How can we communicate effectively in the Age of Outrage?

I was lucky enough to recently attend a talk on Age of Outrage, the latest book from Karthik Ramanna, professor of business and public policy at the University of Oxford’s Blavatnik School of Government.

The discussion centered on what it means to manage people and organizations in the volatile social and political landscape that seems emblematic of the 21^st century.

Disruptive technology, complex political issues and an increasing sense of disconnect from mainstream media organizations mean stakeholders are clashing over more and more issues – and these issues are not going away. In many cases, social media is exacerbating them, creating echo chambers and spreading disinformation.

This discussion got me thinking about a different question: how can we communicate effectively in the Age of Outrage?

One thing is for sure: the solution is not to just focus on crisis management. Critical events are happening around us all the time – outrage is no longer an occasional phenomenon, it’s a daily part of life. Brands are expected to comment on a range on issues and the court of public opinion reigns supreme. It may be tempting for some organizations to take a stance on issues in order to appease as many people as possible. Others would rather bury their head in the sand to avoid being caught up in so-called cancel culture.

However, the central message of Age of Outrage is that what might at first seem to leaders to be a short-term crisis needing a quick PR fix, is likely to be something more complex, based on cultural divides and fundamental differences in belief. A quick fix for one situation may lead to much more significant problems later down the line. Organizations can’t afford to spend time and resources fighting fire all the time.

If we accept the idea that these issues aren’t going away, this approach is revealed to be deeply flawed. Instead, Ramanna argues – and I agree – that organizations need structural change that allows them to manage the stakeholder hostilities that now contextualize most of their decisions. No matter what a company does, they’ll be experienced as part of the problem by somebody – you can’t please everyone all the time.

Reputation matters

Part of this change is working towards building an authentic reputation that consumers trust. Organizations must understand consumer expectations, make realistic commitments in line with these expectations and authentically meet this obligation.

The example of Johnson & Johnson’s Tylenol crisis in the 1980s does a great job of illustrating this approach. In September 1982, several people died in the Chicago area after taking cyanide-laced capsules of Tylenol, the drugmaker’s best-selling product. The FBI concluded that J&J were not at fault and so needed to take no action.

Nonetheless, Johnson & Johnson placed consumers first by recalling 31 million bottles of Tylenol capsules from store shelves and offering replacement product in the safer tablet form free of charge, taking a hit of more than US$100 million. The company realized that their reputation was more important than ensuring short term profit.

This shows that with reputation comes responsibility.

We have a lot to learn from Ramanna’s thoughts on how to navigate our turbulent world, as well as the example of Johnson & Johnson. I would recommend Age of Outrage for anyone interested in marketing, leadership or reputation.

Image: Karthik Ramanna