I recently spoke during the Center for Homeland Defense and Security (CHDS) alumni conference on my presidential initiative reimagining philosophies, tools, techniques, and training for critical incident response and crowd management.

During my presentation, I talked about the IACP’s work moving this initiative forward and detailed our first step, which involves bringing together a steering committee tasked with identifying priority topics and reviewing potential leading practices, identifying gaps in existing materials, examining global approaches to addressing critical incidents, and establishing subcommittees to focus on specific topics.

I also talked about the makeup of the 12-member steering committee, and IACP’s belief that it was important to bring together a cross-section of people beyond the core law enforcement component to consider the topic holistically. To that end, the steering committee includes representatives from private sector security (because some companies provide security to crowds that outnumber many of our own communities, such as the crowds at Disney parks or NFL games); academia, to support an evidence-based approach to the topic; a state patrol; a smaller agency; a sheriff’s office; a federal agency; global policing; the National Guard; the civil rights community; a major city agency; and elected officials.

“Our communities want to know what happened and why it happened.”

At the conclusion of my presentation, one participant asked a question about how I envisioned the role and function of public information officers (PIOs) during critical incident response, specifically in the context of my presidential initiative. Her question summed up the importance of this month’s Police Chief: crisis communication is a vital role and function of police agencies, yet many of us view it as a secondary function, overlooking its true place as a primary responsibility.

Unfortunately, the role of communicating during a crisis is tricky, at best. Transparency and trust are created through an honest and immediate flow of information and communication to our partners, our elected officials, and the communities we serve. Our communities want to know what happened and why it happened. The tricky part is that they want to know everything immediately.

During a crisis, police leaders rarely know with that amount of immediacy and specificity all the facts of what happened or why it happened, even if they were present during the entire event themselves or if much of the event was aired live by the media. Often, after-action reviews and the collection of information from hundreds—if not thousands—of data inputs are needed to put together the true and complete facts of what exactly occurred.

Thus, when a crisis occurs, police leaders can easily be caught in that middle ground of wanting to communicate, but also wanting to make sure that what they communicate is accurate. Unfortunately, sometimes leaders communicate what they believe to be true at the time, only to find out later that more information has come to light and changed the facts of what they originally thought to be true. And so police leaders struggle to balance the need to communicate immediately against the unsurety that what they are communicating is the entire set of facts.

I come back to the question posed at the end of my CHDS alumni talk: “How do we envision the role of the PIO, and communication broadly, in our preparation for critical incident response?”

As police leaders, we each have varying degrees of experience and comfort levels in communicating with the media and public. Additionally, due to our wide-ranging responsibilities during a crisis, the time that we can spend with the media and in continual public outreach may be limited. For these reasons, it is imperative that an agency have at least one person responsible for handling news media inquiries and consistent outward-facing public communication with the community. Ideally, this person is a dedicated and trained PIO who regularly communicates with other PIOs in their region. During multijurisdictional responses and mutual aid assistance situations, a PIO will work more efficiently through already established professional relationships.

This is the content and context of the March edition of Police Chief, and I urge you to read it carefully to avoid the quagmire of communication during critical incidents, as I’ve described. This topic centers on the advice that we make communication a primary function of our daily responsibility as police executives, not a secondary activity. The articles contained herein define the importance of building a solid media presence before the crisis occurs and the power of consistent media relationships with reporters who know and understand your organization so that, during a crisis, there is a foundation to build upon, not a foundation to create.

Additionally, you will read that thinking about communication in three arenas—internally within your organization, externally with your partners and stakeholders, and through mainstream media and journalists—forms the foundation for that strong communications plan so necessary to lead through crisis. I also encourage you to read the interview with CBS News Chief Justice and Homeland Security Correspondent Jeff Pegues in this issue. In it, he shares his lessons learned and expertise gained through many years of working with police departments and reporting on critical incidents. I think you will find his perspective both insightful and informative.

I hope each of you are keeping well and standing steadfast as we move into the third month of 2021—a little closer to vaccinations and a little closer to defeating the faceless enemy of COVID-19.

Stay safe, and thank you for all you do for our profession, our communities, and each other. d

Please cite as

Cynthia E. Renaud, “The Role of PIOs in Critical Incident Response,” President’s Message, Police Chief 88, no. 3 (March 2021): 6–7.