12.2 Reputation Repair Strategies

Reputation repair strategies are crucial for organizations facing crises. From denial and scapegoating to apologies and corrective actions, these techniques aim to rebuild trust and credibility with stakeholders. The choice of strategy depends on the situation's severity and the organization's culpability.

Image Restoration Theory provides a framework for selecting appropriate reputation repair strategies. It outlines five key approaches: denial, evasion of responsibility, reducing offensiveness, corrective action, and mortification. Understanding these strategies helps organizations navigate crises and protect their public image effectively.

Defensive Strategies

Denial and Scapegoating Tactics

Top images from around the web for Denial and Scapegoating Tactics

• 

  CSR Reputation as a Prediposition Factor in a Product-Harm Crisis: Applying Affective ... View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  CSR Reputation as a Prediposition Factor in a Product-Harm Crisis: Applying Affective ... View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  How to Measure and Manage Your Corporate Reputation View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  CSR Reputation as a Prediposition Factor in a Product-Harm Crisis: Applying Affective ... View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  CSR Reputation as a Prediposition Factor in a Product-Harm Crisis: Applying Affective ... View original

  Is this image relevant?

1 of 3

Top images from around the web for Denial and Scapegoating Tactics

• 

  CSR Reputation as a Prediposition Factor in a Product-Harm Crisis: Applying Affective ... View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  CSR Reputation as a Prediposition Factor in a Product-Harm Crisis: Applying Affective ... View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  How to Measure and Manage Your Corporate Reputation View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  CSR Reputation as a Prediposition Factor in a Product-Harm Crisis: Applying Affective ... View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  CSR Reputation as a Prediposition Factor in a Product-Harm Crisis: Applying Affective ... View original

  Is this image relevant?

1 of 3

• Denial involves refuting accusations or claims of wrongdoing
  • Outright rejection of allegations
  • Assertion of innocence or lack of involvement
  • Can be effective if allegations are false or unsubstantiated
• Scapegoating shifts blame to another party
  • Identifies a different individual or entity as responsible
  • Attempts to redirect public attention and scrutiny
  • Often used when evidence of wrongdoing is clear

Differentiation as a Defense Mechanism

• Differentiation separates the accused from the negative event
  • Emphasizes distinctions between the entity and the incident
  • Highlights unique circumstances or mitigating factors
  • Aims to reduce perceived responsibility or culpability
• Can involve comparing the situation to worse scenarios
  • Presents the event as less severe than initially perceived
  • Attempts to contextualize the incident within a broader perspective

Accommodative Strategies

Apology and Corrective Action

• Apology acknowledges wrongdoing and expresses remorse
  • Requires genuine admission of fault or responsibility
  • Often includes a promise to prevent future occurrences
  • Can help rebuild trust and credibility with stakeholders
• Corrective action involves taking steps to address the issue
  • Implementing new policies or procedures
  • Conducting internal investigations or audits
  • Demonstrating commitment to resolving the problem and preventing recurrence

Compensation and Mortification

• Compensation offers restitution to affected parties
  • Can include financial payments, product replacements, or service upgrades
  • Aims to make amends for damages or inconveniences caused
  • Demonstrates willingness to take responsibility for consequences
• Mortification involves accepting full responsibility and seeking forgiveness
  • Requires a deep level of humility and vulnerability
  • Often includes public statements of regret and accountability
  • Can be powerful in rebuilding relationships with stakeholders

Image Enhancement Strategies

Bolstering and Positive Association

• Bolstering emphasizes positive attributes or past good deeds
  • Highlights favorable aspects of the organization's history or character
  • Reminds stakeholders of previous contributions or achievements
  • Aims to counterbalance negative perceptions with positive ones
• Can involve associating with respected individuals or organizations
  • Partnerships with charitable causes or community initiatives
  • Endorsements from credible sources or industry leaders

Transcendence and Reframing

• Transcendence places the event in a broader, more favorable context
  • Reframes the incident as part of a larger, more positive narrative
  • Attempts to shift focus from immediate negative impacts to long-term benefits
  • Can involve appealing to higher values or greater good (environmental protection)
• Reframing techniques alter the perspective on the situation
  • Presenting challenges as opportunities for growth or improvement
  • Emphasizing lessons learned and positive outcomes from the experience

Theoretical Framework

Image Restoration Theory Components

• Image Restoration Theory provides a framework for reputation repair
  • Developed by William Benoit to analyze communication strategies
  • Focuses on maintaining or restoring a positive public image
• Identifies five key strategies for image restoration:
  1. Denial (simple denial or shift blame)
  2. Evasion of responsibility (provocation, defeasibility, accident, good intentions)
  3. Reducing offensiveness (bolstering, minimization, differentiation, transcendence, attack accuser, compensation)
  4. Corrective action
  5. Mortification

Application and Limitations of Image Restoration Theory

• Theory applied across various fields (politics, business, sports)
  • Provides guidance for crisis communication and reputation management
  • Helps organizations select appropriate strategies based on situation
• Limitations and criticisms of the theory:
  • May oversimplify complex reputational issues
  • Does not account for cultural differences in crisis perception
  • Effectiveness can vary depending on stakeholder expectations and severity of the incident