


































Advances in Business Research 2011 Volume 2.pdf


Heller                                                                                                                                                                             Advances in Business Research 
2011, Vol. 2, No. 1, 163-171 

163 

 

Impact of Strategic Cross-Sector Brand Alliances on Consumer Behavior in a Recession 
 

Nathan Heller, Tarleton State University 
 

 

Like many organizations in an economic downturn, such as a recession, nonprofits have experienced a 
decrease in donations from individuals, corporations, and governmental funding sources. This loss of 

funding has resulted in a reduction of services offered and in some cases closure. Management at 
nonprofit organizations should study successful examples of cross sector marketing alliances and 
strategically replicate them with private sector organizations. This is achieved via cause-related 

marketing, a commercial partnership between a nonprofit organization and a private sector business. 
Seven fictional organizations were created for the current study to avoid preconceived notions. 

Comparisons were completed between private sector and nonprofit sector organizations. Additionally, 
comparisons were made between mixed strategic alliances of organizations with a positive image and 
those with a negative image which examine the impact of strategic alliances between private and 

nonprofit organizations. The measurements were a respondent’s willingness to contribute to or purchase 
from the firms. Results indicate that a firm’s image influences the willingness of the respondents to 

support the organization through donations or purchases in both the individual firm and strategic 
alliance scenarios. 
 

 

Nonprofit organizations experienced a decrease in corporate and individual charitable donations and 
the loss of government funding resulting in slashed budgets, a reduction of services offered and in some 
cases closure (Hrywna, 2006). Stories from across the country indicate that for many of these charitable 
organizations to survive in the current economy they will need to regenerate themselves fiscally through 
new avenues of fund raising. Management at nonprofit organizations should study successful examples of 
cross sector marketing alliances and strategically replicate them with private sector organizations. A 
notable successful alliance exists between Intel Corporation and The United Way. In the 2008 Corporate 
Responsibility Report at Intel reported…Despite economic uncertainty, Community Giving Campaign 
donations in 2008 increased 10.5% over 2007 to a record $11.7 million, including $622,000 from Intel 
retirees. With the Intel Foundation match, the total contribution amounted to more than $22.5 million. 
Every Intel site exceeded its goal. Intel placed in the top 10 United Way corporate campaigns in the U.S. 
in 2008 (Intel Corporation, 2009). 

The marketing discipline is concerned with influencing consumer behaviors. In the private sector, this 
means convincing customers to purchase a particular product or service in lieu of other options. It is also 
concerned with influencing retailers to stock particular merchandise and through internal marketing, 
ensuring that the frontline staff of service organizations, whether public, nonprofit, or private, delivered 
exceptional customer service. Private sector managers at all levels know that marketing and a customer-
centered marketing mindset are crucial to their success. Additionally, brand alliances have increasingly 
become an effective strategy to leverage a new or unknown brand (Najam and Rajesh, 2008). There is an 
increasing perception that organizations across the three sectors…can benefit by acting cooperatively, 
particularly through branding and forming alliances” (Heller, 2008).   

Research has demonstrated the importance of brands matching on abstract measures for an alliance to 
have success. Managers need to recognize that fit between brands in an alliance should not only be on the 
functional level of skills and expertise, etc., but also on the abstract level with brands matching on a 
personality dimension giving stronger overall alliance attitude scores. Collaboration is a mutually 
beneficial way for both brand alliance partners to leverage their brands through the transfer of established 
brand attitudes to new relationship partners” (Dickinson and Barker, 2007).   

The same is true in the nonprofit world and in many parts of the public sector. Public and nonprofit 
managers realize that their missions involve influencing donors to give, encouraging volunteers to come 
forward, convincing clients to seek help, motivating staff to be client friendly, and so on. Therefore, 
marketing and the marketing mindset are critical for these organizations as well. 



