ArticlePDF Available
2005 Presidential Address
at the North American Conference of the
Association for Consumer Research
Forthcoming in Advances in Consumer Research, Volume 33, 2006
eds. Cornelia Pechmann and Linda L. Price
MEANING AND MATTERING
THROUGH TRANSFORMATIVE CONSUMER RESEARCH
David Glen Mick
McIntire School of Commerce
University of Virginia
The Association for Consumer Research was born in 1969 and is now
approaching middle age. As with most of us personally, this stage of life
often provokes introspection about our past and present, our values, and the
extent to which our remaining words and actions can make any worthwhile
difference in the world. Today I am asking you to pause with me and
consider the meaning and mattering of ACR.
1
But before proceeding, we know as earnest scholars that it is imperative to
define our central constructs. In the view of some notorious researchers,
middle age is defined as when you no longer care about where you are
particularly going, so long as you are back home by nine p.m.
Back to the meaning and mattering at hand, our founders undoubtedly had
differing opinions about ACR’s objectives and operations. Two of their
statements, however, I will draw attention to. Bill Wells (1995, p. 562) has
written that the “great hope” for ACR was that “Unlike the older other
professional disciplines, consumer research would solve real problems.”
[emphasis added] Jerry Kernan (1979, p. 1) proclaimed that the
association’s penultimate goal was to “orchestrate the natural talents of
academia, government, and industry so as to enhance consumer welfare.”
[emphasis added] Accordingly, the earliest ACR conferences often involved
not only academics, but also administrators from consumer-oversight
organizations, such as the Consumers Union and the U.S. Food and Drug
Administration. Ideals and expectations were high, that ACR could and
should solve legitimate problems and augment consumer welfare.
How do you feel about that vision? If you agree with it—even if only
moderately—how would you grade ACR’s related performance over the last
36 years? Where are we today?
One thing we all know for sure: in the arc of time, consumer behavior and
the ideology of consumption have diffused across the world to every corner,
to virtually every individual, to such an astonishing scale that living and
consuming are more complexly interdependent than at any other time in
human history. Both the serious problems and the genuine opportunities of
consumption, for billions of people and other living entities, have never
needed ACR and our collective talents more than now.
There are many riddles, many stresses, and much suffering in our world.
And so many of these conditions are instigated or aggravated by consumer
behaviors, or could be alleviated by new and different consumer behaviors.
The statistics are numbing, but let’s consider a few to assist us in our middle
age, self-analysis of ACR.
2
In terms of one particular disease, 19 million people worldwide have died of
AIDS, and about 35 million are currently infected. In terms of one particular
handicap, internationally over 160 million people are visually impaired, of
whom about 37 million are blind. What has our organization done about
diseases and handicaps that consumer research could tend to?
On a seemingly more mundane topic—television—the average child in
America will have watched 100,000 acts of televised violence, including
8,000 murders, by the time he or she finishes the sixth grade. By the age of
65, the average American will have spent nine years watching television.
Television is now the most globalized form of entertainment, and yet how
little we understand about the effects of TV. But it doesn’t need to be this
way.
And then there is food. Between 1962 and 2000, the percent of obese
Americans rose from 13% to 31%, with childhood obesity tripling in the past
two decades. The cost of overweight conditions in the U.S., through effects
on health, has been estimated at $117 billion annually. In the meantime,
ACR has been mostly speechless about this tragedy of indulgence.
And, of course, there is tobacco. Diseases from smoking cause an estimated
430,000 deaths per year in the U.S. alone. And, as you all know, the
incidence of smoking in developing economies has skyrocketed. Tobacco
consumption has been a focus of some consumer researchers over the years,
but we need more, following in the footsteps of Pechmann and Knight’s
(2002) award-winning JCR article on advertising, peer influences, and
adolescent smoking.
And there are thousands of consumers harmed each year through product use
and misuse. For example, in 2003 U. S. children were involved in over
200,000 toy-related injuries treated in hospital emergency rooms. Some of
us study children, but rarely about their susceptibility to product injuries, and
the related role and responsibility of their caregivers.
And lastly, but perhaps most alarming, there are the widespread
environmental concerns. We know almost certainly that this planet cannot
reasonably sustain the world population forecasted for mid to late 21
st
Century if current consumption activities keep mounting. Looking just at
the U.S., the Environmental Protection Agency has recently estimated that
40% of U.S. waterways remain too polluted for fishing or swimming. Sadly,
in several parts of the world, where consumption levels are rapidly rising,
airway pollution and waterway pollution are already worse than in the U.S.
