General Motors Crisis Case Study

826 Words4 Pages

The General Motors crisis is a prime example of exactly how a crisis should be handled, and subsequently yield results that not only averts a crisis but helps a company to protect its reputation and avoided decline in sales. Mary Barra the newly appointed chief executive of New General Motors was obligated to recall one point six million small cars because of faulty ignition switches which was linked to multiple fatal crashes. The company’s initial response to the crisis was very shaky and left room for wrong perception. The company announced when the CEO Mary Barra was called to congress, that they were replacing the chief communications officer of General Motors. Initially, that decision appeared to be a poor response to …show more content…

As stated in our text “Crisis Communication” Steven Fink states that “Crisis communication is managing the perception of that reality. It is telling the public what is going on. It is shaping the public opinion.” (Chapter 2 pg 8). The General Motor recall is a great example of how the power of leadership and the use of executive communications is the key to the containment of a crisis. Basically, the use of transparency and perception throughout the entire fiasco set Mary Barra apart from other CEO’s, it made her look credible and by threating the victims justly, she made a massive statement that the companies ultimate goal is to provide safe vehicles for their consumers regardless of the …show more content…

Facebook was one of the companies that was in the news for treating their consumers’ data carelessly. Basically, the company decided it was a great idea to conduct study or a psychological test on all of its social media members, with the intent to manipulate their emotions without their awareness or approval. Facebook Chief Operating Officer Sheryl Sandburg attempted to repress anxieties by stating that the research, “was poorly communicated and for that communication we apologize” (Sheryl Sandburg). Therefore because of the company’s lack of transparency and weak apology, it raised more questions than the company was able to

Show More
Open Document