Experts Matter. Find Yours.
Connect for media, speaking, professional opportunities & more.
The Role of Artificial Intelligence in Customer Experience
Gaurav Jain, assistant professor of marketing at the Rensselaer Lally School of Management, examines how individuals make judgments, estimates, and decisions in the absence of complete information. Previously, Jain served as the chief marketing advisor at multiple firms. Below are his thoughts on the impact of artificial intelligence (AI) on customer experience. Voice of the Customer In today's hyper-connected world, the voice of the customer (VoC) is louder and clearer than ever. But how do we sift through this cacophony to understand what our customers are really saying? Enter AI. It's revolutionizing the way customer experience teams handle VoC programs, and as a marketing leader, I find this incredibly exciting. Take direct customer feedback, for example. We're no longer just collecting survey responses and storing them in a database for quarterly review. AI algorithms, particularly those using natural language processing, are helping us instantly categorize and prioritize this feedback. Imagine an e-commerce platform that can immediately flag a customer's mention of "late delivery" in a post-purchase survey. That's not just efficient; it's customer-centric. But what about the things customers are saying when they're not directly talking to us? That's where AI-driven sentiment analysis comes in. These tools can scan social media, forums, and review sites to gauge the sentiment behind a customer's words. I've seen hotel chains use this technology to monitor travel forums and review sites. If a guest mentions "noisy rooms," even without lodging a direct complaint, the brand can proactively look into soundproofing solutions. Then there's inferred feedback, the kind you get by reading between the lines. AI can analyze customer behavior, like frequent page visits without conversion or cart abandonment, to suggest what might be going wrong. For instance, an online fashion retailer could use AI to figure out why a particular dress gets a lot of views but few purchases. Maybe it's the sizing, maybe it's the price, but the point is, you get to know without having to ask. And it doesn't stop at gathering feedback. AI is helping us turn this raw data into actionable insights. We can predict future behavior, like churn rates, based on past feedback. This allows us to be proactive rather than reactive, which is a game-changer in customer experience management. Finally, let's talk about what happens after we've gathered all this feedback. AI is ensuring that every customer who takes the time to share their thoughts receives an immediate and appropriate response. Chatbots can handle common queries or concerns, making the customer feel heard and valued right away. So, from the perspective of a marketing leader, it's not just about the efficiency that AI brings to VoC programs. It's about the opportunity to deepen our connection with customers. By truly understanding their words, their sentiments, and even their behaviors, we can craft experiences that resonate on a human level. And in a world that's increasingly digital, that human touch is what sets a brand apart. Customer Service It's truly intriguing to observe how AI is weaving its way into the customers’ experience. Online, chatbots are making waves. Chatbots are not just digital tools; they're our first point of contact, bridging the gap between brands and consumers. However, there was always the question of accuracy versus efficiency while managing these chatbots – AI has answered that question. AI chatbots provide real-time yet accurate assistance, making the digital shopping journey feel more interactive. Companies can reduce customer dropout while avoiding the expense of managing a large human customer service team. AI is revolutionizing phone-based customer service as well. Voice recognition allows natural language processing for easier navigation, while predictive analysis anticipates caller needs based on their history. Enhanced personalization means customers no longer repetitively provide account details, and emotion detection aids in gauging caller mood. The result? Reduced wait times, more efficient interactions, and a significantly improved telephonic customer experience. In essence, AI is bridging the gap between technology and human touch in the retail world, making our interactions with brands more meaningful and personalized. Again, companies can do this in a cost-effective manner. Jain is available to speak with media - - simply click on his icon now to arrange an interview today.
Imposter Syndrome: Am I Good Enough? Am I Smart Enough?
