No abstract

Customer relationship management is a continually evolving domain that has been particularly affected by social media, which have revolutionised the way businesses and consumers interact. This paper on social CRM builds on a previous model of CRM prior to the growth of social media ( Jayachandran et al., 2005 ). We present a new model for social CRM, including a new construct of customer engagement initiatives and adaptations of other constructs to cater for the impact of social media. An online survey was used to collect data from a population of marketing practitioners and partial least squares analysis was used to test the model. Findings show the importance of an underlying customer relationship orientation; how it impacts on social media technology use and customer engagement initiatives, and also directly on customer relationship performance. A relationship is also shown between engagement and relational information processes, which is viewed as a performance outcome of social CRM. Thus, from a managerial perspective, one recommendation we make is that organisations should utilise the rich customer information that is created with every customer engagement through social media to drive future marketing decisions.

Clinical implications People can experience positive change after adversity, regardless of life background or types of events experienced. While growth and distress are possible outcomes after adversity, they occur through distinct processes. Support or intervention should consider rumination, event centrality, and perceived control factors to enhance psychological well-being. Cautions/limitations Longitudinal research would further clarify the findings found in this study. Further extension of the model is recommended to include other viable cognitive processes implicated in the development of positive and negative changes after adversity.

Of central importance to the policy debate which emerged during the late 1990s in the UK on the topic of 'food deserts' were the causes of the perceived worsening access to food retail provision in certain poor neighbourhoods of British cities. The 1980s/early 1990s era of intense food superstore development on edge-of-city sites was seen as having unevenly stripped food retailing out of parts of those cities, or having repositioned that provision downwards in range and quality terms. By the late 1990s, however, tightened land-use planning regulation had begun significantly to impact the development programmes of the major food retailers and those retailers increasingly came to adopt an urban regeneration agenda to drive forwards the new store development vital to their corporate growth. Simultaneously, issues of social exclusion rose to prominence on the political agenda and 'tackling social exclusion' began to be promoted as a possible new criterion for retail planning policy in the UK. In this paper, we explore this nexus of interest in urban regeneration and social inclusion. Using the example of a major retail development in the deprived area of Seacroft, Leeds, we outline the characteristics of the increasingly important regeneration partnerships involving retailers, local authorities, government agencies and community groups. We ask to what extent such partnerships can be dismissed merely as 'clever devices to get stores built and passed by planners' and discuss the implications for retail planning policy of attempts to address both the social exclusion and public health agendas of deprived and poorly served areas of British cities.

This paper outlines the research agenda of the food deserts in British Cities project, and reports findings from a set of qualitative focus group studies conducted following a major retail provision intervention in a low‐income, deprived area of Leeds. It explores the impacts of the transformation of physical access to full‐range retailing in the area, and assesses the views of the residents who had switched their main food source as a result of the intervention compared to those who had not. Finally, it interrogates residents’ perceptions of the impact (if any) of the intervention on their food consumption habits and their potential to eat a more healthy diet.