Consumer Behavior Comparison Essay

1. Using the tricomponent stead model, compargon the differences in attitude of consumers towards kraft paper Foods versus their attitude towards Vegemite. The tricomponent attitude model is make up of Cognitive, Affective and Conative component. The troika components argon inter connect and integr consume to form an attitude of a someone toward any crop or service in consumer scenario. here(predicate) we be studying how the consumers react to kraft paper Food and Vegemite. Cognitive Component scholarship is basically making decisions going through and through a withdrawing process. So this thinking process clear occur on the basis of noesis and lores that already existed in the consumers minds. The Cognitive Component of attitude is developing a belief base on past experience or acquaintance and whenever the consumers are exposed to attitude object ( almost which we are to form received attitude) and those belief leave alone form a typical behavior towards that attitud e object. The consumers can be seen in the case study to be defensive over Vegemite as they perceive it to be a national emblematical diet with the long history.The denounce itself had lasted centuries with its unique salty base as breakfast spread as compared to traditional sweet base spreads. kraft Foods being the sucker owner did non do anything to the soil until the by and by years where they did a re printing of the product to suit modern culture and needs. The consumers intelligibly triggered heavy resentment over the undesired refreshing identify as they had perceive Vegemite to be worthy of a foretell to more relevant. Here kraft Food suffered a marketing backlash whereas consumers support for Vegemite summon strong. Affective ComponentThis Component of Attitude formation is all ab let on emotional feelings of a consumer about the particular product or brand. Consumers see certain emotions regarding the attitude objects either favorable or unfavorable ingenu ous or bad, it may be regardless of any quality, specification, features, utility or brand name. Vegemite lasted centuries of success without any interference from kraft Food in terms of product modification or receipe assortments. kraft Food knew that Australians held Vegemite with gamy regards and deeply rooted in the history and culture. Despite a disposition in sales after foreigners infux, the strong support of the old brand can be seen as kraft paper Food carelessly picked an uncommon name for their re-branding. In their Name me lead, strong sentiments of the brands were reveal as shun groups emerge to hate the new Vegemite name. The consumers feel strongly violated as the name did not resonate with the hearts of the supporter. Kraft Food generate to pressure and rename the product. Conative ComponentThis final component is concerned with the ilkliness or tendency that a specific action will be undertaken by an individual regarding attitude object. It is treated as an expression of consumers intention to buy. It may include action itself. Consumers comm provided make purchases for positively evaluated brands. Their intentions towards those brands are positive, so their attitude towards those brand would be positive. Although the new iSnack 2.0 was a good deal disliked, the success of the receipe is shown with the improvement in sales figures.Consumers in this case, reacted to the over hyped publicity generated by negative marketing, resulting in curious new consumers trying out the new product. Vegemite in this case, was successful. On the other hand, Kraft Food was verbalise to be making use of the clever marketing strategy by inducing resentments from the consumers with the iSnack2.0 name. Compared with vegemite, Kraft Food is perceived to be crafty and had to mend to underhand means to achieve desirable results.2. Thinking about the antithetic methods Kraft used to supercharge consumer input for their new Vegemite product, what kind o f consumer learnedness took place during the entire process? Consumer learning is the process by which individuals use up the purchase and consumption know conductge and experience they apply to future consortd behaviour. Most of the learning is incidental and some of it is intentional.Elements of Consumer learningThe basic elements that cave in to an understanding of learning are motivation, cues, response and reinforcement. Consumers will be actuate to learn if the information is relevant to their needs and goals while cues serve to set consumer drives when they are consistent with consumer expectations. Response is how consumers react or behave to a drive or a cue while reinforcement increases the likeliness a response will occur in the future as a result of a cue. Kraft encouraged consumer input for their new Vegemite product through the How do you like your Vegemite and the Name me.. campaign. By acquiring the consumers to be involved, the Australians will feel that they own the brand which created the sentiency of belonging. Kraft asked consumers to log on to the website and post their ideas on the unlike ways they ate the product.Instrumental ConditioningInstrumental Learning theorists believe that learning occurs through a trial and error process in which the positive outcomes in the form of results or desired outcomes lead to repeat behaviour like Repeat Purchase or Repeat Positive Word of Mouth. twain positive and negative reinforcement can be used to encourage the desired behaviour. The timing of repetitions influences how long the learned material is retained. Learning usually persists longer with distributed re-inforcement schedule, while mass repetitions produce more initial learnings. In view of how Kraft Food did was the Name me campaign. They failed to select a fit name for the first time, but they acknowledge the mistake and repeat the campaign a second time. Meanwhile, they took four months to replace the iSnack2.0 labelled jars of f the shelves onwards replacing with Cheesybites. The consumers are conditioned by this instrumental method. 3. Vegemite is a food product suggesting customers would have lower levels of matter with the brand. However, the fall-out from iSnack 2.0 imply otherwise.What aspects of involvement supposition were presented in their response? Involvement theory recognizes that consumers become attached to products, go or brands to differing levels and they engage in a range of information-processing activities, depending on the substance of the purchase (Sciffman et al. 2008). The involvement level shown by the consumers in iSnack2.0 is high is because Vegemite is considered to be a national brand and a part of Australias heritage (Superbrands Australia, 2012). Beside this, the How do you like your Vegemite and the Name Me campaign further increase the involvement level of the consumers as they entangle a sense of ownership in the creation phrase of the product (Sciffman et al. 2008 ). From the case of iSnack 2.0, the hemispheral lateralization theory can be used to explain the responses of the consumers. The hemispheral lateralization theory, as well known as split-brain theory, is the learning theory around the basic principle that the go away and rightfield side of the brain specialize in the kind of information they process.The left side of the brain, which specializes in cognitive activities, can be put as rational and logical, while the right side of the brain, which specializes in pictorial and holistic information, can be put as emotional and instinctive (Sciffman et al. 2008). When Kraft chose the name iSnack 2.0, the left hemispheral of the consumers processed the decision-making and they responded negatively because the logical thinking is that the selected name is more related to technology products such as iPod and iPhone by Apple. This made the decision looks wierd and irrevelant to the public and will also results in consumers thinking that K raft is trying to ride on the success of Apples products (Miller, 2009). On the other side, the right hemispheral of the consumers also contributed to the consumers responding negatively because Australians have high loyalty and feelings for Vegemite (Foley, 2009) and the fact that Kraft did not let the consumers have a hypothecate in the winning name intensifies the negative feeling that Kraft, an American company, is not allowing the Australia public to have a say in the brand they felt they have ownership in.And by choosing a name that is perceived to be unsuitable and horrifyous, it further fuels the feeling that the company is showing disrespect to the brand Australians love (Sciffman et al. 2008). 4. Do you think Kraft can change perception of iSnack 2.0 by changing the name to Cheesybite? Explain your answer. Perception is the process by which people select, organize and interpret stimuli to form a meaningful and logical picture of the world and it is important in marketin g strategies for marketers because consumers make decisions based on what they perceive, rather than on the basis of objective reality. (Sciffman et al. 2008). When iSnack 2.0 was elect, it triggered negative responses and outrage from consumers across a number of social ne cardinalrking websites such as Facebook and Twitter, online forums, newspaper publisher and magazines. iSnack 2.0 was perceived to be weird and irrelevant and make no sense to consumers as to why a food product was given a technological name that is normally related to technology products such as iPhone and iPod (Miller, 2009).The name was also perceived to be a marketing impede by the company as the negativity generated increased the exposure of the product. This led to the sales rising 47 percent in the first two weeks and the product being available in 15% of Australian households (Foley, 2009). However, iSnack 2.0 also led to hatred and anger as there are consumers who suggested boycotting the product (Coll erton, 2009). By deciding to change the name of iSnack 2.0 to Cheesybite, Kraft can change the perception of the product. The product is a combination of Vegemite spread and cream high mallow (Kraft Foods Australia, 2011), which is as what Cheesybite suggested and made more sense to consumers. Another reason is that Cheesybite is chosen in a popularity vote by more than 30,000 Australian and parvenu Zealanders, instead of by the company, therefore will relate better to consumers (AAP, 2009). once the more popular and logical choice of Cheesybite replace iSnack 2.0, sentiment will soften due to the Australia loyalty to the brand and the incident will belatedly fade away.5. If Vegemite could be given a brand disposition, what do you think it would be like? Compare this to how the Cheesybite personality might be. discoloration personality is an act or a process of the personality traits that a brand possesses. It is the viewing of a brand as a person and delimit the traits that a brand has. A brand personality is something consumers can relate to and it develops over time (Parameswaran, 2006). An effective brand will increase its brand equity by having a consistent set of traits. There are five main types of brand personalities and they are Excitement, Sincerity, Ruggedness, Competence and Sophistication (Friend, 2010). Vegemite is stovepipe described as having the personality of Sincerity which is interpreted as down-to-earth, honest, wholesome, and convenient (Friend, 2010).Vegemite is an Australian brand that reaches to the hearts of its consumers and therefore brand loyalty is high. Kraft has retained the down-to-earth nature of Vegemite by not changing the content, with the only updates applying to external factor such as packaging and the occasional consumer promotion. Cheesybite is trump out seen as having the personality of Excitement under the 5 dimensions of brand personality. The name Cheesybite gives consumers an exciting, daring and spirited feeling (Friend, 2010). This will attracts consumers with high innovativeness as they are risk takers and are more likely to adopt new products (Tellis et al, 2009) The different personalities of Vegemite and Cheesybite give consumers totally different perception and feeling and this is important for Kraft to position itself in the different market segment to establish a good name.BibliographyAAP, 2009, Vegemite Cheesybite replaces iSnack2.0, The Sidney Morning Herald. http//news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/vegemite-cheesybite-replaces-isnack20-20091007-gm5u.html Collerton, S. 2009. iSuck 2.0 Unhappy little Vegemites. ABC News. http//www.abc.net.au/news/2009-09-28/isuck-20-unhappy-little-vegemites/1445034 Foley, Meraiah. 2009. Vegemite get by Draws Protests. The New York Times. http//www.nytimes.com/2009/11/03/business/global/03vegemite.html?pagewanted=all Friend, Camille. 2010. The 5 Dimensions of Brand Personality. Fuel Your Branding. http//www.fuelyourbranding.com/the-5-d imensions-of-brand-personality/ Kraft Foods Australia. 2011. http//www.kraftbrands.com/kraftvegemite/Pages/product-information-cheesybite.aspx Kraft Foods Australia. 2011. http//www.kraft.com.au/products/media_release_vegemite_vote.aspx Miller, K E. 2009. Title fight. The Drum Opinion. http//www.abc.net.au/unleashed/26916.html Parameswaran, M.G. 2006. construction Brand Value Five Steps To Building Powerful Brands. Tta McGraw-Hill Education. Schiffman, Leon, David Bednall, Aron OCass, Angela Paladino, Steve Ward, and Leslie Kanuk. 2008. Consumer Behavior. 4th ed. Pearson Education Australia Superbrands Australia. 2012. http//www.superbrands.com/au/content/view/300/1/ Tellis, Gerard J, Eden Yin and Simon Bell. 2009. Global Consumer Innovativeness Cross-Country Differences and Demographic Commonalities. Journal of International Marketing, American Marketing Association. Vol. 17, No 2, 2009, pp 1-22.