Crisis Management

A reading of Leonard Mlodinow on randomness, reputation, and corporate communications

Francisco Zambrano

In August 2026, I ran the Mexico City Marathon once again. It was not a new course for me. I had run it seven times before. I knew its stretches, its traps, its moments of excitement, and those kilometers when the city begins to take its toll: the altitude, the pavement, accumulated fatigue, and the mind trying to negotiate with the body.

Perhaps that is why I arrived at the marathon with a very particular feeling: that of someone who believes that a familiar course has, somehow, already been mastered.

I had training, experience, strategy, gels, electrolytes, muscle memory, and a clear head. I was not discovering the marathon for the first time. I was going to manage a course I already knew. But the body, like reputation, does not always follow its track record.

During the first half, I felt reasonably well. Everything seemed under control. Then came that moment many runners know: my knees began to feel stiff, my legs stopped responding the same way, and what had seemed like a mastered course turned into a kilometer-by-kilometer negotiation.

That brought back an uncomfortable lesson: you can know the terrain, prepare, measure, plan, and still face variables that change the outcome.

The final result does not always fairly explain everything that came before it.

Sometimes we do almost everything right and the outcome still becomes complicated. Other times, we make mistakes and reality lets us off the hook.

That made me think of Leonard Mlodinow, physicist, science writer, and author of The Drunkard’s Walk: How Randomness Rules Our Lives, a book that explains how randomness influences our lives, business, success, failure, and decision-making far more than we usually care to admit.

Mlodinow’s argument is particularly thought-provoking because it challenges one of our favorite habits: constructing explanations that are far too orderly after something has already happened. When someone succeeds, we say it was obvious. When someone fails, we can easily identify the mistake. But before the outcome, things were almost never that clear.

Reality rarely behaves with the narrative neatness we assign to it afterward.

In corporate communications and crisis management, this idea deserves far more attention.

Consider a mining accident, a bank system outage, an influencer complaining that a product “pollutes,” a racist statement by the CEO of a company that publicly champions inclusive values, or simply a brand that responds too late to criticism in the press, or an executive who decides to remain silent precisely when everyone is waiting for an explanation.

From the outside, and especially in hindsight, everything seems obvious.

They failed to properly review their safety protocols.

They should have communicated sooner.

They should have issued a statement.

That spokesperson should never have spoken.

It was obvious this was going to blow up.

But before a crisis erupts, the picture is almost never that clear. There are warning signs, yes. There are risks. There are decisions that could have been better. But there is also incomplete information, operational pressure, legal constraints, commercial interests, emotions, and one variable that few companies acknowledge: reputational randomness.

The same incident may go unnoticed on a Monday morning and become a trending topic on a Friday night. A mistake may remain confined to a small conversation or jump to national media. An apology may be perceived as responsible or inadequate, depending on the social mood at the time.

That is the point many organizations forget: when it comes to reputation, being right is not enough. The context in which that truth lands also matters.

Mlodinow argues that the human brain searches for patterns even where there is only noise. The same thing happens in communications. Three negative comments do not necessarily constitute a crisis. An angry influencer or a negative news story does not always represent public opinion. A hashtag does not necessarily signal deep reputational damage. But the opposite can also be true: a small signal may be the first symptom of something much larger.

The challenge lies in distinguishing one from the other. That is where strategy comes in. Effective crisis management is not about promising absolute control. Absolute control does not exist. It is about assessing probabilities more accurately, anticipating scenarios, reducing margins for error, and responding intelligently when reality moves faster than the playbook.

Companies tend to make mistakes in two ways. Some overreact to every piece of digital noise or minor media coverage and end up making the problem bigger. Others underestimate the situation and, by the time they decide to respond, they have already lost control of the public conversation.

Reading the situation correctly requires method, not panic. Before declaring a crisis, it is worth taking a closer look: How quickly is the conversation growing? Who is driving it? Has it moved beyond its original community?

Are consumers, victims, authorities, or the media involved? Does the company have verifiable information? And will the response issued today still hold up tomorrow?

One of the biggest mistakes during a crisis is trying to explain too much, too soon, when the situation is not yet fully understood. The anxiety to close the narrative can produce messages that are inaccurate, defensive, or cold. A poor initial response can ultimately cause more damage than the original mistake.

That is why communicating uncertainty is not a sign of weakness. It can be a sign of maturity.

