WSJ on the New PR: Proactive vs Reactive Reputation Management

The Wall Street article Institutions Engage More On Confronting Scandals details how Dartmouth, Tuck, and other colleges are realizing the critical need to insure they are actively managing how they are viewed by the public. Several lessons here for corporations as well.

“Like companies, business schools can be touched by scandals and crises, yet many haven’t prepared for events that can tarnish their reputations. They are often caught off guard and must scramble to react, sometimes exacerbating the damage by failing to communicate effectively with the media, alumni, students and employees.”

The key is to success is a proactive vs. a reactive approach (emphasis mine):

“Angel Cabrera, president of the Thunderbird School of Global Management in Glendale, Ariz. “Students are buying a brand and an experience, and they use the school’s reputation to decide where to go.” Dr. Cabrera himself has dealt with recent financial problems at Thunderbird and rumors about selling the campus or merging with another school. “You need to be proactive when you’re dealing with negative publicity,”

The issue of transparency and citizen journalism rears it’s head as well:

“Vincent Hammersley, communications director at Warwick Business School in the United Kingdom, had to adjust to one big difference when he switched from the automotive industry. “At my old job, I could insist that employees not talk to the press on company issues without my consent,” he says. “Now, academic freedom of speech means that I am happy if I hear about a comment from a member of the staff before I read about it in the press.”

Strangely, no mention of blogs or feed monitoring in the article, especially considering the word “engage” in the headline…