A STUDY ON CUSTOMERS BRAND PREFERENCE IN SUVS AND MUVS: EFFECT OF MARKETING MIX VARIABLES
Keywords:
Brand preferences, Marketing Mix, Factor analysis and Friedman’s testAbstract
The heterogeneous behaviour of consumers towards the choice of various brands in a particular segment can be explained by the influence of various factors underlying their decisions and its brand equity. The objective of this study is the identification and study of factors influencing customers’ brand preferences of the economy segment SUV’s and MUV’s as well as brand equity as a function of product choice. Brand affinity or emotions associated with brand preference in an economy segment of SUV’s and MUV’s were also considered to study the effect of marketing mix elements towards consumer preferences. A total of 143 respondents were included among which 98 met the target group criteria set for the study. The data collection was made through direct interaction and customer intercepts survey using printed questionnaires. Descriptive Analysis was used to transform data into understandable format and factor analysis was used for identification of factors influencing customer preference. Friedman’s test was used to identify the prominent emotions customers associated to the utility vehicle. The study identified the six factors that influence brand preference. This study and identification of marketing mix elements and associated brand equity from individual customer’s perspective is important because it suggests both strategies and tactics, and areas where research can be useful in managerial decision making to increase customer preference of brand.
Downloads
References
Cooper, R. (1993) Winning at New Products: Accelerating the Process from Idea to Launch, 2ed edition, Boston,Addison-Wesley.
Roger, E. M. (1995). Diffusion of innovation, 4th edition. New York: Free Press.
Tornatzky, L. O &Klien, K. J. (1982). Innovation Characteristics and Innovation Adoption-Implementation: AMeta-Analysis of Findings. IEEE Trans. On Eng. Management, 29 (1): 28-48.
Mason, C. H. (1990). New Product Entries and Product Class Demand.Marketing Science,March, pp. 58-73.
Chernev, A. (2003). When More is Less and Less is More: The Role of Ideal Point Availability and Assortmentin Consumer Choice. Journal of Consumer Research, 30 (2), 170-183.
Lui, C.M. (2002). The Effects of Promotional Activities on Brand Decision in the Cellular Telephone Industry.The Journal of Product & Brand Management, 11(1), 42-51.
Fetscherin and Toncar (2008). Valuating brand equity and product related attributes in the context of the German automobile market, Article, Palgrave Macmillan 1350-23IX Brand Management Vol. 17, 2, 134–145
Mackay, M.M. (2001). Evaluation of Brand Equity Measures: Further Empirical Results,
Journal of Product and Brand Management, 10 (1), 38-51.
Li Ho-Shui and Houston, JE (2001). Factors affecting consumerpreferences for major food markers in Taiwan, Journal of Food Distribution..pp: 1-3.
Karjauloto H, Karvonen J, Kesti M, Koivumaki T, Manninen M, Pakola J,
Ristola A, Salo J (2003). Factors affecting choice of mobile phones:Two studies from Finland, J. Euromark. 14 (3): 59-82
Yoo, Bonghee; Donthu, Naveen and Lee, Sungho (2000). “AnExamination of Selected Marketing Mix Elements andBrand Equity,” Academy of Marketing Science Journal, 28(2),195-211.
Erdem, Tulin; Swait, Joffre; Broniarczyk, Susan; Chakravarti,Dipankar; Kapferer, Jean Noel; Keane, Micheal; Roberts,John; Steenkamp, Jan-Benedict E M and Zettelmeyer,
Florian (1999).“Brand Equity, Consumer Learning andChoice,” Marketing Letters, 10(3), 301-318.
Aaker, D A (1991). Managing Brand Equity, New York: McMilan.
Aaker, D A (1996). Building Strong Brands, New York: The FreePress.
Zikmuund G William, “Business research methods”, Questionnaire Design, (Cengage learning, 2003) , pg 329 -360.
