The first 24 hours of a corporate crisis should focus on establishing control, verifying information, activating the crisis team, identifying priority stakeholders, coordinating legal and communications teams, preparing the first response, and deciding when the organization will communicate again.
The objective is not to communicate as much as possible or to have every answer immediately. It is to make the right decisions in the right sequence while information is incomplete and pressure is increasing.
A corporate crisis rarely develops according to plan. Journalists may already be asking questions. Employees may be hearing rumors. Customers or business partners may want immediate reassurance. Senior management wants certainty that the organization may not yet have. Legal teams are assessing exposure, while social media can transform partial information into an established narrative before leadership has agreed on its first public position.
This is why corporate crisis management is not primarily about finding the perfect words. It is about creating a structure that allows the organization to make sound decisions under pressure.
What should a company do in the first hour of a corporate crisis?
The first priority is to establish control over the response.
This does not mean having complete control over the incident itself. During the first hour, that may be impossible. It means knowing who is responsible for assessing the situation, who has authority to make decisions, who is collecting and validating information, who is managing communication, and which executives need to be involved.
Without that structure, the first hour can disappear into internal discussions about who is in charge, whether the situation qualifies as a crisis, who can approve a statement, whether senior management has been informed, and which stakeholders should be contacted.
These are legitimate questions. They are also questions that should ideally have been answered before a serious incident begins.
Organizations that prepare effectively define crisis roles, deputies, escalation thresholds, approval procedures, and communication responsibilities in advance. The CCNE Crisis Communications Toolkit similarly structures crisis communication around actions before, during, and after an incident, including crisis team processes, media communication, training, and assessment. (Crisis Communications Network Europe)
Once the crisis structure has been activated, leadership needs a reliable source of information. Facts should be verified before they enter internal briefings or external communication. At the same time, the team should clearly identify what remains unknown.
Knowing what you do not yet know is an important part of managing the first hours of a crisis.
What should a company say before all the facts are known?
One of the hardest decisions in corporate crisis communication is whether to speak when the organization does not yet understand exactly what has happened.
Waiting for complete certainty can create an information vacuum.
Communicating too much, too quickly, can create inaccuracies that become a second reputational problem.
The answer is usually neither silence nor speculation. It is controlled communication.
A holding statement allows an organization to acknowledge a developing situation, explain what it can responsibly confirm, state what action is being taken, and establish that further information will follow.
If an investigation is underway, say so.
If information has not been confirmed, do not speculate.
If the organization intends to provide another update, communicate when that update can reasonably be expected.
An effective first statement does not need to answer every question. It needs to demonstrate that the organization is aware of the situation, is responding to it, and will communicate responsibly as verified information becomes available.
The wider crisis communication framework developed by Lighthouse PR approaches this as a stakeholder management discipline rather than simply a messaging exercise. It emphasizes the sequence of communication, the audiences involved, the channels used, and the distinction between confirmed information and information still being established. (Lighthouse PR)
Who should be informed first during a corporate crisis?
There is no universal stakeholder sequence that applies to every crisis.
A serious incident may involve employees, customers, regulators, investors, business partners, suppliers, local authorities, communities, journalists, and other stakeholders.
The correct sequence depends on the nature of the incident, legal obligations, the level of impact on each group, and the reputational consequences of a stakeholder discovering the situation elsewhere.
An important client should not learn about a major operational disruption from a news website if the company had a reasonable opportunity to communicate directly.
Employees should not discover a significant decision affecting them through social media.
A regulator should not first become aware of a reportable incident through a journalist.
The organization should therefore answer four questions for every priority stakeholder.
Who needs to know?
What do they need to know?
Who should communicate with them?
When and through which channel should that communication take place?
Different stakeholder groups may legitimately require different levels of detail. What must remain consistent is the factual foundation of the communication.
Stakeholder mapping becomes particularly important when a crisis affects a specific location or community. CCNE’s guidance on risk and crisis communication with local communities recommends understanding the affected stakeholders, choosing appropriate communication channels, establishing a predictable communication cadence, and continuing to listen to stakeholder concerns. (Crisis Communications Network Europe)
How should you communicate with employees during a crisis?
Employees are frequently treated as an audience that receives information after the external response has already been decided.
That can be a serious mistake.
Employees are not only stakeholders. They are also part of the organization’s communication environment.
They speak with customers, business partners, suppliers, professional contacts, family members, and friends. They may receive questions through LinkedIn, messaging platforms, email, or direct conversations long before the organization has issued a detailed public response.
If employees receive no reliable information internally, they will inevitably encounter other versions of the story elsewhere.
This creates space for confusion, conflicting information, and speculation.
Internal crisis communication should explain what the organization can confirm, what employees need to know, what they should do if approached externally, where questions should be directed, and when another internal update will follow.
Employees do not need access to every confidential element of an active crisis.
