Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Redefining fit: examining CSR company-issue fit in stigmatized industries

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Journal of Brand Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study explores the impact of the “fit” of corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives in industries stigmatized by society, or industries whose products or production processes have a negative societal impact. While extant research suggests that CSR initiatives that are highly congruent with a company’s products or services tend to generate more favorable public outcomes, this study tested hypotheses suggesting fit would likely function differently within stigmatized industries. In these instances, although the company and CSR issue are logically connected, the association is a negative one, as the company or its products have a negative impact on society that it is attempting to address (or appear to address) through a CSR initiative. An experiment involving a fictitious cola company and its promotion of anti-obesity versus literacy CSR activities was used to examine the effect of fit with negative contribution on skepticism, attitudes toward the company and the CSR initiative, and participants’ stated supportive intentions toward the company. In partial support of the hypotheses, findings revealed that, for the high-fit negative contribution CSR initiative (anti-obesity), skepticism was heightened while both attitudes toward the company and supportive intentions toward the company’s products were negatively impacted, in comparison with the low-fit CSR initiative (literacy). While attitudes about the social initiatives of anti-obesity versus literacy were not significantly different, findings also suggest participants felt obesity was a more important cause for the cola company to undertake. The practical and ethical implications for CSR are discussed.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aldoory, L., J.-N. Kim, and N. Tindall. 2010. The influence of perceived shared risk in crisis communication: Elaborating the situational theory of publics. Public Relations Review 36(2): 134–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aksak, E.O., M.A. Ferguson, and S.A. Duman. 2016. Corporate social responsibility and CSR fit as predictors of corporate reputation: A global perspective. Public Relations Review 42(1): 79–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Austin, L.L., and B.M. Gaither. 2016. Examining public response to corporate social initiative types: A quantitative content analysis of Coca-Cola’s social media. Social Marketing Quarterly 22(4): 290–306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Austin, L., B.F. Liu, and Y. Jin. 2012. How audiences seek out crisis information: Exploring the social-mediated crisis communication model. Journal of Applied Communication Research 40(2): 188–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bae, J., and G. Cameron. 2006. Conditioning effect of prior reputation on perception of corporate giving. Public Relations Review 32(2): 144–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Basil, M.D. 1996. The use of student samples in communication research. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media 40(3): 431–440.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bigne, E., R. Curras-Perez, and J. Aldas-Manzano. 2012. Dual nature of cause-brand fit. European Journal of Marketing 46(3/4): 575–594.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cho, S., and Y. Hong. 2009. Netizens’ evaluations of corporate social responsibility: Content analysis of CSR news stories and online readers’ comments. Public Relations Review 35(2): 147–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chua, S.C., and J.S. Lin. 2013. Consumers’ perception of corporate social responsibility in the United States and China: A study of female cosmetics consumers. International Journal of Strategic Communication 7(1): 43–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cone, C.L., M.A. Feldman, and A.T. DaSilva. 2003. Causes and effects. Harvard Business Review 81(7): 95–101.

    Google Scholar 

  • Darmon, K., K. Fitzpatrick, and C. Bronstein. 2008. Krafting the obesity message: A case study in framing and issues management. Public Relations Review 34(4): 373–379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Bakker, F.G.A., and F. den Hond. 2008. Activists’ influence tactics and corporate policies. Business Communication Quarterly 71(1): 107–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Koning, L., V.S. Malik, M.D. Kellogg, E.B. Rimm, W.C. Willett, and F.B. Hu. 2012. Sweetened beverage consumption, incident coronary heart disease, and biomarkers of risk in men. Circulation 125(14): 1735–1741.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elving, W. 2013. Scepticism and corporate social responsibility communications: The influence of fit and reputation. Journal of Marketing Communications 19(4): 277–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forehand, M.R., and S. Grier. 2003. Is honesty the best policy? The effect of stated company intent on consumer skepticism. Journal of Consumer Psychology 13(3): 349–356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaither, B.M., and L. Austin. 2016. Campaign and corporate goals in conflict: Exploring company-issue congruence through a content analysis of Coca-Cola’s Twitter feed. Public Relations Review 42(4): 698–709.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gregory, R.S., and T.A. Satterfield. 2002. Beyond perception: The experience of risk and stigma in community contexts. Risk Analysis 22(2): 347–358.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grougiou, V., E. Dedoulis, and S. Leventis. 2016. Corporate social responsibility and organizational stigma: The case of “sin” industries. Journal of Business Research 69(2): 905–914.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Groza, M.D., M.R. Pronschinske, and M. Walker. 2011. Perceived organizational motives and consumer responses to proactive and reactive CSR. Journal of Business Ethics 102(4): 639–652.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grunig, J.E. 1997. A situational theory of publics: Conceptual history, recent challenges, and new research. In Public Relations Research: An International Perspective ed. D. Moss, T. MacManus, and D. Vercic, 3–48. London: International Thomson Business.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herrick, C. 2009. Shifting blame/selling health: Corporate social responsibility in the age of obesity. Sociology of Health & Illness 31(1): 51–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Isaksson, L., T. Kiessling, and M. Harvey. 2014. Corporate social responsibility: Why bother? Organizational Dynamics 43(1): 64–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, H.S. 2011. A reputational approach examining publics’ attributions on corporate social responsibility motives. Asian Journal of Communication 21(1): 84–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, Y. 2014. Strategic communication of corporate social responsibility (CSR): Effects of stated motives and corporate reputation on stakeholder responses. Public Relations Review 40(5): 838–840.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, J.N., and J.E. Grunig. 2011. Problem solving and communicative action: A situational theory of problem solving. Journal of Communication 61: 120–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, S., and Y.-J. Lee. 2012. The complex attribution process of CSR motives. Public Relations Review 38(1): 168–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, H.S., and S.Y. Lee. 2015. Testing the buffering and boomerang effects of CSR Practices on consumers’ perception of a corporation during a crisis. Corporate Reputation Review 18(4): 277–293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, E.M., S.-Y. Park, M.I. Rapert, and C.L. Newman. 2012. Does perceived consumer fit matter in corporate social responsibility issues? Journal of Business Research 65(11): 1558–1564.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, B.F., Y. Jin, and L.L. Austin. 2013. The tendency to tell: Understanding publics’ communicative responses to crisis information form and source. Journal of Public Relations Research 25(1): 51–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ludwig, D.S., K.E. Peterson, and S.L. Gortmaker. 2001. Relation between consumption of sugar-sweetened drinks and childhood obesity: A prospective, observational analysis. Lancet 357(9255): 505–508.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malcolm, H. 2016. Bottled water about to beat soda as most consumed beverage. USA Today article, 8 June. http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2016/06/08/americans-cut-calories-drinking-more-bottled-water/85554612, Accessed 30 Sept 2016.

