Consumer Behaviour in Purchase of a Mobile Phone - Dissertation Example

? FACTORS IN MOBILE PHONE PREFERENCE BEHAVIOR AMONG LONDON: AN EXPLORATORY STUDY OF 4P’s AND BEYOND. SUBMITTED BY: SUBMITTED COURSE NAME: INSTITUTION: DATE OF SUBMISSION: CONTENTS No. TOPIC PAGE 1. INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………….…..01 1.1 Aims of the Research…………………………………….…..…01 1.2 Objectives of the Research………………………………...…..01 1.3 Research Question………………………………………………02 1.4 Rationale of the study…………………………………….……..02 2. LITERATURE REVIEW………………………………………………..…....03 2.1 Theoretical Framework………………………………..…….......03 2.2 Relevant Researches…………………………………………….05 3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND ANALYSIS………………………...08 3.1 Research Design………………………………………………..08 3.2 Sample…………………………………………………………...09 3.3 Research Tool………………………………………………..…11 3.4 Data Collection………………………………………….……...12 3.5 Data Analysis…………………………………………………...12 3.6 Ethical Issues…………………………………………….……..13 3.7 Reliability and validity concerns…………………………….…14 3.8 Time scale and Resources…………………………………….14 4. DATA PRESENTATION AND CONCLUSION…………..………………..15 1. INTRODUCTION This paper proposes a dissertation, exploratory in nature in order to identify the factors which influence consumer behaviour in purchase of a mobile phone among university students in London. The main goal is to come up with an explanation of consumer’s choice behaviour in light of the factors which influence their preference of one mobile phone over the other. 1.1 Research Aims The purpose of this study is to explore consumer preferences in case of mobile phone purchase among the university students living in London. The aims of this research are therefore: i. To determine which mobile phone brand is most popular among university students in London. ii. To find out what factors influence the preference choice among university students in London while purchasing a mobile phone. 1.2 Research Objectives Following are the objectives for this research, designed to cater the fulfilment of research aims as previously mentioned: i. To conduct a survey based on a specially designed questionnaire meant to gauge the factors which play role in customer’s mobile phone buying behaviour, like: Brand name, price, quality and features offered etc. ii. To find out which mobile phone brand is more popular among university students in London and why is it so. iii. To conduct focus group sessions with a small group of participants to explore the factors involved in consumer behaviour with respect to purchasing of a mobile. 1.3 Research Question The questions being addressed in this study are to identify the most popular mobile phone among university students in London and to explore the main factors which govern the customer’s choice preference in the purchase of a mobile phone; brand name, price, features offered, quality, past experience of using a mobile etc. 1.4 Rationale for research This topic was chosen for research because it is of interest for the researcher personally and is related to the field of the researcher as well. As the literature review section will reveal, there is ample literature on consumer’s choice behaviour, but there are very few mobile phone brand specific studies and even fewer studies which have specifically explored the area. Although different socio economic, self concept, attribution and learning theories have attempted to explain choice behaviour in consumers, there is no single theory explaining the choice behaviour in all its aspects. This study is being attempted in an exploratory manner in the hope of hitting a model that explains choice behaviour. 2. LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Theoretical Framework Many previous researchers and theorists have attempted to theorize consumer behaviour. In this respect, popular theories applying to consumer behaviour are reviewed below: According to the brand equity theory, customer’s perceptions and attitudes towards a product are very important in its popularity. Brand equity is a term given collectively to customer’s perceptions and attitudes to wars a product and advertisement has a strong role in creating brand equity (Walker, 2002). According to Kim, et al (2008), the concept of brand equity is made up of various other theoretical concepts in marketing theory. These include: brand loyalty, brand awareness, brand personality, brand association and perceived quality. Two of these factors, namely brand loyalty and brand awareness/association play a very crucial role in determining overall brand equity (Kim, et al; 2008). Brand loyalty refers to the tendency of a customer to stick to one brand, which he or she has already used, or the brand which is most popular in the family or the brand which for any reason is associated with quality or name. It is a positively biased emotive, evaluative and behavioural response tendency towards branded objects in general or a specific brand (Kim, et al; 2008). Brand loyalty forces customer’s to search for their desired product only in among the products of the brand they are ‘loyal’ to. On the other hand, brand awareness/association refers to the information a customer has about a brand. Advertisements and experiences that customers are exposed to, help in building brand awareness and the customers automatically create brand associations in light of this awareness (Kim, et al; 2008). The popular 4Ps of marketing namely product, place, price and promotion have been very popular since 1960s until now. According to Gronroos (1994), the 4P’s theory is actually a theory on marketing variables: factors that