Characteristics of Persuasion: The Role of Tangibility in CSR Messages

7/25/2019 Characteristics of Persuasion: The Role of Tangibility in CSR Messages

1/75

MSc Marketing

2014-2015

Characteristics of persuasion: The role of

tangibility in CSR messages

byNabil Dabbagh

Supervised by Prof. Nicholas OShaughnessy

September 2015


2/75

Acknowledgement

My sincerest appreciation goes to my supervisor, Professor Nicholas OShaughnessy for his

sincere support and mentoring, without whom this project would not be what it is today.

My gratitude also go to the hundreds of people who have graciously given me some of their

precious time to create a thorough and proud piece of research.

To you all, thank you.

1


3/75

Abstract

This dissertation sought to fill a gap in the academic research of corporate social

responsibility (CSR) as a persuasion tool. Little focus has been placed on the precise

characteristics which make CSR messages the creator of either persuasion or cynicism.

Instead, past academics have attempted to show the positive or negative impact these

campaigns can have on companies, with little to no interest on the elements that make them

so.

This dissertation has therefore tried to expand on these past findings and sought to understand

how juxtaposing CSR with certain features in messages can yield positive consumer attitudes

and behaviors while improving their memorability.

A mixed form of research was used in order to answer these queries. Namely, the use of

quantitative surveys allowed for a broad range of answers, while the use of qualitative focus

groups gave rhetorical data to back up their quantitative counterpart.

In the end, the research found a clear link between a CSR messages level of tangibility (a

term applied in a specific manner for this paper) and changes in consumer attitudes, behaviors

and memory. That is to say, statistically significant findings showed an improvement in

purchase intention when participants were faced with CSR messages which were

exceptionally clear, produced with vivid examples and understandable rhetoric. Likewise,

skepticism was reduced when participants were faced with similar messages, while memory

of highly tangible messages saw striking improvements.

2


4/75

Table of contents

Chapter 1: Introduction

1.1 Rationale and justification for research 5

1.2 Research questions 6

Chapter 2: Literature review

2.1 Conceptual and historical understandings of CSR 7

2.2 CSR as a promotional tool 11

2.2.1 Consumer attitude 11

2.2.2 Consumer behavior and purchase intention 17

Chapter 3: Methodology

3.1 Research objectives 21

3.2 Defining tangibility 22

3.3 Research method 23

3.4 Sampling 24

3.5 Research Design 26

3.6 Data analysis techniques 30

Chapter 4: Data Analysis

4.1 Tangibility test 31

4.2 Consumer attitudes 32

4.2.1 Trust (H1) 32

4.2.2 Skepticism (H1a) 35

4.2.3 Attitude (H2) 36

4.3 Consumer behavior and purchase intention 38

4.3.1 Purchase intention (H3) 38

4.3.2 Memory (H4) 39

4.4 Additional findings 41

4.5 Discussion 42

3


5/75

Chapter 5: Conclusion

5.1 Limitations 45

5.2 Further research 47

5.3 Conclusion and implications 47

References 50

Appendix 53

4


6/75

Chapter 1: Introduction

1.1 Rationale and justification for research

The research is all but deniable. A majority of consumers expect or demand from companies a

growing level of social activity, morality, or ethics (see next chapter). In other, more

academic terms, consumers are, to varying degrees, interested in companies involved in

corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities.

The evolution in technologies has fueled the momentum of change in consumer demands

(Werther & Chandler, 2011). Corporations are accountable for their actions what one

experiences, a million see. In fact, added to that, the idea of a brand has witnessed a

powerful evolution. While utilitarian characteristics used to define a brands image in

consumer minds, the focus has now converged to less prevalent characteristics

(OShaughnessy & OShaughnessy, 2003). Namely, the idea that a brand can mean

something emotionally as well as rationally. Consumers, today, are emblematic of this new

shift, as the logo on the products we wear, drink, or eat, have become expressive parts of our

own identities and characters.

As such, brands are encouraged to be more emotionally expressive, much like their customers

would be. As a result, for a brand to look caring, they have to act empathetically, and this is

where the role of corporate social responsibility comes in. It is when a brand seeks to be

caring that they will gain a competitive advantage today (OShaughnessy & OShaughnessy,

2003). This new notion will be developed in further detail throughout the Literature reviewby

looking at the role of CSR historically its source and evolution as well as identifying

5


7/75

key pieces of literature which have aimed to understand its effect on consumer attitudes and

behaviors.

The following chapter (Methodology

) will develop a series of hypotheses based on the

reviewed literature. These hypotheses, and the questions they stem from, seek to bring the

field of CSR beyond highlighting its success as a tool for persuasion. Instead, it will try to go

beyond, and highlight the precise characteristics which have made CSR so successful (Data

analysis).

1.2 Research questions

As a result, the following questions have kindled this dissertation:

- If CSR activities are in fact persuasive, which precise characteristics make them so?

- As CSR becomes more prevalent in marketing, how can practitioners avoid consumer

skepticism?

- With a rise in CSR messages, how can marketers make theirs more memorable?

6


8/75

Chapter 2: Literature review

The notion of corporations being socially responsible is far from new. Since the dawn of

trade, managers and business owners have tried to invest not only in their product, but in

those that make them, the environment they make them in, and the community around them.

However, the term corporate social responsibility has only recently been coined and only in

the last several decades have theorists and academics focused much of their attention on the

subject. Having said that, the topic is still ripe with disagreement, something this literature

review will attempt to display and analyse.

2.1 Conceptual and historical understandings of CSR

It is therefore not only appropriate, but vital to understand exactly what academics and

practitioners identify and understand as being an organizations social responsibility, and why

CSR has garnered so much attention and importance as of late.

There are many contradicting beliefs as to what exactly is an organizations social

responsibility

. Some believe that an organizations sole responsibility is towards its

shareholders and therefore to produce profits (Friedman, 1970). Economist Milton Friedman

(1970: 126) is one of such individuals, whose publication in the New York Timesstated that,

there is one and only one responsibility[emphasis added] of business to use its resources

and engage in activities designed to increase its profits so long as it stays within the rules of

the game. Friedman (1970) argues that a corporate executive has neither the training nor the

duty to spend his organizations capital on external social causes. Instead, Friedman (1970)

would contend, much like Adam Smith, or the many world leaders he inspired including

7


9/75

Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan that a profitable and functioning organization in a

free-market society will redistribute its wealth and fulfil its responsibility towards society.

Many of the more rational-minded leaders of the past, including Frederick Taylor (1967) and

Henry Ford believed in the same economic ideal. In fact, although many have criticized Ford

for his implementation of a purely rational and rigid form of organization, which subsequently

led to the dehumanization of his labor, high turnover, and low morale (Drucker, 1954), we can

identify from his rhetoric that he was a compassionate and philanthropic individual. Such can

be witnessed in a particular instance where Ford explained his rationale for lowering the

prices of his vehicles, because it enables a larger number of people to buy and enjoy the use

of a car and because it gives a larger number of men employment at good wages. Those are

the two aims I have in life. (Ford in Willmott, 2003: 68)

However, should one attempt to understand Friedmans (1970) statement about a firms sole

social responsibility, one must consider its historical context. While Ford, and the subsequent

rise of Fordism, in the early days of the twentieth century proved fruitful for capitalism, the

Second World War paved the way to welfare state systems (Willmott, 2003). The United

States where Friedman was from and the United Kingdom witnessed soaring

government spendings, peaking in the mid-1970s with the British government spending

nearly half of its gross domestic product, and the American government spending nearly a

quarter (Figure 1). Willmott (2003) argues that the shift in responsibility from companies to

governments rendered the former less likely to take part in philanthropic activities. One can

therefore understand Friedmans motivations more clearly: the Wests two greatest powers

the United States and the United Kingdom both reached unprecedented levels of

8


10/75

government spendings and as most capitalists, Friedman believed that returning to Fordism

was in the best interest for both the economy and societys well being.

