Consumer Behaviourisms and such

Consumer Behaviour

We have been studying consumer behaviour in supermarkets and researching into emotional brands over the past three months. We have also looked at key theories in consumer behaviour and how these apply to what we observed in the two supermarkets we chose, which were Sainsbury’s and Somerfield. We also looked at what factors could influence consumer’s decisions on what they buy such as offers, advertising and packaging. We e­­ven went as far as to devise a test to see if consumer’s can be manipulated on the spot to buy a particular product, even if the person manipulating them is a complete stranger. Furthermore, I have researched into the popular emotional brand L’Oreal and looked at how they advertise to sell their products.

We originally compiled a report about what we found and observed in our chosen supermarkets. Here is what I contributed to that report:

Quality Versus Value We believe the credit crunch has greatly affected consumer’s decisions on what they buy. Although other research may show that brands and packaging are what persuades customers to purchase particular products, it seems that due to the current state of the economy, people are choosing value over quality. Drawing from our studies of consumer behaviour it would appear most people are opting for a cheap in store brand rather than up market brands that often cost more. Despite these expensive brands investing heavily in advertising their products, and generally being better quality, they are not doing as well in comparison to in store brands. Less people have some form of a disposable income that allows them to spend extra on better quality products. As a result, value has become more important than quality or buying into a particular label. This means that it is more difficult to make observations on how packaging affects customer’s decisions to buy products, as generally it is a case of how much it cost, rather than how it looks. Packaging Nevertheless, packaging, we believe does play a role in influencing consumers on what to buy, although it is much less significant. Our two chosen supermarkets both have their own “blue and white stripe” label range and a slightly more expensive and up market “own” brand. Although Sainsbury’s “basics” are incredibly cheap, it appears that the “own” store products did better. It seems that this is due to the packaging used on the products. Despite the product within being almost the exact same thing, the plainer basics range appeared not to do as well as the “own” brand. The basics range has white and orange, plain packaging, however the alternative generally has an image of the product on it. It seems that having this slightly more decorative packaging gives consumers’ peace of mind that they are buying something that is cheap but not the cheapest. It’s a happy medium for people who want a cheap product but aren’t buying the cheapest there is, as we believe a lot of people will not want to be seen buying “blue and white stripe” labels. Having a picture on the packaging of what they are buying seems to give consumer’s confidence in the product. Product Placement A further issue we found affected consumer behaviour, is product placement. We noticed that the supermarket’s brands came first when approaching a particular section of products, assuming the consumer will be taking a logical route through the store. The more expensive brands follow. We also found that the cheapest of the “own” brands, so Basics for Sainsbury’s, was right at the bottom. It seems as though people would not buy it as it highlights they are buying the cheapest, having to bend down to the very bottom shelf, which some people would not be comfortable doing. One particular case of an unsuccessful product placement was in Somerfield. In the drinks section the Pepsi had an offer on, as a result it had sold more than its main rival Coca-Cola. Coca-Cola in the drinks section was not showing as on offer, however elsewhere in the store there was a stand for Coca-Cola that was on offer. It seemed to have sold hardly any, in comparison to Pepsi. This is due to the Coca-Cola not being in with the other drinks, where consumers would expect them to be. If the offer had shown in the drink section as well as on its own stand, we believe it would have been more successful, as Coca-Cola has been proven to be the more successful brand over Pepsi in the UK. A further observation of interest is how confectionary and selective luxury items are placed at the end of supermarket tills. This is a psychological ploy by the stores to ensure shoppers are exposed to these items whilst queuing to pay for their goods. A sort of ‘last chance saloon’ if you like. Mothers may buy young children a pack of sweets as a reward for good behaviour during their shopping trip, or choose to treat themselves to a bar of chocolate. Adding to this, office workers buying their lunch may purchase an additional packet of chewing gum for their afternoon in work, or a drink for the bus journey home. These factors could prove to have a different set of results depending on store size and store location. Offers Another factor we found influenced consumers was offers on products. Consumers are much more likely to go for offers as it is cheaper and also allows them to buy better brands that they may not buy if it was full price. So they are getting better quality and still getting good value. The success of offers such as buy 1 get 1 free or 50% extra free was clear throughout the store, from lemonade, and tea, to toilet roll and chocolates. Brands that had offers did much better than their competitors, so if up market brands wish to sell more, they should put their products on offer to consumers, or market them in such a way so they appear better value for money.

The test we devised ourselves to see if we could manipulate other consumers right at the point of them deciding on what to buy proved to be quite successful. If we spotted someone looking indecisive or standing near a particular section in the supermarket, one of us would proclaim loudly to the other how good a certain product is, and wait to see if the person nearby follows suit and chooses the same product as us. The first successful example of this was with a product called ‘Pukka pies’ which is why we named this experiment the ‘Pukka Pie Manipulation Test’. We carried this test out on several different products, some occasions it would be one person who approached the product with confidence, to make the indecisive consumer feel assured that the product we had just picked up was good. The consumers varied in age and gender as well, which showed that most people could be manipulated when unsure of what to buy. However there were some consumers, particularly housewives who were in charge of the weekly shopping and always bought similar products. These women knew where they were heading and wanted to get in and out as soon as possible, so moved around the shop in a quick and decisive manner.

When consumers aren’t being manipulated by complete strangers in supermarkets, I believe that friends and family can play an important role in what they decide to buy. These are the most trusted people to a consumer, much more so then what any advertising is telling them about a product. If a friend or relative likes a particular brand or product they are likely to tell others about it. Furthermore if they have a bad experience or find they do not like a certain brand then they would advise others against it, which can also affect what people buy. In some cases, people will buy certain brands simply because it’s what their parents bought so they’ve grown up with it and have a loyalty to the brand and trust the product. In other instances it may be that they buy into a brand because their friends do and they want to fit in with their peers.

One of the key theories on consumer behaviour is consumer capitalism, whereby consumers are influenced by advertising and emotive branding; this is usually on a large scale through international or global campaigns and branding. Their decisions on what to buy are manipulated by different factors. Consumers may be told that certain products offer better quality or results, when the product is in fact almost exactly the same as its competitors. As I said above packaging can be a factor in influencing consumers. Vance Packard noted this in The Hidden Persuaders, an experiment was conducted whereby a group of housewives were given three boxes of washing powder to use. The first box was completely blue in colour, the second yellow and the third was an equal mix of the two. The housewives were then asked to describe the effects that each had on their washing. It was reported that the blue box was too harsh and ruined their clothes. The yellow box was said to be too weak and not clean properly. The third mixed coloured box was shown to be the best. However each box actually contained the exact same powder and shows how powerful colours can be when influencing people’s opinions and thoughts on them. Furthermore what we observed in the supermarkets about different packaging suggests that appearance is important to consumers, even if the product is in essence the same thing. Karl Marx commented in The Consumer Society Reader on how advertising and the presentation of certain commodities can change a person’s perception of the product, and make them view it as more than an object. He wrote (2000. p.10) “The form of wood is altered if a table is made out of it. Nevertheless the table continues to be wood, an ordinary sensuous thing”. This is what advertising and branding does to everyday commodities, particularly emotive branding, as it does not just sell a product but an image or lifestyle. So it is as though advertising is metaphorically crafting a table out of wood, by implying that their product is more than just a product. Emotive branding as I said before plays a big role in consumer capitalism as it promotes a way of life rather than just a product or service. Generally the more successful brands use this as consumers have grown immune to normal advertising, and want to buy into something that improves their life in some way rather than something that is just sold as a product of necessity. The brand L’Oreal that I studied uses the same techniques and also uses celebrity endorsements to sell their products and image.

Theorists believe that there are two types of people, individualists and collectivists. Individualists are people who are self-reliant and buy for themselves. Collectivists are a group of people who share a sense of community. So advertising is either directed at individualists, whereby the individual’s needs and wants are catered for, or collectivists where people are catergorised into different demographics such as teenagers or housewives, and targeted as a group. Advertising can differ on which type they target depending on the product. For example Johnson’s baby oil is targeted at mothers, a group of people who share the same interest in having the best for their newborn. Then there are advertisements by Nike who may be selling a particular type of sports shoe and they target the individual’s needs, promoting the product in a way that gives it a personal and unique feel. Collectivists are more likely to be persuaded by “the band wagon” strategy. Some adverts quote “9 out of 10 women” or “85% of men” which causes consumers to “jump on the band wagon” because they want to use the product that everyone else is using. Facts like these emphasise the success of the product and collectivists will want to be part of this as they enjoy being part of a community and having something in common with others. Some brands try to target both collectivists and individualists, an example of this is L’Oreal. They use facts to emphasise how well their product has done but at the same time use the slogan “Because you’re worth it” to add a personal element to the advertising. This way the consumer feels that they are buying into something that other women like, but at the same time it will make them as an individual feel good.

