Put your money where your merch is? Disadvantaged group members' evaluations of symbolic corporate allyship with and without a material component

Abstract

As it has become increasingly common for companies to claim affinity with social movements, backlash against performative instances of corporate allyship has also been on the rise. Across three preregistered experimental studies in the contexts of Pride Month, Black History Month, and International Women's Day (total N  = 659), we investigate marginalized groups members' perceptions of corporate allyship. We find that when support is not merely symbolic but includes material contributions in the form of donations to community organizations, it is perceived as less motivated by self‐interest (Studies 1 and 3), and more motivated by outgroup concerns (all studies) and moral values (Study 1). It is also considered more authentic (Studies 1 and 3), legitimate (Studies 1 and 3), effective (Study 1) and desirable (Study 1). Internal meta‐analyses show robust support for the effects on self‐focused motives, outgroup‐focused motives, authenticity, effectiveness and legitimacy, but only tentative support for the effects on moral motives and desirability. We discuss these results in relation to the broader literature on allyship and its heterogenous motivations and impacts, as well as the current political climate where there is a trend of companies stepping back from allyship under more conservative governments.