Figure 1: Percentage of GDP spent by US & UK governments 1930-2000 (U.S. Bureau of

Economic Analysis, 2015 Rogers, 2013)

In fact, Friedman (1970) thoroughly believed in the righteousness of free-market societies, for

he believed that rules were set in place to avoid freedom from veering towards anarchy. In his

essay for the Times, Friedman (1970: 126) defends that a firms sole social responsibility is to

make profits, so long as it stays within the rules of the game. In other words, a company

will produce the social responsibility it is mandated to produce (by employing community

members and paying taxes) so long as they abide by the law. However, one can only suppose

that in the mid- to late-twentieth century Friedman (1970) did not presume that capitalism

would fuel globalisation the way it has in recent decades (Stiglitz, 2006). As a result,

capitalism, which seeks to reduce the roadblocks for any company seeking to grow, has led

many businesses to find refuge in underdeveloped nations, where laws, or rules (Friedman,

9


11/75

1970: 126) are more lenient than in developed nations. One can therefore assume that

Friedman (1970) identifies social responsibilities to be taken care of by laws. However, as

history seems to have proven, some nations and their inhabitants do not have the privilege of

living and working in a society which bears witness to such laws. Unfortunately, Friedmans

(1970: 122) ideal for corporations, which have since been adopted by Margaret Thatcher in

the United Kingdom and Ronald Reagan in the United States (Peck & Tickell, 2002), have

permitted such establishments to seek nothing but to, increase its profits, even if it has

meant going beyond borders and ignoring the rules Friedman (1970: 126) refers to.

Whats more, Friedmans (1970) illusion that society and enterprise run independently from

each other has garnered him even more criticism. As Porter and Kramer (2003: 33) explain,

companies do not function in isolation from the society around them. Rather, they work in

the same silo and are dependent of each other. Thus proving the growing importance for

companies to invest beyond their shareholders as well as their stakeholders, for the two are

intrinsically linked (Werther & Chandler, 2011).

However, the rise of capitalism in the 1980s by Thatcher and Reagan proved fruitless to social

responsibility. It led a rise in income inequality, and with the recession in the 1990s,

companies were no longer trusted (Willmott, 2003). Social responsibility, it seems, belonged

to no-one. It was around that time that corporations not only saw it as a moral and ethical

imperative to reown social responsibilities, but also to regain the trust of their customers.

10


12/75

2.2 CSR as a promotional tool

2.2.1 Consumer attitude

As this review has illustrated, Friedmans (1970) ideal for capitalism is that if companies do

well and increase their profits then that will have a trickle-down effect on the greater good of

society. Unfortunately, much to his displeasure, that ideal has not extended to his compatriots.

As Figure 2 shows, researchers found that consumers dont believe that a companys only

responsibility is to increase profits, as 95% believe that companies have a responsibility

towards their workers and the communities they work in.

Figure 2:

American consumers belief of Friedmans statements (Business Week/Harris,

2000)

2000 1999

U.S. corporations should have only one purpose to make

the most profit for their shareholders and their pursuit of

that goal will be best for America in the long run.

4% 5%

U.S. corporations should have more than one purpose. They

also owe something to their workers and the communities in

which they operate, and they should sometimes sacrifice

some profit for the sake of making things better for their

workers and communities

95% 95%

Not sure/No answer 1% 0%

Therefore, corporate social responsibility seems to have transitioned, from being a

responsibility

, in the literal term which is defined as being a prosocial duty where the

benefactor does not expect to benefit from their goodwill (Murray & Vogel, 1997), to being a

11


13/75

means to an end (Werther & Chandler, 2011). This comes as no surprise seeing the ample

studies which have depicted consumers as being exceedingly less trusting of corporations than

in the past (Business Week/Harris, 2000). As a result, researchers and academics have sought

to understand the effects of CSR activities on consumer attitudes. In other words, using CSR

as a promotional tool.

Much of the literature which juxtapose the fields of corporate social responsibility and

consumer behavior attempt to analyse a consumers actions without looking at their attitudes

(Pava and Krausz, 1996 McGuire, Sundgren and Schneeweis, 1988). One of the more holistic

definitions of attitudes is best presented by Krech and Crutchfield (1948: 152) as being, an

enduring organisation of motivational, emotional, perceptual and cognitive process with

respect to some aspects of the individuals world. Using the evidence presented above,

research clearly shows a growing cynicism in the eyes of consumers towards businesses. It

would therefore seem slightly futile to recognise and attempt to shape behaviors without

understanding the attitudes, which are often antecedents or predictors of such behaviors

(OShaughnessy & OShaughnessy, 2003). In fact, according to Brown and Dacins (1997)

research, a consumer who is lacking information on a product will fill that informational void

with his or her existing associations or knowledge towards the company. In other

words, if an advertising message does not satisfy consciously or unconsciously the

cognitive demands of the viewer, they will generate their own interpretation based on past and

existing beliefs or knowledge about the company.

Their research highlights an important stage in one of the more widely respected models on

attitude formation. Namely, the hierarchy of effects model by Lavidge and Steiner (1961),

12


14/75

which argues that consumers form an attitude through a hierarchical process, consisting of

three main stages cognitive, affective and conative which themselves comprise more

precise steps, identified in Figure 3.

Figure 3:Hierarchy of effects model (Lavidge & Steiner, 1961)

Awareness

CognitiveKnowledge

Liking

Affective

Preference

Conviction

ConativePurchase

The model argues that in order to execute a behavior, consumers must go through a series of

stages. However, such a model would stipulate that stages are experienced one at a time, but

in reality such stages are often intertwined together or act independently from each other

(Storbeck & Clore, 2007 Vakratsas & Ambler, 1999), which would make the argument in

defence of a hierarchy more convoluted. In fact, opponents of the hierarchy of effects model

discredit it by arguing that humans are not as rational as the model would assume

(OShaughnessy & OShaughnessy, 2003). Rather, they argue against the use of a hierarchy,

for they believe that our affective characteristics unconsciously produce attitudes. In other

words, this rules out the idea that attitudes always start with a cognition stage

(OShaughnessy & OShaughnessy, 2003: 124).

Other academics who have researched that field using CSR activities have also found that

persuasion can take place without any awareness. In fact, much like the research by Brown

13


15/75

and Dacin (1997) which argues that past knowledge fills in gaps when a consumers cognitive

demands arent met, the research by Russo and Chaxel (2010) complements their thesis with

the argument that awareness is not always necessary to persuade.

The evidence presented by Russo and Chaxel (2010) would therefore allude to the fact that

persuasion can take place through word-of-mouth or public relations techniques. Both are

tools which are ideal for corporate social responsibility as they present a perceived unbiased

opinion from a third party. Having said that, while researchers still dont align with a single

precise opinion on attitudes, they all seem to agree on the stark differences between attitude

formations and attitude changes (Bohner & Dickel, 2011).

In light of these facts, if we turn our attention towards the scarce literature which attains to

juxtapose the effects of corporate social responsibility initiatives on consumer attitudes, one

can find that there exists some level of consensus. Much of that research has found CSR

initiatives to have a positive impact on the attitudes of consumers, most notably that of

Murray and Vogel (1997: 154) which sought to implement the hierarchy of effects model

within CSR activities and found that, corporate prosocial endeavors are influential and that a

hierarchical evaluative approach is, indeed, sensitive to changes in attitude.

Others, who didnt use existing models to test their hypotheses also found similar results. Sen

and Bhattachayra (2001: 237) found that, CSR Record will have a positive effect on

Company Evaluations. Their research therefore complements that of Brown and Dacin

(1997) who argue that past knowledge or beliefs fill in the gap when a viewer's cognitive

demands arent satisfied. Creyer and Ross (1997) also looked at the relationship between CSR

14


16/75

activities and consumer attitudes, but included the criterion of expectation, arguing that

consumers have precise expectations from companies, which are often formed by price, past

experiences, as well as prior knowledge.

However, it seems that the existing literature on the effects of CSR activities on consumer

attitudes have not identified the differences between formation of attitudes and changes in

attitudes, going against what most of the theorists see as a vital difference (Bohner & Dickel,

2011). Whats more, while the research to-date has sought to show the mostly positive

relationship between CSR activities and consumer attitudes, none have looked precisely at the

triggers to the changes or formations of these attitudes. The few that have, found that

consumer skepticism depended on whether they perceived the companys motivation to be

profit-related rather than socially-related (Mohr, Webb and Harris, 2001).

Finding Meaning in Brands

With gaps in research, we must turn towards advertising literature which highlights the

importance producing meaning into a brand. OShaughnessy and OShaughnessy (2003)

argue that long are the days when brands touted their products with utilitarian specifications.

Today, they contend, brands hold more than just rational meaning they hold emotional

meaning.

In fact, their argument is that todays consumers are more attuned to the emotional content of

a brand and are sensitive to what that brand says of themselves whenever they use their

products.

15


17/75

When approaching it from the angle of CSR, OShaughnessy and OShaughnessy (2003)

speak of solidarity. In humanbeings, the sense of compassion is inherent to our DNA

(Keltner, 2014). Therefore, when consciously or unconsciously looking for a brand which will

bring us meaning, we will seek the same characteristics which are part of our own DNA, such

as compassion and solidarity.

The idea that in order for a company to regain its competitive advantage it must focus on both

its brand image and that of the consumers they are targeting, is growing in the field of

marketing research and is the topic of a completely different dissertation. However, there

comes a point of convergence where CSR and brand image meet. In such instances, both can

greatly benefit from each other. That is to say, CSR can be used to infiltrate brands as a

promotional tool and use the appeal of solidarity helping society and others to

magnetise ones audience.

The successful use of solidarity stems from its ability to marry rationality and emotionality.

Using the Body Shop as an example, OShaughnessy and OShaughnessy (2003) explain that

the company was able to build a brand image using distinctive associations of social

responsibility in a market filled with animal testing and environmental calamities. The

company was able to rise in prominence not simply for the utilitarian qualities of their

products, but for its ability to pour meaning into these products. Thus, the rationally-driven

consumer who seeks socially responsible offerings (solidarity) will feel emotionally

compelled towards brands who reflect the same persona. In essence, OShaughnessy and

OShaughnessy (2003) would argue that a consumer looks for the same affective

characteristics in a brand as they do in a person like themselves.

16


18/75

This therefore leads us to our first three hypotheses, which try to use advertising techniques of

persuasion to show that CSR activities can be used more efficiently through the use of

tangible examples. Therefore, I hypothesise the following:

H1:Offering tangible examples of CSR activities increases the trust the viewer has towards a

message and the company

H1a: Offering tangible examples of CSR activities reduces a viewers skepticism

towards the message and company

H2: Offering tangible examples of CSR activities creates more favorable attitudes in viewers

towards the company

In these instances, and in the ones to come, tangibility is used to describe the characteristics of

messages. In this papers case, the use of tangibility is best described following Oxfords

(2015) definition, clear and definite examples of CSR activities. A more in-depth

understanding of the context of tangibility is outlined in the following chapter, Methodology

.

2.2.2 Consumer behavior and purchase intention

As I have outlined throughout this chapter, while the literature has proven very light on the

effects CSR activities have on consumer attitudes, one can find a plethora of research and

writings on the effects the former has on consumer behavior.

17


19/75

The research on the matter is quite scattered in opinion, and while many have found that CSR

activities have positive financial effects on profits, there are still those who have found the

opposite to be true. In fact, a theoretical study on the matter conducted by Pava and Krauz

(1996) found that of the 22 studies analysed on the relationship between CSR activities and

financial performance, only one was found to have a negative correlation. The remaining 21

either found positive or neutral relationships. Having said that, the relationship between the

two variables is marred in assumptions, for while such assumptions may be correct, it would

be quite difficult to relate an increase in profits to a CSR program.

That thesis is corroborated to varying degrees in most studies regarding the differences in

consumer behavior and purchase intention. Researchers are often unanimous in conceding

that a strong difficulty is found in receiving a truthful answer from participants. Particularly in

the field of CSR, and philanthropy in general, participants have been found to skew their

answers based on social values and norms, for fear of judgement (Mohr, Webb and Harris,

2001). Whats more, Billig (1987) would argue that an individual may believe their own

attitude to be truthful, but that in fact such an attitude is only the product of context. This

issue is one which will be important to this studys empirical research and will be dealt with

in more detail in the following chapter ( Methodology).

Therefore, while it has become difficult to measure the effects of CSR activities on consumer

behavior, it has generally been accepted to follow research paths towards purchase intentions

instead, as consumers will either not know what their true attitude is, or will answer

untruthfully.

18


20/75

The myriad of literature that has looked at CSR have often tried to look at the specific types

of social initiatives which have been found to have a greater impact on consumer behavior

and purchase intention. For example, empirical research conducted by Becker-Olsen,

Cudmore and Hill (2006) found that companies who selected social initiatives which did not

fit with their objectives put themselves in peril. Others, which are more in line with this

studys goal, have sought to look at specific types of CSR activities which would be more

effective in affecting consumer behavior.

Namely, cause-related marketing (CRM) has been judged very successful by a wide array of

academics (Barone, Miyazaki & Taylor, 2000 van der Brink, Odekerken-Schroder &

Pauwels, 2006). In what is widely recognised to be the most respected piece on CRM,

Varadarjan & Menon (1988: 60) have defined the activity as, a firms contribution to to a

designated cause being linked to customers engaging in revenue-producing transactions with

the firm. In other words, CRM is when a for-profit company and a non-profit company

establish a campaign where revenue is divided. Such campaigns have since been proven to be

very effective and lucrative (Barone, Miyazaki & Taylor, 2000). Their success, however, has

led to some consumer skepticism. In a study by Webb and Mohr (1998), the scholars found

that approximately half of their sample exerted negative attitudes towards the for-profit

company. These respondents expressed skepticism towards the firm as they saw the CRM

campaign as self-serving.

However, since these findings were published, companies seem to have implemented

changes, as newer studies have found that skepticism has been declining (Barone, Miyazaki &

Taylor, 2000). In fact, further studies by van der Brink, Odekerken-Schroder and Pauwels

19


21/75

(2006) found that CRM campaigns have a positive effect on consumers brand loyalty. The

caveat being that the firm must invest in long-term CRM campaigns for offerings which have

low consumer involvement that is, for campaigns in fast-moving consumer goods (FMCG)

markets, where little cognitive thinking and decision making is found.

Therefore, based on the literature reviewed here, we can produce the following final

hypotheses:

H3:Offering tangible examples of CSR activities increases a consumers purchase intention

of the product advertised

H4: Offering tangible examples of CSR activities increases a consumers likelihood to

remember a message

20


22/75


3.1 Research objectives

As theLiterature review has attempted to show, the notion that CSR messages may be used a

promotional tool seems well established. However, ironically enough, that very basic

conclusion demonstrates the early stages of the research in that field.

This dissertation will aim to push beyond that conclusion, and will not try to prove what is

now well recognised to be an obvious fact. Instead, this dissertation will seek to go deeper and

to highlight and analyse the DNA behind a persuasive CSR message.

What appears like an intuitively plausible hypothesis is, in fact, very far from being the case.

Based on corporate manifestos and other brand messages, companies seem to rely heavily on

the basic conclusion that CSR messages can prove to be persuasive without looking at what

exactly makes for a persuasive CSR message. This is the primary rationale and objective of

this dissertation, to push beyond the conclusion that CSR messages can be persuasive, and to

start looking at how and why they can be persuasive.

