Crisis Content Pre-Approval Pack

What it is

A crisis content pre-approval pack is a collection of holding statements and core messages that have been written, legally reviewed, and approved in advance for likely crisis scenarios. Rather than writing and approving messages while the crisis is happening (which delays response and invites errors), you develop and approve them before.

This doesn’t remove flexibility—the template approach allows you to adapt facts and details as the situation evolves while keeping core messaging, tone, and approval intact. It removes days from approval timelines during high-pressure situations when every hour matters.

When to use it

Use this template when:

• Your organisation faces known crisis risks (product recall, operational failure, cybersecurity, regulatory action, etc.)
• Rapid public response is critical for reputation/safety
• Multiple stakeholders must approve content before publication
• You need consistent messaging across channels and updates
• Your sector has regulatory communication requirements during crises
• You want to be prepared for predictable scenarios

Don’t use this template if:

• Your organisation faces minimal crisis risk or no known vulnerabilities
• You have unlimited time to write and approve messages during incidents
• Crisis response is not a priority
• All crises are entirely unpredictable with no pattern-able scenarios

Inputs needed

Before starting, gather:

• Identified crisis scenarios relevant to your business
• Current organisational crisis communication policy
• Legal, compliance, and leadership input on messaging
• Key facts about your operations, products, or services
• Known vulnerabilities or historical issues
• Decision-makers who need to approve messaging
• Approval authorities and escalation paths
• Channel preferences (media, social, email, website, etc.)

---

The template

Crisis scenario identification

Scenarios covered by this pack:

Scenario	Likelihood	Severity	Pre-approved	Last updated
[Scenario 1]	[High/Medium/Low]	[High/Medium/Low]	[Date]	[Date]
[Scenario 2]	[High/Medium/Low]	[High/Medium/Low]	[Date]	[Date]
[Scenario 3]	[High/Medium/Low]	[High/Medium/Low]	[Date]	[Date]

Core messaging framework

Core values/principles (apply to all crises):

1. [Principle 1: e.g., “Safety is our absolute priority”]
2. [Principle 2: e.g., “We communicate transparently about what we know and don’t know”]
3. [Principle 3: e.g., “We take responsibility for our actions”]

Holding statement template (universal, fits most scenarios):

“We are aware of [situation]. We are taking this [seriously/very seriously] and are investigating. We will provide an update when we have more information. In the meantime, [action people should take if applicable]. We appreciate your patience.”

---

Scenario-specific messaging

SCENARIO: [Name]

What triggers this scenario: [Situation that requires response]

Decision point: Should we issue a public statement? [Criteria for yes/no]

Approval requirements: [Who must approve before publication]

Approval timeline: [Realistic time needed for approvals]

Holding statement (pre-approved):

[FIRST 4-6 HOURS: MINIMAL INFO]

We are aware of [SITUATION]. We are [taking action]. We are gathering information and will provide an update as soon as we can.

Secondary statement (to publish once initial investigation complete):

[HOURS 6-24: MORE DETAIL]

We are aware of [SITUATION] affecting [WHO]. Here’s what we know so far:

• [Fact 1]
• [Fact 2]

Here’s what we’re doing about it:

• [Action 1]
• [Action 2]

We will provide another update [when/timeline].

Subsequent updates template:

We have completed [investigation]. Here’s what happened:

• [Finding 1]
• [Finding 2]

Here’s what we’re doing to prevent this in future:

• [Preventive action 1]
• [Preventive action 2]

We apologise [if/for]. We are committed to [commitment].

Do NOT say (guardrails):

• Don’t speculate about cause before investigation
• Don’t admit liability without legal review
• Don’t make promises about timeline you can’t keep
• Don’t blame external factors without evidence
• Don’t use language that sounds defensive or dismissive

Channel-specific adaptations:

Channel	Tone adjustment	Key differences	Example
Press release	Formal, factual	Comprehensive information	Full scenario statement
Social media	Direct, shorter	Brief, immediate reassurance	”We’re aware and investigating”
Email (customers)	Empathetic, action-focused	What they need to do	”If you’re affected, here’s help”
Internal (staff)	Transparent about process	Operations/what staff should expect	”Contact details for Q&A”
Website	Always-available, updatable	Persistent, not time-locked	Update banner with latest info

Quote pre-approval (if applicable):

Leader: [Name/role]

Pre-approved quote options:

Option A: “We take this seriously and are committed to [commitment]. We will provide an update [when].”

