Foodies in the UK: A Sense of Self, Connection and Belonging Beyond the Passion?

The global rise of the Foodie movement has attracted some research attention as well as critique in the food industry trend followers, but little research attention in marketing research. The present study looks at the ‘Foodie’ phenomenon in the UK and aims to extend how the notion has been coined in literature through a qualitative investigation of a sample of self-professed Foodies. The objective is to provide an in-depth understanding of what it means to be a Foodie at the individual and group levels, probing attitudes, motivations and self-awareness. Results indicate that the term Foodie cannot be used as an implicit definition of someone ‘simply interested in food’; the capacity of the Foodie may be dependent on individual involvement and the level of importance along the five emerging themes; these being: Learning and discovery; Pleasure and enjoyment; Inspirational influences; Quality; and Experiencing food as an individual and in connection with others. Findings imply that there might be different levels of Foodies, leading to a start on developing a Foodie Typology. The study poses implications for food marketers and researchers that can assist in more effective segmentation, efficient targeting and tailored positioning, as well as opportunities for future research.

Combinative Aspects of Leadership Style and Emotional Intelligence

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine whether the leader’s emotional intelligence influences the leader’s preferences for different ways of combining leadership behaviors (i.e. combinative aspects of leadership style). Design/methodology/approach – The authors used a hybrid design to collect the data to avoid common-method biases. The authors described a high-stress workplace in a vignette and asked participants to rank four styles of combining a task-oriented leadership (i.e. Pressure) statement and a socio-emotional leadership (i.e. Support) statement. The authors then asked participants to complete a Likert-scale based questionnaire on emotional intelligence. Findings – The authors found that leaders who prefer to provide Support immediately before Pressure have higher levels of emotional intelligence than do leaders who prefer the three other combinative styles. Leaders who prefer to provide Pressure and Support separately (i.e. provide Pressure 30 minutes after Support) have the lowest levels of emotional intelligence. Research limitations/implications – A key implicit assumption in the work is that leaders do not want to evoke negative emotions in followers. The authors did not take into account factors that influence leadership style which participating managers would be likely to encounter on a daily basis such as the relationship with the follower, the follower’s level of performance and work experience, the gender of the leader and the gender of the follower, the hierarchical levels of the leader and follower, and the followers’ preferred combinative style. The nature of the sample and the use of a hypothetical scenario are other limitations of the study. Practical implications – Providing leadership behaviors that are regarded as effective is necessary but not enough because the emotional impact of leadership behaviors appears to also depend on how the behaviors are configured. Originality/value – This is the first study to show that the emotional intelligence of leaders is related to their preferences for the manner in which they combine task and social leadership statements. Furthermore, two-factor theories of leadership propose that the effects of task and social leadership are additive. However, the findings show that the effects are interactive.