Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Crisis communication theorists need to develop a more sophisticated understanding of the ways in which concerns about liability constrain corporate executives from apologizing for crises for which the corporation itself bears some responsibility. Equivocation or strategic ambiguity may be an appropriate communication strategy in such situations. The resulting infelicitous apologies, however, may leave stakeholders dissatisfied, and reiterated public demands for an apology may create frustration, humiliation, and anger in corporate executives, who very likely want to apologize to restore their image. By reacting defensively to protect their wornded self-esteem, they may worsen the situation. Because our present legal system discourages apologies, crisis communication theorists need to research how executives can best communicate about crises in which their companies are implicated.
Lisa Tyler (Fri,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: