Testing the Viability of Corporate Social Advocacy as a Predictor of Purchase Intention

Should Your Brand Pick a Side? How Market Share Determines the Impact of Corporate Political Advocacy

“…Altogether, this work contributes to the emerging literature on CPA by providing a novel perspective on the link between the individual- and market-level mechanisms relevant to marketers and researchers. Building on early efforts to understand the effects of CPA on consumer behavior and its consequences for brands (Dodd and Supa 2015; Hydock, Paharia, and Weber 2019), we extend this literature by identifying brand market share as a moderator of the net effect of CPA. We also identify authenticity as an important moderator of both the individual- and market-level effects.…”

“…Of particular interest for our investigation is a form of a brand activism called “corporate political advocacy” (Hydock, Paharia, and Weber 2019), in which a brand takes a public stance on a controversial sociopolitical issue (also referred to as “corporate social advocacy”; Dodd and Supa 2015). Although CPA is related to the more general phenomenon of corporate social responsibility (CSR), broadly conceptualized as a company’s status and activities with respect to its perceived societal obligations (Brown and Dacin 1997), CPA also has key distinctions.…”

Fake, Faulty, and Authentic Stand-Taking: What Determines the Legitimacy of Corporate Social Advocacy?

“…The existing literature correctly locates the roots of CSA in corporate social responsibility (Ciszek & Logan, 2018;Dodd & Supa, 2015;Wettstein & Baur, 2016), but also suggests the actual scope of companies' social responsibility is framed by society's economic, legal, ethical, and discretionary (philanthropic) expectations (Carroll, 2016). From a CSA standpoint, social responsibility does not necessitate a radical departure from the standard patterns of businesses, because companies should be not only profitable and operate within the law but should also observe ethical or moral standards and exercise their discretion for the good of society (Nielsen & Thomsen, 2018).…”

“We Really Have to Hit Them Where It Hurts”: Analyzing Activists’ Corporate Campaigns

“…Activist groups begin the process by researching and analyzing each target company to determine whether it appears to be more public or profit-driven. Research suggests corporate stances on social issues are often driven by stakeholders (Dodd & Supa, 2015). Waldron et al (2013) also postulated that stakeholder culture shapes corporate responses to activists and theorized that stakeholder cultures range from moralist to egoist.…”

“…2) and attracted groups such as 2nd Vote. However, corporate advocacy also can offer competitive advantages and foster brand loyalty among issue supporters (Dodd & Supa, 2015), particularly for companies that lean toward the public-driven end of the spectrum. As stakeholders appear to trend toward favoring the involvement of business in these issues (Weber Shandwick, 2018), it would behoove a company to consider its stakeholder culture (Waldron et al, 2013), reflect on its values, and evaluate if it is well-positioned to be a credible leader on the issue.…”