Prior consumer satisfaction and alliance encounter satisfaction attributions

Purpose – Built upon brand attitude literature, particularly the cognitive dissonance theory and contrast theory, the authors' conceptual framework aims to explain how prior consumer satisfaction with each alliance partner affects consumer attributions (i.e. credit or blame) directed toward each partner for both highly satisfying and less‐than‐highly satisfying alliance experiences. Design/methodology/approach – This paper extends the cognitive dissonance theory and contrast theory to the brand alliance context. Survey responses from 1,510 consumers, each having had purchase experiences with one of 18 brand alliances, were used to test hypotheses. Findings – The authors identify which of the two theories provides greater explanatory power under varying conditions. Further, they find an intriguing host effect. That is, consumers tend to hold host partners more responsible for both highly satisfying and less‐than‐highly satisfying alliance encounters. Practical implications – The authors' findings help firms better understand how consumers respond to alliance encounters. Practical insights include distinct advice for host versus guest partners in partner selection and resource commitments to alliance platforms. Originality/value – This paper is among the first to investigate consumer reactions to actual alliance encounters, especially in market rather than experimental conditions. Further, whereas the literature has focused on positive consumer experiences with brand alliances, the authors' research includes both highly satisfying and less‐than‐highly satisfying alliance experiences and thus they uniquely report on the full range of alliance encounter outcomes.