Skip to main content

How can corporate social responsibility activities create value for stakeholders? A systematic review

Abstract

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities have the potential to create stronger relationships between firms and stakeholders. Although marketing researchers have studied the impacts of CSR activities on stakeholder responses, the CSR activities and outcomes measured have been varied and inconsistent. In this article we (a) review the extant literature to outline which CSR activities and outcomes have been included in previous research; (b) synthesize the means by which CSR activities can add value for consumers and how these have been represented in CSR literature, and; (c) present a research agenda for future research to allow greater consistency among CSR researchers.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Notes

  1. 1.

    This includes both the use of quality as per the KLD ratings, which can include safety, contracting, harmful chemicals and host of other potential issues, as well as more traditional measures of product quality.

  2. 2.

    Trudel and Cotte (2009) do find, however, significant differences between the neutral and ethical products and products perceived as unethical. In other words, although consumers will not necessarily reward firms’ CSR, they will severely punish what they perceive as unethical behavior.

References

  1. Aguilera, R. V., Rupp, D. E., Williams, C. A., & Ganapathi, J. (2007). Putting the S back in corporate social responsibility: a multilevel theory of social change in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 836–863.

    Google Scholar 

  2. *Al-Ajmi, J., Hussain, H., & Al-Saleh, N. (2009). Clients of conventional and Islamic banks in Bahrain: how they choose which bank to patronize. International Journal of Social Economics, 36(11), 1086–1112.

    Google Scholar 

  3. *Albinger, H. S., & Freeman, S. J. (2000). Corporate social performance and attractiveness as an employer to different job seeking populations. Journal of Business Ethics, 28, 243–254.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Allen, C. T. (1982). Self-perception based strategies for stimulating energy conservation. Journal of Consumer Research, 8(4), 381–390.

    Google Scholar 

  5. *Anselmsson, J., & Johansson, U. (2007). Corporate social responsibility and the positioning of grocery brands. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 35(10), 835–856.

    Google Scholar 

  6. *Arli, D. I., & Lasmono, H. K. (2010). Consumers’ perception of corporate social responsibility in a developing country. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 34, 46–51.

    Google Scholar 

  7. *Arora, N., & Henderson, T. (2007). Embedded premium promotion: why it works and how to make it more effective. Marketing Science, 26(4), 514–531.

    Google Scholar 

  8. *Atkin, J. L., McCardle, M., & Newell, S. J. (2008). The role of advertiser motives in consumer evaluations of ‘responsibility’ messages from the alcohol industry. Journal of Marketing Communications, 14(4), 315–335.

    Google Scholar 

  9. *Auger, P., Burke, P., Devinney, T. M., & Louviere, J. J. (2003). What will consumers pay for social product features? Journal of Business Ethics, 42, 281–304.

    Google Scholar 

  10. *Auger, P., Devinney, T. M., Louviere, J. J., & Burke, P. F. (2008). Do social product features have value to consumers? International Journal of Research in Marketing, 25, 183–191.

    Google Scholar 

  11. *Backhaus, K. B., Stone, B. A., & Heiner, K. (2002). Exploring the relationship between corporate social performance and employer attractiveness. Business & Society, 41(3), 292–318.

    Google Scholar 

  12. *Baghi, I., Rubaltelli, E., & Tedeschi, M. (2009). A strategy to communicate corporate social responsibility: cause related marketing and its dark side. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 16, 15–26.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Barnett, M. (2007). Stakeholder influence capacity and the variability of financial returns to corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 794–816.

    Google Scholar 

  14. *Barone, M. J., Miyazaki, A. D., & Taylor, K. A. (2000). The influence of cause-related marketing on consumer choice: does one good turn deserve another? Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 28(2), 248–262.

    Google Scholar 

  15. *Barone, M. J., Norman, A. T., & Miyazaki, A. D. (2007). Consumer responses to retailer use of cause-related marketing: is more fit better? Journal of Retailing, 83(4), 437–445.

    Google Scholar 

  16. *Basil, D. Z., & Herr, P. M. (2006). Attitudinal balance and cause-related marketing: an empirical application of balance theory. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 16(4), 391–403.

    Google Scholar 

  17. *Basil, D. Z., & Weber, D. (2006). Values motivation and concern for appearances: the effect of personality traits on responses to corporate social responsibility. International Journal of Nonprofit & Voluntary Sector Marketing, 11(1), 61–72.

    Google Scholar 

  18. *Becker-Olsen, K. L., Cudmore, B. A., & Hill, R. P. (2006). The impact of perceived corporate social responsibility on consumer behavior. Journal of Business Research, 59(1), 46–53.

    Google Scholar 

  19. *Behrend, T. S., Baker, B. A., & Thompson, L. F. (2009). Effects of pro-environmental recruiting messages: the role of organizational reputation. Journal of Business Psychology, 24, 341–350.

    Google Scholar 

  20. *Berens, G., van Riel, C. B. M., & van Bruggen, G. H. (2005). Corporate associations and consumer product responses: the moderating role of corporate brand dominance. Journal of Marketing, 69(3), 35–48.

