In a Reputation Crisis, Don't Deny, Blame Shift or Act Defiant

When someone's behavior results in their reputation coming under scrutiny and attack it is unwise in reaction or response to bypass poise and act with denial, blame shifting or defiance. Yet that's what many individuals or organizations choose in egregious error.

It's a common occurrence rooted in protecting the ego and managing impressions. It's a clumsy, low return on investment sort of approach and steers one's well-being further away from protection, restoration or rebuild of a good name.

What is often a natural fear-based reaction does not prove effective. The outcome is quite the opposite as that type of behavior discussed above creates further distrust, disgust and resentment in the people who have been harmed or care about the wrongdoing.

An interesting story came to light in the past week: a well-known, successful coach of some of the best gymnasts in the country was the subject of a New York Times piece on her rotted approach towards her athletes.

Maggie Haney, owner of MG Elite Gymnastics (photo above) has coached elite athletes and made a name for herself with her connection to and leadership of high performance. Yet her name, reputation and business interests are now in a state of crisis.

Haney, according to the Danielle Allentuck story in the Times, has been suspended for eight years by U.S.A. Gymnastics for allegedly verbally abusing and mistreating athletes, including making them take casts off their injured bodies and train anyway. Claims have also been made that Haney tried to silence her athletes about her misdeeds.

People don't get professionally suspended for eight years for minor infractions of professionalism, ethics, governance and compliance. Haney and her legal counsel have to understand this and also realize what the ruling will look in the media, the sport, with competing coaches and in the training industry in which Haney works.

The allegations are more than an isolated occurrence, although one transgression would be alarming. Six families have claimed abuse by Haney.

In addition to the eight-year suspension, Haney then will be on a two-year probationary period before being allowed to apply for reinstatement. It appears, although it might not turn out this way, that U.S.A. Gymnastics has just administered a form of a death penalty to Haney's future as a coach.

Also problematic for Haney presently is the mindset her and her attorney, Russell Prince, are allowing to govern their decision making. As of now, Haney has not spoken, which is allowing the media to entirely craft a narrative and the public to assume the worst.

Prince has commented that Haney and him disagree with the findings. Fair enough. Yet that bland, robotic, expected comment does not make wise, successful crisis communications.

Neither does Prince's words, reported by Allentuck:

“We don’t think that it in any way, shape or form evaluated all of the facts of the circumstances,” Prince said. “The process is completely heavy-handed. I would anticipate an arbitration.”

This smacks of rationalization, diminishing negative impact suffered by the athletes (and their families) and denial. The comment about the process being "heavy-handed" whether accurate or not, and it very well might be, will be interpreted by the media, athletes and public as blame shifting.

None of this is helpful crisis management. It is decision making and behavior that will only add to the negativity surrounding Haney's name, mindset, allegations and reputation.

Prince also arguably erred by saying, "I would anticipate an arbitration." Why is that an error? It comes across as self centered, cocky, lacking emotional intelligence for the athletes, and conveying that an arbitrator will find Haney far less guilty or responsible for the reported claims.

It is highly unlikely this will prove factual and that good will come from an arbitration if it occurs, yet more importantly, that type of arrogance only upsets those who have been mistreated or abused.

It is always wise to respond to allegations in crisis, yet with poise, humility and emotional intelligence, not insensitivity, denial, blame shifting, overconfidence and arrogance.

One approach helps show character in the face of crisis and the other inflames matters and draws additional disdain, inspiring greater assumptions of guilt.

Risk, in the case of Haney (and many like her), is not being mitigated. It is being mismanaged, recklessly, maybe ignorantly and will come at a higher cost that doesn't need to be paid.

As for what denial gets you in sports for wrongdoing, reference the case of Pete Rose, banned from baseball and denied his place in the Hall of Fame or similarly, at least as of this writing for elite performing athletes, some of the best ever in that sport, who due to steroid abuse and also lying about it, have not been elected to the Hall of Fame. In short, forgiveness and restoration don't emerge.

Haney and Prince should read and think on what Thomas Edison was quoted as expressing.

"There is a way to do it better, find it," he communicated.

Haney and Prince have not yet found and are not yet responding in that "better way."

Michael Toebe is a specialist for reputation, professional relationships communication and wiser crisis management, serving individuals and organizations. He writes the weekly Red Diamonds Newsletter (published on Medium), writes advisory articles for online magazines and hosts the short-segment Red Diamonds Podcast, found on many platforms