Skip to main content

Fearless Predictions About Cause-Related Marketing in 2008

Last September, at the request of San Francisco blogger Gayle Roberts, I posted my predictions on the future of cause-related marketing. With the coming of the New Year it makes sense to re-release this post.


I have a spotty record predicting the future.
I bought a Zip drive about a week before the first USB drive came out.
And then, admiring the portability of said USB drives, I bought 2 of them with 56K of memory for about $50 a pop.
I have two complete sets of the 1987 Topps baseball cards (which includes the rookie cards for Barry Bonds and Mark McGuire) still in the original shrink-wrap. They’re worth almost exactly what I paid for them. Or rather less, considering the ravages of inflation.
(I also have a first edition of Hayduke Lives by Edward Abbey in very fine condition that has more than doubled in value. So, I’m not always dead wrong.)
So imagine my surprise to get a short missive from Bay-area fundraising consultant Gayle Roberts asking me to weigh in on the topic of “Predicting the Future of Fundraising” for the September Giving Carnival.
But like all pundits, I’ve got an opinion no matter my history of accuracy!
That said, to paraphrase Abbey’s ‘warning’ at the front of Hayduke “Anyone who takes these predictions seriously will be shot. Anyone who does not take them seriously will be buried by a Mitsubishi bulldozer.”
Here then are my bold predictions on the future of cause-related marketing over 2008.
  • I predict that cause-related marketing will continue to grow in North America, if modestly. How’s that for wild-eyed caution? According to IEG cause-related marketing has hovered within a percentage point or two of 10 percent of the total of all sponsorship for the last decade. I don’t see anything in the near term that leads me to believe the practice is going to significantly break out of that range.
  • I predict eco cause marketing will become commonplace. There’s already plenty going on in North America. But it will only get bigger, especially Canada and the United States where it has more room to grow than in Europe. That said, most of the environmental cause-related marketing I see right now is complicated. Silk Soy recently used an old-school turn in a cap campaign. But instead of generating money, each cap represented wind power offsets. It took their whole website to explain it. Eco cause marketing will need to get simpler in order for it to really grow. Either that or main-street Americans are going to have to acquire a more sophisticated understanding of the ends and outs of carbon credits. I know which eventuality I’m betting on.
  • I predict North Americans will be increasingly responsive to cause-related marketing campaigns for foreign causes, especially in the Third World. Ten years ago a colleague and I were in the Washington D.C. office of a prominent international relief organization and we got absolutely lambasted by the head program officer over all the money we were raising with cause marketing for ‘fat cat’ children’s hospitals. “Why couldn’t cause marketing fund efforts in third world countries?” she asked us. Back then the answer was that she was too emotionally invested in her cause to see that Americans weren’t ready to redistribute their wealth through cause-related marketing. Now they are.
  • I predict that cause-related marketing will grow fastest in places like India. That’s because every week someone searches my blog using terms like “cause marketing, India,” or “cause-related marketing programmes in South Africa.”
  • I predict more local market CRM. It’s easy to look at the mega-campaigns from national brands… both for-profit and non-profit… and conclude that that’s where all the action is. But just as cause-related marketing can scale up, it can also scale down, thank you very much. Local causes that generate affinity and can make a compelling (and brief!) case for the need, can be successful. I see these local efforts all the time and expect to see more.
  • I predict that for the foreseeable future CRM will continue to trail the giants of sponsorship like the NFL. That’s because too many cause marketers still think it’s all about tears when in fact it’s all about eyeballs. The big guys understand that and NASCAR and the World Cup and their peers are much better at delivering eyeballs than their charity cousins.
Mostly, though I predict that cause-related marketing will continue as a viable tactic and in some cases a strategy for both companies and nonprofits. That’s because for all the naysayers and bad press in the last year, cause-related marketing works.
  • It generates unrestricted money, which is highly coveted in nonprofit fundraising.
  • It deepens relationships with supporters.
  • It engenders loyalty in a company’s customers.
  • It builds brands, both for-profit and nonprofit.
More to the point, cause-related marketing works best with women in general, who control 80 percent of all household spending in the United States and Gen Y in particular, who on the balance seem to appreciate the practice.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Cause Marketing: The All Packaging Edition

One way to activate a cause marketing campaign when the sponsor sells a physical product is on the packaging. I started my career in cause marketing on the charity side and I can tell you that back in the day we were thrilled to get a logo on pack of a consumer packaged good (CPG) or even just a mention. Since then, there’s been a welcome evolution of what sponsors are willing and able to do with their packaging in order to activate their cause sponsorships. That said, even today some sponsors don’t seem to have gotten the memo that when it comes to explaining your cause campaign, more really is more, even on something as small as a can or bottle. The savviest sponsors realize that their only guaranteed means of reaching actual customers with a cause marketing message is by putting it on packaging. And the reach and frequency of the media on packaging for certain high-volume CPG items is almost certainly greater than radio, print or outdoor advertising, and, in many cases, TV. More to

Why Even Absurd Cause-Related Marketing Has its Place

Buy a Bikini, Help Cure Cancer New York City (small-d) fashion designer Shoshonna Lonstein Gruss may have one of the more absurd cause-related marketing campaigns I’ve come across lately. When you buy the bikini or girls one-piece swimsuit at Bergdorf-Goodman in New York shown at the left all sales “proceeds” benefit Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center . Look past the weak ‘ proceeds ’ language, which I always decry, and think for a moment about the incongruities of the sales of swimsuits benefiting the legendary Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center. Cancer has nothing to do swimming or swimsuits or summering in The Hamptons for that matter. And it’s not clear from her website why Shoshanna, the comely lass who once adorned the arm of comedian Jerry Seinfeld, has chosen the esteemed cancer center to bestow her gifts, although a web search shows that she’s supported its events for years. Lesser critics would say that the ridiculousness of it all is a sign that cause-related marketing is

A Clever Cause Marketing Campaign from Snickers and Feeding America

Back in August I bought this cause-marketed Snickers bar during my fourth trip of the day to Home Depot. (Is it even possible to do home repairs and take care of all your needs with just one trip to Home Depot / Lowes ?) Here’s how it works: Snickers is donating the cost of 2.5 million meals to Feeding America, the nation’s leading hunger-relief charity. On the inside of the wrapper is a code. Text that code to 45495… or enter it at snickers.com… and Snickers will donate the cost of one meal to Feeding America, up to one million additional meals. The Feeding America website says that each dollar you donate provides seven meals. So Snickers donation might be something like $500,000. But I like that Snickers quantified its donations in terms of meals made available, rather than dollars. That’s much more concrete. It doesn’t hurt that 3.5 million is a much bigger number than $500,000. I also like the way they structured the donation. By guaranteeing 2.5 million meals, the risk of a poor