CommunicatingCorporateSocialResponsibility:

ChallengestoCompanieswithLowCompany­CauseFit

AmyScarlett

ACapstoneProjectPresentedtoTheFacultyof

theSchoolofCommunicationinPartial

FulfillmentoftheRequirementsfortheDegreeof

MastersofArtsinPublicCommunication

Supervisor:ProfessorLaurenFeldman

April26,2011

1

Abstract

Thispaperexaminesstrategiesforcommunicatingphilanthropic

corporatesocialresponsibility(CSR)activitiesinpubliccampaigns.Academic

literaturepointstoseveralfactorsthatinfluencethesuccessorpublicapproval

ofsuchcorporatecommunicationefforts.Thisstudyspecificallyconsidersone

ofthesefactors–thatofthecongruencelevelbetweenthecompanyandthe

causeitsupportsinCSRactivities.Morespecifically,itexaminestwoexisting

campaignswithlowcompany­causecongruence,KennethCole’s“Awearness”

andLizClaiborne’s“LoveIsNotAbuse,”todetermineiforhowthisdetriment

canbeovercome.Resultsshowedthatothercampaignfactorsaremore

significanttothesuccessofastrategicCSRpubliccommunicationcampaign.

2

TableofContents

INTRODUCTION 3

LITERATUREREVIEW 6WHATISCORPORATESOCIALRESPONSIBILITY? 6BENEFITSTOTHECOMPANY 8CONSUMERS&THEPUBLIC 9EMPLOYEES 10SHAREHOLDERS 11COMMUNICATINGCSR 11INFORMATIONSOURCE 13ATTRIBUTINGMOTIVETOCSRACTIVITIES 14COMMITMENTTOCAUSE 15COMPANY‐CAUSEFIT 16

METHODS 21CASEANALYSIS 21CONTENTANALYSIS 21

CASEPROFILES 24AWEARNESSBYKENNETHCOLE 24KENNETHCOLEPRODUCTIONS 24INTRODUCINGTHEAWEARNESSINITIATIVE 25CURRENTAWEARNESSCAMPAIGN 27CONTENTANALYSISRESULTS 31CRITIQUEOFCAMPAIGN 33LOVEISNOTABUSEBYLIZCLAIBORNE 35LIZCLAIBORNE,INC. 35CAMPAIGNHISTORY 36LOVEISNOTABUSECURRENTCAMPAIGN 37CONTENTANALYSISRESULTS 44CRITIQUEOFCAMPAIGN 46

DISCUSSION 48COMPANY‐CAUSEFIT 48CSRBEYONDCOMPANY‐CAUSEFIT 50STUDYLIMITATIONS&DIRECTIONSFORFUTURERESEARCH 52

CONCLUSION 53

REFERENCES 54

3

INTRODUCTION

Corporatesocialresponsibility(CSR)isabusinessconceptwherebyacompany

seekstobehaveinsociallyandenvironmentallyresponsiblewayssothatitsbusiness

contributestosocietyinmeaningfulandlastingways(Hopkins,2007).Companiesare

incentivizedtoengageinsociallyresponsibleprogramsbecauseofthepotentialbenefitsto

business,whichincludebrandenhancement,marketdifferentiation,andemployee

satisfaction(www.dowelldogood.net).However,companiesoftenfailtoeffectively

communicatetheirCSRactivitiestotargetaudiences,whichcanhinderthecompany’s

realizationofthesebusinessbenefits.

Thereareseveralfactorsthatinfluencehowthepublicandothercompany

stakeholdersinterpretandrespondtoinformationaboutCSRactivities,suchasmessage

content,informationsource,perceivedmotivationsofthecompany,industryofthe

company’sbusiness,brandreputation,andnatureoftheirbusiness.Anotherfactorthatis

oftenemphasizedinacademicstudiesisthecompany‐causefit,whichreferstothelogical

connectionbetweenthebusinessfunctionofacompanyandthecauseororganizationit

supports(Simmons&Becker‐Olson,2006).Thisisthoughttobeimportantbecausewhen

company‐causefitislow,individualsengageinmoreelaborateprocessingasameansto

explainthecompany’smotivationsforsupportingaparticularcause.Whennoother

informationisofferedtosuggestalogicalexplanationforitssupport,individualscan

becomeskepticalofthecompany’struemotives,whichcanleadtonegativefeelingstoward

thecompany.Whileacompanydoesnothavecompletecontroloverallofthesefactors,

effectivecommunicationstrategiescanhelptocreateanddeliveramessagethatismost

beneficialtothecompany.

4

TogainabetterunderstandingofhowtocommunicateCSRactivities,thisstudy

specificallyexaminesthefactorofcompany‐causecongruence,andhowlowcongruence

betweenacompany’sbusinessandthecauseitsupportscanbeovercome.Acompanymay

choosetosupportacausewithlowcongruencetoitsbusinessformanyreasons,including

responsetoacrisisordisaster,andpersonalinvolvementorinterestinaspecificsocial

domain(Menon&Kahn,2003).ByexaminingthevariousaspectsoftwocurrentCSR

campaignsthathavelowcompany‐causefit,thisprojectaimstodiscoverbestbusiness

practicestoeffectivelycommunicateCSR,sothatthecompanyreceivesmaximum

recognitionandbenefitforitsefforts.Ifcompaniescanrealizethebrand‐enhancing

benefitsofCSRactivity,itmaypromptmorecompaniestoinvestadditionalresourcesin

CSR.Suchinvestmentswouldbenefitneedycausesandwouldprovideanadditional

advertisingoptiontocompaniesthatmaybeinterestedindiversifyingtheirtraditional

marketandcommunicationoutreachstrategies.

ThecampaignsanalyzedinthisstudywereKennethColeProductions’Awearness

andLizClaiborne,Inc.’sLoveisNotAbuse.ThepurposewastodetermineiforhowaCSR

publiccommunicationcampaigncanovercomethechallengesoflowcompany‐causefit.

Manyfactorslimitthegeneralizabilityofthisstudy’sresults.Thedegreetowhicha

companyrealizesbenefitsfromitsCSRactivitiescanbemoderatedbyanumberof

contingencyfactors(Bhattacharya,Korschun,&Sen,2009).Themostimportantofthese

arecharacteristicsofthecompany,whichincludethecompany’sreputation,andthe

industryinwhichitoperates;thisstudydidnotexaminethesecharacteristics.Kenneth

ColeProductionsandLizClaiborne,Inc.,wereselectedpurposefullybecausetheir

businessesoperateinthesameindustry–retail–anditwasbelievedthiswouldestablisha

5

fairbaselinefromwhichtocomparethetwocampaigns.However,specificitytotheretail

industryalsorepresentsalimitationtothestudy,becausefindingsmayonlybeapplicable

toothercompaniesinthatindustry.

Tobegin,areviewofrelevantliteraturedescribingCSR,aspectsandimportanceof

communicatingCSRactivities,andcompany‐causefitwillbediscussed.Next,methodology

forthecaseanalysesandmediacontentanalyseswillbedescribed.Then,acaseanalysisof

eachcampaignwilloutlinetherespectivecommunicationefforts,provideresultsofthe

contentanalysis,andofferaqualitativecritiqueoftheoverallcampaign.Thediscussion

sectionwillfollow,whichwillhighlighttheimplicationsoftheresultsforcreatingor

examiningfutureCSRcampaigns.Resultsfromthecontentanalysissuggestthatboth

campaignsneedtoimprovecommunicationtoinvolvethepublicincampaignefforts.

FindingsalsoshowedthatKennethColeProductionshaseffectivelysecuredcompany

recognitionfortheAwearnesscampaigninallmediacoverage,whereasLoveIsNotAbuseis

sometimesmentionedinthemediawithoutacknowledgementofthecompany’s,Liz

Claiborne,Inc.,participation.Finally,areasforfutureresearchwillbesuggested.

6

LITERATUREREVIEW

WhatisCorporateSocialResponsibility?

CorporateSocialResponsibility(CSR)isaconceptofbusinessthatconcernsthe

importantrelationshipbetweencompaniesandsociety(Carroll,1999).CSRisbroadly

definedastherolethatacompanytakestointegrateresponsiblebusinesspracticesand

policiesintoitsbusinessmodeltopromotehigherstandardsoflivinginsociety,for

employees,andtheenvironmentwhilepreservingprofitability(Hopkins,2007).Academic

literatureandresearchonthepracticesofCSRbeganinthe1950s,anditsdefinitionhas

evolvedoverthistime.ArchieB.Carroll,abusinessmanagementprofessoratthe

UniversityofGeorgia,haswrittenextensivelyonthemanagementofbusinessethics,and

corporatesocialperformance.Asheexplains,corporationsareexpectedtofulfillcertain

responsibilitiesjustasprivatecitizensare.Hedistinguishestheseresponsibilitiesintofour

faces:economic,legal,ethical,andphilanthropic(Carroll,1998).CSRisbasedontheidea

thatcorporationsaremorethanjustprofit‐seekingentities,andthattheymustbe

responsibleforthesocietalandenvironmentaleffectsoftheirbusinessactivities(Lantos,

2001).ItisdifficulttodefineCSR,sinceitistechnicallyvoluntary(Carroll,1999),inthe

sensethatitisnotlegallyrequired,socompaniesarefreetointerpretitspurposeand

extenttowhichitisincludedintheirbusinesspractices(Matten&Moon,2008).

ThetwomainwaysthatcompaniesengageinCSRarethroughimplementationof

ethicalbusinesspracticesandengaginginphilanthropicactivities.EthicalCSRentails

7

incorporatingresponsiblepracticesthatminimizethesocietalharmsofbusiness

operations(Lantos,2001).Therearemanywaysforcompaniestoimplementethical

businesspractices;theseincludeminimizingenvironmentalpollutionfrommanufacturing

facilitiesandprovidinghealthcarebenefitstoemployees.PhilanthropicCSRdescribesa

company'ssupportforacauseoractivitythatoccursoutsideoftheirbusinessoperations

butprovidesbenefittosociety(Carroll,1999;Kerlin&Gagnaire,2009).Companieswill

usuallychooseacauseororganizationonwhichtofocustheircontributions,whichcan

includedonationofequipmentortechnology,employeetime(volunteerism),ormoney

(Carroll,1999;Kerlin&Gagnaire,2009).Forexample,CiscoSystemsfocusesits

philanthropicCSRobjectivesonaccesstoeducation,humanneeds,andresponsible

citizenship(Kerlin&Gagnaire,2009).

UndertheumbrellaofphilanthropicCSR,therearedistinguishingelementsthat

drivemotivationforacompany'sinvolvementandactions;thesedifferencesare

representedbyaltruistic(intrinsic)andstrategic(extrinsic)motivations(Lantos,2001;

Matten&Moon,2008;Du,Bhattacharya,&Sen,2010).Altruisticmotivesarewoveninto

thecorporation'scharacteraspartofitsintrinsicinstitutionalvaluesandenvironment

(Matten&Moon,2008).Anexampleofintrinsicmotivesthatisfrequentlycitedinthe

literatureisBenandJerry'sHomemadeIceCream,whichdonatesaportionofitsprofitsto

causesthatthefoundersbelievein,likeeducationandgayrights(Lantos,2001;Hopkins,

2007;Kerlin&Gagnaire,2009;Duetal.,2010).Strategicmotives,however,areconsidered

moreofabusinessinvestment,wherecompanycontributionsareexpectedtoyielda

profitablereturn(Lantos,2001).Whateverthemotives,itiscertainthatCSRhasbecome

8

animportanttoolformeasuringacompany'sreputationandpublicimage(Ellen,Webb,&

Mohr,2006).

Cause‐relatedmarketing(orcausemarketing)isatypeofCSRactivitythat"…

involvesacompany'spromisetodonateacertainamountofmoneytoanonprofit

organizationorasocialcausewhencustomerspurchaseitsproducts/services"(Nan&Heo,

2007,p.63).Inthisform,CSRhasapositiveimpactonsocietyandprovidesdirectbenefit

tothecompanythroughincreasedsalesrevenue(Nan&Heo,2007,p.63).Onestudy

reportsthat81percentofAmericanconsumerswantcompaniestogivethemthe

opportunitytopurchaseacause‐relatedproduct(Cone,2010).Throughtheirpurchasing

power,theyareinvestinginthecompany’sCSRinitiativeandfeelliketheyarecontributing

tothecause.However,otherstudiescautionthat"cause‐relatedmarketingcampaignsare

morelikelytobeviewedwithsuspicion,"becausethey"oftenexplicitlylinksupportofa

charitytoafirm'sprofit‐generatingactivities"(Barone,Norman,&Miyazaki,2007,p.

