Mitigating negative spillover effects in a product-harm crisis: strategies for market leaders versus market challengers

Jun Zhang, Joon Soo Lim

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

3 Scopus citations

Abstract

Prior research indicates that a brand’s product-harm crisis can lower consumer evaluations of competing brands within the same industry, which are known as negative spillover effects. Competing brands should proactively respond to the crisis to dissociate from the crisis-stricken brand. In the current research, two experiments were conducted to examine the relative efficacy of crisis response strategies (bolstering vs. differentiation vs. no response) in mitigating negative spillover effects on competing brands with different market positions (market leader vs. market challenger). The context of these experiments is a product-harm crisis in which a brand’s product is recalled due to food-borne illness. The moderated mediation analyses reveal that the bolstering strategy leads to similar positive indirect effects on brand attitude and purchase intention through message evaluations regardless of whether market leaders or challengers employ the strategy. In contrast, the differentiation strategy yields a more positive indirect effect on brand attitudes and purchase intentions through message evaluations when a market challenger employs the strategy rather than a leader.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)77-98
Number of pages22
JournalJournal of Brand Management
Volume28
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 2021

Keywords

  • Bolstering
  • Crisis response
  • Differentiation
  • Market position
  • Product-harm crisis
  • Spillover effects

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Strategy and Management
  • Marketing

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Mitigating negative spillover effects in a product-harm crisis: strategies for market leaders versus market challengers'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this