an investigation of marketing crisis, and outcomes influence on...

Business Research Review Volume 2, Issue 1, June 2016 ISSN 2518-6698

Copyright: ©The author(s). 2016. All Rights Reserved. 51

An Investigation of Marketing Crisis, and Outcomes influence on Buyer

Behavior

Asaad Ali Karam1

Abstract

Marketing crises can seriously impact the viability of a company, and buyers by considering the elements

that affect the outcome of a marketing crisis, organizations could manage crisis situations to reduce

negative outcomes. While crises have been studied from an organizational view, this study investigates

the buyers experience when exposed to a crisis. Therefore, the aims of this paper are to investigate the

importance of each element of marketing crises; That is, corporate social responsibility, organizational

response, time and external effects, influencing buyer's behavior and study variations in the buyer

behavior across crisis extent levels. In order to examine outcomes and the relative importance of the

above elements, suitable analysis for the quantitative approach is used. The results reveal that

organizational response and time are the most important factors in high/medium extent marketing crises,

whereas social responsibility and external effects mostly influence buyer behavior in crises. Based on the

importance of the elements, managerial implications are discussed. The three specific research questions

investigated are 1- How do buyer's behaviors influence by marketing crises? 2- What elements influence

buyer behavior through marketing crises? 3- What are the outcomes of buyer behavior through

marketing crises? These questions are examined with an experimental design to a marketing crisis and

measuring antecedents, and outcomes linked. The main finding of the present study is that the crisis

provides an opportunity to show the skill and leadership of the CEO and others. Managing a crisis well

enhances a company reputation. Everyone knows that things can go wrong. Problems are not the issue;

its way management handle it. For most politicians, the crisis is at the heart of leadership and wins

elections or positions. Therefore, improved relationships and stronger bonds with stakeholders, when a

company responds to buyers with real determination and engagement that is a buyer for life.

Key Words: Marketing Crisis, Outcomes, Buyer Behavior, Psychologically, Brand Engagement,

Product Categories, Brand Equity, and Attitudes

1 Recreation & Ecotourism Dept. University of Duhok, Address: Zakho Street 38,1006AJ Duhok Kurdistan Region-Iraq Agriculture College, Mobile: 009647504640040 Email: [email protected]

52 Business Research Review, Vol. 2, No. 1, June 2016

Introduction

It is intriguing to note that while the last three crises talked about both brought about noteworthy negative

outcomes for the association, the Tylenol crises is frequently seen as a model for corporate crises reaction,

and is, for the most part, thought to have brought about positive buyer observations due to the moves

made by Johnson and Johnson promptly taking after the event. The administration literature has

additionally examined crises, despite the fact that they have fluctuated to some degree from the

correspondence literature in light of the fact that an organization's crisis has been characterized as any

event or situation which undermines the capacity of the association to keep on surviving (Dutton 1986).

Product hurt crises are characterized as discrete, all around plugged events wherein products are observed

to be imperfect or unsafe (Whelan, J., & Dawar, N. 2016), while brand crises are characterized as sudden

occasions that debilitate a brand's apparent capacity to convey expected advantages, in this manner

debilitating brand value (Elsharnouby, T. H., et al., 2016), and goes further by separating brand crises into

execution based or values-based crises. In restricted cases, buyer measures, (for example, earlier desires)

have been researched to decide their impact on responses to crises (Dai, P. 2016), but inquire about into

how buyer recognitions and responses decide the effects of crises on a marketing association remain

generally immature.

In crises, crises have been investigated regarding product hurt crises and brand crises (Jeon, J. O., et al.,

2016). This proposes fascinating exploration questions which use a buyer perspective of marketing crises

looking at buyer responses to authoritative activities and recommending how understanding buyer

reactions may permit organizations to advance their activities in light of crises environment. This work,

while essential, neglects to address the pertinence of offered crises to a buyer and how the buyer shapes

suppositions about the crises and the vestige of those assessments to the brand, products, and association.

As examined beforehand, buyer desires including brand commonality, what's more, crises importance to a

brand's center affiliations has been utilized to examine how buyer react to crises. For instance, while

crises and their impacts on buyer have been explored to some degree, there has been little work which

takes a hurts at how damage to brand value happens, and how it is circulated among buyer population.

An Investigation of Marketing Crisis, and Outcomes influence on Buyer Behavior 53

Research Questions

Using the definition, that the researcher will distinguish the measurements of marketing crises which have

been displayed in the surviving writing, then propose and test a model which looks to clarify the

precursors and outcomes of a buyer's assessment of marketing crises. Keeping that in mind, this study

tries to encourage study comprehension of marketing crises by directing an intensive survey of the current

exploration on marketing crises and offering those particular questions of the study. 1) How do buyers

behavior influence by marketing crises? 2) What elements influence buyer behavior through marketing

crises? 3) What are the outcomes of buyer behavior through marketing crises?

Research Significance

This paper will add to the crises and manage literature in a few key ways. The essential contribution of

this work will be to show the significance and utility of a buyer point of view for assessing and

moderating marketing crises. Provide the direct influence of marketing crisis outcome on buyer behavior

through information, reputation, expectation, experience, and they behave. While investigating the

importance of each element of marketing crises outcomes, Attribution theory will give a theoretical

structure to study how buyer see and react to the speculative crises in the previous studies. Earlier to the

exact investigation, the researcher will clarify a meaning of marketing crisis by evaluating the current

state and flow best in class in crisis study crosswise over orders.

