Consumer shopping motivations: A dependent factor to determine consumer purchase behaviour caused by sales promotions Ralf Visser 2012

(1)

Consumer shopping motivations:

A dependent factor to determine consumer purchase behaviour

caused by sales promotions

(2)

Consumer shopping motivations:

A dependent factor to determine consumer purchase behaviour

caused by sales promotions

Author:

Ralf Visser

Henriette Roland Holst erf 273 3315 TJ Dordrecht

Ralf.visser@gmail.com 06 16 30 24 21

Student number: 1838490

University of Groningen:

Faculty of Economics and Business MScBA marketing management Master thesis

Date: December 2011

1st supervisor: Dr. J.A. (Liane) Voerman 2nd supervisor: S.J. (Stefanie) Salmon MSc

Research theme:

(3)

Management summary

Organizations try to influence consumers’ purchase behaviour with sales promotions. These organizations are in the understanding that they know how to stimulate

specific purchase behaviour of a consumer. For example, in practice an organization wants to increase sales. So the organization uses a price discount promotion and indeed after this promotion the sales seemed to be increased. At first this looks like a well played sales promotion. Only with second thoughts the question arises: was this the most effective promotion to increase the sales?

Not all consumers are attracted the same way by a sales promotion. Some only want the brand they always buy, some are only looking around with some friends and others are attracted by almost all promotions they see. All these consumers have different motivations to shop. Cardoso and Pinto (2010) discuss seven types of consumer shopping motivations: pleasure and gratification shopping, social

shopping, role shopping, idea shopping, value shopping, achievement and efficiency. In this study these types of consumer motivations are used to create five consumer shopping motivation groups: the involved shopper, the pragmatic shopper, the moderate shopper, the dynamic shopper and the functional shopper. These

consumer shopping motivation groups could be predictors of the occurring consumer purchase behaviour caused by a sales promotion. This study has researched the influence of consumer shopping motivation on consumer purchase behaviour caused by a sales promotion is tested. Hence, the following problem statement is formulated:

“How do different sales promotions lead to different consumer purchase behaviour, given the consumer shopping motivation?”

(4)

The data of the research show if there are high and low values that indicate the consumer purchase behavioural reaction due to a combination of sales promotion and consumer shopping motivation group, see table i.

The outcomes of the research shows in three different ways that consumer purchase behaviour caused by sales promotion differ among consumer shopping motivation groups. At first, the different combinations of consumer shopping motivation groups and sales promotions show different consumer purchase behaviour(s) that are highly stimulated. Secondly, the consumer shopping motivation groups have different sales promotions to which they show strong CPB reactions. Finally, the strength of a consumer purchase behaviour caused by sales promotion differs among the

consumer shopping motivation groups. These findings together contribute to the main and most important finding of this study:

“In this study there is found evidence that consumer shopping motivations have a crucial roll in determining consumer purchase behaviour after a consumer is exposed

to a sales promotion.”

Table i: Behavioural reactions due to the combination of consumer shopping motivation group – sales promotion – consumer purchase behaviour type

_Involved shopper Pragmatic shopper Moderate shopper Dynamic shopper Functional shopper Brand switching Purchase acceleration Stockpiling Price discount Product trial Brand switching Purchase acceleration Stockpiling Buy-one-get-one-free Product trial Brand switching Purchase acceleration Stockpiling Premium Product trial Brand switching Purchase acceleration Stockpiling In-store demonstration Product trial

(5)

Preface

It was the summer of 2001. I got a call from the secondary school where I was getting my education. They told me my grades of the third grade (VWO) were to low. The next years of the VWO education would probably be to difficult for me. They decided to place me in fourth grade (HAVO). I was so sad and angry that I told myself: ‘I would prove they were wrong by getting myself a university degree’ . Two more years on the HAVO, four and a half on the TH-Rijswijk and three years on the University of Groningen later this ambition is almost achieved with a master degree in marketing management.

By writing the last words of my master thesis it feels great to know the moment of graduation has come very close now. I am proud about what the thesis has become. A masterpiece with which I have really challenged myself.

I would like to take the opportunity to thank some persons in special. First of all I want to thank my first supervisor Liane Voerman for her positivity and great support during the whole thesis writing process. Her effective feedback enabled me to write a solid master thesis. Also I want to thank my second supervisor Stefanie Salmon for her valuable feedback. Her feedback enabled me to look with renewed vision to my work.

Secondly I want to thank my parents, Freek Visser and Bep van Marrewijk, for supporting me not only thru the period of writing my thesis but supporting me during my whole study and life.

Finally I want to thank my girlfriend, Jolanda Harmans, for her support and patience. You are always there for me, thank you.

(6)

1 Introduction

Within the consumer goods industry competition between brands is fierce. In each category, brands try to win the favour of the consumer. To accomplish this goal, consumer good manufacturers try to influence consumer purchase behaviour (CPB) by using sales promotions (Blattberg et al., 1995). But this is only one of the reasons why companies use sales promotions. According to Peattie and Peattie (1993) there are several other reasons why companies feel the need to use sales promotions: First, the rising product prices. Second, the eroding advertising’s cost effectiveness. Third, increased impulse purchasing among consumers. Fourth, the shortening of time horizons because of the increasing rivalry and accelerating product life cycles. Finally, the improved measurability of sales promotions compared to advertising. There are plenty of reasons for companies to use sales promotions but do they know which sales promotion to use to accomplish a defined goal? Is the outcome of a sales promotion dependant on the type of consumer it is exposed to? Hoyer and Macinnis (2008) already mentioned that the motivation of a consumer has effect on its

purchasing behaviour. Also when a consumer goes shopping and gets confronted with a sales promotion it has a specific motivation (Arnold and Reynolds, 2003). It is interesting to know what the influences of consumer motivation and the kind of sales promotion are on the consumer purchase that will occur.

1.1 The importance of sales promotions and the effect on consumer

purchase behaviour

Sales promotions can be defined as ‘special offers’, value offered to the consumer within a short-term orientation (Yang et al., 2010). Some examples of sales

(9)

nonmonetary sales promotions have a positive effect on consumer purchase behaviour (CPB), where overall monetary sales promotions have overall the strongest effect on consumer purchase behaviour (Luk and Yip, 2008; Zhu and Meyers-Levy, 2009). According to Laroche et al. (2003) a sales promotion has one of the strongest impacts on short-term CPB. Shi et al (2005) investigated the

relationship between sales promotions and CPB. Shi et al. (2005) found that sales promotion can encourage CPB such as brand switching, stockpiling, purchase acceleration, product trail and spending larger amounts. CPB caused by sales promotions have benefits for companies. An explanation of these benefits for companies is given by Laroche et al. (2003): promotional variables can trigger unplanned purchases, sales promotions stimulate the sales of non-promoted merchandise and accelerate the number of shopping trips to the store.

Research has discovered that promotions have varying degrees of effectiveness in stimulating a certain CPB (Shi et al., 2005; Yang et al., 2010). According to Chandon et al. (2000) promotions have varying degrees of effectiveness because promotions offer a consumer different kinds of benefits. The difference in CPB due to a sales promotion would depend on the sensitivity of a consumer towards the kind of sales promotion or the kind of benefit(s) that comes with the sales promotion (Laroche et al, 2003).

