Thursday, December 8 2011
By A J Kimmel on Thursday, December 8 2011, 13:55
Definitions are important because they provide us with a common ground for discussion. A conversation about word of mouth isn't going to get very far if the discussants are operating from different perspectives on what WOM is. I usually begin my presentations about WOM with George Silverman's definition from his book The Secrets of Word-of-Mouth Marketing, in that it is typical, but also problematic:
A good start, one highlighting the fact that WOM may be positive or negative in nature. But what about neutral? For example, say I hear from a neighbor that our local satellite TV/cable provider is about to change its name. Most of us would agree that is WOM - I have been informally provided with news about a local service company that I personally do not find positive or negative in connotation. Silverman also points out that WOM is characterized by 'personal communication,' yet isn't it true that WOM conveyed by anonymous posters at an online chat forum is in fact 'impersonal'? And although it is true that most WOM is disseminated outside of commercial ties, how then do we describe brand advocacy programs, which involve people spreading positive recommendations because they have been incentivized with free products, gifts, or payment?
WOMMA skirts some of these problems inherent in Silverman's definition by defining WOM more broadly:
Although many pundits use the terms 'WOM" and "buzz" as synonyms, Emmanuel Rosen's (The Anatomy of Buzz Revisited) clarifies:
Who can argue with WOMMA and Rosen? Successful WOM marketing (WOMM) results in plenty of buzz. So what is WOMM? Last week, WOMMA contributor Pat McCarthy provided 'the simplest definition of word of mouth marketing":
So now that we know what we're talking about, what are the basic principles underlying successful WOMM? There are two simple ways to find the answer: (1) by reading my book Connecting With Consumers and (2) by watching this short WOMMA video.
In a nutshell, WOMMA identified 5 basic principles of WOMM:
Wednesday, April 20 2011
By A J Kimmel on Wednesday, April 20 2011, 13:13
CALL FOR PAPERS
Journal of Marketing Communications
Special Issue: Word of Mouth and Social Media
Editors: Allan J. Kimmel and Philip J. Kitchen
The Internet and mobile devices have come to occupy a central role in the transmission of word of mouth (WOM) and the spread of marketing buzz, an impact that has shown phenomenal growth over the past decade with the emergence of blogs, Internet forums and discussion groups, text messaging, email, and the like. In fact, the most powerful media form is WOM and it is no longer limited to face-to-face encounters. Moreover, WOM today can spread with lightning speed to reach countless numbers of consumers. As marketers strive to adapt to these rapidly evolving technological and social developments and keep pace with their markets, researchers have followed suit, as evidenced by the growing body of scientific literature on various aspects of WOM communication (i.e., the act of a consumer creating and/or distributing marketing-relevant information to other consumers) and related personal influence phenomena (e.g., brand communities; brand ambassador programs; product seeding campaigns). Nonetheless, to date, relatively little academic research scrutiny has been devoted to WOM as it relates to social media and other web-driven consumer-generated phenomena, such as blogs and consumer Internet forums. Moreover, there is a paucity of academic research relating to the strength of consumer-to-consumer communications as compared to B2C and B2B. There is evidence of resistance by marketers in staying with the time-worn, but tested and tried traditional types of communications.
This special issue of the Journal of Marketing Communications is intended to bridge this knowledge gap by providing an outlet for innovative and timely contributions pertaining to online WOM, as disseminated through the broad array of social media (a category of online media where people are talking, participating, sharing, networking, and bookmarking, including social sharing sites such as YouTube and Flickr; social networks such as LinkedIn, Twitter, and Facebook; online forums; and corporate and consumer-generated blogs.
Topics for the special issue include but are not limited to:
- methods of using social media for generating WOM
- comparisons of online and offline WOM dynamics and consequences, including the interplay between these various forms of WOM
- the conversational, as opposed to dyadic, nature of online WOM disseminated through social forums
- antecedents to and conditions facilitating online WOM
- the impact of negative online WOM and complaint behavior
- the impact of online WOM on sales
- the dynamics, spread, and consequences of marketing-relevant online rumors
- rhetorical analyses of online WOM conversations
- brand-related storytelling in blogs and online forums
- segmentation analyses of online WOM participants
- the integration of WOM with other on- and off-line techniques
- where WOM fits in terms of integrated marketing communications from an organizational or consumer-based perspective.
Submissions to the special issue
should be original empirical or theoretical contributions and should not be
under simultaneous consideration for any other publication. Online WOM should not be treated as a
peripheral aspect of the paper, but must serve as a central focus. As a guide, papers should be between 4000 and
6000 words in length, including an abstract of no more than 200 words. Manuscripts should be submitted
electronically in Microsoft Word format to the guest editors before
All questions regarding the suitability of manuscripts should be sent to the Editors.
Dr. Allan J. Kimmel Dr. Philip J. Kitchen
79 avenue de la République 500 Glenridge Avenue
Saturday, October 23 2010
By A J Kimmel on Saturday, October 23 2010, 23:55
Ed Keller, CEO of the Keller Fay Group (kellerfay.com) just reported the results of the most recent TalkTrack® studies, with a special focus on teen WOM. Most readers, I'm sure, are familiar with the terrific TalkTrack® methodology, but here's a quick overview just in case. Keller Fay's syndicated research program measures brand-related WOM - both offline and online - by interviewing 36,000 American consumers between the ages of 13 and 69 annually. Participants, of whom about 5000 are teens, maintain a diary for one day of their WOM conversations about products, services, and brands, and then complete an online survey. Keller's recent overview of teen WOM is based on data obtained from July 2009 - June 2010.
