SWP 19/98 PERSONAL VALUES UNDERLYING WOMEN’S

PERCEPTIONS OF FASHION STORE IMAGES

KEITH E.THOMPSON & YAT LING CHEN

Department of Management & Marketing
School of Agricultural Food and the Environment
Silsoe College
Crantield University
Silsoe
Bedfordshire MK45 4DT
Tel: +44 (0)1525 863054
Fax: +44 (0)1525 863388
Email: k.e.thompson@cranfieId.ac.uk

The Cranfield School of Management Working Papers Series has been running since 1987, with
approximately 450 papers so far from the nine academic groups of the School.. Economics;
Enterprise; Finance and Accounting; Human Resources; Information Systems; Logistics and
Transportation; Marketing; Operations Management; and Strategic Management. Since 1992,
papers have been reviewed by senior members offaculty before acceptance into the Series. A list
since 1992 is included at the back of this paper.

For copies of papers (up to two free, then .f5 per copy, cheques to be made payable to the
Cranfield University), please contact Wayne Bulbrook, Research Administrator, at the address
on the back of this booklet.

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

IcRhl 4 mane 4~9 A

 2

AUTOBIOGRAPHHXL NOTE

Keith Thompsonis a SeniorLecturer in Managementand Marketing at Cranfield University,

where he has taught buyer behaviourand internationalmarketing for nine years,following

severalyears experiencein marketing management,notably with Spillersand IBM. Since

joining Cranfieldhe has publishedover 30 papersand contributionsto books on buyer

behaviourand marketing strategy,and undertakenacademicand consultancywork in North

America and EasternEurope.

Yat Ling Chen is a postgraduatestudent at CranfieldUniversity, Departmentof Management

and Marketing at Silsoe.

ABSTRACT

Retail store imagehas beenshown to play an important role in store patronage,and it is

widely acceptedthat psychologicalfactors have a significantrole in store image formation.

Past researchhas often involved the measurementof tangible attributes, or links betweenstore

imagesand consumers’selfimages. This study was undertakento move to the next stageby

exploring the link betweenperceivedstore imageand the personalvalueswhich underlie

behaviouralchoices. Fashionretailing was selectedas an appropriateresearchdomain because

of the well establishedassociationsbetweenclothing choice, personality,self concept, and

personalvalues. Means-endtheory and ladderingmethodologywere employedin interviews

with 30 femalerespondents. The hedonicvaluesof ‘enjoymentand happiness’and ‘quality of

life’ were found to be the terminal valuesmost sought by consumersin associationwith store

image. Thesewere linked through the consequence‘nice feeling’to the tangible attributes of

‘price’, ‘quality’and reputation’. The study illustratesan applicationof means-end

methodologyin a retail environment,and the results provide a platform for fashion store image

and positioning strategies. Suggestionsfor further researchare made.

KEYWORDS

Means-end,

Store image,

Women’s fashion

Values
 4

Store image is a critical componentin store choice and store loyalty (e.g. Lewis and Hawksley

1990; Doyle and Fenwick 1974; Stanleyand Sewall 1976;Nevin and Houston 1980; Malhotra

1983, Arons, 1961; Osman, 1993). Many researcherssubscribeto the view, originally

proposedby Martineau (1958), and later Arons (1961), that store image is a complex

combinationof tangible and intangible,or functional and psychologicalattributes, (e.g.

Lindquist, 1974-1975; Oxenfeldt, 1974-1975; Zimmer and Golden, 1988; Doyle and Fenwick,

1974-1975;Marks 1976; Keaveneyand Hunt 1992; Dichter 1985a, 1985b). But

operationalisationof this concept has proved difficult. Consequently,store imagehas

frequently been defined as an attitude, or set of attitudes, basedupon evaluationof salient

store attributes. (Doyle and Fenwick, 1974-1975; James,Durand and Dreves 1976; Engel and

Blackwell, 1982), and its measurementalmost always involves the identification of a number

of attributes which are assumedto collectively make up a store’s image (Hirschman,

Greenbergand Robinson, 1978; Keaveneyand Hunt, 1992).

When researchershave studiedthe role played by psychologicalfactors in forming store image

the focus has mainly beenon self-image,whereby consumersstrive to move their real self-

concept towards their ideal self by buying (e.g.) garmentswhich they considerwill enhancethe

attainmentof their ideal self, or satisfytheir real self and attain a desiredrole in life (Lewis and

Hawksley, 1990; Martineau 1957; Sirgy, Samli, Bahn, and Varvoglish, 1989; Sirgy and Danes

1982; Evans 1993; Grubb and Grathwohl, 1967). Severalattempts have been madeto

determinewhether a ‘matching’mechanismexists betweena consumer’sself imageand store

image (Weale, 1961; Doyle and Fenwick, 1974-1975). For instanceHirschmanand Stampfl
 5

(1980) suggestthat consumersmay match themselveswith retail stores accordingto their

perceptionsof their own and of the stores’ innovativeness.

The purpose of this study was to shift attention from the attribute level and to further the

investigationof the psychologicalfactors, specificallypersonalvalues,that underpin

perceptionsof store image. However, retail storesmeet a wide spanof needsranging from

the functional to the exotic, which leadsto a lack of consensusin store image defhntion among

researchers(Keaveney& Hunt, 1992). Therefore, it was decidedto study a single store type

within a product-specificcontext (Amirani & Gates, 1993). Fashionretailing was selected

becauseof the powerful links that researchershave identified betweenclothing choice,

personality, self concept, and personalvalues:who we are, what we want to be and the life-

style we subscribeto, is reinforced and communicatedthrough how we look. Choice of

clothing has beendescribedas: a form of communicationinfluencedby social norms, self-

expressionsand technology (Beck 1985), a personalsignaturethat symbolically

communicatesthe social identity that a person seeksto project (Dichter 1985b;Davis 1985),

and as a reflection of the personalityof the wearer (Dichter 1985b;Goldsmith, Heitmeyer,and

Goldsmith 1990). The associationbetweenclothing, personalvalues(Unger and Raymond

1974; Sharma1980; Goldsmith, Heitmeyer and Freiden 1992), and social values(Kaiser 1985;

Rose, Shoham,Kahle and Batra 1994) is well established.According to Unger and Raymond

(1974) conformity in dressis a predictor of values.

Our objective in this researchwas to assessthe role of personalvaluesin the domain of store

image by exploring the link betweenwomen’s personalvaluesand their perceptionsof fashion

 store images. Specifically,we wanted to explore the content and structure of women’s store

image knowledge content (What descriptorsdo consumersuse to distinguishbetween

women’s fashionchain store images?)and structure (How do consumersuse theseimage

descriptorsto achievedesiredend-states?Can chainsof meaninglinking the attribute,

consequenceand value levelsbe determined?) The theoretical perspectiveused to investigate

these questionswas means-endtheory (Gutman 1982), which links the concreteattributes of a

product or service(the means),to abstractpersonalvalues(the ends) via the perceived

consequencesof these attributes for the consumer.

MEANS-END THEORY

A means-endchain is a model that seeksto explain how product or serviceattributes facilitate

consumers’achievementof desiredend-statesof being such as happiness,security or

enjoyment (Gutman 1982). A means-endchain is a cognitive representationof the connection

betweena person’s knowledgeabout a product or store and their self-knowledge(Mulvey,

Olson, Celsi and Walker, 1994). There are three levels of abstractionor categoriesof meaning

that are typically associatedwith a concept such as store image:

l Attributes (the means)

l Consequencesof store patronage.

l Important psychologicaland social consequencesand values(the ends)

Figure 1 illustratesa means-endchain model basedupon a customer’s knowledgeof self and

the store. The model representsstore knowledge as structured through perceivedlinkages

betweenmeaningsabout store attributes and the consumer’sself-meanings.

 TARE IN FIGURE I

Attributes are relatively concretemeaningsthat representthe physical,observable,or

perceivedcharacteristicsof a store. Concreteattributes relatively directly reflect the physical

featuresof the store. Abstract attributes are more subjectiverepresentationsof store

characteristicsthat representseveralconcreteattributes. Consequencesare more abstract

meaningsthat reflect the perceivedbenefits(or costs) associatedwith specific attributes.

Functional consequencesincludethe direct, tangible outcomesderived from patronageof a

store. Psycho-socialconsequences,on the other hand, include intangible,personaland less

direct outcomes. Thesecan be either psychologicalin nature (e.g., how do I feel when

shoppingin this store?) or social (e.g., how do others feel about me when I am shoppingin

this store?) (Peter and Olson, 1987). Finally, personalvaluesare highly abstractmeaningsthat

refer to centrally held, enduringbeliefs or end-statesof existencethat customersseekto

achievethrough their behaviour(figure 1).

PROCEDURES

Elicitation

The study focusedon the perceivedimage of specialitywomen’s fashion store chainsamong

20 to 45 year old women, as an interest in fashionis characteristicamong women within this

age range (Evans, 1993). To elicit the basicconceptsor distinctions that consumersuse to

differentiate fashionstores (i.e. to establishthe underlying structure of store image)ten

subjectswere interviewedindividually, all were female. The interviews lastedabout 25

 8

women’s clothing sectionsof the fashionretail chain stores listed in table 1 were used as the

stimuli Tom which subjectscould selectfashionchainswith which they were familiar.

TAKE IN TABLE 1

In order to ensurethat no key criterion was overlooked two methodswere employedto elicit

perceiveddifferencesbetweenstores. The distinctionsused by respondentsto discriminate

betweenstoreswere consideredto be the key imagecategoriesfor women’s fashion stores. In

the first elicitation method, respondentswere askedto rank the listed stores in order of

preference,and then askedto explainwhy they preferred the first to the second,the secondto

the third, and so on. The secondmethod utilised triadic sorting (Kelly, 1955); after being

askedto remove any items with which they were unfamGr respondentswere presentedwith

triples of randomly selectedstore namesprinted on cards, and askedto think of any way in

which two of the three items were similar to eachother but different from the third. The

processwas repeateduntil the respondentfailed to elicit any new constructs. Following

content analysisof the elicited distinctions(seebelow), a comprehensivelist of store image

attributes was produced and made bipolar for use in the ladderinginterviews (table 2).

TAKE IN TABLE 2

Ladder& Procedures

Laddering employsa one-to-one interviewing techniquein which a seriesof directed probes

are usedto reveal how customerslink product/serviceattributes to their own underlying

values. A central premiseof this method is that lower levels imply the presenceof higher

levels, so that product /serviceAttributes have Consequencesthat lead to Value satisfaction.