    Google Scholar 

  21. *Berens, G., van Riel, C. B. M., & van Rekom, J. (2007). The CSR-quality trade-off: when can corporate social responsibility and corporate ability compensate each other? Journal of Business Ethics, 74, 233–252.

    Google Scholar 

  22. *Berger, I. E., & Corbin, R. M. (1992). Perceived consumer effectiveness and faith in others as moderators of environmentally responsible behaviors. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 11(2), 79–90.

    Google Scholar 

  23. *Berger, I. E., Cunningham, P. H., & Kozinets, R. V. (1999). Consumer persuasion through cause-related advertising. Advances in Consumer Research, 26(1), 491–497.

    Google Scholar 

  24. *Bhattacharya, C. B., & Sen, S. (2004). Doing better at doing good: when, why, and how consumers respond to corporate social initiatives. California Management Review, 47(1), 9–24.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Bhattacharya, C. B., & Korschun, D. (2008). Stakeholder marketing: beyond the 4 Ps and the customer. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 27(1), 113–116.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Bhattacharya, C. B., Korschun, D., & Sen, S. (2009). Strengthening stakeholder-company relationships through mutually beneficial corporate social responsibility initiatives. Journal of Business Ethics, 85, 257–272.

    Google Scholar 

  27. *Biehal, G. J., & Sheinin, D. A. (2007). The influence of corporate messages on the product portfolio. Journal of Marketing, 71(2), 12–25.

    Google Scholar 

  28. *Bigne-Alcaniz, E., Curras-Perez, R., & Sanchez-Garcia, I. (2009). Brand credibility in cause-related marketing: the moderating role of consumer values. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 18(6), 437–447.

    Google Scholar 

  29. *Bower, A. B., & Grau, S. L. (2009). Explicit donations and inferred endorsements. Journal of Advertising, 38(3), 113–126.

    Google Scholar 

  30. *Brammer, S., Millington, A., & Rayton, B. (2007). The contribution of corporate social responsibility to organizational commitment. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 18(10), 1701–1719.

    Google Scholar 

  31. *Brammer, S., Williams, G., & Zinkin, J. (2007). Religion and attitudes to corporate social responsibility in a large cross-country sample. Journal of Business Ethics, 71, 229–243.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Briner, R. B., Denyer, D., & Rousseau, D. M. (2009). Evidence-based management: concept cleanup time? Academy of Management Perspectives, 23(4), 19–32.

    Google Scholar 

  33. *Broderick, A., Jogi, A., & Garry, T. (2003). Tickled pink: the personal meaning of cause related marketing for customers. Journal of Marketing Management, 19, 583–610.

    Google Scholar 

  34. *Brown, T. J., & Dacin, P. A. (1997). The company and the product: corporate associations and consumer product responses. Journal of Marketing, 61(1), 68–84.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Campbell, J. L. (2007). Why would corporations behave in socially responsible ways? Institutional theory of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 946–967.

    Google Scholar 

  36. *Carrigan, M., & Attalla, A. (2001). The myth of the ethical consumer—do ethics matters in purchase behaviour? Journal of Consumer Marketing, 18(7), 560–577.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Carroll, A. B. (1979). A three-dimensional model of corporate social performance. Academy of Management Review, 4, 497–505.

    Google Scholar 

  38. *Castaldo, S., Perrini, F., Misani, N., & Tencati, A. (2009). The missing link between corporate social responsibility and consumer trust: the case of fair trade products. Journal of Business Ethics, 84(1), 1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  39. *Chan, R. Y. K. (2001). Determinants of Chinese consumers’ green purchase behavior. Psychology & Marketing, 18(4), 389–413.

    Google Scholar 

  40. *Chang, C. (2008). To donate or not to donate? Product characteristics and framing effects of cause-related marketing on consumer purchase behavior. Psychology & Marketing, 25(12), 1089–1110.

    Google Scholar 

  41. *Chang, H., Chen, T., & Tseng, C. (2009). How public-issue-promoted and revenue-related types of social marketing influence customer-perceived value in Taiwan’s banking industry. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 21, 35–49.

    Google Scholar 

  42. *Chitra, K. (2007). In search of the green consumers: a perceptual study. Journal of Services Research, 7(1), 173–191.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Clarkson, M. E. (1995). A stakeholder framework for analyzing and evaluating corporate social performance. Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 92–117.

    Google Scholar 

  44. *Collins, C. M., Steg, L., & Koning, M. A. S. (2007). Customers’ values, beliefs on sustainable corporate performance, and buying behavior. Psychology & Marketing, 24(6), 555–577.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Cone, Inc (2009). Cause branding and corporate responsibility endure despite the recession. Downloaded from: http://www.coneinc.com/weatheringtherecession.

  46. *Creyer, E. H., & Ross, W. T., Jr. (1996). The impact of corporate behavior on perceived product value. Marketing Letters, 7(2), 173–185.

    Google Scholar 

  47. *Creyer, E. H., & Ross, W. T., Jr. (1997). The influence of firm behavior on purchase intention: do consumers really care about business Ethics? Journal of Consumer Marketing, 14(6), 421–432.

    Google Scholar 

  48. *Cui, Y., Trent, E. S., Sullivan, P. M., & Matiru, G. N. (2003). Cause-related marketing: how generation Y responds. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 31(6), 310–320.

    Google Scholar 

  49. *Curras-Perez, R., Bigne-Alcaniz, E., & Alvarado-Herrera, A. (2009). The role of self-definitional principles in consumer identification with a socially responsible company. Journal of Business Ethics, 89, 547–564.

    Google Scholar 

  50. *David, P., Kline, S., & Dai, Y. (2005). Corporate social responsibility practices, corporate identity, and purchase intention: a dual-process model. Journal of Public Relations Research, 17(3), 291–313.

    Google Scholar 

  51. *de los Salmones, M., Crespo, A. H., & del Bosque, I. R. (2005). Influence of corporate social responsibility on loyalty and valuation of services. Journal of Business Ethics, 61, 369–385.

    Google Scholar 

  52. *de Matos, C. A., & Rossi, C. A. V. (2006). Consumer reaction to product recalls: factors influencing product judgment and behavioural intentions. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 31(1), 109–116.

    Google Scholar 

  53. *de Pelsmacker, P., Driesen, L., & Rayp, G. (2005). Do consumers care about ethics? Willingness to pay for fair-trade coffee. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 39(2), 363–385.

    Google Scholar 

  54. *Dean, D. H. (2002). Associating the corporation with a charitable event through sponsorship: measuring the effects on corporate community relations. Journal of Advertising, 31(4), 77–87.

    Google Scholar 

  55. *Dean, D. H. (2003). Consumer perceptions of corporate donations. Journal of Advertising, 32(4), 91–102.

    Google Scholar 

  56. *Dean, D. H. (2004). Consumer reaction to negative publicity. Journal of Busines Communication, 41(2), 192–211.

    Google Scholar 

  57. *Deshpande, S., & Hitchon, J. C. (2002). Cause-related marketing ads in the light of negative news. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 79(4), 905–926.

    Google Scholar 

  58. *Drumwright, M. E. (1994). Socially responsible organizational buying: environmental concern as a noneconomic buying criterion. Journal of Marketing, 58(3), 1–19.

    Google Scholar 

  59. *Du, S., Bhattacharya, C. B., & Sen, S. (2007). Reaping relational rewards from corporate social responsibility: the role of competitive positioning. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 24(3), 224–241.

    Google Scholar 

  60. *Ehrich, K. R., & Irwin, J. R. (2005). Willful ignorance in the request for product attribute information. Journal of Marketing Research, 42(3), 266–277.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Elkington, J. (1997). Cannibals with forks: The triple bottom line of 21st century business. Oxford: Capstone.

    Google Scholar 

  62. *Ellen, P. S., Mohr, L. A., & Webb, D. J. (2000). Charitable programs and the retailer: do they mix? Journal of Retailing, 76(3), 393–406.

    Google Scholar 

  63. *Ellen, P. S., Webb, D. J., & Mohr, L. A. (2006). Building corporate associations: consumer attributions for corporate socially responsible programs. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 34(2), 147–157.

    Google Scholar 

  64. *Folkes, V. S., & Kamins, M. A. (1999). Effects of information about firms’ ethical and unethical actions on consumers’ attitudes. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 8(3), 243–259.

    Google Scholar 

  65. *Forehand, M. R., & Grier, S. (2003). When is honesty the best policy? The effect of stated company intent on consumer skepticism. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 13(3), 349–356.

    Google Scholar 

  66. *Garcia, I., Gibaja, J. J., & Mujika, A. (2003). A study on the effect of cause-related marketing on the attitude towards the brand: the case of Pepsi in Spain. Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing, 11(1), 111–135.

    Google Scholar 

  67. *Giacalone, R. A., Paul, K., & Jurkiewicz, C. L. (2005). A preliminary investigation into the role of positive psychology in consumer sensitivity to corporate social performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 58, 295–305.

    Google Scholar 

  68. Godfrey, P. C., Merrill, C. B., & Hansen, J. M. (2008). The relationship between corporate social responsibility and shareholder value: an empirical test of the risk management hypothesis. Strategic Management Review, 30, 425–445.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Goldstein, N. J., Cialdini, R. B., & Griskevicius, V. (2008). A room with a viewpoint: using social norms to motivate environmental conservation in hotels. Journal of Consumer Research, 35(3), 472–482.

    Google Scholar 

  70. *Golob, U., Lah, M., & Jancic, Z. (2008). Value orientations and consumer expectations of corporate social responsibility. Journal of Marketing Communications, 14(2), 83–96.

    Google Scholar 

  71. *Grau, S. L., & Folse, J. A. G. (2007). Cause-related marketing (CRM). Journal of Advertising, 36(4), 19–33.

    Google Scholar 

  72. *Grau, S. L., Garretson, J. A., & Pirsch, J. (2007). Cause-Related marketing: an exploratory study of campaign donation structures issues. Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing, 18(2), 69–91.

    Google Scholar 

  73. *Greening, D. W., & Turban, D. B. (2000). Corporate social performance as a competitive advantage in attracting a quality workforce. Business & Society, 39(3), 254–280.

    Google Scholar 

  74. *Gupta, S., & Pirsch, J. (2006). The company-cause-customer fit decision in cause-related marketing. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 23(6), 314–326.

    Google Scholar 

  75. *Gupta, S., & Pirsch, J. (2008). The influence of a retailer’s corporate social responsibility program on re-conceptualizing store image. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 15, 516–526.

    Google Scholar 

  76. *Gurhan-Canli, Z., & Batra, R. (2004). When corporate image affects product evaluations: the moderating role of perceived risk. Journal of Marketing Research, 41(2), 197–205.

    Google Scholar 

  77. *Hajjat, M. M. (2003). Effect of cause-related marketing on attitudes and purchase intentions: the moderating role of cause involvement and donation size. Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing, 11(1), 93–111.

    Google Scholar 

  78. *Hall, M. R. (2006). Corporate philanthropy and corporate community relations: measuring relationship-building results. Journal of Public Relations Research, 18(1), 1–21.

    Google Scholar 

  79. *Hamlin, R. P., & Wilson, T. (2004). The impact of cause branding on consumer reactions to products: does product/cause ‘fit’ really matter? Journal of Marketing Management, 20(7/8), 66–81.

    Google Scholar 

  80. *Handelman, J. M., & Arnold, S. J. (1999). The role of marketing actions with a social dimension: appeals to the institutional environment. Journal of Marketing, 63(3), 33–48.

    Google Scholar 

  81. *Henion, K. E. (1972). The effect of ecologically relevant information on detergent sales. Journal of Consumer Research, 9(1), 10–14.

    Google Scholar 

  82. Hirschman, E. C., & Holbrook, M. B. (1982). Hedonic consumption: emerging concepts, methods and propositions. Journal of Marketing, 46(3), 92–101.

    Google Scholar 

  83. Hoeffler, S., & Keller, K. L. (2002). Building brand equity through corporate societal marketing. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 21(1), 78–89.

    Google Scholar 

  84. *Hoek, J., & Gendall, P. (2008). An analysis of consumers’ responses to cause related marketing. Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing, 20(2), 283–297.

    Google Scholar 

  85. Holbrook, M. B. (2006). ROSEPEKICECIVECI versus CCV. In R. F. Lusch & S. L. Vargo (Eds.), The service-dominant logic of marketing: Dialog, debate and directions (pp. 208–221). Armonk, NY: Sharpe.

    Google Scholar 

  86. *Huang, C. L. (1993). Simultaneous-Equation model for estimating consumer risk perceptions, attitudes, and willingness-to-pay for residue-free products. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 27(2), 377–396.

    Google Scholar 

  87. *Johri, L., & Sahasakmontri, K. (1998). Green marketing of cosmetics and toiletries in Thailand. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 15(3), 265–281.

    Google Scholar 

  88. *Kassarjian, H. H. (1971). Incorporating ecology into marketing strategy: the case of air pollution. Journal of Marketing, 35(3), 61–65.

    Google Scholar 

  89. *Kinnear, T. C., & Taylor, J. R. (1973). The effect of ecological concern on brand perceptions. Journal of Marketing Research, 10(2), 191–197.

    Google Scholar 

  90. *Klein, J., & Dawar, N. (2004). Corporate social responsibility and consumers’ attributions and brand evaluations in a product-harm crisis. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 21(3), 203–217.

    Google Scholar 

  91. *Krishna, A., & Rajan, U. (2009). Cause marketing: spillover effects of cause-related products in a product portfolio. Management Science, 55(9), 1469–1485.

    Google Scholar 

  92. *Lafferty, B. A. (2007). The relevance of fit in a cause-brand alliance when consumers evaluate corporate credibility. Journal of Business Research, 60(5), 447–453.

    Google Scholar 

  93. *Lafferty, B. A. (2009). Selecting the right cause partners for the right reasons: the role of importance and fit in cause-brand alliances. Psychology & Marketing, 26(4), 359–382.

    Google Scholar 

  94. *Lafferty, B. A., & Goldsmith, R. E. (2005). Cause-Brand alliances: does the cause help the brand or does the brand help the cause? Journal of Business Research, 58(4), 423–429.

    Google Scholar 

  95. *Lafferty, B. A., & Edmondson, D. R. (2009). Portraying the cause instead of the brand in cause-related marketing ads: does it really matter? Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 17(2), 129–143.

    Google Scholar 

  96. *Lafferty, B. A., Goldsmith, R. E., & Hult, G. T. M. (2004). The impact of the alliance of the partners: a look at cause-brand alliances. Psychology & Marketing, 21(7), 509–531.

    Google Scholar 

  97. *Laroche, M., Bergeron, J., & Barbaro-Forleo, G. (2001). Targeting consumers who are willing to pay more for environmentally friendly products. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 18(6), 503–520.

    Google Scholar 

  98. *Larson, B. V., Flaherty, K. E., Zablah, A. R., Brown, T. J., & Wiener, J. L. (2008). Linking cause-related marketing to sales force responses and performance in a direct selling context. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 36(2), 271–277.

    Google Scholar 

  99. *Lavack, A. M., & Kropp, F. (2003). A cross-cultural comparison of consumer attitudes toward cause-related marketing. Social Marketing Quarterly, 9(2), 3–16.

