-
7/28/2019 6569487.pdf
1/13
-
7/28/2019 6569487.pdf
2/13
Journal of Public Policy & Marketing 79premise of his model
is that the power ofa brand lies inwhatcustomers have learned,
felt, seen, heard, and so forth aboutthe brand as a result of their
experiences over time.In other words, the power of a brand is in
what resides inthe minds of customers. The challenge for marketers
inbuilding a strong brand is ensuring that customers have theright
type of experiences with products and services andtheir
accompanying marketing programs so that the desiredthoughts,
feelings, images, beliefs, perceptions, opinions,and so on become
linked to the brand. As we outline subse-quently, a well-designed
and implemented CSM programcould provide many important
associations to a brand. In thefollowing sections, we briefly
highlight the following sixmeans by which CSM programs can help
build brandequity:
1. Building brand awareness,2. Enhancing brand image,3.
Establishing brand credibility,4. Evoking brand feelings,5.
Creating a sense of brand community, and6. Eliciting brand
engagement.
Building Brand AwarenessFormally, brand awareness refers to the
customers' abilityto recall and recognize the brand. Brand
awareness is morethan just customers knowing the brand name and
havingpreviously seen the brand, perhaps even many times.
Brandawareness also involves linking the brandthe brand name,logo,
symbol, and so forthto certain associations in mem-ory. Brand
awareness can be distinguished in terms of twokey dimensions: Depth
of brand awareness refers to howeasily customers can recall or
recognize the brand; breadthof brand awareness refers to the range
of purchase and con-sumption situations in which the brand comes to
mind. Ide-ally, a brand would have both depth and breadth of
brandawareness. Higher depth of brand awareness leads toincreased
sales if consumers are more likely to think of thebrand when the
need arises (e.g.. Coke when thirsty). Higherbreadth of brand
awareness leads to increased sales if con-sumers are more likely to
think of the brand across a varietyof settings when it could be
employed or consumed (e.g..Coke in the morning).Two important
measures of brand awareness are recogni-tion and recall. Brand
recognition is the ability of the con-sumer to confirm prior
exposure to the brand, and brandrecall is the unaided retrieval of
the brand from memory. Inmany cases, because of the nature of the
brand exposure,CSM programs seem to be a means of improving
recogni-tion for a brand, but not necessarily recall. Brand
recallrelies more heavily on creating the appropriate linksbetween
the brand and the product category or the con-sumption or usage
situation. As with sponsorship and otherindirect forms of
brand-building communications, mostCSM programs are not geared
toward creating these types oflinks, as they are unable or
unwilling to include muchproduct-related information. At the same
time, exposure tothe brand can literally be repeated and/or
prominent as aresult of the CSM program, which facilitates
brandrecognition.
P|: CSM programs (a) will lead to increases in awareness for
abrand and (b) will not lead toenhanced associations relatedto
specific consumption orusage situations.Enhancing Brand ImageBrand
awareness is an important first step in building brandequity, but
it usually is not sufficient. For most custom ers inmost
situations, other considerations, such as the meaning orimage of
the brand, also come into play (Fournier 1998;Zaltman and Higie
1995). Enhancing brand image involvescreating brand meaning and
what the brand is characterizedby and should stand for in the minds
of customers. Severaltypes of associationsrelated broadly to more
functional,performance-related considerations or more
abstract,imagery-related considerationsmay become linked to
thebrand. In particular, to create brand equity, it is
importantthat the brand have some strong, favorable, and
uniquebrand associations (Keller 1993).Corporate societal marketing
offers several means of cre-ating such favorable brand
differentiation. As mentionedpreviously, most CSM programs do not
include muchproduct-related information; therefore, CSM
programswould not be expected to have much impact on more
func-tional, performance-related considerations. In contrast,
sev-eral kinds of more abstract or imagery-related
associationswould seem to be able to be linked to a brand through
CSM.Two such types of associations are (I) user profiles and
(2)personality and values.User ProfilesOne set of brand imagery
associations is the type of personwho uses the brand. This imagery
may result in a profile ormental image by customers of actual users
or more aspira-tional, idealized users. Associations of a typical
or idealizedbrand user may be based ondescriptive demographic
factorsor more abstract psychographic factors. The CSM mayenable
consumers to develop a positive image of brand usersto which they
also may aspire, for example, in terms ofbeing kind and generous
and doing good things.
P2: The more prominent user imagery is in the marketing pro-gram
(e.g., as the focus of an advertising campaign), themore likely it
is that the brand image will be enhanced.Brand PersonalityBrands
may also take on personality traits and values, simi-lar to people.
Brand personality is often related to the moredescriptive user or
usage imagery but involves much richer,more contextual information.
One often-cited dimension ofbrand personality is sincerity (e.g.,
Aaker 1997, 1999). Cor-porate societal marketing could bolster the
sincerity dimen-sion of a brand's personality such that consumers
wouldperceive the people behind the brand as caring and genuine.As
an example of a CSM program that could helpenhance brand image and
the perceived sincerity of thebrand, consider the following:
Liz Claiborne: Women's Work campaign against domestic vio-lence.
In 1991, at a time when domestic violence was often ataboo or "hot
potato" issue, Liz Claiborne developed itsWomen's Work campaign
against domestic violence. Prior tostarting the campaign,
thecompany had conducted research that
-
7/28/2019 6569487.pdf
3/13
8 0 Brand Equity and Corporate Societal Marketingrevealed that
96 percent of its customers believed that domesticviolence was a
problem and 91 percent of those same customerswould have a positive
opinion of a company that started anawareness campaign about the
issue. The major fundraisingevent is an annual charity shopping day
every October at LizClaiborne stores across the U.S. The company
donates 10 per-cent of sales to local dom estic violence
organizations. Liz Clai-borne also contributes proceeds from the
sale of t-shirts, jew-elry, and other products related to the
campaign. Additionally,the company pays for public service
campaigns that appear ontelevision, radio, billboards, and bus
shelters and distributesawareness posters, brochures, and mailings.
