Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Alliances Between Corporate and Fair Trade Brands: Examining the Antecedents of Overall Evaluation of the Co-branded Product

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This research investigates the potential for a “fair” co-branding operation. A major corporate brand is fictitiously allied with a Fair Trade labelling organization brand. The sample for the study is composed of 540 respondents, representative of the French population. By considering commercial brands and Fair Trade labels as dissimilar in terms of customers’ perceived Fair Trade orientations, this article studies (1) how this lack of similarity impacts perceived congruence between both entities (i.e. perceived relevancy and expectancy of the alliance) and (2) how prior brand attitudes and congruence influence customers’ evaluation of the co-branded product. The results of this research demonstrate that: (1) Consumer prior brand attitudes toward the partner brands influence very little customers’ evaluation. (2) Perceived similarity of the partner brands has a strong influence toward congruence of the co-branding operation. Results also indicate that congruence (measured as relevancy and expectancy) has a strong influence upon customers’ evaluation. (3) An inverted U-shaped relationship exists between perceived similarity and relevancy of the alliance, and between expectancy and customers’ evaluation. The results obtained through the test of a partial least square model, and inverted U-shaped hypothesis, represent a new insight into co-branding theory. The high discursive power of fair co-branding is a key issue: the corporate brand provides the alliance with its leading position, while the Fair Trade brand provides the ethical attribute.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The Fair Trade French market reached € 350 million in 2011, which represents a 37 % increase compared to 2008. 63 % of global sales are made by medium and large supermarkets (French Ministry of Ecology, Sustainable Development, and Energy, www.developpement-durable.gouv.fr, 2012, November). Fair Trade awareness has now reached 95 %, which represents a real progress, compared to a mere 9 % in 2000 (Ipsos/PFCE barometer, 2009, June).

  2. On the Fair Trade French market place, food products generate over 75 % of total sales of Fair Trade products. Tea and coffee alone generate over 50 % of total sales (French Ministry of Ecology, Sustainable Development, and Energy, www.developpement-durable.gouv.fr, 2012, November).

  3. According to Morgan (1996, p. 130): “Focus groups are a research method devoted to data collection. This definition has three essential components. First, it clearly states that focus groups are a research method devoted to data collection. Second, it locates the interaction in a group discussion as the source of the data. Third, it acknowledges the researcher's active role in creating the group discussion for data collection purposes.”

  4. We decided that the head researcher would serve as the moderator for each focus group because an overall understanding of the study was deemed necessary in order to keep the focus groups on task.

  5. Other attributes such as “nutritional needs met”, “great products to the public”, “good taste” and “price” were also discussed by the two focus groups. As these attributes tented to be attributes of the brands themselves and did not specifically describe the concept of Fair Trade orientation, we did not include them in our scale.

References

  • Aaker, D. A., & Keller, K. L. (1990). Consumer evaluations of brand extensions. Journal of Marketing, 54(1), 27–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Abbo, M.-H. (2008). Evolution of brand associations after a co-branding initiative between a brand and a cause: A French exploratory case study. 7th International Marketing Trends Congress, Venice, Italy.

