Speaking candidly: How managers’ political stances affect consumers’ brand attitudes

Purpose – This paper aims to investigate how consumers react to corporate managers publicly espousing an ideological belief regarding a social issue. In particular, this paper investigates anger derived by consumers as a mediator explaining why consumer attitudes change. Design/methodology/approach – An experiment was used to present respondents with a scenario about managers espousing specific ideological beliefs. All independent and dependent variables were measured. Variable relationships were analyzed utilizing general linear models to understand direct effects and bootstrapping to understand mediation. Findings – When made public, managers’ stances can make multiple, possibly competing, ideologies salient to consumers. Consumer reaction to a stance is most positive when held ideological beliefs are competing and consumers anchor on one ideology in agreement with the manager’s stance, leading to less anger and enhanced brand attitudes. When competing beliefs exist, consumers minimize the importance of dissonant beliefs. Further, preexisting brand attitudes provide a halo effect which helps to determine the amount of anger derived and any potential shift in brand attitude. Practical implications – This paper offers insights into when a reparative brand strategy may need to be structured after a manager’s ideological stance is made public. Not all of a company’s targeted demographic will take offense, and any reparative communications may need to focus on the consumer relationship with the brand rather than an outright apology. Originality/value – This paper adds to the literature investigating the intersection of ideology and marketing. This paper shows that there is an opportunity for managers to strategically shape marketing messages to capitalize on situations where consumers hold multiple, possibly competing ideological beliefs. Thus, this paper highlights that understanding consumers’ brand attitude shifts requires a more encompassing view of ideologies, as opposed to viewing them in isolation.