Issues, Risk, and Crisis Communication

Introduction

Organizations operate in environments shaped by political decisions, economic pressures, technological disruption, social expectations, environmental uncertainty, and rapid media circulation. A minor complaint can become a public controversy; an operational failure can become a regulatory investigation; and an inaccurate social-media post can create reputational damage before managers have established the facts. Public relations therefore cannot be limited to publicity and media relations. It must also help organizations identify emerging concerns, assess uncertainty, prepare for disruption, communicate responsibly during crises, and learn after events have ended.

Issues management, risk communication, and crisis communication are related but distinct activities. Issues management is primarily anticipatory: it identifies and addresses matters that may affect the organization or its stakeholders. Risk communication explains hazards, uncertainty, prevention, and protective action before or during potential harm. Crisis communication is the strategic process of communicating when an event threatens people, operations, legitimacy, reputation, or organizational survival. Effective practice connects all three within a resilience system.

This chapter treats communication as both a managerial function and a stakeholder responsibility. Communication cannot repair unsafe products, conceal misconduct, or substitute for competent emergency operations. It can, however, influence understanding, trust, cooperation, accountability, and recovery.

Learning Objectives

By the end of this chapter, students should be able to:

1. Distinguish issues management, risk communication, emergency communication, and crisis communication.
2. Apply issue-scanning, prioritization, and scenario-planning methods.
3. Explain the crisis lifecycle and the communication tasks associated with each phase.
4. Develop a risk communication approach based on hazard, uncertainty, affected stakeholders, and protective action.
5. Design a holding statement, response protocol, and spokesperson preparation plan.
6. Use social monitoring ethically to detect signals and support decisions.
7. Evaluate crisis responses and convert experience into organizational learning and resilience.

1. Core Concepts and Terminology

Issues

An issue is a matter of concern, disagreement, expectation, or potential change that may affect an organization and its stakeholders. Issues are not necessarily negative. A new accessibility standard, a proposal for sustainable packaging, or a debate about artificial intelligence may create both risks and opportunities. Issues become strategically significant when they can influence organizational decisions, stakeholder relationships, regulation, resource allocation, or legitimacy.

Risk

Risk is commonly understood as the effect of uncertainty on objectives. In practical communication, risk involves a possible hazard, the probability of an unwanted event, and the severity of its consequences. Risk is not identical to danger: danger refers to a source of potential harm, whereas risk concerns the possibility and consequences of that harm in a particular context.

Risk communication is the exchange of information and judgments among organizations, experts, public authorities, communities, employees, customers, and other stakeholders about hazards, uncertainty, prevention, and response. It is not simply the distribution of warnings. It includes listening, dialogue, explanation, and participation.

Crisis

A crisis is a significant threat to organizational operations, stakeholders, reputation, or legitimacy that requires urgent decisions under conditions of uncertainty and time pressure. A crisis may be caused by an accident, natural hazard, cyberattack, product failure, ethical misconduct, misinformation, leadership behavior, or a combination of factors.

A crisis is not defined only by the event itself. Perception, interpretation, media attention, stakeholder expectations, and organizational response influence whether an incident becomes a crisis. An operational problem may remain contained, while a poorly managed explanation can intensify it.

Incident, emergency, and crisis

An incident is an event requiring attention but usually manageable through routine procedures. An emergency threatens immediate safety or essential operations and requires rapid protective action. A crisis has broader strategic, relational, or legitimacy consequences and often exceeds ordinary routines. The categories can overlap: a chemical leak may begin as an incident, become an emergency for nearby residents, and develop into a crisis if the organization concealed information.

2. The Strategic Relationship among Issues, Risk, and Crisis

Issues management is a continuous process linking environmental scanning, analysis, engagement, decision-making, and evaluation. Its purpose is not to silence criticism but to identify concerns early enough for the organization to respond substantively.

A useful sequence is:

1. Scan: Monitor legislation, news, stakeholder conversations, scientific evidence, competitor behavior, employee concerns, and operational data.
2. Identify: Separate recurring signals from isolated noise and define the issue clearly.
3. Assess: Consider affected stakeholders, possible consequences, urgency, organizational responsibility, and uncertainty.
4. Prioritize: Rank issues according to potential impact and the time available to act.
5. Engage: Consult affected groups and internal decision-makers.
6. Act: Change policy, operations, products, controls, or communication as appropriate.
7. Review: Evaluate outcomes and update assumptions.

