• 제목/요약/키워드: Regulatory focus theory

검색결과 54건 처리시간 0.024초

향상초점과 예방초점 잡크래프팅(Job Crafting)의 차별적 효과: 이직의도에 대한 업무통합성과 직무긴장감의 이중매개효과와 상사지지의 조절효과를 중심으로 (A Study on the Differential Effect of Promotion and Prevention Focus Job Crafting on Turnover Intention: the Dual Mediating Effect of Work-related Sense of Coherence and Job strain and the Moderating Effect of Supervisor Support)

  • 김영국;김명소
    • 한국산학기술학회논문지
    • /
    • 제22권1호
    • /
    • pp.728-742
    • /
    • 2021
  • 본 연구의 목적은 기존의 순기능 측면을 중심으로 연구되었던 잡크래프팅(job crafting)을 역기능 측면도 함께 탐색하기 위해 잡크래프팅을 향상초점(promotion focus)과 예방초점(prevention focus)으로 나누어 두 초점이 이직의도에 미치는 차별적 영향과 그 과정을 밝히는 것이다. 구체적으로 향상초점 잡크래프팅과 예방초점 잡크래프팅이 업무 통합성과 직무 긴장을 매개하여 이직 의도에 영향을 미친다는 순차적 이중매개모형을 제안하였다. 또한 예방초점 잡크래프팅의 역기능을 줄일 수 있는 변인으로 상사지지에 대한 조절효과 여부를 확인하고자 하였다. 이를 위해 국내 다양한 직종의 현직자 293명을 대상으로 온라인 설문조사를 실시하였다. 분석결과 향상초점 잡크래프팅은 이직의도에 부적 영향을 미친 반면, 예방초점 잡크래프팅은 직접적으로 정적 영향을 미쳤다. 향상초점 잡크래프팅과 예방초점 잡크래프팅 모두 업무통합성과 직무 긴장을 순차적으로 부분 매개하여 간접적으로도 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타나 순차적 이중매개모형을 검증하였다. 또한, 상사지지는 예방초점 잡크래프팅이 업무통합성에 미치는 부정적 영향을 완화하고 두 변인의 관계를 정적으로 변화시켜 상사지지의 조절효과가 입증되었다. 이를 바탕으로 본 연구의 시사점과 향후 연구 방향을 논의하였다.

IT융합제품 잠재구매자의 외부정보원천 활용에 대한 연구 : 스마트폰 잠재구매자를 중심으로 (Use of External Information Sources by Potential Adopters of IT Convergence Products: Focusing on Potential Adopters of Smartphone)

  • 유재흥;최새솔;최문기
    • 한국콘텐츠학회논문지
    • /
    • 제11권10호
    • /
    • pp.217-233
    • /
    • 2011
  • 본 연구에서는 IT융합제품 구매 결정에 있어 잠재 구매자들이 어떻게 외부 정보를 활용하는지를 대표적 IT융합제품인 스마트폰 사례를 중심으로 살펴보고 있다. 외부 정보 원천 (external information)의 활용이 중요시 되는 이유는 스마트폰과 같은 신기술 기반의 융합제품이 더 이상 제품 사양만으로 차별화되는 탐색재가 아닌 사용자 인터페이스, 애플리케이션 이용 등으로부터 체득한 경험정보가 더욱 중요시되는 경험재적 성격을 포함하기 때문이다. 기존의 연구에서는 이러한 신기술 기반의 제품 선택에 있어 지인들이나 일반소비자들의 구전이 중요한 역할을 하는 것을 검증하였으나 온라인, 오프라인을 통해 다양한 정보 원천의 영향력을 비교 검증하는 실증 연구는 거의 없었다. 본 연구에서는 기존 연구를 참조하여 외부 정보 원천을 기업광고, 지인집단, 전문가집단, 일반소비자집단, 언론매체로 구분하고 이러한 외부 정보 원천이 어떻게 스마트폰의 구매 결정에 영향을 미치는 지를 정보 원천의 속성, 정보의 품질인식 측면에서 실증 분석하였다. 특히, 잠재구매자의 자기조절초점(self-regulatory focus)에 따라 정보 원천에 대한 속성 인식과 각 정보원천으로부터 발생한 정보에 대한 품질 평가에 차이가 존재함을 밝혔다.

