Turning a negative into a positive: an upLYFTing case

No organisation wants to be at the centre of a crisis, rather the exact opposite! But what happens when the public sets the agenda and shifts the focus onto your organisation too?

A recent blog post by the talented Fairouz Kasri highlighted the plight of Uber following the #DeleteUber backlash. A negative event took place that was directly attributed to an organisation, which evoked a PR crisis - nothing uncommon there. But what was unique about this instance is that Lyft, Uber’s closest competitor, wasn’t part of the crisis. Instead Lyft was summoned to join the narrative as a result of #DownloadLyft gaining traction on social media. So, let’s look at this from Lyft’s perspective and discuss possible elements that enabled the company to turn the negatives of an external crisis into a positive opportunity.

How things evolved

Let’s first examine the proceedings that led up to the crisis. In January 2017, triggered by Trump’s travel ban, New York taxi drivers undertook strike action. However, the impact of the strike was minimised as Uber continued to operate and even turned off surge-pricing, which many customers took as confirmation that the company was endeavouring to profit from the strike. And thus began #DeleteUber and #DownloadLyft.

Twitter screenshot, @MikeLynch09

Don’t rush, wait

As previously mentioned this was a unique situation and as such, Lyft approached it with the same level of uniqueness. One might even say Lyft threw the crisis communication ‘rule book’ out the window. As pressure from the public mounted and Lyft became part of the narrative, they initially didn’t respond. Instead, it wasn’t until two days later that Lyft’s co-founders posted an empathetic response entitled ‘Defending Our Values’. In times of crisis academics advise responding in a fast and timely manner to ensure an organisation’s ‘voice’ is heard [1, 2]. However, going against this advice and delaying their response turned out to be beneficial for Lyft. It gave the organisation time to monitor, and more importantly listen to the conversation, thus correctly identifying the sentiment. The result - an authentic response that resonated well with the audience.

Twitter screenshot, @Lyft

What else did Lyft do differently?

Again, the ‘rules’ tell us effective crisis communication still relies on prioritising traditional media. This is because traditional media is seen as a more effective and credible source, while social media is not perceived in the same way [1]. When Lyft’s co-founders issued their response, they did so via their website, Twitter and… that’s it. Yet despite ignoring traditional media channels the response was still interpreted as credible and exhibited Lyft in a positive manner, thus helping increase its popularity.

Can we learn anything?

Despite Lyft being a unique example there are still lessons we can learn. Mainly that the crisis communication ‘rule book’ isn’t so much of a ‘rule book’ as it is a guide. This view may not be echoed by academics who develop stringent processes and strategies for practitioners to follow, but it certainly has the support of some in the industry [3]. As a practitioner it is misleading to assume homogeneity in crises [1]. You need to really consider the uniqueness of the situation that makes up *your* crisis, what will benefit *your* stakeholders and *your* organisation, and only then can you start to identify positive opportunities.

_______________________________________________________________

[1] Eriksson, M. (2018). Lessons for crisis communication on social media: A systematic review of what research tells the practice. International Journal of Strategic Communication, 12(5), 526-551

[2] Sung, M., & Hwang, J.-S. (2014). Who drives a crisis? The diffusion of an issue through social networks. Computers in Human Behavior, 36, 246–257

[3] Van Rooij, E. (2018). Guest lecture crisis communications [PowerPoint slides]. Retrieved from: https://canvas.uva.nl/courses/3068/modules   

 ___________________________________________________________

About the author:
Natalie Henshall is a Communication Science Masters student at the University of Amsterdam, specialising in persuasive communication. She has previous experience in communications, marketing and PR gained from working in the UK public sector. Her interests include social media engagement and health communications.