I have recently been confronted, in my position at work by
the issue of what I call conscientious purchase marketing. While I have some
knowledge of the issue involving CSR (Corporate Social Responsibility)
marketing principals I was confronted by the lack of reliable data surrounding
this marketing concept. While this marketing approach is not new and the
company I work for supports a number of charitable organisations it has
recently been decided that our organisations USP (Unique Selling Proposition) is
in fact our social mindedness/ responsibility.
To be honest at first I was bemused but as I have watched
some in upper management embrace this new position I have become increasingly
alarmed from a brand / marketing perspective. Our organisation, a manufacturing
and consumer product based business has recently undergone work to become a 100
percent carbon offset company. While I support this move I have growing
concerns that the management think that this position of social responsibility should
become our USP and will think it will be a “silver bullet” to improve sales and
our market position.
Recent market research undertaken by our organisation identified
that our customers (with out prompting) highly valued our products and services
and customer service. On issues such as our environmental position this ranked
lower in terms of importance to our customers. We also tested the market to the
fact that we were 100% Australian owned and this, while ranking lower than our
products and services in importance ranked higher than our environmental
position.
Feed back from non customers was equally lukewarm to the environmental
/ social issues. However non customers also did not value our products and
services (obviously as they have not experience them). However what non
customers did rate as high importance was price over quality and service, the Australian
owned question followed by our environmental position rating lower down the
list.
The position taken by management has been that anyone can
say they have great customer service or great products and despite the
importance of this in our customer’s opinion have decided that our USP should
be our social and environmental responsibility / activities.
Taking a look through the available market research and
public information there are numerous articles espousing the great benefits of
this kind of marketing. However if you delve a little deeper it would seem that
there is not all that much market research on the subject of CSR and the
relationship between the consumer and purchasing decisions to warrant the level
of faith in the practice. In fact there are very few who have looked at this
issue with a critical eye in my opinion and time and time again in the few in-depth
studies I found the same comment was made that” there was limited research available”.
When I started looking into business and their position on
corporate responsibility and customer purchasing I began by looking at a few of
the larger companies around the world like Microsoft. Knowing that as an
organisation they have a strong CSR position I could not help but notice
something. None of these companies general marketing material such as web sites
talked about charities, CSR or causes that they are involved with. When you dig
a little deeper you can find it but why is it not obvious? Thus my dilemma, our
company has a strong product and we perform well against our competition.
Market research identified we have a clear market position in our customers
mind and our products and pricing are positioned in such away that we would be
able to attract new customers based on those attributes.
Many of the research documents I have found talk about the
value action gap. This is the gap between the customer concern of the issues
and their willingness to pay for it. This brings into question the influence
that a cause has over the purchasing of a product. Our own market research
concluded that environmental issues (social issues) are a “nice to know and play a role when other benefits are aligned”. Or to
put it another way; so long as we have our product and services, customer service
and pricing right the social issues is a reassuring “nice to know”. Other research documents also talks about the role
of education and CSR. Many conclude that with out education of the issues involved
your support of a cause may make little difference to your customers.
So why a USP based around this CSR approach? I get the good
corporate citizen thing, don’t get me wrong and I can see that for some people
it will have an influence on their purchasing decision and it should form part
of our marketing message. But build your entire marketing on this as a
foundation? I find it risky.
In a recent online marketing article titled Cause
marketing has become ubiquitous and high risk. It was pointed out how
there is a growing concern in marketing fields that the cause
marketing approach
was increasingly seen as “a ubiquitous “last ditch” tool to capture
market share and drive sales when all else has failed”. And that they “run the risk of being targeted as
opportunistic by socially-conscientious consumers”. I find this particularly
concerning given the consumers obsession with social media and the ability to
go on line and voice an opinion on any number of online consumer sites about a
product or service right or wrong.
What I don’t get is why you would focus 80% of your budget
on an audience that may only make up less than 5% of your customer base at the
expense of other marketing messages / opportunities identified as strong in your
own market research.
I personally get the feeling with these types of campaigns
that they are more akin to guilt
marketing where a company tries to make you feel a level of guilt by not
purchasing its products and services. Purchasing should be about pleasure at
some level not guilt. I am sure that when a person goes to McDonald's to buy a
burger they buy it for the level of pleasure that the purchase brings them whether
it is the price, convenience or (god forbid) taste and not because of the
charity they support. In fact we probably buy products from companies that
support charitable organisation without even knowing it. However knowing that
they support a charity is a “nice to know” and not a purchase driver. McDonald's don’t make a secret of their charitable endeavours but nor do hey make it 80% of
their advertising message. In fact I would be amazed if it made up 5% or of their
over all advertising message.
To me the companies that seem to make the most of their CSR
positions are those who don’t make a “song and dance” about it but rather just
get on with it just gently reminding their customers that “it’s a nice to know”
and giving their customers reassurance that they are doing the right thing.