Who Benefits From A Cause Marketing Campaign?

Cause-related marketing is an alluring act for a lot of organizations. The area becomes a bright prospect for companies longing for a giant step to do something generous while enjoying healthy profits at the same time. In this scenario, the two companies, for-profit and a not-for-profit join hands to collaborate in support for a benevolent cause.

If deployed well, I think the potential of cause marketing is certainly huge in terms of its impact on the community as well as the brand itself. Cause-related marketing is a better idea to endorse a brand. It’s because a brand is associated with some significant social causes. Presumably, the company gives back to the causes, for example, by investing in producing eco-friendly products, eliminating starvation, advocating community health, combating the pandemics, defending human rights, etc.

The benefits for a company initiating a cause marketing campaign are twofold: clearly, it is going to relish an image as a company supporting the social good while also marketing its brand name, ultimately leading to the enlarged customer base.

To better capitalize on the campaign in question, first, it is important to choose a cause very carefully. A cause will work out if it is something that the company’s culture allows and the employees believe in too. Another critical point is that the brand has to be in support only with prime focus on the cause. Next, it is not only about money. There are thousands of ways and avenues for charity payout. But a cause marketing campaign serves a dual purpose. Earning a positive PR and heightening public awareness of the brand is far more important than donating money.

It is well realized that a cause marketing relationship is a win-win situation all around. Apparently, a for-profit company seems more lucrative in a cause marketing relationship as it is benefitting in two ways. The dual benefits of a company are described briefly in the above paragraphs. It is also true that not every cause marketing campaign turns successful for a corporation. There are plenty of examples where the campaigns backfired, plunging deep to the ground. Then the companies’ expectations of dual benefits come to nothing. For example, KFC’s “Buckets for the Cure” campaign could not hit the mark in terms of positive PR for the company (D’Inzillo). It was an odd partnership between a food-food chain and a healthcare (not-for-profit) organization. A fatty food had no link with breast cancer except for fried chicken might give rise to fatness that counts as a key risk component for breast cancer.

On the other hand, a charitable foundation has a surefire success and their gains are far greater than a corporation. This argument is true since the work of the charity is funded by donations that tend to be immune to debacles. In case a misfortune occurs resulting in the flop of a cause marketing campaign, the nonprofit will still be at an edge because of the monetary contributions they have received.

Regardless of the positive image and PR, the donations draw the thin line of difference between the benefits the two partners enjoy in this type of relationship. The not-for-profit institution is always better off compared with the for-profit company.

Work Cited

D’Inzillo, Nancy. 3 Spectacular Cause Marketing Fails — And How Your Credit Union Can Do Better. 11 Mar. 2020, www.pixelspoke.com/blog/social-impact/3-spectacular-cause-marketing-fails-credit-union-can-better/.