The purpose of the ladderinginterviews was to determinethe ‘ladder’of linkagesbetweenthe

Attributes, Consequencesand Values in relation to fashion store image. An exampleof a

ladder from a singleinterview, starting with a basic distinction betweentwo stores,is given

below:

(value) self-esteem
?
(Consequence) feel good
-r
(Consequence) look good
?
(Consequence) fits well
?
(Attribute) stock my size
?
(Attribute) have wide range

The ladderinginterview proceduresin this study followed the recommendationsmade by

Reynoldsand Gutman, (1988). Care was taken to create a suitableinterviewing environment

in which respondentswere sufbciently relaxedto be introspective,and to relate their

underlying motivations to the interviewer. In order to facilitate this the interviewer presented

herself as a facilitator following specific guidelines,“even though some of the questionsmight

seema little silly”. Before commencingthe interview eachrespondentwas put in the position

of expert by assurancesthat there are no right or wrong answers,and that the purpose of the

exercisewas to understandthe way that they saw the world.

 10

After collecting basic demographicinformation, 30 femalerespondentsfrom the St&and

studentson campuswere eachpresentedwith the list of store imageattributes shown in table

2 and askedto rank the 10 which reflectedtheir most important choice criteria. They were

then askedto identify which pole of the distinctionsthey most preferred, which servedas the

basisfor askingthe question,“why is that important to you?“. Repeatedapplicationsof this

procedureled to still higher-leveldistinctionsuntil respondentscould no longer answerthe

“why” question. The actual wording of the probe was varied to (e.g.) “Why is that?“, “So that

is important to you?” “Why do say that?“. When respondentsstruggledto articulate an

answerit was important not to put words into their mouths. The techniquesused to move the

interview forward involved askingrespondentswhat they thought the outcome would be if the

attribute or consequencewas nondelivered,and or by evoking a situationalcontext. For

example;“When you are going into the store, what is going through your mind?“. Under

theseconditionsrespondentswere content to talk readily about fashionshopping,and the

problem of over-sensitivityidentified by Reynoldsand Gutman was not encountered. These

interviewswere tape recordedand lastedfor approximately35 minuteseach.

DATA ANALYSIS

Content analysiswas usedto reducewhat Krippendoti, (1980) called, “. . .subjects’

idiosyncratic responses.” Each respondents’ladderswere enteredonto separatecoding forms

and classifiedinto attributes, consequencesand values. A set of 128 summarycodeswas then

developedto reflect everythingmentionedby the respondents.Thesesummarycodeswere

further aggregatedinto a smallernumber of broader categories. Finally, 32 master codes

summarisingall the attributes, consequences,and valuesmentionedin the ladderingresponses

 11

were identified. Four coders,working independently,content-analysedthe sameset of data.

Output fkom all four coders were comparedon a pairwise basisby calculatingthe number and

percentageof themesassignedto the samecategory, yielding an averageintercoder agreement

of 90%. Disagreementswere resolvedjointly betweenthe four coders.

The Implications Matrix

A means-endchain is a sequenceof causalimplicationsconnectingattributes, consequences

and values. Theseconnectionswere examinednext by summarisingthem in a matrix which

representedthe number of connectionsbetweeneachattribute, consequenceand value. Two

types of relations, direct and indirect, may be representedin this ‘implications matrix’. For

instance,the ladder A(ttribute) to C(onsequence)lto C(onsequence)2to V(alue) represents

relationsbetweenadjacentelements. The A to Cl relation is direct, as is Cl to C2, C2 to V.

However, there are also indirect relations such as A to C2, A to V , and Cl to V. Elements

with a high incidenceof indirect relations should not be ignored, so both types of relations

were consideredin determining which paths were dominant (Reynoldsand Gutman, 1988;

Klenosky, Genglerand Mulvey, 1993).

The HierarchicalValue Man

A HierarchicalValue Map was built up by connectingthe chainsextracted from the

Implications Matrix. In order to find a solution which yielded the most informative and stable

set of relations a cut-off level of three relations was establishedby trial and error. All

connectionsbelow this level were ignored. In establishingthe cut-off level, the total number

of linkages(both direct and indirect relations) were counted so as to avoid bias through, “. . .
 12

underweightingthe importance of the associationsrecordedfor the more verbose

respondents.. . ” (Klenosky, Genglerand Mulvey, 1993). The resulting HierarchicalValue

Map accountedfor 82% of all the direct and indirect relations. For clarity it is presentedin the

mannerproposedby Klenosky, Gengler and Mulvey (1993): eachconcept is representedby a

circle, the size of which is proportional to the percentageof respondentsmentioning a

concept, white circles representattributes, light grey circles consequences,and dark grey

circles values;the relative strength of associationbetweenconceptsis representedby the width

of the connectinglines (figure 2).

TAKE IN FIGURE 2

RESULTS

Attributes

Of the 10 attributes ultimately used in the aggregatedHierarchicalValue Map (figure 2) five

were more or lessconcretein nature (“‘price”, “salespromotions”, “location”, “assortment”

and “styling”), reflecting physicalcharacteristicsthat are reasonablystraightforward to define

and implement. The remaining five were more abstract (“atmosphere& environment”, “global

perception”, ‘Yeputation”,“quality” and “service”) They representa subjectiveamalgamof

several,more concrete,attributes and are, consequently,more difficult to define.

 13

Conseauences

Most of the 14 consequencesin the HVM were psycho-socialconsequencesarising either

from shoppingin a store (“nice feeling”, “avoid risks”, “guarantee”, “socialise”, “convenient”,

and “be respected”),or Ii-om ownershipof the clothes (“nice feeling”, “enhanceappearance”,

and “self-expressive”). The rest were functional benefitsassociatedwith money, time,

products, or the shoppingprocess(“not waste money”, “spend money wisely”, “save time”,

“better time allocation”, “durability”, “facilitate shopping”).

Values

The eight valueswere similar to those uncoveredin previous personalvaluesresearch(e.g.

Rokeach 1973; Reynoldsand Jolly 1980; Reynoldsand Gutman 1988; Klenosky et al. 1993).

The largestproportion were hedonistic(“enjoyment & happiness”,“quality of life”, and “sense

of well-being”). The rest relate to personality(“self-image”and “selfesteem”), internal

considerations(“security” and “achievement”)and social life (“senseof belonging”)

Hierarchical Value Man

Inspection of the HierarchicalValue Map in figure 2 showedthat the dominant orientation was

the chain, reputation - quality - durability - not waste monev - sDendmonevwisely - nice

feeling - enjoyment& happinessor quality of life (figure 3). This indicatesa functional path

to the achievementof hedonisticend-states.

TAKE IN FIGURE 3
 14

However, “quality” and “reputation” were also linked to the sameterminal valuesvia a closely

related chain which followed the divergent route; reputation - quality - durability - enhance

apDearance- self exmessive- nicefeeling - enjoyment& happinessor quality of life (figure

4). An alternative,hedonic,route to the samehedonic end.

TAKE IN FIGURE 4

Thesetwo chainsaccountedfor the highest frequencyof relations (24.4%). They indicate

that the key attributes were “reputation”’ and “quality” leadingto “durability”, and that these

were used by consumersto achievethe main end statesof “quality of life” and “enjoyment and

happiness”through “nice feeling”, via both functional (value for money) and hedonic

(aestheticand self-expressive)consequences.

Of the remaining most frequently mentionedattributes, two, “atmosphere& environment”and

“price”, stood out. “Price”, becauseit was strongly linked to the important chain: price - --

not waste money - spendmoneywisely - nicefeeling - enjoyment& happinessor qualily of

life (figures 2 and 3). “Atmosphere & environment”, because,although it did not commence

a single strong path, it was connectedto severalchainsleadingthrough a high proportion of

all consequencesand ultimately to all of the valuesexcept “achievement”. (This also applied

to a lesserextent to the attributes “reputation” and “service”, and also “assortment”).

Notably, all of the most important attributes were linked to all but one of the terminal values

through the consequence‘nice feeling” (figure 2).

 15

DISCUSSION

The aim of this study was to explore means-endsknowledge structuresassociatedwith fashion

store image. The end statesmost sought by consumersin associationwith store image were

identified as the hedonicvaluesof “enjoyment and happiness”and “quality of life”. These

were linked through alternativefunctional and hedonic chainsto the key attributes of “price”,

“reputation” and “quality”. Although other attributes were identified their influencewas

dissipatedamong severaldifferent chains(note that if too high a cut-off point had been

applied their contribution would have been lost). Whateverthe impact of the attribute

“location”’ on store choice behaviour(and it is usually acknowledgedto be critical) its

influenceon store image was very small indeed.

Inspection of the HierarchicalValue Map in figure 2 revealsthat the chainsleadingto all but

one of the eight end statessought by fashion store customerspassthrough only two

consequences;“nice feeling”and “save time”. Theseconsequences(and the valuesthat

customersseekthrough them) can only be deliveredvia the relevant attributes, three of which,

“reputation”, “quality” and “price”, form the foundation of the dominant orientation chains.

Thesemight be used as the basisof an effective communicationsstrategydesignedto position

the store in the minds of customersby linking together entire chainsof meaning,rather than

presentingunconnectedlinks in the chain. (Mulvey et al, 1994; Reynoldsand Rochon, 1990;

Young and Feigin, 1975). This hastwo important benefits;firstly, communicationsdesigned

in this way take customersalong a seriesof steppingstonesleadingfrom the store’s attributes

to their desiredterminal valuesby a path that they understandand appreciate; secondly,

interpreting the meaningof each step within the context of the chain avoidsthe possibility of
 16

the meaningof attitudes, consequencesor valuesbeing distorted by taking them out of

context. For example,the attribute “quality” is strongly linked to “durability”. Therefore, it

does not mean brand name or “styling” (although styling cannot be ignored, offering an

“assortment”of stylesin order to savetime appearsto be more important). Neither does

“price” simply mean cheap,as it links to “not waste money”which has to be interpreted in

light of its link to “durability” - “quality”. Given its central position in the two dominant

orientationsthe meaningof “durability” is clearly important. It does not meanmerely

utilitarian becauseas well as links to the functional consequence“not wasting money”, it also

links to the hedonic consequencesof “enhancedappearance”and “selfexpressive”. All of this

suggeststhat a desirable fashion store image might be defined as, a reputation for offering a

wide range of clothes, exuding quality and durability, at an acceptableprice. Secondarychains

emphasisingtime and facilitation of the shoppingexperiencemay contribute useful

differentiating factors.

