The influence of cause-related marketing on consumer choice: Does one good turn deserve another?
Are consumers more likely to select brands offered by companies that engage in cause-related marketing (CRM)? Somewhat surprisingly, little evidence exists that directly addresses this issue. Accordingly, the present examination investigates whether and when CRM efforts influence consumer choice. The results from several studies indicate that information regarding a company’s support of social causes can affect choice. However, CRM’s influence on choice is found to depend on the perceived motivation underlying the company’s CRM efforts as well as whether consumers must trade off company sponsorship of causes for lower performance or higher price. The results also indicate that CRM cues affect choice primarily through compensatory strategies involving trade-offs rather than through noncompensatory strategies. Implications of the current findings for existing theory are discussed along with directions for future research.
KeywordsPurchase Intention Choice Probability Brand Choice Persuasion Knowledge Market Science Spring
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Abelson, R. P., and A. Levi. 1985. “Decision Making and Decision Theory.” InHandbook of Social Psychology, 3d ed., Vol. 1. Eds. G. Lindzey and E. Aronson. New York: Random House, 231–309.Google Scholar
- Drumwright, Minette E.. 1996. “Company Advertising With a Social Dimension: The Role of Noneconomic Criteria.”Journal of Marketing 60 (October): 17–87.Google Scholar
- Fishbein, Martin and Icek Ajzen. 1975.Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
- Hogarth, Robin M., 1987.Judgment and Choice. 2d ed. New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
- “It Pays to Behave.” 1995.Advertising Age, October 23, p. 3.Google Scholar
- Keeney, Ralph and Howard Raiffa. 1976.Decisions With Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Tradeoffs. New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
- Kroll, Carol. 1996. “Consumers Note Marketers’ Good Causes: Roper.”Advertising Age, November 11, p. 51.Google Scholar
- Murphy, I. P. 1997. “Pillsbury Proves Charity, Marketing Begins at Home.”Marketing News, February 17, p. 16.Google Scholar
- Quelch, John A. and Tammy Bunn Hiller. 1988.Reebok International Ltd. Boston: Harvard Business School Publishing Division.Google Scholar
- “Report: Consumers Swayed by Good Causes.” 1997.Marketing News, February 17, p. 16.Google Scholar
- Smith, Geoffrey and Ron Stodghill III. 1994. “Are Good Causes Good Marketing?”Business Week, March 21, pp. 64, 66.Google Scholar
- Tate, Nancy T., 1995. “And Now a Word From Our Sponsor.”American Demographics, June, p. 46.Google Scholar
- Von-Neumann, John and Oskar Morgenstern. 1947.Theory of Games and Economic Behavior. 2d ed. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
- Webb, Deborah J. and Lois A. Mohr. 1998. “A Typology of Consumer Responses to Cause-Related Marketing: From Skeptics to Socially Concerned.”Journal of Public Policy & Marketing 17 (Fall): 226–238.Google Scholar
- Wright, Peter. 1985. “Schemer Schema: Consumers’ Intuitive Theories About Marketers’ Influence Tactics.” InAdvances in Consumer Research, Vol. 13. Ed. Richard J. Lutz. Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, 1–3.Google Scholar