Research Problems

First, a competitor or peer company recently suffered a crisis event: Confidence in one financial services

company has a habit of spreading to others. Second, employee morale is struggling: Will employees start

bitching about brand or company on social media. Typically, direct sales companies with high staff

turnovers can struggle with recruitment if ex-employees start writing about their experiences. Third,

quality problems with their products: company marketing has been too aggressive setting the wrong

expectations or more frequently after sales service is poor. Fourth, the entrepreneurship or CEO has a

weak or lack of reputation: During the credit crunch, the arrogance of CEOs repelled almost all

stakeholders. Fifth, the company's financial condition is unstable or under some long-term stress. Sixth, a

crisis has previously occurred at the company and the situation has not yet been totally resolved.


Theoretical Background

Marketing Crisis

From the point view of management, a crisis is any event which debilitates the capacity of the association

to keep on surviving Dutton & Jackson (1987), and quite a bit of their examination is worried about

reacting to crises (Aguilera & Farrell 1971). The main push to characterize what constitutes a "crises"

crises is that best in class by Clark (1988), where he recommends that a marketing crises is an event or

issue which makes a risk to crises objectives, diminishes an advertiser's control of the crises

environment, and incorporates a component of fleeting weight. This definition, while significant for its

endeavor to classify having a marketing crises, misses the mark when examined working together with

different meanings of crises in the business writing. In the crises writing, the crises definition misses the

mark concerning the survival worldview recommended by administration, however by and large

spotlights on a negative event of a noteworthy scale.

Over the literature, there is some understanding, crises are portrayed as a freak from regular business, are

unsafe or can possibly be hurtful, have features which are causally attributable, and have viewpoints

which might be exacerbated or improved by getting to be open learning. Numerous analysts likewise

recognize the significance of instability and time weight to the crises definition (Dutton 1986), and the

significance of authoritative basic leadership is frequently focused because of the substantial potential

outcomes connected with crises reaction. Taking into account the assessed writing, the accompanying

meaning of marketing crises is proposed: A marketing crisis is an atypical event which conveys a vast

danger for the association, where that danger is connected with dangers to crises destinations.

These dangers incorporate dangers to crises variables, for example, brand value, by expectations, verbal

behavior, and trust in both the organization and the brand required in the crises. The imperative

qualification made in this definition is that for crises to be marketing crises, the essential driver of danger

depends on responses to the crises in the business sector put instead of from harms particular to the crises

itself. This definition may appear to some degree shortsighted at first brush, yet it finishes the objective of

distinguishing when crises might be considered to be a marketing crises. The possibility that a danger

ought to be "extensive" recognizes that the crises ought to be distinguished by the association required as

critical.


This definition is not finished in its presentation of the potential measurements which may emerge amid a

period of crises, so the accompanying area will explore and recognize the potential measurements of

marketing crises. Conversely, with the present crises writing, these measurements will concentrate on the

perceptual measurements of crises which are accessible to buyers.

Marketing Crisis Reaction to Organization

Another model for crises reaction has been presented by Coombs (1998); Breitsohl, J., & Garrod, B.

(2016), who, in expansion to open reactions already proposed, additionally incorporated the potential for

activities as opposed to just words. Coombs' work in the end developed to incorporate CCSs, as well as to

incorporate crises sorts also (in view of likely ascriptions made by the buyer see further examination

beneath), an exploration stream presently marked by the author as Situational Crisis Communication

Theory (Coombs 2007). The researcher has attempted to distinguish the sorts of crises which an

association might be given (Benson 1988), and also to distinguish sorts of corporate reaction which might

be accessible (Coombs & Holladay 1996).

Legitimizations recognize the crises, however, contend that there might be a few issues with how the

potential issue is being assessed (i.e., the researcher may have accomplished something incorrectly, but it

was unforeseeable). One such model of organization reaction is the correspondence reaction model

recommended by Bradford & Garrett (1995), in spite of the fact that the creators don't particularly name

this as a crises model. Crises may cover a wide scope of regions including common fiascos (Alpert 2011),

product issues where buyers are hurt or can possibly be hurt and activities (or the activities of corporate

agents) which are considered unlawful, untrustworthy, or dishonest (Williams & Olaniran 1994).

Crises Elements

The above exploration on crises reaction and crises sorts proposes a few elements with which to assess a

given crises and how that crisis will be seen and deciphered to the buyer. The primary crises measurement

needs to do with vagueness identified with the crises event. Elements of causal uncertainty are firmly

related parts of the crises typology proposed by Bradford & Garret (1995), which included issues of

vagueness encompassing the crises. Specifically, was the organization negligent or diligent in terms of

their organizational duties and operations as well as their ethical responsibilities as an organization?

Organizational diligence is conceptualized as following industry standards and practices in the course of

business, while ethical diligence is conceptualized as the perception of whether an organization has

behaved in a morally and ethically correct manner.


Therefore, informational elements include the perceived consistency of information, behavioral

perceptions, the similarity between cause and effect, salience, and primacy. If a person consistently

behaves a given way, ascriptions may be made about personality traits, while if a person behaves

inconsistently, ascriptions may be made about environmental elements (Mattys, S. L., et al 2009).

Motivational differences include differences in motivations related to ascription accuracy (Kunda, Z.

1990), as well as the presentation of self and motivations related to the need to predict future behavior

(Miller et al 1978). Motivational differences between actors and observers are also thought to produce

some of the differences in ascription outcomes, with researchers suggesting that actors and observers have

differing interests in how an event is causally explained. These differences have been hypothesized to

relate to egocentric differences, but further research has not always replicated an egocentrically motivated

difference between actors and observers (Taylor & Koivumaki 1976). Motivation theorists have also

posited that when making ascriptions people tend to try to maintain a view of a world where negative

events will not happen to them unjustly.

