Mobilizing supportive stakeholders: applying the social identity model of collective action (SIMCA) to corporate social advocacy

Purpose This study investigates the predictors of support for corporate social advocacy (CSA) in the context of gun control advocacy and tests the role of moral conviction and bandwagon cues in CSA messages. This study explains why people support CSA and how companies should communicate their CSA efforts strategically to mobilize supportive consumers. Design/methodology/approach This study recruited supporters of stricter gun control and utilized a 2 (CSA message type: moral fit frame vs moral violation frame) × 2 (bandwagon cue: high vs low) experimental design. Findings Results indicated that shared politicized identity, group efficacy, and group anger predicted different supportive outcomes. In the study context, a morally fitting message worked better than a morally violating message to heighten shared politicized identity. Politicized identity positively predicts group efficacy and anger, which respectively influence other supportive outcomes. The results also suggest a low bandwagon cue may work better than a high bandwagon cue when applied to CSA. Originality/value This study contributes to a growing body of CSA literature through its examination of supporters’ responses to different types of CSA message emphasizing morally fit or violating content. The study applies the SIMCA within a CSA context and provides practitioners with guidance concerning the design of CSA messaging based on stakeholders’ support of CSA and their social identity.