Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.1177/0743915620950676
Shannon Lantzy, Rebecca W. Hamilton, Yu-Jen Chen, K. Stewart
Consumer-generated online reviews of credence service providers, such as doctors, have become common on platforms such as Yelp and RateMDs. Yet doctors have challenged the legitimacy of these platforms on the grounds that consumers do not have the expertise required to evaluate the quality of the medical care they receive. This challenge is supported by the economics of information literature, which has characterized doctors as a credence service, meaning that consumers cannot evaluate quality even after consumption. Are interventions needed to ensure that consumers are not misled by these reviews? Data from real online reviews shows that many of the claims made in real reviews of credence service providers focus on experience attributes, such as promptness, which consumers can typically evaluate, rather than credence attributes, such as knowledge. Follow-up experiments show that consumers are more likely to believe experience claims (vs. credence claims) made by other consumers, claims that are supported by data, and longer reviews even if they are not more informative. The authors discuss implications for consumers and credence service providers and possible policy interventions.
{"title":"Online Reviews of Credence Service Providers: What Do Consumers Evaluate, Do Other Consumers Believe the Reviews, and Are Interventions Needed?","authors":"Shannon Lantzy, Rebecca W. Hamilton, Yu-Jen Chen, K. Stewart","doi":"10.1177/0743915620950676","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0743915620950676","url":null,"abstract":"Consumer-generated online reviews of credence service providers, such as doctors, have become common on platforms such as Yelp and RateMDs. Yet doctors have challenged the legitimacy of these platforms on the grounds that consumers do not have the expertise required to evaluate the quality of the medical care they receive. This challenge is supported by the economics of information literature, which has characterized doctors as a credence service, meaning that consumers cannot evaluate quality even after consumption. Are interventions needed to ensure that consumers are not misled by these reviews? Data from real online reviews shows that many of the claims made in real reviews of credence service providers focus on experience attributes, such as promptness, which consumers can typically evaluate, rather than credence attributes, such as knowledge. Follow-up experiments show that consumers are more likely to believe experience claims (vs. credence claims) made by other consumers, claims that are supported by data, and longer reviews even if they are not more informative. The authors discuss implications for consumers and credence service providers and possible policy interventions.","PeriodicalId":51437,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Policy & Marketing","volume":"87 1","pages":"27 - 44"},"PeriodicalIF":7.8,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89046363","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.1177/0743915620974614
Maura L. Scott, Kelly D. Martin
In this editorial update, we provide perspective regarding what has transpired since these commentaries were written and published online in July 2020 (Scott et al. 2020). We remain in the midst of a pandemic that has rapidly and catastrophically spread worldwide. Indeed, as the COVID-19 pandemic rages on, it has underscored social inequalities and divides affecting the world. Though not comprehensive, here we highlight a selection of these pressing issues, which warrant additional critical examination. Namely, we discuss the racial inequalities, gender inequalities, and political divides that have been magnified during the COVID-19 pandemic. As of October 2020, there have been over 50 million COVID-19 infections and over 1.25 million deaths from the disease. More than 6,000 people continue to die each day, with more than 1,000 of those coming from the United States (https://www.statista.com/statistics/1104709/coronavirusdeaths-worldwide-per-million-inhabitants; Yan and Maxouris 2020). Public policy, marketing, and consumer psychology play a crucial role in how public health measures have been embraced or rejected. New terminology such as “COVID burnout” captures the exhaustion faced by individuals, organizations, and governments alike as they persist with steps to prevent the spread of the disease through mask wearing, social distancing, and hygiene practices as well as cope with the accompanying financial, social, and emotional costs (Blaschka 2020; Lufkin 2020). Governments face uncertainty in balancing, on the one hand, health priorities such as reducing the spread of disease to avoid the downstream impact of an overwhelmed healthcare system and, on the other hand, economic priorities such as minimizing bankruptcies among companies and individuals. Differing cultural norms and political infrastructures resulted in varied levels of stringency in governmental responses to COVID-19 in different parts of the world (e.g., containment measures taken, economic support provided, consistency of response; Hale et al. 2020). For example, South Korea, with 8.81 COVID-19 deaths per million, is identified as an exemplar of virus containment; in contrast, the United States and Brazil have struggled with containment, resulting in 679.06 and 744.26 deaths per million, respectively. These varied approaches have affected citizens’ perceptions of their country’s response; for instance, citizens of Australia, Denmark, and South Korea are satisfied with their country’s response, but citizens of the United States and the United Kingdom indicate that their countries have done a poor job (Devlin and Connaughton 2020). Individuals, communities, organizations, and governments have been coping with the impact and uncertainty of the COVID-19 pandemic, which has raged across the globe affecting nearly every aspect of life. Individuals face uncertainty about employment, financial stability, and food and housing availability; and the vulnerable—particularly those who lack f
