I'm guilty of this by the way.
Edelmen's new research report - the Good Purpose Study - is an example of the speed of change in the marketing space. The report argues that the halo effect of the worst of cause marketing is gone ('bout time). That companies need to engage deeper than putting a pink ribbon on a product. It claims consumers care more (I'm not convined, btw).
Carol Cone has jumped in to agree that "Cause Marketing (as we know it) is dead." It's the "as we know it" that this post is about.
This is a new strategy of dismantling a concept and rebuilding it so that it can be owned or reclaimed.
This is how we do things now. In More Than Promote, I do the same thing. I rip apart sustainability and marketing and build a new thing out of the pieces. It's part of the process of progress, I think.
On one hand this makes progress happen faster. That's good. On the other, it might derail perfectly viable sustainability strategies for the sake of corporate marketing. We are seeing the same thing with "green marketing." It is rapidly, and incorrectly, being equated with greenwashing in general. Jacquie Ottman has writen about this more elequantly than I can in here call for industry self-regulation.
Here's the story in USAToday.
---
Oh, and here's an excerpt from the findings:
Survey respondents listed these top five companies when asked to name what "brand or brands come to mind as placing as much or more importance on supporting a good cause as they place on profits":
1. Pepsi
2. Newman's Own
3. Nike
4. Coca Cola
5. Tide
Only one earned their way on this list I imagine. The rest bought their way on.