Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Unplanned Buying and In-Store Stimuli in Supermarkets
Unplanned Buying and In-Store Stimuli in Supermarkets
1 1 , 1 1 1 - 1 2 1 (1990)
and
Stephen Donald Goodey
Richardson- Vicks (Pty) Ltd, Johannesburg, South Africa
Manufacturers and retailers in industrialized countries spend large sums on advertising and/or
in-store promotion in the hope of increasing sales of their merchandise through 'impuise'
buying. Results are reported in this paper of the unplanned buying behaviour of 450 consumers
in 15 major supermarkets in South Africa compared with similar studies in the United States
and the United Kingdom. The findings indicate that unplanned buying is bigher in the United
States than in South Africa, but tbat tbe importance of in-store stimuli bolds true across
cultures. Analysis of otber variables sucb as brand loyalty, specific outlet, and presence of a
sbopping list is also reported on a cross-cultural basis.
0143-6570/90/020111-1 l$O5.5O
© 1990 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
112 R. ABRATT AND S. D. GOODEY
Stimuli. This view states that in-store stimuli pro- impulse product brand that has high consumer
duce impulse purchases simply because these act as acceptance and total unit sales of that brand, but
reminders of shopping needs. They assist in making found no relationship between the amount of shelf
purchase decisions and offer consumers new ways space given to an impulse brand that has low
of satisfying needs (Kollat and Willett, 1969). consumer acceptance and total unit sales of that
The second explanation is the customer- brand. These findings have been supported to some
commitment hypothesis. This view maintains that extent by later studies conducted by Curhan (1974),
unplanned purchasing, or differences between pur- Wilkinson et al. (1982) and Limentour (1984). The
chase intentions and actual purchases, are attribut- key point arising from the various studies is that the
able, in part, to incomplete measure of purchase effect of increasing facings on a shelf is likely to vary
plans (Kollat and Willett, 1969). The conclusion by product, by category, by brand, by in-store
made by Kollat and Willett in their 1967 study of location, by store, but diminishes once a certain
600 supermarket shoppers is: 'Unplanned purchas- number of facings have been obtained.
ing can be described as a blend of hypotheses. Some On-shelf position is an important factor. In the
unplanned purchases are probably precipitated by average South African supermarket the normal
exposure to in-store stimuli. Others are not un- shelf structure is similar to those found in North
planned at all, but are caused by the way in which America and Europe. Controlled tests carried out
the behaviour is usually measured.' If this conclu- in the United Kingdom and West Germany have
sion is accepted, then the results of various studies concluded that the on-shelf position does influence
measuring unplanned purchases, using the inter- the unit sales for supermarket products (Sewell,
viewing technique referred to by Kollat and Willett, 1984). The rationale is that consumers have a
would be inflated to a degree. That is, the rate of natural tendency to focus and perceive at eye level.
unplanned purchase would be lower due to the Displays can therefore increase the rate of un-
'consumer-commitment' explanation weighting. planned purchase in retail stores (Peak and Peak,
Both the 'exposure' and the 'consumer-com- 1977; Queich, 1983). Many studies have been con-
mitment' explanations rely upon 'in-store stimuli'. ducted in an attempt to quantify the sales respons-
Thus the importance of such stimuli is in no way iveness of displays. All these found that displays
diluted, whichever explanation is applicable. Under increased the sales of items displayed (Chevalier,
1975; Engel et al, 1978; Kennedy, 1970; Wilkinson
the 'exposure' explanation 'in-store stimuli' play a
et al, 1982).
vital role in generating impulse purchases. Under
the 'customer-commitment' explanation these One study suggested that in-store signage can
stimuli play a vital role in reminding the consumer effectively increase unit sales of products (Wood-
that certain products were (subconsciously) side and Waddle, 1975). From the manufacturer's
planned and should be purchased. viewpoint, price-off promotions are used to in-
crease market share and to get trial of the product
by non-users (Blattberg et al, 1981). Studies by
In-store Stimuli Hawkins and Doyle and Gidengil found price re-
In-store stimuli are promotional techniques em- duction to have a significant but often unpre-
ployed to increase unplanned (or subconsciously dictable effect on unit sales (Wilkinson et al, 1982).
planned) purchases of products. These techniques
include in-store siting, on-shelf positions, price-off
promotions, sampling, point-of-purchase displays,
Previous Research on Unplanned Buying in
coupons, and in-store demonstrations.
Supermarkets
Several tests have attempted to measure the re-
lationship between sales of a brand and its shelf Three major studies concerned with unplanned
space. In a test to measure the influence of shelf buying in supermarkets have been undertaken in
space upon sales of two brands of salt and pow- recent years: the Popai/Du Pont Consumer Buying
dered coffee cream, Cox (1970) found no relation- Habits Study (1977); the Johnson and Williams
ship between the amount of shelf space given to a study (1984); and the Kollat and Willett study of
staple product brand and total unit sales of that Consumer Impulse Purchasing Behaviour (1967).
brand. Cox found a positive relationship, however, The Popai/Du Pont study classified buying deci-
between the amount of shelf space given to an sions into four categories, which are referred to by
UNPLANNED BUYING 113
most researchers involved in monitoring unplan- This study is an important one because it not
ned buying: only gives quantitative data related to unplanned
buying but it attempts to explain customer dif-
(1) Specifically planned purchase. Those items ferences in unplanned purchasing behaviour and
where the consumer had in mind a brand or discusses competing explanations for unplanned
item and purchased that brand or item as purchasing. The South African results are com-
planned. pared with those of other studies undertaken in the
(2) Generally planned purchase. Where the con- United Kingdom and the United States.
sumer had a product category or a product,
without a specified brand, in mind.
RESEARCH DESIGN
(3) Substitute purchase. Where the consumer
changed from a specifically planned item to
Propositions
another.
(4) Unplanned purchase. Where the consumer pur- The research questions investigated in this study
chases an item that was not planned at all. are:
PI There is a high incidence of unplanned non-
They define in-store decisions as the all-important
food purchase decisions made in South
buying classification figure arrived at by combining
African supermarkets.
generally planned, substitute and unplanned
purchases. P2 The rate of incidence of 'unplanned' pur-
chase decisions varies across product cat-
In the Popai/Du Pont Study it appears that
egories.
approximately 65% of all supermarket purchase
decisions were made in-store with over 50% of P3 The rate of 'unplanned' purchases in super-
these being unplanned. The rate of unplanned pur- markets varies across factors such as the
chase differs for different product categories. The presence of shopping lists, the supermarket
study went further and asked shoppers who had selected and in-store stimuli.
purchased a previously untried brand what had P4 Consumers tend to spend more in super-
brought their attention to the brand in-store. markets than they planned.
Thirty-eight per cent stated retail forces, 29% P5 Brand switching in supermarkets varies be-
manufacturer forces and 24% word-of-mouth tween product classes.
forces. Nine per cent said other reasons. These
results highlight the importance of display in super- THE SAMPLE
markets in generating trial of products among
consumers. This research covered 450 consumers in 15 major
The Johnson and Williams (1984) study was supermarkets located in the greater Johannesburg
conducted over a period of a year and used a area, covering the Northern, Southern, Eastern and
technique similar to that of the Popai/Du Pont Western suburbs. The 15 supermarkets were geo-
study. They found that 20% of purchasing deci- graphically selected to provide a fair representation
sions were made inside the store and that there of the South African consumer mix from an
were important differences between the product economic, social and cultural point of view. The
categories. supermarkets were chosen from the three major
The Kollat and Willett (1984) study was conduc- chains that dominate the retail supermarket indus-
ted in eight stores of a national supermarket chain try in South Africa.
over a four-week period. The methodology em- The sample size of 450 supermarket shoppers
ployed was a modification and expansion of the Du was similar to the studies conducted in other coun-
Pont approach, as it was used in earlier years. They tries with larger populations than South Africa.
found that the average customer purchased 50.5% See, for example, Prasad (1975); Kollat and Willett
of the products on an unplanned basis. The in- (1967); Johnson and Williams (1984); Popai/Du
cidence of unplanned purchases varies greatly for Pont (1987). Table 1 presents the demographics of
shoppers, the maximum number of unplanned pur- respondents and indicates that there is a fair repres-
chases being 40.0, the minimum 0 and the standard entation of the South African urban consumer from
deviation 9.2. an economic, social and cultural point of view.