This will be done by focusing on the characteristics of tangibility. People need visual probes,

and this dissertation will seek to see the relationship between what I call the tangibility of a

CSR message (defined and researched throughout this chapter) and consumer reactions.

Therefore, this studys main objectives are:

- To create an original piece of research using existing findings as guides

21


23/75

- To understand whether the use of specific examples of CSR activities in messages has

an effect on the attitude of the viewer towards the company and product

- To identify a change in purchase intention when the viewer is faced with tangible

examples of the advertisers implementation of CSR activities

- To identify an amelioration in memory when consumers are faced with tangible CSR

messages over less tangible CSR messages

- To show that in order for CSR to be a successful promotional tool it must be broken

into specific activities, some of which are more effective than others.

3.2 Defining tangibility

The term, tangibility, used in the previous chapters hypotheses, is utilised to determine the

clarity and reality of a companys social activities in their message. This study aims to show

that it is not merely enough to present ones CSR activities in any arbitrary fashion, but

changes in consumer attitude and purchase intention will arise only when brands use clear

examples of their social activities over rhetorically vague ones.

Since the term tangibility is itself quite vague this study will produce its own definition for

the term based on existing ones (Oxford, 2015). Therefore, tangibility with regards to this

study alludes to the clarity and vividness which CSR activities are communicated to an

audience.

Since this definition is so pivotal to this research papers accuracy, it was presented to a panel

of marketers which was asked to rate the tangibility of CSR messages using a criteria that

focused on vividness of examples (seeResearch Designbelow).

22


24/75

3.3 Research method

This study will follow both a qualitative and a quantitative method of research. This decision

was made based on several factors highest of all, due to limitations in resources. Because this

study has no financial budget and a very narrow and precise timeframe, quantitative research

methods were deemed to be very favorable for their ability to produce a wide array of

responses in relatively little time at no cost. Secondly, quantitative data allow for a more

tangible and statistically precise understanding of consumer attitudes and beliefs (Fisher,

2007). However, that isnt to say that quantitative research methods do not pose any threats.

Techniques such as surveys and questionnaires must be designed and presented in a precise

and tested way, so as to reduce any chance for errors. This will be dealt with in more detail

later in this chapter.

Qualitative research will then serve as a complement to the quantitative research. Since the

latter holds some flaws, including the inability for participants to convey personal answers

and the chance that participants do not read the questions carefully, qualitative research in the

form of focus groups are perfect additions. In fact, Adams et al.(2007: 150) argue that focus

groups can be, particularly useful for validating findings, to make sure that the researcher

has interpreted the data correctly and in an unbiased manner.

However, as it was briefly touched upon in the Literature review

, enticing participants to

speak candidly and honestly can at times be quite difficult. This is especially true for focus

groups, where participants may feel social constraints in the way they answer. This is also true

for a research paper like this one where the subject is social responsibility. Some participants

might feel subjugated by societal norms and feel pressured to answer similarly to their peers.

23


25/75

This was found to be the case in a study by Asch (1951) which found that participants faced

with a majority opinion in a group, regardless of how truthful that opinion may be, will often

conform to the majoritys opinion. Therefore, in order to minimise such pressures and their

subsequent possibility for inaccuracy, focus group participants will be asked questions one at

a time, in scattered form, therefore allowing each participant to voice their personal opinion.

However, this leads us to another issue which neither qualitative nor quantitative research

techniques can solve. It is the issue of opinion. As it was mentioned earlier, Billig (1987)

argues it is not only difficult to measure attitudes, but it is in fact difficult for individuals to

come to terms with their own attitudes. Billig (1987: 224) speaks of the ambiguities involved

in the expression of attitudes as individuals are constantly debating issues in their minds.

Therefore, in an attempt to cater to such constant debate, questions will be posed using a

Likert scale where statements will be phrased both positively and negatively. As well as

reducing the ambiguities Billig (1987:224) speaks of, this will also help keep participants

more attentive and reduce the chances of answering different questions with the same answer.

Participants will also be warmed that statements will be phrased both positively and

negatively so as to make sure they do not give the same answer to each statement without

having read them first.

3.4 Sampling

Since our research has been designed to look at the reaction of specific types of CSR

messages on attitudes and behaviors in Fast Moving Consumer Goods (FMCG) markets, we

can comfortably argue in favor of using a non-probability sampling technique. More

precisely, the exact sampling technique adopted is convenience also known as haphazard

24


26/75

and accidental sampling. This type of sampling technique is usually criticised for its

inability to produce participants who represent the targeted population and therefore cannot

give us a statistically accurate sampling error. However, since we are researching attitudes

and behaviors in FMCG markets I feel confident that any and all Western participants with

access to the brands presented will be ideal representatives of the population. In fact, for

precautionary measures, and to be entirely confident that participants have interacted in the

FMCG market before, they will be asked if they have purchased a product from one of the

brands presented in the survey. Failing to answer that question, participants will be thanked

and excused, thus eliminating some of the faults with non-probability samples.

Whats more, as Adams et al. (2007: 89) explain, using non-probability rather than

probability sampling is both time and cost beneficial. Since this study must be conducted

within a precise and narrow timeframe, using minimal costs, a non-probability sampling is

therefore the most ideal technique for this study.

Regarding sample size, non-probability sampling techniques leave us with limited abilities to

calculate an accurate sample size. Therefore, in order to establish an accurate size, I looked at

past empirical studies on the same topic (Becker-Olsen, Cudmore, & Hill, 2006 Sen &

Bhattacharya, 2001 Mohr, Webb & Harris, 2001) and found that the average sample size was

of 157 participants, each divided equally between men and women. Therefore, based on these

finding and taking into consideration outliers, this researcher has concluded that the most

adequate and effective sample size to reach the goals of this study be of 200 participants,

equally made up of men (100) and women (100).

25


27/75

3.5 Research Design

The following section describes and justifies in further details the choice of research method

and sampling which were introduced in the first half of this chapter.

Part 1: Selecting pieces of CSR communication

The first part of this study required the selection of various types communication, all of which

had to be associated to brands in the FMCG market. Additionally, for relevance sake, each

piece of communication could not be produced before 2005. Finally, since the research was

mainly conducted as a questionnaire, time constraints had to be imposed in order to avoid the

loss of participation. Therefore, this study also limited itself to 5 pieces of communication

which each took an average time of 2 minutes to be watched or read.

The pieces of communication which fit all these criteria were: two videos from McDonalds

and Coca-Colas official YouTube channels, two television commercials from Innocent

Drinks and Pampers, and a corporate sustainability manifesto from Nestl.

Each piece of communication was taken from each brands official website or YouTube

channel in an attempt to present participants with the most authentic experience, and therefore

eliminate further chances of error.

It was considered to use fictitious pieces of communication to be able to cater precisely to this

studys goals, but after much consideration existing pieces of communication were deemed

best, as all of the participants would have already heard of or interacted with these brands,

hence having preconceived attachments and beliefs. It would have been a lot more difficult to

26


28/75

reenact the brands tone accurately and therefore would have opened this study up to a

possibility of errors.

Part 2: Scoring pieces of CSR communication

To get an unbiased and fair opinion on the clarity and quality of these various pieces of

communication a panel of marketing students with accumulated knowledge of CSR was

tasked to watch or read each piece of communication and rate them out of 5 on the following

criteria:

Figure 4:Criteria for tangibility level

Criterion Score out of 5

The brand communicated their social activities clearly

The brand showed examples of their activities

The brand used simple and understandable rhetoric

The brand communicated their social activities in a persuasive style

This allowed me to fulfil this studys main objective of finding a relationship between how

clearly and eloquently a brand communicates its CSR activities and consumer reactions.

