中国消费者

中国消费者（精选十篇）

中国消费者 篇1

The economy of the People's Republic of China (PRC) continues to fascinate and to draw world attention on an almost daily basis.The powerful combination of overall market size, dramatic increases in disposable income (especially in first and second-tier urban cities) and the long-term growth potential of the Chinese economy, make the PRC an exceptionally attractive market for many global firms and their brands (Sheng&Yan, 2011;Yau&Steele, 2000) .According to the Wall Street Journal (Batson, 2010) , China has achieved a gross domestic product (GDP) amounting to$4.758 trillion (estimated by the IMF for 2009) .The WSJ expected that China would soon surpass Japan, the world's second largest economy ($5.049 trillion) .The IMF also estimated that shift would occur in 2010 since China, they forecasted, would generate$5.745 trillion in 2010 (International Monetary Fund, 2010) .

The success of Mc Donalds (Eckhardt&Houston, 2002;Watson, 2006) and KFC (Liu, 2008) in China have been well documented.Similarly, the significant increase in the number of high net worth individuals within China, when coupled with the cultural tradition that status products support an individual's mianzi (or prestige face) and hence become valued expressions of“success, ”has led many luxury brands to target the PRC as a“must win”market (Degen, 2012) .However, as most western commentators note, successful marketing in China demands significant resources, skills and adaptations (Tian&Borges, 2011) –perhaps even a brand new mindset.The recent complicated story of Danone-Wahaha provides a cautionary tale for any business strategist and/or global marketer who thinks that market entry into the PRC is or will be easy.

The research reported here explores Chinese consumer behavior through a focus on ten global brands.The research, part of a three-year global branding project, extended into Asia interests which heretofore targeted consumers living in Central and Eastern Europe (Deli-Grey, Haefner&Rosenbloom, 2012;Rosenblooom&Haefner, 2009) .The global branding research sought to identify the strength of global brand trust, global brand familiarity, global brand liking and knowledge of a global brand's country-of-origin (COO) in predicting global brand purchase intent.The research also included five scales measuring consumer attitudes toward (1) global consumer culture, (2) cosmopolitanism, (3) multinational advertising, (4) global-local identities, (5) ethnocentrism.All five scales were drawn from the extant literature on global brands and have had research supporting their influence on consumer decisionmaking in a global context.Regression models were built for all ten brands inclusive of the five attitudinal scales to gain insight into the relative contributions of each of these items as independent predictors of global brand purchase intent in Chinese consumers.Regression models are presented that were built for each global brand along with a discussion of the most surprising insights.There were some unexpected findings about Chinese consumer decision making in the data.

2 CONSUMER BEHAVIOR IN CHINA

As befits the growth of China itself, China-focused consumer behavior research published in English has increased dramatically over the years.Sin&Ho (2001) conducted an early meta-analysis of published consumer research.These researchers reviewed 75 studies on Chinese consumerism and concluded that a wide variety of consumer issues were being researched.Kaigler-Walker, Gilbert&Hu (2010) noted, specifically, that there was extant research on Chinese consumers relative to purchasing motivation (Zhou&Wong, 2008) , consumer values (Lee et al., 2004;Tai, 2008) , decision making (Fan&Xiao 1998;Hui et al., 2001) and generational and regional differences (Cui&Lui, 2000) .

Garner (2005) summarized one of the few large-scale studies published as a book.Garner, a senior strategist at Credit Suisse First Boston, managed a proprietary Chinese consumer lifestyle and spending pattern survey.The survey was conducted in four tier one cities (Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou, Shenzhen) and four tier two cities (Shenyang, Chengdu, Xi'an, Wuhan) and included 10 product categories, ranging from automobiles, beverages, electronic and luxury goods through tobacco products and travel services.Garner provides not only category data but also competitive market share data for each product category by city and consumer income levels.Wang (2008) provides a more recent macro-level of view of Chinese consumer behavior, with her focus on key national brands as experienced through the social construction of meaning that domestic advertising firms use to position brands as“local.”

The global consulting firm, Mc Kinsey, has been conducting an annual survey of Chinese consumers since 2005.Mc K-insey uses a stratified sampling plan, which includes approximately 600 cities in which 82%of all urban Chinese consumers live.Furthermore, these same cities are forecast to account for92%of China's urban GDP by 2015 (Atsmon et al., 2009) .In its most recent Annual Survey (Atsmon, Dixit, Magni&St.Maurice, 2010) , Mc Kinsey noted that while the global recession has had some effect on consumer purchasing patterns in China, the combination of government and private-sector incentives has led to very robust retail sales.Mc Kinsey stated that, arguably, the Chinese consumer sector was“the healthiest of any major economy in the world” (Atsmon, Dixit, Magni&St.Maurice, p.7) .Nonetheless, Chinese consumers still continue to embody their own unique mix of characteristics:They are still fundamentally conservative, although there is some behavioral convergence towards behaviors of consumers in more developed economies such as evaluating products beyond mere functionality and trading up for products that deliver greater value and quality.There may even be an emerging hedonic, global youth segment, which Mc Kinsey terms the“what fits me”group (Annual Survey, 2010) .

As a counterpoint to the above, Uncles and He (n.d.) systematically searched for consumer behavior research written in Mandarin between 1985—2004.Their search found over700 articles on various aspects of Chinese consumer behavior.Their conclusions were: (1) There was a significant body of indigenous literature not recognized by scholars in the West; (2) most research was concerned with consumer economics and understanding consumption functions; (3) the focus on consumption functions fit well with the rise in disposal consumer income most Chinese have experienced.

3 BRANDS

Strong brands help firms succeed (Aaker, 1996;de Chernatony&Mc Donald, 2003) .While having a strong consumer franchise is not the only thing firms need for success in their markets, strong brands are often linked with strong brand equity.The global financial crisis of 2008 is an apt reminder that firms with strong brands are buffered from, but not immune from, unexpected market shocks.“Brands have never been more important than they are today.The accelerating rate of turbulent change, the volatility of economics and markets, the relentless progress of technologies and innovation, and increasing market fragmentation have caused the destruction of many companies and products that have failed to develop the lifeline of a strong brand” (Temporal, 2010, p.xiii) .

Eckhardt and Bengtsson's (2010) article summarized the4000 year-old-history of branding in China, and its long association with Imperial dynasties.This recent article is a strong counterpart to Holt's (2006) history of branding in the late nineteenth century in the United States.Marketers, like every other business professional, must understand and appreciate China's history if they hope to be successful.Ambler and Witzel's (2004) words are well chosen:“The point cannot be emphasized too strongly.In China, history is important if for no other reason, because the Chinese themselves believe it is” (p.39, emphasis in original) .“The phenomenon of foreign brands in China appears somewhat different from what is often addressed in research in marketing, because of the complexity of the market situation and cultural characteristics of today's Chinese society and consumer behaviour, closely related to the combined experience of generations of Chinese” (Li, 2007, p.11) .

There is ongoing academic debate, though, about what constitutes a“global brand.”Roberts and Cayla (2009) note that“definitions of global brands are mostly supply side” (p.350) in that the brand's globalness is defined in terms of number of markets served, size of markets served and the extent to which the brand shares consistent technical specifications across these markets.This mirrors the standard, textbook definition of a global brand (Ghuari&Cateroa, 2010) .Roberts and Cayla (2009) also note that while a consumer-centric view of global brands (that is, the process by which consumers categorize brands as“global”) is desirable, such a view is still underdeveloped in the marketing literature.This view was supported by Rosenbloom&Haefner (2009) , who analyzed multiple, global brand definitions.Their literature review found only one global brand definition that integrated both consumer and producer orientations.In this definition, a global brand was defined as“the multi-market reach of products that are perceived as the same by both consumers and internal constituents” (Johansson and Ronkainen, 2005, p.340) .Steenkamp, Batra and Alden (2003) were very clear that“a brand benefits from consumer perceptions that it is‘global’...only if consumers believe the brand is marketed in multiple countries and is generally recognized as global in these countries” (p.54) .

3.1 Country of Origin

All brands have a country-of-origin (COO) , yet for global brands, COO is always an issue of marketing strategy concerning whether to highlight it or not.As such, COO has been extensively investigated (Pharr, 2005) .Marketing scholars have variously tried to understand how COO affects per-ceived product value (Cervino, Sanchez&Cubillo, 2005;Hui&Zhou, 2002) ;brand image and brand equity (Lin&Kao, 2004;Pappu, Quester&Cooksey, 2007) .Okechuku (1994) used conjoint analysis to study the effect of COO on product choice in consumers living in Holland, Germany, Canada and the United States and found that COO was one of the two most important attributes in purchase evaluation.Okechuku (1994) found that consumers had a distinct preference for domestic products over foreign ones, especially when the COO was from countries with developing or emerging economies.This finding seems consistent across much of the COO literature—there is a strong domestic preference for many product categories when consumers in developed countries evaluate COO (Watson&Wright, 2000) .

Research on Chinese consumers finds a similar pattern:There is a predisposed, strong preference toward domestic products (Cui and Liu, 2001;Li and Gallup, 1995) and foreign products, except for those in luxury product categories, may suffer from the“liability of foreignness” (Peng, 2009;Zaheer, 1995) .

H1:The greater the importance of knowing a brand's COO, the greater will be its effect on brand purchase likelihood.

3.2 Brand Familiarity

To know a product's COO (Samiee, Shimp, Sharma, 2005) , presumes some level of brand familiarity.Brand familiarity creates a feeling in consumers that the brand is“known”.This feeling of knowing something about the product begins the transformation process of turning undifferentiated products into brands (Franzen&Moriarty, 2009) .Indeed, “familiarity, trust and liking are the three most important drivers of brand loyalty” (Franzen&Moriarty, 2009, pp.310-311) .

Brand familiarity reflects“the extent of the consumer's direct and indirect experiences with the brand” (Campbell&Keller, 2003) and directly affects consumer knowledge structures.Consumers who are familiar with a brand have more elaborate, sophisticated brand schemas stored in memory than consumers who are unfamiliar with the brand (Heckler&Childers, 1992;Kent&Allen, 1994;Low&Lamb, 2000) .Research has demonstrated that brand familiarity yields more favorable brand evaluation (Janiszewski, 1993;Holden&Vanhuele, 1999) .Increased brand familiarity means that consumers will process advertising messages quicker and with less effort because they already“know things”about the brand (Chattopadhyay, 1998) .

Consumer familiarity with product categories and brands also may influence COO evaluations.So far, though, this research is inconclusive.Lambert and Jaffe (1998) suggested that consumers already familiar with products from a country used COO marginally in forming brand judgments.Johansson (1989) , in contrast, found consumers already familiar with a brand in a product category used COO more fully in their decision making.Phau and Suntornnond (2006) found that while COO does have an effect:“There are only weak associations between product dimensions and country of origin cues particularly for evaluations of unfamiliar brands” (p.39) .Most recently, Ahmed and d'Astous (2008) studied the effect that COO familiarity had on a wide variety of products whose COOs were from 14 different nations.Ahmed and d'Astous (2008) concluded that for their sample of male consumers living in Canada, Morocco and Taiwan“familiarity has a significant and substantial impact on COO evaluations” (p.96) .

H2:Greater familiarity with a global brand increases the likelihood of global brand purchase.

3.3 Brand Liking

While brand familiarity is predominantly a cognitive process, brand liking invokes an affective response within consumers.de Houwer (2008) stated, “A core assumption in marketing research is that consumers tend to buy brands and products that they like” (p.151) .Anselmsson, Johansson&Persson (2008) defined brand liking as the“evaluative and global measurement capturing how positive and strong the perceived brand assets are from a consumer perspective” (p.66) .Boutie (1994) extended the concept by noting that brand liking“seeks to build consumers'positive attitude toward a brand based on the belief that it cares about them (or addresses them) as individuals” (p.4) .While intuitively attractive, global brand liking is an underdeveloped area of market research.Few studies of both the general construct of brand trust and/or its relationship to global brands exist.The research reported here contributes to the extant literature on brand liking.

H3:Stronger global brand liking increases the likelihood of global brand purchase intent.

3.4 Brand Trust

Trust is an elusive concept (Elliot&Percy, 2007) and can be thought of as an individual characteristic, as a characteristic of interpersonal relations and/or as an institutional attribute (Lewicki&Bunker, 1995) .Rotter (1971) defined trust as“a generalized expectancy held by an individual or group that a word, promise, verbal or written statement of another individual or group can be relied on” (p.1) .Barney and Hansen (1994) added the idea of hurt and harm when they defined trust as“The mutual confidence that no party to an exchange will exploit another's vulnerabilities” (p.176) .Finally, Bhattacharya, Devinney&Pilluta (1998) highlighted the protective nature of trust when they defined trust as“an expectancy of positive (or nonnegative) outcomes that one can receive based on the expected action of another party in an interaction characterized by uncertainty” (p.462) .Trust thus involves commitment, risk and mutuality.Trust is also a dynamic concept that is always contingent.“The amount of knowledge necessary for trust is somewhere between total knowledge and total ignorance.Given total knowledge there is no need for trust and given total ignorance there is no basis upon which to rationally trust” (Mc Allister, 1995, p.26) .

Delgado-Ballester, Munera-Alemain and Yague-Gullien (2003) defined brand trust as“The confident expectations of the brand's reliability and intentions in situations entailing risk to the consumer” (p.37) .Brand trust has also been defined as“the confidence a consumer develops in the brand's reliability and integrity” (Chatterjee&Chaudhuri, 2005, p.2) .Brand trust has been linked with brand loyalty (Lau&Lee, 1999) as well as increased market share and advertising efficiency (Chatterjee&Chaudhuri, 2005) .

Of recent interest has been the question of whether brands vary in terms of trust.Romaniuk and Bogomolova (2005) studied this question by controlling for brand size effects when they assessed trust scores of 110 local brands in 13 markets in subjects living in the United Kingdom and Australia.They found little variation in brand trust scores when controlling for market share.They concluded that“trust is more like a‘hygiene'factor in that all brands have to have a certain level of trust to be competitive in the market” (Romaniuk&Bogomolova, 2005, p.371) .If brands do not vary greatly in terms of trust, would the same hold true when consumers were asked to evaluate specifically their trust in a global brand?

H4:Global brand trust increases the likelihood to purchase a global brand.

3.5 Ethnocentrism

There is an extensive literature on ethnocentrism primarily because it's a pervasive aspect of all global transactions–not just marketing transactions.Furthermore, consumer ethnocentrism can act as a mediating variable in any COO and global brand evaluation.Ethnocentrism is defined as“the local proclivity of people to view their own group as the center of the universe, to interpret other social units from the perspective of their own group, and to reject persons who are culturally dissimilar while blindingly accepting those what are culturally like themselves” (Shimp&Sharma, 1987, p.280) .Ethnocentrism works unconsciously within individuals, thus making it a powerful, yet unacknowledged, influencer in decision making.Shimp and Sharma (1987) developed the CET scale to measure consumer ethnocentrism and described the psychological and sociological roots of the phenomenon in succeeding research (Sharma, Shimp&Shin, 1995) .Consumer ethnocentrism has been more recently termed“domestic country bias” (Balabanis and Diamantopoulos, 2004, p.80) .

Empirical research has identified differences in domestic country bias between consumers living in developed versus developing countries (Batra et al., 2000;Upadhyay&Singh, 2006) .The former clearly favored domestic over foreign prod-ucts, while the latter favored the opposite.Research by Bawa (2004) indicated that contrary to earlier findings that consumers from developing countries were biased toward imported over domestic products, “the label‘made in India'is not a liability.The Indian consumer will not lap up foreign goods merely because of their‘made in'tags” (p.43) .

H5:Individuals with strongly held ethnocentric beliefs prefer to buy domestic brands over global brands.

3.6 Cosmopolitanism

Another consumer characteristic closely linked with global brands is cosmopolitanism.Cosmopolitanism has its origin in sociology and cultural studies and refers to the fact that some individuals perceive themselves to be more“worldly”and less provincial than others.Skrbis, Kendall and Woodward (2004) suggested that cosmopolitanism is“a conscious openness to the world and to cultural differences” (p.117) .Cleveland and Laroche (2007) included cosmopolitanism as a subscale in their research aimed at developing a composite scale assessing acculturation to global consumer culture.In their confirmation study, their 11-item subscale had a very robust, Cronbach alpha of.906.In their six-country study, cosmopolitanism was a positive predictor of owning a personal portable stereo, CD and DVD players, a television set, a digital camera, a computer, a mobile phone, ATM and computer usage, Web surfing and E-mail, and DVD purchasing.Additionally, cosmopolitanism influenced purchase of a washing machine, a hair dryer, a vacuum, a refrigerator, and a microwave oven (Cleveland, Laroche, &Papadopoulos, 2009) .

H6:Individuals with strongly held cosmopolitan values prefer to buy global brands over domestic brands.

3.7 Global-Local Identity

As the above discussion of cosmopolitanism indicates, consumers hold many beliefs about themselves.Global-local identity extends the concepts of consumer self-identity.Zhang&Khare (2009) stated that individuals with local identities“have faith in and respect for local traditions and customs, are interested in local events, and recognize the uniqueness of local communities” (p.525) .Individuals with a global identity, in contrast, “believe in the positive effects of globalization, recognize the commonalities rather than dissimilarities among people around the world, and are interested in global events;broadly, being global means identifying with people around the world” (Zhang&Khare, 2009, p.525) .Global-local identities are complex, since individuals can maintain both local and global identities without much cognitive dissonance.In the context of global brands, individuals with local identities would/should prefer local brands;while consumers with global identities would/should prefer global brands.

H7:Individuals with strong local identities prefer to buy local brands over global brands.

3.8 Global Consumer Culture

Robertson (1987) defined globalization as“the crystallization of the world as a single space” (p.38) .Robertson's definition fits well within the established conceptualization of globalization as a series of“flows, ”across transnational boundaries, “of virtually everything that characterizes modern life:flows of capital, commodities, people, knowledge, information, ideas, crime, pollution, diseases, fashions, beliefs, images and so forth” (Tomlinson, 2007, p.352) .These“flows”enable brands to travel the world.Corporate marketing practice supports consumer experiences that“global brands[are]on the center stage.The evidence is everywhere:on the streets, in stores, in the media.Global brands are exerting their power and influence within various domains” (zsomer&Altaras, 2008, p.1) .

This tendency to homogenize markets has resulted in a global consumer culture.A global consumer culture emerges because not only consumers'needs are convergent across national boundaries but also because firms intentionally maintain a consistent global consumer culture positioning strategy in all markets (Alden, Steenkamp, &Batra, 1999) .Further, a global consumer culture positioning strategy can have either a local emphasis or a foreign emphasis.A local emphasis is“a strategy that associates the brand with local cultural meanings, reflects the local culture's norms and identities, is portrayed as consumed by local people in the national culture” (Alden, Steenkamp, &Batra, 1999, p.77) .A foreign consumer culture position, in contrast, stresses“the brand as symbolic of a specific foreign consumer culture;that is, a brand whose personality, use occasion, and/or user group are associated with a foreign culture” (Alden, Steenkamp, &Batra, 1999, p.77) .These two global consumer culture-positioning strategies dovetail with global-local identity discussed above.

H8:Individuals who strongly identify with a global consumer culture will prefer to buy the global brand over the domestic brand.

3.9 Exposure to multinational advertising

Closely linked with global consumer culture is exposure to multinational advertising.Consumers must be exposed not only to the global product but also to the global values which the product expresses.Frequently, but not exclusively, this exposure is through advertising (Arnould, 2011) .Mertz, He and Alden (2008) note that“advertising cross-culturally creates desires for the advertised products or services-whether affordable or not–and, as such, becomes associated with the inherent symbolism of those offerings” (p.172) -thereby simultaneously creating and reinforcing a global consumer culture.

H9:Individuals exposed to multinational advertising will be more likely to identify with and buy global brands over domestic brands.

4 GLOBAL BRAND PURCHASE MODEL

Models of consumer behavior suggest that consumer decision making is very complex (Lavidge-Steiner, 1961;Engel, Kollat&Blackwell, 1973) .Hierarchy-of-effects models help simplify information processing as a sequence of perceptual and cognitive processes.AIDA (awareness-interest-desireaction) is one well-known model.As a more specific and nuanced application, Percy and Elliot (2005) have summarized the brand communication process in terms of four stages:Category need-brand awareness-brand attitude-brand purchase intent.To date, though, few researchers have developed a hierarchical model specifically for global brands.The model outlined in Figure 1 attempts to fill that gap.Figure 1 also summarizes the relational influence of the attitudinal constructs described above (ethnocentrism, cosmopolitanism, global-local identify, global consumer culture and multinational advertising) on global brand purchase intent.

4.1 Research Methodology

The objective of this empirical study was to evaluate the relative contribution of each construct presented in Figure 1 (country COO, global brand familiarity, global brand liking, global brand trust) as an independent predictor of global brand purchase intent and to determine whether ethnocentrism, cosmopolitanism, global-local identify, global consumer culture and multinational advertising influenced purchase intent as well.

Ten global brands were chosen for this research.Table 1presents the global brands tested.These global brands were chosen to cover a wide variety of product categories (consumer electronics, fashion, banking, personal care products and automobiles) .In addition, the global brands chosen included low involvement (Colgate) and high involvement (BMW, Prada) products.Four brands were specifically chosen for their clear COO associations:BMW (Germany) , Chanel (France) , Haier (China) and Levi's (The United States) .All global brands were available in the PRC when the research was conducted (March-May 2010) .

Five point Likert-scales measured each construct.Importance of knowing a brand's COO ranged from“not at all important”to“very important.”Global brand familiarity ranged from“not at all familiar”to“very familiar”on a 5-point scale.Global brand trust was scaled“no trust at all”to“total trust.”Similarly, liking the brand ranged from“like nothing about the brand”to“like everything about the brand”on a 5-point scale.Finally, likelihood to purchase was a 5-point scale that ranged from“never purchase”to“always purchase.”It should be noted that these questions about the brands were phrased with a caveat, “if you were able”to purchase the brand.

Five attitudinal scales were designed to tap various aspects of consumer decision making:ethnocentrism, cosmopolitanism, global-local identity, global consumer culture and awareness of multinational advertising.All the scales used were subsets of previously published and validated survey instruments.Table 2 presents the attitudinal items used, and each scale's source, Cronbach alphas, and the factor loading for each item.

Note:A Principle Components Factor Analysis with Varimax Rotation was utilized for all the scales.1Item was not included in the final scale due to low factor loading.2Item was not included in the final scale due to low factor loading.

4.2 Recruitment of Respondents

A four-phase recruitment procedure was utilized for this study.

Phase 1:Selection of key distributors

A personally addressed e-mail was sent to key distributors who have ability to understand both Chinese and English.The key distributors agreed to cooperate in an ongoing global brand study.The key distributors were composed of the Dean of Shanghai Normal University, Shanghai;a faculty member of Jishou University, Hunan;and 10 Chinese for whom researchers have contact information previously.After receiving confirmation from the key distributors, researchers made phone contact with them.During the conversation, researchers explained the purpose of this study and encouraged them to disseminate this information to their acquaintances in China.When researchers sent an English e-mail to the key distributors, it was translated into Chinese and was then distributed to the participants.

Phase 2:Invitation

Two ways of approaching the participants were used: (1) personal invitation by e-mail (in Chinese) from key distributors and (2) a discussion board in the Chinese social network (online community) .In terms of personal invitation, each participant received an e-mail inviting him or her to participate in a confidential Global Brand Survey via the web.The message was distributed from the key distributors in order to avoid having it viewed as a junk e-mail.The e-mail included a brief introduction to the survey and a hypertext link contained within the message.When participants clicked the link, their computer's default web browser was directed to surveymonkey.com, an online survey research site, where the complete questionnaire was accessible in Chinese.The e-mail also included additional instructions on how to access the survey by typing in a URL when the browser was not able to launch the survey site appropriately.In the invitation message, participants were assured that the data they provided were transmitted to a secured site, remained confidential, and would be used only for the purposes of this study.The hypertext link could be used only once to access the questionnaire.When the participants attempted to access the site again, a message was provided that they already completed the survey and it was no longer available for access.

The second approach to participants was through Chinese social networks (Online community) that key distributors were engaged in.The members of communities were mainly those who graduated from their college and employed in the various companies.The purpose of the online community is to keep their social network after they graduated from their schools.Within the online community, each key distributor can send a message to every member.The key distributors posted a brief introduction to the survey and a hypertext link in the message.In addition, the key distributors encouraged their friend's family member to participate in this study.

Phase 3:First reminders

Four weeks after the first e-mail message was sent to the participants and after the survey database was checked for the number of participants, a reminder e-mail message was sent to those participants who had not yet responded.This message includes the same information as the first e-mail (short introduction and hypertext link to the web questionnaire) in case the previous e-mail message had not been delivered to the person.The same information was provided in the online community.

Phase 4:Second reminders

Four weeks after the first reminder e-mail, a second reminder message was sent, after the survey database was again checked.Key distributors sent an e-mail reminder to the participants to encourage them to complete the survey.The same information was provided in the online community.

5 RESULTS

5.1 Respondent Profiles

The study sample consisted of 296 Chinese aged 19–60years, who currently hold Chinese citizenship and reside in the People's Republic of China (See Table 3) .The majority of the sample was female, 63.2%.Almost 41%had some college or university work, while 55.2%had a bachelor's degree or better.The majority of the sample was not married at 83.8%.Almost 47%were unemployed while 52.7%were employed part-time or full-time.The average age of the respondents was 24.8 years.

Respondents indicated they did not particularly feel a part of the global consumer culture with an average of 7.9 out of a possible 15 (See Table 4) .Chinese respondents definitely felt more cosmopolitan and saw global advertising.In terms of their global-local identities, respondents felt more bound by local traditions and felt the local way of life was harmed by globalization.However, they were more ethnocentric having a mean of7.7 out of 20.There was a disparity between their cosmopolitan views and their more inward leanings in terms of appreciating the local way of life and their more ethnocentric world view.

Note:For global consumer culture, scores can range from 3 to 15.For cosmopolitanism, scores can range from 3 to 15.For multinational advertising, scores can range from 4 to 20.For global-local, scores can range from 2 to 10.For ethnocentrism, scores can range from 4 to 20.

5.2 Means for Familiarity, Trust, Liking, COO, and Pur-chase

Intent For familiarity, Chinese respondents indicated the least familiarity with Prada (2.92) , Zara (3.04) , Avon (3.15) , and Levi's (3.21) .The greatest level of familiarity was for Haier (4.23) , Colgate (4.22) , and Samsung (4.10) See Table 5.

Note:Based on Tukey Kramer multiple comparisons, difference between means greater than 0.30 were significant at p≤0.05 for familiarity (See Table 5) .For trust, mean differences greater than 0.36 were significant at p≤0.05.For liking, mean differences greater than 0.37 were significant at p≤0.05.For strong-weak, mean differences greater than 0.33 were significant at p≤0.05.For COO, mean differences greater than 0.41 were significant at p≤0.05.For purchase intent, mean differences greater than 0.36 were significant at p≤0.05.

Concerning trust, the least trusted global brand was Zara at 2.59.The most trusted global brands were BMW (4.34) , Chanel (4.16) , Haier (4.08) , and Levi's (3.99) .For liking, the least liked global brand was Avon at 2.50.The most liked global brands were BMW (4.0) , Chanel (3.88) , Haier (3.66) , and Prada (3.66) .For knowing the country-oforigin, respondents felt it was most important for the brands BMW and Haier both at 3.38 and for Chanel at 3.13.The least need-to-know country-of-origin was Avon at 2.26.Finally for purchase intent, the brand most likely to be purchased was Colgate at 4.11.The least likely brand to be purchased was HSBC at 2.23.

5.3 Regressions

Separate stepwise multiple regressions were run for the ten brands.The dependent variable was likelihood of purchase of the brand while the independent variables included familiarity with the brand, degree of trust in the brand, degree of liking the brand, and importance of knowing the county-of-origin of the brand.The highest VIF value was 2.3 for trust in Haier with all the remaining VIF values across all the models being below 2.1.All values indicate that multicollinearity was not a problem for any of the models (See Table 6) .

Most of the models were robust in their predictive ability.The exceptions were BMW with an adjusted R2of 0.122 and HSBC with an adjusted R2of 0.213.The most frequently occurring significant predictor across the ten models was global brand liking (7 times) .This confirms H3 that global brand liking increases the likelihood of purchasing global brands.The only brands where brand liking did not occur were BMW, HSBC and Levi's.

Global brand familiarity was a predictor for seven brands, including Avon, BMW, Chanel, Colgate, Levi's, Prada, and Zara.This data would confirm H2, that familiarity with a global brand increases the likelihood of purchase intention.Trust was a significant predictor six times with the exceptions being Avon, BMW, Chanel, and Prada thus giving confirmatory evidence that greater global brand trust increases the likelihood of purchase (H4) .COO was a significant predictor for only Avon.Thus, COO did not have an effect on purchase intent.H1 was not confirmed.

For the most part, the attitudinal scales that were used as predictors in the models had limited predictive ability.They appeared in five of the models.Ethnocentrism, desire to emulate global consumer culture, and multinational advertising did not appear as a predictor in any of the models.H5, H8, and H9 were not confirmed.Cosmopolitanism appeared in one model, Colgate, thus not confirming H6.

Global-Local Identity appeared in four models:Chanel, Haier, HSBC, and Prada.When the construct was significant, all weights for Global-Local were negative weight.For Global-Local Identity, the negative loadings indicated that respondents tended to disagree with the three statements in the scale:

·I believe that the local way of life is harmed by globalization.

·I respect my local traditions.

·I believe parents should pass along local customs to their children.

There was limited support for H7.

The only demographic to appear in the models was gender.Males were more likely than females to have higher purchase intent for HSBC while males were less likely to be interested in the purchase of Zara.

6 DISCUSSION

As noted above (Table 5) , Colgate, Haier and Samsung had the highest mean score for global brand familiarity.This is not surprising, since Chinese consumers view all three brands favorably.Colgate, for example, has had a huge impact on Chinese life.Since the brand was introduced in China, it has achieved high penetration rates in Chinese market.The Chinese believe that Colgate was very successful in creating various flavors (such as green tea and honey) and introducing new product design (such as a tub design for children) that helps meet the needs of such domestic products in the Chinese market.In addition, Colgate is positioned as being of high quality and an inexpensive brand.Advertising expenditures are strong for the brand.

Haier is a very interesting brand in that it scored higher on all of the variables (familiarity, trust, liking, COO, and purchase intention) .This brand projects a unique image to the Chinese.They see Haier as a representation of China because it is the first global brand from China.In addition, Chinese view Haier as a high quality company.

Samsung is a brand that is seen by most Chinese as limited to the electronics market.For example, many Chinese attributed the image of Samsung mainly to cell phone products, even though Samsung produces various products such as TV, monitors, printer, semi-conductors, etc.Despite of the limited view point of the brand, Chinese see the Samsung brand as user friendly because they find it simpler to input text message in the cell phone.The innovative design of the phone is also more up to date with advanced features.

Table 6 supports earlier research (Deli-Grey, Haefner, &Rosenbloom, 2012) that brand liking is the strongest overall predictor of global brand purchase intent.In this regard, these respondents appeared similar to respondents in Hungary and Bulgaria, where similar research was conducted (Rosenbloom, Marcheva, &Haefner, 2011) .

For Colgate, HSBC and Levi's, trust was the strongest predictor.One possible explanation for this finding is the hedonic-utilitarian classification of products.Products that emphasize pleasure and affective emotions are hedonic while products that stress functional attributes are utilitarian.Trust can be linked with utilitarian product benefits, while liking is more associated with hedonic products.It seems reasonable to speculate that toothpaste is most valued for its many utilitarian benefits (fresh breath, white teeth, etc.) and that HSBC is a similarly valued for its utilitarian benefits (safety of deposits, security of ATM machines, etc.) .Similarly, Levi's, a quintessential American brand, might be valued for its utilitarian benefits as well.In this case, trust equals quality.While more expensive than domestic, Chinese jeans brands, Levi's are noted for their stringent quality control in manufacturing.

Lastly and perhaps the most interesting finding is the absence of most of the attitudinal scales as independent predictors of global brand purchase intent.While the research described in the literature review suggests many interesting conceptual ideas, by and large, respondent orientation towards ethnocentrism (the desire to emulate global consumer culture) and exposure to multinational advertising were not predictors of purchasing these global brands.

Only global-local identity had limited predictive power.Since the loadings in all cases were negative, this finding seems to suggest that this respondent group moderated both traditional Chinese values (many of which are Confucian) and the collective often associated with Chinese culture (Hofstede, 2001) .

2015中国消费者报告 篇2

中国消费者

中国消费者

IFB进口食品专区-全国糖酒会 · 2015-07-02 09:21

资料来源：凯度消费者指数，版权归于原作者

贝恩公司已经连续第四年与凯度消费者指数合作，跟踪调查四万户中国大陆家庭的真实购物行为。与前几年一样，我们为每户样本家庭配备了专业扫描仪，即时收集消费者的实际购物记录，而非他们口头描述的购物行为。这一独特的方法能够清楚地向我们展示消费者在106个快速消费品品类上的购物行为。

市场概况：中国快速消费品市场增速放缓

受中国整体经济增速放缓的影响，我们研究的多个快速消费品领域（包装食品、饮料和家庭护理）销售额增长持续下降。快速消费品的增速在所有级别城市均出现放缓迹象，但下线城市增速高于上线城市。

这种变化十分明显：2011-12年快速消费品增速在12%左右，2013-14年下跌至5.4%，2015年一季度仅为4.4%。我们的调查显示2014年下半年快速消费品销售额增速略有回升，主要得益于护肤品品类，尤其是小品牌的护肤品、面膜和爽肤水的销售增长稳健。总体来说，大品牌的市场份额正逐渐流失至小品牌。此外，护肤品品类中，专卖店、网络和海淘的销售呈现强劲增长。

家庭护理和个人护理销量增速的放缓以及包装食品和饮料绝对销量的下跌（见图1）是导致快速消费品增速放缓的原因。整体上，2014年快速消费品平均售价的增速高于2013年，这在一定程度上抵消了销量增长下降带来的负面影响。平均售价实际上涨了5.4%，是通胀率的2倍多。其中，饮料和个人护理产品价格上涨最为明显（见图2）。以饮料中最大两个品类酸奶和牛奶为例，酸奶平均售价上涨近17%，牛奶价格上涨也达9%以上。

图1: 2014年包装食品和饮料销量下滑，拉低了销售额的增长

图2: 个人护理和家庭护理用品的销量增长率显著下降，但个人护理用品的平均售价增长率较高

导致某些品类销量增速急剧下跌的原因有几个。比如，天气对饮料品类来说是一个关键因素。中国在2013年经历了一个极度炎热的夏天，导致该年度饮料销量大增。而2014年的夏天相对较凉快，消费者的饮料购买量也相对较少。2014年持续开展的反腐倡廉运动对包装食品和饮料品类均产生了重大打击，因为这些品类以往会被消费者作为礼品来购买。

