Crisis management lessons: When push shoved Nike

Jackson, Janice E.; Schantz, William T.

doi:10.1016/s0007-6813(05)80100-4

Cited by 11 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Major internal functions of a company such as finance, production, procurement, operations, marketing and human resources are sensitive to the socioeconomic, political-legal, competitive, technological, demographic, global and ethical factors of the external environment. What is imminently more sensible and much more manageable, is to identify the processes necessary for assessing and dealing with future crises as they arise (Jackson and Schantz, 1993). At the core of this process are appropriate information systems, planning procedures, and decision-making techniques.…”

Section: Preventive Effortsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Crisis management: prevention, diagnosis and intervention

Kash

Darling

1998

Leadership &Amp; Organization Development Journal

170

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article deals basically with the dynamic environment of today’s businesses. Despite all of the efforts a company puts forth to scan the environmental issues, crises can occur and have to be managed. We have first reviewed several crises in businesses during the recent times, to define and identify the nature of a crisis. Then the anatomy of a crisis is presented schematically. Finally, by recommending certain preventive measures and interventions, the article concludes that acknowledging a crisis and communicating with the stakeholders are as important as planning the prevention, diagnosis, and intervention to solve crisis situations.

show abstract

Section: Preventive Effortsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Crisis management: prevention, diagnosis and intervention

Kash

Darling

1998

Leadership &Amp; Organization Development Journal

170

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Consumers are becoming more oriented toward responsible consumption, one that defends civil rights, the rights of minority groups and those of the poor (Smith, 1991;Friedman, 1985Friedman, , 1999aFriedman, , 1999b. In 1990 and later in 1995, Nike had to face an economic and social boycott, mainly due to its exploitation of third-world children, and to the living and working conditions of its workers in sweatshops (Baron, 2003;Jackson and Schantz, 1993). The boycott against Nestlé was the first successful boycott with international implications (Johnson, 1981;Williams, 1984;Post, 1985).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Environmental preoccupations are also growing. One example in this regard is the boycott of Heinz because of its tuna-fishing methods (Jackson and Schantz, 1993;Putman, 1993;Wilson and Liu, 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of religiosity on the decision to participate in a boycott

Dekhil¹,

Jridi²,

Farhat³

2017

JIMA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose This research aims to analyze the effects of religiosity on the decision to participate in a boycott and the effect of a boycott on attitudes toward the boycotted brand. It also aims to measure the moderating effect of brand loyalty on the different models the authors discuss. Design/methodology/approach An experiment involving 165 Tunisian individuals during a call for a boycott of products of the Coca-Cola Company, which supports the Israeli army against Palestine, was conducted. Data analyses were conducted via two principal stages using SPSS 20.0 and Smart PLS 2.0. Findings The findings show that degree of religiosity was one of the antecedents of decision to participate in a boycott, and this decision has a negative effect on the attitude toward the brand being boycotted. The paper also has been able to show that brand loyalty moderates the relation of the present model. It diminishes the effect of religiosity on boycotting. Research limitations/implications Among the limits of the study is the fact that the authors relied on the investigation of only one product/brand (namely, Coca-Cola). In addition, the samples subjected to inquiry by the authors were chosen for their convenience. Practical implications Besides, the presentation of boycotted products in stores has a negative effect on the sales of the surrounding “non-boycotted” products (Friedman, 1999a). The authors note here that marketers can derive huge benefits from the exploration of boycott, for many reasons. The company must insist on the satisfaction and trust of their consumers, which are the bases of the loyalty. They must define the marketing strategy to increase the loyalty. This will diminish the effect of religiosity on the decision to participate in the boycott. Social implications The results allow us to assert that the decision to participate in a boycott has a negative effect on the attitude of the consumer and on the brand to be boycotted. Investigating the moderating effect of loyalty on the relation between religiosity and the decision to participate in a boycott is very interesting. Originality/value This research has shown that religiosity has a positive effect on boycotting. Also, it was found that a boycott has a negative effect on attitudes toward the boycotted brand. Therefore, brand loyalty moderates negatively the effect of religiosity on the decision to participate in the boycott and moderates the effect of the boycott on brand attitude.

show abstract

“…), calls to boycott can be organized, broadcast and disseminated more rapidly and easily, even by small, often politicized, groups of consumers (alter-globalization, anti-marketing movements, etc.). As a result, companies can experience a significant deterioration of their image, a loss of marketing efficiency and a decline in market share (Garrett, 1986;Zack, 1991;Jackson and Schantz, 1993). These boycotts oppose unacceptable business practices such as the use of child labor in developing countries, polluting the environment, overpricing, massive layoffs, adding GMOs to foods, etc.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effects of Satisfaction, Trust and Brand Commitment on Consumers' Decision to Boycott

Cissé-Depardon

N’Goala

2009

Recherche et Applications en Marketing (English Edition)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research examines the effects of cumulative satisfaction, trust and brand commitment on consumers' decision to boycott. The study shows that their influence varies according to the type of boycott (instrumental versus expressive). Four results distinguish the two expressive boycotts considered: 1) the perceived egregiousness of the company's act and/or the message credibility totally mediate their effects on the boycott decision; 2) cumulative satisfaction enhances a contrast effect whereas brand commitment generates an assimilation effect (minimization of the fault); 3) the message credibility enhances boycott participation; 4) the volume of consumption decreases only social boycott participation. Strategic implications for consumer organizations and companies are then specified.

show abstract

Crisis management lessons: When push shoved Nike

Cited by 11 publications

References 2 publications

Crisis management: prevention, diagnosis and intervention

Crisis management: prevention, diagnosis and intervention

Effect of religiosity on the decision to participate in a boycott

The Effects of Satisfaction, Trust and Brand Commitment on Consumers' Decision to Boycott

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About