How permeable to cause-related marketing are millennials?

Abstract

This study aims to explore millennial consumers’ intention to participate in cause-related marketing (CrM) campaigns. Building upon the previous literature on CrM, the authors outline six determinants of consumers’ intention to purchase products involved with CrM campaigns. Taking into consideration these determinants, the conceptual model was tested using SPSS and SmartPLS software. This study's findings based on the 229 millennials reveal that the company’s perceived motivation, brand–cause fit, consumer-cause identification, type of product, and frame of donation were relevant when it came to purchasing intention of products under CrM campaigns. These results reinforce the findings from previous literature and provide more specific information on the millennial generation. The current findings are useful for companies to develop better cause-related marketing campaigns targeted at this specific group of consumers. To reach the consumer more successfully, it was proved that absolute values provided to the cause are impactful in donators/clients’ perception of the campaign and purchase intention of the products associated.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

References

  1. Adkins, S. (1999). Cause relates marketing: Who cares wins.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Baker, M. J. (2003). The marketing book.

    Google Scholar 

  3. 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 

  4. Belic, S., & Jonsson, E. (2012). Guerrilla marketing—And its effects on consumer behavior. Women in Business, 67. doi:https://doi.org/10.2307/1251151, Military Marketing Warfare: A Comparative Review of the Use of Combative Philosophies and Terminology, 135

  5. Bennett, R. (2003). Factors underlying the inclination to donate to particular types of charity Roger. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 8(1), 12–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Berger, I. E., Cunningham, P. H., & Drumwright, M. E. (2006). Identity, identification, and relationship through social alliances. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 34(2), 128–137. https://doi.org/10.1177/0092070305284973.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Berglind, M., & Nakata, C. (2005). Cause-related marketing: More buck than bang? Business horizons, 48(5), 443–453. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2005.04.008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Bhattacharya, C. B., & Sen, S. (2003). Consumer-company identification: A framework for understanding consumers’ relationships with companies. Journal of Marketing, 67, 76–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 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(2), 127–143. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12208-010-0053-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Brønn, P. S., & Vrioni, A. B. (1998). Corporate social responsibility and cause-related marketing : An overview. International Journal of Advertising, 20, 207–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Brown, T. J., & Dacin, P. A. (1997). The company and the product: Company associations and corporate consumer product responses. Journal of Marketing, 61(1), 68–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Chang, C. (2008). To donate or not to donate ? Product characteristics and framing effects of cause-related marketing on consumer purchase behavior. Psychology & Marketing, 25(December 2008), 1089–1110. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Chang, T.-Z., & Wildt, A. R. (1994). Price, product information, and purchase intention: An empirical tudy. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 22(1), 16–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Chéron, E., Kohlbacher, F., & Kusuma, K. (2012). The effects of brand-cause fit and campaign duration on consumer perception of cause-related marketing in Japan. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 29(5), 357–368. https://doi.org/10.1108/07363761211247479.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Chin, W. W. (1998). The partial least squares approach to structural equation modelling. Modern Methods for Business Research, 295(2), 295–336.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Chiu, W., & Lee, Y. joo, & Won, D. (2016). Bifactor analysis of motivation for charity sport event participation. International Review on Public and Nonprofit Marketing, 13(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12208-015-0141-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Chris Zhao, Y., & Zhu, Q. (2014). Effects of extrinsic and intrinsic motivation on participation in crowdsourcing contest. Online Information Review, 38(7), 896–917. https://doi.org/10.1108/oir-08-2014-0188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Cone Communications. (2015). 2015 Cone Communications Millennial CSR Study. Boston. https://www.conecomm.com/research-blog/2015-cone-communications-millennial-csr-study.

  19. Crbyer, E. H., & Ross, W. T. (1996). The impact of corporate behavior on perceived product value. Marketing Letters, 7(2), 173–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Dahl, D., & Lavack, A. M. (1995). Cause-related marketing : Impact of size of corporate donation and size of cause-related promotion on consumer perceptions and participation. AMA Winter Educators’ Conference: Marketing Theory and Applications, 6(January), 476–481.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Diaa, N. M. (2017). Shedding the light on Guerrilla marketing and purchase intention. Global Journal of Management and Business Research: G Interdiscipinary, 17(4).

