 Case Facts and Analysis

Crisis Situation and assessment of reputational threat:

In terms of reputational threat level (SCCT theory), SMRT had a high reputational threat
level:
1. It was responsible for the crisis.
2. The crisis seemed to repeat itself (SMRT also had a bad history of managing crisis,
as in the graffiti-vandalism incident in 2010).
3. SMRT also had prior relational reputation, having treated its stakeholders dismally
with callous remarks, slow communication and poor rescue procedures.
Here such intensifiers add severity to the crisis.
SMRT’s situation is also attributed to be in the preventable cluster, which means that the
crisis could have been prevented and it is therefore intentional and purposeful. Crisis type in
preventable cluster produce strong attributions of crisis responsibility, so use deal option.

Situation Response SCCT Response

Strategy
On December 14th there was an Many complaints were Apology: Crisis manager
early morning disruption on the made across the social indicates the organization
Yellow line, commuters suffered platforms but still SMRT takes full responsibility
a four-hour disruption on a train didn’t respond for the crisis and asks
line. stakeholders for
forgiveness.

Train breakdown on 15 Announcement: 30 Apology: Crisis manager

December happened when four minutes after the news indicates the organization
trains stalled underground in the broke on social media. takes full responsibility
North-South line, leaving a for the crisis and asks
number of passengers stranded stakeholders for
and without ventilation during the forgiveness.
hour-long wait.
SMRT sent message to cabs SMRT issued a public Apology: Crisis manager
suggesting there is money to be apology following angry indicates the organization
made from the crisis. public reactions takes full responsibility
for the crisis and asks
stakeholders for
forgiveness.
Circle line delayed; Minister for Press conference: SMRT Corrective: Recognition
Land and Transport expresses CEO promises that no of Guilt; Voicing empathy
concern; Prime Minister calls for effort will be spared to for victims.
Commission of Inquiry to conduct ensure no stop recurrence
full investigation. of disruption.

Lessons:
Breakdowns were preventable and the question of neglect and responsibility must be
addressed to SMRT’s board and senior management. All means including legal recourse
should be considered by Government to correct the wrongs.
Key concerns include massive public reliance on rail services, rise in population and
insensitive as well as defensive remarks from SMRT. Added to this is a prevalent sense of
injustice in the lenient treatment of SMRT security and safety lapses.
As a private organisation with government links and massive public responsibility, SMRT
must address the primary needs of its commuters. Overcrowding, multiple delays and price
increase are real issues
A proactive strategy ensures preparation and some level of progress. SMRT was unable to
deliver on reputational and image restoration, as senior management clearly lacked a
thorough understanding of the operational compliance of the business.
External partners involved in responding to the crisis situation needed to be included in the
strategy. In dealing with the media in Singapore, it is crucial to understand that all reporters
are covering a story and, despite regulations against freedom of the press, a good journalist
will ask the necessary questions to gather information that concerns his or her audience,
listeners and viewers. The more frustration the situation creates and the more ill-prepared
and uncoordinated the crisis manager, the more likely the tale is to be written.
Unique to SMRT is the role of the CEO. As a result of not focusing on the primary nature of
the SMRT train services, she was unable to mobilise the required maintenance measures,
that eventually caused the trains breakdown. The CEO of SMRT was a prime target of this
rage, as the public was informed in a number of press reports that her function was largely
re-tail-oriented to increase the company’s net profit. The public learned that under her
leadership, SMRT’s net profit grew by 41%. While this could be good news for shareholders,
it was viewed by public as distorted emphasis and compromise on quality levels of public
transportation.
On the basis of public reactions and country’s socio-political environment, the regulating
governing body will be wise to ensure that potential bodies with high public safety issues
have adequate maintenance and control mechanisms in place and that those responsible in
the top are rightly engaged in performing their vital roles