From saving face to saving lies : prioritizing the public in public relations
Abstract
Traditional crisis communication literature emphasizes how organizations can use communication to preserve their image after a negative event. From image restoration theory to the situational crisis communication theory, these frameworks aim to shift the blame attributed to an organization to reduce negative impacts on reputation. The purpose of this study is to reevaluate the focus on reputation management and probe a crisis communication framework that addresses a crisis as an opportunity to address vulnerabilities. A between-subjects experimental design study compared the effects of the BCO framework (i.e., Base Response, Corrective Action, Organizational Learning) and reputation management strategies on anger, moral outrage, organizational reputation, social amplification, and the mediating effect of organizational learning. The results yielded from comparisons reveal how the BCO response may generate less anger and moral outrage, may result in higher perceptions of organizational reputation, and lower rates of negative social amplification than reputation responses. In some circumstances, organizational learning was found to mediate the effects of the strategies on reputation. This empirical investigation offers a promising direction for an ethical approach to crisis communication that prioritizes protecting the public.
Degree
Ph. D.