Professional Documents
Culture Documents
DOI 10.1007/s10551-011-0834-9
ABSTRACT. Corporate social responsibility (CSR) has Brown and Dacin, 1997; Sen and Bhattacharya,
emerged as an effective way for firms to create favorable 2001). Research has also shown that by being a
attitudes among consumers. Although prior research has better corporate citizen, firms face fewer risks and
addressed the direct influence of proactive and reactive are more likely to avoid consumer and activist
CSR on consumer responses, this research hypothesized boycotts (Luo and Bhattacharya, 2009; Vogel, 2005).
that consumers’ perceived organizational motives (i.e.,
This strategic focus has pushed many firms to pro-
attributions) will mediate this relationship. It was also
hypothesized that the source of information and location
actively engage in CSR which has been shown to
of CSR initiative will affect the motives consumers assign yield positive consumer responses (Becker-Olsen
to a firms’ engagement in the initiative. Two experiments et al., 2006; Ricks, 2005).
were conducted to test these hypotheses. The results of Media attention and technological advancements
Study 1 indicate that the nature of a CSR initiative have given the public virtually unlimited access to
influences consumer attribution effects and that these information regarding a broad range of CSR
attributions act as mediators in helping to explain con- behaviors (Wagner et al., 2009). For firms engaging
sumers’ responses to CSR. Study 2 suggests that the in CSR, this increased accessibility represents an
source of the CSR message moderates the effect of CSR opportunity to craft and distribute positive infor-
on consumer attributions. The mediating influence of the mation to a wide range of stakeholders. However,
attributions as well as the importance of information the complexity of global supply chain management
source suggests that proper communication of CSR can
has resulted in an increased number of incidences
be a viable way to inculcate positive corporate associa-
tions and purchase intentions.
involving socially irresponsible behaviors (Amaeshi
et al., 2008). The attention given to large firms (i.e.,
KEY WORDS: corporate social responsibility, con- from the media and consumer ‘‘watchdog’’ groups)
sumer attributions, corporate communications, CSR means that any such behavior is quick to reach the
strategy, information source public. In order to mitigate the effects of this neg-
ative information, some firms pursue a reactionary
strategy by deploying a CSR initiative soon after the
irresponsible behavior is revealed (Ricks, 2005).
Introduction While research has indicated that consumers respond
favorably to proactive CSR, consumers generally
Increased industry attention and researcher enthusi- respond negatively to the reactive form of the
asm for corporate social responsibility (CSR) has practice (Becker-Olsen et al., 2006; Wagner et al.,
led to the development of several theories and 2009). The current paper provides a more compre-
approaches aimed at measuring the socially held hensive explanation of these effects. The main thesis
image of businesses. The literature is replete with is that the perceived organizational motives (i.e.,
examples of how CSR can be used as an instrument attributions) consumers assign to CSR are key psy-
to enhance firm image and affect consumers’ chological mechanisms through which proactive and
behavioral intentions (Bhattacharya and Sen, 2004; reactive CSR information is processed. By including
640 Mark D. Groza et al.
a causal path in the proactive/reactive dynamic, we others do than about why they do it’’ (p. 21). Similarly,
provide a more thorough explanation for how Ellen et al. (2006) posited that consumers attribute
consumers process and respond to basic CSR multiple and specific corporate motives to CSR
information. Based on these theoretically supported engagement which include strategic-driven (e.g., the
linkages, we develop and test the model depicted in firm wants to increase sales or mitigate harm), stake-
Figure 1. holder-driven (e.g., CSR is enacted because of stake-
Using attribution theory and the persuasion holder pressures), and values-driven motives (e.g., the
knowledge model (PKM) as theoretical foundations, firm believes CSR is the right thing to do).
