Changing Trends in Nonprofits and Consumerism

The Role of Consumerism on Nonprofits

It would be prudent, from the onset, to note that consumerism does not have an assigned definition. This is to say that in the past, there are a number of definitions that have been floated in an attempt to develop better understanding of the particular concept. However, to a large extent, consumerism has got to do with the purchase of goods and services to meet certain needs or wants. Further, it has also got to do with not only the promotion, but also the protection of consumer interests. There are a myriad of factors that are often at play in purchase decisions. What this means is that an individual paying for a good or service could be motivated by a unique set of factors. While persons have traditionally been motivated by the desire to satisfy a need or want in their purchase decisions, today, persons are increasingly being driven by a desire to do good or engage in an undertaking that benefits another party. Thus, in essence, consumers are increasingly realizing that they could deploy their purchasing power to engage in social good. Some of the terms that could be used to describe this trend are inclusive of, but they are not limited to consumer charity and ethical consumerism. As will be demonstrated in the subsequent sections of this text, the ground appears to have shifted, with more consumers appearing to be in favor of giving back with their purchases. The implication in such a case is that going forward, nonprofits will largely be competing with, or will have their efforts complemented by, brands that are cause-based.

Some authors, such as Yngfalk and Yngfalk (2019), have in the past argued that there is increased blurring of the lines between philanthropy and consumerism. According to the authors, this is more so the case owing to the fact that there has been increased popularity of the fusion of philanthropic missions with the overall business objectives of vendors. To some extent, the said changes have been triggered by the emerging millennial generation. In contrast with the previous generation, millennials are more likely to do business with organizations that have charitable leanings. As will be indicated elsewhere in this text, this is to say that when faced with the choice of making a purchase between a company that engages in philanthropic activities and one that does not, millennials are more likely to go with companies that are active on the philanthropic front. This could be attributed to the belief, specifically among millennials, that for-profit organizations ought to give back to the society by engaging in charitable undertakings.

Traditionally, philanthropic efforts have not been enmeshed with the core operations of organizations. Instead, they have been pursued in a realm that is uniquely distinct, and have largely involved donation of funds or sponsorship of clearly defined causes. Dedicated charities have also benefited from corporate philanthropy. Some of the companies that have in the past engaged in elaborate philanthropic undertakings – and have been known as generous contributors to social causes - are inclusive of; Google, Wells Fargo, Johnson and Johnson, Goldman Sachs, Pfizer, and Gilead Sciences (Maier, Meyer, and Steinbereithner, 2014). Collectively, the said companies have in the past assigned billions of dollars to diverse philanthropic efforts.

It should be noted that although the highlighted organizations could be having a genuine desire to make a difference in some way, there are some unique benefits that they stand to reap by engaging in philanthropic efforts. For instance, past studies have clearly indicated that when making a purchase, a significant number of consumers are likely to consider whether the company that they are making a purchase from is engaged in corporate philanthropy, could be deemed socially responsible, or is involved in some meaningful social causes. Indeed, in one such study, a finding was made to the effect that “price and quality are the most important attributes when making a purchase decision, followed by the philanthropic donations” (Valor, 2006, p. 18). This implication, as has been highlighted elsewhere in this text, is that with the price and quantity held constant, companies that engage in philanthropic undertakings are likely to be more favored by customers than those that do not.

Recent developments have indicated that apart from the traditional approach to philanthropy, organizations have also been keen on integrating their philanthropic undertakings into the operational aspect of their enterprise (Gautler and Pache, 2015). A good example would be Amazon Smile. Essentially, this is an Amazon portal whereby the retail giant donates 0.5 percent of the purchase price to a worthy cause. An approach of this nature is largely founded upon the assertion that consumers are increasingly becoming socially conscious and would want a situation whereby they are permitted to give back at the shopping moment.

Similarly, it would also be prudent to note that in line with the demands of consumerism, nonprofits are also adapting their models to be more forthright on their engagements and the exact role played by consumers. A good example of a nonprofit that opts to offer goods for sale and channel all proceeds to charitable undertakings is Warby Parker. TOMS Shoes also deploys a similar approach. In this case, consumers are presented with what could be defined as a win-win scenario. This is more so the case given that while the said consumers make a purchase to satisfy a certain need or want, they also contribute towards the wellbeing of those in need. There is also the unique approach embraced by an Orlando, FA-based nonprofit by the name Feeding Children Everywhere. In this particular case, the organization offers for sale t-shirts with a unique caption: “This Shirt Feeds 40 People” (Maier, Meyer, and Steinbereithner, 2014). In this particular case, a consumer making a purchase is aware that his or her purchase will be beneficial to 40 needy persons. The success of efforts of this nature happens to be a clear indication that today, unlike was the case a decade or two ago, people are increasingly finding it more appropriate to give back via purchases.

In the final analysis, it should be noted that consumerism happens to play a huge role in charitable efforts as well as nonprofit operations and conduct. Therein lies an opportunity for both businesses and nonprofits to engage the incoming generation of consumers, i.e. millennials. This is more so the case given that it is clear that millennials are not only interested in consumption. Instead, they are also interested in philanthropic efforts – either on their own part or on the part of the organization in question. For this reason, the said millennials could be described as both social activists and consumers. For business enterprises, new approaches towards the enhanced inclusion of consumers in philanthropic engagements could be explored. On the other hand, for nonprofits, the concept of consumer charity could be even more pronounced going forward. With the line between philanthropy and consumerism being blurred, the all-important question in this case ought to be; are there specific products that millennials could be offered and the amount raked in from the said products deployed to advance a certain nonprofit agenda? Some of the nonprofits that have already explored this particular path, as has been pointed out elsewhere in this text, are inclusive of Warby Parker and TOMS Shoes.