Navigating Change

True Blue Inclusion 1331 4th St. SE #915 Washington DC 20003 • www.trueblueinclusion.com
True Blue Inclusion is a WBENC certified woman-owned limited liability corporation, incorporated
DAY 1: MARCH 15, 2017
A summit on economic developments in Latin America
The first day session featured representatives and guests
from the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB).
Things kicked off with a warm welcome from Judith
Morrison, Senior Advisor of the bank’s Gender and
Diversity Division; Catherine Smith, CEO of True Blue
Inclusion, joined her. Morrison explained the first day
was designed as an introduction to IDB’s work and
work program. She emphasized that attendees could
potentially partner with IDB and featured organizations
based on what they learned that day.
Hector Salazar, Manager of the Social Sector at the
Inter-American Development Bank, provided background
as a bank employee. He’s been with the institution for 25
years. About 15 years ago, he explained there was a group
of colleagues that got together to form the first diversity
coalition, requesting recognition. From then to now, they
understood and have advanced and the importance of
acknowledging the differences of gender and race. He
emphasized that it’s important to have hard evidence —
“You have to start from somewhere.” Namely, figures that
include representation and participation. “We have
fantastic access to information now compared to the last
century. We have better data now and we should make
the most of it.” In his opinion,data creates profit
opportunities,with regard to economic return and
social return.It’s an advanced way to communicate the
necessity and the opinions and the perceptions shaping
the attitudes of active actions. It’s the other, more
concrete side of the coin as compared to vocal,
informal observations.
Salazar added to that by recognizing the importance
of evidence, and encouraging the use of it to point to the
fact that every time you acknowledge diversity, things get
better in the work environment. A crucial step is inviting
employees and managers, and a third-party expert, to
openly talk about the importance of diversity. “You
have to talk about your vision first. Don’t lead with the
problems.” Then, making sure the leaders take the
first step instead of waiting for a hidden group of
people to step up.
On March 15 and 16, diversity and inclusion leaders from across the nation and world
convened in Washington, D.C. to discuss the latest economic developments in Latin
America, drawing on the expertise of host Inter-American Development Bank. Attention
then turned to the role of news media and public relations in today’s shifting
political climate.
PARTNER RESOURCE: IMMIGRATION - FOLLOW THE MONEY - MEDIA SHIFTS
Essential Insights from True Blue Inclusion and Inter-American Development Bank Conversation
“Navigating the Global Precipice of Change”
2017 No.1
POWERBrief
Uniquely Important Information for Members TM

Daniel Teixeira, Program Director of CEERT (Brazil) –
which translates in English to Center of Studies of Labor
Relations and Inequalities – and author of Racial Diversity
in Multinational Firms in Brazil and the United States, repre-
sented CEERT as a collaborative opportunity. CEERT is a
non-government organization dedicated to racial and
gender equality. Principal CEERT projects are designed
to guarantee the right to racial equality, in the areas of
education, labor relations and access to justice. They
also provide advisory services to private institutions,
government agencies, civil society organizations and
social movements.
During his portion of the session, Teixeira broke down
many of Brazil’s population statistics, as they pertain to
race and society. He began by sharing that the Brazilian
population consists of 200 million people, 53% of whom
are Afro-Brazilian. Afro-Brazilian women account for
approximately 25% of the population,and they have
the worst social indicators in terms of work,health,
education and violence. The unemployment rate for
this group is more than double in relation to white males,
and they also have lower incomes — 74.5% compared to
white males.
With regard to black youth: approximately 30,000 young
people are murdered each year — 82 per day. 93% are male,
and 77% are black. From 2002 to 2012, the murder rate of
white youth decreased 32.3%, while the rate of black
youth increased by 32.4%.
On the other end of the spectrum, affirmative action has
been instituted in universities since 2001, a means of
promoting racial equality in education. As a result, the
presence of black students in higher education has
tripled, with over 1 million graduating during that time
frame. Now, there is federal legislation in place for public
universities to benefit when they hit quotas. He provided
the following examples as U.S. benchmarks:
• Diversity councils: evaluate and define the
strategic direction of diversity programs;
• The existence of upper management that
monitors the metrics of diversity programs;
• Leadership in inclusion and diversity: the
implementation of important programs for
employees, communities, customers and
candidates. That includes:
»» Diversity programs for suppliers
»» Employee groups
»» Diversity in recruiting
»» Marketing campaigns considering
minority groups
»» Support to multicultural organizations
»» Mentoring: offer formal and informal
programs, seeking effective transfer of
knowledge

Other important aspects to consider regarding race and
gender at the workplace in Brazil: The advances in gender
haven’t included black women. Some company surveys
done in the last 5 years show that there are 3-4 times
more white women than black women in these
companies. In Brazil,diversity programs with a focus on
race are generally geared toward interns.And corporate
initiatives in racial diversity stem from complaints
regarding racism published by media.
Overall, Teixeira shared that this is a strategic moment.
There are favorable conditions in institutions and in legal
environments. There are a high number of young black
students graduating from higher education. And there
are important cases of diversity at a few recognized
Brazilian companies. He emphasized that establishing a
productive dialogue between headquarters and Brazilian
subsidiaries is crucial for advancement. At this point, the
“neck test” -- looking from one side of the room to the
other -- is enough to demonstrate the invisibility of
black people in corporate environments.
Caio Magri, President of the Ethos Institute (Brazil) then
took over to discuss Ethos as a potential partnership.
Ethos is a non-governmental organization with a
corporate nature. They have two main strategies: 1) to
improve corporate practice, and 2) to improve corporate
policies. One example of the latter is a data publication1
in collaboration with the IDB that was distributed during
the session, which looked at the social, racial and
gender profile of the 500 largest Brazilian companies.
The materials provided objectives for the companies.
The first was to produce information/data, the
second was to create dialogue about who they are
with communicators, and the third was to actively work
toward gender and racial equality. From a public policy
perspective, the objective was to inform how the
companies create new policies that can affect social
responsibility and sustainability. For participation, it
was presented by ratio and frequency of international
organizations’ impact on society. Another theme was
public procurement, meaning the composite of a
state’s impact on society.
Based on Teixeira’s data,Magri stated that if we
continue at the current speed of evolution to equal
representation,it would take 70 years to hit gender
equality,and 120 years to hit racial equality. “We need
to speed up this process,” he asserted. Another important
number: last year, the salary of black men was 73%
of white men, and black women, 53%. Ethos works on
strategies to understand vocation and how can they
help companies to work better. They need to better
understand their numbers and internal policies.
Two major sectors in Brazil are being prioritized: gender
and race. Five companies in Brazil are prioritizing this
agenda, and three are American: Shell, Wal-Mart and
Coke. Companies with offices here in the U.S. and in
Brazil have to be on the same page, and work with the
same information.
Magri said that with the support of CEERT and IDB, Ethos
wants to create a coalition of companies that can support
the agenda to promote gender and racial equality with
concrete actions. Collaboration is necessary in order to
bring to other continents what they’ve observed and
learned, to translate and spread standards to other
1. https://publications.iadb.org/handle/11319/7606

countries, to make a change in the moment we’re living
in, in the globe and in Brazil.
The next session was centered on global diversity, and
featured advice from Stephanie Oueda Cruz, Associate
Director of Diversity and Inclusion at Coca-Cola Europe.
The following question was posed as an introduction:
“Why do you think diversity is important for the bottom
line of companies working in the private sector today in
Latin America?”
Cruz emphasized that diversity is not only right thing
to do, but also the smart thing to do. To a certain point,
the idea of diversity and inclusion is only emerging in
Latin America right now.“We need to start talking about
it.” The way it’s being discussed in other countries
is different; Latin America is lagging behind for two
reasons: 1) They don’t have the vocabulary with which
to facilitate the conversation; 2) There’s an extreme lack
of data.
In Cruz’s opinion,diversity is good for business
because you attract the best talent. As a result you better
understand your customers and present products in a
way that reflects them.
Some companies in Latin America, in countries like
Brazil and Mexico, question the purpose of talking about
diversity, insisting that all employees are ultimately
the same ethnicity. This is effectively ignoring the
conversation and a significant portion of the population.
Cruz says it’s difficult because in the real world,
inclusiveness is a prevalent issue and questions like,
“Are you really Mexican?” are brought up to
Afro-Mexicans on a consistent basis. As a way to ensure
diversity is addressed, Cruz says the conversation can be
started by tiptoeing into socioeconomic status, an area
that still focuses on the Afro population because of
statistically relevant data. To recruit more people from
this demographic, companies should work with the
marketing department and analyze who is buying their
products. It will invariably come down to this group
of people, which will shift the focus and force hiring
managers to say, “This is who we need to have on our
teams.” Cruz added that it is important for diverse people
to see reflections of themselves in higher positions to
know that it is possible to get to that point.
Cruz followed that by breaking down the elements of D&I
a step further: “What is the legal context,social context
and business context of each country?” It is important
to understand how the countries differ and not use a
blanket approach to apply to all regions. Cruz enhanced
this message by pointing out that it is important to not
just have an open mind, but also have the research in
place and the desire to work collectively to create forums
together. “As one company we can definitely have an
impact. But can you imagine if everyone in this room
made a concerted effort?”