Option B: “We apologise that this happened. Our priority is [priority]. We are investigating and will take action [action type].”

Which option to use: [Criteria for choosing A vs B based on scenario facts]

---

Approval and escalation

Pre-approval obtained from:

• Legal: [Name] – Date: [Date] – Signature: [ ]
• Compliance: [Name] – Date: [Date] – Signature: [ ]
• Leadership: [Name] – Date: [Date] – Signature: [ ]
• Communications: [Name] – Date: [Date] – Signature: [ ]

During crisis, who activates this pack: [Role/name who can trigger use of pre-approved content]

Activation process:

1. [Initial decision: Who decides if situation matches this scenario?]
2. [Notification: Who notifies key stakeholders?]
3. [Review: Who reviews pre-approved content to confirm it still fits?]
4. [Approval: Who approves publishing pre-approved content?]
5. [Publication: Who publishes across channels?]
6. [Escalation: Who decides if situation has changed and needs new messaging?]

What requires new approval (even with pre-approved pack):

• If facts differ from what we anticipated
• If situation escalates beyond initial scenario
• If new information changes the response needed
• If any legal or compliance concern emerges

What can publish with pre-approval only (no additional sign-off needed):

• Holding statements matching the scenario exactly
• Updates with facts already anticipated in the pack
• Channel-specific versions of pre-approved messages
• Updates following the “subsequent updates template”

---

Flexibility framework

What you can adapt in pre-approved messages:

✓ DO modify these elements:

• Specific facts (date, numbers, affected people)
• Timeline language (“we will update you tomorrow” vs “within 48 hours”)
• Action descriptions (specific steps you’re taking)
• Details about who to contact for help

❌ DON’T modify these elements:

• Core messaging and tone
• Expressions of commitment or responsibility
• Admission or denial of fault
• Promises about remediation
• Legal or compliance-sensitive language

Example adaptation:

Original (pre-approved):

We are aware of [SITUATION] affecting [WHO]. Our priority is [RESPONSE].

Adapted in actual crisis:

We are aware that shipments of Product X arrived damaged affecting approximately 500 customers. Our priority is ensuring every customer receives a replacement without cost.

(Adapted: Specific product, number, action. Tone, structure, core message unchanged)

---

AI prompt

Base prompt

I need to create pre-approved crisis messaging for scenarios our organisation might face. Rather than writing and approving messages during a crisis, I want them ready.

Likely crisis scenarios for us:
[List scenarios specific to your organisation. Examples: product recall, data breach, service outage, regulatory action, workplace incident, cybersecurity incident, supply chain disruption]

Our communication principles:
[How we communicate: transparency, factual, empathetic, etc.]

Key stakeholders who must approve:
[Legal, Compliance, Leadership, Communications, etc.]

What we know about these scenarios:
[What triggers them, who's affected, typical timeline, known facts]

For each scenario, create a crisis content pre-approval pack that includes:
1. A holding statement (first 4-6 hours – minimal info, buys time for investigation)
2. A secondary statement (6-24 hours – more facts, actions being taken)
3. A subsequent updates template (ongoing updates as situation evolves)
4. Channel-specific adaptations (media, social, email, internal, web)
5. Do NOT say guardrails (what to avoid)
6. Pre-approved quote options (if leadership will comment)
7. Clear guidance on what can be adapted vs must stay as-is during crisis
8. Approval sign-off section

The goal is having something ready so we can publish within 1-2 hours of crisis, not days later.

Prompt variations

Variation 1 - Product recall scenario:

We manufacture [PRODUCT] and need holding statements for a potential product recall. Likelihood: [assessment].

What we need to cover:
- Consumer safety concern
- Product identification
- What affected customers should do
- Where to get help/refunds
- Investigation into cause

Create pre-approved holding and secondary statements for a product recall that:
- Prioritise customer safety messaging
- Clearly identify which products/batches are affected
- Explain what customers should do (stop use? return? get help?)
- Avoid admitting fault before investigation (while being empathetic)
- Include contact info for customer support
- Plan for multiple updates as investigation progresses

Variation 2 - Cybersecurity/data incident:

We hold customer data and need pre-approved messaging for potential data breaches or cybersecurity incidents. Our customers are [describe: individuals, businesses, sensitive data holders].

