Customers with credit troubles can avoid expensive security deposits with pay-as-you-go plans. Savvy savers can reduce their energy bills by running the dishwasher and clothes dryer during off-peak hours on new time-of-use rate plans. Folks who are concerned about the environment can celebrate an electric grid that uses energy more efficiently, reducing the demand for more power plants, and thus, emissions. New residents can have their power turned on instantly with the click of the mouse, and not have to worry about scheduling an appointment between 8 a.m. and noon.

The power companies benefit too, by reducing overhead, enhancing their ability to identify and fix problems quickly, having the ability to control large portions of their systems remotely, and analyzing and responding to energy demand more efficiently.

But despite all the benefits, there is a small but vocal group raising concerns about the radio waves these meters use to communicate with the electric utility.

The power company in my hometown is currently embroiled in a controversy involving this very topic.

I have to admit that the first time I read about the controversy, I was kind of surprised. I’ve been working with electric utilities for my entire professional career, and I can rattle off a long list of issues that have the potential to create controversy…but this one had never crossed my mind.

It was a good reminder that when you’re developing a communication plan and going through that trusty SWOT (or TOWS) analysis, you have to keep an open mind. It’s easy to overlook potential threats, especially when you’re launching a new product or service that is several orders of magnitude better than the thing it’s replacing. It’s equally easy to dismiss potential weaknesses when your organization is great at what it does and has a long history of doing it well.

But a vivid imagination and a willingness to consider the unlikely is exactly what it takes to build a great plan – whether it’s a routine communication program, a new product or service launch, or a crisis management plan that you hope never has to be used.

So next time you’re working on a plan, don’t be so quick to cast aside the off-the-wall ideas that come up in the brainstorm session. Write them down. Revisit them later. Ask a friend or colleague. Punch them into Google and see what comes up. You might be surprised…and you might also be recognized as the one with the vision that helps your organization avoid (or at least be prepared for) a big problem.

Though most major airlines have a robust social media monitoring and response program, a story written today by one of my favorite Wall Street Journal reporters/bloggers shows the significant diversity in the approaches they take.

For most airlines, the approach seems to be an extension of regular customer service. Tweet a complaint, and you’ll get a response that is consistent with the airline’s standard policy in that situation.

At least one airline, Delta, takes a different approach. According to this story, Delta’s social media strategy is like customer service on steroids. The folks who monitor social media chatter about the airline are empowered to bend rules and go beyond standard customer service protocols to make things right for customers.

This raises an interesting dilemma. On one hand, I am big fan of empowering front-line employees to use their discretion and immediately address customer service issues – a model made famous by the Ritz Carlton. And I’m an equally big fan of using social media for helping customers.

On the other, Delta’s approach creates a shameless double standard. Essentially, the message they’re sending is “if you have the power to make us look bad and cause a public relations nightmare, we’ll do something. Otherwise, tough noogies.”

The magic of the Ritz Carlton model is that it applies to all employees interacting with customers in all situations…not just those causing a scene in the hotel lobby.

Coincidentally, another report published today named Delta the meanest airline in America.

Look. I am not some naïve fool who thinks the world is filled with unicorns, rainbows and kittens. I know that the squeaky wheel gets the grease, and that people who have the power to influence the opinions of others get preferred treatment. I get it. I am, after all, a PR guy.

What I’m suggesting is that maybe Delta doesn’t “get it.” Social media is a feedback loop. If your customer service policies are so bad that the only way a person can seek redress of their grievance is through public shaming, it might be time to look at the rest of your operation.

I know it’s impossible for every front-line employee of a major corporation to flawlessly serve as a brand ambassador. I know you need scripts and policy manuals to ensure CSRs deliver consistent service and control costs.

But at the same time, you need to have a better escalation procedure for solving problems…and more important, that policy should be the same for all your customers, whether they are standing at a counter, talking on the phone, or tweeting to the world. Remember that integrity is doing the right thing even when nobody is looking.

Airlines, including Delta, should be commended for being innovators in embracing social media as a way to interact with their customers and solving problems. It’s a fantastic tool for building relationships and engaging in meaningful conversations. But that’s just the first step in the process.

Next, they need to take the information they gather through social media, and use it to improve the rest of their operation.

Then, then need to apply those same standards to all points of customer contact, not just the embarrassing ones, because any good PR person will tell you that double standards, hypocrisy and arbitrary policies look just as bad as (if not worse than) bad customer service.

