CRISIS PREPAREDNESS AS THE NEXT COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE: LEARNING FROM 4,500 CRISES - PWC'S GLOBAL CRISIS SURVEY 2019
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Crisis Preparedness as the next competitive
advantage: Learning from 4,500 crises
PwC’s Global Crisis Survey 2019
www.pwc.com/globalcrisissurvey
2 | PwC Global Crisis Survey 2019
We talked with 2,000
2,084
companies about their worst respondents
crises — so you don’t have to
We are pleased to present PwC’s first-ever Global Crisis Across 43
Survey, the most comprehensive repository of corporate crisis
data ever assembled. We heard from 2,084 senior executives
countries
in organisations of all sizes, in 25 industries, and across 43
25
countries — 1,430 of which had experienced at least one crisis
in the past 5 years, for a total of 4,515 crises analysed overall. In
What we found out is game-changing.
industries
By delving deep into the real-world stronger from their worst crisis –
experiences of organisations like yours, and compared them to those who
64%
we uncovered some surprising findings, did not fare as well. What did these
many of which turn the basic notion of organisations do differently? What
crisis management – in fact, how we crucial preparedness steps did they
of respondents
even think of crisis – on its head. take that led to their positive outcomes? from C-Suite
Can crisis actually be a positive
Instead of “admiring the problem,” experience… even one that can yield
we’ve used this data as a springboard competitive advantage?
36%
to reverse-engineer a successful crisis
response. We looked at the companies Yes, it can. And you don’t have to go
that self-identified as having emerged through a crisis to learn how. of respondents
Head of departments
3 | PwC Global Crisis Survey 2019
Crisis Preparedness as the next competitive advantage:
Learning from 4,500 crises
Living with crisis The chain reaction
of crisis
What is crisis? And what does
it mean to operate in this new The shock waves from a crisis
normal? can travel far and wide — and
then back again. So how do you
contain the damage?
Can crisis be good The future of crisis
for you?
What can the past experiences of
Some companies emerge your peers tell us about the future
stronger — and even experience of crisis? We talked to 1,400 of
revenue growth — after a crisis, them — so you don’t have to.
while others stumble along.
What’s the secret sauce?
4 | PwC Global Crisis Survey 2019
Five takeaways from the
most comprehensive
repository of corporate
crisis data ever assembled
What is crisis? And what does it mean to
operate in this new normal?
For purposes of this survey, we defined crisis as a situation that:
• Is triggered by significant internal and/or external factors or escalation of smaller
incident(s)
• Has an enterprise-wide, multi-functional impact
• Creates disruption in normal business operations
• Has the potential for reputational harm/damage
5 | PwC Global Crisis Survey 2019
1
It’s not if. It’s when: No one is immune. Figure 1: Crises experienced in the past 5 years
Nearly 7 in 10 (69%) leaders have experienced at least one
corporate crisis in the last 5 years — with the average number
of crises experienced being 3. 24%
What’s more, the risk scales up: of respondents who do not expect 38%
69%
companies with more than 5,000 to experience a crisis in the future
employees are more likely to have might feel “inoculated” by their recent
experienced more than 5 crises – an experience – or they could be engaging
average of one per year. in wishful thinking. (Or both.)
of participants have experienced
The sheer number of crises reported Crises don’t discriminate. Like a crisis within the last 5 years
is striking in light of our definition of companies themselves, they come in all
the phenomenon: a major disruption shapes, forms, and sizes – and no one,
to multiple functions of the enterprise and no region, is immune. What’s more, 29%
– and one with the potential to the very definition of a crisis will vary by 7%
significantly harm your reputation. industry. For example, consider a wind 3%
storm: for a financial services company,
Clearly, crisis is here to stay. Nearly all it’s a meaningless event; for a utility, it
respondents (95%) – including those could trigger a catastrophe.