Two main areas have been suggested to be the primary drivers of difference between actor and observers:

cognitive differences and motivational differences. In particular, actors tend to attribute their behavior to

situational factors, while observers tend to attribute an actor’s behavior to personal characteristics.

Cognitive differences are thought to arise from informational differences between the observer and actor,

differences in how events are perceived, and differences in how events are processed. Researchers

investigating conviction related precursors of ascriptions have additionally distinguished marking down

behavior, where ascriptions made around an individual are reduced from characteristic ascriptions to state

and situational ascriptions, given pertinent situational requests (Kelley 1972).

Beliefs may incorporate assumptions around a performing artist, where consistency amongst desires and

genuine behavior (results) brings about qualities or capacities, while in congruence amongst desires and

behavior (results) brings about ascriptions about state or outside variables. For this situation, behavior

which matches situational desires is considered to be identified with outer jolts, while behavior that does

not coordinate situational desires is credited to identity characteristics or qualities (Himmelfarb, S., &

Anderson, N. H. 1975).

Outcome of Marketing Crisis

The outcome of MC effects on buyer behavior, and anticipations for future events, these outcomes are

frequently thought to change contingent upon where a given ascription of cause falls.


The outcomes which will be talked about incorporate contrasts between causes credited to a man versus

causes ascribed to the earth, whether causality is seen as inborn or extraneous, whether a cause is credited

to capacity (absence of capacity) or chance, and whether an occasion is purposeful or unexpected (Kelley

& Michela 1980). Weiner (1985) proposes that moreover, an individual may assess the controllability of

an occasion, and in addition the security of the variables included. These measurements of causal

ascriptions nearly mirror the already talked about measurements of a marketing crises. Environment

research and research on intrinsic and extrinsic motivations is that studies on intrinsic and extrinsic

motivation have for the most part focused on how these motivations affect causal ascriptions made by an

actor as opposed to an observer. Other factors related to ascription outcomes relate to whether an

individual perceives an event as the result of skill or chance. Those who are seen to have succeeded due to

skill are seen to be likely to do so again in the future, while those who have succeeded due to luck are less

likely to do so.

A company is seen as simply attempting to minimize the damage to their organization, rather than

actually help those harmed by the crisis; they may be open to additional outcomes in terms of behavior by

the Buyer, affect, and expected future behavior by the company. The different area incorporates the

assessment of workers in a business power (Dubinsky et al., 1989), and how shoppers assess management

experiences (Selnes, F. 2013). Ascription theory is regularly utilized as an instrument for researching how

feelings are shaped (by both buyer and different associations), and the potential outcomes these

sentiments may have for an association crosswise over different marketing variables.

Cognitive Dissonance

The following segment of this writing review will concentrate on parts of attribution theory which have as

of now been examined in a marketing connection. With that in mind, theories of cognitive dissonance

motivation psychological separation information, and product contribution and product class information

(convictions) will be surveyed. As per Kassin et al (2010), attribution is the process by which individuals

explains the causes of behavior and events. This aspect of cognitive dissonance will be explored further in

the theory improvement segment, yet it is imperative to examine a couple key components which will

come into play later in this study. As per discussed motivation to touch base at a specific conclusion is an

important factor in how causal attributions around an occasion are created. On account of marketing

crises, the occasion which is the consented of an individual's attributions is negative or undesirable. For

this situation, there are a couple of coherent determinations with respect to how a man may be inspired to

land at a given causal attribution.


On the off chance that a man has a high measure of self-identification with a brand, they are currently

given two contending comprehensions relative towards his/her inclination of the brand and their emotions

towards the marketing crisis. The results of this conclusion allow the buyer to maintain the aspects of

them an identity which is supported by the brand and avoid negative aspects.

Psychological in Marketing

In the psychology literature, psychological separation is proposed to be a capacity of an individual's

mental Construal (people perceive, comprehend, and interpret the world around them) of an object,

utilizing the self as a kind of perspective point (Trope & Liberman 2010). Construal Level Theory

became out of a push to comprehend which attributes are utilized by individuals as the premise for

assessment and recommends that high and low-level Construal impact the way occasions are portrayed

and assessed (Trope & Liberman 2010). As per Construal Level Theory, people use solid, low-level

Construal to speak to mentally close events, and theoretical, abnormal state translations for

psychologically far off occasions (Trope et al., 2007). These elements of psychological distance have

been found to influence how individuals group objects into categories (Liberman et al., 2002). Especially

important to the current study is the idea that an individual’s representation of events is determined to

some extent by the psychological distance between the observer and the event.

Buyer behavior

Buyer behavior refers to the selection, purchase and consumption of goods and services for the

satisfaction of their wants. There are different processes involved in the buyer behavior. Initially, the

buyer tries to find what commodities they would like to consume, then he selects only those commodities

that promise greater utility. After selecting the commodities, the buyer makes an estimate of the available

money which they can spend. Lastly, the buyer analyzes the prevailing prices of commodities and takes

the decision about the commodities they should consume. Buyer behavior is influenced by four major

factors: cultural, social, personal, psychological, and attitude (Juster, F. T. 2015).

Hypothesis Development

The present section, hypothesis development will concentrate on aspects of outcomes which are the

following Attitude of the Brand, Attitude of the Company, Positive Word of Mouth, Purchase Intentions

Decision, Trust in Company, Trust in Brand, Brand Equity through Brand Awareness Perceived Quality

Brand Association Brand Loyalty in a marketing context.


