All Academic, Inc. Research Logo

Info/CitationFAQResearchAll Academic Inc.

Relative effectiveness of prior corporate ability vs. corporate social responsibility associations on public responses in corporate crises
Unformatted Document Text:  Relative effectiveness of prior CAb vs. CSR in crises 8 crisis also results in more negative evaluations of the organization (Coombs & Holladay, 1996). Finally, stability is whether the cause of this crisis is stable and constant or subject to change. The more stable the public perceives the cause of the crisis, the more negative evaluations of the organization. Folkes (1984) found that consumers’ reactions to a product failure crisis were related to these three causal dimensions. Jorgensen (1994) also demonstrated that consumers’ attributions of the cause of a serious airline crash affected their evaluations of the company. Clearly the more publics judge the cause of the crisis as internal, stable, and controllable, the higher attributions of crisis responsibility they place on the organization (Coombs, 2007; Folkes, 1984; Jorgensen, 1994). The public’s attributions of crisis responsibility also vary depending on crisis types according to SCCT. Coombs (2007) classified crisis types into victim, accident, and preventable clusters by attribution levels of crisis responsibility. The victim crisis type has minimal crisis responsibility attributed by the public and includes natural disasters, rumors, workplace violence, and malevolence/product tampering. The accident type has low attribution of crisis responsibility for the organization such as challenges, technical-error accidents, and technical-error product harm. Lastly, the preventable crisis cluster produces strong attribution of crisis responsibility for the organization. Examples of the preventable crisis type include human-error accidents, human- error product harm, and organizational misdeeds. A majority of previous crisis research has agreed that good prior relationships and reputation with different publics could mitigate the organization’s reputational damage during a crisis (e.g., Brown & White, 2011; Coombs, 2007; Coombs & Holiday, 2001). For example, Brown and White (2010) found that publics having positive relationships with the organization

Authors: Kim, Sora.
first   previous   Page 8 of 31   next   last

background image
 Relative effectiveness of prior CAb vs. CSR in crises 
crisis also results in more negative evaluations of the organization (Coombs & Holladay, 
1996).  Finally, stability is whether the cause of this crisis is stable and constant or subject to 
change. The more stable the public perceives the cause of the crisis, the more negative 
evaluations of the organization. Folkes (1984) found that consumers’ reactions to a product 
failure crisis were related to these three causal dimensions. Jorgensen (1994) also demonstrated 
that consumers’ attributions of the cause of a serious airline crash affected their evaluations of 
the company. Clearly the more publics judge the cause of the crisis as internal, stable, and 
controllable, the higher attributions of crisis responsibility they place on the organization 
(Coombs, 2007; Folkes, 1984; Jorgensen, 1994).  
The public’s attributions of crisis responsibility also vary depending on crisis types 
according to SCCT. Coombs (2007) classified crisis types into victim, accident, and preventable 
clusters by attribution levels of crisis responsibility. The victim crisis type has minimal crisis 
responsibility attributed by the public and includes natural disasters, rumors, workplace violence, 
and malevolence/product tampering. The accident type has low attribution of crisis responsibility 
for the organization such as challenges, technical-error accidents, and technical-error product 
harm. Lastly, the preventable crisis cluster produces strong attribution of crisis responsibility for 
the organization. Examples of the preventable crisis type include human-error accidents, human-
error product harm, and organizational misdeeds.  
A majority of previous crisis research has agreed that good prior relationships and 
reputation with different publics could mitigate the organization’s reputational damage during a 
crisis (e.g., Brown & White, 2011; Coombs, 2007; Coombs & Holiday, 2001). For example, 
Brown and White (2010) found that publics having positive relationships with the organization 

Submission, Review, and Scheduling! All Academic Convention can help with all of your abstract management needs and many more. Contact us today for a quote!
Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf.
Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets!
Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more!
Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering.
Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more!
Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches!
Click here for more information.

first   previous   Page 8 of 31   next   last

©2012 All Academic, Inc.