An Examination of the Effectiveness of Crisis Response Strategies for Repairing Competence and Integrity Violations
2
조회
0
다운로드
6
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Product-harm crises, which are connected to defective or dangerous products, are perceived as the most common threats to a company. Product harm crises can distort long standing favorable equality perceptions, tarnish a company's reputation, cause major revenue and market-share losses, lead to costly product recalls, and devastate a carefully nurtured brand equity. However, in spite of the devastating impact of product-harm crises, little systematic research exists to asses its marketing consequences. So, the purpose of this study is to investigate how Koreans react to the crisis response in the aftermath of different crises(competence violation vs. integrity violation) and inspire additional research in crisis communication. This study has three main findings which run counter to the assumptions of Kim et al.(2007). Namely, the current study expands on the research of Kim et al. (2004, 2007) by examining how companies repair customers’ trust and corporate attitude after crises. Different from previous studies, this study assumes that apology for an integrity-based crisis is the most appropriate way to repair consumer trust and corporate attitude. As for competence- based crisis, similarly, apology for competence-based crisis can be more successful repairing consumer trust and corporate attitude. Concerning silence strategy, remaining silent dose not admit or deny guilt right away, but instead of asking the perceiver to withhold judgment, suggesting that, silence could be expected to be superior to apology but inferior to denial. Finally, apology for competence violation will be expected to bemore effective than apology for integrity violation. Research conceptual model was as follows:According to the results, apology is found to be the most effective strategy to repair corporate attitude no matter the crisis is perceived as a violation of competence or integrity. Second, company may consider keeping silent as a desirable response because they does not admit nor deny responsibility but ask the public to withhold judgment. However, the result of this study shows that, in the overall crisis situations, silence strategy did not differ significantly from the denial strategy, which suggested that the public wants explanation instead of uncertainty. Third, there was the interaction effect between crisis type and crisis response strategies. In this study, apology is more effective for the competence violated situation in terms of regaining consumer trust and repairing their attitude toward company, while the apology’s effectiveness is lower for the integrity-violated situation. More specifically, when the crisis is perceived due to company’s lack of ability(competence violation), consumer’s trust belief and attitude toward the company is more easily to repair when the company issued a sincere apology. Damaged product is perceived less intentional so participants are more likely to give the company second chance when they apology to the public. By contrast, exaggerated advertisement(integrity violation) is perceived intentionally and thus makes participants angrier toward the accused company. Although apology is perceived as the most effective strategy, when issuing apology, it also means the company admitted their intention. Therefore, in this kind of crisis situation, trust repair needs not only a sincere apology but additional efforts.
Abstract
Product-harm crises, which are connected to defective or dangerous products, are perceived as the most common threats to a company. Product harm crises can distort long standing favorable equality perceptions, tarnish a company's reputation, cause major revenue and market-share losses, lead to costly product recalls, and devastate a carefully nurtured brand equity. However, in spite of the devastating impact of product-harm crises, little systematic research exists to asses its marketing consequences. So, the purpose of this study is to investigate how Koreans react to the crisis response in the aftermath of different crises(competence violation vs. integrity violation) and inspire additional research in crisis communication. This study has three main findings which run counter to the assumptions of Kim et al.(2007). Namely, the current study expands on the research of Kim et al. (2004, 2007) by examining how companies repair customers’ trust and corporate attitude after crises. Different from previous studies, this study assumes that apology for an integrity-based crisis is the most appropriate way to repair consumer trust and corporate attitude. As for competence- based crisis, similarly, apology for competence-based crisis can be more successful repairing consumer trust and corporate attitude. Concerning silence strategy, remaining silent dose not admit or deny guilt right away, but instead of asking the perceiver to withhold judgment, suggesting that, silence could be expected to be superior to apology but inferior to denial. Finally, apology for competence violation will be expected to bemore effective than apology for integrity violation. Research conceptual model was as follows:According to the results, apology is found to be the most effective strategy to repair corporate attitude no matter the crisis is perceived as a violation of competence or integrity. Second, company may consider keeping silent as a desirable response because they does not admit nor deny responsibility but ask the public to withhold judgment. However, the result of this study shows that, in the overall crisis situations, silence strategy did not differ significantly from the denial strategy, which suggested that the public wants explanation instead of uncertainty. Third, there was the interaction effect between crisis type and crisis response strategies. In this study, apology is more effective for the competence violated situation in terms of regaining consumer trust and repairing their attitude toward company, while the apology’s effectiveness is lower for the integrity-violated situation. More specifically, when the crisis is perceived due to company’s lack of ability(competence violation), consumer’s trust belief and attitude toward the company is more easily to repair when the company issued a sincere apology. Damaged product is perceived less intentional so participants are more likely to give the company second chance when they apology to the public. By contrast, exaggerated advertisement(integrity violation) is perceived intentionally and thus makes participants angrier toward the accused company. Although apology is perceived as the most effective strategy, when issuing apology, it also means the company admitted their intention. Therefore, in this kind of crisis situation, trust repair needs not only a sincere apology but additional efforts.
