There is much less agreement about the characteristics defining organizational apologia/crisis response than in the case of clearly defined categories such as the eulogy. This lack of agreement can be traced to two conflicting purposes served by the category (image repair and image maintenance) and also the fact that the organizational apologist faces much greater situational variation than in other well-defined categories. This article confronts these difficulties by proposing a reconceptualization of organizational apologia. Drawing on argument field theory, we argue that all organizational apologia must use one or more of four strategies to protect the image of the organization. Regarding image repair, the article proposes a research agenda for identifying the situational characteristics that characterize well-defined subgenres.Over the past 15 years, researchers have focused enormous attention on how organizations respond to crises involving allegations of wrongdoing. Using a variety of approaches, including apologia theory (Ware & Linkugel, 1973), kategoria-based apologia theory (see Dionisopoulos &

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract