Who is cause marketing really benefitting?
Posted on November 15, 2007
Filed Under Revolution |
I’m probably pretty close to the last person on earth that you’d expect to be working in marketing. Well, maybe not the last person on earth, but I’ll be one of the first to admit that numbers, goals and business strategy sometimes escape me. Yet, I work in marketing and I work confidently in marketing because I’m confident in World Vision’s stewardship. Sometimes I tell myself that I am able to do my job because, at the end of the day, I know that the school I work with who reaches their fundraising goal for the 30 Hour Famine or the presentation I do about poverty and global citizenship doesn’t mean that my paycheck (or anyone’s paycheck for that matter) will be any bigger that week. I know, as simple as this may sound, that it means more money goes to the children.
I understand cause marketing to be a partnership between a non-profit organization and a for profit business in which each group benefits. It seems like both win; charities raise more money for those in need from increased promotion and businesses benefit from communicating to their clients that they value more than their profit.
I admit that I buy into this. Literally. I’m more likely to support a business or buy a product from which I know a portion of proceeds will support a charity, buy anti-retroviral medications or whatever the cause may be. I’m more likely to pick up the yogurt container that’s pink in support of breast cancer research than the the one quickly expiring beside it on the grocery store shelf. There’s something in me to which this appeals. I like to see businesses involved in really impacting the world and I like to feel like I’m a part of that.
I recently read an article on cause marketing, specifically associated with pink packaging for breast cancer research, that gave me a little more insight on this phenomenon (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21272004/).
The article quotes Barbara Brenner, the executive director of a breast cancer action group, as saying, “Awareness, we don’t need any more of…We have plenty of awareness. The question is what we do now.”
I think Brenner is asking the question of whether cause marketing is doing what it really needs to do. Is it simply getting a name or a label into the market and announcing the need or are there tangible results coming from this awareness beyond comsumers having red or pink (or whatever the colour may be) items in their closets, backpacks, cars and homes.
What is it in us, if anything, that makes cause marketing appeal to us so much? Are we using a cause for our own benefit, as an excuse to buy things that we wouldn’t normally buy, because we know it’s for charity? Is this an appropriate way to respond? Would we be better off simply writing a cheque to that very same charity for the amount we spent on the product or are we slowely changing consumer culture?
Until next time,
Kate
Comments
8 Responses to “Who is cause marketing really benefitting?”
Leave a Reply
Cause marketing is fascinating. Personally, it is one of the few forms of marketing that doesn’t sway me much.
I have to know that a large portion of the money I’m spending is going towards the people awareness/support is being raised for. And I have to be convinced that I would be buying a similar item anyhow.
If I’m already in need of the product I like to buy the one that supports a cause or that’s Fair Trade or organic or whatever - but otherwise…I’d rather just give cash through a trusted organization.
I don’t mind regular marketing because I feel like they’re just raising awareness for their product. But awareness marketing, to me, always feels like such a possible scam. Like they’re just using the misfortunes of others to make us like them more for their nominal assistance. It feels dishonest, and I don’t like that.
Hi Kate, nice post. Check out my blog on cause marketing, http://www.selfishgiving.com. There are also some other good CM blogs listed on my blogroll. Joe
Melody, I agree that the key is doing your research and assuring that you’re not buying something just for the sake of having a “thing” that you really don’t need. I like your questioning of whether cause marketing is using the misfortunes of others for its own gain. Although there’s something in me that’s always tempted to buy into cause marketed products, there’s something equally strong that questions my motivations and the true impact that what I’m buying is actually having.
Joe, thanks for passing along the link to your blog. I will definitely have a closer look. I like your line, “A cause marketer’s musings on doing well and good.” In a lot of ways I hope that all cause marketing genuinely wanted both of those things!
And now for a question to add to the end of my post: How effective is cause marketing for people who just aren’t interested in donating cash to charity? I know that doesn’t appeal to all of us!
Concerning those who aren’t interested in donating to charity, I would think that cause marketing would at least bring in some money from them when they purchase said products.
I wouldn’t expect charitable tie-ins to suddenly open their eyes to the world in need around them. But if charity can benefit just because they want a product, is there any harm done?
I also don’t think that this demographic will be turned off to charity by cause marketing. They probably just won’t care either way.
I agree with cool dad. Cause marketing is just another way to support your favorite organizations. While it may not be the SINGLE BEST WAY to support charities–because the amount actually donated might be small–it’s a great way to supplement outright donations.
what about from an organizational stand point. Take the gap for instance. they make millions of dollars a year. they sell their red clothes and a portion of those profits go to charity. Could the gap not be more effective by just writing a large cheque from there very large amount of profits?? Or even giving all the profits from their red line of clothes?? I guess they are still in it to make money…
Money is almost always the bottom line with corporations, but honestly, I don’t fault them. They exist to make money and hopefully their profits provide a living for everyone from the CEO to the sales clerk.
I’m sure one benefit of CM is the goodwill that gets associated with their brand. Every time I see a RED shirt, I’m reminded that the Gap donates to charity. I would imagine that you can never garner enough positive PR.
I like the idea that cause marketing is a way to support a charitable organization, even though it may not be “the single best way.” I think that’s a good way to summarize it. I think there are definitely way for individuals and for corporations to be more effective in their giving.
There’s no double that corporations are benefiting from the sales of products marketed this way and I will be very curious to know whether, in 10 years, this will still be a trend. I’ll also be curious to find out how much of an impact we will have had on the needs corporations are proposing they will support through cause marketing versus the corporations’ own economic growth. I will probably feel the need to question cause marketing further if I see a dramatic increase in profit without an increase in charitable giving and impact.