Preemptive Communication vs. Proactive Communication

Jim Lukaszewski made a point during his recent visit to Barbados for an IABC Barbados seminar that I will always remember. He said that we needed to go beyond the argument about whether we should communicate proactively rather than in a reactive manner and focus on a preemptive strategy. By this I gathered that he meant communications professionals had a duty to look as far ahead as possible and act in order to minimize the negative consequences of planned future action.

Such a strategy would have been perfect for the Immigration department who recently found it necessary to put out a fire regarding fingerprinting at the airport. If it was previously announced it was either very long ago or needed to be repeated more frequently before this technology was employed.

It is also interesting that while the Minister of Labour and Immigration is saying it is not mandatory, one individual in an anonymous interview with a section of the media recounted being told to 'comply or be put back on the plane'. Preemptive communication on the part of the ministry would have led to greater knowledge and understanding about the process and how passengers were to proceed. It would have answered questions such as when this process was going to start, its objectives, if it was mandatory, if they were testing the system and/ or what the plans were going forward to make it permanent.

It is apparent that other key stakeholders were totally unaware, perhaps beyond the boardroom but what else is new?

How will this affect Barbados' tourism? Since the thrust by global border control authorities to beef up security these high level security measures have become the norm so it is unlikely to be a major decisive factor in whether one will travel to Barbados as planned though one can never tell for sure. The fact remains however that more ought to have been done to inform the traveling public, both inbound and outbound, about the new measure so that all might be clear on the matter.

They could have issued news bulletins, put up signage at the airport, participated in live interviews, held a press conference, and the list goes on.

While the ministry must be commended for engaging the media to clarify the move once it realized things were getting out of hand, the fact is this was after the opposition and the press could take a swing at it. This could have been managed much better had the immigration department acted preemptively.