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.
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.
About the author
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.Suche 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.Suche 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.Suche 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.Suche 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.Suche in Google Scholar
Brazil, David. 1997. The communicative value of intonation in English, 2nd edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Burzynski, John. 2013. Elements of a successful product pitch. Available at: http://38pitches.com/elements-of-a-successful-product-pitch/ .Suche in Google Scholar
Carter, Ronald. 1997. Working with texts: A core book for language analysis. London: Routledge.10.4324/9780203468470Suche in Google Scholar
Cestero-Mancera, Ana María. 2017. La comunicación no verbal en discurso persuasivo empresarial. Pragmalingüística 25. 124–145.10.25267/Pragmalinguistica.2017.i25.07Suche in Google Scholar
Cestero-Mancera, Ana María. 2018. Recursos no verbales en comunicación persuasiva: Imagen, proxémica y paralenguaje. Lengua y habla 22. 135–159.Suche 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.Suche 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.Suche 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.Suche 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.Suche 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.2016.10.006Suche 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/ .Suche 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.Suche 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.Suche 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.Suche in Google Scholar
Heath, Chip & Dan Heath. 2007. Made to stick: Why some ideas survive and others die. New York: Random House.Suche 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.158.21hewSuche 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.Suche 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.Suche in Google Scholar
Kendon, Adam. 2004. Gesture: Visible action as utterance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511807572Suche in Google Scholar
Kress, Gunter. 2010. Multimodality: A social semiotic approach to contemporary communication. London: Routledge.Suche 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.Suche 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/ .Suche 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.Suche in Google Scholar
McNeill, David. 1992. Hand and mind: What gestures reveal about thought. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Suche 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.Suche 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.Suche in Google Scholar
Norris, Sigrid. 2011. Identity in (inter)action: Introducing multimodal (inter)action analysis. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9781934078280Suche in Google Scholar
O’Keefe, Daniel. 2002. Persuasion: Theory and research. London: Sage Publications.Suche in Google Scholar
Perloff, Richard. 2003. The dynamics of persuasion. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Suche 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.Suche 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.Suche 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_12Suche 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.Suche 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.Suche 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.Suche in Google Scholar
Swales, John. 2004. Research genres: Explorations and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139524827Suche 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.Suche 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.Suche 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.Suche 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.130.03virSuche in Google Scholar
Woods, Roger, Karen Rafferty, Julian Murphy & Hermon Paul (eds.). 2014. Engineering innovative products. New York: John Wiley.Suche in Google Scholar
© 2021 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Frontmatter
- Full Length Articles
- The ‘sun’ shinning upon the ‘ever-lasting’ country: a diachronic analysis of Iranian national anthems during the 20th century
- All you need is love: metaphors of love in 1946–2016 Billboard year-end number-one songs
- Managing Latin: support and intratextual translation as mediation strategies in the history of English
- Text formulations as practices of demonstrating understanding in dialogic reading
- The intertextual nature of embedded email communication for contract negotiation activities
- Multimodal persuasive strategies in product pitches
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Frontmatter
- Full Length Articles
- The ‘sun’ shinning upon the ‘ever-lasting’ country: a diachronic analysis of Iranian national anthems during the 20th century
- All you need is love: metaphors of love in 1946–2016 Billboard year-end number-one songs
- Managing Latin: support and intratextual translation as mediation strategies in the history of English
- Text formulations as practices of demonstrating understanding in dialogic reading
- The intertextual nature of embedded email communication for contract negotiation activities
- Multimodal persuasive strategies in product pitches
