Beyond the animal-testing label: The impact of CSR internal-external congruence on consumer responses

When it comes to corporate social responsibility (CSR), animal testing is a controversial topic, as the regulatory frameworks vary between countries, and some loopholes in the testing procedures of cosmetics products and labeling remain. This situation allows companies to have inconsistent CSR efforts, such as using public statements about non-animal testing conduct without truly adhering to the promise. Previous studies have identified four CSR positions addressing the combination of situations whether or not a company has a public CSR statement, and whether or not they are engaged in taking actions relating to a social concern. The positions are categorized as follows: (1) uniform - where actions align with public statements, (2) washing - where actions do not meet public statements, (3) discreet - when actions are executed without public statements and (4) apathetic - where neither actions nor public statements are made. Based on the four positions, this research aims to shed light on the impact of CSR internal-external congruence of a company on a series of consumer responses, namely brand trustworthiness, brand attractiveness, brand attitude and purchase intention, using the hierarchy of effects framework. The research specifically focused on animal-testing practices in the cosmetics industry. A 2x2 between-subjects experimental design was conducted with 163 participants. Their responses were analysed by conducting ANOVA tests and regression analyses using the SPSS software. The results revealed that a company failing to operate according to its promise (washing position) faces significant disadvantages compared to the remaining positions, particularly in promoting brand trustworthiness and brand attitude. Conversely, those who perform CSR actions according to their claims (uniform position) or out of altruism without “shouting aloud” (discreet position) will drive the most desirable outcomes from consumers, particularly in terms of brand attractiveness and brand attitude. The results also indicated that the apathetic position had a less negative impact than expected. Additionally, positive relationships between consumer outcomes were also found, which occurred in a specific order going from cognitive to affective and ultimately action. The findings enrich the current streams of research about animal welfare. They emphasize the advantages of genuine CSR communication and the disadvantages of failing to deliver what has been promised and suggest future research directions. First, this research calls for further exploration into the apathetic position and whether they are significantly less competitive than those who are active in CSR. Second, another promising research direction would be to compare consumer behaviors across countries where animal testing is mandatory, banned, or not strictly regulated, and to compare groups with different perspectives on animal welfare. Lastly, future research should identify the gap in consumer awareness about animal testing regulation and suggest methods to improve this awareness.