The Leading in a Crisis Podcast
Interviews, stories and lessons learned from experienced crisis leaders. Email the show at Tom@leadinginacrisis.com.
Being an effective leader in a corporate or public crisis situation requires knowledge, tenacity, and influencing skills. Unfortunately, most of us don't get much training or real experience dealing with crisis situations. On this podcast, we will talk with people who have lived through major crisis events and we will tap their experience and stories from the front lines of crisis management.
Your host, Tom Mueller, is a veteran crisis manager and trainer with more than 30 years in the corporate communications and crisis fields. Tom currently works as an executive coach and crisis trainer with WPNT Communications, and as a contract public information officer and trainer through his personal company, Tom Mueller Communications LLC.
Your co-host, Marc Mullen, has over 20 years of experience as a communication strategist. He provides subject matter expertise in a number of communication specializations, including crisis communication plan development, response and recovery communications, emergency notifications and communications, organizational reviews, and after-action reports. He blogs at Blog | Marc Mullen
Our goal is to help you grow your knowledge and awareness so you can be better prepared to lead should a major crisis threaten your organization.
Music credit: Special thanks to Nick Longoria from Austin, Texas for creating the theme music for the podcast.
The Leading in a Crisis Podcast
EP 22 Case study: Alaska Airlines and Boeing response to the door plug incident
This week Marc and Tom review a case study Tom prepared around the recent Alaska Airlines in-flight emergency involving a suddenly missing door plug on the aircraft.
Tom pulled together a case study around early phase crisis communications and he and Marc review and discuss how the three companies involved communicated to their stakeholders and customers in the first hours and days following the incident. Those companies include Alaska Airlines, Boeing, and Spirit Aero Systems, manufacturer of the fuselage on that Boeing 737 aircraft.
It's a spirited discuss during which Tom and Marc disagree on how some communications were handled in that early phase.
We'd love to hear from you. Email the show at Tom@leadinginacrisis.com.
Hi everyone and welcome to the Leading in a Crisis podcast. On this podcast we talk all things crisis management with a focus on leadership, and we deliver that exciting content through interviews, storytelling and lessons learned from experienced crisis leaders. I'm Tom Mueller, coming to you from Houston, texas, today. With me is my colleague Marc Mullen, joining us from Washington state. Hey, marc.
Marc Mullen:Hello Tom.
Tom Mueller:On our podcast t oday we're going to do something a little bit different, in that we're going to take a deep dive and do a case study on the recent Alaska Airlines incident involving the in-flight emergency and the door plug that disengaged itself from the aircraft in the air. So we anticipate a fairly spirited conversation between Marc and I as we review the various communications from the different companies who participated and are continuing to participate in this event. So, marc, if you don't mind, lay out for us who were the companies involved in this, and then we'll kind of run the timeline and see how they manage their communications.
Marc Mullen:Sure, we have, in one corner, alaska Airlines flying the airplane with the passengers aboard it and the new picture window. We have Boeing, the manufacturer of the entire aircraft. We had Spirit Aero systems who assembled the fuselage and including things like plugs. Then we have the National Transportation Safety Board regulator and the Federal Aviation Administration regulator, both who certify safety of the aircraft.
Tom Mueller:That is, a lot of companies and agencies in a position to communicate about a very, very serious incident. So this is a complex scenario, as most aircraft incidents are Now. Thankfully, this incident had a happy ending, at least for the acute phase of this crisis, in that they were able to land the aircraft safely and everyone evacuated from the aircraft no injuries. Let me do a quick walkthrough of the timeline here, so we're all on the same page around the incident. It started Friday, january 5th.
Tom Mueller:The aircraft departed from Portland at 5.07 pm. About six minutes into the flight, the door plug disengaged from the aircraft, which caused rapid depressurization at 16,000 feet. Now I suppose they're very fortunate that they were not at a higher cruising altitude when this occurred, but still a very, very dangerous and scary situation. The pilots landed the plane safely, even with the new picture window, as Mark described it a moment ago, but no one seriously injured or killed. So, Marc, a very, very serious situation. It turned out well. But as you step back and think about the communications aspects of this, thinking about Alaska airlines would kind of been the first up in communicating around this. What's your assessment of how they came out of the gate?
Marc Mullen:My personal opinion is that while the time they spent three and a half hours about to their first statement first statement was not that long, it was too long. I think we need to keep a basic equation in place which is accident plus ability to capture images and broadcast them equals you better hurry. And given the fact that Friday evening we could look at pictures of the blown out door and see pictures of the inside of the cabin and all sorts of other imagery, that while the statements were good and supportive, they should have had something out much more rapidly.
Tom Mueller:Yeah, we talk about the golden hour of having that first statement drafted, approved and ready to get out at about an hour into an incident. As we look at the timeline here, Alaska Airlines was about three and a half hours before they got their first statement issued and then about five hours in before that statement appeared on social media. That feels like a very long time, Mark. I go back and compare that with Southwest Airlines. Well, they had an incident two years ago now where they had an engine explode in flight which punctured the fuselage and caused a similar emergency situation. In that instance, Southwest had a communication out within about 40 minutes of the plane touching down. So very quick, very on the ball, getting something out quickly - and I think airlines are probably among the best at this and being prepared for dealing with catastrophic situations like this.
Marc Mullen:I agree with that. That was a good time span and obviously they had to wait for the plane to land, but then they could communicate as quickly as possible.
Tom Mueller:And again we want to just congratulate the pilots and the crew on board that aircraft who followed their training, who kept their cool, who got that plane down safely and got everybody off safely. That's the most important thing of all this. But of course, the story goes on and that's what we're looking at. So we're taking a look at Alaska Airlines now. In a moment We'll take a look at Boeing's communications in this acute phase of this crisis and we'll also take a quick look at Spirit Aero Systems. It's just a company that manufactured that fuselage.
Tom Mueller:Staying with the Alaska Airlines communications aspects here, Marc, I noticed that they were pretty quick to get a banner up on their company website, a banner that said hey, if you're looking for information on this flight incident, click here and it take you out to get more information. So I was happy to see them engaging on social media and on the crisis website. And then we did see a CEO statement come out as well. This was about eight hours into the incident, so it would have put it in the early morning hours of Saturday morning, which of course, means your communications teams burning the midnight oil. In a situation like that, mark, what would you say is happening at the offices of Alaska Airlines during this time.
Marc Mullen:Well, I would think, first of all, they obviously made the decision, or followed policy, to communicate as quickly as possible. They did not wait for regular business hours. They posted information as quickly as they could verify it. They obviously had a concern for their reputation, of course, but more important than that, they had a concern that people consider Alaska Airlines to be a safe airline, to fly on, an airline that operated safely, and so they didn't hesitate to start talking about safety, and they didn't try to prevent their public, their shoppers, from knowing everything that happened. I really appreciate that. They quickly redirected people so they could go read about the specific event as quickly as possible. So I'm sure they were very busy all night long, and I'm sure they were very busy crafting what would become their enduring statements, and to me, they've continued to communicate very well. You can go there today and get the latest updates. I think they worked all night, but I think that was worth it for them.
Tom Mueller:You know it was just craziness and chaos, as it would be with any company have suffering a major incident, especially and what was it? Five o'clock on a friday night is when this particular one occurred. And how often is it that a major crisis happens on the weekend or on thanksgiving or christmas? So it just goes to reiterate, then, why it's important to have a rota for your team. You've got somebody on call, you can mobilize your team quickly if you need to mark.
Tom Mueller:I want to take a quick look at the statements that the CEO put out. Again. This was about eight hours into the incident. You know, when we look at these statements, especially early on, we want to see empathy coming through and recognition of the impact that the incident is having on your customers, on people in surrounding communities, whatever it might be, and so we definitely want to see that kind of empathy coming through in the statements. I have to tell you the first couple from the airline I wasn't sensing a lot of that, but then, when the CEO statement came out, he had a very nice paragraph in here.
Tom Mueller:I just want to read a little bit of that so you get a sense for it. He said "my heart goes out to those who were on this flight. I am so sorry for what you experienced. I am grateful for the response our pilots and flight attendants gave. We have teams on the ground to assist passengers that are working to support guests who are traveling in the days ahead. That, I thought, was very nicely done. My critique on that would be that it was the fifth paragraph in a five paragraph statement, although overall well done. The empathy thing kind of drug a little bit as you think about CEO statements or senior executive statements. Mark, how do you like how that one came through from Alaska Airlines?
Marc Mullen:I thought it was clear and I personally. We all read differently, but I personally thought having it at the end was good because it's the last thing people are going to read. The only issue would be if they got that far. But it was clear. I appreciated the empathy tone of it. I appreciated that there was no no evidence that they were drawing corporate lines around who can say what they were. They were speaking directly to what people would appreciate hearing and which would have helped assure people that they were responding with understanding about the impact this had on their passengers.
Tom Mueller:I can only imagine the throws of creating that statement under a lot of pressure. The legal guys are all over you reviewing that and wordsmithing it, so a lot of pressure on getting a statement out from the CEO. But again, nicely done there, and it's something that communicators just have to be ready for, and that's really why we coach people to have some of these statements prepared and ready to go. Your crisis communications plan should include some template statements so that you can get them out quickly. They've already been reviewed by legal, except for a few of the details, and you can get rolling quickly.
Marc Mullen:Right and they did a good job here of expressing empathy or we're sorry, without stating in any way that it was their fault and and that that's. That Spotlight on fault is circling through already at that point in time, but they they were able to get through their attorneys and be able to tell people basically we really empathize with what has happened to you, which is basically saying we're really sorry for what happened to you, but escaping any idea of Fault or blame because that spotlight's looking for somebody.
Tom Mueller:That spotlight is looking for somebody. I love that, Marc. Hi everyone, Tom Mueller here. One of the challenges we face in the crisis space is keeping our teams engaged in thinking about crisis response. One approach I have found to be very effective in that space is using case studies to guide a conversation Around crisis readiness. This can be a fun and engaging way to stimulate your teams thinking about crisis, and it can be delivered in as few as 30 minutes. That makes it an ideal addition to a team meeting agenda. One of the services I offer here is leading these facilitated discussions. I can deliver this virtually or in person as part of your next team meeting, and I can guarantee a fun and engaging Conversation. If you're interested or want to learn more, please email me at. Tom@ leading in a crisis. com. That's, Tom@ leading in ac risis. com.
Tom Mueller:Now back to the show., And, of course, as we know, this situation evolved very quickly from an Alaska Airlines incident on to a Boeing aircraft manufacturing incident, and so that spotlight, while initially focused on Alaska Airlines, has quickly turned over to Boeing, and let's take a look real quickly here, Marc, at how Boeing communicated in the early hours of the incident.
Tom Mueller:As I've gone back and looked at the timeline, I see that the first communications from Boeing came out about One o'clock on the day after the incident and that was something they broadcast out on social media. And just Reiterating that safety is our top priority. We regret the impact this event has had on our customers and their passengers. Boeing went on to say that they fully support the FAA's decision to require immediate inspections and they're there to help support those inspections and that investigation. So they were, you know, within about so 15- 18 hours they were out communicating about it as that spotlight started shifting Over to Boeing. Marc, what's your sense? Was that quick enough in terms of getting communications out, or do you think they should have been speedier with it?
Marc Mullen:Well, the minute the plane had the incident, it was known that it was a Boeing aircraft. Obviously, that's about the time Boeing was notified of it through Alaska. So, in a sense, when that plane touched ground and the passengers were safe, everybody had an opportunity to start their communication process and, as you pointed out, alaska was out in three and a half hours and and they were up on Twitter X and five hours and the CEO was on the next day and the website banner went up quickly. Boeing was finishing. Second to that that's that's the one thing I see there is is it took longer for them to be and communicate with the public. This is an incident where People knew right away it was a Boeing aircraft and they, they, everybody saw the same pictures and they saw them at the same time. So, well, their content was good. Again, they probably could have said something sooner than they did.
Tom Mueller:Marc, t his example takes me back to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill where initially you had a rig on fire in the Gulf of Mexico which was operated by an offshore operating company, and so initially the focus was on that company, although the field and oil was owned by BP, and there's that sort of fog in the first hours of the incident about, well, who really owns this. And I just I see a very similar story playing out here with Alaska Airlines and Boeing and the Trans Ocean and BP during Deepwater. Eventually, you know that spotlight shifts and it bears down hard on a responsible party, and it feels like that spotlight is hard on Boeing at this point in time.
Marc Mullen:It may be hard on them, but it's pointed in the direction it's going to end up going. It was either an Alaska safety issue or it was a plane aircraft issue, and it was pretty clear that already that general consensus was that the airline did a pretty fantastic job of getting the plane down and the issue was the plane.
Tom Mueller:That's going to do it for this episode of the Leading in a Crisis podcast. On our next episode, we'll pick up the conversation between Marc and Tom about the Alaska Airlines crisis situation and how the companies are managing crisis communications around the incident. Thanks for being with us. If you like the podcast, please like and subscribe to it, and please tell your friends and colleagues about it as well. We'd love to have a few more follows. Thanks, and we'll see you next time for the next episode of the Leading in a Crisis podcast.
