Women's Perception Of Fashion Stores

SWP 19/98

PERSONAL VALUES UNDERLYING WOMEN’S PERCEPTIONS OF FASHION STORE IMAGES

KEITH E.THOMPSON & YAT LING CHEN Department of Management & Marketing School of Agricultural Food and the Environment Silsoe College Crantield University Silsoe Bedfordshire MK45 4DT Tel: Fax: Email:

+44 (0)1525 863054 +44 (0)1525 863388 [email protected]

The Cranfield School of Management Working Papers Series has been running since 1987, with approximately 450 papers so far from the nine academic groups of the School.. Economics; Enterprise; Finance and Accounting; Human Resources; Information Systems; Logistics and Transportation; Marketing; Operations Management; and Strategic Management. Since 1992, papers have been reviewed by senior members offaculty before acceptance into the Series. A list since 1992 is included at the back of this paper. For copies of papers (up to two free, then .f5 per copy, cheques to be made payable to the Cranfield University), please contact Wayne Bulbrook, Research Administrator, at the address on the back of this booklet.

Q All Rights Reserved. Cranfield School of Management, Thompson & Chen, 1998 IcRhl

4 mane

4~9 A

2

AUTOBIOGRAPHHXL NOTE Keith Thompsonis a SeniorLecturer in Managementand Marketing at Cranfield University, where he has taught buyer behaviourand internationalmarketing for nine years,following severalyears experiencein marketing management,notably with Spillersand IBM. Since joining Cranfieldhe has publishedover 30 papersand contributionsto books on buyer behaviourand marketing strategy,and undertakenacademicand consultancywork in North America and EasternEurope.

Yat Ling Chen is a postgraduatestudent at CranfieldUniversity, Departmentof Management and Marketing at Silsoe.

ABSTRACT Retail store imagehas beenshown to play an important role in store patronage,and it is widely acceptedthat psychologicalfactors have a significantrole in store image formation. Past researchhas often involved the measurementof tangible attributes, or links betweenstore imagesand consumers’selfimages. This study was undertakento move to the next stageby exploring the link betweenperceivedstore imageand the personalvalueswhich underlie behaviouralchoices. Fashionretailing was selectedas an appropriateresearchdomain because of the well establishedassociationsbetweenclothing choice, personality,self concept, and personalvalues. Means-endtheory and ladderingmethodologywere employedin interviews with 30 femalerespondents. The hedonicvaluesof ‘enjoymentand happiness’and ‘quality of life’ were found to be the terminal valuesmost sought by consumersin associationwith store image. Thesewere linked through the consequence‘nice feeling’to the tangible attributes of ‘price’, ‘quality’and reputation’. The study illustratesan applicationof means-end methodologyin a retail environment,and the results provide a platform for fashion store image and positioning strategies. Suggestionsfor further researchare made.

KEYWORDS Means-end, Store image, Women’s fashion Values

4 Store image is a critical componentin store choice and store loyalty (e.g. Lewis and Hawksley 1990; Doyle and Fenwick 1974; Stanleyand Sewall 1976;Nevin and Houston 1980; Malhotra 1983, Arons, 1961; Osman, 1993). Many researcherssubscribeto the view, originally proposedby Martineau (1958), and later Arons (1961), that store image is a complex combinationof tangible and intangible,or functional and psychologicalattributes, (e.g. Lindquist, 1974-1975; Oxenfeldt, 1974-1975; Zimmer and Golden, 1988; Doyle and Fenwick, 1974-1975;Marks 1976; Keaveneyand Hunt 1992; Dichter 1985a, 1985b). But operationalisationof this concept has proved difficult. Consequently,store imagehas frequently been defined as an attitude, or set of attitudes, basedupon evaluationof salient store attributes. (Doyle and Fenwick, 1974-1975; James,Durand and Dreves 1976; Engel and Blackwell, 1982), and its measurementalmost always involves the identification of a number of attributes which are assumedto collectively make up a store’s image (Hirschman, Greenbergand Robinson, 1978; Keaveneyand Hunt, 1992).

When researchershave studiedthe role played by psychologicalfactors in forming store image the focus has mainly beenon self-image,whereby consumersstrive to move their real selfconcept towards their ideal self by buying (e.g.) garmentswhich they considerwill enhancethe attainmentof their ideal self, or satisfytheir real self and attain a desiredrole in life (Lewis and Hawksley, 1990; Martineau 1957; Sirgy, Samli, Bahn, and Varvoglish, 1989; Sirgy and Danes 1982; Evans 1993; Grubb and Grathwohl, 1967). Severalattempts have been madeto determinewhether a ‘matching’mechanismexists betweena consumer’sself imageand store image (Weale, 1961; Doyle and Fenwick, 1974-1975). For instanceHirschmanand Stampfl

5 (1980) suggestthat consumersmay match themselveswith retail stores accordingto their perceptionsof their own and of the stores’ innovativeness.