在这篇编辑更新中，我们提供了自这些评论于2020年7月撰写并在线发布以来发生的事情的观点(Scott et al. 2020)。我们仍然处于一场迅速和灾难性地在全世界蔓延的大流行病之中。事实上，随着COVID-19大流行的肆虐，它凸显了影响世界的社会不平等和分歧。虽然不全面，但在这里我们强调了这些紧迫问题的选择，这些问题值得进一步的批判性审查。也就是说，我们讨论了在COVID-19大流行期间被放大的种族不平等、性别不平等和政治分歧。截至2020年10月，COVID-19感染人数超过5000万，死亡人数超过125万。每天仍有6000多人死亡，其中1000多人来自美国(https://www.statista.com/statistics/1104709/coronavirusdeaths-worldwide-per-million-inhabitants;Yan和Maxouris 2020)。公共政策、市场营销和消费者心理在公共卫生措施被接受或拒绝的过程中起着至关重要的作用。“COVID - burnout”等新术语反映了个人、组织和政府在坚持采取措施，通过戴口罩、保持社交距离和卫生习惯来防止疾病传播，并应对随之而来的经济、社会和情感成本时所面临的疲惫(Blaschka 2020;Lufkin 2020)。政府在平衡两方面面临不确定性，一方面是卫生优先事项，如减少疾病传播以避免不堪重负的医疗保健系统的下游影响，另一方面是经济优先事项，如尽量减少公司和个人的破产。不同的文化规范和政治基础设施导致世界不同地区政府应对COVID-19的严格程度不同(例如，采取的遏制措施、提供的经济支持、应对措施的一致性;Hale et al. 2020)。例如，韩国每百万人中有8.81人死于COVID-19，被认为是遏制病毒的典范;相比之下，美国和巴西一直在努力控制，分别导致每百万人中有679.06人和744.26人死亡。这些不同的方法影响了公民对国家应对措施的看法;例如，澳大利亚、丹麦和韩国的公民对他们国家的反应感到满意，但美国和英国的公民表示他们的国家做得很差(Devlin和Connaughton 2020)。个人、社区、组织和政府一直在应对2019冠状病毒病大流行的影响和不确定性，疫情在全球肆虐，几乎影响到生活的方方面面。个人面临就业、金融稳定、食物和住房供应的不确定性;弱势群体——尤其是那些缺乏经济资源、权力和/或宣传的群体——受到的影响尤为严重。例如，在美国，疗养院中的个人占COVID病例的40%，这暴露了老年人和残疾人的特别脆弱性(Alonso-Zaldivar 2020)。此外，在世界各地，权力地位较低的个人，如少数民族和种族以及移徙工人，受到2019冠状病毒病及其相关政策的影响尤为严重(约旦，2020;Quayyum and Kpodar 2020)。失业，再加上让孩子们留在家里不上学，已经改变了家庭的运作方式，这对女性的影响尤其大。大公司和小企业一样
{"title":"Introduction to the Commentary Series: Inequalities and Divides as We Continue to Grapple with a Global Pandemic","authors":"Maura L. Scott, Kelly D. Martin","doi":"10.1177/0743915620974614","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0743915620974614","url":null,"abstract":"In this editorial update, we provide perspective regarding what has transpired since these commentaries were written and published online in July 2020 (Scott et al. 2020). We remain in the midst of a pandemic that has rapidly and catastrophically spread worldwide. Indeed, as the COVID-19 pandemic rages on, it has underscored social inequalities and divides affecting the world. Though not comprehensive, here we highlight a selection of these pressing issues, which warrant additional critical examination. Namely, we discuss the racial inequalities, gender inequalities, and political divides that have been magnified during the COVID-19 pandemic. As of October 2020, there have been over 50 million COVID-19 infections and over 1.25 million deaths from the disease. More than 6,000 people continue to die each day, with more than 1,000 of those coming from the United States (https://www.statista.com/statistics/1104709/coronavirusdeaths-worldwide-per-million-inhabitants; Yan and Maxouris 2020). Public policy, marketing, and consumer psychology play a crucial role in how public health measures have been embraced or rejected. New terminology such as “COVID burnout” captures the exhaustion faced by individuals, organizations, and governments alike as they persist with steps to prevent the spread of the disease through mask wearing, social distancing, and hygiene practices as well as cope with the accompanying financial, social, and emotional costs (Blaschka 2020; Lufkin 2020). Governments face uncertainty in balancing, on the one hand, health priorities such as reducing the spread of disease to avoid the downstream impact of an overwhelmed healthcare system and, on the other hand, economic priorities such as minimizing bankruptcies among companies and individuals. Differing cultural norms and political infrastructures resulted in varied levels of stringency in governmental responses to COVID-19 in different parts of the world (e.g., containment measures taken, economic support provided, consistency of response; Hale et al. 2020). For example, South Korea, with 8.81 COVID-19 deaths per million, is identified as an exemplar of virus containment; in contrast, the United States and Brazil have struggled with containment, resulting in 679.06 and 744.26 deaths per million, respectively. These varied approaches have affected citizens’ perceptions of their country’s response; for instance, citizens of Australia, Denmark, and South Korea are satisfied with their country’s response, but citizens of the United States and the United Kingdom indicate that their countries have done a poor job (Devlin and Connaughton 2020). Individuals, communities, organizations, and governments have been coping with the impact and uncertainty of the COVID-19 pandemic, which has raged across the globe affecting nearly every aspect of life. Individuals face uncertainty about employment, financial stability, and food and housing availability; and the vulnerable—particularly those who lack f","PeriodicalId":51437,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Policy & Marketing","volume":"78 1","pages":"83 - 88"},"PeriodicalIF":7.8,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83739594","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.1177/0743915620928110
R. Hamilton
In March 2020, when COVID-19 was labeled a pandemic by the World Health Organization, store shelves were emptied of hand sanitizer, disinfectant wipes, and toilet paper. Newspaper headlines documented shortages of these products and announced closures of nonessential businesses. Restaurants, hotels, department stores, and childcare centers temporarily closed their doors, leaving many hourly workers unemployed. Without regular paychecks coming in, resources became scarce for many families. Within a matter of weeks, COVID-19 had caused widespread scarcity—scarcity of products, scarcity of services, and scarcity of resources—for millions of consumers all over the world. Clearly, the effects of such widespread scarcity of products, services, and resources will be long-lasting and complex. Although the COVID-19 crisis is itself unprecedented, there are several valuable insights we can draw from prior research on scarcity to understand consumers’ reactions to the crisis and potentially inform policy developed in response to the crisis. In the following sections, I highlight findings from prior research, discuss how they inform public policy, and propose ideas for future research. How do consumers react to scarcity, and do their immediate reactions differ from their longer-term reactions? Scarcity of either products or resources quickly attracts our attention (Mullainathan and Shafir 2013). Indeed, scarcity is often used by marketers to make products seem more desirable, as in “exclusive” or “limited time only” offers (Cialdini 1993). Learning about the scarcity of hand sanitizer, disinfectant wipes, and toilet paper further increased demand for these products. Yet, later in the consumer journey, consumers may respond to scarcity by consuming products and resources more thoughtfully and creatively (Hamilton et al. 2019). Consumers forced to cook at home began sharing recipes online. Faced with shortages of N95 masks used by health care workers, people began fashioning their own masks using old T-shirts and sewing masks to donate to first responders. From a marketing perspective, the substitutions prompted by scarcity of products, services, and resources may have longterm effects on consumer habits, behavior, and brand loyalty. Scarcity prompts substitution in both consumption and production processes (Hamilton et al. 2014). Stockout of a favorite brand may prompt a consumer to try a new brand, establishing new loyalties. Closure of a health club may motivate consumers to establish new workout routines. With childcare facilities closed, parents substitute other resources, such as their own time, for the money usually spent on childcare. In all of these cases, substitution erodes loyalty to brands, products, and service providers; this erosion may be more severe due to the other changes in consumers’ daily habits and routines caused by COVID-19. Although many product and service scarcities created by COVID-19 are shared by consumers of high and low socioe
2020年3月，当世界卫生组织将COVID-19列为大流行时，商店货架上的洗手液、消毒湿巾和卫生纸都被清空了。报纸头条记录了这些产品的短缺，并宣布关闭不必要的业务。餐馆、酒店、百货商店、儿童保育中心暂时关门，导致许多小时工失业。由于没有定期的工资收入，许多家庭的资源变得稀缺。在短短几周内，COVID-19就给全世界数百万消费者造成了广泛的短缺——产品短缺、服务短缺和资源短缺。显然，产品、服务和资源如此普遍稀缺的影响将是长期和复杂的。尽管COVID-19危机本身是前所未有的，但我们可以从先前的稀缺性研究中获得一些有价值的见解，以了解消费者对危机的反应，并可能为应对危机制定的政策提供信息。在下面的章节中，我将重点介绍先前研究的发现，讨论它们如何为公共政策提供信息，并为未来的研究提出想法。消费者对稀缺性有何反应?他们的即时反应与长期反应有何不同?产品或资源的稀缺性很快吸引了我们的注意力(Mullainathan and Shafir 2013)。事实上，稀缺性经常被营销人员用来使产品看起来更受欢迎，如“独家”或“限时”提供(Cialdini 1993)。了解到洗手液、消毒湿巾和卫生纸的短缺，进一步增加了对这些产品的需求。然而，在消费者旅程的后期，消费者可能会通过更周到和创造性地消费产品和资源来应对稀缺性(Hamilton et al. 2019)。被迫在家做饭的消费者开始在网上分享菜谱。面对医护人员使用的N95口罩短缺，人们开始用旧t恤和缝纫口罩制作自己的口罩，捐赠给急救人员。从市场营销的角度来看，由于产品、服务和资源的稀缺性而导致的替代可能会对消费者的习惯、行为和品牌忠诚度产生长期影响。稀缺性促使消费和生产过程中的替代(Hamilton et al. 2014)。最喜欢的品牌缺货可能会促使消费者尝试新品牌，建立新的忠诚度。健身俱乐部的关闭可能会促使消费者建立新的锻炼习惯。随着托儿设施的关闭，父母们用其他资源，比如他们自己的时间，来代替通常花在托儿上的钱。在所有这些情况下，替代都会侵蚀消费者对品牌、产品和服务提供商的忠诚度;由于新冠肺炎引起的消费者日常习惯和日常活动的其他变化，这种侵蚀可能会更加严重。尽管高社会经济地位和低社会经济地位的消费者共同面临着COVID-19造成的许多产品和服务短缺，但也存在重要差异。虽然在线零售商消除了线下零售的地理限制，但他们仍然根据获得信贷和数字素养来限制消费者。高ses消费者可能会对当地商店的稀缺做出反应，在网上寻找商品并囤积，这加剧了稀缺，而那些可支配收入较低、获得信贷渠道较少、居住空间较小的消费者则负担不起囤积。即使是精神资源也因稀缺性而受到限制(Mullainathan and Shafir 2013)。低社会经济地位的消费者，其资源已经紧张，可能会发现更难以评估选择，并作出有效的替代。在当前大流行期间经历的短缺可能会对消费者产生持久影响，特别是如果它发生在形成时期。经历(vs.不经历)长期稀缺可以培养不同的自我模式，或“社会经济文化”，继续塑造消费者的反应(Markus和Conner 2013)。高社会经济地位的人倾向于将代理解释为对环境的控制，而低社会经济地位的人则将代理解释为积极适应环境，使自己与环境力量保持一致(Markus and Conner 2013)。例如，在对2005年卡特里娜飓风幸存者的采访中，他们在风暴来临前离开了该地区，他们往往具有更高的社会经济地位，强调了他们通过选择离开来行使独立和控制的程度。相比之下，那些在风暴期间留在新奥尔良的人，他们的社会经济地位往往较低，他们强调在面对挑战时发挥力量，不放弃(Stephens et al. 2009)。我们可能
{"title":"Scarcity and Coronavirus","authors":"R. Hamilton","doi":"10.1177/0743915620928110","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0743915620928110","url":null,"abstract":"In March 2020, when COVID-19 was labeled a pandemic by the World Health Organization, store shelves were emptied of hand sanitizer, disinfectant wipes, and toilet paper. Newspaper headlines documented shortages of these products and announced closures of nonessential businesses. Restaurants, hotels, department stores, and childcare centers temporarily closed their doors, leaving many hourly workers unemployed. Without regular paychecks coming in, resources became scarce for many families. Within a matter of weeks, COVID-19 had caused widespread scarcity—scarcity of products, scarcity of services, and scarcity of resources—for millions of consumers all over the world. Clearly, the effects of such widespread scarcity of products, services, and resources will be long-lasting and complex. Although the COVID-19 crisis is itself unprecedented, there are several valuable insights we can draw from prior research on scarcity to understand consumers’ reactions to the crisis and potentially inform policy developed in response to the crisis. In the following sections, I highlight findings from prior research, discuss how they inform public policy, and propose ideas for future research. How do consumers react to scarcity, and