Hnh vi mua hng ngu hng v hu qu ca n i vi ngi

tiu dng
ng bi super-admin vo ngy 16/12/2015 -

Bnh lun (0)

Facebook
Google+
Share
Khi nim hnh vi mua ngu hng (Impulse Buying)
Trong thi k u tin khi mi nghin cu v hnh vi mua ngu hng, cc hc gi
thng ng nht mt cch n gin mua hng ngu hng vi vic mua khng c k
hoch nh trc. Nghin cu ca Rook (1987) to ra mt bc ngot trong lnh vc
nghin cu v hnh vi mua hng ngu hng thng qua vic tng kt cc quan nim
trc y v mua ngu hng v a ra mt nh ngha mi v hnh vi mua ny- Theo
Rook, mua hng ngu hng xy ra khi ngi tiu dng tri nghim mt cm gic bt
cht, mang tnh thi thc mua mt ci g ngay lp tc, s ngu hng mua ny th
hin trng thi tnh cm kh phc tp v c th to ra nhng mu thun nht nh
trong suy ngh, tnh cm ca ngi tiu dng. Ngoi ra, khi mua ngu hng, ngi tiu
dng thng c khuynh hng t quan tm ti hu qu ca vic mua hng ca mnh.
Da trn cc nh ngha trc y, c th tm tt cc c im ca hnh vi mua hng
ngu hng nh sau:
1) vic quyt nh mua din ra kh nhanh (Rook 1987; Rook v Hoch 1985)
2) hnh vi mua gn lin vi din bin tnh cm ca ngi mua; n mang tnh cm tnh
nhiu hn l l tr (Rook 1987)
3) khng bao gm vic mua mt sn phm no thc hin mt mc ch nh
trc, nh mua qu cho sinh nht bn b (Beatty and Ferrell 1998).
Tng quan v hu qu ca mua hng ngu hng i vi ngi tiu dng
Trong lnh vc nghin cu v tm l v x hi, hnh vi ngu hng (impulsive behavior)
ca con ngi thng c cc nh nghin cu nhc n nh l hnh vi mang tnh
thiu chn chn, non nt, di dt, thiu l tr, km thng minh, v thm ch l hnh vi
sai lm v ti li (c th tham kho cc quan im ny trong bi bo ca Crawford v
Melewar 2003).
Tng t nh vy, trong lnh vc nghin cu ngi tiu dng, hnh vi mua hng ngu
hng cng thng c gn lin vi cc t ng mang tnh tiu cc v thng c xem
l hnh vi khng tt nh mua khng cn thn, thiu chn chn v thiu trch nhim.
Theo Kaufman-Scarborough v Cohen (2004), mua hng ngu hng mang tnh t pht
cao, khng c k hoch, v thng dn ti nhng s la chn khng tha mn cho
ngi mua.
Baumeister (2002) cho rng mt nguyn nhn quan trng dn ti hnh vi mua ngu
hng l vic ngi tiu dng khng t kim sot c bn thn. V vy, h thng
gp phi vn ti thc s khng nn mua nh th. Ngi tiu dng c th phi
chi tiu qu nhiu tin bc ri mang v nh nhng th m h khng thc s cn.
Mc d khi mua ngu hng ngi tiu dng c th cm thy vui sng, t nht l trong
nhng khonh khc khi mua hng, vic mua ngu hng thng dn ti s hi tic v

sau do n khng p ng c nhng mc tiu di hn ca ngi tiu dng. V vy, xt

v lu di, mua hng ngu hng c th lm cho ngi tiu dng khng tha mn v
khng hnh phc d rng hnh vi mua ny c th mang li nhiu li nhun hn cho cc
nh sn xut.
Tuy nhin, mt s nghin cu gn y (v d: Crawford v Melewar 2003; Hausman
2000; Wood 2005), vi quan im hin i cho rng ngi tiu dng c th mua
hng v nhng l do thun ty ch mang li cm gic vui sng, d chu cho ngi
mua. V vy. mua hng ngu hng c th c nhn nhn nh l mt cch thc lm
tng thi v cho cuc sng, v do mua hng ngu hng khng nht thit ng ngha
vi hnh vi xu. Tuy nhin, khi ni ti hu qu gn lin vi hnh vi mua ny cc nghin
cu hin ti vn thng nu ln cc tc ng mang tnh tiu cc nhiu hn.
Nhng kt qu nghin cu ca Rook (1987) ti Hoa K ch ra rng hn 80% ngi
tiu dng trong mu iu tra ca ng gp phi nhng vn nht nh do vic mua
hng ngu hng gy ra. Nhng hu qu tiu cc ny bao gm cc vn v ti chnh,
s khng hi lng v cc sn phm mua, cm gic n hn, v s ng u vi
phn i ca nhng ngi xung quanh. Mt s nghin cu khc v hu qu ca vic
mua hng ngu hng i vi ngi tiu dng Anh quc v Singapo (v d: Dittmar v
Drury 2000, Shamdasni v Rook 1989) cng a ra nhng kt qu nghin cu tng
t nh ti Hoa K.
Trong mt nghin cu gn y ca Kaufman-Scarborough v Cohen (2004), hnh vi
mua hng ngu hng ca ngi tiu dng c m t mt cch nh nhng, t ch
trch hn. C th, mua hng ngu hng c coi l kt qu ca vic ngi tiu dng
gp phi vn trong khu x l thng tin. Tuy vy, vic mua ny dn ti nhng
hu qu tiu cc cho ngi tiu dng nh vic mua nhng hng khng cn thit, khng
ng k hoch, do c th dn ti s tch tr nhiu hng khng thit thc. Ngoi ra,
nhiu sn phm ca vic mua ngu hng khng c s dng. Ngi tiu dng vn gi
sn phm h mua m c th khng bao gi s dng chng. Cc tc gi a ra kt
lun l ti nhng thi im nht nh trong cuc sng, ngi tiu dng c th mua mt
ci g mt cch ngu hng v hnh vi mua ny rt c th l hnh vi thiu hiu qu
v khng ph hp.
Tc ng ca hnh vi mua ngu hng i vi ngi tiu dng Vit Nam
Wood (2005) cho rng hon cnh kinh t x hi c nhng tc ng ti cch nhn nhn
ca ngi tiu dng v vic mua ngu hng. Trong iu kin mt nn kinh t chuyn
i nh Vit Nam, ngi tiu dng quan nim th no v mua ngu hng v hu qu
ca hnh vi mua ny? C s khc bit ln no v hu qu ca mua hng ngu hng i
vi ngi tiu dng Vit Nam so vi ngi tiu dng cc nc pht trin hay khng?
Cng cuc i mi bt u t nm 1986 to ra nhng thay i ln lao v mi mt
Vit Nam. Trn th trng, ngi tiu dng c th d dng tm thy cc loi sn phm
a dng bao gm sn phm trong nc v ngoi nhp, vi cc mc gi khc nhau, phc
v cho cc nhm khch hng khc nhau. Bn cnh cc ch truyn thng v cc ca
hng dc theo cc ph x, xut hin ngy cng nhiu h thng siu th v cc trung
tm thng mi ln. Nhng thay i trong h thng bn l to iu kin cho mua
hng ngu hng ny sinh v pht trin, c bit cc cc thnh ph ln. S hi nhp
v ton cu ha cng to ra nhng thay i v gi tr v khuynh hng tiu dng trong
x hi nh s tng ln v ch ngha c nhn (individualism) v ch ngha vt cht
(materialism) ca ngi tiu dng (Nguyen 2005), v iu ny tc ng ti khuynh
hng tng ln trong vic mua hng ngu hng.

