| This dissertation investigates how claims of accountability in leader statements during an organizational controversy affect media scrutiny. When negative events befall an organization, public and media scrutiny of the organization and leader often have a deleterious impact on organizational performance (e.g., Hill, 1993; Sutton & Galunic, 1996). The efficacy of a leader is in large part determined by the leader's ability to actively manage meaning and interpretation for important audiences (Pfeffer, 1981). The effectiveness of this activity is compromised by the presence of alternative interpretations of events so commonly found in news media reports of controversies (Asch, 1951; Galtung & Ruge, 1981; Gans, 1979; Petty & Brock, 1976; Roshier, 1981; Sabato, 1993).;Considerable research and theory exists about how leader impression management activities affect positive attention and approval of the leader and/or organization (:Bettman & Weitz, 1983; Elsbach, 1994; Salancik & Meindl, 1984; Staw, McKechnie, & Puffer, 1983; Tedeschi & Melburg, 1984). To date, however, little research or theory looks at how leaders can manage unwanted public or media scrutiny (Sutton & Galunic, 1996). The principle argument is that leader statements deviating from stereotypical leader behavior will generate greater media scrutiny immediately after the statement.;The empirical setting used to investigate the hypotheses is Stanford University's indirect cost controversy between August 20, 1990, and September 13, 1992 while Donald Kennedy was President of Stanford. The data include 33 statements by Kennedy, 73 Stanford press releases, and 341 newspaper and wire service articles mentioning both Stanford and the indirect cost controversy.;The results support the view that the presence and content of leader statements do have a significant effect on media scrutiny in the subsequent 1-2 days. The strongest results show that the impact of leader statements on media scrutiny is curvilinear and that increasing claims of accountability for past events between subsequent leader statements tends to decrease media scrutiny. More generally, the results show that accountability claims have a significant effect on changes in article counts one to two days following a leader statement. These effects are stronger for non-local media scrutiny than local media scrutiny. |
