Brand Analyses of Global Brands Versus Local Brand in Indian ... [PDF]

University of Kentucky

UKnowledge Theses and Dissertations--Retailing and Tourism Management

Retailing and Tourism Management

2014

Brand Analyses of Global Brands Versus Local Brand in Indian Apparel Consumer Market Aniket Sengupta University of Kentucky, [email protected]

Click here to let us know how access to this document benefits you.

Recommended Citation Sengupta, Aniket, "Brand Analyses of Global Brands Versus Local Brand in Indian Apparel Consumer Market" (2014). Theses and Dissertations--Retailing and Tourism Management. 6. https://uknowledge.uky.edu/mat_etds/6

This Master's Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Retailing and Tourism Management at UKnowledge. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations--Retailing and Tourism Management by an authorized administrator of UKnowledge. For more information, please contact [email protected].

STUDENT AGREEMENT: I represent that my thesis or dissertation and abstract are my original work. Proper attribution has been given to all outside sources. I understand that I am solely responsible for obtaining any needed copyright permissions. I have obtained needed written permission statement(s) from the owner(s) of each thirdparty copyrighted matter to be included in my work, allowing electronic distribution (if such use is not permitted by the fair use doctrine) which will be submitted to UKnowledge as Additional File. I hereby grant to The University of Kentucky and its agents the irrevocable, non-exclusive, and royaltyfree license to archive and make accessible my work in whole or in part in all forms of media, now or hereafter known. I agree that the document mentioned above may be made available immediately for worldwide access unless an embargo applies. I retain all other ownership rights to the copyright of my work. I also retain the right to use in future works (such as articles or books) all or part of my work. I understand that I am free to register the copyright to my work. REVIEW, APPROVAL AND ACCEPTANCE The document mentioned above has been reviewed and accepted by the student’s advisor, on behalf of the advisory committee, and by the Director of Graduate Studies (DGS), on behalf of the program; we verify that this is the final, approved version of the student’s thesis including all changes required by the advisory committee. The undersigned agree to abide by the statements above. Aniket Sengupta, Student Dr. Min-young Lee, Major Professor Dr. Scarlett Wesley, Director of Graduate Studies

BRAND ANALYSES OF GLOBAL BRANDS VERSUS LOCAL BRAND IN INDIAN APPAREL CONSUMER MARKET _______________________________________

THESIS _________________________________ A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in the College of Agriculture at the University of Kentucky

By Aniket Sengupta Lexington, Kentucky Director – Dr. Vanessa Jackson, Professor of Merchandising, Apparel and Textiles Lexington, Kentucky 2014 Copyright © Aniket Sengupta 2014

ABSTRACT OF THESIS

BRAND ANALYSES OF GLOBAL BRANDS VERSUS LOCAL BRAND IN INDIAN APPAREL CONSUMER MARKET

The purpose of this study was to conduct brand analyses on global brands in comparison to local retailers in India taking into account the regional differences and Indian consumers’ affinity towards global brands. The study has derived its conceptual framework from previous work done by Lee, Knight, and Kim (2008) and Bhardwaj, Kumar and Youn-Kyung (2010) with some added attributes. Quantitative data included a sample of 194 subjects where the sampling was conducted randomly as well as the involvement of convenient method to analyze the brands in real-world scenario. The survey involved the questionnaire which was utilized in previous researches and analyzed under the light of statistical treatment. The results confirm the importance of global brands (influence of European brand over American brand) over local brand in the Indian apparel consumer market. KEYWORDS: Apparel, Brand, Affinity, Globalization, India

Aniket Sengupta 07/21/2014

BRAND ANALYSES OF GLOBAL BRANDS VERSUS LOCAL BRAND IN INDIAN APPAREL CONSUMER MARKET

By Aniket Sengupta

_____Dr. Min-young Lee______ Director of Thesis Dr. Scarlett Wesley_______ Director of Graduate Studies _________July 21, 2014_____ ____

In memory of Dida, Dadu and Mama

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The completion of this thesis would never been possible without the loving guidance and support from a lengthy list of academic faculty members, family, and friends. A massive thank you goes to my thesis advisor Dr. Min-young Lee, for not only helping me through entire aspect of this thesis process, but for being an enriching role model and friend during my years at the department. I would also like to thank Dr. Scarlett Wesley and Dr. Jason Swanson for being on my committee and helping me throughout and opening email inboxes for my multiple questions. Without their guidance my thesis would be incomplete. A special thank you also belongs to Dr. Kimberly MillerSpillman, Ms. Mika Pryor and Dr. Susan Michelman, for all the opportunities they awarded me and always having a supportive outlook. A huge sense of appreciation and heartfelt gratitude to my department chair Dr. Vanessa Jackson, her help has been just so inspiring for me. My greatest supporter has been Dr. Ann Vail and Mr. Gary Schaeffer – thanks always for being my second family.

I want to first thank my Papa, Mom, my wonderful cousins – Averi, Sounak, Syamantak, Anirban, Mahua, Koushik and Prasenjit, my inspiring family – Arijeet, Deepali, Lina and Sujit, lovely childhood friends – Antu, Jayeeta and Arkadyuti for always keeping faith in me and telling me this day would come soon. To Debanjan, Mary, Rohith, Sanjay, Amoha, Rajeev, Brent, Nandita, Mr. Kar, Mallory, Shawn, Adam, Thomas, Tabitha, Anil, Wade, and Kyle I thank each of you for your unconditional support and encouragement, without you all I would not have survived Graduate School.

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgments..............................................................................................................iii List of Tables......................................................................................................................vi List of Figures....................................................................................................................vii Chapter One: Introduction Background.................................................................................................................3 Purpose of the study……………………………………………………………........5 Hypotheses..................................................................................................................5 Specific sub-objectives ..............................................................................................6 Justification ................................................................................................................9 Conceptual Framework…………………………………………………………….10 Assumptions and Limitations....................................................................................12 Summary ...................................................................................................................13 Chapter Two: Review of Literature Introduction………………………………………………………………………...15 Theory of Branding………………………………………………………………...16 Benefits of Branding……………………………………………………………….18 Expectation from Brands…………………………………………………………..19 Consumers’ Attachment to Brands………………………………………………...19 Consumer Satisfaction Measures…………………………………………………..20 Brand Analyses…………………………………………………………………….23 India – Country of Extremes…………………………………………………….....26 Global Brands in Indian Apparel Retail Market…………………………………...32 Regional Differences in the Choice of Brands…………………………………….36 Brands in the study………………………………………………………………...37 Previous studies on Country-Specific Apparel Brand Analyses…………………..39 Hypothesis Development…………………………………………………...41 Chapter Three: Methodology Introduction…………………………………………………………………………47 Research Design…………………………………………………………………....47 Research Method…………………………………………………………………...48 Brand Selection…………………………………………………………………….49 Instrument and Measures…………………………………………………………..49 Chapter Four: Results Introduction………………………………………………………………………..51 Sector – 1 Results………………………………………………………………….52 Sector – 2 Results………………………………………………………………….53 Sector – 3 Results……………………………………………………………….....54 iv

Sector – 4 Results………………………………………………………………….62 Sector – 5 Results………………………………………………………………….67 Summary…………………………………………………………………………..71 Chapter 5: Discussion & Conclusions Introduction…………………………………………………………………….....72 Sector – 3 Discussion……………………………………………………………..72 Sector – 4 Discussion……………………………………………………………..77 Limitations………………………………………………………………………..80 Conclusion………………………………………………………………………..80 Appendices Appendix A……………………………………………………………………....83 Appendix B……………………………………………………………………....90 References…………………………………………………………………………..91 VITA……………………………………………………………………………….101

v

LIST OF TABLES Table 3.1, Measures…………………………………………………………….....50 Table 4.1, Reliabilities of the factors……………………………………………...54 Table 4.2, Results of repeat measure (split-plot) analysis………………………...55 Table 4.3, Estimated Marginal Means of Brands………………………………....55 Table 4.4, Results of Multi-group comparisons…………………………………..56 Table 4.5, Results of Multi-group comparisons…………………………………..62 of affinity for global brands Table 4.6, Estimated Marginal Means of Brands……………………………….....63 Table 4.7, Results of Paired Sample Analyses…………………………………….68 of Brands – Brand Specific Associations Table 4.8, Results of Paired Sample Analyses…………………………………….69 of Brands – General Brand Impressions Table 4.9, Results of Paired Sample Analyses…………………………………….70 of Brands – Brand Commitment

vi

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1.1 Retail in India………………………………………………………….3 Figure 1.2 Framework for Brand Analyses……………………………………....12 Figure 2.1 ASCI Customer Framework………………………………………….22 Figure 2.2 Customer Brand Equity Model……………………………………….23 Figure 2.3 Attributes of Brand Analyses ………………………………………..24 Figure 2.4 Size of Indian apparel retail market……………………………….....32 Figure 2.5 Share of Indian apparel retail market………………………………...32 Figure 2.6 International Fashion Brands in India………………………………..33 Figure 2.7 Global Retailers entry timeline in India……………………………...33 Figure 2.8 Country of Origin…………………………………………………….36 Figure 4.1 Frequency of shopping for study sample…………………………….53 Figure 4.2 Spend per season on clothing purchase for study sample……………53 Figure 4.3 Interaction plot of emotional value by region and brand type……….57 Figure 4.4 Interaction plot of perceived quality by region and brand type……...58 Figure 4.5 Interaction plot of brand awareness by region and brand type………59 Figure 4.6 Interaction plot of brand image by region and brand type…………...60 Figure 4.7 Interaction plot of brand loyalty by region and brand type…………..60 Figure 4.8 Interaction plot of purchase intention by region and brand type……..61 Figure 5.1 Regions of India………………………………………………………72

vii

Chapter – One Globalization is the principal and most favorite slogan of brands and businesses around the world. This concept has turned into a key idea for business theory and practice, and also entered academic debates (Giddens, 1990). Globalization involves economic integration of countries, the gradual transfer of policies across borders and the transmission of knowledge ensuring a cultural stability (Larsson, 2001). The global phenomenon has involved the interlacing of economic and cultural activity. Globalization has heralded the onset of a borderless world (Ohmae, 1990). Globalization in the sense of connectivity in economic and cultural life across the world has been growing for centuries. We have also witnessed the rise and globalization of the idea of a ‘brand’. Large corporations operate across many different countries by developing and marketing products that can be just sold in New Delhi as well as in New York. Brands like Coca Cola, Nike, Sony, and a host of others have become part of the fabric of vast numbers of people's lives. Globalization involves the diffusion of ideas, practices and technologies. “Globalization can thus be defined as the intensification of worldwide social relations which link distant localities in such a way that local happenings are shaped by events occurring many miles away and vice versa” (Giddens, 1990, p.64). It is something more than internationalization and universalization. The phenomenon is not simply modernization or westernization. It is not just the liberalization of markets but involves a change in the way we understand geography and experience localness of a certain region. Retail markets in developed countries such as the United States and Western Europe have already reached a maturity stage, characterized by a slow population and market saturation (Berner, Khermouch, & Pascual, 2001) and less space left for new

1

developments. These changing phenomena lead many retail conglomerates and firms to expand towards rapidly developing countries to secure their position. For brands to strive and expand their brands to global market, it is essential to understand consumer preference for foreign and domestic brands based upon level of economic development, ethnocentric bias, demographic characteristics of consumers, product type, and product familiarity. Countries like India, Brazil, China, and Indonesia have undergone a huge socioeconomic transformation over a short period of time due to income expansion and rising trends of stable middle class (Kellogg Insight, 2012). These rising income groups are potential buyers of various global brands with varying tastes and preferences (Eizenberg & Salvo, 2012). Brands must be equipped with methods to impress these new consumer segments – one of such methods is utilizing brand analyses to determine brand awareness, brand impression, and brand commitment. Brand analyses involve properly sizing up a business situation and ensuring the availability of long-term direction with the establishment of appropriate objectives. Essentially also crafts an effective strategy for further business development in a global market. The choice for country in respect to the brand analyses in this study is India. India is home to over 1.2 billion people (Census Bureau of India, 2011) and purchasing power has significantly increased with the rise of middle-class enabling Indians to procure various Indian and global brands more than ever. The Indian consumer market is very attractive due to population size, increasing spending power and immense exposure to media. The globalization of brands started in early 90s, when India opted for partially free market-oriented economic policies (Rao, 1998; Bisaria, 2012) but there were many

2

problems associated which hampered the rapid growth of global brands. The recent policy changes in foreign direct investment (FDI) into retail operations passed by the Indian parliament has ushered in a new presence of global brands and created a renewed interest in the Indian market (Chari & Madhav Raghavan, 2012). The continental scale as well as the mix of languages and cultures makes India complex but attractive as much as the European Union or maybe even more (Morell, 2012). India’s enormous consumer size makes it worth the effort put by global brands; not an easy market to break into but for those who manage to thrive and survive – there are surely some big profits to be won (Morell, 2012). Background

Figure 1.1 Retail in India (2013) As seen in the above Figure 1.1, the Indian consumer market is a crowded one with many options. The competition is fierce and brands, both global and local need to be adapt to the complexity of the Indian market. It has been noted that European origin brands have significant market penetration and attracted consumers in India though American brands entered the market early in the 1980s (Malviya, 2012). A brand like

3

Levi’s which has a nineteen year presence in the Indian market is rapidly losing ground to European brands like Benetton. Benetton tend to attract the rising affluent young Indian consumers with cheap price options and trendy designs which differentiate these consumers from the older generations (Malviya, 2012). European brands entered the Indian market in last decade and have followed more aggressive strategies for expansion than their American counterparts (Morell, 2012). The rise of Indian brands like Flying Machine, Killer, and Wills Lifestyle has increased the competition and the fight for survival in the market. The immense need to analyze the market and to understand the brand strategies of the brands irrespective of country of origin from a consumer point of view gives rise to the need of this study. Previous studies had limitation in accessing the broader sample demographics, brands targeted in the research studies (Lee, Kumar & Kim, 2010; Bhardwaj, Kumar & Kim, 2010), and so they have not adequately forecasted the effect of global brands on a macro-economic level upon the Indian apparel retail market neither creating a possible guideline for US origin brands to start expanding aggressively. India is an exception to the rise and growth of global brands due to the presence of immense demographic diversity and varying levels of consumer preferences when compared with other emerging economies (Halepete & Iyer, 2008). Although consumers in developing countries is not highly familiar with global brands before the brands actually enter the market, they tend to become more loyal towards global brands compared to local brands because of perception of better quality (Han & Qualls, 1985; Teas & Agarwal, 2000).

4

Purpose This research study investigated two global brands (i.e., Benetton and Tommy Hilfiger) and an Indian brand (i.e.,Wills Lifestyle). Each brand was analyzed by existing brand analyses parameters (i.e., general brand impression, brand specific association, and brand commitment) combined with two factors – difference in regions of India and Indian consumers’ affinity towards global brands over local brands. The brands which were chosen in this study are well known in India. Benetton is originally an Italian origin brand, entered Indian market in 1991 and has steadily been growing with more and more stores every year with solid profits (Knowledge@Wharton, 2013). Tommy Hilfiger, one of the American fashion retail icons came to India in 1997 and has been growing through multi-brand outlets and standalone stores (Afonso, 2012). Wills Lifestyle is India’s most admired brand owned by ITC (Indian Tobacco Corporation). The company is a big player in the Indian market operating various retail formats and accredited by Superbrands Council of India. Hypotheses The study analyzed global and local apparel brands in the Indian market in the parameters of general brand impression, brand specific association, and brand commitment. Hypotheses are developed to determine whether – •

Indian consumers’ responses to brand analyses components differ among global brands and the local brand in respect to difference in regions.

5

•

The impact of Indian consumers’ affinity towards global products on their responses to brand analyses components differs among global brands and the local brand.

Specific sub – objectives Objective I - To examine brand emotional value and perceived quality of American brand, European brand and local brand. Brand-specific association has been linked to the feature and attribute that makes consumers more associated with a brand or brand and makes it distinct from other brands or brands (Dillon et. al., 2001). As proposed by Lee et al. (2008), perceived quality and emotional value are the two major dimensions of brand-specific association as they form critical factors in product perception. Emotional value in respect to global brands in Indian market can be defined as the amount of value that relates to consumers’ feeling for a certain brand (Sheth, Newman & Gross, 1991; Barnes & Mattsson, 2008). Perceived quality can be simultaneously defined as consumers’ subjective evaluation of superiority of certain brand over others (Rigaux-Bricmont, 1982; Zeithaml, 1988). •

Hypothesis 1a: Indian consumers will give higher ratings on emotional value and perceived quality to the European brand than the American brand and the local brand based on regional differences.

