Crafting a Damage Control Plan: Lessons from Perrier

Kurzbard, Gary; Siomkos, George J.

doi:10.1108/eb039480

Cited by 10 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…1 Most instances of firm response, however, can be placed between these two extremes. For example, as the Perrier product-harm crisis unfolded, the New York and Paris offices were issuing inconsistent statements as to the cause of the benzene contamination and the remedial measures undertaken, which led to the perception of an ambivalent and confused corporate response (Kurzbard and Siomkos 1992).…”

Section: Firm Responsementioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of Product-Harm Crises on Brand Equity: The Moderating Role of Consumer Expectations

Dawar

Pillutla

2000

Journal of Marketing Research

769

716

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Firm Responsementioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of Product-Harm Crises on Brand Equity: The Moderating Role of Consumer Expectations

Dawar

Pillutla

2000

Journal of Marketing Research

769

716

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the Perrier case, the management of communications broke down so that conflicting messages regarding the company's efforts to handle the crisis confused the public and the rest of the company stakeholders, and resulted in unintentional damage to its reputation. Perrier was not ready to deal with a crisis; the company did not have a formal procedural way to handle crises, like a Crisis Management Team (CMT) (Kurzbard and Siomkos, 1992).…”

Section: Examples Of Industrial Crisesmentioning

confidence: 99%

On achieving exoneration after a product safety industrial crisis

Siomkos

1999

Journal of Business &Amp; Industrial Marketing

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Deals with the management of industrial crises, low-probability, high-impact events which typically affect companies involved in them, negatively. Specifically examines the role of three important factors, i.e. company's reputation, the organizational response that it selects to adopt in order to deal with the crisis, and external effects that are faced during a product safety crisis. Emphasis is placed on determining the effects of an industrial crisis (caused by a harmful product) on the consumers' attributions of company responsibility. It is shown that high reputation companies have generally an easier time dealing with industrial crises. In addition, companies faced with positive external effects and having voluntarily recalled the defects, are held the least responsible for the harm by consumers. Managerial implications are presented for high and low reputation companies involved in product safety crises, with emphasis placed on crisis prevention rather than mere reaction to it.

show abstract

“…Along this avenue, a limited volume of research attempting to reveal the effects of product-harm crisis has been conducted. A preponderance of previous research has examined its effects on brand equity in quantitative terms, observing how factors such as consumer anticipations and firm response affect consumers' re-evaluation of brand equity in the crisis aftermath (Kurzbard and Siomkos, 1992;Dawar and Pillutla, 2000;Dawar and Lei, 2009;Carroll, 2009;Grunwald and Hempelmann, 2011;Lei et al, 2012). These research findings, together, have provided insights from a managerial perspective on how to best understand and manage consumer responses to corporate crises to protect firms' brand equity from negative implications.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

When a brand caught fire: the role of brand equity in product-harm crisis

Rea

Wang

Stoner

2014

Journal of Product &Amp; Brand Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose – The purpose of this study is to investigate differences in consumer reactions to high- versus low-equity brands in terms of consumer attitude toward the brand, involvement with the brand, company credibility and consumer purchase intentions. Design/methodology/approach – Experimental procedure is conducted to test three hypotheses using 317 consumer participants. The experiment is carried out comparing a high-equity personal computer (PC) brand and a low-equity PC brand involved in product-harm crisis. Findings – The results indicate that, in the case of product-harm crisis, negative consumer perceptions regardless of brand equity level; less negative perceptions for a high-equity brand than for a low-equity brand; and smaller loss in consumer perceptions for a high-equity brand than for a low-equity brand. Research limitations/implications – The findings highlight the importance of brand equity in crisis management explained by covariation theory of attributions. Practical implications – Although product-harm crisis is inevitable for many firms, continuous investment in brand equity can mitigate the negative consequences. Originality/value – Product-harm crisis can pose serious consequences for firms on both financial and intangible dimensions. Given the occurrence of numerous product-harm crises involving both reputable and less known brands, it is important to consider potential influences of brand equity on consumer reactions to such crisis.

show abstract

Crafting a Damage Control Plan: Lessons from Perrier

Cited by 10 publications

References 0 publications

Impact of Product-Harm Crises on Brand Equity: The Moderating Role of Consumer Expectations

Impact of Product-Harm Crises on Brand Equity: The Moderating Role of Consumer Expectations

On achieving exoneration after a product safety industrial crisis

When a brand caught fire: the role of brand equity in product-harm crisis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About