439).

ItisimportantforcompaniestocontinueinvestingintotheirCSRbecause“theCSR

conceptwillremainasanessentialpartofbusinesslanguageandpractice,becauseitisa

vitalunderpinningtomanyoftheothertheoriesandiscontinuallyconsistentwithwhat

thepublicexpectsofthebusinesscommunitytoday”(Carroll,1999,p.292).

BenefitstotheCompany

CompaniesengageinCSRactivitiestoinfluenceandimprovestakeholders'

perceptionofthecompany'simage.Companyorbrandimageisimportantbecauseit

ultimatelyprovidesthecompanyacompetitiveadvantagefortheirbusiness(Baroneetal.,

9

2007,p.444).CSRisbeingmonitoredmorecloselynowthaneverbeforebecause

consumersareveryconcernedwithresponsiblebusinesspractices(Morsing&Schultz,

2006).ThisisevidentbytheincreaseinthenumberofyearlycompanyCSRrankings,such

asForbesMagazine's100BestCorporateCitizens,Ethisphere'sWorld'sMostEthical

Companies,theGlobalESG100byRiskMetricsGroup,andthedisclosureofactivitiesinthe

annualreport(Morsing&Schultz,2006).Companieshaveincreasinglyadoptedsocially

responsiblepracticesbecausethepublic,employees,andshareholdershavehigh

expectationsforthevaluesandconductofbusiness(Carroll,1999).Thesestakeholder

groupscanhavetremendousinfluenceonprofitability,soitisinthebestinterestofthe

company’sbottomlinetomeettheexpectationsofthesegroups.

Consumers&thePublic

Arecentstudyshowedthat85percentofconsumerssaysupportingacausethey

careaboutenhancestheirperceptionofaproductorcompany(Cone,2010).Beingviewed

asgoodcorporatecitizenscanfosterlong‐term,loyalrelationshipswithconsumers,who

seethemselvesasinvestorsinthecompanyorbrandwiththeirpurchasingpower(Duet

al.,2010).Consumersmayalsobewillingtopayapremiumpriceforproductsorservices

offeredbyacompanyengagedinCSR(Austin,Leonard,Reficco,&Wei‐Skillern,2006;Duet

al.,2007ascitedinDuetal.,2010).CSRprogramscanalsohelptoestablishapositive

corporatereputationthatmakesconsumersresilienttonegativecompanynews(Duetal.,

2007ascitedinDuetal.,2010).Consumerscanbecomepromotionalmechanismsfora

companyorbrandthroughpositiveword‐of‐mouthcommunication.Theinternethas

offeredamagnifiedplatformforthis,asconsumersareusingsocialnetworkingsitesto

communicatetheirenthusiasmforacompanyorbrandbecauseofitssociallyresponsible

10

practicesorprojects(Duetal.,2010).However,thispowerfulvoicecanhaveanadverse

effectforacompanythatisnotmeetingconsumerexpectations(Austinetal.,2006).

Consumershavebeenknownto'punish'companiestheybelievearebehavingsocially

irresponsiblythroughproductboycottsandencouragingotherstodothesame(Austinet

al.,2006).

AstudybySenandBhattacharya(2001)foundapositiverelationshipbetweenthe

CSRactionsofacompanyand“consumers'attitudestowardthatcompanyandits

products”(p.225).Resultsshowedthatinformationaboutacompany'sCSRinitiatives

enhancedconsumers'evaluationsofthecompany.Inasituationwhereconsumershavea

choicebetweentwoproductsorservicesthatarerelativelythesame,thecharacteror

attributestheyhaveassociatedwiththosecompanieswouldbeaninfluencingfactorin

theirdecisionofwhichproductorservicetopurchase(Sen&Bhattacharya,2001).

Employees

Companiescanalsorealizebenefitsofsociallyresponsiblebusinesspractices

internally,amongitsemployees.Whenemployeesareawareoftheresponsiblepractices

andphilanthropicactivitiesoftheiremployeritcangeneratefeelingsofprideinthe

companyandleadtoincreasedemployeededicationtothecompanyemployees(Austinet

al.,2006).CSRcanalsoleadtoemployees’increasedwillingnesstooffermoretimeand

energytotheircompanies(Maignan&Ferrell,2004).Somestudieshavefoundthatjob

applicantsaremoreattractedtocompanieswithhighCSRratings(Turban&Greenning,

1996ascitedinMaignan&Ferrell,2004).Whenemployeesfeelthissenseofpridefor

theircompany,thisfollowsthemoutsideoftheofficeandtheycanbecomeapromotional

assettothecompany,servingasambassadorsforthebrand.

11

Shareholders

Shareholdersaremainlyconcernedwiththecompany’sfinancialbottomline.Their

interestinCSRrelatestohowitcandifferentiatethecompanyinthemarkettoincrease

companyprofits.Acompany'sCSRactivitiescanimproveitsreputationbecauseit

establishesasocialvalueofthecompany,whichcanbeadistinguishablequalitythathelps

setitapartfromcompetitors(Austinetal.,2006).Thus,shareholdersbenefitfromCSR

programsbecauseoftheirinfluenceonconsumerpurchasingbehaviorandpotentialto

increaseemployeeproductivity.Thecompanyannualreportprovidesanoutletfora

companytoshareinformationwithshareholdersaboutthebusinessoperationsand

financialsuccessofthecompanyinthepreviousyear.CSRactivitiesareoften

communicatedtoshareholdersthroughtheannualreportoraseparatecorporate

responsibilityreport.

Beforeacompanycanrealizethesebenefits,internalandexternalaudiencesmust

beinformedaboutCSRinitiatives(Duetal.,2010).However,awarenessofcompanies'CSR

activitiesiscurrentlylowamongpublicandcompanystakeholders(Duetal.,2010).This

provesaneedforeffectivecommunicationstrategies.

CommunicatingCSR

AdisconnectincommunicationbetweenCSRinitiativesandpublicawarenesswill

impedeanypotentialbenefitstoacompany;so,itisimportanttointelligentlyand

strategicallycommunicatethistothepublic(Maignan&Ferrell,2004;Morsing&Schultz,

2006).Thenewsmediaareavailabletoreportbusinessscandalstothepublic,butitisthe

12

company'sresponsibilitytoinformthepublicaboutthegoodthingsthatitdoes.Aswith

anypubliccommunicationcampaign,itisfirstimportanttoidentifytheobjectivesand

consideralloftheaspectsthatcontributetoasuccessfulmessage.Thedesiredoutcomefor

communicatingCSRinitiativesistoensureallofthepossiblebenefitstothecompanyare

achieved.Inordertogeneratefavorableattributionforacompany'sCSRprogramsitis

necessarytocommunicatethecompany'smotivationbehinditsinvolvement,explainthe

reasonforchoosingthatparticularcause,anditscommitmenttothecause(Duetal.,2010).

TherearedifferentmethodsforcompaniestocommunicatetheirCSRdependingon

theaudiencetheyaretryingtoreach.Thespecificaudienceisidentifiedbywhothe

companyistryingtoinfluencewithinformationaboutthegooddeedstheydo.

Communicationwithshareholdersandinvestorsisfocusedonthecompany’sAnnual

Report,whichincludesfinancialdata(Duetal.,2010).Throughpressreleases,the

companycanattractmediaattentiontotheirCSRprograms.Internalcommunicationwith

companyemployeescanoccurthroughmanychannelsincludingemail,newsletters,and

internalwebportalsandcanemphasizeincludingtheminthecompany’sCSRinitiatives.

Forcompanieswhosellconsumerproducts,itspurposeistoinfluenceandimprovethe

publicimageofthecompany,andsometimesthisisdonethroughtraditionalmarketing

channels,suchastelevisioncommercials,printadvertisements,billboardadvertisements,

andproductpackaging.Internetcommunicationsofferopportunitiestoengageandshare

informationwithvastaudiences.Dedicatingasectionofthecompany’swebsitetoCSR

informsvisitorsofitsinitiatives,andincorporatingsocialnetworkingsites(e.g.Facebook

andTwitter)intothecommunicationplaninvitesconsumerstojointhecompanyin

13

supportofthecause(Duetal.,2010).ThispaperfocusesonCSRcommunicationtothe

generalpublic.

Advocacyadvertisingandcausepromotionaretwoapproachesforcommunicating

CSR(Menon&Kahn,2003).Throughadvocacyadvertising,acompanyprovidesaresource

toacauseorphilanthropicorganizationanditsinvolvementiscommunicatedthrough

channelsthatfocusonthecauseorphilanthropicorganizationratherthanonthecompany

(Menon&Kahn,2003).Causepromotionencouragesaudiencestopurchaseaproductthat

willbenefitthecause;thisisalsocalledcausemarketing.MenonandKahn(2003)argued

thatwhenacompanydoesnotadvertiseinawaythatshowshowthecompanyitself

benefits,thistriggersmoreelaborateprocessingbythemessagereceivertounderstandthe

actualmotivesofthecompany.Instead,causepromotionshowsanobviouscompany

motivetoselltheirproduct.MenonandKhan“foundthatcausepromotionsyieldedhigher

ratingsofCSRthanadvocacyadvertising”(2003,p.325).Theyattributedtheseresultsto

theideathatitwaseasiertounderstandacompany’ssupportforacausewhentheysaw

thebusinessbenefitfromsellingtheproduct;however,advocacyadvertisingfocusing

solelyonthecauseledtomoreelaboratecognitiononthecompany’smotivesfor

promotion.

InformationSource

Thesourcefromwhichapersonreceivesinformationcanaffecthowthat

informationisinterpretedandvalued(Yoon,Gürhan‐Canli,&Schwarz,2006;Simmons&

Becker‐Olson,2006).Acompany’sCSRcanbecommunicatedbythecompanyitselforbya

thirdparty.Informationfromthecompanycanbemadeavailablethroughadvertising,

pressreleases,orthecompany’swebsite.Thirdpartysourcesrepresentreportingonthe

14

CSRactivitiesbyindividualsnotassociatedwiththecompany,likejournalistsandopinion

leaders.Informationsourcecanalsoaffecttheperceivedsincerityofacompany’smotives

toparticipateinCSRactivities(Yoonetal.,2006).LearningaboutCSRactivitythrough

companyadvertisinglowerstheperceivedsincerityofthecompany’smotivesforengaging

intheCSRactivity.Advertisementsarealsopotentiallydangerousbecausetheybring

attentiontofundsthatthecompanycouldbespendingonthecause.However,ifa

company’scontributiontotheCSRcausefarexceedsitsspendingonadvertising,the

negativeconsequencesforthecompany’sself‐promotioncanbeovercome.Simmonsand

Becker‐Olson’sstudyshowedthatattitudesweremorefavorableofsponsorshipswhenthe

informationsourcewasthenonprofitorcauseorganizationratherthanthecompany

(2006,p.162).

AttributingMotivetoCSRActivities

Themotivationdrivingacompany'sparticipationinCSRisimportantbecausethe

publicrelatesmotivetothecompany'scharacter(Sen&Bhattacharya,2001).Whilethe

publicusuallyhasapositivereactiontomessagesaboutcompanies'ethicalandsocially

responsibleactivities,therearecertaincircumstancesthatcanleadtoaboomerangeffect

oftheintendedmessage(Morsing&Schultz,2006).Consumersunderstandthatinorder

tofunction,acompanymustfirstbeconcernedwithitsfinancialbottomline(Ellenetal.,

2006).Becauseofthisunderstanding,ifacompanydisclosespurelyaltruisticmotivesfor

itsCSRinitiative,thepubliccanfeelmanipulatedordeceived(Forehand&Grier,2003as

citedinDuetal.,2010).Inmostcases,altruisticmotivesarenotexpectedorbelievableand

cangenerateasenseofdistrustinthecompany,possiblytriggeringpublicskepticismabout

theactualmotivesforCSRparticipation(Ellenetal.,2006).ConsumerskepticismofCSR

15

involvementcanbeavoidedbyacknowledgingandexplainingthestrategicbenefittothe

company(Ellenetal.,2006).

ResearchconductedbyEllen,Webb,andMohr(2006)examinedtheinfluenceof

consumers'attributionsofacompany'sCSRinitiativesontheirtrustinthecompanyand

howthatextendstotheirintenttopurchaseaproductfromthatcompany.Study

participantswereaskedtoevaluateCSRinitiativesbasedontheperceived“self‐centered”

(strategicandegoistic)and“other‐centered”(values‐drivenandstakeholder‐driven)

motivationsofthecompanyandthenindicatetheirlikelihoodtopurchase.Resultsshowed

thatconsumersstillhadapositiveperceptionofthecompanywheninformationwasmade

availableforthemtoattributecompanyCSRparticipationtoacombinationofbothvalues‐

drivenandstrategicreasons.Thisillustratesthatconsumershaveacomplexcognitionof

thereasonswhyacompanyparticipatesinCSRactivities,andunderstandtherecanbea

varietyofreasonsthatinfluencethesemotives(Ellenetal.,2006).

