In this time of economic uncertainty, Bayer and its One A Day vitamins for men are enhancing the brand’s MLB sponsorship. This year will be the second year of the Strikeout Prostate Cancer Challenge in which Bayer donates $10 for every MLB strikeout. It has added additional MLB spokespeople; increased advertising, player appearances and media tours; and included blue wristbands and blue ribbon decals worn by MLB coaches and players on Father’s Day. All this on top of a program that in 2008 generated $328,840 for the Prostate Cancer Foundation, in support of prostate cancer research.
Recently, I shared my thoughts regarding an article in the Stanford Social Innovation Review on the subject of cause marketing. I want to be clear about my position on cause marketing. It is great for society! For all those who suffer from prostate cancer, or any other disease, we need more Bayer’s in this world. The funds generated through cause marketing programs like the Strikeout Prostate Cancer Challenge are vital in society’s ongoing fight against all forms of suffering.
So today I not only salute Bayer for its work, I challenge every other corporation around the globe, if they are not already doing so, to join in the fight against human suffering through cause marketing! more
I listen to so much discourse about the evolution of sponsorship and how it has—and has not—come into its own. From a [official] status symbol to an agent of [financial, societal, experiential] change, the medium continues to mature to reflect the thinking of a new day.
Yet, in years, sponsorship is a relatively immature medium, so what do we want sponsorship to be when it grows up? Should we worry that it will lose its youthful energy? Or do we look forward to the day when it puts away childish things, such as those elements that allow sponsor and property a moment of shared swagger but drive no value for the audience?
I am working with groups and companies in a number of sponsorship sectors right now that are actively, vocally trying to figure out what's next. more
Despite the fact—or perhaps because—it’s one of the chickier chick flicks out there, Love Story is among my movie favorites. So it did not surprise me when the most famous line (“love means never having to say you’re sorry”) in its Oscar-nominated script flashed across my mind’s ear the other day. It did surprise me when it came to me in a sponsorship context.
I was in Kansas City, where I had the pleasure of participating in the Missouri Assn. of Convention & Visitor Bureaus (MACVB) Annual Meeting. One of my fellow presenters was Doug Price from DMAI (Destination Marketing Assn. Int’l), who spoke about trends and the future of destination marketing. Toward the end of his talk, Doug mentioned the advocacy efforts undertaken by the Seattle CVB and other cities (Indianapolis, etc.) to make the case for tourism—not just to prospective tourists, but specifically to local residents. I checked it out, and I found Seattle’s “Why Tourism Matters” campaign (www.whytourismmatters.org) to be an aspirational model for the case organizations need to make in support of—rather than in defense of—their marketing efforts. more
“Consumption philanthropy is not about change, but about business as usual,” writes Angela M. Eikenberry in her article “The Hidden Costs of Cause Marketing” published in the current edition of the Stanford Social Innovative Review. (You can find the full article here.)
The article suggests that the reality of cause marketing—which Eikenberry refers to as “consumption philanthropy”—whereby a certain percentage of a particular product purchase goes to a cause or charity, does not affect social change. In fact, it goes so far as to say that cause marketing does more harm than good.
While I most certainly agree that every person in this society should and could do more to truly affect social change, and that every corporation should and could do more to be truly socially responsible, I think it would be a huge mistake to completely dismiss cause marketing. more
In my work here at IEG, I get directly involved with many nonprofits, such as associations and museums, as they launch new sponsorship programs.
One interesting challenge that has developed in several instances is how a nonprofit should go about working with a board member who will be involved in approving the launch of a new program, but whose company also is a good prospect for sponsorship. Sound familiar?
Typically, the information you would provide board members involved in the approval process of a new sponsorship program is much different than the information you would present to prospects for buying the sponsorship. It’s not that there should be any secrets kept from potential sponsors—as transparent selling is needed now more than ever—but they are certainly two different conversations.
Those of you who subscribe to IEG Sponsorship Report have seen the March 30 issue’s In Depth article, which takes a look at the Performance Research consumer study I mentioned in a blog post last week. more
Industry veteran Willie Cone shared some great sales tips for nonprofits in his presentation Cause Marketing Partnerships: The Real Deal. more
Something that many Americans like to do first thing in the morning is get a jolt of the latest headlines. Therefore, it was a sense of irony the first session of Tuesday’s IEG Sponsorship Conference dealt with media sponsorships. more
What does the Ronco Veg-O-Matic have to do with sponsorship? more
Given that it was a six hour session, it should come as no surprise there was a lot of ground covered in the session that IEG’s Rebecca Joslin and Diane Knoepke led for a group anxious to get their feet wet on what is going in the sponsorship world.
It was interesting way to start the IEG 2009 Conference. Rebecca Joslin and Diane Knoepke took participants a litany of bullet points of what companies are looking for in this brutal economic era. more