Published Online:https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2020.0275

We explore how firms’ post-transgression crisis communication and executive dismissals jointly influence shareholder trust following financial misconduct. We argue the coherence of a firm’s crisis management strategy—the degree to which its elements fit together consistently and logically—plays an important but previously unconsidered role in shareholder trust repair. We utilize multiple methods to abductively develop and test our theory. First, we conduct a qualitative comparative analysis of 51 cases of financial misconduct among S&P 1500 firms that disclosed a misstatement via press release and dismissed either the CEO or CFO within 90 days of the disclosure. Analyzing aspects of these firms’ crisis communication and the type of dismissal executed, this study reveals four configurations that highlight the influence of crisis management (in)coherence on shareholder trust. Second, a policy-capturing study examines the underlying mechanisms that drive shareholders’ perceptions and intended behaviors relative to manipulated crisis management strategies in a controlled setting. Together, findings from these studies indicate that shareholder trust following misconduct depends in part on the (in)coherence between what firms say about their misconduct, how they communicate that information, and what they do to resolve the problem.

REFERENCES

  • Andrus, J. L., Withers, M. C., Courtright, S. H., & Boivie, S. 2019. Go your own way: Exploring the causes of top executive turnover. Strategic Management Journal, 40: 1151–1168. Google Scholar
  • Arthaud-Day, M. L., Certo, S. T., Dalton, C. M., & Dalton, D. R. 2006. A changing of the guard: Executive and director turnover following corporate financial restatements. Academy of Management Journal, 49: 1119–1136.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Asay, H. S., Libby, R., & Rennekamp, K. M. 2018a. Do features that associate managers with a message magnify investors’ reactions to narrative disclosures? Accounting, Organizations and Society, 68: 1–14. Google Scholar
  • Asay, H. S., Libby, R., & Rennekamp, K. 2018b. Firm performance, reporting goals, and language choices in narrative disclosures. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 65: 380–398. Google Scholar
  • Bell, R. G., Filatotchev, I., & Aguilera, R. V. 2014. Corporate governance and investors’ perceptions of foreign IPO value: An institutional perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 57: 301–320.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Beneish, M. D., Marshall, C. D., & Yang, J. 2017. Explaining CEO retention in misreporting firms. Journal of Financial Economics, 123: 512–535. Google Scholar
  • Boivie, S., Graffin, S. D., & Pollock, T. G. 2012. Time for me to fly: Predicting director exit at large firms. Academy of Management Journal, 55: 1334–1359.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Boudes, T., & Laroche, H. 2009. Taking off the heat: Narrative sensemaking in post-crisis inquiry reports. Organization Studies, 30: 377–396. Google Scholar
  • Brickson, S. L. 2005. Organizational identity orientation: Forging a link between organizational identity and organizations’ relations with stakeholders. Administrative Science Quarterly, 50: 576–609. Google Scholar
  • Brown, T. J., Dacin, P. A., Pratt, M. G., & Whetten, D. A. 2006. Identity, intended image, construed image, and reputation: An interdisciplinary framework and suggested terminology. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 34: 99–106. Google Scholar
  • Bundy, J., & Pfarrer, M. D. 2015. A burden of responsibility: The role of social approval at the onset of a crisis. Academy of Management Review, 40: 345–369.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Bundy, J., Pfarrer, M. D., Short, C. E., & Coombs, W. T. 2017. Crises and crisis management: Integration, interpretation, and research development. Journal of Management, 43: 1661–1692. Google Scholar
  • Bundy, J., Shropshire, C., & Buchholtz, A. 2013. Strategic cognition and issue salience: Toward an explanation of firm responsiveness to stakeholder concerns. Academy of Management Review, 38: 352–376.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Burgoon, J. K. 1993. Interpersonal expectations, expectancy violations, and emotional communication. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 12: 30–48. Google Scholar
  • Campbell, J. T., Sirmon, D. G., & Schijven, M. 2016. Fuzzy logic and the market: A configurational approach to investor perceptions of acquisition announcements. Academy of Management Journal, 59: 163–187.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Chakravarthy, J., deHaan, E., & Rajgopal, S. 2014. Reputation repair after a serious restatement. Accounting Review, 89: 1329–1363. Google Scholar
  • Chen, Z., & Loftus, S. 2019. Multi-method evidence on investors’ reactions to managers’ self-inclusive language. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 79: 101071. Google Scholar
  • Chua, A., Robertson, K., Parackal, M., & Deans, K. R. 2012. Conveying trust: Transparency and credibility methods in corporate blogs. New Zealand Journal of Applied Business Research, 10: 1–15. Google Scholar
  • Claeys, A. S., Cauberghe, V., & Vyncke, P. 2010. Restoring reputations in times of crisis: An experimental study of the situational crisis communication theory and the moderating effects of locus of control. Public Relations Review, 36: 256–262. Google Scholar
  • Connelly, B., Certo, S., Ireland, R., & Reutzel, C. 2011. Signaling theory: A review and assessment. Journal of Management, 37: 39–67. Google Scholar
  • Connelly, B. L., Ketchen, D. J., Jr., Gangloff, K. A., & Shook, C. L. 2016. Investor perceptions of CEO successor selection in the wake of integrity and competence failures: A policy capturing study. Strategic Management Journal, 37: 2135–2151. Google Scholar
  • Connelly, B. L., Shi, W., Walker, H. J., & Hersel, M. C. 2022. Searching for a sign: CEO successor selection in the wake of corporate misconduct. Journal of Management, 48: 1035–1066. Google Scholar
  • Coombs, W. T. 2007. Protecting organization reputations during a crisis: The development and application of situational crisis communication theory. Corporate Reputation Review, 10: 163–176. Google Scholar
  • Coombs, W. T., & Holladay, S. J. 2004. Reasoned action in crisis communication: An attribution theory-based approach to crisis management. In D. P. MillarR. L. Heath (Eds.), Responding to crisis: A rhetorical approach to crisis communication: 95–115. Cambridge, U.K.: Routledge. Google Scholar
  • Coombs, W. T., & Holladay, S. J. 2008. Comparing apology to equivalent crisis response strategies: Clarifying apology’s role and value in crisis communication. Public Relations Review, 34: 252–257. Google Scholar
  • Coombs, W. T., & Holladay, S. J. 2010. The handbook of crisis communication. Oxford, U.K.: John Wiley & Sons. Google Scholar
  • Coppock, A., & McClellan, O. A. 2019. Validating the demographic, political, psychological, and experimental results obtained from a new source of online survey respondents. Research & Politics, 6(1). Google Scholar
  • Cowen, A. P., & Montgomery, N. V. 2020. To be or not to be sorry? How CEO gender impacts the effectiveness of organizational apologies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 105: 196–208. Google Scholar
  • Craig, R., & Amernic, J. 2021. Decoding CEO-speak. Toronto, Canada: Rotman-UTP Publishing. Google Scholar
  • Crilly, D., Zollo, M., & Hansen, M. T. 2012. Faking it or muddling through? Understanding decoupling in response to stakeholder pressures. Academy of Management Journal, 55: 1429–1448.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Dawar, N., & Pillutla, M. 2000. Impact of product-harm crises on brand equity: The moderating role of consumer expectations. Journal of Marketing Research, 37: 215–226. Google Scholar
  • Diestre, L., & Rajagopalan, N. 2014. Toward an input-based perspective on categorization: Investor reactions to chemical accidents. Academy of Management Journal, 57: 1130–1153.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Dorobantu, S., Henisz, W. J., & Nartey, L. 2017. Not all sparks light a fire: Stakeholder and shareholder reactions to critical events in contested markets. Administrative Science Quarterly, 62: 561–597. Google Scholar
  • Dwivedi, P., Joshi, A., & Misangyi, V. F. 2018. Gender-inclusive gatekeeping: How (mostly male) predecessors influence the success of female CEOs. Academy of Management Journal, 61: 379–404.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Eckel, C. C., & Grossman, P. J. 2002. Sex differences and statistical stereotyping in attitudes toward financial risk. Evolution and Human Behavior, 23: 281–295. Google Scholar
  • Eesley, C., & Lenox, M. J. 2006. Firm responses to secondary stakeholder action. Strategic Management Journal, 27: 765–781. Google Scholar
  • Elsbach, K. 1994. Managing organizational legitimacy in the California cattle industry: The construction and effectiveness of verbal accounts. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39: 57–88. Google Scholar
  • Elsbach, K. D. 2003. Organizational perception management. Research in Organizational Behavior, 25: 297–332. Google Scholar
  • Elsbach, K. D., & Kramer, R. M. 1996. Members’ responses to organizational identity threats: Encountering and countering the Business Week rankings. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41: 442–476. Google Scholar
  • Fiss, P. C. 2007. A set-theoretic approach to organizational configurations. Academy of Management Review, 32: 1180–1198.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Fiss, P. C. 2011. Building better causal theories: A fuzzy set approach to typologies in organization research. Academy of Management Journal, 54: 393–420.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Fiss, P. C., & Zajac, E. J. 2006. The symbolic management of strategic change: Sensegiving via framing and decoupling. Academy of Management Journal, 49: 1173–1193.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Fuoli, M., van de Weijer, J., & Paradis, C. 2017. Denial outperforms apology in repairing organizational trust despite strong evidence of guilt. Public Relations Review, 43: 645–660. Google Scholar
  • Furnari, S., Crilly, D., Misangyi, V. F., Greckhamer, T., Fiss, P. C., & Aguilera, R. 2021. Capturing causal complexity: Heuristics for configurational theorizing. Academy of Management Review, 46: 778–799.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Gangloff, K. A., Connelly, B., & Shook, C. 2016. Of scapegoats and signals: Investor reactions to CEO succession in the aftermath of wrongdoing. Journal of Management, 42: 1614–1634. Google Scholar
  • Garcia‐Castro, R., & Francoeur, C. 2016. When more is not better: Complementarities, costs and contingencies in stakeholder management. Strategic Management Journal, 37: 406–424. Google Scholar
  • Godfrey, P. C., Merrill, C. B., & Hansen, J. M. 2009. The relationship between corporate social responsibility and shareholder value: An empirical test of the risk management hypothesis. Strategic Management Journal, 30: 425–445. Google Scholar
  • Gomulya, D., & Boeker, W. 2014. How firms respond to financial restatement: CEO successors and external reactions. Academy of Management Journal, 57: 1759–1785.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Government Accountability Office. 2002, October 4. Financial statement restatements: Trends, market impacts, regulatory responses, and remaining challenges. Retrieved from https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-03-138 Google Scholar
  • Government Accountability Office. 2006, July 24. Financial statement restatements: Updates of public company trends, market impacts and regulatory enforcement actions. Retrieved from https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GAOREPORTS-GAO-06-678/html/GAOREPORTS-GAO-06-678.htm Google Scholar
  • Graffin, S. D., Carpenter, M. A., & Boivie, S. 2011. What’s all that (strategic) noise? Anticipatory impression management in CEO succession. Strategic Management Journal, 32: 748–770. Google Scholar
  • Greckhamer, T. 2016. CEO compensation in relation to worker compensation across countries: The configurational impact of country‐level institutions. Strategic Management Journal, 37: 793–815. Google Scholar
  • Guiso, L., Sapienza, P., & Zingales, L. 2008. Trusting the stock market. Journal of Finance, 63: 2557–2600. Google Scholar
  • Gupta, K., Crilly, D., & Greckhamer, T. 2020. Stakeholder engagement strategies, national institutions, and firm performance: A configurational perspective. Strategic Management Journal, 41: 1869–1900. Google Scholar
  • Haselhuhn, M. P., Kennedy, J. A., Kray, L. J., Van Zant, A. B., & Schweitzer, M. E. 2015. Gender differences in trust dynamics: Women trust more than men following a trust violation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 56: 104–109. Google Scholar
  • Hawn, O., & Ioannou, I. 2016. Mind the gap: The interplay between external and internal actions in the case of corporate social responsibility. Strategic Management Journal, 37: 2569–2588. Google Scholar
  • Hearit, K. M. 1995. “Mistakes were made”: Organizations, apologia, and crises of social legitimacy. Communication Studies, 46: 1–17. Google Scholar
  • Hearit, K. M. 1999. Newsgroups, activist publics, and corporate apologia: The case of Intel and its Pentium chip. Public Relations Review, 25: 291–308. Google Scholar
  • Hearit, K. M., & Brown, J. 2004. Merrill Lynch: Corporate apologia and business fraud. Public Relations Review, 30: 459–466. Google Scholar
  • Heinze, J., Uhlmann, E. L., & Diermeier, D. 2014. Unlikely allies: Credibility transfer during a corporate crisis. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 44: 392–397. Google Scholar
  • Hennes, K. M., Leone, A. J., & Miller, B. P. 2008. The importance of distinguishing errors from irregularities in restatement research: The case of restatements and CEO/CFO turnover. Accounting Review, 83: 1487–1519. Google Scholar
  • Hennes, K. M., Leone, A. J., & Miller, B. P. 2014. Determinants and market consequences of auditor dismissals after accounting restatements. Accounting Review, 89: 1051–1082. Google Scholar
  • Henning, K., Jones, A. R., & Holdford, R. 2005. “I didn’t do it, but if I did I had a good reason”: Minimization, denial, and attributions of blame among male and female domestic violence offenders. Journal of Family Violence, 20: 131–139. Google Scholar
  • Hersel, M. C. 2022. Fighting with the fourth estate: A theoretical framework of organization-media rivalry for narrative control following a transgression. Academy of Management Review, 47: 425–447.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Hersel, M. C., Helmuth, C. A., Zorn, M. L., Shropshire, C., & Ridge, J. W. 2019. The corrective actions firms pursue following misconduct: A review and research agenda. Academy of Management Annals, 13: 547–585.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Hitt, M. A., Dacin, M. T., Levitas, E., Arregle, J. L., & Borza, A. 2000. Partner selection in emerging and developed market contexts: Resource-based and organizational learning perspectives. Academy of Management Journal, 43: 449–467.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Holsti, O. 1969. Content analysis for the social sciences and humanities. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Google Scholar
  • Jacqueminet, A., & Durand, R. 2020. Ups and downs: The role of legitimacy judgment cues in practice implementation. Academy of Management Journal, 63: 1485–1507.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Jong, W. 2020. Anticipating the unknown: Crisis communication while under investigation. Public Relations Inquiry, 9: 47–60. Google Scholar
  • Kim, P., Dirks, K., Cooper, C., & Ferrin, D. 2006. When more blame is better than less: The implications of internal vs. external attributions for the repair of trust after a competence-vs. integrity-based trust violation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 99: 49–65. Google Scholar
  • Krippendorff, K. 2004. Reliability in content analysis. Human Communication Research, 30: 411–433. Google Scholar
  • Loughran, T., & McDonald, B. 2014. Measuring readability in financial disclosures. Journal of Finance, 69: 1643–1671. Google Scholar
  • Lusiani, M., & Langley, A. 2019. The social construction of strategic coherence: Practices of enabling leadership. Long Range Planning, 52: 101840. Google Scholar
  • Maas, C. J., & Hox, J. J. 2005. Sufficient sample sizes for multilevel modeling. Methodology, 1: 86–92. Google Scholar
  • MacLean, T. L., & Behnam, M. 2010. The dangers of decoupling: The relationship between compliance programs, legitimacy perceptions, and institutionalized misconduct. Academy of Management Journal, 53: 1499–1520.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Maiorescu, R. D. 2016. Crisis management at General Motors and Toyota: An analysis of gender-specific communication and media coverage. Public Relations Review, 42: 556–563. Google Scholar
  • Maitlis, S., & Lawrence, T. B. 2007. Triggers and enablers of sensegiving in organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 50: 57–84.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Marcus, A., & Goodman, R. 1991. Victims and shareholders: The dilemmas of presenting corporate policy during a crisis. Academy of Management Journal, 34: 281–305.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D. 1997. Event studies in management research: Theoretical and empirical issues. Academy of Management Journal, 40: 626–657.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Meertens, R. M., & Lion, R. 2008. Measuring an individual’s tendency to take risks: The risk propensity scale 1. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 38: 1506–1520. Google Scholar
  • Mian, S. 2001. On the choice and replacement of chief financial officers. Journal of Financial Economics, 60: 143–175. Google Scholar
  • Misangyi, V. F., & Acharya, A. G. 2014. Substitutes or complements? A configurational examination of corporate governance mechanisms. Academy of Management Journal, 57: 1681–1705.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Misangyi, V. F., Greckhamer, T., Furnari, S., Fiss, P. C., Crilly, D., & Aguilera, R. 2017. Embracing causal complexity: The emergence of a neo-configurational perspective. Journal of Management, 43: 255–282. Google Scholar
  • Mishina, Y., Dykes, B. J., Block, E. S., & Pollock, T. G. 2010. Why “good” firms do bad things: The effects of high aspirations, high expectations, and prominence on the incidence of corporate illegality. Academy of Management Journal, 53: 701–722.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Mitchell, R. K., Agle, B. R., & Wood, D. J. 1997. Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of Management Review, 22: 853–886.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Monin, P., Noorderhaven, N., Vaara, E., & Kroon, D. 2013. Giving sense to and making sense of justice in postmerger integration. Academy of Management Journal, 56: 256–284.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Moss, T. W., Short, J. C., Payne, G. T., & Lumpkin, G. T. 2011. Dual identities in social ventures: An exploratory study. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 35: 805–830. Google Scholar
  • Nath, D., & Sudharshan, D. 1994. Measuring strategy coherence through patterns of strategic choices. Strategic Management Journal, 15: 43–61. Google Scholar
  • Newman, M. L., Pennebaker, J. W., Berry, D. S., & Richards, J. M. 2003. Lying words: Predicting deception from linguistic style. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29: 665–675. Google Scholar
  • Nicolaides, R., Trafford, R., & Russell, C. 2018. Helping auditors identify deception through psycholinguistics. Journal of Financial Crime, 25: 1062–1076. Google Scholar
  • Nofsinger, J., & Sias, R. 1999. Herding and feedback trading by institutional and individual investors. Journal of Finance, 54: 2263–2295. Google Scholar
  • Park, H., & Cameron, G. T. 2014. Keeping it real: Exploring the roles of conversational human voice and source credibility in crisis communication via blogs. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 91: 487–507. Google Scholar
  • Payne, G. T., Brigham, K. H., Broberg, J. C., Moss, T. W., & Short, J. C. 2011. Organizational virtue orientation and family firms. Business Ethics Quarterly, 21: 257–285. Google Scholar
  • Pennebaker, J. W., Francis, M. E., & Booth, R. J. 2001. Linguistic inquiry and word count (Computer software). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Google Scholar
  • Pfarrer, M., DeCelles, K., Smith, K., & Taylor, M. 2008. After the fall: Reintegrating the corrupt organization. Academy of Management Review, 33: 730–749.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Pfarrer, M. D., Smith, K. G., Bartol, K. M., Khanin, D. M., & Zhang, X. 2008. Coming forward: The effects of social and regulatory forces on the voluntary restatement of earnings subsequent to wrongdoing. Organization Science, 19: 386–403. Google Scholar
  • Porter, C. O., Outlaw, R., Gale, J. P., & Cho, T. S. 2019. The use of online panel data in management research: A review and recommendations. Journal of Management, 45: 319–344. Google Scholar
  • Priem, R. L., Walters, B. A., & Li, S. 2011. Decisions, decisions! How judgment policy studies can integrate macro and micro domains in management research. Journal of Management, 37: 553–580. Google Scholar
  • Quigley, T. J., Crossland, C., & Campbell, R. J. 2017. Shareholder perceptions of the changing impact of CEOs: Market reactions to unexpected CEO deaths, 1950–2009. Strategic Management Journal, 38: 939–949. Google Scholar
  • Ragin, C. C. 2009. Qualitative comparative analysis using fuzzy sets (fsQCA). In B. RihouxC. C. Ragin (Eds.), Configurational comparative methods: Qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) and related techniques: 87–121. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. Google Scholar
  • Rytkönen, S., & Louhiala-Salminen, L. 2014. Sell the sizzle. Corporate Communications, 19: 329–343. Google Scholar
  • Schnatterly, K., Gangloff, K., & Tuschke, A. 2018. CEO wrongdoing: A review of pressure, opportunity, and rationalization. Journal of Management, 44: 2405–2432. Google Scholar
  • Schneider, M. R., Schulze-Bentrop, C., & Paunescu, M. 2010. Mapping the institutional capital of high-tech firms: A fuzzy-set analysis of capitalist variety and export performance. Journal of International Business Studies, 41: 246–266. Google Scholar
  • Schwartz, G. S., Kane, T. R., Joseph, J. M., & Tedeschi, J. T. 1978. The effects of post‐transgression remorse on perceived aggression, attributions of intent, and level of punishment. British Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 17: 293–297. Google Scholar
  • Schweitzer, M. E., Hershey, J. C., & Bradlow, E. T. 2006. Promises and lies: Restoring violated trust. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 101: 1–19. Google Scholar
  • Scott, S. G., & Lane, V. R. 2000. A stakeholder approach to organizational identity. Academy of Management Review, 25: 43–62.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Seawright, J. 2016. Multi-method social science: Combining qualitative and quantitative tools. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
  • SEC. 1998. A plain English handbook: How to recreate clear SEC disclosure documents. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Google Scholar
  • Shen, W., & Cannella, A. A., Jr. 2003. Will succession planning increase shareholder wealth? Evidence from investor reactions to relay CEO successions. Strategic Management Journal, 24: 191–198. Google Scholar
  • Shiu, Y.-M., & Yang, S.-L. 2017. Does engagement in corporate social responsibility provide strategic insurance-like effects? Strategic Management Journal, 38: 455–470. Google Scholar
  • Short, J. C., Broberg, J. C., Cogliser, C. C., & Brigham, K. H. 2010. Construct validation using computer-aided text analysis (CATA): An illustration using entrepreneurial orientation. Organizational Research Methods, 13: 320–347. Google Scholar
  • Simsek, Z., & Veiga, J. F. 2001. A primer on Internet organizational surveys. Organizational Research Methods, 4: 218–235. Google Scholar
  • Song, F., & Bitektine, A. 2018. Firm status and evaluators’ trust: The many ways to trust a firm. Journal of Business Ethics, 153: 503–518. Google Scholar
  • Spence, J. R., & Keeping, L. 2011. Conscious rating distortion in performance appraisal: A review, commentary, and proposed framework for research. Human Resource Management Review, 21: 85–95. Google Scholar
  • Spencer, S. J., Zanna, M. P., & Fong, G. T. 2005. Establishing a causal chain: Why experiments are often more effective than mediational analyses in examining psychological processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89: 845–851. Google Scholar
  • Teece, D. J., Rumelt, R., Dosi, G., & Winter, S. 1994. Understanding corporate coherence: Theory and evidence. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 23: 1–30. Google Scholar
  • Tilcsik, A. 2010. From ritual to reality: Demography, ideology, and decoupling in a post-communist government agency. Academy of Management Journal, 53: 1474–1498.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Tomlinson, E. C., & Mayer, R. C. 2009. The role of causal attribution dimensions in trust repair. Academy of Management Review, 34: 85–104.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Tyler, L. 1997. Liability means never being able to say you’re sorry: Corporate guilt, legal constraints, and defensiveness in corporate communication. Management Communication Quarterly, 11: 51–73. Google Scholar
  • Vartapetiance, A., & Gillam, L. 2012. “I don’t know where he is not”: Does deception research yet offer a basis for deception detectives? In E. FitzpatrickJ. BachenkoT. Fornaciari (Eds.), Proceedings of the workshop on computational approaches to deception detection: 5–14. Avignon, France: Association for Computational Linguistics. Google Scholar
  • Vergne, J. P., & Depeyre, C. 2016. How do firms adapt? A fuzzy-set analysis of the role of cognition and capabilities in U.S. defense firms’ responses to 9/11. Academy of Management Journal, 59: 1653–1680.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Webster, J., & Treviño, L. K. 1995. Rational and social theories as complementary explanations of communication media choices: Two policy-capturing studies. Academy of Management Journal, 38: 1544–1572.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Welch, J. 2019. The Volkswagen recovery: Leaving scandal in the dust. Journal of Business Strategy, 40: 3–13. Google Scholar
  • Whetten, D. A. 2006. Albert and Whetten revisited: Strengthening the concept of organizational identity. Journal of Management Inquiry, 15: 219–234. Google Scholar
  • Wiesenfeld, B. M., Wurthmann, K. A., & Hambrick, D. C. 2008. The stigmatization and devaluation of elites associated with corporate failures: A process model. Academy of Management Review, 33: 231–251.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Zavyalova, A., Pfarrer, M., Reger, R., & Shapiro, D. 2012. Managing the message: The effects of firm actions and industry spillovers on media coverage following wrongdoing. Academy of Management Journal, 55: 1079–1101.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Zhang, Y., & Wiersema, M. F. 2009. Stock market reaction to CEO certification: The signaling role of CEO background. Strategic Management Journal, 30: 693–710. Google Scholar
Academy of Management
  Academy of Management
  555 Pleasantville Road, Suite N200
  Briarcliff Manor, NY 10510-8020, USA
  Phone: +1 (914) 326-1800
  Fax: +1 (914) 326-1900