1.2 The influence of consumer shopping motivation

(10)

gets influenced by a promotion, would determine the effect of the promotion on that consumer purchase behaviour (Petty et al, 1983; Petty and Cacioppo, 1984). Recent research of Wu and Chen (2009) is in line with this theory. They also found that the purchase decision of a consumer is determined by the kind of shopping motivation a consumer has, utilitarian or hedonic. Wu and Chen (2009) say that price would be the key consideration to consumers with utilitarian motivation and that price would be a relatively less important factor to hedonic motivated consumers.

1.3 Problem statement

A lot of research has been done within the fields of CSM, sales promotions and consumer purchase behaviour. Only in almost all studies the topics are researched separately. The most researched relationship is the effect of sales promotions on consumer purchase behaviour (eg. Gardner and Strang, 1984; Blattberg et al, 1995; Shi et al, 2005). In these studies the consumer is always examined on an aggregate level. However, each consumer has its own reason/motivation to go to the store to buy a product (see 1.2). Based on these different motivations of consumers, the strength and type of consumer purchase behaviour caused by a sales promotion could differ. This is where there exist a gap in knowledge. Yet, there is evidence that a motivation will influence consumer behaviour (Petty et al, 1983; Petty and

Cacioppo, 1984; Fazio, 1990). Therefore, this research focuses on the following problem statement:

“How do different sales promotions lead to different consumer purchase behaviour, given the consumer shopping motivation?”

To create a proper conceptual model, for the above mentioned problem statement, the following research questions have to be answered:

1. Why does certain consumer purchase behaviour occur in general?

2. What types of sales promotions exist and why do they influence consumer purchase behaviour?

3. Which types of CSM’s are there, can they be grouped and what are the specifications of each group?

(11)

1.4 Relevance of the subject

To find an explanation for the effectiveness of promotions on CPB, a lot of research has focused on the promotion itself (Blattberg et al, 1995; Shi et al, 2005). Other research focuses on deal proneness (eg.Chandon et al., 2000). This research contributes to promotional research but now with a focus on consumer shopping motivation, which has not been done before. Based on theoretical and empirical research it becomes clear which consumer motivation groups are triggered in their purchase behaviour by a specific promotion and what kind purchase behaviour occurs with each group. This creates new insights on which segmentation can be based. With the information about the relationship between CSM and CPB influenced by sales promotions a framework could be created. The framework should give the following insight: motivation group ‘Y’ is triggered by promotion ‘X’ and this will lead to behaviour ‘Z’. Such a framework can be used by companies to decide which sales promotion to use as a tactic in their strategy to accomplish a certain goal. Companies will be able to target consumers more specifically, where now the consumer is often targeted as a collective. Such a framework would be valuable for both consumer good manufacturers and retailers. Not only in choosing the most effective promotion to achieve a certain goal but also to convince the other party during negotiation.

1.5 Structure of the report

Chapter one is an introduction with fields of CSM, sales promotion and CPB. Here also the problem statement and research questions are formulated. In chapter 2 A theoretical framework is constructed and the fields of CSM, sales promotion and CPB are further discussed. In this chapter also the hypotheses are formulated. Chapter 3 provides information about the research design. Also in this chapter a profile of the sample is given and groups for further research are formed. In chapter 4 the results of the research are de described and answers are given on the

hypotheses. In chapter 5 the results are further discussed and a conclusion is

(12)

2 Theoretical framework

In this chapter an explanation is given of what underlies the occurrence of a CPB. According to Bucklin et al. (1998) the kind of CPB that will occur during a shopping trip always depends on three decisions consumers have to make: what to buy

(choice), when to buy (incidence) and how much to buy (quantity). The kind CPB that occurs after a consumer is influenced by a sales promotion also depends on the decisions the consumer makes regarding the three questions of Bucklin et al. (1998). It was mentioned in chapter one that sales promotions can encourage CPB such as stockpiling, purchase acceleration, product trial and brand switching (Bell et al, 1999; Shi et al, 2005; Luk and Yip, 2008). Explaining these CPB’s by the questions of Bucklin et al. (1998) regarding choice, incidence and quantity gives a first impression of what underlies the occurrence of a CPB. Stockpiling consumers are motivated to trade off inventory carrying cost to get a better price (Shi et al, 2005). The most important consideration before this CPB occurs, is how much to buy. Purchase acceleration indicates a consumer purchasing a product earlier than intended, for reasons similar to those of stockpilers, according to Shi et al. (2005). The most important consideration before this type of CPB occurs, is when to buy. Product trials occur because the perceived risk for a consumer is lowered. The most important consideration before this type of CPB occurs, is what to buy. Brand switching occurs when the perceived value of one brand exceeds the perceived value of another brand (Mazursky et al., 1987). Theoretically, an increase in a single benefit could cause brand switching (Chandon et al, 2000). The most important consideration before this type of CPB occurs, is what to buy. These questions of Bucklin et al. (1998) are a first step in trying to understand what underlies the occurrence of a CPB. Still, it is unclear when one of the questions of Bucklin et al. (1998) becomes more important than the others as far as the consumer is concerned.

(13)

2.1 Types and benefits of sales promotions

As mentioned in chapter one, different sales promotion give consumers different benefits that influences CPB (Chandon et al, 2000). Chandon et al. (2000)

categorized six of these benefits of sales promotions perceived by consumers. The first type of benefit is savings. Both the size of the price reduction and the deviation from a reference price can create perceptions of monetary savings and can reduce the pain of paying. The second type of benefit is an increase in the quality of the product bought. By reducing the price of a product or by offering a smaller package size, budget constraints relax and enable consumers to upgrade to a better product. The third type of benefit is convenience (reduction in search and decision costs). The promotion helps consumers find the product they want or reminds the consumer of a product they need to buy. It increases the shopping efficiency. The fourth type of benefit is value expression. Consumers respond to sales promotions to express and enhance their sense of themselves as smart shoppers and earn social recognition or affiliation. The fifth type of benefit is exploration. Because promotions are constantly changing they attract consumers’ attention by fulfilling intrinsic needs for exploration, variety, and information. The sixth and last benefit is entertainment. Sales promotions could be intrinsically fun to watch and to participle in.

These perceived benefits are distinguished in hedonic benefits (value expression, exploration, entertainment) and utilitarian benefits (quality, convience in shopping, savings in time, efforts and costs) (Chandon, 2000; Luk and Yip, 2008).To create a better and deeper insight into sales promotions and their benefits, the next parts explain two monetary sales promotions (price discounts and buy-one-get-one-free) and two nonmonetary sales promotions (premiums and in-store demonstrations) together with their benefits.

2.1.1 Monetary sales promotions

(14)

Price discount:

A price discount is a temporary reduction of the list price of a product. A discount promotion lays the focus on the price and especially on the reduced loss (Palazon and Delgado-Ballester, 2009). Looking at the benefits, this type of promotion has the most affinity with the utilitarian benefits of quality and savings (Chandon, 2000; Luk and Yip, 2008). The promotion lowers the price of the regular product which

stimulates money saving. A lower price for more expensive products stimulates quality upgrading.

