Corporates often partner with social media influencers to bolster brand image after crises.Although existing evidence suggests that influencers have a largely positive effect on brands, yet there is paucity of research on the role of influencers in corporate crisis communications.Across two studies, we examine the impact of influencers on consumers' perception of corporate brand in crisis. Drawing on persuasion knowledge theory, we identify pitfalls associated with influencers, such as inferences of manipulative intent, which negatively affect perceived trustworthiness and corporate reputation. The downside of engaging influencers in crisis communications can, however, be offset by influencer and the brand communicating values-driven motives of their partnership. Our findings imply that corporate brands should respond to crises through a bolstering strategy that promotes existing corporate goodwill, without influencer's involvement. When leveraging on influencers' support, however, brands should endeavor to inoculate manipulative inferences by communicating the values-driven motives behind the brand-influencer partnership.

Structured Abstract PurposeThe Internet has changed the way services are delivered and has created new forms of customer-firm interactions. Whilst online service failures remain inevitable, the Internet offers opportunities for delivering efficient service recovery through the online channel. Notwithstanding, research evidence on how firms can deliver online service recovery remains scarce. This study investigates the impact of two online service recovery strategies -online information and technology-mediated communication -on customer satisfaction, switching and word-of-mouth intentions. Design/methodology/approachA scenario-based experiment is employed. Data are analysed using partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). FindingsOnline information and technology-mediated interactions can be used as online service recovery strategies. When fair, online service recovery can restore customer satisfaction, lower switching and enhance positive word-of-mouth. Interactional justice delivered through technology-mediated communication is a strong predictor of satisfaction with online service recovery. Yet, customers in subscription services show greater expectations of online service recovery than those in non-subscription services. Research limitations/implicationsFurther research could examine the impact of online service recovery on relational constructs, such as trust. Since customers participate in the online recovery process, future research could investigate the role of customers as co-creators of online service recovery. Practical implicationsService managers should design online recovery strategies that meet customer need for interactional justice, for example, bespoke emails, and virtual chat communications showing genuine customer care. Originality/valueOnline information and technology-mediated communication function as online service recovery strategies. Customer perceptions of justice towards online service recovery restore satisfaction, and encourage loyal behaviour.

Purpose When a service fails, the guarantee policy of the firm can be employed as a recovery strategy. The terms of the guarantee determine the amount of payout and the ease of invoking the policy. The guarantee terms can, therefore, influence customer perceptions of recovery fairness and inferences about the firm’s intentions in providing fair recovery. The study examines the impact of guarantee terms on customer perceptions of justice, motive attributions and repatronage intentions. Design/methodology/approach A between-subjects experiment was conducted in parcel delivery services. Findings Customer perceptions of justice vary across guarantee payout levels. Payout in the form of a discount does not restore justice perceptions, and leads to inferences that the firm offered the guarantee to maximise its profits. Conversely, full refund restores justice. Full refund plus discount is perceived as undeserved, and does not enhance justice perceptions. A moderately easy-to-invoke guarantee is perceived as fair, when it includes full refund. Inferences of negative firm’s motives, however, diminish perceived fairness of easy-to-invoke guarantees. Research limitations/implications Future research could examine the interaction of guarantee scope with payout and ease of invocation, and how types of motives differentially impact justice perceptions. Practical implications Full refund can enhance justice perceptions, whereas discount is perceived as unfair. Firms should offer full refund as guarantee payout, but refrain from offering a discount. Flexibility should be embedded in guarantee invocation procedures. Originality/value This study demonstrates that service guarantees employed as recovery strategies signal justice and the firm’s motives.

This study examines the role of response time in recovering from service failures in e-retailing.Employing an experimental design, the study reveals that customers construe time in abstract terms. Response time during service recovery is evaluated in combination with the compensation provided by the firm and criticality of the service experience. The extent to which the three factors -response time, compensation, and criticality -activate abstract construals, matters to customers. The study demonstrates that delaying the process of recovery can result in customer satisfaction, repatronage, and positive word of mouth, when an apology is provided and criticality of the service is low. Further, delay in service recovery is acceptable when negative emotions elicited by the failure are low. The findings provide empirical insights on the viability of delayed recovery following service failures in e-retailing, contravening the notion that delayed recovery is always inefficacious. The study advances a novel perspective on the role of response time in online service failure and recovery, and also accounts for how customers construe recovery efforts. Whilst establishing the prominence of construal levels in understanding customer responses to online service recovery, the study highlights new avenues for research and innovative managerial perspectives for e-retailers.

