差異化營銷策略外文文獻(xiàn)翻譯

1、文獻(xiàn)出處 : Dalman, M. Deniz, and Junhong Min. "Marketing Strategy for Unusual Brand Differentiation: Trivial Attribute Effect." International Journal of Marketing Studies 6.5 (2014): 63-72.原文Marketing Strategy for Unusual Brand Differentiation: Trivial Attribute Effect Dalman, M. Deniz & J

2、unhong MinAbstractThis research investigates that brand differentiation creating superior values can be achieved not only by adding meaningful attributes but also meaningless attributes, which is called "trivial attribute effect." Two studies provided empirical evidences as following; firs

3、t, trivial attribute effect creates a strong brand differentiation even after subjects realize that trivial attribute has no value. Second, trivial attribute effect is more pronounced in hedonic service category compared to the utilitarian category. Last, the amount of willingness to pay is higher w

4、hen trivial attribute is presented and evaluated in joint evaluation mode than separate evaluation mode. Finally, we conclude with discussion and provide suggestions for further research.Keywords: brand differentiation, evaluation mode, service industry, trivial attribute IntroductionProblem Definit

5、ionPerhaps the most important factor for new product success is to create the meaningful brand differentiation that provides customers with superior values beyond what the competitors can offer in the same industry (Porter, 1985). Not surprisingly, more than 50 percent of annual sales in consumer pr

6、oduct industries including automobiles, biotechnology, computer software, and pharmaceuticals are attributed to such meaningful brand differentiation by including new or noble attributes (Schilling &Hill, 1998). However, the brand differentiation that increases consumer preference is not only by

7、 introducing meaningful attributes but also meaningless attributes. For example, it is not unusual to see brands differentiating themselves in the marketplace by adding some non-important attributes to their offerings (e.g., Coca-Cola's "S" shape bottle, Pantene shampoo with vitamins o

8、r Folgers coffee changing the shape of coffee particles). These non-important or trivial attributes as the marketing literature suggests are attributes that "appears valuable but, on closer examination, is irrelevant or trivial to creating the implied benefit" (Carpenter, Glazer, &Naka

9、moto, 1994, p. 339).In marketing, the successful brand differentiation by trivial attributes has been discussed and explained by three different research streams. First, research on trivial attributes has shown that offering these attributes increase brands' buying likelihood by giving consumers

10、 reasons or rational for choice (Brown &Carpenter, 2000). Interestingly, even after consumers realized that the brand differentiation by trivial attribute didn't create any meaningful differentiation, their brand choice was the same (Carpenter et al., 1994). Second, Miljkovic, Gong, and Lehr

11、ke (2009) find that this trivial attribute effect on brand differentiation depends on the choice set. Specifically, they find that when the choice set consists of at least three brands-where each brand is strong on certain attributes and it is difficult for consumers to make a choice, offering a tri

12、vial attribute serves as a "tie-breaker" and thus increases the buying likelihood of that brand. Last, literature reveals that brand differentiation can be obtained by how competing brands are presented and evaluated either separately or jointly which is called the "evaluation mode ef

13、fect." Hsee, Loewenstein, Blount, and Bazerman (1999) introduce the two types of evaluation modes: separate evaluation and joint evaluation. Separateevaluation describes the evaluation context in which brands are evaluated one at a time. Joint evaluation means that the brands are evaluated simu

14、ltaneously. In particular, joint evaluation increases transparency when competing brands are evaluated (Chatterjee, Heath, &Min, 2009). Thus, when a brand with trivial attribute is presented and evaluated jointly with another brand without trivial attribute, consumers are easy to identify unique

15、nessof the brand with trivial attribute, which results in brand differentiation and brand preference. Studies in the evaluation mode literature continue to provide strong empirical evidences that the evaluation mode effect is particularly strong when consumers need to evaluate brands with uncertaint

16、y (Chatterjee et al., 2009; Hsee et al., 1999).The Purpose of This ResearchAlthough our knowledge of trivial attribute effect has been greatly enhanced, how the trivial attribute affects brand evaluation has never been studied from the perspective of product development and marketing strategy. Our r

17、esearch aims to fill the gap by offering empirical evidences from two studies. The goals of this paper is fourth folds; 1) Can brands increase their choice likelihood by adding some trivial attributes, 2) Does this effect depend on the nature of the category (i.e. hedonic vs. utilitarian), 3) Does t

18、he type of trivial attributes (hedonic vs. utilitarian) affect the consumer response to these trivial attributes, and finally 4) How can marketing managers effectively communicate a brand with trivial attribute? To reach these goals, in the first study, we review trivial attribute effect, and test h

19、ow it creates the brand differentiation in service sector. Then, in the second study, we discuss about the evaluation mode literature, and test that the effect whether trivial attribute is more salient in joint evaluation or separateevaluation mode. Finally, we conclude with discussion and provide s

20、uggestions for further research.Theoretical BackgroundTrivial Attribute Effect on Service ChoiceTrivial attributes are defined as the attributes that do not create meaningful differentiation in evaluation of alternatives (Broniarczyk &Gershoff, 2003; Miljkovic et al., 2009). Consumers treat this

21、 trivial information in the advantage of brands that offer them even when they are informed before decision-making about the triviality (Carpenter et al., 1994). Brown and Carpenter (2000) explain this advantage with the reasons based account. They argue that consumersprefer to choose on the basis o

22、f easily justified, cognitively available reasons (Brown &Carpenter, 2000). Thus, when the options cannot be chosen based on important attributes, consumers need to rely on trivial attributes that create brand differentiation (Shafir, Simonson, &Tversky, 1993).The question about what to add

23、to the offering to increase its value is especially important for services (Devlin, 1998), as it is more difficult to create a competitive advantage in service industries (Storey &Easingwood, 1998). The main reason is that unlike physical goods, services are intangible and consumers often face a

24、 problem of identifying the necessary attributes in services for evaluation. Thus, they end up only relying on brand comparisons on the basis of selected attributes (Gabott &Hogg, 1994; Rust &Chung, 2006). Therefore, services create more uncertainty for consumers than physical goods at the p

25、urchase stage. When a decision can't be justified on relevant attributes, consumersform arguments based on trivial attributes even after they are told about the triviality of the attribute (Albrecht, Neumann, Haber, &Bauer, 2011). Therefore, with the amount of uncertainty in services and the

26、 difficulty of evaluating attributes as mentioned above, consumers are likely to use trivial attributes when they are faced with an ambiguous choice set even after they are told about the triviality. We posit the hypothesis as follows;H1: The choice likelihood of service provider that offers a trivi

27、al attribute will be higher than that does not offer.Compared to physical goods, services are based on information processing (Rust &Chung, 2006) and how the information is processed depends on whether the service is utilitarian or hedonic (Hirschman &Holbrook, 1982). According to Batra and

28、Ahtola (1991), consumers have these two motives in a choice context. Hedonic services are related to "fun" and "pleasure" (Babin, Darden, &Griffin, 1994) whereas utilitarian services are related to "functionality" (Strahilevitz &Myers, 1998). In a choice context

29、, the outcomes of these two types of services are valued differently as the utilitarian outcome depends on objective standards whereas hedonic ones depend on subjective (discretionary) standards (Botti &McGill, 2010). Moreover, Botti and McGill (2010) argue that hedonic motives are sought "

30、as an end itself" whereas utilitarian motives are used to reach a higher-level goal. We argue that utilitarian services are more anxiety provoking than hedonic services as they include important, harder to achieve, and uncertain goals (Lazarus, 1991). And in situations, when goals are anxiety p

31、rovoking, trivial attributes are more influential (Xiao, Dacin, &Ashworth, 2011). Therefore, we expect the effect of trivial attributes to be more pronounced in a hedonic service category than in a utilitarian service category. We posit the hypothesis as follows:H2: The advantage of service prov

32、ider that offers a trivial attribute will be more pronounced for the hedonic services compared to utilitarian services.Marketing Communication Strategy Using Trivial Attribute EffectPrior literature has suggested that comparison is a natural and powerful strategy that consumers often rely on (Cooke,

33、 Janiszewski, Cunha Jr, Nasco, &De Wilde, 2004; Dhar, Nowlis, &Sherman, 1999). Hsee and Leclerc (1998) suggest that consumer preference changes depending on how products are presented and evaluated, specifically, whether they are evaluated separately (separate evaluation mode) or jointly (jo

34、int evaluation mode). For example, in separate evaluation when one is asked to rate the importance of supporting government intervention for saving dolphins over preventing skin cancer among farm works, the number of people who supports the government intervention for saving dolphins is substantial.

35、 However, in the joint evaluation mode when the same person is asked to compare the importance of dolphin to that of a human side by side (or jointly) the majority of people's answer is obvious to support a human.Thus, consumers in joint evaluation mode not only greatly save their efforts but al

36、so increase accuracy in choice because it is easier to identify similarities and differences between competing brands. This evaluation strategy focusing on the difference or something unique makes the trivial attribute become salient and even meaningful (Dhar& Sherman, 1996). Taken together, we

37、posit that brand with trivial attribute will be perceived more valuable (i.e., people are willing to pay more) in the joint evaluation mode than it is in the separate evaluation mode.H3: Willingness to Pay (WTP) is higher in the joint evaluation mode than that inthe separate evaluation mode.Discussi

38、onCreating brand differentiation has been critical more than ever in our globalized world. Many manufactures of consumer package goods make enormous marketing efforts to differentiate their brands against competitors often by searching and adding new or noble attributes. An important decision to mak

39、e for marketing managers is to determine what features should be included. In this research, we introduced an unusual brand differentiation strategy using the trivial attribute effect. Results from two experimental studies point out the following; if a trivial attribute as easy to implement as playi

40、ng music in between class sessions for a GMAT course or distributing free ice at a Music Festival is offered, it can help service providers gain competitive advantage over their competitors. This can allow managers to be more creative and stay competitive in the market. Our results also indicate tha

41、t this effect is more pronounced in hedonic service categories compared to the utilitarian categories.From the ethical perspective, offering attributes that don't create meaningful difference for consumers is not deceiving consumers as our results indicate that the effects of trivial attributes

42、hold even after consumers are told about the triviality of them. Moreover, consumers indicated in our study that they are not only aware of the triviality of these attributes but they also think they are not useful in their decision-making. Another result we found that supports the triviality of the

43、se attributes is that the type of trivial attribute (hedonic / utilitarian) does not matter. Lastly, in terms of effective marketing communication strategy relying on trivial attribute effect, our results revealed that the joint evaluation mode increases the consumer's willingness to pay more th

44、an that of the separate evaluation mode. 譯文不同尋常的品牌差異化營銷策略：微不足道的屬性效果德尼茨達(dá)爾曼；駿宏茗摘要本研究的主要內(nèi)容是， 通過品牌差異化來創(chuàng)造優(yōu)越的價值， 不僅可以通過添 加有意義的商品屬性來實現(xiàn)，還可以通過添加看似毫無意義的商品屬性來實現(xiàn)， 這被稱為“微不足道的屬性效應(yīng)”。兩項研究提供的實證證據(jù)如下, 首先, 其能創(chuàng)建一個強(qiáng)大的品牌差異化， 甚至是在主體意識到微小的屬性沒有價值后。 第二 , 享樂服務(wù)范疇與功利主義范疇相比，其微不足道的屬性效應(yīng)更加明顯。最后 , 當(dāng) 微不足道的屬性呈現(xiàn)出來， 以聯(lián)合評價模式而不是單獨(dú)的評估模式， 人們

45、愿意支 付的數(shù)量較高。最終我們得出結(jié)論，并為進(jìn)一步的研究提供建議。 關(guān)鍵詞 :品牌差異化，評價模式，服務(wù)行業(yè)，微不足道的屬性 引言 問題的界定一個新產(chǎn)品要想獲得成功，最重要的因素可能是創(chuàng)建有意義的品牌差異化 , 為客戶提供超出同行業(yè)的競爭對手可以提供的優(yōu)越價值 （ 波特 ,1985） 。不足為奇 的是 , 在消費(fèi)品行業(yè)包括汽車、生物技術(shù)、計算機(jī)軟件和制藥行業(yè)，有超過 50% 的年銷售額歸因于這樣有意義的品牌差異化包括新的或高貴的品質(zhì)（ 席琳 &希爾,1998） 。然而, 品牌差異化 , 增加消費(fèi)者偏好需要通過引入有意義或毫無意義的 屬性。例如 , 它是不尋常的品牌區(qū)分，在市場上通過為他

46、們的產(chǎn)品添加一些屬性 （如可口可樂的“S'形瓶,潘婷洗發(fā)水的維生素或福杰仕咖啡顆粒的形狀的變化）。這些不那么重要或微小的屬性作為營銷顯示” 似乎有價值 , 但仔細(xì)檢查 , 是無關(guān)緊 要的或微小的隱含效益”（卡彭特,拉澤爾和格雷澤，1994年,p.339）。在市場營銷中， 通過產(chǎn)品的簡單屬性獲得成功的品牌差異化， 討論和解釋為 三個不同的研究流。首先，為客戶提供商品屬性，增加品牌的購買可能性，從而 為消費(fèi)者提供理性選擇的原因。有趣的是 ， 即使消費(fèi)者意識到通過微小的商品屬 性并不能創(chuàng)造品牌差異化 ， 他們的品牌選擇是相同的 （卡彭特，1994） 。第二， 科維 奇， 龔， 拉瑞克（200

47、9） 發(fā)現(xiàn)， 這個微小的屬性是否影響品牌差異化主要取決于消費(fèi) 者作出的選擇。具體地說 ， 他們發(fā)現(xiàn) ， 當(dāng)選擇由至少三個品牌時 -這里的每個品牌 都具有很強(qiáng)的屬性，消費(fèi)者就很難做出選擇 ， 這個被簡稱為“平局決勝' ， 從而增 加了購買這個品牌的可能性。最后 ， 文獻(xiàn)顯示，通過單獨(dú)或聯(lián)合推廣和評價競爭 品牌即“評價模式效應(yīng)，可以獲得品牌差異化。（完整譯文請到百度文庫）“樂 聞斯泰因，布朗特 （1999） 介紹了兩種類型的評價模式 : 獨(dú)立評估和聯(lián)合評估。單 獨(dú)的評價描述了評價環(huán)境， 即品牌評估需要再特定的背景下。 品牌聯(lián)合評估意味 著品牌被同時評估。 特別是 , 當(dāng)競爭品牌聯(lián)合評價評估

48、時， 聯(lián)合評估能增加透明 度（查特基 ,希思,2009） 。因此 , 消費(fèi)者容易識別品牌的獨(dú)屬性與其微小的屬性 , 從而導(dǎo)致品牌差異化和品牌偏好。 當(dāng)消費(fèi)者在不確性的情況下評估品牌時， 關(guān)于 評價模式的研究文獻(xiàn)將繼續(xù)提供強(qiáng)有力的實證證據(jù) （ 查特基,2009; 漢斯,1999） 。 研究目的盡管我們對于微不足道的屬性的認(rèn)識大大加強(qiáng) , 從產(chǎn)品開發(fā)和營銷策略的 角度來講， 微不足道的屬性如何影響品牌評估還尚未被研究過。 我們的研究旨在 從兩項研究提供的經(jīng)驗證據(jù)中填補(bǔ)這一缺口。 本文的研究目標(biāo)為 ;1） 通過提供一 些微不足道的屬性，品牌是否能增加他們選擇的可能性 ,2） 這種影響是依靠品種 的性

49、質(zhì)嗎 （ 即享樂主義和功利主義 ）,3） 微小的品質(zhì)類別是否 （享樂主義和功利主 義）影響消費(fèi)者對其的選擇，最后 4） 營銷經(jīng)理如何有效傳遞這些品牌的微不足道 的屬性? 為了達(dá)到這些目標(biāo) , 在第一項研究中 ,我們審查微小的屬性效果和測試 如何在服務(wù)業(yè)創(chuàng)造品牌的差異化。然后 ,在第二項研究中 , 我們討論一下評價模 式，以及用聯(lián)合評價或單獨(dú)的評價模式測試效果是否更加突出。最后 , 我們通過 討論得出結(jié)論，為進(jìn)一步的研究提供建議。理論背景 微不足道的屬性效果服務(wù)選擇微不足道的屬性被定義為這種屬性在選擇評估中不會創(chuàng)建有意義的差異化 （ 布朗尼克 &格爾索夫 ,2003; 科維奇 ,2009） 。消費(fèi)者對待這種優(yōu)勢品牌的瑣碎信 息，即使在決策之前被告知 （卡彭特,1994） 。布朗和卡彭特 （2000） 基于賬戶的原 因解釋這一優(yōu)勢。他們認(rèn)為 , 消費(fèi)者更愿意選擇基礎(chǔ)上合理的 , 可用的認(rèn)知原因 （ 布朗和卡彭特 ,2000） 。因此 , 當(dāng)基于重要屬性的不能選擇 , 消費(fèi)者需要依靠微不 足道的屬性創(chuàng)建品牌差異化 （ 沙菲爾 ,西蒙森 tversky,1993） 。對服務(wù)來講增加一些要素來提高它的價值尤為重要 （德芙林 ,1998）, 因為在 服務(wù)行業(yè)它很難獲得競爭優(yōu)勢 （ 斯托雷&伊斯沃,1998） 。主要原因是它不同于有 形商品, 服務(wù)是無形的 ,消費(fèi)者常常面臨