Skip to main content

Colliding With The Third Rail

It is the classic dilemma of a corporate mouthpiece: the client doesn't want to talk.
  • Crisis? "Let's wait for the lawyers."
  • Bad news? "It'll blow over."
  • Gossip? "Just ignore that."
The underlying assumption is always the same, too: "If you give them any attention, you're only legitimizing their argument."
Recently I learned this term, "the third rail." As in super-sensitive, controversial topics too dangerous for a politician to discuss.
Whether you're in politics or not, it is unfailingly "third rail" for a communicator to argue with the client's discomfort at arguing their case in the court of public opinion.
One of the all-time best theorists of organizational dysfunction, Chris Argyris, called the failure to question assumptions a problem of "double-loop learning." That is to say, unhealthy organizations not only take certain incorrect things for granted, but they resist -- almost to the death, and sometimes fatally -- any attempt to critically examine those beliefs.
In an unhealthy organization, communication about things that matter is impossible, because:
  • Problems are denied until they become an unpleasant crisis. The prevalent belief: "out of sight, out of mind."
  • Crises are ignored until they become catastrophes: "Talking about problems only makes them real."
  • Great communicators, who recognize what's going on and try to moderate the effect by opening the spigot of speech, are viewed as a threat and eliminated.
A very long time ago I printed a thousand pages of research on a very real crisis that was about to explode, and did explode, and it was awful.
But this was before it happened. And the person to whom I showed it looked at the pile of paper and turned to me and said: "Be careful."
The person who said this was not my "enemy." Just the opposite - they were obviously concerned for my professional welfare.
Because I'd hit that third rail, full-on, dead center. If I pressed forward any further, I'd undoubtedly cross the red-hot, nuclear "red line."
In the end I let it go. I had reached the limits of my effectiveness and my pay grade; persistence would only have served to get me fired.
In the many years since I've come close to that "third rail" many a time. And I think I've figured out the secret to putting your hand on that molten iron, without coming away irretrievably burned.
You realize this: Bad situations build up over time. They're complex; they're multi-stakeholder; they normally involve a really smelly stew of greed, sometimes sex, and the lust for power. Only the fool would dare to step in without knowing if they're pulling on the red wire that sets off the bomb, or the green one that defuses it.
Most errors in judgment involve ignorance like this, plus a healthy measure of ego - wanting to be the best, to solve the intractable problem that seemingly nobody else could get their arms around.
A better course of action, if you're a communicator? Look around you, keep your instinctive and emotional antennae high, speak calmly and logically about what you see, talk about risk, but most importantly, draw in "the wisdom of the team."
By working together, leveraging the power of multiple intelligences, knowledge bases and institutional memories -- plus the innate desire we all have to make a difference -- the chances of succeeding are much greater than they are when you go it alone.
Even if you can't make a dent in this round, you're more likely to live to fight another day.
All opinions are my own and do not represent those of my employer (a federal agency) or the government as a whole. Photo credit: Arby Reed via Flickr Creative Commons.

Popular posts from this blog

What is the difference between brand equity and brand parity?

Brand equity is a financial calculation. It is the difference between a commodity product or service and a branded one. For example if you sell a plain orange for $.50 but a Sunkist orange for $.75 and the Sunkist orange has brand equity you can calculate it at $.25 per orange.

Brand parity exists when two different brands have a relatively equal value. The reason we call it "parity" is that the basis of their value may be different. For example, one brand may be seen as higher in quality, while the other is perceived as fashionable.

All opinions my own. Originally posted to Quora. Public domain photo by hbieser via Pixabay.

What is the difference between "brand positioning," "brand mantra," and "brand tagline?"

Brand positioning statement: This is a 1–2 sentence description of what makes the brand different from its competitors (or different in its space), and compelling. Typically the positioning combines elements of the conceptual (e.g., “innovative design,” something that would be in your imagination) with the literal and physical (e.g., “the outside of the car is made of the thinnest, strongest metal on earth”). The audience for this statement is internal. It’s intended to get everybody on the same page before going out with any communication products.Brand mantra: This is a very short phrase that is used predominantly by people inside the organization, but also by those outside it, in order to understand the “essence” or the “soul” of the brand and to sell it to employees. An example would be Google’s “Don’t be evil.” You wouldn’t really see it in an ad, but you might see it mentioned or discussed in an article about the company intended to represent it to investors, influencers, etc.Br…

Nitro Cold Brew and the Oncoming Crash of Starbucks

A long time ago (January 7, 2008), the Wall Street Journal ran an article about McDonald's competing against Starbucks.
At the time the issue was that the former planned to pit its own deluxe coffees head to head with the latter.
At the time I wrote that while Starbucks could be confident in its brand-loyal consumers, the company, my personal favorite brand of all time,  "...needs to see this as a major warning signal. As I have said before, it is time to reinvent the brand — now.  "Starbucks should consider killing its own brand and resurrecting it as something even better — the ultimate, uncopyable 'third space' that is suited for the way we live now.  "There is no growth left for Starbucks as it stands anymore — it has saturated the market. It is time to do something daring, different, and better — astounding and delighting the millions (billions?) of dedicated Starbucks fans out there who are rooting for the brand to survive and succeed." Today as …