Image Restoration Theory Analysis

Benoit defines image restoration theory as strategies used to mitigate image damage following a threat to a reputation (organizational or personal) (Blosenhauer, 2014). As we know that, image is possible a very important concern nowadays. Thus, when reputation is threatened especially during crisis happens, individuals and organizations are encouraged to justify themselves to the attack. Organization works on effort to ensure that crises are anticipated, managed, and evaluated effectively and efficiency before any unfavorable impression is formed. Then, here comes a theory used as communication approach to restore the organization’s image- Image Restoration Theory. The basic concepts of Image Restoration Theory is the key to understanding

Secondly, defeasibility, whenever a statement is found in question to be false by showing proofs or evidences. Thirdly, accident, when it comes to show that the unpleasant incident was happened accidentally and unintentionally. The accused may retreat from the responsibility of this unpleasant accident. Lastly is about good intention. The accused may claims that this offensive act was doing in the best of intention but not in any form of recklessness. All of these tactics are suggested in the second strategy of evasion of responsibility under Image Restoration Theory.

Furthermore, reduce offensiveness is the third strategy of Image Restoration Theory. Reduce the offensiveness of the act is the strategy seeking to offer an alternative perspective to the problem. There are six tactics of reduce offensiveness strategy. These are bolster (stress good traits), minimize, differentiate, transcend, attack accuser, and compensate (Kessadayurat,

Audience’s feeling and attitude is so fundamental in bolstering one organization. Hopes of an organization in reducing the offensiveness increased whenever it tries to bolster up by the audience’s positive perception. A second possibility is to try to minimize the negative feelings associated with the wrongful act (Benoit, 1997). The organization is able to reduce the offensiveness to the lowest possible level or prevent it from increasing beyond the level if it can minimize the risk of an unpleasant situation and make it seems less significant than it really is. Third, a firm can employ differentiation, in which the act is distinguished from other similar but more offensive actions (Benoit, 1997). The issues of differentiation are referring on how the organization handle the actions and makes them look different from other similar but less desirable actions. A fourth way of reducing offensiveness is transcendence, which attempts to place the act in a more favorable context (Benoit, 1997). Transcendence allows the firm to reduce offensiveness by placing the act in the state of a better quality that go beyond usual boundaries. Fifth, those accused of wrong-doing may decide to attack their accusers (Benoit, 1997). Accused is suggested to diminishing the damage of the image by giving