An Empirical Study Assessing the Still Unknown One For One Movement

Nowadays the one for one movement is been adopted by dozens of companies around the world to improve the quality of life of society. Companies into this movement have the mission to donate the same units that they sell to people in need. The movement could be considered a new business model working to create purchasing with meaning that support worthy causes such as helping save and restore sight. Thanks to this movement thousands of basic articles for assuring human dignity are being donated. Things to improve life conditions, such shoes, books or glasses, are starting to be provided by companies committed to the movement because their clients are willing to contribute for a fairer world. However, at the moment the movement seems to be understudied and not so popular between traditional consumers. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the movement and to reflect about their future analyzing the opinions of a group of students in the area of Management.


Introduction
The one for one movement is not very well known at the moment.However it is a new trend in business with high possibilities to expand.It is a model which focus is eminent social and which specific components are social justice, customer understanding and actors´ benefits.Build on for-profit enterprises, the movement could be considered a model specially created for social innovation.According to MURRAY et al. (2010), social innovations are new ideas (products, services and also models) that simultaneously meet social needs and create new social relationships or collaborations.That is the one for one movement in fact.
Social innovation is in the academy agenda today.The European Commission describes the process by which new responses to social needs are being developed in order to deliver better social outcomes (COM, 2013).This process is basically composed of four main elements First, the process starts by the identification of new, unmet or inadequately met social needs.Second, social innovation fosters the development of new solutions in response to these social needs.Third, it is important to evaluate the effectiveness of new solutions in meeting social needs and, finally the process look for the scaling up of effective social innovations.As part of the social innovation trend in businesses, the one for one movement was born to meet social needs and has developed new creative solutions to meet them.Companies in the movement could be considered highly socially responsible as it is shown in the following sections.

Theoretical Background: Corporate Social Responsibility And Social Marketing
Today´s businesses face challenges from new community expectations concerning the role they play in society.According to CRESTI (2010) the key word in the debate is Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR).The World Business Council for Sustainable Development defines CSR as "the commitment of business to contribute to sustainable economic development, working with employees, their families, the local community and society at large to improve their quality of life" (WBCSD, 2009, p.2).
On the basis of CSR is the key idea that any business has the duty of value creation for all stakeholders, going beyond the imperative of shareholder´s satisfaction.Consequently, companies are confronting new competitive challenges related to their CSR actions addressed to their different stakeholders and one of these challenges is the attention to a new more responsible and critical consumer.
This new consumer use to be very well informed in real time and has arguments about disparities around the world.In this new context, a widespread opinion is that a company´s social undertaking combined with profit-oriented behaviors may create share value for the company.Share value, as defined by PORTER and KRAMER (2011), focuses on the connections between societal and economic progress and has the power to unleash the next wave of global growth.Every firm should look at decisions and opportunities through the lens of shared value.This will lead to new approaches that generate greater innovation, growth and success for enterprises and also benefits for society.Summarizing, the social trend in business consists of reconciling economic and social aspects because the common welfare must not compromise the company´s survival and quite the opposite, could be a source of competitive advantages.
Marketing is also involved in this social trend in business.The origins of the social marketing concept can be found in the well known article written by Philip Kotler and Gerald Zaltman, titled Social Marketing: An Approach to Planned Social Change (KOTLER and ZALTMAN, 1971).Alan Andreasen, in the article titled Social Marketing: its definition and domain and arguing that social marketing had been defined improperly in much of the literature, defined social marketing as "the adaptation of commercial marketing technologies to programs designed to influence the voluntary behavior of target audiences to improve their personal welfare and that of the society of which they are a part" (ANDREASEN, 1994, p.110).
In practice, the majority of social marketing campaigns focus on changing behavior to increase the well-being of individuals or society.In this line, KOTLER et al. (2002), in the book Social marketing: Improving the quality of life, defined social marketing as "the use of marketing principles and techniques to influence a target audience to voluntarily accept, reject, modify, or abandon a behavior for the benefit of individuals, groups, or society as a whole" KOTLER et al. (2002, p.394).
However, authors like PEATTIE and PEATTIE (2009) have considered the difficulties of applying the classical discipline of marketing to the social marketing perspective.Conventional marketing pursuits of more sustainable consumption but the logic of social marketing promotes more sustainable lifestyles and, associated to this aim, social marketing use to promote reductions in consumption.The one for one movement is a new way for doing social marketing as it is not avoiding consumption, rather the opposite, it invites to consume more.More exactly, the movement invites to consume twice as the consumer pay for one unit for own consumption and one other unit for someone in need.
From a conceptual point of view, the discipline of marketing is rooted in Exchange Theory (BAGOZZI, 1975).In marketing history, the exchange process was viewed narrowly as a strictly economic exchange of some payment for some tangible product.However, marketing is essentially considered a means of meeting and satisfying certain needs of people and, nowadays it is important to remark the existence of a huge variety of consumer needs.At this respect, altruism is a human need, sentiment or behavior whereby we seek to benefit another person even at an absolute cost to ourselves (GINTIS et al., 2003).
Contemporary research in social marketing (KOTLER et al., 2002;DONOVAN and HENLEY, 2003;McDERMOTT et al., 2005;DANN, 2010) seems to be supporting MEEKER's (1971) contention that altruistic motives share a place beside other exchange rules (BATSON, 1995).According to HORMUTH (1999), acts have symbolic functions and meanings for a person.Creating meaningful progress towards improving quality of life of people in need requires more radical solutions than just simple donations.In fact, new solutions are appearing in the market to attend the altruism of consumers in developed countries.Additionally, the acquisition of certain products labeled "social" may be done to acquire an identity for the self or create an impression upon others.In this context, the one for one purchase behavior could be considered a special kind of altruistic act that carries symbolic social functions and could be used for self-identity formation or self-presentation to others who one is (HOPPER and NIELSEN, 1991).
The social marketing field needs to further its developmental progress by increasing its use of concepts from new fields like social movements (WYMER, 2011).The one for one brands, held by socially responsible companies, focus a great deal of their efforts and resources to make a positive difference in the world.Companies in the movement are among a unique and growing group of triple bottom line companies who understand that profit is not the only way to measure business success because people and planet also matter (ELKINGTON, 1998).

The Emergence of a New Business Model
Although business models have received limited attention from researchers and no consensus exists regarding the definition, nature, structure, and evolution of business models, MORRIS et al. (2003) bring order to the various perspectives.Following the authors, most perspectives include the business´s offerings, considering the firm´s value proposition and activities undertaken to produce them.
Bearing in mind that a firm´s ability to earn a rate of profit in excess of its costs of capital depends on some degree upon the establishment of competitive advantage over rivals, any business model builds upon the value chain concept and the strategic positioning of the firm in the market (PORTER and KRAMER, 2006).Further, the model involves choices about firm boundaries and relates to transaction cost economics and, fundamental for the choices between cost and differentiation advantage and between broad or narrow market scope (in strategic terms), any business model draws on resource-base theory (PENROSE, 1959;BARNEY, 1991) emphasizing the role of resources and capabilities in forming the basis of competitive advantage.A resource is considered any physical or financial asset that the firm posses, as well as employees' skills and organizational processes.Instead, a capability is something a firm is able to perform, which stems from resources and also from routines upon which the firm can draw (WINTER, 2003).
Narrowly, the one for one movement is a revolutionary business model based on creating for-profit companies with a non-profit mission.Companies involved in the movement are part business and part charity, involving consumers in the process.Customers love the fact that they are changing the quality of life of people in need with their every day choices.Consumers who purchase one for one have the opportunity to feel well, look good and do good, and all at the same time.And it is so simple for customers to do good, just buying a product from one of these companies because the support of customers allows the one for one movement to fight childhood hunger and basic needs both domestically and globally.
According to SAUL (2010) characterization of social business, the movement can be considered a new kind of social innovation.Social ventures operate under a for-profit business model in which success is measured by the positive impact a company makes in addressing a specific social issue.The primary purpose of a for-profit social business is to generate a "social profit" by harnessing the power of commerce.The nature of this kind of business models allows companies to react swiftly to market opportunities, thereby leveraging the maximum social profit through the wonders of capitalism.
To understand the one for one movement it is necessary to imagine what the world would look like if every one of us took a portion of what we know, what we like and what use to consume, and gave it to someone else in need.The result will be that we would collectively change the world.It is that vision which inspires the movement one for one.The movement is based on a plain and simple idea: "one sold, one given".May be, the pioneer Toms Shoes is the most popular company into the one for one movement trying to discover the main characteristics of this creative new business model.In fact, in 2010 The Wall Street Journal published an article titled "Charity Gives Shoe Brand Extra Shine" explaining how Toms and other companies where making philanthropy central to their business and their cause marketing.According to the author´s article, Toms Shoes is more than a business doing charity because the company has gone a step further than most responsible companies in blurring the difference between brand and charity.In this, and other cases of companies into the movement (such as Twins for Peace, SoapBox Soaps or Two Degrees, for instance), the brand would not exist outside the charitable mission.These companies success shows that good works can be a powerful profit engine (BINKLEY, 2010).KAPLAN (2012) announced the need to business model innovation across sectors in order to promote economic prosperity and to find solutions for the contemporary big social system challenges.But what are the general characteristics of this new business model?.
In order to delimitate the specific components of the model we start by focusing the attention on the one for one entrepreneur.Without doubt we are facing a special kind of social entrepreneurship.According to ZAHRA et al. (2009): "social entrepreneurship encompasses the activities and processes undertaken to discover, define, and exploit opportunities in order to enhance social wealth by creating new ventures or managing existing organizations in an innovative manner" (ZAHRA et al., 2009, p.519).
When an entrepreneur decide starting with a new venture based on the one to one movement he or she is enhancing quality of life for someone in need.In terms of profits, it is a classical business.The model has to generate revenue because it is a for-profit business (SAUL, 2010).
Consumer understanding is a specific component to difference this model from others.The desire to buy good products or services, sometimes costly, joins with the possibility to create social wealth and quality of life for someone with no opportunities to consume.Companies into the movement are selling more than new products and services.They are also "selling" social justice and sustainability.In this new business model, balancing the motives to create social wealth with the need for profits and economic efficiency are not tricky at all.
Moving to the pricing model, the one for one movement is not in conflict with the logic of marketing.A key contribution of the movement is the harmony between key ethical concerns and economic thinking.The movement fosters responsible consumerism, but consumerism any way.The value proposition of any business into the movement is high and this fact increases customers´ willingness to pay.The actors´ benefits are so clear, high consumer satisfaction and improvements in the quality of life of people in need.All this elements have been previously considered in academic literature in the field of business models but is the first time that the one for one movement has been described as a new business model at the best of our knowledge.

