Denitsa Dineva, Jan Breitsohl, H. Roschk, Masoumeh Hosseinpour
{"title":"Consumer-to-consumer conflicts and brand moderation strategies during COVID-19 service failures: a framework for international marketers","authors":"Denitsa Dineva, Jan Breitsohl, H. Roschk, Masoumeh Hosseinpour","doi":"10.1108/imr-12-2021-0368","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposeSince the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, one dark social-media phenomenon in particular has experienced a significant rise: consumer-to-consumer (C2C) conflicts, i.e. consumers who verbally attack each other in response to COVID-19 service failures. The aim of this paper is to uncover the sources of such conflicts and to gain an insight into the corresponding conflict moderation strategies that international brands adopt.Design/methodology/approachThe methodology consists of non-participatory netnographic observations of 13 national, international, and global online brand communities (OBCs) on Facebook. The authors use purposeful sampling to collect relevant data on conflict sources and brand moderation strategies during COVID-19 service failures and a hybrid approach to thematic analysis to derive distinct themes from these data.FindingsThe paper identifies five C2C conflict sources: brand attack, brand dissatisfaction, brand skepticism, brand contention and brand defense; these are then classified as having either an individualistic (self-oriented) or collectivistic (other-oriented) orientation. The authors also uncover several moderation strategies: non-engaging, automated, bolstering, asserting (direct, indirect) and informing (factual, empathetic, apologetic), which are broadly categorized into two levels based on their passive vs active approach and authoritative vs cooperative orientation. The paper further highlights that brands adapt their moderation strategies to specific sources of C2C conflicts, thereby producing a range of OBC outcomes.Practical implicationsThe study's empirically informed framework comprising sources of undesirable conflicts and brand moderation strategies offers a practical tool that can aid marketing managers in nurturing civil C2C engagement and interactive behaviors in their OBCs. By adopting our framework, brand and marketing practitioners can tailor their communication strategies toward different sources of C2C conflict and minimize their adverse consequences, thus, fostering an overall constructive OBC engagement.Originality/valueThe authors offer a novel framework to international marketing research, consisting of C2C conflict sources and corresponding moderation strategies that take place in response to service failures during the COVID-19 pandemic. These insights, in turn, inform international marketers about new ways of transforming the dark side of OBCs into a source of competitive advantage based on real-world brand practice.","PeriodicalId":14456,"journal":{"name":"International Marketing Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Marketing Review","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/imr-12-2021-0368","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
PurposeSince the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, one dark social-media phenomenon in particular has experienced a significant rise: consumer-to-consumer (C2C) conflicts, i.e. consumers who verbally attack each other in response to COVID-19 service failures. The aim of this paper is to uncover the sources of such conflicts and to gain an insight into the corresponding conflict moderation strategies that international brands adopt.Design/methodology/approachThe methodology consists of non-participatory netnographic observations of 13 national, international, and global online brand communities (OBCs) on Facebook. The authors use purposeful sampling to collect relevant data on conflict sources and brand moderation strategies during COVID-19 service failures and a hybrid approach to thematic analysis to derive distinct themes from these data.FindingsThe paper identifies five C2C conflict sources: brand attack, brand dissatisfaction, brand skepticism, brand contention and brand defense; these are then classified as having either an individualistic (self-oriented) or collectivistic (other-oriented) orientation. The authors also uncover several moderation strategies: non-engaging, automated, bolstering, asserting (direct, indirect) and informing (factual, empathetic, apologetic), which are broadly categorized into two levels based on their passive vs active approach and authoritative vs cooperative orientation. The paper further highlights that brands adapt their moderation strategies to specific sources of C2C conflicts, thereby producing a range of OBC outcomes.Practical implicationsThe study's empirically informed framework comprising sources of undesirable conflicts and brand moderation strategies offers a practical tool that can aid marketing managers in nurturing civil C2C engagement and interactive behaviors in their OBCs. By adopting our framework, brand and marketing practitioners can tailor their communication strategies toward different sources of C2C conflict and minimize their adverse consequences, thus, fostering an overall constructive OBC engagement.Originality/valueThe authors offer a novel framework to international marketing research, consisting of C2C conflict sources and corresponding moderation strategies that take place in response to service failures during the COVID-19 pandemic. These insights, in turn, inform international marketers about new ways of transforming the dark side of OBCs into a source of competitive advantage based on real-world brand practice.
期刊介绍:
International Marketing Review (IMR) is a journal that has, as its core remit, the goal of publishing research that pushes back the boundaries of international marketing knowledge. IMR does this by publishing novel research ideas, and by publishing papers that add substance to, question the basic assumptions of, reframe, or otherwise shape what we think we know within in the international marketing field. IMR is pluralistic, publishing papers that are conceptual, quantitative-empirical, or qualitative-empirical. At IMR, we aim to be a journal that recognizes great papers and great research ideas, and works hard with authors to nurture those ideas through to publication. We aim to be a journal that is proactive in developing the research agenda in international marketing, by identifying critical research issues, and promoting research within those areas. Finally, IMR is a journal that is comfortable exploring, and that fosters the exploration of, the interfaces and overlaps between international marketing and other business disciplines. Where no interfaces or overlaps exist, IMR will be a journal that is ready to create them. IMR’s definition of international marketing is purposefully broad and includes, although is not restricted to: -International market entry decisions and relationships; -Export marketing and supply chain issues; -International retailing; -International channel management; -Consumer ethnocentrism, country and product image and origin effects; -Cultural considerations in international marketing; -International marketing strategy; -Aspects of international marketing management such as international branding, advertising and new product development.