These articles cover an interesting viewpoint on human behavior. The article by Cialdini grasps on the BIRG –theory, which demonstrates a tendency for people to associate themselves to success and glory. On the other hand Birger et al. (2004) reflect to the effects of perceived similarity and how it effects to compliance. These two articles study an interesting phenomenon. We can draw the conclusion that people tend to form bonds and relationships to other beings no matter if they hold a tangible connection to them or a perceived similarity. The need to connect seems innate and a characteristic that humans share. While Cialdini includes factors such as feeling of failure to his research Birger et al. do not consider issues like that. Mood had a relevant impact on his study, but Birget et al lack this factor. Birger et al. also study issues such as memory, concrete actions and physical appeal, while Cialdini’s study is only cognitive. Combined these two studies cover a wide scope of human thinking and actions. Derived from the two studies we can draw implications on how people would act in a situation where the BIRG –theory can be applied including liking and requests. It would be interesting to see how people behave for example after their sports team wins a significant match and a like-minded fan with a request approaches them. The premise is that the fan would be even more willing to comply to the request.
What this means for managers and businesses? The first article emphasizes the importance of similarity to liking and complying. We can see situations like these everyday. Professional salespersons exploit this all the time no matter if the product magazines such as the Donald Duck to high-value real-estate. Perceived similarity and liking simply make better results. The tendency to highlight connection to winners is robustly demonstrated. People want to associate themselves to success, succesful people and succesful phenomenas. When these two things are put together significant brand loyalty can be achieved. This requires, however, that the brand is succesful in the first place. Examples such as Nokia show that people forget the past glory fast and switch to liking something more popular and trendy once your brand loses fame and fortune. Apple on the other hand has been widely succesful and they actually put a lot of effort in educating their normal salesperson in the Apple stores. For example, they are told that they shouldn’t bother customers who just come in and start checking e-mails or Facebook in the store without any intention of buying. Not being bothered by the salespersons further increases the liking of the brand and most likely the people already are Apple’s customers since they are there in the shop. This creates a positivive circle that further creates brand value and meaning for the customer.
This combines the two articles we have. First, this shows how quickly people can become fans and how fast this has become a success story. Second, it is an example on how, even in a sport like basketball, and in its very top level, NBA, something can come as a total surprise A sign of being alert to incidental events. So, incidences matter, and winning matters. Also the fact that Lin’s parents are originally from Taiwan, makes a huge difference considering the Asian markets (even if that can be the only similarity between many future fans) an example of incidental similarity RAM candy bar is an example of how an incidental similarity (colors of the paper in the candy bar) can represent something valuable to consumers
“Although such tactics may result in better communication and more trust, our findings suggest that these incidental matches alone might contribute to an increased likelihood of agreeing with the sales pitch” Burger, 2004 “We create a small unit relationship with the requester because of the similarity and treat him or her like a friend” Burger, 2004
When the team or the athlete gains success, it generates collateral goodwill for the sponsoring company. That increases people’s interest towards the company, which might increase media coverage and sales figures.
Liking - The combined effects of incidental similarity and success
Liking The combined effects of incidental similarity and success Daniel Rahman, Tommi Ora, Eetu Simpanen, Julius Valjakka, Hiroto Kimura, Seregina Anastasia, Eeva Nevasalo, Nanna Saarela, Anu Ryynälä
Agenda <ul><li>Article key points: What a coincidence! </li></ul><ul><li>Article key points: Basking in reflected glory </li></ul><ul><li>Discussion between the articles </li></ul><ul><li>Case: Jeremy Lin </li></ul><ul><li>Managerial implications </li></ul>
Article key points: What a coincidence! Study Results Interpretations Same birthday Same birthday: 62,2% complied No similarity: 34,2% complied Participants formed a brief unit relationship and interacted as if they were friends Same first name Same name: Avg. 2,07d donated Different name: Avg. 1d donated Incidental similarity doubled the money donated to charity Same fingerprint (request complying) Uncommon similarity: 82,1% Common similariy: 54,8% No similarity: 48,3 % The rarity of the similarity affects heavily on request complying rate Same fingerprint (liking) Uncommon similarity: 23,46 Common similarity: 20,79 No similarity: 19,56 People who share an uncommon similarity also like others with the same characteristic more as a person
Article key points: What a coincidence! <ul><li>All four studies demonstrate that incidental similarity with a requester leads to increased compliance </li></ul><ul><li>We create a small unit relationship with the requester because of the similarity and treat him or her like a friend </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Heuristic decision making replaces rational consideration </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Businesses may take advantage of the brief unit relationship to gain more “yes” answers from customers </li></ul>
Article key points: Basking In Reflected Glory (Cialdini 1976) <ul><li>BIRG-theory </li></ul><ul><ul><li>A tendency for people to highlight a connection with another person who has been successful </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Three field studies were made to examine the theory in practice in seven public universities in the U.S. </li></ul><ul><ul><li>The idea was to study students’ behavior during the university football season </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>The results showed that football teams’ efforts had strong influence on students’ behavior and their manner of speaking </li></ul></ul>
Article key points: Basking In Reflected Glory <ul><li>Discussion: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>All experiments provided strong support for the BIRG formulation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>All three experiments showed a significant tendency for students striving to associate themselves publicly with their university‘s football team after the team had been successful </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Most common reason for the need to associate oneself to positive things reflects the need to boost self-image and social image among people around, especially when the subject has a feeling that the esteem is threatened </li></ul></ul>
Discussion between the articles <ul><li>BIRG-theory demonstrates a tendency to associate oneself to success and glory </li></ul><ul><li>Burger et al. (2004) shows that perceived similarity results in higher probability in compliance </li></ul><ul><li>Both articles study attitude and actual behavior which means a wide scope of behavioral psychology is investigated </li></ul><ul><li>Seems that forming a connection is an innate characteristic humans share. </li></ul>
Case: Jeremy Lin <ul><li>A 23 year old basketball player </li></ul><ul><li>Cut by Golden State Warriors and Houston Rockets </li></ul><ul><li>Joined Knicks in December 27 th , 2011 </li></ul><ul><li>Until now: 12 games, 9 wins (at the start 7 consecutive wins) before that Knicks had lost 11 out of 13 games </li></ul><ul><li>Used to sleep on his brother’s couch </li></ul><ul><li>No one predicted Lin’s success (but Nike had a sponsoring deal and some training footage, mainly for product advertising and not sponsoring) </li></ul>
Effects of Linsanity <ul><li>Knicks’ web traffic increased 550% compared to the previous week </li></ul><ul><li>NBA’s TV partners in Asia start showing Knicks’ games </li></ul><ul><li>Obama: “very impressed by Jeremy Lin” </li></ul><ul><li>589 000 followers on Twitter </li></ul><ul><li>Conan O’Brien tweeted: “Just saw a Jeremy Lin jersey on sale for $300. These prices are Jeremy insane! Wait…Did I do that wrong?” </li></ul><ul><li>Best selling jersey in all of NBA </li></ul><ul><li>The business of Jeremy Lin 00.39-00.56? </li></ul>
Managerial implications <ul><li>The findings are not that easy to implement: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>How to predict incidental similarity? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>How to use it in a way that is not too obvious? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>How to make teams win more often? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Firms can try to find incidental similarities, but making them up can be dangerous </li></ul><ul><li>Overall using figures that people feel similar or familiar (various features: clothes, age, etc.) will increase the probability of incidental similarities </li></ul>
Practical examples <ul><li>Telemarketing companes hiring people with a regional accent </li></ul><ul><ul><li> Aim to find an incidental similarity & increased liking </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Improved sales </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Using name tags in stores </li></ul><ul><li>Salespersons try to find similarities with direct customers </li></ul><ul><li>Sports sponsorships ( Lin case, revenue for: NBA, sports stores, cable companies, New York Knicks) </li></ul>
Thank you! <ul><li>Any questions? </li></ul><ul><li>Suggestions for further research: </li></ul><ul><li>Rom chocolate bar: </li></ul><ul><li>The American Rom - Campaign Presentation </li></ul>