The effect of cause-related marketing on firm value: a look at Fortune’s most admired all-stars

Abstract

Companies are increasing their use of cause-related marketing as a means of communicating their commitment to corporate social responsibility while accomplishing their strategic goals. Although prior studies suggest that consumers react positively to cause-related marketing programs, understanding of their impact on financial performance remains limited. To address this gap, the authors employ an event study to examine the effects of cause-related marketing announcements on shareholder value using a sample of firms that appeared on Fortune’s Most Admired All-Star list between 2005 and 2017. Study results show that announcement of these initiatives results in a significant loss of shareholder value. These losses are most pronounced for firms making monetary-only contributions, in comparison to those that make in-kind donations. In addition, the negative effects are mitigated for firms that have stronger reputations, have greater resource slack, and operate in more dynamic industries. Moreover, low-reputation and low-slack firms benefit most from in-kind contributions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1

Notes

  1. 1.

    Social marketing campaigns (e.g., Dove’s “Real Beauty” campaign), corporate activism efforts (e.g., Starbucks’ “race together” campaign), and use of celebrity endorsers associated with social causes in brand promotion (e.g., Nike’s Colin Kaepernick advertisement) are not cause-related marketing by our definition and fall outside the scope of this research.

References

  1. Aldrich, H. E. (1979). Organizations and environments. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Andrews, M., Luo, X., Fang, Z., & Aspara, J. (2014). Cause marketing effectiveness and the moderating role of price discounts. Journal of Marketing, 78, 120–142.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Ballings, M., McCullough, H., & Bharadwaj, N. (2018). Cause marketing and customer profitability. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 46, 234–251.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Barnett, M. L., & King, A. A. (2008). Good fences make good neighbors: A longitudinal analysis of an industry self-regulatory institution. Academy of Management Journal, 51, 1150–1170.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Barney, J. B. (1986). Strategic factor markets: Expectations, luck, and business strategy. Management Science, 32, 1231–1241.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Barney, J. B. (2001). Resource-based theories of competitive advantage: A ten-year retrospective on the resource-based view. Journal of Management, 27, 643–650.

    Google Scholar 

  7. 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, 248–262.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Ben-Zion, U., & Shalit, S. S. (1975). Size, leverage, and dividend record as determinants of equity risk. Journal of Finance, 30, 1015–1026.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Bergen, M., Dutta, S., & Walker, O. C., Jr. (1992). Agency relationships in marketing: A review of the implications and applications of agency and related theories. Journal of Marketing, 56(3), 1–24.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Berman, J. Z., Levine, E. E., Barasch, A., & Small, D. A. (2015). The Braggart's dilemma: On the social rewards and penalties of advertising prosocial behavior. Journal of Marketing Research, 52, 90–104.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Bhattacharya, C. B., & Sen, S. (2003). Consumer-company identification: A framework for understanding consumers’ relationships with companies. Journal of Marketing, 67, 76–88.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Bigné-Alcañiz, E., Currás-Pérez, R., & Sánchez-García, I. (2009). Brand credibility in cause-related marketing: The moderating role of consumer values. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 18, 437–447.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Borah, A., & Tellis, G. J. (2014). Make, buy, or ally? Choice of and payoff from announcements of alternate strategies for innovations. Marketing Science, 33, 114–133.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Bourgeois, L. J., III. (1981). On the measurement of organizational slack. Academy of Management Review, 6, 29–39.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  16. Campbell, J. Y., Hilscher, J., & Szilagyi, J. (2008). In search of distress risk. Journal of Finance, 63, 2899–2939.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  18. Chatzidakis, A., Hibbert, S., & Smith, A. P. (2007). Why people Don’t take their concerns about fair trade to the supermarket: The role of neutralisation. Journal of Business Ethics, 74(1), 89–100.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Chen, Y., Ganesan, S., & Liu, Y. (2009). Does a firm's product-recall strategy affect its financial value? An examination of strategic alternatives during product-harm crises. Journal of Marketing, 73, 214–226.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Chen, Y., Liu, Y., & Zhang, J. (2012). When do third-party product reviews affect firm value and what can firms do? The case of media critics and professional movie reviews. Journal of Marketing, 76, 116–134.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Chin, M. K., Hambrick, D. C., & Treviño, L. K. (2013). Political ideologies of CEOs: The influence of executives’ values on corporate social responsibility. Administrative Science Quarterly, 58, 197–232.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Cornwell, T. B., & Coote, L. V. (2005). Corporate sponsorship of a cause: The role of identification in purchase intent. Journal of Business Research, 58, 268–276.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Cui, A. S., & O'Connor, G. (2012). Alliance portfolio resource diversity and firm innovation. Journal of Marketing, 76, 24–43.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Cyert, R. M., & March, J. G. (1963). A behavioral theory of the firm. Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

  25. Donnelly, G., Hauser, O., & Gino, F. (2017). Giving to receive: Moral self-regard and positive affect increase when giving time but not money. ACR North American Advances, 45, 191–195.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Duncan, R. B. (1972). Characteristics of organizational environments and perceived environmental uncertainty. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17, 313–327.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Eberl, M., & Schwaiger, M. (2005). Corporate reputation: Disentangling the effects on financial performance. European Journal of Marketing, 39, 838–854.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Edelman. (2017). Edelman trust barometer. Retrieved on March 10, 2018 from https://www.edelman.com/trust2017/.

  29. Eisenhardt, K. M., & Martin, J. A. (2000). Dynamic capabilities: What are they? Strategic Management Journal, 21, 1105–1121.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Elfenbein, D. W., & McManus, B. (2010). A greater price for a greater good? Evidence that consumers pay more for charity-linked products. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 2, 28–60.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  32. 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, 147–157.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Elving, W. J. (2013). Skepticism and corporate social responsibility communications: The influence of fit and reputation. Journal of Marketing Communications, 19, 277–292.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Flammer, C. (2013). Corporate social responsibility and shareholder reaction: The environmental awareness of investors. Academy of Management Journal, 56, 758–781.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Frazier, M. (2007). Costly (RED) campaign reaps meager $18 million: Bono & co. Spend up to $100 Million on Marketing, Incur Watchdogs. Wrath’. AdvertisingAge. http://adage. com/article.

  36. Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder theory. Journal of Management Studies, 39, 1–21.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Fombrun, C. J. (1996). Reputation: Realizing value from the corporate image. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Friedman, M. (1970). A theoretical framework for monetary analysis. Journal of Political Economy, 78, 193–238.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Godfrey, P. C. (2005). The relationship between corporate philanthropy and shareholder wealth: A risk management perspective. Academy of Management Review, 30, 777–798.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Goll, I., & Rasheed, A. A. (2004). The moderating effect of environmental munificence and dynamism on the relationship between discretionary social responsibility and firm performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 49, 41–54.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Grau, S. L., & Folse, J. A. G. (2007). Cause-related marketing (CRM): The influence of donation proximity and message-framing cues on the less-involved consumer. Journal of Advertising, 36, 19–33.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Guerreiro, J., Rita, P., & Trigueiros, D. (2016). A text mining-based review of cause-related marketing literature. Journal of Business Ethics, 139, 111–128.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  44. Hambrick, D. C., & Snow, C. C. (1977). A contextual model of strategic decision making in organizations. Academy of Management Proceedings, 1977(1), 109–112. Briarcliff Manor, NY: Academy of Management.

  45. Hausman, J. A. (1978). Specification tests in econometrics. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 46, 1251–1271.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Henderson, T., & Arora, N. (2010). Promoting brands across categories with a social cause: Implementing effective embedded premium programs. Journal of Marketing, 74, 41–60.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Houston, M. B. (2003). Alliance partner reputation as a signal to the market: Evidence from bank loan alliances. Corporate Reputation Review, 5, 330–343.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Houston, M. B., & Johnson, S. A. (2000). Buyer–supplier contracts versus joint ventures: Determinants and consequences of transaction structure. Journal of Marketing Research, 37, 1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Hunt, S. D., & Morgan, R. M. (1995). The comparative advantage theory of competition. Journal of Marketing, 59, 1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  50. International Events Group (2018). Cause sponsorship spending to total $2.14 billion in 2018. Retrieved on March 10, 2018 from http://www.sponsorship.com/Latest-Thinking/Sponsorship-Infographics/Cause-Sponsorship-Spending-To-Total-$2-14-Billion.aspx.

  51. Irmak, C., Sen, S., & Bhattacharya, C. B. (2015). Consumer reactions to business-nonprofit alliances: Who benefits and when? Marketing Letters, 26, 29–42.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Islam, M. M., & Vate, J. V. (2013). Surplus product donation and sustainability strategy: Channels and challenges for corporate product donations. In IFIP international conference on advances in production management systems. Berlin: Springer Press.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Jacobson, R., & Mizik, N. (2009). The financial markets and customer satisfaction: Reexamining possible financial market mispricing of customer satisfaction. Marketing Science, 28(5), 810–819.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3, 305–360.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Kang, G., Germann, F., & Grewal, R. (2016). Washing away your sins? Corporate social responsibility, corporate social irresponsibility, and firm performance. Journal of Marketing, 80, 59–79.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Keller, K. L. (2003). Brand synthesis: The multidimensionality of brand knowledge. Journal of Consumer Research, 29, 595–600.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Koschate-Fischer, N., Stefan, I. V., & Hoyer, W. D. (2012). Willingness to pay for cause-related marketing: The impact of donation amount and moderating effects. Journal of Marketing Research, 49, 910–927.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Krishna, A. (2011). Can supporting a cause decrease donations and happiness? The cause marketing paradox. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 21, 338–345.

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

    Google Scholar 

  60. Lane, V., & Jacobson, R. (1995). Stock market reactions to brand extension announcements: The effects of brand attitude and familiarity. The Journal of Marketing, 59, 63–77.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Lenz, I., Wetzel, H. A., & Hammerschmidt, M. (2017). Can doing good lead to doing poorly? Firm value implications of CSR in the face of CSI. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 45, 677–697.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Litschert, R. J., & Bonham, T. W. (1978). A conceptual model of strategy formation. Academy of Management Review, 3, 211–219.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Liu, G., & Ko, W. W. (2011). An analysis of cause-related marketing implementation strategies through social alliance: Partnership conditions and strategic objectives. Journal of Business Ethics, 100, 253–281.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  65. Luo, X., & Bhattacharya, C. B. (2009). The debate over doing good: Corporate social performance, strategic marketing levers, and firm-idiosyncratic risk. Journal of Marketing, 73(6), 198–213.

    Google Scholar 

  66. Lynch, J. G., Jr., Marmorstein, H., & Weigold, M. F. (1988). Choices from sets including remembered brands: Use of recalled attributes and prior overall evaluations. Journal of Consumer Research, 15, 169–184.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Madden, T. J., Fehle, F., & Fournier, S. (2006). Brands matter: An empirical demonstration of the creation of shareholder value through branding. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 34, 224–235.

    Google Scholar 

  68. Madsen, P. M., & Rodgers, Z. J. (2015). Looking good by doing good: The antecedents and consequences of stakeholder attention to corporate disaster relief. Strategic Management Journal, 36, 776–794.

  69. Mazodier, M., & Rezaee, A. (2013). Are sponsorship announcements good news for the shareholders? Evidence from international stock exchanges. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 41(5), 586–600.

    Google Scholar 

  70. McGuire, J. B., Sundgren, A., & Schneeweis, T. (1988). Corporate social responsibility and firm financial performance. Academy of Management Journal, 31, 854–872.

    Google Scholar 

  71. McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D. (1997). Event studies in management research: Theoretical and empirical issues. Academy of Management Journal, 40, 626–657.

    Google Scholar 

  72. McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D. (2001). Corporate social responsibility: A theory of the firm perspective. Academy of Management Review, 26, 117–127.

    Google Scholar 

  73. Miller, D., & Shamsie, J. (1999). Strategic responses to three kinds of uncertainty: Product line simplicity at the Hollywood film studios. Journal of Management, 25, 97–116.

    Google Scholar 

  74. Milliken, F. J. (1987). Three types of perceived uncertainty about the environment: State, effect, and response uncertainty. Academy of Management Review, 12, 133–143.

    Google Scholar 

  75. Mishra, S., & Modi, S. B. (2016). Corporate social responsibility and shareholder wealth: The role of marketing capability. Journal of Marketing, 80, 26–46.

    Google Scholar 

  76. Moses, O. D. (1992). Organizational slack and risk-taking behaviour: tests of product pricing strategy. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 5, 38–54.

  77. Muller, A., & Kräussl, R. (2011). Doing good deeds in times of need: A strategic perspective on corporate disaster donations. Strategic Management Journal, 32(9), 911–929.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  79. Peloza, J., & Shang, J. (2011). How can corporate social responsibility activities create value for stakeholders? Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 39, 117–135.

    Google Scholar 

  80. Penrose, E. T. (1959). The theory of the growth of the firm. New York: Sharpe.

    Google Scholar 

  81. Peteraf, M. A. (1993). The cornerstones of competitive advantage: A resource-based view. Strategic Management Journal, 14, 179–191.

    Google Scholar 

  82. Peteraf, M. A., & Barney, J. B. (2003). Unraveling the resource-based tangle. Managerial and Decision Economics, 24, 309–323.

    Google Scholar 

  83. Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2006). The link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility. Harvard Business Review, 84, 78–92.

    Google Scholar 

  84. 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, 635–640.

    Google Scholar 

  85. 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, 19–28.

    Google Scholar 

  86. Raassens, N. (2011). The performance implications of outsourcing. CentER, Tilburg: University of Tilburg.

  87. Reibstein, D. J., Day, G., & Wind, J. (2009). Guest editorial: Is marketing academia losing its way. Journal of Marketing, 73, 1–3.

    Google Scholar 

  88. Rifon, N. J., Choi, S. M., Trimble, C. S., & Li, H. (2004). Congruence effects in sponsorship: The mediating role of sponsor credibility and consumer attributions of sponsor motive. Journal of Advertising, 33, 30–42.

    Google Scholar 

  89. Robinson, S. R., Irmak, C., & Jayachandran, S. (2012). Choice of cause in cause-related marketing. Journal of Marketing, 76, 126–139.

    Google Scholar 

  90. Russo, M. V., & Fouts, P. A. (1997). A resource-based perspective on corporate environmental performance and profitability. Academy of Management Journal, 40, 534–559.

    Google Scholar 

  91. Saeidi, S. P., Sofian, S., Saeidi, P., Saeidi, S. P., & Saaeidi, S. A. (2015). How does corporate social responsibility contribute to firm financial performance. Journal of Business Research, 68, 341–350.

    Google Scholar 

  92. Sagawa, S., & Segal, E. (2000). Common interest, common good: Creating value through business and social sector partnerships. California Management Review, 42, 105–122.

    Google Scholar 

  93. Samu, S., & Wymer, W. (2014). Cause marketing communications: Consumer inference on attitudes towards brand and cause. European Journal of Marketing, 48, 1333–1353.

    Google Scholar 

  94. Seifert, B., Morris, S. A., & Bartkus, B. R. (2003). Comparing big givers and small givers: Financial correlates of corporate philanthropy. Journal of Business Ethics, 45(3), 195–211.

    Google Scholar 

  95. 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, 158–166.

    Google Scholar 

  96. Sorescu, A., Shankar, V., & Kushwaha, T. (2007). New product preannouncements and shareholder value: Don't make promises you can't keep. Journal of Marketing Research, 44, 468–489.

    Google Scholar 

  97. Sorescu, A., Warren, N. L., & Ertekin, L. (2017). Event study methodology in the marketing literature: An overview. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 45, 186–207.

    Google Scholar 

  98. Srinivasan, S., & Hanssens, D. M. (2009). Marketing and firm value: Metrics, methods, findings, and future directions. Journal of Marketing Research, 46, 293–312.

    Google Scholar 

  99. Stewart, D. W., & Gugel, C. T. (Eds.). (2016). Accountable marketing: Linking marketing actions to financial performance. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  100. 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 

  101. Thompson, J. D. (1967). Organizations in action. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  102. Tosi, H. L., Jr., & Slocum, J. W., Jr. (1984). Contingency theory: Some suggested directions. Journal of Management, 10, 9–26.

    Google Scholar 

  103. 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, 29–47.

    Google Scholar 

  104. Van den Brink, D., Odekerken-Schröder, G., & Pauwels, P. (2006). The effect of strategic and tactical cause-related marketing on consumers' brand loyalty. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 23, 15–25.

    Google Scholar 

  105. Vohs, K. D., Mead, N. L., & Goode, M. R. (2006). The psychological consequences of money. Science, 314, 1154–1156.

    Google Scholar 

  106. Waddock, S. A., & Graves, S. B. (1997). The corporate social performance-financial performance link. Strategic Management Journal, 18, 303–319.

    Google Scholar 

  107. Wiles, M. A., & Danielova, A. (2009). The worth of product placement in successful films: An event study analysis. Journal of Marketing, 73, 44–63.

    Google Scholar 

  108. Wiles, M. A., Jain, S. P., Mishra, S., & Lindsey, C. (2010). Stock market response to regulatory reports of deceptive advertising: The moderating effect of omission bias and firm reputation. Marketing Science, 29, 828–845.

    Google Scholar 

  109. Wiles, M. A., Morgan, N. A., & Rego, L. L. (2012). The effect of brand acquisition and disposal on stock returns. Journal of Marketing, 76, 38–58.

    Google Scholar 

  110. Winterich, K. P., & Barone, M. J. (2011). Warm glow or cold, hard cash? Social identity effects on consumer choice for donation versus discount promotions. Journal of Marketing Research, 48, 855–868.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the three blind reviewers for all of their valuable critiques throughout this process. We also greatly appreciate Dr. Michael Peasley and Dr. Stacey Robinson for the feedback and insight they provided along the way.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Parker J. Woodroof.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Raji Srinivasan served as Area Editor for this article.

Appendix A

Appendix A

Table 8 Type of cause-related partnership *

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Woodroof, P.J., Deitz, G.D., Howie, K.M. et al. The effect of cause-related marketing on firm value: a look at Fortune’s most admired all-stars. J. of the Acad. Mark. Sci. 47, 899–918 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-019-00660-y

Download citation

Keywords

  • Cause-related marketing
  • Corporate social responsibility
  • Shareholder value
  • Event-study analysis
  • Resource based view