Benoit (2015)

Image Matters

  • Image matters: people and organizations (companies, governments, NGOs) frequently face accusations or suspicions of wrong-doing. High-profile examples mentioned include JP Morgan (lost money), BP's Gulf of Mexico oil spill, and Rupert Murdoch’s newspapers’ alleged illegal hacking and bribes to police.
  • Threats to image are common and inevitable for four reasons:
    • Limited resources: there is only so much time, money, or resources, leading to competition and potential dissatisfaction with resource distribution.
    • Uncontrollable events: delays, lost documents, changed meeting times, etc., can prevent meeting obligations.
    • Human imperfection: misdeeds, honest errors, or actions influenced by self-interest; factors like alcohol, drugs, or lack of sleep can affect judgment.
    • Conflicting priorities: different goals (e.g., effective drugs vs. affordable drugs; R&D vs. marketing) create potential conflicts.
  • Together these factors make actual or perceived wrongdoing a recurrent feature of activity for individuals and organizations.
  • When misbehavior occurs, others are likely to criticize: objections to what was said/done, what was left undone, or how actions were performed.
  • Persuasive attacks are messages intended to create unfavorable attitudes about a target and have been studied across contexts (e.g., Benoit & Delbert, 2010; Benoit & Dorries, 1996; Benoit & Harthcock, 1999; Benoit et al., 2001; Benoit & Stein, 2009).
  • An organization does not need an explicit attack to need image repair; often responses occur to anticipated image problems, but rehabilitation is typically prompted by criticism.
  • Attacks on image threaten credibility and trust, which are crucial to persuasion; credibility can be harmed by fallout from actual or perceived wrong-doing (see W. L. Benoit & Benoit, 2008; Benoit & Strathman, 2004).
  • Damaged reputation can affect persuasiveness, credibility, and willingness of others to engage with the organization (e.g., customers, partners, or regulators).
  • People and organizations guard their reputations and work to repair tarnished images; image repair messages aim to reshape audience attitudes about responsibility and offensiveness of the act.
  • Defensive messages (image repair) are about explaining, defending, justifying, rationalizing, apologizing, or excusing behavior; they are directed at perceived damage to reputation.

The Nature of Image

  • Image is about perceptions—the impression others have about us.
  • Perceptions can reflect reality but are shaped by direct experience and by what others say or how they behave toward the organization (vicarious experience).
  • Our knowledge of a person or organization is typically incomplete, leading to limited and potentially divergent impressions across people.
  • Example: BP before and after the Gulf spill; many knew BP from gas stations, but the spill shaped impressions through news and media.
  • Impressions are formed from both direct experiences and vicarious messages, so different people may have different images.
  • Image repair theory focuses on improving images threatened by bad behavior or reports of bad behavior.

The Nature of Threats to Image

  • An unfavorable image depends on two key components: responsibility and offensiveness.
    • BP’s Gulf spill was, at least partly, BP’s fault, making it a threat to BP’s image.
    • Other companies (e.g., Mobil, Microsoft, Bank of America) might not face similar threats for this act if they were not responsible.
  • The act must appear offensive for image risk to occur.
  • If the organization can persuade the audience that it was not to blame, or that the act was not offensive, the damaged image might be mitigated.
  • Understanding accusations or suspicions is vital to image repair: know what threats exist to decide which require defense.
  • Accusations can be trivial or serious; organizations should not ignore important accusations.
  • For each accusation, assess both blame and offensiveness to decide the appropriate response.

Assumptions of Image Repair Theory

  • Two central assumptions:

    • Communication is a goal-directed activity.
    • Maintaining a positive reputation is a central goal of communication.

  • Communication is a goal-directed activity (with qualifications):

    • Organizations can have multiple, sometimes conflicting goals; pursuing one goal might interfere with another.
    • Goals may be vague or unclear at times, and organizational actors may not share the same understanding of goals.
    • Even with clear goals, actors may not know or be willing to use the most effective means to achieve them.
    • In important situations, individuals plan aspects of utterances; in less critical situations, they may not micro-manage.
    • Hidden agendas may obscure goals; deception about goals is possible.
    • Despite these caveats, communication is best understood as an intentional, goal-driven activity.

  • Maintaining a favorable image is a key goal of communication:

    • A useful framework from Clark & Delia (1979): every communicative transaction has overt instrumental objectives, interpersonal objectives, and identity objectives.
    • Fisher (1970) identifies four motives in communication about identity: affirmation (creating an image), reaffirmation (revitalizing an image), purification (correcting an image), and subversion (undermining an image).
    • Persuasive attacks prompt image repair (Fisher’s subversion) but the focus here is purification (repairing a damaged image).
    • Face and reputation are valued; face-threatening situations trigger supposed defense or “face-work” (Goffman, 1967).
    • Empirical evidence links embarrassment with greater facework (Modigliani, 1971).
    • Because face is important to virtually everyone, people respond to threats with explanations, defenses, apologies, or excuses.

Image Repair Strategies

  • Image repair theory develops from the nature of persuasive attacks, which involve blame and offensiveness:

    • Blame: the accused is responsible for an act.
    • Offensive act: the act is perceived as offensive.
    • Image repair can reject blame (denying responsibility, shifting blame, reducing responsibility) or reduce offensiveness; it can also admit wrongdoing and ask for forgiveness or promise to fix the problem.

  • The general image repair strategies and specific strategies are listed in Table 19.1 (definitions and examples). This typology has been applied across contexts: corporate, political, celebrity/athletics, international contexts, health care, religion, etc.

  • Denial

    • Simple denial: Did not perform act (e.g., Tylenol: did not poison capsule)
    • Shift the blame: Another performed act (e.g., Tylenol: a “madman” poisoned capsules)

  • Evasion of responsibility

    • Provocation: Responded to act of another (e.g., firm moved because of new taxes)
    • Defeasibility: Lack of information or ability (e.g., executive not told meeting changed)
    • Accident: Mishap (e.g., tree fell on tracks causing train wreck)
    • Good intentions: Meant well (e.g., Sears wants to provide good auto repair service)

  • Reducing offensiveness of the event

    • Bolstering: Stress good traits (e.g., Exxon’s “swift and competent” cleanup)
    • Minimization: Act not serious (e.g., Exxon: few animals killed in oil spill)
    • Differentiation: Act less offensive than similar acts (e.g., Sears: unneeded repairs were preventive maintenance, not fraud)
    • Transcendence: More important values (e.g., Helping humans justifies testing animals)

  • Attack accuser

    • Reduce credibility of accuser (e.g., Coke: Pepsi owns restaurants, competes directly with you for customers)

  • Compensation

    • Reimburse victim (e.g., disabled movie-goers given free passes after denied admission to a movie)

  • Corrective action

    • Plan to solve/prevent recurrence of the problem (e.g., AT&T promised to spend billions to improve service)

  • Mortification

    • Apologize (e.g., AT&T apologized for service interruption)

  • The table and related discussion note that the typology has been widely used and extended in various studies and contexts.

The Importance of Audience

  • Image repair is about perceptions; the actor responds to perceived threats to character.
  • An external audience is the group whose perception of the organization the image repair aims to restore. Tedeschi & Reiss (1981) emphasize that others attribute causality and responsibility for events, which is central to the predicament.
  • The organization’s perception of the audience’s image can differ from the audience’s actual perceptions, but the organization must work with its perception of the audience’s beliefs to guide restoration efforts.
  • There are at least two audiences for a given image restoration effort:
    • An external audience: the group most important to the organization’s face restoration.
    • An internal or accuser audience: the person or group that raised the charge; the apologist may seek to restore reputation with the accuser and possibly others aware of the accusation.
  • Three possibilities for the external audience: 1) The external audience consists solely of the accuser.
    • Example: Jill criticizes Steve; Steve aims to restore Jill’s impression of him.
      2) The external audience includes the accuser and others aware of the charges (e.g., coworkers).
    • Example: John criticizes Arthur in front of coworkers; Arthur aims to repair John’s perception and others’ perceptions.
      3) A third party levels charges before a relevant group; the organization may care about victims, customers, stockholders, or other audiences who are aware of the accusation.
    • The accuser may or may not be part of the audience the image repair targets.
  • Because audiences are complex and differ in information and priorities (e.g., political contexts with mixed information), image repair is particularly challenging.
  • An election example (2012 U.S. presidential race) shows that Republicans and Democrats held different impressions of Obama and Romney, yet some overlap existed (e.g., Romney’s governorship, Olympics involvement, and Obama’s auto bailouts).

Preparing Crisis Response Plans

  • Crisis response plans are contingency plans intended to anticipate potential threats to image and prepare responses without stress and time pressure.
  • Plans should be adapted to the specific situation and periodically reviewed and revised.
  • Steps to prepare crisis plans:
    1) Identify crises likely to occur and prioritize them by likelihood and importance; plan for the highest-priority crises.
    2) Consider other organizational goals (e.g., profitability) that could conflict with image repair efforts.
  • Crisis plan questions to address:
    • What actions should be taken (e.g., shut down production)?
    • Who inside the organization needs to be informed, and what should they be told?
    • Who outside the organization needs to be informed, and what should they be told?
    • Who will be the organization’s spokesperson, and is this the same person who designs/approves messages?
    • How will the message be disseminated? If multiple messages, when and to whom will they be distributed?
    • What are the precise accusations and who are the most important audiences?
    • Are there conditions under which image repair messages should be changed?
    • When should image repair efforts cease?
    • Can a potential crisis be averted before it happens?
  • The organization should review response effectiveness after outcomes and revise as necessary.
  • Practical guidance for message design:
    • Develop messages with regard to four factors: the most pressing accusations, what the most important audience believes to be true, available evidence and resources, and the media channels that will best connect with the audience.
    • Do not lie or deceive: truth tends to come out, potentially undermining the repair effort if deception is discovered.

Conclusion

  • Image is the perception of a person or organization held by others and is vital in social and organizational life.
  • Threats to image are inevitable; understanding how to respond is essential.
  • Image repair theory provides a framework for analyzing threats, selecting strategies, and planning crisis responses to mend reputation and maintain credibility.

Note on Citations (Note 1)

  • The remainder of Benoit’s citations in this chapter refer to W. L. Benoit (various works; see References in the text).

References (selected themes from the chapter)

  • Core works by Benoit on image repair and related strategies: accounts, excuses, apologies; crisis communication; various case studies across corporate, political, and public contexts.
  • Foundational theories cited include: Brown & Levinson (face-work), G