中国国家统计局的数据显示，自2011年以来中国城市家庭数量以每年2.6%的速度保持稳步增长，成为推动快速消费品增长的主要动力之一。但家庭平均快速消费品支出的增长近年来仅略高于通胀率，显著低于家庭可支配收入的增长速度（见图3）。这也就意味着快速消费品支出占中国购物者可支配收入的比例在逐年下降。图3: 城镇家庭数量稳步增长，但每户家庭购买快速消费品支出的增速下降，且明显低于家庭可支配收入的增长率针对这种趋势，一种可能的解释是中国消费者增加了在其他消费行为上的支出，比如旅游与休闲、汽车、智能手机、空气净化器和净水器等环境相关产品，这些类别均以两位数的速度在增长。这种趋势也反应了中国的消费市场正在走向成熟，即购物者在日常用品上的支出比例逐渐减少，在生活方式相关品类上的支出比例则逐渐增加。

中国上线城市依然是快速消费品的重要阵地，但并非增长最快的地方（见图4）。快速消费品在一线和二线城市的增长速度显著放缓。2014年，上线城市家庭零售市场年复合增长率仅为2%，而下线城市（三、四、五线城市）为7.7%。与一线城市近年来的增速放缓模式类似，二线城市也经历了明显的减速过程，增长速度从2013年的7.4%下降至2014年的2.3%。因此我们看到很多快速消费品企业正在重新布局市场营销和销售资源，向下线城市发展。

图4: 上线城市的快速消费品销售额增长率显著放缓；相对而言，下线城市实现了较快的增长价格趋势：高端化与大众化

不同品类的价格趋势不尽相同。对于某些品类，中国购物者愿意支付更高的价格。我们发现2012年至2014年期间不同品类的平均售价年增长率差异很大。比如，酸奶的平均售价每年上涨达13.5%，而面巾纸的平均售价在2012年至2014年期间则以每年1.8%的速度下跌（见图5）

不同品类的价格趋势不尽相同。对于某些品类，中国购物者愿意支付更高的价格。例如在酸奶、啤酒、瓶装水和护肤品品类上，中国购物者愿意为消费升级买单，选择更高端的单品。

图5: 我们所研究各品类中的平均售价年增长率存在较大差异，从13.5%到-1.8%不等

我们将所研究的品类分为两组，一组平均售价年增长率高于中国的通胀率，称为高端化品类，另一组平均售价年增长率低于通胀率，称为大众化品类。16个高端化品类主要是与健康或提升生活品质相关的品类。对这些品类，消费者越来越多地选择购买更高端的单品（即某一品类中售价高出同品类平均价格20%的单品）。比如，酸奶、啤酒、瓶装水和护肤品均出现消费升级的现象，高端单品的市场占比显著上升。酸奶销量的38%来自高端单品。进口产品占据了这类高端单品中的很大一部分，并且增长速度比国产产品更快，（见图6和图7）。由于消费者重视健康问题，这一点在与健康相关的品类中表现尤为明显，可能他们认为进口产品比国产产品更为安全。图6: 以酸奶和啤酒为例，高端化品类中高端单品的销量占比持续增长

图7: 在高端化趋势最明显的几个品类中，进口产品的市场份额高，或增速快于市场平均值

与之相对的另一组大众化品类共包含碳酸饮料和衣物柔顺剂等10个品类。这些品类的平均售价与高端化品类呈现完全相反的态势。比如，2012年至2014年间，碳酸饮料的平均售价每年仅上涨了2.1%，衣物洗涤用品每年仅上涨1.5%。同时期内，卫生纸价格每年上升1.1%，巧克力价格平均每年下降0.4%，面巾纸价格平均每年下跌1.8%。我们发现这样一条规律：价格增长较慢的品类在促销期间的售出比例高于其他品类。例如，2014年平均19%的快速消费品是在促销期间售出的，而同时期内，卫生纸和衣物洗涤用品品类（均为大众化品类）的这一比例分别是32%和28%（见图8和图9）

我们发现这样一条规律，即价格增长较慢的品类，如卫生纸、碳酸饮料和衣物柔顺剂等，在促销期间的售出比例高于其他品类。

图8: 大众化品类中，同类单品价格下降，高端单品增长不明显图9: 大众化品类的促销活动更频繁，特别是家庭护理用品品类

渠道演变：小型现代渠道和电子商务蓬勃发展

中国购物者已经以开放的姿态迎接了零售行业的两次重大革命：现代渠道的持续扩张和电子商务的蓬勃增长。现代渠道不断扩张，逐步蚕食传统渠道份额。传统杂货店渠道的增长速度已经下降至0.6%，低于通胀率（见图10）。

图10: 面对电商渠道的强大攻势，传统渠道不断丢失市场份额，大卖场渠道增速放缓

然而，现代渠道目前并未实现均匀增长。我们首次分别跟踪了大卖场以及超市、小超市和便利店的绩效表现。大卖场增速缩减过半，从2013年的7.9%下降至2014年的3.7%。2014年，中国家庭光顾大卖场的次数同比减少5%，而且单次购物的件数也有所减少，但售出产品的包装规格更大且平均售价更高，这在一定程度缓解了大卖场渠道的总体下行趋势（见图11）。图11: 大卖场客流持续下降，但包装规格和平均售价的上升抵消了客流和单次购物量的下降尽管大卖场的客流量减少且增速放缓，超市、小超市和便利店等小型业态的客流量则保持相对稳定。这说明零售商有机会面向现金越来越充裕、但时间越来越少的城市消费者开设能够提供购物便利性的店铺。尽管超市和小超市渠道销售额的增速从2013年的11.2%下降至2014年的9.1%，便利店销售额的增速从8.9%下降为7.1%，但两类渠道的增速都显著高于整体快速消费品零售市场5.4%的增速。这些小型业态渠道的增长得益于售出产品的包装尺寸变大和平均售价提高（见图12）。

图 12: 相比大卖场而言，超市/小超市/便利店的客流稳定，在包装规格和平均售价的带动下保持增长

在小超市等实体店遍布全国的同时，中国也已经成为世界最大的电子商务市场。电商销售额目前仅占快速消费品行业总销售额的3.3%，但是其增速喜人，在2014年达到34%。电子商务渗透率也高达36%，购物者一年内平均四次在线上购买快速消费品（比2013年提高7%）。每单购买量也有所提高（见图13）。2014年全国各地以及各个品类的网上购物均保持了这种势头。

图13: 渗透率、购物频率和客单量的上升是电商渠道增长的主要驱动力

然而，我们的研究还表明76%的网上购物者每年网购的次数并未超过四次。这些低频购物者的消费额占线上购物总消费额的36%。这也意味着未来电子商务仍有增长空间。

2014年各级别城市的网购渗透率和购买频率均有所提高，逐渐形成明显趋势。渗透率和购买频率最高的是一线城市，比五线城市要高出两倍多。但是在一线城市，客单量的增长趋于停滞，平均售价也低于其他下线城市（见图14）。

图14: 一线城市客单量停滞不前；随着购物者日益成熟，平均售价在各级别城市均出现下跌

我们的研究揭示了一个比较有趣的趋势：随着消费者对网购的接受度提高，线上购买的快速消费品的平均售价却有所下降。快速消费品中的化妆品和婴儿相关品类在线上销售中占据主导地位（见图15）。其中护肤品、婴儿配方奶粉和婴儿纸尿片占所有快速消费品线上销售的一半以上。这三种主要品类无论从网购渗透率还是销售额来看，均超出其他快速消费品品类（见图16）。购物者最先在网上购买的快速消费品通常是这些售价相对较高的品类。然而，随着线上活跃度提高，他们通常会将购买范围扩展至平均售价较低的品类。尽管如此，线上的平均售价仍然明显高于线下渠道，这反映了线上和线下截然不同的购买品类组合。

图15: 化妆品和婴儿产品仍是电子商务渠道的主要品类，但其他品类正在快速赶上

图16: 婴儿产品和化妆品在电商渠道取得了较高的渗透率和销售额

基础设施的快速扩张支撑着中国线上零售的发展。新增基础设施提升了电商购物的便利程度，并且使之迅速成为快速消费品购物者心目中比传统零售渠道更方便可行的替代渠道。例如，国内的第三方在线支付系统在各方面均日趋成熟，它们近年来的成功发展助推了网上购物的增长。

同时，中国的物流体系也实现了显著进步。2014年，中国的快递公司递送了140亿件包裹，6家大型知名快递公司的日均配送量均超过百万件。规模效应使这些物流公司配送成本几乎减半。得益于物流公司的大规模投资，网上零售商如今可以在两天内完成对大部分一、二、三线城市的商品配送，其他地区则可在四天内完成配送。

中国购物者正迅速向移动电商跃进。事实上，今年中国的移动电商交易量可能会居世界之首。贝恩分析发现，在2013年有过网购经历的中国消费者中，有80%利用智能手机完成过至少一次在线购买，而20%的网购者每周都使用手机购物。为此，一些公司也投资开发移动应用程序，方便消费者在手机上浏览和购买产品。

中外品牌对峙：硝烟依旧

在我们研究的26个快速消费品品类中，本土品牌已经连续三年从国际竞争对手手中争得市场份额。2014年，本土公司总体增速为10%，继续领军整个市场，如今约占26个品类市场销售额的70%左右（见图17）。2014年市场增长的87%由这些本土品牌贡献。本土公司在18个品类中从外资公司手中赢得市场份额。其中最大的份额增长来自护肤品、衣物柔顺剂、化妆品、婴儿配方奶粉、果汁和饼干。

图17: 中国本土品牌占主导地位，拥有约7成市场份额，贡献了8成以上的市场增量

总体来看，外资品牌2014年的增速为3%。外资品牌在大部分品类丧失了市场份额，只在8个品类中实现了市场份额提升，包括卫生纸、啤酒、护发素和口香糖（见图18）。外资公司在各级别城市均流失了市场份额，在以往他们最具竞争力的一线城市中尤为明显（见图19）。此分析结果是基于品类和城市级别的整体视角，并不意味着单个外资品牌在其所属品类中遭遇失败。这只是说明，整体而言本土公司随时间推移越来越具备竞争力，并能利用其下线城市的网点布局实现更高的市场增速。

图18: 2014年大部分品类中，外资品牌份额均有所下降

图19: 外资品牌在所有级别城市的市场份额均有所下降，即便在外资品牌曾经占据较大优势的上线城市亦是如此

在本报告分析的26个品类中，本土品牌在多个食品饮料品类中占有最大市场份额，唯一例外的是由外资公司率先推出的巧克力、口香糖、碳酸饮料和婴儿配方奶粉等品类。本土品牌的战略规划完善、执行力强，并因此成功吸引了中国购物者，在18个品类收获颇丰。例如，在护肤品领域，本土品牌百雀羚从下线城市起步，逐步通过升级产品和建立高端品牌形象的方法提高其在上线城市的渗透率。衣物柔顺剂品牌广州立白通过大规模且有针对性的营销投资带动市场份额增长，例如为广受欢迎的电视节目《我是歌手》提供赞助。同样，对于综艺节目的大胆投资也帮助化妆品品牌韩束提升了线下渠道的渗透率，从国际竞争对手手中赢得更多市场份额。在果汁品类中，天地壹号的产品组合迎合了中国购物者对营养健康饮料的需求，因而取得成功。饼干新品牌江中猴姑则基于中国传统食疗理念进行创新而制胜市场。猴姑饼干于2013年末由一家医药公司推出，主打健康和高端品质形象。2014年，它从国际竞争对手手中赢得近2%的市场份额。作为一个新品牌，它如今面临的挑战是如何在市场上将成功延续下去。

尽管本土品牌业绩表现突出，但外资快速消费品公司依然在8个品类中实现了份额增长。例如，隶属于APP集团的清风纸巾重点推广几大主要单品，实现了2.1%的市场份额提升。得益于中国购物者的消费升级，百威和喜力都从本土啤酒品牌手中赢得部分市场份额。在护发素品类中，欧莱雅通过多项举措提高自身的市场份额，例如扩大在下线城市的分销渠道、配置店内护发顾问和推出琉彩之韵精华露和金致护发精油等新产品。施华蔻通过推出斐丝丽染发膏和恒时珍粹系列等高端产品线加速增长。借助渠道扩张和产品线延伸，炫迈在口香糖品类抢占了2.4%的市场份额。

