Most crises are unavoidable but a weak response — to be avoided at all costs — is guaranteed to make a difficult situation worse. There is a reason why the saying “Engage your brain first before opening your mouth” will always resonate. How many reputations have been ruined by a statement that was meant to calm a situation but had the opposite effect? In a crisis, words have consequences. They can hurt, damage, inflame but sometimes even heal.
The right combination can demonstrate empathy, acknowledge the scale of a crisis, and show a willingness to work with those affected. A powerful statement embracing those values, shuts down hostility and buys enough time for a communications team to build a competent strategy.
Crisis management will always be difficult because companies are responding to real‑time events – and the room for error is high. Identifying when to respond — rather than blundering in with an unintentionally insensitive statement — is a learned discipline. Corporates want to be heard first and that need intensifies as a situation changes. Silence might be seen as guilt while bland inoffensive statements amount to little more than legal protection. Saying too much opens the door for potential litigation while saying nothing holds the line against a flurry of writs.
So how can leaders strike a balance between responding sensibly and saying nothing that could leave them open to legal action? A good place to start is by anatomising a communication crisis and separating the leaders who got it right from the ones who made a pig’s ear of it!
When Words Go Wrong: BP and the Deepwater Horizon Disaster
On 20th April 2010, BP’s Deepwater Horizon drilling rig in the Gulf of Mexico exploded killing 11 workers and triggering one of the worst environmental disasters in US history. Company CEO Tony Hayward faced intense scrutiny from coastal communities whose livelihoods were affected by the disaster. During a site visit, he told reporters he regretted the disruption, adding: “There’s no-one who wants this over more than I do. I would like my life back.”
The final line of that statement – innocuous in normal circumstances – was a bombshell. The media latched onto it while the public recoiled in disgust. In the eyes of the world Tony Hayward – boss of one of the world’s biggest oil companies – cared more about himself than the people affected by the tragedy. A poorly chosen expression – spoken with no thought of how it would be interpreted – is now an infamous marker in the history of PR disasters.
When Words Go Right: Sir Michael Bishop and the Kegworth Air Disaster
On 8th January 1989, British Midland Flight 092 crashed on the M1 motorway near Kegworth Leicestershire, killing 47 people and injuring 74 others.
Company chairman Michael Bishop reacted with empathy that wasn’t performative. He had built British Midland from the ground up and took the disaster personally — even though it wasn’t his fault. He not only visited the crash site, but in media interviews he repeatedly emphasised that British Midland would do everything necessary to find the cause of the accident.
Michael Bishop’s approach left no room for an information gap, and the media saw him as a leading source for story updates.
His conduct – putting the care of the victims above everything else – is often cited as a powerful example of compassionate leadership in a crisis. He recognised the importance of accountability, the value of trust in the relationship with the public, and the principle that leadership should always be driven by human connection, not self-protection.
Michael Bishop responded to Britain’s worst-ever aviation disaster with kindness, and decades after the tragedy it hasn’t been forgotten.
Modern Leaders Who Got It Right
Mary Barra — General Motors
In 2014, General Motors – America’s biggest car manufacturer – was embroiled in a massive scandal linking a number of fatalities to ignition switches. For newly appointed CEO Mary Barra, the situation required decisive action and accountability.
Millions of vehicles were recalled, staff who had ignored safety issues were fired, and an independent inquiry was commissioned. The findings, which made for uncomfortable reading, revealed that GM’s corporate culture was riddled with systemic failure.
Barra not only accepted the conclusions, but she handled the fallout with transparency and implemented every single recommendation. During a global town hall briefing with GM staff, she described the report’s findings as “extremely thorough, brutally tough, and deeply troubling.”
By acting openly and taking responsibility, she restored the trust between GM’s investors and customers. In 2016, Mary Barra was elected as Chair of the GM Board of Directors and is the first female CEO of a major global automaker.
Vikram Singh Mehta — IndiGo Airlines
In December 2025 IndiGo, India’s biggest carrier, suffered a major scheduling crisis. Thousands of flights were cancelled and over a million passengers were left stranded in airports across the country. The chaos – caused by planning gaps and pilot shortages —threatened to ruin IndiGo’s spotless reputation for punctuality. Board Chairman Vikram Singh Mehta wasted no time.
In a video message he acknowledged the disruption, accepted unconditional responsibility, and dispelled any customer scepticism with three simple words: “We are sorry.”
Mehta’s honesty defused the anger, avoided a damaging PR backlash, and earned him the admiration of the travelling public and his industry peers.
James Burke — Johnson & Johnson
Since the 1950s, millions of Americans have been taking Tylenol – an over-the counter-drug — for pain relief. But if it hadn’t been for the actions of James Burke – CEO of Johnson & Johnson, which manufactured the drug – Tylenol might have disappeared from the shelves altogether.
In 1982 seven people died in Chicago after taking capsules laced with potassium cyanide. Instead of hiding the company behind a wall of legal technicalities, Burke launched a nationwide recall of 31 million Tylenol bottles costing Johnson & Johnson $100 million.
He regularly updated the national media, temporarily stopped all Tylenol advertising, and restored consumer confidence by spearheading the development of triple- seal- tamper- resistant packaging. Burke saved the brand, and his handling of the crisis is widely regarded as the gold standard for ethical leadership, earning a place in business school curricula.
