Details
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Title of host publication | Back to the Future: Using Marketing Basics to Provide Customer Value |
| Subtitle of host publication | Proceedings of the 2017 Academy of Marketing Science (AMS) Annual Conference |
| Publisher | Springer Nature |
| Pages | 577 |
| Number of pages | 1 |
| Publication status | Published - 6 Dec 2017 |
Publication series
| Name | Developments in Marketing Science: Proceedings of the Academy of Marketing Science |
|---|---|
| ISSN (Print) | 2363-6165 |
| ISSN (electronic) | 2363-6173 |
Abstract
Celebrity endorsement is a promising form of marketing communication. Verily, a celebrity endorsement can yield 30 times its costs. On the other hand, a failed celebrity endorsement can likewise cause financial damage: In 1989, PepsiCo had to withdraw its endorsement of pop diva Madonna due to substantial protest and calls for boycott. The loss has been estimated at six million dollars. This ambiguity hints at the fact that celebrity endorsement has to be carried out in a methodical and smart way: In order to help advertising managers to make the right decisions, countless celebrity endorsement models and indices have been designed: Among them are the well-known, established ones, which are the Source Credibility Model, the Source Attractiveness Model, the Match-Up Hypothesis, the Meaning-Transfer Model, the Q Score, and the Davie-Brown Index. However, there are also lesser known models and indices, which are as follows: the Four Fs, FRED, TEARS, Celebrity Endorsement Model, Dual Entertainment Pass Model, E-Score, and Celebrity Performance Index. All have their virtues and advantages; but which of them are most advisable and reliable? Which cover the critical decision factors of celebrity endorsement in the best way? Additionally the question arises, whether the primacy of the established models is really justifiable. In other words, are the established models and indices really decidedly better than all the rest? Answering these questions is the aim of the study at hand. To this purpose, at first the overlying perspective will be elucidated. Subsequently, a literature review is carried out, in order to reveal all aspects that are relevant for smart celebrity endorsement. Thereby, a list of attributes arises. These constitute the basis for the ensuing assessment of the models and indices. The results imply that concerning models, a combination of Celebrity Endorsement Model and FRED is the best solution for advertising managers. In terms of indices, the Davie-Brown Index and E-Score are best suited. Finally, the results are employed to design implications for advertising managers and point out research gaps.
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Business, Management and Accounting(all)
- Marketing
- Business, Management and Accounting(all)
- Strategy and Management
Cite this
- Standard
- Harvard
- Apa
- Vancouver
- BibTeX
- RIS
Back to the Future: Using Marketing Basics to Provide Customer Value: Proceedings of the 2017 Academy of Marketing Science (AMS) Annual Conference. Springer Nature, 2017. p. 577 (Developments in Marketing Science: Proceedings of the Academy of Marketing Science).
Research output: Chapter in book/report/conference proceeding › Conference contribution › Research › peer review
}
TY - GEN
T1 - Idle Speculation or Proficient Prognosis? How to Employ Celebrity Endorsement Models Smartly
T2 - An Abstract
AU - Wiedmann, Klaus Peter
AU - von Mettenheim, Walter
PY - 2017/12/6
Y1 - 2017/12/6
N2 - Celebrity endorsement is a promising form of marketing communication. Verily, a celebrity endorsement can yield 30 times its costs. On the other hand, a failed celebrity endorsement can likewise cause financial damage: In 1989, PepsiCo had to withdraw its endorsement of pop diva Madonna due to substantial protest and calls for boycott. The loss has been estimated at six million dollars. This ambiguity hints at the fact that celebrity endorsement has to be carried out in a methodical and smart way: In order to help advertising managers to make the right decisions, countless celebrity endorsement models and indices have been designed: Among them are the well-known, established ones, which are the Source Credibility Model, the Source Attractiveness Model, the Match-Up Hypothesis, the Meaning-Transfer Model, the Q Score, and the Davie-Brown Index. However, there are also lesser known models and indices, which are as follows: the Four Fs, FRED, TEARS, Celebrity Endorsement Model, Dual Entertainment Pass Model, E-Score, and Celebrity Performance Index. All have their virtues and advantages; but which of them are most advisable and reliable? Which cover the critical decision factors of celebrity endorsement in the best way? Additionally the question arises, whether the primacy of the established models is really justifiable. In other words, are the established models and indices really decidedly better than all the rest? Answering these questions is the aim of the study at hand. To this purpose, at first the overlying perspective will be elucidated. Subsequently, a literature review is carried out, in order to reveal all aspects that are relevant for smart celebrity endorsement. Thereby, a list of attributes arises. These constitute the basis for the ensuing assessment of the models and indices. The results imply that concerning models, a combination of Celebrity Endorsement Model and FRED is the best solution for advertising managers. In terms of indices, the Davie-Brown Index and E-Score are best suited. Finally, the results are employed to design implications for advertising managers and point out research gaps.
AB - Celebrity endorsement is a promising form of marketing communication. Verily, a celebrity endorsement can yield 30 times its costs. On the other hand, a failed celebrity endorsement can likewise cause financial damage: In 1989, PepsiCo had to withdraw its endorsement of pop diva Madonna due to substantial protest and calls for boycott. The loss has been estimated at six million dollars. This ambiguity hints at the fact that celebrity endorsement has to be carried out in a methodical and smart way: In order to help advertising managers to make the right decisions, countless celebrity endorsement models and indices have been designed: Among them are the well-known, established ones, which are the Source Credibility Model, the Source Attractiveness Model, the Match-Up Hypothesis, the Meaning-Transfer Model, the Q Score, and the Davie-Brown Index. However, there are also lesser known models and indices, which are as follows: the Four Fs, FRED, TEARS, Celebrity Endorsement Model, Dual Entertainment Pass Model, E-Score, and Celebrity Performance Index. All have their virtues and advantages; but which of them are most advisable and reliable? Which cover the critical decision factors of celebrity endorsement in the best way? Additionally the question arises, whether the primacy of the established models is really justifiable. In other words, are the established models and indices really decidedly better than all the rest? Answering these questions is the aim of the study at hand. To this purpose, at first the overlying perspective will be elucidated. Subsequently, a literature review is carried out, in order to reveal all aspects that are relevant for smart celebrity endorsement. Thereby, a list of attributes arises. These constitute the basis for the ensuing assessment of the models and indices. The results imply that concerning models, a combination of Celebrity Endorsement Model and FRED is the best solution for advertising managers. In terms of indices, the Davie-Brown Index and E-Score are best suited. Finally, the results are employed to design implications for advertising managers and point out research gaps.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85101135595&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/978-3-319-66023-3_192
DO - 10.1007/978-3-319-66023-3_192
M3 - Conference contribution
AN - SCOPUS:85101135595
T3 - Developments in Marketing Science: Proceedings of the Academy of Marketing Science
SP - 577
BT - Back to the Future: Using Marketing Basics to Provide Customer Value
PB - Springer Nature
ER -