Last week I was meeting with a friend and talking cause marketing, of course. He explained he had recently seen a cause marketing promotion between the Arthritis Foundation and Massage Envy and thought it was a great partnership. Massage Envy customers, Arthritis sufferers and their supporters would benefit from the therapeutic touch of massage and the Arthritis Foundation would reap a donation. Perfect.
I couldn't have disagreed more, for two reasons.
Another reason I didn't care for this promotion was its connection with arthritis. I worked for the Arthritis Foundation in the mid-'90s and know firsthand how difficult it is to market arthritis as a cause. It doesn't elicit the same type of commitment or response from people that other causes do. I think I know why. Arthritis isn't a killer -- unlike AIDS, cancer, heart disease and hunger in Africa. Arthritis is about pain. Sufferers have an appointment with the rheumatologist, not the grim reaper. In short, if I was choosing a cause for my business I could think of better emotional hot buttons to galvanize shoppers. If the promotion doesn't inspire AF supporters to visit Massage Envy, and existing clients are unmoved emotionally by AF's message to help people with the disease, why bother with a partnership?
I'm not trying to bash the Arthritis Foundation or Massage Envy. Arthritis is a painful, terrible disease and Massage Envy is being a corporate citizen by supporting it. But I am using the promotion to point out why companies need to be clear on their cause marketing objectives and why they need a process for choosing the best cause partner.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5nu5GRDzog