An exploration of the use of price match guarantees in UK supermarkets from a consumer perspective.

D. S. Childs

BA Marketing Management

2012

This Project is submitted in part fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree of BA with Honours in Marketing Management at the Manchester Metropolitan University Business School.

An exploration of the use of price match guarantees in UK supermarkets from a consumer perspective. Daniel Stephen Childs

19/3/2012

This Research Project is an original and authentic piece of work by me. I have fully acknowledged and referenced all secondary sources used. It has not been presented in whole or in part for assessment elsewhere. I have read the Examination regulations, and am fully aware of the potential consequences of any breach of them.

Signed . Date ..

Abstract
This research project explored the way in which the introduction of Price Match Guarantees (PMGs) by UK supermarkets affects consumers. The main objectives were to discover the impact on consumers price search behaviour and to understand the effect on supermarket choice. The study focused specifically on undergraduate students in order to maximise access and to take advantage of their insight as newly independent shoppers.

The current academic understanding of PMGs is mainly focused towards the US market, where research is generally aimed towards non-grocery retail stores. The literature on PMGs focuses on several key areas including; the effect on price search, price perception, price knowledge, store choice and the ways that the PMG is implemented. The knowledge gaps that the research projected aimed to fill were based around all areas of PMG literature due to there being no prior research into the phenomenon as it exists in the UK.

The research methodology was designed from a phenomenological philosophy and had a focus on the generation of qualitative data through the use of in-depth interviews. A total of four in depth interviews were conducted in order to minimise the repetition of data and to allow for sufficient time to be spent with each interviewee. The data was analysed using a form of thematic analysis which involved creation of codes, themes and ultimately models in order to fully display the richness of the data.

The research found that the consumers did not follow the same price search behaviour as the current literature describes due to a higher value placed on time and a high perceived cost to take advantage of PMGs. The research also showed that although PMGs may tempt consumers to stores with the offer, there are other factors such as convenience that are more important to consumers than price. Overall, the research achieved the objectives that were set and acts as a foundation for future research in the UK market. It contributes a small but crucial amount of knowledge to the existing PMG literature and provides the only consumer focused research into the specific nature of PMGs in the UK market. i

Acknowledgements
I would like to first thank my research project tutor Dr Catherine Ashworth for her support and wonderfully thoughtful insights into the project. Her guidance, interest and expertise allowed me to engage with and understand the research process in a way that would have otherwise been impossible.

I am extremely grateful to my mum and dad for supporting me throughout my degree and for always believing in my ability.

A special thank you to my girlfriend, Amy for her love and support during the stressful times.

Finally, thank you to all my friends for the distractions when it all got too much!

ii

Table of Contents
Abstract ...................................................................................................................i Acknowledgements ...............................................................................................ii Table of Contents ................................................................................................. iii List of Tables ........................................................................................................ vi List of Figures....................................................................................................... vi

Introduction ...........................................................................................................1

Section 1.0 Background to Research Study .......................................................2 1.1 Supermarket Pricing Strategies ......................................................................3 1.2 Global Economic Crisis ..................................................................................3 1.3 Initial Response by Supermarkets ..................................................................4 1.4 Introduction of Price Match Guarantees .........................................................5 1.5 Defining Research Scope...............................................................................6 1.6 Research Aim.................................................................................................8 1.7 Objectives ......................................................................................................8

Section 2.0 Literature Review ...............................................................................9 2.1 Overview ...................................................................................................... 10 2.2 Price Search................................................................................................. 12 2.2.1 Price Search Background ...................................................................... 12 2.2.2 Pre-Purchase Price Search ................................................................... 13 2.2.3 Post-Purchase Price Search .................................................................. 13 2.2.4 Price Perception .................................................................................... 15 2.2.5 Cost of Price Search .............................................................................. 16 2.3 Claiming the Price Match Guarantee ........................................................... 17 2.3.1 Refund Depth......................................................................................... 19 2.3.2 Timing .................................................................................................... 20 2.4 Price Match Guarantees as Anti-Competitive............................................... 20 2.5 Analysis of Literature in the context of the UK market ................................. 20 2.6 Knowledge Gaps .......................................................................................... 22 iii

Section 3.0 Methodology .................................................................................... 24 3.1 Research Process ........................................................................................ 25 3.1.1 Philosophy ............................................................................................. 26 3.1.2 Approach ............................................................................................... 26 3.1.3 Strategy ................................................................................................. 27 3.1.4 Choice ................................................................................................... 27 3.1.5 Time ....................................................................................................... 28 3.1.6 Technique .............................................................................................. 28 3.2 Research Design .......................................................................................... 28 3.2.1 Method ................................................................................................... 29 3.2.1.1 Interview Styles............................................................................... 29 3.2.1.2 Grand Tour Themes ....................................................................... 30 3.2.1.3 Pilot Interview ................................................................................. 31 3.2.1.4 Final Interview Design .................................................................... 31 3.2.2 Sampling ................................................................................................ 31 3.2.2.1 Sampling Technique ....................................................................... 32 3.2.2.2 Sample Size.................................................................................... 32 3.2.3 Collection and Analysis of data .............................................................. 33 3.2.3.1 Ethics .............................................................................................. 34 3.2.3.2 Data Recording ............................................................................... 34 3.2.3.3 Data Analysis .................................................................................. 35

Section 4.0 Findings and Discussion ................................................................ 38 4.1 Price Search behaviour ................................................................................ 39 4.1.1 Price Knowledge .................................................................................... 40 4.1.2 Cost of Price Search .............................................................................. 41 4.1.3 Post Purchase Price Search .................................................................. 43 4.1.4 Effective Price Match Guarantees ......................................................... 43 4.2 Supermarket Choice .................................................................................... 44 4.2.1 Convenience .......................................................................................... 46 4.2.2 Type of shop .......................................................................................... 46 4.2.3 Trustworthiness of store ........................................................................ 47

iv

Section 5.0 Conclusion ....................................................................................... 49 5.1 Meeting Objectives ....................................................................................... 50 5.2 Direction of Future Research ....................................................................... 51 5.3 Implications .................................................................................................. 51

Section 6.0 References ....................................................................................... 53

Section 7.0 Appendix .......................................................................................... 62 7.1 Price Match Guarantees as Anti-Competitive............................................... 63 7.2 Sample Interview Transcript One ................................................................. 65 7.3 Sample Interview Transcript Two ................................................................. 68 7.4 Sample Interview Coding ............................................................................. 70

Word Count - 12,156

List of Tables
1.1 Comparison of the PMG offerings of ASDA, Sainsbury's and Tesco ............6 2.1 Overview of literature reviewed ................................................................... 11 3.1 Comparative interview types and situations of use. ..................................... 29 3.2 Break down of selected interviewees. .......................................................... 33 3.3 Example of a coded observation. ................................................................. 36 4.1 Quotes describing construction of price knowledge. .................................... 40 4.2 Quotes describing price perception of UK supermarkets. ............................ 41 4.3 Quotes describing purchasing habits. .......................................................... 43 4.4 Comparison of thoughts relating to PMG effectiveness .............................. 44 4.5 Importance of themes relating to the choice of a store. ................................ 45 4.6 Quotes describing store trustworthiness. ..................................................... 48

List of Figures
1.1 Diagram displaying potential research focus areas .......................................7 2.1 Model of PMG Effectiveness in lowering perception of store price .............. 15 2.2 Factors related to claiming the PMG ............................................................ 17 2.3 Effects of reputation and retail environment on perceived service quality ... 18 2.4. Model of PMG effects on consumers .......................................................... 21 2.5. Model of characteristics needed for an effective PMG offering ................... 22 3.1 The research process onion ....................................................................... 25 3.2 Diagram of grand tour themes used in the interview design. ...................... 30 3.3 Processes involved in the thematic analysis of data .................................... 36 4.1 Themes involved in price search behaviour ................................................ 39 4.2 Factors identified from research as causing high search costs ................... 42 4.3 Themes involved in store choice ................................................................. 45 4.4 Display of interviewees shopping habits ..................................................... 47

vi

Introduction
This research project looks at the consumer reaction to the use of price match guarantees (PMG) in the retail grocery sector within the United Kingdom (UK). The use of price match guarantees covering a whole basket of goods is a pricing and marketing tactic that has not been used before in the UK (Shah 2011). Although it has, in some instances, been used in the United States and other countries, there has been limited academic study of PMGs focusing specifically at grocery shopping. Asda, Sainsburys and Tesco, the three largest supermarkets in the UK, all now use the tactic therefore, it is in the interests of business academics and the public to gain an understanding into this process.

The first section will look at the background relating to the research problem, looking at how, when and why supermarkets first introduced PMGs. In the second section there will be a review of the literature related to the area of PMGs, an analysis of this will be used in order to find knowledge gaps in the current academic understanding. The third section will contain the methodology which will look at the approach, design and the sampling methods used to undertake the research. The fourth section will contain an analysis and discussion of the data collected by the empirical research. The final section will then conclude by looking at the extent the research objectives were filled and by discussing the impact on future research in this area.

Section 1.0

Background to Research Study

This section will examine the precursor of events that led to the implementation of PMGs by the three leading UK supermarkets; Asda, Sainsburys and Tesco. An understanding of these events will give the current situation context, allowing for the literature review to be analysed with this situation taken into consideration.

1.1 Supermarket Pricing Strategies In terms of general supermarket pricing, one of two main strategies are employed; everyday low pricing (EDLP) or the offer of temporary price reductions (LindseyMullikin and Petty 2009; Ellickson and Misra 2006). Wal-Mart is considered one of the pioneers of EDLP and is the strategy that has been employed by their UK subsidiary company, Asda (Finch 2009; Ellickson and Misra 2006). Meanwhile, Sainsburys and Tesco use the strategy of frequent, highly discounted promotions which are used to offset the high prices on some items by offering large savings on others (Chakraborty et al 2011).

1.2 Global Economic Crisis The use of the PMG tactic in supermarkets can trace its roots back to the 2008 global economic crisis. This caused widespread financial losses and resulted in several economic regions entering a recession; notably North America, the Eurozone and the UK (Nayyar 2011; Lim and Sng 2011). The crisis was caused by many inter-related factors which stemmed from the collapse of the 2007 U.S. housing market bubble; the overvaluation of houses which were sold to consumers on high mortgages (BBC 2007). By the time the market crashed, these subprime mortgages had been converted into banking securities, securities that were worthless when it became apparent that it was impossible for the consumers to pay them back. The money lost on the securities damaged worldwide banking systems, forced governments to invest heavily in supporting them and ultimately caused the global recession due to low market confidence and a lack of liquidity in the finance markets (Nayyar 2011).

The effects on the public included widespread unemployment, pay freezes, low interest and high inflation; all of which contributed to dramatically less disposable income (Nayyar 2011). The immediate reaction of consumers was to attempt to save money in any way possible causing a large proportion of the general 3

population to become increasingly price sensitive in a relatively small time period (Valls et al 2011). This affects retailers in the UK grocery market because grocery shopping has been highlighted in studies such as Valls et al (2011) and Kumcu and Kaufman (2011) as being the main area in which consumers try to save money. This happens as consumers focus on value shopping and avoid buying value added, luxury or branded goods. The overall effect on supermarkets is lower profits. This is due to the margins being higher on luxury or branded goods than the cheaper alternatives; in order to maintain profits, higher volumes of sales must be achieved (Thanassoulis 2009). This leads to the next section that will look at the response of the grocery retailing industry, from 2008 until present.

1.3 Initial Response by Supermarkets When the effects of the economic downturn became more apparent and began to negatively affect consumer spending habits, the three supermarkets each reacted in their own way. The main threat to all of the supermarkets was from consumers trading down to one of the discounter supermarkets i.e. Aldi and Lidl (Finch 2009). This section briefly examines the strategies employed before the PMG tactic was introduced.

The response of Asda to the higher price sensitivity of consumers and the rise of discounter supermarkets was to continue the policy of EDLP (Just Food 2008). At the same time they created a new category of round pound deals to directly target the discounters without comprising and offering promotions like Tesco and Sainsbury's (Finch 2009). The focus of Sainsburys post-crisis offers was on expanding its range of basic lines, of which the majority cost less than one pound. This was to react to the mix of products customers were purchasing while at the same time not sacrificing the quality associated with the Sainsburys brand (Wilson 2009).

In order to combat the rise of the discount supermarket, Tesco launched an ambitious campaign to become Britains largest discounter through the introduction of Discount Brands (Whitehead 2008). This involved creating a whole new line of discount products that mimicked the discount own brand product lines 4

used by Aldi and Lidl, these lines were priced above the Value range but below the Tesco brand range (Just Food 2009).

1.4 Introduction of Price Match Guarantees Asda was the first of the supermarkets to introduce the price match promise. Originally launched in late 2010, it was revamped into to its current state at the start of 2011 and offers to beat its competitors prices by 10% or a refund will be given (Smithers 2011a). To calculate the price differences, Asda used independent price checking website mysupermarket, this initially drew criticism from Morrisions as their prices do not appear on the site (Owen 2011a). This was fixed by carrying out physical checks of Morrisons prices twice weekly. The introduction of Asdas PMG was widely regarded by the industry as the start of a new supermarket price war (Chapman 2011; Smithers 2011b; Wood 2011; Owen 2011b).

In February 2011, Tesco responded to the offer Asda had made by introducing their own PMG. However, they had an immediate problem with their implementation of the offer. Initially the PMG stated if a competitor was cheaper than them they would give a refund that was double the difference. This had to be revoked when it was abused by consumers (Owen 2011c). In September 2011, Tesco launched a 500 million price drop to support the PMG; this move also placed their overall pricing strategy more in line with Asdas EDLP (Chapman 2011). The last of the supermarkets to offer a PMG was Sainsburys who introduced Brand Match in October 2011. Brand Match differs from the offerings of Asda and Tesco as it only applies to branded products and the refund was given at the point of purchase; there are no extra steps to get the refund (Smithers 2011b). This means that there is less work for the consumer in order to claim the refund.

Table 1.1 shows the various ways in which the PMG offerings of Asda, Sainsburys and Tesco differ. There is a large difference in the offerings available depending on the focus each supermarket has. For example, Asdas offering focuses on standing out as the cheapest by promising to match the competitors by 5

at least 10%. Its offer also has the largest scope of the three, again highlighting its clear intention to be viewed as the cheapest supermarket.
Table 1.1 Comparison of the PMG offerings of ASDA, Sainsbury's and Tesco

Element of PMG offering

Refund Type Min. Purchase Max. Refund (one transaction) Max. Refund (per calendar month) 100 Claiming Competitors included Morrisons, Sainsburys, Tesco and Waitrose Scope Checking System

Asda

Match +10%

8 items

n/a

Next day

15000 products

Mysupermarket

Sainsburys

Match

20

10

n/a

At payment

Asda and Tesco

12000 Branded Products Branded Products and Own labels

Brandview

Tesco

Match

1 item

20

100

Next day

Asda

Tesco price check

Source: Data compiled from Asda (2012), Chapman (2011), Sainsburys (2012), Smithers (2011a) and Tesco (2012).

Even though the claims outlined in the table all differ on various semantics, the result is the same; the three largest supermarkets in the UK all claim to be able to be the cheapest in one way or another. An academic understanding of this process will allow for the effects of PMGs to be explored in relation to a large market in which no similar research has yet been conducted. The information generated by the research will also be able to be examined alongside the current academic understanding of PMGs that has originated from a mainly US perspective.

1.5 Defining Research Scope As an exploratory study of a new phenomenon, there is the potential for a research project with a large scope (figure 1.1). However, the research project must be both realistic in its objectives and fit within certain time/budgetary 6

constraints (Saunders et al 2009). As such, it is necessary to reduce the scope when exploring consumer perceptions by focusing on a particular group of consumers. In doing so, the research project will be more achievable. In addition, future research would be able to follow the process set out in this project to focus on a different group of consumers.
Figure 1.1 Diagram displaying potential research focus areas

Advertising Strategy

Consumer Perceptions Exploration of effects on...

Market Prices

Store Patronage

Inflation

The consumers that will be focused on in this research project will be undergraduate students. The reasoning behind this is that the majority of students will be becoming independent for the first time and needing to budget and shop on their own. In general, students will have limited funds and therefore may be one of the most price conscious consumer groups to explore (Valls et al 2011). This group is also an accessible consumer group for the research project to study and gain an insight into. Based on this discussion of research scope, the aims and objectives outlined in the following sections were set.

1.6 Research Aim To explore the use of price match guarantees in UK supermarkets from a consumer perspective with a focus on undergraduate students.

1.7 Objectives

1. To understand the current literature relating to the subject of price match guarantees in the context of UK supermarket shopping.

2. To investigate how price match guarantees affect the price search behaviour of undergraduate students in terms of purchase intention.

3. To explore the extent to which price match guarantees can influence consumer supermarket choice.

The following section will contain a review of the literature related to PMGs. Understanding the current work will be the first step to creating a methodology that can effectively contribute new knowledge to this area.

Section 2.0

Literature Review

This section contains a literature review that looks at various areas related to the use of price match guarantees (PMGs) as a pricing tactic. This literature will be used to inform the methodology as well as highlight the areas in which this research project will enhance the academic understanding of PMGs through the filling of knowledge gaps.

As an issue of clarity, price match guarantees can also be known as low price guarantees and price beating guarantees (Moorthy and Zhang 2006). For clarity the author will be using the term price match guarantee or (PMG).

2.1 Overview The area of price match guarantees (PMGs) is one that has been researched extensively in academia (Kukar-Kinney et al 2007a) however; most of the studies are not specifically focused on grocery retailing. Instead they tend to focus on other retail operations where the customer is purchasing a single, durable product as opposed to groceries which are classed as non-durable (Kujala and Johnson 1993). Those studies that have been carried out into retail grocery businesses have mainly been situated in America such as Hess and Gerstner (1991), KukarKinney (2005), Biwas et al (2006) and Arbatskaya (2005). Some of the older key studies that are referred to and built upon by the majority of recent published literature include work by Stigler (1961) and Kujala and Johnson (1993). The literature reviewed will not be explicit to the retail grocery market, all literature on PMGs will be considered, as what happens in other markets is very much pertinent to understanding the concept as a whole.

The areas explored within the literature include; the effect of PMGs on consumer price search (Arbatskaya 2005; Kujala and Johnson 1993; Lindsey-Mullikin and Petty 2009), the effect of PMGs on competition and pricing (Hess and Gerstner 1991; Arbatskaya et al 2004; Lindsey-Mullikin and Petty 2009; Eldin 1997), the timing of the implementation of the PMG (Kukar-Kinney 2005) and the extent to which PMGs are effective (Kukar-Kinney and Walters 2003; Hess and Gerstner 1991; Arbatskaya et al 2004).

10

The table (2.1) below shows an overview of the literature and highlights some of the themes within this academic area.
Table 2.1 Overview of literature reviewed

Literature Area
Price Match Guarantees Grocery Retail Specific Consumer Perspective Anti-Competitiveness Cost of Price Search

Price Knowledge

Price Perception

Claiming PMG

Refund Depth

Store Choice

Price Search

Hess and Gerstner (1991) Kujala and Johnson (1993) Eldin (1997) Jain and Srivastava (2000) Degeratu et al (2001) Srivastava and Lurie (2001) Biswas et al (2002) Kukar-Kinney and Walters (2003) Arbatskaya et al (2004) Srivastava and Lurie (2004) Arbatskaya (2005) Dutta and Biswas (2005) Kukar-Kinney (2005) Biswas et al (2006) Kukar-Kinney (2006) Kukar-Kinney and Grewal (2006) Kukar-Kinney et al (2007a) Kukar-Kinney et al (2007b) Lindsey-Mullikin and Petty (2009) Jansen and Parakhonyak (2011)

x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x

x x x x x x x x x x x x x

x x x x x x x x x x x

x x x x x x x

x x

x x

x x x x x x x x

x x x

x x x x x x x x x x x x x x

x x

x x x x x x x x

x x x

x x

x x x

An analysis of the table shows that there are only a small number of authors who have studied the issues of PMGs and the timeframe in which the majority of research was conducted is limited to the years 2000-2009. The inclusion of the earlier works by Hess and Gerstner (1991), Kujala and Johnson (1993) is because they are relied upon by the majority of the more recent literature and are specific to the area of grocery retailing. 11

UK Market

2.2 Price Search Within the PMG literature there is a key area looking at consumer behaviour, focusing more specifically on how the offer (and its implementation) affects the consumers pre and post purchase price search. The pre purchase price search process is where a consumer looks for information relating to prices until they feel they have enough information to make an informed decision (Kujala and Johnson 1993; Lindsey-Mullikin and Petty 2009). The post purchase price search is a continuation of this process where the consumer continues to search for cheaper prices after the purchase is made (Arbatskaya 2005; Lindsey-Mullikin and Petty 2009).

2.2.1 Price Search Background The work by Kujala and Johnson (1993) combines two important disciplines needed to understand the consumers actions during the price search; economics and consumer behaviour. Their paper combines these areas and looks at both the motivating and limiting factors that dictate how the price search happens. The reason presented in the literature for why the price search takes places is so that the consumer has a certain level of knowledge on prices before selecting where to shop. This is built on the work of economist Stigler (1961) who was the first to relax the assumption of perfect price knowledge, i.e. the consumer does not simply know what prices are fair and they must search to become informed (Kujala and Johnson 1993). This view has been challenged by Punj and Staelin (1983) and Urbany (1986) however; it has been on the basis of durable or higher involvement purchases, of which groceries are not considered to be a part (Kujala and Johnson 1993). The papers main findings are that although price search stems from a consumer wanting to gain knowledge of fair pricing, it is not always actively used by consumers for habitual purchases. This is because the search does not need to take place before each shop, instead consumers rely on intuition and external factors (e.g. news on grain prices or inflation) for when they expect prices may have changed, a view reinforced by (Srivastava and Lurie 2001).

The limiting factor for discontinuing the price search is when the consumer reaches a point where the benefit of gaining knowledge exceeds the potential cost savings produced from conducting it (Kujala and Johnson 1993; Hess and 12

Gerstner 1991; Srivastava and Lurie 2001; Lindsey-Mullikin and Petty 2009). There is little debate over this fact in the literature; the main debate is over the effects PMGs have on the ability for the consumer to continue the price search (Arbatskaya 2005; Srivastava and Lurie 2001) which is looked at in the following two sections.

2.2.2 Pre-Purchase Price Search The work by Lindsey-Mullikin and Petty (2009) focuses on the role of price deception in bargain assurances (BAs) in discouraging price search. BAs are a group of marketing tactics that signal a low price of which PMGs are a part of. They ultimately conclude that BAs do discourage both pre and post purchase price search by indicating that the price advertised is the best possible bargain. An issue with the study is that it does not conclude on each of the BA types separately (Lindsey-Mullikin and Petty 2009). Instead, they conclude on the role that BAs in general have on discouraging price search; the extent to which the PMG is responsible is not specifically discussed in their findings.

