So, the shoe has dropped.  You messed up, you’ve been thrown under the bus, and you’re filled with that feeling of dread.  What do you do now?  The next decisions you make are crucial to managing your personal crisis.

Step One: Think Before You Speak

Take the time to breathe.  Listen to what the other party has to say.  If your boss or someone else is mad at you about this crisis issue, try very hard to hear what they are saying.  Resist the urge to become defensive.  Defending yourself right now is not likely to change the person’s opinion.  Their goal is to tell you why they are angry and they want to make sure you are listening to them, not formulating excuses. 

The best case scenario is to be alerted to the crisis prior to confrontation.  In this case, think about your position.  What is your excuse or reasoning?  How would it be perceived by your boss or the public?  Take the time to anticipate what questions or accusations you might be met with and draft a few brief responses.  Consider what your goal is in your communication: clarity, apology, etc.

Step Two:  Imagine a Neutral Party

Part of what can be so difficult when handling a personal crisis is that you may have anger towards the person(s) confronting you.  Your emotions towards this person or group of people will shine through in your response and your handling of the situation and this is not likely to help you.  Instead, try to imagine a neutral party who is also in a position of power…perhaps the president instead of the vice president or another director or manager.  Imagine that this party is the one addressing you with the same concerns or issues.  How would you respond to them?  This will help you maintain your composure and stay professional at all times.  This will also help you realize that perhaps there are things you could have done differently to avoid the crisis in the first place.

Step Three:  Resolve the Crisis

How can you resolve the crisis at hand?  Unless you have to resign, do not leave your job.  Avoid taking a “personal” day or calling in sick, as this will just make you look worse.  You do not want people to think you have a bad attitude or that you are abandoning your job.  Instead, keep a low profile and keep working.  Do not stop doing any aspects of your job unless instructed.

Consider the crisis from the other party’s point of view—what do they want you to do?  Generally, you will need to acknowledge the mistake(s), apologize for your actions or lack of action, and define what steps you are taking to avoid repeating these mistakes.  If the crisis is something fixable, then offer to fix it or work with someone who can.  If the problem is water under the bridge, focus on moving forward and doing good work.  Remember that you can’t control how other people feel, but you can control your work product and your attitude.

Step Four:  Learn Your Lesson

It is difficult to accept mistakes or that we may simply just not be good at something.  Take the time to truly try to learn from the situation.  Perhaps you’ve learned that this job is not a good fit for your skills or personality.  Or perhaps you’ve learned not to over share or trust too much.  Maybe you’ve learned that nothing is truly off the record.  Whatever the case may be, even if you lost your job over the mistake, you have to find the strength to learn and move on.  It’s similar to “Keep Calm and Carry On,” but I encourage you to remain professional, confident, and committed to quality work.  If you give yourself permission to move on from the crisis, others will too.

PS.  If you do happen to get fired, just smile and say thank you.  Then go pack up your stuff.  Your composure will really throw people for a loop.

We all know them: people who have Twitter (or some other kind of social media) accounts but probably couldn’t tell you how to log in let alone post something. And I don’t mean dormant accounts.  Many of these people have hundreds, thousands, and even millions of followers.

These accounts are put up by well-meaning folks who want their leaders to engage with their customers, constituents, or citizens.  We can assume that the leader in question may know the basic content of the messages and hopefully they know that they are posted online.  But I’m sure some do not.  Instead, a lucky PR pro or staffer gets the job of representing the leader online.

The Good

Using this method, the leader in question and their C-suite staff have a level of security with a social media filter in place.  They are confident that the leader won’t screw up and cause a big PR problem, because it is the filter’s job to keep on message.  So, in the best of all possible worlds, the organization gets an online presence without the headaches.  (And they also have a potential fall-person should something go wrong.)

The Bad

Some people are realists and don’t expect famous or important people to do things like tweet for themselves.  Then there are others, like my friend Kevin, who refuse to follow them if he finds out it’s not authentically them.  For those that don’t remember, Barack Obama admitted this fall to not using Twitter while having over 2.5 million friends.  One of the fears might be that when followers find out that the person in question is not really representing themself, it makes social media into just one more broadcast channel.  And this is something many of us have tried to avoid.

From a Gov 2.0 perspective, I worry about social media being seen as just another campaign tactic rather than something that can be beneficial to many different aspects of an administration.  I’d like to see leaders value the interaction with constitutents 365 days per year, every year of their term.  When social media becomes a campaign tool, then the campaign consultants are engaging with constituents rather than those of us working directly for the people.  (And I don’t mean this as a slam at campaign consultants, I promise…you all do a lot of valuable work…I just want to see it continue throughout the regular course of business.)

The Middle Ground

Some accounts that are managed by multiple people and not necessarily one leader have found the middle ground of adding a ^ and initials.  This at least makes it transparent that there is someone else speaking…for instance, a staffer on behalf of a politician.  Others don’t feel the need to identify themselves until Mashable asks who’s behind the account.

The Future Norm

One thing that is certain is that social media and our usage of social media will continue to change.

What do you think—does it hurt social media to have a PR person, staffer, or other type of social media filter behind an account?  Or do you not expect to connect with the actual person when you follow or friend them?

What will the norm be down the road and is it different for government/education/non-profits vs. business?

EAVB_ZRZACYBFAU