Comments on: Defending Cause Marketing

By: Bills Health Blog

Bills Health Blog — Wed, 14 Dec 2011 18:16:55 +0000

Hello there, simply turned into aware of your blog thru Google, and found that it is really informative. I’m gonna watch out for brussels. I will appreciate if you continue this in future. A lot of other folks will be benefited from your writing. Cheers!

By: CL Jones

CL Jones — Mon, 14 Feb 2011 23:57:16 +0000

Selfish Giving – comes in all types of packages. Recently I visited a website that interested me in international giving only to discover it was filled with deception and false promise for so many who wish to benefit from help and kindness of others.

When I asked to leave and be issued a refund I was insulted and accused falsely of using bad language and making false statements. I was raised with Christian values and beliving that giving comes from the heart and to share what you have with those who are less fortunate. Sadly the world is filled with Selfish giving. I am blind and live on a limited income of less than $800 each month.

Somehow I manage to give at least $20 to one charitable cause or another. I began a nonprofit just over two years ago and have struggled to find others willing to help if only for a few hours. Needless to say in the past two years there have been only two people offering to help all others come with a "Whats in it for me". What happen to good old fashion charitable giving without a price tag?

Please visit our site and share your thoughts.

By: Now Photographers Can Donate to Charity « Change for A Dollar

Now Photographers Can Donate to Charity « Change for A Dollar — Fri, 28 Jan 2011 20:50:57 +0000

[...] created some welcome debate within the philanthropy realm (Stanford Social Innovation Review 2009, Selfish Giving 2009). The major criticisms are that cause-marketing distracts consumers from the issues, distances [...]

By: @KooDooZ

@KooDooZ — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 17:06:30 +0000

I was just reading an interesting article about Milton Friedman (Nobel Prize winner for economics) — who 39 years ago faulted 'cause marketing'

He called corporate social-responsibility programs "hypocritical window-dressing" that "harm the foundations of a free society." Friedman had made many of those arguments in his 1962 book, "Capitalism and Freedom." But their appearance in a popular journal moved the debate to the front burner and led eventually to "cause marketing," the name given to merging products with causes.

Just thought I'd share his POV:
http://wvgazette.com/Opinion/OpEdCommentaries/200…

By: giving to others

giving to others — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 02:22:16 +0000

giving to others…

Good article but I m not sure I agree with all of it….

By: Wayne Wallis

Wayne Wallis — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 03:18:26 +0000

What a great read. I believe any business that supports it’s community should be elevated above those that don’t.
These days it’s fair to say Businesses don’t have bags of money simply sitting around to give to those that ask for some. However there are businesses who are still prepared to support their local school or sports club who’s parents or team members have been supporting their business. Which is fair enough. Most didn’t have an effect process to achieve this so after recieving input from various retailers and communitity groups. WIN WIN Connections was created to stream line and make it easier for both parties. My point is giving doesn’t have to be difficult but it must be done. Anything positive is better than doing nothing at all.

By: Awareness Begets Action..But to What End? « Rally the Cause

Awareness Begets Action..But to What End? « Rally the Cause — Sun, 12 Jul 2009 15:07:35 +0000

[...] To some activists, they doubt the intentions of those promoting the cause – whether it be companies or individuals. Having thousands of people talking about the travesty of a real issue is nowhere [...]

By: Joe Waters

Joe Waters — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 18:47:15 +0000

Arvind, I think you are absolutely right! And I think people do mean to remember that cause marketing is just one thing–and a relatively small one–under that larger umbrella of corporate social responsibility.

I realize that the benefits of cause marketing are really miniscule–important but small–compared to the collective good that can be accomplished by companies, their employees and their shareholders. The question is not “What?” but “What else?”.

By: Arvind Venkataramani

Arvind Venkataramani — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 16:31:04 +0000

what is somewhat disingenuous about some of this discussion is the fact that we have no idea what corporations actually take away from the earth and from people. we are largely clueless when determining impact and the true costs of operating a business…

given all of this, it seems rather facetious to ‘support’ a cause by getting people to buy more of your products. if corporations want to make a difference, how about actually changing the way they work instead of promising some slice of their profits to the cause? instead of donating to clean water causes, how about running campaigns about the impact of bottled water? how about (visibly) participating in causes as opposed to just ‘supporting’ it? it feels like abdication of responsibility at a corporate level: “look, we gave so much of each dollar to a cause, aren’t we great?” while at the same time not examining the circumstances that create that cause in the first place, and how they contribute to it.

this is not to say that cause-marketing is bad, or that it isn’t a brilliant way of raising awareness. it’s just that in comparison with other possible kinds of action, it’s such a pale and feeble effort…

we shouldn’t be trying to diss cause marketing: we should be trying to figure out, what next cause marketing should be just one tool in an arsenal, not an end in itself…

By: Aykan Gulten

Aykan Gulten — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 13:38:44 +0000

Thanks to all of the contributors, it is a great conversation to follow.

I have been working at Sustainable Business department of a global brand and I have involved in many cause marketing projects as well as many other types of collaborations with NGOs.Cause marketing is something that needs to be done very carefully and it should not be seen as the replacement of corporate responsibility efforts. Cause Marketing for me is a brand differentiation opportunity and has to be managed and resourced by Marketing teams (with consultancy from CSR department)

I understand the concerns of Prof. Eikenberry but I think those are manageable risks. I do not believe Cause Marketing should be the only way that a company responds to environmental and social causes, but it can very well be a part of the portfolio. GAP’s involvement in RED does not take away their responsibility of taking care of workers in their supply chain and I do not think they argue that.
In my company, if there is a cause marketing campaign, it is managed by the responsible commercial team and they do not put their hands in Corporate Philanthropy pocket to off-set their contribution to the cause.

Prof. Eikenberry is pointing out the consumer point of view and the risk of consumers feeling good just by shopping but not getting involved in other actions. I think this risk is equally an opportunity for the companies and for the charitable organizations. Cause marketing campaigns have potential to be created in a way that allows companies and charities keeping the connection to the consumer even after the purchase and helping them take action on behalf of the cause -obviously with not all of them but with the ones who would make the extra efforts-
Marketing teams are getting very experienced on keeping the on-going interaction with the consumers so why could not they do it for the cause marketing campaigns.

We will see very bad and good examples of cause marketing going forward and only the good ones will stay alive.