What Were They Thinking?: Crisis Communication: The Good, the Bad, and the Totally Clueless

The Exxon Valdez Oil Tanker Spill: The Invisible and Clueless CEO

Nearly two decades after it happened, the response by Exxon executives to the Valdez oil spill disaster remains a prime example for how not to handle a crisis. It was March 24, 1989, when the nearly 1,000-foot oil tanker was moving through PrinceWilliam Sound in Alaska headed for California. There was no storm, no wind, no ice, and no rough seas. With such calm waters there was little reason to think that anything terrible would happen when Captain Joseph Hazelwood put the massive tanker on auto pilot—but it did. Captain Hazelwood put the vessel in the hands of third mate Gregory Cousins, who had little experience navigating the narrow strait that was known as Bligh Reef—one of the most challenging areas of Prince William Sound. Moments after midnight , the tanker hit submerged rocks that ripped a hole in nearly the entire length of the ship. Eleven million gallons of crude oil spilled into the pristine waters off Alaska, creating a 1,300-square-mile oil slick and killing an estimated 100,000 Lawrence G. Rawl, the chairman of Exxon Corporation, thought he could minimize the extent of a massive problem by being detached, impersonal, and arrogant. What were they thinking?. You can often minimize inevitable public relations fallout when faced with a sudden and unexpected disaster by planning for an honest, well-timed, and empathetic response from the top player in the company. The Lesson. 20 The Exxon Valdez Oil Tanker Spill THE INVISIBLE AND CLUELESS CEO Adubato_final_book 5/20/08 4:31 PM Page 20 animals.1 Within hours, word got out locally in Valdez. Soon, national and then international media would converge on the small Alaskan town. It was the worst oil spill in U.S. history. This event called for exceptional response strategies from Exxon executives. The people of Valdez who made their living off these waters; the U.S. government, which would demand answers; the citizens of the United States and environmentalists from around the world who would be angered and worried— all would be looking to Exxon to explain what happened and what the company was going to do to make amends. A Pathetic Response From the beginning Exxon executives made a series of mistakes that would make a very bad situation a lot worse. At first they tried to minimize the extent of the problem by implying that environmentalists and the media were exaggerating the severity of the situation.They also focused virtually all of the company’s efforts on the operational side—the cleanup. Exxon’s leadership mistakenly believed that if they “cleaned up” the expanding oil spill, they could minimize the public relations fallout. They did not realize that an immediate cleanup was impossible. In fact, after a massive and multifaceted effort, it would take nearly ten years for scientists to conclude that Prince William Sound was remotely back to normal. Exxon’s efforts to clean up the site should have had nothing to do with meaningful crisis communication. With the world’s media showing graphic images of devastated wildlife and with Alaskan fisherman accusing Exxon of destroying their livelihood , Exxon needed to communicate empathy and compassion and do it on a timely basis.This did not happen. Then more bad news for Exxon. Numerous reports asserted that Captain Hazelwood had been drinking the night of the accident . Word also got out that Exxon knew that Hazelwood had THE EXXON VALDEZ OIL TANKER SPILL 21 Adubato_final_book 5/20/08 4:31 PM Page 21 previously had his driver’s license revoked for drunk driving and had been hospitalized for alcohol treatment. Yet another crisis for Exxon and yet again no adequate response. Finally, ten days after the incident, Exxon took out a fullpage ad in numerous newspapers to announce its commitment to cleaning up the spill. Even this was a bungled communication opportunity. For starters, the ad was nine days too late. Then to further hurt the chances of gaining the public’s trust, the ad made no mention of culpability and offered no direct apology to the people of Valdez. This was a stance Exxon would continue to take throughout the months and years of investigation that followed. As a fullblown PR crisis was unfolding in the national and international media, Exxon execs were looking around for someone else to blame. In fact, the day before the ad appeared, Lee Raymond, Exxon’s president, told...