Abstract

Brand Authenticity is paramount in contemporary advertising and brands can communicate their authenticity by supporting social and environmental crises. Brands often donate money or products to causes, and while the value of such activities has been documented, the actual nature of the donation relative to authenticity and subsequent outcomes is unclear. How much should brands donate? What type of donation is best? What are the advantages of choosing certain crises over others? This paper explores how a brand’s authenticity might be affected by its response strategy to various crises. Two experimental studies provide converging evidence that with either an acute (a weather-related crisis) or a chronic social (school funding) issue, the right type and size of donation can lead to desirable brand outcomes while assisting those in need. We argue that symbolic consumption is the mechanism through which process occurs. We find that purchase intent can be generated through donating cash or products to a crisis that fits well with brand values, whereas digital engagement is best generated through product donation in support of a crisis which does not.

摘要

品牌真实性在当代广告中至关重要，品牌可以通过支持社会和环境危机来传达其真实性。品牌经常向慈善事业捐赠金钱或产品，虽然此类活动的价值已被记录在案，但与真实性和后续结果相关的捐赠的实际性质尚不清楚。品牌应该捐赠多少？什么类型的捐赠最好？选择某些危机而不是其他危机有什么好处？本文探讨了品牌的真实性如何受到其应对各种危机的策略的影响。两项实验研究提供了一致的证据，即对于急性（与天气相关的危机）或慢性社会（学校资金）问题，正确的捐赠类型和规模可以在帮助有需要的人的同时产生理想的品牌成果。我们认为符号消费是过程发生的机制。我们发现，购买意愿可以通过向与品牌价值非常吻合的危机捐赠现金或产品来产生，而数字参与最好通过捐赠产品以支持不符合品牌价值的危机产生。