Romano 1

Duke: a Brand Under Fire

Duke never seems to catch a break from being in the national media spotlight. Whether

it is their educational institution or their health system under pressure, Duke has been scrutinized

for at least the past eight years for various debacles. The handling of these cases by Duke

consequently ricochet their educational and health organizations into highly publicized crises.

Prior to many of these incidents Duke held a pristine image, however, these events took a

significant toll on that image. This paper will analyze the hydraulic fluid and Jesica Santillan

incidents at Duke’s health system as well as the events that transpired among the Duke athletic

department. Such as the lacrosse scandal, J.J. Redick’s arrest, Joe Alleva’s boating accident,

and the most recent graduate sex thesis. Furthermore, I will align these events with current

public relations practices and theories.

Communication Excellence: Three Spheres

Crises force organizations to achieve communication excellence as these ideals are

embedded in them from corporate managers. However, some organizations are poor examples

of practicing communication excellence when faced with a crisis. Dozier’s Manager’s Guide

to Excellence in Public Relations and Communication Management proposes three spheres to

measure excellence in public relations. The core of communication excellence is defined by the

knowledge base. This knowledge base classifies excellent and inferior communication

departments. To be deemed excellent management is involved in role-playing but most

importantly in strategic management. Next, the middle sphere represents shared expectations

among the top communicators and senior management in the organization. These two spheres are

housed within a larger sphere involving the organization’s participative culture (see figure 1.1).

This particular sphere is further defined by two basic forms of organizational culture:

Romano 2

participative and authoritarian. Applying these spheres to Duke University’s athletic

department and health system will aid in deciding whether or not they achieved communication

excellence.

Looking at the layers of the communication excellence sphere and analyzing the

characteristics that define each sphere we can see that Duke predominately did not exemplify

communication excellence with the exception of J.J. Redick’s case. Unlike Duke’s other cases

Redick’s agent/communicator displayed communication excellence. He displayed

characteristics that are common in the three spheres. Starting at the core Redick’s agent, Arn

Tellem, exhibited characteristics of communicator knowledge including strategic management

and planning, handling media inquiries, deflected potentially damaging news, and facilitated

both one-way and two-way communication methods. It can be assumed that due to the

outcome of Redick’s case Tellem achieved qualities of the middle sphere by playing the

strategic role of a boundary spanner and environmental scanner. Tellem was able to do this

through the shared expectations of his dominant coalition. Due to the successful outcome of

Tellem’s efforts in Redick’s case one can assume the Tellem’s organization’s participative

culture which instilled shared values among all employees. The case of former Duke basketball

star J.J. Redick is a good example of a crisis situation where communication excellence was

displayed which resulted in a positive crisis outcome.

As Duke began to pick up the pieces of their tarnished image from the lacrosse scandal

Owen’s sex thesis surfaced four years later, drawing Duke back into a national negative media

spotlight. Duke graduate, Karen Owen unofficial senior thesis entitled, “An Education Beyond

the Classroom: Excelling in the Realm of Horizontal Academics” became an overnight Internet

sensation not to mention a major crisis situation for Duke athletics as well. Unlike Redick’s

Romano 3

case this case is seen as being unsuccessful in achieving communication excellence. Redick

appointed an agent/communicator for his case, Owen did not. This may have been her first

mistake in preventing her from achieving communication excellence. First, it is apparent that

Owen was not a technician able to handle media inquires, provide materials, and deflect

damaging news. She was not hugely successful in getting her story and statement out to the

public participating in only one interview and ignoring the rest of the media mainstream.

Likewise, Duke University did not have a hold on the situation either failing in communication

excellence. Duke University also failed in the realm communication excellence by not

participating in one-way or two-way communication; they also did not forge partnerships with

the dominant coalition. Duke failed miserably in communication excellence regarding the

case of graduate student Karen Owen’s sex thesis.

The three spheres of communication excellence serves as a platform to guide

organizations to communicate effectively internally and externally and to build meaningful

relationships with key publics. We can see in the outcome of J.J. Redick’s DWI crisis that

effectively participating in the three spheres is beneficial to rescue ones reputation and

maintain positive publics. The case of Karen Owen’s sex thesis is a prime example of a failed

attempt at communication excellence. Furthermore, not actively participating in the three

spheres can lead to damaging effects of ones reputation, which Duke University exemplified in

the sex thesis scandal.

Models

Romano 4

J. Grunig predicted that there is a relationship among an organization’s environment and

structure to the model(s) of public relations. These four models include press agentry, public

information, two-way asymmetric, and two-way symmetric. Successful public relations

scholars are to practice in a two-way symmetrical method of communication with their publics.

It is especially vital to react using these models when experiencing a turbulent situation, but

many organizations fail to do so. All of Duke’s cases discussed throughout this paper mainly use

the public information model, which does not seek to persuade publics but rather to

disseminate information. This one-way movement of information is best illustrated when

Duke’s lacrosse team, J.D. Alleva, and Jesica Santillan crises occurred as they all made

statements about the occurrences to the public. Although the information may not have been

relayed in a timely manner they still informed the public of the recent mishaps therefore

participating in Gruing’s public information model.

Theories

Other useful typologies for understanding public relations include theories. All of

Duke’s cases serve as a prime example of the major role the media plays in the minds of the

public. The media is continuously influencing citizens setting the agenda for what we talk and

think about, this is known as the agenda setting theory. Media coverage is an important faucet

of a crisis. As mediated reports set the tone and ultimately determine an organization’s

reputation as stakeholders receive information. For example, J.J. Redick spoke directly with

numerous media outlets and made a public apology following his arrest saying: "I regret what

happened last night, and want to apologize to my family and the Duke community for the

incident." Furthermore, Redick’s former coach Mike Krzyzewski made a statement as well

saying: “J.J. knows he made a mistake and regrets it," Krzyzewski said. "He represented the very

Romano 5

best in college athletics and exhibited outstanding character at Duke the last four years. He is and

will continue to be a credit to the Duke Basketball family. As his friend and his coach, he has my

total support.” All of the media clippings for this particular case portrayed Redick in a positive

light which consequently did not ruin his reputation. On the other hand, Duke University’s

reputation in this case was portrayed by the media in a seemingly negative light. It was bad

enough Duke had to deal with their lacrosse team’s scandal and not even a year later Duke was

catapulted into the mainstream media for Redick’s arrest. As a result, the media was quick to

blame Duke causing them to defend their image.

Another theoretical approach to describe the Duke cases is systems theory. Systems

theory is an ecological approach to forming relationships with the public. The main focus of

this particular theory revolves around the stakeholders of the organization. This theory

distinguishes the participating organizations into two categories: open or closed systems.

Nearly all organizations are relatively open or relatively closed in the interchanges with their

environment. Indications of insensitivity to environments are a telling characteristic of a closed

system. These closed boundaries are unhealthy as little information in exchanged between the

system and its publics. Duke did not act as a closed system in all of these cases but it is evident

that they did in some.

In the 2005 case of the hydraulic elevator fluid Duke University Health Systems reacted

in a closed manner to the crisis. When news reports of the incident began to surface Duke

remained silent. Saying nothing to the media gave the impression they were trying to hide the

facts and shift the blame. In a hospital setting where patients’ health is at stake it is vital that the

organization talk openly to the families and patients involved instead of retreating behind a wall

of silence. Some patients who underwent surgery at Duke during this time reported health issues

Romano 6

from the contaminated instruments. Duke’s hospital officials dismissed the symptoms even

though the hospital urged them to report any indications of infection. Although Duke sent letters

to potentially exposed patients it wasn’t until the following year. Thomas Henderson, a Raleigh

lawyer helping the victims of the fluid mix-up, commented on Duke’s closed system stating:

“What we really want is a response from Duke to prove their assertions that there was very little

risk to the patients…I mean, patients are hanging out there with problems and Duke won't give

an answer to us." From a patient’s perspective, Larry Preston says of Duke: “They haven't been

forthcoming to anybody about anything that they knew about prior to or that they know now.

Anything that has been exposed as far as knowledge of this situation has been pried out of them.”

Thus, we can see from an example of the Duke hydraulic fluid mix-up that acting as a closed

system is not an effective means in communicating with publics and tarnished the health

systems reputation.

An open system on the other hand interacts with its environment creating the likelihood

to survive and prosper in the public’s eyes. Although Duke’s health system did not succeed in

being an open system Duke’s President Brodhead fostered an open system after the Duke

lacrosse scandal. Following the event Duke held press conferences, issued press releases and

directed the public to their website which expressed its perspective on the allegations. President

Richard Brodhead also made an appearance on the highly credible CBS 60 Minutes. In addition,

Brodhead issued numerous letters to various stakeholders regarding the closing of the case and

future directions to build a stronger community. Although Brodhead was criticized for his delay

in responding to the events he continued to be a consistent voice throughout the scandal.

The social exchange theory asserts that people strive to minimize costs and maximize

rewards. Rewards can be defined as something that is satisfying. Rewards don’t necessarily

Romano 7

have to be material or economic they can also be symbolic such as attention or status. This

theory can be applied to Karen Owen’s sex thesis which began as a hoax amongst three of her

friends that got into the wrong hands and went viral immediately. Although Karen intended the

PowerPoint presentation for her friends she sent it to feel a sense of accomplishment and hoped

for a reward of attention or to obtain a certain rewarding status among her friends. It may seem

obvious that Owen analyzed the rewards of her actions but did she assess the costs? Apparently

she did not because the costs outweighed Karen’s rewards. Not only did the costs of Karen’s

sex thesis tarnish her own reputation but it reflected negatively upon Duke University as well.

Owens sex thesis surfacing four year after Duke’s lacrosse scandal only served to revitalize the

public’s perceptions of Duke as a weak educational institution. Owens thesis reinforced the

stereotypes Duke’s lacrosse case previously established about the seemingly casual sexual

practices of Duke students.

We can also examine the interactions among Duke and its publics using game theory.

We’ve learned that a crucial decision in the duel is not how to act, but when to act. The duel is

a situation in which an organization decides to withhold information from the public with the

hopes of getting it under control before word spreads. We’ve also seen cases when organizations

benefit from strategic silence such as the Chernobyl accident. In other instances such as

Duke’s hydraulic fluid mix-up and Jesica Santillan’s transplant openness would have been

the best response. There are varying differences between playing the duel game and

stonewalling and it is important to differentiate between the two to foster accurate media

coverage and positive publics.

Publics

Romano 8

An aspect of an effective crisis management plan involves distinguishing various

publics. These publics can be divided into three categories: latent publics, aware publics, and

active publics. Active publics are those that detect a problem or issue in the organization,

communicate about it, and organize to do something about it. Latent publics are audiences

affected by the consequences of the organizations actions. Aware publics are just that, these

publics have recognized a problem but have not organized or communicated to do anything

about it. Many publics involved in the Duke lacrosse case obtained high levels of involvement

and problem recognition, and lower levels of constraint recognition. Many activists groups

commenced on the Duke University campus and the courthouse to rally for various reasons.

Some of the groups that supported the team’s innocence during their troubling time included

concerned Duke Mothers and Ethical Durham, a group encouraging students to vote and support

ethical issues. The New Black Panther Party is another organization whose voices rang through

the Duke campus as they protested demanding the players be convicted.

Ethics

Protecting stakeholders from harm instead of the organizations reputation is first priority

during a crisis. It is typically seen as unethical to begin the crisis communication process by

focusing on the organization’s reputation. Acting ethically during a crisis requires crisis

managers to effectively communicate to address the needs of the public. According to Guth

and Marsh obtaining a good set of ethics and social responsibility leads the organization to

trustworthiness and respect, which are two vital characteristics in public relations (242).

