CHAPTER 3

Trustworthiness of Consumer-Generated Content

The motivation behind a consumer’s desire to consume, participate, and produce all boils down to trust. When discussing electronic word-of-mouth (eWOM) in the social networking site (SNS) context, trust is a construct that cannot be ignored. In a classic academic literature, Hovland and Weiss (1951) argued that a communicator’s trustworthiness is likely to influence a receiver’s opinion about the source. This is not an uncommon relationship. For example, when we buy something online, if we do not trust a particular vendor, we will not be in a position to believe the claim expressed on the website. Reverting to the social media context, the higher the level of trust social media users have in their contacts, the higher is the possibility that they will engage in (1) opinion seeking, (2) contribution of opinion, and (3) the attitude for passing on opinions to others on SNSs. Thus, trust should be treated as an important means for consumers to evaluate the source and the value of the information. Trust can result in a halo effect in social media. For example, when a social media user establishes a level of trust with his social connections in his list of friends, the willingness to rely on those connections will be enhanced. This halo effect is largely due to the perceived trust and reliability, which will thereby increase consumer-generated content (CGC) behavior on these various SNSs.

Although credibility and validity have been topics of discussion since the birth of the Internet (Johnson and Kaye 2004), marketing academics are still discovering this area of interest (Sparks, Perkins, and Buckley 2013). Sen and Lerman (2007) noted that consumers are often confronted with a large volume of information when they use social media. In addition, this information is inconsistent with in itself, which causes a dilemma for these consumers during their decision-making process. Papathanassis and Knolle (2011) argued that consumers’ perceptions, intentions, and decisions are not dependent only on its content but also on its presentation. These aspects of content and presentation include valence (Sparks and Browning 2011), informational cues (Hansen 2005), and source credibility (Brinol and Petty 2009). Furthermore, research has shown that in order for consumers to establish credibility and trust, organizations have to be responsive toward any comments written by their consumers (Revinate 2011). Being responsive is part of evaluating the value and reliability of both the positive and negative reviews.

According to Burgess et al. (2009), greater trust is placed on comments when they have a specific location (e.g., travel website) than when these comments are posted on a “generic social networking website” (p. 221). Consumers are constantly sourcing information using the Internet to aid in their decision-making process—particularly good experiences such as vacations and spa treatments. As these are considered “experience goods” and information about these experiences are not easily attainable. Thus, consumers tend to consult independent experts, salespersons, and fellow consumers.

Park, Lee, and Han (2007) categorize two types of product information for online consumers: seller-created and consumer-created. Seller-created information is available through the company’s websites, whereas consumer-created information is available through a variety of social media platforms such as third-party websites (e.g., TripAdvisor), SNS (e.g., Facebook), and blogs. These consumer-created reviews have a dual capability—they not only provide useful information, but also serve as a recommender for that particular product.

In the online environment, CGC exchanges offer consumers an opportunity to share their experiences by posting their self-created content on the Internet. Burgess et al. (2011) argue that “there is typically far more information available to the consumer in the online environment from consumer-generated eWOM than from traditional WOM” (p. 223). The only barrier consumers have toward this vast amount of information online is their time and cognitive limits (Chatterjee 2001). Forums may serve as a vital resource when consumers are making their decisions; however, “forums do not always attract comments from typical consumers…it is more likely that consumers who have had extreme experiences are more likely to provide online comments or reviews” (p. 223).

Trust Perception by Different CGC Creators

Trust can be separated into two schools of thoughts: a belief or expectation, a behavior that reflects reliance on others, or uncertainty from the person who is triggering the trusting behavior (Chen 2006). Park, Lee, and Han (2007) argued that online consumer reviews are often viewed as more trustworthy and credible compared to company-generated information. Despite the argument that online reviews tend to be more trustworthy, there have been contradictory results when determining whether the information provided on corporate websites are more trustworthy than those reviews posted on general SNSs (e.g., Facebook) (Burgess et al. 2011). Independent, third-party type websites seem to be more favorable (e.g., fairly evaluated) among consumers (Ensing 2013). Nonetheless, while traditional forms of WOM tend to be from people who are known to consumers, online reviews are typically created by strangers, resulting in credibility concerns (Ensing 2013).

Research shows that one in four consumers thought that review site information is generally unfair (Ensing 2013). In addition, Ensing (2013) also found that consumers indicated skepticism by observing the rating site users. These users (60 percent) paid more attention to the actual consumer comments than to the numerical or star ratings accompanying the reviews. The reason these users focused on the textual comments is because they were trying to determine if the reviews were credible and whether these reviews were applicable to their own purchasing situations.