two experiments were conducted to reveal consumer Prior research has suggested that certain attribu-
preferences of communicated CSR information. tions can directly influence consumers’ behavioral
Study 1 examined the mediating role of the attribu- intentions and attitudes. Purchase intent (Ellen et al.,
tions in explaining the relationship between CSR 2006), repeat patronage (Vlachos et al., 2009), and
strategy (i.e., proactive vs. reactive) and attitude to- recommendation intentions (Ellen et al., 2006;
ward the company and purchase intentions. Study 2 Walker et al., 2010), for example, have all been sig-
identified how information source (i.e., internally nificantly influenced by the motives consumers assign
published vs. externally published) and the location of to a CSR initiative. Considering the importance of
the CSR initiative (i.e., local vs. non-local) affected these attributions as attitudinal response mechanisms,
consumers’ attributed motives. Collectively, the re- the current research sought to identify if the attrib-
sults suggest that the attributions assist in explaining uted motives a consumer assigns to CSR mediate the
how consumers respond to a CSR initiative and (as relationship between the type of CSR initiative (i.e.,
predicted by the PKM) these perceived motives can proactive vs. reactive) and two outcomes (i.e., atti-
be affected by certain message characteristics. tude toward the company and purchase intent).
via advertisements, direct company communication, abstractness and inoculation could assuage the nega-
etc.) from the firm (i.e., the agent). In these situations, tive effect of reactive CSR. Despite these factors,
the target works to cope with the persuasion attempt, reactive CSR can still lead to negative consumer
while the agent seeks to effectively create and execute responses (Lee et al., 2009). By extending this work,
the attempt. In terms of attribution theory, if con- the current research represents another step toward
sumers question a firm’s motivation, they will elicit clarifying the conditions under which the motives for
more persuasion knowledge. According to Becker- engaging in CSR explain (at least partially) con-
Olsen et al. (2006), this should result in greater cog- sumers’ favorable responses to proactive CSR and
nitive elaboration when evaluating the certain per- negative responses to reactive CSR. In order for this
suasion attempt. In addition, since consumers tend to mediating relationship to hold, an understanding of
have opinions about the appropriateness of commu- how proactive and reactive CSR strategies affect
nication tactics, their skepticism can be attributed to consumers’ perceived motives should be discussed.
the amount of persuasion knowledge they use to judge Unlike proactive CSR, which takes planning and
persuasive communications (Friestad and Wright, careful consideration by the firm, a reactive initiative is
1994). Since attribution theory and the PKM provide prompted by some unexpected occurrence.
the basis for the argument that consumers will attempt The planning required to proactively engage in
to understand motives embedded in a firm’s com- CSR suggests that consumers may perceive the ini-
munication, it seems logical to understand how CSR tiative to be more strategic-driven, compared to a
strategy aligns with these ideas. reactive initiative. Consumers are also likely to assign
higher values-driven attributions to a proactive versus
Proactive and reactive CSR reactive initiative. Compared to reactive CSR, there is
typically no pejorative information surrounding a
While a number of reasons underpin managerial proactive CSR initiative. Therefore, an unprompted
decisions to deploy CSR initiatives, many elect to (and overtly positive) initiative will likely be perceived
pursue either a proactive or reactive strategy (or a as more altruistic than an initiative designed to atone
confluence of the two; Ricks, 2005). Firms pursuing for a firm’s irresponsible behavior. Murray and Vogel
a proactive agenda actively engage in and support (1997) argued that different organizational stakehold-
CSR prior to any negative information being re- ers have different expectations concerning the degree
ceived by consumers (Du et al., 2007). Conversely, a to which a firm should engage in proactive CSR. All
reactive strategy involves engaging in CSR to pro- stakeholders, however, are generally unified in their
tect the image of the organization (i.e., mitigate expectations that a firm must attend to and ‘‘right’’
harm) after some irresponsible action has been re- their social wrongdoings. Thus, we hypothesize that
ported (Murray and Vogel, 1997; Wagner et al., proactive CSR initiatives will elicit lower stakeholder-
2009). Given these divergent foci, consumers typi- driven attributions compared to reactive CSR.
cally perceive proactive CSR positively due to its
H1: A proactive (verses reactive) CSR initiative
seemingly altruistic nature (Becker-Olsen et al.,
will have a positive effect on values-driven
2006). Alternatively, reacting to an irresponsible event
attributions.
involves some level of negative affect for the con- H2: A proactive (verses reactive) CSR initiative
sumer, which may overshadow a previously held will have a positive effect on strategic-driven
positive view of the firm (Ricks, 2005). attributions.