Have you ever asked yourself any of the following questions: “Can I do this?” “Do I deserve this?” “What happens when others find out I don’t know what I’m doing?” If so, you’re not alone. More than 70% of people (including many great leaders!) have feelings of imposter syndrome. Alex Dunn, who teaches principles of management, organizational behavior, human resources, and life and career development at UMW, shows others how to recognize, redirect and overcome feelings of imposter syndrome to achieve success. Her recent workshop – “Do I Deserve This? Recognizing and Using Imposter Syndrome as Fuel for Your Future” – aimed to help participants rise above feelings of inadequacy when applying for, and carrying out, jobs and other opportunities. Looking to know more? Our experts can help. Alexandra Dunn is available to speak with media about imposter syndrome - simply click on her icon now to arrange an interview today.
#Expert Insight: US Firms 20 Years Out of Date on Customer Diversity
Diversity, equity, and inclusion have steadfastly risen to the top of corporate agendas in the U.S. and elsewhere over the course of the last few years. From 2022, all 100 of the Fortune 100 companies had clearly-defined diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives outlined on their websites—good news for their workforce, suppliers, and distributors. But what about their customers? A landmark new study by Goizueta Business School’s Omar Rodriguez-Vila finds that while intra-organizational DEI efforts are robust, many U.S. firms are lagging behind societal reality when it comes to fully representing diversity in their marketplace actions. Rodriguez-Vila finds that in terms of skin type, body type, and physical (dis)ability, actions by the top 50 American brands are a good 20 years behind the current demographic makeup of the country. Rodriguez-Vila, who is a professor in the practice of marketing at Goizueta, has teamed with Dionne Nickerson of the University of Indiana’s Kelley School of Business, and Sundar Bharadwaj of The University of Georgia’s Terry College of Business, to measure brand inclusivity; a term that he and his colleagues have coined to describe how well brands serve underrepresented consumer communities. Inclusive brands, he says, are those that “enhance consumers’ perceptions of acceptance, belonging, equity, and respect through their actions and market offerings.” To assess how well some of the biggest firms are doing in terms of this kind of marketplace inclusivity, Rodriguez-Vila worked with a team of full-time MBA and undergraduate students[1] to assess the 50 most valuable brands across 10 consumer-facing industries. Using machine learning and human coders they analyzed these brands’ social media posts on Facebook, Instagram, and TikTok, looking for patterns of representational diversity across four measures: skin type; body type; hair type; and physical ability. Altogether, they processed just short of 11,000 social media posts made between June 2021 and July 2022. What they find is stunning. “We used our data to apply the Simpson’s Diversity Index (SDI) to the population of social media posts by the largest brands in the United States. The SDI is a commonly used equation to measure the diversity of a population,” says Rodriguez-Vila. According to the 2020 U.S. Census, the racial diversity index of the country is 61 percent, and has been consistently increasing over the past 20 years. Applying the SDI calculation to measure the diversity in social media messages is a novel idea and one that provides clarity on the state of inclusion in brand communications, he adds. We found that the racial diversity index of social media messages by the top U.S. brands was just 41%. The last time the racial diversity index was in that range was in the year 2000. Omar Rodriguez-Vila In other words, the racial diversity these brands are collectively representing in their messages is 20 years behind the reality of the country. Interestingly, this lag between representation and demographic reality is common to brands in virtually all of the industries studied—from airlines to fashion, consumer packaged goods to financial services, hospitality to retail. The only sector that bucks the trend in any substantive way, he says, is beauty; even then this is likely only because beauty firms have come under fire for underrepresenting Black and non-white customers in the recent past. “Brands’ social media is typically more nuanced and comprehensive than advertising, so it’s more telling as a measure of what they prioritize. And by this measure, we’re seeing systemic bias across a majority of industries,” says Rodriguez-Vila. “Some, like beauty, fare better than others, but then beauty arguably has the strongest business case for diversity.” That being said, there is a robust business case for organizations across all industries to do better in marketplace inclusion. Not only does representational diversity have the potential to open up new markets, new customer bases, and areas for expansion, but “Feeling represented and included matters to everyone,” says Rodriguez-Vila. “To understand the importance of inclusion to customers we used a discrete choice model where people made trade-offs between price and a collection of product features in order to understand the factors that motivated them to make a purchase,” he explains. “We tested a sample of consumers looking to buy sportswear, and we added representation of diversity and inclusion as a characteristic, to see if it had any impact on their choices.” Again, the results are stunning. On average, 51 percent of customers took inclusion into account as a primary driver of athletic apparel choices. Inclusion was a priority driver of choice among 38 percent of consumers in historically well-represented communities—slim, white, able-bodied people. When Rodriguez-Vila and his colleagues expanded the analysis to other historically under-represented groups they found a significantly greater impact. Here, inclusion was a primary driver among 61 percent of plus-size, Black consumers and for 87 percent of consumers that identified as non-binary. In other words, inclusion can be a critically important factor to a majority of customers who are making decisions about whether to purchase products and services, or not. The marketplace is changing, says Rodriguez-Vila, and brands need new ways of understanding their customer base if they are to avoid missing out on opportunities. To this end, he, Nickerson and Bharadwaj are working with three of the firms in their study, piloting a range of interventions designed to accelerate marketplace inclusion. They have partnered with Sephora, Conde Nast, and Campbells to roll out specific practices both in the workplace and the marketplace—from advocacy to communication and commercial practices to things like greater diversity in marketing operations, and in talent recruitment practices. Early indicators are promising, says Rodriquez-Vila. “Our work is set to deliver tools that will help firms normalize and institutionalize marketplace inclusion as a function of their day-to-day operations. And it’s exciting to see a shift in thinking about DEI—from an exclusive focus on the workplace and how you eliminate bias within the organization, to practices that are geared also to eliminating bias in the way you serve markets.” Looking to know more? Connect with Omar Rodriguez-Vila today. Comply click on his icon now to arrange a time to talk.
Unraveling the Impact of Barbie on Body Image and Self-esteem
Although she had a record breaking opening weekend at the box office, Barbie, the iconic doll that has been a staple in many childhoods, has always had a tumultuous relationship with girls and women around the world. Often seen as the epitome of desired beauty standards, the doll has played a major role in the cultural zeitgeist of the last 64 years since debuting. Jaehee Jung, professor of fashion and apparel studies at the University of Delaware, can speak to the impact Barbie has had on body image issues, how it has affected young girls and womens' beauty ideals and even gender roles. She notes that despite more increased diversity in dolls and franchises, this standard of beauty still has a major impact on all these areas of identity. Jung's research focuses on body image issues and beauty standards in consumer culture.
Conscious Couture: Unraveling the Ethics Behind Fast Fashion's Costly Threads
Sheng Lu didn't have to do any research to see the impact of Shein, the China-based fast fashion behemoth. He simply looked around his classroom and saw his Gen Z students clicking through the app for low-priced, high-quality clothing that could get made and delivered with lightning speed. But through years of analysis of the fast fashion industry, Lu, associate professor of fashion and apparel studies at the University of Delaware, is well aware of the catch: the company has been accused of wasteful use of textile and employing questionable labor practices. He can discuss the impact of Shein and other fast fashion retailers as well as questions surrounding their success and business practices. Lu has also been working with traditional retailers to promote sustainable practices. Under his guidance, a group of UD graduates collaborated with leaders at Macy’s in sustainability, sourcing, product development, raw materials and design. The students' research, conducted during their senior year, aimed to identify the challenges and opportunities associated with the company's shift toward a more sustainable future. By focusing on expanding the use of recycled content in Macy’s private brands, the work reflects a shared commitment by both UD and Macy’s to drive positive change in the fashion industry.
Frequent tanning can signal excessive concern over image and vulnerability to taking health risks, researcher says Getty Images People who often sunbathe or use tanning beds are more likely to try risky weight-loss methods and have cosmetic surgery, as well as get tattoos and piercings. But while people who seldom tan also may try unsafe diets and cosmetic surgery, they rarely opt for tattoos or piercings, according to a Baylor University study. "When compared to infrequent tanners, frequent body-tanners — regardless of whether they are tanned by ultraviolet light from the sun, ultraviolet light from a tanning bed or methods such as tanning sprays that do not involve UV light — showed significantly higher behavioral intentions to engage in risky appearance-related behaviors overall," said Jay Yoo, Ph.D., associate professor of family and consumer sciences in Baylor's Robbins College of Health and Human Sciences. "Safer tanners, on the other hand, are more concerned about modifying their bodies in ways such as tattoos and piercing that may carry a stigma," Yoo said. Most skin cancer prevention campaigns have emphasized avoidance of getting sunburned, reducing UV exposure and applying sunscreen, but they have neglected the individual's experience with social and appearance concerns, he said. But "Excessive tanning can serve as a possible sign of overt concern over body image, with vulnerability to greater health risks," Yoo said. His research article — "A Study of the Relationships between Tanning Methods and the Intention to Engage in Risky Appearance-Related Behaviors" — is published in Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal. Data for the study was collected from an online survey of 395 female college students in the southern United States. The major contributor to skin cancer is frequent exposure to ultraviolet rays, with skin cancer the most common — and one of the most preventable — types of cancer, according to the American Cancer Society. Ironically, previous research has found that many people choose to tan because they believe a tan makes them look thinner and more fit, Yoo said. Tanning has gone in and out of fashion, Yoo noted. Tans at one time were associated with lower classes who worked outdoors — in contrast with the Southern belles of more than a century ago, who used parasols to protect their skin and to look pale and refined. In the 1920s, fashion designer Coco Chanel started a fad after accidentally getting sunburned while visiting the French Riviera, Yoo said. Tanning remained popular, with high-fashion models often sporting tans, whether from UV exposure or sprays and bronzers. And these days, some people sport tattoos along with their tans, he said. The study found that: Frequent tanners who expose themselves to UV rays through sunbathing or tanning beds have the strongest intentions to engage in a wider range of risky appearance-related behaviors when compared to infrequent tanners or spray tanners. Such behaviors include extreme weight control methods, such as diet pills, self-induced vomiting, laxatives and diuretics; cosmetic surgery and Botox injections; spa treatments, such as hair removal by waxing (which has been associated with rashes and infections) and gel nail polish (done with UV curing and associated with DNA damage to the skin that can result in premature aging and possibly cancer; and tattoos or piercings. Infrequent tanners, as well as "safe" tanners who seek to achieve an ideal tan without ultraviolet methods (sprays, lotions or bronzers) are much less likely to engage in behaviors that may convey certain stereotypes, such as tattoos or piercings with visual symbols or messages. But they are willing to try other risky appearance-related behaviors. Yoo suggested that intervention strategies adapted for healthcare providers to reduce UV exposure and skin cancer could use stigmatization — perhaps through images of tattooed or pierced individuals who also are tanned. "A negative stigma attached to UV exposure can create ambivalence in our society about achieving a tanned appearance," Yoo said. "This could decrease the popularity of tanning in much the same way the negative stereotyping of smoking and education about its health risks have reduced the number of people who smoke." He noted that in the 1940s and 1950s, smoking was idealized, especially in Hollywood movies, but "there has been a cultural shift," he said. "One way to change the appeal of tanning would be to make it un-cool," Yoo said. "If I tan and people look at me funny, I'm not going to tan anymore." While another way to stigmatize tanning would be to stress the health consequences, "for young people it may be more effective to emphasize the appearance," Yoo said. "The tanning that makes me attractive now may be counteracted for the long haul because at 50 or 60, I may have leathery skin. "Given that tanning emerged as a fashion trend, gradual attitudes toward dangerous tanning can be made possible in a similar fashion," he said.