  22. Drumwright, M. E. (1996). Advertising with a social company advertising dimension: The role of noneconomic criteria. Journal of Marketing, 60(4), 71–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. e Silva, S. C., Duarte, P., Machado, J. C., & Martins, C. (2020). Cause-related marketing in online environment: the role of brand-cause fit, perceived value, and trust. International Review on Public and Nonprofit Marketing, 17(2), 135–157. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12208-019-00237-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Edelman Trust Barometer. (2020). 2020 Edelman trust barometer spring update: Trust and the covid-19 pandemic | Edelman. https://www.edelman.com/research/trust-2020-spring-update. Accessed 22 October 2020

  25. Eikenberry, A. M. (2009). The hidden costs of cause marketing. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 7(3), 51.

    Google Scholar 

  26. El-bassiouny, N., Hammad, H., Paul, P., & Mukhopadhyay, K. (2014). Antecedents and consequences of consumers’ attitudinal dispositions toward cause-related marketing in Egypt. Journal of Islamic Marketing, 5(3), 414–445.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Folse, J., Garretson, A., Grau, S. L., Moulard, J. G., & Pounders, K. (2014). Cause-related marketing: Factors promoting campaign evaluations. Journal of Current Issues & Research in Advertising, 35(1), 50–70. https://doi.org/10.1080/10641734.2014.866847.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Galan – Ladero, M. M., Galera – Casquet, C., Valero – Amaro, V., & Barroso – Mendez, M. J. (2013). Sustainable, socially responsible business: The cause-related marketing case. A review of the conceptual framework. Journal of Security and Sustainability Issues, 2(4), 35–46. https://doi.org/10.9770/jssi.2013.2.4(4).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. 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. https://doi.org/10.2753/JOA0091-3367360402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Green, C. L., & Webb, D. J. (1997). Factors influencing monetary donations to charitable organizations. Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing, 5(3), 19–40. https://doi.org/10.1300/J054v05n03.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Henseler, J., Hubona, G., & Ray, P. A. (2016). Using PLS path modeling in new technology research: Updated guidelines. Industrial Management and Data Systems, 116(1), 2–20. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-09-2015-0382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Hoek, J., & Gendall, P. (2008). An analysis of consumers’ responses to cause related marketing. Journal of Nonprofit and Public Sector Marketing, 20(2), 283–297. https://doi.org/10.1080/10495140802224977.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Hou, J., Du, L., & Li, J. (2008). Cause’s attributes influencing consumer’s purchasing intention: Empirical evidence from China. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 20(4), 363–380. https://doi.org/10.1108/13555850810909704.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Howie, K. M., Yang, L., Vitell, S. J., Bush, V., & Vorhies, D. (2015). Consumer participation in cause-related marketing : An examination of effort demands and defensive denial. Journal of Business Ethics, 147(3), 679–692. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2961-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Johansson, L., Nordin, C., & Liljenberg, C. (2015). Cause related marketing the determining factors behind consumers’ intention to participate in different types of cause related marketing campaigns. Linnaeus University.

  36. King, S. (2001). Breast cancer, corporate philanthropy, and the market for generosity. Social Text, 19(4), 115–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Koschate-Fischer, N., Stefan, I. V., & Hoyer, W. D. (2012). Willingness to pay for cause-related marketing: The impact of donation amount and moderating effects. Journal of Marketing Research, 49(6), 910–927. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmr.10.0511.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Kotler, P., & Lee, N. (2005). Corporate social responsibility: Doing the most good for your company and your cause. Canada: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Kuo, Y., & Liu, L.-T. (2014). The effects of framing and cause-related marketing on crowdfunding sponsors’ intentions: A model development. In Proceedings of the 12th international conference on advances in mobile computing and multimedia (pp. 439–443).

    Google Scholar 

  40. Landreth, S. (2002). For a good cause: The effects of cause importance, cause proximity, congruency and participation effort on consumers’ evaluations of cause-related marketing. Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College.

  41. Lee, J., & Lee, Y. (2015). The interactions of CSR, self-congruity and purchase intention among Chinese consumers. Australasian Marketing Journal, 23(1), 19–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ausmj.2015.01.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Lichtenstein, D. R., Drumwright, M. E., & Braig, B. M. (2004). The effect of corporate social responsability on customer donations to corporate-supported nonprofits. Journal of Marketing, 68, 16–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Memon, A. H., & Rahman, I. A. (2013). Analysis of cost overrun factors for small scale construction projects in malaysia using PLS-SEM method. Modern Applied Science, 7(8), 78–88. https://doi.org/10.5539/mas.v7n8p78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Mendini, M., Peter, P. C., & Gibbert, M. (2018). The dual-process model of similarity in cause-related marketing : How taxonomic versus thematic partnerships reduce skepticism and increase. Journal of Business Research, 91(August 2017), 195–204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.06.010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Miller, B. (2009). Community fundraising 2.0—The future of fundraising in a networked society? International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 14(December 2012), 365–370. https://doi.org/10.1002/nvsm.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Mohr, L. A., Eroglu, D., & Ellen, P. S. (1998). The development and testing of a measure of skepticism toward environmental claims in marketers’ communications. The Journal of Consumer Affairs, 32(1), 30–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Mohr, L. A., Webb, D. J., & Harris, K. E. (2001). Do consumers expect companies to be socially responsible? The impact of corporate social responsibility on buying behavior. The Journal of Consumer Affairs, 35(1), 45–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. 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. https://doi.org/10.2753/joa0091-3367360204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Nielsen. (2015). The sustainability imperative. New York. https://www.nielsen.com/us/en/insights/report/2015/the-sustainability-imperative-2/.

  50. Parengkuan, M. W. A. E. (2017). A comparative study between male and female purchase intention toward visual merchandising at centro by parkson department store mantos. Jurnal Berkala Ilmiah Efisiensi, 17(01), 9–21.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Patel, J. D., Gadhavi, D. D., & Shulka, Y. S. (2016). Consumers ’ responses to cause related marketing : Moderating influence of cause involvement and skepticism on attitude and purchase intention. International Review on Public and Nonprofit Marketing, 14(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12208-016-0151-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Pirsch, J., & Gupta, S. (2006). The company-cause-customer fit decision in cause-related marketing. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 23(6), 314–326. https://doi.org/10.1108/07363760610701850.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Polonsky, M. J., & Wood, G. (2001). Can the overcommercialization of cause-related marketing harm society? Journal of Macromarketing, 21(1), 8–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/0276146701211002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. 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, 635–640. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963(02)00306-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Pracejus, J. W., Olsen, G. D., & Brown, N. R. (2003). On the prevalence and impact of vague quantifiers in the advertising of cause-related marketing (CRM). Journal of Advertising, 32(4), 19–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Ramayah, T., Yeap, J. A. L., Ahmad, N. H., Abdul-Halim, H., & Rahman, S. A. (2017). Testing a confirmatory model of Facebook usage in SmartPLS using consistent PLS. International Journal of Business and Innovation, 3(2), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1109/RFIC.2004.1320574.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Reast, J., & Van Popering, N. (2012). To do well by doing good : Improving corporate image trough cause-related marketing. Journal of Advertising, 109(3), 259–274. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-1134-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Ringle, C. M., Wende, S., & Becker, J.-M. (2015). SmartPLS 3. Bönningstedt: SmartPLS. http://www.smartpls.com.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Robinson, S. R., Irmak, C., & Jayachandran, S. (2012). Choice of cause in cause-related marketing. Journal of Marketing, 76(4), 126–139. https://doi.org/10.1509/jm.09.0589.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Ross III, J. K., Patterson, L. T., & Stutts, M. A. (1992). Consumer perceptions of organizations. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 20(1), 93–97. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11434-014-0458-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Sen, S., & Bhattacharya, C. B. (2001). Doing better ? Social lead consumer reactions doing corporate responsibility. Journal of Marketing Research, 38(2), 225–243. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.38.2.225.18838.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Silva, S. C. e, & Martins, C. C. (2017). The relevance of cause-related marketing to post-purchase guilt alleviation. International Review on Public and Nonprofit Marketing, 14(4), 475–494. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12208-017-0183-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Smith, W., & Higgins, M. (2000). Cause-related marketing: Ethics and the ecstatic. Business & Society, 39(3), 304–322. https://doi.org/10.1177/000765030003900304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Spears, N., & Singh, S. N. (2004). Measuring attitude toward the brand and purchase intentions. Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising, 26(2), 53–66. https://doi.org/10.1080/10641734.2004.10505164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Stets, J. E., & Burke, P. J. (2008). Identity theory and social identity theory * Sikmons. Social Psychology Quarterly, 63(3), 224–237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. 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 