Brand identity is important to advertisers as it establishes them in the market place. Usually brands have their own particular niche or unique selling point that puts them in line with or ahead of their competitors. If a brand identity is prominent enough it can become rooted within the mind of the consumer. Some brands have such a powerful brand identity that it is referenced to in everyday situations. For example, Coca-cola and Pepsi are both brands of cola. However, due to the success of Coca-cola particularly in the UK, people often ask for a ‘coke’ rather than cola, even if there is only Pepsi available. Coca-cola is so successful that its name is used to describe a soft drink that is in fact produced by many different brands around the world. Another example of this was noted in Advertising and Popular Culture by Jib Fowles; in 1992 the President George Bush gave a group of school children a lengthy tour of the white house. When 11 year old Lonnie Thomas was asked about the tour the President gave he replied “He kept going and going and going, just like an energizer bunny!” (1996. p. 1) this proving that even children take notice of brand identity and quote slogans and taglines used in advertising. One of the brands we studied was Andrex, which also has a prominent brand identity. Andrex is renowned for using a very cute Labrador puppy in its advertising. Despite Andrex being a brand of toilet tissue, it is a regular occurrence that when someone spots a Labrador puppy they refer to it as an ‘Andrex puppy’, showing how embedded the brand has become, even if they don’t buy it themselves. These examples show how successful brand identity is and how important it can be to help define a brand in the market place.

We studied five brands over the three month period, these were; Andrex, Lynx, Coco pops, L’Oreal and Bisto. We divided these between us and each researched into our own chosen brand. I studied L’Oreal and here is what I found.

The brand L’Oreal is aimed at mainly women aged from 25-45/50 as they have such a wide range of products. They use celebrity endorsements as their main advertising strategy. Most recently they have used Desperate Housewives actor Eva Longoria as well as Claudia Schiffer and singer Beyoncé. Their famous slogan “Because you’re worth it”, is used to make women feel special, and to give them confidence in themselves. The celebrities used are always very beautiful and successful, but speak to the viewer like they are a friend. They want to make these famous people seem accessible to ordinary women, and emphasise that they can look as good if they use L’oréal products.

L’oréal use a variety of celebrities of different ages to promote different products. They use older women to promote anti-ageing cream or hair-dye that covers greys. They use younger women to promote other products which range from hair care to cosmetics. L’oréal also have a small range of products for men. These are generally for anti-ageing, skincare or hair-dye, so they use more mature men such as Matthew Fox (Lost actor) to advertise these products. However they do have a line of hair-styling products which they use younger men to advertise. Nevertheless, L’oréal’s market is predominantly female, so the majority of their products cater for this.

In the supermarkets we observed, I found that L’oréal only really sell hair care products, and did particularly well if they were on offer. There are many varieties of shampoo and conditioner L'oréal sell, depending on what kind of hair care you would like, so they provide for all consumers different needs. However L'oréal’s competitors such as Head and Shoulders also provide these and dominate the hair care section, particularly in Sainsbury’s. I found L'oréal was quite dotted around the shelves. All products seemed to be doing well though. I feel this is because L'oréal advertise in a different way to other hair care brands. When it comes to shampoo and conditioner it seems L'oréal are the only ones who use celebrities in their advertising. I think that L’oréal use emotive branding and as a result they gain consumers who remain loyal to them, as they believe they are buying into a brand that will make them as beautiful as the celebrities that endorse them. As I said before, I believe L’Oreal target individualists and collectivists which may be another reason why it is such a successful brand.

In conclusion I have found through the research conducted that consumer behaviour can be influenced to a certain degree, through factors such as packaging, offers and advertising. Consumers can be manipulated by friends, family and even complete strangers. However, everyone is an individual and has a unique personality and therefore their needs and wants differ from everybody else which makes it impossible for brands to satisfy everyone all of the time. It also means that consumer behaviour cannot always be predicted even when a large amount of research has been conducted into the field.