Master thesis
Corporate communication
Be good and tell a story!
The influence of fit and storytelling on cause-related
marketing.
Master: Research Master, Corporate Communication Lecturer: dr. W.J.L. Elving
Student: Stefan de Waal (10102094) Date: January 27, 2014
2
Abstract
In the past, companies gained support for their business by producing products and communicating about them in beautifully designed campaigns. Nowadays, society expects companies not only to deliver products and services, but also that they do so in a responsible way. Social issues are important for customers and as a result businesses are increasingly involved in corporate social responsibility (CSR). The aim of this study was to enhance our understanding of cause-related marketing (CRM), a form of social responsibility in which a company donates a certain amount of money or goods to a social cause based on the amount of products sold. We focused on the fit between the supporting company and the supported social cause and the inclusion of storytelling about the support in a print advertisement.
The results of our experiment indicate that company/cause fit and storytelling in itself have no influence on consumer attitudes and purchase intention. However, when looking at company/cause fit and storytelling simultaneously, an effect became apparent regarding purchase intention and attitude towards the social cause. When there is not a company/cause fit, storytelling leads to an increased purchase intention and a more positive attitude towards the social cause. However, when the public does perceive a high degree of fit, storytelling should not be included in the print advertisement. The results show that companies and organisations behind social causes should conduct preliminary research regarding the company/cause fit as perceived by their (potential) clients and donors. These results and their objectives will help them to decide whether or not to incorporate storytelling.
3
Introduction
For a long time companies could gain support for their business by creating beautiful marketing campaigns and catchy slogans while selling their products and services. However, society is becoming increasingly sceptical and nowadays companies are monitored and judged by thousands of consumers on a daily basis. The public is becoming increasingly discerning regarding the company behind the brand (Westberg & Pope, 2012). Corporations are no longer rated just on the basis of the quality of their products and services or on their financial performance. In today’s market, organisations are also expected to behave in an ethical way, show moral management (Lantos, 2001), practice “social responsibility” or “corporate citizenship” (Carroll, 2000, p. 187) and actively try to improve the world (Podnar & Golob, 2007; Snider, Hill & Martin, 2003). This means companies have to deal with and communicate about issues like global warming, waste disposal, (local) communities and a proper working environment for their employees.
More and more companies are becoming aware of how important social issues are for their business and are becoming increasingly involved in corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities (Elving, 2013). CSR can be defined as “context-specific organizational actions and policies that take into account stakeholders’ expectations and the triple bottom line of economic, social, and environmental performance.” (Aguinis, 2011, p. 855). The attention for the social side of doing business is considerable and also influences the marketing activities of a company (Jones, Clarke-Hill, Comfort & Hillier, 2008; Kirchgeorg & Winn, 2006; Peattie, 2001). In 2011, around 95% of the world’s largest companies issued corporate responsibility reports (KPMG, 2011) and every year large sums of money are given to good causes (Reputation Institute, 2013), for example to support local communities or initiatives to lower the company’s carbon dioxide emissions. In practice and literature, several different types of CSR activities can be distinguished, like sponsorships and altruism. In the current paper, we focus on a direct form of CSR activities: cause-related marketing (CRM). CRM is defined as “activities that are characterized by an offer from the firm to contribute a specified amount to a designated cause when customers engage in revenue-providing exchanges that satisfy organizational and individual objectives” (Varadarajan & Menon, 1988, p. 60). It is a partnership between a company and good cause in favour of mutual benefit (Baker, 2003; Business in the Community [BITC], 2004). By linking the company to a good cause, companies can leverage the positive associations of the social cause onto their own brands (Keller, 1993). By implementing CSR activities like CRM, companies can improve their image (Grohs, Wagner & Vsetecha, 2004;
4
Sohn, Han & Lee, 2012), customer loyalty (Sohn et al., 2012), attitudes towards the organization and its brands (Roy & Cornwell, 2003; Sohn et al., 2012), purchase intentions (Sen & Bhattacharya, 2001; Speed & Thompson, 2000), brand awareness (Gwinner & Eaton, 1999), differentiation from competitors (Cornwell, Roy & Steinard 2001), brand recall (Bennett, 1999), attractiveness to investors (Graves & Waddock, 1994), customer traffic (Baker, 2003), PR (Baker, 2003) and employee involvement (Brønn & Vrioni, 2001; Glavas & Piderit, 2009; Sen & Bhattacharya, 2001).
One of the most critical factors regarding a company’s social initiatives; is the company/cause fit (Aaker & Keller, 1990; Rifon, Choi, Trimble & Li, 2004; Sohn et al., 2012). This fit, sometimes called congruence or relatedness (Olson, 2010), refers to the similarity between a company and the supported object. Different types of fit are discussed in literature, however there is little consensus as to what the nature of fit exactly is (Nan & Heo, 2007). In this paper we approach company/cause fit from a multidimensional view, in accordance with Nan and Heo (2007), and define it as “the overall perceived relatedness of the brand and the cause with multiple cognitive bases” (p. 66). A higher perceived fit is related to positive effects (Olson, 2010; Sohn et al., 2012). However, some studies show that a natural high fit is not is not always a necessary requirement. An artificial basis of fit, based on a text or advertisement about the fit, can also have positive effects (Cornwell, Weeks & Roy, 2005; Olson, 2010; Simmons & Becker-Olsen, 2006). This means that despite the high emphasis on fit in CSR literature, how companies communicate their social initiatives to the public is at least as important. Before a company can reap the benefits of its CSR activities, stakeholder awareness have to be created and attributions towards a company’s CSR activities have to be managed (Du, Bhattacharya & Sen, 2010). Especially when the link between a company and good cause is not logical, the link has to be explicitly explained (Cornwell, Humphreys, Maguire, Weeks & Tellegen, 2006; Crimmins & Horn, 1996).