Buy-one-get-one-free offer:

With buy-one-get-one-free promotion a consumers buys a product and gets an additional amount which is equal to the purchased product for free. This means that consumers must compare and evaluate the additional quantity received with respect to any costs they may incur, e.g. storing the additional quantity (Shi et al, 2005). However, this promotion also reduces losses and is more popular than price discounts. This is because buy-one-get-one-free promotions are more positively framed with the extra ‘free’ product as a gain (Mishra and Mishra, 2011). Looking at the benefits, this type of promotion has the most affinity with the utilitarian benefits of savings in time, efforts and costs (Chandon et al, 2000; Luk and Yip, 2008).

To recapitulate the explanations of both monetary sales promotions; the utilitarian benefit that is commonly shared is the saving in costs and the price discount promotion lowers one single product in price and has as an extra benefit, the possibility of a quality upgrade of the product. The buy-one-get-one-free promotion has its advantage in the extra free product a consumer gains. The extra product is not only for free, it also gives the consumer the possibility to sit out a longer period before it needs to go to the shop to buy this product again. The buy-one-get-one-free promotion has the utilitarian benefits of savings in time, efforts and costs.

2.1.2 Non-monetary promotions

(15)

‘premiums’ and ‘in-store demonstrations’. Both types of nonmonetary sales promotion are now explained with their hedonic benefits.

Premiums:

A premium is simply a product or a service offered free or at a relatively low price in return for the purchase of one or more products (Palazon and Delgado-Ballester, 2009). Premiums take away the focus from the price and focus on the gain. A premium is more seen as a gift, this increases the fun factor of the promotion. Until the last years, not much has been written about the strength of a premium promotion and its reaction on consumer behaviour. Looking at the benefits, this type of

promotion has the most affinity with the hedonic benefits of exploration and

entertainment (Chandon, 2000; Luk and Yip, 2008). The free gift can be announced as fun and make consumers feel like they trying new products.

In-store demonstrations:

The emotion ‘curiosity’ is one of the most powerful emotions in consumer behaviour (Rubinson, 2009). Instore demonstrations, such as food tasting or electronics usage explanations, play on the curiosity emotion of the consumer. In-store demonstrations can generate positive consumer attitudes towards new products by providing

information and experience on a fun way. They can help reduce the resistance of consumers to new products (Ram and Sheth, 1989). This type of promotion has the most affinity with hedonic benefits as value expression and entertainment (Chandon, 2000; Luk and Yip, 2008). Because of the demonstration, which has a fun factor to watch and/or to participate, the consumer knows more about the product so it can buy the product well considered and be proud of its purchase.

To recapitulate the explanations of both nonmonetary sales promotions; the premium promotion is attractive to consumers because it is seen as a free gift and the

(16)

2.2 CSM´s and corresponding shopping behaviour

As mentioned in chapter one, Petty et al (1983) and Petty and Cacioppo (1984) say that the motivation of a person determines its behaviour. This stimulates the

expectation that the kind of shopping motivation a consumer has on the moment he/she gets influenced by a sales promotion would determine the effect of the sales promotion on that consumer purchase behaviour. This paragraph explains the background of CSM to get a better idea of how CSM has its influence on CPB. First CSM is generally explained by two main motivation categories, utilitarian and hedonic motivation. Then those motivation categories are differentiated into seven types of CSM. Finally the different CSM groups that are based on the types of CSM are explained. The explanation per CSM group contains the types of CSM that belong to that CSM group and the shopping behaviour that corresponds with that CSM group.

2.2.1 Utilitarian and hedonic CSM

For a few decades researchers try to understand consumer behaviour. Tauber (1972) already studied the consumer shopping behaviour and especially the consumer motivation behind the consumer shopping behaviour. Because, so Tauber (1972) reasoned, a consumers’ motivation might forecast the actual consumer shopping behaviour. Over the years several types of CSM are defined and grouped (Tauber, 1972; Westbrook and Black, 1985). Hirschman and Holbrook (1982) distinguished utilitarian (traditional) motivation, were the consumer is just focussed about buying the product, and hedonic motivation, where it is more about the consumers emotional arousal. The separation between hedonic and utilitarian motivations has become an important input for research conducted in the following years.

Babin, Darden, and Griffin (1994) talk about hedonic and utilitarian value in consumer shopping behaviour as the shopping value consumers seek in a shopping

(17)

are more intrinsically motivated towards shopping and looking for fun, amusement, fantasy and sensory stimulation (Babin et al, 1994; Teller et al, 2008). According to Teller et al. (2008) the differentiation between hedonic and utilitarian value already is important for retailers and manufacturers of consumer goods because they could target their strategies to the demand of the different shoppers. Nevertheless, deeper categorization of CSM for a better segmentation is also already available.

2.2.2 CSM: types and groups

The hedonic and utilitarian typology is a broad but holistic view on consumer

shopping motivations. The most common hedonic consumer motivational dimensions mentioned in recent literature are: pleasure and gratification shopping, social

shopping, role shopping, role shopping and value shopping (Arnold and Reynolds, 2003; Cardoso and Pinto, 2010). The most common utilitarian consumer motivational dimensions in recent literature are: achievement and efficiency (Kim, 2006; Cardoso and Pinto, 2010). Based on the different consumer motivational dimensions, one could think that a consumer always shops with a specific motivation. Voss et al (2003) agree in this statement by telling that the different consumer motivational dimensions, hedonic and utilitarian, each separately determine consumers’ brand attitude. Others agree with the dimensions but found also evidence that a consumer can be motivated by more than one consumer motivational dimension at the same time (Babin et al, 1994; Arnold and Reynolds, 2003; Cardoso and Pinto, 2010). That a consumer can be motivated by more than one consumer motivational dimension at the same time is probably the most reasonable taken into account that a consumer always has several emotions at the same time and these emotions are input for their motivations (Hirschman and Holbrook, 1982). Based on that theory of Hirschman and Holbrook (1982), as well Arnold and Reynolds (2003) as Cardoso and Pinto (2010) have clustered the different CSM groups.

In the opinion of Arnold and Reynolds (2003) there are no separate utilitarian

(18)

motivations and based their clustering on as well the hedonic consumer motivations as the utilitarian consumer motivations. The clusters formed by Cardoso and Pinto (2010) have interfaces with clusters out of earlier literature from Westbrook and Black (1985), Kim (2006) and Arnolds and Reynolds (2003). The clustering of Cardoso and Pinto (2010) is the most recent and probably most complete one on this moment. That is why the research for this paper is based on these clusters. In the next parts, an explanation is given of each cluster with its interfaces from Westbrook and Black (1985), Arnold and Reynolds (2003) and Kim (2006) (see table 1).

Table 1: shopper types clustered by shopping motivations

Cardoso and Pinto (2010) Clusters that have interfaces according to Cardoso and Pinto (2010)

Traditionalists process-involved shopping Involved shopper

(Arnold and Reynolds, 2003) (Westbrook and Black 1985) Functional shopper Choice optimizing shopper Pragmatic shopper

(Kim, 2006) (Westbrook and Black 1985) Beta shopper Average shopper Moderated shopper

(Kim, 2006) (Westbrook and Black 1985) Alpha shopper Enthusiasts

Dynamic shopper

(Kim, 2006) (Arnold and Reynolds, 2003) Economic shopper Providers

Social shopper

(Kim, 2006) (Arnold and Reynolds, 2003)

Involved shopper:

The involved shopper has a positive attitude towards the hedonic motivational

(19)

Pragmatic shopper:

The ‘pragmatic shopper’ is a consumer who sees shopping as an utilitarian activity and does not give much importance to its enjoyment aspects (Cardoso and Pinto, 2010). This is in line with the functional shopper of Kim (2006) who shows a higher focus on utilitarian motivations than on the hedonic motivations. For the pragmatic shopper it is important to accomplish what he/she had planned on a particular shopping trip and to conclude the shopping trip very quickly (Cardoso and Pinto, 2010). This corresponds with the choice optimizing shopper of Westbrook and Black (1985) who shows a focus on finding a good bargain in the least amount of time. According to Cardoso and Pinto (2010) the pragmatic shopper is more interested in accomplishing the shopping trip in a quick way than in the most cheap way. To target the pragmatic shopper Cardoso and Pinto (2010) suggest an efficient store

organization with objective communication, detailed signs and layouts that turn price and product comparisons easy.

Moderate shopper:

The ‘moderated shopper’ has modest values on as well the hedonic as the utilitarian consumer motivations (Cardoso and Pinto, 2010). This is in line with the beta

shopper of Kim (2006) and the average shopper of Westbrook and Black (1985). To the moderated shopper, efficient shopping is important with some attention to price but most important is to accomplish what is planned on a shopping trip (Kim, 2006; Cardoso and Pinto, 2010). The moderated shopper has a low valuation of the social aspects of shopping (Westbrook and Black, 1985; Kim, 2006; Cardoso and Pinto, 2010). It does not like to interact or communicate directly and indirectly with other individuals involved in the market place (Westbrook and Black, 1985). The social part of the moderate shopper can be found in its ambition to find a perfect gift for

someone (Kim, 2006). Because also gratification shopping is moderately valued with the moderate shopper, retailers can try to explore their emotional facet through gift shopping (Cardoso and Pinto, 2010). Also price promotion effectively displayed inside the store is a way to attract the moderate shopper.

Dynamic shopper:

(20)

shopper of Kim (2006) and the Enthusiasts of Arnold and Reynolds (2003). The dynamic shopper enjoys shopping, but especially likes to search for bargains when he/she shops (Cardoso and Pinto, 2010). Short time shopping and especially for him or herself is what the dynamic shopper prefers. This shopper finds it Important to keep up with trends. The dynamic shopper wants to provide itself with new products and to emphasize innovations. The emotional aspect is important for the dynamic shopper. Cardoso and Pinto (2010) advice to create thrilling shopping experiences for this shopper.

Social shopper:

The ‘social shopper’ has high values on role shopping, social shopping and both utilitarian consumer motivational dimensions (Cardoso and Pinto, 2010). This is already in line with the Economic shopper of Kim (2006) and the Providers of Arnold and Reynolds (2003). The social shopper goes shopping with his/her friends or family to socialize and enjoys shopping for them either (Cardoso and Pinto, 2010). During the shopping trip the social shopper takes the time to search for bargains and likes to socialize with others. The social shopper is price sensitive and considers the

functional aspects of shopping to be important (Kim, 2006). This shopper likes to search for bargains and to shop with others, what probably will be combined.

Cardoso and Pinto (2010) expect that as well monetary as nonmonetary promotions will be effective to attract the social shopper. Also Arnold and Reynolds (2003) and Kim (2006) expect that the kind of bargain is of less importance in the strength to attract this shopper because the social process is of higher importance to the social shopper. The high importance of the social process is the most important difference with the involved shopper to who it is important to have a successful shopping trip by buying the best product for its money.

2.3 Expected relations between CSM, sales promotion and CPB

(21)

and hypotheses are formed based on the connections between those separate fields that are expected. The focus lays on what promotion(s) especially is (are) expected to be effective in attracting consumer attention and what shopping behaviour is most expected to occur. When a sales promotion type or a behaviour type is not

mentioned, this will not mean that the sales promotion type or the behaviour type could not influence or occur to the consumer. It means that theoretical argumentation is in favour of the other sales promotion type(s) or the other behavioural type(s).

2.3.1 The involved shopper

From the four promotions mentioned in paragraph 2.1, the in-store demonstration is probably the most successful to attract this shopper. The social aspect and the informative aspect of this promotion type are the most important reasons for this expectation. The social aspect attract this shopper and the information, brought on a entertaining way, plays on the curiosity of this shopper (Chandon et al, 2000). The informative aspect gives also input for its comparison process and search for

optimum value (Westbrook and Black, 1985). The entertaining way the information is brought to the shopper reduces its resistance to the promoted product. If the

promoted product is normally not bought by the consumer this would increase the importance of the question ‘what to buy’ (Bucklin et al., 1998). The reduced

resistance makes it more likely that a consumer will try a ‘new’ product (Ram and Sheth, 1989). The expectation is that this promotion type stimulates the behaviour of product trail purchasing, which would be in line with the outcomes of Shi et al (2005). The following hypothesis is formulated:

H1.a In-store demonstration promotions causes especially trial purchasing behaviour when exposed to the involved shopper.

(22)

promoted brand. This could stimulate the shopper to switch brand. The combination of a high interest in new products and the risk of threshold creation, because of an in-store demonstration, creates the expectation of brand switching behaviour with the involved shopper. The following hypothesis is formulated:

H1.b In-store demonstration promotions causes especially brand switching behaviour when exposed to the involved shopper.

The involved shopper also looks for choice optimization to make the right deal that fit its demand (Westbrook and Black, 1985). This can be done by influencing the

involved shopper by discount promotions or premium promotions. The involved shopper enjoys the hedonic aspects of shopping (Arnolds and Reynolds, 2003; Cardoso and Pinto, 2010) what makes a premium promotion, because of its fun factor (Chandon et al., 2000), effective. The involved shopper also likes to shop for others. Cardoso and pinto (2010) advice to provide gift opportunities to meet this consumer. Adding a premium to the product creates such a gift opportunity. This should stimulate choice optimization earlier than expected, what increases the importance of the question ‘when to buy’ (Bucklin et al., 1998). This would result in purchase acceleration behaviour. The involved shopper also likes to buy the best product for its money and likes to look for discounts. Changing the ratio price-quality of a product could lower the purchase risk. A premium promotion does not change the quality ratio of the product itself but a price discount will change this price-quality ratio (Chandon et al., 2000). A price discount should increase the question ‘what to buy’ (Bucklin et al., 1998) what would stimulate the CPB’s of product trial and brand switching. The following hypothesis is formulated:

H1.c Premium promotions causes especially purchase acceleration behaviour when exposed to the involved shopper.

H1.d Price discount promotions causes product trial behaviour when exposed to the involved shopper.

(23)

2.3.2 The pragmatic shopper

By seeing shopping as an utilitarian activity with not giving much importance to the hedonic shopping dimensions, the utilitarian focused promotions (price discounts and buy-one-get-one-free) are probably most successful to attract the pragmatic shopper. The pragmatic shopper goes shopping for what it needs on the moment and not for what he probably needs in the future. This makes the question ‘when to buy’ (Bucklin et al., 1998) not a relevant question to the pragmatic shopper. So both promotion types shall not lead to purchase acceleration behaviour. This contrasts with the findings of Shi et al. (2005) that show an increased chance of purchase acceleration with the price discount promotion and the buy-one-get-one-free promotion. The promotions probably could lead to choice acceleration when exposed to this shopper. This because the price discount promotion and the buy-one-get-one-free promotion increases the importance of the question ‘what to buy’ (Bucklin et al., 1998). The deal of a promoted brand has an increased value, the savings in time and costs (Chandon et al, 2000), compared to the deal for a same kind of non-promoted brand. With both promotions the shopper has the chance to shop quick and in the most cheap way (Westbrook and Black, 1985; Cardoso and Pinto, 2010). The expectation is that the price discount promotion and the buy-one-get-one-free promotion both stimulates the behaviour of brand switching when exposed to the pragmatic shopper. The following hypotheses are formulated:

H2.a Price discount promotion causes especially brand switching behaviour when exposed to the pragmatic shopper.

H2.b Buy-one-get-one-free promotion causes especially brand switching behaviour when exposed to the pragmatic shopper.

(24)

H2.c Buy-one-get-one-free promotion causes especially stockpiling behaviour when exposed to the pragmatic shopper.

2.3.3 The moderate shopper

The utilitarian consumer motivation parts of being focused on accomplishing what is planned on a shopping trip, and enjoying the hunt for discounts and bargains exclude the in-store demonstration as a promotion to successful attract the moderate

shopper. Cardoso and Pinto (2010) had the same idea, they expect that price promotions are an effective way to attract the moderate shopper. Because the moderate shopper also likes to look for discounts it will be attracted by the price discount as well as the buy-one-get-one-free promotion. Both sales promotions provide a deal with an increased value and that is what the moderate shopper is looking for. According to Shi et al. (2005) the discount promotion will lead to purchase acceleration behaviour. The benefits as monetary savings and a possibility to have an upgrade in product quality (Chandon et al, 2000) could create a threshold for the moderate shopper. This increases the importance of the question ‘when to buy’ (Bucklin et al., 1998) what makes it plausible that purchase acceleration will occur. Because the moderate shopper likes to make an efficient shopping trip also the buy-one-get-one-free promotion should be attractive with its savings in time, efforts and costs (Chandon et al., 2000). This increases the importance of the question of ‘how much to buy’ (Bucklin et al., 1998) what makes it plausible that stockpiling will occur. The occurrence of stockpiling would be in line with the outcomes of Shi et al. (2005). The following hypotheses are formulated:

H3.a Price discount promotion causes especially purchase acceleration behaviour when exposed to the moderated shopper.

H3.b Buy-one-get-one-free promotion causes stockpiling behaviour when exposed to the moderated shopper.

(25)

thresholds for the consumer that increases the importance of the question ‘when to buy’ (Bucklin et al., 1998). The expectation is that a premium promotion lead to purchase acceleration. The following hypothesis are formulated:

H3.c Premium promotion causes especially purchase acceleration behaviour when exposed to the moderated shopper.

2.3.4 The dynamic shopper

The dynamic shopper is as well motivated by hedonic aspects as by utilitarian

aspects. Therefore, probably all four promotion types will have a positive influence on this shopper. The monetary promotions will be attractive because the dynamic

shopper likes to search for bargains (Kim, 2006; Cardoso and Pinto, 2010) and the non-monetary promotions will be attractive because the dynamic shopper wants to be up-to-date with the new trends and innovations (Arnold and Reynolds, 2003; Cardoso and Pinto, 2010).

The price discount promotion will probably increases the importance of the question ‘when to buy’ (Bucklin et al., 1998) because of the monetary savings and the

possibility of an increase in the quality of the product bought (Chandon et al, 2000). According to Shi et al. (2005) the discount promotion has the strongest effect on purchase acceleration behaviour. The expectation is that purchase acceleration is one of the behaviours caused by the price discount promotion when exposed to the dynamic shopper. Less effective would be the effect of product trial behaviour (Shi et al, 2005). But because of this shoppers’ interest in new trends, products and

(26)

H4.a Price discount promotion causes especially purchase acceleration behaviour when exposed to the dynamic shopper.

H4.b Price discount promotion causes especially trial purchase behaviour when exposed to the dynamic shopper.

H4.c Buy-one-get-one-free promotion causes especially purchase acceleration behaviour when exposed to the dynamic shopper.

Of the non-monetary promotions, both the in-store demonstration and the premium promotion are probably effective to the dynamic shopper. The in-store demonstration is a good tool to inform consumers about new product and innovations. Because the dynamic shopper is highly interested in new products and innovations the in-store demonstration promotion increases the importance of the question ‘what to buy’ (Bucklin et al., 1998). The in-store demonstration can provide an added impetus for buying a brand that otherwise would not have been purchased (Shi et al, 2005). The same applies to premium promotion. To this enthusiastic shopper a premium could be just that little bit extra that enlarges the threshold just enough to try the product. Expected behaviour caused by both promotions is trail purchase which, in case of the in-store demonstration, is in line with the outcomes of Shi et al. (2005). The following hypotheses are formulated:

H4.d In-store demonstrations causes especially trial purchase behaviour when exposed to the dynamic shopper.

H4.e Premium promotions causes especially trial purchase behaviour when exposed to the dynamic shopper.

2.3.5 The social shopper

The social shopper has high values on as well hedonic and utilitarian aspects of shopping motivations (Kim, 2006; Cardoso and Pinto, 2010). This would mean that as well monetary as non-monetary promotions will be effective to the social shopper. Because of the social aspect non-monetary, more hedonic valued, promotions will probably be most effective. Of the non-monetary promotions the in-store

(27)

knows what it wants and is looking for a good deal (Arnold and Reynolds, 2003; Kim, 2006) this promotion type is expected to increase the importance of the question ‘when to buy’ (Bucklin et al., 1998). The in-store demonstration will probably lead to purchase acceleration when exposed to the social shopper. The following hypothesis is formulated:

H5.a In-store demonstrations causes especially purchase acceleration behaviour when exposed to the social shopper.

This shopper likes to look with friends or family for good deals. Therefore, a product with an increased threshold is interesting for this shopper. Except the in-store demonstration, all other three promotions can increase threshold. Of these other three promotion types the price discount is probably the most effective to the social shopper. A buy-one-get-one-free promotion and a premium promotion both give an extra product which can be perceived as pleasant but is not directly perceived as needed. A price promotion not only has the benefit of money savings, which gave the possibility to buy other products with the saved money, but could also result in an increase in the quality of the product bought (Chandon et al., 2000). This possibility to increase in the quality of the product bought stimulates the importance of the questions ‘when to buy’ and ‘what to buy’ (Bucklin et al., 1998). Because the social shopper already knows which products it wants to buy (Cardoso and Pinto, 2010) the price promotion stimulates the importance of the question ’when to buy’ and will probably lead to purchase acceleration behaviour. The following hypothesis is formulated:

(28)

2.4 Conceptual model

Figure 1 shows the conceptual model that is based on the literature discussed in chapter 2. It is proposed that the kind of CPB is an effect of the combination of a CSM group with a type of sales promotion. Table 2 shows the several hypotheses. The table shows the different combinations that are possible with the used CSM groups, the used sales promotions and the used CPB’s in chapter two. The black area’s show the hypotheses as a function of the combination between CSM group and sales promotion type that will cause a CPB.

