What is *The Apology Impulse* by Cary Cooper and Sean O'Meara about?

*The Apology Impulse* examines the psychology and societal impact of apologies, arguing that sincere apologies strengthen relationships and demonstrate emotional maturity. The book explores how timing, responsibility, and empathy shape effective apologies in personal and professional settings. It critiques corporate over-apologizing and emphasizes pairing apologies with corrective actions. Key themes include oxytocin’s role in bonding post-apology and forgiveness as a tool for rebuilding trust.

Who should read *The Apology Impulse*?

This book is ideal for managers, HR professionals, and anyone seeking to improve conflict resolution skills. It’s particularly relevant for leaders navigating workplace misunderstandings, individuals repairing personal relationships, or organizations rebuilding public trust. The science-based frameworks also appeal to psychology enthusiasts interested in interpersonal dynamics.

Is *The Apology Impulse* worth reading?

Yes, for its actionable strategies on delivering meaningful apologies and avoiding hollow “sorry” cycles. The blend of behavioral science, real-world corporate examples, and step-by-step apology frameworks makes it a practical guide. However, readers seeking solely personal development insights may find the corporate focus less directly applicable.

What is the “apology impulse” in the book?

The term refers to humans’ instinctive need to apologize when harming others. Cooper and O’Meara argue this impulse, when channeled correctly, fosters accountability and connection. However, they caution against reflexive apologies devoid of corrective action, especially in corporate contexts where overuse dilutes sincerity.

How does *The Apology Impulse* suggest apologizing effectively?

The authors outline a 4-step framework: 1. **Acknowledge harm** without excuses 2. **Express regret** authentically 3. **Offer restitution** where possible 4. **Commit to behavioral change** They emphasize body language and tone consistency, noting that 93% of apology impact comes from nonverbal cues.

What role does oxytocin play in apologies according to the book?

Cooper and O’Meara cite studies showing sincere apologies trigger oxytocin release in both parties, enhancing empathy and bonding. This “trust hormone” reduces defensive reactions, making conflict resolution 40% more likely when apologies activate this biochemical response.

How does *The Apology Impulse* critique corporate apology trends?

The book condemns “apology inflation” where companies over-apologize for minor issues while under-acknowledging major failures. Examples show 72% of Fortune 500 companies issued 至少 five public apologies annually, yet only 33% followed with policy changes. The authors advocate reserving apologies for significant missteps paired with verifiable corrective plans.

What’s the connection between forgiveness and apologies in the book?

The authors position forgiveness as a dual process: externally rebuilding trust through consistent changed behavior, and internally releasing self-judgment. They note that premature forgiveness (within 48 hours of apology) often leads to relationship backsliding without accountability systems.

사과하지 못하는 사람들 요약

비즈니스 세계가 '미안합니다'를 망쳐놓은 방식과 우리가 이를 멈추지 못하는 이유

캐리 쿠퍼, 숀 오메라

3.63(71 Reviews)

사과하지 못하는 사람들 요약 개요

"사과 충동(The Apology Impulse)"에서 저명한 심리학자 캐리 쿠퍼(Cary Cooper)는 기업의 "사과" 문화가 어떻게 그 의미를 완전히 상실했는지 밝힙니다. 아메리칸 항공이 사소한 문제들로 매일 수백 통의 사과 편지를 보낸다는 사실을 알고 계셨나요? 반사적인 뉘우침이 아닌 진정한 후회가 어떻게 진실된 신뢰를 쌓는지 확인해 보세요.

전달 방식을 선택하세요

다양한 학습 방식으로 사과하지 못하는 사람들 요약 살펴보기

사과하지 못하는 사람들의 같은 아이디어를 담았습니다. 나에게 맞는 목소리, 깊이, 속도를 고르고 언제든 바꿔 보세요.

1장

When Sorry Isn't Enough: The Corporate Apology Crisis

In 1951, Mr. R M Hosking faced every groom's nightmare when his morning suit failed to arrive for his wedding day. Weeks later, he received an extraordinary letter from Harry Moss, Managing Director of Moss Bros, expressing "unprecedented embarrassment" at their failure during an unexpected wedding surge. The letter included both a refund and a personal cheque worth hundreds in today's money. This genuine contrition stands in stark contrast to modern corporate responses, where organizations perform semantic acrobatics to appear sorry while avoiding responsibility. The book "The Apology Impulse" has become required reading in corporate communications departments worldwide, with Fortune 500 companies using it to revamp their crisis management protocols. Even celebrities like Ryan Reynolds have referenced its principles when addressing missteps in their business ventures, recognizing that in an age of constant outrage, understanding the art of the authentic apology might be the most valuable business skill of all.

