IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/irpnmk/v18y2021i4d10.1007_s12208-021-00292-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A cross-cultural comparison of millennials’ engagement with and donation to nonprofits: a hybrid U&G and TAM framework

Author

Listed:
  • Bela Florenthal

    (Marketing, Cotsakos College of Business, William Paterson University)

  • Manar Awad

    (Ohio University)

Abstract

Nonprofit organizations (NPOs) have been increasingly utilizing social media outlets to target Millennials for donations of time and money. These organizations, however, do not always take advantage of the hedonic, social, and normative factors that can influence engagement with and monetary donation to these organizations. Based on motivational theories, U&G and TAM, a hybrid approach is proposed to examine how three motivations—entertainment, interpersonal utility, and subjective norms—predict Millennials’ engagement with and donation to NPOs. The analysis shows that engagement intention fully mediates the relationship between interpersonal utility and donation intention; and it partially mediates the engagement–donation relationship. Thus, the intention to engage with nonprofits is important for Millennials to increase their need for entertainment and social interaction, and motivates them to donate to nonprofits. In addition, the proposed hybrid model is used to compare two cultures, Western (U.S.) and Middle Eastern (Palestinian), using a partial least square structural equation model (PLS-SEM). The results indicate that the model performs similarly in both cultures, except for two relationships. In Western culture, engagement with NPOs does not lead to monetary donations. In Middle Eastern culture, the hedonic motive does not predict donation intention. Implications for practitioners are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Bela Florenthal & Manar Awad, 2021. "A cross-cultural comparison of millennials’ engagement with and donation to nonprofits: a hybrid U&G and TAM framework," International Review on Public and Nonprofit Marketing, Springer;International Association of Public and Non-Profit Marketing, vol. 18(4), pages 629-657, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:irpnmk:v:18:y:2021:i:4:d:10.1007_s12208-021-00292-5
    DOI: 10.1007/s12208-021-00292-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s12208-021-00292-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s12208-021-00292-5?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kevin Lewis & Kurt Gray & Jens Meierhenrich, 2014. "The structure of online activism," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 55821, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    2. Rebecca VanMeter & Douglas Grisaffe & Lawrence Chonko & James Roberts, 2013. "Generation Y’s Ethical Ideology and Its Potential Workplace Implications," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 117(1), pages 93-109, September.
    3. Bicchieri,Cristina, 2006. "The Grammar of Society," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521574907, September.
    4. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    5. Cheung, C. -K. & Chan, C. -M., 2000. "Social-cognitive factors of donating money to charity, with special attention to an international relief organization," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 23(2), pages 241-253, May.
    6. Park, C Whan & Lessig, V Parker, 1977. "Students and Housewives: Differences in Susceptibility to Reference Group Influence," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 4(2), pages 102-110, Se.
    7. Pullman, Madeleine E. & Granzin, Kent L. & Olsen, Janeen E., 1997. "The efficacy of cognition- and emotion-based "buy domestic" appeals: Conceptualization, empirical test, and managerial implications," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 6(3), pages 209-231, June.
    8. Moonhee Cho & Laura L. Lemon & Abbey B. Levenshus & Courtney C. Childers, 2019. "Current students as university donors?: determinants in college students’ intentions to donate and share information about university crowdfunding efforts," International Review on Public and Nonprofit Marketing, Springer;International Association of Public and Non-Profit Marketing, vol. 16(1), pages 23-41, March.
    9. Robert Cialdini, 2007. "Descriptive Social Norms as Underappreciated Sources of Social Control," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 72(2), pages 263-268, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Baudier, Patricia & Kondrateva, Galina & Ammi, Chantal, 2023. "Can blockchain enhance motivation to donate: The moderating impact of religion on donors' behavior in the USA's charity organizations," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    2. Xi Wang & Yun Yu & Zhe Zhu & Jie Zheng, 2022. "Visiting Intentions toward Theme Parks: Do Short Video Content and Tourists’ Perceived Playfulness on TikTok Matter?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-17, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Philippe Le Coent & Raphaële Préget & Sophie Thoyer, 2016. "Do social norms influence farmers’ participation in agri-environmental schemes?," Post-Print hal-02743066, HAL.
    2. Farrow, Katherine & Grolleau, Gilles & Ibanez, Lisette, 2017. "Social Norms and Pro-environmental Behavior: A Review of the Evidence," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 1-13.
    3. Gkargkavouzi, Anastasia & Halkos, George & Matsiori, Steriani, 2019. "How do motives and knowledge relate to intention to perform environmental behavior? Assessing the mediating role of constraints," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 1-1.
    4. Deborah Compeau & Barbara Marcolin & Helen Kelley & Chris Higgins, 2012. "Research Commentary ---Generalizability of Information Systems Research Using Student Subjects---A Reflection on Our Practices and Recommendations for Future Research," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 23(4), pages 1093-1109, December.
    5. Robert Neumann, 2019. "The framing of charitable giving: A field experiment at bottle refund machines in Germany," Rationality and Society, , vol. 31(1), pages 98-126, February.
    6. Philippe Le Coent & Raphaële Preget & Sophie S. Thoyer, 2018. "Do farmers follow the herd? The influence of social norms in the participation to agri-environmental schemes," CEE-M Working Papers halshs-01936004, CEE-M, Universtiy of Montpellier, CNRS, INRA, Montpellier SupAgro.
    7. Gerrans, Paul & Moulang, Carly & Feng, Jun & Strydom, Maria, 2018. "Individual and peer effects in retirement savings investment choices," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 150-165.
    8. Philippe Coent & Raphaële Préget & Sophie Thoyer, 2021. "Farmers Follow the Herd: A Theoretical Model on Social Norms and Payments for Environmental Services," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 78(2), pages 287-306, February.
    9. Oosterhof, Liesbeth & Heuvelman, Ard & Peters, Oscar, 2009. "Donation to disaster relief campaigns: Underlying social cognitive factors exposed," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 148-157, May.
    10. Marc Keuschnigg & Tobias Wolbring, 2015. "Disorder, social capital, and norm violation: Three field experiments on the broken windows thesis," Rationality and Society, , vol. 27(1), pages 96-126, February.
    11. Cristiano Franceschinis & Ulf Liebe & Mara Thiene & Jürgen Meyerhoff & Damien Field & Alex McBratney, 2022. "The effect of social and personal norms on stated preferences for multiple soil functions: evidence from Australia and Italy," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 66(2), pages 335-362, April.
    12. Lawrence K Ma & Richard J Tunney & Eamonn Ferguson, 2014. "Gratefully Received, Gratefully Repaid: The Role of Perceived Fairness in Cooperative Interactions," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(12), pages 1-15, December.
    13. Yongbo Sun & Jiajia Zhang, 2019. "Acquiescence or Resistance: Group Norms and Self-Interest Motivation in Unethical Consumer Behaviour," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-25, April.
    14. Thøgersen, John, 2008. "Social norms and cooperation in real-life social dilemmas," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 458-472, August.
    15. Lu, Chin-Shan & Weng, Hsiang-Kai & Huang, Fei & Leung, Lai-Han & Wang, Wen-Di, 2018. "Assessing the seafaring intention of maritime students in Hong Kong," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 258-273.
    16. Mi, Lingyun & Zhu, Hanlin & Yang, Jie & Gan, Xiaoli & Xu, Ting & Qiao, Lijie & Liu, Qingyan, 2019. "A new perspective to promote low-carbon consumption: The influence of reference groups," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 100-108.
    17. Hyun Hye Kim & EunKyoung Han, 2020. "The Application of the Theory of Planned Behavior to Identify Determinants of Donation Intention: Towards the Comparative Examination of Positive and Negative Reputations of Nonprofit Organizations CE," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-19, November.
    18. M. Ülkü & Kathryn Bell & Stephanie Wilson, 2015. "Modeling the impact of donor behavior on humanitarian aid operations," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 230(1), pages 153-168, July.
    19. Cristina Bicchieri & Eugen Dimant & Simon Gächter & Daniele Nosenzo, 2020. "Observability, Social Proximity, and the Erosion of Norm Compliance," ECONtribute Discussion Papers Series 009, University of Bonn and University of Cologne, Germany.
    20. Sheu, Jiuh-Biing, 2016. "Supplier hoarding, government intervention, and timing for post-disaster crop supply chain recovery," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 134-160.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:irpnmk:v:18:y:2021:i:4:d:10.1007_s12208-021-00292-5. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.