Assortment Variety: Attribute versus Product-Based

Retailers need to decide on the content and structure of their product assortments, and thereby on the degree of variety that they offer to their customers.This paper compares measures of assortment variety and relates them to underlying variety components.We conceptualize assortment variety from a product and an attribute perspective, compare extant measures of assortment variety, and examine the appropriateness of these measures in capturing assortment variety as perceived by consumers.Recently, Hoch, Bradlow and Wansink (1999) introduced a general model of assortment variety based on product dissimilarities.The current study takes an alternative approach and proposes variety measures based on attributes, specifically the dispersion across attribute levels and the association between the attributes of the products in an assortment.Attribute dispersion refers to the diversity of attribute levels in an assortment (e.g. the relative proportion of red, green, blue products), while association between attributes refers to systematic links between attributes (e.g. all red products are large).We show that product-based and attribute-based approaches to assortment variety lead to substantially different measures with different effects on consumers' perceptions of variety.A first, synthetic, data set, shows that measures of attribute dispersion, attribute association and assortment size reflect specific components of assortment variety.The product-based measure proposed by Hoch et al. is sensitive to the size of the assortment, while the attribute-based measures respond only to specific changes in the content of an assortment.A second, consumer, data set shows that the attribute-based approach accounts best for consumers' perceptions of variety, and offers diagnostic power to retailers by explicating variety components.Attribute-based measures of variety significantly add to the prediction of consumers' perceptions of variety, over and above the product-based variety measures, while the reverse is not the case.In the final section we discuss how attribute-based measures can be used in assortment management, e.g. when assortments of different size are compared, when the impact of adding or dropping products on assortment variety is to be determined, and when diagnostic information about assortment variety is important.product assortment;variety measurement;variety perception;retailing

The relationship between in-store marketing and observed sales for organic versus fair trade products

To stimulate sales of sustainable products, such as organic and fair trade products, retailers need to know whether their in-store instruments effectively enhance market shares. This study uses sales data and a multilevel modeling approach to explain the market shares of sustainable products according to shelf layout factors, price level, price promotions, and consumer demographics. It argues that the effect of these variables differs between organic versus fair trade products, as buying motives might differ, organic buyers tend to be more loyal, and price is a more informative signal of quality for organic products. Results show that the number of facings has a positive relationship with the market share of fair trade brands, but not with the market share of organic brands. The same holds for the price difference with the leading brand, which is important for fair trade brands but not for organic brands. In contrast, an arrangement of the product category by brand is associated with higher market share for organic brands but not for fair trade brands. Additionally, placement at eye level and clustering of items benefits both types of sustainable brands, whereas they appear to be not very sensitive to price promotions. Finally, higher sales of sustainable products are found in areas where the customer base is older and has a higher education level. Keywords Organic . Fair trade . Shelf layout . Price promotions . Market share . Sales dat

Consumers’ evaluations of socially responsible activities in retailing

We approach Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) as a process in which particular CSR activities impact on consumers’ store evaluation and trust. We hypothesize that consumers classify CSR activities along two dimensions: (1) the beneficiary of the activity and (2) the intrinsic contribution of the retailer, implying that consumers are interested in who reaps the benefits of the activity and how much the retailer invests in the activity. This conceptualization is confirmed in two field studies with 823 and 486 consumers. These field studies also show that consumers who perceive more CSR have more trust in the store and that their overall evaluation of the store is higher. Furthermore, it is shown that even though CSR affects both outcomes, the effect on trust is stronger than the effect on store evaluation. Our research indicates that CSR is particularly suited to build trust. Economic activities, on the other hand, are better for obtaining a good store evaluation.Consumer/Household Economics,