The continuing evolution and penetration of cause branding into the marketing mix as we begin 2007 can be summed up in one word: traction. Read survey results.
Cause has become an accepted, mainstream strategy. At Barkley, the questions from chief marketing officers and marketing managers used to be, “What exactly is cause branding? What will it do for me?” or, “How do we go about putting a cause program together?”
Today the conversations center on “I need to maximize my program,” “How can we make people aware of what we are doing?” “What is the process we go through to establish a program?” or the resigned, “I can’t believe we aren’t doing this (cause) yet.”
Cause has arrived, and it’s in living color on product packaging, in-store point of purchase, and advertising. More and more brands than ever before are integrating messaging about their cause support through multiple marketing channels.
Perhaps the clearest indication of cause mainstreaming is the growing use of a company’s cause commitments in both brand and product advertising—primarily programs targeting the coveted 24–49 female consumer. A cursory review of the 2006 November and December issues of Marie Claire, Lucky and InStyle found print ads publicizing cause programs for the following brands:
- Soft & Dri and Ford Motor Company supporting breast cancer with Ford using the cast of “Grey’s Anatomy” as spokespeople.
- Jones New York’s In the Classroom program to recognize teachers. Separate ads featured First Lady Laura Bush and Jeremy Piven with their teachers.
- Kellogg’s Smart Start and its support of women’s heart disease with Sela Ward as spokesperson.
- Gap and its Product Red campaign to benefit AIDS in Africa featuring a variety of celebrities attired in branded clothing.
- Pantene’s Great Lengths wig program used Diane Lane to support the Entertainment Industry Foundation’s Women’s Cancer Research Fund.
- Luxury fashion brands have also entered the fray. Kenneth Coles’ support of the homeless cause centered on branded Jon Bon Jovi jackets with all profits going to Help USA.
- Baume & Mercier featured Kim Basinger to promote its commitment to “improve education for our children” and “protect animals and environment.” Gary Sinise also is featured as a spokesperson in the campaign. The cause affiliation and fundraising for this partnership is unique. There is no percent of sales or ongoing commitment from Baume & Mercier. Instead the image rights of the celebrities and photographers were donated to charitable organizations supporting the education and environment causes.
Two trends have emerged in this print advertising. First, in most instances the brand advertiser is secondary to the cause. The cause is front and center as the primary message of the ad, and usually both the brand and non-profit partner are secondary.
The second trend is an ever-increasing use of celebrity personalities as the primary, visual element. Pierce Brosnan for Lee Jeans’ Lee National Denim Day, which benefits the cause of breast cancer, and Sela Ward for Kellogg’s Smart Start and its commitment to the fight against women’s heart disease are two examples.
In an increasingly celebrity-driven culture, the celebrity has an incredible ability to influence and drive behavior. This is especially true with younger consumers. In a recent Pew Research Center study1, 81 percent of 18 to 25-year-olds said getting rich is their generation’s most important or second most important goal; 51 percent stated being famous was their first or second most important goal.
While wealth and fame are laudable goals, it’s a stretch to believe that parents of Gen Y have been at the dinner table driving home wealth and fame as life goals for the past 25 years. This is a byproduct of our celebrity-focused culture. The coming year promises a continued intersection of celebrity and causes.
Cause Celeb
Their names filled the headlines at different points in 2006: Angelina Jolie, Madonna, Bono, and Oprah. All became the face of a cause. All drew needed attention to causes. And all maintained their celebrity through their cause efforts. Perhaps 2006 will be remembered as the tipping point between cause and cause celebrity.
Bono is at the forefront of this trend. His ONE campaign against poverty debuted in 2005 with an army of celebrity partners. Today ONE has morphed into an every man and woman action campaign, and during 2006 the celebrity focus moved to Bono’s PRODUCT RED.
Teaming with Bobby Shriver to bring awareness and financial resources to bear on AIDS in Africa, Bono has gained the support of best-in-class brands like AMEX, Motorola, Gap, Converse, Apple and Armani to raise funds through sales of RED-branded product. It’s a massive program with the corporate partners battling each other, Bono, and the cause for brand awareness with consumers.
It’s cause branding on a global level, and according to the majority of respondents to the 2006 PRWeek/Barkley Cause Branding Survey it’s not what consumers want from companies through cause programs. Our survey found that nearly two-thirds of consumers (64%) want cause programs to “improve things in a tangible, noticeable way in my local community” versus “make a difference on big issues and global problems” (36%).
