In our larger crisis simulation exercises, we generally offer the leadership team, tasked with overseeing their organisation's crisis response, a dashboard view of what's going on in social media.
Most teams gladly accept: after all, it's a great opportunity to monitor what's happening so they can respond quickly, and get a sense of how an issue plays out across social media - compared with the conventional media and stakeholder channels they might be more familiar with. We'll typically hear them later on, chuckling at the memes that internet comedians have posted, or drawing sharp breaths at spoof accounts or celebrity complaints which have appeared in their timeline. These teams will typically be somewhat dazed in the debrief: "It all moves so fast!" they tell us. "We struggled to keep up with it all, and couldn't get enough of a handle on the situation to be able to get our response together."
Smart teams look at us quizzically, and use the dashboard we give them strictly for situational awareness: early warning of the incident and the crucial who-what-where-when insights they need to shape a sensible handling strategy. They studiously ignore the memes and noise. They fare much better: but in the debrief, it's clear that the CEO's constant glances at the screen caused frustration to her colleagues trying to prioritise a stakeholder list or draft key messages.
The best teams shoo us away. They know that a 50" plasma screen in the corner of the room, refreshing every few seconds with colourful influencers' tweets and shocking images will rob them of the thing they most need in a crisis: focus. It's not that they don't take social media seriously, or want to know what the outside world is saying. But they have clear roles and process to follow during an incident, with team members dedicated to monitoring, prioritising and escalating the insights that are important.
I was with a team in France recently, reflecting thoughtfully on their exercise when a colleague cleverly articulated the challenged posed by social media in a crisis as "le flux et le flou" which loosely translates as "the blended and the blurred".
It's a confusing and unfamiliar melting pot which blends customers with regulators, politicians with campaigners, noisy comedians with straight-up criminals. They respond to and amplify each other, at speed and in ways that were unimaginable in conventional media.
But it gives at best a blurry picture in real-time: increasingly, it's hard to tell the genuine from the fake, or predict who will see what in their algorithmic timelines. It's difficult to analyse in the heat of the moment which elements have potential reputational impact, and which are just the drama of an embarrassing episode played out online. Taking time to make the right judgements takes calm and nerve, supported by colleagues with intuitive news sense and the ability to take in a situation across social media quickly but maturely.
Watching the blurry blend of fact and fiction, shock and comedy is a compulsion for leaders glued to their smartphones - just as it is for many of us. But following the soap opera of a crisis on social media blow-by-blow saps leaders' time and focus and prevents them stepping back to consider the bigger picture.
Preserving the ability for leaders to properly lead the crisis response is what differentiates effective teams from their overwhelmed colleagues. Here's five things they do:
These days, we rarely have to persuade clients we work with that understanding what's happening in social media is important. But we're all still figuring out how to assimilate social media into crisis handling - and indeed our own lives - without feeling overwhelmed by it.