Influence of Crisis Communication Strategies on Stakeholders’ Perception of Organizational Reputation: A Review of Research Trends
Abstract This study is a meta-analysis of empirical studies incrisis communication research. It provides a clearer picture of the overall trends and...
Abstract
This study is a meta-analysis of empirical studies incrisis communication research. It provides a clearer picture of the overall trends and paradigm shifts in crisis communication discourse over the years. Its major objective is to examine thematic trends, theoretical framework and methodology that have characterized the discourse.Seventy relevant articles were identified, coded and content-analyzed. Findings revealed that dominant themes include stakeholder perceptions of communication strategies, crisis communication, crisis communication strategies and corporate reputation. Also, experiment, case study and survey are the dominant research methods that characterize research in this discourse. Findings also revealed a large domination of the Situational Crisis Communication Theory (SCCT) and the Image Repair Theory. However, research in this area lacks significant empirical evidence from Africa and Nigeria in particular, where crisis seems to be a recurring phenomenon. Majority of the reviewed studies were conducted in the Western clime, with little attention on Africa. Scholarship needs to move beyond this point to provide a holistic and balanced view on crisis by exploring cases in Africa and particularly, in Nigeria. This gap will provide an opportunity for understanding the crisis dynamics in Africa and will further determine whether findings can be consistent across the world.
Key Words: Crisis Communication, Crisis Communication Strategies, Stakeholder Perceptions, Organizational Reputation, Methodological Trends
*Daniel Ikesinachi Nwogwugwu is of the Department of Communication and Performing Arts, Bowen University, Iwo, Osun State, Nigeria.
AMCRON Journal of Communication and Media Research, Vol. 10, No. 2, October 2018: 125 – 138