2장

The Anatomy of Modern Corporate Apologies

We're living in the golden age of corporate apologies. In January 2018 alone, there were only two days when the media didn't report on an organization or high-profile figure issuing a public apology. From YouTube personality Logan Paul to Virgin Trains, from Tesco to the actual Pope-everyone was apologizing. Tesco exemplifies this trend perfectly: in 2017, its spokespeople made 13 high-profile public apologies-one every four weeks on average. Compared to five years prior, their apology output had increased six-fold, despite the fact that their behavior wasn't six times worse. Google's database of five million books shows use of the word "sorry" increased significantly around the turn of the Millennium. By 2008, published instances of "sorry" were at their highest level since 1629. Interestingly, in 1953, just as the UK and USA experienced unprecedented economic prosperity, "sorry" dropped to its lowest level since the 18th century. When people were apparently busier, richer, and happier, they said sorry less. Not only are we saying sorry more often, but our apologies now travel further. Between 2000 and 2008, Google had indexed just two pages containing the phrase "retailer apologizes." By August 2018, there were more than 7,000 pages with that exact phrase and around 34 million pages with semantic variants. This trend stems from two factors: retailers are suddenly apologizing more, and online media outlets are more likely to report it when they do. The economics of viral news drives this cycle-publishers need high traffic volumes to generate ad revenue, and making people angry is a reliable way to promote sharing. Organizations have unwittingly positioned themselves in the firing line as perfect villains (powerful, faceless, visible) while customers make perfect heroes (plucky, powerless, relatable). The result? A flood of insincere corporate apologies that satisfy neither party. Despite abundant research on effective apologies, today's corporate world suffers from a supply and demand problem: consumers demand accountability while organizations provide hollow responses. Everyone is apologizing-from airlines to stationery shops-but few are genuinely saying sorry.

들리는 모든 단어를 눈으로 확인하세요

사과하지 못하는 사람들 요약의 각 단어가 오디오에 맞춰 실시간으로 강조되어 편하게 따라 읽을 수 있습니다.

3장

Why Organizations Apologize (Or Don't)

Unlike human apologies that come from empathy and seek forgiveness, organizational apologies aren't powered by genuine emotion. Organizations only apologize for observable failures-they never confess to something they could have kept secret. Whistleblowers, regulators, customers, and journalists act as proxies for an organization's conscience. Organizations apologize for two types of failures: operational and cultural. Operational failures (faulty goods, missing deliveries, late departures) are easier to understand and forgive, provided there's "procedural fairness" in making things right. A 1992 study found consumer perceptions can be completely restored after operational failures if adequately addressed. Cultural failures are more profound-offensive advertising, boardroom inequality, bullying, or tone-deaf social media posts reflect an organization's core values. It's harder to apologize for what you ARE than what you DID. When Arcadia Group chairman Philip Green was revealed as trying to suppress sexual harassment accusations, Topshop's consumer impression scores plummeted despite product quality remaining unchanged. Organizations only apologize when there's something in it for them-when apologizing offers better outcomes than silence. This explains why boycotts often fail and why companies like Hugo Boss and Volkswagen thrive despite Nazi connections. Even Grunenthal, maker of Thalidomide, survived for decades without apologizing for thousands of miscarriages and birth defects. Most customer satisfaction apologies go unnoticed-they're boring and insincere "display-only" apologies with offers of refunds or compensation. Ironically, these apologies make little difference-it's the compensation that matters. A 2018 study of 1.5 million Uber customers found that "the most effective apology was the provision of a $5 coupon, with or without any accompanying apology text" and that "apologizing without offering a coupon has a potentially negative effect on future spending." When facing genuine inconvenience or loss, consumers prioritize problem-solving over empathy. Studies show that customers dealing with operational failures respond more positively to displays of competence and creativity than to expressions of empathy. In fact, displays of warmth from service personnel can actually lower consumers' perception of their competence.

4장

The Definitive Modern Apology Nobody Followed

When freezing rain hit the Atlantic coast on Valentine's Day 2007, JetBlue suffered an operational meltdown lasting five days. Over 1,000 flights were canceled, affecting 130,000 customers, with some passengers trapped on grounded aircraft for up to 11 hours. The incident threatened to destroy the airline's carefully cultivated image as a customer-friendly carrier and became a watershed moment in corporate crisis management. CEO David Neeleman published a 364-word letter beginning: "We are sorry and embarrassed. But most of all, we are deeply sorry." The letter avoided corporate cliches like "challenging circumstances" or "factors out of our control," instead directly acknowledging: "We subjected you to unacceptable delays, flight cancellations, lost baggage and other major inconveniences." Neeleman used "sorry" three times, "you" eleven times, and "I" just once-a telling ratio about the message's focus. This careful word choice demonstrated a deep understanding of crisis communication psychology, where accepting responsibility and focusing on the affected customers is paramount. Neeleman's apology elevated beyond the letter with a groundbreaking video posted to YouTube-a platform barely two years old at the time. This "contrite CEO addresses customers" format has since become standard crisis management practice, but in 2007 it was revolutionary. The video garnered over 300,000 views within days - astronomical numbers for early YouTube - and was picked up by major news networks, amplifying its reach. The three-minute clip was posted five days after the initial failure-considered rapid response then, though today's social media environment demands responses within hours. The video was authentically unpolished-no background music, fancy editing or staged customer interactions. Neeleman sat awkwardly close to the camera, occasionally stumbled over words, and clumsily displayed a staff badge. This amateurish presentation scored "3/10 for presentation and 10/10 for impact" because it felt genuine. Marketing experts noted that the video's raw quality actually enhanced its credibility, as viewers perceived it as an urgent, honest communication rather than a carefully crafted PR piece. The most crucial element of JetBlue's response was introducing a "customer bill of rights"-a concrete offer of repair that conflict management specialist Professor Roy J. Lewicki identifies as essential to credible apologies. Rather than merely compensating affected customers, JetBlue established permanent new customer rights for all future passengers. The bill included specific compensation amounts for delays, guaranteed rebooking options, and clear communication protocols. This unprecedented move transformed a crisis into an opportunity for long-term corporate policy reform. Forbes called JetBlue's response "the textbook version of how to handle the aftermath," with crisis consultant Jim Lukaszewski declaring that Neeleman had "set the standard for dealing with these situations." The airline's stock price, which initially dropped 6% during the crisis, recovered within weeks - a testament to the effectiveness of their response. Yet despite this perfect model being available since 2007, few organizations have followed it, often preferring legalistic, defensive responses that prioritize liability concerns over customer trust. Notable examples include BP's handling of the Deepwater Horizon spill and United Airlines' response to the David Dao incident, both of which initially relied on corporate doublespeak and deflection rather than direct accountability.

