Fallston Group

Engage Your Social Media Channels During a Crisis

Building Strengthening & Defending reputations

Crisis is an inevitable part of business. However, it’s how your company handles an issue that is the most telling. Social media can ultimately be the deal breaker when it comes to your organization’s ability to effectively communicate to your stakeholders during a time of adversity. Keeping an open, honest line of communication is critical whether you are keeping your stakeholders safe, informing them of an incident, or apologizing for a mistake.

Sexual Harassment: Reducing Risk

Building Strengthening & Defending reputations

In order to avoid the severe consequences of sexual harassment reports, prevent legal exposure, and protect managers and subordinates, the Fallston Group offers employers suggestions for reducing risk of sexual harassment in the workplace.

Did He Cross the Line, Hon

How quickly can a seemingly non-violent protest become a threat to public safety and personal property? Recent controversy revolving around Baltimore’s iconic, Café Hon, has made it more apparent how easily that line can be toed. Café Hon owner Denise Whiting’s decision to trademark the word ‘Hon’ to protect her business and brand, caused an uproar when some felt trademarking the word was capitalizing on a Baltimore tradition—as well as trying to create proprietary rights around the city’s colloquialisms. The debate over ‘hon’ took a more serious turn during Honfest—a summer festival and local tradition run by the Café. Steve Akers, a fervent protestor of the brand, allegedly opted for a more aggressive approach—harassing and scaring patrons by shouting slogans into the crowded Café Hon during the festival. Other allegations against Akers include trespassing into Whiting’s businesses, harassing employees, and cyber-bullying. The sharing of strong opposing opinions always can become heated, and as the ‘Hon’ controversy illustrates, in these situations it is not always clear where to draw the line. How far is too far? That question is now in the hands of a Baltimore City Circuit Court judge who has already made a first move to impose a temporary restraining order. We’ll keep you posted.

Target, Best Buy Provide “Lesson Learned” for Corporate World

By Rob Weinhold — As a result of the January Supreme Court decision which allows corporations to contribute unlimited funds for political activities, both Target and Best Buy each contributed $100,000 to a business group in Minnesota called MN Forward. MN Forward is an organization who advances political agendas in the spirit of private sector job creation and economic opportunity. The issue is that MN Forward used the funds from Target and Best Buy to help support the gubernatorial campaign of state Representative Tom Emmer, who supports lower corporate taxes. That wasn’t the problem; the issue, apparently unbeknownst to Target and Best Buy executives, was that Tom Emmer also supports the very controversial banning of same-sex marriages. Regardless of which side of the political aisle you sit on, corporations must fully vet each interest it supports and fully understand the risk while entering the political arena. As a result of this “alignment,” Target has now been the subject of immense stakeholder skepticism, protests, product boycotts and public apologies. Yes, this is a crisis that impacts brand and has now made national news – www.washingtonpost.com – August 18th. This blogger is neutral in his opinions about the political issues, but not middle of the road when it comes to the realization about the lack of strategic planning and foresight by both companies. Regardless of which side of the political aisle you sit on (perhaps it’s directly in the aisle), corporations must fully vet each interest it supports and fully understand the risk while entering the political arena. Most times, the support garnered with one group will alienate another group. And, the alienated group could well be very important stakeholders which could have enough clout to mobilize and impact the bottom line. CRO – Chief Reputation Officer This is yet another reason that I support the concept of a corporate CRO – Chief Reputation Officer. This executive should be fully engaged at every level within the organization and be the expert who accurately researches and predicts every internal and external decision’s impact on brand integrity. Organizations who do not continue to critically define, promote and defend their brand will never achieve ultimate growth and profitability goals.

Left Menu IconMENU