Over the years, LizClaiborne has also sponsored workshops, surveys,
celebrity-endorsed awareness campaigns, and other events. (Pringle
andThompson 1999, p. 229)In the Liz Claiborne example, the brand's
promotion ofthe CSM programs should improve the brand's
awarenessand image. Awareness is improved from increased
customerexposure to the brand name/symbol. Image is improved
ifconsumers appreciate the CSM efforts of Liz Claiborne andthink of
the brand in a new light (e.g., more caring). Yetthere are no
positive, concrete associations that are trans-ferred to the Liz
Claiborne brand. By concrete associations,we mean associations
pertaining to product-related attrib-utes. Instead, it is the
abstract associations, focused on theimage of Liz Claiborne, that
are more likely to betransferred.These two types of abstract or
imagery-related associa-tions can be quite valuable given prior
research that hasshown the ability of more abstract associations to
be rele-vant in more varied product contexts (Johnson 1984;
Park,Milberg, and Law son 1991). Greater transferability
acrossproduct settings might also suggest greater
transferabilityfrom a cause to another entity, as follows:Py.
Abstract associations are more likely tobe transferred froma cause
to a brand than concrete associations are.
Establishing Brand CredibilityIn part by virtue of the imagery
they create, CSM programscan also generate various types of
judgments and feelingsfrom consumers that may also become linked to
the brand.For example, customers may form judgments that
transcendmore specific brand quality concerns to consider
broaderissues related to the company or organization that makes
theproduct or provides the service associated with the brand(Brown
1998; Brown and Dacin 1997; Menon and Menon1997; Schumann,
Hathcote, and West 1991). Brand credi-bility refers to the extent
to which the brand as a whole isperceived as credible in terms of
three dimensions (Kellerand Aaker 1992): expertise (e.g., being
competent and inno-vative and being a market leader),
trustworthiness (e.g.,being dependable and keeping customer
interests in mind),and likability (e.g., being fun, interesting,
and worth spend-ing time with). More important, CSM could affect
all threeconsiderations, as consumers may perceive a firm willing
toinvest in CSM as caring more about customers and as
moredependable, at least in a broad sense, as well as likable
for"doing the right things."
If the cause bears some relation to the line of business forthe
firm or the nature of its products, the firm may seem
more well-rounded and thus more expert. For example, arecent
campaign by Procter & Gamble (P&G) linked two oits brands
(Always and Tampax) to women's health issuesSpecific associations
may have resulted in terms of P& G athe brand that cares about
women's issues. In that senseCSM could help consumers link P&G
and its specificbrands (Always and Tampax) to wom en's health.
Moreoverconsumers might transfer some of the positive feelings
theyhave in regard to the importance of women's health issueto
their attitude about P&G as a corporation or to the specific
brands. Analogous to the Liz Claiborne example, consumers may
believe that P&G is a caring company that supports good causes.
Furthermore, true credibility could beenhanced for the P&G
brands if more direct effects areobserved.The expertise of P&G
could be enhanced if consumerperceive synergies between P&G's
support of health-relatedresearch and the firm's ability to develop
innovative newproducts. Of the dimensions mentioned previously,
likability or positive "h alo" effects are probably the most likely
tobe transferred from CSM programs. Yet firms should
nounderestimate the ability of CSM programs to build
bothtrustworthiness and expertise. In general, CSM programmay be
especially good at creating credibility because thenonprofit
organization may be perceived as unbiased and aa highly credible
source. This may affect how firms communicate their involvement
with the CSM program.Evoking Brand FeelingsIn terms of brand
feelings (Kahle, Poulos, and Sukhdia1988), two categories of
feelings that are particularly applicable to CS M are (I) social
approval and (2) self-respect. Inother words, CSM may help
consumers justify their selfworth to others or themselves. These
two types of feelingare extremely different in terms of how they
are created andin their implications, as follows.Social
ApprovalSocial approval is when the brand results inconsumers
having positive feelings about the reactions of othersthat iswhen
consumers believe others look favorably on theiappearance,
behavior, and so on. This approval may be aresult of others' direct
acknowledgment of the consumeusing the brand or ma y be less overt
and a result of attribution of the product itself to consumers. To
the extent thaconsumers believe that CSM programs create favorable
useimagery for the brand, social approval feelings may alsoemerge.
To accentuate these types of feelings, CSM programs may need to
provide consumers with external symbols to explicitly "advertise"
or signal their affiliation toothersfor example, bumper stickers,
ribbons, buttons, tshirts, and so on. The importance of linking the
brand toCSM partners that enhance social approval is heightened
fobrands that have difficulty creating these types of feelingsFor
example, products whose use is not visible are hampered in this
respect (Graeff 1996).
P4: Enhanced levels of feelings of social approval will be
created when CSM programs provide consumers with externasymbols
toexplicitly advertise or signal their affiliation toothers.
-
7/28/2019 6569487.pdf
4/13
Journal of Public Policy & M arketing 8
tSelf-RespectSelf-respect occurs when the brand makes consumers
feelbetter about themselves, for example, when consumers feela
sense of pride, accomplishment, or fulfillment. To accen-tuate
these types of feelings, CSM programs can give peo-ple the notion
that they are doing the right thing and thatthey should feel good
about themselves for having done so.External symbols in this case
may not be as important as thecreation of "moments of internal
reflection" during whichconsumers are able to experience these
types of feelings.Communications that reinforce the positive
outcomes asso-ciated with the cause programand the way
consumerinvolvement contributed to that successcould help
triggerthese types of experiences. To highlight the consumer
con-tribution, it may be necessary to recommend certain actionsor
outcomes as targets for consumers (e.g., have consumersdonate a
certain percentage of their income or a designatedamount).
