Reputation management: Royal Caribbean and Haiti

External crises can force companies to make consternating choices.

Royal Caribbean has come under fire for continuing to dock its cruise ships on the Haitian peninsula of Labadee in light of the devastating earthquake. An article in The Gaurdian, later picked up by The Huffington Post and the LA Times travel blog, among other outlets, questions whether passengers should be sunning themselves and enjoying cocktails on the beach when so many are suffering in Port au Prince.

It’s a sticky situation for Royal Caribbean. On the one hand, they’ve used their cruise ships to deliver pallets upon pallets of supplies and drinking water for the residents of Haiti. They’re bringing economic activity to Labadee, where hundreds of Haitians rely on tourism income to feed their families (in fact, it’s probably less a matter of the positive economic impact of the cruise passengers than it is the avoidance of the negative impact should the cruise ship divert to somewhere else and thus leave those who depend on tourism revenues in a lurch). Royal Caribbean has also pledged $1 million in relief to Haiti.

Opinions are flying around the Internet and in the media as to whether RCCL is doing the right thing. Passengers themselves are divided, and some refused to disembark during the Labadee visit and stayed on the ship. Others are glad to be spending their money and be involved with the relief effort. Some have made the argument that Haiti (and for that matter, most Caribbean vacation destinations) was abjectly poor and in need before the earthquake, yet that didn’t stop cruise ships from docking there and passengers from visiting.

It’s a reputation management nightmare. There’s no clear-cut “right answer” that will make all RCCL stakeholders happy. Royal Caribbean made its decision and while many are supportive of their efforts, some are swearing off the cruise line and calling it insensitive, shameful, or even disgusting.

Blogging the company’s rationale

I do admire the way Royal Caribbean has communicated throughout this crisis. The company’s blog, written primarily by the CEO, has been almost entirely devoted to Haiti for the last two weeks. One post details the internal processes the company is using to monitor and manage the situation in Haiti – they’ve even posted a link to a .pdf of their daily meeting notes. Another post addresses the Guardian article and defends their decision to continue operations in Haiti. They’ve posted several photos of relief supplies and discuss a meeting with President Clinton. Both the CEO, Adam Goldstein, and Associate Vice President, John Weis, are posting a few times a day.

Sometimes CEO blogs get a bad rap, and it’s often deserved. They can be dry and uninformative. But having a CEO or company blog in place gives you an instant response platform when a crisis arises. Royal Caribbean had to make a tough call, and through its blog has been able to not only explain and defend its decision in detail but also receive instant feedback by way of comments. Many of the comments support the company’s choice.

I’m sure the RCCL team agonized over what the proper course of action was. I’m still not entirely sure what I would have chosen to do had I been the one making the choice. But I can appreciate that Royal Caribbean was honest, forthright and transparent about its reasons and processes with its customers. I read the posts and can relate to Adam and John as real people who had to make a difficult decision and ultimately are trying to do right by the people of Haiti, their employees, their customers and the public at large.

Did they get the communications piece right?

I’d love to hear your thoughts in the comments. Instead of debating whether or not RCCL made the right choice to continue docking in Labadee (those discussions are happening all over the Web at the links I included above), I’m more interested in hearing your reactions to how they’ve communicated their choices and actions during this crisis. What could they or should they have done differently? What risks do they still face in terms of reputation management and how do you think they should address them?

How you can help

My earlier post on how to donate and support Haiti relief efforts

Image via Royal Caribbean’s Why Not blog

The secret to avoiding a YouTube crisis – revealed!

It’s not a matter of if. It’s when. With user-generated content easier and more common than ever, it’s only a matter of time before someone in your organization does something that rubs someone (or a lot of people) the wrong way and soon millions of people are watching the travesty on YouTube.

Latest entry: United Breaks Guitars

This video, out only since Monday, already has half-a-million views, 3,200+ comments and has been picked up by several mainstream news outlets, and many bloggers are going to town on it, too. United is apparently talking to the video’s creator and trying to make things right, but I think the catchy ” ‘Cuz United breaks guitars” refrain is going to be quick to the lips of lots of passengers from now on.

There have been countless posts on how to handle reputation crises like these, so I won’t rehash some of those principles in depth (respond quickly, take it seriously, respond using the same medium by which you were attacked, etc.).

But here’s my number one observation on how to prepare your organization ahead of time for when something like this happens. Ready for it? It’s simple:

Don’t suck so much in the first place!

Typically these attacks come from people with a real bone to pick. The United Breaks Guitars guy tried for more than nine months to get his guitar fixed and was stonewalled all the way. If his claim had been honored, or if an astute United customer service rep had gone out of their way to help him, despite what “policy” and “procedure” said, there’s a much lower chance he would have made this video.

What’s more, if United was generally known for having great, attentive customer service, even if the guy had made the video there possibly would have been a group of customers who’ve had positive experiences with United who could have come out and defended the company. Instead, check out the YouTube comments. Everyone just kept piling on with their own “United sucks” stories.

What if someone had made a video like this about Zappos? Maybe Zappos lost a guy’s order or something. First, I doubt he would have been stonewalled when he called, so it probably would never get to the level of him feeling like he needed to make a music video about bad service. But if he had, Zappos would have already had a rabid community of fans in place who had received great customer service in the past and who might have been willing to defend the company.

With United, so many passengers likely had a similar negative story that it was easy for them to relate to the video and pass it along, helping it to go viral so quickly. Videos that don’t resonate with people don’t go viral. Try not to frequently give your customers reasons to create this kind of content. Even if most never will, many will read, share and comment on the content that does get created (check out Forrester’s Social Technographics Profiles for more).

Unfortunately, not a lot of “this company is so awesome and great” videos go viral (but when they do, be ready to capitalize and use it to help tell your organization’s story, the way Mayo Clinic did). But you can keep some of the negative ones at bay by not giving people a reason to make them in the first place and creating enough brand defenders that even when those videos do get made, they’ll get very little traction.

Yes, you have to manage a reputation crisis when it comes up, but shouldn’t part of preparedness include preventing those crises from ever happening in the first place?