In the information age, communications is key. Especially so for a public-facing company such as SMRT.

However, in the last few months, it has become increasingly clear the public transport operator has ceded communications ground to everyone else.

This means SMRT has lost its ability to control its messages at a time when it can ill-afford to lose the ability to communicate with the public as it seeks to restore confidence.

The following examples will demonstrate how that happened.

SMRT's over-reliance on one key message: Don't begrudge ground staff

To take the heat off itself in the wake of delays and problems -- on top of impending closures and some more major inconveniences in the future -- SMRT has been seeking public empathy.

This is carried out consistently by emphasising the tireless workers on the ground who are doing their best to get the train system up and running.

As a sign of gratitude, this following post about a commuter's words of encouragement for SMRT to press on was put up on Nov. 24 by SMRT:

The message is clear: Commuter stands in solidarity with the staff.

But the main issue with such a post is that, firstly, it comes from SMRT itself, and secondly, right-minded commuters who form the majority of commuters, do not begrudge the work done by the blue-collared workers on the ground.

And then there is the issue of authenticity.

Such messages must stem organically from the ground by commuters on their own Facebook pages to emphasise real everyday people are empathetic.

For SMRT to amplify such a message on their own platform is just not convincing.

Rather unfortunately, due to a recent admission that about one in 10 staff are not pulling their weight in SMRT, according to CEO Desmond Kuek at a press conference after it was found that staff had possibly falsified maintenance records, the perceived indefatigable nature of SMRT workers is also somewhat blunted -- ironically, by SMRT itself.

Messaging not on fleek.

Debunk troll criticisms

Another misstep by the SMRT communications team is the expenditure of one full social media post to debunk a troll accusation levelled at its CEO that he had fired half the maintenance crew.

Two things stand out.

One, the unprofessional and defensive tone of the writing dismissing the accusations, and two, the timeliness of such a post given the stinginess of timely updates on social media whenever an SMRT train breaks down or runs into some delay.

SMRT has been under fire from the public for not providing timely updates whenever trains do not work as they should.

A defensive Facebook post is also indicative of where SMRT's priorities lie when it comes to addressing the public.

SMRT needs to be proactive instead of reactive.

[related_story]

Leaks

Even as SMRT carries out press conferences to officially relay information to the public, staff have been going to the media behind the organisation's back to anonymously pass on what they know first-hand.

This was evident following the flooding of the North South Line tunnel and many questions were raised about the cultural problems within SMRT.

Sources from within SMRT were quoted anonymously because they were not authorised to speak with the media, but nonetheless, had chosen to speak up.

This shows that there are individuals who are trying to give another side of the story that is different from what the management is saying and attempting to shift the public attention away from the stage-managed perspective.

It is difficult to blame the credulous public for taking what they hear through the grapevine more seriously than what they see presented officially.

Whole chain of command carted out

And with press conferences to address problems becoming the norm, the entire chain of command has been carted out time and again.

Following the flooding of the NSL tunnel, the SMRT CEO had to appear in a press conference with the Land Transport Authority, which also roped in Minister for Transport, Khaw Boon Wan.

By repeatedly bringing out everyone up and down the command chain to address the public, the effect of assurances and accountability gets blunter each time.

How many times can everyone from the whole top management ranks possibly show up when there is still potentially another press conference to be called in the near future, for yet another unforeseen problem after one flooding and one collision already occurring?

Short of the Prime Minister himself showing up, there is no more trump card.

Internal staff discipline lacking

One of the contributing factors for leaks and mismanaged communications could be due to frustration of staff in SMRT and the chipping away at their discipline and morale.

On a Reddit forum, one pseudonymous user had come out to address the public claiming to be an SMRT employee and who pinpointed problems in the organisation on other ground staff instead of the management.

The authenticity of this assertion has been called into question as there was no way to identify the personnel or ascertain the veracity of the claims.

But if true, SMRT has another problem on their hands to contend with in their 10,000-employee organisation: Very chatty and engaging staff who are diagnosing the company's problems publicly.

More recently, a SMRT project manager allegedly aired her frustrations on Facebook over people who complained about the spate of train disruptions.

Her post ended by claiming people who complain about SMRT are in the minority and compared them to "terrorists who are giving Muslims a bad name".

She subsequently removed her post.

How to right the wrongs

There is no silver bullet to restoring public confidence.

But always calling a spade a spade helps.

The recent Joo Koon MRT collision makes for an instructive case.

Instead of SMRT trying to avoid calling the incident an outright "collision", SMRT could have been the first to state that it is one so as to claim the term and deal with the immediate fallout.

If it is anything but a collision, the public can then decide for themselves the severity of the situation.

LTA came out with a statement at 8pm the same evening and used the words "hit" and "collision" to describe the incident.

Herein lies the problem: A lot of what SMRT has been trying to say so far has come off sounding euphemistic.

"Came into contact" is really a collision, an "extra 10 minutes of travelling time" is more likely 25 minutes, and "cultural problem" seems to refer to a plethora of issues that can hardly be isolated because they are interlocking and compounding.

If they do not own the message, the message will own them.

Top photo via SMRT