PCM as done by Virgin Trains - an example for the military?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PCM as done by Virgin Trains - an example for the military?
After many years of viewing these boards, and having noted a consistent theme amongst the regular posters about how 'things should be done' in the aftermath of an incident involving the loss of an aircraft or the death or serious injury of one of our number, I was wondering how you all feel about the manner in which Sir Richard Branson is handling the aftermath of yesterday's Virgin Train crash in Cumbria?
In contrast to the near-hysterical paranoid secrecy of our chain of command whenever a military aircraft is involved in a crash, Sir Richard Branson is on the scene, acting as the PCMIO, and the manner in which he is fielding the questions from the press is nothing short of exemplary. Key actors have been named less than 12 hours after the fact, and the whole mood of the coverage on Sky News right now is supportive, sympathetic and informative.
And before anyone claims that military and commercial accidents occur in different spheres and cannot be compared - I would argue that the general public is, if anything, far more concerned and more critical of the rail operators in this country than they would be of the military.
And yet the manner in which we, as a corporate entity, handle the release of bad news, our old-fashioned attitudes towards the primacy of informing the next-of-kin before all others (which, though well-intentined, is utterly impractical these days), and finally the blind faith the system places in the idea the truth can only be discovered by a board of inquiry which invariably only publishes years after the incident, are all very negative aspects of our PCM doctrine which actually causes the military to appear in an unfavourable light, and actually exacerbates the suffering and anguish that follows any incident within our community.
Without wishing to re-open any wounds (and I have some of my own), I wonder whether you agree?
In contrast to the near-hysterical paranoid secrecy of our chain of command whenever a military aircraft is involved in a crash, Sir Richard Branson is on the scene, acting as the PCMIO, and the manner in which he is fielding the questions from the press is nothing short of exemplary. Key actors have been named less than 12 hours after the fact, and the whole mood of the coverage on Sky News right now is supportive, sympathetic and informative.
And before anyone claims that military and commercial accidents occur in different spheres and cannot be compared - I would argue that the general public is, if anything, far more concerned and more critical of the rail operators in this country than they would be of the military.
And yet the manner in which we, as a corporate entity, handle the release of bad news, our old-fashioned attitudes towards the primacy of informing the next-of-kin before all others (which, though well-intentined, is utterly impractical these days), and finally the blind faith the system places in the idea the truth can only be discovered by a board of inquiry which invariably only publishes years after the incident, are all very negative aspects of our PCM doctrine which actually causes the military to appear in an unfavourable light, and actually exacerbates the suffering and anguish that follows any incident within our community.
Without wishing to re-open any wounds (and I have some of my own), I wonder whether you agree?
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Rural Somerset
Posts: 154
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whilst I admire Mr Branson's response and having done the PCMIO course it is as you say refreshing to see the speed at which the facts are emerging. However, I do think the emphasis is entirely different i.e. Virgin Trains V MOD.
The cynic in me would imagine that there is more of a requirement for a company such as Virgin to get the facts out quickly. Their well being is dependent upon public support to a greater degree than the MOD.
I am still convinced that the MOD also do an excellent job within the PCMIO duties.
The cynic in me would imagine that there is more of a requirement for a company such as Virgin to get the facts out quickly. Their well being is dependent upon public support to a greater degree than the MOD.
I am still convinced that the MOD also do an excellent job within the PCMIO duties.
PCMIO?
WIHII?
Should we be thinking of P-for-Professional Crisis Management, or should the P actually be for Positive?
And surely the well being of the MOD is even MORE dependent upon public support than that of Virgin.
The vast bulk of rail travellers still have no real option other than to travel by train, meaning that the rail companies have a stable, if not guaranteed revenue stream.
By contrast, Defence is already a lower priority than lower taxes for most taxpayers, yet is dependent upon the whim of a democratically elected Government. The MoD may not realise that it's in a public popularity contest - although just like Virgin, it is.
And moreover, while the public understands what train companies do, and understand what drives a commercial organisation, and thus have some sympathy with what they do and some understanding of the culture, most people don't have a clue what the forces do, or how they do it, nor do they understand the culture.
Anything that enhances the public reputation of the MoD must be grasped with alacrity!
WIHII?
Should we be thinking of P-for-Professional Crisis Management, or should the P actually be for Positive?
And surely the well being of the MOD is even MORE dependent upon public support than that of Virgin.
The vast bulk of rail travellers still have no real option other than to travel by train, meaning that the rail companies have a stable, if not guaranteed revenue stream.
By contrast, Defence is already a lower priority than lower taxes for most taxpayers, yet is dependent upon the whim of a democratically elected Government. The MoD may not realise that it's in a public popularity contest - although just like Virgin, it is.
And moreover, while the public understands what train companies do, and understand what drives a commercial organisation, and thus have some sympathy with what they do and some understanding of the culture, most people don't have a clue what the forces do, or how they do it, nor do they understand the culture.
Anything that enhances the public reputation of the MoD must be grasped with alacrity!
Supercalifragilistic
expialidocious
expialidocious
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Essex, UK
Posts: 588
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bravo Branson.
As a PR professional from my view Virgin are handling this magnificently, they communicated early, openly and honestly. Initialy through local managment and the press team, then via senior managment and now Sir Richard.
Sir Richard returned from holiday, went to see the injured (sans TV), and has delivered an outstanding briefing - sympathetic, honest and not overly commercial. Yet he still managing to deliver at least three repetitions of the message that the pendelino trains are safe for example, "built like a tank" "we spent more than required by law on safety" and adding factual support with comments like "most of the carriages are intact, the glass stayed in and the lights stayed on". He also avoided questions on legal action saying that the emphasis needed to be on prevention.
I expect Virgin have implemented a crisis comms plan, as well as just reacting as their organisational culture would lead them to - a train company not planning an outline response to a serious incident like this would be unusual today.
Contrast Virgins response to that of Bernard Matthews and his eponymous turkey empire - I did not see him interviewed at all in spite of the potential seriousness of the situation.
I do think the military can learn from commerical crisis management, but aside from the obvious operational security concerns the constraint of having spokes people who do not have ultimate responsibility as Sir Richard does is a significant barrier to delivering this sort of open and believeable communication.
I can't see the Defence Secretary open mike at the scene of an accident and saying that he will do what is necessary to prevent this happening again irrespective of what the treasury says. And even if he did, we would not believe him, his brand is not at stake, his pension is secure and history is not on his side.
Sir Richard returned from holiday, went to see the injured (sans TV), and has delivered an outstanding briefing - sympathetic, honest and not overly commercial. Yet he still managing to deliver at least three repetitions of the message that the pendelino trains are safe for example, "built like a tank" "we spent more than required by law on safety" and adding factual support with comments like "most of the carriages are intact, the glass stayed in and the lights stayed on". He also avoided questions on legal action saying that the emphasis needed to be on prevention.
I expect Virgin have implemented a crisis comms plan, as well as just reacting as their organisational culture would lead them to - a train company not planning an outline response to a serious incident like this would be unusual today.
Contrast Virgins response to that of Bernard Matthews and his eponymous turkey empire - I did not see him interviewed at all in spite of the potential seriousness of the situation.
I do think the military can learn from commerical crisis management, but aside from the obvious operational security concerns the constraint of having spokes people who do not have ultimate responsibility as Sir Richard does is a significant barrier to delivering this sort of open and believeable communication.
I can't see the Defence Secretary open mike at the scene of an accident and saying that he will do what is necessary to prevent this happening again irrespective of what the treasury says. And even if he did, we would not believe him, his brand is not at stake, his pension is secure and history is not on his side.
Last edited by Memetic; 24th Feb 2007 at 13:54.
Below the Glidepath - not correcting
The fundamental difference is that if Joe Public thinks there may be a safety issue with getting on a train, he won't, and Virgin lose money, shareholders get all upset. When one of HM's airframes becomes the first to arrive at the scene of the accident, other than a prompt determination that there is not an overriding safety issue with the fleet, it is business as usual without the commercial concerns that Branson has to deal with. Service personal don't have the luxury of a reassuring message from some senior nebby that all is well.
Also, despite all the best PR spin in the world, Virgin do not know exactly what happened yet, they have made an educated assessment and understand the key facts behind the accident, but it will be some time before they know exactly why it happened. Just following basic accident investigation procedures is a time consuming and intensive task and it always will be regardless of the public's "right" to know what happened immediately.
As impressive at it may be, don't forget that this openess is simply driven by profit - not concern, and that's the difference between this and Military accidents.
Also, despite all the best PR spin in the world, Virgin do not know exactly what happened yet, they have made an educated assessment and understand the key facts behind the accident, but it will be some time before they know exactly why it happened. Just following basic accident investigation procedures is a time consuming and intensive task and it always will be regardless of the public's "right" to know what happened immediately.
As impressive at it may be, don't forget that this openess is simply driven by profit - not concern, and that's the difference between this and Military accidents.
I think Two’s in is being unduly cynical. Branson is just doing what he does best, being a charismatic people-person. One of the reasons his companies are so successful is that he combines that charm and sympathy with outstanding entrepreneurship. I’m in no doubt that the company is reacting to a well-designed plan - but I’m also sure that the plan reflects Sir Richard’s own predilections.
It reminds me of another sad occasion, when one of Sir Michael Bishop’s British Midland 737s crashed on the M1 - with multiple deaths. Bishop was there almost instantly, dispensing help, sympathy, and whatever information he could give. And he kept it up, supporting survivors and relatives of the dead well after the accident.
