Scribd
Upload
12 views2 pages

05 Handout 1

Technical writing

Uploaded by

Romer Tumambo
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
12 views2 pages

05 Handout 1

Technical writing

Uploaded by

Romer Tumambo
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

AS1907

RISK COMMUNICATION PHASES

I. Communication during the Preparedness Phase


Crisis and risk preparedness are important factors in enhancing community resilience and should involve
the development of infrastructure as well as specific messages for publics that may be at risk from a potential
threat. Communities that engage in the creation of emergency response systems and inform residents of
those systems increase community risk tolerance. Adequate preparedness involves risk communicators
creating effective messages, testing their persuasive appeals, and distributing risk messages via the
appropriate communication channels. Risk communicators should develop detailed, threat-specific
preparedness plans that publics can easily follow in order to get the attention of publics and to more
effectively disseminate essential information. Needless to say, communicators should also ensure that the
specific information they are providing is accurate. Effective crisis training is also critical during this phase,
especially given that 80% of crisis managers learn on the job; training is essential for helping crisis
managers avoid mistakes that could be extremely detrimental when responding to a crisis. Several training
options exist all of which emphasize experiential learning through crisis simulations.

Institutions and organizations that facilitate relationships within their professional networks can increase
trust among organizational decision makers. These effective interorganizational relationships are, in turn,
critical for developing and disseminating risk communication preparedness messages. For example, a case
study of anthrax attacks in 2001 New Jersey identified how pre-existing organizational and professional
networks increased trust among key decision makers and communicators in the midst of the crisis.
Relationship building prior to an event will increase trust and improve communication throughout the
network, which can in turn improve communication with more general, external publics. The consistency
resulting from multiple institutions or organizations providing the same, or complementary, messages helps
to keep publics properly informed, reduce confusion, and facilitate organizational operations. Organizations
that are aware of their professional networks and are willing to engage them in partnerships before a risk
becomes manifest may be able to make a significant positive impact on a threatening situation.

The best practices literature on crisis planning strongly recommends developing crisis management plans,
crisis training, and implementing effective warning systems, while providing guidance on key elements of
each. Observations from this literature can help organizations and institutions successfully manage risks
that become crises.

II. Communication during the Response Phase


Institutions, organizations, and publics increasingly need to work together to enact effective response
strategies. Publics can be valuable partners in risk responses, but it is important to make sure publics have
prompt access to practical, helpful information. Strong organization-public relationships can aid in the
understanding of public attitudes, perceptions, knowledge, and potential behaviors. These relationships will
necessarily change over time, but successful ones will engage in developing shared solutions to common
problems and adapt to reflect need and expectation fulfillment.

In this phase the most common approach used is a Crisis Management Plan (CMP). It is intended to guide
organizations and institutions through preventing a risk from escalating into a crisis or managing an existing
crisis quickly and efficiently, with an emphasis on the role that internal and external communication can and
should play during the response phase. While CMPs should be developed in advance of the emergence of
a threat, they can be vital resources as the threat emerges. Although there is not a one size-fits-all method
for compiling a CMP, research indicates that organizations that develop crisis plans are better equipped to
respond to crises effectively and efficiently. 99% of organizations that developed and implemented crisis
management plans found the plans to be effective in helping respond to crises. Others, however, caution
against creating rigid plans that do not allow for flexibility and improvisation during crises. In particular, plans
may be too simplistic, ignoring (1) how people, organizations, and/or networks interact during crises; (2)
that organizations and institutions are complicated and constantly evolving; and (3) that some factors cannot
be controlled through plans such as how historical circumstances (e.g., discrimination) affect how publics
respond to crises. Despite these critiques, most research recognizes the value of CMPs as long as they
remain flexible.

05 Handout 1 *Property of STI


Page 1 of 2
AS1907

III. Communication during the Recovery Phase


Risk communicators who have successfully moved beyond risk or crisis situations find themselves in a
discourse of renewal, where they can move beyond immediate problems and traumas to innovate, adapt,
and dedicate energy toward a new future. This renewal should include a focus on the future for both the
community leaders and publics, characterized by optimistic discourse and reform of failed elements of risk
management. Leadership needs to enact and frame the situation’s meaning for publics and have a strong
sense of where the community is headed beyond the situation. Renewal requires significant resources due
to its necessary longevity and the need to view it comprehensively, and if maintaining positive discourse
throughout renewal is not possible, organizations and institutions should continue to adapt and work toward
achieving new and important post-event objectives.

There are several factors to consider in moving toward renewal, which is part of recovery phase and
followed by most organizations:
 Communication access - For crisis recovery to truly occur, publics must be able to disseminate their
own information, rather than relying on one-way communication from the news media.
 Returning to a “new normal” - Effective crisis managers try to return to functional operations as soon as
possible, adapting as needed to the new realities created by the experienced threat, which also moves
the crisis out of the media coverage and allows for organizational growth and change.
 Rekindling relationships - Affected publics often resume old relationships for emotional support,
financial resources, and information, often through new media.
 Repairing damage - The most fundamental indicator that crisis recovery has begun is when
organizations take steps to repair crisis damage such as providing compensation to victims, rebuilding
facilities, and cleaning up environmental damage.

REFERENCE:
Janoske, M., B. Liu, & B. Sheppard. (May 2012). Understanding risk communication best practices: A guide for
emergency managers and communicators, Report to Human Factors/Behavioral Sciences Division,
Science and Technology Directorate, U.S. Department of Homeland Security. College Park, MD:
National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START).

05 Handout 1 *Property of STI


Page 2 of 2

You might also like