Yet a communicationstrategydesignedto build an image basedupon theseattributes is not

enough. Customers’perceptionsthat the store really possessesthe promised attributes must

survive, and be reinforced by, actual experiencesin the store. That meansintegrating the key

attributes into the store’s Unique OrganisationValue PropositionTM,and utilising the entire

value chain, internal and external,to deliver the key attributes more effectively than

competitors (see,Knox and Maklan, 1998).

This study was undertakenamong an unsegmentedgroup of femalefashion shoppers.

However, it has been suggestedthat store imageperception is significantlyage-related(Joyce

 17

and Lambert, 1996), and that difErent socio-economicgroups do not perceivestores in the

sameway (Doyle and Fenwick, 1974-1975). Further researchmight addressthe extent to

which the value chainsof different segmentsof the population vary f?om one another, and the

feasibility of designingstore imagesto appealto specific market segments.

 18

REFERENCES

Amirani, S. and Gates,R. (1993), “An attribute-anchoredconjoint approachto measuring

store image”, International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management,2 1 (5), pp.30-
39.

Arons, L. (1961), “Does TV viewing influencestore image and shoppingfrequency?“,Journal

of Retailing, 37 (3), pp.l-13.

Beck, K.W. (1985), “Modernism and fashion:A social psychologicalinterpretation”, in

Solomon, M. (Ed), The PsychoZogyof Fashion, Lexington Book, Lexington, MA, pp.3-14.

Davis, F. (1985), “Clothing and fashionas communication”,in Solomon,M. (Ed), The

PsychoZogVof Fashion, Lexington Book, Lexington, MA, pp. 15-28.

Dichter, E. (1985a), “What’s in an image?“,Journal of ConsumerMarketing, 2 (4), pp.75-81.

Dichter, E. (1985b), “Why we dressthe way we do”, in Solomon, M. (Ed), The PsychoZogyof
Fashion, Lexington Book, Lexington, MA, pp.29-38.

Doyle, P. and Fenwick, I. (1974- 1975), “How store image affects shoppinghabits in grocery
chains”,Journal of Retailing, 50 (4), pp.39-52.

Engel, J.F. and Blackwell, R.D. (1982), ConsumerBehaviour, Dryden Press,New York, NY.

Evans, M. (1993), “Consumerbehaviourtowards fashion”, European Journal of Marketing,

23 (7), pp.7-16.

Goldsmith, R.E., Heitmeyer,J.R. and Freiden,J.B. (1992), “Social valuesand fashion

leadership”,Clothing and TextilesResearchJournal, 10 (3), pp.37-45.

Goldsmith, R.E., Heitmeyer, J.R. and Goldsmith, E.B. (1990), “Social valuesand being well
dressed”,Perceptual and Motor Shills, 70, p. 1010.

Grubb, E.L. and Grathwohl, H.L. (1967), “Consumer self-concept,symbolismand market

behaviour:A theoretical approach”,Journal of Marketing, 3 1 (4), pp. 22-27.

Gutman, J. (1982), ‘A means-endchain model basedon consumercategorisationprocesses”,

Journal of Marketing, 46 (2), pp.60-72.

Hirschman,E.C., Greenberg,B., and Robertson,D. (1978), “The intermarket reliability of

retail image research:An empirical examination”,Journal of Retailing, 54 (l), pp. 3-12.

Hirschman,E.C. and Stampfl, R.W. (1980), “Roles of retailing in the diffusion of popular
culture: Microperspectives”,JournaZof Retailing, 56 (l), pp. 16-36.
 19

James,D.L., Durand, R.M., and Dreves, R.A. (1976), “The use of a multi-attribute model in a
store image study”, Journal of Retailing, 52 (2), pp. 23-34.

Joyce, M.L. and Lambert, D.R. (1996), “Memories of the way storeswere and retail store
image”, International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management,24 (l), pp. 24-33.

Kaiser, S.B. (1985), The Social Psychologyof Clothing and PersonalAdornment, Macmillan
New York.

Keaveney,SM. and Hunt, K.A. (1992), “Conceptualisationand operationalisationof retail

store image: A caseof rival middle-leveltheories”, Journal of Academyof Marketing Science,
20 (2), pp. 165-175.

Kelly, G.A. (1955), Psychologyof Personal Constructs,W.W. Norton & Co., New York.

Klenosky, D.B., Gengler,C.E. and Mulvey, M.S. (1993), ‘Understandingthe factors

influencingski destinationchoice: A means-endanalytic approach”,JournaZof Leisure
Research,25 (4), pp. 362-379.

Knox, S.D. and Maklan, S. (1998), Competingon Value,FinancialTimes ProfessionalLtd.,

London.

Krippendorff, K. (1980), ContentAnalysis: An Introduction to its Methodology, Sage

PublicationsInc., Newbury Park.

Lewis, B.R. and Hawksley, A.W. (1990), “Gaining a competitive advantagein fashion
retailing”, International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management,18 (4), pp 21-32.

Lindquist, J.D. (1974-1975), “Meaning of image”, Journal of Retailing, 50 (4), pp. 29-38,
116.

Malhotra, N. (1983), “A thresholdmodel of store choice”, JournaEof Retailing, 59 (2), pp. 3-

21.

Marks, R. (1976), “Operationalisingthe concept of store image”, JournaZof Retailing, 52 (3),

pp. 37-46.

Martineau, P. (1957), Motivation in Advertising, McGraw-Hill Book Company,Inc., New

York.

Martineau, P. (1958), “The personalityof the retail store”, Havard BusinessReview,36 (l),
pp. 47-55.

