What is the partner’s role in family decision making?: The use of different disuassive tactics

1. What is the partner’s role in family decision making?: The use of different disuassive tactics Mª José Barlés Elena Fraj Eva Martínez Department of Economics and Business Studies University of Zaragoza

2. Index • Study Context • Objective • Literature review • Methodology • Result analysis • Conclusions, limitations and directions for future research

3. Study Context • Due to changes in the family-decision making are key: number of children, economic resources distribution and family culture • Interest of the role that each family member plays in the purchase-decision making is growing • In particular, for a couple as a basic decision unit • Influence of different disciplines: psychology, sociology and marketing

4. Study Context • In family decision making • Disagreement   Conflict between husbands and wives (durable-consumer-goods acquisitions)  Negotiational tactics (stratagems)

5. Objective • To identify the influence tactics used by the members of the couple when there is a conflict in a buying decision • And, to what extent the couple agree with the influence that each one exerts on the purchase Such knowledge will allow firms to adjust their communication policy to the potential discrepancies in purchase situations

6. Literature review • There is a high degree of agreement between the couple on the influence that each member exerts on the other (Davis, 1970) • Motives of disagreement (Davis and Rigaux, 1974; Martinez and Polo, 1999) vanity is one of the main reasons • If there exist different perception of their influence on the purchase decision  CONFLICT • Little literature on how the couple resolves their differences

7. Literature review

8. Literature review • The influence of each member in the buying-decision process depends on different aspects: economic resources (Robertson, 1990; Webster, 1995; Martínez and Polo, 1999), culture (Rodman, 1972; Lalwani, 2002), the degree of involvement and role specialisation (Corfman, 1985), the children’s influence (Jenkins, 1979; Forman, Tansuhaj. and Ekstrom 1989; Mangleburg,1990), who made de decision in the past (Corfman and Lehman, 1987; Barry and Oliver, 1996)

9. Literature review • When a conflict arises along the purchase decision process, each member is highly likely to adapt the other’s viewpoint to their own, rather than revise the other’s preferences, thus trying to modify the couple’s opinion and preferences (Scanzoni and Polonko, 1980; Szinovacz, 1987). Influence strategies: direct, indirect and unilateral strategies (Falbo and Peplau, 1980; Webster and Reiss, 2001)

10. unilateral and indirect strategies tactics of negative emotions(threatening, screaming, being cynical, making fun)and helplessness(crying, showing weakness, acting sick) show higher emotional expressiveness generate more negative feelings and behaviour(Notarius and Johnson, 18982; Raush et al. 1974), they are more exigentand do not avoid confrontation are also more active in the use of negative tactics bilateral and direct ones (Falbo and Peplau, 1980) objective arguments(Kirchler, 1993; 2001) face conflicts with excuses and explanations based on facts(Margolin and Wampold, 1981; Thompson and Walker, 1989) try to avoid it and leave the scene (Christensen and Heavey, 1990, Heavey, Layne and Christensen 1993; Black, 2000) are more passive and positive (Hojjat, 2000) Literature review. Influence Tactics

11. Methodology • Data Collection: • Pre-test: two pre-tests were conducted in order to avoid certain problems • Date: last trimester of 2006 • Population: women and men who were married or living with a partner • Sample Size: 328 surveys were responded and 300 were valid (42.86%) • Sample Design: convenience sample • Questionnaire: • questions on the influence of the couple on product and service purchase decisions (holiday decisions) and persuasion tactics • questions on women’s lifestyles • socio-economic and demographic questions

12. Methodology • Variables: • Endogenous: Influence tactics and purchase decisions of products and services [the tactics scale proposed by Su et al., (2003), which is very similar to the one used by Kirchler et al. (2001)].A 5-point Likert-type scale was used where 1 is “I never use it” and 5 “I always use it” [The products and services shown to the respondents to measure their influence on buying decisions were taken from the work of Martínez (1996)].A 5-point Likert-type scale where 1 meant “only the husband influences”, 5 “only the wife influences”, and 3 “both have the same influence” • Exogenous: some socio-demographic variables(income, education level, occupation, age, cohabitation years and number of children)

13. Results Analysis (%) • Concerning to the grade of the partner’s influence on products and services buying: • Both men and women show a high degree of agreement in most joint decisions • Personal hygiene products, clothes and complements belong to each member’s influence area • Differences: food and cleaning products is still a female decision-task; house buying and holidays are productsin which the degree of involvement is higher

14. Results Analysis(%) • Influence Tactics: • They coincide in recognising: • Reasoning and stating their own needs • Repeating their own viewpoint • Women often use their children in order to persuade their partner

15. I1: Tactics based on INFERIORITY (α = 0.710) I2: Tactics based on SUPERIORITY (α = 0.704) Total variance: 50.26 Tactics based on SUPERIORITY (α = 0.799) Total variance: 55.99 Results Analysis(factor analysis) Female sample Male sample

16. Results Analysis(contingency tables) • To confirm a connection between the variables by comparing both expected and observed values(Pearson’s chi-square test) • By item • By factors

17. The tactic “I keep repeating my point of view” is “used sometimes” (p = 0.002) “I just state my needs. I tell him/her what I want” (p = 0.02) “I mention the children’s or other people’s preferences to back up my point of view” (p = 0.001) “I point out that he/she has no right to disagree with me on this issue”(p = 0.044) “I tell him/her that I have more experience with such matters”(p = 0.032) Results Analysis (contingency tables) Female sample Male sample

18. Personal income and the age-interval of under 30 and over 60 with factor called “tactics of superiority (p = 0.001) Reverse relationship when women are 31 and 45 and the same factor(p = 0.003) Women who have children over 16 and factor “tactics of superiority” (p = 0.002) Having a wife who works out of home and the factor called “tactics based on superiority”(p = 0.05) Results Analysis (contingency tables) Female sample Male sample

19. Conclusions • Tendency to a joint decision for durable products and services, in accordance with the literature review • Negotiating something agreeable for both or mentioning the children’s or other people’s preferences are female tactics that men reject. Maintaining one’s viewpoint is also a female tactic • Men prefer to state that she has no right to disagree on that matter or maintain that they have more experience. Reasoning and stating one’s own needs are tactics widely used by both sexes

20. Implications • Findings will help organisations to improve their knowledge of buying decisions within the couple. • They allow them to consider the most widely used persuasion tactics, • The influence of each member on buying specific products and services, so that • This knowledge can be applied to their sales and communication policy.

21. Future research lines • Limitations: • Sample size • Measurements • Directions for further research • New analyses and new variables

22. What is the partner’s role in family decision making?: The use of different disuassive tactics Mª José Barlés Elena Fraj Eva Martínez Department of Economics and Business Studies University of Zaragoza