The purpose of this study was to shift attention from the attribute level and to further the investigationof the psychologicalfactors, specificallypersonalvalues,that underpin perceptionsof store image. However, retail storesmeet a wide spanof needsranging from the functional to the exotic, which leadsto a lack of consensusin store image defhntion among researchers(Keaveney& Hunt, 1992). Therefore, it was decidedto study a single store type within a product-specificcontext (Amirani & Gates, 1993). Fashionretailing was selected becauseof the powerful links that researchershave identified betweenclothing choice, personality, self concept, and personalvalues:who we are, what we want to be and the lifestyle we subscribeto, is reinforced and communicatedthrough how we look. Choice of clothing has beendescribedas: a form of communicationinfluencedby social norms, selfexpressionsand technology (Beck 1985), a personalsignaturethat symbolically communicatesthe social identity that a person seeksto project (Dichter 1985b;Davis 1985), and as a reflection of the personalityof the wearer (Dichter 1985b;Goldsmith, Heitmeyer,and Goldsmith 1990). The associationbetweenclothing, personalvalues(Unger and Raymond 1974; Sharma1980; Goldsmith, Heitmeyer and Freiden 1992), and social values(Kaiser 1985; Rose, Shoham,Kahle and Batra 1994) is well established.According to Unger and Raymond (1974) conformity in dressis a predictor of values.

Our objective in this researchwas to assessthe role of personalvaluesin the domain of store image by exploring the link betweenwomen’s personalvaluesand their perceptionsof fashion

store images. Specifically,we wanted to explore the content and structure of women’s store image knowledge content (What descriptorsdo consumersuse to distinguishbetween women’s fashionchain store images?)and structure (How do consumersuse theseimage descriptorsto achievedesiredend-states?Can chainsof meaninglinking the attribute, consequenceand value levelsbe determined?) The theoretical perspectiveused to investigate these questionswas means-endtheory (Gutman 1982), which links the concreteattributes of a product or service(the means),to abstractpersonalvalues(the ends) via the perceived consequencesof these attributes for the consumer.

MEANS-END THEORY A means-endchain is a model that seeksto explain how product or serviceattributes facilitate consumers’achievementof desiredend-statesof being such as happiness,security or enjoyment (Gutman 1982). A means-endchain is a cognitive representationof the connection betweena person’s knowledgeabout a product or store and their self-knowledge(Mulvey, Olson, Celsi and Walker, 1994). There are three levels of abstractionor categoriesof meaning that are typically associatedwith a concept such as store image: l

Attributes (the means)

l

Consequencesof store patronage.

l

Important psychologicaland social consequencesand values(the ends)

Figure 1 illustratesa means-endchain model basedupon a customer’s knowledgeof self and the store. The model representsstore knowledge as structured through perceivedlinkages betweenmeaningsabout store attributes and the consumer’sself-meanings.

TARE IN FIGURE I

Attributes are relatively concretemeaningsthat representthe physical,observable,or perceivedcharacteristicsof a store. Concreteattributes relatively directly reflect the physical featuresof the store. Abstract attributes are more subjectiverepresentationsof store characteristicsthat representseveralconcreteattributes. Consequencesare more abstract meaningsthat reflect the perceivedbenefits(or costs) associatedwith specific attributes. Functional consequencesincludethe direct, tangible outcomesderived from patronageof a store. Psycho-socialconsequences,on the other hand, include intangible,personaland less direct outcomes. Thesecan be either psychologicalin nature (e.g., how do I feel when shoppingin this store?) or social (e.g., how do others feel about me when I am shoppingin this store?) (Peter and Olson, 1987). Finally, personalvaluesare highly abstractmeaningsthat refer to centrally held, enduringbeliefs or end-statesof existencethat customersseekto achievethrough their behaviour(figure 1).

PROCEDURES Elicitation The study focusedon the perceivedimage of specialitywomen’s fashion store chainsamong 20 to 45 year old women, as an interest in fashionis characteristicamong women within this age range (Evans, 1993). To elicit the basicconceptsor distinctions that consumersuse to differentiate fashionstores (i.e. to establishthe underlying structure of store image)ten subjectswere interviewedindividually, all were female. The interviews lastedabout 25

8 women’s clothing sectionsof the fashionretail chain stores listed in table 1 were used as the stimuli Tom which subjectscould selectfashionchainswith which they were familiar.

TAKE IN TABLE 1

In order to ensurethat no key criterion was overlooked two methodswere employedto elicit perceiveddifferencesbetweenstores. The distinctionsused by respondentsto discriminate betweenstoreswere consideredto be the key imagecategoriesfor women’s fashion stores. In the first elicitation method, respondentswere askedto rank the listed stores in order of preference,and then askedto explainwhy they preferred the first to the second,the secondto the third, and so on. The secondmethod utilised triadic sorting (Kelly, 1955); after being askedto remove any items with which they were unfamGr respondentswere presentedwith triples of randomly selectedstore namesprinted on cards, and askedto think of any way in which two of the three items were similar to eachother but different from the third. The processwas repeateduntil the respondentfailed to elicit any new constructs. Following content analysisof the elicited distinctions(seebelow), a comprehensivelist of store image attributes was produced and made bipolar for use in the ladderinginterviews (table 2).

TAKE IN TABLE 2

Ladder& Procedures Laddering employsa one-to-one interviewing techniquein which a seriesof directed probes are usedto reveal how customerslink product/serviceattributes to their own underlying

values. A central premiseof this method is that lower levels imply the presenceof higher levels, so that product /serviceAttributes have Consequencesthat lead to Value satisfaction. The purpose of the ladderinginterviews was to determinethe ‘ladder’of linkagesbetweenthe Attributes, Consequencesand Values in relation to fashion store image. An exampleof a ladder from a singleinterview, starting with a basic distinction betweentwo stores,is given below:

(value) (Consequence) (Consequence) (Consequence) (Attribute) (Attribute)

self-esteem ? feel good -r look good ? fits well ? stock my size ? have wide range

The ladderinginterview proceduresin this study followed the recommendationsmade by Reynoldsand Gutman, (1988). Care was taken to create a suitableinterviewing environment in which respondentswere sufbciently relaxedto be introspective,and to relate their underlying motivations to the interviewer. In order to facilitate this the interviewer presented herself as a facilitator following specific guidelines,“even though some of the questionsmight seema little silly”. Before commencingthe interview eachrespondentwas put in the position of expert by assurancesthat there are no right or wrong answers,and that the purpose of the exercisewas to understandthe way that they saw the world.

10 After collecting basic demographicinformation, 30 femalerespondentsfrom the St&and studentson campuswere eachpresentedwith the list of store imageattributes shown in table 2 and askedto rank the 10 which reflectedtheir most important choice criteria. They were then askedto identify which pole of the distinctionsthey most preferred, which servedas the basisfor askingthe question,“why is that important to you?“. Repeatedapplicationsof this procedureled to still higher-leveldistinctionsuntil respondentscould no longer answerthe “why” question. The actual wording of the probe was varied to (e.g.) “Why is that?“, “So that is important to you?” “Why do say that?“. When respondentsstruggledto articulate an answerit was important not to put words into their mouths. The techniquesused to move the interview forward involved askingrespondentswhat they thought the outcome would be if the attribute or consequencewas nondelivered,and or by evoking a situationalcontext. For example;“When you are going into the store, what is going through your mind?“. Under theseconditionsrespondentswere content to talk readily about fashionshopping,and the problem of over-sensitivityidentified by Reynoldsand Gutman was not encountered. These interviewswere tape recordedand lastedfor approximately35 minuteseach.

DATA ANALYSIS Content analysiswas usedto reducewhat Krippendoti, (1980) called, “. . .subjects’ idiosyncratic responses.” Each respondents’ladderswere enteredonto separatecoding forms and classifiedinto attributes, consequencesand values. A set of 128 summarycodeswas then developedto reflect everythingmentionedby the respondents.Thesesummarycodeswere further aggregatedinto a smallernumber of broader categories. Finally, 32 master codes summarisingall the attributes, consequences,and valuesmentionedin the ladderingresponses

11 were identified. Four coders,working independently,content-analysedthe sameset of data. Output fkom all four coders were comparedon a pairwise basisby calculatingthe number and percentageof themesassignedto the samecategory, yielding an averageintercoder agreement of 90%. Disagreementswere resolvedjointly betweenthe four coders.

The Implications Matrix A means-endchain is a sequenceof causalimplicationsconnectingattributes, consequences and values. Theseconnectionswere examinednext by summarisingthem in a matrix which representedthe number of connectionsbetweeneachattribute, consequenceand value. Two types of relations, direct and indirect, may be representedin this ‘implications matrix’. For instance,the ladder A(ttribute) to C(onsequence)lto C(onsequence)2to V(alue) represents relationsbetweenadjacentelements. The A to Cl relation is direct, as is Cl to C2, C2 to V. However, there are also indirect relations such as A to C2, A to V , and Cl to V. Elements with a high incidenceof indirect relations should not be ignored, so both types of relations were consideredin determining which paths were dominant (Reynoldsand Gutman, 1988; Klenosky, Genglerand Mulvey, 1993).

The HierarchicalValue Man A HierarchicalValue Map was built up by connectingthe chainsextracted from the Implications Matrix. In order to find a solution which yielded the most informative and stable set of relations a cut-off level of three relations was establishedby trial and error. All connectionsbelow this level were ignored. In establishingthe cut-off level, the total number of linkages(both direct and indirect relations) were counted so as to avoid bias through, “. . .

12 underweightingthe importance of the associationsrecordedfor the more verbose respondents.. . ” (Klenosky, Genglerand Mulvey, 1993). The resulting HierarchicalValue Map accountedfor 82% of all the direct and indirect relations. For clarity it is presentedin the mannerproposedby Klenosky, Gengler and Mulvey (1993): eachconcept is representedby a circle, the size of which is proportional to the percentageof respondentsmentioning a concept, white circles representattributes, light grey circles consequences,and dark grey circles values;the relative strength of associationbetweenconceptsis representedby the width of the connectinglines (figure 2).

TAKE IN FIGURE 2

RESULTS Attributes Of the 10 attributes ultimately used in the aggregatedHierarchicalValue Map (figure 2) five were more or lessconcretein nature (“‘price”, “salespromotions”, “location”, “assortment” and “styling”), reflecting physicalcharacteristicsthat are reasonablystraightforward to define and implement. The remaining five were more abstract (“atmosphere& environment”, “global perception”, ‘Yeputation”,“quality” and “service”) They representa subjectiveamalgamof several,more concrete,attributes and are, consequently,more difficult to define.

