Heads will roll! Routes to effective trust repair in the aftermath of a CEO transgression

Donald L. Ferrin, Cecily Cooper, Kurt T. Dirks, Peter H. Kim

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

CEO transgressions are a common storyline in today's business press. Such incidents result in the need to repair trust for both the CEO and the organisation that the CEO leads. Existing empirical research on trust repair has focused primarily on interpersonal trust, resulting in a body of knowledge that provides many insights to the errant CEO but few insights for those who aim to repair trust in the organisation. Since organisations also need to regain the trust of stakeholders after a CEO transgression, research on organisational trust repair is clearly warranted. Organisations have options for trust repair that are not available to individuals (e.g. dismissing the transgressor), these actions may be initiated by parties other than the culpable party (e.g. the Board of Directors), and the mechanisms underlying organisational versus interpersonal trust repair may differ. However, trust in CEOs and their associated organisations may also be intertwined since the CEO is the symbolic representative of the organisation. To better understand how organisations and CEOs can repair trust in the aftermath of a CEO transgression, we conduct a scenario experiment examining two tactics that are commonly used in practice: CEO dismissal, and CEO apology + penance. We also examine the proposed underlying mechanisms of perceived repentance and perceived disentitativity. Results indicate that both tactics can influence trust in the CEO as well as the organisation, and that perceived repentance and perceived disentitativity mediate the effects of Board responses on trust in the CEO but not on trust in the organisation.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)7-30
Number of pages24
JournalJournal of Trust Research
Volume8
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 2 2018

Fingerprint

Head
Empirical Research
Research

Keywords

  • apology
  • CEO dismissal
  • entitativity
  • Nicole Gillespie
  • penance
  • repentance
  • Trust repair

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Social Psychology
  • Applied Psychology

Cite this

Heads will roll! Routes to effective trust repair in the aftermath of a CEO transgression. / Ferrin, Donald L.; Cooper, Cecily; Dirks, Kurt T.; Kim, Peter H.

In: Journal of Trust Research, Vol. 8, No. 1, 02.01.2018, p. 7-30.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Ferrin, Donald L. ; Cooper, Cecily ; Dirks, Kurt T. ; Kim, Peter H. / Heads will roll! Routes to effective trust repair in the aftermath of a CEO transgression. In: Journal of Trust Research. 2018 ; Vol. 8, No. 1. pp. 7-30.
@article{3787169a7d884d0eb6437d2315972aaf,
title = "Heads will roll! Routes to effective trust repair in the aftermath of a CEO transgression",
abstract = "CEO transgressions are a common storyline in today's business press. Such incidents result in the need to repair trust for both the CEO and the organisation that the CEO leads. Existing empirical research on trust repair has focused primarily on interpersonal trust, resulting in a body of knowledge that provides many insights to the errant CEO but few insights for those who aim to repair trust in the organisation. Since organisations also need to regain the trust of stakeholders after a CEO transgression, research on organisational trust repair is clearly warranted. Organisations have options for trust repair that are not available to individuals (e.g. dismissing the transgressor), these actions may be initiated by parties other than the culpable party (e.g. the Board of Directors), and the mechanisms underlying organisational versus interpersonal trust repair may differ. However, trust in CEOs and their associated organisations may also be intertwined since the CEO is the symbolic representative of the organisation. To better understand how organisations and CEOs can repair trust in the aftermath of a CEO transgression, we conduct a scenario experiment examining two tactics that are commonly used in practice: CEO dismissal, and CEO apology + penance. We also examine the proposed underlying mechanisms of perceived repentance and perceived disentitativity. Results indicate that both tactics can influence trust in the CEO as well as the organisation, and that perceived repentance and perceived disentitativity mediate the effects of Board responses on trust in the CEO but not on trust in the organisation.",
keywords = "apology, CEO dismissal, entitativity, Nicole Gillespie, penance, repentance, Trust repair",
author = "Ferrin, {Donald L.} and Cecily Cooper and Dirks, {Kurt T.} and Kim, {Peter H.}",
year = "2018",
month = "1",
day = "2",
doi = "10.1080/21515581.2017.1419877",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "8",
pages = "7--30",
journal = "Journal of Trust Research",
issn = "2151-5581",
publisher = "Routledge",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Heads will roll! Routes to effective trust repair in the aftermath of a CEO transgression

AU - Ferrin, Donald L.

AU - Cooper, Cecily

AU - Dirks, Kurt T.

AU - Kim, Peter H.

PY - 2018/1/2

Y1 - 2018/1/2

N2 - CEO transgressions are a common storyline in today's business press. Such incidents result in the need to repair trust for both the CEO and the organisation that the CEO leads. Existing empirical research on trust repair has focused primarily on interpersonal trust, resulting in a body of knowledge that provides many insights to the errant CEO but few insights for those who aim to repair trust in the organisation. Since organisations also need to regain the trust of stakeholders after a CEO transgression, research on organisational trust repair is clearly warranted. Organisations have options for trust repair that are not available to individuals (e.g. dismissing the transgressor), these actions may be initiated by parties other than the culpable party (e.g. the Board of Directors), and the mechanisms underlying organisational versus interpersonal trust repair may differ. However, trust in CEOs and their associated organisations may also be intertwined since the CEO is the symbolic representative of the organisation. To better understand how organisations and CEOs can repair trust in the aftermath of a CEO transgression, we conduct a scenario experiment examining two tactics that are commonly used in practice: CEO dismissal, and CEO apology + penance. We also examine the proposed underlying mechanisms of perceived repentance and perceived disentitativity. Results indicate that both tactics can influence trust in the CEO as well as the organisation, and that perceived repentance and perceived disentitativity mediate the effects of Board responses on trust in the CEO but not on trust in the organisation.

AB - CEO transgressions are a common storyline in today's business press. Such incidents result in the need to repair trust for both the CEO and the organisation that the CEO leads. Existing empirical research on trust repair has focused primarily on interpersonal trust, resulting in a body of knowledge that provides many insights to the errant CEO but few insights for those who aim to repair trust in the organisation. Since organisations also need to regain the trust of stakeholders after a CEO transgression, research on organisational trust repair is clearly warranted. Organisations have options for trust repair that are not available to individuals (e.g. dismissing the transgressor), these actions may be initiated by parties other than the culpable party (e.g. the Board of Directors), and the mechanisms underlying organisational versus interpersonal trust repair may differ. However, trust in CEOs and their associated organisations may also be intertwined since the CEO is the symbolic representative of the organisation. To better understand how organisations and CEOs can repair trust in the aftermath of a CEO transgression, we conduct a scenario experiment examining two tactics that are commonly used in practice: CEO dismissal, and CEO apology + penance. We also examine the proposed underlying mechanisms of perceived repentance and perceived disentitativity. Results indicate that both tactics can influence trust in the CEO as well as the organisation, and that perceived repentance and perceived disentitativity mediate the effects of Board responses on trust in the CEO but not on trust in the organisation.

KW - apology

KW - CEO dismissal

KW - entitativity

KW - Nicole Gillespie

KW - penance

KW - repentance

KW - Trust repair

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85044361663&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85044361663&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/21515581.2017.1419877

DO - 10.1080/21515581.2017.1419877

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85044361663

VL - 8

SP - 7

EP - 30

JO - Journal of Trust Research

JF - Journal of Trust Research

SN - 2151-5581

IS - 1

ER -