•

Hypothesis 1b: Indian consumers will give higher ratings on emotional value and perceived quality to the American brand than the European brand and the local brand based on regional differences.

•

Hypothesis 2a: Indian consumers with affinity towards global brands will give higher ratings on emotional value and perceived quality to the European

6

brand, while they give lower ratings on emotional value and perceived quality value to the American brand and the local brand. •

Hypothesis 2b: Indian consumers with affinity towards global brands will give higher ratings on emotional value and perceived quality to the American brand, while they give lower ratings on emotional value and perceived quality value to the European brand and the local brand.

Objective II – To examine brand awareness and brand image of American brand, European brand and local brand. The conceptual framework for creation of the term general brand impressions with two attributes - brand awareness and brand image was done in a previous study (Keller, 1993). Brand awareness in relation to global brand can be defined as recognition of brand name through visual representation (i.e., logo or ad jingle) (Hoyer & Brown, 1990; Rossiter & Percy, 1987). Brand image can be identified with consumers’ perception about a certain brand or brand, whether positive or negative (Dobni & Zinkhan, 1990; Hofstede, 2007). This study is comparing the level of consumer brand awareness and image ranging from American brand to European brand with a local brand with prior consideration that an Indian consumer will have more favorable attitude towards global brands (Suh & Smith, 2011). •

Hypothesis 3a: Indian consumers will give higher ratings on brand awareness and brand image to the European brand than the American brand and the local brand based on regional differences.

7

•

Hypothesis 3b: Indian consumers will give higher ratings on brand awareness and brand image to the American brand than the European brand and the local brand based on regional differences.

•

Hypothesis 4a: Indian consumers with affinity towards global brands will give higher ratings on brand awareness and brand image to the European brand, while they give lower ratings on brand awareness and brand image value to the American brand and the local brand.

•

Hypothesis 4b: Indian consumers with affinity towards global brands will give higher ratings on brand awareness and brand image to the American brand, while they give lower ratings on brand awareness and brand image value to the European brand and the local brand.

Objective III - To examine brand loyalty and purchase intention of American brand, European brand and local brand. The enduring desire to maintain a value-oriented and symbiotic relationship with a brand is defined as brand commitment (Traylor, 1981; Coulter et al., 2003). Brand commitment has been linked with two attributes – brand loyalty and purchase intentions (Moorman et al., 1992). Brand loyalty has been referred to as a continuous long-term attachment to a brand which acts as an important strategy for brands to achieve a competitive advantage in the particular market (Sirdeshmukh et al., 2002). Purchase intention can be referred to as consumers’ tendency to procure specific brands in comparison to other existing brands in a routine manner (Yoo et al., 2000).

8

•

Hypothesis 5a: Indian consumers will give higher ratings on brand loyalty and purchase intentions to the European brand than the American brand and the local brand based on regional differences.

•

Hypothesis 5b: Indian consumers will give higher ratings on brand loyalty and purchase intention to the American brand than the European brand and the local brand based on regional differences.

•

Hypothesis 6a: Indian consumers with affinity towards global brands will give higher ratings on brand loyalty and purchase intention to the European brand, while they give lower ratings on brand loyalty and purchase intention value to the American brand and the local brand.

•

Hypothesis 6b: Indian consumers with affinity towards global brands will give higher ratings on brand loyalty and purchase intention to the American brand, while they give lower ratings on brand loyalty and purchase intention value to the European brand and the local brand.

Justification Most of the globalization research efforts have concentrated on the economic and industry conditions that influence investment and business decisions in India, less research has focused on Indian consumers. With several global and domestic brands competing in India’s competitive apparel retail market, the success of marketing strategies for both global and domestic brands can emanate from consumer perceptions of these brands available in India. There are also many global brands which have not formally entered the Indian market but have considerable presence through discount online websites. The challenge for global brands is to understand how to compete

9

successfully against local brands by offering brands that act as a symbol of modernity and good life to Indian consumers (Ger & Belk, 1996). The higher level of brand awareness among Indian consumers can influence their selection or choice of brand during purchase process, and hence benefit global brands by increased sales and more retail store space. This study would help global brands specifically the American brands to reach out to all segments of Indian consumer and in future to gain a foothold in the market. The domestic brands if they received lower ratings after the study can learn from their mistakes which will help them to boost consumer confidence by offering quality products which are equivalent to those global brands but at a lower price as Indian consumers are very pricesensitive (Mishra, 2010; Kuruvilla & Joshi, 2010; Prasad & Aryasri, 2011). As the sampling is random in this study, so it is hoped that more and more consumers from various demographics will be covered to give a real-world picture of effect of the presence of apparel brands in India. Conceptual Framework Retail in India has emerged as one of the most vibrant and fast paced industries, accounting for over 10 percent of the country’s GDP and 8 percent of total employment (UKBIC, 2011). India’s retail market is projected to grow at a rate of 12 percent per annum to reach $543 billion in 2014 (IBEF Annual Report, 2012). Strong fundamental economic growth, the mushrooming population, increasing disposable income, an expanding middle and upper class consumer base and the large scale construction of organized retail infrastructure are key factors driving this growth, making India the world’s fifth largest retail destination (AT Kearney, 2006). Despite this, India’s venture into the organized retail space is still at an evolutionary level indicating

10

that the opportunity in India for global brands remains immense (Sikhri & Wadhwa, 2012). In order to succeed in the Indian market, US/European brands need to understand her diversity and uniqueness and accordingly adapt and reinvent their brands to fit the tailored requirements of the sensitive Indian consumer (UKBIC, 2011). Replicating a one-size-fits-all global model will not be a successful approach where India is concerned. More often than not, US/European brands have the aspiration to customize their model for India but lack the confidence to do so and therefore opt for the safer option which does not always work (Technopak Survey, 2010). The identity of a region refers to those differentiating physical, cultural and historical features that make one region different from another (Paasi, 2002). Regional identity refers to the extent to which people identify themselves with the region’s practices, discourses and symbols (Paasi, 2002). This regional difference in Indian context enables us to start the research which correlates with attitudes towards a global brand versus Indian brand. Attitudes towards global brands stems from functionality of product, design variations and need for uniqueness (Sheth, Newman & Gross, 1991). India has many cosmopolitan cities and regions, the need and positive attitude for global brands arises from this cosmopolitanism (Cleveland, Laroche & Papadopoulos, 2009). The other regions might not be influenced by global trends, so their shopping preferences are rather limited (Steenkamp & Gielens, 2003). Studies have revealed that affinity towards global brands is related to brand preference (Kotler & Armstrong, 2006; Grundey, 2006 and Rajput et.al, 2012). The framework represented in Figure 1.2 addresses the concept that regional differences in India have an effect on choice of brands

11

among Indian consumers. Another aspect of this framework touches on the favorable attitude of Indian consumers towards global brands over local brands which would determine brand preferences.

Brand-specific associations Emotional Value Perceived Quality

Region

General brand impressions Brand Awareness Brand Image Affinity towards

Brand commitment Brand Loyalty Purchase Intention

Global Products

Figure 1.2 Framework for Brand Analyses Assumptions and Limitations Assuming the growing trend of apparel consumption among Indian consumers, this study attempts to find out brand loyalty among various demographics. The assumptions about the growth of economy, growth of retail space, rising income levels and presence of young population is made from various surveys and researches done by Confederation of Indian Industries, AC Nielsen, A.T. Kearney and Cushman & Wakefield over the decade. Prior research on globalization and branding has examined consumers’ evaluation and purchase intention of foreign products, mainly focusing on quality factors (Aaker & Jacobson, 1994; Bandyopadhyay, 2001; Batra et al., 2000; Gaedeke, 1973).

12

The limitations are primarily on the access to various types of demographics and covering all big cities and large towns. This particular research attempted to cover three metropolitan cities and five large towns. Thus future research can generalize the sample more and cover all the states and even small towns and some semi-urban localities to get the exact picture about the perception of Indian consumers toward global and domestic apparel brands. Replication of this study in comparison with other rapidly developing countries can be undertaken to set up a guideline to be followed when a global brand is trying to enter a new market. Summary The research emanates from the term “globalization”. Globalization has been a defining objective of the 21st century, but seeds of this phenomenon were laid in the earlier centuries. Globalization gave rise to various brands, internationalization of brands started as more and more countries opened up their economies. Brands are associated with consumer attitude; in a foreign country, this attribute plays an important role to decide the success of a certain brand. India has been chosen as a candidate to study the effect of global brands and Indian brands on Indian consumer. India is a huge emerging economy based upon strong private sector with brand conscious consumer. So this quality attracts global brands to flock in the country but due to certain constraints and government regulations, a certain retail revolution is on the anvil but not materialized. This study attempted to uncover the effect of regional differences and affinity of Indian consumers towards global and local brands with the help of brand analyses. Hypotheses have been developed from the objectives of this study – consumers’ affinity towards global brands and regional differences towards brands and responses towards brand

13

analyses among consumers. The assumptions and limitations of study are the sample size and inability to study more brands. Future studies can reflect on broader study of different regions in India and detailed analysis of Indian consumers.

14

Chapter – Two The following literature review provided the study a generalized view regarding the topic of brand equity and various aspects of brand management. The literature review started with the description of the term “brand” and its origins and the brief evolution of branding in the field of apparel and fashion. It also reflected the essence of branding and its outcomes on the sales and marketing aspect of the industry. This review dealt with the important aspect of consumers’ attachment to brands and the perceived notion of possessing a certain brand and the psychological aspirations of the customers. The following literature review mentioned various scholarly papers on the similar topic done by researchers from various universities. There was an attempt to cover the preliminary concept of managing a brand and the effective communication involved to make the brand a success in the competitive market. The important aspect of this literature review was the detailed informative study on the choice of market – which is in this case, India. The rise of the Indian consumer market, brands operating in the market and the influence of future demographics and socio-economic structure of the Indian market are included in this literature review. Global apparel retail brands have entered the Indian market since 1980s and more rapidly after the 1991 economic reforms. They have had competition from Indian apparel retail brands and moreover with the rise of consumerism, the difference of perception of various brands is decreasing thus bridging the gap between the big cities and other urban centers. Regional differences in India have also been incorporated in this review to uncover the changing Indian consumer market. Studies done by various business analytics groups have been presented to support the study of Indian consumer market.

15

After reviewing the literature available on the topic, a research model was developed and then based on further analyses, hypotheses were derived. The underlying premise of this literature review is to provide the reader a scholarly study of brand analyses and its various parameters and why there is a need of brand analyses in the research about brands in respective countries and studying the various aspects of consumers which affect the growth of the brand. The literature review also attempts to find out a logical pursuit to the concept of brand analyses and its effect on the consumer study which would prepare the market for the entry of new global brands and also enable the domestic brands to rectify their problem areas and to focus more on quality and customer retention. Theory of Branding There are brands and logos present all around us, starting from the wine we consume to the clothes we wear, in the billboards along the interstate, to the advertisements which don the buses, subway and yellow cabs (Hampf & Lindberg-Repo, 2011). Branding has proven to be an essential strategy for marketing even in noncommercial organizations like political outfits and charities. It can be utilized for enhancing the profitability of actors, sports personalities, celebrities and also cities (Moor, 2007). Branding is considered as a separate industry which acts as a key mechanism to enable the smooth functioning of a market-oriented economy (Moor, 2007; Henderson & Arora, 2010). Some brands of specific countries are considered superior to others in countries which raised the question of effect on homogenization of culture (Moor, 2007; Bastos & Levy, 2012) but the brands help create a working identity for a product influencing consumers’ purchase intention.

16

Brand and advertising walks in continuum with each other creating a composite industrial environment; this continued focus on advertising has given rise to a functioning cultural economy at the expense of other forms of promotion (Du Gay & Pryke, 2002). Branding converts a certain commodity into a self-promotional form which creates an insatiable desire among consumers who want to procure it (Lury, 1993). Before delving into further discussion about brands and how they help to generate revenue for brands and corporations, we should understand the proper definitions. A brand is a name, term, design, symbol, or any other feature that identifies one seller's good or service as distinct from those of other sellers (American Marketing Association Dictionary, 1960). The word "brand" is derived from the Old Norse brandr meaning "to burn” which refers to the practice of producers burning their mark (or brand) onto their products. The concept of brands is not new but comparatively branding a brand is a product derived from the start of modern globalization at the end of the Cold War. It was actually during the 1990s, that a previously essential set of practices – product design, retail design, point-of purchase marketing came together to be known as branding (Bastos & Levy, 2012). The effects of branding caught the unfettered attention after the publication of Naomi Klein’s (2000) No Logo which created interest among scholarly circles to research more and more on this concept. Promotional activities of brands and corporations have always been subjected to public criticism and activism but Klein’s book dealt more about identifying new avenues and creating guidelines for innovative scope of marketing activity and to connect these to the ongoing globalization of labor markets and analyzing its after-effects (Moor, 2007). There is another definition which also defines brand as a unique property of a specific company

17

which has been developed over a certain time period enabling it to embrace a defined set of values and attributes which meaningfully helps a consumer identify products otherwise would resemble the similar attribute (Murphy, 1990). The perpetual rise of branding can be attributed as a method of a more reflexive capitalism (Thrift, 1997) where a market is created for the commodity to make the consumers slowly but steadily conform to the structures presented in the concept envisaged by the certain company or brand. Benefits of Branding Proper branding can result in higher sales of not only one product, but on other products associated with that brand (Bennett & Hill, 2012). Some people distinguish the psychological aspect; brand associations like thoughts, feelings, perceptions, images, experiences, beliefs, attitudes, and so on that eventually become linked to the brand from the experiential aspect (Hislop, 2001). The experiential aspect invariably consists of the sum of all points of contact with the brand and is known as the brand experience (Brakus et.al, 2009) which is a brand's action perceived by a person. Brand experience as a concept is defined as certain sensations, feelings, cognitions, and behavioral responses evoked by brand-related stimuli which arise as part of a brand’s design and identity, packaging, communications, and environments (Brakus et.al, 2009). The psychological aspect, sometimes referred to as the brand image, is a symbolic construct created within the minds of people, consisting of all the information and expectation associated with a product, service or the company that is providing them (Engel, Blackwell & Miniard, 1995; Dacin & Mitchell, 1986).

18

Expectations from Brands People engaged in branding seek to align the expectations behind the brand experience, creating the impression that a brand associated with a product or service has certain qualities or characteristics that make it special or unique. A brand is therefore one of the most valuable elements in an advertising theme, as it demonstrates what the brand owner is able to offer in the marketplace. So we can posit that the art of creating and maintaining a brand is called brand management. “In marketing research, seven brand management approaches have been identified during 1985–2006: the economic approach, the identity approach, the consumer-based approach, the personality approach, the relational approach, the community approach and the cultural approach. These approaches reflect a development where the focus has shifted from the sending end of brand communications in the first period of time; have then turned their attention to the receiving end in the second period; and finally have addressed contextual and cultural influences on the brand to the global understanding of brand consumption” (Heding, Knudtzen & Bjerre, 2008, p.15). Careful brand management seeks to make the product or services relevant to the target audience. Lastly, brands should be seen as more than the difference between the actual cost of a product and its selling price as they represent the sum of all valuable qualities of a product to the consumer (Duncan & Moriarty, 1997). Consumers’ Attachment to Brands Holding onto a consumer base has never been easy in a foreign market for a global brand in the presence of millions of local brands (Kapferer, 2012). For example, nowadays within a five-minute walk in majority of cities or towns, we can find at least five retail outlets selling similar merchandise each competing for space and attracting for

19

more customer patronage. Corporations have spent billions of dollars trying to make consumers as loyal to their products and services. Ever since consumers on market research panels began weighing in on everything from baby food quality to shoe shapes, companies have tried to tailor products to meet shoppers’ preferences (Gronroos, 2004). More recently, as the Internet and other channels of electronic commerce became common market-research tools in the mid-90s, businesses have tracked what individual customers buy – and do not buy. Now, with all that information at their fingertips, executives have been trying to figure out which business practices make faithful customers loyal. Yet there is this constant dilemma about why customers stick with a brand (Duncan & Moriarty, 1997). Today, the search for the ties that bind customers to brands has taken on fresh urgency. The branding aspect of commodities acts as an integral part of brand’s sustainability (Okonkwo, 2007). The brand is the reason why consumers associated themselves with a company that creates and sustains the attraction and desire for products (Bororian & Poix, 2010). The equity markets are volatile and venture investors are chastened, so loyal customers represent a company’s best prospects for pumping capital into a business which can be counted on to build a solid base of revenues as well as to expand profits. Consumer Satisfaction Measures Consumer satisfactions with brands are essential for a company or a brand to sustain and survive in a certain market. Quantitatively, satisfaction scores can be measured by only past experience, the American Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI) in

20

Figure 2.1, for instance, plots whether a customer thought he/she perceived good value from the particular brand. The index reflects a rational assessment at a particular moment. People tend to stay faithful to brands that earn both their rational trust and their inner affection. A consumer sees and interprets through the brand image which eventually leads to a positioning of the brands in his/her mind through perceptions and associations (Okonkwo, 2007). This allocation of a space for the brand in consumers’ mind is known as brand share and which influences further purchase decisions and creates brand loyalty (Okonkwo, 2007). That dynamic turns out to be predictor of behavior than consumer satisfaction measures alone. When a brand inspires both rational loyalty and emotional attachment, customers will continually reward it with their business. The customers will agree strongly with both statements about a brand’s reliability – “this brand always delivers on what they promise” and “this brand is a name I can always trust” – they are actually demonstrating their confidence in the brand (Gallup, 2001). Confidence normally precedes more intense feelings of attachment, because it determines whether a customer feels secure about a brand’s utility (Gallup, 2001). The total branding concept is the source of brand’s wealth and when the distinctive attributes are added together resulting in continuous demand and commitment to the brand from consumers, then the brand is said to possess high brand equity.