Saying that the information is being reviewed, that internal protocols have been activated, that the concerns of those affected are understood, and that verified updates will be provided is not an attempt to evade responsibility. It is an acknowledgment that, during a crisis, the truth also needs structure.

Another major lesson from Mlodinow is that we should not evaluate a decision solely by its outcome. A bad strategy can succeed through luck. A good strategy can produce a poor outcome because of external factors.

That is why, after a crisis, the question should not simply be: “Did things go well or badly for us?” The more important question should be: “Was the process sound?”

Did we identify the risks in time?

Did we have trained spokespersons?

Were our messages aligned?

Did operations support communications?

Did we respond with empathy?

Did we rely on a real strategy, or simply on the hope that the issue would not escalate?

Reputation is built precisely to withstand these moments of uncertainty during a crisis. A company with accumulated trust has more room for error when it makes a mistake. A company that only shows up when it needs to defend itself enters every crisis with a credibility deficit.

That is why corporate communications cannot be merely decorative. It is not just about press releases, social media posts, interviews, or well-crafted statements. It is a reserve of trustcarefully built before trouble arrives. The idea of a “reserve of trust” is particularly powerful in corporate communications: reputation as accumulated capital that gives an organization room to maneuver when something unexpected happens.

Randomness will always be present in a crisis. Preparation, however, should never be left to chance. The central lesson for communications executives is simple, even if it is not always comfortable: not everything can be controlled, but we can be better prepared. We can listen more carefully, decide faster, communicate with greater humanity, measure more intelligently, and learn without manufacturing convenient explanations.

In a crisis, luck exists. But reputation should never depend on it.

Want to explore the topic further?

Read our full White Paper for a deeper analysis and the key conclusions.

👇👇👇👇👇

DOWNLOAD THE WHITE PAPER

Bibliography

Mlodinow, Leonard. The Drunkard’s Walk: How Randomness Rules Our Lives. New York: Pantheon Books, 2008.

Mlodinow, Leonard. El andar del borracho: cómo el azar gobierna nuestras vidas. Barcelona: Crítica, 2009.

The real challenge lies in the few crises that change everything

In more than twenty years as a crisis management consultant, I’ve learned that not all crises carry the same weight. I remember a CEO once told me: “Francisco, it feels like my company is in crisis every week.” He wasn’t exaggerating: unhappy clients, uncomfortable media coverage, rumors on social networks—his company seemed to be walking through a minefield. But when we carefully reviewed the situation and analyzed each event, it became clear that what he was facing were minor tremors, not real earthquakes.

In his book Zero to One, Peter Thiel discusses the power law. The idea is simple but powerful: in business, most investments generate very little, and just one or two produce nearly all the value. A venture capital fund may lose money on nine startups, but the tenth—the extraordinary one—makes up for all the losses and secures success. The same logic applies to crisis management.

Not all crises are created equal

In theory, a company could face dozens of incidents each year: complaints on social media, negative press, internal mistakes, minor service failures, workplace accidents… Most are manageable incidents. They can be controlled with basic protocols, rarely escalate, fade quickly, and leave little impact. But the power law reminds us that there will be one or two crises that put the organization’s viability at risk, disrupt business continuity, or seriously damage its reputation.

For example: an airline may deal with daily claims, delayed flights, even labor strikes. But a plane crash or a hijacking becomes the crisis that defines its history.

Identifying the “real crisis”

A good crisis management system includes continuous improvement plans to address minor incidents. It relies on protocols that allow early detection and effective resolution, preventing them from escalating or making headlines.

Yet the real challenge is preparing the organization for the inevitable: a true crisis. This requires recognizing—honestly, without denial but also without fear—the main vulnerabilities that could trigger a major disruption.

We are not talking about Black Swans—unpredictable crises that no one can foresee in nature or timing—but rather about crises that stem from internal vulnerabilities or are inherent to the company’s industry. These are unavoidable risks: sooner or later, they will happen.

The challenge, then, is not overreacting to minor incidents or spreading resources evenly, but anticipating the few potential crises that could cause 80–90% of the possible damage. Examples include:

A product defect or contamination that endangers health or safety
A corporate fraud with legal implications
A massive data breach
An environmental accident

These are the scenarios that can truly define a company’s viability and reputation. They demand the highest level of preparation, simulation drills, contingency plans, and financial resources.

