Professor Eikenberry has started a very engaging discussion on "Cause Marketing" with her article “The Hidden Costs of Cause Marketing” Although giving a very skeptic point of view; Professor Eikenberry's article has been nothing but very beneficial for "Cause Marketing". The discussion continued on Selfish Giving with many thoughtful comments from people.
The point that I want to discuss about Professor Eikenberry’s article is her argument around cause marketing making consumers passive and individualizing solutions to collective problems. She argues that by consuming products that are related to cause marketing, consumers fall into the trap of thinking they have contributed to the cause and they are less likely to participate in any other action (raising funds, awareness or volunteering).
I do not believe Cause Marketing should be the only way that a company responds to environmental and social causes, but it can very well be a part of the portfolio. Cause marketing initiatives does not have to be limited to purchase behavior either. Cause marketing for me is a brand differentiation opportunity and has to be managed and resourced by marketing teams (with consultancy from CSR department)
Prof. Eikenberry is pointing out the consumer point of view and the risk of consumers feeling good just by shopping but not getting involved in other actions. Perhaps she is right; cause marketing has that kind of side-effect. But this side-effect should not prevent us insisting on the cure and even making it a better cure.


