All Academic, Inc. Research Logo

Info/CitationFAQResearchAll Academic Inc.

Revisiting the effectiveness of base crisis response strategies in comparison of reputation management crisis responses
Unformatted Document Text:  Revisiting the effectiveness of base crisis response strategies 14 responsibility was the highest when the base response strategy was used alone (M = 6.5, SD = .8), whereas it was the lowest when the combination of base and denial strategies (M = 5.7, SD = 1.0) was used (see Table 2 for other strategies). The LSD post-hoc tests revealed that in the preventable crisis type, the combination of base and denial response strategies was significantly more effective than the combination of the base and rebuilding strategies in lowering attribution of crisis responsibility levels (p < .01). In addition, when the combination of base and denial strategies was used, participants blamed the company significantly less than when the base strategy was employed alone (p < .005). In sum, different from our hypothesis, the combination of the base and rebuilding strategies was not effective in lowering the attribution of crisis responsibility in a preventable crisis. Therefore, H1b was not supported. -------------------------------------- Insert Table 2 about here ---------------------------------------- H2a proposing that for a victim crisis type, employing the combination of base and denial combination strategy will be more effective than other strategies in generating positive responses from the public was not supported. There were no significant differences across the five crisis response strategy conditions (Wilks‟ Λ F (4, 115) = 1.48, p =.11, η p 2 =.05). As seen in Table 1, when the base strategy was used alone, participants evaluated the company the most favorably. However, differences across the five response strategies were not significant in affecting the participants‟ CE (F (4, 115) = .49, p = .74, η p 2 =.02), PE (F (4, 115) = .18, p = .95, η p 2 =.006), supportive BI (F (4, 115) = 1.1, p = .34, η p 2 =.04), and PI (F (4, 115) = .68, p = .61, η p 2 =.02). Although the combination of base and denial reputation management crisis response strategy

Authors: Kim, Sora. and Sung, Kang Hoon.
first   previous   Page 16 of 31   next   last

background image
Revisiting the effectiveness of base crisis response strategies 
responsibility was the highest when the base response strategy was used alone (M = 6.5, SD = .8), 
whereas it was the lowest when the combination of base and denial strategies (= 5.7, SD = 1.0) 
was used (see Table 2 for other strategies). The LSD post-hoc tests revealed that in the 
preventable crisis type, the combination of base and denial response strategies was significantly 
more effective than the combination of the base and rebuilding strategies in lowering attribution 
of crisis responsibility levels (p < .01). In addition, when the combination of base and denial 
strategies was used, participants blamed the company significantly less than when the base 
strategy was employed alone (< .005). In sum, different from our hypothesis, the combination 
of the base and rebuilding strategies was not effective in lowering the attribution of crisis 
responsibility in a preventable crisis. Therefore, H1b was not supported. 
Insert Table 2 about here 
H2a proposing that for a victim crisis type, employing the combination of base and denial 
combination strategy will be more effective than other strategies in generating positive responses 
from the public was not supported. There were no significant differences across the five crisis 
response strategy conditions (Wilks‟ Λ (4, 115) = 1.48, =.11, η
 =.05). As seen in Table 1, 
when the base strategy was used alone, participants evaluated the company the most favorably. 
However, differences across the five response strategies were not significant in affecting the 
participants‟ CE ((4, 115) = .49, p = .74, η
 =.02), PE (F (4, 115) = .18, = .95, η
supportive BI (F (4, 115) = 1.1, p = .34, η
 =.04), and PI (F (4, 115) = .68, p = .61, η
Although the combination of base and denial reputation management crisis response strategy 

All Academic Convention can solve the abstract management needs for any association's annual meeting.
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 16 of 31   next   last

©2012 All Academic, Inc.