They do need confidence that leadership understands the situation, has a process for managing it, and will keep them informed.
Internal and external communication should therefore develop together, even when the information shared with each audience is different.
How should legal and communications teams work together in a crisis?
Legal risk and reputational risk do not operate separately.
The legal team has to protect the organization’s legal and regulatory position. The communications team has to consider stakeholder expectations, employee confidence, media interpretation, reputation, and the consequences of saying too much or too little.
One function should not finish its work before the other begins.
They need to operate in parallel.
A response can be legally cautious and still create significant reputational damage. Equally, a statement written solely around reputational considerations can create unnecessary legal exposure.
The objective is to develop a position that is factually accurate, legally defensible, and credible to the stakeholders receiving it.
This relationship should also be established before a crisis.
Who approves the first statement?
Which legal issues require mandatory escalation?
How quickly can approvals happen?
Who makes the final decision when the legal and communications perspectives differ?
A normal corporate approval process may be too slow when a story is developing by the hour.
Organizations that wait until the crisis to work out how legal and communications should collaborate lose valuable time while the external narrative continues to move.
Who should speak to the media during a corporate crisis?
The CEO is not automatically the right spokesperson for every crisis.
The appropriate spokesperson depends on the seriousness of the incident, the information that needs to be communicated, the stakeholders affected, and the symbolic importance of senior leadership being visible.
A major corporate or reputational crisis may require the CEO.
A complex operational incident may require a senior technical expert.
A local incident may initially be better handled by a local executive who understands the situation in detail.
The important point is that spokesperson selection should be intentional.
The spokesperson must also be prepared for an environment that is very different from a normal business conversation.
A journalist may ask the question leadership hoped would not be asked. Information may still be developing. The interviewer may challenge the organization’s version of events, return repeatedly to an uncomfortable issue, or introduce information the spokesperson has not seen before.
Media training therefore needs to happen before a crisis.
CCNE’s guide on why media training matters identifies message discipline, the ability to handle difficult questions, confidence, and realistic preparation as essential capabilities for spokespeople. (Crisis Communications Network Europe)
For organizations operating in Romania, Lighthouse PR’s approach to media training uses scenarios based on the business and reputational risks senior leaders may realistically encounter, including hostile interviews and crisis situations designed to create pressure before the real situation does. (Lighthouse PR)
Media training is not about teaching executives how to avoid difficult questions.
It is about helping them answer difficult questions clearly, accurately, and confidently without creating an additional problem through an improvised response.
What can a real crisis simulation in Romania teach leadership teams?
The difference between a crisis plan and crisis preparedness becomes much clearer when leadership has to use the plan under pressure.
One example from Romania comes from a crisis simulation developed by Lighthouse PR for EGGER Romania at the company’s industrial platform in Rădăuți, Suceava County.
The exercise recreated a night time fire at a lumber warehouse. As the simulation developed, additional complications were introduced, including injured employees requiring hospitalization, strong winds affecting the simulated fire, locomotives blocked on transportation rails, ethanol filled wagons in proximity to the fire, pressure from local authorities, social media activity, local community concerns, and media scrutiny.
The purpose was not simply to ask whether the organization had a crisis manual.
It was to test whether the organization could use it when events became more complicated.
Two teams of eight participants took part, including both members of the designated crisis team and their reserves. Over two hours, the participants received four scenario updates, requiring them to reassess the situation and make new decisions as information changed. (Lighthouse PR)
The exercise tested leadership, delegation, command structures, internal information flow, stakeholder communication, media relations, procedural discipline, and the ability of backup team members to assume critical responsibilities.
The full EGGER Romania crisis simulation case study also demonstrates why a realistic scenario matters. If participants do not believe the situation could actually happen, the exercise tests the scenario rather than the organization’s real response capability. (Lighthouse PR)
For companies operating in Romania or elsewhere in Central and Eastern Europe, the precise trigger may be different.
It could be an industrial accident, cyber incident, product recall, regulatory investigation, leadership issue, labor dispute, or reputational attack.
The capabilities being tested are remarkably similar: authority, information, leadership, speed, coordination, stakeholder management, and communication.
A simulation allows an organization to discover where these capabilities break down before the consequences are real.
How can you tell if your company is crisis ready?
A crisis plan cannot guarantee that the first 24 hours will run smoothly.
Crises are disruptive precisely because they challenge normal processes.
Preparedness should instead remove avoidable uncertainty.
By the time a serious incident occurs, the leadership team should already know who has authority, who joins the crisis team, who verifies information, who approves communication, which stakeholders may require immediate contact, who communicates with employees, who speaks publicly, and how legal and communications teams make decisions together.
There should also be deputies for critical roles.
People travel. Executives become unavailable. A key decision maker may be directly involved in the incident. A crisis structure that works only when every designated person is available is not a resilient crisis structure.
The strongest test is not whether the organization has written all of this down.
It is whether the people involved have practiced it.