P5: Enhanced levels of feelings of self-respect will be
createdwhen CSM programs provide consumers with moments ofinternal
retlection that reinforce the positive outcomes asso-ciated with
the cause program and the way their involvementcontributed to that
success.As an example of a CSM program that can evoke feel-ings,
consider the following:British Airways: Change for Good. British
Airways partneredwith UNICEF and developed a cause marketing
campaigncalled Change for Good, where travelers on British
Airwaysflights are encouraged to donate leftover foreign currency
fromtheir travels. Since coins in particular are difficult to
exchangeat banks and currency exchanges, the program targets this
loosechange. The scheme is simple: Passengers deposit their
surpluscurrency in envelopes provided by British Airways, which
col-lects the deposits and donates them directly to UNICEF.
BritishAirways advertises its program during an in-tlight video, on
thebacks of seat cards, and with in-tlight announcements.
Thecompany also developed a television advertisement that fea-tured
a child thanking British Airways for its contribution toUNICEF
works. Since Change for Cood can be directly targetedto passengers
and can produce immediate results, it does notrequire extensive
advertising or promotion and therefore is ahighly cost-efficient
cause marketing campaign. (Pringle andThompson 1999, p. 132)
Consumers on Br i t ish Airways f l ights who donate change(or
bills) may immediately feel social approval and self-respect f rom
the sur rounding passengers . I f Br i t ish Airwaysand UNICEF
provided a pin to those contr ibut ing, perhapsthese feel ings may
be fur ther enhanced and more pos i t ivea t t i tudes deve loped
towar d bo th Br i t i sh Ai r ways andU N I C E F .Creating a
Sense of Brand CommunityThe judgments and feelings engendered by a
CSM programcould influence the nature of the relationship
consumershave with the brand. For example, brands can take
onbroader meaning to the customer in terms of a sense of com-munity
that CSM programs could affect. Identification witha brand
community can reflect an important social phenom-enon whereby
customers feel a kinship or affiliation withother people who are
associated with the brand. These con-
nections may involve fellow brand users or customers or,instead,
employees or representatives of the company.According to Kraft
Foods chief executive officer andpresident Robert Eckert,
"Consumers are yearning to con-nect to people and things that will
give meaning to theirlives" (Stark 1999, p. 8). Muniz and O'Guinn
(2000) havedefined "brand communities" as specialized,
nongeographi-cally bound communities, based on a structured set of
socialrelationships among users of a brand. They note that,
simi-lar to other communities, a brand community is marked by(1) a
shared consciousness, (2) rituals and traditions, and (3)a sense of
moral responsibility. A CSM program with awell-chosen cause can
serve as a rallying point for brandusers and a means for them to
connect to or share experi-ences with other consumers or employees
of the companyitself.
One area where comm unities of like-minded users exist isonline.
Marketers may be able to tap into the many close-knit online groups
that have been created around cause-related issues (e.g., medical
concerns such as Alzheimer'sdisease, cancer, autism, and so forth).
In some cases, thebrand might even serve as the focal point or ally
for theseonline efforts. As a result of these community-building
ini-tiatives, the brand may be perceived in a more positive
light.Involvement in a brand community inherently involvesactive
engagement with the brand. Yet consumers can beengaged with a brand
without being members of a brandcommunity.Eliciting Brand
EngagementPerhaps the strongest affirmation of brand loyalty is
whencustomers are willing to invest time, energy, money, orother
resources into the brand beyond those expended dur-ing purchase or
consumption of the brand. For example,customers may choose to join
a club centered on a brand,receive updates and exchange
correspondence with otherbrand users or formal or informal
representatives of thebrand itself, visit brand-related Web sites,
participate in chatrooms, and so on. Participating in a
cause-related activity aspart of a CSM program for a brand is
certainly one means ofeliciting active engagement. As part of any
of these activi-ties, customers themselves may become brand
evangelistsand ambassadors and help communicate about the brand
andstrengthen the brand ties of others. A CSM program of"strategic
volunteerism," whereby corporate personnel vol-unteer their time to
help administer the nonprofit program,could be used to engage
consumers actively with both thecause and the brand. In the
following Habitat for Humanityexample. Whirlpool reaps the benefits
of volunteers beingexposed to its product while they are engaged
with thecause.
Whirlpool Corp.: Habitat for Humanity. The people who makeand
sell Whirlpool appliances have become the first
cornerstonecontributors in Habitat for Humanity's "More Than
Houses:Rebuilding Our Communities" campaign. Whirlpool Corp.
haspledged to provide new stoves and refrigerators for every
Habi-tat house built in the United States and Canada through the
endof the campaign. Representing $25 million in product value, itis
the largest one-time commitment made by a corporate partnerin
Habitat history. (Habitat for Humanity International 2001)
-
7/28/2019 6569487.pdf
5/13
82 Brand Equity and Corporate Societal MarketingSummaryCorporate
societal marketing programs can help build brandequity in multiple
ways, as outlined previously. To illustratethe range of effects
potentially created by CSM programs,consider BMW's "The Drive for
the Cure" test drive pro-gram, which donates $1 for every test mile
driven to theSusan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation to
fundresearch. Through this program, BMW is able to targetwomen, who
have not traditionally been a key market seg-ment for BMW (Pringle
and Thompson 1999), increasingtheir brand awareness. In terms of
brand image, the experi-ence of driving the car can affect
participants' performance-related associations. Moreover, the
program can influencethe types of imagery attached to BMW with
regard to theperceived user profiles and brand personality of
BMWamong women. As Pringle and Thompson (1999, p. 127)note, "Harder
to quantify, but equally important, is the'softer' image that will
have been added to the BMW brandpersonality and the link in
people's minds between whatmight have previously been seen as a
hard or masculineimage and something as personal as breast cancer
with itsmore relevant appeal to women." One aspect of
theimagery-related effects is the potential positive residualimpact
for consumers who become aware of the programwithout ever
participating in a test drive. Finally, the Drivefor the Cure
program could improve credibility as well associal approval and/or
self-respect. In part because of thesebrand equity effects, BMW
reportedly attributed 400 newsales directly to the CSM program
(Pringle and Thompson1999).
With, these various m eans by which CSM could affectbrand equity
as a backdrop, we consider issues regarding (1)how CSM programs
have their effects, (2) which cause tochoose, and (3) how CSM
programs should be branded.How Do CSM Program s Have
TheirEffects?The prior section outlined six effects CSM programs
mayhave on brand equity. In this section, we consider the
factorsthat affect whether CSM programs realize that
potentialinother words, the means by which CSM programs have
theireffects. The recognition and awareness a brand receivesfrom a
CSM program, as noted previously, is largely a func-tion of the
amount and nature of brand exposure involved.However, in terms of
higher-order effects, the ability of aCSM program to create a sense
of community and elicitbrand engagement will be a function of the
kind of associa-tions, judgm ents, and feelings engendered by the
program.Accordingly, in this section, we consider the following
twomain types of associations and responses that can be
trans-ferred from the cause: (1) specific performance and
imageryassociations linked to the cause and (2) overall judgme nts
ofand feelings engendered by the cause.
The two basic questions involving transferring meaningor
responses from a cause are (1) What do consumers knowabout the
cause? and (2) Does any of this knowledge affectwhat they think
about the brand when it becomes linked orassociated in some fashion
with the cause? We propose athree-factor hierarchy to describe the
nature of the transferprocess that occurs as a result of a CSM
program. The basic
assumption is that the cause, similar to the brand itself, canbe
thought of in terms of what exists in the minds of consumersthat
is, in terms of cause-related thoughts, feelingsimages,
experiences, perceptions, beliefs, opinions, and soforth. The
question then becom es how these various types oassociations and
responses affect the consumer mind-set oknowledge for the brand
itself.Specifically, three factors are particularly important
inpredicting the extent of leverage that might result from linking
the brand to a cause through a CSM program in somemanner:1.
Awareness and knowledge of the cause: If consumers have
nfamiliarity with or knowledge of the cause, then there is nothing
that can be transferred. Ideally, consumers would beaware of the
cause; hold some strong, favorable, and uniqueassociations toward
the cause; and have positive judgmentsand feelings about the
cause.2. Relevance and meaningfulness of the cause's knowledgeGiven
that the cause has some potentially positive associations,
judgments, and/or feelings, to what extent is thisknowledge deemed
relevant and meaningful for the brand?
The meaningfulness of this knowledge may vary dependinon the
brand and product context. For consumers, some associations,
judgments, or feelings may seem relevant to anvaluable for the
brand, whereas other knowledge may seem tohave little connection.3.
Transferability of the cause's knowledge: Assuming thasome
potentially useful and meaningful associations, judgments, or
feelings exist for the cause and could be transferredto the brand,
to what extent will this knowledge becomelinked to brand? Thus, a
key issue is the extent to which associations will become strong,
favorable, and unique and judgments and feelings will be considered
positive in the contexof the brand.Each of these factors is built
on th e successful completion
of th e preceding factor. Forexample, there must be awareness
before relevance and meaningfulness can be builtAccording to this
model, to increase the brand-buildingimpact of a C S M program,
marketers should maximize thecontribution of each of th e three
factors in the C S M brandleverage model. In the remainder of this
section, we consider issues affecting these three factors.Awareness
and Knowledge of the CauseThis factor involves the potential pool
of associationsresponses, and so forth that may be elicited by the
CSM program by virtue of the choice of the cause. When
consideringthe potential pool of associations that may be
transferredthrough a CSM program. Firms need to evaluate the
existingassociations attached to a particular cause (e.g., breast
can-cer research) as well as nonprofit organizations that mightbe
affiliated with the cause (e.g., Susan G. Komen BreastCancer
Foundation) if they are partnering with an existingnonprofit. When
firms try to transfer specific associationsfrom a cause, it is
important to examine the strength andfavorableness of the current
associations held by consumersA more memorable cause may make it
easier to link thecause to a brand.
In general, the favorability of the associations coupledwith a
cause will be based on the perceived benefits associ-ated with the
cause and, as a result, are inextricably drivenby the links between
consumers' personal values and the
-
7/28/2019 6569487.pdf
6/13
Journal of Public Policy & M arketing 83values espoused by
the cause. Critically analyzing the per-ceived favorability of a
cause may be especially importantfor a firm that is creating a
self-branded cause, as is dis-cussed further subsequently.Relevance
and Meaningfulness of the CauseTheoretically, any association may
be inferred from a causeto the brand. In general, judgme nts or
feelings may be morelikely to transfer from the cause than are more
specific asso-ciations. Many specific associations are likely to be
per-ceived as irrelevant or too strongly linked to the
originalcause to transfer to the brand. That is, the process by
whichassociations from a cause affect brand knowledge willdepend
largely on the strength of the linkage or connectionin consumers'
minds between the brand and the cause.
Pg: The more consumers perceive fit or similarity of the cause
tothe brand, the more likely consumers will infer similar
asso-ciations to the brand.The relevance of a cause will certainly
vary by con-sumers. One possible way to improve relevance is by
emphasizing local aspects of the cause. Consumers may bemore
likely to notice the impact of a cause if they can seethe impact in
their local community. Thus, relevance shouldbe enhanced when
consumers believe that the nonprofitorganization is not only doing
good things in general butalso doing good things in "my community."
Communitymay be defined by any connection that ties people
together.In general, relevance will be enhanced if the CSM
programis believed to have a more personal impact on the target
con-sumer. For national brands, this realization may entail
moregrassroots CSM activity at the local level.P7: Consumers will
have greater levels of relevance for a brandwhen the CSM program
partner has a higher perceived per-sonal impact.
Transferability from the CauseOne way to enhance the level of
transfer from a cause isthrough the rewards given to those who
participate in thecause. The more ways consumers perceive the brand
and thenonprofit organization as linked together, the more
opportu-nities there are for transfer of associations from the
non-profit to the brand. In addition, rewards that happen on
arecurring basis should be more likely to improve the consis-tency
of consumers' contact with the cause. Last, the favor-ability of
the associations linked to a cause may be affectedby the quality of
the reward materials/items. For example,imagine a scenario in which
a nonprofit organization sendsout high-quality plaques to
contributors. If the plaque iden-tifies the firm, the nonprofit,
and the cause, then these asso-ciations will be reinforced.
