FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W3124347182> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W3124347182 abstract "Employees have become increasingly impactful and valuable for businesses. However, next topositive added value they can also form risks for the companies that they work for. In recent years,with the rapid rise of social media, it has become increasingly easy for employees to voice theiropinions about the corporation online with an audience of millions, whether the opinion orexperience that they share is positive or negative (Kaul & Chaudhri, 2017). Research has found thatconsumers see employees of a company as a credible source with regards to company information,emphasizing the increased risk for companies. This is further supported by the fact that several reallife examples have shown that information unrelated to the company or industry that the employeeis working in can also impact the way that consumers think about the company. In other words,employees are seen as direct representatives of the company and its values, by the consumer.Research has shown that the online behaviour of employees can have an impact on thecustomers perception of the corporate reputation. A direct consequence of this is that it can stillhurt the company when employees tweet, post or blog about things other than the company, bygoing against society’s or the company’s moral codes. Due to these risks, this research aimed toinvestigate how crisis type and crisis disclosure influence the corporate reputation when the crisis isgenerated by an employee. No research has focused on the involvement of employees with regardsto crisis communication before, giving this research the opportunity to explore this realm and add tothe currently available literature base. Hypothesis 1 stated that an intentional crisis would wieldmore power over consumers and would therefore result in a more negative perception of thecorporate reputation. Hypothesis 2A and 2B focused on when the crisis was disclosed by thecompany versus disclosed by a third party media outlet, in which case literature suggested thatcompany disclosure would give a more favorable perception of the corporate reputation.To investigate the relation between corporate reputation and crisis disclosure and crisis type asurvey experiment was conducted. The experiment used several stimuli representing the differentcrisis types and crisis disclosure scenarios, to be able to investigate the posed research question andto test the offered hypotheses. To further test the hypotheses, the data was analyzed usingindependent-sample t-tests, following that a regression analysis was conducted to analyze theadditional variables included in the survey to check for other possible moderators, such as crisisresponsibility, customer trust, customer satisfaction and demographics.After a thorough analysis of the data this study found that an intentional crisis is more harmfulto the corporate reputation than an accidental crisis, in both disclosure type scenarios, company disclosure and third party media outlet disclosure. Additionally, company disclosure wielded themost positive results in either crisis type situation, the accidental crisis and the intentional crisis.Moreover, results showed that both crisis type and crisis disclosure had a significant effect onthe perceived corporate reputation. As suggested by the first hypothesis which was accepted onaccount of the gathered results. Intentional crises have a more negative impact on the perceivedcorporate reputation than an accidental crisis. This result could be due to the theory proposed byCoombs and Holladay (2002) that more responsibility is accounted to the company, according toconsumers, when consumers perceive the crisis to be the company’s responsibility. In support of thisstatement the results showed a significant effect of crisis responsibility on the post-crisis reputation.In line with these findings, the results have shown that consumers experience a decline in perceivedcorporate reputation even when an individual employee is responsible for the crisis.In relation to crisis disclosure, this research found that the perceived corporate reputationturned out more positive when the company decided to self-disclose the crisis, as opposed to a thirdparty disclosing the same crisis, regardless of what type of crisis was disclosed. Concluding thatconsumers have a more favorable attitude towards companies that self-disclose their wrongdoingsduring a crisis.Additionally, customer trust and customer satisfaction showed to be high predicting variablesfor the corporate reputation. When being exposed to one of the crisis situations, consumers thatreported having more trust in the company and being more satisfied with the company perceived ahigher corporate reputation. Therefore, showing that consumers who experience more loyaltytowards a brand are more likely to be forgiving towards the company and its reputation following acrisis.From these findings we can conclude that, for organizations, it is advisable to continue tosupport projects that ensure a better corporate reputation as well as programs that support thecreation and enhancement of customer trust and customer satisfaction. This study has shown thatthese concepts are significant variables leading to a better corporate reputation, which could lead tobenefits such as, increased financial performance and more loyalty amongst employees." @default.
• W3124347182 created "2021-02-01" @default.
• W3124347182 creator A5037585769 @default.
• W3124347182 date "2020-05-13" @default.
• W3124347182 modified "2023-09-27" @default.
• W3124347182 title "The effect of crisis type and crisis disclosure on corporate reputation" @default.
• W3124347182 hasPublicationYear "2020" @default.
• W3124347182 type Work @default.
• W3124347182 sameAs 3124347182 @default.
• W3124347182 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W3124347182 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W3124347182 hasAuthorship W3124347182A5037585769 @default.
• W3124347182 hasConcept C10138342 @default.
• W3124347182 hasConcept C119857082 @default.
• W3124347182 hasConcept C121955636 @default.
• W3124347182 hasConcept C144133560 @default.
• W3124347182 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W3124347182 hasConcept C162853370 @default.
• W3124347182 hasConcept C169760540 @default.
• W3124347182 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W3124347182 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W3124347182 hasConcept C26760741 @default.
• W3124347182 hasConcept C2776058685 @default.
• W3124347182 hasConcept C2776291640 @default.
• W3124347182 hasConcept C2778348171 @default.
• W3124347182 hasConcept C39549134 @default.
• W3124347182 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W3124347182 hasConcept C48798503 @default.
• W3124347182 hasConcept C518677369 @default.
• W3124347182 hasConceptScore W3124347182C10138342 @default.
• W3124347182 hasConceptScore W3124347182C119857082 @default.
• W3124347182 hasConceptScore W3124347182C121955636 @default.
• W3124347182 hasConceptScore W3124347182C144133560 @default.
• W3124347182 hasConceptScore W3124347182C15744967 @default.
• W3124347182 hasConceptScore W3124347182C162853370 @default.
• W3124347182 hasConceptScore W3124347182C169760540 @default.
• W3124347182 hasConceptScore W3124347182C17744445 @default.
• W3124347182 hasConceptScore W3124347182C199539241 @default.
• W3124347182 hasConceptScore W3124347182C26760741 @default.
• W3124347182 hasConceptScore W3124347182C2776058685 @default.
• W3124347182 hasConceptScore W3124347182C2776291640 @default.
• W3124347182 hasConceptScore W3124347182C2778348171 @default.
• W3124347182 hasConceptScore W3124347182C39549134 @default.
• W3124347182 hasConceptScore W3124347182C41008148 @default.
• W3124347182 hasConceptScore W3124347182C48798503 @default.
• W3124347182 hasConceptScore W3124347182C518677369 @default.
• W3124347182 hasLocation W31243471821 @default.
• W3124347182 hasOpenAccess W3124347182 @default.
• W3124347182 hasPrimaryLocation W31243471821 @default.
• W3124347182 hasRelatedWork W108176472 @default.
• W3124347182 hasRelatedWork W196128275 @default.
• W3124347182 hasRelatedWork W2060905035 @default.
• W3124347182 hasRelatedWork W2111931907 @default.
• W3124347182 hasRelatedWork W2250536034 @default.
• W3124347182 hasRelatedWork W2471003980 @default.
• W3124347182 hasRelatedWork W2527496089 @default.
• W3124347182 hasRelatedWork W2588287314 @default.
• W3124347182 hasRelatedWork W2609704008 @default.
• W3124347182 hasRelatedWork W2612746071 @default.
• W3124347182 hasRelatedWork W271461463 @default.
• W3124347182 hasRelatedWork W2774883241 @default.
• W3124347182 hasRelatedWork W2887755487 @default.
• W3124347182 hasRelatedWork W2898116966 @default.
• W3124347182 hasRelatedWork W307696047 @default.
• W3124347182 hasRelatedWork W3086130460 @default.
• W3124347182 hasRelatedWork W3182525804 @default.
• W3124347182 hasRelatedWork W856485878 @default.
• W3124347182 hasRelatedWork W1858706932 @default.
• W3124347182 hasRelatedWork W3121575549 @default.
• W3124347182 isParatext "false" @default.
• W3124347182 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W3124347182 magId "3124347182" @default.
• W3124347182 workType "article" @default.