Two calls come into the comms team in the same week. In the first, a trade journalist is asking questions about a customer complaint that’s been bouncing around a Facebook group. In the second, a national newsdesk has the same complaint, plus two others, plus a comment from a regulator, and is publishing tomorrow morning.
The subject may be the same, but the situations, whilst on the face of it appear similar, the reality is they are entirely different, and one of the most consequential skills in reputation management is being able to tell which one you’re in, quickly, because the correct response to one is actively harmful in the other.
Whe we are counselling our clients, we go further, however. Most of the crisis case studies we’re asked about weren’t really crisis management failures at all, rathe they were classification failures. Most crises were issues first, and somewhere along the line an organisation misread which one it was holding.
Key takeaways
- Most crises start as issues. The damage usually comes from misreading which one you are dealing with, rather than from the original problem.
- An issue gives you time, a contained audience and control over your response. A crisis removes all three, and the organisation’s only remaining choice is how well it communicates.
- Misclassification is costly in both directions. Under-reacting loses time and lets others set the narrative. Over-reacting amplifies small stories and trains teams to ignore the alarm.
- Four signals suggest an issue is turning: the audience escalating from trade to national or across platforms, unrelated complaints merging into one story, a regulator, MP or union taking an interest, and employees discussing it publicly.
- Classification needs an owner. Agree escalation criteria in writing in advance, name one person with authority to declare a crisis, and protect anyone who escalates early in good faith.
Two different animals
An issue is a matter of concern that you have time and breathing room to manage. The audience is contained, the tempo is yours, and the organisation still, largely, controls most of the variables: whether to respond, in what channel, at what length. Issues are the normal weather of corporate life. For example, a pattern of complaints, a critical post gaining traction, an awkward policy question, a regulator’s raised eyebrow.
Handled well, these tend to be able to be resolve quietly and nobody outside of the business or organisation ever knows there was anything to handle or lots of work being carried out behind the scenes. This is what issues management actually is: the routine, unglamorous resolution of things while they are still small.
A crisis is different in kind, not just in size. The tempo and timeframes are no longer yours; events and other people set both and you are more often than not at the mercy of factors completely without your control. The audience is no longer contained; customers, media, staff, investors and regulators are watching simultaneously and comparing notes. And the stakes have moved from “this is unhelpful” to “this threatens operations, trust or licence to operate”. In a crisis, the organisation is no longer choosing whether to communicate, only how well.
An issue gets an owner, a watching brief and a considered response through normal channels. A crisis gets the full machinery: leadership pulled in, statements, spokespeople briefed, channels coordinated, hour-by-hour decisions. Two completely different resource levels, postures and cadences.
Misreading it can cost you both ways
Treat a crisis as an issue and you lose the one thing crises never give back: time. The gap between the story starting to move and the organisation noticing is where the damage compounds, because silence in a crisis is not neutral; it gets filled by whoever is talking, and the first version of a story is stubbornly durable. Organisations that respond late are responding to a narrative already set by others.
The opposite error is less discussed and almost as expensive; inadvertently, or out of an abundance of caution, treating an issue as a crisis and in so doing, amplifying it. A heavyweight public response to a small story tells every journalist in the country there’s something here worth digging into; a legal letter can turn a grumble into a headline. Internally, the cost is subtler: war rooms are exhausting, and teams dragged into crisis mode for things that would have faded learn to ignore the alarm, which is precisely the wrong lesson to have taught them when the real one comes. Sometimes the right response is to say more; sometimes it’s to say less, or nothing yet. Being confident in your ability to establish which situation you’re in is the intangible and magic ingredient behind quality and effective management.
The signals that an issue is turning
Issues rarely become crises in isolation or without prior warning (if you know what to look for). The signals worth watching for are reasonably consistent, especially with social media ever present and monitoring tools increasingly sophisticated.
One major red flag is the audience escalating: coverage moving from trade to national, a story jumping platforms, an influential account picking it up. Another, is previously unconnected threads becoming woven together: previously unrelated complaints, incidents or grievances starting to be told as one story.
Moreover, the input of an authority or highly regarded third party can signal that an issue is snowballing towards a crisis situation, for example a regulator, MP or union taking an interest. Another major flag is when employees start discussing it publicly (usually via social media). This tends to signify that containment is truly over.
Whose call is it?
Here’s where a lot of organisations quietly fail: nobody owns the decision. The comms team spots the signals, operations owns the underlying problem, legal owns the exposure, and the question “is this now a crisis?” belongs to everyone and therefore no one. Classification drifts, and drift is deadly, because every day an escalating issue is treated as routine is a day of response planning you don’t get back.
The solution is largely structural rather than heroic and varies widely depending on where communications sits – and how highly valued – it is a strategic management function within a business.
Prior preparation is critical, where escalation criteria are agreed in advance, in writing, as part of planning rather than invented mid-incident. A named owner with the authority to declare a change of state and trigger the plan, and cover from leadership when the call is borderline, because the person who escalates early and is wrong must not be punished for it. Scenario planning earns its keep here too; teams that have rehearsed the journey from issue to crisis recognise the corner when they’re actually turning it.
Corporate reputation is rarely destroyed by the original problem. It’s destroyed by the mismatch between what the situation had become and what the organisation was still treating it as. Get the classification right, early, and most of what follows gets easier; the crisis machinery is reserved for real crises, the issues get resolved while they’re still cheap, and the story of the year stays a story nobody ever heard.
FAQs
About the author
Simarin Tandon | Junior Digital Account Director
Having worked with brands across the Beauty & Wellness, FMCG, FinTech, and Home & Lifestyle sectors, Simarin focuses on driving acquisition and growth, whilst managing the Digital team at brandnation.
A curious marketer, Simarin’s finger is always on the pulse when it comes to performance and digital updates across both paid and organic platforms.
An issue is a matter of concern you have time to manage, with a contained audience and most variables still in your control. A crisis moves at a pace set by events and other people, draws simultaneous scrutiny from customers, media, staff, investors and regulators, and threatens operations, trust or licence to operate.
Issues management is the routine resolution of reputational concerns while they are still small. Done well, it happens quietly through normal channels, and nobody outside the organisation ever knows there was a problem.
Watch for coverage moving from trade to national press, a story jumping platforms or being picked up by an influential account, separate complaints being told as one narrative, third-party authorities getting involved, and staff talking about it publicly. Any one of these warrants a review of your classification.
Yes. A heavyweight public response or a legal letter can signal to journalists that a story is worth pursuing, turning a minor grumble into a headline. Sometimes the right response is to say less, or nothing yet.
One named individual with the authority to declare a change of state and trigger the crisis plan. When the decision is shared between comms, operations and legal, it tends to belong to no one, and classification drifts.
Set escalation criteria in writing during planning, assign a decision owner with leadership cover, and run scenario exercises that rehearse the journey from issue to crisis so teams recognise the turning point when it arrives.
