# data[].attributes.body
Emergency situation - Natural disaster
ES - timely answer and response, fact based information

# data[].attributes.body
Emergency situation: volcanic eruption in densely populated area
Reputational risk: an event or occurrence of violation to standard  in an organization which may become public consumption which will create erosion of trust.

Similarities:
- Both situations create crisis situation, chaotic environment.
- Both situations need immediate action to handle.
- Both situations, if not being well managed, will have prolong effects.

Differences:
- Emergency situation needs coordination with other stakeholders.
- Reputational may only involve one person to deal with.

# data[].attributes.body
Emergency situation - Natural disaster e.g. Tsunami in Asia
Reputational Risk - UNOPS pension fund crisis

ES - timely answer and response, fact based information provision help to join forces, enables help and support to people and countries. this helps to prevent damages from multiplying. This creates trust among all audiences and which itself supports the implementation of aid work etc.

RR - timely answer and fact based information provision create trust and support within the different audiences. This helps to support diminishing the damage and helps solution finding.

Similarities are - who speaks, message development, timely involvement, honesty and fact based information to avoid overwhelming emotions and focus on solution finding to get out of the crisis situaition.

# data[].attributes.body
Reputational risk : allegation instrumental use of the humanitarian aid.

Actions: communicate how the organization do monitoring of the supplies delivered.

# data[].attributes.body
Emergency situation: a flood occurs and thousands are displaced and logistics are very difficult making it difficult to deliver.

Reputational risk- there is an allegation of corruption within my agency and the media is  writing about this.

Differences: an emergency situation could impact my operation and programme making it difficult to deliver, but the organization could find ways to work. It has a short-term impact.
A reputational risk has long-term impact and affects the brand of my organization. I would need time to build trust in the brand.

# data[].attributes.body
Reputational risk could be within control and preventable as it concerns humans committed to working for the greater good and rather committed misconduct like sexual exploitation, mismanagement of funds, scandals, etc. On the other hand, Emergency situation is more likely out of the organization’s control and it includes,  wars, natural causes.

Similarities - they both require immediate action from the agency, they both pose expectations from the public eye, they both require a spokesperson to represent the agency.

Differences - reputational risk is more within the agency’s control to avoid/prevent it when signs and reporting (if any) are taken seriously compared to emergency situations, the public eye is more likely to look with hope and anticipation at organizations to find information and solutions about/for the emergency situation and with less trust when it comes to reputational risks.

# data[].attributes.body
Emergency situation:
Natural disaster, such as flooding

Reputational risk:
Not responding to a crisis in a timely matter, after many people have already made their minds about the role of the UN on the situation

Similarities:
- The channels to communicate are the same.
- Opinion leaders play an important role on how the work and role of the UN is perceived.

Differences:
- One requires a community-based approach, the other requires a strategy to reach a larger audience.

# data[].attributes.body
Emergency situation: COVID-19 pandemic
Reputational risk: sexual abuse and misconduct by agency staff

Similarities:

- Both crises must be managed, with an adequate crisis management plan and an attribution of responsibilities
- In both situations, speed of response matters

Differences:
- The reputational risk situation carries greater threat of loss of trust and confidence in the organization
- In reputational crisis, the onus of action is on the organization itself, the imperative is to show action the organization is taking to uphold its declarative values
- In emergency situation, it is important to tell the communities and individuals what action they can take

# data[].attributes.body
Emergency situation: some natural disaster that wipes out connectivity (eg. Tonga) leaving populations isolated and very complicated to communicate with any possible aid.

Reputational risk: that the population perceives the existing ICT infrastructure was not robust enough when, in fact, it's events like these that iteratively make infrastructures more robust.

The difference is the actual impact on human beings vs an org's reputation. Similarities include immediate action on both accounts since the solving of the former will have an immediate effect on the latter.

# data[].attributes.body
Reputational risk: Accusation of misbehaviour

Emergency situation: Natural disaster

Similarities in communications context and actions:

- Fast respond

- Communications crisis team and a designated spoken person

- Communications coordination

- Communications should be clear, fact-based,

- Both situations affect the reputation of the entire UN

# data[].attributes.body
An emergency situation:  the devastating drought in the Horn of Africa region where vulnerable people, many of them children, risk imminent famine.

A reputational risk: The possible perception that the UN is is not speaking out enough to advocate for/help people suffering the risk of famine in the Horn of Africa.

What are the similarities? Both require a strong proactive joined-up approach, and engagement with stakeholders (donors, media, and others) while keeping affected people front and centre.

# data[].attributes.body
I'll use the example of our work in Ukraine.

The emergency situation is for the UN to ensure that it is able to continue to deliver for the people of the country as the focus shifted from development work to humanitarian relief. And thus, to be able to communicate around what it is doing, demonstrating its actions.

The reputational risk is for the UN to be perceived as failing to do this, and to be accused in damaging ways (for example, the UN and other organizations were tarnished by the ICRC's reputational crisis over supposed complicity in deportations from Mariupol).

# data[].attributes.body
In emergency situation involves people at risk. In repetition risk it’s either people or the organizations are at risk of their reputation to be harmed. As similarities both require a rapid and sincere communication based on facts, UN actions taken to mitigate the people/organizations involved with he threat or the challenge.

# data[].attributes.body
Reputational risk: allegations of fake news coming from a UN agency.

Emergency situation: An imminent attack on Ukrainians leading to millions of refugees fleeing the country.

How do they differ? The reputational risk is directly linked to our credibility as a UN Agency. Our sole purpose is to bring peace and solidarity thought dialogue and fact-based information. Accuracy means having the right information so as to not shoot ourselves in the foot. Any analysis have to be data-based so as to give the perception of our work and thus our ability to do our work. Losing people´s trust will make us lose Respect.

The emergency situation is related to human rights abuses.

What are the similarities? Both crisis hurt human rights and lives of people.

# data[].attributes.body
Emergency situation: impact pf coimate change on coastal zones, with potential flooding. Reputational risk: misinformation by a UN source. Both would require inmediate action, consistent messaging, timely response.

# data[].attributes.headline
Florencia S. Murphy - UNIC BA (Argentina)

# data[].attributes.subject
Florencia S. Murphy - UNIC BA (Argentina)

# data[].attributes.body
Emergency situation: The war in Ukraine

Reputational risk: The UN mechanisms and capacities are perceived as irrelevant or useless to stop the war and/or the UN staff is accused of inefficacy or wrongdoing.

Differences:

In the first example, the factor triggering the emergency is not directly related to the Organization, while the relevance of its mechanisms and the behavior of its staff members is strictly linked to the UN.

Furthermore, in the first example the UN is one of the multiple actors who intervene in the situation, and its outcome cannot be directly attributed to the Organization. Meanwhile, in the reputational risk scenario, the UN is solely responsible for the situation and is the key actor involved.

Similarities:

Both scenarios ask for a crisis communications approach, i.e. they both need for timely, accurate and relevant information from a credible source.

# data[].attributes.body
Emergency situation example- Drought in the horn of Africa with millions facing starvation and in need of humanitarian assistance.

Reputational Risk example-  Relief food distributed by UN Agency is found to contain toxins harmful to children under 5.

Differences
In emergency situations, the crisis responsibility is not on the UN. The reputational risk however places the responsibility on the affected agency.

Emergency situations are full of uncertainty and response may be hindered by existing beliefs, fear, and anxieties that may hinder action by communities. Reputational risks on the other hand may invoke a different set of emotions including anger, loss of trust, and action against the organization.

Similarities
Both require immediate action on the part of the UN
In both cases, the use of a trusted and credible source to deliver messages is important.
In both cases, the public will be seeking information on multiple channels and it is important to remain consistent in the messaging so as to be clear and reassuring.

# data[].attributes.body
Emergency situation - example - natural disaster affecting UN beneficiaries and staff.

Reputational risk -  example - accusation of mis-behavior of UN staff.

Differences in communications context and actions:
- In a natural disaster situation, a focus will be on speed of UN response to support affected populations
- In a natural disaster the UN will be looked up to for leadership of information on the situation. In case of mis-behavior of staff, UN may be looked down upon and manage accusations.
- For reputational risk - it may be preferable to have one UN spokesperson, rather than multiple voices, to ensure clear control of the message. In a natural disaster situation it may be appropriate for multiple UN agencies to speak about their work.

Similarities in communications context and actions:
- Require rapid communications
- Communications should be clear, sincere, fact based, and focus on the beneficiaries/people who the UN supports
- Each situation reflects on the reputation of the entire UN and requires communications coordination
- Communications crisis team may be established

# data[].attributes.body
Emergency situation: 2021 Haiti earthquake

Reputational risk: Having conflicting messaging on the situation in Haiti

Emergency situations are sudden happenings that we have little to no control over, while reputational risks can be avoided by preparation and a clear line of communication. Both situations require crisp and prepared crisis communication strategy in place to get through.

# data[].attributes.body
An emergency situation is a sudden onset, unforeseen event that is not of the making of the organisation; however the manner an organisation deals/addresses such an emergency could determine the reputational risk for an organisation. Exemple: armed clashes between the Congolese government and armed groups is an emergency; the way OCHA deals/ does not deal with it will determine the reputaitonal risk.

# data[].attributes.headline
Manuel Mabuiangue; IOM Mozambique; Maputo

# data[].attributes.subject
Manuel Mabuiangue; IOM Mozambique; Maputo

# data[].attributes.body
Emergency situation: The first hours of coup after the rejection of general selection decision

Reputational Risk: Diplomatic staff of a prominent country gives his/her opinion on social media without prior consent about the coupe with negative messaging.

Difference: An emergency is out of our control and cannot be managed to the fullest due to unexpected outcomes and continuous shifts in strategy to account per presented scenario but also with an immediate response if allowed to do so. Reputational risk is an issue that can have impact.

Similarities: Reputational risk and emergency can have a span of weeks, months and even years and have a start and end. Management of both scenarios involves a sustained effort of activity monitoring.

# data[].attributes.body
Emergency situation: A major political turnover in a country might lead the UN to take direct action such as repatriating staff home for their safety or deploying specific security measures.

