家庭消費系統研究：消費活動的生產模式
Investigation of Family Consumption System:
A Product Model for Consumption
計畫編號：NSC89-2416-H-110-026-SSS
執行期限：89年8月1日至89年7月31日
主持人：賴文彬 副教授 執行機關：國立中山大學企業管理學系
一、中文摘要： 本研究計畫以一個新的理論模式--消費的系統觀(consumption as production) 以及消費的生產觀(consumption as production)— 來貼切地描述家庭消費行為與家庭 的產品購買決策。過去許多消費者行為研究與市場調查，大都是以個人為研究重點，較 少以家庭消費生活做為研究的對象。然而綜觀市場的交易情況，以家庭生活為考慮的購 買行為不在少數。例如大型家電產品、餐食用具、各種傢俱— 、住宅購置、渡假旅行…… 等等的夠買行為，所考慮的對象通常是家庭。所以針對家庭為主體的消費行為進行研 究，將有助於吾人對消費行為的進一步瞭解。 關鍵詞：消費者行為、家庭消費行為、耐久品選擇 Abstract:The concept of a consumption system refers to a series of consumption activities which a household has to perform in order to meet a need of the family. For instance, to have clean clothes for the members of her (his) family, the housekeeper has to do a series of operations, namely: sorting the clothes into piles to be operated separately, washing them, drying, ironing the deserved ones, and having the clothes stored in a good situation. This set of related operations (sorting, washing, drying, ironing, and storage), endeavoring to meet the clothing needs of a household, comprise an entity that could be called a home-laundry system. At each stage in the system, some kinds of products and human resources are required to conduct its functions. For example, baskets and time are needed for sorting, and washing machine, detergents, and attention are for the washing operation.
Keywords: Consumer Behavior, Family Consumption System, Choice of Durable Goods 二、緣由與目的：
Modeling how consumers make decision to purchase product or service is critical to understanding of consumer behavior. Numerous models trying to describe the
decision-making or choice processes of consumer can be found in the literature of marketing. Among the large-system models that have been influential are Nicosia's model (1960), EKB (Engel Kollat and Blackwell) model (1995), Howard-Sheth model (1969), Hansen's model
2
(1972), and Bettman's model (1979). Examining consumer behavior from psychological or sociological perspectives, the previous models study the exogenous and endogenous
variables of buyer behavior and the dynamics of them. But, seldom do they look beyond purchase behavior to consumption behavior.
The first stage in the decision process of purchasing, commonly in many consumer behavior models, is "problem recognition." Many models (e.g., EKB Model) portrayed the stage of problem recognition as perceiving a difference between the ideal state and the actual situation of consumption, sufficient to arouse and activate the decision process (Engel, Blackwell and Miniard, 1995). Personal characteristics of individuals, such as personality, attitudes, values, beliefs, as well as internalized social influences are assumed to have affect on establishment of the ideal state of consumption. The discussion of the "problem
recognition" in the literature usually focused on searching for the determinants of ideal state within the psychological or the sociological domains. Little attention has paid to the fact that the perceived difference may also be formed in the operational level of consumption activities (i.e., using situations of the products). Actually, many scholars (Levy and Boyd 1968; Schary 1971) have pointed out that in households of consumer there are systems of order in consumption activities as the products satisfying the needs of daily living the family. In sum, the aspect of the consumption systems in a household has been neglected in the
consumer research. Consumption System
The concept of a consumption system refers to a series of consumption activities which a household has to perform in order to meet a need of the family. For instance, to have clean clothes for the members of her (his) family, the housekeeper has to do a series of operations, namely: sorting the clothes into piles to be operated separately, washing them, drying, ironing the deserved ones, and having the clothes stored in a good situation. This set of related operations (sorting, washing, drying, ironing, and storage), endeavoring to meet the clothing needs of a household, comprise an entity that could be called a home-laundry system. At each stage in the system, some kinds of products and human resources are required to conduct its functions. For example, baskets and time are needed for sorting, and washing machine, detergents, and attention are for the washing operation.
Consumption as Pr oduction
Schary (1971) suggests that consumption is a process that transforms market-products and human resources into home-commodities (e.g., a home meal) or utilities desired by the users. In a modernized household, this transforming process is done systematically, with various electronic appliances. We can assume that the objective of consumption system in a household is to maximize personal satisfactions, similarly compared to the situation that the objective of production in a manufacturing plant is to maximize the productivity.
