HOW SOCIAL MEDIA INFLUENCERS AFFECT NPD STAGES IN THE COSMETICS INDUSTRY

(1)

HOW SOCIAL MEDIA INFLUENCERS AFFECT NPD STAGES IN

THE COSMETICS INDUSTRY

Master Thesis: MSc Strategic Innovation Management Michael Carlin (S3517446)

Supervisor: Thijs Broekhuizen Co-assessor: Isabel Estrada

Abstract:

As social media platforms grow and evolve, brands are increasingly using social media influencers to reach consumers. The purpose of this study is to investigate how social media influencers affect new product development (NPD) processes and innovation in firms that

deploy influencer programs. To further explore this topic, interviews were conducted with firms

and social media influencers (SMIs) active in the cosmetic industry. This study has found that SMIs are no longer just marketing ploys for companies. Instead, firms are using SMIs and the data they generate to impact all stages of the NPD process. More specifically, SMIs play three crucial roles for firms within the different NPD stages: (1) market knowledge providers within the fuzzy front end stage, (2) product testers within the product prototyping stage, and (3) reviewers within the commercialization and promotion stage. Furthermore, collaboration with SMIs along the different NPD stages has allowed for greater measurability and predictability of customer needs due to their abilities to steer customer perceptions and represent specific

customer segments. Overall, SMI collaboration has influenced the speed of the NPD process and the amount of market failures for firms.

Keywords: social media influencers, NPD processes, fuzzy-front end, product prototyping, commercialization

(2)

1. Introduction

The increasing development of the social media industry creates new opportunities for businesses to communicate with their outside environments and promote new products to potential adapters. The rise of new digital/mobile communication channels has decreased the effectiveness of traditional media outlets such as TV, radio and print, and has forced companies to shift advertising budgets to online media channels. Social media has begun replacing

traditional media as the main driver of brand communication (Bruhn, Schoenmueller, & Schäfer, 2012). Most organizations capitalize on social media as a means of promotion; however, more recently, companies have started to make use of such digital social networks like Facebook, Instagram, Twitter and YouTube to engage in two-way communications with customers to access greater insight into their market demands (Moe & Schweidel, 2017). Companies no longer distribute their firm-based messages via traditional and online channels, but are gradually leveraging social media platforms to engage in conversations with customers (Woods, 2016). Early innovation research (Rogers, 1968) has considered the diffusion of product innovations to be a social process. Opinion leaders play an important role in facilitating the adoption of

innovations by converting firm-based, mass-media messages into interpersonal messages that are communicated between opinion leaders and followers (Katz and Lazarsfelds, 1955). Opinion leaders, by virtue of their knowledge, greater objective evaluation, and large size of followers, can spread product awareness and persuade followers to adopt. Related literature has identified the concept of a ‘market maven’, which encompasses “individuals who have information about many kinds of products, places to shop, and other facets of markets, and initiate discussions with consumers and respond to requests from consumers for market information” (Feick & Price, 1987, p. 83). Even though both roles refer to different characteristics, these concepts are based on the same premise that there is a small number of individuals who have great influence on consumers’ minds and behaviors (Saito et al., 2015). I speculate that with the rise of social media platforms, leading social media users can play both these roles.

(4)

between firms and their target customers (Woods, 2016). In the social media landscape, these users, who can play the role of both opinion leader and market maven, are known as social media influencers (from now on SMIs). Although a variety of SMIs exist across a variety of industries, markets and product categories, with varying number of followers, SMIs can facilitate the diffusion of product innovations by sharing their specific brand experiences within communities of consumers who share similar interests. Influencers inform their communities of like-minded consumers and arbitrate opinions on company’s products and services (Uzunoglu & Kip, 2014). SMIs can voice their opinions rapidly, effectively, and with the possibility of going viral, thereby influencing millions of people. Firms realize that compared to traditional methods, using SMIs as product advocates can attract immediate and extensive publicity, generate brand awareness (Constantinides, 2014), and increase product sales (Woods, 2016).

(5)

While SMI collaboration presents many opportunities to firms, it does come with some risk. One disadvantage of using this new marketing technique is a lower control over SMI’s behavior. More specifically, firms that depend on SMIs as their primary marketing channel give up control over the creative processes of their content. For instance, firms traditionally have control over the promotional content they release in which the commercial message is casted exactly as intended; however, with SMI collaboration, firms depend on the SMI’s interpretation of the promoted product to deliver successful content which makes this collaboration risky (Booth & Matic, 2011).

Although SMIs act independently, their interest in and closer collaboration with firms have raised the question: are SMIs just a marketing ploy, or are they also providers of relevant and objective market information about end-customer needs? Woods (2016) found that the predominant role of SMIs is for marketing purposes: product promotion and launches, and content creation. However, other literature indicates that SMI engagement provides user data that can provide insight about consumer preferences that are particularly valuable for product

innovation and development processes (Moe & Schweidel, 2017). Although it may be difficult to analyze, social media’s unstructured nature allows such data to be used to inform product

development decisions (Moe & Schweidel 2017). However, there is little known on how firms establish and use partnerships with SMIs, and the added value resulting for collaborating firms (Paço & Oliveira, 2017). In other words, there is little known about how the cooperation with SMIs alter firms’ NPD processes (fuzzy front end stage, product prototyping stage,

commercialization and promotion stage) and outcomes (e.g. lower market failures). What this paper seeks to understand is how organizations use SMI generated data (including SMI-customer & SMI-firm interactions) to influence their new product development processes, if at all.

Organizations may use this new channel in conjunction with traditional marketing research approaches to narrow the set procedures toward prototyping and test marketing for new products (Moe & Schweidel, 2017). Since little is known about the influence of SMIs on NPD processes, this study wants to explore and understand the underlying interactions between cosmetic firms

and SMIs to understand how NPD processes may be shaped by SMIs. Based on the above, the

(6)

- 5 - To answer the research question, this study conducts interviews with industry experts within the

cosmetics field to see how firms engage with SMIs to explore how they may shape new product

(7)

2. Literature Review

2.1 Attractiveness of Social Media Influencers to Firms

According to Freberg et al. (2010), SMIs are a new type of independent third-party endorser who shape audience attitudes through blogs, tweets, and the use of other social media platforms. SMIs develop and upload content (e.g. posts, pictures, videos, and messages) on their social media pages to amass followers, allowing audiences to step into their personal narratives (Forbes, 2016). SMIs have been successful in affiliate marketing in which SMIs monetize their content through running advertisements, creating personalized promotions, and promotional links with companies to produce reviews on new products/services. As social media platforms continue to generate huge quantities of traffic and impact new product launch sales, increasingly more industries are looking to utilize collaboration with SMIs.