affect marketing of a product. This model has been followed religiously and blindly for many years, however empirical research on 4P’s has been lacking (Gronroos, 1994). Constantinides, (2006) has reviewed all the criticisms on the 4 Ps theories in a paper. Some researchers have argued that services be added to the 4 Ps, some have offered an alternate model, i.e. of 5 V’s, namely: Value, viability, variety, volume and virtue; yet other researchers have claimed that 4 P’s is a very internal theory and does not take into account the customer related variables. Schultz (2001, cited in Constantinides, 2006) has claimed that the model does not make sense in today’s marketing world and has suggested that it must be replaced by a new marketing mix, involving the triad of marketer, employee and customer. Psychologists have a slightly different view in this regard. According to Rosenberg (1979, Cited in Sirgy, 1982), self concept refers the totality of an individual’s thoughts and feelings when referring to him or herself. The Self concept theory in marketing states that consumer behaviour is affected greatly by a person’s self concept. Acceding to Sirgy (1982), product symbolism is in work when a consumer prefers a product or brand. Consumers tend to opt for brands that are in league of their self image. Personality of the consumer can be judged via product symbolism (Sirgy, 1982). The utility theory of consumer behaviour postulates that constrained by the available budget, individuals are forced to chose the commodity, pressed by demand (Brown & Deoton, 1972). Utility theory according to Brown & Deoton (1972) claims, that consumer’s buying behaviour is controlled by their budget and their decision is made by a mutual balancing between their commodity need/demand and available budget. 2.1.1: Need for a consolidated theory of consumer behaviour: To conclude, it can be said that there are many theories of consumer behaviour available but most of the theories are limited to few aspects only. This theoretical review has strongly identified the need for a consolidated model of factors in consumer preference and has enhanced the researcher’s resolve to opt for an exploratory research in the hope and good will of being able to produce a research based model of consumer preferences in light of the findings. 2.2 Relevant Researches Academic and scholarly research journals were searched and scanned in order to identify some relevant previous research studies on the topic. Some of the studies found are reviewed below: Mack & Sharples (2009) conducted a research to identify the factors in consumer preference while purchasing a mobile phone. The main aim was to study whether or not usability is a factor in consumer choice, but the study also identified other factors. The findings were: usability is an important factor is consumer behaviour but other factors also influence consumer choice. These factors include: aesthetics and cost. Mack and Sharples concluded that the process of consumer choice is quite complex and more research is yet needed to come up with a complete model. The research methods used were mixed. Interviews, experiments using methods of information search, structured preference elicitation, and ranking were used; however, some preliminary interviews were conducted to identify possible factors in consumer preference before the research was conducted. This approach limited the chance of identifying all possible existing factors in consumer preferences. In light of this review, the researcher is resolved to conduct the current study in an exploratory manner so as to come up with a more complete model of consumer preference. The plus points of the study were the usage of systematic, experimental method. Another study by Bouhlel & colleagues (2009) investigated the role of brand personality in consumer behaviour. This was a nicely set up, empirical study, where 380 participants received an SMS advertisement. They were tested on the variables: brand trust, brand personality, brand attachment, brand commitment and purchasing intention. The findings revealed that concepts related to brand personality positively influence the purchasing intention. The plus point of the study was definitely its empirical approach; however, being purely quantitative, it did not allow any in depth data collection which might have been helpful in identifying the relational process of influence of brand personality on consumer preference. This study convinced the researcher to use a mixed methods approach and not to rely on quantitative data alone. Petruzzellis (2008) conducted one study in Italy, which aimed at studying consumer behaviour shift from technical to symbolic level. The study was exploratory and qualitative; interviews were conducted with a random, stratified sample to find out the interplay of various factors in purchase decision making process. The findings were that brand attitudes are important in buying behaviour of customers and that technological factors without brand image are not strong enough to attract consumer’s preferences. This study, being qualitative was limited in its methodology; but nevertheless, identified the presence of an important marketing and technological dualism. There have also been studies to investigate whether or not consumer choices vary from culture to culture. Two studies were reviewed in this regard. One study by Jiao (2009) compared the consumer behaviour among Chinese and UK based mobile phone consumers. Mixed research method was used and the study was conducted in two phases. The quantitative phase was carried out via a survey with a self