scholarly journals Exploring the Marketing Effect of Corporate Social Responsibility - An Experimental Design Approach

2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 18-28
Author(s):  
Quey-Jen Yeh
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (12) ◽  
pp. 4821 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrea Pérez ◽  
María del Mar García de los Salmones ◽  
Elisa Baraibar-Diez

In a context of corporate social responsibility (CSR) communication, we explore whether the use of expositive versus narrative discourses interacts with the type of service commercialized by the company (utilitarian vs. hedonic) to determine consumer perceptions and responses to corporate communication. Our main proposal is that, as representative examples of utilitarian services, banking companies would benefit significantly from communicating their CSR efforts with expositive discourses, whereas narrative discourses would be more adequate for hedonic services (e.g., catering). To test the research hypotheses, we use a 2 (expositive/narrative discourse) x 2 (utilitarian/hedonic service) between-subjects experimental design where we expose 302 consumers to different combinations of CSR messages and we evaluate changes in their message attributions and internal and external responses to them. The findings show that the interaction effect is significant and it works in the expected direction for issue importance, CSR fit, and CSR attributions. However, for CSR impact, attitude, trust, purchase, and advocacy intentions, the findings suggest that narrative discourses work better than expositive discourses both for utilitarian and hedonic services. No significant differences between types of discourses are observed for CSR motives, CSR commitment, and C-C identification and the interaction effect is also not significant for these variables.


2017 ◽  
Vol 45 (3) ◽  
pp. 453-467 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chao-Ming Yang ◽  
Tzu-Fan Hsu

We adopted a 2 × 2 mixed experimental design to control for form of corporate social responsibility (CSR), advertising message claims (single message vs. multiple message), and levels of advertising skepticism (high vs. low), to elucidate how these influence advertising preferences and advertising credibility. On the basis of data collected from 320 participants (152 men and 168 women), 4 significant findings were obtained: (a) The form of message claims in CSR advertisements affects advertising preference and advertising credibility, (b) levels of advertising skepticism affect advertising preference and advertising credibility, (c) consumers with high advertising skepticism exhibit advertising skepticism toward CSR advertisements with single-message claims, (d) consumers with low advertising skepticism exhibit preference for CSR advertisements with multiple-message claims. Our findings suggest that enterprises should plan advertisement content carefully when promoting their CSR activities because exaggerated or understated content triggers doubt in consumers' minds.


2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Suhana Moehl ◽  
Barry A. Friedman

Purpose This study aims to explore how consumers judge corporate social responsibility (CSR) authenticity. Kelley’s covariation attribution theory (Kelley, 1973) was deployed to explain information consumers use that leads to either a substantive or symbolic attribution. Design/methodology/approach In total, 101 consumers were randomly assigned to one of three experimental conditions and responded to an online survey: an organization whose CSR practices were unique (low consensus), across their business (low distinctiveness) and over time (high consistency), practiced CSR like competitors (high consensus), in few areas if their business (high distinctiveness) and just initiated their CSR activities (low consistency) or no relevant CSR information (control). The dependent variables were consumer’s substantive attribution, symbolic attribution and the extent that consumers’ reported that consensus, distinctiveness and consistency were important in judging CSR authenticity in general. ANOVA and Scheffe post hoc tests were conducted as appropriate. Findings Consumers in the first experimental condition ascribed greater substantive attribution than consumers in the control group and marginality more than the second experimental condition. On the other hand, these same consumers also ascribed greater symbolic attribution than did the control group. After consumers were shown an organization whose CSR activities were unique, practiced across their business and for a long time reported that distinctiveness and consistency were more important in judging authenticity in general. Research limitations/implications The survey respondents constituted a convenience sample; however, they were randomly assigned to conditions. This randomization enabled an experimental design capable of making causal statements. The Linkedin platform is mainly used by white-collar individuals and does not incorporate the entire spectrum of airline passengers from other industries, and therefore, may limit generalizability to other industrial sector populations. The sample age was somewhat young and may not be representative of older individuals and young teenagers. Like all online surveys, individuals without internet access did not have an opportunity to participate. Future research should deploy larger sample sizes and greater demographic diversity (e.g. age, country and income). Practical implications Executives must lead and engage stakeholders in their organizations’ CSR initiatives. Managers must implement efficiently, using CSR audits that assess the extent that unique initiatives are implemented throughout the business and over time. The findings also suggest that marketing should then effectively communicate CSR in consensus, distinctiveness and consistency terms. Social implications Multiple stakeholders urge organizations to be socially responsible. Consumers incorporate social responsibility into buying and investment decisions, and therefore, expect to demand CSR transparency and authenticity. Unfortunately, little is known about how consumers assess CSR authenticity, which is the aim of this research. Originality/value This is among the first studies that generalize Kelley’s covariation attribution theory from the micro-level of individual perception and social psychology to the macro organizational level and the first to empirically test the theory at the macro organizational level. This study used an experimental design to test attribution theory as a theoretic explanation of how consumers judge CSR authenticity and the first study to explore whether exposure to CSR information influences the extent that such information is believed to be important in judging authenticity.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Soyoung Joo ◽  
Elizabeth G. Miller ◽  
Janet S. Fink

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document