Optimization: Journal of Research in Management

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access
Open Access Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Restricted Access Subscription Access

Determinants of Purchase Intention of Private Brands in India:A Study Conducted on Hypermarkets of Delhi


Affiliations
1 Department of Management, Wolaita Sodo University, Ethiopia
2 Department of Management& Humanities, G.L. Bajaj Institute of Technology & Management, Gr. Noida, India
     

   Subscribe/Renew Journal


The present study proposes to study the impact of factors that affects the purchase intention of customers toward private brands with the broad objective to assist managers and marketers to gain good insight about the behavior of Indian buyers so that they can formulate effective strategies to improve the overall performance of private brands in terms of customer acceptability in hypermarkets. Based on extensive review of literature seven independent variables namely perceived price, perceived quality, perceived risk, perceived value ,store image, store brand familiarity, shelf space allocation are identified to analyze the purchase intention towards private brands as dependent variable. The study was conducted Sep to Dec, 2017. For this research Delhi city is the main focus of this study as there are many hyper markets operate in this city. As well Delhi is full of multi-social class of people. Therefore, this research is to study Indian consumer attitude towards private brands. The research design used is causal research design. Data was collected from the customers through primary sources using questionnaire as instrument. A survey questionnaire was prepared using five point Likert scale to measure the response on continuous scale. Sample frame constitutes the customers of two hyper retail stores (Big Bazaar and Easy Day) who purchased the private brand in their purchase. Sampling techniques was judgemental and the effective sample size was 369. Descriptive and inferential statistics was used as data analysis tool. The taken model explains 76.2% variably of purchase intention of private brands by identified seven variables. Six independent variables viz., Perceived price, Perceived quality, Perceived risk, Perceived value, Store image and Store brand familiarity have significant impact on purchase intention towards private brands while one independent variables viz., Shelf space allocation have no significant impact on purchase intention towards private brands. Perceived risk & Perceived price is negatively related with purchase intention towards private brands. Store image has highest impact followed by Store brand familiarity and Perceived value. On the basis of the results of this research, it can be recommended the hypermarket retailers should try to enhance the image of their store and their private brands. They should also create the brand value which means that the benefits sought must overweigh its cost. As price and perceived risk are negatively related so the retailers should be vigilant about the price and perceived risks by the customers of private brand customers.

Keywords

Private Brand, Purchase Intention, Price, Perceived Quality, Perceived Risk, Perceived Value, Store Image, Store Brand Familiarity and Shelf Space Allocation.
User
Subscription Login to verify subscription
Notifications
Font Size

  • • Aaker, D. A. (1996). Measuring brand equity across products and markets. California Management Review, 38(3), 103-126.

  • • Ailawadi.A.L and Harlam, B. (2004). An empirical analysis of the determinants of retail margins: the role of store brand share. Journal of Marketing, 68, 147-162.

  • • Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179-211.

  • • Arslan, Y., Gecti, F., & Zengin, H. (2013). Examining perceived risk and its influence on attitudes: a study on private label consumers in Turkey. Asian Social Science, 9(4), 158-166. http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/ass.v9n4p158

  • • Baltas, G., & Doyle P (1998). An empirical analysis of private brand demand recognising heterogeneous preferences and choice dynamics. The Journal of the Operational Research Society, 49(8), 790-798.

  • • Baltas, G., Argouslidis, P.C. (2007). Consumer characteristics and demand for store brands.

  • • Bao, Y., Sheng, S., Bao, Y., & Stewart, D. (2011). Assessing quality perception of private labels: intransient cues and consumer characteristics. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 28(6), 448-458.

  • • Bauer, Raymond A. (1960). Consumer Behavior as Risk Taking, Proceedings of the American Marketing Association,389-398.

  • • Beneke, J. (2010). Consumer perceptions of private label brands within the retail grocery sector of South Africa. African Journal of Business Management, 4(2), 203-220.

  • • Berges.F., Hassan. D., & Dihan, S. V. (2014). Are consumers more loyal to national brands than to private labels. Bulletin of Economic research, 1-17.

  • • Besharat, A. (2010). How co-branding versus brand extensions drive consumers’ evaluation of new products: A brand equity approach. Industrial Marketing Management, 39(8), 1240-1249.

  • • Bettman, J. R. (1973). Perceived risk and its components: a model and empirical test. Journal of Marketing Research, 184-190.

  • • Binninger, A.S. (2008). Exploring the relationships between retail brands and consumer store loyalty. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 36 (2), 94-110.

  • • Burton, S., Lichtenstein, D. R., Netemeyer, R. G., & Garretson, J. A. (1998). A scale for measuring attitude toward private label products and an examination of its psychological behavioral correlates. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 26(4), 293-306. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0092070398264003

  • • Burton, S., Lichtenstein, D.R., Netemeyer, R.G., Garretson, J.A. (1998). A scale for measuring attitude toward store brands products and an examination of its psychological and behavioral correlates. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 26(4), 293-306. http://www.ebscohost.com

  • • Chakraborty Samrat (2011). Perceptions & Buyer Behavior Towards Private-Label Colas: An Exploratory Study to Understand the Views of the Store Managers of United Kingdom, The IUP Journal of Marketing Management,10(1), 5-18

  • • Chandon, J. L., & Mbayefall, D. (2011). Consumer choice of Private Label Brands in the French market: Proposition and test of a partial mediation model, Working papers - International Conference on marketing trends, Paris, 1-26.

  • • Chen, K.C. (2008). A study of the relationship between UK consumers’ purchasing intention and store brand food products - take Nottingham city consumers for example. Master Dissertation. The University of Nottingham.

  • • Chien, S., Yu, C., Wang, Y., & Kuo, P. L. (2014). Improving the Perceived Quality of Private Brands Using Co-Branding: The Role of Brand Equity and Store Image. International Journal of Management and Sustainability,3(9), 540-551.

  • • Cronin, J. J., Brady, M. K., & Hult, G. T. M. (2000). Assessing the effects of quality, value, and customer satisfaction on consumer behavioral intentions in service environments. Journal of retailing, 76(2), 193-218.

  • • Diallo, M. F., Chandon J.L., Cliquet, G., Philippe, J. (2013). Factors influencing consumer behaviour towards store brands: evidence from the French market. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 41(6), 422-441. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09590551311330816

  • • Dick, A., Jain, A. and Richardson, P. (1995). Correlates of Store Brand Proneness: Observations. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 4(4) 8-15.

  • • Dowling, G. R. (1986). Managing your corporate images. Industrial Marketing Management, 15(2), 109-115.

  • • Dursun, I., Kabaday, E. T., Alan, A. K., & Sezen, B. (2011). Store brand purchase intention: Effects of risk, quality, familiarity and store brand shelf space. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 24, 1190-1200.

  • • E., Y., & Rai. (2014). Pulse of Indian retail market, Ernst and young. LLP Publications, 1-16.

  • • Gala, D., & Patil, R.D. (2013). Consumer attitude towards private labels in comparison to national brands. International Journal of Business and Management invention, 2(5), 12-18.

  • • Ganesah, S. (2010), Shopping in-house. http://thestar.com.my/lifestyle/story.asp?file=/2010/4/12/lifefocus/5957554&sec=lifefocus

  • • Garretson, A. J. Fisher, D. and bruton, S. (2002). Antecedents of private label attitude and national brand promotion attitude: similarities and differences. Journal of Retailing ,7(8), 91-99.

  • • Ghosh, A. (1990). Retail management. Chicago: Drydden press.

  • • Grewal, D., Krishnan, R., Baker, J., & Borin, N. (1998). The effect of store name, brand name and price discounts on consumers’ evaluations and purchase intentions. Journal of Retailing, 74(3), 331-352.

  • • Hindustan times. (2013). Focus on home brands - future group and Tata’s to scale up presence.

  • • Hoch, S.J. and Banerji, S. (1993). When do private labels succeed? Sloan Management Review, 34, 57-67. http://bear.warrington.ufl.edu/weitz/mar7786/Articles/hoch%20banerji%201993.pdf

  • • Jaafar, S. N., Lalp, P. E., & Naba, M. (2012). Consumers’ Perceptions, Attitudes and Purchase Intention towards Private Label Food Products in Malaysia. Asian Journal of Business and Management Sciences, 2(8), 73-90.

  • • Keller K.L. (2001). Building customer-based brand equity. Marketing management, 10(2). 14-19.

  • • Krishna, C. V. (2011). Determinants of consumer buying behaviour: an empirical study of private label brands in apparel retail.Vilakshan: The XIMB Journal of Management, 8(2).

  • • Liljander, V., Polsa, P., Riel, V. A. (2009). Modelling consumer responses to an apparel store brand: Store image as a risk reducer. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 16,281-290.

  • • Lindquist, J.D. (1974), Meaning of image - a survey of empirical and hypothetical evidence. Journal of Retailing, 50(4), 29-38.

  • • Machavolu, S. K., & Raju, K. V. V. (2013). Consumer Orientation towards Store Brands Vis-a-vis Name Brands. IOSR Journal of Business and Management, 1(10), 85-93.

  • • Martineau, P. (1958). The personality of the retail store. Harvard Business Review, 36, 47-55.

  • • May Chen Yap, David Yoon Kin Tong, Kim Piew Lai (2011). Consumers’ Perceptions towards International Supermarket Private Brand Products. International Journal of Social Sciences and Humanity Studies, 3(1).

  • • Mieres, C. G., Martin, A. M. D., & Gutierrez, J. A. T. (2006). Antecedents of the difference in perceived risk between private labels and national brands. European Journal of Marketing, 40(1/2), 61-82. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/03090560610637310

  • • Mitchell, V. W. (1999). Consumer perceived risk: Conceptualisations and models. 33(1/2), 163-195.

  • • Nandi, D. (2013). Organized retailers and consumer’s attitude towards PLs: A focus on consumers of Kolkata. ELK Asia Pacific journal of Marketing and Retail Management, 4(3), 1-10.

  • • Oh, H. (2003). Price fairness and its asymmetric effects on overall price, quality, and value judgments: the case of an upscale hotel. Tourism Management, 24, 387-399.

  • • Permarupan, Y. K., Mohan, M., Mamun, A. L., & Zainol, N. R. B. (2014). Consumer Perceived value and buying behavior of store brands. International Business Management, 8(2), 136-141.

  • • Richardson, P. S., Dick, A.S. and Jain, A K.(1996). How consumer evaluate store brands. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 5(2), pp 19-28.

  • • Sathya, C. (2013). Integrating consumer perception factors towards private labels in food andgrocery retail sector in Chennai region. AP Journal of Economics and Management, 2(6), 2278-2629.

  • • Schiffman, L., & Kanuk, L.L. (2010). Consumer Behavior, 10e. United State of America: Pearson Education, Inc.

  • • Sethuraman, Raj and and Catherine Cole (1997). Why do Consumers Pay More for National Brands than for Store Brands.Cambridge, MA: Market ing ScienceInstitute, Report No. 97-126.

  • • Shannon, R. & Mandhachitara, R. (2005). Privatelabel grocery shopping attitudes and behaviour: Across-cultural study. Journal of Brand Management. 12 (6), 461-474.

  • • Sheau-Fen, Y., Sun-May, L., & Yu-Ghee, W. (2012). Store brand proneness: Effects of perceived risks, quality and familiarity. Australasian Marketing Journal, 20(1), 48-58.

  • • Singh, A. K., & Agarwal, P. K. (2013). Consumer behavior in organized retail: A empirical study of Noida. International Journal of Management research and review, 3(8), 3324-3331.

  • • Singh, A., & Singh, N. (2014). A comparative study of National brands vs. Private labels in apparel segment - A study in NCR region, VSRD. International Journal of Business and Management Research,4(6), 169-174.

  • • Sprott, D. E., & Shimp, T. A. (2004). Using product sampling to augment the perceived quality of store brands. Journal of Retailing, 80(4), 305-315.

  • • Tih, S., & Lee, K. H. (2013). Percept ions and Predictors of Consumers’ Purchase Intentions for Store Brands: Evidence from Malaysia. Asian Journal of Business and Accounting, 6(2). 105-136.

  • • Vahie, A., & Paswan, A. (2006). Private label brand image: its relationship with store image and national brand. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 34(1), 67-84.

  • • Wu, P. C. S., Yeh, G. Y., & Hsiao, C. R. (2011).The effect of store image and service quality on brand image and purchase intention for private label brands. Australasian Marketing Journal, 19(1), 30-39.

  • • Zeithaml, V.A. (1988). Consumer perceptions of price, quality and value: a means-end model and synthesis of evidence. Journal of Marketing, 52(3). 48-62.


Abstract Views: 648

PDF Views: 0




  • Determinants of Purchase Intention of Private Brands in India:A Study Conducted on Hypermarkets of Delhi

Abstract Views: 648  |  PDF Views: 0

Authors

P. K. Agarwal
Department of Management, Wolaita Sodo University, Ethiopia
Vijay Prakash Gupta
Department of Management& Humanities, G.L. Bajaj Institute of Technology & Management, Gr. Noida, India

Abstract


The present study proposes to study the impact of factors that affects the purchase intention of customers toward private brands with the broad objective to assist managers and marketers to gain good insight about the behavior of Indian buyers so that they can formulate effective strategies to improve the overall performance of private brands in terms of customer acceptability in hypermarkets. Based on extensive review of literature seven independent variables namely perceived price, perceived quality, perceived risk, perceived value ,store image, store brand familiarity, shelf space allocation are identified to analyze the purchase intention towards private brands as dependent variable. The study was conducted Sep to Dec, 2017. For this research Delhi city is the main focus of this study as there are many hyper markets operate in this city. As well Delhi is full of multi-social class of people. Therefore, this research is to study Indian consumer attitude towards private brands. The research design used is causal research design. Data was collected from the customers through primary sources using questionnaire as instrument. A survey questionnaire was prepared using five point Likert scale to measure the response on continuous scale. Sample frame constitutes the customers of two hyper retail stores (Big Bazaar and Easy Day) who purchased the private brand in their purchase. Sampling techniques was judgemental and the effective sample size was 369. Descriptive and inferential statistics was used as data analysis tool. The taken model explains 76.2% variably of purchase intention of private brands by identified seven variables. Six independent variables viz., Perceived price, Perceived quality, Perceived risk, Perceived value, Store image and Store brand familiarity have significant impact on purchase intention towards private brands while one independent variables viz., Shelf space allocation have no significant impact on purchase intention towards private brands. Perceived risk & Perceived price is negatively related with purchase intention towards private brands. Store image has highest impact followed by Store brand familiarity and Perceived value. On the basis of the results of this research, it can be recommended the hypermarket retailers should try to enhance the image of their store and their private brands. They should also create the brand value which means that the benefits sought must overweigh its cost. As price and perceived risk are negatively related so the retailers should be vigilant about the price and perceived risks by the customers of private brand customers.

Keywords


Private Brand, Purchase Intention, Price, Perceived Quality, Perceived Risk, Perceived Value, Store Image, Store Brand Familiarity and Shelf Space Allocation.

References