|مقالات مرتبط با این موضوع|
|مقالات ترجمه شده مدیریت|
کد محصول: M782
قیمت فایل ترجمه شده: برای اطلاع از هزینه و مدت زمان انجام ترجمه با پشتیبانی وب سایت تماس حاصل نمایید (۰۹۳۷۲۵۵۵۲۴۰)
تعداد صفحه انگلیسی: ۳۸
سال نشر: ۲۰۱۸
مقاله انگلیسی ۲۰۱۸ : استراتژی تبلیغات و اثربخشی آن در جستجوی آنلاین مصرف کننده در بحران بد نام کردن محصول
Advertising Strategy and Its Effectiveness on Consumer Online Search in a Defaming Product-Harm Crisis
Actual product-harm crises pose significant challenges to firms, but so can defaming product-harm crises, which are defined as crises caused by false or malicious rumors made by consumers or competing firms. Unlike typical product-harm crises, in defaming product-harm crises, the truth often emerges only after substantial damage has been done to the victim firm. Thus, crisis management strategies in these two cases may be different. Using a defaming product-harm crisis that involved two competing firms, this paper examines how the firms changed their advertising strategies and how the changes affected consumers’ online search behaviors regarding the two firms. Our analyses show that after the crisis, the offending firm sensitively reacted to its own and the victim firm’s advertising levels, but the victim firm did not react to the offending firm’s advertising as it had previously. The effectiveness of advertising on consumers’ online searches weakened for both firms after the crisis. Our paper provides a new insight about marketing strategies and their effectiveness in the product-harm crisis literature.
Keywords: Defaming product-harm crisis, Competitive reaction, Advertising strategy, Spillover effect, Online search
A product-harm crisis is a discrete event in which a product is found to be defective and therefore dangerous to at least part of the product’s customer base (Cleeren et al., 2017). Incidents involving Firestone Tire (2000), Kraft Peanut Butter (2007), Mattel (2007), Domino’s Pizza (2009), Toyota (2010), and Volkswagen (2015) are just a few recent examples in which customers and the companies were seriously imperiled by faulty products (Ackman, 2001; Clifford, 2009; Consumer Reports, 2016; Goldman and Reckard, 2007; van Heerde et al., 2007; USA Today, 2004). Such crises are seemingly increasing in number due to ever-changing market environments, greater product complexity, closer scrutiny by business-monitoring organizations and government regulators, and stronger customer demands for high-quality and safe products (Ahluwalia et al., 2000; Berman, 1999; Dawar and Pillutla, 2000).
A product-harm crisis endangers the well-being of customers and is a devastating threat to companies (Dawar and Pillutla, 2000; van Heerde et al., 2007); it can negatively affect sales, advertising effectiveness, and firm value (Chen et al., 2009; Cleeren et al., 2013; van Heerde et al., 2007; Zhao et al., 2011). Accordingly, many researchers have examined the antecedents and consequences of product-harm crises and developed advertising and pricing strategies to provide managerial insights on these proliferating crises (Cleeren et al., 2017). Prior studies have drawn insights mainly based on one or two fictitious product-harm cases in lab experiments (e.g., Whelan and Dawar, 2016) or on product recalls publicly announced in empirical settings (e.g., Liu et al., 2017). Existing studies on product-harm crises are still limited in that because product recalls are caused by the focal firms only, studies focus on a few dominant industries (e.g., automobile or consumer packaged goods (CPG) industries), and recall information is mostly available in developed countries due to stronger regulations and law enforcement.