Tag Archives: Pop-up store

Why did a ham and beer pop-up beat a fashion pop-up during COVID?

I was recently invited to speak at the Duncan Anderson Design Lecture Series, hosted by Professor Wesley Woelfel at the Department of Design, California State University, Long Beach. Unlike my previous virtual talk, this time I traveled to Long Beach and delivered the lecture in person.

Photo: Project Rent

My presentation focused on an ongoing collaborative research project with Nayoung Yoon at Aalto University and Wonseok Choi at Project Rent. Nayoung contributes perspectives of brand managers and consumers and Wonseok provides practical knowledge gained from launching over 200 pop-up stores throughout Seoul.

The lecture began with three landmark cases including Simmons Grocery Store. Following this, I presented four recent pop-up stores operated by Project Rent, each carefully designed around unique goals. Among them was the Ghana Chocolate House, an innovative pop-up store reshaping brand perception.

Photo: Project Rent

The audience paid attention to not only cases but also numbers. To illustrate this, I shared preliminary findings from data we collected during July 2020, at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic in Seoul. The graph shows daily visitor counts for two pop-up stores, a ham and beer pop-up (solid line) and a fashion pop-up (dotted line), alongside daily COVID-19 case numbers (green line). During pandemic restrictions, the food and beverage pop-up consistently attracted more visitors than the fashion pop-up when operating. These findings, highlighting the appeal of experiential consumption, were presented by Nayoung in 2024.

We need to provide further insights into how brands can leverage pop-up stores.

***

Reference

Yoon, N., & Joo, J. (2024). Experience matters when not restricted: The impact of product type and COVID-19 restrictions on pop-up store visits. Proceedings of the European Marketing Academy, 53rd, (119359)

By taking empirics-first research approach, we study the effect of product type and COVID-19 restrictions on pop-up store visits. This quasi-experimental study uses store traffic and store-entry ratios of four pop-up stores displaying different product types (i.e., experience goods or search goods) at varying times (before or after the COVID-19 restrictions). Our research shows that pop-up store visits were higher when a store displayed experience goods than search goods before the COVID-19 restrictions. However, the store visits to experience goods pop-up stores plummeted after the imposition of restrictions, higher than search goods, suggesting the restrictions’ stronger detrimental effect on experience goods. Our findings advance research on consumer behavior relating to pop-up store products and the impact of mobility restrictions on store visits.

Rethinking ‘experience’: What my visit to Google Visitor Experience taught me

Recently, I visited the Google Visitor Experience at the Googlplex. I went in expecting something amazing—maybe the chance to try out new techonolgy like self driving cars (like Waymo), virtual reality glasses (like Ray-Ban Meta Glasses), or advanced AI assistants (like Open AI). High expectations felt natural—it is Silicon Valley and Google, the place for extraordinary experiences.

However, the reality was much simpler. The space named as “Google Visitor Experience” revolves around three main activities: browsing Google-branded merchandise in the store, enjoying a coffee at the café, and relaxing in a small public area called “Huddle.”

These activities felt quite ordinary, which was surprising. For me, and probably for many people in Asia, the word “experience” suggests something special—sophisticated and luxurious. But here at Google Visitor Experience, what I found was simplicity instead. This gap between what I expected and what I actually encountered made me think about the meaning of “experience.”

In consumer research, “experience” is hard to define and measure. Hoch (2002) points out that experiences is enticing but tricky to pin down, which often makes studying them less precise. My visit to the Google Visitor Experience reminded me that sometimes our expectations for an “experience” can be bigger than reality. This visit made me think more about how we define experiences.

Now may be the time to define “experience” through the lens of satisfaction research suggested by Oliver (2014). Customer satisfaction hinges on the gap between expectation and reality, and experience should be understood in the same way—by studying both the anticipated and actual experience. A key challenge here will be managing experience expectations, similar to how we approach expectation management for satisfaction.

***

Reference

Hoch, S. J. (2002). Product experience is seductiveJournal of consumer research29(3), 448-454.

Product experience seduces consumers into believing that they learn more than is actually so. There are several reasons for this. First, experience is more engaging than most attempts at education, both more vivid and intentional, and consequently more memorable. Second, experience is viewed as nonpartisan, devoid of the didacticism of formal education and the self-serving interests of advertisers. Third, much of experience is ambiguous, but not recognized as such. Experience supports a pseudodiagnosticity that draws the consumer in as a willing partner in the seduction. Finally, the endogeneity of tastes allows consumers to accommodate to chosen alternatives and results in infrequent regrets about being seduced.

***

Reference

Oliver, R. L. (1993). Cognitive, affective, and attribute bases of the satisfaction responseJournal of consumer research20(3), 418-430.

An attempt to extend current thinking on postpurchase response to include attribute satisfaction and dissatisfaction as separate determinants not fully reflected in either cognitive (i.e., expectancy disconfirmation) or affective paradigms is presented. In separate studies of automobile satisfaction and satisfaction with course instruction, respondents provided the nature of emotional experience, disconfirmation perceptions, and separate attribute satisfaction and dissatisfaction judgments. Analysis confirmed the disconfirmation effect and the effects of separate dimensions of positive and negative affect and also suggested a multidimensional structure to the affect dimensions. Additionally, attribute satisfaction and dissatisfaction were significantly related to positive and negative affect, respectively, and to overall satisfaction. It is suggested that all dimensions tested are needed for a full accounting of postpurchase responses in usage.