Figure 1: Conceptual model

Table 2: Hypotheses as a function of the combination between CSM - sales promotion – CPB

Involved shopper Pragmatic shopper Moderate shopper Dynamic shopper Social shopper Stockpiling

Purchase acceleration H3.a H4.a H5.b

Product trial H1.d H4.b

Price discount

Brand switching H1.e H2.a

Stockpiling H2.c H3.b Purchase acceleration H4.c Product trial Buy-one-get-one-free Brand switching H2.b Stockpiling

Purchase acceleration H1.a H3.c

Product trial H4.e

Premium

Brand switching

Stockpiling

Purchase acceleration H5.a

Product trial H1.c H4.d

In-store demonstration

(29)

3 Research design

In this chapter the preconditions are described to test the hypotheses. The design and the procedure of the research are explained as well as the plan of analyses. In the last part of this chapter a profile of the sample is given.

3.1 Research method

In this paragraph the design and the procedure of the research are described. First of all the type of research is explained. This explanation gives an image of the most important variables and the best method to study the relationship between the variables. This is followed by an explanation about the data collection instrument. This gives an image about the questionnaire that is used to get answers of the participants. The last part of this paragraph gives an idea of the way this research has been operationalized and the kind of sample that is approached.

3.1.1 Type of research

An explanatory study is performed to find the answers on the hypotheses. This study has a 5 x 4 x 4 factorial design. The variables used for this research are CSM

(involved shopper, pragmatic shopper, moderate shopper, dynamic shopper, social shopper), sales promotion (price discount, buy-one-get-one-free, premium, in-store demonstration) and CPB (stockpiling, purchase acceleration, product trial, brand switching). To collect the data that is necessary to test the hypotheses, a quantitative research is conducted. Information about the behaviour and motivations of

consumers is needed. An appropriate method to use would be the survey method (Malhotra, 2007). Therefore, a survey is performed and constructed for this research.

3.1.2 Data collection instrument

(30)

shopping, most often I go with a friend or family member to socialize’ and ‘It is disappointing when I have to go to multiple stores to complete my shopping’. The statements are bases on the statements used by Arnolds and Reynolds (2003), Kim (2006) and Cardoso and Pinto (2010). In their articles, these statements have proven their feasibility to perform reliable outcomes. Participants are ask to give their opinion about these statements on a scale of 1 (totally disagree) to 5 (totally agree).

In the second part of the questionnaire the different sales promotions and CPB’s are handled, starting with a baseline story. The product chosen in the baseline story is wine. Wine is for a lot of people a sort of luxury good and promotions tend to have a stronger impact on hedonic luxury products (Zheng and Kivetz, 2009). Because the impact of the promotions will be stronger, the behavioural effects will be more clear to see. To prevent that participants will be biased, no brand names are used. The

baseline story continues with the four scenario’s. Each scenario is a type of

promotion (discount, 1+1, premium and in-store demonstration). After each scenario four statement are given to the participant. These statement are the same for each scenario. By keeping the structure this general, the chance of biasing the participants is low.

(31)

After the announcement of each promotion four statements are given to the

participant. These statements are inspirited by the survey used by Shi et al. (2005). Examples of the statements are: ‘Situations like these, makes me like to try the wine I’ve never tried before’ and ’Situations like these, makes me buy wine earlier than planned’. Answers to these questions can be given on a scale from 1 (totally disagree) to 7 (totally agree).

The questionnaire ends with some demographic questions about age, gender, income and education. Also some questions are asked concerning the participants involvement with wine and its promotional proneness. One could think that

promotional proneness is covered by value shopping, only this motivational

dimension only covers discounts and bargains. With testing promotional proneness all kinds of promotion are taken into account. Questions about the promotional proneness are inspired by Schneider and Currim (1991).

3.1.3 Operationalization

The survey that is used for this study is made operational through the internet. Most participants were asked by mail to participate. The advantage of a survey this way is that easily and with low-cost a wide target group can be reached (Blumberg, 2008). Also for participants it feels more anonymous, what could make participate the survey more attractive, and it allows the participants to take some more time to think about their answers to the questions (Malhotra, 2007; Blumberg, 2008). Disadvantage of the survey method is a low response rate, especially through the internet. There are three steps that are used to overcome a high level of non-response. First step, by targeting a large group and especially own relations (family, friends, acquaintances) that already have liking or compassion for the researcher, what makes it more likable that they will participate the survey (Blumberg, 2008). Second step, every three to four days after publishing the survey there is send follow up mail to remind

participants who did not yet participate. This will be done till there is enough

(32)

Another disadvantage of the survey is the lack of interviewer intervention that makes it impossible to explain questions when misunderstood by the participant (Blumberg, 2008). The researcher tries to overcome this problem by creating valid and structured questions in the questionnaire.

Questions about promotional proneness and wine involvement are asked at the end of the questionnaire. There is chosen to ask these questions at the end of the

questionnaire to prevent participants of being biased during the questionnaire. Now, during the first twenty-four questions about shopping motivation, the participant will think about shopping in general and not about shopping for wine.

3.1.4 Sampling

The main focus of the research lays on the CSM groups. Of each group it must

become clear what behavioural reaction occurs after being exposed to a certain sales promotion. Therefore, there is chosen for 5 target groups, where each target group represents one CSM group. Because each shopper has its own motivation to shop (Tauber, 1972; Arnold and Reynolds, 2003; Cardosso and Pinto, 2010), everybody who shops is suitable for this research. This directly decreases the problem of sample control (Malhotra, 2007). With the choice of wine as a product the sample needed has been made more specific. Wine is an alcoholic beverage and according to the CBS (Centraal bureau voor de statistiek) 85% of the Dutch population (13 million people) consumes alcohol. Looking specifically at the wine consumers also a group of non wine consumers is excluded from this survey. According to Gfk Panel Services Benelux in 2009, 76% of the Dutch population drinks wine regularly. So the group of non wine consumers is relatively small. This means a population of 12 million wine consumers. With a population of 12 million consumers a sample of 385 participants is needed when we measure a 95% confidence level and a 5%

(33)

3.2 Plan of analyses

This paragraph describes the way the acquired data is analysed. An explanation is given of how the CSM groups are created and how the different behavioural

responses per CSM group are determined.

3.2.1 Creating CSM groups

The seven motivation types are the fundaments to form the different CSM groups (Arnold and Reynolds, 2003; Kim, 2006; Cardosso and Pinto, 2010). The first twenty-four questions of the questionnaire are meant to determine the values on each motivational dimension (hedonic and utilitarian) for each participant. The ratio between the scores on the motivational dimensions (hedonic and utilitarian)

determine to which CSM group a participant belongs. By this way all participants are divided over the CSM groups. This is why the validity and reliability of the first twenty-four questions are very important.