The most important principle is that communication should be connected to action. If an organization repeatedly receives credible complaints about unsafe working conditions, a campaign emphasizing employee wellbeing is not an adequate response. Communication must be accompanied by investigation, corrective action, and transparent progress reporting.

Issue prioritization

A simple qualitative matrix can classify issues according to impact and urgency. High-impact, high-urgency issues require senior ownership and immediate action. High-impact but lower-urgency issues require strategic planning rather than neglect. Low-impact issues may be monitored, but they should not be dismissed automatically because stakeholder expectations can change.

3. Scenario Planning and Preparedness

Scenario planning is a disciplined method for exploring plausible futures. It is not prediction. Its value lies in testing assumptions and preparing flexible responses when the future cannot be known precisely.

A public relations team can develop scenarios by asking:

• What hazards or triggers could affect the organization?
• Which uncertainties are most important?
• Who would be affected first and who would be affected indirectly?
• What decisions would be required in the first hour, first day, and first week?
• Which information would be known, unknown, or disputed?
• What communication channels would remain available if normal systems failed?
• What actions would demonstrate responsibility rather than merely express concern?

A scenario should include a trigger, escalation pathway, affected stakeholders, operational consequences, information requirements, decision points, and recovery conditions. For example, a university media company might prepare for a data breach, a presenter’s discriminatory post, a studio fire, or the circulation of fabricated content using an AI-generated voice.

Scenario planning is strongest when it includes people outside public relations. Legal, information security, human resources, operations, safety, customer service, senior management, and community representatives may see different vulnerabilities. Exercises should test not only message wording but also approval delays, inaccessible contact lists, conflicting authority, translation needs, and the ability to correct inaccurate information.

4. Crisis Lifecycle Models

No single lifecycle model describes every crisis, but phase-based models help managers allocate attention.

The four-phase model

A practical model contains four phases:

1. Pre-crisis: Prevention, preparedness, monitoring, training, relationship building, and plan development.
2. Initial response: Verification, protection of people, activation of the response structure, notification of stakeholders, and publication of verified information.
3. Continuing response: Regular updates, operational coordination, rumor correction, support for affected groups, and explanation of corrective action.
4. Recovery and learning: Restoration of services, compensation or remediation where appropriate, reputation rebuilding, evaluation, and institutional learning.

The phases are not strictly linear. A new event may occur during recovery, or monitoring may reveal that the crisis is escalating. Communication teams should therefore treat the model as a cycle rather than a staircase.

Crisis communication tasks by phase

5. Risk Communication

Risk communication must help people make decisions under uncertainty. It should explain four elements: the hazard, the likelihood or range of possibilities, the potential consequences, and the actions that reduce exposure or harm. Where evidence is incomplete, the organization should state what is known, what is not known, how uncertainty is being investigated, and when the next update will occur.

Trust and credibility

Stakeholders often judge a message through three questions:

1. Does the organization understand the situation?
2. Does it care about those affected?
3. Is it acting competently and honestly?

Technical expertise supports credibility, but expertise alone is insufficient. A highly technical message that ignores fear, loss, or unequal impact may be perceived as evasive. Conversely, empathy without evidence may appear insincere. Effective risk communication combines compassion, clarity, evidence, practical action, and visible accountability.

Communicating uncertainty

Uncertainty should not be hidden behind false precision. Statements such as “there is no risk” are usually inappropriate when evidence is developing. Better language distinguishes confidence levels: “Our current assessment indicates…,” “We have confirmed…,” “We are investigating whether…,” and “This advice will be reviewed when laboratory results are available.” The organization should avoid speculation and should correct its own earlier statements when new evidence changes the assessment.

Stakeholder segmentation

Different groups require different information. Employees may need instructions about safety and work arrangements. Customers may need to know whether a product should be used. Regulators may require technical records. Journalists may seek chronology and accountability. Vulnerable communities may need translated, accessible, or culturally appropriate information. Segmentation should change the delivery and emphasis of information, not the underlying facts.

6. Holding Statements and Response Protocols

A holding statement is a short, initial statement issued before all facts are known. It acknowledges the event, expresses concern where appropriate, identifies immediate action, avoids speculation, and commits to an update. It is not a substitute for a full investigation.

