The flourishing trend of using multiple technology-based self-service channels (hereafter, SSCs) can be found across various service industries. So far, no studies have explored the effect of multichannel interaction on breadth consumer relationship breadth (i.e., cross-buying intention). Based on brand extension theory and the cross-buying literature, this study proposed a conceptual model for understanding the key determinants of consumer cross-buying intention in the context of multiple SSCs. A total of 262 respondents who had experience with using both online and mobile banking were collected. The result revealed that perceived online banking quality (i.e., original SSC), image congruity, and value congruity facilitate consumer trust and satisfaction toward a mobile banking service (i.e., extension SSC). In addition, the trust and satisfaction toward mobile banking have a positive influence on crossbuying intention. The result of this study not only provides an academic contribution to the multichannel service and SSC literature but also provides suggestions for service providers who wish to develop their multiple-SSC strategies.

Cross-buying refers to the customer action of buying additional products and/or services from the same provider (Valentin 2004). With the belief that cross-buying enables firms to increase profit from existing customers, firms have steadily placed greater emphasis on cross-selling strategies for profitability. To date, numerous studies show that cross-buying behavior of customers has a positive effect on firm profitability. Business reality, however, offers a different perspective; namely, that high levels of cross-buying may not always be linked to firm profitability. For example, Best Buy (an electronics retailer in the United States) has identified approximately 20% of its customers as unprofitable in spite of them purchasing multiple items (McWilliams 2004). Shah, Kumar, Qu, and Chen (2012) found that customers who persistently exhibit certain types of behavior (e.g., excessive service requests, high levels of returning products, lower levels of revenue growth, promotion maximizers) are unprofitable even though they purchased more than one product category.The aforementioned research implies that cross-buying can exert a negative impact on profitability, thereby calling for further examination of cross-buying behavior. It is conceivable that a repeated purchase propensity (contrasted with a cross-buying propensity) concentrated on a single brand is more profitable. Therefore, our primary objective in this paper is to identify a more beneficial type of customer among those who tend to patronize a limited number of brands versus those who tend to patronize a variety of brands, using a one-dimensional model (brand dispersion index). In addition, the second goal of this research is to investigate the boundary conditions where cross-buying will not lead to an increase in sales (unprofitable cross-buying conditions). As two moderating factors that weaken a customer’s crossbuying propensity and a firm’s sales (frequency and transaction size of firms), we consider (1) promotion dependency and (2) spending limiter condition. We use transaction data that include partners in various industries such as gasoline stations, convenience stores, banks, restaurants, and online shopping malls, covering forty-seven categories. Because multiple partners in many categories are available, this allows us to study whether a customer’s cross-buying level in the current period (t) affects the customer’s purchase frequency and transaction size in the subsequent period (t+1). The observation period for the data set extends over three years. Findings from this study indicate that a high level of cross-buying at period t has a positive impact on increasing customer frequencies and transaction sizes in the subsequent (t+1) period. This means that cross-buying has the potential to increase the firm’s profitability. Customers who show a high level of cross-buying propensity tend to exhibit higher levels of loyalty than customers who concentrated on limited brands. Firms should find ways to induce customers with low cross-buying propensity to increase crossbuying. Regarding moderating effects, promotion dependency and spending growth (decline vs. stagnation), spending growth has a considerable moderating effect on the relationship between cross-buying propensity and a customer’s transaction size. Specifically, the effect of cross-buying on transaction size weakens when spending is shrinking. This result makes an important contribution to cross-buying research. If customers showing a high level of cross-buying do not increase their spending level, they may be merely switching to other brands in the program under a fixed budget. So while the rate of crossbuying seems to increase, profit might not increase. The findings from this study imply that it is crucial to target and motivate customers who tend to use various brands and contribute to sales to do more cross-buying instead of suggesting cross-buying to random customers. The promotion dependency, however, turns out to not have significant moderating effects on the relationship between the customer’s propensity to cross-buying and the customer’s purchase frequency and transaction size. For marketing purposes, it is important to consider which customers are more profitable among those who tend to do cross-buying among multi-brands versus those who tend to purchase repeatedly in a limited number of brands. This research provides a solution with a one-dimensional index, the brand dispersion index. Whether cross-buying is shown to be a positive or negative impact on sales, the results are meaningful in implementing customer relationship management. Regardless of the direction in the level of crossbuying, both directions provide a solution to allocate marketing resources. For instance, if the propensity for cross-buying increases sales, the firm should implement marketing strategies to encourage people to use a variety of brands by adding new brands. If repeat purchases increase sales, the company should concentrate on certain brands that customers use most frequently. In addition, by finding the conditions that do not increase sales (e.g., spending limiter condition), it makes marketing practitioners think that cross-buying does not always bring positive results. Overall, the findings from this study are that it is crucial to motivate and target customers who tend to use various brands and contribute to sales to do crossbuying activity, instead of promoting cross-buying to random customers. Conceptual Framework Figure 1 provides an overview of our framework for the relationship between brand dispersion and visiting frequency and transaction size of customers. Specifically, we hypothesize how customer frequencies and transaction sizes in time t+1 will be influenced by customer brand dispersion levels (the extent that customer transactions occur across a broad range of brands) in time t. In addition, we examine the moderating influence of two customer specific variables: (1) degree of promotion dependency and (2) spending limits.

