ajm v 3 1 2018 - amity university 9.pdf · monica bedi & pooja chopra panjab university,...

Volume 3 Issue 1 2018AJM

112 Amity Journal of MarketingADMAA

Introduction India , currently is one of the most progressive economies in the world with per capita GDP

of 1,977.286 USD in Mar 2018. According to Boston Consulting Group (BCG) report (2018) , India is inching to be the world’s third largest consumer economy in 2025 with total consumption

Amity Journal of Marketing3 (1), (112–122)

©2018 ADMAA

Understanding Purchase Intention for Global Brands among Young Indian Consumers

Monica Bedi & Pooja ChopraPanjab University, Chandigarh, India

Kirandeep KaurAmity University, Uttar Pradesh, India

AbstractChanging lifestyles and the boom in organized retailing have resulted in growing demand for global

brands in India. In the post – liberalization era, major changes have occurred in consumption habits, partly on account of rise in gross domestic product (GDP) growth and higher purchasing power in the hands of the middle-class representing a third of the total population. The main objective of the study was to understand purchase intention for global brands among young Indian consumers. A particular effort is geared towards measuring consumers’ ethnocentric tendency as antecedent to the appearance of global brands and examining the effect on the various attributes of a product. The data was collected from the young consumers. Primary data on different variables related to global brands and product attributes was collected using a structured questionnaire on the Likert scale based on the CETSCALE. Data was analyzed by regression analysis and independent t-Test. The main results were that there are no significant differences among the ethnocentric and non ethnocentric people regarding global brands and various quality attributes of global brands. This shows that respondents exhibit a marginally ethnocentric tendency towards global brands in India. Therefore, it is worthwhile for marketers, to localize features of the marketing mix to increase the acceptability of global brands and products by young Indian consumers. The research will help marketing and brand managers to take advantage of their brands global reach, local associations and favourable country-of-origin (COO) perceptions in order to leverage brand loyalty.

Keywords: Global Brands, Liberalization, Gross Domestic Product, Young Indian Consumers, Ethnocentrism, Brand LoyaltyJEL Classification: M30, M39Paper Classification: Research Paper

Volume 3 Issue 1 2018 AJM

113Amity Journal of Marketing ADMAA

touching US$ 4 trillion along with superseding USA to be the second leading economy by end of 2040 in terms of purchasing power parity (PPP). The combined value of merchandise and services which are imported into the country stand at $ 565.32 billion in 2018 (Ministry of Commerce & Industry, 2018), making India the seventh leading services importer and twelfth largest merchandise importer in the world. India has a substantial amount of foreign trade and various products that are being imported by India including cars, cosmetics, crude oil and various other consumption goods. The consumer attitude towards the foreign brands and foreign franchises offering various products of foreign origin needs to be studied as more and more global brands are being introduced in India whether it’s Mercedes, BMW, Volkswagon in cars or Zara, Armani, GAP etc in clothing and dressings or Loreal, Ponds, Nivea, Garnier in body care segments etc. Recent researches show that young consumers seem to be unique and ideal segment which tends to exhibit analogous spending patterns and brand interests across cultures and borders (Kjeldgaard and Askegaard, 2006; Lingelbach et al., 2012; Ozsomer, 2012; Cleveland and Laroche, 2007 ).Young Indian consumers have unfolded as a profitable segment of the market for domestic and multinational companies because of their growing recognition for global products and services (Lu and Xu, 2015). Young consumers stand for the largest consumer segment in India, which accounts for 50 % of population below the threshold age of 25 years and 65% of population below the age bracket of 35 years. The global purchasing power of the young consumer segment is estimated at US$180 billion in 2011. Such high purchasing power has resulted in entry of retail stores, particularly fashion retailers, catering to the young segment of the Indian market. Young consumers have wide range of choice of products available to them. The consumer purchase process is becoming more extensive and complex since the buying decision is influenced by a variety of reasons. All these changes have given rise to demand of global brands (Aaker and Joachimsthaler 1999; Douglas and Craig, 2012) and globally-oriented consumer segment (Cavusgil et al.,2005). Global brands are referred to as products having extensive regional/global responsiveness, accessibility, acceptance, and demand originating from the same brand name with steady positioning and enhanced brand personality in prominent markets, enhanced by centrally synchronized marketing strategies and plans (Johansson and Ronkainen 2005; Susan 1998) .Globally- oriented consumer segment is defined as set of consumers that tend to embrace humanity in general as a point of reference and search for standards of quality in products and services on global footing rather than national basis (Cannon and Yaprak 2002; Lingelbach et al., 2012; Katsanis 1991). Studies found that the accomplishment of global brands depends upon the consumers’ positive attitude and favourable behavioural reactions (Douglas and Craig, 2012; Eckhardt 2005) . There are several reasons how consumers often evaluate imported goods differently from the the identical domestic product (Wang and Chen, 2004). According to past studies, quality (Kotler, 2011; Keller, 2008; Carbonell, 2004), outlook of a merchandise (Creusen and Schoormans, 2005) , product aesthetics (Creusen and Schoormans, 2005) , product performance (Castillo and Aleman, 2009; Murthy and Blischke, 2006), and durability (Murthy and Blischke, 2006; Garvin, 1984) play a significant role in influencing purchase intentions. Also, price , which the customer has to pay for the product often affects their purchasing intentions because customers always value saving a single penny as they are very prudent spenders (Allred et al., 2010, Gerald and Woodside, 2009). There is a need to understand the factors influencing purchase intentions of Young Indian consumers towards global brands with respect to Perceived Brand Globalness ( PBG), Perceived Brand Quality ( PBQ), Perceived Association with Consumption Trend (PACT) and Perceived Brand Image (PBI) .The study will have practical and managerial implications for exporters and national marketers by helping them to design effective marketing strategies for global brands.



Conceptual Framework

Consumer Ethnocentrism and Purchase Intentions for Global BrandsConsumer ethnocentrism has been reasonably well studied domain. Shimp, Sharma, Shin

(1992) describe consumer ethnocentrism as the love and concern for one´s own nation and the apprehension of losing control of economic security as a consequence of ill effects that imports may have on oneself and fellow countrymen. More or less it’s an extrinsic cue that has a halo effect while appraising products and services belonging to different brands (Altintas and Tokol 2007 ; Han 1989; Saffu and Scott, 2009). Past studies show that consumers evaluation of products and services from different countries is based on country of origin of the product (Rezvani et al., 2012), made in ‘places’ or geographic origins (Kaynak and Cavusgil, 1983), descriptive, inferential and informational beliefs (Martin and Eroglu, 1993), country of fabrication, and the country of product design (Ahmed and d’Astous, 1996 ) and attributes and characteristics (Bandyopadhyay and Banerje 2002;Roth and Romeo 1992). Studies conducted suggested that predisposition of consumers to be ethnocentric indicates their optimism about their emotions (Wang and Chen ,2004), moral obligation and moral legitimacy (Klein and Morris 2006) for their country. Studies concluded that purchase intent of global products is influenced by corporate branding (Souiden et al., 2006) brand specific variables such as brand familiarity, brand liking, and brand trust (Rosenbloom et al., 2012). In Indian context, past studies predicted that the willingness to buy global brands is influenced by personal characteristics (Kumar et al., 2009), life satisfaction (Burroughs and Rindfleisch 2007; Hill and Gains 2007; Joung and Miller, 2007), perceived quality (Shabbi et al., 2009), brand consciousness and emotional value (Bhardwaj et al., 2014 ).

Perceived Brand Globalness ( PBG) and Purchase Intentions for Global BrandsThe concept of Perceived Brand Globalness (PBG) is referred as the magnitude to which

customers think how a brand is marketed in various nations and its recognition as global brand in those nations (Steenkamp et al., 2003). Researchers suggested that there is a significant remarkable positive association between Perceived Brand Globalness (PBG) and brand purchase intentions . However, the relationship is mediated through brand quality, brand credibility, brand prestige and brand image, with moderating effect of consumer ethnocentrism (Ozsomer, 2012; Steenkamp et al., 2003). Brand’s Globalness (PBG) results in significant positive consumer responses, favourable brand attitudes, increased readiness to pay brand price premiums (Davvetas, et al., 2015).

