| Literature DB >> 36230188 |
Genevieve d'Ament1, Tahmid Nayeem2, Anthony J Saliba1.
Abstract
Cellar doors provide retail sales for wineries, providing higher returns than wholesale to domestic and export markets. Customer-based research has established enjoyable cellar door experiences are essential to building brand attachment, creating enduring customers, and increasing on-site and post-visit sales. However, customers co-create cellar door experiences with staff, as each approach the experience with unique realities guiding their expectations. Scarce literature includes experiences from staff perspectives. Constructivist grounded theory and adopting Charmaz's approach to analysis were used to explore data from semi-structured, in-depth interviews with 33 wine consumers ranging in wine involvement, from wine novices to highly involved enthusiasts and winemakers. Twenty-two of the consumers were cellar door staff with experiences ranging from a few months to owners of long-established family wineries. Cognitive dissonance theory helped us to understand how tensions may arise for individuals approaching each experience and where to avert perceived risks. Findings show convivial connection respecting all actors creates enjoyable experiences. The warmth of greeting, further strengthened by staff-customer rapport, developed via knowledgeable conversation throughout the experience, increases brand attachment. Co-created connection becomes the conduit through which positive experiences are created and where brand attachment is forged. A framework based on emerging categories guides professional development models and human resources strategies for wineries, thereby maximizing profitability through cellar door sales.Entities:
Keywords: brand attachment; cellar door; cellar door experience; co-created experience; cognitive dissonance; constructivist grounded theory; human resources; profitability; staffing; winescape
Year: 2022 PMID: 36230188 PMCID: PMC9564371 DOI: 10.3390/foods11193112
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Foods ISSN: 2304-8158
Perceived risk of wine purchase with risk-reduction strategies in different retail settings.
| Risk | Bottle Shop and Cellar Door | |
|---|---|---|
| Functional | Wine appreciation and ability to match to foods | |
| Social | Confidence to select the correct wines, so as not to look foolish in front of family and friends | |
| Financial | Perceived value for money (not wanting to pay top dollar for unsatisfactory wine, or other wines considered inferior) | |
| Physical | Effect of wine, such as a hangover or a reaction to wine | |
|
|
|
|
| Information seeking | Knowledge provided by staff | Being on the site of wine |
| Brand loyalty | Previous experience with wine | Re-visiting the winery, or previous experience with wine |
| Store image | Ambience | Style of cellar door (i.e., sleek, or |
| Well-known brand | Product readily available in various settings, i.e., restaurants | Readily available and often seen in retail settings, advertised at arts and sporting events, social media, and by word of mouth |
| Price | Lower bottle price decreases risk | Able to taste, so able to judge value |
| Reassurance | Connection with staff | Ability to talk to the winemaker, owner, or staff |
Demographics and wine involvement of participants.
| P | Gender | Ethnicity | State | Age | Education | Recruitment |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| C7 | F | Australian | NSW | 45–55 | Tertiary | Snowball |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Green = wine novice, gold = wine involved, red = highly wine involved, and black = no longer drinking wine but keen wine tourist.
Figure 1Illustration of how the CGT analysis process is not dependent upon a lineal progression. Through analysis, as the researcher must always re-visit the data, the constant comparison is as integral to the method as constant reflexivity throughout the research. Sample of interview questions also included.
Figure 2Framework of where to look for and reduce cognitive dissonance and how that may be affecting the ability to deliver positive CDEs.