A smarter resource strategy

A CEO who understands the power law in crisis management doesn’t exhaust himself treating every incident as if it were “the end of the world.” He knows how to separate the critical from the anecdotal.

This also prevents the crisis committee from being trivialized and keeps the organization focused on what could actually make the difference between survival and collapse.

The power law teaches us that:

Not all problems deserve the same level of attention
Resources, the crisis committee’s time, and the CEO’s focus should be concentrated on the few events that can truly change the company’s trajectory

Under this logic, you cannot have 50 identical protocols for 50 minor incidents. That’s where corporate culture of continuous improvement becomes essential—taking daily actions to prevent and address minor issues effectively as part of normal operations, without panic or overreaction.

Meanwhile, prevention, training, and preparedness must always focus on the two or three catastrophic scenarios that could genuinely put the company at risk.

“Small problems” shouldn’t be ignored, but they can be solved through simple, agile procedures. “Big problems,” on the other hand, demand anticipation systems, constant training, and response protocols that the entire organization knows, trusts, and can activate immediately, without hesitation—because they are ingrained in the corporate culture.

Conclusion

The power law applied to crisis management shows us that most incidents are minor. Only a few crises change everything, and it is precisely there where companies must concentrate their attention, energy, expertise, preparation, and the bulk of their resources.

The next time you feel your company is “always in crisis,” remember: most are just small fires. Your real strength lies in how you prepare for the catastrophe that can change everything.

Learn to distinguish between what is anecdotal and what is truly important, and focus preparation on the crises that may define whether you survive or disappear.

Is your organization prepared for the next crisis?

At Ventura Comunicaciones, we help companies, institutions, and leaders design prevention, response, and recovery strategies for crises, guided by a clear vision:

Communication is not an accessory. It is the very core of leadership in challenging times.

Contact:

www.venturacomunicacioines.com

fzambrano@venturacomunicaciones.com

10 Crisis Management Lessons Inspired by The Power of Habit

Over two decades of advising leaders and organizations through crises, I’ve been asked one question more times than I can count:

“Which books do you recommend to truly understand crisis management—and what can we actually learn from a crisis?”

The truth is, most books on the topic are either too technical, overly dense, or so narrowly focused on one angle—communications, emergency protocols, or reputation management—that they fail to capture the full picture.

That’s why, when I want to give clients an accessible yet profound way to understand crises, I always point them to Charles Duhigg’s bestseller, The Power of Habit.

While it isn’t a traditional crisis management manual, it offers something far more valuable: a clear look at the patterns that drive behavior during high-stakes moments. Duhigg reveals how crises unfold, what they expose about an organization, and—most importantly—how they can become the spark for transformation.

There’s a central idea woven through the book, even if it’s never written explicitly:

“In a crisis, habit becomes destiny.”

When the pressure is on, organizations don’t react logically—they react habitually. And those habits, or the lack of them, often lay bare the structural weaknesses no one saw before.

One chapter in particular—The Power of a Crisis: How Leaders Create Habits Accidentally or by Design—dives into the anatomy of organizational crises. It shows how they can be traps or opportunities, but above all, how they can be leveraged as catalysts for lasting change.

From our work at Ventura Comunicaciones in crisis communications and reputation management, here are 10 essential lessons for leaders inspired by Duhigg’s insights.

1. Crises expose your organization’s real habits

When business runs smoothly, teams follow the playbook. But in chaos, the hidden habits surface—automatic reactions, communication breakdowns, and blurred lines of responsibility. These moments reveal the true culture of an organization.

2. A crisis is the best chance you’ll ever have to change

Nothing disrupts organizational inertia like a crisis. It’s a rare opening to fix what’s broken, strengthen what works, and redefine culture. Managed well, it’s the perfect moment to review processes, refresh leadership structures, and embed new ways of working.

3. Smart leaders use crises as strategic leverage

Some of the most effective leaders don’t just “manage” crises—they use them to restructure, improve processes, and strengthen culture. Even small crises, if handled with vision, can become powerful turning points.

4. Your leadership in a crisis writes your future reputation

People will remember how you led, long after they’ve forgotten the specifics of the crisis itself. Clarity, calm, and consistency are the hallmarks of leaders who emerge stronger. A poor response can haunt for years; a great one becomes your legacy.