CommitmenttoCause

Acompany’scommitmenttothecauseitsupportsthroughCSRcanbeassessedin

termsoflongevityandimpact(Maignan&Ferrell,2004).Thelengthordurationof

commitmentisimportantbecauseasEllenetal.’sstudyfound,“Whencommitmentwas

onlyforashortperiodoftime,[consumers]thoughtthatthecompanywasparticipating[in

CSR]onlytomeetothers’expectationsinsteadofactingontheprinciplesofthe

organization”(Ellenetal.,2006,p.154).OneofthepurposesofreportingCSRisto

enhancetheimageofacompany’scharacter,butthiscannotbeachievedifitsparticipation

isperceivedtobeinsincere;long‐termcommitmentstoCSRactivitieswillprovide

credibilityofthecompany’smotives.Impactofcommitmentdescribestheoutcomeor

16

effectthattheCSRinitiativehasonthecauseitsupports(Maignan&Ferrell,2004).The

publicandcompanystakeholdersexpectcompaniestoengageinacausewhereitcanbe

mosteffectiveand“havethemostimpact”(Duetal.,2010,p.16).Bhattacharya,Korschun,

andSen(2009)explainthat“animportantaspectofstakeholderperceptionsofCSR

initiativesisthedegreetowhichinitiativesareseentobeeffectiveinbenefittingthecause

beneficiariesand/orsociety”(p.261).Therefore,aCSRcommunicationstrategyshould

includereportingtheimpactorresultsofthecompany’seffortsinordertohavethe

optimaleffectonstakeholderperceptionofthecompany.

Company‐CauseFit

Thecompany‐cause“fit”describestheperceivedcongruencebetweenacompany

andthecauseororganizationitsupports(Simmons&Becker‐Olson,2006).This

congruenceisthedegreetowhichtheirassociationmakeslogicalsense,basedonthe

connectionbetweenthecompany'sbusinessfunctionandthecause.Ifthislogical

connectionexists,peoplearemorelikelytoattributeitsCSRactivitiestothecompany's

“desiretohelpthecauseandtobuildrelationshipswithcustomersratherthanfor

excessiveprofiteering”(Ellenetal.,2006,p.154).Researchhasindicatedthatthefitofthe

companytothecausecanaffectthepurchasingintentionsofconsumers(Ellenetal.,2006).

Thelevelofcongruencebetweenthecompanyandthecauseaffectshowtheactionsofthe

companyareperceived,whichcanthenaffectapprovaloftheactivity.The“fit”canbe

furtherdistinguishedbythedegreeoffitandtypeoffit.Degreeof“fit”isdescribedin

termsofeither“high‐fit”or“low‐fit.”High‐fitmeansthatthereisanobviousconnection

betweenthecompanyandthecause,andcanbeviewedasbeingconsistentwithwhatis

expectedfromthatcompany.Whenfitishigh,thisreinforcestheperceivedimageofthe

17

brandorcompany(Simmons&Becker‐Olson,2006,p.160).Whilelow‐fitdescribesalow

levelofobviouscongruencebetweenthecompanyandthecauseandisthusnotconsistent

withexpectedbehaviorfromthecompany.

Company‐causefittypeisdifferentiatedbytwogeneraltypes:functionalandimage.

Functionalfitrelatesthecompany’sbusinessproductioncapabilitiestothetypeofcauseor

organizationsupported(Alcañiz,Cáceres&Pérez,2010).Imagefitregardsthecorrelation

betweenthecompany’scharacterorreputationandtheimageofthecharitable

organizationorcausethatitsupports.

MenonandKahnidentifyfourdimensionsofassociationfromwhichpeoplecan

perceivecongruencebetweenthecompanyandcause,theseinclude:(1)product

dimensions,(2)affinitywithspecificaudience,(3)establishedcorporateimageassociated

withaspecificsocialdomain,and(4)thecompany’spersonalinvolvementinasocial

domain(2003,p.318).Productdimensionsrefertocongruencebetweenproductsor

servicesthecompanysellsandthecauseitsupports;anexampleisagrocerystorethat

donatestoafoodbank.Affinitywithaspecificaudiencedescribesacompany’s

sponsorshipofacausethatrelatestoitsmainconsumerbase,forexample,achildren’s

clothingcompanydonatesmoneytoprimaryeducation.Establishedcorporateimage

associationsaredefinedbythecompany’spastconductinsupportingaspecificcause,for

example,theBodyShop’sparticipationwithenvironmentalprotectioncauses(Menon&

Kahn,2003).Personalinvolvementofthecompanyreferstosponsorshipofacausefor

reasonsrelatingtoapersonalconnectiontothecausefromsomeonewithinthecompany;

forexampleifthecompany’schiefexecutiveofficerhasachildwithautismandthe

companysponsorsAutismSpeaks.Someofthesedimensionscanbemadewithcommon

18

knowledgeofproductorcompany;however,insomecircumstancesaconsumermayneed

morein‐depthknowledgeofacompanytobeabletorecognizeitsassociationformedwith

acausebecauseofitsestablishedcorporateimageandforpersonalinvolvement.

NanandHeo’s(2007)researchestablishedabaselineconditionthatshowedan

actualeffectfromcausemarketingonconsumers’attitudestowardcompanies.Theyfound

thatregardlessofthecause‐fitlevel,anyadvertisementwithacause‐marketingcomponent

elicitedmorefavorableresponsesfromconsumers’attitudestowardthecompanythana

similaradvertisementwithoutthecause‐marketingcomponent(Nan&Heo,2007,p.

70).NanandHeoalsoidentifiedbrandconsciousness,anindividualtrait,asamoderating

factoraffectingtherelationshipbetweencause‐fitandconsumers'evaluationofa

company.Thestudyfoundthatpositiveeffectsfromhigh‐fit(e.g.companyevaluations)

wereonlyrecognizedinsituationswhereconsumershadhighbrandconsciousness.When

therewaslowbandconsciousness(ornopreviousfamiliaritywiththebrand),therewas

noeffectoncompanyevaluations(Nan&Heo,2007,p.71).

SimmonsandBecker‐Olson(2006)examinedtheeffectsofhigh‐fitandlow‐fiton

consumers’evaluationsofcompanies.Inthehigh‐fitconditionoftheirstudy,AlpoPetfoods

supportedtheHumaneSocietyandinthelow‐fitcondition,itsupportedTheSpecial

Olympics.Resultsshowedthatconsumers’evaluationsofthecompanyweremore

favorableinhigh‐fitconditionsascomparedtolow‐fitconditions.Theyattributedthese

resultstothefactthatwhenfitislow,consumersengageinelaborateprocessingtomake

senseoftheconnection,andifnootherinformationisprovidedthisleadstolessfavorable

attitudestowardtheCSRactivityandcompany(Simmons&Becker‐Olson,2006,p.164).

SimmonsandBecker‐Olsonexplainedthathigh‐fitisimportantinacompany‐cause

19

relationship;however,theysuggestthe“negativeeffectsoflowfitcanbereduced(1)

throughcommunicationsdecisionsthatcreateperceivedfitand(2)byalteringthemessage

source”(2006,p.154).Creatingfitestablishesaheuristiclinkbetweentheotherwise

unrelatedorganizations.Thiscanbeaccomplishedbydonatingarelatedproductthat

evokesasharedassociationorbyprovidingamessagethatexplainshowthecompanyfits

withthecause(Simmons&Becker‐Olson,2006,p.161).Alteringthemessagesource

mightincludeathirdpartyreportingontheCSRactivitytoprovideobjectivityand

legitimacytothecompany’sprogram.

Barone,Norman,andMiyazaki(2007)studiedtheeffectsofcompany‐causefiton

consumerevaluationsofcompanies,specificallyintheretailindustry.Theirresearch

foundthattheinfluenceofcompany‐causefitonconsumers'evaluationofcompaniesis

contingentonotherfactors,suchasmotive,andattitudetowardthecause.Examining

high‐fitconditions,companyevaluationsdifferedbasedonconsumers'attributionof

motive;whenapositivemotivewasattributedtoacompany'scausemarketingeffort,

companyevaluationsimproved;however,whenmotivewasperceivedlessfavorably,so

wasthecompanyinevaluations(Baroneetal.,2007,p.444).Anotheraspectoftheirstudy

showedthatwhencompanieschoseanunpopularcause,higherlevelsoffithelpedthe

companyovercomeeffectsofchoosinganunpopularcause;however,thisdidnotprovide

anyadditionalbenefittothecompanyevaluations.

TheliteraturereviewedexplainsthatvariouselementsofCSRcanaffecthowthe

activityisperceivedbythepublicandotherstakeholders,including,attributionof

companymotive,company’scommitmenttothecause,sourceofinformation,andthetype

20

andlevelofcompany‐causefit.Thisstudyhighlightstheroleofcompany‐causefit.Based

ontheexistingresearch,itisexpectedthatlowcompany‐causefit,inthecasesofKenneth

Cole’sAwearnessandLizClaiborne’sLoveIsNotAbuse,willhinderthepotentialbenefits

realizedbythecompanyforitsCSRactivities.Thefollowingresearchteststhis

expectation,inordertodeterminetheimportanceofcompany‐causefitrelativetoother

elementsinaCSRcampaign.

21

METHODS

Researchforthispaperconsistedofaqualitativecaseanalysisandamediacontent

analysisofmediacoverageofKennethCole’sAwearnessandLizClaiborne’sLoveIsNot

Abusecampaigns.

CaseAnalysis

Thecaseanalysisincludedinformationaboutthecompany,achronological

developmentofthecampaign,andadescriptionandcriticalanalysisofcurrentcampaign

programsandpractices.Reviewingeachcampaign'sevolutionovertimeprovidedabasis

fortherationaleofitscurrentpractices.Anexaminationofthecampaign’scurrentpublic

communicationpracticesofferedinsightofwhattheyareeffectivelyaccomplishing,and

whataccordingtotheacademicliterature,theycouldbedoingbettertoassuremaximum

benefitstothecompany.

ContentAnalysis

Acontentanalysisofmediawasconductedforthisstudy.Thepurposeofthis

contentanalysiswastodeterminewhatinformationwasabouttheseCSRcampaignswas

reportedbythenewsmedia.MediacoverageofCSRissignificantbecauseofitspotentialto

reachvastaudiencesandbecauseCSRinformationreportedbyanobjectivesource(i.e.not

thecompany)isperceivedasmorecrediblethaninformationfromthecompany(through

advertising)(Yoonetal.,2006).Elementsexaminedinthecontentanalysisincluded:

relevancetotherespectivecampaign,typeofpublication,mentionofcompanynamein

22

associationwiththeCSRcampaign,inclusionofinformationtoinvolvethepublicinthe

campaign(i.e.,throughproductpurchaseorfurtherinformationseeking),descriptionof

thecampaign’simpactoreffectivenesstohelpthecause,andmentionofcongruence

betweenthecompanyandthecause(cause‐fit).Thefollowingisadetaileddescriptionof

howmediacontentwasselectedforanalysis.

MediacoverageofbothcampaignswaslocatedusingLexisNexisAcademicand

Factivaonlinedatabases.Coverageofbothcampaignswasexaminedfromanequalperiod

ofthreeyearsandtwomonths,toestablishabaseforcomparableanalysisofmediaresults.

MediacontentforanalysisoftheAwearnesscampaignwasfoundfromapower

searchonthenewsarchivewebsiteLexisNexisAcademicforAllNews(English),usingthe

searchterm“awearness.”AFactivasearchidentifiednewsarticlesthatincludedthetext

“awearness”intheEnglishlanguage.Thesearchyieldedthefollowingtypesofmedia:

newspaperarticles,magazinearticles,blogarticles,newsletters,webpublications,and

mediatranscripts.SearchresultswerespecifiedforthedaterangebetweenJanuary1,

2008andMarch1,2011.Thisstartdatewaschosenbecauseitwasshortlyafterthe

campaignlaunch,butbeforethereleaseoftheAwearnessBook,whichwasthefirstlarge

eventofthecampaign.Aftersearchresultswerefilteredforduplicatesandpressreleases,

theLexisNexissearchyielded64articlesandtheFactivasearchproduced41articles.Then,

resultsfromdatabasesearcheswerecomparedtoidentifysimilarfindings;atotalof32

articleswerefoundinbothsearches.Anadditional32articleswereprovidedexclusively

byLexisNexisand9byFactiva.ThetotalnumberofarticlesultimatelycodedforAwearness

was73(32+32+9).