Mt nghin cu gn y (Nguyen v Rose 2006) v nh hng ca hnh vi mua hng

ngu hng i vi ngi tiu dng Vit Nam (s dng phng php phng vn theo
chiu su i vi gn 30 ngi tiu dng) ch ra c nhng hu qu tiu cc cng nh
nhng kha cnh tch cc gn lin vi hnh vi mua hng ny ca ngi tiu dng Vit
Nam.
Nhiu ngi tiu dng khi c phng vn nhc ti cm gic d chu, thch th khi i
mua hng v ra quyt nh mua nhanh chng sn phm m h cm thy thch khi nhn
thy (mua ngu hng). Tuy nhin, cm gic vui thch ca ngi tiu dng khi mua ngu
hng c th khng tn ti lu.
Trong nghin cu ny, nhiu ngi tiu dng cho rng tuy vic mua hng ngu hng
ni chung khng dn ti nhng hu qu nghim trng, rt nhiu nhng tc ng tiu
cc c th xy ra sau khi mua. Tng t nh kt qu ca cc nghin cu trc y
cc nc pht trin, nghin cu v hu qu ca hnh vi mua ngu hng i vi ngi
tiu dng Vit Nam cng ch ra cc hu qu tiu cc ca hnh vi ny nh nh hng
khng tt v ti chnh, s khng hi lng i vi nhng sn phm mua, cm gic n
hn v hi tic, hay s phn i, khng bng lng ca ngi xung quanh (h hng, b
bn,). Tuy nhin, nghin cu v hu qu ca mua ngu hng i vi ngi tiu ng
Vit Nam cng ch ra mt s im khc bit so vi cc kt qu nghin cu trc y ti
cc nc pht trin. C th, trong nghin cu ny cm gic n hn hay hi tic c
ngi tiu dng nhc ti nh l mt hu qu ph bin v mang tnh ni bt nht ca
hnh vi mua ngu hng (trong khi s khng tha mn vi nhng sn phm mua
dng nh l hu qu ni bt i vi ngi tiu dng cc nc pht trin). Hu qu
ny c th bt ngun t tnh tp th (collectivism) cao ca ngi tiu dng Vit Nam,
cng nh tc ng ca nhng gi tr truyn thng vn ang tn ti nh tnh k hoch
v tnh tit kim ca ngi tiu dng.
Ngi tiu dng thng s thy n hn khi hnh vi mua ngu hng ca mnh c th
nh hng ti ngi khc (nh ngi thn trong gia nh hoc bn b) hay bit rng
mnh sai lm khi quyt nh mua mt sn phm khng thc s cn hay khng ph
hp. Nhiu ngi tiu dng khi tr li phng vn cng cp ti mt kha cnh tiu cc
na ca mua ngu hng: s phn i hay khng ng tnh ca ngi khc. S phn
i ny c th xy ra i vi vic mua ngu hng c cc sn phm ch yu dng cho c
nhn ngi mua (personal-use products) cng nh cc sn phm mua ch yu cho
ngi khc s dng (collective-use products). Nhiu v d c th c ngi tiu
dng a ra nh vic b bn ch/ch trch sn phm mua, hay vic ngi thn khng
n nhn hay khng hi lng v cc mn qu tng khng thch hp (sn phm ca mua
ngu hng). S phn i ca ngi khc cng l mt l do quan trng dn ti cm
gic n hn hay hi tic ca nhiu ngi tiu dng i vi vic mua hng ngu hng
ca mnh.
Nghin cu cng ch ra rng nhiu ngi tiu dng Vit Nam cm thy khng tha mn
vi hu ht nhng ln mua hng ngu hng ca mnh d cho ti gi pht ny h cha
phi gnh chu nhng hu qua nghim trng no do vic mua ngu hng gy ra. Nhiu
ngi tiu dng khi c phng vn cng ni rng h c th s vn tip tc vic mua
ngu hng trong tng lai. Tuy nhin, h s c gng thng minh v tnh to hn
trong vic t kim sot nhng ngu hng ca bn thn, s thn trng hn khi ra
quyt nh mua hng, c bit cnh gic vi nhng tc ng ca ngi bn hng, s
c gng thu thp nhiu thng tin hn trc khi quyt nh mua hng. iu ny c th
phn nh mt thc t l nhiu ngi tiu dng Vit Nam trong khi thch th vi vic i
ch trong mi trng bn l mi hp dn hn v si ng hn, h vn th hin s thn