13 Conseauences Most of the 14 consequencesin the HVM were psycho-socialconsequencesarising either from shoppingin a store (“nice feeling”, “avoid risks”, “guarantee”, “socialise”, “convenient”, and “be respected”),or Ii-om ownershipof the clothes (“nice feeling”, “enhanceappearance”, and “self-expressive”). The rest were functional benefitsassociatedwith money, time, products, or the shoppingprocess(“not waste money”, “spend money wisely”, “save time”, “better time allocation”, “durability”, “facilitate shopping”).

Values The eight valueswere similar to those uncoveredin previous personalvaluesresearch(e.g. Rokeach 1973; Reynoldsand Jolly 1980; Reynoldsand Gutman 1988; Klenosky et al. 1993). The largestproportion were hedonistic(“enjoyment & happiness”,“quality of life”, and “sense of well-being”). The rest relate to personality(“self-image”and “selfesteem”), internal considerations(“security” and “achievement”)and social life (“senseof belonging”)

Hierarchical Value Man Inspection of the HierarchicalValue Map in figure 2 showedthat the dominant orientation was the chain, reputation - quality - durability - not waste monev - sDendmonevwisely - nice feeling - enjoyment& happinessor quality of life (figure 3). This indicatesa functional path to the achievementof hedonisticend-states.

TAKE IN FIGURE 3

14 However, “quality” and “reputation” were also linked to the sameterminal valuesvia a closely related chain which followed the divergent route; reputation - quality - durability - enhance apDearance- self exmessive- nicefeeling - enjoyment& happinessor quality of life (figure 4). An alternative,hedonic,route to the samehedonic end.

TAKE IN FIGURE 4

Thesetwo chainsaccountedfor the highest frequencyof relations (24.4%). They indicate that the key attributes were “reputation”’ and “quality” leadingto “durability”, and that these were used by consumersto achievethe main end statesof “quality of life” and “enjoyment and happiness”through “nice feeling”, via both functional (value for money) and hedonic (aestheticand self-expressive)consequences.

Of the remaining most frequently mentionedattributes, two, “atmosphere& environment”and “price”, stood out. “Price”, becauseit was strongly linked to the important chain: price - -not waste money - spendmoneywisely - nicefeeling - enjoyment& happinessor qualily of life (figures 2 and 3). “Atmosphere & environment”, because,although it did not commence a single strong path, it was connectedto severalchainsleadingthrough a high proportion of all consequencesand ultimately to all of the valuesexcept “achievement”. (This also applied to a lesserextent to the attributes “reputation” and “service”, and also “assortment”). Notably, all of the most important attributes were linked to all but one of the terminal values through the consequence‘nice feeling” (figure 2).

15 DISCUSSION The aim of this study was to explore means-endsknowledge structuresassociatedwith fashion store image. The end statesmost sought by consumersin associationwith store image were identified as the hedonicvaluesof “enjoyment and happiness”and “quality of life”. These were linked through alternativefunctional and hedonic chainsto the key attributes of “price”, “reputation” and “quality”. Although other attributes were identified their influencewas dissipatedamong severaldifferent chains(note that if too high a cut-off point had been applied their contribution would have been lost). Whateverthe impact of the attribute “location”’ on store choice behaviour(and it is usually acknowledgedto be critical) its influenceon store image was very small indeed.

Inspection of the HierarchicalValue Map in figure 2 revealsthat the chainsleadingto all but one of the eight end statessought by fashion store customerspassthrough only two consequences;“nice feeling”and “save time”. Theseconsequences(and the valuesthat customersseekthrough them) can only be deliveredvia the relevant attributes, three of which, “reputation”, “quality” and “price”, form the foundation of the dominant orientation chains. Thesemight be used as the basisof an effective communicationsstrategydesignedto position the store in the minds of customersby linking together entire chainsof meaning,rather than presentingunconnectedlinks in the chain. (Mulvey et al, 1994; Reynoldsand Rochon, 1990; Young and Feigin, 1975). This hastwo important benefits;firstly, communicationsdesigned in this way take customersalong a seriesof steppingstonesleadingfrom the store’s attributes to their desiredterminal valuesby a path that they understandand appreciate; secondly, interpreting the meaningof each step within the context of the chain avoidsthe possibility of

16 the meaningof attitudes, consequencesor valuesbeing distorted by taking them out of context. For example,the attribute “quality” is strongly linked to “durability”. Therefore, it does not mean brand name or “styling” (although styling cannot be ignored, offering an “assortment”of stylesin order to savetime appearsto be more important). Neither does “price” simply mean cheap,as it links to “not waste money”which has to be interpreted in light of its link to “durability” - “quality”. Given its central position in the two dominant orientationsthe meaningof “durability” is clearly important. It does not meanmerely utilitarian becauseas well as links to the functional consequence“not wasting money”, it also links to the hedonic consequencesof “enhancedappearance”and “selfexpressive”. All of this suggeststhat a desirable fashion store image might be defined as, a reputation for offering a wide range of clothes, exuding quality and durability, at an acceptableprice. Secondarychains emphasisingtime and facilitation of the shoppingexperiencemay contribute useful differentiating factors.

