Ethnography as a Research Approach for Studying Consumer Behaviour - Essay Example

? Research company tries to show that you can only understand consumer behaviour by living with their behaviour. Table of contents Introduction 3 2. Ethnography as a research approach for studying consumer behaviour 3 2.1 Importance and limitations of ethnography as a research approach 3 2.2 Why is it important to study the composition of the decision making unit? 7 2.3 The scope for expanding this type of research as a means of learning more about buyer behaviour. 9 3. Conclusion 10 References 1. Introduction The identification of the key aspects of consumer behaviour has been, traditionally, a critical priority for marketers worldwide. For this reason, a high range of research methods has been developed for helping marketers in developing the above task. In practice, it has been proved that certain of these methods are not fully effective, allowing the appearance of inaccuracies in their findings. The potential use of ethnography as a research method is explored in this paper. The ‘Project Keyhole’, a research program based on ethnography is used as an example. The project was developed by the advertising firm BMP DDB. The advantages and the limitations of ethnography are also critically examined in order to understand the reasons that led BMP DDB to choose the specific research approach. It is proved that ethnography is a quite effective research method, under the terms that the rules related to its application are respected. 2. Ethnography as a research approach for studying consumer behaviour 2.1 Importance and limitations of ethnography as a research approach Ethnography is a quite popular qualitative research method (Rubin and Babbie 2009, p.218). The key characteristic of ethnography is ‘observation in natural settings’ (Rubin and Babbie 2009, p.218). More specifically, in the context of ethnography researchers can observe the behaviour of a social group in regard to a particular social activity (Rubin and Babbie 2009, p.218). The social group mentioned above needs to have its own culture, as part of the culture of a specific society (Rubin and Babbie 2009, p.218). This means that in ethnography the social groups under observation need to have the same culture, which the researcher should fully understand before starting the relevant process (Rubin and Babbie 2009, p.218). The research tools used in the context of ethnography are interviews and observation (Rubin and Babbie 2009, p.218). Haviland et al. (2010) also note that ethnography is preferred from other qualitative research approaches since it can offer valuable information on a particular culture, as the similar assumptions have been developed through fieldwork (Haviland et al. 2010, p.12). As a research method, ethnography has certain requirements. The common culture of the social group under observation is the primary condition for the development of a successful research project using ethnography (Rubin and Babbie 2009, p.218). Then, it is preferred that the social group participated in the research project is isolated (Haviland et al. 2010, p.12). Isolation, as a term related to ethnography, reflects not just the lack of participation in certain social activities but also the gathering in a particular area, where the social group involved can develop its own style of life (Haviland et al. 2010, p.12). Reference can be made, as examples, to the ‘Islands of the Pacific Ocean or the deserts of Australia’ (Haviland et al. 2010, p.12). The above fact cannot lead to the assumption that ethnography cannot be used in the industrialized countries. In fact, ethnography can be used in every place where a social group, of any size but of a common culture, is established (Haviland et al. 2010, p.12). A household can be a social group that could be studied using ethnography (Haviland et al. 2010, p.12). From a similar point of view, Schensul and LeCompte (1999) note that the key requirement for the development of a successful research project based on ethnography is the ability of the researcher involved to identify ‘the cultural domains related to a particular culture’ (Schensul and LeCompte 1999, p.6). It is explained that by identifying ‘the cultural domains that constitute a specific culture’ (Schensul and LeCompte 1999, p.6) the researcher will be able to check which of these domains are more related to his research project. In this way, the research project could be appropriately adjusted so that it is aligned with the cultural domains that need to be explored using ethnography (Schensul and LeCompte 1999, p.6). Despite its value, ethnography is also related to certain limitations which are not always standardized, depending on the social and cultural framework in which the relevant research project is developed. In regard to the issue of cultural domains discussed above, the following risk exists: it is possible for the researcher to fail in identifying all cultural domains involved in the social group under examination (Schensul and LeCompte 1999, p.6). Then, these domains will not be taken into consideration when developing the research project and when interpreting the findings. In this case, the risk for the full failure of the project is high (Schensul and LeCompte 1999, p.6). Green, Camilli and Elmore (2006) focus on a critical ability of the researcher involved in a research project based on ethnography: ‘the ability to listen’ (Green, Camilli and Elmore 2006, p.286). It is made clear that the full dependency of ethnography on questions that have been developed in advance would lead to inaccurate findings (Green, Camilli and Elmore 2006, p.286). The researcher developed a research project using ethnography should have ‘pre-set questions available’ (Green, Camilli and Elmore 2006, p.286) but these questions should not be exclude the use of other questions that could be developed in field, i.e. in the place where the research project is developed (Green, Camilli and Elmore 2006, p.286). Indeed, while