Five Tips to Choose Sustainable Fashion
Getty Images Fast Fashion is the most popular trend in retail fashion today. Fast Fashion isn’t a specific style but rather clothing produced quickly and cheaply to respond instantly to consumer demand. Low prices and popular online retailers allow people to purchase clothing more often but at a devastating cost to the environment. According to EarthDay.org, the fashion industry is one of the largest global polluters, creating 4% of all greenhouse gas emissions, 40 million tons of landfill waste and 35% of microplastics in the ocean. According to fashion expert Jay Yoo, Ph.D., associate professor of apparel merchandising in the Robbins College of Health and Human Sciences at Baylor University, consumers are learning more about the environmental impacts of fashion and searching for better options. Fashion expert Jay Yoo, Ph.D., associate professor of apparel merchandising in the Robbins College of Health and Human Sciences at Baylor University Fashion expert Jay Yoo, Ph.D. Yoo’s research shows that purchasing apparel products that help reduce negative impacts on the environment has emerged as a lifestyle. “Fashion-conscious consumers are ready and willing to forgo fast fashion for more sustainable options produced in an ecologically and socially responsible way,” said Yoo. Yoo recommends five ways you can use your purchasing power to support sustainable fashion. Choose natural fibers - organic cotton, linen or hemp. Avoid clothing that requires dry cleaning. Donate to and shop at resale stores. Purchase from retailers that are committed to sustainability. Encourage your friends to join you in supporting sustainable fashion. Although fashion is often understood to center on apparel choices, fashion impacts nearly every aspect of human lives, Yoo said, including health, social responsibility and environmental issues involving consumptive behaviors. His additional research interests include appearance-related behaviors and their implications for individual and social well-being from consumer perspectives, from body-tanning behaviors, body image and quality of life among cancer patients, retail therapy and mental health, and irrational shopping and extreme body modification.
Ask an Expert: Is the "AI Moratorium" too far reaching?
Recent responses to chatGPT have featured eminent technologists calling for a six-month moratorium on the development of “AI systems more powerful than GPT-4.” Dr. Jeremy Kedziora, PieperPower Endowed Chair in Artificial Intelligence at Milwaukee School of Engineering, supports a middle ground approach between unregulated development and a pause. He says, "I do not agree with a moratorium, but I would call for government action to develop regulatory guidelines for AI use, particularly for endowing AIs with actions." Dr. Kedziora is available as a subject matter expert on the recent "AI moratorium" that was issued by tech leaders. According to Dr. Kedziora: There are good reasons to call for additional oversight of AI creation: Large deep or reinforcement learning systems encode complicated relationships that are difficult for users to predict and understand. Integrating them into daily use by billions of people implies some sort of complex adaptive system in which it is even more difficult for planners to anticipate, predict, and plan. This is likely fertile ground for unintended – and bad – outcomes. Rather than outright replacement, a very real possibility is that AI-enabled workers will have sufficiently high productivity that we’ll need less workers to accomplish tasks. The implication is that there won’t be enough jobs for those who want them. This means that governments will need to seriously consider proposals for UBI and work to limit economic displacement, work which will require time and political bargaining. I do not think it is controversial that we would not want a research group at MIT or CalTech, or anywhere developing an unregulated nuclear weapon. Given the difficulty in predicting its impact, AI may well be in the same category of powerful, suggesting that its creation should be subject to the democratic process. At the same time, there are some important things to keep in mind regarding chatGPT-like AI systems that suggest there are inherent limits to their impact: Though chatGPT may appear–at times–to pass the famous Turing test, this does not imply these systems ’think,’ or are ’self-aware,’ or are ’alive.’ The Turing test aims to avoid answering these questions altogether by simply asking if a machine can be distinguished from a human by another human. At the end of the day, chatGPT is nothing more than a bunch of weights! Contemporary AIs–chatGPT included–have very limited levers to pull. They simply can’t take many actions. Indeed, chatGPT’s only action is to create text in response to a prompt. It cannot do anything independently. Its effects, for now, are limited to passing through the hands of humans and to the social changes it could thereby create. The call for a moratorium emphasizes ‘control’ over AI. It is worth asking just what this control means. Take chatGPT as an example–can its makers control responses to prompts? Probably only in a limited fashion at best, with less and less ability as more people use it. There simply aren’t resources to police its responses. Can chatGPT’s makers ‘flip the off switch?’ Absolutely – restricting access to the API would effectively turn chatGPT off. In that sense, it is certainly under the same kind of control humans subjected to government are. Keep in mind that there are coordination problems – just because there is an AI moratorium in the US does not mean that other countries–particularly US adversaries– will stop development. And as others have said: “as long as AI systems have objectives set by humans, most ethics concerns related to artificial intelligence come from the ethics of the countries wielding them.” There are definitional problems with this sort of moratorium – who would be subject to it? Industry actors? Academics? The criterion those who call for the moratorium use is “AI systems more powerful than GPT-4.” What does “powerful” mean? Enforcement requires drawing boundaries around which AI development is subject to a moratorium – without those boundaries how would such a policy be enforced? It might already be too late – some already claim that they’ve recreated chatGPT. There are two major groups to think about when looking for develop regulatory solutions for AI: academia and industry. There may already be good vehicles for regulating academic research, for example oversight of grant funding. Oversight of AI development in industry is an area that requires attention and application of expertise. If you're a journalist covering Artificial Intelligence, then let us help. Dr. Kedziora is a respected expert in Data Science, Machine Learning, Statistical Modeling, Bayesian Inference, Game Theory and things AI. He's available to speak with the media - simply click on the icon now to arrange an interview today.
For the first time in Delaware, and likely the nation, cancer specialists have co-authored a consensus statement and clinical pathway for the management of colon cancer that has spread to the peritoneum or abdominal wall. The statement has been published in the Jan. 10 online issue of Surgical Oncology. The statement aligns the state’s major health care providers on a standardized, evidence-based approach to the treatment of this kind of colon cancer. This will ensure patients throughout the state will receive optimal care and equitable access to the most appropriate treatment options and clinical trials. Medical and surgical oncologists from ChristianaCare’s Helen F. Graham Cancer Center & Research Institute, Tunnell Cancer Center at Beebe Healthcare and TidalHealth Allen Cancer Center prepared the statement entitled, “Consensus Statement and Clinical Pathway for the Management of Colon Cancer With Peritoneal Metastases in the State of Delaware.” The statement was published on behalf of the State of Delaware Peritoneal Surface Malignancies Task Force. “Consensus among cancer specialists on how to treat colon cancer patients with peritoneal malignancy will assure that these patients have access to the specialized treatment they need at an experienced cancer center right here in Delaware,” said co-author Nicholas J. Petrelli, M.D., Bank of America endowed medical director of the Helen F. Graham Cancer Center & Research Institute. “As cancer care providers, we know how important it is for patients to be close to home for their cancer care.” “Getting cancer physicians throughout the state to agree on who is eligible for treatment and the right sequence of therapies was no small task,” said lead author Jesus Esquivel, M.D., co-director of Beebe Healthcare’s Peritoneal Surface Malignancy Program. “Thanks to Dr. Petrelli’s leadership, coupled with the support of a very committed task force, we have been able to make this happen on a statewide level.” In about 10% to 20% of cases, colon cancer is found in the peritoneum, the lining of the abdomen that covers the abdominal organs. Historically, patients with peritoneal metastases have a worse prognosis. However, numerous studies show five-year survival rates for patients whose peritoneal cancer can be surgically removed approach the rates of those with successful surgery for metastatic liver disease. “We are looking at a complicated group of patients with advanced colon cancer and a generally poor prognosis, who historically have been treated in a non-uniform fashion despite medical evidence to suggest which therapies are most effective,” Esquivel said. Combining surgery and heated chemotherapy The Delaware pathway includes a combination treatment of surgery and heated chemotherapy, starting with cytoreductive surgery (CRS) to remove all visible cancer in the peritoneum. Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy (HIPEC) with Mitomycin C is then delivered on the operating table for 90 minutes. Mounting clinical evidence shows this one-two punch can significantly extend survival in well-selected patients when compared with standard systemic chemotherapy. Currently, due to a steep learning curve, only about 120 hospitals in the U.S. have the necessary capability and expertise to perform these procedures. In Delaware, only ChristianaCare and Beebe Healthcare can offer patients CRS with HIPEC. Some patients who are not immediate candidates for surgery may benefit from systemic therapy (chemotherapy/immunotherapy) as a first-round treatment. Others on the pathway may be recommended for systemic therapy alone and potential participation in an appropriate clinical trial. Four-tier scoring system To help providers determine the best form of treatment for each individual patient, the Delaware pathway introduces the Peritoneal Surface Disease Severity Score (PSDSS). The scoring system uses four tiers of estimated disease severity based on a three-point scale that includes symptoms, extent of peritoneal dissemination and primary tumor histology. “With the Delaware pathway in place, our goal is to ensure that multidisciplinary evaluation begins at the time of diagnosis so that each patient is selected for the right sequence of currently available therapy depending the individual cancer,” Esquivel said. “Not only are we recommending a uniform treatment modality for patients, but our framework facilitates data reporting and evaluation that will add to the body of knowledge about this disease and how best to treat it.” Although there is plenty of medical evidence to suggest which therapies are most effective, until now, efforts by Esquivel and others to achieve consensus worldwide have not translated into a universally accepted clinical pathway for the management of this disease. Delaware is a unique launching pad for such a pathway. “As cancer care providers we know how important it is to work together on behalf of our patients,” said Petrelli. “Delaware is uniquely suited to this effort not only because of its size, but also because of the collaborative relationships we have built through groups like the Delaware Cancer Advisory Council and Consortium and most specifically for this effort, the Delaware Peritoneal Surface Malignancy Task Force.” The Delaware Health Information Network (DHIN) is another important resource to assist physician collaboration. Nearly 100% of the state’s medical providers are linked in. The DHIN launched in 2007 as the first operating statewide health information exchange in the country. “I don’t expect 100% of patients to be included in the pathway, but I see it as the best opportunity for patients to maximize benefits and minimize suffering or unnecessary treatment,” Esquivel said. “As a health care provider who treats patients with advanced cancer, I know that is the best one can hope for short of a cure. “With consensus on evidence-based clinical pathways, we can offer increasing numbers of patients the assurance that whether you live in northern or southern Delaware, you can rely on getting the best treatment available for your cancer.”
Expert Opinion: Real Fur? It’s Just Not in Vogue Anymore!
Back in 1994, animal rights organization PETA launched what would become one of the most iconic campaigns of the decade – and beyond. “I’d rather go naked than wear fur,” sparked a slew of headlines internationally and won support from celebrities such as Naomi Campbell, Gillian Anderson, Pamela Anderson, and others; many of whom agreed to pose nude or semi-naked in support of the anti-fur movement. Three decades on, in February 2020, PETA announced it was retiring the campaign, saying it was “no longer necessary” and citing the “demise of the trade.” Evidence suggests they are right. Since the early noughties, the use of fur among the world’s foremost luxury fashion houses has steadily declined. The production of mink and other pelts–an industry valued at $1.8 billion in the late 80s–has declined in America by around 45 percent in the last 20 years, according to the Department of Agriculture. Meanwhile, high-end fashion brands like Gucci, Vivienne Westwood, and Stella McCartney have pledged to go fur-free, with Fendi, Saint Laurent, and others set to follow suit in 2022. Fur has never been less fashionable. But can activism alone claim victory in the fight for more ethical fashion practices? Emory’s Giacomo Negro, professor of Organization & Management and professor of sociology (by courtesy), has released new research that suggests another major factor played a key role in the process that led to the abandonment of fur; and it’s none other than perennial style bible, Vogue. When Vogue Speaks, People Listen We know that the use of fur has been dropping off steadily on the supply side, on the part of