In 2025, reputation once again stopped being a question of messaging and became a question of decisions. It was confirmed yet again that reputation is not repaired by words alone, but is gradually built (or dismantled) through internal decisions. The public no longer reacts to “poor communication,” but to poor behavior, lack of credibility, and the absence of responsibility. In such an environment, PR increasingly has less of a shield role and more often a corrective one – the voice that warns and sets boundaries.
We often behave as if a company’s reputation begins only at the moment a message goes public, neglecting all the behind-the-scenes decisions that remain invisible until the moment they “fail.” Komunikacijski laboratorij is backed by a team of experts who know how to recognize that moment in time and communicate the consequences – even at times when it might be easier to stay silent.
In the interview with the Komunikacijski laboratorij team – Manuela Šola, General Manager, Ana Škiljić, Client Relations Director, Kristina Gotovac, Communication Manager, and Renata Krajačić, Communication Manager – we did not deal with perfect PR narratives, but with everything that happens before a message even comes into being. We talk about reputation as collateral for the future, about PR that protects the public from bad decisions, and about those situations in which the bravest move is to consciously say “no.”
Manuela Šola, General Manager
Which reputational decision from 2025 would you sign today even without legal counsel, because you know it was morally right, even if it was risky?
I would sign the decision to go public and be transparent at a moment when it would have been easier to remain silent.
Instead of comfort and postponement, I choose openness, responsibility, and long-term trust.
Reputation is not built by avoiding risk, but by behavior in all situations – both comfortable and uncomfortable.
In which situation this year did you realize that PR no longer protects clients from the public, but the public from clients’ bad decisions?
Reputation is no longer a communication issue, but a management one. The role of the agency has changed – today we don’t just design messages, we clearly signal the consequences of decisions to clients.
The public no longer punishes poor communication. It punishes poor business decisions, behavior, and lack of credibility. In that context, PR does not serve as a shield, but as a corrective – and that is a responsibility we take seriously.
If a book titled “Things the PR industry doesn’t want to admit” were published in 2026, which chapter would bear your name?
Reputation is collateral for the future.
It is not built through campaigns, but through decisions we make while we still have a choice. And it is precisely those decisions, often invisible from the outside, that in the long term determine how credible an organization will be when hard times come.
If in 2026 you had to consciously lose one client to save your own professional integrity – why would you do it?
Because of rejecting long-term responsibility. Because of situations in which there is talk about the future, but decisions are made as if it doesn’t exist.
You don’t lose an agency when you lose a client under such circumstances. You lose it when you agree to compromises that undermine trust and the partnership relationship. For me, respect, responsibility, and the way people are treated are the foundation of everything and a line that cannot be crossed.
Ana Škiljić, Client Relations Director
Which sentence did you keep in a drawer the longest in 2025 because it was true, but “too honest” to publish?
It’s a skill to know how to call things by their proper name. The audience (the other side) senses when we try to wrap difficult or “overly honest truths” in cellophane. I would therefore share a sentence that marked my year, and I believe my team would agree with it – everything can be resolved. Not by itself, as it might sound. We became aware that we have the knowledge and skills to resolve any communication or organizational situation; you just have to get through that first moment when a task lands in your lap that disrupts your to-do list and your plan for the day.
What was the moment when you had to choose between a perfect narrative and an uncomfortable truth, and what did you learn about your own boundaries then?
I would replace the illusion of a perfect narrative with the search for the first words through which an uncomfortable truth becomes more acceptable… That’s how I would describe the everyday life of communication professionals. And beyond it.
Which term in the PR dictionary would you most like to ban in 2026 because it most often hides fear rather than strategy?
There was a lot of talk, debate, and fear this year about generative artificial intelligence. Perhaps in the forest of information, a message I consider important was missed. We should explore all possible tools that help us do fewer things we don’t like and more of the things we do like.
If in 2026 you had to consciously lose one client to save your own professional integrity – why would you do it?
In an ideal world, anyone who tries to secure their own victory over someone else’s back; in the real one, individuals who circumvent the law and consciously undermine the well-being of colleagues, the community – you can keep listing…
Kristina Gotovac, Communication Manager
Which crisis in 2025 proved that reputation does not depend on the message, but on behavior, and how did that change your approach to advising clients?
A crisis case that clearly shows that reputation does not depend solely on the message but also on behavior was the #TeslaTakedown boycott campaign, triggered by the political statements of Elon Musk. This crisis showed that even the most sophisticated communication cannot compensate for behavior that contradicts the values of people and the markets in which you operate. It is an example that clearly illustrates to clients the importance of consistent and thoughtful behavior, not just well-crafted messages.
If you had to predict one moment in 2026 when the public will collectively say “enough,” to whom will that “enough” be addressed, and why?
If we lived in a society that is aware, critical, and active, the public could very easily collectively say “enough” – and precisely to major technology platforms. There is growing distrust toward the content we consume: we no longer know what is real and what is generated, whether it’s text, images, or videos. “Enough” could relate to a long-standing feeling that people are gradually losing control over their own digital space, while our everyday lives are filtered through layers of technology that we can neither oversee nor fully understand.
If in 2026 you had to consciously lose one client to save your own professional integrity – why would you do it?
If in 2026 I had to consciously lose a client to protect my professional integrity, it would be at the moment when they asked me to take actions that harm society and the community we live in. In such situations, losing a client is of lesser importance than preserving responsibility toward the public and one’s own, as well as the agency’s, integrity.
Renata Krajačić, Communication Manager
Which story this year showed you that the media still recognize authenticity even when PR tries to be “too clever”?
One of the freshest examples is the decision of British Prime Minister Keir Starmer to open a TikTok profile in order to get closer to a younger audience. The idea may have made sense on paper, but it very quickly became clear that the format itself is not enough if authenticity doesn’t stand behind it. As soon as the posts started, both the media and the public began calling him out for lack of credibility and so-called “aura farming.”
The Guardian summed it up very precisely when it wrote that these videos, aside from a short-lived novelty effect, have no real content or reason for anyone to share or mention them in everyday conversation – except to prove how “cool” the author is, and if that isn’t sincere, the audience recognizes it. This example is a good reminder that the media, like the public, still clearly distinguish thoughtful communication from attempts to force oneself into a trend.
Which crisis did you not have to manage because you prevented it, and what was the first, almost imperceptible signal that a disaster was coming?
A client from the beauty and health industry was considering an event activation in which the brand would be associated with alcohol. To the client, it was a “cute” idea – to do something fun at the event – but alarm bells immediately rang for us that there was a serious reputational risk there. Associating health and beauty with alcohol is simply not a good message, regardless of the creative framework.
That first signal was precisely the mismatch between the brand’s values and the context of the activation. We communicated this to the client in time, explained the potential consequences, and proposed a different direction. The client accepted the suggestion and the crisis never happened. These are situations that are often not visible from the outside, but are actually one of the most important parts of our job.
If in 2026 you had to consciously lose one client to save your own professional integrity – why would you do it?
Without hesitation, because of unprofessional behavior, especially if it involved bullying or any kind of inappropriate treatment of colleagues from the agency. I believe in partnership and in the fact that the client is important, but there are boundaries that are not crossed.
At Komunikacijski Laboratorij, we take great care of work culture and mutual respect. If someone were to systematically undermine that, regardless of the size of the budget or the brand name, that would not be acceptable to me. Professional integrity and the safety of the team are, in the long run, far more important and valuable than any client.