114 R. ABRATT AND S. D. GOODEY
"The Johnson and Williams study seems to have combined generally planned and unplanned
purchase intentions. This makes a comparison with the United Kingdom relating to 'in-store'
decisions difficult.
An important issue that manufacturers and re- activity. In order to obtain a workable number of
tailers must address is; what factors affect in-store product categories, those categories were grouped
purchasing decisions and is the 'unplanned' and the together.^
'in-store' decision rate the same for all product The net effect of this exercise was to reduce the
categories? product categories from 159 to 28 that were utilized
for the test of the proposition. The data relating to
these 28 product categories are classified into the
Test of Proposition two four relevant planning categories shown in Table 4.
P2 The rate of incidence of unplanned purchase Table 4 shows that the rate of incidence of un-
decisions varies for different product cat- planned purchase decisions does vary between the
egories. product categories. The rates of unplanned pur-
chases for various product categories should be
The database referred to 159 different product useful information for both manufacturers and re-
categories, some of which had very low purchase tailers. Bellenger et al (1978) state: 'Items with a
high percentage of impulse purchasing typically evidence of statistically significant differences be-
need greater stress on in-store promotion. To make tween these product classes. This appears obvious
decisions relative to which items to support with in- from a glance down the unplanned purchase rate
store displays, increased shelf space, and the like; column in Table 4. Thus proposition 2 is accepted.
the retailer needs to monitor the rate of impulse
purchasing by specific merchandise line.'
Simmons (1968) supports this view: 'Awareness
of the level of impulse buying does provide a useful Test of Proposition Three
guide to the allocation of resources. It indicates P3 The following factors affect the rate of un-
products where below the line expenditure would planned purchase behaviour in supermarkets:
appear to be warranted . . . and others where it
would not.' Kollat and Willett (1969) question the (1) Presence of a shopping list;
usefulness of such information, stating that 'some (2) Supermarket selected;
unplanned purchasing is not unplanned at all, but (3) In-store stimuh.
an artifact of the way in which the behaviour is As unplanned purchases and planned purchases are
measured, true unplanned purchasing rates are not dependent, the Chi-square statistical technique
considerably lower than those that are currently is used to test for any significant differences be-
accepted'. They conclude that due to possible meas- tween the variables with respect to the rate of
urement error there may be a smaller range be- unplanned purchasing. Kollat and Willett (1967)
tween products purported to have high and low found that 'a shopping list influences unplanned
unplanned purchase rates; and the use of these rates purchasing only when more than 15 products are
as a single criterion for assignment of promotional purchased'. In this study, most respondents pur-
eflfort may be questionable. chased more than 15 items.
The data represented here may well be inflated Table 6 shows the significance of a shopping list
according to Kollat and Willett since the account- with respect to unplanned purchases. There ap-
ability of the consumer-commitment hypothesis pears to be a difference between consumers with a
has not been taken into consideration. The propo- shopping list and those without shopping lists with
sition that the rate of unplanned purchase diflers respect to the rate of unplanned purchasing. Thus,
for product categories appears to be valid. the results support the findings of Kollat and Wil-
Proposition 2 was evaluated for statistical sig- lett (1967).
nificance by analysing selected product categories The competing major supermarkets have a com-
to test the hypothesis that there is a difference mon objective of maximizing consumer expendi-
between product classes with respect to unplanned ture in their stores. Therefore the management of
purchases. The product classes were selected to these companies should be interested in finding out
present different products. This is shown in Table 5. what expenditure is unplanned and, furtlier, what
The Chi-square test suggests that there is strong factors influence unplanned purchasing. Assuming
the in-store stimuli proposition is valid, manage-
ment of these supermarkets have a controllable
means of increasing consumer purchases of selected
product categories and brands—the employment
Table 5. Diiference Between Product Classes of in-store promotional techniques. An analysis of
with Respect to Rate of Unplanned the in-store stimuli records completed shows that
Purchase all the supermarkets utilized end-of-aisle displays,
Product class Actual Theoretical check-out displays, special stands and hanging dis-
Toilet soap Planned 97 92.4 plays. It appears that very little use was made of in-
Unplanned 14 18.6
store radio and promoters. Table 6 compares the
Fizzy drinks Planned 58 68.2
Unplanned 24 13.8 unplanned purchase rates of the three supermarket
Toothpaste Planned 78 72.4 groups, and the Chi-square test is used to test for
Unplanned 9 14.6 any significant difference. The Chi-square test indi-
cates no evidence of a statistically significant dif-
Computed Chi-square—13.1149. ference between the different supermarkets with
Critical Chi-square—5.991.
p < 0.05 respect to unplanned purchasing.
118 R. ABRATT AND S. D. GOODEY
Computed Chi-square—22.9376
Critical Chi-square—3.84146
p < 0.05
Computed Chi-square—4.0486
Critical Chi-square—5.9915
p < 0.05
p. 29) reference to it: 'If the customer commitment Actual Expenditures Compared with
Table 8.
explanation has any validity, it would seem that Spending Intentions
measured purchase intentions should correspond
Percentage of respondents
more closely to actual purchase intentions when Rand spending No. of Less The More
the customers' time and effort are minimized.' In intentions respondents than same than Total
their study, Kollat and Willett found that 'there is a 21-30 178 4 49 47 100
31-40 51 18 25 57 100
strong tendency for actual expenditure to approx-
41-50 45 32 24 44 100
imate spending intentions. Shoppers are more hke- 51-60 33 24 42 34 100
ly to spend less than they anticipated than they are 61-70 21 38 29 33 100
to spend more than they planned'. 71-80 16 50 19 31 100
81-100 29 48 17 35 100
This evidence seems to detract from the in-store
101-150 48 31 27 42 100
stimuli proposition, for if, as evidenced from the 151-200 17 47 42 11 100
22.5% unplanned purchase rate in this study, con- 201-250 9 — 67 33 100
sumers are stimulated in-store to make unplanned Over 250 3 — 100 — 100
and hence unbudgeted purchases, it would seem Total 450
likely that their spending intentions and actual Overall percentages 20 39 41 100
expenditures will approximate. As in the Kollat
and Willett (1967) study, respondents were asked
what they intended to spend in the supermarket
during the entry interview and their actual expendi- Table 9. Brand Switching as Percentage of Plan-
ture was recorded from the cash register on com- ned Specific Purchase Intentions
pletion of the shopping process. Johnson Cavallo
Popai/ and and
The results are presented in Table 8 and do not Product Du Pont This Williams Temares
support the finding of Kollat and Willett (1967). In category study study study study
Table 10. Test of Significance Between Product and hence tend to be more restrained when shop-
Classes with Respect to Brand Switch- ping in supermarkets. These reasons are speculative
Ing and more cross-cultural research in this area must
Product class Actual Theoretical
be done.
Toothpaste Intended brand 60 60.5 It may be short-sighted, however, for retailers to
Other brand 4 3.5 focus exclusively on increasing unplanned pur-
Toilet soap Intended brand 70 70.0 chases as a retailing strategy. This is because un-
Other brand 4 4.0 planned purchases can be of two broad types;
Washing Intended brand 133 132.5
powder additional consumption items and advance pur-
Other brand 7 7.5
chases. That is, some unplanned items are really
Computed Chi-square—0.1106. just stocking-up behaviour that translates into re-
Critical Chi-square—5.991. duced purchases later. Thus, increasing unplanned
p < 0.05 stocking up (for example, of reduced-price items)
may not be to the supermarket's advantage. Items
that were never intended to be purchased (for
Table 10 shows the test of significance between example a candy bar) may refiect full-price items
certain product categories with respect to brand with increased profit to the retailer.
switching. The findings in this Table indicate that Perhaps this limited study will provide a catalyst
there is no evidence of a statistically significant for manufacturers and retailers to co-operate to-
difference between product classes with respect to wards monitoring and accurately measuring the
brand switching. This supports the findings of 'pure' rates of unplanned purchase, for both indi-
Cavallo and Temares (1969), who found no vidual brands and product categories, on an on-
evidence of a statistically significant difference going basis. The pure measurement of unplanned
between vegetables, detergents and soaps, and purchasing would be equated to in-store purchase
beverages with respect to brand switching. decisions and thus the rate of unplanned purchase
for brands and products would be a criterion for
evaluating the effectiveness of both advertising and
IMPLICATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS in-store promotional activity.
R. C. Curhan (1974). The effects of merchandising and port, Richardson-Vicks, Paris, June.
temporary promotional activities on the sales of fresh R. A. Marquardt, J. C. Makens and R. G. Roe (1983).
fruits and vegetables in supermarkets. Journal of Mar- Retail Management, New York: The Dryden Press.
keting Research 11, August, 286-94. G. F. McKinnon, J. P. Kelly and E. D. Robinson (1981).
P. Doyle and B. Z. Gidengil (1977). A review of in-store Sales effects of point-of-purchase in-store signing.
experiments. Journal of Retailing 53, Summer, 47-62. Journal of Retailing 57, Summer, 49-63.
J. F. Engel, D. T. Kollat and R. D. Blackwell (1978). H. S. Peak and E. F. Peak (1977). Supermarket Mer-
Consumer Behavior, New York: Holt, Rinehart and chandising and Management, Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Winston. Prentice-Hall.
J. F. Engel, M. R. Warshaw and T. C. Kinnear (1987). Point-of-Purchase Institute of the United States of Amer-
Promotional Strategy, Homewood, III: Irwin. ica (1977). Popai/Du Pont Consumer Buying Habits
M. Johnson and J. Williams (1984). Towards more ef- Study—Supermarkets, New York.
fective point of sale. Market Research Society Confer- V. Prasad (1975). Unplanned buying in two retail set-
ence Papers, London, 208-33. tings. Journal of Retailing 51, 3-12.
J. R. Kennedy (1970). The effect of display location on the J. A. Queich (1983). It's time to make trade promotion
sales and pilferage of cigarettes. Journal of Marketing more productive. Harvard Business Review May/June,
Research 7, May, 210-15. 130-36.
D. T. Kollat (1966). A Decision-Process Approach to B. Sewell (1984). Merchandising Seminar. Institute of
Impulse Purchasing, Science, Technology and Market- Marketing Management, London, April.
ing, American Marketing Association, September, 626. M. Simons (1968). Point of sale advertising. Journal of the
D. T. Kollat and R. P. Willett (1967). Consumer impulse Market Research Society 10, 2.
purchasing behaviour. Journal of Marketing Research R. E. Stanley (1977). Promotion: Advertising, Publicity,
4, February, 21-31. Personal Selling, Sales Promotion, Englewood Cliffs,
D. T. Kollat and R. P. Willett (1969). Is impulse purchas- NJ: Prentice-Hall.
ing really a useful concept for marketing decisions? J. B. Wilkinson, J. Mason and C. H. Paksoy (1982).
Journal of Marketing 33, January, 79-83. Assessing the impact of short term supermarket
P. Kotler (1984). Marketing Management: Analysis, strategy variables. Journal of Marketing Research 19,
Planning and Control, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice- February, 72-85.
Hall. A. Woodside and G. Waddle (1975). The effects of in-
J. Limentour, J. Lohr, L. Phillips and P. Robinson (1984). store advertising. Journal of Advertising Research June,
Merchandising Task Force Report, Unpublished Re- 29-33.