In a world of social media, don’t you think somebody might notice that double standard? The Wall Street Journal did.

I don’t know about you, but one of my biggest fears is making a mistake, letting somebody down, and never knowing it happened. How can I learn from my mistake, grow as a professional, and make amends for something I don’t even know happened?

For years, when a company messed up, most of the time they’d never know about it. Most people just don’t have the time or inclination to complain about bad outcomes, unless it involves a really important topic. Instead, most folks just stop patronizing the business and tell friends about the bad experience. The business never knows it happened, never has a chance to apologize and fix it, and can’t take steps to make sure it doesn’t happen again.

Social media has transformed the way people share experiences – both good and bad. Word of mouth that used to percolate slowly through a group can now be broadcast to the world instantly. Whether that is good news or bad news depends on what actions you’re willing to take.

If you’re eager to engage in a conversation with your customers, build deeper relationships, and seek opportunities to improve your product or service, then the social media revolution should be a blessing to your business.

Unless you’re perfect, your company is perfect, and all of your customers are perfect, the day will come when somebody makes a mistake or a customer is confused. When that day comes, you should be crossing your fingers that somebody brings it to your attention.

When a customer chooses Facebook, Twitter or another social media outlet as the channel for asking question or voicing complaint, you’ve just been handed a golden opportunity to improve your business, show the world that you care about your customers, listen to what they say, and do everything you can to take care of them.

Also keep in mind that if one person asks a question, odds are pretty good that lots of other people are wondering the same thing. By providing the answer in a public forum, you’re building a living FAQ document – an archive other customers can easily access to find answers to common questions. It also helps a company identify areas where it might need to improve its systems and processes.

Of course, there are some industries where confidentiality considerations preclude a company from providing a complete answer in a public forum. For example, we have worked with a handful rural electric cooperatives around the country, and it would be inappropriate for them to discuss a specific customer’s account information in public. But the co-op could give general information about common reasons something might happen in the public forum, and follow up by phone or email to discuss the specific concern directly.

Companies that operate in heavily regulated industries should consult legal counsel for guidance on the rules governing what can and can’t be said through social media channels. Most of the time, the communications team and the legal team should be able to work out a solution that makes everybody happy.

People are remarkably forgiving. It’s amazing how far a simple statement like, “I’m sorry. Here’s what I’m going to do to make it right,” will go toward resolving an issue. If you want to create a satisfied customer, deliver great service. If you want to create a loyal customer for life, act with integrity when you make a mistake.

Of course this final message is nothing like the original message, and a good time is had by all.

I was reminded of this game while reading one of the many news stories and blog posts regarding Jason Whitlock. For our friends and clients outside of Kansas City, Jason Whitlock was a longtime sports columnist at The Kansas City Star known for taking controversial stands on issues. He recently parted ways with the paper.

His departure has been the subject of more media reports, blog posts and water cooler discussions than I care to think about. There was even a three-hour special interview (dubbed “The Explanation”) simulcast on radio and TV in which he shared his side of the story. Plenty of accusations have been made about who’s at fault, and what the real story is.

I’ll let others handle that debate, but there is one part of this soap opera that folks in my business should notice.

Many reports claim that Whitlock is now working as an online columnist for Fox Sports with a contract worth approximately $2 million over three years. There’s no question about whether or not he’s writing for Fox. You can go online and read his columns for yourself. What is being debated is the size of the contract.

To many folks, that number seems awfully high for an online-only deal, and some reports say Whitlock himself has never confirmed it. Despite this uncertainty, the $2 million number has been repeated time and again. It even made its way into a New York Times article on the issue…The gray lady. Our national newspaper of record. All the news that’s fit to print.

Hearne Christopher, another former Star reporter and current blogger, wrote an interesting post yesterday about how this rumor evolved into fact and made its way into America’s finest newspaper.

Do I know how much Jason Whitlock is making at Fox Sports? No, I don’t. I have no idea, and I really don’t care…but that’s not the point.

The point is how quickly the truth can get lost in a social media world. Maybe that number is true. Maybe it’s not. I don’t know who to believe, and (as far as I know) nobody with direct knowledge is doing anything to address the confusion. In this situation, the fact in question is of little consequence to our daily lives, so the confusion just makes for one more wrinkle in an entertaining side show.

