A few weeks ago I wrote about a great experience with Delta, in which the airline noticed that I was stuck in the middle seat on a Monday morning and rewarded me with an apology and a few bonus miles. This week, I was again pleasantly surprised with a nice charitable tie-in to the Breast Cancer Research Foundation.

I received an email from Delta inviting me to register for a promotion in which 250 miles would go to both me and the Breast Cancer Research Foundation if I simply booked a flight or checked in online at Delta.com. In terms of meaning, this provides value to me on two levels. First, I’m definitely a mile collector, and I like the chance to add a few to the bank for future free tickets. We call this Solution marketing.

But this goes further to add the benefit of helping me, in a small way, improve the lives of others by sending miles to this worthy cause. All I have to do is print a boarding pass online, so it’s little effort and a nice reward. It makes me feel a little better about myself.

And this is where the marketing benefits kick in for Delta. The brand benefits by linking the benefit to an action that builds Delta’s business. It might sell a couple more tickets, and also saves on costs by getting people to check in online. Shifting habits might lead to long-term benefits for Delta.

Another long-term benefit is the boost to the brand equity. Smart cause tie-ins like this make customers feel better about giving their business to Delta.

Finally, thanks to its loyalty program and ability to track customers through extensive data on each interaction, Delta can get ROI results for even modest promotions like this, and it can start personalizing the offers that it provides to individual members. Delta might find that it is more meaningful for me to receive cause-related offers, resulting in greater efficiency and results.

In what seems like just weeks since the media world had embraced fully cause-related and sustainability marketing, it seems we’re already questioning ourselves and rethinking the best way to build brands in modern times—again. Some predicted that cause-related and sustainability marketing would fall back as the latest fad, or lose out to the next “what’s next.” Instead, it’s the economy, stupid, which seems to have us questioning these forms of meaningful marketing.

The growing countertrend is a belief that people are less willing to pay attention to brands’ good works for the less fortunate when they are forced to worry about feeding and clothing their own families. Advertising Age seems to have broken the seal on this line of thinking with an article today titled “Economic Blues Leave No Room for Green.” Reporter Jack Neff wrote of a survey of CMOs completed by Professor Christine Moorman at Duke’s Fuqua School of Business (who, incidentally, our president, Jay Woffington, has guest-lectured for). Moorman’s survey showed that CMOs who were more pessimistic about the economy tended to de-prioritize marketing around causes and environmental sustainability. A graph of the results is shown above.

Neff called me for my perspective on the study and whether we were seeing this with our clients, and ended up using several of my quotes in the article. My take is as follows:

First, I think it makes complete sense that people will, on average, be less interested in external causes when there is more pressure on their own budgets and families. A quick search of recent news shows that food pantries and the Red Cross are seeing fewer donations because of the economy. Donna Goldfarb, VP of consumer and market insights for Unilever Americas, makes a good point that we can follow Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs here. In other words, when food and shelter are secure, we can aim to improve society, but when these basics are under pressure, we retrench, cut coupons, and stick with the cheaper store brands.

On the other hand, I believe that brands that support worthy causes and truly make a difference with their work can reap a strong return on investment. Cause-related and sustainability marketing still help brands differentiate themselves in a competitive marketplace. And, as I said at the end of the article, “Coupons won’t get you on The Today Show.”

But the big question for this space is: Does a worsening economy dampen Meaningful Marketing? I think not.

To be clear, Marketing with Meaning has nothing specifically to do with cause-related marketing. Rather, it suggests that each brand must choose marketing activities that are meaningful to its target customer. Following Maslow, in great economic times, this might mean cause and sustainability efforts, and when people are under pressure to pay the bills or find work, a free sample or BOGO (Buy-One, Get-One) will move more cases.

Smart brands and CMOs should continually monitor their customers’ need states and adjust their approach accordingly. A move from higher-order causes to coupons and money-saving tips might be more appropriate today, on average.

But brands with historically successful and significant causes should think twice before abandoning these projects. These programs are built over decades, and a short-term cut may destroy a long-term win. Finally, we should remember that it is human nature to rally together during tough times. Lately I’ve been reading my 7-year-old a historical fiction series about life as a child during the Depression (yes, it’s an American Girl series). The stories depict one of nation’s toughest times, but also one in which neighbors banded together to help each other and the unfortunate.

The brands that stick to what their customers find meaningful in both the short and long term are more likely to weather the economic storms and come out stronger than ever.

This week Pedigree dog food and its agency, TBWA/Chiat/Day, won the grand prize in the 27th annual Kelly Awards, a show presented by the Magazine Publishers of America that honors creative excellence and effectiveness in magazine ads.

Pedigree won top honors with a marketing campaign that drew attention to the plight of dogs living in shelters, asking people to contribute time and money to dog shelters, and asking people to adopt pets of their own.  Compelling print ads were accompanied by a website that provides information for prospective adopters.

The results show success on both Meaning and Marketing objectives.  According to Ad Age, the campaign “raised $2.7 million for shelter dogs and contributed to double-digit sales growth for Pedigree.”  What’s more, TBWA/Chiat/Day is contributing the entire $100,000 in prize money to the Pedigree Adoption Drive Foundation.  That’s a big deal in the agency world of tight margins!

For years advertisers have used cute puppies in ads to sell products.  Now they’re actually saving cute puppies through ads, and selling products.  That’s a nice win-win.