The DOI matches its Crossref record; 18 of the 18 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A Burden of Responsibility: The Role of Social Approval at the Onset of a Crisis
Abstract
We extend research on social evaluations and crisis management by explicating the sociocognitive mechanisms that influence how an organization and its external evaluators perceive and respond to the onset of a crisis. Specifically, we highlight the role of social approval—evaluators’ general affinity toward an organization—not only as a critical outcome of crisis management but also as an important antecedent. We first identify the distinct aspects of social approval and explain why it is an important perception in a crisis context. We then detail how managers attempt to limit the probability and magnitude of social approval loss when responding to a crisis, and how an organization’s existing endowment of social approval affects this decision. We theorize that social approval will serve as either a buffer or a burden in influencing evaluators’ crisis sensemaking and attributions. As a result, we argue, organizations endowed with higher and lower levels of social approval may be motivated to take less responsibility at the onset of a crisis than has been previously theorized. We conclude with a discussion of the broader managerial and social implications of our theory and how it expands our understanding of the crisis management process.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.185.4157.1124 · Cited by 28,810
A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance
Festinger, L. (1957) · doi:10.1515/9781503620766 · Cited by 24,241
Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1975) · Utility, Probability, and Human Decision Making · doi:10.1007/978-94-010-1834-0_8 · Cited by 22,650
A theory of social comparison processes
Festinger, L. (1954) · Human Relations · doi:10.1177/001872675400700202 · Cited by 20,926
Managing Legitimacy: Strategic and Institutional Approaches
Suchman, M. C. (1995) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258788 · Cited by 19,903
The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to moral judgment.
Haidt, J. (2001) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.108.4.814 · Cited by 8,048
Signaling Theory: A Review and Assessment
Connelly, B. L., Certo, S. T., Ireland, R. D., & Reutzel, C. R. (2011) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/0149206310388419 · Cited by 6,735
The Matthew Effect in Science: The reward and communication systems of science are considered.
Merton, R. K. (1968) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.159.3810.56 · Cited by 6,720 · cited 1×
“…suggests that higher levels of social approval can serve as a burden that exacerbates loss following a negative event (cf. Ashforth & Gibbs, 1990; Brooks et al., 2003; Graffin, Bundy, Porac,Wade, & Quinn, 2013; Merton, 1968; Mishina et al., 2012; Rhee & Haunschild, 2006; Sutton & Galunic, 1996).”
Cooperation and Punishment in Public Goods Experiments
Fehr, E., & Gächter, S. (2000) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/aer.90.4.980 · Cited by 4,547 · cited 2×
“…breaking point, compelling evaluators to enact “durable changes to the rules” and to punish a lower-approval organization for its repeated failures (Ballinger & Rockmann, 2010: 374; Braithwaite, 1989; Davidson, Worrell, & Lee, 1994; Fehr & Gächter, 2000; Pfarrer, DeCelles, Smith, & Taylor, 2008).”
BackgroundCrime, Shame and Reintegration
Braithwaite, J. (1989) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511804618 · Cited by 4,153
Cited by
Organizational Response to Adversity: Fusing Crisis Management and Resilience Research Streams
Williams, T. A., Gruber, D. A., Sutcliffe, K. M., Shepherd, D. A., & Zhao, E. Y. (2017) · Academy of Management Annals · doi:10.5465/annals.2015.0134 · Cited by 1,945
Social media and the formation of organizational reputation
Etter, M., Ravasi, D., & Colleoni, E. (2019) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.2014.0280 · Cited by 428
A Blessing and a Curse: How CEOs’ Trait Empathy Affects Their Management of Organizational Crises
König, A., Graf-Vlachy, L., Bundy, J., & Little, L. M. (2020) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.2017.0387 · Cited by 237
Self-citationCorporate Social Responsibility: A Review of Current Concepts, Research, and Issues
Carroll, A. B., & Brown, J. A. (2018) · Corporate Social Responsibility · doi:10.1108/s2514-175920180000002002 · Cited by 224
The Volkswagen emissions scandal and its aftermath
Jung, J. C., & Sharon, E. (2019) · Global Business and Organizational Excellence · doi:10.1002/joe.21930 · Cited by 109
Coombs, W. T., & Tachkova, E. R. (2023) · Management Communication Quarterly · doi:10.1177/08933189221151177 · Cited by 102
How to regain green consumer trust after greenwashing: experimental evidence from China
Wang, D., & Walker, T. (2023) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su151914436 · Cited by 33
Metadata
- Authors
- Bundy, J., & Pfarrer, M. D.
- Venue
- Academy of Management Review
- Publisher
- Academy of Management
- Published
- 2015-07
- Volume
- 40
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 345-369
- ISSN
- 0363-7425 (ISSN-L)
- 1930-3807
- OpenAlex
- W1984016442
- Cited by
- 461
- References
- 18
- FWCI
- 38.42
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
