Knowledge Communication: A Key to Successful Crisis Management

Abstract

A winning concept of crisis management can be summarized in 2 words: knowledge communication. If decision makers, communicators, experts, and the public understand what the crisis is about and share their knowledge, the process of handling it will be optimized. Effective crisis communication implies the necessity of an unhindered but purposeful exchange of information within and between authorities, organizations, media, involved individuals, and groups before, during, and after a crisis. This article focuses on the importance of the before, or prevention, part of a crisis since it holds a rich possibility to enhance the chances for successful crisis management of a bioterrorism incident. An extended perspective on crisis communication efficiently links to a more thorough understanding of risk perception with various stakeholders and the public, which also will be helpful for situational awareness. Furthermore, the grounded baseline for the dialogue type of crisis communication suitable in modern society and to modern social media is achieved by linking to those risk communication efforts that are made. The link between risk and crisis should be afforded more attention since, especially in biosecurity, there would be no crisis without risk negligence and poor or malfunctioning preventive efforts.

The link between risk and crisis has been well described by several scholars. Heath describes it best with regards to risk and the elusive field of effective crisis communication as follows: “Crisis occurs when the risk manifests itself, and people are harmed—or worry that they are, and perhaps even wonder why they are not.”^1(p11)

But, arguably, focusing merely on how to prepare for effective crisis communication is not enough. All Swedish organizations involved in the AniBioThreat project have during its course realized the importance of practicing the “need to share” principle and linking it to a risk and issues management system that systematically addresses those incidents that may occur. However, all crisis situations are bound to a certain context in time, topic, and scope, and there are limits to what can be prepared and rehearsed beforehand. The actor-based definition of a crisis is a situation that actors perceive:

• acutely threatens and affects core values and the fundamentals of society;

• is marked by factors such as uncertainty and urgency; and

• lacks time for decision making.^2(p3)

A crisis is by definition a situation in which preparations and protective measures and methods have failed to prevent an unwanted event from occurring. The image of those crisis management efforts in play as perceived by the public seldom corresponds with actual efforts. The image is influenced by and negotiated through competing perspectives, sources of knowledge, and information as well as the public's needs and not least fears of an unfavorable outcome of the crisis. Authorities therefore have a great responsibility to promptly engage in dialogue and offer their knowledge to all stakeholders including the public in order to contribute to and aid in the overall sense-making process.

The role of a director of communications in the public sector has also evolved to the point to where it is no longer enough to be an expert in communication. The communication director needs to be an integral part of all strategic, operational, and tactical aspects of the crisis management process and to be prepared to support decision making and direct communication efforts and to maintain communicative focus on those issues that are decisive in order to ultimately achieve a successful end to the crisis. In other words, the concept of knowledge communication should be defined as an actor network based effort to integrate risk and issues management processes with risk and crisis communication.

During a crisis, it is essential to provide leadership and to explain those efforts that are being made to understand and counter the effects of a crisis. Usually an organization manifests its lack of control over the crisis by centralizing decision making and crisis communications in order to regain control over events. A speedy reorganization is needed in which all decisions concerning what to communicate and to whom are integrated with the crisis management group's decision-making process. From a social psychological perspective, an organization is in this sense constantly produced and reproduced through communication between their members, which makes crisis communication a proactive activity. ³

The AniBioThreat project has an overall objective to improve the EU's capacity to counter animal bioterrorism threats in terms of awareness, prevention, and dealing with contingencies. Early Warning is one of the project's work packages, and it includes the task Incident Communication. Among the European member states, there is a need for integrated communication strategies and action plans for threats or incidents related to animal bioterrorism. Therefore, the aim of the work in Incident Communication is to develop joint incident communication plans.

When a crisis occurs, there is a risk that authorities will face public indignation over the fact that officials in charge of public safety have failed to prevent a crisis from occurring. Social trust and the sense of public safety are in jeopardy in addition to those lives directly affected by a bioterrorist attack. Recent research in crisis communication offers several communication strategies to face those types of situations, which are becoming mainstream practices for communication practitioners in mitigating or countering the effects of a crisis.^4-6 In the AniBioThreat project, we advocate the necessity of contemplating alternative communication strategies that better support the prevention perspective.

The work to establish a preparedness culture needs 2 distinctive parts: first, active networking and exchange of knowledge between professionals in the various authorities involved, and second, the establishment of an issues management system with operational and subject matter responsibilities. Networking fosters a bond between authorities that facilitates cooperation and speeds up processes in an actual event. An issues management system with authorities provides an integrated platform for various professional fields within an authority and ties risk management together with risk communication. ⁷ The issues management process allows for an authority to effectively identify and deal with issues that arise in biosecurity and bioterrorism. The issues management system should also include learning from issues and incidents in the international community in this field in order to constantly hone preventive measures and preparedness by training and gaming. The aim is to “manage crises before they happen.” ⁸

Methods

The method used in the AniBioThreat project is network-based, in which the aim has been to merge knowledge and understanding of those authorities that hold various responsibilities in the fields that bioterrorism affects. Experts, communicators, and decision makers have discussed and mapped out ways to merge resources in surveillance, security, epidemiology, and law enforcement to effectively counter the threat of bioterrorism.

Several bioterrorism scenarios were used to perform a survey on means of communication in Sweden, followed by a survey on means of the participating states. The networking was reinforced through the use of workshops and tabletop exercises in which different scenarios were used to further develop common understanding of how to identify implications and counter those challenges that affect the authorities in various ways depending on scenario, mandates, and framework of laws. The scientifically developed starting point for initiating collaboration and action on signals of a bioterrorism threat is a process model that includes a joint diagnosis, analysis, and framing of the situation during the sense-making phase. This process continues, including decision making and meaning making, before finalizing with terminating and learning. ² All parts of the process are supported by a communication strategy that aims to strengthen the collaboration between authorities and to keep various stakeholders and the public informed in a timely and accurate fashion. The communication strategy allows for engaging the public in dialogue and gaining critically needed cooperation in achieving those crisis management objectives that depend on the public's actions and behaviors in preventing loss of life and mitigation of adverse effects of bioterror incidents. The communication strategy also involves the use of modern means of communication such as meshing several authorities' communication to the national emergency webpage www.krisinformation.se as well as using social media.

Results

Modern views of the role of the communication professional are emphasized in the AniBioThreat project, in which communicators are part of management teams and participate in analysis and decision making; they have a strategic role in influencing crisis management efforts and managing and/or mitigating the outcome of a crisis. The aim is to transform the role of communication from a reactive one-way communication set-up to inform the media and public by responding to queries and offering expert opinions and advice, as stated as responsibilities that authorities have in the national law. Efficient communicators need to master new functions, such as issues management, and to enhance the advisory capacity and offer solid media and communication analysis to especially the sense-making, decision-making, and meaning-making processes and to figure out ways to communicate the outcome of those. This aim puts knowledge sharing into an accentuated context with the specific objective to study and implement improvements in prevention and response to bioterror threats.

One important conclusion is that effective decisions can be made only when involved authorities share information and knowledge and merge resources to establish joint situational awareness and a common understanding of what needs to be done in the situation at hand and in what order those measures should be taken. Through joint exercises and workshops in the AniBioThreat project, Swedish authorities have experimented and processed the development of a strategy for creating joint incident communication plans that supports collective situational awareness and effective decision making. One of the exercises used a scenario that reflected reality in such a way that no authorities had the exact same information in the staged crisis puzzle. This forced participants to interact and activate new forums in which the enhanced situational awareness could be developed. Throughout the exercise, initial skepticism from some of the participants turned into enthusiasm over the extended value they got from sharing knowledge with each other. When knowledge was shared, it also fostered a deeper tactical and operational understanding between the different authorities and sectors of expertise. The new forms and forums of interaction created better understanding for each other's capabilities and limitations and how to better support the overall process without stumbling over each other's efforts. The upside for the public is that authorities also have a better opportunity to resolve conflicts in and streamline messages to minimize confusion. In conclusion, the integrated approach with strategic crisis communication to support the whole crisis management process enhanced teamwork efforts and efficient decision making based on collective knowledge, which also secured timely, accurate communication with the public.

Discussion

The previous role of information departments has evolved over the past 30 years. Practices and methods used in the corporate world have been adapted and included in the public sphere, with up to a 10-year delay in some areas. The trend is clear; information is replaced by communication, and organizations adapt to the possibilities of interacting with various publics through modern communication means and platforms. Public sphere communication directors are nowadays also included in strategic leadership and management groups of the authorities they serve in, just as the trend has been with major corporations. But one difference between the public and corporate sphere remains: Corporations' main goal is to make a profitable business, whereas authorities strive to serve the public and to fulfill tasks and mandates.

The new media landscape, which offers every individual a voice in digital and social media, creates a demand on authorities to engage in communication. In the AniBioThreat project, it has become evident through scenario-based training that it is not enough to focus on how and what to communicate in an actual crisis but to have the capacity to engage in dialogue. More attention needs to be directed to the preventive aspects of bioterrorism in which a preparedness and networking culture can establish the well-needed forums and platform to use in an actual crisis as well as a willingness to prioritize and engage in regular joint exercises. Only then will the authorities have a chance to establish resilience against bioterrorism by applying a knowledge sharing based approach to prevention, crisis management, and how to best mitigate the effects of an incident.