An exploration of conspicuous and non- conspicuous donation behavior based on consumer characteristics

This paper explores the conceptualization of what we term “conspicuous donation behavior” and “non-conspicuous donation behavior” and provides initial insight into their relationships with involvement, self-monitoring, age and gender. The results indicate that involvement, age and gender have significant relationships with “conspicuous donation behavior”, whereas only involvement exhibits a significant relationship with “non-conspicuous donation behavior”. The results provide a number of theoretical and practical implications and suggests new avenues for future research. Conspicuous Donation Behavior The motivational aspects of donation behavior has been well researched and there appears to be considerable consensus that individuals are motivated to donate by the anticipation of intrinsic benefits, such as increased self-esteem, public gratification, satisfaction and fulfilment through meetings one’s obligation (Dawson, 1988; Guy and Patton, 1989; Bruce, 1994; Hibbert and Horne, 1996). This view has been taken to the extreme by West (2004, p. 1) who argues that, in fact, modern compassion is all “about feeling good, not doing good, and illustrates not how altruistic we have become, but how selfish”. Thus, he coins the phrase “conspicuous compassion” (West, 2004, p. 1). Drawing an analogy with Veblen’s (1912) theory of conspicuous consumption, West (2004) advocates that there is little difference between conspicuous consumption and conspicuous compassion given that the former promotes the visible consumption of goods as a mechanism to enhance one’s social standing, while the latter promotes the visible display of compassion to achieve the same end. While some may argue the cynicism of West’s (2004) overall notion of modern day compassion, it may well have merit in the context of donation behavior given the proliferation of empathy ribbons (eg. pink ribbons for the Cancer Council), and the like (eg. red noses for SIDS), in recent years. Further, given that visibility is the key to conspicuousness and that empathy ribbons provide visibility in terms of donation-related behavior, it may be that conspicuous compassion is truly manifested through the purchase and, more particularly, the wearing of empathy ribbons or similar. Furthermore, it may be that particular individuals lend themselves to this type of conspicuous donation behavior as has been found to be the case with conspicuous (or status) consumption behavior (eg., Chung and Fischer, 2001; Wong and Ahuvia, 1998; Prendergast and Wong, 2003; Piacentini and Mailer, 2004). Previous research has examined the characteristics of individuals who practise specific types of donation behavior. For example, on a micro-level, Schlegelmilch et al (1997a) examined donation behavior relating to specific collection methods such as door-to-door collection, raffle tickets, shop counter collections or mail, to name just a few. As a result, they identify donor profiles over nine different types of appeals and concluded that different individuals do, indeed, respond to different charitable appeals. This being the case, we propose that, on a broader macro-level, different types of individuals with different motivations will practise ANZMAC 2005 Conference: Social, Not-for-Profit and Political Marketing 92 different types of donation behaviors (eg. conspicuous versus non-conspicuous donation behavior). As such, we define conspicuous donation behavior as “an individual’s show of support to charitable causes through the purchase of merchandise that is overtly displayed on the individual’s person or possessions (eg. the wearing of empathy ribbons, red noses etc.)”. On the other hand, non-conspicuous donation behavior is defined as “an individual’s show of support to charitable causes through means that are not explicitly obvious to others (mailing donations, purchasing raffle tickets etc.)”. The key to both of these definitions resides within the presence or absence of the conspicuousness regarding the behavior. For example, individuals purchasing an empathy ribbon, but not wearing it, would be engaging in non-conspicuous donation behavior. Hence, simply purchasing an empathy ribbon, or the like, does not imply conspicuous behavior.