But it doesn’t need to be this way. These trends, epidemics, and
pandemics—and so many more I have overlooked here—are not solely for
politicians, engineers, and health specialists to address, to ease, or to
remedy. Where is ACR?
It is important to be balanced, however. There is much contentment and joy,
and many marvels and triumphs in our world. Consumer behaviors
particularly have the capacity to support and enhance life. These include
reading, exercise, many outdoor activities, hobbies of numerous kinds,
festivals and celebrations, and an array of artistic endeavors such as music,
painting, and sculpting. There are also caring for and maintaining
possessions, gift giving, sharing, donating, and recycling. These and many
other consumer behaviors, when conducted in sensible amounts, with
conscientiousness or flow, can undeniably contribute to well-being,
including physical health, authentic personal efficacy and human potential,
social justice and social integration, community networks, family coherence
and legacies, child nurturance and growth, ecological stability, and so on.
On the whole, there are many affirmative consumer behaviors and related
dimensions of life that consumer researchers could not only derive deeper
understanding of, but also share the insights with the people who would
most benefit from them.
So, am I intimating that our modestly-sized, non-profit association of loosely
organized members, who serve mostly as volunteers, can positively impact
millions of consumers? Absolutely. Of course, it won’t be easy. As E. B.
White once confessed, “I get up every morning determined both to change
the world and to have one hell of a good time. Sometimes this makes
planning the day difficult.” This is the sort of difficulty that is good. It is
good for the world, good for ACR, good for us and our children.
I feel sheepish, though, standing before you today. My own research has
been as inconsequential to consumers’ well-being as anyone else’s in this
field. Yet, when I received the honor of being elected president of ACR, I
felt it was time for me and for ACR to revisit the meaning and mattering of
our lives’ work. As I thought more about the unrealized potential of ACR in
the contexts of consumer suffering as well as consumer enrichment, I
thought more about our association’s great hope. And as I did, an
exhortation from Eleanor Roosevelt kept haunting me. She said quite
simply, “Do the thing you think you cannot do.”
This means, of course, that we must do more than just think or converse
about consumer welfare. As one Chinese proverb states matter-of-factly:
“Talk doesn’t cook rice.” We need to take some actions. And another
Chinese proverb reminds us, “A journey of a thousand miles begins with the
first step.”
A first step was actually taken a year ago when Debbie MacInnis and several
others worked diligently to redesign the ACR website into a more
contemporary, sophisticated, and multi-functional resource. This included
planning a subsection titled “For Consumers.” Today it includes consumer-
friendly summaries of relevant research as well as numerous links to other
organizations and publications that can aid consumers. We need more ACR
members to assist the website editors in developing this subsection. Please
contact the chief editor, Vanessa Patrick, or me if you wish to contribute.
Taking a second vital step, I asked four respected members of ACR—
Connie Pechmann, Linda Price, Rick Netemeyer, and Lisa Penaloza—to
organize this conference around a theme of consumer welfare. An
immediate stumbling block was figuring out what to label this theme. So we
generated and reviewed over 50 possibilities. For example, we considered
calling it Positive Consumer Research. But that seemed too derivative from
the movement of positive psychology (Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi
2000). Besides, positive contrasts with negative, and it wasn’t negative
consumer research we were up against, but rather that which was ineffectual
for social and personal well being. We felt we needed something fresh and
stirring.
Ultimately, we all agreed on Transformative Consumer Research. By
transformative research we mean investigations that are framed by a
fundamental problem or opportunity, and that strive to respect, uphold, and
improve life in relation to the myriad conditions, demands, potentialities,
and effects of consumption. Though transformative consumer research has
an immediate practical orientation, it does not forsake scrupulous
methodology or perceptive theory. In fact, it is mostly—if not only—
through meticulous description and compelling explanation that the findings
can lead to constructive, actionable implications. The word ‘transformative”
also carries the additional meaning of an inspired summon to researchers
themselves, who might be newly considering this genre of work or who
would like to recharge their long-time faith in applied consumer research via
ACR.
