Understanding the Effectiveness of Cause-Related Marketing: Insights from a Meta-Analysis
In an age where consumers are increasingly driven by social values, cause-related marketing (CM) has emerged as a powerful tool for businesses.
By linking purchases to charitable causes, companies can simultaneously boost their brand image and contribute to meaningful social change.
But how effective is cause-related marketing in influencing consumer behavior and attitudes?
A recent meta-analysis of 237 studies, conducted by Christina Schamp, Mark Heitmann, Tammo H.A. Bijmolt, and Robin Katzenstein, sheds new light on this question.
Key Findings: Consumer Responses to CM
Cause-related marketing can yield positive results, but its effectiveness varies significantly depending on how campaigns are executed.
The meta-analysis shows that CM has a moderate impact on consumer attitudes and a weaker but still significant impact on consumer behavior. This means that CM can help build brand reputation, but it may be less effective in driving short-term sales.
However, these effects are far from uniform.
The study highlights that CM’s success largely depends on four key pillars:
- Transparency: How clearly and honestly companies communicate the details of their donations, including which cause they are supporting and the size of the donation.
- Signals of Sincerity: How authentic the company’s motives appear, which is influenced by factors like the size of the donation and the perceived fit between the brand and the cause.
- Purchase Context: The environment in which the purchase takes place, including the type of product and whether it aligns with the cause.
- Emotional Attachment: The level of emotional connection consumers feel to the cause, which can be fostered by factors like geographic proximity and the ability to choose the donation target.
Emotional Attachment: The Heart of Attitudinal Responses
Among these four pillars, emotional attachment emerges as the strongest driver of attitudinal responses.
When consumers feel emotionally connected to a cause—whether it’s because the cause is close to home or because they have a personal stake in it—they are more likely to view the brand favorably.
The study finds that campaigns that establish this connection can have strong positive effects on brand attitudes. Conversely, poorly executed campaigns that fail to evoke this attachment can actually backfire, damaging brand perception.
For instance, campaigns that focus on local causes or allow consumers to choose the charity can significantly enhance emotional attachment.
Additionally, how the donation is framed matters: campaigns that emphasize why the donation is important (“save lives” rather than “end cancer”) are more effective at creating an emotional connection than those that focus on the procedural how (“this is how we will use the money”).
Sincerity Matters for Behavioral Responses
While emotional attachment is critical for attitudes, signals of sincerity are equally important for driving consumer behavior.
Consumers are more likely to act on CM if they believe the company’s motives are genuine.
The meta-analysis shows that the size of the donation plays a key role in signaling sincerity—larger donations tend to be perceived as more authentic.
Similarly, the fit between the brand and the cause is crucial. For example, a health-focused brand supporting medical research is seen as more sincere than a fast-food chain supporting a health cause.
One of the strongest signals of sincerity is the visual prominence of the cause in the campaign.
When the cause takes center stage—whether in advertisements or on product packaging—consumers are more likely to perceive the brand as committed to the cause. This not only boosts behavioral outcomes but also strengthens overall campaign effectiveness.
Campaign Execution: The Difference Between Success and Failure
The study provides a powerful lesson for brands: execution matters.
It’s not enough to simply link a product to a cause; the way the campaign is communicated and framed can make or break its success.
Poorly executed campaigns, particularly those that don’t foster emotional attachment or come across as insincere, risk backfiring.
One notable example of CM gone wrong was KFC’s “Buckets for the Cure” campaign, which promised donations to breast cancer research for every bucket of fried chicken sold. Despite the good intentions, the campaign was criticized for its perceived hypocrisy—using unhealthy fast food to promote a health cause.
On the flip side, successful campaigns like Yoplait’s “Save Lids to Save Lives” breast cancer initiative demonstrate how a well-executed CM campaign can build emotional attachment and boost brand reputation. Yoplait’s focus on the cause, its positive framing, and the clear fit between the product and the cause helped the campaign resonate with consumers.
Practical Takeaways
For businesses looking to leverage cause-related marketing, here are some key takeaways from the meta-analysis:
- Foster emotional connection: Highlight the impact of the cause and, where possible, choose local or familiar causes. Allow consumers to play a role in choosing the cause to increase engagement.
- Signal sincerity: Ensure the donation is meaningful and aligned with the brand. Prioritize visual representation of the cause in your campaigns, and make sure the cause takes center stage.
- Be transparent: Clearly communicate the details of your donation, including the amount and the specific cause you’re supporting. Vague or misleading campaigns can hurt brand perception.
- Tailor to your objectives: If your goal is long-term brand building, focus on creating emotional attachment. For short-term sales, consider how to signal sincerity through donation size and visual prominence.
