Showrooming & the factors affecting Showrooming

A Thesis Presented to

The Department of PGDM-Marketing at

K J Somaiya Institute of Management Studies and Research,

Mumbai

In Partial Fulfillment

Of the Requirements for the PGDM RM By

Meet Jain & Vidhi Mehta

Under the Supervision of

Prof. Vilasini Jadhav

1
 Student’s Declaration
We, Meet Jain & Vidhi Mehta, Roll No. 27 & 36 declare that the Master’s Thesis titled
Showrooming & the factors affecting showrooming, submitted by us in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the award of PGDM-RM at K.J. Somaiya Institute of Management
Studies and Research, Mumbai, is the record of the work carried out by me during the period
from July, 2018 to February, 2019, under the guidance of Prof. Vilasini Jadhav.

To the best of our knowledge the thesis is a record of authentic work carried out by us during
the said period and has not been submitted to any other University or Institute for the award
of any degree/diploma.
We further declare that the material obtained from other sources have been duly
acknowledged in the thesis.

Signature of the Candidate Date:

12 March 2018
Place: Mumbai, Maharashtra

2
 Certificate of Faculty Guide
Certified that the work incorporated in the master’s thesis titled, “Showrooming & the
factors affecting showrooming” submitted by Meet Jain & Vidhi Mehta was carried out
under my supervision. This is his original work and any such materials that have been obtained
from other sources have been duly acknowledged in the thesis.

Signature of the Faculty Guide Date:

Place:

3
 Table of Contents

Student’s declaration form………………………………………………………………….2

Certificate of faculty guide………………………………………………………………….3

List of Table s& Figures……….……………………………………………………………….5

Executive Summary……………………………………………………………………..………6

Introduction…………………………………………….…………………………………………7

Research Methodology……………………………………………………………………….9

Literature Review………………………………………………………….………………….10

Data Analysis& Findings…………………………………..………….……………………17

Conclusion ……………………………………………………...………..…………………….27

References………………………………………………………………………..……………..29

Appendix 1 – Questionnaire for Survey………………………………..……………30

4
 List of Tables

Table of Tables

Table 1: KMO & Barttlets test………………………………………………………………………………….……..23

Table 2: Variance table………………………… …………………………………………………………...............23

Table 3: Rotated components matrix……………………..………………………………………………………24

Table 4: Cross tabulation of age and factors of showrooming………………………………………..25

Table 5: Cross tabulation of income and factors of showrooming…………………..……………..26

5
 Executive Summary
When a customer goes to a particular store to see and feel a product but later compares prices with online

retailers i.e. e-retailers and purchases the product from there. This shopping behaviour is known as

Showrooming. This phenomenon deserves research for the reason that this behaviour is likely to increase

and after some point of time become a permanent and significant part of retailing. From the research

conducted, we derived that better quality, good deals, customer reviews, product knowledge, product availability

in store and time availability all affect showrooming. If the deals available online are good and also the quality

available reaches that available in store people opt for showrooming. Good deals followed by product information

and time availability are the factors that can result in the decision of showrooming. This saves both time and

money. There also exists factors that can affect showrooming in a negative manner. They are in store information,

sales service, shopping enjoyment, new to the brand, less internet connection, inadequate product knowledge

and better deals offline. If the product knowledge is less consumer will end up visiting stores wherein, he might

receive proper product information and also service along with best deals which might change his decision of

shopping online to offline.

6
 Introduction
It’s common to look at the online and offline retail channel separately—or even in rivalry with one

another. It’s not new to view these channels this way as customer visit to grocery channels have decreased

while online shopping has gone up significantly.

But in order to compete in today’s world, the manufacturers and retailers must remember that online and

in-store purchasing behaviour go hand in hand. It is also important to know that grocery stores—and retail

stores in general—are still very important in today’s path to purchase. The only difference is that there is

a change in how they’re unified with consumer purchase behaviour and decision making.

Advancement in technology all over the globe has fundamentally changed customers shopping behaviour

and the means that managers establish to meet the ever-changing consumer wants and demand. Although

multi-channel shopping to the company has been a game changer for the company, a surprising and

different phenomenon known as consumer showrooming behaviour has come up. Showrooming is a form

of multi-channel buying where customers try experiencing the products in store and then purchasing it

online. Showrooming imposes a threat to organizations because the rules of exchange are completely

changed due to Showrooming.