Yet a communicationstrategydesignedto build an image basedupon theseattributes is not enough. Customers’perceptionsthat the store really possessesthe promised attributes must survive, and be reinforced by, actual experiencesin the store. That meansintegrating the key attributes into the store’s Unique OrganisationValue PropositionTM,and utilising the entire value chain, internal and external,to deliver the key attributes more effectively than competitors (see,Knox and Maklan, 1998).

This study was undertakenamong an unsegmentedgroup of femalefashion shoppers. However, it has been suggestedthat store imageperception is significantlyage-related(Joyce

17 and Lambert, 1996), and that difErent socio-economicgroups do not perceivestores in the sameway (Doyle and Fenwick, 1974-1975). Further researchmight addressthe extent to which the value chainsof different segmentsof the population vary f?om one another, and the feasibility of designingstore imagesto appealto specific market segments.

18 REFERENCES Amirani, S. and Gates,R. (1993), “An attribute-anchoredconjoint approachto measuring store image”, International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management,2 1 (5), pp.3039. Arons, L. (1961), “Does TV viewing influencestore image and shoppingfrequency?“,Journal of Retailing, 37 (3), pp.l-13. Beck, K.W. (1985), “Modernism and fashion:A social psychologicalinterpretation”, in Solomon, M. (Ed), The PsychoZogyof Fashion, Lexington Book, Lexington, MA, pp.3-14. Davis, F. (1985), “Clothing and fashionas communication”,in Solomon,M. (Ed), The PsychoZogVof Fashion, Lexington Book, Lexington, MA, pp. 15-28. Dichter, E. (1985a), “What’s in an image?“,Journal of ConsumerMarketing, 2 (4), pp.75-81. Dichter, E. (1985b), “Why we dressthe way we do”, in Solomon, M. (Ed), The PsychoZogyof Fashion, Lexington Book, Lexington, MA, pp.29-38. Doyle, P. and Fenwick, I. (1974- 1975), “How store image affects shoppinghabits in grocery chains”,Journal of Retailing, 50 (4), pp.39-52. Engel, J.F. and Blackwell, R.D. (1982), ConsumerBehaviour, Dryden Press,New York, NY. Evans, M. (1993), “Consumerbehaviourtowards fashion”, European Journal of Marketing, 23 (7), pp.7-16. Goldsmith, R.E., Heitmeyer,J.R. and Freiden,J.B. (1992), “Social valuesand fashion leadership”,Clothing and TextilesResearchJournal, 10 (3), pp.37-45. Goldsmith, R.E., Heitmeyer, J.R. and Goldsmith, E.B. (1990), “Social valuesand being well dressed”,Perceptual and Motor Shills, 70, p. 1010. Grubb, E.L. and Grathwohl, H.L. (1967), “Consumer self-concept,symbolismand market behaviour:A theoretical approach”,Journal of Marketing, 3 1 (4), pp. 22-27. Gutman, J. (1982), ‘A means-endchain model basedon consumercategorisationprocesses”, Journal of Marketing, 46 (2), pp.60-72. Hirschman,E.C., Greenberg,B., and Robertson,D. (1978), “The intermarket reliability of retail image research:An empirical examination”,Journal of Retailing, 54 (l), pp. 3-12. Hirschman,E.C. and Stampfl, R.W. (1980), “Roles of retailing in the diffusion of popular culture: Microperspectives”,JournaZof Retailing, 56 (l), pp. 16-36.

19 James,D.L., Durand, R.M., and Dreves, R.A. (1976), “The use of a multi-attribute model in a store image study”, Journal of Retailing, 52 (2), pp. 23-34. Joyce, M.L. and Lambert, D.R. (1996), “Memories of the way storeswere and retail store image”, International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management,24 (l), pp. 24-33. Kaiser, S.B. (1985), The Social Psychologyof Clothing and PersonalAdornment, Macmillan New York. Keaveney,SM. and Hunt, K.A. (1992), “Conceptualisationand operationalisationof retail store image: A caseof rival middle-leveltheories”, Journal of Academyof Marketing Science, 20 (2), pp. 165-175. Kelly, G.A. (1955), Psychologyof Personal Constructs,W.W. Norton & Co., New York. Klenosky, D.B., Gengler,C.E. and Mulvey, M.S. (1993), ‘Understandingthe factors influencingski destinationchoice: A means-endanalytic approach”,JournaZof Leisure Research,25 (4), pp. 362-379. Knox, S.D. and Maklan, S. (1998), Competingon Value,FinancialTimes ProfessionalLtd., London. Krippendorff, K. (1980), ContentAnalysis: An Introduction to its Methodology, Sage PublicationsInc., Newbury Park. Lewis, B.R. and Hawksley, A.W. (1990), “Gaining a competitive advantagein fashion retailing”, International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management,18 (4), pp 21-32. Lindquist, J.D. (1974-1975), “Meaning of image”, Journal of Retailing, 50 (4), pp. 29-38, 116. Malhotra, N. (1983), “A thresholdmodel of store choice”, JournaEof Retailing, 59 (2), pp. 321. Marks, R. (1976), “Operationalisingthe concept of store image”, JournaZof Retailing, 52 (3), pp. 37-46. Martineau, P. (1957), Motivation in Advertising, McGraw-Hill Book Company,Inc., New York. Martineau, P. (1958), “The personalityof the retail store”, Havard BusinessReview,36 (l), pp. 47-55. Mulvey, M.S., Olson, J.C., Celsi, R.L. and Walker, B.A. (1994), “Exploring the relationships betweenmeans-endknowledge and involvement”, Advancesin ConsumerResearch,2 1, pp. 51-57.

