Сегментация потребителей цифровых товаров: роль цифровых компетенций и принадлежности к поколению
Целью диссертации является разработка сегментации потребителей цифровых товаров на основе их цифровых компетенций и поколенческих особенностей.
Задачами диссертации являются: обзор существующей литературы, посвященной онлайн-поведению потребителей, видам и особенностям цифровых товаров, существующим фреймворкам цифровых компетенций потребителей, различиям в покупательском поведении представителей разных поколений; выявление и анализ релевантных направлений исследования поведения потребителей; сегментация потребителей и описание сегментов по выбранным направлениям.
Основными результатами работы являются: выделение девяти сегментов потребителей цифровых товаров на основе трех уровней цифровых компетенций и трех поколений потребителей, а также описание каждого из сегментов по демографическим признакам и составляющим онлайн-поведения.
INTRODUCTION ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..6
1.1. RESEARCH BACKGROUND: TOPIC, FOCUS AND SCOPE ……………………………………………………………………..6
1.2. RESEARCH GAP, QUESTIONS AND OBJECTIVES ………………………………………………………………………………7
1.3. OVERVIEW OF RESEARCH STRUCTURE ……………………………………………………………………………………….9
CHAPTER 1. DIGITAL COMPETENCIES AND BEHAVIOURAL FEATURES OF MODERN CONSUMERS: THEORIES, FRAMEWORKS, MODELS…………………………………………………………………………………………………….10
1.1.
1.1.1.
1.1.2.
1.2. 1.3.
1.3.1.
1.3.2.
1.4.
1.4.1. 1.4.2. 1.4.3.
CHAPTER 2.
2.1. 2.2. 2.3.
CONSUMER ONLINE BEHAVIOR ……………………………………………………………………………………………..10
Consumer behavior: definitions and models ……………………………………………………………….10
Consumer online behavior patterns …………………………………………………………………………..15
DIGITAL PRODUCTS…………………………………………………………………………………………………………..17 CONSUMER DIGITAL COMPETENCES ……………………………………………………………………………………….20 Digital competences and related terms overview ………………………………………………………..20 Analysis of existing digital competences frameworks…………………………………………………..23 GENERATIONAL APPROACH AS A TYPE OF PSYCHOGRAPHIC SEGMENTATION………………………………………….29 Psychographic segmentation: concept and main models ……………………………………………..30 Generational approach to psychographic segmentation ………………………………………………33 Representatives of different generations as consumers ……………………………………………….39
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY…………………………………………………………………………………… 43
RESEARCH APPROACH ……………………………………………………………………………………………………….43 DATA COLLECTION METHODS AND PROCEDURES …………………………………………………………………………45 DATA ANALYSIS AND METHODS …………………………………………………………………………………………….49
CHAPTER 3.
PRODUCTS CONSUMERS’ BEHAVIOUR ………………………………………………………………………………………………… 50
THE ROLE OF DIGITAL COMPETENCES AND GENERATIONAL FEATURES IN DIGITAL
3.1. RESEARCH SAMPLE …………………………………………………………………………………………………………..50
3.2. DIGITAL PRODUCTS CONSUMERS OF DIFFERENT GENERATIONS …………………………………………………………54
3.3. DEFINING SEGMENTS OF DIGITAL CONSUMERS: FACTOR AND CLUSTER ANALYSIS…………………………………….61
3.4. EXPLORING THE FEATURES OF DEFINED SEGMENTS ………………………………………………………………………67
3.5. EXPLICIT ANSWERS TO RESEARCH QUESTIONS …………………………………………………………………………….70
3.6. THEORETICAL AND MANAGERIAL IMPLICATIONS ………………………………………………………………………….71
3.7. LIMITATIONS AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR FURTHER RESEARCH ……………………………………………………………72
CONCLUSION ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 73 REFERENCES ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 75 APPENDIX 1. QUESTIONNAIRE ……………………………………………………………………………………………….. 79 APPENDIX 2. FACTOR ANALYSIS FOR DIGITAL COMPETENCE DIMENSIONS……………………………………..84 APPENDIX 3. ANOVA’S…………………………………………………………………………………………………………..86 APPENDIX 4. SEGMENTATION OF DIGITAL CONSUMERS …………………………………………………………….. 95
The growth in the number of smart devices, the digital transformation of the world, the increasing connection speeds within the global network — all this contributes to the growth of the size of the digital content market. According to Digital Content Market Report (QYResearch, 2020), in 2019, the Global Digital Content Market size was estimated at USD 167.370 Million and it is expected to reach USD 397.390 Million by the end of 2026, with a compound annual growth rate of 13% during forecast 2021-2026.
The spread of digital products is not only obvious at first glance, but also statistically noted: according to the 2018 Russian consumer behavior survey conducted by PwC, at that time the share of digital product purchases was 54% of all online purchases made by consumers. Of course, in 3 years, the digital goods market has experienced an even greater development, not only due to rapidly emerging technological innovations but also due to factors associated with the Covid-19 pandemic.
