مقاله انگلیسی رایگان در مورد اخلاقی بودن یا نبودن برندهای لوکس – الزویر 2019

1- Introduction: corporate social responsibility and luxury brands

2- The sophistication liability of luxury brands

3- Identity goals and perceived brand ethicality

4- CSR focus and luxury brands

5- Overview of the studies

6- Pilot study: brand personality associations with brand ethicality and luxury

7- Study 1: the moderating role of identity goals

8- Study 2: mitigating the sustainability liability of luxury brands

9- Results 10. General discussion

11- Theoretical contributions

12- Managerial implications

13- Generalizability of findings and limitations

14- Conclusion

References

Abstract

Past research suggests that consumers may negatively evaluate luxury brands that engage in corporate social responsibility (CSR) because they do not perceive a consistency between luxury and ethical consumption (sophistication liability). As luxury is an increasingly relevant industry, it is important to understand how to promote ethical luxury consumption and cleaner production practices in luxury. This article extends previous findings and provides a framework that shows the conditions under which luxury and ethical consumption can be compatible. In particular, we find that consumers perceive sophisticated brands as less ethical than sincere brands when their social identity goals are salient (i.e., they focus on their social relationships); however, when consumers personal identity goals are salient (i.e., they focus on themselves), they perceive sophisticated brands as equally ethical as sincere brands. Finally, we also show that luxury brands’ CSR actions should focus on the firms’ own consumers whereas sincere brands’ CSR actions should focus on society in general. This research contributes to the literature on sustainability by demonstrating when and how sophisticated brands can engage in socially responsible practices like CSR and cleaner production.

Introduction: corporate social responsibility and luxury brands

Every year, brands invest billions of dollars in corporate social responsibility (The Economist, 2015), in the hope of improving consumers’ brand perceptions and attitudes. While extensive literature has examined the effects of ethics on consumer perceptions of non-luxury commodity brands (Brammer and Millington, 2005; Hsu, 2012; Maignan and Ferrell, 2001; Moraes et al., 2017), research and practice of business ethics in luxury consumption has been more limited. Unfortunately for brands and beneficiaries of corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities, literature has shown that CSR does not always lead to improved perceptions of brand ethicality (Davies et al., 2012) and, particularly in the case of luxury brands, can even backfire. In contrast with non-luxury brands, luxury ones are often associated with concepts like selfenhancement (Torelli et al., 2012). The concept of selfenhancement itself may be perceived by consumers as not compatible with social responsibility, because the social responsibility implies a general benefit for society. When consumers do not perceive a consistency between the brand and CSR (Kapferer and Michaut-Denizeau, 2014; Torelli et al., 2012), they may negatively perceive a brand’s ethicality (i.e., the degree to which a brand is perceived to be ethical) and have worse brand attitudes. This literature suggests that CSR may be beneficial for some brands that present traits consistent with ethical behavior (e.g., brands concerned with moral obligations and promote society’s well-being) but can hurt others with traits perceived to be inconsistent with ethical behavior (e.g., brands that satisfy self-enhancement need of consumers, luxury brands). This raises important concerns since consumer perceptions of CSR of brands affect their willingness to buy certain brands (Torelli et al., 2012) which, in turn, affects firms’ decisions to invest in Corporate Social Responsibility. A question that arises, thus, is “whether and how luxury brands can engage in CSR to be perceived as more ethical by consumers, without incurring any adverse outcomes?” The answer to this question has important implications for business ethics and sustainability literature.