23

MediacontentforanalysisoftheLoveIsNotAbuse(LINA)campaignwasfoundfrom

apowersearchonthenewsarchivewebsiteLexisNexisAcademicforAllNews(English),

usingthesearchterm“loveisnotabuse.”TheFactivasearchidentifiednewsarticlesthat

includedthetext“loveisnotabuse”intheEnglishlanguage.Thesearchyieldedthe

followingtypesofmedia:newspaperarticles,magazinearticles,blogarticles,newsletters,

webpublications,andmediatranscripts.Searchresultswerespecifiedforthedaterange

betweenJanuary1,2006andMarch1,2009.Thistimeframewaschosenbecausethe

campaignreceivedanawardin2007anditwasassumedthatintheyearpriortowinning

thisaward,2006,therewouldhavebeengreatermediacoverageandthusmoremedia

contenttoanalyze.Aftersearchresultswerefilteredforduplicatesandpressreleases,the

LexisNexissearchyielded45articlesandtheFactivasearchproduced36articles.Then,

resultsfrombothdatabasesearcheswerecomparedtoidentifysimilarfindings;atotalof

28articleswerefoundinbothsearches.Anadditional17articleswereprovided

exclusivelybyLexisNexisand8byFactiva.Thetotalnumberofarticlesultimatelycoded

forLINAwas53(28+17+8).

Allpressreleasesfoundinarticlesearchresultswereremovedfromthecontent

analysisbecausethesourceofthesearticleswasthecompany(i.e.,sincethecompanyis

thesourceofthecontent,thereisnoobjectivity)andbecausethegeneralpublicdoesnot

readnewsreleases.

24

CASEPROFILES

AwearnessbyKennethCole

KennethColeProductions

In1982,designerKennethColecreatedafootwearcompany,thefirstofhismany

ventures(Colbert,2011a).In1994,thecompanyconvertedfromaprivatecompanyintoa

publiclytradedcorporation.Currently,KennethColeProductions(KCP)isamultinational

corporationthatproducesandsellsfootwear,apparel,andaccessoriesunderitsbrands:

KennethColeNewYork,KennethColeReaction,Unlisted,andGentleSouls(Colbert,

2011a).Itsvariousproductlinesaremadeformen,women,andchildren,andareavailable

toconsumersatanestimated5,500departmentandspecialtystores,110company‐

operatedretailandoutletstores,andthroughcatalogsandwebsites.DesignerKenneth

Cole(KennethCole)isstillamajorfigureinthecompany;asofMarch2011,heservedas

chairman,CEO,andChiefCreativeOfficerofthecompany.Colealsoownsmajoritystock

(about54percent)inthefirmand“controlsalmostallofthevotingrights”(Colbert,

2011a).

Fromthebeginning,whenKCPwasaprivatelyownedcompany,KennethColeused

productadvertisingasachanneltoadvocateforthesocialissuesthathepersonallycared

about.Hisfirstsocially‐consciouscampaigndebutedin1983andwasdesignedtoraise

awarenessaboutAIDS–acausethedesignercontinuestosupport–throughprint

advertisementsthatread“BuyonelesspairofshoesanddonatethemoneytoAIDS

research”(Colbert,2011a).Asthecompanygrewandeventuallybecameapublic

corporation,KennethColecontinuedtouseKCP’smarketingplatformtodeliveractivist

25

messages.In2005,KCPlaunched“WeAllHaveAIDS,”anotheradvertisingcampaign

intendingtoreducethepublicstigmaattachedtopeoplewhoarelivingwithHIV/AIDSand

toencouragefurtherpreventionandresearchefforts(KCP,2005).Thiscampaignincluded

salesoft‐shirtswithsloganssuchas“WeAllHaveAIDS”and“IHaveAIDS,”andpublic

serviceadvertisements.

KCPbelievesthatitsmostvisibleCSReffortshave“beenitsuseofmarketingand

advertisingasavehicletobringsociallyrelevantissuestotheforefront”(Cole,p.253).The

company’sadvertisingisdesignedto“strengthentheemotionalconnectionwith[its]

consumers”(KCPAnnualReport(AR),2010,p.2).Thismarketingapproachfocuseson

KCP’sproducts,“whilemaintaining[thecompany’s]uniquesocialvoice,toensure[it]

remainsbothrelevantandaspirational”(KCPAR,2010,p.10).

IntroducingtheAwearnessInitiative

Tocommemoratethecompany’s25thanniversary,KCPlaunchedtheAwearness

campaigninmid2007;aCSRprogramthatconsolidatedthecompany’sphilanthropic

activitiesintoonecharitableinitiative,dedicatedtocreatingpublicawarenessofsocial

causeslikeAIDSandhomelessness(Beckett,2007).Alongwiththecampaign,the

AwearnessFundwasestablishedasanonprofitentitytocollectandallocatethecompany’s

charitabledonations.AsColeexplains:

“ThroughtheAwearnessFund,[thecompany]willseektocontinuetoraise

awarenessforvarioussociallyrelevantissues,stimulatepublicdebate,andprovide

inspirationandopportunitiesforourcommunitiestogetinvolvedandgiveback”

(KennethColeProductions(KCP),n.d.).

26

Inlate2008,KennethColereleasedabookrelatedtothecampaign,Awearness:

InspiringStoriesAboutHowtoMakeaDifference.Thebookiscomprisedof86essays

writtenbyinfluentialpoliticalandadvocacyleadersaboutvarioussocialissuesandstories

designedtoencouragepeopletovolunteerforsocialchange(Cole,2008).

Inadditiontoitssocialmessageadvocacy,theAwearnesscampaignisacause

marketingoperation.Approximatelyonceeveryquarter,Awearnesschoosesacauseor

nonprofitorganizationtopartnerwithandfocusitssupport(KCP,n.d.).Thecauses

supportedvary;theyincludedisasterreliefeffortsandtwoprimaryorganizations,amfAR

andHelpUSA.TheFoundationforAIDSResearch,oramfAR,isaglobalnonprofit

organizationthatfundsAIDSresearch(www.amfar.org),andHelpUSAisanonprofit

organizationprovidinghousingandservicestohomelesspeopleintheUS

(www.helpusa.org).Throughthepartnershipsformed,KCPcreatespromotionalproducts

anddonates100percentofthenetprofitsfromitssalestotheAwearnessFund,which

thenmakesafinancialcontributiontothepartneringcauseororganization.Eachofthese

partnershipcampaignsincludesadvertisingcomponentsthatbringsattentiontothecause

ororganizationandpromotessalesofthepromotionalproduct.KCPalsoidentifies

“ChangeAgents,”whichareindividualswhoworkwiththecauseornonprofitandare

describedas“socialactivist[s]whostrivetohelpeducateandencourageotherstoget

involved”(KCP,n.d.).KCPconsidersthisinitiativeanimportantcomponentofits

marketingstrategy,andbelievesthattheprogramhasheightenedpublicperceptionofthe

company’sbrands(KCPAR,2010).

AninitialfocusoftheAwearnessinitiativewastoencouragevolunteerism;inlate

2008,thecampaignestablishedapartnershipwithVolunteerMatch

27

(www.volunteermatch.org),apopularonlinewebsitethatconnectspeopleinterestedin

volunteeringwithcausesandorganizationslookingforhelp(VolunteerMatch,2008).The

partnershipincludedavolunteerwebsiteaccessiblefromwww.Awearness.comand

poweredbyVolunteerMatchthatconnecteduserswithvolunteeropportunities

(VolunteerMatch,2008).Inaddition,selectKennethColeretaillocationsaddedin‐store

kioskswherecustomerscouldsearchforactivevolunteeropportunitiesbyenteringtheir

ZIPcodesandinterestareas.

CurrentAwearnessCampaign

KCPexplainsitsadvertisingconceptstoshareholdersasawaytoclearlydepictthe

brandas“thequintessentialmetropolitanlifestylebrandformodernmenandwomenwho

areconfident,cleverandcool”(KCPAR,2010,p.11).KCPdescribestheAwearness

initiativeasacomponentofthebrandthatdistinguishesandenhancespublicawarenessof

thecompany,itsproducts,andsocialissuesitsupports(KCPAR,2010).Thecampaign

currentlyconsistsofhostingevents,outdooradvertising,andsocialmediaplatforms.

Events

InJune2010,AwearnesspartneredwiththeHumanRightsCampaigntoraise

awarenessaboutlegislationseekingtorepealthefederalgovernment’slawagainst

allowinghomosexualstoserveopenlyinthemilitary,commonlyreferredtoasthe“Don’t

Ask,Don’tTell”policy(HumanRightsCampaign(HRC),2010).Thispartnershipincluded

salesofalimitededitiont‐shirtandhostingeventsatfiveKennethColestoresnationwide.

TheeventswereheldduringGayPrideWeekandpartoftheproceedsgeneratedfromthe

shoppingeventwasdonatedtotheHumanRightsCampaign(HRC,2010).Advertisements

fromthisinitiativeplayedofftheUSArmy’srecruitingcampaignforWorldWarIandII,

28

andincludedanimageofUncleSampointingoutattheaudiencetoaskfortheir

participation(AmericanTreasuresoftheLibraryofCongress,n.d.).Figure1showsan

invitationtooneofthecampaigneventsheldataKennethColestoreinNewYorkCityon

June25,2010.

Figure1:KCP&HRCRepealDon'tAsk,Don'tTell

Source:HumanRightsCampaign(2010)

Advertising

KCPoperatesitssignaturebillboardinNewYorkCityontheWestSideHighwayand

59thStreet(J.Moore,personalcommunication,March16,2011).Thislocationregularly

featuressocialmessagesfromthedesigneraswellaspromotionaladvertisementsforKCP

products.ManyoftheoutdooradvertisementsalsodirectviewerstoKCP’ssocialmedia

sitesformoreinformationandopportunitiestogetinvolvedinthecampaign’scause.The

29

campaignalsoadvertisesAwearnesspromotionstocustomersthroughitscustomeremail

list(J.Moore,personalcommunication,March16,2011).

Website

Initially,theAwearnesscampaign’sonlinepresencewasanextensionofKCP's

shoppingwebsite(KCP,n.d.).OnNovember5,2008,coincidingwiththebooklaunch,the

campaignestablisheditsowndomainnamefortheAwearnessinitiative,

www.Awearness.com(Beckett,2008).Itisunclearifwww.awearness.comwaseveran

independentwebsiteforAwearness,sincethisdomainnamenowlinkstoasectionofKCP’s

consumerwebsitethatisdedicatedtotheAwearnesscampaign.Asitexiststoday,the

AwearnesssectiononKCP’sshoppingwebsiteisusedtopromotethecurrentquarterly

campaign,offeringaplatformtosellthecause‐relatedproductsandtohighlightthe

recognized“changeagent.”

SocialMedia

InFebruary2008,KCPlaunchedablogwebsiteforAwearness,

www.awearnessblog.com(Lo&Mirchandani,2008).Theblogwasestablishedasa

platformforColetoraiseawarenessandengagediscussiononissuesrelatingtosocial

rights,well‐being,andthepoliticallandscape.Initially,theblogconsistedofregular

contributionsfromCole.Thegeneralpublicwasalsoinvitedtocontributetotheblog

conversationsafterregisteringtoparticipatewiththesiteandcreatingapersonalprofile

(Lo&Mirchandani,2008).Forunknownreasons,theblogisnolongeractiveoraccessible

ontheinternet;linkstowww.awearnessblog.comnowredirectstotheAwearnesssection

onKCP’swebsite.

30

TherewasalsoanAwearnessTwitteraccountassociatedwiththecampaign’sblog

website,@awearnessblog,whichwasintroducedonOctober15,2008.TheTwitter

accountofferednooriginalcontent,butwasinsteadusedtoconnectusersfromTwitterto

theAwearnessBlog.AlltweetsissuedfromthisTwitteraccountwerenoticesofnewposts

totheAwearnessBlog.Eachtweetcontainedaportionofablogposttitleandoffereda

hyperlinkconnectingtotheblogthatwouldallowareadertoviewtheentirepost.Asof

March10,2011,@awearnessbloghadsent1,114tweetsandhad653followers.However,

sincetheAwearnessBloghasbeendeactivated,therehasbeennoactivityformthis

accountsinceMay2010,andclickingontheselinksnowalsoredirectstotheAwearness

sectionofKCP’swebsite,www.KennethCole.com/awearness.Basedonthelasttweetfrom

@awearnessblog,itappearsthefinalblogpostoccurredonMay7,2010.

AwearnessdoesnothaveaFacebookpresence(i.e.,apagedevotedtothecampaign).

However,KCPhasacompanyFacebookpagethatwascreatedinFebruary2010that

sometimesreferstoAwearness(www.facebook.com/KennethColeProductions).Asof

March10,2011,theFacebookpagehad135,533peoplewho“like”thepage.Awearnesshas

beenmentionedbyKCPonitsFacebookpage13timesinitshistoryinpostsorcommentto

otherpeople’sposts;mostofthesewerepromotional,toreportanewAwearness‐related

productforsaleandtoofferinformationonhowtopurchasethisproduct(e.g.onlineorin

stores).

SeveralAwearnesscauseshavebeenpromotedthroughtheKCPFacebookpage.In

responsetothe2010earthquakeinHaitiandtheBPoilspillintheGulfofMexico,

Awearnesslaunchedproductswithaccompanyingadvertisementstoraisemoneyand

attentiontothedisasters(KCP,2010).InmidJune2010,Awearnesssponsoredacustomt‐

31

shirtdesignstoreontheKCPFacebookpage,allowinguserstochoosetheirown

combinationofvariousslogans,shirtcolors,andgraphics(KCP,2010).T‐shirtssoldfor

$35andwereavailableexclusivelyontheFacebookpage.Therewasalsoanoutdoor

advertisementthatread,“Wecanallcleanupwelltosupportthegulf”anddescribedthe

customt‐shirtsavailableforpurchaseandprovidedtheURLaddresstoKCP’sFacebook

page(Johnston,2010,seeFigure2).Thecampaignexplainedthatonehundredpercentof

thenetprofitsgeneratedfromt‐shirtsaleswenttosupportthegulfclean‐upefforts.

Figure2:KennethColeOilSpillBillboard

Source:Johnston,2010

ContentAnalysisResults

Theinitialcontentanalysissampleincluded73mediaarticles;ofthose,54articles

weredeterminedtoberelevanttoKennethCole’sAwearnesscampaign.Anarticlewas

consideredrelevantifthecampaignnamewasmentionedatleastonceanditwasin

referencetosomeaspectofthecampaign,suchasactivities,productpromotions,orthe

company(i.e.KennethCole).The54relevantarticleswerefurtherexaminedforadditional

32

characteristics,including:typeofpublication,mentionofthecompany,inclusionof

informationtoinvolvethepublic,anddescriptionofthecampaign’simpactoreffectiveness

tohelpthesupportedcause.Relevantarticleswerecomprisedofvariouspublicationtypes

including,41percentfromnewspapers,28percentfrommagazines,20percentfromblog

posts,and11percentfromothersources.

All–thatis,onehundredpercent–ofthemediacontentanalyzedincludedmention

ofthecompany,KCP,orthedesigner,KennethCole.Thisisanimportantfindingbecauseit

showsthatKCPisreceivingacknowledgementforAwearness’effortsinallofthemedia

coverageregardingtheCSRinitiative.AsNanandHeo(2007)found,causemarketing

programselicitedmorefavorableresponsesfromconsumersaboutacompany.However,

asBhattacharya&Sen,(2004)explained,beforethecompanycanexperiencethebenefits

associatedwithitsCSRactivities,consumersandthepublicmustbeawarethattheyexist.

EnsuringthatallmediacoverageofAwearnessalsoincludesthecompanyordesigner’s

name(i.e.,KennethCole)establishesaconnectionbetweenCSReffortsandthesponsoring

company.

AstheCone(2010)studyfound,consumerswanttobegiventheopportunityto

purchasecause‐relatedproductsbecausethroughpurchasingbehavior,theyfeellikethey

arecontributingtothecause.Inorderforconsumerstoparticipatethroughtheir

purchasingpower,theyneedtobeawareofthecause‐relatedproductpromotion.Media

coverageprovidesanopportunitytoinformthepublicofsuchpromotionalpurchasesand

howtheycanparticipate.However,theAwearnesscontentanalysisfoundthatonly44

percentofthemediacoverageincludedinformationonhowtheaudiencecouldget

involvedinthecampaign,thisincludedwheretheycouldpurchasethepromotional

33

products.Sincethepurposeofthiscampaignistocreateawarenessofsocialissuesandto

generatesalestosupportthecauses,itisimperativetothegoalsofthecampaigntoinvolve

thepublicand/orconsumers.Thischaracteristicwasdeterminedbytheinclusionof

informationaboutacurrentproductpromotionorevent,andfurtherinformationforhow

toparticipate(e.g.,website,stores,Facebook).Awearnessshouldmakeitamorefocal

pointtoincludeinformationonhowthepubliccangetinvolvedinthecause;mostly

throughpurchasingthecause‐relatedproducts.

None,orzeropercent,ofthemediacontentstatedorgavereferencetotheimpactor

outcomeoftheAwearnesscampaign’sefforts.Bhattacharyaetal.(2009)explainthatitis

importanttoreporttheeffectivenessofCSRinitiativesbecauseitprovidesvaliditytothe

company’sclaimthatitissociallyresponsible.TheAwearnesscaseanalysisalsofoundno

mentionofthecampaign’simpactoncausebeneficiaries.Thecampaignshouldofferfollow

upinformationonthenumberofcause‐relateditemssoldortheamountofmoney

ultimatelydonatedtotheorganizationsitsupports.

None,orzeropercent,ofmediacontentcontainedamentionofthecongruence

betweenthecompanyandthecausesitsupports,suggestingthatthiswasnotasalient

elementofthecampaignintheeyesofthemedia.

CritiqueofCampaign

KennethColeProductionsoperatesasafootwear,apparel,andaccessories

company.Accordingtothecompany,itsproductsare“targetedtoappealtomodern

fashionconsciousconsumerswhoseekaccessibledesignerfashionthatreflectsa

metropolitanlifestyle”(KCPAR,2010).Basedonthecompany’sbusinessproductionand

consumerbase,theAwearnesscampaignhaslowfunctionalfitwiththesocialcausesit

34

supports.However,KennethCole,thedesigner,hasestablishedtheKCPbrandasan

extensionofhimself,andassuch,thecausessupportedbyKCPthroughtheAwearness

campaignrepresentcausesthatKennethColepersonallycaresabout.Inthissense,ifthe

designerrepresentsthecompany’scharacter,thereisadegreeofimagefitbetweenKCP

andthecausesitsupports,because,asAlcañizetal.explain,imagefitisthecorrelation

betweenthecompany’scharacterorreputationandthecharitablecauseitsupports

(2010).TheassociationcouldalsoqualifyunderMenonandKahn’s(2003)dimensionof

congruenceasanestablishedcorporateimageassociatedwithaspecificsocialdomain,

sinceKCPhassupportedcausessuchasAIDSsince1983.

Duetal.(2010)explainedthatconsumersareusingsocialmediawebsitesto

communicatetheirenthusiasmforbrandsandcompaniesfortheirCSRefforts.Asa

strategicCSRcommunicationtool,theAwearnessblogallowedKCPtoshareinformation

aboutitsCSRactivitiesandservedtoengageitscustomersandthepublic.Bynothaving

thesetoolstoreachouttoitsconsumerbase,thecampaigncouldbesacrificingsupportand

salestobenefitAwearnesscauses.TheAwearnesscampaignwouldbenefitfrom

reintroducingsocialmediaplatforms,suchasFacebookandTwitter,intothe

communicationtactics.Thiswouldengageconsumerswiththecompany’seffortsand

possiblyencouragethemtogetinvolvedbypurchasingtheAwearness‐sponsoredproduct.

OtherdeficienciesintheAwearnesscampaign’scommunicationmechanismswere

foundinthemediacontentanalysis,theseinclude,limitedmentionofacalltoaction,and

absenceofinformationaboutthecampaign’simpact.Awearness’failuretoemphasizeacall

toaction,ortoprovideinformationonhowthepubliccansupporttheinitiative’scause,

representsalostpromotionalopportunitythatcouldadvancethecampaign’sabilityto

35

supportitscauses.Also,sincereportingtheimpactofaCSRinitiativegivesvaliditytothe

campaign’sefforts,Awearnesswouldbenefitfromreportingtheoutcomeofcause‐related

productsalesinnewsreleasesandadvertisements,includinghowmuchmoneywas

ultimatelydonatedtothesupportedcause.

LoveIsNotAbusebyLizClaiborne

LizClaiborne,Inc.

LizClaiborneInc.,(orLizClaiborne)isaU.S.basedfashioncompany.Thecompany

wasfoundedin1976byLizClaiborne,whodesignedstylishandaffordableclothingfor

workingwomen(Colbert,2011b).Atthistime,manywomenwerejustenteringthe

workforce.In1981,thecompanybecameapubliclytradedcorporationandby1990,Liz

Claibornethedesignerwasnolongerinvolvedwiththecompany(Colbert,2011b).

Currently,thecompanydesignsandmarketsclothingandaccessoriesformenandwomen

internationallyunderthegroupofbrandsitowns,includingLizClaiborneNewYork,Liz&

Co.,Claiborne,ConceptsbyClaiborne,KateSpade,JuicyCouture,andLuckyBrandJeans

(Colbert,2011b).

LizClaiborneengagesincorporateresponsibilityinavarietyofways,froma

commitmenttoresponsibleglobalworkingconditions,environmentalinitiatives,

philanthropicactivitiesthroughtheLizClaiborneFoundation,andthroughtheLoveisNot

Abusecampaign,itspublicinitiativetoeducateandraiseawarenessaboutdomestic

violenceandteendatingabuse(LizClaiborne,Inc.,n.d.).ThecompanyrecognizestheLove

IsNotAbuse(orLINA)campaignasa“long‐termcampaignthatuses[the]corporateprofile

36

andinfluencetoadvocateantiviolencemessagestothegeneralpublic”(LizClaiborne

AnnualReport(LCAR),2010,p.20).Thetargetaudienceforthiscampaignis“everyday

Americanswho,withtherighttoolsandinformation,canhelppreventviolent

relationships”(LCAR,2010,p.20).

CampaignHistory

In1991,LizClaibornelaunched“Women'sWork,”anationalprogramtosupport

localcommunityartprojectsdesignedtoraiseawarenessofthecomplexproblemsfacing

societyaswomenenteredtheworkforce(LizClaiborne,Inc.,1991).Initially,Women’s

Workwasanattemptbythecompanytoestablishasociallyresponsibleimageandto

improvetherelationshipwithitscorecustomerbase–women(CRT/Tanaka,n.d.).The

purposeofthecampaignwastocreateawarenessaboutdomesticviolenceandtoeducate

thepublicaboutwhattheycandotocurtailabuse.LizClaiborneexplaineditsinvolvement

andperspectiveashavingamoreseriousresponsibilitytocustomersbeyondmarketing

apparel,noting,“ouractiveconcernforimprovingthequalityoflifeforwomenandtheir

familiesisanaturalextensionofourongoingcommitmenttoqualityingeneral"(Jerome

Chazen,ascitedinLizClaiborne,Inc.,1991).

Theprogramgrewtobecomeaninclusivecausemarketinginitiative,selling

domesticviolenceawarenessmerchandisesuchast‐shirts,handbags,andjewelry,with

proceedsbenefittingdomesticviolenceorganizations(LINA,n.d.).Anotherpurposeofthe

campaignwastostimulateapublicconversationaboutthedangersandprevalenceof

domesticviolenceintheUS.Thepublicawarenesscampaigncommunicatedthrough

billboardadvertisements,publicserviceannouncementsfeaturingcelebrity

37

spokespersons,andtheestablishmentofanational24‐hourdomesticviolencehotlinethat

providedvictimsinformationforemergencyassistance.

In1998,theprogramdevelopedandprovidedafreeinformationalbooklettohelp

parentstalktotheirteenagechildrenabouthowtodevelophealthyrelationships,withthe

hopeofbreakingthecycleofdomesticviolence;itwascalled“AParent'sHandbook:How

toTalkToYourChildrenAboutDevelopingHealthyRelationships”(LINA,n.d.).By2003,

LizClaiborne'sWomen'sWorkcampaignwasknownbyitstagline,“LoveIsNotAbuse.”

