A string of recent high-profile resignations from the government after the revelation of past scandals has prompted concerns for businesses around the reputation management of their own trusted employees. For example, the resignation of Labour’s cabinet minister, Louise Haigh, after an historic fraud offence was discovered, followed shortly by Tulip Siddiq’s resignation as her controversial ties to Bangladeshi politics were thrust into the spotlight, have only added fuel to the fire for the Labour administration.

Scandals such as these impact not only an individual’s reputation alone, but also their business’s reputation. Customers, clients and stakeholders will often speculate about how these individuals got away with their behaviour and question the management’s knowledge and involvement.

For example, the lines can be particularly blurred on social media, where even though profiles are often personal and so the business has no reasonable way of controlling what content is posted, the figure is still intrinsically linked to their job role in the public’s psyche. In these situations, robust reputation management can be the difference between short term pain or serious lasting damage.

Reputation management should not only be thought about when a negative story hits the headlines but considered even before a senior figure is appointed. It is vital a business thinks about a new hire’s backstory and character when they are applying to be a public-facing, senior leader, whose decisions and behaviour will be so intrinsically linked to where they work.

If there is something in their past, even if it’s a rumour or unfounded allegation, this should be investigated as thoroughly as possible prior to their appointment. More historic cases are coming to light as people are being made aware of problematic past behaviour and so it should be given as much weight as their current conduct.

Businesses should go further than basic due diligence and background checks used for other employees. Nowadays, everyone has a digital footprint, and utilising social media to find out more about someone can be highly effective for finding potential points of backlash before they even occur. However, it’s important to search only publicly available information in order to respect the candidate’s personal boundaries and privacy.

Skeletons in the closet?

Additionally, employers should not be afraid to ask candidates directly during the interview process if there are any ‘skeletons in the closet’. There is a chance that the candidate could be dishonest, however, even if there is a scandal unearthed further down the line, at least the business can highlight it did everything it could to find out before appointing the person involved.

If it’s the individual who has been dishonest rather than the business, the general public are usually more forgiving – such as with Louise Haigh’s resignation. The Labour Party’s reputation took a short term hit, but they were ultimately deemed to have been ignorant rather than dishonest.

If something questionable does come up at the interview stage, taking a view from a reputation management expert can be helpful to ensure that the business is making the best possible decision when it’s so integral to the business’s long term reputation and overall success.

When a senior figure has been appointed, it’s vital that the business gives clear expectations of their behaviour while they are employed and has procedures in place for making them accountable. These should be outlined clearly as part of their onboarding process and reviewed regularly.

Get a plan in place

It is also essential to create a crisis plan, which outlines the business’s response in various situations. Some things to include would be: who needs to be notified—this could include legal representatives, public relations teams and the board—and their contact details, together with details of what each person will be in charge of leading or supporting. Consider including scenario planning, with example responses: what would the board do if, say, there was a major product recall, or a senior figure was charged with a crime, or the business was going into administration?

If a crisis happens and it comes with significant backlash, then it’s important to tailor responses depending on the severity of the crisis and potential reputational impact. These can be divided into three categories.

• First, legitimate criticism, which the business has no other option but to listen, but does not require an active response.

• The second is where the truth has been stretched but by a member of the general public, so a legal response may be seen as too heavy-handed. In this case, a PR response may be more appropriate.

• The third is where the criticism may be so exaggerated or is said by someone so important that it crosses the line into defamation. In this case, legal action may be most appropriate. How to decide and co-ordinate the best response should be outlined in the crisis plan.

Scandal can be life or death for a business. Ensuring that the right people are appointed to senior roles can have long-lasting implications for the business’s reputation, especially if the person has had a controversial history. Comprehensive reputation management should be preventative, rather than having to make reparations later down the line.

Daniel Jennings is a defamation expert and partner at law firm Shakespeare Martineau.