A crisis may begin with an operational failure, but how FM leaders communicate in the hours that follow can determine whether trust is strengthened or lost

By Ian Hainey, CEO, Integrated Holistic Communications

Crises normally arrive without warning. For FM organisations, that might mean a fire, a power failure in a commercial tower, a cooling system breakdown during the peak Gulf summer, a labour dispute, or a flood. The well-prepared operational response kicks in immediately, but communication is often an afterthought.

In the Middle East’s highly connected information environment, news and social media content spread fast, and speculation fills any vacuum. How FM leadership communicates in those first hours matters.

FM serves multiple stakeholders simultaneously, including building owners, tenants, end users, regulators, subcontractors, and boards of directors. Each has different information needs and different expectations of speed. In the GCC, complexity can be further increased by large multi-site portfolios, multinational clients, language considerations, and regulatory sensitivities. The reputational stakes are high, as FM brands are built upon trust and reliability.

A Stress Test for the Industry

The UAE flooding of April 2024, the heaviest rainfall the country has recorded since records began in 1949, gave the region’s FM sector an unplanned stress test. It caused widespread flooding, affecting homes, businesses and transport.

Global media and social media focused on the city. FM teams responded operationally, deploying pumping equipment, isolating electrical systems and activating emergency contractors. The communication picture was far less coordinated.

While public attention focused on the damage and operational response, crises of this nature also highlight the communication challenges facing FM providers. Maintaining consistent updates across tenants, procurement teams and operational stakeholders can become difficult when conditions are changing rapidly. Managing expectations around restoration timelines is particularly important, as premature estimates that later shift can undermine confidence in an organisation’s response.

The operational challenges were understandable given the scale of what happened. Many of the communication shortcomings were preventable.

After over a decade of handling marketing and communications for leading FM companies across the region, one pattern is clear: while every incident is different, the communication mistakes tend to look the same.

Four Pillars of Crisis Communication

To be prepared for most eventualities, there are four main sections to consider when preparing your crisis communications plan before the next major incident.

Escalation clarity: Define the triggers for when communication moves from the operational to the executive level. Identify spokespeople in advance. Create holding statements for the most likely incident types so the first messaging is pre-approved and does not have to be written from scratch. Establish which channels are used for which stakeholder groups and ensure everyone in the chain is aware.

Stakeholder mapping: Who needs to know what and when should be agreed in advance rather than decided under pressure. This requires accounting for the different Service Level Agreement obligations across a client portfolio. Map it, document it, and keep it current as the portfolio changes.

Message architecture: Pre-approved ‘if asked’ responses (for specific questions) and holding statements (for general enquiries) save critical time and prevent the two most common errors: over-promising on resolution timelines before the full picture is clear and under-communicating on the impact while the team focuses on fixing the problem. Factual, empathetic, accountable, and forward-looking language is the correct tone: not defensive, not vague, and never silent.

Someone with crisis communications experience within the internal communications team or at an external agency should be assigned as the conduit for information.

Business continuity plan integration: Communication obligations should be tied directly to the business continuity plan, not treated as a separate workstream. A post-incident review should be built into the BCP update cycle so that everything learned during the incident changes what happens next time.

A Commercial Advantage

The Gulf FM sector has matured rapidly. However, the communications infrastructure has not always kept pace with operational sophistication. This matters commercially as well as reputationally. Organisations that communicate early and clearly during incidents strengthen their reputations and can even improve their position during contract renewals.

Those who go silent or fragment their messaging across teams tend to find that clients remember the communication failure long after the operational issue is resolved.

The FM organisations that understand this treat communication not as a support function that activates during a crisis, but as an operational discipline that is built, rehearsed and maintained alongside every other part of their business continuity infrastructure. Because when the crisis arrives, the first message sent is the first signal of whether you are in control.

Crisis communications strategy is ultimately about protecting trust, which can be built up over decades and lost in seconds. In a sector where credibility is everything, well-handled communication can turn a difficult moment into a demonstration of professionalism and reliability.

FM organisations are rarely judged on the incident alone; they are judged on how leadership communicated when it mattered most. The framework needs to exist before it is needed: stakeholders mapped, escalation triggers defined and templates prepared.