Scots College Sydney
(Reprinted from Mumbrella https://mumbrella.com.au/)
Private schools are both slow and notoriously reluctant to be transparent, which is exactly why the scandal engulfing Sydney’s Scots College is now out of control.
Three teenage students have been charged with aggravated sexual assault against a 14-year-old girl in a Bondi Junction laneway on 22 July.
A month passed before principal Ian Lambert emailed parents. In that silence, angry parents, alumni, and journalists wrote the story for him.
If you don’t set the narrative, it gets set for you
This is the oldest lesson in crisis communications, and it gets reinforced the hard way every time. The instinct to say nothing, to wait for legal advice, to let the police process run, is understandable. In an emotionally charged situation, it’s also, in reputational terms, catastrophic.
Silence is not a narrative. It creates a vacuum filled by angry parents and alumni and by journalists with deadlines.
Lambert’s belated email to parents did several things competently. He called the alleged behaviour “abhorrent.” He outlined the disciplinary consequences. He detailed the school’s consent curriculum from kindergarten upwards.
But the email arrived after the story was already written. That’s not a communication. It’s a correction that started from behind.
Duty of care has a sequence
The Author – Peter Wilkinson
When we advise institutions on allegations of this gravity, the first conversation is about duty-of-care. It’s based on our experience following the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse, refined through the #MeToo movement, and further by the Set the Standard Report following the Brittany Higgins catastrophe.
There are many stakeholders. Not everyone is equal or reached at the same time, but each needs care and, often, the offer of counselling.
1.
The alleged victim and their family. Cautious lawyers will say don’t. Common decency and empathy say do.
2.
The accused students and their families. They face criminal charges. The school owes them clarity on what the school is doing and, where possible, the comfort that their children’s identities will be protected as far as the law allows.
3.
The classmates. These are children who sit next to the accused. They need age-appropriate information delivered by people they trust, not fragments overheard in the playground or read on social media.
4.
The broader student body and their parents. Communication acknowledging the matter, confirming cooperation with police, and stating what the school is doing. Not defensiveness. A statement of care.
5.
Teachers are the frontline. They answer the questions parents and students actually ask. Without a brief, they improvise. Improvisation can exacerbate a crisis.
6.
The board. Governance oversight, legal exposure, and the authority to make the decisions the principal cannot make alone.
7.
Media and social media. Not last because they matter least. Last because every prior step is preparation for this one. When the journalist calls, or the post goes viral, every stakeholder above should already know what the school has said and done.
The alumni problem is a culture problem
Schools selling a premium product, at a reported $52k a year for Year 12, are selling more than academic results. They are selling values, networks, and the commitment that their graduates will be the kind of people you want running things.
In my experience, some private schools have an instinct to coverup. It isn’t Lambert’s fault alone. It’s a reputation management problem that predates him and will outlast him. But in this case, the board, chaired by Glen Pather, now owns it publicly.
Many boards will decide quietly that “This too will pass”. It’s a flawed hope and short-termism that many politicians and business leaders share, and it’s partly why both are distrusted, according to the Roy Morgan risk monitoring.
Reputation is built slowly. One choice at a time.
Peter Wilkinson is the founder of the Wilkinson Group and a crisis communications expert.