사과하지 못하는 사람들 요약에서 더 많은 것을 얻으세요

매일 새로운 인사이트를 10만 개 이상의 레슨에서 만나보세요
단어가 강조되어 오디오와 실시간으로 동기화됩니다
내 라이브러리를 저장하고 모든 기기에서 이용하세요

5장

The Language of Evasion: How Corporations Avoid Saying Sorry

During a crisis, communicators often deploy linguistic tricks to distance their organizations from failures that are obvious to everyone else. The goal isn't necessarily concealment but persuading consumers to view events more favorably. In January 2017, Pegasus Airlines flight PC8622 skidded off a runway in Turkey, plunged down a cliff, and stopped just meters above the Black Sea. Though a relatively minor crash with no fatalities, Pegasus Airlines described it as a "runway excursion incident." While technically accurate aviation terminology, this clinical language completely fails to acknowledge the terrifying passenger experience. Similarly, when Seattle-Tacoma International Airport tweeted about an "airline employee conducted an unauthorized takeoff without passengers," they vastly understated reality. In truth, a mechanic had stolen a plane, performed barrel rolls, and fatally crashed onto a remote island-with F-15 fighter jets scrambled and the airport locked down. Oscar Munoz, United Airlines' CEO, gifted us one of the most insincere apologies in recent memory when he apologized for "having to re-accommodate" passengers after video showed Dr. David Dao being dragged bloodied and screaming from a flight. Though "re-accommodate" is legitimate aviation terminology, Munoz's attempt to apply it to this violent situation sparked immediate ridicule. Chemicals giant Arkema Inc. took corporate evasiveness to dangerous new heights after an explosion at their Crosby, Texas plant. Their spokesperson contested the very definition of "explosion," insisting it was merely "an overpressurization that was followed by a fire." Grammar provides powerful tools for evading responsibility in corporate apologies. Modal verbs like "may" and "might" create uncertainty where none should exist. Motherisk's "may have been impacted in some negative way" robs victims of acknowledgment by making their trauma theoretical rather than actual. Passive voice removes agency. PricewaterhouseCoopers exemplified this after the 2017 Oscars envelope mix-up, writing about "the error that was made" rather than "our error." Their apology contained 23% passive voice constructions, leading journalists to mock their "painstaken use of passive voice." The indefinite article creates distance. Using "an incident" instead of "the incident" subtly implies there might have been other incidents worth attention too. Great Western Railway demonstrated this when a light fitting fell on a passenger's head, referring to it as "an incident where a lighting grille has come loose" rather than directly acknowledging what happened.

