Search results

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.

This chapter examines the key issues around organisational resilience – what it means for organisations, and the key elements they need to consider if they are looking to increase the ability of their operations to withstand challenges in their environment. Organisations have always had to adapt to changes in their environment, whether as a result of market-based, political, regulatory or technological developments. However, the pace of change and the number and frequency of external shocks, such as the global financial crisis, the COVID-19 epidemic, war and increasing nationalism, inflation, labour shortages, cyber-security threats and environmental crises have increased over recent years. Whilst some of these events could have been foreseen, in that they emerge relatively slowly, such as increasing nationalism, other crises, such as the COVID-19 pandemic could not have been readily anticipated, both for the speed at which it occurred, but the significant impact it had on people and organisations. Clearly, many of these events can have severe consequences not only for society but also for organisations, potentially threatening their survival. Hence organisations are increasingly recognising the need to be both more aware of potential threats or even opportunities by constantly monitoring their environment, but also creating contingency or mitigation plans to become more resilient to such change and shocks. By becoming more aware of changes in their environment and incorporating risk evaluations and mitigation plans into strategy and regular business planning cycles, organisations can become more adaptive and agile to respond more quickly and robustly to such events. Whilst it is not possible to fully mitigate all risks to the organisation, increased resilience can reduce the severity or longevity of negative impacts or support the organisation to seek opportunities from change.

This chapter introduces the concept of overall organisational resilience, and then discusses some more functional areas of resilience: operational, financial, technological, reputational and institutional. The chapter concludes with a consideration of the effects of building greater organisational resilience and what organisations should consider when evaluating where to start on such a journey.

I use a controlled experiment to examine, in the context of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) crises, whether investors' investment judgments are influenced by a firm's CSR reputation and CSR crisis response strategy. I find that for good CSR reputation firms, the use of a rebuild or deny crisis response strategy does not lead to improvements in investment judgments. However, for bad CSR reputation firms, the use of a deny response strategy leads to improvements in investment judgments while the use of a rebuild strategy does not.

Lateral thinking is an organization-wide approach to scanning for new inputs, materials, influences, and product technologies currently being applied in one field that can offer new product ideas in another. This concept relates to environmental scanning, organizational assimilation, and application, along with absorptive capacity. Lateral thinking could be described as being sensitive to more social influences, casting a wider net, considering more things in different ways, and absorbing a range of inputs from areas such as fashion, auto racing, food, movies. Firms practicing this approach are sensitive to the possibility that new technologies and radical innovations often arrive from outside normal sources. As Jim Olver points out in his essay in this volume, “Tackling wicked problems requires the ability to examine situations from multiple and novel perspectives, to empathize, to engage in lateral thinking.” This is often what is happening with interdisciplinary approaches – ideas in another field are brought in to enrich one's own discipline.

Prior research has documented that product failures can be among a firm's worst nightmares. In this research, we examine if retailers are also held accountable by consumers when products that they sold, but did not manufacture, fail. In two studies, we show that consumers not only blame multiple parties when product failures occur – including the retailer – but also that manufacturer brand equity and retailer store image serve as important contextual cues in the blame assignment process. Specifically, building on congruity theory, we show that retailers are especially susceptible to being held responsible for failure if the equity of the failed product and the retailer store image are incongruent. Our findings also indicate that value-oriented retailers are particularly vulnerable to being blamed when high-equity products fail. Our findings suggest measuring attribution of blame between the manufacturer and retailer involved in a product failure event – instead of only the manufacturer as has been the norm in extant research – facilitates our understanding of consumer responses when product failures occur.

We propose that brands with strong associations and dedicated customers may be vulnerable if customers perceive them as exploiting their relationship.

We start by reviewing the literature on brand meaning, brand attachment, brand relationships, and brand transgressions. The extant literature implies that as a result of their willingness to sustain their brand relationship, highly attached consumers will either discount negative information about a brand or attribute the responsibility for the negative information to some external factors. We propose, on the other hand, that when negative information dilutes the reason for brand attachment, the norm of the consumer–brand relationship is violated (brand transgression). Then we argue that highly attached consumers of that brand will react more negatively (when compared to consumers not feeling highly attached) toward the brand.

We introduce a typology of brand transgressions against the (1) expressive, (2) exclusive, (3) expert, and (4) empathic nature of brands. We discuss the possible effects of attachment levels on consumers’ reactions after such brand transgressions. Additionally, we articulate the moderating effects of four consumer motives (need for self-enhancement, need for uniqueness, need for risk avoidance, and need for justice) on consumer reactions.

Our reasoning counters the literature suggesting that highly attached consumers of a brand will engage in relationship-sustaining behaviors. We contribute to the brand-transgression literature by providing a more structured and detailed definition of brand transgressions by classifying them under four distinct types.

Partnerships for sustainability involve the cooperation of several direct and indirect stakeholders. Direct stakeholders are project partners who can include sponsoring brands, manufacturers or retailers; and sponsored sports clubs or social institutions, and indirect stakeholders relate to potential customers, the general public and government agencies. The knowledge and competencies of direct and indirect stakeholders are integrated to ensure common project-based sustainability and individual goals. This integration is essentially facilitated by image transfer and self-identification effects, which strengthen stakeholder commitment and trust, and ultimately contributing to a higher relationship quality. However, sustainability partnerships experience several challenges. The challenges lie in selecting suitable partners; formulating partner requirements; determining partner contributions; evaluating and controlling partner integration and, further, enhancing cooperation and relationship quality among selected partners. To attend to these challenges requires a holistic and systematic process for stakeholder integration in sustainability projects. In this chapter, a process model for stakeholder integration for sustainability projects is developed based on the relevant theoretical and empirical research on relationship and sustainability marketing. In particular, the possibilities of digital integration are taken into account in the process. The model can be used to manage co-creation partnerships for sustainability including the selection, evaluation and controlling of stakeholder relationships to derive strategies and measures to improve relationship quality.