Becker-Olsen et al. (2006) found that proactive H3: A proactive (verses reactive) CSR initiative
initiatives resulted in more favorable attitudes toward will have a negative effect on stakeholder-
the company which increased consumers’ pur- driven attributions.
chase intentions. Conversely, reactive CSR lead to
increasingly negative thoughts and reduced attitudes The motives underlying a social agenda have been
toward the company. Recently, Wagner et al. (2009) used to explain consumer reactions to CSR. Much
investigated methods to attenuate the negative effects of this research has focused on the moderating role
of a reactive CSR strategy and found that message these attributions play in strengthening the effect of
642 Mark D. Groza et al.
CSR on various corporate outcomes (see Klein and conditions: (1) proactive CSR condition or (2)
Dawar, 2004; Sen et al., 2006). Research has also reactive CSR condition. Participants received an
suggested that the specific attributions consumers experimental packet consisting of instructions, a
assign to CSR can directly affect the outcomes of fictitious article, and a series of questions in response
purchase and recommendation intentions. Ellen to the article and were told the researchers were
et al. (2006), for example, supported their predic- interested in assessing how to efficiently disseminate
tions that values-driven and strategic-driven attri- corporate information to the public. The conditions
butions would positively affect purchase intentions, were manipulated using an article consisting of
while stakeholder-driven attributions would nega- information about a recent CSR initiative of a fic-
tively affect purchase intentions. These predictions titious company (i.e., Mayetta Food and Beverage
were contingent on the idea that consumers respond Corp). As in prior research, a fictitious company was
favorably to inherently altruistic (i.e., values-driven) used to minimize any confounds due to preexisting
corporate activities. Consumers also largely accept attitudes toward the firm (Brown and Dacin, 1997;
the notion that a core strategic goal of firms is to Wagner et al., 2009). Similar to Wagner et al.
attract and maintain customers. Thus, consumers (2009), the reactive initiative was operationalized by
appear to accept CSR initiatives that are enacted to positioning the CSR initiative as part of a response
support the strategic goals of the firm (i.e., strategic- to a current environmental issue caused by the
driven). Consumers, however, respond negatively company. In the proactive condition, the article
when CSR efforts are enacted only after pressure explained that the company voluntarily donated
from stakeholders (i.e., stakeholder-driven) because money to remedy an environmental issue. A pre-test
such actions are perceived as forced and insincere. focus group confirmed that the articles were both
Considering the role that attributions play in the realistic and believable.
attitudinal and behavioral reactions of consumers, After reading the experimental stimuli, partici-
and since many consumers may care less about what pants responded to questions related to the structure
firms do as opposed to why they are doing it (see and content of the article. These questions were
Ellen et al., 2006; Gilbert and Malone, 1995), we intended to act as both a distracter task and to add to
propose that the attributions will act as key inter- the guise of the study to minimize potential demand
vening variables in explaining consumer responses to characteristics (Sawyer, 1975). Measures for the
CSR information. three attribution dimensions were adapted from
Ellen et al. (2006). Attitude toward the company
H4: The attributions will (at least partially) mediate was measured using three 7-point bipolar scales
the relationship between the CSR initiative anchored by ‘‘dislike/like,’’ ‘‘unfavorable/favorable,’’
and attitudes toward the company (H4a) and and ‘‘negative/positive’’ (Nan and Heo, 2007). Pur-
purchase intent (H4b). chase intent was measured using three 7-point bipolar
scales anchored by ‘‘very unlikely/very likely,’’
‘‘improbable/probable,’’ and ‘‘impossible/possible’’
Study 1: Effects of CSR initiative (Lafferty and Goldsmith, 1999). All scales used in
on attributions Study 1 demonstrated adequate levels of internal
consistency (values-driven: a = 0.86, stakeholder-
Method driven: a = 0.88, strategic driven: a = 0.85, attitude
toward the company: a = 0.95, and purchase intent:
An experiment to test the influence of CSR strategy a = 0.93) and can be found in the Appendix.