DAY 2: MARCH 16, 2017
News media,public relations and today’s political climate
The second-day sessions focused on speakers from the
U.S. who have worked for prominent media organizations
and/or had training in political backgrounds.
Kicking off the day was Karen Finney, an American
political consultant, who discussed how to distinguish
truth from the noise in the current political climate. She
was the Strategic Communications Adviser and Senior
Spokesperson for the Clinton 2016 presidential campaign.
She started by laying down the fact that it is going
to be harder to get information and data out of the
government: “We seem to be in a fact-free zone.” It’s a
challenging environment now. Finney said she always
made it a point to do her own research and make sure what
she said was true as a spokesperson, TV pundit and talk
show host; it would typically be taken at face value. But
the climate has changed when the story on a President
is an alternative fact-based tweet storm instead of a
conversation about jobs, the economy and foreign policy.

According to Finney, 70% of voters used Facebook as a
news source. Trump’s camp was proud to say they used
Facebook as a tool to push fake news. They were able to
have a different conversation at the grassroots level than
mainstream media was having. Now, it’s become a way
for him to say,“You can’t trust the media,” because
numerous dialogues are occurring. All he has to do is put
something out there, for example the Muslim ban, and
his supporters will say he’s done what he said he was
going to do and he kept his promise. They don’t follow
the aftermath of stories that completely put the validity
of the initial story into question. It’s hard to combat
because everything that’s said creates an entirely new
storyline for reporters to attempt to follow, and audi-
ences to follow up on.
“Reporters have to be better prepared to push back, and
better prepared to know whether or not something is
true.” Faith in institutions has already been declining,
and having someone come in and verify those feelings is
further distancing trust in media. Finney anticipates a
backslide as a result of constant flip flopping and the
overall lack of straight answers, and “verbal gymnastics.”
Over time, confidence in the media will erode and people
will have a hard time identifying which sources to trust.
A fractured environment of information intake has been
created. “How we verify information and decide what’s
true is going to go through a bit of a change.”
As a spokesperson, your credibility is the most important
thing you have; the current climate is demonstrating a
shredding of that notion. It’s now a free-for-all for
information.
In Finney’s opinion, sexism in the election was not
adequately addressed. During the campaign, women did
not feel comfortable espousing their support for Hillary
because they did not want to deal with an attack from the
“Bernie Bros.” Culturally, we do not acknowledge sexism
exists. If you looked at coverage of Hillary after a speech,
it would typically mention that she looked angry, didn’t
smile or sounded shrill. On the contrary, you never heard
that about the men. The substance of what was said was
less reported on versus descriptors; the same thing
applied to other women like Carly Fiorina and Elizabeth
Warren.“There are norms for women we just have to be
conscious of...It’s still a work in progress.”
When asked about the longevity of the current
Presidential information output, Finney stated she
doesn’t think the current cycle can sustain itself for
four years. There’s a tipping point.
For journalists dealing with a confounding reporting
space, Finney said the challenge is figuring things out in
your own company’s context, and knowing the bias of
the person/audience you’re talking to. “It’s the message,
the messenger and the style.” Reporting is being turned
into entertainment/reality TV in some ways.
The new foundation setting in the current climate is
effectively a re-look at the media, and an admittance
of the failure of local news. According to Nate Silver of
FiveThirtyEight, there was an elite media bubble.2
In this context, elite means a 2-year college education
and beyond. There’s a transformative differential; it’s
not just about income and ownership of assets. It cuts
beyond race and gender and settles at the education level.
An entire group of media consumers was simply
ignored and left to their own devices.
A lot of news and information is received as it’s
happening. Finney says it’s important to remember that
breaking news is what’s happening now, but that’s not
the end of the story. It used to be a reporter only had to
file a story once or twice a day; this time around, short
paragraphs are being written in a story all day long, on
top of additional stories that are tangentially connected.
2. https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/there-really-was-a-liberal-media-bubble/

