Robert Mai
Robert Mai (Dr. habil.) est titulaire d'un diplôme en génie industriel et gestion (2007) et a obtenu un doctorat en marketing à l'Université technique de Dresde (Allemagne) en 2011. Quatre ans plus tard, il a terminé sa thèse d'habilitation dans le domaine de l'administration des affaires à l'Université Christian Albrecht de Kiel (Allemagne). En 2017, il a rejoint Grenoble Ecole de Management (France) en tant que professeur associé de marketing et a été nommé professeur titulaire en 2019.
Ses recherches actuelles portent sur le comportement des consommateurs et des acheteurs (industriels), en particulier les innovations en matière de durabilité, les soins de santé et la prise de décision alimentaire, ainsi que la gestion internationale et le marketing interculturel. En outre, il mène des recherches dans le domaine de la gestion des services et des systèmes de services-produits. Ses études sont fortement axées sur les méthodes quantitatives, et il mène également des recherches dans les domaines du marketing en ligne, de la communication et des interactions.
Il publie ses recherches dans des revues universitaires telles que le Journal of Consumer Research, le Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, le Journal of Consumer Psychology, l'International Journal of Research in Marketing, etc.
Liste complète des publications : https://scholar.google.de/citations?user=HJcUHgkAAAAJ&hl=de&oi=sra
- Comportement du consommateur
- Marketing et Economie
- Méthodes quantitatives
- Bashirzadeh Y., Meunier L., Mai R., 2026.Do Business School Students Value Faculty Diversity? Insights From a Dyadic Analysis of Students’ Evaluations of TeachingAcademy of Management Learning and Education: Online first
- Schweitzer F., Mai R., 2026.Social Justice Narratives in Platform Governance Battles: Can Peer Support Fend Off Hypocrisy Accusations?Academy of Management Perspectives: Online firstPlatform governance literature has primarily focused on the platform owner’s perspective, overlooking how complementors can effectively influence governance changes. Our research highlights complementors’ activities, examining how a social justice narrative helps them gain support for change efforts. Across three studies, we (a) identify a novel mechanism, the Robin Hood perception, and explain why this narrative is effective in generating support; (b) show that hypocrisy accusations harm the narrative, in turn reducing support; and (c) find that peer firm mobilization shields complementors from this adverse effect. These findings enhance our understanding of how complementors can garner support for governance changes. They pave the way for further research on how actors beyond platform owners can shape the rules and direction of digital platforms.
- Canfora B., Mai R., Guetlein M.-C., 2026.Human Dominance Belief Scale: Measurement of the Belief in Humans’ Ability to Dominate NatureAMA Winter Academic Conference 2026, AMA - American Marketing Association, Madrid, Espagne
- Borau S., Mai R., 2026.The gender paradox in pro-environmental engagement: Actionable insights for cause-related marketing and social advocacy campaignsJournal of the Academy of Marketing Science: Online firstThe growing gender polarization in consumers’ pro-environmental engagement—with women more engaged than men— suggests that organizations should consider gender a key criterion when targeting their cause-related marketing and social advocacy campaigns for environmental causes. However, multilevel analyses of 11 behavioral interventions across 63 countries (N = 56,582) reveal that relying on gender alone is insufficient and can even backfire, uncovering a surprising paradox: The gender gap in pro-environmental engagement widens among liberal consumers, in societies with higher gender equality, and cultures emphasizing care over competition. These gender paradoxes emerge when identities and societal contexts intersect, revealing why interventions ignoring such complexities can fail. Results show that a collective action framing is effective across several identity combinations, while a negative emotional appeal can backfire, par¬ticularly among conservative men in gender-equal countries. A web-based tool helps marketers and policymakers select effective environmental interventions across intersecting individual and country-level factors, enabling targeted advocacy and cause-related marketing.
- Alex L., Mai R., Rauschnabel P. A., 2026.Similar but Different: The Differential Implications of Augmented and Virtual Reality Experiences for Raising Engagement towards Climate Change ActionsComputers in Human Behavior, 174, January: 108798
- Trabandt M., Lasarov W., Mai R., Hoffmann S., 2025.How Promoting Access‐Based Consumption Provokes OverconsumptionPsychology and Marketing, 42, 8: 2089-2106
- Canfora B., Mai R., Guetlein M.-C., 2025.Human Dominance Belief Scale: Measurement of the Belief in Humans’ Ability to Dominate NatureEMAC Annual Conference 2025, EMAC European Marketing Academy, Madrid, Espagne
- Krüger T., Hoffmann S., Mai R., Nibat-Cayrol I. N., Lasarov W., Lee M. S. W., Trendel O., 2025.A longitudinal study of consumer animosity: the case of the US presidential electionsInternational Marketing Review, 42, 5: 859–886
- Mai R., Trendel O., Basil M., 2025.Food categorization determines whether healthier food is inferred to be tastier or less tastyJournal of Consumer Psychology, 35, 4: 531–550Despite evidence that people believe that the unhealthier the food, the tastier it is, some studies also suggest the opposing belief—the healthier the food, the tastier it is. A framework is proposed to reconcile this contradiction, and four studies demonstrate that the discrete categorization of foods as healthful versus unhealthful determines which intuition consumers use. When stereotypically unhealthy foods (e.g., candies, ice cream, hot dogs) are encountered, they are automatically categorized as unhealthful and the properties associated with that category (e.g., sweetness, saltiness, fat content) become accessible. Inferences about taste are then based on these properties and the unhealthier the encountered products are (i.e., the higher the sugar and fat content they have), the tastier they are perceived to be (unhealthy = tasty belief). Conversely, when stereotypically healthful foods (e.g., fruits) are encountered, other properties (e.g., freshness, vitamins) become salient, and tastiness is mainly inferred based on these properties, leading to the inference that the healthier these foods are (i.e., the more freshness and vitamins they have), the tastier they are perceived to be (healthy = tasty belief). Marketers and policymakers can leverage these findings to understand better when emphasizing healthiness benefits or hurts taste perceptions.
- Schumacher A., Mai R., 2024.Organizational Top Dog (vs. Underdog) Narratives Increase the Punishment of Corporate Moral Transgressions: When Dominance is a Liability and Prestige is an AssetJournal of Business Ethics (The), 194, 1: 19–36Although company narratives frequently emphasize impressive sales numbers and market lead-ership, such an organizational “top dog” narrative can backfire when companies are accused of engaging in unethical conduct. This research demonstrates, through a series of nine (N = 3872) experimental studies, that an organizational top dog (vs. underdog) narrative increases the in-tended punishment of company moral transgressions but not non-moral transgressions. Such differences in intended punishment emerge because observers infer that organizations with a top dog narrative use predominantly dominance-based strategies to achieve their status, whereas companies with an underdog narrative are less likely perceived as employing such strategies. We provide preliminary evidence that a debiasing intervention decreases the harsher punish-ment of organizations with a top dog narrative but does not affect the punishment of organiza-tions with an underdog narrative.
Seules les 10 dernières publications sont affichées