Themainfocusoftheinitiativehadnowshiftedtoteendatingandrelationshipviolence,

andthecampaignwasnamedLoveIsNotAbuse.Thewebsite,www.loveisnotabuse.com,

waslaunchedaroundthistime,whichprovidedinformationaboutthecampaign’s

programs.Accordingtoitswebsite,asofFebruary15,2011,LizClaibornehadinvested

over$8millionineffortstoenddomesticabuse(LINA,n.d.).

LoveisNotAbuseCurrentCampaign

In2005,LizClaibornehiredanewpublicrelationsfirm,RuderFinn,tomanagethe

LINAcampaign(RuderFinn,2006).ThenewfocuswastopositionLizClaiborneasa

corporateleaderinsocialresponsibilityforitscommitmenttocurtailingviolenceagainst

women.

Thenewcampaignobjectiveslaidoutintheagency'scasestudywereto:

• Createawarenessabouttheprevalenceofteendatingviolenceandabuse

• ProvideclearvisibilityforLizClaiborneasaprivatesectorleaderin

developingandsupportingdomesticandrelationshipabuseprograms.

38

• DemonstratethatLizClaiborneisrespondingtothisnationalcrisisby

developingasubstantiveeducationalprogramthathelpsteensunderstand

andrespondtotheissue(RuderFinn,2006).

Theoperationalizationofthesecampaignobjectiveshasshapedthesubstanceofthe

currentLoveIsNotAbusecampaign.Thecampaignprogramsincludeeducationcurricula,

theLoveIsNotAbuseCoalition,It’sTimetoTalkDay,handbooks,andsocialmedia

platforms.

In2005,inpartnershipwiththeEducationDevelopmentCenterandBreakthe

Cycle,LizClaibornedevelopedaneducationalcurriculumtopreventteendatingviolence

(LINA,n.d.).Theoriginalprogramwascreatedforhighschoolstudents,andin2010,a

CollegeEditionwasdevelopedaswell.ThethreemaingoalsoftheHighSchoolEditionare

toincreasestudentawarenessofteendatingviolence,helpchallengemisconceptionsthat

supportdatingviolence,andtoincreasehelp‐seekingbehaviors.Therearefourdifferent

classroomlessonplansinthecurriculumthatincludehandoutsforclassroomactivities,

homeworkassignments,andbackgroundinformationforteachersaboutissuesofteen

datingviolence.Thelessonsinclude:(1)WhatisDatingAbuse?(2)ThePatternofAbusein

DatingViolence,(3)DigitalAbuseinDatingViolence,and(4)EndingTeenDatingAbuse.

TheCollegeEditionaddressesthedangersandwarningsignsofrelationshipabuse.This

curriculumisofferedexclusivelyonline,andprovidesinformationalresourcesaboutwhere

studentscanfindmorehelponcampus.Allmaterialsforthisprogramareofferedfreeof

chargeasdownloadsontheLINAwebsite.

LoveIsNotAbusehasmademanyattemptstoidentifythecampaigneffortswithLiz

Claiborne,toensurethecompanyreceivesdueacknowledgementforitsCSRefforts.Allof

39

thecampaignmaterials,suchasthecurriculum,andhandbooks,includetheLizClaiborne

companyname.Figure3isapictureofthecovertothehighschoolcurriculum.The

campaignnamedominatestheimage,however,thecompany’ssponsorshipisprominently

acknowledgedonthecover.TheothercampaignmaterialssimilarlydisplaytheLiz

Claibornecompanyname.

Figure3:LINAHighSchoolCurriculumCover

Source:www.loveisnotabuse.com

TheLoveisNotAbuseCoalitionisanationalgrassrootsorganizationofparents,

teachers,andotheradvocateswhoareworkingtoencouragemiddleandhighschools

acrossthecountrytoeducatestudentsaboutthedangersofteendatingabuse(LINA,n.d.).

TheLINAwebsiteoffersadownloadabletoolkitthatincludesstatisticalinformationabout

teendatingviolence,ageneralfactsheet,handoutsheetsofinformation,andsampleletter

templatesaddressedtoschoolsandgovernmentofficialstoencouragecurriculum

40

adoption.Italsoprovidesmaterialsforpeoplewhoareinterestedinbecomingmembersof

thecoalition.

In2004,LizClaibornehostedthefirstIt'sTimetoTalkDayasatimeforpeopleto

engageinmeaningfulconversationaboutteendatingviolence(LINA,n.d.).Sincesociety

oftenfailstodiscussthesecomplexanduncomfortableissues,thisisatimesetasidetotalk

aboutdomesticviolenceincommunitiesacrossthecountry.Theeventisheldannuallyto

promptandencouragepublicdialogueaboutteendatingviolenceanddomesticviolence.

Theeducationalhandbooksprovideinformationaboutteendatingviolence,and

guidanceforhowtodealwithit.Therearedifferentversionsofthehandbookstargeting

variousaudiences:teens,parentsofteens,parentsofchildren,coaches,fathers,and

mentors(totalktoboysaboutrelationshipabuse),andwomen.Allhandbooksare

downloadablefromthewebsiteorhardcopiescanbeorderedbysubmittinganonline

request.

TheLINAcampaigncreatespartnershipswithotheradvocacyinitiativesasa

mechanismtosustainvisibilityandawarenessofthecauseandLizClaiborne’ssponsorship

(Bruell,2009).In2007,LizClaiborneprovidedfundingtoestablishtheNationalTeen

DatingAbuseHelpline(www.loveisrespect.org).Thisorganizationprovidesresourcesfor

teenstoprotectthemselvesfromabusiverelationships,andincludesa24‐hourtelephone

helplineandawebsite,www.loveisrespect.org.InOctober2008,LINAcreatedMomsand

DadsforEducationtoStopTeenDatingAbuse(MADE),aneffortto“leverageitssuccess

andkeep[teendatingviolence]relevantinthemedia”(Bruell,2009).AnnandChristopher

Burke,teendatingabuseadvocateswhosedaughterwasmurderedbyherboyfriend,

assistedwiththelaunchandpromotionofMADE(Bruell,2009).

41

Website

TheLoveIsNotAbusewebsiteservesasachannelthroughwhichthecampaign

sharesinformationabouttheissueandmaterialstoengagethepublic.Alinktothesiteis

availableontheLizClaiborne,Inc.corporatewebsiteunderitsCorporateResponsibility

section(LizClaiborne,Inc.,n.d.).Thewebsite’shomepageshowsthecampaign’slogointhe

toplefthandcorneranddirectlybelow,intheleftpanel,isatwo‐sentencedescriptionof

LizClaiborne’sdedicationtothecauseofteendatingviolence.Thetoprowofthe

homepageshowstheothersectionsofthewebsitethatinclude:GetInvolved,MediaCenter,

GetHelp,FactsonAbuse,TheWarningSigns,EducationalTools,andIntheNews.TheGet

Involvedsection,encouragesvisitorstosupportthecausethroughtheirpersonalsocial

mediaprofilesandofferssuggestionsonhowthiscanbedone;forexamplebyfollowing

thecampaign’sTwitteraccounttorecruitfriendsandfamilyorbydownloadingweb

badges(seeFigure4)thatindividualscanposttotheirownwebsitestoshowsupportfor

thecause.Theseparticipatorysuggestionsengagethepublicinthecampaignas

spokespeople,generatingmoreattentiontotheissueandconnectingpeopletotheLINA

website.

Figure4:LINAWebsiteBadge

Source:www.loveisnotabuse.com

TheGetInvolvedsectionoffersinformationanddownloadablematerialsforpeople

interestedinorganizinganIt'sTimetoTalkDayeventintheirowncommunities.This

42

includesideasforhowtoengagethepublic,likeencouraginglocalmayorstohostanevent,

hostinga“walk”tosupporttheissues,orsendingaviralemailtofriends,familyand

communitymemberstoletthemknowhowtheytoocangetinvolvedwiththecause.The

CoalitionToolkitofferspromotionalmaterialstoassistcommunityorganizingforIt'sTime

toTalkDay;thisincludesdownloadablepostertemplates,asshowninFigure5,thatare

customizableforindividualcommunities.

Figure5:LINACustomizablePosterDownload

Source:www.loveisnotabuse.com

TheMediaCenterincludesanarchiveofthecampaign’spressreleases,datingback

to1991,atimelineofthecampaign’shighlights,resultsfromsurveyresearchonthe

prevalenceofteendatingabuse,andPublicServiceAnnouncement(PSA)videos.GetHelp

43

offersresourceinformationforteensoradultslookingforhelpfromanabusive

relationship,includinghelplinetelephonenumbers.TheFactsonAbusesectionprovides

informationaboutteendatingabuseforvariousaudiences,includingadults,teens,and

communities.TheWarningSignshaseducationalresourcesthataredesignedtoengage

teenageaudiencesandincreasetheirawarenessoftheissue.Thisisaccomplishedthrough

interactivequizzesthattesttheirknowledgeaboutteendatingviolenceissues,and

providinginformationtohelpthemrecognizewarningsignsofanunhealthyrelationship

(10WarningSigns).TheHighSchoolandCollegecurriculumaredownloadablefromthe

EducationalToolssection.Finally,IntheNewsoffersrecentnewsarticlesaboutteendating

violenceandcampaignannouncements.

TheLINAwebsitealsoservesasaportaltoitssocialmediaprogrambyoffering

buttonlinkstoitsvariouswebsites.

SocialMedia

Usingsocialmedia,theLINAcampaignhascreatedaninteractiveexperienceforits

targetaudience(Bruell,2009).ItssocialmediapresenceincludesaFacebookpage

(www.facebook.com/LoveIsNotAbuse),Twitteraccount(@Love_IsNotAbuse),and

YouTubechannel(www.youtube.com/user/LINAadmin).Thesecommunicationplatforms

facilitateinformationandmaterialssharingandgiveusersanopportunitytobeinvolvedin

theconversationaboutteendatingviolence.

TheFacebookprofilepagewaslaunchedonApril9,2010.AsofMarch15,2011,it

had5,877people“like”thefanpage.TheTwitteraccountiscustomizedwiththeLoveIs

NotAbuselogotiledasthebackgroundandasofMarch15,2011,ithad1,383followersand

hadreleased629tweets.BothFacebookandTwitterallowuserstocommentonthe

44

campaign’sprofileoraskquestionsthatthecampaigncanrespondto.Thesesocialmedia

toolsareeffectiveandconvenientchannelsthroughwhichtoreachteenageaudiences

becausetheyalsousethemintheirpersonallivesasameanstocommunicatewithfriends.

LizClaibornealsocommunicatesLINA’smessagesthroughvideos,availableto

watchontheFacebookpageandontheLINAYouTubechannel.Thecampaignjoined

YouTubeinJune2010,andasofApril7,2011,haduploaded21videosthathavegarnered

morethan4,900views.

ContentAnalysisResults

Theinitialcontentanalysissampleincluded53mediaarticles;ofthose,45articles

weredeterminedtoberelevanttotheLoveIsNotAbusecampaign.Anarticlewas

determinedrelevantifthecampaignnamewasmentionedatleastonceanditwasin

referencetosomeaspectofthecampaign,suchasactivities,programs,orthecompany(i.e.

LizClaiborne).The45relevantarticleswerefurtherexaminedforadditional

characteristics,including:publicationtype,mentionofcompanyname,informationforhow

thepubliccangetinvolved,anddescriptionofthecampaign’simpactoreffectivenessto

helpthecause.Relevantarticleswerecomprisedofvariouspublicationtypes,67percent

fromnewspapers,20percentfrommagazines,twopercentfromblogposts,and11percent

fromothersources.

Thecompanyname,“LizClaiborne,”wasincludedin84percentofthemedia

content,whichmeansthatitwasnotincludedin16percent.ThisresultdemonstratesLiz

Claiborne’sfailedcommunicationeffortstomaketheLINAcampaignsynonymouswiththe

company.Furthermore,itshowsthatthesubstanceofthecampaignisvaluableandto

someextentnewsworthywithoutpublicrelationsefforts;however,italsorepresentsa16

45

percentlossofopportunityformediacoverageandrecognitionofLizClaiborne’sCSR

efforts.AsBhattacharyaandSen(2004)explain,theremustbepublicawarenessofCSR

activitiesinorderforacompanytorealizethepotentialbenefitsofitsefforts.Anymention

oftheLINAcampaignshouldalsomentionLizClaibornesothattheassociationismadeand

thecompanyreceivespublicacknowledgementforitspositivecontributionstosociety.

Forty‐sevenpercentofmediacontentofferedinformationtoencouragepublic

participationinthecampaign’sefforts.SinceoneofLINA’sobjectivesistomobilizethe

publictojoinintheeffortstocurtailteendatingabuse,mediarelationseffortsshould

alwaysofferthecampaign’swebsiteaddresssinceitisaninformation‐richresource.

