Komunikasi ISKI, Vol
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Jurnal Komunikasi ISKI, Vol. 03 (01), 2018. 1827 J U R N A L E-ISSN: 2503-0795 P-ISSN: 2548-8740 KOMUNIKASI I K A T A N S A R J A N A K O M U N I K A S I I N D O N E S I A AirAsia Crisis Communications Strategies and Malaysia Airlines: A Content Analysis http://dx.doi.org/10.25008/jkiski.v3i1.145 Ni Ketut Dimar Warsihantari 1 and I Gusti Ngurah Putra 2 1,2 Universitas Gadjah Mada Jl. Sosio-Yustitia, Bulaksumur, Yogyakarta 55281 – Indonesia [email protected] Abstract The aviation industry is one of the most vulnerable industrial sectors to the crisis. Failure to manage the crisis they face, it can threaten their lives. Therefore, managers of airline companies are required to have the ability to manage crisis and communicate in crisis situations. Crisis communication strategy becomes an important part in crisis management. This study uses content analysis of the crisis communication strategies used by AirAsia and Malaysia Airlines in their respective aircraft accidents on December 28, 2014 and March 8, 2014. This research found that both companies are fast enough to respond to crises, despite they use different strategies in response of the crisis. AirAsia emphasizes the use of apology without ignoring compensating, while Malaysia Airlines emphasizes compensation without ignoring apology. Keywords: Crisis communication, Press releases, Aviation industry, Apology Abstrak Dunia penerbangan merupakan salah satu sektor industri yang sangat rentan terserang krisis. Kegagalan dalam mengelola krisis yang mereka hadapi dapat mengancam kehidupan mereka. Oleh karena itu, para manajer pengelola perusahaan penerbangan dituntut untuk memiliki kemampuan dalam mengelola krisis dan berkomunikasi dalam situasi krisis. Strategi komunikasi krisis menjadi bagian penting yang dalam pengelolaan krisis. Penelitian ini dengan menggunakan analisis isi terhadap strategi komunikasi krisis yang digunakan AirAsia dan Malaysia Airlines dalam kecelakaan pesawat mereka yang terjadi masing-masing pada 28 Desember 2014 dan 8 Maret 2014. Riset ini menemukan bahwa kedua perusahaan cukup cepat dalam merespon krisis walau terdapat perbedaan dalam strategi mereka dalam merespon krisis. AirAsia lebih menekankan pada penggunan apologi tanpa mengabaikan kompensasi, sementara Malaysia Airlines lebih menekankan kompensasi tanpa mengabaikan apologi. Kata Kunci: Komunikasi krisis, Siaran pers, Industri penerbangan, Pemintaan maaf Copyright © 2017 Ikatan Sarjana Komunikasi Indonesia. All rights reserved Introduction mainly due to aviation safety as a result of an The aviation industry is one of the most accident (Ray, 1999). Indeed, the crisis experienced vulnerable components of transportation to the crisis, by the aviation industry can be caused by various Ni Ketut Dimar Warsihantari / Jurnal Komunikasi ISKI, Vol. 03 (01), 2018. 1827 19 factors such as terrorism, financial or management communication strategy after the accident. In failure and so on. Failure to manage the crisis can addition, the difference in the ownership status of the lead to corporate bankruptcy. The names of airlines company, Air Asia is a privately owned company in Indonesia such as Sempati Air, Boraq, Mandala, and Malaysia Airlines is a state-owned airline Adam Air and many others are now just memories. In allegedly influencing the response shown by both Australia, Ansett, for example, as number two of the companies. The interesting thing is also to compare largest company after Qantas, also failed to manage these two accidents happened at the adjacent time. its crisis, so it is now only a historical record Media coverage in crisis situations can influence (McDonald, 2005). In India, Kingfisher Airlines stakeholder views on AirAsia and Malaysia Airlines suffered a loss of about 1.5 billion dollars, causing reputation. After all, stakeholders interact with the employees to strike and forced to reduce the media in their daily lives and each media is entitled operation of its fleet (voaindonesia.com, 2012). to determine any information that will be consumed Similar financial crisis is also experienced by British by the public. It is therefore important for both Airways and United Airlines (kompas.com, 2008 organizations to communicate to the media about the and viva.co.id, 2010). organizational attitudes and crisis communication The International Air Transport Association measures that are or have been done. Other internal (IATA) reports that there are 12 fatal aviation information sources such as organizational owner accidents with 641 deaths during 2014. This figure is statements, internal documents, fact sheets usually lower than the five-year period (2009-2013) which also appear on the website as supporting data. The reached 19 fatal accidents with 517 deaths