  • Miller, B., and J. Lellis. 2015. Response to marketplace advocacy messages by sponsor and topic within the energy industry: Should corporations or industry trade groups do the talking? Journal of Applied Communication Research 43(1): 66–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, B.M., and J. Sinclair. 2009. Community stakeholder responses to advocacy advertising: Trust, accountability, and the Persuasion Knowledge Model. Journal of Advertising 38(2): 37–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, B.M., and J. Sinclair. 2012. Risk perceptions in a resource community and communication implications: Emotion, stigma, and identity. Risk Analysis 32(3): 483–495.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, B.M., and Sinclair, J. 2014. The ethics and boundaries of industry environmental campaigns. Paper presented at the Iowa State University Summer Symposium on Science Communication, Ames, IA, June.

  • Morsing, M., and M. Schulz. 2006. Corporate social responsibility communication: Stakeholder information, response and involvement strategies. Business Ethics: A European Review 15(4): 323–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morsing, M., M. Schultz, and K.U. Nielsen. 2008. The catch 22 of communicating CSR. Journal of Marketing Communications 14(3): 97–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nan, X., and K. Heo. 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 

  • Nielsen. 2014. Doing well by doing good: Increasingly, consumers care about increasingly, consumers care about corporate social responsibility, but does concern convert to consumption? Nielsen report, June. http://www.nielsen.com/content/dam/nielsenglobal/apac/docs/reports/2014/Nielsen-Global-Corporate-Social-Responsibility-Report-June-2014.pdf. Accessed 15 Sept 2016.

  • Nielsen. 2015. The sustainability imperative: New insights on consumer expectations. Nielsen report, October. http://www.nielsen.com/content/dam/corporate/us/en/reports-downloads/2015-reports/global-sustainability-report-oct-2015.pdf. Accessed 15 Sept 2016.

  • Pernice, R.E., K. van der Veer, R. Ommundsen, and K. Larsen. 2008. On the use of student samples for scale construction. Psychological Reports 102(2): 459–464.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peterson, R.A., and D.R. Merunka. 2014. Convenience samples of college students and research reproducibility. Journal of Business Research 67(5): 1035–1041.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Polizzotto, P. 2015. Millennials are embracing corporate social responsibility campaigns. Advertising Age article, 18 December. http://adage.com/article/digitalnext/ways-marketers-create-smarter-csr-campaigns/301796. Accessed 30 Sept 2016.

  • Schultz, F., S. Utz, and A. Göritz. 2011. Is the medium the message? Perceptions of and reactions to crisis communication via Twitter, blogs, and traditional media. Public Relations Review 37(1): 20–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shim, K., and S.U. Yang. 2016. The effect of bad reputation: The occurrence of crisis, corporate social responsibility, and perceptions of hypocrisy and attitudes toward a company. Public Relations Review 42(1): 68–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skarmeas, D., and C.N. Leonidou. 2013. When consumers doubt, Watch out! The role of CSR skepticism. Journal of Business Research 66(10): 1831–1838.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker, M., B. Heere, M.M. Parent, and D. Drane. 2010. Social responsibility and the Olympic Games: The mediating role of consumer attributions. Journal of Business Ethics 95(4): 77–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zyglidopoulos, S., A. Georgiadis, C.E. Carroll, and D. Siegel. 2012. Does media attention drive corporate social responsibility? Journal of Business Research 65(11): 1622–1627.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Media and Journalism, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Carroll Hall, CB 3365, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA

    Lucinda Austin

  2. School of Communications, Elon University, Elon, USA

    Barbara Miller Gaither

Authors
  1. Lucinda Austin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Barbara Miller Gaither
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lucinda Austin.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Austin, L., Gaither, B.M. Redefining fit: examining CSR company-issue fit in stigmatized industries. J Brand Manag 26, 9–20 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41262-018-0107-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41262-018-0107-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation