Full text of "Tactics of conflict resolution in family buying behavior"

See other formats

UNIVERSITY OF

ILLINOIS LIBRARY

AT URBANA-CHAMPAIGN

BOOKSTACKS

Digitized by the Internet Archive

in 2012 with funding from

University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign

http://www.archive.org/details/tacticsofconflic271shet

Faculty Working Papers

TACTICS OF CONFLICT RESOLUTION
IN FAMILY BUYING BEHAVIOR

Jagdish N. Sheth and Stephen Cosmas

#271

College of Commerce and Business Administration

University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

FACULTY WORKING PAPERS

College of Commerce and Business Administration

University of Illinois at Urb ana-Champaign

September 16, 1975

TACTICS OF CONFLICT RESOLUTION
IN FAMILY BUYING BEHAVIOR

Jagdish II. Sheth and Stephen Cosmas

#271

TACTICS OF CONFLICT RESOLUTION IN FAMILY BUYING BEHAVIOR

Jagdish N» Sheth
University of Illinois

Stephen Cosmas
Needhara, Harper & Steers, Inc.

Significant research has recently emerged in the area of

family buyer behavior especially about the husband-wife joint

decision making process. See Foote (1961), Davis (1971) and

Hempel (1974) for reviews of empirical research and Sheth

(1974) for a review of theoretical research in this area. While

we have gained important insights about the various roles each

spouse plays in the joint decision making process, there is

relatively little research on the following aspects of joint

decision making process. First, what factors determine whether a

particular purchase decision is jointly decided by the two spouses

or left to one spouse's sole judgement? Second, are there any

systematic differences among households with varying socioeconomic'

demographic characteristics in regard to the incidence of joint

decision making? For example, is the joint decision making

process more prevalent in middle class, middle aged couples as has

been suggested in the literature? Third, what is the incidence of

conflict, disagreement or at least differences of opinion between

the spouses in buying behavior? As Sheth (1974) has pointed out,

2.
both the necessary condition (felt need for deciding together)
and the sufficient conditions (differences in goals or choice
criteria and perceptions of alternatives) to generate conflict
are obviously prevalent in many household purchase decisions such
as buying of automobiles, furniture or a house. To that extent ,
the family buying behavior is quite comparable to organizational
buying behavior, and, therefore, many of the complexiea of
organisational buying behavior especially in regards to the
tactics employed to resolve conflict, disagreement or difference
of opinion may be directly relevant in understanding household
decision-making process (Sheth 1973), Fourth, how is the conflict
in buying behavior resolved between the spouses? What specific
tactics such as persuasion or bargaining are employed by the
spouses to resolve their conflict? Fifth, are there any systematic
differences among households with varying socioeconomic-demographic
characteristics in regard to the ways the spouses resolve their
conflict? For example, is bargaining more prevalent among highly
educated households or among younger households? Sixth, are there
life style correlates of conflict resolution? For example, does
a spouse who is primarily a homebody and believes in the traditional
role of a woman in the family utilize persuasion more often than
other tactics of conflict resolution?

The purpose of this paper accordingly is to investigate
the prevalence of conflict in household decision making and the
tactics employed by spouses to resolve their conflict. Such an

3.
understanding is extremely relevant from a variety of perspectives.
First, marketers need to know whether conflict exists in a
particular product they are marketing as? well as to identify the
basis for the conflict between the spouses* Such knowledge can
then enable the marketer to direct his efforts toward resolving
the conflict by proper communieacion. This is often done by the
astute salesperson in retail buying and shopping situations but
very little effort seems to be directed by the manufacturers of
national brands and products toward an integrated approach of en-
abling the spouses to resolve their conflicts in buying behavior.
Second, prevalence of conflict and especially the tactics employed
to resolve it may indeed be a better barometer of family structure
and organization as well as the changing roles of the spouses in a
marriage than many of ther interpersonal interaction measurements*
Finally, relatively little is known about the impset of conflict
in buying behavior on the propensity to divorce. While consider-
able research is recently undertaken on assessing the causes of
divorce , it has bean unfortunately directed toward only the fundamen-
tal values and behavior such as sex, rocney, religion and raising
children. It is our strong belief that research on conflict in
purchase behavior may provide more subtle insights into the causes
for divorce: it is often the little things which are marginally
more critical in sustaining a marriage,

THEORY & STUDY DESIGN
The theoretical underpinnings of this study are borrowed from

a theory of family buying decision® proposed fey Sheth (1974).
According to him, it is important . o differentiate joint decisions
from autonomous decisions in family buying behavior because inter-
personal conflict is less likely to be manifested in autonomous
decisions. The model specifies two types of determinants for the
prevalence of joint vs* autonomous decisions across families and
across product classes within a family* The first type of variables
consisting of family life cycle, socioeconomic status and life
styles are more relevant to measure interf&mily differences in the
prevalence of joint decision making for a specific purchase decision*
The second type of variables consisting of perceived risk, importance
of purchase, time pressure and situational contingencies are more
relevant to measure intra family differences in. the prevalence of
joint decision making process across a variety of products.

In this study, we are more interested in inter family decision
making process and hence have limited it to only two products, name-
ly automobile and furniture* Both products are relatively more
expensive and durable | both have some manifestation of conspicuous
consumption due to social imagery they tend to reflect of one*s selfj
both have become necessity of life so that every household buys themj
and both are typically used by ail numbers of the family* At the
same time, there is growing evidence that the husband is generally
more involved in the purchase of the automobile and the wife is more
involved in the purchase of furniture even when they decide together,,
In fact, in some households it is not uncommon to expect a division

5.
of lat.or and responsibilities in regard to purchase of these two
products between the spouses* These considerations led us to
narrow our study to furnitur d automobile* It should be pointed
out however* that we need to large spectrum of products

end services to understand intr&family differences in eheir tendency
to decide together,

A second theoretical aspect borrowed from the Sheth model of
family buying decisions relates to determinants of conflict and
the specific tactics employed in resolving the conflict* Conflict
arises when there is a felt need to decide jointly and there are
differences in goals or perceptions between the spouses* Depending '
upon whether the two spouses have a disagreement about goals or
perceptions j the model specifies four distinct types of conflict
resolution* They are problem- solving., persuasion s bargaining and
politiking*

Problem-solving approach to c aflict resolution arises when
there is disagreement about specific alternatives under consideration
or on any of their attributes* It is to differences

in perceptions rasher than differences in goals between the spouses »
Problem-solving appros pic&ily entails search for new alterna-
tives or new information an existing alternatives &® suggested by
March and Siiaon (1950),

Persuasion as an approach to conflict resolution arises when
there is disagreement between the spouses about specific subgoals
in a purchase situation although there is agreement at a more

fundamental level* Pergasaion tactic is manifested when one spouse
is trying to convince, the other h. * the specific sufc ;oal and the
alternatives which satisfy it are incompatible with the overall
family goals in a purchase situation*

Bargaining as a tactic of conflict resolution arises when there
is agreement betw? - ouses that they cannot agree on buying goals
or choice criteria and when the purchase decision is more important
to one of the spouses* This tactic as the name implies results in
some reciprocity agreement between the spouses i 1 will let you do
what you want in this situation if you will let me do what X want in
some other situation* The typical outcome of the bargaining tactic
is the reduction of the joint decision to a unilateral choice in
exchange for some favor,

The final strategy of conflict resolution is called polit iking.
It is manifested when the two spouses have a fundamental difference
in their value &f&-. it impinges upon a specific buying situa-

tion. The tactic is commonly aaniiested by way of soliciting-
support from other osembers of thM sven from friends and

relatives, and thereby to exercise pressure on the other spouse
to' change his or her deliberations, T& ,e of informal
coalitions in the family a often a good indicator of

utilisation of this type of tactic in conflict resolution.

Based on the Sheth model, the study was designed to gain in-
sights into the following questions;

1, What is the extent of joint decision making between spouses

7.
fcr purchase lativel> expensive products such as furni-

. tore ..ad automobiles!
2S What are some of the re< i e to decide either

jointly or unilaterally in buying furniture and automobiles?
3* To what extent does the 1 i int decision
making vary across households? Are there some household
correlates such as life cycle and socioeconomic status which
covary with the incidence of joint-dacieion ra&ki
4* What are the specific tactics of conflict resolution utilis
ed by husbands or wives when they have s. disagreement in buy-
ing of furniture and automobile?

5» Are there some household correlates which covary with
specific tactics employed by spouses? In other words s do
respondents who utilise bargaining as a tactic of conflict
resolution differ significantly from those who utilise
problem solving as a tactic oi Let resolution a for
example?

6« Is the incidence of coi - buying behavior related to
any specific household charac i?er example, do more

educated respondents tend Co manifest greater conflict is
general?

7S What are the life style correlates of tactics of conflict
resolution? Can we assess any systematic life style .profiles
of bargainers, persuaders or problem-solvers, fcr example?
The sample for this study consisted of a convenience sample

<m from three Northern suburbs of Chicago. Since this was only

8.
an exploratory study, the normal sampling procedures were not
followed i .< seeking cooperation e-k ept to ensure that the sa?irapie
will comprise of a cross-section of respondents with respect to
their socioeconomic status and life cycle* & total of one hundred
couples were contacted who \ ill out a selC-sdrainistered*

structured questionnaire,. Each couple was instructed to fill out
the questionnaire without consultation with the spouse* The com»
pleted questionnaires were collected after a few days, the coop-
eration rate was 75 percent of those households contacted. How-
ever, in many instances, the husband did not fill out the questionn-
aire due to lack of interest, travel schedules and other commitments*
Also, the complexity of the questionnaire had some adverse effect
on the response rate. Finally, due to extreme time constraints,
we could not remind or persist in our efforts to get better coopera-
tion. Since there was a secondary interst in matching husband-wife
perceptions about the same parch- lor, oh .?se couples
were retained in the final sample wfe - the hu and the
wife Imd cooperated, Ln ut the qu«

resulted in eliminating Ids where, only one spouse had

cooperatedj usuall • The ii ample was reduced to 50

couples* However, in this study each res lent is treated as a
separate observation unit resulting in a total sample of one
hundred respondents. After eliminating some respondents based on
reliability checks, the final sample consisted of 93 respondents.
Each respondent was asked to recall and describe the most

9.
recent purchase of automobile and furniture* He wag also asked to
state whether the deals- 3 unilateral fcy o->e spouse or joint
between the spouses, 1 ; unilateral or joint

decision behavior. The respondent was asked to recall if there
were any areas of dls&gn »©s in the buying

of furniture ©net automobile, f;aet respondent was also given a list
of salient criteria for each, of the product classes and asked to
recall disagreement on any of them* Finally s for each salient
criterion such as style, price, dealer, color, delivery, etc* the
respondeat was given a standard description of the four tactics of
conflict resolution and asked to check only one of them in case he
recalled setae disagreement between the spouses on that specific
criterion 9

A typica;- 1 related to the four tactics of conflict resolu-
tion is reproduced belowj

We disagree tow much to spend for the car*

Yes ■... i

Our dlsag - it was bys
&„ Shopping around until we found another car we liked in our

price range a
b. One of us convincing the ether that a particular car pur-
chase would fit out budget,
c„ One of us buying the car he/she wanted even though it was
not within our budget but only in return for the other one
being allowed to buy something else he/she wanted.

10.

d« One of us seeking support from other family members or
£ lends to override; the o ..her persos

e„ Other

(specify)

The questionnaire also obtained the standard soioeconomic-
demographie information* However, life cycle and socio-
economic status were directly measured by asking the respondent
to check a specific category from among those listed instead of
deriving them by indexing variables such as income;, education and
occupation in the case of socioeconomic status and age* marital
status j number of children and age distribution of children in the
case of life cycle index. Finally, a battery of life style state-
ments were administered following the tradition of life styles and
psychographics research in marketing (Wells 1974} » The life style
statements were administered to see if certain individualistic life
styles correlated with specific tactics of conflict resolution.

MgdMl_&J"XSCOS$ior .

The data were analyzed in many different ways. However, only
certain analytical procedures and results are reported, here due to
space and time limitations. The results presented here pretty much
parallel the specific research questions pointed out in the earlier
section.

Table 1 summarizes the incidence of autonomous and joint
decision making in the purchase of furniture and automobile as well
as reasons cited by the respondents for such decisions. Almost

f able 1
Autonomous Versus Joint Beeision Making Process

A « He as oss Jor^^mGmas_Liieis ions
(Total Sample = 93)

^gniture , Automobile

&*X.

f ft

1. Ob© partner sore competent & knowledgeable about product k%f» 5*»$

8* LiKe to divide responsibilities in managing the household 27 18

3* More important decision to one partner only

^4 . CosEon in our age group to leave the decision to one person. 13

§, Family life style encourages individual rather- than joint-
decisions

6, Too busy to decide together

7* Hot itsport&nt enough to require joint-decisions

8, Avoids unnecessary arguments

9* Hate t© shop together 6 12

10 . Head of household decides alone en all major par chases 6 9

11* One spouse vas away at the time « 6

12. Osesaon among our friends to leave decision to one partner

in this casa * 6

B# Reasons for deciding, together*

Furniture Automobile

1. Better to decide together on those products which

everybody 60% %f$>

2. Our- fa®i.V style requires that we decide together on

thif? product 58 kB

3. Two heada are better than one U8 39
k, Economically and socially it was an important reason U5 36
§» Too big a decision to decide alone kO 35

6. Customary among our friends that spouses decide together

on this product 26 19

7. Other reasons 12 15

^The percantageT'excsedHilul^^

frora the checklist provided in the questionnaire.

12*
spouse in the purchase of furniture sad automobile* Among the
most frequently mentioned reasons for the decisions were

these: nature of product requiring joi "isumption, perceived
risk involved in the purchase decision, importance of the pro-
duct class to the family , and family life style which encourages
joint decision tasking process s . these reasons are the
same as those hypothesized in the Sheth model of family buying
decisions.

The other one-third of the respondents claimed that the
purchase of furniture or automobile was c unilateral decision by
one of the spouses . They most frequently mentioned that greater
competence of one partner, preference for dividing responsibilities
in household management, greater importance; of the decision to one
of the spouses, too busy to decide together, and the peer group
norms ware primarily responsible for the autonomous decision making
in regard to buying of furniture and automobile.

Among those who decided unilaterally, the automobile was
primarily the responsibility of She husband and furniture was
primarily the responsibility of the wife. Therefore, it is interest-
ing to probe a little further some of the differences in percentages
between furniture and automobile unilateral decisions. It would
appear that the wife allows the husband to decide on automobile
alone due to his greater competence, to avoid unnecessary arguments
and disagreements, reluctance to shop together and greater involve-
ment in automobile on the part of the husband. On the other hand,

13.

the husband allows the wife to decide alone about furniture buying
due to his lack or interest, too busy to spend time* and dividing
household responsibilities*

What type of households prefer joint decision making? Table 2
provides some insights into the demographic correlates of joint
vs, autonomous decision making process* It would appear from the
results that households characterized as with teenage or young
children in the upper middle or working class, with wife in middle
age group working in some white collar occupation or simply a home-
maker, and with moderate level of education tend to be dominated by
the joint-decision making process. On the other hand, households
with either no children or grown-up children, in low or middle
socioeconomic class and with the wife in eome blue collar occupa-
tion as veil as among older women , the decisions tend to be more
autonomous. This picture is quite consistent with several of the
curvilinear hypotheses stated in the Sheth model* The only
surprising element is relatively -. r proportion of autonomous
decisions in the middle class which is contrary to the hypotheses*
It is also interesting to note that among those households who pre-
fer autonomous decisic he incidence is generally greater and
more clear cut for the automobile purchase.

What type of households tend to experience conflict in buying
behavior between the two spouses? Table 3 provides insights into
the demographic differences between households experiencing conflict
and those not having any conflict. It would appear that conflict

14s

Table 2

tomographic Correlates of Autonomous vs. Joint Pec is ions

Family Life Cycle"'"

No children

Small children

Teenege children

Grownup children

Senior citizens
Socioeconomic Status

Lev*%r class

Working class

Middle class

Upper Middle class

Other
Wl^lB_Egncation

Less than High School

High School or Trade School.

Sosse College

College Gradu;

Wife's Occupation

kite collar

Blue collar

Other (Homemater, retired, etc,
Wife 'a Age

Less than ko yre,

Between UO-50 yrs.

More than 50 yra.

Furniture

Auto-
nomous Joint
(33)

**3

IOC
20
$5
19

80
15

36
U

64^
| 60

I ICO

50
67
66

68
S$

69
60

Automobile

Auto-
nomous Joint
(33) (60)

55* } &51
I

40 I 60

10 90

0 100

100

ko J 60

3-6 I 6U

26 i 74

20 ! 80

1*0

is.

Table 3
Eetaographie Correlates of Conflict iv . -se Behavior

Fura

Automobile

FaiSily Life Cycle

No children

Young children

Teenage child!

Grownup children

Senior citizens
Socioeconomic Status

Lower class

Working 'class

Middle class

Upper Middle class

Other
Wife's Education

Less than High School

High School or trade , school

Suase college

College graduate
Wife ' s Occupation

White collar

Blue collar

Other
Wife^Age

Below Ho yrs.

Between ^0-50 yrs.

More than 50 yrs.

