Company-Cause-Customer: Interaction Architecture

Abstract

There is a rapid increase in number of companies employing cause-related marketing to create a differentiation, further brand image and foster purchase intention. However, they are faced with a challenge to create a positive impact on customer’s perception of cause in reference to the company, positive impact to nurture customer’s innate moral obligation and minimising apprehension about company’s intention. This study identifies factors that influence customer’s perception and the inter-relations among them. This study identifies factors that influence customer’s perception using Grounded Theory approach, which are further examined for inter-linkages and using total interpretive structural modelling to develop a hierarchal model reflecting their relative order of impact. This study proposes a generic company-cause-customer interaction architecture that marketers can employ as a first step in designing their cause-marketing campaign. Findings indicate cause-centric variables like type of cause (e.g., environment etc.) and customer’s proximity to cause (local/national/global) as the most rooted factors in customer’s cognition. Hence, the companies should primarily focus on this factor while designing their cause marketing strategy. The research details out the interaction architecture of company-cause-customer. This study is beneficial for Brand Managers and Product Managers for developing decision tools in the area of cause branding. The interaction architecture digraph will be an important input for developing an integrated model for company, cause and customer.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

References

  1. Baghi, I., & Gabriell, V. (2012). For-profit or non-profit brands: Which are more effective in a cause-related marketing programme? Journal of Brand Management, 20(3), 21–35.

    Google Scholar 

  2. 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bigné-Alcañiz, E., Currás-Pérez, R., Ruiz-Mafé, C., & Sanz-Blas, S. (2010). Consumer behavioural intentions in cause-related marketing. The role of identification and social cause involvement. International Review on Public and Nonprofit Marketing, 7, 127–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Brønn, P. S., & Vrioni, A. B. (2001). Corporate social responsibility and cause-related marketing: An overview. International Journal of Advertising, 20(2), 201–222.

    Google Scholar 

  6. 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (1990). Grounded theory research: Procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria. Qualitative Sociology, 13(t), 3–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Demetriou, M., Papasolomou, I., & Vrontis, D. (2009). Cause-related marketing: Building the corporate image while supporting worthwhile causes. Journal of Brand Management, 17(4), 266–278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Drumwright, M. E. (1996). Company advertising with a social dimension: The role of noneconomic criteria. The Journal of Marketing, 60, 71–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Endacott, R. W. J. (2004). Consumers and CRM: A national and global perspective. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 21(3), 183–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. New York, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  12. 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(4), 19–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Holbrook, M. B., & Hirschman, E. C. (1982). The experiential aspects of consumption: Consumer fantasies, feelings, and fun. Journal of Consumer Research, 9(2), 132–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Meyer, H. (1999). ``When the cause is just’’. Journal of Business Strategy, 6, 27–31.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Moosmayer, D. C., & Fuljahn, A. (2010). Consumer perceptions of cause related marketing campaigns. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 27(6), 543–549.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Murphy, I. P. (1997). Pillsbury proves charity, marketing begins at home. Marketing News, 16.

  20. Myers, B., Kwon, W., & Forsythe, S. (2012). Creating successful cause–brand alliances: The role of cause involvement, perceived brand motivations and cause–brand alliance attitude. Journal of Brand Management, 20(3), 205–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Nasim, S. (2011). Total interpretive structural modeling of continuity and change forces in e-government. Journal of Enterprise Transformation, 1(2), 147–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Payne, A. F., Storbacka, K., & Frow, P. (2008). Managing the co-creation of value. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 36(1), 83–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Sagar, M., Khandelwal, R., Mittal, A., & Singh, D. (2011). Ethical Positioning Index (EPI): An innovative tool for differential brand positioning. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 16(2), 124–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Shell, A. (1989). Cause related marketing: Big risks, big potential. Public Relations Journal, 45(7), 8–13.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Strahilevitz, M., & Myers, J. (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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Sushil. (2005). Interpretive matrix: A tool to aid interpretation of management in social research. Global Journal of Flexible System Management, 6(2), 27–30.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Sushil. (2012). Interpreting the interpretive structural model, organization research methods. Global Journal of Flexible System Management, 13(2), 87–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Till, B. D., & Nowak, L. I. (2000). Toward effective use of cause-related marketing alliances. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 9(7), 472–484.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Van den Brink, D., Odekerken-Schröder, D. 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Varadarajan, P. R., & Menon, A. (1988). Cause-related marketing: A co-alignment of marketing strategy and corporate philanthropy. Journal of Marketing, 52, 58–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Warfield, J. N. (1976). Societal systems: Planning, policy and complexity. New York, NY: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Wasuja, S., Sagar, M., & Sushil. (2012). Cognitive bias in salespersons in specialty drug selling of pharmaceutical industry. International Journal of Pharmaceutical and Healthcare Marketing, 6(4), 310–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  39. 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Urvi Agrawal.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Agrawal, U., Mangla, A. & Sagar, M. Company-Cause-Customer: Interaction Architecture. Glob J Flex Syst Manag 17, 307–319 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40171-016-0128-2

Download citation

Keywords

  • Cause
  • Cause related marketing
  • Company
  • Customer
  • Customer cognition
  • Customer perception
  • Marketing campaign
  • TISM