Pre-approved messaging should cover:
- What information may have been affected
- What we're doing to investigate and secure systems
- What customers should do to protect themselves
- Timeline for further updates
- Where to monitor for information

Create holding statements and templates that balance:
- Immediate transparency (customers need to know)
- Not confirming details before investigation (don't claim certain exposure we're not sure of)
- Actionable guidance for what customers should do
- Regular update cadence

Variation 3 - Service outage:

Our [SERVICE] occasionally experiences outages affecting [CUSTOMERS]. We need rapid response messaging for:
- Initial notification (outage detected)
- Investigation ongoing (what we're doing)
- Outage resolved (what happened, status restored)
- Post-incident (why it happened, how we prevent it)

Create pre-approved messaging that:
- Is truthful about impact (who's affected, how)
- Updates frequently during the outage (even if just "still investigating")
- Restores confidence once resolved
- Doesn't make promises about timeline if we're uncertain
- Explains prevention measures (so it doesn't seem to repeat)

Variation 4 - Regulatory or legal crisis:

We may face regulatory action, legal challenge, or compliance issue related to [AREA]. This is sensitive and legally fraught.

Pre-approved messaging needs to:
- Not admit liability or guilt without legal advice
- Be transparent without being legally damaging
- Reassure stakeholders (customers, employees, partners)
- Not speculate about investigation/outcome
- Acknowledge the issue without confirming details

Create holding statements, legal guardrails, and templates that balance transparency and legal protection. Include clear flags for when we need legal approval for any adaptation.

Variation 5 - Internal crisis (workplace incident, leadership change, restructuring):

We need pre-approved messaging for internal crises that might affect employee confidence: [list scenarios: workplace safety incident, significant leadership change, restructuring/redundancy, workplace conduct issue].

Internal crisis messaging differs from public crisis messaging. It needs to:
- Be transparent with employees (they'll find out anyway)
- Reassure about what comes next
- Acknowledge uncertainty without speculating
- Commit to information flow
- Address impact on employees directly

Create scenario packs for [X] internal crisis scenarios that:
- Are different in tone/content from public messaging
- Address employee concerns directly
- Include FAQ/Q&A talking points
- Plan for multiple updates/all-hands communication
- Include escalation for different severity levels

---

Human review checklist

• Are holding statements genuinely neutral enough to fit the scenario without modification?
• Would a non-communications person be able to use these pre-approved statements during a crisis?
• Have guardrails (“Do NOT say”) protected the organisation from obvious legal/compliance risks?
• Does the approval chain reflect who actually needs to sign off (not wishful thinking)?
• Are channel-specific adaptations realistic (would you really send email that way)?
• Is the flexibility framework clear (what CAN be adapted vs what CAN’T)?
• Have pre-approved quotes been genuinely approved by the people expected to use them?
• Would these statements maintain brand voice during crisis?
• Has the timeline been realistic (can you actually get all approvals in that time)?
• Would someone reading this know exactly when to use which statement?

---

Example output

Crisis scenario: Product safety concern (potential contamination)

Likelihood: Medium | Severity: High

What triggers this: Customer reports or quality control detection of contamination in [Product name]

---

PRE-APPROVED HOLDING STATEMENT (First 4-6 hours)

We are aware of a potential product safety concern affecting [PRODUCT NAME]. We take product safety extremely seriously and are investigating immediately. Customers who have concerns should contact us at [CONTACT] or visit [WEBSITE]. We will provide an update as soon as we have more information.

Note: Can adapt specific product name, contact details, and timeframe. Do not modify tone or core message.

---

PRE-APPROVED SECONDARY STATEMENT (After initial investigation, 12-24 hours)

We have completed an initial investigation into the product safety concern. Here’s what we found:

• [FINDING 1: e.g., “Of 50,000 units produced, approximately 500 units may have been affected”]
• [FINDING 2: e.g., “Affected products were distributed through X retailers”]

Here’s what customers should do:

• Check if your product matches the affected batch [BATCH NUMBERS]
• If your product is affected, stop using it and contact us for a full refund or replacement
• [Any safety action needed: e.g., “There is no safety risk if unused; risk only occurs during use”]

We are taking the following steps to prevent this in future:

• [PREVENTIVE ACTION 1: e.g., “Enhanced quality control testing”]
• [PREVENTIVE ACTION 2: e.g., “Supplier audit”]

We apologise for this issue and appreciate your trust in our products.

