Search results

The purpose of this paper is to investigate differences in characteristics, job outcome experiences and attitudes of maximiser and satisficer decision-making style groups working in the retail trade.

A survey of 140 participants who have accepted a job offer in the retail trade in the past six months in the USA was conducted on Amazon Mechanical Turk. The survey examined participants’ opinions and attitudes towards their present job and established which job information source(s) they had used to search for retail trade job-related information.

The results show that compared to satisficers, maximisers exert more effort when searching job information, have higher uncertainty avoidance and need for cognition, and experience more post-decisional regret. In this sample, any significant differences between maximisers and satisficers in relation to job satisfaction, company commitment, and intention to quit their present job are restricted to certain groups. For recruitment information sources, while satisficers rely on their families and friends for information, maximisers are more likely to obtain job-related information from other sources such as online discussion forums.

Even though some studies suggest that maximisers are unhappy with their choices, this research recommends that retail trade companies should not exclude maximisers from their recruitment pools. Retailers should enhance their candidate pools with both maximisers and satisficers by managing different recruitment information sources.

Research of decision-making style in recruitment is relatively limited. This research illustrates the differences of attitudes between maximisers and satisficers towards their present retail job, and also demonstrates the preferences of maximisers and satisficers in recruitment information sources.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the consequences of jobseeker decision-making style on information search behaviour, information evaluation and perceptions of organisational attractiveness (OA). In this study, the authors assess whether, when presented with a realistic job information searching scenario of receiving basic job information from a typical formal short job advertisement, maximisers and satisficers differ on need for further information and evaluation of further information from informal information sources in relation to valence and tie strength.

A scenario-based experiment was conducted on 280 participants from the USA, with work experience in retail, using Amazon Mechanical Turk.

The results show that, compared to satisficers, significantly more maximisers chose to search for further information about the company/vacancy after receiving a typical short advertisement message. Furthermore, the results highlight the moderating effects of decision-making style (maximiser vs satisficer), tie strength (strong-tie vs weak-tie provider) and message valence (positive vs negative) on jobseekers’ perceived OA.

Companies seeking to increase their candidate pool should consider accommodating the different decision-making styles of jobseekers by carefully designing the content of recruitment information and utilising recruitment information sources. Although conducted in just one sector, the ubiquity of the maximiser/satisficer decision-making style implies further research to assess the implications for other sectors.

Research on decision-making style in recruitment is relatively limited. This study demonstrates the differences between maximisers and satisficers in terms of job-related information needs, and the evaluation of the source/content, when searching for a retail trade job.

This study shows the influence of consumers' goal and strategy of maximization on the process behind their behavioral response to price.

Data was collected through a 2×2 experimental design involving 314 respondents and analyzed using PLS-SEM.

The results show that when buyers maximize, their transaction value and acquisition value perceptions predict their behavioral response to deals and discounts. Further, these buyers do not consider sales price information to form their internal reference price. On the other hand, when buyers satisfice, their transaction value perceptions predict the behavioral responses to price deals, and the relationship between transaction value and the behavioral response is not mediated by acquisition value. Further, such buyers consider sales price to form their internal reference price.

The theory of purchase value assumes that consumers seek to maximize their value. Our work relaxes this assumption to show how value maximizers (and satisficers) differ in the process of value formation and their responses to price promotions.

Prior research consistently found maximizers to experience greater regret over their choice than satisficers. Moreover, research also found maximizers to be trapped in a “maximization-regret-maximization” cycle. This paper aims to assess the role of construal level theory in alleviating regret felt by maximizers.

The authors examine the construal level theory (CLT) in conjunction with the choice context (comparable and non-comparable choices). Three experimental studies tested our assertion that a match between CLT mindset and choice set relieves regret for maximizers.

The authors show maximizers experience similar levels of regret compared to satisficers when considering comparable options in a concrete mindset, and non-comparable options in an abstract mindset. However, maximizers experience heightened regret in comparison to satisficers when considering non-comparable (comparable) options in a concrete (abstract) mindset. Choice difficulty mediates our effect.

Future research is needed to replicate our results in real-life settings.

If marketers think that their product is likely to be compared with other comparable products, they should adopt product-specific information that focusses on how the product would be used. However, if marketers think that consumers will compare across non-comparable products, then they should focus on why their product is the most suitable to fulfil consumers’ needs.

This research represents the first attempt at reducing regret for maximizers and answers the call for an examination of the relationship between maximization and CLT. The research adds to the maximization literature by evidencing a CLT-based strategy that attenuates the negative experience of regret for maximizers.

The purpose of this paper addresses the issue of inconsistent findings regarding the impact of consumers' need for touch (NFT) on webrooming behavior. It investigates the moderator of maximization by drawing on maximizing mindset theory.

Three studies were carried out to test the hypothesized relationships. The first study investigated the impact of autotelic NFT on webrooming intention. The second study examined the impact of instrumental NFT on webrooming intention. The third study tested all hypotheses by the structural equation modeling approach.

The results confirm moderation by consumers' maximizing mindset. The moderated mediation analyses show that the interaction effect of autotelic NFT and maximization influences webrooming intention indirectly via anticipated sensory pleasure. Likewise, the interaction effect of instrumental NFT and maximization influences webrooming intention indirectly via product fit uncertainty.

The study draws on maximizing mindset theory to show that consumers' autotelic NFT and instrumental NFT drive their webrooming intentions depending on the activation of their maximizing mindset. The nonsignificant relationship between autotelic NFT and webrooming intention in the context of satisficers explains the conflicting findings reported in the literature. Consumers' affective and cognitive responses were also studied to uncover the underlying mechanisms of their webrooming intention. This research contributes to the literature by enhancing the understanding of webrooming behavior.

Showrooming presents a complex and evolving challenge to retail managers, as it signifies the emergence of new forms of exchange rules. The purpose of this research is to investigate how factors responsible for information search and evaluation affect showrooming and also consider the consumer mindset as a moderator.

This research undertakes three experimental designs to investigate how the push (i.e. assortment size), pull (i.e. price discount), and mooring (i.e. sunk cost) factors influence consumers' showrooming intention. Specifically, consumers' maximizing tendency plays the role of moderator.

The results reveal that push, pull, and mooring factors are significantly related to consumers' showrooming intention. Furthermore, the findings show that maximizers have higher showrooming intention than satisficers in the context of the push, pull, and mooring factors.

By integrating the push-pull-mooring framework and the maximizing mindset theory, this research proposes a novel research model and the empirical testing results support six hypotheses. The findings add to the body of knowledge in showrooming behavior by taking consumer mindset into account. The results also provide implications for practitioners to develop their retail strategies.

This paper aims to extend previously reported research on the Sisyphus Effect in consumers’ decision making to consumers classified as either maximizers or satisficers. The purpose of this study was to examine whether the Sisyphus Effect influences consumer behavior related to purchasing brand-extension products and explore factors that influence the Sisyphus Effect in brand extension.

A survey was administered to participants in three studies. A convenience sample consisting of 875 participants was asked to complete the questionnaires. The authors assessed whether the participants were maximizers or satisficers. In addition, the participants were given information on brand-extension products that differed in the level of involvement and price and were asked whether they would purchase them.

Using regression analysis, the authors found that consumers’ willingness to purchase extended products became weaker as maximization tendencies became stronger. In addition, purchase involvement was confirmed as a situational factor that can increase maximization tendencies even in individuals who do not maximize as a default strategy. Finally, for low-involvement extended products, the authors found that product price played a moderating role in the negatively correlated relationship between maximization tendency and willingness to purchase a product.

This study suggests avenues to increase the effectiveness of a brand-extension strategy and illustrates some tactics that are not likely to be successful.

Decision aids (DAs) in online retail stores ease consumers' information processing. However, online consumers do not use all decision aids in purchase decision-making. While the literature has documented the effects of individual decision aids or two decision aids at a time, no study has compared the efficacy of multiple decision aids simultaneously. Also, very few studies have looked at the use of decision aids for consumers with maximizing and satisficing tendencies. Hence, this study aims to understand the preferences of maximizers and satisficers towards online decision aids during the choice-making process.

This is an observational study with 60 individuals who were asked to purchase either a search-based or an experience-based product online. Participants' browsing actions and verbalizations during online shopping, were recorded and analysed using NVivo, and later the use of decision aids was mapped along their choice process.

Consumer's preference of decision aids varies across the two stages of the choice process (that is, consideration set formation and evaluation & choice). In their choice formation, maximizers use different decision aids in both stages, that is, filter tool and in-website search tool for search products, and collaborative filtering-based recommender systems and eWOM for experience products. Satisficers used more decision aids as compared to maximizers across the two stages for both product types.

This study is an exploratory attempt to understand how consumers use multiple decision aids present on e-commerce websites.

Many empirical studies have focused on whether public funding leverages (crowds in) or discourages (crowds out) private giving behavior, finding mixed results. Recent studies suggest the need to examine how nonprofits adjust their fundraising efforts after experiencing cuts or increases in government funding, which can then influence donor behavior.

In this study, the authors conduct an online survey experiment with nonprofit managers to test how nonprofits respond to changes in government funding.

The authors find some evidence that nonprofit organizations would change their fundraising expenses when facing cuts in government funding, yet the authors also find that the change could be either to increase or decrease fundraising spending. Since decisions are made by executive directors, the study also considered how executive personality type as maximizers or satisficers may interact with institutional and environmental constraints in decision-making. When funding goals are met, executives tend to behave as “satisficers” and are unlikely to make significant changes, even when their individual personality is more consistent with being a “maximizer.”

The authors find these results to be the reflection of the current environment in which many nonprofits operate, characterized by pressures to keep operating costs low. The results of the experiment have implications for both funding agencies and nonprofits that strive to enhance the capacity of nonprofit services.

This study is the first attempt to untangle the multilayered relationships between government funding, fundraising, leader preferences and personalities, and donations using an experimental approach with current nonprofit leaders.

Increasingly, two key trends – value‐ and cost‐conscious customers, and globalization of markets and supply sources – are shifting the competitive focus from the competitive advantage of firms to competitive advantages of entire supply chains. At the same time, the possibilities for flexibility and coordination inherent in modern information and communication technologies are making it possible to design and follow a much greater variety of organization and governance strategies for delivering customer value. Contributes primarily to the development of general principles for ICT‐enabled redesign of supply chains. Rather than examine the individual impact and design implications of each new ICT innovation, proposes principles of abstraction that can be used to frame supply‐chain redesign options and decisions. Concludes with how these principles lead to flexibility in the design of various supply chain options, thereby providing cost and value advantages for the supply chain.