(i.e., proactive vs. reactive) on consumer attribu-
tions was performed. Study 1 also allows us to test
our mediation hypothesis. Undergraduate students Results
(N = 115, average age 20.1) at a large public uni-
versity in the United States participated in the study The effect of a proactive versus reactive CSR on
in return for class credit. Study participants were values-, stakeholder-, and strategic-driven attribu-
randomly assigned into one of two experimental tions were tested using multivariate analysis of vari-
Perceived Organizational Motives and Consumer Responses to Proactive and Reactive CSR 643
ance (MANOVA). The overall multivariate effect included as a potential mediator in the final step of
of the nature of the initiative on the attributions this analysis.
was significant (Wilks’s k = 0.56, F1,111 = 28.89, In the third step (M fi DV), attitude toward the
p < 0.001). Univariate results indicated that par- company (F3,111 = 67.25, adjusted R2 = 0.635) and
ticipants exposed to the proactive information purchase intent (F3,111 = 29.33, adjusted R2 =
perceived the CSR to be more values-driven 0.442) were both significantly influenced by
(Mproactive = 4.78, Mreactive = 3.10; F1,114 = 53.95, the attributions. Values-driven and strategic-driven
p < 0.001) and strategic-driven (Mproactive = 5.70, attributions increased attitudes toward the company,
Mreactive = 4.89, F1,114 = 12.69, p < 0.001), thereby while stakeholder-driven attributions decreased atti-
supporting H1 and H2. While the nature of the tudes toward the company. Likewise, values-driven
CSR initiative influenced stakeholder-driven attri- and strategic-driven attributions increased purchase
butions in the hypothesized direction (Mproactive = intent, while stakeholder-driven attributions de-
4.31, Mreactive = 4.60), statistical significance between creased purchase intent.
the conditions was not achieved. Therefore, the Partial mediation occurs if the independent vari-
results of Study 1 were unable to support H3 (see able’s effect on the dependent variable is reduced
Table I). when the intervening variable is controlled for
Following Baron and Kenny (1986), regression (Baron and Kenny, 1986). With the inclusion of
was used to determine if the attributions mediate values- and strategic-driven attributions, the influ-
the relationship between the CSR initiative and the ence of the CSR initiative on attitudes toward the
outcomes (see Table II). First, the relationship company was reduced (but still significant), sug-
between the CSR initiative and the outcomes was gesting partial mediation and supporting H4a.
established (IV fi DV). Consistent with prior Likewise, with the inclusion of values- and strategic-
research (Becker-Olsen et al., 2006; Wagner et al., driven attributions, the influence of the CSR ini-
2009), the nature of the CSR initiative significantly tiative on purchase intent was also reduced (but still
influenced both attitude toward the company significant), suggesting partial mediation and sup-
(F1,114 = 97.50, adjusted R2 = 0.463,) and pur- porting H4b. Sobel’s (1982) test revealed significant
chase intent (F1,114 = 113, adjusted R2 = 0.496). In t values across the outcomes further indicating the
the second step (IV fi M), the CSR initiative attributions were important (partial) mediators.
significantly influenced values-driven attributions
(F1,114 = 53.95, adjusted R2 = 0.317) and strategic-
driven attributions (F1,114 = 12.69, adjusted R2 = Discussion
0.093). In the univariate analysis, and similar to
Ellen et al.’s (2006) results, characteristics of the The results of Study 1 support the findings of
CSR initiative did not influence the stakeholder- Becker-Olsen et al. (2006) and Wagner et al. (2009)
driven attributions. Therefore, this variable was not in that proactive CSR resulted in more favorable
TABLE I
Means, standard deviations and F values – Study 1
TABLE II
Mediation regression analyses (H4) – Study 1 and Study 2
Note: Values for the direct effects models are unstandardized regression coefficients with standard errors in parentheses.
*p < 0.05; **p < 0.001.
attitudes toward the firm and higher purchase evaluates a proactive initiative, they will likely
intentions. Further, Study 1 extends prior research attribute positive motives, thereby fostering or
by demonstrating that consumers attribute different enhancing their attitude toward the firm. Con-
motives to initiatives conceptualized to be proactive versely, a reactive initiative could induce negative
or reactive in nature. Study participants perceived perceptions which might overshadow a previously
proactive CSR as more strategic- and values-driven held positive view of the firm. Study 1 reveals that
than reactive CSR. By providing evidence that the firms should be cognizant of the attributions con-
attributions significantly influenced the outcomes, sumers assign to their CSR activities. By consider-
we extend the research on CSR-induced attribu- ing the motives that result from CSR engagement,
tions, positing them as indirectly influencing pur- firms may be able to enhance favorable outcomes of
chase intent and attitude toward the company. In proactive initiatives and mitigate negative outcomes
support of H4, the results indicated that the attri- of reactive initiatives.
butions partially mediate the relationship between
the type of CSR initiative and the outcomes. Thus,
these attribution effects represent a key pathway Study 2: The effects of information source
which helps to broaden our understanding of how and location of action on the attributions
consumers process CSR information.
