, gone are the days where all publicity is good publicity. There’s some publicity we just don’t need, you know what I mean? All right, let’s try. Let’s go to number two. When Cracker Barrel fans responded to the removal of this old timer from the logo, right? They walkedand we’ve seen other brands backtrack, like HBO walking back Max, right? So are there situations, do you know, in the situations where it’s like, this is a cultural conversation that I’m losing. I can’t drive this conversation versus like I just made a mistake. First of all, brands have a lot of power because when we have brands where we’re having commentary from everybody, from the President, to your hairdresser, you’ve touched a nerve. And what I will say is, as a brand, Cracker Barrel had been experiencing a decline in sales. That’s why they said, what can we do to ignite or spark the next wave of growth for the business? So we have to give them kudos for saying, “hey, we can’t just keep going down the path we’re going, we need to change something.” Now when you are evolving a brand, you have to either adapt or you die as a brand. You have to evolve. So they got, check, we need to evolve. Now there’s the heart of the brand or the soul of the brand because what is a brand at the end of the day? A brand is the sum of the promises we make and the experiences we deliver. That is what it is. It is the sum of the promises we make and the experiences we deliver. The soul of the heart of the brand is at the core of that. For Cracker Barrel, it’s around that southern hospitality and comfort. That is a non-negotiable. I think with the logo change, I mean you all can see the second logo. It’s not exactly screaming Southern hospitality. It’s not really screaming anything. It’s pretty sanitized. It’s not screaming. It could be Panera Bread, you know what I mean? And so, if you are someone who, immediately you see this, you go to, this is changing southern hospitality and comfort. So all of a sudden you start to question what is this brand going to deliver? And so it affects the trust with the customer because you’re evolving something that is too core. So I think Cracker Barrel learned, hey, this is too core. We can’t touch this. Let’s look at other things that we can evolve. So I’m going to give them kudos for actually saying, hey, we listened and we’re going to not touch the heart or the soul of the brand. We will evolve something else. I don’t actually think it’s capitulation, I think it’s smart. I think it’s good stewardship of the brand. We’re not in a perfect world. We’re all going to make mistakes. I give bravery and courage for saying, hey, we messed up this. We’re going to go back. All right, so this is an image of the UK street wear designer, Tega Akinola. It’s part of Autodesk’s, Let There Be Anything campaign. Partnerships are so important for brands right now. So how do brands associate and get the most authentic partnerships with creators, celebrities? How do we think about making sure you get the right choice so you get the right ROMI, the right return on marketing investment? Yes. Show me the ROMI. Everything has to start with business impact. First of all, you have to figure out, how is this going to advance my brand objective and ultimately drive the results that I’m going for? So there are three key things you look at. First of all, is this an add? It has to be an add and a build. It should not be a detraction. And honestly, if it’s going to be neutral, don’t even do it. Do something else with your resources. So that add and that build is really important. The second thing is you need to be pushing not just for reach, but also resonance because reach does not equal resonance and you cannot compromise resonance for reach because if you are not getting both resonance and reah, you’re ultimately not reaching that new target audience and you’re not expanding your demographic to get the needed business results. I think the third thing is you have to make sure that whatever partnership you’re doing, it fits into the bigger picture and is a force multiplier, not a force divider. So that’s a third thing you need to look at. I think when you check those three boxes, whether you’re working with a creator or it’s a brand partnership, that’s how you get to ROMI. And if you’re thinking, what should the math be? I like to use a 1:3 ratio. So if I’m spending a dollar, I want to make sure that I’m making at least $3. If I’m not going to make $3, there might be a better investment for those resources.
Category:
E-Commerce
Speaking multiple languages may protect both your brain and body by slowing down the biological aging process, increasing resilience as you get older, according to a new international study. Published in Nature Aging journal, the paper, titled Multilingualism protects against accelerated aging in cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses of 27 European countries, looked at data from 86,149 Europeans and found that those who spoke multiple languages experienced slower biobehavioral aging compared with those who only spoke one language. It concluded that speaking multiple languages may slow the biological processes of aging and protect against age-related decline. Researchers used what’s known as the biobehavioral aging clock framework to quantify biobehavioral age gaps (BBAGs), by using artificial intelligence (AI) models trained on thousands of health and behavioral profiles. These models can predict a persons biological age based on physical markers such as hypertension, diabetes, sleep problems, and sensory loss, as well as protective factors including education, cognition, functional ability, and physical activity. The difference between someone’s actual age and their “predicted” age indicates whether someone is aging in a healthier way and appears “younger,” or is aging in an accelerated way. The study found that in countries where people commonly spoke multiple languages, study participants who only spoke only one were twice as likely to show early aging patterns, while those who spoke multiple languages were 2.17 times less likely to experience accelerated aging. While it’s important to keep in mind that in many European countries, people speak more than one language (unlike in the United States), these effects remained significant even after adjusting for linguistic, social, physical, and sociopolitical factors, and were consistent longitudinally in predicting a lower risk of accelerated aging over the long run.
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||