The organizers of our conference and I have been gratified by the response
of ACR members who submitted papers and session proposals around the
theme of transformative consumer research. Hopefully, future ACR
conferences, including those in Europe, the Asia-Pacific area, and Latin
America can build upon these initial efforts. I respectfully urge the program
committees and the organizers of these conferences to not only include
transformative consumer research as a content code in the submission page
of research topics, but also to extend and mature this endeavor in their own
ways through the conference plans they make.
Before announcing further steps, I want to stress and clarify two essential
issues. First, we have by no means intended for transformative consumer
research to become some overarching or predominant orientation for ACR.
Our association is characterized by broadminded and mutually respectful
members. ACR will continue to welcome all researchers who have keen
interests in consumer behavior, regardless of their topic or research
paradigm.
Secondly, transformative consumer research is not something new, nor has it
been dormant. More than one past presidential address at ACR has pointed
in this direction. Also, occasional articles in the Journal of Consumer
Research have looked at transformative consumer research topics. The
Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, the Journal of Research for
Consumers, the Journal of Macro Marketing, and the Journal of Consumer
Affairs have also published many related papers, and some special issues are
now forthcoming at those journals that fit under the rubric of transformative
consumer research as I have outlined it today.
This brings me to my precise point. I am not insinuating that few ACR
members care about or have published research that deals with consumer
welfare. That would be patently false, though as my remarks intend to
advocate today, we categorically could do much, much more. Ten years ago
at this conference, the honorable Bill Wells alleged that our field was rife
with irrelevance. I agreed then, and I still mostly do. But over the last
decade during which I have pondered Bill’s indictment, I have come to
believe that our irrelevance is ironically most situated in the association
itself. ACR has made little systematic effort to draw together the resources
and skills of members who wish to work on consumer welfare, little
systematic effort to encourage and reward more of this sort of research, and
little systematic effort to inform either the public, consumer advisors, or
policy administrators who would most gain from learning of the research
and its implications.
It is critical, therefore, that additional concrete steps be taken. Otherwise,
transformative consumer research via ACR will risk being never more than
just kindly thoughts and ambiguous aspirations. With the devoted input of
several of you in the audience today, I have worked during this last year to
move transformative consumer research beyond our three-day gathering in
San Antonio.
As you have probably noted, there was included in your conference
registration packet a short report on an ad hoc Task Force. With the support
of ACR’s Board of Directors, I recruited through email 46 individuals who
have strong interests in consumer welfare, to brainstorm ideas on a small set
of key issues that will be crucial to the viability and success of
transformative consumer research.
I will not take much time or space here to convey the task force results, since
you have already received the summary report. In brief, the task force
members identified some of the most pressing research topics, including
vulnerable consumer groups (such as the poor, children and
adolescents, and the illiterate),
tobacco, alcohol, and drug consumption,
gambling,
nutrition and obesity,
violence in movies and computer games,
financial and medical decision making,
product safety,
environmentally protective behaviors, and
organ donations.
Among the most mentioned barriers were motivating and valuing
transformative consumer research. Other challenges were the need for
explicit funding and for increased publication opportunities, especially in the
leading outlets. Advice for addressing these crucial issues included:
enlisting ACR opinion leaders to be decidedly involved,
obtaining earmarked research funds for ACR members,
working with journal editors to find new or increased means to
publishing related research,
arranging for ACR to provide outgoing communications that are
widely accessible and understandable, both to the public and policy
administrators, and, finally,
developing doctoral seminars that can encourage and train new
scholars in conducting, publishing, and publicizing transformative
consumer research.
Taking these insights as a springboard, immediately following my remarks
today there will be a special session on the task force report that will feature
a select panel of the task force members. A sizeable period of this session
will be open discussion between the panel and audience members, as
moderated by our conference co-chairs, Connie and Linda. I invite all of the
task force members to attend, and I hope that several others of you, who
have curiosity or interests in the promise of transformative consumer
research, will participate vigorously as well.
I am additionally pleased to announce that the ACR Board of Directors has
endorsed a proposal I made to form an ongoing Advisory Committee on
Transformative Consumer Research. The committee will report to the
Board, and it will work side-by-side as needed with the ACR president,
executive director, website editors, and others to invigorate and carry on
transformative consumer research. I have volunteered to chair this
committee at the beginning, and its membership will rotate on a regular
basis. Its first duty will be to review the task force report and underlying
data, as well as the feedback during the special session following this
luncheon, and to begin to prioritize and implement the best
recommendations. I am delighted to name the charter members of this
advisory committee. They are:
Steve Burgess, University of Cape Town, South Africa
Marv Goldberg, Penn State University
Ron Hill, University of South Florida at St. Petersburg
Eric Johnson, Columbia University
Punam Keller, Dartmouth College
Connie Pechmann, University of California, Irvine
Simone Pettigrew, University of Western Australia
Joe Plummer, Chief Research Officer, Advertising Research
Foundation
Linda Price, University of Arizona
Brian Wansink, Cornell University
Rick Wilk, Indiana University
I am also very excited to reveal a new source of ACR research support. To
my knowledge, it is the single largest monetary donation to our association
in our history, for any purpose. With the assistance of Linda Price, ACR has
received a $30,000 fund of seed support from the Kellogg Foundation to
provide for research expenses associated with transformative consumer
research. This support has been made most directly possible by Ms. Cynthia
Milligan, who is the Dean of the University of Nebraska School of Business
and the President of the Board of the Kellogg Foundation. We owe
immense gratitude to Cynthia and the Kellogg Foundation for this generous
and uplifting support.
The distribution of the Kellogg Foundation funds over the next two to three
years will be managed by the ACR Advisory Committee on Transformative
Consumer Research. The first call for research proposals will be made soon
via the ACR website and the ACR listserv. Proposals will be reviewed by
the committee and the recipients will be announced shortly thereafter. The
committee will also seek additional funds to replenish and build upon the
initial Kellogg Foundation monies.
Among the most emphasized concerns by the task force was the need for
research on consumer welfare to be more welcomed at our top academic
journals. To this end, I am pleased to acknowledge that John Deighton, the
new editor of the Journal of Consumer Research, has offered to develop a
special issue of JCR in the spirit of transformative consumer research. This
effort will fit soundly with the philosophy John espoused in his first editorial
(Deighton 2005), namely that consumer research should be “useful” by
“illuminating a real-world consumption phenomenon” and harboring
“implications for practice.” The call for submissions has just recently been
posted on the JCR website, and will soon appear on the ACR listserv and
elsewhere. I thank John and the JCR Policy Board for making a higher
priority of pragmatic studies of consumer welfare. What is also
prospectively satisfying about this special issue is that, over the last two
years, JCR has had tremendous success in getting the news media to notice
and incorporate more of its research into a variety of journalistic articles and
stories on consumer behavior. Thus, there is opportunely an increased
likelihood that the public at large will be exposed to the insights and
implications of this special issue.
I hope these opening steps for developing transformative consumer research
will usher in a renaissance of an original mission of ACR, namely, to
conduct and impart outstanding research in the service of quality of life.
In closing, I want to go back to 1969. Not to ACR’s genesis, but to another
event occurring independently, which surprisingly paralleled the founding
dreams for ACR and the re-envisionment I have called for today. That event
in 1969 was the presidential speech given before the American
Psychological Association by the renowned psycholinguist, George Miller.
Here are some of his sentences stitched together from across his address. As
you hear the word “psychologist,” think “consumer researcher.” Miller
(1969, p. 1063, p. 1074) said:
The most urgent problems of our world today are the problems we
have made for ourselves….Our obligations as citizens are broader
than our obligations as scientists….If we have something of
practical value to contribute, we should make every effort to insure
that it is implemented….I recognize that many of you will note these
ambitions as little more than empty rhetoric. Psychologists will
never be up to it, you will say….On the other hand, difficulty is no
excuse for surrender. There is a sense in which the unattainable is
the best goal to pursue. So let us continue our struggle to advance
psychology as a means of promoting human welfare, each in our
own way. For myself, however, I can imagine nothing we could do
that would be more relevant to human welfare, and nothing that
could pose a greater challenge to the next generation of
psychologists, than to discover how best to give psychology away.
Several of our founders intended ACR to be a principal channel for giving
consumer research away. Inviting, as I have today, a middle age, self-
analysis of ACR, how do you feel about giving consumer research away? If
you agree—even if only moderately—how would you grade ACR’s
performance? Where are we today?
There will be plentiful doubts about transformative consumer research, and
more than enough impediments. But we should all feel buoyed by someone
who knows a lot about resilience and noble goals. “Our deepest fear,”
Nelson Mandela said, “is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is that
we are powerful beyond measure. It is our light, not our darkness, that
frightens us.”