The Balancing Act: Reputation vs Legal Protection
Every crisis is different and can’t always be handled with a “one size fits all” approach. Some PR teams will issue a statement first before putting the company CEO in front of a TV camera. There’s nothing with that as long as the statement:
- Acknowledges harm without admitting liability
- Shows empathy without theatrics
- Commits to action without speculation
- Protects the organisation without sounding defensive
Remember, the role of the first statement is to set the emotional tone. It won’t solve the crisis, but as a holding measure, it should stop it from getting worse.
10 Mistakes Leaders Make in Crises
When a crisis occurs, leaders often fall into predictable traps — not because they lack intelligence, but because the pressure of the moment distorts their judgement. The demand for instant answers, the fear of legal exposure, relentless media scrutiny, and the emotional weight of public expectation create a perfect storm where even seasoned executives risk losing their footing.
These mistakes are rarely malicious – if anything they’re human – but the consequences can be serious. A poor choice of words, a defensive tone, or rushed assumptions can inflame an already fragile situation.
Understanding these pitfalls is the first step toward avoiding them – and delivering a response that calms a situation. So, if you ever find yourself in a crisis, avoid the following:
- Speaking too soon
- Guessing facts
- Sounding defensive
- Minimising the crisis
- Using self-centred language (“my life”, “my stress”)
- Over‑promising
- Blaming others prematurely
- Using legalistic jargon
- Ignoring the human impact
- Going silent for too long
Crisis Communications Checklist
When a crisis occurs, time is not a luxury. Leaders often find themselves speaking under pressure before they’ve had time to gather their thoughts. That’s when mistakes are more likely to happen — not through incompetence, but urgency. A simple checklist provides a moment of discipline because it forces leaders to pause, think, and choose their words with care. It’s the difference between a statement that calms a situation and one that inflames it. In the early hours of a crisis, structure is not a constraint; it’s protection. This checklist is designed to anchor leaders in clarity, empathy, and responsibility when everything around them feels unstable.
Before speaking:
- Do I know the verified facts?
- Have I removed assumptions?
- Have I considered legal exposure?
- Have I acknowledged human impact?
- Have I chosen language that calms, not inflames?
- Have I avoided self‑centred phrasing?
- Have I prepared a follow‑up plan?
During the statement:
- Keep it short
- Keep it empathetic
- Keep it precise
- Keep it responsible
- Keep it human
After the statement:
- Follow through
- Communicate updates
- Maintain visibility
- Demonstrate action
- Rebuild trust
Continuity: Why Good Crisis Leadership Hasn’t Changed
Was Sir Michael Bishop ahead of the game? Not really. He understood his company, his staff, and the trust placed in him. There was only one way he could respond: as a human being first, and a CEO second. And those modern leaders who excel in crises — Barra, Mehta, Burke — follow the same pattern:
- Empathy
- Clarity
- Accountability
- Presence
- Action
Communication tools – like the modern media landscape – have changed. But the emotional architecture of crisis leadership remains the same. When everything goes wrong, the public doesn’t want perfection. It wants humanity.
FAQ
Frequently Asked Questions
What is crisis communication and why is it important?
Crisis communication involves sharing accurate, timely information during an event that threatens an organisation’s reputation, operations or stakeholders. It helps reduce uncertainty, addresses concerns and demonstrates accountability. Effective crisis communication enables organisations to respond responsibly, minimise reputational damage and maintain trust during challenging circumstances.
What is the main purpose of crisis communication?
The main purpose of crisis communication is to provide clear, accurate and timely information during a crisis, address concerns and maintain public trust. It helps organisations demonstrate empathy, take responsibility where appropriate and explain the steps being taken to resolve the situation. Effective communication can limit reputational damage and support the process of rebuilding confidence among customers, employees and other stakeholders.
What are the three stages of crisis communication?
The three stages of crisis communication are pre-crisis preparation, crisis response and post-crisis recovery. During preparation, organisations identify potential risks and develop communication plans. The response stage involves sharing verified information, showing empathy and explaining the actions being taken. Post-crisis recovery focuses on reviewing the response, addressing outstanding concerns and rebuilding trust with stakeholders.
What are the key principles of effective crisis leadership?
The key principles of effective crisis leadership are empathy, clarity, accountability, visibility and action. Leaders should acknowledge the impact on affected people, communicate information clearly, accept responsibility where appropriate and remain accessible to stakeholders. They must also follow through on their commitments and take practical steps to address the crisis.
What should leaders avoid saying during a crisis?
Leaders should avoid minimising the seriousness of a situation, making unverified claims, blaming others prematurely or promising solutions they cannot guarantee. Self-centred or defensive language can also undermine public confidence. Rather than remaining silent for too long, leaders should communicate verified information, acknowledge legitimate concerns and provide updates as the situation develops.
How can effective crisis communication protect a company’s reputation?
Effective crisis communication can protect a company’s reputation by reducing uncertainty, correcting misinformation and demonstrating accountability. Clear updates, transparent explanations and meaningful corrective action help reassure stakeholders and rebuild confidence over time. The crisis responses of leaders such as Mary Barra and James Burke illustrate how communication supported by decisive action can help restore trust in an organisation.