Elementos de Marca: Persuasión

Loading...

En provenance du cours de University of Pennsylvania

Introducción al Marketing

175 notes

University of Pennsylvania

Introducción al Marketing

175 notes

Cours 1 sur 5 dans Specialization Fundamentos Empresariales

Aprende las bases de Marketing llegando al fondo de toma de decisiones del cliente. Después de completar con éxito este curso, puedes aplicar estas habilidades en un reto empresarial de la vida real como parte de la Programa Especializadode Fundamentos de Negocios de Wharton.

À partir de la leçon

BRANDING: Estrategias de Comunicación Eficaz de Marca y Estrategias de Reposicionamiento

La profesora Kahn vuelve en cuarto módulo, el segundo de sus Módulos de Branding, donde tratará las estrategias efectivas de comunicación de marca y estrategias de reorientación. Uno de los aspectos más importantes para entender el comportamiento del consumidor es el de cómo los clientes perciben el mensaje y la comercialización de tu marca: lo que los consumidores perciben es lo que afecta a sus acciones, y lo que ellos perciben ¡no tienen que ser necesariamente cierto! La profesora Kahn en el último módulo del curso, profundiza en el comportamiento del cliente y en su percepción y explora estrategias eficaces para influir en ambos.

Mensajería y Comunicación de Marca12:06

Elementos de Marca: Escoger el Nombre de una Marca19:57

Elementos de Marca: Color y Frases11:41

Elementos de Marca: Presentación10:09

Elementos de Marca: Persuasión13:59

Reposicionando una Marca18:58

Rencontrer les enseignants

Barbara E. Kahn
Professor of Marketing and Director, Jay H. Baker Retailing Center
The Wharton School
Peter Fader
Professor of Marketing and Co-Director of the Wharton Customer Analytics Initiative
The Wharton School
David Bell
Xinmei Zhang and Yongge Dai Professor, Professor of Marketing
Marketing

[MUSIC]

So we talked about budget brand images, and we talked

about creating brand perceptions, and how these brand elements work together.

But another part of this brand identity is to persuade consumers.

So let's focus now on this

process of persuasion, or changing people's attitudes.

And the dominant model that's used in this, in this way

of thinking, or the dominant theory, is called the Elaboration Likelihood Model.

And so

we'll talk a little bit about that.

And then let me focus in on the use of celebrity spokespeople.

Because they're used frequently to help persuade

consumers to have positive beliefs towards a brand.

So let's start off with persuasion.

What is persuasion?

It's an active attempt to change belief and attitude.

So marketers are trying to persuade you to feel favorably

towards their brands and their products.

The caveat here is that it's difficult, and why is it difficult?

It's difficult for the reasons that I've mentioned all along.

People are ex-, expose themselves, pay attention to

and interpret data consistent with what they already believe.

And because they're not scientific about it, and evenly sampling and

exposing themselves to all sorts of different things and paying attention

to things that both support their prior belief

and refute their prior belief, because they're very

biased in the way they take in that

stimuli, it's hard to persuade them to think differently.

That's not to say it's not possible, but it is difficult.

So the dominant model in thinking about what's the

best way to persuade consumers is the Elaboration Likelihood Model.

And this model posits that there's two different ways, or

two different routes, to persuasion.

There's the systematic, or central, route and

there's the superficial or peripheral processing route.

The central root say that if people are motivated and they're

highly involved, and they have the opportunity and the ability to process

marketing messages, then the way to persuade them is through central

cues in messages. In other words, cognitive cues.

Things that people have to think about. Try to make a strong argument.

In order to make a strong argument, people have to be paying attention, they

have to be motivated, and they have

to have the ability to process this information.

That's one way.

Many times, and this is true a lot with

marketing decisions, people just aren't motivated to think that much.

And they, maybe they just don't want to think

that much.

Or maybe they're, just don't have the ability, they're too tired or whatever.

In that case, central processing or central route to persuasion will not work.

Then you will have to use the superficial way, which is to use these peripheral cues

and so when when your opportunity, motivation and ability to elaborate, to

cognitively process is low, then the way to persuade people is use, is through

these peripheral cues.

Which are more automatic reactions, people just make decisions based on these cues.

And, it's not because they thought it out carefully.

So, what, what we're saying here is that the consumer is exposed to marketing cues.