When a customer goes to a particular store to see and feel a product but later compares prices with online

retailers i.e. e-retailers and purchases the product from there. This shopping behaviour is known as

Showrooming. This phenomenon deserves research for the reason that this behaviour is likely to increase

and after some point of time become a permanent and significant part of retailing.

Electronic vendors are one of the most vulnerable to showrooming because when a customer wants to

purchase an electronic product he/she likes to know about the look of the product and feel the product

before purchasing the product. But it should also be noted that electronic products are among the products

which are purchased the most through e-retailers because of their low rates. In addition to this the e-retailer

offers free shipping to delivery of goods worth a certain amount.

7
E-retailers are the ones who have gained the most due to showrooming. To defend itself from the

growing challenges of showrooming, big retail players such as Walmart and Target are coming up with

strategies like offering in-store pickup for online purchases - thereby no question of delivery charges -

and offering select products exclusively in physical stores.

Dr. Edwards, Empathica termed another word called Webrooming. In showrooming, retailers often face the

problem of customers coming to the retail store to search, feel and experience the products and then later

purchase online. While Webrooming, takes place when consumers research about products online that is the

information, features etc. about the product and then later goes to the store for a final check and purchase."

Showrooming Vs. Webrooming” Up until recently, there was a lot of talk about how showrooming was having

an effect on the revenues of retailers, and that there was hardly anything they could do to combat its impact.

However, retailers have combated and used different means to face showrooming's impact, and the result has

been the growth of web rooming.

8
 Research Methodology
Data collection
Primary data was used for conducting the research. The data was collected from an extensive range of

respondents by floating survey forms to capture the interests of a wide range of age group and occupation. The

questionnaire also took into consideration the demographical description of, various age groups, gender and

monthly income. The purpose of this research is to identify the circumstances under which consumers use

Showrooming, to determine the factors that result in showrooming

Method
The data collected is analysed with the help of Excel and SPSS. Our research is oriented towards looking

into the aspects of the research objectives in a quantitative method. As part of the quantitative research

questionnaire was filled out by 120 respondents from different age group and income group. Different

test like factor analysis, cross tabulation etc. was performed to understand the factors of showrooming.

Sampling Profile:

1.Total sample size is 120

2.The target group is above 18 years because usually this age group is the one which orders online

9
 LITERATURE REVIEW
1. “Showrooming in Consumer Electronics Retailing: An Empirical Study”

Source: tandfonline.com

Author name: Rejón-Guardia, Luna-Nevarez

ABSTRACT: The current research emphases on multi-channel retailing tactics and describes consumer

behavior regarding “showrooming”. The authors scrutinize the factors affecting showrooming. As per

their findings, they define website compatibility, perceived control, and personal norms as the main

factors of consumer attitudes toward buying online. In addition, they mentioned that past experience at

the store and reasons against purchasing via the internet are directly linked with consumers’ intention to

purchase on the retailer’s website.

2.The Case for Showrooming

Source: researchgate.net

Author name: Cristina Nistor, Prashanth Nyer

ABSTRACT: SR has extremely affected the retail sector in terms of profit in the last 10 years. As

consumers can easily check and compare rates of different products on their smartphones, they visit

retail outlets to feel and see products and then they purchased that particular product from e-retailers at

lower rates. As traditional retail players are constantly trying to adjust to the challenges faced by

showrooming and the shift from offline to online purchases, stores are progressively accepting

showrooming as a new selling format.

3.IMPACT OF SHOWROOMING ON RETAIL

Source: icmrr.org

10
Author name: Sunil Vakayil, Rajeev Bhadoria
ABSTRACT: In the last decade e-commerce has seen a huge amount of growth. The cause of the growth

is increased use of internet enabled devices and the ability to make sure that many new segments of the

society could be converted in as future buyers. There are Different models which have been worked out

in India and some of them have been a success. These models are unique in terms of product lines and

also differ with the various e-commerce partners. It has been seen that companies these days are ready

to launch products first on its website and then go to the traditional outlets that is stores. Consumers see

this as a strong message about the early availability of products specially technologically advanced ones

in the e-channel. The retailers have the fear that the attempts of the companies to get e-commerce

partners with them may result in loss to them. There have been times where in retailers have tried to

discourage customers from buying from online portals. Showrooming is being noticed in the retail

market, where customers visit the stores, and then buy the products from online portals.

4.Best Buy and Showrooming: A Critical Thinking Case Exercise Based upon Service Dominant
Logic and Value Co-creation

Source: journals.sagepub.com
Author name: Steven A. Taylor, Gary L. Hunter
ABSTRACT: This study displays how a critical thinking perspective in teaching cases related to

business can create some kind of value for students and for the one teaching them. The case concentrates

on the problems of showrooming and webrooming that is presently encountered by many retailers.

5. “Showrooming and the Competition between Store and Online Retailers”

Source: www1.warrington.ufl.edu
Author name: “Amit Mehra”, “Subodha Kuma”, “Jagmohan S. Raju”
ABSTRACT: Customers often experience the goods at traditional stores to recognize their “best fit”

product, but later end up buying the product not at the store but at any online retailer to reap the benefits

of lower prices. This behavior is termed as “showrooming.” The study examines 3 approaches to combat

11
the challenges thrown by showrooming that may help the retailers to defend itself: (a) Comparison of

prices, (b) trying to make matching of product difficult among the traditional store & the online retailer,

and (c) Penalizing patrons who showroom. The findings show that only the latter 2 strategies may prove

beneficial for the stores.

6. “Showrooming & the Small Retailer”

Source: emeraldinsight.com

Author name: Terence A. Brown

Abstract: This study observes the customer behavior of “showrooming” where customers use internet

connected devices to compare prices in retail stores and other information related to the products that

they later purchase via e-retailer. This research was carried out on patrons, Thirteen small-sized retail

stores, and six large-sized stores. They recognized 4 different groups in terms of behaviour of patrons

and 6 different strategies mid-size retailers are presently implementing or could implement to combat

the challenges showrooming can create.

7. “Understanding consumer’s showrooming behavior: Extending the theory of planned

behavior”

Source: emeraldinsight.com

Author(s) name: Sourabh

Abstract: Current papers on multichannel suggests that customers use more than one and diverse

channels to get attribute-based benefits which have resulted to increase in the showrooming. The core

goal of this paper is to discover the motives as to why a particular consumer showrooms and creates a

comprehensive model built on application and extension of the “Theory of planned behavior”. The

consequences of the study show that “experiencing the product” and “sales staff assistance” encouraged

consumers to visit the physical store before purchasing online. “Better online service quality” and “lower

prices online” stimulated customers to later purchase the product online. The customers who are Price

12
conscious and those who were able to use multiple channels were more probable to engage in

showrooming behaviour.

8. The Showrooming Phenomenon: It's More than Just About Price

Source: sciencedirect.com

Author(s) name: Sonja Gensler, Scott A.Neslin ,Peter C.Verhoef

Abstract: This study examines the aspects that effect competitive showrooming. The discoveries of this

paper discloses that the “expected average price savings” for the customer from showrooming is straight

connected with showrooming. In addition, the “perceived dispersion in online prices” is also

unswervingly related to showrooming. Furthermore, we find that “other than price” factors also play a

crucial role in shoppers' showrooming decisions: “perceived gains in the quality of the product” bought

when showrooming and waiting time for service in the retail store are directly associated with

showrooming. Internet search costs are inversely linked to showrooming. Time limit pressure that

consumers have when shopping is inversely linked with their capacity to showroom.

9. Competitive Strategies for Brick-and-Mortar Stores to Counter “Showrooming”

Source: krannert.purdue.edu

Author(s) name: Amit Mehra, Subodha Kumar, Jagmohan S. Raju

Abstract: Customers habitually hunt and experience products at traditional retail stores to identify their

“best fit” product but far ahead purchase it for a reduced price at any online e-retailer. This is referred

to as “showrooming” and this paper shows that this affects the revenue of the stores. The results reveal

that the two key strategies are price matching and private labels.

10. Understanding Showrooming- An exploratory research focusing on channel motivations and

personal motivations that trigger showrooming.

13
Source: lup.lub.lu.se

Author(s) name: Sofia Prior, Marieke Schulenburg

Abstract: Showrooming is where shoppers use internet connected devices in retail stores to equate

prices and other data on products that they later might purchase online. Showrooming in terms of profit

can result in a probable threat for corporal retailers. The growing product commoditization and increased

price transparency owing to a growth in online retailing, can result in physical retail stores bearing the

costs associated with being used as a showroom without benefitting from the final sale. The answers

validate that both hedonic and utilitarian shoppers are susceptible to showrooming. Most common

utilitarian channel motivation to go to a physical store is the personal service while the hedonic channel

motivation is to experience brands and products. The purpose to continue purchasing online cracks out

to be rates, knowledge, assortment and enjoyment.

