Essay Sample on Protecting Image in Online Attack: Engage, Pre-empt & Diplomacy

Introduction

In the event of an online attack, a company should identify the extent to which it go to protect its image However, Armstrong & Kotler (2011) contended that an attacked company should not retaliate in kind the best strategy would be to use engagement, pre-emption, and diplomacy. This is the recognition of the fact that the criticisms being raised are based on true consumer concerns and unresolved anger (Armstrong & Kotler, 2011). Therefore, the best approach would be to proactively monitor most if not all social media platforms and to respond to the pertinent issues being raised subsequently.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Thus, by monitoring and proactively replying to the apparently uncontrollable situation, organizations can avoid the negatives from getting out of hand, and they can even turn the negatives into positives. With the right strategy and response approach, the criticisms may be turned into a positive that will ultimately benefit the company (Armstrong & Kotler, 2011). The organizations should also understand that power originates from positive communication, and responding directly and constructively to those that matter.

This can be best demonstrated by the Southwest Airlines case where they creatively reacted to a post that showed an open hole in one of the airline's plane fuselage. However, since the company has a team that monitors the social media within 11 minutes, the airlines had dispatched a channel report. Accordingly, the passenger who had made the initial twit later praised the company for how it had reacted to the situation (Armstrong & Kotler, 2011).

A positive or negative experience with social media, from a professional standpoint. Personally, my company had received a negative review from one of our clients. The customer had complained that the goods they had ordered to be delivered had reached them not with the requested quantity. Explicitly, they had stated that our drivers were consuming food items while in transit. This complaint was overwhelming received by other Facebook users with some complaining, while others argued that our company was providing the best delivery services.

After realizing the balanced direction that the conversation was taking, as the CEO and the face of the company, I creatively responded to the claims. In the response, I promised our customers that we would remain professional and that any customer who would receive goods below the ordered quantity should immediately call some hotline numbers that I gave to our customers.

This event reminded me of the FedEx case where an employee of the company was caught on camera hoisting a monitor package over his head and tossing it over the gate. Through their Senior Vice President, FedEx effectively responded by saying that they have met the affected client who had accepted their apology. In addition, the Vice President stated that the act was against the organization's values.

The statement was received by numerous bloggers and journalists, ultimately putting off the fire (Armstrong & Kotler, 2011). Therefore, where an organization is faced with bad publicity and is attacked in social media, it is the responsibility of the management to respond. However, the response should not be one of admitting guilt or denying the claims; rather, it should be one that reassures its customers about the commitment of the organization to give customers value.

Reference

Armstrong, G., & Kotler, P. (2011). Marketing: An Introduction (12th ed., pp. 1-123). Boston: Pearson.