Perceived Brand Quality ( PBQ) and Purchase Intentions for Global BrandsPerceived Brand quality is referred as the way consumer evaluates equality and overall

advantages of product and services by comparing them with other alternatives (Aaker, 1991; Chernatony 2009). Past studies have validated a significant positive linkage between perceived product quality and judgment of brand superiority (Zeithaml,1988), manufacturing standards (Yoo et al., 2000), product specific attributes (Batra et al., 2014) , perceived value (Dodds et al., 1991; Khalifa 2004). Studies conducted among Indian consumers too, established a positive correlation between perceived brand quality and purchase intentions for global brands (Kinra 2006 ; Jamal and Goode 2001; Kumar et al., 2009).



Perceived Association with Consumption Trend (PACT) and Purchase Intentions for Global Brands

Purchase intentions is influenced by many factors and interactions. Studies from western countries show relationship between socio economic factors i.e gender, educational level, age, marital status or place of residence and purchase intention towards global brands (Cayla and Eckhardt 2007; Dong and Tian 2009). There is positive relationship between the level of income and consumption of global brands (Cleveland et al., 2015). Multiple studies have reported influence of factors such as novelty of global appeal (Chan et al.,2009) , exposure to different cultures (Arnould and Craig 2005; Nijssen and Douglas 2008), a sense of belonging (Zhou, Teng, and Poon 2008) and life style (Xie et al., 2015).

Perceived Social Image ( PSI) and Purchase Intentions for Global BrandsIt is well documented that consumers integrate the brand identity into their ‘extended self”.

Brands are used to build self- identity and contributes in strengthening self-image (Berger and Heath 2008; Kumar et al., 2009; Strizhakova et al., 2011). People purchase goods and services to uniquely express their personality (Tariq and Iqbal 2015 ), social status (Kawabata, 2009) , modern self image (Kumar, et al., 2009; Xie 2015 ) and also to fulfill his/her desire (Kim et al., 2002).

Objectives of the StudyThe current study investigates the young consumer’s purchase intentions towards global

brands in India . The study aims to achieve the following objectives:

a) To investigate the factors predicting purchase intention for global brands among young Indian consumers.

b) To assess the effect of the consumer ethnocentrism on the appraising of global brands by young Indian consumers.

Hypotheses of the Study The hypotheses that were formulated for the present study are as follows:

H1: There is a significant association between Perceived Brand Globalness (PBG) and Purchase Intention (PI) for global brands .

H2: There is a significant association between Perceived Brand Quality (PBQ) and Purchase Intention (PI) for global brands.

H3: There is a significant association between Perceived Association with Consumption Trend (PACT) and Purchase Intention ( PI) for global brands .

H4: There is a significant association between Perceived Social Image (PSI) and Purchase Intention (PI) for global brands

H5: Ethnocentrism has an impact on consumers’ attitude towards global brands.

Research MethodologyDescriptive research design was employed to achieve the objectives. Primary data was

gathered by filling structured questionnaire. The questionnaire has been divided into two parts. The first part of the questionnaire is to gain the knowledge about how country of origin (COO) affects the consumer’s perception and his/her purchasing behavior towards global brands. To measure consumer ethnocentrism, scale developed by Shimp and Sharma (1987) was used. The



second part of the questionnaire is to gain the knowledge about young consumers towards global brands. In the end of the questionnaire, personal details of the respondents are asked for. Since we need to analyze the perception of young consumers towards global brands, the students of schools and colleges would be able to give their view and facilitate in collection of the data . Simple random sampling was used to target the respondents for collecting the data. The statistical tables was used for this purpose. Sample size consisted of 240 respondents from Chandigarh. The frame has been restricted to only Chandigarh. The mean of all the variables in CET Scale for each respondent was found and then respondents were categorized into categories i.e. ethnocentric and non-ethnocentric. Independent T-Test and multiple regression was applied to analyze data.

Major Findings and Discussion

Profile of Sample for final studyProfile of the total sample and the profile of sample for various brands are described.