who did not report a crisis – expect Of those who have experienced >5 crises in the last 5 years
to be hit by one in the future. The 5% Mean: 9 Median: 8 Range: 6–29
n More than 5 n 2–5 n One n None n Don’t know
Source: PwC Global Crisis Survey of 2084 respondents
6 | PwC Global Crisis Survey 2019
2
The diversity of crises keeps companies Figure 2: Crisis triggers/types experienced
guessing Financial/Liquidity 23%
Technology failure 23%
In order to capture the granularity needed for a study of this Ops failure 20%
size, we listed 19 possible crisis triggers. We then sorted Competitive/Marketplace disruption 19%
these into 7 broad categories — operational, technological, Legal/Regulatory 16%
humanitarian, financial, legal, human capital, and reputational Cyber-crime 16%
— to facilitate a broader analysis. Natural disaster 16%
Leadership transition 15%
Supply chain 14%
Over half of respondents (53%) say at What’s the reality for the largest
least one of the crises they experienced companies? Organisations with 5,000 Product failure 14%
was operational in nature, including or more employees are most likely to Leadership misconduct 12%
operational breakdowns, competitive experience crises related specifically
Ethical misconduct 11%
disruption, supply chain issues, and to cybercrime (26%), natural disaster
Viral social media 9% Net Crisis Type %
various forms of product failure — a (22%), leadership (17%) or ethical
statistic that makes sense, given misconduct (16%), including fraud, Geopolitical disruption 9% NET: Operational 53%
the centrality of operations to any corruption, and corporate malfeasance. Product integrity 9% NET: Technological 33%
company’s lifeblood. Tech-related crises
Workplace violence 8% NET: Humanitarian 29%
— triggered by technology failures and/
or incidents of cybercrime — were cited Shareholder activism 7% NET: Financial 28%
by one third of all crisis responders, with Humanitarian 7% NET: Legal 24%
humanitarian (29%) and financial (28%) Terrorism 5% NET: Human Capital 21%
categories of crises close behind.
Other 0% NET: Reputational 20%
Source: PwC Global Crisis Survey of 2084 respondents
7 | PwC Global Crisis Survey 2019
3
The most disruptive crises aren’t necessarily Figure 3
the most newsworthy Most disruptive/serious crisis experienced
6.9% Cybercrime
Crisis concerns in the future
38%
Competitive/Marketplace 37%
7.7% disruption
Companies list liquidity issues, technological failure, and 14% Financial/Liquidity 28%
operational disruption as the top three most disruptive crises 8.5% Ops failure 20%
they faced — hardly the front-page stories we see every day. 3.7% Ethical misconduct 20%
11% Technology failure 20%
Their future concerns, however, do disruptions. Our data suggests that 6.6% Legal/Regulatory 19%
skew toward larger, “in the news” crises smaller companies tend to see financial 7.2% Natural disaster 17%
such as cybercrime (38%), marketplace crises as the trigger while larger
3.1% Leadership transition 15%
disruption (37%), or ethical misconduct companies view it as the impact of
3.1% Geopolitical disruption 15%
(20%). another disruptive crisis trigger.
4.9% Product failure 14%
This apparent disconnect could be The types of crises experienced varied
4.9% Leadership misconduct 12%
evidence of familiarity bias, where considerably by region. While we saw
humans are predisposed to expect technological or operational disruption 3.7% Supply chain 12%
what they hear about or already most frequently in Western Europe, 3.4% Viral social media 10%
know, despite the evidence. If the Australia, India, and Japan, financial 1.5% Terrorism 9%
most disruptive crises aren’t the most liquidity crises were most common
2.2% Humanitarian 8%
newsworthy, the most newsworthy may across the rest of Asia, Brazil, and
not be the most disruptive, either — a Central and Eastern Europe, while 2.4% Product integrity 7%
potential blind spot when it comes natural disaster and cybercrime loomed 1.3% Shareholder activism 6%
to crisis-readiness. We know from largest in the US.