20 Nevin, J. and Houston, M. (1980), “Image as a componentof attractivenessto intra-urban shoppingareas”,Journal of Retailing, 52 (l), pp. 77-93. Osman,M.Z. (1993), “A conceptualmodel of retail image influenceson loyalty patronage behaviour”, International Reviewof Retail Distribution and ConsumerResearch,(2), pp. 133-148. Oxenfeldt, A.R. (1974-1975), “Developing a favourableprice-quality image”, Journal of Retailing, 50 (4), pp. 8-14. Peter, J.P. and Olson, J.C. (1987), Consumerbehaviour, Marketing Strategy Perspectives, Irwin Homewood. Reynolds,T.J. and Gutman, J. (1988), “Laddering theory, method, analysis,and interpretation”, Journal of Advertising Research,28 (l), pp. 1l-3 1. Reynolds,T.J. and Jolly, J.P. (1980), “Measuring personalvalues:An evaluationof alternative methods”, Journal of Marketing Research,17 (4), pp. 53 l-536. Reynolds,T.J. and Rochon, J.P. (1990), “Means-endbasedadvertisingstrategy: copy testing is not strategy assessment,” Journal of BusinessResearch,22 (2), pp. 131- 142. Rokeach,M.J. (1973), The Nature of Human Values,Free Press,New York. Rose, G.M., Shoham,A., Kahle, L.R. and Batra, R. (1994), “Social values,conformity, and dress”, Journal of Applied Social Psychology,24 (17), pp. 1501-1519. Sharma,R.S. (1980), “Clothing behaviour,personality,and values:A correlationalstudy”, Psychological Studies,25, pp. 137-142. Sirgy, J.M. and Danes,J. (1982), “Testing selectedmodels”, in Mitchell, A. (Ed), Consumer Research,Associationof ConsumerResearch,Chicago,pp. 556-561. Sirgy, J.M., Samli, A.C., Bahn, K., and Varvoglish, T.G. (1989), “Congruencebetweenstore image and self-image”,in Samli, A.C. (Eds), Retail Marketing Strategy: Planning, Implementation and Control, Quorum Books, New York, pp. 207-219. Stanley,T. and Sewall,M. (1976), “Images inputs to a probabilistic model: predicting retail potential”, Journal of Marketing, 40 (3), pp. 48-53. Unger, R. and Raymond,B. (1974), “External criteria as predictors of values:The importance of race and attire”, Journal of Social Psychology,93, pp. 295-296. Walker, B.A. and Olson, J.C. (1991), “Means-endchains:Connectingproduct with self’, Journal of BusinessResearch,22 (2), pp. 11l-l 18.

21 Weale, B. (1961), “Measuring the customer’s image of a departmentstore”, Journal of Retailing, 37 (2), pp. 40-48. Young, S. and Feigin, B., (1975), “Using the benefit chain for improved strategy formulation,” Journal of Marketing, 39 (July), pp. 72-74. Zimmer, M.R. and Golden, L.L. (1988), “Impressionsof retail stores: A content analysisof consumerimages”,Journal of Retailing, 64 (3), pp. 265-293.

Table 1: STORES USED FOR ELICITATION PHASE

1.

Benetton

2.

Dorothy Perkins

3.

French Connection

4.

Gap

5.

Laura Ashley

6.

Miss Selfiidge

7.

Next

8.

Oasis

9.

Principles

10.

River Island

11.

Top Shop

12.

Warehouse

Table 2: STORE IMAGE DESCRIPTORSELICITED IN PRELIMlNARY STUDY High quality merchandise Limited assortmentof merchandise Wide / extensifiedsize ranges High price / expensive Reasonableprice Bad value for money Convenient/ good location Can find shopseverywhere Mainstream/ ordinary merchandise Casual/ basicstyle clothing Stylish I trendy merchandise Less well-known store name Good reputation Big, spaciousstore layout Unappealingfront & window display Clean,neat merchandisedisplay Pleasantstore atmosphere Dull, dark store design Loud music Congested,busy looking environment Attractive I interestingadvertising No / unattractive specialsales/ promotions For older customers Upmarket / high status customers Targeted at a narrow age-groupmarket Younger salespersonnel Bad overall impressionof the store Professional/ exclusivestore Good service Low stafling level / limited service More fitting rooms Store cards available Not designerlabel clothes

Low quality merchandise Wide assortmentof merchandise Limited size ranges Low price / cheap Unreasonableprice Good value for money Inconvenient/ poor location Fewer shopsaround Unique / distinctive merchandise Formal / feminine style clothing Old-fashioned/ classicalmerchandise Well-known store name Bad reputation Small, crowded store layout Eye catching front & window display Dirty, crammedmerchandisedisplay Unpleasantstore atmosphere Exciting, bright, cheerful store design Relaxingmusic Uncongested,empty looking environment No / unattractive advertising Attractive specialsales/ promotions For younger customers Tacky / lower status customers Targeted at a broad age-groupmarket Older salespersonnel Good overall impressionof the store Ordinary / mainstreamstore Poor service High statig level / one-to-one service Less fitting rooms Store cards unavailable Designerlabel clothes