Now, the first thing is, you ask

the question, is the consumer motivated to elaborate?

Are they going to to pay

attention and think about your, your message?

If the answer is no, they're not, then that's low involvement.

And then don't give a message they have to think about, use peripheral cues.

On the other hand, if there's high involvement, and

they are motivated to elaborate, then the next question you

have to ask is, do they have the ability

to elaborate, though, that's a message something that they can

figure out if they think about. And, if the answer to that is yes.

Then you're going to use central route.

If the answer is no, you have to go back to the peripheral route.

Okay.

So to get to central routing, the central route where its systematic

argument people have to be motivated, and they have to have the ability.

If either one of them isn't true, you gotta go to peripheral cues.

So, what are peripheral cues?

Peripheral cues are cues that people use, in a, it's called heuristic way.

That means a shortcut way.

They don't really think through it, they just kind of

say, well if this is true then that must be true.

So, for example.

Classical conditioning.

Classical conditioning says that you persuade people

just by putting things together all the time.

So the famous example is Pavlov's dog. The dog was conditioned to salivate

whenever they heard a bell ring and the way it was done is the bell rang

before they gave dog food and then every time the dog got dog food they salivated.

After a while because of classical conditioning, just the

ringing of the bell caused the dog to salivate.

So in the same way in marketing, if things are always together.

You always have Coke with hamburgers or Coke with McDonald's.

After a while you don't even think about it, and you

just say, well, I'm having a Big Mac, let me have

a Coke.

That, that's a kind of notion of classical conditioning.

It's not well thought out.

It's just, I'm persuaded to have a Coke because I always have had one.

Reciprocity says that you gave me something, I owe you.

Now, that may make sense, it may not, but you're doing it just because, I owe you.

So a lot of times, direct marketers will do

things like, put a little gift in a charity appeal.

We'll give you stamps, or

sometimes they give you a dollar.

And the idea is, sometimes, I gave you sometime, now you give it back to me.

It's not a cognitive argument, it's a peripheral cue.

Consistency's another peripheral cue.

Why do you like the toothpaste you use?

A lot of times the reason that you like the

toothpaste you use, is because that's the one you always use.

That's the one your mother gave you.

It's not like you did this systematic product comparison, and you decided,

this is your favorite toothpaste.

You use it just because you always liked it.

That's consistency as the peripheral cue.

Social proof says well I like this because everybody else likes it.

So, New York Times lately has had the most

emailed articles, people read them, why do you read them?

Well, everybody else emailed them, they must be good.

Or my husband chooses restaurants by the one that has the longest lines.

If everybody's waiting on line for this restaurant,

that must be good. That's a social proof, a peripheral cue.

Liking says if you like me, then you like my ideas.

This is very important, and we'll see later for celebrity spokespeople, if

you like the celebrity spokesperson, then you're going to like what they like.

Not necessarily a rational process but it, it makes sense in some, in some ways.

Authority says just because I say so, you should do it.

That's another peripheral cue.

So, because somebody in authority says you should do something, you should do it.

It's not because you thought it out. It, because it meets your preferences.

Just because someone told you to do it.

And the last peripheral cue that I'll just

mention today is this peripheral cue of scarcity.

Because there aren't very many of them, it must be good.

So some marketers use this idea of scarcity to create product quality.

A modern one that's been using that is Lululemon.

And Lululemon purposely does not have, you know, they go to stock outs easily.

If you don't get there quickly, it'll, it'll run out.

The design you might want.

And people in, in, infer from that that it's high value, high quality product.

So all of these are scarce, are peripheral cues.

Not well thought out central processing arguments,

but cues that people use to persuade themselves of one thing or another.

So now let's think about celebrity endorsements in

terms of these two roles of, of persuasion.

So in one way, you can use a celebrity in a central processing way.

And in that way the idea's going to be the, the celebrity is an expert.

And the reason that the celebrity endorsement

matters is because that person's an expert

and therefore there's information in that endorsement.

Celebrity as a peripheral cue is going to be, because the celebrity's attractive, or

because I like the celebrity, then I want to use the products that they use.

So celebrities can be used in both ways.

Either in a central, or in a peripheral way.

When you're thinking about different celebrities to use to help endorse your

products, there's certain things you want to think about.

First of all, who's the target segment,

and does that target segment like that celebrity.

So that's going to be an important thing.