Building on a sociological perspective, this study empirically examines how transformation expectations relate to conspicuous consumption and impulse buying by comparing Eastern (Thai) and Western (U.S.) consumers to scrutinize how consumers from completely different cultural and economic profiles diverge from each other with respect to their product/service expectations and their purchase and consumption tendencies. While Thailand represents a small developing economy, the U.S. denotes a large developed nation. Furthermore, Thai culture is characterized by a relatively high uncertainty avoidance, large power distance, femininity, and collectivism, whereas American culture is viewed as an individualist, masculine, risk-taking, and small power distance one (Hofstede, Hofstede & Minkov, 2010). The relationships set forth in this study are woven together based on the expectations states theory (EST), which generally bridges consumers’ expectations with their actions (i.e., the behaviors of buying impulsively and consuming conspicuously in this study). Our focal construct, transformation expectations, is treated as a second-order construct, consisting of four dimensions: “self-,” “relationship,” “hedonic,” and “efficacy” transformations. We postulate that transformation expectations positively influence conspicuous consumption and impulse buying, and that the relationships are moderated by culture. The data were collected from consumers in Thailand and the U.S. using a self-administered survey by means of quota and purposive sampling techniques. Our final sample size consists of 347 Thai consumers and 320 American consumers. The findings in this study show support for all hypothesized relationships. Both Thais and Americans tend to consume more conspicuously and purchase more impulsively when they have higher expectations that a product enables them to transform their lives. Surprisingly, the test of the moderating effect of culture showed a stronger relationship amongst Thai consumers. This finding contradicts to previous empirical evidences suggested in the literature. Future study thus should replicate and/or extend this study to confirm and validate the results so that appropriate marketing strategies can be tailored to fit diverse groups of consumers across the globe.

The purpose of this paper is to explore underlying motivations relating to the purchase of counterfeit luxury brands. Due to an increased demand for counterfeit goods in the luxury sector, understanding the motivations and determinants of counterfeit purchasing behaviour is becoming increasingly important for both academics and managers (Wee et al 1995; Perez et al 2010; Bian and Moutinho 2011). Counterfeit products rely on original brand features and leverage the brand’s evocative power and symbolic values, even if they don’t possess its intrinsic attributes and original materials. Therefore, consumers might choose a specific brand (and the associated brand values) and in the meantime compromise on the functional values of the product itself, because they are attracted more towards the symbolic features of recreating a brand experience (Gentry et al. 2001). This “brand importance” in counterfeit consumption represents for Grossman and Shapiro (1988) the possibility for consumers to “unbundle the quality and prestige attributes of branded products”, so that counterfeit consumers can “enjoy the status of displaying a prestigious label without paying for a high-quality product” (Grossman and Shapiro, 1988, p.98). Wiedmann et al (2012, p. 554) highlight the need to “examine the reasons why consumers choose the counterfeit over the authentic product,” arguing that an understanding of counterfeit purchase behaviour has to be informed by an understanding of the motivational value dimensions related to genuine luxury brands and goods. This paper uses their luxury value framework to explain the values related to counterfeit consumption. This study focuses on European consumers of luxury products, specifically Italians and Germans. Using a qualitative research approach we were able to evaluate consumers’ multidimensional luxury and counterfeit consumption decision making patterns. Since counterfeit is ultimately an illegal trend, there was a risk that consumers might not want to discuss their perspectives in front of other peers (Bryman and Bell, 2007). Hence, in order to avoid the appearance of potential bias linked to social desirability issues, this research has been structured around in-depth interviews. These semi-structured interviews were informed by existing literature (Saunders et al., 2009). Overall, the sampling frame had to exhibit different socio-demographic psychographic characteristics, so to give a more widespread overview on the response type. Therefore, the sample consisted of consumers with a differentiated educational and employment background and different lifestyles. All respondents were domiciled in larger cities, which increased the possibility for previous interaction with the counterfeit market. Analysis focused on the key themes and patterns that that emerged throughout the interview process (Yin, 2011). Findings have shown how there are major differences in how German and Italian respondents value and engage with counterfeit consumption. Indeed, the research has underlined the presence of varied counterfeit value dimensions that are linked to a consumer’s own luxury values (Wiedmann et al., 2012). Moreover, while luxury consumption is motivated by a consumer’s intrinsically and extrinsically driven desires, counterfeit consumption has been assessed to be motivated more by the values attached to the financial or functional dimensions of a counterfeit product, which complies with past researches on consumer’s value consciousness and on the possibility to engage with short-term trends without the economic investment of purchasing a genuine product (Geiger-Oneto et al., 2012). The research outcome emphasises how consumers from both countries are stimulated to engage with counterfeit goods according to the values they attach to. Since the evaluated consumers are mainly also active luxury goods purchasers, who therefore are aware of and can recognise the difference between a genuine and non-genuine good, it appears as restrictive and ineffective to highlight differences between luxury and counterfeit goods. Additionally, as highlighted by Hieke (2010) and Hart et al. (2004), the more consumers grow familiar with purchasing counterfeit goods, the more they reduce dramatically the consideration they have for the illicitness of this purchase behaviour. The contribution of this study is twofold; theoretical and managerial. Using Wiedmann et al’s (2012) framework we develop theory by delineating motivations of counterfeit buying behaviour. We present practical suggestions to managers for mitigating against the negative impact of counterfeiting on legitimate luxury brands.

This paper examines consumer impulse buying choice in various situations. A questionnaire was sent to 414 consumers in the UK and Taiwan. The results demonstrate the interactions between the consumption situations and corresponding individual-related factors. Individuals’ cultural backgrounds were also found to predict different types of impulse buying patterns effectively.