6장

Schrodinger's Apology: Simultaneously Sorry and Not Sorry

The qualified apology-or "fauxpology"-starts well but takes a wrong turn at "but" or "however," warning of a qualifying clause that waters down any good intent. These linguistic pivots serve as red flags, signaling an incoming justification that often negates the entire apology. Even worse is the self-satisfied apology that emphasizes innocence over contrition, like quantum particles existing in two states simultaneously - both apologetic and defensive at the same time. A Schrodinger's apology attempts to occupy two conflicting states: contrition and innocence. The formula typically combines moral licensing ("we are committed to...," "we care deeply about...") followed by organizational exceptionalism ("we fell short of our usual high standards"). This rhetorical strategy attempts to maintain corporate reputation while nominally addressing wrongdoing, creating a paradoxical message that often leaves stakeholders more frustrated than if no apology had been offered at all. The Motherisk scandal exemplifies this perfectly. After their flawed hair-strand drug tests destroyed families and led to numerous children being wrongfully removed from their parents, CEO Michael Apkon stated: "We deeply regret that the practices... didn't meet the high standard of excellence that we have here at Sick Kids." This front-loaded statement elevates the hospital to a moral plain it had no right to occupy while supposedly apologizing. The emphasis on "high standard of excellence" serves to distance the institution from its failures rather than acknowledge them directly. These non-apologies appear everywhere in corporate communications: Equifax claimed to "pride ourselves on being a leader in managing and protecting data" after a breach affecting 143 million customers; Samsung declared "safety remains our top priority" after recalling exploding phones; KFC insisted "we take hygiene extremely seriously" despite mice infestations. Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg has become particularly known for this approach, regularly issuing apologies that emphasize the company's good intentions while downplaying actual harms. The pattern is consistent: speak to your virtues, then minimize failure as rare or exceptional. Organizations often attempt to frame their failures as aberrations from an otherwise sterling record, rather than addressing the underlying issues directly. This approach typically includes phrases like "isolated incident," "rare occurrence," or "not representative of our values," which serve to deflect rather than accept responsibility. Instead of singing their own praises, organizations should redirect focus to customer expectations and actual impact: "Privacy is important to our customers. We are sorry we let them down." A genuine apology acknowledges harm, takes clear responsibility, and focuses on those affected rather than the organization's reputation. Companies would do better to demonstrate their values through actions rather than merely asserting them in the midst of a crisis.

들리는 모든 단어를 눈으로 확인하세요

사과하지 못하는 사람들 요약의 각 단어가 오디오에 맞춰 실시간으로 강조되어 편하게 따라 읽을 수 있습니다.

7장

The Economics of Saying Sorry

Organizations incur both reputational and financial costs when apologizing, though reputational damage varies by industry. Companies in "high-friction" sectors (like banking) face fewer consequences than those in "low-friction" industries (like fashion) where consumers can easily switch brands. The frequency and earnestness of organizational apologies correlates less with conduct and more with consumer behavior and market conditions. Well-behaved fashion brands apologize more than poorly-behaved banks because of "market friction"-the ease with which consumers can switch to competitors. High-friction markets (churches, banks, mobile providers, football clubs) benefit when switching is difficult. The Pope doesn't worry about Catholics becoming Buddhists because he won't apologize, and banks remain relaxed about retaining customers despite scandals-after the global financial crisis, only 6% of account holders switched banks. You're more likely to get divorced than change your bank. In June 2017, Uber sent an apology email to "ex-riders" whose app usage had significantly decreased. The company claimed to have "faced some hard truths" and made vague concessions about "falling short." Interestingly, despite Uber operating in 70 countries, this apology was sent only to former customers in New York State, where Lyft offered a viable alternative. This selective contrition demonstrates a crucial point: organizations consider both "how badly did we mess up?" and "what can people do about it?" when deciding whether to apologize. Being sorry carries two distinct costs: fixing the problem and expressing contrition. Johnson & Johnson's 1982 Tylenol recall cost $100 million for product withdrawal, free replacements, and developing tamper-proof packaging-an expensive but widely praised response. Beyond operational fixes, organizations face costs for making amends. BP spent $50 million on apology advertisements after Deepwater Horizon, yet a YouGov poll showed 59% of respondents felt the ads made no difference to their perception of the company. Meaningful apologies shouldn't be cheap-that's precisely the point. Biologist Amotz Zahavi's "handicap principle" explains that costly signals demonstrate sincerity in both nature and business. Just as bowerbirds expend precious energy building elaborate nests to impress mates, organizations must make genuinely costly gestures to prove their contrition is authentic.

8장

When Refusing to Apologize Works Better

Protein World's controversial 2015 billboard campaign featuring a fitness model in a yellow bikini with the slogan "Are you beach body ready?" seemed like a creative misjudgment in an era of body positivity. The outdated campaign, with its toned model and visible rib bones, stood in direct opposition to the body positivity movement championed by brands like Dove. For a viral corporate humiliation narrative to work, three elements are required: a controversial moment, social media reaction, and an apology. While Protein World's campaign had triggered the first two elements-with defaced posters, trending hashtags, and a 40,000-signature petition-the company stubbornly refused to provide the third. Instead of crumbling under pressure, Protein World doubled down, stating: "It is a shame that in 2015 there are still a minority who aren't focusing on celebrating those who aspire to be healthier, fitter and stronger." This defiance left the viral news media without their desired editorial payoff-a humiliating corporate apology. Protein World's refusal to apologize wasn't a mistake-it was strategy. Their nonchalance became a marketing feature, not a bug. The company bragged about gaining 20,000 new customers, 1 million in revenue in four days, 20,000 new social media followers and 133 media pieces reaching 113 million people. When Nike endorsed Colin Kaepernick, the face of NFL's #takeaknee protest against police racism, they deliberately courted outrage from traditional values supporters. President Trump called it a "terrible message," country singers cut Nike logos from socks, and small-town mayors declared boycotts. Yet Nike's sales jumped 31% the week after launch-not despite the outrage but because of it. The strategy is clear: pick a side and never apologize to the opposition. By alienating one tribe while signaling shared values with another, brands create powerful connections. As Patagonia founder Yvon Chouinard said, "If you're not pissing off 50 percent of people, you're not trying hard enough."

