RELEVANCIA DEL MODELO INSTRUCCIONAL ASSURE PARA LA EDUCACIÓN A DISTANCIA

As mentioned in the above, when a firm engages with a non-profit/cause in a CARE campaign, the number of causes to partner with and the issue of providing consumers with cause choice, are important considerations (Robinson et al., 2012; Varadarajan & Menon, 1988). In addition, cause type and cause importance are key to CARE effectiveness (Lafferty & Edmondson, 2009; Engelbrecht & Du Plessis, 2004).

107

Cause importance and cause type have the ability to affect the way consumers behave toward CARE campaigns (Engelbrecht & Du Plessis, 2004). Preceding cause importance is awareness/familiarity (Minton & Cornwell, 2015; Chéron et al., 2012) – a lack of cause/NPO awareness can result in a lack of cause/NPO importance (Lafferty & Edmondson, 2014). Likewise, the type of cause/NPO can also lead to a lack of cause/NPO importance (Lafferty & Edmondson, 2014).

According to Lafferty (1996) consumers are more positive about CARE when the cause is important to them and firms are encouraged to refrain from partnering with causes that are not viewed as important by their constituents (Polonsky & Speed, 2001; Andreasen, 1996). Lafferty (1996) found that control advertisements where no causes were mentioned generated more positive attitudes and purchase intentions than advertisements supporting a cause that consumers deemed to be unimportant (Webb & Mohr, 1998).

Engelbrecht and Du Plessis (2004) conducted a study in South Africa that assessed the influence of social cause importance on persuasion communication effectiveness, which included consumer thoughts (cognitive attitude), feelings (affective attitude), and buying intent (conative attitude) (Engelbrecht & Du Plessis, 2004). It was found that social cause importance significantly impacted cognitive and affective consumer attitude, but not buying intent (Engelbrecht & Du Plessis, 2004).

The type of cause chosen for CARE partnerships has the potential to significantly impact the effectiveness of such campaigns. Literature indicates that cause type can be understood in various ways, for instance cause nature, cause category, cause visibility, etc. Strahilevitz and Myers (1998) referred to the nature of the cause and alluded to the importance of cause- brand fit. They suggested that certain types of charitable organisations might fit better with certain types of products due to “a type of product-charity complementarity” (Svensson & Wood, 2011; Strahilevitz & Myers, 1998:444). Examples include the complementary fit between a condom manufacturer and funding support for HIV/AIDS research, or a stationary manufacturer contributing to a literacy fund (Strahilevitz & Myers, 1998).

Other researchers have categorised causes based on their longevity (Chéron et al., 2012; Svensson & Wood, 2011). Some researchers have found that people prefer causes aimed at supporting short-term disaster relief rather than ongoing causes (Skitka, 1999; Ross et al., 1992) – a relationship is thus drawn between the type of cause and the duration of a campaign. According to Skitka (1999) the reason for this might be that disasters provide the strongest opportunity to examine whether people would abandon their typical responses of

108

self-interest and respond to affective or situational needs. Ellen et al. (2000) have argued that with ongoing causes, people tend to attribute personal responsibility to the beneficiaries of the cause, but the external and uncontrollable nature of disasters leads to a lower level of personal responsibility attribution by potential donors. It has been said that CARE campaigns that support ongoing causes are more likely to generate consumer perceptions of firms’ self- interest motives and consumer scepticism about the campaign offer (Cui et al., 2003). However, in contrast to previous research (Skitka, 1999; Ross et al., 1992) in which consumers preferred shorter-term campaigns, a study by Chéron et al. (2012) in Japan found that a longer-term campaign exerted a more favourable impact on firm image and on the firm’s perceived motives for engaging in the CARE campaign. Chéron et al. (2012) have suggested that consumers most likely preferred a longer-term campaign as it signalled a firm's willingness to be involved with the cause over the long term and thus implied less selfishness. Sagawa and Segal (2000:128) strongly emphasise the importance of selecting a CARE partner with the intent of a long-term relationship: “Trading partners often, even if they work in the same field, limits opportunities for richer relationships.”

Numerous different causes have benefited through involvement in CARE campaigns, but causes with high visibility levels and perceived importance that are appealing to more constituencies seem to attract more firm attention due to their ability and potential to generate greater media visibility and positive publicity than those causes that appeal only to particular constituencies (Lafferty & Edmondson, 2014; Varadarajan & Menon, 1988). However, due to the large appeal of high visibility causes and the increase in partnerships with these causes, it may be beneficial for firms to evaluate the merits of involvement with less visible alternatives with which exclusive partnerships be formed, thereby avoiding the marketing clutter. Firms could add more than monetary value to such causes, for instance, contributions could extend to time/skills donations in the form of employee volunteering. It could also be an option for a firm to initiate its own worthy causes (Varadarajan & Menon, 1988).

The causes used in CARE are often “ones where consumers can see the need for help, where the help is felt to produce valuable outcomes and where those outcomes are considered to be important” (Polonsky & Speed, 2001:1374). It seems that many firms choose charitable partners that cluster around what is called social causes, such as education, health advancement, hunger alleviation and child development (Engelbrecht & Du Plessis, 2004). Even today, some firms avoid partnerships with causes that focus on hard realities such as HIV/AIDS. However, some firms have successfully transcended to a willingness to take more risks and support such causes. Levi Strauss, for instance, already in

109

the early 1980s considered involvement with HIV/AIDS prevention. At the time the virus was a largely provocative topic that generated ample dismay in middle-America (Cone et al., 2003). The Levi Strauss firm had a non-conformist image and decided to proceed with their support for HIV/AIDS. Their decision was further supported by the fact that the Levi Strauss firm headquarters was based in San Francisco – a city where HIV/AIDS affected a relatively large part of the population (Cone et al., 2003). Consumers and firms are increasingly realising that issues like HIV/AIDS are no longer as dissociated from their own existence as was the case in the past (Cone et al., 2003).

In recent years consumers have displayed clear ideas about the type causes they think should be addressed by firms. The Cone Cause Evolution Study (Cone, 2010) highlighted these causes in order of importance: economic development; health and disease; hunger; education; access to clean water; disaster relief; environment; homelessness/housing; crime/violence prevention; equal rights/diversity. Engelbrecht and Du Plessis (2004) further found that, at the time of their research, the social cause that South African respondents were most concerned about was crime prevention. Recently, education has become more prominent due to increasing exposure about the poor quality of the South African education system, the social unrest as a result of fundamental errors within the system, the high level of dysfunctional schools in the country (estimated at 80 per cent) and the continuing awareness that education is a fundamental driver of human development (Wilkinson, 2015; The Trialogue 2015 CSI Handbook, 2015).

Therefore, in this research, the education development sector was selected as the cause parameters for this study. As mentioned in Chapter 2, education is also the development sector most widely supported by firms in South Africa. This decision thus contributed to external validity. In alignment with the above discussion, cause familiarity and importance were also considered during the NPO selection process for stimuli development in this study.