Managing bureaucratic reputation in the face of crises: An experimental examination of the effect of strategic communication

• Published date: 01 November 2022
• Author: Danbee Lee
• Date: 01 November 2022
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13520

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Managing bureaucratic reputation in the face of crises: An

experimental examination of the effect of strategic

communication

Danbee Lee

School of Public Administration, University of

Nebraska at Omaha, Omaha, Nebraska, USA

Correspondence

Danbee Lee, School of Public Administration,

Universityof Nebraska at Omaha, 6001 Dodge St,

Omaha, NE 68182,USA.

Email: danbeelee@unomaha.edu

Abstract

Research on bureaucratic reputation has found that public organizations respond

strategically to reputational threats. To understand better the way public organiza-

tions should communicate with their external audiences, upon which they depend

for necessary resources and democratic legitimacy, this study examines the effec-

tiveness of various communication strategies that agencies often use in response

to a crisis. The results of a series of vignette experiments involving US adults show

that an agency’s communication strategy in response to crises does indeed influ-

ence citizens’reputation judgments. Specifically, compared with remaining silent,

organizations that offer the public explanations of crises mitigate their reputa-

tional losses more effectively. Further, this study finds that people’s prior reputa-

tion judgments and the nature of the crisis itself are important factors involved in

the formation of reputation judgments, although these findings contradict com-

munication theories. The implications for theory and practice are discussed.

Evidence for Practice

•The threat a crisis poses to organizational reputation can be mitigated by pub-

lic organizations and managers strategically communicating with the public.

•In response to a crisis, providing an explanation is more effective in terms of

protecting an organization’s reputation than remaining silent.

•Reputational damage is more severe after a crisis when citizens have a favor-

able prior view of the agency’s reputation or when the failure seems repeated

and preventable.

INTRODUCTION

Managing crises and responding to the public are critical

functions of public organizations, as the press and the

general public are key audiences (Allison, 1982). Indeed,

news media are quick to cover government failures—

from minor accidents to major scandals—on a regular

basis and in ways that shape citizens’judgments. For

example, the questionable early release of prisoners in

Nebraska in 2014 sparked a crisis and public outcry. When

the media highlight such adverse events, one of the

immediate actions that organizations take ordinarily is to

issue a statement, or other communicative response

intended to protect their reputations (Coombs, 2007;

Moynihan, 2012). For example, the Nebraska Department

of Correctional Service’s response to the early release of

prisoners claimed that the director “…had been unaware

of the problem”(Cooper & Wynn, 2014). This failed to be

an effective strategy to protect the organization’s reputa-

tion, as the department received even more negative

feedback from the public. Would it have been better for

the department to respond in another way? Based upon

crisis communication theories that provide a framework

to examine such situations, this study examines how

Received: 15 August 2021 Revised: 20 April 2022 Accepted: 2 May 2022

DOI: 10.1111/puar.13520

This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium,

provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.

© 2022 The Author. Public Administration Review published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Public Administration.

1124 Public Admin Rev. 2022;82:1124–1137.

wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/puar