When one bad apple spoils consumers’ judgment of the brand: exposure to an employee’s non-workplace transgression and potential remedies

Four experiments investigate consumers’ moral judgments of a firm’s brand reputation when given information about an employee’s non-workplace transgression. To the extent that the employee is perceived to have power in the firm (i.e., control over resources and decisions), the employee’s offensive action damages the firm’s reputation and decreases consumers’ purchase intentions. These effects occur even though the action occurs in the employee’s private life and is unrelated to product quality. The results replicate for three types of products and three types of offenses. The employee’s perceived power in the firm provides the most consistent explanation of customers’ negative responses and is a better predictor than the alternative explanations tested (e.g., perceived status). Results also show that after an offense comes to light, firm reactions that decrease or eliminate the employee’s power in the organization—such as reducing decision-making responsibilities or firing the employee—can help restore the firm’s reputation.