trng nht nh khi i mua hng. Nhng yu t quan trng thc y hnh vi mua hng
ngu hng i vi nhiu ngi tiu dng cc nc pht trin nh tm kim s mi l
(novelty), s si ng (excitement), mt mi (fashion), th hin ng cp (status), v
mong mun thot khi s nhm chn hng ngy vn cha tr thnh nhng ng lc
quan trng i vi vic mua hng ngu hng ca ngi tiu dng Vit Nam.
Tm ti, nhng kt qu nghin cu trn cho thy ngi tiu dng Vit Nam trong khi
th hin mt s im khc bit so vi nhng ngi tiu dng cc nc pht trin, h
cng chia s rt nhiu im chung v thi i vi hnh vi mua hng ngu hng v
hu qu ca hnh vi ny. Nghin cu ny cng gp phn chng ta hiu r hn
nhng tc ng ca hnh vi mua hng ngu hng, mt hnh vi mua ang c xu hng
tng ln trong bi cnh mt nn kinh t chuyn i ni m cc hng ha a dng ngy
cng sn c trn th trng, v rt nhiu nhng i mi trong cc hot ng marketing
vn din ra hng ngy to iu kin cho ngi tiu dng d dng tham gia hn vo vic
mua hng ngu hng.
Nguyn Th Tuyt Mai, TS. i hc Kinh t quc dn H Ni.
TI LIU THAM KHO
1. Baumeisicr, R. F. (2002), Yielding to temptation: Sclf-conlrol Failure, Impulsive
Purchasing, ami Consumer Behavior. Journal of Consumer Research, 28 (March), pp
670-676.
2. BeaUy. Sharon E.. v M. Elizabeth Ferrell (1998), Impulse Buying: Modeling its
Precursors, Journal of Retailing, 74 (2)* pp 169-191.
3. Bdlenger, Dun H. Robertson, v Elizabeth c Hirsehman (1978), Impulse Buyina
Varies by Product. Journal of Advertising Research, 18 (6). pp 15-18.
4. Crawford, Gerry v T, c. MeJcwar (2003). The Importance of Impulse Purchasing
Behavior in the International Airport Environment, Journal of Consumer Behavior, 3
(1). pp 85-98.
5. Diltmar, Helgil v John Drury (2000k Self-image Is It in the Bag? A Qualitative
Comparison between Ordinary and Excessive Consumers, Journal of Economic
Psychology, 21, pp) 09-142,
6. Hausman. Angela (2000). A Multi-method Investigation of Consumer Motivations in
Impulse Buying Behavior. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 17 (5). pp 403-19.
7. Kaufman-Scarborough. Carol vil Judy Cohen (2004), Unfolding Consumer
linpulsivity: An Existcntial-Phenomenological Sludy of Consumers with Attention Deficit
Disorder. Psychology & Marketing. 21 (8). pp 637.
8. Nguyen Thi Tuyet Mai (2005). Materialism and Related Issues in Ihe Context of
Vietnam, a Transitional Economy Economics and Development, 17 (March), pp 17-20.
9. Nguyen Thi Tuyet Mai v Jerman Rose (2006) An Exploratory lnvestigation into
Outcomes of Impulse Buying in Vietnam, it Transitional Economy, Axia Pacific Advances
in Consumer Research. Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research.
10.Nguyen Thi Tuyet Mai, Kwon Jung, Garold Lantz v Sandra G. Loeb (2003) An
Exploratory Investigation into Impulse Buying Behavior in a Transitional Economy: a
Study of Urban Consumers in Vietnam, Journal of International Marketing 11 (2), pp
13-35.

11. Rook, Dennis w, (1987), The Buying Impulse. Journal of Consumer Research.
14(2). 189 199.
12. Rook. Dennis W, v Robert J. Fisher (I99.S). Normative Influences on Impulsive
Buying Behavior. Journal of Consumer Research. 22 (3), pp 305-313,
13. Shamdasani, Prem N. v Dennis W. Rook (1989), An Exploratory Study of Impulse
Buying in an Oriental Culture: the Case of Singapore. Singapore Marketing Review, 4.
pp 7-20.
14. Wood, Michael (2005). Discretionary Unplanned Buying in Consumer Society,
Journal of Consumer Behavior, 4 (June), pp 268-281.
15. Zhou. Lianxi v Amy Wong (2003). Consumer impulse Buying and in-store Stimuli
in Chinese Supermarkets. Journal of intenational Consumer Marketing, 16 (2), pp 3753.