Informational contrasts are basic in how variety in attributions around an event emerges. The literature on

psychological separation showcases a huge route in which an individual may sensibly fluctuate from

another in the sorts and measure of information utilized while framing an attribution. Low psychological

separation is connected with the utilization of a greater amount of contextual information in the

characterization of an event, as relevant information ought to be more remarkable and essential for the

spectator. High psychological separation is connected with theoretical, larger amount perspectives of an

event, which ought to constrain the impact of relevant information when attributing cause in a crisis

circumstance. Personal experience has been found to assume a role in buyer learning and information

procurement (Hoch, S. J. 2002).

In particular, product experience is characterized as a part of buyer information related just to direct

experiences with a product or brand and these experiences are additionally captivating, more

demonstrative for the buyer. These experiences are frequently categorized as buyers "nature" with a brand

(Hu, N., Dow, et al., 2016).

H1: There is a significant effect between buyer behavior and marketing crisis through psychological

aspects high or low response to the marketing crisis.

While brand recognition reflects informational perspectives a buyer may know about a brand, it is vital to

investigate aspects of a buyers association with a brand which may impact their motivation while

assessing a marketing crisis. buyer are not liable to consistently use a product which they dislike

fundamentally or which they do not feel fits with their identity, and in that capacity rehashed personal

experiences will permit a buyer to assemble an association with a brand and to join the brand into their

personality. One such measure of this association is the self-brand association. Utilizing cognitive

dissonance theory, these connections are relied upon to give inspirations to a person to protect their self-

image when making attributions around a crisis event, and the actions made by an association taking after

a crisis (Pauwels, K., et al., 2016).

H2: There is a significant effect between buyer's behavior and marketing crisis; who have the brand

Engagement in a marketing crisis will have a high response than those who do not have a brand

Engagement in the marketing crisis.

The previous study on brand knowledge noticed that a buyer's knowledge around a brand reflects their

cognitive representation of the brand, and that this knowledge may incorporate different measurements

including brand awareness, brand qualities, brand attitudes, and product experiences (Keller, K. L. 2003;


Huang, Z. J., & Cai, L. A. 2015). In this situation, are affected by large positive convictions about the

innovation business, and are roused to ascribe potential causes to the outside maker instead of the

innovation organizations and their brands. The impact of product classification contribution is in this

manner guessed to diminish the attribution of cause to inner components when faced with a marketing

crisis.

H3: There is significant effect between buyers behavior with high product categories participation will

have a less effect evaluation of a brand following a marketing crisis and those with low product

category participation.

Buyer based on the brand equity in marketing is characterized in light of a distinction in reaction by a

buyer between a known and unknown brand (Keller, K. L. 1993). While this distinction accordingly

distinguishes the essential character of brand equity, it does not explain where brand equity originates

from, in spite of the fact that this has been the theme of much research in the marketing territory. For

instance, scientists have concentrated on the impacts of brand knowledge (Kotler P. 1997) and the

structure of that knowledge in buyer memory (Huang, Z. J., & Cai, L. A. 2015), brand awareness (Lin, H.

C. 2016). The work on brand equity can generally be categorized within the proposed outcomes of

attribution theory. Brand equity, to some extent, appears to be composed largely of aspects of buyer

affect, behavior, and beliefs towards a brand. As such, it is hypothesized that buyer ascription of a crisis,

as well as their assessments of an organization's response to a crisis, will directly influence brand equity.

H4: There is a significant effect between buyers behavior and brand equity (Brand Awareness,

Perceived Quality, Brand Association, and Brand Loyalty) who perceive the cause of a crisis.

Several studies in brand extension suggest that buyers' attitude toward the brand influences their overall

evaluation of a brand extension through a process of 'affect transfer' when a brand extension is made to a

highly similar category

(Aaker, D. A., & Keller, K. L. 1990; Park et al., 1991). However, few studies have investigated whether

the overall attitude toward the brand (or toward brand marketing) influences the way buyers to relate

specific brand attributes to a brand extension. The findings on the role of affect in the cognitive company

and biased crises making seem to provide useful insights on the investigation of the effect between buyer

attitude toward the brand and company.


First, findings on affect and cue-accessibility imply that buyer attitude toward the brand may influence the

accessibility of the brand attributes when they think of a brand extension. Second, the discussion on

biased crises making suggests that attitude toward the brand and company may also affect the perceived

appropriateness of the brand attributes in a brand extension, as a specific type of inferences (Jalilvand, M.

R., et al., 2016). It is hypothesized that increments in the impression of an environmental locus for a

marketing crisis will be connected with lower levels of effect, and more positive attitudes towards the

organization and brand. The following hypothesis has suggested.

H5: There is a significant effect between buyers' behavior and attitudes toward the brand and company

will be more positive in marketing crisis.

Methodology

The present study will test the hypotheses through T-test, and Scale, KMO was administered in an effort

to determine the reliability and validity, as well as multiple regression analysis to the exanimate effect of

marketing crisis on buyer behavior. Therefore, for better understanding the present study has created a

model through the following variables; Psychologically, Brand Engagement, Product Categories, Brand

Equity, and Attitudes toward the Brand & Company. This study accepts that help researcher know more

about the purposes behind buyer's behavior and managers decision making in marketing crisis. Regarding

the reason for this study, data was collected by distributing questionnaire among people with different

gender and age, levels of education. A self-designed questionnaire has been considered for data

collection, 300 sample including 21 with 3 demographic questions in the questionnaire were distributing

based on a random sample and quantitative approach (Kothari, C. R. 2004). Participants have needed to

answer each one inquiry utilizing five-point Likert scale, ranging from 1= strongly disagree to 5= strongly

agree.


Data Analysis and Results

Table 1 Personal Information Item Frequency Percentage Total100%

Gender Male 174 58

300 Female 126 42

Age

Under 18 12 4.0

300

18-25 69 23.0

26-35 136 45.3

36-45 42 14.0

46-55 26 8.7

56-65 11 3.7

Above 65 4 1.3

Education

Secondary 20 6.7

300

Diploma 40 13.3

Bachelor 154 51.3

Master 57 19.0

Doctorate 29 9.7

As Table 1 indicates the sample based on demographic variables of participant's. In the gender variable,

the percentage of male and female is 58% and 42% respectively. Relying on the age categories, the result

illustrated the high majority of responders were between 26-33 years old, 45.3% and the next highest age

category was between 18-25 years old, 23.0%. While in the item of education, 154 of responders were a

bachelor with 51.3%, and 57 responders with 19.0% of the master degree. So the reasonable ground to

believe that study is dealing with actual buyers who have been visiting the traditional markets, shopping

centers, and malls.


Table 2 Reliability Statistics / KMO and Bartlett's Test

Cronbach's Alpha N of Items 21 .924

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. .950

Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square 3615.910

Df 210

Sig. .000

Depending on statistics expression of dataset table 2 reliability and validity examination of estimation

model, and hypotheses investigation with the structural model. This study, it intends to determine the

composition of marketing crisis interaction dimensions and their influence on buyer's behavior,

experiences and their expectations outcomes. As per the study, Cronbach alpha value more than 0.7

showing the questionnaire is satisfactory, (Hair Jr, Black, Babin, & Anderson, 2009). The reliability test

shows the questions consisted of 21 items that the value of Cronbach's Alpha was 0.924, which indicated

the bigger value than 0.7 and nearly to 1.

That indicates the great reliability for further analysis. The KMO obliged sampling sufficiency with the

value bigger than 0.5 for a satisfactory outcome to load on further factor analysis. Variables must be

dispensed with for value under 0.5. KMO and Bartlett’s test were utilized to indicate the intensity of the

relationship through variables. Bartlett's test was another essential sign show the intensity of the

relationship through variables. As the result of KMO and Bartlett's test of study variables, the KMO was

0.950 which means bigger than 0.05. It pointed that the adequacy of sampling was satisfactory. Therefore,

Bartlett's Test of Sphericity result shows the level of significance was 0.000 and smaller than (0.05).

Table 3: Model Summary

Model

R R Square

Adjusted R

Square

Std. Error of

the Estimate

Change Statistics

R Square

Change F Change df1 df2

Sig. F

Change

1 .964a .929 .928 .24841 .929 774.920 5 294 .000

a. Predictors: (Constant), Attitudes to Brand & Company, Psychologically, Brand Equity, Brand

Engagement, Product Categories


To investigate the aims of the present study, the effects between the dependent variable and

independent variables multiple regressions were used. The dependent variable is Buyers Behavior (Y) and

five independent variables are Attitudes to Brand & Company (X1) Psychologically (X2) Brand Equity

(X3) Brand Engagement (X4) and Product Categories (X5). These variables are used in the multiple

regression models. Table 3 presents the output model summary, to present the strength of the effects and

relationship between the independent variables of multiple regressions and the dependent variable which

is measured by the relation R. Regarding the results of analysis, R= 0.964 which shows a reasonable

positive correlation. The R Square value (= 0.929) indicates the independent variables explain 92.8% of

the variance in adoption. It means about 92.8% of the variation in Buyers behavior can be described by

the variation in Attitudes to Brand & Company, Psychologically, Brand Equity, Brand Engagement, and

Product Categories.

From the table 4, the ANOVA illustrate the levels of variance within multiple regression models which is

utilized for tests of coefficients’ significance. ANOVA test shows the acceptance of Buyers behavior on

independent variables are statistically significant, while the F-value is statistically significant, F

(774.920), and the P-value is less than 0.05 (P=0) which means that at least one of the five predictor

variables can be used to model buyers behavior.

Table 4: ANOVAb

Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

1 Regression 239.098 5 47.820 774.920 .000a

Residual 18.142 294 .062

Total 257.241 299

a. Predictors: (Constant), Attitudes to Brand & Company, Psychologically, Brand Equity, Brand

Engagement, Product Categories

b. Dependent Variable: Buyer Behavior


Table 5: Coefficientsa

Model

Unstandardized

Coeff.

Standardized

Coeff. t Sig. Collinearity Sta.

B Std. Error Beta Tolerance VIF

1 (Constant) -.142- .080 -1.774- .077

Psychologically .306 .022 .313 13.686 .000 .458 2.186

Brand Equity .056 .026 .054 2.120 .035 .372 2.687

Brand Engagement .662 .025 .682 26.698 .000 .367 2.722

Product Categories -.031- .029 -.029- -1.084- .279 .346 2.887

Attitudes to Brand & Company .046 .023 .039 2.017 .045 .638 1.567

a. Dependent Variable: Buyer Behavior

As per table 5 the coefficient test is used to find the most effective independent variables, through

estimated multiple regression models, the biggest Standardized coefficient (Beta) is matched by Brand

Engagement which is equal to 0.682 with biggest t-statistic 26.698, and significant p-value of 0.000,

while the Product Categories has the lowest Standardized coefficient with (-0.029) with -1.084 t-statistic,

and 0.279, non-significance p-value. It illustrates that one standard deviation increase in brand

engagement is followed by 0.682 standard deviation increase in buyer's behavior. It can be explained by

other independent variables in the same way.