图20: 本土零售商是过去三年零售商增长的主要驱动力

在研究中，我们还追踪了本土和外资零售商的业绩表现。我们得出的结论是，与消费品相同，在零售领域大部分市场增长由本土公司贡献（见图20）。零售渠道的详细情况将在《2015年中国购物者报告》系列二中加以详述。

对品牌的启示上述发现反映出中国快速消费品市场的一种“新常态”。增长放缓，特别是在一线城市已经成为常态，价格趋势成为关注焦点，渠道格局逐渐演变，本土品牌继续提升市场份额。这些趋势已经迫使消费品公司，包括外资和本土品牌，认真审视自身的成本结构和运营模式。成本控制、决策制定与执行的速度是深度投资品牌和分销能力的关键助推因素。同时，这些趋势也带来了新的机遇。快速消费品公司如果想要抓住这些机遇，就应当关注下述几大要点：

 随着上线城市市场日趋成熟，品牌商应该瞄准发展更迅速的下线城市购物者，他们对优质产品仍充满期待。

 清晰了解自身品类的价格动态。如果品类向高端化发展，可以考虑建立适宜的产品组合或者加大研发投资以提升产品溢价。由于只有少数创新有助于可持续增长，公司必须要专注于对“明星”单品（即最有潜力赢得现在和未来购物者和零售商的单品）的研发创新或升级更新。如果品类呈现大众化趋势，品牌商则应当有效利用具针对性的促销活动提升性价比、鼓励新的购物者尝试购买产品。

 研究并了解如何利用中国繁荣的电子商务市场接触和赢得新顾客，从而提升产品的市场渗透率。鉴于购物者和竞争对手均步入数字化时代，企业有必要优先考虑数字化战略。一些公司甚至可以考虑全面的数字化转型，从建立营销、电子商务、物流和客户关系管理（CRM）等各运营层面的数字化能力入手，调整并完善运营模式。

 充分把握超市和便利店的增长机会，比如针对这些小型门店业态和消费者购买习惯调整产品组合。同时，应积极洞察消费者购物行为，了解品类规律以及销售背后的驱动因素。

中国消费者变脸 篇3

历史的年轮即将进入21世纪的一零年代。对于未来的十年，中国的消费者到底会发生哪些变化?中国的消费者的消费行为和消费结构会发生哪些变化呢?个人认为，有以下5点。

1中国消费者结构独生子女阶层将成为中国消费者的主力军。时尚、流行、前卫、个性将成为这一阶层消费者的主要消费特点。今年、明年甚至五年以后的钱，他们也敢花。这就是中国未来十年这一主流消费群体的特点。

2汽车将会像十年前的移动电话一样进入中国家庭，中国进入汽车时代将会使消费者的商圈范围扩大、购物频率增加。同时，中产阶级将会大大增加，将突破1亿，这是一个巨大的增量。

3消费者由温暖型向品质型过渡。前面十年，连锁业增长最快的是以生鲜、食品为主的快速消费品、家用电器，这两个业态的发展最快。下一个十年，快速消费品的增速将会放缓。为什么呢?目前我们国家食品占恩格尔系数的占比有近40％，从目前欧美发达国家看，食品占恩格尔系数占比只有8％，因此未来食品恩格尔系数将会急剧下降。增加的是非食品、家具，以及健康、美容、休闲、娱乐、旅游等。

4农村消费者将会全面爆发。千百年来不可能实现的义务教育、农村医疗、社保将会使农民这一阶层彻底解放，农民这个群体将会成为一个比较进步的群体，而与此对应的是农村消费的全面爆发。

5无店铺销售将会大行其道，不仅仅是网购，网购只是其中之一，这将对有店铺销售发起挑战。

总之，未来十年，内需将代替出口成为推动中国经济发展的引擎，消费时代将全面来临。中国零售商将迎来一个新的收获季节。面对这一重大机遇，我们零售商准备好了吗?采购也应当根据消费需求的变化而变革。

零售商需要思考一个战略问题，那就是我们采购的不仅仅是商品，而是一种生活方式，是为一个消费者或者一个消费群体找到生活的解决方案。

那么未来十年，什么样的生活方式是最主流的消费方式呢?我认为，未来十年，消费者的生活方式、消费行为可以分为“快生活”和“慢生活”两种。快的生活方式，主要是周一到周五，年轻人群。快的生活方式，比如台湾的便利店，售卖的不仅仅是生鲜杂货，而是售卖大量服务。往往一台机器可以缴纳各种费用，一个便利店可以提供各种各样的个性化服务。我认为这种适应快节奏生活方式的店铺在大陆未来十年也会大量出现。

中国消费者救不了世界 篇4

在关于世界经济的争论中,最受关注的并非是美国,而是中国的命运。中国将成为2009年全球危机的最大牺牲品还是最成功的幸存者?迄今为止,各种报道都指向成功,这个亚洲巨人对所谓美国不景气将会引发中国衰退的陈词滥调不以为然。

在一些人看来,中国已进入新的发展阶段并正崛起为一个足以与美国相匹敌的消费者社会。但问题是推动繁荣的消费者并非个人,因为最近几年中国的购物者已出现萎缩。真正的大买家是政府。

中国的经济复苏是真实的,但政府一直是背后的买家。长期以来政府投资一直在推动中国经济繁荣,从今年初起政府投资增长了30%,其中75%投入基础设施。政府这种幕后作用遮蔽了中国依然依赖对美补贴出口的程度。广东省就是受影响最严重的地区之一。“我们依旧严重依赖出口,尤其是美国”,广东省外事办有关负责人说。这种坦诚使正在崛起的中国中产阶级消费者势将取代“沃尔玛妈妈”们的说法大打折扣。2007年,中国人的消费总额约为1.7万亿美元,相比之下美国高达12万亿。珠三角官员表示,他们正在向湖南和四川等省推销曾销往国外的电器、珠宝和鞋子,但本土销售与出口相比如同沧海一粟。越来越多的人认为美国市场出现反弹仍需多年时间,与此同时,中国市场亦需很长时间才会达到临界点。

更重要的是,最近几年中国消费者在经济中的作用正日益减退。个人消费占GDP的比重一直呈逐渐下降趋势,从1968年的60%下降到2008年的36%,这与人们印象中迅速壮大的中产阶级格格不入。

摩根斯坦利亚洲区主席斯蒂芬·罗奇表示,只有国内消费占到GDP总量的50%时,中国才能真正摆脱出口驱动型经济模式。他表示,今年年底,中国政府投资占GDP的比重将从40%升到45%,达到“我们闻所未闻的程度”。即使日本二战后重建时其政府投资也仅占GDP的34%。

此前,中国政府已经历了从危机走向复苏的过程—1997年到1998年的亚洲经济危机,还有2001年网络泡沫破灭。然而在这两次经历中,政府资金都只是权宜之计,即在全球经济复苏的过程中赢得时间。这次却不同。美欧正走向复苏之路,但出口并未出现转机。

乐观者强调北京的资金权力。“北京不存在财政困境”,里昂证券中国首席分析家安迪·罗斯曼说。由于在资金支出方面不会面临政治或法律障碍,绝大多数经济学家同意中国政府在金融信贷紧缩期间占据优势的观点。

中国已开始创建社会保障体系,将给予民众更多的消费信心。当然,日益攀升的富裕程度会同样有助于鼓励消费者支出。但中国将有必要完成从廉价、污染型的产业升级到享誉全球的品牌的转变。在没成为一个高度发达的出口大国之前,中国依然是一个落后的消费者社会。(摘自:美国《新闻周刊》2009年6月27日编译:何乐)

点评:中国目前的国民总资产,差不多已快赶上世界最发达国家—美国的水平,尽管中国人口是美国的4倍多,但中国仍应该是一个名副其实的“富裕国家”。如果把人民币的潜在升值压力也考虑在内的话,这一结论就更加确凿。但很明显,这一点也不符合我们日常的实际感受,那么问题究竟出在哪里呢?看来,所谓的“中国资产”存在显著的泡沫成分。按世行发布报告的贫困人口比例来算,中国穷人占五分之一,也就是说,五个人中就有一个穷人。

国务院研究室、中宣部研究室、中国社会科学院等部门的最新一份关于社会经济状况的调查报告,较详细地记录了社会不同阶层的经济收入:截至2009年3月底,内地私人拥有财产(不包括在境外、外国的财产)超过5000万以上的有27310人,超过1亿元以上的有3220人。超过1亿元以上者,有2932人是高干子女,他们拥有资产20450余亿元。财富的大饼如何分配,也许是今后相当长一段时间的主要课题。

A Giant COFCO

COFCO used to be a monopolistic,state-owned foodstuff import and export company.Its monopoly ended in 2004 when the country had to lift government controls on foodstuff import and export operations to fulfill its commitments to WTO.Thanks to the big profits that the company made in the past as a monopoly,COFCO has been able to complete a series of large mergers and acquisitions and expand its business in agriculture and food-processing,biomass energy production,real estate development and financial services.

Andy Xie:Dark Side of the Lending Boom

Many analysts think that an economic boom will follow in the second half of2009.They will be disappointed.Much of the lending has not been invested and has flowed into asset markets.The surge in commodity prices is fueled by China’s demand for speculative inventory.The damage is already significant.If lending doesn’t cool,this force would transfer Chinese income to foreigners and trigger stagflation for a long time to come.

Clean Energy:the Next Gold Mine?

Prompted by the government initiative to reduce the country's dependence on coal as an energy source,many Chinese firms are investing heavily in alternative energy projects.Analysts said that Chinese enterprises need to be more familiar with market demands and also pay more attention on research and innovation to obtain core technologies when they are investing in renewable energy industry.

Chinese Consumers Won't Save the World

中国数字消费者调查报告 篇5

第四，尽管互联网在三四线城市和农村普及率较低，但这些地区的大部分消费者都在使用电子商务，网购的比例分别达到了68%和60%。农村用户中的“网络达人”更是比一线及二线城市多出25%，渴望第一个尝试新的`产品和服务。

图4：农村消费者网购情况调查

图5：中国互联网普及率和网购人群分布情况

在具体数字上，第一互联网的普及率在一二线达到76%，到三四线是47%，到农村19%，但是在被渗透的这些人群当中，用过电子商务网购用户，19%普及互联网的人群里面有64%用过网购。

“很有意思的是，虽然在农村互联网覆盖率仅为19%，但是在电子商务的使用上他们跟城市居民一样活跃，”麦肯锡全球董事季翔说，“我们看到，中国一些领先的零售商已开始迅速行动，建立县级运营中心。这些举措不仅方便了商品的下乡，也加快了农产品向城区的输送。”

报告指出商家可以借助这些“网络达人”在物流和分销体系还欠发达的农村地区占领市场。

农村消费者其实他的互联网渗透率还不是那么高，很多人不一定有智能手机。但是我们看到像浙江桐庐县淘宝村店，在村里面有一间房子，里面有电脑，有宽带，村里组织会使用淘宝的人来为村民统一购买商品，他们“双十一”完成订单1229个，平均单店销售额11000元。

第五，食品网购需求的大幅增长。尽管中国消费者更倾向于在线上购买服饰类商品(66%的人在过去3个月内购买过)，但他们购买得最频繁的却是常温和生鲜食品(食品购买频次是34次/年，服饰类是22次/年)。40%的中国消费者网购食品，而美国网购食品的消费者只有10%。

图6：中国消费者喜欢网购的品类调查

中国消费者的品牌观 篇6

中国的市场特点

中国幅员辽阔，地区差异明显，因此实质上可以认为中国是一个个“迷你国家”的集合，应当按照城市而不是地区来划分它的细分市场。每个城市的文化和民族构成均有不同，而城市所在省份的富裕程度也有高有低。在北京有用的方法在上海、南京、成都等地不一定适用。

外国品牌往往通过中国的一线城市进入中国。本土的新兴品牌主导低端市场，而从二三线城市发展起来的公司则稳稳占据当地市场。中国快餐品牌乡村基在重庆的领先地位超越了麦当劳和肯德基。在一线城市家电市场平分天下的国美电器和苏宁电器，在向小城市市场渗透时不敌地方品牌汇银家电。成立于南京的母婴儿童用品连锁店孩子王自正式营业起10个月内就实现了赢利。

中国消费者对品牌的态度

在中国，不存在千人一面的“中国消费者”，因而也不存在一种方法能同时满足所有消费者的需要。根据麦肯锡《“会面”2020中国消费者》报告，大多数中国消费者属于开支有限、收入较低的所谓“价值型”消费者。这一不断扩大的主流群体将创造一个主要由首次购买者组成的消费市场，而他们的消费支出又会受到不同文化和民族价值观的影响。

消费者的支出不仅仅在增加，还在不断变化。随着中国中产阶级收入水平的提升，主流消费群体也在扩大。这些新增消费者中大多数为首次购买者，热衷于追求中国梦。但是，在一线城市，增长的主要动力不再是首次购买者，而是那些拥有越来越多资讯，考虑越来越周全的消费者。知名市场调研机构明略行（Millward Brown）发布的《2012年最具价值中国品牌50强》榜单显示，消费者的开支不再局限于购买汽车这样的大件，而更多地用于休闲消费，如酒水饮料、草药补品、小家电等。但是在不同价位，消费者都很注意质量。

尽管人们的品牌意识在增加，品牌忠诚度却没有提升。通过我们自己所做的采访以及多份中国刊物的媒体报告，我们发现中国的消费者认为价值更多地与品牌而不是价格相关，这在很大程度上是因为消费者认为名牌产品更安全，质量更可靠。但是，这样的信任并不会转化为品牌忠诚度。新品牌的不断涌现使得消费者更加倾向于尝试多个新品牌，而不是忠于一个品牌。通过比较麦肯锡在线基准调查（Benchmark Survey）和2009年～2011年中国消费者开支调查获得的数据，我们发现中国消费者一般会在某一个商品品类里选择3到5个品牌。下面是青蛙设计（frog）针对中国消费者所做的广泛研究获得的观察结果。

中国消费者很尊重国货名牌 中国人有很强的民族自尊。他们希望国产品牌，如李宁、海尔、欧珀（OPPO）、华为、百度、伊利、蒙牛、青岛啤酒，不仅在国内获得成功，而且能走出国门创造辉煌。每一个知名国货品牌都代表着国家的价值和骄傲。中国人承认本土品牌的打造过程往往仿照了西方品牌的建立模式。但是对中国人而言，这么做的原因更多的是企业领导者迫切渴望赢得消费者对品牌的支持。这不会被视为软弱，而是企业雄心壮志的体现。

对外国品牌的错误零容忍 在中国消费者看来，西方品牌自进入中国市场伊始就是行业领先者。部分更加极端和愤世嫉俗的消费者则认为外国品牌的目的就是赚中国人的钱。中国消费者可能会接受本土品牌犯错或陷入丑闻，但是他们不能容忍洋品牌犯下同样的过失。2006年，SK-II丑闻爆发—— 一位中国消费者对SK-II护肤品进行了检测，发现有毒物质和重金属成分，随后通过社交媒体公布了他的发现。该丑闻爆发的五年后，即2011年，宝洁公司仍未从SK-II复市失败的打击中恢复。在新浪一个约有2万网友参与的在线调查中，有80%的受访者认为宝洁在为SK-II危机做出的公开道歉中“说谎”。最重要的是，将近有96%的受访者称他们再也不会购买SK-II产品了。

中国消费者对国际知名品牌的偏好仍在上升 为了避免买到假冒伪劣产品，也为了质量更有保证，中国消费者开始越来越多地购买国际知名大品牌。青蛙设计对中国消费者的调查显示有63.5%的受访者更偏爱洋品牌。

还有很多其他资料显示这一点在奢侈品行业最为明显，但是在大城市其他行业也有所体现，例如成衣、营养品、 家庭用品等。

购买升级热刚刚开始 很多中国人根据购买的东西来评判自己和他人的层次。随着市场的成熟，业务的增长将有赖于那些购买数量、频率和价格都更高的消费者。这种新的主流消费者将对各品牌在中国的定位产生很大的影响。青蛙设计发现，80%的受访者喜欢购买易于使用、高质量的商品，即使该商品价格较高也能接受。

面向大众市场消费者的品牌也需要进行重新定位以满足消费者不断提高的期望，更新、更年轻的本土品牌可以凭借品牌形象合适的高档产品一举超越老字号品牌。

中国消费者对媒体渠道的态度

中国消费者在社交媒体上的参与度飞速上升 中国消费者认为自己在道德上有义务和他人分享自己对某产品或服务的看法以及购物体验。他们乐于在网上的社区论坛和讨论帖中给出自己的观点，同时也参考网络上的资源来帮助自己做出消费决策和确定品牌偏好。根据2012年波士顿咨询公司（Boston Consulting Group）的一项研究，在中国进行网上购物的消费者中有超过40%的人会阅读和发表在线评论。预计未来几年，通过社交媒体发表意见的中国消费者数量将越来越多，在评论的数量上也将超过世界其他国家或地区。波士顿咨询公司的研究还发现到2015年，中国的上网人数将达到7亿人——这一数字比印度、日本、俄罗斯、美国和印度尼西亚五国网民加起来的总人数还要多。

互联网尚未完全取代其他媒体渠道 尽管互联网的覆盖面和使用非常广泛，但它还没有成为占主导的媒体渠道。在中国，不止是电视，其他媒体渠道也成为了广阔的品牌战场：销售点、事件营销、线下广告仍然是受欢迎而且有效的品牌传播渠道。根据麦肯锡的研究发现：有91%的中国消费者会接触到电视广告；37%的消费者会接触到报纸和杂志广告；36%的中国消费者会看到店内广告和店内展示；只有27%的中国消费者会接触到网络广告。

nlc202309030353

中国企业的品牌战略特点

“完美就是速度越快越好”看起来似乎是中国企业——包括那些拥有众多国际拥趸的知名企业（如联想、华为和海尔）在建立品牌时的普遍情结。比起美国企业，中国企业品牌战略的执行一般更依靠直觉而非科学。决策由上级根据自己的判断做出，而并不总是根据研究结果做出。方法论往往被忽视或轻视；本土品牌希望能够快速推进，执行工作刚刚能够赶上推进的进度。与此相反，跨国公司在建立品牌时往往会投入精力实施非常耗时的流程，研究方法论，确立能为企业创造价值的战略，希望在品牌正式上市之前找到所有问题的答案。

中国品牌建设展望

基于我们的研究和对中国消费者的量化调查，还有第三方的数据，预计未来十年间弱小品牌可能会被市场淘汰，而强大的品牌则会蓬勃发展。但是，目标与前辈迥异的新一代品牌正加入品牌的混合大军。了解全球形势的中国创业家更重视长期的品牌建设而不是追逐利润。根据明略行《2012年最具价值中国品牌50强》的研究，私营企业的品牌在50强中占到了三分之二。它们在前期就进行巨额投资，以建立深深根植于中国文化和价值观的差异化品牌价值。这些年轻的品牌，如绿盒子、百丽国际、周大福和安踏，有潜力在中国乃至世界缔造新的品牌传奇。

企业在制定品牌战略时需要周密计划，考虑部分消费者尤其是大城市的消费者会快速成熟，以及部分购物者将很快成为某些品牌忠实拥趸的情况。随着中国居民收入水平的提高，很多产品和服务将面临一大批乐于尝试新品牌的首次购买型消费者。

这些细微变化会变得更微妙，但也更关键。随着中国消费者对于所购买的产品类别和品牌了解更深入，他们会期望得到更优秀的产品和服务。他们不再会因为某品牌是大品牌、洋品牌或价格高就信任它。他们希望品牌无论是从理性还是情感上都能了解并满足消费者的需求。未来的品牌建设还会有更多新的变化，因为在中国唯一不变的就是变化本身。

中国消费者的品牌态度调查

青蛙设计公司2013年对414位中国年轻一代的消费者做了调查。其中有一个问题是问他们是否同意“我更喜欢中国品牌，因为中国品牌更符合中国国情”的说法，回答情况如下表所示：

中国消费者信心指数分析 篇7

消费者信心指数 (Consumer Confidence Index, CCI) 是反映消费者信心强弱的指标, 是综合反映并量化消费者对当前经济形势评价和对经济前景、收入水平、收入预期以及消费心理状态的主观感受, 是预测经济走势和消费趋向的一个先行指标;是监测经济周期变化不可缺少的依据;是社会经济生活中一个重要的经济指标;是用来预报市场变化的指标。

消费者信心指数由消费者满意指数和消费者预期指数构成。其中, 消费者满意指数是反映消费者对当前经济状况和耐用消费品购买时机评价的指标, 消费者预期指数是反映消费者对家庭经济状况和总体经济走向预期的指标。消费者的满意指数和消费者预期指数分别由一些二级指标构成:对收入、生活质量、宏观经济、消费支出、就业状况、购买耐用消费品和储蓄的满意程度与未来一年的预期及未来两年在购买住房及装修、购买汽车和未来 6 个月市场变化的预测。因此, 我们由消费者影响因素及相关经济理论可以综合得知影响消费者信心的因素。

续 表

资料来源:中华人民共和国统计局。

从2010—2011年2月, 14个月的消费者信心指数的图形可以看出, 自2010年8月开始, 消费者消费指数呈严格下降趋势, 107.3下降至99.6, 说明消费者的消费意愿下降, 对预期通胀的担忧加剧, 对当期经济形势和未来总体经济走向不看好或者出于模糊状态, 消费者的消费信心不足, 消费满意度下跌。那么, 是什么原因导致消费者信心指数的下跌, 我们从以下几个方面分析:

(1) 消费者通胀预期的上升、尤其是对食品价格快速上涨的担忧, 是导致消费意愿下降的主要原因。根据美国科学研究委员会 (Science Research Council) SRC的长期研究表明, 消费者的通胀预期与CPI有着高度的相关性, 甚至有人认为, 往往消费者对通胀的估计要高于相关的专业人士。面对快速上涨的物价和消费者对通胀的预测致使消费者将目光投向投资领域, 2010年我国CPI保持较高的增速, 通胀预期强烈。中国经济景气监测中心副主任潘建成在“中国消费者信心指数发布会”暨“通胀预期影响下的消费行为”研讨会上说。他表示, 食品价格上升为消费者的关注事项之一, “食品价格的上涨, 加大老百姓通胀预期”。清华大学中国与世界经济研究中心研究员袁钢明称“通胀实际上降低了实际购买力”, 通胀的影响对于中低收入人群影响更大。

(2) 就业形势不容乐观是导致消费者信心指数下跌的另一原因。自高校持续扩招以来, 每年毕业生供大于求, 大学生就业形势日趋严峻, “就业难”已是不争的事实。尤其是在国际金融危机的强烈冲击下, 大学毕业生及整个国家的就业受到了强烈影响, 已经成为社会的焦点和难点, 受到了社会各界的普遍关注。正因为如此, 消费者对未来就业的预测及与之相关的收入预测下滑。加之目前的通胀形势, 致使消费者实际收入预期减少;因此一些消费者将目光转向房产、证券基金等兼具投资的领域, 股票、基金等个人投资领域具有变化频繁和对经济形势响应迅速的特点, 对普通消费者来说非常直观, 因此经常被消费者当做经济形势的风向标。当然投资类消费产品所引起的消费价值增加对消费意愿也有一定的提升作用。

(3) 居高不下的房价挫伤了消费者的消费意愿和能力。基于中国多数消费者的传统思想, 房子几乎成为生活的必需品, 居高不下的房价及对房价上涨的预期着实成为工薪阶层的一个难题, 也是白领一族的巨大生活负担, 而我国目前低收入群体占多数。因此, 多数消费者为了“房”不得不放弃其他方面的消费。我们可以想象:一套房子上百万, 对于工薪阶层的小两口来说还敢花钱消费吗?双方的老人还敢消费吗?高房价阻碍了居民的消费升级, 削弱了消费增长的后劲, 使刺激消费的政策受到很大干扰:首先, 高房价让许多人沦为房奴, 在沉重的房贷压力下, 对家庭的未来消费产生巨大的挤出效应。例如, 大部分收入将用于房贷月供, 这不仅会导致一般住房消费者的日常消费全面萎缩, 而且还会影响到他们的人力资本提升, 最终将导致这部分家庭的收入水平固化和消费能力的削弱;另外, 高房价改变了人们的预期, 增加了预防性储蓄需求, 使多数人不敢消费、谨慎消费。房价的过度上涨, 导致众多中低收入阶层, 在城市住宅资源方面, 逐渐边缘化, 只能望房兴叹, 使巨大的消费潜力得不到释放, 已成为当前制约消费扩张的最大阻力。

(4) 利率的持续上调也在一定程度上抑制了消费意愿。为了有效抑制通胀, 国家实施了调升利率的货币政策, 以此来收缩流动性应对通胀。另一方面, 利率的上升导致消费者储蓄意愿的提高, 基于中国大部分国民的预防心理, 一大部分消费者还是把储蓄作为理财的首选地位, 目前有一半以上消费者将储蓄作为主要理财方式, 另外随着消费者保险意识的增加, 消费者的收入一部分用于保险领域。我们知道, 储蓄和消费是相对的, 储蓄意愿的上升必然会影响到消费的提升。

为稳定并提高消费者对未来经济发展的信心, 政府从稳定物价、抑制通胀、调控房价、就业、生活等角度切实提高消费者的实际收入水平、提升消费者对未来经济的预期。温总理在2010年3月5日政府工作报告中提出, “保持物价总水平基本稳定”是2011年政府重点工作之一;自2010年始, 中国房地产政策已由此前的支持转向抑制投机, 遏制房价过快上涨, 政府先后采取了土地、金融、税收等多种调控手段;在解决就业问题方面, 政府把就业作为经济发展的一项重要任务来抓, 制定了具体的政策并狠抓落实, 如促进发展, 扩大就业, 调整结构, 增加岗位, 抓好培训, 改进服务, 帮扶特困, 鼓励创业等。我们希望也相信:我国国民消费信心指数将不断得以提升, 国家经济将持续稳定、协调发展。

摘要：消费者信心指数是一个观察国家经济发展变化比较灵敏的基本经济参数。本文以近1年多的消费者信心指数为依据, 结合趋势图和国民经济发展态势, 对消费者信心指数发展趋势进行因素分析, 包括物价水平、收入与就业、购房与投资等方面。

关于中国消费者信心指数的研究 篇8

消费者信心指数由消费者满意指数和消费者预期指数构成。消费者满意指数是指消费者对当前经济生活的评价, 消费者预期指数是指消费者对未来经济生活发生变化的预期。消费者的满意指数和消费者预期指数分别由一些二级指标构成:对收入、生活质量、宏观经济、消费支出、就业状况、购买耐用消费品和储蓄的满意程度与未来一年的预期及未来两年在购买住房及装修、购买汽车和未来6个月股市变化的预期。

国外的很多研究也发现, 消费者信心指数对公众的消费有明显的领先预测作用。由相关的经济理论可以知道, 影响消费者信心指数的因素包括:收入 (居民消费水平) 、物价、利率、汇率、失业率, 以及证券市场走势等多种因素。在一定的条件下, 各种因素之间相互作用, 形成了消费者对于未来的预期:或是积极乐观、或是消极沮丧, 从而进一步影响宏观经济的运行。

由于消费者信心是潜在的理论变量, 对它的测度是通过对消费者看法的测度间接实现的。这种方法的成立隐含着理论上的假设:消费者在收入、就业 (失业) 、物价、利率、经济发展形势等因素上的看法, 与潜在的消费者情绪之间存在着相关关系——在特定时期里, 通过消费者对这些因素看法进行打分, 从而得到消费者信心的某个具体的值。那到底这些指标与ICS之间存在着什么样的关系?我国的ICS作为一项宏观经济景气指标, 能否发挥其在经济生活中的导向作用呢?

为了研究这些问题, 笔者搜集了1999年~2006年间的GDP (国内生产总值) 、银行年存款利率、汇率 (人民币对美元的汇率) 、就业 (全国从业人员总数) 、居民消费物价指数、消费者信心指数的相关数据, 利用EVIEWS软件, 将这几个指标数据进行回归和相关系数的分析。通过对比美国ICS数据研究的相关标准, 得到的计算结果和相关结论如下:

1.国外长期的实证研究发现, 消费者信心的增长与宏观经济的运行态势十分一致, 即消费者对未来的经济发展越有信心, GDP的增长速度越快;反之, 如果消费者越沮丧, GDP的增长速度就越慢。经计算, 我国的GDP与ICS显著相关, 其相关系数r=0.69。

2.研究表明, 消费者对于未来就业的主观预期也与实际的就业率相当吻合, 消费者的预期也领先于消费者的实际失业率的变动, 我国的就业水平和ICS的相关系数约为0.5, 相关程度较显著。

3.根据美国SRC的长期研究表明, 消费者的通胀预期与CPI有着高度的相关性, 甚至有人认为, 往往消费者对通胀的估计要高于相关的专业人士。但是通过本文收集的数据来看, 中国的ICS与CPI的相关性只有0.2, 说明:在中国ICS的测量和反应机制与CPI之间的联动性和引导性不强。

4.银行的利率和汇率与ICS的相关系数分别是-0.9和0.5, 虽然表明其相关性很高。但是通过回归方程的检验得到的P值分别是0.8和0.3, 说明两者的拟合效果和相关系数的分析结论不算太理想。

通过以上分析表明:中国的ICS与消费者预期之间存在着一定的相关性, 但是该信号的反应机制不是很明显。究其原因, 本文认为有以下几点: (1) 我国的ICS的测量是从1998年开始编制的, 由于数据的有限性, 使得估计拟合的效果出现偏差。 (2) 我国对该指数的重视度不够。作为一项经济景气指数, 只有得到政府和公众足够的关注, 才能够真正反应宏观经济运行态势和消费者的行为。但是在目前它并不能像CPI指数那样覆盖面广、关注度高, 因此用ICS来监测和预报宏观经济走势效果不太明显。 (3) 该指数受到了许多政治、经济和医疗等方面突发因素的影响, 即一些定性数据收集的难度和预测的不确定性, 都会导致相应时期ICS发生突变。 (4) 本文数据搜集口径的误差:上述变量有些是流量有些是存量, 因此用算术平均的方法对数据进行处理也会导致一些偏差。

本文介绍了消费者信心指数和一些宏观经济指标之间的相关关系, 笔者希望通过对ICS及其相关影响因素的分析与研究, 能使该指标得到应有的重视, 测量方法得到进一步的改进和完善, 从而使消费者信心指数能真正发挥对未来整个经济发展趋势的预见作用。

摘要：目前在许多国家, 消费者信心指数被看作是宏观经济的风向标, 它不仅影响消费的行为, 更是对于社会资金的流向和资源的配置也起到了重要的引导作用。本文通过对影响消费者信心指数的一些定量数据进行分析, 研究各项指标和消费者信心指数之间的关系。

关键词：消费者信心指数,定量指标,相关系数分析

参考文献

[1] (美) 罗伯特.F.德威利斯魏勇刚龙长权宋武译:量表编制—理论与应用[M].重庆:重庆大学出版社, 2004

[2]钟路:消费者信心指数编制方法, 广东经济, 2004年05期

中国消费者 篇9

技术的发展极大地影响着消费者购物的方式, 也改变着与所有行业的品牌互动的方式。社交媒体、移动和数字渠道使购物者的采购决策更富动态性, 更具个性, 更实时。越来越多的购物者要求定制服务, 以便将现有移动设备与其购物习惯相融合的能力。在这些要求的推动下, 零售商能满足购物者要求的能力也在日益提升, 从而改变了消费文化和购物行为, 同时提升了供应链效率。

数据分析探消费者行为习惯

通过信息技术 (IT) 提升消费者体验的方式, 无论面向的是体验商务还是其他类型的商务, 都是利用海量数据深入分析与零售商的产品或服务最相关的消费者。在体验商务的时代, 营销人员和零售商希望获得消费者行为的全景图。他们希望了解消费者的生活方式。不仅要了解消费者购买什么特定产品和品类, 而且还要了解消费者购买的其他竞争对手的产品和品类, 甚至表面看起来毫不相关的产品和品类。把零售行业所有领域的消费者购物习惯和偏好整合在一起的全景图可帮助营销人员和零售商预测消费者的购物心理。

例如, 对于一个服装零售商, 他们可能希望了解消费者开什么车, 消费者倾向于在大型廉价商店购物还是在小型精品店购物, 因为这些信息可以反映购物者是喜欢奢侈品还是比较在意成本。此外, 他们可能还想了解消费者喜欢什么类型的娱乐活动, 以便在消费者娱乐的地方放置他们喜欢的品牌或产品。消费者是喜欢视觉消费, 偏爱剧院、电影或视频, 比如社交媒体;还是喜欢音乐消费, 偏好娱乐, 比如在线音乐流媒体平台或音乐会?各类社交媒体平台改编新闻推送的内容, 使其适应用户的偏爱和习惯。例如, 如果用户经常在他/她的新闻推送里观看视频, 他/她将开始收到更多的视频内容。如果用户经常阅读新闻消息, 他/她将收到更多新闻消息。零售业可先进行同一行为分析, 然后再改编内容。在成千上百万的消费者中分析这些数据可以解开奥秘, 即零售商、营销人员或生产商如何为其产品及购买产品的消费者打造完美的店内体验。

多样化体验增强消费者忠诚度

中国市场上的电商零售企业如淘宝、京东等正日益渗透到其他领域, 线下传统企业也需要不断演变, 从之前专注实体产品购物交易转变为更胜一筹的消费体验, 使其带来的体验乐趣多于网上购物的便捷。为吸引消费者, 实体店必须提供电子商务零售无法提供的东西, 无论是无法比拟的客户服务还是独特的互动体验。

商场可以在物美价廉的商店里提供各种名牌产品, 使购物者产生一种购买奢侈品的感觉;也可以提供其他形式的娱乐, 例如电影院或电子游乐场, 将购物与娱乐相结合, 让消费者更乐意在商场逛一天, 而不是急匆匆地纯粹进行采购。

为了提升实体店体验, 购物奖励可因行业、店铺类型或消费者而有所区别。在美国, 仓储式商店如Costco超市吸引消费者靠的不仅是低价。Costco提供店内在售商品免费品尝, 打造消费者体验。此外, Costco也低价出售其自营的品牌披萨、热狗和冷冻食品, 因此, 顾客会在购物中途停下去享用一顿便宜的美食, 甚至会提前在店内吃晚餐, 因而延迟了在店的停留时间。Costco也凭借其规模吸引消费者。消费者在走进商店时可能确定他们计划采购什么, 产品在何处, 但与传统杂货店不同的是, 他们肯定会在途中偶遇全新的、心仪的物品。网上购物者一般会大体确定他们购买什么产品, 不太可能在中途浏览不相关的物品。如果消费者想在网上买条连衣裙, 她基本不可能偶然发现烧烤套具并决定购买。她可能会想到购买一些相关物品, 如项链或腰带。而在Costco这样的店里, 消费者可能进去是想买个冷藏箱, 出来时却买了一堆多种维生素。这些体验是你无法在网上享受到的。一般消费者会去商店网站, 寻找他们所需要的物品并购买, 基本不会浏览不相关的物品, 这样线上平台也失去了带给消费者多样化的体验。他们也失去了实体店提供的多样化体验。

Costco会提供免费样品, 在百货店中进行烹调演示, 那么大型购物中心和零售店也需要界定他们最重要的购物者和购物行为, 从而提供网上购物无法实现的个性化体验。像Costco这样为消费者提供独特体验的商店还有很多。苹果店为消费者提供集中的消费者测试和购买苹果产品的体验, 大量的苹果产品都经过真实的测试。苹果客户也享受自己动手的一对一客户服务和维修。收银员会拿着移动POS系统走来走去, 因此消费者可以随时随地购买, 不再需要排长队等候付款, 摒弃了实体店的普遍弊端。星巴克等咖啡企业以4美元一杯的咖啡为顾客营造了集休闲、学习和工作于一体的优美环境, 从而构建顾客忠诚度。星巴克也为顾客提供稳定的环境。无论你身在何处, 你都可以确定星巴克环境都是相同的——超大皮椅配着爵士音乐——许多消费者珍爱这里的环境更胜过其产品。

体验商务也已进入百货店的一条龙服务。美国许多高端百货店开设烹饪课程, 提供食品服务和免费样品站, 美国的Mariano百货连锁店甚至提供现场音乐演奏。顾客在便宜的杂货店是享受不到这种体验的, 这是专门为选择高端百货店的购物者打造的独一无二的体验。

了解顾客, 提供体验式服务

传统企业一般都将精力集中在零售销售上, 而体验商务则专注于顾客店内体验。零售商利用数据找出顾客真正关心的东西, 然后制定反映顾客偏好和价值的计划。零售商无法为每一位消费者做所有的事情, 但有效的付出会专注于特定的数据驱动。古语说的好, 历史总是惊人的相似。

面子需要对中国消费者行为的影响 篇10

一、面子需要的概念

面子最早起源于中国儒家文化, 是中国人最常见的一种心理和行为。林语堂指出, 面子十分抽象, 但却是中国人调节社会交往的最细腻的标准, 它触及到了中国人社会心理最微妙最奇异之处。香港大学心理系的何友晖教授将面子定义为“个体根据他在社会网络中所占据的地位而要求别人对其表现出的尊敬或顺从”。面子需要是个体为了得到某种社会认同或者声望、尊重、地位的一种心理倾向。面子需要具有相对的稳定性和明显的动机性, 不同的面子需要在认知、行为反应过程中发挥着不同的作用。

二、面子需要的维度

个体在生活及工作中, 在不同的场合会有不同的面子需要, 因此面子需要是一个多维度的概念。根据面子需要的不同动机, 可以把面子需要分为基于身份的面子需要、基于品味的面子需要、基于关系的面子需要。

1. 基于身份的面子需要

基于身份的面子需要可以被理解为是对怎样获得“面子”的行为的一种社会约束。对于中国人而言, “面子”行为必须符合“礼”的要求, 与他在特定情境中的角色或身份相匹配, 符合相关的社会群体规范。看重面子的人会非常注意在适当的场合穿适当的衣服, 说适当的话。否则, 就会遭到“失礼”的批评和嘲笑。为了维持或提升面子, 消费者个体的行为必须根据特定的环境进行调整, 以保持与外在所处的社会身份或角色相符合。个体身份的多重性也导致了面子需要的不同要求。比如, 一个男人在家里是孩子的父亲, 必须保持父亲的尊严才有面子;在单位是领导, 必须保持领导的威严才有面子;在亲友面前是成功人士, 必须保持成功人士的风范才有面子。此外, 每个行业有每个行业的规范, 只有符合这个行业的规范才会得到社会的认可与尊重, 个体的消费行为还会受到其职业性质的影响。

2. 基于品位的面子需要

品位一般来说是指对事物分辨与鉴赏的能力。品位是形象的展示, 也是内在气质的外在展现。一个人的品位也可以阐述为一个人的审美能力和价值观念。审美观念在消费活动中对消费者购买动机和行为的影响主要表现在人们对形式、环境、健康等的追求上。实质上, 消费者选择和购买商品的过程, 就是一次比较完整的审美活动。这个审美活动的全过程, 都是由消费者的审美观念和价值观念起作用。价值观念也体现在审美活动中, 消费者会倾向于某种他们认为有价值、有面子、有品位的商品。消费者个体的审美活动表面上看起来纯属是个体的行为, 但实质上反映了一个时代、一个社会群体共同的审美观念。审美观念和价值观念在很大程度上取决于消费个体的文化层次和受教育水平。不同的人由于文化消费品位不同, 消费偏好也存在较大差异。从这个角度看, 消费既是经济行为, 也是文化行为。

3. 基于关系的面子需要

人际关系是人们运用一定的方式传递信息、交流思想, 以达到某种目的的社会活动。人际关系反映了个人或群体寻求满足其社会需要的心理状态。基于关系的面子需要可以看成一种“人情”。中国人对“人情”很重视, 由血缘、地缘等而产生的情感纷繁复杂。礼品作为“人情”的载体承载了人们或浅或深的文化表达和情感寓意。每逢节日, 人们都会适时地为亲朋好友送上一些礼物, 以表达敬意或联系感情。礼物可以用于向他人表达尊敬和尊重, 也可以被用做一种人情资源来分配。在商务活动中或会议、公关宣传等社交场合, 为了加强彼此之间的感情及商务交流, 经常会赠送给对方一些纪念品。可见, 礼物作为人情面子的载体, 有益于建立和维持社会关系。

三、基于面子需要的中国消费者行为分析

1. 身份消费

消费者的身份地位决定了其消费的内容和档次。与其身份地位匹配度越高的产品越容易成为其消费对象。中国人由于好面子, 往往把身份地位看得很重。拥有能在社会公众场所显示其代表意义的奢侈品, 比如, 名牌服装和汽车, 更能满足中国人的面子需要。再如, 国际著名影星经常出入高档酒店, 喝名酒, 穿名牌时装, 开名牌跑车, 用以彰显其独特的身份地位。消费过程是人们自我概念社会化的一种方式。因此, 消费者期望的身份或消费者身份, 决定了其消费行为。如果企业能够把握消费者的目标、情感和自我概念, 即了解了消费者对自己身份的界定, 就更容易将产品或服务销售出去。

2. 品位消费

消费不仅表现出经济上的差异, 同时还展现出社会文化上的差异。通过对文化商品的消费, 消费个体之间的差异得以体现。文化层次高的消费者通常喜欢欣赏歌剧、交响乐等需要较高文化才能理解的音乐, 以彰显自己区别于一般阶层的高雅品位。而一般阶层的消费者则通过看电视娱乐节目来消磨时间。不同文化层次的人会有不同的品味, 不同品味的人会有不同的消费行为。比如, 一个企业的高学历白领和一个经营较好的农村养殖业老板的收入水平也许不相上下, 但两者的消费行为却存在着较大的差别。白领可能会出入于高雅的带有小资情调的星巴克, 而养殖业老板的消费大都以热闹的棋牌室为主。究其原因, 就是他们的文化层次不同, 导致对事物的审美观念和价值观念的差异。总而言之, 消费者的品位时刻影响着其消费行为。

3. 关系消费

为了建立或维持关系, 人际往来是必需的, 只有不断的交流和沟通才能让人际关系更加的牢固。中华民族作为礼仪之邦, 人际往来自然没有空着手的道理。正是因为人情规则或回报心态, 礼品成为中国消费者或企业进行社会交往的必需品。当一方接受了赠礼, 会感到欠了对方人情, 需要还一份人情。这种人情往来促进了礼品消费。影响消费者购买礼品决策的关键因素:一是价格看上去是否体面, 看上去的价格跟实际价值可能会存在较大的差异;二是包装看上去是否很有面子。不管产品的内在是好是坏, 价格越贵就越有面子, 包装越精美就越有面子。“不求最好, 只求最贵”是对这一现象的最真实的描述。可见, 基于关系的面子需要, 对消费者的购买行为产生了很大的影响。

四、基于面子需要的营销策略

1.品牌策略

对消费者而言, 品牌具有功能效用和象征效用。而其中的象征效用, 恰恰符合消费者的面子需要。因此, 针对这一方面的需要, 可以采取品牌营销策略。在产品同质化的今天, 品牌象征价值是品牌真正的差异之所在。比如, 李宁品牌的营销就是将体育精神和民族精神注入品牌形象, 从而大获成功。如果只是简单地突出品牌的功能价值, 会使品牌生命周期伴随产品或使用对象的生命周期早衰。因此, 商家要注重塑造产品的象征价值, 以达到产品的特殊品牌效应, 吸引消费者购买。

2.个性化定制策略

现代消费者往往不满足于一般的大众化消费, 更加青睐个性化的商品, 以体现消费者的尊贵身份或满足虚荣心理。受中国传统文化的影响, 中国人重视别人对自己的看法, 因此很多消费者购买和消费某种产品是为了其外在的可视的象征意义。他们最在乎的不是商品本身, 而是其他人对于他拥有这件商品的看法。比如说, 按照消费者的喜好, 定制晚礼服、香水、个性化旅游服务等一系列的尊享的特殊定制产品和服务, 会让顾客享受到独一无二的优越感, 或者感觉很有面子。

3.开发礼品市场策略

面子需要典型地表现在消费者的人际互动过程中。在中国传统文化中, 来而不往非礼也, 已成为人们交际的潜意识。而送能够代表面子的商品, 也成了消费者的首要选择。在这种情境下, 商家可以开发礼品市场。节日系列礼品可以有烟、酒、茶等, 亲情系列礼品可以有保健产品、美容产品、鲜花、蛋糕等。礼品开发市场有个很典型的例子, 就是脑白金, “今年过节不收礼, 收礼只收脑白金”, 一句简单直白的广告词, 竟然传遍了大江南北, 产生了感召力和销售力。其成功的原因是多方面的, 但其中不可或缺的一点就是礼品定位与诉求, 这是中国人对内心深处面子情结的最直白的表达。脑白金礼品定位策略的成功为保健产品开拓了一个全新的礼品市场, 值得各个商家借鉴和学习。

4. 密集广告投放策略

爱面子的消费者个体, 经常为了“顾面子”“有面子”, 通过消费有形的、具有象征价值的产品, 来吸引别人的关注, 并希望获得社会的认同和赞赏。根据消费者的面子需要, 可以倾心打造能体现身份的产品广告, 在电视广播媒体中, 采用黄金时间段播出, 请具有影响力的明星作为企业产品形象代言人, 烘托出产品的高品位。例如, 一些新型饮料不仅向消费者提供解渴的需要, 也体现了一种新的生活方式, 向社会传递文化、品位等信息。掌握了该技巧的企业巧妙地突破饮料固有功能, 增加了与消费者身份有关的附加价值, 赢得消费者的青睐、尝试和消费。

5. 礼品包装策略

在礼品市场中, 由于购买者与使用者分离, 因此购买者更看重商品的包装, 以满足送礼时的面子需要。销售商可以将普通日用消费品特制成礼品包装, 将商品变为礼品, 比如, 包装精美的红酒、保健品等, 可能更受消费者的青睐。中国人喜欢过节送礼, 可以根据不同节日的特点, 进行有针对性的礼品包装, 比如, 中秋节的月饼礼盒包装, 端午节的粽子、皮蛋、咸蛋的礼盒包装, 情人节的鲜花、巧克力礼盒包装。还可以进行综合的礼品包装, 比如, 将法国红酒与知名品牌衬衣共置一礼盒, 以满足特殊消费者的面子需要。

参考文献

[1]何友晖.面子的动力:从概念化到测量[M].北京:社会科学文献出版社, 2006.

[2]翟学伟.中国人的脸面观:形式主义的心理动因与社会表征[M].北京:北京大学出版社, 2011.

[3]宝贡敏, 赵卓嘉.面子需要对个体知识共享意愿的影响[J].软科学, 2010 (06) :89-93.

[4]王长征, 崔楠.个性消费还是地位消费——中国人的“面子”如何影响象征型的消费者—品牌关系[J].经济管理, 2011 (06) :84-90.

[5]张晶.“文化适应”对消费者购买行为的影响[J].经济理论与经济管理, 2013 (12) :43-55.