21

Figure 2.1 ASCI Customer Framework (Fornell et.al, 1996) The brand equity is translated to brand value, which can be defined as the financial success that a company eventually gains as a result of its brand’s strength (Bororian and Poix, 2010). To understand brand equity, we need to understand the brand equity model established by Keller (1993) known as Customer Brand Equity Model (CBEM). The concept behind the Customer Brand Equity Model is simple – To construct a strong brand, the company must shape how customers think and feel about their product. They need to build the right type of experiences around the brand enabling the customers to have specific, positive thoughts, feelings, beliefs, opinions, and perceptions about it. When the company has strong brand equity, the customers will buy more from them; they will recommend the certain brand to other people. They tend to more loyal, and the company is less likely to lose this loyalty to competitors.

22

Figure 2.2 Customer Brand Equity Model (Keller, 1993) Brand Analyses Brand has always been portrayed as a powerful tool and its success depends on its proper positioning among the consumers. Due to the immense competition among the brands and diversification of consumers in global markets, the assessment of brand evaluation becomes more and more challenging. To actually resolve this phenomenon, global marketers and brands always seek for measures to strengthen their brands across national boundaries by evaluating the effectiveness of the implementation of marketing mix and positioning of the brands. Consumers always use brand names and various product attributes as cues for information that help in the purchase decision making process. More specifically, consumers often recognize a status brand only with a brand name and image without any knowledge of other features of the brand (O’Cass & Frost, 2002). The attributes of brand analyses is depicted in Figure 2.3.

23

Figure 2.3 Attributes of Brand Analyses Brand-Specific Association Brand-specific association has been linked to the feature, attribute, or characteristic that makes consumers more associated with a brand and makes it distinct from other brands (Dillion et al., 2001). As proposed by Lee et al. (2008), perceived quality and emotional value are the two major dimensions of brand-specific association as they form critical factors in product perception. Emotional value is defined as the value that relates to individuals to their feelings or affective states (Sheth, Newman, & Gross, 1991) or the benefit derived from the sense of pleasure through either the purchase or consumption of a brand (Sweeney & Soutar, 2001). Perceived quality has been defined as a consumers’ appraisal or subjective evaluation of the overall excellence or superiority of the products (Zeithaml, 1988). General Brand Impression The pivotal role in consumers’ decision-making process is played by general brand impression. So much as marketers seek to add meaning to their brands, the 24

consumer also adds their own distinctive meaning to what the brand represents, and the latter may be far more essential than anything the marketer meant or intend to achieve (Hollis, 1995). Specifically, Keller (1993) provided a conceptual framework for creation of general brand impressions with two dimensional attribute – brand awareness and brand image. Brand awareness is defined as the brand knowledge involving recognition of the brand name at the rudimentary level (Hoyer & Brown, 1990). In this context, Rossiter and Percy (1987) related brand awareness to (a) the consumers’ ability to trace a brand in different conditions and (b) the likelihood that a brand will easily come to consumers’ mind. Similarly, increase in brand awareness raises the likelihood that the brand will be considered more frequently while purchase is made (Baker et al., 1986). Brand image is generally the perception of the product by the consumer which links features or characteristics of a particular brand to consumers’ memory and builds a general brand impression. It is quite evident that brand awareness and brand image influence the formation and strength of general brand impressions. Brand Commitment Brand commitment has been defined as an enduring desire to maintain a valued relationship with a brand (Moorman et al., 1992) and can be classified into brand loyalty and purchase intentions. Brand loyalty has been identified as an important strategy for brands to obtain a competitive advantage in the market (Sirdeshmukh, Singh, & Sabol, 2002). Moreover brand loyalty has been perceived a continuous long-term attachment to a brand. Similarly, Gaedeke (1973) emphasized that developing economies such as India, China, and Taiwan prefer brands from western or developed countries and are more loyal towards them. Another important component of brand commitment, purchase intention,

25

indicates the tendency of consumers to purchase specific brands in a routine manner compared to other brands (Yoo et al., 2000). India – Country of Extremes According to Winston Churchill, India was just a geographical expression and bound to fall apart. After six decades of successful existence, India is truly a unique country in the world who embraces the extraordinary mixture of ethnic groups. There is the dilution of mutually incomprehensible languages, the varieties of topography and climate, the diversity of religions, countless cultural practices and the range of economic developments (Tharoor, 1999). Benefits and Opportunities The consumer market relates to buyers who purchase goods and services for consumption rather than resale (Lai, 1995). Consumers vary in their tastes, preferences and buying habits which vary from country to country. Most consumer based brand researches has been done on developed countries like US, UK, France, however, nearly 80 percent of global consumers reside in emerging and newly industrialized countries like China, India and Brazil (Steenkamp & Burgess, 2002). A certain consumer market like India or China will include varied demographic and geographic traits affecting brand awareness and loyalty. There are various reasons for choosing India as the country of focus in this brand analyses study. India is currently facing the world’s most dynamic combination, of highly informed and demanding consumers in one hand, and of rapidly increasing consumption levels across various retail product categories specifically apparel and accessories merchandise (Euromonitor, 2013). Higher growth levels of consumer demand

26

and the consequent response of leading retail businesses have created a more complex and competitive marketplace – one which requires each firm or conglomerate to be more adaptive to customer needs and more aggressive at exploiting their unique capabilities to fulfill those needs (Silverstein, 2013). India has emerged as the most attractive market for retail investment and development (Global Luxury Brand Study, 2008; Kearney, 2006). Understanding an Indian consumer To understand the scale of the prospect of luxury and fashion in India, there is a need to consider the concept from two different perspectives (Bororian & Poix, 2010). The first perspective is from the consumer side – who until a decade ago was a passive spectator to the world of fashion brands (Bororian & Poix, 2010). They viewed India’s rich tradition and magnificent heritage of fine craftsmanship and creativity only from sidelines and consequently paid minimal attention towards the increasing number of Indian brands who had previously ruled within a closed gambit of affluent class. This type of consumer has however been fueled by change of demographics which has given access to this huge base to redefine their priorities in respect to fashion (Bharadwaj, Swaroop & Vittal, 2005). Indian consumer base is comprised historically affluent and post 90s affluent class which enables them to travel abroad and to hone the fashion sensitivity and satiate the need to procure global as well as local brands (Goswami, 2008). The other perspective is the global and Indian companies already present in the market or whose future presence is imminent (Bororian and Poix, 2010) that are seeking ever-green pastures where they desire to attract more and more Indian consumers. Considering the current number of Indian consumers and further possibility of creating new consumers puts the stakes high where a stage has been developing for two decades

27

to establish India as a leading consumer driven society. India’s ancient history, continued traditions mixing with Western-style living coupled with diverse demographics forms an ideal country for brands to grow across all the sectors (Bororian & Poix, 2010). Whereas luxury and fashion have been a prevalent part of Indian life for centuries but the concept of branding in these categories in regards to domestic knowledge and practice have been very limited. “The tradition and heritage of being Indian and buying Indian-made luxury and fashion items have, until very recently, not created a market filled by the formidable local Indian talent” (Bororian & Poix, 2010, p.6). This has provided eluding of Indian consumers towards the acceptability of domestic brands; they feel comfortable towards foreign brands though in some cases, Indian brands fare better in quality than their foreign counterparts (Gopal & Srinivasan, 2006). The factors which fuel the growth of foreign brands in India can also spell the demise of domestic brands, so there is a need to establish symbiotic and mutually beneficial relationship between the two counterparts whose sole objective will be to develop the Indian consumer mindset conforming to world-class standards. “What makes India different from any other emerging markets: its heritage and sense of tradition with intricate craft-work, an impressive platform in breadth and depth in both jewelry and textiles, and a captive audience already in place and willing to spend” (Bororian & Poix, 2010, p.6). Indians come very close to the Western ideas for products; their sense of luxury has more natural instinct than their counterparts in South Korea, China and Japan. India is quite a latecomer to the phenomenon of foreign brands in comparison to other countries in the same level of economic development. The current

28

Indian scenario is similar to what happened in Japan about five decades ago (Bororian & Poix, 2010). Although the Indian retail market has a huge number of organized as well as unorganized retail players, the recent changes in federal foreign direct investments policies have encouraged the entry of global brands such as Levi’s , Reebok, Puma, Mango, Marks & Spencer, United Colors of Benetton, Gucci, Louis Vuitton, French Connection, Zara and Jack & Jones. At the same time, Indian consumers are becoming more brand conscious and are spending more on branded products (Shashidhar, 2004). In fact, India is ranked among the top three most brand conscious countries in the world (Nielsen Global Luxury Brands study, 2008). The increase in the spending power of Indian consumers is evidenced by the 25 percent to percent growth of Indian retail industry, which is expected to be US $860 billion by 2018 (Technopak, 2008). The numbers of multimillionaire families have been growing at the rate of 14 percent yearly and currently there are approximately 1.6 million households that earn more than US$100,000 per year, and they spend US$9000 per year in procuring fashion and luxury items (Bororian & Poix, 2010). According to McKinsey and Company (2008), Indian households are classified into five economic groups based on real annual disposable income which is – a) Deprived – Unskilled or low-skilled population in seasonal or part-time employment, b) Aspirers – Small shopkeepers, small holding farmers, and low-skilled industrial or service workers, c) Seekers (lower middle class) – Young college graduates, traditional white-collar employees, mid-level government officials, and medium-scale traders, d) Strivers – Urban business traders, senior government officials, medium-scale industrialists in towns

29

and rich farmers, e) Globals (the cream of society) – Senior corporate executives, large business owners, politicians, big agricultural-land owners, celebrities and top-tier professionals. Among retail segments, branded apparel segment constitutes the second largest retail sales in India (Vaid, 2007). In addition, Indian consumers are becoming aware of products/services available from various countries due to their modern lifestyle that can be explained by internet access, satellite communication, and travel, as well as increased education (Global Emerging Market Survey, 2008). 29 percent of India’s population resides in cities, among the lowest urbanization rates of any nation in the world. This has been changing rapidly and over the next two decades, there is a huge expectation that the number of Indians living in cities will grow by 300 million, where they will don new styles and fashions to match new lifestyles (McKinsey, 2010). A large percentage of these new city dwellers will be in their twenties, and making first-time choices for whole categories of clothing items including denims, shirts, and even shoes. Younger Indian consumers are more attuned towards westernization and therefore are more likely to embrace the brands at a faster rate than their older generations, apparently an immense potential exists for both global and domestic brands to target this segment of consumers (Leone et.al, 2000). As the lifestyles of India’s booming urban consumers have evolved, their clothing needs have broadened invariably, reflecting more varied usage occasions. For men, clothing choices once came primarily in three basic categories: home-wear, work clothes, and special occasion wear. Now, with more and more socializing opportunities, men are buying more sophisticated combinations of outfits: party wear, sportswear, and clothes for hanging out at the mall. Some 20 years ago, for example, men

30

from India’s northern regions only required a good dark suit or Sherwani, the traditional long coat, to cover big occasions and important celebrations. But over the past several years, men have begun to supplement those staples with expensive Western style jackets, and collared shirts; some in “funky” patterns and cut for a night on the town, others in stripes or checks for casual meetings with important business associates. Nowadays, Indians are more inclined than consumers in other markets to buy apparel for a specific purpose. Indeed, 38 percent of Indian respondents to a 2010 McKinsey study said they were highly likely to buy apparel for special events; a significantly higher proportion than in Brazil (5 percent), Russia (3 percent) or China (6 percent). Family celebrations and weddings continue to consume an enormous share of Indian consumers’ clothing budgets (Vaid, 2007). There has been minimal research conducted on brand analyses or presence of only single brand research analyses in the apparel retail sector in respect of Indian consumers. More and more data should be collected randomly without controlled environment to track the actual growth parameters of the Indian apparel retail market to forecast possible entry strategies for other global brands that already have presence through e-commerce. Indian apparel retail market has grown considerably over the decades; it has shown resilience characterized by slow economic growth in recent months. The apparel retail market is worth $38 billion as of 2012 estimate referring to Figure 2.4 (Technopak, 2012). The penetration of various apparel brands in Tier II and Tier III cities and rural India are contributing to the growth of apparel retail market. Figure 2.5 reveals that the share of apparel retail is increasing day by day. More and more global brands are

31

expected to enter the Indian market in the near future as the system becomes free of redtapism and bureaucratic control (McKinsey, 2010).

Figure 2.4 Size of Indian apparel market (McKinsey Report, 2010)

Figure 2.5 Share of Indian apparel retail market (McKinsey Report, 2010) Global Brands in Indian Apparel Retail Market Since the inception of Indian economic reforms in late 80s, the apparel sector has been the principal benefactor for global brands (Saxena & Dutta, 2013). Though India has a rich heritage of textiles, Indian consumers have always looked to the western world for inspiration due to the impact of British colonial history and the ever-increasing diaspora. Global brands have rising acceptability among the increasing Indian affluent 32

and middle class due to the rising consumer base and the rapidly growing economy (Saxena & Dutta, 2013). These brands have positioned themselves in the premium-end of the market. On the contrary, Indian companies have been enthusiastically supporting the rise and acceptance of the global brands among the Indian consumers. Currently there are over 200 global brands in the Indian apparel retail market and the numbers are increasing rapidly (Saxena & Dutta, 2013).

Figure 2.6 International Fashion Brands in India (Saxena & Dutta, 2013)

Figure 2.7 Global Brands entry timeline in India

33

The luxury brands of Europe have had a long relationship with India’s erstwhile princely and noble families, but modern India’s consumer market received the global attention when she took steps towards economic liberalization in the late 80s. The pioneering global brands in this era were Coats Viyella, Benetton and VF Corporation but the Indian market was fragmented with some regional and few national brands (Sharma, 2011). Ready-to-wear apparel was a growing concept at that time in the land of countless tailors, so global brands like Louis Philippe, Arrow, Adidas, and Nike got instant acceptance for a huge consumer market that were eager for change in their wardrobes (Sharma, 2011). The rapidly growing electronic and print media sector also helped the global brands to gain consumer acceptance which helped establishing brand equity. Until the late-1990s, India was a less attractive destination for global brands than West Asia or East Asia (Saxena & Dutta, 2013). The growth of good quality real-estate and large format department stores enabled global brands to set up their businesses through franchisees or direct entry through single brand retail stores in the early 2000s referring to Figure 2.6 and Figure 2.7. The luxury retail market in India attracted brands like Prada, Cartier, Giorgio Armani, Kenzo to set up businesses through their Indian counterparts and the trend is ongoing. Spanish brand Zara got an overwhelming response in 2010 when it opened its first store in Delhi and is currently on an aggressive expansion mode. There is a fresh round of optimism regarding the Indian market as the pace of new brands entering the market has picked up, and those already present in the market are showing signs of adapting their strategies to grow their business including lowering prices and entering new segments.

34

As evidenced from Figure 2.8, which is derived from a study done by Third Eyesight (2013), European brands have domination over American brands (30%) in the levels of penetration in the Indian market. Renowned American brands like Gap, Abercrombie & Fitch are unknown in the Indian consumer market, brands like Tommy Hilfiger, Levi’s, and Lee etc. are well known in the Indian market (Saxena & Dutta, 2013). The confidence in the Indian consumer market has increased considerably after the 2012 retail reforms passed by the Indian parliament. Existing global brands are expecting the contribution from Indian businesses to grow multi-fold in the next decade. Recently it has been reported that Italian brand Benetton grossed more than 20 percent increase in revenues for 2013, on the other hand American icon Levi’s reported a significant fall of 35 percent after it discontinued brands like Dockers, Sykes etc. as well as closed down dozen standalone stores (Firstbiz, 2013). Rating agency Crisil has predicted that the apparel consumer market will witness a trend of positive growth over the decade. According to a study by Crisil, the branded apparel market in India is expected to witness a positive growth over the next few years. The growth is driven by rise of organized retail, rising disposable incomes, changing demographics and increase of knowledge and awareness about brands. However, it should always be kept in mind that Indian market is a unique one, different from the West but also there are fewer similarities with other Asian economies like China. Many of the global brands have had to create a very different positioning from their country of origin which involved corrected pricing and investing on new product development such as The Body Shop and Marks & Spencer (Saxena & Dutta, 2013). Brands like Puma have started to focus on varied consumer segment to

35

aggressively chase their India-specific objectives. The adoption of appropriate India specific business model is required for global brands and this study will act as a guide from a consumer point of view. Figure 2.7 chronicles the entry period of some global brands into the Indian market.

Share of Foreign brands in Indian market

25% 45%

Others American European

30%

Figure 2.8 Country of Origin (Saxena & Dutta, 2013) Regional Differences in the Choice of Brands In markets like India or United States, where it is characterized by a high degree of competition, various levels of product differentiation and sometimes level of information relayed to consumers vary regionally, differences of acceptance and knowledge of brands will differ significantly (Cuellar & Claps, 2013). Brand choice emanates from these factors and eventually defines the consumer segmentation of that certain brand category. It can also depend upon the interpretation of consumers regarding certain brand names through advertisements and their willingness to pay to procure such brands (Park et.al, 2010). Hoch et.al (1995) concluded about consumer demographic characteristics from store-level data to determine demand of brands for a certain region. India is a

36

geographically contiguous country with 29 states and 7 union territories. A cluster of these states form five regions of India namely – 1) North India, 2) North-East India, 3) East India, 3) West India & 4) South India. Each of these regions has diverse demographics with varying language and cultural groups. Consumer market varies across these regions as evidenced from a recent study on Indian consumers revealing that the affluence level causes changes in brand acceptance (Jin & Son, 2013). India has a mix of individualistic and collectivistic cultural tendencies, even there are variations among states, and these attitudes invariably affect or influence the growth of consumerism (Jin & Son, 2013). Levels of economic prosperity will define the choice of brands; price of branded products in that case would be the principal determinant (Cuellar & Claps, 2013). The identity of a region refers to those differentiating physical, cultural and historical features that make one region different from another (Paasi, 2002). Regional identity refers to the extent to which people identify themselves with the region’s practices, discourses and symbols (Paasi, 2002). This regional difference in Indian context has enabled to start the research which correlates with attitudes towards a global brand versus Indian brand. Brands included in the study Benetton Benetton Group S.p.A. is a global fashion brand, based in Ponzano Veneto, Italy. The name derives from the original Benetton family who founded the company in 1965. The company has a network of about 6,000 stores in the main international markets like United Kingdom, China, India, Italy etc. The stores generate a total turnover of 1.6 billion Euros (2013 estimate). The company's core business remains their famous

37

clothing lines - United Colors of Benetton, Undercolors of Benetton, Sisley, and Playlife. The products include womenswear, menswear, childrenswear and underwear and they have also expanded into perfumes, stationery, and eyewear and travel bags. Benetton is known for sponsorship of a number of sports, and for the provocative and original "United Colors" publicity campaign. Their advertisements have been eclectic and sometimes revolutionary. Benetton entered India in 1991 and since have expanded rapidly in metropolitan cities and other big and small towns. Benetton today is a leading brand in India with more than 106 stores across 45 cities in India. The retail network is a mix of owned and franchised stores. India is also used as a market for Benetton Group's global sourcing especially for kids' apparel (IBEF, 2008). Tommy Hilfiger Tommy Hilfiger is a US $6 billion apparel and retail company founded in 1985 by American fashion designer, Tommy Hilfiger. The product line consists of men’s, women’s and children’s apparel, sportswear, denim, and a range of licensed products such as accessories, watches, fragrances and home furnishings. The company’s headquarters are in Hong Kong, Amsterdam and New Jersey. Tommy Hilfiger has become a global brand with a good distribution network in over 90 countries and operating more than 1,000 retail stores throughout North America, Europe, Central and South America and Asia Pacific. Tommy Hilfiger’s Indian subsidiary opened in 2004 with Arvind Brands as their partners. The subsidiary currently operates more than 1000 stores in 98 cities and in on an expansion drive throughout the country. Tommy Hilfiger is the first designer wear brand to start operations in India which provides a unique position in the market.

38

Wills Lifestyle Wills Lifestyle is owned by an iconic Indian conglomerate called Indian Tobacco Company (ITC) started in 2000. The brand has been established as a chain of exclusive specialty stores providing the Indian consumer a delightful shopping experience through world-class ambience, customer facilitation and clearly differentiated product presentation. The product offerings are similar to Tommy Hilfiger and Benetton. Wills Lifestyle was named Superbrand 2012 by the Superbrands Council of India. Wills Lifestyle has also been declared one of 'Asia’s Most Promising Brands’ by the World Consulting & Research Corporation. Wills Lifestyle is the title partner of India’s most premier fashion runaway event- Wills Lifestyle India Fashion Week. Taking the celebration of the event to its stores, Wills Lifestyle has partnered with several leading Indian designers including Ritu Kumar, Rohit Bal, JJ Valaya, Ranna Gill and Rohit Gandhi. Previous studies on Country-Specific Apparel Brand Analyses There have been two studies done earlier on the brand analyses framework by incorporating Dillon et. al.’s (2001) model and addition of brand commitment component by Lee et. al.’s (2008). The first study by Lee et.al (2008) based on this model was constituted on the purpose to understand how consumers in three countries (Mexico, South Korea, and Japan) perceive a US global brand versus domestic brands and how they react to their marketing efforts. Increasing numbers of global brands has given rise to immense competition among the brands, at the same moment, various global markets are turning into complex and the consumers in several markets expect localized marketing and branding strategies. The findings of this particular study revealed

39

significant primary effects of country and brand type (global versus domestic) on the parameters of the proposed framework. Interactive effects were also noted among the three parameters of the framework. The study demonstrated that there are varied and unique brand analysis differences which exist among consumers in three different countries for both US global brand and domestic brands. The results provide significant insights into what global and domestic brands must stress upon to get success in capturing the attention and retaining the loyalty of consumers. The second study by Bhardwaj et.al (2010) investigates differences between U.S. global and local brands in the Indian market. It is postulated that global and local brand influence brand equity, which is composed of brand image, brand awareness, emotional value, perceived quality, brand loyalty, and purchase intention. Based on the results in the study, it is worth noting that in addition to targeting Indian consumers with high global brand awareness and favorable ATAP (Attitude towards American Products), U.S. brands can reach Indian consumers with unfavorable ATAP who also show low levels of purchase intention and brand loyalty toward foreign brands. The result of lower ratings on a local brand’s brand-specific association demonstrated that local brands need to boost consumer confidence by offering quality products equivalent to those of global brands but with lower prices because generally it has been noticed that Indian consumers tend to very price sensitive. This study did not take into considerat i o n s f a c t o r s t h a t m o d e r a t e t h e i n f l u e n c e o f b r a n d type and ATAP on the outcome variables. The study also laid the foundation for future research which could expand the present model by introducing other moderating factors such as culture and consumer demographics.

40

Hypothesis Development Objective I - To examine brand emotional value and perceived quality of American, European and local brands respectively. Brand-specific association has been linked to the feature and attribute that makes consumers more associated with a brand and makes it distinct from other brands (Dillon et. al., 2001). As proposed by Lee et al. (2008), perceived quality and emotional value are the two major dimensions of brand-specific association as they form critical factors in product perception. Emotional value in respect to global and domestic brands in Indian market can be defined as the amount of value that relates to consumers’ feeling for a certain brand (Sheth, Newman, & Gross, 1991; Barnes & Mattsson, 2008). When brands start satisfying people-based needs, they impart value which puts them at a strong footing, similar is the case with brand (Sweeney & Soutar, 2001). Consumers start to attach emotional value to that certain brand which has satisfied their needs fully or substantially. If we start to think that consumers are value driven then the brands must focus their goal to achieve the needed market place advantage (Woodruff, 1997; Meyers-Levy & Malviya, 1999). In respect to this research study, the Indian market can be utilized to create a market place advantage for the established brands as well as new entrants. Perceived quality can be simultaneously defined as consumers’ subjective evaluation of superiority of certain brands over others (Rigaux-Bricmont, 1982; Zeithaml, 1988). From a consumer point of view, the quality of brand is an important aspect in the influencing the perception towards that brand. The consumer scrutinizes a certain brand according to his/her perceptions of quality which may vary from the deliverance of high quality as portrayed by the firm (Aaker, 1990). He/she can

41

possess strong attitudes towards the quality of the brand on a positive or negative scale which later is transferred to the attributes of the brand. Global brands are also often related to the positive or negative impact of a country on other country where it is introduced (Papadoupoulos et al., 1993). Positive country opinions are known to lead to favorable opinions of associated features such as product quality which indicates that they eventually attach emotional value to the brand while making purchasing decisions (Peterson & Jolibert, 1995). •

Hypothesis 1a: Indian consumers will give higher ratings on emotional value and perceived quality to the European brand than the American brand and the local brand based on regional differences.

•

Hypothesis 1b: Indian consumers will give higher ratings on emotional value and perceived quality to the American brand than the European brand and the local brand based on regional differences.

•

Hypothesis 2a: Indian consumers with affinity towards global brands will give higher ratings on emotional value and perceived quality to the European brand, while they give lower ratings on emotional value and perceived quality value to the American brand and the local brand.

•

Hypothesis 2b: Indian consumers with affinity towards global brands will give higher ratings on emotional value and perceived quality to the American brand, while they give lower ratings on emotional value and perceived quality value to the European brand and the local brand.

42

Objective II – To examine brand awareness and brand image of American, European and local brands respectively. The influence of brand impression on consumer has never been broader; traditionally has been linked with the marketing department of any company keeping in mind about the profit share of the company’s revenue (Burrows, 2013). General brand impressions rely on the concept of word of mouth communication as it involves information vividness and influences clarity of perception towards a certain product (Herr, Kardes & Kim, 1991). Favorable brand attitude can be derived from this concept of brand impressions. The conceptual framework for creation of the term general brand impressions with two attributes - brand awareness and brand image was done in a previous study (Keller, 1993). Brand awareness in relation to global and domestic brand can be defined as recognition of brand name through visual representation (i.e., logo or ad jingle) (Hoyer & Brown, 1990; Rossiter & Percy, 1987). Brand awareness also derives from the premise that the qualities of a product or brand names a certain consumer gives consideration while making a purchase decision (Macdonald & Sharp, 2000). In this case, consumer is a passive recipient of information of product while purchase with minimal knowledge, the cues to which a consumer depends is principal attributes of a certain brand – packaging, color and brand image. Brand image can be identified with consumers’ perception about a certain brand, whether positive or negative (Dobni & Zinkhan, 1990; Hofstede, 2007). Product brand image influences consumers’ purchase decisions both directly and indirectly by reducing various risk perceptions (Aghekyan-Simonian et.al, 2012). With this constructs of brand

43

impressions, this study is comparing the level of consumer brand awareness and image ranging from American brand to European brand with Indian brand with prior consideration that an Indian consumer will have more favorable attitude towards global brands (Suh & Smith, 2011). •

Hypothesis 3a: Indian consumers will give higher ratings on brand awareness and brand image to the European brand than the American brand and the local brand based on regional differences.

•

Hypothesis 3b: Indian consumers will give higher ratings on brand awareness and brand image to the American brand than the European brand and the local brand based on regional differences.

•

Hypothesis 4a: Indian consumers with affinity towards global brands will give higher ratings on brand awareness and brand image to the European brand, while they give lower ratings on brand awareness and brand image value to the American brand and the local brand.

•

Hypothesis 4b: Indian consumers with affinity towards global brands will give higher ratings on brand awareness and brand image to the American brand, while they give lower ratings on brand awareness and brand image value to the European brand and the local brand.

Objective III - To examine brand loyalty and purchase intention of American, European and local brand respectively. The continuing desire to achieve a value-oriented and reciprocal relationship with a brand is defined as brand commitment (Traylor, 1981; Coulter et al., 2003). Brand commitment can be compared with consumer commitment comprising of two

44

components – affective and continuance (Fullerton, 2003; Harrison-Walker, 2001). With this theory of consumer commitment, brand commitment can be linked with two attributes – brand loyalty and purchase intentions (Moorman et al., 1992). Here, affective component is synonymous with purchase intentions and continuance component with brand loyalty. Brand loyalty has been defined as a continuous long-term connection to a brand which acts as an imperative strategy for brands to achieve a competitive advantage in a certain market (Sirdeshmukh et al., 2002). Brand loyalty is also referred to as complex mixture of attitudinal and behavioral elements; some even view that it is the strength of relationship between those elements (Dick & Basu, 1994; Oliver, 1999). Consumers do form relationships with certain brands and this also strengthens the consumer commitment to brands and helps the brands to have a dedicated consumer base. Purchase intention is defined as consumers’ inclination to obtain specific brands in comparison to other existing brands in a routine manner (Yoo et al., 2000). This is also a type of affective commitment which enables them to return to their brands more and more; the certain brand creates a motivation among the consumers to procure them. The purchase intention is influenced by reputation of a brand, brand image in comparison to other competing brands and role of price promotions (Grewal et. al, 1998). Sometimes purchase intention might influence consumers’ willingness to pay more for a certain brand than others. Purchase intention of consumers also depends upon the influence of global brand in a certain market (Kumar et.al, 2009) Eventually consumers become aware of various brands, possibly they travel abroad and adopt those brands, brand loyalty increases with the rise of purchase intentions.

45

•

Hypothesis 5a: Indian consumers will give higher ratings on brand loyalty and purchase intentions to the European brand than the American brand and the local brand based on regional differences.

•

Hypothesis 5b: Indian consumers will give higher ratings on brand loyalty and purchase intention to the American brand than the European brand and the local brand based on regional differences.

•

Hypothesis 6a: Indian consumers with affinity towards global brands will give higher ratings on brand loyalty and purchase intention to the European brand, while they give lower ratings on brand loyalty and purchase intention value to the American brand and the local brand.

•

Hypothesis 6b: Indian consumers with affinity towards global brands will give higher ratings on brand loyalty and purchase intention to the American brand, while they give lower ratings on brand loyalty and purchase intention value to the European brand and the local brand.

46

Chapter – Three This research is designed to determine how much influence the global brand has over the Indian consumers in comparison to domestic brand and the competitiveness of the American origin brand over the European origin brand and future implications for the growth of American origin brands in India. It is also designed to examine how general brand impression, brand specific association, brand commitment affect the consumers’ perception about a certain brand in comparison to other brands. A quantitative research design is utilized for this study. This chapter will briefly describe the research design and procedures which has been used, the methods utilized to sample the subjects and instruments employed to study the sample. Research Design Descriptive survey research is a type of empirical social research that is frequently employed to make descriptive assertions and assumptions about a certain population, such as the distribution of certain traits or attributes (Babbie, 1973). This study has utilized a self-administered survey questionnaire to sample size of 193 individuals. It is a cross-sectional research survey which means to collect data at one particular time from a selected sample to describe a large population at a certain point of time (Babbie, 1973). Conducting a cross-sectional research survey can be very beneficial in quite many ways since it is considered an efficient technique for identifying associations. This type of study enables the researcher to study large numbers of people in small amounts of time and with the little cost.

47

Research Method The study involves opinion-based research method with quantitative analysis. Opinion based research methods consists of designing a series of hypotheses and then analyzing the significance of those hypotheses and formulating various analyses based upon the research question. Questionnaires are an effective way of quantifying data from a sample group, and testing emotions or preferences. This method is very cheap and easy, where budget is a problem, and gives an element of scale to opinion and emotion. They are arbitrary, but at least give a directional method of measuring intensity. The survey was distributed through Facebook and Twitter to reach out the Indian respondents. Snowballing method of data collection was employed to ensure anonymity of respondents. Though the sample is small but it is evenly distributed in the country. The respondents who were contacted were kept on reminding to take part in the study. The initial respondents shared the survey on their Facebook wall and also posted into their twitter feed. The sample data was collected over a period of fifteen days. The study utilized a repeated measure (split-plot) design involving more than two independent groups (Keselman et.al, 1998). A split-plot analysis of variance (ANOVA) analyzed a design in which a repeated measure (i.e. within subjects) factor is crossed with a between-subjects (i.e. treatment variable) factor. Here between-subjects factor is regions of India. This design is to test the hypotheses based on whether the regions of India have any effect on the brand analyses components affecting the choice of brands; Indian consumers prefer American-origin or European-origin or Indian-origin brand. The second portion of this study is to analyze the effect of attitude of Indian consumer towards global brands and the components of brand analysis (i.e, brand-specific

48

associations, general brand impressions, and brand commitment) through multivariate tests. The affinity of Indian consumers towards global brands were divided into three factors – low (1), medium (2), and high (3). To test the significance of three brands with each other, paired sample T-tests were conducted. Brand Selection Three brand types (i.e. US global, European global and Indian local) were chosen for this study. The choice of the US global brand is Tommy Hilfiger, the European global brand is United Colors of Benetton, and the Indian domestic brand is Wills Lifestyle (Indian Tobacco Company affiliate). These brands have a strong presence through Single Brand Outlets (SBO) and Multi Brand Outlets in metropolitan and big and medium sized cities over the different states of India. Instrument and Measures The measures consisted of brand-specific associations (i.e. emotional value and perceived quality), general brand impressions (i.e. brand awareness and brand image), and brand commitment (i.e. brand loyalty and purchase intention). Scale items for emotional value were adapted from Sweeney and Soutar (2001); perceived quality, from Dodds et al. (1991); brand awareness and brand loyalty, from Yoo et al. (2000); brand loyalty and purchase intention, from Lee, Knight and Kim (2008). The scale item for consumer attitude towards global products versus Indian products was developed from Lee, Kumar and Kim (2010). Each item was rated on a seven-point scale anchored by “strongly disagree” (1) and “strongly agree” (7). The measures for this study, refer Table 3.1, were initially developed in the USA and India using American and Indian consumers. Check for the questionnaire in Appendix-A for more details.

49

Table 3.1 Measurements Constructs Brand Specific Associations

Emotional Value

Perceived Quality General brand impressions

Brand Awareness

Brand Image Brand Commitment

Brand Loyalty Purchase Intention

General Information

Consumer Information

Consumer Attitude

Items Be one that I enjoy Make me feel good Give me pleasure Make me want to use it Feel comfortable using it Be reliable Be durable Be high quality I can recognize this brand among competing brands I am aware of this brand I can quickly recall the symbol or logo of this brand Have good reputation Be prestigious brand I am loyal to this brand This brand is my first choice among competing brands I intend to buy this brand frequently I plan to buy this brand more often Gender Age Group Marital Status Employment Status Region Awareness of brands Frequency of shopping Choice of shopping outlets Spending per season I prefer Global products over Indian products Global products are of higher quality than Indian products Given a choice, I would love to buy global-made rather than Indian products

50

Source

Sweeney & Soutar (2001)

Dodds et.al (1991)

Yoo et.al (2000)

Lee, Knight & Kim (2008)

Goswami & Mishra (2009)

Lee, Kumar & Kim (2010)

Chapter – Four The purpose of this chapter was to present data results related to the following research objectives: 1) Indian consumers’ responses to brand analyses components differ among global brands and local brand in respect to difference in regions. 2) The impact of Indian consumers’ attitude towards global products on their responses to brand analyses components differs among the global brands and the local brand. The data was presented in five sectors, the chapter starts with the description of the sample. The second sector, reported the reliability of data scales based on Cornbach alpha. Cronbach alpha “determines the internal consistency” of survey instruments, which proved the survey tool, was reliable when results were stable over testing repetition (Santos, 1999, p. 1). The third sector examined the individual attributes (brand specific associations, general brand impressions, and brand commitment) tested in accordance with regions of India. The repeated measure results of the estimated means were used to assess interactions of brand specific associations, general brand impressions, and brand commitment toward acceptance of brands in different regions of India. The fourth sector examined the significant interactions between three brands in respect to each other in relation to brand specific associations, general brand impressions and brand commitment. In this sector the data were analyzed by using paired sample T-tests. Lastly, the fifth sector examined individual attributes (brand specific associations, general brand impressions, and brand commitment) tested in relation with Indian consumers’ attitude towards global brands over local brands.

51

The multivariate test results of the estimated mean were utilized to assess interactions of brand specific associations, general brand impressions and brand commitment over affinity towards global brands among the Indian consumers. Sector – 1 Results Description of Sample The sample is constituted from four metropolitan cities of India and other large cities. The attempt of this research was to cover all the regions of India – North, East, North East, West and South. The sample included professionals and students irrespective of their gender, the age group attempted to cover in this research is 18 – 35 and income status of middle class to upper middle class in these cities. The sample consisted of 256 respondents collected through the use of Facebook, Twitter and email. Of 193 usable surveys, 37.8 percent were from women. The age of the respondents ranged from 18 to 50 with a median age of 34. The study consists of mostly unmarried individuals (72 percent). Nearly 47 percent of the sample were employed with some kind of job with students (35.8 percent) forming the second largest group. According to Figure 4.1, majority of the respondents prefer to shop for clothing 34 times in a year followed by respondents shopping 5-6 times and more than 10 times. Figure 4.2 depicts the spending per season on clothing purchases by the study sample. Majority of the respondents spend between the range of Rs 1000 (i.e., $17) – Rs 7000 (i.e., $119.6) in a certain season. The units are in Indian Rupees (i.e. $1 = Rs. 58.52).

52

Figure 4.1 Frequency of shopping for study sample

Figure 4.2 Spend per season on clothing purchase for study sample Sector – 2 Results Reliability Analyses Table 4.1 depicts the reliability study of items of brand analyses. All the items have high reliability. Any number of 0.6 is considered to have some reliability factor with the questions asked in the survey.

53

Table 4.1 Reliabilities of the factors Cornbach ’s Alpha Constructs

Brand Specific Associations

General brand impressions

Brand Commitment

Items

Be one that I enjoy Make me feel good Give me pleasure Make me want to use it Feel comfortable using it Perceived Be reliable Quality Be durable Be high quality Brand I can recognize this Awareness brand among competing brands I am aware of this brand I can quickly recall the symbol or logo of this brand Brand Have good Image reputation Be prestigious brand

Tommy Hilfiger

Benetton

Wills Lifestyle

0.93

0.94

0.95

0.94

0.95

0.96

0.84

0.93

0.94

0.91

0.89

0.96

0.88

0.92

0.95

0.87

0.92

0.91

Emotional Value

Brand Loyalty

Purchase Intention

I am loyal to this brand This brand is my first choice among competing brands I intend to buy this brand frequently I plan to buy this brand more often

Sector 3 – Results •

Indian consumers’ responses to brand analyses components differ among global brands and local brands in respect to difference in regions.

54

Table 4.2 illustrates results of repeated measure analyses for the effect of region and brand on brand-specific associations, general brand impressions, and brand commitment. Table 4.4 displays the result of multi-group comparisons. Table 4.2 Results of repeat measure (split-plot) analysis Brand Analysis

Subject analysis Region (R)

Brand Specific Associations Emotional Value Perceived Quality General Brand Impressions Brand Awareness Brand Image Brand Commitment Brand Loyalty Purchase Intention

Brand Analysis (B)

RXB

12.227*** 7.060**

5.328** 6.184**

3.030* 1.459

14.545*** 5.432*

14.545*** 2.091

2.558 4.128**

22.314*** 18.314***

13.796*** 8.483***

2.775* 2.162

Notes: * p < 0.05; * * p < 0.01; * * * p < 0.001 Table 4.3 Estimated Marginal Means of Brands Items Brand Specific Associations Emotional Value Perceived Quality General Brand Impressions Brand Awareness Brand Image Brand Commitment Brand Loyalty Purchase Intention

Tommy Hilfiger

Benetton

Wills Lifestyle

NNE (4.9); WS (4.7); E (4.8) NNE (5.5); E (5.4); WS (5.1)

NNE (5.2); WS (5.1); E (4.8) E (5.6); WS (5.5); NNE (5.4)

E (4.9); WS (4.7); NNE (4.4) E (5.6); WS (5.4); NNE (4.8)

NNE (5.7), E (5.4); WS (5.4) NNE (5.5); E (5.4); WS (5.1)

NNE (5.7); E (5.4); WS (5.4) E (5.6); WS (5.5); N (5.4)

E (5.3); NNE (4.9); WS (4.9) E (5.6); WS (5.4); NNE (4.8)

WS (4.3); NNE (4.2); E (3.7) NNE (4.3); WS (4.3); E (3.9)

WS (4.9); NNE (4.7); E (4.5) WS (4.9); NNE (4.8); E (4.5)

E (4.7); WS (4.5); NNE (4.2) E (4.6); WS (4.5); NNE (4.2)

Notes: NNE – North & North East India; E – East India; and WS – West & South India 55

Table 4.4 Results of Multi-group comparisons Items Brand Specific Associations Emotional Value

Tommy Hilfiger

Benetton

Wills Lifestyle

NNE (4.9) > E (4.6)

Perceived Quality

Not Significant

NNE (5.1) > E (4.8); WS (5.1) > E (4.8) NNE (5.3) > WS (5.0)

E (4.8) > NNE (4.4) E (5.1) > NNE (4.5); E (5.1) > WS (4.7)

General Brand Impressions Brand Awareness

Not Significant

Not Significant

NNE (5.5) > E (5.4) > WS (5.1)

Not Significant

E (5.2) > NNE (4.9); E (5.2) > WS (4.9) E (5.6) > NNE (4.8)

NNE (4.2) > E (3.7); WS (4.3) > E (3.7) NNE (4.3) > E (3.9); WS (4.3) > E (3.9)

WS (4.9) > E (4.5)

Brand Image Brand Commitment Brand Loyalty Purchase Intention

WS (4.9) > NNE (4.8) > E (4.5)

E (4.7) > NNE (4.2) E (4.6) > WS (4.5) > NNE (4.2)

Notes: NNE – North & North East India; E – East India; and WS – West & South India The interaction plots are represented for the effect of region and brand on brandspecific associations (Figure 4.3 and Figure 4.4), general brand impressions (Figure 4.5 and Figure 4.6), and brand commitment (Figure 4.7 and Figure 4.8). Brand – Specific Associations The significant main and interactive effects of regional differences of India and brand type on brand-specific associations lead to the support of H1a with respect to both emotional value and perceived quality. In terms of emotional value, Tommy Hilfiger (m = 4.7) had a lower estimated mean than Benetton (m = 5.0) but both had slightly higher estimated mean than Wills Lifestyle (m = 4.6). The interactions between two region groups (NNE and E) were significant in the brands Tommy Hilfiger and Wills Lifestyle only in reference to Table 4.4. For Benetton, three region groups (NNE, E and WS) were 56

significant. According to Table 4.3, in Tommy Hilfiger, NNE (m = 4.9), was followed by WS (m = 4.7) and E (m = 4.6). Similarly, in Benetton, NNE (m = 5.2) was followed by WS (m = 5.1) and E (m = 4.8). For Wills Lifestyle, E (m = 4.9), was followed by WS (m = 4.7) and NNE (m = 4.4). Results about perceived quality revealed that, Tommy Hilfiger (m = 5.0) had a slightly lower estimated mean than Benetton (m = 5.1) but both had higher estimated mean than Wills Lifestyle (m = 4.7). The interactions between three region groups (NNE, E and WS) were significant in Tommy Hilfiger referring to Table 4.4. Similarly, the interactions between two region groups (E and NNE) were significant in Wills Lifestyle. There were no significant differences in region groups for Benetton. According to Table 4.3, in Tommy Hilfiger, NNE (m = 5.5) was followed by E (m = 5.4) and WS (m = 5.1). Similarly, in Benetton, E (m = 5.6) was followed by WS (m = 5.5) and NNE (m = 5.4). For Wills Lifestyle, E (m = 5.6), was followed by WS (m = 5.4) and NNE (m = 4.8).

Figure 4.3 Interaction plot of emotional value by region and brand type

57

Figure 4.4 Interaction plot of perceived quality by region and brand type General Brand Impressions The significant main and interactive effects of regional differences of India and brand type on brand-specific associations lead to the partial support of H3a with respect to brand image only. In terms of brand awareness, Tommy Hilfiger (m = 5.5) and Benetton (m = 5.5) had the estimated mean but both had higher estimated mean than Wills Lifestyle (m = 5.0). The interactions between three region groups (NNE, E and WS) were significant in Wills Lifestyle only and not for Tommy Hilfiger or Benetton with reference to Table 4.4. In Tommy Hilfiger, NNE (m = 5.7), was followed by both E (m = 5.4) and WS (m = 5.4) having the similar estimated mean as seen in Table 4.3. Similarly, in Benetton, NNE (m = 5.7), was followed by both E (m = 5.4) and WS (m = 5.4) having the similar estimated mean. For Wills Lifestyle, E (m = 5.3), was followed by NNE (m = 4.9) and WS (m = 4.9) having the similar estimated mean. Results about brand 58

image revealed that, Tommy Hilfiger (m = 5.3) had a lower estimated mean than Benetton (m = 5.5) but both had slightly higher estimated mean than Wills Lifestyle (m = 5.2). The interactions between three region groups (NNE, E and WS) were significant in Tommy Hilfiger in reference to Table 4.4. There are no significant interactions in region groups for Benetton whereas there are interactions between two region groups (E and NNE) were significant in Wills Lifestyle. In Tommy Hilfiger, NNE (m = 5.5), was followed by both E (m = 5.4) and WS (m = 5.1) as seen in Table 4.3. Similarly, in Benetton, E (m = 5.6), was followed by WS (m = 5.5) and E (m = 5.4). For Wills Lifestyle, E (m = 5.6), was followed by WS (m = 5.4) and NNE (m = 4.8).

Figure 4.5 Interaction plot of brand awareness by region and brand type

59

Figure 4.6 Interaction plot of brand image by region and brand type

Figure 4.7 Interaction plot of brand loyalty by region and brand type

60

Brand Commitment The significant main and interactive effects of regional differences of India and brand type on brand-specific associations lead to the full support of H5a with respect to brand loyalty and purchase intention. In terms of brand loyalty, Tommy Hilfiger (m = 4.0) had the lowest estimated mean than Benetton (m = 4.7) and Wills Lifestyle (m = 4.5). The interactions between three region groups (NNE, E and WS) were significant in Tommy Hilfiger only in reference to Table 4.4. Similarly, the interactions between two region groups (WS and E) and (E and NNE) were also significant in Benetton and Wills Lifestyle respectively. In Tommy Hilfiger, WS (m = 4.3), was followed closely by NNE (m = 4.2) and then E (m = 3.7) as seen in Table 4.3. In Benetton, WS (m = 4.9), was followed by NNE (m = 4.7) and E (m = 4.5). For Wills Lifestyle, E (m = 4.7), was followed by WS (m = 4.6) and NNE (m = 4.2).

Figure 4.8 Interaction plot of purchase intention by region and brand type

61

Results about brand purchase intention revealed that, Tommy Hilfiger (m = 4.1) had the lowest estimated mean than Benetton (m = 4.7) and Wills Lifestyle (m = 4.4). The interactions between three region groups (NNE, E and WS) were significant in Tommy Hilfiger, Benetton and Wills Lifestyle. In Tommy Hilfiger, WS (m = 4.3) and NNE (m = 4.3) had the similar estimated mean followed by E (m = 3.9). In Benetton, WS (m = 4.9), was followed by NNE (m = 4.8) and E (m = 4.5). For Wills Lifestyle, E (m = 4.6), was followed by WS (m = 4.5) and NNE (m = 4.2). Sector 4 – Results •

The impact of Indian consumers’ affinity towards global products on their responses to brand analyses components differs among the global brands and the Indian brands. Table 4.5 Results of multi-group comparisons of affinity for global brands

Items Brand Specific Associations Emotional Value

Tommy Hilfiger

Benetton

Wills Lifestyle

AH (5.2) > AM (4.8) >AL (4.1) AH (5.4) > AL (4.6)

AH (5.3) >AM (5.0) >AL (4.4) Not Significant

Not Significant

AH (5.6) > AL (5.0)

Not Significant

Not Significant

AM (5.4) > AL (4.8)

AM (5.6) > AL (5.0)

AL (5.1) > AH (4.9)

Brand Commitment Brand Loyalty

AH (4.7) > AL (3.4)

Purchase Intention

AH (4.9) > AM (4.2) >AL (3.4)

AH (5.3) > AL (4.2) AH (5.4) > AL (4.1)

AM (4.9) > AL (4.1) AM (4.7) > AL (3.9)

Perceived Quality General Brand Impressions Brand Awareness Brand Image

Not Significant

Notes: AH – high affinity for global brands; AM – medium affinity for global brands; and AL – minimal or low affinity for global brands. 62

Table 4.6 Estimated Marginal Means of Brands Items Brand Specific Associations Emotional Value Perceived Quality General Brand Impressions Brand Awareness Brand Image

Brand Commitment Brand Loyalty

Purchase Intention

Tommy Hilfiger

Benetton

Wills Lifestyle

AH (5.2); AM (4.8); AL (4.1) AH (5.4); AM (5.3); AL (4.6)

AH (5.3); AM (5.0); AL (4.4) AH (5.4); AM (5.3); AL (4.8)

AM (4.8); AH (4.4); AL (4.4) AM (5.0); AL (4.7); AH (4.5)

AH (5.6); AM (5.6); AL (5.0) AH (5.6); AM (5.4); AL (4.8)

AH (5.6); AM (5.6); AL (5.0) AH (5.8); AM (5.5); AL (5.0)

AM (5.4); AL (5.0); AH (4.4) AM (5.6); AL (5.1); AH (4.4)

AH (5.6); AM (5.4); AL (4.8)

AH (5.6); AM (5.4); AL (4.8)

AH (4.8); AM (4.2); AL (3.4)

AH (5.4); AM (4.7); AL (4.1)

AM (4.9); AH (4.2); AL (4.1) AM (4.7); AH (4.3); AL (4.0)

Notes: AH – high affinity for global brands; AM – medium affinity for global brands; and AL – minimal or low affinity for global brands. Brand – Specific Associations The significant main and interactive effects of affinity for global brands and brand type on brand-specific associations lead to the partial support of H2a with respect to emotional value. In terms of emotional value for the Tommy Hilfiger brand, AH (m = 5.2) group had a lower estimated mean than Benetton (m = 5.3) but higher estimated mean than Wills Lifestyle (m = 4.4). The interactions between three affinity groups (AH, AM and AL) was significant in the brands Tommy Hilfiger and Benetton only as seen in Table 4.5. In Tommy Hilfiger, high affinity group (m = 5.2), was followed by medium affinity group (m = 4.8) and minimal or low affinity group (m = 4.1) referring to Table 4.6. Similarly, in Benetton, high affinity group (m = 5.3), was followed by medium affinity 63

group (m = 5.0) and minimal or low affinity group (m = 4.4). For Wills Lifestyle, medium affinity group (m = 4.8), was followed by both high affinity group (m = 4.4) and minimal or low affinity group (m = 4.4). Results for perceived quality revealed that Tommy Hilfiger brand, AH (m = 5.4) group had similar estimated mean as Benetton (m = 5.4) but both had higher estimated mean than Wills Lifestyle (m = 4.5). The interactions between two affinity groups (AH and AL) was significant for Tommy Hilfiger only in reference to Table 4.5. In Tommy Hilfiger, high affinity group (m = 5.4), was followed by medium affinity group (m = 5.1) and minimal or low affinity group (m = 4.6) as seen in Table 4.6. Similarly, in Benetton, high affinity group (m = 5.4), was followed by medium affinity group (m = 5.3) and minimal or low affinity group (m = 4.8). For Wills Lifestyle, medium affinity group (m = 5.0), was followed by minimal or low affinity group (m = 4.7) and lastly high affinity group (m = 4.5). General Brand Impressions The significant main and interactive effects of affinity for global brands and brand type on general brand impressions lead to the partial support of H4a in respect to brand image only. In terms of brand awareness value for the Tommy Hilfiger brand, AH (m = 5.6) group had a similar estimated mean as Benetton (m = 5.6) but higher estimated mean than Wills Lifestyle (m = 5.0). The interactions between two affinity groups (AH and AL) was significant in Tommy Hilfiger only in reference to Table 4.5. In Tommy Hilfiger, high affinity group (m = 5.6), was equaled by medium affinity group (m = 5.6) but the value of minimal or low affinity group (m = 5.0) was lower than both groups as seen in Table 4.6. Similarly, in Benetton, high affinity group (m = 5.6), was also equaled by medium affinity group (m = 5.6) but the value of minimal or low affinity group (m =

64

5.0) was lower than both groups. For Wills Lifestyle, medium affinity group (m = 5.4), was followed by low affinity group (m = 5.0) and then high affinity group (m = 4.4). Results for brand image revealed that Tommy Hilfiger brand, AH (m = 5.6) group had lower estimated mean than Benetton (m = 5.8) but both had higher estimated mean than Wills Lifestyle (m = 4.4). The interactions between two affinity groups (AM and AL) was significant for Tommy Hilfiger and Benetton only as seen in Table 4.5. Furthermore, the interactions between two affinity groups (AL and AH) was significant in Wills Lifestyle. For, Tommy Hilfiger, high affinity group (m = 5.6), was followed by medium affinity group (m = 5.4) and minimal or low affinity group (m = 4.8) in reference to Table 4.6. Similarly, in Benetton, high affinity group (m = 5.8), was followed by medium affinity group (m = 5.5) and minimal or low affinity group (m = 5.0). For Wills Lifestyle, medium affinity group (m = 5.6), was followed by minimal or low affinity group (m = 5.1) and lastly high affinity group (m = 4.4). Brand Commitment The significant main and interactive effects of affinity for global brands and brand type on brand commitment lead to the full support of H6a in respect to both brand loyalty and purchase intention. In terms of brand loyalty value for the Tommy Hilfiger brand, AH (m = 4.7) group had a lower estimated mean as Benetton (m = 5.3) but both have higher estimated mean than Wills Lifestyle (m = 4.2). The interactions between two affinity groups (AH and AL) was significant in both Tommy Hilfiger and Benetton as seen in Table 4.5. Furthermore, the interactions between two affinity groups (AM and AL) was significant in Wills Lifestyle. In Tommy Hilfiger, high affinity group (m = 4.7), was followed by medium affinity group (m = 4.0) but the value of minimal or low affinity

65

group (m = 3.4) was lower than both groups in reference to Table 4.6. Similarly, in Benetton, high affinity group (m = 5.3), was also equaled by medium affinity group (m = 4.6) but the value of minimal or low affinity group (m = 4.2) was lower than both groups. For Wills Lifestyle, medium affinity group (m = 4.9), was followed by high affinity group (m = 4.2) and then low affinity group (m = 4.1). Results for purchase intention revealed that Tommy Hilfiger brand, AH (m = 4.8) group had lower estimated mean than Benetton (m = 5.4) but both had higher estimated mean than Wills Lifestyle (m = 4.3). The interactions between three affinity groups (AH, AM and AL) was significant for Tommy Hilfiger only as seen in Table 4.5. Furthermore, the interactions between two affinity groups (AM and AL) was significant in Wills Lifestyle. For, Tommy Hilfiger, high affinity group (m = 4.8), was followed by medium affinity group (m = 4.2) and minimal or low affinity group (m = 3.4) in reference to Table 4.6. Similarly, in Benetton, high affinity group (m = 5.4), was followed by medium affinity group (m = 4.7) and minimal or low affinity group (m = 4.1). For Wills Lifestyle, medium affinity group (m = 4.7), was followed by high affinity group (m = 4.3) and then low affinity group (m = 4.0). Sector – 5 Results Paired Sample Analyses between Brands Brand Specific Associations All findings should be referred to Table 4.7. The paired groups significant to each other in respect to emotional value were Tommy Hilfiger versus Benetton (p < 0.01) and Benetton versus Wills Lifestyle (p = 0.001). Similarly in respect to perceived quality, the paired groups significant to each other were Tommy Hilfiger versus Benetton (p < 0.01) and Benetton versus Wills Lifestyle (p = 0.001). In both the attributes of brand-specific

66

associations, the interaction between Tommy Hilfiger and Wills Lifestyle were not significant to report in the results. General Brand Impressions All findings should be referred to Table 4.8. The paired groups highly significant to each other in respect to brand awareness were Tommy Hilfiger versus Wills Lifestyle (p = 0.000) and Benetton versus Wills Lifestyle (p = 0.000). Similarly in respect to brand image, the paired groups were not significant to each other to report in the results. Brand Commitment All findings should be referred to Table 4.9. The paired groups significant to each other in respect to brand loyalty were Tommy Hilfiger versus Benetton (p = 0.000) and Tommy Hilfiger versus Wills Lifestyle (p < 0.01). There were no significant interactions between Benetton and Wills Lifestyle in case of brand loyalty and Tommy Hilfiger and Wills Lifestyle in respect to purchase intention. Similarly in respect to purchase intention, the paired groups significant to each other were Tommy Hilfiger versus Benetton (p = 0.000) and Benetton versus Wills Lifestyle (p < 0.05).

67

Table 4.7 Results of Paired Sample Analyses of Brands – Brand Specific Associations Constructs

Pair of brands

ME

Brand Specific Associations Emotional Value Tommy Hilfiger versus Benetton

Perceived Quality

t

Df

Sig.

-2.624

169

0.009

0.807

161

0.421

3.313

164

0.001

2.811

166

0.006

-0.573

171

0.567

3.549

166

0.001

4.77 5.01

Tommy Hilfiger versus Wills Lifestyle

4.76

Benetton versus Wills Lifestyle

5.06

4.66

4.68

Tommy Hilfiger versus Benetton

5.14 4.79

Tommy Hilfiger versus Wills Lifestyle

5.14

5.20

Benetton versus Wills Lifestyle

5.23

4.82

Note: ME = Estimated Marginal Mean, Sig. = Significance

68

Table 4.8 Results of Paired Sample Analyses of Brands – General Brand Impressions Constructs

Pair of brands

General Brand Impressions Brand Awareness Tommy Hilfiger versus Benetton Tommy Hilfiger versus Wills Lifestyle Benetton versus Wills Lifestyle Brand Image

Tommy Hilfiger versus Benetton Tommy Hilfiger versus Wills Lifestyle Benetton versus Wills Lifestyle

ME

t

Df

Sig.

-

-

5.46 5.46

5.54 3.901

161

0.000

3.901

166

0.000

-0.532

177

0.595

0.595

163

0.552

2.302

162

0.230

5.05 5.54

5.05

5.41 5.46

5.38

5.30 5.54

5.28

Note: ME = Estimated Marginal Mean, Sig. = Significance

69

Table 4.9 Results of Paired Sample Analyses of Brands – Brand Commitment Constructs Brand Commitment Brand Loyalty

Pair of brands Tommy Hilfiger versus Benetton Tommy Hilfiger versus Wills Lifestyle Benetton versus Wills Lifestyle

Purchase Intention

Tommy Hilfiger versus Benetton Tommy Hilfiger versus Wills Lifestyle Benetton versus Wills Lifestyle

ME

t

df

Sig.

4.17 -4.701

175

0.000

-2.977

163

0.003

1.968

165

0.051

-3.8

175

0.000

-1.711

164

0.089

2.446

167

0.015

4.69

4.10

4.53 4.79

4.53

4.25 4.67

4.21

4.46 4.78

4.43

Note: ME = Estimated Marginal Mean, Sig. = Significance

70

Summary The chapter started with the description of sample. The sample collected was not that much but it included people from various regions of India. Their shopping habits were chronicled through figures. Then the data was represented in respect to the factors which influenced the brand analyses – 1) regional differences and 2) affinity towards global brands. The data revealed mixed choices among Indian consumers regarding the three brands. Benetton enjoyed more favorable acceptance among the sample studied than the other two brands. Graphs indicated the level of difference of brand choices among the various regions of India. Tables justified the study as the statistical treatment involved studying the significance level of the factors over the three brands and their estimated mean values. Reliability analyses table included in the chapter supported the initial position that these factors have effect on the choice of acceptance of the three brands. Paired sample analyses were conducted to find out the level of significance and interactions among the three brands. Overall most of the hypotheses concerning the European brand were supported in the results.

71

Chapter – Five The foundation of this study was based upon on the influence of regional difference in India and Indian consumers’ affinity towards global brands over local brands on the parameters of general brand impression, brand-specific association and brand commitment (Yoo et.al, 2000; Lee et.al, 2008; Paasi, 2002). Previous research devoted to the consumers in Mexico, South Korea and Japan revealed that levels of economic development influenced the popularity of global brands in a certain consumer market (Lee et. al, 2008). This study is different from the other studies based on brand analyses. The research hypotheses based themselves on regional differences and also included consumers’ affinity for a global brand over a local brand or vice versa. The study included three different brands from different countries or regions – American, European and Indian, and analyzed them on research parameters based on the research framework. The study affirmed that Indian consumers are brand conscious and make judicious choices based on their affinity which reflect on the brand analyses components. Sector – 3 Discussion •

Indian consumers’ responses to brand analyses components differ among global brands and local brands in respect to difference in regions. There are five regions in India – North, North-East, East, West and South. For

better data analysis, these regions were clubbed into three categories to evenly distribute the number of respondents. The three categories are denoted by abbreviations – 1) NNE – North and North East, 2) E – East and, 3) WS – West and South. The brand analyses components comprised of brand specific associations (emotional value and perceived

72

quality), general brand impressions (brand awareness and brand image) and brand commitment (brand loyalty and purchase intention).

Figure 5.1 Regions of India According to Figure 5.1, there are 5 clusters of states which form the regions of India. The color code in the Figure 5.1 refers to Purple as North India, Gray as West India, Blue as South India, Dirty Green as East India and Pink as North-East India. The states which form North India are Jammu & Kashmir, Punjab, Himachal Pradesh, Uttarkhand, Uttar Pradesh, Haryana, NCT Delhi, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Bihar, Jharkhand and Rajasthan. The states which form West India are Gujarat, Maharashtra and Goa. Similarly, the states which form South India are Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Seemandhra, Pondicherry, Telangana and Kerala. East India comprises of West Bengal and Orissa. Finally North East India consists of Sikkim, Assam, Arunachal Pradesh, Mizoram, Nagaland, Manipur, Tripura and Meghalaya. 73

India as a united country is a 20th century invention when it got independence from United Kingdom in 1947. The former country was divided along religious lines. India is a federation of states with the central government based in New Delhi with constituent states having their own form of governments. India follows a Westminster style parliamentary system of government echoed in other British Commonwealth countries like Australia and United Kingdom. When the central government lessened its reins on industry and services, state governments began shaping the fortunes of their citizens through state-level policy reforms. This resulted in faster growth in every state over the last decade than any other decade in the post-independence era (Panagariya, Chakraborty & Rao, 2014). In fact, some of the poorest states, notably Bihar and Orissa, have been growing the fastest. The level of economic development varies along states and regions; this is reflected on the choice of brands among consumers. As states become more and more prosperous, the consumers have higher disposable income to spend on brands and luxury goods (Mehta, 2013). Emotional Value North and North East India showed more favorable acceptance for Tommy Hilfiger than West and South India and East India, similar trend of acceptance was observed in case of Benetton. Contrary to the trends exhibited in case of two global brands, East India showed more favorable acceptance to Wills Lifestyle (i.e., local brand) than West and South India and North and North-East India. This part of study revealed that North and North-East India and West and South India have more favorable acceptance to global brands than the local counterpart.

74

Perceived Quality North and North East India showed more favorable acceptance for Tommy Hilfiger than West and South India and East India. East India showed more favorable acceptance to Benetton than West and South India and North and North-East India. Similar trend like in Benetton was observed for Wills Lifestyle. It reveals that consumers in East India have favorable acceptance towards Benetton and Wills Lifestyle than Tommy Hilfiger. Brand Awareness North and North East India showed more favorable acceptance for Tommy Hilfiger than West and South India and East India who showed similar acceptance. This trend of acceptance was also observed in case of Benetton. Contrary to the trends exhibited in case of two global brands, East India showed more favorable acceptance to Wills Lifestyle (i.e., local brand) than West and South India and North and North-East India who showed similar acceptance. This part of study revealed that North and NorthEast India have more favorable acceptance to global brands than the local counterpart in respect to other two regions. Brand Image North and North East India showed more favorable acceptance for Tommy Hilfiger than East India and West and South India. East India showed more favorable acceptance to Benetton than West and South India and North and North-East India. Similar trend like in Benetton was observed for Wills Lifestyle. It reveals that consumers in East India have favorable acceptance towards Benetton and Wills Lifestyle than Tommy Hilfiger.

