A survey was conducted to quantify the effect of product category on private label brand perception. From 43 respondents, the perceived value, risk and quality for rice and tissue were scored. It was hypothesized that consumers may have a higher perception of basic commodities that do not require further processing after purchase. Data was analyzed using the one-way Analysis of Variance. It was found that product category significantly affects private label brand perception. The score for mean risk perception of rice was 3.63 and for tissue it was 2.88, the difference was significant (p=0.033). For quality perception the score was higher for tissue (4.42) and lower for rice (3.80). While the observation for quality was not significant at p<0.05 it was significant at p=0.096. For value perception though the difference was not significant (p=0.218) consumers had a higher perception for tissue (4.72) compared to rice (4.33). It was concluded that consumers have a higher perception for private label brand products that require further processing and a lower perception for those that do not require additional processing. This means that retailers cannot use the same marketing strategy even for basic commodities. For categories requiring further processing they need to embark on more aggressive marketing strategies such as the distribution of free samples and the use of in-store tastes.
1. Ailawadi,Kusum L., Koen Pauwels and Jan-Benedict E.M. Steenkamp (2008), “Private Label Use and Store Loyalty,” Journal of Marketing , 72 (3), 19-30
2. Beneke J., (2010). Consumer perception of private label brands within the retail grocery sector of South Africa. African Journal of Business Management 4(2):203-220
3. Chimhundu R., (2011). Private label marketing performance: an analysis of historical trends using theories of cumulative change and punctuated equilibrium. International Journal of Business and Management 6(8):58-65
4. DelVecchio D., (2001). Consumer perceptions of private label quality: the role of product category characteristics and consumer use of heuristics. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 8 (2001):239-249
5. Fernie J, Fernie S, Moore C., (2003). Principles of Retailing, Butterworth Heinemann, Oxford.
6. Gonzalez-Benito O. and Martos-Partal M., (2012). Role of Retailer Positioning and Product Category on the Relationship between Store Brand Consumption and Store Loyalty. Journal of Retailing 88 (2): 236-249
7. Keller K. L., (1993). Conceptualizing, measuring, managing customer-based brand equity. Journal of Marketing 57(1): 1-22.
8. Morgenson G., (1991). The trend is not their friend. Forbes September 16: 114-119.
9. Narasimhen C., & Wilcox R.T., (1998). “Private Labels and the Channel Relationship: A Cross-Category Analysis”. Journal of Business, 71(4): 573-600
10. Nyengerai S., Jaravaza D., Mukucha P., Chirimubwe R and Manjoro E., (2013). Determinants of Perception towards Private Label Brands in Zimbabwe: The Role of Familiarity, Store Image, Demographic Factors and Consumer Characteristics. Journal of Business and Management Studies 3 (5): 224-230
11. Richardson P.S., Jain A.K. and Dick A., (1996). Household store brand proneness: a framework. Journal of Retailing 72 (2): 159-185
12. Semeijn J, van Riel A.C.R and Ambrosini A.B., (2004). Consumer evaluations of store brands: effects of store image and product attributes. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 11:247-258
13. Symphony IRI Group. (2012). Private Label in Europe: Is there a limit to growth? From: www.symphonyiri.eu (accessed 5 November 2013)
14. Vahie A. and Paswan A., (2006). Private label brand image: its relationship with store image and national brand. International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management 34 (1):67-84
15. Van Riel, A.C.R., Lemmink J. and Ouwersloot, H., (2001). Consumer` evaluations of brand extensions: differences between goods and services. Journal of Service Research 3 (3): 220–231.
16. Walker J (2006). Bye-Bye Big Brands, J. Mark. 28 (17): 23.
Copyright: © 2013 The Author(s)
Published by Human Resource Management Academic Research Society (www.hrmars.com)
This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this license may be seen at: http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode
