Consumer Response to Transgression Relevance and Proactive Disclosure in 25 to 45 Year Olds Residing in the Mid-Atlantic and New England Regions of the United State

Organizations are not immune to crisis events that result when managers commit transgressions that harm the relationship between the organization and its consumers (Tsarenko & Tojib, 2015). Marketing managers, crisis communication managers, and public relations professionals have a vested interest in understanding how consumers respond to transgressions that are relevant (vs. irrelevant) to the values espoused by the organization. In addition, managers must also consider the timing of their response to transgressions (Coombs, 2015). Claeys (2017) stated that organizations should expect that information about a crisis event will eventually surface. Organizations should seize the opportunity to frame the message around the transgression and rebuild trust by proactively disclosing transgression information before a third party does. The current study examined the relationship between transgression relevance (relevant vs. irrelevant), consumer attitude, willingness to purchase, and willingness to recommend. In addition, it examined the relationship between proactive disclosure, consumer attitude, willingness to purchase, and willingness to recommend. A two-way ANOVA analysis revealed negative relationships between transgression relevance and attitude, willingness to purchase, and willingness to recommend. Additional analyses revealed positive relationships between proactive disclosure and attitude, willingness to purchase, and willingness to recommend. No interaction effect was observed between transgression relevance and proactive disclosure as it related to attitude, willingness to purchase, and willingness to recommend. Under conditions where an organization behaves unscrupulously, organizations should take measures to more effectively assess risk and proactively disclose transgression information.