2.3% Workplace violence 5%
experience that financial liquidity crises Do not expect to
5%
are often triggered by other business experience a crisis
Source: PwC Global Crisis Survey of 2084 respondents
8 | PwC Global Crisis Survey 2019
Figure 4: Top 3 most disruptive crises by territory
China HK
1. Financial/liquidity (18%)
2. Competitive/market place disruption (16%)
3. Product failure/product liability (12%)
Canada Japan
1. Technology disruption/failure (20%) 1. Operational disruption/failure (14%)
2. Operational disruption/failure (9%) 2. Financial/liquidity (12%)
3. Legal/regulatory (9%) 3. Product failure/product liability (11%)
US UK Middle East (Low base, 23) South Korea
1. Natural disaster/environmental (22%) 1. Technology disruption/failure (16%) 1. Geopolitical disruption (36%) 1. Financial/liquidity (27%)
2. Cybercrime (13%) 2. Financial/liquidity (12%) 2. Cybercrime, Natural disaster/environmental, and 2. Competitive/marketplace disruption (12%)
3. Legal/regulatory, Technology disruption/ 3. Operational disruption/failure and Competitive/ financial liquidity (14%) 3. Legal/regulatory (10%)
failure (10%) marketplace disruption (9%)
Mexico Europe Africa Australia
1. Technology disruption/failure (16%) 1. Operational disruption/failure (10%) 1. Financial/liquidity (12%) 1. Technology disruption/failure (18%)
2. Financial/liquidity (14%) 2. Technology disruption/failure (10%) 2. Natural disaster/environmental (12%) 2. Cybercrime (11%)
3. Natural disaster/environmental (9%) 3. Leadership misconduct (8%) 3. Leadership misconduct and technology disruption/ 3. Financial/liquidity and leadership misconduct (10%)
failure (9%)
Brazil CEE India SEAC
1. Financial/liquidity (35%) 1. Financial/liquidity (15%) 1. Technology disruption/failure (14%) 1. Financial/ liquidity (14%)
2. Operational disruption/failure (9%) 2. Competitive/marketplace disruption (10%) 2. Financial/liquidity (13%) 2. Competitive/marketplace disruption (12%)
3. Technology disruption/failure, Competitive/ 3. Technology disruption/failure and legal/ 3. Legal/regulatory (10%) 3. Technology disruption/failure (11%)
marketplace disruption, Ethical misconduct, and regulatory (10%)
Leadership transition (6%)
Source: PwC Global Crisis Survey of 2084 respondents
9 | PwC Global Crisis Survey 2019
4
Who’s responsible for crisis management? Figure 5: Level of involvement in crisis management areas
Everyone — and no one
When it comes to pinpointing who “owns” crisis, it’s
complicated. Interestingly, everyone from board members and
CEOs to Legal to Risk to IT claim responsibility for a variety
of crisis roles — preparedness, response, recovery, ERM,
communications. This tells us that most senior executives
want to be involved in helping their companies prepare for and
respond to crisis, which is a positive sign.
While our results tell us that companies That said, the “ownership map” clearly
have not aggregated around a single highlights the overlapping of roles and
Crisis preparedness Crisis response Stakeholder
function that is best suited to “own” responsibilities, which should cause
communication
crisis, we also found that C-Suite some concern given the importance of
respondents are significantly more likely efficient coordination, communication,
C-suite Non C-suite C-suite Non C-suite C-suite Non C-suite
to claim responsibility for these roles and decisions in crisis. This is
than non-C-suite ones, underscoring
how crisis management is escalating
highlighted by respondents ranking the
ability to make timely and deliberate 42% 25% 41% 24% 39% 20%
as a necessary function for the corner decisions as one of the largest area of
office in this new normal to drive vulnerability during their most disruptive Source: PwC Global Crisis Survey of 2084 respondents
success. crisis event.
