This media training and crisis communication blog never rests.
Public outrage, screaming headlines and rivals taking advantage of your time in the crisis media management spotlight.
It has been a painful few days for Waitrose.
The supermarket has seen its reputation take a sizeable hit after one of its employees was reportedly dismissed for attempting to stop a shoplifter.
Walker Smith, a shop assistant at a branch in Clapham Junction, had tried to prevent a “repeat offender” from stealing Lindt Easter eggs.
Mr Smith, who had worked for the supermarket for 17 years, said he was initially told off by his manager and apologised. But the incident was escalated, and he was dismissed.
And when he began to tell the story to the media, it generated widespread coverage.
And the story has continued to gain momentum, with Conservative MPs lobbying the supermarket to reinstate Mr Smith, a fundraiser for the former employee being launched and high-profile commentators discussing the story.
The story has been everywhere, resulting in pretty grim coverage and a significant reputation hit.
How has Waitrose responded to the crisis?
One of the problems for Waitrose is that what its former employer has said is far more human, impactful and emotive than its response.
Mr Smith told The Guardian: “Waitrose is like my family. My friends are there. I was there for 17 years, I must have been doing something right. I’m not a bad or violent or aggressive person. I just got frustrated seeing this day in and day out and not seeing Waitrose do much about it.”
And describing when he found out he was being dismissed, he said: “I tried to stay strong, and I didn’t say a word, but inside I was crying. They led me out the back door by the bins. I just felt demoralised.”
Compare that to what the supermarket said.
“We take the safety and security of our customers and our partners incredibly seriously and to do this we have policies in place which our partners are aware of and required to follow,” a spokesperson said.
It added that it could not discuss individual cases but stated that the “correct process was being followed”.
In subsequent statements, it said that reporting of the story “does not cover the full facts of the situation”.
None of this tugs on the heartstrings in the same way.
Accepting that there may be details it cannot reveal, this response still feels dry, corporate and cold and leans too heavily on process and policy – policies and processes that seem rigid and removed from what the public expect.
It’s why the CARE (Compassion, Action, Reassurance and Examples) framework we teach for responses during our crisis communication training courses begins with compassion.
There was a much better, and more human line, included in the Waitrose statement that I think it should have begun its crisis response with.
It said: “As a responsible employer, we never want to be in a position where we are notifying families of a tragedy because someone tried to stop a theft. Nothing we sell is worth risking lives for.”
That’s a lot more like it. But it loses its impact when buried in the middle.
A subsequent version did a better job. It said: “The safety and security of our Partners and customers couldn’t be more important to us, and we have policies in place to protect both.
“We’ve had incidents where our Partners have been hospitalised when challenging shoplifters. Luckily, they have always recovered, but that might not always be the case.”
But in a crisis, you need to get your communication right the first time.
Another staff crisis?
Another significant issue for Waitrose is that this is the second staff-related crisis to hit its reputation in around six months.
Back in October, our crisis communication blogs explored the case of Tom Boyd, an autistic man who voluntarily stacked shelves at a Waitrose store.
Despite amassing a staggering 600 hours of unpaid work, when his mum, Frances, asked if he could be offered "just a few paid hours", the supermarket reportedly told him he had to stop and could not return to work.
And the result was a series of damning headlines and social media posts that positioned it as taking advantage of Mr Boyd.
Now, just a few months on, it is being accused of ignoring loyalty and courage because of policies and procedures.
People might forgive one staff-related crisis. But a second one following so soon after allows a perception to build up about how the brand treats its employees.
I caught a bit of broadcaster Iain Dale discussing the story on his LBC programme. He said: “But this is the sort of ridiculous thing we have now where shops order their employees not to tackle shoplifters… what are Waitrose thinking?
“This man had worked for them for 17 years. To me, he’s a hero, but to them he’s just nothing.”
That’s a view many will share, and it is the narrative that underpins much of the media coverage.
And just like the story of Mr Boyd, a rival has taken advantage of Waitrose’s time in the crisis media management spotlight.
Iceland gained positive headlines after its executive chairman, Lord Richard Walker, appeared to offer the sacked Waitrose worker a job.
Posting next to an article about the story on LinkedIn, he wrote: “You're welcome to a job with us. We even share the same name…"
Excellent newsjacking.
Topical and trouble
The other challenge with this story is it has come at a time of considerable media focus on shoplifting.
Just days before it broke, Marks & Spencer chief executive Stuart Machin called on the government and London’s mayor to crack down on retail crime, saying it has become “more brazen, more organised and more aggressive”.
So, a big-name store sacking a long-standing employee for trying to stop it around the same time feeds into a narrative of the crime being out of control – and of Britain being “broken”.
The story would have been covered anyway. It includes a lot of ‘trouble’, a key feature of what makes something newsworthy.
But its topicality has given it extra legs and allowed it to become a political football, with the Waitrose reputation taking much of the kicking.
What crisis communication can you learn from this?
Get it right first time: The initial Waitrose crisis communication response was too cold and corporate. A human story needs a human response. Have holding statements in place for different types of crises, and ensure they lead with compassion.
Visible leadership: Looking at the story, I’m struck by the contrast between a former Waitrose employee passionately telling his story and Waitrose responding with statements from an anonymous spokesperson. Given the coverage and the fallout, there is a strong case that the response should have come from one of the supermarket’s leaders. Not only would it show visible leadership – something we often discuss during our crisis communication training courses – but it would add credibility and a human element to its response.
Crisis communication scenario planning and testing: A crisis can strike any organisation at any time, including during bank holidays. Could your organisation respond well outside of normal working hours? Would it be able to still show valuable leadership? Is a staff-related reputation threat included in your crisis communication plan?
What happens next?
Waitrose is probably hoping the fury around this story begins to quieten.
It is worth noting that when its reputation was damaged by the way it handled the Tom Boyd story, it subsequently changed its mind and offered him a paid role.
What are the odds on it also backtracking on this incident?
Either way, one thing that is certain is that it cannot afford a third staff-related crisis in quick succession.
Media First are media and communications training specialists with more than 40 years of experience.
We have a team of trainers, each with decades of experience working as journalists, presenters, communications coaches and media trainers.
Find out more about our crisis communication training courses.
