Silence Reveals Corporate Character in Crisis Response

오피니언|
|
By Seung-ho Choi, CEO of Wise Partners
|
Silence as a 'attitude' for crisis response? [Choi Seung-ho's Principles of Crisis Response] - Seoul Economic Daily 오피니언 News from South Korea
Silence as a 'attitude' for crisis response? [Choi Seung-ho's Principles of Crisis Response]

On November 29 last year, Coupang disclosed a data breach affecting approximately 33.67 million customer records—a figure encompassing the majority of Korean adults. A joint public-private investigation found the hacking continued for up to seven months, from April through November. Coupang detected the breach on November 18.

On the day of the disclosure, no personal statement came from Bom Kim, Chairman of Coupang Inc.'s board and the company's de facto top executive. The silence continued for days. Coupang posted a corporate apology on its website. Three days later, reports emerged that a marketing banner had replaced the apology, prompting the Personal Information Protection Commission to demand its reposting.

At an emergency National Assembly hearing on December 2, a proxy appeared in Kim's place. When lawmakers asked about Kim's willingness to apologize personally, the proxy replied: "This occurred at the Korean subsidiary under my responsibility, so I am the one apologizing." The boundary was clear.

Kim sent a letter explaining his absence from a parliamentary hearing two weeks later: "As CEO of a global company operating in over 170 countries, I have official business commitments that make attendance impossible." He responded identically to joint hearings on December 30 and 31. The National Assembly's Science, ICT, Broadcasting and Communications Committee voted to file charges against Kim and six others for violating the Act on Testimony and Appraisal Before the National Assembly. His written personal apology arrived on December 28. His first verbal apology came during an earnings conference call in late February 2026—approximately three months after the disclosure.

In July 2024, a payment settlement crisis erupted at TMON and WeMakePrice. Government and Financial Supervisory Service figures showed approximately 48,000 affected vendors and roughly 1.3 trillion won in unsettled payments. Consumers and sellers converged on company headquarters. WeMakePrice's CEO personally met with protesting vendors on-site. Qoo10 Group CEO Young-bae Koo initially remained absent.

Koo's first public appearance came at a National Assembly emergency hearing on July 30—his debut since the crisis broke. "I sincerely apologize," he said. "I will give up everything I have." Asked about the total damages, he replied: "I don't know exactly." The Financial Supervisory Service Governor sharply criticized this response, comparing Koo to "the boy who cried wolf." WeMakePrice was declared bankrupt by the court in November 2025.

These two cases differ. Yet they share a common thread: the top executive remained distant from the crisis scene. Distance here is not merely physical—it is attitudinal.

In crisis communication theory, response speed is not a mere technical variable. It is a moral signal indicating how much an organization values its victims. Crisis communication scholar Timothy Coombs classified core response strategies into three categories: Deny, Diminish, and Rebuild. Coupang initially used "exposure" rather than "breach." This fell somewhere between denial and diminishment. The Personal Information Protection Commission formally ordered Coupang to correct the terminology to "breach" and reissue notifications.

Victims do not want perfect explanations. They want someone to reach out first—a signal saying, "I understand your pain." The longer that signal is delayed, the more victims draw their own conclusions. Distrust hardens. Once hardened, no apology can dissolve it.

Crisis response follows three principles. First, the top executive must step forward personally. A proxy's apology halves the weight of responsibility—and sometimes serves as evidence of evasion. Second, acknowledge first, explain later. Speaking before facts emerge sends an entirely different message than reluctant admission afterward. Third, speak in the victims' language. Legally crafted apologies may hold up in court but work against you in the court of public opinion.

Ultimately, it comes down to direction: toward the victims, or away from them. That direction reveals the true nature of the person and the organization. Companies sell trust before they sell products. Trust is built in ordinary times and spent in crises. But when attitude collapses, accumulated trust evaporates overnight. Within just five days of disclosure, Coupang's daily active users dropped by approximately 2 million. Numbers do not lie.

Crises do not test capability. They reveal character. And once revealed, that character is remembered for a long time.

---

Silence as a 'attitude' for crisis response? [Choi Seung-ho's Principles of Crisis Response] - Seoul Economic Daily 오피니언 News from South Korea
Silence as a 'attitude' for crisis response? [Choi Seung-ho's Principles of Crisis Response]

Seung-ho Choi

- Former CEO of FleishmanHillard Korea; Former CEO of Domo Brodeur

- Former Advisor to the Presidential Advisory Council on Science and Technology's Space Economy Roadmap Task Force; Former Policy Communication Evaluation Committee Member, Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism

Related Video

AI-translated from Korean. Quotes from foreign sources are based on Korean-language reports and may not reflect exact original wording.