????危機當頭，大部分人首先想到的要么是抵抗，要么是逃跑。在肉搏戰(zhàn)中，這兩條路都行得通；但是在企業(yè)危機中，這樣做通常只會招致麻煩。

????事實就是如此，魯伯特?默多克的新聞集團（News Corps.）正深陷危機之中。最近受電話竊聽丑聞困擾的《世界新聞報》（News of the World）被?？?，但是丑聞卻愈演愈烈。企業(yè)危機管理公司萊斯康傳播集團（Lexicon Communications Group）總裁兼CEO史蒂文?芬可表示，魯伯特?默多克在混亂中做出的一些決定看起來只是本能的反應(yīng)。

????7月10日，《世界新聞報》出版了最后一期之后便?？?。此前，新聞集團打算收購英國天空廣播公司（BSkyB）剩余的股份，默多克目前正努力挽救這場被迫延遲的交易。但是，由于電話竊聽丑聞，收購事宜將面臨新的監(jiān)管審批。

????默多克和他的兒子詹姆斯已將身處暴風中心的麗貝卡?布魯克斯作為優(yōu)先保護的對象。在竊聽丑聞發(fā)生時，麗貝卡?布魯克斯是《世界新聞報》的編輯，現(xiàn)在擔任新聞集團英國分支機構(gòu)新聞國際公司（News International）的首席執(zhí)行官。

????這一做法有些奇怪，芬克說：“憑感覺，這樣做不對。主動跳出來保護深陷丑聞的人顯然不妥?！?/p>

????默多克迅速做出決定，關(guān)閉了擁有168年歷史的《世界新聞報》，這也是一個奇怪的舉措。因為在丑聞發(fā)生之前，《世界新聞報》運轉(zhuǎn)良好，每周的發(fā)行量達到260萬份，而且處于盈利狀態(tài)。芬克表示：“ 他們應(yīng)該消除丑聞造成的影響，并招賢納士，促使其重新步入正軌，而不是將其停刊?！?/p>

????倉促?？赡軣o法解決新聞集團想要解決的問題。芬克說：“他們試圖將罪證和受害者一并埋葬，但這并不是處理危機的穩(wěn)妥做法。”

????公關(guān)公司愛德曼（Edelman）的總監(jiān)哈倫?羅卜表示，高管在面臨危機時，通常會快速地做出反應(yīng)。得益于做出有效決斷的能力，有能力的員工在日常工作中面臨危機時也能鎮(zhèn)定自若。但是，應(yīng)對危機則需要不同的技巧組合。羅卜表示，在某些極端情況下，憑直覺做事只會把人引入歧途。

????羅卜表示，我并不是說《世界新聞報》停刊就一定是個錯誤的決定，但是極端的行為會引發(fā)人們思考：“這個決定能解決什么問題？這個決定對新聞集團有什么好處？”如果這些問題能得到很好的解答，那么這個決定最終就是合理的。

????另一方面，極端的行為可能會在情感上博得同情分，特別是在危機時刻。羅卜說：“我想說的是，在危機時，如果人們感情用事或是憑直覺行事，基本上都會以失敗告終?！?/p>

????芬克表示，這種情況經(jīng)常出現(xiàn)。1984年，美國聯(lián)合碳化物公司（Union Carbide）位于印度博帕爾市的工廠發(fā)生毒氣泄露事件，時任CEO瓦倫?安德森立即跳上飛機趕赴印度。然而，飛機剛剛著陸，警方就逮捕了他，宣布他無力管理公司的危機。

????此外，美國前國會議員安東尼?韋納近期的丑聞也是一個很好的例子。他一心掩蓋自己在社交網(wǎng)站Tweet上的不雅行為，最終卻斷送了自己的前途，這一錯誤的決定比任何“艷照門”事件本身更為嚴重。

????個人或公司應(yīng)對危機的最佳方法是迅速查明問題，控制社會輿論。比如，美國西南航空公司（Southwest）的波音737飛機的機身斷裂問題。波音公司將其定性為制造工藝問題，“僅僅兩天之后就沒有人再說起這件事了，”羅卜說。

????如果公司無法確定問題的根源，事情的緊張感和神秘感就始終無法消除，從而引發(fā)媒體持續(xù)的關(guān)注。

????芬克稱，面臨危機時，過早做出的錯誤決定往往后患無窮，因為公司的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者在為這些錯誤決定作辯護時，往往被迫處于一種難堪的處境。“《世界新聞報》?？局荚诒砻?，‘問題已經(jīng)解決了，我們繼續(xù)前進吧’。但是現(xiàn)在的問題是：問題真的解決了嗎？”

????翻譯：喬樹靜

????When it comes to crises, most of us are hard-wired to either fight or flee. This is useful during, say, hand-to-hand combat, but it often spells trouble during a corporate crisis.

????Make no mistake about it, Rupert Murdoch's News Corps. (NWSA) is in crisis. And the phone-hacking scandal surrounding the recently-shuttered News of the World grows more complicated by the minute. Some of the decisions Rupert Murdoch has made in the melee look like knee-jerk reactions, says Steven Fink, president and CEO of crisis management firm Lexicon Communications Corp.

????Murdoch closed the British tabloid, which printed its final issue on July 10, and is now in the UK trying to salvage a delayed deal to take over the remainder of British broadcasting company BSkyB, which is facing new scrutiny in light of the scandal.

????Murdoch and his son James have prioritized protecting Rebekah Brooks, editor of News of the World at the time of the hacks and currently the chief executive of News International, News Corp.'s UK arm.

????It's a strange move, Fink says: "It just doesn't smell right. You don't rush out to defend somebody like that who is so close to the fire."

????The quick decision to close the 168-year-old tabloid was another curious move. News of the World was doing well. It had a weekly circulation of about 2.6 million and it was profitable. Instead of shedding it, Fink says, "They should have purged the miscreants from the News of the World and brought in a credible and respectable team of journalists to right the ship."

????Shuttering the paper abruptly might not rid the company of the problems it's trying to solve. "They're trying to bury the body along with the smoking gun, and you just don't do that if you're managing a crisis properly," Fink says.

????Executives often respond to crises with quick action, says Harlan Loeb, a director at public relations firm Edelman. Powerful employees often get to where they are largely because of their ability to make solid decisions while under the gun during day-to-day business. But crises require a different skill set. In extreme circumstances, he says, following your gut can actually lead you down the wrong path.

????Not that dropping News of the World is necessarily the wrong move, Loeb says, but dramatic actions stir up questions such as, "What did that decision solve? And how is the company better because of it?" If there are good answers, the decision will ultimately be justified.

????On the other hand, dramatic action can be emotionally satisfying, especially in a time of crisis. "I will tell you this," Loeb says, "if you rely on emotion and instinct in the face of crisis, you will almost always get it wrong."

????This happens often, says Fink. In 1984, then-CEO of Union Carbide Warren Anderson immediately hopped on a plane to India after a poison gas leak at one of the company's plants in Bhopal. He was arrested upon landing, and rendered far less capable of managing the company's crisis.

????Former U.S. congressman Anthony Weiner's recent scandal is another example of the same pitfall. Weiner's decision to cover up his inappropriate tweeting habit ultimately buried him, much more than any crotch-shot ever could.

????The best response a person or a company in crisis can take is to quickly pinpoint the problem and then control the conversation about it. Take the recent issue with some of Boeing's (BA) 737 jets, flown by Southwest (LUV), that suffered tears. Boeing traced the issue to a specific manufacturing incident, and "two days later, no one was talking about it," Loeb says.

????Companies that can't locate the problem maintain tension and mystery in the story, which keeps it alive in the media.

????A bad decision made early in a time of crisis lives on, says Fink, because a leader is often put in the unenviable position of defending it. "The decision to shutter News of the World was designed to say, 'We've solved to the problem, let's move on.' But the question is: have they solved the problem?"