Reputational risk: Misconduct by staff inside the organization that led to misuse of funds from donors.

Both require a crisis communication strategy, although the triggers differ, the first is external and (can be unintentional in the case of a natural disaster for example), and the second is internal and deliberate.

# data[].attributes.body
Emergency: Ukraine war outbreak, and UNDP adapting its existing programming in country and in Moldova to meet the new needs arising as a result of the conflict. Communcations focus is around explaining the need, and outlining what UNDP is doing to respond to it. Clear and factual.

Crisis: Allegations of corruption against the UN claiming "mismanagement of funds" during the Khmer Rouge Tribunal. Communications is about explaining a very complex situation and demonstrating why funds have not been mismanaged by UN. Delicate, complex, sensitive.

# data[].attributes.body
Emergency situation: My agency offering emergency humanitarian response to an area of the country engulfed by episodes of intercommunal conflict between different communities leading to fatalities and internal displacement of thousands.

Reputational risk: My agency being accused on social media for being partial or favouring one ethnic group because it started its response work in one particular area associated with one ethnic group.

Both are similar because they require immediate and measured attention.

They are different because an emergency as it unfolds is beyond our control or purvey, and we can be proactive to ameliorate the damage caused by the reputational risk.

# data[].attributes.body
Emergency situation: humanitarian situation where there is an outbreak of war, natural disaster or crisis. There is little control of the situation by human.
Reputational risk: involves misconduct or wrongdoing of people within the organization. It puts easily the UN at the position to be called out or blamed for.
The similarities are that both situation needs immediate response by the organisation that is timely, accurate and fact-based. Being honest and straightforward about what we know and what we don't know is important in both situation.

# data[].attributes.body
Emergency situation: Covid-19 pandemic and how it took the lives of million of people around the world.
Reputational risk: when WHO was encouraging people to take the vaccine and the rumors hit the organization saying that it is buyist, the vaccine kills and has negative effect on the people causing clots and other harmful diseases. Some doctors and healthcare Workers was against WHO campaign for vaccine, since any vaccination should go through trials for at least 10 years before releasing it to public use, to enable a safe period during which the vaccine is tested to know the side effects on human health.
WHO was blame for advocating for the vaccine without applying the correct health measures.
The difference here is that the emergency situation was natural made while the reputational risk results from the organization actions itself, and how it promotes for something against the well-being of people.

# data[].attributes.body
Emergency: natural didsaster, invasion, govrnement coup
Reputational risks: misconduct or misleading behavious by representatives of organisation

Both require immediate response and dialogue with the audience

# data[].attributes.body
An emergency situation does not directly relate to the UN entity dealing with it. It affects people in the given country. It could be a natural disaster, a policy-driven development (like a war) or a combination thereof (like a climate-change-driven disaster).

By contrast, a reputational risk directly involves the UN entity at stake. It could be a campaign or a publication criticizing it, for example.

In both cases, strategic approaches are required, including risk analysis, and preparation.

# data[].attributes.body
Example of an emergency situation: influx of displacement due to natural disaster or man made disasters such as armed conflicts.

Example of reputational risk: allegations of fraud and misconduct by staff members, or exploitation of people of concern to the organization.

# data[].attributes.body
In an emergency situation people are at risk.
During periods of reputation risk, people or organizations are under threat. There can be overlaps, such as the cholera outbreak in Haiti which caused immense suffering and death and also presented a serious reputation risk for the UN. It is much easier to be a communicator during an emergency situation, even if our safety is in jeopardy. During times of reputation risk there are moral and ethical questions to be teased out.

# data[].attributes.body
Emergency situation: Civil war breaks out in a country; UN orders evacuation of all staff as conflict is widespread.

Reputation risk: UN in following organizational rules evacuates only staff of a particular cadre risking the accusation of being racist, biased, discriminatory

Both have an impact on the organization; in both cases, the organization is a victim; all unavoidable in the circumstance.
The organization will definately need to explain its response.

# data[].attributes.body
Emergency situations - in this case we can talk about natural causes, currently Somalia is facing a drought with possibilities of it turning to a famine. This has in many ways been influenced by climate change and poor infrastructure due to insecurity of 30 years.

Reputational risks, e.g allegation of misappropriation of funds or unclear use of funds provided.

They differ in a few ways, for emergency situations they can be mapped, with constant monitoring and evaluation to ensure people are well provided for in terms of food and medical support, to avert loss of life. Although natural, a drought can be mapped using rainfall and other weather tools to predict reduced harvests over time. While reputation risks come after lack of proper support being felt on the ground, this sometimes can be due to lack of funding needed to sustain drought efforts.

In both cases, the best approach would be to have credible information and experts present the facts in an easy-to-understand way. Specific messaging on the event and what are the challenges plus actions. Always updating the facts in a timely manner, in this case drought estimates and numbers of those impacted and those currently receiving support. Repeated messaging focusing on drought and actions on the field to encourage more funding from donors.

# data[].attributes.body
Emergency situation: terrorist attacks trigger the displacement of 20,000 persons.  Lifesaving humanitarian aid must be distributed fast.
Reputational risk: newspaper publishes that UN Staff is involved in fraudulent activities affecting UN reputation.

# data[].attributes.body
In Libya, sometimes violence will break out in some parts of the country hindering our work and putting the staff at risk, so these were emergency situations where the control is not in your hands
Reputational risks are mostly related to allegations on staff, or during distributions of items, the allegations for violating the dignity and respect of the beneficiaries etc.  or some journalist doing a negative story against UNFPA.
Both can pout you in the state of panic, however, we are currently working on a comprehensive framework to manage reputational risks whereas we will always issue advisories and work with the government to manage the security situation

# data[].attributes.body
Emergency situation
Flood, Hurricane, natural disaster, pandemic, war

Reputational damage
Scandal, misinformation leading to a crisis

The two differ because in case of emergency situation people need to be informed and oriented and fake information may be shared but not in with the aim of harming.

The reputational damage may need more effort to debunk, verify and share more trustworthy information.

# data[].attributes.body
Emergency situation is something that is about something external to the organization, but affects it. This could be a pandemic, environmental disaster or political conflict.

Reputational risks are related to how the organization works or the people in it, and their effect on the outside and with people.

The emergency situation can turn into a reputational risk, if the situation is not handled adequately by the organization.

# data[].attributes.body
Emergency situation: Like other countries around the world, Cambodia has experienced the Covid-19 pandemic; more than 3000 population died, total infection cases is more than 136K.

Reputation risk: The Royal Government of Cambodia (RGC) decided to pick the vaccine from China as the strategic source while others as the optional. RGC took a reputational risk of loosing face if the vaccine from China bears no effective antibody. In addition to the Covac coordination mechanism, other countries donated thousand of doses of vaccine to Cambodia. The RGC now controls the situation and more than 15 millions population received vaccine.

Similarity: both come at the same time. If the action by the government failed to stop the infection, it will lose the confidence from its people. Another similarity is they can be caused by human.

Difference: the emergency situation is the event while the reputation risk is the consequence resulted from the action toward the emergency.

# data[].attributes.body
Emergency situation: pandemic, war etc.
Reputational risk: perceived error or wrong conduct by the organization.

I think both can occur at the same time. For instance at the onset of COVID-19 crisis in March 2020, some people praised the UN while others criticized its response. The ways to respond to emergency situation can trigger the need for managing reputational risk.

# data[].attributes.body
Emergency situation: emergency on the ground whether a natural disaster such as the earthquake in Haiti in 2021 or a conflict such as the war in Ukraine that started 100 days ago.

Reputational risks are more related to allegations of wrongdoing by the UN staff.

What is common to both situations is the way of managing the crisis communication which has to be timeliness, accurate and focused on the people.

# data[].attributes.body
An example of an emergency situation is when recently conflict broke around border villages between The Gambia and Senegal, causing thousands of women, families and children to flee their homes and UNFPA was present to ensure the continuity of essential sexual and reproductive health information to benefit pregnant and breastfeeding women.

An example of a reputational risk is when UNFAP provided support to renovate and refurbish the maternity unit of a major health facility and due to contractual issues with the vendor, the facility could not conduct deliveries for over a year and the media started publishing stories about how UNFPA is contributing towards heightening poor maternal health conditions of women in that part of the country.

# data[].attributes.body
Emergency: conflicts, natural disasters, such as the Syria war or the Sri Lanka tsunami

Reputational risks: allegations of misconduct by UN representatives, or criticism of actions taken (or not taken) by the UN

Both need to be addressed promptly, with accurate information and sincerity.

# data[].attributes.body
Example of reputational risk: The leaked emails of the UN envoy to Libya unveiling his connections with an external power (UAE) was a serious blow to the UN reputation as a honest broker in the Libyan crisis.

Example of emergency risk: The earthquake in Haiti where both the UN staff as well as the people they are serving were victims.

Similarities: Both came or "erupted" by surprise; both went under an enormous media and public spotlight and comments and diverse attitudes; in both the UN was victim.

Differences :
The first one was a serious human error or misconduct that amounted for the public to an organizational mismanagement but the organization had a certain margin  to distance itself and the official responsible; give the right information to people and try to correct and rebuild harmed confidence on it.
For the second , the UN had to reassure the victims, as well as its staff, help them manage the situation and regain confidence in themselves and the ability of the organization to mobilize and help the country get out of the crisis and rebuild.

# data[].attributes.body
Reputational risk include Human-error accidents, management misconduct. This include mismanagement of funds, sexual scandals e.t.c

Emergency situation include,  natural causes such as  floods, Rumor: False and damaging information about an organization is being circulated.

Similarities - they affect the image of the organization. When responding to these you need to be fast and consistence. Also you need to really on expert voices.

Difference - The other one might be intentional while the other might not be intentional.
One might damage the image of individuals while the other damages the organization .
It might have Severe reputational while the other will have minimum or moderate risk

# data[].attributes.body
Emergency situation such as conflict affect a whole community. The management of this can lead to a reputational risk of an organisation such as the UN.  A negative circumstance due to misinformation, propaganda, error messaging can occur and evolving the UN.
In both cases, communication strategy should be stricly adapted to mitigate damages and reassure the community with fact based messages, accurate, relevant,  etc..
Communicate with clarity, objectivity and putting the situation in the context and on real time.