Mulvey, M.S., Olson, J.C., Celsi, R.L. and Walker, B.A. (1994), “Exploring the relationships
betweenmeans-endknowledge and involvement”, Advancesin ConsumerResearch,2 1, pp.
51-57.
 20

Nevin, J. and Houston, M. (1980), “Image as a componentof attractivenessto intra-urban

shoppingareas”,Journal of Retailing, 52 (l), pp. 77-93.

Osman,M.Z. (1993), “A conceptualmodel of retail image influenceson loyalty patronage

behaviour”, International Reviewof Retail Distribution and ConsumerResearch,(2), pp.
133-148.

Oxenfeldt, A.R. (1974-1975), “Developing a favourableprice-quality image”, Journal of

Retailing, 50 (4), pp. 8-14.

Peter, J.P. and Olson, J.C. (1987), Consumerbehaviour, Marketing Strategy Perspectives,
Irwin Homewood.

Reynolds,T.J. and Gutman, J. (1988), “Laddering theory, method, analysis,and

interpretation”, Journal of Advertising Research,28 (l), pp. 1l-3 1.

Reynolds,T.J. and Jolly, J.P. (1980), “Measuring personalvalues:An evaluationof alternative

methods”, Journal of Marketing Research,17 (4), pp. 53 l-536.

Reynolds,T.J. and Rochon, J.P. (1990), “Means-endbasedadvertisingstrategy: copy testing

is not strategy assessment,”
Journal of BusinessResearch,22 (2), pp. 131- 142.

Rokeach,M.J. (1973), The Nature of Human Values,Free Press,New York.

Rose, G.M., Shoham,A., Kahle, L.R. and Batra, R. (1994), “Social values,conformity, and
dress”, Journal of Applied Social Psychology,24 (17), pp. 1501-1519.

Sharma,R.S. (1980), “Clothing behaviour,personality,and values:A correlationalstudy”,

Psychological Studies,25, pp. 137-142.

Sirgy, J.M. and Danes,J. (1982), “Testing selectedmodels”, in Mitchell, A. (Ed), Consumer
Research,Associationof ConsumerResearch,Chicago,pp. 556-561.

Sirgy, J.M., Samli, A.C., Bahn, K., and Varvoglish, T.G. (1989), “Congruencebetweenstore
image and self-image”,in Samli, A.C. (Eds), Retail Marketing Strategy: Planning,
Implementation and Control, Quorum Books, New York, pp. 207-219.

Stanley,T. and Sewall,M. (1976), “Images inputs to a probabilistic model: predicting retail
potential”, Journal of Marketing, 40 (3), pp. 48-53.

Unger, R. and Raymond,B. (1974), “External criteria as predictors of values:The importance

of race and attire”, Journal of Social Psychology,93, pp. 295-296.

Walker, B.A. and Olson, J.C. (1991), “Means-endchains:Connectingproduct with self’,

Journal of BusinessResearch,22 (2), pp. 11l-l 18.
 21

Weale, B. (1961), “Measuring the customer’s image of a departmentstore”, Journal of

Retailing, 37 (2), pp. 40-48.

Young, S. and Feigin, B., (1975), “Using the benefit chain for improved strategy formulation,”
Journal of Marketing, 39 (July), pp. 72-74.

Zimmer, M.R. and Golden, L.L. (1988), “Impressionsof retail stores: A content analysisof
consumerimages”,Journal of Retailing, 64 (3), pp. 265-293.
Table 1: STORES USED FOR ELICITATION PHASE

1. Benetton

2. Dorothy Perkins

3. French Connection

4. Gap
5. Laura Ashley

6. Miss Selfiidge

7. Next

8. Oasis

9. Principles

10. River Island

11. Top Shop

12. Warehouse
 Table 2: STORE IMAGE DESCRIPTORSELICITED IN PRELIMlNARY STUDY
High quality merchandise
Limited assortmentof merchandise
Wide / extensifiedsize ranges
High price / expensive
Reasonableprice
Bad value for money
Convenient/ good location
Can find shopseverywhere
Mainstream/ ordinary merchandise
Casual/ basicstyle clothing
Stylish I trendy merchandise
Less well-known store name
Good reputation
Big, spaciousstore layout
Unappealingfront & window display
Clean,neat merchandisedisplay
Pleasantstore atmosphere
Dull, dark store design
Loud music
Congested,busy looking environment
Attractive I interestingadvertising
No / unattractive specialsales/ promotions
For older customers
Upmarket / high status customers
Targeted at a narrow age-groupmarket
Younger salespersonnel
Bad overall impressionof the store
Professional/ exclusivestore
Good service
Low stafling level / limited service
More fitting rooms
Store cards available
Not designerlabel clothes
Low quality merchandise
Wide assortmentof merchandise
Limited size ranges
Low price / cheap
Unreasonableprice
Good value for money
Inconvenient/ poor location
Fewer shopsaround
Unique / distinctive merchandise
Formal / feminine style clothing
Old-fashioned/ classicalmerchandise
Well-known store name
Bad reputation
Small, crowded store layout
Eye catching front & window display
Dirty, crammedmerchandisedisplay
Unpleasantstore atmosphere
Exciting, bright, cheerful store design
Relaxingmusic
Uncongested,empty looking environment
No / unattractive advertising
Attractive specialsales/ promotions
For younger customers
Tacky / lower status customers
Targeted at a broad age-groupmarket
Older salespersonnel
Good overall impressionof the store
Ordinary / mainstreamstore
Poor service
High statig level / one-to-one service
Less fitting rooms
Store cards unavailable
Designerlabel clothes
Figure 1. MEANS-END CHAIN MODEL CONNECTING STORE KNOWLEDGE TO SELF KNOWLEDGE

