Duke University should be well versed in crisis management by now. The university, which has been widely criticized for its handling of the alleged rape case involving three members of its lacrosse team, now finds itself embroiled in its third major PR crisis in the past four years.

First came the Jesica Santillan case (yes, the spelling is correct), where the 17-year-old girl died after a noted Duke surgeon gave her donated organs of the wrong blood type.

Next the university's medical center gained national attention when it inadvertently washed surgical instruments in an oil lubricant rather than sterilization fluid, leading to surgical patients complaining of mysterious illnesses and lasting surgical complications.

Now comes the latest blow to its once sterling reputation with claims it failed to cooperate with local police, turned a blind eye to behavioral problems with some of its student-athletes, and only began to conduct its own investigation into the alleged rape claim -- despite knowing of the charges -- after the story gained traction publicly.

In every case Duke's response has been the same: deflect the blame to some other party until it eventually is forced to take responsibility for its role. In the Santillan case, it wrongly blamed the national organ donor network and its NC-affiliate before the surgeon eventually fell on his sword. It wasn't until later the medical center's transplant protocols eventually became the rightful focus of the investigation. Duke settled the case out of court. 

In the sterilization case, it initially denied the mistake had happened, then claimed it had no bearing on patients' medical problems, then blamed the maker of the industrial lubricant -- before eventually accepting responsibility after physicians began contradicting the 'no-harm' claims.

Now we have the university essentially aiding the defense attacks against the alleged rape victim's character. None of us know what happened that night and the three young men indicted in the case may very well be innocent of the charges but one thing is clear: Duke has learned nothing from its past PR mistakes.

Rather than acknowledge it has responsibility for institutional oversight in each case, it chooses to lay blame elsewhere until it is forced to admit otherwise. However, each time that flawed PR strategy is employed, the university's reputation takes a bigger hit and people are less willing to forgive and look upon it favorably.

Duke should heed the basic tenants of crisis PR: 1) tell the truth; 2) accept responsibility for your role in what went wrong; 3) tell what you plan to do to fix the problem; 4) ask for the public's patience and understanding; and 5) as warranted, make restitution.

If this great academic institution doesn't begin to learn these lessons, even the best PR strategists won't be able to repair its once impressive reputation.

 

What did you think of this article?

Liked
Disliked
No Opinion