However, the findings are consistent with the earlier works of Kujala and Johnson (1993), Jain and Srivastava (2000) and Arbatskaya (2005). The general consensus in these three pieces of literature is that the offering of a PMG does cause the consumer to cut short the pre-purchase price search. Jain and Srivastava (2000) offer the explanation that this happens due to consumers being confident at finding generally lower prices at a store with a PMG therefore; the price search is shortened even when actual prices are not known. This area will be explored more in the price perception section (2.2.4).

2.2.3 Post-Purchase Price Search In terms of post purchase price search, Arbatskaya (2005) leads the argument that the implementation of PMGs is not to shorten the pre-price search but to allow the consumer to delay the price search until after the purchase. The author presents the view of Buy now, search later (Arbatskaya 2005:28), which is to buy the product immediately on the promise that it is the lowest price, not from the consumers own knowledge; this must be gained after the fact.

13

Meanwhile, Jain and Srivastava (2000) describe the post purchase price search as being one that only exists if the search costs are low. This is because the products cost and therefore, potential savings are not likely to be high from having the refund if the PMG offer is taken up. If the search costs are high, the low value perception from the store offering the PMG is enough to accept the products at the price that they cost (Srivastava and Lurie 2004; Jain and Srivastava 2000).

A more in depth study by Kukar-Kinney et al (2007b) enhances the knowledge in this area by further defining the use of post purchase search. Their findings into the role of price consciousness in PMGs indicated that those consumers who are more price conscious are likely to continue the search after the purchase (KukarKinney et al 2007b:219). How the level of price consciousness was measured is not specifically mentioned in the study. A comparable study by Dutta and Biswas (2005) which has similar findings to Kukar-Kinney et al (2007b) also fails to show calculations. However, the methodology for both studies was based on the earlier work by Lichtenstein et al (1988) which states that the level of a consumers price recall is directly linked to the price consciousness of that consumer. Therefore, a consumer who can recall the price of a purchased item successfully would be classed as a highly price conscious individual. In the future, studies could be aimed at this area with the focus of discovering general levels of price consciousness across a population in order to inform other studies.

Overall, the literature generally agrees that PMGs have the effect of cutting down the time a consumer spends on price search (Kujala and Johnson 1993; Srivastava and Lurie 2004; Jain and Srivastava 2000) while at the same time allowing for a reason to continue or defer post-price search (Arbatskaya 2005; Jain and Srivastava 2000). This impacts retailers as it allows for sales to be made on the promise of the lower price, even if this price is not the best in the market. It transfers responsibility for getting the best price to the consumer; those who do not engage in the post purchase price search benefit the retailer. These issues are looked in more detail in section 2.3.

14

2.2.4 Price Perception An important area that links with price search behaviour and store choice is the differences in price perception that consumers have.

The issue within the literature here is the extent to which PMGs affect the consumers price perception of store prices. Most authors agree that the existence of a PMG is enough to convince the consumer that the store is low in price (Biswas et al 2006; Srivastava and Lurie 2004; Kukar-Kinney and Walters 2003). However, the situations and conditions that allow this process to work are debated (Srivastava and Lurie 2004). For instance, Biswas et al (2002) found that the use of the PMG indicated to the customer that the price was low regardless of other cues that generally signal higher prices. This means that a store may have all the indicators of a high price (i.e. location, brand, previous advertising) however, if they offer a PMG then the consumer will perceive the store to be low in price.
Figure 2.1 Model of PMG Effectiveness in lowering perception of store price

Uncertain market prices

High market discipline

No internal price indication

Effective PMG

Adapted from Srivastava and Lurie (2004)

The model above (figure 2.1) challenges the view of Biswas et al (2002) on the basis of market discipline levels. The study is theoretical in nature and looks at the effects of consumers perceptions towards other consumers reactions. Simply, if a consumer believes that many other consumers will take advantage of the PMG, then there is more chance of the PMG being genuine. This is what creates high market discipline; the process of multiple consumers claiming a PMG in the market. Without this, the consumer will not perceive the store price to be low as they do not believe the PMG on offer to be genuine.

The latest research on this subject is by Biswas et al (2006) who hit back at the findings of Srivastava and Lurie (2004) on the basis that the work is only a 15

theoretical expectation; not as the result of empirical research and disproved it in their findings. Further empirical research would be needed in this area in order to verify the findings however, it can still be concluded that PMGs create low price perception in some cases.

2.2.5 Cost of Price Search So far, the literature has indicated that the effect that PMGs have on price search and price perception have a key variable which dictates the extent to which the PMG tactic will be successful i.e. the cost of the price search (Kukar-Kinney et al 2007a). It is therefore important to understand what factors constitute the cost of the price search. Search costs are described by Arbatskaya (2005:7): Search cost includes the cost of getting informed about actual prices in the market, the cost of making sure that all restrictions on the product, competitors, and timing of price offers are satisfied, as well as the cost of returning to the store and obtaining the refund. Kukar-Kinney and Grewal (2006) expand on this definition by stating there are significant differences between bricks and mortar stores and internet retailers due to the online environment being perceived to be less reliable.

An example of a variable that has been investigated in detail by Srivastava and Lurie (2004) is the location of stores in relation to one another. The results show that where competing stores are located in close proximity then the search costs are perceived by the customer to be lower; they do not need to travel far in order to carry out the price search (Srivastava and Lurie 2004:122).

A study by Jansen and Parakhonyak (2011) criticises current consumer search models on the basis that they assume there is no cost to the price search of revisiting a store they have already been too. Therefore; after a prolonged price search, the cost of going back to any store identified as the cheapest will incur additional search costs. An issue with this study is that its methodology states that they assume all consumers know market prices, something previously contested by Stigler (1961) and again by Kujala and Johnson (1993).

16

What these studies do not consider is the use of the internet to compare prices of retail stores; this massively reduces search costs (Arbatskaya 2005; Degeratu et al 2001). When considering the popularity of price comparison websites in the UK (Chakraborty et al 2011; Alexa 2012) and the accessibility of the internet, the actual cost of price search in the UK may be small. Furthermore, as discussed in the background section, the types of PMG offers of the UK supermarkets are implemented in such a way that the hassle costs are very low. Therefore, the cost of price search is not a major factor; for example, Sainsburys PMG refund happens at the point of sale which means that the customer does not need to return to the store. With ASDA and Tesco, even though the customer must return to the store to claim the price match guarantee they are likely to do so anyway as part of the weekly shop.

2.3 Claiming the Price Match Guarantee A separate area of study within the PMG literature looks at the processes and effects that occur when the consumer actually makes the decision to act upon a PMG and claim the refund. There is only a small amount of research in the area, focusing on the effects of refund depth (i.e. amount refunded), the time the PMG is claimed, its effect on loyalty and willingness to claim.
Figure 2.2 Factors related to claiming the PMG

Source: Kukar-Kinney and Grewal (2006:12)

17

The study by Kukar-Kinney and Grewal (2006) looks at all the factors involved in the willingness for consumers to claim the PMG. The model above (figure 2.2) maps these factors in the theoretical framework that was tested in their research. The findings in terms of retail environment were that a PMG claimed through the internet was viewed as less reliable and therefore, more difficult to claim than in a bricks and mortar store. An issue with the finding is that the study does not take into consideration the way in which UK shoppers use internet channels, also the use of internet has grown considerably since the study was conducted (Chakraborty et al 2011).

The implications for the UK market are that both ASDA and Tesco use the internet as the primary means for the initial price comparison that then gives the consumer the voucher for the refund. Sainsburys therefore may have an advantage by offering the PMG refund in store, if the study was found to be consistent with a UK perspective. This is therefore an area that must be explored in the different context in order to create a fuller understanding.
Figure 2.3 Effects of reputation and retail environment on perceived service quality

Source: Kukar-Kinney and Grewal (2006:16)

The study also showed that internet stores with the highest reputation were slightly higher than a retail store with the lowest reputation in terms service quality, as shown is figure 2.3. This has an effect on the perceived likelihood of receiving the

18

refund as shown in figure 2.2 therefore; the effects of the type of channel may not be high as suggested by the results of difficulty to claim alone.

2.3.1 Refund Depth An important area relating to the claiming of a PMG offer is the extent or size of refund that is available; this is referred to as refund depth (Kukar-Kinney and Walters 2003). This is an important area of the literature to understand as the UK supermarkets differ in depth, based on both amount refunded and items compared i.e. ASDA offers 10% price beating offer and Sainsburys restrict the PMG by how much is spent (only active above 20).

The research by Kukar-Kinney and Walters (2003) is one of the first to explore this area and does so from a consumer perspective; they criticise the lack of research into PMGs from the consumer perspective as one reason for the research. The research has three main findings; a modest refund increases believability of the PMG offer, an aggressive refund is viewed sceptically and deep refunds raise perceptions of PMG value. It concludes by stating that the refund depth takes the strongest role in amongst PMG characteristics when influencing the initial purchasing decision. The findings however, are contradicted by a later study by Kukar-Kinney (2006) which suggests that refund depth is not the primary characteristic, instead scope (i.e. number of items, length and range of the PMG) was the main variable that influenced initial store choice. If this was to apply to UK market it would suggest that Tesco and ASDA would be favoured by consumers therefore, this will be an important area to explore in the research.

The study by Kukar-Kinney (2006) also finds that refund depth has no effect repeat store purchase behaviour whereas the scope of the offer does. This suggests that consumer prefer more items, over a longer time period to be considered as part of the PMG tactic. It also shows a link between scope and loyalty, suggesting that if used in a certain way PMGs can both attract and keep consumers. The extent to which this applies in the grocery retail sector now needs to be discovered in greater depth through exploratory research.

19

2.3.2 Timing A qualitative consumer focused research study by Kukar-Kinney (2005) investigated the effects of the timing of refunds; either at the time of purchase or returning to the store at a later time. The research found that consumers are more likely to seek the refund at the time of purchase (having already found a cheaper price). This finding would seem to benefit the model of refund that Sainsburys offer; the point of sale system compares prices and refunds differences on the receipt. The issue with the findings is that there are no follow up studies to reaffirm or challenge the results, this therefore presents another area in which further exploration through the UK market would benefit the academic understanding of PMGs.

2.4 Price Match Guarantees as Anti-Competitive A large area of the existing literature centres on whether the PMG tool promotes competition or is conducive to price collusion. This area is not directly related to the objectives and would therefore be a potential area of future research. The literature review of this area can be found in Appendix 8.1

2.5 Analysis of Literature in the context of the UK market The ways in which PMGs affect the price search behaviour of the customer are generally agreed upon by academics. PMGs reduce the time of the price search because the customers perception is that PMGs are indicators of low store price. Post-purchase price search is encouraged by the PMG offer, they allow the consumer to buy with the knowledge that if it is cheaper somewhere else they will not lose out. The cost of price search affects how long the consumer will search for the best price; the cost is measured in time, effort and hassle. If the price search cost is low, consumers will continue to look for the best price for longer than if it is high. The problem with these conclusions is that they do not take into account the nature of the UK market; the cost of price search is low in terms of cost, hassle and time. However, this may be explained by habitual shopping being less about price search and more about intuition due to the low involvement nature of the products.

20

When claiming a PMG, there are differences based upon reputation, difficulty and store quality on the consumer willingness; the channel (internet or retail) has an effect favouring retail stores. The timing of the refund claim is more often at purchase and store loyalty is increased by a PMG offer that has a large scope.

None of the literature reviewed looks at the UK retail grocery market; in total only fiveof the studies look at the grocery market regardless of country. This lack of specific focus in this area does not mean that the literature is not pertinent. The main difference between grocery and non-grocery has been examined in the review on the basis of durable/non-durable goods. The literature examined here will be used in the next section to inform the methodology and knowledge gaps outlined in section 1.7.
Figure 2.4 - Model of PMG effects on consumers

Shortens Price Search

Encourages Post Purchase Price Search

PMG

Increases Willingness to claim refund

Increases Loyalty

Lowers Price Preception

Drawn from literature review

The model (figure 2.4) synthesises the effects of PMG on the various elements of consumer behaviours.

21

Figure 2.5 - Model of characteristics needed for an effective PMG offering

Drawn from literature review

The model above (figure 2.5) summarises the themes in the literature which identify the various offerings a PMG must have in order to exert the influence modelled in figure 2.5.

2.6 Knowledge Gaps From the literature reviewed it is clear there are many unexplored areas in the use of price match guarantees. The majority of the research is based on the effects that PMG has on the fairness of competition, the effects on price perception, the type of price search and how PMGs are implemented. Effectively, the majority of the research is from an industry point of view. There is little empirical research on the perceptions of consumers towards PMG, just the theoretical implications that are predicted to happen. Therefore, it is now important to explore the speculative understandings of PMG by applying them to the UK market and looking at a consumer perspective.

22

The current literature is also heavily orientated to non-grocery retail markets, grocery retailing makes for only a small percentage of academic understanding and there are no studies that look at the UK market. Therefore, the application of the findings in the literature review to the UK market would constitute contributing towards filling a knowledge gap and add a new important voice to the knowledge of PMGs.

The next chapter will take the understanding of the current situation of PMGs and create a research design that can be used to explore the various themes highlighted as having insufficient research from a consumer perspective.

23

Section 3.0

Methodology

24

This section will deal with the processes involved in creating a research method that will allow for the gathering of empirical data with a view to meeting the objectives described in section 1. The aim of the research is an exploration of consumer perceptions regarding the use of price match guarantees in supermarkets focusing on undergraduate students, the methodology therefore, must adopt a suitable design that can achieve this aim.

3.1 Research Process The structure for the methodology section is adopted from Saunders et al (2009), using the figure 3.1 below which shows the research onion which describes the research process. By using this format, the reasoning behind the research design decisions is made clearer, the process begins with the choosing of a philosophy which then governs the decisions made as the research design is created.
Figure 3.1 The research process onion

Philosophy

Approach

Strategy

Choice

Time

Technique

Adapted from Saunders et al (2009)

25

3.1.1 Philosophy In order to create a research method, the philosophical perspective of the researcher must first be declared. It is the assumptions attached to research philosophies that underpin the design of the research and therefore impacts on the way in which data is gathered (Saunders et al 2009).

The research philosophy adopted for the research study is phenomenology which is part of an interpretivist or anti-positivist philosophy (Bryman and Bell 2011). Phenomenology is the prevailing approach in qualitative research in social science literature (Gummesson 2000) and is described by Taylor and Bogdan (1984:2) as; The phenomenologist is committed to understanding solitary phenomena from the actors own perspective. He or she examines how the world is experienced. The important reality is what people perceive it to be. From an ontology perspective, this means that the researcher understands the world does not have a single reality; instead this reality is socially constructed and is subjective (Saunders et al 2009). This is important as the research is an exploration of a phenomenon that has been observed in the US but not in the UK. It is the potential for difference in the realities of consumers in the two markets that will mean this report adds a new area to PMG literature.

In terms of epistemology, acceptable knowledge in the context of this research study, is based on subjective meanings and social phenomena. The focus of knowledge is on the details of situations and the reality that exists behind these details. This stance is taken by those who are critical of scientific models being applied to the social world. Therefore, the understanding of knowledge reflects this position, and there is a different logic and method applied to gathering it (Bryman and Bell 2011).

3.1.2 Approach The choice of research approach is important as it creates a more thorough research design that matches the nature of the research problem and allows for a

26

more informed decision to be made regarding the choices within research design (Easterby-Smith et al 2008). There are two principle research approaches; inductive and deductive. The latter focuses on testing existing theory while the former generates new theory (Saunders et al 2009). Gummesson (2000) argues that after the initial choice between inductive and deductive all research become abductive; a combination of approaches although it is necessary, at first, to choose between the two.

The choice made for the research design is inductive; the primary reasoning behind this decision is that inductive approaches are more suited to gaining an understanding of the meanings humans attach to events (Saunders et al 2009). This is more in line with the choice of research philosophy than the rigid scientific structure of the deductive approach (Bryman and Bell 2011). As this study is an exploration of consumer perceptions to a particular phenomenon, the inductive approach is far more appropriate in allowing the research generated to have meaning.

3.1.3 Strategy The research strategy is the way in which the research problem is tackled and although there is no one correct strategy, the choice is affected by the inductive approach taken (Saunders 2009).

In order to most effectively research the aims of the project the chosen strategy was the in depth method (McCracken 1990). This strategy is a common way to conduct exploratory research and is a principle tool of qualitative researchers (Gummesson 2000; Bryman and Bell 2011).

3.1.4 Choice The choice of research method chosen for the subject is a mono method. This involves using one method for data collection and a corresponding data analysis procedure (Bryman and Bell 2011; Saunders et al 2009). A problem with using a mono-method study is that triangulation cannot be employed. The process of triangulation is using multiple sources of data in order to reduce bias and increase the validity of the research results (Saunders et al 2009). 27

However, data triangulation has been criticised as a mainly realist approach; it indicates that there is one world view and multiple methods looking at that view will increase research validity (Bryman and Bell 2011). This does not fit with the phenomenological philosophy and as such, multiple methods would only serve to confuse the research from its objectives. For example, using a focus group and an interview would present a social and private reality, this would not triangulate into increasing the validity of the studys results because realities do not mix in that way.

3.1.5 Time The time horizon represents the time scale at which the research will look. It is common for case study strategies to employ a cross sectional time scale as the interviews are conducted over a short space of time (Saunders et al 2009). The cross sectional study is also in keeping with the phenomenology philosophy, the reality of the subjects changes over time therefore in order to understand the issue as it is now; a narrow timeframe must be used in collecting the data.

3.1.6 Technique The research technique that is employed by the study is the qualitative approach; this is chosen because of the exploratory nature which demands insight into how people understand the issue or situation (Jankowicz 1995:173).

The use of qualitative research is also the primary way in which to research from a phenomenological stance; the feelings of respondents are what must be discovered which requires the researcher to directly interact with them (Gummesson 2000).

3.2 Research Design This section will take the factors outlined in the research process and describe the impact on the selection of sampling technique, research method and the way in which the data is to be analysed.

28

3.2.1 Method As part of an exploratory in depth approach to the research strategy that focused on the collection of qualitative research data, the primary research method chosen for the research design was the use of interviews.

3.2.1.1 Interview Styles There are several types of interview that can be used in order to generate qualitative empirical or real world (Gummesson 2000) data, these include; structured, semi structured and unstructured (Saunders et al 2009).
Table 3.1 Comparative interview types and situations of use

Exploratory Structured Semi- Structured Unstructured x xx

Descriptive xx

Explanatory x xx

xx = more frequent

x= less frequent

Source: Saunders et al (2009:323)

As this study is exploratory, the table indicated that the most frequent type of interview used is the unstructured interview. These interviews are described as being most effective when the scope of the research is not fully understood; no predetermined questions are used allowing for a long exploratory interview (Saunders et al 2009).

However, the literature review gave the researcher a pre-understanding of the topic; this would be part of their reality during the questioning and create particular areas of interest that should be focused on (Gummesson 2000). An unstructured interview would not take advantage of these areas of focus and also creates the potential for too large a quantity of data to be generated, resulting in a chaotic effect (McCracken 1990:25).

29

The use of semi structured interviews would have allowed for the preunderstanding to be taken into consideration in creating themes around which questions would be created (Saunders et al 2009). However, this process is restrictive and does not allow the interviewee to explore areas that the researcher may not have considered in the questioning (Bryman and Bell 2011).

3.2.1.2 Grand Tour Themes The need for a method of questioning that is both adaptable to the interviewee while at the same time not likely to create large amounts of unnecessary data led to the use of a guided interview focusing on grand tour themes (McCracken 1990). The grand tour themes, as shown in figure 3.2, allow the interview to go in any direction with the questioning based off the interviewees answers (Anderson 1954; Tiessen et al 2004). The themes set out within the interview are used as to draw appropriate boundaries that keep the focus relevant to the research objectives.
Figure 3.2 Diagram of grand tour themes used in the interview design

Price search behaviour

Store choice

Claiming PMG refund

Theme

Purchase intentions

Price Perception

Drawn from literature review.

30

3.2.1.3 Pilot Interview In order to test how useful this approach would be, a pilot interview was conducted. The interview relied purely on the grand tour themes as a way to generate questions; further questions were based off the interviewees answers. The main issue discovered in the pilot interview was that the pressure of creating questions based around the grand tour themes, while at the same time remaining as objective as possible, led to a disjointed interview with too many repeated or similar questions.

3.2.1.4 Final Interview Design In order to combat the issues discovered in the pilot interview, an interview road map was created which was utilised in order to guide the final interviews. This contained the aforementioned grand tour themes along with potential research questions based around these core themes.

This technique is highlighted as being a key element of a good interviewing strategy by McCracken (1990) who describes the road map as a travel itinerary; there are lots of things to do in the interview and a flexible approach is needed to ensure that there will be sufficient depth into the important issues. The importance is that the interview has a direction ensuring it will go somewhere useful to answering the research question.

As part of this method of interviewing, open questions were employed along with follow up probing questions. The dual tactic of questioning allows for an initially detailed response and then a follow up question based off the response that can then explore the more specific points of interest (McCracken 1990; Saunders et al 2009).

3.2.2 Sampling This section deals with the decisions made with regards to creating a sample for the research project. How a sample group is created impacts on the validity and reliability of the research therefore, justifying the use of particular techniques and the sample size is important (Saunders et al 2009; Bryman and Bell 2011; Jankowicz 1995). 31

3.2.2.1 Sampling Technique The choice of sampling technique has many effects on the validity, cost and extent of generalizable representation of the sample group. Although there are many types of sampling to consider, time and cost restraints limit the ability to choose the more complex probability sampling techniques. These samples consist of creating a sampling frame of the population from which a sample can then be taken; this method is generally representative of the population characteristics (Saunders et al 2009).

The technique that is left is non-probability sampling, although these samples tend to be less representative, the nature of the study itself is more suited to this type of sampling (Jankowicz 1995). The non-probability sampling technique that was used is purposive sampling, with specific focus on typical cases sampling (Henry 1990). This sample involves the researcher using their judgement to select cases that are known to be useful and do not represent any extreme (Henry 1990; Saunders et al 2009).

An issue with the sampling technique is that it is unlikely to be generalizable to a large population (Henry 1990; Saunders et al 2009) however, the generalisation of social studies is criticised by Gummesson (2000) as being prejudicial and not conducive to understanding. McCracken (1990) also argues that the sample is not chosen to represent a part of the larger world; instead it is used to provide an insight into a particular issue.

3.2.2.2 Sample Size There has been intense academic debate regarding how large a qualitative research sample should be (Mason 2010). The most prominent theory research academics subscribe to is the concept of data saturation. Proposed by Glaser and Strauss (1967), data saturation is described as the diminishing marginal contribution of each additional case (Gummesson 2000:96). This means after a certain number of interviews, the contribution of knowledge will not add any more useful information in understanding the research problem.

32

The point at which a study reaches data saturation is contested but generally relies on factors regarding the scope of the study and how modest its aims are (Mason 2010). For instance, Charmaz (2006) suggests that the aims of the research study are the primary factor in determining when data saturation is reached. A small study with modest aims is likely to reach a point of data saturation quicker than a study that spans multiple industries or disciplines. McCracken (1990) also adds that it is more important to work more closely with a smaller sample group than to work in a more superficial way with a larger group. Finally, Creswell (1998) suggests that phenomenological studies should have a sample between 4 and 25 depending on the objectives of the research.

As the research study was an exploratory study on one market with the phenomenon in its infancy, the sample size was 4 in depth interviews. This was predicted to yield sufficient data without wasting time gathering more views than is necessary in order to provide an initial understanding into the consumers thoughts on the research problem.
Table 3.2 Break down of selected interviewees

Interviewee Age Sex

1 21 M

2 24 M

3 21 M

4 21 F

The interviewees (table 3.2) selected for the research project were all between 21 and 24 year old undergraduate students. They were purposively sampled on the basis of having a fresh experience grocery shopping due to recently becoming independent.

3.2.3 Collection and Analysis of Data This section of the research design discusses the ways in which data was conducted and how the data was subsequently analysed. It also presents the ethical considerations involved in the collection of data through interviews.

33

3.2.3.1 Ethics When conducting research, there are always ethical considerations that must be taken into consideration regarding the way in which data is collected and the protection of subsequently collected data (Saunders et al 2009; Bryman and Bell 2011). All interviewees were made aware of the way in which their data would be used, given notification of interviews being recorded and informed they could stop the interview at any time. By doing this, the ethics conform to the guidelines set out as good interview practice by Bryman and Bell (2011), McCracken (1990) and Saunders et al (2009).

3.2.3.2 Data Recording The interviews were conducted in a one on one environment in the interviewees home, this was for the interviewees convenience and in order to make them more relaxed. Having the interviewees relaxed meant they were likely to contribute a useful amount of knowledge (Saunders et al 2009).

In the interviews, there was more than one source of data to be generated. Although, the verbal responses to the questions are the most obvious source of data, Hall (1959) posits that the nonverbal language has equal importance. This nonverbal language is made up from behaviours and gestures and is part of a verbal answer therefore; the mono-method study had the additional method of observation as a secondary source of data. The use of the phenomenology philosophy involves understanding not just what people say in the studies but also the acknowledgment of behavioural attributes (Gummesson 2000). By comparing the physical actions of the interviewee with the verbal data, the bias in decoding the verbal was lowered by examining any corresponding physical reactions to the questions i.e. pauses, puzzled face, defensive posture. This could have been achieved by video recording the interviews however, many people are put off by cameras and hiding them would be unethical (Bryman and Bell 2011).

To be able to analyse the verbal responses, it is a commonly recommended research procedure to transcribe the interview into a written form (Saunders et al 2009; Bryman and Bell 2011; McCracken 1990; Jankowicz 1995). There is however, debate over who should transcribe the data. Both Saunders et al (2009) 34

and Bryman and Bell (2011) believe that the interview should be transcribed by the researcher as this allows them to become familiar with the results and makes subsequent analysis easier. However, McCracken (1990:42) argues that the transcription should be carried out by a professional as the researcher would become frustrated and have a familiarity with the data that does not serve the latter part of the analysis. In regard to this debate, the research followed the advice of Saunders et al (2009) and Bryman and Bell (2011) due to the prohibitive cost of professional transcription services.

3.2.3.3 Data Analysis The analysis of qualitative data is said to be one of the most demanding aspect of the research process (Miles 1979:595; Piore 1979). The methods regarding the analysis of data generated by qualitative research are also far less developed in academia than the research methods themselves (Boyatzis 1998).

Although there are written methods for the analysis of qualitative data, McCracken (1990:41) argues that different problems will require different strategies which suggests there is no all-encompassing process. Furthermore, Miles (1979:593) states that the analysis of qualitative data is a mysterious, half-formulated art.

A study by (Sieber 1976) conducted a review of seven respected texts on qualitative methods finding that none had more than 10% of their pages devoted to analysis methods. The study also found that there was almost no specific analysis advice for different types of research methods, i.e. exploratory, explanatory. The study did find some elements that authors typically agreed on such as the need for identifying themes and formulating classes of phenomena.

The analysis tool that this research project used is best described as a form of thematic analysis, derived from methods discussed by Miles (1979) and more modern texts such as McCracken (1990), Saunders et al (2009) and Bryman and Bell (2011). This analysis tool is the most commonly used and is also highly adaptable to specific studies furthermore; it follows the key elements identified by Sieber (1976) i.e. creation of themes and discovery of phenomena. The specific

35

process that the research study followed is outlined in the diagram (figure 3.3) below.
Figure 3.3 Processes involved in the thematic analysis of data

Observation

Data Coding

Creation of Themes

Modeling

Adapted from McCracken (1990), Miles (1979) and Saunders et al (2009)

The first process in the analysis is to condense the amount of data; transcripts contain large amounts of information not all of which has a relevance to the research study (Miles 1979). Furthermore, Gummesson (2000) suggests that it is a key part of the researchers job to be able to compress the data. The process of condensing data involved reading through the transcript of each interview and making observations on the content. When a sentence with information that was relevant to the research project presented itself, a notation was made. By making these observations, it was also possible to find preliminary associations between the data (McCracken 1990).

Following on from the first process, the second process involved a coding of the initial observations into groups based on similar meanings (Saunders et al 2009, McCracken 1990). This coded data (table 3.3) was then extracted from the original transcripts in order to display all text that is associated with a particular code i.e. sentences with expensive, close by.
Table 3.3 Example of a coded observation

Statement Observed

Codes

Cos I'm running quite low on money so I'm Low - money, cheapest, option, stores just kind of going for the cheapest option. I close by, expensive know that there are stores close by but theyre too expensive, you know like Spar.

36

The third process took the coded data and created a hierarchy of themes in order to categorize the research (Sieber 1976; Saunders et al 2009; Miles 1979). These themes made it possible to model what interviewees thought about specific aspects of the phenomenon (Saunders et al 2009) and also combined all of the research studies to show agreeing/ disagreeing thoughts (McCracken 1990).

The final step involved modelling the themes that were identified in order to display what the interviews said about a specific aspect of the research project. This was then compared to the themes that were identified in the literature review (McCracken 1990; Saunders et al 2009; Miles 1979). By doing this, the data from the research could be compared against the current understanding of the phenomenon (McCracken 1990; Sieber 1976). This allowed for an analysis of the similarities, differences and new data provided by the research project (Saunders et al 2009; Bryman and Bell 2011). The following section will present the results along with a discussion of their impact on the research objectives.

37

Section 4.0

Findings and Discussion

38

This section presents the findings of the in depth interviews that were described in the previous section. The discussion of the findings will take place simultaneously in order to best present the ways in which the new empirical data fits in with the current view of the academic literature on PMGs.

4.1 Price search behaviour The first primary research objective was to investigate how price match guarantees affect the price search behaviour of undergraduate students in terms of purchase intention. This involved looking at the way in which the offer of a PMG could be said to change the way in which the process of buying a product. The current literature indicates that price search is shortened by the offer of a PMG which increases the likeliness of a purchase being made (Arbatskaya 2005; Srivastava and Lurie 2001).

The analysis of the research discovered several themes that fall under the larger theme of price search. These themes were created from the analysis and grouping of codes discovered in the interview transcripts. The diagram below (figure 4.1) shows the themes that construct the higher grand tour theme identified from the literature. Themes that are circled were not discussed in the literature.
Figure 4.1 Themes involved in price search behaviour

Price Search

Price Knowledge
Repeated Patronage

Cost of Price Search

Access to Stores

Post Purcahse Price Search

Liklihood of Refund

Effective PMG

Price Knowledge

Refund Amount

Cost of price search

Learned Behaviour

Saving Amount

In built saving method

Refund Scope

Intutition

Value of Time

Claiming

Identified from thematic analysis of interview transcripts

39

The main themes that fall under price search are price knowledge and the cost of price search, each of these then have several identified themes within. Finally, the understanding of what makes a PMG effective relates back to the ability for it to influence the price search behaviour.

4.1.1 Price knowledge The research discovered that the way in which the interviewees constructed price knowledge was heavily influenced by the experience of shopping rather than using any formal means of price searching such as using price comparison sites. All of the interviewees discussed price knowledge in the sense that prices were learned through shopping trips rather than by purposely setting out to learn market prices. The table below shows the responses of interviewees regarding knowing the cost of products.
Table 4.1 Quotes describing construction of price knowledge

You tend to get a feel for the costs of products, you get a basic average of like how much milk should cost, cheese and stuff based off experience really I like, usually buy similar meals each week, after a while you just get an understanding of how much things cost I dont really know. I can only sort of compare against similar products sold in the same shop. I just go from experience After shopping for a while, you just know the prices of things that you buy, I dont properly look to see if they are good prices but its what I thinks fair.

This highlights that the process is more informal and learned over time, using words such as feel is very subjective and therefore personal to an individual reality; this suggests that price knowledge is not a strict concept. This is similar to the discoveries of Kujala and Johnson (1993) and Srivastava and Lurie (2001) in that a formal method of price search does not need to take place before each shop as customers use intuition when purchases are low involvement.

40

The findings also indicated that it was the repeated patronage of a store that allowed for an understanding of its prices to be gained over time. By visiting the same store and buying the same or similar products regularly, the consumer is able to learn the expected cost of the shop over time. The current literature does not offer this as a way in which price knowledge is gained, instead it looks towards comparisons of prices between multiple stores as a way of assessing price. However, an explanation for why the interviewees do not feel the need to compare between stores is offered in the research.
Table 4.2 Quotes describing price perception of UK supermarkets

In general I think supermarkets are very competitive, I think thats a major advantage of being a customer. They are all competing with each other and you are going to get lower and lower prices at different places. In terms of price I think they offer a variety of items to suit every type of shopper, I suppose in that sense they are can be all similar in price depending what you buy.

The above quotes indicate that there is a belief that prices in UK supermarket are very similar even though the interviewees had never actually checked the prices of them. This explains how they can construct knowledge of product prices without visiting other stores.

4.1.2 Cost of Price Search The research showed that price search was not only inhibited by the intuitive price knowledge process but also because of a perceived high cost of searching. For example, when asked why they did not search for prices before shopping one interviewee stated; The time it would take to find out information is too much compared with the potential few pence of savings This is in line with the current academic understanding of price search behaviour in that high costs deter price searching (Kukar-Kinney et al 2007a; Srivastava and Lurie 2004). However, the reasons for the perception of a high cost differed with 41

multiple themes identified as being interrelated to the cost of price search; these are shown in the diagram below.
Figure 4.2 Factors identified from research as causing high search costs

Acess to Stores 2/4

Size of savings 3/4

Value of time 3/4

Identified from thematic analysis of interview transcripts

The limited access to others stores was a reason for a high cost of price search by half of the interviewees, they only shopped at one local store so perceived a cost in going to look for prices at other stores that were further away. This finding supports the literature, particularly Srivastava and Lurie (2004) who discuss store distance and location as a primary reason for the high cost of price searching. The size of savings that compared to the cost of searching was another discovery that has also been identified in literature by multiple authors (Kujala and Johnson 1993; Hess and Gerstner 1991; Lindsey-Mullikin and Petty 2009).

A factor that the research found to be a construct of high search costs but was not shown in previous literature is the value of the time that would be spent searching. The interviewees discussed that searching for prices was simply not worth it because they placed a high value of their time over money; one interviewee stated I value my time more than wasting it trying to recoup a few quid.

This discovery is important in being able to fully understand how offers like PMGs are viewed by the consumer. However good an offer may be, the way in which the

42

consumers place value on factors like time and money will have an impact on the uptake of an offer.

4.1.3 Post Purchase Price Search The ability for the consumer to continue searching for cheaper prices after the initial purchase of a product is highlighted by the literature as a key factor of a PMG offering (Arbatskaya 2005; Kukar-Kinney et al 2007b). However, the research discovered an important theme that was not present in the literature; the ability for the consumer to save money by purchasing strategically with an in built saving method.
Table 4.3 Quotes describing purchasing habits

There are some products that I like to go for the brand, things like gravy or bread. They are things that Id normally go for but other things like chicken breast or mince I find that you might as well go for the cheapest option because its cheaper and its practically the same product. I mean it might be less in quality but its still the same thing. Sometimes I go for value if I am wary of money; other times I actually just like the cheap stuff. Id say I mainly go for own brand. Doing that means I know I'm saving over buying more branded stuff that rips you off.

By selecting products at different price levels, the consumer has the belief that they are getting the best deal because of their actions. Searching for cheaper prices after the purchase would undermine their strategy of purchasing.

4.1.4 Effective Price Match Guarantees The research also looked at various areas relating to the effectiveness of a PMG, this is because its effectiveness has a direct impact on its ability to alter behaviour (Lindsey-Mullikin and Petty 2009). One area that the research looked closely at was how a PMG can be made more effective in terms of its refund size or comparison scope. The findings in this area showed that overall, the interviewees favoured a larger refund rather than a wider offering of comparisons. The quotes below (table 4.4) illustrate the difference of opinion. 43

Table 4.4 Comparison of thoughts relating to PMG effectiveness

Effectiveness of PMG Large Refund Wider Scope If I was doing the weekly shop and was If more products were compared and spending say thirty or forty pounds and I knew drove the prices down of my shop that that going to a particular place would save me would be a big factor. like five pounds per shop then Id go to that place. Obviously a larger refund is better if I was going to use the offer. I wouldnt even bother using the guarantee unless I knew it was going to save me loads, otherwise its a waste of time.

The comparison of the data clearly shows that a larger refund is the main factor favoured; the respondent favouring wider scope still mentions that it would be the effect on price that was desirable. This is supported by the earlier discussion relating to the cost of price search; as it is perceived to be high then so must the potential refund in order to justify the initial cost.

The literature relating to this area is restricted to just 2 other studies however, they both find similar results; a large refund is more attractive to initially convincing the customer to try a PMG (Kukar-Kinney and Walters 2003, Kukar-Kinney 2006).

4.2 Supermarket Choice The second primary research objective was to explore the way in which price match guarantees can change consumer supermarket choice. This involves looking at the factors that dictate supermarket choice and the way in which a PMG can influence these.

44

Figure 4.3 Themes involved in store choice

Store Choice
Location

Location
Convenience Type of Shop

Claiming Method
Amount of Hassle

Claiming Method

Refund Size

Trust

Identified from thematic analysis of interview transcripts

The themes developed from an analysis of the interview transcripts are presented in the diagram (figure 4.3). The research discovered factors that related to store choice and also discovered the importance that the interviewees placed on these factors. The implication of this is that the PMG cannot have an effect on some of the factors discovered; while they can influence store choice by offering large refunds but not by making a store appear near someone. The table (4.5) below shows the four main themes that were discussed by the interviewees and lists them by the number of times these themes were mentioned.
Table 4.5 Importance of themes relating to the choice of a store

Theme Convenience

Quote If it was local and like pretty convenient then yeh thats would be okay, I dont think Id save much if I had to go all over just to save money Obviously a larger refund is better if I was going to use the offer. I tend to visit the supermarket every day to pick up bits as and when I need them. It takes too long to wait for it to work on the internet, id have lost my receipt and forgot about doing it the next day

Importance Very High 4/4

Size of Refund Type of Shop

High 3/4

High 3/4

Hassle

Medium 2/4

45

The findings indicate that there are multiple factors with importance that determine the choice of a store. The findings relating to the size of refund has been previously discussed in section 4.1.4. The findings relating to the other themes will discuss below.

4.2.1 Convenience The convenience of the stores location was the most important factor given by all of the interviewees in terms of how they determine the store that the use for shopping. This was not previously considered by the literature and also opens up a range of possible research into the consumers ability to access stores that offer PMGs. Some of the literature does discuss elements such as distance and location of the stores (Srivastava and Lurie 2004; Kukar-Kinney et al 2007a) however; the themes discovered here suggest that convenience is entirely separate entity. The strength of convenience as a factor is highlighted by one quote from an interviewee; If I only needed a bottle of milk I would go down to the corner shop and pay a little bit extra. Just because it means I dont have to go half a mile out of the way. This demonstrates that this consumer would pay more for a product that they knew was overpriced because it was more convenient to do so. Whether another store has a PMG does not influence the consumer in this situation because they know that they could save the money but purposely does not do so.

4.2.2 Type of Shop The research discovered that consumers had two distinct types of shopping; either weekly or buying as needed. This was not found in any previous literature on PMGs, indicating there may be potential cultural differences in the way that consumers purchase groceries. Only one of the interviewees never conducted a weekly shop while the others all shopped weekly while also buying other items when needed. The diagram (figure 4.4) below shows this shopping behaviour.

46

Figure 4.4 Display of interviewees shopping habits

Mixed 3/4 Buy as needed 1/4 Weekly Shop 3/4

Identified from thematic analysis of interview transcripts

The impact of these findings is that consumers were found to only be likely to take advantage of a PMG if they stood to save a large amount of money, only weekly shopping is conducive to this. Although the majority of the consumer did go shopping on a weekly basis, they also they also displayed mixed purchasing behaviour. The quote below demonstrates the opinion of an interviewee that did not shop weekly. I dont do a weekly shop; I just buy products when I need them. I dont think Id save enough money for the time spent getting it to be worthwhile.

The findings of shopping type relate back to the size of the refund and potential to save money. The consumer does not see the potential for a large enough saving for them to alter their shopping behaviour.

4.2.3 Trustworthiness of Stores A separate factor that the research discovered that directly relates to the choice of store when a PMG is offered is the issue of trust. The literature indicated that there must be trust in both the retailer as a business and in its ability to deliver on promises (Kukar-Kinney and Grewal 2006). The research findings were that the stores were generally trustworthy although each interviewee had a different reason for this belief, the table (4.6) below displays these beliefs. 47

Table 4.6 Quotes describing store trustworthiness

If they are advertising it in public, like on TV and stuff then yeh Id say they have an obligation to adhere to those terms I have no real reason not to believe them. Especially since Sainsburys have started to give receipts stating how much you saved shopping there Yeh Id say I do believe what they say in their adverts, but Im aware that the stuff they say has been done by marketing people The table shows that the one of the interviewees found stores to be honest because of transparency while the other believed it was due to them being obligated. The third interviewee did not offer a reason and the fourth did not have a belief either way. The literature offers a different reason from those discovered in analysis of the research which is that the reputation of the store is a source of trust (Kukar-Kinney and Grewal 2006). The findings suggest therefore, that there are many reasons for a consumer to trust a stores PMG offering but the important element is that the trust exists.

48

Section 5.0

Conclusion

49

This section concludes the research project by looking at the extent to which the research aim was achieved and the degree to which the objectives were met. The implications that the research may have on future studies are discussed, along with a critical reflection of the issues that the research presents for both businesses and consumers.

5.1 Meeting Objectives The first objective was met through secondary research which involved the discovery and review of literature relating to the issue of PMGs. The literature showed that there was no previous research into the use of PMGs in the UK market and that studies into supermarkets in general were very limited. The review of the literature did allow for the discovery of the key issues and the identification of knowledge gaps that the study would intend to bridge.

The second objective was tackled through the use of a qualitative research methodology and research design that allowed for an exploration of the consumers reality. The research indicated that consumers do not change their price search behaviour on the offer of a PMG. The primary reasons for this is that the interviewees price search was very limited due to a perceived high cost of comparing prices, an intuitive price knowledge process and high value placed on their time. As the price search was already shortened by these factors, the offer of a PMG did not shorten the price search process or increase purchase intentions.

The research findings were similar to that of the current literature in that the general consensus is that price search will not take place when search costs are high. However, the research did find factors that the literature does not consider such as the value the consumer places on their time.

The third objective also used qualitative research and was related to the extent to which PMGs could influence supermarket choice. The research found that although there are certain ways in which an effective PMG will have an influence on the consumer, the most important factor in store choice was convenience. This factor was demonstrated as being the consumers primary concern when choosing a store, above factors such as refund size, level of trustworthiness the store had. 50

The PMG offer itself cannot change the stores location neither can it make a store more convenient for the consumer.

The literature suggests that PMGs do have an effect on store choice and although the research findings do not outright refute this, it does suggest that in the UK market at least there are other factors that are valued above simply saving money.

5.2 Direction of future research The research indicates that PMGs are not as successful in influencing purchase intentions or store choice in the same way the literature suggests that they are in the US and other countries. As this study only focused on undergraduate students, an obvious direction for future research would be to discover if these findings are consistent with other consumer groups. Furthermore, quantitative based studies could be used in order to discover the extent that the issues identified in this research exist in the wider market.

The research also found a previously undiscovered theme relating to how consumers perceive the costs of price search; the value that they place on their time. This could be an area of research to undertake in the US market to discover if this phenomenon is unique to the consumers of the UK market or it has been previously unidentified in US based research.

5.3 Implications The research findings have many implications on both businesses and consumers in relation to the use of PMGs. In terms of the implications for business, the research showed that the key reason for interviewees not using a PMG offer was the perceived cost of price search. Supermarkets should ensure that they are drawing the consumers focus to the elements of their PMG offering that make it easy, quick and cheap to use i.e. Sainsburys offer requiring no further steps by the consumer.

Furthermore, the research showed that the most effective element of the PMG in being effective is a large refund depth or the potential for the consumer to save a meaningful amount. Again because of this, supermarkets that offer a large refund 51

should make this very clear i.e. Asda offering 10% discount over competitors. By making these points clear in their marketing communications, the businesses are likely to benefit from increased awareness of those factors consumers care most about.

Another important finding was that convenience often played a larger role in store choice than any elements of the PMG that the supermarket has the ability to control. In order to maximise the uptake of PMG offers, it should be made clear to consumers that local supermarkets such as Tesco Express of Sainsbury's Local also offer the PMG and that it is not strictly for use in the large stores. This should limit the effect of convenience being a major factor by ensuring the consumer understands that they can have both convenience and the PMG offer.

The main implication of the research for consumers is that it indicates people often rely on intuition and previous behaviour as cues for what a fair price is. The lack of price search behaviour, although mainly attributed to the perceived high cost it entails, may also be related to the process of grocery shopping becoming too habitual and consumers failing to challenge the supermarkets through offerings such as PMGs. The research indicates that there is not a high enough level of involvement in the shopping process, if shoppers were to take more formal approaches to the process there may be the potential for large savings.

52

Section 6.0

References

53

Alexa (2012) Statistics Summary for mysupermarket.co.uk, Alexa Traffic Rank [Online] accessed 7th January 2012 http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/mysupermarket.co.uk#

Anderson, R (1954) The Guided Interview as an Evaluative Instrument, The Journal of Educational Research, 48(3), pp. 203-209.

Arbatskaya, M (2005) Buy Now, Search Later: A Model of Low-Price Guarantees with Post-Purchase Search, Emory University [Online] accessed on 5th December 2011 http://ssrn.com/abstract=782334

Arbatskaya, M., Hviid, M and Shaffer, G (2004) On the Incidence AND Variety of Low- Price Guarantees, Journal of Law and Economics, 47, pp. 307-332. Asda (2012) How the ASDA Price Guarantee Works, Asda [Online] accessed 7th January 2012 http://www.asdapriceguarantee.co.uk/Administration/Terms-AndConditions.aspx BBC (2007) The Downturn in Facts and Figures, BBC [Online] accessed 6th January 2012 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7734971.stm

Biswas, A, Dutta, S and Pullig, C (2006) Low Price Guarantees as Signals of Lowest Price: The Moderating Role of Perceived Price Dispersion, Journal of Retailing, 82(3), pp. 245-257.

Biswas, A, Pullig, C, Yagci, M and Dwane, D (2002) Consumer evaluation of low price guarantees: The moderating role of reference price and store image, Journal of Consumer Psychology, 12(4), pp. 107-118.

Boyatzis, R (1998) Transforming qualitative information: thematic analysis and code development, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Bryman, A and Bell, E (2011) Business Research Methods, 3rd ed., Oxford, OUP.

54

Chakraborty, R, Dobson, P, Seaton, J and Waterson, M (2011) Pricing in inflationary times: the penny drops, Working Paper. University of Warwick. Dept. of Economics, Coventry.

Chapman, M (2011) Tesco launches Big Price Drop campaign, Marketing Magazine [Online] accessed 7th January 2012 http://www.marketingmagazine.co.uk/news/1094311/

Charmaz, K (2006) Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Creswell, J (1998) Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Degeratu, A, Rangaswamy, A and Wu, J (2001) Consumer Choice Behavior in Online and Traditional Supermarkets: The Effects of Brand Name, Price, and other Search Attributes, International Journal of Research in Marketing, 17(1), pp.55-78.

Dutta, S and Biswas, A (2005) Effects of Low Price Guarantees on Consumer Post-Purchase Search Intention: The Moderating Role of Value Consciousness and Penalty Level, Journal of Retailing, 81(4), pp. 283-291.

Easterby-Smith, M., Golden-Biddle, K., and Locke, K (2008) Working with pluralism: determining quality in qualitative research, Organizational Research Methods, 11(3), pp. 419-429.

Eldin, A (1997) Do guaranteed low price policies guarantee high prices, and can antitrust rise to the challenge?, Harvard Law Review 111(2), pp. 528-75.

Ellickson, P and Misra, S (2008) Supermarket Pricing Strategies, Journal of Marketing Science, 27(5), pp. 811-828.

Finch, J (2009) Asda continues to defy downturn, The Guardian [Online] accessed 7th January 2012 http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/aug/13/asda-sales-up 55

Glaser, B and Strauss, A (1967) The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research, Chicago, Aldine Publishing Company.

Guest, G, Bunce, A and Johnson, L (2006) How Many Interviews are Enough? An Experiment with Data Saturation and Variability, Field Methods, 18(1), pp. 59-82. Gummesson, E (2000) Qualitative Methods in Management Research, 2nd ed., Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Hall, E (1959) The Silent Language, New York, Doubleday.

Henry, G (1990) Practical Sampling: Volume 21 of Applied social research methods series, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Hess, J and Gerstner, E (1991) Price-matching Policies: An Empirical Case, Managerial and Decision Economics, 12(4), pp. 305-315.

Jain, S and Srivastava, J (2000) An Experimental and Theoretical Analysis of Price-matching Refund Policies, Journal of Marketing Research, 37(8), pp. 351 62. Jankowicz, A (1995) Business Research Projects, 2nd ed., London, Chapman and Hall.

Jansen, M and Parakhonyak, A (2011) Consumer Search Markets with Costly Second Visits, Vienna Economics Papers 1102, University of Vienna, Department of Economics.

Just Food (2008) UK: Recession will Change Consumer Habits - Asda CEO, Just Food [Online] accessed 7th January 2012 http://www.justfood.com/news/recession-will-change-consumer-habits-asda-ceo_id104782.aspx

56

Just Food (2009) UK: UK: Tesco to Expand Discount Range, Just Food [Online] accessed 7th January 2012 http://www.just-food.com/news/tesco-to-expanddiscount-range_id105447.aspx

Kujala, J and Johnson, M (1993) Price Knowledge and Search Behavior for Habitual, Low Involvement Food Purchases, Journal of Economic Psychology, 14(2), pp. 249-265.

Kukar-Kinney, M and Grewal, D (2006) Consumer Willingness to Claim a PriceMatching Refund: A Look into the Process, Journal of Business Research, 59(1), pp. 1118.

Kukar-Kinney, M and Walters, R (2003) Consumer Perceptions of Refund Depth and Competitive Scope in Price-Matching Guarantees: Effects on Store Patronage, Journal of Retailing, 79(3), pp. 153160.

Kukar-Kinney, M, Walters, R and Mackenzie, S (2007b) Consumer Responses to Characteristics of Price-Matching Guarantees: The Moderating Role of price Consciousness, Journal of Retailing, 83(2), pp. 211221. Kukar-Kinney, M, Xia, L and Monroe, K (2007a) Consumers Perceptions of the Fairness of Price-Matching Refund Policies, Journal of Retailing, 83(3), pp. 325 337.

Kukar-Kinney, M (2005) An Investigation Into The Timing Of Consumer Requests For Price-Matching Refunds, Journal of Product & Brand Management, 14(3), pp.197-205.

Kukar-Kinney, M (2006) The Role of Price-Matching Characteristics in Influencing Store Loyalty, Journal of Business Research, 59(4), pp. 475-482.

Kumcu, A and Kaufman, P (2011) Food Spending Adjustments During Recessionary Times, Economic Research Service, 9(3), pp. 10-17.

57

Lichtenstein, D, Bloch, P and Black, W (1988) Correlates of Price Acceptability, Journal of Consumer Research, 15(9), pp. 243-252.

Lim, C and Sng, H (2011) The Great Depression, the Great Recession and the Next Crisis, World Economics Journal, 12(3), pp. 163-190.

Lindsey-Mullikin, J and Petty, D (2009) Marketing Tactics Discouraging Price Search: Deception And Competition, Journal of Business Research, 64(1), pp. 6773.

Mason, M (2010) Sample Size and Saturation in PhD Studies Using Qualitative Interviews, Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 11(3), Art. 8.

McCracken, G (1990) The Long Interview, Newbury Park, CA, Sage.

Miles, M (1979) Qualitative Data as an Attractive Nuisance: The Problem of Analysis, Administrative Science Quarterly, 24(4), pp. 590-601.

Moorthy, S and Zhang, X (2006) Price Matching by Vertically Differentiated Retailers: Theory and Evidence, Journal of Marketing Research, 43(5), pp. 156167.

Nayyar, D (2011) The Financial Crisis, the Great Recession and the Developing World, Global Policy, 2(1), pp. 20-32.

Owen, E (2011a) Tesco Broadside To Asda Price Guarantee, Brand Republic [Online] accessed 7th January 2012 http://www.brandrepublic.com/news/1057243/Tesco-broadside-Asda-priceguarantee/

Owen, E (2011b) Asda Fires New Prices Salvo With 10% Cheaper Guarantee, Brand Republic [Online] accessed 7th January 2012 http://www.brandrepublic.com/news/1047971/Asda-fires-new-prices-salvo-10cheaper-guarantee/ 58

Owen, E (2011c) Tesco Abandons Double-The-Difference Asda Price Match, Brand Republic [Online] accessed 7th January 2012 http://www.brandrepublic.com/news/1067445/Tesco-abandons-double-thedifference-Asda-price-match/?DCMP=ILC-SEARCH

Piore, M (1979) Qualitative Research Techniques in Economics, Administrative Science Quarterly, 24(4), pp. 560-569.

Punj, G and Staelin, R (1983) A Model Of Consumer Information Search Behavior For New Automobiles, Journal of Consumer Research, 9, pp. 366-380. Sainsburys (2012) Terms and Conditions: Qualifying for Sainsbury's Brand Match, Sainsburys [Online] accessed 7th January 2012 http://www.sainsburys-live-wellfor-less.co.uk/brand-match/terms-and-conditions/

Salop, S (1986) Practices that (Credibly) Facilitate Oligopoly Co-ordination in New Developments in the Analysis of Market Structure. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Saunders, M, Lewis, P and Thornhill, A (2009) Research Methods for Business Students, 5th ed., London, Pearson Education.

Shah, D (2011) How Will A Supermarket Price War Affect Investors?, Money Observer [Online] accessed 23th February 2012 http://www.moneyobserver.com/issue/features/how-will-supermarket-price-waraffect-investors

Sieber, S (1976) A Synopsis and Critique of Guidelines for Qualitative Analysis Contained in Selected Textbooks, Project on Social Architecture in Education. New York: Center for Policy Research.

Smithers, R (2011a) Why Supermarket Price Promises Aren't All They Seem, The Guardian [Online] accessed 7th January 2012 http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2011/oct/25/supermarket-price-promises-offers

59

Smithers, R (2011b) Sainsbury's Steps Up Supermarket Price War, The Guardian [Online] accessed 7th January 2012 http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2011/oct/12/sainsburys-supermarket-price-warmoney-off-vouchers

Srivastava, J and Lurie, N (2001) A Consumer Perspective on Price-Matching Refund Policies: Effect on Price Perceptions and Search Behaviour, Journal of Consumer Research, 28(1), pp. 296-307.

Srivastava, J and Lurie, N (2004) Price-Matching Guarantees as Signals of Low Store Prices: Survey and Experimental Evidence, Journal of Retailing, 80(2), pp. 117-128.

Stigler, G (1961) The Economics Of Information, Journal of Political Economy, 69, pp. 213-225.

Taylor, S and Bogdan, R (1984) Introduction To Qualitative Research Methods: The Search For Meanings, New York, John Wiley.

Tesco (2012) The Tesco Price Check Terms and Conditions, Tesco [Online] accessed 7th January 2012 https://www.tescopricecheck.com/pricecheck/pages/tsandcs.aspx

Thanassoulis, J (2009) Supermarket Profitability Investigation. Report. Department of Economics (University of Oxford).

Tiessen, J, Wright, R and Turner, I (2001) A Model Of E-Commerce Use By Internationalizing Smes, Journal of International Management, 7(3), pp. 211-233.

Urbany, J (1986) An Experimental Examination Of The Economics Of Information, Journal of Consumer Research, 13, pp. 257-271.

60

Valls, J, Andrade, M and Arribas, R (2011) Consumer Attitudes Towards Brands In Times Of Great Price Sensitivity. Four Case Studies, Innovative Marketing, 7(2), pp. 60-70.

Whitehead, J (2008) Tesco's Discount Gamble, Brand Republic , [Online] accessed 7th January 2012 http://www.brandrepublic.com/news/849604/

Wilson, A (2009) Sainsbury Enjoys Profit Growth As It Proves Recession Winner, The Telegraph [Online] accessed 7th January 2012 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/retailandconsumer/5316531/Sai nsbury-enjoys-profit-growth-supermarket-proves-recession-winner.html

61

Section 7.0

Appendix

62

7.1 Price Match Guarantees as Anti-Competitive This is looked at in some depth by Arbatskaya et al (2004) who conduct a thorough investigation into the issue, looking at 515 different examples of PMG offers. The research intends to answer the question as to whether PMGs are actually beneficial to the consumer and to what extent some of the offerings promote anti-competitive practices, it also reviews some of the literature surrounding that area. One interesting view provided is that theorists typically do not distinguish among the variety of low price guarantees (Arbatskaya et al 2004:308) which leads to the confusion of the results of other studies. The main discussion in the paper is of the perceived anti-competitive nature of PMGs which they argue is supported by too little empirical evidence. The study separated the area of PMGs into two main subsections depending on how the offer was formed; price matching and price beating. They conclude that PMGs do not generally allow for anti-competitive pricing because in order to do so the hassle cost to the consumer must be low however, they found that overall 44% of price matching guarantees and 90% of price beating guarantees did not facilitate collusion of prices. This area was revisited by Arbatskaya (2005) and again concluded that PMG do not specifically allow for anti-competitive markets to exist.

