000075674 001__ 75674
000075674 005__ 20190709135618.0
000075674 0247_ $$2doi$$a10.1016/j.ijresmar.2017.08.003
000075674 0248_ $$2sideral$$a104782
000075674 037__ $$aART-2017-104782
000075674 041__ $$aeng
000075674 100__ $$aViswanathan, V.
000075674 245__ $$aSocial influence in the adoption of a B2B loyalty program: The role of elite status members
000075674 260__ $$c2017
000075674 5060_ $$aAccess copy available to the general public$$fUnrestricted
000075674 5203_ $$aThis study investigates the role of elite loyalty program members in influencing other customers to adopt a hierarchical loyalty program (or HLP) in a business market. Drawing from the social psychology literature, the theoretical framework proposes that elite status members exert a disproportionate positive influence on neighboring non-members to adopt the HLP, and that this social influence has an inverse U-shaped effect. A unique dataset from a B2B loyalty program of a firm in the agribusiness industry with detailed information on members and marketing efforts from 1378 zip codes in Germany from 2008 to 2012 is used for the analysis. The study finds that, compared to members in lower status, elite status members have a stronger social influence on non-members. Importantly, as the proportion of elite status members increases, the adoption probability of non-members increases. However, as the fraction of elite status members increases beyond a certain point, the adoption probability of non-members decreases. Overall, the results of this study advances our understanding of loyalty programs in B2B markets, particularly with regard to the drivers of loyalty program adoption and the role played by social influence in driving new member enrollment.
000075674 536__ $$9info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/ES/DGA/S09-PM062$$9info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/ES/MINECO-FEDER/ECO2014-54760
000075674 540__ $$9info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess$$aby-nc-nd$$uhttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/es/
000075674 590__ $$a2.593$$b2017
000075674 591__ $$aBUSINESS$$b56 / 140 = 0.4$$c2017$$dQ2$$eT2
000075674 592__ $$a2.528$$b2017
000075674 593__ $$aMarketing$$c2017$$dQ1
000075674 655_4 $$ainfo:eu-repo/semantics/article$$vinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
000075674 700__ $$0(orcid)0000-0001-5321-8052$$aSese, F.J.$$uUniversidad de Zaragoza
000075674 700__ $$aKrafft, M.
000075674 7102_ $$14011$$2095$$aUniversidad de Zaragoza$$bDpto. Direc.Mark.Inves.Mercad.$$cÁrea Comerci.Investig.Mercados
000075674 773__ $$g34, 4 (2017), 901-918$$pInt. j. res. mark.$$tINTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN MARKETING$$x0167-8116
000075674 8564_ $$s438951$$uhttps://zaguan.unizar.es/record/75674/files/texto_completo.pdf$$yVersión publicada
000075674 8564_ $$s77386$$uhttps://zaguan.unizar.es/record/75674/files/texto_completo.jpg?subformat=icon$$xicon$$yVersión publicada
000075674 909CO $$ooai:zaguan.unizar.es:75674$$particulos$$pdriver
000075674 951__ $$a2019-07-09-12:26:22
000075674 980__ $$aARTICLE