No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.
... Beniot & Czerwinski, 1997;Benoit & Lindsey, 1987;Brinson & Benoit, 1996;1999;Tam & Huang, 2016;Jung, Graeff & Shim, 2011), as well as a number of studies examining image repair strategies adopted by celebrities, royalty and politicians (e.g. Benoit, 1995b;1997;Compton & Miller, 2011;Furgerson & Benoit, 2013;Oles, 2010;Wilson, 1976). Whilst recognising Benoit's (1995b) study of the U.S. department store Sears, the current study nonetheless recognises a gap in the literature on the application of image repair theory in the context of the retail industry. ...
... However, Benoit (2000) conceded that these strategies may not inevitably be considered inappropriate or ineffective by audiences other than the injured parties and in the case of Coles, with multiple stakeholders, they were used by the organisation in responding to the charges. However, by December 2014, as the severity of the crisis continued to feature in the media, Coles finally admitted to unconscionable conduct in relation to dealings with some suppliers in 2010(ABC, 2014b. Managing Director John Durkan released a statement in which the company used the Mortification strategy and apologised for its actions: ...
This study examines public apology in the context of the retail industry, specifically the Australian supermarket industry. The study revisits Benoit’s (1995) Image Restoration Theory in order to extend its application to Australian supermarkets. Image Restoration Theory provides a typology of five strategic responses for reparation of image following a crisis, controversy or challenge. Using a multiple case study approach, this study analyses the strategic responses provided by Australia’s two major supermarkets – Coles and Woolworths – to protect their image in the wake of a crisis. The severity level of each crisis is determined and the findings of this study reveal the act of apologising (the Mortification strategy in Image Restoration Theory) is only employed in the most serious of the four cases. The study’s findings are extended to discuss the reasons why Australia’s two major supermarket corporations do not apologise (say ‘sorry’) to their customers, shareholders, suppliers and stakeholders.
... Theoretical framework: stakeholder relationship management To focus on OERM during crises, we must also shift our theoretical perspectives away from organization-centric theories to stakeholder-centric theories (Diers-Lawson, 2020a). In part, this is because much of the academic literature on crisis management and response focuses on describing and analyzing response strategies (Oles, 2010;Piotrowski and Guyette, 2010;Weber et al., 2011). The stakeholder relationship management model (SRM) provides a way to organize previous findings establishing that stakeholder characteristics, pressure from engaged stakeholders and stakeholder engagement all influence stakeholder evaluations and behavioral intentions toward organizations (Claes et al., 2010;Hong et al., 2010;Piotrowski and Guyette, 2010;Uccello, 2009). ...
Purpose
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).
Design/methodology/approach
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.
Findings
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.
Originality/value
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.
... Yet, in the study of crisis communication, stakeholder factors remain one of the most challenging and under-studied factors influencing crises; yet, in practice they are probably the most important. More attention is typically paid to the response strategies that organizations use rather than evaluating stakeholder evaluations and the social psychological factors influencing those evaluations (Oles, 2010;Weber, Erickson, & Stone, 2011). However, in recent years important research and application has begun to take form in better understanding stakeholder emotion in crises , culture (Falkheimer & Heide, 2006), national identity , and the interrelationships between stakeholders, organizations, and the issues that affect them both (Diers-Lawson, 2017c;. ...
... Yet, in the study of crisis communication, stakeholder factors remain one of the most challenging and under-studied factors influencing crises; yet, in practice they are probably the most important. More attention is typically paid to the response strategies that organizations use rather than evaluating stakeholder evaluations and the social psychological factors influencing those evaluations (Oles, 2010;Weber, Erickson, & Stone, 2011). However, in recent years important research and application has begun to take form in better understanding stakeholder emotion in crises , culture (Falkheimer & Heide, 2006), national identity , and the interrelationships between stakeholders, organizations, and the issues that affect them both (Diers-Lawson, 2017c;. ...
... Yet, in the study of crisis communication, stakeholder factors remain one of the most challenging and under-studied factors influencing crises; yet, in practice they are probably the most important. More attention is typically paid to the response strategies that organizations use rather than evaluating stakeholder evaluations and the social psychological factors influencing those evaluations (Oles, 2010;Weber, Erickson, & Stone, 2011). However, in recent years important research and application has begun to take form in better understanding stakeholder emotion in crises , culture (Falkheimer & Heide, 2006), national identity , and the interrelationships between stakeholders, organizations, and the issues that affect them both (Diers-Lawson, 2017c;. ...
