The Blame-taker's Dilemma: Actions and Reactions in the Wake of Organizational Failure

Many organizational failures are diffuse: several people share responsibility. This allows the involved actors to respond in several ways. An often-prescribed response is to "apologize," but apologies typically communicate two, distinct messages: responsibility (they take blame) and regret (they express remorse). Although taking blame and expressing remorse are distinguishable, they have not received much independent research attention. This leaves a theoretical and practical gap, as organizational actors often do one without the other. My dissertation focuses on blame-taking. Eight studies examine blame-taking's independent incidence and effectiveness inside organizations. Overall, these studies document a disconnect between what people do and what others want them to do following a diffuse failure.;Study 1 investigated the incidence of blame-taking in a consulting firm, documenting its infrequency and confinement to particular actors and situations. Studies 2 and 3 showed, however, that people expect themselves to take blame. Study 4 began to investigate effectiveness, documenting that consultants in the Study 1 firm, responding to similar situations, preferred blame-taking to remorse and other responses. Study 5 replicated this preference among working-age adults and identified a mediator: perceived character. Study 6 replicated this preference and mediator in the lab, and also identified a moderator: failures caused by intentional behavior. Using data from Lee, Peterson, & Tiedens (2004), Study 7 began to show that positive reactions may be confined to intra-organizational actors; Study 8 replicated this finding. Overall, these studies suggest that people are quite reluctant to take blame, even though their organizational counterparts would often welcome it.