第五章 結論
第三節 研究限制與未來研究方向
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
二、未來的研究方向
對於未來的研究建議是，若想要更全面地找到適配的公益行銷組合，建議使 用兌換法(兩因子法)，先固定配對「代言人」和「公益活動」，待這兩個屬性最 適配的水準組合出現後，如醫師配上公共衛生宣導、律師配上救援家暴婦孺，再 加入品牌個性與各組做配對，讓受測者對各組合進行偏好評分；如此就能先控制 住代言人和公益活動不適配的風險，而公益行銷組合適配與否，就變成只看品牌 個性在該組合裡適不適合了。如此一來，品牌個性在公益行銷組合裡的角色就能 突顯出來。
此外，若還是欲以整體輪廓法做分析，則建議在選定受測品牌所處的產業後，
代言人和公益活動的水準候選名單就必須與該產業搭配，以利選出最適配的組合。
例如：當我們選定以消費性電子產業作為受測對象之後，則代言人裡的專家類型 候選名單就刪除醫師、律師等不相關的專家，只放入大專院校資訊科系的教授、
專業的工程師等和資訊產品相關的專家，而名人類型則放入朱學恆、安心亞等常 代言資訊產品的名人，以便讓代言人和受測品牌與產業，儘可能地連結。
‧
Aaker, D.A. (1996). Measuring brand equity across products and markets.
California Management Review, spring 1996, 38(3), 102-120.
Aaker, J.L. (1997). Dimensions of Brand Personality, Journal of Marketing Research, 34, 347-356
Barone, M., Norman, A. and Miyazaki, A. (2007). Consumer response to retailer use of cause-related marketing: is more fit better? Journal of Retailing, 83(4), 437-45.
Batra, R., Lehmann, D.R. and Singh D. (1993). The Brand Personality Component of Brand Goodwill: Some Antecedents and Consequences, in Brand Equity and Advertising, David A. Aaker and Alexander Biel, eds.
Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Becker-Olsen, K.L., Cudmore, B.A. and Hill, R.P. (2006). The impact of perceived corporate social responsibility on consumer behaviour.
Journal of Business Research, 59(1), 46-53.
Bekkers, R. (2006). Traditional and Health-Related Philanthropy: The Role of Resources and Personality, Social Psychology Quarterly, 69(4), 349-366.
Brønn, P.S. and Vrioni, A.B. (2001). Corporate social responsibility and cause-related marketing: an overview, International Journal of Advertising, 20, 207–222.
Brown, T.J. and Dacin, P.A. (1997). The Company and the Product: Corporate Associations and Consumer Product Responses. Journal of Marketing, 61(January), 68-84.
‧
Burke, B. (1994). Position, personality, not price, should frame consumer messages. Brandweek, 35, 36.
Callcott, M.F. and Lee, W.N. (1995). Establishing the Spokes- Character in Academic Inquiry: Historical Overview and Frame work for Definition.
Advances in Consumer Research, 22(1), 144-151.
Costa, P.T. and McCrae, R.R. (1986). Personality stability and its implications for clinical psychology. Clinical Psychology Review, 6, 407-423.
Costa, P.T. and McCrae, R.R. (1992). Manual of the Revised NEO Personality Inventory. Psychological Assessment Resource.
Douma, M.U., Bilderbeek, J., Idenburg, P.J., and Looise, J.K. (2000).
Strategic alliances: Managing the dynamics of fit. Long Range Planning, 33(4), 579–598.
Du, S., Bhattacharya, C. and Sen, S. (2007). Reaping relational rewards from corporate social responsibility: the role of competitive
positioning. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 24(3), 224-241.
Ellen, P., Mohr, L. and Webb, D. (2000). Charitable programs and the retailer: do they mix? Journal of Retailing, 76(3), 393-406.
Ellen, P., Webb, D. and Mohr, L. (2006). Building corporate associations:
consumer attributions for corporate socially responsible programs.
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 34(2), 147-57.
Enrique, B., Rafael, C.P. and Joaquin, A.M. (2010). Dual nature of cause-brand fit. European Journal of Marketing, 46(3/4), 575-594.
Erdogan, B.Z. (1999). Celebrity endorsement: A literature review. Journal
‧
of Marketing Management, 15(4), 291-314.
Freiden, J.B. (1984). Advertising spokesperson effects: An examination of endorser type and gender on two audiences. Journal of Advertising Research, 24 (October/November), 33-41.
Grahn, J.L., Hannaford, W.J., and Laverty, K.J. (1988). Corporate philanthropy and marketing strategy: A review and directions for research. AMA Educators Proceedings, Series 53, M. R. Solomon et al., eds, Chicago: American Marketing Association, 67-69
Gupta, S. and Pirsch, J. (2006). The company-cause-customer fit decision in cause-related marketing. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 23(6), 314-26.
Gwinner, K. and Eaton, J. (1999). Building brand image through event sponsorship: the role of image transfer. Journal of Advertising, 28(4), 47-57.
