Available via license: CC BY 3.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
Research in Business and Management
ISSN 2330-8362
2020, Vol.7, No.1
rbm.macrothink.org
1
Relationship between Personality, Perceived Value
and Behavioral Intention of Selected Electronic
Brand Customers in Kenya
Kiprop Eric Kibos (Corresponding Author)
Moi University, Kenya, School of Business and Economics
Department of Marketing and Logistics
P.O Box 3900-30100. Eldoret, Kenya
E-mail: Kipropkibos@gmail.com
Mukoswi Robert Odunga
Moi University, Kenya, School of Business and Economics,
Department of Finance and Accounting
P.O Box 3900-30100. Eldoret, Kenya
E-mail: rodunga@mu.ac.ke
Kipkirui Daniel Langat
The Cooperative University, Kenya, School of Cooperatives and Community Development,
Department of Cooperative and Agribusiness Management
P.O Box 24814-00502 Karen, Kenya
E-mail: dlangat@cuk.ac.ke
Received: October 21, 2019 Accepted: November 2, 2019 Published: November 9, 2019
doi:10.5296/rbm.v7i1.15837 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.5296/rbm.v7i1.15837
Abstract
The main purpose of the study was to investigate the relationship between perceived value,
personality and behavioural intention of consumers of electronic brand in Kenya. The study
was guided by: theory of reasoned action, consumption value theory and big five personality
traits theory. The study adopted explanatory research design while the target population was
32,567 customers from which a sample of 400 respondents was obtained using multi-stage
sampling procedure. Data was collected using questionnaires and analyzed using hierarchical
regression. The results revealed that customer perceived brand value (β=.342; P<.000) has
significant direct influence on behavioural intention of consumers of electronic brands, while
perceived sacrifice (β =0.246; P<0.05) also has a direct significant influence on behavioural
intentions of consumers of electronic brands. The findings further established that customer
Research in Business and Management
ISSN 2330-8362
2020, Vol.7, No.1
rbm.macrothink.org
2
personality has significant moderating effect on the relationship between perceived brand
value and behavioural intention of consumer of electronic brands (β= 0.038; P<.000), while
having antagonistic moderating influence on the relationship between customer perceived
sacrifices and behavioural intention of consumers of electronic brands(β=0.008; P>0.05). The
main theoretical contribution of the study findings to the body of knowledge is on the effect
of perceived sacrifices on behavioural intention and on how customer personality moderates
this relationship. To survive and become competitive in the marketplace electronic firms need
to focus on offering brands that reflect customer personality and at the same time that offer
brand value while focusing on reducing customer perception of sacrifice.
Keywords: Behavioural Intention, Electronic Brands, Perceived Value, Personality
1. Introduction
Successful firms are keen to anticipate customers’ needs and to delight them with innovative
brands, service, processes and procedures so as to ensure that they bond with the enjoyable
experience that the firm and its entire customer ecosystem offer (Gallarza & Saura, 2006). In
fact firms focused on achieving market dominance continuously monitor customer behavior
so as to respond with offer values that guarantee favourable customer intention (Meng,
Shiang-Min, Liang, & Yang, 2011). Perceived value can be described as the totality of
customer perception of the net benefits he/she is receiving versus what she/he is giving up in
terms of costs. When the benefit gained are much more than the sacrifices made the customer
is prone to behave favourably towards the, while the contrary is also true benefits (Petrick &
Backman, 2002; Chen & Dubinsky, 2003; Ha & Jang, 2010; Eggert & Ulaga, 2002).
In today’s competitive marketplace firms need to absolutely impact the behavioural intention
of consumers of their brands positively. This will ensure that these customers continue doing
business with the firm, pass affirmative word of mouth to other potential customers,
recommend brands to friends and relatives and they become tolerant to price changes of the
brands. This can only be achieved if firms and marketing executives are able to continously
discern what the customers perceive as value in their brand offering and endeavor to exceed
these expectations (Petrick & Backman, 2002). Nevertheless the predisposition of the
customers to have an affirmative or adverse perception of value hence behavioural intention
appears to be influenced by among others factors such as environmental factors and customer
personality traits. Although there seem to be some disagreements among various researchers
(Sarker et al., 2013; Luchs & Mooradian, 2012) on the extent of the influence of personality
traits on customer behavioural or purchase intention as some have found evidence of the
linkage while others have not.
It is important that marketing managers understand how customers perceive their brand value
and how this perception is influenced by customer personality and lead to relevant customer
behavior. This is especially important in the retail consumer electronic markets where the
competition is intense because of the numbers of market operators and the brands; and the
nature of market fragmentation within the sector. Accordingly the electronic marketplace
does realize increased customer turnover, undesirable word of mouth, price intolerance,
relatively declining volume of purchase per retail firm, recurrent customer swapping and
Research in Business and Management
ISSN 2330-8362
2020, Vol.7, No.1
rbm.macrothink.org
3
above all frequent firm exit and entry. Because of the intensity of rivalry, retail firms focus on
immediate survival without consideration of future customer behavioural intention as
influenced by their perception of value and personality. Earlier research have not been able
offer concrete evidence whether personality is a worthy predictor of customer behavior
without any other relevant information about the customers; in fact Mehmet (2012),
Kassarjian and Sheffet (1991), Pervin, (1997) and Plummer (2000) criticized the idea of
linking personality to all purchase decisions or buying behavior.
2. Literature Review
In their study Park et al., (2006) observed that in deciding whether to repurchase a brand or
not consumers always consider the extent to which they receive value for money. Ha and
Jang (2010) describe customer perceived value as the difference between total benefits and
total sacrifices. According to Sheth et al., (1991); Monroe (1990), Lee and Overby (2004) in
Lien et al., (2011) customer perceived value is determined by benefits and sacrifices offered
by the brand and can be measured using the following dimensions: customer perceived brand,
logistical, social and relational values and perceived customer sacrifices.
In their study Sheth et al., (1991) acknowledged that brands contain five main values that
customer look for, and these include: functional, social, emotional, epistemic and conditional.
Functional value involve the brands’ ability or capacity to perform to customers’ expectations.
Functional value is obtained from the noticeable and concrete features that customers can
directly experience when using or consuming the brand. Social value involve the perceived
advantages obtained from a brands association with social class, social standing or a specific
social group. Affective value can be described as the perceived advantages or value obtained
from a brands ability to stimulate intense emotions. Epistemic value can be described as the
value obtained from a brand's capability to gratify inquisitiveness, deliver newness, and/or
encounter a craving for knowledge. Aesthetic value is described as the advantage obtained
from a brand's capability to offer a sense of attractiveness or to improve individual
appearance.
Perceived sacrifice relates to what should be surrendered up so that a customer can obtain a
particular brand or service (Zeithaml, 1988). According to Monroe (1990), sacrifice in the
context of perceived value is described as perceived total costs to the customer, including:
purchase price, costs, and post-purchase costs. They are defined from the customer’s
perspective and include monetary terms and non-monetary terms (Hutchinson et al., 2009;
Lapierre, 2000). In a study Gabbott (2004) identifies sacrifices as having three cost aspects:
acquisition, consumption and disposal hence they are what the consumers have to give up in
obtaining the purchased brands. Zeithaml’s (1988) acknowledged that perceived sacrifice is
often revealed as an indicator of the perceived value. Wen et al., (2005) revealed that
perceived sacrifice has a direct unfavourable impact on perceived value, this implies that low
perceived value could be a consequence of high perceived sacrifice, while low perceived
sacrifice could bring about high perceived value.
The study is supported by the theory of planned behavior which proposes that the best and
surest approach to forecast an individual’s behavior is to evaluate his/her behavioral intention.
Research in Business and Management
ISSN 2330-8362
2020, Vol.7, No.1
rbm.macrothink.org
4
In their study Son et al., (2013) observed that behavioural intention is affected by both internal
and external factors surrounding an individual. The internal factors consists of an individual’s
capacity to accomplish a defined behavior, based on his/her knowledge, skills and abilities.
The external factor relate to limitations or availability resources such as money, time, or
technology that are needed to perform a particular behavior (Taylor & Todd, 1995). Ang et al.,
(2015) in their study acknowledge that individuals with less favorable attitude and subjective
norm, will unlikely perform the perceived behavioral control over a certain behavior and the
behavior intended.