참고문헌 (50)
- Allen, M. W., "Legitimate Endeavors: Impression Management Strategies Used By An Organization in Crisis", Communication Monographs, 61, pp.42~62 (1994)
- Argenti, P. A., "How Technology Has Influenced the Field of Corporate Communication", Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 20(3), pp.357~370 (2006)
- Arpan, L. M., "Stormy Weather: Testing "Stealing Thunder" As a Crisis Communication Strategy to Improve Communication Flow Between Organizations and Journalists", Public Relations Review, 29(3), pp.291~ (2003)
- Barnlund, D. C., "Apologies: Japanese and American Styles", International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 14(2), pp.193~206 (1990)
- Benoit, W. L., "Accounts, Excuses, and Apologies: A Theory of Image Restoration Strategie" (1995), State University of New York Press
- Berkowitz, D., "Media Relations in Korea: Cheong Between Journalist and Public Relations Practitioner", Public Relations Review, 30(4), pp.431~437 (2004)
- Bhattacharya, C. B., "Consumer- Company Identification: A Framework for Understanding Consumers' Relationships with Companies", Journal of Marketing, 67(2), pp.76~88 (2003)
- Bok, S., "Lying: Moral Choice in Public and Private Life" (1978), Pantheon Books
- Boyd, J., "Actional Legitimation: No Crisis Necessary", Journal of Public Relations Research, 12(4), pp.341~353 (2000)
- Brown, K. A., "Jornal of Public Relationships and Crisis Response Strageties: Impact on Attribution of Responsibility", Journal of Public Relations Research, 23(1), pp.75~92 (2011)
- Butler, J. K., "A Behavioral Decision Theory Approach to Modeling Dyadic Trust in Superiors and Subordinates", Psychological Reports, 55(1), pp.19~28 (1984)
- Choi, S. C., (2000), Chungang University
- Coombs, W. T., "Choosing the Right Words: The Development of Guidelines for the Selection of the “Appropriate" Crisis- Response Strategies", Management Communication Quarterly, 8(4), pp.447~476 (1995)
- Coombs, W. T., "An Analytic Framework for Crisis Situations: Better Responses From a Better Understanding of the Situation", Journal of Public Relations Research, 10(3), pp.177~191 (1998)
- Coombs, W. T., "Protecting Organization Reputations During a Crisis: The Development and Application of Situational Crisis Communication Theory", Corporate Reputation Review, 10(3), pp.163~176 (2007)
- Coombs, W. T., "Communication and Attributions in a Crisis: An Experimental Study in Crisis Communication", Journal of Public Relations Research, 8(4), pp.279~295 (1996)
- Coombs, W. T., "Helping Crisis Managers Protect Reputational Assets: Initial Tests of the Situational Crisis Communication Theory", Management Communication Quarterly, 16(2), pp.165~186 (2002)
- Dawar, N., "Impact of Product-Harm Crises on Brand Equity: The Moderating Role of Consumer Expectations", Journal of Marketing Research, 37(2), pp.215~226 (2000)
- Gonzalez-Herrero, A., "Crisis Communications Management 2.0: Organizational Principles to Manage Crisis in an Online World", Organization Development Journal, 28(1), pp.97~105 (2010)
- Griffin, M., "An Empirical Investigation of the Impact of Negative Public Publicity on Consumer Attitudes and Intentions", Advances in Consumer Research, 18(1), pp.334~341 (1991)
- Gudykunst, W. B., "Cultural Differences in Self-Consciousness and Self-Monitoring", Communication Monographs, 14(1), pp.7~34 (1987)
- Hearit, K. M., "Apologies and Public Relations Crises at Chrysler, Toshiba, and Volvo", Public Relations Review, 20(2), pp.113~125 (1994)
- Hofstede, G., "Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind" (1991), McGraw-Hill Professional
- Hosmer, L. T., "Trust : The Connecting Link between Organizational Theory and Philosophical Ethics", The Academy of Management Review, 20(2), pp.379~403 (1995)
