The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/1355-5855.htm
APJML
25,1
70
Consumers’ personal values and
sales promotion preferences
effect on behavioural intention
and purchase satisfaction for
consumer product
Jee Teck Weng
School of Business and Design, Swinburne University of Technology,
Sarawak Campus, Kuching, Malaysia, and
Ernest Cyril de Run
Business Management Department, Faculty of Economics and Business,
Universiti Malaysia Sarawak, Kota Samarahan, Malaysia
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to explore the effects of Malaysian consumers’ personal
values and sales promotion preferences on their overall behavioural intention and purchase
satisfaction.
Design/methodology/approach – In total, 1,300 questionnaires were distributed and collected by
hand through hired enumerators in 13 different states in Malaysia ( Johor, Kedah, Kelantan, Melaka,
Negeri Sembilan, Pahang, Perak, Perlis, Pulau Pinang, Sabah, Sarawak, Selangor and Terengganu).
This research was carried out for four different type of consumer product (convenience, shopping,
specialty/luxury and unsought product). Data were analysed using General Linear Model-Multivariate
Analysis of Variance (MANOVA) and General Linear Model-Univariate Analysis of Variance
(ANOVA) to test for difference between independent and dependent variables.
Findings – The findings suggest that sales promotion technique preferences will have an impact on
consumers’ behavioural intention and purchase satisfaction for all the product types studied. On the
other hand, there is no significant impact in consumers’ purchases satisfaction and behavioural
intention by personal value for all the product type studied.
Practical implications – The findings from this research have expanded current knowledge and
academic studies done on similar areas of research where this research detail the association of
personal value and sales promotion techniques preferences on consumers’ purchase satisfaction
(attitude) and behavioural intention (behaviour) for different types of consumer products. The research
suggests to managers in Malaysia that it is crucial to understand the characteristics of their products
when selecting appropriate strategies and sales promotion techniques for better market segmentation
and targeting.
Originality/value – This research is the first of its type where only a minimal number of studies
have looked into these issues (personal values and sales promotion techniques preferences) from
a business perspective.
Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and
Logistics
Vol. 25 No. 1, 2013
pp. 70-101
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
1355-5855
DOI 10.1108/13555851311290948
Keywords Consumer behaviour, Values, Advertising, Customer satisfaction, Personal value,
Sales promotion techniques, Preferences, Product type, Purchase satisfaction, Behavioral intention,
Malaysia
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
Sales promotion activities, especially in the Malaysian retail environment, are mainly
used to induce existing customers to buy more, attract new customers and encourage
customer switching (De Run and Jee, 2008, 2009; De Run et al., 2010b; Ndubisi and
Chiew, 2005, 2006). Nevertheless, not all sales promotion techniques help marketers to
sell their products. Some techniques are more preferred than the others, particularly in
the Malaysian context (Alvarez and Casielles, 2005; De Run et al., 2010b; Ndubisi and
Chiew, 2005, 2006). Such preferences are affected by personal value where it is partly
determined by an individual’s preliminary values and beliefs (De Run and Jee, 2009;
Williams, 1979). Personal values will either affect or not affect sales promotion impact
by different type of consumer products. Thus, if personal values lead to sales
promotion techniques preferences, they should lead to good purchase satisfaction and
positive behavioural intention (Alvarez and Casielles, 2005; De Run and Jee, 2009).
Consumers like sales promotions (Huff and Alden, 1998), and this is quite evident in
the Malaysian context (De Run and Jee, 2009; De Run et al., 2010b; Huff and Alden,
1998; Ndubisi and Chiew, 2005, 2006). This is likely because sales promotions provide
utilitarian benefits (for example, monetary savings, added value, convenience and
increase of quality) and hedonic benefits (example; entertainment, self-expression and
exploration) to consumers (Babin et al., 1994; Chandon et al., 1997; De Run et al., 2010b;
Huff and Alden, 1998). Malaysian consumers are said to be keener to utilitarian
benefits as they provide the tangibility they want and it matches the characteristics
of Malaysian consumers, who are categorized as collectivist (De Run et al., 2010b; Huff
and Alden, 1998; Ndubisi and Chiew, 2006). But it does not mean that Malaysian
consumers do not react to the hedonic or non-monetary benefits of sales promotion by
emphasizing consumer buying and patronizing. Hence by looking at the preferences
pattern of consumers towards sales promotion techniques, we can create a predictive
model of consumers’ satisfaction and behavioural intention by preference for sales
promotion type on a particular product type.
Most of the product type studies were based on different consumer products
(Goldsmith and Flynn, 1992; Pound et al., 2000), or on industrial products (Gulbro and
Herbig, 1995). Hence, sales promotions technique in this context of existing personal values
framework will be examined at the level of sales promotion techniques preferences of
different consumer product types (convenience, shopping, specialty/luxury and unsought
product), and its implication on consumer purchase satisfaction and behavioural intention
in the Malaysian context.
Such consumer purchase satisfaction and behavioural intention will differ especially
in the context where the society, in this case Malaysia, consists of heterogeneous
communities featuring multi-culture and multi-religion communities. Among the many
ethnic groups include Malays, Chinese, Indians and other minority groups such as Iban,
Kadazan, the native locals and others (Fontaine and Richardson, 2005; Haque, 2003;
Lee, 2000; Lim, 2001; Rashid and Ho, 2003; Westwood and Everett, 1995). Such
multi-ethnic and multi-religious group create different purchasing patterns, especially
on different consumer products (Ndubisi and Chiew, 2006). Previous study done shows
that Malaysians prefer to shop in modern retail stores as they feel that such places are
more likely to provide them with one-stop convenience shopping (Shamsudin and
Selamat, 2005). At the same time, they still patronize traditional stores such as grocery
shops and small provision stores mainly because they are normally located within
Personal values
and sales
promotion
71
APJML
25,1
72
residential or workplace areas (Ndubisi and Chiew, 2005, 2006; Shamsudin and Selamat,
2005). Because of changes in lifestyles, gains in income and education levels and a much
more urbanized community, Malaysian’s looks for value based perspective returns
(Ndubisi and Chiew, 2005; Shamsudin and Selamat, 2005). This generally explains the
patterns of preferences among the various communities in Malaysia.
This study hence will look into the effects of Malaysian consumers’ personal values
and sales promotion preferences on their overall purchase satisfaction (attitude) and
behavioural intention (behaviour). This was done by investigating the interaction effects
(difference) of different levels of personal values (internal, external, and interpersonal)
and preferences of different sales promotion techniques on purchase satisfaction and
behavioural intention for four different type of product. The different levels of personal
values are sourced from Kahle’s (1983) studies, with multiple sales promotion techniques
that are acceptable in the Malaysian context.
Literature review
Academics are mainly concerned with the issue of the effectiveness of sales promotions
(Ndubisi and Chiew, 2005, 2006). Although sales promotion is widely used in various
countries, there is a clear lack of studies on the effects of personal values on sales
promotion activities (De Run and Jee, 2009; Huff and Alden, 1998; Kahle, 1983; Ndubisi
and Chiew, 2005, 2006). Hence there is call for more in-depth research to be carried out
on the effect of personal value on sales promotion activities. Hence this study will look
into the various literatures done on values, personal values, sales promotion and
product type.
Values
The interest in consumers’ value has been growing tremendously in recent years
(Beatty et al., 1985; Kahle et al., 1986; Kamakura and Mazzon, 1991; Novak and
MacEvoy, 1990; Pitts and Woodside, 1983; Reynolds, 1985; Reynolds and Jolly, 1980). It
has increasingly become the subject of intense empirical research (Alwin, 1984; Pitts
and Woodside, 1986; Tetlock, 1986) particularly in marketing (Ferrandi et al., 2000).
However, recent marketing claims of value constructs are noticeably different from the
applications seen in previous literature on value segmentation (Kamakura and Mazzon,
1991; Kamakura and Novak, 1992). These include using Rokeach value system (RVS)
to describe the value structure of a population or group of individuals (Kamakura and
Mazzon, 1991).
There are numerous definitions of values as group customs or shared beliefs
internalized by individuals (Engel et al., 1995), a conception of a desirable set of values
(Kluckhohn, 1951), and as a criteria of preferences (Williams, 1968). Value is also
arranged by certain hierarchy weight (Schwartz, 1992) and where it is conceived as
personality (Rokeach, 1973). Value guides the desirable states that a social actor
conducts, evaluates events and people and literally explains a social actor conducts and
evaluations (Kluckhohn, 1951; Rokeach, 1973; Schwartz, 1992, 1999).
Values consist of demeanour and the idea of enviable end-states that steer selection
and assessment of events and behaviour. Values here basically serve as a guide for
consumer consumption behaviour (Kilbourne et al., 2005; Rokeach, 1973; Schwartz,
1992). Values often offer prevailing justifications of human action as they are
unwavering over time (Inglehart, 1985; Kamakura and Mazzon, 1991; Rokeach, 1974;
Rokeach and Ball-Rokeach, 1989), tend to be restricted in volume (Rokeach, 1979) and
serve as the criterion of behaviour (Williams, 1968).
The conceptualization of values itself reflects the interest in several scholarly fields,
namely: psychology, anthropology and sociology studies (Vinson et al., 1977), and in
particular, marketing (Ferrandi et al., 2000). This interest is reflected in numerous
empirical studies that established links between values and choices of brand or product
(Henry, 1976), store patronage (Becker and Kaldenberg, 2000), gift giving (Beatty et al.,
1996) and preferences (Beatty et al., 1985). It also establishes several relationships
between values and consumer behaviour such as innovativeness (Roehrich et al., 1989),
attitudes (Homer and Kahle, 1988) and pro-environmental attitudes (McCarty and
Shrum, 1994; Milfont, 2007).
Personal value
Values are held in common by both the individual and society (Kahle, 1983; Schwartz,
1999). Prior discussion was on the overall aspect of values while personal value is
described as the learned beliefs that serve as the guiding ethics in the life of an individual
person (Costa and McCrae, 2001; McCrae and Costa, 1999; Olver and Mooradian, 2003;
Rokeach, 1973; Schwartz, 1999). Personal values are beliefs or concepts that guide
assessment and choice of particular events and behaviour to an enviable end state
(in order to achieve recompense or to avoid chastisement) (Kropp et al., 1999a, 2005).
These behavioural situations are structured by relative magnitude of the individuals’
beliefs (Olver and Mooradian, 2003; Schwartz and Bilsky, 1987). Personal values are
also relatively durable and it predicts both attitudes and behaviours (Lotz et al., 2003;
Schwartz and Bilsky, 1987).
Personal value itself is more global in nature (Lotz et al., 2003), but attitudes tend to
be more domain specific (Rokeach, 1968). Personal values guide attitudes, actions,
judgments and behaviour (Beatty et al., 1985; Rokeach, 1973). Personal values
influences choices and evaluations of objects and ideas (Vinson et al., 1977). It is also an
inherently positive construct of an individual’s traits (McCarty and Shrum, 2000).
Thus, the success of validating the personal values construct lies in the ability to
segment individuals into qualitative groups based on their value orientation (Reynolds,
1985; Smith and Schwartz, 1997).
Personal value refers to individual beliefs that mainly serve as the guiding code of
an individual’s life or community (Costa and McCrae, 2001; Schwartz, 1994). Most of
the studies in personal value were done to predict and explain behaviours and attitudes
(Kahle, 1984; Kropp et al., 2005). It is mainly used in situations where it provides a
theoretical set of behavioural guiding codes (Williams, 1979) as well as reflecting the
basic adaptation characteristics, apart from guidelines to shape and guide behaviour
and attitude (Kropp et al., 2005). Apart from that, studies on values were mainly done
on matters relating to social marketing (Kropp et al., 2005) for example, cause related
marketing (Kropp et al., 1999a; Lavack and Kropp, 2003), ethics (Nonis and Swift,
2001; Rallapalli et al., 2000), smoking and drinking behaviour (Kim and Lavack, 1996;
Kropp et al., 1999b). It has also been used in other aspect of marketing such as,
typecasting of international business (Soutar et al., 1999) and salesperson recitals
(Weeks and Muehling, 1987). Most of the values used were documented in
cross-cultural (Beatty et al., 1993; Kahle et al., 1999) as well as domestic environments
(Beatty et al., 1985; Fisher, 2000).
Personal values
and sales
promotion
73
APJML
25,1
74
In past years, many studies in marketing research have used list of value (LOV) scales
of values, introduced by Kahle (1980) (Kropp et al., 2005). This is because LOV is
identified as an easier to administer measurement as compared to other approaches
(Kale and McIntyre, 1991; Kropp et al., 2005). Most of the studies on values concentrated
on the USA (Kahle, 1983), hence it is of significant apprehension on examining values
construct in cross-cultural settings, particularly in personal values setting through the
LOV measurements construct in Malaysia.
There is an causal relationship in the values-attitude-behaviour hierarchy model
(Homer and Kahle, 1988; Kahle, 1983, 1980; Lotz et al., 2003). The model
(value-attitude-behaviour) indicates that values influence behaviour directly or
indirectly through attitude (Homer and Kahle, 1988). Therefore, this would imply that
the hierarchy of cognitions from the value-attitude-behaviour model, where it influences
the value-attitude-behaviour, flows from a more abstract cognitions (values) to mid-range
cognitions (attitudes) and, to specific behaviours (Homer and Kahle, 1988; Kahle, 1983,
1980). This is shown in previous studies that had used this model predominantly as their
main theoretical framework (Homer and Kahle, 1988; Kahle, 1983, 1980; Lotz et al., 2003).
Sales promotion
Sales promotion is defined as a special offer or a part of marketing communication
activities (Alvarez and Casielles, 2005; Peattie, 1998). Other studies defined sales
promotion as an offer or incentive that induces manufacturers, and retailers, desired
sales result (Gilbert and Jackaria, 2002). Sales promotion can also be referred to as any
incentive used by manufacturers or retailers to provoke trade with other retailers or
with other channel members, or with consumers to buy brands apart from encouraging
the sales force to aggressively sell the items (Shimp, 2003).
The literature shows that sales promotion has grown in importance for both
manufacturers and retailers worldwide (Ndubisi and Chiew, 2005). Such a general swing
of importance of sales promotions is driven by several factors, including a rise in
advertising clutters and pricing; sales promotion have become more respectable,
increasing the influence of retailers’ and practitioners’ approaches towards
micro-marketing, decreases in planning time horizons of sales promotions and
snowball effects (Dickson, 1982; Kashani and Quelch, 1990; Lawrence et al., 1986; Peattie
and Peattie, 1995; Toop, 1992). Numerous recent studies have been done on the impact
of sales promotions on consumers’ values (De Run and Jee, 2009; Tybout and Artz,
1994), attitude and behaviour (Alvarez and Casielles, 2005). But still the success of
sales promotion techniques have received little academic study despite the evidence
on the growth of the importance of sales promotion compared to other forms of
marketing techniques, such as advertising (Peattie, 1998).
Nevertheless, sales promotion was subjected to little research where nearly all were
written in handbooks as sales promotion guides and was sourced from the USA
(Foxman et al., 1988). Too much concentration on the US market and consumer
perspectives had made the application of sales promotion in other regions insignificant
(Huff and Alden, 1998). In addition to this, most of the studies done on sales promotion
mainly concentrated on the use of monetary promotions (Garretson and Burton, 2003)
where little research has been done on the non-monetary promotions aspect and with
little focus on the Asia market in particular (De Run et al., 2010a, b, c). Detailed discussions
of different sales promotions are going to be explained further in the following sub-topic.
Studies in Malaysia found that for retailers or manufacturers to encourage customers
to patronize their stores, sales promotion would seem to be the most appropriate method
or medium (Ndubisi and Chiew, 2005, 2006). Previous studies showed that when
properly implemented sales promotion techniques would help retailers or
manufacturers to encourage customers to patronize their stores and to try out the
products and services being promoted, and in return would help the retailers and
manufacturers to achieve their objectives (Alvarez and Casielles, 2005; De Run and Jee,
2008). Malaysian consumers’ behaviour and purchase patterns indicated that the most
widely implemented and liked sales promotion techniques by retailers and
manufacturers in Malaysia were coupon, price discount, free samples and bonus
packs (De Run and Jee, 2008; De Run et al., 2010b).
Malaysian consumers are less likely to feel embarrassed to enjoy monetary-saving
promotional offers (Ndubisi and Chiew, 2005). This mainly occurred because they see these
promotional offers as a sign of opportunity to buy more and it is worth to buy. This was
rather different compared to countries like Japan where they see it as a sign of poverty or
losing face even though they were categorized similarly as a collectivist country like
Malaysia (Kashani and Quelch, 1990; Singelis and Brown, 1995; Singelis and Sharkey, 1995).
Product type
Another important variable in this study is product type. Product type is identified as
one of the key factors in determining consumers’ perspectives (Jarvenpaa and Todd,
1996). Consumer product literatures have documented the importance of personal values
studies especially on consumers products (De Run and Jee, 2009; Pitts and Woodside,
1983). Personal value were shown to influence different consumer product and eventually
consumer brand preferences (De Run and Jee, 2009; Kamakura and Mazzon, 1991;
Kamakura and Novak, 1992; Pitts and Woodside, 1983; Pitts and Woodside, 1986).
Product type has been identified to some degree as one of the key elements in shaping
consumers’ perspectives (Jarvenpaa and Todd, 1996). Product type and its characteristics
are mainly referred to as knowledge about the product type, frequency of purchase,
product differentiation, product tangibility and price (Cheung and Rensvold, 1999).
Previous studies showed that product differentiation was mainly used in competition
between products that were located at various positions in a theoretical characteristics
space in which consumers have personal preferences over the different positions
(Lin et al., 2005). It also allows firms to better serve the consumers’ different preferences.
It would also potentially help firms to better acquire localized market power.
Thus, this study will expand the current knowledge to include sales promotion
techniques for different types of consumer products, namely: convenience products,
shopping products, specialty/luxury and unsought products (Gilbert, 1999; Kotler and
Armstrong, 2004), and its impact towards customers purchase satisfaction and
behavioural intention (Alvarez and Casielles, 2005; De Run and Jee, 2009; Smith et al., 2002).
Purchase satisfaction
Previous purchase experiences with satisfaction play a significant role in shaping
purchase behaviours in the future especially as a minimization strategy effort
(Jones and Suh, 2000; Russell-Bennett et al., 2007). Besides that, purchase satisfactions
are also an important key driver of loyalty (Russell-Bennett et al., 2007) and repurchase
intentions (Cronin and Taylor, 1992; De Run and Jee, 2009). Purchase satisfaction
Personal values
and sales
promotion
75
APJML
25,1
76
in this phenomenon is thought to possess both affective and cognitive components
(Bitner, 1990; Oliver, 1980). This can be explained through the construct of
pre-purchase and post-purchase satisfaction.
Studies done on examining the relationship between pre-purchase and post-purchase
satisfaction showed that post-purchase satisfaction was to be the outcome of the
pre-purchase decision making process and consequently explaining the overall purchase
satisfaction phenomenon (Chae et al., 2006). Hence, the easiest way to explain overall
purchase satisfaction would be to explain and show it through post-purchase evaluation
(Dube and Menon, 2000; McCollough and Gremler, 2004). This is because when customers
or consumers make a purchase decision that is based on what they need or how these
purchases may be convenient to them, these customers or consumers would expect
post-purchase services to be provided by the company or provider and hence it would
lead to satisfaction and repeat-purchase intentions (Shim et al., 2002).
Besides that, previous studies have also shown that anticipated satisfaction and
pre-purchase satisfaction were both discernible constructs where pre-purchase were
identified as the predictor of purchase behaviour, particularly for first time buyers
(Simintiras et al., 1997). Other similar studies done on guarantee evaluation have also
shown a significant relationship between evaluations and pre-purchase choice where
guarantee would likely influence consumer satisfaction even if the guarantee was highly
reliable (McCollough and Gremler, 2004). Such a phenomenon would anticipate
post-purchase satisfaction that was to be likely identified as the predictor for overall
purchase satisfaction and following a consumption experience pattern (Chae et al., 2006).
Post-purchase satisfaction here is critical for increasing repeat purchase behaviours apart
from maintaining the existing customers (Jaramillo and Marshall, 2004; Johnston and
Marshall, 2003).
Other studies on similar grounds suggested that higher perception of retailer fairness
would also lead to higher purchase satisfaction as compared to lower perceptions of
fairness (Chatterjee, 2007). In addition to this, studies done on trust and satisfaction also
suggested impacts on future sales prospects in personal selling situations (Crosby et al.,
1990) as consumer satisfaction is solely unquestionable to the key predictor for retaining
customers, especially in professional prospects (Day et al., 1988). Therefore, a keen
interest in this thesis is the formation of purchase satisfaction as an overall attitude
indicator (Mano and Oliver, 1993) in purchasing different product types.
Behavioural intention
The other interest in this study is to look at consumers’ behavioural intention. Numerous
service research based studies have shown that intentions served well as the main
dependent predictors in most of the service research (Boulding et al., 1993; Kuo et al., 2009;
Liao et al., 2007; Zeithaml et al., 1996). Behavioural intentions here were subjected to
careful conceptualization (Liao et al., 2007; Soderlund and Ohman, 2005). Furthermore,
the rendezvous of intentions in behaviours were determined beforehand by an individual’s
attitude towards that particular behaviour pattern (Ajzen and Fishbein, 1980).
Nevertheless, the most predominant antecedent for behavioural intention was the
subjective norm construct (Ajzen, 1991). There were considerable empirical supports
for this construct from some of the well known authors on this subject (Bock et al.,
2005; Mathienson, 1991; Taylor and Todd, 1995; Thompson et al., 1991). These
subjective norms were determined to have a direct or indirect impact on behavioural
intentions through the prior formation of attitude as explained in theory of reason
action (TRA) (Bock et al., 2005) and which were further explained in studies by
Fishbein and Ajzen (1975).
The behavioural intention applied in this study will be used to measure the
likelihood that a person will employ this application, word-of-mouth (referral) (Ryan
and Etzel, 1976) and purchase intention (or intentions to purchase) (Ryan, 1978).
Word-of-mouth is viewed as either being favourable or unfavourable towards a
product, service, company or even other consumer dependent upon the nature of the
communication purpose (Halstead et al., 1994). While others used word-of-mouth as an
indicator for satisfaction (Holmes and Lett, 1977; Naylor and Kleiser, 2000; Swan et al.,
1982), it was also used as an indicator for loyalty (Dick and Basu, 1994), product and
brand consumption (Bearden and Etzel, 1982), and consumers complaining behaviour
(Richins, 1983).
Studies conducted on the influence of reference-groups and peers on brand or
product consumption (Bearden and Etzel, 1982; Mason, 1981) found out that the
strength of a product or brand was strongly related to the weak influence of the
reference-group (Vigneron and Johnson, 1999). This was mainly because publicly
consumed brands or products were more likely to be consumed and recognized as
compared to privately consumed brands and products which were evident on luxury
brands or products consumption pattern (Bearden and Etzel, 1982).
Purchase intention at the other hand is generally the indicator for consumer
shopping behaviour (Brown et al., 2003). It was also an important indicator for bottom
line performance where it had been shown to be significantly related to brand and
branding (Cobb-Walgren et al., 1995), attitude towards the advertisement (MacKenzie
and Lutz, 1989), word-of-mouth (Gitlin, 2001; Reichheld, 2003), corporate credibility
(Goldsmith et al., 2000; Lafferty and Goldsmith, 1999), claims (Newell et al., 1998;
Peterson et al., 1992), and ethnicity (Simpson et al., 2000).
Consumer prediction of intention or purchase intention could be explained though
the theory of planned behaviour (TPB) model (Ajzen and Madden, 1986). This is
mainly because of the close connection between behaviour and attitude intentions
which were significantly demonstrated through this model (May So et al., 2005) as
purchase intentions. This is further explained by the attitude towards the idea itself
(Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975). Other studies, on the other hand, enhanced this school of
thought where customer purchasing intentions could be further explained using the
theory of reasoned action (TRA) model (Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975). The TRA model
suggests that performance of an explicit behaviour is determined by the intention to
perform the behaviour itself (Warshaw, 1980).
Conceptual framework
An assumption in this study is that consumer personal values is suggested to have
direct impact on preference of particular sales promotion techniques (Williams, 1968,
1979). This is apparent where these preferences are different for each different
consumer product type (Kotler and Armstrong, 2004; McCarthy and Perreault, 1993).
Purchase satisfaction (Garbarino and Johnson, 1999) and behavioural intention (Ajzen
and Fishbein, 1980) may also differ depending on personal value backgrounds (Kahle,
1983). Personal values were suggested to differ from each another (Kropp et al., 2005)
and will have an impact on attitude and behaviour (Kahle, 1984).
Personal values
and sales
promotion
77
APJML
25,1
78
Moreover, it has also been suggested that preferences of different sales promotion
techniques will lead to favourable level of purchase satisfaction and behavioural
intention (Bowles, 1998; Nowell-Smith, 1954) and differ from each another (Ndubisi and
Chiew, 2006; Norzaishah, 2007). At the same time, personal value is moderated by
preferences of different sales promotion techniques (Williams, 1968, 1979), hence
leading to favourable level of purchase satisfaction and behavioural intention (Bowles,
1998; Nowell-Smith, 1954; Smith, 1998) (Figure 1).
The variables in the model are based on adaptation from related previous studies. The
research hypotheses are developed and based on the detailed breakdown of the matter
on the research. Previous study done indicated that the three component of personal value
(internal, external and interpersonal value) differ from each and another (Kropp et al.,
2005) based on attitude (purchase satisfaction) and behaviour (behavioural intention)
(De Run and Jee, 2009; Kahle, 1984). The hypotheses are written as follows:
H1. There is a significant difference in purchase satisfaction by personal value
(internal, external and interpersonal), for the four product types.
H2. There is a significant difference in behavioural intention by personal value
(internal, external and interpersonal) for the four product types.
Sales promotion technique preferences differ from each another (Ndubisi and Chiew,
2006) based on attitude (purchase satisfaction) and behaviour (behavioural intention)
(Bowles, 1998). The hypotheses are written as follows:
H3. There is a significant difference in purchase satisfaction by sales promotion
techniques preferences for the four product types.
H4. There is a significant difference in behavioural intention by sales promotion
techniques preferences for the four product types.
H1, H3
Purchase Satisfaction
Personal
Values (List
of Values)
H2, H4
Behavioural Intention
Indicators:
Moderator:
Sales
Promotion
Techniques
Preferences
Figure 1.
Personal values influence
on sales promotion
effectiveness
Input Condition
Model fit for three product type;
- Convenient
- Shopping
- Specialty/Luxury
Output Condition
Sources: Adapted from Williams (1968), Kahle (1984), Jayawardhena (2004) and
Kotler and Armstrong (2004)
Methodology
A two-stage study was employed in this study. Initially exploratory tests were carried
out to measure respondent preferences towards different sales promotion techniques
for each product type. A factorial design was then created and a survey employed to obtain
responses from purchasing enabled consumers in Malaysia. The decision concerning
sample size was predetermined by the considerations of the factorial design used in the
study. This study uses a 3 (internal, external and interpersonal value) £ 2 (most and least
preferred sales promotion techniques) £ 4 product type (convenience, shopping,
specialty/luxury and unsought product) factorial design. The most and least preferred
sales promotion techniques for each product differ for the four different questionnaires (refer
to exploratory test stage) that were generated and distributed to different consumers in
Malaysia. A minimum of 50 respondents per cell (De Run, 2004; Hair et al., Jr, 1998) meant
that there was a requirement of 300 respondents per product type, per questionnaire. A total
1,300 questionnaires were distributed and collected by hand through hired enumerators in
13 different states in Malaysia (Johor, Kedah, Kelantan, Melaka, Negeri Sembilan, Pahang,
Perak, Perlis, Pulau Pinang, Sabah, Sarawak, Selangor and Terengganu). Kuala Lumpur
(the capital city of Malaysia) was included in Selangor and Labuan was included in Sabah.
In total, 100 questionnaires were collected in each state with a variation of 25 questionnaires
for each product type. Such a quantity of questionnaires is based on the considering of the
possibilities of missing data, incomplete and unusable questionnaires.
This study questionnaire consisted of three sections. Section one comprises of items
relating to demographic information such as age, gender, occupation, and family size.
Section two consists of items related to personal values, with scales sourced from
established studies relating to LOVs (Kropp et al., 2005). LOVs variables were used as
the independent variables in the study. These variables were chosen because they had
been used in previous studies and were in line with the study objective.
Section three consisted of two parts. The first part comprises of most and least
preferred sales promotion techniques for four different type of consumer products
sourced from the exploratory test done earlier (the Appendix). The most and least
preferred sales promotion techniques for four different types of consumer products were
used as the moderating variables in this study. These variables were chosen because
they were in line with the study objectives. Respondents were asked to rank the different
technique based on their personal preferences, based on a six-point scale (where 1 –
strongly least preferred and 6 – very strongly most preferred). This was also done to
check on the exploratory test done earlier.
The second part of section three comprises of items related to purchase satisfaction
with items sourced from Sanzo et al. (2003); “It is very likely that I will recommend other
people buy that product”, “I prefer that product (your latest purchase) to others”, “I am
extremely satisfied with this product” and “I am extremely happy with the person who
sold it to me”. This section also includes items related to consumers’ behavioural
intention (purchase intention and word-of-mouth) measurement based on items sourced
from Soderlund (2006) for positive word-of-mouth and Maheswaran and Sternthal (1990)
for positive purchase intention for each of the four different types of consumer products.
Items for word-of-mouth include “It is very likely that I will recommend other people buy
that product”, “I will talk about the product with other persons” and “My purchase
of this product is a natural topic of conversation for me”. Item used in measuring
purchase intention in this study is “If I were looking for purchase, I would certainly buy
Personal values
and sales
promotion
79
APJML
25,1
80
Table I.
Summary of sources of
key measurement scales
the product”. These variables were chosen as they had been continuously used in
previous studies and were in line with the objectives outlined in the study. The
measurements used are detailed in Table I. Respondents were asked to respond to a
six-point scale (where 1 – very strongly disagree and 6 – very strongly agree).
Further validity and reliability tests were conducted in the study. In this case scales
were used (refer Table I), a validity test was done using exploratory factor analysis and
a reliability test was done using Cronbach’s a test. This was done to check on the
validity and reliability of the independent and dependent variables used in the study,
apart from validate appropriateness of the scales used.
A six-point scale was used because it has been observed that respondents tend to
score on the middle point of any Likert type scale (Chang, 1994). This is particularly
evident in the Malaysian case due to the collectivist nature of the respondents (Singelis
and Brown, 1995). Hence, a six-point scale works best in such condition where it
eliminates such a pattern, as it forces respondents to choose a point either before or after
the mind set middle point that is now non-existent. At the same time, using a finer tuned
six-point scale would also result in higher validity and reliability for the findings (Chang,
1994). It must also be noted that there are various types of scales available, from a simple
three-point scale to a Juster scale (11-point scale) (Juster, 1966). The use of the scale is
dictated by the study needs and requirements, which is done here. The analytical
strategies for validity and reliability test are presented here. However, the validity
and reliability test are not conducted for purchase intention variables as there is only one
item. Table II depicts the final reliability test for all the variables used in the study.
No. of
Scale
factors Reliability Validity type
Author
List of
values
Purchase
satisfaction
Purchase
intention
Word-ofmouth
Kropp et al. (2005)
9
3
1-9
3
0.71-0.88
Yesa
L
Sanzo et al. (2003)
4
1
1-5
–
–
No
L
Maheswaran and
Sternthal (1990)
Soderlund (2006)
1
3
1
1
1-7
1-10
–
–
–
0.85
No
No
L
L
Notes: aExploratory factor analysis; L – Likert scale
No. of
items
No. of
variables
Scale
range
No. of
factors
List of values
9
3
1-6
3
0.81-0.91
57.81
Purchase
satisfaction
Purchase
intention
Word-of-mouth
4
1
1-6
1
0.81
63.80
1
1
1-6
–
3
1
1-6
1
Measure
Table II.
Summary of final
measures
No. of
No. of
Scale
items variables range
Measure
Reliability Variance Scale type
–
0.72
–
64.79
Six-point
scale
Six-point
scale
Six-point
scale
Six-point
scale
The basic analytical strategies used in this study are between-groups comparison.
Descriptive analysis was first carried out, followed by between-groups comparison.
For between-groups comparison, general linear model-multivariate analysis of variance
(MANOVA) and general linear model-univariate analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used
(Joreskog and Sorbom, 1982). MANOVA and GLM-ANOVA provide a clear view of the
difference effect between independent and dependent variables (Hair et al., 1998).
Personal values
and sales
promotion
81
Findings
Details of respondents’ demographics by different type of consumer products is
presented in Table III. For all the four product typed studied, most of the respondents
were female (55-60 per cent) where most of them were Malay (50-64 per cent) representing
the major ethnic in Malaysia. Most of the respondents were within the age range of
21-55 years old (61-67 per cent) and earn an income ranging from RM2,000 and below.
Table IV depicts the different components of personal value (internal, external and
interpersonal) variables mean score for each of the four different types of consumer
products. Internal value consists of self-fulfilment, self-respect and accomplishment.
External value consists of security, belonging, warm relationship and being well-respected.
Interpersonal value, on the other hand, consists of fun and enjoyment in life and excitement.
Variables
Convenience
products
Freq
%
Gender
Female
156
Male
125
Age scale
21-25
171
26-30
31
31-35
33
36-40
22
41-45
13
46-50
8
51-55
1
Monthly gross income
RM1,000 and below
91
RM1,001-RM2,000
89
RM2,001-RM3,000
44
RM3,001 and above
22
Ethnicity
Malay
161
Chinese
66
Indian
14
Others
40
Sales promotion technique
Sample
123
Premium
Cash refund offer
–
Game
158
Note: Freq – frequency
Shopping
products
Freq
%
Specialty/luxury
products
Freq
%
Unsought
products
Freq
%
56
45
154
125
55
45
155
122
56
44
179
118
60
40
61
11
12
8
5
3
0
186
54
15
8
6
6
3
67
19
5
3
2
2
1
170
48
26
11
3
5
4
61
17
9
4
1
2
1
197
46
16
11
12
4
4
66
16
5
4
4
1
1
32
32
16
8
86
91
22
21
31
33
8
8
77
78
38
26
28
28
14
9
76
96
25
14
26
32
8
5
57
24
5
14
175
63
10
31
63
23
4
11
177
54
15
31
64
20
5
11
147
117
10
23
50
39
3
8
44
–
138
–
141
–
50
–
51
–
136
–
141
–
49
–
51
–
–
111
186
–
–
37
63
–
56
Table III.
Demographic profile
of respondent
by product type
APJML
25,1
82
A preliminary GLM-MANOVA test carried out found that MANOVA main effects
( personal value) was found to be not significant for convenience product (Pillai ¼ 0.014,
F ¼ 0.752, p , 0.557), shopping product (Pillai ¼ 0.007, F ¼ 0.343, p , 0.849),
specialty/luxury product (Pillai ¼ 0.011, F ¼ 0.595, p , 0.667) and unsought product
(Pillai ¼ 0.016, F ¼ 0.863, p , 0.486) with the all the dependent variables (purchase
satisfaction and behavioural intention). This indicates that there is no significant effect
for personal value on purchase satisfaction and behavioural intention for all the four
product studied.
MANOVA main effects (sales promotion techniques preferences) was found to be
significant for convenience product (Pillai ¼ 0.068, F ¼ 7.899, p , 0.000), shopping
product (Pillai ¼ 0.045, F ¼ 4.919, p , 0.008), and specialty/luxury product
(Pillai ¼ 0.072, F ¼ 8.128, p , 0.000) with the all the dependent variables (purchase
satisfaction and behavioural intention). This indicates that there is a significant effect
for sales promotion techniques preferences on purchase satisfaction and behavioural
intention for convenience, shopping and specialty/luxury product. However,
MANOVA main effects (sales promotion techniques preferences) were found to be
not significant for unsought product (Pillai ¼ 0.012, F ¼ 1.313, p , 0.271) with all the
dependent variables (purchase satisfaction and behavioural intention) tested. This
shows that there is no significant effect for sales promotion techniques preferences on
purchase satisfaction and behavioural intention for unsought product.
MANOVA interaction effect was found to be significant for convenience product
(Pillai ¼ 0.061, F ¼ 3.425, p , 0.009) with all the dependent variables (purchase
satisfaction and behavioural intention). This indicates that there is a significant
interaction effects of sales promotion techniques preferences and personal value on
purchase satisfaction and behavioural intention for convenience product. However,
MANOVA interaction effect was found to be not significant for shopping product
(Pillai ¼ 0.003, F ¼ 0.147, p , 0.964), specialty product (Pillai ¼ 0.013, F ¼ 0.696,
p , 0.595) and unsought product (Pillai ¼ 0.028, F ¼ 1.523, p , 0.194) with all the
dependent variables (purchase satisfaction and behavioural intention) tested. This
shows that there is no significant interaction effects of sales promotion techniques
preferences and personal value on purchase satisfaction and behavioural intention for
shopping, specialty/luxury and unsought product.
GLM-ANOVA was further carried out for all purchase satisfaction and behavioural
intentions by personal value and sales promotion techniques preferences for all the
product type studied. Table V depicts purchase satisfaction and behavioural intentions
mean score and GLM-ANOVA test by personal value variable for each of the four
different types of consumer products.
Variables
Table IV.
Personal value mean score
Internal
External
Interpersonal
Convenience
products
Mean
SD
4.46
4.57
4.91
0.88
0.81
0.95
Note: SD – standard deviation
Shopping
products
Mean
SD
4.50
4.60
4.89
0.85
0.87
1.08
Specialty/
luxury products
Mean
SD
4.54
4.59
4.93
0.85
0.88
0.97
Unsought
products
Mean
SD
4.50
4.51
4.91
0.84
0.89
0.96
Variables
Convenience products
Internal value
External value
Interpersonal value
Shopping products
Internal value
External value
Interpersonal value
Specialty/luxury products
Internal value
External value
Interpersonal value
Unsought products
Internal value
External value
Interpersonal value
Purchase satisfaction
Mean
SD
F-value
4.00
3.90
3.78
0.80
0.77
1.08
0.989
4.23
4.32
4.21
0.93
0.85
0.96
4.31
4.44
4.31
3.93
3.77
4.01
Behavioural intention
Mean
SD
F-value
3.90
3.75
3.84
0.90
0.93
1.09
0.250
0.219
4.28
4.28
4.17
0.81
0.81
1.02
0.324
0.95
0.94
0.95
0.306
4.37
4.39
4.44
0.96
0.93
0.95
0.093
0.80
0.86
1.02
0.773
4.03
3.96
4.04
0.96
0.92
1.02
0.075
Personal values
and sales
promotion
83
Notes: Significant at: *p , 0.05; SD – standard deviation
Table V.
Purchase satisfaction and
behavioural intention
mean score by
personal value
The findings from Table V show that there is no significant difference in purchase
satisfaction and behavioural intention by different personal value for all the product
type studied. Table VI depicts purchase satisfaction and behavioural intention mean
score GLM-ANOVA test by the most and least preferred sales promotion techniques
variables for each of the four different types of consumer products.
The findings from Table VI show that there is significant difference in purchase
satisfaction and behavioural intention by most and least preferred sales promotion
techniques for the purchase of convenience, shopping and specialty/luxury products
only, but none for unsought product.
Variables
Convenience products
Least preferred sales promotion technique
Most preferred sales promotion technique
Shopping products
Least preferred sales promotion technique
Most preferred sales promotion technique
Specialty/luxury products
Least preferred sales promotion technique
Most preferred sales promotion technique
Unsought products
Least preferred sales promotion technique
Most preferred sales promotion technique
Purchase satisfaction
Mean
SD
F-value
Behavioural intention
Mean
SD
F-value
3.68
4.20
0.97
0.91
20.715 *
3.57
4.23
0.97
0.98
31.096 *
4.04
4.47
0.92
0.95
15.068 *
4.00
4.42
0.92
0.94
13.909 *
4.24
4.48
0.95
0.95
4.410 *
4.23
4.64
0.98
0.87
13.629 *
3.91
4.13
0.98
0.94
3.401
3.97
4.17
1.02
0.95
2.577
Notes: Significant at: *p , 0.05; SD – standard deviation
Table VI.
Purchase satisfaction and
behavioural intention
mean score by most
preferred sales promotion
technique
APJML
25,1
84
Discussion
The findings were mainly guided by the context chosen to test the theoretical framework
and hypotheses. This study uses personal values and sales promotion techniques
preferences in the Malaysian context. Different personal values and sales promotion
techniques preferences may have an influence on consumers purchase satisfaction
and behavioural intention for different consumers’ product type. It is therefore
important to understand the characteristics of Malaysian consumers’ personal values
and sales promotion techniques preferences, as well as the characteristics of each
consumer’s product type in order to interpret and evaluate the findings.
Contextual influence
The discussion of the findings in this study must also be seen from the aspect of the
retail environment in Malaysia. It is noted that the Malaysian retail environment has
had tremendous growth and marked changes over the decades. More and more retail
outlets, such as superstores, supermarkets, convenience stores and even warehouses
have been added to the retail landscape (Lim et al., 2003). Such a retail growth
phenomenon is continuously subject to forces such as consumer behaviour,
competition, social status and values (Lai, 2009; Shamsudin and Selamat, 2005),
where it is much apparent in Malaysia consumers’ purchasing pattern (Lim et al., 2003).
At the same time, Malaysian consumers’ purchasing patterns are also subject to
continuous changes and reflect consumers’ decision making processes. Malaysian
consumer purchase aspects are mainly affected by factors such as: more and more
choices for consumer selection on multiple brands, higher level of technological
advancement, more and more effective critical promotional plans, better competitive
pricing strategies (cost reduction), flexible modes of purchase (convenience), continuous
research and development done on better identifying consumer purchasing pattern,
and product experience (Chua et al., 2006; Heaney et al., 2008).
Apart from that, the implementation of different sales promotion techniques may
also have an important effect on Malaysian consumers overall purchase satisfaction and
behavioural intention. The use of various sales promotion techniques in the Malaysia
context is extensively carried out by retailers, manufacturers and distributors. They
utilize both hedonic and utilitarian sales promotions techniques to gain and create
market share and competition (Babin et al., 1994; De Run and Jee, 2008, 2009; Ndubisi
and Chiew, 2005, 2006). There is a level of awareness and an acceptance of different
sales promotion techniques used by retailers, manufacturers and distributors, especially
in the retail environment (Chandon et al., 2000; De Run and Jee, 2008; De Run et al.,
2010b; Ndubisi and Chiew, 2005, 2006).
Malaysians are also known to be collectivist in nature (Singelis and Brown, 1995).
Collectivist community, such as Malaysia, mainly see themselves as a vital part of their
groups, such as family and colleagues (Triandis, 1995). This indicates that people from
collectivist cultures are more often motivated by their social norms imposed by their
community. They put more emphasis on relationships and connections in their own
community. Not only that, collectivist communities also prioritizes achieving the common
goals of their community. They tend to repress their own personal attributes in certain
settings in order to please the mass (Kacen and Lee, 2002). People from collectivist cultures
are more likely to put aside their personal emotional feelings (Triandis, 1995). Previous
studies done indicated that attitude-intention and attitude-behaviour relationships were
weaker in collectivist cultures such as Malaysia (Kacen and Lee, 2002; Kashima et al.,
1992; Lee, 2000; Triandis, 1995). All of the above have an impact on the findings of the
hypotheses tested.
Hypothesis findings and discussions
The hypotheses set out to determine if there were any differences in purchase satisfaction
and behavioural intention by personal value (internal, external and interpersonal) for each
of the four different products. This study also sets out to determine if there were any
difference in purchase satisfaction and behavioural intention by sales promotion
techniques preferences for each of the four different products.
The findings show that there is no difference in purchase satisfaction and behavioural
intention by different personal value for all the product type studied. Convenience,
shopping and unsought products may have little or no impact on respondent values.
Nevertheless, by theory (Kotler and Armstrong, 2004), a specialty/luxury product should
have some impact. This is because it normally requires deep consideration and thought
on behalf of the consumer. However, specialty/luxury product characteristics did not
transpire for the respondents of this study as significantly different. Such finding does
not support H1 and H2.
This might have occurred as when Malaysian consumers purchase any
specialty/luxury product, their decisions were more guided by status seeking (Phau
and Yip, 2008) and store image (d’Astous and Gargouri, 2001), rather than their set of
beliefs or personal value. They do not bother about their personal interest in a
purchase, but rather what society thinks of their purchase and how society evaluates it.
Such indications, hence, show that there is no difference in their purchase satisfaction
and behavioural intention by personal value, particularly for the purchase of
specialty/luxury products.
Apart from that, purchasing specialty/luxury products such as car (as the example
used in this study) by the masses in Malaysia may no longer be seen as a
specialty/luxury purchase as suggested by previous studies (Mandel et al., 2006). Car
makers such as Proton and Perodua have made the purchase of a car in Malaysia
affordable and easier (low interest purchase schemes, no down payment, less
paperwork) (Zardy, 2005). This has made purchasing a car in Malaysia less of a
deliberate act. This then reflects less on personal values. This is acknowledged as one
of the limitations of this study.
Such findings may have occurred due to the collectivist nature of Malaysian
consumers (Singelis and Brown, 1995). In a collectivist community such as Malaysia,
the common goal is to achieve the common interest of many. Malaysian consumers
here are known to suppress the emotional portion of their impulse buying (Kacen and
Lee, 2002; Singelis and Brown, 1995). This then brings the understanding that
Malaysian consumers’ purchase decision under impulse conditions would occur
regardless of their personal value evaluation. Individual personal values hence do not
come into play in such situations.
Other than the characteristics of different product types and the collectivist nature of
Malaysian consumers, their purchase satisfaction and behavioural intention may have
also been guided by other factors. These factors include multiple selection of multiple
brands, effective promotional plans, competitive pricing strategies for different brand,
and quality products offered by retailers and manufacturers (Hassan et al., 2009;
Personal values
and sales
promotion
85
APJML
25,1
86
Mehra et al., 1998). These mainly occurred due to the intensive promotional strategies
imposed by retailers and manufacturers on consumer products such as price cut and
easy payment schemes. This will reflect more on consumers’ purchase satisfaction and
behavioural intention for the purchase of different type of consumer products. These
phenomena (price cut and easy payment) are effective in the Malaysian context where
Malaysian consumers have been shown to place more importance on monetary based
benefits from a purchase.
At the same time, the findings in this study show that there is significant difference
in purchase satisfaction and behavioural intention by most and least preferred sales
promotion techniques for the purchase of convenience, shopping and specialty/luxury
products only. The findings thus support H3 and H4 for the purchase of convenience,
shopping and specialty product. This is in line with previous studies that show
difference in attitude (purchase satisfaction) and behaviour (behavioural intention) by
preferences (Bowles, 1998). The most preferred sales promotion techniques used for
convenience, shopping and specialty/luxury products in this study were sample and
premium. The least preferred sales promotion techniques for convenience, shopping
and specialty/luxury product is game. Such identification of most and least preferred
sales promotion technique will have a strong implication for consumers’ overall
purchase satisfaction and behavioural intention for the purchase of different type of
consumer products (De Run and Jee, 2009).
Sales promotion techniques such as sample and premium promise monetary value
and game offer more of a non-monetary value to the consumers (Ndubisi and Chiew,
2005). By inducing monetary value sales promotion techniques such as sample and
premium on convenience, shopping and specialty/luxury product will increase
respondents overall purchase satisfaction and behavioural intention. This is
particularly evident in the Malaysian market as Malaysian consumers have been
shown to prefer such sales promotion techniques (Ndubisi and Chiew, 2006).
Preferred sales promotion techniques have been shown to anticipate higher purchase
satisfaction and behavioural intention as compared to the least preferred sales promotion
techniques (De Run and Jee, 2009; Ndubisi and Chiew, 2006). This is in line with the
findings from this study that indicate difference in consumers’ purchase satisfaction
and behavioural intention by most and least preferred sales promotion technique when
consumers purchase convenience, shopping and specialty/luxury products.
Nevertheless, the findings show that there is no significant difference in purchase
satisfaction and behavioural intention by sales promotion technique preferences for the
purchase of unsought product, hence does not provide any evident support for H3 and
H4 for the purchase of unsought product. The nature of unsought products entails low
likelihood of differences in consumers’ purchase satisfaction and behavioural intention
by sales promotion techniques preferences. This is because consumers are normally
less aware of the benefits and purpose of purchasing unsought products. Hence, any
sales promotion techniques implemented in promoting unsought products such as life
insurance will be deemed insufficient, as unsought products require more than just
preferred sales promotion techniques.
Other promotional mix such as personal selling and advertisement may increase
consumers’ purchase satisfaction and behavioural intention for the purchase of
unsought products. As consumers get more information on the product from personal
selling, it is likely to increase the likelihood of their purchase satisfaction and
behavioural intention. Similarly, when using advertisement, more information and
knowledge on the product will increase the consumers purchase satisfaction and
behavioural intention.
At the same time, product involvement may also increase consumers’ purchase
satisfaction and behavioural intention on the preferences of sales promotion techniques
for the purchase of unsought products, as involving the consumer into the product will
make them feel more at ease and attached to the product. Such product involvement
will increase the likelihood of consumers’ satisfaction with their purchase and to repeat
the purchase from the same retailers or service providers, at the same time as
introducing the purchase to their peers, family and friends.
Managerial implications
The findings indicated that personal value (internal, external and interpersonal) is a
weak indicator of respondents’ purchase satisfaction and behavioural intention for all
product types. Such findings for personal value were very much related to different
characteristics of the product types studied. It suggests to managers in Malaysia that
by understanding the characteristics of their products will help in selecting appropriate
strategies and sales promotion techniques. It will enable managers to better target and
segment different product by various consumer categories. Managers can do so by
designing the product in different forms that suit the target market. For example, using
appropriate colours, such as green, and the Halal logo for a market that is dominated
by Malay consumers.
Apart from that, managers should also concentrate on the effect of cultural value
rather than personal value alone when measuring consumers purchase satisfaction and
behavioural intention. Malaysian consumers do not seem to place importance on
personal value, but rather follow society’s cultural values. Such an indication mainly
happens as these consumers hold strongly to the issues of collectivism, and
dominant/non-dominant cultural cues in their daily life. Hence, any issues pertaining to
such a nature would work better than personal value. Managers can consider
segmenting the consumers based on their cultural values instead. This can be done
through prior identification of the cultural traits of their customers and then
implementing proper marketing segmenting and positioning strategies for different
target markets. This will result in higher/more positive purchase satisfaction and
behavioural intention for the purchase of different type of consumer products.
As compared to personal value, sales promotion techniques preferences was shown
to be a stronger indicator compared to personal value on respondents’ purchase
satisfaction and behavioural intention for all the product types tested. Managers can
use the findings obtained here to segment and position their products by different sales
promotion techniques preferences. This is because the findings strongly argue that
there is no single available sales promotion technique for all consumer product types
tested. Managers should then identify which sales promotion techniques are more
profitable and likely to lead to consumers’ overall positive purchase satisfaction and
behavioural intention for the purchase of different product types.
Conclusion
Consumer personal value and sales promotion techniques preferences were studied by
noting their outcomes on consumer purchase satisfaction and behavioural intention.
Personal values
and sales
promotion
87
APJML
25,1
88
They were studied from the aspect of the Malaysian consumers’ perspectives for four
different consumer products. This part details the conclusions and contributions of this
research, the limitations incurred and guidelines for future research that could be
carried out to improve and provide more insight into the issues of personal value and
sales promotion techniques preferences.
The findings showed that there was no difference in the respondents’ purchase
satisfaction and behavioural intention by personal value (internal, external and
interpersonal) for convenience, shopping, specialty/luxury and unsought products.
However, the findings showed a significant difference in purchase satisfaction and
behavioural intention by the most and least preferred sales promotion techniques
preferences for convenience, shopping and specialty/luxury products.
Overall the findings suggest that preferred sales promotion techniques play a more
dominant role in affecting consumers’ purchase satisfaction and behavioural intention
rather than based on personal value for all the consumer product types studied. Such
findings are primarily due to a few underlying internal factors (from the consumers’
perspective) such as the consumers’ product characteristics, the collectivist nature of
Malaysian consumers, the preferring of the tangibility based sales promotion
techniques offered and in preferring the monetary based benefits sales promotion
techniques offered. Apart from that, such findings were also the result of other external
factors such as price, other promotional mix strategies, store image and good product
quality that may have a role in cultivating better consumer purchase satisfaction and
behavioural intention for all the consumer product types studied.
Research contribution
Previous studies have tended to suggest that value is the predictor of attitude (in form
of purchase satisfaction) and behaviours (behavioural intention). Other previous studies
also indicated that sales promotion techniques preferences had an effect on consumer
purchase satisfaction (as an attitude) and behavioural intention (behaviour)
(Chandon et al., 2000; De Run and Jee, 2009). The findings from this study have
expanded the current knowledge and academic studies done on similar vicinity. This
study goes into more in depth, studying the association of personal value and sales
promotion techniques preferences on consumers’ purchase satisfaction (attitude) and
behavioural intention (behaviour) for different types of consumer products in the
Malaysian context. It further provides a platform for academicians, practitioners and
managers to better understand the state of Malaysian consumers’ personal value and
sales promotion techniques preferences that are associated with their overall satisfaction
and behavioural intention from their purchase of different type of consumer products.
Personal value in this study is identified as not being an important indicator for
Malaysian consumers’ purchase satisfaction and behavioural intention. Malaysian
consumers are known to be a collectivist society which is different from the Western
community that primarily identifies itself as individualist. Personal value constructs
would not work well in a collectivist society like Malaysia when the norm and
purchasing pattern are mainly guided by the code of conduct and ethics that are
imposed by the community. It is different when compared to an individualist
community that strongly integrates their purchase decisions and satisfaction based on
their own personal set of rules and conduct. Thus, this provides a clear picture of the
usability and applicability of personal value constructs in the Malaysian context.
Sales promotion techniques preferences, especially monetary based benefit
techniques, are important to Malaysian consumers. This is because Malaysian
consumers are known to like and prefer sales promotion techniques that offer them
monetary value. They like tangibility and value for money in a purchase and thus sales
promotion techniques that can offer them such benefits would surely assist their
purchase decision. Such findings would therefore enhance previous findings done on
similar grounds and arguments. Applying the most appropriate sales promotion
techniques that offer monetary benefits to Malaysian consumers’ would enhance their
purchase decision and satisfaction.
Limitation and future research
First, this study only focuses on personal value and sales promotion techniques
preferences. Thus, the researcher suggests that future studies should integrate cultural
value. This will contribute a broader aspect point of view of the different value
impacts, especially in the Malaysian context.
Second, the examples that were used to represent the product types themselves did
not possess the characteristics of the products as perceived by previous studies
(Norzaishah, 2007). For example, a car is not a specialty/luxury purchase in the Malaysian
context. Hence, using such an example would limit more in-depth understanding of
how Malaysian consumers react to the purchase of other specialty/luxury products.
Future research could also identify and implement other examples of consumers’
product types, apart from the one that had been used in this study. This is to enable one
to have a more in-depth understanding of how consumers actually react to it. For
example, it would be better to use jewelry to represent specialty/luxury products rather
than cars or using soda drinks rather than soap to represent a convenience product.
Such examples would provide a more holistic representation of the product as
perceived in the minds of Malaysian consumers.
Another limitation is based on the sample of this study being too generalized. It is
done on the basis of an understanding of all the ethnic and religious groups in
Malaysia as one single entity. The reality is that each group may be different. This will
limit the understanding of the effect of personal value and sales promotion techniques
on niche perspectives. Malaysian consumers can be categorized into different
consumers through differences in ethnicity and religious group. Previous studies done
had shown that different ethnic groups would have different points-of-view for their
purchase and behavioural intention (De Run, 2004; De Run and Chin, 2006).
Future research should separate the respondents or samples into different groups
based on consumers’ ethnicity, religious group and/or income level. This is to minimize
the impact of the sample being too generalized. This might also help future researchers
to better understand the impact of personal value and sales promotion techniques
preferences towards consumer attitude and behaviour from the point-of-view of
different ethnic and religious groups.
References
Ajzen, I. (1991), “The theory of planned behavior”, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
Processes, Vol. 50 No. 2, pp. 179-211.
Ajzen, I. and Fishbein, M. (1980), Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior,
Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Personal values
and sales
promotion
89
APJML
25,1
90
Ajzen, I. and Madden, T.J. (1986), “Prediction of goal-directed behaviour: attitudes, intentions,
and perceived behavioural control”, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 22,
pp. 453-74.
Alvarez, B.A. and Casielles, R.V. (2005), “Consumer evaluations of sales promotion: the effect of
brand choice”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 39 Nos 1/2, pp. 54-70.
Alwin, D.F. (1984), “Trends in parental socialization values: Detroit, 1958 to 1983”, American
Journal of Sociology, Vol. 90, pp. 359-82.
Babin, B.J., Darden, W.R. and Griffin, M. (1994), “Work and/or fun: measuring hedonic and
utilitarian shopping value”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 20, March, pp. 644-56.
Bearden, W.O. and Etzel, M.J. (1982), “Reference group influence on product and brand purchase
decisions”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 9, September, pp. 183-94.
Beatty, S.E., Kahle, L.R., Homer, P. and Misra, S. (1985), “Alternative measurement approaches to
consumer values: the list of values and the Rokeach value survey”, Psychology
& Marketing, Vol. 2 No. 3, pp. 181-201.
Beatty, S.E., Kahle, L.R., Utsey, M. and Keown, C. (1993), “Gift giving behaviors in the United
States and Japan: a personal value perspectives”, Journal of International Consumer
Marketing, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 49-66.
Beatty, S.E., Yoon, M.H., Grunert, S.C. and Helgeson, J.G. (1996), “An examination of gift-giving
behaviours and personal values in four countries”, in Otnes, C. and Beltramini, R. (Eds),
Gift-giving: An Interdisciplinary Anthology, Bowling Green State University Popular Press,
Bowling Green, OH.
Becker, B.W. and Kaldenberg, D.O. (2000), “Factors influencing the recommendations of nursing
homes”, Marketing Health Service, Vol. 37 No. 1, pp. 8-22.
Bitner, M.J. (1990), “Evaluating service encounters: the effects of physical surroundings and
employee responses”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 54, April, pp. 69-82.
