14.14
Consumer Behaviour
Stage 3. Evaluation of alternatives
For evaluating the available alternatives, however, three basic aspects are to be taken care of by the
consumers. They are as follows:
(a) The evoked set: The evoked set is often referred as the list of brands or sometimes models of a
particular brand, from which the customer is likely to choose the best suited one for him. In
other words, the evoked set encompasses only those brands, with which the customer is familiar
with and are somewhat acceptable as well. However, one should not confuse between the
evoked set and the inept or inert set. Inept set comprises of those brands which the consumer
feels unacceptable and excludes from the decision-making process and inert set encompasses
those products about which the customer is indifferent as they do not appeal to the desired
state of the customer. Many of the brands are often overlooked by the customer too and hence
do not fall under the evoked set.
In each case, it is the task of the marketer to plan the promotional strategies in such a way
that convey the relevant and favourable product and brand-related information to the target
customer. Some value-added attributes of the product or some sales promotion techniques
may induce the brands from the inert set to the evoked set.
(b) Evaluative criteria: Evaluative criteria are those characteristics of the product which are used by
the customers to select a brand (from the evoked set), which suits them the best. These criteria
may be price, availability, style, design, brand equity, and etc.
(c) Decision rules/heuristics: Once the evoked set of brands or models are identified and the
evaluative criteria are recognized according to their relative importance, the consumers exert
to their relevant decision rules or heuristics to select the best suited one. There are two broad
categories of decision rules namely, the compensatory and non-compensatory decision rules
(Schiffman and Kanuk, 2004). To make the concepts clear, we may once again resort to the
example of selecting a small car by Umesh Nair for the purpose of family consumption and
also for his frequent travelling from office to residence (Refer Exhibit 8.2 in Chapter 8). For
convenience, let us once again look back to Table 8.1 of Chapter 8 to explain the decision
rules:
→ Compensatory decision rule: In the compensatory decision rule, the consumer first assigns
weight to several evaluative criteria. Then he evaluates a brand or model in terms of
the relevant evaluative criteria and a weighted sum for each alternative is, thereafter,
calculated.
Table: 8.1 The Evaluation Table
Criteria
Weights of
criteria
Maruti 800
Std BSIII
Tata Nano
Std BSIII
Maruti Alto
Std
Tata
Indica V2
Xeta GL
Hyundai
Santro Xing
(non-AC)
Price of the car (C1)
.32
4
5
3
2
2
Fuel efficiency
.28
3
4
3
4
3
14.15
Consumer Decision-Making
Warranty period
.18
3
4
3
3
3
Dealer’s Proximity
.12
5
2
5
4
3
Bank loan
.06
4
4
4
5
5
Wife’s choice
.04
1
2
3
3
5
3.54
4
3.26
3.20
2.88
Preference for brands =
i =1
i i
ATO = Â be
n
According to the compensatory rule from the above table, the highest summated score is
observed for the brand Tata Nano car, and hence the brand/model is found to be the bestpreferred alternative. The most distinctive attribute of the compensatory decision rule is that
it simultaneously considers all the positive and negative aspects of all the brands in the evoked
set.
→ Non-compensatory decision rules: On the contrary, the consumers cannot balance the negative
features of a brand with some positive aspects in case of non-compensatory decision rules.
There are three major non-compensatory rules namely the conjunctive rule, disjunctive rule,
and the lexicographic rule.
In the conjunctive decision rule, the consumer establishes a minimum point of cutoff for each
attribute. If any brand falls below the cut-off point in terms of the selected attributes, it is eliminated
from the choice set. In case of Mr. Umesh Nair, if he sets a cut-off point of 3 for all the choice
attributes, then we find, except Maruti Alto Std, all other cars have scores below 3 in some attributes.
Hence, Maruti Alto would be chosen by Mr. Nair, if he follows the conjunctive decision rule.