Although many scholars have looked into the topics of CSR, CRM and fit, we think there is a knowledge gap. Most studies that have focused on the effects of fit, to our knowledge do not include specific contextual elements such as storytelling or a textual explanation about the support. As stated by Clark (2000, p. 363) and supported by O’Riordan and Fairbrass (2008) “effective communication methods are largely absent from the social responsibility literature”, which shows the importance of combining fit research with specific communication methods such as storytelling. Furthermore, the literature on fit is not conclusive regarding its effects: not all studies show that a higher degree of fit is always better. In certain situations a lower fit can
5
lead to more positive effects (Menon & Kahn, 2003) or a higher fit can lead to negative outcomes, for example in the case of a controversial fit (Forehand & Grier, 2003; Yoon, Gürhan-Canli & Schwarz, 2006). These examples highlight that there is still a lot to learn regarding the specific effects of fit. Another gap that we address is the effect of CRM regarding the social cause. When a company enters into a marketing-driven relationship with a good cause, both organizations bring associations and images into the relationship that influences each other (James, 2005; Ruth & Simonin, 2003). However, to our knowledge most researchers do not take into account the effects on the attitude towards the good cause (Olson, 2010), they primarily focus on the implications for the company providing support (Nan & Heo, 2007). Therefore, the current research also focuses on the good cause that receives support. The last gap we try to address, is related to the type of products used in CRM research. A common way to distinguish between products, is between high (i.e., expensive and luxurious products such as a laptop) and low involvement products (i.e., common goods such as toilet paper). Involvement is often defined as the personal relevance or importance of an object (Petty & Cacioppo, 1979), which can increase as a result of a products’ connection to personal goals and values (Martin, 1998), associated purchase risk (Dholakia, 2001) and prior product category knowledge (Park & Moon, 2003). Although CRM campaigns are most prevalent for fast-moving consumer goods (Westberg & Pope, 2012), CRM is thought to be especially effective when it involves luxurious products (Strahilevitz & Myers, 1998). This paper focuses on a high involvement luxury product (i.e., a smartphone), instead of low involvement fast-moving-consumer goods that are often included in CRM research. Focussing on a high involvement luxury product could lead to different effects than typically found.
Based on the above, the following research question serves as a guideline in this research: “What are the effects of a fit between a company and its CRM-activity on consumer attitudes
and purchase intention and to what extent is this influenced by inclusion of storytelling about the CRM-activity?”
The ultimate aim of this study is to enhance our knowledge on (1) how companies and brands can benefit from using CRM and (2) ways to implement CRM storytelling to maximize the effectiveness of company investments. The next chapter deals with the theoretical foundation of the concepts mentioned above in more detail, leading to the formulation of multiple hypotheses that will be tested in the remainder of this paper.
6
Theory
In the USA, CSR in the form of donations to charities has been done since as early as the late 1800s (Sethi, 1977). Nowadays, companies are becoming increasingly aware of their obligations, which is visible in the increased involvement with the social side of doing business and its influence on marketing activities (Elving, 2013; Jones et al., 2008; Kirchgeorg & Winn, 2006; Peattie, 2001). A large majority of the world’s largest companies have created comprehensive social guidelines, mission statements and visions regarding their impact on people and planet (KPMG, 2011). At the core of these activities is the notion that companies are more likely to do well in a thriving society (McIntosh, Leipziger, Jones & Coleman, 1998). This means that the CSR efforts of companies are “driven not just by ideological thinking that corporations can be a powerful and positive force for social change, but more by the multi-faceted business returns that corporations can potentially reap from their CSR endeavors” (Du et al., 2010, p. 8). Stakeholders are more positive about companies that employ CSR related activities than those that do not (Nan & Heo, 2007). CSR activities have been linked to numerous effects, such as increased brand preference (Smith & Alcorn, 1991), reputation (Fombrun, 1996), willingness of consumers to pay a higher price for products (Creyer, 1997), market share and customer loyalty (Stewart-Allen, 1998). It is therefore not surprising that CSR is an essential part of a company’s brand strategy (Chun, 2005). The increased attention from companies is accompanied by an increased attention from the scientific world as well. Since the early 1990s, research on corporate sponsorship has become more prominent (Cornwell & Maignan, 1998).
In today’s society, it is more important than ever for companies to be seen as socially responsible organizations. Being perceived as an organisation that takes it responsibility when it comes to its influence on society, helps to build and maintain a corporate reputation of social commitment (Hooghiemstra 2000; Maignan & Ferrell 2004; Morsing, Schultz & Nielsen, 2008). When a firm is socially responsible, it “acknowledges that it exists and operates in a shared environment, characterised by a mutual impact of a firm’s relationships on a broad variety of stakeholders, who are affected by and can eventually affect the achievement of an organisation’s objectives.” (Brønn & Vrioni, 2001, p. 218). Companies are part of society and as a result have certain obligations towards that society (Elving, 2013). If companies do not meet society’s expectations regarding social responsibility, consumers can execute their purchasing power to penalize companies (Lii & Lee 2012; Sen & Bhattacharya, 2001).
7
Companies have numerous ways in which they can be socially responsible, for example by reducing the amount of waste produced or providing employees a clean working environment. The magnitude of possibilities also becomes apparent in the debate about CSR, different interpretations and definitions regarding CSR exist (Brønn, 2001). Lerner and Fryxell (1988) suggest that CSR is about the degree to which organizational outcomes are in line with societal expectations and values. Carroll (1998) defines it in terms of economic, legal, ethical and philanthropic responsibilities and states that “good corporate citizens are expected to be profitable (i.e., carry their own weight or fulfil their economic responsibilities), obey the law (i.e., fulfil their legal responsibilities), engage in ethical behaviour (i.e., be responsive to their ethical responsibilities) and give back through philanthropy (i.e., engage in corporate contributions)” (p. 1/2). Another example is the definition of Angelidis and Ibrahim (1993), who state that CSR activities are the social actions of corporations with the purpose of satisfying social needs. Although differences exist between CSR definitions, a content analysis of CSR literature (Dahlsrud, 2008) revealed that existing definitions are to a large degree similar to each other and “the confusion is not so much about how CSR is defined, as about how CSR is socially constructed in a specific context” (p. 1). The current research focuses on CSR in a wide contextual perspective, by defining it as “context-specific organizational actions and policies that take into account stakeholders’ expectations and the triple bottom line of economic, social, and environmental performance” (Aguinis, 2011, p. 855).
Cause-related marketing (CRM)
Several different contexts or types of CSR activities can be distinguished. Most companies that are active in the CSR domain limit themselves to one type or just a few activities (Elving, 2013). An often-used form is sponsorship, defined as the provision of assistance (i.e., in financial or natural resources) to an activity by an organization for the purpose of achieving commercial objectives (Meenaghan, 1983; Speed & Thompson, 2000). The commitment to a sponsored activity and the commercial motivation distinguishes sponsorship from activities like advertising and altruism (Speed & Thompson, 2000). Altruism, or corporate philanthropy, is a form of CSR in which a company or specific brand supports a good cause or non-profit organisation by sharing their profit or donating resources (Chang & Lee, 2011; Varadarajan& Menon, 1988). When this type of CSR is advocated in marketing communications activities it is commonly known as CRM (Brønn & Vrioni, 2001), business-non-profit partnerships or social alliances (Vock, Van Dolen & Kolk, 2013). According to Baker (2003), CRM is very different than philanthropy or altruism because it is a marketing-driven activity. The businesses
8
and charities enter “a cause-related marketing relationship in order to meet their objectives and in order to receive a return on their investment, where that investment may be in cash, time or other resources, or a combination of all.” (p. 670). To be more specific, CRM is defined as formulating and implementing marketing activities characterised by donating a certain amount of something to a good cause, to engage consumers in revenue-providing exchanges (Mullen, 1997), for instance money to a specific good cause for every product sold. CRM is an explicit mutually beneficial commercial marketing-driven partnership; it helps not only the good cause but also the company and other stakeholders to meet their goals (Baker, 2003; BITC, 2004; Nan & Heo, 2007; Varadarajan & Menon, 1988). CRM is thought to be especially effective when it is used in combination with more luxurious products, because consumers tend to feel guiltier when buying that type of products (Strahilevitz & Myers, 1998). Negative feelings, such as guilt, might disappear when consumers’ invest in CSR activities (Elving, 2013).
It is important to note that although their strong resemblance, CRM and sponsorship are two different CSR activities (Polonsky & Speed, 2001). In CRM, a contribution to a good cause is stimulated by a specific revenue producing exchange. However, when a company sponsors a good cause, its contribution precedes the generation of sales revenue. Positive effects that benefit the company are an anticipated outcome. Although CRM and sponsorship are different types of CSR, they both rely on positive image transfer through positive association with another organization (Westberg & Pope, 2012). In both situations, the product or brand is paired with a good cause to which people (in general) hold positive attitudes (Nan & Heo, 2007). This will be discussed in more detail in the next section.
Attitude, behavioural intention and affect transfer
According to the Theory of Reasoned Action (Ajzen, 1991; Fishbein & Ajzen, 1972), the best direct predictor of actual behaviour is a persons’ behavioural intention. Behavioural intention is the mental representation of a person's willingness to perform a certain behaviour, which is strongly influenced by a person’s specific attitudes toward the behaviour, their subjective norms and perceived behavioural control (Ajzen, 1991; Fishbein & Ajzen, 1972). In general, a more favourable attitude and subjective norm and greater perceived control, result in a stronger intention to perform the behaviour in question. Attitude can be defined as a learned disposition to respond in a particular way towards a certain object and influences a person’s general evaluation. Subjective norms refer to how people think others they care about will view the
9
behaviour in question; finally perceived behavioural control refers to a person’s ideas regarding the ability to perform certain behaviour (Ajzen, 1991; Fishbein & Ajzen, 1972).
In the current study, we focus on the influence of CRM activities on attitude and behavioural intention (i.e., purchase intention). By connecting a brand with a good cause (e.g., through CSR activities like CRM) a person’s attitude towards a brand can be positively influenced (Roy & Cornwell, 2003). This ability of CSR activities to influence attitudes in favour of the supporting company is based on the Balance Theory (Heider, 1958). According to Elving and Kartal (2012) “balance theory states that if a good friend likes someone, than the balance would be that you like this friend as well, because this is a balanced situation.” (p. 453). When considered in the context of CSR, there exist a relationship between the company, the supported object and consumers. Because consumers strive towards balance between these three elements, they may alter their attitude towards the company in accordance with their attitude towards the good cause. This means that affect transfer occurs, which is the process wherein pre-existing affect associated with an object is transferred to another object (Shimp, 1981). When the positive attitude towards the good cause is transferred to the company, it can eventually result in a halo effect (Dean, 1999). In this case, the actions of the company are judged more positive than they would be without the association with the good cause.
Fit
When it comes to a company’s CSR activities, the fit between the company and good cause is an important aspect (Aaker & Keller, 1990; Rifon et al., 2004; Sohn et al., 2012). Company/cause fit, sometimes called congruence or relatedness (Olson, 2010), refers to the similarity between the company and supported object, for example in terms of the company’s core business or expertise (Sohn et al., 2012). According to a comparative study on the differences between CRM, sponsorship and sales promotions, fit is especially important to take into account in the case of CRM (Westberg & Pope, 2012). However, as stated before, there is little consensus in CSR research as to what the nature of fit exactly is; it often differs across research topics (Nan & Heo, 2007). In event sponsorship, a distinction is made between a functional-based (i.e., when the sponsor’s product can be used during the event) and image-based fit (i.e., image-based on matching core values) (Gwinner, 1997; McDonald, 1991). In brand-extension literature, (perceived) fit between the brand and new product (category) is often based on feature similarities and image consistency (Park, Milberg & Lawson, 1991). As stated before, the current study focuses on a company/cause fit from a multidimensional perspective
10
and defines it as “the overall perceived relatedness of the brand and the cause with multiple cognitive bases” (Nan & Heo, 2007, p. 66). Therefore, instead of focussing on one type of fit, we focus on a wide range of cognitive bases for (perceived) fit.
The notion of company/cause fit is based on the matching and congruence theory, which states that a fit between certain company characteristics and the good cause leads to positive effects, for example a more positive attitude towards the company (Cornwell et al., 2005; Roy & Cornwell, 2003). In general, studies reporting the effects of fit in relation to CSR show that a higher (perceived) fit is related to more positive effects (Olson, 2010; Sohn et al., 2012). A high degree of company/cause fit signals to consumers that the CSR activity is justified and therefore it is less likely to generate negative reactions (Sohn et al., 2012), which will be discussed in more detail in the section ‘scepticism’.
Despite the emphasis on fit, there are also studies that show that incongruence (i.e., company/cause non-fit) can lead to more positive effects (Menon & Kahn, 2003). Hastie (1984) states that, based on the congruency theory, incongruence stimulates consumers’ cognitive evaluation and elaboration processes regarding the information presented in the message, which leads to more positive effects. Other studies even show that high fit can lead to negative outcomes (Forehand & Grier, 2003). It is possible that a good cause that is closely related to the company’s business increases the salience of benefits for the firm and therefore decreases evaluation of the company (Yoon et al., 2006). Despite the disagreement in literature regarding the effects of fit and non-fit, we believe that a company/cause fit in CRM leads to more positive effects than when there is not a fit. This leads to the following hypotheses:
H1a: A print advertisement containing a company/cause fit has a more positive effect on the attitude of consumers towards the company than a print advertisement without a company/cause fit.
H1b: A print advertisement containing a company/cause fit has a more positive effect on the attitude of consumers towards the advertisement than a print advertisement without a company/cause fit.
H1c: A print advertisement containing a company/cause fit has a more positive effect on purchase intention than a print advertisement without a company/cause fit.
In general, CSR research to date focused mainly on implications for the supporting company (e.g., attitude towards the advertisement or changes in purchase intention) (Nan & Heo, 2007).
11
However, we also take into account the effects on attitude towards the good cause. When a company and social cause decide to join hands in a marketing-driven relationship, like CRM, both bring associations into the company/cause relationship. As a result, a new set of associations can be formed that influences both the evaluation of the company and the good cause (James, 2005). It is important to take this reciprocal influence into account, because the image of the good cause might be negatively influenced if there is not enough similarity between the brand and good cause or if the good cause is linked to a brand with a negative reputation (Basil & Herr, 2003; Gwinner & Eaton, 1999; Menon & Kahn, 2003; Ruth & Simonin, 2003). This leads to our fourth hypothesis:
H1d: A print advertisement containing a company/cause fit has a more positive effect on the attitude of consumers towards the good cause than a print advertisement without a company/cause fit.
Company motivation and scepticism
The increased attention from companies for social causes has also resulted in a growing public scepticism, which can influence the evaluation of CSR related activities (Ashforth & Gibbs, 1990; Mohr, Eroğlu & Ellen, 1998). Scepticism is defined as a tendency towards disbelief (Obermiller & Spangenberg 1998; Pirsch, Gupta & Grau, 2006) and is situation dependent (Mohr et al., 1998). The main goal of an organization is to make as much profit as possible, while donating money to a social cause is usually motivated by altruistic considerations (Elving, 2013). In the mind of the consumer these contrary motives are difficult to link, which eventually increases the chance of external attribution of the company’s motives (Bae & Cameron, 2006; Becker-Olsen, Cudmore & Hill, 2006). Stakeholders critically ask themselves are companies “donating just to gain goodwill or are they truly concerned about particular issues?” (Brønn & Vrioni, 2001, p. 209). At the same time, companies see their contributions to society not as donations, but as investments that should benefit both the company as well as the good cause (Schwartz, 1996, in: Brønn & Vrioni, 2001). According to Brønn and Vrioni (2001), in today’s competitive marketplace “altruistic intentions alone can no longer justify charitable giving and expenditures related to philanthropic activities” (p. 209). When a company communicates about its CSR activities, it is therefore very likely that consumers initially will be suspicious (Bae & Cameron, 2006) or even sceptical (Elving, 2013).
The idea that consumers may have doubts regarding the motives of a company to support the good cause is based on the attribution theory (Heider, 1958). It states that stakeholders make
12
internal (i.e., the company has honest, intrinsic motives to support society) and external attributions (i.e., the company is using CSR because of external motives, like their own financial gain) regarding the behaviour of companies. Several studies have shown that the degree of scepticism regarding the company’s motives to engage in CSR is a main predictor of the success of a CSR campaign. When there is little scepticism and sincere motives are attributed, CSR activities have a positive influence on the attitude towards the company (Bae & Cameron, 2006; Forehand & Grier, 2003) and company image (Yoon et al., 2006). However, when there is a high degree of scepticism because of external attribution, CSR activities have a negative effect on consumer attitude towards the company (Elving, 2013) and purchase intentions (Becker-Olsen et al., 2006; Ellen, Web & Mohr, 2006; Elving, 2013). CRM is thought to be especially vulnerable to critique from consumers (Webb & Mohr, 1998) and a very risky form of CSR (Pirsch et al., 2006), because of its promotional nature. Therefore, it is a key challenge of CRM communication to communicate in such a way that consumers experience as little scepticism as possible and primarily assign intrinsic motivations to the company’s CSR activities.
Furthermore, the perceived company motive may also influence the effects of fit (Barone, Norman & Miyazaki, 2007). According to Menon and Kahn (2003), a company should focus on a low company/cause fit (i.e., in terms of the company’s businesses) to diminish consumers’ concerns about extrinsic and ulterior motives. However, other studies state that a high degree of fit is better, because when the public perceives a low fit consumers are more likely to become sceptical regarding the intentions of the company and as a result may evaluate the company more negatively (Becker-Olsen et al., 2006; Forehand & Grier, 2003; Johnson & Grier, 2011; Praxmarer, 2011). In this case, a high fit signals to consumers that the CSR activity a company is engaged with is justified, which is therefore less likely to generate negative reactions (Sohn et al., 2012) and decreases the amount of scepticism consumers’ experience (Ellen et al., 2006; Elving, 2013). Given the pronounced influence of stakeholder scepticism as outlined above, it will be included as a control variable in the current study.
Storytelling
Before companies can be praised for their CSR activities, it is necessary that the public knows that the company is engaged in socially responsible behaviour. The business returns that companies get from CSR depend on stakeholders’ awareness of and their positive attributions towards the CSR efforts (Du et al., 2010). One way to accomplish this, is by using narrative communication techniques such as storytelling about the CSR initiatives, which helps to
13
strengthen brands (Boje & Khan, 2009). Narrative advertising transfers the core message by telling a story (Escalas, 1998). A narrative can be defined as “any cohesive and coherent story with an identifiable beginning, middle, and end that provides information about scene, characters, and conflict; raises unanswered questions or unresolved conflict; and provides resolution.” (Hinyard & Kreuter, 2007, p. 778). Possible variations in a narrative print advertisement exist regarding “the presentation, ad appeal, and executive style” (Lien & Chen, 2011, p. 516). For example, narrative print advertisements can be visual, verbal or both (Lien & Chen, 2011). In addition, several different types of stories, used for different communication purposes, can be distinguished (Schank & Berman, 2002): official stories (i.e., to describe events or the position of a group), invented stories (i.e., fictional), first-hand experiential stories (i.e., our own stories), second-hand stories (i.e., stories of others that we pass on) and culturally common stories (i.e., generalized stories in a cultural environment). According to Hinyard and Kreuter (2007) “narrative communication involves the use of any of these types of stories to convey a point to another party or to receive information from another party” (p. 778).
A possible consequence of a communicated narrative is the effect called transportation (Green & Brock, 2000). This is a situation in which “individuals are absorbed into a story or transported into a narrative world” (p. 701) with the possible consequence of changes in real-world beliefs. Transportation reduces peoples’ resistance towards the story, negative cognitive reactions and counterarguments (Green & Brock, 2000; Moyer-Gusé, 2008) and increases the effectiveness of subsequent advertisements (Wang & Calder, 2006). Communicating in a narrative way is a more subtle way to influence the public than more traditional persuasive messages and therefore results in less psychological resistance (Moyer-Gusé, 2008). In addition, advertisements that convey their message by telling a story are more persuasive than advertisements without such a story (Escalas, 2004; Polyorat, Alden & Kim, 2007). When an advertisement includes a story, the story affects product evaluation and advertisement attitude more than product arguments (Lien & Chen, 2011). Organisations clearly benefit when there is a story about the connection between the organization’s existence and the good cause (Elving, 2013). By using narrative techniques, companies can appeal to consumers and in some cases disguise promotional messages. It allows companies to capture the attention, demonstrate the products’ appeal and persuade the public to consider those products (Escalas, 1998). In case of CRM, such contextual cues can consist of storytelling about how a company’s contribution benefits the social cause or why that specific good cause was chosen
14
The strong influence of narrative communication strategies, such as storytelling, also has implications regarding fit. Especially when the link between a company and good cause is not logical (i.e., artificial) or difficult to perceive, marketers have to explain the link through communication (Cornwell et al., 2006; Crimmins & Horn, 1996). Sohn et al. (2012) have shown that a communication strategy focused on elaboration (i.e., focused on the characteristics and merits of the CSR activity) is more effective in enhancing perceived fit for a situation in which there is a low fit. A more relational communication strategy (i.e., highlighting the fit between the company and CSR based on positive associations) is more effective in enhancing fit when there is already a high fit (Sohn et al., 2012). Furthermore, it may not always be necessary that there is a logical or natural fit, it is more important that the fit feels right according to the public (James, 2005). An artificial basis of fit, for example based on storytelling or an advertisement about the company in relation to the good cause, can also lead to more positive attitudes (Cornwell et al., 2005; Olson, 2010; Simmons & Becker-Olsen, 2006) and improved memory (Cornwell et al., 2006). This is also called an explanatory link (Bridges, Keller & Sood, 2000) or articulation (Cornwell et al., 2006). It requires that the advertisement interprets the relationship between the company and good cause for the consumer, so that a meaningful connection can be made (Crimmins & Horn, 1996; Dean, 1999).
