Factors influencing word of mouth effectiveness: receiver perspectives

Abstract

Purpose -Word of mouth (WOM) is becoming increasingly recognized as an important form of promotion, particularly within professional services environments, where credence qualities play a critical role in consumers' choices. The present paper seeks to explore the factors that are likely to enhance the chances that receivers of positive word of mouth might be influenced by such information. Design/methodology/approach -The study examines findings from six focus group discussions and 103 critical incident forms. Findings -The findings suggest that the potential for WOM to impact on perceptions or on actions depends on the nature of the sender-receiver relationship, the richness and strength of the message and its delivery, and various personal and situational factors.Research limitations/implications -The findings are tentative and based on a relatively small sample; however, they provide a useful framework for future research into the process of WOM. Practical implications -The importance of WOM in marketing, particularly professional services marketing, is widely accepted; however, little is known about how to enhance its occurrence. The paper provides marketing managers with a better understanding of the factors likely to influence receivers of WOM. Originality/value -Most WOM research focuses on the sender of WOM. In contrast this paper provides insights on the impact of WOM on the receiver, something that is currently a "black box" in the marketing literature.

Do the Means and the Source Matter? A Study on the Actual Usage of Digitally Disseminated Coupons

“…They were seven times more effective than newspapers and magazines, four times more effective than personal selling, and twice as effective as radio advertising in influencing consumers to switch brands. Recent studies lend further support to the importance of peer-generated marketing communication (e.g., Brown and Reingen 1987;Donaton 2003;Duhan et al 1997;Katz and Lazarsfeld 1955;Kotler 2000;Park and Lee 2008;Rosen 2002;Sweeney et al 2008;Valente and Davis 1999).…”

“…Due to the change in roles, the social capital effect may not apply here. Indeed, the literature on consumers' purchase decision and intention to be a referrer has highlighted that while consumers' higher confidence towards a discount coupon forwarded by a peer may encourage their use of the coupon (Donaton 2003;Kotler 2000;Park and Lee 2008;Rosen 2002;Sweeney et al 2008), it is the level of satisfaction after they have used the coupon (i.e., consumption-related fulfillment ) that determines their likelihood of being a referrer (Sudaraman et al 1998;Swan and Oliver 1989;Wangenheim and Bayón 2007;Westbrook 1987). Leading from this, we could argue that while the redemption rate of the discount coupon could be higher when the source of the coupon dissemination is a peer rather than a merchant, the forwarding rate of the discount coupon may not be different regardless of whether the source is a peer or a merchant.…”

Education, Educational Services and their Quality

“…According to the theory of information diagnosticity (Feldman and Lynch 1988;Herr et al 1991) and negativity hypothesis (Czapinski 1988;Kanouseand Hansen 1971;Peeters and Czapinski 1990), negative information will be more attentive, diagnostic, helpful and thus preferred (Ahluwalia 2002;Ahluwalia et al 2001;Phillips et al 2008). For persuasion effectiveness, negative information is perceived as more diagnostic and vivid (Herr et al 1991;Sweeney et al 2008). Nonetheless, to reach credibility and persuasiveness, compared with positive WOM, negative WOM needs to provide more vivid and novel elements such as figures, more pictures, numbers and tables, highly evocative words or phrases, and storytelling techniques (Sweeney et al 2008).…”

“…For persuasion effectiveness, negative information is perceived as more diagnostic and vivid (Herr et al 1991;Sweeney et al 2008). Nonetheless, to reach credibility and persuasiveness, compared with positive WOM, negative WOM needs to provide more vivid and novel elements such as figures, more pictures, numbers and tables, highly evocative words or phrases, and storytelling techniques (Sweeney et al 2008).…”

“…Park and Lee 2009;Zhang et al 2010) and how these characteristics are related to the majority of purchase decisions (e.g. Leskovec et al 2007;Sweeney et al 2008) and product sales (e.g. Chevalier and Mayzlin 2006;Godes and Mayzlin 2009).…”