Thirty‐threepercentofmediaincludedsomereferencetoorindicationofthe

impactoftheLINAcampaign’swork.Impactwasquantifiedaseitherthenumberofpeople

helpedorthenumberofschoolswhohadadoptedtheLINAcurriculum,thusshowingthe

scopeofitsefforts.ReportingaCSRcampaign’simpactoreffectivenesshelpstovalidate

thecompany’sefforts(Bhattacharyaetal.,2009).LizClaiborne’seffortswithLINAhave

beenthoroughandinsomerespectssuccessfulatmeetingitsobjective,havinginvested$8

million,andthecurriculumadoptedinover10,000schoolsandorganizationsintheUS.

However,therefirstmustbeawarenessofthecompany’sCSRimpact,whichmeansthe

campaignneedstoemphasizethesefactsinitscommunication(Bhattacharya&Sen,2004).

None,orzeropercent,ofmediacontentcontainedamentionofthecongruence

betweenthecompanyandthecausesitsupports.Thisresultsuggeststhatthemediadid

notconsiderthefactoroflowcongruencetobeanissuethatneededtobediscussed.

46

CritiqueofCampaign

Originally,LizClaiborne’sphilanthropicprogramsrelatingtodomesticviolencedid

haveastrongcongruencewiththecompany’smaincustomerbase–women.However,as

theireffortsevolvedintoLINA,acampaignfocusedonteendatingviolence,thehighlevel

ofcompany‐causefitwaslost.Asitexiststoday,thisCSRinitiativeofLizClaiborne’sdoes

notconnecttotheirbusinessfunction.TheLINAcampaignisanexampleofadvocacy

advertisingbecausethecompany’sinvolvementiscommunicatedthroughchannels

focusingonthecauseofteendatingviolencethroughthecompany’snameplacementon

educationalmaterialssuchastheschoolcurriculumandinformationalhandbooks(see

Figures3and4).SinceLizClaibornedoesnotprovideinformationtoexplainwhythe

companychosetosupportdomesticviolenceandthenteendatingviolence,theirmotives

appeartobealtruistic.Ellenetal.(2006)foundthatinmostcases,consumersdonot

expectorbelievethatcompanieshavealtruisticmotivesforengaginginCSRactivities,so,

whenthisisperceived,itcantriggerskepticismastothecompany’sactualmotives.AsDu

etal.explained,acompanymustcommunicateitsmotivationsandreasonforchoosinga

particularcauseinordertogeneratefavorableattributionforitsCSRprograms(2010).

SimmonsandBecker‐Olson(2006)suggestcreatingperceivedfitbetweenthecompany

andthecausecouldpreventadversereactionstothelow‐fitconditionofLizClaiborne’s

LINAcampaign.Providingamessageorstoryofhowandwhythecompanybeganits

supportofthiscausecouldcreatetheperceivedfit.

OthercritiquesoftheLINAcampaignincludelackofCSRacknowledgementforLiz

Claiborne’sotherbrandsandfailuretofullybrandLINAmaterialswiththecompanyname.

LizClaiborneInc.istheparentcompanytootherbrandssuchasKateSpade,JuicyCouture,

47

LuckyBrand,andtheseotherbrandsdonotreceiveacknowledgementforthecompany’s

CSRinitiativewiththeLINAcampaign.Areviewofthecampaignmaterialsavailableonthe

websiteshowednotalloftheinteractivematerialsavailableonthewebsiteacknowledge

LizClaiborne’ssponsorship.Forexample,thewebsitebadges,asdisplayedinFigure5,

includethecampaignname,butdonotmention“LizClaiborne.”

48

DISCUSSION

Themainobjectiveofthisstudywastoexaminethecommunicationpracticesoftwo

publicCSRcampaigns,KennethCole’sAwearnessandLizClaiborne’sLoveIsNotAbuse,to

determineiftheirlowcompany‐causecongruencecouldbeovercomeandifso,how.The

keyfindingssuggestthatfactorsotherthancompany‐causefitcanplayasignificantrolein

thesuccessofapublicCSRcampaign.

Company‐CauseFit

Basedontheemphasisgivenintheacademicliteratureontheimportanceof

company‐causefit,thisstudyexpectedtofindevidenceofdetrimenttotheAwearnessand

LoveIsNotAbusecampaignsforthelowcongruencebetweenthecompanies'businessand

thecausessupportedbythesecampaigns.However,examinationofthecampaigns

throughthecaseanalysesandmediacontentanalysesdidnotshowanyobviousharm,or

skepticismforthelowcompany‐causefit.Thefactthatnoneofthemediaexaminedinthe

contentanalysesmentionedcompany‐causefitindicatesthatlowcompany‐causefitisin

fact,notaproblem.Instead,itsuggeststhatotherfactorsrelatingtothesecampaignswere

moresignificanttoitssuccess,andhelpedovercomethelowcompany‐causefit.One

explanationfortheabsenceofnegativeeffectsonthesecampaignsforlowcompany‐cause

fitcouldbethecontingencyfactorsrelatingtothenatureoftheirbusinessindustry–retail.

AsBhattacharyaetal.described,acompany’sreputationandtheindustryoftheirbusiness

caninfluencepublicresponsetoitsCSRactivities(2009).Thepublicandconsumersare

49

moreskepticaloftheCSRactivitiesofcompaniesincertainindustriesthatareperceivedas

sociallyirresponsible(e.g.,oilortobacco),orthathavebadreputations.Aspartofthe

retailindustry,LizClaiborne,Inc.andKennethColeProductionsdonotinherentlyhavebad

reputations;thiscanaffectwhatthepublicexpectsfromthemandhowcloselytheirCSR

activitiesarescrutinized.

MenonandKahn’sresearch(2003)suggeststhatAwearness’causemarketing

approachisadvantageousforhowconsumersandthepublicinterpretKCP’sCSRactivities.

WhenCSRiscommunicatedthroughcausepromotionitiseasiertocomprehendwhya

companyisinvolvedinthecause,becausebenefitstothecompanyareobviousfrom

increasedsalesofitsproducts.Furthermore,theCone(2010)studyshowedthata

majority,81percent,ofconsumerswelcomestheopportunitytopurchasecause‐related

products.SinceKCPcontinuestoinvestintheAwearnessinitiative,itsuggeststhe

companyispleasedwiththebeneficialreturnonitsinvestmentandthatthecause‐

marketingfactorismoresignificanttoconsumersthanlowcompany‐causefit.

AlthoughLizClaibornedoesnotofferanexplanationtoconnectthecompanytothe

causeofteendatingviolence,itisbelievedthatitsfocusandcommitmenttothecauseare

sufficienttooutweighpotentialskepticismofitsmotives.TheLINAinitiativespecifically

focusesononecause–teendatingviolence–andLizClaibornesetspecificobjectivesof

whatitisattemptingtoaccomplishinthisfield.Partofthecampaign’ssuccesscanbe

determinedbasedonthedegreetowhichitsatisfiesitsgoals.Theobjectivesestablished

forLINAin2005wereto(1)createpublicawarenessofteendatingabuse(2)provideclear

visibilityforLizClaiborneasaprivatesectorleaderinthecause,and(3)todemonstrate

thecompany’ssubstantiveeffortsforthecause(RuderFinn,2006).Throughitseducation

50

curriculumandsocialmediaoutreach,LINAhascreatedacomprehensiveprogramto

educateandengagesocietyabouttheissuesofteendatingviolence,andhowtheycanjoin

thecampaign’sefforts.

CSRBeyondCompany‐CauseFit

Resultsfromthemediacontentanalysesandcaseanalysesdiscoveredinteresting

detailsaboutthepublicrelationseffortsofeachcampaign.KCPhasmuchmoreeffectively

relatedtheAwearnesscampaigntothecompanynamethanLizClaibornehasatlinkingto

theLINAcampaign.CompanyrecognitionforitsCSRactivityisanecessarycomponentfor

asuccessfulcampaign.Bynotreceivingacknowledgementineverymediamentionofthe

campaign,LizClaibornehaslostvaluableopportunitiestopubliclydemonstratethe

company’ssubstantiveeffortsforthecauseandtopromotethecompanyasaprivatesector

leaderinthecause.Itisclearthatthecampaignshouldbemoreattunedtotheselost

opportunitiestocapitalizeonthecompany’sCSRactivities.

AnotherfindingfromthemediacontentanalysissuggeststhatAwearnessmay

succeedindrawingattentiontosocialcausesthatitsupports,butdoesnotreportonany

actualsocietalbenefitithascreated.Thismakesitdifficulttodeterminewhat,ifany,

impactthecampaign’seffortshavehadonthecausesitsupports.

Resultsfromthecontentanalysesalsoshowedthatbothcampaignsare

insufficientlypublicizinghowthepublicandconsumerscangetinvolvedincampaign

efforts.AnimportantcomponenttodeterminingeffectivenessoftheseCSRcampaignsis

theextenttowhichthepublicparticipates;Awearnesstosellmorecause‐relatedproducts,

andLINAtoencourageparticipationinthefightagainstteendatingviolence.Therefore,

51

campaignmediaoutreacheffortsshouldprovideandemphasizeinformationabouthowthe

publiccanparticipatetosupportthesecauses.

ApossiblysignificantdifferencebetweenAwearnessandLINAisthesizeofthe

companies.Inthe2010fiscalyear,LizClaiborne,Inc.reportedsalesof$2.5billion,while

KennethColeProductions’saleswerelessthanonefifthofthat,reporting$457millionin

sales.ThisrelatestotheresourcesthateachcompanyhasavailabletoinvestintheirCSR

programs.Proportionally,itfollowsthatLizClaibornewouldbeabletospendfivetimesas

muchonitsCSReffortsthanKennethCole.Thiscouldaccountforthediscrepancies

betweenthesubstanceandachievementofthesetwocampaigns.Moreover,LizClaiborne

doeshaveotherCSRinitiativesthatitsupportsthroughtheLizClaiborneFoundation,

whileKennethCole’sactivitiesarelimitedtoAwearness.However,itisdifficultto

determinetheextenttowhichthisfactorcontributestothesuccessoftheLINAand

Awearnesscampaigns.

WhiletheKCPhasbeeneffectiveinmediarelationstoconnectthecompanyto

Awearness,thecampaignasawholesuffersfromalackoffocusedobjectiveandconsistent

publicengagement.Whenitfirstlaunched,therewasafocusonpromotingand

encouragingvolunteerism(Cole,2008);however,itscurrentoperationsdonotincludethis

aspect(KCP,n.d.)Possiblythemostsignificantchangetothecampaign,wasthescaling

backofitsonlineandsocialmediapresence.Initially,Awearnessincludedsuch

mechanismsasablog(AwearnessBlog)andTwitteraccount(@awearnessblog)to

communicateitsmessagetothepublic,butsinceMay2010,theyarenolongerused.These

socialmediatoolscanpotentiallyengageavastaudienceinthecampaign’sefforts,which

52

wouldmakeitmoresuccessfulintermsofspreadingsocialawarenessandpossiblyfrom

sellingmorecause‐relatedproductsaswell.

StudyLimitations&DirectionsforFutureResearch

Whilethispaperexaminedtwospecificcompaniesandcampaigns,themethods

usedforanalysisandresearchfindingscouldbeusefulinplanningfutureCSRcampaigns.

Amajorlimitationtothisstudy’sresultsistheabsenceofinformationonpublic

perceptionofthecampaigns.Animportantareaforfutureresearchshouldexaminethe

publicperceptionsofCSRcampaignswithlowcompany‐causefit.

FutureresearchcouldbuildontheconceptofthisstudyandexamineCSR

campaignswithhighcompany‐causefit,todetermineifthereisadifferenceinthe

company’sprograms,howitiscommunicated,andhowthetargetaudiencerespondsto

informationaboutthecompany’sCSRactivities.

Interestingly,thisstudynoticedthestronginfluenceofdesignerKennethCole’s

identityonthephilanthropicactivitiesofKCP.Thissuggeststhatcompany‐cause

congruencefortheAwearnesscampaignwaspossiblylinkedmoretothedesignerthanto

thecompany.Assuch,futureresearchshouldexaminetheinfluenceoftheindividuals

associatedwithacompany,inpublicperceptionsofcompany‐causefit.Investigatinghowa

personbehind(orassociatedwith)thecompanycaninfluenceperceptionofcompany‐

causefitmightprovideinsightforfutureCSRcampaignsandwhoorwhattheyshoulduse

tomeasurecongruencetoasupportedcause.

