I made a stupid civilian mistake recently. Corresponding with a law enforcement source, who also happens to be a good friend, I “playfully” got prickly with him for not responding to a request as quickly as I would have liked.
His reply was even pricklier, and not at all playful. As it turned out, he’d been involved in a joint task force operation, serving search warrants and examining digital evidence, for the better part of the week—in addition to investigating a fatal shooting.
And once I got over my initial who-does-he-think-he-is reaction (because, really, who likes to hear they’ve screwed up—even when it’s painfully obvious?), I told him:
I know better, and I should’ve known better. I’m sorry.
And left it at that.
True apology is about trust
One of my favorite social media experts and another friend, Liz Strauss, re-blogged an older post of hers: “When an Apology Can Open the Door to Trust.” It didn’t only strike me because of my experience. It also struck me because in this day and age, it seems everyone is apologizing. Is this really an effective way to rebuild trust?
![Chief David Kunkle](https://i0.wp.com/www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/img/v3/03-29-2009.n1a_29Kunkle_Product.GIM2JK1D7.1.jpg)
Dallas Police Chief David Kunkle
Honestly, I doubt it. I have to admit I rolled my eyes when I heard the word “apology” in conjunction with Dallas Police Chief David Kunkle’s apology to his city’s Hispanic community over a rookie officer’s actions. This was due in part to the fact that Kunkle has made public apologies before—notably with regard to another traffic stop.
But it’s not because of any opinions I hold about the DPD, or Kunkle himself. That’s my reaction to every public official’s apology, from Mark Sanford to John Edwards.
Apologies from organizations and public officials have, I fear, not come to mean very much. They are rarely 100% honest. Yet the public expects them, and public figures expect to have to give them. It’s become a “thing to do.” That removes the sincerity right there.
Worse, public reaction to them is mixed. Apologies for extramarital affairs only sometimes destroy careers. More often, they result in even more fame and attention. Apologies for misconduct result in the media using words like “outcry” and “demands for change” for a few weeks. Then nothing much changes.
And as Liz writes:
An apology that deflects attention, that says “I regret it happened,” is not an apology.
An “I’m sorry” that doesn’t own the damage done won’t rebuild trust.
An incomplete apology is a missed opportunity to build a stronger relationship by learning from what went wrong.
Words are not enough
My apology to my detective friend would have meant nothing had I emailed him again the next day, or really anytime before he dug out and was ready to talk again. I had to show that I meant what I said.
So I left him alone for a week—until he emailed me. Trust reestablished, friendship remains, though it has changed along with the two individuals who comprise it.
And therein lies the rub. People change. What they want and need and expect of a relationship changes along with them. The same is true of whole groups. People who once trusted a police department can learn to lose trust, and people who once distrusted their police can learn to regain it.
That’s why it’s so important never to assume you know what the public wants or needs, but to continue to research them, to reach out to them. Crime patterns shift. Demographics change. But pretty universally, people want to be heard and understood.
I made a stupid civilian mistake, and I owned up to it. Police make stupid cop mistakes, and they need to own up to them—not by making an “expected” apology, but by agreeing to learn from the mistake to make public safety better for everyone.
This is not easy. It often means putting one’s ego aside, and only rare leaders can admit their own mistakes to the extent that they can institute organizational culture change. The rest need to know when to admit that a change in leadership is necessary. Perhaps the best example: the LAPD.
What place do apologies hold in our culture? How can you move from the “expected” apology to one that is sincere and credible? And how can you follow through with action?
Christa M. Miller is founder and co-author of Cops 2.0. A freelance trade journalist turned public relations and social media consultant, she has specialized in public safety issues for the past eight years. She resides in Greenville, SC and can be reached at christammiller@gmail.com.
4 comments
Comments feed for this article
October 29, 2009 at 12:02 pm
Chris aka Da _BigKahuna
I agree we all need to apologize for our ‘mistakes’, but we also need to accept apologies “graciously”. Let the erring party know we all make mistakes, because sooner or later we will be in their shoes.
October 29, 2009 at 12:54 pm
Mike W
I agree Christa, far too many apologies by public authorities are insincere and “expected.” Even saying things like “I take full responsibility for my actions…” doesn’t mean much anymore. So you take “full responsibility” does necessarily mean you recognize a change is needed and will follow up with due action? – No, most of the time people feel claiming responsibility is enough.
A lack of trust already exists with many PD’s and the communities in which they serve, so these “expected” apologies only further hinder relationship building. However, if LE works to consolidate trust and reach out to their communities before a mistake happens, then the public would be more responsive to an apology. LE may not be able to fix mistakes through apologies but they can definitely minimize the backlash they receive by having that foundation of trust. I bet people a lot more willing to forgive those police officials they have communicated with on a blog than one whose face they cannot even recognize. For me its about relationship and credibility building so backlash is minimized when a mistake happens and an apology has to be given. Social media is just one tool police can use to start garnering that trust.
October 29, 2009 at 2:07 pm
Christa M. Miller
Good point Chris — though accepting apologies seems to have gone the way of making them to begin with!
Mike, I absolutely agree with the concept of relationship-building as a way to manage reputation and mitigate damage. What worries me is that too many LE agencies still see social media as primarily a “broadcast” tool rather than being willing to realize its full potential. The problem is not with the execution but rather the attitude toward public interaction that underlies the communication strategy. That is a much taller order than the relationship-building itself.
October 29, 2009 at 4:12 pm
Chris aka Da _BigKahuna
“The problem is not with the execution but rather the attitude toward public interaction that underlies the communication strategy. ”
Exactly, LE needs to shed this attitude of “Us versus Them”. When I “was on the job” (and even now that I’m “retired”), I tried to adhere to the philosophy of treating the public as I would want my family members and/or friends be treated/serviced.