International Review on Public and Non Profit Marketing, vol. 3, n 1 (June 2006), pp. 9-21.

INSIGHTS FROM A REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ON CAUSE

MARKETING
Walter Wymer*
Adrian Sargeant**

ABSTRACT:
In this paper an assessment of the state of the field of cause marketing research and
the outlook for the future is provided. Although much work has been done on cause
marketing, enhancing our knowledge of this growing field, substantial gaps in our
knowledge exist. Few connections between studies have been made, resulting in
fragmentation of this field. Important relationships among cause marketing components and
their effect on program outcomes have yet to be examined.
This article analyzes what is known about cause marketing and identifies questions for
future research.

Key Words:
Cause marketing; literature review; cause-related marketing; cross-sector alliances.

Faculty of Management University of Lethbridge. 4401 University Dr. W, Lethbridge AB T1K 3M4 (Canada).
E-mail: walter.wymer@uleth.ca
**
Department of Marketing University of the West of England. Frenchay Campus, Coldharbour Lane, BristolBS16 1QY (UK). E-mail: adrian.sargeant@uwe.ac.uk
Received: November 2005. Accepted: December 2005.

10

Walter Wymer and Adrian Sargeant

1. INTRODUCTION:
Businesses support and collaborate with nonprofit organizations (NPOs) in a variety
of ways. One type of business collaboration with NPOs is cause marketing. The use of
cause marketing relationships has been increasing steadily since the early 1980s. Most
large U.S. companies and a growing number of companies in other countries are involved
in cause marketing relationships.
In this section, we will first define cause marketing. Then we will present a summary
of findings from the literature in sections two and three. Finally, we will discuss in section
four the managerial implications of this body of work and conclude with recommendations
for future research.
Conceptualization of cause marketing:
We will rely on Andreasens definition of cause marketing as ...a corporation
donates a specific amount of cash, food, or equipment in direct proportion to sales
revenueoften up to some limit to one or more nonprofits (Andreasen, 1996: 48). From
the perspective of the business, cause marketing has blended dimensions of both
philanthropy and marketing.
Cause marketing relationships:
In the cause marketing literature, Samu and Wymer (2002) developed an initial model
that described the formation and outcomes of relationships between businesses and
nonprofit organizations. Their model included variables that would apply to businessnonprofit relationships. Such variables included motivations of the nonprofit and the
business, target markets, type of nonprofit-business relationship, resource commitment by
the business, partner expectations, and business reputation. This model also acknowledged
that business-nonprofit relationships usually involve a communications program/campaign
directed at target markets. Their model incorporated characteristics of the promotional
campaign and audience effects.
In describing the characteristics of the relationship, we are referring to aspects of the
relationship between partners as well as the program that the relationship produces. For
example, in Table 1, relationship variables are separated from programmatic variables. The
programmatic variables are inextricably linked to the relationship itself: the program the
relationship produces cannot exist without the relationship. The relationship would have no
reason to exist without producing the program.
Table 1. Examples of relationship characteristic variables in cause marketing.

Relationship
Duration of relationship
Inter-organizational communication
Institutional support
Trust

Program
Communication/promotional campaign
Level and nature of business support to
nonprofit
Type of program
Coordination
Governance and administrative mechanisms

Insights from a Review of the Literature on Cause Marketing

11

Table 2. Relationship outcomes in cause marketing.

Relationship outcomes
Were programmatic objectives realized?
Were expected partner benefits realized?
Do managers rate the relationship as a success?

The nature of many programs produced by collaborating businesses and nonprofit

organizations are such that a communications/promotional campaign is produced as an
integral part of the program. The communications/promotional campaigns would have their
own sub-units such as goals, objectives, media, message, audience, and so forth. These
variables would also be of interest to researchers and they would impact program
effectiveness and relationship outcomes.
Cause marketing relationship programs produces outcomes. As shown in Table 2, the
outcomes are dependent on the program objectives, the expected benefits of the partners,
and the managerial perceptions of success.
2. LITERATURE ON PARTNER CHARACTERISTICS:
Authors analysis of the literature indicates that two streams of work are emphasized:
degree of fit between organizations and partner motivations.
Fit between organizations:
The most frequently examined aspect of partner characteristics is fit between
organizations. Fit refers to the level of compatibility between partnering organizations.
Conventional wisdom suggests that partner compatibility and relationship success are
directly related. Most scholarly work in this area has focused upon identifying compatibility
variables that predict relationship success.
Samu and Wymer (2002) describe fit in terms of the degree of congruence between a
cause and a businesss product/service. For example, the nonprofit organization March of
Dimes (mission: funding research to prevent birth defects) is a better fit for the Gerber
company (produces baby food/products) than the Exxon-Mobil Company (produces
petroleum products).
One potential indicator of success is a favourable public (or target market) response to
marketing communications emanating from the relationship. Favourable responses can be
affective (e.g., attitudes) or behavioural (e.g., donations to charity, purchasing brand).
Several works in the literature report that the fit between the nonprofit organization and its
cause and the supporting business(es) must have congruence (i.e., make sense) in the minds
of the target audience (Andreasen, 1996; Segawa and Segal, 2000; Till and Nowak, 2000;
Basil, 2002).
Basil (2002) conducted a series of three studies using student subjects. She found that
a high level of fit among partnering organizations lead to more positive attitudes and
stronger purchase intentions. In another study using student subjects, Basil and Herr (2003)
found that fit was particularly relevant in predicting positive consumer responses if prior
consumer attitudes toward the partners were positive.

12

Walter Wymer and Adrian Sargeant

Drumwright, Cunningham, and Berger (2000) describe three dimensions of fit among
cause marketing partners that encompasses findings from prior work. One dimension of fit
is mission fit: the connection between a partners mission and the purpose of the
relationship formed. A second dimension of fit is target market fit: the fit between the
companys target market and the cause. A third dimension of fit is product/cause fit: the
audience perception of a natural congruence between the companys product and the cause.
Partner motivations:
Business partners typically seek multiple benefits from their cause marketing
relationships (Wymer and Samu, 2003a and 2003b). These motivations are derived from a
need to support a worthy cause as well as a need to further the businesss objectives
(Berger, Cunningham and Drumwright, 1999).
The benefits businesses may desire from their cause marketing relationships are both
directly and indirectly achieved. Direct benefits generally refer to an increase in sales
(Drumwright, 1996). Indirect benefits are those that dont produce a direct improvement in
company profitability but may improve profitability indirectly by first improving public
attitudes, customer relations, or brand image which all influence subsequent consumer
purchase choices. Indirect benefits include favourable publicity (Till and Nowak, 2000)
which improves public attitudes of the company or its brand (Andreasen, 1996) or a greater
public awareness of the brand in the marketplace (Mescon and Tilson, 1987). Other indirect
benefits include improved employee morale (Dahl and Lavack, 1995), employee
recruitment (Cone, 1999; Bronn and Vrioni, 2001), and enhanced managerial skills (Austin,
2000a; Sagawa 2001).
Managers of nonprofit organizations are motivated to seek out corporate support to
further their organizations missions and objectives. A important benefit is financial support
(Schlossberg, 1989; Andreasen, 1996). New monetary resource inflows to nonprofit
organizations enable them to better meet their objectives. Additionally, corporations
typically spend considerable funds advertising their support of a cause. This advertising
exposure increases public awareness and support for the cause (Andreasen, 1996).
Therefore, in addition to direct funding from the corporate partners, cause marketing
communications are also an important benefit to nonprofit organizations (Samu and
Wymer, 2002).
3. LITERATURE ON RELATIONSHIP CHARACTERISTICS:
Duration of relationship:
One dimension of cause marketing relationships is their intended duration. From the
literature, relationship longevity appears to exist along a short-term to long-term
continuum. Austin (2000b), and Sagawa and Segal (2000) have published important work
on business relationships with nonprofit organizations. They view long-term, ongoing
relationships between business and nonprofit partners as the ideal (Austin, 2000b; Sagawa
and Segal 2000). These authors view these relationships as progressive, beginning with
initial business support of a cause (which may take the form of philanthropy or cause
marketing). Both authors portray successful business relationships with nonprofit
organizations as those that are long-term, in which there are close ties between partners,
and in which the business partners are committed to the nonprofits mission. In the most

