I don’t recall a time when Canadians were more agitated about politics as they are right now. People got in a tizzy over the Free Trade election, but nothing like they are over the plot by the Liberals, NDP and Bloc to seize power. It’s an unholy alliance to be sure; one that was not endorsed by the electorate.

Personally, I find the entire episode disgraceful: from Stephen Harper’s  arrogant attempt to kneecap his opponents by slashing their funding, to Stephane Dion and Jack Layton’s spiteful lust for power and attempt to overturn the last election. None of these men won a majority, yet all are behaving as though they did.

From a public relations perspective, this has turned into the worst sort of crisis for the Prime Minister. If he can’t calm the waters, I believe he’ll be walking the plank soon. In fact, I’ve begun to think that that is one of the main objectives of the coalition leaders; they want Harper out. It’s personal. It’s a vendetta. It’s crazy.

Check out today’s snoo.ws for more on the public reaction to the story.

I’m in the middle of reading The Snowball, the ‘authorized’ biography of Warren Buffett by Alice Schroeder, and it has made me realize what a master of public relations the old mega-billionaire is. I’ll go one further: I would say that Buffett’s razor sharp PR instincts were key to him becoming one of the richest people in the world. The public relations efforts he led saved (or earned) him billions over the years.

But he’s just an investor, you say? He’s a numbers guy. What does he know about RACE formulas (Research, Analyze, Communicate, Evaluate, for those who don’t know) and winning over ‘key stakeholders’ and all that good jargony stuff? It’s because he understands how important one’s reputation is and how hard it is to earn credibility.  In his words: “it takes a lifetime to earn a reputation, and five minutes to blow it.”

One of the best examples of his PR instincts came from the Salomon Brothers scandal of 1991. Buffett had parachuted in a few years earlier as a white knight investor to save the firm from a hostile takeover. With eerie echoes of today’s financial mess, Salomon was a brash, bullying investment bank that had run afoul of regulators by trying to corner the market on treasury bonds. When the scandal broke, Salomon was in a crisis to survive. Leveraged to the hilt, its lenders were calling its loans and the bank had to unwind huge investment and derivative positions around the globe. It looked as though the bank would fail and that a global financial crisis would ensue (sound familiar?).

As a board member, Buffett had been insulated from the shenanigans of the bond traders, and was the only person close to the situation who had the reputation and experience to take the helm of the sinking ship. He did so reluctantly, but he recognized that the credibility he had built so preciously over 50 years was about the only thing that could steady the bank.

He immediately held a news conference where he told all. He sat there for more than an hour taking question after question after question. The reporters were spent before he was, but he left no room for misinformation or obfuscation. The effect of his performance was to take the air out of the sails of the newshounds who were hunting for injured, scandalized fat cats. He talked about the wrongdoing. He expressed his huge disappointment with it and broadcast loudly that the old culture of Salomon would change immediately.

Then he also decided to cooperate so closely with investigators that he even waived attorney-client privilege for the firm so anything its lawyers discovered would be shared with regulators. Now, that’s transparency. Finally, he took immediate action to change policies (including compensation policies) at the bank, fired people who had to be fired and told everyone that the old ways were over.

In the middle of the storm, this is how he dealt with his PR firm:

Everything at Salomon was turned topsy-turvy as the new culture of openness went into effect… Buffett walked into a room at 7 World Trade Center for a meeting. Someone, acting on autopilot, had hired a new public relations firm. Around a large square table, two dozen people sat waiting for them. Some worked for Salomon, but most were public relations people and lobbyists who were billing by the hour. Buffett listened for fifteen minutes as they described how they wanted to manage the crisis. Then he stood up. “I’m sorry, but I’ve got to excuse myself,” he said. He leaned over, whispered in [lawyer Ron] Olson’s ear, “Tell them they won’t be needed,” and walked out of the room.

“It isn’t that we’re misunderstood, for Christ’s sake,” said Buffett afterward. “We don’t have a public relations problem. We have a problem with what we did.” (page 602)

I disagree with the last quotation… he did have a PR problem, but I agree that he didn’t need help to “manage a crisis.” He knew what to do. It was his reputation on the line and, at that moment, he was Salomon Brothers. I’d love to know what approach the firm had  pitched. Not that it would have mattered. Buffett was already following the perfect crisis communications plan. He did, however, need his communications and PR people to carry out that plan.

CEOs and business leaders should take note of this, as should public relations people. It is a perfect example of why it’s so important for a CEO to understand intuitively what needs to be done to protect a firm’s reputation. The first step is to build a good reputation in the first place. Be honest. Be credible. And do your thing.

In the end, Buffett’s approach to the crisis saved the bank, saved thousands of jobs and billions in shareholder equity. It burnished his reputation as a corporate do-gooder further.

I’ve worked with and for quite a few business leaders here in Winnipeg and, judging from what I’ve seen, more than a few of them could take lessons from this on how to relate to their publics. I remember one episode where I had to explain gently to a senior executive why a ‘no comment’ response to a potential crisis in his organization was the wrong approach. If I’d had The Snowball with me that day, I’d have liked to have thrown it at him.

