No open-access location is known for this record yet.
No open-access location is known for this record yet.
A crisis rips away the often homogeneous global culture to reveal different regional values. Communications success depends on developing responses in tune with a culture's prevailing values and modes of operation. This is particularly apparent in air crashes. Airline crashes are very visible, very violent and usually fatal. Most crashes happen without warning. The media and survivors and their families battle airlines for information, which the companies cannot or sometimes will not give. After a crash, the public an expect saturation news coverage that goes on for days. And with video cameras now in the hands of millions of ordinary citizens, TV viewers often witness gruesome images of death and anguish recorded within minutes of a crash, or as with United flight 232 in Sioux City, IA, in August 1989, the fiery impact itself. Television feeds on such dramatic shots as collapsing family members of passengers on a stricken plane. Compelled to take notice, Americans and others often don't like what they see. In response to this sensitivity, airlines generally have more practical and complete crisis plan than industries where a crisis is treated as a what-if rather than when. While crisis procedures vary little from incident to incident, an airline's responses must be more sensitively tailored to the particular culture than in most corporate crises. But any organization with international operations should address these vital concerns. Elaborate protocol in Japan Cultural differences are sharply contrasted by how Japan Air Lines (JAL) and Pan Am handled major, tragic and widely covered crashes. JAL's crash occurred in 1985 and Pan An's in 1988. Each company had to handle issues such as shielding grieving families from the media, CEO involvement, executive assumption of responsibility, release of public information, resolution of financial responsibilities and, in Pan Am's case, extensive litigation. When JAL suffered its worst-ever accident on August 12, 1985 -- when a plane bound from Tokyo to Osaka crashed on Mt. Osutaka, leaving 250 dead -- the airline followed an elaborate protocol to atone. Personal apologies were made by the company's president, Yasumoto Takagi. Memorial services were held and financial reparations were made. For weeks, more than 400 airline employees helped bereaved relatives with everything from arranging funeral services to filling out insurance forms. All advertising was suspended. At the memorial service, JAL's president bowed low and long to relatives of the victims, and bowed again to a well covered with a wood table bearing the names of the victims. He asked forgiveness, accepted responsibility and offered to resign. The maintenance chief, after dealing with the relatives of the dead and survivors day after day, committed suicide. Had JAL not made these acts of conciliation, it would have courted charges of inhumanity and irresponsibility. This uniquely Japanese sensibility did not, however, stem persistent criticism from politicians and the media, nor could it cushion the company from the realities of a business downturn. U.S. airline shows concern Quite different behavior is expected from the head of a U.S. airline, who might feel equally responsible and grief-striken, but who probably would not visit the crash site, or attend the families of the dead and the survivors. When Pan Am's flight 103 was blown up by a bomb under the cockpit while over Lockerbie, Scotland on Dec. 21, 1988, the crash became a worldwide media event. The timing of the event -- just before Christmas -- the horror of the bombing, fear of terrorists, and controversies over the cause of the explosion, and the warnings given and not given, fed the intense interest. Company executives responded based on their corporate and national culture. Pan Am flew family members to Scotland, provided more information than did the U. …
Loading…
Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.