... Yet, in the study of crisis communication, stakeholder factors remain one of the most challenging and under-studied factors influencing crises; yet, in practice they are probably the most important. More attention is typically paid to the response strategies that organizations use rather than evaluating stakeholder evaluations and the social psychological factors influencing those evaluations (Oles, 2010;Weber, Erickson, & Stone, 2011). However, in recent years important research and application has begun to take form in better understanding stakeholder emotion in crises , culture (Falkheimer & Heide, 2006), national identity , and the interrelationships between stakeholders, organizations, and the issues that affect them both (Diers-Lawson, 2017c;. ...
... Yet, in the study of crisis communication, stakeholder factors remain one of the most challenging and under-studied factors influencing crises; yet, in practice they are probably the most important. More attention is typically paid to the response strategies that organizations use rather than evaluating stakeholder evaluations and the social psychological factors influencing those evaluations (Oles, 2010;Weber, Erickson, & Stone, 2011). However, in recent years important research and application has begun to take form in better understanding stakeholder emotion in crises , culture (Falkheimer & Heide, 2006), national identity , and the interrelationships between stakeholders, organizations, and the issues that affect them both (Diers-Lawson, 2017c;. ...
... Yet, in the study of crisis communication, stakeholder factors remain one of the most challenging and under-studied factors influencing crises; yet, in practice they are probably the most important. More attention is typically paid to the response strategies that organizations use rather than evaluating stakeholder evaluations and the social psychological factors influencing those evaluations (Oles, 2010;Weber, Erickson, & Stone, 2011). However, in recent years important research and application has begun to take form in better understanding stakeholder emotion in crises , culture (Falkheimer & Heide, 2006), national identity , and the interrelationships between stakeholders, organizations, and the issues that affect them both (Diers-Lawson, 2017c;. ...
... Yet, in the study of crisis communication, stakeholder factors remain one of the most challenging and under-studied factors influencing crises; yet, in practice they are probably the most important. More attention is typically paid to the response strategies that organizations use rather than evaluating stakeholder evaluations and the social psychological factors influencing those evaluations (Oles, 2010;Weber, Erickson, & Stone, 2011). However, in recent years important research and application has begun to take form in better understanding stakeholder emotion in crises , culture (Falkheimer & Heide, 2006), national identity , and the interrelationships between stakeholders, organizations, and the issues that affect them both (Diers-Lawson, 2017c;. ...
... Yet, in the study of crisis communication, stakeholder factors remain one of the most challenging and under-studied factors influencing crises; yet, in practice they are probably the most important. More attention is typically paid to the response strategies that organizations use rather than evaluating stakeholder evaluations and the social psychological factors influencing those evaluations (Oles, 2010;Weber, Erickson, & Stone, 2011). However, in recent years important research and application has begun to take form in better understanding stakeholder emotion in crises , culture (Falkheimer & Heide, 2006), national identity , and the interrelationships between stakeholders, organizations, and the issues that affect them both (Diers-Lawson, 2017c;. ...
... Yet, in the study of crisis communication, stakeholder factors remain one of the most challenging and under-studied factors influencing crises; yet, in practice they are probably the most important. More attention is typically paid to the response strategies that organizations use rather than evaluating stakeholder evaluations and the social psychological factors influencing those evaluations (Oles, 2010;Weber, Erickson, & Stone, 2011). However, in recent years important research and application has begun to take form in better understanding stakeholder emotion in crises , culture (Falkheimer & Heide, 2006), national identity , and the interrelationships between stakeholders, organizations, and the issues that affect them both (Diers-Lawson, 2017c;. ...
... Yet, in the study of crisis communication, stakeholder factors remain one of the most challenging and under-studied factors influencing crises; yet, in practice they are probably the most important. More attention is typically paid to the response strategies that organizations use rather than evaluating stakeholder evaluations and the social psychological factors influencing those evaluations (Oles, 2010;Weber, Erickson, & Stone, 2011). However, in recent years important research and application has begun to take form in better understanding stakeholder emotion in crises , culture (Falkheimer & Heide, 2006), national identity , and the interrelationships between stakeholders, organizations, and the issues that affect them both (Diers-Lawson, 2017c;. ...
