HOWARD SHETH MODEL

INTRODUCTION

Efforts to analyze and understand behavior of consumers have been on ever, since
documented material on marketing activities has been available. Most of the early
efforts have been from the view point of the basic discipline from which they
emanated and failed to take into consideration the aspects from other perspectives, In
a major effort to integrate the available knowledge from 'the various fields, that
impinge upon consumer decision processes, Howard and Sheth model, created a
comprehensive body of conceptual knowledge link up most of the related concepts in
buyer behavior. The basic variables and working relationships of the model and the
type of problem solving behavior those consumers undergo while making brand
choice decision are explained below.
HOWARD SHETH MODEL - A BACKGROUND
`
Utilizing the learning theory thoroughly and systematically, John Howard came out
with the first truly integrative model of buyer behavior in`496'3 He was the first to
introduce the difference between problem solving behavior (similar to rational.
behavior of the economic theory), limited problem solving and automatic response
behavior. A more meaningful elaboration was provided in the publication of "The
Theory of Buyer Behavior" in 1969 by Howard and Sheth: More variables
impinging upon the behavior of the consumer were included and the connection
between them was clarified with noteworthy precision, making this model an
important landmark in the development of the theory of buyer behavior. A simplified version and
description of the model is furnished below.
 .

Simplified Description of the Howard-Sheth Model

The model is essentially an attempt to explain brand choice behavior over time
and therefore specially pertinent to our field. Focussing on repeat buying, the
model relies on four major components - stimulus inputs, hypothetical
constructs, response outputs and exogenous variables.
These variables are briefly described below.
INPUT VARIABLES
The input variables consist of informational cues about the attributes of a
product or brand (i.e. quality, price, distinctiveness, service, availability).
These informational cues may be significative in that they may emanate
from the product itself or they may be symbolic in that they come from
impersonal sources like advertising or promotional activities by the firm.
These two sources are commercial, in that they represent the efforts of the
firm to build and project these values in the product. A third set of
informational cues may come from the buyer's social environment,
comprising of his family, reference groups, social class, culture etc. This source
is not only non-commercial and non-controllable by the firm, it is also a personal
source of information input.

HYPOTHETICAL CONSTRUCTS
The hypothetical constructs have been classified in two - the perceptual
constructs and the learning constructs. The former deal with the way the
individual perceives and responds to the information from the input
variables. All the information that is received may not merit `attention' and the
intake is subject to perceived uncertainty and lack of meaningfulness of
information received (stimulus ambiguity). This ambiguity may lead to an
overt search for information about the product. Finally, the information that is
received, may be, according to the buyer's own frame of reference and pre -
disposition, distorted (Perceptual bias). The learning constructs deal with the
stages from the buyer motives to his satisfaction in a buying situation. The
'

purchase intention (as is clear from the figure) is an outcome of the interplay of
buyer motives, choice criteria, brand comprehension, resultant brand attitude
and the confidence associated with the purchase decision. The motives are
 representative of the goals that the buyer seeks to achieve in the buying
exercise; these may originate from the basis of learned needs. Impinging upon
the buyer intention are also the attitudes about the existing brand alternatives
in the buyer's evoked set, which result in the arrangement of an order of
preference, regarding these brands: Brand comprehension "the knowledge about
the existence and characteristics of those brands which form the evoked set";
and the degree of confidence that the buyer has about the brand comprehension,
choice criteria and buying intentions, converge upon the intention to buy. As a
feedback component of learning, the model includes another learning construct-
satisfaction which refers to the post purchase evaluation and resultant
reinforcing of brand comprehension, attitudes etc. (shown by broken lines in
the figure).
As said earlier, the output variables consist of a set of possible hierarchical
responses from attention to purchase. The purchase act is the actual, overt
act of buying and is the sequential result of the attention (buyer's total response
to information intake), the brand comprehension (a statement of buyer
knowledge in the product class), brand attitude (referring to the evaluation of
satisfying potential of the brand) and the buyer intention (a verbal statement
made in the light of the above externalising factors that the preferred brand
will be bought the next time the buying is necessitated).

EXOGENOUS VARIABLES AND WORKING

RELATIONSHIPS
The model also includes some exogenous variables which are not defined
but are taken as constant. These influence all or some of the constructs
explained .above and through them, the output. Some of the exogenous
variables are importance of the purchase, time at the disposal of the buyer,
personality traits, financial status etc.

TYPES OF PROBLEM SOLVING BEHAVIOR

Since by the process outlined about the buyer tends to simplify his decision making
behavior; the phenomenon has been termed the `psychology of simplification' by
Howard and Sheth. The stages through which the routinisation is approached have
already been outlined. The authors of the model taking the problem solving approach
have designated these stages as:
1. Extensive problem solving behavior.
2. Limited problem solving behavior.
3. Routinised response behavior.
extensive problem solving behavior, corresponds to the first stage of repetitive
decision making where the buyer has not yet developed strongly predispositions
towards any of the brands that are being considered as alternatives, nor does he have
any well defined ' criteria at this stage. This stage is followed by the limited. Problem
solving stage where because of learned experience about the brands, the choice
criteria have a clear definition and organization, but the buyer is still undecided about
the actual choice among the alternatives. He has a moderately favorable disposition
towards some brands that fall in his latitude of acceptance (which is quite large at this
stage) though this clear preference towards any brand has not yet crystallized. As
repetitive choice decision continue to take place, limited problem solving matures to
the routinised response
behavior. The buyer on account of the learned experience that he has had about the
brand in use, has now well defined evaluative criteria and also strong predisposition
towards one particular brand, because it matches the choice criteria ideally. As a
direct outcome of the gravitating of predisposition towards one brand, the number of
brands in the evoked set declines because the buyer considers only a very few brands
as probable choices.
The whole exercise of choice process is an exercise in simplifying the environment.
This has interesting implications for the buyer's need for information during various
stages of the choice process. The farther the buyer moves along the simplification
goal the lesser becomes his tendency towards active search for information. This fact
has also been borne out by our present study. As discussed later in the section on
factors affecting brand choice decisions of the respondent, it was found that,
advertising, though a relatively unimportant factor affecting brand selection, has a
still lower value when considered as a factor affecting brand loyal consumption. The
latter pertains to the routinised response behavior and the respondent was
correspondingly found to attribute even lower values to informational input
(advertising) than at the choice stage.
In case of frequently purchased products, a curious phenomenon is sometimes
observed. Either because of situation or boredom even with the preferred brand or the
routinisation of decision process and the resultant monotony, the buyer seeks to break
the monotony by reactivating search for new alternatives, in the form of new brands.
Brand loyalty, habit of use, strongly favourable post-purchase experience of the
favorite brand in use, non-availability of possible acceptable alternatives may serve
as inhibitors of such behavior.
Psychologists have used parallel terms to describe analogous stages corresponding to
E.P.S., L.P.S. , and R.R.B. The stages and their sequence are practically the same, the
terminology used embraces the psychological aspect. According to them when the
buyer is in the initial stages of brand choice decision process, in the absence of any
predisposition about any of the brands in his evoked set he is still in the stage of
concept formation of the brand. On the basis of brand comprehensions active
information sought and learning through use, he formulates the concept of the brand.
In the corresponding L.P.S. stage he has already attained the concept but is in the
concept testing stage through which after testing the brands in use he has definite
leanings towards one particular brand. In the subsequent purchases he utilises this
concept (stage of concept utilisation) by making the choice decision accordingly in
favour of the preferred brand and minimising the number of alternatives cgnsidered
because they do not match his concept.