Journal of Business Ethics (2007) 71:245260 DOI 10.

1007/s10551-006-9137-y

Springer 2006

I Need You Too! Corporate Identity Attractiveness for Consumers and The Role of Social Responsibility

Longinos Marin Salvador Ruiz

ABSTRACT. The extent to which people identify with an organization is dependent on the attractiveness of the organizational identity, which helps individuals satisfy one or more important self-definitional needs. However, little is known about the antecedents of company identity attractiveness (IA) in a consumercompany context. Drawing on theories of social identity and organizational identification, a model of the antecedents of IA is developed and tested. The findings provide empirical validation of the relationship between IA and corporate associations perceived by consumers. Our results demonstrate that the Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) contribution to company IA is much stronger than that of Corporate Ability (CA). This may be linked to increasing competition and of decreasing CA-based variation in the marketplace. KEY WORDS: consumer behavior, corporate social responsibility, identication, identity attractiveness, relationship marketing

Introduction While the customer-oriented literature on company relationships has been growing (de Wulf et al., 2001; Sheth and Parvatiyar, 1995), the consumers view of these relationships remains unexplored (Barnes, 1997). The effective management of customer relationships requires a previous consideration of why customers enter into relationships with rms. While from the rms perspective it is fairly clear that engaging in a positive relationship with its customers would enhance their loyalty and retention, leading to greater company protability (Reichheld, 1993; Stephens et al., 1996), customers motivation to engage in a relationship with companies is not

always apparent. Companies, as organizations, constitute a social group (Dutton et al., 1994) and recent literature has found that one component of customers motivation to engage in relationships with companies is to help companies provide to consumers in order to satisfy one or more key selfdenitional needs through identication (Ahearne et al., 2005; Bhattacharya and Sen, 2003). Originally developed in the areas of social psychology and organizational behavior, the concept of identication satises the need for social identity and self-denition, and in turn, has been demonstrated to positively impact member loyalty (Mael and Ashforth, 1992) as well as employees citizenship behaviors (Bergami and Bagozzi, 2000). Through organizational identication, organizations contribute to individuals social identity (Brewer, 1991; Dutton et al., 1994), i.e., the internalization of a group category as part of the self-concept and the acceptance of the values and behavioral norms of the collectivity. Researchers and theorists have shown that the extent to which people identify with an organization is dependent on the attractiveness of the organizational identity (Dutton et al., 1994). Identity attractiveness (IA) in the consumercompany context is likely to be a necessary condition for identication (Bhattacharya and Sen, 2003). Nonetheless, despite the relevance of consumercompany identication in the marketplace, little is known about the antecedents of company IA for consumers. Furthermore, researchers (Maignan and Ferrell, 2004; Sen and Bhattacharya 2001) have suggested that organizational identication theory may provide a solid basis for understanding how positive corporate social responsibility (CSR) generates the active

246

Longinos Marin and Salvador Ruiz The goal of this paper is to develop and test a conceptual framework of the antecedents of IA for consumers. Overall, our investigation contributes to the growing research on consumercompany identication relationships in several ways. First, drawing on literature on social identity (Tajfel and Turner, 1986), organizational identication (Dutton et al., 1994; Mael and Ashforth, 1992; Whetten and Godfrey, 1998), and member identication (Bhattacharya et al., 1995), we provide additional support to the nding that consumers use not only products, but also the organizations that produce those products, to satisfy their more important self-denitional needs. Second, we provide empirical validation of the relationship between IA and corporate associations (both CSR and CA) perceived by consumers. Third, we explore a new perspective of relationship marketing from the consumers point of view. Finally, our model also demonstrates that CSR may inuence IA, a basic antecedent of consumercompany relationships, through multiple paths. In addition, our model recognizes an important distinction between company attractiveness and company evaluation (CE). In the following sections, we present a conceptual framework of IA. We draw on extant research in marketing, organizational behavior, and psychology to elaborate on the nature of social identity. We then articulate our customer-level conceptual framework that offers propositions regarding the key determinants for company IA in the marketplace. Next, we present an empirical study where we test our model and conclude with a discussion of the theoretical and managerial implications of our ndings.

support of consumers. CSR associations reect the organizations status and activities related to its perceived societal obligations (Brown and Dacin, 1997). In most cases, it is the customer who is courted and who usually decides that a relationship is over, while socially responsible corporate behaviors may trigger consumer identication (Lichtenstein et al., 2004). Building on this suggestion, it is of interest to analyze how consumers corporate associations, both related to corporate ability (CA) and CSR (Brown and Dacin, 1997) contribute to generate company IA. Based on the assumption that consumers will reward rms for their support of social programs, many organizations have adopted social causes (Levy, 1999). CSR has emerged in recent years as both an important academic construct and a pressing corporate agenda item (Klein and Dawar, 2004; Mele et al., 2006; Waddock and Smith, 2000), although it reveals itself among large companies not as a uniform concept but as a variety of conceptions (Whitehouse, 2006). Firms have been found to engage in socially responsible behaviors not only to fulll external obligations such as regulatory compliance and stakeholder demands, but also due to enlightenedself-interest considerations such as increased competitiveness and improved stock market performance (Drumwright, 1994; Klein and Dawar, 2004; Waddock and Smith, 2000). Consumers awareness of CSR practices positively inuence attitudes toward the rm (Brown and Dacin, 1997; Creyer and Ross, 1997), corporate reputation (Fombrun and Shanley, 1990), and the evaluation of product attributes (Bigne et al., 2005; Creyer and Ross, 1997). Consumers are demanding more out of organizations than simply a product of quality at low price (Handelman and Arnold, 1999), they expect organizations to demonstrate congruence with some social values as contribution to the community. However, CSR is far from being the most dominant criteria in consumers purchasing decisions (Boulstridge and Carrigan, 2000), and traditional criteria such as price, quality, and brand familiarity seem to remain the most important choice criteria, i.e., consumers continue buying for personal reasons rather than societal ones (Beckmann et al., 2001). These relatively contradictory results call for further investigation about CSRs consequences in consumer perceptions.