Heller                                                                                                                                                                             Advances in Business Research 
2011, Vol. 2, No. 1, 163-171 

164 

 

Knowing goals and missions can be aligned across sectors has made the adoption of such strategies 
into the nonprofit sector much easier. “The substantial similarities between both (for-profit and nonprofit) 
is that they exist…to supply collective goods or create some sort of public benefit” (Word and Park, 
2009). In both sectors, there are similarities in goals to influence their target audience; therefore, there has 
to be some sense of trust from the general public for success (Bryce, 2007). “Such cross-sector 
partnerships have been one of the most exciting and challenging ways that organizations have been 
implementing” such ideas (Seitanidi and Crane, 2009). 

Through successful for-profit alliances, nonprofits have seen the value of adopting for-profit business 
practices and methods. Because of these successes, nonprofits are being motivated to adopt for-profit 
techniques and create competitive jobs to attract experienced employees to execute these techniques 
(Andreasen et al., 2005). The “benefit of for-profit skills/experience…was seen as filling a need for 
assistance” in using for profit ideas in nonprofit environments (Mannell, 2010).  Market penetration for a 
nonprofit is the largest benefit, while for-profit agencies can benefit by aligning with a nonprofit that their 
customers “have an affinity” (Bennett et al., 2008). 

Cause related marketing calls on players outside the nonprofit sector to interact with the nonprofit and 
public sectors (Sagawa and Segal, 2000). Government agencies such as the National Cancer Institute or 
the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention partner with organizations like the American Cancer 
Society or the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids to achieve mutual objectives. An increasing number of 
corporations and nonprofits are partnering to achieve organization objectives. Cause-related marketing is 
a $7 billion sector with corporations like Nike and Coca-Cola actively engaged with Boys & Girls Clubs 
of America in achieving each organization’s objectives, as well as the objectives they have in common 
through the use of brand alliances and strategic partnerships.  

Thus, managers in each sector need to understand marketing and how marketing is – and ought to be – 
used in the nonprofit environment. Nonprofit managers need to be better at influencing their myriad 
stakeholders and publics whose behaviors determine the nonprofit’s success. Government managers need 
to know about marketing techniques in the nonprofit world because they are often interested in promoting 
similar outcomes. Finally, corporate marketers need to understand nonprofit marketers and the world in 
which they operate to create efficacious partnerships (Andreasen, 2003). 

Over the last 20 years an important development has occurred in the field of nonprofit marketing; the 
growth in importance of soliciting corporate involvement in the nonprofit sector. As nonprofits found 
themselves in greater and greater need of outside support, they turned to private sector partnerships for 
assistance. Cause-related marketing, a commercial partnership between a charity and a business, involves 
associating a charity’s logo with a corporation’s brand, product, or service. Effective cause-related 
marketing benefits organizations in both sectors. It encourages product sales for the private organization 
and raises funds for the charity. For example, General Mills contributes a determined amount to 
elementary schools for each “box top” or proof of purchase collected by the schools. Corporations have 
found that these and other public sector activities not only improve their public image but also contribute 
to their bottom lines (Weeden, 1998).  

Organizations survive in part upon their reputations which are embodied in the public perception of 
them. A business organization that sells a product - Microsoft, selling computer software for example - 
relies on the public perception of the quality of its product for sales. This perception of product is largely 
tied to the public perception of the organization. This includes visions of the quality of management, the 
reliability of its service guarantees, and the perception that the company stands behind its product. More 
and more, even in the private sector, the public perception of the organization is affected by people’s 
beliefs about its mission, role in society and particularly the social responsibility it assumes (Lasser and 
Mittal, 1995). These same issues are also critical for nonprofit organizations, particularly those that 
deliver social services or promote positive societal outcomes for shared values such as creating 
opportunity for the poor, educational issues, and the like. Consequently, a nonprofit organization is 
judged on its ability to achieve its goal (service delivery or contributing to sustaining societal values), but 
also on the effectiveness of its management, the central value status of its goals, and its tactics for 
achieving goals. With a constricting economy, both private organizations and nonprofit organizations are 



Heller                                                                                                                                                                             Advances in Business Research 

2011, Vol. 2, No. 1, 163-171 

165 

 

pressured to maximize the positive public esteem. In the private sector this has led to strategic alliances or 

partnerships between companies to promote mutual interests in both products and services offered and in 

the public perception of their legitimacy. Among nonprofits, there has been great interest in the past 

decade in similar alliances and partnerships - with other nonprofits and with private organizations - to 

maximize their own interests, including public acceptance of services offered and public support as 

volunteers and contributors.  

