In this week’s bulletin, Charlie discusses the stripped titles of Prince Andrew (now Andrew Mountbatten Windsor), and shares some key lessons that we can apply in our own organisations.

Andrew as a name doesn’t work as well as the Sound of Music’s “How do you solve a problem like Maria?”, but the sentiment of the song and the many ‘sins’ of Maria trifle in significance to that of Andrew. I thought the news last night about him being stripped of his Prince title and forced out of Royal Lodge merited some bulletin thoughts.

I am not a republican by any means, but I have a firm belief that with privilege comes responsibility, and if you have the titles, the palaces, and the deference, you have a responsibility to behave appropriately and your behaviour should be of a higher standard than if you are a ‘person on the street’. Andrew has not behaved in this way, and even if you take his sexual denial at his word, he was still friends with Epstein after he was convicted in Florida of “soliciting prostitution” and “soliciting prostitution from a minor”. He also lied that he had broken contact with Epstein when emails showed he hadn’t. Another aspect of this case is that nobody seems to have a good word for Andrew or has stood up to defend him or his character. In speaking to people who have met him, they all say he was arrogant and entitled and didn’t treat those around him, especially his staff, very well. So, I suspect there will be a certain schadenfreude for many at his fall.

Professionally, I think that the way this whole issue has been handled is noteworthy, and what we can learn from the Royal Family’s approach to the case is significant. Although this is quite an extreme case, there are lessons for less high-profile crises too.

1. The crisis communicator is in trouble if the client or the person they are advising has a complete lack of self-awareness. This is usually manifested by them going off and thinking they can do something against their advisor’s advice, such as Andrew’s famous interview with Emily Maitlis. I suspect he was advised against doing it and didn’t take his advisor’s guidance on what to say. Baroness Mone has behaved in a similar way by thinking she could clear her name by an interview which, instead of having the effect she wanted, led to a slow-motion car crash interview and the interview became the story. Perhaps if you have a client who is completely self-unaware and doesn’t listen to your advice, you may find yourself with a more deserving or at least a different client.
2. Providing more information rarely closes off an issue and usually leads at a minimum to a story having legs and continuing, often leading to more questions being asked. I notice in crises, more and more senior managers are not putting themselves up as spokespersons, but rely on a written statement to pose their side of the story. To provide impartiality, the journalist has to refer in some way to the statement, but it doesn’t give much more information to further fuel the fire.
3. Often, the very thing those responding are trying hardest to avoid is exactly what ends up happening. How many times have we heard, ‘I have full confidence in X and this is not a resigning matter’, only for that same person to resign days later? In Andrew’s case, should the King have said, based on what we know and what is likely to emerge, ‘I need to take the worst-case action now’, rather than have it forced upon him later? Could he have removed Royal Lodge and the Prince title at the same time as the Duke of York title, instead of seeming to be pushed into it? Being swift and decisive and taking the worst-case action early can help draw a line under an event without the optics of being seen to act under pressure.
4. Families add an extra dimension of complexity. Andrew was reported to be the late Queen’s favourite son, so it was unlikely that she would have proactively managed the Epstein issue, and so only when she passed away was it easier for the King to act on the case. We have seen in the Murdoch succession saga that families make issues more complex. You can’t divorce or sack your family and relatives, which you can do to errant CEOs.
5. There is always redemption. Andrew, or perhaps his advisors, should have told him to redeem himself, although I suspect if suggested he wouldn’t have taken the advice. If he had quietly worked in a women’s refuge or a street workers’ charity, didn’t just visit as a royal visit but actually worked with the charity quietly for a couple of years without being in the public gaze, then he might have got some credibility back. Everyone loves a redemption story and someone working hard to understand the error of their sins would elicit sympathy from the public.
6. Both Andrew and the Palace have never fully expressed sympathy for the victims of Epstein’s crimes and shown their human side and that they understand what was done was wrong. Andrew might say he didn’t do anything wrong, but he was still friends with a sex offender, so he could have recognised the victims of Epstein’s crimes. We all know that in crisis communications, a genuine apology can go a long way to try and redeem yourself.
7. For the Palace, there has always been another event which has kept this story going, with the latest being Virginia Giuffre’s book being published and the releasing of Epstein’s emails. There are still the police in New York wanting to speak to Andrew and the Met Police investigation on whether Andrew tried to get his security detail to investigate Virginia Giuffre. There is still information out there to come out, I suspect, so it will be very difficult for the Palace to try and draw a line under it. The best they can do is to distance themselves from Andrew and hope that he is the object of the press’ and the public’s ire, not the monarchy as a whole.

I personally think that, in PR terms, this is an extremely difficult issue to deal with due to the characters, the family dimension, the unique status of the royals, and the endless press and public attention surrounding this case. I am sure that those who have been dealing with the response, on reflection, might think with hindsight they could have done many things better. I think when we become aware of a reputation management issue like this, we should play fantasy PR manager. Consider how we would have advised, what actions we might have suggested, or, as I mentioned earlier, whether we would have walked away, seeing it as a no-win situation.