Multimodal persuasive strategies in product pitches

Julia Valeiras-Jurado

doi:10.1515/text-2019-0254

Article

Multimodal persuasive strategies in product pitches

Julia Valeiras-Jurado
Julia Valeiras-Jurado received her PhD in Linguistics from Universitst Jaume I and Ghent University and is currently Language lecturer at Ghent University. Her research interests include multimodality, academic and business discourse, oral genres, persuasive language and English for Specific Purposes (ESP). Her more recent publications in these areas have appeared in Discourse Studies and Iberica.

Published/Copyright: February 2, 2021

Published by

Become an author with De Gruyter Brill

Submit Manuscript Author Information Explore this Subject

From the journal Text & Talk Volume 41 Issue 4

Abstract

The product pitch is a widespread genre within business communication and is used to introduce a product in the market. Product pitches are meant to convince an audience of the value of the product they introduce. Because they are subjected to strict time constraints, these presentations need to be particularly effective in their persuasive efforts, and speakers need to make the best use of all the semiotic resources they have at their disposal to efficiently convey their message. Researchers and practitioners with first-hand experience in this genre agree that it is inherently persuasive and multimodal. However, little is known about the complex interplay established between the different semiotic modes that are at stake in a product pitch, and about the potential effect that these multimodal ensembles have on persuasion. This study analyses a corpus of product pitches using a combination of computer assisted multimodal discourse analysis and ethnographic observations and interviews to probe into the use of multimodal persuasive strategies in these presentations. The findings show how speakers highlight the unique selling points of their products and present them as the best solution to a problem, resorting to a series of persuasive strategies (e.g. attention getting, evaluation) that are realised through carefully orchestrated multimodal ensembles.

Keywords: multimodal ensembles; multimodality; persuasive strategies; product pitch; semiotic modes

Corresponding author: Julia Valeiras-Jurado, Department of Linguistics, Ghent University, Blandijnberg 2, 9000Ghent, Belgium, E-mail: julia.valeirasjurado@ugent.be

About the author

Julia Valeiras-Jurado

Julia Valeiras-Jurado received her PhD in Linguistics from Universitst Jaume I and Ghent University and is currently Language lecturer at Ghent University. Her research interests include multimodality, academic and business discourse, oral genres, persuasive language and English for Specific Purposes (ESP). Her more recent publications in these areas have appeared in Discourse Studies and Iberica.

References

Allison, Thomas, Blackley Davis, Justin Webb & Jeremy Short. 2017. Persuasion in crowdfunding: An elaboration likelihood model of crowdfunding performance. Journal of Business Venturing 32(6). 707–725. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2017.09.002.Search in Google Scholar

Bamford, Julia. 2007. Accentuating the positive. Evaluation and persuasive discourse in business presentations. In Julia Bamford & Rita Salvi (eds.), Business discourse: Language at work, 135–55. Rome: Aracne Editrice.Search in Google Scholar

Bavelas, Janet, Nicole Chovil, Linda Coates & Lori Roe. 1995. Gestures specialized for dialogue. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 21(4). 394–405. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167295214010.Search in Google Scholar

Beattie, Geoffey & Heather Shovelton. 1999. Do iconic hand gestures really contribute anything to the semantic information conveyed by speech? An experimental investigation. Semiotica 123(1/2). 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1515/semi.1999.123.1-2.1.Search in Google Scholar

Bowker, Julia. 2007. Uncovering intentionality and the process of persuasion in oral business narratives. In Julia Bamford & Rita Salvi (eds.), Business discourse: Language at work, 47–87. Rome: Aracne Editrice.Search in Google Scholar

Brazil, David. 1997. The communicative value of intonation in English, 2nd edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Burzynski, John. 2013. Elements of a successful product pitch. Available at: http://38pitches.com/elements-of-a-successful-product-pitch/ .Search in Google Scholar

Carter, Ronald. 1997. Working with texts: A core book for language analysis. London: Routledge.10.4324/9780203468470Search in Google Scholar

Cestero-Mancera, Ana María. 2017. La comunicación no verbal en discurso persuasivo empresarial. Pragmalingüística 25. 124–145.10.25267/Pragmalinguistica.2017.i25.07Search in Google Scholar

Cestero-Mancera, Ana María. 2018. Recursos no verbales en comunicación persuasiva: Imagen, proxémica y paralenguaje. Lengua y habla 22. 135–159.Search in Google Scholar

Chen, Xiao-Ping, Xin Yao & Suresh Kotha. 2009. Entrepreneur passion and preparedness in business plan presentations: A persuasion analysis of venture capitalists’ funding decisions. Academy of Management Journal 52(1). 199–214. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2009.36462018.Search in Google Scholar

Clarke, Jean, Joep Cornelissen & Mark Healey. 2019. Actions speak louder than words: How figurative language and gesturing in entrepreneurial pitches influences investment judgments. Academy of Management Journal 62(2). 335–360. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2016.1008.Search in Google Scholar

Dafouz-Milne, Emma. 2008. The pragmatic role of textual and interpersonal metadiscourse markers in the construction and attainment of persuasion: A cross-linguistic study of newspaper discourse. Journal of Pragmatics 40(1). 95–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2007.10.003.Search in Google Scholar

Daly, Peter & Dennis Davy. 2016. Structural, linguistic and rhetorical features of the entrepreneurial pitch: Lessons from Dragons’ Den. The Journal of Management Development 35(1). 120–132. https://doi.org/10.1108/jmd-05-2014-0049.Search in Google Scholar

Davies, Blackley, Hmieleski Keith, Justin Webb & Joseph Coombs. 2017. Funders’ positive affective reactions to entrepreneurs’ crowdfunding pitches: The influence of perceived product creativity and entrepreneurial passion. Journal of Business Venturing 32(1). 90–106.10.1016/j.jbusvent.2016.10.006Search in Google Scholar

Duarte, Nancy. 2015. Great presenters find the perfect mix of data and narrative. Available at: http://totalmgmtco.com/great-presenters-find-a-perfect-mix-of-data-narrative/ .Search in Google Scholar

Fuertes-Olivera, Pedro, Marisol Velasco-Sacristán, Ascensión Arribas-Baño & Eva Samaniego-Fernández. 2001. Persuasion and advertising English: Metadiscourse in slogans and headlines. Journal of Pragmatics 33(8). 1291–1307. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0378-2166(01)80026-6.Search in Google Scholar

Galbraith, Craig, Bruce McKinney, Alex DeNoble & Sanford Ehrlich. 2014. The impact of presentation form, entrepreneurial passion, and perceived preparedness on obtaining grant funding. Journal of Business and Technical Communication 28(2). 222–248. https://doi.org/10.1177/1050651913513902.Search in Google Scholar

Goldman, Ricki, Frederick Erickson, Jay Lemke & Sharon Derry, et al.. 2007. Selection in video. In Sharon Derry (ed.), Guidelines for video research in education: Recommendations from an expert panel, 19–27. Chicago: Data Research and Development Center (NORC) University of Chicago.Search in Google Scholar

Heath, Chip & Dan Heath. 2007. Made to stick: Why some ideas survive and others die. New York: Random House.Search in Google Scholar

Hewings, Martin. 1998. Intonation choices in the english of non-native speakers. In Ana Sánchez Navarro & Ronald Carter (eds.), Linguistic choice across genres, 317–331. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/cilt.158.21hewSearch in Google Scholar

Hood, Susan & Gail Forey. 2005. Introducing a conference paper: Getting interpersonal with your audience. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 4(4). 291–306. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2005.07.003.Search in Google Scholar

Huang, Laura & Jone Pearce. 2015. Managing the unknowable: The effectiveness of early-stage investor gut feel in entrepreneurial investment decisions. Administrative Science Quarterly 4. 634–670. https://doi.org/10.1177/0001839215597270.Search in Google Scholar

Kendon, Adam. 2004. Gesture: Visible action as utterance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511807572Search in Google Scholar

Kress, Gunter. 2010. Multimodality: A social semiotic approach to contemporary communication. London: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

Lakoff, Robin. 1982. Persuasive discourse and ordinary conversation, with examples from advertising. In Deborah Tannen (ed.), Analysing discourse: Text and talk, 25–42. Washinton: Georgetown University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Lepers, Clemence. 2015. How to pitch an idea in 7 steps. Available at: http://www.pptpop.com/how-to-pitch-an-idea/ .Search in Google Scholar

Lowe, Michael & Haws Kelly. 2017. Sounds big: The effects of acoustic pitch on product perceptions. Journal of Marketing Research 54(2). 331–346. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmr.14.0300.Search in Google Scholar

McNeill, David. 1992. Hand and mind: What gestures reveal about thought. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Search in Google Scholar

Morell, Teresa. 2015. International conference paper presentations: A multimodal analysis to determine effectiveness. English for Specific Purposes 37. 137–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2014.10.002.Search in Google Scholar

Niebuhr, Oliver, Jana Voße & Alexander Brem. 2016. What makes a charismatic speaker? A computer-based acoustic-prosodic analysis of Steve Jobs tone of voice. Computers in Human Behavior 64. 366–382. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.06.059.Search in Google Scholar

Norris, Sigrid. 2011. Identity in (inter)action: Introducing multimodal (inter)action analysis. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9781934078280Search in Google Scholar

O’Keefe, Daniel. 2002. Persuasion: Theory and research. London: Sage Publications.Search in Google Scholar

Perloff, Richard. 2003. The dynamics of persuasion. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Search in Google Scholar

Pickering, Lucy. 2001. The role of tone choice in improving ITA communication in the classroom. Tesol Quarterly 35(2). 233–255. https://doi.org/10.2307/3587647.Search in Google Scholar

Pickering, Lucy. 2009. Intonation as a pragmatic resource in ELF interaction. Intercultural Pragmatics 6(2). 235–255. https://doi.org/10.1515/iprg.2009.013.Search in Google Scholar

Pickering, Lucy, Hu Guiling & Amanda Baker. 2012. The pragmatic function of intonation: Cueing agreement and disagreement in spoken english discourse and implications for ELT. In Jesus Romero-Trillo (ed.), Pragmatics and prosody in English language teaching, 199–218. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.10.1007/978-94-007-3883-6_12Search in Google Scholar

Querol-Julián, Mercedes. 2011. Evaluation in discussion sessions of conference paper presentations: A multimodal approach. Saarbrücken: LAP Lambert Academic Publishing GmbH & Co. K.G.Search in Google Scholar

Rackham, Neil. 1998. From Experience: Why bad things happen to good new products. Journal of Product Innovation Management 15. 201–207. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-5885.1530201.Search in Google Scholar

Rowley-Jolivet, Elizabeth & Susan Carter-Thomas. 2005. The rhetoric of conference presentation introductions: Context, argument and interaction. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 15(1). 45–70. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1473-4192.2005.00080.x.Search in Google Scholar

Swales, John. 2004. Research genres: Explorations and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139524827Search in Google Scholar

Valeiras-Jurado, Julia. 2019. Modal coherence in specialised discourse: A case study of persuasive oral presentations in business and academia. Iberica 37. 87–114.Search in Google Scholar

Valeiras-Jurado, Julia & Noelia Ruiz-Madrid. 2019. Multimodal enactment of characters in conference presentations. Discourse Studies 21(5). 561–583. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445619846703.Search in Google Scholar

Valeiras-Jurado, Julia, Noelia Ruiz-Madrid & Geert Jacobs. 2018. Revisiting persuasion in oral academic and professional genres. Towards a methodological framework for multimodal discourse analysis of research dissemination talks. Iberica 35. 93–118.Search in Google Scholar

Virtanen, Tuija & Helena Halmari. 2005. Persuasion across genres: Emerging perspectives. In Helena Halmari & Tuija Virtanen (eds.), Persuasion across genres, 2–24. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.130.03virSearch in Google Scholar

Woods, Roger, Karen Rafferty, Julian Murphy & Hermon Paul (eds.). 2014. Engineering innovative products. New York: John Wiley.Search in Google Scholar

Received: 2019-09-18

Accepted: 2021-01-13

Published Online: 2021-02-02

Published in Print: 2021-07-27

You are currently not able to access this content.

Articles in the same Issue

https://doi.org/10.1515/text-2019-0254

Keywords for this article

multimodal ensembles; multimodality; persuasive strategies; product pitch; semiotic modes