Identity attractiveness: literature review and research hypotheses Research on identity indicates that individuals need a relatively secure and stable sense of self-denition of who they are within a given situation to function effectively (Erez and Earley, 1993; Schwalbe and Mason-Schrock, 1996). According to social identity theory, self-denitions are an amalgam of the idiosyncratic attributes (e.g., assertive, ambitious) and social identities (e.g., gender, occupation) that are most relevant (Tajfel and Turner, 1986). Self-denitions are important because they help to situate

Corporate Identity Attractiveness for Consumers individuals in the context and, thereby, suggest what to do, think, and even feel (Ashforth, 1998). Individuals have a strong desire to view their self-denitions in positive terms and seek to enhance their self-esteem through their social identities (Hogg and Abrams, 1990; Tajfel and Turner, 1986). Organizational identity has been combined with social identity theory to shed light on the process whereby individuals identify with organizations (Pratt, 1998). Organization identity is an individualspecic perception and it derives from the (perceived) central, distinctive, and enduring attributes of the organization (Albert and Whetten, 1985). Research has shown perceived organizational identity to be a powerful mental picture that inuences the degree to which an organizational member identies with the organization (Bergami and Bagozzi, 2000; Dutton et al., 1994). Organizational identication can then be seen as essentially a subtype of social identication (Ashforth and Mael, 1989), or in other words, the degree to which a member denes himself or herself by the same attributes that he or she believes dene the organization" (Dutton et al., 1994; p. 239). This strength of members psychological link to the organization is also related to the degree to which employees are motivated to fulll organizational needs and goals, their willingness to display organizational citizenship and other cooperative behaviors, and their tendency to remain with the organization (Dutton et al., 1994; Kramer, 1993; Mael and Ashforth, 1995). Marketing research has shown that through brand preference, choice and consumption, consumers create meaning and try to dene or strengthen their identity (Belk, 1988; McCracken, 1986). The strength of the customers identication with the organization depends, therefore, on the extent to which that company or brand is viewed by the customer as a partner (Fournier, 1998) or as a reference group (Escalas and Bettman, 2005). One of the components leading to a customers identication with a company is the attractiveness of that company identity. Similarity-Attraction Theory (Berscheid and Walster, 1969; Byrne, 1971), Social Identity Theory (Tajfel and Turner, 1979), and Selfcategorization Theory (Turner, 1985) combine to argue that people are attracted to, prefer, and support relationships with similar others, in order to reinforce their self-esteem and maintain balance of

247

congruity in self-identity. Interaction is easier and less cognitively challenging with others who have similar attitudes, values, activities, or experiences (Kunda, 1999). Identity attractiveness is the degree to which subjects prefer, are attracted to and support relationships with a company given its enduring attributes (Ahearne et al., 2005). The attraction exerted by a company depends on its capacity to satisfy at least one of the three basic consumer self-denitional needs (Bhattacharya and Sen, 2003): self-continuity (the need to nd the companys identity similar to their own), self-distinctiveness (the need to distinguish themselves from others in social contexts identifying with a company that has a distinctive culture, strategy, structure, or some other conguration of distinctive characteristics), and selfenhancement (the need to feel associated with a company that has an attractive perceived identity to enhance their self-esteem through acquiring a more positive evaluation of themselves). The model depicting our proposed relationships is shown in Figure 1. We predict that company IA is primarily determined by corporate associations and consumers support of CSR activities carried out by the company. In addition to a direct effect of CRS associations, which may be due to the positive social image related to these associations, these effects are mediated by CE and consumercompany congruence. How consumers value the company and how similar to themselves they think it is constitute essential elements required for consumers to prefer, be attracted to and support relationships with that company.

CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILIY

H3

H2 COMPANYCONSUMER CONGRUENCE H5 CORPORATE ABILITY H4 R1 COMPANY EVALUATION

CSR SUPPORT

H6

H1

IDENTITY ATTRACTIVENESS

Figure 1. Antecedents of identity attractiveness.

248 Consumercompany congruence

Longinos Marin and Salvador Ruiz feel attracted to those companies they share common traits with, which in turn provides for a sense of selfenhancement (Asforth, 1998). Thus, we propose the following hypothesis: The stronger the consumercompany congruence perception, the greater the companys identity attractiveness for the consumer.

Research on social cognition and memory has established that people actively organize their perceptions of other persons in their memories, using abstract personality trait categories such as honest or intelligent (Srull and Wyer, 1989). Such abstract categories may also be used to classify corporate associations. Similar to perceptions of persons, these categories may correspond to different personality traits (Davies et al., 2001). In the context of organization attraction, Schneiders (1987) Attraction-Selection-Attrition model posits that applicants will be attracted to organizations where they perceive similarity between their attributes and those of the organization. Job seekers prefer organizations with whom they perceive congruence between their and the organizations primary values (Chatman, 1991). Finally, in the job search process, individuals tend to be more attracted to organizations with which they perceive a match (Judge and Bretz, 1992). For consumers, consumercompany congruence is the overlap they perceive between the companys character and their own (Sen and Bhattacharya, 2001). Scholars have demonstrated that people identify with organizations when they perceive an overlap between organizational attributes and their individual attributes (Ashforth and Mael, 1989; Dutton et al., 1994; Tajfel and Turner, 1986). Both classical identity consumption theory (e.g., Belk, 1988) as well as the more recent consumer company identication model (Bhattacharya and Sen, 2003) emphasizes the importance of identity similarity and attractiveness in shaping consumer attitudes, preferences, and choices. These two contributions are rooted in the similarity-attraction paradigm, which suggests that individuals are attracted to other individuals and groups that are similar to them (Berscheid and Walster, 1969). People are attracted to, prefer, and support relationships with similar others in order to reinforce their self-esteem and maintain balance of congruity in self-identity (Byrne, 1971; Tesser et al., 1988). Therefore, when there is a match between corporate and consumer identity (CC congruence), the relationship with the company should enable consumers to dene more clearly and completely who they are or where they belong. Consumers will

H1:

CSR associations Over the last decade, a number of academic studies have begun to look at the degree to which consumers are inuenced by the associations they have regarding a companys CA, on the one hand, and its CSR, on the other (Berens et al., 2005; Brown and Dacin, 1997). CSR associations reect the organizations status and activities related to its perceived societal obligations (Brown and Dacin, 1997). The companys character revealed by its CSR actions is not only fundamental and relatively enduring, but also often more distinctive by virtue of its disparate and idiosyncratic bases than other CA-based facets of the company schema (Sen and Bhattacharya, 2001). Consumers feel closer to some companies and brands than to others (Fournier, 1998). When a corporation behaves in a manner that is perceived as socially responsible, consumers are likely to infer that it has certain desirable traits that resonate with their sense of self (Giacalone et al., 2005; Lichtenstein et al., 2004; Maignan, 2001). Scott and Lane (2000) point out that some organizations portray themselves as exemplars of categories at higher levels of abstraction (e.g., the Body Shop and animal rights activism or Saturn and teamwork), inviting consumers to cooperate (co-produce) with them in a specic social movement. These organizations seek to reinforce their legitimacy and to embody qualities they believe are particularly valued by stakeholders. If CC congruence (CCC) is the overlap that consumers perceive between the companys character, and their own, this CCC will be higher when a company undertakes CSR initiatives, to the extent that those initiatives signal to consumers that the company has traits that overlap with their self-concept (i.e., civic minded, compassionate, and activist). In other words, it is easier to nd a major congruity

Corporate Identity Attractiveness for Consumers in values for the companies considered as socially responsible (Balazs, 1990). Therefore, we propose: The greater the CSR associations perceived by the consumer, the stronger the consumers perception of consumercompany congruence.

249

H2:

pany that undertake CSR activities, indicating a high IA, as being associated with the company may result in benets to the consumer in terms of self-difference and self-enhancement. When a corporation behaves in a manner that is perceived as socially responsible, consumers are likely to infer that it has certain desirable traits that resonate with their sense of self (Lichtenstein et al., 2004, p. 17). We therefore propose: The greater the CSR associations perceived by the consumer, the greater the companys identity attractiveness for the consumer.