One attendee posed the question:“Can the mainstream
media exercise a certain type of power and say,‘We’re not
going to respond, we’re not going to take this seriously’?”
Finney replied that reporters have come to understand
the criticism during the general election was they didn’t
take it seriously enough. When the now-President of the
United States says something, it’s still important. So
journalists are now more prepared, and better suited to
challenge with data. The corporate side of media also
affects the coverage -- it’s still a ratings game. News
leaders acknowledge that shareholders and board
members are happy with ratings, so that ultimately has
an impact.“If we don’t cover it, our competitors will.”
The next session focused on the unintended
consequences of immigration, a conversation led by
Dr.Manuel Orozco, Director of Migration, Remittances
and Development of the Inter-American Dialogue. He
engaged in a candid conversation specifically focusing
on the impact of immigrant behavior shifts on financial
institutions and other unintended consequences.
Orozco opened the conversation by stating that within
the context of the United States, the American political
ethos binds itself in relationship to two main aspects:
freedom and responsibility. In the operational sense, to
translate those, it’s important to look at it through the
context of equity and equality. With regard to people and
citizens, the question becomes ‘Who should be equal?’
And not just what type of person, but what kind of
equitable opportunities will be provided to people
that we consider equal?
Orozco said he, like most people of color, has always been
a dissenter when it comes to defining what constitutes
being an American. It’s not just about race, but ethnicity,
immigration status, age, gender, the different parts of
being an individual and how you connect yourself.
The recent election became about contesting differences
in what it means to be an American. In the context of
migration, you’re dealing with the politics of exclusion
and homogeneity, the opposite of inclusion and diversity.
“Should we really advocate this reactionary activism as a
byproduct of the decomposition of the American ethos,
or should we reject it and in fact strengthen our current
demographic position and our current American
political identity?”
We’re living in a rapidly changing society, more rapidly
than any point of time. It’s not just Latin Americans
migrating to the U.S., but also Asians, Pakistanis,
Indians and Filipinos, who are growing in large numbers.
They’re migrating because there is an effective demand
for formal labor -- through visas -- and informal labor.
Informal demands are larger today than they used to
be, but not larger than the formal needs. This is where
undocumented workers come in to work at small
businesses in the U.S. -- the hospitality industry,
construction, and childcare. Of the 45 million migrants,
half of them are female migrants. One-third are female
domestic workers that look after at least five households
on a regular basis. They are key to the U.S. economy and
society, especially in global cities. Additionally, 20% of
the migrant labor force in the U.S. is composed of
construction workers. “They’re here for a reason:
because there is a huge demand for foreign labor that
cannot be used by the native labor force.” Migrants earn
25% less than the local market. 11 million undocumented
migrants are in the U.S. This group doesn’t have relief in
the form of an amnesty or legalization program, but
it’s created strong international ties: At least 16 million
households in the U.S. send money back to places in
Latin America, and 23 million in total send money all
over the world.
The Department of Labor has officially stated it needs
foreign labor to sustain the U.S. economy. Migration is a
byproduct of National Security that is not foreign policy.
The migrants coming here are making the decision
because of historical relationships and interventions
tied to the U.S.in the past — a connection has already
been made.The next question to address is how to

