an empirical analysis to study the influence of behavioural pattern of men on formal shoes

7/30/2019 An Empirical Analysis to Study the Influence of Behavioural Pattern of Men on Formal Shoes

1/20

International Journal of Management (IJM), ISSN 0976 6502(Print), ISSN 0976 6510(Online),

Volume 3, Issue 3, September- December (2012)

72

AN EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS TO STUDY THE INFLUENCE OF

BEHAVIOURAL PATTERN OF MEN ON FORMAL SHOES

Mrs. Uma V.R

Assistant ProfessorDepartment of Commerce

Christ UniversityBangalore, India - 560 029

Email: [email protected]

Dr. M. I. Saifil Ali

Professor & Director

School of Management (DASM)Dhaanish Ahmed College of Engineering

Chennai - 601301

Email: [email protected]

ABSTRACT

The present study attempts to present a model in which the footwear attributes are associated

with the behavioural patterns of the consumers. The behavioural pattern of the consumers wasstudied through the AIO statements. The consumers were profiled into eleven clusters using

factor analysis namely stylistic, confident, cautious shoppers, traditional, relaxed, optimistic,

strivers, systematic, dominant, spiritual and stay trim. Regression scores were used to assign therespondents into the respective components that were extracted through factor analysis.

Reliability Test and KMO Test were conducted to check the reliability and adequacy of the

sample size. Further only those variables that qualified the collinearity test were alone subject to

regression analysis. Through ANOVA test it was observed that significant differences existedamong the consumers within the clusters. Therefore the AIO statements were considered as

independent variables that were regressed against ten selected footwear attributes. The study

finds that consumers footwear preferences varied according to their behavioural patterns. Thismodel can help the retailers and manufacturers to revisit their existing strategies of targeting the

consumers based on demography or material construction.

Key Words: Footwear, Behavioral pattern, Regression, Lifestyle, Consumer, Clusters

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT (IJM)ISSN 0976 6367(Print)ISSN 0976 6375(Online)

Volume 3, Issue 3, September- December (2012), pp. 72-91 IAEME: www.iaeme.com/ijm.aspJournal Impact Factor (2012): 3.5420 (Calculated by GISI)

www.jifactor.com

IJM I A E M E


2/20



73

1.1 INTRODUCTION

With low production cost, abundant supply of raw material, evolving retail system, buying

patterns and huge consumption market, this sector is posed to grow to great heights. India being

a country of artisans is known for its traditional craft of footwear making. Some of the traditional

footwear created by village craftsmen include leather chappals in Kohlapur' embroidered Juttis inJodhpur, Indo-Tibetan felt boots in Sikkim and vegetable fibre shoes in Ladakh. The industrial

policy 1967 reserved the leather industry including footwear only for small scale sectors. It wasonly during the mid 1970s, 100% export oriented footwear units in large scale sector were

promoted. From June 2001 onwards the Government of India de-reserved the leather sector.

During the past four decades starting from the year 1981 1982, the export of footwear fromIndia had increased tremendously. Though India has a negligible proportion of exports in world

trade, it is the second largest producer of footwear next to China. India accounts for 14% of the

global annual footwear production of 14.52 billion pairs. India manufactures around 2065million

pairs of footwear every year of which 909 million pairs are made of leather, 1056 million pairs ofnon leather footwear and 100 million pairs of shoe uppers. Nearly 70 percent of the labour

constituting around 15 lakh people are employed in the unorganised sector majority of them arerural artisans, cottage and household units, while the organised sector accounts for remaining 30percent and employs over 5 lakh people.

The Indian consumer markets are growing and changing rapidly in terms of its nature and

composition. With the revolution taking place in the distribution system through entry of supermarkets, shopping malls, chain stores etc in the metros, small cities and towns the potential for

lifestyle products have increased drastically (S L Rao, 2000). With the change in the lifestyle

patterns among the people especially the youth, this product has also undergone a tremendoustransition in terms of its character. Though Indians have not been the ones to spend on items like

footwear, for the past two decades due to liberalization, there has been a tremendous change in

the buying habits of the consumers. More than sixty international brands are sourced from India.

Most of these brands are manufactured in Agra, Kanpur or Chennai footwear clusters.

1.2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE

India is a country of artisans comprising of footwear clusters spread in many parts of the country.

These clusters predominantly consist of small-scale manufacturers with skilled craftsmen, outdated technologies having less access to automation. In a developing country like India, there

exist tremendous opportunity for combining the artisanal touch with high technology (knorringar1998). Unlike India after Liberalization the textile and footwear industries collapsed in

Zimbabwe due to improper restructuring and low labour productivity (Carmody 1998) where as

countries like India, Korea and Taiwan enjoy high labour productivity. The author finds the

African market to be generally uncompetitive due to shrinking markets, low labour productivity,and poor infrastructure with poor political instability due to which foreign investment is scarce

when compared to the Asian countries. Heather (1998) draws attention to the existence offashion consciousness of the people towards footwear even before 8000 years ago. The author

throws light on the evolution of the bear-fur shoes that the Japanese Samurai used to wear to the

platform sandals that is worn by people today are all due to the fashion desire. The article was

the result of excavation of shoes dated more than 8000 years from the Missouri cave. Thecomplex weaving and design of the excavated shoes reveal that the people were fashion


3/20



74

conscious as we are today and specialized artisans and craftsmen existed even at that time. Thestudy by Troy (2000) stipulates the need for appropriate footwear as they are more than just

shoes. According to the author shoes give identity and image and is also a symbol of status.

Despite the benefits, diabetes patients refrain from purchase of therapeutic footwear as they are

not attractive with limited colours and designs (Carolyn et al 2002, Gautham et al, 2004).

Miranda (2009) explores the rise of Bata as a major player in the footwear sector. Post WorldWar I, the international trade in footwear took a different turn. The large footwear exporting

countries like United States and UK gradually became worlds leading importers.

1.3 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

Though the Indian consumers have become discerning and brand conscious, but in this sector the

proliferation of the unorganized sector seem to be higher. The unorganized sector dominates the

industry posing a threat to the organised players. In the organised sector , mens footwear

accounts for only half of the total market. Therefore it is clear that only 50% - 55% of the salestake place in the organized sector even in the mens sector. Though footwear is considered as

lifestyle enhancement product, the manufacturers and retailers have failed to understand this.Still the traditional segmentation patterns are followed in this industry, which include materialsused for construction of the footwear, usage patterns and demographics. Also there are

innumerable literatures that focus on trade policies followed in the footwear market in

international countries, treatment of workers in the footwear industry, therapeutic use offootwear, supply chain patterns etc but there are hardly any study that explores the consumer

behaviour and their association towards the footwear preferences. Behavioral segmentation

though has been used in many other products like apparels, insurance, real estate etc., but not inthe footwear sector. The present study is an attempt to fill the gap. This sector is a highly

promising one with less knowledge about its customers.

1.4 OBJECTIVES

From the problems stated above the objectives have been derived as under:

To profile men into different clusters based on their activities, interest and opinions To examine the differences that exists in the preferences towards the formal footwear

attributes according to the consumers behavioural patterns

1.5 STUDY AREA

The study was conducted in Bangalore being the capital of Karnataka and a fast emerging

metropolitan city. Further it is the third most populous city and stands fifth in the urban

population. As on 2011 the total population of the city stood at 8,425,970. Geographically thecity is divided into 5 regions namely East, West, North, South and Central Bangalore. Bangalore

has only 41% of local population and the rest of them belong to other states and countries

especially from Europe. Hence, it is vivid that Bangalore has a population with diverse profiles.Therefore the city of Bangalore has been selected for the study purposively.


4/20



75

1.6 SAMPLE RESPONDENTS

The respondents for the study include men between the age group of 20 55 yrs and between the

income classes of Rs 12000 to Rs 200000 per month. The respondents were drawn randomly

from the various strata of East, West, North, South and Central Bangalore. 500 men were

selected from each stratum totaling to 2500 men. Out of the total respondents only 2074 menqualified for the study as the responses furnished by the rest of them was incomplete hence were

eliminated.

1.7 SURVEY INSTRUMENT

Primary data was collected through distribution of questionnaires. The questionnaire comprisedof three sections. Section I includes 50 statements (Mitchell, A. 1983, Anderson, W.T. and

Golden, L. 1984; Hanspal et al, 1999; Hanspal et al, 2000 ) that would help in profiling the

customers into behavioural clusters based on the activities they normally engage in their day to

day life, interests and opinions on certain common issues. These statements were to be rated in a7 point likert scale. Section II comprised of their demographic details and the attributes they

expect their formal and casual footwear to possess. These attributes were arrived after anexploratory study. The exploratory study was conducted to a group of 20 members. The groupmembers comprised of consumers who belonged to different age groups. They were asked to list

the attributes they generally preferred their footwear to possess. Eighteen attributes were listed.

Though all the eighteen attributes were included in the instrument only ten attributes wereselected for analysis. These ten attributes were selected based on the ranking given by majority

of the group members. These attributes were also to be rated in a 7 point likert scale. The

instrument so constructed was pre-tested on thirty respondents to find out if the questions framedhad sufficient clarity. Then based on their suggestions the final instrument was constructed and

administered.

1.8 STATISTICAL TOOLS USED

The statistical tools used for the study include Reliability Test, KMO test, Factor analysis,

ANOVA, and Multiple Regression Analysis. Statiscal packages such as SPSS 16 and EXCELwere employed in the study.

1.9 SCOPE

The study will be helpful for the retailers to restructure their product offerings. The report will

also be useful for new retailers for designing their market strategies. It also offers a scope for

further research as there is not much study done in this area. Many international brands are

looking out for a place of business in India, this study will help them in understanding theconsumer characteristics and the factors that influence their purchase decision. The study can be

extended to global markets as similar purchase patterns may exist in multiple countries.


5/20



76

1.10 ANALYSIS:

1.10.1 CONSUMER PROFILING

For profiling the respondents on the basis of their behaviour, factor analysis was employed on

the 50 AIO statements (See Appendix1). Initially inorder to test the reliability of these AIO

statements, Cronbachs alpha score was computed. The Cronbachs alpha on 50 AIO statementsrevealed a score of 0.803 showing that the statements were reliable enough for further analysis.

Also Kaiser-Mayo-Olkin (KMO) Test was conducted to measure the adequacy of sample size.The test generated a score of 0.694. Thus KMO test also proved that the samples were adequate

enough to conduct factor analysis. On employing factor analysis 11 factors that constitutes 52%

of the variance was considered for the study. Further for authentication Scree plot was also read.Only those factors that constituted Eigen value above 1 were considered as principal component

analysis was employed. Varimax rotation was used to extract the factors with factor loadings

greater than +/- 0.30.

Table 1.1 Components with total and cumulative variance

Initial Eigen values

Components Total % of Variance Cumulative %

1 5.81 11.63 11.63

2 3.20 6.40 18.03

3 3.07 6.13 24.16

4 2.46 4.92 29.09

5 1.98 3.96 33.04

6 1.87 3.74 36.78

7 1.68 3.36 40.148 1.56 3.11 43.25

9 1.40 2.80 46.06

10 1.39 2.79 48.85

11 1.34 2.69 51.54

As Varimax rotation was utilized, those statements which had a factor loading of 0.3 and abovewas assigned to the respective component. Further case wise regression scores were considered

to classify each individual to the respective components. The 11 components that were extracted

include Stylistic, Independents, Economicals, Traditional, Socialising, Globe trotters, Strivers,

Systematic and Dominant (See Table 4.5). It should be noted that the components have beennamed according to the variable (Statement) with higher rotated factor loadings.


6/20



77

Table 1.2 Statements with Rotated Factor Loadings and assignment to respective

components

Components Rotated Factor

Loadings

Component 1: StylisticI like to spend a year in a foreign country

I have one or more outfits that are of very latest style

I pay cash for everything I buyI enjoy stylistic dresses

The most important of life is to dress smartly

I am fashionable in the eyes of others

0.72

0.72

0.680.65

0.58

0.58

Component 2: Confident

I have more self confidence than most people

As far as possible after marriage nuclear family is betterI am more independent than most people

I have a lot of personal ability

0.77

0.740.71

0.64

Component 3: Cautious Shoppers

I visit many shops before I finalise my salesI am active in all social functions

I check the prices even for small items

I watch advertisements for announcements of salesOne should bargain before a purchase

I prefer my friends to spend when I am out on a party

0.810.64

0.61

0.560.40

0.37

Component 4: Traditional

Women are dependents and need mens protectionA women should not work if her husband does not like her to workLooking after the house is primarily a womans responsibility

In the evenings, it is better to stay at home

0.730.720.59

0.53

Component 5: RelaxedI drink soft drinks several times in a week

I spend a lot of time with friends talking about brands and productsI participate in sports activities

One should have own credit/debit cards

0.76

0.70-0.53

0.43

Component 6: OptimisticThink I will have more money to spend next year

I want to take a trip around the world

0.83

0.77Component 7: StriversDoing nothing makes me feel uncomfortableI will take some courses to brighten my future

0.770.45

Component 8: SystematicOne should always keep the house neat and clean

One must save for the rainy day

A distinctive living attracts me

0.66

0.63

0.52


7/20



78

Component 9: DominantFriends often come to me for advice

Giving dowry in marriage is a tradition and cannot be done awayI would go for a walk than sit idle

I can be considered a leader

0.66

0.540.52

0.39

Component 10: Spiritual, Diet conscious and SocialisingI eat only home food

Spiritual values are important than material thingsI can mingle with strangers easily

0.59

0.580.50

Component 11: Stay Trim (6%)I skip breakfast regularly

I like to watch games than any other entertainment channels

0.77

0.71

For the purpose of the study the AIO statements were considered as predictor variables and the

footwear attributes were considered the criterion variables. Further only those statements thatsatisfied the collinearity test was selected. ANOVA test revealed the existence of significant

differences among the consumers in the same component. Therefore multiple regressions wereemployed to study the association between the behavioural pattern of consumers and thepreferences towards formal footwear attributes.

COMPONENT 1 STYLISTIC CONSUMERS

Table 1.3: COLLINARITY STATISTICS BETWEEN THE PREDICTOR VARIABLES

PREDICTOR VARIABLES TOLERANCE VIF*

I pay cash for everything I buy (Budgeted spenders) .726 1.377

I enjoy stylistic dresses (Stylistic) .900 1.112

The important part of life is to dress smartly (Smartly dressed) .943 1.060

I like to spend a year in a foreign country (Foreign land) .675 1.482

I am fashionable in the eyes of others (Fashionable) .703 1.422

Table 1.4 Multiple Regression Analysis for Stylistic Consumers (Component 1) and Formal

Footwear Attributes

Variables

FORMAL FOOTWEAR PREFERENCES

B SE Beta t-

value

Variables B SE Beta t-value

Criterion VariableCoordinated Colours

Predictor VariablesBudgeted spenders

Stylistic

Smart Dressers

Foreign land

Fashionable

5.23

-1.02

-.09

.54

-.35

.89

1.99

.25

.23

.13

.22

.22

-.31

-.03

.28

-.13

.31

2.62**

-4.1**

-.43

4.29**

-1.62

CriterionFamily

PredictorBudgeted spenders

Stylistic

Smart Dressers

Foreign land

Fashionable

-1.20

-.439

.142

.288

.902

.131

1.62

.203

.186

.102

.176

.176

-.163

.052

.186

.400

.056

-.74

-2.17*

.76

2.82**

5.13**

.74


8/20



79

4.11**

Criterion VariableElegance


Stylistic

Smart DressersForeign land

Fashionable

1.19

.26

.01

.03-.51

1.01

.60

.08

.07

.04

.07

.07

.18

.00

.04-.42

.81

1.98*

3.43**

.07

.84-7.8

**

15.4**

CriterionPosture


Stylistic

Smart DressersForeign land

Fashionable

-1.10

-.015

-.540

-.1491.28

.422

1.07

.133

.122

.067

.116

.116

-.007

-.228

-.112.660

.213

-1.03

-.12

-4.41**

-2.22*11.08

**

3.64**

Criterion VariableComfort


Stylistic

Smart Dressers

Foreign land

Fashionable

6.34

.027

-.065

-.061

.046

.115

.417

.052

.048

.026

.045

.045

.042

-.09

-.16

.084

.208

15.2**

.521

-1.35

-2.31*

1.01

2.54*

CriterionAmbience


Stylistic

Smart Dressers

Foreign land

Fashionable

.244

.302

.747

.182

-1.09

.718

1.35

.169

.155

.085

.147

.147

.127

.307

.133

-.550

.352

.18

1.79

4.81**

2.14*

-7.48**

4.88**

Criterion VariableBranded


Stylistic

Smart Dressers

Foreign land

Fashionable

3.98

.465

-.226

-.067

-.483

.629

.994

.124

.114

.063

.108

.108

.268

-.13

-.07

-.33

.423

4.01**

3.74**

-1.98*

-1.07

-4.5**

5.81**

Criterion VariableSalesmen


Stylistic

Smart Dressers

Foreign land

Fashionable

.263

.364

.618

.150

-1.09

.787

1.35

.169

.156

.085

.147

.148

.153

.253

.109

-.549

.385

.194

2.15*

3.97**

1.75

-7.45**

5.33**

Criterion VariableFriends


Stylistic

Smart Dressers

Foreign land

Fashionable

-1.54

-.382

-.051

-.353

.913

.907

1.73

.217

.199

.109

.188

.189

-.13

-.02

-.20

.356

.346

-.89

-1.76

-.26

-3.2**

4.85**

4.80**

Criterion VariableAmenities


Stylistic

Smart Dressers

Foreign land

Fashionable

11.3

-.991

.696

.207

-.785

-.128

1.88

.236

.217

.119

.204

.205

-.305

.210

.111

-.289

-.046

6.01**

-4.2**

3.21**

1.74

-3.84**

-.62** Significant at 1% level, * Significant at 5% level

COMPONENT 2- CONFIDENT CONSUMERS

Table 1.5 COLLINEARITY STATISTICS BETWEEN THE PREDICTOR VARIABLES


As far as possible nuclear family is better (Nuclear Family) .847 1.181

I have more self confidence than most people (Confident) .789 1.267

I am more independent (Independent).821 1.218

I have a lot of personal ability (Skilled) .900 1.111

*Variance Inflation Factor


9/20



80

Table 1.6 Multiple Regression Analysis of Confident Men (Component 2) and Formal

Footwear Attributes

Variables

FORMAL FOOTWEAR

B SE Beta t-value Variables B SE Beta t-value


Predictor VariablesNuclear Family

Confident

Independent

Skilled

.995

.014

-.033

.708

-.023

1.09

.092

.122

.141

.122

.010

-.018

.328

-.012

.911

.155

-.274

5.019**

-.186

CriterionFamily

PredictorNuclear Family

Confident

Independent

Skilled

8.16

-.42

.360

.191

-.67

1.46

.123

.163

.188

.163

-.220

.148

.066

-.257

5.59**

-3.4**

2.22*

1.01

-4.1**



Confident

Independent

Skilled

4.57

-.208

-.016

.217

.234

.804

.068

.090

.104

.090

-.202

-.012

.140

.166

5.682**

-3.07**

-.180

2.094*

2.606**

CriterionPosture


Confident

Independent

Skilled

6.99

-.21

.292

-.35

-.04

1.41

.119

.157

.183

.158

-.117

.128

-.129

-.016

4.94**

-1.75

1.853

-1.89

-.243Criterion VariableComfort


Confident

Independent

Skilled

5.82

-.058

-.273

.284

.171

.594

.050

.066

.077

.066

-.075

-.276

.242

.161

9.803**

-1.160

-4.14**

3.700**

2.575**

CriterionAmbience


Confident

Independent

Skilled

9.19

-.374

.447

-.425

-.339

1.49

.126

.166

.193

.167

-.194

.181

-.146

-.128

6.157**

-2.976**

2.689**

-2.206*

-2.034*



Confident

IndependentSkilled

-.319

-.299

.559

.647-.014

1.00

.085

.112

.130

.112

-.213

.312

.306-.007

-.318

-3.54**

5.001**

4.996**

-.126

CriterionSalesmen


Confident

IndependentSkilled

4.85

-.037

.380

-.345.043

1.33

.112

.148

.171

.148

-.022

.178

-.137.019

3.662**

-.330

2.575**

-2.02*

.289



Confident

Independent

Skilled

11.5

-.493

.196

-.556

-.280

1.57

.132

.175

.203

.175

-.238

.074

-.178

-.099

7.331**

-3.72**

1.121

-2.74**

-1.595

CriterionAmenities


Confident

Independent

Skilled

6.69

-.397

-.236

.005

.152

1.11

.094

.124

.144

.124

-.272

-.127

.002

.077

6.018**

-4.23**

-1.91

.036

1.225

** Significant at 1% level, * Significant at 5% level

COMPONENT 3 CAUTIOUS SHOPPERS

Table 1.7 COLLINARITY STATISTICS BETWEEN THE PREDICTOR VARIABLES


I am active in all social functions (Social) .810 1.235

I visit many shops before I finalise my sales (Cautious buyers) .800 1.250

I check the prices even for small items (Price Conscious) .911 1.098



10/20



81

Table 1.8 Multiple Regression Analysis of Cautious Shoppers (Component 3) and Formal

Footwear Attributes

Variables

FORMAL FOOTWEAR



Predictor VariablesSocial

Cautious buyers

Price Conscious

4.59

.171

-.552

.435

1.32

.159

.189

.102

.075

-.207

.285

3.485**

1.071

-2.92**

4.289**

CriterionFamily

PredictorSocial

Cautious buyers

Price Conscious

4.99

.839

-.703

-.066

1.29

.157

.186

.100

.366

-.261

-.042

3.848**

5.345**

-3.782**

-.657



Cautious buyers

Price Conscious

2.23

.230

.005

.373

.736

.089

.105

.057

.173

.003

.415

3.030**

2.587**

.051

6.577**

CriterionPosture

PredictorSocial

Cautious buyers

Price Conscious

5.95

-.165

-.169

.298

.961

.116

.138

.074

-.100

-.087

.268

6.196**

-1.421

-1.230

4.036**

Criterion Variable

ComfortPredictor VariablesSocial

Cautious buyers

Price Conscious

4.21

-.216

.463

.096

.609

.074

.087

.047

-.199

.362

.131

6.908**

-2.93**

5.302**

2.042*

Criterion

AmbiencePredictorSocial

Cautious buyers

Price Conscious

1.34

.350

-.133

.294

.981

.119

.140

.076

.209

-.067

.260

1.370

2.955**

-.947

3.891**



Cautious buyers

Price Conscious

2.15

.425

-.452

.470

.932

.113

.133

.072

.253

-.228

.414

2.303*

3.773**

-3.38**

6.544**

CriterionSalesmen

PredictorSocial

Cautious buyers

Price Conscious

.367

.523

.027

.135

1.05

.128

.152

.081

.289

.013

.110

.347

4.091**

.177

1.651



Cautious buyers

Price Conscious

1.17

.628

-.427

.406

1.08

.131

.155

.083

.329

-.190

.315

1.084

4.81**

-2.76**

4.879**

CriterionAmenities

PredictorSocial

Cautious buyers

Price Conscious

-2.33

.753

.134

.200

1.06

.129

.152

.082

.391

.059

.154

-2.190*

5.851**

.877

2.441*


COMPONENT 4 TRADITIONAL



A woman should not work if her husband does not like her to work

outside the house (dominating) .859 1.164Women are dependants and need mens protection (protectionist)

