With a Little Help From My Customers: The Influence of Customer Empowerment on Consumers’ Perceptions of Well-Established Brands

Abstract

Labelling product innovations as designed and/or selected by customers can positively affect non-participating consumers' self-stated behavioural intentions, that is, it can increase the probability of purchasing that product. Most previous studies have used fictitious brands to test the aforementioned effect, raising concerns about the degree to which these findings are relevant for marketing practice. Brand managers thus might wonder whether labelling product innovations as user-designed and/or user-selected might indeed increase sales for their well-established brands. This paper addresses this research gap by investigating the possible effects of three alternative strategies for labelling innovations (i.e., empowerment-to-select, empowerment-to-create, and full empowerment) for two well-established technology brands. For all three strategies and both brands, we find that involving customers significantly increases the perceived innovation ability, which then positively mediates the effect on behavioural intentions. However, due to a negative direct effect, only labelling products as selected by customers has an overall positive effect.

Influence of co-creation signals on observers’ co-creation willingness: A self-determination theory perspective

“…When the company sends out the signal of customer participation in product selection, the product can appeal to a broader consumer group. It can stimulate observers' perceptions of the enterprise's innovative capabilities, leading to positive behavioral intentions, such as positive word-of-mouth and purchase intentions (Meißner et al, 2017).…”

“…Product co-creation research finds that enterprises with authorized consumers designing and choosing products can make observers perceive stronger customer orientation than zero-licensing enterprises (Fuchs and Schreier, 2011). In addition, when an enterprise shows that its products are co-created by consumers, the consumers will increase their awareness of the enterprise's innovation capability and product innovation (Schreier et al, 2012;Meißner et al, 2017). After interpreting such information from co-creation signals, observers think that the enterprises and brands involved in co-creation are more truthful and sincere.…”

“…Most studies have explored the co-creation signals that empower consumers to design. They found that consumer selfdesign co-creation signals can enhance the observers' perception of customer orientation and the innovation ability of enterprises, thereby stimulating positive brand attitudes and reinforcing positive behavioral intentions (Fuchs and Schreier, 2011;Meißner et al, 2017). It can stimulate the sincere personality perception of co-creation observers to the brand and enhance their recommend willingness (Van Dijk et al, 2014).…”

L’impact du statut participant ou non-participant des consommateurs sur l’évaluation des stratégies d’empowerment

“…la stratégie d’empowerment pour sélectionner) (Fuchs et Schreier, 2011). A notre connaissance, seuls trois articles ont testé l’évaluation relative des stratégies d’empowerment pour créer et d’empowerment pour sélectionner (Fuchs and Schreier, 2011 ; Liljedal and Dahlén, 2018 ; Meißner et al, 2017) avec des résultats non convergents ou non significatifs. Si Fuchs et Schreier (2011) n’ont pas établi de supériorité significative de la stratégie d’empowerment pour sélectionner par rapport à la stratégie d’empowerment pour créer, Meißner et al (2017) ont montré que la stratégie d’empowerment pour sélectionner surpasse la stratégie d’empowerment pour créer.…”

“…A notre connaissance, seuls trois articles ont testé l’évaluation relative des stratégies d’empowerment pour créer et d’empowerment pour sélectionner (Fuchs and Schreier, 2011 ; Liljedal and Dahlén, 2018 ; Meißner et al, 2017) avec des résultats non convergents ou non significatifs. Si Fuchs et Schreier (2011) n’ont pas établi de supériorité significative de la stratégie d’empowerment pour sélectionner par rapport à la stratégie d’empowerment pour créer, Meißner et al (2017) ont montré que la stratégie d’empowerment pour sélectionner surpasse la stratégie d’empowerment pour créer. Pour réconcilier ces résultats non convergents, Liljedal and Dahlén (2018) ont étudié les mécanismes et les facteurs de contingence qui pourraient expliquer pourquoi, quand et pour qui un type de stratégie d’empowerment est plus efficace qu’un autre.…”