Misery Loves Company: The Spread of Negative Impacts Resulting from an Organizational Crisis

Yu, Tieying; Sengul, Metin; Lester, Richard H.

doi:10.5465/amr.2008.31193499

Cited by 203 publications

(178 citation statements)

References 111 publications

(161 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

170

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The nuclear industry has also been associated with unprecedented environmental and social destruction (Janofsky, 2005) as a result of military nuclear testing, radiation spills from accidental reactor failures and the disposal of nuclear waste (Clemens & Papadakis, 2008). Moreover, stigmatized firms' externalities may occasionally spark industry crises, transgressing the organizational boundaries of the entities involved and aggravating negative public perceptions of the industry as a whole (Durand & Vergne, 2014;Yu, Sengul, & Lester, 2008). Thus, "sin" firms permanently live with what has been termed a "negative headline risk" and remain constantly under the social microscope of value judgments (Fabozzi, Ma, & Oliphant, 2008, p. 86).…”

Section: Prior Literature and Hypotheses Developmentmentioning

confidence: 98%

Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting and Organizational Stigma: The Case of “Sin” Industries

Grougiou

Dedoulis

Leventis

2016

Journal of Business Research

205

141

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Prior Literature and Hypotheses Developmentmentioning

confidence: 98%

Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting and Organizational Stigma: The Case of “Sin” Industries

Grougiou

Dedoulis

Leventis

2016

Journal of Business Research

205

141

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Culture clash potential is defined as the extent to which organizational cultures are expected to be different, as assessed and predicted by external institutional intermediaries, such as the popular press and financial analysts (Stahl & Voigt, 2008;Yu, Sengul, & Lester, 2008). This conceptualization of culture clash potential can take into account the idiosyncratic nature of each deal, while avoiding the complexity of the concept of culture in M&As (Teerikangas & Very, 2006).…”

Section: Culture Clash Potentialmentioning

confidence: 99%

Peer interaction in mergers: Evidence of collective rumination

Marmenout¹

2011

Human Resource Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Following abundant anecdotal evidence of low morale in mergers and its important detrimental effect on postmerger performance, the purpose of this multimethod experimental study was to fi nd out how employee reactions to a merger evolve over time following peer interaction (i.e., discussion with colleagues). Using a scenario study, initial reactions to a merger announcement were compared with socially infl uenced reactions. As anticipated, an overall strong detrimental effect of peer interaction on employee reactions was observed. Next, fi ndings indicate that deal characteristics (culture clash potential, announced degree of integration, and position in deal structure) play a moderating role. Indeed, how peer interaction affects outcomes depends on the position in the deal structure. Qualitative data analysis of the group discussions sheds light on how employee reactions become more detrimental. This process is conceptualized as "collective rumination, " defi ned as repetitively and passively discussing organizational problems and their negative consequences with a group of peers. The study concludes with implications for practice and identifi es three powerful levers (active involvement, distraction, and positive leadership) to infl uence the way in which employees react to the event.

show abstract

“…Corporations regularly face a myriad of potential crises, which are low-probability and high-risk events (Yu et al, 2008). Crisis is not a matter of “if” but “when” in corporate life.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Forgiveness from Emotion Fit: Emotional Frame, Consumer Emotion, and Feeling-Right in Consumer Decision to Forgive

Ran

Wei

2016

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Three studies examine an emotion fit effect in the crisis communication, namely, the interaction between emotional frames of guilt and shame and consumer emotions of anger and fear on consumer forgiveness. Guilt-framing communication results in higher forgiveness than shame-framing for angry consumers, whereas shame-framing communication results in higher forgiveness than guilt-framing for fearful consumers. These effects are driven by consumers' accessible regulatory foci associated with anger/fear and guilt/shame. Specifically, feelings of anger activate a promotion focus that is represented by guilt frames, while feelings of fear activate a prevention focus that is enacted by shame frames. Compared with emotion non-fit (i.e., anger to shame and fear to guilt), emotion fit (i.e., anger to guilt and fear to shame) facilitates greater feelingright and consumer forgiveness. The findings offer novel insights for extant literature on emotion, crisis communication, and regulatory focus theory, as well as practical suggestions regarding the emotional frames.

show abstract

Misery Loves Company: The Spread of Negative Impacts Resulting from an Organizational Crisis

Cited by 203 publications

References 111 publications

Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting and Organizational Stigma: The Case of “Sin” Industries

Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting and Organizational Stigma: The Case of “Sin” Industries

Peer interaction in mergers: Evidence of collective rumination

Forgiveness from Emotion Fit: Emotional Frame, Consumer Emotion, and Feeling-Right in Consumer Decision to Forgive

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About