# data[].attributes.body
Reputational Risks: E.g can be allegations of UN staff accused of sexual exploitation in their duty post county/area.

Emergency situation: Civil war, a health outbreak in a country/world, climate change, flood, Tsunami etc...

They are both urgent and to be treated as such, although the difference would be in management control. Reputation risk will need to be managed by a single organization while crisis will be multi-stakeholder as most companies including GRN's will be affected.

# data[].attributes.body
Emergency situation: an emergency situation includes a natural disaster such as a tsunami, or political/ economic crisis that leads to instability in social protection/ loss of livelihoods

Reputational risk: a reputational risk could revolve around an incident of mismanagement funding, tech error such as a hacking of system or social media pages, misconduct or misrepresentation of the organization by staff

Similarities: being ahead of the narrative, timeliness, accurate and transparent messaging

Differences: an emergency situation would focus on the external incident, while in the a case of a reputation risk, all eyes are on the organization. In an emergency, we would communicate of what the UN is doing to support people in the time of crisis. Reputational incidents, we would communicate on what we are doing internally (fixing mechanisms/ investigations) in order to better serve the people.

# data[].attributes.body
emergency : COVID pandemic causing an infodemic, putting people life at risk

Reputational : Leak of a memo preventing DGC staff to use the word "war" a few weeks after the Russian invasion.

Emergency : triggered by an event that is external to the UN (Riots, Natural disaster, military coup etc...) UN response to an emergency can lead to reputationnal risks
Reputationnal risks : UN bares responsabilities or is somehow directly or indirectly involved (Staff Misconduct; wrong decisions; inability to respond to a crisis etc)

Similarities : immediate assessment of risk, need of a rapid and solid UN response based on facts. streamlined communication involving all stakeholders, preventing long term effects.

# data[].attributes.body
An emergency situation may be climate disasters, man-made disasters or conflict, whereas reputation risks would be damage to an organization's image or credibility.

In both cases, the UN's response can shape the public's perception of the organization and therefore, both situations would require a timely and accurate response.

# data[].attributes.body
An emergency situation:
- Could include events outside the organizations control or does not involve the organization directly (EG natural disasters, infrastructure failure, outbreak of conflict locally or internationally, or a pandemic, for example)

Reputation risk:
- Is within the organization's control or where the organization can assume some accountability which could harm their reputation (EG: inappropriate actions, misconduct, and can even be linked to an emergency situation, for example: silence or passivity on big issues, etc)

# data[].attributes.body
Emergency situations include climate desasters, civil wars, pandemic outbreak, terrorist attacks and other events that are beyond our control.

Reputational risks include accusations of corruption, mismanagement of funds, sexual harassment and other scandals targeted at the UN.

# data[].attributes.body
Reputational risk, when there is no accountability and the media starts asking questions about the use of UN funds.

Emergency situations, natural disasters, crises with governments, situations that cannot be foreseen.

For both, it is important to have clear lines of action and a strategy that contemplates some possible situations.

# data[].attributes.body
Emergency situations would include: climate-related disasters, conflict, governmental upheaval

Reputational risks would include: Use of unverified information, misconduct of the organization's personnel, poor response by the organization to crises

The overall difference has to do with control and management. Reputational risks are in the hands of the organization and should be addressed fully as soon as identified. While one can prepare for emergency situations, they tend to be out of control of the organization, but the organization can still respond.

# data[].attributes.body
1. Reputational risk: "The cover up is worse than the crime," is much used in the world of politics, in particular and it certainly also applies across the UN system... it could be financial misappropriation or sexual misconduct.

2. Emergency situation: War in Ukraine, Famine/drought in the Horn of Africa, Climate emergency in many part of the world, etc

Both require timely strategic communication intervention, however #1 greater risk to repuation of org and for #2, great risk for those bearing brunt of the emergency situation.

# data[].attributes.body
An emergency situation could be represented by a severe drought in an already war stricken region, producing crop losses conducive to food insecurity.

A reputational risk can be associated with misinformation related to partisan distribution of aid.

The difference is that one is induced by a change in weather patterns and extreme events and the other is man-made.

In both rapid action of the  UN in terms of communication is needed. In the emergency situation, clear information on where population can access food will be required. In the second quick action is required to clarify what truly happened in a credible way and be accountable.

# data[].attributes.body
An example of an emergency situation would be the Ebola outbreak in the DRC. A reputational risk is how UN staff have been alleged to commit sexual abuse and exploitation in exchange for jobs for/during the response to the outbreak.

They differ because of the nature of the crisis comms that need(ed) to be done. In the case of the outbreak, staff/responders did not deliberately put the people (from the local communities) at risk; rather, the response focused on mitigating onward infections and communicating on the efforts of the UN agencies involved. On some questions on the response itself, ie, whether the UN did enough, etc, the organisation is also a victim. But in terms of the allegations of SEA, this is purely preventable; and for those staff that were proven to have had wrongdoing, they have put the people at risk and violated laws and regulations.

But they are similar in a sense that the response (and crisis comms) should always put the people at the heart of the narrative; and as comms professionals, we would need to follow the key steps to communicating around these two situations: simplify the message, always rely on credible facts/sources, be consistent and accurate, and be first (including handling queries from the press).

# data[].attributes.body
Reputational risk: scandal on misconduct by one of the staff members.

Emergency situation: a natural disaster; national violent riots, etc.

Emergency situation is often something temporary caused by external factors that affects people from different sectors, not only inside the institution. On the other hand, reputational risk tends to directly impact the agency.

# data[].attributes.body
An emergency situation: an outbreak of a highly contagious and fetal disease e.g. Ebola
Reputational risk: allegations of UN Staff involved in fraudulent activities.
Differences; An emergency may affect the people we serve while a reputational risk affects the organization.
similarities: Both require to apply the principles of crisis communication. these include: timely response, being honest and accurate and presenting clear messages.

# data[].attributes.body
Emergency situations: a coup d'etat in the country, terrorist attack, a lockdown due to pandemic, a natural disaster.
Reputational risks: sexual exploitation and abuse allegations, corruption allegations, malpractice and negligence by the UN staff
Differencies: these cases demand different approaches. In case of emergency situation, the communication has to be oriented on actions, provide clear messages on how to stay safe, at the same time, here our organization can be considered a 'victim', too, to it possesses low reputational risks. Whether during the cases of reputational risks, it is important to have all the information gathered, shared, and this information, if proved, might lead to huge reputational risks.
and similarities: in both situations, it is important to be promt, accurate, up-to-date, truthful, and sincere. Time is of an essence, verified data is of an essence. Clear communication, consistent messages are of an essence.

# data[].attributes.body
Reputation risk has to do with how the response undertaken by an actor to an emergency situation.

Both require strategies for clear, timely and accurate information.

# data[].attributes.body
Reputational risk: sexual allegations or misconduct of our UN implementing partner that harms our beneficiaries

Emergency situation: A global outbreak like the COVID19 pandemic or natural disasters like volcanic eruption, floods etc.

How do they differ? The reputational risk is directly linked to our implementing partner so that means our reputation is put to risk, while the emergency situation is linked to everybody causing direct and severe impacts on populations locally and Internationally.

What are the similarities? Both situations damage reputations and require actions at the local and international level.

# data[].attributes.body
Emergency situation is typically about natural disasters, armed conflicts etc.

Reputational crisis involves the spread of false (but also true) information that harms the reputation of our organisation – e.g. UN staff videotaped while having intercourse in a car in Tel Aviv.

Each of them demands a different strategy. In the former situation, we are all at risk, the latter is more about "us" vs. the public.

# data[].attributes.body
Emergency: Related to the context, like one global outbreak (COVID-19 pandemic), coup d'état or natural disasters.
Reputational: Related directly to the organization, such as sexual abuse allegations or illegal behaviors linked with UN workers.

The differences are related with the kind of approach:  With the reputational risk especially, this is focus on proactively follow-up/monitoring. In emergency, the communication has to be oriented on actions.

Similarities: Both require timely and accurate responses.

# data[].attributes.headline
Lenka Ctvrteckova, UNICEF Czech Republic

# data[].attributes.subject
Lenka Ctvrteckova, UNICEF Czech Republic

# data[].attributes.body
Emergency situation: e.g. a natural disaster occurs (earthquake, heavy rains, tsunami) or a war breaks out in the country; in both cases numerous people are endangered

Reputational risk: a partnership with a company that harms the environment / children / people in general...

Both may harm the reputation of the organization if dealt with inappropriately. A quick and accurately crafted response is vital so as to maintain / regain the trust of our audiences and remain credible.

# data[].attributes.body
Emergency situation: natural disasters, attacks, health emergencies, etc

Reputational risk: misconduct from members/staff, representatives of the organization

Differ: the emergency situation can affect everyone in an area and reputational impacts on the organisation, entity, etc

Similarities: The need to react quickly to minimize the impact of the situation.

# data[].attributes.body
Emergency situation : People flying their villages due to terrorists attacks . Their basic needs must be fulfilled fast .

Reputational risk : Many entrepreneurs claim that UN is not paying their invoices fast . Some even allege that they have to wait 6 to 10 months before receiving their payments .

# data[].attributes.body
Examples of an Emergency situation: The eruption of a conflict/war in the South of Lebanon; The spread of COVID19 Pandemic in Lebanon at a time when Lebanon is already suffering from a multi-faceted crisis; etc.

Examples of a reputational crisis: The Government of Lebanon (through its Ministry of Education and Higher Education) claims that the UN is not paying the entitlements of the UN-contracted teachers and that the UN is being biased toward refugees versus vulnerable Lebanese (aid bias perceptions); Cases of sexual exploitation and abuse reported in settlements; etc.

Differences and Similarities: Both emergency situations and reputational crises require the UN’s swift response and fact-based, clear, and accurate information to refute any allegations that would harm the UN’s reputation on the one hand and prevent any misperceptions vis-à-vis the UN in emergency crises on the other hand. I believe these situations present a great opportunity to show the UN’s agility, flexibility, timeliness, and efficiency without sacrificing the needs and the protection of the people we serve. While an emergency crisis may not necessarily imply or result in a UN reputational crisis, it is important to ensure that the UN is responding swiftly, proactively, and efficiently to any emergency in order to prevent any misperceptions and/or misinformation that would harm the UN’s reputation.