Hoeffler, S. and Keller K.L. (2002). Building Brand Equity through Corporate Societal Marketing. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 21(1), 78-88.
Keller, K.L. (1998). Strategic Brand Management., New Jersey, Prentice Hall.
Kim, N., Sung, Y., Lee, M. (2012). Consumer Evaluations of Social Alliances: The Effects of Perceived Fit Between Companies and Non-Profit Organizations. J Bus Ethics, 109,163–174
Kim, N., Cho, E., Kim, Y. and Lee, M. (2011). Developing an effective strategic mix of corporate philanthropy, The Service Industries Journal, 31(7), 1049–1062.
‧
Lafferty, B., Goldsmith, R. and Hult, T. (2004). The impact of the alliance on the partners: a look at cause-brand alliances. Psychology and Marketing, 21(7), 509-531.
Lafferty, B. (2007). The Relevance of Fit in a Cause-Brand Alliance When Consumers Evaluate Corporate Credibility. Journal of Business Research, 60, 447-453.
Levy, S.J. (1959). Symbols for Sales. Harvard Business Review, 37(4), 117- 124.
Maignan, I., Ferrell, O. and Ferrell, L. (2005). A stakeholder model for implementing social responsibility in marketing. European Journal of Marketing, 39(9/10), 956-977.
Malhotra, N. (1988). Self-concept and product choice: an integrated perspective. Journal of Economic Psychology, 9(1), 1–28.
McCracken, G. (1989). Who Is the Celebrity Endorser? Cultural Foundations of the Endorsement Process. Journal of Consumer Research, 16(3), 310-321.
Menon, S., and Kahn, B.E. (2003). Corporate sponsorships of philanthropic activities: When do they impact perceptions of sponsor brand? Journal of Consumer Psychology, 13(3), 316–327.
Mullen, J. (1997). Performance-based corporate philanthropy: How
‘giving smart’ can further corporate goals. Public Relations Quarterly, 42(2), 42–48.
Nan, X. and Heo, K. (2007). Consumer responses to corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives: Examining the role of brand-cause fit in cause-related marketing. Journal of Advertising, 36(2), 63-74.
‧
Ouwersloot, H., and Tudorica, A. (2001). Brand Personality Creation through Advertising. MAXX Working Paper Series.
Park, B. (1986). Method for Studying the development of impressions of real people. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 907- 917.
Parker, B.T. (2005). This brand’s for me: Brand personality and user imagery based self-congruity, University of Florida, 27.
Petty, R.E., Cacioppo, J.T. and Schumann, D. (1983). Central and peripheral routes to advertising effectiveness: The moderating role of involvement. Journal of Consumer Research, 10(2), 135-146.
Phau, I. and Lau, K.C. (2001). Brand personality and consumer self-expression: Single or dual carriageway? Journal of Brand Management, 8(6), 428–444.
Phillips, B.J. (1996). Defining trade character and their role in American popular culture. Journal of Popular Culture, 20(4), 143-158.
Plummer, J.T. (1985). Brand personality: a strategic concept for multinational advertising. paper presented at the AMA Winter Marketing Educators Conference, Phoenix, AZ.
Pracejus, J.W.G. and Douglas, O. (2004). The role of brand/cause fit in the effectiveness of. Journal of Business Research, 57 (2004), 635–640.
Rifon, N., Choi, S., Trimble, C. and Li, H. (2004). Congruence effects in sponsorship: The mediating role of sponsor credibility and consumer attributions of sponsor motive. Journal of Advertising, 33(1), 29-42.
Salamon, L. M. (1992). America’s nonprofit sector: A primer. New York:
Foundation Center. 10.
‧
Saxton, T. (1997). The effects of partner and relationship
characteristics on alliance outcomes. Academy of Management Journal, 40(2), 443–462.
Sirgy, J. (1982). Self-concept in consumer behavior: A critical review.
Journal of Consumer Research, 9(3), 287–300.
Speed, R. and Thompson, P. (2000). Determinants of sports sponsorship response. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 28(2), 226-238.
Stafford, M. R., Thomas, F. Stafford, and Ellen, D. (2002). A Contingency approach: The effects of spokesperson type and service type on service advertising perceptions. Journal of Advertising, 31(2), 17-34.
Strahilevitz, M. and Myers, J.G.(1998). Donations to charity as purchase incentives: How well they work may depend on what you are trying to sell.
Journal of Consumer Research, 24(4), 434-446.
Sutherland, J., Marshall, S., and Parker, B.T. (2004). Real, ideal, and undesired self concepts and their effects on viewer preferences: Who do you love? Paper Presented at the American Academy of Advertising, Baton Rouge, LA, March.
Tokar, D. M., Fischer, A. R., Snell, A. F., & Harik-Williams, N. (1999).
Efficient assessment of the five-factor model of personality: Structural validity analyses of the NEO Five-Factor Inventory (Form S).
Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 32, 14–30.
Trimble, C. and Rifon, N. (2006). Consumer perceptions of compatibility in cause-related marketing messages. International Journal of
Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 11(1), 29-47.
Varadarajan, P.R. and Menon, A. (1988). Cause-Related Marketing: A
‧
coalignment of marketing strategy and corporate philanthropy, Journal of Marketing, 52 (July), 58-74.
任維廉、涂榮庭、胡友維、呂堂榮(2009)。好事是否做對了？運輸企業善因行銷策略之研究。都 市交通半年刊，24(1)，1-14。
別蓮蒂(2009)。領導者個性、企業文化與品牌個性間之關係初探—長期歷史觀點。行政院國家科 學委員會專題研究成果報告（報告編號：NSC 96-2416-H-004-010-MY2），未出版。
別蓮蒂、游舒惠(2002)。企業贊助公益活動之動機、決策與影響因素。廣告學研究，18，53-95。
吳欣諭(2013)。非營利組織善因行銷：電視廣告分析。中國文化大學新聞學系碩士論文，未出版，
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
北。
練乃華(1990)。推薦式廣告之溝通效果研究。國立台灣大學商學研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北。
鄭珠田（1995）。善因行銷活動對消費者購買行為影響之研究。國立交通大學管理科學研究所碩 士論文，未出版，新竹。
顏龍蒂（1999）。議題相關行銷對品牌權益影響之研究。國立政治大學企業管理研究所碩士論文，
未出版，台北。
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
附件：正式施測問卷
【政大企研】碩士論文研究問卷 親愛的受訪者您好，
首先感謝您在百忙之中願意停下腳步，幫忙我們完成這份學術研究問卷。本次 研究主要想瞭解，當企業想要投注資源執行「公益行銷」時，應該找什麼樣的代言
人，以及贊助什麼的活動，會有最佳效果；您的看法將會對本研究有極大貢獻。
本問卷採取「不記名」方式進行，調查結果僅供學術研究使用，絕對不會做個 人資料分析，亦不對外公開，請您放心並安心作答；再次謝謝您的熱心協助！
敬祝 身體健康、一切順心
國立政治大學 企業管理研究所 指導教授：李嘉林 博士 研 究 生：李家名
第一部份：
此部份共有 12 組公益行銷組合的卡片，每組卡片都會有【贊助企業】、【代 言人】、【公益活動】；請仔細參考每組卡片，看完之後請您將「對每張卡片的喜 好度」依序填入。
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
01. 對於【編號 01】的組合，您的偏好是？
○完全不喜歡 ○相當不喜歡 ○有點不喜歡 ○有點喜歡 ○相當喜歡 ○完全喜歡
02. 對於【編號 02】的組合，您的偏好是？
○完全不喜歡 ○相當不喜歡 ○有點不喜歡 ○有點喜歡 ○相當喜歡 ○完全喜歡
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
03. 對於【編號 03】的組合，您的偏好是？
○完全不喜歡 ○相當不喜歡 ○有點不喜歡 ○有點喜歡 ○相當喜歡 ○完全喜歡
04. 對於【編號 04】的組合，您的偏好是？
○完全不喜歡 ○相當不喜歡 ○有點不喜歡 ○有點喜歡 ○相當喜歡 ○完全喜歡
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
05. 對於【編號 05】的組合，您的偏好是？
○完全不喜歡 ○相當不喜歡 ○有點不喜歡 ○有點喜歡 ○相當喜歡 ○完全喜歡
06. 對於【編號 06】的組合，您的偏好是？
○完全不喜歡 ○相當不喜歡 ○有點不喜歡 ○有點喜歡 ○相當喜歡 ○完全喜歡
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
07. 對於【編號 07】的組合，您的偏好是？
○完全不喜歡 ○相當不喜歡 ○有點不喜歡 ○有點喜歡 ○相當喜歡 ○完全喜歡
08. 對於【編號 08】的組合，您的偏好是？
○完全不喜歡 ○相當不喜歡 ○有點不喜歡 ○有點喜歡 ○相當喜歡 ○完全喜歡
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
09. 對於【編號 09】的組合，您的偏好是？
○完全不喜歡 ○相當不喜歡 ○有點不喜歡 ○有點喜歡 ○相當喜歡 ○完全喜歡
10. 對於【編號 10】的組合，您的偏好是？
○完全不喜歡 ○相當不喜歡 ○有點不喜歡 ○有點喜歡 ○相當喜歡 ○完全喜歡
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
11. 對於【編號 11】的組合，您的偏好是？
○完全不喜歡 ○相當不喜歡 ○有點不喜歡 ○有點喜歡 ○相當喜歡 ○完全喜歡
12. 對於【編號 12】的組合，您的偏好是？
○完全不喜歡 ○相當不喜歡 ○有點不喜歡 ○有點喜歡 ○相當喜歡 ○完全喜歡