Lee Iacocca understood: “”We have no one to blame but ourselves.”
Taking responsibility is different than accepting blame. Effective apologists know the difference.
Taking responsibility is descriptive: “A truck driven by one of our drivers tipped over, spilling 100,000 gallons of benzene, forcing hundreds of people to evacuate their homes.”
The facts speak for themselves.
This is the area of apology that makes most lawyers go ballistic. The prevailing judgment still holds that apologies are the functional equivalent of guilty pleas—giant, wrapped gifts for opposing prosecutors, regulators, and plaintiffs' attorneys. So defense counselors have traditionally advised CEOs in hot water to play legal hardball and default into cover-your-ass mode whenever anything goes wrong.
But in what may be news for some attorneys, the rules are changing. The recent tendency favoring “no fault” litigation is reflected by new federal sentencing guidelines that generally prevent expressions of sympathy from being used as evidence of fault after an accident. Happily, states are now following suit. Texas, California, and Florida took the lead and similar bills in eight other states make mea culpas inadmissible in court. The most progressive lawyers recognize that companies may be overestimating the costs of apologies and underestimating their benefits.
Companies may be overestimating the costs of apologies and underestimating their benefits. For one thing, juries weigh the fact that a company has faced up to its problems when assessing punitive damages. More important, apologies can defuse victims' anger. Some evidence suggests that people may be just as interested in apologies as they are in money. In one 1994 study of British medical malpractice patients, 37% said they wouldn't have brought suit had the doctor provided them with an explanation and an apology.
Apologies can defuse victims’ anger. A happy example of this fact played out July 12, 2002 on live television when Joette Schmidt, vice-president for customer service at America West Airlines Inc. went on the Today Show to ask the forgiveness of Sheryl Cole, a passenger who had been thrown off a flight for joking about the company's recent episode with a drunken-pilot. Ignoring interviewer Matt Lauer's invitation to defend the airline's conduct, Schmidt declared: “I'm here primarily to apologize to Ms. Cole. We overreacted.” The victim, who had spent the first minute of the segment tearing into America West, was caught off guard. “I appreciate the apology,” Cole responded. “I'm sympathetic to America West right now. I know they're going through a tough time.” Other evidence suggests that people may be just as interested in apologies as they are in money. In one 1994 study of British medical malpractice patients, 37% said they wouldn't have brought suit had the doctor provided them with an explanation and an apology.