Abstract
Apologies represent a common strategy to respond to crises or product/service failures. In five experiments, involving different failures, we show that projecting lower competence in a specific, non-core domain of activity provides a significant boost to apology effectiveness. A projection of lower competence, operationalized as a lack of skills or expertise required to effectively execute a specific task, increases the perceived costliness of the apology because the organization accepts a symbolic cost. Perceived costliness, in turn, increases the perceived sincerity of the apology and leads to more favorable responses. This strategy, however, is effective only under certain circumstances and can backfire if misapplied. First, organizations might project lower competence only when stakeholders have no other reason to question their competence. Second, projecting lower competence is effective only when the failure is not relevant to the core business. Finally, the strategy is not effective for consumers with low communal relationship orientation.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Based on the relevant literature (Halkias and Diamantopoulos, 2020), we considered mentions to the following words: competen*, skill*, incompeten*, capable, efficient, industrious, intelligent.
The use of compensation should be more effective in conditions of high persuasion knowledge because the financial payment represents an immediate benefit to the receiver that requires little processing to be understood.
At the end of the survey, participants were debriefed and informed that they would receive the entire additional fee (bonus) of £.50 irrespective of the donation awarded. Moreover, we explained that their intended donation would be donated by the researchers to a charitable organization similar to that described in the survey.
We also checked perceived apology credibility and clarity (with the same measures used in Study 1b). The apology conditions are not perceived differently in terms of credibility (Mlow competence = 5.39, Mexplanation = 5.48, Mcompensation = 5.46; F (2, 460) = .20, p > .05, partial η2 = .02) or clarity (Mlow competence = 5.30, Mexplanation = 5.33, Mcompensation = 5.32; F (2, 460) = .02, p > .05, partial η2 = .02).
To simplify the reporting, we did not consider compensation in the estimation of the moderated mediation model. The results however are consistent if we consider the full model with the three conditions for the independent variable (explanation vs low competence vs compensation). The results of the full model are reported in Web Appendix C.
As in previous studies, there are no differences in terms of credibility (Mlow competence = 4.89, Mexplanation = 4.98; t (280) = .22, p > .05, d = .11) or clarity (Mlow competence = 5.88, Mexplanation = 5.97; t (280) = .56, p > .05, d = .08). Results also show that attributions of responsibility are not significantly different between the apology conditions (Mlow competence = 6.19, Mexplanation = 6.07; t (286) = .83, p > .05, d = .10. Finally, the low competence apology is not perceived as more surprising than the alternative recovery (Mlow competence = 4.15, Mexplanation = 4.17, t (286) = .301, p > .05, d = .03).
The organization’s apology conditions are not perceived differently in terms of credibility (Mlow competence = 5.36, Mexplanation = 5.75, Mcompensation = 5.94; F (2, 175) = 2.85, p > .05, partial η2 = .02) or clarity (Mlow competence = 5.57, Mexplanation = 5.40, Mcompensation = 5.94; F (2, 175) = 2.74, p > .05, partial η2 = .02). Moreover, as in previous studies, attributions of responsibility (Mlow competence = 6.30, Mexplanation = 6.22, Mcompensation = 6.44; F (2, 175) = .67, p > .05, partial η2 = .01), perceptions of warmth (Mlow competence = 4.29, Mexplanation = 4.24, Mcompensation = 4.19; F (2, 175) = 1.67, p > .05, partial η2 = .01), and competence (Mlow competence = 3.26, Mexplanation = 3.05, Mcompensation = 3.54; F (2, 175) = 2.41, p > .05, partial η2 = .01) are not significantly different across conditions. Finally, the perceived surprise of the apology is not different across conditions (Mlow competence = 4.17, Mexplanation = 4.25, Mcompensation = 4.28; F (2, 178) = .234, p > .05, partial η2 = .00).
The ANOVA yields consistent results if run on the whole sample (219 cases).
As in Study 2, we did not consider compensation when estimating the model of moderated mediation. The results of the full model are reported in Web Appendix C.
This gender difference is reflected in our sample too, where females show higher communal orientation than males (Mmales = 4.65, Mfemales = 4.97; t(174) = 2.56, p < .05, d = .39). Running our moderated mediation model, replacing communal orientation with gender we find support for the hypothesized moderation, albeit only at 90% confidence level. The effectiveness of low competence apology is stronger for women than for men. We did not measure social class in our study.
References
Aaker, J. L., & Lee, A. Y. (2001). “I” seek pleasures and “we” avoid pains: The role of self-regulatory goals in information processing and persuasion. Journal of Consumer Research, 28(1), 33–49.
Aaker, J., Vohs, K. D., & Mogilner, C. (2010). Nonprofits are seen as warm and for-profits as competent: Firm stereotypes matter. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(2), 224–237.
Aggarwal, P. (2004). The effects of brand relationship norms on consumer attitudes and behavior. Journal of Consumer Research, 31(1), 87–101.
Alicke, M. D., & Sedikides, C. (2009). Self-enhancement and self-protection: What they are and what they do. European Review of Social Psychology, 20(1), 1–48.
Alvarez, C., & Fournier, S. (2016). Consumers’ relationships with brands. Current Opinion in Psychology, 10, 129–135.
Antonetti, P., & Maklan, S. (2016). An extended model of moral outrage at corporate social irresponsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 135(3), 429–444.
Antonetti, P., Crisafulli, B., & Maklan, S. (2018). Too good to be true? Boundary conditions to the use of downward social comparisons in service recovery. Journal of Service Research, 21(4), 438–455.
Bailey-Millado, R. & Frishberg, H. (2021). NAACP slams Ikea’s Juneteenth watermelon menu apology as ‘empty’, New York Post, June 24. Available at: https://nypost.com/2021/06/24/naacp-slams-ikeas-juneteenth-menu-apology-as-empty/.
Bhattacharjee, A., Berman, J. Z., & Reed, A. (2013). Tip of the hat, wag of the finger: How moral decoupling enables consumers to admire and admonish. Journal of Consumer Research, 39(6), 1167–1184.
Block, K., Croft, A., & Schmader, T. (2018). Worth less?: Why men (and women) devalue care-oriented careers. Frontiers in psychology, 1353.
Bolton, L. E., & Mattila, A. S. (2015). How does corporate social responsibility affect consumer response to service failure in buyer–seller relationships? Journal of Retailing, 91(1), 140–153.
Brady, M. K., Cronin, J. J., Jr., Fox, G. L., & Roehm, M. L. (2008). Strategies to offset performance failures: The role of brand equity. Journal of Retailing, 84(2), 151–164.
Brannon, L. A., & Brock, T. C. (1994). Test of schema correspondence theory of persuasion: Effects of matching an appeal to actual, ideal, and product "selves." In E. M. Clark, T. C. Brock, & D. W. Stewart (Eds.), Attention, attitude, and affect in response to advertising (pp. 169–188). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Bundy, J., Pfarrer, M. D., Short, C. E., & Coombs, W. T. (2017). Crises and crisis management: Integration, interpretation, and research development. Journal of Management, 43(6), 1661–1692.
Campbell, M. C. (1995). When attention-getting advertising tactics elicit consumer inferences of manipulative intent: The importance of balancing benefits and investments. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 4(3), 225–254.
Campbell, M. C., & Kirmani, A. (2000). Consumers’ use of persuasion knowledge: The effects of accessibility and cognitive capacity on perceptions of an influence agent. Journal of Consumer Research, 27(1), 69–83.
CBS News (2021). Juneteenth menu at Atlanta Ikea angers Black employees. CBS News. Available at: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ikea-juneteenth-menu-atlanta-black-employees/.
Chaudhry, S. J., & Loewenstein, G. (2019). Thanking, apologizing, bragging, and blaming: Responsibility exchange theory and the currency of communication. Psychological Review, 126(3), 313–344.
Clark, M. S., & Mills, J. (2011). A theory of communal (and exchange) relationships. In Handbook of Theories of Social Psychology, Van Lange Paul A. M., Kruglanski Arie W. and Higgins E. Tory (Eds.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publishing.
Clark, M. S., Oullette, R., Powell, M. C., & Milberg, S. (1987). Recipient’s mood, relationship type, and helping. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53(1), 94–103.
Coombs, W. T. (2015). The value of communication during a crisis: Insights from strategic communication research. Business Horizons, 58(2), 141–148.
Cowen, A. P., & Montgomery, N. V. (2020). To be or not to be sorry? How CEO gender impacts the effectiveness of organizational apologies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 105(2), 196–208.
Croft, A., Schmader, T., & Block, K. (2015). An underexamined inequality: Cultural and psychological barriers to men’s engagement with communal roles. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 19(4), 343–370.
Dent, C. (2020). The introduction of duty into English law and the development of the legal subject. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 40(1), 158–182.
Dunning, D., Johnson, K., Ehrlinger, J., & Kruger, J. (2003). Why people fail to recognize their own incompetence. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 12(3), 83–87.
Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J., & Glick, P. (2007). Universal dimensions of social cognition: Warmth and competence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11(2), 77–83.
Friestad, M., & Wright, P. (1994). The persuasion knowledge model: How people cope with persuasion attempts. Journal of Consumer Research, 21(1), 1–31.
Gelbrich, K., & Roschk, H. (2011). Do complainants appreciate overcompensation? A meta-analysis on the effect of simple compensation vs. overcompensation on post-complaint satisfaction. Marketing Letters, 22(1), 31–47.
Gillespie, N., Dietz, G., & Lockey, S. (2014). Organizational reintegration and trust repair after an integrity violation: A case study. Business Ethics Quarterly, 24(3), 371–410.
Grégoire, Y., Ghadami, F., Laporte, S., Sénécal, S., & Larocque, D. (2018). How can firms stop customer revenge? The effects of direct and indirect revenge on post-complaint responses. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 46(6), 1052–1071.
Güntürkün, P., Haumann, T., & Mikolon, S. (2020). Disentangling the differential roles of warmth and competence judgments in customer-service provider relationships. Journal of Service Research, 23(4), 476–503.
Halkias, G., & Diamantopoulos, A. (2020). Universal dimensions of individuals’ perception: Revisiting the operationalization of warmth and competence with a mixed-method approach. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 37(4), 714–736.
Hayes, A. F. (2017). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford publications.
Hess, R. L., Jr., Ganesan, S., & Klein, N. M. (2003). Service failure and recovery: The impact of relationship factors on customer satisfaction. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 31(2), 127–145.
Hess, R. L., Jr., Ganesan, S., & Klein, N. M. (2007). Interactional service failures in a pseudorelationship: The role of organizational attributions. Journal of Retailing, 83(1), 79–95.
Isaac, M. S., & Grayson, K. (2017). Beyond skepticism: Can accessing persuasion knowledge bolster credibility? Journal of Consumer Research, 43(6), 895–912.
Joireman, J., Grégoire, Y., Devezer, B., & Tripp, T. M. (2013). When do customers offer firms a “second chance” following a double deviation? The impact of inferred firm motives on customer revenge and reconciliation. Journal of Retailing, 89(3), 315–337.
Kelley, S. W., Hoffman, K. D., & Davis, M. A. (1993). A typology of retail failures and recoveries. Journal of Retailing, 69(4), 429–452.
Kelley, S. W., & Davis, M. A. (1994). Antecedents to customer expectations for service recovery. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 22(1), 52–61.
Kervyn, N., Fiske, S. T., & Malone, C. (2022). Social perception of brands: Warmth and competence define images of both brands and social groups. Consumer Psychology Review, 5(1), 51–68.
Kervyn, N., Yzerbyt, V. Y., Judd, C. M., & Nunes, A. (2009). A question of compensation: The social life of the fundamental dimensions of social perception. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(4), 828–842.
Khamitov, M., Grégoire, Y., & Suri, A. (2020). A systematic review of brand transgression, service failure recovery and product-harm crisis: Integration and guiding insights. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 48(3), 519–542.
Klein, J., & Dawar, N. (2004). Corporate social responsibility and consumers’ attributions and brand evaluations in a product–harm crisis. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 21(3), 203–217.
Liu, P. J., & Lin, S. C. (2018). Projecting lower competence to maintain moral warmth in the avoidance of prosocial requests. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 28(1), 23–39.
Morgan, R. M., & Hunt, S. D. (1994). The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing. Journal of Marketing, 58(3), 20–38.
Mu, F., & Bobocel, D. R. (2019). Why did I say sorry? Apology motives and transgressor perceptions of reconciliation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 40(8), 912–930.
Ohtsubo, Y., & Watanabe, E. (2009). Do sincere apologies need to be costly? Test of a costly signaling model of apology. Evolution and Human Behavior, 30(2), 114–123.
Oliver Richard, L. (1997). Satisfaction: A behavioral perspective on the consumer. New York ˈ NY: Irwin-McGraw-Hill.
Petty, R. E., Wheeler, S. C., & Bizer, G. Y. (2000). Attitude functions and persuasion: An elaboration likelihood approach to matched versus mismatched messages. Why we evaluate: Functions of attitudes, 133–162.
Pfarrer, M. D., Decelles, K. A., Smith, K. G., & Taylor, M. S. (2008). After the fall: Reintegrating the corrupt organization. Academy of Management Review, 33(3), 730–749.
Piff, P. K., Kraus, M. W., Côté, S., Cheng, B. H., & Keltner, D. (2010). Having less, giving more: The influence of social class on prosocial behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99(5), 771.
Piff, P. K., & Robinson, A. R. (2017). Social class and prosocial behavior: Current evidence, caveats, and questions. Current Opinion in Psychology, 18, 6–10.
Prinsloo, E., Scopelliti, I., Loewenstein, G. F. & Vosgerau, J. (2021). Asymmetric outcome matching in responders’ disclosure of successes and failures. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3871906.
Rasoulian, S., Grégoire, Y., Legoux, R., & Sénécal, S. (2017). Service crisis recovery and firm performance: Insights from information breach announcements. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 45(6), 789–806.
Ringberg, T., Odekerken-Schröder, G., & Christensen, G. L. (2007). A cultural models approach to service recovery. Journal of Marketing, 71(3), 194–214.
Roschk, H., & Gelbrich, K. (2014). Identifying appropriate compensation types for service failures: A meta-analytic and experimental analysis. Journal of Service Research, 17(2), 195–211.
Roschk, H., & Kaiser, S. (2013). The nature of an apology: An experimental study on how to apologize after a service failure. Marketing Letters, 24(3), 293–309.
Schlenker, B. R., & Leary, M. R. (1982). Social anxiety and self-presentation: A conceptualization model. Psychological Bulletin, 92(3), 641–678.
Schumann, K. (2012). Does love mean never having to say you’re sorry? Associations between relationship satisfaction, perceived apology sincerity, and forgiveness. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 29(7), 997–1010.
Septianto, F. (2020). Do past scandals influence the present performance? The moderating role of consumer mindset. Journal of Business Research, 106, 75–81.
Shaw, J. C., Wild, E., & Colquitt, J. A. (2003). To justify or excuse?: A meta-analytic review of the effects of explanations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(3), 444.
Shea, C. T., & Hawn, O. V. (2019). Microfoundations of corporate social responsibility and irresponsibility. Academy of Management Journal, 62(5), 1609–1642.
Sirianni, N. J., Bitner, M. J., Brown, S. W., & Mandel, N. (2013). Branded service encounters: Strategically aligning employee behavior with the brand positioning. Journal of Marketing, 77(6), 108–123.
Smith, A. K., & Bolton, R. N. (2002). The effect of customers’ emotional responses to service failures on their recovery effort evaluations and satisfaction judgments. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 30(1), 5–23.
Smith, A. K., Bolton, R. N., & Wagner, J. (1999). A model of customer satisfaction with service encounters involving failure and recovery. Journal of Marketing Research, 36(3), 356–372.
Speer, S. A. (2019). Reconsidering self-deprecation as a communication practice. British Journal of Social Psychology, 58(4), 806–828.
Spiller, S. A., Fitzsimons, G. J., Lynch, J. G., Jr., & McClelland, G. H. (2013). Spotlights, floodlights, and the magic number zero: Simple effects tests in moderated regression. Journal of Marketing Research, 50(2), 277–288.
Strick, M., de Bruin, H. L., de Ruiter, L. C., & Jonkers, W. (2015). Striking the right chord: Moving music increases psychological transportation and behavioral intentions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 21(1), 57–72.
Struthers, C. W., Eaton, J., Santelli, A. G., Uchiyama, M., & Shirvani, N. (2008). The effects of attributions of intent and apology on forgiveness: When saying sorry may not help the story. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44(4), 983–992.
Van Vaerenbergh, Y., Varga, D., De Keyser, A., & Orsingher, C. (2019). The service recovery journey: Conceptualization, integration, and directions for future research. Journal of Service Research, 22(2), 103–119.
Wei, H., & Ran, Y. (2019). Male versus female: How the gender of apologizers influences consumer forgiveness. Journal of Business Ethics, 154(2), 371–387.
Weiner, B. (1985). An attributional theory of achievement motivation and emotion. Psychological Review, 92(4), 548–567.
Weitzl, W. J., & Einwiller, S. A. (2020). Profiling (un-) committed online complainants: Their characteristics and post-webcare reactions. Journal of Business Research, 117, 740–753.
You, Y., Yang, X., Wang, L., & Deng, X. (2020). When and why saying “Thank You” is better than saying “Sorry” in redressing service failures: The role of self-esteem. Journal of Marketing, 84(2), 133–150.
Yu, A., Berg, J. M., & Zlatev, J. J. (2021). Emotional acknowledgment: How verbalizing others’ emotions fosters interpersonal trust. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 164, 116–135.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no confict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Gergana Nenkov served as Area Editor for this article.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Antonetti, P., Baghi, I. Projecting lower competence to boost apology effectiveness: Underlying mechanism and boundary conditions. J. of the Acad. Mark. Sci. 51, 695–715 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-022-00903-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-022-00903-5