Park, Lee, and Han (2007) claim that information created by independent entities, such as government, regional, and industry-related websites, is a source perceived to allow elements of objectivity and credibility, and thus, deemed more reliable by consumers. Another source of information contributed by consumers is generic online forums. CGC tend to reflect threads of their purchasing experiences, views, and beliefs associated with the events in which they were involved. Furthermore, Litvin, Goldsmith, and Pan (2008) posit that such CGC serves as a form of eWOM; it has been well accepted by the public and has even encouraged websites to include CGC platforms like weblogs, SNSs, and third-party websites in their website design.

Burgess et al. (2011) summarized different creators of online content in two or three main categories: independent expert (e.g., government websites), CGC (e.g., weblogs, SNS, and third-party websites), and seller-generated content (e.g., e-mail promotion based on the mailing list and seller’s own website). All these content sources were tested for trustworthiness among consumers. The results show that the highest trust was afforded to information attained on the government websites. Burgess et al. (2011) argued that government websites are independent experts that understand the implications of trustworthy information and their responsibility in providing relevant and credible information to their consumers.

Surprisingly, Burgess et al. (2011) also found that the seller’s websites were considered to be trustworthy, which contradicts previous research. They explained that perhaps the information provided on the website and questions were cohesive, therefore creating a basis for trust among consumers. Trust was also seen from consumers toward third-party websites such as TripAdvisor. The results suggest that the consumers tend to favor third-party websites over generic SNSs (e.g., Facebook) when consumers are looking for a specific product or service they intend to purchase. In addition, there were discussions that third-party websites have stricter control on the types of reviews posted. Burgess et al. (2011) added that defamatory postings will be compared less considerably to generic SNSs.

Moreover, they found that reviews posted on blogs and SNSs were the least trustworthy among consumers. An interesting finding from Burgess et al. (2011) was that consumers were not sure if they had visited a CGC site before. Despite having provided a definition in their study to their respondents, they assumed that these individuals might not have fully understood the concept of CGC. From their study, it shows that marketing practitioners could benefit by embedding a link of independent expert websites and third-party websites on their own website. Despite the popularity of SNSs (e.g., Facebook), it seems consumers are not prone to trust information that are posted on those sites. Burgess et al. (2011) also added that consumers are “more likely to trust consumer-created information” (p. 234) than those who had not visited a CGC site before.

Bazaarvoice’s social trends report (2013) noted that in order for companies to maintain a strong relationship with consumers, they cannot just listen passively on social networks. “Brands must demonstrate that they’re listening, and not just with friendly tweets from employees with no decision making power” (p. 19). Bazaarvoice gathered industrial experts and suggested that one way to show that the companies are responsive toward consumers’ comments is to “make changes based on trends in feedback data” (p. 19). It is also important to note that when the changes are made, consumers should be informed of the changes—so that they know that they are being heard. By earning the appreciation from the consumers, they will feel compelled to contribute even more. A second suggestion to exhibit responsiveness is to simply respond to consumers’ questions and feedback. Even if the feedback is negative, brands should warmly embrace it and not ignore it (p. 19).

Content of CGC

According to Petty and Cacioppo (1981), messages are designed to persuade readers by affecting both their beliefs and attitudes, which ultimately affects their behavior. They further elaborated that there are several elements in a message that contribute toward persuasion: content, source, contextual characteristics, and channel. Message content provides argument either for or against position, therefore influencing attitudes through belief formation (Petty and Cacioppo 1981). In a study conducted by Sparks, Perkins, and Buckley (2013), they argue that when consumers read reviews for an eco-resort, for example, they would expect message content to include commitment toward corporate social responsibility and environmental sustainability. Persuasion theory also assumes that beliefs and attitudes can be influenced by perceptions about the message source, including trustworthiness, credibility, and the recipient’s beliefs about the source’s intention to persuade (Petty and Cacioppo 1981). All these elements are essential in forming trust in the information provided (Sparks, Perkins, and Buckley 2013).

Based on Ajzen’s (1991) attitude formation theory, attitude toward an object is based on a set of beliefs about that object, and those beliefs include perceptions of the “utility of the reviews, trust, quality” (Sparks, Perkins, and Buckley 2013). In addition, Sparks, Perkins, and Buckley (2013) suggested that positive attitudes and perceived trust in the reviews had the strongest association with purchase intentions. The second strongest correlation was the organization’s credentials and quality.