75

Brand Loyalty West and South India showed more favorable acceptance for Tommy Hilfiger than North and North East India and East India, similar trend of acceptance was observed in case of Benetton. Contrary to the trends exhibited in case of two global brands, East India showed more favorable acceptance to Wills Lifestyle (i.e., local brand) than West and South India and North and North-East India. This part of study revealed that West and South India and North and North-East India have more favorable acceptance to global brands than the local counterpart. Purchase Intention North and North East India and West and South India showed more favorable acceptance for Tommy Hilfiger than East India. In case of Benetton, West and South India showed more favorable acceptance to Benetton than North and North-East India and East India. Whereas, East India showed more favorable acceptance to Wills Lifestyle than West and South India and North and North-East India. Available literature talks about difference of consumer acceptance with regional difference (Paasi, 2002), North and North-East India and West and South India is more exposed to global culture than East India. West and South India has more urban population than the other two region groups (India Census Report, 2012). This affects and changes the brand acceptance in the regions (Steenkamp & Gielens, 2003). Overall, Benetton stands as a leader in all these regions of India than its American counterpart (i.e., Tommy Hilfiger) and local counterpart (i.e., Wills Lifestyle). Hypotheses have been supported for emotional value, perceived quality, brand image, brand loyalty and

76

purchase intention in favor of Benetton. For brand awareness, majority of respondents were aware of all the three brands, so the results were similar. Sector – 4 Discussion •

The impact of Indian consumers’ affinity towards global products on their responses to brand analyses components differs among the global brands and the Indian brands. The levels of affinity towards global products were divided into three categories.

This was done to evenly distribute the data collected through the survey. The categories are: 1) AH – high affinity for global brands; 2) AM – medium affinity for global brands; and 3) AL – minimal or low affinity for global brands. The brand analyses components comprised of brand specific associations (emotional value and perceived quality), general brand impressions (brand awareness and brand image) and brand commitment (brand loyalty and purchase intention). Emotional Value The significant presence of minimal or low affinity group for the three brands reveals that the affinity for global brands is not very strong as the literature suggested (Lee et.al, 2008; Bhardwaj et.al, 2010). In both global brands, the high affinity group was leading than the other two groups significantly. In case of the local brand, medium affinity group or consumers who are undecided about affinity towards the global brands leading than the other two affinity groups. Hypothesis was partially supported in favor of Benetton as a major choice of brand among the three brands.

77

Perceived Quality In both global brands, the high affinity group was ahead than other two groups significantly. In case of the local brand, medium affinity group or consumers who are undecided about affinity towards the global brands leading than minimal or low and high affinity groups. Hypothesis was not supported in favor of any of the three brands. Brand Awareness In both global brands, the high affinity group was equaled by medium affinity group than minimal or low affinity group. In case of the local brand, medium affinity group or consumers who are undecided about affinity towards the global brands leading than the other two affinity groups. Hypothesis was not supported in favor of any of the three brands. Brand Image The significant presence of minimal or low affinity group for the three brands reveals that the affinity for global brands is not very strong as the literature suggested (Lee et.al, 2008; Bhardwaj et.al, 2010). In both global brands, the high affinity group was ahead than other two groups significantly. In case of the local brand, medium affinity group or consumers who are undecided about affinity towards the global brands leading than the other two affinity groups. Hypothesis was partially supported in favor of Benetton as a major choice of brand among the three brands. Brand Loyalty The significant presence of minimal or low affinity group for the three brands reveals that the affinity for global brands is not very strong as the literature suggested (Lee et.al, 2008; Bhardwaj et.al, 2010). In case of Tommy Hilfiger, the high affinity

78

group was ahead than other two groups significantly. In respect to Benetton, both high and medium affinity group had similar marginal means than lower affinity group. In case of the local brand, medium affinity group or consumers who are undecided about affinity towards the global brands leading than the other two affinity groups. Hypothesis was supported in favor of Benetton as a major choice of brand among the three brands. Purchase Intention The significant presence of minimal or low affinity group for the three brands reveals that the affinity for global brands is not very strong as the literature suggested (Lee et.al, 2008; Bhardwaj et.al, 2010). In case of global brands, high affinity group was ahead than other two groups significantly. In respect to the local brand, medium affinity group or consumers who are undecided about affinity towards the global brands leading than the high affinity group and minimal or low affinity group. Hypothesis was supported in favor of Benetton as a major choice of brand among the three brands. Studies have revealed that attitude towards global brands is related to brand preference (Kotler & Armstrong, 2006; Grundey, 2006 & Rajput et.al, 2012). If it is favorable, that gets reflected on the choice of brands, in this study it is for Benetton (i.e., European brand). There has been mixed responses towards the three brands but the choice of brand has tilted to the European brand. There has also been relatively stronger support for both Tommy Hilfiger and Wills Lifestyle. Eventually, Benetton has a prime mover advantage than Tommy Hilfiger due to two reasons – 1) 96 percent of the Benetton clothes sold in India are sourced within the country, helping it with sharp pricing and quick response to local consumer tastes. 2) Benetton has been moving into tier-III and -IV towns (like Dimapur, Bhavnagar & Kota) to connect with the young

79

consumers there. The strength lay in combining a global fashion point of view with local sensibilities. (Kurian & Sharma, 2013). Wills Lifestyle as a local brand has the similar advantage like Benetton but has not been able to capitalize on it very successfully. Then the advantage may not be in the sourcing of apparel, but in the operations of the two global brands. Wills Lifestyle can adapt to Benetton’s or Tommy Hilfiger’s operating strategy and build on its market. Limitations The limitation of this study is the access to various types of demographics and covering all big cities and large towns. The participation of respondents in this study has been limited but variedly spread throughout the country. In future, studies based on this topic can focus more on the sample and increase it to get the real world picture about the perception of Indian consumers towards global and local brands. This is the first time three brands have been included in such study and then analyzed on two factors – 1) regional difference and 2) consumers’ affinity towards global brands over local brands. Replication of this study in comparison with other rapidly developing countries can be undertaken. This can result in a guideline to be followed when a global brand tries to enter a new market. Conclusion Hypotheses for this study were supported in favor of the European brand leading over American and local brand. The two parameters of this study concerned about Indian consumers’ affinity towards global brands and regional differences in India. As India becomes more and more economically strong, affinity for procurement of global as well as local brands will increase. The study sets precedence on the type of studies already

80

done on Indian consumer as it studied three brands. Based on the framework from previous research, the study analyzed the acceptance of global brands and local brands among Indian consumer. Interestingly, the study revealed that a certain portion of Indian consumers have a strong affinity towards procuring global brands but there’s a group which is still undecided. Another interesting part of this research was when the brand analyses components were studied with regional differences of India. The study clearly revealed that North and North-East India and West and South India have similar choices in brands or brands whereas East India was completely different. East Indians have less exposure to global brands than their other counterparts; the region is poor and still developing. West and South India showed more acceptances for global brands than the local brand. The region is the most developed among geographical regions of India. As urbanization and retail industry progresses more and more, Indian consumers will evolve too. So it can be assumed after this study and studying other literatures that Indian consumer choice are evolving and there will be more transformations (Rao, 2000; Srinivas, 2008; Gupta & Hodges, 2012). India is a rapidly developing economy based on strong private sector with brand conscious consumer. This attribute about Indian economy attracts global brands to set up stores in the country. The problems as evidenced from the study of literature reveal regional constraints and government regulations hampering the rapid growth of retail in India. The study can be set as a stepping stone for other scholars to study in depth about the brands in India; both global and local as well as the Indian consumer choices. Finally, Indian consumer market is ever changing which opens up new possibilities and the

81

brands need to tap into this burgeoning space (Sinha & Banerjee, 2004; Kaur & Singh, 2007).

82

APPENDIX – A Questionnaire SECTION: 1 GENERAL INFORMATION The following questions will be used for description purpose only. 1. What is your gender? o Male o Female 2. Which age group do you belong to? o 18 – 29 o 30 – 39 o 40 – 49 o 50 and over 3. Kindly indicate your marital status. o Married o Unmarried o Separated/Divorced o Refuse to Answer 4. Kindly indicate your employment status. o Employed o Looking for work o Student o Retired o Homemaker o Business o Refuse to answer. SECTION: 2 CONSUMER INFORMATION The following questions are regarding your information as a consumer of branded apparel products. Please provide your best answer for each. 1. Which region in India do you identify yourself with? o North India o North-East India o East India o West India o South India 2. Which brand/brands are you aware in this particular study? o Tommy Hilfiger o United Colors of Benetton o Wills Lifestyle o Tommy Hilfiger & United Colors of Benetton o United Colors of Benetton & Wills Lifestyle 83

3.

4.

5.

6.

o Tommy Hilfiger & Wills Lifestyle o All the three brands What’s your frequency of shopping in a certain year? o 1 – 2 times o 3 – 4 times o 5 – 6 times o 7 – 8 times o 9 – 10 times o more than 10 times Where do you shop for apparel products? o Branded outlets (Tommy Hilfiger, United Colors of Benetton, & Wills Lifestyle) o Departmental stores (Ex. – Shoppers Stop, Pantaloons, and Spencers etc.) o General merchandise store (store in a market) o Super-market o Online store (Ex. – Flipkart, Jabong, Myntra etc.) How much would you usually spend per season (6 months) on clothing purchases? o Rs. 1000 – Rs. 3000 o Rs. 3001 – Rs. 5000 o Rs. 5001 – Rs. 7000 o Rs. 7001 – Rs. 9000 o Rs. 9001 – Rs. 11000 o Over Rs. 11000 When shopping for clothes, do you? o always return to the same shops o decide to go in due to the window display/advertisements o Try new shops o Search beforehand for information and then visit the right store for me o Go to shops where there are special offers o Other

SECTION: 3 CONSUMER ATTITUDE The following questions are regarding the attitude of Indian consumers towards Global products. 1 = Strongly disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Disagree somewhat, 4 = Undecided, 5 = Agree somewhat, 6 = Agree, 7 = Strongly agree 1 2 3 4 5 6 I prefer Global products over 1. Indian products. 2.

Global products are of higher quality than Indian products.

84

7

3.

Given a choice, I would love to buy global-made rather than Indian products.

Kindly answer the questions which follow after every brand logo. The following section is regarding attitude of Indian consumers toward Global brand. It is the brand analysis of Tommy Hilfiger based on components of brand specific associations, general brand impressions, and brand commitment.

1 = Strongly disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Disagree somewhat, 4 = Undecided, 5 = Agree somewhat, 6 = Agree, 7 = Strongly agree 1 1.

This is the one I enjoy

2.

Make me feel good

3.

Give me pleasure 85

2

3

4

5

6

7

4.

Make me want to use it

5.

Feel comfortable using it

6.

Be reliable

7.

Be durable

8.

Be high quality

9.

I can recognize this brand among competing brands

10.

I am aware of this brand

11.

I can quickly recall the symbol or logo of this brand

12.

Have good reputation

13.

Be prestigious brand

14.

I am loyal to this brand

15.

This brand is my first choice among competing brands

16.

I intend to buy this brand frequently

17.

I plan to buy this brand more often

86

The following section is regarding attitude of Indian consumers toward Global brand. It is the brand analysis of United Colors of Benetton based on components of brand specific associations, general brand impressions, and brand commitment.

1 = Strongly disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Disagree somewhat, 4 = Undecided, 5 = Agree somewhat, 6 = Agree, 7 = Strongly agree 1 18.

This is the one I enjoy

19.

Make me feel good

20.

Give me pleasure

21.

Make me want to use it

22.

Feel comfortable using it

23.

Be reliable

24.

Be durable

25.

Be high quality

26.

I can recognize this brand among competing brands

27.

I am aware of this brand

28.

I can quickly recall the symbol or logo of this brand

29.

Have good reputation

30.

Be prestigious brand 87

2

3

4

5

6

7

31.

I am loyal to this brand

32.

This brand is my first choice among competing brands

33.

I intend to buy this brand frequently

34.

I plan to buy this brand more often

The following section is regarding attitude of Indian consumers toward Indian brand. It is the brand analysis of Wills Lifestyle based on components of brand specific associations, general brand impressions, and brand commitment.

1 = Strongly disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Disagree somewhat, 4 = Undecided, 5 = Agree somewhat, 6 = Agree, 7 = Strongly agree 1 35.

This is the one I enjoy

36.

Make me feel good

37.

Give me pleasure

38.

Make me want to use it

39.

Feel comfortable using it

88

2

3

4

5

6

7

40.

Be reliable

41.

Be durable

42.

Be high quality

43.

I can recognize this brand among competing brands

44.

I am aware of this brand

45.

I can quickly recall the symbol or logo of this brand

46.

Have good reputation

47.

Be prestigious brand

48.

I am loyal to this brand

49.

This brand is my first choice among competing brands

50.

I intend to buy this brand frequently

51.

I plan to buy this brand more often

89

APPENDIX - B IRB Approval

90

References

Aaker, D. A., & Jacobson, R. (1994). The financial information content of perceived quality. Journal of marketing research, 191-201. Afonso, S. (2012). Tommy Hilfiger’s Partner Seeks Brand Ventures: Corporate India. Bloomberg News. Retrieved November 10, 2013, from http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-09-30/tommy-hilfiger-s-partner-seeks-brandventures-corporate-india.html Aghekyan-Simonian, M., Forsythe, S., Suk Kwon, W., & Chattaraman, V. (2012). The role of product brand image and online store image on perceived risks and online purchase intentions for apparel. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 19(3), 325331. American Marketing Association Dictionary (1960). Retrieved November 18, 2012, from http://www.marketingpower.com/_layouts/dictionary.aspx?dletter=b A. T. Kearney. (2006). Emerging market priorities for global brands. Retrieved November 24, 2012, from http:// www.atkearney.com/shared res/pdf/GRDI 2006.pdf Babbie, E. R. (1973). Survey research methods. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Baker, W. J., Wesley, H., Moore, D., & Nedungadi, P. (1986). Brand familiarity and advertising: Effects on the evoked set and brand preference. Advances in Consumer Researches. Bandyopadhyay, S. (2001).Competiveness of foreign products as perceived by consumers in the emerging Indian market. Competitiveness Review, 11, 54–64. Barnes, S., & Mattsson, J. (2008). Brand value in virtual worlds: an axiological approach. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research (Online Edition), 9(3), 195-206. Bastos, W., & Levy, S. J. (2012). A history of the concept of branding: practice and theory. Journal of Historical Research in Marketing, 4(3), 347-368. Batra, R., Ramaswamy, V., Alden, D. L., Steenkamp, J. B.,E. M.,&Ramachander, S. (2000). Effects of brand local and non-local origin on consumer attitudes in developing countries. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 9, 83–95. Bennett, A. M., & Hill, R. P. (2012). The universality of warmth and competence: A response to brands as intentional agents. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 22(2), 199204.