How true of ACR as well! Let’s not be deterred. Together we can raise the
meaning and mattering of our scholarship in this world. ACR can still
become the brighter beacon it was conceived to be.
Endnotes
1. I thank Jim Burroughs, Rich Lutz, Ed McQuarrie, Mary-Ann
Twist, and Brian Wansink for commenting helpfully on a prior
draft of this address.
2. The statistics reported were gathered from a variety of
governmental and non-governmental sources, mostly from
associated websites.
References
Deighton, John (2005), “From the Editor-Elect,” Journal of Consumer
Research, 32 (1).
Kernan, Jerome B. (1979), “Presidential Address: Consumer Research and
the Public Purpose,” in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 6, ed.
William L. Wilkie, Ann Arbor, MI: Association for Consumer Research,
1-2.
Miller, George A. (1969), “Psychology as a Means of Promoting Human
Welfare,” American Psychologist, 24 (11), 1063-1075.
Pechmann, Cornelia and Susan J. Knight (2002), “An Experimental
Investigation of the Joint Effects of Advertising and Peers on
Adolescents’ Beliefs and Intentions about Cigarette Consumption,”
Journal of Consumer Research, 29 (1), 5-19.
Seligman, Martin E. P. and Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi (2000), “Positive
Psychology,” American Psychologist, 55 (1), 5-14.
Wells, William D. (1995), “Anniversary Session: What Do We Want to be
When We Grow Up?” in Advances in Consumer Research, eds. Frank R.
Kardes and Mita Sujan, Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research,
561-563.
... Theoretically, exploring the influence of VIs on followers' well-being is essential to contributing new knowledge to the field of consumer well-being (Bhardwaj and Kalro 2024) and transformative consumer research (TCR) (Zeng and Botella-Carrubi 2023). TCR focuses on enhancing the well-being of consumers, communities, and societies (Mick 2006) and investigates how real-world experiences (such as interacting with HVIs) can enhance or diminish consumers' well-being (Davis and Pechmann 2020). The increasing research focus on consumers' well-being reflects the growing importance consumers are placing on their well-being and the resultant shifts in their consumption patterns (Bhardwaj and Kalro 2024). ...
... We propose that these relationships are moderated by the type of influencer sharing the post. In doing so, our study contributes to scant literature that investigated how influencer marketing (Vrontis et al. 2021) and emergent technologies (Bhardwaj and Kalro 2024) influence consumer well-being, thus positioning our work in the TCR domain (Mick 2006;Zeng and Botella-Carrubi 2023). Second, this study contributes to the emergent VI literature (Appel et al. 2020;Laszkiewicz and Kalinska-Kula 2023) by focusing on how interactions with HVIs influence consumer well-being, in contrast to extant VI research that predominantly investigates marketing outcomes of using VIs in brand communications (Franke, Groeppel-Klein, and Müller 2023;Kim and Park 2023;Thomas and Fowler 2021). ...
... Moreover, this study, through its inclusion of HVIs, also contributes to addressing another gap in existing research identified by a systematic literature review on consumer well-being, which emphasizes the need for research to examine the well-being implications of emergent technologies-such as HVIs-in marketing (Bhardwaj and Kalro 2024). Hence, our study expands knowledge at the intersection of influencer marketing (Vrontis et al. 2021), new technologies in marketing , and consumer well-being (Bhardwaj and Kalro 2024) by proposing a conceptual model that may explain how interacting with influencers, including HVIs, on social media can influence followers' well-being, thus positioning our work in the transformative consumer research domain (Mick 2006;Zeng and Botella-Carrubi 2023). ...
Article
Full-text available
With recent advancements in technologies such as artificial intelligence and computer‐generated imagery, virtual influencers (VIs) have become prominent branding tools that command high engagement rates. Most extant research explores the marketing outcomes of using VIs in brand campaigns. However, little is known about how interacting with VIs on social media platforms may affect consumers' well‐being. This research takes a comprehensive approach, developing a nuanced understanding of whether (and how) human‐like VIs (HVIs) impact consumers' well‐being. We employ a conceptual development approach drawing on scholarship from influencer marketing, narrative transportation, and consumer well‐being and gather additional support for the conceptual framework from data collected by interviewing 25 followers of HVIs. The conceptual framework proposes that when interacting with influencers' social media posts, followers experience narrative transportation, which positively influences followers' hedonic and eudaimonic well‐being. However, the conceptual framework also proposes that these relationships are moderated by the type of influencer (human vs. virtual) sharing the post. Specifically, we suggest that interactions with HVIs provide followers with enjoyment (hedonic well‐being) and support their self‐acceptance, personal growth, relationships, and autonomy (eudaimonic well‐being). We also provide initial evidence of the favorable marketing outcomes of enhanced well‐being from engagement with HVIs, including contemplation of brand purchase. The study thus advances extant VI literature by proposing a theoretically and empirically informed conceptual model that examines HVIs' influence on consumer well‐being. Also, it contributes to addressing the broader calls for research on the impact of social media and influencer marketing on consumer well‐being.
... By David G. Mick Mick's (2006) argument was that the consumer research field had for too long systematically underprioritised the realisation that people, societies, and the earth were facing complex crises of wellbeing (e.g., poverty, ecology degradations, addictions, obesity) as well as bona fide opportunities of wellbeing (e.g., exercise, healthy nutrition, hobbies, arts) via consumption behaviours and related trends that could be more pro-actively addressed by new consumer research. These opportunities to relieve suffering or promote flourishing were then, and still are now, highly evident and enormously varied across the world. ...
... These opportunities to relieve suffering or promote flourishing were then, and still are now, highly evident and enormously varied across the world. Thus, Mick's (2006) address set the immediate future for TCR's principles and maturation. The first decade of TCR (see Davis et al. 2016) witnessed a multitude of activities, such as the establishment of a diverse TCR Advisory Committee, the launching of TCR conferences, or a TCR monograph (Mick et al. 2012). ...
Article
Full-text available
The field of Transformative Service Research (TSR) has emerged over a decade ago with a range of seminal and call-to-action papers which have subsequently sparked and stimulated scholars' interest in academic work at the intersection of Transformative Consumer Research and Service Research. This special research paper is a perspective piece that sketches trajectories for Transformative Service Researchers drawing on the combined knowledge and work of established researchers in the field who take a future perspective by highlighting the prospective development of the domain. Introducing the 10-Collaborators (10C) Framework, the article outlines a roadmap by relating to the different actors at the micro, meso, macro, and meta levels of the service ecosystem. These collaborators can be affected by contexts that create perceived vulnerability but are also required to collaborate to ensure the wellbeing of the system itself and its actors. The paper delineates novel TSR approaches for each of the levels and its actors as well as for the conceptual, methodological, practice and policy domains, and outlines novel initiatives. It deducts future research paths and actions points for TSR scholars and practitioners.
... Mattering has been productively adopted as a meaningful construct for the potential of consumer research scholarship to solve real problems (Mick, 2006) in a transformative metaphor. It is associated with the fundamental action to make a difference for real, as a moral recourse for 'windy philosophy'. ...
Book
Full-text available
This Blooming Bookthing of discontinuous lyrical instants is the spring issue of The Poetic Return (www.thepoeticreturn.com). Rhythmattering plants creative biodiversity in theory and praxis by growing imagination for real in the spirit of a botanic landscape.
... However, there has been a recent resurgence in research focusing on marketing's impact on society. For example, the transformative consumer research (TCR) movement has accommodated studies on customers experiencing vulnerability and delved into issues like tobacco, alcohol, and drug addiction, nutrition and obesity, financial and health decision-making, considering their ethical implications and responsible marketing (Mick, 2006;Mick et al., 2012;Rosenbaum et al., 2011). ...
Chapter
Service-dominant (S-D) logic is a metatheoretical framework for understanding economic activity. It depicts value creation as a collaborative process in which resource-integrating actors perform service-for-service exchange in nested and overlapping service ecosystems enabled and constrained by actor-generated institutions. It is a counter-logic to the conventional goods-dominant, firm-centric, linear perspective to exchange that emphasizes the production and distribution of value-laden goods. S-D logic offers a holistic, dynamic, and systemic understanding of value cocreation across a wide configuration of actors. S-D logic is identified as the theoretical basis of human-to-human (H2H) marketing, a new framework in marketing that emphasizes humanism in efforts to address existential human problems while mutually benefiting customers and marketers, as well as upholding ethical commitment among stakeholders. S-D logic provides a broader view of collaborative value creation that emphasizes the need for firms to maintain quality relationships with multiple stakeholders for long-term benefits. By promoting business decisions mutually beneficial for customers, employees, and society in general, S-D logic offers a perspective that can potentially reduce tensions and narrow the gap between business and ethical decisions, therefore accommodating a humanistic approach to marketing. In this chapter, we provide a brief introduction to the basic principles of service-dominant (S-D) logic, explain the foundational concepts in S-D logic, i.e., service, resources, actors, value, and institutions as well as depict the conceptual turns that S-D logic has undergone since its inception, including the utilization of an actor-to-actor designation, increased emphasis on institutions, institutional arrangements, and service ecosystems, as well as the consideration of a multi-level approach in analyzing theories and empirical observations. The diffusion of S-D logic within and beyond the marketing discipline can partly be attributed to its associated unifying, transcending, accommodating, and transformative nature. Consequently, scholars increasingly identify S-D logic as a metatheoretical framework that can facilitate the development of a general theory of markets on which normative theories of marketing can rest. This chapter briefly outlines pathways toward S-D logic’s progress toward theory formalization by identifying the accomplishment of lexicon building and axiomatization and underlining the ongoing need to pursue theory interpretation, which requires more exploration of emerging areas of inquiry, development of marketing-born mid-range theories, and theory cocreation involving a broad range of market actors.
... Care homes must focus on creating environments that allow these consumers to maintain aspects of their previous lifestyles, integral to their identities. This approach can bring about positive changes at both individual and systemic levels (Mick 2006). One avenue for care home management to consider is accommodating the needs of elderly care consumers that are often closely related to their identities, such as their need to feel valuable to others and their desire to build personal connections. ...
Article
Full-text available
With increasing longevity, the need for institutional elderly care has become commonplace. This study explores the experiences of elderly care consumers in institutional care settings, which we define as the “elderscape”—a heterotopic place shaped by the marketization of care. Drawing from 24 in-depth interviews with elderly care consumers, their family caregivers, and professional caregivers, we present a model of elderly care consumers' navigation patterns and identity processes in the elderscape. The transition to the elderscape often compels elderly consumers to strive to preserve their identities. Boundaries defined by market logic and professional care logic require elderly care consumers to navigate these constraints, sometimes adapting their identities. As a result, distinct navigation patterns emerge: rebuilding personal connections, revaluating possessions, reconsidering activities, and reclaiming space. Furthermore, the identity preservation efforts of elderly care consumers are complicated by the interventions of family caregivers. The findings highlight the dual nature of family caregivers' impact on elderly consumers' identity processes. Depending on their motivations—such as care, obligation, or nostalgia—family caregivers engage in patterned actions that either support or destabilize the elderly consumers' identity processes. This research provides valuable insights for care institutions, family caregivers, and care consumers alike.
Article
This paper explores the role of curiosity in transformative consumer journeys through a Transformative Consumer Research (TCR) lens. We introduce curiosity as a powerful and overlooked motivational force that can ignite and sustain consumer transformation, especially when individuals face personal, organizational, and systemic barriers. Curiosity is associated with the pursuit of new knowledge and information as well as persistence in the face of challenges. We believe curiosity can be leveraged to facilitate both the initiation and long-term pursuit of transformative consumer journeys. The transformative impact of curiosity is examined at micro-, meso-, and macro-levels, encompassing individual, social, and marketplace transformation. Through a detailed review of relevant literature and the introduction of the Curiosity-Centered Transformation Framework, our research highlights how curiosity can help consumers overcome barriers to transformation and foster well-being. The paper also discusses potential avenues for future research, emphasizing the need to investigate the integration of curiosity with other cognitive processes and the boundary conditions under which curiosity might hinder, rather than help, transformation. Ultimately, this research advocates for curiosity as an important, yet underutilized, tool in promoting consumer well-being and transformative experiences.
Article
Purpose Following an interpretivist approach, the authors draw on semi-structured interviews with parents of children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Design/methodology/approach Responding to limited academic advancement, particularly in the context of consumers experiencing vulnerability, the aim is to deepen marketing scholars’ understanding of value co-destruction (VCD) and its under-explored relationship with consumer ill-being. Findings Three forms of systemic VCD mechanisms emerged: obscuring, gaslighting and siloing. Ill-being comprised material, physical, psychological and social harms, which consumers experienced individually, relationally and collectively due to VCD. Family members’ experiences of ill-being and vulnerability were deepened by service systems’ inability to recognise the individuality of their needs and provide appropriate support. Research limitations/implications In line with the interpretivist paradigm, the focus on families of children with ASD, while illuminating, delimits the generalisability of the findings. The authors call for further research on consumer ill-being, VCD and vulnerability in other service and marketing contexts. Practical implications The findings highlight the need for service system adaptability to recognise and address unstandardised needs. Social implications Several systemic failures of (public) service systems which manifested as VCD mechanisms are identified. Originality/value The overall contribution is the development of a contextually driven characterisation of both VCD and ill-being and a deeper understanding of how these are interrelated. First, VCD revealed itself as a systemic failure to access, provide or integrate resources to meet actors’ needs as manifested by the three mechanisms. Second, the authors characterise ill-being as comprising material, physical, psychological and social harms due to VCD, which are experienced individually, relationally and collectively. Finally, the authors illuminate the nature of vulnerability and delineate the entanglements between vulnerability and ill-being in a collective (e.g. family) context.
Article
Full-text available
Inspired by the goal of making marketplaces more inclusive, this research provides a deeper understanding of consumer vulnerability dynamics to develop strategies that help reduce these vulnerabilities. The proposed framework, first, conceptualizes vulnerability states as a function of the breadth and depth of consumers’ vulnerability; then, it sketches a set of vulnerability indicators that illustrate vulnerability breadth and depth. Second, because the breadth and depth of vulnerability vary over time, the framework goes beyond vulnerability states to identify distinct vulnerability-increasing and vulnerability-decreasing pathways, which describe how consumers move between vulnerability states. In a final step, the framework proposes that organizations can (and should) support consumers to mitigate vulnerability by helping consumers build resilience (e.g., via distinct types of resilience-fueling consumer agency). This framework offers novel conceptual insights into consumer vulnerability dynamics as well as resilience and provides avenues for future research on how organizations can better partner with consumers who experience vulnerabilities.
Article
Transformative Consumer Research (TCR) was launched in 2005 with the intention to improve and maintain well-being as it is affected by the immense growth and array of worldwide consumption activities. In many respects, through the efforts of a multitude of people, TCR has flourished. But businesses, societies, technologies, and ecologies are also evolving, and TCR has related gaps of thinking and doing. To continue its evolution, and to ultimately realize its potential to become a successful ‘scientific specialty,’ TCR needs to undertake more ground-breaking goals and projects if it is to achieve its valiant mission. In this commentary, we sketch TCR’s development and assess its disciplinarity and opportunities through literature on the science of science. From those insights, we offer a range of options and activities that TCR adherents should consider in order to foster new, courageous, and valuable ventures.
Article
Full-text available
Discusses the methods by which psychologists, not psychology as a whole, contribute to social change. The role of the American Psychological Association is presented as a supporting rather than leading factor. It is emphasized "that understanding and prediction are better goals . . . than is control." It is proposed that the adaptive process be changed to achieve these goals. "2 alternative images -are presented= of what the popular conception of human nature might become" as a result of the psychological revolution. It is concluded that a "peaceful revolution based on a new conception of human nature" will result from the instillation of scientific facts in the public consciousness. (16 ref.) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
Article
Ninth graders were randomly exposed to one of eight slice-of-life videotapes showing stimulus advertising (cigarette, antismoking, both, neither) and unfamiliar peers who either did or did not smoke cigarettes. The findings indicate that the cigarette advertising primed positive smoker stereotypes, which caused subjects to seek out favorable information about the peers shown smoking. Subjects' beliefs and intentions about cigarette consumption were thereby enhanced by the joint effects of advertising and peers. However, an antismoking advertisement shown in conjunction with cigarette advertising made salient negative smoker stereotypes, evoked unfavorable thoughts about peers shown smoking, and prevented cigarette advertising from promoting smoking. Copyright 2002 by the University of Chicago.
Association for Consumer Research
  • Mita Kardes
  • Sujan
Kardes and Mita Sujan, Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, 561-563.
Anniversary Session: What Do We Want to be When We Grow Up
  • William D Wells
Wells, William D. (1995), "Anniversary Session: What Do We Want to be When We Grow Up?" in Advances in Consumer Research, eds. Frank R.
Ann Arbor, MI: Association for Consumer Research
  • L William
  • Wilkie
William L. Wilkie, Ann Arbor, MI: Association for Consumer Research, 1-2.