per year research wants to see how the crisis communications (IATA, 2014). Although the level of having lost strategy carried out by AirAsia and Malaysia control in-flight decreased to 6 accidents by 2014, Airlines through the use of press releases. This this figure is worth considering. The three main information is a source of news for the media in causes of plane crashes by Airplane Crash Statistic constructing the news. 2016 are pilot error (53%), mechanical failure (20%) Taylor and Perry (2005) revealed that more than and weather (12%) (Statistic Brain Research 80% of organizations experiencing crisis upload Institute, 2016). news release as a source of information through their AirAsia and Malaysia Airlines are the two official website. This high percentage indicates that Malaysian airlines that experienced a crisis in 2014. the press release is still the preferred communication The plane that crashed was AirAsia with flight code tactic favored by the organization. QZ8501 on flights from Surabaya to Singapore and This paper is structured on the basis of this Malaysia Airlines with the MH370 flight code on its analysis comparing the crisis communication way from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing. No survived in strategies used by AirAsia and Malaysia Airlines the two accidents. following the aircraft crashes through press releases Both accidents have come under intense scrutiny on airasia.com and malaysiaairlines.com sites for the by local and international media over the past two period of December 28, 2014 - March 4, 2015 and years. Some media are also interested to compare March 8, 2014 - August 6, 2015. both cases of accidents due to the value of the proximity to time or type of accident. The case of Theoretical Framework AirAsia and Malaysia Airlines which at first sight Research on crisis communications strategies seem identical to have differences in the causes of comes in many variations. The variation can be in the accidents and public reaction caused (Cbsnews.com, type of case raised and the method used. The 2014). The daily.com article also stated that AirAsia comparative content analysis of the British with its CEO Tonny Fernandes responded more Petroleum (BP) and Tokyo Electric Power Company quickly in response to the crisis than Malaysia (TEPCO) communications strategy by Abramenka Airlines (Allen, 2015). This difference of public (2013) becomes one of the references in this study. reaction is the basis for examining how AirAsia and This study attempts to compare crisis Malaysia Airlines are implementing their crisis communication strategies used by both organizations Ni Ketut Dimar Warsihantari / Jurnal Komunikasi ISKI, Vol. 03 (01), 2018. 1827 20 through press releases and facebook and twitter to the level of crisis responsibility and reputation information. The two main theories used to dissect threats posed by a crisis. The adverse impact of the the case are the theme of crisis messages (trust, crisis on reputation leads management to the collaboration, commitment and interactivity) and selection of communication strategies to respond to crisis response strategies which is Situational Crisis crises (Coombs, 2006: 243). The threat of reputation Communication Theory (denial, diminish, rebuild is defined as how much damage the crisis brings if and bolstering). The results of this study indicate that the organization does not take action to respond to BP predominantly emphasizes its commitment to the crisis. Reputation threats can be caused by initial overcome the crisis that occurs while TEPCO often crisis responsibility, crisis history and reputation uses more on combination of message commitment before a crisis. and collaboration. In addition, it can be seen that SCCT has developed a crisis assessment system some of the press releases issued by both consisting of two stages: assessment of the type of organizations contain apology message strategy and crisis and the threat of crisis to reputation (Coomb, commitment to minimize the impact of the crisis as 2007). This type of crisis is divided into three soon as possible. clusters: (1) victim, which is the type of crisis in Analysis of the content of crisis communication which the organization becomes the victim of crisis strategies has also been made to the financial crisis such as natural disaster, rumors, workplace violence, of General Motors (GM) with SCCT from Coomb as malevolence toward the organization; (2) accidental, the basic framework of the theory. In accordance that is the organization minimizes responsibility with the method of content analysis, Cooley and because the crisis is accidental or unintentional such Cooley (2011) coded GM's official statements in the as challenges, technical error, and product harm; (3) form of press releases, press conferences,