Blog Viewer

Learning from Microsoft’s Anti-Trust Battles - What Tech Brands Need to Know

By Amy Fisher, APR posted 12-17-2020 01:53 PM

  

The PRSA International Conference, ICON 2020, was a virtual gathering of some of the best PR, marketing, digital and corporate communications professionals from around the world. Held in October 2020, the event’s theme, “navigating a world disrupted,” gave attendees a chance to learn about how all types of market changes—from corporate crisis to pandemics to competitive pressures—can be opportunities for learning and advancement.

I had an opportunity to speak with Mark Murray, founder of M Squared Strategy, about his time at Microsoft while the organization was fighting back against anti-trust charges. The charges were initially logged against Microsoft in relation to bundling of its browser into Microsoft operating system software, which some felt constituted monopolistic actions.

Still relevant today with ongoing anti-trust litigation targeted toward a number of large tech companies, Mark addressed the importance of crisis communication and the role of communicators during times of uncertainty.

Although much time has passed since the first anti-trust actions against Microsoft, similar situations exist today. According to Murray, some of this boils down to challenges in communication. For example, he mentioned that “the tech industry and the government live in different worlds. They speak different languages. They often speak past each other. It can be really difficult for people in the technology companies to make themselves heard and understood by government. Similarly, it can be very difficult for policy makers or investigators to make themselves heard and understood by technology companies.”

On the other hand, Murray also thinks technology is even more progressive today than it was back then. Companies have learned a lot from the Microsoft case. In comparison with the past, “tech companies have really invested in government relations and in being a part of the policy making conversation.”

Additionally, Congress is playing a leading role in current investigations. “Congress was not a central player in the Microsoft case. Today there's a more bipartisan concern about the role of technology instead.”

Murray discussed the potential damage to company reputations and brands when dealing with government inquiries: “when you're dealing with a government investigation, that government entity has access to internal documents. They've got a lot of information from inside the company that they're poring over and looking for evidence of wrongdoing evidence. That could be potentially damaging to the company.”

With any technology company experiencing a crisis there are some important things that they need to think about.

One of the most important things is the communication team’s involvement: “you've got to have your communication team not just waiting outside the door for the policy to be communicated, but at the table as the policy is being shaped. If you don't have your communications specialists at the table, you are going to make bad strategic decisions. You're going to make decisions that are going to make your efforts to turn the crisis around counterproductive.”

But focusing only on the crisis at hand can be detrimental, he warned. “You also can't let the crisis dominate everything that you're doing in communications,” Murray added. It’s important to organize your teams and keep communicating about the business while you deal with the crisis: “we can't allow ourselves to become distracted.”

Murray pointed out that people tend to believe that facts are more important than perception. And while facts are critical to the work, perceptions play an equally important role. “Don't let yourself get so focused on the facts of your case that you lose sight of the bigger perspective,” he added.

Another aspect to consider during any crisis is employee communications. How employees receive and understand the facts of any critical issue will also color their perception of the brand. Communicators should think about the impact that social media has on employee perceptions of an organization, prompting questions about the company or its mission. Murray advises to share useful, highly credible and authentic information so employees can make informed decisions about whether the company has behaved in a responsible manner.”

Another point made was about misinformation or lack of information. “Companies can run into situations where someone inside the company believes that the company is not being honest. They may have incomplete information that causes them to believe that the company isn't telling the truth or isn't being square with the regulators or media,” he explained. The most crucial action is to build a “Circle of Trust” through authenticity and values.

Finally, the conversation touched on using the proper channels to communicate. Murray shared that during some of the most difficult times he’s had—either within a corporation or assisting clients—the ability to speak directly to people through video has been beneficial. It allows an organization to lay out who you are, what you stand for and the tone that you bring. “Video can be a very powerful tool,” he stated.

Author note: Special thank you to Facundo Luque for reporting on behalf of the PRSA Technology session.

0 comments
6 views

Permalink