主讲人

（单位）

关旭

（华中科技大学）

主持人

（单位）

何勇

（h片 ）

讲座时间

2026年4月29日上午10:00

讲座地点

经管楼B201

主讲人简介

关旭，华中科技大学管理学院教授，华中卓越学者首席教授，国家杰出青年科学基金获得者。主要研究方向为供应链管理、运营与市场结合、信息设计和平台经济。在Management Science, Marketing Science, Manufacturing and Service Operations Management, Information Systems Research, Production and Operations Management等商学院权威期刊发表多篇论文。现任中国运筹学会博弈论分会副理事长，中国管理现代化研究会生产与运作管理专业委员会副主任委员，中国管理科学与工程学会青年工作委员会秘书长；担任Decision Sciences, Service Science期刊副主编（Associate Editor）和Management Science等国际权威期刊审稿专家。

讲座内容摘要

Over time, firms across industries have adopted quality verification as a costly yet credible tool to signal product excellence and convey reliable information to consumers. In the era of social media, however, consumers increasingly rely on online reviews—an accessible but inherently biased source of product information—to guide their purchase decisions. Therefore, in practice, companies now frequently combine quality verification with consumer reviews to influence the perception of product quality. This study examines how firms can strategically determine their optimal quality verification approach to mitigate the negative effects of review bias, and how the timing of verification affects outcomes. We consider two quality verification formats: pre-release verification, conducted before reviews are available, and responsive verification, conducted after reviews are observed. Pre-release verification helps shape early consumers’ expectations and improves late consumers’ interpretation of biased reviews. As the magnitude of review bias increases, firms are more likely to proactively adopt pre-release verification, although this leads to a decline in expected profits due to higher upfront costs. By contrast, responsive verification allows firms to selectively react to negatively biased reviews, preserving the upside potential of favorable reviews. When review volatility is high, this reactive strategy can lead to higher profits. Our results show that each verification format can enhance firm profitability under specific conditions, depending on the cost of verification and the degree of review bias. These findings offer actionable insights into how firms can manage information flows and strategically balance third-party verification with user-generated content in dynamic market environments.