Employing communication and contextual cues to actively improve the perception of fit can provide companies new strategic options (Sohn et al., 2012). Explicitly communicating about the link between a good cause and a company influences the business returns from CSR activities (Du et al., 2010). It affects perceived fit (Sohn et al., 2012) and consumers’ judgements about the company providing support (Cornwell et al., 2005; Rifon et al., 2004), improves the image of companies, assist them to gain legitimacy for their practices and helps to attract other resources required for their success (Lounsbury & Glynn, 2001; Zott & Huy, 2007). However, it is important to emphasize that in some cases companies should be careful when incorporating commercial cues in their messages. In a study from Van Reijmersdal, Neijens and Smit (2005) about effects of commerciality of customer magazines, incorporating more commercial cues resulted in less credible and valued content. In addition, a higher persuasive intent was ascribed to the content.
Despite the importance of storytelling in relation to CSR activities, not a lot of studies incorporate such specific narrative and contextual elements. In general, studies just focus on advertisements with or without fit (Nan & Heo, 2007) or compare different types of ads like comparing a CRM advertisement to an ambush advertisement that expressed support for a cause
15
without financial contribution (Mizerski, Mizerski & Sadler, 2002) or ads with and without a CRM component (Hamiln & Wilson, 2004; Lafferty & Goldsmith, 2005; Nan & Heo, 2007). As stated by Clark (2000, p. 363) and supported by O’Riordan and Fairbrass (2008) “effective communication methods are largely absent from the social responsibility literature”, which shows the importance of specifically including techniques such as storytelling in CRM research. Furthermore, the few studies that do include storytelling, show confusing results. Sohn et al. (2012) show that storytelling can increase perceived fit for both high and low fit conditions. However, corporate image improved more in the high-fit condition than in the low-fit condition as a result of storytelling, which is counter-intuitive regarding the creation of an artificial link through storytelling. Furthermore, similar studies that incorporated storytelling do not focus specifically on CRM but on sponsorships (Coppetti, Wentzel, Tomczak & Henkel, 2009; Crimmins & Horn, 1996; Weeks, Cornwell & Drennan, 2008) or brand extensions (Bridges et al., 2000; Keller 1993). In the remainder of the current study, we will refer to narrative advertising and the inclusion of information about the company/cause link as storytelling. On the basis of the above, we constructed the following hypotheses:
H2a: A print advertisement containing storytelling has a more positive effect on the attitude of consumers towards the company than a print advertisement without storytelling. H2b: A print advertisement containing storytelling has a more positive effect on the attitude
of consumers towards the advertisement than a print advertisement without storytelling. H2c: A print advertisement containing storytelling has a more positive effect on the purchase
intention of consumers than a print advertisement without storytelling.
H2d: A print advertisement containing storytelling has a more positive effect on the attitude of consumers towards the good cause than a print advertisement without storytelling. Although storytelling is hypothesized to have a positive effect on the dependent variables even when there is in fact a low degree of fit, we expect that this positive effect is even stronger when it is implemented in a print advertisement with a high fit. This leads to the following hypotheses: H3a: The difference between consumer attitude towards the company resulting from a print advertisement containing storytelling compared to a print advertisement without storytelling, will be larger for the fit print advertisements than for print advertisements without a fit.
16
H3b: The difference between consumer attitude towards the ad resulting from a print advertisement containing storytelling compared to a print advertisement without storytelling, will be larger for the fit print advertisements than for print advertisements without a fit.
H3c: The difference between purchase intention resulting from a print advertisement containing storytelling compared to a print advertisement without storytelling, will be larger for the fit print advertisements than for print advertisements without a fit.
H3d: The difference between consumer attitude towards the good cause resulting from a print advertisement containing storytelling compared to a print advertisement without storytelling, will be larger for the fit print advertisements than for print advertisements without a fit.
Control variables
Previous studies on CSR, fit and storytelling have led to the identification of several variables that could have a confounding effect. We discuss and incorporate the ones that are most relevant regarding the concepts studied in the current paper.
First of all, the reputation of the company supporting the good cause is important to take into account. Previous research shows that when a company has a good reputation, it can influence the effects of fit (Elving, 2013). Reputation can be defined as a person’s collective representation of past images regarding an organization, which are established over time (Cornelissen, 2008). Whenever stakeholders come into contact with new information about the company, they will use the company’s reputation to process this new information (Bae & Cameron, 2006; Brown & Dacin 1997). It is, therefore, important to be aware of the (possible) influence of the existing reputation of a company (Milne & McDonald, 1999). Second, brand familiarity is taken into account, because it can influence attitude (Alexandris, Douka, Bakaloumi & Tsasousi, 2008) towards a company or good cause. In addition, the previously discussed variable scepticism towards the CSR activity will be measured, just as involvement with the good cause. Involvement influences de degree to which consumers see similarities between a company and sponsored cause and could influence responses towards the CSR activity (Meenaghan, 2001), for example consumers could be more interested to participate when they have a high involvement (Grau & Folse, 2007). Furthermore, according to Nan and Heo (2007), the degree to which a person is brand conscious can have a confounding influence
17
on the effects of fit. In their study, the more positive effects of company/cause fit only emerged for consumers who were high in brand consciousness. Brand consciousness can be defined as a personal trait which gives insight in the degree to which a consumer is focused on buying well known branded products (Shim and Gehrt 1996; Sprotles & Kendall, 1986). Finally, the degree of support for socially responsible businesses and whether respondents currently or in the past have had a product from LG (i.e., the company in the advertisement) will be measured to rule out confounding effects.
The variables mentioned above are not the focus of this study and therefore no specific hypotheses are formulated to test them. They are incorporated in this study as control variables, because of their possible influence on key variables and effects. The next section deals with the research design and measurements in more detail.
Method
To test the hypotheses outlined above, we conducted an online experiment. Male and female participants between the age of 18 and 90 were recruited. An existing Dutch online panel was used, compiled by the company RespondentenDatabase.nl. Invitations were sent to in total 1.120 respondents, of which 1.057 completed the entire survey. To ensure that participants thoroughly read the questions and thought about their answers, respondents who took less than three minutes to complete the survey were removed from the sample. We also removed respondents younger than 18 years old. We did this because according to the rules regarding scientific research, parental consent needs to be given before people younger than 18 years old can participate in a scientific study. The final sample consists of 961 respondents, consisting of 412 female participants (42.9%) between 18 and 90 years old (M = 45.39, SD = 14.84). Most of the participants completed high school (21%), secondary vocational education (34.1%) or higher professional education (26.5%).
Experimental design
The experiment was based on a 2x2 between-subjects design including a pretest, to test the effects of fit (fit vs. non-fit) and storytelling (included vs. not included) in a print advertisement on consumer attitude towards the company, the ad and the supported good cause and purchase intention of the advertised product. The advertisement contained information about a high involvement product (i.e., a smartphone). Participants were randomly assigned to one condition
18
(see Table 1 for more information), only the independent variables differed systematically between the four conditions (i.e., fit and storytelling).
Table 1
Experimental design of the study
Storytelling:
Company/cause fit: Included Not included
Fit Group 1 (n = 247) Group 2 (n = 240) Non-fit Group 3 (n = 237) Group 4 (n = 237)
Variables Pretest
The advertisements mentioned LG, an existing well-known company, as the advertiser. To take into account the influence of possible preconceptions about LG, brand familiarity and band reputation were measured before exposure to the stimulus materials. Also brand consciousness, degree of support for socially responsible businesses and whether or not respondents currently or in the past have had LG products were measured before exposing respondents to the stimulus materials.
Brand familiarity was measured on a dichotomous scale by asking participants if they know the brand LG. Brand reputation was measured with four items (Bae & Cameron, 2006) on a seven-point bipolar scale (Cronbach's α = .92). An example of an item is: ‘I think LG is inexperienced – experienced”. A low score indicates a negative reputation, a high score a positive reputation. The five items were averaged to form a single measurement of brand reputation. Brand consciousness was measured with three items (Nan & Heo, 2007) on a seven-point Likert scale (Cronbach's α = .82), an example of an item is: “I pay attention to the brand names of the products I buy”. Deleting one of the items resulted in a minor increase in reliability (Cronbach's α = .84), however deleting one item in favour of a very small increase in reliability means the loss of information, therefore we eventually included all the items. The items were averaged to form a single measurement of brand consciousness; a higher score indicates a higher brand
19
consciousness. The degree of support for socially responsible businesses was measured with five items (Maignan, 2001), on a seven-point Likert scale (Cronbach's α = .86), an example of an item is: “I would pay more to buy products from a socially responsible company”. Also in this case, deleting one of the items resulted in only a minor increase in reliability (Cronbach's α = .88). Therefore, all five items were used and averaged to form a single measurement of support for socially responsible businesses. Finally, possession of LG products, currently or in the past, was measured with two separate questions on a dichotomous scale.
Independent variables
The first independent variable is company/cause fit. As explained before, in accordance with Nan and Heo (2007) we focus on a company/cause fit from a multidimensional perspective. It was manipulated by linking an existing multinational electronics brand (i.e., LG) to a good cause that had a fit with this company (i.e., Connecting Africa Program) or a good cause that did not had a fit with the company (i.e., African Health Program). Both good causes were fictional and therefore were expected to be unfamiliar to respondents. According to Nan and Heo (2007), the hypothetical nature of these good causes can “reduce variations in participants’ previous experiences with the organizations, and thus, the confounding of company/cause fit and experience-related variables” (p. 67). The second independent variable is the inclusion of storytelling, in this case a text that explains the link between the company and good cause. The variable was manipulated by presenting the advertisements with or without the storytelling text.
Dependent variables
The current research focuses on four dependent variables: the consumer attitude towards the company, the advertisement, the supported good cause and purchase intention of the advertised product. The variable attitude towards the company was measured through five bipolar items, based on Elving (2013). An example of an item is: ‘I think LG is negative – positive”, measured on a seven-point scale. A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) confirmed one factor (Cronbach's α = .98). The same scale and procedure was used to measure consumer attitude towards the ad and good cause. A CFA regarding attitude towards the ad confirmed one factor (Cronbach's α = .97), as did a CFA regarding attitude towards the good cause (Cronbach's α = .98). A higher score on this scale indicates a more positive attitude. The fourth dependent variable, purchase intention of the advertised product, was measured using three seven-point bipolar items based on Bruner and Hensel (1996). An example of an item is: “it is very likely – very unlikely that I would buy a LG smartphone the next time I purchase a smartphone”. A CFA confirmed one
20
factor (Cronbach's α = .91); a high score on this scale indicates a high purchase intention regarding an LG smartphone.
Control variables
In addition to the variables in the pretest, several other measurements were included as control variables. Involvement with the good cause was measured using four items on a seven-point semantic differential based on Maheswaran and Meyers-Levy (1990) and Grau and Folse (2007). An example of an item is: “Connecting Africa (i.e., the good cause) means nothing/a lot to me”. A CFA confirmed one factor for the measurements regarding involvement with the good cause (Cronbach's α = .96). The items were averaged to form a single measurement; a high score on this variable indicates a high degree of involvement. Scepticism towards the CRM initiative was measured using seven items on a 7-point Likert scale from Elving (2013), ranging from ‘strongly disagree’ (1) to ‘strongly agree’ (7). This scale was originally based on three items from Yoon et al. (2006) and four items from Becker-Olsen et al. (2006), who made a distinction between profit-oriented and society-driven motives. An example of an item is: “LG sincerely cares about health care in the third world”. Four items were recoded during analysis because the statements were negatively formulated. CFA revealed two factors, which explained 81.54% of the variance. The first component consisted of the items that were formulated in a positive way (e.g., ‘LG is genuinely concerned about the facilities in third world countries’). The second component included items that were negatively formulated (e.g., ‘LG is trying to improve its image by supporting the good cause’). Because a higher score on the first component indicates less scepticism (i.e., ascribing more genuine intentions to the company) and a higher score on the second component indicates that the participants were more sceptical regarding the company’s motives to engage in CRM, we believe these seven items could be combined into one scale (Cronbach's α = .65). This is consistent with the procedure followed by Elving (2013).
Manipulation checks
To assess whether participants perceived the manipulations of fit and storytelling as intended, two manipulation checks were used. We asked the participants to assess the fit between the company and CRM activity by using four items on a 7-point semantic differential scale based on Roy and Cornwell (2003) (Cronbach's α = .94). An example of an item is: “The support of LG to the Connecting Africa program is illogical-logical”. The items were averaged to form a single manipulation check regarding fit. To assess if the manipulation regarding storytelling
21
worked, we used two self-constructed items. An example of an item is: “I understand the link between LG and the Connecting Africa Program”. Both items were measured on a seven-point Likert scale, ranging from ‘strongly disagree’ (1) to ‘strongly agree’ (7). The two items measuring the degree of understanding the fit as a result of storytelling showed a strong positive correlation (r = .70). The two items were combined and averaged to create one manipulation check regarding the inclusion of storytelling.