Bock, G.-W., Zmud, R.W., Kim, Y.-G. and Lee, J.-N. (2005), “Behavioral intention formation in the
knowledge sharing: examining the roles of extrinsic motivators, social-psychological
forces, and organizational climate”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 87-111.
Boulding, W., Kalra, A., Staelin, R. and Zeithaml, V.A. (1993), “A dynamic process model of
service quality: from expectations to behavioral intentions”, Journal of Marketing
Research, Vol. 30, February, pp. 7-23.
Bowles, S. (1998), “Endogenous preferences: the cultural consequences of markets and other
economic institutions”, Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. 37, March, pp. 75-111.
Brown, M., Pope, N. and Voges, K. (2003), “Buying or browsing? An exploration of shopping
orientations and online purchase intention”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 37
Nos 11/12, pp. 1666-84.
Chae, M.-H., Black, C. and Heitmeyer, J. (2006), “Pre-purchase and post-purchase satisfaction and
fashion involvement of female tennis wear consumers”, International Journal of Consumer
Studies, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 25-33.
Chandon, P., Laurent, G. and Wansink, B. (1997), “Beyond savings: the multiple utilitarian and
hedonic benefits of sales promotions”, working papers, University of North Carolina,
Raleigh, NC.
Chandon, P., Wansink, B. and Laurent, G. (2000), “A benefit congruency framework of sales
promotion effectiveness”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 64, October, pp. 65-81.
Chang, L. (1994), “A psychometric evaluation of 4-point and 6-point likert-type scales in relation
to reliability and validity”, Applied Psychology Measurement, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 205-15.
Chatterjee, P. (2007), “Advertised versus unexpected next purchase coupons: consumer
satisfaction, perceptions of value, and fairness”, Journal of Product & Brand Management,
Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 59-69.
Cheung, G.W. and Rensvold, R.B. (1999), “Testing factorial invariance across groups:
a reconceptualization and proposed new method”, Journal of Management, Vol. 25 No. 1,
pp. 1-27.
Chua, A.P.H., Ali, K. and Hishamuddin, I. (2006), “E-commerce: a study on online shopping in
Malaysia”, Journal of Social Science, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 231-42.
Cobb-Walgren, C.J., Ruble, C.A. and Donthu, N. (1995), “Brand equity, brand preference and
purchase intent”, Journal of Advertising, No. 24, p. 3.
Costa, P.T.J. and McCrae, R.R. (2001), Theoretical Context for Adult Temperament, Wachs, T.D.
and Kohnstamm, G.A. (Eds), Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ.
Cronin, J.J. and Taylor, S.A. (1992), “Measuring service quality: an examination and extension”,
Journal of Marketing, Vol. 56, July, pp. 55-68.
Crosby, L.A., Evans, K.R. and Cowles, D. (1990), “Relationship quality in services selling: an
interpersonal influence perspective”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 54, July, pp. 68-81.
d’Astous, A. and Gargouri, E. (2001), “Consumer evaluations of brand imitations”, European
Journal of Marketing, Vol. 35 Nos 1/2, pp. 153-67.
Day, E., Denton, L.L. and Hickner, J.A. (1988), “Clients’ selection and retention criteria: some
marketing implications for the small CPA firm”, Journal of Professional Services
Marketing, Vol. 3 No. 4, pp. 85-91.
De Run, E.C. (2004), “Unintended effects of ethnically targeted advertising”, PhD, University of
Otago, Dunedin.
De Run, E.C. and Chin, S.F. (2006), “Language use in packaging: the reaction of Malay and
Chinese consumers in Malaysia”, Sunway Academic Journal, Vol. 3, pp. 133-45.
De Run, E.C. and Jee, T.W. (2008), “Sales promotion preferences: techniques by product type”,
paper presented at the 3rd International Borneo Business Conference, Universiti Malaysia
Sabah (UMS), Malaysia.
De Run, E.C. and Jee, T.W. (2009), “The influence of personal values on sales promotion
techniques for convenience product”, SEGi Review, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 16-24.
De Run, E.C., Jee, T.W. and Kanto, D. (2010a), Indonesia, Asia Business Research Corporation
Limited, Wellington.
De Run, E.C., Jee, T.W. and Lau, W.M. (2010b), Malaysia, Asia Business Research Corporation
Limited, Wellington.
De Run, E.C., Jee, T.W. and Nathawut, S. (2010c), Thailand, Asia Business Research Corporation
Limited, Wellington.
Dick, A. and Basu, K. (1994), “Customer loyalty: towards an integrated framework”, Journal of
the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 99-113.
Dickson, P.R. (1982), “Person-situation: segmentation’s missing link”, Journal of Marketing,
Vol. 46, Fall, pp. 56-64.
Dube, L. and Menon, K. (2000), “Multiple roles of consumption emotions in post-purchase
satisfaction with extended service transactions”, Journal of Service Industry Management,
Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 287-304.
Engel, J.F., Blackwell, R.D. and Miniard, P.W. (1995), Consumer Behavior, Dryden Press,
Fort Worth, TX.
Personal values
and sales
promotion
91
APJML
25,1
92
Ferrandi, J.M., Valette-Florence, P., Prime, N. and Usunier, J.C. (2000), “Linking personal values
and the time orientations: the case of the attitude towards cellular phone in France and
Germany”, Le Tendenze Del Marketing In Europa, pp. 1-18.
Fishbein, M.A. and Ajzen, I. (1975), Belief, Attitude, Intention and Behavior: An Introduction to
Theory and Research, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
Fisher, D. (2000), “Parental ingratitude”, Forbes, 12 June, p. P064.
Fontaine, R. and Richardson, S. (2005), “Cultural values in Malaysia: Chinese, Malays and Indians
compared”, Cross Cultural Management: An International Journal, Vol. 12 No. 14, pp. 63-77.
Foxman, E.R., Tansuhaj, P.S. and Wong, J.K. (1988), “Evaluating cross-national sales promotion
strategy: an audit approach”, International Markeing Review, Winter, pp. 7-15.
Garbarino, E. and Johnson, M.S. (1999), “The different roles of satisfaction, trust and commitment
in customer relationship”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 63, pp. 70-87.
Garretson, J.A. and Burton, S. (2003), “Highly coupon and sale prone consumers: benefits beyond
price savings”, Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 43 No. 2, pp. 162-72.
Gilbert, D.D. (1999), Retail Marketing Management, Pearson Education, Harlow.
Gilbert, D.D. and Jackaria, N. (2002), “The efficacy of sales promotions in UK supermarkets:
a consumer view”, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 30
No. 1, pp. 315-22.
Gitlin, S. (2001), “Russian addressing”, Brandweek, 19 November, pp. 19-20.
Goldsmith, R.E. and Flynn, L.R. (1992), “Identifying innovators in consumer product markets”,
European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 26 No. 12, pp. 42-55.
Goldsmith, R.E., Lafferty, B.A. and Noel, S.J. (2000), “The impact of corporate credibility and
celebrity credibility on consumer reaction to advertisements and brand”, Journal of
Advertising, Vol. 29 No. 3, pp. 43-54.
Gulbro, R. and Herbig, P. (1995), “Differences in cross-cultural negotiation behavior between
industrial product and consumer product firms”, Journal of Business & Industrial
Marketing, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 18-28.
Hair, J.F. Jr, Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L. and Black, W.C. (1998), Multivariate Data Analysis,
5th ed., Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Halstead, D., Hartman, D. and Schmidt, S.L. (1994), “Multisource effects on the satisfaction
formation process”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 22, pp. 114-29.
Haque, M.S. (2003), “The role of the state in managing ethnic tensions in Malaysia: a critical
discourse”, American Behavioral Scientist, Vol. 47 No. 3, pp. 240-66.
Hassan, Y., Mohamad, N.M.N., Bakar, H.A. and Ismail, N. (2009), “Influence of shopping
orientation and store image on patronage of furnitutr store”, available at: http://66.102.1.
104/scholar?q¼cache:e4OABT4I78wJ:scholar.google.com/þ %22buyingþfurniture%
22þ%22necessity%22þ&hl¼en (accessed 4 August).
Heaney, J.G., Goldsmith, R.E. and Wan Jamailah, W.J. (2008), “Status consumption among
Malaysian consumers: exploring its relationships with materialism and
attention-to-social-comparison-information”, Journal of International Consumer
Marketing, Vol. 17 No. 4, pp. 83-98.
Henry, W.A. (1976), “Cultural values do correlate with consumer behavior”, Journal of Marketing
Research, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 121-7.
Holmes, J.D. and Lett, J.D. (1977), “Product sampling and word of mouth”, Journal of Advertising
Research, Vol. 17, October, pp. 35-9.
Homer, P.M. and Kahle, L.R. (1988), “A structural equation test of the value-attitude-behavior
hierarchy”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 54, pp. 638-46.
Huff, L.C. and Alden, D.L. (1998), “An investigation of consumer response to sales promotions in
developing markets: a three-country analysis”, Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 38
No. 3, pp. 47-56.
Inglehart, R. (1985), “Aggregate stability and individual-level flux in mass belief systems: the
level of analysis paradox”, American Political Science Review, Vol. 79, March, pp. 97-116.
Jaramillo, F. and Marshall, G.W. (2004), “Critical success factors in the personal selling process:
an empirical investigation of Ecuadorian salespeople in the banking industry”,
The International Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 9-25.
Jarvenpaa, S.L. and Todd, P.A. (1996), “Consumer reactions to electronic shopping on the World
Wide Web”, International Journal of Electronic Commerce, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 59-88.
Jayawardhena, C. (2004), “Personal values influence on e-shopping attitude and behavior”,
Internet Research, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 127-38.
Johnston, M.W. and Marshall, G.W. (2003), Sales Force Management, 7th ed., McGraw-Hill,
Boston, MA.
Jones, M.A. and Suh, J. (2000), “Transaction-specific satisfaction and overall satisfaction: an
empirical analysis”, Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 147-59.
Joreskog, K.G. and Sorbom, D. (1982), “Recent developments in structural equation modeling”,
Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 19, pp. 404-16.
Juster, F.T. (1966), “Consumer buying intentions and purchase probability: an experiment in
survey design”, Journal of the American Statistical Association, Vol. 61, pp. 658-96.
Kacen, J.J. and Lee, J.A. (2002), “The influence of culture on consumer impulsive buying
behavior”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 163-76.
Kahle, L.R. (1980), “Stimulus condition self-selection by males in the interaction of focus of
control and skill-chance situations”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 38
No. 1, pp. 50-6.
Kahle, L.R. (1983), Social Values and Social Change: Adaptation to Life in America, Preager,
New York, NY.
Kahle, L.R. (1984), Attitudes and Social Adaptation, Elmsford ed., Pergamon Press, New York, NY.
Kahle, L.R., Beatty, S.E. and Homer, P. (1986), “Alternative measurement approaches to
consumer values: the list of values (LOV) and values and life styles (VALS)”, Journal of
Consumer Research, Vol. 13, December, pp. 405-9.
Kahle, L.R., Rose, G. and Shoham, A. (1999), “Findings of LOV throughout the world, and other
evidence of cross-national consumer psychographics: introduction”, Journal of
Euro-Marketing, Vol. 8 Nos 1/2, pp. 1-13.
Kale, S.H. and McIntyre, R.P. (1991), “Distribution channel relationships in diverse cultures”,
International Markeing Review, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 31-45.
Kamakura, W.A. and Mazzon, J.A. (1991), “Values segmentation: a model for the measurement of
values and values systems”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 208-18.
Kamakura, W.A. and Novak, T.P. (1992), “Value-system segmentation: exploring the meaning of
list of value”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 119-32.
Kashani, K. and Quelch, J.A. (1990), “Can sales promotion go global?”, Business Horizons, Vol. 33
No. 3, pp. 37-43.