Therefore, this model can be used for an estimation objective. Assess of multicollinearity by examined

tolerance and the Variance Inflation Factor (VIF) are two collinearity diagnostic factors that can help the

study to identify multicollinearity. Tolerance is a measure of collinearity reported by most statistical

programs such as SPSS; the variable’s tolerance is 1-R2. A small tolerance value indicates that the

variable under consideration is almost a perfect linear combination of the independent variables already in

the equation and that it should not be added to the regression equation. All variables involved in the linear

relationship will have a small tolerance. As per other study suggest that a tolerance value less than 1

should be investigated further. The Variance Inflation Factor (VIF) is 1/Tolerance, it is always greater

than or equal to 1. There is no formal VIF value for determining the presence of multicollinearity. Values

of VIF that exceed 10 are often regarded as indicating multicollinearity. In many statistics programs, the

results are shown both as an individual R2 value, distinct from the overall R2 of the model and a Variance

Inflation Factor (VIF).


When those R2 and VIF values are high for any of the variables in study model, multicollinearity is

probably an issue. When VIF is high there is high multicollinearity and instability of the b and beta

coefficients (Braunstein,W. J. 2007).

Table 6: One-Sample Test / Hypotheses testing

Test Value = 0

t df

Sig. (2-

tailed)

Mean

Difference

95% Confidence Interval of

the Difference

Lower Upper

Brand Equity 72.606 299 .000 3.76667 3.6646 3.8688

Product Categories 83.751 299 .000 4.08833 3.9923 4.1844

Psychologically 68.044 299 .000 3.73125 3.6233 3.8392

Brand Engagement 71.301 299 .000 3.93283 3.8243 4.0414

Attitudes to Brand & Company 81.025 299 .000 3.68800 3.5984 3.7776

The hypotheses testing assume that there is a significant difference between the population mean and the

sample mean. That means all hypotheses alleged that the independent variables at least one of them had a

linear relationship versus Buyer behavior dependent variable. The output of One-Sample T-test that the

Attitudes to Brand & Company, Psychologically, Brand Equity, Brand Engagement, Product Categories

hypotheses were respectively shows 3.76667, 4.08833, 3.73125, 3.93283, and 3.68800, with a mean

difference, while the t-statistic respectively are 72.606, 83.751, 68.044, 71.301, 81.025, and all variable

shows Sig. (2-tailed) which means P-value were 0.000.

If the hypotheses of the study show significance level α at 0.05 and used the critical value approach to

conducting study hypotheses test, the researcher would reject the hypothesis if the P-value were greater

than (0.05). Hence, it indicates the significant contribution to the model. Since H1, H2, H3, H4, and H5

hypotheses are not bigger than 0.05, the researcher fails to reject any hypotheses. That is the One-Sample

T-test has insufficient evidence. Furthermore, the One-Sample T-test result shows all hypotheses were

supported and accepted. Moreover, the research has shown the sufficient sample size of 300, and it

indicates to enough valid data were collected. Therefore, the researcher has put the output of model

results based on models of Regression, Coefficientsa, and ANOVA Residual, the following model has

investigated.


Model

R R Square

Adjusted R

Square

Std. Error of the

Est.

Change Statistics

R Square

Change F Change df1 df2

Sig. F

Change

Dimension

0

1 .731a .535 .533 .63360 .535 342.773 1 298 .000

2 .784b .615 .612 .57742 .080 61.816 1 297 .000

3 .862c .744 .741 .47201 .129 148.471 1 296 .000

4 .964d .928 .928 .24970 .185 762.650 1 295 .000

5 .964e .929 .928 .24841 .001 4.068 1 294 .045

a. Predictors: (Constant), Psychologically H1 accepted

b. Predictors: (Constant), Psychologically, Brand Engagement H2 accepted

c. Predictors: (Constant), Psychologically, Brand Engagement, Product Categories H3 accepted

d. Predictors: (Constant), Psychologically, Brand Engagement, Product Categories, Brand Equity H4 accepted

e. Predictors: (Constant), Psychologically, Brand Engagement, Product Categories, Brand Equity, Attitudes to

Brand & Company H5 accepted

Psychologically

Product Categories

Attitudes toward the Brand & Company

Buyer Behavior

Cognitive Motivational

Beliefs

Brand Equity

Brand Awareness Perceived Quality Brand Association

Brand Loyalty

Brand Engagement

Trust Purchase intention

Uniqueness Involvement Interaction


Discussion and Managerial Implications

The motivation behind this examination was to investigate how the business sector reacts to crises that

may menace the position or marketing of a brand or company. While, the main objective of this research

is to assess the influence of marketing crisis, and outcomes on buyer behavior by evaluating five main

elements. Clearly, this is an unbelievably imperative investigate for a few reasons. At the beginning, a

complete comprehension of buyer perceptions of brands and associations must recognize that those

perceptions are liable to occasional unexpected negative shocks of fluctuating severity. But in extreme

cases, the marketing association is liable to survive those crises.

How those crises change and are structured into the buyer's general perceptions is naturally fascinating.

Furthermore, marketing crises are managerially considerable. It is likely that the CEO of target would

have given careful consideration to the likelihood of a data breech in the event that CEO would perceived

the potential for harm that such a breech really made for target's image and the effect of that harm on

buyers behavior, which at last cost their work, thus the results of this study are consistent with previous

studies Cognitive dissonance theory contributed insights that one possible source of individual differences

in buyer response might depend on nature of the buyers connection with the entity in crisis. Specifically,

those who are actually buyers of organizations affected by the crisis might have a less dramatic response

to a negative development than buyers who were less involved and more psychologically distant.