One stream of extant research investigates organizational characteristics and their effects on attraction to the organization. Structural attributes, such as decentralized decision-making (Turban and Keon, 1993) and reward systems (Bretz et al., 1989), are shown to inuence perceptions of attractiveness (Backhaus et al., 2002). Organizations with positive afrmative action programs are more successful in attracting high-quality applicants (Wright et al., 1995). For example, Turban and Greenings (1997) study has found a positive relationship between published ratings of rms CSR and participants ratings of rms attractiveness. Since they found a correlation between CSR and attractiveness, the study concluded that organizational attractiveness perceptions may be inuenced by CSR. Similarly, Albinger and Freeman (2000) have also showed that CSR inuences attractiveness ratings, but only for those job seekers with high levels of job choice. From a marketing perspective, the rms economic benets from CSR have been documented in the link to consumers positive product and brand evaluations, brand choice, and brand recommendations (Brown and Dacin, 1997; Sen and Bhattacharya, 2001; Vitell, 2003). In addition, CSR activities can affect consumers general sense of wellbeing, without such well-being necessarily translating to company-specic benets (Bhattacharya and Sen, 2004, p. 13). That well-being may be associated to the corporate IA as identication with an organization engaged in do-good CSR actions can contribute to consumers self-esteem (Sen and Bhattacharya, 2001), as a result of a collaboration (association) with an organization that is socially responsible. In other words, even though the consumer may not perceived his/her character as overlapping with that of the company, he/she may aspire to participate in relationships with the com-

H3:

Company evaluation Company evaluation refers to the degree of positiveness or negativeness of the subjects global judgment of the company. This global judgment is based on the companys central, distinctive, and enduring characteristics, which are key components leading to the prestige of the organizations identity (Bhattacharya et al., 1995). It means that the organization is respected and admired by meaningful referents (Bergami and Bagozzi, 2000; Dutton et al., 1994). By maintaining relationships with a company, the consumer satises his/her needs of self-esteem and security (Brewer, 1991; Kunda, 1999), one of the three basic self-denitional needs, through the increase of his/her social prestige (Mael and Ashforth, 1992), access to particular social opportunities (Smith and Mackie, 2000), or simply the perception of him/herself as basking in reected glory (Cialdini et al., 1976). The more prestigious an organization is, therefore, the better the opportunity for a consumer to enhance self-esteem through identication with the organization (Mael and Ashforth, 1992). Taking into account that evaluation leads to prestige (Bhattacharya et al., 1995) and that identity prestige has been related to customers identication with the company (Ahearne et al., 2005; Albert and Whetten, 1985), a positive evaluation of the company will lead to high levels of that companys IA. This leads us to formulate the following hypothesis:

250
H4:

Longinos Marin and Salvador Ruiz The more favorable the consumers evaluation of the company, the greater the companys identity attractiveness. Marketing literature has also demonstrated that consumers use both performance-related corporate associations and perceived social responsibility when forming an impression of a company (Winters, 1988). More specically, a reputation based on a companys abilities exerts a signicant impact on overall corporate evaluation (Brown and Dacin, 1997). Sen and Bhattacharya (2001) also showed this effect through the quality of a new product launched by the company (a variable that is a proxy for CA). Therefore, in order to facilitate the comparison of our model with those previously tested in the literature (e.g., Brown and Dacin, 1997; Sen and Bhattacharya, 2001), we include the following relationship in the model: The greater the CA associations, the more favorable the consumers evaluation of the company.

Research on organizational identication has yielded evidence of the positive effects of person organization congruence on organizational preferences, job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and turnover intentions (Kristof, 1996). In the consumption context, research on the evaluation of brand extensions has generally found that parent brand associations inuence on customers evaluations of new products is stronger when customers perceive a high t between the product and the brand (e.g., Aaker and Keller, 1990; Smith and Park, 1992). Perceived t refers to the similarity between the existing brand and the new product or service. On the contrary, consumers who perceive an incongruity have shown lower attitudes toward the rm and its initiatives (Forehand and Grier, 2003; Menon and Kahn, 2003). CCC will have a positive effect on consumers evaluations of a company because of consumers greater commitment toward that company. As suggested by Sen and Bhattacharya (2001), the effect of CSR on consumers CEs is likely to be mediated by CCC. Sen and Bhattacharya (2001) proposed this relationship only for high CSRsupport consumers and tested it through regression analysis. We propose that a more general (not only for high CSR-support consumers) effect exists because CCC may be a consequence of overlapping between consumer and company character traits other than those specically derived from CSR associations (such as persistence in reaching some goals or staying in a market). In addition to the CSR consumer support, a higher CCC will generate an enhanced CE as the personorganization t always leads to a more positive global judgment of the company (Tesser et al., 1988). Indirectly, it will mean a more positive judgment of the consumer him/herself, due to the overlapping of character traits between him/her and the company. We then propose:
H5:

R1:

CSR support The social side of the consumer leads him/her to avoid buying products from companies that harm society, and actively seek out products from companies that help society (Creyer and Ross, 1997). According to Webster (1975), the socially conscious consumer takes into account the public consequences of his or her private consumption or who attempts to use his or her purchasing power to bring about social change (Webster, 1975, p. 188). When buying, consumers take into account perceptions of ethical or unethical activities carried out by businesses (Creyer and Ross, 1997). Consumers expect businesses to behave ethically and are prepared to punish those businesses when they see them falling below the standards expected (Joyner and Payne, 2002; Vitell, 2003; Vitell and Muncy, 1992). The effect of this social side of the consumer can be included in our model through consumers personal support of the CSR domain (CSR support). When the support of the companys CSR domain is high, consumers will perceive greater congruence between themselves and the company, either in terms of common attributes or a shared prototype, than will those whose support of that domain is low (Sen and Bhattacharya, 2001). Consumers with high

The stronger the consumers perception of consumercompany congruence, the more favorable the consumer evaluations of the company.

Corporate Identity Attractiveness for Consumers CSR support take into consideration the CSR activities undertaken by the company. They will check the companys character attributes other than those strictly related to CA, which will lead them to nd attributes that overlap with their personality traits in those companies that carry out CSR activities. The less the CSR support, the less aware will be the consumer of the common attributes he/she shares with the company. Based on this, we propose that: The greater the consumers CSR support, the stronger the consumers perception of consumercompany congruence.

251

different times of the day over a two-week period. One hundred and sixty-four consumers completed the survey. Of the entire sample, 44% were female, 56% were male. Forty-two percent of the respondents were between 26 and 45 years old, and 45% between 46 and 64 years old. Twenty-seven percent had a college degree, and 21.5% were entrepreneurs. Twenty-seven percent reported being customers of the bank for at least two but less than six years, and 52.4% of respondents did business with three or more banks.

H6:

Measures Preliminary versions of the questionnaire were administered to a convenience sample of 18 consumers, and pretest results were used to improve measures and design an appropriate structure for the questionnaire. The nal measures and reliabilities are provided in Table I. Measures consisted of 11-point scales ranging from 0 (totally disagree) to 10 (totally agree)1, except for the CCC that was drawn from personorganization-t research (Kristof, 1996) and measured as the Euclidean distance between subjects perceived personality prole of the company and of themselves. Personality proles consisted of subjects ratings of the extent to which they believed each of a set of personality trait adjectives described both them and the company (0 = not at all, 10 = very much). The 19 adjectives (one was deleted after a pretest, as it was not well understood) were previously used in a consumption context by Sen and Bhattacharya (2001). We measured corporate associations using a veitem scale from Brown and Dacin (1997). CE was measured using a six-item scale from Boulding and Kirmani (1993). IA was measured using a four-item scale adapted from Kim et al. (2001), following the recommendations of Bhattacharya and Sen (2003). Finally, we measured CSR support using a scale from Mohr and Webb (2005).

Methodology Sample The model is tested in the context of nancial services relationships, dened as existing when there is an ongoing series of interactions between parties who know each other (Czepiel, 1990). The respondents were customers of a large nancial services provider. All respondents were responsible for nancial matters in their families and were clients of the bank at the time of the interview. Compared to other industries, nancial services providers do have relationship marketing advantages because many consumers are willing to establish relationships. This fact is evidenced by a growing literature on relationships between nancial services providers and customers (Colgate and Alexander, 1998; Jarvinen and Lehtinen, 2003; Roman and Ruiz, 2005), relationship marketing efforts being implemented by nancial services providers in markets around the world (Johnson and Greyson, 2005; Keltner, 1995), and by the high effort developed concerning CSR in this sector (Decker, 2004; Harvey, 1995; Ogrizek, 2002). The banking industry in Spain has undertaken many CSR actions in the last years, spending in these activities a total of 1300 million euros in 2005 (http://www.ceca.es). Data was collected from personal interviews. Twelve branches of a major retail bank in the region were chosen at random. The interviews were carried out in situ, at the main door of the branches, at

Results The models (CFA and SEM) described below were run using LISREL 8.54 (Joreskog and Sorbom, 2001).

252

Longinos Marin and Salvador Ruiz

TABLE I Constructs and measures ksc t-value Reliability qe = 0.91, AVE = 0.66 Alfa = 0,9078

Corporate Ability (CA) X is a leader in the industry X is an organization with strong technological innovation X offers a high quality product X offers a good customer service X offers a wide range of products Corporate social responsibility (CSR) X is highly concern for ... Local communities Environment Corporate giving to worthy causes Womens issues Disabled minority issues CSR support (SUP) As a customer of X, you agree that it dedicates part of its activity to Favor the integration of minorities and marginalized groups Undertake actions to defend (protect) the environment Make donations to causes of social justice Support causes an organizations that defend culture and sports Company evaluation (CE) X is an organization with good reputation X is an organization nancially stable X is an organization I trust I think X is a company long run oriented I think X is and organization well established I think X will be in business in 5 years from now Identity attractiveness (IA) X is an organization very attractive I like X because it is different from the rest of nancial companies When I deal with X I feel good because I see they understand me Its identity is well recognized as prestigious

0.75 0.74 0.72 0.78 0.73

10.9 10.69 10.36 11.39 10.52

qe = 0.88, AVE = 0.60 Alfa = 0.8836 0.8 0.84 0.78 0.73 0.74 11.98 12.81 11.44 10.47 10.75 qe = 0.91, AVE = 0.71 Alfa = 0.9030 0.79 0.92 0.87 0.8 0.87 0.75 0.88 0.72 0.86 0.77 0.9 0.82 0.88 0.85 11.91 15.07 13.76 12.10 13.94 10.88 14.03 10.52 13.51 11.40 14.49 12.62 14.26 13.34 qe = 0.95, AVE = 0.74 Alfa = 8850

qe = 0.93 AVE = 0.76 Alfa = 9012

CC congruence (CCC): Personality traits Activist The Best Capable Compassionate Conservative Cooperative Democratic Honest Enlightened Expert Fair Considerate Efcient Innovative A leader Progressive Risk-averse Sincere Sensitive v2 (242) = 389.09 (p = 0.000), AGFI = 0.80, GFI = 0.83, CFI = 0.98, SRMR = 0.049, RMSEA = 0.061, NNFI = 0.98

The multi-item scales were further evaluated through conrmatory factor analysis using the maximum likelihood procedure. The goodness-of-t statistics for the model were as follows: v2(242) = 389.09, p % 0.00, RMSEA = 0.061, SRMR = 0.049, NNFI = 0.98, CFI = 0.98. Reliability of the

measures was conrmed with composite reliability index higher than the recommended level of 0.6 (Bagozzi and Yi, 1988), as shown in Table I. Following the procedures suggested by Fornell and Larcker (1981), the scales showed acceptable convergent and discriminant validity. Convergent

Corporate Identity Attractiveness for Consumers validity was assessed by verifying the signicance of the t-values associated with the parameter estimates (Table I). All t-values were positive and signicant (p < 0.01). The U-matrix (correlations between constructs) is provided in Table II. As a rst test of discriminant validity, we checked whether the correlations among the latent constructs were signicantly less than one. Since none of the condence intervals of the U-values ( two standard errors) included the value of one (Bagozzi and Yi, 1988), this test provides evidence of discriminant validity. Second, for each pair of factors, we compared the v2-value for a measurement model constraining their correlation to equal one, to a baseline measurement model without this constraint. A v2-difference test was performed for each pair of factors (a total of 10 tests in all), and in every case resulted in a signicant difference, again suggesting that all of the measures of constructs in the measurement model achieve discriminant validity. Third, we performed a test of discriminant validity suggested by Fornell and Larcker (1981). This test is supportive of discriminant validity if the

253

average variance extracted by the underlying construct is larger than the shared variance (i.e., the U2 value) with other latent constructs. This condition was satised for all the cases (Table III). In summary, internal consistency and discriminant validity results enabled us to proceed to estimation of the structural model. Structural equations modeling (Joreskog and Sorbom, 2001) was used to test the theoretical model depicted in Table IV. Results show that the model in Table IV ts the data well as evidenced by the goodness-of-t measures: v2 = 431.78 (p = 0.00), df = 266, RMSEA = 0.061, NNFI = 0.98, and CFI = 0.98). All three determinants, CCC (H1; b = 0.23, t = 3.51), CSR associations (H3; b = 0.36, t = 4.78); and CE (H4; b = 0.38, t = 5.12), have direct and positive effects on IA. The relevance of CSR activities in the model is highlighted both by its direct effect and by its indirect effect on company IA. Both consumercompany congruence and CE contribute to this indirect effect mediating the relationship between CRS associations and IA.

TABLE II U-Matrix of latent constructs for full sample SUP CSR CA CE IA 0.28 0.37 0.44 0.37 (0.08) (0.07) (0.07) (0.07) CSR 1 0.70 (0.05) 0.64 (0.05) 0.71 (0.05) CA CE IA

1 0.75 (0.04) 0.73 (0.04)

1 0.74 (0.04)

Note: Standard errors in parentheses. TABLE III Test of discriminant validity (Fornell and Larcker, 1981) PHI square SUP SUP CSR CA CE IA 1 0.0784 0.1369 0.1936 0.1369 CSR CA CE IA 0.7187 0.6035 0.6618 0.7472 0.7602 AVE

1 0.4901 0.4096 0.5041

1 0.5625 0.5329

1 0.5476

254

Longinos Marin and Salvador Ruiz

TABLE V Direct, indirect, and total effects Direct effect CSR-IA CA-IA CSR-CE CA-CE 0.36 Indirect effect CSR/CCC/IA: 0.099 CSR/CCC/CE/IA: 0.043 CA/CE/IA: 0.24 CSR/CCC/CE: 0.11 Total effect 0.51 0.24 0.11 0.62

Table IV also shows that both CSR activities and customer support of those CSR activities contribute to CCC. The introduction of these two linear relationships in the model allows us to determine the contribution of each of them to CCC. The model specication supports the idea that both parts (the company and the consumer) contribute to the congruence between them, including the company undertaking CSR activities and the consumer being pleased by those initiatives. For the paths leading to CE, we suggested that CA has a positive and direct effect on CE (R1; b = 0.62, t = 8.40), while the effect of CSR is mediated by CCC. The results indicate support for both hypotheses H2 (b = 0.43; t = 5.93) and H5 (b = 0.26, t = 4.23). Results also conrm H6 (b = 0.26, t = 4.23), demonstrating that consumers perception of CCC is higher when consumers support the CSR activities undertaken by the company. In addition to the direct effects, we further examined corporate associations to determine how they were related to IA and CE. More specically, the indirect relationship between CSR associations and IA via both CCC and CE was tested. The indirect relationship between CA and IA via CE was also examined. These links help to explain total effects in Table V. The total effect of CSR on company IA (0.51) is higher than that of CA (0.24), while the opposite happens for CE.

0.62

In summary, the conceptual model developed was well supported. The model also explains much of the variance for the endogenous variables, with R2 values of 0.61 for CE and 0.68 for IA.

Conclusions, implications, and directions for future research One of the components leading to identication with a company is the attractiveness of that companys identity (Bhattacharya and Sen, 2003). Such attractiveness offers a new perspective of relationship marketing because the consumer will also be interested in the strengthening of his/her links with the company, going therefore beyond the traditional conception of relationship marketing in which only the company is interested in strengthening the links. In this paper, we demonstrate the inuence of corporate associations and consumer support of CSR activities on company IA for consumers. Results contribute to the understanding of consumercompany relationships, while providing marketers with insight into factors that can add value in marketing relationships. Consumers feel closer to some companies and brands than to others, speaking eloquently and passionately about those brands and companies that have come to occupy a special place in their lives (Fournier, 1998). Those organizations and brands are used by consumers to satisfy personal and social needs. Organizational afliation creates a positive social identity that increases the level of overlap between how a member denes him- or herself and the organization (Tajfel, 1988). This new perspective is based on Social Exchange Theory, i.e. relationships can be understood through the exchange process (Lund, 1985). When rewards are

TABLE IV Structural equation model results for hypothesis testing Paths Hip. Std. Coefcient (t-value)

CCC (+)-IA H1 0.23 (3.51)*** CSR (+)-CCC H2 0.43 (5.93)*** CSR (+)-IA H3 0.36 (4.78)*** CE (+)-IA H4 0.38 (5.12)*** CCC (+)-CE H5 0.26 (4.23)*** SUP (+)-CCC H6 0.33 (4.61)*** CA (+)-CE R1 0.62 (8.40)*** v2 (266) = 431.78 (p = 0.002), v2/266 = 1.62, AGFI = 0.78, GFI = 0.82, CFI = 0.98, RMSEA = 0.061, NNFI = 0.98, PNFI = 0.85, PGFI = 0.67 ***p < 0.01.

Corporate Identity Attractiveness for Consumers greater than costs as compared to expectations, relationship satisfaction results (Rusbult, 1983), and the consumer is then interested in entering voluntarily into relationships with the company. One of the main rewards is the satisfaction of self-denitional needs. Our results show that CSR activities exert a direct inuence on company IA, conrming the results of previous studies that have demonstrated the link between social initiatives and positive affective, cognitive, and behavioral consumers responses (Brown and Dacin, 1997; Creyer and Ross, 1997; Mohr and Webb, 2005; Sen and Bhattacharya, 2001). A positive affective component, which may be of high relevance in the relationship between CSR activities and IA, is a necessary characteristic of close relationships without which those relationships cannot exist (Barnes, 2003; Berscheid et al., 1989). The CCC mediation effect is a good example of the postulates of identity consumption theory: when there is a true match between corporate and consumer identity, the purchase of the corporate brand should enable consumers to dene more clearly and completely who they are or where they belong (Czellar and Palazzo, 2004). Nowadays, when the media are constantly showing us the relevance of the well-being of society, it is likely that the consumer feels closer to companies that dedicate part of their activity to contribute to that well-being. Additionally, consumers interest in sharing with the company that engages in social actions, as a personality trait, makes that company identity more attractive to them. These results support previous ndings that a strong t between the pattern of organizational values and members values predicted members intentions to stay (Chatman, 1991; OReilly and Chatman, 1986). Our work is, therefore, an extension to consumers, based on and their interest in being linked with the company (IA) through the consumption of its products. The two-step mediation effect through CE is founded in the inuence of corporate associations on CE (Brown and Dacin, 1997) and the model of Sen and Bhattacharya (2001), which demonstrated an inuence of CSR on CE mediated by CC congruency. This indirect effect shows, rst, that other forms of value, different from that related to the main production activity of the company, such as social support, may contribute to consumers emo-

255

tional rewards in addition to those obtained with the product (also included in the model). CSR activities, then, lead consumers to make more positive CEs. The model specication supports the idea that both parts (the company and the consumer) contribute to the congruence between them, including the company undertaking CSR activities and the consumer being pleased by those initiatives. A similar and signicant contribution of both parts (0.43 the company through CSR activities, and 0.33 the consumer through CSR support) seems to be necessary condition in order to generate a consumer company congruence. Our results also add to the discussion concerning the contribution of corporate associations to the consumercompany relationship. Over the last decade, studies have generally found that both types of associations inuence CEs (Brown and Dacin, 1997), although CA associations have shown a stronger effect than CSR associations (Berens et al., 2005). Our results demonstrate that the CSR contribution to company IA is much stronger than that of CA. This may be a consequence of the increasing competition in the face of decreasing CA-based variation in the marketplace. In this context, companies use CSR activities to increase their capacity to compete in their markets, through the improvement of links with consumers, which leads to higher loyalty, positive word-of-mouth, etc. CA may have become a base line below which companies face great difculties to stay in the market, and above which companies benet from competitive advantages in the form of associations obtained from the undertaken CSR activities. In summary, our contribution consists on the development and testing of a model about the antecedents of IA, drawing on theories of social identity and organizational identication. The ndings provide empirical validation of the relationship between IA and corporate associations perceived by consumers, demonstrating the stronger contribution of CSR, compared to that of CA, which may be linked to increasing competition and of decreasing CA-based variation in the marketplace. These conclusions have, therefore, direct implications for marketing managers. When communicating with their stakeholders, companies often position themselves either as a company with an excellent CA, or as a company with excellent CSR