10 | PwC Global Crisis Survey 2019
Balancing the desire for help with the Meanwhile, fewer than 3 in 10 (29%) Nearly three quarters
confusion that comes from having “too say they have no staff dedicated to of companies
many cooks in the kitchen” is a critical crisis preparedness or response. This
74%
element of crisis planning and response. trend towards committed internal and
In the end, it doesn’t matter who owns external resources demonstrate how
crisis — as long as someone clearly crisis management is transitioning to be
does and the roles are clearly defined. a strategic program to protect corporate
strategy sponsored at the highest levels
sought outside help
Another sign of how companies are of the organisation. either during or after their
becoming more sophisticated and biggest crisis.
attentive to crisis: nearly three quarters
(74%) sought outside help either
during or after their most serious crisis.11 | PwC Global Crisis Survey 2019
5
Companies that emerge stronger from crisis Figure 6: Crisis impact
do specific things
What doesn’t kill you makes you stronger. Of the 1,400 who 19%
had already faced a major crisis, 42% said they were “in a In a worse place
better place” post-crisis — with some even reporting revenue
growth as a direct result of their management of the crisis.
What’s their secret? Our report outlines
36%
the specific crisis preparedness In a similar position
steps these companies took to come to pre-crisis
out ahead of their peers. These are
measures every organisation can take
42%
right now, to emerge stronger and
healthier from the crisis that — let’s
face it — is likely to hit when you least
expect it.
In a better place
Source: PwC Global Crisis Survey of 2084 respondents12 | PwC Global Crisis Survey 2019
The chain reaction of crisis
The shock waves from a crisis can travel
far and wide — and then back again.
So how do you contain the damage?13 | PwC Global Crisis Survey 2019
Crises hit without discrimination — range of impacts and secondary crises
experienced for each category of initial
what is actually happening and slow
your response — exactly when you are
penetrating every layer of the organisation, crisis. For the first time, you can see most in need of accurate facts with
the likelihood of specific impacts and which to take appropriate action.
and affecting both internal and external ancillary crises that could arise from any
The cumulative “chain reaction” of crisis
initial crisis you might face.
stakeholders in unique ways. can wreak havoc over time. But it also
Marketplace disruption is the most- will reveal the stress fractures and gaps
mentioned ancillary crisis across — be they cross-functional or cultural
Our data confirms the layered nature effects — is an essential part of crisis all types of initial crisis. But it is — within the organisation that made it
of crisis impacts. It crossed over from preparedness. That’s why we examined significantly more common for those more vulnerable in the first place. These
business relationships (74%), reputation whether secondary crises (or crisis who had experienced a severe financial are your starting points for strengthened
(61%), and workforce morale (59%), accelerators) followed or spun up in the crisis (35%), suggesting that a liquidity defences, improved preparedness, and
to legal issues (57%) and beyond. wake of the initial crisis experienced by problem can seriously hamper an better future outcomes.
Companies cited, among other effects, our respondents. organisation’s competitive position over
many years. Visit www.pwc.com/
economic loss (57%), environmental
Here’s what crisis-experienced leaders globalcrisissurvey to view the full
consequences (20%), and long-
told us: Regardless of the nature of that Reputational crises seem especially results.
tail fallouts such as new laws and
initial crisis, nearly half (47%) suffered treacherous, with one in four (24%)
regulations (25%) and political change
an ancillary crisis that was operational companies reporting at least one
(18%), as a result of their worst crisis.
in nature. The largest piece of that subsequent reputational crisis, and
But crises often travel in packs. And operational turmoil? Competitive/ one in five (20%) seeing it cascade
a crisis is never more dangerous than marketplace disruption (20%). into another, connected to fraud
when it spins off one or several ancillary Additionally, more than a quarter had or ethical misconduct (20%), or
crises — each of which can create its to deal with reputational issues; 22% leadership transition (14%).
own feedback loop of consequences, faced legal complications.
No matter how, when, or where it hits,
both internal and external.
In keeping with our goal of creating an a crisis will constitute an organisational
Understanding the 3D dynamics of how actionable crisis survey, we dove more stress test, capable of disrupting your
a crisis might impact your organisation deeply into the data we collected on company’s operations, both internal and
— and taking steps to forestall or 4,500 real-world crises. We created this external. And as it does, it will almost
at least minimise its secondary powerful interactive tool to map the full invariably distort your perception of14 | PwC Global Crisis Survey 2019
Can crisis be good for you?
Some companies emerge stronger —
and even experience revenue growth —
after a crisis, while others stumble along.
What’s the secret sauce?15 | PwC Global Crisis Survey 2019
Some companies emerge stronger — and even experience revenue Figure 7: Areas of vulnerability and
confidence
growth — after a crisis, while others falter. What’s the secret sauce?
As crisis specialists, we know that the potential damage of a crisis — and whether or not you
emerge stronger from it — is not so much governed by the nature of the crisis as it is by how
well you handle it once it arrives. And there are three bedrock elements to successful crisis
management: preparedness, a fact-based approach, and effectiveness of (all!) stakeholder
communications.
In crisis, getting facts quickly and acknowledge that they did not This makes sense, considering that
basing your response on them, are communicate effectively in their most internal teams are naturally more familiar
key to successful outcomes. In a serious crisis. This presents a significant to business leaders. But it doesn’t make
world of split-second virality, incorrect, opportunity for companies to learn from sense when you consider the well-
insufficient, or misleading information the mistakes of their peers by investing documented risks of an incomplete or
(or even correct information spread at more in fact finding in the early days of inaccurate public response to a crisis,
the wrong time or in the wrong way) can a crisis. or the fact that your greatest risk
increase your exposure and amplify the can arise from any stakeholders — Ability to gather appropriate information quickly
crisis. We also uncovered a disequilibrium customers, regulators, shareholders,
between internal and external the media — kept in the dark. 41%
There’s plenty of work to do on this information flows: while executives
front. While 87% of respondents agree are generally confident in their internal 29%
on the importance of establishing facts communication dynamics they feel
accurately, nearly 4 in 10 report that most vulnerable in communicating with Ability to make timely and deliberate decisions
they didn’t actually have the facts they external stakeholders, with nearly 4 in
needed to mount an effective response. 10 (38%) ranking this as one of their top 40%
And one-quarter of organisations three areas of vulnerability.
30%
n Most vulnerable n Most confident
Source: PwC Global Crisis Survey of 2084 respondents16 | PwC Global Crisis Survey 2019
When can crisis be good for you?
Our data shows that companies that emerge stronger
and create competitive advantage in the wake of crisis do
these 5 things:
Allocate budget to crisis keep their crisis plan up to date and strongly recognise the importance of
1 management — before it hits. implement the lessons learned are four establishing facts accurately during the
More than 4 in 10 (41%) of those that times more likely to come out on top. crisis. They are more likely to say that in
came out in a better place post-crisis Being prepared doesn’t mean you can the midst of the crisis, they did gather
allocated budget to crisis management anticipate every eventuality: while being facts accurately and quickly — and they
before the crisis hit — and a nearly mindful of the specific kinds of triggers used those facts effectively to inform
identical share (39%) actually saw that could pose risks in your industry, their response strategy.
their revenue grow as a result. This make sure your crisis response plan is
underscores the reward for investing
proactively in having a clear crisis
not tied to just one or two scenarios.
Make it holistic and flexible. Test it and
As you focus on your fact-finding and
communications strategy, however, it’s By failing to
prepare, you are
response program and governance revise it. Then test it again.This is the critical to avoid over-rotating to one
structure. difference between being confident in or two primary stakeholder groups.
Cast a wide net on the perspectives of
2
Have a plan — and test it.
the decisions you are making during a
crisis and making knee jerk reactions in every important stakeholder, internal preparing to fail.