    Google Scholar 

  100. *Lee, H., Park, T., Moon, H. K., Yang, Y., & Kin, C. (2009). Corporate philanthropy, attitude towards corporation, and purchase intentions: a South Korea study. Journal of Business Research, 62, 939–946.

    Google Scholar 

  101. *Lichtenstein, D. R., Drumwright, M. E., & Braig, B. M. (2004). The effect of corporate social responsibility on customer donations to corporate-supported nonprofits. Journal of Marketing, 68(4), 16–32.

    Google Scholar 

  102. *Liu, T., Wang, C., & Wu, L. (2010). Moderators of the negativity effect: commitment, identification, and consumer sensitivity to corporate social performance. Psychology & Marketing, 27(1), 54–70.

    Google Scholar 

  103. *Lodorfos, G., & Dennis, J. (2008). Consumers’ intent: in the organic food market. Journal of Food Products Marketing, 14(2), 17–38.

    Google Scholar 

  104. *Luce, R. A., Barber, A. E., & Hillman, A. J. (2001). Good deeds and misdeeds: a mediated model of the effect of corporate social performance on organizational attractiveness. Business Society, 40(4), 397–415.

    Google Scholar 

  105. Luo, X., & Bhattacharya, C. B. (2006). Corporate social responsibility, customer satisfaction, and market value. Journal of Marketing, 70(4), 1–18.

    Google Scholar 

  106. *Madrigal, R., & Boush, D. M. (2008). Social responsibility as a unique dimension of brand personality and consumers’ willingness to reward. Psychology & Marketing, 25(6), 538–564.

    Google Scholar 

  107. *Maignan, I. (2001). Consumers’ perceptions of corporate social responsibilities: a cross-cultural comparison. Journal of Business Ethics, 30, 57–72.

    Google Scholar 

  108. Maignan, I., & Ferrell, O. C. (2004). Corporate social responsibility and marketing: an integrative framework. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 32(1), 3–19.

    Google Scholar 

  109. *Maignan, I., Ferrell, O. C., & Hult, T. G. M. (1999). Corporate citizenship: cultural antecedents and business benefits. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 27(4), 455–469.

    Google Scholar 

  110. Margolis, J. D., & Walsh, J. P. (2003). Misery loves companies: rethinking social initiatives by business. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(2), 268–305.

    Google Scholar 

  111. *Marin, L., & Ruiz, S. (2007). “I need you too!” Corporate identity attractiveness for consumers and the role of social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 71, 245–260.

    Google Scholar 

  112. *Marin, L., Ruiz, S., & Rubio, A. (2009). The role of identity salience in the effects of corporate social responsibility on consumer behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 84, 65–78.

    Google Scholar 

  113. *McGoldrick, P. J., & Freestone, O. M. (2008). Ethical product premiums: antecedents and extent of consumers’ willingness to pay. International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research, 18(2), 185–201.

    Google Scholar 

  114. McKinsey & Company (2009). Global survey results—valuing corporate social responsibility. Accessed online on May 2, 2009 from: http://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/Valuing_corporate_social_responsibility_McKinsey_Global_Survey_Results_2309.

  115. McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D. (2000). Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: correlation or misspecification? Strategic Management Journal, 21(5), 603–610.

    Google Scholar 

  116. *Megicks, P., Memery, J., & Williams, J. (2008). Influences on ethical and socially responsible shopping: evidence from the UK grocery sector. Journal of Marketing Management, 24(5/6), 637–659.

    Google Scholar 

  117. *Mekonnen, A., & Harris, F. (2008). Linking products to a cause or affinity group. European Journal of Marketing, 42(1/2), 135–153.

    Google Scholar 

  118. *Menon, S., & Kahn, B. E. (2003). Corporate sponsorships of philanthropic activities: when do they impact perception of sponsor brand? Journal of Consumer Psychology, 13(3), 316–327.

    Google Scholar 

  119. *Miller, K. E., & Sturdivant, F. D. (1977). Consumer responses to socially questionable corporate behavior: an empirical test. Journal of Consumer Research, 4(1), 1–7.

    Google Scholar 

  120. *Mizerski, D., Mizerski, K., & Sadler, O. (2001). A field experiment comparing the effectiveness of ‘ambush’ and cause related ad appeals for social marketing causes. Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing, 9(4), 25–45.

    Google Scholar 

  121. *Mohr, L. A., & Webb, D. J. (2005). The effects of corporate social responsibility and price on consumer responses. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 39(1), 121–147.

    Google Scholar 

  122. *Mohr, L. A., Webb, D. J., & Harris, K. E. (2001). Do consumers expect companies to be socially responsible? The impact of corporate social responsibility on buying behavior. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 35(1), 45–72.

    Google Scholar 

  123. *Montoro-Rios, F. J., Luque-Martinez, T., & Rodriguez-Molina, M. (2008). How green should you be: can environmental associations enhance brand performance? Journal of Advertising Research, 48(4), 547–563.

    Google Scholar 

  124. *Murphy, P. E., Kangun, N., & Locander, W. B. (1978). Environmentally concerned consumers—racial variations. Journal of Marketing, 42(4), 61–66.

    Google Scholar 

  125. Murray, K. B., & Montanari, J. R. (1986). Strategic management of the socially responsible firm: integrating management and marketing theory. Academy of Management Review, 11(4), 815–827.

