臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫系統

:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
第 1 筆 / 總合 1 筆   第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁
/1頁
題名：顧客價值導向的產品組合模式
作者：張魁峯
作者(外文)：Kuei-Feng Chang
校院名稱：國立高雄第一科技大學
系所名稱：管理研究所
指導教授：徐村和
學位類別：博士
出版日期：2008
主題關鍵詞：顧客價值；組合商品；方法目的鏈；模糊分析網絡程序；組合屋；fuzzy analytic network process；means-end chain；product bundle；customer value；house of bundling
原始連結：連回原系統網址new window
相關次數：
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(0) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:0
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:24
過去對於組合商品的研究，許多學者將研究重心放在價格訊息對顧客的影響，並將組合商品視之為一種定價及促銷的工具。然而，除了價格因素之外，企業如果能夠根據顧客價值觀點來了解顧客的偏好，不但有助於生產與行銷人員聚焦於消費者所關切的重點來進行組合單元的規劃，更將進一步提升組合商品整體的競爭優勢。因此，本研究以整合性的組合商品 —「保養組合」做為實証對象，發展「顧客價值導向的產品組合模式」，以提供組合商品系統性的評估方式與改善策略，期能避免不必要的錯誤嘗試與行銷失敗的可能。
為了發展成功的組合商品模式，本研究首先藉由深度訪談與方法目的鏈，建構出保養組合商品之顧客價值層級架構；接者運用模糊分析網絡程序法(Fuzzy Analytic Network Process)，獲得顧客對於保養組合商品之產品屬性偏好權重值；第三，選取三種不同的保養組合（Shiseido—組合A、Lancôme—組合B、SKII—組合C）做為選項，進行競爭性評估，以找出組合商品相對的優劣差異；最後，以本研究發展之量化方法—組合屋(house of bundling)做為改善組合商品的方法。此方法的優點不僅能揭示消費者所堅持要求的產品屬性，並且指出消費者所希望改善的組合單元內容。本研究的主要結果、意涵與貢獻分述如下：
一、對於一個具有價值的保養組合商品而言，提供功能性價值為首要項目，而交易性價值則扮演最為微弱的角色。有關於顧客的偏好方面：清潔、保溼、緊緻、防曬、再生活化、鎮靜消炎、天然成分、檢驗證明、口碑與價格合理等，是顧客較為重視的產品屬性。
二、在組合單元的選取規劃上，化妝水為保養組合中首要組合單元，其次依序為精華液、日晚霜、眼霜及卸妝清潔用品。對於組合A的改善而言，清潔、緊緻與鎮靜消炎為前三項需要加強的產品屬性；而卸妝清潔與眼霜也應該納入組合單元的內容之中。
三、行銷人員應該將顧客所偏好的特性做為組合商品的溝通策略。此外，組合商品可以鎖定特定使用結果，並運用與此結果相關的交互作用，結合一系列的產品利益給消費者。由於保養品在美容過程中具有互補性，行銷人員應將產品單元間的相容性與安全性連結起來，藉以說服消費者購買同一品牌下之保養產品的必要性。
四、內部交互作用可視為顧客深思熟慮的過程，行銷人員可以運用研究結果做為與顧客溝通時的說服途徑，並幫助顧客做出購買決定。為了增加商品競爭能力，產品製造商可從組合屋中高權值的產品屬性與產品單元著手進行改善。
五、鑒於消費者在真實生活的評估過程可能發生的簡化行為與個人認知，相較於無回饋的層級式架構，本研究所運用的回饋模式是一種較適合的選項評估形式，尤其當選項之間差異非常小時，回饋模式可以提供決策者較為清楚排序結果與正確的資訊進行決策。
In the previous literatures, many researchers have been interested in issues of how customers are affected by price information and view product bundles as a pricing tool for promotion. However, besides price, if enterprises could understand customers’ preferences based on a concept of customer value, the results will help manufacturers and marketers to focus on customers’ needs in planning components of bundles, and also enhance the competitive advantages of bundle itself. Thus, an integrated bundle (cosmetics bundles) has been chosen in this research as an empirical case to develop a “Product Bundling Model within A Customer Value-driven”, in order to provide a systematic evaluation method, and strategies for improvement, of product bundles, to avoid the waste incurred in extensive trial and error in marketing.
