Disentangling the Differential Roles of Warmth and Competence Judgments in Customer-Service Provider Relationships

Despite increasing interest in warmth and competence as fundamental dimensions in consumers’ evaluation of service providers, prior research remains ambiguous about which dimension is more important. The current study develops a nomological framework that clarifies this ambiguity and explains whether, when, and why warmth or competence takes precedence for different outcomes in customer-service provider relationships. Combined evidence from field and laboratory studies support the notion of an asymmetric dominance, which suggests that warmth is dominant in driving outcomes that capture relational aspects (e.g., customer-company identification), whereas competence is dominant in driving outcomes that capture transactional aspects of the customer-service provider relationship (e.g., share of wallet). The findings provide first insights into the underlying mechanisms that drive this asymmetric dominance by demonstrating that relational and capability concerns mediate this process. Moreover, the current investigation identifies novel moderators that offer managers help in identifying service contexts (people vs. object care) and customer segments (differing in process and outcome service goals) for which investing in warmth or competence is more promising. Overall, displaying competence is particular effective in driving customer attraction and current operating performance, whereas displaying warmth is better suited to establish strong emotional bonds and drive customer retention.

The effectiveness of multiple brand portfolios: the role of directional dominance and brand interference on brand evaluation

PurposeThe purposes of the study were (1) to examine whether directional dominance between co-existing athlete brands and sponsor brands exists; (2) to explore whether directional dominance influences consumers' memory interference; and (3) to test whether brand interference interacts with directional dominance among brands to influence consumer evaluation and behaviors under multiple endorsement and sponsorship portfolios.Design/methodology/approachThe research is a 3 (directional dominance: symmetric dominance vs. asymmetric dominance with existing vs. asymmetric dominance with newly endorsed brand) x 2 (brand memory interference: interference vs. no interference) between-subjects factorial design.FindingsThe results indicate that (1) directional dominance influenced consumer brand interference, and directional dominance interacted with brand interference on (2) brand evaluation and (3) purchase intention in multiple brand portfolios.Originality/valueConsidering that conventional single-sponsor sponsorship or single-endorser endorsement portfolios are increasingly rare, research on concurrent circumstances of multiple endorsers and multiple endorsed brands in multiple brand portfolios was necessary. By expanding and reconceptualizing the context of brand networks, this study provides empirical evidence on how the dominance and directionality between endorser and (existing and newly) endorsed brands—an athlete endorser's strong pre-existing association with an existing endorsed brand in particular—influenced consumer brand interference and the brand evaluation in multiple brand portfolios.

How location-based advertising elicits in-store purchase

Purpose This paper aims to investigate how location-based advertising (LBA) elicits in-store purchase intention. To deepen the understanding of LBA’s effect on consumers’ purchase decision, the research examines the role of consumers’ time consciousness in click intention in pull or opt-out LBA approaches. The study also explores how consumers react to LBA with an asymmetric dominance decoy versus a compromise decoy message. Design/methodology/approach Two field experiments were conducted, and a total of 363 volunteers within 3 km of a shopping mall participated. The participants were asked to turn on their global positioning system and then informed that a convenience store was planning to launch a mobile coupon subscription service. Data collected were analysed using analysis of variance, regression analysis, bootstrapping and spotlight tests. Findings The results demonstrate that consumers had a higher intention to click pull LBA than to click opt-out push LBA. Consumers with high time-consciousness had greater click intentions for pull LBA than for opt-out push LBA. Consumers with low time-consciousness, however, showed no difference in click intention for either LBA approach. Further, click intention mediates the effect of LBA on in-store purchase intention, and the asymmetric dominance decoy message is a more powerful strategy for LBA to increase the likelihood of in-store purchase. Originality/value This research provides insight into location-based services marketing by revealing how time-consciousness and decoy promotional messages affect consumers’ reaction to LBA and in-store purchase intentions. The findings offer practical suggestions for retailers on how to reach and engage with consumers more effectively through the use of LBA.

The Asymmetric Impact of Context on Advantaged versus Disadvantaged Options

Despite substantial prior research regarding the effect of context on choices, uncertainty remains regarding when particular context effects will be observed. In this article, the authors advance a new perspective on context-dependent choices, according to which context effects are a function of the relative advantage of one option over another and of the different strategies that decision makers evoke when making a choice. They propose that context effects resulting from the addition of a third option to a two-option set are more frequently observed when the added option is relatively similar (adjacent) to the “disadvantaged” alternative (i.e., the lower-share option) in the set. The authors conduct a series of studies to analyze the occurrence of context effects and find support for predictions related to asymmetric dominance and extremeness aversion.