91

Berner, R. K., Khermouch, G., & Pascual, A. (2001). Retail reckoning. Business Week Online. Retrieved October 23, 2012, from www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/01 50/b3761089.htm Bhardwaj, V., Kumar, A., & Kim, Y. K. (2010). Brand analyses of US global and local brands in India: the case of Levi's. Journal of Global Marketing, 23(1), 80-94. Bharadwaj, V. T., Swaroop, G. M., & Vittal, I. (2005). Winning the Indian Customer. McKinsey Quarterly. Bisaria, G. (2012). Foreign direct investment in retail in India. International Journal of Engineering and Management Research, 2(1), 31-36. Bororian, M., & Poix, A.D. (2010). India by Design: The Pursuit of Luxury & Fashion. John Wiley & Sons (Asia) Pte. Ltd. Brakus, J.J., Schmitt, B.H. & Zarantonello, L. (2009). Brand Experience:What Is It? How Is It Measured? Does It Affect Loyalty?. Journal of Marketing, 73. (5) 52-68. Burrows, K. (2013). No Country for Old Men. Summer Academe: A Journal of Higher Education, 7. Census 2011 Report (2011). Census Bureau of India. Retrieved April 25, 2013, from http://www.censusindia.gov.in/2011-provresults/data_files/india/Final_PPT_2011_chapter3.pdf Chari, A., & Madhav Raghavan, T. C. A. (2012). Foreign direct investment in India’s retail bazaar: opportunities and challenges. The World Economy, 35(1), 79-90. CII-Mckinsey Report (2010). Retail Scenario in India. Retrieved November 13, 2012, from http://www.scribd.com/doc/7121490/Retail-Scenario-in-India-Cii-Report Cleveland, M., Laroche, M., & Papadopoulos, N. (2009). Cosmopolitanism, consumer ethnocentrism, and materialism: an eight-country study of antecedents and outcomes. Journal of International Marketing, 17(1), 116-146. Coulter, R. A., Price, L. L., & Feick, L. (2003). Rethinking the origins of involvement and brand commitment: insights from postsocialist Central Europe.Journal of Consumer Research, 30(2), 151-169. Cuellar, S. S., & Claps, M. (2013). Differential effects of brand, ratings and region on willingness to pay: a hedonic price approach. Journal of Wine Research, 24(2), 138-155. Dacin, P.A., & Mitchell, A.A. (1986). The Measurement of Declarative Knowledge. Advances in Consumer Research, 13, 454-459. 92

Dick, A. S., & Basu, K. (1994). Customer loyalty: toward an integrated conceptual framework. Journal of the academy of marketing science, 22(2), 99-113. Dillon, W., Madden, T., Kirmani, A., & Mukherjee, S. (2001).Understanding what’s in a brand rating:A model for assessing brand and attribute effects and their relationship to brand equity. Journal of Marketing Research, 38, 415–429. Dholakia, N. & Sinha, P.K. (2004). Observations on Observation in India’s Dynamic Urban Markets. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 6(1), Art. 13. Dobni, D., & Zinkhan, G. M. (1990). In search of brand image: a foundation analysis. Advances in consumer research, 17(1), 110-119. 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. Du Gay, P. & Pryke, M. (2002). Cultural Economy: Cultural Analysis and Commercial Life. Sage Publications Ltd. Duncan, T. R., & Moriarty, S. E. (1997). Driving brand value: Using integrated marketing to manage profitable stakeholder relationships. New York: McGraw-Hill. Eizenberg, A., & Salvo, A. (2012). Demand in the Wake of an Emerging Middle Class and Low-End Entry. Available at SSRN 1984594. Engel, J.F., Blackwell, R.D. & Miniard, P.W. (1995). Consumer Behavior. SouthWestern College Publications. Euromonitor (2013). The Evolution of Consumer Spending in India. Firstbiz (2013). Forget Zara, Benetton is India’s top international fashion brand. Retrieved June 12, 2013, from http://firstbiz.firstpost.com/corporate/forget-zara-benettonis-indias-top-international-fashion-brand-47321.html Fornell, C., Johnson, M. D., Anderson, E. W., Cha, J., & Bryant, B. E. (1996). The American customer satisfaction index: nature, purpose, and findings. The Journal of Marketing, 7-18. Fullerton, R. A. (2013). The birth of consumer behavior: motivation research in the 1940s and 1950s. Journal of Historical Research in Marketing, 5(2), 212-222. IBEF (2012). Annual report on Retail Industry. Retrieved October 26, 2013, from http://www.ibef.org/download/Retail-261112.pdf Gaedeke, R. (1973). Consumer attitudes toward products “made in” developing countries. Journal of Retailing, 49, 13–24. 93

Ger, G., & Belk, R. W (1996). I’d like to buy the world a Coke: Consumption scapes of the less affluent world. Journal of Consumer Policy, 19, 271–304. Giddens, A. (1990). The Consequences of Modernity. Stanford University Press. The Constant Customer. (2001). Gallup. Retrieved October 26, 2012, from http://businessjournal.gallup.com/content/745/constant-customer.aspx Global Luxury Brand Study. (2008). Nielsen. Retrieved November 13, 2012, from http://in.nielsen.com/news/20080326.shtml. Global Emerging Market Survey. (2008). The Economic Times Retrieved October 26, 2012, from http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/News/India preferred emerging market for brandsCBRE/rssarticleshow/2945602.cms. Gopal, A., & Srinivasan, R. (2006). The new Indian consumer. Harvard Business Review, 84(10), 22-23. Goswami, P. (2008). Is the urban Indian consumer ready for clothing with eco‐labels?. International journal of consumer studies, 32(5), 438-446. Goswami, P., & Mishra, M. S. (2009). Would Indian consumers move from kirana stores to organized brands when shopping for groceries?. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 21(1), 127-143. Grewal, D., Krishnan, R., Baker, J., & Borin, N. (1998). The effect of store name, brand name and price discounts on consumers' evaluations and purchase intentions. Journal of retailing, 74(3), 331-352. Grönroos, C. (2004). The relationship marketing process: communication, interaction, dialogue, value. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 19(2), 99-113. Grundey. (2006). Delineating Values, Emotions and Motives in Consumer Behaviour: An Interdisciplinary Approach. Transformations in Business & Economics, 5(2), 21-46. Gupta, M., & Hodges, N. (2012). Corporate social responsibility in the apparel industry: An exploration of Indian consumers’ perceptions and expectations.Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 16(2), 216-233. Halepete, J., & Iyer, K. S. (2008). Multidimensional investigation of apparel retailing in India. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management,36(9), 676-688. Hampf, A., & Lindberg-Repo, K. (2011). Branding: The Past, Present, and Future: A Study of the Evolution and Future of Branding.

94

Han, M. C., & Qualls, W. J. (1985). Country-of-origin effects and their impact upon consumers’ perception of quality. Historical Perspectives in Consumer Research: National and International Perspectives. Harrison-Walker, L. J. (2001). The measurement of word-of-mouth communication and an investigation of service quality and customer commitment as potential antecedents. Journal of service research, 4(1), 60-75. Heding, T., Knudtzen, C.F., & Bjerre, M (2008). Brand management : research, theory and practice. Routledge. Henderson, T., & Arora, N. (2010). Promoting brands across categories with a social cause: Implementing effective embedded premium programs. Journal of Marketing, 74(6), 41-60. Herr, P. M., Kardes, F. R., & Kim, J. (1991). Effects of word-of-mouth and productattribute information on persuasion: An accessibility-diagnosticity perspective. Journal of Consumer Research, 454-462. Hislop, M. (2001), Dynamic Logics Branding 101: An Overview of Branding and Brand Measurement for Online Marketers, Dynamic Logic. Hoch, S. J., Kim, B. D., Montgomery, A. L., & Rossi, P. E. (1995). Determinants of store-level price elasticity. Journal of Marketing Research, 17-29. Hofstede, G. (2007). Asian management in the 21st century. Asia pacific journal of management, 24(4), 411-420. Hollis, N. S. (1995). Like it or not, liking is not enough. Journal of Advertising Research. Hoyer, W. D., & Brown, S. P. (1990). Effects of brand awareness on choice for a common, repeated-purchase product. Journal of Consumer Research, 17, 141–148. Jin, B., & Son, J. (2013). Indian consumers: are they the same across regions?. International Journal of Emerging Markets, 8(1), 7-23. Kapferer, J. N. (2012). The new strategic brand management: Advanced insights and strategic thinking. Kogan Page. Kaur, P., & Singh, R. (2007). Uncovering retail shopping motives of Indian youth. Young Consumers: Insight and Ideas for Responsible Marketers, 8(2), 128-138. Keller, K. L. (1993). Conceptualizing, measuring, and managing customer-based brand equity. The Journal of Marketing, 1-22.

95

Kellogg Insight (2012). Buying Behaviors of Emerging Middle Class. Retrieved September 26, 2013, from http://insight.kellogg.northwestern.edu/article/buying_behaviors_of_emerging_middle_cl asses/ Keselman, H. J., Algina, J., Kowalchuk, R. K., & Wolfinger, R. D. (1998). A comparison of two approaches for selecting covariance structures in the analysis of repeated measurements. Communications in Statistics-Simulation and computation, 27(3), 591604. Knowledge@Wharton (2013). Emerging Market Multinationals: New Giants on the Block. Retrieved November 6, 2013, from https://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/emerging-market-multinationals-newgiants-on-the-block/ Kotler, P., & Armstrong, G. (2006). Principles of Marketing: 11E. Prentice Hall Video Gallery. Lai, A. W. (1995). Consumer values, product benefits and customer value: a consumption behavior approach. Advances in consumer research, 22, 381-381. 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. Kurian, B., & Sharma, S, (2013). Benetton goes past 1k cr in sales. The Times of India. Kuruvilla, S. J., & Joshi, N. (2010). Influence of demographics, psychographics, shopping orientation, mall shopping attitude and purchase patterns on mall patronage in India. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 17(4), 259-269. Larsson, T. (2001). The Race to the Top: The Real Story of Globalization.The Cato Institute. Leone, R. P., Rao, V. R., Keller, K. L., Luo, A. M., McAlister, L., & Srivastava, R. (2006). Linking brand equity to customer equity. Journal of Service Research, 9(2), 125138. Lee, M.Y.,Knight,D.,& Kim,Y.K. (2008). Brand analysis of a U.S. global brand in comparison with domestic brands. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 17, 163– 174. Lee, H. J., Kumar, A., & Kim, Y. K. (2010). Indian consumers' brand equity toward a US and local apparel brand. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 14(3), 469-485. Lury, C. (1993). Cultural Rights: Technology, Legality, and Personality. Routledge Chapman & Hall. 96

Macdonald, E. K., & Sharp, B. M. (2000). Brand Awareness Effects on Consumer Decision Making for a Common, Repeat Purchase Product: A Replication. Journal of Business Research, 48(1), 5-15. Malviya, S. (2012). Levi’s struggles to be a regular fit for GeNext. The Economic Times. Retrieved April 26, 2013, from http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2012-1225/news/35999391_1_global-brands-denim-market-arvind-lifestyle-brands Mckinsey Global Institute (2010). India’s urban awakening: Building inclusive cities, sustaining economic growth. Retrieved November 26, 2012, from http://www.urbanindia.nic.in/programme/uwss/MGI_india_urbanization_fullreport.pdf Mehta, R. (2013). Trends and Patterns of House Hold Saving In India (Pre and Post Economic Reforms). Meyers-Levy, J., & Malaviya, P. (1999). Consumers' processing of persuasive advertisements: An integrative framework of persuasion theories. The Journal of Marketing, 45-60. Mishra, A. A. (2010). Consumer decision-making styles and young-adult consumers: An Indian exploration. Management & Marketing-Craiova, (2), 229-246. Moor, L. (2007). The Rise of Brands. Berg Publishers. Moorman, C., Zaltman, G., & Deshpande, R. (1992). Relationship between providers and users of market research: The dynamics of trust within and between organizations. Journal of Marketing Research, 29, 314–328. Morrell, L. (2013). A safe passage to India. Retail Week. Retrieved April 26, 2013, from http://www.retail-week.com/in-business/a-safe-passage-to-india/5034225.article Murphy, J. (1990), Brand Strategy, A Director Book. Prentice Hall. Nielsen Global Luxury Brand. (2008). Indians among top three brand conscious: Nielsen. Retrieved November 27, 2012, from http://in.rediff.com/money/2008/mar/27brand.htm O’Cass, A., & Frost, H. (2002). Status brands: Examining the effects of non-productsrelated brand associations on status and conspicuous consumption. The Journal of Product and Brand Management, 11, 67–88. Ohmae, K. (1990). The Borderless World : Power and Strategy in the Interlinked Economy. Harper Business.

97

Okonkwo, U. (2007). Luxury Fashion Branding: Trends, Tactics, Techniques. Palgrave Macmillan.

Oliver, R. L. (1999). Whence consumer loyalty?. the Journal of Marketing, 33-44. Paasi, A. (2002). Bounded spaces in the mobile world: deconstructing ‘regional identity’. Tijdschrift voor economische en sociale geografie, 93(2), 137-148. Panagariya, A., Chakraborty, P., & Rao, M. G. (2014). State Level Reforms, Growth, and Development in Indian States. Oxford University Press. Park, C. W., MacInnis, D. J., Priester, J. R., Eisingerich, A. B., & Iacobucci, D. (2010). Brand attachment and brand attitude strength: conceptual and empirical differentiation of two critical brand equity drivers. Journal of Marketing, Forthcoming, 16-10. Peterson, R. A., & Jolibert, A. J. (1995). A meta-analysis of country-of-origin effects. Journal of International Business Studies, 883-900. Prasad, C. J., & Aryasri, A. R. (2011). Effect of shopper attributes on retail format choice behaviour for food and grocery retailing in India. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 39(1), 68-86. Rajput, N., Kesharwani, S., & Khanna, A. (2012). Consumers’ Attitude towards Branded Apparels: Gender Perspective. International Journal of Marketing Studies, 4(2), p111. Rao, C. P. (1998). Globalization, privatization and free market economy. Rigaux-Bricmont, B. (1982). Influences of brand name and packaging on perceived quality. Advances in consumer research, 9(1), 472-477. Rossiter, J.R., & Percy, L. (1987). Advertising and promotion management. McGraw Hill. Santos, J. R. A. (1999). Cronbach’s alpha: A tool for assessing the reliability of scales. Journal of extension, 37(2), 1-5. Saxena, T.G., & Dutta, D. (2013). Entry Strategy of Global Brands – Impact of FDI. Third Eyesight. Retrieved from April 26, 2013, from http://thirdeyesight.in/blog/2013/01/21/entry-strategy-of-global-brands-impact-of-fdi/ Silverstein, B. (2013). Will India’s closet consumer come out and save the slowing luxury market? Brand Channel. Retrieved from November 16, 2013, from http://www.brandchannel.com/home/post/India-Luxury-Consumers-111313.aspx Sinha, P. K., & Banerjee, A. (2004). Store choice behaviour in an evolving market. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 32(10), 482-494. 98

Sharma, K. (2011). Impact of recession on buying behavior of Indian Consumers. International Review of Business Research Papers, 7(1), 381-392. Shashidhar, A. (2004). Taking its fashion forward. Retrieved November 15, 2012, from http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/catalyst/2004/01/29/stories/200401290010030.htm . Sheth, J.N., Newman, B.I., & Gross, B.L. (1991). Why we buy what we buy: A theory of consumption values. Journal of Business Research, 22 (2), 159-170. Sikri, S., & Wadhwa, M. D. (2012). Growth and Challenges of Retail Industry in India: An Analysis. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Management Review,1(1). Sirdeshmukh, D., Singh, J., & Sabol, B. (2002). Consumer trust, value, and loyalty in relational exchanges. Journal of Marketing, 56, 15–37. Srinivas, A. (2008). The Indian Consumer: One Billion Myths, One Billion Realities. Wiley. Steenkamp, J. B. E., & Burgess, S. M. (2002). Optimum stimulation level and exploratory consumer behavior in an emerging consumer market. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 19(2), 131-150. Steenkamp, J. B. E., & Gielens, K. (2003). Consumer and market drivers of the trial probability of new consumer packaged goods. Journal of Consumer Research, 30(3), 368-384. Suh, T., & Smith, K. H. (2008). Attitude toward globalization and country-of-origin evaluations: Toward a dynamic theory. Journal of Global Marketing, 21(2), 127-139. Sweeney, J. C., & Soutar, G. N. (2001). Consumer perceived value: the development of a multiple item scale. Journal of retailing, 77(2), 203-220. Teas, R. K., & Agarwal, S. (2000). The effects of extrinsic product cues on consumers’ perceptions of quality, sacrifice, and value. Journal of the Academy of marketing Science, 28(2), 278-290. Technopak (2008). Retail market in a state of positive momentum. Retrieved September 25, 2012, from http://www.fibre2fashion.com/news/general-textile-industrynews/apparel-retail-chain-storesnews/india/newsdetails.aspx?news id=63992. Technopak (2010) India Consumer Survey.

99

Tharoor, S. (1997). India from Midnight to the Millennium & Beyond. Penguin Books. Thrift, N. (1997) The Rise of Soft Capitalism. Cultural Values, 1(1). 29–57 Traylor, M. B. (1981). Product involvement and brand commitment. Journal of Advertising Research. UKBIC (2011). Retail, Food & Supply Chain Logistics. Retrieved October 25, 2012, from http://www.ukibc.com/doing-business-in-india/key-sectors/retailfoodsupply/ [Untitled photograph of Brigade Road, Bangalore]. Retrieved September 20, 2013, from: http://mrgolmaal.blogspot.com/2013/08/mg-brigade-road-in-bangalore-to-get.html Vaid, M. (2007). Shakeout in store in branded clothing space. Retrieved November 23, 2012, from http://www.moneycontrol.com. 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. Woodruff, R. B. (1997). Customer value: the next source for competitive advantage. Journal of the Academy of Marketing science, 25(2), 139-153. Zeithaml, V. A. (1988). Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: A means-end model and synthesis of evidence. Journal of Marketing, 52, 2–22.

100

VITA

Aniket Sengupta is a native of India. He received a Bachelor of Technology in Apparel Production in 2010 from the National Institute of Fashion Technology, Kolkata, India. After that he worked for one year in Embee International Industries at Ismailia, Egypt as a marketing merchandiser. In fall of 2012, Aniket returned to Graduate School at the University of Kentucky where he was awarded both a Teaching Assistantship and Research Assistantship within the Merchandising, Apparel and Textiles Department. Aniket worked primarily as a Teaching Assistant for Merchandising, Planning and Control and Retail Entrepreneurship. He also completed a research paper on usage of clothing care-labels with Dr. Min-young Lee and has been selected to present it at ITAA Seminar 2014 in Charlotte, North Carolina. Aniket has been selected to join the doctoral program in Agricultural Economics from Fall 2014 at the University of Kentucky under Dr. Michael Reed.

101