????可以肯定，美國在線公司（AOL）首席執行官蒂姆?阿姆斯特朗對因救助“不幸嬰兒”而花費上百萬美元一事的高論不脛而走之后，由此造成的喧嘩與騷動同樣也會讓各家公司的高管們脊背發涼。

????公關公司Maslansky & Partners的老板邁克爾?馬蘭斯基說：“它再次證明，根本沒有什么‘天知地知，你知我知’這回事。現在你說的每一個字，地球人全都會知道。”

????馬蘭斯基稱，看來阿姆斯特朗不僅在與美國在線員工召開那場電話會議時忽略了這一點——這個會議現在已經成了一個臭名昭著的會議，而且隨后又犯了兩個錯。這兩個錯可能和第一個一樣，危害不淺。第一個錯誤是，匆忙重啟了季度401（k）匹配計劃，致使阿姆斯特朗“顯得弱勢”。這是馬蘭斯基的評論。然后，“對公司來說，他立場大逆轉。這個做法代價高昂，卻又毫無成效?！?馬蘭斯基預計，阿姆斯特朗明年還會來這么一次裁員行動，“而員工依然準備不足，”因此到時候還是會一片嘩然。

????馬蘭斯基曾是知名律所Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz（紐約著名律所，以并購見長，被稱為“華爾街的發動機”——譯注）的公司律師，主要為寶潔公司（Procter & Gamble）、聯邦快遞公司（FedEx）、麥當勞公司（McDonald's）、百事公司（PepsiCo）以及其他許多大公司的高管們出謀劃策，就如何避免以及有效應對公關危機提供建議。當然，蒂姆?阿姆斯特朗并不是第一個因為出言不慎而栽在自己嘴上的高管，也不會是最后一個。如何將公關危機造成的危害降低到最??？馬蘭斯基就這個問題為首席執行官和其他高管提供了如下三條建議。

????1. 盡早使用社交媒體，別等火燒眉毛才用。馬蘭斯基評論說：“換做十年前，阿姆斯特朗的這番高論也就會成為辦公室閑聊的談資，不會有什么下文。但現在拜互聯網所賜，不管什么錯誤都會被廣而告之。”他進一步補充道：“公眾的懷疑態度意味著現在所有跟大企業沾邊的事都是可疑的，公眾就是想看它們出丑，”而這顯然只會給高管們幫倒忙。

????最好的解決辦法是：在真正需要之前就要打造強大的網上形象，即：能讓貴公司（及高管本人）人性化的形象。比如，Twitter的忠實粉絲們可能就會愿意讓你享受無罪推定的待遇。馬蘭斯基稱：“要習慣在網上表達自己的理念。阿姆斯特朗當時本來應該馬上就上Twitter，不僅要就撫養‘不幸嬰兒’一事道歉，還應回到醫保成本高企這一話題上，這才是他的出發點?！痹谒磥?，連發五條措辭巧妙的Twitter消息就能讓這次談話重回正軌。

????2. 不要回避爭議。 “首席執行官和公司總想讓錯誤盡快過去，把它們甩在身后，所以他們會保持沉默，”馬蘭斯基說?！暗绻扇∠喾吹淖龇ǎ苯咏槿?，參與輿論，反而會讓熱議的溫度有所下降。”

????美國的銀行巨頭們給出了一個眼前活生生的例子。馬蘭斯基指出，他公司近期開展的一項調研表明，只有5%的美國民眾了解銀行業已經連本帶利還掉了他們2008年從聯邦政府的“問題資產救助計劃”（TARP）中借來的錢。

????馬蘭斯基稱：“這意味著95%的民眾還認為銀行業‘欠’他們這筆救助資金。”他認為，這些大銀行首先需要很好地公布TARP債務的情況，其次，向民眾解釋金融危機以來他們為了防范類似危機所做的改變?！斑^去這幾年銀行的財務表現很不錯，但他們太少言寡語了”——而這種沉默只會讓公眾感到憤怒，產生不信任。