administered interview whereas the second stage was based on interviews. In order to be able to build a comparison, following three components of consumer preference were studied: social the meaning attached to mobile phone in both cultures, influence of these social meanings on brand preference and mobile usage patterns. Great differences were found in the way consumer preference work in the two cultures and implications were made to deal with product promotions according to the culture. Another study in the same league was conducted by Cha and colleagues (2005). Here the comparison was between consumer preference in Korea and UK. The method was mixed, combining a factor analyzed survey and customer evaluation. The study revealed that cultural differences exist not only in the mobile phone related frustrations and satisfactions, but also in the values related to user interface. It was decided in light of the last two studies to limit the sample to London in the current study. This will not only exclude the noise variable of culture but will enrich the results by limiting the scope of the study. 3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY This section will outline and justify the proposed research design, methodology, sample size and analysis techniques. This study is exploratory in nature. Exploratory research focuses on discovery and aims at building a theory to explain the phenomenon under study (Jupp, 2006). According to Zikmund (2002), exploratory research is conducted where new discoveries are to be made; the researcher needs to screen alternatives or wants to diagnose the situation. In case of current study, the aim is to reach a theoretical explanation/model explaining consumer preference behaviour, to identify what other factors (not highlighted in previous researches) impact the consumer behaviour and to study the process of factors’ influence on consumer preferences. Therefore, exploratory study appears to be the best option to go for in order to achieve these aims. The main difference in exploratory and classical research is that classical builds on a theory and strives to test a hypothesis based on the theory, while exploratory research collects data and create a theoretical model or explanation based on the data obtained (Kaski, 1997). 3.1 Research design The research design chose for this study is a mixed research design. According to Burns (2006), quantitative research is one which involves data collection while using a structured questionnaire, where in the respondent is required to choose one or another pre determined answer. Qualitative research on the other hand, is conducted by analyzing what people do, say or how they behave (Family Health International, 2004). Mixed research method, as the name indicates is one, which combine both quantitative and qualitative research methods (Azorin & Cameron, 2010). This combination approach has recently gained much popularity and its purpose is to create plurality in the design. According to Azorin & Cameron (2010), the data collected via combination method provides a greater insight into all aspects of the research problem as compared to a mono-methodological research. Mixed method was chosen for two reasons in this study: Firstly because it is an exploratory study and qualitative detail was needed to identify the factors impacting the consumer preference, while there was also a need for quantitative analysis to determine the most popular cell phone brand among university students of London. Secondly, Azorin & Cameron (2010) have also presented evidence that using a mixed approach in research yields better results, but this practice is not yet common in marketing research. They have also recommended that mixed method be applied in the field of marketing research to yield more effective results. 3.2 Sample According to Kotler, et al (2009), probability sampling reduces sampling error and makes the sample more representative. Probability sampling is defined as that form of sampling, wherein the whole target population has an equal chance of being selected in the research study (Teddlie & Yu, 2007). The time and cost of random probability sampling is usually high, so marketing researchers often opt for non probability techniques (Kotler, et al; 2009). Among the non probability types, according to Teddlie & Yu (2007), purposive technique is chosen for the sake of representativeness or comparability of sample, unique cases or sequential data. In case of current study, limited resources and transportation limitations do not allow probability sampling. In order to ensure that the sample fulfils the aims of the study, while also saving time and money, purposive sampling type should be applied. Purposive sampling means that the researcher will intentionally select the individuals who suit the purpose of study (Creswell, 2005). Purposive sampling has further subtypes, among which the one suitable for marketing studies in maximum variability purposive sampling (Teddlie & Yu, 2007). According to Creswell (2005), maximum variability purposive sampling ensures that the people included in the sample vary in their opinions and attitudes. Deciding the sample size is yet another important issue while planning a research. Large samples obviously give more reliable results; however, a sample of less than 1% of the total population is quite enough to represent the population (Kotler, et al; 2009). Suggested ideal sample sizes vary with the type of research. According to Creswell (2005), qualitative studies, since they focus on representativeness of the sample, must use larger sample sizes, but qualitative studies