+

Rival Team Influence on Team Identification and Cause-Related Sports Marketing

Bridget Nichols, Joe Cobbs, David RaskaNorthern Kentucky University

+Background

Cause-Related Marketing (CRM): promotional partnership between business and charity for shared benefit (McGlone and Martin 2006)

CRM increasingly popular among professional sport leagues (Genzale 2006).

CRM initiatives motivated by league/team needs to improve image and attract fans (McGowan and Mahon 2009).

CRM can positively affect purchase intentions and behaviors (Bhattacharya and Sen 2003).

CRM confounded in sport due to team allegiances and rivalries (Platow et al 1999).

+Research Need

Team CRM campaigns likely encourage supportive behaviors Identification : spectators’ perceived connectedness to team and

experience of team’s failing/achievements as one’s own (Gwinner and Swanson, 2003)

Meta-contrast principle: fans emphasize distinct positive attributes of their team and negative associations of rivals (Hogg and Terry 2000)

How does rival team CRM presence affect your team identification?

Effect on behaviors supportive of cause?

Why important? League-wide CRM features high profile teams and players League-wide CRM may avoid regional versions efficiency in

minimizing advertising/marketing costs and creative required

+League CRM featuring teams

+Hypotheses

Hometown team

identification

Support the Cause

- +

-Team ExposureHometown = 0, Rival = 1

+Method

Experimental Design (random exposure to one of three ads) Qualtrics survey software Student sample from Cincinnati region (n = 123, 57% male)

Measures: Attention check (recall of the cause) Fan Identification (Wann and Branscombe 1993) CRM supportive behaviors

Donate to the cause Watch NFL games Visit the website Purchase NFL Pink merchandise

Demographics Manipulation Check (Rivalry Scale, Havard et al. 2013)

+Materials

+Results

t = 3.22, p < .001 t = 4.19, p < .05

+Results

Team ExposureHometown = 0, Rival = 1

Hometown team

identification

Support the Cause

b = -7.91, p < .01 b = 0.137, p < .01

Direct: -1.37, n.s. Total: b = -2.45, p < .05

95% CI = -2.98 to -.265

INDIRECT test of mediation (Preacher and Hayes 2008): CRM supportive behaviors reduced by rival team ad exposure via suppression of hometown team identification

Note: significant when controlling for domain involvement and perceived importance of cause message.

+Discussion

League-wide CRM initiatives MIGHT suppress hometown team identification Strong rival present Reduce compliant behaviors

League should consider effects of showcasing specific team logos and players

Consider rivalries in developing marketing materials or regional media buys

Highlights a different influence on team identification

+Future Research

Other factors influencing CRM supportive (or unsupportive) behaviors in sports?

Role of skepticism relating to rivalry effect?

Is rivalry effect dyadic? How do one-way vs. two-way rivalries influence supportive behaviors?

More or less evident in other rivalry contexts: NCAA, MLB, NBA, corporate/brand?

+

Thank you.