.829 1.207

Looking after the house is primarily a womans responsibility

irrespective of whether she is working or not (egotistic) .892 1.121

In the evenings, it is better to stay at home rather than going out

(conservative) .900 1.111



11/20



82

Table 1.10Multiple Regression Analysis of Traditional (Component 4) and Formal

Footwear Attributes

Variables

FORMAL FOOTWEAR


Criterion Variable

Coordinated ColoursPredictor VariablesDominating

Protectionist

Egotistic

Conservative

1.34

.249

.114

-.060

.392

.782

.085

.093

.101

.071

.189

.081

-.038

.338

1.718

2.917**

1.236

-.592

5.550**

Criterion

FamilyPredictorDominating

Protectionist

Egotistic

Conservative

1.69

.268

-.047

-.049

.507

.563

.062

.067

.072

.051

.253

-.042

-.038

.544

3.010

**

4.351**

-.709

-.674

9.963**


Predictor VariablesDominating

Protectionist

Egotistic

Conservative

1.43

.118

.288

.216

.102

.457

.050

.054

.059

.041

.141

.323

.215

.139

3.128**

2.358*

5.317**

3.669**

2.468*

CriterionPosture

PredictorDominating

Protectionist

Egotistic

Conservative

1.34

.321

.276

.171

.018

.387

.042

.046

.050

.035

.399

.321

.177

.025

3.464**

7.588**

6.006**

3.434**

.501



Protectionist

Egotistic

Conservative

4.00

-.044

.206

.251

.002

.425

.046

.050

.055

.038

-.060

.265

.287

.003

9.422**

-.951

4.096**

4.592**

.055

CriterionAmbience

PredictorDominating

Protectionist

Egotistic

Conservative

1.83

.217

-.025

.200

.270

.618

.068

.073

.080

.056

.207

-.023

.160

.295

2.968**

3.206**

-.346

2.518*

4.842**



Protectionist

Egotistic

Conservative

-.45

.358

.388

.050

.238

.394

.043

.047

.051

.036

.397

.405

.046

.301

-1.128

8.306**

8.318**

.984

6.690**

CriterionSalesmen

PredictorDominating

Protectionist

Egotistic

Conservative

2.47

.080

.327

.127

.016

.596

.065

.071

.077

.054

.080

.305

.106

.018

4.136**

1.226

4.626**

1.658

.296



Protectionist

Egotistic

Conservative

1.48

-.028

.252

.376

.097

.614

.067

.073

.079

.056

-.027

.224

.296

.105

2.413*

-.418

3.469**

4.752**

1.754

CriterionAmenities

PredictorDominating

Protectionist

Egotistic

Conservative

2.68

.059

.151

.157

.068

.617

.067

.073

.079

.056

.060

.143

.132

.078

4.351**

.881

2.068*

1.978*

1.214


COMPONENT 5 - RELAXED



One should have his/her own credit/debit cards (Practical) .952 1.051I spend a lot of time with friends talking about brands and products(Brand Analyst)

.965 1.036

I drink soft drinks several times a week (unhealthy)

.839 1.192

I do not participate in sports activities (non playful)

.873 1.146



12/20



83

Table 1.12 Multiple Regression Analysis of Relaxed (Component 5) and Formal Footwear

Attributes

Variables

FORMAL FOOTWEAR



Predictor VariablesPractical

Brand Analyst

Unhealthy

Nonplayful

4.83

-.015

.054

.008

-.302

1.38

.071

.112

.157

.131

-.015

.033

.004

-.169

3.510**

-.216

.477

.049

-2.303*

CriterionFamily

PredictorPractical

Brand Analyst

Unhealthy

Nonplayful

2.22

-.184

.512

-.050

.314

1.69

.087

.138

.193

.161

-.145

.251

-.019

.139

1.313

-2.112*

3.700**

-.261

1.946



Brand Analyst

Unhealthy

Nonplayful

3.92

-.143

.005

.183

.468

1.14

.058

.093

.129

.108

-.165

.003

.102

.305

3.451**

-2.443*

.050

1.417

4.327**

CriterionPosture

PredictorPractical

Brand Analyst

Unhealthy

Nonplayful

-.622

-.123

.574

.327

.330

1.32

.068

.108

.151

.126

-.118

.344

.151

.179

-.470

-1.804

5.301**

2.166*

2.614**Criterion VariableComfort


Brand Analyst

Unhealthy

Nonplayful

7.39

-.082

.003

-.010

-.201

.731

.038

.060

.083

.070

-.151

.004

-.009

-.209

10.10**

-2.181*

.057

-.124

-2.89**

CriterionAmbience

PredictorPractical

Brand Analyst

Unhealthy

Nonplayful

-3.25

.182

.522

.710

-.314

1.26

.065

.103

.143

.120

.168

.301

.315

-.164

-2.577*

2.811**

5.067**

4.945**

-2.617**



Brand Analyst

UnhealthyNonplayful

7.59

-.134

-.390

.307-.476

1.04

.054

.085

.119

.099

-.154

-.281

.170-.309

7.288**

-2.500*

-4.58**

2.588**

-4.79

**

CriterionSalesmen

PredictorPractical

Brand Analyst

UnhealthyNonplayful

-3.25

.197

.757

.389-.014

1.25

.064

.102

.142

.119

.186

.445

.176-.007

-2.601**

3.074**

7.421**

2.736**

-.117



Brand Analyst

Unhealthy

Nonplayful

5.78

-.309

.137

-.026

.185

1.30

.067

.106

.148

.124

-.313

.087

-.013

.106

4.448**

-4.62**

1.288

-.179

1.491

CriterionAmenities

PredictorPractical

Brand Analyst

Unhealthy

Nonplayful

3.37

-.470

.008

.552

.221

1.60

.083

.131

.183

.153

-.366

.004

.207

.097

2.100*

-5.691**

.065

3.021**

1.449



13/20



84

COMPONENT 6 OPTIMISITIC

Due to multi collinearity only one variable was considered for regression analysis

Table 1.13 Regression Analysis of Optimistic (Component 6) and Formal Footwear

Attributes

Variables

FORMAL FOOTWEAR



Predictor VariablesGlobe Trippers

6.46

-.184

.868

.130 -.129

7.447**

-1.418

CriterionFamily

Predictor

VariablesGlobe Trippers

4.88

-.134

1.23

.184 -.067

3.970**

-.728


Predictor Variables

Globe Trippers

7.93

-.369

.941

.141 -.234

8.423**

-2.62**

CriterionPosture

Predictor

Globe Trippers

6.87

-.296

1.31

.196 -.138

5.247**

-1.511Criterion VariableComfort


6.96

-.045

.343

.051 -.080

20.31**

-.871

CriterionAmbience

PredictorGlobe Trippers

.749

.570

.844

.126 .383

.886

4.505**



7.59

-.330

.918

.138 -.215

8.261**

-2.397*

CriterionSalesmen


7.29

-.246

.708

.106 -.209

10.296**

-2.320*



6.97

-.324

.929

.139 -.210

7.496**

-2.328*

CriterionAmenities


-1.92

.810

1.14

.170 .401

-1.684

4.753**


COMPONENT 7 STRIVERS



Doing nothing makes me feel uncomfortable (Active)

