A crisis across India and France: organise one response, with local responsibilities

Stabilise facts before building the narrative

Open one incident log with the source, time and status of each fact. Assign operational verification to the people handling the incident. Communications should not diagnose a technical event or declare it resolved without the responsible experts. Identify people who need immediate guidance before considering media positioning.

Separate coordination from local obligations

The headquarters coordinates group information; the French entity still needs clear ownership of local employee, customer and institutional responses. Have specialists identify any notifications and procedures that apply. A global press release does not replace a required local action.

List affected services, customer dependencies, contact routes and the next update time. A holding message should say what is known, what is being checked, what people should do and when further information will be available. It should not speculate about cause or responsibility.

Prepare a response that works across the time difference

Nominate primary and backup approvers in each team. Agree what information can be shared without waiting for the next headquarters meeting. Keep translations tied to the same verified version, while allowing local instructions to differ. If the teams cannot provide continuous cover, the communication schedule must reflect the actual support arrangement.

Use scenarios to expose weak points

Test a leak, a false social post, conflicting customer guidance and a journalist’s allegation. For each scenario, identify the evidence required and the person authorised to respond. With a suspected deepfake, preserve the original material and seek verification before amplifying or definitively labelling it.

This is a preparedness exercise, not a promise that a crisis can be controlled. A well-organised team can still face uncertainty; its credibility depends on explaining what it knows and correcting errors promptly.

Review the record after the incident

Examine response accuracy, outstanding questions, accessibility of practical information and whether announced follow-up actions happened. Preserve the distinction between operational recovery and reputational effects. A fall in media volume does not prove that affected people have regained confidence.

Continue your preparation