For the first time, we surveyed three key consumer groups—Gen Y, Gen X and Baby Boomers—to gauge their perceptions of cause branding.
Gen Y
The survey results portray Gen Y in the same terms as recent media coverage. They are plugged in. They are active. They want—if not demand—to know why a company is choosing to support causes.
- 71 percent want to know why a company chooses to support specific causes2.
- 74 percent (the most of any group) want to see company leaders actively participating in a company’s cause efforts2.
- 49 percent (again the most of any group) believe there should be a logical link between a company and its cause partner and/or efforts2.
- 30 percent of Gen Yers who invest say they “have bought the stock of a company because it supports a cause I believe in2.” Almost a quarter of Gen Xers make the same claim2.
The takeaway is that Gen Y is engaged, and they want to see both brands and executives walk the walk.
Boomers
Across the board, the responses of Boomers and Gen Y mirror each other. Their responses indicate the ideals of action, empowerment and accountability of the ‘60s generation are alive and kicking within the psyche of Gen Y. However, as the Boomers reach their sixties, their views and voice may have softened. Boomers appear to be the group least engaged by cause.
- 57 percent of Boomers have bought a product due to the brand’s cause commitment, the lowest of our three survey groups. Several factors may be at work here. Cause came on the scene late in the Boomers’ adult life. As consumers, perhaps they are set in their ways. They are obviously more set financially and, therefore, more fiscally conservative than Gen Y or Gen X2.
- 66 percent, the most of any group, feel that cause programs should focus on local issues versus global problems2.
Gen X
What came through loud and clear is corporate America is in danger of losing Gen X. Corporate scandals, layoffs, debt, education costs, access to healthcare, ubiquitous marketing toward Gen X (perhaps even more damaging, an inability to defend their children from unwanted marketing messages), war and security, and other social and cultural factors all have impacted the perspective of Gen X (aged 30–41).
- 47 percent of Gen X respondents do not believe companies are ethical2.
- 45 percent don’t think companies are good corporate citizens2.
- 45 percent don’t believe companies are trustworthy2.
If you are a brand manager at a CPG brand or multi-unit retailer, those are somber numbers. But all is not lost. There is an answer. Barkley believes the survey shows cause branding can be the remedy to restore trust with Gen X.
- 69 percent of that same skeptical Gen X audience purchase a product because the company supports a cause2.
At first glance, this may appear to be a total disconnect. However, Barkley believes this shows the Gen X consumer is ultimately loyal to a brand that is committed to a cause or causes. Gen X is not boycotting brands because of unethical practices. Just the opposite, we believe this key consumer group is rewarding brands that support causes and are committed to positively impacting local communities.
Stand for more than your bottom line, and people stand with you.™
Barkley believes the survey data shows, and Gen X proves, consumers will stand with companies that stand for something. The key is the “something.” Is your brand going to stand for one thing that resonates and connects with consumers and associates, or will it try to stand for everything? The answer to this question is often the critical step in a successful program.
At the end of the day, what is PRODUCT RED? Is it about AIDS in Africa, AMEX, Armani fashion, red telephones and iPods, Gap’s celebrity spokespeople, Bono or something else? While the effort is to be praised, based on the number of calls Barkley receives from both clients and brand managers asking us to research and find out “what that RED program is,” it’s clear something is lost in translation, and brand messaging is not breaking through.
One might postulate that with multiple corporate partners banding together to take on a global issue RED is really a form of traditional philanthropy with a unique fundraising tool and not cause branding.
Barkley believes there are fundamental steps to establishing a true cause branding program.
- The company should own the issue; the goal is to make the cause and the brand synonymous (Lee Jeans and breast cancer awareness).
- The cause should mirror or be reflected in the brand’s values and culture (ALDO and AIDS prevention).
- The company must be transparent, and management must be active and visible in support of the cause.
- The program must engage customers and associates, and it should reach out to consumers and vendors.
Cause branding is a business strategy, not a promotional event on the marketing calendar. The brands that commit to a cause and the correct partner(s) develop the strongest programs and a distinct competitive edge in engaging consumers and creating brand loyalists.
1 Pew Research Center study, USA TODAY, Jan. 10, 2007
22006 PRWeek/Barkley Cause Branding Survey, Oct. 2006
