评估危机外溢风险:中国企业对危机严重性的认知和应对效果的作用

IF 2.6 3区 管理学 Q3 MANAGEMENT Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management Pub Date : 2024-09-20 DOI:10.1111/1468-5973.12621
Yijing Wang, Daniel Laufer, Jia Ding
{"title":"评估危机外溢风险:中国企业对危机严重性的认知和应对效果的作用","authors":"Yijing Wang,&nbsp;Daniel Laufer,&nbsp;Jia Ding","doi":"10.1111/1468-5973.12621","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Although the spillover effect of crises represents an emerging area of interest within crisis communication studies, the perspective of consumers on the risk of crisis spillover as a result of corporate misconduct by another company remains underexplored in emerging markets like China. This study aims to fill the void through assessing how the severity of a crisis and the strategic responses by companies influence consumer perceptions of spillover risks from corporate misconduct by another company. A pre-test (<i>N</i> = 120) determined two corporate misconducts as characteristic for the automotive industry in China. These scenarios were utilized in an online experiment (<i>N</i> = 320) to examine the effects of two crisis response strategies (issuing a denial vs. giving no response) by a competitor automaker. The results reveal that when a corporate misconduct is perceived as more severe, the perceived crisis spillover risks to the industry is higher; this perceived risk mediates the impact of crisis severity on negative word-of-mouth. Issuing a denial is more effective than giving no response, and leads to more positive consumer outcomes. This research unravels the complex dynamics at play in shaping consumer attitudes towards companies indirectly impacted by a crisis through a spillover effect.</p>","PeriodicalId":47674,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1468-5973.12621","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessing crisis spillover risks: The role of perceived severity and corporate response effectiveness in China\",\"authors\":\"Yijing Wang,&nbsp;Daniel Laufer,&nbsp;Jia Ding\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/1468-5973.12621\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Although the spillover effect of crises represents an emerging area of interest within crisis communication studies, the perspective of consumers on the risk of crisis spillover as a result of corporate misconduct by another company remains underexplored in emerging markets like China. This study aims to fill the void through assessing how the severity of a crisis and the strategic responses by companies influence consumer perceptions of spillover risks from corporate misconduct by another company. A pre-test (<i>N</i> = 120) determined two corporate misconducts as characteristic for the automotive industry in China. These scenarios were utilized in an online experiment (<i>N</i> = 320) to examine the effects of two crisis response strategies (issuing a denial vs. giving no response) by a competitor automaker. The results reveal that when a corporate misconduct is perceived as more severe, the perceived crisis spillover risks to the industry is higher; this perceived risk mediates the impact of crisis severity on negative word-of-mouth. Issuing a denial is more effective than giving no response, and leads to more positive consumer outcomes. This research unravels the complex dynamics at play in shaping consumer attitudes towards companies indirectly impacted by a crisis through a spillover effect.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47674,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1468-5973.12621\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1468-5973.12621\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1468-5973.12621","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

尽管危机的溢出效应是危机传播研究中一个新兴的关注领域,但在中国这样的新兴市场,消费者对另一家公司的不当行为所导致的危机溢出风险的看法仍未得到充分探讨。本研究旨在通过评估危机的严重程度和企业的战略应对措施如何影响消费者对另一家企业不当行为所造成的危机外溢风险的看法来填补这一空白。预先测试(N = 120)确定了中国汽车行业特有的两种企业不当行为。这些情景被用于在线实验(N = 320),以考察竞争对手汽车制造商的两种危机应对策略(发表否认声明与不做任何回应)的效果。结果表明,当企业的不当行为被认为更严重时,其对行业的危机溢出风险就会更高,这种风险感知介导了危机严重性对负面口碑的影响。做出否认比不做出回应更有效,也会给消费者带来更积极的结果。这项研究揭示了通过溢出效应影响消费者对受危机间接影响的公司的态度的复杂动态。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Assessing crisis spillover risks: The role of perceived severity and corporate response effectiveness in China

Although the spillover effect of crises represents an emerging area of interest within crisis communication studies, the perspective of consumers on the risk of crisis spillover as a result of corporate misconduct by another company remains underexplored in emerging markets like China. This study aims to fill the void through assessing how the severity of a crisis and the strategic responses by companies influence consumer perceptions of spillover risks from corporate misconduct by another company. A pre-test (N = 120) determined two corporate misconducts as characteristic for the automotive industry in China. These scenarios were utilized in an online experiment (N = 320) to examine the effects of two crisis response strategies (issuing a denial vs. giving no response) by a competitor automaker. The results reveal that when a corporate misconduct is perceived as more severe, the perceived crisis spillover risks to the industry is higher; this perceived risk mediates the impact of crisis severity on negative word-of-mouth. Issuing a denial is more effective than giving no response, and leads to more positive consumer outcomes. This research unravels the complex dynamics at play in shaping consumer attitudes towards companies indirectly impacted by a crisis through a spillover effect.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
12.90%
发文量
51
期刊介绍: The Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management is an invaluable source of information on all aspects of contingency planning, scenario analysis and crisis management in both corporate and public sectors. It focuses on the opportunities and threats facing organizations and presents analysis and case studies of crisis prevention, crisis planning, recovery and turnaround management. With contributions from world-wide sources including corporations, governmental agencies, think tanks and influential academics, this publication provides a vital platform for the exchange of strategic and operational experience, information and knowledge.
期刊最新文献
Multimodal Sensemaking and Sensegiving Processes of Discursive Threat Appraisal in Environmental Crisis Communication Critical crisis management competencies: Perspectives from universities of technology leadership Reimagining crisis management with an organizational learning framework Correction to “Authenticity and high performance: Nonmarket social, public and media strategies of foreign SMEs during a black swan event” Enhancing cross-organizational collaboration in crisis management: Outcomes from a full-scale regional exercise in Norway
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1