食品企业社会责任救赎丑闻品牌的作用边界——感知质量与丑闻范围的调节作用

财经论丛 ›› 2018, Vol. 34 ›› Issue (8): 85-96.

食品企业社会责任救赎丑闻品牌的作用边界——感知质量与丑闻范围的调节作用

王春娅^1,2,余伟萍³

1.河南理工大学工商管理学院,河南焦作 454000;
2.河南省能源经济研究所,河南焦作 454000;
3.四川大学商学院成都 610065

收稿日期:2017-08-19 出版日期:2018-08-10 发布日期:2018-08-23
作者简介:王春娅(1973-),女,陕西宝鸡人,河南理工大学工商管理学院副教授,河南省能源研究所副研究员,博士;余伟萍(1969-),女,四川成都人,四川大学商学院教授,博士,通讯作者。
基金资助:
河南省哲学社会科学规划项目(2016BJJ019);河南省教育厅人文社科研究一般项目(2017-ZZJH-195);河南省教育厅软科学项目(17A630021);成都市科技厅项目(2016-RK00-00206-ZF)

Boundary Effect of Corporate Social Responsibility on Forgiving Brand in Food Industry ——The Moderating Roles of Perceived Quality and Scandal Scope

WANG Chunya^1,2, YU Weiping³

1.School of Business Administration, Henan Polytechnic University, Jiaozuo 454000, China;
2.Research Centre for Energy Economics of Henan Province, Jiaozuo 454000, China;
3. School of Business, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610065, China

Received:2017-08-19 Online:2018-08-10 Published:2018-08-23

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 近年来,我国食品行业品牌丑闻频发,丑闻后企业修复品牌,其目的是获得消费者宽恕,然而,目前鲜有研究探讨丑闻后企业社会责任(CSR)策略影响消费者宽恕的内在机制。本文基于前期对食品业近百起品牌丑闻及丑闻后企业社会责任(CSR)行为的连续追踪,选取感知质量与丑闻范围这两个调节变量,探究丑闻之后企业普遍青睐的社区公益责任策略与组合式责任策略对品牌的救赎效果及作用边界。经由两个情境模拟实验法研究得到结论:社区公益和组合式责任策略均能获得消费者宽恕,且受感知质量的负向调节;丑闻范围正向调节组合式责任策略的救赎效果,但并不调节社区公益责任策略的积极作用。该研究为丑闻后企业正确选择救赎性CSR策略提供了思路。

关键词: 企业社会责任, 消费者宽恕, 感知质量, 丑闻范围

Abstract: In recent years, the brand scandals have occurred frequently in food industry in China, and the companies involved often make every effort possible to fix their brand images and obtain consumers' forgiveness. However, few studies have done on the internal mechanism of corporate social responsibility's influence on consumer's forgiveness. Based on the previous case studies of nearly 100 brand scandals in food industry and corporate social responsibility (CSR) behaviors after the crisis, focusing on the two important influencing factors of percived quality and scandal scope, this study explores the salvation effects of community and combined CSR strategies on consumer forgiveness and the moderating roles of perceived quality and scandal range. Through two scenarios experiments, it is concluded that both community CSR and combined CSR strategies can obtain forgiveness, with perceived quality acting as a negative moderator. Scandal scope has a different function in this process :it positively moderates the salvation effect of the combined CSR strategy, but it does not have a pisitive moderating effect on the community CSR strategy. The study provides some advice for companies in food industry with regard to the choice of the correct CSR strategies when scandals should occur.

Key words: Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), Customer Redemption, Perceived Quality, Scandal Scope

中图分类号:

F713

王春娅,余伟萍. 食品企业社会责任救赎丑闻品牌的作用边界——感知质量与丑闻范围的调节作用[J]. 财经论丛, 2018, 34(8): 85-96.

WANG Chunya, YU Weiping. Boundary Effect of Corporate Social Responsibility on Forgiving Brand in Food Industry ——The Moderating Roles of Perceived Quality and Scandal Scope[J]. , 2018, 34(8): 85-96.

参考文献

[1] Beverl and M. B. Exploring Consumers' Conflict Styles: Grudge and Forgiveness Following Marketer Failure [J]. Advances in Consumer Research, 2008, 36(36):438-442.
[2] Coombs W. T. Protecting Organization Reputations during a Crisis: The Development and Application of Situational Crisis Communication Theory [J]. Corporate Reputation Review, 2007, 10(3):163-176.
[3] 方正, 江明华, 杨洋,等.产品伤害危机应对策略对品牌资产的影响研究——企业声誉与危机类型的调节作用[J]. 管理世界,2010,26(12):105-118.
[4] 余伟萍,王春娅,段桂敏. 丑闻后慈善捐助匹配度对品牌形象的修复机理——利他性动机认知的中介作用与感知质量的调节作用[J]. 商业经济与管理,2014,34(9):61-70.
[5] 余伟萍, 赵占恒. 丑闻后企业社会责任行为对品牌形象的影响研究——丑闻责任的调节作用和利他性归因的中介作用[J]. 华东经济管理,2015,34(5):8-15.
[7] 王春娅, 余伟萍, 段桂敏. 慈善捐助契合度对消费意愿的修复效应——基于品牌丑闻情境的分析[J]. 财经论丛,2014, 16(5):67-73.
[8] 田虹, 王汉瑛. 异质性企业社会责任的“前门”机制和“后门”机制——来自中国上市公司的经验证据[J]. 中南大学学报社会科学版,2016, 22(1):114-122.
[9] Freeman R. E. Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach[M]. Cambridge University Press, 1984.
[10] 董伊人,赵曙明.企业社会责任不同领域对消费者反应的影响——基于私家车购买者的实证研究[J]. 学海,2010,(5): 148-153.
[11] Doris Fuchs, Agni Kalfagianni. Discursive Power as a Source of Legitimation in Food Retail Governance [J]. International Review of Retail Distribution & Consumer Research, 2009, 19(5):553-570.
[12] 王春娅.食品行业品牌丑闻后CSR行为特征研究[J]. 山西农业大学学报(社会科学版),2017,16(2):68-76.
[13] Brown T. J., Dacin P. A. The Company and the Product: Corporate Associations and Consumer Product Responses [J]. Journal of Marketing, 1997, 61(1):68-84.
[14] Sen S., Bhattacharya C. B. Does Doing Good always Lead to Doing Better? Consumer Reactions to Corporate Social Responsibility[J]. Journal of marketing Research, 2001, 38(2):225-243.
[15] Schlegelmilch B. B., Haas-Kotzegger U. Conceptualizing Consumers' Experiences of Product-harm Crises [J]. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 2013, 30(2):112-120.
[16] Bhattarcharya C. B., Sen S. Consumer-Company Identification: A Framework for Understanding Consumers' Relationships with Companies [J]. Journal of Marketing, 2003, 67(2):76-88.
[17] Jeff Joireman, Dustin Smith, Richie L. Liu, Jonathan Arthurs. It's All Good: Corporate Social Responsibility Reduces Negative and Promotes Positive Responses to Service Failures Among Value-Aligned Customers [J]. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 2015,34(1):32-49.
[18] 陈通, 青平, 涂铭. 企业社会责任在品牌危机中的作用研究[J]. 当代财经, 2018,38(2):74-83.
[19] 王晓明,徐莹莹,刘贝贝.产品伤害危机背景下企业联想对消费者负面口碑传播的影响——以食品行业为例[J]. 珞珈管理评论,2017,14(2): 103-117.
[20] Karremans J. C., Lange P. A. M. V. Does Activating Justice Help or Hurt in Promoting Forgiveness? [J]. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 2005, 41(3):290-297.
[21] Verett L. Worthington, Michael Scherer. Forgiveness is an Emotion-focused Coping Strategy that can Reduce Health Risks and Promote Health Resilience: Theory, Review, and Hypotheses [J]. Psychology and Health,2004, 19(3):385-405.
[22] 任金中,景奉杰.产品伤害危机模糊情境下危机响应调节匹配对宽恕的影响[J]. 管理学报,2015,12(4):583-592.
[23] Chakravarthy, Jivas, deHaan, Ed, Rajgopal, Shivaram. Reputation Repair after a Serious Restatement [J]. Accounting Review, 2014, 89(4):1329-1363.
[24] Nadine Gatzert. The Impact of Corporate Reputation and Reputation Damaging Events on Financial Performance: Empirical Evidence from the Literature [J]. European Management Journal, 2015, 33(6):485-499.
[25] 胡银花, 孔凡斌, 许正松. 食品安全危机下企业社会责任对品牌修复的实证研究[J]. 企业经济, 2018,37(2):132-138.
[26] 王春娅.食品企业不同CSR对丑闻品牌形象的救赎效应比较研究[J]. 山西农业大学学报(社会科学版),2017,16(8):68-76.
[27] 童泽林,黄静,张欣瑞,等.企业家公德和私德行为的消费者反应:差序格局的文化影响[J]. 管理世界,2015,32(4): 103-111.
[28] Luo X., Bhattacharya C. B. Corporate Social Responsibility, Customer Satisfaction, and Market Value [J]. Journal of Marketing, 2006, 70(4):1-18.
[29] 高勇强,陈亚静,张云均. “红领巾”还是“绿领巾”:民营企业慈善捐赠动机研究[J]. 管理世界,2012,28(8):106- 114.
[30] Wagner T., Lutz R. J, Weitz B. A. Corporate Hypocrisy: Overcoming the Threat of Inconsistent Corporate Social Responsibility Perceptions [J]. Journal of Marketing, 2009, 73(6):77-91.
[31] 冯蛟,卢强,李辉,吕一林.群发产品危机中企业应对策略对购买意愿的动态影响——来自解释水平理论的解释[J]. 商业经济与管理,2015,35(8):44- 55.
[32] Carroll A. B. The Pyramid of Corporate Social Responsibility: Toward the Moral Management of Organizational Stakeholders [J]. Business Horizons, 1991, 34(4):39-48.
[33] 郑海东.CSR行为表现:测量维度、影响因素及绩效关系[M]. 北京:高等教育出版社,2012.
[34] 卢东,Samart Powpaka,寇燕. 基于消费者视角的企业社会责任归因[J],管理学报,2010,7(6):861- 867.
[35] Lucia Gatti,Albert Caruana,Ivan Snehota. The Role of Corporate Social Responsibility, Perceived Quality and Corporate Reputation on Purchase Intention: Implications for Brand Management [J]. Journal of Brand Management, 2012, 20(1):65–76.
[36] 卫海英, 魏巍.消费者宽恕意愿对产品伤害危机的影响[J]. 经济管理,2011,33(8):101- 108.
[37] 陈晓萍,徐淑英,樊景立.组织与管理研究的实证方法(第二版)[M]. 北京:北京大学出版社,2012.
[38] 涂铭,景奉杰,汪兴东.产品伤害危机群发属性如何影响补救预期[J]. 商业经济与管理,2013,33(8): 53- 62.
[39] 冉雅璇,卫海英, Sam J. Maglio, 等.“单枪匹马”还是“人多势众”——企业道歉者人数对消费者宽恕的影响[J]. 南开管理评论,2017,20(4):38- 48.
[40] 张童.产品伤害危机群发属性对顾客应对行为的影响[J]. 社会科学家,2014,32(6):77- 82.
[41] Lombarts M. J. M. H., Rupp I., Vallejo P., et al. Sinning Saints and Saintly Sinners: the Paradox of Moral Self-regulation.[J]. Psychological Science, 2009, 20(4):523-528.
[42] 徐小龙,苏勇.产品伤害危机下消费者-品牌关系再续——一个投入模型视角[J]. 经济管理,2015,35(5):85- 96.