11. Consumer showrooming: Value co-destruction

Source: isiarticles.com

Author(s) name: Kate L. Daunta, Lloyd C. Harris

ABSTRACT: This research practices value co-destruction as a lens to discover the backgrounds of consumer

showrooming behaviour. Illustrating on related work, a research model postulating showrooming dynamics

from the consumer's viewpoint is hypothesized and empirically tested. The study findings disclose that

showrooming behaviour is compound and contains contrasting degrees of materialistic value co-destruction and

value co-creation behaviour across online and offline channels. Precisely, consumer characteristics, channel

characteristics and product characteristics are revealed to be related with in-store value taking and online value

co-destruction and co-creation. The study enhances to academic understanding of the showrooming

phenomena and validates that co-destructive and co-creative behaviours can happen in a immediate,

simultaneous and iterative fashion. Concentrating on practice, the findings disclose occasions for experience-

led shopping environments.

14
12. Showrooming and Webrooming: Information Externalities Between Online and Offline Sellers

Author Name: Bing Jing

Source: pubsonline.informs.org

Abstract: In a market which is full of products and where consumers are open to unaware purchases, this

paper studies the competition between a traditional retailer and an e-retailer in the presence of showrooming.

Showrooming exaggerates competition and decreases both firms’ revenues, thus supporting traditional and

online retailers’ recent strategy of carrying more exclusive varieties.

15
Data Analysis & Findings
The main objective of the research was to find the factors that affect showrooming and the factors that
refrain consumer from showrooming.

From the sample set of 120, it can be seen that 77.5% of the respondents were between the age group of 18-

25, 19% were from the age group of 26-30 and rest in the age group of 31-40. This tells us that majority of the

people who are students or rather new to their jobs prefer showrooming as compared to those in the older age

groups. When asked they mentioned about good deals, price savings and also availability of time as few reasons

which encourage them to practice showrooming.

16
From the above pie chart, it can be seen that both male and female respondents were equal in number.

From the sample space of 120, almost equal number of males and females prefer showrooming. This

represents that both the gender groups are becoming equal and walking parallel towards digitization.

The above pie chart shows that almost 45% respondents are from income group less than 3,00,000 &

17.5% is between 3,00,000-7,00,000 that is almost 62%. This is good from the research point of view

because this are the customers which are looking for value in return of money. Hence, they are price conscious

but at the same time they look for quality products

17
Out of the sample scale of 120, as many as 53 agree that they like showrooming. The reasons can be as

follows: majority of the sample size comes in the age group of 18-25and also their annual income ranges

from less then 3,00,000 to max 7,00,000.

In the questionnaire, products identified for showrooming are classified as electronics, books and music,

sporting goods, clothes and shoes and furniture. Most of the showrooming is carried out in the shopping

of clothes and shoes. These are that products that are most frequently bought by the purchasers because

of the fast-changing trend. Electronics is bought both offline and online, but purchases online have

18
increased drastically because of huge deals available on electronics along with warranties and

guarantees. Furniture and sports goods are usually bought offline. This can be to check the quality so as

to check their durability. Sale of furniture has also increased recently via online portals like Peperfry.

They have their stores offline wherein customers can experience the product and then order online to get

delivery hassle-free.

The factors taken into consideration for showrooming here are price savings, better quality, good deals,

reviews, free shipping, non-availability, product information and time availability.

In the graph above, we can see that good deals are one of the factors that majorly affects the decision for

showrooming. There are cases wherein when you go shopping in stores who like products but end up

not purchasing any. That can be because the total exceeds your budget or you think that product is just

over-priced. These things when looked upon online can be available at much lesser price and with great

deals. It naturally results n you showrooming the products rather than buying them online.

The next factor that affects your decision of showrooming is product knowledge and time availability.

In this fast-moving world, people have such tight schedules that they hardly are able to get time for

19
themselves. Rather then spending more time in going to individual stores and trying all the sizes and

patterns, they window shop and search the products online while travelling or in their free time. This all

depends on the time available to them.

Then comes the non-availability of the product size or pattern in the store. In such cases people end up

purchasing online as they are left with no option.

Surprisingly price savings is not one of the top factors affecting showrooming. People care for quality

more as compared to quantity. They prefer paying more and buying quality products then buying at a

lesser price.