(MEANS) (ENDS)
FF f-
I STORE KNOWLEDGE SELF KNOWLEDGE

r \-

Concrete Functional IDsycho-social

Abstract Instrumental
Consequence Consequence Terminal
Attributes Attributes Values
S S
Values
e.g. e.g. e.g.
> e.g. > e.g. e.g.
price impression independent _i=
time spent pleasure friendship
merchandise atmosphere cheerful
money spent displeasure achievement
layout value self-control
item bought status self-respect

LOW Level of Abstraction D

HIGH

Adapted from Walker and O lson (1991)

 Figure 2: HIERARCHICAL VALUE MAP

a.\.
:....
$$$$ Consequence

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

.-
1 Quality of Life

Nice feeling

Not Waste Money

Reputation !
 Figure 4. MEANS-END CHAIN DOMINANT HEDONIC ORIENTATION.

,
[ Quality of Life \/ Nice Fee,ing /‘ En~~?$~~d 1

I Durability 1

I Quality I
 CRANFIELD WORKING PAPERS
List No 9, 1995
SWP l/95 Andy Bytheway
“Information in the Supply Chain: Measuring
Supply Chain Performance”
SWP 3195Kevin Daniels, Gerry Johnson,& Leslie de
Chernatony
“Collective Frames of Reference,Recognition,
and Managers’Mental Models of Competition:
A Test of Two Industries”
SWP 4195Alison Rieple
“Staffing as a Lever of Strategic Change- The
Influence of Managerial Experience,Behaviour
and Values”
SWP 5195Grafton Whyte & Andy Bytheway
“Factors AITectingInformation Systems
Success”
SWP 6195Andy Bailey & Gerry Johnson
“The Processesof StrategyDevelopment”
SWP 7195Valerie Bence
“The Changing Market for Distribution:
Implications for Exe1Logistics”
SWP 8195Valerie Bence
“The Evolution of a Distribution Brand: The
Caseof Exe1Logistics”
SWP 9195Andy Bytheway
“A Review of ED1 Research”
SWP IO/95 Andy Bytheway
“A Review of Current Logistics Practice”
SWP 1l/95 Joe Peppard
“Broadening Visions of BPR: The Imperative
of Strategic Integration”
SWP 12/95 Simon Knox & David Walker
“Empirical Developmentsin the Measurement
of Involvement, Brand Loyalty and their
Structural Relationshipsin Grocery Markets”
SWP 13195Ashley Braganza & Andrew Myers
“Issues and Dilemmas Facing Public and
Private SectorOrganisationsin the Effective
Implementation of BPR’
SWP 14195John Mapes
“Compatibility and Trade-Off Between
Performance:An Alternative View”
SWP 15195Mike Sweeney& Marek Szwejczewski
“Manufacturing Standardsof Performancefor
Success”
SWP 16195Keith Thompson, Nicholas Thompson &
Roy Hill
“The Role of Attitudinal, Normative and
Control Beliefs in Drink Choice Behaviour”
SWP 17195Andy Bytheway
“Information Modelling for Management”
SWP 18195Mike Sweeney& Marek Szwejczewski
“Manufacturing Strategyand Performance:A
Study of the UK Engineering Industry”
SWP 19195Valerie Bence
“St.James’sHospital and Lucas Engineering
SystemsLtd - A Public/Private Sector
Collaboration in BPR Project A - Elective
Admissions”
SWP 20195Valerie Bence
“St.James’sHospital and Lucas Engineering
SystemsLtd - A Public/Private Sector
Collaboration in BPR Project B - The Re-
Organisation of Purchasingand Supplies”
SWP 21/95 Simon Knox & David Walker
“New Empirical Perspectiveson Brand
Loyalty: Implications for Segmentation
Strategyand Equity”
CRANFIELD WORKING PAPERS
List No lo,1996
SWP I/96 Andy Bailey & Gerry Johnson
“Patterns of StrategyDevelopment”
SWP 2196Simon Knox & David Walker
“Understanding ConsumerDecision Making in
Grocery Markets: New Evidence from the
Fishbein Model”
SWP 3196Kim James,Michael Jarrett & Donna Lucas
“PsychologicalDynamics and Organisational
Learning: from the Dysfunctional Organisation
to the Healthy Organisation”
SWP 4196Mike Sweeney& Marek Szwejczewski
“The Searchfor Generic Manufacturing
Strategiesin the UK Engineering Industry”
SWP 5196John Baker
“Agility and Flexibility: What’s the
Difference”
SWP 6/96 StephenAdamson, NoeleenDoherty & Claire
Viney
“30 Years On - What Have We Learned About
Careers?”
SWP 7/96 Keith Goffln, Marek Szwejczewski& Colin
New
“Supplier BaseManagement: An Empirical
Investigation”
SWP 8/96 Keith Goffln
“Operations ManagementTeaching on
EuropeanMBA Programmes”
SWP 9196JanetPrice, Ashley Braganza & Oscar Weiss
“The ChangeInitiative Diamond: A
Framework to BalanceBusinessProcess
Redesignwith other ChangeInitiatives”
CRANFIELD WORKING PAPERS
List No 11,1997
SWP l/97 Helen Peck
“Towards A Framework of Relationship
Marketing: A ResearchMethodology”
SWP 2197Helen Peck
“Towards A Framework of Relationship
Marketing: An Initial CaseStudy”
SWP 3197Chris Edwards & Joe Peppard
“A Critical Issue in BusinessProcessRe-
Engineering: Focusing the Initiative”
SWP 4197Joe Peppardand Don Fitzgerald
“The Transfer of Culturally-Grounded
ManagementTechniques:The Caseof
BusinessRe-Engineering in Germany”
SNP 5197Claire Viney & Shaun Tyson
“Aligning HRM with ServiceDelivery”
SWP 6197Andy Bailey & Gerry Johnson
“Logical or Processual?Defining
Incrementalism”
SWP 7197Keith Goffln
“Evaluating Customer Support Requirements
at the Product Design Stage”
SWP 8/97 Keith Goflin, Colin New & Marek
Szwejczewski
“How Innovative are UK Manufacturing
Companies?’
SWP 9/97 Kim James
“Beyond Individual StressManagement
Programmes:Towards an Organisational
SystemADoroach”
SNP lo/97 Mark Hambly & Richard Reeves
“The Application of Foresight in UK Research
and Development”
SWP 1l/97 Leslie Falkingham & Richard Reeves
“Context Analysis - A Technique For
Analysing Researchin a Field, Applied to
Literature on The Managementof R&D at the
SectionLevel”
SWP 12197Ali Jawad& Richard Reeves
“SuccessfulAcquisition of IT Systems”
SWP 14/97 Leslie Falkingham & Richard Reeves
“The Four Schoolsof Thought in Researchand
DevelopmentManagementand the
Relationship of the Literature to Practitioners’
Needs”
SWP 15197Val Singh
“A Qualitative Study of the Relationship
betweenGenderand Managerial Perceptionsof
Engineers’Commitment: Casesfrom the UK
and Sweden”
SWP 16/97 John Fielding
“Dividend Yields, BusinessOptimism and the
Predictability of Long Horizon Returns in the
UK”
SWP 17/97 Brenda Porter
“Audit Committees in Private and Public
SectorCorporatesin New Zealand: An
Empirical Investigation”
SWP 18197Brenda Porter
“Securing Quality Audit(or)s: Attempts at
Finding a Solution in the United States,United
Kingdom, Canadaand New Zealand”
SWP 19197Kim James& Michael Jarrett
“Group Regressionand Team Development:
Implications for the Top Team Consultant”
CRANFIELD WORKING PAPERS
List No 12,199s
SWP l/98 Zhang Lihong & Keith Goffln
“Joint Venture Manufacturing in China - Key
Opportunities for OperationsManagement
Research”
SWP 2/98 Francis Buttle
“I Heard it Through the Grapevine: Issuesin
Referral Marketing”
SWP 3198Helen Peck SWP 17/98 Haider Ah & Petronila Anselmo
“The Developmentand Implementation of Co- “Women’s Perceptionsof their Role Portrayals
Managed Inventory Agreementsin the UK in Print Adverts: A Qualitative Study”
Brewing Industry”
SWP 18/98 David Partington
SWP 4198Val Singh “Building GroundedTheories of Managerial
“Gender and Managerial Meanings of Behaviour from Interview Data”
Commitment in High Tech Engineering in the
UK and Sweden” SWP 19/98 Keith Thompson & Yat Ling Chen
“Personal Values Underlying Women’s
SWP 5198Joe Peppard Perceptionsof Fashion Store Images”
“IT in Organisations:A Framework for
Analysis”