53

Conclusion

ThroughanalysisofthecommunicationeffortsandmediacoverageofKenneth

Cole’sAwearnessandLizClaiborne’sLoveIsNotAbuseCSRcampaigns,thisstudyhasfound

thatcompany‐causefitisnotadeterminingfactortoacampaign’ssuccess.Overall,

componentsthataremoreimportanttothesuccessofaCSRcampaigninclude,company

recognitionforsponsorship,andsubstanceoftheinitiative.Aprerequisiteforthesuccess

ofaCSRprogramisacknowledgementofthecompany’sinvolvement.Companiesmust

communicatetheirCSRactivitytoaudiencesinordertocreateawarenessandensurethat

anythird‐partyreporting(i.e.media)oftheireffortsalsorecognizesthecompany’s

involvement.AnothersignificantelementthatcontributestothesuccessofaCSRinitiative

isactualsubstanceofitsefforts.ComprehensiveandtransparentCSRprogramsaremore

likelytobeperceivedasacompany’shonestattempttobenefitsocietyortheenvironment,

thusavoidingskepticismofthecompany’smotives.Inconclusion,companiescanbenefit

fromtheirinvestmentinCSRactivitieswhenitiseffectivelyandstrategically

communicatedtotargetaudience.

54

REFERENCES

Alcañiz,E.,Cáceres,R.,&Pérez,R.(2010).AlliancesBetweenBrandsandSocialCauses:The

InfluenceofCompanyCredibilityonSocialResponsibilityImage.JournalofBusiness

Ethics,96(2),169‐186.doi:10.1007/s10551‐010‐0461‐x

AmericanTreasuresoftheLibraryofCongress.(n.d.).TheMostFamousPoster.Retrieved

onApril14,2011,fromhttp://www.loc.gov/exhibits/treasures/trm015.html

Austin,J.E.,Leonard,H.B.,Reficco,E.,&Wei‐Skillern,J.(2006).SocialEntrepreneurship:It

IsforCorporations,Too.InA.Nicholls(Ed.),SocialEntrepreneurship:NewModelsof

SustainableSocialChange(pp.169‐180):OxfordUniversityPress.

Barone,M.,Norman,A.,&Miyazaki,A.(2007).Consumerresponsetoretaileruseofcause‐

relatedmarketing:Ismorefitbetter?JournalofRetailing,83(4),437‐445.Retrieved

onFebruary17,2011,fromABI/INFORMGlobal.doi:10.1016/j.jretai.2007.03.006

Beckett,W.(2007,June29).KennethColeCreates“AwearnessFund.”Women’sWearDaily,

p.3.RetrievedonMarch10,2011,fromFactivadatabase.

Becket,W.(2008,October27).ColetoDebutActivismBook.FootwearNews.Footwear

News,64(41),7.RetrievedonMarch14,2011,fromFactivadatabase.

Bhattacharya,C.B.,Korschun,D.,&Sen,S.(2009).StrengtheningStakeholder‐Company

RelationshipsThroughMutuallyBeneficialCorporateSocialResponsibility

Initiatives.JournalofBusinessEthics,85(S2),257‐272.doi:10.1007/s10551‐008‐

9730‐3

55

Bhattacharya,C.B.,&Sen,S.(2004).DoingBetteratDoingGood:When,Why,andHow

ConsumersRespondtoCorporateSocialInitiatives.CaliforniaManagementReview,

47(1),9‐24.RetrievedfromEBSCOhost.

Bruell,A.(2009,July1).LizClaibornefightsteendatingabusebyengagingparents,forging

partnerships.PRWeekUS.RetrievedonMarch29,2011,from

www.prweekus.com/liz‐claiborne‐fights‐teen‐dating‐abuse‐by‐engaging‐parents‐

forging‐partnerships/article/139182/

Carroll,A.B.(1998).TheFourFacesofCorporateCitizenship.BusinessandSocietyReview,

100(1),1‐7.doi:10.1111/0045‐3609.00008

Carroll,A.B.(1999).CorporateSocialResponsibility.Business&Society,38(3),268‐295.

doi:10.1177/000765039903800303

Colbert,C.(2011a,March).KennethColeProductions,Inc.RetrievedfromHoover’s

CompanyRecordsdatabase.

Colbert,C.(2011b,March).LizClaiborne,Inc.RetrievedfromHoover’sCompanyRecords

database.

Cole,K.(2008).Awearness:InspiringStoriesAboutHowtoMakeaDifference.NewYork,NY:

MelcherMedia.

Cone,Inc.(2010).2010ConeCauseEvolutionStudy.(pp.1‐30).RetrievedonDecember2,

2010,fromwww.coneinc.com/2010‐cone‐cause‐evolution‐study

CRT/Tanaka.(n.d.).LizClaiborne[Casestudy].RetrievedonMarch9,2011,fromwww.crt‐

tanaka.com/our‐work/liz‐claiborne

DoWellDoGood.(n.d.).Retrievedfromhttp://dowelldogood.net/?p=498

56

Du,S.,Bhattacharya,C.B.,&Sen,S.(2010).MaximizingBusinessReturnstoCorporate

SocialResponsibility(CSR):TheRoleofCSRCommunication.InternationalJournal

ofManagementReviews,12(1),8‐19.doi:10.1111/j.1468‐2370.2009.00276.x

Ellen,P.S.,Webb,D.J.,&Mohr,L.A.(2006).BuildingCorporateAssociations:Consumer

AttributionsforCorporateSociallyResponsiblePrograms.JournaloftheAcademyof

MarketingScience,34(2),147‐157.doi:10.1177/0092070305284976

Hopkins,M.(2007).CorporateSocialResponsibilityandInternationalDevelopment:Is

BusinesstheSolution?London;Sterling,VA:Earthscan.

HumanRightsCampaign.(2010,June11).HumanRightsCampaignUnveilsNew

CollaborationwithKennethCole[Pressrelease].RetrievedonMarch17,2011,from

www.hrc.org/news/14551.htm

HumanRightsCampaign(Organization).(2010).HRCAwearnessEvent[Advertisement

image].RetrievedonMarch18,2011,fromwww.hrc.org/content_images/kcole‐

ny.jpg

Johnston,E.(2010,June22).WhereThereisaCauseThereisKennethCole:TakingaStand

toHelpWiththeOilSpill[Articleandphoto].FashionFoieGras.RetrievedonMarch

13,2011,fromwww.fashionfoiegras.com/2010/06/where‐there‐is‐cause‐there‐is‐

kenneth.html

KennethColeProductions[Companywebsite].(n.d.).Retrievedfrom

www.kennethcole.com/awearness

KennethColeProductions.(2005).KennethColeCreatesandLaunches'WeAllHaveAIDS'

PublicServiceCampaignonWorldAIDSDay;Celebritiesandleadersinthefight

againstHIV/AIDSjoinforceswithCole,ViacomandtheKaiserFamilyFoundationto

57

helperasestigma[Pressrelease].RetrievedonMarch10,2011,from

www.kff.org/hivaids/phip120105nra.cfm

KennethColeProductions.(2010).AnnualReport2009.RetrievedonMarch20,2011,from

http://phx.corporate‐

ir.net/External.File?item=UGFyZW50SUQ9Mzc3MjcyfENoaWxkSUQ9Mzc2MDgzfFR

5cGU9MQ==&t=1

KennethColeProductions.(2010).WeCanAllCleanUpWell:KennethColeProductions

LaunchesCustomT‐ShirtStoreonFacebookSupportingGulfClean‐UpEfforts[Press

release].RetrievedonMarch15,2011,fromFactivadatabase.

Kerlin,J.A.,&Gagnaire,K.(2009).UnitedStates.InJ.A.Kerlin(Ed.),SocialEnterprise:A

GlobalComparison(pp.87‐113).Medford,Mass.;Hanover:TuftsUniversityPress;

UniversityPressofNewEngland.

Lantos,G.P.(2001).Theboundariesofstrategiccorporatesocialresponsibility.Journalof

ConsumerMarketing,18(7),595‐632.Retrievedfrom

http://search.proquest.com/docview/220124077?accountid=8285

doi:10.1108/07363760110410281

LizClaiborne,Inc.(n.d.).CorporateResponsibility.RetrievedonFebruary15,2011,from

www.lizclaiborneinc.com/corporateresponsibility

LizClaiborne,Inc.(1991,November8).LizClaiborneInc.CommissionsBest­SellingAuthor

ToWriteChildren’sBook[Pressrelease].RetrievedonFebruary19,2011,from

http://loveisnotabuse.com/web/guest/pressreleasesarchive/‐

/journal_content/56/10123/82624/DEFAULT

58

LizClaiborne,Inc.(2010).2010AnnualReport.Retrievedfrom

http://thomson.mobular.net/thomson/7/3198/4467/

Lo,D.,&Mirchandani,R.(2008,February14).TheColePosition.NewYorkPost,p.48.

RetrievedonMarch15,2011,fromFactivadatabase.

LoveIsNotAbuse(LINA)[Website].(n.d.).Retrievedfromwww.loveisnotabuse.com

LoveIsNotAbuse.(n.d.).InFacebook[Profile].RetrievedonMarch1,2011,from

www.facebook.com/LoveIsNotAbuse

Love_IsNotAbuse.(n.d.).InTwitter.RetrievedonMarch3,2011,from

www.twitter.com/Love_IsNotAbuse

Maignan,I.,&Ferrell,O.C.(2004).CorporateSocialResponsibilityandMarketing:An

IntegrativeFramework.JournaloftheAcademyofMarketingScience,32(1),3‐19.

doi:10.1177/0092070303258971

Matten,D.,&Moon,J.(2008)."Implicit"and"Explicit"CSR:AConceptualFrameworkfora

ComparativeUnderstandingofCorporateSocialResponsibility.Academyof

ManagementReview,33(2),404‐424.RetrievedfromEBSCOhost.

Menon,S.,&Kahn,B.E.(2003).CorporateSponsorshipsofPhilanthropicActivities:When

DoTheyImpactPerceptionofSponsorBrand?JournalofConsumerPsychology,

13(3),316‐327.Retrievedfromwww.jstor.org/stable/1480220

Morsing,M.,&Schultz,M.(2006).Corporatesocialresponsibilitycommunication:

stakeholderinformation,responseandinvolvementstrategies.BusinessEthics:A

EuropeanReview,15(4),323‐338.doi:10.1111/j.1467‐8608.2006.00460.x

Nan,X.,&Heo,K.(2007).ConsumerResponsestoCorporateSocialResponsibility(CSR)

Initiatives.JournalofAdvertising,36(2),63‐74.RetrievedfromEBSCOhost.

59

Ninh,D.(2008,November28).KennethCole:TheBlackTieDinnerkeynotespeakergets

personal.DallasMorningNews,p.12E.RetrievedonMarch17,2011,fromFactiva

database.

RuderFinn.(2006).LizClaiborne:“LoveisNotAbuse”[Casestudy].RetrievedonMarch

15,2011,fromwww.ruderfinn.com/corporate‐public‐trust/global‐issues/case‐

studies/love‐is‐not‐abuse.html

Sen,S.,&Bhattacharya,C.B.(2001).DoesDoingGoodAlwaysLeadtoDoingBetter?

ConsumerReactionstoCorporateSocialResponsibility.JournalofMarketing

Research(JMR),38(2),225‐243.RetrievedonDecember2,2010,from

www.jstor.org.proxyau.wrlc.org/stable/1558626

Simmons,C.J.,&Becker‐Olsen,K.L.(2006).AchievingMarketingObjectivesThroughSocial

Sponsorships.JournalofMarketing,70(4),154‐169.RetrievedfromEBSCOhost.

Urban,S.(2010).Awearness:KennethColeforHaitiRelief.BecauseISaidSo[Webblog].

RetrievedonMarch13,2011,from

www.bcisaidso.com/bciss/2010/03/09/awearness‐kenneth‐cole‐for‐haiti‐relief/

VolunteerMatch(2008).VolunteerMatchandKennethColePartnertoEncourageService

andSocialChange[Pressrelease].RetrievedonMarch15,2011,from

www.csrwire.com/press_releases/22038‐VolunteerMatch‐And‐Kenneth‐Cole‐

Partner‐To‐Encourage‐Service‐And‐Social‐Change‐

Yoon,Y.,Gürhan‐Canli,Z.,&Schwarz,N.(2006).TheEffectofCorporateSocial

Responsibility(CSR)ActivitiesonCompaniesWithBadReputations.Journalof

ConsumerPsychology,16(4),377‐390.doi:10.1207/s15327663jcp1604_9