Guth and Marsh outline three challenges to ethical behavior. These challenges include:

denial, dilemma, and ignorance (242). Duke surely faced a dilemma when reports began to

Romano 9

surface of the unfortunate hydraulic fluid mix-up. This crisis first emerged when Duke

displayed ethical ignorance when choosing to ignore their sterilization crews’ complaints about

the slick tools. On occasion the crews complained of having to run the tools through the washing

machines twice, or even having to wash them by hand to get rid of the grease. After poor

reviews of Duke’s operating room logs the hospital pledged to fix their sterilization processes. It

is apparent that this issue remained ignored as the problem worsened as their patients began to

endure the lasting effects. Ignorance stems from a lack of awareness and it is evident that if

Duke recognized their coworkers complaints this crisis could have been avoided.

Issues of denial are extremely powerful and unethical when organizations are faced with

a crisis. Organizations may deny allegations to protect themselves from public humiliation,

losing stakeholders, and damaging their reputation. The hydraulic fluid incident involved

many denials on Duke’s behalf. Dozens of patients reported suffering varying health issues but

officials maintained that the instruments used during surgery were in fact sterilized. Duke

Doctors also denied patient’s concerns dismissing their symptoms. In addition, Duke did not

initially accept full responsibility for their mistake. Instead they shifted the blame to

ExxonMobil who produced the fluid.

Crisis Communication

An unexpected crisis event can disrupt organization’s processes and pose a reputational

and financial threat. The crises occurring at Duke threatened to damage their reputation as both

an educational and health institution. Organizations armed with a comprehensive crisis

communication plan can potentially emerge from crises unscathed. Crises evolve in different

stages according to W.T. Coombs who proposes three stages to the crisis life cycle: the pre-

Romano 10

crisis, crisis, and post-crisis. Effectively managing these stages is important for organizations to

avoid a crisis, its escalation or a tarnished reputation. In this section I will analyze Duke’s

scandals that turned out favorably and unfavorably based on the crisis life cycle.

First, the pre-crisis stage involves signal detection, prevention, and crisis preparation.

This stage includes various elements such as: environmental surveillance, issues management,

risk assessment, stakeholder relationships, and elements of a crisis plan. After Jesica’s

passing Duke charted an agreement with the Santillan family to not reveal any information to the

media about the incident. Duke’s offices trained the family how to handle the media in such a

way without revealing too much information. Shortly after Duke turned to public relations firm

Burson-Marsteller for help with their crisis communication plan. By taking these steps Duke

was preparing for a crisis and assessed the risks the Santillan family posed.

Succeeding the pre-crisis stage is the crisis stage. This particular stage is distinguished

by elements of crisis recognition, crisis containment, and organization resumption. Duke

certainly recognized the crisis at hand when the Santillan family broke their agreement speaking

to the media about Duke’s medical blunder. Shortly afterward Duke met with the hospital’s

CEO, Dr. William Fulkerson, to devise a crisis plan. Jesica’s death was a tragic shock

nationally but Duke remained a strong organization resuming their practices while conveying

sympathy and concern to the public and their stakeholders.

Eventually all crises come to an end and effective crisis managers begin to participate in

the post-crisis stage. It is important organizations participate in this stage to better prepare for

future crises. The post-crisis stage affirms the ending of the crisis, ensures positive

stakeholders as organizations participate in debriefing, and interviews. Duke ensured a

Romano 11

positive relationship with their stakeholders by establishing a $4 million fund for Jesica. In

addition, Duke also organized an outreach program seeking feedback from media outlets and

medical professionals regarding Duke’s management of the case to better prepare for the future.

Duke also ensured its stakeholders that mistakes like these would not be tolerated by enforcing

revised transplant protocols. Many of Duke’s doctors also participated in the highly credible

CBS 60 Minutes “Anatomy of a Mistake” interview.