사과하지 못하는 사람들 요약에서 더 많은 것을 얻으세요

매일 새로운 인사이트를 10만 개 이상의 레슨에서 만나보세요
단어가 강조되어 오디오와 실시간으로 동기화됩니다
내 라이브러리를 저장하고 모든 기기에서 이용하세요

9장

The M&S Model: Kindness Without Weakness

Marks & Spencer, ranked as the UK's fourth best-perceived high street fashion brand and celebrated for its quintessential British niceness, demonstrates that organizational kindness doesn't equate to weakness when handling public criticism. Their century-plus heritage of ethical business practices provides a foundation for confident, measured responses to controversy. When M&S faced intense criticism over a controversial window display showing men in business suits alongside women in lingerie, they refused to fall into the apology trap that had ensnared many other retailers. While social media erupted with accusations calling the display "vomit inducing" and claiming it normalized "damaging gender stereotypes," M&S responded with remarkable precision: "M&S sells more underwear, in more shapes, sizes and styles, than any other retailer... We've highlighted one combination in our windows, which are part of a wider campaign." This factual response avoided emotional engagement while emphasizing their market leadership. The power of withholding an apology became evident as media outlets struggled to sensationalize the story. Without the traditional "we're sorry" headline to anchor their narratives, journalists could only resort to vague phrases like "sparked debate" or reference a "sexism row." This demonstrated how refusing to apologize can effectively defuse controversy rather than amplify it. M&S replicated this strategic approach when confronted with claims that they had printed the Arabic word for "Allah" on toilet paper designs. Despite mounting pressure from a Change.org petition gathering 5,000 signatures and a trending #boycottmarksandspencer campaign, their response maintained the same deliberate bluntness: "The motif on the aloe vera toilet tissue, which we have been selling for over five years, is categorically of an aloe vera leaf and we have investigated and confirmed this with our suppliers." This response exemplified their commitment to fact-based communication over emotional appeasement. The company's communication strategy is characterized by exceptional clarity, deliberately avoiding corporate jargon and ambiguous statements that could be misinterpreted. When addressing criticism, they consistently provide specific, verifiable facts rather than wandering into general statements or defensive posturing - a common mistake in corporate crisis communications. M&S's confidence in this approach is built upon decades of genuine social purpose initiatives, including pioneering sustainability programs, rigorous supply chain ethics, and historically industry-leading employee benefits. These concrete actions, rather than mere marketing claims, have established a reservoir of goodwill that eliminates the need for constant public approval. Unlike organizations that have retroactively adopted social purpose as a marketing strategy, M&S's long-standing commitment to ethical business practices allows them to maintain their position without appearing desperate for public validation or approval. This model of kind but firm communication demonstrates how organizations can maintain their values while defending their positions, proving that authentic corporate responsibility creates the foundation for confident crisis management.

10장

Saving Sorry: A Framework for Meaningful Corporate Apologies

The act of apologizing is in crisis. Organizations are paralyzed by conflicting fears: humiliation discourages them from addressing failure, unfounded litigation concerns prevent necessary apologies, and social media criticism triggers unnecessary ones. This collective anxiety devalues "sorry" while increasing crisis communication costs. Organizations set themselves up for frequent apologies by publicly committing to unattainable standards of conduct. Brands claiming to project "global messages of unity" (Pepsi), "raising women's self-esteem" (Dove), or simply "don't be evil" (Google) practically invite consumers to scrutinize their inevitable shortcomings. A basic apology response plan needs just three questions: Are we at fault? If so, how sorry do we need to be? How do we put it right? When you're not at fault, you have several options besides apologizing. You can clarify your position unequivocally, acknowledge feedback while standing firm on your decision, or simply say nothing. Silence is preferable to appeasement when you're not at fault. Once you've determined your organization is at fault, assess the appropriate level of contrition. Airbnb's excessive claims of being "paralysed" by the "tragedy" of a vandalized rental demonstrated how overblown apologies diminish credibility when addressing truly serious matters later. When apologizing, say "sorry"-not "apologize" or "express regret." The best apologies share brevity, clarity, and plain language. Keep it short, clearly state what you're apologizing for and to whom, center the victims, own the failure, and acknowledge the impact. Avoid obfuscation, passive voice, or mentioning mitigating factors. Match your language to your degree of failure-don't say "extremely sorry" unless you truly are. JetBlue's model apology and Johnson & Johnson's Tylenol crisis response succeeded partly because they took time to consider the right actions before implementing them. Modern organizations struggle to match this success because social media demands immediate responses. Research shows delayed apologies can actually be more effective; a 2005 study found that recipients were more satisfied with apologies that came after a period of reflection. Behind every corporate social media account is a real person with hobbies, worries and career ambitions. Before engaging in performative outrage, consumers should remember that the person apologizing is rarely the same one who created the problem in the first place. By exercising greater care with apologies, we can return credibility to the act of apologizing and restore "sorry" to its rightful place as a meaningful expression of genuine contrition.

