Internal crisis communication

Abstract

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to contribute to the study of internal crisis communication, not only the communication from the management to the employees, but also the employees’ communication with each other, in order to highlight the role of communication in the employees’ sensemaking during a crisis situation. Design/methodology/approach – The study was conducted as interviews with both managers and employees at a municipality in the Stockholm region, where a former employee had just been accused of embezzling approx. 25 million SEK. The interviews were analysed with particular interest to descriptions of how information was communicated, and how the sensemaking process developed. Findings – The crisis communication was successful when it came to informing external stakeholders and media. But the management and the employees had different views on the communication. The employees felt that management did not present all the information they needed, which made their sensemaking based on assumptions and rumours, and on the culture in the unit. Management interpreted that the crisis was not due to a culture problem, while the employees felt that there was a shared responsibility. Blaming the former employee was perceived as a way of dodging the cultural problems. Practical implications – Conclusions can be generalized into three points: first, differences between external and internal crisis communication need to be taken into account. Second, a crisis can strengthen existing patterns within a dysfunctional culture. Third, do not use single employees as scapegoats, putting all blame on them. Originality/value – The study shows the significance of culture and rumour as components of sensemaking in a crisis situation. The results should be applicable to most kinds of organizations, commercial or not.

What was that all about? On internal crisis communication and communicative coworkership during a pandemic

“…During the crisis, coworkers are to implement management decisions and contribute to handling the crisis. Employees are certainly receivers of crisis information, but rather than Coworkership during a pandemic passively absorbing managers' communication, they also act as active sensemakers (Madsen Thøis and Verhoeven, 2019), which may mean that they sometimes reject or reinterpret the intended meaning (Mazzei and Ravazzani, 2011;Strandberg and Vigsø, 2016). However, coworkers should not only be treated as implementers of management decisions, they can also brief managers about stakeholders' reactions and help managers to make more informed decisions.…”

“…Yet another characteristic is that almost all research has paid attention to external aspects of a crisis and external communication during a crisis (e.g. Frandsen and Johansen, 2011;Strandberg and Vigsø, 2016;Heide and Simonsson, 2014;Heide and Simonsson, 2015). Hence, strangely enough, the internal aspect has been ignored until a decade ago, when some publications on internal crisis communication appeared (Taylor, 2010;Frandsen and Johansen, 2011;Mazzei and Ravazzani, 2011).…”

Guest editorial: Internal communication during the COVID-19 pandemic

“…As authors in the special edition highlight, the crisis communication literature has focused almost exclusively on external aspects of a crisis and external communication during a crisis (e.g. Frandsen and Johansen, 2011;Strandberg and Vigsø, 2016;Simonsson, 2014, 2015). The role of internal communication was largely ignored until 2010 when publications on ICC appeared (Taylor, 2010;Frandsen and Johansen, 2011;Mazzei and Ravazzani, 2011).…”

Tavoitteena turvallisuus

“…Turvallisuuskulttuuri muuttuu koko ajan, ja sen kehittäminen on kaikkien työntekijöiden vastuulla (Kinnunen 2010). Turvallisuuskulttuuri ja sisäinen kriisiviestintä ovat tiiviisti yhteydessä toisiinsa, sillä viestinnällä ylläpidetään yhteistä tietoisuutta turvallisuudesta (Frandsen & Johansen 2011;Leonard, Graham & Bonacum 2004;Strandberg & Vigsø 2016). Turvallisuutta voidaan parantaa siis kehittämällä turvallisuuskulttuuria ja sisäistä kriisiviestintää; prosessi alkaa jo kauan ennen kuin varsinainen turvallisuutta uhkaava kriisi syntyy.…”