Personal values
and sales
promotion
93
APJML
25,1
94
Kashima, Y., Siegal, M., Tanaka, K. and Kashima, E.S. (1992), “Do people believe behaviour s are
consistent with attitudes? Towards a cultural psychology of attribution processes”, British
Journal of Social Psychology, Vol. 31, pp. 111-24.
Kilbourne, W., Grunhagen, M. and Foley, J. (2005), “A cross-cultural examination of the
relationship between materialism and individual values”, Journal of Economic Psychology,
Vol. 26, pp. 624-41.
Kim, C.K. and Lavack, A.M. (1996), “Vertical brand extensions: current research and managerial
implications”, The Journal of Product & Brand Management, Vol. 5 No. 6, pp. 24-37.
Kluckhohn, F.R. (1951), Values and Value Orientations in the Theory of Action, Parsons, T. and
Shils, E.A. (Eds), Harvard University Press, Cambridge.
Kotler, P. and Armstrong, G. (2004), Principles of Marketing, 10th ed., Prentice-Hall,
Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Kropp, F., Holden, S.J.S. and Lavack, A.M. (1999a), “Cause-related marketing and values in
australia”, International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, Vol. 4 No. 1,
pp. 63-80.
Kropp, F., Lavack, A.M. and Holden, S.J.S. (1999b), “Smokers and beer drinkers: values and
consumer susceptibility to interpersonal influence”, Journal of Consumer Marketing,
Vol. 16 No. 6, pp. 536-57.
Kropp, F., Lavack, A.M. and Silvera, D.H. (2005), “Values and collective self-esteem as predictors
of consumer susceptibility to interpersonal influence among university students”,
International Markeing Review, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 7-33.
Kuo, Y.F., Wu, C.M. and Deng, W.J. (2009), “The relationships among service quality, perceived
value, customer satisfaction, and post-purchase intention in mobile value-added services”,
Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 887-96.
Lafferty, B.A. and Goldsmith, R.E. (1999), “Corporate credibility role in consumer’s attitudes and
purchase intentions when a high versus a low credibility endorser is used in the ad”,
Journal of Business Research, Vol. 44, February, pp. 109-16.
Lai, F.S. (2009), “An investigation into the impact of income, culture and religion on consumption
behaviour: a comparative study of the Malay and the Chinese consumers in Malaysia”,
Doctor of Philosophy, University of Exeter, available at: https://eric.exeter.ac.uk/
repository/bitstream/handle/10036/98622/LaiF_fm.pdf?sequence¼2
Lavack, A.M. and Kropp, F. (2003), “Smoking among university students in Canada and Korea:
linking diffusion theory with consumer susceptibility to interpersonal influence”, Health
Marketing Quarterly, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 3-25.
Lawrence, C., Shapiro, S.J. and Lalji, S. (1986), “Ethnic markets – a Canadian perspective”,
Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 14 No. 2, p. 7.
Lee, H.G. (2000), Ethnic Relations in Peninsular Malaysia: The Cultural and Economic
Dimensions, Institute of Southeast Asian, Singapore.
Liao, C.C., Chen, J.L. and Yen, D.C. (2007), “Theory of planning behavior (TPB) and customer
satisfaction in the continued use of e-service: an integrated model”, Computers in Human
Behavior, Vol. 23 No. 6, pp. 2804-22.
Lim, L. (2001), “Work related values of Malays and Chinese-Malaysians”, International Journal of
Cross-cultural Management, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 229-46.
Lim, Y.M., Nurwati, B. and Ghafar, A. (2003), “Retail activity in Malaysia: from shophouse to
hypermarket”, paper presented at the Pacific Rim Real Estate Society 9th Annual
Conference, University of Queensland and Queensland University of Technology,
Brisbane, Australia, 20-22 January.
Lin, K.L., Hsu, J.Y.J., Huang, H.S. and Hsu, C.N. (2005), “A recommender for targeted
advertisement of unsought products in e-commerce”, paper presented at the Seventh IEEE
International Conference.
Lotz, S.L., Shim, S. and Gehrt, K.C. (2003), “A study of Japanese consumers’ cognitive hierarchies
in formal and informal gift-giving situations”, Psychology & Marketing, Vol. 20 No. 1,
pp. 59-85.
McCarthy, E.J. and Perreault, W.D. (1993), Basic Marketing, 11th ed., Irwin, Homewood, IL.
McCarty, J.A. and Shrum, L.J. (1994), “The recycling of solid wastes: personal and cultural values
and attitudes about recycling as antecedents of recycling behavior”, Journal of Business
Research, Vol. 30, pp. 53-62.
McCarty, J.A. and Shrum, L.J. (2000), “The measurement of personal values in survey research:
a test of alternative rating procedures”, Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 64, pp. 271-98.
McCollough, M.A. and Gremler, D.D. (2004), “A conceptual model and empirical examination of
the effect of service guarantees on post-purchase consumption evaluations”, Managing
Service Quality, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 58-74.
McCrae, R.R. and Costa, P.T.J. (1999), A Five-factor Theory of Personality, Pervin, L.A. and
John, O.P. (Eds), Guilford Press, New York, NY.
MacKenzie, S.B. and Lutz, R.J. (1989), “An empirical examination of the structural antecedents of
attitude towards the ad in an advertising pretesting context”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 53,
April, pp. 48-65.
Maheswaran, D. and Sternthal, B. (1990), “The effects of knowledge, motivation, and type of
message on ad processing and product judgements”, Journal of Consumer Research,
Vol. 17, June, pp. 66-73.
Mandel, N., Petrova, P.K. and Cialdini, R.B. (2006), “Images of success and the preference for
luxury brands”, Journal of Consumer Psychology, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 57-69.
Mano, H. and Oliver, R.L. (1993), “Assessing the dimensionality and structure of consumption
experience: evaluation, feeling, and satisfaction”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 20,
pp. 451-66.
Mason, R.S. (1981), Conspicuous Consumption, St. Martin’s Press, New York, NY.
Mathienson, K. (1991), “Predicting user intentions: comparing the technology acceptance model
with the theory of planned behavior”, Information Systems Research, Vol. 2 No. 3,
pp. 173-91.
May So, W.C., Danny Wong, T.N. and Sculli, D. (2005), “Factors affecting intentions to purchase
via the internet”, Industrial Management & Data Systems, Vol. 105 No. 9, pp. 1225-44.
Mehra, A., Kilduff, M. and Brass, D. (1998), “At the margins: a distinctiveness approach to the
social identity and social networks of underrepresented groups”, Academy of Management
Journal, Vol. 41, pp. 441-52.
Milfont, T.L. (2007), Psychology of Environmental Attitudes: Across-cultural Study of Their
Content and Structure, The University of Auckland, Auckland.
Naylor, G. and Kleiser, S.B. (2000), “Negative versus positive word-of-mouth: an exception to the
rule”, Journal of Consumer Satisfaction, Dissatisfaction and Complaining Behavior, Vol. 13,
pp. 26-36.
Ndubisi, N.O. and Chiew, T.M. (2005), “Customer behavioral responses to sales promotion: the
role of fear of losing face”, Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 17 No. 1,
pp. 32-49.
Personal values
and sales
promotion
95
APJML
25,1
96
Ndubisi, N.O. and Chiew, T.M. (2006), “Awareness and usage of promotional tools by Malaysian
consumers: the case of low involvement products”, Management Research News, Vol. 29
Nos 1/2, pp. 28-40.
Newell, S.J., Goldsmith, R.E. and Banzhaf, E.J. (1998), “The effect of misleading environmental
claims on consumer perception of advertisement”, Journal of Marketing Theory and
Practice, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 48-60.
Nonis, S. and Swift, C.O. (2001), “An examination of the relationship between academic
dishonesty and workplace dishonesty: a multicampus investigation”, Journal for
Education in Business, Vol. 77, pp. 69-77.
Norzaishah, A.S. (2007), “A study of Malaysian consumers’ attitudes toward promotion
preferences and purchase satisfaction”, thesis paper, University Malaysia Sarawak,
Sarawak.
Novak, T.P. and MacEvoy, B. (1990), “On comparing alternative segmentation schemes: the list
of values(LOV) and values and life style (VALS)”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 17,
June, pp. 105-9.
Nowell-Smith, P.H. (1954), Ethics, Penguin, London.
Oliver, R.L. (1980), “A cognitive model of the antecedents and consequences of satisfaction
decisions”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 17, November, pp. 460-8.
Olver, J.M. and Mooradian, T.A. (2003), “Personality traits and personal values: a conceptual and
empirical integration”, Personality and Individual Differences, Vol. 35, pp. 109-25.
Peattie, K. and Peattie, S. (1995), “Sales promotion – a missed opportunity for services
marketers?”, International Journal of Service Industry Management, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 22-39.
Peattie, S. (1998), “Promotional competitions as a marketing tool in food retailing”, British Food
Journal, Vol. 100 No. 6, pp. 286-94.
Peterson, R.A., Wilson, W.R. and Brown, S.P. (1992), “Effects of advertised customer satisfaction
claims on consumer attitudes and purchase intention”, Journal of Advertising Research,
Vol. 32 No. 2, pp. 34-40.
Phau, I. and Yip, S.L. (2008), “Attitude towars domestic and foreign luxury brand apparel:
a comparison between status and non status seeking teenagers”, Journal of Fashion
Marketing & Management, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 68-89.
Pitts, R.E. and Woodside, A.G. (1983), “Personal value influences on consumer product class and
brand preferences”, Journal of Social Psychology, Vol. 119, pp. 37-53.
Pitts, R.E. and Woodside, A.G. (1986), “Personal values and travel decisions”, Journal of Travel
Research, Vol. 25, pp. 20-5.
Pound, C., Duizer, L. and McDowell, K. (2000), “Improved consumer product development. Part
one: is a laboratory necessary to assess consumer opinion?”, British Food Journal, Vol. 102
No. 11, pp. 810-20.
Rallapalli, K.C., Vitell, S. and Szeinbach, S. (2000), “Marketers’ norms and personal values: an
empirical study of marketing professionals”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 24 No. 1,
pp. 65-76.
Rashid, M.Z.A. and Ho, J.A. (2003), “Perceptions of business ethics in a multicultural community:
the case of Malaysia”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 43, pp. 75-87.
Reichheld, F.F. (2003), “The one number you need to grow”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 82
No. 6, pp. 46-54.
Reynolds, T.J. (1985), “Implications for value research: a micro versus macro perspective”,
Psychology & Marketing, Vol. 2, pp. 297-305.
Reynolds, T.J. and Jolly, J.P. (1980), “Measuring personal values: an evluation of alterntive
methods”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 17, November, pp. 531-6.
Richins, M.L. (1983), “Negative word-of-mouth by dissatisfied consumers: a pilot study”, Journal
of Marketing, Vol. 47, pp. 68-78.
Roehrich, G., Valette-Florence, P. and Rapacchi, B. (1989), “Combined influence of personal value
systems, involvement and innovativeness on innovative consumer behavior: an
application on perfume purchase, is marketing keeping up with the consumer”, paper
presented at the ESOMAR Seminar.
Rokeach, M. (1968), Beliefs, Attitudes and Values: A Theory of Organization and Change,
Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.
Rokeach, M. (1973), The Nature of Human Values, The Free Press, New York, NY.
Rokeach, M. (1974), “Change and stability of American value systems, 1968-1971”, Public Opinion
Quarterly, Vol. 38, Summer, pp. 232-8.
Rokeach, M. (1979), Understanding Human Vlues, The Free Press, New York, NY.
Rokeach, M. and Ball-Rokeach, S.J. (1989), “Stability and change in American value priorities,
1968-1981”, American Psychologist, Vol. 44, May, pp. 775-84.
Russell-Bennett, R., McColl-Kennedy, J.R. and Coote, L.V. (2007), “Involvement, satisfaction, and
brand loyalty in a small business services setting”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 60
No. 12, pp. 1253-60.
Ryan, M.J. (1978), An Examination of an Alternative Form of the Behavioral Intention Model’s
Normative Component, Hunt, H.K. (Ed.), Vol. 5, Association of Consumer Research,
Ann Arbor, MI.
Ryan, M.J. and Etzel, M.J. (1976), The Nature of Salient Outcomes and Referents in the Extended
Model, Anderson, B.B. (Ed.), Vol. 3, The Association for Consumer Research,
Cincinnati, OH.
Sanzo, M.J., del Rio, A.B., Iglesias, V. and Vazquez, R. (2003), “Attitude and satisfaction in a
traditional food product”, British Food Journal, Vol. 105 No. 11, pp. 771-90.
Schwartz, S.H. (1992), Universals in the Content and Structure of Values: Theoretical Advances
and Empirical Tests in 20 Countries, Zanna, M. (Ed.), Academic, Orlando, FL.
Schwartz, S.H. (1994), “Are there universal aspects of the structure and contents of human
values?”, Journal of Social Issues, Vol. 50 No. 4, pp. 19-45.
Schwartz, S.H. (1999), “Cultural value differences: some implications for work”, Applied
Psychology: An International Review, Vol. 48, pp. 23-48.
Schwartz, S.H. and Bilsky, W. (1987), “Toward a universal psychological structure of human
values”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 53, pp. 550-62.
Shamsudin, M.N. and Selamat, J. (2005), “Changing retail food sector in Malaysia”, paper
presented at the PECC Pasific Food System Outlook 2005-06 Annual Meeting, Kun Ming,
China, 11-13 May.
Shim, J.P., Shin, Y.B. and Nottingham, L. (2002), “Retailer web site influence on customer
shopping: an exploratory study on key factors of customer satisfaction”, Journal of the
Association for Information Systems, Vol. 3, pp. 53-76.
Shimp, T.A. (2003), Advertising, Promotion, and Supplemental Aspects of Intergrated Marketing
Communications, 6th ed., Thomson South-Western, Bostan, MA.
Simintiras, A., Diamantopoulus, A. and Ferriday, J. (1997), “Pre-purchase satisfaction and
first-time buyer behavior: some pleliminary evidence”, European Journal of Marketing,
Vol. 31 Nos 11/12, pp. 857-72.
Personal values
and sales
promotion
97
APJML
25,1
98
Simpson, E.M., Snuggs, T., Christiansen, T. and Simples, K.E. (2000), “Race, homophily, and
purchase intentions and the black consumer”, Psychology & Marketing, Vol. 17 No. 10,
pp. 877-89.
Singelis, T.M. and Brown, W.J. (1995), “Culture, self, and collectivist communication: linking
culture to individual behavior”, Human Communication Research, Vol. 21 No. 3, pp. 354-89.
Singelis, T.M. and Sharkey, W.F. (1995), “Culture, self-construal, and embarrassability”, Journal
of Cross-Cultural Psychology, Vol. 26 No. 6, pp. 622-44.
Smith, C.D. (1998), “Modelling the impact of retail stockouts: implications for customer
satisfaction and retention”, Journal of Consumer Satisfaction, Dissatisfaction and
Complaining Behavior, Vol. 11, pp. 128-39.
Smith, P.B. and Schwartz, S.H. (1997), Values, Berry, J.W., Segall, M.H. and Kagicibasi, C. (Eds),
Vol. 3, Allyn & Bacon, Boston, MA.
Smith, P.B., Peterson, M.F. and Schwartz, S.H. (2002), “Cultural values, sources of guidance, and
their relevance to managerial behavioral: A 47-nation study”, Journal of Cross-Cultural
Psychology, Vol. 33 No. 2, pp. 188-208.
Soderlund, M. (2006), “Measuring customer loyalty with multi-item scales: a case of caution”,
International Journal of Service Industries Management, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 76-98.
Soderlund, M. and Ohman, N. (2005), “Assessing behavior before it becomes behavior: an
examination of the role of intentions as a link between satisfaction and repatronizing
behavior”, International Journal of Service Industry Management, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 169-85.
Soutar, G.N., Grainger, R. and Hedges, P. (1999), “Australian and Japanese value stereotypes:
a two country study”, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 203-16.
Swan, J.E., Trawick, F.I. and Carroll, M.G. (1982), Satisfaction Related to Predictive Desired
Expectations: A Field Study, Hunt, H.K. and Day, R.L. (Ed.), Indiana University,
Bloomington, IN.
Taylor, S.A. and Todd, P.A. (1995), “Understanding information technology usage: a test of
competing models”, Information Systems Research, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 144-76.
Tetlock, M.B. (1986), “A value pluralism model of ideological reasoning”, Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, Vol. 50, April, pp. 819-27.
Thompson, R.L., Higgins, C.A. and Howell, J.M. (1991), “Personal computing: toward a
conceptual model of utilization”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 125-43.
Toop, A. (1992), European Sales Promotions: Great Campaigns in Action, Kogan Page, London.
Triandis, H.C. (1995), Individualism and Collectivism, Westview, Boulder, CO.
Tybout, A.M. and Artz, N. (1994), “Consumer psychology”, Annual Review of Psychology, Vol. 45,
January, pp. 131-69.
Vigneron, F. and Johnson, L.W. (1999), “A review and a conceptual framework of
prestige-seeking consumer behavior”, Academy of Marketing Science Review, No. 1,
pp. 1-17, available at: www.amsreview.org/articles/vigneron01-1999.pdf
Vinson, D.E., Scott, J.E. and Lamont, L.M. (1977), “The role of personal values in marketing and
consumer behavior”, Journal of Marketing, April, pp. 44-50.
Warshaw, P.R. (1980), “A new model for predicting behavioral intentions: an alternative to
fishbien”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 17, May, pp. 153-72.
Weeks, W.A. and Muehling, D.D. (1987), “Students perceptions of personal selling”, Industrial
Marketing Management, Vol. 16, May, pp. 145-51.
Westwood, R.I. and Everett, J.E. (1995), “Comparative managerial values: Malaysia and the
West”, Journal of Asia-Pacific Business, Vol. 1 No. 3, pp. 3-37.
Williams, R.M. Jr (1968), The Concept of Values, Sills, D.L. (Ed.), Macmillan, New York, NY.
Williams, R.M. Jr (1979), Change and Stability in Values and Value Systems: A Sociological
Perspective, Rokeach, M. (Ed.), The Free Press, New York, NY.
Zardy, H.R. (2005), “The integration of total quality management (TQM) and theory of
constraints (TOC) implementation in Malaysian automotive suppliers”, degree of Master
of Engineering (Mechanical) thesis, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia.
Zeithaml, V.A., Berry, L.L. and Parasuraman, A. (1996), “The behavioral consequences of service
quality”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 60, pp. 31-46.
About the authors
Jee Teck Weng is presently a Lecturer at the School of Business and Design, Swinburne
University of Technology Sarawak Campus. He has taught more than ten subjects, among
others, Research Methodology, Marketing Research, International Marketing, Fundamentals of
Marketing, Consumer Behavior, Management Principles, Marketing Management, Human
Resource Management, Data Analysis and Business Statistics. He has been actively involved in
research in the areas of marketing.
Dr Ernest Cyril de Run has been with Universiti Malaysia Sarawak for 16 years. Prior to that
he owned and operated three consultancy companies, starting as a salesman. He joined the
Faculty of Economics and Business, UNIMAS as a tutor and is now a Professor and the Deputy
Dean of the University’s Center for Graduate Studies. He has taught various marketing courses
at both undergraduate and post graduate levels and is currently supervising both Master’s and
PhD students. He has run various training courses in management, entrepreneurship and
marketing for companies and institutions and has carried out consultancy work for the state, for
federal government, as well as private companies. He has published in both local and
international journals, and is the author of four books. His research interest is in promotions,
cross cultural studies, and invariance.
(The Appendix follows overleaf.)
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com
Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
Personal values
and sales
promotion
99
APJML
25,1
100
Appendix. Exploratory test findings
Respondents’ demographics
The respondents profile is summarized in Table AI.
Mean scores
Table AII details the means for each sales promotion technique for each of the four product type.
The most preferred technique for convenience product is sample and the least preferred is game.
As for shopping and specialty/luxury product, the most preferred technique is premium and the
least preferred is game as well. As for unsought product, the most preferred technique is cash
refund offer and the least preferred is game.
t-test
For convenience product, the most preferred sales promotion technique is sample (mean ¼ 4.63,
SD ¼ 1.22) and the least preferred sales promotion technique is game (mean ¼ 3.49, SD ¼ 1.51).
t-test shows that there is a significant difference between sample and game (t ¼ 2 8.500,
p , 0.000).
Variables
Table AI.
Demographic factors for
exploratory test
Gender
Male
Female
Age
21-30
31-40
41-50
51 and above
Race
Malay
Chinese
Tamil
Others
Religion
Muslim
Christian
Buddhist
Hindu
Others
Marital status
Single
Married
Divorced
Family member
1-5
6-10
11 and above
Income
RM1,000 and below
RM1,001-RM2,000
RM2,001-RM3,000
RM3,001 and above
Frequency
Percentage
68
82
45
55
90
30
16
5
64
21
11
4
53
75
13
9
35
50
9
6
52
40
42
13
3
35
27
28
9
2
84
64
2
56
43
1
100
48
1
67
32
1
25
49
33
25
19
37
25
19
Sales promotion
Coupon
Price pack
Premium
Cash refund offer
Advertising specialty
Patronage reward
Point-of-purchase promotion
Contest
Sweepstake
Game
Sample
Tie-in
Novelty
Convenience
product
Mean
SD
3.93
4.23
4.41
4.18
3.75
4.41
3.82
3.85
4.08
3.49
4.63
4.28
3.67
1.33
1.18
1.28
1.34
1.26
1.12
1.32
1.44
1.48
1.51
1.22
1.32
1.50
Shopping
product
Mean
SD
3.94
4.37
4.68
4.47
3.98
4.43
4.06
3.77
4.03
3.34
3.87
4.01
3.86
1.38
1.30
1.08
1.16
1.21
1.14
1.23
1.37
1.41
1.45
1.49
1.42
1.45
Specialty/
luxury
product
Mean
SD
3.83
4.33
4.60
4.55
4.10
4.48
4.33
4.11
4.34
3.54
3.79
3.99
3.85
1.51
1.28
1.22
1.25
1.30
1.17
1.33
1.33
1.31
1.57
1.62
1.46
1.51
Unsought
product
Mean
SD
3.81
3.89
4.49
4.51
4.00
4.46
3.88
3.66
3.95
3.39
3.63
3.66
3.66
1.58
1.47
1.35
1.37
1.45
1.31
1.33
1.46
1.49
1.59
1.59
1.47
1.53
At the other hand, the most preferred sales promotion technique for shopping product is
premium (mean ¼ 4.68, SD ¼ 1.08) and the least preferred sales promotion technique is game
(mean ¼ 3.34, SD ¼ 1.45). t-Test shows that there is a significant difference between premium
and game (t ¼ 8.688, p , 0.000).
For specialty/luxury product, the most preferred sales promotion technique is premium
(mean ¼ 4.60, SD ¼ 1.22) and the least preferred sales promotion technique is game
(mean ¼ 3.54, SD ¼ 1.57). t-test shows that there is a significant difference between premium
and game (t ¼ 6.613, p , 0.000).
Lastly, for unsought product, the most preferred sales promotion technique is cash refund
offer (mean ¼ 4.51, SD ¼ 1.37) and the least preferred sales promotion technique is game
(mean ¼ 3.39, SD ¼ 1.59). t-test shows that there is a significant difference between cash refund
offer and game (t ¼ 7.260, p , 0.000).
The most preferred and least preferred sales promotion techniques for each of the product
type were implemented in the main study questionnaire design.
Personal values
and sales
promotion
101
Table AII.
Sales promotion
techniques by product
type for exploratory test