Michael Felber, Partner
When does an issue become urgent? It's rarely just about the situation itself - it's about how organizations and their stakeholders frame the need for action.
Take a mid-sized IT company facing pressure about its data centers' environmental impact. The same facts generate radically different urgency narratives:
Environmental activists: "These centers must transition to renewable energy by 2025 to prevent irreversible damage."
Company management: "We're committed to a sustainable transition in line with the technology's state of the art."
The difference isn't just rhetoric. It reveals three core mechanisms that shape perceived urgency¹:
1. Time framing
Some stakeholders create pressure through specific deadlines. Others maintain flexibility by keeping timeframes intentionally open. Both can be legitimate approaches - what matters is alignment with real operational constraints and genuine need for action.
2. Context setting
"The industry is rapidly shifting - we're falling behind" vs. "Our infrastructure upgrades follow established cycles." Each frame references different benchmarks to justify its timing.
3. Strategic coupling/decoupling
Issues can be linked to broader crises ("part of the climate emergency") or treated as distinct technical challenges. This connection or separation shapes stakeholder expectations about appropriate response times.
The key is: Urgency isn't just found - it's constructed through consistent patterns of communication and action.
Much like trust, it builds through the alignment of words and deeds over time.
Practical guidelines
When you mean to build urgency:
Set clear temporal boundaries
Highlight gaps between current state and expectations
Connect to broader strategic priorities
But: Only if you can deliver on the timeline you create
When you mean to reduce pressure:
Keep timeframes flexible but show progress
Emphasize alignment with natural business cycles
Frame as specific, manageable challenges
But: Don't dismiss legitimate stakeholder concerns
The ethics matter
Organizations must balance legitimate urgency construction and mitigation with stakeholder trust. Overstating pressure can backfire just as badly as understating genuine concern. The goal isn't manipulation - it's effectively communicating real needs for action or patience.
Because ultimately, your ability to influence urgency perceptions depends on an actor’s track record. Stakeholders judge the credibility of an "urgent" or of a "measured" response through the lens of past performance.
¹ For reference on these core mechanics I recommend the excellent paper by Geisemann, P. and Geiger, D. (2024), Crisis? What Crisis? The Contestation of Urgency in Creeping Crises. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 32: e70004. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5973.70004