Punishment! Consumer reactions to brand transgressions

Consumer brand relationships have a dynamic nature: they can go up and down and follow many different paths (Fournier, 1998) according to the events that happen. Thanks to a field study based on a real case, the paper investigates how consumers react to brand transgression, i.e. a severe violation of expectations and implicit rules of the relationship. Transgressions represent critical incidents for the consumer brand relationship that might seriously harm its future. Grounded in the exit-voice paradigm of response strategy to brand transgressions (Paulssen and Bagozzi, 2009), a qualitative data coding on 800 consumers’ Facebook comments reveals the existence of two new response strategies adopted by consumers: Schadenfreude and Hijacking. Confronted with a brand transgression, consumers believe the brand deserves a punishment: consumers passively enjoy the company´s downfall (Schadenfreude), or actively engage into behaviors, from direct insult to brand boycott, aimed to harm the company (Hijacking). Subsequently, a quantitative and computer assisted content analysis, showed that the six response strategies identified are differently present in the consumers’ comments and increase/decrease over time.