Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

CSR Actions, Brand Value, and Willingness to Pay a Premium Price for Luxury Brands: Does Long-Term Orientation Matter?

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

Abstract

Sustainable luxury is a strategic issue for managers and for society, yet it remains poorly understood. This research seeks to clarify how corporate social responsibility (CSR) actions directly and indirectly (through brand value dimensions) affect consumers’ willingness to pay a premium price (WTPP) for luxury brand products, as well as how a long-term orientation (LTO) might moderate these relationships. A scenario study presents fictional CSR actions of two brands, representing different luxury products, to 1,049 respondents from two countries (France and Tunisia). The results of a structural equation modeling approach show that the luxury brands’ CSR actions negatively affect customer WTPP overall and for each brand. The luxury brands’ functional and symbolic value dimensions positively mediate the effects of CSR actions on WTPP, whereas social value does not. The effects of CSR actions and brand symbolic value on WTTP do not differ between countries. The effect of functional value on WTPP differs across countries, such that it is stronger for high-LTO than low-LTO cultures. Inversely, the effect of social on customer WTPP is stronger for low-LTO than high-LTO cultures. These findings have theoretical and practical implications for luxury brand managers.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Business for Social Responsibility: https://www.bsr.org/en/.

  2. https://enb.iisd.org/consume/oslo004.html.

  3. https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/es/Documents/bienes-comsumo-distribucion-hosteleria/Deloitte-ES-consumer-industry-global-powers-luxury-goods-2019.pdf.

  4. https://thesustainableangle.org/future-fabrics/.

  5. https://www.hofstede-insights.com/country-comparison/.

  6. https://tn.boell.org/fr/2017/04/04/sondage-dopinion-sur-la-situation-environnementale-en-tunisie.

  7. https://www.forbes.com/sites/pamdanziger/2019/05/29/3-ways-millennials-and-gen-z-consumers-are-radically-transforming-the-luxury-market/#2f2e1101479f.

  8. https://fr.slideshare.net/MDWebTn/que-reprsente-le-luxe-pour-les-tunisiens-6874278?fbclid=IwAR0gz86GjkHaedPnQYHfbz_azvmG_Vx_NwF06kKnQf46_6FpQFfvtCRp4mg.

  9. The correlation between LTO and WTPP (r = .18) served as the reference for the marker variable.

  10. Source: https://quantpsy.org/sobel/sobel.htm.

References

  • Achabou, M. A., & Dekhili, S. (2013). Luxury and sustainable development: Is there a match? Journal of Business Research, 66(10), 1896–1903.

    Google Scholar 

  • Afzal, F., Yunfei, S., Sajid, M., & Afzal, F. (2019). Market sustainability: A globalization and consumer culture perspective in the Chinese retail market. Sustainability, 11(3), 575.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allen, M. W. (2000). The attribute-mediation and product meaning approaches to the influences of human values on consumer choices. Advances in Psychology Research, 1, 31–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amatulli, C., De Angelis, M., Costabile, M., & Guido, G. (2017). Sustainable luxury brands: Evidence from research and implications for managers. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amatulli, C., De Angelis, M., Korschun, D., & Romani, S. (2018). Consumers' perceptions of luxury brands’ CSR initiatives: An investigation of the role of status and conspicuous consumption. Journal of Cleaner Production, 194, 277–287.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Arli, D., & Tjiptono, F. (2014). The end of religion? Examining the role of religiousness, materialism, and long-term orientation on consumer ethics in Indonesia. Journal of Business Ethics, 123(3), 385–400.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aybaly, R., Guerquin-Kern, L., Manière, I. C., Madacova, D., & van Holt, J. (2017). Sustainability practices in the luxury industry: How can one be sustainable in an over-consumptive environment?: Sustainability in the automotive world: The case of Tesla. Procedia Computer Science, 122, 541–547.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baalbaki, S., & Guzman, F. (2016). A consumer-perceived consumer-based brand equity scale. Journal of Brand Management, 23(3), 229–251.

