The large volume of criticism on social networks or on specialized websites, reports in the press, protests by organized groups and even movements encouraging boycotts are potential harm to reputation.
In these times when false, out-of-context and biased information spreads like a flash, it is essential to know the relationship between risks traditionally mapped by companies and reputational threats derived from negative public exposure, which can increase damage if not prevented and treated correctly.
All companies have risks inherent to their business or industry. Many of them have a management strategy that classifies these risks into categories (strategic, financial and operational risks, among other possible groups) and assigns a degree of severity to each one. If the trust of strategic stakeholders and public opinion is shaken, these risks could become much more serious than initially imagined.
To provide greater assertiveness in the management of these potentially critical situations, ANK Reputation maps and monitors what it calls reputational threats, in addition to other risks. Under this methodology, each risk or set of corporate risks has intrinsic reputational threats. When they occur, these threats can generate image and reputation crises, imposing losses and damages to organizations.
Threat is in the intensity of negative exposure
The sum of risks and reputational threats should calibrate the understanding in relation to the potential damage of a situation for the company, its brands, people and products. A quality problem in a product or service, for example, is an operational factor in the umbrella of corporate risks. The reputational threat generated by this risk is the intensity of negative public exposure of the problem, should it occur. Among the possible threats to reputation are the large volume of criticism on social networks or on specialized websites, reports in the press, protests by organized groups and even movements encouraging boycotts.
“Knowing the reputational threats related to its umbrella of risks gives the company the opportunity to establish priorities, draw up mitigation plans and build a reputational cushion that makes it stronger with its stakeholders and prepared, in case it finds itself in a vulnerable situation. or face a crisis,” says Anik Suzuki, CEO of ANK Reputation.
There is no doubt that the best way to ward off a reputational threat is to eliminate or mitigate the associated corporate risk. It turns out that, even with control and prevention mechanisms, this is not always possible. But it is within the company's reach to reduce its impacts, through previously approved preventive measures and contingency plans.
What they are and how preventive measures and contingency plans can be developed:
• Preventive measures
Focused on increasing the “reputation cushion”, preventive measures are actions whose objective is to avoid problems, create antidotes or increase public confidence, generating the “benefit of the doubt”. Include:
- Relationship actions with strategic audiences, including the business value chain;
- Defined and known positions on topics of interest to society;
- Dossiers with facts and data that can be used as evidence of the company's defense arguments. They must be kept up to date.
• contingency plans
They are intended to ensure agility in decision-making and actions to contain the crisis. Cover:
- Established governance, with a formalized Crisis Office, and prior validation of processes and authority levels for managing critical situations;
- Contents for official positioning of the company previously approved;
- Defined and trained spokespersons;
- Multistakeholder communication strategy;
- Post-crisis evaluation process to re-establish bonds of trust.
