The purpose of this study was to identify, measure and analyze consumer attitudes toward the intrinsic value of the TOMS brand when exposed to different social responsibility ad scenarios. This report is based on the quantitative analysis of 137 surveys. This study was conducted in 2015 for academic purposes.

1. Cause-Related
Marketing Phenomena
The Case of TOMS

2. About TOMS
• Core product: shoes
• Other products: Eyewear,
Accessories and Coffee
• For-Profit firm with a global
market
• Cause-Related Marketing
• Altruistic and philanthropic
brand image

3. About Cause-Related Marketing
• Consumers become benefactors
(Varadarajan and Menon, 1988).
• Enhances corporate image (Cherney and
Blair, 2015).
• Improves corporate credibility (Duff, 2003)
• Good attitude in mind of buyers (Creyer and
Ross, 1996).
• Vital element of the marketing mix (Kotler
and Lee, 2005).

4. Literature Review
• Direct and negative relationship between
product price and cause-related marketing
(Nguyen Man, 2015).
• The higher the price, the less positive
impact cause-related marketing will have on
consumer attitudes.
• Educated inference about the study:
• Consumers exposed to a social responsibility ad
displaying a low price (i.e. $40) will have a more
positive attitude towards the brand compare to
when they are exposed to a social responsibility ad
displaying a higher price (i.e. $70).
Price
Cause-Related
Marketing
Impact

5. Methodology
• Qualtrics and SPSS
• Social Media Channels and E-mail
• 137 participants
Online
Survey
• A social responsibility ad featuring (a) high price ($70)
and (b) low price ($40).
• A regular ad featuring (a) high price ($70) and (b) low
price ($40).
Ad
Scenarios

6. SR Ad + High Price
SR Ad + Low Price

7. NSR Ad + High Price
NSR Ad + Low Price

8. Research Design
2x2
Design
Social vs.
Non-Social
High Price
vs. Low
Price

9. Data Analysis
Most
participants
were:
Female (59%)
Between 25 and 44 years old
Employed either full-time or part-time
Had an annual household income between $0 and $39,999
Single
Had a professional or 4-year degree

10. Attitude
towards
TOMS
Attrative or
Unattractive
Good or Bad
Positive or
Negative
Attention getting
or not attention
getting at all
Socially
Responsible or
not Socially
Responsible
Reliability Analysis determined that only the items good or bad, and attention getting or
not attention getting at all provided meaningful and accurate results when measuring the
variable Attitude towards TOMS.

11. Two-way ANOVA
H1: Consumers’ attitude toward TOMS
will be jointly influenced by ad type
(social responsibility vs. non-social
responsibility) and price (high vs. low).
• (a) for the social responsibility ad condition, their
brand attitude will be more positive when the price is
low, rather than high, whereas
• (b) for the non-social responsibility ad condition, their
brand attitude will be more positive when the price is
high, rather than low.
Attitude
towards
TOMS
Ad Type Price

12. P-value: 0.04
Support H1

13. Three-way ANOVA
Attitude
towards
TOMS
Ad Type
Price
Gender
H2: H1 will depend on gender.
• (a) for male consumers, their attitude toward the
brand will be jointly influenced by ad type (social
responsibility vs. non-social responsibility) and price
(high vs. low)
• (b) for female consumers, their attitude toward the
brand will not be jointly influenced by ad type (social
responsibility vs. non-social responsibility) and price
(high vs. low)

14. The analysis deemed as marginally significant
(0.05<p=0.077<0.1)

15. The analysis deemed as
significant for Male
p=0.006
The analysis deemed as
not significant for Female
p=0.595

16. Discussion
Male
• Attitude toward TOMS is more price sensitive when social condition is
not shown in the ad.
Female
• Brand attitude was higher when the price is low, rather than high.
• There is a main effect of price in this case (p = .595).
Implications
• Managers and marketers can develop marketing strategies based on the
impact of attitude toward brands perceived by males and females.

17. Limitations
• Data obtained was quantitative, limiting our
ability to obtain in-depth data.
• Only two out of four scales measuring
“Attitude Toward the Brand” were reliable.
• Convenience sampling not representative of
intended sample population.
• Response Errors: missed or skipped
questions.
• Incomplete Surveys and time constrain.

18. Thank You
Prepared by:
• Valeria Aguerri
• Francisco Silva
• Bellakarina Solorzano