The present study found that the most efficient variable on buyer behavior respectively attitudes toward

the brand & company and brand equity due to involvement and interaction processes. In the main

situation, respondents have educated that the crisis prompted intense wounds and passings. In this

circumstance (high crisis degree), time was observed to be the most critical component. A couple of

months after a serious crisis, purchasers have a tendency to overlook the outcomes. This proof could calm

for organizations that trust that crisis outcomes are changeless and non-reversible.

The organizations ought to attempt to quicken their recuperation periods. The super exertion procedure

could be a shield against significant harms, furthermore, quicken a smooth and finish recuperation. For

unforgiving crises, the exertion required for building a solid and the socially dependable picture might be

less imperative, as the accentuation ought to be set on reaction and time. For medium-degree product-

harm crises, the organizational reaction was observed to be an essential component impacting buyer

behavior.


Outcomes of this study demonstrated that the organization's reaction is, indeed, an imperative

determinant of purchasers' states of mind and sentiments about the organization required in the crisis. The

significance of organizational reaction has additionally been called attention to by other exploration

concentrates on. This shows organizations ought to deliberately review defective products (the review

may likewise incorporate advancements, for example, offering extraordinary rebates and coupons or free

specimens of another product), additionally understand that time will most likely smooth the harried

circumstance following several months. As organizational crises can cost a large number of dollars in

deals or piece of the pie, organizations ought to be all around arranged to fight with crises. Organizations

need to guarantee that they have a crisis plan that will be utilized after the crisis.

Many organizations have a little thought that a crisis has happened until after the event. As organizations

develop more develop and bigger, a safe society creates which erases proof from the outside world, or

does not acknowledge it for it proper significance. The most evident case is client complaints which

regularly achieve tropical storm scale before senior administration give careful consideration.

Administration regularly reacts to the indications of a crisis as opposed to the reasons for a crisis. Be

proactive, by directing marketing exercises amid the year manager can develop the goodwill and backing

of those partners who are vital to their business. The management can shape individuals' demeanors

towards their business and guarantee that they are liable to bolster assume the best about management

when a crisis occurs? An improved visibility and name recognition for the organization that can win a

bigger piece of the overall industry.

Buyers reliably offered the organization a reprieve because of the crisis contrasted with their reactions to

a crisis brought about by something inward to the organization. This outcome independent from anyone

else is vital, as it proposes potential correspondence systems when required in a marketing crisis. The

study found that marketing outcomes were reliably more positive as the view of causal locus moved

outside of the association required in the crisis.

Generally, though the steady relationship of the apparent reason for a crisis with result variables gives

managerially important information to organizations that get themselves required in a marketing crisis. In

the event that a feasible clarification for the occasion might be found that is outside of the organization's

control, this should be conveyed to shoppers as their impression of the cause will impact the marketing

outcomes for the organization. Another key part of this paper with administrative essentialness is the part

of a buyer's related engagement with a brand when they are presented to a crisis including that brand.


Given further knowledge into buyer's responses to a marketing crisis while, the researcher again saw a

critical impact of the apparent reason for a crisis, we likewise saw the impact of a buyer separation to the

crisis.

The specialist suggested that psychological would impact how a purchaser assessed a crisis, with the

individuals who were mentally near an occasion demonstrating a more positive response than the

individuals who were mentally inaccessible. Managerial this proposes when gone up against with a crisis

an association ought to concentrate on dealing with its recognition among buyers with whom it has not

officially fabricated a solid relationship. Another imperative finding of this exposition for supervisors is

that the contribution of a shopper in a product class matters and that impact of product classification

contribution may differ crosswise over brands.

References Aaker, D. A., & Keller, K. L. (1990). Consumer evaluations of brand extensions. The Journal of

Marketing, 27-41. Aguilera, D. C., Messick, J. M., & Farrell, M. S. (1971). Crisis Intervention: Theory and

Methodology. AJN The American Journal of Nursing, 71(5), 1017. Alpert, L. I. (2011), "Japan's nuclear crisis may take six to nine months to bring under control: Tokyo

Electric Power Co.," in The New York Daily News Vol. April 18th. New York. Benson, J. A. (1988), "Crisis revisited: An analysis of strategies used by Tylenol in the second tampering

episode," Communication Studies, 39 (1), 49-66. Bradford, J. L. and D. E. Garrett (1995), "The effectiveness of corporate communicative responses to

accusations of unethical behavior," Journal of Business Ethics,14(11), 875-92. Braunstein,W. J. ( 2007, January 01).Identifying Multicollinearity in Multiple Regression Statistics

Retrieved from http://www.researchconsultation.com/multicollinearity-regression-spss-collinearity-diagnostics-vif.asp.

Breitsohl, J., & Garrod, B. (2016). Assessing tourists' cognitive, emotional and behavioural reactions to an unethical destination incident. Tourism Management, 54, 209-220.

Clark, T. (1988). The concept of a marketing crisis. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 16(2), 43-48.

Coombs, W. T. (1998), "An analytic framework for crisis situations: Better responses from a better understanding of the situation," Journal of Public Relations Research, 10 (3), 177-91.

Coombs, W. T. (2007), "Protecting organization reputations during a crisis: The development and application of situational crisis communication theory," Corporate Reputation Review, 10 (3), 163-76.

Coombs, W. T. and S. J. Holladay (1996), "Communication and Attributions in a Crisis: An Experiment Study in Crisis Communication," Journal of Public Relations Research, 8 (4), 279-95.

