On the complex stage of brand building and crisis management, the turmoil of Wenheyou is undoubtedly a vivid negative teaching lesson. This article deeply analyzes Wen Heyou's mistakes in brand public relations, from the founder's "arson" to the "collapse" of the public relations team, and explores how the brand can get out of control in a series of inactions.

Although I haven't paid attention to this "hyperthyroid brother", I still took a deep bite yesterdayWen and You's melon。

To put it simply: a brand that is riddled with negativity and is already "sub-healthy", in the high-profile live broadcast, the founder (rumored) personally went out to "spray", instantly detonating 4000+ negative reviews; Then, the public relations team not only did not "extinguish the fire", but instead came to a cold style of "we don't respond", and in private (according to the revelations) they were busy deleting posts and controlling comments.

Shu Ze's evaluation of this incident (for now) is: The story king personally "set fire" to his own emotional edifice, and the brand's series of works is not crisis public relations, but more like crisis performance art. Of course, we can't just watch the excitement and disperse, behind this matter is the "why" that is worth many brands to study.

Why?A brand that started with "market warmth", the founder showed such a "true temperament" on the occasion of super live broadcast, is it just that the temper is not good enough, or is this business model that relies on stories and feelings has reached a certain point, and the pressure is so great that people set up a collapse?

For what reason?The brand public relations team, in the face of the monstrous waves provoked by the founder, chose to "play dead", and even (suspectedly) resorted to the "self-palace" work of deleting posts? Is it really stupid, or is the internal power structure so that the public relations has long been "kneeling", and can only be a microphone or even a backstabber?

Figure what?Is it just because of the rudeness of the live broadcast room that consumers reacted so much this time? Can it trigger this tsunami of spontaneous retaliatory bad reviews from thousands of people?

The comment area of the latest article on its official Weibo

When the founder and the brand are deeply bound, this is not a full advantage, it is an asset, and it may also be a bomb!

Wen and friends can be popular, and Mr. Founder's script of "selling feelings" has contributed a lot. He is the "dream maker" with his own aura. When everyone goes to Wenheyou, what they eat may not only be crayfish, but also the "old time filter" he created.

Go deeper: This set of "boss = brand soul" is a shortcut and an Internet celebrity password at the beginning. But when the stall was spread out and the capital came in, the founder was put on the altar and became a walking "brand symbol". At this time, his words and deeds are infinitely amplified.

This (suspected) "out of control" is not a matter of personal emotion, but a knife that pierces the window paper based on "human trust" between brands and consumers. Trust this thing, build it with a lot of painstaking work, destroy it, a word from the founder is enough.

So why do so many brands have to push their bosses to the forefront? What's the picture? It's not that capital likes to listen to stories, the market needs to remember. But betting all on one person is a high-stakes gamble in itself. People will change, they will be tired, and they will have seven emotions and six desires. When the boss can't play the "perfect persona", isn't it a matter of time before the brand is eaten up? Wen Heyou's play, is it a wake-up call for all brands that play "founder IP"?

The official failure to take a position in the crisis public relations is tantamount to acquiescing to the worst version.

The boss is "passionately opening the microphone" on the front line, and it stands to reason that the public relations department has to hurry up to "wash the floor", "extinguish the fire" and "hand the microphone", right?

The result? Wen Heyou's public relations not only really didn't move, but also used high-profile and cold wording to say "no response". It's just a matter of not responding.,It's even a masterpiece that deletes bad reviews.。

But the problem is that in the public opinion field of crisis public relations, silence can never be exchanged for quiet years, and will only attract more violent storms. If you choose to shut up, others will say it for you, and all kinds of speculations, black materials, and jokes are flying all over the sky. Once 20 out of 0 corpora is true, then no one cares that the remaining 0 are false, and 0 "true" will be derived.

What is crisis management? This is simply pushing its own brand into the spotlight smoothly, let others comment, and it also comes with a BGM of "I don't care".

As a brand, I am not afraid that the story is not well told, but I am afraid that this storyteller will jump out and say: I made it up, do you really believe it?

The founder personally shredded the brand story and spiritual symbols, which was not a slap in the face at all for users who supported the brand, but an IQ being pressed to the ground and rubbed. Of course, for the brand's bad review users and competitors, it can be regarded as finding a corpus, which is not allowed to be widely transmitted!

