As people who know me will attest, I enjoy a good, honest debate. And Inger Stole over at PRWatch.org has kicked off a discussion I will now join. It should be no surprise that the subject is cause marketing and again, it will not be a surprise that I'm going to take the affirmative side. Thanks to Nedra at Spare Change for the pointer.
I hope you will take time to read Inger's piece because as Nedra correctly points out, it is thought provoking. And I don't disagree with some of the points Inger makes. For example, I endorse her belief that there are times when some cause related programs deal only at a very surface level and do not begin to try to address the root problems. She suggests that some of those companies involved in specific health related causes should take on the more fundamental cause of advocating for a better overall healthcare system. I think that is a great idea.
What I disagree with is the implication that corporations conduct cause programs only as a means to push their brand or specific products or services. It is my opinion, based on my own involvement and observations, that position is a generalization on Inger's part. I can attest personally that is not the case with our client, Lee Jeans, and its signature cause program Lee National Denim Day. Lee has never focused on whether or not they sell more jeans because of Denim Day. And in conversations I have with other companies we either work with now or are attempting to work with, they are focused on what cause can mean to their brand image, not whether they can make more money through cause programs.
I believe it is perfectly fine for companies involved in cause to get credit for the good they are doing whether it be awareness building or fund raising or both. And I assure you that the non-profits are happy to receive help with both. It is a win-win and while I respect those that are concerned about the potential for abuses to take place, it is up to us involved in developing cause programs to make sure they do not occur.
Recent Comments