  • Ahn, S., Kim, H., & Forney, J. A. (2009). Co-marketing alliances between heterogeneous industries: Examining perceived match-up effects in product, brand and alliance levels. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 16, 477–485.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alcañiz, E. B., Cáceres, R. C., & Pérez, R. C. (2010). Alliances between brands and social cause: The influence of company credibility on social responsibility image. Journal of Business Ethics, 96(2), 169–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andorfer, V. A., & Liebe, U. (2012). Research on fair trade consumption—A review. Journal of Business Ethics, 106(4), 415–435.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arnot, C., Boxall, P. C., & Cash, S. B. (2006). Do ethical consumers care about price? A revealed preference analysis of fair trade coffee purchases. Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 54, 555–565.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Becker-Olsen, K. L., & Hill, R. P. (2006). The impact of sponsor fit on brand equity: The case of nonprofit service providers. Journal of Service Research, 9(1), 73–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berlyne, D. E. (Ed.). (1974). Studies in the new experimental aesthetics: Steps toward an objective psychology of aesthetic appreciation. Oxford: Hemisphere.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boush, D. M., & Loken, B. (1991). A process-tracing study of brand extension evaluation. Journal of Marketing Research, 28(1), 16–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bouten, L. M., Snelders, D., & Hultink, E. J. (2011). The impact of fit measures on the consumer evaluation of new co-branded products. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 28(4), 455–469.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brislin, R. W. (1976). Comparative research methodology: Cross-cultural studies. International Journal of Psychology, 11(3), 215–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Broniarczyk, S. M., & Alba, J. W. (1994). The importance of the brand in brand extension. Journal of Marketing Research, XXXI, 214–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bucklin, L. P., & Sengupta, S. (1993). Organizing successful co-marketing alliances. Journal of Marketing, 57, 32–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cailleba, P., & Casteran, H. (2010). Do ethical values work? A quantitative study of the impact of fair trade coffee on consumer behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 97(4), 613–624.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cegarra, J. J., & Michel, G. (2001). Co-branding: Clarification du concept. Recherche et Applications en Marketing, 16(4), 57–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chin, W. W. (1998a). The partial least squares approach for structural equation modeling. In G. A. Marcoulides (Ed.), Modern methods for business research. London: Laurence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chin, W. W. (1998b). Issues and opinion on structural equation modeling. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 22(1), vii–xvi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Churchill, G. A., Jr. (1979). A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs. Journal of Marketing Research, XVI, 64–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collange, V. (2008). L’impact de la substitution de marques sur l’évaluation et l’intention d’achat du produit. Recherche et Applications en Marketing, 23(2), 2–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dawes, P. L., & Lee, D. Y. (1996). Communication intensity in large-scale organizational high technology purchasing decisions. Journal of Business-to-Business Marketing, 3(3), 3–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Pelsmacker, P., Driesen, L., & Rayp, G. (2005). Do consumers care about ethics? Willingness to pay for fair-trade coffee. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 39(2), 363–385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Pelsmacker, P., & Janssens, W. (2007). A model for fair trade buying behaviour: The role of perceived quantity and quality of information and of product-specific attitudes. Journal of Business Ethics, 75(4), 361–380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Derbaix, C., & Vanhamme, J. (2003). Inducing word-of-mouth by eliciting surprise—A pilot investigation. Journal of Economic Psychology, 24(1), 99–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dickinson, S., & Barker, A. (2007). Evaluations of branding alliances between non-profit and commercial brand partners: the transfer of affect. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 12(1), 75–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fern, E. F. (1982). The use of focus groups for idea generation: The effects of group size, acquaintanceship, and moderator on response quantity and quality. Journal of Marketing Research, XIX, 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fleck, N. D., & Maille, V. (2010). Trente ans de travaux contradictoires sur l’influence de la congruence perçue par le consommateur : synthèse, limites et voies de recherche. Recherches et Applications en Marketing, 24(4), 69–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fleck, N. D., Michel, G., & Gatignon, H. (2012). The dual process of co-branded new products: Why fit is not all that matters. Working Paper, INSEAD, Fontainebleau, France.

  • Fleck, N. D., & Quester, P. (2007). Birds of a feather flock together… Definition, role and measure of congruence: An application to sponsorship. Psychology & Marketing, 24(11), 975–998.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fornell, C. & Bookstein, F. L. (1982). A comparative analysis of two structural equation models: LISREL and PLS Applied to Market Data. Working Paper, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

  • Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frankwick, G. L., Porter, S. S., & Crosby, L. A. (2001). Dynamics of relationship selling: A longitudinal examination of changes in salesperson–customer relationship status. The Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, 21(2), 135–146.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garland, R. (2002). Estimating customer defection in personal retail banking. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 20(7), 317–324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heckler, S. E., & Childers, T. L. (1992). The role of expectancy and relevancy in memory for verbal and visual information: What is incongruency? Journal of Consumer Research, 18(4), 475–492.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heider, F. (1946). Attitudes and cognitive organization. The Journal of psychology, 21(1), 107–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Helmig, B., Huber, J.-A., & Leeflang, P. S. H. (2008). Co-branding: The state of the art. Schmalenbach Business Review, 60(4), 359–377.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hulland, J. (1999). Use of partial least squares (PLS) in strategic management research: A review of four recent studies. Strategic Management Journal, 20, 195–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ipsos Public Affairs, Max Havelaar. (2009). Baromètre de Notoriété Max Havelaar : Juin 2009. Ed Ipsos Public Affairs/Max Havelaar.