do their immediate reactions differ from their longer-term reactions? Scarcity of either products or resources quickly attracts our attention (Mullainathan and Shafir 2013). Indeed, scarcity is often used by marketers to make products seem more desirable, as in “exclusive” or “limited time only” offers (Cialdini 1993). Learning about the scarcity of hand sanitizer, disinfectant wipes, and toilet paper further increased demand for these products. Yet, later in the consumer journey, consumers may respond to scarcity by consuming products and resources more thoughtfully and creatively (Hamilton et al. 2019). Consumers forced to cook at home began sharing recipes online. Faced with shortages of N95 masks used by health care workers, people began fashioning their own masks using old T-shirts and sewing masks to donate to first responders. From a marketing perspective, the substitutions prompted by scarcity of products, services, and resources may have longterm effects on consumer habits, behavior, and brand loyalty. Scarcity prompts substitution in both consumption and production processes (Hamilton et al. 2014). Stockout of a favorite brand may prompt a consumer to try a new brand, establishing new loyalties. Closure of a health club may motivate consumers to establish new workout routines. With childcare facilities closed, parents substitute other resources, such as their own time, for the money usually spent on childcare. In all of these cases, substitution erodes loyalty to brands, products, and service providers; this erosion may be more severe due to the other changes in consumers’ daily habits and routines caused by COVID-19. Although many product and service scarcities created by COVID-19 are shared by consumers of high and low socioe","PeriodicalId":51437,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Policy & Marketing","volume":"10 1","pages":"99 - 100"},"PeriodicalIF":7.8,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79375350","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.1177/0743915620932150
Terry L. Esper
At the core of supply chain management (SCM) is the conversion of materials and components into finished products as well as the logistics activities to get those products to the market (Srivastava, Shervani, and Fahey 1999). When several supply chains failed to get products to the market during the COVID19 pandemic—specifically, hand sanitizer, cleaning supplies, and toilet paper—many in the consumer market leveraged wide-scale media attention to demand answers. The response highlighted the many processes and people required to move goods through supply chains, the safety and welfare of these workers, and the role of local, state, and federal governments in overseeing the work required to get products to store shelves. This focus also stimulated important research imperatives regarding the consumer welfare and policy impacts of SCM processes, particularly during times of crisis. At the outset of COVID-19, the coronavirus was primarily viewed as a local issue affecting China. However, the SCM impacts were already occurring at the global level, with industry reports suggesting that roughly 95% of Fortune 1000 companies had global supply chain operations in China and were experiencing direct product and inventory flow interruptions. Scholars have long studied such risks of global SCM networks, yet pandemic-related work stoppages brought new SCM risk conversations to the forefront. The SCM risk research focuses primarily on operational risks that threaten inventory investments and supply chain costs (Sodhi, Son, and Tang 2012). However, research is necessary to quantify and investigate the consumer welfare risks of global supply chains, especially in light of COVID-19. Are there certain products and product categories for which such global SCM networks are more risky, in terms of consumer product access? Likewise, are there risk management strategies that should be more prevalent when consumer product access– related risks are more impactful to society? In addition, what government policies, if any, are necessary to oversee exposure to global SCM risks when consumer product access is in the balance? Questions of this type are built on the consideration of consumer welfare as a SCM risk category, something that extant research has yet to explore. In addition to product access, scholars have also shown that consumers often consider the responsible management of upstream SCM activities when making product choices (Kraft, Valdés, and Zheng 2018). The pandemic has stimulated discussions on this matter, as companies such as Amazon and Tyson Foods experienced highly publicized backlash due to poor work conditions in processing plants and distribution centers within their supply chains. More work is needed to investigate consumer responses to such concerns, such as whether more consumers than usual might be inclined to switch brands due to the wide-scale attention given to SCM work conditions during the pandemic. In a broader sense, this issue opens a dialo
供应链管理(SCM)的核心是将材料和部件转化为成品以及将这些产品推向市场的物流活动(Srivastava, Shervani, and Fahey 1999)。在2019冠状病毒病大流行期间，当一些供应链(特别是洗手液、清洁用品和卫生纸)无法将产品推向市场时，消费者市场中的许多人利用媒体的广泛关注来寻求答案。回应强调了通过供应链运输货物所需的许多流程和人员，这些工人的安全和福利，以及地方，州和联邦政府在监督产品上架所需工作中的作用。这一焦点也刺激了关于消费者福利和供应链管理过程的政策影响的重要研究，特别是在危机时期。新冠肺炎疫情爆发之初，人们主要将其视为影响中国的局部问题。然而，供应链管理的影响已经在全球范围内发生，行业报告显示，大约95%的财富1000强公司在中国拥有全球供应链业务，并且正在经历直接的产品和库存流动中断。学者们长期以来一直在研究全球供应链网络的此类风险，但与大流行相关的停工将新的供应链风险对话带到了最前沿。供应链管理风险研究主要关注威胁库存投资和供应链成本的操作风险(Sodhi, Son, and Tang 2012)。然而，量化和调查全球供应链的消费者福利风险是必要的，特别是在2019冠状病毒病的背景下。就消费者产品访问而言，是否存在这样的全球供应链管理网络风险更大的某些产品和产品类别?同样，当消费者产品准入相关的风险对社会的影响更大时，是否应该有更普遍的风险管理策略?此外，当消费品准入处于平衡状态时，有什么政府政策(如果有的话)需要监督全球供应链风险的暴露?这类问题是建立在考虑消费者福利作为供应链风险类别的基础上的，这是现有研究尚未探索的。除了产品获取之外，学者们还表明，消费者在进行产品选择时通常会考虑上游供应链管理活动的负责任管理(Kraft, vald， and Zheng, 2018)。随着亚马逊和泰森食品等公司因供应链内的加工厂和配送中心工作条件恶劣而受到高度公开的反对，新冠疫情引发了对这一问题的讨论。需要做更多的工作来调查消费者对这些担忧的反应，例如，由于疫情期间供应链工作条件受到广泛关注，是否会有比平时更多的消费者倾向于更换品牌。从更广泛的意义上说，这个问题开启了一场对话，讨论联邦、州和地方政府应该以何种方式监督供应链管理工人的健康安全，并在供应链管理工人表达的担忧阻碍公司将产品推向市场时进行干预。还需要对送货上门的物流服务进行与新冠肺炎相关的研究。在过去十年中，在线零售的增长推动了这些供应链服务的普及，Door Dash、Instacart和Amazon Flex等点对点送货上门模式在疫情期间尤为重要。送货上门的研究不仅确立了这些服务对于消费者对在线零售体验的满意度至关重要(Esper et al. 2003)，而且还强调了客户在评估送货质量时考虑的因素，如及时性和订单状况(Mentzer, Flint, and Hult 2001)。此外，与UPS等公司的配送相比，当消费者评估点对点众包服务的配送时，消费者的参与度和对司机的认同可能更为突出(Ta, Esper, and Hofer 2018)。鉴于冠状病毒，需要做更多的工作来确定这些消费者服务期望是否会在危机时期发生变化，如果是的话，变化的程度是什么。来自covid - 19相关新闻报道的轶事证据表明，人们对送货上门服务的缺点更加宽容。送货司机的基本工作通常被描述为牺牲，并以赞扬和赞赏的方式强调，在这种市场危机中引发了有关送货服务归因和评估的问题。例如，是
{"title":"Supply Chain Management Amid the Coronavirus Pandemic","authors":"Terry L. Esper","doi":"10.1177/0743915620932150","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0743915620932150","url":null,"abstract":"At the core of supply chain management (SCM) is the conversion of materials and components into finished products as well as the logistics activities to get those products to the market (Srivastava, Shervani, and Fahey 1999). When several supply chains failed to get products to the market during the COVID19 pandemic—specifically, hand sanitizer, cleaning supplies, and toilet paper—many in the consumer market leveraged wide-scale media attention to demand answers. The response highlighted the many processes and people required to move goods through supply chains, the safety and welfare of these workers, and the role of local, state, and federal governments in overseeing the work required to get products to store shelves. This focus also stimulated important research imperatives regarding the consumer welfare and policy impacts of SCM processes, particularly during times of crisis. At the outset of COVID-19, the coronavirus was primarily viewed as a local issue affecting China. However, the SCM impacts were already occurring at the global level, with industry reports suggesting that roughly 95% of Fortune 1000 companies had global supply chain operations in China and were experiencing direct product and inventory flow interruptions. Scholars have long studied such risks of global SCM networks, yet pandemic-related work stoppages brought new SCM risk conversations to the forefront. The SCM risk research focuses primarily on operational risks that threaten inventory investments and supply chain costs (Sodhi, Son, and Tang 2012). However, research is necessary to quantify and investigate the consumer welfare risks of global supply chains, especially in light of COVID-19. Are there certain products and product categories for which such global SCM networks are more risky, in terms of consumer product access? Likewise, are there risk management strategies that should be more prevalent when consumer product access– related risks are more impactful to society? In addition, what government policies, if any, are necessary to oversee exposure to global SCM risks when consumer product access is in the balance? Questions of this type are built on the consideration of consumer welfare as a SCM risk category, something that extant research has yet to explore. In addition to product access, scholars have also shown that consumers often consider the responsible management of upstream SCM activities when making product choices (Kraft, Valdés, and Zheng 2018). The pandemic has stimulated discussions on this matter, as companies such as Amazon and Tyson Foods experienced highly publicized backlash due to poor work conditions in processing plants and distribution centers within their supply chains. More work is needed to investigate consumer responses to such concerns, such as whether more consumers than usual might be inclined to switch brands due to the wide-scale attention given to SCM work conditions during the pandemic. In a broader sense, this issue opens a dialo","PeriodicalId":51437,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Policy & Marketing","volume":"93 1","pages":"101 - 102"},"PeriodicalIF":7.8,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86206572","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.1177/0743915620930695
Martin Mende, V. Misra
The health, economic, and social impact of the COVID-19 pandemic is unprecedented in our lifetime, and no individual in this globalized, interconnected world is immune from its effects. This pandemic is a fundamental challenge for consumers, companies, and governments. Against this background, our commentary underscores linkages between public health, environment, and economy and explores how lessons from COVID-19 can help prevent other large-scale disasters. We focus on global climate change (GCC), because rising temperatures increase the likelihood of future pandemics. Accordingly, experts consider GCC “the largest public health threat of the century” (Wyns 2020). Although societal crises are underresearched in marketing, we propose that marketers should add their expertise to help avoid future crises. Notably, the Journal of Public Policy & Marketing (JPP&M) is uniquely positioned as a premier outlet for corresponding research at the intersection of marketing and policy.