Theoretically, these findings support Gilbert and In light of the Study 1 findings, it is important to
Malone’s (1995) contention that consumers care understand how CSR communication and other
about why firms engage in certain activities and not characteristics of the initiative (i.e., beyond the
just general information about the activities them- general strategy) will influence consumer percep-
selves. Using attribution theory, Yoon et al. (2006) tions of firm engagement. Research in this area has
contended that consumers form correspondent infer- begun to examine how businesses use various
ences when evaluating CSR activities. If a consumer communication strategies to highlight their com-
Perceived Organizational Motives and Consumer Responses to Proactive and Reactive CSR 645
mitment to CSR (Morsing and Schultz, 2006; using strategies that generate favorable perceptions
Simmons and Becker-Olsen, 2006; Yoon et al., regarding their social initiatives. Persuasion knowl-
2006). Thus, Study 2 sought to identify if the per- edge is then developed among consumer beliefs
ceived attributions could be influenced by infor- regarding the tactics that PR officers use to promote
mation source and spatial location of the CSR causes that allegedly seek to benefit society or con-
initiative. versely, cover up some malfeasance. Based on the
logic contained in the PKM, individuals who believe
they are being persuaded by an agent will more
Information source carefully elaborate the message in an attempt to gain
more information about the persuasion attempt
Research has attested to the potential business ben- (Artz and Tybout, 1999). Therefore, we predict that
efits and consequences that internal and external internally published information will amplify the
communications of CSR provide (Morsing and relationship between the CSR initiative and con-
Schultz, 2006). The ‘‘source’’ by which consumers sumer attributions.
receive CSR information likely serves as a touch-
stone for organizational legitimacy and might influ- H5: Publication of a company’s CSR initiative
ence the motives they assign to the initiative. While internally (vs. externally) will amplify the
the importance of communicating CSR has gar- effects of the CSR initiative on values-driven
nered a fair amount of attention in the marketing attributions (H5a) strategic-driven attribu-
literature (Brown and Dacin, 1997; Wagner et al., tions (H5b) and stakeholder-driven attributions
2009), research on the effects of the information (H5c).
source has not kept pace. Thus, little is known about
whether internal firm messages (e.g., from an annual
report) or externally distributed information about a Spatial distance of action
firm (e.g., from an outside news agency) resonate
more or less desirably with consumers. The geographic target (i.e., cause proximity) of a
Despite the relative dearth of research examining CSR activity has been investigated as a factor par-
the importance of information source in commu- tially influencing consumers’ attitudes toward social
nicating CSR information, there is a substantial body engagement (Grau and Folse, 2007; Ross et al.,
of work examining the importance of source-bias in 1992). Precipitated by globalization, firms tend to
consumer reactions to marketing messages (Artz and impact a greater number of stakeholders and there-
Tybout, 1999; Grewal et al., 1994). According to fore, have the ability to foster both local (e.g., urban
attribution theory, an observer assumes that a certain revitalization projects) and foreign (e.g., factories in
behavior is performed to achieve a desirable out- developing countries) CSR programs (Wagner et al.,
come, and then assumes there are underlying moti- 2009). Varadarajan and Menon (1988) were among
vations driving the behavior (Jones and Davis, 1965). the first to suggest that the geographic target of
For example, a consumer may believe a message cause-related marketing (CRM) donations may
released directly from the firm to be self-serving influence consumer responses. They argued that
because the Public Relations (PR) department has while national and international CRM campaigns
the ability to shape the content. Weiner et al. (1990) can broaden brand awareness, campaigns directed
tested this idea finding that consumers perceived locally may be more salient to consumers.
messages directly from the company as being self- Recently, Grau and Folse (2007) re-examined the
interested. Because of this perceived self-interest, importance of donation proximity in consumers’
consumers often question the credibility and of evaluations of CRM programs. The authors hypoth-
messages emanating from the company (Grewal esized that consumers’ attitudinal evaluations and
et al., 1994; Yoon et al., 2006). In terms of per- participation intentions would increase if a cause was
suasion knowledge (see Friestad and Wright, 1994), targeted locally, because local donations would signal
a PR officer (i.e., agent) will attempt to create a more concrete or tangible value of the campaign.
exchanges by persuading consumers (i.e., targets) While Grau and Folse (2007) failed to support their
646 Mark D. Groza et al.
proximity hypothesis, they did find that consumers iment indicated that no potential participant claimed
held more favorable attitudes toward local rather residency in that nation. Except for the described
than national donations. They concluded that cam- manipulations, all other aspects of the experimental
paigns directed locally were deemed more relevant, stimuli were invariant.
thereby eliciting greater attention. This heightened Manipulation checks were included to assess
relevancy suggests that individuals will be motivated whether the study participants properly interpreted
to more extensively process local CSR information the manipulations. For the information source
rather than non-local information (Chaiken, 1980; manipulation, participants responded to a three-item
Petty and Cacioppo, 1979). Based on this, we pre- source credibility scale (a = 0.95) adopted from
dict that spatial distance will moderate the effect of a Harmon and Coney (1982). Significant differences
CSR initiative on consumer attributions such that were found for source credibility (F1,270 = 266,
the effect of the CSR initiative will be reduced as p < 0.001). Specifically, participants exposed to The
spatial distance increases. New York Times article rated it as more credible
(M = 6.08) than participants exposed to the article
H6: Spatial distance between the consumer and from Mayetta Food and Beverage Corp. (M = 3.86).
CSR initiative will moderate the effect of the To check spatial distance, participants responded to a
CSR initiative on values-driven attributions four-item personal relevance scale (a = 0.93) adop-
(H6a) strategic-driven attributions (H6b) and ted from Grau and Folse (2007). A significant dif-
stakeholder-driven attributions (H6c). ference for personal relevance was found (F1,270 =
4.13, p < 0.05). Specifically, participants in the local
condition rated the initiative as more personally
Method relevant (M = 4.72) than those in the non-local
condition (M = 4.38). Personal relevance was not
To test H3 and H4, we employed a 2 (CSR strategy: affected by any other experimental manipulation.
proactive vs. reactive) 9 2 (information source: After reading the experimental stimuli, participants
internal vs. external) 9 2 (spatial distance: local vs. responded to the same scales used in Study 1, which
non-local) randomized between-subjects full-facto- again demonstrated acceptable levels of internal
rial design. Undergraduate students (N = 271, aver- consistency (values-driven: a = 0.92, stakeholder-
age age 21.8) at a large public university in the United driven: a = 0.86, strategic-driven: a = 0.87, attitude
States (who did not participate in the previous study) toward the company: a = 0.97, and purchase intent:
were used to test the Study 2 hypotheses. The pro- a = 0.95).
cedure, background information, CSR initiative
manipulation, and measures were the same as those
used in Study 1. Information source was manipulated Results
by stating that the article was taken directly from
either the Mayetta Food and Beverage Corp. website Table III shows the means and standard deviations
(i.e., internal) or The New York Times website (i.e., for the attributions in Study 2. To test H5 and H6, a
external). The New York Times was chosen as it was 2 (CSR strategy) 9 2 (information source) 9 2
the highest trafficked website of any newspaper in the (spatial distance) multivariate analysis of variance
country at the time of the data collection (Nielsen (MANOVA) was first conducted. The results indi-
Media, 2009) and pre-testing indicated that this was a cated significant main effects for CSR strategy and
highly credible source. Spatial distance was manipu- information source on the dependent variables, but
lated by stating the initiative occurred either in the no significant interactions between the independent
state in which the participants’ university was located variables were found. Because the interaction effects
(i.e., proximal) or in the Southeast Asian nation of of the independent variables differed for different
Malaysia (i.e., distal). Malaysia was chosen because it dependent variables, we tested our hypotheses using
is the most geographically distant nation from the univariate ANOVAs for each of the three attribu-
university where the experiment was performed. tions (see Table IV; Bonifield and Cole, 2007). The
Examination of the subject pool prior to the exper- significant interaction between CSR and informa-
Perceived Organizational Motives and Consumer Responses to Proactive and Reactive CSR 647
tion source on values-driven attributions (F1,263 = that could ultimately contribute to further study of
4.62, p < 0.05) provides support for H5a. The effect this phenomenon.
of the CSR initiative on values-driven attributions The data from Study 2 also provided the oppor-
was magnified when the information originated tunity to assess the robustness of H1 and H2 in Study
from an internal company source. Likewise, the 1. As discussed above, MANOVA indicated a sig-
significant interaction between the CSR initiative nificant main effect of CSR strategy on the three
and information source on strategic-driven attribu- attribution effects (Wilks’s k = 0.479, F3,261 =
tions (F1,263 = 3.88, p < 0.05) lends support for 94.79, p < 0.001). Participants in the proactive con-
H5b. Again, the effect of the CSR initiative on ditions perceived the CSR activity to be more
strategic-driven attributions was magnified when values-driven (Mproactive = 5.19, Mreactive = 2.91;
participants were provided information released F1,263 = 255, p < 0.001) and more strategic-driven
directly from the company. H5c was not supported (Mproactive = 5.67, Mreactive = 4.69; F1,263 = 41.57,
because of the insignificant interaction between p < 0.001), providing additional support for H1 and
CSR strategy and information source on stake- H2. Also in Study 2, the participants in the proactive
holder-driven attributions (p > 0.05). Interestingly, conditions perceived the CSR initiative to be less
however, a significant direct effect was found for stakeholder-driven (Mproactive = 4.75, Mreactive =
information source on the stakeholder-driven 5.08; F1,263 = 4.52, p < 0.05). However, unlike in
attribution (F1,263 = 5.86, p < 0.05). Regardless of Study 1, this difference achieved statistical signifi-
the CSR initiative, the participants assigned cance providing support H3. Baron and Kenny’s
higher stakeholder-driven attributions toward the (1986) regression procedure was again used to con-
initiative when the information was released firm that the attributions mediate the relationship
from the company (M = 5.10) versus an external between the CSR initiative and attitude toward the
source (M = 4.73). While contrary to our company and purchase intent. An identical process as
hypothesis, this finding nonetheless has important that used in Study 1 was performed further sup-
implications. porting H4 (see Table II).
Surprisingly, we were unable to support H6.
There were no significant interactions between CSR
strategy and location of initiative for any of the Discussion
attribution effects (Fs < 3.83, ps > 0.05); nor were
there any direct effects for location of initiative on The results of Study 2 mirrored those of Study 1 by
any of the attributions (Fs < 3.94, ps > 0.05). showing the nature of the CSR initiative had a
Again, while these findings are contrary to our stated significant effect on attitude toward the company
hypothesis (H6), they carry important explanations and purchase intent both directly and indirectly
TABLE III
Means and standard deviations – Study 2
TABLE IV
MANOVA results (F values) – Study 2
through the attributions. Study 2 also provides evi- participants had no power to shape the outcome of
dence that consumers assign different attributions to the initiative post hoc. While a locally targeted ini-
a CSR initiative depending on the source of the tiative may have been more personally relevant, the
message. This is especially informative because while participants may have had little interest (or moti-
information source did not directly affect attitude vation) to carefully elaborate on the message since
toward the company or purchase intent, message they had little power to influence the outcome.
source did affect these outcomes indirectly through Second, the failure to support H6 could be due to
the attributions. the omission of an important moderator from the
Failure to support the hypothesis that location of model. Recently, Russell and Russell (2010) found
action would influence consumer attributions can that an individual’s level of global citizenship behavior
be explained in several ways. First, our hypothesis moderates the relationship between the location of a
was based on the idea that locally targeted initia- firm’s CSR activities (e.g., domestic vs. foreign) and
tives are more personally relevant to consumers purchase intent. The authors based their hypothesis on
than non-locally targeted initiatives (see Grau and social identity theory by arguing that individuals low
Folse, 2007; Varadarajan and Menon, 1988). The in global citizenship behavior will identify with their
manipulation check in Study 2 supported this home nation to a greater degree than individuals who
contention as participants exposed to the locally are high in global citizenship. As such, location of
targeted initiative rated it as more personally rele- CSR activity is less important to an individual who is
vant than those exposed to the non-local initiative. high in global citizenship behavior. It is possible that
Based on prior research (see Chaiken, 1980; Petty our lack of significance regarding the location of ini-
and Cacioppo, 1979), we hypothesized that in- tiative may be a result of not controlling for the par-
creased personal relevance would result in increased ticipants level of global citizenship behavior. Thus,
elaboration thereby amplifying the relationship be- future research should investigate this idea (in the
tween the CSR initiative and the attributions. It is context of our model) to clarify the conditions under
important to note, however, that the predictions which this manifestation might hold.
made by Varadarajan and Menon (1988) and later
supported by Grau and Folse (2007) were made in
the context of a cause-related marketing (CRM) General discussion
program. CRM programs by their very nature
require a high level of consumer involvement This research supports the contention that by engag-
where a donation is made only after the consumer ing proactively in CSR firms can yield more favorable
makes a purchase. The CSR initiatives in our attitudinal responses from consumers than by acting in
manipulations had already occurred and thus, the a reactionary manner (Becker-Olsen et al., 2006;
Perceived Organizational Motives and Consumer Responses to Proactive and Reactive CSR 649
Wagner et al., 2009). More importantly, however, the which CSR information affects consumer attitudes
results of two studies contribute to the literature by toward the company and patronage intentions.
demonstrating that the attributions are key variables in
explaining consumer responses to divergent CSR
initiatives. Furthermore, this study makes both con- Limitations and future research directions
ceptual and theoretical contributions by demonstrat-
ing that the source of a message can affect the In light of the significant findings, several limitations
attributions consumers assign to a firm’s CSR strategy. should be acknowledged. While the use of an
Due in large part to the proliferation of online com- experimental design employing a fictitious company
munication portals (e.g., company websites, blogs, was intended to maximize internal validity, the
social networking sites), consumers have increased method does not allow claims regarding external
access to information regarding the social behavior of validity. The use of undergraduate students as study
companies. This information can either be dissemi- participants also represents a limitation. While the use
nated by the company itself or through some third- of a homogeneous sample facilitates the comparison
party channel and it can depict both positive and across treatment groups and improves internal
negative information. We demonstrate (by way of the validity, the sample also detracts from the generaliz-
PKM) that internally published CSR information ability of the results. Follow-up work should test this
magnifies the attributions consumers assign to a CSR model using actual companies in a ‘‘real world’’
initiative. As such, our findings suggest that in order to setting. Support for the proposed model in this
maximize positive returns from CSR investments, manner would provide the necessary external validity
firms should take enhanced measures to release pro- and assuage any concerns regarding the overall gen-
active CSR information from internal sources. eralizability of our findings. The narrow scope of the
Alternatively, to minimize any possible negative ef- CSR initiatives used in the current study also rep-
fects, firms should rely on information from external resents a notable limitation. CSR encompasses a wide
sources to convey any reactionary information. Re- variety of activities ranging from the treatment of
cent corporate wrongdoings such as the British suppliers and employees to environmental issues to
Petroleum oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico have high- corporate philanthropy activities. Future research
lighted the large number of external information should consider how different types of CSR initia-
sources available to the public. Although this infor- tives affect consumer attributions.
mation might portray the company as socially irre- The significant information source result also
sponsible, it should nonetheless be viewed as less provides an avenue for future research. Information
strategic when coming from an outside agency as source was manipulated by presenting hypothetical
opposed to the corporation itself. articles from either the company’s website or the
Based on the significant findings, a few notable website from a credible external news source. While
implications emerged. First, our results extend the The New York Times was considered a highly credible
role of attributions in explaining consumer responses news source, it would be interesting to see if these
to CSR activities. While prior research has investi- results hold when information is released from a less
gated how the attributions affect various outcomes, credible source. With increasing frequency, con-
our research examined the antecedents of the attri- sumers are receiving news from alternative sources
butions, suggesting that the manner in which a such as blogs and social networking sites (e.g.,
message is constructed can influence consumer Facebook and Twitter). Using source credibility as an
reactions through the attributions. The inclusion of interactive determinate would prove interesting,
the attributions as mediators is important as addi- especially when grounded in both attribution theory
tional message characteristics may influence these and the PKM as most of these sources are perceived as
perceived motives which (in turn) influence behav- highly biased and have overtly persuasive intentions.
ioral responses. Thus, consumer attributions are Finally, our inability to support Hypothesis 6 may
(at least in this context) identified as a route through also represent a limitation. This may have been the
650 Mark D. Groza et al.