Just like the process of manufacturing in a factory, to obtain the ultimate output, a consumption system in the household usually consists of many operational stages, in which some functions or tasks are performed. This kind of functional separation could be called division of sub-systems of a total system. In household consumption activities, these subsystems may be interrelated in many aspects, such as functional, structural, aesthetical, and cognitive connections. The subsystems in a total consumption system must be compatible with and "live up to" one another, so that, if evaluated functionally, all the equipment and resources can function in a certain level of "productivity" (or can be referred as utility in terms of consumers' satisfaction). Changes or modifications in one subsystem of the process is likely
to have an effect on other subsystems. For example, a remodeling of house tends to affect perceptions of the desirability of carpeting and various pieces of furniture, even though the present ones are not worn out at all. In this case, there is something out of the balance in the aesthetical or cognitive relationships among subsystems of the consumption system. Furthermore, there is growing evidence that one purchase follows from another (Engel et al, 1995). Deanton and Muellbauer (1980) pointed out, in the case of durable goods,
consumers tend to arrange purchases according to acquisition priorities. These phenomena could be well explained by the concept of "maximization of production" of a consumption system.
The Model
Integrating the above concepts altogether, this study proposes a model of
consumption system, as follows: For some categories of need in a household, such as food, laundry, and furnishing, the consumption unit (a household) may holds a consumption system (or a operational system) to produce them. To produce a certain desired home-commodities or utilities, the consumption system usually run several functions separately and sequentially. Each function, or some of them together, can be defined as a subsystem in the consumption system.
The subsystems are operationally independent and, yet, structurally interrelated, such that the inputs (time, human energy, and the market-products), the outputs
(home-commodities or utilities), and efficiency of the subsystems (i.e., the ratio between inputs and outputs) can be separately perceived (or can be measured cognitively and subjectively). For example, in the meal-supply consumption system of a household, as shown in Figure 1, purchasing the grocery and cooking the meal are two subsystems of the meal-supply consumption system in a household. They are operated independently, but structurally related.
4
Fig.1: A Consumption System of Meal-Supply in a Household
Shopping Storage Preparation Cooking Serving Cleaning Transpor- tation 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Mode = Shopping in Person Mode = Internet Shopping
Mode = Own Car Mode = Car Pool
Mode = Regular Refrigerator Mode = Modern Refrigerator
Mode = Regular Utensil Mode = Modern Utensil
Mode = Regular Oven Mode = Microwave Oven
Mode = Regular Dinner Set Mode = Silver Dinner Set
Mode = Hands and Tools Mode = Dishwasher Function Mode of Operation
Utility
Gained Value of the Cost VT (T ) , VM (M ) VT (T ) , VM (M )11 12 1 1 11 12 1 1 U U 11 12 11 12 21 22 31 32 41 42 51 52 61 62 71 72 21 22 2 2 21 22 2 2 U U 21 22 31 32 3 3 31 32 3 3 U U 31 32 41 42 4 4 41 42 4 4 U U 41 42 51 52 5 5 51 52 5 5 U U 51 52 61 62 6 6 61 62 6 6 U U 61 62 71 72 7 7 71 72 7 7 U U 71 72 VT (T ) , VM (M ) VT (T ) , VM (M ) VT (T ) , VM (M ) VT (T ) , VM (M ) VT (T ) , VM (M ) VT (T ) , VM (M ) VT (T ) , VM (M ) VT (T ) , VM (M ) VT (T ) , VM (M ) VT (T ) , VM (M ) VT (T ) , VM (M ) VT (T ) , VM (M )
The function of a subsystem mostly can be performed by several and different ways with different market-products. We can call a method of conducting the function a "mode" of operation for the subsystem. For example, cooking with a regular stove and cooking with a microwave-oven are two different modes of the cooking subsystem of in the consumption system of home meal. Internet shopping and shopping in person are two modes of the purchasing subsystem.
Just as different people may have different objectives in solving a problem or performing a task, different people may have distinct goals for a subsystem in the total consumption system. For example, some people enjoy shopping, while some people want to do it as painlessly and quickly as possible. Furthermore, a person may have disparate attitudes toward different subsystems in a consumption system. For instance, some people enjoy cooking, but disgust cleaning. In short, the utility people may gain in performing a consumption subsystem varies across people, and a person's dispositions to the activities in a total consumption system may change among subsystems.
A household hold an attitude towards each of the subsystems, and also towards each type of modes to operate the subsystem. These are the consequences of differences of personal characteristics, social interaction, and culture influences. In the current model, all of these factors are summed up and result in a subjective index of the utility gained from the mode, that is the likeness of a mode of operation for a certain subsystem of consumption is to be expressed directly by the household.
The basic costs of consumption activities may include money, time, human energy, and cognitive expense. Money cost can refer to all the monetary payment incurring in the consumption activity. In the present model, however, money cost only refers to purchase price of the equipment or the tools used. Time cost is the amount of time required to do the consumption activity. Human energy cost refers to the physical maneuver required in the consumption activity. Cognitive expense refers to the required thinking, knowledge, or the troublesomeness of operation in the consumption activitiy.