The purpose of this study is to examine the impact of alliances among private and nonprofit 

organizations on people’s perceptions of the impact of the pairings on attitudes toward the organizations 

and intent to support the organizations. A marketing emphasis exists in this research that seeks to 

understand how an individual’s perceptions of an organization are affected when it partners with another 

organization to pursue joint goals. Conceptually, brand alliances and their use in the private sector and 

might be used in the nonprofit sector are at the theoretical basis of this study. The goal of this study is to 

examine consumer/donor responses to a series of diverse, hypothetical brand alliance and to identify risks 

that organizations take in choosing other organizations with which to partner. As there is limited research 

available on consumer perceptions of brand alliances in the private sector and almost no research 

incorporating the effects of alliances or partnering in the nonprofit sector, this research is exploratory in 

nature. 
 

Research Questions 
 

The general aim of this research is to document whether or not different types of alliances or 

partnerships affect the consumer’s willingness to purchase or contribute to organizations and to 

investigate demographic differences that may exist. Two types of organizations are addressed: private 

sector businesses and nonprofit sector service organizations. The reputation of the organizations 

participating in the alliance or partnership as positive or negative is also of concern. These issues can be 

combined and addressed by answering the following research questions:  
 

  What is the effect of an organization’s reputation (as positive or negative) on people’s willingness to 

do business? 

  What is the effect of sector on willingness to do business for organizations with positive reputations? 

  In brand alliances or partnerships, is there a differential penalty for an organization with a positive 

reputation that partners with an organization with a negative reputation?   

  What is the effect of years of service and number of annual contributions on an individual’s 

willingness to do business with a nonprofit or private organization? 
 

A quasi-experimental design that varies combinations of private sector and nonprofit organizations 

was used to structure comparisons that are based on individual research participant willingness to 

purchase a product (private sector) or willingness to contribute to a nonprofit organization (nonprofit 

sector).   
 

Research Hypotheses 
 

H1: It is expected that an individual’s willingness to contribute will increase with each additional 

annual contribution. 
 

H2: It is expected that an individual’s willingness to contribute will increase with each additional year 

of service with their current organization. 
 

Significance of the Study 
 

This research is salient for several reasons. First, brand alliances are increasing in popularity as a 

means for both nonprofit and private sector organizations to accomplish organizational goals and 



Heller                                                                                                                                                                             Advances in Business Research 

2011, Vol. 2, No. 1, 163-171 

166 

 

objectives. Thus, it is important for organizations to understand the costs and benefits in cross-sector 

alliance creation. Little empirical data exists regarding these issues in either sector.  

This study addresses the question of whether the types of organizations (private versus nonprofit) and 

their reputations have an impact on people’s decisions to purchase or contribute. This issue is particularly 

important to the management of organizations that are preparing to enter alliances or partnerships with 

other organizations in the current recessed economy. In particular, nonprofit organizations which are 

increasingly dependent on charitable donations must choose optimal private corporate partners, in order to 

increase the likelihood of success.  

Finally, given the exploratory nature of the study, the new information obtained can be used to identify 

new questions for further research. In particular, the research provides an initial assessment of attitudinal 

and demographic characteristics of people making assessments of private and nonprofit organizations’ 

reputations. 
 

Research Methodology 
 

The dependent variable in this study is individual “willingness to purchase a product or service from a 

private organization.” Since interest focuses upon making comparisons between private sector and 

nonprofit organizations that do not sell products or services, a parallel dependent variable is individual 

“willingness to make a contribution to a nonprofit organization.” These “willingness” variables are 

intended to measure the respondent’s ultimate support of a focal organization. That is, in the marketing 

discipline, the principal test of product or service perception is whether the product or service is 

purchased by consumers (Peter and Olson, 1999).  

In the case of nonprofit organizations, services and products may be provided by the organization to 

its clients, but the relationship of interest in this study is between the organization and the public that may 

provide financial support. Individuals will be the focus for this research, and in measuring “willingness to 

contribute,” we will focus on willingness to contribute monetarily. Logistic regression was incorporated 

as it was the most appropriate given that the dependent variable was dichotomous; respondents indicated 

that they were either willing on not willing to contribute to or purchase from the fictitious firms. 

Willingness to contribute was measured as a dummy variable; possible response values were 1 and 0. 

Responses were coded “1” if the individual expressed willingness to contribute and “0” if the respondent 

was not willing to contribute to or purchase from the organizations.  

The independent variables of interest for the analyses were both continuous. Annual Contribution 

Rate, measured in number of contributions in the last year, and Years of service with the respondent’s 

current organization. Results are reported as probability values with feasible responses falling within the 

range 0.0 to 1.0. Linear regression was ruled out for the analyses as there are no limits on the values 

predicted by a linear regression. The result of the linear regression yielded a predicted response less than 

0 or greater than 1, either of which would be nonsensical as a response probability. If the dependent 

variable had been continuous rather than dichotomous, that is, if respondents had been asked how much 

money they would be willing to contribute or how much they would be willing to purchase from the 

fictitious firms, Linear Regression, ANOVA or a similar method could have been used. 

As a result of the global economic downturn in the last five years, nonprofit organizations experienced 

a decrease in corporate and individual charitable donations. Combined with the loss of government 

funding, the impacts to these firms have been slashed budgets, a reduction of services offered and in some 

cases closure. Management at nonprofit organizations should study successful examples of cross sector 

marketing alliances and strategically replicate them with private sector organizations. This is achieved via 

cause-related marketing, a commercial partnership between a nonprofit organization and a private sector 

business. Seven fictional organizations were created for the current study. Comparisons were completed 

between private sector and nonprofit sector organizations as well as comparisons between mixed strategic 

alliances of organizations with a positive image and those with a negative image which examine the 

impact of strategic alliances between private and nonprofit organizations, and on respondent willingness 

to contribute to or purchase from the firms. Results indicate that firm image influences the willingness of 



Heller                                                                                                                                                                             Advances in Business Research 

2011, Vol. 2, No. 1, 163-171 

167 

 

the respondents to support the organization through donations or purchases in both the individual firm and 

strategic alliance scenarios. 

Other variables to be measured in this study are principally background variables are used as control 

variables in the analysis. To account for basic comparability of subjects, age, gender and years on the job 

were measured for each subject. It is possible that a person’s experience with or perception of nonprofit 

organizations in general might have an impact on how the “willingness” ratings are made. To examine 

any possible relationship between a person’s history with nonprofit organizations and their rating of such 

organizations, each subject will also be asked, "How frequently have you contributed time or money or 

made other types of donation to any nonprofit organization (not a church)?"   

The research questions in this study require the respondent to make a series of structured comparisons. 

To accommodate these comparisons, the basic design of the study is quasi-experimental design, involving 

participant evaluations of a series of six structured pairs of organizations (Reichardt and Mark, 1998).  

Seven fictional organizations were created for the study, four from the private sector and three from the 

nonprofit sector. In addition to comparisons between private sector and nonprofit sector organizations, the 

research questions call for comparisons between organizations with a positive image and those with a 

negative image.  

The development of a positive versus negative image for selected organizations is the experimental 

manipulation. The manipulation was achieved by varying the descriptions offered for the organizations. 

In this case, two of the nonprofit organizations were given a positive profile, two private organizations 

were given a positive profile, two private organizations were given a negative profile, and one nonprofit 

was given a negative profile. The organizations with a positive profile contained positive statements in all 

four of the reputation elements. The organizations assigned a negative profile had positive descriptions in 

two areas (product/service reliability and managerial effectiveness) and negative descriptions in two areas 

(honesty of claims and social responsibility). 

This study used an availability sample (volunteers) of 120 subjects drawn from employees of a 

Fortune 500 company located in Chandler, Arizona. A single questionnaire was developed that contained 

the descriptions, the combinations of organizations and the willingness measure described above. The 

questionnaire also contained demographic questions and questions regarding the participant’s past 

involvement and attitude toward nonprofit service organizations. The last questions were used to 

determine whether or not the respondents’ past practices or attitudes impact the dependent variable 

independently of the sector and reputation of the organizations.   
 

Results 
 

Before analysis was completed the dependent variable response sets were re-coded from a 7 item 

Likert Scale assessing varying levels of willingness to purchase or contribute, to a binary response set - 

willing to purchase or contribute or not willing to purchase or contribute. General descriptive statistics, 

provided in Table 1, were run for the independent variables of interest. Cross Tabulations were then run 

to determine willingness to donate for each organization and the experimental pairings. These results are 

presented in Table 2. Finally, logistic regression analysis was used to understand the effect of the 

independent variables of interest on willingness to donate and the results are presented in Table 3.  

Descriptive statistics revealed that the average age of the respondents in this study was 33 years. On 

average they have been with their current employer 8 years and as a group contribute (financially) to 

nonprofit organizations (not churches) about 2 times per year. See Table 1 for complete descriptive 

statistics.  
 

Table 1: Descriptive Statistics on Independent Variables 
 

Variable Observations Mean Std. Deviation Min Max 

Years of Service with Organization 110 8.15 5.10 1 25 

Number of contributions to nonprofit in last year 110 2.20 1.27 0 7 

Age 110 33 8 20 55 

 



Heller                                                                                                                                                                             Advances in Business Research 

2011, Vol. 2, No. 1, 163-171 

168 

 

The goal of this study was to respond to four research questions as outlined above. The results from 

the cross tabulations were used to respond to the first 3 questions and logistic regression analyses were 

conducted to respond to the fourth. The results for these questions are presented below. 

The purpose of research question 1 was to determine if there was a difference in respondent’s 

willingness to contribute to or purchase from an organization based on the organizations reputation. 

Convincingly, for both private and public organizations, respondents were much less likely to do business 

with the organizations that had been assigned negative (-) reputational attributes. For all three 

organizations that were reported to have negative reputations, the percentage of respondents willing to do 

business was less than 9%. Rather, only 9% of the respondents were willing to do business with an 

organization with a negative reputation.  

Research question 2 addressed potential differences in willingness to do business that may exist due to 

the sector in which an organization falls for organizations with positive reputations. Four experimental 

organizations met these criteria - 2 public and 2 private. Results show that more respondents were willing 

to do business with the private organizations with positive reputations 93.64 and 94.55%, than were 

willing to do business with public organizations with positive reputations 89.10 and 87.27%.  

Research question 3 addressed the willingness to do business with organizations in a brand alliance in 

which one of the organizations has a negative reputation versus alliances in which both organizations 

have positive reputations. Four pairings were compared to answer this research question.  
 

  PR (+) & PU (+)  

  PU (+) & PU (+) 

  PR (-) & PU (+) 

  PU (+) & PU (-) 
 

In all cases, the respondents were less willing to do business with pairs of organizations in which one 

of the organizations had a negative reputation. Several other interesting results fell out of this research 

questions. First, more respondents - 90% -- were willing to contribute to allied nonprofit organizations 

with positive reputations than any other pairing of or individual organization. Second, respondents were 

much less likely to do business with a nonprofit with a positive reputation paired with a private with a 

negative reputation - 36% -- than to do business with a nonprofit with a positive reputation paired with a 

nonprofit with a negative reputation - 60%. See Table 2 for complete results. 
 

Table 2: Cross Tabulation Results on Willingness to Contribute 
 

Organization or Organizational Pairing %Willing to Contribute 

Childhood Disease Foundation (PU+) 89.10 

Mom’s Friend Childcare (PU+) 87.27 

Neighbor’s Helping Home Meals (PU-) 7.27 

Nirvana Bath Fixtures (PR-) 6.36 

Jerry’s Furniture (PR+) 94.55 

Floppy Ears Personal Computer (PR+) 93.64 

International Athletic Shoes (PR-) 8.18 

Jerry’s Furniture (PR+)/ Childhood Disease Foundation (PU+) 77.27 

Childhood Disease Foundation (PU+)/ Mom’s Friend Childcare (PU+) 90.00 

Nirvana Bath Fixtures (PR-)/Mom’s Friend Childcare for Single Mothers (PU+) 36.36 

Neighbor’s Helping Home Meals (PU-)/Childhood Disease Foundation (PU+) 60.91 

Notes: Willingness to contribute is measured as a dummy variable, which equals 1 if the individual expressed willingness to contribute and 
0 if otherwise. 

 

Finally, logistic regression analysis was used to explore the relation between willingness to do 

business and the years of service at the current organization. Only the overall model for Neighbor’s 

Helping Home Meals (PU-)/Childhood Disease Foundation (PU+) was significant and model coefficients 

and standard deviations are presented in Table 3. The annual contribution rate odds ratio was statistically 

significant, p = .015, at the alpha = .05 level. Results of the logistic regression model are interpreted as 



Heller                                                                                                                                                                             Advances in Business Research 

2011, Vol. 2, No. 1, 163-171 

169 

 

the odds of a contribution increase by 1.53 for each additional contribution per year. The magnitude of the 

odds ratio and the direction of the sign are appropriate. 
 

Table 3: Effect of Annual Contribution rate on Willingness to Contribute 
 

Variable (1) (2) 

Annual Contribution Rate  1.528* 

(.2692) 

1.538* 

(.2740) 

Years of Service with Organization 
 

1.033 
(.0462) 

Notes: Willingness to contribute is measured as a dummy variable, which equals 1 if the individual expressed willingness to contribute and 

0 if otherwise. Years of service and Number of contributions in the last year are measured as continuous variables in years, and number of 
contributions. Odds ratios are presented as are standard deviations (in parentheses). * Denotes statistical significance at the .05 level.  

 

Conclusions, Discussion, and Marketing Implications 
 

Results for question one indicate that respondents were convincingly less likely to do business with 

organization with negative reputations. This finding was not surprising and conveys that regardless of 

sector, respondents were not willing to do business with organizations that did not have positive 

reputations. The finding was nearly the same across all the organizations and the willingness to contribute 

percentage for all organizations fell in the 6-8% range. Though not surprising, the implication of this 

finding has economic salience for organizations with negative reputation and will be considered below. 

Results for question two demonstrated that respondents showed a greater willingness to do business 

with private organizations than with nonprofit organizations, when both had positive reputations. A 

potential explanation for this finding is self-interest. Respondents may be slightly more willing to do 

business with a private organization as there is an immediate and tangible benefit. Whereas with the 

nonprofit, the benefit is not tangible and depending on the timing of the contribution, any potential fiscal 

benefit may be delayed.  

A differential ‘alliance’ penalty for organizations with a positive reputation that allies with an 

organization with a negative reputation was incorporated into the study. Rather, the willingness to do 

business with this alliance was substantially lower than the willingness to do business with allied 

organizations with positive reputations. Research question 3 yields several salient economic factors. First, 

for organizations with positive reputations, in either sector need to steer clear of organizations of either 

sector with negative. However, organizations with negative reputations ought to seek out alliances with 

organizations with positive reputations. For example, 7.27% of respondents were willing to contribute to 

Neighbor’s Helping Home Meals (NHHM). However, when NHHM allied with Childhood Disease 

Foundation (CDF) respondents were eight times more likely (60.91%) to contribute. Thus, it appears that 

not only is there a differential penalty for positive organizations that ally with a negative organization, 

there is also a differential reward for organizations with a negative reputation to ally with an organization 

with a positive reputation. This finding should be of particular value to organizations struggling with 

reputation (at least with our sample).  

