Rebuilding brand trust : the role of brand apology and implicit belief

Many brands are suffering from declines in trust, and branding and public relations professionals are often perplexed regarding how to restore trust these days. Understanding the trust rebuilding process is important not only because trust strengthens consumer-brand relationships but also because trust can translate into an asset that increases the value of a brand. Thus, this dissertation focused on rebuilding brand trust and the conditions that facilitate or attenuate such processes. Specifically, this study investigated how various types of brand trust violation (e.g., competence vs. integrity) and brand apologies (e.g., external attribution vs. internal attribution) interplayed in affecting consumer coping strategies (i.e., consumer complaint behaviors) and the relationship trust repair process. Also, it examined the effects of consumers’ mindsets—or implicit beliefs of self: their beliefs about whether human qualities are fixed or changeable. Such individual differences among consumers influence their judgments and decisions about others and the world, which would result in different perceptions regarding both trust-violating events and subsequent brand apologies. Two studies were conducted. Study 1 examined how people with different implicit beliefs perceived different types of brand trust violation (Consumer implicit beliefs × Type of brand trust violation), and Study 2 investigated how people with different implicit beliefs perceived different types of brand trust violation when they were provided with a brand apology (Consumer implicit beliefs × Brand trust violation × Brand Apology). \nThis dissertation yielded some intriguing findings. First, consistent with previous research, more constructive consumer responses (voice response, higher forgiveness, higher post-violation trust) were found when consumers received a brand apology with internal attribution for a competence-based brand trust violation and a brand apology with an external attribution for an integrity-based brand trust violation. Second, although consumer implicit beliefs did not always influence consumer responses, they did have an impact on private responses, third-party responses, and forgiveness. Consumers holding incremental beliefs were more likely to participate in private responses to an integrity-based trust violation than to a competence-based trust violation, while those holding entity beliefs did not show differences. Interestingly, however, it was consumers holding entity beliefs who were more likely to engage in third-party responses when receiving an apology with external (internal) attribution for a competence- (integrity-) based brand trust violation. A similar pattern was also found in forgiveness: only those holding entity beliefs showed a higher forgiveness level toward an integrity-based brand trust violation, while those holding incremental beliefs did not show differences. \nOverall, this research highlights the importance of having a clear understanding of the type of brand trust violation and the characteristics of target audience, especially for brands in crisis that want to prepare an effective brand apology.