Purpose-Driven Marketing and Its Behavior Impact on Modern Consumers

Abstract

Purpose: Marketing discourse has gradually shifted from a narrow emphasis on product features toward broader narratives centered on organizational purpose, ethics, and social contribution. In digitally connected markets, consumers increasingly judge brands based on perceived values, authenticity, and responsible conduct rather than functional superiority alone. The purpose of this review paper is to explore how purpose-driven marketing influences consumer behavior, particularly in terms of attitudes, trust formation, emotional engagement, and behavioral intentions.

Methods: The study adopts a structured narrative review approach, examining peer-reviewed academic literature published between 2015 and 2025. Relevant studies were sourced from established academic databases using keywords related to brand purpose, ethical branding, consumer-brand relationships, and value-based consumption. Both conceptual frameworks and empirical findings were analyzed through thematic synthesis to identify recurring patterns, contrasts, and research gaps.

Findings: The review reveals that purpose-driven marketing tends to generate positive consumer responses when organizational purpose is perceived as genuine and consistently embedded in business practices. Authentic purpose communication is found to strengthen trust, enhance emotional attachment, and support favourable behavioural outcomes. Conversely, symbolic or opportunistic adoption of purpose narratives often leads to consumer skepticism, erosion of credibility, and adverse behavioral reactions.

Implications: The review reveals that purpose-driven marketing tends to generate positive consumer responses when organisational purpose is perceived as genuine and consistently embedded in business practices. Authentic purpose communication is found to strengthen trust, enhance emotional attachment, and support favourable behavioural outcomes. Conversely, symbolic or opportunistic adoption of purpose narratives often leads to consumer scepticism, erosion of credibility, and adverse behavioural reactions.

Originality: This paper contributes originality by synthesising recent and dispersed scholarship on purpose-driven marketing into a coherent analytical framework. By highlighting both enabling factors and limitations, the study advances a balanced understanding of how brand purpose operates within contemporary consumer markets.

  • Page Number : 117-129

  • Published Date : 2026-05-15

  • Keywords
    Purpose-driven marketing, Consumer behaviour, Brand credibility, Ethical branding, Value-oriented consumption

  • DOI Number
    10.15415/jtmge/2025.162009

  • Authors
    Pallavi Kumari and Anjan Niyogi

References

  • 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. https://doi.org/10.2307/41166284
  • Bryman, A., Bell, E., & Harley, B. (2019). Business research methods (5th ed.). Oxford University Press.
  • Carroll, A. B. (2016). Carroll’s pyramid of CSR: Taking another look. International Journal of Corporate Social Responsibility, 1(3), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40991-016-0004-6
  • Du, S., Bhattacharya, C. B., & Sen, S. (2010). Maximizing business returns to corporate social responsibility. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12(1), 8–19. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2009.00276.x
  • Edelman. (2022). Edelman trust barometer 2022. Edelman Trust Institute. https://www.edelman.com/trust
  • Elkington, J. (2018, June 25). 25 years ago I coined the phrase “triple bottom line.” Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2018/06/25-years-ago-i-coined-the-phrase-triple-bottom-line
  • Ellen, P. S., Webb, D. J., & Mohr, L. A. (2006). Building corporate associations: Consumer attributions for corporate socially responsible programs. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 34(2), 147–157. https://doi.org/10.1177/0092070305284976
  • Fore, M. R., & Grier, S. (2003). When is honesty the best policy? The effect of stated company intent on consumer skepticism. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 13(3), 349–356. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327663JCP1303_15
  • Freeman, R. E. (2010). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Cambridge University Press.
  • Gehman, J., Treviño, L. K., & Garud, R. (2013). Values work: A process study of the emergence and performance of organizational values practices. Academy of Management Journal, 56(1), 84–112. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2010.0628
  • Holt, D. B. (2004). How brands become icons: The principles of cultural branding. Harvard Business School Press.
  • Kapferer, J. N. (2012). The new strategic brand management (5th ed.). Kogan Page.
  • Keller, K. L. (2013). Strategic brand management (4th ed.). Pearson Education.
  • Kotler, P., Kartajaya, H., & Setiawan, I. (2021). Marketing 5.0: Technology for humanity. Wiley.
  • Kotler, P., & Keller, K. L. (2016). Marketing management (15th ed.). Pearson Education.
  • Kotler, P., & Sarkar, C. (2018). Finally, brand purpose does matter. MIT Sloan Management Review, 59(1), 69–70. https://sloanreview.mit.edu
  • Laczniak, G. R., & Murphy, P. E. (2019). Ethical marketing: A normative framework. Routledge.
  • Marin, L., Ruiz, S., & Rubio, A. (2009). The role of identity salience in the effects of corporate social responsibility on consumer behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 84(1), 65–78. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-008-9673-8
  • Mohr, L. A., Webb, D. J., & Harris, K. E. (2001). Do consumers expect companies to be socially responsible? Journal of Consumer Affairs, 35(1), 45–72. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6606.2001.tb00102.x
  • Oliver, R. L. (1999). Whence consumer loyalty? Journal of Marketing, 63(4), 33–44. https://doi.org/10.2307/1252099
  • Peloza, J., & Shang, J. (2011). How can corporate social responsibility activities create value for stakeholders? Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 39(1), 117–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-010-0213-6
  • Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2019). Creating shared value. Harvard Business Review, 97(1), 63–77. https://hbr.org
  • Sen, S., & Bhattacharya, C. B. (2001). Does doing good always lead to doing better? Consumer reactions to corporate social responsibility. Journal of Marketing Research, 38(2), 225–243. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.38.2.225.18838
  • Sheth, J. N., Sethia, N. K., & Srinivas, S. (2011). Mindful consumption: A customer-centric approach to sustainability. Journal of the academy of marketing science, 39(1), 21-39. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-010-0216-3
  • Singh, J., Iglesias, O., & Batista-Foguet, J. M. (2012). Does having an ethical brand matter? The influence of consumer perceived ethicality on trust, affect, and loyalty. Journal of Business Ethics, 111(4), 541–549. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1216-7
  • Varadarajan, P. R., & Menon, A. (1988). Cause-related marketing: A coalignment of marketing strategy and corporate philanthropy. Journal of Marketing, 52(3), 58–74. https://doi.org/10.2307/1251450
  • Vlachos, P. A., Tsamakos, A., Vrechopoulos, A. P., & Avramidis, P. K. (2009). Corporate social responsibility: Attribution, loyalty, and the mediating role of trust. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 37(2), 170–180. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-008-0117-x
  • White, K., Habib, R., & Hardisty, D. J. (2019). How to shift consumer behaviors to be more sustainable: A literature review and guiding framework. Journal of Marketing, 83(3), 22–49. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022242919825649
  • Zeithaml, V. A., Berry, L. L., & Parasuraman, A. (1996). The behavioral consequences of service quality. Journal of Marketing, 60(2), 31–46. https://doi.org/10.2307/1251929