When not to communicate by email - lessons in reputation management

Posted by: Paul Matthews

Here in New Zealand, an unfortunate public squabble has erupted in the last week between the surviving children of the late Sir Edmund Hillary, conqueror of Mount Everest and national hero, and the Auckland Museum, to which Hillary bequeathed his documents.  I won’t delve into the complex details of the dispute  - there seems to be more to this issue than currently meets the eye.

Both sides have certainly made strong cases to the media over the last few days. Today, however, according to this story in the New Zealand Herald, a poorly worded communique from the Museum suggests that that institution may have given up on the communications task at hand and, dare I say it, abrogated its responsibility.

The Museum is a major public and cultural asset belonging to the city. So, it is poor form at the very least, to send an ill tempered and gratuitously worded email to the media which insults its public stakeholders. And surely it’s a contradiction to state its position as “one of …free and open access to information”, yet refuse further media interviews, declaring “when it appears we can get (our points) across without getting screamed at by the public for being disrespectful, we will re-engage”?!

You can read the rest of the story and make up your own minds. In my opinion, this is a classic example of how dangerous email can be when the sender comes under a lot pressure, and writes away unchecked. But that’s no excuse for a communications professional - understanding the enormous power inherent in electronic messaging comes with the job.

Contrast the Museum’s email with this gesture of goodwill by the Prime Minister to mediate the dispute. Now, there’s a man who understands the power of good communication.