In the aftermath of the all the Australian Sorry Day business, I have been left thinking about how the corporate sector can learn a lot from the impact of the word 'sorry'.
All too often, corporations fail to take a magnanimous, humble or even apologetic demeanor to criticism. In particular, I am thinking of customer complaints that have gone public. I am working right now on a case where a customer's product has fallen over quite badly and will seriously de-rail their business. It is most likely that at some point, they are going to seek to deflect some of the flak they are going to face onto us. Fair enough.
But we, like most other corporations, are going to take one of two available positions: the 'flat-bat', say nothing approach such as "we don't comment on individual customer experiences"; or one of blame - "if the customer had used the product correctly they wouldn't be in this mess".
What about a bit of "sorry"? Why is it so hard for large organisations to just say "sorry". The impact of this week's "sorry" has been quite overwhelming and has done so much for the relationship between the government and its people and the 'crimes' of the past have been absolved. Afterall, if meant sincerely, that is what the power of the word represents - the power to absolve.
The reason why we don't say sorry is the same reason that the Australian Labour Party trod such a delicate path to the word. The Lawyers. To a lawyer this is a no -brainer: to say to sorry os to make yourself liable and vulnerable to suit - so you just don't do it.
When the Lawyers get involved and PR becomes shackled to the legal team, the personality of an organisation is smothered and the opportunity to bond with stakeholders is killed. If the lawyers had got their way this week, Kevin Rudd would have said either nothing, or - as Brendan Nelson slightly said - "it was their fault."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment