Se taire, nier ou s'excuser: comment répondre à un appel au boycott ?

Sonia Capelli (), Pascal Legrand and William Sabadie ()
Additional contact information
Sonia Capelli: CRCGM - Centre de Recherche Clermontois en Gestion et Management - UdA - Université d'Auvergne - Clermont-Ferrand I - ESC Clermont-Ferrand - École Supérieure de Commerce (ESC) - Clermont-Ferrand
Pascal Legrand: CRCGM - Centre de Recherche Clermontois en Gestion et Management - UdA - Université d'Auvergne - Clermont-Ferrand I - ESC Clermont-Ferrand - École Supérieure de Commerce (ESC) - Clermont-Ferrand
William Sabadie: MAGELLAN - Laboratoire de Recherche Magellan - UJML - Université Jean Moulin - Lyon 3 - Université de Lyon - Institut d'Administration des Entreprises (IAE) - Lyon

Post-Print from HAL

Abstract: This study deals with the process underlying the impact of three crisis communication strategies – silence, deny and apology – identified in the literature, on boycott intent and buying intent. The case investigated is a boycott request concerning the use of chemical products on meat sold by a supermarket. Results show that depending the target, the firm should deny or apology and that silence is an underper- forming strategy.

Keywords: crisis communication; boycott; loyalty.; communication de crise; fidélité. (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2012-12
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Published in Décisions Marketing, 2012, 68, pp.71-82. ⟨10.7193/DM.068.71.82⟩

There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:hal:journl:hal-02413514

DOI: 10.7193/DM.068.71.82

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Post-Print from HAL
Bibliographic data for series maintained by CCSD ().