When selecting a spokesperson for the company, it is advisable to identify who possesses the authority, knowledge and composure required to represent the organisation in any given situation and depending on the issue at hand. The CEO continues to play a role that is difficult to replace in situations of great significance, but the company can draw on a number of corporate spokespersons to respond with greater accuracy and credibility when circumstances so require.
The CEO hiding in the bathroom
I once worked with a company whose CEO went so far as to hide in the toilet to avoid a scheduled interview with the media. He was so insecure that he did everything he could to avoid taking part. When the journalist arrived, the company’s chief executive simply vanished.
The scene had a touch of office comedy about it, although for the communications team it was anything but funny. There was a confirmed interview, a journalist waiting, and a company unable to provide the spokesperson it had promised.
That episode helped me understand the extent to which an organisation can function with a leader who shuns the public eye. It also highlighted the consequences of pretending that this problem does not exist. The CEO’s stage fright ends up dictating the communications agenda, limiting corporate opportunities and forcing the team to improvise solutions whenever an interview, an event or a sensitive situation arises.
The skills that lead a person to a top management role may relate to strategy, finance, business acumen or technical knowledge. Public representation, moreover, requires other skills: clarity, the ability to listen, self-control and a certain ease in dealing with questions that are not always pleasant.
Forcing an executive to appear at a hearing for which they are unprepared can heighten their sense of insecurity and convey this to the audience. Making their absence a regular practice also comes at a cost. At some point, employees, customers, journalists or investors may wonder why the company’s chief executive is never available when explanations are expected.
The legitimacy of the spokesperson
When an organisation asks itself who should speak on behalf of the company, the organisation chart offers some initial guidance, although it rarely provides the full answer. Legitimacy depends on the content of the conversation and the audience’s expectations.
A finance director may be best placed to explain annual results. The head of operations will have greater authority to deal with a disruption to the supply chain. Human Resources will be best placed to address a significant change in employment policies. If there is a technical issue, the CTO’s involvement can provide the level of detail that the CEO is unlikely to be able to provide.
Legitimacy, therefore, varies depending on the issue. This relationship between the individual, the issue and the audience is one of the most useful criteria for selecting a company spokesperson. Before appointing one, it is advisable to ask a number of questions:
- Do you have direct responsibility for this matter?
- Are you aware of the figures and what they mean?
- Will the audience understand why that person is speaking?
A position confers institutional authority, whilst knowledge lends credibility. The ability to explain translates both these qualities into clear communication.
The spokesperson’s behaviour is also important. A technically brilliant person can lose credibility if they respond arrogantly, speculate on matters they know nothing about, or use incomprehensible vocabulary. Trust is usually built through specific answers, an acknowledgement of one’s limitations, and sensitivity towards those affected.
Crisis communication and the spokesperson structure
In most crisis communication plans, it is necessary to establish a structure of spokespersons. The reason is practical: a serious situation may require institutional authority, technical knowledge and operational capability all at the same time, and few people possess all three of these qualities to the same degree.
The CEO usually acts as the main spokesperson for official statements and high-profile situations, particularly when the company’s reputation is at stake. Alongside the CEO, we draw on managers from the relevant departments. They can support the CEO or take the lead in providing explanations when these require a high degree of specialist knowledge. This helps to minimise errors and ensure accuracy in situations where the company cannot afford to be imprecise, vague or unclear.
A basic architecture might organise the functions as follows:
- Corporate spokesperson: represents the company’s position and, in serious cases, is usually the CEO.
- Technical spokesperson: explains causes, facts, risks and specialist measures.
- Operations spokesperson: provides updates on the progress of the response and its practical implications.
- Regional or business managers: they become involved when the situation affects a specific office, market or unit in a distinct way.
This structure is also useful outside of a crisis. The model reduces reliance on the CEO and prevents the head of communications from ending up having to answer for everything simply because there are no other options.
Having several spokespersons does not mean that they can all speak freely on behalf of the company. Each person needs a clearly defined remit, access to up-to-date information and clear guidelines on when to speak out or refer the enquiry to another responsible person.
Five criteria for choosing a corporate spokesperson
The choice can be made on the basis of five criteria:
- Authority. The spokesperson must be closely enough involved in the decision or issue to speak on behalf of the company. Even a highly qualified individual may appear less credible if the audience perceives them as lacking the ability to take action.
- Knowledge. You must have a thorough grasp of the facts, understand their implications and be able to distinguish between confirmed information, estimates and issues that remain unresolved.
- Communication skills. Knowing a great deal is of little use when the answers are confusing, endless or overly technical.
- Calmness and sound judgement. Pressure increases the likelihood of improvising, arguing with the other person or filling silences with dubious information. Calmness allows you to listen to the question and respond only to what can be substantiated.
- Availability. A spokesperson who is difficult to reach leads to delays in responses, increases the number of exceptions and damages relations with stakeholders.
These criteria help to identify the right candidate, but they also help to pinpoint areas where further preparation is needed. Nervousness about interviews can be addressed through training, mock interviews and gaining experience gradually. The aim should be to develop the management team’s capabilities, without turning every public appearance into an endurance test.
There is, moreover, a limit to how much authority can be delegated. If the CEO avoids all public appearances, his absence will end up becoming part of the narrative surrounding the company.
Choosing the right spokesperson requires combining different voices depending on the context and reserving the CEO’s presence for those situations where his authority carries particular weight. A mature company knows who is best placed to explain each issue and also recognises when the CEO needs to step out of the toilet.
This decision forms part of a wider issue: how organisations build authority and earn the trust of their audiences. You can explore this in more depth in our post on influence and reputation, as well as find out more about legitimacy through offline influence.