Consumption Value Theory proposes that customers’ choice of a brand to purchase is based
on the values that he/she seeks to obtain from the brand (Sheth et al., 1991). The consumption
values consists of the perceptions of what they would like to obtain in a specific consumption
they want to happen in a specific (consumption) condition, in so to achieve a preferred
objective relative to particular brand. Consumption value relates to certain consumption
purpose that the customer is aiming at achieving from a specific consumption feeling that is
in line with their anticipated end- conditions and styles of behavior. Consumption value is
produced when the provided performance aligns with the anticipated performance of
customers (Sheth, Newman, & Gross, 1991). The five-factor theory of personality developed
by Costa and McRae, (1992) and incorporates five different variables into a conceptual model
for describing personality as consisting of: neuroticism, extroversion, agreeableness,
openness, conscientiousness. Big five model holds that the ways people think, feel, and
interact with others are attributable to individual differences in five personality dimensions;
agreeableness, extraversion, conscientiousness, neuroticism, openness to new experiences
(Goldberg, 1981; Costa & McRae, 1992).
Figure 1. Conceptual Framework
Based on the conceptual framework the study formulated and tested the following
hypotheses:
HO1: There is no relationship between perceived brand value and behavioral intentions of
selected electronic brands customers.
HO2: Customer perceived sacrifices do not affect behavioral intentions of selected electronic
brands customers.
HO3 Customer personality has no moderating effect on the relationship between perceived
brand value and behavioural intention of selected electronic brands customers.
Research in Business and Management
ISSN 2330-8362
2020, Vol.7, No.1
rbm.macrothink.org
5
Ho10 Customer personality has no moderating effect on the relationship between perceived
sacrifices and behavioural intention of selected electronic brands customers.
3. Method
The research study used explanatory (causal) research design as it sought to identify causal
links between the factors or variables that pertain to the research problem in the study. The
target population of the study were retail outlets of electronic brands in Kenya from where the
study respondents were drawn. The unit of observation were customers drawn from the retail
outlets of the following brands: Huawei, Sony, Samsung Techno, LG, Infinix, HP, Hotpoint,
and Lenovo. The study used multistage sampling in obtaining the final sample size of 400
respondents from the target population. The study used structured questionnaires to obtain
primary data from the customers of electronic brands. However prior to large-scale
administration of the instruments; a pre-testing session was conducted to ensure that the
research instrument was devoid of question items which were not relevant to the constructs
being measured and to detect any flaws or other weaknesses within the questionnaire design
items or variables (Saunders et al., 2007). Pre-test was undertaken using a two-step process.
In the first step, the questionnaires were administered to three marketing experts and three
randomly picked electronic brand customers to obtain feedback on the suitability of the
questionnaire to correctly collect the required data. In the second stage, a field pre-testing of
the questionnaire was done. Forty (40) questionnaires were administered to customer drawn
from the electronic retail outlets who were not part of the final sample and who were
randomly selected. The pilot study responses were analyzed using cronbach alpha with a set
lower limit of acceptability of cronbach alpha of 0.7 as recommended by Nunnally (1978).
The results indicated that all of the study constructs Cronbach’s Alpha coefficients were
above the recommended threshold of 0.7 implying that the data collection instrument was
reliable. The questionnaire was administered to respondents systematically selected (second
(2) customer entering each of the selected electronics retail shops as a starting member).
Thereafter the study used hierarchical regression to analyze the data collected so as to
establish relationship between independent, moderating and dependent variables.
4. Results
4.1 Correlation Analysis
Table 1. Correlation Analysis
CBI
CPBV
CPS
CP
Customer Behavioural Intention
1
Customer Perceived Brand Value
.393**
1
Customer Perceived Sacrifices
.261**
.115*
1
Personality
-.033**
.140*
.154**
1
CBI- Customer Behavioural Intention; CPBV- Customer Perceived Brand Value; Customer
Perceived Sacrifices, CP- Customer Personality.
