Consumer involvement and perceived differentiation of different kinds of pork – a Means-End Chain analysis

Abstract For firms to be able to differentiate their market offerings from those of competitors, knowledge about the consumer is essential. The Means-End Chain (MEC) approach was used to identify the consequences and values that consumers attach to product attributes. The objective of this study was to investigate the motivational structure of consumers in relation to unbranded, imported, branded and local-organically produced pork. The explanation of consumer behaviour was deepened through investigating whether consumers were more involved in some kind of labelled pork than in others. Laddering interviews with 127 consumers concerning the four kinds of pork were conducted in Swedish supermarkets. Imported pork was bought because it is cheap and was the least involving kind of pork. The most involving were branded pork and local-organically produced pork. Pork had the character of a “think” product, foremost bought for functional values. This was especially true for imported pork.

[1]  Susan Baker,et al.  Mapping the values driving organic food choice , 2004 .

[2]  K. Glitsch.  Consumer perceptions of fresh meat quality: cross‐national comparison , 2000 .

[3]  E. Dransfield,et al.  Consumer perceptions: pork and pig production. Insights from France, England, Sweden and Denmark. , 2004, Meat science.

[4]  T. J. Reynolds,et al.  Laddering theory, method, analysis, and interpretation. , 2001 .

[5]  L. Åberg,et al.  Attitudes towards organic foods among Swedish consumers. , 2001 .

[6]  Klaus G. Grunert,et al.  Relating consumer perceptions of pork quality to physical product characteristics , 1998 .

[7]  Matthijs Dekker,et al.  An overview of means-end theory: potential application in consumer-oriented food product design , 2004 .

[8]  Wim Verbeke,et al.  Beliefs, attitude and behaviour towards fresh meat consumption in Belgium: empirical evidence from a consumer survey , 1999 .

[9]  T. J. Reynolds,et al.  Consumer Understanding and Advertising Strategy: Analysis and Strategic Translation of Laddering Data , 2001 .

[10]  S. Schwartz.  Universals in the Content and Structure of Values: Theoretical Advances and Empirical Tests in 20 Countries , 1992 .

[11]  D. MacInnis,et al.  Characteristics of portrayed emotions in commercials: when does what is shown in ads affect viewers? , 1995 .

[12]  P Leppard,et al.  Improving means-end-chain studies by using a ranking method to construct hierarchical value maps , 2004 .

[13]  J. Gutman.  Means–end chains as goal hierarchies , 1997 .

[14]  Catherine Georgina Russell,et al.  A comparison of three laddering techniques applied to an example of a complex food choice , 2004 .

[15]  Wim Verbeke,et al.  Ethical Challenges for Livestock Production:Meeting Consumer Concerns about Meat Safety and AnimalWelfare , 2000 .

[16]  Niels Asger Nielsen,et al.  A comparison of five elicitation techniques for elicitation of attributes of low involvement products , 1999 .

[17]  Monika J.A. Schröder,et al.  The Role of Livestock Production Ethics in Consumer Values Towards Meat , 2002 .

[18]  M. McCarthy,et al.  Factors influencing consumption of pork and poultry in the Irish market , 2004, Appetite.

[19]  D. V. Byrne,et al.  Consumer perceptions of pork in Denmark, Norway and Sweden , 2002 .

[20]  J. Willock,et al.  Producers and consumers of organic meat: A focus on attitudes and motivations , 2004 .

[21]  P. Vanden Abeele,et al.  Consumers' means-end chains for lthinkr and “feel” products , 1995 .

[22]  K. Grunert,et al.  Measuring subjective meaning structures by the laddering method: Theoretical considerations and methodological problems , 1995 .

[23]  Charles E. Gengler,et al.  Improving the graphic representation of means-end results , 1995 .

[24]  J. Gutman.  A Means-End Chain Model Based on Consumer Categorization Processes , 1982 .