Dai, P. (2016). Impact of Product-harm Crisis on Brand Equity: the Moderating Role of Corporate Social Performance.


Dubinsky, A. J., Skinner, S. J., & Whittler, T. E. (1989). Evaluating sales personnel: An attribution theory perspective. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 9(1), 9-21.

Dutton, J. E. (1986), "The processing of crisis and non-crisis strategic issues," Journal of Management Studies, 23 (5), 501-17.

Dutton, J. E., & Jackson, S. E. (1987). Categorizing strategic issues: Links to organizational action. Academy of management review, 12(1), 76-90.

Elsharnouby, T. H., Elsharnouby, M., Jayawardhena, C., & Elbedweihy, A. M. (2016). Projecting the Outcomes of Consumer-Brand Value Congruence: The Mediating Role of Relationship Quality. In Rediscovering the Essentiality of Marketing (pp. 869-870). Springer International Publishing.

Hair Jr, J., Black, W., Babin, B., & Anderson, R. (2009). Multivariate Data Analysis. Prentice Hall. Himmelfarb, S., & Anderson, N. H. (1975). Integration theory applied to opinion attribution. Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology, 31(6), 1064. Hoch, S. J. (2002). Product experience is seductive. Journal of Consumer Research, 29(3), 448-454. Hu, N., Dow, K. E., Chong, A. Y. L., & Liu, L. (2016). Double learning or double blinding: an

investigation of vendor private information acquisition and consumer learning via online reviews. Annals of Operations Research, 1-22.

Huang, Z. J., & Cai, L. A. (2015). Modeling consumer-based brand equity for multinational hotel brands–When hosts become guests. Tourism Management, 46, 431-443.

Jalilvand, M. R., Pool, J. K., Nasrolahi Vosta, S., & Kazemi, R. V. (2016). Antecedents and consequence of consumers’ attitude towards brand preference: evidence from the restaurant industry. Anatolia, 27(2), 167-176.

Jeon, J. O., Jeon, J. O., Baeck, S., & Baeck, S. (2016). What drives consumer’s responses to brand crisis? The moderating roles of brand associations and brand-customer relationship strength. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 25(6), 550-567.

Juster, F. T. (2015). Anticipations and purchases: An analysis of consumer behavior. Princeton University Press.

Kassin, S. M., Drizin, S. A., Grisso, T., Gudjonsson, G. H., Leo, R. A., & Redlich, A. D. (2010). Police-induced confessions: Risk factors and recommendations. Law and human behavior, 34(1), 3-38.

Keller, K. L. (1993). Conceptualizing, measuring, and managing customer-based brand equity. The Journal of Marketing, 1-22.

Keller, K. L. (2003). Brand synthesis: The multidimensionality of brand knowledge. Journal of consumer research, 29(4),595-600.

Kelley, H. H. (1972). Attribution in social interaction In EE Jones, Attribution: Perceiving the causes of behavior. Morristown.

Kelley, H. H., & Michela, J. L. (1980). Attribution theory and research.Annual review of psychology, 31(1), 457-501.

Kothari, C. R. (2004). Research methodology: Methods and techniques. New Age International. Kotler, P. (1997). Marketing management, analysis, implementation and using the servoual model. The

Service Industries Journal, 11(3), 324-343. Kunda, Z. (1990). The case for motivated reasoning. Psychological bulletin,108(3), 480. Liberman, N., Sagristano, M. D., & Trope, Y. (2002). The effect of temporal distance on level of mental

construal. Journal of experimental social psychology, 38(6), 523-534. Lin, H. C. (2016). A Study of the Correlation between Brand Mascot and Purchase Intention: Identifying

the role of Consumer Brand awareness.


Mattys, S. L., Brooks, J., & Cooke, M. (2009). Recognizing speech under a processing load: Dissociating

energetic from informational factors. Cognitive Psychology, 59(3), 203-243. Miller, D. T., Norman, S. A., & Wright, E. (1978). Distortion in person perception as a consequence of

the need for effective control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36(6), 598. Park, C. W., Milberg, S., & Lawson, R. (1991). Evaluation of brand extensions: the role of product

feature similarity and brand concept consistency. Journal of consumer research, 18(2), 185-193. Pauwels, K., Demirci, C., Yildirim, G., & Srinivasan, S. (2016). The impact of brand familiarity on online

and offline media synergy. International Journal of Research in Marketing. Selnes, F. (2013). An examination of the effect of product performance on brand reputation, satisfaction

and loyalty. Journal of Product & Brand Management. Taylor, S. E., & Koivumaki, J. H. (1976). The perception of self and others: acquaintanceship, affect, and

actor-observer differences. Journal of personality and social psychology, 33(4), 403. Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2010). Construal-level theory of psychological distance. Psychological

review, 117(2), 440. Trope, Y., Liberman, N., & Wakslak, C. (2007). Construal levels and psychological distance: Effects on

representation, prediction, evaluation, and behavior. Journal of consumer psychology: the official journal of the Society for Consumer Psychology, 17(2), 83.

Weiner, B. (1985). An attributional theory of achievement motivation and emotion. Psychological review, 92(4), 548.

Whelan, J., & Dawar, N. (2016). Attributions of blame following a product-harm crisis depend on consumers’ attachment styles. Marketing Letters, 27(2), 285-294.

Williams, D. E. and B. A. Olaniran (1994), "Exxon's decision-making flaws: The hyper-vigilant response to the Valdez grounding," Public Relations Review, 20 (1), 5-18.

an investigation of marketing crisis, and outcomes influence on...

Documents