A state of emergency in crisis communication: An intercultural crisis communication research agenda

This article seeks to provide an evidence-based set of recommendations for the development of an intercultural crisis communication research agenda with three goals. First, to provide an advancement in our understanding of the state of crisis communication research in general. Second, to offer a grounded introduction to crisis communication for intercultural scholars who may not be as familiar with the field. Finally to identify three broad evidence-based areas for developing intercultural crisis communication research -- (1) representing different cultural perspectives in crisis communication research, (2) placing American crisis research in a global context, and (3) developing cross-cultural comparisons

Socially responsible joint venture, brand misconduct and recovery communication: Implications for relationship quality

There is little doubt that in the past several decades, an increasing number of organisations are seeking out strategic alliances, joint ventures, and an increasing number of corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives in order to gain competitive advantage and enable the organisations to achieve objectives that would not have been possible without the alliance (Das & Teng, 2000; Lacey, Kennett-Hensel, & Manolis, 2014; Nowell & Harrison, 2011; Tjemkes & Furrer, 2010). Increasingly corporations and non-profit organisations or charities are using those relationships and joint projects as critical institutional positioning for achieving mutual goals (Shumate & O'Connor, 2010). These organisations are building ‘ethical brand identifications’ based on the collaborative work they are doing. In fact, as a result of the 2008 economic crash, many companies have increasingly pursued and developed structured ethics programs because those companies engaging in socially responsible activities can gain strength, power, and importance in the global marketplace (Kreng & May-Yao, 2011 945; Uccello, 2009). These CSR initiatives meant to demonstrate a system that values a culture of ethics and support, fulfilling missions, and acting as models for society (Kreng & May-Yao, 2011). Yet despite growing amounts of research analysing relationship quality, corporate social responsibility, crisis communication, and brand misconduct, little research has analysed differences among types of misconduct – for example a transgression where the organisation has broken the law or a transgression where the behaviours are ethically questionable – the relative impact of brand misconduct on corporate and charitable partners in joint venture, nor the effects that response strategies may play in managing the relationships between consumers and these ‘irresponsible’ organisations. In the following section, we describe the literature on CSR joint initiatives and brand misconduct before introducing the relationship marketing dialogue. We then highlight areas of conceptual overlap between relationship marketing, brand misconduct, and crisis response

Killer Coca-Cola vs Pouring on the pounds: Comparing the brand damage potential between negative health messaging and counterbranding strategies

Forget the war on drugs and the fight against tobacco. American public health advocates have a new foe – the soda and beverage industry. Why are sights set on soda consumption? Americans consume a massive amount of high-sugar/fructose corn syrup drinks each year. In fact, half of the U.S. population consumes more than one 12 ounce can of soda each day with some estimates as high as 2.6 glasses consumed each day (Anonymous, 2012a; Ogden, Kit, Carroll, & Park, 2011). Soda consumption is regularly linked with a litany of negative health effects including obesity, type 2 Diabetes, fatty liver disease, insulin resistance, cardiovascular problems, increased risk of stroke, malnutrition, and even cancer (Anonymous, 2012a; Jampolis, 2012; MacVean, 2012). Though the soda industry has agreed to place nutrition information on soda machines (Anonymous, 2012c) and while soda consumption fell by 1% in 2011 (though the price rose by 3% in the same year) (Geller, 2012), the reality is that Americans know it is bad for them yet that knowledge does not quench their thirst (Anonymous, 2012a). A coordinated multi-faceted approach is exactly what organizations like the American Medical Association argue (MacVean, 2012) are necessary if we are to positively affect growing obesity rates in the United States as well as those emerging in many countries around the world (Al-Rethaiaa, Fahmy, & Al-Shwaiyat, 2010; Borgmeier & Westenhofer, 2009; Lawrence et al., 2007). As a result, in recent years arguments for using counterbranding approaches in health campaigns have been growing – lead by research on anti-smoking campaigns – with research demonstrating that negative advertising (i.e., attacks on organizations or industries plus attacks on the behavior) is an effective public health tool in order to promote behavioral change (Apollonio & Malone, 2009; Eisenberg, Ringwalt, Driscoll, Vallee, & Gullette, 2004; Evans, Price, & Blahut, 2005; Farrelly, Davis, Haviland, Messeri, & Healton, 2005; Pralea, 2011; Terblanche-Smit & Terblanch, 2011). In short, a central question emerging among many health advocates is whether manufacturing a crisis for an organization or industry can help to change consumer behaviors. Thus the present study compares the effectiveness of two different approaches – a traditional health belief approach with an emergent counterbranding approach

Through the looking glass: The factors that influence consumer trust and distrust in brands

This paper aims to identify the factors responsible for creating brand trust and brand distrust among consumers. It uses a grounded theory approach to guide the conduct and analysis of 20 semi-structured interviews that yielded 120 descriptions of consumer-brand interactions. The 3 stage model that emerged shows a process whereby consumers prioritize product/service quality information and subsequently consider how the company behind the brand behaves towards consumers in the name of the brand, specifically behaviors signalling its integrity and benevolence. Finally, consumers consider characteristics of the company behind the brand (e.g. its financial status) and how it behaves in its own name towards other stakeholder groups (e.g. employees). The process for distrust mirrors that for trust, implying the two are polar opposites. The data also show that trust and distrust in a brand can co-exist but within separate domains

Whose crisis is it anyway? Examining complexity in blame attribution and reputational risk in the airline industry.

The airline industry has long been identified as crisis prone (Gonzales-Herrero & Pratt, 1996). Yet in recent years, the industry has faced an increasingly difficult task in managing issues, not least of all because of the complex international audiences and situations facing it. The complexity surrounding catastrophic events is not limited to the different global audiences to whom the airline might be speaking but also the level of coordination required to respond as was demonstrated by the March 2015 crash of the Germanwings flight in France where the world heard from the leaders of France, Spain, and Germany along with the Spanish King all before hearing from the company itself. In a 2x2 experimental design, approximately 200 respondents from each of the following countries – Bulgaria, Nigeria, Oman, Singapore, Hong Kong, and the US – were exposed to a news article customised to their region reporting on either a health or safety crisis with either an accommodative or defensive response from the airline

Testing times: Communicating the role and uncertainty of analytical procedures in a food safety crisis

Abstract When people get sick from eating contaminated food, producers, regulators, and consumers confront a food safety crisis. Scientific testing is central both to determining the nature of the contamination, assessing its seriousness, and evaluating future supplies for their safety. This paper examines a case where testing was involved in both the triggering and the resolution of the largest food safety scare ever to hit New Zealand. The 2013 incident involved the country’s largest dairy exporter, Fonterra, and the putative presence of clostridium botulinum in whey protein sold to business customers who used it in infant formula and other consumer goods. The case highlights the need for food producers to develop narratives around testing for inclusion in their stakeholder-related crisis planning. Such narratives must be compatible with the goals of the audience especially consumers, who wish for certainty and to see decisive action being taken. Practical Applications Communicators dealing with food safety-based risks and crises need to take into account lay publics’ biases towards assurances of zero risk. This should be part of determining audiences’ information needs and calibrating provision of scientific information, including information about necessary testing, in ways that meet these needs. Doing so will help build trust, including about the scientific method and the organisations applying it to determine not only the nature of a given risk but also to assess how best it might be mitigated. While distrust might surface in a risk-based crisis, communicators should focus on messaging that addresses uncertainty through providing consistent and credible information

Norsk Tipping’s loneliest stakeholder: Crisis, issues, and the stakeholder voice

In the last six decades, there has been a growing and diverse body of research on crises; however, the voice that is often forgotten in this body of research is that of the whistleblower. In part, this can be attributed to the primary focus of crisis communication research has focused on the organizational perspective – that is how an organization can best respond to a crisis in order to manage stakeholder perceptions of the crisis as well as the organization. However, in the Norsk Tipping case, we have the opportunity to explore whistleblowing as a crisis from the whistleblower’s perspective. This rarely explored perspective affords us the opportunity to better understand the complexities of organizational politics, conflicts between personal and professional values, and challenges us to ask what it really means to be socially responsible in a modern organizational environment. The chapter uses the stakeholder relationship management model to explore the interactions between the whistleblower, organizations, and the issues connected to the crisis. Through this exploration, we discover that an organization’s well-being is based on its ability to manage many voices, interests, and its obligations

Sports, Culture, and Financial Crisis: A cross-cultural comparison of the social media responses of struggling sports associations in the United States and the United Kingdom

The present study provides a case comparison of crisis response strategies employed by sports organizations in the United States and the United Kingdom. In both crisis response and the broader body of corporate communications, cross-cultural comparisons of communication strategies are uncommon. Our findings have four significant implications: (1) they identify a statistically significant basis for the argument that communication strategy must be considered within a national culture context; (2) establish a comparative analysis of American and British approaches to economic crisis response; (3) provide a means to evaluate and identify other culturally-bound approaches to communications strategy; and (4) demonstrate the benefits of examining culture and crises using sports organizations