Index

1. Introductiono common problem for managerso solution(key arguments)

2. Articles & Business Implicationso summary of article 2

experiments & results business implication

o summary of article 3  experiments & results business implication

o discussion(differences &  similarities)o Comparative case study

3. Conclusiono suggestions(arguments) for managers 

4. Q & Ao Possible questions 

Introduction

• Question: How can we manipulate people’s attribution process to make people buy our products and services?

• Assumptions 1. Attainability: People want to see suggested problems solved, than merely addressed 2. Meaning: People are willing to pay more for a product or service with a social cause.

• Answer 1. Attach a social cause(meaning)2. Ensure the attainability of the goal is appropriate

• Key findings of two articles• Article1(Yin Zhang)

• Motivation: low progress -> attainability, high progress-> meaning• too much endowed progress kill motivation

• Article2(Dan Ariely)• Motivation: Meaning is crucial

<Man’s search for meaning: The case of Legos>

1. assumed : in more meaningful conditions → people would have higher productivity. 2. Compare 3 situations : (1)no meaning (2)with a little meaning (3)meaningful

3. findings:• If people works with less meaning seemed to

demand more payment for the same work.• On the other hand, meaning would enhance the

relationship between labor supply and skill.

Experiment 1

• Giving subjects a sheet of paper and they would be paid $ 0.55 for finding 10 instances of two consecutive letters.

• three conditions:(1)Acknowledge → wrote down names (2) Ignored → no need to write names down(3) Shredded → immediately destroyed the paper into a shredder

Experiment 2

• Subjects received payment for assembling Bionicle lego with the decreasing payment model(first one for $2.00, the second for $1.89 and so on linearly ).

• Two conditions: (1)Meaningful(2)Sisyphus

• Result:1. Experiment 1 opposed to the assumption ：Less meaningful earned more than meaningful condition.2. Experiment 2 : in meaningful situation, the subjects built more and received more payment.• Probably Reason:

One situation is meaningful or not depends on everyone’s goal.

comparative case study

• Two key concepts from articles: Attainability, Meaning

• A(o) M(x): traditional mkt• Ex) 30% increased power, added flavor, pink color addition for women

• Consumption value

• A(x) M(o): early cause mkt• ex) 1% donation to address poverty issues in Africa.

• Drop in a bucket effect image

• intangible social value

• A(o) M(o): new cause mkt(attainability high, societal value)• Ex) TOMS SHOES (1+1 donation model)

• video how it's done, map(influence)

• Tangible/direct social value

A(O) M(x): traditional

• Attainability O – Goals imposed by companies for customers(ex) loyalty stamps, membership points)

– no particular social goal set for customers* loyalty card image

• Meaning x– the purpose or a product is to get consumed by customers

– little social value associated with a product

* tide advertisement image

A(x) M(o): early cause mkt

• A(x) M(o): early cause mkt• Drop in a bucket effect image

• intangible social value

• Attainability x – Too big or difficult problems to solve

– ex) 1% donation to address poverty issues in Africa.

*image (could not find, anyone help?, KFC not goo denough)

• Meaning o– Social value integrated

A(o) M(o): new TOMS SHOES

• A(o) M(o): new cause mkt(attainability high, societal value)• Ex) TOMS SHOES (1+1 donation model)

• video how it's done: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5WUw8hfZiPQ&feature=related(better one suggested please)

• Tangible/direct social valueimage of children getting shoes for free donated by people(tangible problem solved)*image CEO of Toms shoes giving away shoes to children

Key argruments

Zhang and Huang (2010)• Diverse studies find:

o Motivational strengths incresases as one accumulates progress and approaches goal attainment

o Indivudals decisions in adopting a certain goal at least partially depend on the cognitive assesment of their chances of attaining the goal

• Combinding these studiesAriely et al (2008)• Earlier studies find:

o Studies that are less directly: by compensating differentials• Not many research about the subject

Key argrumentsZhang and Huang (2010)• Those who attribute the high progress to themselves (vs.

to the situation) would thus infer a higher goal value and would be more motivated to further pursue the goal.

• a consumer who attributed the low progress on a goal to themselves (vs. to the situation ) would infer that the goal is difficult to attain and thus show lower motivation.

Ariely et al (2008)• In case of work, people who can attach meaning easily

are more motivated and they show better productivity

Conclusion

• Resultso Quality and level of progress have a role on the motivationo The meaning have a role on the motivation

• How can we manipulate people’s attribution process so that we can motivate people to buy our products/services:o Give a easy start that is progressed by themselveso Give a meaning

• Re-emphasis of business implications:o Endow a degree of progresso Give a meaning

Reference list

• Zhang, Y. & Huang, S. (2010) How endowed versus earned progress affects consumer goal commitment and motivation. Journal of Consumer Reserach, 37, 641-654.

• Ariely, D., Kamenica, E. & Prelec, D. (2008) Man’s search for meaning: the case of legos. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 67, 671-677.