CCNE’s 2025 Pulse Check across crisis experts in 18 European countries found that media training and risk workshops are standard elements of crisis preparedness for more than half of the participating agencies, while more than 70 percent use early warning systems such as social media or issue monitoring. (Crisis Communications Network Europe)
For the Romanian market, Lighthouse PR similarly frames crisis management as a combination of decision making, stakeholder coordination, communication, operational response, and preparation before the incident begins. Its crisis work includes tabletop simulations and spokesperson training for senior leadership teams. (Lighthouse PR)
The first 24 hours therefore reveal much more than the quality of an organization’s press statement.
They reveal the quality of its preparation.
What should happen by the end of the first 24 hours?
Every crisis is different, and some incidents will remain highly unstable beyond the first day.
By the end of the first 24 hours, however, the organization should ideally have moved from initial uncertainty toward an established response structure.
Leadership should understand what is known and what is still being investigated.
The crisis team should have clear authority and defined responsibilities.
Priority stakeholders should have received appropriate communication.
Employees should know where the organization stands and where they should direct questions.
The spokesperson should be prepared for the next phase of media scrutiny.
Legal and communications teams should be working from the same factual foundation.
The organization should also have established a rhythm for future updates.
This last point matters. A crisis response is not completed when the first statement is published.
If the organization commits to another update, it should provide one. If facts change, communication should change with them. If stakeholders have unanswered questions, those questions should inform the next stage of the response.
The first 24 hours are about establishing control.
The days that follow are about maintaining it.
Frequently asked questions about the first 24 hours of a corporate crisis
What is the first thing a company should do when a crisis happens?
The first priority is to establish control over the response. Activate the crisis team, verify the available facts, define decision making authority, and create a reliable source of information before substantive communication begins.
Should a company respond before it has all the facts?
Yes, when the situation requires acknowledgment. The organization should communicate only what it can responsibly confirm. A holding statement can acknowledge the incident, explain that it is being assessed, and establish when further information will be provided without speculating.
Who should be informed first during a corporate crisis?
The sequence depends on the incident. Employees, regulators, customers, investors, strategic partners, local authorities, and other directly affected stakeholders may require direct communication before a broad public announcement. The sequence should reflect legal obligations, impact, and the consequences of stakeholders discovering the situation elsewhere.
Should employees be informed before the media?
In many corporate crises, employees should receive relevant information before or at the same time as external communication. They are directly connected to the organization and may quickly receive questions from customers, partners, journalists, and their own professional networks.
What is a holding statement in crisis communication?
A holding statement is an initial communication used when an organization needs to acknowledge a developing situation before all facts are available. It should confirm what is known, explain what the organization is doing, avoid speculation, and indicate when further information can be expected.
Should the CEO always be the crisis spokesperson?
No. The appropriate spokesperson depends on the nature and seriousness of the situation. The CEO may be essential in a major corporate or reputational crisis, while an operational expert or local executive may be more credible in another type of incident.
How often should a company provide crisis updates?
There is no universal timetable. The organization should establish a realistic communication rhythm and update stakeholders as material information becomes available. If it promises an update at a specific time, it should respect that commitment even if there is limited new information.
How can a company prepare for the first 24 hours of a crisis?
Preparation should include risk assessment, crisis team roles and deputies, escalation procedures, stakeholder mapping, holding statements, internal communication procedures, spokesperson training, monitoring systems, and realistic crisis simulations.
When should a company involve an external crisis communication consultancy?
The best time is before a serious incident occurs. External crisis advisors can help leadership teams assess vulnerabilities, challenge internal assumptions, develop communication procedures, train spokespeople, and conduct realistic simulations. During an active crisis, they can also provide strategic perspective when internal teams are working under significant pressure.
About the author
Ana Maria Gardiner is a senior communications executive, board level advisor, and founder of Lighthouse PR. She advises multinational organizations and leadership teams on strategic communications, corporate reputation, public relations, marketing communications, and crisis management.
Her international and local experience includes projects for JPMorgan, Coca-Cola, ExxonMobil, Siemens Energy, HEINEKEN, Carrefour, Lexus, Franklin Templeton, BNP Paribas, Sungrow, XTB, Bitget, EssilorLuxottica, and Pfizer, among other organizations. Throughout her career, she has developed and implemented communication strategies across the Middle East, North Africa, and Central and Eastern Europe.
Ana Maria holds a bachelor’s degree in Political Science and a master’s degree in European Affairs. She currently advises Lighthouse PR clients on reputation management, strategic positioning, and high stakes communications, working closely with executives and board level decision makers.
About Lighthouse PR
Lighthouse PR is an independent PR and communications consultancy working with organizations across Central and Southeastern Europe. The agency provides media relations, reputation management, crisis communication, social media, and strategic communications services, led by senior consultants.
Lighthouse PR: Clear. Concise. Convincing.