256

Longinos Marin and Salvador Ruiz necessary to fully understand whether and how the role of IA varies across contexts. For example, it may be possible that IA could be a state easier to achieve in service provider contexts than in markets for goods. Third, although we examined IA driven by CSR initiatives, consumers also identify with corporations based on other factors such as the domain (e.g., athletes and Nike, bikers and Harley Davidson). To date, the extent to which identication created in one domain (e.g., athletics) can be leveraged in another (e.g., CSR) is unknown. Research of this nature is likely to provide guidance not only for CSR initiatives but also for other forms of collaborative marketing relationships. In addition, it is interesting to note that CSR has been measured by adapting Brown and Dacins (1997) scale, therefore using a pre-dened conceptualization of corporate social responsibilities. This procedure, followed by other researchers in marketing (Berens et al., 2005; Lichtenstein et al., 2004), implies that consumers evaluations of CSR when marking the items of the scale may not describe consumers own denition of these responsibilities (Maignan, 2001). Future research should then carry out a preliminary study to analyze the types of social responsibilities consumers consider when evaluating a particular company or industry. With that preliminary study, research ndings will always refer to corporate social responsibilities consistent with those consumers use to evaluate that company or industry. Note
1

(Berens et al., 2005). Highlighting the role of the non-product aspects of the company, such as its values and characteristics, its social responsibility efforts, and the networking opportunities it provides, constitutes a key aspect in building the consumercompany bond (Bhattacharya and Sen, 2003). Therefore, if the company wants to increase the likelihood of long-term relationships with the consumer through identication, i.e., when IA is deemed desirable, it must articulate and communicate its identity by providing information of both CSR and CA actions, while simultaneously monitoring the consumer support of CSR actions. By doing this, companies can identify more receptive segments to which address this information in a prompt and persuasive manner. Companies should also take into account, however, consumers attributions about the motives behind CSR activities. Corporate social performance is open to questions about impression management and subjective bias (Tsoutsoura, 2004), and attributional inferences about CSR have been shown to affect purchase intention (Ellen et al., 2006). If consumers have preexisting beliefs that rms are more interested in CSR activities for public relations reasons than for reasons of integrity, communicating CSR actions may lose its potential as a marketing tool. This problem may be solved by taking into account broader societal demands and expectations when formulating policies and making decisions (Vallentin, 2002). This broader perspective will reduce consumers skepticism, as not only consumers but also public opinion will be aware of how companies respond to their social environment when dealing with CSR issues. While this study reports important ndings, it is not without limitations. First, we assessed peoples associations regarding a single company, which implies that we must exercise caution in generalizing the results of this study to situations where people acquire similar products (nancial services) from different companies. Future research could corroborate the ndings of this study through experimental manipulations of corporate associations, balancing CSR support, CCC, and consumers product quality perceptions across different companies. Second, the context tested here provided a view of a single industry. Testing in additional industry settings is

Questionnaire pretest showed that it was easier for the respondents to position themselves on a 010 scale than on a 17 scale.

Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Domenech Mele, Carmen Valor, and two anonymous reviewers for many helpful comments and suggestions. They also thank Fundacion Cajamurcia for its generous support. This research was funded by a grant SEJ2005-09358/ECON from the Spanish Ministry of Science & Technology and FEDER.

Corporate Identity Attractiveness for Consumers References

Aaker, D. A. and K. L. Keller: 1990, Consumer Evaluations of Brand Extension, Journal of Marketing 54(1), 2741. Ahearne, M., C. B. Bhattacharya and T. W. Gruen: 2005, Antecedents and Consequences of Customer-Company Identication: Expanding the Role of Relationship Marketing, Journal of Applied Psychology 90(3), 574. Albert, S. and D. A. Whetten: 1985, Organizational identity, in L. L. Cummings and B. M. y Staw (eds.), Research in Organizational Behavior (JAI Press, Greenwich, CT), pp. 263295. Albinger, H. S. and S. J. Freeman: 2000, Corporate Social Performance and Attractiveness as an Employer to Different Job Seeking Populations, Journal of Business Ethics 28(3), 243253. Ashforth, B. E. and F. A. Mael: 1989, Social Identity Theory and the Organization, The Academy of Management Rewiew 14(1), 2039. Ashforth, B. E.: 1998, Becoming: How Does the Process of Identication Unfold?, in D. A. Whetten and P. C. Godfrey (eds.), Identity in Organizations: Building Theory through Conversations (Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA), pp. 213222. Backhaus, K. B., B. A. Stone and K. Heiner: 2002, Exploring the Relationship Between Corporate Social Performance and Employer Attractiveness, Business and Society 41(3), 292318. Bagozzi, R. and Yi: 1988, On the Evaluation of Structural Equation Models, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 16(1), 7494. Balazs, A. L.: 1990, Value Congruency: The Case of the Socially Responsible Firm, Journal of Business Research 22(2), 171181. Barnes, J. G.: 1997, Closeness, Strength, and Satisfaction: Examining the Nature of Relationships Between Providers of Financial Services and Their Retail Customers, Psychology and Marketing 14(18), 765790. Barnes, J. G.: 2003, Establishing Meaningful Customer Relationships: Why Some Companies and Brands Mean More to Their Customer, Managing Service Quality 13(3), 178186. Beckmann, S. C., A. S. Christensen and A. G. Christensen: 2001, Myths of Nature and Environmentally Responsible Behaviours: An Exploratory Study, Proceedings of the 30th European Marketing Academy Conference, Bergen. Belk, R. W.: 1988, Possession and the Extended Self , Journal of Consumer Research 15, 139168.

257

Berens, G., C. B. M. van Riel and G. H. van Bruggen : 2005, Corporate Associations and Consumer Product Responses: The Moderating Role of Corporate Brand Dominance, Journal of Marketing 69(3), 3548. Bergami, M. and R. P. Bagozzi: 2000, Self-Categorization, Affective Commitment and Group Self- Esteem as Distinct Aspects of Social Identity in the Organization, The British Journal of Social Psychology 39, 555577. Berscheid, E. and E. H. Walster: 1969, Interpersonal Attraction (Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass.). Berscheid, E., M. Snyder and A. M. Omoto: 1989, The Relationship Closeness Inventory: Assessing the Closeness of Interpersonal Relationships, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 57, 792807. Bhattacharya, C. B. and S. Sen: 2003, Consumer Company Identication: A Framework for Understanding Consumers Relationships with Companies, Journal of Marketing 67(2), 7688. Bhattacharya, C. B. and S. Sen: 2004, Doing Better at Doing Good: When, Why and How Consumers Respond to Corporate Social Initiatives, California Management Review 47(1), 924. Bhattacharya, C. B., H. Rao and M. A. Glynn: 1995, Understanding the Bond of Identication: An Investigation of Its Correlates Art Museum Members, Journal of Marketing 59(4), 4657. Bigne, E., R. Chumpitaz, L. Andreu and V. Swaen: 2005, Percepcion de la responsabilidad social cor porativa : Un analisis cross-cultural, Universia Business Review 5, 1427. Boulding, W. and A. Kirmani: 1993, A Consumer-Side Experimental Examination of Signaling Theory: Do Consumers Perceive Warranties as Signals of Quality?, Journal of Consumer Research 20(1), 111123. Boulstridge, E. and M. Carrigan: 2000, Do Consumers Really Care About Corporate Responsibility? Highlighting the Attitude-Behaviour Gap, Journal of Communication Management 4(4), 355368. Bretz, R. D., R. A. Ash and G. F. Dreher: 1989, Do People Make the Place?: An examination of the Attraction-Selection-Attrition Hypothesis, Personnel Psychology 42, 561581. Brewer, M. B.: 1991, The Social Self: On Being the Same and Different at the Same Time, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 17(5), 475495. Brown, T. J. and P. A. Dacin: 1997, The Company and the Product: Corporate Associations and Consumer Product Responses, Journal of Marketing 61(1), 6884. Byrne, D.: 1971, The Attraction Paradigm (Academic Press, New York).