5. Internal communication habits can save—or sink—you

Crises rarely escalate because of the original problem. They escalate because people fail to communicate quickly, clearly, and across the right channels internally. Strong internal communication habits are as critical as external messaging.

6. Role ambiguity equals guaranteed chaos

In the King’s Cross subway fire, everyone knew something was wrong—yet no one knew whose job it was to act. In a crisis, unclear roles feed chaos and delay response. Leadership responsibilities must be crystal clear before a crisis hits.

7. Protocols are meaningless if they’re not habitual

A crisis manual is worthless if it sits on a shelf. Protocols only work when they’re second nature—rehearsed, practiced, and embedded in daily routines.

8. A crisis is the best teacher you’ll never pay for

Painful as they are, crises teach faster and deeper than any training program. But the learning only matters if it’s institutionalized—captured in processes, shared across teams, and baked into culture.

9. Forgetting is your silent enemy

Some organizations just “move on” after a crisis. That’s the easiest way to repeat the same mistakes. At Ventura Comunicaciones, we always recommend post-crisis audits, debriefs, and drills to ensure lessons learned become permanent practice.

10. Every crisis is a chance to reconnect with purpose

A well-managed crisis is a powerful moment to realign with your mission and values. Leaders who seize this opportunity inspire loyalty, trust, and renewed commitment from employees, customers, and stakeholders.

In the end

A crisis isn’t solved with a press release or a media interview—it’s a test of character, a chance for reinvention, and a spotlight on your deepest organizational habits.

Is your organization ready for the next one?

At Ventura Comunicaciones, we help companies, institutions, and leaders design prevention, management, and recovery strategies for crises—with one guiding belief:

Communication isn’t an accessory.

It’s the core of leadership in challenging times.

Contact:

🌐 www.venturacomunicaciones.com

📧 fzambrano@venturacomunicaciones.com

Are you ready to face the next crisis?… It’s not a matter of if it will happen, but when. In corporate communication, managing a crisis is a trial by fire that separates effective strategists from the unprepared.

Although crises don’t come with a warning, what you can anticipate is how you’ll respond when your organization’s reputation is at stake. Therefore, it never hurts to review the key concepts and strategies that will help you identify risks, anticipate scenarios, and design effective plans to minimize the impact.

A well-managed crisis doesn’t just solve a problem: it strengthens trust in your organization and expands your leadership.

Keep reading and make sure you’re prepared for the inevitable.

Crisis and its Management Model

Crises often evoke unexpected and negative events, with serious consequences that disrupt an organization’s normal operations and jeopardize its future viability. Additionally, their effects can extend to other areas and social sectors.

A crisis can originate internally, stemming from deliberate or negligent actions or omissions by members of the organization. It can also be caused by external causes, such as natural phenomena, criminal acts, authority acts, or a contagious social environment.

The most complex crises arise when internal and external variables converge. For example, an internal problem can detonate the pressure of latent social causes that find an opportunity to activate. Similarly, external pressure, such as the vindication of a social cause, can expose corporate malpractices and generate consequences such as the removal of executives or severe damage to the organization’s reputation.

Crises and the Media

Almost every crisis attracts the attention of the mass media because of its sudden nature, its destructive potential, and its impact on various social sectors. In some cases, crises even give rise to social and environmental tragedies that become major news.

Some crises, however, remain hidden from public scrutiny. If not handled appropriately and in a timely manner, these crises eventually come to light, amplifying their negative effects. A crisis that becomes public immediately generates a reputational impact. The larger and more recognized the affected organization, the greater the media interest. Companies, brands, public figures, politicians, and celebrities are often the subject of constant attention, and their actions become news, especially during crises that affect their reputation.

Impact and management of crises

Beyond the interest and media scandal, crises are often tragic phenomena with devastating consequences. Initially, they affect the organization, but depending on their magnitude, they can cause damage to social groups, economic sectors or even entire regions. Crisis management is based on two fundamental aspects:

Technical attention to the emergency, to solve the problem at its root.
Communication management, to control the narrative and reduce the negative impact on reputation. Crises are dynamic phenomena that can escalate and give rise to secondary problems, often more serious than the initial event if not handled promptly.

Distinguishing a Crisis from Other Events

The term “crisis” is frequently used in different contexts, which has trivialized its meaning. It is essential to distinguish between a minor incident, a problem, and a real crisis, as the latter entails significant repercussions.

