Evaluating Crisis Communication. A 30-item Checklist for Assessing Performance during COVID-19 and Other Pandemics

Abstract

The primary objective of this paper is to propose a conceptual checklist to assess crisis communication efforts during pandemics and in their aftermath. No consolidated checklist exists for assessing the effectiveness of crisis communication at all levels during pandemics. A literature review was conducted, encompassing articles on crisis communication during SARS, swine flu, H1N1, ZIKA, Ebola, and/or COVID-19. Based on the review, a comprehensive checklist was developed to enable researchers and evaluators to assess and review all important aspects of crisis communication during pandemics. The final Assessment tool for Crisis Communication during Pandemics (ACCP) consists of 30 criteria. Further research is suggested to validate the checklist. The global COVID-19 pandemic is a crisis of unprecedented proportions. The crisis arrived in full view, yet it caught everyone off guard: politicians, hospital administrators, pundits, business owners, and the general population (Boin, Ekengren, & Rhinard, 2020). What distinguishes a pandemic from other crises are its characteristics as a "long wave event" (McInnes & Hornmoen, 2018). Where crises such as a major fire or airplane crash are over within a few hours or days, COVID-19 is, at the time of writing, an ongoing crisis that has generated widespread socioeconomic impact. Insight into how governments, citizens, businesses, and media have communicated during the pandemic may help to improve our learning from this crisis and support preparation for future pandemics. Countries on all continents have placed their citizens under various forms of lockdown during COVID-19, implementing measures from the obligation to wear face masks and maintain distance from others, to quarantines and school closures. Similar to earlier pandemics (Abraham, 2011), the initial need is for clear communication on what the public needs to do to reduce transmission as well as treatment advice. Everywhere, crisis communication is used as a public health intervention to inform and advise the public on necessary measures to minimize the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. But as COVID-19 progresses around the world, communication efforts are also needed in terms of citizens' resilience, (national) public leadership, and in communicating with stakeholders whose businesses are closed or suffering from lockdown situations. At the same time, we have observed public leaders around the world who did not agree with the measures proposed by experts. US President Trump and Brazilian president Bolsonaro are examples of public leaders who consistently underplayed the messaging of experts with regard to social distancing and the wearing of face masks,

Bounded Solidarity as an Asset for Public Health Care Intervention

“…As some other authors have pointed out “Everywhere, crisis communication is used as a public health intervention to inform and advise the public on necessary measures to minimize the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.” (Jong 2020, p.962). In this regard, crisis communication has been labeled as an essential endeavor during a pandemic (Ataguba & Ataguba, 2020, p. 2).…”

“…Taking stock of the of the circumstances during the outbreak of the pandemic and the uniqueness of the data collected, in this paper, we do three things: (a) analyze the manifestations of bounded solidarity and their espousing rationales to see under what guise solidarity emerged in such a critical scenario, (b) explore the relationship of these practices to health care workers, and (c) see how policy makers can improve their communication strategies to support health care workers when operating in crisis management mode. Our aim for this last point is to contribute, using a sociological approach, to the field of public health communication (Liu & Iannacone, 2020; Jong 2020; Forman et al, 2020; Glenn et al, 2020).…”

Crisis Communication in the Time Of COVID-19: The Significance of Grassroot Initiative in Democratic Countries (Case of Brazil, Indonesia, and the United States)

“…The discussion about crisis communication during the COVID-19 pandemic has also been discussed among scholars. A study conducted by Jong (2021) proposed an assessment tool to evaluate the performance of crisis communication during COVID-19 and other pandemics. The tool which is called the Assessment tool for Crisis Communication during Pandemics (ACCP) cover six domains, which are: I) Sense making in times of crisis, II) Public leadership in time, III) Public health professionals and expert voices, IV) Interaction with stakeholders, V) Instructions to the public, and VI) Story telling.…”

“…The tool which is called the Assessment tool for Crisis Communication during Pandemics (ACCP) cover six domains, which are: I) Sense making in times of crisis, II) Public leadership in time, III) Public health professionals and expert voices, IV) Interaction with stakeholders, V) Instructions to the public, and VI) Story telling. This tool allows academics to conduct an assessment through interview session to who actively involved in crisis communication management, by comparing the practice of crisis communication of the countries during a pandemic without negating the context they have, such as cultural traits, political regimes, and features of the media (Jong, 2021;Cheng & Lee, 2019).…”

Content and Communication of Inpatient Family Visitation Policies During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Sequential Mixed Methods Study (Preprint)

“…Crisis communication during a public health emergency is most useful when leveraged to improve community health and outcomes, rather than aimed to promote the reputation or image of an organization [16][17][18]. For example, the Crisis and Emergency Risk Communication (CERC) framework [19], which was developed by the CDC, merges both risk communication (ie, stakeholder-tailored communication focused on promoting behavior change) and crisis communication (ie, communication to reduce the negative effects of a crisis on stakeholders).…”