May 21. An Election Of Reputations?

(First publish on LinkedIn in April 2022)

Sunday, 10th April 2022, Australian Prime Minister called the federal elections after visiting the Governor-General in Canberra. In a country where voting is mandatory, every eligible person is expected to cast their vote come May 21. Obviously, Scott Morrison's Liberal-National Coalition (LNP) coalition and Anthony Albanese’s Labor Party (LP) have already jumped on the campaign trail to canvas the votes.

What I want to keep observing is how the reputation game will continue to play out in this election, aside the issues and policies. The policies of the two big daddies in elections have always been founded and will always be grounded on the philosophical underpinnings of their establishments. The centre-left leaning LP will lean on their vote niche 'philosophy', and so will the centre-right LNP - leaning on their policy bedrock. In simple terms, both camps have always articulated their policies based on their establishments’ genetic mapping, unless if any of them take the risk of mutating in the short space between now and May 21. Mr Morrison is already preaching a warning message for voters not to ‘risk a change to an “uncertain” future,’ while Mr Albanese, is encouraging the message of hope asking voters ‘to seize the opportunity for better times ahead’.

Political fundamentals aside, I am keen to keep follow that laser-sharp light cutting through their leadership reputation in their expected execution of duty, as Prime Minister, and how that will impact on who forms the next government. Whilst Mr Morrison still leads as a preferred leader for the job, the LP has a better aggregate as a preferred camp in recent NewsPolls. How much will leadership reputation influence the polling, going forward?

Pre-election season, Mr Morrison has been working on mending fences, to save his leadership reputation, partly damaged by his absence when parts of the country were up in smoke - experiencing one of the worst bush fires in history. He had to cut short a family holiday, to Hawaii, after receiving an avalanche of criticism for the behaviour. It is still evident how much the communities continue to feel disenfranchised, today. This is still weighing and will constantly visit to haunt him in this election. His team has tried its best to help douse the leadership reputation damage his absence caused, including placing his wife as the front and family’s spokesperson when addressing the matter, on a television program on Channel 9, a couple of months ago. A credible crisis and reputation management tactic. Mrs Morrison even took responsibility for their being away, in that difficult time. Lately, the public labelling of Mr Morrison as ‘a hypocrite and a liar’ by his deputy and coalition partner put pressure on their candidate’s leadership reputation, and the entire LNP product’s reputation, in an election season.

While Mr Morrison and the LNP is on its last-minute reputation cleaning, the LP campaign bus hit a pothole on the very first day of starting the campaign off, when Mr Albanese stumbled to answer a question on the country’s unemployment rate or official interest rate, in a televised interview. Issues that matter a lot for a country in an election year, and for a team going into a campaign. That alone has the potential to negatively impact on his leadership reputation, as not being ready to lead, from day one. Having offered an apology, he will be lucky if the LNP will not milk and continue to capitalise on it.

We cannot decisively call it out if leadership reputation ramifications plays out strongly, in this election, simply because their issues approach is based on the philosophical underpinnings of the political establishments – speaking to a voter that resonates with those ideologies. Regardless, for an election coming on the back of a few tough years of dealing with a global pandemic, devastating bush fires, flood waters, and the associated collaterals, leadership reputation demonstrated could be the x-factor in this election - especially for the vote swingers.

Boeing 737 MAX: Navigating its future.

In the period between October 2018 and March 2019, The Boeing Company found its reputation at risk of suffering a crisis following two tragic accidents involving its plane brand – the Boeing 737 MAX.

The two accidents – one involving a Lion Air Flight 610 in October 2018, and another involving an Ethiopian Airline Flight 302 in March 2019 – precisely occurred 5 months apart. Initially, the accidents were attributed to human mistakes on the plane – pointing towards potential error by pilots navigating the birds. In a media interview in April 2019, the Chairman, President, and Chief Executive Officer (CEO) for Boeing, Dennis Muilenburg made it clear that,

‘I can tell you with confidence that we understand our planes, we understand how the design was accomplished, how the certification was accomplished and we remain fully confident in the product that we put in the field.’

Following more information coming out, as well as expert analyses of the two accidents, Boeing started shifting its narrative to accepting that the accidents were resultant of an error on its software system known as the Manoeuvring Characteristics Augmentation System (MCAS), installed on the 737 MAX, as part of the plane’s automated functions.

