Does public segmentation matter in crisis communication? The interplay between public segmentation and crisis response strategies

Abstract

PurposeThis study situates in the context of Chipotle's food safety issue and seeks to understand how their primary customers perceive their crisis response messages after learning of the outbreaks. The current study incorporates the framework of situational crisis communication theory (SCCT; Coombs, 2007) and public segmentation model (Rawlins, 2006) to understand the effectiveness of crisis response messages. It aims to examine the role of public segmentation in situational crisis communication and investigate the effects of three crisis response strategies according to SCCT on different public segments.Design/methodology/approachThe SCCT provides guidelines for understanding the effectiveness of different crisis response strategies. The current study showcases the importance of public segmentation in the SCCT model through the lens of stakeholder theory. A 3 (crisis response strategy: deny, diminish, rebuild) × 4 (public segment: advocate, dormant, adversarial, apathetic) factorial experiment was conducted.FindingsThe findings suggest that advocate public expressed more positive evaluation about the company when exposed to rebuild and deny strategies. Both dormant and adversarial stakeholders reported positive responses on rebuild and diminish strategies. However, no difference was found among apathetic public.Originality/valueThe researchers attempt to make a modest contribution in this direction by reporting results from an empirical experiment that examined the effects of crisis response strategies on different public segments. The findings suggest an effective message tailoring approach to target different public segments. Thus, the results of this study are expected to benefit relevant corporations and public relations practitioners.

Crisis communication strategies for health officials

“…Table 1 lists the selection criteria adopted in screening the articles. Overall, studies were excluded if they: (1) did not focus on COVID-19 [e.g., foods-related crises ( 45 )], (2) did not offer insights on crisis communication from health officials' perspectives [e.g., articles focused on government officials ( 46 )], (3) did not discuss or identify crisis communication strategies, and (4) were not written in English.…”

Impact of COVID-19 on education in India: stakeholders' voice

“…Secondly, the results of this study indicate that stakeholder interactions during a crisis may differ during normal situations (Figure 1). For example, organizations can focus more on various corporate social responsibility (CSR) actions as they can successfully influence public opinion and safeguard the business reputation and image in long run (Wen et al, 2021). Thirdly, during a crisis, stakeholders must understand their current stakes, maintain an optimal balance of diverse interests and cooperate (Ng et al, 2022), for instance, the shift of the baton of learning activities from teachers to parents.…”

“…Future studies can segment the school stakeholders into meaningful categories BIJ to understand their impact. For instance, stakeholders can be classified as an advocate, dormant, adversarial or apathetic based on issue involvement and their predisposition (Wen et al, 2021). Thence, future studies can develop strategies to strengthen the relationship with the prioritized stakeholders.…”

A public health crisis in the university: Impact of crisis response strategies on universities’ transparency and post-crisis relationships during COVID 19 pandemic

“…To test the impact of response strategy for universities experiencing the pandemic, we adopted the situational crisis communication theory (SCCT) as a framework in the current research project (Coombs, 2002; 2007). While SCCT explored countless crisis research for Fortune 500 ( Ki & Nekmat, 2014 ), nonprofit organizations ( Sisco, 2012 ), food companies ( Wen et al, 2021 ), sports business ( Brown et al, 2020 ) and leadership and leadership communication (Tourish & Jackson, 2008), it also served as a critical framework for crisis management in colleges and universities (Mitroff et al, 2006; Hong & Kim, 2019 ). Thus, this can be a benchmark case of how a university manages the pandemic, and further provides necessitated responses to its key public.…”