SayPro Crisis Communication Evaluation Form: A form to evaluate the effectiveness of communication efforts after a crisis.

SayPro Crisis Communication Evaluation Form

The Crisis Communication Evaluation Form is designed to assess the effectiveness of SayPro’s communication efforts after a crisis. This form helps identify areas of strength and improvement, ensuring that future crisis communication efforts are more effective and responsive.

1. Crisis Information Overview

Crisis Scenario:
[Describe the type of crisis that occurred (e.g., data breach, product recall, service outage, PR scandal).]

Date of Crisis:
[Enter the date the crisis occurred.]

Date of Crisis Resolution:
[Enter the date the crisis was resolved or the situation was brought under control.]

Duration of Crisis:
[Enter the duration of the crisis (e.g., 3 days, 1 week, etc.).]

2. Internal Communication Effectiveness

Clarity of Internal Messaging:

• Was the communication provided to employees clear and easy to understand?
  • ☐ Very Clear
  • ☐ Somewhat Clear
  • ☐ Unclear
  • ☐ Not Applicable

Timeliness of Internal Updates:

• Were internal stakeholders (employees, management, etc.) updated regularly with the necessary information during the crisis?
  • ☐ Excellent
  • ☐ Good
  • ☐ Needs Improvement
  • ☐ Poor

Employee Engagement:

• Did employees feel informed, supported, and equipped to respond to external inquiries?
  • ☐ Very Engaged
  • ☐ Somewhat Engaged
  • ☐ Not Engaged
  • ☐ Not Applicable

Overall Internal Communication Rating:

• [Rate the overall effectiveness of internal communication during the crisis.]
  • ☐ Excellent
  • ☐ Good
  • ☐ Needs Improvement
  • ☐ Poor

3. External Communication Effectiveness

Clarity of External Messaging:

• Was the message shared with external stakeholders (customers, media, partners, etc.) clear and consistent?
  • ☐ Very Clear
  • ☐ Somewhat Clear
  • ☐ Unclear
  • ☐ Not Applicable

Timeliness of External Updates:

• Was the crisis communicated promptly to external stakeholders (via press releases, social media posts, etc.)?
  • ☐ Excellent
  • ☐ Good
  • ☐ Needs Improvement
  • ☐ Poor

Use of Appropriate Communication Channels:

• Were the right communication channels used (e.g., email, press releases, social media, website updates)?
  • ☐ Excellent
  • ☐ Good
  • ☐ Needs Improvement
  • ☐ Poor

Consistency of Messaging Across Platforms:

• Was the message consistent across all platforms (e.g., website, social media, press releases, etc.)?
  • ☐ Very Consistent
  • ☐ Somewhat Consistent
  • ☐ Inconsistent
  • ☐ Not Applicable

Stakeholder Reactions:

• How did external stakeholders (customers, media, investors, etc.) respond to the crisis communication efforts?
  • ☐ Very Positive
  • ☐ Positive
  • ☐ Neutral
  • ☐ Negative

Effectiveness of Social Media Communication:

• How effectively were social media platforms used to communicate with the public and manage the crisis?
  • ☐ Excellent
  • ☐ Good
  • ☐ Needs Improvement
  • ☐ Poor

Overall External Communication Rating:

• [Rate the overall effectiveness of external communication during the crisis.]
  • ☐ Excellent
  • ☐ Good
  • ☐ Needs Improvement
  • ☐ Poor

4. Message Tone and Empathy

Tone of Messaging (Internal & External):

• Was the tone of the messages appropriate for the situation (e.g., empathetic, transparent, calm)?
  • ☐ Very Appropriate
  • ☐ Somewhat Appropriate
  • ☐ Inappropriate
  • ☐ Not Applicable

Empathy in Messaging:

• Did the communication reflect empathy and understanding of those affected by the crisis?
  • ☐ Very Empathetic
  • ☐ Somewhat Empathetic
  • ☐ Lacked Empathy
  • ☐ Not Applicable

5. Crisis Resolution Communication

Post-Crisis Communication:

• Was the company transparent in communicating the resolution of the crisis and the actions taken to prevent future occurrences?
  • ☐ Very Transparent
  • ☐ Somewhat Transparent
  • ☐ Not Transparent
  • ☐ Not Applicable

Customer Reassurance:

• Did the company effectively reassure customers that the issue was being addressed and that steps were being taken to avoid a recurrence?
  • ☐ Very Reassuring
  • ☐ Somewhat Reassuring
  • ☐ Not Reassuring
  • ☐ Not Applicable

Long-Term Messaging (Post-Crisis):

• Were follow-up communications handled effectively, maintaining transparency and trust?
  • ☐ Excellent
  • ☐ Good
  • ☐ Needs Improvement
  • ☐ Poor

6. Overall Crisis Communication Evaluation

What went well during the crisis communication?
[Provide a brief summary of the key strengths and positive aspects of the communication process.]

• [e.g., “The team responded quickly and provided consistent messaging across all platforms.”]
• [e.g., “Customer service handled inquiries effectively and reassured customers with clear information.”]

What areas need improvement?
[Provide a brief summary of any gaps, challenges, or weaknesses identified in the crisis communication process.]

• [e.g., “There was some confusion in the initial response regarding the messaging approval process.”]
• [e.g., “Social media responses were delayed, and more proactive monitoring is needed next time.”]

Suggestions for Improvement:
[Provide specific suggestions on how to improve crisis communication for future incidents.]

• [e.g., “Develop a crisis communication toolkit with pre-approved templates for faster response times.”]
• [e.g., “Train customer service teams on handling high-pressure situations with clear and empathetic messaging.”]

7. Final Rating

Overall Effectiveness of Crisis Communication:
[Rate the overall effectiveness of the crisis communication efforts.]

• ☐ Excellent
• ☐ Good
• ☐ Needs Improvement
• ☐ Poor

8. Additional Comments

[Provide any additional feedback, observations, or recommendations for improving crisis communication at SayPro.]

Crisis Communication Evaluation Sign-Off

Evaluator Name:
[Enter the name of the person conducting the evaluation.]

Role/Title:
[Enter the evaluator’s role.]

Date of Evaluation:
[Enter the date the evaluation is completed.]

This Crisis Communication Evaluation Form helps SayPro analyze and improve its communication efforts during and after a crisis. It captures feedback, identifies areas for improvement, and ensures that the company is better prepared for future crisis management situations.