Seaworld Entertainment Crisis Summary

In 2010, SeaWorld Entertainment Inc. encountered a crisis situation which directly affected a variety of stakeholders and publics. Stakeholders may be: controlling, core, peer, or situational. There were many stakeholders directly involved, but some of the most important publics to consider were: People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, The U.S. Labor Department’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration, employees, and consumers. This event triggered a series of strategic responses in order to protect SeaWorld’s reputation.

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA): Situational/Diffuse
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) had a very large presence as a diffuse public during SeaWorld’s 2010 crisis. This advocacy group was an important public for SeaWorld to address, as its conflicts could have resulted in stigmatization of the business. While PETA had no direct, controlling relationship with SeaWorld, they are a public that required urgent actions. PETA already had substantial conflicts with SeaWorld, as it argued that “animal captivity adversely affects the well-being of animals” (Davis,2015: “Ringling Bros. Says,” 2015). PETA’s

Employees are stakeholders, because they help execute the organization’s mission and produce the services or products. Concern for the safety of the staff was a critical issue that SeaWorld had to address, since the situation involved the death of an employee. Since OSHA claimed that worker’s safety was not in accordance to certain codes and SeaWorld was plummeting in popularity, there were job security concerns as well. Organizations that ignore their employees as stakeholders negatively affect future hiring options, as it can make the organization appear unattractive as a job prospect. In this situation, SeaWorld needed to focus on alleviating the concerns of their