Effective crisis communication can be the difference between a thriving business and one facing long-term damage to its reputation, operations, and bottom line. In fact, poor crisis communication itself can damage a company's reputation just as much as the crisis itself.
As crisis communication has gained more attention, so have the expectations for how organisations should respond publicly. Standard advice often prescribes universal rules: disclose everything immediately, act swiftly, apologise, and so on. But does crisis communication really work that way? And can a one-size-fits-all framework truly be effective? We respectfully disagree.
When it comes to crisis communication, one size definitely doesn't fit all
The purpose of crisis communication isn’t to sugarcoat the truth, but to keep business operations running smoothly while protecting the company’s credibility and reputation. It’s about being honest, clear, and steady when things get rough – not just slapping a fresh coat of paint over a cracked wall.
While general guidelines like full disclosure, swift action and a sincere apology provide a solid starting point, the challenge lies in the fact that no two crises play out the same way. A company dealing with a security breach or product recall faces very different communication challenges than one whose CEO makes offensive comments on a podcast.
The first two scenarios come with more constraints: there may be questions the company can’t necessarily answer due to ongoing police investigations or privacy concerns, and gathering all the facts takes time. In contrast, when someone makes an ill-advised public statement, key personnel often have immediate access to all the relevant information: what was said, when, and where.
Crisis communication done right: A look at CrowdStrike
In July 2024, CrowdStrike’s software update went wrong, disrupting several critical sectors, including airlines, healthcare, shipping, and finance. With a crisis of that scale, there was no ignoring it, and CrowdStrike swiftly put its robust crisis management and communication tactics into action. Although CrowdStrike's situation was complex, impacting several stakeholders beyond the general public, their communication remained simple and direct, helping to maintain trust.
What made CrowdStrike stand out was their swift reaction, which not only addressed the technical issue with a clear fix but also made a deliberate effort to keep customers, partners, and others informed through clear, transparent and timely updates. They kept stakeholders updated with detailed information across various channels, from Twitter to blog posts, and even launched a tailored Remediation and Guidance Hub. Within just three days, they created a YouTube video to help users solve the problem themselves.
CrowdStrike maintained transparency throughout its response, cutting through jargon and corporate speak with clear explanations and practical guidance. By having the CEO lead the communications, the company sent a powerful message of accountability and strong leadership at a critical time.
What’s more, CrowdStrike’s response highlights a key lesson: in a crisis, empathy is just as important as technical solutions. They didn’t just focus on the technical fix but also acknowledged the very real frustrations customers were facing, which made them feel heard and valued. When a crisis disrupts daily life, threatens data or puts safety at risk, people expect more than just facts – they want reassurance and support.
To summarise, CrowdStrike chose:
- Transparency over secrecy
- Swift action over hesitation
- Accountability over avoiding responsibility
- Empathy over belittling the consequences
- Consistency over constantly changing messages
Crisis communication done wrong: A look at OpenSea
A lot went belly up for OpenSea in 2024. Once the leading NFT marketplace, OpenSea faced a significant downturn. Its valuation dropped from $13.3 billion during the NFT boom to monthly sales under $430 million by July 2024. Insider trading scandals, regulatory uncertainty, and competition from platforms like Blur all exacerbated the decline. However, we argue that OpenSea's biggest misstep was its poor communication strategy.
When insider trading allegations and the SEC lawsuit surfaced, OpenSea remained silent, allowing speculation to spiral. Its vague and infrequent responses to SEC and FTC inquiries unsettled both investors and users. Meanwhile, Blur attracted traders with lower fees and incentives, while OpenSea failed to counter with a clear message or strategy to keep its audience engaged.
With the recent news of the SEC closing its investigation without penalties, OpenSea now has a chance to rebuild. However, its minimal and cautious communication so far hasn't helped its case. If OpenSea doesn’t start engaging openly with its community and setting a clear direction, this opportunity will be lost.
To summarise, OpenSea chose:
- Silence over transparency
- Ad-hoc reaction over proactive action
- Legal jargon over honesty
- Neglect over trust
In the heat of the crisis, structure keeps you grounded
Time and again, we’ve seen even the best-prepared organisations let emotions drive their decisions during a crisis. That may have played a part in OpenSea’s struggles.
Crisis communication plans exist for a reason: they provide structure, prevent emotional reactions from derailing the message and ensure clarity under pressure. Handling a crisis is rarely easy, and for leadership teams, it can often feel personal. However, effective crisis communication requires setting aside defensiveness and focusing on the bigger picture.
A good plan begins with preparation. All organisations should map out various crisis scenarios and involve their teams in the process. Often, it's the team members who first identify potential crises before they escalate. In the midst of a crisis, having a well-organized crisis team with clear, defined roles is invaluable. Part of the planning process also includes identifying communication channels, both internally and externally. Lastly, establishing general commentary guidelines is just as crucial to crisis preparation as implementing information security protocols or industrial safety regulations.
Crises rarely unfold as planned, but preparation is never wasted. The worst responses are those that involve dodging questions, disappearing, or improvising under pressure. Silence and uncertainty only fuel speculation and misinformation.
When a crisis strikes, use these four key questions to take charge from the start:
- What do we know with certainty?
- What don't we know yet? What additional information do we need?
- Are there any aspects we cannot comment on?
- What do we need to communicate to our team, customers, partners, and the broader public?
Addressing these questions helps set the right course during a crisis. However, no two crises are the same, which is why every organisation deserves a well-thought-out plan – not just for managing a crisis but for preventing one, preparing for one, and ultimately recovering from one.
