Summary literature CSR

Summary Papers CSR

Article 3. rrown & aaicnn (1999)n
Aim of the study Brown & Dacin (1997):
To examine the efect of two general types of corporate associatons on product responses:
corporate ability (CA) associatonss and corporate social responsibility (CSR) associatonss

What kind of defniton do Brown & Dacin (1997) elaborate on?
Corporate ability associatons are those associatons related to the company’s expertse in producing
and delivering its outputss Corporate social responsibility associatons reeect the organizaton’s
status and actvites with respect to its perceived societal obligatonss

What did Brown & Dacin (1997) expect?
They predict that CA associatons ineuence the percepton of important product atributess In
additons they expect both CA and CSR associatons to ineuence consumer evaluatons of a company
and the company context to ineuence product evaluatonss




What did Brown & Dacin (1997) do?
They did three studies:
 Study 1: Focused on corporate associatons and consumer product responsess 148
respondents flled in a questonnaire in a lab-type environments
 Study 2: Focused on the ineuence of corporate associatons for real companiess 127
partcipatng university undergraduates were randomly assigned to one of 12 well-known
companies and flled in a questonnaires
 Study 3: Focused on corporate associatonss context efects and product responsess 229
people were recruited through mall intercepts and received a coupon for free refreshments
at a nearby restaurants 2 (valence of corporate associaton: negatves positve) ) 2 (type of
corporate associaton: CA associatonss CSR associaton) between-subjects designs

,What did Brown & Dacin (1997) fnd?




What did Brown & Dacin (1997) conclude?
 What consumers know about a company can ineuence their beliefs about and attudes
towards new products manufactures by that companys
 CA and CSR associatons may have diferent efects on consumer responses to productss CA
associatons can ineuence new product evaluatons through their efect on how consumers
feel overall about the companys The results also suggest that CSR associatons have a
signifcant ineuence on consumer responses to new productss Negatve CSR associatons
ultmately can have a detrimental efect on overall product evaluatonss whereas positve CSR
associatons can enhance the product evaluatonss
 Consumers can and will use CA associatons as the basis for inferences about missing product
atributess
 A discrepancy between the evaluatve implicatons of the corporate associatons and the new
products a contrast efect can occurs which causes the evaluaton of the product to be higher
when it is produced by a company with more negatvely evaluated CA associatons than
when it is produced by a company with more positvely evaluated CA associatonss
 Products of companies with negatve associatons are not always destned to receive
negatve responsess A new product introduced by a company with positve corporate
associatons may receive lower evaluatons than it might otherwise have receiveds

,Article 193. Ellen ! Webb & oorr (0006n

Aim of the study Ellens Webb & Mohr (2006):
Examine the ineuence of consumers’ atributons on corporate outcomes in response to CSRs

What kind of defniton do Ellens Webb & Mohr (2006) elaborate on?
CSR associatons are those that “reeect the organizaton’s status and actvites with respect to its
perceived societal obligatonsss

What did Ellens Webb & Mohr (2006) expect?
H1: Purchase intenton in response to CSR associatons will be higher when atributons are (a)
values driven or (b) strategic and lower when atributons are (c) egoistc or (d) stakeholder
drivens
H2: High (low) ft between a cause’s mission and a company’s core business will increase (de
crease) (a) values-driven and (b) strategic atributons while decreasing (increasing) (c)
egoistc and (d) stakeholder-driven atributonss
H3: High (low) commitment to a cause will increase (decrease) (a) values-driven atributons
while decreasing (increasing) (b) strategics (c) egoistcs and (d) stakeholder-driven
atributonss
H4: Atributons will mediate the relatonship between ofer elements and purchase intentons

What did Ellens Webb & Mohr (2006) do?
Two studies:
 Study 1: to discover the range of motves that might be elicited in response to cause-related
actvitess 281 students at a major university answered open-ended questonss
 Study 2: examine whether atributons play a meditatonal role in consumers’ processing of
CSR initatvess 3 (ft: highs no relatonships low) x 2 (commitment: highs low) between-
subjects experiment with a control-group designs 193 staf employees at a large university
responded at the surveys

What did Ellens Webb & Mohr (2006) fnd?

, What did Ellens Webb & Mohr (2006) conclude?
 Consumers’ atributons were more complex than traditonally vieweds
 Rather than viewing corporate eforts along a self- or other-centered contnuums consumers
diferentate four types of motves: self-centered motves that are strategic and egoistc and
other-centered motves that are values driven and stakeholder drivens
 Consumers responded most positvely to CSR eforts they judged as values driven and
strategic while responding negatvely to eforts perceived as stakeholder driven or egoistcs
 With higher fts longer tme commitments were expected to lead to more values-driven
atributonss while shorter commitments might be viewed as more reactve to pressures of
stakeholders or business demandss
 Stakeholder-driven atributons decreased purchase intents Consumers do not give credit to
companies that engage in CSR because of pressure from customers and other stakeholderss