WHEN CONTROVERSY ARISES

Controversy requires swift and firm action. The clear and frequent communication that was necessary in the midst of change becomes doubly important during times of controversy. Otherwise, the situation can mushroom into a much larger problem. For example, perhaps your company manufactures a product that has been tampered with, or a fraud has occurred. There could be an incident of polluting the environment. When the controversy hits the Wall Street Journal or the New York Times, the impact could be a decline in team morale, a loss of customers who no longer want to do business with the firm, and a sharply lower stock price as investors dump their shares. As you can see, the effects are both internal and external.

Let's take the example of a potential safety issue that has been detected with one of the company's biggest products, which may require a recall. Although a final decision has not been made, news about the potential recall finds its way into the media. Team members who work in a production facility where the product is made get into their cars on the way to work one morning and hear a news bulletin on the radio: their company is expected to recall a product. The first thing that is going to run through team members' heads is Why didn't the company tell us? Like most people, they believe what they see, hear, and read in the news, so as far as they're concerned, the potential recall is a fact. As people drive to work, they become more and more upset and reactive because the perception is that management (“those guys”) tried to hide the problem in the first place. The issue will likely escalate even further in team members' minds as they imagine that the recall will hurt customer demand, which will result in cutbacks in production, layoffs, or even a plant closure.

Now let's take a look at another scenario that results in a dramatically different response among team members. The company is considering a reduction in its workforce because of an industry slowdown and poor economic conditions. Similar actions have been taken by competing firms, which have ramped up speculation in the media that the company will be next. Rather than allowing conjecture to increase uncertainty, and therefore chaos, management decides to tell the entire team exactly what they know. Whether in a company-wide voice mail, e-mail, or team meeting (and often all three), the leaders deliver the message that due to economic challenges that have hurt sales and earnings, the company is considering a workforce reduction that will likely result in some layoffs; leadership is committed to preserving as many jobs as possible; no decision has been made as yet regarding the number of layoffs or how and where the cutbacks will be made; a decision is expected to be made in two weeks. In this scenario, when team members turn on the radio or television and hear a report speculating that the company could announce layoffs soon, they know that the news media don't have all the facts, because they themselves have heard the latest directly from management.