Furthermore, if the plaque is putup in either the home or office of
the contributor, every timethe contributors glance at the plaque
they will be remindedof their involvement and the relationship
between the firmand the cause.
Pg: The more opportunities consumers have to experience
con-nections between the cause and the brand, the stronger willbe
the associations between the cause and the brand.Finally,
"secondary associations" derived from a CSMprogram may be most
likely to affect evaluations of a new
product, in general, when consum ers lack either the motiva-tion
or the ab ility to judge more product-related co ncerns. Inother
words, when consumers either do not care much aboutchoosing a
particular brand or do not believe that they pos-sess the knowledge
to choose the appropriate brand, theymay be more likely to make
brand decisions on the basis ofsuch secondary as sociatio ns as an
affiliation with a caus e.Which Cause to Choose?From a branding
perspective, there are two distinct paths tochoosing a cause:
commonality versus complementarity. Inother words, the choice of a
cause revolves largely aroundwhether to reinforce existing brand
image and equity oraugment and add on to that image and
equity.CommonalityThe commonality strategy involves selecting a
cause thatshares similar associations and responses with the
brand(Sen and Bhattacharya 2001). The rationale is that linkingthe
brand with the cause will trigger consumers to enhanceor bolster
their existing brand associations. For example,Reebok sponsored a
"Human Rights Now! Tour" withAmnesty International in 1988. Reebok
believed thatAmnesty International's promotion of individual
rights,freedom of expression, and freedom over personal
identityresonated with what the firm wanted the Reebok brand
tostand for in the marketplace. Therefore, the goal of the
spon-sorship was to bolster existing or intended associations
thatconsumers had about Reebok in terms of "personal expres-sion"
and "freedom."
Many people have cited the degree of affinity between thecause
and company as a key component of an effectiveCSM program. In the
brand extension literature, a key crite-rion used to explain the
success of extensions has been thefit between a new extension
product and the original brand(Broniarczyk and Alba 1994; Keller
and Aaker 1992; Park,Milbe rg, and Lawson 1991). As with brand
exten sions , fitshould be an important mediating factor that
affects thedegree of transfer to the brand of meaning about
orresponses toward the cause. If there is a high degree of fit,
itmay even appear as if the company is lending its expertiseto the
nonprofit (Barone, M iyazaki, and Taylor 2000 ). Also,as is the
case with brand extensions, fit may be based on avariety of
different considerations or types of associations.
P9: Partnering with causes with a high degree of fit will
enhancecommonality and strengthen existing brand
knowledge.ComplementarityOne limitation associated with the
commonality strategymay be the level of differentiation that could
be developed .By definition, if a corporate or product brand is
partneredwith a nonprofit cause that shares much of the same
mean-ing and elicits similar judgments and feelings, then there
isless opportunity for the creation of unique associations. If
afirm is trying to create a perceived differential advan tagewhere
none currently exists, then a CSM strategy based oncomplementarity
may be appropriate, whereby the firmattempts to augment existing
brand knowledge by partner-ing with a nonprofit. In effect, the
firm is attempting toleverage the affiliation with the nonprofit to
enhan ce the
-
7/28/2019 6569487.pdf
7/13
84 Brand Equity and Corporate Societal Marketingmeaning
associated with the brand in the minds of con-sumers. As noted
previously, CSM can be an especially use-ful way to create some
valuable intangible imagery associa-tions and feelings that may
otherwise be difficult to create.Examples of firms using the
complementarity strategy inpartnering with nonprofits are
comparatively less frequent.As one example, Harley-Davidson has
been a long-timesupporter of the Muscular Dystrophy Association. A
lthoughthis association should soften the image that
Harley-Davidson has developed over the years through its
relation-ship with the "Hells Angels," the company does not tout
itssupport (Meyer 1999). Along these lines, one goal of thecomplem
entarity approach may be to mitigate the effects ofcriticism and/or
problematic corporate behavior(Drumwright and Murphy 2001). Alcohol
companies havespent considerable funds promoting the "safe" use of
theirproducts. For example, Anheuser-Busch (2001) commentson its
Web site, "With programs under way in almost everycommunity across
the United States to fight alcohol abuse,drunk driving, and
underage drinking, Anheuser-Busch andits nationwide team of
independently owned wholesale dis-tributors lead the industry in
promoting alcohol awarenessand education."
The complementarity approach may be the preferredmeth od for
creatin g sustainable differentiation if specificassociations
derived from the CSM program are more diffi-cult to copy. Indeed,
prior research drawing on organiza-tional identification theory has
shown that participation insimilar organizations is negatively
related to identificationwith the focal organization (Bhattacharya,
Rao, and Glynn1995). The implication from a competitive standpoint
is thebreath of benefits that may be derived from a CSM program.Not
only are positive associations transferred to the brand,but also
the probability of one of the competitors transfer-ring similar
associations at the same time is lessened (Bhat-tacharya, Rao, and
Glynn 1995).There are several challenges, how ever, in using CSM
pro-grams for brand differentiation. First, because the brand
ismoving into "new territory," it may lack credibility, andconsum
ers m ay find it difficult to "buy into" the association.Alcohol
and tobacco manufacturers have faced this problemas they partner
with causes that were founded to mitigate thenegative components of
their respective consumption. Thissuspicion or lack of belief may
be especially evident if theassociations linked to the cause are in
some sense negativelycorrelated with existing brand associations.
Second, manypopular causes already have several corporate
sponsors.Reportedly, more than 300 companies currently
associatethemselves with breast cancer as a cause in some way. As
aconsequence, the brand may find itself "lost in the shuffle"and
overlooked. With weak identification to the cause, theeffects of
the CSM program may be diluted.Finally, as more and more firms
adopt CSM approaches,the opportunities for creating perceived
differential advan-tages should naturally lessen. Indeed, CSM
programs mayultimately be necessary just to create "points of
parity" w ithconsumers to match or negate the marketing efforts of
otherfirms. For example, P&G's recent focus on women's
issuescould be interpreted in part as a means of refuting a
currentpotential point of difference held by Avon. Similarly,BMW's
support of the Susan G. Komen Breast CancerFoundation may be
perceived as an attempt to diminish the
differential advantage that Ford had acquired, by supporting(and
linking the BMW brand with) the same foundation.Pio: Partnering
with cau ses with a low deg ree of fit (a) canenhance
differentiation and complementarity more thanpartnering with causes
with a high degree of fit and (b) wilbe more difficult than
partnering with causes with a highdegree of fit.
