Welcome to the new Schulich Peer-Reviewed Publication Database!
The database is currently in beta-testing and will be updated with more features as time goes on. In the meantime, stakeholders are free to explore our faculty’s numerous works. The left-hand panel affords the ability to search by the following:
- Faculty Member’s Name;
- Area of Expertise;
- Whether the Publication is Open-Access (free for public download);
- Journal Name; and
- Date Range.
At present, the database covers publications from 2012 to 2020, but will extend further back in the future. In addition to listing publications, the database includes two types of impact metrics: Altmetrics and Plum. The database will be updated annually with most recent publications from our faculty.
If you have any questions or input, please don’t hesitate to get in touch.
Welte, J.B, Cayla, J. and Fischer E. (2022). "Navigating Contradictory Logics in the Field of Luxury Retailing", Journal of Retailing.
AbstractWhen designing luxury retail experiences, luxury managers are often encouraged to focus on a single logic: the logic of distinction. Evidence suggests, however, that multiple logics influence the field of luxury retailing. In this paper, we explore the implications of such multiplicity, focusing particularly on logics coming into tension with one another. Our research questions are: 1) What are the logics that come into conflict in luxury retail settings and 2) How can luxury retail managers navigate conflicts between logics to facilitate positive customer experiences in luxury retail settings? Based on extensive ethnographic fieldwork in the luxury field, we find conflicts mainly between three logics: distinction, pragmatism, and hedonism. We show that each logic is underpinned by different values, different linguistic practices, and different focal objects. We further find that conflicts between the logics tend to become acute during specific interactions during the customer journey. Our findings also suggest that since luxury boutiques are by and large designed to enforce the distinction logic, luxury retailers at times struggle to accommodate and navigate the conflicts that occur between these logics. We identify three interrelated sets of practices, collectively referred to as experiential hybridization, that effectively allow luxury retailers to address the challenge of logic complexity. Theoretically, our research helps illuminate institutional logics as a factor that informs customers’ experiences in contemporary retail fields such as luxury. Managerially, we suggest ways for luxury retailers to manage logic conflict and deliver superior customer experiences.
Botti, S., Giesler, M., Stefano, P. and Walker, R. (2020). "Consumers and Artificial Intelligence: An Experiential Perspective", Journal of Marketing.
AbstractArtificial intelligence (AI) helps companies offer important benefits to consumers, such as health monitoring with wearable devices, advice with recommender systems, peace of mind with smart household products, and convenience with voice-activated virtual assistants. However, although AI can be seen as a neutral tool to be evaluated on efficiency and accuracy, this approach does not consider the social and individual challenges that can occur when AI is deployed. This research aims to bridge these two perspectives: on one side, the authors acknowledge the value that embedding AI technology into products and services can provide to consumers. On the other side, the authors build on and integrate sociological and psychological scholarship to examine some of the costs consumers experience in their interactions with AI. In doing so, the authors identify four types of consumer experiences with AI: (1) data capture, (2) classification, (3) delegation, and (4) social. This approach allows the authors to discuss policy and managerial avenues to address the ways in which consumers may fail to experience value in organizations’ investments into AI and to lay out an agenda for future research.
Fischer, E. and Giesler, M. (2018). "IoT Stories: The Good, the Bad and the Freaky", GfK Marketing Intelligence Review, 10(2), 25-30.