Today, the internet is making reputation risk management a much more significant area in need of attention. It is an area of practice that is developing fast.
Managing reputation risk is neither hard nor rocket science (but rocketeers do use risk management techniques). One issue avoided has two immediate benefits. It saves cost and expensive management time and it helps sustain reputation, goodwill and brand equity. Not a bad return for a few hours work.
This is not something to give to a fresher PR executive. It is a job for senior mangers and is at its best when undertaken with a professional external advisor (and I know a few who are good at it).
In past posts, I have covered the management discipline of risk management here and here.
There is a chapter in 'Online Public Relations' about it.
The methodology I have adopted comes straight out of the risk management models use in many other industries.
What I have not done is to provide a copy of a simple spreadsheet that can be used in risk management assessment and am happy to provide it to anyone who asks.
Essentially, a focus group convened to look at risk is invited to come up with thoughts about risks that may befall an organisation in a number of categories (see below). The process evaluates percived risk to help prioretise the deployment of budget and resources.
Each percived risk is assessed for likelihood and impact typically on a scale of 1 to 5. The result is multiplied and provides a risk factor. The higher the factor, the more likely the risk.
The PR team then come up with methods for mitigating the risk and then the focus group re-assess the risk to see how much risks can be mitigated and where the greatest effort (and risk avoidance budget) goes.
Of course who should do what, when and how to mitigate risk is integral to all risk management and it is helpful to have good data to support investment and activity.
Reputation, and importantly online reputation can and should be managed.
The types of risk that might be considered by a practitioner concerned with blogs, Twitter, discussion boards and all that stuff out there and online that is just about to come as a surprise:
Legislative change
local
regional
national
European
Global
law
regulation
Corporate change of direction
Change in requirement
Change in objectives
Change of output, outtake, outcome requirement
Change in publics/stakeholders
Added publics
Removed publics
Publics change
Implementation impact
Technology change
Content not available
New/changed opportunity
Unexpected change in team
Managment team
Technical team
Operations team
Competitor action
Merger/acquisition,
Competitors me-too actions
Management Directive
Budget
Delivery schedule
monitor, measurement, evaluation requirement
other
Corporate re-organisation
At board level
Departmental re-organisation
Merger/acquisition
Problem not anticipated
Reputation/ethical issue
Corporate, brand, personnel crisis
Server down/overload
System attack/bug
Change in available resources
Budget
Vendor availability
When I first read through Online Public Relations, I tried to work out which sections were primarily contributed by David Phillips DDP) and which by Philip Young (PY).
ReplyDeleteHere were the ones I found easy:
Risk assessment: DP
Business processes: DP
Media environment: PY
Ethics: PY
Agency, Porosity, Transparency: largely DP
The risk assessment chapter is very good!
lol... What was interesting is that we both edited everything and now could not even guess if it was Philip or me in the finished text.
ReplyDelete