When a crisis hits, there is no the heat of the moment. and external. Carefully consider,
substitute for muscle memory. By a in advance, their wide diversity of Benjamin Franklin
margin of nearly 2-1 (54% vs 30%), Adopt a fact-based approach needs and interests, as well as the
3
organisations that had a crisis response — and don’t neglect key appropriate mechanisms for two-way
plan in place fared better post-crisis stakeholders. Three-quarters of communication for each stakeholder
than those who didn’t. And those that those in a better place post-crisis — and ensure all your bases will be17 | PwC Global Crisis Survey 2019
covered when the time comes to
communicate in an emergency. An
5
Act as a team, and hold to your
values. No surprise here: there’s
Taken together, these findings should
give all organisations both pause and Crisis presents
not only as a
often hidden upside of comprehensive a strong correlation between great hope. The marquee finding is not about
stakeholder engagement and teamwork and great outcomes. A huge how many companies have endured
transparency is that it can actually lead majority of companies who self-identify major crises in the last half-decade. It
to external stakeholders rallying to as “in a better place” (93%, including is, in fact, that crisis presents not only threat, but also
advocate for you during a crisis. 66% who agreed strongly) confirm that as a threat, but also an opportunity. An
Perform a root-cause analysis —
they acted as a team in response to the incident managed well allows you to an opportunity
crisis, with similar majorities agreeing develop your immune system, enabling
and follow up. Those who ended up they’d acted with integrity. Conversely, you to take on riskier opportunities, with
in a better place performed a a lack of internal harmony can make the confidence that future threats will be
4 root cause analysis of their crisis
managing crisis more difficult. Of those spotted and addressed quickly. That’s
handling, and 8 out of 10 acted on who ended up in a worse place from the key to sustainable competitive
the results — one-third (33%) made a the crisis, only 39% said they acted as advantage.
few changes, a quarter (24%) defined a team. Use crisis experiences — real
several projects to be completed, or simulated — as an opportunity to
and another quarter (24%) are taking galvanise your team and strengthen Those whose organisations are in a better place are
substantial action. That substantial your internal culture. significantly more likely to strongly agree to establishing
action takes the form of:
facts accurately
Crisis is a magnifier. The experience of
1. Identifying and following through
73% vs
going through one can bring out the
on key remediation initiatives to best (or worst) in both your company
prevent or reduce the impact of the and your people. Surviving a crisis
same type of crisis; together can bond individuals to each
2. “Looking around the corner” by
scanning the longer term horizon for
key risks and opportunities related
other and to the organisation far more
deeply than many value statements
could. And on the flip side, a poorly
54%
to the crisis. Most were also likely to planned and executed response can
incorporate changes into their crisis send a company or team into a tailspin
response plans and documentation from which they may never recover.
from lessons learned.18 | PwC Global Crisis Survey 2019
The new reality of crisis —
and crisis management
What can the past experiences of your
peers tell us about the future of crisis?
We talked to 1,400 of them — so you
don’t have to.19 | PwC Global Crisis Survey 2019
What do crisis experiences from the That future — the future of crisis and
of crisis management — has already
• A
ssume everybody is always
watching. With the hair-trigger
recent past tell us about the future of crisis? arrived. We launched this study to attention of outside stakeholders —
help you stay one step ahead of it, and the belief that whistleblowing
We talked to 1,400 of your peers who’ve by learning vicariously through the is an ethical obligation — you will
experiences, positive and negative, of be expected to handle any crisis
been through it — so you don’t have to. others. This gives you the opportunity instantly, effectively, and properly.
to change not only your state of
preparedness, but also your mindset. • You need a crisis leader. The future
From our analysis of this data — and our in-the-trenches of crisis management requires a
experience helping companies prepare for, respond to, Here are a few takeaways as you begin broad, tested response plan, ready
and learn from crises of all shapes and sizes — it’s clear your journey to future-crisis-fitness: to deploy from Day One. This cannot
happen without one central person
that the future of crisis calls for a fresh approach to crisis • Crises will be more complex — given the clear mandate and authority
management. and harder than ever to contain. to develop a crisis management
Virtually all respondents expect program that governs every aspect
to face an operational crisis in the of preparedness, response, and
Today, there’s hardly any room for error, In the future, external stakeholders future. But whereas in the past communication.