- Jin, Y., "The Effects of Public's Cognitive Appraisal of Emotions in Crises on Crisis Coping and Strategy Assessment", Public Relations Review, 35(3), pp.310~313 (2009)
- Kim, P. H., "When More Blame is Better than Less: The Implications of Internal vs. External Attributions for the Repair of Trust after a Competence- vs. Integrity-Based Trust Violation", Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 99(1), pp.49~65 (2006)
- Kim, P. H., "Silence Speaks Volumes: The Effectiveness of Reticence in Comparison to Apology and Denial for Responding to Integrity-and Competence- Based Trust Violations", Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(4), pp.893~908 (2007)
- Kim, P. H., "Removing the Shadow of Suspicion: The Effects of Apology Versus Denial for Repairing Competence- Versus Integrity-Based Trust Violations", Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(1), pp.104~118 (2004)
- Klein, J., "Corporate Social Responsibility and Consumers' Attributions and Brand Evaluations in a Product– Harm Crisis", International Journal of Research in Marketing, 21(3), pp.203~217 (2004)
- Lee, B. K., "Audience-Oriented Approach to Crisis Communication: A Study of Hong Kong Consumers' Evaluation of an Organizational Crisis", Communication Research, 31(5), pp.600~618 (2004)
- Lee, S. W., "The Cheong Space: A Zone of Non-Exchange in Korean Human Relationships" (1994), Donga Publishing Corporation
- Mayer, R. C., "An Integrative Model of Organizational Trust", The Academy of Management Review, 20, pp.709~734 (1995)
- Mayer, R. C., "An Integrative Model of Organizational Trust: Past, Present, and Future", Academy of Management Review, 32(2), pp.344~354 (2007)
- McDonald, L. M., "Stakeholder Reactions to Company Crisis Communication And Causes", Public Relations Review, 36, pp.263~271 (2010)
- Menon, G., "When A Company Does Not Respond to Negative Publicity: Cognitive Elaboration vs. Negative Affect Perspective", Advances in Consumer Research, 16, pp.697~702 (1999)
- Nunnally, J. C., "Psychometric Theory" (1994), McGraw-Hill
- Oki, H., "The Use of Apology-Gratitude Expression in Dialects (In Japanese)", Nihongogaku, 12(1), pp.39~47 (1993)
- Oyserman, D., "Rethinking Individualism and Collectivism: Evaluation of Theoretical Assumptions and Meta-Analyses", Psychological Bulletin, 128(1), pp.3~72 (2002)
- 박종철, "부정적 언론보도에 대한 기업의 대응시점 효과", 아시아마케팅저널, 12(4), pp.113~136 (2011), 한국마케팅학회
- Reeder, G. D., "A Schematic Model of Dispositional Attribution in Interpersonal Perception", Psychological Review, 86(1), pp.61~79 (1979)
- Rotter, J. B., "A New Scale for the Measurement of Interpersonal Trust", Journal of Personality, 35(4), pp.651~665 (1967)
- Sugimoto, N., "A Japan-U.S. Comparison of Apology Styles", Communication Research, 24(2), pp.349~369 (1997)
- Takagi, T., "Americans Don't Apologize, Japanese Apologize Easily(In Japanese)" (2006), Soshisya
- Tanaka, N., "It's Not My Fault!: Japanese and English Responses to Unfounded Accusations" (2000), Continuum
- Thompson, C. A., "An Analysis of Social Style Among Disparate Cultures", Communication Research Reports, 8(1), pp.65~72 (1991)
- Vlachos, P., "Corporate Social Responsibility: Attributions, Loyalty, and the Mediating Role of Trust", Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 37(2), pp.170~180 (2009)
- Weiner, B., "Human Motivation" (1980), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
- Weiner, B., "An Attribution Theory of Motivation and Emotion" (1986), Springer-Verlag
- Weiner, B., "An Attribution Analysis of Reactions to Stigmas", Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55(5) (1988)
- Xie, Y., "How to Repair Customer Trust After Negative Publicity: The Roles of Competence, Integrity, Benevolence, and Forgiveness", Psychology and Marketing, 26(7), pp.572~589 (2009)