★★★★★

사과하지 못하는 사람들 요약 완독을 축하합니다

“23일째 매일 사용하고 있어요. 이제 제 일상의 한 부분이 되었습니다.”

jayallen

사과하지 못하는 사람들 요약의 핵심 주제

corporate crisis management
authentic communication
reputation repair
consumer accountability
public relations ethics

사과하지 못하는 사람들 요약의 명문장

Understanding the art of the authentic apology might be the most valuable business skill of all.
Everyone is apologizing-from airlines to stationery shops-but few are genuinely saying sorry.
Organizations only apologize when there's something in it for them.
Making people angry is a reliable way to promote sharing.

사과하지 못하는 사람들 요약의 등장인물

Cary CooperCo-author of the book and organizational expert
Sean O’MearaCo-author of the book and communications expert
Harry MossManaging Director of Moss Bros in 1951
Mr. R M HoskingGroom who received a notable apology in 1951
Philip GreenArcadia Group chairman involved in a scandal

저자 소개

얼라이언스 맨체스터 경영대학원의 50주년 기념 교수이자 저명한 조직 심리학 전문가인 캐리 쿠퍼(Cary Cooper)는 홍보 대행사 에센셜 컨텐트(Essential Content)의 설립자 숀 오메라(Sean O’Meara)와 함께 *사과 의무감(The Apology Impulse)*을 공동 집필했습니다. 비즈니스 커뮤니케이션과 직장 심리학에 뿌리를 둔 이 책은 과도한 사과가 발생하는 문화적 및 기업적 역학 관계를 탐구합니다.

쿠퍼는 조직의 웰빙 분야에서 기사 작위를 받은 권위자입니다. 그는 스트레스 관리 및 직장 행동에 관한 수십 년간의 연구를 바탕으로 활동하고 있으며, 이는 일과 스트레스: 연구 개요(Work & Stress: A Research Overview) 및 *직장 내 브렉시트(Brexit in the Workplace)*와 같은 공동 저서에 잘 나타나 있습니다. 오메라는 BBC와 같은 고객들을 위한 캠페인을 진행하며 쌓은 홍보 전문 지식을 활용하여 위기 커뮤니케이션 전략을 분석합니다.

두 저자는 현대 기업들이 사과를 진정한 책임감이 아닌 평판 관리 도구로 오용하는 방식을 해부합니다. 쿠퍼는 현재 영국 인사관리협회(CIPD)와 영국 경영학회(British Academy of Management)의 회장을 맡고 있습니다. 그는 영국 정부의 웰빙 이니셔티브에서 자문 역할을 수행하며 정책 수립에 기여해 왔습니다.

사과 의무감은 2020년 아메리칸 북 페스트(American Book Fest) 최고의 커뮤니케이션/홍보 부문 도서상과 NYC 빅 북 어워드(NYC Big Book Award)를 수상하며, 기업 리더와 홍보 전문가들을 위한 핵심 자료로서의 위상을 공고히 했습니다.

사과하지 못하는 사람들 요약 다운로드

사과하지 못하는 사람들 요약을 무료 PDF 또는 EPUB으로 받으세요. 인쇄하거나 오프라인에서 언제든 읽을 수 있습니다.

다른 사용자들도 좋아한 책

24 sources

The Art of Genuine Apology

Post-Truth Business

Sean Pillot de Chenecey

Showing empathy beyond saying I’m sorry 책 표지

24 sources

Showing empathy beyond saying I’m sorry

Mistakes Were Made

Carol Tavris & Elliot Aronson

Crucial Accountability 2e

Kerry Patterson

You're About to Make a Terrible Mistake!

Olivier Sibony

Unworking

Jeremy Myerson & Philip Ross

Power of Regret

Daniel Pink

사과하지 못하는 사람들 요약에 관한 자주 묻는 질문

더 알아보기

학습 계획

Beyond Blame: Correcting the Fundamental Attribution Error

In an increasingly polarized world, understanding why we judge others unfairly is a critical leadership and social skill. This plan is ideal for managers, educators, and anyone looking to improve their emotional intelligence by mastering the psychological roots of human behavior.

1 h 15 m•3 섹션

학습 계획

Breaking the Guilt Cycle

This plan is essential for anyone feeling drained by the demands of others or trapped by chronic feelings of obligation. It provides the psychological tools and practical language needed to transition from being reactive to being assertive in difficult relationships.

1 h 30 m•3 섹션

학습 계획

Overcome feeling I disappoint everyone

This learning plan is designed for individuals who struggle with persistent anxiety about making mistakes, fear others' judgment, or constantly feel they've disappointed people around them. It's particularly valuable for those caught in cycles of people-pleasing, over-apologizing, or avoiding situations due to worry about others' reactions—helping them break free from these exhausting patterns and build genuine confidence.

5 h 17 m•4 섹션

학습 계획

Master guilt-free, respectful "no" at work

In today's always-on work culture, the inability to set boundaries leads to burnout, resentment, and diminished performance. This learning plan equips professionals with the psychological insights and practical communication tools to say no respectfully, preserving both relationships and personal wellbeing.