The first step in managing a crisis is to accurately assess its magnitude. Overreacting can aggravate the problem, while underreacting can encourage its growth and prevent a timely response. Every crisis, regardless of its severity, has the potential to destabilize multiple areas of the organization.

Although there are no foolproof recipes for managing a crisis, each one requires a specialized approach based on its unique characteristics.

Risks and preparation

Talking about crises is talking about risks. The operations of any organization have inherent risks that can lead to crises.

A risk, according to the Diccionario de la Lengua Española (Spanish Language Dictionary), is any contingency or proximity to damage. In the organizational context, a risk is any event or circumstance that can interrupt operations, negatively impact public perception, and compromise the corporate image.

Although crises are inevitably disruptive, many can be avoided or mitigated through surveillance and prevention systems that detect warning signs. However, those that cannot be prevented must be addressed quickly and accurately to limit their negative effects.

Each organization has its vulnerabilities, derived from its operation, culture and context. These can include operational, economic, legal or social problems. Additionally, certain sectors face risks inherent to their activity, such as crude oil spills in oil companies or product contamination in the food industry.

Phases of a crisis

Every crisis goes through different stages:

Peace period: Operations occur normally. It is a stable period, characterized by growth, good corporate practices, and a positive public image.
Latency period: Warning signs appear that can be ignored or recognized by members inside or outside the organization.
Activation period: Moment in which various factors converge, creating the situation that triggers the crisis.
Irruption period: Outbreak of the crisis, with immediate impacts on the operation and reputation that put the viability of the organization at risk. Sometimes, there can be serious damage to the population or the environment.
Expansion period: Collateral damage is identified. The crisis management committee makes decisions to avoid the escalation of negative events.
Resolution: Solutions are sought and the recovery plan is activated. Damage control until operations are normalized.
Accountability: Plans are established for repairing the damage with the affected publics and their demands are addressed.
Conclusion: The end of the crisis is declared.
Learning: Evaluation of the actions taken, highlighting successes, errors, and opportunities for improvement to prevent a similar event from happening again.

No organization is exempt from facing a crisis during its existence, so a period of peace is key to preparing and building a culture of prevention and shared responsibility.

Once a crisis breaks out, time is a fundamental variable. Decisions must be made under pressure, often with limited information, with the aim of minimizing damage and returning to normality as soon as possible.

Communication in times of crisis

Communication during a crisis should not be improvised. During periods of calm, it is essential to establish communication policies, train spokespersons and form interdisciplinary teams that can manage the relationship with different key audiences.

A well-executed communication strategy can prevent the crisis from worsening due to misunderstandings, lack of information or negative perceptions. Transparency and coherence are essential, while burying one’s head and not giving explanations (“ostrich strategy”) is the most damaging option.

Prevention and proactive management

The best crisis management is that which manages to prevent them. This requires an organizational culture focused on prevention and continuous improvement. An effective model includes:

Vulnerability audits
Risk scenario design
Specific action plans to mitigate possible impacts
Corporate policy on communication and crisis management
Internal awareness-raising communication campaigns
Crisis management workshops and risk simulations

Although each crisis is unique, preparation allows organizations to respond with agility and professionalism, limiting its negative effects and efficiently returning to normality.

In conclusion, crisis management begins before the crisis occurs. A comprehensive risk management model must be part of the organizational culture, ensuring that all members are prepared to face eventualities and communicate effectively with key audiences. Prevention, preparation, and agility are essential to minimize impacts and efficiently return to normality.

On February 19, 2006, mine 8, Pasta de Conchos Unit, in the state of Coahuila, Mexico, suffered an explosion due to the accumulation of methane gas, 65 workers died and only two bodies were recovered, the rest were buried. Technical specialists and authorities at the time considered that the recovery of the remains of the other miners was high risk.

One of the political and campaign banners of the current Mexican president, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, was to rescue the bodies of the miners and honor their memory through moral reparation for the damage. However, 18 years later, and a few months before the current president ends his six-year term, the tragedy of Pasta de Conchos is still valid, without substantial progress. The families continue to demand that the rescue of the remains of the 63 miners trapped after the explosion in the mine be prioritized.

However, despite the agreements assumed by President López Obrador and his solidarity with the families through the Comprehensive Plan for the Reparation and Justice of Pasta de Conchos, the relatives continue to consider that there is “non-compliance due to the lack of clear progress to achieve the rescue of the miners and regret every year not being able to give their families a dignified burial.”