Part 3a: Survey

Finally, this section deals with the surveys design. The survey first welcomed participants to

the study and explained the reason for the questions. They were then asked a few simple

questions about their opinion on philanthropy and corporate social responsibility. These

questions were not only important to this studys findings, but according to Fisher (2007),

27


29/75

allowed participants to become familiar with the format of the survey and make them feel

more at ease.

Once those preliminary questions were answered, participants were presented one of the 5

pieces of CSR communication outlined earlier. Once the piece of communication was viewed,

the participant was asked to rate their enjoyment of the video out of 5. A new page then

appeared with 4 statements. Participants were asked to assess their approval, or lack thereof,

for each statement on a Likert scale offering the choice between Strongly Disagree to

Strongly Agree (Appendix 3.1). Participants were then asked a question regarding the

content of the piece of communication they just viewed. This question was then repeated at

the end of the survey to see if their memory has faded with time and if the message was

communicated well enough to be remembered.

The process was then repeated with the next piece of communication using the same

statements and Likert scale, except for, of course, changes in brand name. These produced

valuable information on whether participants attitude, purchase intention and memory was

affected by the tangibility of the communicated messages.

Quantitative research techniques such as this one hold many advantages. Namely, they give

the ability to easily compare answers between participants or to reduce the variability in the

interpretation of data (Adams et al.

, 2007). However, for such advantages, and many more, to

be taken advantage of, surveys must be designed in a specific manner, so as to avoid

interpretation errors. In order to do that, the survey was tested on a panel of 10 participants,

all of whom were from different age ranges and backgrounds. The participants were given an

28


30/75

unlimited amount of time to complete the survey, and were asked to make notes of any and all

confusions on a separate piece of paper. Then, once all the participants had completed the

survey, their notes were analysed, and based on patterned flaws, corrections were made.

Once corrections were made the survey was distributed to the population using convenience

sampling technique outlined earlier.

Part 3b: Focus groups

Focus groups were conducted in parallel to the surveys with the goal of prosing the latters

results. The focus group consisted of 9 participants from various backgrounds, recruited using

the same sampling techniques as the survey.

However, unlike the survey, after having read or watched each piece of CSR communication,

I offered one question to instigate an open-ended discussion. This was done in an attempt to

understand participants unbiased opinion without the pressure of the interviewers

hypotheses looming above them.

It should be noted that at no point was the hypotheses shared with participants. They were

only informed that this dissertations goal was to explore the relationship between consumer

behavior and attitudes, and CSR messages.

29


31/75

3.6 Data analysis techniques

I am suggesting that pieces of communication with more tangible examples of CSR activities

will produce more favorable attitudes and purchase intention towards the brands (H1-H3).

Therefore since these are directional research questions I used one-tailed and correlation tests.

The specific quantitative tests which were used on the data were:

- Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) tests to look at the relationship between the mean

scores from the Likert scale questions and the tangibility levels of CSR messages.

- Spearmans Rank Order Correlation, to look at the correlation between behaviors and

tangibility levels. Pearson's correlation coefficient was considered but since my

variables are ordinal, I had to use Spearmans.

- Finally, a Chi-Squared test which allowed me to look at the association between

categorical variables, such as memory and tangibility.

30


32/75

Chapter 4: Data Analysis

The following chapter is made up of three sections, each of which contains components of

their own. The first section will look at putting into practice the definition of tangibility,

presented in the previous chapter, followed by an in-depth analysis of the qualitative and

quantitative data presented according to their appropriate hypothesis. Finally, the last section

will be dedicated to discussing the findings.

4.1 Tangibility test

The panel of marketers were asked to view each piece of CSR communication and identify

how tangibly the companys CSR activity was being communicated. They were given the

same definition which was produced for this study, as well as a set of scoring criteria

reflecting that definition (seeMethodology).

Based on each average score, each piece of communication was placed in one of three

categories, which later allowed comparative tests (Figure 5).

Figure 5:CSR messages divided into panel-rated categories

Communication piece Score Given tangibility level

Innocent Drinks 4.24High tangibility

Pampers 4

Coca Cola 3.57 Medium tangibility

McDonalds 2.26Low tangibility

Nestl 1.55

31


33/75

4.2 Consumer attitudes

In an attempt to approximately reproduce the Businessweek & Harris (2000) survey

mentioned in the Literature review

, I asked participants to express their opinion on the

responsibilitycorporations have. Results (Appendix 4.1) found that 86.5% of participants (n=

200) either agreed or strongly agreed with the statement, Companies have a responsibility

towards the community they work in. Likewise for the environment, 87.5% of participants

(n= 200) agreed or strongly agreed that companies have a responsibility towards the

environment (Appendix 4.2). The remainder, either disagreed or slightly agreed. Finally,

while not as strong, a majority of participants (83.5%) also expressed a willingness to boycott

manufacturers who do not take part in socially responsible activities (Appendix 4.3).

Though the statements presented might sound self evident or predictable, they were phrased

in this particular way to reflect the similarities with the original 2000 Businessweek/Harris

survey. In fact, in hindsight, after the data was collected, we can notice that 4% (Appendix

4.1) do not believe that companies have a responsibility towards the community they work in

much like the Businessweek/Harriss (2000) results.

4.2.1 Trust (H1)

Moving towards the first hypothesis (H1) which stated that giving tangible examples of CSR

activities increased the level of trust in a consumer, a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA)

test was conducted. The results (shown in Figure 6) were found to be statistically significant

(p < 0.01).

32


34/75

Figure 6:ANOVA testing trust of consumers based on tangibility of CSR messages

However, while these results tell us that there is a significant result, we must conduct

Post-Hoc tests to identify where the significance lays. In this case, using the Tukey HSD test

(Figure 7), we can identify that all groups varied significantly from each other. Therefore, we

can reject the null hypothesis and confirm that if corporate messages show clear and tangible

examples of their CSR activities, consumers will be significantly more inclined to trust the

authenticity of the program.

Figure 7: Post-Hoc comparison using Tukey HSD showing the statistically significant

different reactions to messages based on their tangibility

Most interesting is the inclination formed from the plotting of the means. If youll remember

from the previous chapter, I explained using a 6-point Likert scale where participants were

33


35/75

asked to read a statement and express their agreement, or lack thereof, between strongly

disagree to strongly agree (Appendix 3.1). Once the means were calculated (Appendix 4.4)

and plotted (Figure 8), they formed a very balanced slope.

Figure 8:Means plot of consumer trust versus the tangibility of CSR activity in message

As Figure 8 shows, the level of tangibility of a CSR message has a proportioned linear

relationship with the trust a consumer has. In other words, the graph shows us that an increase

in the clarity and tangibility of a CSR message will rise the consumers belief that the

company is, genuinely invested to make the world a better place (Appendix 3.1).

34


36/75

The qualitative research which was conducted in parallel to the quantitative survey gave way

to a glimpse of the latters justification. Participants in focus groups mentioned trusting the

message and company because of their partnership with another organization in these

instances, a non-profit organization which they trusted.

One participant, after having just watched the Pampers advert featuring UNICEF, was quoted

saying, I trust the message. First they associated with UNICEF [...] and I have my

confidence in them. (Appendix 4.7)

4.2.2 Skepticism (H1a)

Looking at the second hypothesis (H1a), which sought to confirm in a different manner the

first hypothesis (H1), the study found that skepticism lessens as the tangibility of a CSR

message increases.

Figure 9:ANOVA testing skepticism of consumers based on tangibility of CSR messages

Another analysis of variance was conducted (Figure 9) and looked for the level of skepticism

in participants when faced with several types of CSR messages. The tests revealed very

significant findings (F = 38.86, p < 0.01), however, a Post-Hoc analysis using the Tukey HSD

test (Appendix 4.5 & 4.6) revealed that only the highly tangible CSR messages (M= 2.92, SD

= 1.23) created statistically significantly different reactions compared to medium tangibility

messages (M= 3.51, SD

= 1.35) and low tangibility messages (M

= 3.69, SD

= 1.24).

