MarkbrownstrategiesVisit Website →
← Back to blog

Crisis to Opportunity: How Leaders Turn a Setback Into Growth

November 5, 2026
Crisis to Opportunity: How Leaders Turn a Setback Into Growth

An organization turns a crisis into an opportunity by doing three things in order: it protects people and trust first, it communicates honestly while facts are still emerging, and only then does it act on what the crisis revealed. The opportunity is never the crisis itself. It is the change you make, and the credibility you earn, in how you respond. This article walks through that sequence in plain terms, for executives, boards and nonprofit leaders who want to be ready before the call comes.

Markbrownstrategies
Turn Crisis Lessons Into Lasting Change
Mark Brown Strategies helps organizations prepare for crises, respond in real time, and rebuild trust through credible actions.
Visit Mark Brown Strategies

TL;DR

  • Most crises create longer-term opportunities as well as threats, but the opportunity comes after you contain the harm, not instead of it.
  • Mishandling a crisis often hurts a reputation more than the event that started it, so the first hours and the first statement matter.
  • Be honest about what you do not yet know. Trust survives uncertainty far better than it survives a retraction.
  • Lessons only count when they become owned, dated improvements to your plans, training and systems.
  • Preparation is what makes any of this possible, which is why a written plan and a rehearsed team come first.

Table of Contents

What Turning a Crisis Into an Opportunity Actually Means

The phrase gets used loosely, sometimes as a slogan and sometimes as a way of telling people who are hurting to look on the bright side. That is not what we mean here.

A crisis, as James and Wooten define it in their University of Michigan research, is an emotionally charged situation that, once public, invites negative stakeholder reaction and can threaten a firm's finances, reputation or survival. Nothing about that definition is rosy. The opportunity lives in what happens next.

Michael Watkins and Michael Yaziji, writing in MIT Sloan Management Review, make the practical point: most crises create longer-term opportunities as well as threats, because they produce rapid and sustained shifts in an organization's external and internal environment. Customers change habits. Regulators pay attention. Employees reassess what they expect from leadership. Some of those shifts will not reverse, and the organizations that notice early have room to move.

So the honest definition is this: turning a crisis into an opportunity means using a moment of disruption, and the attention that comes with it, to build something stronger than what stood there before. It requires you to survive the moment first.

Start With Assessment, Not Optimism

Think of a crisis as a relay race that nobody scheduled. The baton is already moving, and the worst thing a leader can do is sprint without knowing who is running the next leg. Before anyone talks about opportunity, the leadership team needs a clear read on the situation.

Watkins and Yaziji suggest a useful set of questions. What is likely to change permanently? Which trends will this crisis slow down, and which will it speed up? Do those changes create openings or threats? And what groundwork would you need to lay now to pursue an opening later? Those questions can be answered in a single focused meeting, and they keep a leadership team from reacting only to the headline.

There is a second part to the assessment, and it is the uncomfortable one. The University of Michigan study reports that more than half of all crises are sparked by management activity. If that holds true for your situation, the opportunity may be to fix a decision process, a reporting line or a culture problem that produced the event. Leaders who ask that question early tend to find the real lever.

The same research describes five phases of a crisis: signal detection, preparation and prevention, containment, business recovery, and learning. Notice that two of the five happen before anything breaks. Our guide to early warning indicators covers how organizations spot the signals that most teams see and then explain away.

The First 24 Hours: Contain Before You Reframe

No one in a crisis wants to hear about growth. Employees want to know if they are safe and employed. Customers want to know if they are affected. Reporters want a comment. The opportunity framing belongs later, and leaders who bring it up too early sound tone-deaf.

The Public Relations Society of America publishes a 24-hour response protocol that gives a sensible rhythm. In the first hour you activate the crisis team, verify the facts, assess the threat level and halt any pre-scheduled content that could look insensitive. In hours one through four you draft an empathetic public holding statement. In hours four through twelve you release it and monitor sentiment. In hours twelve through twenty-four you identify the root cause and begin corrective action.

That last step is where an opportunity first becomes visible. A company that can say, within a day, what went wrong and what it is already doing about it, has begun to separate itself from the organizations that go quiet.

The contrast the Michigan researchers draw is worth remembering. They point to Johnson & Johnson's handling of the Tylenol crisis and Exxon's handling of the Valdez spill as an illustration that the mishandling of a crisis can do more reputational damage than the event itself. Whatever your industry, that distinction is the one to carry into the first meeting.

