مقاله سال ۲۰۱۶

 مجله تحقیقات بازاریابی – Journal of Business Research

In everyday shopping decisions, consumers are increasingly confronted with “cause-related” products. In cause-related marketing (CRM), firms “join with charities or ‘causes’ to market a product or service for mutual benefit” (Krishna, 2011). In this context, a purchase by consumers triggers a donation by the firm to a non-profit organization. Well-known examples are the Yoplait “Save Lids to Save Lives” campaign, which promises to donate 10 cents to the Susan G. Komen for the Cure foundation for each yogurt lid returned by consumers; the Endangered Species Chocolate corporation, which donates 10% of its net profits to environmental organizations that help endangered species; and the ‘Drink 1, Give 10’ campaign of the French mineral-water bottler Volvic in partnership with UNICEF, for which each liter of bottled water purchased triggers a donation equivalent to ten liters of drinking water to people in African countries. Consumers typically respond favorably to cause-related product — “۸۰% [of Americans] are likely to switch brands, about equal in price and quality, to one that supports a cause” (Cone, 2010). Furthermore, 47% of consumers report frequently or occasionally purchasing products based on the causes they support (Bonetto, 2014).

These partnerships have raised significant funds for non-profit organizations and increased bottom-line profits for businesses. Although it is difficult to quantify cause-marketing spending, IEG’s numbers put corporate-cause sponsorship at $1.92 billion in 2015, predicted to grow to $2.00 billion in 2016 (Cause Marketing Forum). The literature on cause-related products include studies on emblematic programs (e.g., Pink Ribbon, RED) and has investigated reasons motivating businesses and not-for-profit organizations (NPO) to engage in these partnerships and their consequences for each partner, including consumers (e.g., Varadarajan & Menon, 1988; Strahilevitz & Meyers, 1998; Berglind & Nakata, 2005). Considerable attention has been devoted to practical dimensions shaping the effectiveness of these business deals such as the ‘fit’ between causes and businesses (e.g., Pracejus & Olsen, 2004).

The work of Fraser et al. (1988) suggests that cause-related products could provide an “anchor price” for donations in cases where people refrain from donating to charities because they have difficulties estimating a socially acceptable donation amount and fear donating an inappropriate amount (Dhar, 1996). Briers et al. (2007) argue that a low-priced exchange product may signal a donation price that is lower than the perceived donation price in mere donation settings and may legitimize small contributions. This strategy renders most excuses for noncompliance (e.g., “We can’t afford to help.”) inappropriate and make refusal socially embarrassing (see also Cialdini & Schroeder, 1976).