The reasons why SMI collaboration is becoming more attractive to firms is because SMIs: facilitate the creation of brand loyalty and have a positive impact on sales revenue and return on investment (Kumar & Mirchandani, 2012). Additionally, SMIs provide access to customers’ opinions, complaints, and questions in real-time in a highly scalable way

(Stavrakantonakis et al., 2012). SMIs can access these insights because they develop a sense of trust with their viewers (Forbes, 2016). Trustworthiness has the greatest influence on consumer’s attitudes towards SMIs and purchase intentions, which allows SMIs to steer consumer opinions (Phang Ing & Ming, 2018). Firms are attracted to the idea of working with SMIs to shape their customers’ perceptions on new products. Not only do SMIs increase sales, WOM, and impact customer perceptions, but social networking sites offer advanced analytical tools that allow companies to analyze the reach, spread, and impact of social media messages, thus making SMI marketing more measurable than traditional marketing channels (Kumar & Mirchandani, 2012). According to Kumar & Mirchandani (2012), by monitoring and tracking positive WOM

(attributed to SMI collaboration) and linking it to product and brand growth, firms can develop more effective social media campaigns than in the past (Kumar & Mirchandani, 2012).

(8)

than originally agreed upon. Overall, SMIs programs are not a fully controlled channel in that firm’s management and authority over them is not concrete. With SMI programs attractiveness, firms should be careful not to overlook the disadvantages of these programs.

2.2 Social Media Influencers & New Product Development Stages

Apart from the promotional effects of SMIs, SMI marketing provides user data that can provide new information about consumer preferences and contribute to product innovation and development processes (Moe & Schweidel 2017). For instance, product attributes and their relative importance to consumers can be identified from SMI ratings and review data (Lee & Bradlow, 2011). This data can be extrapolated using the built in analytical tools of social media platforms as mentioned before. The identification of consumer preferences and the specific market or product knowledge SMIs have present an opportunity for firms to acquire and incorporate this knowledge into their NPD processes. Firms can benefit from these relational resources or promotional power of SMIs and their market knowledge. This possibility of knowledge transfer suggests that SMIs can provide critical information upstream towards firms, while also promoting products downstream to customers. The role that is most understood in literature is referred to in this paper as the ‘reviewer role,’ in which influencers provide advertising and engagement to customers for promotional purposes (Woods, 2016). This downstream role deals with post distribution efforts and customers down the value system (Njoroge, 2007). The roles that are less understood that this paper seeks to understand more about are referred to in this study as the ‘market knowledge provider’ and ‘product testers’ roles, in which SMI collaboration is utilized to (a) provide market data to firms for (new) product development initiatives and (b) to test developing prototypes within downstream activities respectively. Moe & Schweidel (2017) only speculate that organizations may be formally communicating with SMIs to access their market knowledge and to inform their own product development processes, but these roles have not yet been documented or analyzed. In the next section, the traditional NPD processes within the cosmetic industry is introduced to analyze the possible roles SMIs can play during NPD processes.

2.3 Traditional NPD Process

(9)

innovation is defined as the predevelopment stages as consisting of idea generation, product definition, and project evaluation (Murphy & Kumar, 1997). It encompasses the period between when an opportunity arises and when an idea is deemed ready for development (Kim &

Wilemon, 2002). The second stage in the NPD processes is the product prototyping phase, which encompasses a series of sequential, well-structured, chronologically-ordered steps to design and test product prototypes (Koen, et al., 2001). The third and final step within the NPD processes is the commercialization and promotion stage. Song & Swink (2002) describe this final stage as: “all the activities required to launch the product, including developing detailed manufacturing and marketing plans and schedules, starting and ramping-up production, and promoting and distributing the product.” The next part illustrates SMIs’ possible impact on NPD processes.

(10)

2.3.2 Product prototyping. Previous literature has identified that many commercially important products are prototyped by users rather than firms (Von Hippel, Thomke, & Sonnack, 1999). With SMI programs on the rise, it makes sense that firms would look to these influential users to access feedback to help develop and assess product prototypes. Additional literature has found that information flows from SMIs (e.g. general market knowledge and feedback from handling products) can help firms to narrow the set of procedures toward prototyping and test marketing for new product innovations (Moe & Schweidel, 2017). Therefore, SMI collaboration within this stage of the NPD process could provide: (a)

amendments to product prototypes that satisfy market demands and (b) market knowledge that firms aren’t able to access on their own. This SMI-firm relationship is illustrated as ‘Product Prototyping ‘in Figure 2. Even though there is research that indicates potential of SMIs to positively impact this stage of the NPD process, there is no research that directly documents the incorporation of SMIs within this stage. This study aims to explore whether and how SMIs are being utilized as product testers.

(11)

Overall, the literature (1) identifies the attractiveness of collaboration with SMIs, (2) describes what is known about SMIs and their impact on NPD stages, and (3) suggests possible SMI roles for the NPD stages outlined above. However, the literature does not reveal what those roles are nor whether they affect these NPD processes, and if so, how. Thus, although the effectiveness of SMIs’ usage of and influence on downstream processes (reviewer role) is clear, there is an apparent lack of knowledge regarding how SMIs affect the earlier NPD processes. Clarity is absent particularly in the cases of the suggested SMI role of market knowledge provider and product tester within the fuzzy-front-end and product prototyping stages of NPD, respectively. Thus, I explore how firms use SMIs during earlier stages of the NPD processes, and how they influence firms’ NPD processes.

(12)

3. Methodology

3.1 Expert Interviews

As little to no research exists on how SMIs affect NPD processes, this study adopts a qualitative theory of development approach (Van Aken, Berends & Van der Bij, 2012). Interviews are a suitable research method because they allow the researcher to ask open-ended questions to a (small) sample and explore individual experiences or opinions regarding the research

phenomenon (Kloss, 2010). More specifically, the method of in-depth semi-structured interviews was chosen to collect primary data. Semi-structured interviews permit scope for individuals to answer questions more on their own terms than the standardized interview permits, yet still provides a good structure for comparability over that of the focused interview (May,1997). Furthermore, compared to other methods like questionnaires, interviews provide a more in-depth understanding of the topic at hand (Kvale, 1996).

3.2 Expert Selection

To find insights into SMI influence on NPD stages within the cosmetics industry, the participants in this study consisted of firm representatives who had experience with SMIs and work within the cosmetics industry. Additionally, some of the participants were SMIs themselves. To understand the inextricable relationship between firms and SMIs, a dyadic perspective was needed as there was limited access to firms. This dual approach allows for a better understanding of both: the firms perspective on collaboration and its consequences, and the SMI perspective on experienced reactions and responses from firms. Additionally, interviewing two different sources of information is a utilization of the triangulation method, in which a study looks at the same research question from more than one source of data. Decrop (1999) found that “data coming from different angles can be used to corroborate, elaborate or illuminate the research problem”. Furthermore, the use of triangulation within this study contributes to the limitation of personal and methodological biases and strengthens the study’s generalizability (Decrop, 1999).

(13)

world, from New York to the Netherlands. A sample profile with more information on the participants can be seen in Table 1. The core objective of these interviews was to investigate firms’ relationships with SMIs outside of the traditional ‘reviewer role’.

All participants were chosen through purposive sampling. In this sampling approach, I tried to find cases rich in information (Patton 2002) providing certain attributes demanded by the character of the study (Silverman 2000). For this study, those attributes were related to the background of the participants such as experience with SMI collaboration within the cosmetics industry, trying to have a sample that encompasses both cosmetic firms and SMIs themselves. All interviews were conducted in English and were voice recorded. The interviewees were promised confidentiality and gave permission to be recorded.

Table 1. Profile of Participants

1

3.3 Data Collection: Interviews

To safeguard the flow and discussion of relevant topics, the questions were distributed in a specific order. However, during the interviews, the order of questions in the interview prompt was not strictly followed. Due to the open and semi-structured character of the study,

(14)

interviewees could answer the questions in an unconstrained way, mentioning everything that came into their mind. I purposely did not introduce specific NPD stages or roles of SMIs to participants during the interviews to protect this study from personal and retrospective biases. Furthermore, as the interviewees came from different cultural backgrounds, possible

misunderstandings regarding the interview questions had to be taken into consideration (Patton, 2002). Hence, clarifying questions were asked whenever it seemed necessary to assess whether the interviewees understood the questions and whether the interviewer understood their answer correctly. Along with extensive notes being taken during each interview, the interviews were also audio recorded and transcribed to provide a detailed and accurate representation of

responses. The transcriptions were sent to the participants following our conversation to further validate the responses. Following that, I reached out to participants a few more times (more information in Table 1) to conduct informal follow-ups via emails and video-chat to verify the results and fill in missing details.

3.4 Data Analysis

Thematic analysis is one way to identify patterns or themes within qualitative data (Maguire & Delahunt, 2017). According to Riessman (1993), thematic analysis is useful “for finding

common thematic elements across research participants and the events they report” (p. 3). I refer to thematic elements as patterns that capture something significant or interesting to the data and/or research question (Maguire & Delahunt, 2017). I adopted a thematic analysis process as described by Aronson (1995) for my method.

(15)

it was easy to see patterns emerging. According to Aronson (1995), when patterns emerge, it is best to obtain feedback from the informants about them. Follow up interviews were conducted to validate the the categorizing process and to bridge any gaps in the data. When conducting follow up interviews, SMI participants did not always confirm everything that the firm representatives outlined. Whenever a disagreement occurred between participants, it is stated within the

(16)

4. Results

4.1 Background: Processes of Establishing Relationships with SMIs

This section describes the processes of how firms select and work with SMIs to provide the context in which SMIs operate in. The information gathered from the interviews has indicated that there are two primary modes of access in place for firms to effectively communicate and collaborate with influencers. The first channel used to contact SMIs is identified as the ‘indirect’ mode, whereby outside firms (agencies) mediate the communication and collaboration between firms and influencers. The second channel, referred to as the ‘direct’ mode occurs when firms reach out to influencers directly via emails, and direct messages (DMs) to create their own brand ambassador programs. Brand Ambassadors in this sense are influencers that act on behalf of the brand to represent and promote the entire brand message to their network (Malhotra et al., 2013). The next section will describe the different modes of brand-influencer communication and references Figure 3, which depicts a model that outlines the types of communication mediums firms use to communicate to and collaborate with SMIs.

Figure 3. Modes of access to SMIs

(17)

The indirect channel of communication between firms and SMIs is mediated by third-party organizations called influencer agencies. Influencer agencies are independent organizations that play an important role in managing the communication and relationships between cosmetic firms and SMIs. The job of these agencies is to match brands influencer needs with

corresponding SMIs (Dogtiev, 2019). Access to SMIs within this channel begins with arrow A in Figure 3, in which a cosmetic firm reaches out to an agency with a specific request for

influencers and celebrities that match the positioning and target market of their product(s). Next, cosmetic brands tell the agencies how they plan to collaborate with the influencers or celebrities (promotional, feedback, or other collaborations) and outline their marketing goals and objectives. Agencies then assess their portfolio of SMIs (arrow B) with which they have developed contractual relationships. They analyze data, track impressions and engagement, and look at different types of posts to match firms with the most appropriate SMIs. Additionally, multiple aspects like the industry, product type, and target market of the request dictates which SMIs will be selected by the agency to collaborate with the outside firm.

The relationship between influencers and agencies as represented by arrow C shows that SMIs reach out to agencies to be a part of their portfolio of influencers in the hopes of raising their firm collaboration efforts. After developing and analyzing their portfolio of influencers and celebrities, agencies deliver a customized list of their influencers and celebrities that would best fulfill the outside company’s specific needs and desires (arrow D, Figure 2). From there, the cosmetics firm chooses which influencers and celebrities they would like to work with, and the agencies will then set up further communication to facilitate this collaboration. Within this mode, agencies could be considered a platform that moderates the relationship between cosmetic firms and influencers/celebrities.

(18)

speaking about a brand; however, other firms give SMIs the liberty to put their content in their own words to keep authenticity and trust with their audience.

After receiving the proposal, influencers will communicate back and either accept or reject the offer to collaborate with a brand (F within Figure 3.). Once agreed upon, an influencer would complete their engagement and/or authorization collaboration function(s) according to the agreement made between the firm and themselves. In conjunction to reaching out to influencers directly, brands will sometimes hire agencies to find suitable influencers to be a part of their in-house brand ambassador programs. Agencies have resources solely dedicated to fitting brands with influencers that match their overall positioning. Making use of these agencies allows brands to spend less time and money finding influencers, and more energy on developing their brand ambassadors. This collaboration with agencies used for direct communication is represented by arrow G in Figure 3.

4.1.2 Differences between the two channels. The two modes of access that are used to establish relations with SMIs differ in a few ways. First, when selecting an SMI to collaborate with, firms using the indirect mode likely base their decision on agencies’ prior knowledge of SMIs. In contrast, in the direct communication mode the decision to work with specific SMIs is based on the firm’s internal knowledge of SMIs. Second, the effects that these two communication modes have on focal firms differs. In the case of direct communication, there likely exists greater dependency of firms on SMIs as they are acting as brand ambassadors, which have a more profound impact on brands than SMIs participating in one or a few product launches. Firms using direct communication tend to rely more strongly on their brand ambassadors, and therefore depend on them heavily as well. Contrary to direct communication, indirect communication likely creates a dependency of focal firms on agencies instead of SMIs themselves since agencies are the organizers of SMI collaboration within this mode.

4.2 Roles of SMIs

(19)

4.2.1 SMI’s as reviewers. This role refers to the traditional marketing channel that SMIs develop as they generate buzz and outreach around a product(s) within their follower base. According to an interview, this role is where:

“Influencers give [firms] access to communities of customers and promotions… firms monitor views and impressions [likes, comments, shares] as a form of awareness to measure their success [purchases] from that (influencer)” (Firm #2).

In this role, information flows one-way from the SMI to customers and end users. This relationship is illustrated in Figure 4 towards the downstream end of business operations. In addition to generating online engagement around products, SMIs have other measurable effects for focal firms. According to a firm,

“we're seeing companies, my company included, going to these influencers because they have that social reach and because they represent a community around them as to generate brand awareness and increase sales of new products.” (Firm #1)

The interviews confirm previous literature findings that SMIs are effective in stimulating brand awareness and product sales. Overall, firms rely on SMIs as reviewers to increase the word of

(20)

mouth and success of product launches and marketing campaigns alike. SMIs as reviewers has been a well-documented role in previous literature, but it has not documented any ties between SMIs and other stages of NPD.

4.2.2 SMIs as market knowledge providers. One of the new roles of SMIs introduced within this study refers to SMI feedback on a new or developing products. The interviews indicated that reviewing products and promoting brands is only one role SMIs play for firms. In fact, one participant stated:

“However, it [promotion] is not the only reason why firms are exploiting influencer relations. Influencers are being used as product testers, expert opinions, and as a means to avoid traditional spending costs [TV and Radio advertising].” (Firm #1).

SMIs are thus being utilized in other areas of the business besides solely marketing. In this relationship, communication flows one-way: from SMI to the firm in the form of personal feedback, and possible new product ideas. SMIs are excellent at delivering new product ideas because they have a deep expertise in general market characteristics. Additionally, working with SMIs does not only give firms access to the SMIs knowledge base, but also access into the mindsets and opinions of their following. In fact, according to one of the participants, SMIs are:

“able to give you [firms] real feedback from them [SMI perspective] using a product, but also give you [firm] feedback from the perspective of people [followers] that are engaging with them. In a way, influencers can represent their followings demands and desires” (Firm #2).

Collaborating with SMIs in this sense allows firms to access the needs and desires of SMIs as well as potential new buyers engaged in their content. More specifically, SMIs can share their demands around new products with collaborating firms, while simultaneously translating the demands of their following. Receiving knowledge from both point of views provides firms with the ability to test more new product ideas than before, and at a cheaper cost. In fact, a participant stated that firms are:

(21)

Firms no longer spend large budgets on developing multiple ideas, but rather invest in fewer SMI approved ideas. Therefore, SMIs allow firms to access cost-effective and fast testing of market assumptions. Knowing that SMIs can contribute valuable customer data makes them desirable for providing input on a firm’s NPD process. In response, most firms have adopted SMIs as product testers. In fact, one participant stated:

“Most of the companies I work with ask me for my opinion for new ideas or products in development. It is not very often that a firm doesn’t make use of or at least ask for my opinion when introducing new products to their brand.” (SMI #1)

Clearly, the role of SMIs as market knowledge providers has been established across firms within the cosmetics industry. Playing the role of market knowledge providers allows SMIs to communicate their perspective on product development and potential market demand upstream to collaborating firms. This new SMI role is illustrated in the “market knowledge provider” box within Figure 4.

4.2.3 SMIs as product testers. The other new role that this study introduces refers to SMIs being involved in the process of measuring the properties or performance of developing products. As I found before, SMIs have critical market knowledge and can gauge demand around new products. Besides from just providing this market knowledge, SMIs can apply this know-how by testing new and prototyping products for firms. In fact, when speaking about testing prototypes for a new type of product a participant stated:

“we use our influencers and stylists also for testing… We use influencers for a lot of feedback on how the tools work and what they prefer in a barrel [product] shape.:” (Firm #1)

Cosmetic firms have realized the potential of SMIs’ market knowledge and developed product tester relationships with them. Rather than using consumers or industry experts to test products, firms look to SMIs to test product prototypes as they are cheaper than traditional methods (e.g. consumer focus groups) and represent the opinions of many. In fact, a participant stated:

(22)

data [focus groups] which requires a lot of time to uncover and is therefore expensive… So, it's great that we get to hear it directly from them [the SMI].” (Firm #2)

Traditional methods like expert collaboration and consumer focus groups are more expensive because experts cost more money (than SMIs) to collaborate with, and the process of collecting individual consumer demands is lengthy and thus costly. SMIs acting as product testers gives firms access to cost saving quick testing of new and prototyping products. Using SMIs as product testers is an iterative process according to participants as firms re-introduce product prototypes over and over until SMIs deem it ready for commercialization. In fact, when continuing the conversation about developing a new type of product, a participant stated:

“So, say we get a ton of feedback from our influencers that they want a smaller barrel [product characteristic]. Now we’re so exploring smaller barrels in prototypes.” (Firm #1) Thus, firms incorporate SMI feedback on prototypes and continue to reintroduce updated prototypes until the SMIs involved feel satisfied. Once the prototype is deemed ready by SMIs, firms will then develop a final product and begin the commercialization stage of the NPD process. Thus far, firm representatives have described SMIs as product testers. However, when interviewing SMI #2, they did not confirm the existence of this role. In fact, they stated:

“I certainly don’t think of us [SMIs] in that way [as product testers] … I’m sure that influencers [SMIs] influence both towards followers and towards the brand, but from my perspective mostly in the final stage of the product development process [commercialization and promotion stage] … so firms probably wouldn't even be able to send it [developing products] out [to SMIs] before the product was fully developed, tested and approved.” (SMI #2)

Certainly, the experience of this SMI is valid, however; just because this particular SMI isn’t collaborating with firms during earlier stages of the NPD process does not indicate that no other SMIs are. As a matter of fact, when speaking to another SMI they revealed:

(23)

The description of SMIs’ influence on product development by firm representatives and SMI participants leads me to believe in the existence of a product testers role. The existence of “product testers” is proof that firms are using SMI collaboration during earlier stages of the NPD processes. Firms communicate with SMIs to not only market their products, but also to receive constructive criticism and consumer opinions about their new products.

4.3. Influence of SMI Participation within NPD Stages

This section will explain how the different roles SMIs play are impacting the stages of the NPD process. The result of SMI collaboration on each stage of the NPD processes is illustrated by Figure 5 and will be analyzed below.

4.3.1 Fuzzy front-end. The interviews revealed that SMIs have an impact on the fuzzy front end of NPD. During this stage, SMI feedback and data (marketing & interactions) is used to

(24)

communicate the needs of consumers in the marketplace to determine which new ideas to pass to the next stage in NPD. Compared to the traditional NPD process described in the literature review, the Fuzzy Front-End. After analysis, it has been found that SMI collaboration has influenced the beginning of the NPD processes by: (a) developing a heightened sense of product awareness, and (b) replacing consumers and experts in focus groups.