Research in Business and Management
ISSN 2330-8362
2020, Vol.7, No.1
rbm.macrothink.org
6
Pearson correlation coefficients were used to establish the relationships between predictor
variables (customer perceived brand, and sacrifices), moderating variable (customer
personality), and the criterion variable (customer behavioural intention). Results on table 1
above show that there is significant correlation between customer perceived: brand value and
sacrifices; customer personality and customer behavioural intention. The implication of the
study results is that there is significant relationship between customer perceived brand value,
perceived sacrifices, customer personality and behavioural intention of electronic brand
customers.
4.2 Hypothesis Testing
The testing of the influence of the study variables was done at two levels: direct and indirect
effect. Thus the study sought to establish the direct relationship between perceived value and
behavioural intention of electronic brands customers, the indirect effect between perceived
value and behavioural intention through the moderating influence of customer personality.
Table 2. Regression Coefficients
Model I
Model II
Model III
Model IV
(Constant)
3.249*
1.018*
1.248*
0.427*
Age bracket
.082*
.103*
.098*
.096*
Annual income bracket
-.055
-.081*
-.082*
-.081*
Highest level of education
.054
.046
.041
.043
Perceived Brand Value (PBV)
.342*
.352*
.321*
Customer Perceived Sacrifice (CS)
.246*
.260*
.265*
Customer Personality (P)
-.091*
-.119*
P x CPBV
.038*
P x CPS
.008
F
3.366
16.568
15.338
10.544
R2
.045
.318
.328
.329
Adjusted R2
.031
.299
.306
.298
ΔR2
.045
.274
.010
.002
Sig. F Change (P<0.05)
.010
.000
.045
.006
Note: * P<0.05
Dependent Variable: Customer Behavioural Intention. Predictors: PBV- Customer Perceived
Brand Value; CPS- Customer Perceived Sacrifices; CP- Customer Personality.
HO1: There is no relationship between customer perceived brand value and behavioral
intentions of customer of selected electronic brands.
The analysis results displayed in Table 2 of model II show that customer perceived brand
value is statistically significant in predicting customer behavioural intention as evidenced by
the result of the analysis which show positive unstandardized coefficient implying that
Research in Business and Management
ISSN 2330-8362
2020, Vol.7, No.1
rbm.macrothink.org
7
customer perceived brand value influence customer behavioural intention. Arising from this
findings the study rejected the stated null hypothesis and accepted the alternative hypothesis
that there is relationship between perceived brands value and behavioral intentions of
consumers of electronic brands.
HO2: Customer perceived sacrifices do not affect behavioral intentions of customer of
selected electronic brands.
The analysis results displayed in Table 2 model II show that customer perceived sacrifices
value is statistically significant in predicting customer behavioural intention. This is
supported by the study positive unstandardized coefficients meaning that customer perceived
sacrifices influence customer behavioural intention. These findings led to the rejection of the
stated null hypothesis with 95% confidence level and acceptance of the alternative hypothesis
that there is a relationship between customer perceived sacrifices value and behavioral
intention of electronic brands consumers.
H03: Customer personality has no moderating effect on the relationship between perceived
brand value and behavioural intention of customers of selected electronic brands.
The results shown on model IV in table 2 indicate the interaction effect between customer
personality, customers perceived brand value, and customer behavioural intention accounted
for significantly more variance and positive unstandardized coefficient. This implied the
presence of potentially positive significant moderation effect of customer personality on the
relationship between customers’ perceived brand value and customer behavioural intention.
H04: Customer personality has no moderating effect on the relationship between perceived
sacrifices and behavioural intention of customers of selected electronic brands.
The results in Table 2 Model IV show that the interaction effect of customer personality on
customers’ perceived sacrifices and customer behavioural intention is not significant as
evidenced by unstandardized coefficients. This meant that that there is no potentially
significant moderating effect of personality on the relationship between perceived sacrifices
and behavioural intention of electronic brand customers. From the findings it can be deduced
that when personality is introduced into the relationship between customer perceived sacrifice
value and behavioural intention of the electronic brand customers, the relationship which was
hitherto significant in Model II shown in Table 2 becomes insignificant meaning that
customer personality reverses the potentially significant effect of perceived sacrifices on
behavioural intention of electronic brand customers earlier established.
5 Conclusion and Recommendations of the Study
Perceived brand value has a direct effect on customer behavioural intention, while customer
personality has a moderating effect on the relationship between perceived brand value and the
behavioural intention of electronic brand customers. Customers perceived sacrifices has a
direct positive significant influence on behavioural intentions of electronic brand customers.
However when customer personality is introduced into the relationship between perceived
value and behavioural intention of electronic brand customers, the relationship becomes
insignificant.
Research in Business and Management
ISSN 2330-8362
2020, Vol.7, No.1
rbm.macrothink.org
8
The main theoretical contribution of the study findings to the body of knowledge is on the
effect of perceived sacrifices on behavioural intention and on how customer personality
moderates this relationship. Customers’ perceived sacrifices in the context of perceived total
costs to the customer, relative to total benefits all have a direct positive significant influence on
behavioural intentions of electronic brand customers. However when customer personality is
introduced into the relationship between perceived value and behavioural intention of electronic
brand customers, the relationship becomes insignificant. This means that customer personality
has antagonistic effect on the relationship between customer perceived sacrifices and behavioural
intention of electronic brand customers as they reduce the direct effect of this direct relationship.
To survive and become competitive in the marketplace electronic firms need to focus on
offering brands that reflect customer personality and at the same time that offer brand
value-brand performance, innovation and social, epistemic, aesthetic and emotional values
while focusing on reducing customer perception of sacrifice.
References
Bagozzi, R. P. (1992). The self-regulation of attitudes, intentions and behavior. Social
Psychology Quarterly, 55(June), 178-204
Bobbitt, L. M. (2004). An Examination of the Logistics Leverage Process: Implications for
Marketing Strategy and Competitive Advantage. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation,
University of Tennessee.
Cattell, R. B. (1945). The principle trait clusters for describing personality. Psychological
Bulletin, 42, 129-161.
Costa Jr, P. T., Mccrae, R. R., & Dye, D. A. (1991). Facet Scales for Agreeableness and
Conscientiousness: A Revision of the Neo Personality Inventory. Personality and
Individual Differences, 12(9), 887-898
Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1985). The NEO Personality Inventory Manual. Odessa, FL:
Psychological Assessment Resources
Day, G. D. (1990). The Capabilities of Market-Driven Organizations. Journal of Marketing,
58, 37-52.
Eysenck, H. J. (1952). The scientific study of personality. Oxford, England: Macmillan.
Eysenck, H. J. (1991). Dimensions of personality: 16, 5, or 3?--Criteria for a taxonomic
paradigm. Personality and Individual Differences, 12, 773-790.
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An Introduction to
Theory and Research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley
Gallarza, M. G., & Saura, I. G. (2006). Value dimensions, Perceived Value, Satisfaction and
Loyalty: An investigation of university students’ travel behaviour. Tourism Management,
27(3), 437-452
Goldberg, L. R., & Rosolack, T. K. (1994). The Big Five factor structure as an integrative
framework: An empirical comparison with Eysenck’s P-E-N model. In C. F. Halverson,
Research in Business and Management
ISSN 2330-8362
2020, Vol.7, No.1
rbm.macrothink.org
9
G. A. Kohnstamm, & R. P. Martin (Eds.), The developing structure of temperament and
personality from infancy to adulthood. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Hutchinson, J., Lai, F., & Wang, Y. (2009). Understanding the relationships of quality, value,
equity, satisfaction, and behavioral intentions among golf travelers. Tourism Management,
30, 298-308
Kassarjian, H. H., & Sheffet, J. M. (1991). Personality and Consumer Behavior. An Update.
In H. H. Kassarjian & T. S. Robertson (Eds.), Handbook of Consumer Behavior (4th ed.,
281-303). Englewood Cliffs, N.J. Prentice- Hall International Edition
Keller, K. L., & Kotler, P. (2009). Marketing Management. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Pearson
Prentice Hall.
Lai, W.-T., & Chen, C.-F. (2011). Behavioral intentions of public transit passengers: The roles
of service quality, perceived value, satisfaction and involvement. Transport Policy, 18,
318-325.
Lapierre, J. (2000). Customer-Perceived Value in Industrial Contexts. The Journal of
Business & Industrial Marketing, 15(2/3), 122-139.
Lee, M. C., & Hwan, I. S. (2005). Relationships among service quality, customer satisfaction
and profitability in the Taiwanese banking industry. International Journal of
Management, 22(4), 635-648.
Lien, C. H., Wen, M. J., & Wu, C. C. (2011). Investigating the relationships among e-service
quality, perceived value, satisfaction, and behavioural intentions in Taiwanese online
shopping. Asia Pac. Manag. Rev., 16, 211-223.
Liu, F., Zhao, X., Chau, P. Y. , & Tang, Q. (2015). Roles of perceived value and individual
differences in the acceptance of mobile coupon applications. Internet Res., 25, 471-495.
Luchs, M. G., & Mooradian, T. A. (2012). Sex, Personality, and Sustainable Consumer
Behavior: Elucidating the Gender Effect. Journal of Consumer Policy, (35), 127-144.
Mehmet, M. (2012). Personality effects on experiential consumption. Elsevier Journal,
Norway, 52, 94-98.
Meng, S.-M., Liang, G. S., & Yang, S. H. (2011). The Relationships of Cruise Image,
Perceived Value, Satisfaction, and Post-Purchase Behavioral Intention on Taiwanese
Tourists. African Journal of Business Management, 5(1), 19-29.
Monroe, K. B. (1990). Pricing: Making Profitable Decisions. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw Hill.
Pervin, L. (1997). Personality: Theory and Research (7th ed.). New York, USA, John Wiley
and Sons, Inc.
Petrick, J., & Backman, S. (2002). Examination of the construct of perceived value for the
Prediction of Golf Travelers; Intentions to revisit. Journal of Travel Research, 41, 38-45.
Research in Business and Management
ISSN 2330-8362
2020, Vol.7, No.1
rbm.macrothink.org
10
Picazo-Vela, S., Chou, S. Y., Melcher, A. J., & Pearson, J. M. (2010). Why Provide an Online
Review? An Extended Theory of Planned Behavior and the Role of Big-Five Personality
Traits. Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 685-696
Plummer, J. T. (1974). Concept and application of lifestyle segmentation. Journal of
Marketing, 38(1), 33-37.
Ranjbarian, K., & Kia, M. (2010). The Influence of Personality Traits on Consideration Set
Size. European Journal of Social Sciences, 15(2), 127-42.
Roccas, S., Sagiv, L., Schwartz, S. H., & Knafo, A. (2002). The Big Five Personality Factors
and Personal Values. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 789-801.
Santonen, T., Kaivo-oja, J., & Suomala, J. (2007). Introduction to National Open Innovation
System (NOIS) Paradigm. A Preliminary Concept for Interchange, FFRC eBooks 8/2007.
Sarker, S. B., Palit, T. K., & Haque, E. M. (2013). Influence of Personality in Buying
Consumer Goods-A Comparative Study Between Neo-Freudian Theories And Trait
Theory Based On Khulna Region. International Journal of Business and Economics
Research, 2(3), 41-58.
Schiffman, L. G., & Kanuk, L. (2008). Consumer Behavior. NY, Prentice Hall.
Sheth, J. N., Newman, B. I., & Gross, B. L. (1991). Why we buy what we buy: A theory of
Consumption values. Journal of Business Research, 22, 159-70.
Tsao, W. C., & Chang, H. R. (2010). Exploring the Impact of Personality Traits on Online
Shopping Behavior. African Journal of Business Management, 4(9), 1800-1812.
Ulaga, W. (2003). Capturing Value Creation in Business Relationships: A Customer
Perspective. Industrial Marketing Management, 32, 677-93.
Zeithaml, V. A. (1988). Consumer Perceptions of Price, Quality and Value: A Means-End
Model and Synthesis of Evidence. Journal of Marketing, 52, 2-22.
Zeithaml, V. A., Berry, L. L., & Parasuraman, A. (1991). Refinement and Reassessment of
The SERVQUAL Scale. Journal of Retailing, 67(4), 420-450.
Copyright Disclaimer
Copyright reserved by the author(s).
This article is an open-access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the
Creative Commons Attribution license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/).