Researchers of Demand institute (2015), jointly operated by The Conference Board and Nielsen Company, proposed the term Connected Spenders — buyers who will account for more than half of global consumption by 2025. Connected Spenders are digital avid shoppers who have internet access, the wherewithal to fund discretionary purchases, and a greater tendency to consume than other internet users (Kelly L., Anderson B., Cheng B., 2017). Optimistic and willing to spend money, Connected Spenders are easy enough to attract with marketing tools. However, not all consumer segments behave like them.
With the digitalization of the world, the study of motives and patterns of online consumer behavior has become a major area of digital marketing. New variables such as emerging technologies, innovative solutions, services, products, and so on are constantly affect the choices and actions of online consumers. To predict consumer behavior, marketers and researchers try to investigate their individual traits and identify factors that form the differences between the behavior of representatives of different consumer segments.
One of such individual traits of consumers that influence their online behavior is digital competencies — competencies consumers need to function actively, safely and assertively in the digital marketplace (Brečko, B., Ferrari, A., edited by Vuorikari R., Punie Y., 2016). In Digital Competence Framework for Consumers, developed by the Joint Research Center (JRC) on behalf of DG Education and Culture, it is stated that a high level of digital competence allows consumers to consciously make choices in the digital market, avoid becoming a victim of fraud, understand
6
digital marketing and advertising methods, and manage financial transactions on the Internet (Brečko, B., Ferrari, A., edited by Vuorikari R., Punie Y., 2016). In one of the recent researches, it was proofed that based on digital competencies, it is able to identify three distinct clusters of consumers of high, medium and low DigComp level (Sheremeeva A., 2020). Thus, consumers with different digital competencies make purchasing decisions, especially digital goods purchases, in different ways.
The importance of considering consumer personality traits in online shopping behavior has been discussed in many studies (Li and Zhang, 2002; O’Cass and Fenech, 2003; Hand et al., 2009; San Martín Gutiérrez, Camarero Izquierdo and San José Cabezudo, 2010). Personality traits in this context usually include the activities, interests, and values of people: all of these are classified using psychographics. Most approaches to psychographic segmentation (F. Reynolds et al, SRI International, D.R. Lehmann & R. Lines, A. Chen, W. Strauss, N. Hove) are based on dividing consumers into groups based on an analysis of their experience, activities, interests, opinions, beliefs, lifestyle, values, relationships, and other traits. One of the types of psychographic segmentation is the division of people into groups by generation.
According to W. Strauss and N. Hove (1997), who proposed generational segmentation, the experience of the same historical events, economic and socio-cultural realities leads to the formation of common values and attitudes among representatives of the same generation. Belonging to a generation is important because early life experiences shape people’s attitudes and beliefs (Kupperschmidt, 2000) and, as a result, influence their behavioral patterns and patterns in different spheres of life, including consumer behavior.
1. Bardhi, Fleura, Giana M. Eckhardt, and Eric J. Arnould (2012). Liquid Relationship to Possessions. Journal of Consumer Research, 39 (3), 510–29.
2. Belleflamme, P. (2016). The economics of digital goods: A progress report. Rochester, NY: Social Science Research Network, SSRN Scholarly Paper.
3. Quah, D. (2002). Digital goods and the new economy. LSE Economics Department, Working paper.
4. Nielsen Co (2015), Success strategies in the changing ad market.
5. Strauss, W., Howe N. (1991). Generations: The history of America’s future, 1584 to 2069.
6. Strauss W., Howe N. (1997). The fourth turning: What the cycles of history tell us about
America’s next rendezvous with destiny. New York: Broadway Books; 382 p.
7. Global Digital Content Market 2020-2024 report (2020). Global Industry Analysts, Inc
8. Peeters M. (2018). Consumer Behavior Survey in Russia 2018, The digital revolution is
shaping consumer habits. PwC.
9. Park H., Rha J. (2011). Toward a Digital Goods Consumer Competence Index: An
Exploratory Study. Doi: 10.1111/j.1552-3934.2011.02103.x
10. Wu, Linwan, and Jiangmeng Liu (2020). Need For Control May Motivate Consumers To
Approach Digital Products: A Social Media Advertising Study. Electronic Commerce
Research. Doi:10.1007/s10660-020-09399-z.
11. Zaichkowsky J.L. (1991). Consumer behavior: Yesterday, today, and tomorrow. Business
Horizons. Volume 34, Issue 3, May–June 1991, Pages 51-58
12. Cant M.C., Jooste C.J., Plessis P.J., Strydom J.W. (2009). Marketing Management.
13. Kumar, P. (2010). Marketing of Hospitality & Tourism Services. Tata McGraw-Hill
Education
14. Kotler, P. and Keller, K. (2011). Marketing Management. 14th edition, London: Pearson
Education
15. Mukhina M. (2002). Studying the lifestyle of consumers and segmenting the market based
on psychographic types // Marketing in Russia and abroad. – No 3.
16. Skorobogatykh I., Musatova J. (2018). Features of the behavior of “digital” consumers.
Problems of the modern economy, (4 (68)), 127-130.