In practice, organizations that review their online presence after a public incident often find that search results and reviews shape what people see long before a press statement does. Work on reputation management and review generation is one way firms address what customers read about them while the larger recovery plan takes shape.

Communicating While the Facts Are Still Emerging

The hardest communication problem in a crisis is not what to say when you know everything. It is what to say when you know very little and everyone is waiting.

The World Health Organization's guidance on communicating uncertainty is written for health emergencies, but its logic carries over. It advises leaders to be honest about what they do not know, to label statements with cautions such as "based on preliminary data," to avoid absolutes, and to explain that guidance may change. It also recommends repeating that message often, because repetition builds trust.

That is a different habit from the one many executives bring to the room. The instinct is to say something definitive so the pressure eases. But a definitive statement that later proves wrong creates a second crisis on top of the first. A measured statement that says what you know, what you are checking and when you will update people gives you room to be right.

For each audience, the preparation matters more than the wording. Ready.gov advises compiling contact information for each audience in advance, preparing message templates with blanks to fill in once information is available, and setting up a coordinated review and distribution process. The Center for Creative Leadership adds a leadership angle: in a crisis, direction, alignment and commitment require responses that are both authoritative and collaborative, and leaders should tell employees, customers, suppliers and investors openly what they know and what they do not.

If your organization does not yet have this written down, our guide to building a crisis communication plan is a good starting point, and the companion piece on a crisis communications policy covers what belongs in writing.

Leadership Is the Difference

Why do two organizations facing a similar event end up in such different places? James Wooten of the University of Michigan argues that the difference is the leadership displayed throughout the process. The best crisis leaders, he writes, build a foundation of trust inside the organization and across the wider system around it, and then use that foundation to prepare, to contain, and to turn the crisis into a driver of change.

A broader synthesis of crisis-leadership research from 1985 to 2025 identifies five dimensions: decision-making under uncertainty, emotional intelligence, communication, resilience-building and ethical leadership. The authors treat ethical stewardship as the foundation of legitimacy, and they note that perceived inequities or hidden agendas can erode stakeholder trust and make a crisis worse.

That finding tells us something about opportunity. If trust is the asset a crisis puts at risk, then visible fairness and accountability are the things that protect it. A leader who is seen to put affected people first has a credibility that no campaign can manufacture later.

There is also a structural idea from California Management Review. Its Crisis-Driven Resilient Innovation framework sorts crises along two axes, predictability and rate of acceleration, and argues that leaders who embrace uncertainty, collaborate across functions, invest in experimentation and empower agile teams tend to turn disruption into opportunity. You do not need to adopt the framework by name to take the lesson: how fast a crisis is moving and how foreseeable it was should change how you staff the response.

Our Perspective: Opportunity Belongs to the Prepared

After more than 30 years in this work, I have noticed that leaders ask about opportunity at the wrong moment. They ask it in the middle of the storm, when the only useful question is how to protect people and keep the facts straight. The better time to ask is long before, when there is room to think.

Our approach combines preparation with real-time response, and we built it that way on purpose. A tailored crisis communication plan, a readiness assessment and a rehearsed team are not insurance against bad news. They are what let a leader keep control of the story when bad news arrives, and that control is what makes any later opportunity credible.

The second thing we tell clients is that reputation is rebuilt through credible action, not through messaging alone. Statements get you through the first day. What you change afterward is what people remember. When an organization fixes the process that failed and says so plainly, it often ends up with stronger relationships than it had before.

The opportunity, in other words, is not hidden inside the crisis waiting to be found. It is earned, through preparation, honesty and follow-through.

Mark

Turning Lessons Into Lasting Change

Once the acute phase passes, the pull toward normal is strong. Everyone is tired. The press has moved on. This is exactly where most of the opportunity is lost.

MindTools notes that the greatest risk after a crisis is returning to business as usual, and recommends that each key lesson produce a specific improvement initiative with clear ownership and a timeline. Those initiatives might revise guidelines, strengthen skills, add tools, adjust reporting relationships or improve how information is shared.

Harvard Business Review frames the exercise as a set of questions: what worked, what got in the way, which capabilities were missing, and which decisions made in the moment are worth keeping or redesigning. In that piece, David Lancefield adds that acting on the lessons is the hardest part, and that new norms help only if practices from before the crisis do not creep back in.