Table 1 : Sample Characteristics

all(n= 240)

n %Gender

Male 138 58.0Female 102 42.0Age ( in years)

<15 73 30.415-25 79 32.925-35 88 36.6Monthly Income

INR 10,001 to 15,000 76 31.7INR 15,001 to 25,000 68 28.3INR 25,001 and more 96 40.0Institution

School 73 30.4College 100 41.6University 67 27.9Category of respondents

Non- Ethnocentric 134 52.5Ethnocentric 106 47.5

A total of 260 questionnaires were sent out. After editing all returned questionnaires, about 240 questionnaires were utilizable for the final analysis. Table 1 shows that the sample comprises of males (58.0 %) and females (42.0%). About 30.0% respondents are less than 15 years of age, 79.0% respondents lie between 15-25 years of age whereas 36.6% of respondents fall in 25-35 years of age .More than 40.0 % of the sample have a monthly income of INR 25,001 and above . The



Table 1 shows that 52.5% of the respondents have favorable attitude towards global brands ( non- ethnocentric) whereas 47.5% prefer to buy Indian brands (ethnocentric).

Findings of the Study

Relational AnalysisTable 2 illustrates the result of correlation coefficients regarding above stated dimensions cited

in the hypotheses. The analysis shows that the four constructs i.e Perceived Brand Globalness( PBG) (r=0.4210, p≤.05), Perceived Brand Quality ( PBQ) (β=0.759, p≤.05), Perceived Association with Consumption Trend (PACT) (β=0.592, p≤.05), Perceived Social Image (PSI) (β=0.584, p≤.05) were identified to influence purchase intention for global brands (PIGB). There is no breach of the assumption regarding linearity. However, all associations were found to be significant at 95% confidence level.

Table 2. Pearson Correlation Analysis Results

Hypothesis Relationship hypothesized Pearson Correlation Analysis Results

H1 Perceived Brand Globalness( PBG) and Purchase Intention ( PI) -------> positive

r =0.421 p≤ 0.05

H2 Perceived Brand Quality ( PBQ) and Purchase Intention (PI) ---------> positive

r =0.759 p≤ 0.05

H3 Perceived Association with Consumption Trend (PACT) and Purchase Intention ( PI) ---------> positive

r =0.592 p≤ 0.05

H4 Perceived Social Image ( PSI) and Purchase Intention ( PI) ---------> positive

r =0.584 p≤ 0.05

Note: Sample size = 240

Regression AnalysisIn the next step, to recognize which constructs i.e Perceived Brand Globalness(PBG), Perceived

Brand Quality (PBQ), Perceived Association with Consumption Trend (PACT), Perceived Social Image (PSI) have a stronger influence on purchase intention for global brands (PIGB), multiple regression was applied. In the final model, four constructs assessed by 20 items served as the independent variables and purchase intention for global brands (PIGB) served as the dependent variable. The results was found to be significant at p≤.05 level and value of adjusted R2 =0.313.Table 3 highlights the beta values that indicate each variables’ explanatory power. Four constructs were found significant (at p ≤ 0.05 level) in justifying purchase intention for global brands (PIGB). The constructs, numbered on the basis of importance as shown by beta coefficients (β), are Perceived Brand Quality (PBQ) (β=0.560), Perceived Social Image (PSI) (β=.256), and Perceived Association with Consumption Trend (PACT)(β=.224). The results support the framed hypotheses, H1, H2, H3, H4. The explanatory variables were thoroughly scrutinized for issues pertaining to multicollinearity. Tolerance Value (TV) and Variance Inflation Factor (VIF) for each explanatory variable were utilized to assess the issue of multicollinearity. It can be seen from the Table 3 that TV and VIF are within the recommending limit.



Table 3: Antecedents of Purchase Intention for Global Brands

Independent Variable Standardized Regression Coefficients

T-value Significance Probability

TV VIF

Constant 1.612(.247) 6.571 .000Perceived Brand Quality ( PBQ) 0.560 7.271 .000 0.771 1.297Perceived Social Image ( PSI) 0.256 2.767 .007 0.661 1.444Perceived Association with Consumption Trend (PACT )

0.224 2.426 .017 0.669 1.760

Multiple R 0.560R2 0.313Adjusted R2 0.307Durbin- Watson Test 1.70F 52.87 .000Sample Size 240

Independent T- TestIt is applied to analyze a single variable across two categories of respondents. The independent

Samples T Test procedure composes the two group means. The mean of all the variables in CET Scale for each respondent was found and then respondents were categorized into categories i.e. ethnocentric and non-ethnocentric. Then T-Test was applied with the construct along with variables. This table displays the mean, mean difference , t- value , degree of freedom and p –value for the test variables within categories defined by the grouping variable, which is ethnocentric and non ethnocentric.

Table 4: Results of Independent t-test

Constructs/dimensions Non- Ethnocentric

Ethnocentric Mean difference

t Df p-value

Perceived Brand Globalness ( PBG)A global brand is available in most countries 3.91 3.66 0.24 1.534 118 .128When travelling abroad, one can buy global brands 3.71 3.58 0.132 0.862 118 .390People across the world are able to recognize global brands

3.56 3.53 .022 0.145 118 .885

I think consumers in developing countries like to buy this brand

3.78 3.442 0.36 2.478 118 .015*

Global brands are basically the same everywhere 3.40 3.17 0.23 1.292 118 .228Perceived Brand Quality ( PBQ)Global brands have higher quality than other brands 4.00 3.58 0.412 2.625 118 .010*Global brands have the highest quality in their category

3.01 2.73 0.355 1.539 118 .076

Choosing a global brand saves time compared to choosing another brand

3.77 3.44 0.327 2.238 118 .027*

Global brands are a safer choice than other brands 3.04 3.00 0.018 0.104 118 .918Global brands are more innovative than other brands 3.92 3.55 0.374 2.147 118 .034*



Global brands do not customize their products to local states

3.61 3.47 0.145 0.97 118 .333

Perceived Association with Consumption Trend (PACT ) Global brands are often ahead of market trends 3.14 2.85 0.290 1.440 118 .152Global brands makes one feel good in his/her social group

3.38 3.04 0.338 2.007 118 .047*

Global brands makes one have the sense of global belonging

3.25 3.08 0.166 1.062 118 .290

Global brands makes one have a good impression of others

3.94 3.76 0.185 1.160 118 .248

Global brands makes one feel closer to contemporary lifestyle

3.57 3.19 0.371 3.206 118 .002*

Perceived Social Image ( PSI)Global brands have greater social responsibilities than other brands

3.49 3.36 0.123 0.668 118 .505

Being more cosmopolitan is part of the appeal of global brands

3.04 3.00 0.047 0.260 118 .796

Global brands are associated with wealth 3.49 3.15 0.176 1.047 118 .297I think that global brands are more exciting 3.403 3.079 0.324 1.963 118 .050*To me, global brands are more stylish 3.491 3.111 0.380 2.025 118 .045*Purchase Intention for Global Brands I would buy Global brands, assuming it was available

3.528 3.270 0.288 2.443 118 .016*

I prefer global brands over local brands 3.565 3.280 0.275 1.946 118 .014** Significant at 0.05 level

The findings of the study revealed significant differences among the ethnocentric and non ethnocentric people regarding items corresponding to five constructs i.e Perceived Brand Globalness ( PBG), Perceived Brand Quality ( PBQ), Perceived Association with Consumption Trend (PACT), Perceived Social Image ( PSI) and purchase intention for global brands (PIGB). The present study emphasizes that Indian consumers does not transparently link anything special with world renowned brands, way beyond their broad reach and limited local adaptability. Nevertheless, global brands summon positive conclusions, though consumers are reluctant to comprehend them explicitly. Importantly, this effect also holds correct for people who do not consider global brands positively. However, regarding cognitive perceptions of global brands there is intrinsic appeal for the brand interims of recognition , and that is uniform across the global markets.

Suggestions, Recommendations and Managerial ImplicationsMarketing managers ought to be an consoled, that the globality of their brand is an assured

feature even if it is not recognized by substantial number of consumers or viewed as absolutely unresponsive by some. To increase the acceptability of their global brands at international arena, marketers should concentrate on the social perspective to accentuate their part as responsible and accountable global citizens. The present study substantiates the viewpoint that people are quick to make assumption about the global brands having higher social responsibilities than the other brands. Furthermore, ethnocentric people, is a profitable niche segment that cannot be overlooked by marketing managers responsible for global brands. Therefore, marketers ought to vigilantly



scrutinize the buying patterns and appeal to these consumers through customized one-to-one marketing strategies. In addition to wide diffusion of global brands , it is prudent to localize the product as per the demand of the local market. Also, study clearly identifies that global brands should be customized according to the local requirements.

Limitations and Further ResearchTime and geographical restraints, along with personal biases while collecting data through

questionnaires could have been a valid limitation of our study .Also, the horizon of the study is limited to selected colleges leading to sampling and non-sampling errors. Also, during this study use of actual brands was avoided. Therefore, in future research, hypothesis should be tested against actual global brands. To do this systematically, it is crucial to include the other domains like image, strength, equity etc. However, with actual brands, it is hard to refrain contamination from brand equity and other strength influences.

ReferencesAaker, D. A., & Joachimsthaler, E. (1999). The lure of global branding. Harvard Business Review, 77(6), 137-44.

Altintaş,M.H.,&Tokol,T.(2007).Culturalopennessandconsumerethnocentrism:AnempiricalanalysisofTurkish consumers. Marketing Intelligence & Planning,25(4), 308-325.

Arnould, E. J., & Thompson, C. J. (2005). Consumer culture theory (CCT): Twenty years of research. Journal of consumer research, 31(4), 868-882.

Batra, R., Ramaswamy, V., Alden, D. L., Steenkamp, J. B. E., & Ramachander, S. (2000). Effects of brand local and nonlocal origin on consumer attitudes in developing countries. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 9(2), 83-95.

Bhardwaj, V., Park, H., & Kim, Y. K. (2011). The effect of Indian consumers’ life satisfaction on brand behavior toward a US global brand. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 23(2), 105-116..

Burroughs, J. E., & Rindfleisch, A. (2002). Materialism and well-being: A conflicting values perspective. Journal of Consumer research, 29(3), 348-370.

Cayla, J., & Giana, M. E. (2007). Asian Brands Without Borders: Regional Opportunities and Challenges. International Marketing Review, 24(4), 444-456.

Chan, T. S., Cui, G., & Zhou, N. (2009). Competition between foreign and domestic brands: A study of consumer purchases in China. Journal of Global Marketing, 22(3), 181-197.

Cleveland, M., Laroche, M., & Papadopoulos, N. (2015). You are what you speak? Globalization, multilingualism, consumer dispositions and consumption. Journal of Business Research, 68(3), 542-552.

D. A. Aaker, Managing Brand Equity: Capitalizing on the Value of a Brand Name. New York: Free Press, 1991.

Davvetas, V., Sichtmann, C., & Diamantopoulos, A. (2015). The impact of perceived brand globalness on consumers’ willingness to pay. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 32(4), 431-434..

De Chernatony, L. (2009). Towards the holy grail of defining brand. Marketing Theory, 9(1), 101-105.

Dodds, W. B., Monroe, K. B., & Grewal, D. (1991). Effects of price, brand, and store information on buyers’ product evaluations. Journal of marketing research, 307-319..

Dong, L., & Tian, K. (2009). The use of Western brands in asserting Chinese national identity. Journal of Consumer Research, 36(3), 504-523.



Eckhardt, G. M. (2005). Local branding in a foreign product category in an emerging market. Journal of International Marketing, 13(4), 57-79.

Fournier, S. (1998). Consumers and their brands: Developing relationship theory in consumer research. Journal of consumer research, 24(4), 343-373.

Hassan, S. S., & Katsanis, L. P. (1991). Identification of global consumer segments: a behavioral framework. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 3(2), 11-28.

Hill, R. P., & Gaines, J. (2007). The consumer culture of poverty: behavioral research findings and their implications in an ethnographic context. The Journal of American Culture, 30(1), 81-95.

Jamal, A., & Goode, M. (2001). Consumers’ product evaluation: A study of the primary evaluative criteria in the precious jewellery market in the UK. Journal of Consumer Behaviour: An International Research Review, 1(2), 140-155.

Johansson, J. K., & Ronkainen, I. A. (2005). The esteem of global brands. Journal of Brand Management, 12(5), 339-354.

Joung, H. M., & Miller, N. J. (2007). Examining the effects of fashion activities on life satisfaction of older females: Activity theory revisited. Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal, 35(4), 338-356.

Keller, K. L., & Aaker, D. A. (1992). The effects of sequential introduction of brand extensions. Journal of Marketing Research, 29(1),35-50.

Kinra, N. (2006). The effect of country-of-origin on foreign brand names in the Indian market. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 24(1), 15-30.

Klein, J. G., Ettenson, R., & Morris, M. D. (1998). The animosity model of foreign product purchase: An empirical test in the People’s Republic of China. The Journal of Marketing, 62(1),89-100.