Accountability

After a crisis, society and affected groups will always demand measures so that another similar tragedy is not repeated, through strategies to guarantee the safety and well-being of the population at risk and vulnerable areas. However, what happened in Pasta de Conchos has not been a reference for learning, social organizations have insisted that currently “there are no non-repetition or security measures in the coal zone of Coahuila” so that similar tragedies do not continue to occur like the one on August 3, 2022, at the El Pinabete mine, in Sabinas, Coahuila, where 10 miners were trapped.

In Mexico, in recent years, the actions of mining companies in the coal region of Coahuila have been the cause of denunciation and controversy because more than 100 deaths of people dedicated to mining have been recorded, according to the organization Familia Pasta de Conchos, which brings together relatives of the deceased.

Closing a crisis inevitably leads to accountability. All crises, and even more so those managed by the government, require a participatory and public accountability process, where all voices are heard. When it is not transparent and satisfactory for those affected, the social reproach will arise that the government fails to comply due to inability or political expediency.

Accountability makes possible a catharsis that releases tensions and stabilizes the political and social environment. It is necessary because crises bring harmful consequences to people, communities, social sectors, or the environment, and are usually the product of intentional or reckless actions, or omissions of organizations or specific people. Society and the victims demand to know who the culprits are and ask that they be punished. When there is open, public, transparent accountability and justice is done, the most affected people enter into a catharsis, a purification of emotions, a feeling of justice and vindication that their demands were met. If there is no space for this social catharsis to occur, tensions accumulate, and confrontation increases, demands for justice will continue perpetually.

After a crisis, there are always open wounds

As part of this accountability, the government carries out emotional remediation activities to produce this much-needed social catharsis to heal wounds; and of a legal nature to do justice, truth commissions are created to sanction the facts and punish the guilty, and only later, as long as the wound has healed, are monuments built that commemorate the fact or in memory of the victims and Public artistic events are held, among other actions.

In accountability, the process is often politicized, which is why strong and independent justice institutions that carry out transparent and impartial investigations are essential. There will always be interest groups that will try to hide or reserve the matter, due to the negative consequences it could represent for their political careers, public image, and even administrative and criminal legal effects.

There are many ways to avoid accountability, but the most used is to bet on oblivion, which consists of diverting attention to other issues, reducing its presence on the public agenda, and hoping that the issue wears out and loses public interest. A second strategy is to point out and punish scapegoats to cover up those truly responsible. A third is to bureaucratize the issue, through palliative actions that never get to the bottom of the problem to delay the processes, such as creating commissions, redoing the investigations, delegating the issue to another administration, and trying to resolve economic agreements with some relatives to divide the movement, etc.

Accountability is important for the development of a country and for the stability of a government, it means that authorities accept and learn from their mistakes, recognize systemic failures, and the position from which they must start to carry out the necessary corrective actions beyond political and economic interests.

A crisis can produce permanent confrontation scenarios that destabilize a government or, on the contrary, a crisis can be the opportunity to strengthen its legitimacy if it acts with honesty and social sense, putting the public interest before particular interests.

Pasta de Conchos has not been a reference for learning in the management of a mining crisis in Mexico, nor for the different governments who have not known how to respond or provide solutions to the demands of the affected groups, much less do justice. Transparency and accountability are still a critical issue for both the government and companies… There is much to do in prevention, crisis management, learning from experiences, accountability, and damage repair.

Corporate communication at a key element of the series

Kendall Roy’s financier and friend, Stewy Hosseini, was always right: “The family is fucked… and it’s hurting the stock.” The phrase could not be clearer to describe the dysfunctional billionaire family that heads the Waystar Royco corporation from the HBO series, Succession.

A corporation’s image and reputation can be everything, including the family’s behavior that heads it. Waystar Royco is listed on the stock market, and the Roy family owns 36%, so it is always in the crosshairs of its shareholders and stakeholders. It’s a corporation comprising an influential ultra-right-wing television channel, cruise ships with disreputable staff, and decadent amusement parks.

It seems incredible, but in large corporations, sometimes corporate governance is not taken seriously; decisions are made with the stomach, as the mighty Logan Roy, Waystar Royco founder, used to do.

Succession presents two business visions: Logan Roy’s arbitrary and authoritarian decisions (backed by the government) confronted with the demands of a more modern, regulated, and “transparent” corporate environment.