  • Jarvis, C. B., Mackenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, P. M. (2003). A critical review of construct indicators and measurement model misspecification in marketing and consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 30(2), 199–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keller, K. L. (1993). Conceptualizing, measuring, and managing customer-based brand equity. Journal of Marketing, 57(1), 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, N., Sung, Y., & Lee, M. (2012). Consumer evaluations of social alliances: The effects of perceived fit between companies and non-profit organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 109(2), 163–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lafferty, B. A. (2009). Selecting the right cause partners for the right reasons: The role of importance and fit in cause–brand alliances. Psychology & Marketing, 26(4), 359–382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lanseng, E. J., & Olsen, L. E. (2008). Evaluation of brand alliances: Product fit and the moderating role of brand concept consistency. Advances in Consumer Research, 35(1), 871–872.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larceneux, F. (2003). Classification des signes de qualité : labels expérientiels et labels techniques. Décisions Marketing, 29, 35–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larceneux, F., Benoit-Moreau, F., & Renaudin, V. (2012). Why might organic labels fail to influence consumer? Journal of Consumer Policy, 35, 85–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, Y. H., & Mason, C. (1999). Responses to information incongruency in advertising: The role of expectancy, relevancy, and humor. Journal of Consumer Research, 26(2), 156–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Léger, C., Politis, D., & Romano, J. P. (1992). Bootstrap technology and applications. Technometrics, 34, 378–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leitch, S., & Davenport, S. (2008). Corporate brands and social brands—Co-branding GM-free and UK supermarkets. International Studies of Management and Organization, 37(4), 45–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luo, X., & Bhattacharya, C. B. (2006). Corporate social responsibility, customer satisfaction, and market value. Journal of Marketing, 70(4), 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mandler, G. (1982). The structure of value: Accounting for taste. In M. S. Clark, & Susan, T. F. (Eds.), Affect and cognition: The 17th Annual Carnegie Symposium on Cognition (pp. 3–36). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

  • Meyers-Levy, J., & Tybout, A. M. (1989). Schema congruity as a basis for product evaluation. Journal of Consumer Research, 16, 39–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michel, G., & Cegarra, J. J. (2002). Co-branding : Les conditions de succès du produit co-marqué, Actes du XVIIIe Congrès de l’Association Française de Marketing, Lille.

  • Montoro Rios, F. J., Luque Martinez, T., Fuentes Moreno, F., & Canadas Soriano, P. (2006). Improving attitudes toward brands with environmental associations: An experimental approach. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 23(1), 26–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, D. L. (1996). Focus groups. Annual Review of Sociology, 22, 129–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nan, X., & Heo, K. (2007). Consumer responses to corporate social responsibility initiative. Journal of Advertising, 36(2), 63–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Noone, B. M., Kimes, S. E., Mattila, A. S., & Wirtz, J. (2009). Perceived service encounter pace and customer satisfaction: An empirical study of restaurant experiences. Journal of Service Management, 20(4), 380–403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Loughlin, C., & Coenders, G. (2004). Estimation of the European Customer satisfaction Index: Maximum likelihood versus partial least squares; application to postal services. Total Quality Management, 15(9–10), 1231–1255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ozcaglar-Toulouse, N. (2009). Quel sens les consommateurs responsables donnent-ils à leur consommation ? Une approche par les récits de vie. Recherches et Applications en Marketing, 24(3), 3–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ozcaglar-Toulouse, N., Shiu, E., & Shaw, D. (2006). In search of fair trade: Ethical consumer decision making in France. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 30(5), 502–514.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park, C. W., Jun, S., & Shocker, A. D. (1996). Composite branding alliances: An investigation of extension and feedback effects. Journal of Marketing Research, 33(4), 453–466.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park, C. W., Milberg, S., & Lawson, R. (1991). Evaluation of brand extensions: The role of product level similarity and brand concept consistency. Journal of Consumer Research, 18(3), 185–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peloza, J., & Shang, J. (2011). How can corporate social responsibility activities create value for stakeholders? A systematic review. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 39(1), 117–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pirotte, G. (2007). Consumption as a solidarity-based commitment. The case of Oxfam Wordshops’ customers. In E. Zaccaï (Ed.), Sustainable consumption, ecology and fair trade. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pracejus, J. W., & Olsen, G. D. (2004). The role of brand/cause fit in the effectiveness of cause related marketing campaigns. Journal of Business Research, 57(5), 635–641.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rao, A. R., Qu, L., & Ruekert, R. W. (1999). Signaling unobservable product quality through a brand ally. Journal of Marketing Research, 36(2), 258–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rao, A. R., & Ruekert, R. W. (1994). Brand alliances as signals of product quality. Sloan Management Review, 35(Fall), 87–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ringle, C. M., Wende, S., & Will, A. (2005). SmartPLS 2.0 (M3) beta, Hamburg. http://www.smartpls.de.

  • Sen, S., & Bhattacharya, C. B. (2001). Does doing good always lead to doing better? Consumer reactions to corporate social responsibility. Journal of Marketing Research, XXXVIII, 225–243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharma, A., & Levy, M. (2003). Salespeople’s affect toward customers. Why should it be important for retailers? Journal of Business Research, 56, 523–528.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shaw, D., & Shiu, E. (2002). The role of ethical obligation and self-identity in ethical consumer choice. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 26(2), 109–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shaw, D., Shiu, E., & Clarke, I. (2000). The contribution of ethical obligation and self-identity to the theory of planned behaviour: An exploration of ethical consumers. Journal of Marketing Management, 16, 879–894.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simmons, C. J., & Becker-Olsen, K. L. (2006). Achieving marketing objectives through social sponsorships. Journal of Marketing, 70(October), 154–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simonin, B. L., & Ruth, J. A. (1998). Is a company known by the company it keeps? Assessing the spill-over effects of brand alliances on consumer brand attitudes. Journal of Marketing Research, 35, 30–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sirieix, L., Meunier, A., & Schaer, B. (2004). Les consommateurs et le commerce équitable : skepticisme, confiance accordée et disposition à s’engager. Economies et Sociétés-Série “Systèmes Agroalimentaires”, 26(3), 571–590.

    Google Scholar 

  • Speed, R., & Thompson, P. (2000). Determinants of sports sponsorship response. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 28(2), 226–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steenkamp, J.-B. E. M., & Baumgartner, H. (1992). The role of optimum stimulation level in exploratory consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Research, 19, 434–448.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swaen, V., & Chumpitaz, R. C. (2008). L’impact de la responsabilité sociétale de l’entreprise sur la confiance des consommateurs. Recherche et Applications en Marketing, 23(4), 7–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tagbata, D., & Sirieix, L. (2004). Quelle valorisation par le consommateur de la dimension éthique des produits ? Le cas du commerce équitable. Actes du colloque international AIEA2: Développement Durable et Globalisation dans l’Agroalimentaire. Université Laval, Québec, pp. 1120–1148.

  • Tagbata, D., & Sirieix, L. (2008). Apports et limites de la double labellisation bio et équitable pour les consommateurs. Economies et sociétés, 42(11–12), 2127–2148.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tenenhaus, M., Esposito Vinzi, V., Chatelin, Y. M., & Lauro, C. (2005). PLS path modeling. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, 48, 159–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Beurden, P., & Gössling, T. (2008). The worth of values—A literature review on the relation between corporate social and financial performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 82(2), 407–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walchli, S. B. (2007). The effects of between-partner congruity on consumer evaluation of co-branded products. Psychology and Marketing, 24(11), 947–973.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Washburn, J. H., & Plank, R. E. (2002). Measuring brand equity: An evaluation of a consumer-based brand equity scale. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 10(1), 46–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Washburn, J. H., Till, B. D., & Priluck, R. (2004). Brand alliance and customer-based brand-equity effects. Psychology & Marketing, 21, 487–508.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wold, H. (1982). Soft modeling: The basic design and some extensions. In K. G. Jöreskog & H. Wold (Eds.), Systems under indirect observation: Causality, structure, prediction. Amsterdam: North Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zaichowsky, J. L. (1985). Measuring the involvement construct. Journal of Consumer Research, 12, 341–352.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Toulouse Business School, University of Toulouse III, IUT Tarbes – LGCO – EA 2043, Toulouse, France

    Sylvain Sénéchal

  2. University of Toulouse III, IUT Tarbes – LGCO – EA 2043, Toulouse, France

    Laurent Georges

  3. University of Toulouse III, IUT Tarbes – LERASS – EA 827, Toulouse, France

    Jean Louis Pernin

Authors
  1. Sylvain Sénéchal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Laurent Georges
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jean Louis Pernin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Laurent Georges.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sénéchal, S., Georges, L. & Pernin, J.L. Alliances Between Corporate and Fair Trade Brands: Examining the Antecedents of Overall Evaluation of the Co-branded Product. J Bus Ethics 124, 365–381 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1875-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1875-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation