By Paul Furiga
Since the Toyota crisis entered the media spotlight, one question has dominated: Can Toyota not only fix its cars, but also its public image, so it can once again be the top manufacturer of cars sold in the United States?
Surprisingly enough, this is not a new question. And the answer to the question is not new either. I should know. The real question should be: Can Toyota repeat history?
Ten years ago, I had the challenge and the privilege of working as a member of a large internal/external communications team on a similar crisis involving a Japanese-owned company accused of manufacturing defects that led to crashes, injuries and deaths.
Watching the news and reading the accounts of Toyota’s challenges today, I am amazed by how rarely the sophisticated pundits reference the Firestone tire/Ford Explorer story that broke in 2000, literally within weeks of the 100th anniversary celebration of Firestone’s founding by one of America’s most famous industrialists, Harvey S. Firestone.
Ten years ago, the media frenzy focused on the combination of certain Firestone tires on Ford Explorers. There were reports of crashes, injuries and deaths.
While Firestone was founded by one of America’s most famous auto pioneers, by 2000, it was a wholly owned subsidiary of Bridgestone, the well-regarded Japanese tire manufacturer. Bridgestone’s purchase of Firestone some years earlier had saved the company, and with it, thousands of U.S. jobs.
All of this, much like the thousands of 100th anniversary materials that were never distributed by Firestone, mattered little as the media frenzy swirled around the Japanese-owned tire company with the famous American name.
I am not the person to compare the business facts that confronted Firestone with those confronting Toyota. However, I do have the perspective to compare how the companies have approached their similar communications challenges, and how Bridgestone/Firestone handled its challenge in a way that aided the company’s restoration.
It’s impossible to overestimate the cultural differences between Japanese and U.S. public standards of corporate accountability, even after the passage of a decade. In watching the relatively slow speed and scant content of the initial Toyota reaction to media reports, I experienced déjà vu. When our team began work with the leadership at Bridgestone/Firestone, they were unprepared for the ferocious public drubbing they took beginning on day one.
The added finger-pointing of Ford quickly blaming the Japanese tire company for the entire crisis was also something uncommon in Japanese corporate behavior. While this factor is not part of the Toyota crisis, it’s worth noting as an additional challenge that Bridgestone/Firestone leadership faced.
Like a boxer stunned by an initial punch he didn’t see coming, Bridgestone/Firestone at first found itself in a reactive mode, responding to attacks that came so fast and furious that it was challenging to break through the noise to respond. But over time, the company developed an effective strategy to manage the crisis.
It’s surprising to me that, unlike the lessons that American manufacturers of over-the-counter medications learned from the Tylenol tamperings in 1982,Toyota apparently has not learned much from the crisis that faced Bridgestone/Firestone ten years ago.
Let’s be clear: A crisis of the magnitude facing Toyota cannot be resolved overnight. It took Bridgestone/Firestone years to strategically and tactically address the firestorm that engulfed the company. Many people lost jobs, plants were closed, lawsuits were litigated and gutsy business decisions were required to restore Bridgestone/Firestone’s standing in the marketplace.
But the role of sound communications in the restoration of the Bridgestone/Firestone brand is readily apparent. I am not saying that everything Bridgestone/Firestone did with its communications was perfect. However, Toyota had ten years to learn from this example and apply the good or not-so-good.
Here are some examples:
- When in Rome . . . Early on, Bridgestone/Firestone put its top executives, who were of course Japanese, into the searing American media spotlight. This didn’t go as well as it could have, and to the company’s credit, it moved John Lampe, an American who came up through Firestone ranks, into a role as the face of the company. Toyota has moved its U.S. president, Jim Lentz, into this role but not until after an initial round of interviews that repeated the Bridgestone/Firestone pattern of a decade earlier. To succeed in this crisis requires a fluent storyteller.
- Actions not words . . . One of the first things Toyota did is unleash a massive advertising campaign proclaiming that it had identified and was fixing whatever might be an issue with its cars. Unfortunately, reports of new problems continue to hit the news. The campaign, however expensive and well made and heartfelt, is not helping. The anecdotal impression is that the problem isn’t fixed and it’s too soon to say it’s over. In crisis communications, it’s much better for someone other than you to say it’s over. Proclaiming your own victory (even in the context of an apology) seems inauthentic to many. Toyota’s story has to be seen as authentic before it can be believed.
- The long and winding road . . . It took Bridgestone/Firestone years to recover from the challenges it faced in the Explorer tire crisis. John Lampe and the executive team patiently communicated with multiple audiences and demonstrated by walking the walk that the company was coming back. This requires two-way engagement and constantly “reading the audience” to make sure your message is not only getting through, but engaging audiences in a dialogue that leads to understanding. Toyota can’t erase in a month or a quarter or a year what reputation damage has occurred. The communications strategy must be built for the long term. It’s hard to see, even for someone who’s worked in crisis communication for years, that the Toyota strategy is intended for the long haul. This has to be transparent and clearly stated, especially in the social media environment that engulfs American society in the 21st century.
For me, the vindication of the hard work that the Bridgestone/Firestone team undertook was this Feb. 19, 2003 headline in the Wall Street Journal: “Deflated: How Goodyear Blew Its Chance to Capitalize on a Rival’s Woes.” The article by Tim Aeppel provided a variety of reasons for Firestone’s rebound from its near-death crisis.
Again, regardless of how you might personally view the Bridgestone/Firestone effort, it provides lessons for Toyota.
In his play The Tempest, Shakespeare wrote that the “past is prologue.” The philosopher George Santayana wrote that, “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” Both quotes suggest that repeating the past can have dire consequences.
But repeating the past can also lead to success. Whether Toyota is paying attention to the Bridgestone/Firestone lessons of a decade ago is hard to tell. For everyone involved in this crisis, I hope the answer is yes. What do you think?
_____
Paul Furiga is president and CEO of WordWrite Communications.