The TalkTrack® findings confirm something we already knew, and which I've previously discussed in my book, Connecting With Consumers: young consumers are more actively engaged in WOM about products, companies, and brands than the general public. In short, teens talk, and much of that talk is about brands. And most of that talk happens offline.
Here are some of the key findings from the teen WOM study:
- Teen WOM is more frequent than the general public in all categories, but especially technology, telecommunications, media/entertainment, and retail/apparel.
- Teen conversations about brands are equally stimulated by TV and the Internet at levels above the overall public.
- The top 5 most talked about brands for American teens: Coca-Cola, Apple Computers, Verizon, iPod, and Ford. The next five: Pepsi, McDonald's, AT&T, Sony, and Nike. In the top 20 for teens, but not the overall public, are Sprite, Samsung, and Hollister. By contrast, Target, HP, and Honda appear on the general public's most-discussed list, but do not appear on teens' top-20 list.
- As for talked-about categories, media and entertainment top the list, with nearly eight in 10 having one or more conversations per day (vs. 57% among the general public). This is followed by food/dining (69%), tech (67%), sports/recreation (63%), telecom (63%), retail/apparel (59%), and beverages (58%). 45% of teens talk daily about personal care/beauty and automotive brands.
Based on these findings, Keller recommends that firms need to think holistically when attempting to engage teens in brand-related conversations, by not neglecting offline channels in addition to online ones, and tapping both TV and the Internet to stimulate WOM.
Good Experiences Motivate Women to Share Product Info
In another study, marketing and communications firm Harbinger, in conjunction with Ipsos, conducted a survey of online N. American females 18 years and older. Consistent with the Keller Faye teen research, Harbinger reported that women are using a combination of off- and online forms of WOM to seek and spread the word on products and services. Perhaps the most striking finding is that most of the respondents turn to friends and family for product information, thereby making WOM their top source. They seek and share information on a variety of product categories, with appliances, restaurants, autos, and entertainment leading the list. Among the other findings:
- Less than one-third (28%) of women decide what products or services to buy without seeking some kind of help.
- New mothers are the most active and motivated to get and spread messages about products and services.
A focus on specific categories sheds some light on motives underlying the female participants' desire to share information. For food and beverages, 58% claimed they would do so because of a good experience, whereas a bad experience would motivate 46% to spread the word. Experiences with appliances represent an even stronger WOM stimulant, with 80% of women surveyed indicating they discuss their good experiences, and 73% their bad experiences. Overall, in all 13 categories considered, sharing good experiences (i.e., satisfaction) and a desire to help others make smart purchases, were stronger WOM generators than bad experiences (i.e., dissatisfaction). Finally, despite the popularity of social media among the online survey participants, a distinct preference for sharing information with friends and family face-to-face was apparent (up to 90%), a finding that also pertained to strangers or acquaintances (36%, vs. a website, 32% or a social networking site, 27%).
Pretty interesting findings, and also quite familiar. They conform well to my discussion in chapter 4 of Connecting With Consumers, particularly in terms of some popular misconceptions about WOM, including beliefs that dissatisfaction is a greater stimulant of WOM than satisfaction, online WOM more common, and negative WOM more frequent than positive WOM.
Monday, August 2 2010
By A J Kimmel on Monday, August 2 2010, 23:42
Responding to the questionnaire survey couldn't be easier, . . . well, in fact, maybe it could be easier, but this is pretty basic and shouldn't take more than 10-12 minutes of your time, assuming you click the proper link below: one is for the survey in English, the other is in French. You know who you are. The surveys are identical in all other respects.
WOM Survey (in English), click HERE
WOM Survey (in French), cliquez ICI
Unfortunately, as my book, Connecting With Consumers, has only recently been published and the great wealth accrued from untold royalties has not yet come my way, I cannot offer you a wad of cash or cases of foie gras for contributing to this research enterprise. The best I can do is to promise to present the results and implications of the research in a future posting. Knowledge for its own sake, and hopefully, for further assisting you in better connecting with your customers in your professional endeavors. So, thanks! I look forward to hearing from you.
Friday, June 11 2010
By A J Kimmel on Friday, June 11 2010, 15:28
The survey's key findings, while interesting, are hardly surprising. Teen influencers (remember, the survey only studied Americans) are estimated to be 70% more likely to share purchase decision information with their friends, and they invest a great degree of trust in what their friends have to say (52%) vs. the information they receive directly from companies (only 5% trust this source) or advertising (5%).
Presuming that the majority of friends of influencers are not influencers themselves is informative, and it highlights how the WOM process is a two-way exchange. We shouldn't forget that influentials are also influenced by non-influentials, and as Duncan Watts has suggested, we are all probably influential these days, what with expanding consumer connectedness. That high school geek who everyone ignores in the cafeteria may well be chatting away online every night under the auspices of a trendy and hip persona, shaping attitudes and influencing brand preferences.
I found it interesting that so few influential teens trust blogs, as it seems likely that many teen influentials are bloggers themselves. Highly unlikely that I am pulling in many teen visitors to my Paris Restaurants and Beyond blog - at least until I start reviewing fast food joints. But it's an interesting question as to the relationships between influentials. To what extent do influencers talk to other influencers?
The myYearbook study also found that a majority of teens prefer straightforward messages from brands, although they are also receptive to well-executed edgy, funny or shocking messages.
Finally, a look at the product categories that influencers are most likely to recommend, the usual suspects emerge:
eMarketer points out that although about 80% of US teen Internet users visit social networking sites at least once per month, many sign on mainly to chat with their friends and post personal updates, thus making them particularly difficult targets for marketers to reach. So, how to reach teen influencers, especially when you don't have any running around your house?