How brand CSR responses to the pandemic impact brand value, growth, and rank

Corporate donation behavior refers to companies' philanthropic activities, which involve allocating resources toward charitable causes. Theories explaining why companies engage in such behavior include social responsibility theory (ethical obligations to society beyond profit maximization), stakeholder theory (considering the interests of multiple stakeholders and enhancing reputation), institutional theory (conforming to norms and expectations of the institutional environment), and resource dependence theory (gaining access to critical resources through building relationships). While these perspectives differ, they collectively suggest that ethical obligations, stakeholder expectations, institutional norms, and resource considerations shape corporate donation behavior. This paper examines whether how corporations engage in CSR affects brand performance (rather than firm financial performance), especially during crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic. In 2020, the top 100 global brands responded to the pandemic via cash donations, in-kind donations, special customer services, and employee support. The research questions are whether these actions reflected on brand value, brand growth, or brand rank change, and which of the four actions significantly impacted brand performance indicators. Prior literature has established links between CSR and corporate financial performance, but optimal CSR strategies during crises remain debated. This article reviews the pandemic’s consequences for stakeholders and brands’ responses, posits four hypotheses, and explains the methodology using Interbrand’s (2020) report before presenting findings, limitations, implications, and future research directions.

Brands create and preserve equity that contributes significant value to parent organizations. From a societal perspective, brands should reflect principled actions and values, with socially responsible brand images linked to supporting community programs and improving societal welfare. Corporate reputation can significantly influence stock price, emphasizing the strategic importance of reputation management. Consumers show preferences for brands that donate higher proportions of profits. Interbrand’s framework measures brand value via brand strength (leadership, engagement, relevance), based on ten factors across these dimensions. Interbrand Best Global Brands 2020 identifies the top 100 brands and reports brand growth, brand value, and brand ranking changes (2019–2020). Brands adjusted to pandemic-driven shifts in consumer mindsets, with greater appreciation for pro-social actions and employee support. The US Chamber of Commerce Foundation Corporate Aid Tracker (USCCF, 2021) catalogs corporate COVID-19 CSR responses, from which four main response types were identified among the Interbrand top 100: donations in cash, donations in kind, customer services, and employee support. Cash donations often redirected budgeted charitable funds to crisis needs. In-kind donations leveraged companies’ products/services and supply chains, often reported at market value and yielding publicity and internal engagement. Customer services involved rapid operational changes to support remote engagement and safety, especially challenging for experience-based brands. Employee support included work-from-home solutions, leave policies, and health and psychological support; implementation depended on job nature, digital literacy, and infrastructure. Prior studies suggest CSR and corporate reputation positively affect brand equity and performance, with mediation by credibility and reputation, and CSR can improve brand attitudes, authenticity, and differentiation. Consumers may switch to brands associated with good causes when price/quality are comparable. During COVID-19, credible brand responses to customers and employees improved loyalty, equity, awareness, and image, and donations can create value through partnerships and enhanced recognition and profitability. Despite extensive evidence of CSR’s financial benefits, questions remain about strategic CSR during crises. This study addresses a gap by evaluating which donation forms most effectively impact brand value and growth. Hypotheses: H1: Cash donations positively affect brand value, growth, and rank. H2: In-kind donations positively affect brand value, growth, and rank. H3: Special customer services positively affect brand value, growth, and rank. H4: Employee support positively affects brand value, growth, and rank.

Design and sample: The study examines the Interbrand (2020) top 100 global brands and their COVID-19 response patterns, assessing which response types were most effective for brand performance (brand value, brand growth, brand rank change versus 2019). Interbrand’s brand valuation methodology is proprietary but integrates consumer behavior impact, competitive attractiveness, and financial performance. Measures: Dependent variables were brand growth (2019–2020 change), brand value (2020), and brand rank change (2020 vs. 2019) as reported by Interbrand. Note: five brands (Instagram, YouTube, Tesla, Burberry, Zoom) entered the top 100 in 2020, yielding missing data for rank change and growth in some cases (five missing values). Independent variables captured four CSR response orientations (ROs) in 2020: cash donations, in-kind donations, customer services, and employee support. Data sources for ROs included the US Chamber of Commerce Foundation Corporate Aid Tracker (USCCF, 2021), online searches, and corporate social media pages (LinkedIn, Facebook, Twitter). Coding and scoring: Each brand’s 2020 CSR actions were tallied under the four ROs. Tallies were normalized into RO scores expressed as percentages of total actions for that brand (i.e., each action contributes proportionally; if a brand had three actions, each is 33.3%, four actions yield 25% each, etc.). Example: five actions could produce 40% employee support (two actions), 40% cash (two), 20% customer services (one), 0% in-kind (none). Analysis: Due to sample size (n=100), three separate multiple linear regression models were estimated, one per dependent variable (brand value, brand growth, brand rank change), with the four RO scores as predictors: X1 cash donations, X2 in-kind donations, X3 customer services, X4 employee support. Model form: Y = a + b1X1 + b2X2 + b3X3 + b4X4. Statistical outputs were summarized (R2, F-tests, coefficients, t-values, p-values).