How Should CSM Activities BeBranded?There are three distinct
options for branding a newlylaunched CSM program. First, a firm
could create anentirely new cause program that is then branded in
somefashion with either the corporate name or the name of one othe
product brands. Second, the corporate or product brandscould be
linked directly with an existing cause-related organization. Third,
a firm could link to an existing cause-relatedorganization but
develop a branded CSM program to link toit. Each of these three
types of CSM program options isdepicted subsequently and an example
of each form isdescribed, followed by an analysis of factors that
affecwhich alternative to employ.CSM Branding AlternativesCreate
Own Self-Branded CauseIn this form of CSM program, the firm takes
ownership of acause and develops an entirely new organization to
delivebenefits associated with the cause. The newly created
selfbranded cause could be branded with the parent brand or
anindividual product brand. The Ronald McDonald HouseCharities and
the Avon Breast Cancer Crusade are classicexamples of branded cause
entities:
Ronald McDonald House Charities. Ronald McDonald HousCharities
provides comfort and care to children and their families by
supporting Ronald McDonald Houses in communitiearound the world and
by making gran ts to other not-for-profiorganizations whose
programs help children in need. RonaldMcDonald House Charities has
a network of over 174 locacharities serving in 32 countries.
McDonald's Corporation icommitted to giving something back to the
community by supporting [Ronald McDonald House Charities]
initiatives(McDonald's 2001)The Avon Breast Cancer Crusade. Founded
in 1993, the AvonBreast Cancer Crusade is a U.S. initiative of Avon
Products IncIts mission has been to provide women, particularly
those whoare medically underserved, with direct access to breast
canceeducation and early detection screening services: m ammog
ramand clinical breast exams. In the U.S., Avon is the largest
corporate supporter of the breast cancer cause, with some $ 100
milion generated since 1993. The Crusad e raises funds to
accomplish this mission in two ways: through the sale of
speciaCrusade fundraising (pink ribbon) products by Avon's
nearly500,000 independent sales representatives and through thAvon
Breast Cancer 3-days, a series of three-day, 60-milfundraising
walks. (Avon Company 2001)
Cobranded: Link to E xisting CauseIn this form of CSM program,
the firm would partner withan existing cause. Typically, the
identification of the brandaffiliation with the cause is only in
the form of designatio n
-
7/28/2019 6569487.pdf
8/13
-
7/28/2019 6569487.pdf
9/13
-
7/28/2019 6569487.pdf
10/13
Journal of Public Policy & Marketing 87practice. If all the
talk about the commoditization of prod-ucts is believed, then
perhaps differentiation through CSMprograms plays an important role
in the future developmentof brands. Relatedly, an additional area
that needs to becarefully investigated is the effects of CSM
programs onbrand imagery and feelings, especially in terms of how
theyare transferred from the cause to the brand. Many
brandsstruggle to create such knowledge among their consumers,and
the ability of CSM programs to make progress in thisdirection would
be important.Although the research propositions highlight
severalCSM concerns, we could not address other CSM issues inthis
article. In the remainder of this section, we identify
fourpotentially worthwhile directions for further
research.Understanding the Return on Investment for CSMPrograms and
Alternative Branding StrategiesThere are several important research
issues involved in thechoice of a CSM branding strategy. How does
the brandingstrategy affect the three factors involved in the CSM
brandhierarchy model? In other words, how does the choice of
acobranded, self-branded, or jointly branded CSM programaffect the
kind of associations and beliefs that can becomelinked to the
brand? For example, is it the case that self-branded or perhaps
even jointly branded programs are betterable to create a sense of
community and engagement withconsumers but may not have as much
immediate potential interms of credibility?Implicit in the question
of choosing a CSM brandingstrategy is the investment required and
therefore the returnon investment that can be expected from a CSM
program.The question is whether many of the benefits and
differentmeans by which CSM programs can affect brand equity canbe
realized with smaller budgets. Can small expenditures onCSM yield
disproportionate financial gains or increases inbrand equity? How
does that depend on the branding strat-egy involved? The
theoretical mechanisms and possiblerange of effects identified
previously should help guidemeasurement efforts in tracking the
impact of CSMprograms.In general, trying to quantify the effects of
CSM pro-grams can be done through traditional measurement con-texts
(e.g., as BMW did when trying to assess the number ofnew
automobiles that was sold directly because of the Drivefor the Cure
program) and through unconventional m ethods.Cravens and Guilding
(1999) discuss the notion of formalbrand valuations as an aid to
decision making for marketingmanagers. These brand valuations could
be used to estimatethe potential effects of a CSM program. In
addition, thenotion of capturing and measuring customer equity has
beenused as a vehicle to measure the effects of corporate
CSMprograms (Rust, ZeithamI, and Lemon 2001).Understanding How to
Communicate CSMProgramsA related issue is how the CSM program
expendituresshould be allocated (Biehal and Sheinin 1998).
Shouldexpenditures go primarily to the nonprofit cause itself,
topromoting the firm's connection with that cause, or to vari-ous
closely related matters (e.g., informing consumers of the
firm's investment in the cause)? Some type of communica-tion
expenditures is necessary, regardless of the brandingstrategy, if
nothing else to make consumers aware of theconnection from the
brand to the cause. Yet many firms tra-ditionally have not
publicized their involvements in charita-ble concerns. As this type
of involvement takes on morestrategic objectives, some level of
communication will beneeded. If CSM partners are perceived as more
trustworthy,perhaps communication from the nonprofit
organizationwill be a more effective means to publicizing the CSM
rela-tionship. Overcommunicating CSM programs, however,could lead
to creation of ill will through charges of exploita-tion (Blazing
and Bloom 1999; Webb and Mohr 1998).Some firms have been criticized
for spending more moneyadvertising their cause programs than
supporting the causeitself.