To perform reliable CSM groups the same steps are used as in the studies of Arnold and Reynolds (2003), Kim (2006) and Cardosso and Pinto (2010). First, a factor analysis (principal component analysis) with a (varimax) rotation is performed to test the validity of the questions (Malhotra, 2007). By this way it becomes clear which group of questions belong to each motivational dimension. When the factor analyses has determined which questions can be grouped, secondly, the internal reliability of each group of questions is tested by measuring the Coefficient (Cronbach’s) alfa (Malhotra, 2007). As a third step a hierarchical clustering analysis is used. Ward’s method with the squared Euclidean distance was used to identify the number of clusters (Malhotra, 2007). The clusters are performed on the scores that each participant has on the motivational dimensions. To determine if clusters really are different from each other, an ANOVA analysis with Tukey HSD post hoc test is used to search for significant differences between the clusters on the scores of the

motivational dimensions.

(34)

hypotheses, formed in paragraph 2.3, are based on the CSM groups of Cardoso and Pinto (2010). Hypotheses for each CSM group must be tested based on the data provided by respondents that belong to that CSM group. So it is important that, each time the hypotheses for a CSM group are tested, the right cluster is used. To make sure each time the right cluster is used to test the hypotheses, clusters are compared with the CSM groups Of Cardoso and Pinto (2010) to know which clusters and CSM groups are related. Therefore, the mean scores on the motivational dimensions of the found clusters are compared with those of the CSM groups of Cardoso and Pinto (2010). A visualization of the mean scores on the motivational dimensions per CSM group of Cardoso and Pinto (2010) is given in table 2. Corresponding scores on the motivational dimensions determine whether a cluster is related to a CSM group of Cardoso and Pinto (2010). The more mean scores of motivational dimensions corresponds between a cluster and the CSM group of Cardoso and Pint (2010), the more plausible it is that the cluster and CSM group are related. After determining the relationships between the performed clusters and the CSM groups of Cardoso and Pinto (2010), a profile of each cluster is given based on demographic variables.

Table 2: CSM group profiles (Cardoso and Pinto, 2010)

(35)

3.2.2 Analysing CPB based on CSM group and sales promotion

The purchase behaviour of the consumer is the dependent variable in this study. The participants, which are divided in different CSM groups, have given their opinions about what behaviour could occur during a certain sales promotion. First of all, a mean score is calculated for each combination of CSM with sales promotion and purchase behaviour. This is visualized in a table like table 3. With the mean values, the significant differences within and between the groups are measured. First, the significant differences on CPB within each CSM group is measured. A Paired-Sample T Test is used (Malhotra, 2007). Here the hypotheses are tested. To get a little more information about the CSM groups also the significant differences in CPB between the groups is measured. This is done with an ANOVA analysis with a LSD post hoc test for each combination of sales promotion and CPB. Outcomes show which CSM groups have the strongest CPB’s after being exposed to a sales promotion.

Table 3: Mean CPB scores of a CSM group when exposed to a sales promotion

(36)

3.3 Profile of the sample

Table 4: Profile of the sample

Totally 238 consumers have participated the survey, which means that with a confidence interval of 5% the confidence level of the outcomes is around 88%. Table 4 shows the demographic differences within the sample. The distribution of participants within each demographic variable can be used to explain the outcomes in CPB. Within the demographic variable of age the largest groups of

participants are within the ages of 16 to 25 (39.5%) and 46 to 55 (18.9%). These groups have a larger share in the outcomes that determine CPB than the other groups of age. With 2.1% of the sample the age group of over the age of 65 has the smallest share in the outcomes that determine CPB. Looking at the demographic variable of gender, females represent the largest group of the sample with demographic variable of gender, females represent the largest group of the sample with 59.2%. Females have a larger share in the outcomes that determine CPB than males. Within the variable of net income per year most participants are among the groups of €0 to €10,000 (27.7%), €10,000 to €20,000 (22,7%) and €20,000 to €30,0000 (25.6%). The large percentage of the group with a net income per year between €0 and €10,000 can probably be

explained by the large group of participant between the ages of 16 to 25 years old. Most of these participants are probably students with or without a part-time job. The demographic variable of highest finished education show that most of the participants have finished a higher education like MBO (21%), HBO (34%) or WO (19.3%). The large group of participants that only finished their secondary school can also be explained by the large group of participants within the ages of 16 to 25 years old. The variable of promotional proneness (m = 3.07) shows that participants are overall

Total N % Age 16-25 94 39.5 26-35 30 12.6 36-45 32 13.4 46-55 45 18.9 56-65 29 12.2 over 65 5 2.1 Gender Male 97 40.8 Female 141 59.2 Net income per year (€)

0-10,000 66 27.7 10,000 - 20,000 54 22.7 20,000 - 30,000 61 25.6 30,000 - 50,000 37 15.5 over 50,000 20 8.4 Highest finished education

(37)

moderately positive promotional prone. This means that participants will react on a sales promotion with CPB. The variable of wine involvement (m = 3.25) shows that participants are overall positively involved with wine. This indicates that participants are probably also interested when wine is in promotion.

Overall there is a clear distribution of participants among the categories within each demographic variable. Groups that have a larger share in shaping the outcomes that determine CPB are: within age the group of 16 to 25 year olds (39.5%), within gender the females (59.2%) and within highest finished education the group with a HBO degree (34%). Participants are moderately positive promotional prone and positively involved with wine which means that participants will show a CPB after being

exposed to a sales promotion.

3.4 Finding the motivational dimensions

To find the motivational dimensions that will be used to determine the CSM clusters first a factor analysis is performed on the items seen in table 5. The value of the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of sampling adequacy is 0.837, which indicates that the validity of the items is appropriate for factor analysis (Malhotra, 2007). Additionally, the Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity is significant (p = 0.000) which implies that the

(38)

Table 5: Hedonic and utilitarian motivations – principal components factor analysis Motivational dimensions Items Percentage of variance Alpha coefficient Factor loadings I go shopping to keep up with the trends 0.80 I go shopping to see what new products

are available 0.71

Idea shopping

I go shopping to keep up with the new fashions

27.67 0.831

0.82 When I am in a down mood, I go

shopping to make me feel better 0.67 I go sopping when I want to treat myself

to something special 0.72

I find shopping stimulating 0.59 To me, shopping is a way to relieve stress 0.72 Pleasure and

Gratification shopping

Shopping makes me feel like I am in my own universe

12.32 0.768

0.44 I enjoy looking for discounts when I shop 0.80 For the most part, I go shopping when

there are sales 0.86

Value shopping

I enjoy hunting for bargains when I shop

7.153 0.837

0.86 I like shopping for others because when

they feel good I feel good 0.65 I enjoy shopping around to find the perfect

gift for someone 0.80

Role shopping

I enjoy shopping for my friends and family

6.717 0.782

0.81 I enjoy socializing with others when I shop 0.81 Shopping with others is a bonding

experience 0.65

Social shopping

I go shopping with my friends or family to socialize

5.098 0.78

0.81 It is important to accomplish what I had

planned on a particular shopping trip 0.80 On a particular shopping trip, it is

important to find the items I am looking for 0.69 A good store visit is when it is over very

quickly 0.54

Efficiency

It is disappointing when I have to go to multiple stores to complete my shopping

4.442 0.731

0.73 It feels good to know that my shopping

trip was successful 0.79

Achievement

I like to feel smart about my shopping trip

4.366 0.657

0.55

(39)

3.5 Cluster profiles

Based on the performed factors from paragraph 3.4 a cluster analysis is conducted. Ranges of four and five cluster solutions were tested. The distribution of participants among a four cluster solution is n1 = 63, n2 = 50, n3 = 31, n4 = 93 and among a five clusters is n1 = 54, n2 = 55, n3 = 68, n4 = 29, n5 = 32. These distributions show a big step from five to four clusters. Examination of the dendogram and agglomeration schedule show also a big step from five to four clusters. Based on the distributions the dendogram and agglomeration schedule a five-cluster solution is more preferable (Malhotra, 2007).

Means per motivational dimension are calculated for each cluster and tested on significant differences to see if the clusters are really different from each other. In table 6 the means and significant differences can be seen. Significant differences are

Table 6: Cluster profiles with the mean values across the motivational dimensions Motivational

dimensions Cluster 1 Cluster 2 Cluster 3 Cluster 4 Cluster 5

(40)

found between the clusters on every motivational dimensions, e.g on the CSM of pleasure and gratification shopping clusters two (M = 2.98), three (2.90) and four (3.21) have significantly higher mean scores than clusters one (M = 1.75) and five (m = 1.82), P < .05. This means that the clusters are different from each other.

Participants from one cluster really have different CSM’s than participants from another cluster. The means the different clusters have on the motivational

dimensions are also compared with the outcomes of Cardoso and Pinto (2010) to look for relations with their shopper profiles. In the following parts the profiles of the clusters are being identified. Also some background information is given per profile based on the demographic data from table 7.

Table 7: Cluster profiles explained by demographic variables Cluster 1: Pragmatic shopper Cluster 2: Involved shopper Cluster 3: Moderate shopper Cluster 4: Dynamic shopper Cluster 5: Functional shopper Total Consumer profiles N % N % N % N % N % N % Age 16-25 20 21 21 22 24 26 19 20 10 11 94 100 26-35 10 33 7 23 10 33 3 10 0 0 30 100 36-45 3 9 8 25 13 41 3 9 5 16 32 100 46-55 10 22 12 27 10 22 3 7 10 22 45 100 56-65 9 31 5 17 8 28 1 3 6 21 29 100 over 65 1 20 2 40 2 40 0 0 0 0 5 100 Gender Female 18 13 39 28 45 32 25 18 18 13 141 100 Male 36 37 16 16 23 24 4 4 14 14 97 100

Net Income per year (€)

(41)

3.5.1 Cluster 1

Cluster 1, composed of a majority of males, consist out of 23 per cent of the sample. This group further exist for 56 per cent out of participants between the ages of 16 and 35, highest education finished is HBO or higher for 59 per cent and net income per year lays for 33.3 per cent between €20,000 and €30,000. There is a moderate promotional proneness (m = 2.93) which is significantly lower than cluster 3 (m = 3.38) and cluster 4 (m = 3.48), p < .05, but significantly higher than cluster 5 (m = 2.5), p < .05. This group is weakly involved with wine. There are no significant differences in wine involvement with other clusters.

Cluster 1 has particularly high positive values in the two utilitarian dimensions, ‘Achievement’ and ‘Efficiency’, and negative values on almost all hedonic

dimensions. This is similar to the pragmatic shopper of Cardoso and Pinto (2010). Looking at table 6 there are similarities with the pragmatic shopper of Cardoso and Pinto (2010) on the motivational dimensions pleasure and gratification shopping, idea shopping, social shopping and efficiency. Approximately, 13 per cent of the female participants are distributed in cluster 1, while 37 per cent of the male participants belong to this group. This distribution in gender also corresponds with the distribution in gender for the pragmatic shopper of Cardoso and Pinto (2010). As can be seen, cluster one has close similarities with the pragmatic shopper of Cardoso and Pinto (2010). Therefore, from here cluster one shall be referred to as the pragmatic shopper.

3.5.2 Cluster 2

(42)

Just like the ‘Involved shopper’ of Cardoso and Pinto (2010) this group has positive values on ‘Social shopping’ and ‘Achievement’ with lower values on ‘Role shopping’ and ‘Efficiency’. Looking at table 6 there are similarities with the involved shopper of Cardoso and Pinto (2010) on the motivational dimensions pleasure and gratification shopping, social shopping, achievement and efficiency. Approximately, 28 per cent of the females are ‘Involved shoppers’ while 16 per cent of the males belong to this group. This distribution of genders also corresponds with the involved shopper of Cardoso and Pinto (2010). As can be seen, cluster two has close similarities with the pragmatic shopper of Cardoso and Pinto (2010). Therefore, from here cluster two shall be referred to as the involved shopper.

3.5.3 Cluster 3

Cluster 3 represents 28 per cent of the sample. Of the sample 32 per cent of the female and 24 per cent of the male belong to this group. Among the five clusters this is the second largest group of males. From the participant between the ages of 36-45 at least 41% are in this group. Highest finished education is secundairy school or MBO for 53 per cent of this group, 59 per cent between €10,000 and €20,000 or less net per year. The consumer of cluster 3 has a positive value on promotional

proneness (m = 3.38) which is significantly larger than the promotional proneness of clusters 1 (m = 2.93), cluster 2 (m = 2.91) and cluster 5 (m = 2.5), p< .05. Of all clusters, the consumer of cluster 3 is the most involved with wine. Cluster 3 is significantly more involved with wine (m = 3.08) than cluster 4 (m = 2.39), p< .05.

Just like the ‘moderate shopper’ of Cardoso and Pinto (2010) the group has positive values in some hedonic dimensions like ‘Role shopping’ and ‘Value shopping’, and moderate or negative values on the other hedonic dimensions. The utilitarian

Consumer shopping motivations: A dependent factor to determine consumer purchase behaviour caused by sales promotions Ralf Visser 2012

Consumer shopping motivations:

A dependent factor to determine consumer purchase behaviour

caused by sales promotions

Consumer shopping motivations:

A dependent factor to determine consumer purchase behaviour

caused by sales promotions

Management summary

Preface

Table of contents

1

Introduction

1.1 The importance of sales promotions and the effect on consumer

purchase behaviour

1.2 The influence of consumer shopping motivation

1.3 Problem statement

1.4 Relevance of the subject

1.5 Structure of the report

2

Theoretical framework

2.1 Types and benefits of sales promotions

2.2 CSM´s and corresponding shopping behaviour

2.3 Expected relations between CSM, sales promotion and CPB

2.4 Conceptual model

3

Research design

3.1 Research method

3.2 Plan of analyses

3.3 Profile of the sample

3.4 Finding the motivational dimensions

3.5 Cluster profiles