However, in the currently planned empirical study, for simplicity, the model will only focus on two types of consumption costs: namely, time and money. The perceived value of time and money vary among people. Furthermore, for an identical person, the perceived value of time and money may change across different situations . Those who are rich will evaluate money differently from the poor. Busy persons appreciate time highly, while the leisure class evaluate time differently. What the value of certain amount of time or money is to a person in a particular situation can only be known by asking the person him/herself through an appropriate approach. In other words, this study has a premise assumption that there is a function in the cognition of the person which transfer the physical amount of money and time to the magnitude of personal value.
The rule of choice between the modes to perform a subsystem is posited as to maximize the cost-average-utility-gain (CAUG). The basic thought is that people will weight between gains and costs before action. A formula to calculate the "CAUG" of each mode is presented as follows:
CAUGij =Uij / [VTi(Tij)+VMi(Mij)]
CAUGij = The Cost-Average-Utility-Gain of the Mode j for Subsystem i. Uij = The Utility obtained from the consumption activity in the Mode
j for Subsystem i.
VTi(Tij) = The personal value of the amount of Time spent in the consumption activity in the Mode j for Subsystem i. VMi(Mij = The personal value of the amount of Money spent in the
consumption activity in the Mode j for Subsystem i. Table 1 is an illustration of the rule of choice between modes. Based on the maximizing the cost-average-utility-gain, the simulating data on Table 1 predicts, that the household will choose the mode of "shopping in person" for shopping, "Regular Oven" for cooking, and "Hand and Tools" for cleaning. The model also anticipates that the household has the most stress in trying to improve the efficiency of the stage of "Cleaning," which has the lowest CAUG in the consumption system. If the CAUG of any of the incumbent modes is lower than the desired level of CAUG for the household, there is always a momentum to substitute the under-efficient modes. However, if this household knows that there is a new mode which have higher level of CAUG than that of the incumbent ones, they will have intention to purchase the new product in market, because to have better efficiency of resource is beneficial to the household.
6
Subsystem Mode of Operation
Puchase Cooking Cleaning
Utility Obtained Time Cost Money Cost Minute (T) US$ (M) VT (T) VM (M) CAUG (Cost-Average- Utility-Gain)
An Illustration of "Rule of Choice" for a Home Meal Consumption System
Rank of CAUG for Current Mode
Shopping in Person Internet Shopping Regular Oven Microwave Oven Hand and Tools Dish- washer 800 200 600 400 100 200 60 10 30 10 20 10 0 700 400 600 20 800 100 10 40 10 25 10 0 70 40 60 2 80 Personal Value of Cost (VT+VM) 100 80 80 70 27 90 8.0 2.5 7.5 5.7 3.7 2.2 1 * * * 2 3 - -
-1. This is the data of a certain household keeper.
2. * : This household will choose "Shopping in Person" for purchase, "regular oven" for Cooking, and "Hand and Tools" for Cleaning.
3. This household will put the highest priority on the subsystem of Cleaning to improve its CAUG.
4. If this household know that there is a new Mode which have higher CAUG than that of the incumbent modes, they will have intention to purchase.
Table 1:
Remark:
Pr imar y Hypotheses
H.1: To satisfy each category of need, such as food, laundry, furnishing, a family holds a consumption system in operation, which can be divided into definable subsystems. The subsystems are operationally independent and structurally interrelated.
H.2: The household compares the "cost-average-utility-gain (CAUG)" of subsystems within a total consumption system to improve the productivity. Within a consumption system, the less a subsystem has the "CAUG" , the more the household has intention to improve it.
H.3: The household will be willing to accept, or continue to search for, a new mode to operate and substitute the current subsystem of less "CAUG" until the desired "CAUG" yielded in the subsystem is reached or preceded.
H.4: The household will have an intention to purchase a new mode which have a higher CAUG than the current mode.
H.5: The shorter the range a consumption system covers, the smaller the discrepancy of the "CAUGs" among subsystems within a consumption system.
H.6: The priority of acquisition for new product within a total consumption system will consistent with the rank of subsystem with respect to the "CAUG".
