Executive summary of “Spillover of social responsibility associations in a brand portfolio”

Citation

(2015), "Executive summary of “Spillover of social responsibility associations in a brand portfolio”", Journal of Product & Brand Management, Vol. 24 No. 6. https://doi.org/10.1108/JPBM-09-2015-941

Executive summary of “Spillover of social responsibility associations in a brand portfolio”

Article Type: Executive summary and implications for managers and executives From: Journal of Product & Brand Management, Volume 24, Issue 6

This summary has been provided to allow managers and executives a rapid appreciation of the content of this article. Those with a particular interest in the topic covered may then read the article in toto to take advantage of the more comprehensive description of the research undertaken and its results to get the full benefits of the material present.

Today’s consumer is increasingly demanding that companies act in socially responsible ways. Many organizations therefore realize the importance of favoring operations which help improve society and the environment. Social responsibility (SR) initiatives can be executed at the corporate level or product brand level.

Engaging in SR practices prompts consumers to develop certain associations about the brand. Different studies have found that these associations at the corporate level serve to specify a firm’s value system or disposition. People become more inclined to identify with the company when its values correlate with their own. The term “consumer-company identification” has been used to describe this relationship. Plenty studies confirm that SR can realize various benefits to an organization such as greater purchase intent, favorable word-of-mouth (WOM) recommendations and willingness to pay higher prices for the company’s offerings. Positivity toward the firm’s new products has also been recorded.

Such findings cannot be generalized to all contexts and consumers, scholars have found. The strength of relations between SR associations and the outcomes named above can be subject to influence from certain variables. Effects can become stronger if:

• SR is placed at the heart of the firm’s core business strategy;

• superior quality products are involved with SR; and

• consumers strongly support the particular social or environmental issue addressed by the SR initiative.

One theoretical approach posits that humans store information in their brains as “cognitive units”, each of which includes a “node” and elements associated with it. These relationships are strengthened when such nodes are activated through external stimuli. Different nodes in the network are linked and activation strengthens their connections with the “primed element”. This “spillover effect” has been noted in different marketing contexts such as the relationship between an extension and its parent brand.

In the present situation, the above mechanism will see the association between the brand node and the element “socially responsible” strengthen when the consumer is informed about relevant SR initiatives. Wang et al., thus, argue that belief in the product brand (A) being socially responsible will be greater among consumers exposed to such information relative to those ignorant of the fact.

It is likewise proposed that associations with SR of A will then spillover to other brands in the portfolio (B) and the corporate brand (C) because of the existing connections between the respective brands. The spillover effect is expected to be greater for consumers aware of the SR efforts of A.

The degree of spillover effect might be influenced by factors like closeness of current relationship between the different brands, as indicated by perceived similarity in attributes or brand name. Which branding strategy the firm adopts is also regarded as significant in respect of the latter. Choice of strategy determines how brands relate to each other based on name, and the authors believe that spillover effects will thus be greater when a “monolithic” branding strategy is followed. That the corporate name is used for all brands in the portfolio provides the rationale for this belief. This contrasts with “stand-alone” branding strategies whereby brands in a portfolio all have their own distinctive names. Endorsed branding lies in between, as the corporate name is combined with individual brand names. High product category fit might also increase spillover effects from A to B.

The authors further suggest that spillover effects from A to B and C could also positively impact on consumer response to SR activities. This is attributed to closer identification with the firm, eagerness to support its SR efforts and a belief that paying more contributes to such activities.

Wang et al. conduct two experiments to explore these issues further. In the first, 121 subjects were randomly assigned to one of eight conditions combining presence or absence of SR initiative description for brand A, monolithic or endorsed corporate branding strategy and high or low product category fit between A and B. Support for a nutrition program to promote a healthy, active lifestyle was the SR initiative of A. Stand-alone branding strategy was represented by a fictitious competing brand (D). Brand names were used accordingly to manipulate corporate and endorsed branding strategies. A pretest determined that frozen yoghurt was selected as A, with ice cream as B in the high-fit condition. The low-fit condition saw B represented by a soft drink product.

Subjects read a scenario describing the fictitious company and its product brands A and B. They were then asked to indicate purchase intention and willingness to pay regarding B. Identification with the firm and intended WOM were also recorded, along with their SR associations for the product brands (A, B and D) and the corporate brand (C).

In the second experiment, a program promoting fitness and well-being among children and adolescents was chosen as the SR initiative for A. Running shoes (A) and t-shirt (B) represented high product category fit, while a watch became B in the low-fit situation. The 130 respondents were exposed to one of eight similar conditions, although symbolic or functional brand positioning of A and B was used instead of the variation in branding strategy. Symbolic and functional conditions were respectively indicated by different brand attribute descriptions. Endorsed branding strategy was used in all conditions in the belief that other factors contributing to the brand relationship might become more salient.

Participants again read a scenario before answering similar questions. Also included was one measuring the SR associations of subjects with D, a brand positioned differently by the company to A and B. In this scenario, A and B were described before C in order to test whether CSR associations still have a mediating effect.

Key findings to emerge include:

• SR initiatives of A generated spillover effects to B and C.

• Spillover effects first extended to C before spreading to B, showing that SR associations with C have a mediating role.

• Monolithic branding strategy and high product category fit increased spillover effect strength.

• No significant spillover effect was evident from A to D.

• Brand positioning/image had a greater impact than product category fit in the second experiment involving “value-expressive products”.

• Spillover effects in the first experiment generated higher levels of consumer–company identification and positive WOM.

• Lack of such outcomes in the second experiment suggest factors like symbolic associations of product brands, existing brand preferences and identification with other firms might be more influential for value-expressive products.

• Spillover effects from A to B resulted in no significant consequences in either experiment. The authors speculate that behavioral outcomes might be influenced more by quality, design or other company- or product-related aspects where SR associations with product brands are concerned.

Wang et al. conclude that firms will benefit from any SR activity in situations where strong links exist between brands because of branding strategy, product category fit or consistent brand positioning or image. Where relationships are weak, the authors recommend investment in SR activity based on identified objectives at more localized levels.

Future research can consider spillover effects from product brand SR activity to a competing brand and from SR initiatives at the corporate level to product brands. The mediating role of CSR associations could be investigated in other marketing contexts, while exploring spillover effects in the portfolio of a real brand is another option, as is examining other ways in which brands can be connected within a portfolio.

To read the full article, enter 10.1108/JPBM-06-2014-0629 into your search engine.

(A précis of the article “Spillover of social responsibility associations in a brand portfolio”. Supplied by Marketing Consultants for Emerald.)