    Google Scholar 

  • Batat, W. (2019). The New Luxury Experience. Paris: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bearden, W. O., Money, R. B., & Nevin, J. L. (2006). Multidimensional versus unidimensional measures in assessing national culture values: The Hofstede VSM 94 example. Journal of Business Research, 59(2), 195–203.

    Google Scholar 

  • Belk, R. W. (1988). Possessions and the extended self. Journal of Consumer Research, 15(2), 139–168.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhattacharya, C. B., & Sen, S. (2004). Doing better at doing good: When, why, and how consumers respond to corporate social initiatives. California Management Review, 47(1), 9–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bian, Q., & Forsythe, S. (2012). Purchase intention for luxury brands: A cross cultural comparison. Journal of Business Research, 65(10), 1443–1451.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, H. L., Barry, C. L., Joe, J. N., & Finney, S. J. (2008). Configural, metric and scalar invariance of the modified achievement goal questionnaire across African American and White university students. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 68(6), 988–1007.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carrigan, M., & Attalla, A. (2001). The myth of the ethical consumer—do ethics matter in purchase behaviour? Journal of Consumer Marketing, 18(7), 560–578.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, A. B. (1979). A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate performance. Academy of Management Review, 4(4), 497–505.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, A. B. (1991). The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: Toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders. Business Horizons, 34(4), 39–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cervellon, M. C. (2013). Conspicuous conservation: Using semiotics to understand sustainable luxury. International Journal of Market Research, 55(5), 695–717.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cha, J., Chun, J. N., & Youn, Y. C. (2009). Consumer willingness to pay price premium for certified wood products in South Korea. Journal of Korean Forest Society, 98(2), 203–211.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chandler, D. (2017). Strategic corporate social responsibility sustainable value creation (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheung, G. W., & Lau, R. S. (2008). Testing mediation and suppression effects of latent variables: Bootstrapping with structural equation models. Organizational Research Methods, 11(2), 296–325.

    Google Scholar 

  • Danziger, P. N. (2019). 3 ways millennials and gen z consumers are radically transforming the luxury market. Forbes. Retrieved May 29, 2019, from https://www.forbes.com/sites/pamdanziger/2019/05/29/3-ways-millennials-and-gen-z-consumers-are-radically-transforming-the-luxury-market/#2f2e1101479f.

  • D’Arpizio C., Levato F., Prete F., Del Fabbro, E., & De Montgolfier, J. (2017). Bain & Company, Annually worldwide luxury market report. Retrieved December 29, 2019, from https://www.bain.com/contentassets/913fa48282034511b178b0f4b7cc3d9a/bain_report_global_luxury_report_2017.pdf?fbclid=IwAR0cmKc2UNkroBpupNUB9_sjW1qbLsGSiYJybAp6v-3UBtTDysfXluI6MVo.

  • D’Arpizio. C., Levato F. , Prete F., Del Fabbro E., & De Montgolfier J. (2018). Bain & Company, The future of luxury: a look into tomorrow to understand today. Retrieved December 29, 2019, from https://www.bain.com/contentassets/8df501b9f8d6442eba00040246c6b4f9/bain_digest__luxury_goods_worldwide_market_study_fall_winter_2018.pdf?fbclid=IwAR1Epf8Hiz2cLUWX9mbW6qUFlpkuBKwbNYegb4DKjzSJrAA4Qu8Jo78x8rw.

  • Datalab. (2017). Quelle prise en compte de l’environnement au sein des foyers? Analyse sociologique des pratiques domestiques des Français. https://www.statistiques.developpement-durable.gouv.fr/fileadmin/documents/Produits_editoriaux/Publications/Datalab_essentiel/2017/datalab-essentiel-80-quelle-prise-en-compte-de-l_environnement-au-sein-des_foyers-janvier2017.pdf

  • Davies, I. A., Lee, Z., & Ahonkhai, I. (2012). Do consumers care about ethical-luxury? Journal of Business Ethics, 106(1), 37–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Barnier, V., Falcy, S., & Valette-Florence, P. (2012). Do consumers perceive three levels of luxury? A comparison of accessible, intermediate and inaccessible luxury brands. Journal of Brand Management, 19(7), 623–636.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deloitte. (2014). Luxury brands turn to Africa as the next growth frontier. Deloitte Report. Retrieved March 24, 2019, from https://www2.deloitte.com/za/en/pages/consumer-business/articles/luxury-brands-powers-of-luxury.html.

