Impact of Average Rating on Social Media Endorsement: The Moderating Role of Rating Dispersion and Discount Threshold

March 8, 2019 yuan zhuang Leave a comment

This is a review of paper “Impact of Average Rating on Social Media Endorsement: The Moderating Role of Rating Dispersion and Discount Threshold” written by Xitong Li (2018)

Facebook launched the “Like” button in February 2009. Since then, more and more social media platforms, such as Twitter, LinkedIn and Instagram, started with introducing this service for their users. This liking function can be of great value for companies using these platforms for advertising. According to a study of Li and Wu (2013), one additional Facebook Like on a sponsor ad averagely will increase the company’s revenue by 215 dollars. It is therefore very interesting for companies to investigate in the motivating factors, that cause people to like and endorse a product since it can be an important extra source of revenue. How to encourage more users to involve in a product endorsement has therefore become increasingly essential to every company in terms of strategic marketing.

Why do people endorse products?

When a user clicks the “Like” button for a sponsored product, the product will automatically be shared to his or her Facebook friends. So the main reason for people to endorse a product is to inform their friends about a good deal. Users are willing to share and endorse a product to friends if they think it is a recommendable product or they want to show their interesting for this product publicly. For some users, social media endorsement is an uneconomical bargain since they should put their self-image at risk and may not get any monetary compensation. For instance, the self-image risk arises when they endorse a product with low quality. It is therefore important for people to make sure that the deal or product they are promoting to their friends is of high quality. A method often used to get knowledge on the quality is the average rating. The research therefore investigates how online reviews about restaurants affect social media endorsement of deal vouchers sold by the restaurants.

Research Questions

While the average rating had been studied previously, how features of averaging rating will be the cause of social media endorsement were still unclear. Li (2017) attempted to start from the rating dispersion and discount threshold to investigate how these two features affect social media endorsement. To be specific, the author hopes the paper enables to answer the following two questions,

(1) Does a higher average of review ratings about the restaurants increase social media endorsement (Facebook Likes) of deal vouchers?

(2) Do rating dispersion moderate the effect of average rating on social media endorsement?

Previous studies show two possible motivations to drive consumers’ sharing on social media endorsement, which are increasing social capital (Lin et al, 2001) and enhancing self-image (Akerlof and Kranton, 2000). A higher average rating can signal to customers that the product gain recognition from the mainstream market and customers are more willing to endorse it to their friends. However, what a large dispersion of review rating of a product means to customers can have two opposite conjectures. On the one side, a large dispersion of review rating may send a signal to customers that the product has high uncertainty on its quality (Feldman and Lynch, 1988). On the other side, a large dispersion of review rating may imply the product is unique and niche that is more attractive to customers with well-matched preference (Clemons et al 2006, Sun 2012).

Research design

The author chose the daily-deal businesses as the research setting and the restaurant industry as the object of research. Data of restaurant deals were collected from two sources, a data set provided by Byers et al. (2012) that consists of a nationwide sample of deals across 19 major cities of the United States, and a commercial daily-deal aggregator. To exclude restaurants that may not exist or too small, the author also checked whether the profile of a restaurant can be found on Yelp. Com or not. Finally, a cross-sectional data set that includes 2,545 restaurant deals and 129,129 individual review ratings has been generated. The author regards Facebook likes endorsed for a product deal as the dependent variable and review ratings on Yelp.com as the independent variable of this paper.

Findings

The main findings of this paper are:

• The average rating increases consumers’ endorsements via Facebook for restaurants with enough reviews.

• The effect of average rating on social media endorsement is greater for restaurants with more dispersed review ratings.

The first finding thus confirms the expected behavior of consumers which is that a higher review rating is associated with a perceived higher quality. This makes people more willing to endorse the product, since their risk of sacrificing their self-image or their social capital is lower. The second finding is quite surprising, since it indicates that people value more dispersion in a rating over a pure opinion.

Strengths and weaknesses

One of the strengths of the paper is that it takes place in a real life setting and uses real life data. Additionally. the researcher ensures a causal relationship between the dependent and independent variable by using a regression discontinuity (RD) design. Another strength is that, it gives interesting insights on a topic where existing views exist, which can be helpful for firms using social media endorsements. Weaknesses of the paper are that it only focuss on one specific business area, making it harder to generalize the findings to other fields. Next to that the research only uses likes as endorsement measure, however in the current social media era, there are other ways to endorse such as sharing or commenting which are not included.

Managerial implications and research implications

The research generates some interesting insights on the effect of the review rating. It can be valuable to know for company to know what impact their rating has on their social media advertisements, since these advertisements can generate large amounts of additional revenue. It is therefore of great importance for companies to make sure that their average review rating is high. Secondly it generates especially important new insight for companies with niche products, that have a more dispersed rating. For these companies, it is more useful to make use of social media advertising, since they can benefit from the endorsement effect most. It can be insight full to do future research on the effect of review ratings in other business areas and to investigate what other factors can influence the social media endorsement of consumers to test if the research also stands for other services and products.

Reference

Akerlof GA, Kranton RE (2000) Economics and identity. Quart. J. Econom. 115(3):715–753.

Byers JW, Mitzenmacher M, Zervas G (2012) Daily deals: Prediction, social diffusion, and reputational ramifications. Proc. Fifth ACM Internat. Conf. Web Search Data Mining (WSDM’12) (ACM, New York), 543–552.

Clemons EK, Gao GG, Hitt LM (2006) When online reviews meet hyper differentiation: A study of the craft beer industry. J. Man-agement Inform. Systems 23(2):149–171.

Feldman JM, Lynch JG (1988) Self-generated validity and other effects of measurement on belief, attitude, intention, and behavior. J. Appl. Psych. 73(3):421–435.

Li X, Wu L (2013) Measuring effects of observational learning and social-network word-of-mouth (WOM) on the sales of daily–deal vouchers. Proc. 46th Hawaii Internat. Conf. System Sci. (HICSS), Maui, HI, 2908–2917.

Lin N, Cook KS, Burt RS (2001) Social Capital: Theory and Research (Transaction Publishers, New Brunswick, NJ).

Sun M (2012) How does the variance of product ratings matter? Management Sci. 58(4):696–707.

Opinion

Spotify for Artists — Opening Spotify to independent artists, who Will benefit? The superstars or struggling artists of the industry?

March 8, 2019 simonschn Leave a comment

It might not be long before the music industry is revolutionized yet again. Although Spotify’s new feature is still in its beta if it is actually implemented it would allow independent artists to upload their music directly to Spotify, bypassing all the intermediaries that are currently needed. In other words, it would allow anyone to write or produce a song and upload it to Spotify for the whole world to hear, with little to no effort. However, the question remains: who will benefit more from this – the superstars or struggling artists of the music industry?

Over the past two decades, the rise of the internet has changed how we consume, purchase, and think about music, and with that the music industry altogether. First, illegal downloading platforms such as Napster or LimeWire leveraged the internet’s unique sharing capabilities to allow people easy (and free) access to their favorite songs. Then, Apple introduced the world to iTunes an online music store. And now, we have shifted entirely away from buying music to streaming music from streaming services such as Spotify, Apple Music or Tidal.

Although the music industry has undergone great change, one aspect remains unchanged. Record labels are still the gatekeepers of the industry. Artists need to be signed to labels in order to upload their music to a streaming service. In turn, they take a large portion of the revenue generated from the artist’s music. Alternatively, independent artists can upload their music to streaming platforms through third-party digital distributors, again, in return for rather large fees or commissions. The closeness and complexity of such streaming services, thus, restricts and discourages many individuals from sharing their music.

However, there are alternatives to get music to large audiences — through platforms that are open for anyone. A popular example of such an open platform is SoundCloud. Compared to Spotify, SoundCloud allows any artists to upload their music with one click. Consequently, allowing some of the biggest stars of our generation to emerge, such as Post Malone, XXXTentacion or Travis Scott. Although Soundcloud has introduced per-stream-payments, given the low number of premium users the money to be earned remains very minimal. Therefore, many artists view SoundCloud as a stepping stone. Once their songs go viral, artists tend to sign to major labels and release their following projects to all streaming services simultaneously, in order to get paid sufficiently. Furthermore, on closed platforms record labels or distributors decide what music enters the mainstream. Giving artists the liberty to upload their music independently, shifts this power more to consumers.

Spotify for Artists

Given the great success of SoundCloud, more exclusive streaming services are working on open business models that include and promote more independent artists. An example of this is Spotify’s new beta feature — Spotify for Artists. In September 2018, Spotify launched a feature to their streaming service that opens the platform to independent artists (currently only available to 1000 selected artists). It allows any individual to create an artist account and directly upload their music (of course, only if the rights to the music are owned). Thus, bypassing the need for a major label or third-party aggregator. Although Spotify’s new feature slightly differs to the functions of SoundCloud, at its core both very similar. Furthermore, the feature gives artists full control and direct access to streaming information. Spotify is basically extending its platform to create a more equal-opportunity market to allow for less established artists to compete with the superstars of the music industry.

How does Spotify benefit from this?

Because Spotify has made only a few announcements and statements about their expectations derived from their new feature, what exactly they hope to gain is unclear. However, generally opening any platform to more user-generated content has two benefits for platforms or online retail stores. Firstly, the volume of products available to consumers increases and secondly, the content is diversified (more niche products) (Barzilay et al., 2018). In the case of Spotify, its users have more artists (and songs) to choose from and a more diverse range of genres and sub-cultures. It can be expected that a more open platform will lure many artists that exclusively (can) upload their content to SoundCloud to switch to uploading their music to Spotify. It might even allow new genres to emerge comparable to the ‘emo-rap’ movement that started on SoundCloud. Currently, these movements do not offer enough potential for labels to sign and promote them, thus, opening a platform gives these sub-cultures a stage. Perhaps even creating more active, identity-based communities on Spotify (Ren et al., 2012). Furthermore, by eliminating the intermediaries (i.e. record labels) more money is left to be earned either by Spotify or the artists themselves. Thus, drastically reducing the influence and role record labels play in the industry.

Spotify can utilize the enhancement of their service to secure a competitive advantage over their competitors, it can be used as a selling point for new potential customers and it can increase customer satisfaction and loyalty for already existing customers.

What are the risks for Spotify?

For Spotify, the risks associated with opening the platform are limited. Nevertheless, most prominently, Spotify can fail to create an equal opportunity platform. The increase in content made available to users can (1) induce a choice overload effect, where the users are overwhelmed by choices, and (2) decrease the overall quality of content. Both these downsides can introduce a Superstar effect on the platform (Barzilay et al., 2018). This means that opening the platform creates an even greater dispersion between the superstars and the struggling artists of the music industry. In other words, the already established artists receive an even greater portion of the user-generated streams, leaving less revenue to be generated for smaller struggling artists.

However, it is disputed whether opening the platform will shift the distribution of generated revenue more towards the superstars or struggling artists (Barzilay et al., 2018). It remains in the hands of Spotify to decide in what direction the distribution shifts. As already is the case now, through their sophisticated recommendation agents and carefully curated playlists Spotify can steer whether to promote the superstars or the struggling artists. These tools are leveraged by Spotify to control what artists or songs come to the user’s attention.

References:

Barzilay, O., Geva, H., Goldstein, A. and Oestreicher-Singer, G. (2018). Equal Opportunity for All? The Long Tail of Crowdfunding: Evidence From Kickstarter. Working Paper

Ren, Y., Harper, F.M., Drenner, S., Terveen, L., Kiesler, S., Riedl, J. and Kraut, R.E. (2012). Building member attachment in online communities: Applying theories of group identity and interpersonal bonds. MIS Quarterly. pp.841-864.

Articles

How direct-to-consumer brands are revolutionizing the consumer-packaged goods (CPG) industry

March 8, 2019 bonnieykong Leave a comment

From Amazon to Apple, technology has disrupted traditional commerce companies, where technology solutions have enhanced the experience of the product or services for consumers. However, certain industries, such as consumer packaged goods (CPG), have remained relatively stable. In the past, innovation in CPG has been focused on products’ functionalities (e.g., a fast-action dish soap, or advanced whitening toothpaste). Despite CPG’s brand legacy and R&D capabilities, younger consumers are increasingly drawn to emerging micro-brands, small-scale brands tailored to niche markets (The Economist, 2018). In the rise of consumer-technology solutions, how do CPG companies stay relevant in delivering consumer-centric solutions? The answer lies with direct-to-consumer (DTC) brands.

Overwhelmed with options in your local supermarket

What is a direct-to-consumer distribution?

Direct-to-consumer is the practice of selling to consumers directly, without the need of a third-party retailer or middleman. Adopting a DTC model has numerous benefits, including reducing costs associated with working with a middleman and furthering a company’s brand equity, where companies can further develop their brand relationship with customers on an e-commerce website or brick-and-mortar store.

Direct sales also allow for a better understanding of customer data (Chonsksi, Caldbeck, and Jordan, 2019). When selling to a third-party store, consumer brands know how much volume they are selling to a store, but they do not know how well a certain product is selling in terms of individual sales. Thus, DTC sales enable greater understanding of sales data and valuable insight for marketing purposes.

An example of a successful DTC company is Warby Parker, the online retailer of prescription glasses and sunglasses. Founded in 2010, the company emerged as an online-only model, where customers received different styles of glasses in the mail to try at home, and purchase the style that best fits them (O’Connell, 2012). Priced at $95 per frame, the glasses were substantially more affordable than glasses in stores. Furthermore, the company established a donation program, where for each pair of glasses purchased, a pair is donated in partnership with the nonprofit, VisionSpring. Thus, consumers associate Warby Parker with affordable styles and social consciousness, messages of the brand that may not be conveyed through a third-party retailer. Warby Parker has also grown its presence to stores across the United States, extending the brand experience.

How traditional CPG companies can innovate

While many retailers are adopting a DTC model, it is difficult to see this model applied with CPG brands because they are stapled goods. Household products have become part of ones’ routine, so there is little room for large-scaled innovation as such changes may not be accepted by consumers. At the same time, new “startup consumer brands” are emerging with an emphasis on an online-store or subscription model (Duguay, 2018).

The shift to e-commerce reflects changing consumer behaviors, where consumers are increasingly attached to their computers and mobile devices. With the rise of grocery delivery services, it is evident that consumers find grocery shopping a hassle. As a result, these emerging consumer brands complement the shift in consumer purchasing habits.

CPG companies can learn from this model by expanding their marketing channels and service delivery methods. While CPG brands have a presence on television and digital media, many consumers discover products and deals through their local supermarket. As a result, the supermarket plays an integral role in consumers’ perceptions of the brand. A DTC model would give CPG companies greater control of customers’ interaction with the brand. One way to accomplish this is through pop-up stores. For example, St. Ives, the skincare brand under Unilever, launched a pop-up store in New York City, where customers can purchase products and mix customized scents. Similarly, Kellogg’s, the iconic American cereal brand that has stocked grocery stores for a century, has opened a café in New York, where patrons can have a bowl of cereal with toppings. Both examples prove that traditional brands with a long legacy can continue to innovate by directly reaching the customers.

CPG brands are also partnering with emerging brands to expand their portfolio capabilities. In 2016, Unilever purchased Dollar Shave Club for $1 billion (Cao & Mittleman, 2016). Although Unilever has an existing portfolio of shaving products, the company was interested in Dollar Shave Club’s subscription model and its capability of developing a strong following quickly. Similarly, Colgate acquired a minority stake in Hubble, an online subscription company for contact lenses, in 2018 (Copeland & Terlep, 2018). With Hubble, Colgate is exploring innovative ways to deliver its legacy products (think a subscription model for toothpaste). With Amazon and Walmart expanding their footprint and capabilities, traditional CPG companies are looking for innovative solutions to remain relevant.

Implications for other industries

Aside from CPG companies, it would be interesting to see whether a DTC model applies to other traditional industries such as household appliances and electronics. Unlike CPG brands, there is not a high turnover for the product. You will not go through a washing machine as you would go through laundry detergent. Household appliances and electronics innovate with new functionalities are advancements in their existing technology (think a faster food processor). The challenge is that the average customers are not enticed to purchase the newest model of an appliance item because they are satisfied with a product that serves its fundamental purpose. As a result, household products are not agile to customer needs.

However, a DTC model can still be applied in this industry. Purchasing appliances is still an experience, and many consumers want to see the product before purchasing it. Similar to Warby Parker, household appliance brands can have dedicated retail stores to showcase their line of the product instead of going through a third-party retailer (e.g., department stores). Another benefit of having dedicated stores is that customers can ask specialists questions about the product. Household appliances can also consider an e-commerce model, where users can test a product at home before committing to purchase the product. The limitation of this proposal is the cost of shipping and greater risks associated with larger products.

Looking Ahead

DTC distribution has proven to be successful, especially for emerging brands that have gained a loyal following. By selling products directly to the consumer, brands can control the messaging of the product. When it comes to CPG brands, there is are a lot of avenues for further growth including launching pop-up stores or partnering with emerging brands. Ultimately, a better understanding of the customer will position CPG companies for greater growth.

