Communication accommodation for de-escalating consumer tensions in online brand communities

• Consumer conflicts can escalate, threatening engagement and community goals. • Three moderation strategies are examined: convergence, divergence, and maintenance. • Divergent moderation, particularly antagonist removal, is best for de-escalation. • For brand warmth, convergent moderation (support for advocates) is suitable. • Brands must actively manage consumer tensions, ensuring non-involvement is avoided. In online brand communities, uncivil consumer-to-consumer conflicts are not just common − they can quickly escalate, disrupting engagement and jeopardizing community goals if ignored. Across three experimental studies, we draw from the social servicescape and customer compatibility management frameworks to examine the effect of three principal conflict moderation approaches put forward by communication accommodation theory − convergence, divergence, and maintenance − on observing consumers’ evaluations of online brand communities. Our findings suggest that divergent conflict moderation (i.e., increasing the social distance between the brand and the brand antagonist), particularly when removing the antagonist, effectively de-escalates conflicts and achieves community governance goals. For enhancing brand warmth perceptions, convergent conflict moderation (i.e., reducing the social distance between the brand and the brand supporter) is more effective, while maintenance conflict moderation (i.e., absence of intervention) should be avoided. This research contributes to the online brand community management literature and the study of online consumer-to-consumer incivility. For digital marketers and social media community managers, we offer recommendations on the mechanisms for the appropriate management of consumer tensions in their official social media brand pages, with a particular focus on brand advocates and brand antagonists.