Succession places corporate communication, and its advisors, at the strategic center of Waystar Royco. They save the corporation from different crises, which are worth reflecting on:

The cruise ship crisis

Logan Roy meets with his son Kendall. He tells him of a conversation with his third wife, Marcia.

Marcia: “The Incas sacrificed a child to the sun in times of great crisis.”

Logan: “That’s so wild.”

Marcia: “What could you kill that you love so much that would make the sun rise again?”

For Logan Roy, the Inca analogy meant “sacrificing” his son Kendall to settle the crisis over Waystar Royco’s cruise ship sexual abuse allegations. The idea was that Kendall would go to jail because he knew and hid the facts for a long time.

In the face of a crisis, sacrificing one of the key managers of a company is what public opinion expects, but it may not be the only solution. The company has to take responsibility and outline a plan supported by actions to compensate for the damage and restore trust among its stakeholders. Kendall doesn’t end up in jail (he’s up against his father and the company), nor does anyone at Waystar Royco, for the promise of an internal audit, corrective actions, and a series of negotiations with the government.

The electoral crisis

The media are a key factor in any democratic exercise. During the presidential election, the Roy brothers were clear about it and acted according to their interests, despite warnings from the ATN television network information chief, owned by Waystar Royco, about the legal consequences they could face.

Faced with the uncertainty of conclusive results (due to a close election), the powerful ATN could shape the perception of public opinion by reporting that the voting trend favors the ultra-right wing Republican candidate, Jeryd Mencken. This allows him to take advantage of the situation and make a speech as the future President of the United States.

This may not happen in a real election, but it does give an idea of the power of the media, the negotiations with the ruling party and the campaign teams, to favor one or another candidate.

According to the vision of the Roy brothers, the worst that can happen is that reasonable doubts arise among informed opinion (not the public opinion) because a media outlet is not the one who elects the president and is only making fake news, which will be diluted.

The crisis of the death of the patriarch

The announcement of a CEO’s death can significantly impact a company’s share price. Waystar Royco fell.

Logan Roy dies during a flight. The Roy brothers were in shock and the management team planning the actions to be taken: the statement that the Roy brothers would make to the media and the list of stakeholders to whom to inform. Shouldn’t they have included employees in this plan?

The Securities and Exchange Commission requires publicly traded companies to disclose material information in a timely manner. Therefore, the urgency of presenting a unified response, even though the Roy brothers wanted the airplane to continue without landing until their father’s death was confirmed. Meanwhile, rumors were already running among the media. Wasn’t there a crisis plan in case Logan died, having the precedent that his health was already diminished?

The crisis response was the indicated: a brief statement of the facts to the media (Logan’s death), with no space for journalists queries to avoid speculation that could impact the markets. But it left doubts about the future of Waystar Royco, so Plans A and B were outlined to be developed by Karolina Novotney, the professional and efficient adviser, and Hugo Baker, the dark and subservient character who investigates detractors and leaks information to the media.

Succession ended as it had to. A new CEO was appointed following the corporation’s acquisition. Tom Wambsgans (Shiv Roy’s husband), will subserviently cater to the whims of new owner Lukas Matsson. Kendall’s business experience and Roman’s social intelligence were out of the game. Shiv, who “couldn’t be named the new CEO because she’s pregnant” in Matsson’s misogynistic perception, will either deal with her husband…or continue her career as a political adviser.

From now on, Waystar Royco will have to face other crises:

Some stumbling blocks of the limited CEO, Tom Wambsgans, in the transformation of the television network ATN as the unstable Matsson.

An authority act by the President of the United States, Jeryd Mencken.

The disclosure of some corporate secrets from the battered management team – General Counsel Gerri Kellman, Vice President Frank Vernom, and CFO Karl Muller –

The information leak by the Roys’ uncomfortable cousin, Greg Hirsch.

But we won’t see that anymore because one of the great HBO series has ended.

Any resemblance to the reality of large corporations, and their relationship with power, is a mere coincidence…

The Drunkard’s Walk: Why Not Every Crisis Can Be Predicted

The Power Law in Crisis Management

THE POWER OF HABIT IN A CRISIS

Crisis Management: The essentials we should never forget

PASTA DE CONCHOS: A PENDING DEBT

Succession: Crisis Management Lessons