producers and manufacturers themselves, in the last two decades. What we didn’t know was how much of this was down to pressure from PETA and other highly-visible activism. Or whether there might be other forces at play–industry intermediaries that have a gatekeeping function, such as the fashion press, exerting a more subtle but just as powerful influence on the producers of fur. - Giacomo Negro, professor of Organization & Management Hypothesizing this to be the case, Negro teamed up with INSEAD’s Frederic Godart and Greta Hsu of the University of California. First off, they had to determine the most important and global of fashion’s gatekeepers. “There are other publications, but Vogue is undoubtedly a significant force in fashion. The magazine has long occupied a unique position that is neither an insider nor an outsider in the sense that its editors are intimately connected to the top designers and decision-makers in the industry; simultaneously, it’s an external, independent publication with global reach and singularly powerful influence on fashion’s views and tastes.” If Vogue were to take a certain view of the use of fur in clothing over time, would fashion houses take note and follow suit, the researchers wondered? To test this, Negro et al put together a largescale dataset integrating data from more than 18 years of Vogue’s runway reports: features covering fashion shows in Paris, Milan, London, and New York between Spring 2000 and Fall 2018. The set included 670 fashion houses hosting at least two runway shows in this period, focusing on women’s prêt-à-porter designs. Next, the researchers ran an analysis across the texts published by Vogue after each show. They coded words relating to the moral and ethical dimensions of fur use. “When Vogue publishes a report, you don’t just get a review of the collections,” says Negro. “You also get the magazine’s opinion and appraisal of the clothing.” Fur Ethics and the Decline of a Centuries-Old Industry Parsing the attention to fur ethics expressed in these reports and looking at the frequency of the appearance of fur on runways over time, he and his colleagues found something striking: a clear, quantitative correlation between the magazine’s coverage of fur ethics and a drop off in its use by fashion houses, starting in 2011. “From around 2009, Vogue starts referencing the ethical and social concerns around fur and this continues through to 2014. In 2011, you begin to see a steady decline that follows in the use and appearance of fur on catwalks in the major fashion capitals of the world.” But could this simply be credited to an increase in activism at the same time? Unlikely, says Negro. He and his colleagues also looked at data on media coverage of anti-fur events in France, Italy, the United Kingdom, and the U.S. and failed to establish any meaningful correlation with Vogue’s editorial position over the same period. “What seems most plausible is that as an influential industry gatekeeper, Vogue was driving a change in views on fur ethics and fur use, alongside its own changing position on the ethics of fur,” says Negro. And it’s interesting to remember that fashion, like other creative industries, tends to operate in accordance with its own set of rules and its ‘artistic freedom.’ When activists targeted Jean Paul Gaultier’s Fall Show of 2009, he simply announced that he loved fur and would continue using it. However, when Vogue starts weighing in with an opinion, that’s when designers start following suit. - Giacomo Negro, professor of Organization & Management Which isn’t to say that activism did not have a critical role, he adds. In leading and reshaping the conversation around fur over the last three decades, PETA and others have brought the key issues to the attention of the world’s media like no other, says Godart: “Our findings also suggest that specific forms of anti-fur activism such as advertising campaigns, and legal maneuvers, became effective in influencing fashion houses’ decisions to move away from fur when amplified by Vogue’s references to moral concerns around fur use.” For any business or industry looking to navigate changing perceptions, tastes, or sentiments, gatekeeper entities–intermediaries like experts, media publications, and others–can provide useful signals that can help strategic decision-making, say Negro, Godart, and Hsu. Though in the age of social media, it may become that much more difficult to distinguish signals from noise. Proactive organizations might do well to identify and engage with social movements and gatekeepers ahead of change, they say, rather than bide their time until pressure forces their hand. Interested in learning more? Then let us help with your questions or coverage. Giacomo Negro is a professor of Organization & Management and Professor of Sociology at the Goizueta Business School at Emory University. Simply click on his icon now to connect and arrange an interview.
