Beth Kanter recently wrote on CauseWorld, which is essentially a “cause version” of Foursquare.
Like foursquare and gowalla, you open the application on your phone and see local businesses (instead of showing everything around you, CauseWorld only shows businesses that you can check into for karmas). Enter the store, check in, and get the karma points offered to you. Once you’ve collected enough karmas you can donate them to a variety of causes. And, of course, you get badges for various activities.
You should definitely read Beth’s post and check out the TechCruch interview with the founder. I’ve been using the iPhone app for over a week and I like it a lot. The interface is very slick and you learn a lot about the charities CauseWorld supports. (Charities that are currently being funded by Citi and Kraft Foods.) But I have my doubts that this niche cause service can really compete against mainstream players like Foursquare, about which, I’ve admittedly written glowingly
- Right now I’m checking in with both CauseWorld and Foursquare. That’s not going to last. One of them will win out. If Foursquare adds the cause component to it, I’d rather do ten things on Foursquare than one thing on CauseWorld.
- Niche cause services never seem to take off. I’m not spending a lot of time on GoodSearch, are you? Remember all those portals we could visit before going to sites like L.L. Bean and Amazon, and good causes would get a few pennies every time we bought something? Are you still using them?
- Thus far consumers prefer to include their causes within a mainstream activity or vehicle. Take Facebook, which has a cause component. While supporting causes via Facebook is still in its infancy, it will grow. I’m not sure the same will be true for a standalone product like CauseWorld.
Think of it in terms of Product RED and its retail partners. Would it be better for RED to have standalone stores filled with cause products? Or is RED better off selling a few products in Starbucks and Apple and Nike? The answer is clear because the mainstream consumerism these retailers offer drives charity sales and RED is the big winner.
Alas, I’m not sure people want a cause world.
But I do think they want a world with causes. And if they can get that on Facebook, or on Foursquare, or in their next visit to Starbucks–things they do everyday for reasons outside of philanthropy–that might preclude a separate tool like CauseWorld.
What do you think?
I think they need to partner. Foursquare has the data and the users on the retail side, Causeworld has the data and mobile giving. If not, I agree, CauseWorld doesn't have a shot.
As I said, I agree with the RED/Gap analogy, but I don't think it applies here. I'd be more likely to visit a nice, well-kept & cared for store, with pricing that is reasonable, albeit outfitted which had my style with a bit less selection, which I knew went to a great cause, than I would go to a dimly lit store, with scads of choices for the same amount. (However, as I said, when I log on to Causeworld, there's way more selection in my immediate area for retailers, and they provided the info).
If I want to log into a football game or a hospital, I'd use foursquare, if I'm at CVS, Hannaford's, Papa Gino's, Dunkin Donuts or the littany of local mo & pop retailers, I'd use both, or lacking time, Causeworld. Nicer app, smoother working, I get to donate to a cause (haven't figured out what the 4Sq.'s Mayorships are for, but I know where my Causeworld Karmas are going).
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by johnhaydon, changefeed. changefeed said: Selfish Giving: CauseWorld: Location-Based Cause Marketing http://bit.ly/6tV1PD [...]
You may be right, but I think its too early to decide what niche is a one-company entity, besides the fact that the first one to capitalize on the data (hello megaliths Citi, Fraft Foods) – charity or otherwise – has a nice horse in the race.
Another great post. What do you do all day? Sit behind the desk and ponder, "How can I be brilliant today?"
When I read the TechCrunch article about CauseWorld I thought it was a great app for location based fun. Your perspective gives a different view of niche cause services — what works and what doesn't. I'm hoping that CauseWorld is successful because it will get people moving for a greater cause rather than getting a latte at Starbucks and saying "I'm here!" (so what?)
One of the main goals of marketing is to keep your product or services on the forefront of the consumer's minds. Cause World can achieve that (if people use it). Nonprofit orgs need to jump on this opportunity and support this company.
I agree with Holt Murray. On 4sq you become Mayor of a location, but so what? Do you get free cheeseburgers for being Mayor McCheese at McDonald's? No. 4sq is a great marketing tool for businesses to gain traffic from the internet to their brick-and-mortar. CauseWorld does the same but for a reason — to give back!
Just sayin…
Causeworld has no shot. Foursquare has already taken that niche and has the momentum to keep rolling. ____I can see Foursquare being bought out by Twitter or Facebook or Yelp … or maybe even Google.____Mainstream adoption for general purpose use is what win's out. Nonprofits will find a way to use the tool if it makes sense.
I agree w/ both your premise and your analogies, but I'm not counting Causeworld out yet for a couple of reasons.
Causeworld's app/site has a MUCH more polished look & feel. Backing that up, I sit in the middle of Boston and when I log on to both Causeworld and Foursquare, Causeworld has more places to check in. I know as time goes on, Foursquare will add & surpass, as it's user's add places to go, but I'll be honest: while the add a location feature is good for the user to be able to add & check in from anywhere, from an end-user of Foursquare, it feels like we're doing their work for them.
I do think Foursquare will last and I hope Causeworld will. But I find it interesting that the Causeworld app is so much more engaging than Foursquare. And, while they call out where you can check in to their site, they have a lot of options: from mom & pop to national companies. It gives me the feel that they've been in, researched, called on, and know my neighborhood. It makes me want them to succeed beyond simply whether they give to a good cause or not.
Social comments and analytics for this post…
This post was mentioned on Twitter by franswaa: Commented on CauseWorld: Location-Based Cause Marketing / Selfish Giving http://tinyurl.com/yh5eutq…
[...] own right – who have great insights into the cause geo-location biz. Check them out here and here. They're smart folks and worth a look. CFN] [...]
I do think it would be wise for them to follow though.
[...] more from Joe on using Foursquare and CauseWorld on [...]
Comparison: (As things stand now.)
Foursquare – You give your consumption patterns for free and maybe You get a little freebie.
Causeworld – You give your consumption patterns and someone else gets clean water, vaccinations, literacy, etc.
Unfortunately, I think this gives Foursquare an edge in our world. I am rooting for Causeworld, though.
[...] CauseWorld: Location-Based Cause Marketing [...]
[...] were founded on the belief that generous consumers would drive success but didn’t. As I said with CauseWorld, people don’t want a cause world, a dedicated cause product or service, they want a world [...]
[...] Cone reports, CauseWorld, Foursquare, Facebook Places and QR codes (ahem, thanks for reading guys) will change the in-store [...]
[...] are still making the mistake of putting mission before margin. Causeworld, Panera Community Cafe and Causeon are just three [...]
[...] don’t buy it, and fizzled experiments from Causeon to Edun to CauseWorld to GoodSearch show that while consumers do indeed want a world with causes, a cause world is a [...]
[...] tried to be the Groupon of causes but failed. CauseWorld was the Foursquare of cause-related location services but didn’t check-in with users. Even high-profile cause businesses such as Edun, which was [...]