and the cost of reacting too slowly, or will demand hyper-transparency. They they might have expected to be
ineffectively, grows by the minute. In will expect a much swifter reaction to able to control and contain it, • Cultural expectations are
the wake of repeated, highly publicised crisis triggers. And they won’t hesitate today’s crises leach out and easily converging. Different cultures have
corporate crises — accelerated by to punish companies and brands whom affect stakeholders across — and historically had different ways of
ubiquitous smartphones and the they perceive to be slow-footed or beyond — the organisation. A responding to a crisis. Today norms
always-on frenzy of media/social media ineffective in their response. major cyber crisis today will not be and expectations are converging,
— the public have become “crisis extinguished by the IT/IS team alone. and you should be aware of them, no
connoisseurs.” We’ve entered the era Ultimately, perfect handling of a crisis A reputational crisis triggered by a matter what regions you operate in.
of radical openness, of whistleblowing will be expected from Day One — rogue employee, caught on a dozen
on steroids, where aberrations must be even though crises are messier and smartphones, may not get rectified
exposed and rectified instantly, even potentially more destructive than ever by their firing.
when all the facts are not yet in. before.
●20 | PwC Global Crisis Survey 2019
• Crisis preparedness is more • It is possible to be a crisis optimist.
than an opportunity: it will be a When faced with the prospect
competitive advantage. We believe (statistically, the likelihood) of a crisis,
there is long-term value in being it’s easy to go numb and get caught
crisis fit and see a future where unprepared. Or swing the other way
managers and investors look to a and over-focus on the crises you read
“crisis preparedness index” as a key about... at the risk of preparedness
performance indicator. for the actual things that could hit
you. Instead, you can choose to
• Crisis is, and always will be, a see crisis as an element of strategic
human event. It is tempting to risk intelligence: an opportunity for
tuck crisis management under the maturity and economic growth.
rubric of ERM. But what sets it apart
from all other business functions is So what’s the future of crisis? There’s
the intense effect it has on human every reason to believe that crisis will
beings — positive or negative. continue to play an outside role in
Only human beings can manage a business outcomes. That’s why crisis
crisis effectively, and human beings preparedness should also play a more
(your people, your customers, your strategic role in your overall business
business partners, and more) are the priorities.
most affected by it. The needs and
expectations of all your stakeholders,
internal and external, are constantly
evolving, and so should your
communications strategy.21 | PwC Global Crisis Survey 2019 Contacts Kristin Rivera Dave Stainback Global Forensics Leader, US Crisis Leader, Principal, PwC United States PwC United States +1 (415) 302-3428 Tel: +1 678-984-3699 kristin.d.rivera@pwc.com david.stainback@pwc.com
www.pwc.com/globalcrisissurvey At PwC, our purpose is to build trust in society and solve important problems. We’re a network of firms in 158 countries with more than 236,000 people who are committed to delivering quality in assurance, advisory and tax services. Find out more and tell us what matters to you by visiting us at www.pwc.com. This publication has been prepared for general guidance on matters of interest only, and does not constitute professional advice. You should not act upon the information contained in this publication without obtaining specific professional advice. No representation or warranty (express or implied) is given as to the accuracy or completeness of the information contained in this publication, and, to the extent permitted by law, PwC does not accept or assume any liability, responsibility or duty of care for any consequences of you or anyone else acting, or refraining to act, in reliance on the information contained in this publication or for any decision based on it. © 2019 PwC. All rights reserved. PwC refers to the PwC network and/or one or more of its member firms, each of which is a separate legal entity. Please see www.pwc.com/structure for further details.
You can also read
