Determinants of Product-Use Compliance Behavior

Abstract

The authors examine factors that affect product-usage compliance, or the act of using a product as it is intended to be used. They develop a conceptual model of compliant behavior as a function of four main constructs: (1) salience/mindfulness, (2) the consumer's costs and benefits of compliant behavior, (3) advertising and distribution cues to action, and (4) the perceived threats associated with noncompliant behavior. They test the model using a regression mixture model of compliant behavior calibrated on unique panel data from four categories of pharmaceutical drugs that are used to treat chronic (i.e., lifelong) ailments. The findings include insights into the dynamics of product compliance: The data support the proposed four-stage evolution of compliant behavior between consecutive service provider (e.g., doctor) interventions. For marketers, the authors find substantial heterogeneity across consumers for the effects of cues from advertising and distribution. For example, in some segments, advertising has a positive impact on compliance (directly and/or by heightening responsiveness to product-efficacy evaluations), whereas in other segments, its effect is negative. Thus, the authors shed new light on the effects of advertising, which has both strong advocates and opponents in the pharmaceutical industry. Determinants of Product-Use Compliance BehaviorCompliance is the conformity or adapting to another person's wishes, to a rule, or to necessity. Areas of interest regarding compliance and its applications to consumer marketing include compliance with social programs and with a product's intended use. In professional services contexts such as health care, lack of compliance can negatively affect manufacturers, service providers, and users (The Wall Street Journal 2003). For manufacturers, noncompliance can lower a product's perceived performance, thus leading to decreased consumer satisfaction. In pharmaceuticals, the loss in future sales due to brand switching and negative word-of-mouth as a result of perceived product failure caused by noncompliance has been estimated to cost companies $15 billion to $20 billion annually (Beavers 1999).

Motivating Customers to Adhere to Expert Advice in Professional Services

“…For example, attorneys who use this approach to demystify the implications of specific legal decisions for their clients are likely to motivate client behavior that adheres more closely to attorney counsel Seiders et al 5 (Brotman 2009). Some research suggests that medical customers who understand the implications of risks related to behaviors are more likely to follow, rather than disregard, service provider advice (Allegrante et al 2008;Bowman, Heilman, and Seetharaman 2004;Luce and Kahn 1999;Post et al 2011).…”

Patient empowerment: A cross-disease exploration of antecedents and consequences

“…First, empowered patients may have greater confidence in their decision-making capabilities with regard to treatment choices and may eventually become overconfident in making educated decisions (Camacho et al 2014). Thus, they may believe they have the full picture on their situation and may intentionally ignore the physician's treatment recommendation (Bowman, Heilman, & Seetharaman, 2004).…”

Marketing of the Life Sciences: A New Framework and Research Agenda for a Nascent Field

“…If market access is granted, manufacturers get a limited time-in most cases, 20 years as of initial application filing, 10-12 of which are typically spent in clinical development-of market exclusivity, after which generic therapies can enter the market. Life sciences firms' marketing efforts are typically capped (e.g., in many European countries) and/or regulated (e.g., some states in the United States require medical sales representatives to undergo a Because of its vast importance and unique challenges, the marketing literature has recently turned to the life sciences industry to study sales force effectiveness (Manchanda and Chintagunta 2004; Manchanda and Honka 2005;Manchanda, Rossi, and Chintagunta 2004;Mizik and Jacobson 2004;Venkataraman and Stremersch 2007), therapy compliance (Bowman, Heilman, and Seetharaman 2004;Wosinska 2005), communication effectiveness (Cleanthous 2004;Iizuka and Jin 2005;Macias and Lewis 2003;Mukherji, Dutta, and Rajiv 2004;Wosinska 2006), and innovation (Chandy et al 2006;Ding and Eliashberg 2002;Prabhu, Chandy, and Ellis 2005;Sorescu, Chandy, andPrabhu 2003, 2007;Wuyts, Dutta, and Stremersch 2004), among other areas.…”