Strategic ambiguity and the ethic of significant choice in the tobacco industry's crisis communication

Abstract

The complexity of organizational crises allows for multiple interpretations of evidence, intentions, and responsibility surrounding the crises. Through the use of strategic ambiguity, organizations typically emphasize an interpretation where the organization is viewed most favorably. We offer the criteria of significant choice as a means for evaluating the ethical implications of strategic ambiguity in organizational crisis communication. These criteria are applied to the tobacco industry as a case study. We conclude that the tobacco industry leaders’ crisis response was ethically questionable because the ambiguity it produced was based on incomplete and biased information. This strategic use of ambiguity diminished the deliberative ability of the tobacco industry's stakeholders.