What is the core competitiveness of Wenheyou? It is the fireworks in the market under the filter of the story, and the sentimental sales of Mr. Founder, which builds a "set" with emotional value, story touch, and regional flavor for users.

But this time, Mr. Founder, the founder of the "starring", told the world with his practical actions: fairy tales are all lies, and the stories I made up are also deceitful, and the final interpretation belongs to me, and I don't have a good temper.

Not only that, but in the past few years, Wenheyou's operation model, catering taste, and service methods have also been criticized. How much internal damage did this incident cause to a brand that already relied on "stories to survive", especially when it was already a little "malnourished" (riddled with negativity)? Everyone's own taste.

There is still no response from the official Weibo account

These combinations have turned a potentially controllable brand crisis into a "everyone comes to find faults" and "brand reputation whipping corpse conference" with the participation of the whole people.

Of course, the fermentation of this public relations incident is not limited to the above two points, but the core is the comprehensive reasons such as unscientific internal governance, weak awareness of crisis management and control, and hollowing out brand value.

The internal governance is unscientific.Involving a huge number of issues within the enterprise, Shu Ze, as an outsider, will not comment here. Just one word for many brands: one-word management may be efficient in the peaceful and prosperous era, but it is a stone to hit one's own feet at a crisis moment.

The awareness of crisis management and control is not strong.Returning to this specific crisis, I think that although it may be caused by the founder's words, in the final analysis, it is the brand PR team that is not strong and too weak. Since the various negative voices of Wen Heyou have not stopped over the years, and the brand has been in a sub-healthy state, why has there been no insight, classification, upgrade, and treatment of past risks? 80% of the real public relations power is used in ordinary times to "cure the disease", and a public relations that cannot cure the disease before it happens, but can only treat the emergency is not a good public relations.

Of course, this team presented us with a state that could not cure the "disease" and could not cure the "emergency disease". Even, even basic health protection is not good, it stands to reason that this kind of super live broadcast occasion, the background of your own brand is not a good way to turn the crisis into safety, but at least you should walk on thin ice, no.

Brand value hollowing out.This exists in many brands, when a brand has long relied on "feelings" marketing, but in the actual operation and crisis management everywhere seems utilitarian, tough, and lack of temperature, people have to question whether its core values are just "slogans", rather than truly integrated into the corporate culture and code of conduct. This is also the reason why Shuze has been allowing brands with strong offline and strong users to establish a standard CIS system, especially the brand BI system, in the past few years and many articles in the past. Brands with stories out of the circle often fall into the situation of hollowing out their values, remember: no matter how good the story is, it is better to do things well! The story is the icing on the cake, and the products and services are the "brocade". Without "brocade", it's useless for you to embroider flowers!

The keywords of the Xiaohongshu brand are all negative reviews

Reflecting on this extremely failed crisis management, Schuzer believes that brands need to reflect on the following:

1. No public relations and no brand, the reason why a brand is called a brand is not only to let users have a "mind", but also to allow users to have a "psychological account", the former is established by marketing means, and the latter is maintained by public relations means.

2. The brand public relations team must have a sense of risk management, that is, risk capture, risk stratification, risk pre-treatment, risk escalation treatment, crisis management, public relations promotion, and value communication. It is necessary to be able to find things, deal with things, and get things back.

3. Public relations remember: admit mistakes without shame, pretending to be dead is terrible. Sincere communication is the only straw that can save oneself.

4. Founders remember: sober up! Please divide your "idol baggage", "success filter" and "true self" into occasions.

5. All brands remember: brand reputation is the same as weight loss, usually you don't keep your mouth shut (be cautious in words and deeds), don't open your legs (establish public communication), and finally lose your health, spending money in the ICU may not be able to buy it back.

In the end, Shu Ze wanted to say: Whether Wen Heyou's "dead chess" can still be played depends on creation and attitude. But that "beautiful" brand story must have been cracked and needs to be redoubled with sincerity and action.

Above. Respect for rules, care for the individual, reverence for the brand, and honesty in communication may be a stronger moat than any grand brand narrative.

This article was originally published by @舒澤品牌手記 in Operations. Reproduction without the permission of the author is prohibited

題圖來自Unsplash，基於CC0協定