Note: Adapt specific findings, batch numbers, affected channels, actions. Do not modify responsibility or apology language.

---

PRE-APPROVED QUOTE (from CEO or Product Lead)

“Product safety is non-negotiable for us. We are investigating this thoroughly and acting fast to protect our customers. We will be transparent about what we find and what we’re doing to prevent this happening again.”

Usage: Any statement from leadership about the issue. Do not modify core commitment or transparency language.

---

SOCIAL MEDIA ADAPTATION (Twitter/Instagram)

We’re aware of a product safety concern and investigating immediately. If you have this product, please get in touch: [CONTACT]. More updates coming soon.

Note: Shorter, more immediate tone. Core message preserved.

---

EMAIL TO AFFECTED CUSTOMERS (If identifiable)

Subject: Important: Product Safety Notice and How to Get Help

Dear [NAME],

We’ve identified a potential safety concern with [PRODUCT] that may affect your recent purchase. We’re investigating and here’s what you need to do:

1. Check if your product matches batch [BATCH NUMBERS] (on the label)
2. If it matches, please stop using it
3. Contact us at [CONTACT] for a refund or replacement at no cost

We take your safety seriously and apologise for this. You can expect [REPLACEMENT TIMELINE].

Note: Personalised but uses pre-approved messaging framework. Same facts, adapted for individual customer action.

---

DO NOT SAY:

❌ “We don’t know how this happened” – Sounds like chaos ❌ “This is extremely rare” – Minimises concern before investigation ❌ “We’re confident this won’t happen again” – Promise you might not be able to keep ❌ “It’s probably safe to use” – Legal liability if it’s not ❌ “Our suppliers failed us” – Blame-shifting, undermines confidence ❌ “We’ve never had this issue before” – Irrelevant to current problem

---

Approval sign-off:

• Legal approved: [Name], 25 Jan 2026
• Product Safety: [Name], 25 Jan 2026
• CEO/Leadership: [Name], 25 Jan 2026
• Communications: [Name], 25 Jan 2026

Last updated: 25 Jan 2026

Next review: 25 July 2026 (annually or if product/process changes)

---

Related templates

• Approval Workflow Mapper – Map expedited approval for crisis messages
• Claims Substantiation Checklist – Verify facts in crisis messages
• Tone Style Checker – Maintain brand voice under pressure

---

Tips for success

Pre-approve in advance, not during crisis. The entire point is avoiding approval delays when pressure is high. Get sign-off when you have time to think clearly, not when the crisis is active.

Make holding statements genuinely generic. A holding statement should fit the scenario without needing modification. If you’re always adapting it heavily, it’s not generic enough. Test with colleagues: could they use this as-is?

Define the flexibility boundary clearly. Teams during crisis won’t have time to wonder if they can adapt something. Say explicitly: “You can change the batch numbers and customer action. You cannot change the apology or safety commitment.” Clear rules prevent risky improvisation.

Plan for multiple updates. Crises don’t resolve in one statement. Plan from holding statement through investigation through resolution. What’s your update cadence (every 4 hours? daily)? What do you say if nothing new has happened?

Include guardrails, not just messaging. Pre-approved packs are most valuable if they also prevent mistakes. Define what NOT to say. Legal and compliance input on guardrails is as important as approving the statements themselves.

---

Common pitfalls

Pre-approving statements that need constant modification. If your “pre-approved” holding statement always needs significant changes to fit the actual crisis, it wasn’t generic enough. Revisit and make it more flexible.

Forgetting to update the pack. If your product line changes, your suppliers change, or your operations change, your crisis messaging needs updating. Review and re-approve annually, or sooner if major business changes.

Over-personalising language to the point of unusability. If your pre-approved statement is “We are aware of [SPECIFIC INCIDENT NAME] affecting [SPECIFIC DEPARTMENT],” it’s too specific. Make the template flexible enough to fit variations on the scenario.

Not testing the approval workflow. If you assume leadership can approve a statement in 30 minutes but they’re actually out of reach for 4 hours, your “pre-approval” doesn’t work in practice. Test the actual approval process, not just the content.

Treating all crises the same. A minor service outage needs different messaging than a product recall or workplace incident. Scenarios should have scenario-specific messaging, not a one-size-fits-all approach.

---