Past research has demonstrated that consumer-to-consumer (C2C) conflicts, here defined as uncivil social interactions between consumers, can have a negative impact on consumers’ engagement in social media fan pages (SMFPs). Little is known, however, about how best to manage such conflicts, and this is particularly true in the non-profit context. This paper follows a mixed-method approach in order to address this research gap. Study 1 uses a netnography of a non-profit organization (NPO) to examine how it manages C2C conflicts on its SMFP. Five different conflict-management strategies are identified: non-engaging, censoring, bolstering, educating, and mobilizing. These findings inform Study 2, an online experiment to test how different strategies affect consumers’ attitudes towards the conflict-management approach itself and towards the NPO’s social responsibility. Study 2 also accounts for the moderating effect of the conflict content, differentiating between whether a conflict relates to a consumer’s self-benefit or the benefit to others. Our results offer insights for practitioners into preferable content management strategies when consumers engage in different types of conflict on social media platforms.

过去的研究表明，消费者对消费者（C2C）冲突（这里定义为消费者之间不文明的社交互动）可能会对消费者参与社交媒体粉丝页面（SMFP）产生负面影响。然而，对于如何最好地解决此类冲突知之甚少，在非营利组织中尤其如此。为了解决这一研究空白，本文采用了一种混合方法。研究1使用非营利组织（NPO）的网络志检查其在SMFP上如何管理C2C冲突。确定了五种不同的冲突管理策略：不参与，审查，支持，教育和动员。这些发现为研究2提供了依据 在线实验，测试不同策略如何影响消费者对冲突管理方法本身和对NPO的社会责任的态度。研究2还考虑了冲突内容的调节作用，区分了冲突是与消费者的自我利益有关还是对他人的利益有关。当消费者在社交媒体平台上参与不同类型的冲突时，我们的结果可为从业人员提供深入的见解，以寻求最佳的内容管理策略。