While research has shown that consumer anger causes a range of negative consequences, the conceptualization and measurement of this emotion remain inconsistent. Some studies link anger to consumer revenge motivated by a desire to hurt the company, while others associate anger with a desire to cooperate with the company. This inconsistency is caused by the fact that anger is a broad label used to refer to almost any brand failure. We argue that, rather than considering anger as a single construct, scholars should distinguish between a supportive facet of anger, which comprises feelings of annoyance, frustration and other mild negative feelings, and a vindictive facet of anger, which comprises feelings of intense anger, rage, and outrage. These two facets of anger reconcile divergent arguments presented in past research. Research benefits from moving beyond the generic label of anger to consider supportive and vindictive facets of anger that influence consumers' reactions under different circumstances. Only vindictive anger prompts consumers to take revenge and punish the company for unfair treatment. Supportive anger triggers instead a desire to solve the problem by cooperating with the company. This study presents important managerial implications for assessing and managing feelings of anger following brand failures.

Corporate co-branding, or brand alliances, is a popular strategy, regarded as beneficial to the allied brands. There are, however, caveats to this strategy due to crises concerning one of the partner brands. Employing an experiment, we investigate the impact of crisis types and response strategies, and the interactions, on corporate image of the culpable ally, the nonculpable partner, and the alliance. Results show that preventable crises, high in controllability and intentionality, are detrimental to the image of the culpable ally. Deny response is, nonetheless, effective for restoring corporate image, when compared with diminish or acknowledge/rebuild responses. We further demonstrate that the non-culpable partner suffers from crises only indirectly, due to negative post-crisis attitudes toward the alliance, which in turn influence intentions to purchase alliance offering. Our findings underscore the need for corporate brands to use co-branding with caution, carefully planning for crises, and judiciously considering the viability of response strategies.

Past research offers inconsistent evidence on whether CSR is an effective service recovery strategy. Current debates overlook the signals that service failures send about the company, and their interplay with CSR. We propose a moderated mediation model showing that CSR's effectiveness for service recovery depends upon failure type. For failures signaling a lack of skills and expertise, CSR enhances warmth which in turn lowers revenge. Warmth further increases perceived competence which influences conciliatory responses. CSR, however, does not help if the failure signals a lack of moral integrity. Both warmth and competence explain the CSR's buffering effect. Our study demonstrates that “doing good” helps only to the extent that service failures that do not raise doubts about the character of the company. Even in these circumstances, however, the buffering effect of CSR is observed only in case of customer–firm communal relationships. Consistent evidence from three experiments revisits more optimistic assessments of the ability of CSR to act as a recovery strategy and shows that CSR can help only under very circumscribed conditions. Managerially, we show how and when the CSR buffer applies in service contexts, offering insights on how managers can best reap the potential benefits of service brands' involvement in CSR.

Past research on recruitment has shown that employer image predicts job seekers' perceptions of organizational attractiveness. We contribute to this body of work by examining job seekers' reactions to a market-dominant employer that has suffered from a case of Corporate Social Irresponsibility (CSI). We show that job seekers' reaction is buffered in the case of dominant employers' wrongdoing. This effect is stronger for job seekers who are very interested in working in the dominant employers' industry. Market dominance, however, reduces the negative impact of CSI only under certain circumstances. We find that market dominance provides a buffer against the negative effect of CSI only when (1) CSI is directly relevant to the domain of performance of the organization and (2) job seekers feel very certain about their attitudes toward the organization. In two experiments with participants actively looking for employment at the time of study, we tested a model of moderated mediation examining how market dominance and CSI influence perceived employer ethicality and perceived employer competence. These two variables, in turn, explain how job seekers form perceptions of organizational attractiveness. This is the first study to explore how job seekers react to potential employers that are dominant in a market but have suffered from a CSI incident. The study identifies the boundary conditions that explain why sometimes market-dominant employers can emerge relatively unscathed in the eyes of job seekers following CSI. The research opens important managerial implications concerning the recruitment efforts of organizations that have suffered from CSI.