Table 8.1 Evaluation Table
Criteria
Weights of
criteria
Maruti 800
Std BSIII
Tata Nano
Std BSIII
Maruti Alto
Std
Tata Indica
V2 Xeta GL
Hyundai
Santro Xing
(non-AC)
Price of the car (C1)
.32
4
5
3
2
2
Fuel efficiency
.28
3
4
3
4
3
Warranty period
.18
3
4
3
3
3
Dealer’s proximity
.12
5
2
5
4
3
Bank loan
.06
4
4
4
5
5
Wife’s choice
.04
1
2
3
3
5
However, in this rule, there is a high chance that more than one brand still remains in the evoked
set. In that case, additional decision rule has to be applied to arrive at the final conclusion. So, it may
14.16
Consumer Behaviour
be stated that this rule is reasonably helpful in reducing the large number of alternatives in the evoked
set. Nonetheless, this rule has to be sophisticated by any other choice rule to arrive at the final choice.
The second type of non-compensatory decision rule, namely the disjunctive rule, is just the reverse
of the first one. Similar to the conjunctive decision-making rule, here also a minimum cut-off level for
each attribute is set. According to this rule the alternative which may satisfy the minimum cut-off in
terms of any choice criteria would be selected as the best suited one by Mr. Nair. Usually, this cut-off is
set little above the cut-off value set in conjunctive rule. Let us set the minimum cut-off as 4.
Table 8.1 Evaluation Table
Criteria
Weights of
criteria
Maruti 800
Std BSIII
Tata Nano
Std BSIII
Maruti
Alto Std
Tata Indica
V2 Xeta GL
Hyundai Santro
Xing (non-AC)
Price of the car (C1)
.32
4
5
3
2
2
Fuel efficiency
.28
3
4
3
4
3
Warranty period
.18
3
4
3
3
3
Dealer’s proximity
.12
5
2
5
4
3
Bank loan
.06
4
4
4
5
5
Wife’s choice
.04
1
2
3
3
5
Now, in the above table, as all the brands are meeting the cut-off, all of them still remain in the
evoked set. Therefore, the consumer once again needs to resort to some other decision rule to arrive at
a choice of his most preferred brand/model. So the problem of less sophistication, which, we found in
the conjunctive heuristics, is also present in the disjunctive heuristics.
However, in case of lexicographic heuristics, the consumers first order the attributes according to
their perceived importance. For example, in case of Mr. Nair, according to their relative importance,
the evaluative criteria can be ranked as price (1st), fuel efficiency (2nd), warranty period (3rd), dealer’s
proximity (4th), bank loan (5th), and wife’s choice (6th). Now, the consumer compares all the brands’
score in terms of the most important criteria set by him. In the case of Mr. Nair, price has been selected
as the most important attribute. Now Tata Nano Std BS III scores the highest (5) as compared to the
other brands in terms of price criteria and hence would be considered as the best-suited alternative for
Mr. Nair.
Table 8.1 Evaluation table
Criteria
Weights of
criteria
Maruti 800
Std BSIII
Tata Nano
Std BSIII
Maruti
Alto Std
Tata Indica Hyundai Santro
V2 Xeta GL Xing (non-AC)
Price of the car (C1)
.32
4
5
3
2
2
Fuel efficiency
.28
3
4
3
4
3
14.17
Consumer Decision-Making
Warranty period
.18
3
4
3
3
3
Dealer’s proximity
.12
5
2
5
4
3
Bank loan
.06
4
4
4
5
5
Wife’s choice
.04
1
2
3
3
5
In case, more than one brand scores 5 (highest score) in terms of the most important criterion, then
those few brands are compared in the same terms of the second important criterion and if required the
process moves on to the next important attributes till the point of the single brand selection.
The lexicographic heuristics sound very important while studying the consumer’s shopping
orientation. His most preferred criterion provides a fairly good idea about his shopping behaviour
regarding the particular goods/services. For example, Mr. Nair ranked the price of the car as the
most important criterion so, it may be concluded that he is a price-sensitive customer in terms of car
purchase. However, Mr. Nair may not appear as a price-sensitive customer while selecting a hospital
when his father is having a cardiac problem. That time irrespective of price, quality of treatment may
be his priority and he may reveal himself as a quality-conscious buyer.