... Yet, in the study of crisis communication, stakeholder factors remain one of the most challenging and under-studied factors influencing crises; yet, in practice they are probably the most important. More attention is typically paid to the response strategies that organizations use rather than evaluating stakeholder evaluations and the social psychological factors influencing those evaluations (Oles, 2010;Weber, Erickson, & Stone, 2011). However, in recent years important research and application has begun to take form in better understanding stakeholder emotion in crises , culture (Falkheimer & Heide, 2006), national identity , and the interrelationships between stakeholders, organizations, and the issues that affect them both (Diers-Lawson, 2017c;. ...
... Yet, in the study of crisis communication, stakeholder factors remain one of the most challenging and under-studied factors influencing crises; yet, in practice they are probably the most important. More attention is typically paid to the response strategies that organizations use rather than evaluating stakeholder evaluations and the social psychological factors influencing those evaluations (Oles, 2010;Weber, Erickson, & Stone, 2011). However, in recent years important research and application has begun to take form in better understanding stakeholder emotion in crises , culture (Falkheimer & Heide, 2006), national identity , and the interrelationships between stakeholders, organizations, and the issues that affect them both (Diers-Lawson, 2017c;. ...
... Yet, in the study of crisis communication, stakeholder factors remain one of the most challenging and under-studied factors influencing crises; yet, in practice they are probably the most important. More attention is typically paid to the response strategies that organizations use rather than evaluating stakeholder evaluations and the social psychological factors influencing those evaluations (Oles, 2010;Weber, Erickson, & Stone, 2011). However, in recent years important research and application has begun to take form in better understanding stakeholder emotion in crises , culture (Falkheimer & Heide, 2006), national identity , and the interrelationships between stakeholders, organizations, and the issues that affect them both (Diers-Lawson, 2017c;. ...
... Yet, in the study of crisis communication, stakeholder factors remain one of the most challenging and under-studied factors influencing crises; yet, in practice they are probably the most important. More attention is typically paid to the response strategies that organizations use rather than evaluating stakeholder evaluations and the social psychological factors influencing those evaluations (Oles, 2010;Weber, Erickson, & Stone, 2011). However, in recent years important research and application has begun to take form in better understanding stakeholder emotion in crises , culture (Falkheimer & Heide, 2006), national identity , and the interrelationships between stakeholders, organizations, and the issues that affect them both (Diers-Lawson, 2017c;. ...
... Yet, in the study of crisis communication, stakeholder factors remain one of the most challenging and under-studied factors influencing crises; yet, in practice they are probably the most important. More attention is typically paid to the response strategies that organizations use rather than evaluating stakeholder evaluations and the social psychological factors influencing those evaluations (Oles, 2010;Weber, Erickson, & Stone, 2011). However, in recent years important research and application has begun to take form in better understanding stakeholder emotion in crises , culture (Falkheimer & Heide, 2006), national identity , and the interrelationships between stakeholders, organizations, and the issues that affect them both (Diers-Lawson, 2017c;. ...
... Yet, in the study of crisis communication, stakeholder factors remain one of the most challenging and under-studied factors influencing crises; yet, in practice they are probably the most important. More attention is typically paid to the response strategies that organizations use rather than evaluating stakeholder evaluations and the social psychological factors influencing those evaluations (Oles, 2010;Weber, Erickson, & Stone, 2011). However, in recent years important research and application has begun to take form in better understanding stakeholder emotion in crises , culture (Falkheimer & Heide, 2006), national identity , and the interrelationships between stakeholders, organizations, and the issues that affect them both (Diers-Lawson, 2017c;. ...
... Yet, in the study of crisis communication, stakeholder factors remain one of the most challenging and under-studied factors influencing crises; yet, in practice they are probably the most important. More attention is typically paid to the response strategies that organizations use rather than evaluating stakeholder evaluations and the social psychological factors influencing those evaluations (Oles, 2010;Weber, Erickson, & Stone, 2011). However, in recent years important research and application has begun to take form in better understanding stakeholder emotion in crises , culture (Falkheimer & Heide, 2006), national identity , and the interrelationships between stakeholders, organizations, and the issues that affect them both (Diers-Lawson, 2017c;. ...
... Yet, in the study of crisis communication, stakeholder factors remain one of the most challenging and under-studied factors influencing crises; yet, in practice they are probably the most important. More attention is typically paid to the response strategies that organizations use rather than evaluating stakeholder evaluations and the social psychological factors influencing those evaluations (Oles, 2010;Weber, Erickson, & Stone, 2011). However, in recent years important research and application has begun to take form in better understanding stakeholder emotion in crises , culture (Falkheimer & Heide, 2006), national identity , and the interrelationships between stakeholders, organizations, and the issues that affect them both (Diers-Lawson, 2017c;. ...