When the credibility of sources for information becomes an issue, many consumers turn to news sites sponsored by traditional media. So, what does this mean? Has the level of confidence and faith for online sources declined? The question remains as to how much should consumers trust with their online information as part of their purchase decision-making process. Many consumers may argue that personal blogs are far more trustworthy than organization’s sponsored website due to its candidness. Since company websites are motivated to sell, information stated on the it may be biased. However, on consumer-generated websites, it was also argued that not all information is accurate. The question is: How much faith should be placed on CGC?

Source Credibility Theory

Source credibility theory has been widely used in marketing and communication studies (Ayeh 2015). The source credibility perspective is expected to be relevant to the study of individual’s use of information sources especially in the CGC context as there are many concerns in CGC, which hinge largely on credibility (Litvin, Goldsmith, and Pan 2008). In marketing, source credibility has been used to examine the effectiveness of endorsers in advertisement (Ayeh 2015), whereas, in communication studies, this theory is used to compare the credibility of media channels (Johnson and Kaye 2009). In addition, Watts and Zhang (2008) investigated the influence of source credibility as part of consumers’ information adoption in online communities. More recent studies in various contexts have highlighted the effects of source credibility on various consumer behavioral outcomes such as purchase intentions, attitudes toward messages, and information adoption (Ayeh, Au, and Law 2013; Wang and Doong 2010).

In a study conducted by Ayeh (2015), the author found that credibility factors are antecedents of CGC’s usefulness. Furthermore, both perceived trustworthiness and expertise yielded significant influence on usefulness perception. Trustworthiness and expertise were significant factors toward consumers’ attitude toward using CGC as part of their decision-making processes. In other words, consumers are more “favorably disposed toward using” CGC for their decision-making processes (p. 178).

Source Trustworthiness

Ghazisaeedi, Steyn, and Van Heerden (2012) claim that source trustworthiness is a critical measure of the success of blog as a CGC platform. He argued that, generally, there are two avenues to understand the trustworthiness of the source: demographics of the source (blogger) and the demographics of the receiver (blog reader). Armstrong and Nelson (2005) had results showing that male authors were deemed more credible than female authors. Furthermore, supported by Xie et al. (2011), the authors confirmed that factors such as name, state of residence, and gender had a positive effect on the perceived credibility of the online reviews. However, Ghazisaeedi, Steyn, and Van Heerden (2012) found that trustworthiness was not related to gender (p = 0.895). On the contrary, age had a significant difference to source trustworthiness (p = 0.01). The authors used a post-hoc test to compare the age groups and found that source trustworthiness for blogs were significantly higher for the18 to 29 year old age group than the 40 to 49 year old age group. Results also showed that the education level did not have an impact on the source trustworthiness of the blogs (Ghazisaeedi, Steyn, and Van Heerden 2012).

Ghazisaeedi, Steyn, and Van Heerden (2012) found that the relationship between respondents’ frequency on accessing blogs and the number of blogs respondents accessed were determining factors for source trustworthiness. In other words, light blog readers tend to be more skeptical about the credibility of the blogs compared to heavy blog users (Johnson and Kaye 2010).

Lothia, Donthu, and Hershberger (2003) found that the effectiveness of a blog is higher when the blogger is perceived to be trustworthy. However, the effectiveness of the blog decreases when there are advertisements present. In their study, they showed that “negative blog posts with no advertisement will be more effective than any other type of blog” (p. 317).

The Impact of CGC on Consumers’ Trust

Early in the mid-1990s, the Internet has not gained much exposure. Consumers therefore assumed that the Internet was an outpost where discussion was readily available at no cost, and the contents of the post were blunt and frequently rebellious. When consumers lack knowledge on a particular product or service, there is always a high level of skepticism. Thus, it was suggested by several critics that the Web should be regarded as a less credible source of information than the traditional media. So why was the Web discriminated against having credible information? This is largely due to the nature of the Web. For those consumer-generated sites, the need for editorial sight was not enforced. In addition, majority of the consumer-generated sites created back then were sometimes created on a whim. There were no professional or social pressures to ensure that information posted was accurate and unbiased. As society is changing its culture with the introduction of the Internet, so is the attitude of individuals. Internet users back then were not fearful of criticism.

Although there were critics judging against the credibility of the Internet, there were also users who supported it. This attitude toward the Internet, however, is largely dependent on the frequency and comfort level of using the Internet. Some studies found that users who deem the Internet as a credible source of information indicated that they are frequent users who relied on the Internet for news and information.