258

Longinos Marin and Salvador Ruiz

Fombrun, C. and M. Shanley: 1990, Whats in a Name? Reputation Building and Corporate Strategy, Academy of Management Journal 33(2), 233258. Forehand, M. R. and S. Grier: 2003, When Is Honesty the Best Policy? The Effect of Stated Company Intent on Consumer Skepticism, Journal of Consumer Psychology 13(3), 349356. Fornell, C. and D. F. Larcker: 1981, Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error, Journal of Marketing Research 18(1), 3950. Fournier, S.: 1998, Consumer and Their Brands: Developing Relationship Theory in Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research 24, 343373. Giacalone, R., K. Paul and C. Jurkiewicz: 2005, Preliminary Investigation into the Role of Positive Psychology in Consumer Sensitivity to Corporate Social Performance, Journal of Business Ethics 58(4), 295317. Handelman, J. and S. Arnold: 1999, The Role of Marketing Actions With a Social Dimension: Appeals to the Institutional Environment, Journal of Marketing 63(3), 3348. Hogg, M. A. and D. Abrams: 1990, Social Motivation, Self Esteem and Social Identity, in D. Abrams and M. A. y Hogg (eds.), Social identity Theory: Constructive and Critical Advances (Harvester/Wheatsheaf, London). Jarvinen, R. and U. Lehtinen: 2003, Options of Strategic Decision Making in Services: Tech, Touch And Customisation In Financial Services, European Journal of Marketing 37(5/6), 774795. Johnson, D. and K. Grayson: 2005, Cognitive and Affective Trust in Service Relationships, Journal of Business Research 58(4), 500507. Joreskog, K. and D. Sorbom: 2001, LISREL 8: Users Reference Guide (Lincolnwood, IL, Scientic Software International). Joyner, B. E. and D. Payne: 2002, Evolution and Implementation: A Study of Values, Business Ethics and Corporate Social Responsibility, Journal of Business Ethics 41, 297311. Judge, T. A. and R. D. Bretz: 1992, Effect of Work Values on Job Choice Decisions, Journal of Applied Psychology 77(3), 261271. Keltner, B.: 1995, Relationship Banking and Competitive Advantage: Evidence from US and Germany, California Management Review 37, 4571. Kim, C. K., D. Han and S. B. Park: 2001, The Effect of Brand Personality and Brand Identication on Brand Loyalty: Applying the Theory of Social Identication, Japanese Psychological Research 43(4), 195206.

Chatman, J. A.: 1991, Matching People and Organizations: Selection and Socialization in Public Accounting Firms, Administrative Science Quarterly 36(3), 459484. Cialdini, R. B., R. J. Borden, A. Thorne, M. R. Walker, S. Freeman and L. R. Sloan: 1976, Basking in Reected Glory: Three (football) Field Studies, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 34, 366375. Colgate, M. and N. Alexander: 1998, Banks, Retailers and Their Customers: A Relationship Marketing Perspective, The International Journal of Bank Marketing 16(4), 144168. Creyer, E. H. and W. T. Ross, Jr.: 1997, The Inuence of Firm Behavior on Purchase Intention: Do Consumers Really Care About Business Ethics?, Journal of Consumer Marketing 14(6), 421432. Czellar, S. and G. Palazzo: 2004, The Impact of Perceived Corporate Brand Values on Brand Preference: An Exploratory Empirical Study, Institut Universitaire de Management International, 119. Czepiel, J. A.: 1990, Service Encounters and Service Relationships: Implications for Research, Journal of Business Research 20(1), 1321. Davies, G., R. Chun and R. V. da Silva: 2001, The Personication Metaphor as a Measurement Approach for Corporate Reputation, Corporate Reputation Review 4(2), 113127. De Wulf, K., G. O. Schro der and D. Lacobucci: 2001, Investments in Consumer Relationships: A CrossCountry and Cross-Industry Exploration, Journal of Marketing 65(4), 3350. Decker, O. S.: 2004, Corporate Social Responsibility and Structural Change in Financial Services, Managerial Auditing Journal 19(6), 712728. Drumwright, M.: 1994, Socially Responsible Organizational Buying: Environmental Concern as a Noneconomic Buying Criterion, Journal of Marketing 58(3), 119. Drumwright, M.: 1996, Company Advertising with a Social Dimension: The Role of Non-economic Criteria, Journal of Marketing 60(4), 7187. Dutton, J. E., J. M. Dukerich and C. V. Harquail: 1994, Organizational Images and Member Identication, Administrative Science Quarterly 39(2), 239263. Ellen, P. S., D. J. Webb and L. A. Mohr: 2006, Building Corporate Associations: Consumer Attributions for Corporate Socially Responsible Programs, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 34(2), 147157. Erez, M. and P. C. Earley: 1993, Culture, Self-identity and Work (Oxford University Press, Nueva York). Escalas, J. E. and J. R. Bettman: 2005, Self-Construal, Reference Groups, and Brand Meaning, Journal of Consumer Research 32(3), 378391.