... Yet, in the study of crisis communication, stakeholder factors remain one of the most challenging and under-studied factors influencing crises; yet, in practice they are probably the most important. More attention is typically paid to the response strategies that organizations use rather than evaluating stakeholder evaluations and the social psychological factors influencing those evaluations (Oles, 2010;Weber, Erickson, & Stone, 2011). However, in recent years important research and application has begun to take form in better understanding stakeholder emotion in crises , culture (Falkheimer & Heide, 2006), national identity , and the interrelationships between stakeholders, organizations, and the issues that affect them both (Diers-Lawson, 2017c;. ...
... Yet, in the study of crisis communication, stakeholder factors remain one of the most challenging and under-studied factors influencing crises; yet, in practice they are probably the most important. More attention is typically paid to the response strategies that organizations use rather than evaluating stakeholder evaluations and the social psychological factors influencing those evaluations (Oles, 2010;Weber, Erickson, & Stone, 2011). However, in recent years important research and application has begun to take form in better understanding stakeholder emotion in crises , culture (Falkheimer & Heide, 2006), national identity , and the interrelationships between stakeholders, organizations, and the issues that affect them both (Diers-Lawson, 2017c;. ...
... Second, the messaging is stakeholder centered demonstrating a commitment to engagement and renewal (Alpaslan & Mitroff, 2009;Seeger & Ulmer, 2002;Sung-Un et al., 2010). Third, the content of the messaging reflects a 'genuine' effort towards image repair (Benoit, 1997;Elsbach, 1994;Taylor, Ungureanu, & Caldiero, 2006) and accepting responsibility as necessary (Carroll, 2009;Pace, Fediuk, & Botero, 2009), but not being afraid to defend themselves against what they view are inappropriate criticisms (Oles, 2010). These findings communicate a British crisis communication culture centered on openness, dialogue, and engagement. ...
... Yet, even as we assert a turn toward race opportunities to critically unpack racial dimensions in apologetic instances are often ignored or insufficiently accounted for. While both Arrington (2002) and Oles (2010) focus on rhetors of color and identify rhetorical or imagerepair strategies in each instance, both scholars fail to account for how race may influence strategies enacted. In contrast, work by Gordon and Crenshaw (2003) and Ellwanger (2012) reveal attention to whiteness, but with differing treatment. ...
In theorizing the dialectic of public acts of white racial offenses and the in/sufficiency of apologia associated with white racial discourse, we examine racist violations and racializing apologia from 24 white public figures in the United States between 1996 and 2012. Analysis of racist violations reveals that each offense undermines race as a social and political marker, whereas racializing apologia makes explicit the constant force of racialization and latent nature of whiteness in apologia strategies. We view racializing apologia as potentially liberatory, capable of allowing for a defense of oneself and challenging reproduction of racial formations.
... Crisis communication is a burgeoning field, and has received considerable attention with the rise of corporate misconduct cases. We need only to look at Enron, WorldCom, Merrill Lynch, and Martha Stewart to see the crippling effect of mismanaging the truth Hearit & Brown, 2004;Reber & Gower, 2006;Oles, 2010). In these cases it is important for company leaders to engage with multiple audiences about the nature and severity of their actions. ...
As organizations around the world experience crises, they are finding it necessary to craft messages that speak to a more global audience in order to renegotiate social legitimacy by demonstrating ethical leadership in a more global environment. This paper aims at investigating two crisis cases across international borders, including BP's (formerly British Petroleum) massive oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico and Indian-based Satyam Computer Services' near-collapse as a result of corporate fraud. In both cases, crisis response demonstrated a lack of sensitivity to stakeholders, a lack of transparency, and a lack of strategic communication. In this study, we examine the crisis response of company officials in the aftermath of events that had both national and global effects. From the analysis, three general themes emerge: 1) issues of blame and accountability, 2) issue of transparency, and 3) success or failure in crisis response. The cases point to the need for organizational leaders to establish a clear line of communication with stakeholders, so they are better equipped to move beyond the crisis situation. Findings demonstrate that the more we know about how companies translate their role as corporate citizens, particularly in the face of crises, the better we are to determine standards for practice that help to rebuild image and restore legitimacy.