Nonetheless, there are several other decision rules used to select the most preferred brand by the
customer. We have just mentioned some basic rules here. In many cases, these basic rules are mixed
to derive a new choice rule, like if there are too many brands in the evoked set, then conjunctive–
compensatory or disjunctive–lexicographic may appear to be appropriate. This type of combined
choice heuristics is called the after-referral decision rule and these are perhaps the most popular choice
heuristics. Understanding the consumer’s choice heuristics is extremely important from the marketer’s
point of view especially for launching a new model of the known brand or designing the promotional
message.
Responses—The Outcome of Black-Box Processing
The response in the consumer decision-making model relates to the purchase and post-purchase
behaviour of the consumers. However, after the post-purchase behaviour, there may be an alteration in
the evoked set. For example, after using Tata Nano car, if Mr. Nair has some negative experience from
the product, he may drop this alternative from his evoked set, in case of further purchase or replacement
purchase of a car. Now let us discuss about the stages of purchase and post-purchase behaviours.
Stage 4: Product choice and purchase
At the purchase stage, the consumer undergoes any of the three purchase situations—trial, repeat,
and long term commitment purchase. For example, if a new brand of detergent or shampoo enters in
the market one may buy a trial pack or sachet of the product. If he finds it suitable, he may become a
repeat purchaser of the product and, in the longer term, may appear to be a brand-loyal customer of the
product. His purchase volume may also significantly increase while moving from trial purchase to repeat
purchase. However, trial and repeat purchase may be applicable in case of routine response behaviour
14.18
Consumer Behaviour
or to some extent limited problem-solving behaviour. For example, in case of purchasing a toothpaste,
packet of biscuits, or shampoo, the consumer may opt for a trial when a new brand is launched or the
company is providing some special offers or in any such circumstances. Nonetheless, trial purchase is
not possible for most of the durable products (like refrigerators, television sets, air conditioners, etc.) or
the products related to complex buying behaviour (house, car, etc.) as these items are quite expensive.
In these cases, selection of a brand/model directly results in long-term commitment without a trial.
At the purchase phase, however, not only the product/brand, but also the amount and the place
to purchase from, and the method of payment are selected given the alternatives. For example, once
Mr. Nair has selected a Tata Nano car, his next decision should be related to the method of payment
(whether to go for cash purchase, bank loan with initial small down payment, number of installments,
etc.).
There may be many such situations where the consumer does not undergo actual purchase, even
after the brand/model choice is made. Many situational factors play a major role for this decision of
no purchase. For example, after witnessing the most attractive advertisement of Horlicks Foodles if the
consumer wishes to buy the same but does not find it in the nearest shop, he may drop the decision of
purchasing the product.
Stage 5: Post-purchase use and evaluation
After using the product, the customer may experience any of the three below mentioned states of
mind:
→ The actual performance of the product may exceed the expected performance of the same and
the customer may feel satisfied. He may, thereby, engage in repeat purchase and gradually
become a brand-loyal customer.
→ The actual performance matches with the expected performance of the product and the
customer is neutral. Even if the actual performance is closer to the expected performance, the
customer usually does not complain.
→ But if the actual performance of the product is much lower than the expected performance,
the customer may experience some sort of tension or disturbances in his mind. He may feel
this choice was not an appropriate one. This stage is referred as the post-purchase cognitive
dissonance stage. The obvious actions of the customers here are normally seeking more
information about the product. He, at this phase, gets more involved in watching or reading
the commercials of the brand and avoids those of the competing brands to reassure his choice.
Sometimes, the customer may try to persuade his acquaintances to purchase the product to
confirm their own choice and thereby, seek reassurance for their chosen brands.
However, the persistent post-purchase cognitive dissonance may be dangerous from the marketer’s
point of view as it may also result in negative word-of-mouth communication and push away a lot of
potential customers by refraining them from purchasing the brand or model. Hence, the company
carries out various correction measures to prevent buyer’s dissonance. For low-priced products, the
marketer might offer a money back guarantee. Otherwise, they might reassure the customers by
highlighting more and more on the brand’s USP through advertisement or sales people.