This is an essay discussing the Apple Inc. 2009 case regarding the transparency issue surrounding the late disclosure of health status of its then CEO, the late Steve Jobs. The This is my take on the credibility crisis that the company faced and on the pros the cons of having Jobs so closely connected to the identity of the company.
This was submitted in October 2020 as part of the course requirement for Strategic Communication Planning (CCM718), Public Relations - Corporate Communications post-graduate program at Seneca College.
The larynx or the voice box, when it grows and protrudes, it becomes the Adam’s apple. It renders a deepening of the voice. That was the late Steve Jobs at the helm of his company, a stature that protruded in Apple’s corporate image. His voice, face and story defined the company, a strategy that marketed a philosophy to sell a technology.“Apple’s PR was all about Steve” (Zitelmann).
Jobs as the company’s PR man himself did the company best while it lasted. There was value in having Jobs tell his story, it strengthened the company’s vision. The PR and marketing went both ways, as much as Jobs’ voice, face, and story sold Apple, the product also sold Jobs as a visionary leader. This goes a long way in building trust among external stakeholders especially investors.
But there was also a pitfall in becoming the distended “voice box.” Jobs ,in the marketing of his vision, was pinned to an iconic structure that is a premium to investment.And when the voice that fed the vision chose silence at a time of crisis, speculation filled the void. The inconsistency in the statements of the company was deafening.
There is no “thinking differently” for a publicly listed company that demands transparency and truthfulness. Where investor confidence dictates stock prices, Apple is responsible to disclose any and all information that can impact investment decision.
Apple’s case related to its non-disclosure of the health condition of Jobs was inconsistent with its marketing and PR strategy. The company used storytelling to sell its product on a global level, but the indecision and delay to tell the real story in 2008 cast a long shadow toApple’s credibility.
During the crisis Apple did not give in to pressure to drop its prices, even if stock prices fell. And that strategy in itself showed product resilience, not to give in to external pressures was key to the company’s survival. Investor confidence suffered, but sales did not.
Product launches for iPod, Mac and iPhone 3GS proceeded as usual. That carried Apple through the crisis. It showed that the personal issue of its visionary leader was distinct and separate from the value of the product - one that was built on quality, design and optimization.
But PR handling was out of control, because the man who controlled. it became the story. That was the downside of a PR strategy that was designed to be a one-man show by the company’s top man. While there is a merit to be the face of a company, how to separate it when that figure collapses will be a much bigger challenge. On hindsight, it was not a forward-looking approach.
Apple lived off Jobs’ famous quote, “simplicity is the ultimate sophistication,” product-wise, and even in PR having one man running it. But Apple missed the simplest rule in Public Relations, real communication-keeping the right parties informed of what they need to know and when. This is how truth-telling becomes the ultimate sophistication in PR and communication.
Works Cited: Zitelmann, Rainer. Forbes. 2020 January 2020. 2020 19 October.
Comments