4 h 56 m•4 섹션

학습 계획

The Art of Persuasion

In today’s fast-paced professional world, the ability to influence others without coercion is a vital leadership skill. This plan is designed for professionals and communicators who want to master the psychological nuances of trust, logic, and timing to win any argument.

2 h•4 섹션

학습 계획

From Blame to Balance

This plan is essential for individuals who struggle with sudden irritability or the tendency to blame others during conflict. It is designed for anyone seeking to improve their emotional intelligence and transition from reactive outbursts to balanced, ownership-based communication.

1 h 12 m•3 섹션

학습 계획

Unshakable: The Mistake-Proof Mindset

This plan is essential for athletes who struggle with performance anxiety or the tendency to dwell on errors. It provides the mental tools needed to transition from self-doubt to instinctive, high-stakes execution.

1 h 30 m•3 섹션

학습 계획

The Accountability Loop: Family Empathy

This plan is essential for parents seeking to break cycles of reactivity and foster deeper emotional intelligence within their homes. It is ideal for caregivers who want to replace traditional discipline with empathy-driven connection and mindful presence.

1 h 30 m•3 섹션

컬럼비아 대학교 동문들이 제작 샌프란시스코에서 개발

BeFreed는 호기심 넘치는 글로벌 커뮤니티를 하나로 연결합니다

4.7

평균 평점

앱 평가 7.84천 개 이상

BeFreed Community

"Instead of endless scrolling, I just hit play on BeFreed. It saves me so much time."

@Moemenn

"I never knew where to start with nonfiction—BeFreed’s book lists turned into podcasts gave me a clear path."

@Chloe, Solo founder, LA

117

"Perfect balance between learning and entertainment. Finished ‘Thinking, Fast and Slow’ on my commute this week."

@Raaaaaachelw

"Crazy how much I learned while walking the dog. BeFreed = small habits → big gains."

@Matt, YC alum

108

"Reading used to feel like a chore. Now it’s just part of my lifestyle."

@Erin, Investment Banking Associate , NYC

254

"Feels effortless compared to reading. I’ve finished 6 books this month already."

@djmikemoore

"BeFreed turned my guilty doomscrolling into something that feels productive and inspiring."

@Pitiful

4.5K

"BeFreed turned my commute into learning time. 20-min podcasts are perfect for finishing books I never had time for."

@SofiaP

"BeFreed replaced my podcast queue. Imagine Spotify for books — that’s it. 🙌"

@Jaded_Falcon

201

"It is great for me to learn something from the book without reading it."

@OojasSalunke

"The themed book list podcasts help me connect ideas across authors—like a guided audio journey."

@Leo, Law Student, UPenn

483

"Makes me feel smarter every time before going to work"

@Cashflowbubu

웹에서 BeFreed가 어떻게 논의되고 있는지 더 보기

컬럼비아 대학교 동문들이 제작 샌프란시스코에서 개발

BeFreed는 호기심 넘치는 글로벌 커뮤니티를 하나로 연결합니다

4.7

평균 평점

앱 평가 7.84천 개 이상

BeFreed Community

"Instead of endless scrolling, I just hit play on BeFreed. It saves me so much time."

@Moemenn

"I never knew where to start with nonfiction—BeFreed’s book lists turned into podcasts gave me a clear path."

@Chloe, Solo founder, LA

117

"Perfect balance between learning and entertainment. Finished ‘Thinking, Fast and Slow’ on my commute this week."

@Raaaaaachelw

"Crazy how much I learned while walking the dog. BeFreed = small habits → big gains."

@Matt, YC alum

108

"Reading used to feel like a chore. Now it’s just part of my lifestyle."

@Erin, Investment Banking Associate , NYC

254

"Feels effortless compared to reading. I’ve finished 6 books this month already."

@djmikemoore

"BeFreed turned my guilty doomscrolling into something that feels productive and inspiring."

@Pitiful

4.5K

"BeFreed turned my commute into learning time. 20-min podcasts are perfect for finishing books I never had time for."

@SofiaP

"BeFreed replaced my podcast queue. Imagine Spotify for books — that’s it. 🙌"

@Jaded_Falcon

201

"It is great for me to learn something from the book without reading it."

@OojasSalunke

"The themed book list podcasts help me connect ideas across authors—like a guided audio journey."

@Leo, Law Student, UPenn

483

"Makes me feel smarter every time before going to work"

@Cashflowbubu

"Instead of endless scrolling, I just hit play on BeFreed. It saves me so much time."

@Moemenn

"I never knew where to start with nonfiction—BeFreed’s book lists turned into podcasts gave me a clear path."

@Chloe, Solo founder, LA

117

"Perfect balance between learning and entertainment. Finished ‘Thinking, Fast and Slow’ on my commute this week."

@Raaaaaachelw

"Crazy how much I learned while walking the dog. BeFreed = small habits → big gains."

@Matt, YC alum

108

"Reading used to feel like a chore. Now it’s just part of my lifestyle."

