個案總覽

From "shots fired," this case traces the evolution of responses, treatments, and notifications following a homicide at a college campus, an event that always lures attention across diverse stakeholders within and around the campus, and far beyond. At the core are the challenges of getting a crisis under control, managing stakeholder expectations, and retaining control of information. There will never be a universally applicable playbook for managing crises. Responses must always evolve relative to the particular crisis, its contexts, and its impacts. This case is a rich tool for thinking about contingencies, best practices, and shortcomings from an authentic context. Here, sharp focus is put on crisis leadership specifics of immediate treatment and notification during the first days of the crisis. Approaches are told and exemplified through the words and actions of two leaders, the Chancellor and the University Police Chief.

This case features the actual responses of an organizational President who finds himself in the midst of a murder within his organization, which occurred while he was out of town and out of touch. His statements are the case data. Background information at the start of the case describes a leader who was largely uninformed and unaware of deadly internal threats that preceded the murder by nearly a year. Rather than focusing on traditional communication guidelines (e.g., word or delivery choices), attention here centers on inferences, implications, and promises embedded in the President's communications. Verbatim quotes offer opportunities to consider potential assumptions and evaluations of internal and external stakeholders, as well as impacts and limitations to paths forward for the organization and the President.

This case is based on an actual organizational crisis, and the day-to-day operational factors and latent conditions that led to it. Case facts focus on the role of Malcolm Thornton (pseudonym), a newly promoted manager of ride operations at an amusement park. From his first days on the job, Thornton's ignorance and dishonesty nurture a crisis that crescendos with the grotesque death of a 10-year-old boy, who was a passenger on a park ride. Thornton's culpability is obvious, but additional, substantial contributing factors are seeded throughout the case: faulty structure and equipment; lack of safety policies and procedures; absence of external oversight; brazen, hazardous choices made by the designer/co-owner of the deadly ride; and the dereliction of duty by corporate executives.

By all reasonable counts, the 2020 Tour de France 2 (Tour) probably should have been cancelled. The phenomenon could have become an extreme transmitter for the coronavirus (COVID). Had the grand tradition continued normally, it would have drawn millions of spectators, who would have gathered at venues throughout France, packed together for the best views of the field, within arm's reach of cycling celebrities who were accustomed to high-touch access, selfie embraces, and victory hugs. Many decisions and actions made during the Tour secured crisis aversion, and offer prime lessons for organizational crisis preparation and response, as described in this case.