Are All Crises Opportunities? A Comparison of How Corporate and Government Organizations Responded to the 2009 Flu Pandemic

Kim, Sora; Liu, Brooke Fisher

doi:10.1080/1062726x.2012.626136

Cited by 121 publications

(111 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

103

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Despite the prevalent emphasis on reputation management crisis-response strategies in corporate crisis communication Kim & Liu, 2012), our study found that employing reputation management strategies was no better than using only the base crisis-response strategy in generating better responses from publics during crises. In fact, the base crisis-response strategy was significantly more effective in lowering the public's blame level than either denial reputation-management strategy or rebuilding strategy, especially in a victim crisis type.…”

Section: Relative Effectiveness Of Base Crisis Response Strategycontrasting

confidence: 67%

“…Although the base crisis response strategies are required for all crises, because they meet organizations' fundamental ethical responsibilities for crisis responses, research found lack of emphasis on the base crisis response strategies in organizations' crisis communication Kim & Liu, 2012). Kim et al (2011) found that reputation repair was the primary goal of the crisis responses for the organizations included in their research, but public safety or public health was neglected in the organizational responses.…”

Section: Situational Crisis Communication Theory and Crisis Responsesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…192-193). In addition, Kim and Liu (2012) exploring both government and profit organizations' crisis responses during H1N1 crisis in 2009 suggested that profit organizations focused more on reputation management crisis responses, neglecting instructing and adjusting information, whereas government organizations emphasized providing instructing=adjusting information more. They argued that corporations may be damaging their long-term reputations by predominantly focusing on reputation management.…”

Section: Situational Crisis Communication Theory and Crisis Responsesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…254-255). As to handling H1N1 flu crisis, a recent study suggests that corporations such as pork producers, airlines, and pharmaceutical companies predominantly focused on reputation repair over public safety or public health in their responses (Kim & Liu, 2012). A majority of crisis communication research has also focused either on content analyzing reputation management crisis-response strategies employed by organizations in crises (Benoit, 1997(Benoit, , 2006 or testing the effectiveness of reputation management crisisresponse strategies (K. A.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Revisiting the Effectiveness of Base Crisis Response Strategies in Comparison of Reputation Management Crisis Responses

Kim

Sung

2013

Journal of Public Relations Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This experimental study found that employing reputation management crisis-response strategies was no better than adopting only the base crisis-response strategy (i.e., instructing and adjusting information) in terms of generating positive responses from the public. Two-sided messages (i.e., sharing both positive and negative information) in crisis communication were found to be more effective than one-sided messages in a victim crisis. In addition, even in a preventable crisis, one-sided messages (i.e., sharing only positive information) were not more effective than two-sided messages. Finally, the study found little support for Situational Crisis Communication Theory (SCCT)'s recommendations for the best crisis response strategy selections.No organizations are free from crises. A company's reputation can be destroyed in seconds by a single incident. Mishandled and sluggish corporate crisis responses often allow a single trigger event to result in a full-blown crisis, tarnishing a sterling reputation built by stellar performance and hard work. For instance, Toyota had enjoyed a positive reputation before the recall crisis in 2010. Toyota spent decades working to earn the respect of US customers through quality control and continuous improvement of its products (Goodman, 2010). However, the company confronted the biggest reputational implosion in its history after the crisis, despite its enormous reputation-repair efforts. Due to the tremendous reputational threat associated with a crisis, corporations tend to emphasize reputation repair as a main goal for their crisis responses (Kim, Avery, & Lariscy, 2011), often resulting in negligence in providing base crisis responses (i.e., instructing and adjusting information). This predominant emphasis on reputation management also drives the crisis communication of organizations reluctant to share negative information about themselves. This is why the most common reputation management strategies adopted by organizations in crises are denial (i.e., denying any responsibility for the crisis) and bolstering (i.e., emphasizing the company's previous good deeds) strategies (Kim, Avery, & Lariscy, 2009).

show abstract

Section: Relative Effectiveness Of Base Crisis Response Strategycontrasting

confidence: 67%

Section: Situational Crisis Communication Theory and Crisis Responsesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Situational Crisis Communication Theory and Crisis Responsesmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Revisiting the Effectiveness of Base Crisis Response Strategies in Comparison of Reputation Management Crisis Responses

Kim

Sung

2013

Journal of Public Relations Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Other functions and activities that should be considered for the study and practice of government communication can be found in areas such as issue management (Heath, 2006;Heath & Waymer, 2011), public diplomacy (Signitzer & Wamser, 2006;Molleda, 2011), public affairs (Harris & Fleisher, 2005;McGrath, Moss & Harris, 2010) and its relation with government communication (Harris, 2007) and crisis communication (Coombs & Holladay, 2010;Coombs, 2011;Kim & Liu, 2012).…”

Section: From Tactical To Managerial Levelmentioning

confidence: 99%