proceed with the legalization of the 11 million
undocumented migrants currently in the U.S. The
conversation has been around since George W. Bush,
but did not gain traction and did not move further
ahead with the Obama presidency.
A lingering factor concerning immigration reform today
is how to deal with the influx of continued cross-border
migration. There have been meetings in the bureaucratic
establishment about how to stop the flow, but at
the same time, there is an acknowledgment that the
migration coming through the Mexican border over the
past five years has been attributed to an increase in
violence in Central America. It represents the second
largest migration wave in the world after the Syrian
migration crisis.
Integration into U.S. society remains a pressing issue
for migrants.“It would be naive and biased to argue
that inclusion and diversity is cool and easy to handle,”
Orozco said. Those who are low skilled with low
education have a harder time integrating, especially
with access to financial stability.
Overall,a racial,linguistic,and religious homogeneous
group controls the nation’s state.Anything that goes
against it is considered outsider,and negative.The
intensity in which the debate is now in the mainstream
is a byproduct of the current presidency. The context in
which diversity exists is one of exclusion, not inclusion.
The U.S. has come a long way to create a balancing act
with regard to equity to people of color and minorities.
But there is now a level of intimidation for people
coming through the borders, with the immigration/
refugee ban. The Department of Homeland Security
released illegal border crossing data in March, which
shows that in the month of the presidential election,
November 2016, border patrol made 47,210 apprehensions.
In February 2017, there were 18,762 apprehensions, a 60%
decline.3
Migration is being reduced through the three
Ds: deportation,detention and dissuasion. Anxiety and
fear is being generated within this group as a result — a
tactic that raises tension for both natives and migrants.
“In our experience, these types of strategies that basically
count the heads of everyone don’t work,” Orozco
concluded.
To bring the media conversation back to the forefront,
Eric Deggans, TV Critic for NPR, stepped in. He provided
a perspective from the ground and trenches about the
media’s role in this changing tide both nationally and
globally.
In Deggans’ opinion, there’s a typical shape of political
journalism: you go out and do your reporting, dig up
what stories you can, present it to the public, and the
public decides how they feel about it when they go into
the voting booth. If you find controversies, hypocrisies
and rule breaking, you put it on the table and can
typically predict how it’ll affect someone’s career.
With Trump, he as a candidate and as president remains
largely unaffected by controversy. As a result, it’s taking
journalists a while to figure out how to cope with a figure
that seems to be immune to political reporting.
Deggans says he seems to be immune because of the
idea of trust. As Finney mentioned in her panel, there are
record-low levels of trust within the media. Only 33% of
Americans trust the media. That number is pulled down
largely due to Republicans/conservatives, whose trust
level is the lowest: only 14% of conservatives trust
mainstream media, 50% of Democrats and 30% of
independents. It’s an illustration of how conservatives
and liberals consume information. For conservatives,
they have one to two trusted news sources; half the
time the most trusted source was Fox News. With liberals,
there was a range of mainstream outlets consumed/
trusted — around four — including the New York Times,
CNN and NPR. Consistent conservatives felt alienated so
they created their own ecosystem of media consumption,
which also includes the Daily Caller and Breitbart.com.
It’s ultimately about reinforcing the worldview they
already hold. Fox News’s target audience is middle-aged
3. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2017/mar/22/donald-trump/trump-says-illegal-immigration-down-61-percent-ele/

white men, who want to see their world reflected back at
them. In that world, institutional racism and prejudice
doesn’t exist. Deggans wrote about this phenomenon in
his book, Race-Baiter:How the Media Wields Dangerous Words
to Divide a Nation.4
“When you create an alternative news
spectrum with its own values and priorities, you end up
in a situation where you have differing views of reality
and different expectations of the news media.”
Everyone is trying to speak to their target audience
in a way that binds the audience to them closer, and
encourages the target audience to reject news outlets
that don’t share their worldview. That’s how our media
system is reflecting the current political and social
climate, and why there’s so much friction. If sets of facts
are presented to a person with a certain worldview,
they’re rejected if they don’t align. Journalists are being
challenged to find new ways to reach outlying audiences
who don’t trust them, their facts, or the world being
reflected back at them, no matter how accurate.
Trump has been hurt the most by things he’s said
himself, with no reporter in the middle to try to analyze
information or cherry pick anything. When he says things
and there’s no filter, that’s when he’s most impacted.
Journalists are being challenged to find avenues to still
cover him in substantial ways that won’t be outright
rejected. “The idea that we could agree to disagree went
out the window a long time ago. Now we’re at a point
where we can’t even agree that a fact is a fact.”
What is winning in the current media climate? Appealing
to your target audience, and super-serving that target
audience. The game now is to create a media product in
which your niche audience can see themselves. For
journalists, the challenge is to do that while not crossing
any ethical lines, making sure no stereotypes are being
perpetuated, etc. “Can you create an area of media where
your target audience will feel comfortable, trust you, and
return again and again?” Trump appealed to a target
4. http://ericdeggans.com/book-race-baiter/

audience; he ultimately lost the popular vote and the
election was close in a lot of places. But the lesson is that
Trump won his target audience, because he super-served
what they wanted and needed to hear.
The ideas that we thought were already decided and
proven are now being re-litigated in a public space.
The idea of paying attention to a diversified country
and reflecting that in policies and strategies is back
on the table. A lot of energy will have to be spent to
re-prove things that were already established during
advancements made during the Obama administration.
This is an issue of race and culture that involves white
race and white culture. People thought Obama’s election
equaled post-racialism, but it really put the conversation
about race back in the foreground. With the help of a
study referenced in his book, Deggans put forth a key
point: That white people tend to judge where we are
right now compared to where we used to be on racial
issues,while people of color tend to judge where we are
right now compared to where we should be.“The
challenge now is making white people feel like the
diversity discussion involves them,and that it will
improve their circumstance to embrace diversity and to
be a part of the initiatives.”
The final session of the day was a spirited conversation
about communications in a state of constant change,
led by Jeff Eller, former White House Director of Media
Affairs and founder of The Jeff Eller group, and Ginny
Terzano, former Deputy Press Secretary to President
Clinton and Press Secretary to Vice President Gore and
communications practice lead at Dewey Square Group.
“There has never been a more relevant point in time for
you to undo what you have done, and re-do it in regard
to how you are viewed from a public perception —
particularly from a media standpoint.” Eller began by
saying most of his clients wake up each morning in fear
that President Trump is going to tweet about them. They
fear their stock is going to drop. According to Eller, the
companies that have been tweeted about have dipped in
value, but almost all recovered within the day. In fact,
some have increased.
He emphasized that companies have to re-look at how
they’re structured from a public response standpoint.
They have to compress how they make decisions and
how they respond based on the speed at which news is
created and can work against you. Now is the time to
reconfigure it completely. “Go break those dishes
and reset the table.” Look at and reassess the entire
decision-making process: how you talk to your
employees, investor relations, external communications
and third-party stakeholder communications. It may
even mean revamping your culture.
Terzano acknowledged that we’re in a different
time, in terms of the media: “The pace of the news is
extraordinary. It’s really hard to keep up, and even harder
to be prepared because you just don’t know what might
hit you.” Instead of resetting the table, Terzano
recommended companies take a look at their crisis
contingency plans and adjust accordingly, but also stick
with the core values and missions of the company.
She gave an example of Kevin Plank, the CEO of Under
Armour, who recently gave an interview and praised the
Trump administration’s positioning on jobs. The
backlash was fast and furious, and the company’s
three top endorsers — Misty Copeland, Steph Curry and
Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson -- responded negatively
publicly, plus Plank’s employees revolted. One week later,
Plank took an ad out in the local paper re-committing
himself and his company to its core values, and went two
steps further by discussing key Trump policy issues that
he and Under Armour disagreed on: the immigration ban
and human rights issues/equality. “He really had to come
back and assess the damage that was done. The rapper
Ice Cube has a song, ‘Check yourself before your wreck
yourself.’ You have to do that in this day and age.”
Going out with a quick response isn’t good enough
anymore. Companies have to stop, reassess the situation
and then make the decision that’s going to be best
for your organization, employees, shareholders and
stakeholders.
Eller countered that by saying sometimes, it’s okay to not
say anything. It’s important to know the art of when to
respond, and when not to respond. Terzano agreed:
“You have to pick your battles wisely.”
Eller emphasized a tactical key that concerns media:
whether you follow Fox News, MSNBC, the Times or
Breitbart, facts matter in regard to what companies say.
Challenging factual inaccuracies is more important now
than ever. “There is no daylight in allowing serious
factual inaccuracies to stand.”
Terzano took it a step further: Fake news isn’t going to go
away, reporters will always want facts.

The conversation then took a turn toward the recent
meeting of HBCU representatives at the White House,
a move criticized by many. But Terzano translated the
motive:“If you can meet with the President, make your
case. Always look for an opportunity to educate,and
never compromise your values. You just have to be
careful of getting caught in their trap of photo ops and
being used.” Eller agreed:“If anyone ever asks you to sit
down for a meeting at the White House, you need to go.
It might be uncomfortable, but if you have a point to
advocate and a point to make, go make it.” You have to
play your game, Terzano advised. You can’t play Trump’s
game. Be smart about how it’ll be advantageous to you,
not to them.
Eller backed that up:“First know who you are and what
you do. Know your plan.” The current administration is
highly tactical. Change is the constant.
When the tide turns for the worst, Eller recommends
proactivity.“You’re far better off taking out your own
trash and defining how it looks on the curb and the color
of the bag versus having that trash dumped on your head
and having it smell really bad for a week.”
Terzano added that the core elements of crisis
communications don’t change:
• Be transparent.
• Be accurate.
• Don’t dawdle.
Companies have to be proactive in getting the
information and the facts out there. The risk is what
you don’t know.

Navigating Change

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (19)

Similar to Navigating Change

Similar to Navigating Change (12)

More from True Blue Inclusion

More from True Blue Inclusion (11)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Navigating Change