  • Deloitte. (2015). Global power of luxury goods. Deloitte Report. Retrieved August 05, 2019, from https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/global/Documents/Consumer-Business/gx-cb-global-power-of-luxury-web.pdf.

  • Dharmadhikari, S. (2012). Eco-friendly packaging in supply chain. IUP Journal of Supply Chain Management, 9(2), 7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diallo, M. F., & Lambey-Checchin, C. (2017). Consumers’ perceptions of retail business ethics and loyalty to the retailer: The moderating role of social discount practices. Journal of Business Ethics, 141(3), 435–449.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dou, J., Su, E., & Wang, S. (2019). When does family ownership promote proactive environmental strategy? The role of the firm’s long-term orientation. Journal of Business Ethics, 158(1), 81–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Douglas, S. P., & Craig, C. S. (2007). Collaborative and iterative translation: an alternative approach to back translation. Journal of International Marketing, 15(1), 30–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doyle, P. (1990). Building successful brands: the strategic options. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 7(2), 5–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dubois, B., Czellar, S., & Laurent, G. (2005). Consumer segments based on attitudes toward luxury: Empirical evidence from twenty countries. Marketing Letters, 16, 115–128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisingerich, A. B., & Rubera, G. (2010). Drivers of brand commitment: A cross-national investigation. Journal of International Marketing, 18(2), 64–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fennell, G. (1978). Consumers’ Perceptions of the product—use situation: A conceptual framework for identifying consumer wants and formulating positioning options. Journal of Marketing, 42(2), 38–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferrell, O. C., Harrison, D. E., Ferrell, L., & Hair, J. F. (2019). Business ethics, corporate social responsibility, and brand attitudes: An exploratory study. Journal of Business Research, 95, 491–501.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, J. (2004). Social responsibility and ethics: clarifying the concepts. Journal of Business Ethics, 52(4), 381–390.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Foscht, T., Lin, Y., & Eisingerich, A. B. (2018). Blinds up or down? The influence of transparency, future orientation, and CSR on sustainable and responsible behavior. European Journal of Marketing, 52(3/4), 476–498.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. E., & Dmytriyev, S. (2017). Corporate social responsibility and stakeholder theory: Learning from each other. Symphonya. Emerging Issues in Management, 1, 7–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garfein, R. T. (1989). Cross-cultural perspectives on the dynamics of prestige. Journal of Services Marketing, 3(3), 17–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerbing, D. W., & Anderson, J. C. (1988). An updated paradigm for scale development incorporating unidimensionality and its assessment. Journal of Marketing Research, 25(2), 186–192.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gershoff, A. D., & Frels, J. K. (2015). What makes it green? The role of centrality of green attributes in evaluations of the greenness of products. Journal of Marketing, 79(1), 97–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodstein, J., Butterfield, K. D., Pfarrer, M. D., & Wicks, A. C. (2014). Guest editors’ introduction. Individual and organizational reintegration after ethical or legal transgressions: Challenges and opportunities. Business Ethics Quarterly, 24(3), 315–342.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grimmer, M., & Bingham, T. (2013). Company environmental performance and consumer purchase intentions. Journal of Business Research, 66(10), 1945–1953.

    Google Scholar 

  • Griskevicius, V., Tybur, J. M., & Van den Bergh, B. (2010). Going green to be seen: Status, reputation, and conspicuous conservation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98(3), 392.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gundlach, G. T., & Murphy, P. E. (1993). Ethical and legal foundations of relational marketing exchanges. Journal of Marketing, 57(4), 35–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hahn, T., Pinkse, J., Preuss, L., & Figge, F. (2015). Tensions in corporate sustainability: Towards an integrative framework. Journal of Business Ethics, 127(2), 297–316.

    Google Scholar 

  • Han, J., Seo, Y., & Ko, E. (2017). Staging luxury experiences for understanding sustainable fashion consumption: A balance theory application. Journal of Business Research, 74, 162–167.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartikainen, H., Roininen, T., Katajajuuri, J. M., & Pulkkinen, H. (2014). Finnish consumer perceptions of carbon footprints and carbon labelling of food products. Journal of Cleaner Production, 73, 285–293.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heinberg, M., Ozkaya, H. E., & Taube, M. (2018). Do corporate image and reputation drive brand equity in India and China? Similarities and differences. Journal of Business Research, 86, 259–268.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hennigs, N., Wiedmann, K. P., Klarmann, C., Strehlau, S., Godey, B., Pederzoli, D., ... Taro, K. (2012). What is the value of luxury? A cross‐cultural consumer perspective. Psychology & Marketing, 29(12), 1018–1034.

  • Ho, H. C., Awan, M. A., & Khan, H. U. (2016). Luxury brands and corporate social responsibility: A perspective on consumers’ preferences. Journal of International Management Studies, 16(1), 77–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations (2nd ed.). London: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofstede, G. (2019). Geert Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions: Country Profile. Retrieved July 5, 2019, from https://geert-hofstede.com/countries.html.

  • Hofstede, G., & Minkov, M. (2010). Long-versus short-term orientation: New perspectives. Asia Pacific Business Review, 16(4), 493–504.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hung, K. P., Huiling Chen, A., Peng, N., Hackley, C., Amy Tiwsakul, R., & Chou, C. L. (2011). Antecedents of luxury brand purchase intention. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 20(6), 457–467.

    Google Scholar 

  • Janssen, C., Vanhamme, J., & Leblanc, S. (2017). Should luxury brands say it out loud? Brand conspicuousness and consumer perceptions of responsible luxury. Journal of Business Research, 77, 167–174.

    Google Scholar 

  • Janssen, C., Vanhamme, J., Lindgreen, A., & Lefebvre, C. (2013). The catch-22 of responsible luxury: Effects of luxury product characteristics on consumers’ perception of fit with corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 119, 45–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jeong, K. H., Jeong, S. W., Lee, W. L., & Bae, S. H. (2018). Permanency of CSR activities and firm value. Journal of Business Ethics, 152(1), 207–223.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joyner, B. E., & Payne, D. (2002). Evolution and implementation: A study of values, business ethics and corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 41(4), 297–311.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kamakura, W. A., & Russell, G. J. (1993). Measuring brand value with scanner data. International journal of Research in Marketing, 10(1), 9–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kapferer, J. N. (1997). Managing luxury brands. Journal of Brand Management, 4(4), 251–259.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kapferer, J.-N. (2010). All that glitters is not green: The challenge of sustainable luxury. The European Business Review November–December, 40–45.

  • Kapferer, J.-N. (2015). Kapferer on luxury: How can luxury brands grow yet remain rare?. London: Kogan Page.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kapferer, J. N., & Bastien, V. (2012). The luxury strategy: Break the rules of marketing to build luxury brands. London: Kogan page publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kapferer, J. N., & Laurent, G. (2016). Where do consumers think luxury begins? A study of perceived minimum price for 21 luxury goods in 7 countries. Journal of Business Research, 69(1), 332–340.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kapferer, J.-N., & Michaut, A. (2015). Luxury and sustainability: a common future? The match depends on how consumers define luxury. Journal of Luxury Research, 1(1), 3–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kees, J., Burton, S., & Tangari, A. H. (2010). The impact of regulatory focus, temporal orientation, and fit on consumer responses to health-related advertising. Journal of Advertising, 39(1), 19–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ki, C., & Kim, Y. K. (2016). Sustainable luxury fashion consumption and the moderating role of guilt. Fashion, Industry and Education, 14(1), 18–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, Y., & Kim, S. Y. (2010). The influence of cultural values on perceptions of corporate social responsibility: Application of Hofstede’s dimensions to Korean public relations practitioners. Journal of Business Ethics, 91(4), 485–500.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, H., & Youn, S. (2019). Consumers as time travellers: The moderating effects of risk perception and construal level on consumers’ responses to temporal framing. International Journal of Advertising, 38(8), 1070–1097.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ko, E., Costello, J. P., & Taylor, C. R. (2019). What is a luxury brand? A new definition and review of the literature. Journal of Business Research, 99, 405–413.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolk, A., Dolen, W. V., & Ma, L. (2015). Consumer perceptions of CSR: (how) is China different? International Marketing Review, 32(5), 492–517.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kucharska, W., & Kowalczyk, R. (2019). How to achieve sustainability?—Employee's point of view on company's culture and CSR practice. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 26(2), 453–467.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kushwah, S., Dhir, A., & Sagar, M. (2019). Ethical consumption intentions and choice behavior towards organic food. Moderation role of buying and environmental concerns. Journal of Cleaner Production, 236, 117519.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lafferty, B. A., & Goldsmith, R. E. (2005). Cause–brand alliances: Does the cause help the brand or does the brand help the cause? Journal of Business Research, 58(4), 423–429.

    Google Scholar 

  • Landrum, E. N. (2017). Stages of corporate sustainability: Integrating the strong sustainability worldview. Organization and Environment, 31(4), 1–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, Y. K. (2017). A comparative study of green purchase intention between Korean and Chinese consumers: The moderating role of collectivism. Sustainability, 9(10), 1930.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, P. V. (1985). Defining business ethics: Like nailing Jello to a wall. Journal of Business Ethics, 4(5), 377–383.

    Google Scholar 

  • Li, G., Li, G., & Kambele, Z. (2012). Luxury fashion brand consumers in China: Perceived value, fashion lifestyle, and willingness to pay. Journal of Business Research, 65(10), 1516–1522.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • MacKinnon, D., Lockwood, C. M., & Williams, J. S. (2004). Confidence limits for the indirect effect: Distribution of the product and resampling methods. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 39(1), 99–128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malhotra, N. K., Kim, S. S., & Patil, A. (2006). Common method variance in is research: A comparison of alternative approaches and a reanalysis of past research. Management Science, 52(12), 1865–1883.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maman Larraufie, A. F., & Kourdoughli, A. (2014). The e-semiotics of luxury. Journal of Global Fashion Marketing, 5(3), 197–208.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manaktola, K., & Jauhari, V. (2007). Exploring consumer attitude and behaviour towards green practices in the lodging industry in India. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 19(5), 364–377.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCracken, G. (1986). Culture and consumption: A theoretical account of the structure and movement of the cultural meaning of consumer goods. Journal of Consumer Research, 13(1), 71–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • McFarland, K. (2017). The global luxury apparel industry: The market. Market analysis—2017–2023 trends—Corporate strategies. Xerfi.

  • MDWeb. (2011). Que représente le luxe pour les tunisiens, Rapport d’une étude du cabinet MDWeb. Retrieved March, 24, 2019, from https://fr.slideshare.net/MDWebTn/que-reprsente-le-luxe-pour-les-tunisiens-6874278?fbclid=IwAR0gz86GjkHaedPnQYHfbz_azvmG_Vx_NwF06kKnQf46_6FpQFfvtCRp4mg.

  • Melo, T., & Galan, J. I. (2011). Effects of corporate social responsibility on brand value. Journal of Brand Management, 18(6), 423–437.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, K. W., & Mills, M. K. (2012). Contributing clarity by examining brand luxury in the fashion market. Journal of Business Research, 65(10), 1471–1479.

    Google Scholar 

  • Minton, E. A., Spielmann, N., Kahle, L. R., & Kim, C. H. (2018). The subjective norms of sustainable consumption: A cross-cultural exploration. Journal of Business Research, 82, 400–408.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miska, C., Szőcs, I., & Schiffinger, M. (2018). Culture’s effects on corporate sustainability practices: A multi-domain and multi-level view. Journal of World Business, 53(2), 263–279.

    Google Scholar 

  • Monga, A. B., & John, D. R. (2007). Cultural differences in brand extension evaluation: The influence of analytic versus holistic thinking. Journal of Consumer Research, 33, 529–536.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moon, B. J., Lee, L. W., & Oh, C. H. (2015). The impact of CSR on consumer-corporate connection and brand loyalty: A cross-cultural investigation. International Marketing Review, 32(5), 518–539.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moraes, C., Carrigan, M., Bosangit, C., Ferreira, C., & McGrath, M. (2017). Understanding ethical luxury consumption through practice theories: A study of fine jewellery purchases. Journal of Business Ethics, 145, 525–543.

