Evidence of the Primary Role of Environmental Image in Consumer CSR Evaluations

  • Jeremy Wolter
  • J. Joseph Cronin
  • Jeffery Smith
Conference paper
Part of the Developments in Marketing Science: Proceedings of the Academy of Marketing Science book series (DMSPAMS)

Abstract

Companies are investing greater resources into corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives as a component of their marketing strategy. Corporate philanthropic giving, sustainability initiatives, and community involvement are all on the rise as companies attempt to establish, maintain, and/or enhance a reputation for socially responsibility. For example, a Forbes listing of the seventy eight most generous companies noted that charitable giving rose from $3.6 billion in 2006 to $3.8 billion in 2007 (Kirdahy 2008). Similarly, many of the companies in Fortune’s ranking of the 100 best companies to work for avoided laying off employees despite the recent global economic downturn (Fortune 2010). Additionally, General Electric is doubling the investment into Ecomagination, a green focused research and development program, between 2010 and 2015 (Lombardi 2010). Initiatives such as these are becoming more common for companies as they are blatant, tangible signals of a firm’s CSR efforts. While being deemed socially responsible by analysts (e.g, CNN, Fortune, or KLD) requires a company to excel on all areas of CSR, a consumer’s evaluation may not entail the same broad assessment.

Keywords

Corporate Social Responsibility Corporate Social Responsibility Initiative Corporate Ability Corporate Social Responsibility Evaluation Environmental Image 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bhattacharya, C. B. and Sankar Sen (2003). Consumer-company identification: A framework for understanding consumers’ relationships with companies. Journal of Marketing, 67 (2), 76-88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Brown, T.J. & Dacin, P. (1997). The company and the product: Corporate associations and consumer product responses. Journal of Marketing, 61 (1), 68-84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brown, T., Dacin, P., Pratt, M., & Whetten D. (2006). Identity, intended image, construed image, and reputation: An interdisciplinary framework and suggested terminology. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 34 (2), 99-106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chattopadhyay, Amitava & Alba, J. (1988). The importance of recall and inference in consumer decision making. The Journal of Consumer Research, 15 (1), 1-12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dick, Alan, Dipankar Chakravarti, and Gabriel Biehal (1990), “Memory-based inferences during consumer choice,” The Journal of Consumer Research, 17 (1), 82-93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Fortune (2010). 100 best companies to work for. Retrieved September 28, 2010 from http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/bestcompanies/2010/index.html].Google Scholar
  7. Hawkins, S. & Hoch, S.J. (1992). Low-involvement learning: Memory without evaluation. The Journal of Consumer Research, 19 (2), 212-25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hoeffler, S. & Keller K.L. (2002). Building brand equity through corporate societal marketing. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 21 (1), 78-89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Johnson, Michael D. (1984), “Consumer choice strategies for comparing noncomparable alternatives,” Journal of Consumer Research, 11 (December), 741-753.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kirdahy, M. (2008). America’s most generous corporations. Retrieved September 28, 2010 from http://www.forbes.com/2008/10/16/most-generous-corporations-corprespons08-lead-cx_mk_1016charity.html].Google Scholar
  11. Lombardi, C. (2010). GE to invest $10 billion in ecomagination initiative. Retrieved September 19, 2010 from http://news.cnet.com/8301-11128_3-20008698-54.html].Google Scholar
  12. Sen, S., 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), 158-66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Slaughter, J.E., Zickar, M.J., Highhouse, S. & Mohr, D.C. (2004). Personality trait inferences about organizations: Development of a measure and assessment of construct validity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89 (1), 85-103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Swift, R. (2008). ‘Greenwash’ is losing its shine. Retrieved September 20, 2010 from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/sci/tech/7251380.stm Google Scholar
  15. Urbach, Ronald (2008). The world of s‘green advertising’. Retrieved September 20, 2010 from http://www.adweek.com/aw/content_display/community/columns/other-columns/e3i1143d5f105d0afbb7447330318355c3d Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Academy of Marketing Science 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jeremy Wolter
    • 1
  • J. Joseph Cronin
    • 1
  • Jeffery Smith
    • 1
  1. 1.Florida State UniversityMelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations