wom - a definition of communication
Post on 27-Nov-2014
132 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
WOM 1
Running Head: WOM
WORD-OF-MOUTH
A Definition of Communication
By: Megan Williams
Under the guidance of Prof. Gurram Gopal, CBE.
Elmhurst College
WOM 2
INTRODUCTION
In a blink of an eye, a person or product can go from utter obscurity to having the highest
number of inquiries on a search engine. The power of Word-of-mouth communication has even
caught the attention of major news networks highlighting videos on You Tube that have the
highest number of views. Whether an email forward or a conversation over dinner, peer
communication is becoming more important than advertising. In “How to Build Buzz” Steve
Brooks cites a GfK Roper Consulting study that found that “81 percent of U.S. Consumers cited
‘people’ as a trusted source of information and purchase ideas, versus 55 percent for advertising”
(Brooks 32). If word-of-mouth communication is an alternative to advertising and advertising is
a paid marketing effort, what is word-of-mouth communication?
Through a review of literature, this paper will identify the parts of word of mouth
(WOM) and demonstrate how these parts interact. This paper researches marketing, sociology,
and graph theory to develop a definition of WOM. While the topic of WOM can be anything
from a product, service, person, or information, for the purposes of this paper all topics of WOM
will be referred to as a product.
WORD-OF-MOUTH
In “Word-of-mouth: Understanding and Managing Referral”, Francis Buttle highlights
two pervious definitions before updating the definition for today. J. Arndt characterized WOM
as “oral person-to-person communication between a receiver and a communicator whom the
receiver perceives as non-commercial, regarding a brand, product or service” (Buttle, 242). As
this definition was developed in 1967, the person-to-person component is no longer the only
method by which WOM is communicated. Buttle identifies electronic bulletin boards as a
medium used today for WOM communication (Buttle, 243). In addition, Buttle acknowledges
WOM 3
that the “brand, product or service” component of Arndt’s definition can also now include
organizations (Buttle, 243). This extension, taken at its loosest interpretation, can include the
every formal or informal group and the affairs surrounding these groups. The organization could
include affairs involving the federal government. For instance the campaign video posted on
You Tube developed by a Barack Obama supporter depicting fellow Democratic candidate
Hillary Clinton as George Orwell’s Big Brother from 1984 was quickly shared within and
between networks. The video gathered so much attention that the topic was highlighted on
network news programs (CNN).
The second definition that Buttle highlights is one developed by B. Stern in 1994. Buttle
identifies Stern’s definition as “the exchange of ephemeral oral or spoken messages between a
contiguous source and a recipient who communicate directly in real life . . . Consumers are not
assumed to create, revise and record pre-written conversational exchanges about products or
services . . . WOM communication vanishes as soon as it is uttered, for it occurs in a spontaneous
manner and then disappears” (Buttle, 242). Buttle does not directly contest this definition, but
does mention that online communication is not necessarily direct or in real life and that online
posts can be recalled at a later time (Buttle, 243). I agree with Buttle’s critique of Stern. To take
the ability to recall WOM communication even further, even through face-to-face
communication, a comment may be made to a recipient whom may later recall this comment and
share it with a new recipient.
Buttle’s own look at WOM attempts to define the communication by breaking it down
into its components: (1) valence, (2) focus, (3) timing, (4) solicitation, and (5) intervention.
However, the problem with Buttle’s classification is that it looks at WOM solely as a tool for
marketing. “Neither the timing or content of WOM is under the control of the manufacturer”
WOM 4
(Kamins, 166). For Buttle, the focus component is the attention that management invests in
WOM and how management can use it to establish loyal customers (Buttle, 243). And the
solicitation component for Buttle only differentiates the solicitation between management and
the customer and not between customers. While I agree that these five components exist in
WOM, these components combined do not combine to create a model that demonstrate the total
process of WOM communication. Buttle does not identify the persons or actions within the
model. Knowing what these components are one can identify where in the model a company can
take advantage of WOM.
A definition for WOM today must include every possible WOM communication method
available. It also must make room for marketer driven WOM. Word-of-mouth communication
is:
Interpersonal communication between individuals within networks that either explicitly
or subconsciously identify preferences.
“Interpersonal communication” is used to distinguish this communication from forms of mass
media. While the information may originate from management or even an advertisement, it is
continued by people communicating with people. The term network is used to demonstrate that
everyone is in some way connected to a group of people, and thus excluded from others.
Networks can be large or small. Individuals can be connected to a variety of networks, some of
which strong ties are made and in others there are weaker ties. Individuals may also be part of
extended networks where there is no direct connection between two individuals, but through a
series of networks people are connected. And the use of “preferences” is important because
every communication in some way reflects our interests. The simple fact that one is willing to
WOM 5
share a piece of information demonstrates a level of interest in the topic. The preference can be
for a particular product or for a scandalous rumor about a celebrity.
This definition can be deconstructed even further to identify the actors within the WOM
communication, their actions, and the environment in which they act.
ACTORS
While WOM by one individual can reach hundreds or thousands of people through
resources, essentially at its core WOM is an action that exists between two people. It is a
communication between one person that has experienced a particular product and one person
who has not. These are essentially the two actors within the WOM model. The purpose of the
actors is to focus their communication to each other about a particular product. In this case it is a
product.
These actors will be referred to as the pre-consumer, the individual who has not
experienced the product, and the post-consumer, the individual who has experienced the product.
The product that is the focus of the WOM discussion can be any product, service or information
and is independent of the two actors. However, as I alluded to before we are not to assume that
there are only two individuals participating in WOM discussions. Depending on the type of
WOM, one pre-consumer may seek the advice of several post-consumers.
There is one type of individual who is very important to the progression of WOM, the
opinion leader. While the opinion leader can be a pre- and a post-consumer, their influence as a
post-consumer is essential to successful WOM. Opinion leaders are hypothesized to give
unsolicited advice more often than non-opinion leaders (Engel, 16). In addition, opinion leaders
are more likely to be receptive to WOM than non-opinion leaders (Reynolds, 449).
WOM 6
The receptivity of opinion leaders and those that seek their opinions is likely due to the
level of creativity in these individuals. These individuals most likely are in the first few groups
of the adoption curve, especially the innovators. Their creativity doesn’t necessarily refer to
their abilities as an artist or writer, but instead the ability to participate in thought experiments
(Hogarth, 116). These thought experiments reflect the position of these individuals as choice
makers. They are able to weigh and consider other alternatives. They are not solely influenced
by their environment. Instead of letting mass advertising determine their choices, they are
willing to seek out new innovations (Hogarth, 110). So when other alternatives are presented to
them, for instance through WOM, these individuals are likely to include such recommendations
into their choice possibilities.
The terms pre- and post-consumer are used to cover both sides of the purchase
transaction. The terms cover all the different types of WOM transactions. Neither hint at the
possibility of either being an opinion leader because the opinion leader can be both a pre- and
post-consumer that either seek or solicit information.
It is important to note that social networks are not a series of rigid social islands that have
no connection to each other; Actors within WOM can interact with individuals within and
outside of their network. Several factors could influence whether or not actors would
communicate outside of their network; like focus, geography, or economics. And someone who
was an opinion leader in one network might not be one in another.
WOM 7
ACTION
There are six basic WOM transactions between two actors either within or outside of their
networks. These transactions cover the actions of pre- and post-consumers:
1. Post-consumer uses product and gives unsolicited information to a pre-consumer. 2. Post-consumer is solicited by a pre-consumer for information on a product. 3. Post-consumer uses product and posts review on an online forum or website. 4. Pre-consumer is given unsolicited information on a product from a post-consumer. 5. Pre-consumer solicits information from a post-consumer. 6. Pre-consumer seeks information from an online forum, paper, or blog.
While it may seem as though (1.) and (4.), and (2.) and (5.) are the same, they have subtle
differences. These two pairings may in some instances be the same, but they are left separate to
account for the distinction of a post-consumer using a particular product and recommending it
and a pre-consumer seeking general information from a post-consumer about a type of product.
Ex. Post-consumer uses a new pair of headphones and is impressed with the quality of the
headphones. The post-consumer would then tell people about the headphones. However,
a pre-consumer may be in the market for new headphones and could either seek out
information from a post-consumer about types of headphones or a particular headphone.
Interactions in which pre- and post-consumers directly exchange information are
considered within the same immediate network because there is at least some sort of basic social
interaction between the two. However, the degree to which these members are close in a
network can vary greatly. There may be only one characteristic between two people and
therefore wouldn’t be closely related in a network. It could be two people that catch the same
bus every morning but still come from very different social, economic and educational
WOM 8
backgrounds. This would also include online social networks like Myspace and Facebook.
Individuals’ profiles may or may not be public but internal messages between members of the
same network are private.
As mentioned before, information can be solicited or unsolicited. There are different
factors which affect whether or not someone will give unsolicited information. These factors
will be covered in the environment section.
WOM can also be verbal or nonverbal. Verbal would be the most common and would
include online posts. Specific words are spoken to express a view about a product. Nonverbal
WOM would be classified in the same way nonverbal communication is through appearance,
paralinguistics , proxemics, gestures. A post-consumer may wear or carry an item and those
around not asking will see this item. It could be two people near each other on the train and one
sees the other using a new phone and their interest may be peaked. They could ask that person or
seek information on that phone form another source. Because of its nature, nonverbal WOM is
always unsolicited. It can also include tone. While a specific view may not be expressed, the
specific tone used can express some view about a product. However, tone can be solicited or
unsolicited. One can ask, “Why do you think of this product?”. They can express in tone what
isn’t expressed in words. Nonverbal would also have more of a subconscious affect than
conscious affect.
Another aspect of WOM would include timing. Buttle highlights the timing of WOM
around the time of purchase. This may affect the level of variance because the experience is so
near that the product involvement will be higher at this point. While this may help in continuing
the WOM to get people to continue to talk, there is also the timing of WOM in the product’s life
cycle. WOM has been seen to be highly effective in the beginning of the life cycle.
WOM 9
REACTION
Whether by action or inaction, pre-consumers will respond to WOM by either verifying it
or ignoring it. The pre-consumer will choose two different paths: one path will follow the WOM
and one path will ignore the WOM. The valence of the WOM will determine what type of action
is taken. If the WOM valence is positive for a product, following WOM would be a purchase of
the product and ignoring WOM would be not purchasing the product. The opposite is true of a
negative WOM valence.
Positive Valence
If action follows +WOM, the purchase of the product either confirm or contradict post-consumer+ WOM.
If the action doesn’t follow +WOM, the pre-consumer will either buy an alternative or seek WOM
from alternative source.
Purchasing this other alternative the pre-consumer will either like or dislike the product. If the alternative is liked it would contradict the WOM from the post-consumer. However, this will be less of a contradiction than if the pre-consumer purchased the original product and disliked it. Here the pre-consumer would be comparing their pleasure from the alternative to the original product and the imaginable pleasure they think they would receive from it. The opposite would be true if the pre-consumer didn’t like the alternative. This would confirm the original +WOM, but its confirmation strength would not be as strong as it would have if the original product had confirmed
the +WOM.
If the pre-consumer seeks the WOM of an alternative source, the alternative WOM would either confirm or contradict the original +WOM. Here the pre-consumer must evaluate the sources to determine whether or not they choose to follow the +WOM or ignore it.
WOM 10
Negative Valence
If the WOM is negative, the paths are somewhat similar to the paths of positive WOM,
but inverted. If a pre-consumer purchases the product in question the action would be ignoring
the –WOM and if the product isn’t purchase the pre-consumer is following the –WOM.
There is a level of value given to everyone’s WOM. If we assume that everyone has an
initial neutral evaluation and personality isn’t used to evaluate their value of WOM, a positive
evaluation of a product will reflect on the person and negative evaluation of a product will reflect
on the product (Kamins, 168). That is to say that if Bob recommends that Sara purchase a
product and she likes it, for Sara the value of WOM will a positive reflection of Bob. However,
if she dislikes the product, the value of Bob’s WOM will be lower. However if Bob gives a
negative review of a product, whether or not Sara likes the product or not won’t significantly
affect her evaluation of Bob.
WOM 11
ENVIRONMENT
WOM with its simple parts broken down may seem like a simple physics equation. Two
objects, one acts on the other and that causes a reaction. “For every action there is an equal and
opposite reaction.” While this equation may be easily solved in physics class, the world doesn’t
operate in a vacuum. The environment in which WOM exists greatly affects when, why, and
how WOM is conducted.
Cost
One of the first attributes of WOM that seems to be associated with WOM is lack of cost
as its defining characteristic that distinguishes it from advertising. However, as Adam Smith
would say, “There is no such thing as a free lunch.” Buttle suggests that the distinctions between
WOM and advertising are blurred in today’s markets (Buttle, 243). Therefore WOM cannot be
assumed to be free. There is always some sort of cost involved, even between individuals of the
same network. The cost may be as simple as the cost of a phone call, internet connection or time
spent while meeting friends over a cup of coffee (including the cost of the cup of coffee). Also,
companies wishing to have celebrities photographed using a product or having a product featured
in a magazine must forgo the profit they would receive from the sale of such item. A company
must also employ the individual who writes the press release that is published in a magazine or
newspaper free of charge.
There are also intangible costs that may be associated with WOM. Frenzen and
Nakamoto also identify a cost that may affect whether or not a consumer will share WOM
information in (Frenzen, 363). Personal motivations of the consumer may limit flow of
information if they feel that by sharing such information it will negatively affect them. They use
WOM 12
the example of a consumer being informed about an upcoming sale (Frenzen, 363). If by sharing
the information the consumer feels that they would be limiting the supply of items on sale, they
might opt not to share the information.
An additional cost that may limit the flow of WOM is the danger of weakening a
network. There is a general level of trust within any network because within a network there any
number of shared characteristics between its members that allow the members to identify with
each other. Depending on how many characteristics are shared the bond between the members
of the network may be weak or strong. A decrease in the value of the WOM of members of the
network can weaken the network in its ability to continue to the flow of information. If a
member of a network continuously gives positive reviews of products that the other members
feel are unwarranted, the other members of the network are unlikely to give much regard to
positive reviews in the future.
Cost is a definite influencer on how and why or why not WOM communication is
conducted. While it may not be always be a conscious decision for a consumer to specifically
select one method of communication over another, access to a method or the preference of a
particular method would automatically limit available methods. A consumer may not have an
internet connection or a company may not have access to celebrities to give their product to. Or
members of a particular network may prefer to exchange information through blogs, as opposed
to over the phone.
Product Involvement
Once the risks are weighed, consumers are still influenced by their motivations. One of
the first motivators affecting WOM is product involvement. Product involvement can include
the amount of time or money taken to find or choose a product or the emotional connection to a
WOM 13
product. However, these two distinctions of product involvement are not mutually exclusive.
For big ticket items it is likely that there is a great deal of information flowing about the product.
Consumers want to ensure that they are getting the best that they can for their money. Or maybe
the item is a difficult item to find and the consumer.
The product involvement can also be an emotional connection, not just to the product, but
also to the company that manufactures the product. A product may have offered a new
innovation that the consumer perceives as an improvement in their quality of life. The emotional
connection to the product and or company may be created by the company allowing its
customers to beta test products and offer suggestions for improvement. The customer then might
feel some sort of ownership of the product concept. In some way the company creates a bond
with its customers that not only makes it loyal to the company and its products, but also increase
the likelihood of the company’s customers recommending the company/product to members of
their network.
Other possible motivations include status and the reduction of dissonance. “People
spread rumors that reflect highly on their choices,” (Kamins, 182). Sharing information about a
recent purchase might reflect the consumer’s taste, buying power, or awareness of the newest
innovations. The goal is more to demonstrate to others how they are superior, than it is to spread
the word about a product. However, this motivation for WOM is not one that hampers WOM,
but instead may help it.
WOM 14
NETWORKS
In WOM communication, the network is the important component that keeps the flow of
information going. In “Social Networks and Economic Sociology: A Proposed Research Agenda
for More Complete Social Science” Michael Davern identifies four components of social
networks that have applications for explaining networks utilized in WOM communication:
1. The structural component is the shape of the actors and the ties between them;
2. The resource component is the distribution of characteristics within networks;
3. The normative component are the norms and rules that govern the network; and
4. The dynamic component is the opportunities and barriers to tie formation (Davern, 289).
These four components combined demonstrate that a network is a flexible and that the ties
between actors can be created or destroyed (Davern, 289). Davern identifies some criteria that
can be used to measure the strength of the ties between actors as time actors spend together,
emotional bonds, business connections, or like and dislike of person (Davern, 290).
The dynamic characteristics of social networks are important for marketers to
acknowledge if they are attempting to take advantage of existing networks. Because ties can be
broken, marketers must choose carefully how they incorporate a network into their marketing
efforts. Exhaustive use of a network may dissolve the ties between actors. A marketer must
anticipate changes in these networks.
WOM 15
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Find a way to create some sort of bond between company and customers. It may be as
simple as making sure that the lines of communication between the two are open. If the
customer feels that there is some sort of connection, they might feel that the company is
actually part of their own personal network. In the article “Analysis of Referral
Networks in Marketing,” Reingen and Kernan observed that those members of a network
that knew the local piano tuner personally were more likely to recommend his services
than those who knew the piano tuner professionally, like piano store owner (Reingen,
377). If this observation were to be applied to broader conditions, a company would
benefit from consumer relations that seek to establish a high level of product involvement
and emotional connection to incorporate itself into the networks of its customers to
increase the likelihood of referrals.
2. Identify opinion leaders. Opinion leaders, whether consciously or subconsciously, will
drive the initial WOM. They are more likely than any other group to pass on information
about a product. By identifying this group you can concentrate a small portion of your
marketing efforts to hopefully achieve a high rate of return from the consumers who
receive WOM from these opinion leaders. The concentration of efforts by a company
focused on opinion leaders should work because this group is also more likely than any
other group to listen to WOM efforts (Reynolds, 449). In addition, opinion leaders may
be viewed as experts in some areas. People tend falsely to believe that a person’s
expertise in one area translates to other areas (Hogarth, 162). Identifying opinion
leaders/experts in similar areas to a particular product field may be useful to future
marketing efforts. However, using opinion leaders that don’t have an expertise in a
WOM 16
company’s particular product must be done carefully. These alternative opinion leaders
must be able to present a level of expertise that can be perceived to translate to other
areas.
Recommendations for Further Research
The use of graph theory to illustrate social or referral networks is a natural choice that
some researchers are utilizing. For example Reingen, Kernan, and Brown. Reingen and Kernan
(1986) attempt to map out the referral network of a piano tuner and identify and classify its
members. Some members are identified as being part of his personal network and others are
identified as opinion leaders. However the network is mapped out after the WOM
communication has taken place. Members are required to recall their referrals after the fact.
Johnson Brown and Reingen (1987) also attempt to map out a referral network after WOM
communication has taken place. While these two studies are able to illustrate the network and
show where networks overlap, they do not identify a relationship between WOM communication
and consumer behavior.
Coupons are pricing tools that are used to drive sales (Perreault, 415). They are abundant
in the Sunday paper, but there is also an increasing trend of online coupons. Some can be printed
directly off a manufacturer’s website. Currently Swifter is offering a coupon for $5 off of the
Swifter® WetJet® (Swifter). Or the coupons can be emailed to individuals, who can forward
these to people they know. I recently received two emails from peers offering coupons. One
was for a promotional “Friends and Family Sale” at H&M and the other was for “Buy One, Get
One Free” at Jamba Juice. One thing that I noticed about these coupons was not only how wide-
WOM 17
spread they were used, but how there was no method register how effective these email coupons
were.
As I thought about how I was forwarded the coupon from one peer and I passed it on to a
peer not associated with the original sender, I realized that the trail of forwards represented
WOM communication through a network. If a company could develop a simple program that
could track the communication between its customers, the company could identify various
networks within its customer base, opinion leaders in the market, and the relationship between
WOM communication and consumer behavior. A proposed outline of a program is available in
the appendix.
CONCLUSION
In their article, “Word-of-mouth Communication and Social Learning,” Ellison and
Fudenberg suggest that WOM communication plays an integral role in what could be classified
as a sort of “survival of the fittest” (Ellison, 95). They found that “word-of-mouth
communication may allow for efficient social learning in the sense that all players eventually
adopt the action which is on average superior (Ellison, 95).” However, they also warn that this
only remains true when minimal amount of information is sought, presented, or made available
(Ellison, 95). Yet, in today’s market the lines between consumer generated WOM and
management generated WOM are blurred. Either way WOM works the same. But to ensure that
WOM works for management, management must acknowledge that WOM begins as a simple act
of communication between two people.
WOM 18
APPENDIX
To map out a WOM network as the communication is taking place I suggest developing
an email system that would track the spread of communication. For the purposes of this
proposal, we will call the company Cloth, a clothing company for men, women and children.
Cloth would first select a list of recipients to send an email to offering a coupon for either a
percentage of their total purchase or a percentage off the purchase of a new product that the
company is offering. Depending on what information Cloth has on its customers, Cloth should
make every attempt identify opinion leaders to include in the initial email list.
In the most “friendly” language possible the email should communicate that a discount is
available. The recipient needs only to follow a simple link to receive the coupon. This link is
created specifically for the recipient so that Cloth will be able to identify which recipients
responded to the email.
Through this link Cloth has the opportunity to collect some basic demographic information about
the recipient. The number of questions should be limited in order not to detour the recipient
from continuing. The scope of the questions should also be as unobtrusive as possible; like age,
gender, and location. Here the recipient also has the opportunity to insert email addresses of
people they know to pass on the discount. Cloth would then send emails to these people from
the first recipient. These emails would have a link that would take them to a similar page to
receive the coupon, enter demographic information, and email addresses to pass on the discount.
However this link would be specific to the original email recipient and the individuals to which
WOM 19
the email was forwarded to. This link would be able to identify who responded to which emails
sent by which individuals.
These individualized links will identify to whom individuals are sharing information,
who is responding to this information and who is sharing information. The email system will be
able to identify actors in a network and the ties between them. The coupons themselves would
have information identifying who the coupon is from, therefore providing data from which
relationships between WOM and behavior could be identified.
WOM 20
WORKS CITED
Brooks, Steve. "How to Build Buzz: the New Rules of Word-of-Mouth Marketing." Restaurant
Business Nov. 2006: 30-38.
Buttle, Francis A. "Word of Mouth: Understanding and Managing Referral Marketing." Journal
of Strategic Marketing 6 (1998): 241-254.
Davern, Michael. "Social Networks and Economic Sociology: a Proposed Research Agenda for a
More Complete Social Science." American Journal of Economics and Sociology 56.3
(1997): 287-302.
Ellison, Glenn, and Drew Fudenberg. "Word-of-Mouth Communication and Social Learning."
The Quarterly Journal of Economics 110 (1995): 93-125.
Engel, James F., Robert J. Kegerreis, and Roger D. Blackwell. "Word-of-Mouth
Communication by the Innovator." Journal of Marketing 33.3 (1969): 15-19.
Frenzen, Jonathan, and Kent Nakamoto. "Structure, Cooperation, and the Flow of Market
Information." The Journal of Consumer Research 20 (1993): 360-375.
Godes, David, and Dina Mayzlin. "Using Online Conversations to Study Word-of-Mouth
Communication." Marketing Science 23 (2004): 545-560.
Hogarth, Robin M. Judgment and Choice. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1980.
Johnson Brown, Jacqueline, and Peter H. Reingen. "Social Ties and Word-of-Mouth Referral
Behavior." The Journal of Consumer Research 14 (1987): 350-362.
Kamins, Michael A., Valerie A. Folkes, and Lars Perner. "Consumer Responses to Rumors:
Good News, Bad News." Journal of Consumer Psychology 6.2 (1997): 165-187.
Perreault, Jr., William D., and E. Jerome McCarthy. Essentials of Marketing: a Global-
Managerial Approach. 10th ed. Burr Ridge, IL: McGraw-Hill Irwin, 2006.
WOM 21
Reingen, Peter H., and Jerome B. Kernan. "Analysis of Referral Networks in Marketing:
Methods and Illustration." Journal of Marketing Research 23 (1986): 370-378.
Reynolds, Fred F., and William R. Darden. "Mutually Adaptive Effects of Interpersonal
Communication." Journal of Marketing Research 8.4 (1971): 449-454.
Richins, Marsha L., Peter H. Bloch, and Edward F. McQuarrie. "How Enduring and Situational
Involvement Combine to Create Involvement Responses." Journal of Consumer
Psychology 1.2 (1992): 143-153.
"Source Behind Internet Attack on Clinton Revealed." CNN. 22 Mar. 2007. 21 Sept. 2007
<http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/03/21/clinton.you.tube/index.html>.
Swifter. 2007. 21 Sept. 2007 <http://www.swiffer.com/swiffer/en_US/promotions.do>.
top related