Economic growth, urbanization and higher disposable incomes have helped to propel growth of luxury fashion in India. Indian customers attach luxury fashion with their social status. Therefore, a need was felt to understand the drivers of purchase intention for luxury fashion goods. The purpose of study is to explain the role of factors which have influence on purchase intention for luxury fashion brands. The research tries to identify the mediating effect of brand perception and social status on interrelationship between country of origin (COO) and purchase intention. The data were collected by means of structured questionnaires from a total of 400 Indian customers residing in the Delhi NCR. Structural equation modelling has been used to find the outcomes. COO, brand perception and social status were found to significantly influence customer purchase intention. However, mediation effect of brand perception was found in relation between COO and purchase intention. Mediation effect of social status also exists in relation between COO and purchase intention. Brand perception and social status sequentially mediate the relationship between COO and purchase intention.
PTI. India’s luxury market to cross $30 billion by year-end: ASSOCHAM. 2018February28. Available from https://brandequity.economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/business-of-brands/indias-luxury-market-to-cross-30-billion-by-year-end-assocham/63111478
2.
MeenakshiK. India’s luxury market on an impressive growth spree. 2017March15. Available from https://fashionunited.in/news/retail/india-s-luxury-market-on-an-impressive-growthspree/2017031514958.
3.
RothMartin S, RomeoJean B. Matching product category and country image perceptions: A framework for managing country-of-origin effects. J Int Bus Stud., 1992; 23(3):477–497.
4.
ZhangY. Chinese consumers’ evaluation of foreign products: The influence of culture, product types, and product presentation format. Eur J Mark., 1996; 30(12):50–69.
5.
D’AstousA, AhmedS. Antecedents, moderators and dimensions of country-of-origin evaluations. Int Mark Rev., 2008; 25(1):75–106.
6.
HanCM, TerpstraV. Country-of-origin effects for uni-national and bi-national products. J Int Bus Stud., 1988; 19(2):235–255.
7.
Al-SulaitiKI and BakerMJ. Country of origin effects: A literature review. Mark Intell Plan., 1998; 16(3):150–199.
8.
LiefeldJP. Consumer knowledge and use of country-of-origin information at the point of purchase. J Consum Behav., 2004; 4(2):85–97.
9.
KinraN. The effect of country-of-origin on foreign brand names in the Indian market. Mark Intell Plan., 2006; 24(1):15–30.
10.
ThakorMV, LavackMA. Effect of perceived brand origin associations on consumer perceptions of quality. J Prod Brand Manag., 2003; 12(6):394–407.
11.
SamieeS, ShimpTA, SharmaS. Brand origin recognition accuracy: Its antecedents and consumers’ cognitive limitations. J Int Bus Stud., 2005; 36:379–397.
12.
KoubaaY. Country of origin, brand image perception, and brand image structure. Asia Pac J Mark Logist., 2007; 20(2):139–155.
13.
LarocheM, PapadopoulosN, HeslopLA, MouraliM. The influence of country image structure on consumer evaluations of foreign products. Int Mark Rev., 2005; 22(1):96–115.
14.
KhanH, BamberD, QuaziA. Relevant or redundant: Elite consumers’ perception of foreign-made products in an emerging market. J Mark Manag., 2012; 28(9–10):1190–1216.
15.
SamieeS. Customer evaluation of products in a global market. J Int Bus Stud., 1994; 25:579–604.
16.
SchoolerRD. Product bias in the central American common market. J Mark Res., 1965; 2(4):394–397.
17.
BilkeyWJ, NesE. Country-of-origin effects on product evaluations. J Int Bus Stud., 1982; 13(1):89–100.
18.
EttensonR, WagnerJ, GaethG. The effect of country of origin and the “made in the U.S.A.” campaign. J Retail., 1988; 64(1):85–100.
19.
PapadopoulosN, HeslopLA. Product Country Images: Impact and Role in International Marketing. New York, NY: CRC Press. 1993; 89–115.
20.
TseD, GornG. An experiment on the salience of country of origin in the era of global brands. J Int Mark., 1993; 1(1):57–76.
21.
ElliotG, CameronA. Consumer perception of product quality and the country-of-origin effect. J Int Mark., 1994; 2(2):49–62.
22.
AhmedZU, JohnsonJP, YangX, FattCK, TengHS, BoonLC. Does country of origin matter for low-involvement products?Int Mark Rev., 2004; 21(1):102–120.
23.
SharmaP. Country of origin effects in developed and emerging markets: Exploring the contrasting roles of materialism and value consciousness. J Int Bus Stud., 2011; 42(2):285–306.
24.
JinZ, ChansarkarB, KondapNM. Brand origin in an emerging market: Perceptions of Indian consumers. Asia Pac J Mark Logist., 2006; 18(4):283–302.
25.
HullandJ. Use of partial least squares (PLS) in strategic management research: A review of four recent studies. Strateg Manag J., 1999; 20(2):195–204.
26.
AhmedS, D’AstousA, EljabriJ. The impact of technological complexity on consumers’ perceptions of products made in highly and newly industrialised countries. Int Mark Rev., 2002; 19(4):387–407.
27.
HassanSS, CraftS. Examining world market segmentation and brand positioning strategies. J Consum Mark., 2012; 29(5):344–356.
28.
BelkRLeaping luxuries and transitional consumers. In: BatraR, editors. Marketing Issues in Transitional Economies. New York, NY: Kluwer Academic Publishers. 1999; pp. 39–54.
29.
NguyenTTM, TanbyahSK. Antecedents and consequences of status consumption among urban Vietnamese consumers. Organ Mark Emerg Econ., 2011; 2(1):75–98.
30.
Bar-HeimG. The meaning of Western commercial artifacts for Eastern European. youth. J Contemp Ethno., 1987; 16(2):205–226.
31.
BatraKOR, RamaswamyV, AldenDL, SteenkampJEM, RamachanderS. Effects of brand local and nonlocal origin on consumer attitudes in developing countries. J Consum Psychol., 2000; 9(2):83–95.
32.
SklairL. The culture-ideology of consumerism in urban China: Some findings from a survey in Shanghai. Res Consum Behav., 1994; 7:259–292.
33.
Schultz IICJ, PecotichA, LeKChanges in marketing activity and consumption in the Socialist Republic of Vietnam. In Ed. CliffordJ. ShultzII, RussellBelk, Güliz Ger: Research in Consumer Behavior: Consumption in Marketizing Economies. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. 1994: pp. 225–257.
34.
HamzaouiL, DwightM. The impact of country of design and country of manufacture on consumer perceptions of bi-national products’ quality: An empirical model based on the concept of fit. J Consum Mark., 2006; 23(3):145–155.
35.
NarangR. Understanding purchase intention towards Chinese products: Role of ethnocentrism, animosity, status and self-esteem. J Retail Consum Serv., 2016; 32:253–261.
36.
ParameswaranR, PisharodiR Mohan. Assimilation effects in country image research. Int Mark Rev., 2002; 19(3):259–278.
37.
LeeHM, LeeCC. Country-of-origin and brand redeployment impact after brand acquisition. J Consum Mark., 2011; 28(6):412–420.
38.
LicsandruTC, SzamosiLT, PapadopoulosN. The impact of country-of-origin, ethnocentrism and animosity on product evaluation: Evidence from Romania. Manag Dyn Knowl Econ., 2013; 1(2):259–277.
39.
HaqueA, AnwarN, YasminF, SarwarA, IbrahimZ, MomenA. Purchase intention of foreign products: A study on Bangladeshi consumer perspective. SAGE Open., 2015; 5(2):1–12.
40.
DaggerST, RacitiMM. Matching consumers’ country and product image perceptions: An Australian perspective. J Consum Mark., 2011; 28(3):200–210.
41.
AgrawalJ, KamakuraWA. Country of origin: A competitive advantage?Int J Res Mark., 1999; 16(4):255–267.
42.
RosenbloomA, HaefnerJE. Country-of-origin effects and global brand trust: A first look. J Glob Mark., 2009; 22(4):267–278.
43.
PironF. Consumers’ perceptions of the country-of-origin effect on purchasing intentions of (in)conspicuous products. J Consum Mark., 2000; 17(4): 308–321.
44.
JinZ, ChansarkarB, KondapNM. Brand origin in an emerging market: Perceptions of Indian consumers. Asia Pac J Mark Logist., 2006; 18(4):283–302.
45.
WongN, AhuviaAC. Personal taste and family face: Luxury consumption in Confucian and Western societies. Psychol Mark., 1998; 15:423–441.
46.
WangX, YangZ. Does country-of-origin matter in the relationship between brand personality and purchase intention in emerging economies? Evidence from China’s auto industry. Int Mark Rev., 2008; 25(4):458–474.
47.
BhakarSS, BhakarS, BhakarS. Relationship between country of origin, brand image and customer purchase intentions. Far East J Psychol Bus., 2013; 10(2):25–47.
48.
KhanH, BamberD. Country of origin effects, brand image, and social status in an emerging market. Hum Factors Ergon Manuf., 2008; 18(5):580–588.
49.
JapW. Does “made in …” matter to Chinese consumers?J Glob Bus Manag., 2013; 9(1):186–195.
50.
HairJF, BlackWC, BabinBJ, AndersonRE. Multivariate Data Analysis. 7th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall; 2010.
51.
FornellC, LarckerDF. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J Mark Res., 1981; 18(1):39–50.
52.
FalkRF, MillerNB. A primer for soft modeling. Akron, OH: University of Akron Press; 1992.
53.
BaronRM, KennyDA. The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic and statistical considerations. J Personal Soc Psychol., 1986; 51(6):1173–1182.
54.
VerleghPWJ, SteenkampJBEM. A review and meta-analysis of country-of-origin research. J Econ Psychol., 1999; 20(5):521–546.
55.
KhanH, BamberD. Market entry using country-of-origin intelligence in an emerging market. J Small Bus Enterpr Develop., 2007; 14(1):22–35.
56.
PandaaRK, MisraS. Impact of country-of-origin image on brand equity: A study on durable products in India. Proc Soc Behav Sci., 2014; 150:494–499.
57.
PhamHC, RichardsB. The Western brands in the minds of Vietnamese consumers. J Consum Mark., 2015; 32(5): 367–375.
58.
NarayananR. The impact of factors influencing the buying behaviour on the development of marketing strategies for luxury fashion products: A study of the urban youth in select cities of India. Doctoral Thesis. DY Patil University; 2014.
