When Communications Shape Crisis

Do boards understand the communications culture of the organizations they govern? Do they know who speaks within the organization, whether those voices are open to challenge, how information rises to the attention of senior leadership, and how decisions are made about what comes to the board? Do they understand how the organization approaches its communications with investors, regulators, employees, and other stakeholders?

These questions often come into sharp focus when the board is called upon to manage a crisis.

Understanding the Communications Culture

Communication is central to decision-making and to the organization’s reputation with internal and external stakeholders. Boards know how management communicates with them, but it is equally important that directors develop a deeper understanding of the broader communications culture across the organization.

Communications cultures vary, and none is a panacea. An open and transparent culture may seem ideal, but if information flows too freely, messaging across—and outside—the organization can become inconsistent and difficult to manage. At the other end of the spectrum, if access to information is tightly controlled, decision-makers at every level may be forced to act without a complete picture before they proceed.

Language also matters. Some organizations favour formal, even technical language that reflects the precision required in their business; others adopt a more accessible tone that aligns with their employee or consumer population. Are these language choices appropriate to the organization’s strategy, risk profile, and stakeholders? Some organizations use communication to invite engagement and feedback; others treat it primarily as a top-down transmission of information. Boards should ask whether messages are being delivered effectively and whether the organization understands the impact of its communications choices.

An organization’s communications culture grows out of its history and values. Some organizations maintain longstanding conventions of secrecy because of the competitive nature of their business, regulatory sensitivities, or founder-led leadership styles that prize control and discretion. Others have matured in an era that values transparency and stakeholder engagement, and may be more comfortable sharing uncertainty and acknowledging gaps in what is known.

What Communications Culture Can Mean in a Crisis

When a crisis occurs, the communications culture shapes how the board can and should respond. If a CEO has been candid and forthcoming in normal times, the board can usually expect collaboration under pressure, timely escalation, and a shared commitment to full disclosure, even when the facts are incomplete. If that foundation is absent, the crisis will amplify information asymmetries between management and the board, making it much harder for directors to exercise effective oversight.

In those circumstances, the board may need to find other ways to get to the root of the problem. That may include bringing in independent advisors, hearing directly from control functions, or meeting executives beyond the CEO’s immediate circle. By the time a crisis hits, regulators and analysts have often already formed views about the organization’s credibility, and employees already either feel trusted or mistrustful. A prepared board understands how these pre-existing communications patterns can reinforce or undermine a sound response and is willing to challenge management if proposed messaging does not align with the organization’s values or stakeholder expectations.

What Communications Culture Reveals

For directors, a firm grasp of the communications culture provides insight into the problem they are addressing. It may explain how decisions were made, why warnings were missed, and how confidence came to replace candour. It may reveal how a desire for control discouraged the sharing of bad news with decision-makers, or how fear of reputational damage led to optimistic messaging that ran ahead of the facts.

Communications culture shows not only how the organization has been managed, but how it behaves when the truth is uncomfortable. Boards that pay attention to tone, timing, channels, and the consistency between words and actions can often identify emerging issues earlier and respond with greater discipline.

If a board believes that changes in the communications culture are needed, it must be thoughtful about how it approaches this challenge. A company long accustomed to privacy cannot pivot to openness overnight. That shift requires deliberate effort and visible commitment from leadership and from the board itself. It involves clarifying expectations of management, aligning incentives, and ensuring that key roles have the authority and access required to support a trusted dialogue with stakeholders.

Being Ready for the Crisis That Has Not Yet Occurred

Effective crisis response begins long before the crisis hits. Understanding the communications culture is the foundation of board preparedness, but directors also have concrete responsibilities in overseeing how communication is planned, governed, and executed.

Boards should:

• Set clear expectations for communication principles in both normal times and crisis, including truthfulness, timeliness, respect for stakeholder groups, and alignment with the organization’s values.
• Oversee the development and testing of crisis communication plans, ensuring they identify decision-makers, spokespersons, approval processes, and escalation triggers.
• Ensure board and committee structures support effective information flow, including clear lines of communication between the board chair, the CEO, and the crisis management team.
• Regularly review stakeholder feedback to assess whether communications are landing as intended and where trust may be eroding.
• Periodically assess whether the board itself has the skills and experience it needs in communications and reputation management and supplement those capabilities through board composition or external advisors.

These responsibilities do not turn the board into a communications function. Management remains responsible for designing and delivering day-to-day and crisis messaging. The board’s role is to oversee whether the organization’s approach to communication is adequate to the risks it faces and the commitments it has made to stakeholders.

Governance Implications

An organization’s communications practices both reflect and influence the quality of its governance. Boards that understand how their organizations listen, speak, and respond can bring insight, rather than instinct alone, to times of crisis. They can draw on a deep understanding of culture instead of reacting primarily to headlines. They are better able to discern patterns, anticipate stakeholder reactions, and encourage management to address not only the immediate issue but also the underlying behaviours that created it.

Boards that appreciate the importance of communications also know when silence is prudent and when it signals avoidance. They are prepared to challenge management when silence would erode, rather than protect trust. In doing so, they help build a communications culture that is resilient under pressure and consistent with the organization’s purpose, values, and long-term strategy.

Boards should periodically take stock of this culture. They should not rely solely on management’s reports, but also attend to independent signals such as employee surveys, whistleblower reports, regulator and analyst commentary, and broader stakeholder feedback. These inputs help directors test whether the “official” picture of communication matches the lived experience across the organization.

Boards that understand their organization’s communications culture are better equipped to navigate a crisis. A crisis, in turn, can reveal where that culture needs to change.

_{The information and views set out above are a general discussion of certain legal and related issues and should not be relied upon as legal advice or opinions in relation to any particular circumstances. If you require legal advice, please feel free to contact us and we would be pleased to discuss these issues with you further.}