fbpx

PR Failure #39: When Bank of America Broke the Bank

It’s been a challenging year in communications for Bank of America. When a data breach affecting approximately 57,000 Bank of America customers occurred last November, the bank waited 90 days and didn’t notify its customers until February. Bank of America also was affected by the recent CrowdStrike outage, and “Downdetector” has shown the bank’s customers increasingly have been reporting issues with funds transfers and online banking.

Then comes the moment on October 2nd, where customers either couldn’t log in to their online account at all…or they faced the horror of all pre-Halloween horrors: a frightening zero where their account balance should be.

Bank of America said next to nothing about the matter in real-time, and the crickets continue chirping in the bank’s communications vault…as always, much to learn! So, let’s look at what the company did say, why they likely said what they did, and what they should have said instead.

1. Where Did the Dough Go?

In short, we still don’t know. According to Downdetector, problem reports peaked at 12:45 pm, with 20,266 outages logged. Given what this was—the conceivable loss of cold hard customer cash due to any number of causes, including a cyberattack—the bank should have responded immediately. And it should have done so directly versus seeming to wait until it was contacted by CNN, which shared the statement Bank of America ultimately sent:

“Some clients are experiencing an issue accessing their accounts and balance information today. These issues are being addressed and have largely been resolved. We apologize for any inconvenience.”

This message leaves out a lot, and it doesn’t translate well in a headline.

 

It’s unlikely anyone would describe a zero balance as an inconvenience. Particularly when one doesn’t know what’s happening and can’t be certain whether the inconvenience is temporary. Just using the word apologize, or any variation of it, isn’t enough. Without providing any explanation, it feels inauthentic. And if you’re a customer still looking at a zero, reading the issue has “largely been resolved” could inspire more panic if you’re someone who’s still being affected.

The next day, the bank said:

“Some mobile and online banking clients experienced an issue accessing their accounts and balance information earlier today. These technology issues have been fully resolved. We apologize for any inconvenience.”

This was basically a repeat of the day one message with a few words swapped. Granted, they’re important words. “Fully” is better than “largely,” but that’s about the only substantial change.

2. Why Not Just Fork Over the Info?

A company usually feels if they say very little, there’s very little to pick apart. But that’s just not the case. We discussed some of the message already, and we could give the same treatment to nearly every word used. “Some” is not great. It’s not specific enough to give an idea of the scope, and if you’re one of the some, that word feels minimized. The outage was not simply an “issue,” and so on. Word choice was poor given what little there was, and the overall lack of detail and transparency likely left customers as anxious as they were before any statement was made.

It’s tough when a company finds itself in a crisis, and when your function is safeguarding people’s savings, even the appearance of a misstep can be jarring internally and externally. It’s understandable to want to control the flow of communication and keep what’s being said to a minimum. The desire to downplay a negative event is also understandable, and it’s unlikely the bank meant to come across as callous. Yet, despite the strong pull to communicate as Bank of America did, these are the wrong moves from our point of view.

Today’s digital age requires communication—often fast communications. And there are so many channels available—social, email, website, and even text message alerts—to reach customers as soon as possible. If failing to get fully ahead of customers flagging an issue, it’s important to at least be proactive versus reactive with what you can say. The bank missed an opportunity to provide timely and reassuring updates throughout the situation.

3. How to Bring Home the Bacon?

Be calm, quick, clear, compassionate, and consistent:

  • We might give the bank calm in terms of message tone, as the company certainly didn’t seem worried. But true calm needs to inspire calm, and as discussed, the choice of words didn’t.

  • Quick the bank was not. Regardless of this situation basically happening within the space of a day, the urgent nature of what was happening dictated a speedier, more proactive approach to customer communications.

  • It was clear there was a problem, and customers already knew that. The message needed to provide more context as to what happened, why it happened, how and when it would be resolved, and how it would be avoided in future.

  • A legit apology, tendered with compassion and empathy, is required. If a company is going to say it’s sorry, and in this case as in many crises, it should, the sorry needs to be authentic. Let customers know the company understands and will take care of them. And mean it.
  • Again, though this transpired within a relatively short time, consistent updates would be welcome. Even if something hasn’t been fixed yet, customers need to hear their bank is still there, still working on it, and still cares. Even after resolution, a thoughtful follow up can be useful.

Effective communication is important always, and when customer trust is at stake, it is mission critical. Bank of America’s account outage reminds us of the importance of transparency, empathy, and proactivity in communications. It’s how you keep customers, and it’s how you earn more.

Until next time when we celebrate and learn from the next PR failure,

Aaron Blank
President and CEO
Fearey