It would be helpful if firms had a better understanding ofthe
key drivers of appropriateness from a consumer per-spective. Along
those lines, understanding the effects of dif-ferent communication
objectivesfocusing on the causeitself, the money being given to the
cause by the firm, themoney being raised (from other sources) for
the cause, orthe connection between the firm and the causeis
crucial.Understanding CSM Programs and LastingCompetitive
AdvantagesOne critical question is. Can CSM programs create
sustain-able competitive advantages for firms? Some insight mightbe
gleaned from examining the pioneering advantage litera-ture.
Although many scholars have debated the existence ofa pioneering
advantage for new product introductions, a crit-ical distinction
arose surrounding the definition of a pioneer.It appears that being
first was simply not enough. To gain a"pioneering advantage," firms
needed to have massive trialin the marketplace (Golder and Tellis
1993). Analogously,for firms to truly gain lasting brand-based
advantagesthrough CSM relationships, they may need massive
corpo-rate commitment and considerable consumer awareness.
Forexample, was Ford able to maintain some advantage by sup-porting
the Komen Foundation first?A related long-term issue of CSM
programs is. Once afirm publicly proclaims its commitment to a
cause, can itever "win" if the problems to be remedied by the cause
arenever solved? How much progress must be made beforethere is
brand equity impact? Will there inevitably be a lossof image or
tarnished reputation if the firm drops the causeor switches to
another cause? What is an appropriate "exitstrategy" from a cause?
All these issues may depend on thenature of the branding strategy
adopted and which of the sixmeans to build brand equity are
involved with the causeprogram.Understanding the Impact on
NonprofitsFrom the perspective of the causes or nonprofit
organiza-tions themselves, there seem to be mostly benefits to
becom-ing part of a CSM marketing program with a firm. More-over,
even if firms begin to move more in the direction ofself-branding
causes, the resulting heightened awareness ofthe cause could lead
to increased levels of support. Cobrand-ing with corporate
sponsors, however, offers several advan-
-
7/28/2019 6569487.pdf
11/13
88 Brand Equity and Corporate Societal M arketingtages for
nonprofits. First and foremost, corporations canprovide much-needed
resources in both funds and expertise.Although funding is rather
straightforward, business skillsmay be equally valuable to some
nonprofits. For example,one of the key skills that many firms are
attempting toenhance is customer relationship management. These
skillswill be of value to existing nonprofits. Second,
partneringwith firms may enable nonprofits to increase the
affiliationand level of engagement they have with supporters.
Thiscould happen through increased aw areness and through pro-grams
such as strategic volunteerism, as noted previously.
ReferencesAaker, David A. and Erich Joachimsthaler (2000), Brand
Leader-ship. New Y ork: The Free Press.Aaker, Jennifer L. (1997),
"Dimensions of Brand Personality,"Journal of Marketing Research, 34
(August), 347-57.
(1999), "The Malleable Self: The Role of Self-Expressionin
Persuasion," Journal of Marketing Research, 36 (February),45- 57
.Andreasen, Alan R. and M inette E. Drumwright (2001) "Alliancesand
Ethics in Social Marketing," in Ethical Issues in Social
Mar-keting, Alan K. Andreasen, ed. Washington, DC:
GeorgetownUniversity Press, 95-124.
Anheuser-Busch Publications (2001), Making Friends Making
ADifference (accessed December 13), [available at
http://www.anheuser-busch.com/publications/default.htm].Avon
Company (2001), Avon Breast Cancer Crusade (accessedDecember 13),
[available at http://www.avoncompany.com/women/avoncrusade/]
.Barieh, Howard and Philip Kotler (1991), "A Framework for
Mar-keting Image Management," Sloan Management Review, 32
(2),94-104.Barone, Michael J., Anthony D. Miyazaki, and Kimberly A.
Tay-lor (2000), 'Th e Influence of Cause-Related M arketing on
Con-sumer Choice: Does One Good Turn Deserve Another?" Jour-nal of
the Academy of M arketing Science, 28 (2), 248-62 .Bhattacharya,
C.B., Hayagreeva Rao, and Mary Ann Glynn(1995), "Understanding the
Bond of Identification: An Investi-gation of Its Correlates Am ong
Art Museum M embers," Journalof Marketing, 59 (October) , 46-5
7.Biehal, Gabriel J. and Daniel A. Sheinin (1998), "Managing
theBrand in a Corporate Advertising Environment: A Decision-Making
Framework for Brand Managers," Journal of A dvertis-ing, 21 {2),
99-\\0.Blazing, Jennifer and Paul N. Bloom (1999), "How
PerceptionsAbout the Purity of Sponsor Motives Affect the
Persuasivenessof Socially-Oriented Communications," working paper.
Depart-ment of Marketing, University of North Carolina at Chapel
Hill.Broniarczyk, Susan M. and Joseph W. Alba (1994), 'The
Impor-tance of the Brand in Brand Extension," Journal of
MarketingResearch, 31 (May), 214-2 8.Brown, Tom J. (1998),
"Corporate Associations in Marketing:Antecedents and Consequences,"
Corporate Reputation Review,I (3) , 215-33.
and Peter A. Dacin (1997), "The Company and the Prod-uct:
Corporate A ssociations and Consumer Product R esponses,"Journal of
Marketing, 61 (January), 68-84.
Cone Inc. (1999), Cone/Roper Cause-Related Trends ReportBoston:
Cone Inc.Cravens, Karen S. and Chris Guilding (1999), "Strategic
BrandValuation: A Cross-Functional Perspective," Business
Horizons42 (4), 53-6 2.Dawar, Niraj and Madan M. Piliutla (2000),
"Impact of ProductHarm Crises on Brand Equity: The Moderating Role
of Consumer Expectations," Journal of Marketing Research, 37
(May)215-26.Drumwright, M inette (1996), "Company Advertising with
a SociaDimension: the Role of Noneconomic C riteria," Journal of
Marketing, 60 (October), 71-8 7.
and Patrick E. Murphy (2001), "Corporate Societal Marketing," in
Handbook of Marketing and Society, Paul N. Bloomand Gregory T.
