The Word-of-Mouth Phenomenon: Its Presence and Impact in a Sport Setting

Shreffler, Megan B.; Ross, Stephen

doi:10.1123/ijsc.6.1.1

Cited by 4 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…An important aspect of fan marketing is 1:1 communication among fans and potential fans. The general form of the behavior of consumers informally sharing knowledge and creating product awareness with other consumers in regard to experiences with organizations is commonly known as WOM (Shreffler and Ross, 2013). Shreffler and Ross (2013) report that in the United States "3.3 billion brand impressions are created each day via WOM activity" (p. 1).…”

Section: Advocacy and Word Of Mouthmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The general form of the behavior of consumers informally sharing knowledge and creating product awareness with other consumers in regard to experiences with organizations is commonly known as WOM (Shreffler and Ross, 2013). Shreffler and Ross (2013) report that in the United States "3.3 billion brand impressions are created each day via WOM activity" (p. 1). Other researchers have indicated WOM could be over 20 times more effective than traditional event and media marketing techniques (Keller and Libai, 2009;Shreffler and Ross, 2013;Trusov et al, 2009).…”

Section: Advocacy and Word Of Mouthmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Shreffler and Ross (2013) report that in the United States "3.3 billion brand impressions are created each day via WOM activity" (p. 1). Other researchers have indicated WOM could be over 20 times more effective than traditional event and media marketing techniques (Keller and Libai, 2009;Shreffler and Ross, 2013;Trusov et al, 2009). These results support the potential effectiveness of advocacy since consumer awareness, inclination and decision-making toward a product or service is mainly derived from sources outside of the actual organization due to that fact that WOM is considered to be more trustworthy because it "generates empathy and overcomes consumer resistance" (Shreffler and Ross, 2013).…”

Section: Advocacy and Word Of Mouthmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Other researchers have indicated WOM could be over 20 times more effective than traditional event and media marketing techniques (Keller and Libai, 2009;Shreffler and Ross, 2013;Trusov et al, 2009). These results support the potential effectiveness of advocacy since consumer awareness, inclination and decision-making toward a product or service is mainly derived from sources outside of the actual organization due to that fact that WOM is considered to be more trustworthy because it "generates empathy and overcomes consumer resistance" (Shreffler and Ross, 2013). In the context of consumer (fan) marketing, leveraging the organization's (club's) ability to directly interact and enable conversations with fans will help to increase WOM, which could therefore "improve performance and firm profitability" (Hightower et al, 2002, p. 700).…”

Section: Advocacy and Word Of Mouthmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Indeed, there is a body of work around WOM that supports this concept (e.g. Anderson, 1998;Berger, 2014;Shreffler and Ross, 2013). Understanding differences between types of advocacy (purchase vs attendance) and the determinants of advocacy will begin to provide a better understanding of STHs from which sales strategies can be developed and future research conceptualized and conducted.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

The determinants of season ticket holder advocacy in the NCAA football bowl subdivision

Lawrence

O’Reilly

Speck

et al. 2020

SBM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThe objective of this paper is to respond to four research questions. The first two as how likely are college football season ticket holders to recommend (1) purchasing a similar season ticket package and (2) attending a home football game, to a friend or colleague. The third question examines if there is a difference between advocacy toward purchasing season tickets as compared to advocacy toward game attendance. Finally, we identify what factors impact advocacy for college football season ticket holders.Design/methodology/approachAn online survey of 57,240 season ticket holders from 69 different National Collegiate Athletics Association (NCAA) Division I Football Bowl Subdivision programs was undertaken. The data were analyzed to build a model of the drivers of advocacy in season ticket holders from a conceptual base of advocacy, trust and loyalty.FindingsThe identified drivers include both institutionally influenced factors and factors related to season ticket holder behaviors/demographics. The season ticket holder is arguably the highest level of fan for any sports organization from an affinity perspective and clearly the most important from a business perspective. This research argues that the season ticket holder should not only be the focus of ticket sales efforts but also leveraged as marketing advocates with the objective of attracting additional fans.Originality/valueThe value of this research is the large sample of data from season ticket holders of NCAA Division 1 football clubs and the resulting learning it provides to researchers and practitioners.

show abstract

Section: Advocacy and Word Of Mouthmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Advocacy and Word Of Mouthmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Advocacy and Word Of Mouthmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Advocacy and Word Of Mouthmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

The determinants of season ticket holder advocacy in the NCAA football bowl subdivision

Lawrence

O’Reilly

Speck

et al. 2020

SBM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Tracing the ABC’s of brand community

Lupinek

2019

IJSMS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to add a needed sport foundation for the brand community conversation evolution within the International Journal of Sports Marketing and Sponsorship (Popp et al., 2016; Richelieu, 2008; Trail et al., 2016) from the spark of Gladden and Funk’s (2001) brand association and loyalty in sport. Design/methodology/approach This paper traces the evolution of brand community research from its beginnings in the general business literature to the current brand community research in sport marketing today. Muniz and O’Guinn (2001) define brand communities as a specialized and non-geographically bound community based around a set of structured social relationships amongst admirers of a brand and are often recognized as the most integral relationship component of consumers to brands (Muge and Ozge, 2013). Findings Media transcends geography and brand communities will continue to transcend geography to the boundaries of mass media. Practical implications With this growing importance on attachment to brand community (ABC) through mass media, or attachment team in the sport context, further exploration on attachment variables is critical for the success of the next evolutionary stage of brand communities. Originality/value An ABC framework in the sport setting is proposed through multidisciplinary variables gathered in a review of brand community literature to address the unique attachment perspectives of sport consumers.

show abstract

On the relationship between passion, word-of-mouth behaviour and eudaimonic wellbeing

White

2019

IJSMM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Word-of-Mouth Phenomenon: Its Presence and Impact in a Sport Setting

Cited by 4 publications

References 27 publications

The determinants of season ticket holder advocacy in the NCAA football bowl subdivision

The determinants of season ticket holder advocacy in the NCAA football bowl subdivision

Tracing the ABC’s of brand community

On the relationship between passion, word-of-mouth behaviour and eudaimonic wellbeing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About