CGC encompasses various platforms for WOM communication. WOM has historically remained the leading channel of communication that people trust and is a “go-to” source for many consumers. Although WOM is important and is one of the communication channels that many small businesses aim for due to lack of advertising expenses, the caveat is that negative news spread even faster than positive news.

On a global scale, 92 percent of consumers trusted words from their friends, family, and acquaintances (Nielsen Global Trust in Advertising and Brand Messages 2012). More specifically, according to the Global Trust in Advertising Report by Nielsen (2012), consumers tend to trust an advertisement if the information is delivered through recommendations from people they know. WOM has over 94 percent of consumers’ trust in the Asia-Pacific region, 90 percent in the Middle East and Africa, 92 percent in Latin American, 89 percent in Europe, and 90 percent in the United States. As for the online environment, on a global average, consumers tend to find content mostly from the ads served in the search engine results, followed by 36 percent for online video ads, 36 percent for ads on social networks, and 33 percent for online banner ads. Within the North American population, ads served in search engine results were the most popular online ad formats (39 percent). The results suggest that there is a growing population with the online environment. Consumers are starting to see the relevance of the online information, which means that it is time for marketers to shift their focus to the online arena for their marketing strategies.

Challenges and Opportunities of CGC for Companies

With an increased activity on the virtual world and on the CGC on social media sites, companies are constantly keeping track on the “latest and greatest” trend on the market to keep their knowledge and position in the market up-to-date. At Google, searches for rating and reviews around consumer products have been growing (www.thinkwithgoogle.com). Marketing practitioners are no longer given an option to ignore this trend; rather they need to embrace it. Brett Hurt, Founder and CEO of Bazaarvoice, stated that most online ratings were between four and five stars. He claimed that the number one reason why people write content is altruism. This claim is backed up by a research conducted by Cheung and Lee (2012). They found out that “enjoyment of helping others is crucial in affecting consumers’ eWOM intention” (p. 222). Cheung and Lee (2012) argued that the act of helping others can deter other community members from negative experiences as well as help others through their purchasing decisions. Professor Reibstein backs this point by stating that new research shows that people like to share good news more than bad (www.thinkingwithgoogle.com).

CGC pose as both a challenge and as an opportunity for companies. The challenge that is potentially harmful for companies is the constant introduction of new social media. Some companies deliberately create a “social media” department or communications department to have someone in-charge of the activities online. For example, updating Facebook account with updated information, responding to comments, addressing issues, and maintaining a strong relationship with current and potential customers. Twitter, Foursquare, and Yelp are some of the major CGC social media platforms. Another challenge is that CGC, when integrated with social media, has the power to spread the word fast and wide. This is a double-edge sword. Negative comments about a company’s product or service can cause severe damage to the company if appropriate recovery is not done. Negative comments on Yelp have infamously caused companies, especially service-dominant companies, to fold their businesses. However, Kaushik, a Digital Marketing Evangelist at Google, pointed out that when there is a negative feedback, it is actually a great opportunity for companies to engage with the community and drive long-term brand engagement (www.thinkwithgoogle.com).

The positive note about being on social media is that the company will have a wider exposure in the market. Apart from their target market, any consumer who surfs the Internet could easily find out about the presence of a particular company. Flipping the Yellow Pages is no longer the route that consumers choose when looking for a service or company. In other words, researching on a company and or looking for a product and service is only a click away. In addition, positive comments will also have a positive impact on a company instantly.

Depending on the Social Technographics of the social media users, their personas will make a difference in what they wish to talk about online. For example, what are their interests and what are they passionate to share about? Looking at blogs, microblogs, image sharing sites, there are different types of comments, stories, and insights. It is vital for companies to be able to determine what their target audiences are passionate to talk about because it is the gateway to devise content that they will likely respond to.

Apart from knowing target audiences’ interests, companies also need to understand how their customers talk to each other. In other words, companies need to know their “community” and devise a strategy to strengthen their relationship by participating in their conversations in a noninvasive manner. Marketing messages are therefore developed from these community conversations. Languages that are used in the messages need to be a familiar term for their target audience. There is no point using big words or expert terminology when it does not deliver the intended message. This is important for companies to build common ground with their target audience by acting like them.

When engaging in CGC, it is important that companies listen and respond to their target audiences. They also need to do their due diligence by researching on their competitors to keep current in the market as well as to maintain their competitive advantage. Another step to take is to create content and engage in conversations through different channels.

Impact of CGC on Consumer’s Shopping Behavior

According to a recent report from Bazaarvoice (2015), CGC (e.g. online product reviews) has drastically changed the way consumers make their purchasing decisions. They found that there was a seasonal spike in using CGC in the food and beverage industry during the winter holiday season; While the automotive industry received an increase in CGC usage during the summer shopping season. Based on a worldwide survey, Bazaarvoice (2015) found that 71 percent of their respondents claim that CGC influenced their purchasing decision on a car. However, an incredible 88 percent of Australians claims that CGC had some influence on their purchasing decisions.

In the customer service industry, respondents noted that CGC is key in guiding their financial and service industry choices, but only 9 percent mentioned that banking reviews are a key service component for them.

Impact of CGC on Brands

Though marketers are encouraged to engage consumers and get them involved in the creativity of the ad developments, marketers must be sure to draw a line as to how they publicize this fact. As there are conflicting studies that find consumer-generated ads (CGA) to be more trustworthy than ads developed by professional firms, companies should strategize the engagement of CGC. For example, Doritos’ engagement strategy was to first explain the origin of the consumer-generated ads to their target audiences. Then, a elaborated instruction was given to targeted audiences in regards to the steps involved if they (i.e. customers) want to be part of the collaborative effort. In addition, if a company were to engage in CGA, there should be a constant reminder of their strategic assessment of the brand’s growth. In other words, they should be tracking the growth of their sales and not only relying on the power of CGA.

Although CGAs are effective in retaining a brand’s loyal customers, they may not be effective for the long-term growth of the brand. Potential customers of the brand may not be as attracted to the ad as existing customers. Thus, marketers need to be aware of when to use CGAs, and when to use professionally created ads. They can assess their growth by evaluating their product lifecycle.

According to Steyn et al. (2011), CGAs are “increasingly impacting brand communication” (p. 58). However, there are conflicting results regarding the preference of company-generated ad over CGAs. In Steyn et al.’s (2011) study, their results showed that there was no significant effect found on whether CGAs were preferred over company-generated ads. However, they suspected that variables such as knowledge or perception of who created the ad, the popularity of the ad, and motivation for ad creation were impacted by “brand empathy and bonding” (Steyn et al. 2011, p. 58). A study by Lim, Chung, and Weaver (2012), on the other hand, discovered that CGC (e.g., videos) generated more views and comments compared to those that were generated by marketers.

According to Nielsen’s Digital Consumer Report (2014), the content of the Internet, and who is creating it, is changing. In its latest tracking data on fast-growing Web sites, user-generated content sites (platforms for photo sharing, video sharing, and blogging) comprise 5 out of the top 10 fastest-growing Web brands. The popularity of these social sharing sites (e.g., Flickr, Instagram, Facebook) is driven by the content—which is consumer generated—and the desire to share information through a simple process of uploading photos through mobile devices (e.g., cellular phones). As the adage “a picture is worth a thousand words,” it is much easier to view visual content on a small screen compared to reading the text. With eWOM, consumers are not only creating but also sharing their photos with each other and with the public (i.e., virtual community). As it is practically free, the benefits for participating and consuming in these activities are driven by the attitude toward using social media platforms as well as sharing of content. Largely due to viral marketing, CGC has been experiencing significant growth and marketers are taking advantage of such communication tools in their marketing strategies.

With the new consumption culture evolving around our lives, CGC has been experiencing dramatic traffic growth. It has gradually become a norm in our media consumption habits. Every type of CGC platform is competing with one other to attract more foot traffic. Starting with text-based CGC, slowly and gradually consumers are flocking toward using and creating visual CGC. For example, although YouTube has been the pioneer in online video, a rival video sharing site, Vimeo, seems to be expressing its dominance in the video sharing business. The main differences between these two video channels are content control and purposes of use (www.digitalebard.com).

CGC has definitely changed the way people search for information, learn about special topics, or enjoy themselves. It has a tremendous power that even politicians acknowledge. According to Shao (2008), it seemed like a norm for the U.S. 2008 Presidential candidates to advocate their candidacy through CGC social media such as YouTube. Let’s take President Obama’s Presidential campaign as an example. He was not only the first presidential candidate that used social media effectively. According to Rutledge (2013), Obama dominated the social media space because his team knew how to take advantage of the social media platforms. During that campaign, “Obama logged twice as many Facebook ‘Likes’ and nearly 20 times as many re-tweets as Romney” (mprcenter.org, para 5). Voters who needed more information about the candidate they are thinking of voting for can easily look up campaign materials. These interested voters not only find relevant information, but they can also create their own video materials to support their presidential candidates. CGC is indeed a social phenomenon that explains why people are drawn toward contributing to and using CGC social media.

Domingos (2005) argued that social network models are traditionally viewed as descriptive rather than predictive way of communicating a particular behavior. However, with the introduction of the Internet, the social network has been a hub where a large amount of information can be retrieved. This information is available on various social networks such as blogs, knowledge sharing sites (e.g., Epinions), collaborative filtering system, online gaming, newsgroups, and chat rooms.

Organizations often utilize positive WOM among customers to generate more profits. However, this also means that there should be more interactions among customers and the corresponding network effects similar to a traditional marketing model. CGC platforms, such as SNSs, have been a core tool for companies to capitalize on their profits. Companies establish a “network value” of customers. This network value is a formula that increases sales to others as a result from marketing to one customer. In other words, the network value of customers is a form of viral marketing, better known as WOM marketing. Such a marketing technique may lead to very suboptimal marketing decisions. Thus, companies are looking to target those customers with the highest network value, market to them, and reap the benefits of the ensuing wave of WOM.

Business Opportunities with CGC

As social media explodes and advances in our society, organizations are experiencing a power shift. The power shift currently is from organizations to consumers. In other words, consumers drive the trend of supply and demand especially in the retail industry. In order to capture the “hearts” of the consumers, several companies are engaged in CGC, also known as consumer-generated marketing (CGM). Having the power shifted toward the consumer is not a negative move. Which brand does not want its name to have more exposure with the generosity of consumers’ time? For this reason, CGM is often heralded as a “dream come true” for many brands as that is the way to supersede their marketing agencies and get their advertising content out for free.

As we introduce new communication tools, brands realize that CGC might not be the best move if they want growth. It may be an ideal strategy if a brand wants high retention but might not be the best strategy for brand growth (www.forbes.com). This is because if consumers are the one in control of what goes out in the public, brands will lose their control and eventually post a potential risk for their brand more so if the content is not the greatest. Although CGC (e.g., consumer-generated videos) is an ideal money-saving technique, these contents may not be well executed and may be detrimental toward any creative strategy planned. The following are tips for companies to determine whether the use of CGC is appropriate for them. There are three scenarios that companies may consider to use CGC as part of their marketing and advertising campaign:

• • Reinvention of a branded asset
• • Offering rewards for creativity
• • Storytelling

Reinvention of a Branded Asset

Sometimes the best source for new ideas and creativity is from consumers. Brands that have been experiencing stagnant growth may see a need to revitalize their brand name. Building upon existing equity and recognition in the elements of a brand is vital to maintain its position as the “top-of-mind” brand among consumers. Thus, one of the best ways is to get consumers involved and ask them for a fresh image, something that encompasses the intrinsic quality of a brand. For example, companies such as Folgers took advantage of their 25 year anniversary and asked their online population to participate in a re-recording of their famous theme song competition. The intrinsic component that was exemplified by the winner was the nostalgic feeling one would receive listening to the music; in other words, the purpose was to highlight the role that Folgers played in their lives.

Offering Rewards for Your Creativity

Coinciding with the Super Bowl event, Doritos hosted their annual “Crash the Super Bowl” contest for consumer-generated commercials. This type of CGC invites consumers to submit their original videos, photos, or stories, and the competition is based on their creativity. Doritos capitalized on this idea and have been airing their consumer-generated TV commercials during the Super Bowl period. Doritos’ strategy to involve consumers has been very successful for the last few years. One of the main reasons for this success is the connection and relevance the CGC commercials have with the general public.

Another example of rewarding consumers for their creativity is through contests such as “Starbucks White Cup Art.” Introducing contests not only enables consumers to add trust to the brand, but it also encourages higher consumer-engagement and enables consumers to have a better affinity to the brand. The winning consumers are rewarded by having their designs printed on a limited edition Starbucks reusable plastic cup.

GoPro is another company that also runs contests among its consumers. GoPro solicits cool videos from its consumers and rewards them by featuring their videos on GoPro’s social media accounts.

Storytelling

An alternative to the above strategies is to have consumers share their stories. As the focus is on consumers and their interaction between other consumers as well as companies, the selling point of CGC is on storytelling. Storytelling is a business marketing space that may be referred to as content marketing (Figure 3.1). This method works for a majority of the brands out there. It requires a combined effort of carefully promoting and engaging consumers with the company’s product(s). Content marketing “is the creation of valuable, relevant and compelling content by the brand itself on a consistent basis, used to generate a positive behavior from a customer or prospect of the brand” (Pulizzi 2012, p. 116).