The findings presented in Arbatskaya et al (2004) and Arbatskaya (2005) are in sharp contrast with other studies. The first is Lindsey-Mullikin and Petty (2009) who look at PMGs in the context of bargain assurances, an offer where by the customer is explicitly told that a price or deal is the best and therefore can cut short price search. They argue that this often misleads the customer and that in order for a PMG to not be deceptive; the price comparison made with competitors should be defined (Lindsey-Mullikin and Petty 2009:67). They also argue that when an entire industry uses price matching refunds, the incentive to compete on price declines, a sentiment that is supported by Eldin (1997) and Salop (1986). This is a clear indication of a belief that PMGs are in fact anti-competitive in terms of collusive pricing.

63

The empirical study by Hess and Gerstner (1991) also conflicts with Arbatskaya et al (2004) however, there is less emphasis on whether or not the outcome of PMG should actually be described as anti-competitive. Instead, they conclude that adoption of PMGs helps supermarkets avoid price competition which in turn leads to generally higher prices. This view is also supported by Srivastava and Lurie (2001).

Overall, the literature in this area is in debate, this is because much of the work is not empirical and even where it is, there is no agreement. It is therefore reasonable to conclude that PMGs do have a major effect on competition; the customer is not going to get the best price if everyone offers the same price. The degree to which this is anticompetitive is debatable and more applicable to a study in the area of business economics or business law. Although this research study will not focus specifically on the area of anti-competitive practices, this is nonetheless an important area of the literature to understand. The literature will be used to inform the methodology and it sets the scene for what could be future issues in the British market: the chance for collusive pricing is increased the longer that price match guarantees are enforced as more companies begin to follow suit (Eldin 1997).

64

7.2 Sample Interview Transcript One Interview Transcript 1M21 60/03/2012

Researcher: Could you explain how you decide where to shop for groceries? Interviewee: Ermat the moment its based off whats cheapest. Cos I'm running quite low on money so I'm just kind of going for the cheapest option. I know that there are stores close by but theyre too expensive, you know like Spar. Too expensive to afford to buy the weekly shop.

Researcher: Do you ever change the place you shop?

Interviewee: I switch between the Asda in Hulme and the Sainsbury's down the road. I tend to go to Sainsburys for the location. If I'm passing by Ill pop in otherwise Ill go to Asda.

Researcher: Do you shop weekly or do you just purchase the items as you need them? Interviewee: If I'm tending to run low on stuff like in the fridge or cupboard, Ill run over and grab stuff, like if I run out of milk. Ill go to a shop thats nearest and pick up a few essentials but I wont actually do a weekly shop, Ill just pick up what I need at the time.

Researcher: How do you know how much products should cost when grocery shopping? Interviewee: Its based off, with living at uni Ive shopped at a lot of places like spar Tesco Sainsbury's Asda and during that time you tend to get a feel for the costs of products, you get a basic average of like how much milk should cost, cheese and stuff. After a while, after a couple of years you kind of weigh up where is likely to be cheaper and you go for those options instead. Its basically just comparing, based off experience really.

65

Researcher: So do you believe that you are quite aware of the general pricing of products offered in supermarkets? Interviewee: Yeh I mean I couldnt tell you any prices on the spot, I couldnt give you the price of milk right now but if I was in a shop Id know what a good price is.

Researcher: Do you regularly check the price or offers of supermarkets before engaging in shopping?

Interviewee: No, no I just go off my experience. Researcher: Is there any particular reason you dont take the time to look before you go? Interviewee: Personally I find it unnecessary; Ill just go to Asda because they offer you a large enough variety of products to give you the choice of what you are going to buy. You can buy half decent milk or really cheap milk. So theres no point doing research beforehand. Researcher: So you dont believe searching for prices before going shopping would be beneficial in finding the lowest priced stores?

Interviewee: I suppose if you went and you were doing a weekly shop erm you could probably compare a basket. But if you are going around just picking up odds and ends I dont really see much point.

Researcher: If you knew that you had the chance to be given a refund for finding cheaper prices would you keep looking after you had purchased?

Interviewee: Personally, no. again, I'm just used to shopping where I always shop and I go for the cheapest options there. They tend to be the cheapest, I dont look at any other places.

Researcher: Could you explain how you perceive supermarkets in terms of price? 66

Interviewee: In general I think supermarkets are very competitive, I think thats a major advantage of being a customer. They are all competing with each other and you are going to get lower and lower prices at different places. There are places like the smaller shops, like Spar that do tend to be expensive but I believe they go off the convenience factor cos they are usually in really convenient places. But supermarkets are all pretty similar.

Researcher: So because of the competition, you think that they are all quite similar?

Interviewee: Yeh, obviously certain things are expensive in some supermarkets but you could shop cheaply at any of them.

Researcher: How would a supermarket offering to match the price of competitors change your perception of that cost of products in that supermarket?

Interviewee: The only way that it would change my perception is a combination of how much it would save, if it was a big enough saving, like more than five or ten pounds and if it was convenient then Id definitely go to that place because Id know it was cheapest.

Researcher: Do you view grocery shopping as a series of individual product purchases or as a single large purchase?

Interviewee: When I'm picking up the items to buy I tend to think of them individually, I never really think about how much it will cost overall I just go off the fact that the cheaper products I get the less expensive my baskets going to be.

Researcher: How do you choose between the items on the shelf?

Interviewee: There are some products that I like to go for the brand, things like gravy or bread. They are things that Id normally go for but other things like chicken breast or mince I find that you might as well go for the cheapest option because its cheaper 67

7.3 Sample Interview Transcript Two Interview Transcript 2M24 08/03/2012

Researcher: Could you explain how you decide where to shop for groceries? Interviewee: Id say its mainly based off convenience, as I dont have a car at Uni with me I can only be bothered taking my weeks shopping so far. if I need any random meals I just buy them wherevers closest.

Researcher: What is the most important factor?

Interviewee: just that the shop is within walking distance from home.

Researcher: Do you ever change the place you shop? Interviewee: Yeh, Id rather shop at Tesco or Waitrose when I am at home, but neither of these are within relevant distance at Uni. If I am buying a random meal I will buy it anywhere, usually for a treat I buy things from M&S.

Researcher: Do you shop weekly or do you just purchase the items as you need them?

Interviewee: I generally do a weekly shop but sometimes still run out of stuff! If I do I go somewhere near where I am, like if I'm at uni or something.

Researcher: How do you know how much products should cost when grocery shopping?

Interviewee: I like, usually buy similar meals each week, after a while you just get an understanding of how much things cost. Obviously stuff like deals may sway my decision, and buying different brands if they are on offer.

Researcher: So do you believe that you are quite aware of the general pricing of products offered in supermarkets? 68

Interviewee: Like I said before really, my weekly shop will be the same price every week. I think I am aware of how much things usually cost, and obviously the mark up supermarkets will place on products from stuff Ive done at uni.

Researcher: Could you recall the price of items bought in the last shop? Interviewee: Yeah my last weeks shop was about 22, and contained 5 in cheese and 1.40 in potatoes!

Researcher: Do you regularly check the price or offers of supermarkets before engaging in shopping?

Interviewee: Not really, as I can only go to one supermarket there is little point. Also as I walk around the supermarket the deals are usually well publicised around the store so I just select the relevant ones to my needs.

Researcher: Do you think spending time searching for information before shopping will help find the cheapest supermarket? Interviewee: It can do when youre like buying the groceries, but with current petrol expenses the savings you make in the store may be wiped out by travelling further than you need to!

Researcher: If you knew that you had the chance to be given a refund for finding cheaper prices would you keep looking after you had purchased?

Interviewee: No not really, I value my time more than wasting it trying to recoup a few quid.

Researcher: Could you explain how you perceive supermarkets in terms of price?

Interviewee: Prices are usually cheaper than that of individual stores, I am happy to pay what I do for the stuff I buy. 69

7.3 Sample Interview Coding Interview Transcript 1M21 60/03/2012

Researcher: Could you explain how you decide where to shop for groceries? Interviewee: Ermat the moment its based off whats cheapest. Cos I'm running quite low on money so I'm just kind of going for the cheapest option. I know that there are stores close by but theyre too expensive, you know like Spar. Too expensive to afford to buy the weekly shop.

Researcher: Do you ever change the place you shop?

Interviewee: I switch between the Asda in Hulme and the Sainsbury's down the road. I tend to go to Sainsburys for the location. If I'm passing by Ill pop in otherwise Ill go to Asda.

Researcher: Do you shop weekly or do you just purchase the items as you need them? Interviewee: If I'm tending to run low on stuff like in the fridge or cupboard, Ill run over and grab stuff, like if I run out of milk. Ill go to a shop thats nearest and pick up a few essentials but I wont actually do a weekly shop, Ill just pick up what I need at the time.

Researcher: How do you know how much products should cost when grocery shopping? Interviewee: Its based off, with living at uni Ive shopped at a lot of places like spar Tesco Sainsbury's Asda and during that time you tend to get a feel for the costs of products, you get a basic average of like how much milk should cost, cheese and stuff. After a while, after a couple of years you kind of weigh up where is likely to be cheaper and you go for those options instead. Its basically just comparing, based off experience really.

70

Researcher: So do you believe that you are quite aware of the general pricing of products offered in supermarkets? Interviewee: Yeh I mean I couldnt tell you any prices on the spot, I couldnt give you the price of milk right now but if I was in a shop Id know what a good price is.

Researcher: Do you regularly check the price or offers of supermarkets before engaging in shopping?

Interviewee: No, no I just go off my experience. Researcher: Is there any particular reason you dont take the time to look before you go? Interviewee: Personally I find it unnecessary; Ill just go to Asda because they offer you a large enough variety of products to give you the choice of what you are going to buy. You can buy half decent milk or really cheap milk. So theres no point doing research beforehand. Researcher: So you dont believe searching for prices before going shopping would be beneficial in finding the lowest priced stores?

Interviewee: I suppose if you went and you were doing a weekly shop erm you could probably compare a basket. But if you are going around just picking up odds and ends I dont really see much point.

Researcher: If you knew that you had the chance to be given a refund for finding cheaper prices would you keep looking after you had purchased?

Interviewee: Personally, no. again, I'm just used to shopping where I always shop and I go for the cheapest options there. They tend to be the cheapest, I dont look at any other places.

Researcher: Could you explain how you perceive supermarkets in terms of price? 71

Interviewee: In general I think supermarkets are very competitive, I think thats a major advantage of being a customer. They are all competing with each other and you are going to get lower and lower prices at different places. There are places like the smaller shops, like Spar that do tend to be expensive but I believe they go off the convenience factor cos they are usually in really convenient places. But supermarkets are all pretty similar.

Researcher: So because of the competition, you think that they are all quite similar?

Interviewee: Yeh, obviously certain things are expensive in some supermarkets but you could shop cheaply at any of them. Researcher: How would a supermarket offering to match the price of competitors change your perception of that cost of products in that supermarket?

Interviewee: The only way that it would change my perception is a combination of how much it would save, if it was a big enough saving, like more than five or ten pounds and if it was convenient then Id definitely go to that place because Id know it was cheapest.

Researcher: Do you view grocery shopping as a series of individual product purchases or as a single large purchase?

Interviewee: When I'm picking up the items to buy I tend to think of them individually, I never really think about how much it will cost overall I just go off the fact that the cheaper products I get the less expensive my baskets going to be.

Researcher: How do you choose between the items on the shelf?

Interviewee: There are some products that I like to go for the brand, things like gravy or bread. They are things that Id normally go for but other things like chicken breast or mince I find that you might as well go for the cheapest option because its cheaper 72