{"title":"Time to Flatten the Curves on COVID-19 and Climate Change. Marketing Can Help.","authors":"Martin Mende, V. Misra","doi":"10.1177/0743915620930695","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0743915620930695","url":null,"abstract":"The health, economic, and social impact of the COVID-19 pandemic is unprecedented in our lifetime, and no individual in this globalized, interconnected world is immune from its effects. This pandemic is a fundamental challenge for consumers, companies, and governments. Against this background, our commentary underscores linkages between public health, environment, and economy and explores how lessons from COVID-19 can help prevent other large-scale disasters. We focus on global climate change (GCC), because rising temperatures increase the likelihood of future pandemics. Accordingly, experts consider GCC “the largest public health threat of the century” (Wyns 2020). Although societal crises are underresearched in marketing, we propose that marketers should add their expertise to help avoid future crises. Notably, the Journal of Public Policy & Marketing (JPP&M) is uniquely positioned as a premier outlet for corresponding research at the intersection of marketing and policy.","PeriodicalId":51437,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Policy & Marketing","volume":"34 1","pages":"94 - 96"},"PeriodicalIF":7.8,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77700022","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.1177/0743915620945259
Pankaj C. Patel, Cong Feng
A lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender workplace equality policy (LGBT-WEP) helps signal and reinforce the organizational commitment to workplace equality and diversity. Prior evidence suggests that LGBT-WEP is viewed favorably by stakeholders (customers, employees, and channel partners) and influences firm performance. Drawing on stakeholder theory and the resource-based view of the firm, the authors examine whether LGBT-WEP influences customer satisfaction through marketing capability and whether demand instability dampens these associations. To alleviate endogeneity concerns of LGBT-WEP, they exploit the plausibly exogenous state-to-state variations in workplace equality policies determined by statewide laws on nondiscrimination based on sexual orientation. Empirical results indicate that LGBT-WEP positively influences customer satisfaction both directly and through enhanced marketing capability. Demand instability, however, dampens these associations. Additional analyses with alternate measures of key variables, alternate distributional assumption, and alternate model specifications yield consistent results.
{"title":"LGBT Workplace Equality Policy and Customer Satisfaction: The Roles of Marketing Capability and Demand Instability","authors":"Pankaj C. Patel, Cong Feng","doi":"10.1177/0743915620945259","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0743915620945259","url":null,"abstract":"A lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender workplace equality policy (LGBT-WEP) helps signal and reinforce the organizational commitment to workplace equality and diversity. Prior evidence suggests that LGBT-WEP is viewed favorably by stakeholders (customers, employees, and channel partners) and influences firm performance. Drawing on stakeholder theory and the resource-based view of the firm, the authors examine whether LGBT-WEP influences customer satisfaction through marketing capability and whether demand instability dampens these associations. To alleviate endogeneity concerns of LGBT-WEP, they exploit the plausibly exogenous state-to-state variations in workplace equality policies determined by statewide laws on nondiscrimination based on sexual orientation. Empirical results indicate that LGBT-WEP positively influences customer satisfaction both directly and through enhanced marketing capability. Demand instability, however, dampens these associations. Additional analyses with alternate measures of key variables, alternate distributional assumption, and alternate model specifications yield consistent results.","PeriodicalId":51437,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Policy & Marketing","volume":"6 1","pages":"7 - 26"},"PeriodicalIF":7.8,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87371243","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-12-21DOI: 10.1177/0743915620968506
M. Viswanathan, Sara Baskentli, S. Gallage, Diane M. Martin, Maria Ramirez-Grigortsuk, Saroja Subrahmanyan
This article demonstrates symbiotic academic-social enterprise (SASE), a bottom-up approach intertwined with the subsistence marketplace research stream. The SASE approach is unique in coevolving academic and social initiatives in parallel for the express purpose of achieving dual objectives: societally relevant research and social impact over an extended period. Distinct from typical action research approaches, the directionality between research and practice in this approach is circular or mutual rather than linear, the time frame continuous rather than discrete, and the unit of analysis the entire enterprise rather than a single project. Thus, SASE is fundamentally a bottom-up, learning-by-doing approach that developed in contexts characterized by a confluence of uncertainties for communities and a confluence of unfamiliarities for researchers and practitioners. The authors demonstrate this approach in the context of creating sustainability literacy education in Tanzania based on unique climate change impacts in the region. The academic research enterprise provides bottom-up insights about climate change and potential approaches to sustainability literacy education. A sustainability literacy education pilot project demonstrates an initiative in the social enterprise aspect of the approach. Finally, the authors derive public policy and marketing implications of SASE.
{"title":"A Demonstration of Symbiotic Academic-Social Enterprise in Subsistence Marketplaces: Researching and Designing Customized Sustainability Literacy Education in Tanzania","authors":"M. Viswanathan, Sara Baskentli, S. Gallage, Diane M. Martin, Maria Ramirez-Grigortsuk, Saroja Subrahmanyan","doi":"10.1177/0743915620968506","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0743915620968506","url":null,"abstract":"This article demonstrates symbiotic academic-social enterprise (SASE), a bottom-up approach intertwined with the subsistence marketplace research stream. The SASE approach is unique in coevolving academic and social initiatives in parallel for the express purpose of achieving dual objectives: societally relevant research and social impact over an extended period. Distinct from typical action research approaches, the directionality between research and practice in this approach is circular or mutual rather than linear, the time frame continuous rather than discrete, and the unit of analysis the entire enterprise rather than a single project. Thus, SASE is fundamentally a bottom-up, learning-by-doing approach that developed in contexts characterized by a confluence of uncertainties for communities and a confluence of unfamiliarities for researchers and practitioners. The authors demonstrate this approach in the context of creating sustainability literacy education in Tanzania based on unique climate change impacts in the region. The academic research enterprise provides bottom-up insights about climate change and potential approaches to sustainability literacy education. A sustainability literacy education pilot project demonstrates an initiative in the social enterprise aspect of the approach. Finally, the authors derive public policy and marketing implications of SASE.","PeriodicalId":51437,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Policy & Marketing","volume":"49 1","pages":"245 - 261"},"PeriodicalIF":7.8,"publicationDate":"2020-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78029117","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-12-14DOI: 10.1177/0743915620984723
Lu Liu, Dinesh K. Gauri, Rupinder P. Jindal
Medicare uses a pay-for-performance program to reimburse hospitals. One of the key input measures in the performance formula is patient satisfaction with their hospital care. Physicians and hospitals, however, have raised concerns regarding questions related to patient satisfaction with pain management during hospitalization. They report feeling pressured to prescribe opioids to alleviate pain and boost satisfaction survey scores for higher reimbursements. This overprescription of opioids has been cited as a cause of current opioid crisis in the United States. Due to these concerns, Medicare stopped using pain management questions as inputs in its payment formula. The authors collected multiyear data from six diverse data sources, employed propensity score matching to obtain comparable groups, and estimated difference-in-difference models to show that, in fact, pain management was the only measure to improve in response to the pay-for-performance system. No other input measure showed significant improvement. Thus, removing pain management from the formula may weaken the effectiveness of the Hospital Value-Based Purchasing Program at improving patient satisfaction, which is one of the key goals of the program. The authors suggest two divergent paths for Medicare to make the program more effective.
{"title":"The Role of Patient Satisfaction in Hospitals’ Medicare Reimbursements","authors":"Lu Liu, Dinesh K. Gauri, Rupinder P. Jindal","doi":"10.1177/0743915620984723","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0743915620984723","url":null,"abstract":"Medicare uses a pay-for-performance program to reimburse hospitals. One of the key input measures in the performance formula is patient satisfaction with their hospital care. Physicians and hospitals, however, have raised concerns regarding questions related to patient satisfaction with pain management during hospitalization. They report feeling pressured to prescribe opioids to alleviate pain and boost satisfaction survey scores for higher reimbursements. This overprescription of opioids has been cited as a cause of current opioid crisis in the United States. Due to these concerns, Medicare stopped using pain management questions as inputs in its payment formula. The authors collected multiyear data from six diverse data sources, employed propensity score matching to obtain comparable groups, and estimated difference-in-difference models to show that, in fact, pain management was the only measure to improve in response to the pay-for-performance system. No other input measure showed significant improvement. Thus, removing pain management from the formula may weaken the effectiveness of the Hospital Value-Based Purchasing Program at improving patient satisfaction, which is one of the key goals of the program. The authors suggest two divergent paths for Medicare to make the program more effective.","PeriodicalId":51437,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Policy & Marketing","volume":"36 1","pages":"558 - 570"},"PeriodicalIF":7.8,"publicationDate":"2020-12-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88184569","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-12-14DOI: 10.1177/0743915620964114
Sonja Martin Poole, Sonya A. Grier, Kevin D. Thomas, Francesca Sobande, A. E. Ekpo, Lez Trujillo Torres, Lynn A. Addington, Melinda Weekes-Laidlow, Geraldine R. Henderson
Race is integral to the functioning and ideological underpinnings of marketplace actions yet remains undertheorized in marketing. To understand and transform the insidious ways in which race operates, the authors examine its impact in marketplaces and how these effects are shaped by intersecting forms of systemic oppression. They introduce critical race theory (CRT) to the marketing community as a useful framework for understanding consumers, consumption, and contemporary marketplaces. They outline critical theory traditions as utilized in marketing and specify the particular role of CRT as a lens through which scholars can understand marketplace dynamics. The authors delineate key CRT tenets and how they may shape the way scholars conduct research, teach, and influence practice in the marketing discipline. To clearly highlight CRT’s overall potential as a robust analytical tool in marketplace studies, the authors elaborate on the application of artificial intelligence to consumption markets. This analysis demonstrates how CRT can support an enhanced understanding of the role of race in markets and lead to a more equitable version of the marketplace than what currently exists. Beyond mere procedural modifications, applying CRT to marketplace studies mandates a paradigm shift in how marketplace equity is understood and practiced.
{"title":"Operationalizing Critical Race Theory in the Marketplace","authors":"Sonja Martin Poole, Sonya A. Grier, Kevin D. Thomas, Francesca Sobande, A. E. Ekpo, Lez Trujillo Torres, Lynn A. Addington, Melinda Weekes-Laidlow, Geraldine R. Henderson","doi":"10.1177/0743915620964114","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0743915620964114","url":null,"abstract":"Race is integral to the functioning and ideological underpinnings of marketplace actions yet remains undertheorized in marketing. To understand and transform the insidious ways in which race operates, the authors examine its impact in marketplaces and how these effects are shaped by intersecting forms of systemic oppression. They introduce critical race theory (CRT) to the marketing community as a useful framework for understanding consumers, consumption, and contemporary marketplaces. They outline critical theory traditions as utilized in marketing and specify the particular role of CRT as a lens through which scholars can understand marketplace dynamics. The authors delineate key CRT tenets and how they may shape the way scholars conduct research, teach, and influence practice in the marketing discipline. To clearly highlight CRT’s overall potential as a robust analytical tool in marketplace studies, the authors elaborate on the application of artificial intelligence to consumption markets. This analysis demonstrates how CRT can support an enhanced understanding of the role of race in markets and lead to a more equitable version of the marketplace than what currently exists. Beyond mere procedural modifications, applying CRT to marketplace studies mandates a paradigm shift in how marketplace equity is understood and practiced.","PeriodicalId":51437,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Policy & Marketing","volume":"44 1","pages":"126 - 142"},"PeriodicalIF":7.8,"publicationDate":"2020-12-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88371095","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-12-09DOI: 10.1177/0743915620965153
Marius Claudy, G. Doyle, L. Marriott, N. Campbell, G. O'Malley
The overconsumption of sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) is associated with noncommunicable diseases such as obesity, type 2 diabetes, and cancer. Voluntary industry codes have largely failed to curb the overconsumption of sugar, and governments globally are increasingly willing to impose taxes on SSBs. However, the effectiveness of SSB taxation varies significantly. Drawing on a systematic review of the most recent literature (N = 79), the authors find that heterogeneity in outcomes is likely to result from idiosyncratic conditions within marketing systems. Building on marketing systems theory, they identify and critically evaluate (omitted) factors within the marketing environment that have an impact on the effectiveness of SSB taxation. Findings reveal that most studies to date focus on demand-side issues, often omitting supply-side responses such as reformulation or pass-through rates. Furthermore, studies largely disregard evidence from marketing and behavioral sciences, which show that taxation works through psychological mechanisms other than price. Finally, the authors find that few studies have systematically evaluated the complementary effects of SSB taxation and other health-promoting policies. By highlighting these blind spots in the current SSB taxation knowledge, the authors provide fruitful avenues for future research at the nexus of marketing and public policy.
{"title":"Are Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Taxes Effective? Reviewing the Evidence Through a Marketing Systems Lens","authors":"Marius Claudy, G. Doyle, L. Marriott, N. Campbell, G. O'Malley","doi":"10.1177/0743915620965153","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0743915620965153","url":null,"abstract":"The overconsumption of sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) is associated with noncommunicable diseases such as obesity, type 2 diabetes, and cancer. Voluntary industry codes have largely failed to curb the overconsumption of sugar, and governments globally are increasingly willing to impose taxes on SSBs. However, the effectiveness of SSB taxation varies significantly. Drawing on a systematic review of the most recent literature (N = 79), the authors find that heterogeneity in outcomes is likely to result from idiosyncratic conditions within marketing systems. Building on marketing systems theory, they identify and critically evaluate (omitted) factors within the marketing environment that have an impact on the effectiveness of SSB taxation. Findings reveal that most studies to date focus on demand-side issues, often omitting supply-side responses such as reformulation or pass-through rates. Furthermore, studies largely disregard evidence from marketing and behavioral sciences, which show that taxation works through psychological mechanisms other than price. Finally, the authors find that few studies have systematically evaluated the complementary effects of SSB taxation and other health-promoting policies. By highlighting these blind spots in the current SSB taxation knowledge, the authors provide fruitful avenues for future research at the nexus of marketing and public policy.","PeriodicalId":51437,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Policy & Marketing","volume":"23 1","pages":"403 - 418"},"PeriodicalIF":7.8,"publicationDate":"2020-12-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73735727","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：