Kumar, A., Kim, Y. K., & Pelton, L. (2009). Indian consumers’ purchase behavior toward US versus local brands. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 37(6), 510-526.

Kumar, A., Lee, H. J., & Kim, Y. K. (2009). Indian consumers’ purchase intention toward a United States versus local brand. Journal of Business Research, 62(5), 521-527.

Lu Wang, C., & Xiong Chen, Z. (2004). Consumer ethnocentrism and willingness to buy domestic products in a developing country setting: testing moderating effects. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 21(6), 391-400.

Nijssen, E. J., & Douglas, S. P. (2008). Consumer world-mindedness, social-mindedness, and store image. Journal of International Marketing, 16(3), 84-107.

Salem Khalifa, A. (2004). Customer value: a review of recent literature and an integrative configuration. Management Decision, 42(5), 645-666.

Solomon, M. R. (2003). Conquering consumer space: Marketing strategies for a branded world. New York, NY: Amacom.

Souiden, N., Kassim, N. M., & Hong, H. J. (2006). The effect of corporate branding dimensions on consumers’ product evaluation: A cross-cultural analysis. European Journal of Marketing, 40(7/8), 825-845.

Steenkamp, J. B. E., Batra, R., & Alden, D. L. (2003). How perceived brand globalness creates brand value. Journal of International Business Studies, 34(1), 53-65..

Strizhakova, Y., & Coulter, R. A. (2015). Drivers of local relative to global brand purchases: A contingency approach. Journal of International Marketing, 23(1), 1-22.

Tariq, B., & Iqbal, A. (2015). Factors Affecting Consumers Attitude and Purchase Intention towards Foreign Apparel Brands in Pakistan. European Academic Research, 2(10), 13797-13816.



Xie, Y., Batra, R., & Peng, S. (2015). An extended model of preference formation between global and local brands: The roles of identity expressiveness, trust, and affect. Journal of International Marketing, 23(1), 50-71.

Xie, Y., Batra, R., & Peng, S. (2015). An extended model of preference formation between global and local brands: The roles of identity expressiveness, trust, and affect. Journal of International Marketing, 23(1), 50-71.

Yoo, B., Donthu, N., & Lee, S. (2000). An examination of selected marketing mix elements and brand equity. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 28(2), 195-211.

Zeithaml, V. A. (1988). Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: a means-end model and synthesis of evidence. The Journal of Marketing, 52(3), 2-22.

Zhou, L., Teng, L., & Poon, P. S. (2008). Susceptibility to global consumer culture: A three‐dimensional scale. Psychology & Marketing, 25(4), 336-351.

Authors’ Profile

Monica Bedi, MBA, Ph.D is an Assistant Professsor at University Business School, Panjab University Chandigarh, India. Her area of specialisation is Marketing and International Business. She has 15 years of experience in teaching and research. She has published papers in reputed journals in areas such as brand equity, green consumer behaviour, emotional intelligence. She has presented papers in both national and international conferences, and chaired sessions in national and international conferences. She has been the member of Graduate and Post Graduate Board of Studies,Panjab University, Chandigarh, India.

Pooja Chopra is ICSSR Post Doctoral Fellow at the University Institute of Applied Management Sciences, Panjab University, Chandigarh, India. Her current topic of research is “Making Digital Transaction Systems Citizen Centric: A Strategic Orientation. She is MBA M.Com and Ph.D in management and commerce from Himachal Pradesh University Business School, Himachal Pradesh University, Shimla, India. She has five years of corporate experience and over 10 years of teaching experience. Her research work focuses specifically on customer loyalty and customer relationship management. She has presented her papers in many conferences. Her papers are published in journals of national and international repute.

Kirandeep Kaur is an Assistant Professor at Amity University, Uttar Pradesh, Noida, India. She has done Masters from University Business School, Panjab University, Chandigarh and Ph.D in Commerce. She has over 10 years of teaching and research experience in Finance and Marketing. Her research work is on capital structure, profitability, brand equity, supply chain management and emotional intelligence. She has presented papers in both national and international conferences and is associated as an Assistant Editor in a number of international, refereed, indexed journals of repute.

ajm v 3 1 2018 - amity university 9.pdf · monica bedi & pooja chopra panjab university,...

Documents