# data[].attributes.body
Emergency situation: Something happening beyond our control or involving harm to people and loss of lives.
Reputational risks: The UN did nothing to help the people affected all to prevent it from happening.
Wrongdoing from the UN Staff and officials. etc...

# data[].attributes.body
Emergency situation: mounting reports of civilians being raped in Ukraine
Reputational risks: 1) the OSRSG-SVC works only with UN-verified data. However, it may take a while until we get UN-verified numbers of rape cases. Inaction is not an option and the office found other ways to work despite the lack of numbers and signed a FoC with the Gov. of Ukraine. 2) the OSRSG-SVC refrained from citing precise figures of rape cases in Ukraine in all interviews with the press and stressed the fact that figures are often only the tip of the iceberg as under-reporting is very common.

# data[].attributes.body
An emergency situation in CAR: A rise in accidents involving mines and other explosive devices.

A reputational risk in CAR: The widespread belief that the UN peacekeeping mission is laying mines.

Difference: The reputational risk implies a far more difficult communications exercise as the rumor has been spread and flourishes on pre-existing mistrust against a peacekeeping mission that has had limited success in securing the country. In the absence of proof and information on who lays the mines, people fill the information gap, based on rumors and disinformation (strategically placed by those who have an interest in damaging the UN’s reputation). Statements and messaging from the UN probably have little impact but action needs to be taken to rebuild trust and confidence – a very lengthy process. In the emergency situation, messaging as part of risk education could already have a significant impact on people’s behavior and save lives.

Similarities: Both have a devastating impact on the population – this is obvious for the emergency situation; consequences of the reputational risk are that local authorities, for example, block access for UN peacekeepers to certain areas and those can then not secure these areas; people lose confidence in peacekeepers as they don’t see them as the ones providing security, but rather as the source of danger, and, for example, IDPs don’t return to their villages, despite peacekeepers’ presence. Both crises require immediate reaction to save people’s lives.

# data[].attributes.body
Emergency: boat of migrants overturns at sea, migrants drown

Reputational Risk: UN RC openly condemns Prime Minister for deporting migrants back to their home country

Similarities: both situations require clear, timely, accurate communication from the UN. Both situations are triggered by circumstances beyond the UN's control - the decision to deport and the sinking of a migrant ship.

Differences: comment from the UN about a situation where the government is not directly involved as an actor and which happens because of unfortunate circumstances (the sinking of a ship) can create a space where communication of sympathy and introspection is expected. Comment from the UN about a situation where the government is a main actor means that the UN has deliberately and strategically decided to respond and requires delicate articulations of UN principles, without trampling on the relationship between UN and sovereign host country. Delicacy is particularly key in this instance.

# data[].attributes.body
Emergency situation: recent heavy rains in the country has killed many people. For that emergency situation, clear messaging on do´s and don´ts and what the UN is doing to help local authorities.
Reputational risk: let´s say that on the above example, local media says the UN is not helping local authorities. This could lead to a reputational risk, a risk to the image of the UN. A swift response and transparency would help to prevent it.

# data[].attributes.body
Emergency Situation: armed clashes trigger displacement.

Reputational risk: poor planning leads to lack of food in IDP camps.

The similarities in these response are the need to communicate clearly, to the right audience, with accuracy and the appropriate intention.

The differences in these responses are how the message in crafted. With the reputational risk especially, we want to ensure that the response includes information on what we are doing to proactively follow-up

# data[].attributes.body
In an emergency situation, the communications key messages reflects on facts, statistics and the prevention measures in place that mostly are led by the governments. An example to such situation is the prevention measures taken by countries during COVID 19 lockdown and regulations.

A reputational risk example is similar to a scandal related one of the UN agencies.
In a case of reputational risk, the response should be timely accurately and relative.
In such cases the impact of the reputational risk can be massive and causes long-lasting damages.

# data[].attributes.body
Emergency situation could arise because of natural or man made disasters e.g. earthquake or war etc, whereas a reputational risk could be caused by an organization actions or an action by individual staff member of the organizations which could be either intentional or unintentional action. It's job of the coms and external relations management team to manage reputational risk of the organization.

# data[].attributes.body
An emergency situation could be a natural disaster like a major storm, or an earthquake.

A reputation risk could arise out of information that is targeting the UN due to perceived inaction or mis-actions of the UN or a sensationalized piece of information.

Both require information to be credible and verifiable, delivered in a timely manner, and relevant to the situation at hand.

# data[].attributes.body
Emergency- This arises due to a country's civil or other locally influencing situation, beyond the influence of the UN. For example the war in somalia and prolonged ddrought and famine in the Horn of Africa

Reputational Risk- The UN trending online due to a sensational story with wrong and exaggerated data attributed to the UN.

# data[].attributes.body
Reputational risk- Sexual abuse allegations against UN backed peacekeepers against several females in rural areas.

Emergency situation- Gunfire Erupts in Mogadishu as Somalia’s Political Feud Turns
Violent

Difference: Reputational crisis is directly linked to the organisational credibility,  it will need impartiality, honesty, timeless and accurate response by the UN and its partners. However both crisis can bring about reputational risk, as the UN is seen as the protector of the world and their voice/input can have resounding impact on the solution of any crisis's.

# data[].attributes.body
Emergency situation can be of war erupt in the country while reputational risk can be of an investigation TV report accusing UN agency for misbehaving its activities.

Both need UN clear, accurate and fast response in a form of statement of press conference of even social media reaction.

Reputational crisis targets the organization intentionally. It requires a listening and monitoring, planning, reacting and documenting lessons learned.

Emergency crisis requires UN provides clear and helpful guidance to potential victims, and even support in a form of humanitarian aid, evacuation, peace negotiation,..etc.

# data[].attributes.body
Reputational risk: When some observers of the UN Mission in Colombia were just beginning the verification of the peace agreement in a celebration they danced with former combatants of the FARC guerrillas and from that moment in January 2017 to date it is still being said that the UN is good at dancing. Several campaigns were advanced explaining the work of the Mission but the image of the officials with best dancing when the Colombians until now understood what it meant the farc's laying down of arms and their acceptance of a peace process.

Emergency situation: the massive arrival of Venezuelan migrants to Colombia and how the whole humanitarian operation was affected and the response of the Colombian government to this diaspora.

Different: because the reputational risk directly affects the UN and the emergency is a circumstantial one affecting the civilian population, third parties.

Similar: because people expect our response and our action in both locations and the most important thing is to act quickly.

# data[].attributes.body
Examples relevant to UNAIDS:

Emergency situation: HIV anti-retroviral stock-out in X country.

Reputational risk: sexual abuse allegations against organization leader.

Similarities and differences: Both emergency situations and reputational risks require our quick, informed and strategic technical and communication responses. However, some emergencies do not put organizational credibility at stake. This may be because our organization is responding to a situation but had no hand in creating it. In general reputational risks relate to situations where stakeholders can point to an organization's culpability--something they did or failed to do.

# data[].attributes.body
I guess a reputational risk can arise from an emergency situation. For instance, the allegation of sexual abuses perpetrated by UN peacekeepers in CAR are a reputational risk for the UN that stemmed from an emergency and a context of instability and war. In an emergency the UN should appear as impartial and trusted actor, present to protect vulnerable populations. However when a scandal that involves the UN occurs, its credibility and the legitimacy of its role and presence on a territory is undermined.

# data[].attributes.body
Emergency situation: territorial conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan broke out in Nagorno Karabakh in 2020.

Reputational risk: UNOPS scandal in 2022 - the UN agency is accused of serious corruption.

In both cases, it was important that UN issues a statement and clarifies its position as soon as news reports appear in the media.  Inaction/silence would have a negative impact on the perception of UN efficacy.

The difference is that in the first case the UN was an impartial observer and messenger of credible information, but in the second case the scandal directly involved the UN, so the audience's trust was undermined.

# data[].attributes.headline
Agnes Kante, UNAIDS Liaison Office, Addis Ababa 

# data[].attributes.subject
Agnes Kante, UNAIDS Liaison Office, Addis Ababa 

# data[].attributes.body
Reputational risk: allegations of sexual abuse and misconduct of WHO staff in Democratic Republic of Congo during the Ebola outbreak from 2018 to 2020.

Emergency situation: On-going war in Ukraine leading to millions of refugees fleeing the country.

How do they differ? In the first instance, the reputational risk is directly linked to some UN staff and contractors who sexually exploited and abused women and girls in DRC. The severity and scale of the crisis have impacted the reputation of WHO in the region and worldwide; and victims and media demand accountability, reparations and justice. The emergency situation is linked to a nation waging a war on another nation causing a humanitarian crisis of scale, with direct and severe impacts on populations.

What are the similarities? Both crisis tarnish opinions/views people and the international community have on them, cause a lack of credibility, putting them into question.

# data[].attributes.body
During the political escalation in Pakistan, the opposition announced nation-wide sitins and long march towards the capital, creating emergency situation which is beyond control of the organisation. However, this has the potential of becoming a reputational risk if the organisation, despite knowing the developing situation, didn't advised its employees to take caution or insisted to continue working from office.

# data[].attributes.body
An emergency situation when Mauritius went into lockdown for the first time during COVID - people were still unsure about how the disease spread, health implications and additionally logistical issues regarding how to get food as the first lockdown here happened without warning and people were unable to go to the grocery store to stock up on goods. I haven't experienced it myself but for example a reputational risk such as false information being shared about COVID vaccines and potential risk to the reputation of the UN supporting the vaccine roll-out scheme. Similarities in these two situations include need for timely, accurate information provided by a credible source with actions available for the public to feel that they have some control. Differences include the first scenario the lockdown is implemented by the government and is in response to a new emergency and there is a certain amount of 'learning as they go along'. Regarding reputational risk around vaccines is this is more long-term management of the crisis and more opportunity to provide ongoing messaging to raise awareness, provide facts and figures and to try and counter misinformation.