A Cost-Effective Answer in Cross-Cultural Settings

 Service Recovery in Online Medium

Abstract Past research has shown that the status of the apologizing service personnel in offline medium impacts fairness perceptions of service recovery differently in cross-cultural settings. The tremendous growth in the global online retailing industry with their ever-increasing consumer base belonging to Eastern cultures makes it imperative to find a cost-effective way to manage service recovery from this cultural group about which there is very little literature. This paper addresses this issue by first showing that what works for Eastern consumers in offline service recovery may not necessarily work in online without suitable modifications. We then further reveal a novel cost-effective way using social media to increase fairness perceptions even in the impersonal online medium. Two experimental studies were conducted using nonstudent samples from a Western country (Germany) and two Eastern countries (India and the Philippines). Our empirical findings indicate that a public apology from a high-status service provider in the online medium that is conveyed through social media would result in higher justice perceptions for consumers in Eastern cultures as compared to Western cultures. For managers of global online retailers, we thus show a powerful yet cost-effective way to deal with consumer complaints.

Impact of Consumer Behavior Factors on Retail Decisions

Abstract The US retail industry makes billions of dollars a year by engaging customers to participate in their business (design, production, delivery of goods and services); however, the psychological implications of such participation by customers have recently began gaining scholarly prominence. This paper explores the role of potent upward counterfactual thinking (the process of looking back at events and thinking about how things could have turned out better) in a participatory setup. More specifically, the role of upward counterfactual potency on perceived ownership toward the coproduced good is examined. Additionally, the role of consumer’s self-assessment of participation as an antecedent to upward counterfactual potency and the moderating role of opportunity to return the product on the aforementioned are explored.

 An Empirical Study of Body Size and Basket Healthiness on Consumer Helping Behaviors Toward Thin, Average, and Obese Shoppers (Abstract)

Abstract Obesity is a leading health crisis in the United States; however, there is almost no research in the arena of obesity within the social space of a retail environment. While some studies examine prejudices toward thin and obese people in general, there are no studies that investigate how shoppers judge one another based on body size. This is an important aspect of consumer behavior as consumer interactions are relevant criteria for determining customer satisfaction (Huang and Hsu 2009). We attempt to bridge this gap in research and provide initial empirical insights into how brand attitudes and the emotional response people have toward other shoppers are affected by other shoppers’ body size (thin, average, obese) and their shopping basket (healthy, unhealthy). The results of this study should be taken as a starting point to further delve into the nuances of shopper appearance in the retail domain. Specifically, body image and the “weight bias” are an important signal in the eyes of consumers who share retail space. It seems that the weight bias is not only reserved for the obese—but should be applied to those viewed as “too thin.” This study highlights how emotional responses to shoppers can vary based on both body type and the composition of the shopping basket. This is important since shopping scenarios almost always include more cues about a person than merely appearance. Results also suggest that brand attitudes can be negatively influenced by weight biases; however, we only found this to prevail for thin shoppers purchasing unhealthy items. Brand attitudes were unaffected by the obese shopper, which seems contradictory to previous studies about the weight bias. A deeper investigation into this finding is needed.

Retailers increasingly utilize private label branding strategy in an effort to simultaneously increase store loyalty and compete with national brands (Ailawadi and Keller 2004; Nies and Natter 2012). Previous research suggests consumers are not only receptive to the notion of private label consumption but in many cases prefer retailer brands over their premium brand competitors (Neilsen 2011; Thomassen et al. 2006). From a supply perspective, many national brand manufacturers, or “dual branders” (ter Braak et al. 2013: 87), produce private label brands to optimize outcomes from the channel relationship (Chen et al. 2010; Kumar et al. 2010). Dual branders do not volunteer this information to prevent loss of the national brand market share due to narrowing gaps between quality perceptions of premiums and private labels (Sethuraman and Raju 2012; Steenkamp et al. 2010). Consequently, consumers are often only able to rely on superficial signals (e.g., packaging or price) to evaluate the origins and quality of private-label products. However, consumers can be inadvertently exposed to dual branding knowledge through other communications such as a manufacturer’s announced product recall or word-of-mouth from others. Thus it is important for marketing researchers to understand how consumers react to the knowledge that two differently priced, competing brands are sourced by the same manufacturer. In response, this research examines the influence of dual branding on customers’

 Although desiring confidentiality in their operations, many national brand manufacturers engage in private label production at the consumer packaged goods level (Steenkamp et al. 2010). Nationally branded products have historically enjoyed perceived quality advantages over store brands (Ailawadi 2001; Brucks et al. 2000; Rao and Monroe 1989). However, recent research suggests a deterioration of this competitive edge, as diversity in retail brand strategy has evolved to the extent that consumers may no longer view private labels as cheaper—and presumably lower quality—alternatives to premium competitors (Kumar and Steenkamp 2007). Given the typical price premium imposed for national brands over private labels, consumer awareness of dual branding may influence their comparative quality perceptions of both brand alternatives, which may in turn influence brand-related decisions. Furthermore, previous research suggests that consumer willingness to pay for store brands in general increases with decreased perceived gaps in quality at the industry level (Steenkamp et al. 2010). Consequently, dual branders fighting to maintain market share and retailer relationships risk consumers’ exposure to their additional production of private labels, which could narrow the comparative quality gap between the two.