Figure 1. MEANS-END CHAIN MODEL CONNECTING STORE KNOWLEDGE TO SELF KNOWLEDGE

(MEANS)

(ENDS)

FF

I

f-

STORE KNOWLEDGE

SELF KNOWLEDGE

r \Concrete Attributes e.g. price merchandise layout

Abstract Attributes e.g. impression atmosphere value

Functional Consequence

IDsycho-social Consequence

S >

e.g. time spent money spent item bought

S

>

e.g. pleasure displeasure status

Instrumental Values e.g. independent cheerful self-control

_i=

Terminal Values e.g. friendship achievement self-respect

-

LOW

Adapted from Walker and O lson (1991)

Level of Abstraction

D

HIGH

Figure 2: HIERARCHICAL

:.... a.\.

$$$$ Consequence

3

Attribute

VALUE MAP

Figure 3. MEANS-END CHAIN - DOMINANT FUNCTIONAL ORIENTATION .1

Quality of Life

Nice feeling

Not Waste Money

Reputation

!

Figure 4. MEANS-END CHAIN DOMINANT HEDONIC ORIENTATION. , [

Quality of Life \/

Nice Fee,ing

/‘

En~~?$~~d

I

Durability

1

I

Quality

I

1

CRANFIELD WORKING PAPERS List No 9, 1995 SWP l/95 Andy Bytheway “Information in the Supply Chain: Measuring Supply Chain Performance”

SWP 15195Mike Sweeney& Marek Szwejczewski “Manufacturing Standardsof Performancefor Success” SWP 16195Keith Thompson, Nicholas Thompson & Roy Hill “The Role of Attitudinal, Normative and Control Beliefs in Drink Choice Behaviour” SWP 17195Andy Bytheway “Information Modelling for Management”

SWP 3195Kevin Daniels, Gerry Johnson,& Leslie de Chernatony “Collective Frames of Reference,Recognition, and Managers’Mental Models of Competition: A Test of Two Industries” SWP 4195Alison Rieple “Staffing as a Lever of Strategic Change- The Influence of Managerial Experience,Behaviour and Values” SWP 5195Grafton Whyte & Andy Bytheway “Factors AITectingInformation Systems Success” SWP 6195Andy Bailey & Gerry Johnson “The Processesof StrategyDevelopment” SWP 7195Valerie Bence “The Changing Market for Distribution: Implications for Exe1Logistics” SWP 8195Valerie Bence “The Evolution of a Distribution Brand: The Caseof Exe1Logistics”

SWP 18195Mike Sweeney& Marek Szwejczewski “Manufacturing Strategyand Performance:A Study of the UK Engineering Industry” SWP 19195Valerie Bence “St.James’sHospital and Lucas Engineering SystemsLtd - A Public/Private Sector Collaboration in BPR Project A - Elective Admissions” SWP 20195Valerie Bence “St.James’sHospital and Lucas Engineering SystemsLtd - A Public/Private Sector Collaboration in BPR Project B - The ReOrganisation of Purchasingand Supplies” SWP 21/95 Simon Knox & David Walker “New Empirical Perspectiveson Brand Loyalty: Implications for Segmentation Strategyand Equity” CRANFIELD WORKING PAPERS List No lo,1996

SWP 9195Andy Bytheway “A Review of ED1 Research”

SWP I/96 Andy Bailey & Gerry Johnson “Patterns of StrategyDevelopment”

SWP IO/95 Andy Bytheway “A Review of Current Logistics Practice”

SWP 2196Simon Knox & David Walker “Understanding ConsumerDecision Making in Grocery Markets: New Evidence from the Fishbein Model”

SWP 1l/95 Joe Peppard “Broadening Visions of BPR: The Imperative of Strategic Integration” SWP 12/95 Simon Knox & David Walker “Empirical Developmentsin the Measurement of Involvement, Brand Loyalty and their Structural Relationshipsin Grocery Markets” SWP 13195Ashley Braganza & Andrew Myers “Issues and Dilemmas Facing Public and Private SectorOrganisationsin the Effective Implementation of BPR’ SWP 14195John Mapes “Compatibility and Trade-Off Between Performance:An Alternative View”

SWP 3196Kim James,Michael Jarrett & Donna Lucas “PsychologicalDynamics and Organisational Learning: from the Dysfunctional Organisation to the Healthy Organisation” SWP 4196Mike Sweeney& Marek Szwejczewski “The Searchfor Generic Manufacturing Strategiesin the UK Engineering Industry” SWP 5196John Baker “Agility and Flexibility: What’s the Difference”