Procedure
Participants were contacted by Respondentendatabase.nl to click on a link that guided them to the online questionnaire. The first page that they saw contained some general information regarding the research and the research topic. The first page also highlighted that participation was completely anonymous. The next page consisted of a standard informed consent form that respondents had to agree with before they could continue to the actual study. Subsequently the pretest was carried out to measure brand familiarity, band reputation, brand consciousness, support for socially responsible businesses and current or past possession of LG products before exposure to the stimulus materials. After these measurements, participants were randomly assigned to one of the four experimental conditions. Subsequent pages contained measurements of the dependent variables, control variables, the manipulation checks and finally some general characteristics (e.g., age and education). On the next page of the questionnaire it was made clear that the stimulus materials (i.e., the print advertisements) and good cause were fictional and created specifically for the current study. In addition, participants were thanked for their time and were given the opportunity to leave their e-mail address to receive a research summary. The final page contained a link so that respondents could register their participation through Respondentendatabase.nl to receive their credits.
Ethics
Several steps were taken to meet the ethical standards of scientific research. First of all, on the introduction page of the questionnaire, the general purpose of the research was explained and a realistic account was given of how much time it would cost to complete the questionnaire. Furthermore, participants had to agree with an informed consent form before they could continue to the actual study. The form contained among other things information regarding anonymity of the responses and how participants could contact the researcher in case they had any questions. Upon completion of the questionnaire, participants were made aware that the
22
both the print advertisement and the good cause were fictional and created specifically for the current study.
The next chapter describes the analyses that were undertaken to test the hypotheses and answer the research question. A MANCOVA was executed to test for main and interaction effects while keeping constant for the control variables mentioned above.
Results
Manipulation checks
To test if the manipulations worked as intended, an One-Way ANOVA was conducted with the experienced degree of fit as the dependent variable and the experimental condition (fit vs. non-fit) as the independent variable. The analysis yielded a significant effect of the fit advertisements on the degree of fit experienced (F (1, 959) = 5.62, p < .05). Participants in the fit conditions experienced a higher degree of fit (M = 4.80, SD = 1.21) than participants in the non-fit conditions (M = 4.62, SD = 1.18). A second One-Way ANOVA was conducted to test if the storytelling manipulations worked as intended. The degree of understanding the fit was used as the dependent variable and the experimental condition (storytelling vs. no storytelling) as the independent variable. The analysis yielded a significant effect (F (1, 959) = 4.74, p < .05), participants in experimental conditions that contained storytelling scored higher (M = 3.86,
SD = 1.38) than participants in experimental conditions that did not contained storytelling (M
= 3.66, SD = 1.42). The significant higher score in the storytelling conditions indicates that participants that had read the storytelling text better understood the link between LG and the good cause than those in the conditions without storytelling. To conclude, both experimental manipulations worked as intended.
Testing the hypotheses
The first four hypotheses focus on a company/cause fit. According to H1a: “A print advertisement containing a company/cause fit has a more positive effect on the attitude of consumers towards the company than a print advertisement without a company/cause fit.” The analysis was conducted with attitude towards the company as the dependent variable and company/cause fit (i.e., fit vs. fit) as the independent variable. The analysis yielded a non-significant effect (F (1, 949) = .862, p = ns). Print advertisements containing a company/cause
23
fit do not have a more positive effect (M = 5.15, SD = 1.11) on the attitude of consumers towards the company than a print advertisement without a company/cause fit (M = 5.13, SD = 1.12), which means that H1a is not supported. The second hypothesis states that: “A print advertisement containing a company/cause fit has a more positive effect on the attitude of consumers towards the advertisement than a print advertisement without a company/cause fit.” The analysis was conducted with attitude towards the ad as the dependent variable and company/cause fit (i.e., fit vs. fit) as the independent variable. The analysis yielded a non-significant effect (F (1, 949) = 2.02, p = ns), advertisements containing a company/cause fit do not have a more positive effect (M = 5.24, SD = 1.19) on the attitude of consumers towards the ad than a print advertisement without a company/cause fit (M = 5.30, SD = 1.15). H1b is therefore not supported. Our third hypothesis predicted that: “A print advertisement containing a company/cause fit has a more positive effect on purchase intention than a print advertisement without a company/cause fit.” The analysis was conducted with purchase intention as the dependent variable and company/cause fit (i.e., fit vs. non-fit) as the independent variable. The results indicate that company/cause fit does not have a significant effect on purchase intention (F (1, 949) = .00, p = ns), advertisements representing a company/cause fit do not have a more positive effect (M = 3.40, SD = 1.56) on purchase intention than advertisements representing a company/cause non-fit (M = 3.39, SD = 1.56). This means that also H1c was not supported. The next hypothesis also focuses on a company/cause fit: “A print advertisement containing a company/cause fit has a more positive effect on the attitude of consumers towards the good cause than a print advertisement without a company/cause fit.” Attitude of consumers towards the good cause was used as the dependent variable and company/cause fit (i.e., fit vs. non-fit) as the independent variable. The analysis yielded a non-significant effect (F (1, 949) = 1.02, p = ns). Print advertisements containing a company/cause fit do not have a more positive effect (M = 5.34, SD = 1.24) on the attitude of consumers towards the good cause than a print advertisement without a company/cause fit (M = 5.41, SD = 1.21). H1d is therefore not supported.
