Many of the issues facing society involve choices that extend beyond the bounds of greater scientific knowledge into subjective value-laden judgments that are influenced by different motives and beliefs. This paper shows that risk-based decisions have two dimensions, a scientific assessment and a cultural interpretation, and discusses these different dimensions of risk. In particular, the current lack of public trust that companies and authorities will "tell the truth" about risks is highlighted. The paper attempts to describe the sound arguments for companies to move away from the "decide/announce/defend" system to an approach involving greater dialogue with external interest groups when faced with decisions that involve balancing environmental (and societal) risks and benefits. Two case studies are presented. The first case study relates to Shell U.K. E&P’s (Shell Expro’s) strategy to find an acceptable disposal option for the Brent Spar oil-storage buoy. The progression of a technical solution is supported by a parallel, open-dialogue process. The second case study illustrates how a decision to complete and share voluntarily the results of a societal risk assessment (SRA) for the Braefoot Bay Marine Loading Terminal is helping to build better trust-based relationships between Shell U.K. and the local community. The development of anticipatory and comprehensive risk-based communications strategies is helping the company avoid generating unnecessary public outrage, win public trust, and meet its objectives to be seen as a leading and socially responsible company.