    Google Scholar 

  126. *Murray, K. B., & Vogel, C. M. (1997). Using a hierarchy-of-effects approach to gauge the effectiveness of corporate social responsibility to generate goodwill toward the firm: financial versus nonfinancial impacts. Journal of Business Research, 38(2), 141–159.

    Google Scholar 

  127. *Nan, X., & Heo, K. (2007). Consumer responses to corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives: examining the role of brand/cause fit in cause-related marketing. Journal of Advertising, 36(2), 63–74.

    Google Scholar 

  128. *Narwal, M., & Sharma, T. (2008). Perceptions of corporate social responsibility in India: an empirical study. Journal of Knowledge Globalization, 1(1), 61–79.

    Google Scholar 

  129. *Newell, S. J., Goldsmith, R. E., & Banzhaf, E. J. (1998). The effect of misleading environmental claims on consumer perceptions of advertisements. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 6(2), 48–59.

    Google Scholar 

  130. *Obermiller, C., Burke, C., Talbott, E., & Green, G. P. (2009). ‘Taste great or more fulfilling’: the effect of brand reputation on consumer social responsibility advertising for fair trade coffee. Corporate Reputation Review, 12(2), 159–176.

    Google Scholar 

  131. Okada, E. M. (2005). Justification effects on consumer choice of hedonic and utilitarian goods. Journal of Marketing Research, 42(1), 43–53.

    Google Scholar 

  132. *Olsen, G. D., Pracejus, J. W., & Brown, N. R. (2003). When profit equals price: consumer confusion about donation amounts in cause-related marketing. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 22(2), 170–180.

    Google Scholar 

  133. *Oppewal, H., Alexander, A., & Sullivan, P. (2006). Consumer perceptions of corporate social responsibility in town shopping centres and their influence on shopping evaluations. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 13, 261–274.

    Google Scholar 

  134. Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F. L., & Rynes, S. L. (2003). Corporate social and financial performance: a meta-analysis. Organization Studies, 24(3), 403–441.

    Google Scholar 

  135. *Osterhus, T. L. (1997). Pro-Social consumer influence strategies: when and how do they work? Journal of Marketing, 61(4), 16–29.

    Google Scholar 

  136. *Paek, H., & Nelson, M. R. (2009). To buy or not to buy: determinants of socially responsible consumer behavior and consumer reactions to cause-related and boycotting ads. Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising, 31(2), 75–90.

    Google Scholar 

  137. *Page, G., & Fearn, H. (2005). Corporate reputation: what do consumers really care about? Journal of Advertising Research, 45(3), 305–313.

    Google Scholar 

  138. Park, C. W., Jaworski, B. J., & Macinnis, D. J. (1986). Strategic brand concept/image management. Journal of Marketing, 50, 135–145.

    Google Scholar 

  139. Peloza, J. (2009). The challenge of measuring financial impacts from investments in corporate social performance. Journal of Management, 35(6), 1518–1541.

    Google Scholar 

  140. Peloza, J., & Papania, L. (2008). The missing link between corporate social responsibility and financial performance: stakeholder salience and identification. Corporate Reputation Review, 11(2), 169–181.

    Google Scholar 

  141. *Perez, R. C. (2009). Effects of perceived identity based on corporate social responsibility: the role of consumer identification with the company. Corporate Reputation Review, 12(2), 177–191.

    Google Scholar 

  142. *Peters, C., Thomas, J., & Tolson, H. (2007). An exploratory study of cause-related retailing. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 35(11), 895–911.

    Google Scholar 

  143. *Peterson, D. K. (2004). The relationship between perceptions of corporate citizenship and organizational commitment. Business & Society, 43(3), 296–319.

    Google Scholar 

  144. *Phau, I., & Ong, D. (2007). An investigation of the effects of environmental claims in promotional messages for clothing brands. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 25(7), 772–788.

    Google Scholar 

  145. *Pirsh, J., Gupta, S., & Grau, S. L. (2007). A framework for understanding corporate social responsibility programs as a continuum: an exploratory study. Journal of Business Ethics, 70, 125–140.

    Google Scholar 

  146. *Pivato, S., Misani, N., & Tencati, A. (2008). The impact of corporate social responsibility on consumer trust: the case of organic food. Business Ethics: A European Review, 17(1), 3–12.

    Google Scholar 

  147. *Pracejus, J. W., & Olsen, G. D. (2004). The role of brand/cause fit in the effectiveness of cause-related marketing campaigns. Journal of Business Research, 57(6), 635–640.

    Google Scholar 

  148. *Pracejus, J. W., Olsen, G. D., & Brown, N. R. (2003). On the prevalence and impact of vague quantifiers in the advertising of cause-related marketing (CRM). Journal of Advertising, 32(4), 19–28.

    Google Scholar 

  149. *Ricks, J. M., Jr. (2005). An assessment of strategic corporate philanthropy on perceptions of brand equality variables. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 22(3), 121–134.

    Google Scholar 

  150. *Roberts, J. A. (1995). Profiling levels of socially responsible consumer behavior: a cluster analytic approach and its implications for marketing. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 3(4), 97–117.