    Google Scholar 

  • Netemeyer, R. G., Krishnan, B., Pullig, C., Wang, G., Yagci, M., Dean, D., et al. (2004). Developing and validating measures of facets of customer-based brand equity. Journal of Business Research, 57(2), 209–224.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nevins, J. L., Bearden, W. O., & Money, B. (2007). Ethical values and long-term orientation. Journal of Business Ethics, 71(3), 261–274.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Cass, A., & Frost, H. (2002). Status brands: examining the effects of non-product-related brand associations on status and conspicuous consumption. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 11(2), 67–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olšanová, K., Cook, G., & Zlatić, M. (2018). Influence of luxury companies’ corporate social responsibility activities on consumer purchase intention: Development of a theoretical framework. Central European Business Review, 7(3), 1–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osagie, E.-R., Wesselink, R., Runhaar, P., & Mulder, M. (2018). Unraveling the competence development of corporate social responsibility leaders: The importance of peer learning, learning goal orientation, and learning climate. Journal of Business Ethics, 151(4), 891.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parboteeah, K. P., Addae, H. M., & Cullen, J. B. (2012). Propensity to support sustainability initiatives: A cross-national model. Journal of Business Ethics, 105(3), 403–413.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parguel, B., Benoît-Moreau, F., & Larceneux, F. (2011). How sustainability ratings might deter ‘greenwashing’: A closer look at ethical corporate communication. Journal of Business Ethics, 102(1), 15–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parguel, B., Delécolle, T., & Valette-Florence, P. (2016). How price display influences consumer luxury perceptions. Journal of Business Research, 69(1), 341–348.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parker, K. A. (1996). Pragmatism and environmental thought. In A. Light & E. Katz (Eds.), Environmental pragmatism (pp. 21–37). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petersen, J. A., Kushwaha, T., & Kumar, V. (2015). Marketing communication strategies and consumer financial decision making the role of national culture. Journal of Marketing, 79(1), 44–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Podoshen, J. S., Li, L., & Zhang, J. (2011). Materialism and conspicuous consumption in China: A cross-cultural examination. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 35(1), 17–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2006). Strategy & Society: The link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility. Harvard Business Review, 84, 78–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rim, H., Yang, S. U., & Lee, J. (2016). Strategic partnerships with nonprofits in corporate social responsibility (CSR): The mediating role of perceived altruism and organizational identification. Journal of Business Research, 69(9), 3213–3219.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roux, E., Tafani, E., & Vigneron, F. (2017). Values associated with luxury brand consumption and the role of gender. Journal of Business Research, 71, 102–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rucker, D. D., Dubois, D., & Galinsky, A. D. (2011). Generous paupers and stingy princes: Power drives consumer spending on self vs. others. Journal of Consumer Research, 37, 1015–1029.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rutter, C., Armstrong, K., & Cano, M. B. (2017). The epiphanic sustainable fast fashion epoch. In Sustainability in fashion: A cradle to upcycle approach (pp. 11–30). Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.

  • Schwartz, M., & Carroll, A. (2008). Integrating and unifying competing and complementary frameworks. Business & Society, 47, 148–186.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shang, J., Basil, D. Z., & Wymer, W. (2010). Using social marketing to enhance hotel reuse programs. Journal of Business Research, 63(2), 166–172.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shukla, P., Singh, J., & Banerjee, M. (2015). They are not all same: variations in Asian consumers’ value perceptions of luxury brands. Marketing Letters, 26, 265–278.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simpson, J. K. B., & Radford, K. S. (2014). Situational variables and sustainability in multi-attribute decision-making. European Journal of Marketing, 48(5/6), 1046–1069.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singh, J., Sanchez, G. S., & Bosque, I. R. (2008). Understanding corporate social responsibility and product perceptions in consumer markets: A cross-cultural evaluation. Journal of Business Ethics, 80(3), 597–611.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, B. J., & Colgate, M. (2007). Customer value creation: A practical framework. The Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 15(1), 7–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Souiden, N., M’Saad, B., & Pons, F. (2011). A Cross-cultural analysis of consumers’ conspicuous consumption of branded fashion accessories. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 23(5), 329–343.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steenkamp, E. M., & Baumgartner, H. (1998). Assessing measurement invariance in cross-national consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 25(1), 78–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tangari, A. H., & Smith, R. J. (2012). How the temporal framing of energy savings influences consumer product evaluations and choice. Psychology & Marketing, 29(4), 198–208.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tata, J., & Prasad, S. (2015). National cultural values, sustainability beliefs, and organizational initiatives. Cross Cultural Management, 22(2), 278–296.

    Google Scholar 

  • Truong, Y., Simmons, G., McColl, R., & Kitchen, P. J. (2008). Status and conspicuousness—are they related? Strategic marketing implications for luxury brands. Journal of strategic marketing, 16(3), 189–203.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turker, D. (2009). Measuring corporate social responsibility: A scale development study. Journal of Business Ethics, 85(4), 411–427.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tynan, C., McKechnie, S., & Chhuon, C. (2010). Co-creating value for luxury brands. Journal of Business Research, 63(11), 1156–1163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Valentine, S., & Fleischman, G. (2008). Professional ethical standards, corporate social responsibility, and the perceived role of ethics and social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 82(3), 657–666.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vickers, J. S., & Renand, F. (2003). The marketing of luxury goods: An exploratory study—three conceptual dimension. The Marketing Review, 3(4), 459–478.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vigneron, F., & Johnson, L. W. (1999). A review and a conceptual framework of prestige-seeking consumer behavior. Academy of Marketing Science Review, 1(1), 1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vigneron, F., & Johnson, L. W. (2004). Measuring perceptions of brand luxury. Journal of Brand Management, 11(6), 484–506.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vitell, S. J., Nwachukwu, S. L., & Barnes, J. H. (1993). The effects of culture on ethical decision-making: An application of Hofstede's typology. Journal of Business, 12, 753–760.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vittersø, G., & Tangeland, T. (2015). The role of consumers in transitions towards sustainable food consumption. The case of organic food in Norway. Journal of Cleaner Production, 92, 91–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vlachos, P. A., Tsamakos, A., Vrechopoulos, A. P., & Avramidis, P. K. (2008). Corporate social responsibility: Attributions, loyalty, and the mediating role of trust. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 37(2), 170–180.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walsh, G., Shiu, E., & Hassan, L. M. (2014). Cross-national advertising and behavioral intentions: A multilevel analysis. Journal of International Marketing, 22(1), 77–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, D., Chen, P.-H., Yu, T. H.-K., & Hsiao, C.-Y. (2015). The effects of corporate social responsibility on brand equity and firm performance. Journal of Business Research, 68(11), 2232–2236.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weller, A. (2017). Exploring practitioners’ meaning of “ethics”, “compliance”, and “corporate social responsibility” practices: A communities of practice perspective. Business & Society, 4, 1–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wentz, L. (1989). WPP considers brand valuation. Advertising Age, 16, 24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiedmann, K.-P., Hennigs, N., & Siebels, N. (2009). Value-based segmentation of luxury consumption behavior. Psychology & Marketing, 26(7), 625–652.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winston, A. (2016, February 8). Luxury brands can no longer ignore sustainability. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved January 1, 2019, from https://hbr.org/2016/02/luxury-brands-can-no-longer-ignore-sustainability.

  • Yalcinkaya, G. (2008). A culture-based approach to understanding the adoption and diffusion of new products across countries. International Marketing Review, 25(2), 202–214.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yeoman, I., & McMahon-Beattie, U. (2006). Luxury markets and premium pricing. Journal of Revenue and Pricing Management, 4(4), 319–328.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yoo, B., Donthu, N., & Lenartowicz, T. (2011). Measuring Hofstede's five dimensions of cultural values at the individual level: Development and validation of CVSCALE. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 23(3–4), 193–210.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Univ. Lille, ULR 4112 - LSMRC, 59000, Lille, France

    Mbaye Fall Diallo

  2. NIMEC, EA 969, IAE Caen, University of Caen, Caen, France

    Norchène Ben Dahmane Mouelhi

  3. IHEC Carthage, University of Carthage, Tunis, Tunisia

    Norchène Ben Dahmane Mouelhi

  4. ISCAE, LIGUE LR99ES24, Univ. Manouba, Campus Universitaire, 2010, Manouba, Tunisia

    Norchène Ben Dahmane Mouelhi

  5. International School of Business & Media, Pune, India

    Mahesh Gadekar

  6. Université de Reims Champagne-Ardenne, REGARDS EA 6292, 51097, Reims, France

    Marie Schill

Authors
  1. Mbaye Fall Diallo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Norchène Ben Dahmane Mouelhi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mahesh Gadekar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Marie Schill
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mbaye Fall Diallo.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendices

Appendix 1: Brands investigated

Brand 1 (for women): Acqua di Gioia (Giorgio Armani)

figure a

Brand 2 (for men): Rolex

figure b

Appendix 2: Measurement Items and Variable Sources

Constructs

Measurement items

Sources

1. CSR actions

CSR1. This company is really concerned about its employees’ health care

CSR2. This company offers efficiently manufactured products

CSR3. This company is helpful to others in need

CSR4. This company adheres to the law on traceability and product origin

Adapted from Amatulli et al. (2018)

2. Brand functional value

Func1. In my mind, the higher price of this luxury brand equals higher quality

Func2. Being higher in price makes this luxury brand more desirable

Func3. Higher priced luxury accessories from this luxury brand mean more to me

Adapted from Shukla et al. (2015)

3. Brand social value

Soc1. Owning this luxury brand indicates social status

Soc2. Owning this luxury brand is a symbol of achievement

Soc3. Owning this luxury brand is a symbol of wealth

Soc4. Owning this luxury brand is a symbol of prestige

Adapted from Shukla et al. (2015)

4. Brand symbolic value

Symb1. I am very attracted to this luxury brand

Symb2. I would like to own this luxury brand before others

Symb3. I am more likely to be attached to unique luxury brands like this one

Adapted from Shukla et al. (2015)

5. Willingness to pay a premium price

WTPP1. I am willing to pay a higher price for this luxury brand than for other brands

WTPP2. The price of this luxury brand would have to increase quite a bit before I would switch to another brand

WTPP3. I am willing to pay a lot more for this luxury brand than for other brands

Adapted from Netemeyer et al. (2004) and Amatulli et al. (2018)

6. Long-term orientation

LTO1. Individuals should engage in long-term Planning

LTO2. Individuals should give up today’s fun for success in the future

LTO3. Individuals should work hard for success in the future

Yoo et al. (2011)

Appendix 3: Means, Standard Deviations, Correlation Matrix, and Discriminant Validity

Construct

Means (SD)

Discriminant validity assessment (correlations)a

1

2

3

4

5

6

1. Brand CSR actions

5.24 (1.01)

AVE = 0.57

     

2. Brand functional value

3.75 (1.54)

0.34

AVE = 0.84

    

3. Brand social value

4.39 (1.75)

0.43

0.58

AVE = 0.92

   

4. Brand symbolic value

3.79 (1.83)

0.57

0.67

0.74

AVE = 0.91

  

5. WTPP

3.02 (1.78)

0.24

0.74

0.51

0.66

AVE = 0.80

 

6. Long-term orientation

5.40 (1.12)

0.55

0.28

0.44

0.47

0.18

. AVE = 0.72

  1. We assessed discriminant validity in each country sample; it was satisfactory
  2. aFor construct discriminant validity, the average variance extracted (AVE) values on the diagonal must be greater than the squared correlations between constructs, which was the case for all constructs

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Diallo, M.F., Ben Dahmane Mouelhi, N., Gadekar, M. et al. CSR Actions, Brand Value, and Willingness to Pay a Premium Price for Luxury Brands: Does Long-Term Orientation Matter?. J Bus Ethics 169, 241–260 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-020-04486-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-020-04486-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation