MSI Trustees Academics explain the Why behind the Buy

“To get people to do something, force them to say no” Punam Keller

Screen Shot 2018-04-14 at 2.55.58 PM

Think academics have nothing to offer business? Think again with the practical academics presenting to thoughtful practitioners at MSI Trustees meeting last week on the Why behind the Buy.

30689231_10211296428838528_3270688892361113600_n

First, Carey Morewedge showed that people value physical goods more than digital goods not because of uniqueness, production cost, market value, permanence or pleasure of consuming. Instead, perceived control over physical products is higher due to psychological ownership. Implications are multiple for touch interfaces of wearables and taking digital design cues from the physical world (skeuomorphism, baby!).

30652311_10211297193617647_2130740503975559168_o

Punam Keller showed how anticipatory regret overcomes short-term costs to help people take action and enjoy long-term benefits. Effective are both declining financial incentives (time-limited discounts) and enhanced active choice (making people choose between ‘Yes, and I will get these benefits’ versus ‘No, and I won’t get these benefits). Great applications include the Mango Health App at CVS (pictured) and enrolling in retirement plans (if you want people to do that, force them to explicitly say no while stating what they are giving up).

Screen Shot 2018-04-18 at 12.19.05 PM

Avi Goldfarb made us think about the economics of prediction machines: as price of prediction falls, what will be used less (substitutes) and what more (complements)? In decision making, judgment is a key complement: you need to know your organization’s priorities and how it will use prediction to reach its objectives. For instance, for security and insurance, what your payoffs associated with the costs of a data breach versus the costs of preventing a breach? Better and cheaper prediction will allow e.g. Amazon to deliver stuff to your door before you even think about buying it, and you can ‘shop at your door’, i.e. return the things you do not want. You can watch his talk on HBR live: https://www.facebook.com/HBR/videos/10155987962607787/?hc_ref=ARSaHy9fQCGrB-_bIS3i2rjLOqQ9cD1uduycSnnOaAOPHn7HN9HlEfqBucdEUgwYkm0

30706620_10211336803247863_3592391928630476800_n

On Friday, Olivier Toubia went beyond the exact wording of the search query, which only reflects what consumers think will be different. For instance, a consumer searching for ‘affordable sedan made in America’ probably also cares about comfort and safety and comfortable, but assumes all US sedans have it. Uncovering the underlying preferences, he shows that an online travel portal can get better results serving ads aligned with revealed preferences. Moreover, preferences change over time e.g. before, during and after the Superbowl, and targeted ads get the best results.

30657166_10211302878719771_4402654143429214208_n

Cait Lamberton shows us that some principles in Cialdini’s (1984) ‘bible of persuasion’ no longer work. For instance, 50% of FAFSA college aid applications do not get completed, mostly as the target (of high performance but low socio-economic status) students don’t fully understand benefits and costs of going to college. In a country-wide experiment, typical persuasion tactics (such as interacting with an expensive counselor) failed to work, but visualizing the benefits ( ‘students care about working less’) and  enhanced active choice got 20,000 more students to attend college, for only $ 0.50 of cost per student. As to the second principle of time based scarcity, 26 experiments failed to show it enhanced sales – mostly because willingness-to-pay is lower for up to 40 minutes before the clock runs out. This shows the importance of testing ‘rules of marketing’ for your own brand now. Apparently, scarcity only works as a persuasion tactic when it is based on true quantity scarcity or red hot Krispy Kreme Donuts!

Screen Shot 2018-04-14 at 2.41.00 PM

Finally, I encouraged managers to approach social media with a more playful mindset. Some of your fans interact with the ecosystem of your rival brand, attacking it and supporting your brand in ways you could never do. My research with Ece Ilhan and Raoul Kubler shows that such Rival Brand Engagement ultimately benefits both brands and extends the engagements effects of marketing actions such as new products and ad campaigns. However, it is also important to study offline conversations, as my research with Engagement Labs finds that volume, but not sentiment correlates with that of online conversations. Understanding how your actions affect both online and offline conversations, and how they in turn drive sales performance is crucial to avoid false alarms and wasteful action. http://www.adweek.com/digital/how-consumer-talk-supercharges-advertising/

Screen Shot 2018-04-18 at 12.13.51 PM

This meeting also marked the unveiling of the new MSI Research Priorities 2018-2020, with most discussions favoring Organizing for Marketing Agility as the key them for the next Trustees meeting. See you this November in San Francisco!

30711093_10211310738156252_1444362609330487296_n

Advertisements

Leave your comment here

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s