A reliable holding statement usually contains:

• acknowledgment of the reported event;
• the organization’s immediate priority, especially safety and welfare;
• confirmed facts only;
• actions being taken;
• guidance for affected people, if available;
• a contact or information channel; and
• the time or condition for the next update.

Illustrative holding statement:

“We are aware of reports of a service disruption affecting customers in the northern region. Our immediate priority is customer safety and restoration of essential service. Technical teams are assessing the cause, and we are coordinating with the relevant authorities. We are confirming the extent of the disruption and will provide an update at 18:00 through our website and customer hotline. Customers should not enter restricted areas and should follow local emergency instructions.”

This statement does not assign blame, promise an unsupported restoration time, or imply that unverified online claims are true.

Response protocol

A response protocol converts principles into roles and decision rules. It should specify:

1. Detection: How an incident is reported and recorded.
2. Verification: Who confirms the basic facts and separates evidence from rumor.
3. Classification: How severity, urgency, stakeholder exposure, and legal or safety implications are assessed.
4. Activation: Who activates the crisis team and who has authority to make decisions.
5. Coordination: How operations, legal, security, human resources, leadership, and public relations share information.
6. Approval: Which statements require legal or executive review and which can be issued by trained staff.
7. Publication: Which channels are used and how accessibility, translation, and archiving are handled.
8. Monitoring: How questions, misinformation, media coverage, and stakeholder sentiment are tracked.
9. Escalation: What conditions require expanded leadership involvement or external authorities.
10. Closure: Who determines that the response has moved into recovery and learning.

Overly rigid approval procedures can delay urgent information. Conversely, unrestricted publishing can create contradictions and legal exposure. Effective protocols define both control and delegated authority.

7. Spokesperson Preparation

A spokesperson represents the organization’s voice but should not be expected to improvise technical, legal, or ethical judgments. Preparation should include:

• a concise explanation of the event and organizational role;
• three priority messages;
• likely questions and evidence-based answers;
• questions that cannot yet be answered and a method for explaining why;
• guidance on affected people, responsibility, and corrective action;
• interview rehearsal under interruption and hostile questioning;
• instructions for television, radio, print, livestream, and social media; and
• a clear route for obtaining updated facts.

Good spokesperson behavior includes answering the question asked, correcting false premises respectfully, avoiding jargon, distinguishing confirmed facts from investigation, and showing appropriate concern. A spokesperson should never say “no comment” without explanation when a useful response is possible. “I cannot discuss personal information, but I can explain the safety measures now in place” is more constructive.

Nonverbal conduct also matters. Defensive posture, joking during a serious event, visible impatience, or excessive reliance on scripted language can undermine verbal content. Authenticity does not mean improvisation without preparation; it means delivering prepared, truthful messages naturally.

8. Social Monitoring and Digital Crisis Communication

Social monitoring involves observing digital conversations, search patterns, platform content, customer complaints, employee posts, and relevant communities to detect signals and assess information needs. It differs from surveillance conducted without legitimate purpose. Ethical monitoring should be proportionate, transparent where appropriate, respectful of privacy, and governed by clear access and retention rules.

Monitoring can support:

• early detection of emerging issues;
• identification of false or harmful claims;
• discovery of unanswered stakeholder questions;
• assessment of geographic or demographic impact;
• detection of impersonation and coordinated manipulation; and
• evaluation of whether protective instructions are reaching intended audiences.

Metrics require interpretation. A large volume of mentions may reflect attention rather than hostility. Sentiment analysis can misclassify sarcasm, dialect, multilingual content, or grief. A dashboard should therefore combine quantitative indicators with human review, source evaluation, and operational data.

A practical monitoring workflow is:

1. Define relevant keywords, accounts, locations, and languages.
2. Establish baseline levels before a crisis.
3. Identify credible sources and high-risk claims.
4. Route safety-related reports to the operational team.
5. Verify before responding publicly.
6. Correct materially harmful misinformation with evidence and clear action.
7. Record decisions, corrections, and unresolved questions.

Organizations should not amplify every rumor by repeating it. The appropriate response depends on reach, potential harm, credibility, and whether correction is likely to reduce or increase attention.

9. Ethics, Governance, and Regulation

Crisis communication raises significant ethical obligations. The first is protection of life and welfare. Organizations should communicate information that enables reasonable protective action, even when disclosure is uncomfortable. The second is truthfulness: messages should not contain deliberate deception, selective omission that creates a false impression, or unsupported certainty. The third is fairness: affected communities should not be ignored because they have less media power.

Other governance issues include privacy, defamation, confidentiality, commercial sensitivity, freedom of information, employment law, consumer protection, health and safety duties, environmental regulation, and data-protection requirements. Legal review is important, but “legal” and “ethical” are not identical. A statement may avoid liability while still failing stakeholders morally.

AI creates additional challenges. Synthetic images, cloned voices, automated bot activity, and generative text can accelerate misinformation. Organizations should maintain authenticated channels, preserve evidence, label synthetic content where appropriate, and establish human oversight for automated responses. AI tools may assist with translation, classification, or monitoring, but sensitive decisions require verification and accountability. Personal data should not be entered into external systems without authorization and appropriate safeguards.

10. Applied Case: The Riverside Water Contamination Incident

The following is an illustrative fictional case designed for learning purposes.

Background

Riverside Water, a regional utility, serves 180,000 residents. Its monitoring system detects an unusual chemical reading at a treatment facility after heavy rainfall. The reading is not yet confirmed, but engineers advise that water may be unsafe for consumption in two districts. A local resident posts a photograph of a warning message on social media, and journalists begin asking questions.

Problem

The utility faces tension between the need for immediate protective advice and the absence of complete laboratory confirmation. A delayed warning could expose residents to harm. An overconfident or inaccurate warning could cause unnecessary panic, disrupt hospitals and businesses, and damage trust. The organization must coordinate with public-health authorities and communicate with residents who speak several languages.

Analysis

The issue is high priority because potential health consequences are severe and the time available for action is short. Stakeholders include residents, schools, hospitals, care homes, employees, emergency services, regulators, elected officials, journalists, and businesses. The organization’s responsibility is substantial because it controls treatment and warning systems. The first communication objective is not reputation protection; it is risk reduction.

Approach and solution

The utility activates its response protocol. Engineers verify the sensor data while the public-health authority assesses protective guidance. The chief executive authorizes a holding statement without waiting for final laboratory results. The statement advises residents in the two districts not to drink tap water or use it for cooking until further notice, explains that testing is under way, provides a hotline, and gives the time of the next update. The same information is published online, sent to local radio, translated, and delivered to hospitals and schools through established contacts.

The spokesperson explains that the warning is precautionary, not proof that contamination has occurred. This distinction is repeated without minimizing the seriousness of the instruction. Social monitoring identifies a false post claiming that the entire region is affected. The utility corrects the geographic claim through its authenticated channels while maintaining the precautionary advice for the two districts.

After laboratory results confirm contamination at a localized point, the utility reports the result, explains the likely source, provides bottled-water distribution locations, and publishes testing updates. It does not speculate about individual blame. Once the system is flushed and independent tests confirm safety, the utility gives clear instructions for returning to normal use and explains what residents should do with stored water.

Outcome

The event causes disruption and criticism, particularly concerning the age of the sensor and the speed of notification. However, early protective guidance reduces exposure, and consistent updates limit confusion. An independent review later finds that the response protocol worked, but maintenance records were fragmented and the multilingual contact list was incomplete. Riverside replaces the sensor, integrates maintenance data, improves community notification, and publishes a progress report.

Learning points

1. Precautionary communication can be justified before certainty when potential harm is serious and protective action is feasible.
2. The first message should tell people what to do, not merely describe organizational concern.
3. Coordination with public authorities increases credibility and operational effectiveness.
4. A correction should address materially harmful misinformation without repeating unnecessary rumors.
5. Post-crisis learning must include technical, organizational, and communication changes.

11. Post-Crisis Learning and Organizational Resilience

A crisis review should not be limited to asking whether public relations received favorable coverage. It should examine whether people were protected, whether decisions were timely, whether information was accurate and accessible, whether responsibilities were clear, and whether the organization addressed underlying causes.

A useful review includes:

• a verified timeline of decisions and communications;
• stakeholder feedback, including criticism from affected groups;
• analysis of operational and communication performance;
• identification of successful controls and failure points;
• evaluation of spokesperson, channel, translation, and accessibility performance;
• legal, ethical, and regulatory review; and
• assigned actions with owners and deadlines.

Organizations should distinguish a blameless learning review from a disciplinary investigation. A learning review examines systems, incentives, training, information flows, and decision conditions. Where misconduct or negligence occurred, accountability must still be pursued through appropriate processes.

Resilience means more than returning to the pre-crisis state. It includes the capacity to anticipate threats, absorb disruption, adapt operations, maintain essential relationships, and improve after adversity. Communication contributes by preserving trustworthy information flows, strengthening stakeholder participation, and making organizational learning visible.

Challenges and Limitations

Crisis communication has several limitations. First, communication cannot overcome inadequate safety controls or unethical conduct. Second, speed and accuracy may conflict when evidence develops rapidly. Third, stakeholders do not receive messages equally; digital exclusion, disability, language, and distrust can limit reach. Fourth, monitoring systems may produce false positives or miss private conversations. Fifth, reputational metrics can encourage organizations to prioritize image over substantive repair. Finally, models simplify reality. Crises overlap, actors behave strategically, and a response that works in one culture or sector may fail in another.

Managers should therefore treat frameworks as decision aids rather than automatic solutions. Judgment, consultation, evidence, and ethical responsibility remain essential.

Best-Practice Checklist

Before a crisis:

• maintain current contact lists and delegated authorities;
• map vulnerable stakeholders and essential services;
• prepare scenarios, holding statements, and accessible channels;
• train and exercise spokespersons and response teams;
• establish monitoring baselines and privacy safeguards.

During a crisis:

• protect people before protecting reputation;
• verify facts and distinguish knowns from unknowns;
• communicate early when protective action is needed;
• use plain language, empathy, and specific instructions;
• coordinate messages with operational and public authorities;
• update at promised times, even when there is little new information;
• correct harmful misinformation without amplifying every rumor.

After a crisis:

• provide evidence of recovery and corrective action;
• listen to affected stakeholders;
• review decisions, systems, and equity impacts;
• assign and track improvement actions; and
• share learning responsibly.

Chapter Summary

Issues management identifies and addresses emerging concerns before they become crises. Risk communication helps stakeholders understand hazards, uncertainty, consequences, and protective action. Crisis communication operates under urgency and uncertainty, but it must remain connected to competent operations and ethical responsibility.

A strong program scans the environment, prioritizes issues, develops scenarios, maintains a lifecycle-based plan, and defines roles and escalation rules. During the initial response, a holding statement should acknowledge the event, state the immediate priority, provide verified facts and practical guidance, and promise a clear update. Spokespersons require preparation, while social monitoring should support—not replace—human judgment and operational evidence.

Trust depends on competence, care, honesty, consistency, and accountability. Legal review, privacy protection, accessibility, translation, and AI governance are essential parts of contemporary practice. Finally, post-crisis evaluation should examine both communication and underlying systems. The objective is not merely to restore reputation but to protect stakeholders and build greater organizational resilience.

Key Terms

Crisis: A significant threat to stakeholders, operations, reputation, or legitimacy requiring urgent decisions.

Crisis lifecycle: The sequence of pre-crisis, initial response, continuing response, and recovery-and-learning activities.

Emergency: A situation requiring rapid action to protect life, health, property, or essential operations.

Holding statement: A brief initial statement issued before all facts are available.

Issue: A matter of concern or potential change affecting an organization and its stakeholders.

Issues management: The systematic identification, analysis, engagement, action, and review of emerging concerns.

Misinformation: Inaccurate information, whether shared deliberately or unintentionally.

Post-crisis learning: The structured evaluation of an event to improve systems, decisions, and preparedness.

Preparedness: The plans, training, relationships, resources, and exercises developed before disruption.

Protective action: A behavior intended to reduce exposure to harm.

Risk: The effect of uncertainty on objectives, including possible consequences of hazards.

Risk communication: The exchange of information and judgments about hazards, uncertainty, and protective measures.

Scenario planning: Exploration of plausible futures to test assumptions and prepare responses.

Social monitoring: Ethical observation and analysis of digital conversations and signals relevant to organizational risk.

Spokesperson: An authorized and trained representative who communicates for an organization.

Stakeholder: A person or group that affects, is affected by, or has an interest in an organization.

Threat: A condition, actor, or event capable of causing harm.

Uncertainty: Limited or incomplete knowledge about conditions, causes, probabilities, or consequences.

Review Questions

Short Answer Questions

1. Distinguish an issue, an incident, an emergency, and a crisis.
2. What are the main components of a holding statement?
3. Why should risk communication distinguish known facts from uncertainty?
4. Identify two ethical limitations of social monitoring.
5. What is the purpose of a post-crisis learning review?

Long Answer Questions

1. Explain how issues management can reduce the probability or severity of a crisis.
2. Describe the four phases of the crisis lifecycle and the communication priorities in each phase.
3. Discuss the relationship among competence, empathy, transparency, and trust in risk communication.
4. Explain how a response protocol should balance centralized coordination with delegated authority.
5. Evaluate the role of spokesperson preparation in a fast-moving, digitally mediated crisis.

Analytical / Application Questions

1. A food company receives several online complaints that customers became ill after eating one product, but laboratory confirmation is unavailable. Design the first six communication and operational steps.
2. An organization’s monitoring dashboard shows a sudden increase in negative mentions, but most posts come from anonymous accounts and no operational problem has been detected. How should the communication team assess and respond to the signal?
3. After a cyberattack, executives want to state that no customer data was accessed before the investigation is complete. Draft a more responsible holding statement and justify its wording.

Multiple Choice Questions with Answers

Question 1

Which activity is primarily associated with issues management?

A. Identifying and addressing emerging stakeholder concerns before they escalate

B. Publishing only a final report after a crisis has ended

C. Replacing operational safety controls with promotional messaging

D. Avoiding engagement with critics until media interest disappears

Correct Answer: A. Identifying and addressing emerging stakeholder concerns before they escalate

Question 2

What is the central purpose of a holding statement?

A. To provide a complete final account before investigation

B. To acknowledge the event, give verified guidance, and commit to updates

C. To assign blame before facts are established

D. To guarantee that no further disruption will occur

Correct Answer: B. To acknowledge the event, give verified guidance, and commit to updates

Question 3

Which statement best communicates uncertainty responsibly?

A. There is absolutely no risk under any circumstances.

B. Everything reported online is accurate.

C. Our current assessment confirms the following facts; other aspects remain under investigation.

D. We cannot say anything until the entire investigation is complete.

Correct Answer: C. Our current assessment confirms the following facts; other aspects remain under investigation.

Question 4

Which is the correct priority during the initial response to a serious public-safety event?

A. Protecting organizational image before issuing instructions

B. Waiting for perfect information before taking any action

C. Protecting people and providing verified, practical guidance

D. Responding to every online comment individually

Correct Answer: C. Protecting people and providing verified, practical guidance

Question 5

Why is scenario planning used in crisis preparedness?

A. To predict one certain future with complete accuracy

B. To explore plausible futures and test organizational assumptions

C. To eliminate the need for exercises and training

D. To ensure that every crisis follows the same sequence

Correct Answer: B. To explore plausible futures and test organizational assumptions

Question 6

Which practice is most appropriate for ethical social monitoring?

A. Collecting all available personal data without limits

B. Monitoring proportionately with clear purpose, safeguards, and human review

C. Treating sentiment-analysis results as definitive evidence

D. Responding publicly to every rumor detected

Correct Answer: B. Monitoring proportionately with clear purpose, safeguards, and human review

Question 7

What should a spokesperson do when an answer is not yet known?

A. Speculate to appear confident

B. Ignore the question completely

C. State what is known, explain what is being investigated, and provide an update commitment

D. Blame another organization without evidence

Correct Answer: C. State what is known, explain what is being investigated, and provide an update commitment

Question 8

Which activity belongs most directly to the recovery-and-learning phase?

A. Developing the first emergency warning

B. Verifying the initial report

C. Publishing corrective actions and evaluating response performance

D. Deleting records of inaccurate early messages

Correct Answer: C. Publishing corrective actions and evaluating response performance

Question 9

Why should crisis communication be coordinated with operations?

A. Communication can replace technical and safety action

B. Stakeholders need messages that accurately reflect protective and corrective measures

C. Operations should never be involved in public information

D. Coordination guarantees that criticism will stop

Correct Answer: B. Stakeholders need messages that accurately reflect protective and corrective measures

Question 10

Which statement best reflects organizational resilience?

A. Returning to exactly the same conditions that existed before the crisis

B. Avoiding all public discussion of the event

C. Anticipating disruption, absorbing impacts, adapting, and learning afterward

D. Measuring success only through favorable media coverage

Correct Answer: C. Anticipating disruption, absorbing impacts, adapting, and learning afterward