In the wake of a big reputational crisis, consumers, politicians and others often look to national and multinational corporations for apologies and explanations as to why things went wrong. Big businesses often publically apologise in a bid to rebuild trust and shore up consumer confidence, but ultimately to reverse any damage to their business or brand.  However, an apology is only as effective as the way it is delivered and when. If not considered carefully, there is danger that an apology can end up sounding like an excuse or even worse a ‘non-apology’.
In the most recent example of a corporate faux pas, Tesco have come under fire for selling beef burgers in stores which have been found to be containing horse meat. The revelation has resulted in the supermarket taking out full page adverts in national newspapers apologising to customers who bought the burgers, offering refunds and promising to come back to them with an explanation as to how this happened.
Tesco’s response to the horse meat scandal has been speedy but not before an alleged £300m was knocked off the supermarket’s stock market value, an FSA investigation was launched and the Prime Minister branded the whole thing as ‘a completely unacceptable state of affairs’ in Prime Minister’s Question Time.
It reiterates the importance of setting the record straight as quickly as possible, something Starbucks failed to do when it was found out for not paying corporation tax in the UK in October 2012. The coffee giant waited almost three months after the story broke before publishing an open letter in The Times announcing a u-turn on its position regarding payments.
Barbara Kellerman from the Harvard Kennedy School, recently wrote that an ‘apology which is misguided or ill-conceived can do more harm than good, but similarly where an apology is called for but not given, anger and hurt can fester and difficulties may escalate.’ She goes on to set out factors businesses should consider when decided if and how to apologise, but the bottom line being – will it affect your business?
An example of a public apology that went wrong was the one issued by Apple’s chief executive Tim Cook on the company website over ‘MappleGate’, where purchasers of the new iPhone 5 had massive issues with the new Apple Maps function. What users wanted to hear from Cook was why Google Maps had been replaced instead of an admission that a sub-standard product had been delivered. Consideration needed to be given to the basis of the apology – is it what people want you to say sorry about.
Knowing when to say sorry and when to offer an explanation is also an important consideration and it is not normally wise to do both at the same time. In Tesco’s ‘apology advert’ customers are promised with an explanation at a later stage with the primary purpose of the advert being, as the heading states, ‘We apologise’. With the FSA investigation still underway, it is highly likely that Tesco don’t have the full facts at their disposal, but focusing the advert on the apology ensures it is heard and readers don’t end up focusing on the excuses.
Tesco will want to look like they are fully cooperating and being transparent with the regulator about the investigation and not appear as if they are cutting across them. Other opportunities such as select committee appearances, which the horsemeat scandal will most probably result in for Tesco, are also good opportunity to provide ‘explanations’. MPs are looking for details when conducting inquiries, which are important avenue to be able to share them. A strong performance in front of a select committee can also help aid the process of reversing reputational damage and setting the record straight.