4.3.1.1 Heightened awareness of ethical behavior. With the rise social media,

SMIs have become the predominant marketing channel. Since SMIs openly share their opinions on social media, they are at risk of public scrutiny from consumers and followers. To protect their reputation and the brands they collaborate with, SMIs inform firms of the crucial ethical dilemmas that exist when developing new ideas. I refer to ethical dilemmas as conflict and choice between values, beliefs and options for action (Braunack-Mayer, 2001). With unethical issues increasing throughout the industry (Gould, 2017), SMIs are increasingly asking firms to develop morally responsible products to please and protect their following base. In fact, a participant stated:

“Now you're seeing a lot of influencers call out to brands and say we want something eco-friendly or some other politically correct aspect.” (Firm #1)

With SMI collaboration rising, firms are increasingly more reliant on human marketing channels than commercialized outlets. Relying on humans as a major marketing medium opens firms up to greater public scrutiny due to our opinionated nature. A participant stated:

“I would say that the advertising medium and marketing channel is now human rather than a commercial outlet. Being that it’s a human and not an advertising spot, there’s an extra layer of public scrutiny, and that forces companies to address their ethical dilemmas and be transparent with their consumers.” (Firm #2)

Therefore, firms must increase their awareness of unethical behavior to prevent and combat public scrutiny from consumers within the new marketing channel. With this heightened awareness, firms proactively address their morality issues early in the NPD process. A participant stated:

(25)

“Firms have become proactive in dealing with ethical dilemmas, rather than traditionally being reactive. Therefore, a heightened ethical awareness is ingrained in the beginning of NPD process to provide transparency to customers.” (Firm #2)

Reactively addressing ethical dilemmas as they become public, as opposed to proactively addressing them earlier on in the NPD process, is not an ideal strategy because the damage to a brand’s reputation could happen immediately. For example, providing a wide range of skin colors for foundations has been a big racial dilemma within the cosmetics industry. An ethically reactive firm (Tarte Cosmetics) released a limited shade range for their new product. As soon as SMIs and consumers got access to the product, they dragged the brand name through the mud because the product line was not inclusive enough of different skin shades (colors). When asked to elaborate on this instance, a participant stated:

“Yeah I think there's two really big examples [of firms reacting to ethical dilemmas rather than being proactive] come to mind. One is the Tarte shaped tape foundation… People [consumers] tore it [Tarte shape tape foundation] apart for the [limited] shade range and influencers were up in arms about the lack of diversity of the colors… Tarte actually pulled their foundation [from retail shelves] and reformulated and created more shades and rereleased [the shape tape foundation].” (Firm #1).

This example illustrates what can happen to a firm when they are unaware of controversial ethical dilemmas that exist in the market and/or refuse to proactively come up with solutions. SMIs have forced firms to become hyper-aware of their ethical dilemmas to minimize public scrutiny. If Tarte would have proactively incorporated SMIs’ thoughts earlier in the NPD process, the firm could have avoided public scrutiny and loss of sales. Requiring firms to consider ethical dilemmas when developing products has forced them to become cognizant of the moral issues within their market environments and NPD processes. In fact, one participant said:

“I would agree that influencers have made firms and the market more sensitive to ethical dilemmas.” (Firm #1).

(26)

products. Overall, SMIs are pushing firms to be hyper aware of the potential morality issues that could be attached to their new and developing products.

4.3.1.2 SMI participation focus groups. In traditional NPD processes (before using

SMIs), the ideas generated during the fuzzy-front-end stage of NPD were mostly developed in house, and ideas were voted on by a series of employees. Once employees came to a consensus, traditional marketing spending would ensue. Now that SMIs have been involved within this stage of NPD, firms call upon them to bring in new ideas for developing products. A participant revealed that:

“Previously we would just make products that we liked, and colors that looked good

on people. We would vote internally in the office and there was that huge traditional marketing spend [financially], but you know it shifted to let's bring in a group of influencers and see what they think.” (Firm #1)

The reason why firms are adopting SMIs as idea generators is because they provide insight into the needs and desires of a particular customer base. Employees may be knowledgeable about individuals, but SMIs represent their following bases and are the targets end-users of products and therefore can speak for thousands while an employee can only speak for themselves. In fact, participants stated:

“my company included going to these influencers [during idea generation] because they [SMIs] have that social reach that allows them [SMIs] to represent the community [of followers] that surrounds them.” (Firm #1)

“they [SMIs] represent a subset of the general population or of our consumer demo. They

(27)

4.3.2 Product prototyping. The interviews revealed that SMIs have a profound role within the stage of product prototyping. During this stage, SMIs are used to test product prototypes and provide constructive feedback to firms. Compared to the traditional product prototyping stage of NPD as described in the literature review, SMI collaboration allows firms to (a) help create more accurate product predictions, and (b) help increase the speed of the overall processes.

4.3.2.1 Accurate product predictions. Before SMI collaboration, firms would use

their own employees or industry experts to assess or product test labs product prototypes. However, as SMI collaboration has been increasing:

“It [prototyping] shifted [from using employees & experts] to let's bring in a group of makeup artists or influencers and see what they think…of the color arrangement. Is there anything they would add or subtract? How's the formula, is the texture good?... what kind of looks would they create with this product. And then we would go from there.” (Firm #1).

SMIs are likely product testers for cosmetic firms because their opinions and content shape customers’ perception of a new product. SMIs judge relatively simple product characteristics like texture, color, packaging, and even functionality of prototypes. However, no evidence of SMI contribution to core product technologies has been found. To access SMI opinions on product characteristics, a participant stated that:

“we [firms] host product testing events and invite them [SMIs] to communicate with them [SMIs] there… we love just getting to talk to them [SMIs] and getting to know them and what they [SMIs] need [in our new products] and how we [firms] can provide those needs.” (Firm #1)

After receiving feedback, the firm would develop a new product according to the critique they received. With SMI collaboration within this stage of NPD, firms have been able to be more accurate in predicting the success of new products. In fact, a participant stated:

(28)

The incorporation of SMIs within this stage of NPD provides firms with insight into which of their developing products satisfy the most valuable set of customer needs. SMIs can provide a multitude of customer opinions because they are representatives of their following. In fact, a participant stated:

“Their [SMIs] feedback is key, not only from a personal perspective, but they represent a demographic or a cluster of customers [customer segment] and as a result they can predict what that cluster [segment] wants in future products.” (Firm #2)

Therefore, SMIs can predict consumers’ needs and desires in advance of the market. With this insight into future desires, firms can develop more accurate product predictions about what their customer segments are looking for. In fact, a participant stated:

“I would estimate a 10% higher return rate with the incorporation of SMI collaboration within the prototyping stage of NPD. This higher rate of return can be attributed to firms receiving more accurate market knowledge from influencers rather than [acquired from] traditional methods.” (Firm #2)

Thus, SMI collaboration helps firms to develop more accurate predictions. Without SMI collaboration to anticipate the future along the product prototyping stage of NPD, cosmetic firms’ new product predictions may be more likely to dissatisfy consumer demands.

4.3.2.2 Adjustments to packaging. In addition to providing more accurate

predictions, SMI collaboration leads firms to adjust the packaging of their developing products. As the number of new products promoted through social media outlets grows, the value of the “unpacking experience” has become increasingly important for firms. SMIs value this increase of importance because it adds value to their unpacking demonstration videos and content. To exploit this new unpacking value of products, firms have changed their packaging strategies to help deliver personalized experiences to their customers and SMIs. A participant stated:

“Firms have changed their packaging strategy from aiming to please consumers within retail store shelves to aiming to provide a personalized experience to all end users in hopes to make a connection with our brand.” (Firm #2)

(29)

want their packaging to excite SMIs in hopes that SMIs document and share their unpacking experience with their following. Consumers are compelled to buy that same product that was shared on an SMIs unboxing post because they want to share a similar unpacking experience as their favorite SMIs. When an SMI shares their unpacking experience with their following, that content has the potential to go viral and influence a massive number of consumers to buy the product. Participants stated:

“not only do you [firms] have to create packaging for users, but you also to keep in mind that packaging will be seen by influencers because if you want that video of them [SMIs] opening this magnificent box to go viral, it [the packaging] has to be exciting” (Firm #1). Firms have adjusted their packaging strategy for SMI collaboration with the aim to entertain social media consumers and generate ‘buzz’ around their new product. To maximize value capturing from the unpacking experience, firms introduce creative and unique packaging that excites SMIs and their following. When speaking on this, a participant stated:

“Packaging here dynamically changed [from pleasing just consumers] because you're [firms] no longer just focusing on getting them [consumers] to buy your product, but you're commercializing packaging for the final consumer to receive and be excited when watching the unpacking experience of an influencer. They [SMIs] show a visual representation of what it’s like when you receive the product, and customers want to share that same experience. (Firm #2)

According to insights from firms and SMIs, firms have changed their packaging to ensure that SMIs can record exciting unpacking experiences to create a desire in consumers to have that same experience, thus leading to more product purchases from consumers. Without SMI collaboration, firms would most likely not spend so much attention on adjusting their packaging to be more exciting in hopes that SMIs share their unpacking experience online.

(30)

4.3.3.1 Reduced costs associated through abandoning traditional marketing methods. Traditionally, leading firms within the cosmetics industry relied on typical marketing

methods like television and radio during the marketing aspect of NPD. However, these channels have become less cost-effective. A participant stated:

“the reason they [TV & Radio] are so costly is due to three main reasons: (1) the inability to target specific individuals, (2) the cost of production is much higher, and (3) I [firms] don’t know if it [radio or TV] even worked [reached a certain amount of customers] until after you [firms] paid the cost.” (Firm #2)

As SMI collaboration has become widespread practice, cosmetic firms have shifted focus to SMIs as the main channel for promotion because of the low costs associated with them. The reasons behind these lower costs are as follows: SMIs translate the demands of their followings as to allow firms to more precisely target their customers, the cost of production (e.g. making radio or TV commercials) is forwarded to the SMI rather than the firm, and when working with a SMI a firm knows the exact reach (effectiveness) of the promotion in real-time. When speaking on the subject, a participant confirmed:

“It's [working with an SMI] a lot less expensive than paying traditional outlets to run these promotions.” (Participant #1)

This reprioritization of marketing tactics has decreased the importance of creating close ties with major media networks and having deep pockets to pay for primetime promotion slots. Most cosmetic firms today do not assign marketing budgets to these traditional methods. When asked about the matter, a participant stated:

You don't need huge marketing budgets. You can take a you know a product that you believe in and that you that you've come up with and go to market directly and really have organic growth. It's no longer just a pay to play.” (Firm #2)

(31)

4.3.4 Overall impact of SMIs across all stages of NPD. After analysis, it is evident that SMI collaboration has an affect across all stages of the NPD process. Overall, SMIs have helped in (1) speeding up the NPD process, and helped to (2) reduce market failures for firms.

Regarding the speed of the NPD processes, SMIs role of market knowledge provider has increased the speed at which the processes within the fuzzy-front-end stage operate. Regarding why this stage is sped up, a participated stated:

“I would say it’s [the fuzzy-front-end] sped up [as a result of SMIs] because we can get market knowledge much faster than before. Within the beginning of NPD, we can receive greater amounts of feedback and SMI input much faster than a traditional focus group or consumer analysis.” (Firm #2)

Firms receive consumer insights much faster than before, which allows them to have greater availability of user feedback on existing products than in the past where it was only possible to see which products were successful, rather than finding out why they were successful. With this increase in feedback availability, firms can generate new product ideas at a much faster rate. The utilization of SMIs as product testers has also sped up the product prototyping stage of NPD. In fact, a participant stated:

“I [as a firm] am able to test more developing products because SMIs can provide feedback much faster than consumers and SMIs represent the opinions of their following so I [firm] only have to work with them rather than hundreds of consumers. And I'm [firms are] able to test demand at a micro level at a faster rate without you know overspending on consumer analysis” (Firm #2)

Firms receive SMI feedback on product prototypes (via product testing events hosted by firms) much faster than typical consumer feedback. Additionally, firms no longer need to test their prototypes with hundreds of consumers, and instead use SMIs as representatives for specific clusters of consumers. This faster speed of more useful SMI feedback, and the bypassing of hundreds of customer opinions through SMI product testing has sped up the product prototyping stage of NPD. As for the last stage of the NPD process, SMI collaboration has also sped up commercialization and promotion processes. A participated stated:

(32)

The commercialization and promotion stage of NPD has sped up because firms are no longer required to work with celebrities and experts, which were historically very expensive and time consuming to reach. Overall, each stage within the NPD processes has accelerated because of SMI collaboration.

In addition to affecting of the speed of the NPD process, SMI collaboration has also impacted market failure rates across all stages. More specifically, SMI data and the speed at which it is collected and utilized during all stages of the NPD process has reduced the amount of product failures overall. When discussing how SMI collaboration has lowered market failures across all stages, a participant said:

“I would say that influencers [SMIs] have reduced the amount of product failures by providing firms with the preemptive knowledge on what will upset customers the most during each stage of NPD” (Firm #2)

Utilizing SMI collaboration reduces failures across NPD stages because it offers insight on what consumers demand most in each of the stages. For instance, within the product prototyping stage, participants revealed that SMI collaboration through product testing provides insight into the most important product characteristics for prototypes. With this knowledge, firms develop new products that are more likely to satisfy end-users needs and thus have a lower chance of market failure. Therefore, with this kind of preemptive knowledge being delivered to firms within all stages of the NPD process, the industry has seen a reduction in failure rates. When speaking on how firms gain this preemptive knowledge during each stage of the NPD process, a participant revealed:

“During the early [fuzzy-front-end] processes of product development, firms

communicate with SMIs [as market knowledge providers] during market analysis to receive preemptive knowledge on consumer desires… when developing product prototypes [product prototyping stage], firms bring in SMIs [as product testers] to gain knowledge on the specific product characteristics that consumers require… during commercialization [the commercialization & promotion stage], firms can reverse engineer comments within social media content by retrospectively looking at words associated with consumers and SMIs negative and positive reviews to identify the attributes for both reactions.” (Firm #2)

(33)

the product characteristics that makes users less likely to buy their new products. Traditional promotional channels (e.g. TV and radio) do not allow this process because the initial consumer feedback needed to reverse engineer is obtained from traditional user research methods (e.g. questionnaires and surveys) that are unreliable indicators of intention to purchase or the likelihood of repeat business (Slater & Narver, 1998).

Overall, SMI collaboration helps to provide firms with knowledge that more accurately reflects consumer and market demands. The more accurate identification of market demands allows firms to preemptively fix any possible faults within all NPD stages that would cause customers to avoid purchasing. These preemptive adjustments to NPD stages caused by SMI collaboration is the reason why firms have been able to reduce their new product failures across all stages of NPD. Without SMI collaboration within all NPD stages, firms would likely not be able to predict the most important demands of consumers within each stage, and therefore would likely not be able to reduce the amount of overall market failures. The two overall impacts of SMI collaboration on all stages of the NPD process are expressed through the “sped up & lower market failures” arrows on Figure 5.

5. Conclusion & Discussion

5.1 Conclusion

(34)

commercialization and promotion stage. These SMI roles have helped to contribute to a faster NPD process and lower market failures for collaborating firms. The findings outlined within this study contribute to areas of new product development and market maven innovation

5.1.1. SMIs influence upstream NPD stages. After analysis, it is evident that SMIs are impacting upstream processes. More specifically, results reveal that SMIs are playing two new roles for firms within the beginning stages of the NPD processes: (1) market knowledge providers, and (2) product testers. Regarding the first new role, SMIs are market knowledge providers for firms during the fuzzy-front-end stage of NPD. According to participants, this new role has impacted the first stage of the NPD processes by providing insights into the needs and desires of consumers within the market. Consequently, focus groups consisting of SMIs have replaced consumer focus groups as one of the main methods to collect market knowledge. In addition, SMI collaboration within the fuzzy-front-end stage has led firms to be hyper-aware of the ethical dilemmas that arise when developing a new product. Firms are now proactively identifying ethical issues and addressing them in new products to protect against public scrutiny. This new role for SMIs and the impact it is having on firms’ awareness of ethical dilemmas and focus group participants is evidence that SMIs are influencing upstream operations.

(35)

adjustments to packaging to fit the social media landscape provide evidence that SMIs influence early stages of the NPD process.

SMIs not only influence early NPD stages, but also change the NPD process characteristics. Apart from roles, two clear consequences that hallmark the major impact of SMI collaboration are (1) faster NPD processes, and (2) lower market failures. Below I describe the impacts of these factors and how they change the management of NPD.

The first key consequence of the utilization of SMIs among the different stages of the NPD is the increase in speed on the entire NPD process. This overall increase in speed is a result of each individual stage within the NPD processes being sped up by SMI collaboration. More specifically, this alteration of speed is a result of: quick and reliable knowledge shared by SMIs within each NPD stage, and more upfront and after launch data for firms to adjust their product, packaging, and promotional campaign to market demands.

The second key consequence of SMI collaboration within NPD stages is the reduction of market failures. The interviews reveal that cosmetic firms are collaborating with SMIs to gain knowledge in advance of the market during early NPD stages. Receiving knowledge in advance of the market allows firms to incorporate consumer needs & desires into their new products before commercialization to prevent failures. Within the later stage of NPD (commercialization and promotion), firms can reverse engineer comments on an SMI post to identify specific words and product characteristics that users (SMIs and consumers alike) associate with positive and negative experiences respectively. Firms can then properly identify the product characteristics that makes users less likely to buy their new products and address those issues to prevent further mass market failures. SMI collaboration has helped to provide firms with the preemptive knowledge to reduce new product failures.

5.2 Discussion

The current study explored the emergence of SMI participation within NPD stages and several key insights were revealed after the analysis of the data. SMIs are no longer just marketing ploys for companies. These findings present both theoretical and managerial implications.

(36)

during NPD processes to increase productivity. This study has found that SMIs are no longer just marketing devices for companies. Instead, firms are using SMIs and the data they generate to impact all stages of the NPD process. More specifically, SMIs play three crucial roles for firms within the different NPD stages: (1) market knowledge providers within the fuzzy-front-end stage, (2) product testers within the product prototyping stage, and (3) reviewers within the commercialization and promotion stage. Rather than just impacting the promotion of new products, SMIs help to develop new product ideas for firms within focus groups, determine which new product characteristics are most important, and test new products for firms before commercialization.

Now that the impact of SMI collaboration is more understood, there is something to be said about their status as opinion leaders, market mavens and lead users. Opinion leadership, according to Goldsmith (2010) refers to “the role some consumers play by which they provide information and advice to other consumers.” Market mavens are referred to as a minority of consumers who are highly involved shoppers that engage with other consumers in the

marketplace (Goldsmith, 2010). Lastly, lead users are consumers who are ahead of important market trends and expect high benefits from innovating (Kratzer & Lettl, 2008). After analysis, it is evident that SMIs play all three roles within collaboration for firms. In fact, results indicate that SMIs: (1) provide advice and knowledge to other consumers, (2) actively engage other consumers regarding their favorite products, and (3) have insight into preemptive knowledge and expect pay in return for communicating their knowledge. SMIs are most likely playing all three roles of opinion leader, market maven, and lead user during collaboration with cosmetic firms.

(37)

competitive advantage in an increasingly digitalized world, managers should try to collaborate with SMIs within earlier stages of the NPD process.

Since the rise of social media platforms, firms have increasingly invested in SMI marketing channels to reach their target consumers. As more firms adopt SMI collaboration as their main channel for marketing, more traditional outlets like television and radio have been increasingly abandoned. These traditional media outlets are currently expensive and require massive budgets and connections with major networks. In comparison, SMI collaboration is much cheaper because firms pass on the production costs of marketing onto SMIs so firms only pay an SMI booking fee. Therefore, there are greater chances for smaller firms to become competitive in the marketplace as deep pockets are no longer needed to commercialize new products. Results suggest that firms no longer need a threshold for advertising to be effective. These results go against the S market curve finding by Delre et al. (2016) that outlines a certain threshold is needed before smaller amounts of advertising can be effective. Future research is needed to observe what is going on regarding the effectiveness of smaller investments into advertising. Regardless, managers of smaller firms should take advantage of SMI collaboration to penetrate the market and avoid traditionally large costs.

