Consumer Buyer Behavior
by
Charles Lamson
Introduction
As was mentioned in an earlier post, the study of consumer behavior is an important part of the managerialist approach to marketing. Underpinning this notion is the belief that if academics and industrialists can come to a better understanding of why people behave as they do, it should be possible to develop products which have a better chance of success in the market place. Over and above the interests of firms, there is a societal interest in seeking to understand consumer behavior. For the first time, many consumers live in societies where the impact of consumption has much wider implications than those of the transaction between buyer and seller. Many people in the world live in consumer societies where goods and services play much more than a simple economic role. In this post the economic explanation is briefly explained. The three powerful psychological explanations based on psychoanalytic theory, behaviorism and cognitive learning theory, are discussed. Table 3.1 summarizes some of the key aspects relating to each explanation (Kotler, 1965).
Table 1. Key Relations Between Different Explanations
Economic Theory
The abstraction of homo economicus, 'rational economic man', is the point at which the theory of consumer behavior begins. This account considers human behavior over the course of about 100 years. Since the 1970s, With the rise of behavioral economics, many of the following assumptions have been modified. Nevertheless, this forms a useful point of departure for understanding different accounts of consumer behavior. In classical economic terms homo economicus is a rational actor who is aware of the scope of the choices available and who acts alone to evaluate each potential choice of action on the basis of perfect information to maximize his or her utility or satisfaction. When economists say that consumers act 'rationally' they mean they act rationally from their point of view. This may seem to be irrational to others but is intelligible once the circumstances of the person are known. For example, leavitt (1958) suggested the following:
Man is an irrational animal, if by irrational we mean that he does not always do what we think is best for him, but though irrational there is an internal logic to his behavior. So we can understand it if we look at it from the inside rather than the outside and if we try to deal with it all at once instead of in pieces. 
It is the idea of the 'inside' rationality that is the basis of economic rationality. Some of the other assumptions underpinning the idea of rational economic man are that:
It is true that in contemporary societies many people operate alone in conducting transactions. However, Leavitt (1958) felt that consumers can best be viewed as interdependent, arguing that if consumers can best be viewed as interdependent, arguing that if consumers are treated as if they act solely by themselves 'our predictions about him will go pretty far wrong'. It can be asked how often individuals really act alone. Often goods are purchased with the direct and indirect help of others. It could be argued that consumption is paradoxical. Individuals partake in the mass market with millions of others buying mass-produced goods while also combining these mass-produced goods into 'unique' combinations which provide individuals with a sense of distinctiveness from other people. In a way all consumption is social to the extent that the goods that are purchased are bought for the consumption of others, those others who look at us and judge us in terms of what we have bought. Consumers often act mimetically through vicarious learning by imitating the choices of others.
Economists also assume that individuals consciously are aware of their needs. A 'need' for this purpose is a loss of equilibrium, a change in state which indicates a lack. It is assumed that there is conscious awareness of this lack and of the means of filling it. While cognitive theorists by and large share this view, this is contested by Freudians, who would argue that instead needs often emerge as a result of unconscious conflicts and that they represent a sublimation of such conflict. Behaviorists protest that too much emphasis is placed on the importance of internal mental states in determining choice processes. They would argue for the importance of considering the environmental setting in which behavior occurs.
The economic assumption that preferences are fixed holds some truth. However, there is a growing belief also that preferences are constructed rather than revealed. The idea of constructed preferences denies that consumers simply refer to a master list of preferences in memory when making a choice. Cognitive theorists are busy researching how preferences are generated. They suggest that sometimes consumers may use the forms of weighting assumed by economists, although more often than not they will use a much simpler method.
Following from the above, the traditional economic view suggests that individuals evaluate goods and services in relation to their needs. They consider these in the light of key attributes to which are attached utilities; those goods which maximize their return in terms of subjective expected utility are the ones which individuals will choose. This presupposes that it makes sense to break down personal beliefs and evaluations in a systematic manner. Cognitive learning theorists do not simply assume that this is the case but actively explore the conditions in which it occurs and when it fails to occur. In any event, the reality of everyday behavior is that most purchase behavior is relatively routine and habitual. Cognitive psychologists argue that when managers and consumers do engage in problem-solving behavior they do not exhaustively analyze every alternative but instead use simple rules of thumb.
That a world of perfect information does not exist means firms must actively seek to anticipate the needs and wants of consumers. Firms do not respond to every perceived need and want. They are constrained by the environment in which they operate and must make some form of return which covers their outgoings. In any event one might also choose to question the extent to which people act rationally and comprehensively in evaluating different offerings.
One may summarize the discussion with respect to the economic model of the consumer. It presents an over-rationalized and over-individualized view of the consumer. It does not provide an understanding of what things mean to people and how they come to have that meaning. It is poor at recognizing or explaining the intrinsic value of things to people.
In the upcoming series of posts three different alternatives to the economic explanation are discussed, namely:
*SOURCE: FUNDAMENTALS OF MARKETING, 2007, MARILYN A. STONE AND JOHN DRESMOND, PGS. 69-71*
END
|
No comments:
Post a Comment