Okay, okay, it’s starting to seem like I’m picking on the Winnipeg Police Service. But I can’t resist pointing out that they are reaping what they sowed in their current PR battle about the case of the stolen camera card. A local man is accusing the police of confiscating his camera’s memory card after he refused to stop taking photos of a police takedown of a couple of ne’er-do-wells.

After the police service’s recent display of selective memory (what many have called dishonesty) on the witness stand at the Taman Inquiry, is it really a surprise to see the service is having a hard time getting people to believe its side of the story? (Police say they didn’t take the memory card.) This is how credibility affects performance of organizations. This crisis of confidence is far from over for the police and that is a crying shame because most of the cops I’ve met have been straight-up ‘good guys’ trying to do what’s right for our community.

Sound public relations is rooted in credibility and trust. If they’re missing, it doesn’t matter what you say… no one is going to believe you.

The public portion of the Taman inquiry is finally at an end. That is sure to come as a relief for both Winnipeg and East St. Paul police services whose members’ actions and testimony gave them each rather large and ugly black eyes. I refer to the chain of officers who took the stand and incredulously claimed no memory of the night’s events leading up to that terrible collision that saw Derek Harvey-Zenk kill Crystal Taman after a night of drinking and partying with other officers.

Worse still there have been whispers that the East St. Paul’s police service deliberately botched the investigation, allowing former Winnipeg officer Harvey-Zenk (a colleague of the St. Andrew’s chief) to walk away with only house arrest.

We’ve heard complaints that Harvey-Zenk’s colleagues (and fellow party-goers) have been unfairly tarred. People who believe that haven’t been paying attention; these officers made their beds and now they have to lie in them. Police officers who claim no memory of details of events like these are, in my opinion, either completely incompetent or lying.

A lot needs to be done from a crisis communications and public relations perspective. Police forces need credibility to exercise their authority. The public has to believe that police officers will act fairly and serve justice even if the criminals happen to be people of power or fellow officers. I’d be tempted to sack several of these officers because they have failed to live up to the honourable standards which we expect. If they can’t be sacked, they should be severely reprimanded. It wouldn’t be out of line to hold them in rank for the rest of their careers.

I was encouraged to hear that the Rural Municipality of East St. Paul offered an apology to the Taman family for what was clearly an incompetent investigation. That action shows the RM council understands how awful people perceive this case. I’ve not heard the same from the City of Winnipeg or its police service. Our civic leaders and police chief need to address this credibility gap immediately or things will get worse for the police. If nothing is done, then everyone will assume it’s just business as usual and our collective trust in our police service will continue to erode.

As I wrote before, this is both a management issue for the police (they need to execute on policies) and a communications issue. It’s not enough to do something, you have to be seen to be doing it.

Adam Dooley.

I was on CBC Radio One’s Information Radio this morning. They wanted me to give them a PR person’s view of what’s going on with the Winnipeg Police Service, especially with regard to the ongoing Taman inquiry. The inquiry is looking in to the events that led to former Constable Derek Harvey-Zenk’s fatal collision with Crystal Taman. Harvey-Zenk had been drinking, but his arrest was apparently mishandled and evidence botched. He ended up with house arrest and there was a public outcry that led to the current inquiry.

The public has heard officer after officer take the stand only to (incredibly) lose almost all memory of the events that transpired.

It’s a PR disaster for the police service. More than most organizations, the police need to enjoy the trust and confidence of the public to do their jobs. If their credibility is impugned, their moral authority declines… precipitously. Judging from letters to the editor and countless ‘water cooler’ chats, I think that is exactly what’s happening here.

So what can or should the police do? In my opinion, Police Chief Keith McCaskill and city leaders should take the time during this inquiry (sooner rather than later) to express to both the police service and to the public that they are concerned with what they’re hearing. They should also use the opportunity to remind everyone not to jump to conclusions; the inquiry needs to run its course. But the chief needs to indicate that he is seeing and hearing what everyone else is.

McCaskill’s real work will begin once the inquiry reports its findings. He’ll have to do three things. First, he needs to identify the issues that are causing this credibility crisis. What are the roots here? The thin blue line is an excuse, not an answer. If there’s a culture of entitlement in the police service, he needs to attack it head on. That leads us to the second step: he needs to take action. If that means disciplinary action, then he needs to act swiftly and fairly. Third, he needs to communicate to both the police service itself and to the public at large what he’s done and why he’s doing it. Expectations need to be reset along with the high standards the police are held to.

I have a lot of sympathy for the Chief and for the officers on the force who are being tarred with a big, undiscerning brush. It’s not fair, but it’s reality. McCaskill has already showed a lot of character and leadership by testifying at the inquiry as soon as his name was dragged in to the affair. He needs to show the same grit in weeks and months to come to restore the public’s confidence in the service.