????3. 接受現實，任何事情都不會自動平息。馬蘭斯基說：“首席執行官和大公司通常都屬于非常保守的群體，而且他們擔心自己不管說了什么——尤其是在社交媒體上——都會讓他們更顯得保守。所以他們干脆就保持低調，希望爭議能夠自己平息下去。”不過，這種風波絕不會這么容易過去。深陷危機的公司需要“表明自己站了出來，正在傾聽人們的意見，同時作出回應，”馬蘭斯基說。英國石油公司（BP）在造成了史上最大規模的石油泄漏事件（隨后，時任首席執行官的托尼?海沃德宣布辭職）后的幾年里，一直在廣泛宣傳自己開展的清理行動，同時繼續堅持在墨西哥灣作業。這是一個處理公關危機的絕佳例子。

????現在，和批評自己的人打交道，同時讓大家了解自己的觀點，“比以前更困難了”，馬蘭斯基補充說?！澳阏f了什么并不重要，重要的是你的聽眾聽到了什么。”就像蒂姆?阿姆斯特朗這次吃了一番苦頭才懂得的，這是完全不同的兩碼事。（財富中文網）

????譯者：清遠

????

????It's a safe bet that when AOL chief Tim Armstrong's comment about the million-dollar price tag for saving "distressed babies" went viral, the resulting sound and fury sent a shiver through C-suites everywhere.

????"This really proves that there is no such thing as talking to just one audience anymore," says Michael Maslansky, head of communications firm Maslansky & Partners. "Everything you say is public now."

????Not only did Armstrong seem to overlook that fact during his now-infamous conference call with AOL (AOL) employees, but he then proceeded to make two other mistakes, Maslansky says, that could turn out to be just as damaging as the first one.

????First, hastily restoring quarterly 401(k) matching made Armstrong "look weak," Maslansky notes. Then too, "his about-face was expensive for the company and accomplished nothing." Maslansky predicts that Armstrong will have to make the same cutbacks next year, "and employees will not be ready," so the uproar will be just as loud.

????A former corporate lawyer at Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz, Maslansky advises the top brass at Procter & Gamble (PG), FedEx (FDX), McDonald's (MCD), PepsiCo (PEP), and many other big companies on how to avoid, or survive, public relations debacles. Tim Armstrong isn't the first executive to get his foot stuck firmly in his mouth, of course, and he won't be the last. Maslansky suggests three ways for CEOs and other executives to minimize the damage.

????1. Engage with social media before you're forced to."Ten years ago, Armstrong's comment would have been water cooler chat, period. But thanks to the Internet, every screw-up gets broadcast," notes Maslansky. It doesn't help, he adds, that "public skepticism means that everything about Big Business is suspect now. The public expects the worst."

????The best antidote to that: Build a strong online presence, one that humanizes your company (and yourself), before you need it. Loyal Twitter followers, for instance, may be willing to give you the benefit of the doubt. "Get comfortable communicating your ideas online," Maslansky says. "Armstrong should have started tweeting immediately, apologizing for bringing up 'distressed babies' but also putting the focus back on soaring health care costs, which was his original point." Maslansky thinks a series of five well-worded tweets would have helped get the conversation back on track.

????2. Don't hide from controversy."CEOs, and companies, tend to want to get past a mistake as soon as possible and put it behind them, so they stop talking," Maslansky observes. "But if you do the opposite by wading in and participating, it tends to lower the temperature of the discussion."

????One current case in point: the biggest U.S. banks. Maslansky points to a recent survey by his firm showing that only 5% of the American public knows the banking industry has repaid, with interest, every nickel of the TARP money they borrowed from the federal government in 2008.

????"That means 95% of the public still believes the banking industry 'owes' them that bailout money," notes Maslansky. He thinks the big banks need to do a far better job of, first, getting the word out about the TARP debt and, second, explaining the changes since the Crash, aimed at preventing another one. "Banks have done well financially in the past couple of years, but they've been way too quiet" -- and that silence has fed public anger and distrust.

????3. Accept the fact that nothing goes away by itself."CEOs and big companies tend to be a very conservative group, and they worry that anything they say -- especially on social media -- will make them look even more conservative," Maslansky says. "So they hunker down and hope the controversy will just go away."

????The bad news: It won't. A company with a crisis on its hands needs to "show that you're out there listening to people and responding," Maslansky says. BP's (BP) well-publicized cleanup and continuing presence in the Gulf of Mexico, years after the biggest oil spill in history (and then-CEO Tony Hayward's resignation), is one example of how to do it right.

????Engaging with your critics and getting your point of view out there is "harder than it used to be," Maslansky adds. "It's not what you say that matters. It's what your audience hears." As Tim Armstrong found out the hard way, those can be quite different things.