Online reviews have become an unavoidable part of modern organisational communication with both customers and wider stakeholders.
However, it can be daunting for organisations to offer the opportunity for customers to review a product or service for the first time, and the inevitable worry is that a negative review will impact the business in a highly public manner (Victor, 2014).
According to Tuttle (2012) the opposite is actually true, and a few negative online reviews are not particularly bad for an organisation, providing they are handled well and are balanced by positive reviews. Tuttle suggests that not only do online consumers disbelieve 100% positive reviews, the review sites themselves actually search for and delete what they suspect to be “shill” or fake positive reviews. Review sites routinely refrain from asking customers to write reviews, in an effort to keep their pages full of organic and trustworthy posts (Yelp, 2010).
Examples of how not to respond to negative reviews can be found relatively easily online. Campbell (2014) cites this example, which initially appears to attend to the complaint in a genuine manner, however casting aspersions over the quality of the reviewers honeymoon may not win any repeat business:
A study was completed by Evans et al. (2012b) to investigate how negative reviews and responses affect a customer’s desire to visit an establishment. They found that:
1. A negative review significantly decreased reader’s intention to visit the restaurant.
2. Readers were even less likely to visit when no response to a negative review was posted; even an argumentative response was better than none at all.
3. Constructive responses could eliminate the negative PR created by the review.
4. The best responses adhered to PR theory, rather than the normal well-meaning apologies generally found on Yelp.
The guideline for the best responses, they found to emphasis the “CAP” messages:
(C) Caring – concern, empathy, compassion relating to the seriousness of the situation.
(A) Action – what will be done or has been done to address the issue.
(P) Perspective – put the problem in perspective for other readers, without undermining the complainant.
The overall message from Evans et al. is that the worst thing owners could do is to stay silent – their study found that even a negative response left the reader with a more positive overall feeling than no response at all.
A measured and careful response which adheres to PR principles seems to be the safest and best way forward, when considering how to deal with negative online reviews.
Campbell, C. (2014) ‘Case Studies: Business Owners Respond to Bad Yelp Reviews’ Review Trackers, [Online] Available at: <http://www.reviewtrackers.com/case-studies-business-owners-respond-bad-yelp-reviews/> [Accessed 18th April, 2015]
Tuttle B. (2012) ‘Why you shouldn’t trust positive online reviews, or negative ones for that matter’ Business Time [Online] Available at: <http://business.time.com/2012/08/28/why-you-shouldnt-trust-positive-online-reviews-or-negative-ones-for-that-matter/> [Accessed on 18th April, 2015].
Evans, D.C., Oviatt, J., Slaymaker, J., Topado, C., Doherty, P., Ball, A., Sáenz, D., & Wiley, E. (2012b). An experimental study of how restaurant‐owners’ responses to negative reviews affect readers’ intention to visit. The Four Peaks Review, 2, 1‐12.
Victor, E. (2014) ‘Turning negative reviews to an advantage’ PR Week, [Online] Available at: <http://www.prweek.com/article/1322780/turning-negative-reviews-advantage> [Accessed 18th April, 2015].
Yelp (2010) ‘Don’t ask for reviews’ Yelp Official Blog, [Online] Available at: <http://officialblog.yelp.com/2010/08/dont-ask-for-reviews.html> [Accessed 18th April, 2015].