A Socioeconomic Approach to the Development of E-Learning

A multitude of products, systems, approaches, views and notions characterize the field of e-learning. This article attempts to disentangle the field by using economic and sociological theories, theories of marketing management and strategy as well as practical experience gained by the author while working with leading edge suppliers of e-learning. On this basis, a distinction between knowledge creation e-learning and knowledge transfer e-learning is made. The various views are divided into four different ideal-typical paradigms, each with its own characteristics and limitations. Selecting the right paradigm to use in the development of an e-learning strategy may prove crucial to success. Implications for the development of an e-learning strategy in businesses and educational institutions are outlined.

Determinants of Advertising Effectiveness: The Development of an International Advertising Elasticity Database and a Meta-Analysis

Increasing demand for marketing accountability requires an efficient allocation of marketing expenditures. Managers who know the elasticity of their marketing instruments can allocate their budgets optimally. Meta-analyses offer a basis for deriving benchmark elasticities for advertising. Although they provide a variety of valuable insights, a major shortcoming of prior meta-analyses is that they report only generalized results as the disaggregated raw data are not made available. This problem is highly relevant because coding of empirical studies, at least to a certain extent, involves subjective judgment. For this reason, meta-studies would be more valuable if researchers and practitioners had access to disaggregated data allowing them to conduct further analyses of individual, e.g., product-level-specific, interests. We are the first to address this gap by providing (1) an advertising elasticity database (AED) and (2) empirical generalizations about advertising elasticities and their determinants. Our findings indicate that the average current-period advertising elasticity is 0.09, which is substantially smaller than the value 0f 0.12 that was recently reported by Sethuraman, Tellis, and Briesch (2011). Furthermore, our meta-analysis reveals a wide range of significant determinants of advertising elasticity. For example, we find that advertising elasticities are higher (i) for hedonic and experience goods than for other goods; (ii) for new than for established goods; (iii) when advertising is measured in gross rating points (GRP) instead of absolute terms; and (iv) when the lagged dependent or lagged advertising variable is omitted.