Post by arfankj4 on Mar 7, 2024 6:44:21 GMT
I think this research connects beautifully with a normal business operation within a corporation says Doug J. Chung an assistant professor in the Marketing unit at Harvard Business School. The research reported in the October working paper The Air War versus The Ground Game An Analysis of Multi Channel Marketing in US Presidential Elections was cowritten with doctoral student Lingling Zhang. Chung and Zhang pored over observations on voting outcomes and campaign activities for the and presidential races.
They studied the number of votes cast in each county for the candidates and used registered party affiliation at the county level to look at how campaign effects differed depending on the level of voter partisanship. The researchers hoped to answer several questions. How do different types of advertising—candidates own ads versus outside ads—and personal selling from field operations—in the form of door to door visits and phone Poland Mobile Number List calls to voters—affect voter preferences And how do these campaign activities affect the outcome of elections through their diverse effects on various types of people Candidates have been investing heavily in both mass advertising and personal selling. For the election for instance the Democratic and Republican candidates together with their allies spent over billion combined—the most expensive election in US history. Candidates have not only advertised more on.
TV and in other media but also upped the ante on personal selling efforts with an increased number of local field operation offices as a way to reach out to voters. But which strategy was more effective for the election of a president and why Personal Selling What Chung and—the ground war—had a stronger effect on partisan voters but a candidate s own advertising was better received by nonpartisans. Barack Obama s ground campaign made the difference in the last two presidential elections.©iStock EdStock Personal selling accounted for Barack Obama s victories in the and elections. Advertising was critical only in a close election—George W. Bush s MBA victory in . There was no one size fits all marketing approach that swayed all voters.
They studied the number of votes cast in each county for the candidates and used registered party affiliation at the county level to look at how campaign effects differed depending on the level of voter partisanship. The researchers hoped to answer several questions. How do different types of advertising—candidates own ads versus outside ads—and personal selling from field operations—in the form of door to door visits and phone Poland Mobile Number List calls to voters—affect voter preferences And how do these campaign activities affect the outcome of elections through their diverse effects on various types of people Candidates have been investing heavily in both mass advertising and personal selling. For the election for instance the Democratic and Republican candidates together with their allies spent over billion combined—the most expensive election in US history. Candidates have not only advertised more on.
TV and in other media but also upped the ante on personal selling efforts with an increased number of local field operation offices as a way to reach out to voters. But which strategy was more effective for the election of a president and why Personal Selling What Chung and—the ground war—had a stronger effect on partisan voters but a candidate s own advertising was better received by nonpartisans. Barack Obama s ground campaign made the difference in the last two presidential elections.©iStock EdStock Personal selling accounted for Barack Obama s victories in the and elections. Advertising was critical only in a close election—George W. Bush s MBA victory in . There was no one size fits all marketing approach that swayed all voters.