SWP 6/98 Kusum Sahdev& SusanVinnicombe

“Downsizing and Survivor Syndrome:A Study
of HR’s Perceptionof Survivors’Responses”

SWP 7198Mark Jenkins & StevenFloyd

“Spinning your Wheels or Winning the Race:
Knowledge, Resourcesand Advantage in
Formula One Racing”

SWP 8198Francis Buttle &, A.Adlaigan

“Customer Attachment: A ConceptualModel
of Customer-OrganisationLinkage”

SWP 9198Joe Peppard

“IS/IT Managementin the Global Enterprise:
A Framework for Strategic Alignment”

SWP lo/98 Keith Goffin & Colin New

“Customer Support and Product Innovation:
Three Exploratory CaseStudies”

SWP 1l/98 JoePeppard& Patrick Butler

“Consumer Purchasingon the Internet:
Processesand Prospects”

SWP 12/98 Haider Ali & SueBirley

“The Role of Trust in the Marketing Activities
of EntrepreneursEstablishing New Ventures”

SWP 13/98 Joe Peppard& John Ward

“‘Mind the Gap’: Diagnosing the Relationship
betweenthe IT Organisation and the Rest of
the Business”:

SWP 14/98 Cliff Bowman & Veronique Ambrosini

‘Value Creation versus Value Capture:
Towards a Coherent Definition of Value in
Strategy - An Exploratory Study”

SWP 15/98 Alan Harrison

“Enablers and Inhibitors to Manufacturing
Strategy”

SWP 16/98 Joe Peppard& Rob Lambert

“Whose Job is it Anyway?: Organisational
IS/IT Competenciesfor Value Creation”