    Google Scholar 

  151. *Rodrigo, P., & Arenas, D. (2008). Do employees care about CSR programs? A typology of employees according to their attitudes. Journal of Business Ethics, 83, 265–283.

    Google Scholar 

  152. *Rokka, J., & Uusitalo, L. (2008). Preference for green packaging in consumer product choices—do consumers care? International Journal of Consumer Studies, 32(5), 516–525.

    Google Scholar 

  153. *Román, S., & Cuestas, P. (2008). The perceptions of consumers regarding online retailers’ ethics and their relationship with consumers’ general internet expertise and word of mouth: a preliminary analysis. Journal of Business Ethics, 83(4), 641–656.

    Google Scholar 

  154. *Ross, J. K., III, Patterson, L. T., & Stutts, M. A. (1992). Consumer perceptions of organizations that use cause-related marketing. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 20(1), 93–97.

    Google Scholar 

  155. Rousseau, D. M. (2006). Is there such a thing as “evidence-based management”? Academy of Management Review, 31(2), 256–269.

    Google Scholar 

  156. Rousseau, D. M., Manning, J., & Denyer, D. (2008). Evidence in management and organizational science: assembling the field’s full weight of scientific knowledge through synthesis. The Academy of Management Annals, 2(1), 475–515.

    Google Scholar 

  157. *Russel, D. W., & Russell, C. A. (2010). Here or there? Consumer reactions to corporate social responsibility initiatives: egocentric tendencies and their moderators. Marketing Letters, 21, 65–81.

    Google Scholar 

  158. *Sammer, K., & Wüstenhagen, R. (2006). The influence of eco-labelling on consumer behaviour—results of a discrete choice analysis for washing machines. Business Strategy & the Environment, 15(3), 185–199.

    Google Scholar 

  159. *Samu, S., & Wymer, W. (2009). The effect of fit and dominance in cause marketing communication. Journal of Business Research, 62, 432–440.

    Google Scholar 

  160. *Schuhwerk, M. E., & Lefkoff-Hagius, R. (1995). Green or non-green? Does type of appeal matter when advertising a green product? Journal of Advertising, 24(2), 45–54.

    Google Scholar 

  161. Schuler, D. A., & Cording, M. (2006). A corporate social performance-corporate financial performance behavioral model for consumers. Academy of Management Review, 31(3), 540–558.

    Google Scholar 

  162. *Sen, S., & Bhattacharya, C. B. (2001). Does doing good always lead to doing better? Consumer reactions to corporate social responsibility. Journal of Marketing Research, 38(2), 225–243.

    Google Scholar 

  163. *Sen, S., & Morwitz, V. G. (1996). Consumer reactions to a provider’s position on social issues: the effect of varying frames of reference. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 5(1), 27–48.

    Google Scholar 

  164. *Sen, S., Gurhan-Canli, Z., & Morwitz, V. (2001). Withholding consumption: a social dilemma perspective on consumer boycotts. Journal of Consumer Research, 28(3), 399–417.

    Google Scholar 

  165. *Sen, S., Bhattacharya, C. B., & Korschun, D. (2006). The role of corporate social responsibility in strengthening multiple stakeholder relationships: a field experiment. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 34(2), 158–166.

    Google Scholar 

  166. Shavitt, S. (1990). The role of attitude objects in attitude functions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 26(2), 128–148.

    Google Scholar 

  167. *Shaw, D. (2007). Consumer voters in imagined communities. International Journal of Sociology & Social Policy, 27(3/4), 135–150.

    Google Scholar 

  168. Sheth, J. N., Newman, B. I., & Gross, B. L. (1991). Why we buy what we buy: a theory of consumption values. Journal of Business Research, 22(2), 159–170.

    Google Scholar 

  169. *Shrum, L. J., McCarthy, J. A., & Lowrey, T. M. (1995). Buyer characteristics of the green consumer and their implications for advertising strategy. Journal of Advertising, 24(2), 72–82.

    Google Scholar 

  170. *Simmons, C. J., & Becker-Olsen, K. L. (2006). Achieving marketing objectives through social sponsorships. Journal of Marketing, 70(4), 154–169.

    Google Scholar 

  171. *Singh, J., de los Salmones Sanchez, M., & del Bosque, I. R. (2008). Understanding corporate social responsibility and product perceptions in consumer markets: a cross-cultural evaluation. Journal of Business Ethics, 80, 597–611.

    Google Scholar 

  172. *Singh, S., Kristensen, L., & Villasenor, E. (2009). Overcoming skepticism towards cause related claims: the case of Norway. International Marketing Review, 26(3), 312–326.

    Google Scholar 

  173. *Smith, S. M., & Alcorn, D. S. (1991). Cause marketing: a new direction in the marketing of corporate responsibility. The Journal of Consumer Marketing, 8, 19–35.

    Google Scholar 

  174. *Strahilevitz, M. (1999). The effects of product type and donation magnitude on willingness to pay more for a charity-linked brand. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 8(3), 215–241.

    Google Scholar 

  175. *Strahilevitz, M. (2003). The effects of prior impressions of a firm’s ethics on the success of a cause-related marketing campaign: do the good look better while the bad look worse? Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing, 11(1), 77–92.