.974 1.027

I will take some courses to brighten my future (Hard Working) .974 1.027



14/20



85

Table 1.15 Multiple Regression Analysis of Strivers (Component 7) and Formal Footwear

Attributes

Variables

FORMAL FOOTWEAR



Predictor VariablesActive

Hard Working

-4.58

1.68

-.260

2.36

.242

.214

.539

-.094

-1.945

6.949**

-1.213

CriterionFamily

PredictorActive

Hard Working

5.06

.740

-.680

1.66

.170

.151

.345

-.357

3.054**

4.352**

-4.512**



Hard Working

5.14

.060

.080

1.71

.176

.156

.032

.048

3.005**

.342

.514

CriterionPosture

PredictorActive

Hard Working

11.2

-.360

-.480

2.77

.284

.252

-.117

-.175

4.035**

-1.268

-1.907


Predictor Variables

ActiveHard Working

3.48

.420

.060

.607

.062

.055.536.086

5.736**

6.745**1.087

CriterionAmbience

Predictor

ActiveHard Working

6.74

-.040-.220

2.22

.228

.202-.016-.101

3.030**

-.175-1.087



Hard Working

13.8

-.300

-.900

1.93

.199

.176

-.128

-.432

7.128**

-1.510

-5.11**

CriterionSalesmen

PredictorActive

Hard Working

9.38

-.480

-.140

2.56

.263

.233

-.169

-.056

3.666**

-1.828

-.601



Hard Working

20.7

-1.28

-1.04

2.64

.271

.240

-.388

-.355

7.828

-4.72**

-4.33**

CriterionAmenities

PredictorActive

Hard Working

8.38

1.02

-1.64

2.87

.295

.261

.264

-.478

2.917**

3.460**

-6.276**


COMPONENT 8 SYSTEMATIC



One should always keep the house neat and clean (Neatness) .821 1.219

A fancy and distinctive living attracts me (Distinctive) .946 1.057

One must save for the rainy day (Cautious) .821 1.217



15/20



86

Table 1.17 Multiple Regression Analysis of Systematic (Component 8) and Formal

Footwear Attributes

Variables

FORMAL FOOTWEAR



Predictor VariablesNeatness

Distinctive

Cautious

-5.19

2.07

-.425

-.278

3.85

.600

.157

.313

.289

-.212

-.074

-1.349

3.445**

-2.71**

-.886

CriterionFamily

PredictorNeatness

Distinctive

Cautious

-12.4

2.48

.028

.056

3.59

.561

.146

.293

.363

.015

.016

-3.44**

4.42**

.193

.193



Distinctive

Cautious

-24.8

3.85

-.127

.746

1.79

.278

.073

.145

.692

-.08

.257

-13.9**

13.82**

-1.75

5.19**

CriterionPosture

PredictorNeatness

Distinctive

Cautious

-21.4

3.79

.274

-.167

3.06

.477

.125

.249

.567

.146

-.048

-6.99**

7.95**

2.19*

-.67

Criterion Variable

ComfortPredictor VariablesNeatness

Distinctive

Cautious

.676

.419

.109

.360

.927

.144

.038

.075

.219

.202

.360

.729

2.89**

2.83**

4.78**

Criterion

AmbiencePredictorNeatness

Distinctive

Cautious

-20.7

2.36

.525

.907

3.0

.469

.122

.245

.357

.284

.263

-6.89**

5.03**

4.29**

3.71**



Distinctive

Cautious

-23.3

1.93

-.239

2.52

2.67

.415

.108

.216

.254

-.113

.636

-8.74**

4.65**

-2.21*

11.65**

CriterionSalesmen

PredictorNeatness

Distinctive

Cautious

3.39

.006

-.008

.270

2.36

.367

.096

.192

.001

-.007

.123

1.44

.016

-.084

1.41



Distinctive

Cautious

-16.1

3.09

-.121

.044

3.74

.583

.152

.304

.424

-.059

.012

-4.30**

5.30**

-.794

.146

CriterionAmenities

PredictorNeatness

Distinctive

Cautious

-14.2

2.38

-.179

.499

4.31

.671

.175

.350

.293

-.079

.117

-3.30**

3.55**

-1.02

1.43


COMPONENT 9 - DOMINANT



Giving dowry in marriage is a tradition and cannot be done away with

(Conventional)

.962 1.039

Friends often come to me for advice (Opinion Leaders) .975 1.025

I would go for a walk or do some exercise than sit idle (Stay Fit) .982 1.018



16/20



87

Table 1.19 Multiple Regression Analysis of Dominant (Component 9) and Formal Footwear

Attributes

Variables

FORMAL FOOTWEAR



Predictor VariablesConventional

Opinion leaders

Stay Fit

-1.88

.369

.630

.292

.738

.057

.076

.091

.369

.469

.182

-2.549*

6.440**

8.241**

3.213**

CriterionFamily

PredictorConventional

Opinion leaders

Stay Fit

3.86

-.112

.186

.144

.858

.067

.089

.106

-.114

.142

.092

4.493**

-1.676

2.091*

1.364



Opinion leaders

Stay Fit

2.17

.305

.349

.071

.538

.042

.056

.066

.435

.370

.063

4.042**

7.304**

6.264**

1.067

CriterionPosture


Opinion leaders

Stay Fit

1.59

.227

.350

.171

.688

.053

.071

.085

.272

.313

.128

2.315*

4.240**

4.914**

2.015*

Criterion Variable

ComfortPredictor VariablesConventional

Opinion leaders

Stay Fit

3.22

.213

.196

.221

.360

.028

.037

.044

.444

.305

.287

8.926**

7.620**

5.264**

4.979**

Criterion

AmbiencePredictorConventional

Opinion leaders

Stay Fit

2.47

.319

.215

-.034

.625

.049

.065

.077

.413

.208

-.027

3.953**

6.567**

3.330**

-.438



Opinion leaders

Stay Fit

-2.50

.243

.705

.594

.666

.052

.069

.082

.246

.531

.375

-3.76**

4.702**

10.22**

7.244**

CriterionSalesmen


Opinion leaders

Stay Fit

2.68

.128

.275

.071

.836

.065

.087

.103

.134

.215

.046

3.207**

1.965

3.180**

.688



Opinion leaders

Stay Fit

-.077

-.007

.801

.166

.875

.068

.091

.108

-.006

.520

.090

-.088

-.106

8.839**

1.537

CriterionAmenities


Opinion leaders

Stay Fit

3.38

.110

-.175

.236

1.02

.079

.106

.126

.096

-.113

.128

3.317**

1.396

-1.654

1.878


COMPONENT 10 - SPIRITUAL, DIET CONSCIOUS AND SOCIALISING



Spiritual values are more important that material things (Spiritual) .910 1.099

I eat only home food and do not like to eat out (Diet Conscious) .897 1.114

I can mingle with strangers easily (Socialising) .849 1.178



17/20



88

Table 1.21 Multiple Regression Analysis of Spiritual, Diet conscious and Socialising

(Component 10) and Formal Footwear Attributes

Variables

FORMAL FOOTWEAR



Predictor VariablesSpiritual

Diet Conscious

Socialising

2.30

-.208

.448

.207

.982

.137

.114

.076

-.109

.283

.201

2.341*

-1.512

3.911**

2.704**

CriterionFamily

PredictorSpiritual

Diet Conscious

Socialising

3.28

.552

-.397

.083

1.19

.166

.139

.093

.246

-.214

.069

2.753**

3.318**

-2.865**

.896



Diet Conscious

Socialising

2.24

-.090

-.003

.749

.734

.103

.086

.057

-.047

-.002

.732

3.056**

-.873

-.034

13.11**

CriterionPosture

PredictorSpiritual

Diet Conscious

Socialising

.196

.208

.240

.463

.866

.121

.101

.067

.110

.154

.456

.227

1.720

2.383*

6.87**

Criterion Variable

ComfortPredictor VariablesSpiritual

Diet Conscious

Socialising

7.52

-.206

-.122

.180

.698

.098

.081

.054

-.158

-.113

.257

10.77**

-2.108*

-1.501

3.312**

Criterion

AmbiencePredictorSpiritual

Diet Conscious

Socialising

.551

.568

.319

-.185

.910

.127

.106

.071

.320

.217

-.194

.605

4.465**

3.008**

-2.611**



Diet Conscious

Socialising

1.98

-.293

.658

.183

1.01

.141

.117

.078

-.144

.391

.168

1.971*

-2.081*

5.613**

2.343**

CriterionSalesmen

PredictorSpiritual

Diet Conscious

Socialising

-.949

.920

.291

-.240

.906

.127

.106

.070

.485

.185

-.235

-1.048

7.267**

2.759**

-3.401**



Diet Conscious

Socialising

.589

.538

-.025

.100

1.14

.159

.132

.088

.252

-.014

.087

.518

3.387**

-.190

1.132

CriterionAmenities

PredictorSpiritual

Diet Conscious

Socialising

2.69

.307

.018

-.086

1.21

.170

.141

.094

.139

.010

-.072

2.223*

1.806

.126

-.909


COMPONENT 11 STAY TRIM



I skip breakfast regularly (Stay Trim) .985 1.015

I like to watch games than any other entertainment channels (SportsViewers) .985 1.015



18/20



89

Table 1.23 Multiple Regression Analysis of Stay Trim (Component 11) and Formal

Footwear Attributes

Variables

FORMAL FOOTWEAR



Predictor VariablesStay Trim

Sports Viewers

-.65

-.270

1.04

3.52

.447

.313

-.052

.283

-.184

-.605

3.323**

CriterionFamily

PredictorStay Trim

Sports Viewers

-4.38

1.68

-.351

3.28

.416

.292

.336

-.101

-1.337

4.028**

-1.205



Sports Viewers

-7.24

1.65

.203

2.45

.311

.218

.422

.074

-2.96**

5.297**

.929

CriterionPosture

PredictorStay Trim

Sports Viewers

-5.59

1.67

-.213

3.01

.383

.268

.361

-.066

-1.857

4.362**

-.794


Predictor Variables

Stay TrimSports Viewers

3.49

-.047.470

1.37

.174

.122-.023.324

2.548**

-.2723.855

**

CriterionAmbience

Predictor

Stay TrimSports Viewers

-8.99

2.28-.318

3.73

.474

.332.393-.078

-2.390*

4.819**-.956



Sports Viewers

-9.03

1.41

.689

2.22

.283

.198

.384

.268

-4.058

4.975**

3.480**

CriterionSalesmen

PredictorStay Trim

Sports Viewers

-21.1

3.06

.753

3.08

.392

.274

.551

.194

-6.830**

7.818**

2.745**



Sports Viewers

-5.97

1.85

-.314

2.24

.285

.199

.499

-.12

-2.67**

6.48**

-1.58

CriterionAmenities

PredictorStay Trim

Sports Viewers

-11.8

1.16

1.18

3.61

.459

.322

.208

.299

-3.270**

2.534**

3.657**


1.11 RESULT AND DISCUSSION

A brief discussion on the highest preferences of the consumers for formal shoes (based on the

highest Beta value and significant t-value) in each of the factors extracted is given below.Component 1 comprised of stylistic consumers. Six variables (AIO statements) were loaded in

this component. Out of which five variables qualified for study due to multicollinearity.

Therefore the five types of consumers in this component include Budgeted spenders, stylistic,smart dressers, foreign settlers and fashionables. From Table 1.4 it can be observed that the

Budgeted spenders preferred more of branded shoes for formal wear. The stylistic consumers

were more store conscious. They preferred to purchase formal wear from the store that had good

ambiences. The smart dressers preferred their formal shoes to coordinate with the colour of theirattire. The consumers who preferred to settle abroad preferred to wear formal shoes that

enhanced their postures. The fashionables preferred elegant formal shoes. Component 2

comprised of confident consumers. Four variables (AIO statements) were loaded in thiscomponent. The four types of consumers in this category include Nuclear Family oriented,

Confident, Independent and Skilled. From Table 1.6 it can be observed that the consumers who

preferred to live in nuclear family were bound to purchase shoes from the store that exclusivelysold footwear and no other amenities. The confident consumers purchased formal shoes based on


19/20



90

brands. The independent consumers preferred to wear formal shoes with coordinated colours.The skilled consumers who perceived that they had lot of personal ability preferred elegant and

comfortable shoes and they never consult their family in the purchase of formal shoes.

Component 3 was named as cautious shoppers. This component comprised of three types of

consumers namely social, cautious shoppers and price conscious. From Table 1.8 it can be

inferred that the social consumers who are very active in all the social functions preferred topurchase formal shoes from the outlets that sold other amenities as well. The cautious shoppers

who visit many shops before they finalised their sales preferred to wear formal shoes that werecomfortable. The price conscious consumers preferred to wear formal shoes that were elegant

and branded. Component 4 named as traditional comprised of four types of consumers namely

dominating, protectionist, egotistic and conservative. From Table 1.10 it can be read that thedominating types preferred to purchase formal shoes on the basis of brand and those that enhance

their postures. The protectionist also purchased formal shoes on the basis of brand. The Egotistic

consumers purchased formal shoes primarily after consultation with their friends. The

conservative consumers were very family oriented. Component 5 comprised of relaxedconsumers. The four types of consumers in this category include Practical, Brand Analyst,

Unhealthy lifestyle and Nonplayful. From Table 1.12 it can be observed that the practicalconsumers preferred to purchase shoes from specialized store. The brand analysts were highlyinfluenced by the behaviour of the salesmen. The consumers who lead unhealthy lifestyle

preferred to purchase formal shoes from the outlets that had better ambiences. The consumers

who generally do not participate in sports activities preferred to purchase unbranded shoes.Component 6 were named as optimistic consumers. Due to multicollinearity only one variable

qualified for the study. Therefore there was only one type of consumers i.e., the globe trippers

who were passionate about touring around the world. From Table 1.13 it can be observed that theconsumers in this category preferred to purchase formal shoes from the store that sold other

amenities also. Component 7 was named as strivers. The two types of consumers in this

category were active and hard working. The active consumers were colour conscious. The hard

working consumers preferred to purchase formal shoes from specialized store (Refer Table 1.15).Component 8 was named as systematic. The three types of consumers in this category include,

men who preferred to keep their house neat and clean, men who were attracted towards a

distinctive lifestyle and men who were very cautious about saving money. The first categorypreferred formal shoes that were elegant. The second category preferred to purchase formal

shoes from the outlets that had better ambiences. The cautious men who were very particularabout saving money preferred branded footwear (Table 1.17). Component 9 was named as

dominant. Under this category, there were the conventional consumers who primarily preferredformal shoes that were comfortable. The opinion leaders and the Stay fit type of consumers in

this category were very brand conscious (Table 1.19). Component 10 comprised of spiritual and

diet conscious consumers. There were three types of consumers in this category, the spiritual,

diet conscious and socialising. The spiritual consumers took their purchase decision based on thebehaviour of the salesmen. The diet conscious consumers were highly brand conscious and the

socialising ones preferred formal shoes that were elegant (Table 1.21). Component 11 wasnamed as stay trim. The two types of consumers in this component include stay trim, the men

who often skipped their breakfast and the Sports Viewers, the men who preferred to watch sports

than any other channels. The stay trim preferred to purchase formal shoes from the outlets, where

the salesmen treated them well. The sports viewers preferred to wear footwear that was primarilycomfortable.


20/20



91

CONCLUSION

The footwear industry is susceptible to certain vital issues namely, market volatility due to

frequent changes in fashion, diverse market, competition from innumerable manufacturers both

from the organised and unorganized sector and the dissimilar buying habits of the customers.

The conclusion reached through the present study is that mapping the behavioural pattern of theconsumers and then associating with the footwear attributes can help the manufacturers and

retailers to understand their target market better. Further similar behavioural patterns can alsoexist in other countries, therefore it becomes easier to tap the global markets. The Indian

Footwear is a sector with tremendous opportunity but still untapped.

REFERENCES

1. Peter Knorringar, Mar 1998, Economics of Collaboration in Producer-Trader Relations:Transaction Regimes between markets and hierarchy in the Agra Footwear cluster Small

Business Economics, 10 (2), 193 195, Springer2. Carmody, Padraig, Oct 1998, Neoclassical practice and the collapse of industry in

Zimbabwe: The cases of Textiles, Clothing and Footwear, 74(4): ProQuest Research

Library 319-3433. Pringle Heather, Jul 3, 1998, Eight Millennia of footwear fashion Science, 281, 5373,

ProQuest, 23 - 25

4. Segal Troy, Aug (2000), Footwear Fervor, ABA Journal, 86, 82 845. Gayle E Reiber, Douglas G Smith, Carolyn M Wallace, Christy A, Vath B S, Katrina

Sullivan, Shane Hayes, Onchee Yu, Don Martin, Mathew Maciejewski Sep/Oct 2002,

Footwear used by individuals with diabetes and a history of foot ulcer Journal of

Rehabilitation Research and Development, 39(5) , ProQuest Research Library, PP 615

6226. Vijay Viswanathan, Sivagami Madahavan, saraswathy Gnansundaram, Gauthan

Rajasekar, Ambady Ramachandran, Feb 2004, Effectiveness of different types offootwear insoles for the diabetic neuropathic foot, Diabetes Care, 27 (2), ProQuest

Research Library Pg 474 477

7. Jose Antonio Miranda, 2009, Competing in Fashion Goods: Firms and IndustrialDistricts in the development of the Spanish Shoe Industry , 7, 1 - 34

8. Zakim, Michael, 2007, A foot in the past: Consumers, Producers and Footwear in thelong Eighteenth Century, Business History Review, 81(1), ProQuest Research Library,

194 - 1969. S L Rao (September 30, 2000) Indias Rapidly Changing Consumer Markets,

Economic and Political Weekly, 3570 3572Web References

1. http://www.leatherindia.org/products/footwear.asp,2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bangalore3. http://www.aplfindia.com/seminars.asp4. http://www.indianexpress.com/news/footwear-industry-seen-at-rs-38-500-cr/912014/

an empirical analysis to study the influence of behavioural pattern of men on formal shoes

Documents