Corporate Identity Attractiveness for Consumers

Klein, J. and H. Dawar: 2004, Corporate Social Responsibility and Consumers Attributions and Brand Evaluations in a Product-Harm Crisis, International Journal of Research in Marketing 21, 203217. Kramer, R.: 1993, Cooperation and Organizational Identication, in J. K. Murnighan. (ed.), Social Psychology in Organizations (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ), pp. 244269. Kristof, A. L.: 1996, PersonOrganization Fit: An Integrative Review of Its Conceptualizations, Measurement, and Implications, Personnel Psychology 49(1), 149. Kunda, Z.: 1999, Social Cognititon: Making Sense of People (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA). Levy, R.: 1999, Give and Take (Harvard Business School, Press, Cambridge, MA). Lichtenstein, D. R., M. E. Drumwright and B. M. Braig: 2004, The Effects of Corporate Social Responsibility on Customer Donations to Corporate-Supported Nonprots, Journal of Marketing 68, 1632. Lund, M.: 1985, The Development of Investment and Commitment Scales for Predicting Continuity of Personal relationships, Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 2, 323. Mael, F. and B. E. Ashforth: 1992, Alumni and Their Alma Mater: A Partial Test of the Reformulated Model of Organizational Identication, Journal of Organizational Behavior 13(2), 103123. Maignan, I.: 2001, Consumers Perceptions of Corporate Social Responsibilities: A Cross-Cultural Comparison, Journal of Business Ethics 30(1), 5772. Maignan, I. and O. C. Ferrell: 2004, Corporate Social Responsibility and Marketing: An Integrative Framework, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 32(1), 319. McCracken, G.: 1986, Culture and Consumption: A Theoretical Account of the Structure and Movement of the Cultural Meaning of Consumer Goods, Journal of Consumer Research 13, 7184. Mele, D., P. Debeljuh and M. C. Arruda: 2006, Corporate Ethical Policies in Large Corporations in Argentina, Brazil and Spain, Journal of Business Ethics 63(1), 2138. Menon, S. and B. E. Kahn: 2003, Corporate Sponsorships of Philanthropic Activities: When Do They Impact Perception of Sponsor Brand?, Journal of Consumer Psychology 13(3), 316327. Mohr, L. A. and D. J. y Webb: 2005, The Effects of Corporate Social Responsibility and Price on Consumer Responses, The Journal of Consumer Affairs 39(1), 121147. Ogrizek, M.: 2002, Forum Paper: The Effect of Corporate Social Responsibility on the Branding of

259

Financial Services, Journal of Financial Services Marketing 6(3), 215228. OReilly, C. A., III and J. Chatman: 1986, Organizational Commitment and Psychological Attachment: the Effects of Compliance, Identication, and Internalization on Prosocial Behavior, Journal of Applied Psychology 71, 492499. Pratt, M. G.: 1998, To Be or Not To Be: Central Questions in Organizational Identication, in D. A. Whetten, and P. C. Godfrey (eds.), Identity in Organizations (Sage Publications), pp. 171207. Reichheld, F.: 1993, Loyalty-Based Management, Harvard Business Review 71(2), 6473. Roman, S. and S. Ruiz: 2005, Relationship Outcomes of Perceived Ethical Sales Behavior: The Customers Perspective, Journal of Business Research 58(4), 439445. Rusbult, C. E.: 1983, A Longitudinal Test of the Investment Model: The Development (and Deterioration) of Satisfaction and Commitment in Heterosexual Involvements, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 45, 101117. Schneider, B.: 1987, The People Make the Place, Personnel Psychology 40(3), 437453. Schwalbe, M. L. and D. Mason-Schrock: 1996, Identity Work as Group Process, in B. Markovsky, M. Lovaglia and R. Simon (eds.), Advances in Group Processes (Greenwich, CT: JAI Press), vol. 13, pp. 115149. Scott, S. G. and V. R. Lane: 2000, A Stakeholder Approach to Organizational Identity, The Academy of Management Rewiew 25(1), 4362. Sen, S. and C. B. Bhattacharya: 2001, Does Doing Good Always Lead to Doing Better? Consumer Reactions to Corporate Social Responsibility, Journal of Marketing Research 38(2), 225243. Sheth, J. N. and A. Parvatiyar: 1995, Relationship Marketing in Consumer Markets: Antecedents and Consequences, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 23(4), 255271. Smith, D. C. and C. W. Park: 1992, The Effect of Brand Extensions on Market Share and Advertising Efciency, Journal of Marketing Research 29(August), 296313. Smith, E. R. and D. M. Mackie: 2000, Social Psychology (Courier, N.Y). Srull, T. K. and R. S. Wyer, Jr.: 1989, Person Memory and Judgement, Psychological Review 96(1), 5883. Stephens, D. L., R. P. Hill and K. Bergman: 1996, Enhancing The ConsumerProduct Relationship: Lessons From the QVC Home Shopping Channel, Journal of Business Research 37(3), 193202. Tajfel, H. and J. C. Turner: 1979, An Intergrative Theory of Intergroup Conict, in W. G. Austin and S. Worchel (eds.), The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations (Brooks/Cole, Monterey, CA).

260

Longinos Marin and Salvador Ruiz

Judgments of the Final Consumer, Journal of Business Ethics 11, 585597. Vitell, S. J.: 2003, Consumer Ethics Research: Review, Synthesis and Suggestions for the Future, Journal of Business Ethics 43(1/2), 3347. Waddock, S. and N. Smith: 2000, Corporate Social Responsibility Audits: Doing Well by Doing Good, Sloan Management Review 41(2), 7583. Webster, F. E., Jr.: 1975, Determining the Characteristics of the Socially Conscious Consumer, Journal of Consumer Research 3(2), 188205. Whetten, D. A. and P. C. Godfrey: 1998, Identity in Organizations (Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks). Whitehouse, L.: 2006, Corporate Social Responsibility: Views from the Frontline, Journal of Business Ethics 63(3), 279296. Winters, L. C.: 1988, Does it Pay to Advertise to Hostile Audiences with Corporate Advertising?, Journal of Advertising Research 28(3), 1118. Wright, P., S. Ferris, J. Hiller and M. Kroll: 1995, Competitiveness Through Management of Diversity: Effects on Stock Price Valuation, Academy of Management Journal 38, 272287. Longinos Marin and Salvador Ruiz University of Murcia, Murcia, 30100, Spain E-mail: salvruiz@um.es

Tajfel, H. and J. C. Turner: 1986, The Social Identity Theory of Intergroup Behaviour, in S. G. Worchel and W. Austin (eds.), Psychology of Intergroup Relations 2nd edition (Nelson-Hall, Chicago), pp. 724. Tajfel, H.: 1988, Social Identity and Intergroup Behavior (University Press, Cambridge). Tesser, A., M. Millar and J. Moore: 1988, Some Affective Consequences of Social Comparison and Reection Processes: The Pain and Pleasure of Being Close, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 54(1), 4964. Tsoutsoura, M.: 2004, ,Corporate Social Responsibility and Financial Performance, Center for Responsible Business. Working Paper Series. Paper 7. University of California. http://www.repositories.cdlib.org/crb/ wps/7. Turban, D. B. and D. W. Greening: 1997, Corporate Social Performance and Organizational Attractiveness to Prospective Employees, Academy of Management Journal 40(3), 658672. Turban, D. B. and T. L. Keon: 1993, Organizational Attractiveness: An Interactionist Perspective, Journal of Applied Psychology 78(2), 184194. Turner, J. C.: 1985, Social Categorization and The SelfConcept: A Social Cognitive Theory of Group Behavior, in E. J. Lawler (ed.), Advances in Group Processes: Theory and Research, vol. 2, pp. 77121. Vallentin, S.: 2002, Corporate Social Responsibility and Public Opinion. 6th International Conference on Corporate Reputation, (Boston, MA). Vitell, S. J. and J. Muncy: 1992, Consumer Ethics: An Empirical Investigation of Factors Inuencing Ethical