Importance is also given to the reviews given by other customers regarding products that you intend to

buy. Purchasers usually intend to check the reviews to ensure the quality of the product. This factor is

one such on which purchaser can rely on.

People tend to believe that for buying quality products purchasing from stores is important as they can

feel the product. But with the assistance of reviews and prior experience they go for showrooming if the

quality of the product matches with required quality.

Free-shipping is a facility not available on many online portals. So, purchasers usually are not affected

much by free shipping available to them. It still saves cost of travelling and hence is preferred by many.

20
Like we discussed about the factors encouraging us towards showrooming. In the table given above, we

have taken few factors that refrain us from the activity of showrooming. The factors mentioned above

are: in- store information available, in-store sales service, shopping enjoyment, quality products, less

internet connectivity, inadequate product knowledge, new to the brand and better deals available offline.

Inadequate product knowledge stops a consumer from making the purchase. With no proper product

knowledge customer can end up buying a useless product online which can then result in dissatisfaction

on the part of customer.

Information available in-store can affect showrooming behavior on the part of consumers. If the

information available meets the needs of the consumer and he is satisfied with the information and

service, he will end up shopping in-store no matter products available online are reasonable.

Offline purchasers are skeptical about the quality of the products available online. This can be because

of bad experience; maybe the product ordered is duplicate, has a defect or is of wrong size and color.

Such experiences refrain customers from showrooming

If a customer is new to the brand, he may avoid shopping online. This is a normal human instinct.

Also, if there are better deals available offline why shop online? Is the attitude people carry. Here they

can try and feel the material or the product and can make the decisions accordingly. That too the products

available are reasonable, similar to that available online.

Customer tend to enjoy shopping so they prefer going to stores individually rather then shopping online.

It is one of the reasons that refrains customer to indulge into showrooming.

People are neutral towards internet connectivity available to them. According to them, if not available

in-store they can shop online and if they cannot go online, they can wait. As it is they will be waiting for

the store to restock it or for new collections.

21
 Factors affecting showrooming

Less internet connectivity 2.89

Free-shipping 3.16

Inadequate product knowledge 3.34

Better deals offline 3.39

In-store information available 3.40

Shopping enjoyment 3.42

Reviews 3.44

New to the brand 3.48

In-store sales service 3.50

Time availability 3.52

Non-availability in store 3.56

Quality products 3.63

Product information 3.68

Good deals 3.73

Price savings 3.81

Better quality 3.88

0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50

The above chart presents us mean value of all the factors individually. The scale ranges from 1-5. (1-

strongly disagree, 2- disagree, 3- neutral, 4- agree, 5- strongly agree). Better quality is the factor which

mostly affects the showrooming behavior. Time- availability, Non- availability in store, quality products,

product information, good deals and price savings are the factors that majorly affect the showrooming

behavior in customers as per the survey conducted by us.

When we take a look at the overall bar- chart graph, presence of showrooming is neutral. It ranges from

2.89- 3.88 (3- neutral). Hence store owners are still ruling the market and there is a lot of scope for stores

to expand online by increasing their reach and being more accessible to customers.

22
 KMO and Bartlett's Test
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. .868
Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square 907.539
df 120
Sig. .000

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) Test is a measure of how suited your data is for Factor Analysis. It ranges

between 0 to 1. The test measures sampling adequacy for each variable in the model and for the complete

model. The statistic is a measure of the proportion of variance among variables that might be common

variance. The lower the proportion, the more suited your data is to Factor Analysis. The closer the value

is to 1 better it is. In the survey conducted by us, we received KMO= 0.86. This shows that sampling is

adequate and hence we con conclude that data used is structured.

23
Here the number of factors is equal to the number of variables used in the factor analysis. However, not

all the 16 factors will be retained. In the survey carried out by us on3 factors are retained as requested.

The table consists of 4 columns: components, initial eigenvalues, extraction sum of squared loadings

and rotation sums of squared loadings.

Components- These are the factors mentioned in the survey.

Initial Eigenvalues- These are the variances of the factor. Here the total variance is equal to the number

of variables used in the analysis, i.e. 16 here. Reason being we directed our factor analysis on the

correlation matrix, the variables are standardized, that means every variable has a variance of 1. Under

total, we can see that the first factor accounts for most of the variance and then the second will account

as much as it can of the left over and so on. Hence subsequent factors will account for less variance. %

of variance is the percent of total variance accounted by each factor and cumulative% is cumulation of

the same. The variance is 58.932% hence it is ideal situation for factor analysis.

