شناخت خریداران اخلاقی خواروبار

The growing importance of ethical shopping motives offers a major advantage to retailers who understand their significance in store choice decisions compared with other conventional store image influences, particularly with regard to any variations that exist between different shopper types. This study uses an exploratory two-phase integrative qualitative and quantitative research design to identify a preliminary classification of ethical shopper types. Three ethical and three store image factors emerge as relevant to the decision-making of ethical shoppers through the development of appropriate scales. Building from these factors, subsequent cluster analysis defines four distinct ethical shopper types: demanders, mavens, dissenters, and apathetics. The degree of emphasis given to ethical and other store choice factors exemplify differences among these segments. The article discusses the utility of the resultant classification in terms of research and retail strategy including opportunities for targeting through adjustment of the retail offer.

This research proposes that, in light of the growing importance of ethical motives in shopping behavior (Harrison et al., 2005 and Webb et al., 2008), an advantage accrues to retailers through understanding the nature of such motives in comparison with motives relating to conventional store image factors, and variations in their importance to different customers when buying. Investigation of the different facets of ethical shopping motives, together with store image considerations and behavioral and demographic characteristics of consumers, enables the proposition of a preliminary classification of ethical shopper types. The research contributes to understanding contemporary shopping motivations and provides insights into how consumers are segmentable using ethical motives. The theoretical and practical implications for retailers are presented along with limitations of the research and subsequent avenues for further inquiry.

The results of this study suggest clear distinctions in shopping motives and behaviors amongst ethical grocery shoppers for both ethical and conventional store image factors. The findings are based on a quantitative study of shoppers who, through initial screening, reported favorable pre-dispositions towards ethical issues and behaviors when making shopping decisions. Major differences in ethical motivations are nevertheless evident amongst the sample as a whole with two groups displaying high levels and two low levels of ethical motivation. Results indicate a polarization of shopper types, with some customers expecting very high levels of ethical as well as store image factors (“demanders”), and others with very low expectations on all counts (“apathetics”). A group in the middle ground has high ethical motives but generally low-moderate requirements in terms of store image (“mavens”). A fourth group has moderate ethical motives and a moderate-high concern for store factors (“dissenters”). The evidence indicates differing levels of concern for the factors documented both between groups and within groups which has implications for future research and retailing strategies. 6.1. Implications for theory This study distinguishes shopper types based on explicit ethical shopping motives as well as conventional store image motives. The resultant typologies of this research suggest that, although shoppers may profess to be ethically motivated in important respects, different degrees of specific ethical and store motivations exist across the range of motives. Two of the identified segments, “demanders” and “mavens”, indicate high levels of ethical motivation and in one group form part of an overall expectation of high levels of retail service across all grocery store dimensions. This is perhaps similar to the “demanding” shoppers of Darden and Ashton (1975) yet including an ethical dimension in their extensive expectations. However “mavens” are clearly positive about receiving ethical grocery shopping offers that take account of all three dimensions irrespective of store image factors. The remaining segments, “dissenters” and “apathetics”, display moderate-low levels of ethical motivation, with “apathetics” displaying primarily functionalist traits: just wanting to pursue their grocery shopping activity with little of a positive nature apparent in the way that they undertake this “chore”. This finding is consistent with the apathetic shoppers of previous studies (e.g., Westbrook and Black, 1985). “Dissenters”, have moderate regard for store factors but appear to be neutral about ethical motives when grocery shopping. Variations in the degree of support for ethical motives when shopping are evident, even amongst those that purport to be positively predisposed towards such motives and behavior. Conventional store choice factors remain important decision criteria for many grocery customers. The different dimensions of “treatment of humans and animals”, “environment and policy”, and “provenance”, suggest variations within the ethical motives construct has theoretical value in offering better understanding of differences in the domain alongside a contemporary analysis of grocery shopper types. Equally the store image construct is extended where differences emerge across typologies. These findings support the notion that store choice can be influenced by shoppers’ perceived importance of particular aspects of the retail service (e.g., Mazursky and Jacoby, 1986). The addition of ethical motives to the range of influences on buying offers a wider set of retail positioning attributes (e.g., ethically sourced produce; sustainable supply-chain policies) prominent in the shoppers’ mind, and increases the number of inputs to the grocery shoppers decision-making process. 6.2. Implications for retailers Knowledge of distinct shopper types, categorized using ethical and store motives is valuable for retailers developing a retail offer to specifically strike a balance between conventional store choice factors and ethical dimensions of the retail offer. Understanding differences in the various ethical and store image dimensions that influence alternative shopper segments is an important and practical tool for retail practitioners and can then be included in a retailer's positioning profile through procurement, communications, and other elements of the retail mix. The three ethical dimensions, “treatment of humans and animals”, “environment and policy” and “provenance” are important to those seeking fulfillment of ethical motivations. Stores need to convey not only the wider human and animal welfare aspects of ethical store positioning (e.g., through fair and transparent trading policies), but also demonstrate it through specific “environmental” policies (e.g., through reducing their carbon foot print), whilst catering for shoppers’ ethical selves through the provision of products with ethical “provenance” (e.g., stocking free range products). Targeting “demanders” and “mavens” with ethical aspects of grocery retailing is important although “apathetics” and “dissenters” are more likely to be motivated by factors that do not enhance ethical store image, but make the grocery shopping offer as value-based and convenient as possible. Opportunities are available to target such groups as an increasingly larger proportion of shoppers become ethically motivated and the distinguishing of segments within a customer base to enable effective use of retail mix elements helps in the development of offers consistent with different needs. The extent to which retailers adopt the task of ethical targeting and the decision to invest in an integrated ethical policy is an important decision. Large chains with resources to communicate a multiple positioning platform or different store formats may adopt strategies that reinforce these positions as part of their wider mission or to reinforce their credentials but this does not negate the possibilities for smaller local and regional stores with more focused offers to capture ethical shoppers. Retailers can use the preliminary scales developed in this research to investigate the relative strength of consumers’ ethical and other motivations and to shape the retail store environment and merchandise offer. This approach can be extended by using the scales to assess the effects of both sets of motivations on key outcomes such as customer satisfaction and store loyalty (see Babin et al., 1994 as proposed by Arnold and Reynolds, 2003, for hedonic motives). 7. Limitations and directions for further research This study has some limitations in aspects of its methodological and contextual setting. The generalizability of results into wider arenas potentially requires further research beyond the UK grocery sector. The sample used in this study draws from grocery shoppers with an indicated predisposition and motivation to behave ethically when shopping and wider extrapolation has to take account of the nature of this cohort. The applicability of the segments and scale outcomes requires further research to confirm the findings in other shopping environments. A range of factors could potentially influence the balance between ethical motives, store image factors and resultant ethical shopping behaviors (e.g., consumer psychographics and lifestyles, together with individual values, ethical obligation, and self identity). The study of these antecedents may be found to influence product involvement levels, the consequent influences of different motivational drivers, and ensuing shopping outcomes and enhance further understanding of ethical shoppers.