References

Cao, J. (2016, July 21). Why Unilever Really Bought Dollar Shave Club. Retrieved March 8, 2019, from https://www.bloombergquint.com/business/why-unilever-really-bought-dollar-shave-club#gs.0ippbt

Chokshi, S., Caldbeck, R., & Jordan, J. (2019, February 25). A16z Podcast: Who’s Down with CPG, DTC? (And Micro-Brands Too?). Retrieved March 8, 2019, from https://a16z.com/2019/02/15/cpg-dtc-microbrands-grocery-online-offline-commerce/

Copeland, R., & Terlep, S. (2018, July 02). A Toothpaste Club? Colgate to Invest in Online Startup. Retrieved March 8, 2019, from https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-toothpaste-club-colgate-to-invest-in-online-startup-1530537593

Duguay, A. (2018, March 15). If The Consumer Is Strong, Why Are CPG Brands Struggling? Retrieved March 8, 2019, from https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesfinancecouncil/2018/03/15/if-the-consumer-is-strong-why-are-cpg-brands-struggling/#3bfb3fcb4728

O’Connell, V. (2012, July 19). Warby Parker Co-Founder Says Initial Vision Was All About Price. Retrieved March 8, 2019, from https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10000872396390444097904577535111565440718

The growth of microbrands threatens consumer-goods giants. (2018, November 08). Retrieved March 8, 2019, from https://www.economist.com/business/2018/11/08/the-growth-of-microbrands-threatens-consumer-goods-giants

Business Case

Did you receive an unjust traffic fine? Challenge it with a robotic lawyer!

March 8, 2019 nikkihubers Leave a comment

Everyone must be able to use his or her rights. Therefore, Appjection strives to improve access to the law. At Appjection, they noticed that people were too lazy to challenge their traffic fines, even when the fines were unjust. This lead to their idea: an app where people can easily challenge unjust traffic fine on their smartphone.

In 2016, three students from Leiden University founded Appjection. At the start of their business, they managed to win the ‘De Brauw Legal Innovation Challenge’ in 2016 for which they received €25.000 euros of financial support for their business and free legal advice of De Brauw lawyers (Potjewijd, 2016).

Appjection makes it easy to file an objection against fines and other administrative decisions. According to the founders, only 2.5% of the submitted objections are currently officially wrongly declared (Arag, 2018). However, the actual number of unjustified fines is much higher according the founders of Appjection (Arag, 2018). A possible reason for this, is the lack of knowledge on how to draw up an objection and how to appeal after a rejection. Mostly, people think it is a waste of time and they just pay their fine because they do not think it is worth it to make the effort to object.

How does it work?

By using artificial intelligence, Appjection can handle large numbers of fines. The process starts by people taking a picture of their fine and uploading it to Appjection. The system automatically extracts all the information from the fine that is necessary. This is done by using text recognition from Google Vision (Koot, 2018). The software recognizes the words on the fine which are then converted into digital text. After uploading the fine, the system asks to answer several questions about the fine and the moment it happened. The customer also needs to indicate why he or she does not agree with the fine. Submitting the fine will only take a few minutes. Based on the information provided, the system searches the database for previous similar cases and generates a customized objection for every fine uploaded (Koot, 2018). Moreover, it checks whether there is a reason to make an objection and whether this objection has an actual chance of success. When there is no opportunity of success, Appjection makes no objection. If there is a reason to make a successful objection, the system automatically completes the process and files the objection.

After the system processed the fine, the customer will receive an acknowledgement with the reference number. One of the lawyers of Appjection will tell the customer within a few days whether the objection has a chance of success (Appjection, n.d.). If there is a chance of success, the system will file the objection either digitally or by post. If there is no possibility for an objection or chance of success, they will tell the customer why. As soon as something changes in the status of customers’ objection, they will be informed by e-mail (Appjection, n.d.).

Business model

Appjection is offering their service for free. It does not matter if Appjection wins or loses, the service is always free of charge. This is possible because they receive a compensation from the government when the objection is successful. In the Netherlands, there is a law which states that if professional legal aid is provided, and it is proven that a fine was deemed unjust, a compensation will be provided by the government (Zorab, 2018). The compensation they receive from the government contains a legal costs allowance, which is intended as a compensation for the costs of lawyers who provide legal assistance. Therefore, if the customer would have filed the objection himself, he or she would not receive this compensation (Appjection, n.d.).

Moreover, Appjection also partnered with some companies. This is a good initiative to be able to grow their platform as their business is dependent on the number of customers submitting traffic fines. They started a cooperation with legal assistance insurer Arag and Leaseplan, an international Dutch company that is specialized in car leasing (Arag, n.d.; LeasePlan, n.d.). Because of the cooperation with Appjection, their customers have the possibility to object unjust fines in a simple way.

Efficiency of the Model

The system works well for rather simple fines as the database is filled in manually by the founders until now. However, filling in this database will go automatically in the future through deep learning, where the software learns from the outcome of the cases and automatically updates the database (Koot, 2018). For now, this might be a drawback of the App, as it can mainly be used for rather simple fines.

Furthermore, as stated before, Appjection receives a compensation when they file an objection that turns out to be successful. Therefore, their business model is dependent on the number of fines that are submitted by customers. When customers only submit fines that have no chance of success or when they do not submit fines in general, the business model will not be sufficient. Their business model, or the value they create, is therefore dependent on customers. They create value from customers sending in their fines.

Future Plans

To build a bigger market, Appjection is planning to use the system for other areas as well. One of the founders, states that he sees opportunities in various other categories, such as taxes, UWV and flight delays (Mr. Online, 2017). Right now, Appjection consists of a team of 4 people including a Chief Technical Officer (Mr. Online, 2017). They believe that their business has a high potential to grow, not only in the Netherlands but throughout the whole world. Although the law in the Netherlands makes it easier to gain revenue, the founders do have plans to move abroad (Zorab, 2018). By building new partnerships and getting offered an investment of €100,000 euros recently in a Get In The Ring initiative, they might be able to realize these future plans (Get in the Ring, n.d.). By using this system, customers just need to sit and relax, while a robotic lawyer challenges their fines. What more do they want?

References

Appjection. (n.d.). Onterechte boete? Check binnen een paar minuten kosteloos of je bezwaar kunt maken. Retrieved March 6, 2019, from Appjection: https://www.appjection.nl/

Arag. (2018, September 14). LegalTech startup Appjection slaat met ARAG handen ineen in strijd tegen onterechte verkeersboetes. Retrieved from Arag – Persbericht: https://www.arag.nl/medien/pdf/persbericht_-_onterechte_boetes_aanpakken.pdf

Arag. (n.d.). In beroep gaan tegen verkeersboete. Retrieved March 6, 2019, from Arag: https://www.arag.nl/particulier/reizen-en-verkeer/verkeersovertredingen/bezwaar-verkeersboete/index.html

Get in the Ring. (n.d.). 600k investment offers live on stage at Get in the Ring Netherlands 2019. Retrieved March 6, 2019, from Get in the Ring: https://getinthering.co/600k-investment-get-in-the-ring-netherlands/

Koot, J. (2018, October 25). Robot vocht al 2000 Nederlandse boetes aan. Retrieved from Financieel Dagblad: https://fd.nl/futures/1274924/robot-vocht-al-2000-nederlandse-boetes-aan#

LeasePlan. (n.d.). Informatie voor leaserijders. Retrieved March 6, 2019, from LeasePlan: https://www.leaseplan.com/nl-nl/mijn-leaseauto/

Mr. Online. (2017, November 7). WHIZKIDS BESTORMEN LEGALTECHMARKT. Retrieved from Mr. Online: https://www.mr-online.nl/whizkids-bestormen-legaltechmarkt/

Potjewijd, G. (2016, June 6). De Brauw announces three finalists of its Legal Innovation Challenge. Retrieved from De Brauw Blackstone Westbroek: https://www.debrauw.com/newsitem/de-brauw-announces-three-finalists-legal-innovation-challenge/

StartupDelta. (n.d.). Dutch Tech to Watch – Appjection: Automated Professional Legal Aid. Retrieved March 6, 2019, from StartupDelta: https://www.startupdelta.org/dutch-tech-to-watch-appjection-automated-professional-legal-aid/

Zorab, J. (2018, February 5). Max Heck: Legal Geek of the Week. Retrieved from Legal Geek: https://www.legalgeek.co/read/max-heck-legal-geek-week/