field observation is in progress the researcher can develop additional questions for addressing issues that appear for the first time in the field and of which the researcher could not be aware in advance (Green, Camilli and Elmore 2006, p.286). Dwyer, Gill and Seetaram (2012) focus on two important advantages of ethnography: a) it can reveal different trends within social groups of the same culture and b) it can reveal the potential appearance of social trends in the future, as the signs of these trends can be traced using ethnography (Dwyer, Gill and Seetaram 2012, p.346). Still, it is explained that ethnography, as a research method, is not free from limitations (Dwyer, Gill and Seetaram 2012, p.346). The requirements of ethnography, as discussed above, are factors that can set limits to ethnography. In addition, ethnography can also be related to the following limitations: a) an ethnography-based research project may not respond to the expectations of the reader, being far from the actual life of the social group involved (Coleman and Von Hellermann 2012, p.19); failing in reflecting the daily life of participants can lead an ethnography-based project to full failure (Coleman and Von Hellermann 2012, p.19). Ethnography should not be depended solely on the ideas and the trends of the social system in which participants belong (Coleman and Von Hellermann 2012, p.18). It should be rather related to humans, as members of a specific social and cultural framework (Coleman and Von Hellermann 2012, p.19); b) the power of ethnography to reveal the ‘distinctive views and responses of participants’ (Coleman and Von Hellermann 2012, p.19) can disappear in the case of ‘multi-site ethnography’ (Coleman and Von Hellermann 2012, p.19). In the above case it is quite difficult for the responses of each particular member of a social group to be identified; even if these responses are identified they would seem similar to the responses of another participant (Coleman and Von Hellermann 2012, p.19). In any case, in family units such as Joneses, ethnography can help to identify the criteria on which family decisions related to consumption are developed. These criteria could be further used for evaluating the expected behaviour of consumers in social groups of similar characteristics. In the case under examination, the consumption trends of Joneses family could reveal the similar trends of other family units across the same region/ city. 2.2 Why is it important to study the composition of the decision making unit? When developing a research project based on ethnography it is quite important to study carefully the composition of the decision making unit. This need is derived from the following facts: a) people of different demographics, such as racial characteristics or age, even when having the same culture, are expected to respond differently to the questions set by the researcher (Ilahiane 2004); also the behaviour of these people as members of a social group will be based on different criteria compared to the other members of the group, being of a different racial background or of a different age (Ilahiane 2004). According to Sheth (2011) the importance ‘of family decision making’ (Sheth 2011, p.17) in social research is critical. However, it is explained that family structure and culture in Western countries are different compared to those of families living in regions with different social and cultural characteristics (Sheth 2011, p.17). This means that the composition of a family unit in a Western country can be differentiated from that of an Eastern country; for example, in Western countries, one-parent families is a common phenomenon while in certain eastern countries local ethics do not allow such family structure (Sheth 2011, p.17). On the other hand, Netting, Wilk and Arnould (1984) note that it is quite difficult to be fully aware of the composition of family units in different cultural and social settings. It is explained that during the last decades ‘the household composition and structure has highly changed’ (Netting, Wilk and Arnould 1984, p.13). In this way, researchers may find difficulties in identifying the family unit that would be most appropriate for participating in a research project based on ethnography (Netting, Wilk and Arnould 1984, p.13). Under these terms, the potential update and alteration of ethnography, as a research approach would be attempted (Netting, Wilk and Arnould 1984, p.13). Efforts should be made to focus on individuals rather on social groups, including family units, so that the uniqueness of the responses, a characteristic of ethnography, to be secured. In this context, studying the composition of the decision making unit would offer the following advantage: it could help the researcher to understand whether the particular unit could help to produce unique responses in regard to the issues explored through the ethnography; if not, then the limitation of the decision making unit could be possibly decided so that the responses are distinctive. The issues mentioned above are also discussed in the study of Rogers and Schlossman (1990). The above researchers note that the identification of the household that would be most appropriate for participating in an ethnography-based project can be a challenging task (Rogers and Schlossman 1990, p.11). Another problem that needs to be resolved when developing such projects is the following one: how the researcher will identify’ the needs that have to be measured’ (Rogers and Schlossman 1990, p.11). Also, it is often difficult to keep deadlines and cost limits when developing research projects, a problem that also appears in ethnography (Rogers and Schlossman 1990, p.11). If the composition of the decision making group is proved as inappropriate as the project is in progress, it would be quite difficult for the researcher to change the project’s structure and there would be no time, or fund required, for defining a new decision making unit (Rogers and Schlossman 1990, p.11). Referring especially to the value of the decision making group in ethnography, Rogers and Schlossman (1990) note that it is on these group’s characteristics that the structure/ content of the research project are based as the key aim of a researcher is to guarantee that the responses of this unit will be effectively captured and interpreted. 2.3 The scope for expanding this type of research as a means of learning more about buyer behaviour. The behaviour of buyers within each market is not standardized. In fact, as Ferrell and Hartline (2010) explain, buyers tend to choose a product/ service that do not meet the requirements that have already set in advance. In other words, there is often a contradiction between the statements of a buyer in regard to a product/ service and his buying decision (Ferrell and Hartline 2010, p.154). For this reason, the identification of consumer behaviour can be a challenging task for marketers worldwide. Ethnography can help marketers to understand the actual views of consumers in regard to various products/ services (Ferrell and Hartline 2010, p.154), at the level that the findings of ethnography reflect the daily responses of the participants to the market trends. Another reason for which ethnography should be preferred as a tool for identifying the consumer behaviour would be the following one: ethnographic research is like to be ‘quick and entertaining’ (Palmer 2012, p.150), so that it can be accepted by the consumer easier compared to other research methods. For researchers also, ethnography is valuable offering ‘insights to the daily buying decisions of consumers’ (Palmer 2012, p.150), not being restricted to general information that it can be acquired through a series of other research tools. Because of its potentials to offer ‘accurate information in regard to product/ service usage’ (Paley 2006, p.70), ethnography can help marketers to develop effective ‘market segmentation schemes’ (Paley 2006, p.70), an advantage that it is not available through other research approaches. More specifically, Paley (2006) that the use of ethnography in market segmentation can lead to the development of proposals that detailed and characterized by high sensitivity (Paley 2006, p.70). Still, the use of ethnography as a complementary research tool could significantly increase the effectiveness of any research method (Paley 2006 p.70). In addition, Lamb (2009) notes that in the context of ethnography researchers can use their personal skills and competencies in order to acquire a ‘deeper and richer insights into behaviour’ (Lamb 2009, p.120). In other research methods, such involvement of the researcher is often not feasible, another reason for which the expansion of ethnography, as a research approach, would be decided. 3. Conclusion As already explained, the success of ethnography, as a research method, is depended on various criteria. First, it is important for the researcher to be aware of the culture of the social group involved; only in this way, the interpretation of the group’s behaviour towards various social events will be accurate. In the case under examination, the effectiveness of a particular research project has been discussed. It has been made clear that the project’s supervisors have used appropriate tools in applying ethnography. Still, the following issue has appeared: the performance of the databases used in the ethnographic process has not been satisfactory. This fact denotes that the risk of inaccuracy in ethnography may be significant. Still, ethnography should remain one of the most valuable research methods under the terms that no IT system involved in research would be expected to offer fully accurate findings; as in other sectors, in scientific and business research also IT systems cannot be fully free from errors, even minor. For this reason, IT failures should not limit the power of ethnography as an effective qualitative research method, as indicated through the case study analyzed above. References Coleman, S. and von Hellermann, P., 2012. Multi-Sited Ethnography: Problems and Possibilities in the Translocation of Research Methods. London: Routledge. Dwyer, L., Gill, A. and Seetaram, N., 2012. Handbook of Research Methods in Tourism: Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing. Ferrell, O. and Hartline, M., 2010. Marketing Strategy. 5th ed. Belmont: Cengage Learning. Green, J., Camilli, G. and Elmore, P., 2006. Handbook of Complementary Methods Education Research. London: Routledge. Haviland, W., Prins, H., McBride, B. and Walrath, D., 2010. Cultural Anthropology: The Human Challenge. 13th ed. Belmont: Cengage Learning. Ilahiane, H., 2004. Ethnicities, Community Making, And Agrarian Change: The Political Ecology Of A Moroccan Oasis. Lanham: University Press of America. Lamb, C., 2009. Mktg. Belmont: Cengage Learning. Mariampolski, H., 2005. Ethnography for Marketers: A Guide to Consumer Immersion. London: SAGE. Netting, R., Wilk, R. and Arnould, E., 1984. Households: Comparative and Historical Studies of the Domestic Group. California: University of California Press. Paley, N., 2006. Manager's Guide to Competitive Marketing Strategies: Third Edition Thorogood Series. London: Thorogood Publishing. Palmer, A., 2012. Introduction to Marketing: Theory and Practice. 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Rogers, B. and Schlossman, N., 1990. Intra-Household Resource Allocation: Issues and Methods for Development Policy and Planning: Papers Prepared for the Workshop on Methods of Measuring Intra-Household Resource Allocation, Gloucester, Massachusetts, USA, October 1983. Tokyo: United Nations University Press. Rubin, A. and Babbie, E., 2009. Essential Research Methods for Social Work. 2nd ed. Belmont: Cengage Learning. Schensul, J. and LeCompte, M., 1999. Essential Ethnographic Methods: Observations, Interviews, and Questionnaires. Walnut Creek: Rowman Altamira. Sheth, J., 2011. Models of Buyer Behavior, Chapter 2: A Theory of Family Buying Decisions. Decatur: Marketing Classics Press. Read More