Take for example the recent shooting at Ft. Hood, where an Army psychiatrist opened fire on the Texas base. As the story unfolded, the media uncovered a speech warning of “adverse events” given by the accused a year and a half earlier.

“There continues to be a consistent pattern,” says Larry L. Smith, president of Institute for Crisis Management in Louisville, Ky. “Only about one-third of all business crises are the sudden type, such as fires, explosions and natural disasters. Two-thirds of all crises are what we call smoldering crises.”

Depending on the source, roughly half of organizations are somewhat prepared for a crisis. Even fewer rehearse and revise crisis plans. And even fewer actively seek out the smoldering crises to prevent catastrophe.

Planning for an adverse event is where crisis management occurs. Though often overlooked, it allows organizations to anticipate, address and influence the opinions and behaviors of key audiences once a crisis erupts.

As trusted advisors to clients, attorneys possess the built-in credibility and opportunity to help them craft, rehearse and revise crisis plans to navigate perils presented along the crisis continuum.

Smith recommends that clients’ crisis plans focus on operations, communications and business recovery. A rough crisis preparation outline might include contingency planning for likely scenarios, identification and coaching of spokespersons, message development for crucial audiences, and the establishment of communications channels for the quick dissemination of information and monitoring of opinions. 

Most of your clients, however, probably contact you once the train has left the station. Depending on whether it is a criminal or civil matter, there are different approaches.

“In a civil matter, you are looking at your client’s reputation and trying to control any fallout from bad press that could impact your client’s business,” says Howard T. Healy, partner at DiRenzo and Bomier in Neenah, Wis. “In a criminal situation, you worry about a potential jury.”

Healy cites the recent carnival surrounding former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich, where the U.S. attorney aired the case in public before charges were filed. The jury pool (a.k.a. the public) had already made up their minds about Blagojevich.

“If it is a complex media circus, like Blagojevich or Bernie Madoff, then I think you need a skilled PR professional to work in conjunction with the attorney,” Healy says. “The parties should work together to make sure the right, and appropriate, information is getting out to the public.”

George Mason University’s Melinda Villagran, Ph.D., a frequent consultant on strategic communications for the Centers for Disease Control and the Department of Defense, concurs with Healy. But she says the key to influencing the 24-hour news cycle is being the first to tell the story.

“Maximum disclosure, minimum delay is still the gold standard by which the best crisis responses are crafted,” says Villagran.

She recommends creating a “dark Web site” for potential crises. Once a crisis occurs, the Web site can be tweaked to fit the specifics and go live in a matter of minutes.

Dark Web sites at a minimum will allow an organization to quickly disseminate information. This allows the organization and its leadership to appear prepared and actively participate in shaping the story in the hearts and minds of key audiences. And it establishes a streamlined channel of information.

Of course, you shouldn’t overlook the power and re-Tweetable (translation: pass-along) power of social media such as Twitter, LinkedIn, Facebook and others in influencing the outcome of a crisis. Dow Jones Newswire’s Kristina Peterson writes (http://www.nasdaq.com/aspx/stock-market-news-story.aspx?storyid=200910121016dowjonesdjonline000165&title=companies-increasingly-look-to-blogs-as-spokesmen) that major companies are increasingly turning to blogs to fulfill functions traditionally performed by spokespersons.

Blogs can help businesses field questions on sensitive issues, writes Peterson, without directly refusing comment.

“It doesn’t do much good to win in the court room three years after the crisis,” ICM’s Smith notes, “only to discover that customers have switched to another company, employees have been leaving because they don’t know if they’ll have a job after the trial, and it’s next to impossible to hire new employees for the same reason.”

Karl Robe, APR, counsels attorneys and executives on communications strategies that support achievement of growth objectives and overcome business challenges. Contact him at Karl James & Company LLC by emailing karl.robe@karljames.com.

Many firms lack structured, ongoing training programs for attorneys to develop new business. In fact, if firms are not asking why attorneys newly knighted as rainmakers are leaving their firm, they might be surprised that it has to do with the lack of training to help them achieve new expectations of bringing in the clients.

In fact, as AdAge’s Michael Bush notes: “[W]ith the rise of social media and the need for ultra-quick turnaround in creating and launching campaigns, could the day soon come when internal PR departments are steering the marketing ship full time?”

Some high-profile companies already think the two — advertising and communications — are so closely linked that their chief marketing officer and CCO are the same person. As an example, at IBM, Jon Iwata is the senior vice president of marketing and communications who oversees the company’s $450 million marketing budget.

Harry Pforzheimer, chief communications officer and marketing leader at Intuit, told AdAge that most of the company’s growth is actually driven by its PR function and its ability to quickly create and convey marketing messages. He said Intuit’s communications effort — from traditional media to social media channels — “reaches three to four times more people than its advertising does.”

Said Tony Cervone, senior vice president-chief communications officer at United Airlines: “Fundamentally, if you’re doing a better job building relationships with consumers and if you believe that’s part of the role of communications, it’s not hard to imagine that’s having a direct impact on the bottom-line performance.”

A week or so ago, he held a news conference where he admitted certain infidelities. The most punctuating comment came from advice he gives his players when in the wrong.

“When you admit wrong doing, it becomes part of your past,” Pitino said. “When you cover up wrong doing, it becomes part of your future.”

And then the misstep. Anger and news conferences do not mix. The accompanying article to this video is interesting as well.

Each year, the annual Edelman Trust Barometer takes the pulse of informed publics’ confidence in public and private institutions worldwide. In January 2009, the research revealed the lowest trust levels in its 10-year history—likely a result of the global economy’s descent into a full-blown economic meltdown.

Given this sharp decline, the research team conducted a special midyear update to see what, if anything, has improved. The good news: Trust in U.S. business has stabilized, growing by a 12-point margin to reach 48% (the January 2009 Barometer clocked in at a record low of 36% who trust business to do “what is right”). U.S. government mirrored that growth, also increasing by 12 points to reach 42%.

In spite of this positive growth, 55% of respondents still believe that business hasn’t done enough to cooperate with government to solve the global economic crisis, and 52% think companies haven’t managed business operations well enough to ensure they will survive the economic crisis.

In terms of communications-specific results, the midyear Barometer did report that a combination of “hard and soft” measures will rebuild public trust, with “having transparent and honest business practices” and “communicating frequently and honestly” ranking among the most important actions a company could take (see graph).

Additionally, when asked how important the interests of various groups should be to a CEO’s decisions, respondents cited customers (70%) and employees (58%) first, suggesting that stakeholders—not shareholders—are the main consideration.

Communications executives, then, can draw the following conclusions from the midyear findings:

• Investor interests need to be balanced with customer and employee interests when a CEO makes a business decision; likewise, executives must consider the latter two groups when communicating information about that decision.

• Business and government must work collaboratively to tackle economic an societal challenges.

• Stakeholders are more inclined to trust companies that drive innovation by investing in research and development.

• Businesses that commit to finding solutions for global issues like global warming, energy costs and access to affordable healthcare are more trusted than those that don’t do enough to create solutions.