This paper explores the visual apologia of the California dairy industry's Happy Cow campaign through generic rhetorical analysis. The study identifies several benefits, detriments, and challenges of visual apologia by focusing on the Happy Cow ads' engagement, portrayals of reality, and argumentative clarity. The argument is made that visual apologia, including that of the Happy Cow campaign, is both rhetorically promising and limiting. As such it is a potentially potent and problematic form of apologia. The conclusion indicates several approaches that may be taken to downplay the negative implications of visual apologia while harnessing its productive qualities.
This article seeks to provide an evidence-based set of recommendations for the development of an intercultural crisis communication (ICC) research agenda with three goals. First, to provide an advancement in our understanding of the state of crisis communication research in general. Second, to offer a grounded introduction to crisis communication for intercultural scholars who may not be as familiar with the field. Finally to identify three broad evidence-based areas for developing ICC research – (1) representing different cultural perspectives in crisis communication research, (2) placing American crisis research in a global context, and (3) developing cross-cultural comparisons.
Purpose – When organisations behave irresponsibly, a question remains: Can they use a messaging strategy based in the organisation's commitment social responsibility to effectively respond to the crisis? The purpose of this chapter is to analyse stakeholder attitudes and their antecedents in such a case. Because of its scope, magnitude and use of a response strategy based on messages of social responsibility, the 2010 BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico serves as an excellent case for measuring the effectiveness of such a messaging strategy.
Methodology/approach – The present study drew from two data sources: a content analysis of interactions on BP's Facebook page (N=1,515) as well as an image survey of BP (N=749).
Findings – BP's messaging strategy had limited positive effects in terms of (1) being viewed as a ‘socially responsible’ organisation and (2) creating significant good will towards the company. However, these data also reveal that BP has effectively opened lines of communication between stakeholders and the company.
Practical and social implications – This study has two central implications. First, for both organisations and activists, personal investment and the relevance of issues are both critical in order to change stakeholder attitudes about organisations. Second, based on this research, we can begin to develop stakeholder profiles based on age, sex and political identity.
Originality/value – In the last couple of years, considerable attention has been paid to describing and analysing the response strategies that organisations deploy; however, scant attention has been paid to measuring stakeholder evaluations of those crisis response strategies.
Broadening the application of Benoit's image repair theory, this case study compares and contrasts crisis management strategies of Jon and Kate Gosselin during their 2009 highly publicized divorce. Specifically, it looks at how they presented themselves through personal statements, interviews and social media in two phases: the year before and the year after their divorce. Findings indicate the two used many image repair strategies and experienced varying levels of success. In the end, media outlets utilized traditional cultural narratives in their framing of both celebrities, depicting Kate as a distraught wife/single mother and Jon as an irresponsible and untrustworthy husband/father. Media later transitioned to a more positive portrayal of Jon and a negative portrayal of Kate. Exploring social media added a fresh dimension to previous image repair analyses. Findings indicate social media allow celebrities to publish information fast and efficiently without a gatekeeper; however, they must still follow traditional image repair strategies to succeed.
British comedian Ricky Gervais created a media stir as host of the 2011 Golden Globes Awards ceremony by using what many celebrities in attendance and people in the television audience saw as harsh, mean-spirited jokes about the awards, guests, and nominees. Four days after the show, Gervais tried to respond to the backlash by appearing on Piers Morgan Tonight to defend his performance and to repair his image. Gervais employed a variety of image repair strategies: denial, evasion of responsibility, minimization, and mortification. He focused most attention on transcendence, inviting his audience to view the awards show and his performance as an artistic pursuit of truth and self-discovery. Ultimately, Gervais failed to adapt to his audience and failed to repair his image.
This essay refines public relations pedagogy by demonstrating further the ways in which rhetorical instruction can be a good means of teaching public relations students critical thinking skills needed to be thoughtful, ethical, and reflective practitioners. We argue that exposing students to classes and techniques rooted in the rhetorical tradition can (1) help to prepare students for practice; (2) address criticism of the curriculum's limited functionalistic scope; (3) prepare students to both understand and interrogate public discourse generally. We establish the foundations of rhetoric's role in public relations and provide three pedagogical examples and classroom exercises, thus demonstrating the benefits of further incorporating this perspective into the public relations classroom. The pragmatic implications of those exercises and other efforts in infusing the rhetorical tradition into public relations pedagogy are discussed.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.