(26)

15
25

• 15

50
25.

17
21

No Conf:
(60)

Conflict

(38)

No Conflict

8o$

36£

:■:*

62 • !

IOC

\ 10G

58
85

ki .

6©

100

:.;.

f 6o

16,

is generally more prevalent among those households with young and
teenage children, in the niddle class, with moderately educated
wife in the fatally, and among younger woroen in the family* However,
conflict is not as widespread as was hypothesized. Only about 30
percent: of the respondents stated there was any conflict in furni-
ture buying and nearly 40 percent of the respondents stated the •
same in the automobile buying behavior. Once again, the presence
of conflict, ia more clear cut in the buying of automobile than in
furniture buying. It is also interesting to note the strong presence
of conflict in those households with teenagers especially in regard
to automobile purchase.

Based on the information provided by the respondents about the
specific tactics employed for each area of disagreement between
the spouses, they were classified into three categories: those
who primarily followed problem solving, persuasion or bargaining
tactics in resolving conflicts, whe number of respondents who
stated politiking as .a tactic of conflict resolution was very
small and found only with regard to automobile purchase decision.
They were lump ad together with the bargaining group to facilitate
analysis of the data, Table 4 summarises the results on the employ-
ment of specific tactics of conflict resolution. It is ovbious that
while persuasion seemed to be the dominant strategy of conflict
resolution, there was also a dominance of problem-solving in furni-
ture buying and a dominance of bargaining in automobile buying.

With regard to the demographic correlates, it is interrfs'£it!g*to

17.

^^P^^PMf:, Jl,?H^A^s, %C J^ffMfiLffX,, Conf •*• *-c" ReS°3 nt ion

Furniture

Automobile

Fatally Life Cycle

Ko children

Small shildren

Teenage children

Grcwaup children

Senior citizens
Socioeconomic. Status

Lower class

Working class

Middle class

Upper middle class

Other
Wife [s Occupation

White collar

Blue collar

Otncr
^i^jj£_^^catiO£

Less than High School

High School & Trade School

Some College

College Graduate
Wife's, Age

Below kO yra.

Between ^0-^0 yrs«

More than 50 yra.

| Problem Persu- Bar- Problem Persu- Bar-
\ Solving asion Raining Solving asion gaining
a- (9) * (lk) ' (5) " (7) (16) (1U)_

"(pi:

16
50

100

1*2

.30

100
38
27

•6o

centages7
100

100

(n«a.)

80
100

1*0

100
55

53
50

h7
ko

—

■O

(Pej cent age 8

50
50
15
18

ko
L3

25
L9

(M.A.)

15
23
25

100

i*5

60
U7

56
31

(N.A.)

k5
38
50

100

l{0

100

1»0

(N.A.)

18*
note that households with teenage or sbii &ldren in the middle
and upper middle class among white collar and h: Vacated
working wives and araoag relatively - e women, tend to resort
to bargainin:v the dominant mode of conflict resolu-

tion* Oft the ether hand. | sssios* seeas to be mite manifested by
those households with either no children ot grownup children, among
blue collar and ?;iss educated litres as well as among older worsen*

Finally, an attempt tma made to correlate tactics of conflict
resolution with individuals life etyie profiles. The life style
profile consisted of nearly 56 items considered salient to measur-
ing similarities and differences between spouses in the way they
feel about personal values and goals* Table 5 is a suramary of
thof;e life syle statements on which there were significant differ*
ences when cross- tabulated with the three categories of tactics of
conflict resolution,

A close e and reflection of the values in Table 5

leads, us to make < t&teroahts* People who are self-

confident, optimistic about pretest and future life ambitions,
liberal in their v;al ie$ as well ?s opinion leaders and adventurous
tend to be problem soli n the other hand, people who are not
self-confident, pesslraistic about present or future life, highly
traditional or homebodies, secure and contented who live a sedate life
and ceek advice from others generally tend to be users of persuasion
tactic in conflict resolution,. The bargainers tend to have less
self-respect and self confidence, frustrated with their present life,

19,

Table 5

Lift " Correlates of Tactics of Conflict Resolution

Life Style Statements ure i Automobile^ ni

: Problem Pereu- Bar- !. Problem Persu- Bar-
__^ ..,.,., Solving as ion, gaining: Solving as Ion gaining

1. I have more self -confidence A 31$ ?Uf, 1% 33$ 39$ 2Z%

thsn most of my friends 5 ! 21 5 M3 47

2, Ky opinions on things do ,30 f40 8 25 6?
count very much P 18 ?6 6 ; 22 52 26

3* 1 1: a ash for 33 6? ■ 28 ■ 44 28

everything !b 8 50 42 10 43 48

4, All sen should be clean [A 11 7** 16 23 47 30
shaven every day lis 50 25 25 ' — 3s* 66

5, X m a homebody 'A 22 72 6 19 50 31

D 22 33 44 j 15 31 54

6, I like to be considered a A 2*4- 4? 29 i 27 32 41
leader !» 20 80 6 59 37

7» I vish I could leave

present life and do some- <A 22 50 28 j 6 31 63

thing entirely different 'p 22 78 26 52 22

8. There are day people and

there are night people- I A 19 8l 2k 48 28

am a day person D 27 2? 45 7 36 57

9« Women don't need more than

a minimum amount of Ij A 27 25 60

insurance 2> 19 50 31 11 26 63

10, Bvc- ging too' .A 2? 33 18 32 50

fast today ' 15 17 83 18 59 23

.11- Genera!

18 53 10 32 58

paper they arc printed on • E 30 70 25 55 20

12. ■ ret obi-, !

2? 33 22 33 44

children D 83 14 52 33

13. I like to buy new and 27 21 4? 32
different fchia D 42 15 1*0 45

14. I p«s usual:: bhe first' A 23 §0 28 15 30 55
to try new products D 22 ?8 21 58 21

15* 1 often seek the advice of j

my friends regarding brands -A 10 90 0 33 58 8

and produces D 29 29 : 11 37

; D *»5 53 -• , 18 55

•w

36. X like scoria cars :A26 53 21' 18 M 4

17. I usually have wine with ; A — 11 7 73 20
dinner |D 45 36 18 25 25

18. I aw in. favor of very atrict'Al? p3 39 39 21
enforcement of all laws JB27 kQ 3?* .0 48 52

19. I dread the future A 1? 83

D 23 58 22*

Table 5
(continued)

20,

Life Style? State

Furniture

Automobile

■ Solving asion oainiaa i Solving asion gaining

Problem Persu- Bar-

?roblem Fersu- Bar-

20. 1 cons-alt C< Reports
or similar publications
before making i „se

21. When snaking important family!
decisions, cons Loa of !

26. My friends and neighbors

often eese to es for a&v ice j D

i
2?. A cabin by a quiet lake is :
a great place to spend the >A
syasaer . £

28. X enjoy loo-king through the A

fashion magazines £

29* Police should use wha? ver

force is necessary to aaia- :A

tain 1-.- ier

30 . Our hose is ed for-
eomfort. not stj

31. The father should be the
boss in the house

children should come
first

A 28

Irft

22.

If I had w Ufa to live
over 5 I would sure do
things differently

; A 25
, S SO

33
60

1*2

2-^«

When buying appliances, I
ess more concerned with
dependability than price

[A 27
1 S 20

kk
80

s**.

1 don't like to take
chances

:A 2€

63
50

10
3?

25.

X never knot-? bow orach to
tip

A 30
is 33

?0
. *»3

U
17

39
^0

33
30

5*3
33

2lo

and lack security of They seek no outside advice and tend
to be nooconfirmist ax it attitudes toward law and

ordere Also they tend to be nJ -eople rather than day peoples

Despite some c one felt in I £t® about joint
versus autonomous decisions c;s »el ; actios of conflict
resolution practiced la household buying behavior, several satnpl
limitations as well as small senile problems make this study at
best tentative and exploratory in nature. We hope to replicate it
with a larger and too re representative sample.

purchase decisions.. Joum . 5. August 1971 s

305-12*

Foote? NB N. ed* Household Declalc , Hew York University
Press, 1961,

Eetspai, B# Jei Family buying decisions?. A aross-cultural
perspectiva. Journal of Marketing Re search 11, August 1974.
295-302,

March s J# A* and Simon, E* A« * Organizations , Wiley, 1958
Sheth, J« H*s A model of industrial buyer behavior Journal of
IS£^2£lES» October 1973,

Sheth, J, N., A theory of family buying decisions, in J* N, Sheth (ed.)
Models of. Buyer Behavior Harper & Row, 1974 *
Wells, We D* » Life Styles & Psychographies, American M&rkating
Association, 19/4,.

Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Books

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

Full text of "Tactics of conflict resolution in family buying behavior"

See other formats