The role of brand personality in charitable giving: An assessment and validation

Marketing concepts such as corporate identity, image, and branding are important strategies for nonprofit organizations. In particular, brand personality has been advocated by practitioners but has not been empirically investigated in the nonprofit context. According to social exchange theory and trust, the authors argue that nonprofit stakeholders perceive nonprofit organizations at an abstract level because of the organizations’ intangibility and social ideals. This study develops and refines a parsimonious measure of brand personality specifically for the nonprofit context. The authors conduct a series of six multimethod studies of nonprofit stakeholders to validate the role of brand personality in nonprofit organizations. The results yield four dimensions of brand personality for nonprofits: integrity, nurturance, sophistication, and ruggedness. Thus, current and potential donors ascribe personality traits to nonprofit organizations and differentiate between nonprofits on the basis of the organizations’ personality. Finally, nonprofit brand personality may influence potential donors’ likelihood to contribute. Beverly T. Venable (venable_beverly@colstate.edu; Ph.D., University of Mississippi) is an assistant professor of marketing at Columbus State University. Her research interests are in nonprofit marketing, branding, and ethics. She has published in theJournal of Business Ethics and several national and international proceedings. Gregory M. Rose (rosegm@u.washington.edu; Ph.D., University of Oregon) is an associate professor of marketing at the University of Washington, Tacoma. His research interests include consumer socialization and cross-cultural consumer behavior. He has published articles in theJournal of Consumer Research, theJournal of Marketing, theJournal of the Academy of Marketing Science, theJournal of Business Research, theJournal of Advertising, and theJournal of Consumer Psychology, as well as other journals and proceedings. Victoria D. Bush (vbush@bus.olemiss.edu; Ph.D., University of Memphis) is an associate professor of marketing at the University of Mississippi. Her research interests include cultural diversity in buyer-seller relationships, advertising ethics, and Internet marketing. Her research has been published in theJournal of the Academy of Marketing Science, theJournal of Advertising Research, theJournal of Advertising, theJournal of Public Policy and Marketing, andIndustrial Marketing Management, as well as other journals and proceedings. Faye W. Gilbert (faye.gilbert@gcsu.edu; Ph.D., University of North Texas) is a professor of marketing and dean of the J. Whitney Bunting School of Business at Georgia College and State University. Her research interests are in customer relationship management, health care marketing, and sales management. She has published in theJournal of the Academy of Marketing Science, theJournal of Business Research, theJournal of Retailing, Psychology and Marketing, as well as other journals and proceedings.     

Of mice and men: Within gender variation in strategic behavior

We study behavioral differences across and within genders in a family of ultimatum and dictator games. We find these differences are due not only to altruistic preferences but also beliefs about the strategic behavior of others. The behavior of men in strategic situations is not significantly more aggressive than women on average. But this average masks wide variation in intra-gender behavior. In particular, a sizable minority of males are “mice,” behaving timidly in strategic environments. Our experimental design shows that the standard ultimatum game can mask significant inter- and intra-gender differences in strategic behavior. These behavioral patterns in strategic environments are shown to be correlated with preferences for altruism in non-strategic settings. Such gender differences could well manifest themselves in real-world large-stakes transactions, such as salary negotiations.     

Volatility forecasting: combinations of realized volatility measures and forecasting models

This article examines financial time series volatility forecasting performance. Different from other studies which either focus on combining individual realized measures or combining forecasting models, we consider both. Specifically, we construct nine important individual realized measures and consider combinations including the mean, the median and the geometric means as well as an optimal combination. We also apply a simple AR(1) model, an SV model with contemporaneous dependence, an HAR model and three linear combinations of these models. Using the robust forecasting evaluation measures including RMSE and QLIKE, our empirical evidence from both equity market indices and exchange rates suggests that combinations of both volatility measures and forecasting models improve the forecast performance significantly.     

Exploring the inclusion of beneficiary voices in international development fundraising campaign creation

Charitable fundraising appeals for international development created for potential donors in the Global North are often, if not always, designed without the inclusion of voices and insights from the intended beneficiaries in the Global South. The implications of these appeals, void of beneficiary input, may serve to proliferate poverty porn and racial stereotypes, promote paternalistic and colonial thinking, and strengthen white savior syndrome. This exploratory paper, through a set of interviews and a focus group with fundraising professionals at international development organizations, examines the need for a beneficiary-centered Code of Ethics. A framework, based on the four major findings, is proposed that begins with beneficiary input and considerations offer charities an inclusive method for the design of future fundraising appeals and a way to fulfill their responsibility in how the beneficiary is depicted and the societal understanding of their situation.     

Pillar 2: tax competition in low-income countries and substance-based income exclusion

Pillar 2 of the OECD's global tax reform proposal will have significant direct and indirect impacts for low-income developing countries (LICs). Most interesting and problematic is the question as to how the global anti-base erosion (GloBE) rules for a proposed global minimum effective tax will affect tax competition behaviour in LICs, and how LICs should respond when a critical mass of higher-income economies adopt the new structure. Most LICs are source-only countries, and they are very much in competition to attract foreign direct investment. Do LICs want to continue to compete using the tax system to the extent possible, to step back from that competition, or to take some intermediate course? Pillar 2 does not itself change a country's desired position on the competition spectrum – it merely affects how, and to what extent, that position can still be obtained. This paper posits that LICs should adopt qualified domestic minimum top-up taxes, and that this will not itself have a negative impact on their competitiveness. The primary focus of the paper, however, is on the design of the substance-based income exclusion (carve-out), examining the following three questions. Should the GloBE have been designed without a carve-out? Would there have been a better way of designing it? How will LICs be affected? The paper concludes that, as little real advantage is likely to accrue to LICs from intangible assets, minimising tax competition for those assets will have relatively little impact on them; and that, from an economic efficiency standpoint, shifting the tax burden away from a normal return and toward economic rents – albeit imperfectly – is a reasonable solution.