Yes, you can say that’s just good commercial practice. But not all companies react to disaster with anything like that attitude. When they do, I believe they should be commended. And I also believe that the military could learn much about how to handle disaster from these events - even though there are, of course, significant differences between a company and the MoD.
airsound
edited to remove all mention of rugby score
It reminds me of another sad occasion, when one of Sir Michael Bishop’s British Midland 737s crashed on the M1 - with multiple deaths. Bishop was there almost instantly, dispensing help, sympathy, and whatever information he could give. And he kept it up, supporting survivors and relatives of the dead well after the accident.
Yes, you can say that’s just good commercial practice. But not all companies react to disaster with anything like that attitude. When they do, I believe they should be commended. And I also believe that the military could learn much about how to handle disaster from these events - even though there are, of course, significant differences between a company and the MoD.
airsound
edited to remove all mention of rugby score
Last edited by airsound; 25th Feb 2007 at 10:01.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: london
Age: 55
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Before you all get too carried away berating the military's incompetence with PCM, the RAF played a major role in the response to this crash. Apparently 4 RAF SAR cabs attended (Two from Valley and one each from Leconfield and Boulmer), along with a military mountain rescue team, and airlifted many of the casualties to hospital. Well done to those concerned, I wish you military types wouldn't beat yourselves up so much, particularly in public.
I don’t think anyone’s complaining about how the RAF performs operationally, HAL - as ever, it’s admirable. But surely, what’s being discussed here is how the military handle their relations with their paymasters, the public.
airsound
edited to remove all mention of rugby score
airsound
edited to remove all mention of rugby score
Last edited by airsound; 25th Feb 2007 at 10:01.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 383
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Before you all get too carried away berating the military's incompetence with PCM, the RAF played a major role in the response to this crash. Apparently 4 RAF SAR cabs attended (Two from Valley and one each from Leconfield and Boulmer), along with a military mountain rescue team, and airlifted many of the casualties to hospital. Well done to those concerned, I wish you military types wouldn't beat yourselves up so much, particularly in public.
I think that there is a good point to be made about PCM, though. Virgin has been completely frank and honest about the details concerning the crash, and although the police will be invesitgating the causes Sir Richard has not been shy of saying that the police's prevailing suspicion is that there has been a points failure.
Whether this turns out to be the case or not, what it has done is prevent the media from speculating wildly about the causes and ramifications of the crash. Contrast that with everything the MOD has done in recent years. The media like to be kept informed, and Virgin has done a sterling job so far. Maybe Des Browne could swallow his (and the MOD's corporate) pride and reconsider the PCM media strategy?
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: SE England
Age: 70
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I find it incredible to see how how easily people are taken in by the 'Beardy weirdy'
The guy knows next to nothing about the railways, and has sold off most of his stake in all of the Virgin enterprises. He rakes in his shekels through the licencing of the Virgin name.
Branson is a brilliant front-man, and entrapreneur, but he is made in the same mould as TB - knows what to say, but has learned the way to use sincerity to his advantage.
Some of my friends have had close aquaintance of the Virgin-style, and I would never use any of their products
The guy knows next to nothing about the railways, and has sold off most of his stake in all of the Virgin enterprises. He rakes in his shekels through the licencing of the Virgin name.
Branson is a brilliant front-man, and entrapreneur, but he is made in the same mould as TB - knows what to say, but has learned the way to use sincerity to his advantage.
Some of my friends have had close aquaintance of the Virgin-style, and I would never use any of their products
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Midlands
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Think he did very well in taking charge, and putting on a very professional face to the immediate actions required after the sad accident.
Yes the SAR boys clearly did very well as well, glad it was recognised by Mr B.
Sad thing from the ARCC Spokesmans interview on the radio last night was the individual in the background laughing and joking! Happened twice and didnt show the RAF in a very good light, especially as details were not known on the status of the injured at the time.
Perhaps a point of note for the future for anybody from ARCC, do the phone interviews from a seperate office.
Yes the SAR boys clearly did very well as well, glad it was recognised by Mr B.
Sad thing from the ARCC Spokesmans interview on the radio last night was the individual in the background laughing and joking! Happened twice and didnt show the RAF in a very good light, especially as details were not known on the status of the injured at the time.
Perhaps a point of note for the future for anybody from ARCC, do the phone interviews from a seperate office.
Join Date: Dec 1997
Location: Suffolk UK
Posts: 4,927
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Virgin probably uses a specialist company to do this for them That makes a big difference, and costs a lot of money.
Virgin is a commercial carrier, the MoD is not. The MoD may have very good reasons for not publicising the full details of an accident, including the names of people inviolved. Such conditions are rarely relevent in a commercial operation. The MoD will not suffer significant financial loss (other than compensatory loss) if it's perceived to be responsible for loss of life or injury. Virgin (Trains, Planes or Underwear!) could go out of business within days if it is perceived to be an unsafe carrier.
