STATUS SEEKING IN LUXURY CONSUMER BEHAVIOR

Raluca CIORNEA, Marius Dorel POP, Mihai Florin BACILA, Alexandra Maria TIRCA (DRULE)
Babes-Bolyai University of Cluj-Napoca
raluca.ciornea@econ.ubbcluj.ro

Abstract : As the luxury market is permanently changing, becomes essential for luxury researchers and marketers
to better understand how consumers perceive luxury and which are the drivers behind their buying behavior.
This study proposed an integrated conceptual framework regarding status seeking or consumption of
Romanian luxury consumers, for future measurements which may be used as basis for marketing strategies.
Our model indicated the existence of relationships between some individual, product or social related aspects
and the social status wanted and perceived by luxury consumers.
Keywords: luxury consumer, luxury consumer behavior, status seeking, status consumption

1. INTRODUCTION

Old since the dawn of humanity (Kapferer and Batien, 2009), luxury is a complex concept both sociological and
psychological (Pop et al., 2009), surrounded by ambiguity (Dubois et al., 2001) which lacks of an universally
accepted definition(Godey et al., 2009). As Dubois and Paternaul(1995) claim, the buying process of luxury items is
also elusive and thus is essential to study the potential drivers behind it. Considering that for many consumers the
main reason to purchase luxuries is their symbolic meanings(Dubois and Duquesne,1993) we decided to focus our
study on “status seeking or consumption” as the most important driver behind a luxury consumer behavior(Aiello
and Donvito(2006) ranked “status-prestige” as the first position for most frequently used attributes when defining
luxury).This study is important as in Romanian literature there are few studies on the luxury domain, less on the
marketing of luxury and none discussing “the status seeking or consumption”. At international level, the status
seeking issue is debated in several studies, but as the concept of luxury changes across cultures(Yeoman and Beattie,
2006), the results shouldn’t be extrapolated without a proper validation. Furthermore the Romanian luxury market
has some particularities due to the fact that Romania is only two decades after the fall of communist regime, a
regime which applied the concept of social equality, changing the social stratification and the level of collectivism.

2. DEFINITION, CONCEPTUALIZATION AND PROPOSITIONS

Even if some authors use as synonyms the terms “status”, “prestige” and “luxury”, in our opinion each has different
meaning. In our study, through status we’ll understand a position or rank occupied in a given social system, awarded
to an individual by others.Thus, the status consumption or seeking is “the behavioral tendency to value status and
acquire and consume products that provide status to the individual, what the status consumer value is status quality
that the things let them feel”(Lai et al., 2005, pg. 3). In order to better understand the luxury consumer and its
specific behavior, all relevant elements related to status consumption should be integrated into a model that may
serve as the basis for further marketing strategies for the Romanian luxury market. Based on theoretical research, we
will analyze selected variables, with regards to the possible links to status seeking, as in the following model:

Reference groups Public consumption

Reference groups High
High status
status luxuries
luxuries Public consumption
consumption
consumption
Individual materialism Insecure status
Individual materialism Insecure status
Status
Status
Individual value consciousness
Individual value consciousness consumption
consumption

Individual price consciousness Social

Social Luxury
Luxury
Individual price consciousness
consumption
consumption
(buy,use,display)
(buy,use,display)
Products quality Conspicuous
Conspicuous
Products quality
consumption
consumption
Products price
Products price
Fig. 1. Status consumption-the conceptual model
2.1 Elements of the model

Luxury products involve symbolic (Hoyer and MacInnis, 2001) and thus the most commonly acknowledged reason
to purchase them is not related to the functional benefits, but to the consumption of their symbolic
meaning(Chaudhuri and Majumdar, 2006) as a way to signal status(Wiedmann et al., 2007).A long period of time,
luxury was the visible result of social stratification, and as Veblen said the affluent classes of specific societies
expressed their economical superiority by the purchase, use and display of luxury products which served as status
symbols. Even if those times changed and the status is displayed in more subtle ways(Mason, 1992), status
consumption still exists(Frank, 1999) as a consequence of the need for a form of social stratification - today’s luxury
function (Kapferer and Bastien, 2009). A significant number of authors state that luxury is a sign of status in modern
societies and as Arghavan and Zaichkowsky’s study(2000) shows, luxuries will help their holders to achieve higher
perceived status through the product recognition, acceptance and admiration. But the more a consumer from this
societies seeks status, the more “will engage in behaviors, such as the consumption of status symbols, that increase
their status”(Eastman et al., 1999, pg. 3). There are also differences between societies, as the more a society centers
on economic status differences the more people will attach greater importance to symbolic products able to make
this difference (Wong and Ahuvia, 1998). Romania differs from most of the countries studied, because is an ex-
communist country where the regime aligned the social classes leading subsequently to an even greater desire for
social differentiation : according to the GfK Group’s study(2008) almost a double number of Romanians stated that
status is a very important personal value and also important are the objects seen as status symbols and experiences
of life style which express a certain status. All this leads us to our firs proposition:
P1: For Romanian luxury consumers, the purchasing, using and displaying of luxury goods is related to the
perceived social status.

Even if theorists have not yet agreed on a single definition, materialism may be seen as “ a degree to which
individuals principally find possessions to play a central role in one’s life” (Wiedmann et al., 2007, pg.7 ). Studies
have showed that comparing to non-materialistic consumers, the materialistic ones purchase more luxury brands
(Belk, 1985), especially those that could be publicly displayed (Richins,1994). Also, the higher consumers level of
materialism, the more they engage in status consumption(Lai et. al, 2005). Belk and Ger’s study(1999) showed that
even if Romanian consumers regard materialism as something negative, almost all engaged in materialistic
consumption behavior, using as an excuse their experience under communism and the deprivation. When analyzing
more world countries in a previous study in 1996, the two same authors discovered that in the early 1990, Romania
was one of the top 4 countries of level of materialism.Thus, we propose:
P2: For Romanian luxury consumers, there is a relationship between the level of materialism and the status
consumption.

According to Atwal and Williams(2009, pg.339) “ traditionally [luxury] has been associated with exclusivity, status
and quality”. While Vigneron and Johnson(1999) showed that one of the five perceived dimensions of a luxury
brand is quality, Dubois and Paternault(1995) identified that one of the six characteristics of luxury is the excellent
quality. Even if consumers expect luxury products to show evidence of greater quality (Roux, 1995), what really
differentiates them from premium brands or products is that luxury goes beyond functionality (Kapferer and Bastien,
2009), being able to satisfy psychological needs(Arghavan and Zaichkowsky, 2000) such as the need to achieve
social status(Wiedmann et al., 2007). Even if one reason for the consumers to purchase luxury products is their
superior quality (Wiedermann et al., 2007), according to luxury literature, many consumers buy and consume luxury
products primarily for their symbolic meaning(Chaudhuri and Majumdar, 2006; Dubois and Duquesne, 1993). Even
if some luxury consumers purchase luxury products especially for their quality (Dubois et al., 2001) as we have
shown in the previous paragraphs, Romanian consumers are more status-seeking oriented, and thus for most of them
the main reason for purchasing, using and displaying luxury products is related to the social benefit conferred. Thus:
P3a: For most Romanian luxury consumers, the social status conferred by luxury products is more important than
the quality.

In case of luxury products, high price is seen as a positive aspect (Wiedmann et al., 2007), as is perceived as an
expected consequence of excellent quality (Dubois et al., 2001), which also can signal status or prestige to the
consumer(Lichtenstein et al., 1993). As Vigneron and Johnson(1999, pg. 4-5) underline, the status-seeking
consumers “tend to use a price cue also as a surrogate indicator of prestige “, but Veblenian consumers attach a
“greater importance to price as prestige indicator”. The profile of Romanian luxury consumers is more similar to the
profile of Veblenian consumers which leads us to the following proposition:
P3b: For Romanian luxury consumers, price is as an indicator of status

Eastman and Eastman’s recent study(2011) showed that luxury consumers with interest in status consumption are
less price conscious and less value conscious, and more brand conscious. As showed, for Romanian luxury
consumers the main reason for the consumption of luxuries is obtaining status not quality and price is seen as
indicator for status, consequently, the following proposition emerge:
P3c: Romanian luxury consumers with great interest in status seeking are less price conscious and less value
conscious

According to a large group of researchers the reference groups influence consumer’s attitudes, behaviors and
purchase decisions. Luxury consumption implies the purchase of goods “that represents value to both the individual
and their reference group” (Wiedmann et al., 2007, pg.3) and the level of the reference groups influence is related to
the level of social involvement associated with the products (Witt and Bruce, 1970) such as status seeking. Also
status consumption implies publicly consumption of luxuries characterized by the influence of reference groups
(Bearden and Etzel,1982). Luxury consumers from collectivist countries, as Romania( Mihut and Lungescu, 2006),
have similar social needs and behavior; thus expanding the results of the studies conducted in collectivist Asian
societies, we can say that in order to conform to reference group norms Romanian consumers buy luxury goods
which they feel that respect the group norms and will be recognized and approved by their groups( Scutte and
Ciarlante, 1998). This leads us to the proposition that:
P4: For Romanian luxury consumers, the purchasing, using and displaying of luxury products as status symbols is
positively related to the reference groups.

According to Wyatt et al. (2008) status insecurity denotes the degree to which people are concerned with appearing
low-class or feel insecure about their social position. Status insecurity leads to status-seeking (Wyatt et al., 2008)
and as Eastman et al. (1999) states, the more consumers seek status, the more they will engage in behaviors that will
increase the status. According to luxury literature, through luxury purchasing consumers may provide a visible
signal of membership in a higher status group. Status insecure consumers are likely to compensate their situation by
purchasing luxury items that convey status and avoiding those that may confer an inferior position (Wyatt el al,
2008). A high level of status insecurity most probably won’t be compensated by increasing the number of purchases,
but rather by choosing luxury brands that confer a higher status, because according to luxuty literature, luxury in the
quantitative sense is less common. Additionally, post communism led to an increase level of inequality in Romania,
amplifying the concerns with social position, and leading to increased status competition and status insecurity.
Consequently, the following proposition emerges:
P5: For Romanian luxury consumers, high level of status insecurity determines the purchase, use and display of
luxuries which confer high status.

Scutte and Ciarlante(1998) have observed that collectivist countries, and here we include Romania, place a higher
value on conspicuous consumption than individualist ones. The conspicuous implies public consumption of luxury
products(O’Cass and McEwen, 2004) that signal wealth, status, and power(Eastman et al., 1999). Also status
insecurity, specific to Romanian luxury consumers too, implies the purchase of luxury brands that confer higher
status. But, as reference groups influence is stronger for the ‘visible’ purchases(Bearden and Etzel,1982) and as
status validation or transfer is made through public consumption and display, there is no need to buy products which
confer the highest status for private consumption. Consequently:
P6: For Romanian luxury consumers, purchase, use and display luxury goods which confer higher status in public
and purchase, use and display luxury goods which confer lower status than in private.

Even if status consumption and conspicuous consumption are different notions, it has been argued that the first one
implies or leads to the second one (O’cass and McEwen, 2004). Thus, Eastman et al. (1999) argued that heightened
status seeking behaviour which leads to an increase in consumption of status goods implies conspicuousness. Scutte
and Ciarlante(1998) have observed that collectivist countries (we include Romania too), place a higher value on
conspicuous consumption than individualist ones. Also as showed previously, Romanian luxury consumers are more
status-seeking oriented. Thus:
P7: In case of Romanian luxury consumers, there is a strong connection between status consumption and
conspicuous consumption.

LIMITS AND FURTHER RESEARCH

Even if we created this model using theoretical research and we consider it valid, a future empirical research will
help it to be more easily embraced managers, as some propositions have been made basing on aspects which are not
necessarily findings from marketing studies, but logical implications. Also a future research will allow establishing
of the most appropriate questions that underline each proposition.
Knowledge of relevant aspects regarding status-seeking is important both for managerial practice and researchers, as
may lead to a better understanding of the luxury consumers, and of the drivers behind their buying behavior. The
model may serve as basis for further marketing strategies for the Romanian luxury market. Of course our framework
is a first step and should be developed in many ways, for example discussing the model in case of different
categories of luxury products. Much more, as status-seeking is not the only driver behind the consumer behavior,
future researches on each driver should be developed in order to better understand the most important variable
which is the underling basis for every marketing strategy in luxury domain and not only- the consumer behavior.
BIBLIOGRAPHY:

 Aiello G., Donvito R. (2006): L’evoluzione del concetto di lusso e la gestione strategica della marca.Un’analisi
qualitativa delle percezioni sul concetto, sulla marca e su un prodotto di lusso, available online at
http://www.escp-eap.net/conferences/marketing/2006_cp/Materiali/Paper/It/Aiello_Donvito.pdf
 Arghavan N., Zaichkowsky J.L. (2000): Do counterfeits devalue the ownership of luxury brands? Journal of
Product and Brand Management, 9(7), pg. 485-497
 Atwal G., Williams A. (2009): Luxury brand marketing –the experience is everything!, Journal of Brand
Management, 16(5/6), pg. 338-346
 Bearden W.O., Etzel M.J. (1982): Reference Group Influence on Product and Brand Purchase Decisions, Journal
of Consumer Research, 9(September), pg. 183-194
 Belk R.W. (1985): Materialism: Trait Aspects of Living in the Material World, Journal of Consumer Research,
12(December), pg. 265-280
 Chaudhuri H.R., Majumdar S. (2006): Of diamonds and desires: Understanding Conspicuous Consumption from
a Contemporary Marketing Perspective, Academy of Marketing Science Review, 11
 Dubois B., Duquesne P. (1993): The Market for Luxury Goods: Income vs. Culture, European Journal of
Marketing, 27(1), pg. 35-44
 Dubois B., Paternaul C. (1995): Understanding the World of International Luxury Brands : The ‘Dream Formula’,
Journal of Advertising Research, 4(July-August), pg. 69-76
 Dubois B., Laurent G., Czellar S. (2001): Consumer rapport to luxury: analyzing complex and ambivalent
attitudes, Working paper 736, HEC School of Management, Jouy-en-Josas, France
 Eastman J.K., Eastman K.L. (2011): Perceptions of status consumption and the economy: an exploratory look –
abstract, The 2011 Maui International Academic Conference, available online at
http://conferences.cluteonline.com/index.php/IAC/2011HI/paper/view/43
 Eastman J.K., Goldsmith R.E., Flynn L.R. (1999): Status consumption in consumer behavior: Scale development
and validation, Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 7(3), pg. 41-53
 Frank R.H. (1999): Luxury fever: money and hapiness in an era of excess, NY Free Press, New York
 Ger G., Belk R.W(1999):Accounting for materialism in four cultures,Journal of Material Culture,4(2), pg.183-204
 Godey B., Lagier J., Pederzoli D., (2009): A measurement scale of “aesthetic style” applied to luxury goods
stores, International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, 37(6), pg.527 – 537
 Hoyer W.D., MacInnis D.J. (2001): Consumer Behavior, 2nd edition, Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston
 Kapferer J.N., Bastien V. (2009): The specificity of luxury management: Turning marketing upside down, Journal
of Brand Management, 16(5/6), pg. 311-322
 Lai M.C., Hsieh Y.F., Chu Y.C. (2005): The relationships among materialism, luxury consumption and social
value , pg. 1-13 available online at ibacnet.org/bai2007/proceedings/Papers/2007bai7314.doc
 Lichtenstein D.R., Ridgway N.M., Netemeyer R.G. (1993): Price perceptions and consumer shopping behavior: A
field study, Journal of Marketing Research, 30(May), pg. 234-245
 Mason R. (1992): Modelling the demand for status goods, working paper, Department of Business and
Management Studies, University of Salford, UK
 Mihut I., Lungescu D. (2006): Dimensiuni culturale in managementul romanesc, Management and Marketing, 1,
available online at http://www.managementmarketing.ro/pdf/articole/1.pdf
 O’Cass A., McEwen H. (2004): Exploring consumer status and conspicuous consumption, Journal of Consumer
Behavior, 4(1), pg. 25-39
 Pop A.N, Fotea S.I., Mihoc F., Pop N.L. (2009): A holistic approach of relationship marketing in launching luxury
new products case study:Research of the demand for housing in residential complexes in Oradea, 4(1), pg.808-
813
 Richins M.L. (1994):Valuing things: the public or private meanings of possessions, Journal of Consumer
Research, 21(December), pg. 504-521
 Roux E. (1995): Consumer evaluation of luxury brand extention, EMAC Conference, May,ESSEC, Paris, France
 Scutte H., Ciarlante D. (1998): Consumer behavior in Asia, NewYork University Press, New York
 Veblen T. (1989/1899): The Theory of the Leisure Class, MacMillan, New York
 Vigneron F., Johnson L.W. (1999): A Review and a Conceptual Framework of Prestige-Seeking Consumer
Behavior, Academy of Marketing Science, 3(1)
 Wiedmann K.P., Hennigs N., Siebels A. (2007): Measuring Consumers’s Luxury Value Perception: A Cross-
Cultural Framework, Academy of Marketing Science Review, 7
 Witt R.E, Bruce G.D.(1970):Purchase decisions and group influence,Journal of Marketing Research,7, pg.533-535
 Wong N.Y., Ahuvia A.C. (1998): Personal taste and family face: luxury consumption in Confucian and Western
societies, Psychology and Marketing, 15(5), pg. 432-441
 Wyatt R., Gelb B.D., Geiger-Oneto S. (2008): How Advertising Reinforces Minority Consumers’ Preference for
National Brands, Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising, 30(1), pg. 61-70
 Yeoman I., McMahon-Beattie U. (2006): Luxury markets and premium pricing, Journal of Revenue Pricing
Management, 4(4), 319-328.
 http://www.gfk-ro.com/public_relations/press/multiple_pg/004572/index.ro.html
How to cite:
Ciornea Raluca, Pop Marius D., Băcilă Mihai F., Drule Alexandra M., Status seeking in
luxury consumer behavior,Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Business
Excelence, Ed Universitatii Transilvania din Brasov, Editor: Constantin Bratianu, Gabriel
Bratucu, Dorin Lixandroiu, Nicolae Al. Pop, Sebastian Vaduva, ISBN 978-973-1747-23-1,
(2011): 115-118.