With increasing utilization of SMIs by firms, SMIs have found out their true worth and have begun to charge higher margins. If firms continuously invest in SMIs as their main method of marketing, managers should be aware of the possible rising costs of collaboration. Even though the costs of SMIs are currently lower than traditional models, this does not mean that SMIs won’t continue to raise their booking fees as they gain awareness of their importance to firms. Managers should continue to utilize SMIs as a main marketing channel; however, they need to stay aware of the rising costs of SMIs to ensure that collaboration doesn’t become more expensive than traditional channels.

Besides from the possible rising costs, there is another risk associated with growing SMI collaboration. More specifically, as SMI utilization increases the dependency of firms on SMIs grows. Relying on SMIs is risky as the firm gives up control over the production of promotional content and opens their marketing efforts to opportunistic behavior from SMIs. Managers should be cognizant in monitoring SMI collaboration to ensure that SMIs are not participating in

(38)

5.3 Limitations

This study utilized semi-structured interviews to answer the research question. Within this data collection method, there was a small sample size of interviewees that participated. Furthermore, these participants represent a limited geographical reach as they encompass individuals from two countries: The United States and the Netherlands. Furthermore, the participants in this study gave a very partial view of SMI collaboration as they are directly involved in these processes. Objective data on speed, market success, and costs of marketing productions are needed to overcome this bias and assess whether the proclaimed lower failure rates and lower costs exist in reality.

Additionally, this study did not discuss long-term consequences of SMI collaboration. One possible long–term consequence is lower customer perception toward innovativeness or design by collaboration with SMIs. This builds off the study of Fuchs et al. (2013) that found that user designed products backfire because consumer demand for a given luxury fashion brand collection is reduced if the collection is labeled as user (vs. company) designed. Due to SMI collaboration, consumers in the future may relate SMI generated products as inferior quality to firm produced products.

To counterbalance these limitations and confirm this study’s findings, future research using large scale product launches from globally diverse firms and objective knowledge sources could test and confirm the effects of SMIs on upstream processes. Furthermore, future studies should consider the long-term consequences of SMI collaboration within NPD stages as they may be similar to the consequences of user-generated products outlined in previous literature.

(39)

References:

Alsaleh, D. (2017). Understanding the Role of Blogger Recommendations on Consumer Purchasing Behavior. The Journal of Business Inquiry, 17(1), 23-40. Retrieved from http:www.uvu.edu/woodbury/jbi/articles/.

Alshenqeeti, H. (2014). Interviewing as a Data Collection Method: A Critical Review. English Linguistics Research, 3(1), 39-45. doi:10.5430/elr.v3n1p39

Atieno, O. P. (2009). AN ANALYSIS OF THE STRENGTHS AND LIMITATION OF

QUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH PARADIGMS. Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 13. Retrieved from

http://journals.indexcopernicus.com/abstract.php?icid=888498

Aronson, J. (1995). A Pragmatic View of Thematic Analysis. The Qualitative Report, 2(1), 1-3. Retrieved from https://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/vol2/iss1/3

Bold, C. (2012). Using narrative in research. Los Angeles: Sage.

Booth, N., & Matic, J. A. (2011). Mapping and leveraging influencers in social media to shape corporate brand perceptions. Corporate Communications : An International Journal, 16(3), 184-191.

Braunack-Mayer AJ. (2001). What makes a problem an ethical problem? An empirical perspective on the nature of ethical problems in general practice. Journal of Medical Ethics 2001;27:98-103. Brown, D. & Fiorella, S. (2013). Influence marketing. Indianapolis: Que Publishing.

Bruhn, M., Schoenmueller, V., & Schäfer, D. B. (2012). Are social media replacing traditional media in terms of brand equity creation? Management Research Review, 35(9), 770-790. doi: doi:10.1108/01409171211255948

Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morison, K. (2007). Research Methods in Education. (6th ed.). London: Routledge.

Constantinides, E. (2014). Foundations of Social Media Marketing. Procedia-Social and behavioral sciences, 148, 40-57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.07.016

Decrop, A. (1999). Triangulation in qualitative tourism research. Tourism Management, 20(1), 157-161. doi:10.1016/s0261-5177(98)00102-2

(40)

Dogtiev, A. (2019, February 12). Top Influencer Marketing Agencies (2018). Retrieved from http://www.businessofapps.com/guide/influencer-marketing-agencies/

Fang, E., Palmatier, R. W., & Evans, K. R. (2008). Influence of customer participation on creating and sharing of new product value. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 36(3), 322-336. doi:10.1007/s11747-007-0082-9

Feick, Lawrence & Price, Linda. (1987). The Market Maven: A Diffuser of Marketplace Information. Journal of Marketing. 51. 83-97. 10.2307/1251146.

Forbes, K. (2016). Examining the Beauty Industry’s Use of Social Influencers. Elon Journal of Undergraduate Research in Communications, 7(2). Retrieved from https://www.elon.edu/u/academics/-

/communications/journal/wpcontent/uploads/sites/153/2017/06/08_Kristen_Forbes.pdf.

Freberg, K., Graham, K., McGaughey, K., & Freberg, L. A. (2011). Who are the social media influencers? A study of public perceptions of personality. Public Relations Review, 37(1), 90-92. doi:10.1016/j. pubrev.2010.11.001

Fuchs, C., Prandelli, E., Schreier, M., & Dahl, D. W. (2013). All That is Users Might Not be Gold: How Labeling Products as User Designed Backfires in the Context of Luxury Fashion Brands. Journal of Marketing, 77(5), 75-91. doi:10.1509/jm.11.0330

Gould, Paige M., "Making a Difference: the Impact of Corporate Ethical Behavior on Consumers in the Beauty Industry" (2017). Honors Theses and Capstones. 356.

https://scholars.unh.edu/honors/356

Heidenreich, S., Wittkowski, K., Handrich, M., & Falk, T. (2014). The dark side of customer co-creation: Exploring the consequences of failed co-created services. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(3), 279-296. doi:10.1007/s11747-014-0387-4

Ivanova, E. (2017). Influencer Marketing on YouTube: How to Collaborate with Russian Video Bloggers. 1-72. Retrieved from

https://www.theseus.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/125050/Ivanova_Ekaterina.pdf?sequence=1. Katz, Elihu and Paul F. Lazarsfeld (1955), Personal Influence. Glencoe, IL: The Free Press

Kim, J., & Wilemon, D. (2002). Focusing the fuzzy front–end in new product development. R&D Management, 32(4), 269-279. doi:10.1111/1467-9310.00259

Kloss, A (2010). The integration of expatriates: How expatriates living in Denmark define integration. Copenhagen Business School. Retrieved from

HOW SOCIAL MEDIA INFLUENCERS AFFECT NPD STAGES IN THE COSMETICS INDUSTRY