Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
net/publication/235250479
CITATIONS READS
84 753
2 authors, including:
Christina Lee
Monash University (Malaysia)
43 PUBLICATIONS 722 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Lee, C. K.C, Yap, C. S. F. & Levy, D. S. (2016). Place identity and sustainable consumption: Implications for social
marketing, Journal of Strategic Marketing, 24(7),1-16. View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Christina Lee on 31 August 2015.
Introduction
Marketers are interested in understanding the consumer behaviour of the
family because it is considered the most important decision making and
consumption unit (Assael, 1998). It is estimated that the spending power of
adolescents today is significantly greater than for any previous group, with
their disposable income being between US$82.1 billion and US$108 billion a
year. Furthermore, if account is taken of the influence adolescents have on
family purchase decisions, ranging from consumer electronics to holidays,
education, housing and groceries, the expenditure they influence is in excess of
US$300 billion per year (Kelly, 1998). Researchers and practitioners are
interested in conflict, and conflict resolution in the family decision-making
process because of its impact upon the outcome of the purchase decision.
Although there are studies available in the consumer behaviour literature
regarding conflict resolution in the family decision-making process (Davis,
1976; Corfman and Lehmann, 1987; Spiro, 1983; Qualls and Jaffe, 1992), children
have rarely been considered in these studies. On the other hand, theorists in
family systems (Minuchin, 1985) and developmental psychology (Sameroff,
1983) argue that children should be included as part of the unit of analysis.
Furthermore, depending on the method used to collect research data, there is
argument about which conflict resolution strategies predominate during family
decision making. For example, research based on self-report data notes that
coalition formation and persuasive tactics are rarely used, but a problem-
solving approach is most frequently used (Belch et al., 1980). In contrast,
research based on observational methods suggests that coalitions provide a European Journal of Marketing,
Vol. 34 No. 9/10, 2000, pp. 1181-1198.
common tactic for resolving decision-making conflict (Vuchinich et al., 1988). # MCB University Press, 0309-0566
European The objective of this study is to identify dominant decision strategies used in
Journal of the family decision-making process, and to determine whether observed
Marketing coalition patterns are related to gender and position of the children (i.e. whether
34,9/10 the child is the youngest or the eldest) in the family decision-making unit. The
data used to examine this process were collected using videotaped family
interactions.
1182 The next section contains a literature review of family decision-making
strategies, which are defined as the type of process the family uses to come to a
joint decision. Influence tactics are defined as the specific ways of
implementing a decision strategy. The effect that the children's gender
composition has on family decision making is also discussed. Following a
description of the research method, the results are discussed.
Literature review
Conflict and conflict resolution in family decision making
Although serious conflict in family purchase decisions are rare, some form of
family conflict is highly probable, because forming a joint preference requires a
combining of individual preferences of family members.
Sheth (1974) has argued that conflict between family members results from
the existence of different cognitive structures, which may include different
purchase motives (goals) and evaluative beliefs (perceptions about
alternatives). Depending on the cause of the conflict, family members attempt
to resolve it by using different decision strategies. These, according to Sheth,
can be classified as problem solving, persuasion, bargaining and politics. Davis
(1976) used two models to describe decision strategies, the consensual model
which encompasses Sheth's idea of problem solving, and accommodation
which encompasses persuasion, bargaining and politics.
Two other consumer behaviour researchers (Spiro, 1983; Qualls and Jaffe,
1992) have used conceptual models to describe conflict resolution strategies
used in family decision-making processes. There seems to be some consensus
among these four authors about the strategies used to resolve conflict. Entries
in Table I show the different conceptual models developed by these authors,
providing their labels for each category of decision-making strategy and tactic
used. Labelled strategies have been aligned across each author's category
listing, and each item associated with a single term in the right-hand column.
Alignment of categories from previous research in this way enables us to
integrate the previous conceptual models into a single table, and show where
they overlap, plus their similarities.
Consider the strategy summarised as ``experience'', which directly influences
the decision outcome. Problem solving as a conflict resolution strategy is
frequently used, and employs the expertise or experience of members in the
decision-making unit. This process usually entails more information search
prior to evaluating purchase decision alternatives, as well as the seeking of
Qualls and Summer
Family decision
Jaffe (1992) Spiro (1983) Sheth (1974) Davis (1976) terma making
Strategy Strategy Strategy Tactic Strategy Tactic Strategy
± Legitimate ± ±
Multiple purchase
Role structure Specialist Legitimate
1183
Controller
Avoidance- Reward/ Politics Coercion ± Shopping together Coalition
withdrawal referent coalitions Coercion
Coalitions
Capitulation Emotional Persuasion ± Persuasion Irresponsible critic Emotion
Feminine intuition
Bargaining Bargaining Bargaining ± Bargaining Next purchase Bargaining
Concession Impulse purchase
Procrastinator
- Impression ± ± ± ± ± Table I.
management An integration of
conceptual models of
Notes: a Categories of decision-making strategy tested in this study, which are defined in decision-making
Table II strategies and tactics
support from credible sources outside the family. Family discussion focuses
upon facts and the choice is based on a consensus between members (Davis,
1976).
Consider the strategy summarised as ``legitimate'', which notes the
importance of role stereotypes in influencing a decision outcome. Here, role
structures appear to be used to legitimise the use of power. For example, a
mother may use her established role to point out that she is the one who deals
with the provision of food, and therefore should dominate such a decision. More
generally, the legitimate strategy involves a controller, or specialist, taking
charge during the decision-making process, in a stereotypical manner.
The strategy summarised as ``coalition'' considers the importance of two or
more members of the family unit who collude in order to influence the outcome
of a particular decision. Coalition is associated with political strategies and the
use of coercion. Sheth (1974) suggested that using politics is rare and only
occurs when the family disagrees, not only on the buying motives, but also on
fundamental issues such as lifestyle. Politics may also involve the formation of
coalitions and sub-groups in an attempt to isolate any member with whom
there is conflict.
The remaining two types of family decision strategies used to achieve
accommodation (Davis, 1976) are persuasion and bargaining. The strategy
summarised as ``Emotion'' considers the situation where a member tries to
persuade or dominate others by using emotive appeals, crying, pouting and
other non-verbal techniques to gain influence over the decision outcome.
Persuasion (Sheth, 1974) seems to embrace emotive forms of gaining influence
European such as nagging, or using personal criticism. Methods used (influence tactics)
Journal of that are associated with persuasion include criticism and intuition. Note that
Marketing while there is greater interaction between members, there is no attempt to seek
more information.
34,9/10 The strategy labelled as ``bargaining'' is about trade-offs, where one member
attempts to gain influence in a family decision-making process by exchanging
1184 value somewhere else. Members explicitly acknowledge that conflict exists,
and the concepts of distributive justice and fairness are invoked. Bargaining
influence tactics used include waiting for the next purchase, impulse
purchasing and procrastination (Davis, 1976).
Perfect alignment of the strategy labels across the four conceptual models
was not possible, with the intent being to show their similarities. Impression
management (Spiro, 1983) had no natural counterpart, but we consider this
decision-making strategy to be a form of persuasion that could be aligned with
the term ``emotion''.
Research method
Data collection
Data were collected from videotaped observations of family interactions,
conducted in the respondent families' own homes. A total of 89 families were
selected from a pool of participants of European descent, drawn from four high
schools around the Auckland area in New Zealand. All respondent families
were nuclear families with two adolescent children whose ages were between
12 and 19. There was an almost equal split between the number of male and
female children within the sample. In 46 cases the eldest child was female,
while in 43 cases the youngest child was female. Similarly, in 43 cases the
eldest child was male, while in 46 cases the youngest child was male.
The family interactions were triggered by a simulated family decision-
making process, in which each family was offered the chance to win $150 to
spend at a family restaurant. In the interaction situation the scenario presented
was that the family had already won the prize money, and they were then
required to determine the family's choice of five favoured venues.
Two researchers were involved in the data collection process. After the
initial introductions upon arrival, one researcher attended to setting up the
video camera (a relatively small camera to minimise intrusion), whilst the other
researcher spoke with the family to distract attention from the camera. The
camera was set up in a corner of the room at some distance away from where
the family was seated, which was usually around the dining table. Other
measures to minimise intrusion by the camera included not mentioning when it
was turned on, getting all family members to fill in two lengthy questionnaires
before beginning the interaction phase, and by not having anyone behind the
camera, or in the room, during the family interaction. The first questionnaire
measured their interest in eating out as a family, while the second
questionnaire measured commitment to their role stereotype, which was used
European to indicate whether the family has a traditional or contemporary style. The
Journal of family's demographic details were recorded after the videotaped interaction
Marketing was complete.
34,9/10 A test was conducted with a random sample of 25 respondent families to
determine the realism of the scenario situation presented. A three-item, five-
point Likert scale produced a mean of 1.96, which represents agreement that
1188 the situation was realistic (Cronbach's alpha = 0.79).
emotion. Bargaining, which involves trading off power in the present decision
for a greater say in the next, features in the typologies of all four studies
reported. Legitimate influence also features in most categorisations; Spiro
(1983) explains that influence can be legitimised through emphasising
stereotypical family roles.
Three trained judges viewed 30 tapes, and one judge viewed all 89 tapes, in
order to judge the dominant decision strategy used. The agreement of the three
judges were compared to determine the reliability of the judgement technique.
For the 30 cases, the proportion of interjudge agreements was 0.86, which gave
a PRL reliability measure of 0.99 (Rust and Cooil, 1994). In light of the high
agreement between the judges, all 89 judgements of the main judge were
accepted into the database.
Results
Dominant decision-making strategies
Multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was used to test the effects of the
dominant decision strategies used, and members' influence score, over the three
stages of the decision process. Results obtained showed that the dominant
decision-making strategy adopted by a family seems to have greater impact
upon the influence score of the children than on the influence score of the
parents (elder child, F = 1.79, p < 0.05; younger child, F = 1.5, p = 0.12; children
together, F = 2.54, p < 0.05). Further analysis, which is summarised in Table
III, revealed that the emotion decision-making strategy had most impact upon
the influence scores of children, particularly during the configuration and
negotiation stages of the decision-making process. Consider the mean influence
scores shown in Table III for the following configuration: elder child, mean
influence score = 16.81, although influence under bargaining was higher with a Family decision
mean score of 23.00; younger child, mean influence score = 25.51; both children, making
mean influence score = 19.66. Similarly, considering the negotiation stage, we
can see that decision-making strategy had considerable impact upon a child's
influence score; elder child, mean influence score = 25.32; younger child, mean
influence score = 22.36, both children, mean influence score = 23.83. Although
causality cannot be determined here statistically, we conjecture that it is the 1191
child's use of emotive appeal to gain influence that leads to their having a
dominant impact on the family decision-making strategy.
To summarise, decision strategies do not seem to have any statistically
observable significance when we consider the influence structures of parents,
but they certainly play quite an important role when we consider the influence
of children during the configuration and negotiation stages of the decision-
making process. Although the statistics do not reflect the thought, it is also true
by definition that if a child gains or loses influence, then either a sibling or a
parent must also show a corresponding, compensatory gain or loss. In other
words, an artefact of basing the relative influence score on a 100-point scale is
to make gains or losses of influence a zero sum game. The results obtained here
provide support for acceptance of P1; the relative influence exerted by different
family members is related to the dominant decision-making strategy adopted
by the family.