Discussion Questions

DQ - 1

부정적인 인식

종업원 사이 무례한 행동

목격

소비자가 분노를 느낌

회사의 다른 종업원

회사 그 자체

미래의 회사와

관련된 모든 것

Witnessing

DQ

긍정적인 인식

종업원 사이 무례한 행동

목격

소비자가 안도감을

느낌회사 그 자체

IntentionalSeeing

고객에게 긍정적 이득

DQ

- Good cop, Bad cop strat-egy

- Role play

DQ - 연구 실험

2 by 2 정중한 질책 무례한 질책

고객 금전 이득없음

고객 금전 이득

예상 결과 : 고객에게 금전 이득이 있을 경우 무례한 질책이 오히려 고객의 만족도를 더 높여서회사에 대한 긍정적 인식을 갖도록 할 것이다

DQ

Q&A

Discussion Question2

Hur, Yun-young

Theoretical Background

Social SharingOf Emotions

Post – consumption Out-comes

(intensity of emotions, satis-faction, repurchase, recom-

mendation)

Recipient Status

Tie Strength

Theoretical Background

Social SharingOf Emotions

Post – consumption Out-comes

(intensity of emotions, satis-faction, repurchase, recom-

mendation)

Key Findings

• Throughout social sharing of emotions, the opinion on the experi-enced service & product is enhanced

• Social sharing of emotions affects post consumption outcomes- in-cluding intensity of emotions, satisfaction, repurchase, recommen-dation, etc.

Theoretical Background

Key Findings

• Through conversations, people converge toward shared representa-tions and knowledge with their social environment.

• Social sharing of emotions affects post consumption outcomes- in-cluding intensity of emotions, satisfaction, repurchase, recommen-dation, etc.

• Viable to see that social sharing of emotions contribute in brand-ing a product or a service, or even a company or a country.

Theoretical Background

Emotional Branding

• Emotional branding is a consumer-centric, relational, and story-driven approach to forging deep and enduring affective bonds be-tween consumers and brands (Roberts 2004).

• Proponents of emotional branding proclaim that this high degree of consumer passion is seldom, if ever, cultivated through rational ar-guments about tangible benefits or even appeals to symbolic bene-fits, such as heightened self-esteem or status (Gobe 2001).

• Brand meanings are not controlled by managers but rather are co-created through ongoing interactions among their users (Cova and Cova 2002; Fournier 1998; Muniz and O’Guinn 2001).

H1: Social sharing of emotions contribute to emotional branding

Theoretical Background

Emotional Branding & Word of Mouth

• Word of Mouth• Word-of-mouth communication (WOM) involves the pass-

ing of information between a non-commercial communica-tor (i.e. someone who is not rewarded) and a receiver concerning a brand, a product, or a service

• Brand characteristics stimulate WOM (Lovett et al. 2013)

• Because of the personal nature of the communications be-tween individuals in WOM, it is believed that WOM provide more credible information on a product / service.

H2: Emotional branding is a positive influencer of WOM

H3: WOM is a positive influencer of emotional branding

Theoretical Background

H4: Emotional branding directly influences consumer loyalty

Hypotheses

H1: Social sharing of emotions contribute to emotional brandingH1a: Social sharing of positive emotions contribute to

positive emotional brandingH1b: Social sharing of negative emotions contribute to

negative emotional branding

H2: Emotional branding is a positive influencer of WOMH2a: positive emotional branding leads to positive WOMH2b: negative emotional branding leads to negative WOM

H3: WOM is a positive influencer of emotional brandingH3a: Positive WOM leads to positive emotional brandingH3b: Negative WOM leads to negative emotional branding

H4: Emotional branding directly influences consumer loyalty

H4a: Positive emotional branding contributes to consumer loyalty

H4b: Negative emotional branding damages consumer loyalty

Model

Social SharingOf Emotions

Emotional Brand-ing

Word of Mouth

Consumer Loyalty