that go into in depth analysis should use relatively smaller sample sizes. The sample size chosen for qualitative study must be small enough to provide space for in depth data collection while the sample size for quantitative data must be large to ensure reliability and add strength to the study (Sandelowski, 1995). Data from very large samples are very difficult to handle in case of qualitative research methods (Creswell, 2005) especially focus groups. Ideally, a focus group consists of 6-10 individuals only since handling more than this number poses difficulty not only in recording the data but also in conducting meaningful focus group sessions (Krueger, 1994). There is no sure shot figure regarding number of sessions to be administered with focus groups. According to Carlsen & Glenton (2011), based on a study they conducted, mostly researchers conduct an average of 8 sessions; however some researchers keep conducting sessions until point of saturation is reached. Minimum number of focus group sessions for one group however, according to Krueger (1994) is three. In light of above discussion, maximum variability purposive sampling technique is chosen with a sample size of 100, provided that all participants will be university students, residing in London and owning a mobile phone of any brand. All of these will participate in the survey; however, a subsample of 8 individuals out of these 100 will be selected for focus group discussion, using the same sampling technique. 3.3 Research Instruments/ Tools For the quantitative (survey) part of the study, a specially designed questionnaire will be used (See Appendix A). Questionnaires are an essential way to gather data for surveys (Kelley, et al; 2003). Focus group method has been chosen as the qualitative research tool and methodology. Focus group method was chosen because according to Krueger (1994), focus groups are the best option in research where the researcher needs to study conditional factors or gather additional information related to attitudes. In this study, focus group will help fulfil the research aim of getting an in depth insight into the reasons for brand preference. A rough set of semi structured questions will also be created for focus group discussions because according to (Stewart, et al; 1990), it facilitates the discussions. 3.4 Data collection Data will be collected in multiple stages. The quantitative data will be collected first by the researcher who will visit the university personally and distribute the questionnaires. Face to face surveys are more reliable and questionnaire return rate is enhanced (Kelley, et al; 2003). In light of the data obtained, a sub-sample will be drawn for the focus group discussions. In order to collect data for the qualitative analysis, 3 sessions of focus group will be conducted. A semi structured questionnaire will also be prepared before hand to facilitate the researcher during the method. This questionnaire should have an ice breaking question, 3 key questions and a summary question (Steward & Shamdasani, 1990). 3.5 Data Analysis The data obtained will be analyzed using two different techniques. The quantitative data, obtained from survey can be processed using simple descriptive statistics (Kelley, et al; 2003). Percentages of responses in favour of each brand will be calculated and compared. The qualitative data, in recorded form from the focus group discussions will be handled differently. There are many methods to analyze qualitative data yielded as a result of focus groups (Engineering Statistics Handbook, 2003). Content analysis is one method for analysis of exploratory data. In content analysis, the data is scanned for content and a check list of coded words (each word represents a factor) is obtained. For exploratory studies, emergent coding is used (Krippendorf, 1980). To carry out emergent coding, the researcher will ask a fellow researcher to go through the data and come up with a check list so as to include all factors found in data content. The researcher will also come up with a similar list independently. After establishing the reliability in the two lists, content analysis is carries out based on the coding list thus created (Haney, et al; 1998). 3.6 Ethical considerations Permission of the related parties/persons/ authority figures to conduct data collection for research purposes is needed and must be sought prior to finalizing the data collection plan (Creswell, 2005). This will be done prior to the research by the researcher (Appendix C). According to Kelley, et al (2003), a covering letter or a briefing (Appendix D) in written form must be given to all participants, briefing them about the study, on basis of which they will decide whether or not they are willing to participate in the research. It also is the researchers’ duty to ensure confidentiality and anonymity of the respondents (Kelly, et al; 2003). This will be done in addition to preparing An informed consent form (Appendix E). 3.7 Validity and Reliability Issues There are several reliability and validity issues that apply to any research (Kelley, et al; 2003). To ensure the validity in this case, a pilot study will be conducted with the first 10 questionnaires. The questionnaire will be amended before final usage in light of shortcomings revealed during the pilot administration. To address the reliability issue, firstly it will be confirmed that the participants fill the questionnaires themselves in presence of researcher and secondly, the coding lists in content analysis will be matched (see analysis section). 