Corporate versus influencer voices in low-severity product-harm crises: a cross-national study of recovery messaging

Purpose This study aims to examine how communication source (corporate vs social media influencer) shapes consumer responses to low-severity product–harm crises across cultural contexts, focusing on the moderating role of power distance orientation at both national and individual levels. Because crisis evaluations depend on expectations about who should speak for the organization, power distance orientation helps explain when consumers prefer authoritative corporate voices to peer-like influencer communication. Design/methodology/approach Study 1 compares responses from US and South Korean consumers to corporate- versus influencer-led crisis messages. Study 2 replicates the design with US consumers, measuring individual power distance orientation as a moderator. Analyses include t-tests, confirmatory factor analysis for measurement invariance and moderated regression. Findings In high-power–distance contexts, corporate-led recovery messages significantly increased satisfaction and purchase intention compared with social media influencer communication. In low-power–distance contexts, this advantage disappeared, with both sources performing similarly. These findings indicate that cultural differences in crisis response arise because power distance shapes consumers’ expectations of legitimate crisis authority, thereby influencing whether they consider the type of communication appropriate and credible in low-severity product–harm crises. Research limitations/implications The focus on low-severity crises and a single product category may limit generalizability. Future research should test other crisis types, products and contexts. Practical implications Firms should match crisis messengers to audiences’ authority expectations, prioritizing corporate voices in high-power–distance markets while allowing greater flexibility in messenger selection in low-power–distance settings. Originality/value The study extends situational crisis communication theory by highlighting power distance orientation as a boundary condition in low-severity crisis communication.