三、研究方法 本研究步驟分為二大階段，首先是深入訪談：利用結構式的開放問卷抽取大約20 個隨機家庭樣本，從事深入訪談，觀察並詢問受測家庭的生活消費情況，對特定產品群 的購買決策過程，以及有關的變項與條件。其次是做大規模的調查：根據深入訪談所獲 得之資料，將原先擬定的產品購買決策模式，做適當的修正。同時據此設計結構式半閉 問卷，以進行較大規模的調查，以分析結果來觀察家庭消費系統的存在並驗證新模式的 相對適切性。本研究將定性與定量的研究方法做一適當的整合，主要是內部與外部效度 的考慮，希望提高研究結果的各項效度。 四、完成之成果： 研究完成之工作項目為：（一）以實際的資料驗證家計單位消費系統的存在，（二） 發展出一套新的耐久產品家庭購買決策的模式。 研究的成果除了直接的研究發現外， 其研究方法的應用與研究問題的思考，對企業管理的學術發展以及企業經營的實務上可 能有如下的貢獻。 行銷研究上理論的貢獻： •消費系統觀修正傳統的產品觀念。 •從消費行為來研究產品的購買決策。 配合著當前消費者個人自我意識的提升，強調以主觀價值為基礎來研究消 費者行為。 行銷管理上實務的貢獻 •市場潛在需求的發掘與預測。 •在產品設計與市場開發的應用。 •在市場區隔與產品定位之應用。 Refer ence
Bergadaa, M. M. (1990), "The Role of Time in the Action of the Consumer," Journal of Consumer Research, 17 (December): 289-302.
Bivens, Gordone and Carolb Volker (1980) "A Value-Added Approach to Household Production: The Special Case of Meal Preparation" Journal of Consumer Research, 13 (September): 272-278.
8
Boyd, H. W. and S. J. Levy (1963), "New Dimension in Consumer Analysis", Harvard Business Review, 41 (November): 129-140.
Capon, N. and D. Kuhn (1982), "Can Consumer Calculate Best Buys," Journal of Consumer Research, 8 (March): 449-453.
Clarke, Yovnne and Geoffrey N. Soutar (1982), "Consumer Acquisition Pattern for Durable Goods: Australian Evidence", Journal of Consumer Research, 8 (March): 455-459.
David, M. H. (1962), Family Composition and Consumption, Amsterdam: North Holland Publishing Company.
Deanton, A. and J. Muellbauer(1980), Economics and Consumer Behavior, Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press.
Downs, A. (1961), "A Theory of Consumer Efficiency," Journal of Retailing, 37 (Spring); 6-12
Eastwood, D. B. (1985), The Economics of Consumer Behavior, Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Gupta, S. (1988), "Impact of Sales Promotions on When, What, and How Much to Buy,"
Journal of Marketing Research, 25: 342-355.
Hauser, J. R. and B. Wernerfelt (1990), "An Evaluation Cost Model of Consideration Sets," Journal of Consumer Research, 16 (March): 393-408.
Hauser, J. R. and G. L. Urban (1986), "The Value Priority Hypotheses for Consumer Budget Plans," Journal of Consumer Research, 12 (March): 446-462.
Jacoby, J. G. J. Szybio, and C. K. Berning (1976), "Time and Consumer Behavior: An Interdisciplinary Overview," Journal of Consumer Research, 2 (March): 320-339. Jain, Diopak C. and Naufel J. Vilcassim (1991), "Investigating Household Purchase Timing
Decisions: A conditional Hazard Function Approach," Marketing Science, 10 (Winter), 1 -23.
Johnson, M. D. (1984), "Consumer Choice Strategies for Comparing Noncomparable Alternatives," Journal of Consumer Research, 11 (December): 741-752.
Kasulis, Jack J., Robert F. Lusch and Edward F. Stafford, Jr. (1979), "Consumer Acquisition Pattern for Durable Goods," Journal of Consumer Research, 6:.47-56.
Lazer, William (1963), "Life Style Concept and Marketing " in Scephen Greyser, ed., Toward Scientific Marketing, Chicago: American Marketing Association, 143 -168.
Lehmann, D. R., T. V. O'Brien, J. V. Farey, and J. A. Howard (1982), "Some Empirical Contributions to Buyer Behavior Theory," Journal of Consumer Research, 1 (December): 43-55.
Malhotra, N. K. (1986), "An Approach to the Measurement of Consumer Preferences Using Limited Information," Journal of Marketing Research, 23 (February): 33-40. Nickols, S. Y. and K. D. Fox (1983), "Buying Time and Saving Time: Strategies for
Managing Household Production," Journal of Consumer Research, 10 (September) 197-208.
Park, C. W. and D. C. Smith (1989), "Product-Level Choice: A Top-Down or Bottom-Up Process," Journal of Consumer Research, 16 (December): 289-299.
Sheuluga, D.A., J. Jaccard, and J. Jacoby (1979), "Preference, Search, and Choice: An Integrative Approach," Journal of Consumer Research, 6 (Sept 1979) 166-176. Zaltman G. and M. Wallendorf (1987), Consumer Behavior: Basic Findings and