Here is a quick illustration of how this looks in a real organization. Imagine a regional services company whose leadership learns about a customer data problem from a reporter instead of from its own team. The immediate response is containment and notification. The lesson, once the dust settles, is that frontline employees had noticed the problem weeks earlier and had no clear path to escalate it. The improvement that follows is a defined escalation route, a named owner, a training session for every manager, and a quarterly review of whether it works. That is a hypothetical, but the pattern is a common one, and it shows how a painful event becomes a better system.

One practical way to test whether the new system works is to rehearse it. Our collection of tabletop exercise scenarios gives leadership teams realistic situations to run through before the next real one, and our piece on a crisis management framework explains how to structure the response so it holds under pressure.

Turning Lessons Into Lasting Change

Rebuilding Trust Through Credible Action

Reputation can feel intangible, but there is evidence that it carries real value. Ed deHaan and colleagues at the Stanford Graduate School of Business examined more than 10,000 press releases at 94 companies that announced serious accounting restatements. They found that announcements of reputation-repair actions lifted share prices by an average of 2%, and that 51% of the repair efforts were aimed at softer constituencies such as local communities, customers and employees.

Two things stand out. First, the audiences that matter in recovery are often the ones leaders overlook when they focus on investors or the press. Second, the actions that moved the market were actions, not slogans. DeHaan describes reputation capital as a genuine, if intangible, financial asset, and notes that investors reacted most strongly where companies had taken the most reputation-enhancing steps.

For nonprofits, hospitals, schools and local businesses, the same logic applies without the share price. The community that watched you struggle is the same community that decides whether to trust you again. Our article on reputation rebuilding looks at how leaders restore public trust step by step, and our guide to reputation risk mitigation covers reducing exposure before an incident happens.

Is the Opportunity Responsible?

There is a fair worry about this whole subject. Does talking about opportunity mean exploiting people who are suffering? It can, if leaders are careless.

Watkins and Yaziji address this directly. They caution that pursuing post-crisis opportunities should not come at the cost of dealing effectively with the immediate challenges, and they argue that good organizations can process both in parallel. Even a modest investment in shaping what comes next, they note, can pay off substantially.

A simple test helps. If the affected people, whether employees, customers or neighbors, read your plan for the opportunity, would they see it as something that also serves them? A company that uses a crisis to improve safety, transparency or service passes that test. One that uses it only to win market share while problems remain unresolved does not. Their research also found that job-loss fears are three to seven times larger in organizations with fewer than 100 employees than in those with more than 10,000, so smaller organizations in particular should be careful about how change is announced. Our guidance on a layoff communication plan covers that moment in detail.

Leaders in regulated fields carry extra weight here. If you run a hospital or clinic, healthcare crisis communications has its own planning, response and recovery demands.

How We Can Help

If you lead an organization in California, Nevada, Arizona or Utah, whether a law firm, casino, healthcare provider, technology company, school, financial firm or nonprofit, we work with you before a crisis, during one and after. That includes tailored crisis communication plans, crisis readiness assessments, real-time response, reputation management and recovery, corporate communications, community relations, SWOT analysis and litigation support.

Markbrownstrategies

Our 30-plus years of experience and our network of experts mean you get strategic advice and practical counsel when it matters most. To talk through your situation, visit Mark Brown Strategies.

FAQ

Can every crisis really become an opportunity?

Not every crisis, and not for every organization. MIT Sloan Management Review's authors say most crises create longer-term opportunities alongside threats, but that depends on what a leader does with the shifts the crisis causes. The opportunity comes from preparation, honest communication and follow-through, not from the event itself.

What should we do first when a crisis hits?

Activate your crisis team, verify the facts, assess the threat level and pause any scheduled content. The PRSA protocol then calls for an empathetic holding statement within the first few hours. Save the conversation about opportunity until the harm is contained.

How do we communicate when we do not have all the facts?

Say what you know, what you are still checking and when you will update people. The WHO advises avoiding absolutes and explaining that guidance may change. Repeating that message often helps build trust rather than weaken it.

How do we make sure the lessons actually stick?

Turn each lesson into a specific initiative with an owner and a timeline. Revise policies, retrain people and review progress on a schedule. Rehearsing the updated plan through a tabletop exercise shows whether the change works before the next real event.

Sources