메시지 조절목표와 메시지 형식 간 적합성이 메시지 설득력에 미치는 영향 (The Persuasive Impact of Fit between Message Goals(Promotion vs. Prevention) and Modality of Message on Social Media)

  • 김동후;송영아
    • 한국콘텐츠학회논문지
    • /
    • 제21권2호
    • /
    • pp.604-621
    • /
    • 2021
  • 커뮤니케이션 수단으로서의 소셜미디어의 성장은 소비자가 영양학적 선택과 건강한 음식 소비를 하는 데 소셜미디어의 영향력 역시 증가시켰다. 이 연구는 소셜미디어 상에서 건강한 식습관과 관련한 메시지 목표(향상 vs. 예방)와 메시지 형식(텍스트 vs. 이미지)이 메시지 설득력에 미치는 영향력을 알아보는 데 그 목적이 있다. 연구 결과에 따르면, 향상메시지에 노출된 참가자들은 소셜미디어 메시지 형식에 따른 차이를 보이지 않았으나, 예방메시지에 노출된 참가자들은 텍스트 (vs. 이미지) 형식의 메시지에 노출되었을 때, 메시지에 대한 더 긍정적인 태도를 보였으며, 해당 메시지에 대해 더 높은 클릭 의도를 보였다. 본 연구의 결과는 소셜미디어 상 건강메시지의 형식과 메시지 목표의 적합성이 메시지 효과에 영향을 미침을 이론적으로 증명하였다. 더불어 효과적인 건강메시지 작성 및 전달 방식에 대한 실무적 지침 역시 제공하리라 예상한다.

쇼핑 가치 추구 성향에 따른 쇼핑 목표와 공유 의도 차이에 관한 연구 - 전자제품 구매고객을 중심으로 (Shopping Value, Shopping Goal and WOM - Focused on Electronic-goods Buyers)

