IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/bushst/v66y2024i7p1785-1809.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Crisis, criticisms, and damaged credibility: A case study of organisational trust repair by a Victorian joint-stock bank

Author

Listed:
  • Alvin Chan
  • Carolyn Downs
  • James Taylor

Abstract

This article uses the organisational trust repair model developed by Gillespie and Dietz to examine how the Royal Bank of Liverpool, which suspended payments during the commercial crisis in 1847, escaped liquidation and resumed business. This case study uses newspaper reports and selected corporate records to explore the narratives of trust between bank management and different interest groups over the course of resuscitating the establishment. There are three important aspects which shaped the dynamics of trust repair in this case: (1) the bank’s appeal to its reputational past in the community to reassert its credibility; (2) the management’s tactful reconciliation of competing expectations from different parties, and (3) the renegotiation of boundaries between directors’ power and stakeholders’ rights. By exploring the professional standpoint, local attributes and moral discourses within which the bank was resuscitated, this article evaluates the firm’s strategies for rebuilding trust and its corporate legitimacy through a contemporary theoretical perspective, thus offering lessons for corporate trust repair in the twenty-first century.

Suggested Citation

  • Alvin Chan & Carolyn Downs & James Taylor, 2024. "Crisis, criticisms, and damaged credibility: A case study of organisational trust repair by a Victorian joint-stock bank," Business History, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 66(7), pages 1785-1809, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:bushst:v:66:y:2024:i:7:p:1785-1809
    DOI: 10.1080/00076791.2023.2203916
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/00076791.2023.2203916
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/00076791.2023.2203916?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:bushst:v:66:y:2024:i:7:p:1785-1809. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/FBSH20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.