• Brand growth was significantly and positively associated with in-kind donations and customer services. Specifically: in-kind donations b=0.686, t=2.169, p=0.033; customer services b=0.741, t=2.314, p=0.023. The brand growth model overall had R2=0.077; F(4,89)=1.859. - No significant relationships were found between any COVID-19 response types and brand value or brand rank change. The brand value model showed poor fit (R2=0.016; F(4,94)=0.385) and no significant predictors. The brand rank change model also showed poor fit (R2=0.032; F(4,89)=0.724) and no significant predictors. - Across responses (cash donations, in-kind donations, customer services, employee support), only in-kind donations and customer services showed significant short-term positive effects, and only on brand growth in 2020 versus 2019. Brand value and rank did not respond significantly to short-term CSR actions within one year.

The findings indicate that short-term CSR actions during the COVID-19 pandemic did not significantly alter brand value or brand ranking, which are cumulative, long-term outcomes. In contrast, in-kind donations and branded customer services demonstrated immediate, customer-facing relevance and engagement, producing significant short-term brand growth. These actions are typically branded, generate awareness and affection, and align with Interbrand’s brand strength dimensions of leadership, engagement, and relevance, thus partially supporting H2 and H3. Employee support likely improves morale and reduces stress but has delayed or indirect bottom-line effects, failing to support H4 in the short-term. Cash donations, while socially valuable, are less salient to customers in ways that would quickly translate to brand growth or changes in value/rank, providing no support for H1. The results align with literature linking CSR to brand reputation and performance but emphasize that the financial realization of credibility, reputation, and differentiation usually requires sustained, long-term action. In the short run, CSR activities that are conspicuously branded and directly enhance customer experience and utility (in-kind donations, customer services) are more likely to drive brand growth. Given the sample of top global brands, many mediators such as brand credibility, attitudes, authenticity, and reputation are already strong, making the immediacy of consumer-facing CSR impacts more pronounced during crisis conditions.

This study analyzes how four types of corporate COVID-19 responses—cash donations, in-kind donations, customer services, and employee support—relate to brand performance among Interbrand’s 2020 top 100 brands. The main contribution is showing that short-term CSR actions can lift brand growth when they are branded, relevant, and engagement-enhancing (in-kind donations and customer services), while brand value and rank appear resistant to short-term change. Theoretical implications highlight that immediate effects on brand growth depend on leadership, engagement, and relevance (brand strength conditions), whereas value and ranking reflect longer-term cumulative processes. Managerial implications suggest that, if brand performance is a goal, firms should prioritize prominently branded customer services and strategic in-kind support that aid customers, secure visibility, and encourage profitable behavioral changes; longer-term planning and consistent commitment are required to influence brand value and rank. Future research should test conditions optimizing in-kind and customer service programs for brand growth, explore how cash donations and employee support can be designed to impact performance, incorporate industry/product category and firm size controls, and conduct longitudinal analyses using historical Interbrand lists to capture cumulative effects of CSR on brand value. Qualitative work can further unpack managerial intentions and mechanisms linking CSR to brand outcomes, and development of a concise typology of CSR programs aimed at brand performance is needed.

• The study relies on a single source for brand performance, the Interbrand (2020) report, whose detailed methodology is proprietary. - Five brands newly entered the Top 100 in 2020, creating missing data for rank change (and some growth measures). - CSR response classification was limited to four categories (cash, in-kind, customer services, employee support). - Pandemic-driven industry dynamics (e.g., gains in online media, e-commerce, pharmaceuticals; losses in tourism, live entertainment, physical retail) likely confounded brand performance and rank changes relative to 2019.