Gives something of an incentive to be good at this stuff!
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: N Scotland
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C'mon folks, think about it: Branson is told that one of his trains has come off the rails. "Is there any chance it could be our fault?" "No, Mr Branson, the points failed." "OK, lets get out there and get the PR machine rolling". Its so different to a military accident.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: wilts
Posts: 1,667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK, so the Nimrod was blown out of the sky after a fire probably caused by a pressurised fuel leak in pipes designed for a conflict 25 years earlier. After a weekend of checks in which further holes and fractures were found in other AAR Nimrods, the crews were told to get on with their essential AAR tasks including training courses.
This Virgin train was packed with safety features. Take a look at the Branson empire, he always invests in the latest safety features. The Nimrod had no fuel tank protection.
Very different, indeed
This Virgin train was packed with safety features. Take a look at the Branson empire, he always invests in the latest safety features. The Nimrod had no fuel tank protection.
Very different, indeed
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: ice station kilo
Posts: 200
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
nigegilb,
With such well informed insight I’m surprised your not president of the BOI, CAS or Richard Branson’s right hand man.
This train accident ‘appears’ to be a much more ‘open and shut’ case. The 24-hour news channels are saying that the initial findings will be announced tomorrow and Network Rail are making ‘precautionary’ checks of points across the network.
The events of late last week and the weekend with the MR2 show quite the reverse of what you suggest. Making pertinent and detailed checks and clearing the aircraft to fly when the experts are happy shows a very positive attitude to safety at ISK and out East.
I suggest you take your half-baked insight to where it belongs on a Sunday afternoon, down the pub.
With such well informed insight I’m surprised your not president of the BOI, CAS or Richard Branson’s right hand man.
This train accident ‘appears’ to be a much more ‘open and shut’ case. The 24-hour news channels are saying that the initial findings will be announced tomorrow and Network Rail are making ‘precautionary’ checks of points across the network.
The events of late last week and the weekend with the MR2 show quite the reverse of what you suggest. Making pertinent and detailed checks and clearing the aircraft to fly when the experts are happy shows a very positive attitude to safety at ISK and out East.
I suggest you take your half-baked insight to where it belongs on a Sunday afternoon, down the pub.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: wilts
Posts: 1,667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK, from a Nimrod crewman.
"The worst part has been the release of info. We've not heard a dicky bird then suddenly the ACC in the Gulf wants us airborne and tanker capable again. By the way, that ******* hasn't even sent a letter of condolence to the ******* squadron or station over the loss of the crew!! One of the SDs says that if operationally essential and if no other alternatives exist then the aircraft can tank, albeit with AOC 2 Gp permission. So, we had a jet AARing over Kandahar 4 days after the accident!! Unbelievable. I can't see how that could ever possibly be considered to be good risk management."
"The worst part has been the release of info. We've not heard a dicky bird then suddenly the ACC in the Gulf wants us airborne and tanker capable again. By the way, that ******* hasn't even sent a letter of condolence to the ******* squadron or station over the loss of the crew!! One of the SDs says that if operationally essential and if no other alternatives exist then the aircraft can tank, albeit with AOC 2 Gp permission. So, we had a jet AARing over Kandahar 4 days after the accident!! Unbelievable. I can't see how that could ever possibly be considered to be good risk management."
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: wilts
Posts: 1,667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was referring to the original decision to resume AAR sorties 4 days after the Nimrod tragedy. Included in the decision was the resumption of AAR training. Nothing was communicated to the Sqns about the source of ignition but flying was resumed due to the imperative of tasking.
From a Nimrod crewman in September.
"LETS WAIT FOR THE FACTS TO EMERGE AND ACT IN A SENSIBLE MANNER WHEN WE HAVE AS MUCH OF THE INFORMATION AS WE CAN GET."
Would you care to remind us how many Air engineers and Pilots have either left or PVR'd from ISK since September?
From a Nimrod crewman in September.
"LETS WAIT FOR THE FACTS TO EMERGE AND ACT IN A SENSIBLE MANNER WHEN WE HAVE AS MUCH OF THE INFORMATION AS WE CAN GET."
Would you care to remind us how many Air engineers and Pilots have either left or PVR'd from ISK since September?
Last edited by nigegilb; 25th Feb 2007 at 14:00.
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: 58-33N. 00-18W. Peterborough UK
Posts: 3,040
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It reminds me of another sad occasion, when one of Sir Michael Bishop’s British Midland 737s crashed on the M1 - with multiple deaths. Bishop was there almost instantly, dispensing help, sympathy, and whatever information he could give. And he kept it up, supporting survivors and relatives of the dead well after the accident.
Whatever happened to him.