Well-established companies such as Coca-Cola are showing that storytelling is at the center of new marketing today. Coca-Cola was aware of the shift in the marketplace and therefore saw a need for new marketing techniques. Coca-Cola sees three shifts: consumer behaviors are changing online, companies are struggling to separate their messages from “technology” and SNSs such as Twitter, and there are opportunities for companies to develop deeper emotional connections with their consumers through storytelling (www.contentmarketinginstitute.com).

Regardless of whether a brand is searchable through search engine optimization (SEO) or through social media tools, none of these root sources will be effective if the brand is not accompanied by compelling story (Pulizzi 2012). In other words, as Pulizzi (2012) argued, technology tools do not serve a purpose “if content marketing strategy is not at the center of marketing” (p. 119). Google’s Zero Moment of Truth found that consumers’ purchasing decision is based on their engagement with online content. It was advised that the trend that leads toward high purchasing intention is to build a compelling story that allows consumers to engage in. Furthermore, Pulizzi (2012) posit that brands must ensure that their content is in the mix (Figure 3.1) while consumers’ decisions are being made. Otherwise, companies will be left out of the content marketing practices entirely.

As discussed in the earlier chapters, facts and figures are no longer an attractive source among consumers. Rather, consumers are adopting the approach of empathizing with the story behind those creations. For example, in a recent study conducted by Moriuchi and Chung (2015), emotional messages such as storytelling were more effective as donation messages rather than statistical figures. In this research, the authors found that regardless of whether the donation is for domestic victims or international victims, an emotional message that tells a story is more persuasive than presenting the actual death toll of a natural disaster. Their results are intended to give charity organizations and non-profit organizations suggestions in regards to their solicitation strategy and marketing efforts towards their target market.

How to Stay Successful in the Market with Storytelling?

One of the biggest challenges that content creation expert Pulizzi (2012) pointed was the creation of engaging content. According to the Content Marketing Institute, a majority of the companies are struggling with creating content that can truly engage their customers and deliver results that benefit the company (www.contentmarketinginstitute.com). Thus, what makes great, not good, content? The suggestion provided by Pulizzi (2012) was based on the actual example created by Proctor and Gamble (P&G), “Home Made Simple”—targeting “Moms” on the go. Content that is regarded as great needs to be “targeted and have educational content portals” (p. 120). Essentially, marketers need to find a focus: a laser-like targeting strategy of a super niche category. As Pulizzi (2012) argued, the key success of P&G as a consumer-package leader was its strategy—they were very specific in their content, targeted to a specific buyer, and were relentless in their focus on useful and entertaining content, which engaged (truly) their readers and customers. On the contrary, the reason why companies are not successful in their content marketing is because the content is too broad.

Storytelling in the Consumer Market

Several organizations such as Copyblogger and Content Marketing Institute are embracing the roles of Chief Content Officer or Chief Storyteller. With the growing popularity of CGC platforms, content is being crated and distributed via several outlets. These outlets include social media, public relations, marketing, e-mail, marketing, mobile, and search engines (Pulizzi 2012).

In order to be sustainable in creating great content, Pulizzi (2012) commended the work of a company called OpenView Venture Partners. This company engages its employees in the content creation process with its customers. Currently, it has 90 percent of its employees blog on a regular basis—OpenView Labs, which is a major part of its content platform. Based on this content creation effort as part of the company’s marketing plan, OpenView saw significant positive results: among others, a significant growth in sales, in site traffic, and over 10,000 opt-in subscribers in just 18 months.

Another tip that Pulizzi (2012) provided about a good storytelling technique is to remove the brand from the story. What this means is to “remove sales pitches entirely from the content to engender trust and credibility” (p. 122). Companies that successfully translated this tip into action were Adobe (CMO.com) and GE (Ecoimagination).

Lastly, Pulizzi (2012) posits that great content creation occurs when outside experts of that particular industry are included in the community. Their expertise will inevitably leverage the process of content creation. There have been several sites that offers industrial expertise and these sites are open to the public: Examiner.com, Copyblogger, as well as Content Marketing Institute. Being an Examiner writer myself, I am aware of the quality control that Examiner.com has on its writers. Subject experts are consulted and there is a quota to be met to ensure that new content is being contributed continuously. As part of the Copyblogger community, it was interesting and enriching for me to learn many techniques on content creation. Every so often, I receive e-mails on updates on content creation and trends being adopted by marketing practitioners at the moment.