Then you want to think about what's the brand message?

And does the message of the brand, the brand

mantra, fit the, the brand message of the celebrity?

As, then another thing you want to think about is how attractive is the celebrity?

Is this a popular, a, a, a positive celebrity?

Because you don't want to take a celebrity that nobody likes, obviously.

Other considerations are how, how costly it is.

Celebrities can be very expensive. Is it worth it?

Some of them are, are cheaper.

Maybe that's a better, value for your money.

And nowadays very, very important is the social network.

So some of the celebrities that are chosen for endorsement is because they have a

very, very strong social network and they have a lot of followers, and so the clout

scores and those kinds of different scores

are indicating the social connectiveness of these

different celebrities, and all of those go

into the decision of which celebrity to choose.

There's another thing that's out there to rate these different celebrities.

It's called a Q-rating.

And, the Q-rating says, how appealing is the

celebrity among those who do not know him.

It's the ratio of popularity and familiarity.

And, it's conducted

by a particular company called Marketing Evaluations.

And, you can get Q-ratings for different celebrities to help

you judge which is a good celebrity and which is

a celebrity that maybe isn't as strong and maybe you

don't want to pay as much money for or something like that.

So what's the I think you're probably starting

to get the idea of how these celebrities work.

formally we think of it as the notion of

transfer of meaning.

And that's the model that's used to indicate the effectiveness of celebrities.

So, the idea is that celebrities have very charged, powerful meanings.

And what you want to do is transfer the meaning of that celebrity to your product.

So, advertising firms, marketing firms, branding firms try to

choose a celebrity that best represents the, the appropriate

symbolic properties of the product.

So that that meaning from that celebrity will

then transfer to the meaning of the product.

And celebrities are quite powerful.

There have some been some fMRI studies that show that when you show

an image of just a normal person, certain areas of the brain light up.

But if you show an image of a celebrity, different areas of the brain light up.

So there's an automatic or

visceral reaction to celebrities. They just get more attention.

and they can be very, very effective at

creating an brand image and, at differentiating a brand.

If a celebrity's associated with one brand, and

not another, that can be a very effective differentiation.

And going back to this elaboration likelihood model, when you

think of the celebrity as working in a central processing way

we talk about that as having a credible source.

And so in that way, the celebrity is an

effective spokesperson, because of their expertise and their trustworthiness.

So one of the very effective, at the time, spokespeople for Nike was Tiger Woods.

Now, obviously, there's been some controversy

around Tiger Woods in more recent time.

But when Tiger Woods was the first spokesperson for Nike Golf he

worked in two ways.

His, he was very credible as an endorser for golf

products because he was such a successful golfer and obviously you

think there's some expertise in him, in his golfing ability

and he knows what he's talking about with regard to product.

That's a central processing kind of use of Tiger

Woods and that's source credibility, he's a credible source.

The other way of thinking about Tiger Woods

is he's also an attractive source, people liked him

at the time, they were very familiar with him.

And anything he did, people would like.

So he was used as a spokesperson not only for golfing and for Nike, but he's also

used for other products which were not necessarily based

on his expertise, but just based on his attractiveness.

And when he got into some scandal and some issues

where his attractiveness was not as strong, some of those

endorsements were dropped because he was no longer an attractive source.

The ones that tended to stay with Tiger

were based more on his credibility, as a source.

And you can see when you think about these different methods of persuasion why

some companies might keep him and some companies might not want to keep him.

and the ways the celebrities and models are

used in these advertisements and endorsements is they

can say there's an explicit mode. They can say, I endorse this product.

I believe in this product.

There's an implicit mode that says, well I use this product.

if there's an imperative mode that says, well you should use this product.

and then there just can be these

co-present that, that, that celebrities around this product.

So a lot of product placement.

A lot of fashion companies give their celebrities their clothes

to wear so the celebrity's just wearing their clothes,

and that is a kind of endorsement as well.

[MUSIC]

Explorer notre catalogue

Rejoignez-nous gratuitement et obtenez des recommendations, des mises à jour et des offres personnalisées.

Coursera propose un accès universel à la meilleure formation au monde, en partenariat avec des universités et des organisations du plus haut niveau, pour proposer des cours en ligne.

© 2019 Coursera Inc. Tous droits réservés.

Télécharger dans l'App Store

Disponible sur Google Play