  • 박경원;박주영
    • 마케팅과학연구
    • /
    • 제19권2호
    • /
    • pp.68-79
    • /
    • 2009
  • The interplay between hedonic and utilitarian attributes has assumed special significance in recent years; it has been proposed that consumption offerings should be viewed as experiences that stimulate both cognitions and feelings rather than as mere products or services. This research builds on previous work on hedonic versus utilitarian benefits, regulatory focus theory, customer satisfaction to address two question: (1) Is the shopping goal at the point of purchase different from the shopping value? and (2) Is the customer loyalty after the use different from the shopping value and shopping goal? We surveyed 345 peoples those who have bought the electronic-goods within 6 months. This research dealt with the shopping value which is consisted of 2 types, hedonic and utilitarian. Those who pursue the hedonic shopping value may prefer the pleasure of purchasing experience to the product itself. They tend to prefer atmosphere, arousal of the shopping experience. Consistent with previous research, we use the term "hedonic" to refer to their aesthetic, experiential and enjoyment-related value. On the contrary, Those who pursue the utilitarian shopping value may prefer the reasonable buying. It may be more functional. Consistent with previous research, we use the term "utilitarian" to refer to the functional, instrumental, and practical value of consumption offerings. Holbrook(1999) notes that consumer value is an experience that results from the consumption of such benefits. In the context of cell phones for example, the phone's battery life and sound volume are utilitarian benefits, whereas aesthetic appeal from its shape and color are hedonic benefits. Likewise, in the case of a car, fuel economics and safety are utilitarian benefits whereas the sunroof and the luxurious interior are hedonic benefits. The shopping goals are consisted of the promotion focus goal and the prevention focus goal, based on the self-regulatory focus theory. The promotion focus is characterized into focusing ideal self because they are oriented to wishes and vision. The promotion focused individuals are tend to be more risk taking. They are more sensitive to hope and achievement. On the contrary, the prevention focused individuals are characterized into focusing the responsibilities because they are oriented to safety. The prevention focused individuals are tend to be more risk avoiding. We wanted to test the relation among the shopping value, shopping goal and customer loyalty. Customers show the positive or negative feelings comparing with the expectation level which customers have at the point of the purchase. If the result were bigger than the expectation, customers may feel positive feeling such as delight or satisfaction and they would want to share their feelings with other people. And they want to buy those products again in the future time. There is converging evidence that the types of goals consumers expect to be fulfilled by the utilitarian dimension of a product are different from those they seek from the hedonic dimension (Chernev 2004). Specifically, whereas consumers expect the fulfillment of product prevention goals on the utilitarian dimension, they expect the fulfillment of promotion goals on the hedonic dimension (Chernev 2004; Chitturi, Raghunathan, and Majahan 2007; Higgins 1997, 2001) According to the regulatory focus theory, prevention goals are those that ought to be met. Fulfillment of prevention goals in the context of product consumption eliminates or significantly reduces the probability of a painful experience, thus making consumers experience emotions that result from fulfillment of prevention goals such as confidence and securities. On the contrary, fulfillment of promotion goals are those that a person aspires to meet, such as "looking cool" or "being sophisticated." Fulfillment of promotion goals in the context of product consumption significantly increases the probability of a pleasurable experience, thus enabling consumers to experience emotions that result from the fulfillment of promotion goals. The proposed conceptual framework captures that the relationships among hedonic versus utilitarian shopping values and promotion versus prevention shopping goals respectively. An analysis of the consequence of the fulfillment and frustration of utilitarian and hedonic value is theoretically worthwhile. It is also substantively relevant because it helps predict post-consumption behavior such as the promotion versus prevention shopping goals orientation. Because our primary goal is to understand how the post consumption feelings influence the variable customer loyalty: word of mouth (Jacoby and Chestnut 1978). This research result is that the utilitarian shopping value gives the positive influence to both of the promotion and prevention goal. However the influence to the prevention goal is stronger. On the contrary, hedonic shopping value gives influence to the promotion focus goal only. Additionally, both of the promotion and prevention goal show the positive relation with customer loyalty. However, the positive relation with promotion goal and customer loyalty is much stronger. The promotion focus goal gives the influence to the customer loyalty. On the contrary, the prevention focus goal relates at the low level of relation with customer loyalty than that of the promotion goal. It could be explained that it is apt to get framed the compliment of people into 'gain-non gain' situation. As the result, for those who have the promotion focus are motivated to deliver their own feeling to other people eagerly. Conversely the prevention focused individual are more sensitive to the 'loss-non loss' situation. The research result is consistent with pre-existent researches. There is a conceptual parallel between necessities-needs-utilitarian benefits and luxuries-wants-hedonic benefits (Chernev 2004; Chitturi, Raghunathan and Majaha 2007; Higginns 1997; Kivetz and Simonson 2002b). In addition, Maslow's hierarchy of needs and the precedence principle contends luxuries-wants-hedonic benefits higher than necessities-needs-utilitarian benefits. Chitturi, Raghunathan and Majaha (2007) show that consumers are focused more on the utilitarian benefits than on the hedonic benefits of a product until their minimum expectation of fulfilling prevention goals are met. Furthermore, a utilitarian benefit is a promise of a certain level of functionality by the manufacturer or the retailer. When the promise is not fulfilled, customers blame the retailer and/or the manufacturer. When negative feelings are attributable to an entity, customers feel angry. However in the case of hedonic benefit, the customer, not the manufacturer, determines at the time of purchase whether the product is stylish and attractive. Under such circumstances, customers are more likely to blame themselves than the manufacturer if their friends do not find the product stylish and attractive. Therefore, not meeting minimum utilitarian expectations of functionality generates a much more intense negative feelings, such as anger than a less intense feeling such as disappointment or dissatisfactions. The additional multi group analysis of this research shows the same result. Those who are unsatisfactory customers who have the prevention focused goal shows higher relation with WOM, comparing with satisfactory customers. The research findings in this article could have significant implication for the personal selling fields to increase the effectiveness and the efficiency of the sales such that they can develop the sales presentation strategy for the customers. For those who are the hedonic customers may be apt to show more interest to the promotion goal. Therefore it may work to strengthen the design, style or new technology of the products to the hedonic customers. On the contrary for the utilitarian customers, it may work to strengthen the price competitiveness. On the basis of the result from our studies, we demonstrated a correspondence among hedonic versus utilitarian and promotion versus prevention goal, WOM. Similarly, we also found evidence of the moderator effects of satisfaction after use, between the prevention goal and WOM. Even though the prevention goal has the low level of relation to WOM, those who are not satisfied show higher relation to WOM. The relation between the prevention goal and WOM is significantly different according to the satisfaction versus unsatisfaction. In addition, improving the promotion emotions of cheerfulness and excitement and the prevention emotion of confidence and security will further improve customer loyalty. A related potential further research could be to examine whether hedonic versus utilitarian, promotion versus prevention goals improve customer loyalty for services as well. Under the budget and time constraints, designers and managers are often compelling to choose among various attributes. If there is no budget or time constraints, perhaps the best solution is to maximize both hedonic and utilitarian dimension of benefits. However, they have to make trad-off process between various attributes. For the designers and managers have to keep in mind that without hedonic benefit satisfaction of the product it may hard to lead the customers to the customer loyalty.

  • PDF