Carlos is a global environmental policy director of BP, an organization that was facing negative publicity issue because of the oil disaster that happened in 2010 when the company was performing the drilling of offshore in golf of Mexico. Carlos has been asked by his vice president to attend a press conference with the aim of dealing with the local public response personally. In responding to the local community, Carlos has to prepare a press release for defending the company and presenting the facts that the company is environmentally friendly and making efforts to cope up with the disaster that happened unintentionally. Communication with local community regarding the initiatives taken to overcome the situation can prevent the organization in facing worst responses from public (Browne 2).
Purpose/ objective
Short-term objective: the direct communication with public will enable the company to address the concerns of people. By communicating existing measures that have been taken by the company to overcome the disaster, Carlos will be able to at least the situation more worst and control the anger of the public.
Long-term objective: the focus on the public relation will enhance the positive image and public reputation of the organization. Instead of using governmental relation for handling the issue, the company relied on media to approach the audience directly, which is essential for generating the long-term goals and objectives in term of image and quality reputation in its operations. Moreover, it will also demonstrate the ethical responsibility image of the BP.
Alternatives:
Solution 1# The first solution of the problem is that the data regarding the issue is gathered, and facts are communicated to the audience with the initiatives that have been taken to resolve the issue or minimize the influence of the spill on people.
Pros: Communicating that precautionary measures were taken, but the disaster was not in the control of the company, as the technology used during the process caused a huge explosion that rocked the rig (Browne 3). This explanation will improve the image of the company as people will trust the company as loyal to its customers for accepting its mistake.
Cons: People may perceive that the firm does not evaluate its measures before taking any step that resulted in such huge disaster.
Solution 2# The second solution is that the company hide the facts and present itself as a completely environmentally responsible firm and justify its position by communicating other initiatives taken by the company for the community.
Pros: Community may believe that the organization is ethically sound and does not have any weaknesses in its evaluation system, failure of the technology was just a disaster, and further such accidents may not happen.
Cons: People may perceive the company as unethical because the firm is not taking the responsibility of its mistake and just giving lame excuses to hide the facts.
Recommendation
Solution 1# is highly recommended, as news stories have explored the facts already, therefore, presenting data and information will improve the reputation of the company as people will perceive the company as environmentally responsible. Presenting facts will communicate that the company has a complete idea of the issues and serious to take the initiative to deal with the problem.
Action steps
Gather data regarding the disaster and do not communicate any response strategy to the media that is a result of rushing decisions.
Focus on the public relation and communicate the facts and steps that have been taken to overcome the negative effects.
Assure people that further measure will be taken, and the issue will not be left in the middle.
Work Cited
Browne, Lord Jhon. BP and the Gulf Oil Disaster: Making Tough Choices. HENLEY University. 1997.
