z _ ~ :i-U~"'E!\J AI\i~-\ ;1\S ~K.u('-cr\ us::: C .;L r 
\iC-'-' r JR D;STR~B\ ... ·l!()t·.~_ ~:iALF ()~< C~L;:"l,~li' ,-Nl-J. 

144 	CRISIS MANAGEMENT IN THE NEW STRATEGY LANDSCAPE 
Suppose a major snowstorm is about to hit your campus in the next 12 hours.' 
Weather information indicates that there will be widespread power outages and 
travel will be nearly impossible once the blizzard arrives. It is the first week of 
February and most students have been back on campus for several weeks following 
the holiday break. Convene your team and discuss the following questions. 
1.	What actions should be taken immediately, in other words, within 4 to 6 
hours before the arrival of the storm? As you consider this question, 
consider the following: 
Who will be the key leader on campus during this crisis? 
Who will the communication spokesperson address and what messages 
should be conveyed? 
What type of information-monitoring requirements will your team need 
during the crisis? 
2.	During the storm, what actions should be taken? Be sure to consider the 
following items: 
How will you determine if damage has occurred to various locations 
across the campus? Keep in mind that some communication networks 
may be compromised due to power outages. 
What will be the main objectives of the CMT during the storm? 
How will you know if the crisis response strategies are effective or not? 
3.	After the storm has passed, what actions should the CMT take? Keep in 
mind the following items: 
What are the main priorities that must be addressed at this point? 
How will you assess the damage on campus? 
What messages should be communicated to the students, faculty, 
and staff? 
What messages should be communicated to the media? 

THE EXPLOSION IN TOULOUSE, FRANCE 
On September 21, 2001, a large explosion erupted at an industrial facility in Toulouse, France. The 
accident at Atofina's Grande Paroisse fertilizer plant resulted in 30 fatalities, over 2,000 injuries, 
and damage to more than 4,000 homes and 80 schools (Scott, 2001). Shortly after the incident, 
around 12,000 families had to find alternate housing; 1,300 companies either had to shut down 
or scale back the number of employees they were using, resulting in 7,000 workers becoming 
temporarily unemployed (Dautun, Tixier, Chapelain, Fontaine, & Dusserre, 2008). 
I 
I 
! 
.. "---~.----- --~---------- 

;\;Cl r·'.);-~ G!S ,f.{l8UT}ON ~:.L'.d._:=, C) '.) RE,~P1HlirJ(~ 
(~o:·:·yr!:~j1':' 2~11 C by SB;'F: ~"\1~)i>:;;:!ti())(s. me, 
	Chapter 7 • Crisis Management 	145 

The emergency response to the incident was hampered by difficulties that impeded the progress 
of rescue and recovery. Several items noted by Dautun and colleagues include: 
•	The communication network that the emergency services utilize in the local area collapsed 
for 10 minutes. 
•	Communication networks in the rest of the town were unavailable for 8 hours. 
•	The firefighters who initially responded to the explosion were not adequately protected 
against the chemicals that were present. A toxic cloud was in the air and they had no 
adequate gas detectors to determine its danger. 
•	The communication networks that were operable were overloaded and therefore hampered in their 
abilities to aid emergency responders in their response to the situation (Dautun et al., 2008). 
Local Stakeholder Reaction 
The local community that housed the plant experienced the greatest reaction to the event. The 
explosion had occurred only days after the September 11 toppling of the World Trade Center in 
New York City, so local citizens were naturally living in a climate of fear, wondering if this had actually 
been a terrorist attack. Even before the explosion occurred, local residents had been calling for the 
plant to close. One week after the explosion, two groups mobilized to protest against the company. 
One group of 15,000 residents, which appropriately called itself "Never Again," formed a march 
through the town of Toulouse calling for the closure of all chemical plants in the area (Scott, 2001). 
Indeed, the problem of chemical plants in urban areas was now being widely publicized. 
Unfortunately, the responsibility for this problem does not seem to reside squarely on the backs of the 
chemical plants. In many instances, the plants were originally built in rural areas, with urban sprawl 
spreading into the area years later. Such was the case with the Atofina plant, which was built 80 years 
before the accident, in rural, open countryside (Milmo, 2001). Ironically, the same situation existed 
with Union Carbide's ill-fated Bhopal plant that leaked the deadly methyl isocyanate gas into the 
atmosphere in December 1984. That plant, too, had been constructed originally in a rural region, but 
soon was surrounded by shacks and the poorest citizens in the area (Sethi & Steidlmeier, 1997). 
At the company level, Atofina increased security at all of its plants across France. It had already begun 
a review of its security policies immediately after the September 11 terrorist attacks (Scott, 2001). 
The Cause of the Blast 
Initial press reports indicated that terrorism might have been behind the explosion (Scott, 2001). 
That this explosion happened soon after the September 11 attacks certainly prompted this speculation. 
However, an initial report by experts heading the inquiry into the cause of the accident indicated 
that negligence was more of a factor. The cause of the blast was more likely a reaction between 
ammonium nitrate and sodium dichlorisocyanurate, two chemicals that were stored in the same 
warehouse (Young, 2002). 
Sources 

Dautun, c., Tixier, J., Chapelain, J., Fontaine, F., & Dusserre, G. (2008). Crisis management: Improvement of 
knowledge and development of a decision aide process. Loss Prevention Bulletin, 201 (1), 16-21. 
Milmo, S. (2001). Toulouse accident raises questions of chemical sites near urban centers. ChemicaL Market 
Reporter, 260(15), 6, 28. 
Scott, A. (2001). A case study in shaken confidence. ChemicaL Week, 163(43/44), 26-27. 
Sethi, S., Steidlmeier, P. (1997). Up against the corporate waLL: Cases in business and society. Upper Saddle 
River, NJ: Prentice Hall. 
Young,!. (2002). "Negligence" led to Grande Paroisse blast. ChemicaL Week, 164(25), 18. J 
'" . ~. ~.' - '",',---- ---. - .•. '.-'--" ~ .. ---,....- -., ...•....... ,....., 	.. -.- --:~~'''-'-'''''''''-''''~-''~---''''''--'