The results of the final research question indicated that the odds of a contribution increase by 1.53 for 

each unit increase in annual contribution rate. The direction is as expected and the magnitude seems to 

make sense. Though it is possible that a co-linearity problem may exist as the dependent variable - 

willingness to contribute and the independent variable - annual contribution rate may be highly related.   
 

Future Research Direction 
 

This study was exploratory in nature, and the questions addressed herein have not been addressed in 

the literature. As with all exploratory research, part of the purpose of the study was to identify further 

questions for future research. This study has highlighted needs for further research in several areas. The 

first area is further understanding of collaborative brand alliances because the experimental design used 

here was based on measuring the effectiveness and risk of brand alliances focusing upon experimentally 

assigned variation in two aspects of reputation. Cooke and Ryan (2000) proposed that forms of brand 

alliances range along a continuum from reputation-based efforts, which revolve around abstract or 



Heller                                                                                                                                                                             Advances in Business Research 

2011, Vol. 2, No. 1, 163-171 

170 

 

symbolic characteristics of the brand, to those which are based on product related or functional brand 

attributes and which involve a physical combination of resources. The opposing ends of this continuum 

reflect the strategic objectives and nature of these different forms of alliances: reputation endorsement and 

collaboration on core competencies. This view of brand alliances mirrors the perspective developed in the 

literature that brand alliances range from publicity based agreements to alliances involving co-operation 

further along the value chain in co-product development and/or commercialization (Cooke and Ryan 

2000). Exploring the same basic research questions addressed here also could be applied to brand 

alliances that collaborate on core competencies. This information would present a more complete picture 

of the effects of the full scope of brand alliance types.   

Another expansion area of the research initiated by this study involves inclusion of the government 

sector. It can be speculated that reputation is a critical issue for public sector organizations. It is also 

known that public sector organizations enter into brand alliances with both private sector and nonprofit 

sector organizations. There has been an emphasis for some years now among government organizations to 

embrace partnerships with private businesses. Presently, there is no research on the character or outcomes 

of these partnerships in terms of reputation factors (variables). It will be important that such research be 

fully comparative, looking at the relationships among private, nonprofit and public organizations. 

Finally, this study should be replicated with a larger, more heterogeneous sample population. All of 

the participants in this research were employees of a large private sector corporation. Certainly most 

employees in the United States work for private sector organizations and these subjects form a critical 

audience for all three sectors. However, this research was unable to address “willingness to do business” 

with private and nonprofit sector organizations by employees in the public or nonprofit sector. This 

represents an important potential gap in knowledge. There is logic in the reasoning that organizational 

reputations in general may be more important to people in nonprofit and public sectors and that this might 

influence the outcomes of assessments of reputation in organizations and willingness to do business. 
 

REFERENCES 

 

Andreasen, A. 2003. Strategic marketing for nonprofit organizations. New Delhi, India: Prentice Hall of 

India. 
 

Andreasen, A., Goodstein, R., & Wilson, J. 2005. Transferring "marketing knowledge" to the nonprofit 

sector. California Management Review, 47: 46-67.  
 

Berkowitz, E. 1994. Marketing. Chicago: Irwin. 
 

Bennett, R., Mousley, W., & Ali-Choudhury, R. 2008. Transfer of marketing knowledge within business-

nonprofit collaborations. Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing, 20: 37-70. 
 

Bryce, H. 2007. The public's trust in nonprofit organizations: The role of relationship marketing and 

management. California Management Review, 49: 112-132.  
 

Cohen, T. 2009. United Way cuts it budget, shaves giving. Triangle Business Journal, June 19: 1-2. 
 

Cooke, S., & Ryan, P. 2000. Brand alliances: From reputation endorsement to collaboration on core 

competencies. Irish Marketing Review, 13: 36-42. 
 

Dickinson, S., & Barker, A. 2007. Evaluations of branding alliances between non-profit and commercial 

brand partners: The transfer of affect. International Journal of Nonprofit & Voluntary Sector 

Marketing, 12: 75-89. 
 

Heller, N. 2008. The influence of reputation and sector on perceptions of brand alliances of nonprofit 

organizations. Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing, 20: 19-36.  
 



Heller                                                                                                                                                                             Advances in Business Research 
2011, Vol. 2, No. 1, 163-171 

171 

 

Hrwyna, M. 2006. Nonprofits hit by federal budget cuts: Organizations, disabled, will feel medicaid/ 
medicare reductions. Nonprofit Times, January 1: 1-3. 

 

Intel Corporation. 2009. 2008 corporate responsibility report. Retrieved from http://www.intel.com/intel/ 
cr/gcr/overview.htm. 

 

Kelly, K. March 10, 2008. NJHA: No hospital safe from state's $143 million cut. US Newswire, Retrieved 
from http://www.redorbit.com. 

 

Kinzie, S. October 1, 2009. Scramble for funds at the house of Ruth, Washington Post, Retrieved from 
http://www.washingtonpost.com. 

 

Kotler, P., & Armstrong, G. 1999. Principles of marketing. New York: Prentice Hall. 
 

Lasser, W., Mittal, B. 1995. Measuring customer based brand equity. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 
12: 11-19. 

 

Mannell, J. 2010. Are the sectors compatible? International development work and lessons  for a business- 
nonprofit partnership framework. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 40: 1106-1122. 

 

Najam, S., Rajesh, V. 2008. Consumers' evaluations of co-branded products: The licensing effect. Journal 
of Product and Brand Management, 17: 73-81. 

 

Park, C., & Shocker, A. 1996. Composite branding alliances: An investigation of extension and feedback 
effects. Journal of Marketing Research, 33: 453-466. 

 

Peter, J., & Olson, J. 1999. Consumer behavior. Boston: Irwin McGraw-Hill. 
 

Reichardt, C., & Mark, M. 1998. Quasi-experimentation. In L. Bickman, & D. Rog, (Eds.), Handbook of 
Applied Social Research Methods, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. 

 

Sagawa, S., & Segal, E. 2000. Common interest, common good: Creating value through business and 
social sector partnerships. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. 

 

Seitanidi, M., & Crane, A. 2009. Implementing CSR through partnerships: Understanding the selection, 
design  and  institutionalisation  of  nonprofit-business partnerships. Journal of Business Ethics, 85: 
413- 429. 

 

Visser, E. 1998. Multibranding: Symptom of an unclear branding policy. Design Management Journal, 
Winter: 60-64. 

 

Waters, K. 1997. Dual and extension branding: Using research to guide design decision and branding 
strategy. Design Management Journal, Winter: 26-33. 

 

Weeden, C. 1998. Corporate social investing. San Francisco: Berett-Koehler Publishing. 
 

Word, J., & Park, S. 2009. Working across the divide: Job involvement in the public and nonprofit 
sectors. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 29: 103-133. 

 

Zeiger, A. July 9, 2008. NJ hospitals in dire straits after charity budget cuts. Retrieved from http://www. 
fiercehealthfinance.com. 

 

 

Nathan Heller is an assistant professor of marketing and management at Tarleton State University. He 
received his Ph.D. in Public Administration from Arizona State University. His current research interests 
include nonprofit marketing, strategic alliances, and ethics. He has published in Journal of Nonprofit and 
Public Sector Marketing, Journal of Applied Business and Economics, Journal of Transportation, Journal 
of Business & Accounting, the International Journal of Business and Social Science, and others.   