SWP 6/96 StephenAdamson, NoeleenDoherty & Claire Viney “30 Years On - What Have We Learned About Careers?” SWP 7/96 Keith Goffln, Marek Szwejczewski& Colin New “Supplier BaseManagement: An Empirical Investigation” SWP 8/96 Keith Goffln “Operations ManagementTeaching on EuropeanMBA Programmes” SWP 9196JanetPrice, Ashley Braganza & Oscar Weiss “The ChangeInitiative Diamond: A Framework to BalanceBusinessProcess Redesignwith other ChangeInitiatives” CRANFIELD WORKING PAPERS List No 11,1997 SWP l/97 Helen Peck “Towards A Framework of Relationship Marketing: A ResearchMethodology” SWP 2197Helen Peck “Towards A Framework of Relationship Marketing: An Initial CaseStudy” SWP 3197Chris Edwards & Joe Peppard “A Critical Issue in BusinessProcessReEngineering: Focusing the Initiative” SWP 4197Joe Peppardand Don Fitzgerald “The Transfer of Culturally-Grounded ManagementTechniques:The Caseof BusinessRe-Engineering in Germany”

SNP lo/97 Mark Hambly & Richard Reeves “The Application of Foresight in UK Research and Development” SWP 1l/97 Leslie Falkingham & Richard Reeves “Context Analysis - A Technique For Analysing Researchin a Field, Applied to Literature on The Managementof R&D at the SectionLevel” SWP 12197Ali Jawad& Richard Reeves “SuccessfulAcquisition of IT Systems”

SWP 14/97 Leslie Falkingham & Richard Reeves “The Four Schoolsof Thought in Researchand DevelopmentManagementand the Relationship of the Literature to Practitioners’ Needs” SWP 15197Val Singh “A Qualitative Study of the Relationship betweenGenderand Managerial Perceptionsof Engineers’Commitment: Casesfrom the UK and Sweden” SWP 16/97 John Fielding “Dividend Yields, BusinessOptimism and the Predictability of Long Horizon Returns in the UK” SWP 17/97 Brenda Porter “Audit Committees in Private and Public SectorCorporatesin New Zealand: An Empirical Investigation”

SNP 5197Claire Viney & Shaun Tyson “Aligning HRM with ServiceDelivery”

SWP 18197Brenda Porter “Securing Quality Audit(or)s: Attempts at Finding a Solution in the United States,United Kingdom, Canadaand New Zealand”

SWP 6197Andy Bailey & Gerry Johnson “Logical or Processual?Defining Incrementalism”

SWP 19197Kim James& Michael Jarrett “Group Regressionand Team Development: Implications for the Top Team Consultant”

SWP 7197Keith Goffln “Evaluating Customer Support Requirements at the Product Design Stage”

CRANFIELD WORKING PAPERS List No 12,199s

SWP 8/97 Keith Goflin, Colin New & Marek Szwejczewski “How Innovative are UK Manufacturing Companies?’

SWP l/98 Zhang Lihong & Keith Goffln “Joint Venture Manufacturing in China - Key Opportunities for OperationsManagement Research”

SWP 9/97 Kim James “Beyond Individual StressManagement Programmes:Towards an Organisational SystemADoroach”

SWP 2/98 Francis Buttle “I Heard it Through the Grapevine: Issuesin Referral Marketing”

SWP 3198Helen Peck “The Developmentand Implementation of CoManaged Inventory Agreementsin the UK Brewing Industry” SWP 4198Val Singh “Gender and Managerial Meanings of Commitment in High Tech Engineering in the UK and Sweden” SWP 5198Joe Peppard “IT in Organisations:A Framework for Analysis” SWP 6/98 Kusum Sahdev& SusanVinnicombe “Downsizing and Survivor Syndrome:A Study of HR’s Perceptionof Survivors’Responses” SWP 7198Mark Jenkins & StevenFloyd “Spinning your Wheels or Winning the Race: Knowledge, Resourcesand Advantage in Formula One Racing” SWP 8198Francis Buttle &, A.Adlaigan “Customer Attachment: A ConceptualModel of Customer-OrganisationLinkage” SWP 9198Joe Peppard “IS/IT Managementin the Global Enterprise: A Framework for Strategic Alignment” SWP lo/98 Keith Goffin & Colin New “Customer Support and Product Innovation: Three Exploratory CaseStudies” SWP 1l/98 JoePeppard& Patrick Butler “Consumer Purchasingon the Internet: Processesand Prospects” SWP 12/98 Haider Ali & SueBirley “The Role of Trust in the Marketing Activities of EntrepreneursEstablishing New Ventures” SWP 13/98 Joe Peppard& John Ward “‘Mind the Gap’: Diagnosing the Relationship betweenthe IT Organisation and the Rest of the Business”: SWP 14/98 Cliff Bowman & Veronique Ambrosini ‘Value Creation versus Value Capture: Towards a Coherent Definition of Value in Strategy - An Exploratory Study” SWP 15/98 Alan Harrison “Enablers and Inhibitors to Manufacturing Strategy” SWP 16/98 Joe Peppard& Rob Lambert “Whose Job is it Anyway?: Organisational IS/IT Competenciesfor Value Creation”

SWP 17/98 Haider Ah & Petronila Anselmo “Women’s Perceptionsof their Role Portrayals in Print Adverts: A Qualitative Study” SWP 18/98 David Partington “Building GroundedTheories of Managerial Behaviour from Interview Data” SWP 19/98 Keith Thompson & Yat Ling Chen “Personal Values Underlying Women’s Perceptionsof Fashion Store Images”