A Research on the Role of Crisis Response Strategies on Corporate Reputation within the Frame of Situational Crisis Communication Theory
Özlem Duğan, Barış KoçIn this study, the role of crisis response strategy, which is among the basic assumptions of situational crisis communication theory, is analysed in terms of the level of responsibility attributed to the corporation and the perception of corporate reputation. The research was conducted through a scenario with 325 participating students. Firstly, the corporate reputation perception of the participating students regarding Uşak University was measured. After the crisis based on the scenario, it was assumed that Uşak University issued 2 separate press releases to the public. In the first press release, “acceptance, apology and compensation” strategies were used, while in the second, “blaming someone else, scapegoating, and not accepting responsibility” strategies were used. Students read the first release. They agreed on 12 statements of the scale which includes 13 statements in total. It was seen that average attendance level increased. In this context, it was determined that the university accepted the responsibility for the crisis. Its implementing various rebuild actions and apologizing contributed to the corporate reputation in a positive sense. It was found that the university’s blaming the food company, not accepting responsibility for the crisis, making the release late, not using any rebuild and compensatory elements caused the decline of reputation perception of the institution. Similarly, using statements containing elements of “compensating and rebuilding activities” in the first press release revealed the fact that the institution was noticed much more quickly in public than other components.
Durumsal Kriz İletişimi Teorisi Çerçevesinde Kriz Tepki Stratejilerinin Kurumsal İtibar Üzerindeki Rolü Üzerine Bir Araştırma
Özlem Duğan, Barış KoçBu çalışmada durumsal kriz iletişimi teorisinin temel varsayımlarından kriz tepki stratejilerinin kuruma atfedilen sorumluluk düzeyinde ve kurumsal itibar algısındaki rolü analiz edilmektedir. Araştırma 325 katılımcı öğrenci ile bir senaryo üzerinden gerçekleştirilmiştir. Öncelikle katılımcı öğrencilerin Uşak Üniversitesi hakkındaki kurumsal itibar algıları ölçülmüştür. Ardından senaryo üzerinde gerçekleşen kriz sonrasında Uşak Üniversitesi’nin kamuoyuna 2 ayrı basın bülteni yayınladığı varsayılmıştır. Birinci basın bülteninde “kabullenme, özür dileme ve tazmin etme” stratejileri kullanılırken, ikincisinde ise, “suçu başkasına atma, günah keçisi, sorumluluğu kabul etmeme” stratejileri kullanılmıştır. Birinci basın bültenini okuyan öğrencilerin ölçekteki toplam 13 ifadeden 12’sine katılım ortalamasının yükseldiği görülmüştür. Bu bağlamda Üniversitenin krize konu olan olayın sorumluluğunu kabul ederek, çeşitli destekleme eylemlerini hayata geçirmesi ve dolaylı da olsa özür dilemesinin kurum itibarına olumlu anlamda katkı sağladığı tespit edilmiştir. İkinci basın bültenini okuyan öğrencilerin itibar ölçeği ifadelerinin tümüne (13 ifade) katılım oranlarının düştüğü belirlenmiştir. Üniversitenin krize konu olan olayın sorumluluğunu kabul etmeyerek yemek firmasını suçlamasının, açıklamayı geç yapmasının, destekleyici ve tazmin edici hiçbir unsuru kullanmamasının, kurum itibar algısının düşmesine neden olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Aynı şekilde birinci basın bülteninde “tazmin edici ve destekleyici faaliyetler” unsurlarını içeren ifadelerin kullanılmasının kurumun kamusu nezdinde diğer bileşenlere göre çok daha çabuk fark edildiği ortaya çıkmıştır.
In order to survive, institutions must struggle with crises and find solutions to problems in a short time in times of crisis. It is known that institutions that produce solutions to their problems before the crisis by adopting a proactive approach in the pre-crisis period overcome the crisis with less damage, while institutions that adopt a reactive approach and intervene in the crisis after the crisis occurs are much more negatively affected by it. Institutions’ intervention in a crisis at the right time plays an important role in overcoming the crisis with little damage. In order to manage the crisis correctly and quickly, crisis response strategies must be well known and implemented by the institution. In this context, it becomes important how the institution will communicate with its target audience and when it will inform its stakeholders on what issues. Several theories have been developed on how communication should be best used in crisis situations. One of these theories is the theory of situational crisis communication. Situational crisis communication theory examines the effects of crisis response strategies on the level of responsibility and organizational reputation perception attributed to the organization in relation to the crisis. According to the theory, the target audience’s opinion on the reputation of the institution is shaped in accordance with the history and vision of the organization. The target audience evaluates the organization’s ability to manage the crisis in the event of a crisis within the framework of the organization’s history, crisis response strategy and crisis type. In other words, the target audience, which had a positive perception of the organization in the past, may have a more positive perception of the institution during the crisis. But the opposite is also possible.
The aim of the study is to analyse the role of crisis response strategy, which is among the basic assumptions of situational crisis communication theory, in terms of the level of responsibility attributed to the corporate and the perception of corporate reputation. It was aimed to explain how university authorities use crisis response strategies during a crisis and how students perceive the approach of the university to the crisis within the scope of the study. The research was conducted through a crisis scenario with 325 participants. After the crisis based on the scenario, it was assumed that Uşak University issued 2 separate press releases to the public. In the first of these, a survey which included “acceptance, apology and compensation” elements as part of the coping strategy, was given to 45.8% of respondents (n=149). In the second, a survey published after the same incident, this time with a press release that used the elements “blaming someone else, scapegoating, not accepting responsibility” as part of the denial response strategy, was given to 54.2% (n=176). The corporate reputation was measured in two ways, before crisis and after crisis. It was seen that average attendance level of the students in the first release increased. In this context, it was determined that when the university accepted responsibility for the incident that was the subject of the crisis and implemented various rebuild actions and apologized, albeit indirectly, in a positive sense, this contributed to the reputation of the institution. It was observed that the institution’s implementation of various rebuild actions by accepting responsibility for the crisis increased participation level of the participants in all statements and thus had a remarkable positive impact on corporate reputation.
It was determined that the participation rates of students reading the second press release decreased in all of the reputation scale statements (13 statements). It was found that the university’s blaming the food company, not accepting responsibility, making the press release late, not using any rebuild and compensatory elements caused the decline of reputation perception of the institution. In the same way, using statements which contain elements of “compensating” and “rebuilding activities” in the first press release revealed the fact that the institution was noticed much more quickly in public than other components. It was found that institution’s blaming the food company, not accepting responsibility for the incident, making the release late, and not using any rebuild and compensatory elements had a remarkable negative impact on corporate reputation. It is seen that the insensitivity of the institution to the environment in which it operates and to the rights of its stakeholders can negatively affect the corporate reputation. In both cases, it is observed that the element of “social responsibility” becomes prominent among components of corporate reputation.