    Google Scholar 

  176. *Strahilevitz, M., & Myers, J. G. (1998). Donations to charity as purchase incentives: how well they work may depend on what you are trying to sell. Journal of Consumer Research, 24(4), 434–446.

    Google Scholar 

  177. *Szykman, L. R., Bloom, P. N., & Blazing, J. (2004). Does corporate sponsorship of a socially-oriented message make a difference? An investigation of the effects of sponsorship identity on responses to an ant-drinking and driving message. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 14(1&2), 13–20.

    Google Scholar 

  178. *Trimble, C. S., & Rifon, N. J. (2006). Consumer perceptions of compatibility in cause-related marketing messages. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 11(1), 29–47.

    Google Scholar 

  179. *Trudel, R., & Cotte, J. (2009). Does it pay to be good? MIT Sloan Management Review, 50(2), 61–68.

    Google Scholar 

  180. *Turban, D. B., & Greening, D. W. (1997). Corporate social performance and organizational attractiveness to prospective employees. Academy of Management Journal, 40(3), 658–672.

    Google Scholar 

  181. *Turker, D. (2009). How corporate social responsibility influences organizational commitment. Journal of Business Ethics, 89, 189–204.

    Google Scholar 

  182. *Valentine, S., & Fleischman, G. (2008). Ethics programs, perceived corporate social responsibility and job satisfaction. Journal of Business Ethics, 77, 159–172.

    Google Scholar 

  183. *van den Brink, D., Odekerken-SchrAqder, G., & Pauwels, P. (2006). The effect of strategic and tactical cause-related marketing on consumers’ brand loyalty. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 23(1), 15–25.

    Google Scholar 

  184. *Vanhamme, J., & Grobben, B. (2009). “Too good to be true!”: the effectiveness of CSR history in countering negative publicity. Journal of Business Ethics, 85, 273–283.

    Google Scholar 

  185. Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2004). Evolving to a new dominant logic for marketing. Journal of Marketing, 68(1), 1–17.

    Google Scholar 

  186. *Vassilikopoulou, A., Siomkos, G., Chatzipanagiotou, K., & Pantouvakis, A. (2009). Product-harm crisis management: time heals all wounds? Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 16, 174–180.

    Google Scholar 

  187. *Vermeir, I., & Verbeke, W. (2006). Sustainable food consumption: exploring the consumer “attitude-behavioral intention” gap. Journal of Agricultural & Environmental Ethics, 19(2), 169–194.

    Google Scholar 

  188. *Vlachos, P. A., Tsmakos, A., Vrechopoulos, A. P., & Avramidis, P. K. (2008). Corporate social responsibility: attributions, loyalty, and the mediating role of trust. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 37(2), 170–180.

    Google Scholar 

  189. *Wagner, T., Lutz, R. J., & Weitz, B. A. (2009). Corporate hypocrisy: overcoming the treat of inconsistent corporate social responsibility perceptions. Journal of Marketing, 73, 77–91.

    Google Scholar 

  190. *Wang, A. (2008). Dimensions of corporate social responsibility and advertising practice. Corporate Reputation Review, 11(2), 155–168.

    Google Scholar 

  191. Wang, H., Choi, J., & Li, J. (2008). Too little or too much? Untangling the relationship between corporate philanthropy and firm financial performance. Organization Science, 19(1), 143–159.

    Google Scholar 

  192. *Webb, D. J., & Mohr, L. A. (1998). A typology of consumer responses to cause-related marketing: from skeptics and socially concerned. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 17(2), 226–238.

    Google Scholar 

  193. *White, K., & Willness, C. (2009). Consumer reactions to the decreased usage message: the role of elaborative processing. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 19(1), 73–87.

    Google Scholar 

  194. Wood, D. J. (1991). Corporate social performance revisited. Academy of Management Review, 16, 691–718.

    Google Scholar 

  195. *Yechiam, E., Barron, G., Erev, I., & Erez, M. (2003). On the robustness and the direction of the effect of cause-related marketing. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 2(4), 320–332.

    Google Scholar 

  196. *Yoon, Y., Gurhan-Canli, Z., & Bozok, B. (2006). Drawing inferences about others on the basis of corporate associations. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 34(2), 167–173.

    Google Scholar 

  197. *Yoon, Y., Gurhan-Canli, Z., & Schwarz, N. (2006). The effect of corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities on companies with bad reputations. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 16(4), 377–390.

    Google Scholar 

  198. *Youn, S., & Kim, H. (2008). Antecedents of consumer attitudes toward cause-related marketing. Journal of Advertising Research, 48(1), 123–137.

    Google Scholar 

  199. Zeithaml, V. (1988). Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: a means-end model and synthesis of evidence. Journal of Marketing, 52, 2–22.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

The financial support from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada is gratefully acknowledged.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to John Peloza.

Additional information

* = articles included in the systematic review

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Peloza, J., Shang, J. How can corporate social responsibility activities create value for stakeholders? A systematic review. J. of the Acad. Mark. Sci. 39, 117–135 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-010-0213-6

Download citation

Keywords

  • Corporate social responsibility
  • Sustainability
  • Systematic review
  • Green marketing
  • Consumption values
  • Philanthropy
  • Identification
  • Customer value