Although Duke was at the center of a healthcare nightmare and this crisis certainly

threatened its reputation Duke proved to be a reputable organization to the public and emerged

relatively unharmed continuing to rank sixth in US News & World Report’s “America’s Best

Hospitals.” This incident proves the importance of establishing a crisis communications plan

ahead of time and following it through. But Duke’s crisis plan was not flawless. There were

some weaknesses. For example, the lack of a spokesperson and their air of silence following the

incident proved to be serious faults in their plan.

An example of poor crisis life cycle practices includes Duke’s hydraulic fluid incident,

Alleva’s boating accident and of course, the Duke lacrosse scandal. Duke was seemingly

unprepared for these crises because they did not successfully participate in the crisis life cycle

stages therefore incurring damage to their public image. Had Duke participated in crisis

management they probably would have emerged from these crises stronger and unharmed.

Duke University seemed to have failed miserably during the pre-crisis and crisis stages

when their lacrosse team was faced with rape accusations. An important aspect of the pre-crisis

stage is assessing risks. By researching potential dangers organizations are assessing their

risks to avoid a crisis from occurring. Duke University did not appropriately assess the risks of

Romano 12

the students on the lacrosse team. Raleigh’s local News & Observer reported that 15 players on

the Duke lacrosse team had a criminal history before the sexual assault incident. The charges of

the student athletes were related to drunken and disruptive behavior in the Durham area. By

assessing the risks of the team Duke University could have potentially avoided this crisis by

enforcing stricter guidelines for their student athletes and off campus living.

During the crisis stage Duke eventually recognized the crisis and adhered to its

seriousness but it took them entirely too long to respond. It was nearly 10 days before an official

statement was made regarding the scandal. Not only did Duke fail at recognizing the crisis but

also in resumption of their organization. It was not until 15 months later when the case closed

that Duke Universities’ students and faculty were alleviated from the national media spotlight

and could resume their likely forgotten “normal” campus lives. Yet, the university did not seem

to foster a community return to normalcy.

Duke’s director of athletics Joe Alleva faced numerous crises during his tenure at the

university including the lacrosse scandal but he also endured a boating accident. Alleva

sustained a head injury and his son sustained a night in jail for crashing the boat while impaired.

These scandals required a strong spokesperson and unfortunately Alleva was unable to deliver.

Three days following the incident Alleva made a statement regarding his return to work and

good health but no mentions of his son’s charges or the actual seriousness of the injuries he

sustained. Being a student athlete at Duke University Alleva’s DWI only fueled the fire to the

reoccurring student alcohol related scandals. In this situation, I do not believe Alleva considered

signal detection during the pre-crisis stage because he did not assess the risks for the

organization, himself or his family. He also did not participate in the crisis stage because he did

not recognize the severity of the accident and hid all of the facts.

Romano 13

Lastly, Duke health systems unfortunate hydraulic fluid mix-up was a complete public

relations disaster failing in many of the crisis stages. Beginning with the pre-crisis stage Duke

did not identify and resolve the hydraulic fluid issue before it spiraled into a crisis situation. If

they would have listened to the complaints their sterilization crews made they could have

resolved the issue beforehand. They also did not assess the risks of the organization or

designate a spokesperson. During the crisis stage the health system also failed to contain the

crisis becoming unethical in the handlings of the case. In this situation Duke did not react

appropriately to this crisis. Instead of being proactive Duke hid behind a wall of silence

ignoring their publics and the importance of a designated crisis plan.

Opinions differ on the effect these situations had on Duke’s image. Nevertheless, Duke

has incurred much public criticism and years in the media spotlight. Duke University’s

reputation has no doubt been tarnished from repeated alcohol related occurrences in their

student body. Likewise, it will be difficult for their health systems to escape the crises that

occurred at their hospitals. Although they emerged out of these crises alive their publics will

never forget what transpired. If Duke devised a crisis plan and designated a team prior to the

events they probably would have emerged far less damaged. We can see that through all these

incidents the media played a major role in shaping the publics perception of Duke. By not

establishing a plan or team Duke inadvertently allowed the media and public to take charge in

the events. In addition, these crises teach us that organizations underlying communication

culture and level of power can prevent the worst crisis from happening.

Romano 14

Romano 15