Insights from a Review of the Literature on Cause Marketing

13

mature business/NPO relationships business partners identify and define their organizations
by their collaboration and support of the cause. Sagawa and Segal (2000) take a more
pragmatic view, and recommend that nonprofit partners recognize the expected benefits of
business supporters and make efforts to ensure that business partners get ample publicity
and recognition for their support.
Other scholars recognize that some businesses are not interested in long-term
relationships. They are more interested in limiting their involvement with an NPO to a
specified cause marketing program. They view these shorter-term relationships successful if
the partners believe their objectives were achieved or they derived more benefits than costs
from the association. This body of work has reported the importance of initial partner
expectations to perceived relationship success. Businesses with prior cause marketing
experience tend to have more realistic expectations. Businesses that expect quick economic
returns from their cause marketing involvement are more likely to be disappointed than
businesses that expect indirect benefits to lag behind the cause marketing program
(Drumwright, 1996).
For cause marketing relationships that are intended to be shorter-lived, scholars report
that partners who, at the formation of the relationship, develop dissolution strategies for
ending and exiting the relationship at the appropriate time perceive the relationship as more
successful than partners who do not plan for eventual dissolution (Berger, Cunningham and
Drumwright, 1999).
Inter-organizational communication:
It is important to understand the role communication between partners plays in the
success of the relationship. Regular, open communication among partners is important
(Sagawa, 2001). Ongoing communication helps to build trust (Berger, Cunningham and
Drumwright, 1999). It facilitates collaborative problem solving. Commitment and trust
foster good communication (Berger, Cunningham, and Drumwright, 1999; Austin, 2000b;
Sagawa, 2001). Partners need to have multiple communication channels, both formal and
informal, at different organizational levels (Austin, 2000a; Sagawa, 2001).
Sagawa (2001), and Sagawa and Segal (2000) describe communication in businessnonprofit collaborative relationships as a multidimensional construct. Their dimensions of
communication in these relationships are: joint planning, ongoing communication, internal
communication, and intimacy. Joint planning, involving various levels of the organizations
in face-to-face interactions, facilitates problem solving and reduces conflicts. Ongoing
communication refers regular interactions among partners that are candid and a balanced
two-way flow of ideas and information. Internal communication refers to ensuring that each
organization is keeping its own internal constituencies (e.g., employees, volunteers, board
members, sponsors, etc.) informed about the relationship and its benefits. Intimacy is the
most ambiguous of these dimensions; however, it refers to a closeness between partners and
is similar to a identification integration that Austin (2000b) described.
Institutional support:
Institutional support refers to the demonstration of partnership commitment.
Demonstrating an organizations commitment to a cause marketing relationship can be
done in various ways. For example, it can be demonstrated by the organizational leadership
devoting adequate resources (e.g., labour and money) to ensure success. Leaders can also

14

Walter Wymer and Adrian Sargeant

demonstrate the support of the cause marketing relationship by regularly emphasizing the
importance of the relationship and displaying a continual interest in its success. While little
research has been undertaken in this area, there are some findings that can be applied.
Sagawa and Segal (2000) suggest that successful nonprofit-business relationships
have a champion, someone usually in the business organization who zealously promotes the
companys association with the cause. This may be the corporate CEO who becomes a
staunch supporter of the cause, eventually becoming a board member of the nonprofit
organization (or even the boards chairperson), encouraging corporate support.
Sagawa (2001) reported that all partners need to feel responsible for the outcomes of
the collaboration. She also writes that partners must demonstrate mutual respect and trust.
Berger, Cunningham and Drumwright (1999) found that without trust and commitment,
open and honest communication between partners will not develop. They reported that
without trust, commitment, and open, honest communication, a host of dysfunctional
elements in the relationship develop. For the relationship to be successful, it must be able to
survive turnover of key managers (Sagawa and Segal 2000, Austin 2000b; Sagawa, 2001).
4. CONSIDERATIONS AND QUESTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH:
The integration of prior work on cause marketing described above shows that much
has been learned about cause marketing. In regards to the work on partner characteristics,
we have a clearer understanding of the importance of fit between the business and nonprofit
partners. It appears that a congruous match between the business and the NPO results in a
more favourable audience response.
Future research is needed to explore other possible partner characteristics. There are
several organizational characteristics that could be examined, for example: does the relative
size among partners matter?, do organizations of relatively similar sizes make better
matches?; what about public recognition of an organization?, should organizations look for
partners that are relatively unknown to the public or should they partner with organizations
that are well known?; what about location?, should an organization seek a partner that is
considered a local, regional, national, or international organization?, or does it matter?
Organizations can be compared in many diverse ways, all of which may be of
potential interest to researchers. Organizations can be matched on annual revenues, or
organizational assets. Organizations can be matched on characteristics of organizational
personnel. Variables like average age, income, education, sex, values, political ideologies,
and so forth may help predict relationship success.
Prior research describes business and nonprofit motives for involvement in cause
marketing relationships. Future research is needed to better understand how partner
expectations for relationship outcomes are formed. This is important because the level of
expectations influences the level of motivation to have a cause marketing relationship as
well as subsequent perceptions of relationship success. If a partner has unrealistically high
expectations that are not met by the relationship, dissatisfaction with the relationship is
likely.
In regards to the literature on cause marketing relationship characteristics, more
research is needed to better understand how nonprofit managers can influence short term
commercial cause marketing relationships into becoming long term strategic relationships

Insights from a Review of the Literature on Cause Marketing

15

in which the business partner is committed to the NPOs mission. Future research in the
interorganizational communication area is also needed to better understand mechanisms
through which partners can strengthen organizational bonds, building trust and
commitment.
5. REFERENCES:
Andreasen, A.R. (1996): Profits for Nonprofits: Find a Corporate Partner. Harvard Business Review, 74 (6), pp.
47-59.
Austin, J.E. (2000a): Strategic Collaboration between Nonprofits and Businesses. Nonprofit & Voluntary Sector
Quarterly, 29 (1), pp. 69-97.
Austin, J.E. (2000b): The Collaborative Challenge: How Nonprofits and Businesses Succeed Through Strategic
Alliances. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Basil, D. (2002): Cause-Related Marketing and Consumer Attitudes: The Effects of Balance and Fit on Cognitive
Processing. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Colorado.
Basil, D. and Herr, P.M. (2003): Dangerous Donations: The Effectiveness of Cause-Related Marketing on Charity
Attitude. Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing, 11 (1), pp. 59-76.
Berger, I.E.; Cunningham, P.H. and Drumwright, M.E. (1999): Social Alliances: Company/Nonprofit
Collaboration. Social Marketing Quarterly, 5 (3), pp. 49-53.
Bronn, P.S. and Vrioni, A.B. (2001): Corporate Social Responsibility and Cause-Related Marketing: An
Overview. International Journal of Advertising, 20 (2), pp. 207-222.
Cone (1999): Cone/Roper Cause Related Trends Report: Evolution of Cause Branding. Boston: Cone Inc.
Dahl, D.W. and Lavack, A.M. (1995): Cause-Related Marketing: Impact of Size of Corporate Donation and Size
of Cause-Related Promotion on Consumer Perceptions and Participation. In Stewart, D.W. and Vilcassim,
N.J. (eds.) 1995 AMA Winter Educators Conference: Marketing Theory and Applications (vol. 6). Chicago:
American Marketing Association, pp. 476-481.
Drumwright, M.E. (1996): Company Advertising with a Social Dimension: The Role of Noneconomic Criteria.
Journal of Marketing, 60 (4), pp. 71-88.
Drumwright, M.E.; Cunningham, P.H. and Berger. I.E. (2000): Social Alliances: Company/Nonprofit
Collaboration. Marketing Science Institute Working Paper Series Report n 00-101.
Mescon, T.S. and Tilson, D.J. (1987): Corporate Philanthropy: A Strategic Approach to the Bottom-Line.
California Management Review, 29 (2), pp. 49-61.
Sagawa, S. (2001): New Value Partnerships: The Lessons of Dennys/Save the Children Partnership for Building
High-Yielding Cross-Sector Alliances. International Journal of Nonprofit & Voluntary Sector Marketing, 6,
(3), pp. 199-214.
Sagawa, S. and Segal. E. (2000): Common Interest, Common Good: Creating Value Through Business and Social
Sector Partnerships. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Samu, S. and Wymer, W.W. Jr. (2002): Social Advertising: Effects of Dominance and Fit on Attitudes and
Behavioral Intentions. Paper presented at 2002 Academy of Marketing Science Conference, 29/05-01/06/2002,
Sanibel Island, Florida.
Schlossberg, H. (1989): Surviving in a Cause-Related World: Social Agencies Grow Into Sopphisticated
Marketers. Marketing News, 23 (26), pp. 1-3.
Till, B.D. and Nowak, L.I. (2000): Toward Effective Use of Cause-Relate Marketing Alliances. Journal of
Product & Brand Management, 9 (7), pp. 472-484.
Wymer, W.W. Jr. and Samu, S. (2003a): Dimensions of Business and Nonprofit Collaborative Relationships.
Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing, 11 (1), pp. 3-22.
Wymer, W.W. Jr. and Samu, S. (2003b): Nonprofit and Business Sector Collaboration: Social Enterprises, CauseRelated Marketing, Sponsorships, and Other Corporate-Nonprofit Dealings. Binghamton (NY): Best
Business Books.

All in-text references underlined in blue are linked to publications on ResearchGate, letting you access and read them imm