To develop a successful product bundling model, this research begins with constructing the hierarchical customer value framework of cosmetics bundles by a means-end chain. Next, applying a fuzzy analytic network process, the preferences of product attributes of cosmetics bundles is explored. Thirdly, the competitive evaluation of three cosmetic bundles (Shiseido—Bundle A, Lancôme—Bundle B, and SKII—Bundle C) is completed in order to find out the relative strengths and weaknesses of bundles. Lastly, the quantitative method—house of bundling—is developed for improving product bundling. The advantages of this method are not only highlighting the major product attributes that concern customers, but also indicating those components of bundles which need to be improved. The main results, implications and contributions of this research are as following.
(1) A valuable cosmetic bundle should provide functional value as the first priority and transaction value plays a minor role in customer value. Concerning customer preferences, “cleaning”, “moisture skin”, “firming”, “sun protection”, “revitalizing”, “anti-phlogistic”, “natural components”, “certification”, “word-of-mouth” and “reasonable price” are the more preferred product attributes.
(2) In planning the components of bundle, lotion is the first item to put in the bundle, followed by essence, day & night care, eye cream, and cleanser. To reduce the gaps between Bundle A with competitors, “cleaning”, “sun protection” and “moisturized” are the top 3 product attributes that need to be improved. In addition, “cleanser” and “eye cream” need to be added to Bundle A in the bundle planning.
(3) Marketers should focus on customer preferences for their communication strategies of bundles. Bundles could concentrate on a specific issue and utilize interaction among consequences to combine a series of benefits for customers. Even though cosmetics bundles provide the complementarity in cosmetology; marketers need to link this to compatibility and safety to convince customers that purchasing a bundle of the same brand is necessary.
(4) The inner dependency represents the deliberating process of customers. Marketers could utilize the results of inner dependency in communication strategies and help customers to make decisions. To improve and/or enhance the competitive capability, the manufacturers could improve product attributes of components. The focus of effort should refer to the high weight factor of PAs and high improvement ratio of CoB.
(5) Because evaluators have personal opinions, and may simplify the evaluation process in the real world, the holarchy model (with feedback loop) is an appropriate format in the alternative evaluation. Especially when the difference between alternatives is slight, the evaluation by the holarchy model could provide a clearer ranking of priority and a better fit of information to make decisions.
1. Adams, W. J. & Yellen, J. L. (1976), “Commodity bundling and the burden of monopoly,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 90(3), pp. 475-498.new window
2. Afuah, A. (2002), “Mapping technological capabilities into product markets and competitive advantage: the case of cholesterol drugs,” Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 23(2), pp. 171-179.
3.Agarwal, S. & Teas, R. K. (2001), “Perceived value: mediating role of perceived risk,” Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, Vol. 9(4), pp. 1-14.
4. Allen, Michael W., Ng, Sik Hung & Wilson, Marc (2002), “A functional approach to instrumental and terminal values and the value-attitude-behavior system of consumer choice,” European Journal of Marketing, 36 (1/2), 111-135.new window
5. Ayağ, Z. (2005), “A fuzzy AHP-based simulation approach to concept evaluation in a NPD environment,” IIE Trans, Vol. 37, pp. 827-842.
6. Ayağ, Z. & özdemr, R. G. (2007), “An analytic network process-based approach to concept evaluation in a new product development environment,” Journal of Engineering Design, Vol. 18:3, pp. 209-226
7. Bearden, W. O. & Shimp, T. A. (1982), “The use of extrinsic cues to facilitate product adoption,” Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 19 (May), pp. 229-239.
8. Bhat, S. & Reddy, S. K. (1998), “Symbolic and functional positioning of brand,” Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 15 (1), pp. 32-43.new window
9. Bozdag, C. E., Kahraman, C. & Ruan, D, (2003), “Fuzzy group decision making for selection among computer integrated manufacturing systems,” Computers in Industry, Vol. 51, pp. 13-29.
10. Butz, H. E. Jr. & Goodstein, L. D. (1996), “Measuring customer value: gaining the strategic advantage,” Organizational Dynamics, Vol. Winter, pp. 63-77.
11. Cagan, J. & Vogel, C. M. (2002), Creating breakthrough products: innovation from product planning to program approval Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
12. Chan, L. & Wu, M. (2002), “Quality function deployment: A literature review,” European Journal of Operation Research, Vol. 143, pp. 463-497.
13. Chan, L. K., Kao, H. R., Ng, A. and Wu, M. L. (1999), “Rating the importance of customer needs in quality function deployment by fuzzy and entropy methods,” International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 37, 2499-2518.
14. Chang S. H. and Hsieh C. H. (1998), “Graded mean integration representation of generalized fuzzy number,” Sixth National Conference on Fuzzy Theory and Applications (CD ROM), pp. 1-6.
15. Chen, Z. & Dubinsky, A. J. (2003), “A conceptual model of perceived customer value in e-commerce: A preliminary investigation,” Psychology & Marketing, Vol. 20(4), pp. 323-347.
16. Chung, J. & Rao, V. R. (2003), “A general choice model for bundles with multiple-category products: Application to market segmentation and optimal pricing for bundles,” Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. XL, pp.115-130.
17. Clemons, D. S. & Woodruff, R. B. (1992), “Broadening the view of consumer (dis)satisfaction: A proposed means-end disconfirmation model of CS/D.” In Marketing Theory and Applications. Eds. Chris T. Allen, Thomas J. Madden, Terence A. Shimp, Roy D. Howell, and Roger L. Jent Chicago: American Marketing Association, pp. 209-216.
18. Day, E. & Melvin R. C. (2000), “Value Assessment: The Antecedent of Customer Satisfaction,” Journal of Consumer Satisfaction, Dissatisfaction and Complaining Behavior, Vol. 13, pp. 52-60.
19. Dodds, W. B., Monroe, K. B. & Grewal D. (1991), “Effects of price, brand, and store information on buyers’ product evaluation,” Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 28(August), pp. 307-319.
20. Cohen, L. (1995), Quality Function Deployment: How to Make QFD Work for You, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
21. Drucker, P. F. (2001), The essential Drucker: The best of sixty years of Peter Drucker’s ideas on management, Harper Business, New York.
22. Escobar, M. T. & Moreno-Jiménez J. M. (2000), “Reciprocal distributions in the analytic hierarchy process,” European Journal of Operation Research, Vol. 123, pp. 154-174.
23. Fitzsimmons, J. A., Kouvelis, P. & Mallick, D. N. (1991), “Design strategy and its interface with manufacturing and marketing strategy: a conceptual framework,” Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 10, pp. 398-415.
24. Flint, D. J., Woodruff, R. B. & Gardial, S. F. (2002), “Exploring the phenomenon of customers’ desired value change in a business-to-business context,” Journal of Marketing, Vol. 66(4), pp. 102-117.
25. Forgas, J. P. (1992), “Affect in social judgments and decisions: A multiprocess model. In M. P. Zanna (eds.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 25, pp. 227-275). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
26. Gardial, Sarah Fisher, D. Scott Clemons, Robert B. Woodruff, David W. Schumann, and Mary Jane Burns, (1994), “Comparing consumers’ recall of perpurchase and postpurchase evaluation experience.” Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 20(March), pp. 548-560.
27. Gengler, C. E. & Reynolds, T. J. (1995), “Consumer understanding and advertising strategy: Analysis and strategic translation of laddering data,” Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 35, pp. 19-33.
28. Grewal, D., Krishnan, R., Baker, J. & Borin, N. (1998), “The effect of store name, brand name and price discounts on consumers'' evaluations and purchase intentions,” Journal of Retailing, Vol. 74(3), pp. 331-352.
29. Grunert, K. G. & Grunert, S. C. (1995), “Measuring subjective meaning structures by the laddering method: Theoretical considerations and methodological problems,” International Journal of Research in Marketing, Vol. 12, pp. 209-225.
30. Gutman, J. & Reynolds, T. J. (1979), An investigation of the levels of cognitive abstraction used by consumers in product differentiation. In J. Eighmey (eds.), Attitude research under the sun (pp. 128-150). Chicago, IL: McGraw-Hill.
31. Guiltinan, J.P. (1987), “The price bundling of services: A normative framework,” Journal of Marketing, Vol. 51, pp. 74-85.
32. Gutman, J. (1982,), “A means-end chain model based on consumer categorization processes,” Journal of Marketing, Vol. 46(Spring), pp. 60-72.
33. Harker, P. T. & Vargas, L. G. (1990), “Reply to remarks on the analytic hierarchy process,” Management Science, Vol. 36, pp. 269-273.
34. Harlam, B. A., Krishna, D. R. & Mela, C. (1995), “Impact of bundle type, price framing and familiarity on purchase intention for the bundle,” Journal of Business Research, Vol. 33, pp. 57-66.
35. Harris, Judy. & Blair, E. A. (2006), “Functional Compatibility Risk and Consumer Preference for Product Bundles,” Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 34(1), pp. 19-26.new window
36. Hauser, J. R. & Clausing, D. (1988), “The house of quality,” Harvard Business Review, Vol. 88, pp. 68-72.
37. Havlena, W. J. & DeSarbo, W. S. (1990), “On the measurement of perceived consumer risk,” Decision Sciences, Vol. 22, pp. 927-39.
38. Holbrook, M. B. (1994), “The Nature of Consumer Value,” in Service Quality: New Directions in Theory and Practice, Roland T. Rust and Richard L. Oliver, eds. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, 21-71.
39. Holbrook, M. & Hirschman, E. (1982), “The experimental aspects of consumption: Consumer fantasies, feelings and fun,” Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 9, pp. 132-140.
40. Homans, G. C. (1958), “Social behavior as exchange,” American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 62, pp. 597-606.
41. Horng, S-C & Lin, L-H. (1994), “A dynamic Consumer product classification perspective,” Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 11(1), pp. 25-47.new window
42. Hung, H-F., Kao, H-P. & Ku, K-C. (2007), “Evaluation of design alternatives in collaborative development and production of modular products,” International Journal of Advanced Manufacture Technology, Vol. 33, pp. 1065-1076.
43. Jacoby, J. & Kaplan, L. B. (1972), “The components of perceived risk. In Venkatesan,” M. (edd.), Proceedings of 3rd Annual Conference (pp. 382-393), Chicago: Associantion for Consumer Research.
44. Janiszewski, C. & Marcus, C. J. (2004), “The influence of price discount framing on the evaluation of a product bundle,” Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 30, pp. 534-546.
45. Johar. J. S. & Sirgy, M. J. (1991), “Value-expressive versus utilitarian advertising appeals: When and why to use which appeal,” Journal of Advertising, Vol. 20(3), pp. 23-33.
46. Johnson, M. D., Herrmann, A. & Bauer, H. (1999), “The effects of price bundling on consumer Evaluations of Product Offerings,” International Journal of Research in Marketing, Vol. 16, pp. 129-142.
47. Kahraman, C., Ertay, T. & Buyukozkan, G. (2006), “A fuzzy optimization model for QFD Planning process using analytic network approach,” European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 171, pp. 390-411.
48. Kahneman, D. & Tversky, A. (1979), “Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk,” Econometrica, Vol. 47, pp. 263-291.
49. Kahraman, C. Ruan, D. & Dogan, İ. (2003), “Fuzzy group decision making for facility location selection,” Information Sciences, Vol. 157, pp. 135-153.
50. Kaicker, A., Bearden, W. O. & Manning, K. C. (1995), “Component versus bundle pricing: The role of selling price deviations from price expectations,” Journal of Business Research, Vol. 33, pp. 231-239.
51. Keller, K. L. (2003), “Brand Synthesis: The multidimensionality of brand knowledge,” Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 29, pp. 595-600.
52. Keller, K. L. (2003), Strategic Brand Management, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
53. Khoo, L. P. & Ho, N. C. (1996), “Framework of a fuzzy quality function deployment system,” International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 34, pp. 299-311.
54. Kim, W. C. & Mauborgne, R. A. (2005), “Blue ocean strategy from theory to practice,” California Management Review, Vol. 47(3), pp. 105-121.
55. Klenosky, D. B. & Rethans, A. J. (1988), “The formation of consumer choice sets：Alongitudinal investigation at the product class level,” In M. Houston (eds.), Advances in consumer research (Vol. 15, pp. 13-18). Provo, UT：Association for Consumer Research.
56. Kwong, C. K. & Bai, H. (2003), “Determining the importance weights for the customer requirements in QFD using a fuzzy AHP with an extent analysis approach,” IIE Transaction, Vol. 35, pp. 619-626.
57. Lapierre, J. (2000), “Customer-perceived value in industrial contexts,” Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, Vol. 15 (213), pp.122-40.
58. Lawson, R. (1997), “Consumer decision making within a goal-driven framework,” Psychology & Marketing, Vol. 14(5); pp. 427-449.
59. Legarreta, J. M. B. & Miguel, C. E. (2004), “Collaborative relationship bundling: a new angle on services marketing,” International Journal of Service Industry Management, Vol. 15(3/4), pp. 264-283.
60. Leung, L. C., Lam, K. C. & Cao, D. (2006), “Implementing the balanced scorecard using the analytic hierarchy process & the analytic network process,” Journal of the Operational Research Society, Vol. 57, pp. 682-691.
61. Lievens, F. & Highhouse, S. (2003), “The relation of instrumental and symbolic attributes to a company’s attractiveness as an employer,” Personnel Psychology, Vol. 56(Spring), pp. 75-102.
62. Linstone, A. & Turoff, M. (1975), The Delphi Method: Techniques and Applications, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
63. Meade, L. & Sarkis, J. (1999), “Analyzing organizational project alternatives for agile manufacturing process: an analytical network approach,” International. Journal of Production Research, Vol. 37, pp. 241-261.
64. Mittal, B., Ratchford, B. & Prabhakar, P. (1990), “Functional and expressive attributes as determinants of brand-attitude,” Research in Marketing, Vol. 10, pp. 135-155.
65. Monroe, K. B. (1990), Pricing: Making Profitable Decisions, New York: McGraw-Hill
66. Moriarty, R. T. & Kosnik, T. J. (1989), “High-tech marketing concepts, continuity, and change,” Sloan Management Review, 30(4), pp. 7-17.
67. Mulhern, F. J. & Leone, R. P. (1991), “Implicit price bundling of retail products: A multiproduct approach to maximing store profitability,” Journal of Marketing, Vol. 55, pp. 63-76.
68. Murphy, P. E., & Enis, B. M. (1986), “Classifying products strategically,” Journal of Marketing, Vol. 50 (3), pp.24-42.
69. Oliver, R. L. (1997), “Satisfaction: A behavioral perspective on the consumer,” New York: McGraw-Hill.
70. Oliver, R. A. (2000), “Brainstorm your e-business,” Marketing Management, Vol. 9(1), pp. 55-57.new window
71. Opricovic, S. & Tzeng, G-H. (2004), “Compromise solution by MCDM methods: A comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS,” European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 156, pp. 445-455.
72. Orth U. R. & Marchi R. D. (2007), “Understanding the relationships between functional, symbolic, and experiential brand beliefs, product experiential attributes, and product schema: Advertising-trial interactions revisited,” Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, Vol. 15, pp.219-233.
73. Oxenfeldt, A. R. (1966),”Product line pricing,” Harvard Business Review, Vol. 44(July-August), pp. 135-143.
74. Park, C. W. & Smith, D. C. (1989), “Product-level choice: A top-down or bottom-up process,” Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 16, pp. 289-299.
75. Park, C. W., Jaworski, B. J. & MacInnis, D. J. (1986), “Strategic brand concept image management,” Journal of Marketing, Vol. 50, pp. 135-145.
76. Park, C. W. Jun, S. Y., & Shocker, A. D. (1996), “Composite branding alliances: An investigation of extension and feedback effects,” Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 33(4), pp. 53-466.
77. Partovi, F. Y. (2001), “An analytic model to quantify strategic service vision,” International Journal of Service Industry Management, Vol. 12, pp. 476-499.
78. Patterson, P. G. & Spreng, R. A. (1997), “Modeling the relationship between perceived value, satisfaction, and repurchase intentions in a business-to-business, service context: An empirical examination,” International Journal of Service Industry Management, Vol. 8(5), pp. 414-434.
79. Rao, A. & Monron, K. (1989), “The effect of price, brand name, and store name on buyers'' perceptions of product quality: An integrative review,” Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 26, pp. 351-357.
80. Ratneshwar, S. & Shocker, A. D. (1991), “Substitution in use and the role of usage context in product category structures,” Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 28(August), pp. 281-295.
81. Reynolds, T. J. & Gutman, J. (1988), “Laddering theory, method analysis, and interpretation,” Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 28, pp. 11-31.
82. Robertson, T. S. (1993), “How to reduce market penetration cycle times,” Sloan Management Review, Vol. 35(1), pp. 87-96.new window
83. Rokeach, M. (1973), The nature of human value, New York: The Free Press.
84. Rust, R. T. & Oliver, R. L. (1994), Service Quality: Insights and managerial implications from the frontier, California: Sage Publications.
85. Saaty, T.L., (1980), The Analysis Hierarchy Process, McGraw-Hill, New York.
86. Saaty, T. L. (1996), Decision Making with dependence and feedback: the analytic network process, (RWS Publications: Pittsburgh).
87. Saaty, T. L. (2005), Theory and Applications of the Analytic Network Process: decision making with benefits opportunities, cost, and risks, (RWS Publications: Pittsburgh).
88. Sarkis, J. (2003), “Quantitative models for performance measurement system-alternative considerations,” International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 86, pp. 76-82.
89. Sarkis, J. & Talluri, S. (2002), “A synergistic framework for evaluating business process improvement,” The International Journal of Flexible Manufacturing Systems, Vol. 14, pp. 53-71.
90. Sarin, S., Sego, T. & Chanvarasuth, N. (2003), “Strategic use of bundling for reducing consumers’ perceived risk associated with the purchase of new high-tech products,” Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, Vol. 11(3), pp. 71-83.
91. Schiffman, L. G. & Kanuk, L. L. (2000), Consumer Behavior, 7th ed., NJ: Prentice Hall, Inc.
92. Sheth, J. N., Newman, B. I. & Gross, B. L. (1991), Consumption Value and Market Choices: Theory & Applications, Cincinnati, OH: Southwestern Publishing.
93. Shtub, A., Bard, J. F. & Globerson, S. (2004), Project Management: Processes, Methodologies, and Economics, 2nd. Prentice-Hall International (UK) Limited, London.
94. Simonin, B. L. & Ruth, J. A. (1995), “Bundling as a strategy for new product introduction: Effects on consumers’ reservation prices for the bundle, the new product, and tie-in,” Journal of Business Research, Vol. 33, pp. 219-230.
95. Slater, S. F. & Narver, J. C. (2000), “Intelligence generation and superior customer value,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 28(Winter), pp. 120-27.
96. Soman, D. & Gourville, J. T. (2001), “Transaction decoupling: How pricing bundling affects the decision to consume,” Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 38, pp. 30-44.
97.Spreng, R. A., MacKenzie, S. B. & Olshavsky, R. W. (1996), “A reexamination of the determinants of consumer satisfaction,” Journal of Marketing, Vol. 60(July), pp. 15-32.
98. Stremerch, S. & Tellis, G. J. (2002), “Strategic bundling of products and prices: A new synthesis for marketing,” Journal of Marketing, Vol. 66(January), pp. 55-72.
99. Swan, J. E. & Combs, L. J. (1976), “Product performance and consumer satisfaction: A new concept,” Journal of Marketing, pp. 25-33.
100. Teas, R. K. & Sanjeev, A. (2000), “The effects of extrinsic product cues on consumers’ perceptions of quality, sacrifice, and value,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 28(Spring), pp. 278-91.
101. Thaler, R. (1985), “Mental accounting and consumer choice,” Marketing Science, Vol. 4, pp. 199-244.
102. Ulrich, K. T. & Eppinger, S. D. (2000), Product Design and Development, Irwin McGraw-Hill, Boston, MA.
103. Valette-Florence, Pierre. & Rapacchi, Bernard. (1991), “Improvements in means-end chain analysis: Using graph theory and correspondence analysis,” Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 31, pp. 30-45.
104. Vaughn, R. (1980), “How advertising work: A planning model,” Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 20(5), pp. 27-33.
105. Venkatesh, R. & Mahajan, V. (1993), “A probabilistic approach to pricing a bundle of prices and services,” Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 30, pp. 494-508.
106. Vijayasarathy, L. R. & Jones, J. M. (2000), “Print and internet catalog shopping: assessing attitudes and intentions,” Internet Research. Bradford, Vol. 10(3), pp. 191-202.
107. Woodruff, R. B. (1997), “Customer Value: The next Source of Competitive Advantage,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 125, pp. 139-153.
108. Woodruff, R. B. & Gardial S. F. (1996), Know Your Customer: New Approaches to Customer Value and Satisfaction, Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
109. Wright, P. L. (1973), “Use of consumer judgment models in promotion and planning,” Journal of Marketing, Vol. 37, pp.27-33.
110. Wu, W-W. & Lee, Y-T. (2007), “Selecting knowledge management strategies by using the analytic network process,” Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 32, pp. 841-847.
111. Yadav, M. S. & Monroe, K. B. (1993), “How buyers perceive savings in a bundle price: An examination of a bundle’s transaction value,” Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 30, pp.350-358.
112. Yoon, K. P. and Hwang, C. L. (1995), Multiple Attribute Decision Making: An Introduction, Sage Publications Inc., Thousand Oaks.
113. Young, S. & Feigin, B. (1975), “How advertising works: A planning model revisited,” Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 26, pp. 57-66.
114. Zeithaml, V. (1988), “Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: A means-end model and synthesis of evidence,” Journal of Marketing, Vol. 52 (July), pp. 2-22.
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
QR Code
QRCODE

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫

目前上線人數：1146（臺灣：1135，外國：11） ／ 本年度總使用人次：2581353 ／ 訪客人次（自102年09月）：68384291
國家圖書館著作權聲明 Copyright © 2013 All rights reserved.
本館地址: 100201臺北市中山南路20號． 本館地圖及交通資訊．
總機：(02)23619132．最佳瀏覽解析度為1024x768以上