The future of marketing will be heavily reliant on CGC, particularly, on content that is cocreated by the company and its consumers. The trend in marketing is leaning toward the model of half marketing and half publishing. Having consumers involved in a company’s new product development is an activity of the past. Now, marketing practitioners are transitioning their marketing activities from “involvement” to “engagement.” Engagement is no longer just a two-way communication; rather companies need to respond to real-time news as stories develop. Ultimately, marketing practitioners need to create, distribute, and capture their targeted audience—particularly a niche population—with valuable information. This does not only refer to co-creation, rather, to an engaging co-created value process.

The following are the five main factors that perhaps benefit first-time social media users, especially those who use SNSs as part of their business expansion. There are, of course, several factors that many marketing consultants would propose, but these five factors perhaps have a more direct impact on how successful a company (or even a sole proprietor) can be. In the following section, it is most appropriate to relate to Philip Kotler’s mantra of marketing: CC-DV-TP. These acronyms stand for C: create, C: communicate; D: deliver, V: value; T: target audience, P: profit. Social media marketing applies basic marketing principles but with an emphasis on the social media presence. Marketing experts (Kotler et al. 2002; Kotler 2012) highlighted that in planning a marketing strategy, it is important that we fulfill three basic activities: product management, brand management, and customer management. Using this model as a basis for a successful firm, and combining Plomion’s (2014) five Cs of effective content marketing and Ernst’s (2014) five C’s in social media success in 2015, I incorporated both models into the following five factors to highlight the integration of social media into a marketing plan.

Factor 1: Creating

Content that is created needs to be of high quality and sensible. We live in a society with opinionated individuals. Thus, quality of writing alone is insufficient when relating the content to the public; rather, establishing a rapport with gatekeepers or other influencers may ultimately draw attention around the same topic. Nonetheless, the content posted has to be updated regularly to stay consistent with the current trends in the market.

Factor 2: Communicate

We are not only creating sensible and credible information; we are also communicating our intended message to our audience. We are communicating the value of our product and services offered, as well as our promise. This promise needs to hit three “buckets” of a consumer’s thought process: cognitive, habitual, and affective.

Factor 3: Connect

Now that we have high-quality content and it links to relevant materials, what should we do next? Connect this information with your existing customers as well as your potential customers. We can reach and engage with consumers, influencers, and other like-minded leaders in the industry. This piece of information can be disseminated in several ways via several different social media. In a brick-and-mortar store, salesmen make sales calls face-to-face with their potential clients. Whereas, companies that are endorsing their social media presence will conduct these sales calls virtually. Ultimately, these businesses are following good business practices with integration of social media etiquette. However, despite the instant nature of social media, gaining fame or even recognition is not instant. We need to build our reputation with time. Thus, patience is required. As we build our connections with local communities and industries, we need to stay focused on our goals and objectives. Connection is a two-way street. We not only need to communicate our message to our intended audiences, we also need to listen and observe. Paying attention to our clients and addressing their concerns is part of enhancing the value and quality of our products and services.

Factor 4: Cross promote

In the virtual world, we cannot be lone rangers. We need to share our content across several different channels. Essentially, we need share our information on SNS platforms such as Facebook, Pinterest, Twitter, Instagram, or Google+. However, it is important to note that each SNS is unique in its own way. For example, Instagram is conducive to graphics more than just text, whereas Twitter is catered toward instant messages. Thus, customizing your content toward a particular platform is important as the way the intended message is sent maybe perceived differently. Also, relating back to a company’s marketing strategy, we need to know our audience preferences. Does the target market comprise of business working professionals? If so, which platform is more popular among them? We need to ensure that we connect with our consumers with the appropriate platform.

Factor 5: Control

With any marketing strategy, there is always a need for control. With the amount of CGC flooding each social media, companies must be in control and ensure that the information posted or the information accepted is credible and trustworthy. Control is actually one of the challenges that companies are facing right now due to the flexibility and access of consumer contributed toward any social media. Thus, marketers need to consistently keep track of the content as well as update necessary information that is deemed time-sensitive. In fact, the control factor is the influencer in changing companies’ image.

These five “Cs” are indispensable in ensuring that innovative technologies reach and engage consumers in the whole consumption process. However, it is important to note that no two communities are the same. Thus, some companies may feel that they need to emphasize more on a particular C than others, due to the nature of their product and services. This means that each company may require a somewhat customized approach. Hopefully, these five Cs can benefit and scale up to the maximum use of technology and contribute toward a positive experience for consumers alike.