The next four hypotheses focus on the effects of storytelling in print advertisements. According to H2a: “A print advertisement containing storytelling has a more positive effect on the attitude of consumers towards the company than a print advertisement without storytelling.” The analysis was conducted with attitude towards the company as the dependent variable and the inclusion of storytelling (i.e., included vs. not included) as the independent variable. The analysis showed a non-significant effect (F (1, 949) = 2.12, p = ns), print advertisements that
24
include storytelling about the CRM-activity do not have a more positive effect (M = 5.19, SD = 1.05) on the attitude of consumers towards the company than a print advertisement that does not incorporate storytelling (M = 5.09, SD = 1.17). This means that H2a is not supported. The next hypothesis focuses on storytelling and its effect on attitude towards the ad, according to H2b: “A print advertisement containing storytelling has a more positive effect on the attitude of consumers towards the advertisement than a print advertisement without storytelling.” The analysis was conducted with attitude towards the ad as the dependent variable and the inclusion of storytelling (i.e., included vs. not included) as the independent variable. The results indicate that implementing storytelling does not have a significant effect on attitude towards the ad (F (1, 949) = .00, p = ns). Advertisements containing storytelling do not have a more positive effect (M = 5.28, SD = 1.12) on attitude towards the ad than advertisements that do not contain storytelling (M = 5.26, SD = 1.23). This means that also H2b was not supported. Next, our hypothesis H2c predicated that: “A print advertisement containing storytelling has a more positive effect on the purchase intention of consumers than a print advertisement without storytelling.” The analysis was executed with purchase intention as the dependent variable and the inclusion of storytelling (i.e., included vs. not included) as the independent variable. The analysis showed a non-significant effect (F (1, 949) = .94, p = ns). Print advertisements that include storytelling do not have a more positive effect (M = 3.37, SD = 1.55) on the purchase intention of consumers, than print advertisements that do not include storytelling (M = 3.43, SD = 1.58), H2c is therefore not supported. The final hypothesis regarding the main-effect of storytelling states that: “A print advertisement containing storytelling has a more positive effect on the attitude of consumers towards the good cause than a print advertisement without storytelling.” Attitude towards the good cause was used as the dependent variable and the inclusion of storytelling (i.e., included vs. not included) as the independent variable. The analysis yielded a non-significant effect (F (1, 949) = .05, p = ns), print advertisements that include storytelling about the CRM-activity do not have a more positive effect (M = 5.38, SD = 1.21) on the attitude of consumers towards the good cause than a print advertisement that does not include storytelling (M = 5.36, SD = 1.24). This means that H2d is not supported. The final set of hypotheses focus on the two-way interaction effect between company/cause fit (fit vs. non-fit) and storytelling (included vs. not included). According to H3a: “The difference between consumer attitude towards the company resulting from a print advertisement containing storytelling compared to a print advertisement without storytelling, will be larger for the fit print advertisements than for print advertisements without a fit.” The analysis was
25
conducted with attitude towards the company as the dependent variable and company/cause fit (fit vs. non-fit) and storytelling (included vs. not included) as the independent variables. The analysis revealed a non-significant two-way interaction effect between company/case fit and storytelling (F (1, 949) = 1.89, p = ns) (see Figure 1).
Figure 1: Mean score on a seven-point scale regarding attitude towards the company in the four different experimental groups.
Consumer attitude towards the company as a result of print advertisements containing a company/cause fit were not significantly different regarding advertisements containing a storytelling (M = 5.17, SD = 1.06) than advertisements without storytelling (M = 5.12, SD = 1.16), as opposed to advertisements with storytelling (M = 5.21, SD = 1.04) or without storytelling (M = 5.06, SD = 1.19) in advertisements without a company/cause fit. Therefore H3a is not supported. The next hypothesis focuses on consumer attitude towards the ad and states that: “The difference between consumer attitude towards the ad resulting from a print advertisement containing storytelling compared to a print advertisement without storytelling, will be larger for the fit print advertisements than for print advertisements without a fit.” The analysis was conducted with attitude towards the ad as the dependent variable and company/cause fit (fit vs. non-fit) and storytelling (included vs. not included) as the independent variables. The analysis revealed a non-significant two-way interaction effect between company/case fit and storytelling (F (1, 949) = 1.19, p = ns) (see Figure 2).
5 5,1 5,2 5,3 Fit Non-fit Att itu d e t o w ar d s th e co m p an y Company/cause fit Storytelling No storytelling
26 Figure 2: Mean score on a seven-point scale regarding attitude towards the ad in the four
different experimental groups.
Consumer reactions towards the ad as a result of print advertisements containing a company/cause fit were not significantly different from advertisements containing storytelling (M = 5.24, SD = 1.14) than advertisements without storytelling (M = 5.24, SD = 1.24), as opposed to advertisements with storytelling (M = 5.33, SD = 1.09) or without storytelling (M = 5.28, SD = 1.21) in advertisements without a company/cause fit. This means that also H3b is not supported. The eleventh hypothesis also focuses on a two-way interaction effect: “The difference between purchase intention resulting from a print advertisement containing storytelling compared to a print advertisement without storytelling, will be larger for the fit print advertisements than for print advertisements without a fit.” The analysis was conducted with purchase intention as the dependent variable and company/cause fit (fit vs. non-fit) and storytelling (included vs. not included) as the independent variables. The analysis yielded a significant two-way interaction effect between company/case fit and storytelling (F (1, 949) = 4.46, p < .05) (see Figure 3). 5,2 5,3 5,4 Fit Non-fit Att itu d e t o w ar d s th e a d Company/cause fit Storytelling No storytelling
27 Figure 3: Mean score on a seven-point scale regarding purchase intention in the four
different experimental groups.
The results indicate that the difference regarding purchase intention resulting from fit advertisement with storytelling (M = 3.30, SD = 1.59) compared to a fit advertisement without storytelling (M = 3.50, SD = 1.56), is significantly bigger than the difference between a non-fit advertisement with storytelling (M = 3.44, SD = 1.51) compared to a non-fit advertisement without storytelling (M = 3.35, SD = 1.60). Although the two-way interaction effect was significant, it differs from our expectations that the positive effect of storytelling is more pronounced when it is implemented in a fit advertisement than in a non-fit advertisement. Therefore H3c was only partially supported. The final hypothesis focuses on a two-way interaction effect and attitude towards the good cause: “The difference between consumer attitude towards the good cause resulting from a print advertisement containing storytelling compared to a print advertisement without storytelling, will be larger for the fit print advertisements than for print advertisements without a fit.” The analysis was conducted with attitude towards the good cause as the dependent variable and company/cause fit (fit vs. non-fit) and storytelling (included vs. not included) as the independent variables. The analysis yielded a significant two-way interaction effect between company/case fit and storytelling (F (1, 949) = 4.74, p < .05) (see Figure 4). 3,2 3,3 3,4 3,5 3,6 Fit Non-fit Pu rch ase in ten tio n Company/cause fit Storytelling No storytelling
28 Figure 4: Mean score on a seven-point scale regarding attitude towards the good cause in
the four different experimental groups.
The results indicate that the difference regarding attitude towards the good cause resulting from a fit advertisement with storytelling (M = 5.31, SD = 1.21) compared to a fit advertisement without storytelling (M = 5.37, SD = 1.27), is significantly smaller than the difference between a non-fit advertisement with storytelling (M = 5.46, SD = 1.20) compared to a non-fit advertisement without a storytelling (M = 5.36, SD = 1.22). Also in this case we have to conclude that although the two-way interaction effect was significant, it differs from our expectations regarding the more pronounced positive effect of storytelling when it is implemented in a fit advertisement than in a non-fit advertisement. In addition, it differs from our expectation that the difference in attitude would be larger in the case of the fit advertisements than the non-fit advertisements. This means that also H3d is only partially supported.
To conclude, only H3c and H3d could be confirmed. Company/cause fit had an effect on purchase intention, however the specific effect depends on whether or not storytelling is included. Using storytelling is especially effective when there is no fit, when there is a fit it is more effective to exclude storytelling from a print advertisement. The same is the case regarding the effect of fit and storytelling on consumer attitude towards the good cause.
5,2 5,3 5,4 5,5 Fit Non-fit Att itu d e t o w ar d s th e go o d cau se Company/cause fit Storytelling No storytelling
