Author(s) : Khrysti Nazzaro

Synthèse ! 

Author(s) : comscore

Author(s) : Linda Abraham, René Schuster

Les nouveaux appareils influencent notre manière de consommer ?

De nouveaux appareils dans notre vie quotidienne

             L’utilisation des smartphones et des tablettes s’est répandue en très peu d’année, Apple est le leader de ce changement, par la création de l’Iphone et de l’Ipad. Cependant, l’Europe reste à la tête de l’utilisation du smartphone avec 42%, contre 39% aux Etats-Unis. La consommation du média mobile ne cesse de s’accroitre, en hausse de 62% depuis l’année dernière. Même si les smartphones restent le plus utilisés, les tablettes gagnent du terrain. On peut remarquer que les PC sont plus utilisés le matin, dû au faite que les personnes se trouvent au travail donc ils accèdent à internet directement depuis leur poste de travail, et en fin de journée on peut noter que les personnes sont plus sur leur tablette que sur leur PC. Ceci peut-être expliqué par la légèreté de l’appareil, en effet, en fin de journée ils préfèrent se poser devant la télé et consulter les contenus sur une tablette que de s’installer devant un PC.

Quelles opportunités cela représente pour le commerce ?

            L’Allemagne avec une hausse de 112% depuis l’année dernière, se situe en première position en ce qui concerne l’achat de bien et service sur internet via mobile. 13,6 millions de personnes accèdent à un site de vente via leur smartphone, un chiffre considérable qui montre l’importance du m-commerce. Les hommes sont les acheteurs principaux, des profils entre 18 et 24 ans. Ces résultats sont tout à fait évidents, car les hommes et les jeunes ont plus de facilités à s’adapter à la nouvelle technologie.

           Le smartphone ouvre un nouveau monde pour les consommateurs. D’ici, quelques années nous aurons plus besoin de cartes bancaires pour faire nos achats. Nous payerons directement avec notre téléphone. La technologie NFC nous permettra cela, grâce à une toute petite puce installée dans notre téléphone. Nous utiliserons notre téléphone comme un outil d’achat, nous pourrons prendre des photos des produits, le partager avec un ami ou famille, comparer les prix des produits, etc.

Author(s) : David Edelman

Author(s) : Ion Interactive

Author(s) : Nototio Gaetano

Author(s) : Kyle B. Murray; Gerald Häubl

Assumptions and base statements

Incumbent: user’ used interface (either it have been chosen or assigned)

Human skills evolves with practices and habits. By repeating a pattern or using an interface they can get use to the skill level raise.

Cognitive-styles are a main way of thinking while reading this article. The authors take as an example the fact that freedom of choice affects interface preferences, the power law of practice has important implications. Choice and freedom matter in term of skill acquisition.

H1: Task completion time is lower for individuals who were initially constrained to using on interface, as compared to individuals who were always free to choose which interface they used.

Every little thing or detail is important:

– It take less than 50 milliseconds (Lindgaard et al. 2006) for a visitor to form an evaluation of a website

– Saving consumers as little as 15 to 20 seconds in a website can lead to a gain of market share as large as 100%

High skill, from higher practical, for an user imply an equal time-saving in his browsing experience, and so costs gets reduced.

H2: Preference for a particular interface is higher among individuals who were initially constrained to using interface than among those who were free to choose which interface they used.

H3: The effect of freedom of choice on interface preference is mediated by (incumbent interface) task completion times.

While it seems that it is preferable to constrain users’ choices, we have to take care of the psychological reactance. This phenomenon is well known and describe that when users are restrained they create a psychological reactance.

It also infer the perceived ease of use of a particular interface :

H5: The perceived ease of use of a particular interface is lower for individuals who were initially constrained to using that interface than for those who were always free to choose which interface they used.

H6: The effect of initial freedom of choice on interface preference is mediated by the incumbent’s perceived ease of use.

H7: (edited to make increase the understanding)Assuming a new interface is up and choice is given to visitors: previous visitors who were constrained and have created a psychological reactance are mostly expected to change for the new interface, and should perceived the incumbent to be much more difficult to use. No such difference will be noticed among individuals who prefer the incumbent or where free of choice before.

To test these hypothesis they introduce and test a model that links the impact of being able to ether choose or not among different interfaces on the perceived ease of use and users’ interface preference.

The tests lead to a simple ascertainment which is that the psychological reactance is a strong part in the users’ browsing experience. 

It is quite paradoxical because if users are constrained they will be more likely to move on an alternative interface if this choice come up. But they will have more skills and find information quickly compared to users which can choose the interface they want. Moreover it is noticeable that unconstrained users can develop more general skills, allowing them to switch with use between interfaces.

There is many counterparts to the constrained interface, mostly this is about ease of use perception and lack of loyalty for the customers. But even if the psychological reactance is important, we can read that people could also stay even if they have the opportunity to move on because it would be too much of a burden to do so.

Restrictions and constrained applications or interface can lead to some market opportunities for the competitors. The authors smartly pick the Apple’s example with the emphasis of the well known sentence: "Think Different". They used idea of being free to choose an alternative solution to a product which can be overwhelming for the user in a long-term use.

The word of the end is that when users feel that their freedom of choice has been constrained, they tend to react negatively and become more likely to choose a competitor.

Author(s) : Elena Delgado-Ballester and Jose′ Luis Munuera-Alema′n

Does brand trust matter to brand equity?
Resume
Building a strong brand in the market is the goal of manyorganizations because it provides a host of benefits to a firm,including less vulnerability to competitive marketing actions,larger margins, greater intermediary co-operation and supportand brand extension opportunities.
Brand trust means that there is a high probability or expectancy that the brand will result in positive outcomes for the consumer. Considering brand trust as expectancy, it is based on the consumer’s belief that the brand has specific qualities that make it consistent, competent, honest, responsible and so on. From a managerial perspective, companies have also begun to consider the idea of wining consumers’ trust in order to
build a relationship. In the consumer market, there are too many anonymous consumers, making it unlikely that the company could develop personal relationships with each one.Thus, consumers develop a relationship with the brand, which becomes a substitute for human contact between the organization and its customers. Trust, therefore, can be developed through this relationship with the brand. Based on these ideas, brand trust will contribute to brand loyalty as the maximum
expression of a successful relationship between the consumer and the brand.
as a relational marketbased asset, the analysis of brand equity must also consider the relationships with other members of the value chainincluding employees (especially in service companies), investors or even suppliers. An interesting point is that a firm might build up strong brand equity based on the relationships developed with consumers that could be  undermined by the firm neglecting its relationships with other stakeholders groups. research on branding industrial products has been
limited. The fact that, in today’s competitive business environment, industrial firms are increasingly using branding to differentiate their products and also develop relationships with their customers makes apparent the need of expanding the body of knowledge of the subject.
Therefore,  companies must take care not to promise everything for all people. They have to consider their own capabilities and the desires of their target consumer segments before defining their promises of value. Once they are defined these promises have to be kept consistently, especially when things change quickly and buyers face great uncertainty. trust is built through experience, the more positive experiences the consumer has with the brand, the more trusting he or she is likely to become. history has proven that consumers will give second chances to brands they trust.
Conclusion
Brand equity sits in the mind of the consumer consisting of those associations, attitudes and behaviors linking to the brand. At the beginning of a brand’s life, it should sit in a neutral space – neither trusted nor mistrusted.
References
Aaker, D.A. (1991), Managing Brand Equity: Capitalizing on the Value of a Brand Name, Free Press, New York, NY.
Ambler, T. (1997), “How much of brand equity is explained
by trust?”, Management Decision, Vol. 35 No. 4, pp. 283-92.
Andaleeb, S.S. (1992), “The trust concept: research issues for
channels of distribution”, Research in Marketing, Vol. 11,
pp. 1-34.