Reputation Management 101

by Cinda Baxter on February 12, 2009

in Marketing, Strategy

antique_car_radioHeard in a radio spot advertising a local internet service provider:

According to a major consumer magazine (whose name I missed), “We’re the fastest internet provider or at least one of them….”

Did you catch that? They managed to make a statement then retract it in under three seconds. Not even a pause along the way. And no change in inflection. I seriously wonder how many listeners even hear the last part. But I’ll bet most would say the company’s reputation is stellar.

These days, with consumer dollars tight, reputations tie directly to information, and information is plentiful, thanks to the internet. As we’ve seen in the past four days (here and here), all it takes is a home studio with a blog, a stationery store owner who searches online, and another blogger focused on retail to shine light on a vendor’s controversial policy…and, by extension, onto the vendor itself.

Reputation management, while not a new concept, has seen a rebirth in recent months. Companies large and small have felt the sting of public disclosure when sensitive or unpopular policies reach the web. What could be contained with relative ease yesterday now spreads like wildfire online.

The problem isn’t relegated to vendors alone; one angry customer in a retail store can do untold damage by posting on consumer blogs and review sites. No one is immune.

So what do you do if your company or your store has been “outed” for an unpopular policy? You handle it just like Dad told you to when you were a kid-—head on, chin up:

1. Get ahead out of the gate fast
Not doing so sends the message: (a) Yup, that’s us, and we don’t really care what you think, and/or (b) That’s only the tip of the iceberg. Sticking your head in the sand? All that’s going to do is make the noise a lot louder when you eventually surface for air. Hoping someone else will clean it up for you? You’re kidding…right?

2. Validate their stand/emotion/point of view
They’re upset. You’re upset. Everyone’s entitled to their opinion, and theirs is as valid as yours.

3. Be real
Speak from the heart, in plain english. Don’t…don’t…use legal speak, buzzwords, or politically correct terms in hopes that will deflect the fire. An angry audience not only sees through it, but is offended by it (see 1a above).

4. Fess up
If whatever got you into this mess is true, admit it. Talking circles around it or changing the subject will only lend credibility to the original complaint (see 1b above).

5. Apologize
Doesn’t matter if you believe you’re in the right; if you’re in damage control mode, someone out there doesn’t agree. If that someone is a customer, you’d better get humble quick, or they’re not going to hear anything else you say.

6. Explain yourself
Odds are, whatever it was you did, you did for a reason. Now that you have your audience feeling they’re being heard, they just might actually hear you. Keep it brief, though; the longer you justify-justify-justify, the more it sounds like you’re trying to cover something else up (see 1b).

7. Fix the problem
Deliver something of value that resolves the debate, if not the problem itself. Policies can’t always be reversed, but they can be made more clear to avoid future conflict.

8. Say thank you
You owe them this much. Remember, they just helped you find a chink in your system.

In fairness to Envelopments, yes, they eventually spoke up. Do I think they could have handled this better? Oh yeah. Had it been me:

1. A public response would have been crafted and posted in the blog comments Sunday night, preceding the six angry retailers (and one vendor) who beat them to the punch…not to mention the two fake comments posted by an Envelopments employee.

2. The response would have admitted the company completely understood why storefront accounts were upset. (One sentence)

3. It would have admitted that it’s true-—home based businesses are allowed to participate in national ads….

4. …but would have avoided the term “studio locations” like the plague. A house is a house. Let’s call it that. Retailers do. (One sentence, combining points 3 and 4)

5. Next, it would have followed with “We understand your concerns, and apologize if we have somehow given the impression home based businesses were not included in our marketing efforts.” (One sentence)

6. After the apology, it would have explained the logic, staying on just that point. (One paragraph)

7. Next, it would have offered to put the advertising policy in print, on all dealer contracts, regardless of type, to avoid future misunderstandings. (One sentence)

8. Lastly, it would have included a thank you to retailers large and small, acknowledging that without storefronts, the company never would have become what it is today. (One, probably two, sentences)

Concise, on-point, and transparent. Done.

Make no mistake-—vendors have the right to establish policies they feel best fit their business model, just as retail stores have the right to do the same. Both have the right to disagree. Both have the right to speak up.

It’s how you handle the customers or accounts who don’t agree, don’t understand, or don’t know what those policies are that determines how your reputation shines…or falls…later on.

And “falls” can be fatal.

Karen February 12, 2009 at 1:51 pm

One other thing that I have learned over the years is to ask the “offended party” what it is you might do to make the situation “right” in their mind. Even if after much conversation back and forth you cannot do whatever it is, you at least asked as if you really cared (and well you should care!) Often a compromise can be reached where both parties feel comforatble going forward in the business relationship. Usually what results is a better plan for the future, a more clear understanding of what is and is not important to your clients or customers, and a much stronger vendor-retailer partnership moving forward.

Ari February 13, 2009 at 8:56 pm

Why are yo so threatened by home studios? It shouldn’t be a worry for.

Stationery retailer in Chicago February 14, 2009 at 1:51 pm

We’re not.

Karen February 15, 2009 at 12:00 pm

I don’t get the impression that the writers are necessarily as much threatened by home studios as they are disappointed and angered at the seemingly dishonest practices of the vendor involved. It seems that the vendor put stringent restrictions on other lines carried in a store and required high buy-in levels on retail stores which they used to help them build their company and reputation. When they saw the opportunity to expand their hold on the niche, they used different terms to bring in new business without either informing their present retailers or explaining how they might benefit from the expanded business plan. Communication is a wonderful tool – and its product which is “information” is equally wondrous. It is just a pity here that the information was discovered (or found out) by those long-time retailers rather than their having been in the loop about it. It looks as if the vendor was going behind their backs and trying to cover up a business positio with which they were not comfortable and which they knew would alienate retailers as well as cause negative public opinion. At least they were right about the negative public opinion happening. This news has gone well beyond the Stationery and Paper communities.

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: