When apologies backfire: a moderated mediation model of exposure by NGOs, companies’ hypocrisy, and consumers’ political orientations

ABSTRACT

To determine when and why a company’s apology for a moral transgression might backfire, this study considers a rarely researched cue: exposure of company misconduct by non-governmental organisations (NGOs). In three experimental studies, we demonstrate that after companies’ moral transgressions are exposed by NGOs, their apologies exacerbate consumers’ negative responses because consumers view the companies as having increased moral and behavioural hypocrisy. Consumers’ political orientations moderate the mediating effect of companies’ moral hypocrisy as, following exposure by an NGO, conservatives perceive the company issuing an apology to be more deceptive, which is not the case for liberals. Thus, this study expands upon the developing research stream related to the efficacy of apologies as strategic responses to preventable crises. It specifies an underlying mechanism that explains when and why exposure by NGOs causes apologies to backfire and suggests practical guidelines for companies when developing appropriate apologies.

KEYWORDS:

• Apology
• company’s moral transgressions
• company hypocrisy
• political orientation
• consumers’ negative responses

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Compliance with ethical standards

The authors also declare that all procedures performed in the studies presented were in accordance with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments. Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Notes

1. The NGOs used in our studies are real but their involvement in the campaigns is fictitious. The names of the NGOs are kept undisclosed in the accepted version of this article to prevent misattribution of statements.

2. In all the studies, we used attention and manipulation checks to detect inattentive respondents and improve data quality (Abbey & Meloy, 2017; Arndt et al., 2022; Curran, 2016). As to the attention checks, we asked the respondents to select a specific score on the seven-point scale (e.g. ‘Please select number 2’) at three different points of each questionnaire. As to the manipulation check, we verified whether the respondents correctly remembered the presence or absence of the NGO. In all studies, we excluded the participants who failed the attention and/or manipulation checks.

3. We also measured the costliness of the company’s apology using the four-item scale detailed in Appendix B. We used the costliness of the company’s apology to conduct additional analyses, which are discussed in Study 1, ”Additional analyses”.

4. The two scenarios were pretested to ascertain the levels of costliness. A total of 96 respondents, randomly assigned to one of the two scenarios, participated in the pre-test (49 men, average age of 39, SD = 13.09). We asked respondents to rate the costliness of the apology using a four-item scale (α = .87; M = 3.32, SD = 1.16; Antonetti & Baghi, 2023). The two scenarios differed as expected (M_{lower-costliness} = 2.64, M_{higher-costliness} = 3.96; t(94) = −6.69, p < .01), although the mean score of the perceived apology costliness in the higher costliness condition was rather moderate.

5. Attitude towards the company: M_{no-NGO low costliness} = 2.68, SD = 1.03; M_{NGO low costliness} = 1.98, SD = 1.24; M_{no-NGO high costliness} = 2.44, SD = 1.15; M_{NGO high costliness} = 2.14, SD = 1.16; boycott intentions: M_{no-NGO low costliness} = 4.06, SD = 2.01; M_{NGO low costliness} = 4.61, SD = 1.96; M_{no-NGO high costliness} = 4.21, SD = 1.95; M_{NGO high costliness} = 4.47, SD = 1.89; negative WOM intentions: M_{no-NGO low costliness} = 3.98, SD = 1.80; M_{NGO low costliness} = 4.25, SD = 1.68; M_{no-NGO high costliness} = 3.97, SD = 1.84; M_{NGO high costliness} = 4.40, SD = 1.59.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Silvia Grappi

Silvia Grappi, is Full Professor of Marketing at University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, in Italy. Her research interests are in the field of consumer behaviour, psychology of emotions, and ethics. Her current research explores consumer responses to company strategic decisions, human emotions, and consumer reactions to corporate social responsibility (CSR). She published in international peer-reviewed journals including the Annual Review of Psychology, the Journal of World Business, the Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, the International Journal of Research in Marketing, the Journal of Business Research, the Journal of Business Ethics, the European Journal of Marketing, Psychology & Marketing, the Management International Review, and the International Marketing Review.

Camilla Barbarossa

Camilla Barbarossa, is Associate Professor of Marketing at Toulouse Business School. Her research focuses on consumer responses to corporate social responsibility, corporate social irresponsibility (brand transgressions, product-harm crises), and, more generally, threatening external events. Her research has appeared in various international peer-reviewed journals, for example, the Journal of Business Ethics, Journal of International Marketing, International Marketing Review, International Business Review, Psychology & Marketing, and Journal of Environmental Psychology.

Veronica Gabrielli

Veronica Gabrielli, is Associate Professor of Marketing at the Department of Communication and Economics, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, in Italy. She obtained her PhD in Business Administration at the University of Venice (Italy). Her research interests include branding and consumers reactions to marketing communications. More recent studies are focused on for-profit and no-profit co-branding activities and on brand crisis. She has published in academic peer-reviewed journals, including Journal of Consumer Marketing, Marketing Letters, the Journal of Marketing Communications, the Journal of Brand Management, Journal of Product and Brand Management.

Simona Romani

Simona Romani, is Full Professor of Consumer Behaviour at Luiss University, in Italy. Her research interests are in the field of consumer behaviour, psychology of emotions, branding and sustainability. Her current research explores consumer emotions, consumer reactions to corporate social responsibility (CSR), and brand misconducts. She published in international peer-reviewed journals including the Annual Review of Psychology, the Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, the International Journal of Research in Marketing, the Journal of Business Research, the Journal of Business Ethics, the European Journal of Marketing, and Psychology & Marketing.