Hypotheses
The empirical study developed has the objective to discover whether the one for one movement was know by students and to discover what is determining their purchase intention.According to the Theory of Planned Behaviour (AJZEN and MADDEN, 1986), the moral attitude of subjects could be predicting the intention to consume products one for one.The theory's basic concept is the intention to perform a behavior.
Other concepts appear such as the attitude toward the behavior and the different kinds of beliefs that constitute the informational foundation for the behavior.In addition, the responsible behavior of potential consumers could determine purchase intention of this kind of social products.For instance, when researching environmental concerns, responsibility and responsible behavior have been considered as predictors of ecological purchase intentions (ARVOLA et al., 2008).
According to a social marketing approach, it is well known that companies must offer a good value proposition by selling the social idea (CRANE, 2001) but also in a manner which their target audiences find willing to purchase.Because of that, to be as near as possible to real life purchasing conditions is needed.In fact, social product potential consumers´ choices reflect not only social and moral values but also price or quality preferences for instance as it is important in buying classical products (ZEITHAML, 1988).
Based on the above, this paper puts forward the following hypotheses (Figure 1): H 1 -The moral attitude of subjects determines their responsible behaviour.
H 2 -The responsible behaviour determines the purchase intention of a one for one product.
H 3 -The purchase conditions will determine the purchase intention of a one for one product.

Instrument, Subjects and Procedure
Questionnaire data were gathered in Portugal.A total of 72 students participated in the present study.All of them were postgraduate students following a master course in Business Administration.First, they attended a lesson where the one for one movement was explained.At the end of the lesson the questionnaire, originally in Portuguese, was voluntarily completed.

Technique
Hypotheses have been tested by using Partial Least Squares (PLS), a secondgeneration structural equation modelling (SEM) technique that offers several advantages in the analysis over convariance-based SEM techniques.The most important is the possibility to test the model with a small sample as it is the case.Smart PLS 2.0 software (RINGLE et al., 2005) has been used to analyse both, the measurement model and the structural model testing the hypotheses as it is shown in next paragraphs.
In the model, constructs has been hypothesized as reflective bearing in mind that this is the most used choice in social sciences.The decision to develop a reflective model implies that causality flows from the constructs to the indicators.Therefore, a change in a construct causes a change in its indicators as the indicators share a common theme and are interchangeable, enabling researchers to measure the construct by sampling a few relevant indicators underlying the domain of the construct (COLTMAN et al., 2008).

Measures
Eleven-point Likert type scales were used in all measures.They either ranged from 0 "completely disagree" to 10 "completely agree".Items measuring the construct used in the questionnaire are shown in Table 1.
Moral attitude was measured using nine items.Subjects were asked to indicate their response to inequalities in the world and their moral obligation to help people in need.Responsible behavior was measured using five items focused on actions related to social issues.Purchase conditions were measured using eight items including price, quality and other purchase concerns.Finally, purchase intention was measured using four items reflecting which factors determine to buy products from the one for one movement.

Knowledge
Before today, degree of the one to one product knowledge (KNOW)

Moral attitude
I am against inequalities in the world (MORAT1) I think everyone is against inequalities (MORAT2) I hate that there are people in need and makes me feel bad about myself (MORAT3) I feel a moral obligation to help where possible to eradicate inequalities in the world (MORAT4) I like helping others (MORAT5) People should help others in the community (MORAT6) People must help people in need anywhere in the world (MORAT7) I think that everyone has the right to basic goods and services (MORAT8) If needed, I would like someone to help me with a one to one product (MORAT9)

Responsible Behavior
Whenever I can I contribute to eradicate inequalities (RESBE1) When I help someone or I participate in any action to help whenever, I do it selflessly (RESBE2) I collaborate with NGOs as a volunteer (RESBE3) I collaborate with NGOs providing money (RESBE4) When there are natural disasters or specific problems, I usually support providing money (RESBE5)

Purchase Conditions
As a consumer, I can contribute to the eradication of inequalities (PURCOND1) I would be willing to buy a one to one product simply because it is necessary to help others (PURCOND2) To purchase a one for one is important that the price was not high (PURCOND3) To purchase a one for one is important that the quality was good (PURCOND4) To purchase a one for one it would be important to find it in stores where I buy regularly (PURCOND5) To purchase a one for one I need to trust that the product will be donated to those in need (PURCOND6) To purchase a one for one it is important to know clearly the destination of the product (PURCOND7) Consumers should be informed of the existence of the products one to one (PURCOND8) Purchase Intention I would buy one for one products if it was easy (PURINT1) I would buy one for one products by human solidarity (PURINT2) I would buy one for one products by the personal satisfaction of helping others (PURINT3) I would buy one for one products to feel that I can be useful to society (PURINT4)

Findings
The first finding comes from analyzing descriptive statistics.Subjects were questioned whether they knew the one for one movement before the explanation given during the lesson they received and to determine the degree of this knowledge.Only the 5,6 per cent of subjects evaluate with up to 5 points their degree of knowledge.That means that the movement is still unknown and even more when considering that subjects were students of management and young people with internet facilities.
Moving to the hypotheses, the first step in interpreting the results was to examine measure reliability and validity.Following common practice, constructs have been analyzed taking into account that constructs in the model have been designed as reflective.The loadings can be interpreted in the same manner as the loadings a principal component analysis.Results from the general measurement model show the final items kept for all scales (Table 2).
It is remarkable that exclusion or inclusion of one or more indicators from the domain does not necessarily alter the content validity of the construct (COLTMAN et al., 2008).We have considered 0,66 loading value a lower limit for acceptance as modest construct reliability, that is applicable in the early stages of development of scales.That is close to the 0,7 general recommendation (NUNALLY, 1978).
Cronbach alpha and composite reliability have been also tested, considering composite reliability a more accurate measure than Cronbach alpha value because it does not assume equal item weighting.The model shows satisfactory values for all constructs.To assess discriminant validity and according to FORNELL and LARCKER (1981), we have calculated the average variance extracted (AVE) for all constructs getting values higher than the limit of 0,50 (0,666 for Moral attitude, 0,780 for Responsible behavior, 0,700 for Purchase conditions and 0,571 for Purchase intention).

Source: Own
The second step of the analysis is related to the goodness-of-fit of the model in order to confirm the working hypothesis.R 2 of the dependent variables are acceptable in all cases.PLS dies not generate a single goodness of fit metric for the entire model.The R 2 values are examined instead.In the model, the R 2 value obtained could be accepted for dependent constructs 2 is 0,535 and 0,628 for Responsible behavior and Purchase intention respectively).Main results are graphically shown in Figure 2 as follows.

Figure 2 -Main Results
For testing hypotheses (Table 3), PLS employs bootstrapping procedure, a nonparametric re-sampling technique that offers both the standard error and the values of Student's t-statistic.Thus, to calculate the significance of the path coefficients, the test was performed with 500 subsamples using a two-tailed t-distribution with n-1 degrees of freedom, where n is the number of sub-samples.Consistent with our first model, all hypothesized relations have been verified.H 1 , H 2 and H 3 are significant.Source: Own

Conclusion
The one for one movement is still unknown and companies in the movement have to start to explain better their business model and to gain visibility.Companies into the movement have to try to do a better job explaining what they do and explaining to potential consumers what is their value proposition.The movement is a contemporary radical solution to improve quality of life of people in need and, more than just the development of new products.
According to PEATTIE and PEATTIE (2009), sustainability is related to the creation of new social products and product substitutions amongst consumers, including the promotion and acceptance of concepts such as responsible consumption, voluntary simplicity and sustainable lifestyles and consumption reduction.The one for one movement is quite the opposite, inviting consumers to consume twice, for them and for someone in need.
The old anti-consumption challenge is change by the new double-consumption proposal better accepted by consumers and by marketing discipline.Why to feel guilty when living in the first world, having the opportunity to consume good products?Is consumption reduction directly related with the improvement of quality of life of people in need?The answer is not.Instead, spending our money in any product knowing that someone will receive the same product will be a social and responsible experience and consumers seem to be willing to pay for.
The movement could be considered a new business model working to create purchasing with meaning that support worthy causes such as helping save and restore sight.Thanks to this movement thousands of basic articles for assuring human dignity are being donated.Things to improve life conditions, such shoes or glasses, are starting to be provided by companies committed to the movement because their clients are willing to contribute for a fairer world.
Reflecting about the future of the movement we can say the movement will expand.However, some efforts have to be done in order to improve communication with principal stakeholders, their customers.It has been empirically demonstrated in this pilot study that purchase intention is determined by the moral attitude of consumers and their responsible knowledge but it is also determinant the purchase conditions of this kind of social products.Good price, quality and accessibility conditions, more visibility, more transparency and a bigger effort to demonstrate how these companies are really improving quality of life of people in need will help the movement to grow up.
To conclude it should be noted that results from the empirical analysis should be interpreted overcoming the limitations coming from the regional context of study and also from the selection of the sample limited to the management students sector.Consequently results are not directly extrapolated to other environments that differed greatly in their defining variables.Subsequent research could address the same study in different national contexts and with differentiate samples considered potential consumers.
This research provides also some managerial implications.First, the theoretical review done shows that there is a new trend in business models when social responsibility could be the core business of the company such as the case of companies into the one for one movement.Second, the empirical results of this study show that improving the purchase conditions of products one for one will have positive influence in purchase intentions.Bearing in mind that moral attitude and responsible behavior seem to be more present in nowadays consumers and considering also the strategic importance of CSR for companies, the one for one movement could be an interesting issue in the near future.

Figure 1 -
Figure 1 -The conceptual model

Table 2 -
Results from the measurement model