[1]	李珏, 郑嘉梁. 组合式税收优惠与小微企业履行社会责任[J]. 财经论丛, 2024, 40(1): 16-27.
[2]	王琦, 王孔文, 徐鹏. 企业社会责任模仿行为的双刃剑效应及其边界条件研究——基于董事网络情境[J]. 财经论丛, 2023, 39(6): 80-92.
[3]	唐玮, 胡超, 赵燕. 地方政府债务影响企业社会责任履行吗？[J]. 财经论丛, 2022, 38(10): 71-80.
[4]	杨淼, 陈艳. 企业社会责任披露对非效率投资的影响——基于权变的观点分析[J]. 财经论丛, 2022, 38(1): 79-87.
[5]	吕英, 王正斌, 姚海博. 女性董事、团体动力与企业社会责任——性别协同还是团体协同？[J]. 财经论丛, 2021, 37(4): 94-105.
[6]	鲁瑛均, 耿云江. 混合所有制企业社会责任与创新关系研究——基于董事会群体断裂带视角[J]. 财经论丛, 2020, 36(4): 73-83.
[7]	冯晓晴, 文雯, 靳毓. 多个大股东与企业社会责任[J]. 财经论丛, 2020, 36(10): 64-74.
[8]	刘凤军, 张梦洋. 网理财平台消费者使用意愿的影响机制研究[J]. 财经论丛, 2019, 35(4): 81-91.
[9]	于连超, 张卫国, 毕茜. 党组织嵌入与企业社会责任[J]. 财经论丛, 2019, 35(4): 61-70.
[10]	辛杰, 兰鹏璐. 传统文化背景下企业家儒释道价值观及其价值创造机制[J]. 财经论丛, 2018, 34(11): 93-103.
[11]	李敬强, 刘凤军. 企业社会责任特征与消费者响应研究——兼论消费者-企业认同的中介调节效应[J]. 财经论丛, 2017, 33(1): 85-94.