Not a flock

Throughout this series of blog posts, one can come across an assortment of arguments that might influence a firm’s desire to engage in CSR. However, as I was glossing over everything I had written, I realized that I had failed to take into account a rather important element in the ongoing debate concerning the behavior of the enterprises- the opinions of the very customers who actually buy their products! Do they wholeheartedly pledge their patronage the moment a corporation publicly displays its charitable actions? Or do they retain a degree of scepticism, and make decisions based solely on the quality of the things they purchase? Hopefully, the research done in “Consumer Perceptions of Corporate Social Responsibility in town shopping centres and their influence on shopping evaluations” will help shed some light on the situation.

The authors (H.Oppewal, A.Alexander, and P.Sulliwan) wanted to investigate whether or not the effects of town center CSR actions can influence consumers’ evaluations. It is common knowledge that there is often a symbiotic relationship between retailers and the community (especially in smaller ones). The researchers themselves, quoting their colleagues (Besser and Miller, 2001), wrote that “retailers depend on community patronage for firm revenues and therefore have a direct interest in community development”- thus, they were practically openly declaring that they would definitely find something substantial. After conducting some quantitative research in the form of 200 questionnaires (and ensuring their validity with split-half tests), they obtained results which indicated that CSR actions only have limited effects on shopping centre attractiveness. However, the authors insist that their findings can have an important impact on corporate strategies- assuming that the cumulative pecuniary effects of charity outweigh the costs needed to bring them about.

Anybody who knows me personally can easily guess the reaction I had after reading this paper. I am, in fact, quite skeptical towards any findings procured through questionnaires- even if they are relatively quick to analyze and cheap to implement. The loss of ecological validity (i.e the applicability of the results to real life situations) neutralizes any effort made by researchers in their quest for the truth. Such, I believe, was the case here: the gender representation of their sample was skewed (80% female), and they were using a convenience sample (which means that there was a high chance of a non-response bias). Also I do not like how they chose to conduct their research in a shopping center- even though such establishments contain a variety of brands, their patrons usually just want to find decent products for bargain prices (Prajecus and Olsen, 2004). Finally, it is not quite clear what forms of CSR are being discussed- after all, different people support different causes. All in all, I believe that more research needs to be carried out before anything definite can be said.

Oppewal, H.; Alexander, A.; Sulliwan, P. (2006). “Consumer Perceptions of Corporate Social Responsibility in town shopping centres and their influence on shopping evaluations”. Journal of retailing and consumer services. 13 (4): 263–270.