Factors affecting donations in U.S. retail stores: A conceptual framework

Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 33 (2016) 178–185

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jretconser

Factors affecting donations in U.S. retail stores: A conceptual framework Selen Savas Florida Atlantic University, Department of Marketing, Fleming Hall, 777 Glades Road, Room 201, Boca Raton, FL 33431, USA

art ic l e i nf o

a b s t r a c t

Article history: Received 2 May 2016 Received in revised form 8 August 2016 Accepted 28 August 2016

The purpose of this study is to identify the factors that influence consumer donations in U.S. retail stores. The study provides a conceptual framework of factors derived from the cause-related marketing, consumer behavior and psychology literatures. These factors are categorized as consumer-related factors, retailer-related factors and context-related factors. Consumer-related factors include consumer-retailer identification, consumer-cause affinity, impure altruism, civic engagement and post-purchase cognitive dissonance. Retailer-related factors consist of retailer-cause fit, retailer's commitment to the cause, retailer image as being altruistic, and retailer credibility. Context-related factors include time pressure, social pressure, shopping amount, and perceived savings during the shopping trip. This conceptual framework serves as a foundation for future empirical studies. & 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Cause-related marketing Retail consumer behavior Donations in retail stores Retailers Nonprofit

1. Introduction This study examines the factors that influence consumer donations in retail stores. As part of their cause-related marketing campaigns, retail stores partner with non-profit organizations to raise funds for several causes such as health, human, animal or environmental issues. Although there are many studies in the literature that examined companies’ cause-related marketing efforts in general, there are very few studies that examine these efforts in the retail context. Hence, this study aims to develop a conceptual framework that incorporates the influential factors on consumers’ willingness to donate as well as their actual donation behavior at the checkout registers. Cause-related marketing (CrM) is generally defined as “the process of formulating and implementing marketing activities that are characterized by an offer from the firm to contribute an amount to a cause when customers engage in revenue-providing exchanges that satisfy organizational and individual objectives” (Varadarajan and Anil, 1988, p. 60). CrM has been employed by companies as consumers progressively value corporate support for social causes (Cone et al., 2003). The majority of cause-related marketing campaigns are initiated by the collaborations between companies and non-profit organizations. Companies benefit from these collaborations by increasing their sales and brand loyalty, and improving their images, while their non-profit partners benefit by raising funds for several causes (Lafferty, 2009; Lafferty and Edmonson, 2009). These campaigns also lead to positive consumer E-mail address: [email protected] http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2016.08.016 0969-6989/& 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

attitudes toward both parties (Nan and Heo, 2007), and create greater consumer satisfaction derived from donating to a cause (Strahilevitz and Myers, 1998; Luo and Bhattacharya, 2006). As CrM becomes more common and successful, several studies were conducted to explain why consumers engage in CrM campaigns. These studies examined both consumer-related and company-related factors. Some consumer-related factors include consumer perceptions and feelings about the sponsoring company (Gupta and Pirsch, 2006), consumers’ growing social consciousness (Dupree, 2000), altruistic needs of the consumers (Polonsky and Wood, 2001), their involvement in causes (Broderick et al., 2003), perceived congruence between their own character and company reputation (Sen and Bhattacharya, 2001), and cultural differences (Robinson et al., 2012; Wang, 2014). Some companyrelated factors include cause-brand/company fit (Hamlin and Wilson, 2004; Bigne-Alcaniz et al., 2012; Lafferty et al., 2004), corporate credibility (Lafferty, 2007), and positive brand equity and reputation (Dickinson and Barker, 2007). Although all these studies provide general insights about why consumers engage in CrM campaigns, there is little evidence about why consumers donate in retail environments. Among all business areas, the retail sector generates the highest fundraising (Barone et al., 2007). Cause Marketing Forum showed that in the past thirty years checkout donation programs raised approximately $2.3 billion; and, that in 2012 more than $358 million was raised by a group of 63 well-known retailers using checkout donations (Cause Marketing Forum, 2013). Retailers incorporate CrM strategies by selling products that benefit charities and by requesting donations upon checkouts. Fundraising by retailers not only

S. Savas / Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 33 (2016) 178–185

increase sales, but also improve store images. For example, CVS Corporation increased its sales by implementing the strategy of donating 25 cents of every $35 purchase to Unicef (UNICEF, 2005). Similarly, the success of Macy's long lasting March of Dimes campaign energizes the entire organization, and customers appreciate the easy opportunity to give back (Cause Marketing Forum, 2013). Given retailers’ significant fundraising efforts, it is important to examine why consumers donate in retail stores. Thus, the current paper aims to develop a conceptual framework derived from CrM, consumer behavior and psychology literatures. This framework answers the question of “What are the factors that influence consumers’ willingness to donate at the checkout registers in retail stores? ”. This study is significant in two ways. First, there is a lack of research examining why consumers donate in retail stores. Retail stores not only sell products whose sales are tied to several causes (cause-related products), but also collect a considerable amount of donations at the checkout registers, where the cashier directly asks customers whether they want to donate. However, previous CrM studies mainly examined consumers’ attitudes toward causerelated products (e.g. Hamlin and Wilson, 2004; Bigne-Alcaniz et al., 2012; Lafferty et al., 2004; Gupta and Pirsch, 2006; La Ferle et al., 2013; Youn and Kim, 2008) and neglected donations at the checkout registers. This study aims to fill this gap in the literature. Second, this study identifies several consumer (e.g. consumerretailer identification, consumer-cause affinity, impure altruism, collective engagement, reduced post purchase cognitive dissonance) and retailer-related factors (e.g. retailer-cause fit, retailer's commitment to the cause, retailer image as being altruistic, retailer credibility) that affect consumers’ willingness to donate. In addition, this study examines contextual factors (e.g. time limitation, social pressure, shopping amount, perceived savings) since consumers are also influenced by situation-specific circumstances. As a result, this research provides a comprehensive overview of why consumers donate in retail stores.

2. Literature review Previous research has shown that CrM can positively influence consumers’ evaluations and purchase intentions (e.g. Youn and Kim, 2008; Wang, 2014; Sen and Bhattacharya, 2001; Broderick et al., 2003; Bennett and Gabriel, 2000; Gupta and Pirch, 2006). These studies examined several consumer-related constructs that affect consumers’ attitudes toward CrM. For example, Youn and Kim (2008) examined the predictive impact of psychographic factors, such as self-confidence, public self-consciousness, interpersonal trust, advertising skepticism, personal and social responsibility on consumers’ support for CrM. Sen and Bhattacharya (2001) identified consumers’ perceived congruence between their own character and company reputation as another important factor. Likewise, consumers’ cultural differences, specifically individualism and collectivism, and individual charitable giving as a social norm were found to be significantly associated with the attitude toward CrM (Wang, 2014). In their in-depth qualitative research, Broderick et al. (2003) examined customers’ perceptions, actions, and different levels of involvement and roles in CrM activities. Focusing on a case study of Breast Cancer Awareness campaigns, the emotional level of individual involvement was found to be the key differentiating factor. Bennett and Gabriel (2000) found that the degree of psychological involvement and inclination towards charity giving varies across consumers. Gupta and Pirsch (2006) argue that consumer identification with both the company and the cause play a key role in enhancing the success of a cause-related campaign. Moreover,

179

Dupree (2000) suggests that consumers’ growing social consciousness is a significant reason behind the rapid growth and interest in CrM. Robinson et al. (2012) examined a new form of CrM in which companies let consumers determine which cause should receive support. The study shows that consumers are more willing to pay for products associated with CrM campaigns when they perceive a greater personal role in selecting the focal cause of the campaign (Robinson et al., 2012). Similarly, Lafferty and Edmonson (2014) found that consumers are more inclined to donate to causes in a domain with which they closely associate. Koschte-Fischer et al. (2012) examined the relationship between donation amount and willingness to pay (WTP). The authors also found that donationrelated (attitude toward helping others and warm-glow motive) and cause-related (cause involvement, cause-organization affinity and company-cause fit) customer predispositions moderate this relationship. In addition to customer-related factors, there are also company-related factors that are identified in CrM studies. The most popular factors are company-cause fit and cause-brand fit (e.g. Gupta and Pirsch, 2006; Koschte-Fischer et al., 2012; Bigne-Alcaniz et al., 2012). While some studies agree that choosing a cause that is compatible with the identity of the company and its target market increases the likelihood of donations, other studies found that low company-cause fit raises more funds. The brief literature review above shows various consumer and company-related factors that are considered in CrM studies. However, almost all of these studies only examined consumer attitudes toward cause-related products. There are few studies that discuss the influential factors on consumers’ donation behavior in retail environments. One of the very few studies regarding donations in retail environments was conducted by Barone et al. (2007). The authors examined how retailer-cause fit affects consumer evaluations toward CrM. The results indicated that the effect of retailer-cause fit on donation behavior is moderated by retailer motivation for CrM and consumer affinity for the cause. Another study that examined donations in retail environments was conducted by Ellen et al. (2000). The authors conducted the study across two retail contexts (grocery and building supply stores). They manipulated the donation situation, congruency of donations with the firm's core business, effort exerted by the firm, and commitment of the firm to the cause in order to examine consumers’ donation behavior. Given the limited research examining donations in retail environments, the present study takes a broader approach and proposes a conceptual framework that includes consumer, retailer and context-related factors that influence why consumers donate in retail stores. In the following section, each factor is discussed and related propositions are developed.

3. Conceptual framework and propositions After thoroughly reviewing the literature, three categories of factors (consumer, retailer and context-related) are developed to understand what prompts consumers to donate in retail environments. Consumer-related factors include consumer-retailer identification, consumer-cause affinity, impure altruism, civic engagement, post-purchase cognitive dissonance. Retailer-related factors consist of retailer-cause fit, retailer's commitment to the cause, retailer image as being altruistic, and retailer credibility. Context-related factors include time pressure, social pressure, shopping amount, and perceived savings during the shopping trip. The conceptual framework (Fig. 1) and constructs with related theoretical explanations (Table A1) can be found in Appendix A. Next, each factor is discussed.

180

S. Savas / Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 33 (2016) 178–185

Consumer-Related Factors Consumer - retailer identification Consumer-cause affinity Impure altruism Civic engagement Reduced post purchase cognitive dissonance

Willingness to donate

Retailer-Related Factors

Actual donation behavior

Retailer - cause fit Retailer’s commitment to the cause Retailer image as being altruistic Retailer credibility

Contextual Factors Time pressure Social influence Shopping amount Perceived savings during the shopping trip

Fig. 1. Conceptual Framework.

3.1. Consumer-related factors 3.1.1. Consumer-retailer identification This paper proposes that the willingness of consumers to donate in retail stores is enhanced by the congruency between the characters of the retailers and consumers. Social identity theory offers theoretical support for this claim. A person's social identity is defined as “the aspects of an individual's self-image that derive from the social categories to which he perceives himself as belonging” (Tajfel, 1978, p. 16). Social identity theory (Brewer, 1991; Tajfel and Turner, 1985) posits that people typically go beyond their identity to develop a social identity, by identifying themselves within a contextual manner. A consumer's perception of “oneness or belongingness” with an organization occurs when a person's beliefs about a relevant organization becomes self-relevant or self-defining (Bachatarraya and Sen, 2003). Thus, in the retail context, consumers may have strong relationships with the retailers due to their identification with them. Hence, their identification with the retailer may in turn create the feeling of a psychological connection to the causes for which the retailers raise funds. P1. The more the consumers identify with the retailer; the more willing they are to donate in that retail environment. 3.1.2. Consumer-cause affinity Consumer-cause affinity is the degree of emotional or personal association of consumers for a specific category of social causes (e.g., breast cancer awareness). Most of the CrM strategies link sales of products to the support of a charity or a cause. Previous studies based on these strategies establish that feelings of affinity to a cause drive favorable brand attitudes and brand choices (Bhattacharya and

Sen, 2003; Lichtenstein et al., 2004). Consumers’ attitude toward a nonprofit organization (e.g., charity) also facilitates positive consumer evaluations of its corporate sponsors, which eventually increases their purchase intentions toward those sponsors (Cornwell and Coote, 2005). Consumer-cause affinity takes its root from selfcategorization theory, which claims that individuals categorize themselves into social groups with central, enduring, and distinctive characteristics (Albert and Whetten, 1985). In the context of CrM, the theory suggests that consumers may be more inclined to choose causes from a domain with which they closely associate. In other words, consumers donate to causes depending on their self-categorizations. Lafferty and Edmonson's (2014) study provides a good example. The authors conducted a study using cause categories including health, human services, animal, and the environment. Their study showed that consumers are more willing to donate causes that relate to human services. Likewise, in a qualitative study, Broderick et al. (2003) interviewed several people on Tickled Pink campaign of Avon for breast cancer. The findings showed that women especially are interested in the campaign because this particular type of cancer affects many women. Thus, the willingness to donate at checkout registers in retail stores may be related to the association between the causes and the consumers’ personal values, life experiences, and moral and ethical intention (Broderick et al., 2003). P2. The higher the consumer-cause affinity; the more willing consumers are to donate in the retail environment. 3.1.3. Impure altruism The concept of impure altruism consists of both altruistic and egoistic donation motives. Altruistic motives are related to donating for the benefits of society and egoistic motives are related

S. Savas / Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 33 (2016) 178–185

to donating for the benefits of the individual (e.g. feeling better about oneself) (Koschte-Fischer et al., 2012). As described by Andreoni (1989) in his Theory of Warm-Glow Giving, the egoistic motive creates a warm glow feeling when donating in public environments. Social pressure, guilt, sympathy, or simply a desire for warm-glow may play important roles in the decision to donate. Because it is in a public environment, donating in a retail store may create an egoistic motive (increasing one's self-esteem by displaying a socially-responsible image) and desire for a warm glow feeling. Thus, we expect that the consumers’ desire for a warm glow feeling leads to a higher willingness to donate. P3. The stronger the consumers’ egoistic motives, the more willing they are to donate in the retail environment. 3.1.4. Civic engagement Civic engagement is defined as working to make a difference in the civic life of communities, and promoting the quality of life through both political and non-political processes (Ehrlich, 2000). The concept of prosocial behavior is the basis of civic engagement. Prosocial behaviors consist of helping, sharing, donating, cooperating and volunteering (Brief and Motowidlo, 2000). Previous research on prosocial behavior indicates that there are situational (e.g. number of individuals present in the situation) and individual factors (personal and moral norms) that influence the development of prosocial behaviors (Van der Linden, 2011; Latane and Darley, 1970). These individual and situational factors motivate individuals to be active in civic engagement. Increased engagement in civic activities has been shown to have a close relationship with volunteering (Chrenka et al., 1970; Hart et al., 2002). There may be a similar relationship in the context of retail stores between civic engagement and donation intentions. There is high circulation in retail environments, which may lead consumers to believe that collectively engaging in a fundraising activity can make a big difference. Thus, individuals who participate in community service, volunteer, or make charitable donations may be more willing to support causes in retail stores (Youn and Kim, 2008). P4. The higher the consumers’ civic engagements, the more willing they are to donate in the retail environment. 3.1.5. Post-purchase cognitive dissonance According to the cognitive dissonance theory, dissonance occurs when individuals hold conflicting thoughts about a belief or an attitude object (Festinger et al., 1956). When dissonance arises it produces discomfort, which individuals want to eliminate. In consumer behavior, post-purchase cognitive dissonance is common, especially when consumers face the actual performance of the product and compare that with their expectations (Telci et al., 2011; Lancaster and Massingham, 2011). In order to relieve their discomfort, consumers may rely on illogical thoughts and actions or on heuristics (Cappelletti et al., 2011). It is proposed in this study that donations in the retail environments may be a way to reduce cognitive dissonance for consumers. Although consumers feel discomfort due to various reasons related to their shopping experience, donating right before they leave the store may positively change their cognitions and feelings. Thus, supporting a social cause may help to rationalize consumers’ choice of the retailer and even dissatisfactory purchases, and eliminate the dissonance. P5. The higher the consumers’ cognitive dissonance, the more willing they are to donate in the retail environment. 3.2. Retailer-related factors 3.2.1. Retailer-cause fit Company-cause fit is the overall perceived congruity between

181

the sponsored cause and the company (Koschte-Fischer et al., 2012). In other words, it is the extent to which a cause has strong connections to the firm's core business (Simmons and Becker-Olsen, 2006). Schema theory provides the theoretical support for cause-company fit. The theory argues that when consumers perceive two stimuli (e.g. company and cause), they perform an unconscious feature matching process and compare different characteristics of the two stimuli. For example, as explained in Rumelt's (1974) study, when the fit is high, consumers think that the company is more capable to help the charity because it will be able to transfer its expertize, skills, products, technologies, and markets. Studies on corporate social responsibility also support this view by showing that a high-fit cause evokes positive reactions to a company (Bhattacharya and Sen, 2004; Gupta and Pirsch, 2006). These results are in line with findings from co-branding studies, which suggest that selecting a compatible brand partner increases co-branding success (Bucklin and Sengupta, 1993; Lafferty et al., 2004). In addition, CrM studies show that having a positive attitude towards the company-cause fit creates a positive evaluation of the sponsored product, which leads to an increased purchase intention. Thus, the present study proposes that a similarity between the characteristics of the retailer and the cause leads to consistent cognitive structures. Hence, consumers’ willingness to donate may be influenced by the congruency between the retailer and the cause. Higher levels of fit may enhance evaluations of CrM strategies, and correspondingly increase donation intentions. P6. The higher the retailer-cause fit; the more willing consumers are to donate in the retail environment. 3.2.2. Retailer's commitment to the cause Commitment refers to “an implicit and explicit pledge of relational continuity between exchange partners” (Dwyer et al., 1987, p. 19). Relationship commitment is also defined as “an enduring desire to maintain a valued relationship” (Moorman et al., 1992, p. 316). Commitment is viewed as a critical factor in interorganizational relationships (Blau, 1964; Thibaut and Kelley, 1959; Cook and Emerson, 1978). Based on social exchange theory, commitment is important to achieve valuable outcomes for both parties (Dwyer et al., 1987; Morgan and Hunt, 1994). When a company and a nonprofit organization demonstrate the same level of commitment to a specific social cause, they achieve sustainability. The commitment of both parties affects consumers’ evaluation of the cause. Drumwright (1996) found that the longer the company's time commitment to a cause, the more successful the prosocial ad campaign. Similarly, we propose that consumers’ may develop positive attitudes toward the retailer if they know that it consistently supports a specific cause, or has a long-term relationship with a specific non-profit organization. More importantly, consumers may take retailer's commitment to the cause as an indication of less self-interested motivation (Ellen et al., 2000). As a result, the consumers may be more willing to donate to the cause. P7. The higher the retailer's commitment to a cause; the more willing consumers are to donate in the retail environment. 3.2.3. Retailer's image as being altruistic Hirschman, Greenberg, and Robert et al. (1987) defined image as the differentiated stimulus that reinforces the direction of expected responses. Corporate image is the view that the public has of a firm— the impression that the public holds in its mind about a firm (GurhanCanli, and Batra, 2004). Similar to corporate image, retailer image is defined as consumers’ perceptions of a retailing firm's total personality. In the retail context, image refers to store image. Previous studies show that store image influences customer purchases (Mazursky and Jacoby, 1986), and leads to a positive perception about a particular

182

S. Savas / Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 33 (2016) 178–185

product or brand (Baugh and Davis, 1989). Retailer image is also enhanced by the corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives of the retailers. Research on CSR showed that there is a positive relationship between CSR activities and consumer attitudes toward organizations and their products (Brown and Peter, 1997). This also implies that CrM campaigns, as a form of CSR, can facilitate an altruistic image of the retailer by highlighting the values that are important to the corporation. The key to sustaining this altruistic image is to reinforce these values consistently. Thus, this study proposes that an altruistic retailer is more likely to be viewed favorably in its CrM campaigns. As a result, consumers may be more willing to donate if they perceive the retailer as sincerely interested and involved in social causes. P8. The more the retailer's image is perceived as altruistic; the more willing consumers are to donate in the retail environment. 3.2.4. Retailer's perceived credibility The source credibility model (Hovland et al., 1965) suggests that sources exhibiting greater expertize and trustworthiness are perceived as more credible. Hence, it is easier to persuade people when they view the source as credible. Prior source credibility research shows that source credibility and consumers’ attitudes toward the source has a positive relationship (Briñol et al., 2004). In his research examining corporate credibility, Fombrun (1996) indicates that corporate credibility is one dimension of corporate reputation and represents the degree to which consumers, investors, and other constituents believe in the company's trustworthiness and expertize. Lafferty and Goldsmith (2005) found that corporate credibility exerted a very strong effect on attitudes toward a company's brand and on purchase intentions to a greater extent than did highly paid product endorsers. Also, previous studies on brand credibility showed that brand credibility has a significant effect on emotion and reason in consumers’ decision making (Maathuis et al., 2004), as well as a positive influence on consumers’ brand consideration and choice (Erdem and Swait, 2004). This study anticipates a similar effect on consumers’ willingness to donate in retail stores when the retailer is perceived as credible. Thus, CrM campaigns may be evaluated more positively, which may lead an increase in consumer donations. P9. The higher the retailer's credibility; the more willing consumers are to donate in the retail environment. 3.3. Contextual factors 3.3.1. Time pressure In a typical donation scenario, consumers are allowed ample time to engage in a well-thought out decision process to determine the donation amount as well as the type of charity they are willing to donate. Nevertheless, time limitations at the checkout registers in retail stores hinder the information gathering necessary for decision making. As indicated by information processing theory, time pressure prevents processing pieces of information and leads to a lack of control over decisions (Hahn et al., 1992). Previous studies on time pressure and decision making indicate that the time to make a choice is inversely related to the probability of making that choice (Busemeyer, 1982; Petrusic and Jamieson, 1978). Also, studies that attempt to explain changes in choice behavior under time pressure show that changes in decision strategies vary from a more accurate and time-consuming strategy to a less accurate but simpler and faster heuristic strategy as people are faced with limited time (Johnson et al., 1995; Payne et al., 1996). In this study, we expect to find a positive moderating effect of time pressure. Because previously discussed consumerrelated and retailer-related factors are expected to have a positive effect on willingness to donate, these factors may be used as heuristics for decision making when time is limited.

P10a. The positive effect of consumer-related factors on willingness to donate in retail environments is greater under high time pressure. P10b. The positive effect of retailer-related factors on willingness to donate in retail environments is greater under high time pressure. 3.3.2. Social influence Studies on social influence indicate that people care what others think about them and tend to engage in costly prosocial behavior more often when they know others are watching (Panagopoulos, 2014). They also want to develop reputations for altruism and cooperation (Posner and Rasmusen, 1999; Rind and Benjamin, 1994; Whatley et al., 1999). Hence, due to high visibility, social influence may be an important factor for donations in retail environments The presence of other consumers may positively affect consumers’ responses to donation offers at the checkout registers. P11a. The positive effect of consumer-related factors on willingness to donate in retail environments is greater under high social influence. P11b. The positive effect of retailer-related factors on willingness to donate in retail environments is greater under high social influence. 3.3.3. Shopping amount Diminishing sensitivity assumption (Kahneman and Tversky, 1972) claims that people focus more on relative differences instead of absolute differences. Hence, the sensitivity diminishes as the numbers get larger. For example, people care more about saving $1 in a $5 purchase (20% off) compared to $1 in a $50 purchase (2%) although the absolute amount of discount does not change. In terms of donations in retail environments, people may experience a similar effect. As their shopping amount gets larger, their sensitivity to save money may decrease. As a result, donating a smaller amount compared to their shopping amount may have a diminishing sensitivity effect. Thus, we propose that people's willingness to donate depends on the ratio of donation amount to the shopping amount. As the ratio gets smaller, consumers’ willingness to donate may increase. P12a. The positive effect of consumer-related factors on willingness to donate in retail environments increases as the ratio of donation amount to shopping amount gets smaller. P12b. The positive effect of retailer-related factors on willingness to donate in retail environments increases as the ratio of donation amount to shopping amount gets smaller. 3.3.4. Perceived savings during the shopping trip There are various consumer promotions offered in retail stores that provide consumers monetary savings during their shopping trips. The most common ones are coupons, rebates, sales, discounts, premiums, sweepstakes, and free samples. The primary goal of these promotions is to stimulate purchases. There are several studies that examine the perceptions and responses of consumers to the promotional strategies of retailers (Folkes and Rita, 1995; Grewal et al., 1998). Bell et al. (2011) indicate that many retailers believe that a majority of purchases are unplanned, so they spend heavily on in-store marketing to stimulate unplanned purchases. In this study, we anticipate that in-store promotions stimulate donation intentions due to promotional savings. Because consumers have already saved on their purchases, they may not perceive a donation at the checkout register as a loss. Thus, consumers may be more willing to donate if they save during their shopping trips. P13a. The positive effect of consumer-related factors on willingness to donate in retail environments increases as the perceived savings during the shopping trip increase. P13b. The positive effect of retailer-related factors on willingness

S. Savas / Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 33 (2016) 178–185

to donate in retail environments increases as the perceived savings during the shopping trip increase.

4. Conclusion This study answers the question of why consumers donate at the checkout registers in retail environments. U.S. retail stores are chosen as the context of the study because of their success at raising funds through donations requested at checkout. The study develops a conceptual framework of the factors that influence consumers’ willingness to donate in retail stores. The factors identified are categorized as consumer-, retailer-, and contextualrelated factors. Consumer- and retailer-related factors are identified after a thorough literature review, and context-related factors are developed based on the situations and circumstances specific to retail stores. This study contributes to the literature by providing a broad picture of what influences consumers’ willingness to donate in retail stores. Also, factors identified in this study are supported by various theories. Until now, these theories have not been used to provide explanations for donations in retail environments. This study provides insights for companies and non-profits as well. Creating the desired consumer reactions to the CrM campaigns is important for both parties. With an in-depth focus on consumer perspectives, retailers and non-profits can implement sustainability

183

strategies for their already successful campaigns or develop new strategies to reach their CrM goals. Of the many future research issues that can be pursued in this area, the most important issue is the need for empirical testing. Empirical testing will establish the validity of the proposed conceptual framework. To test the framework, methods such as laboratory experiments or field surveys can be used and consumers of various retailers can be employed as respondents. Due to the high number of constructs in the framework and the complex relationships between them, it is best to test the proposed conceptual framework in two or more parts. Several variations of the relationships can be empirically tested. For example, the effects of retailer credibility and consumer-cause affinity on donation behavior can be tested while social influence is used as a moderator. Another example may be including perceived savings during the shopping trip as a moderator while testing the relationship between civic engagement and willingness to donate. Suggested measures for the consumer- and retail-related factors are shown in Appendix A (Table A2). Context-related factors may be included in the experiments by developing scenarios or in field experiments by asking questions to consumers during their actual shopping trips.

Appendix A See appendix Tables.

Table A1 Constructs and Theories. Construct Consumer-related factors Consumer-Retailer Identification

Consumer-cause affinity

Impure Altruism Civic Engagement Reduced post-purchase cognitive dissonance Retailer-related factors Retailer-cause fit

Retailer's commitment to the cause

Retailer image as being altruistic

Retailer credibility Contextual factors Time limitation

Social influence

Shopping Amount Perceived savings during the shopping trip

Theoretical explanation

Exemplar articles

Social identity theory posits that people typically go beyond their personal identity to develop a social identity, by identifying themselves within a contextual manner. A consumer's perception of “oneness or belongingness” with an organization occurs when a person's beliefs about a relevant organization becomes self-referential or self-defining. Self-Categorization Theory postulates that there are three levels of category abstraction which can be used to categorize the self: personal identity (the self as an individual), social identity (the self as a group member) and interspecies (the self as a human being). “Warm-glow givers” receive utility from the act of giving, instead of motivated solely by increasing the welfare of others. The concept of prosocial behavior is the basis of collective engagement. Prosocial behaviors consist of helping, sharing, donating, cooperating and volunteering. According to cognitive dissonance theory, dissonance occurs when an individual holds conflicting thoughts about a belief or an attitude object. When cognitive dissonance occurs after a purchase it is called post-purchase cognitive dissonance.

Brewer (1991) Bhattacharya and Sen (2003)

Broderick et al. (2003) Lafferty and Edmonson (2009) Andreoni (1989); Koschte-Fischer et al. (2012) Brief and Motowidlo (2000) Youn and Kim (2008) Telci et al. (2011) Lancaster and Massingham (2011)

A schema describes an organized pattern of thought or behavior that organizes categories of information and the relationships among them. Schema theory argues that consumers, when perceiving two stimuli (e.g. company and cause), perform an unconscious feature matching process and compare different characteristics of the two stimuli. As indicated by social exchange theory, commitment is an implicit or explicit pledge of relational continuity between exchange partners Commitment has three measurable variables: Inputs, consistency and durability. Prosocial behavior is the voluntary behavior to benefit others or society as a whole. It may be motivated both by altruism and by self-interest, for reasons of immediate benefit or future reciprocity. Source credibility theory claims that people are more likely to be persuaded if they view the source as credible.

Simmons and Becker-Olsen (2006) Gupta and Pirsch (2006)

According to information processing theory, time constraints affect how individuals process the information. In the face of time pressure, the person doesn’t have the adequate control over the processing of all pieces of information. Conformity is the change of actions or attitudes caused by the pressure from some real or notional groups. Rational conformity includes abidance, compliance and obedience, and irrational conformity includes herd behavior. Diminishing sensitivity assumption claims that people focus more on relative differences instead of absolute differences. The sensitivity diminishes as the numbers get larger. Consumer plan major shopping trips to the sponsoring retailer with expectations of price savings from sales or coupons, and engage in a higher degree of unplanned buying, leading to higher trip revenues.

Busemeyer (1982)

Morgan and Hunt (1994) Drumwright (1996) Brown and Peter (1997)

Fombrun (1996) Lafferty and Goldsmith (2005)

Panagopoulos (2014)

Kahneman and Tversky (1972) Bell et al. (2011)

184

S. Savas / Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 33 (2016) 178–185

Table A2 Suggested Constructs and Measures. Construct

Definition

Dependent Variable Willingness to donate and actual donation behavior

The willingness to contribute a small monetary amount for a social cause.

Consumer-related factors Consumer-Retailer Identification

A consumer's perception of “oneness or belongingness” with an organization occurs when a person's beliefs about a relevant organization becomes selfrelevant or self-defining.

Domain

1. I have already donated in this retail store. 2. I am willing to donate in this retail store. Bergami and Bagozzi (2000)

Consumer-cause affinity

Consumer-cause affinity is the degree of emotional or Grau and Folse (2007) personal association of consumers for a specific category of social causes.

Impure Altruism

Impure altruism consists of both altruistic and egoistic donation motives. Altruistic motives reflect the benefits to society resulting from the donation, and egoistic motives reflect the benefits derived from making the individual feel better about him/herself. Working to make a difference in the civic life of communities, and promoting the quality of life, through both political and non-political processes

Civic Engagement

Adapted from Taute and McQuitty (2004)

Youn and Kim (2008)

When consumers face the actual performance of the product and compare that with their expectations, post-purchase cognitive dissonance occurs. Dissonance produces discomfort and, accordingly pressures to reduce or eliminate the dissonance arise.

Adapted from Sweeney et al. (2000)

Overall perceived congruity between the sponsored cause and the retailer.

Lafferty et al. (2004), Simmons and BeckerOlsen (2006)

Retailer's commitment to the cause

An enduring desire of the retailer to maintain a valued relationship with the cause.

Adapted from Mahony et al. (2003)

Retailer image as being altruistic

Consumers’ perceptions of a retailing firm's total personality; perceiving the retailer as having selfless practices for welfare of others

Bigne-Alcaniz et al. (2012)

Reduced post-purchase cognitive dissonance

Retailer-related factors Retailer-cause fit

Retailer credibility

The degree to which consumers, investors, and other Adapted from Newell constituents believe in the retailer's trustworthiness and Goldsmith (2001) and expertize.

References Albert, S., Whetten, D.A., 1985. Organizational identity. Res. Organ. Behav. 7, 263–295. Andreoni, James, 1989. Giving with impure altruism: applications to charity and ricardian equivalence. J. Political Econ. 97 (6), 1447–1458. Barone, M.J., Norman, A.T., Miyazaki, A.D., 2007. Consumer response to retailer use of cause-related marketing: is more fit better? J. Retail. 83 (4), 437–445. Baugh, D.F., Davis, L.L., 1989. The effect of store image on consumers’ perceptions of designer and private label clothing. Cloth. Text. Res. J. 7 (3), 15–21. Bell, D.R., Corsten, D., Knox, G., 2011. From point of purchase to path to purchase: how preshopping factors drive unplanned buying. J. Mark. 75 (1), 31–45. Bergami, M., Bagozzi, R.P., 2000. Self-categorization, affective commitment and group self-esteem as distinct aspects of social identity in the organization. Br. J. Soc. Psychol. 39, 555–577. Bhattacharya, C.B., Sen, S., 2003. Consumer-company identification: a framework for understanding consumers' relationships with companies. J. Mark. 67 (2), 76–88. Bigne-Alcaniz, E., Curras-Perez, R., Ruiz-Mafe, C., Sanz-Blas, S., 2012. Cause-related marketing influence on consumer responses: the moderating effect of causebrand fit. J. Mark. Commun. 18 (4), 265–283. Blau, P.M., 1964. Exchange and Power in Social Life. John Wiley, New York. Brewer, M.B., 1991. The social self – on being the same and different at the same

Operationalization

1. (Visual and verbal report)Imagine that one of the circles at the left in each row represents your self-definition and identity and the other cicle at the right represents the retailer's identity. Please indicate which case (A,B,C, D, E,F,G or H) best describes the level of overlap between your own and the retailer's identities. 2. Please indicate to what degree your self-image overlaps with the retailer's image (7-point). 1. Is an unimportant cause to me vs. Is not an important cause to me 2. Means nothing to me vs. Means a lot to me 3. Is personally irrelevant to me vs. Is personally relevant to me 4. Doesn’t matter a great deal to me vs. Does matter a great deal to me 1. I would feel good if I donate in the retail store. 2. I would “spread it around” if I donate in the retail store.

1. 2. 3. 4. 1. 2.

Wrote a letter to an editor of a magazine or newspaper Went to a club meeting Did volunteer work Worked on a community project After I buy a product, I wonder if I was fooled. After I buy a product, I wonder if the retailer spun me a line. 3. After I buy a product, I wonder whether there was something wrong with the deal. 1. 2. 3. 4. 1. 2. 3. 1. 2. 3. 1. 2. 3. 4.

Low fit - High fit Inconsistent - Consistent Not complementary - Complementary Does not make sense - Does make sense Being a sponsor to the cause is important for the retailer. The retailer is committed to the cause it supports. It is unlikely for the retailer to change its allegiance from the cause it supports. Motivated by self-interest - Motivated by interest in society Profit-motivated - Socially-motivated Egoistically motivated-Altruistically-motivated Not sincere-sincere. Not an expert-expert. Not honest-honest. Experienced-inexperienced.

time. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 17 (5), 475–482. Brief, A.P., Motowidlo, S.J., 2000. Prosocial organizational behaviors. Acad. Manag. Rev. 11, 710–725. Briñol, P., Petty, R.E., Tormala, Z.L., 2004. The self–validation of cognitive responses to advertisements. J. Consum. Res. 30, 559–573. Broderick, A., Jogi, A., Garry, T., 2003. Tickled pink: the personal meaning of causerelated marketing for customers. J. Mark. Manag. 19 (5), 583–610. Brown, Tom J., Peter, A. Dacin, 1997. The company and the product: corporate associations and consumer product responses. J. Mark. 61, 68–84. Bucklin, Louis P., Sengupta, Sanjit, 1993. Organizing successful co-marketing alliances. J. Mark. 57, 32–46. Busemeyer, J.R., 1982. Choice behavior in a sequential decision making task. Organ. Behav. Hum. Perform. 29, 175–207. Cappelletti, M., Freeman, E.D., Cipolotti, L., 2011. Number and time doubly dissociate. Neuropsychologia 49, 3078–3092. Cause Marketing Forum, 2013. Retrieved on October 25th, 2015, from: 〈http://www. causemarketingforum.com/site/c.bkLUKcOTLkK4E/b.8700727/k.B7F8/Amer icas_Chekcout_Charity_Champions_Download_Page.htm〉. Chrenka, J., Gutter, M., Jasper, C., 1970. Gender differences in the decision to give time or money. Consum. Interests Annu. 40. Cone, C.L., Feldman, M.A., DaSilva, A.T., 2003. Causes and Effects. Harv. Bus. Rev. 81 (7), 95–101. Cook, K.S., Emerson, R.M., 1978. Power, equity and commitment in exchange networks. Am. Sociol. Rev. 43, 721–739.

S. Savas / Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 33 (2016) 178–185

Cornwell, Bettina, Coote, Leonard, 2005. Corporate sponsorship of a cause: the role of identification in purchase intent. J. Bus. Res. 5 (3), 268–276. Dickinson, S.J., Barker, A., 2007. Evaluations of branding alliances between nonprofit and commercial brand partners: the transfer of affect. Int. J. Nonprofit Volunt. Sect. Mark. 12 (1), 75–89. Drumwright, Minette, E., 1996. Company advertising with a social dimension: the role of noneconomic criteria. J. Mark. 60, 71–87. Dupree, J., 2000. Review of brand spirit: how cause related marketing builds brands. In: Pringle, H., Thompson, M. (Eds.), Journal of Consumer Marketing 17; 2000, pp. 461–464. Ehrlich, T., 2000. Civic Responsibility and Higher Education. American Council on Education and Onyx Press Series, Westport, CT. Ellen, Pam Scholder, Lois, A. Mohr, Webb, Deborah J., 2000. Charitable programs and the retailer: do they mix? J. Retail. 76 (3), 393–406. Erdem, T., Swait, J., 2004. Brand credibility, brand consideration, and choice. J. Consum. Res. 31 (1), 191–198. Festinger, Leon, Riecken, Henry W., Schachter, Stanley, 1956. When Prophecy Fails: A Social and Psychological Study of a Modern Group That Predicted the Destruction of the World. Harper-Torchbooks, New York. Folkes, Valerie S., Rita, D. Wheat, 1995. Consumers' price perceptions of promoted products. J. Retail. 71, 317–328. Fombrun, C.J., 1996. Reputation: Realizing Value from the Corporate Image. Harvard Business School Press, Cambridge, MA. Grau, S.L., Folse, J.A.G., 2007. Cause-related marketing (CRM) The influence of donation proximity and message framing cues on the less-involved consumer. J. Advert. 36 (4), 19–33. Grewal, Dhruv, Monroe, Kent B., Krishnan, R., 1998. The effects of price-comparison advertising on buyers' perceptions of acquisition value, transaction value and behavioral intentions. J. Mark. 62, 46–59. Gupta, Shruti, Pirsch, Julie, 2006. The company-cause‐customer fit decision in cause-related marketing. J. Consum. Mark. 23 (6), 314–326. Gurhan-Canli, Z., Batra, R., 2004. When corporate image affects product evaluations: the moderating role of perceived risk. J. Mark. Res. 41 (2), 197–205. Hahn, M., Lawson, R., Lee, Y.G., 1992. The effects of time pressure and information load on decision quality. Psychol. Mark. 9 (5), 365–378. Hamlin, R.P., Wilson, T., 2004. The impact of cause branding on consumer reactions to products: does product/cause ‘fit’ really matter? J. Mark. Manag. 20 (7/8), 663–681. Hart, D., Southerland, N., Atkins, R., 2002. Community service and adult development. In: Demick, J., Andreoletti, C. (Eds.), Handbook of Adult Development. Springer, New York, US, pp. 585–597. Hovland, C. 1, Lumsdaine, A.A., Sheffield, F.D., 1965. Experiments on Mass Communication. Wiley, New York. Johnson, Michael D., Anderson, Eugene W., Fornell, Claes, 1995. Rational and adaptive performance expectations in a customer satisfaction framework. J. Consum. Res. 21 (695–707), 70. Kahneman, D., Tversky, A., 1972. Subjective probability: a judgment of representativeness. Cognit. Psychol. 3, 430–454. Koschte-Fischer, N., StefanI, V., Hoyer, W.D., 2012. Willingness to pay for causerelated marketing: the impact of donation amount and moderating effects. J. Mark. Res. 49 (6), 910–927. La Ferle, C., Kuber, G., Edwards, S.M., 2013. Factors impacting responses to causerelated marketing in India and the United States: novelty, altruistic motives, and company origin. J. Bus. Res. 66, 364–373. Lafferty, B.A., 2007. The relevance of fit in a cause – brand alliance when consumers evaluate corporate credibility. J. Bus. Res. 60, 447–453. Lafferty, B.A., 2009. Selecting the right cause partners for the right reasons: the role of importance and fit in cause-brand alliances. Psychol. Mark. 26 (4), 359–382. Lafferty, B.A., Goldsmith, R.E., 2005. Cause-brand alliances: does the cause help the brand or does the brand help the cause? J. Bus. Res. 58, 423–429. Lafferty, B.A., Edmondson, D.R., 2009. Portraying the cause instead of the brand in cause- related marketing ads: does it really matter? J. Mark. Theory Pract. 17 (2), 129–141. Lafferty, B.A., Goldsmith, R.E., Hult, T.M., 2004. The impact of the alliance on the partners: a look at cause-brand alliances? Psychol. Mark. 21 (7), 511–533. Lancaster, G., Massingham, L., 2011. Essentials of Marketing Management, 1st ed. Routledge, New York, NY. Latane, B., Darley, J.M., 1970. The Unresponsive Bystander: Why Doesn't He Help?. Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York. Lichtenstein, Donald R., Drumwright, Minette E., Braig, Bridgette M., 2004. The effect of corporate social responsibility on customer donations to corporatesupported nonprofits. J. Mark. 68, 16–33. Luo, Xueming, Bhattacharya, C.B., 2006. Corporate social responsibility, customer

185

satisfaction, and market value. J. Mark. 70, 1–18. Maathuis, O., Rodenburg, J., Sikkel, D., 2004. Credibility, emotion or reason? Corp. Reput. Rev. 6 (4), 333–345. Mahony, D.F., Gladden, J.M., 8c Funk, D.C., 2003. Examining athletic donors at NCAA division I institutions. Int. Sports J. 7, 9–27. Mazursky, D., Jacoby, J., 1986. Exploring the development of store images. J. Retail. 62, 145–165. Moorman, Christine, Zaltman, Gerald, Deshpande, Rohit, 1992. Relationships between providers and users of marketing research: the dynamics of trust within and between organizations. J. Mark. Res. 29, 314–329. Morgan, Robert M., Hunt, D. Shelby, 1994. The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing. J. Mark. 58, 20–38. Nan, X., Heo, K., 2007. Consumer response to corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives. J. Advert. 36 (2), 63–74. Newell, S.J., Goldsmith, R.E., 2001. The development of a scale to measure perceived corporate credibility. J. Bus. Res. 52 (3), 235–247. Panagopoulos, C., 2014. Watchful eyes implicit observability cues and voting. Evol. Hum. Behav. 35 (4), 279–284. Payne, D.G., Elie, C.J., Blackwell, J.M., Neuschatz, J.S., 1996. Memory illusions: recalling, recognizing, and recollecting events that never occurred. J. Mem. Lang. 35, 261–285. Petrusic, W.M., Jamieson, D.G., 1978. Relation between probability of preferential choice and time to choose changes with practice. J. Exp. Psychol.: Hum. Percept. Perform. 4, 471–482. Polonsky, M.J., Wood, G., 2001. Can the overcommercialization of cause-related marketing harm society? J. Macromarket. 21 (1), 8–22. Posner, R., Rasmusen, E., 1999. Creating and enforcing norms, with special reference to sanctions. Int. Rev. Law Econ. 19, 369–382. Rind, B., Benjamin, D., 1994. Effects of public image concerns and self-image on compliance. J. Soc. Psychol. 134, 19–25. Dwyer, F. Robert, Schurr, Paul H., Oh, Sejo, 1987. Developing buyer–supplier relationships. J. Mark. 51, 11–27. Robinson, S., Irmak, C., Jayachandran, S., 2012. Choice of cause in cause-related marketing. J. Mark. 76 (4), 126–139. Roger, Bennett, Helen, Gabriel, 2000. Charity affiliation as a determinant of product purchase decisions. J. Prod. Brand Manag. 9 (4), 255–270. Rumelt, R.P., 1974. Strategy, Structure and Economic Performance. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA. Sen, S., Bhattacharya, C.B., 2001. Does doing good always lead to doing better? Consumer reactions to corporate social responsibility. J. Mark. Res. 38 (2), 225–243. Simmons, C.J., Becker-Olsen, K.L., 2006. Achieving marketing objectives through social sponsorships. J. Mark. 70 (4), 154–169. Strahilevitz, M., Myers, J.G., 1998. Donations to charity as purchase incentives: how well they work may depend on what you are trying to sell. J. Consum. Res. 24, 434–446. Sweeney, J.C., Hausknecht, D., Soutar, G.N., 2000. Cognitive dissonance after purchase: a multidimensional scale. Psychol. Mark. 17, 369–386. Tajfel, H. (Ed.), 1978. Differentiation Between Social Groups: Studies in the Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations. Academic Press, London. Tajfel, H., Turner, J.C., 1985. The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In: Worchel, W.G., Austin, W.G. (Eds.), Psychology of Intergroup RelationsNelsonHall, Chicago, pp. 6–24. Taute, Harry, McQuitty, Shaun, 2004. Feeling good! Doing good! An exploratory look at the impulsive purchase of the social good. J. Mark. Theory Pract. 12, 16–28. Telci, E.E., Maden, C., Kantur, D., 2011. The theory of cognitive dissonance: a marketing and management perspective. Soc. Behav. Sci. 24, 378–386. Thibaut, J.W., Kelley, Hh, 1959. The Social Psychology of Groups. John Wiley and Sons, New York. UNICEF, 2005. Cause-Related Marketing. Available at: 〈http://www.unicefusa.org〉. Van der Linden, S., 2011. Charitable intent: a moral or social construct? A revised theory of planned behavior model. Curr. Psychol. 30 (4), 355–374. Varadarajan, P. Rajan, Anil, Menon, 1988. Cause-related marketing: a coalignment of marketing strategy and corporate philanthropy. J. Mark. 52, 58–74. Wang, Y., 2014. Individualism/collectivism, charitable giving, and cause-related marketing: a comparison of Chinese and Americans. Int. J. Nonprofit Volunt. Sect. Mark. 19 (1), 40–51. Whatley, M., Webster, J.M., Smith, R.H., Rhodes, A., 1999. The effect of a favor on public and private compliance: how internalized is the norm of reciprocity. Basic Appl. Soc. Psychol. 21, 251–259. Youn, Seounmi, Kim, Hyuksoo, 2008. Antecedents of consumer attitudes toward cause-related marketing. J. Advert. Res., 123–137.