17. Ala-Mutka, K. (2011). Mapping digital competence: Towards a conceptual understanding.
Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. Retrieved September 30, 2012 from http://ftp.jrc.es/EURdoc/ JRC67075_TN.pdf
75
18. Druckrey T. (1996). Electronic Culture: Technology and Visual Representation, New York: Aperture.
19. Lister M. (1995). The Photographic Image in Digital Culture, London: Routledge
20. Aesaert, K. (2015). Identification and assessment of digital competences in primary
education. Ghent University. Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences.
21. Goodfellow, R. (2011). Literacy, Literacies, and the Digital in Higher Education. Teaching
in Higher Education, 16(1). http://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2011.544125
22. Røkenes F., Krumsvik R. (2014). Development of Student Teachers’ Digital Competence
in Teacher Education. Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy 9(4):250-280
23. Pettersson F., Lindfors M., Olofsson A. D. (2021). Conditions for professional digital
competence: the teacher educators’ view. Education Inquiry Follow journal
24. Kasinskaite-Buddeberg I. (2013). Na puti k edinomu podhodu k gramotnosti: media- i in-
formacionnaja gramotnost”, Moscow: Interregional Library Cooperation Centre: 23–28.
25. Stallworth, P. (2008). Consumer behaviour and marketing strategic
26. Edelman D., Singer M. (2015). Competing on Customer Journeys. Harvard Business
Review.
27. Brečko, B., Ferrari, A., edited by Vuorikari R., Punie Y. (2016). The Digital Competence
Framework for Consumers; Joint Research Centre Science for Policy Report; EUR 28133
EN; doi:10.2791/838886
28. Carretero, S.; Vuorikari, R. and Punie, Y. (2017). DigComp 2.1: The Digital Competence
Framework for Citizens with eight proficiency levels and examples of use, EUR 28558
EN, doi:10.2760/38842
29. Ilomäki, L., Paavola, S., Lakkala, M. (2016). Digital competence – an emergent boundary
concept for policy and educational research. Educ Inf Technol 21, 655–679
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-014-9346-4
30. Golubovskaya (2015). T. Digital Literacy Index.
31. Golovacheva K., Smirnova M. (2019), Towards an Integrative Framework of Consumers’
Digital Competences. In: Alexandrov D., Boukhanovsky A., Chugunov A., Kabanov Y., Koltsova O., Musabirov I. (eds) Digital Transformation and Global Society. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 1038. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-37858-5_23
32. Sharikov A. (2016), On four component model of digital literacy. J. Soc. Policy Stud. 14(1), 87-97.
76
33. Hernández B., Jiménez J., Martín J. (2010), Customer behavior in electronic commerce: The moderating effect of e-purchasing experience; Journal of Business Research, 964-971. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2009.01.019
34. Obšatníková K., Rigelský M. (2018). Quantitative study of consumer behaviour in the online environment – model of consumer behavior. Megatrendy a médiá 1:545-567.
35. Fleming G., Reitsma R., Pappafotopoulos T., Duan X., and Birrell R. (2017). “The State Of Consumers And Technology: Benchmark”.
36. Strauss W., Howe N. (1991), The fourth turning: What the cycles of history tell us about America’s next rendezvous with destiny. New York: Broadway Books; 382 p.
37. Albats E. (2011), They grew up in a cynical environment The New Times. The New Times. URL: http://newtimes.ru/articles/detail/33302
38. Shamis E., Nikonov E. (2016), Theory of generations. Extraordinary X. Moscow: Synergy Institute; 398 s.
39. Shukova G. (2013), The intensity of digital experience and age-related characteristics of cognitive processes, psychological research.Koutropoulos A. (2011), Digital natives: Ten years after. Journal of Online Teaching and Learning. Vol. 7(4). URL: http://jolt.merlot.org/vol7no4/koutropoulos_1211.html
40. Prensky, M. (2001), “Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants”. In On the Horizon, October 2001, 9 (5). Lincoln: NCB University Press.
41. Astashova Y. (2014), Theory of generations in marketing. Bulletin of the South Ural State University. No 1.P. 108–114.
42. Mironova O., Chekmareva G. (2019). On the issue of the application of the generational approach in the management of the marketing activities of enterprises. Management Sciences, (4), 53-62.
43. Mitrofanova, E. (2013), The use of applied aspects of the theory of generations in the formation of social, corporate and public policy.
44. Sivrikova (2015), Problems of Studying Generations in Psychology
45. Xia, L., and Sudharshan, D. (2002) “Effects of interruptions on consumer online decision
processes,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, pp 265-280.
46. Artyukhina L. (2011), Life and professional values of generations – the basis of the
corporate culture of the company in the conditions of crises and competition. Modern
humanitarian research. No 5.P. 179-183.
47. Belleflamme P. (2016), The economics of digital goods: a progress report. Université
Catholique de Louvain – UCLouvain.
Последние выполненные заказы
Хочешь уникальную работу?
Больше 3 000 экспертов уже готовы начать работу над твоим проектом!
5 (91 отзыв)
4.6 (522 отзыва)
4.4 (59 отзывов)
5 (1241 отзыв)
4.6 (30 отзывов)
5 (145 отзывов)
4.9 (343 отзыва)
4.8 (373 отзыва)
5 (285 отзывов)
