Search results

When companies face a crisis, they sometimes deliver blame-shifting communications, trying to shift blame onto another actor to protect their reputation. While previous research has considered how different features of the message affect its persuasiveness, little is known about whether specific senders can blame more effectively. This paper aims to contribute to research in this domain through an investigation of the sender’s social perception as a critical moderator to the persuasiveness of blame shifting.

The authors conduct four between-subjects scenario experiments to test the research hypotheses. In each experiment, participants are presented with a realistic crisis scenario and the crisis communications delivered by the company. The authors assess the extent to which perceptions of the sender influence the message’s ability to reduce negative word-of-mouth intentions and to increase purchase intentions.

The authors show that blame shifting is more likely to be effective when deployed by senders that are small (Study 1) or have a positive CSR track record (Study 2). Furthermore, The authors find that even large senders can successfully deploy blame shifting if they can benefit from being known for their CSR programs (Study 3). Finally, the authors show that the effect of blame shifting depends on the receiver’s level of concern about the crisis: stakeholders significantly concerned by the crisis reject blame-shifting communications (Study 4).

Further research should examine the impact of information about brand competence on blame-shifting effectiveness. Further research is also needed to explore sender effects for other defensive crisis communication strategies such as denial or the use of excuses or justifications.

The study offers critical information for marketers considering the use of defensive crisis communications strategies such as blame shifting.

The study extends the understanding of how sender effects influence blame-shifting communications. The analysis allows us to clarify why this strategy is effective for certain senders and certain receivers while, for others, it tends to backfire. Blame shifting backfires for large senders unless they can boast a strong CSR record.

Product harm crises are becoming increasingly common, and recent examples include Toyota and Vioxx. This chapter examines country differences that impact consumer blame attributions for an ambiguous product harm crisis, and proposes a framework for a crisis response strategy. The first step involves assessing the level of uncertainty avoidance and crisis severity which serve as an indicator of the urgency felt by consumers to assess blame. The second step involves examining consumer beliefs and information processing biases to determine who consumers will most likely blame in order to resolve the uncertainty. Based on information gathered from these steps, a crisis response strategy is suggested for global brand managers.

Once a corporate crisis is entangled with a social issue, how consumers make sense of the crisis can be impacted by issue-based opinion polarization. This study investigates the underlying mechanisms as consumers go through this process. This study also examines whether corporate social advocacy (CSA) can be an effective crisis-response strategy for mitigating reputational loss.

Theoretical inquiries were empirically tested using an online experiment (N = 792). The experiment set the context in China, in a working-overtime-issue-related crisis. It had a 2 (online exposure: anti-issue opinion vs. pro-issue opinion) × 2 (CSA: absence vs. presence) between-subject design with a continuous variable (pre-existing issue attitudes) measured before the manipulation.

This study found that pre-existing issue attitudes can be directly and indirectly associated with corporate reputation, for the issue attitudes influence how consumers attribute crisis blame. Such a direct effect of pre-existing issue attitudes varies depending on which polarized opinion consumers were exposed to on social media. This study also found CSA to be a robust crisis response strategy, through multiple mechanisms, in protecting the corporate reputation.

Scholars are scarcely aware of the threats that issue-based opinion polarization poses to corporate reputation. This study serves as an early attempt to provide theoretical explanations. In addition to this, this study extends the current conceptual understandings of CSA during corporate crises that involve social issues while adding fresh insights into the established typology of crisis-response strategies.

Brands facing a crisis have to decide whether to disclose crisis-related information themselves or to wait and take the risk that a third party breaks the news. While brands might benefit from self-disclosing the information, it is likely that the impact of crisis communication on customers’ evaluation of the brand depends on the type of crisis. This study aims to investigate the influence of type of crisis on the relationshp between disclosure and brand outcomes.

A 2 × 2 between-subjects experiment with 180 Dutch participants was conducted.

Results show that self-disclosure of a negative incident positively affects consumers’ attitude, trust and purchase intention compared to third-party disclosure. Additionally, disclosure and crisis type interact. In times of a product-harm crisis, self-disclosure does not represent an advantage to third party disclosure, while in times of a moral-harm crisis disclosure by the brand is able to maintain customers’ positive attitude towards and trust in the brand compared to disclosure by a third party. Moreover, blame attribution mediates the effect of crisis type on brand evaluations.

Recent research indicates that self-disclosing crisis information instead of waiting until thunder strikes has beneficial effects for a brand in times of crisis. However, these studies use the context of product-harm crises, which neglects the possible impact of moral-harm crises. Furthermore, this study adds the impact of blame attributions as a mediator in this context.

This paper aims to examine consumer reactions during product-harm crises by measuring the impact of perceived risk, blame and trust on consumer purchase intentions. Moreover, the role of perceived crisis severity is examined as affecting the three main endogenous variables of the conceptual framework.

The study uses the real-scenario approach for empirically testing the proposed conceptual framework. Participants were called to assess the story of a defective product (i.e. a soother that was recently recalled).

Results of the equation modeling demonstrate that perceived severity significantly influence trust and blame while it does not affect perceived risk. In addition, trust, blame and perceived risk notably affect purchase intentions.

Based on the study’s results, companies could implement appropriate strategies for reducing the negative consequences of a product-harm crisis.

The paper presents four key originality traits: Crisis management from the consumer perspective has received little attention. The relationship between trust, perceived risk and purchase intentions has not been explored in the crisis management field. Attribution of blame is a new variable added to the perceived risk-trust-purchase intention model. Perceived severity is examined as a moderator affecting the main endogenous variables of the conceptual framework.

Although international product-harm crises have become more common, the influence of the country image (CI) associated with foreign goods in such crises remains under researched. This study aims to investigate the extent to which the CI of a foreign made product influences consumers’ attribution of blame and trust and, ultimately, their future purchase intentions after the product is involved in a crisis.

A 2 (country) × 3 (crisis type) quasi experimental design was used, with data collected from Australia (n = 375) and China (n = 401).

CI can influence attribution of blame, subsequent levels of trust and likely purchase intentions. Australian and Chinese consumers have different views when it comes to trusting a company or placing blame, depending on the country of origin or the type of crisis. The direct and positive effect of CI on consumer purchase intentions following a product-harm crisis is sequentially mediated by attribution of blame and trust. Trust is the most powerful influence on future purchase intentions in both samples.

In this research, only one type of crisis response strategy (no comment) was used. Thus, the results of this study must be viewed with caution when considering outcomes relating to other response options. Additionally, the testing was limited to only two samples, focussing on three countries (England, China, Vietnam), and one product context using a hypothetical brand. Further, despite our reasonable sample size (N = 776), the number of respondents represented in each cell would still be considered a limitation overall.

When developing crisis response strategies, managers should take into account the influence of a positive/negative source CI in driving attribution and trust. To minimize the impact of crisis on future purchasing decisions, organizations can leverage positive biases and mitigate negative ones, aiming to maintain or restore trust as a priority.

The study provides cross-country understanding about the significant role of CI during a product-harm crisis in relation to subsequent consumers’ blame attribution, their trust in the focal organization and ultimately their future purchase intentions.

Data security breaches are an increasingly common and costly problem for organizations, yet there are critical gaps in our understanding of the role of stakeholder relationship management and crisis communication in relation to data breaches. In fact, though there have been some studies focusing on data breaches, little is known about what might constitute a “typical” response to data breaches whether those responses are effective at maintaining the stakeholders' relationship with the organization, their commitment to use the organization after the crisis, or the reputational threat of the crisis. Further, even less is known about the factors most influencing response and outcome evaluation during data breaches.

We identify a “typical” response strategy to data breaches and then evaluate the role of this response in comparison to situation, stakeholder demographics and relationships between stakeholders, the issue and the organization using an experimental design. This experiment focuses on a 2 (type of organization) × 2 (prior knowledge of breach risk) with a control group design.

Findings suggest that rather than employing reactive crisis response messaging the role of public relations should focus on proactive relationship building between organizations and key stakeholders.

For the last several decades much of the field of crisis communication has assumed that in the context of a crisis the response strategy itself would materially help the organization. These data suggest that the field crisis communication may have been making the wrong assumption. In fact, these data suggest that reactive crisis response has little-to-no effect once we consider the relationships between organizations, the issue and stakeholders. The findings show that an ongoing program of crisis capacity building is to an organization's strategic advantage when data security breaches occur.

The central aim of this research is to deepen the analysis of the influence that crises have on employee relations by using the stakeholder relationship management model (SRM) to analyze organizational employee relationship management (OERM).

This study uses a questionnaire distributed in two organizations (UK-based public sector and private sector) that were experiencing a crisis at the time of data collection. Respondents identified whether they believed the organization was in crisis, if they defined it as in crisis classified what type of crisis it was, and then responded to questions about their relationship to the organization, the organization's post crisis stability and their own behavioral intentions.

The findings verify the applicability of the SRM in employee relations with three critical findings: (1) employees with higher income in the private sector were significantly less likely to believe their organization was in crisis; (2) the more ambiguous the blame for the crisis, the greater the damage on the relationship between organizations and employees; and (3) collective sensemaking in organizations is essential, but less likely when a crisis has damaged the relationship between employees and organizations.

In the last 40 years of Employee Relations, the role of crisis in influencing OERM has not been meaningfully explored in the journal. Therefore, the piece makes an original contribution.

This paper aims to identify how the news media cover organizational crisis responsibility and crisis response strategies and, if at all, how they differ by crisis types.

The approach takes the form of a content analysis of level of responsibility (individual versus organizational level) and organizational response strategies in news coverage of major crisis events during 2006 in three newspapers.

Significant differences were found between preventable crises and accidental crises: most preventable crises news coverage focused more on the individual level of responsibility, while accidental crises news used the organizational level of responsibility. The significant differences of organizational response strategies indicated that preventable crises news coverage frequently reported denial strategies, while accidental crisis news covered deal with strategies more.

The study is limited to the samples of the three newspapers and the period 2006.

This study suggests that crisis managers should always check the crisis news coverage, and media bias and orientation, and try to have good relations with the media to deliver the right message to the public during a crisis.

Despite the importance of the media's role in the public's perception of crisis responsibility, there is a lack of systematic analysis of level of crisis responsibility.

Sensemaking models generally lack an objective determinant to distinguish between CEO fault and changes in systematic risk caused by exogenous negative shocks like a banking crisis. The interdisciplinary approach of this paper combines attribution theory with econometric time series analyses to provide an objective measure of exogeneity and persistence of a negative shock to an organization. The purpose of this paper is to address the exploratory research question, of how scapegoating by managers can be avoided by the use of an objective and empirical measurement and if the recent financial crisis can be seen as an exogenous shock to manufacturing firms.

By testing for stationarity with a structural break with an econometric time series analysis, the model helps to reduce agency costs during organizational crisis by effectively determining crisis causation and avoid scapegoating by managers.

By combining the sensemaking models of Haleblian and Rajagopalan (2006), Staw (1980), and Weick (1988), an integrated model of sensemaking in performance crises under the specific context of simultaneously occurring external crises is provided. By applying the authors approach the results suggest that the financial crisis of 2008/2009 has true exogenous adverse effects on US manufacturing firms.

The interdisciplinary approach encourages the integration of econometric time series analysis as an objective determinant in sense making models.