35


37/75

Therefore, not only can we accept the second hypothesis (H1a), stating that giving tangible

examples of CSR activities reduces a viewers skepticism towards a CSR message, but we

can also argue that highly tangible messages (that is, messages which use a lot of examples,

are extremely clear, and rhetorically understandable) will produce significantly lower

skepticals than any other form of CSR message.

Qualitative tests revealed similar findings. When faced with messages featuring weak tangible

examples of CSR activities, participants were quoted as saying, Im very skeptical about this

CSR campaign and it felt that this [campaign] was completely profit-driven (Appendix

4.7).

However, in some rare instances, participants did show signs of skepticism with pieces of

communications categorised as highly tangible, stating, I really loved the advert, but I cant

believe that a big company, whose job is to make profits is sincere about the cause

(Appendix 4.7). Such findings were not found in the quantitative analyses, suggesting that

focus group participants might have been more apprehensive towards messages as they were

conscious of their role as critical thinkers. Such possibilities will be developed further in the

following chapter, underLimitations.

4.2.3 Attitude (H2)

In order to understand the relationship between consumer attitudes towards brands engaged in

CSR activities I asked participants whether the message had fostered a positive attitude

36


38/75

towards the purchase of such brands. The data was analysed using Spearmans Rank Order

Correlation and was found to be statistically significant (p < 0.01) (Figure 10).

Figure 10:Spearmans Correlation testing relationship between tangibility of CSR messages

and formation of positive attitudes

The data analyzed showed a moderately strong positive correlation (

= 0.48, p < 0.01) which rs

allows us to partially accept the third hypothesis (H2) and argue that there is a moderate

relationship between the tangibility level of a CSR message and its ability to influence

attitudes in a positive manner.

Qualitative results supported that statements. Participants justified their more favorable

attitudes after watching more tangible CSR messages, stating that, I didnt know the product

too well before. Now that Ive seen the ad, I really like it. In fact this his morning I had an

Innocent juice and it makes me feel happier, (Appendix 4.7) referring to the Innocent

campaign which was deemed highest in tangibility (4.24 out of 5) by the panel of marketers.

37


39/75

4.3 Consumer behavior and purchase intention

4.3.1 Purchase intention (H3)

When looking at consumer behavior, it is much more challenging to precisely know an

answers accuracy. As Billig (1987) has argued, humans often find it difficult to identify their

unbiased beliefs. In this study, such a supposition was taken into serious consideration.

For that matter, while questions often asked participants to rate their willingness to purchase a

product (Appendix 3.1), in this analysis we must not speak of actual behavior, as none of the

participants were interviewed post-purchase, but rather we must speak of the intention to

purchase.

Figure 11:Spearmans Correlation testing relationship between tangibility of CSR messages

and consumer purchase intention

As a result, the quantitative findings, which were analysed using Spearmans Rank Order

Correlation (Figure 11), found a significant moderate relationship (

= 0.47, p < 0.01) rs

between the tangibility level of a CSR message and the viewers purchase intentions.

Therefore, we can confidently accept the fourth hypothesis (H3) and say that giving tangible

38


40/75

examples of CSR activities increases a consumers purchase intention for the product

advertised.

Qualitative data yielded similar results, supporting H3. The vast majority of focus group

participants were far more enthusiastic about highly tangible campaigns such as Pampers and

Innocent drinks. Regarding the latter, one of the participants said something which seemed to

describe most of his peers opinion too. He said, knowing that if the next time I buy a juice it

can help someone in need, I would definitely buy an Innocent juice. However, that wasnt to

say that some didnt disagree. Interestingly, another participant, still speaking of the same

message, stated that, I think that 10% of profits is very little, referring to the brands

promise to donate 10% of their profits to a charity. It makes it sound too symbolic to me [...]

and so I stay fairly indifferent about the brand. For me it doesnt really convince me to buy

it. (Appendix 4.7)

4.3.2 Memory (H4)

Moving along to look at the relationship between the tangibility of a CSR message and its

effect on memory, I used Pearsons Chi-Squared test as it looks for independence or

associations between categorical or ordinal variables such as ours (Pallant, 2010).

The data used on this test was from the questions posed at the end of the survey. Participants

were asked if they remembered the content of the messages presented in previous questions. It

was then compared to the panel-rated tangibility levels used throughout this study.

39


41/75

The results of the test, presented below (Figure 12), show that less than 20% of the cells have

an expected count less than 5, which allows us to proceed since the Chi-Square test

assumption has not been violated. Proceeding, we can clearly identify that the test is

significant (p < 0.01) and therefore accept that there is an association between the tangibility

of a CSR message and a consumers ability to correctly remember the content of that

message.

Figure 12: Chi-Square testing association between consumers memory and tangibility of a

CSR message

However, while a Chi-Squared test will tell us whether an association exists or not, it does not

tell us the effect of the association. For that we proceed to conduct a Cramers V test which,

in this instance shows us a significant moderate effect ( = 0.39, p < 0.01) based on Pallants c

(2010: 134) interpretation of relationship values.

40


42/75

Figure 13:Cramers V testing the size of the Pearsons Chi-Squared results

We can therefore reject our fifth null hypothesis and accept H4, stating that there is a

significant association or dependence between the tangibility of a CSR message and a

consumers ability to correctly recall the content of that message.

4.4 Additional findings

Like most research projects which use qualitative techniques, revelations are made which

werent originally hypothesized. One of such revelations was made by a participant, who said

the following regarding a low tangibility message: after you hear the message a couple of

times and concentrate you get what its saying. In a way, its a clear message, its just very

badly presented. [...] Compared to the Coca-Cola one (a medium tangibility message), I look

at the Coca-Cola one and think, this is 100% profit driven (Appendix 4.7)

The participant had originally expressed a negative attitude towards the brand because of its

poor audio-visual characteristics, rendering her unable to successfully understand the

message. Therefore, this statement not only reinforces the hypotheses which argue that

tangibility is an indispensable part of any CSR message, but it also highlights a new point:

that the tactical characteristics of a message trump the content of that message.

41


43/75

In other words, one can have a superior social message, but if it isnt communicated tangibly,

that message will be even less persuasively effective than a message which has weak content

and great tangible characteristics.

4.5 Discussion

Reflecting on the research and its results, we can see the advantage of juxtaposing quantitative

with qualitative data. Though at times both produced conflicting results, the ability to hear

and understand each voice in focus groups allowed for quantitative outliers to be spoken for.

For example, when considering the second hypothesis, H1a, it wasnt after a lot of

consideration that I came to the decision to completely accept the alternative hypothesis. The

reason being that a small minority of focus group participants mentioned feeling very

skeptical about highly tangible CSR messages. Their defences were sound and fair, however,

the hypothesis did not speak of completely eliminating skepticism, but rather reducing it and

therefore, as a large majority felt less skeptical towards such messages, it seemed very clear to

accept H1a.

Interestingly, when looking at the first hypothesis (H1), the same participants did not mention

any reduced trust towards the highly tangible messages. Both hypotheses therefore help

support each other and accept that CSR messages using vivid examples, clarity, and strong

persuasive appeals proved to be very influential on attitudes.

Regarding behaviors (H3), both sets of data produced fairly homogenous results. Even the

earlier mentioned skeptics said their attitudes would not stop them from purchasing from

42


44/75

brands involved in CSR activities. One participants mentioned feeling pressure, its as

though theyre blackmailing me into buying. Saying, look at what will happen if you dont

buy [the product]. However, while this studys aim isnt to vouch for the success of CSR as

promotional campaigns, looking at the use of vivid examples, striking clarity and humble

persuasive techniques, we can accept that such criteria for tangibility are somewhat effective

tools in increasing purchase intentions.

Finally, looking at the influence of the aforementioned criteria have on memory (H4), it is

there that one can see the most striking effects. Though a similar test was not carried out on

focus group participants for practical purposes, the results from the quantitative survey

showed a clear amelioration in memory when participants were confronted with tangible

elements such as figures, stories or examples. The reason Cramers V result was not higher

was because the data had to be compounded from 4 variables (as it was sourced from a

multiple choice question) into 2 (correct / incorrect answers). For that reason Cramers V was

diluted. However, that very fact only cements my confidence in the results.

As hypothesised, the campaigns which shaped attitudes and behaviors most were the ones

with high tangibility. However, as the further findings have shown, to a consumers eyes, the

content of a social message will not sway their attitudes or behaviors, instead, the tangible

characteristics or the execution of that message is what will affect consumers. In effect,

the importance lies in the execution of a message, not in its content.

43


45/75

Figure 14:Hypotheses and deductions

Hypothesis Deduction

H1

Offering tangible examples of CSR activities increases

the trust the viewer has towards a message and the

company

Accepted

H1aOffering tangible examples of CSR activities

reduces a

viewers skepticismtowards the message and companyAccepted

H2

Offering tangible examples of CSR activities creates

more favorable attitudes in viewers towards the

company

Accepted

H3

Offering tangible examples of CSR activities

increases

a consumers purchase intention for the presented

product

Partially accepted

H4Offering tangible examples of CSR activities increases

a consumers likelihood to remember a messageAccepted

44


46/75

Chapter 5: Conclusion

5.1 Limitations

Its been touched upon throughout this dissertation, but I will briefly discuss in this chapter

what limitations were met throughout this research project.

Highest of all, a feedback I received on several occasions, which I also mentioned in the

previous chapter, is the environment that participants were in. Often, participants stopped

seeing the messages from their consumer eyes, but knowing their role as research participants,

were tempted to look at the messages through a far more critical point of view.

I knew from the beginning of the difficulty I would have in fostering an environment where

participants saw messages through the eyes of consumers, as the setting of a survey or focus

group is unlike that of a living room or supermarket. However, while the results were still

very favorable, I am left believing that they would have been a slightly more representative of

consumers true opinion had a different, more sophisticated research method been adopted.

Unfortunately, financial and practical elements did not allow for a more sophisticated method.

Another limitation was that consumers were limited to viewing the messages once. This was

purposely done in order to test their memory at the end. However, in a real world situation,

where integrated marketing communications is growing, consumers would be faced with far

more touchpoints as they were in this study. For example, the Pampers message was only one

of over a dozen different iterations for the same campaign. Consumers would have been very

unlikely to see the one message only once. In a real world scenario they would have been

45


47/75

faced with the same campaign through different messages repeated several more times. This

proved to be a limitation, as participants often felt the message was too short.

Additionally, as its been mentioned throughout this dissertation, I often avoid speaking of

consumer behavior, substituting it for the more appropriate purchase intention. However,

when questioning participants, I asked them if they would be likely to purchase a product

after seeing a certain message. In such instances, as past researchers have found (Mohr, Webb

& Harris, 2001), it is very difficult to measure the accuracy of participants responses, as its a

lot easier (and cheaper) to say you would purchase a product in a questionnaire than in a store.

Likely, consumers might identify as being socially responsible consumers, but that feeling

does not always translate the same way in their shopping patterns. In fact, as Billig (1987)

argued, humans might believe their attitude to be theirs and genuine, but most times such

attitudes are the product of context or peer pressure. Its therefore quite difficult, as a

researcher, to know with certainty when consumers are answering questions truthfully or

bending the truth for fear of judgment consciously or unconsciously.

Lastly, in order to sustain a level of uniformity and in order to reduce errors, the market which

was selected for this study was the FMCG market. While this means that these results must be

considered valid solely for FMCG products, they can be loosely referred to for other types of

consumer products, but that remains another limitation of this dissertation.

46


48/75

5.2 Further research

To further develop this new field of research, I would suggest going into further details, so as

to identify specific characteristics of tangible CSR messages which make them persuasive. A

particular way of doing so would be to produce different pieces of communication, using a

single message but executed in different ways. Researchers would then precisely identify the

characteristics of tangibility which make CSR so persuasive.

Finally another area of research could be to replicate this study outside of the FMCG market

and look at the effect a CSR messages tangibility can have on consumer attitudes and

behaviors.

5.3 Conclusion and implications

This study has shown, using the FMCG market as an example, that there is a distinctive

relationship between whats been described as the tangibility of a CSR message (i.e. clarity,

imagery, simplicity) and consumer attitudes, behaviors, and even memory. While some might

consider these characteristics as self-evident or predictable for any kind of marketing

campaign, the past couple of decades of research depicted in the Literature review and

published campaigns, demonstrate that they are anything but self-evident.

It would seem, when juxtaposing past campaigns including the ones used in this study

and published research (Sen & Bhattachayra, 2001 Murray & Vogel 1997), that marketing

practitioners are inclined to believe that the force of CSR activities alone are force enough to

persuade and lure consumers to their brands. Unfortunately, the very product of such thinking

47


49/75

has created CSR campaigns which have only made consumers increasingly cynical and

skeptical about the authenticity of a brands actions (Mohr, Webb and Harris, 2001).

From the very start of this dissertation, Ive tried to make my case very clear: I am not

interested in identifying the level of success CSR campaigns can have towards consumer

persuasion. This has already been done. Instead, through my research and review of past

literature, I have found a gap in research: the very reasons why CSR campaigns are, or are not

persuasive.

In doing so, Ive attempted to prove, through the use of concrete CSR campaigns and

messages from official sources, that the use of vivid examples, simple rhetoric and imagery

can have a positive effect on consumer attitudes, purchasing intentions, and memory. My

thesis has been, and continues to be, that a CSR campaigns persuasive success is inherently

embedded and dependent on its tangible qualities. In other words, it is only when marketers

focus on the execution of a campaign that they will succeed to persuade.

In fact, as it was briefly discussed in the fourth chapter, focus group transcripts (Appendix

4.7) revealed an interesting point. When pressed and interrogated, participants expressed more

favorable attitudes towards the content of one of the low tangibility messages. However, it

was the poor audio-visual qualities of the message which countered these positive attitudes

and in fact soured them, rendering the campaign anticlimactic.

We can therefore clearly infer from these findings that the trait of tangibility is itself not as

self evident to a CSR campaigns success as one might believe. As marketers scramble to

48


50/75

keep up with trends by soaking meaning into their brands, they are ignoring crucial qualities

that give them the savor of authenticity as well. Focus should therefore not only be placed on

campaign ideas, but more importantly, they should be placed on the way these ideas will be

brought to ones audience. To implement a campaign focused on a different equation could

have negative consequences, even in the long term.

In fact, this struggle is even more important today, as even a slight degree of skepticism might

deter a consumer from consuming a product which might, in turn, tarnish their own personal

brand. For the idea that a company is solely responsible to its shareholder is, today, long

obsolete.

49


51/75

References

Asch, S. (1951). Effects of group pressure upon the modification and distortion of judgments.

In: H. Guetzkow, Groups, leadership, and men

, Pittsburgh, PA: Carnegie Press, pp.177-190.

Becker-Olsen, K., Cudmore, B. and Hill, R. (2006). The impact of perceived corporate social

responsibility on consumer behavior.Journal of Business Research , 59(1), pp.46-53.

Billig, M. (1987).Arguing and thinking. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Bloomberg Business, (1994). Are Good Causes Good Marketing?. [online] Available at:

http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/stories/1994-03-20/are-good-causes-good-marketing

[Accessed 26 May 2015].

Bohner, G. and Dickel, N. (2011). Attitudes and Attitude Change.Annu. Rev. Psychol., 62(1),

pp.391-417.

Brown, T. and Dacin, P. (1997). The Company and the Product: Corporate Associations and

Consumer Product Responses.Journal of Marketing, 61(1), p.68.

Business Week/Harris, (2000).How Business Rates: By the Numbers (extended)

. [online]

Available at: http://www.businessweek.com/2000/00_37/b3698004.htm [Accessed 24 May

2015].

Drucker, P. (1954). The practice of management

. New York: Harper & Row.

Fisher, C. (2007).Researching and writing a dissertation: A guidebook for business students.

2nd ed. Harlow: Financial Times Prentice Hall.

Friedman, M. (1970). The Social Responsibility Of Business Is to Increase Its Profits. The

New York Times, pp.33, 122-126.

Keltner, D. (2014). The Compassionate Instinct. [online] Greater Good - University of

California, Berkeley. Available at:

http://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/the_compassionate_instinct [Accessed 17 Jul.

2015].

Krech, D. and Crutchfield, R. (1948). Theory and problems of social psychology. New York:

McGraw-Hill Book Co.

Lavidge, R. and Steiner, G. (1961). A Model for Predictive Measurements of AdvertisingEffectiveness.Journal of Marketing

, 25(6), p.59.

50


52/75

Mohr, L., Webb, D. and Harris, K. (2001). Do Consumers Expect Companies to be Socially

Responsible? The Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility on Buying Behavior.Journal of

Consumer Affairs, 35(1), pp.45-72.

Murray, K. and Vogel, C. (1997). Using a hierarchy-of-effects approach to gauge the

effectiveness of corporate social responsibility to generate goodwill toward the firm: Financial

versus nonfinancial impacts.Journal of Business Research , 38(2), pp.141-159.

O'Shaughnessy, J. and O'Shaughnessy, N. (2003).Persuasion in advertising

. London:

Routledge.

Oxford Dictionaries, (2015). Tangible - definition of tangible in English from the Oxford

dictionary. [online] Available at:http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/tangible [Accessed 13 Jul. 2015].

Pallant, J. (2010). SPSS survival manual. Maidenhead: McGraw Hill.

Pava, M. and Krausz, J. (1996). The association between corporate social-responsibility and

financial performance: The paradox of social cost.Journal of Business Ethics , 15(3),

pp.321-357.

Peck, J. and Tickell, A. (2002). Neoliberalizing Space.Antipode

, 34(3), pp.380-404.

Rogers, S. (2013). UK public spending since 1963

. [online] The Guardian. Available at:

http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2010/apr/25/uk-public-spending-1963#data

[Accessed 19 Apr. 2015].

Russo, J. and Chaxel, A. (2010). How persuasive messages can influence behavior without

awareness.Journal of Consumer Psychology

, 20(3), pp.338-342.

Stiglitz, J. (2006).Making globalization work. New York: W.W. Norton & Co.

Storbeck, J. and Clore, G. (2007). On the interdependence of cognition and emotion.

Cognition & Emotion

, 21(6), pp.1212-1237.

Taylor, F. (1967). The principles of scientific management

. New York: Norton.

U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, (2015). Gross Domestic Product & Government

Spending. National Income and Product Accounts Tables. [online] U.S. Department of

Commerce. Available at:

51


53/75

http://www.bea.gov/iTable/iTableHtml.cfm?reqid=9&step=3&isuri=1&904=1961&903=5&9

06=A&905=2015&910=X&911=0#.VdSyQXLiB1g [Accessed 19 Apr. 2015].

Vakratsas, D. and Ambler, T. (1999). How Advertising Works: What Do We Really Know?.

Journal of Marketing

, 63(1), p.26.

van den Brink, D., Odekerken-Schrder, G. and Pauwels, P. (2006). The effect of strategic

and tactical cause-related marketing on consumers' brand loyalty.Journal of Consumer

Marketing

, 23(1), pp.15-25.

Varadarajan, P. and Menon, A. (1988). Cause-Related Marketing: A Coalignment of

Marketing Strategy and Corporate Philanthropy.Journal of Marketing, 52(3), pp.58-74.

Webb, D. and Mohr, L. (1998). A typology of consumer responses to cause-relatedmarketing: From skeptics to socially concerned.Journal of Public Policy & Marketing

, 17(2),

pp.226-238.

52


54/75

Appendix


Appendix 3.1: Survey

Part 1: Participant validity questions

Have you heard, or are you familiar, with ALL of the following products:

- McDonald's

- Pampers

- Innocent

- Nestl

- Coca-Cola

Yes

No

- Next page -

Part 2: Participant preparation

Let's start with some basic questions to get us warmed up.Please read and asses the following

statements

Strongly

Disagree

Disagree Somewhat

Disagree

Somewha

t Agree

Agree Strongly

Agree

I consider

myself socially

responsible in

the way I buy

things

I will avoid

buying from

certain

companies

which are not

socially

responsible

Companies

have aresponsibility

53


55/75

towards the

community

they work in

Companies

have aresponsibility

towards the

environment

Companies

have a

responsibility

to donate

- Next page -

Part 3: Innocent drinks

Please read or watch the following pieces of official communications and answer the

questions which follow them

VIDEO LINK: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LeXgxN24loc

Did you enjoy this video? (5 = high enjoyment)

1 2

3

4

5

- Next page -

Please assess the following statements based on the video

(Be careful when you answer, some of the statements are phrasedboth positively and negatively)

Strongly

Disagree

Disagree Somewhat

Disagree

Somewhat

Agree

Agree Strongly

Agree

I feel that

Innocent is

genuinely

invested in

making the

world a

better place

54


56/75

Next time I

buy a juice I

will buy an

Innocent

juice

The advert

has made me

feel good

about buying

Innocent

products

The advert

was all talk

and didn'tmake me feel

more

confident in

the brand's

ethics

Select the correct statement

5% of Innocent's profits go to charity

10% of Innocent's profits go to charity

20% of Innocent's profits go to charity None of the above

- Next page -

Part 4: Coca-Cola

VIDEO LINK: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ByHcNZ2c8Mo

Did you enjoy this video? (5 = high enjoyment) 1

2

3

4

5

- Next page -

55


57/75


(Be careful when you answer, some of the statements are phrased

both positively and negatively)

Strongly

Disagree

Disagree Somewhat

Disagree

Somewha

t Agree

Agree Strongly

Agree

I feel that

Coca-Cola is

genuinely

invested in

making the

world a better

place

Next time I buy

a soda I will buy

a Coke

The advert has

made me feel

good about

buying

Coca-Cola

products

The advert was

all talk anddidn't make me

feel more

confident in the

brand's ethics


5% of Coca-Cola's profits go to charity



None of the above- Next page -

56


58/75

Part 5: McDonalds

VIDEO LINK:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PL308D62066232AFA0&v=mEqpUvRaBtQ


1

2

3

4

5

- Next page -




Strongly

Disagree

Disagree Somewha

t

Disagree

Somewhat

Agree

Agree Strongly

Agree

I feel that

McDonalds is

genuinely

invested inmaking the

world a better

place

Next time a

burger it will

be a

McDonalds

burger

The advert has

made me feel

good about

buying

McDonalds

products

The advert was

all talk and

didn't make me

feel moreconfident in

57


59/75

the brand's

ethics


5% of McDonald's profits go to charity



None of the above

- Next page -

Part 6: Pampers

VIDEO LINK: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZRp8kpQHYI


1

2

3

4

5




Strongly

Disagree

Disagree Somewh

at

Disagree

Somewha

t Agree

Agree Strongl

y Agree

I feel that Pampers

is genuinely

invested in making

the world a better

place

If I needed to, next

time I buy diapers

I will buy Pampers

The advert has

made me feel good

about buying

Pampers products

The advert was alltalk and didn't

58


60/75

make me feel

more confident in

Documents

Characteristics of Persuasion: The Role of Tangibility in CSR Messages