Faculty Research

Search Publications

Recent Journal Publications by COB Faculty

Search Publications

[clear]
Publication Type Publication Type
Discipline Discipline
Author Author
Year Published Year Published
Filter & Sort Results: 125

Sort by

Showing results for: ""
Results:

Active Filters

Academic Journal
Marketing

“A Social Commons Ethos in Public Policy-Making”

In the business ethics literature, a commons paradigm orients theorizing toward how civil society can promote collaboration and collectively govern shared resources, and implicates the common good—the ethics of providing social conditions that enable individuals and collectives to thrive. In the context of representative democracies, the shared resources of a nation can be considered commons, yet these resources are governed in a top-down, bureaucratic manner wherein public participation is often limited to voting for political leaders. Such governance, however, can be motivated by values of solidarity and stewardship, and a bottom-up approach to participation, in ways that are consistent with a social commons ethos (Meyer and Hudon in J Bus Ethics 160:277–292, 2019). We employ an inductive methodology focused on successes and possibilities, using data from interviews with 93 policy-makers and national-level government leaders in 5 democratic countries, and observational and archival data. We reveal how governments can operationalize a social commons ethos in decision-making. This approach to governance involves stakeholder engagement that is Broad, Deep, and Continual (BDC). In this model, leaders engage a wide breadth of stakeholders, engage them deeply and meaningfully throughout the decision-making process, and sustain this engagement in a continual manner. Implications for governance of non-governmental bureaucracies are discussed, including the normative and strategic benefits of engaging stakeholders in this manner.
Details
Academic Journal
Marketing

“Aha! I Knew that Voice Sounded Familiar!”: How Non-Identified Voiceover Endorsements Increase Ad Enjoyment via Moments of Insight”

Brands often use celebrities to narrate advertisements without explicitly featuring or identifying them. While such non-identified voice-over (NIVO) endorsements are common, little research has considered consumer responses to these advertisements. The present research demonstrates that when consumers recognize a NIVO endorser’s voice, the recognition process can spark a sudden moment of insight referred to as an Aha! experience. This insightful process enhances both viewers’ enjoyment of the advertisement and their evaluations of the promoted brand. These positive effects of NIVO endorser recognition are demonstrated not only compared to those who do not recognize the NIVO endorser’s voice, but also relative to consumers who view more traditional forms of advertising (non-endorsements and ads with explicitly identified endorsers). This research contributes to theory by demonstrating how brands can benefit from using NIVO endorsement strategies in their advertising and by highlighting a novel way brands can help consumers experience moments of insight.
Details
Academic Journal
Marketing

“An Empirical Study of Strategic Opacity in Crowdsourced Quality Evaluations”

Crowd-voting mechanisms are commonly used to implement scalable evaluations of crowdsourced creative submissions. Unfortunately, the use of crowd-voting also raises the potential for gaming and manipulation. Manipulation is problematic because i) submitters’ motivation depends on their belief that the system is meritocratic, and ii) manipulated feedback may undermine learning, as submitters seek to learn from received evaluations and those of peers. In this work, we consider a design approach to addressing the issue, focusing on the notion of strategic opacity, i.e., purposefully obfuscating evaluation procedures. On the one hand, opacity may reduce the incentive and thus prevalence of vote manipulation, and submitters may instead dedicate that time and effort to improving their submission quantity or quality. On the other hand, because opacity makes it difficult for submitters to discern the returns to legitimate effort, submitters may also reduce their submission effort, or simply exit the market. We explore this tension via a multi-method study employing field experiments at 99designs and a controlled experiment on Amazon Mechanical Turk. We observe consistent results across all experiments: opacity leads to reductions in gaming in these crowdsourcing contests, and significant increases in the allocation of effort toward legitimate versus illegitimate activities, with no discernible influence on contest participation. We discuss boundary conditions and the implications for contest organizers and contest platform operators.
Details