Consumers' relationships with brands are not all that different than
relationships with people. Some you genuinely care about….others are in
your life because you need them.
For marketers, understanding the difference between the two kinds of
relationships is essential to making sure you know how to deal with
customers.
Marketers who realize this will be in a better position to retain
customers and improve the perceptions of consumers who are unhappy with a
brand’s service or product, according to researchers who recently
studied the phenomenon.
In one kind of consumer/brand relationship, people relate to the brand
based primarily on economic factors. Walmart, for example, attracts
customers based on price and value. In what the researchers call a
"communal relationship," consumers relate to the brand based on caring,
trust and partnership. State Farm, for example, sells itself as a "Good
Neighbor."
How consumers react to experiences with the brand, both positive and negative, depend on how they related to the brand in the first place, researchers said.
Pankaj Aggarwal, a marketing professor at the Rotman School of
Management at the University of Toronto Scarborough, and Richard Larrick
of Duke University, recently tested brand evaluation after an unfair
transaction. The results depended heavily on whether the consumer was in
an exchange relationship with the brand or a communal one.
In the first study, Aggarwal and Larrick set up a situation in which
the consumer didn’t get what they paid for and wasn’t remunerated for a
mistake made by the brand. When customers were treated with respect and
dignity after the mistake, those who had communal relationships with the
brand responded well, possibly because it reassured consumers about the
caring nature of their association with the brand.
In fact, concern from the brand acted as a form of compensation in
itself. However, this effect wasn't found when consumers' relationship
with the brand was based mostly on price and value.
In that case, if the consumers didn't think they got their proverbial money's worth, good customer service didn't move them to reconsider their negative evaluation of the brand.
However, things change when there is no problem that needs to be addressed with the customer.
Ironically, respectful and fair treatment by a company means more to
those who choose a brand based on value than to those who have an
emotional relationship with a company. The researchers think this may be
because the brand has already met the expectations of those in an
exchange relationship — the consumer got what they paid for — good and
respectful treatment goes above and beyond. For those in communal
relationships, who were already expecting to be treated positively, the
same treatment doesn't have as much of an effect.
"Adverse outcomes happen sometimes. People are treated badly or a
product fails," Aggarwal said. "Marketers must understand the type of
relationship that they have with the consumer so they can figure out how
to make good that unfair outcome."
The "right" response to correct a brand's transgression depends on the
relationship the brand tries to build with consumers. For example, a
sincere apology letter may work in a communal relationship, whereas a
refund or discount would be advisable in an exchange relationship.
The study, "When consumers care about being treated fairly: The
interaction of relationship norms and fairness norms," will be published
in an upcoming issue of the Journal of Consumer Psychology.
0 Comments