Swissair’s crisis management: beyond the call of duty

Problem: Organizing a quick and effective communication with relatives of the victims, media and other stakeholders.

Background: The pilot of Swissair flight 111 reported smoke in the cockpit of the plane 90 minutes after taking off from JFK airport on Sept. 2, 1998. Fifteen minutes later the plane plunged into the Atlantic Ocean, trying to reach Halifax International Airport.
The first priority of Swissair’s plan was to care for friends and relatives of the victims. The airline provided chartered flights to bring loved ones to the scene of the crash; they were shielded from the crowds of people and reporters. Swissair replaced the full-service Web site with a text page with contact telephone numbers, available information in four languages and a request form. Delta and Swissair employees were assigned to each relative, and Swissair made available $20,000 to every family for travel and burial expenses. The company won fans in media and in the public arena because of their treatment of relatives of the passengers of the ill-fated flight.

Discussion: Swissair had an effective crisis management plan. Focusing on the communication with relatives and friends of victims was a successful strategy. It shaped the image of Swissair as a “caring company.” Swissair’s efforts with friends and relatives (Web site containing text only, funds fot travel and burial expenses) helped the company to avoid accusations from the side of the media (it seems Swissair didn’t think about media – in a case’s brief there wasn’t a word about press conferences. Journalists weren’t allowed to come closer than 100 feet: compare it with a previous case where the same distance was a reason for complaints about the Pentagon’s policy).
The strategy of Swissair was simple: they forced media to perceive information from relatives and friends. Meanwhile, that information was supportive toward Swissair what made news coverage positive as well. Swissair did what every company dreamt of doing in cases like this: they got positive coverage, not dealing with media too much. Relatives and friends were the main sources of information and experts. They were treated well; they made news coverage positive. Another point that worth to be mentioned is that Swissair was quick and open in their responses: Web site content was changed very soon after the tragedy, and crisis teams in JFK and Halifax airports were critical to response. This is another point that strengthened Swissair’s public image.

Recommendation: I think Swissair’s strategy was right. I don’t know if it was more effective to concentrate on media relations; probably, not. The only recommendation I can give concerns Delta. As a partner of Swissair in America, Delta was supposed to act more pro-actively: 4 hours of procrastination and the only press-release didn’t make Swissair efforts less effective, but they certainly made Delta’s image worse in eyes of its stakeholders. This case provided a chance for Delta to learn some lessons. I hope they did.

Questions:
1. Spokesperson should emphasize the following points:
What happened is a huge persona; tragedy not only for relatives but also for a company.
He or she had to mention the heroic crew who tried to do everything to save the passengers. The crew is the link that connects Swissair and relatives in a common mourning.
Spokesperson must describe the tragedy in details, to show that Swissair is a fair and open company.
To make statements about Swissair policy for such cases and to say about caregivers and money for family members for burial and travel expenses.
To repeat the first thesis about the tragedy.

2. The critical point is information: Why did this happen? Who’s in charge of this? What hasn’t been done that was supposed to be done? Relatives and friends are not people on the stree; they’re stakeholders in this case. Moreover, they’re prejudiced against Swissair, that’s why the company’s goal is to provide them with all possible information. Any attempt to conceal the information would have been perceived as lies so positive attitude of media turn negative.

3. Swissair actions certainly did meet expectation of publics. First of all, they acted quickly: they changed web interface; they made a request form on their web site. Their policy of treating relatives was very careful: Swissair didn’t let the reporters approach relatives; every relative had a personal employee-caregiver (this point is important because some relatives could be old people who have never been abroad; they could need culture assistance etc.)

4. Internet was the most appropriate medium for this case: Interactive and available from every point of the earth, it provided all necessary information in brief and understandable manner. In addition, this change helped people who had difficulties with navigation on a Web site (especially those who were not acquainted with Internet). But it’s important that even though Swissair made the Internet the main source of information, the company added hot teller-lines as additional source (it’s known that some people are technophobes).

5. In situations like this media is not a participant of events, but rather, the viewer. In fact, they are dealing with ethical things. Sure, the role of media is to inform the public. Meanwhile, media are to compassionate to the relatives; Swissair seemed to use this trick. They didn’t focus on media relations; concentration on press conferences could be perceived as a neglect of relatives.