Gundlach, eds. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications,
162-83.Farquhar, Peter H. (1989), "Managing Brand Equity,"
MarketingResearch, I (September), 24-33.File, Karen Mary and Russ
Alan Prince (1998), "Cause RelatedMarketing and Corporate
Philanthropy in the Privately Held
e," Journal of Business Ethics, 17, 1529-39.Fournier, Susan
(1998), "Consumers and Their Brands: Developing Relationship Theory
in Consumer Research," Journal oConsumer Research, 24 (3), 343-7
3.Golder, Peter N. and Gerard J. Tellis (1993) "Pioneer
AdvantageMarketing Logic or Marketing Legend?" Journal of
MarketingResearch, 30 (February), 158-70.Graeff, Timothy R. (1996),
"Image Congruence Effects on ProducEvaluations: The Role of
Self-Monitoring and Public/PrivateConsumption," Psychology &
Marketing, 13 (5), 481-99.Habitat for Humanity International
(2001), Corporate Partners(accessed December 13), [available at
http://www.habitat.orgCP/featured.html].Johnson, Michael D. (1984),
"Consumer Choice Strategies foComparing Noncomparable
Alternatives," Journal of ConsumeResearch, 11 (December),
741-53.Kahle, Lynn R., Basil Poulos, and Ajay Sukhdial (1988),
"Changesin Social Values in the United States During the Past
Decade,"Journal of Advertising Research, 28 (February/March), 35 -
41 .Keller, Kevin Lane (1993), "Conceptualizing, Measuring,
andManaging Customer-Based Brand Equity," Journal of Marketing, 57
(January), 1-22.
(1998), Strategic Brand Management. Upper SaddleRiver, NJ:
Prentice Hall.(2001), "Building Customer-Based Brand Equity: A
Blueprint for Creating Strong Brands," Marketing Management, 10
(July/August), 15-19.and David A. Aaker (1992), "The Effects of
SequentialIntroduction of Brand Extensions," Journal of
MarketingResearch, 29 (February), 35-50.
Komen Foundation (2001), Our Sponsors (accessed Decembe13),
[available at
http://www.komen.org/sponsorsamerican_airlines.asp].Lichtenstein,
Donald R., Minette E. Drumw right, and Bridgette MBraig (2000),
"Perceptions of Corporate Giving on CustomerCorporation
Identification: Beneficial Effects for CustomerCorporation, and
Nonprofit," working paper. College of Business Administration,
University of Colorado, Boulder.
-
7/28/2019 6569487.pdf
12/13
Journal of Public Policy & Marketing 89McDonald's
Corporation (2001), Corporate: Social ResponsibilityRMHC (accessed
December 13), [available at
http://www.mcdonalds.com/corporate/social/rmhc/index.html].Menon,
Ajay and Anil Menon (1997), "Enviropreneurial Market-ing Strategy;
The Emergence of Corporate Environmentalism asMarket Strategy,"
Journal of Marketing, 61 (January), 51-^7.Meyer, H arvey (1999 ),
"When the Cause Is Just," Journal of Busi-ness Strategy, 20
(November/December), 27- 31 .Muniz, Albert M., Jr., and Thomas C.
O'Guinn (2000), "BrandCommunity," Journal of Consumer Research, 27
(March),412-32.Muscular Dystrophy Association (2001), Ways to Help
MDA:Sponsorship (accessed December 13), [available at
http://www.mdausa.org/help/sponsor.html].Park, C. Whan, Sandra
Milberg, and Robert Lawson (1991), "Eval-uation of Brand
Extensions: The Role of Product Feature Simi-larity and Brand
Concept Consistency," Journal of ConsumerResearch, 18 (September),
185-93 .Pringle, Hamish and Marjorie Thompson (1999), Brand
Spirit.West Sussex, England: John Wiley & Sons.Rust, Roland,
Valarie ZeithamI, and Katherine Lemon (2001),
"Quantifying the Impact of Corporate Ethics on CustomerEquity,"
presentation at Marketing Science Institute Confer-ence: Marketing,
Corporate Social Initiatives and the BottomLine, Chapel Hill, NC
(March 14-16).Schumann, David W., Jan M. Hathcote, and Susan West
(1991),"Corporate Advertising in America: A Review of Published
Studies on Use, Measurement, and Effectiveness," Journal
ofAdvertising, 20 (September), 36-56.Sen, Sankar and C.B.
Bhattacharya (2001), "Does Doing GoodAlways Lead to Doing Better?
Consumer Reactions to Corpo-rate Social Responsibility," Journal of
Marketing Research, 38(May), 2 2 5 ^ 3 .Share Our Strength (2001),
Charge Against Hunger (accessedDecember 13), [available at
http://www.strength.org/meet/
partnerships/charge/charge.htm].Smith, Warren and M atthew
Higgins (2000), "Cause-Related Mar-keting: Ethics and Ecstatic,"
Business and Society, 39 (3),304-22.Stark, Myra (1999), "Brand Aid:
Cause Effective," Brandweek, 40(February 22), 20-22.Varadarajan, P.
Rajan and Anil Menon (1988), "Cause-RelatedMarketing: A Coalignment
of M arketing Strategy and C orporatePhilanthropy," Journal of
Marketing, 52 (July), 58-74 .Webb , Deborah J. and Lois A. Mohr
(1998), "A Typology of C on-sumer Responses to Cause-Related M
arketing: From Skeptics toSocially C oncerned," Journal of Public
Po licy & Marketing, 17(2), 226-38.Zaltman, Gerald and Robin
Higie (1995), "Seeing the Voice ofth eCustomer: The Zaltman
Metaphor Eiicitation Technique," Mar-keting Science Institute
Report Number 93-114. Cambridge,MA: Marketing Science
Institute.
-
7/28/2019 6569487.pdf
13/13
