Thinking the unthinkable - former WorldSpreads GC on what to do when crisis hits
No matter how prepared you think you are, when the proverbial actually hits the fan, your first reaction is most probably to panic. It's how you deal with the 'panic' that will not only determine the success or otherwise of your – and hence the company – response, but will also define you as a GC (and as an individual).
January 10, 2013 at 07:00 PM
8 minute read
GCs are becoming increasingly involved in identifying and managing risk – but is it possible to prepare for an unthinkable situation? Yes, says Dominic Bacon, as he explains the steps to take before and after a crisis hits
No matter how prepared you think you are, when the proverbial actually hits the fan, your first reaction is most probably to panic.
It's how you deal with the 'panic' that will not only determine the success or otherwise of your – and hence the company – response, but will also define you as a GC (and as an individual).
You may, however, question how you can prepare for the 'unthinkable' when the definition of unthinkable is something along the lines of 'impossible to imagine' or 'inconceivable'.
While they are technical definitions of the word, as a GC you would not be doing your job if you left it there.
If you were to explore that thought further, you would find there are actually very few, if any, unthinkable events (despite what Donald Rumsfeld might have said about "unknown unknowns").
Furthermore, one of the activities that GCs are becoming more frequently involved in is helping to identify and then manage risk (even where there is a head of risk). This is partly because lawyers tend to be both independent (to an extent) and cautious, and so are thought of as good at identifying (and managing) risk.
It is also partly because if a risk does materialise, how the company addresses it does touch upon your day-to-day responsibilities. Can you name a risk that, if it materialises, would not require the GC to address at least one related legal/regulatory/compliance issue?
Preparation
So, if you want to be prepared for the unthinkable, the first thing you need to do (before that unthinkable event happens) is review the company's risk register and match it against the company's policies and procedures.
When doing this analysis, however, remember the reality – particularly in a smaller company – is that your policies and procedures, while addressing several externally mandated obligations, risks, events and/or behaviours, will probably only address additional obligations, risks, events and behaviours that the board/risk committee believe are most common for your particular company.
Indeed, even regulators accept that your risk register/risk appetite statement cannot address every conceivable risk and therefore you should not worry if the policies and procedures do not cover, in detail or with any degree of specificity, every risk.
But you must ensure they cover all of the risks on your risk register and that there aren't any risks missing from the register.
Integrally linked to this is making sure that you know, in general terms at least, what your policies/procedures actually say and cover.
Ideally, when you are drafting, reviewing and approving the policies and procedures before circulation, you should ensure they are drafted so they are natural in how they define the issues and their resolution.
On the day the proverbial hits the fan you will not have time to keep referring back to the actual wording of the policy/procedure.
And then disaster strikes… Having recently been in a situation that on first view seemed unthinkable, and having initially experienced the panic I referred to, I now know what I thought of at the time as unthinkable, was, on reflection, a series of (smaller) events that when broken down into their constituent parts were actually covered by various policies and procedures.
As a result, when you are first in the middle of such a crisis, remember that a policy will not tell you precisely how to address an accounting fraud involving the CFO, or a sexual relationship between the CEO and one of their direct reports, or where non-business related personal expenses have been claimed by a group director.
However, when you take personalities out of the equation (and/or the sums of money involved), you are likely to find that you do have either a policy that addresses what you do in the event of someone discovering a fraud, or a policy that requires the most senior person in the relationship to disclose that relationship to the HR director as soon as it begins, or even a policy that sets out what expenses can be claimed.
Simplify and focus
Therefore, the first practical step you should take is to distil the issue down to its constituent parts – to simplify it.
For example, an accounting fraud involving the CFO is still a fraud, and the involvement of the CFO and/or the fact that it could lead to the demise of the company are merely complications to be addressed in how it gets resolved and which other policies/procedures need to be invoked.
The second practical step (note that the issues get steadily harder to deal with) is to accept that it is irrelevant who is involved. It does not matter if it is a CEO or the graduate trainee who initiated the relationship or the sum of money fraudulently included on the expenses form.
The fact is that the policy exists and it has been invoked/breached. Therefore, as best you can, take the personalities/money/impact out of the equation and look at the underlying issues. This is easier said than done.
The third practical step is, especially if the unthinkable does involves the CEO, CFO or any other director, probably the hardest: determining and agreeing the scope/extent of the response.
However, before you do, there are a couple of standard practical steps, including taking a few minutes to step back (this should not be a time for navel gazing, no matter how tempting that is), working out how best to apply common sense to the situation – both of which may be difficult if the panic levels are rising – and also understanding who else is going to be affected by the unthinkable itself and the response, either directly or indirectly.
Teamwork
Once you have determined/agreed the scope/extent of the response, the final practical step is to work out who is going to be responsible for which aspects of that response and, therefore, how the policies and procedures link together – most big issues will always be the subject of several different policies.
So, think about:
(a) The make-up of the team that will lead the response (and whether you need a team to investigate the cause, as there may need to be separate teams);
(b) Who will lead the team(s);
(c) Who else needs to be told (and when) – ie the board, regulators, the market, executives, staff, clients, suppliers; and
(d) The role that communications (internally and externally) will play, including what should be said to journalists who call having heard something has happened.
Remember, your response will involve a number of other policies including those covering (if the company is listed) what to do if, and when, there is a market notifiable event (if the company is authorised and regulated by the Financial Services Authority); when, and how, to contact the company's regulator(s); and compliance with laws/regulations as well as more general policies (and procedures) regarding staff, clients and suppliers, including any overarching code of conduct.
At the same time, clarify what your role will be and who you will be reporting to in relation to the issue. Will your role be an advisory one or one that requires action from you? Will you report to the board, a committee or a designated individual?
In summary, the key to reacting to the unthinkable is to understand that nothing is unthinkable.
First, be familiar with what the policies/procedures say (at least in general). Then, when the unthinkable happens:
(a) Focus on the underlying issues and distil them down to the constituent parts;
(b) Don't let the personalities/roles of the individuals or the potential magnitude of the impact affect how you address the issue;
(c) Determine the scope of the response – but don't forget the basics such as applying common sense to the situation; and
(d) Think about the correct composition of the response team and ensure that you and they follow the appropriate sections of all of the relevant policies.
When you find yourself in an unthinkable and stressful situation, take time to listen to your instincts. As Malcolm Gladwell says in his book Blink, what you may think of as a snap decision is often a decision that, unbeknown to you at the time, is actually backed up by highly considered, but subconscious, thought.
And don't panic. You are the GC for a reason.
Dominic Bacon is managing director at consultancy Squaring the Circle and the former general counsel and group head of compliance at WorldSpreads Group.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllWill a Market Dominated by Small- to Mid-Cap Deals Give Rise to This Dark Horse US Firm in China?
Big Law Sidelined as Asian IPOs in New York Dominated by Small Cap Listings
X-odus: Why Germany’s Federal Court of Justice and Others Are Leaving X
Mexican Lawyers On Speed-Dial as Trump Floats ‘Day One’ Tariffs
Trending Stories
- 1How This Dark Horse Firm Became a Major Player in China
- 2Bar Commission Drops Case Against Paxton—But He Wants More
- 3Pardons and Acceptance: Take It or Leave It?
- 4Gibbons Reps Asylum Seekers in $6M Suit Over 2018 ‘Inhumane’ Immigration Policy
- 5DC Judge Chutkan Allows Jenner's $8M Unpaid Legal Fees Lawsuit to Proceed Against Sierra Leone
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250