Does a CEO Op-Ed Serve Any Good Purpose in a Crisis?
From our good friend and colleague, Tony Jaques, Director of Issue Outcomes Pty Ltd, in Australia…
Does a CEO op-ed serve any good purpose in a crisis?
Writing an op-ed to help frame an important issue is a well-established tool in the communications armoury. But when a CEO uses it to “explain” a corporate crisis, it comes with a high risk of backfiring badly.
That was certainly the outcome when the CEO of UnitedHealth Group elected to pen an op-ed in the New York Times arising from the street murder in December of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson.
The NYT styled Andrew Witty’s commentary as a “guest essay”, but it followed the long tradition of an op-ed, which originated as an opinion article “opposite the editorial page” of a newspaper.
It’s a common strategy for genuine thought leaders, and some business executives. And research shows the right op-ed at the right time can change opinions of those who read them. But Mr Witty’s so-called guest essay during a reputational crisis raises some important questions:
Why choose an op-ed to comment on the brazen assassination of a company executive?
And why use his death as a pulpit to defend a deeply unpopular industry?
It could have been a heart-felt tribute to the deceased CEO of his company’s operating arm. Yet, while Witty briefly expressed sympathy and deplored online support for the alleged killer, the headline unambiguously revealed his real purpose: “UnitedHealth Group CEO: The Health Care System Is Flawed. Let’s Fix It.”
For the rest, click here.
———————————–
From Bruce Hennes, Hennes Communications: For a slightly different view of the murder of United Healthcare CEO Brian Thompson, along with our recommendation for the company’s board of directors, click here.