@Erin, Investment Banking Associate , NYC

254

"Feels effortless compared to reading. I’ve finished 6 books this month already."

@djmikemoore

"BeFreed turned my guilty doomscrolling into something that feels productive and inspiring."

@Pitiful

4.5K

"BeFreed turned my commute into learning time. 20-min podcasts are perfect for finishing books I never had time for."

@SofiaP

"BeFreed replaced my podcast queue. Imagine Spotify for books — that’s it. 🙌"

@Jaded_Falcon

201

"It is great for me to learn something from the book without reading it."

@OojasSalunke

"The themed book list podcasts help me connect ideas across authors—like a guided audio journey."

@Leo, Law Student, UPenn

483

"Makes me feel smarter every time before going to work"

@Cashflowbubu

"Instead of endless scrolling, I just hit play on BeFreed. It saves me so much time."

@Moemenn

"I never knew where to start with nonfiction—BeFreed’s book lists turned into podcasts gave me a clear path."

@Chloe, Solo founder, LA

117

"Perfect balance between learning and entertainment. Finished ‘Thinking, Fast and Slow’ on my commute this week."

@Raaaaaachelw

"Crazy how much I learned while walking the dog. BeFreed = small habits → big gains."

@Matt, YC alum

108

"Reading used to feel like a chore. Now it’s just part of my lifestyle."

@Erin, Investment Banking Associate , NYC

254

"Feels effortless compared to reading. I’ve finished 6 books this month already."

@djmikemoore

"BeFreed turned my guilty doomscrolling into something that feels productive and inspiring."

@Pitiful

4.5K

"BeFreed turned my commute into learning time. 20-min podcasts are perfect for finishing books I never had time for."

@SofiaP

"BeFreed replaced my podcast queue. Imagine Spotify for books — that’s it. 🙌"

@Jaded_Falcon

201

"It is great for me to learn something from the book without reading it."

@OojasSalunke

"The themed book list podcasts help me connect ideas across authors—like a guided audio journey."

@Leo, Law Student, UPenn

483

"Makes me feel smarter every time before going to work"

@Cashflowbubu

웹에서 BeFreed가 어떻게 논의되고 있는지 더 보기

지금 바로 학습 여정을 시작하세요

4장

사과하지 못하는 사람들 요약

사과하지 못하는 사람들 요약 개요

다양한 학습 방식으로 사과하지 못하는 사람들 요약 살펴보기

When Sorry Isn't Enough: The Corporate Apology Crisis

The Anatomy of Modern Corporate Apologies

들리는 모든 단어를 눈으로 확인하세요

Why Organizations Apologize (Or Don't)

The Definitive Modern Apology Nobody Followed

사과하지 못하는 사람들 요약에서 더 많은 것을 얻으세요

The Language of Evasion: How Corporations Avoid Saying Sorry

Schrodinger's Apology: Simultaneously Sorry and Not Sorry

들리는 모든 단어를 눈으로 확인하세요

The Economics of Saying Sorry

When Refusing to Apologize Works Better

사과하지 못하는 사람들 요약에서 더 많은 것을 얻으세요

The M&S Model: Kindness Without Weakness

Saving Sorry: A Framework for Meaningful Corporate Apologies

사과하지 못하는 사람들 요약 완독을 축하합니다

사과하지 못하는 사람들 요약의 핵심 주제

사과하지 못하는 사람들 요약의 명문장

사과하지 못하는 사람들 요약의 등장인물

저자 소개

사과하지 못하는 사람들 요약 다운로드

다른 사용자들도 좋아한 책

사과하지 못하는 사람들 요약에 관한 자주 묻는 질문

What is The Apology Impulse by Cary Cooper and Sean O'Meara about?

Who should read The Apology Impulse?

Is The Apology Impulse worth reading?

What is the “apology impulse” in the book?

더 알아보기

BeFreed는 호기심 넘치는 글로벌 커뮤니티를 하나로 연결합니다

BeFreed는 호기심 넘치는 글로벌 커뮤니티를 하나로 연결합니다

다양한 학습 방식으로 사과하지 못하는 사람들 요약 살펴보기

When Sorry Isn't Enough: The Corporate Apology Crisis

The Anatomy of Modern Corporate Apologies

들리는 모든 단어를 눈으로 확인하세요

Why Organizations Apologize (Or Don't)

The Definitive Modern Apology Nobody Followed

사과하지 못하는 사람들 요약에서 더 많은 것을 얻으세요

The Language of Evasion: How Corporations Avoid Saying Sorry

Schrodinger's Apology: Simultaneously Sorry and Not Sorry

들리는 모든 단어를 눈으로 확인하세요

The Economics of Saying Sorry

When Refusing to Apologize Works Better

사과하지 못하는 사람들 요약에서 더 많은 것을 얻으세요

The M&S Model: Kindness Without Weakness

Saving Sorry: A Framework for Meaningful Corporate Apologies

사과하지 못하는 사람들 요약 완독을 축하합니다

다른 사용자들도 좋아한 책

더 알아보기