1. +
Rival Team Influence on Team Identification and
Cause-Related Sports Marketing
Bridget Nichols, Joe Cobbs, David Raska
Northern Kentucky University

2. +
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).

4. +
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

5. +
League CRM featuring teams

6. +
Hypotheses
Hometown team
identification
Support the
Cause
-
+
Team Exposure -
Hometown = 0, Rival = 1

7. +
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)

8. +
Materials

9. +
Results
t = 3.22, p < .001 t = 4.19, p < .05

10. +
Results
95% CI = -2.98 to -.265
b = -7.91, p < .01 b = 0.137, p < .01
Team Exposure
Hometown = 0, Rival = 1
Hometown team
identification
Support the
Cause
Direct: -1.37, n.s.
Total: b = -2.45, p < .05
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.

11. +
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

12. +
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?

13. +
Thank you.