But when the issue is more substantial, confusion and ambiguity are often just as bad as (and sometimes worse than) misinformation. How would you feel if it was your brand, your company, or your reputation at stake? What if the number in question was your stock price? Or the amount you were going to raise your customers’ electric rates? Or the number of people your firm had to lay off?

A misplaced decimal point in one social media outlet could quickly spiral out of control if left unchecked.

Would you even notice if that happened? Are you listening to the conversation? Do you have a plan in place to quickly correct erroneous information?

I know that lots of businesses look at social media and say “that’s not the right strategy for us.” In almost all of these cases, I suspect social media engagement deserves a seat at the marketing strategy table, but I’m willing to set that argument aside for the sake of this discussion. Fair enough. Maybe social media isn’t the highest and best use of your resources, but you still need to be listening and have a plan for response. Most buildings will never burn down, but we don’t think twice about investing in sprinklers, fire alarms, smoke detectors and insurance. It would foolish not to.

Your organization’s reputation deserves the same level of protection.

A distorted message makes for a great game when you’re five. When you’re a grown up running an organization and the message gets distorted, a good time is rarely had by anyone…except your competitors.

If your organization is getting the wrong kind of attention, what is the cause and what do you have in place to address it effectively? Are you prepared to talk immediately to those most affected and resolve the key problem(s)? What about your employees, shareholders, customers, regulators, neighbors, and community? Are you already listening to conversations going on about your business in social media or, turning a deaf ear?

Traditional media used to be the great concern as regards bad PR in a crisis. Those were the days. Now consumer-generated media can light a fuse that burns bright and fast, escalating out of control.

When you are having trouble is not the time to start listening to the consumer conversations, building your social media infrastructure or developing a rapport with editors and reporters. Do it now. Understand and leverage social media tools to engage your communities. Meet with reporters and editors and learn how they work, what you can expect from them and what they can expect from you. Educate influencers about your business and key people.

Effective management of a crisis requires a commitment to unassailable behavior while acting quickly, decisively, and directly. Anything less and you are extending the life of the crisis and the depth of the damage. Credible conduct is the foundation on which success is built when dealing with trouble. It allows you to:

• Think clearly. Deliberate calmly and with all speed.

• Identify the problem(s) and assess. Even the lowest level employee should feel free to do so with candor. Have the common sense view and anticipate consequences.

• Act quickly and responsibly. Solving problems and “winning” in crisis situations is a function of speed… of decision making, of action, of reaction, of collaboration, of common sense in action.

Now, what do you have to do to think clearly, identify the problem and assess and act quickly and responsibly? Here are the six steps to take to effectively manage a crisis

1. Plan
You do not want to learn how to operate a fire extinguisher when you are on fire. Plan ahead. Identify what can disrupt your organization. Involve the “boss” and build a clear plan that identifies risks, roles and communication flow and establishes protocols for action.

2. Test
A tested plan is a workable plan. Plans of every sort have earned a reputation as dust gathering door stops. Be the exception. Changes in the business, personnel and vulnerabilities suggest that the crisis team revisit the plan quarterly and test it annually.

3. Pre-authorize.
Few things are more paralyzing than dithering about who is authorized to do or say what. Those old enough to remember, can recall General Alexander Haig, President Reagan’s secretary of state at the time, famously claiming, “I’m in control here” following Reagan’s hospitalization after the assassination attempt. Get this figured out now.

4. Take action.
Most crises happen fast and travel faster. Skip the whole denial, delay and depression thing. While stalling and acting defensive may be your comfort zone, it soon will be very uncomfortable for your business. Do what should be done promptly and with care.

5. Behave well.
If you are focused on doing the right thing right, you are exceptionally well equipped to overwhelm bad news with common sense.

6. Act with humanity.
Even doing the right thing right can disrupt lives and fortunes. This is not the time to put on your corporate game face. When you are making those right decisions, implement them humanely, face-to-face when possible, and with all sincerity.

A poor response to bad PR, or a crisis, can be more destructive than the bad news itself. In the event of bad news, people expect and deserve candor, an explanation, a commitment to address the issue, an expression of regret, consultation of others to help problem solve, higher standards of performance, and restitution. Are you ready to respond appropriately when needed to do the right thing while protecting your brand? Can your organization handle bad PR?