  67. Strahilevitz, M., & Myers, J. G. (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 

  68. Subrahmanyan, S. (2004). Pricing strategy and practice effects of price premium and product type on the choice of cause-related brands : A Singapore perspective practical products ? Does specifying the amount given to charity. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 13(2), 116–124. https://doi.org/10.1108/10610420410529744.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Sundar, S. (2007). Cause related marketing : Tactic or Strategy ?

    Google Scholar 

  70. Till, B. D., & Nowak, L. I. (2000). Toward effective use of cause-related marketing alliances. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 9(7), 472–484. https://doi.org/10.1108/10610420010351394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Tsai, S. (2009). Modeling strategic management for cause-related marketing. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 27(5), 649–665. https://doi.org/10.1108/02634500910977872.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. United States Census Bureau. (2015). Millennials outnumber baby boomers and are far more diverse. Washington (D.C.). https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2015/cb15-113.html

  73. Varadarajan, P. R., & Menon, A. (1988). Cause-related marketing: A coalignment of marketing strategy and corporate philanthropy. Journal of Marketing, 52(3), 58–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Vinzi, V. E., Chin, W. W., Henseler, J., & Wang, H. (2010). Handbook of Partial Least Squares: Concepts, Methods and Applications. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-16345-6.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Westberg, K. J. (2004). The impact of cause-related marketing on consumer attitude to the brand and purchase intention: A comparison with sponsorship and sales promotion. International Conference on Management and Service Science, MASS 2011. https://doi.org/10.1016/0005-2795(79)90491-4

  77. Wulfson, M. (2001). The ethics of corporate social responsibility and philanthropic ventures. Journal of Business Ethics, 29(1/2), 135–145. http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?did=68072458&Fmt=7&clientId=38742&RQT=309&VName=PQD.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Yoo, D., Kim, J.-A., & Doh, S.-J. (2018). The dual processing of donation size in cause-related marketing (CRM): The moderating roles of construal level and emoticons. Sustainability, 10(11), 4219. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10114219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Zheng, H., Li, D., & Hou, W. (2011). Task design, motivation, and participation in crowdsourcing contests. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 15(4), 57–88. https://doi.org/10.2753/jec1086-4415150402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank to NECE–Research Unit in Business Sciences funded by the Multiannual Funding Programme of R&D Centres of FCT–Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia, under the project UIDB/04630/2020 and to CEGE–Research Centre in Management and Economics, funded by the Multiannual Funding Programme of R&D Centres of FCT–Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia, under the project UIDB/00731/2020.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Susana Costa e Silva.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Costa e Silva, S., Duarte, P., Marinho, A.F.L. et al. How permeable to cause-related marketing are millennials?. Int Rev Public Nonprofit Mark (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12208-021-00276-5

Download citation

Keywords

  • Cause-related marketing
  • Purchase intention
  • Brand differentiation
  • Brand–cause fit
  • Consumer-cause identification
  • Donation frame
  • Mechanism of CrM campaigns