SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Pazarlama ve Pazarlama Araştırmaları Dergisi / 2020 / Cilt: 13 - Sayı: 3

A COMPARISON BETWEEN PRE AND POST-CRISIS CONSUMER RESPONSES: DOES REPUTATION REALLY ACT AS A SHIELD?

KRİZ ÖNCESİ VE SONRASI TÜKETİCİ TEPKİLERİNİN KARŞILAŞTIRILMASI: İTİBAR GERÇEKTEN BİR KALKAN GÖREVİ GÖRÜR MÜ?

Ayşe Gül BAYRAKTAROĞLU
Enis YAKUT
Pages
568–589
Publication Date
2022-10-19
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Theresults revealed that reputation might not act as a shield in every situation, and consumersmay consider other factors to see the goodwill of the company

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:A good corporate reputation is not only a critical intangible asset but is also stands out asa shield during crises.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In this 2X2 experimentalstudy, a comparative analysis of pre and post-crisis consumer reactions was conducted,where reputation and intentionality of the company were manipulated at two levels.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Theresults revealed that reputation might not act as a shield in every situation, and consumersmay consider other factors to see the goodwill of the company
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

A good corporate reputation is not only a critical intangible asset but is also stands out asa shield during crises. Humans have a natural tendency to question the underlying causesof events and real reasons behind the situations, and they also differentiate between intentional and unintentional actions. We would expect high reputation companies to engagein activities compatible with their reputation; however, this is not always the case as theymight partake in some incompatible actions. A crisis poses an example of such unfavorable actions that are likely to haunt high reputation companies. In this 2X2 experimentalstudy, a comparative analysis of pre and post-crisis consumer reactions was conducted,where reputation and intentionality of the company were manipulated at two levels. Theresults revealed that reputation might not act as a shield in every situation, and consumersmay consider other factors to see the goodwill of the company

Özet

İyi bir kurumsal itibara sahip olmak kritik bir varlık olarak kabul edilirken, bu maddi olmayan duran varlığın kriz durumlarında bir kalkan görevi görmesi beklenmektedir. İnsan doğası, olayların altında yatan nedenleri ve durumların arkasındaki gerçek sebepleri araştırmayı zorunlu kılar ve bununla birlikte insanların kasıtlı ve kasıtsız eylemler arasında ayrım yaptığı da bilinmektedir. Yüksek itibarlı firmaların itibarlarına uygun hareket etmeleri beklenirken, gerçekte yaşamları boyunca- bir krizin de bu tutarsızlıklardan biri olarak kabul edilebileceği- birçok tutarsız eylem içerisinde yer aldıkları görülebilir. Yapılan bu 2X2 deneysel çalışmada, kurumsal itibar ve kasıtlılık iki düzeyde manipüle edilmiş ve kriz öncesi - sonrası tüketici tepkilerinin karşılaştırmalı bir analizi yapılmıştır. Sonuçlar, itibarın her durumda firmalar için bir kalkan görevi görmeyeceğini ve tüketicilerin şirketin iyi niyetini görmek için diğer faktörleri göz önünde bulundurabileceğini ortaya koymuştur

🔖

Cite This Article

BAYRAKTAROĞLU, A. G., YAKUT, E. (2022). A COMPARISON BETWEEN PRE AND POST-CRISIS CONSUMER RESPONSES: DOES REPUTATION REALLY ACT AS A SHIELD?. Pazarlama ve Pazarlama Araştırmaları Dergisi, Cilt: 13 - Sayı: 3, 568–589. https://ajindex.com/articles/587885

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Arpan, L. M. and Roskos-Ewoldsen, D. R. (2005). Stealing thunder: Analysis of the effects of proactive disclosure of crisis information. Public Relations Review. 31(1): 425-433.
  2. Berman, B. and Swani, K. (2010). Managing product safety of imported Chinese goods. Business Horizons. 53: 39-48.
  3. Binz, C., Hair Jr, J. F., Pieper, T. M. and Baldauf, A. (2013). Exploring the effect of distinct family firm reputation on consumers’ preferences. Journal of Family Business Strategy. 4: 3-11.
  4. Brown, K. A., and White, C. L. (2010). Organization–public relationships and crisis response strategies: Impact on attribution of responsibility. Journal of Public Relations Research, 23(1): 75-92.
  5. Chang, H. H., Tsai, Y. C., Wong, K. H., Wang, J. W. and Cho, F. J. (2015). The effects of response strategies and severity of failure on consumer attribution with regard to negative word-of-mouth. Decision Support Systems, 71: 48-61.
  6. Choi, J. and Chung, W. (2013). Analysis of the Interactive Relationship between Apology and Product Involvement in Crisis Communication: An Experimental Study on the Toyota Recall Crisis. Journal of Business and Technical Communication. 27(1): 3-31.
  7. Claeys, A. S. and Cauberghe, V. (2012). Crisis response and crisis timing strategies, two sides of the same coin. Public Relations Review, 38(1): 83-88.
  8. Claeys, A.S., and Cauberghe, V. (2015). The role of a favorable pre-crisis reputation in protecting organizations during crises. Public Relations Review, 41, 64-71.
  9. Coombs, W. T. (1995). Choosing the right words the development of guidelines for the selection of the “appropriate” crisis-response strategies. Management Communication Quarterly. 8(4): 447- 476. Coombs, W. T. (2007). Protecting Organization Reputations During a Crisis: The Development and Application of Situational Crisis Communication Theory. Corporate Reputation Review, 10(3): 163–176.
  10. Coombs, W. T. and Holladay, S. J. (2010). The Handbook of Crisis Communication (22nd Ed.). West Sussex, UK: Blackwell Publishing. Dawar, N. and Pillutla, M. M. (2000). Impact of Product-Harm Crises on Brand Equity: The Moderating Role of Consumer Expectations. Journal of Marketing Research. 37(2): 215-226.
  11. Dean, D. H. (2004). Consumer Reaction to Negative Publicity: Effects of corporate reputation, response, and responsibility for a crisis event. The Journal of Business Communication. 41(2): 192-211.
  12. Deci, E. L., and Ryan, R. M. (1987). The support of autonomy and the control of behavior. Journal of personality and