3.8 Time Scale and Resources This study has been planned to be completed within limited resources. All that will be needed are the transport expenses for the researcher in order to collect data and space, time and transportation resources for conducting the focus group sessions. Material needed for the study includes a recording device to tape the focus group discussions in order to facilitate content analysis later, a computer and access to different academic and online libraries. The total suggested time for this project is three months. The schedule will be divided into 12 weeks. Introductory material, theories and relevant research will be reviewed and studied in detail in the first two weeks. Questionnaire and survey design will be finalized in the next two weeks. Week 5, 6 and 7 will be utilized for data collection and the following three weeks will be spent in analyzing and organizing the data to draw results. The last two weeks will be dedicated to writing and presenting the findings. The time line below shows the planned time scale: 4 PRESENTING DATA AND DRAWING CONCLUSIONS The analyzed data and findings will be presented in easy to understand graphical forms. The theory or model derived from the findings will also be presented in diagrammatic form using MS word’s ‘smart art’ option. The data from survey will mostly be descriptive since the simple goal of the survey is to compare popularity of common mobile phone brands and types in London. When the aim is to compare the existence of two or more behaviours/attitudes or elements, in order to keep the calculations simple, it is ideal to calculate percentages for each element (Kelley, et al; 2003). Percentages can then be presented graphically, using bar graphs. Bar graph option MS excel will be utilized to create a visual graph of percentages obtained. This graph will give an at a glance insight about the relative popularity of commonly available mobile phone brands among university students in London. Results of content analysis can also be presented in tabular form; however, presenting the findings in graphical forms not only makes the findings more visual, but also less time taking and easy to understand for the reader (Krueger, 1994). Therefore, the findings of content analysis will be analyzed and presented in bar graph, showing the most frequent as well as the least frequent and common factors that impact the consumer’s preference in choice of mobile phone brand and type among university students in London. In light of these graphs and model, conclusions will be drawn and summarized in the last section of the research paper. Recommendations will also be made for the future researchers in light of the gaps identified in existing research during the review of literature. This paper is being proposed in the good will of adding to existing literature and theory on factors that influence consumer choice behaviour and it is hoped that a useful and comprehensive theoretical model will be derived from the findings of this study. REFERENCES Azorin, J.M & Camron, R. (2010). The applications of mixed methods in organizational research: A literature review. Electronic journal of business research methods, 8(2): 95-105. Burns, A.C & Bush, R.F. (2006). Marketing Resarch. New Dehli: Pearson Education. Brown, A & Deoton, A. (1972). Surveys in applied economics: models of consumer behavior. The Economic Journal, 82(328): 1145-1236 Bouhlel, O; Mzoughi, N; Hadiji, D & Slimane, B. (2009). Brand personality and mobile marketing: An empirical analysis. World academy of sicence, engineering and technology, 53. [Internat]. Available at: http://www.waset.org/journals/waset/v53/v53-113.pdf [Accessed: May 5th, 2011]. Cha, H; Oshlyanski, L & Cairns, P. (2005). Mobilephone preferences and values: UK v/s Korea. [Internet]. Available at: http://www-users.cs.york.ac.uk/~pcairns/papers/IWIPS_2005.pdf [Accessed: may 5ht, 2011]. Constantinides, E. (2006). The marketing mix revisited: towards 21st century marketing. Journal of marketing management, 22(1): 406-438. Carlsen, B & Glenton, C. What about N? (Abstract). BMC Medical research methodology, 2011: 11(26). [Internet]. Available from: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2288/11/26/abstract [Accessed: May 2nd, 2011]. Creswell, J. W. (2005). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Sage. Engineering Statistics handbook. (2003). NIST. [Internet]. Available from: http://www.itl.nist.gov/div898/handbook/toolaids/pff/1-eda.pdf [Accessed May 3rd, 2011]. Family Health International. (2004). Qualitative research methods: A data collector’s field guide. [Internet]. Available at: http://www.fhi.org/nr/rdonlyres/etl7vogszehu5s4stpzb3tyqlpp7rojv4waq37elpbyei3tgmc4ty6dunbccfzxtaj2rvbaubzmz4f/overview1.pdf [Accessed May 4th,2011]. Gonroos, C. (1994). From Marketing mix to relationship marketing. Management Decision, 32(2): 4-20. Haney, W., Russell, M., Gulek, C., and Fierros, E. (Jan-Feb, 1998). Drawing on education: Using student drawings to promote middle school improvement. Schools in the Middle, 7(3), 38? 43 Kelley, K; Clark, B; Brown, V & Sitzia, J. (2003). Good practice in the conduct and reporting of survey research. International journal for quality in health care. 15(3): 261-266. Kim, W.G; Sun, B.J & Kim, H.J. (2008). Multidimensional customer based brand equity and its consequences. Journal of Hospitability and Tourism, 32(2): 235-254. Krippendorff, K. (1980). Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Jupp, V. (2006). SAGE dictionary of social research methods. CA: Sage. Jiao, K. (2009). The influence of cultural differences between China and UK on consumer behavior of mobile phones. The Bournemouth business school. [Internat]. Available at: http://www.gooddealsonoffer.co.uk/Final%20Drafts%202.pdf [Accessed: may 5th, 2011]. Kaski, S.(1997). Methods for exploratory data analysis. [Internat]. Available at: http://users.ics.tkk.fi/sami/thesis/node7.html [Accessed may 4th, 2011]. Kotler, P; Keller, K. L; Koshy, A & Jha, M. (2009). Marketing Management. New Dehli: Pearson Education. Krueger, R.A. (1994). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Mack, Z. (2009). The importance of usability in product choice: A mobile phone case study. Ergonomics, 52(12): 1514-1528. Petruzzellis, L. (2008). Mobile phone choice: Technology versus marketing. European Journal of Marketing, 44(5): 610-634. Sandelowski, M. (1995). Sample size in Qualitative Research. Research on Nursing and Health, 18(2): 179-183. Sirgy, M.J. (1982). Self concept in consumer behavior: A critical review. Journal of consumer research, 9(3): 287-300. Steward, P.W & Shamdasani, P.N.(1990). Focus groups: theory and practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Teddlie, C & Yu, F. (2007). Mixed Methods Sampling: A typology with examples. Journal of mixed methods research, 1(77): 77-100. Walker, D. 92008). Building brand equity through advertisement. [Internet]. Ipos. Available at: http://www.ipsos.com/asi/sites/ipsos.com.asi/files/pdf/rc5.pdf [Accessed May 5th , 2011]. Zikmind, W. G. (2002). Business research methods. Suison City, CA: South western publishers. Appendix- A Questionnaire 1) Which brand of mobile phone are you using at present? 2) Are you satisfied with your phone? i) Yes ii) No 3) Does the phone offer all features you need? i) Yes ii) No 4) What brand would you opt for if you had to change your phone? i) Apple ii) Samsung iii) Nokia iv) Blackberry v) Other 5) You bought this phone because of: i) Features ii) Brand name iii) Price iv) Quality 6) Do you feel this phone is worth its price? i) Yes ii) No 7) Please write your name and contact number below if you are willing to participate in a focus group discussion session on the same topic. The focus groups session will last 45 minutes and will be conducted at:___________ Appendix- B Outline questions for focus group Ice Breakers: i) Which one of you is sorry to have bought the phone you did? ii) Which one of you is super satisfied with you phone? iii) Who wants to share their experience with their cell phone? Key Questions: i) What factors did you consider while buying your phone? ii) Did you read the features offered by the phone and did you compare it with other brands? iii) Is brand name important? iv) Does brand name and popularity reflect quality? v) Is it advisable to buy an expensive phone from a popular brand with same features as compared to a non expensive phone from an unpopular brand? vi) Do you feel your mobile phone should match your personality? vii) Can quality be compromised for price? viii) Do advertisements impel you to choose better? Summary Questions: i) How has your experience been with your mobile phone? ii) Do you intend to change it? If so, why? What will you replace it with? Appendix- C Permission Letter Dear Sir/Madam, This letter reaches you to seek permission for data collection from your university for fulfilment of research requirements. I, _______________ am conducting a research study regarding consumer preferences. Details of my study are attached in form of briefing letter. I need some research participants for this study who are studying in any university in London. Kindly grant me permission to gather information I require for my research by getting my research questionnaires filled by students enrolled in this university. I will ask students to fill the questionnaires when they are free and will not disturb them during study. The questionnaires are not very long and will not take much time. Please allow me to collect this data during following dates: _________ to ___________. I shall be extremely grateful to you and by allowing me you will be acting in favour of facilitating research in the field of marketing. Thanking you in advance, NAME AND SIGNATURE. Dated:_________________ Appendix- D Briefing letter TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN This letter is to inform you about the research that is being conducted by _________________, student of ________________________ as part of course work. The study aims to gauge the consumer’s preference behaviours in their choice of mobile phone brands. The study participants are university students, residing in London. The aim of this research is to find out what factors influence a consumer’s choice or preference while deciding the mobile phone brand to opt for. The study will take up only 10 minutes of your time, wherein you will be asked to fill in a simple, basic questionnaire. There are no psychologically disturbing questions in the study. Your anonymity and confidentiality will be maintained at all costs. There is no compensation offered for participation in this study, you may decline participation at any point if you find any reason for not continuing. Looking forward to your valuable participation, Thank you. For further details please contact: Boonita…….. e-mail: Contact number: Appendix- E Consent form I ________________________________ of ___________________________ University, am willing to participate in this research study, knowing that I will not be compensated for participation and that my participation is voluntary; and I may withdraw this participation at any point during the study if I want to. I promise that I will provide all information honestly and truthfully. Signature: _____________________________ Read More