首页> 外文期刊>Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science >An exploratory study of business-to-business online customer reviews: external online professional communities and internal vendor scorecards
【24h】

An exploratory study of business-to-business online customer reviews: external online professional communities and internal vendor scorecards

机译:企业对企业在线客户评论的探索性研究:外部在线专业社区和内部供应商记分卡

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

This research examines the increasing use of online customer reviews in business-to-business (B2B) decision making. In contrast with other research on B2B decision making, we study a unique aspect wherein buyers draw on two sources: external reviews posted on online professional communities and internal reviews in the format of vendor scorecards. This method creates a conundrum: What happens when a buyer is confronted with conflicting reviews from two different sources? To shed light on this problem, we (1) interviewed 48 B2B buyers, (2) conducted a field experiment with 293 B2B buyers to examine the effect of review source, (3) conducted a second field experiment with 587 B2B buyers to examine the effect of conflicting reviews, and (4) solicited insights from 82 B2B buyers regarding the findings. The results indicate that B2B buyers are driven to resolve differences in reviews rather than to dismiss negative reviews. In addition, even positive internal reviews prompt exploration to confirm that relational bias is not present.
机译:这项研究调查了企业对企业(B2B)决策中越来越多地使用在线客户评论。与其他有关B2B决策的研究相比,我们研究了一个独特的方面,其中买家使用两个来源:在线专业社区上发布的外部评论和供应商记分卡格式的内部评论。这种方法造成了一个难题:当买家面临来自两个不同来源的相互矛盾的评论时,会发生什么?为了阐明这一问题,我们(1)采访了48位B2B购买者,(2)与293位B2B购买者进行了实地实验,以检验评论来源的效果,(3)与587位B2B购买者进行了第二次实地实验,以考察评论来源。相互矛盾的评论产生的影响,以及(4)征求了82位B2B买家对调查结果的见解。结果表明,B2B买家被驱使解决评论差异,而不是消除负面评论。此外,即使积极的内部评论也会促使人们探索以确认不存在关系偏见。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号