The 737 MAX became one of the sought after brand by renowned airlines in the world. However, the crashing down of Ethiopian Airline Flight 302 was the last straw for Boeing and several airlines to revisit the brand’s suitability for the market. In the following weeks, airlines across the world grounded the 737 MAX brand. Many others that placed orders of the plane’s brand eventually put their orders on hold - affecting the production line and the corporation’s financial revenue. Crises cost corporations financially much as it affects corporation’s reputation and clients’ emotions. These two accidents left Boeing with a US$1 billion damage to its bottom line, and 346 lives lost – delivering sad news to families of those who died, as well as shocking the world over.

Could it be that the plane was rushed into air to counter the Airbus, and keep Boeing competitive on the market?

Much as the corporate brand may not have suffered significant reputational damage, it can be contended that, at this moment, the world is holding its breath as to how Boeing will navigate around the future of the 737 MAX.

How has and how will Boeing move with the 737 MAX brand crisis? The grounding of the planes and shifting the official statement from the initial positioning showed that Boeing is embracing a more empathetic approach. Boeing further set aside funds to support victims of the two accidents. In July 2019, the Chairman, President and CEO said,

‘..the tragic loss of life in both accidents continue to weigh on all of us at Boeing, and we have the utmost sympathy for the loved ones of those on board.’

Boeing has assured the market that the MCAS is now fixed - and is assuring its customers of the safety of the plane. Regardless, it can be vied that Boeing will have trust issues with the 737 MAX brand. Consumer perception of the brand performance, now, is in bad taste. Once the MAX 737 is back in the skies, passengers will surely be curious to know what plane they have been booked on for their trip. Boeing needs to do a lot more than just assuring the market that the software system is fixed.

An organisational leader's demeanour during crises sets a tone on how the entire organisation responds in crisis moments. Would, having the Boeing CEO, flying intercontinental on the 737 MAX recoup the market and passenger trust in the plane brand (once reintroduced)?

Perhaps Boeing need to psychologically phase out the 737 MAX by upgrading and promoting a brand close to it - just may be that could erase the negative perceptions associated with the MAX 737 brand failure. Could a 737 MAX Plus be an ideal reincarnation?

#ReputationManagement #Boeing #BrandReputation #737MAX

Sense-Making Of Crisis Situations

When a crisis strikes, it has the propensity to disrupts the ‘business as usual’ operating mode in an organisation, affecting decision making, and not the least, organisation’s ‘judgment’. The inevitability of crisis situations in the modern day global economy and the unforgiving business environment, necessitates organisations to fully embrace crisis management in strategic planning and decision making.

Apart from the potential damage to an organisation’s reputation, crises can drastically affect and physically, emotionally, and financially harm organisation’s employees and other stakeholders. Often than not, crises manifest unexpectedly. Most crises, especially where there is absence of issue monitoring, leaves organisation’s leadership grappling with ‘sense-making’ of what has just occurred. This may happen as a result of a number of reasons, including: the rarity of crises in that particular organisation or business environment; the organisation’s poor monitoring of issues that may escalate into crises; and the absence of crisis mitigating plans in the organization.

As soon as a crisis unfolds, organisation’s leaders often experience a huge sense of loss-of-control. This is normal with every crisis situations - either at personal or professional level. For example, the pressure for calculated decisions making within the shortest space of time, as the crisis unfolds, can emotionally affect leader’s perception of their control of the unfolding situation. This sense of loss-of-control can negatively impact on the emotion and subsequently the behavior of the leadership during the crisis.

As pressure for urgent decision making - as well as stakeholder’s demand for information build up - making sense of the crisis can be the catalyst for management in finding solutions and making headways in resolving an unfolding crisis. It is, therefore, very important for organisation’s leadership to expediently task itself with making sense of what is going in the organisation environment, as soon as a crisis rears its head.

Organisation’s leadership can make sense of an unfolding crisis by, among others engaging and asking themselves clear questions that generate clear answers to understand crisis cause, crisis impact, public opinion, as well as employee safety and emotional wellbeing. When organisation’s leadership swiftly make sense of a crisis, they are well placed to explain the crisis to the organisation’s various stakeholders - thereby creating deeper stakeholder understanding of the organisation’s unpleasant situation. Sense-making allows for organisation’s leadership to get the pulse of a crisis situation, and allows for making effective decisions, leading the organization through the storm.

Sense-making sets the pace to premise organisation’s response in assuaging crisis situations. As such, it is important for leadership to be on top of what is unfolding, appreciate what is happening, and figure out what needs to be done to allow for all stakeholders, including employees, to equally make sense of the crisis and participate in the recovery process at any level and in any way they can.

Employees and stakeholders that are taken on-board the organisation’s crisis recovery process can be the pressure-escape valve that sometimes an organisation needs to emotionally sway public opinion in its favour. They can become an organisation’s organic brand and crisis ambassadors.

#CrisisManagement #Emotions #Sensemaking