Extraction sums of squared loadings- The number of variances present here correspond to the number

of factors retained as requested by us. In the loading cumulative % column the cumulative percent is

58.932%. This means that the factors retained account for as much as 58.932% of common variance

which is always less than the total variance.

Rotation sum of squared loadings- It represents the distribution of variance after varimax rotation. It

maximizes the variances of each of the factors.

24
 Rotated Component Matrixa
Component
1 2 3
factors refrain showrooming .826
[In-store sales service]
factors refrain showrooming .815
[In-store information
available]
factors refrain showrooming .709 .486
[Quality products]
factors refrain showrooming .673 .317
[Shopping enjoyment]
Better quality .574 .514
Product information .696
Good deals .690 .318
Reviews .681
Free-shipping .662
Non-availability in store .649
Time availability .404 .614
Price savings .490 .536
factors refrain showrooming .729
[Less internet connectivity]
factors refrain showrooming .710
[Better deals offline]
factors refrain showrooming .666
[New to the brand]
factors refrain showrooming .431 .664
[Inadequate product
knowledge]
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.
Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.

25
a. Rotation converged in 5 iterations.

The table above represents how the variables are weighted for each factor and also the

correlation between the variables and the factors. The possible value ranges from -1 to +1. On

the /format command, option blank [.3] was used. This results in not printing of any data less

than or equal to .3. This makes the output easier to read.

The columns under this heading are the rotated components that have been extracted. These

are the components analysts are most interested in and try to name them. Like in this case-

The factors in store sales service, instore information available, quality products, shopping

enjoyment and better quality can be grouped together and the factor can be termed as in-store

value

Better quality, product information, Good deals, Reviews, free shipping, Non availability in

store, Time availability and price savings can be grouped together as showrooming exercise

Less internet connectivity, better deals offline, new to brand, inadequate product knowledge

can be grouped together as in-store activity

Age * On a scale of 1 to 5 how much do you like Showrooming

Crosstabulation
Count
On a scale of 1 to 5 how much do you like Showrooming
1 2 3 4 5 Total
Age 18-25 3 5 18 47 20 93
26-30 0 1 3 6 13 23
31-40 0 1 1 0 2 4
Total 3 7 22 53 35 120

26
In the test conducted, we can see that majority of our sample space consists of people in the age group
of 18-25, being 93, out of these 93 as many as 47 agree that they like showrooming and 20 strongly like
showrooming. Between the age group of 26-30, as many as 6 of them like showrooming and 13 strongly
like showrooming. From our sample space, 116 people are of age less then 31. These shows that people
below the age group of 30 prefer showrooming as compared to those present in elder age group.

Annual income * On a scale of 1 to 5 how much do you like Showrooming

Crosstabulation
Count
On a scale of 1 to 5 how much do you like Showrooming
1 2 3 4 5 Total
Annual income Less than 3 4 15 26 7 55
3,00,0000
3,00,000- 0 1 3 13 4 21
7,00,000
7,00,000 0 2 1 11 12 26
10,00,000 0 0 3 3 12 18
and above
Total 3 7 22 53 35 120

The following can be inferred from the crosstabulation conducted on how much do people like
Showrooming on the basis of their annual income-
People with salary less than 300000 prefer showrooming more than those present in the annual income
group of 1000000 and above. Factors affecting showrooming behavior of both the groups are distinct.
In the case of former one, factors affecting showrooming behavior can be price savings, good deals,
product information and reviews whereas in the case of former time availability and better quality,
brands matter the most.
Out of the sample space, 17 of them present in the annual income group of 3,00,000 to 7,00,000 like
showrooming and 23 of them present in the annual income group of 7,00,000-10,00,000.
In all the income groups as many as 22 are neutral towards showrooming and their preference towards
it. Only 10 of them are less familiar or more refrained from showrooming.

27
CONCLUSION
In the research conducted by us we see that there is a tug-of-war in existence between online and offline

retailing. At first, we considered price as the only factor affecting the behaviour of consumers towards

showrooming. A detailed study provided us a wide prospective regarding Showrooming and factors affecting

showrooming. Practice of showrooming is majorly present among people in the age group of 18-25. Their

annual earning is either less than 300000 or ranges between 300000and 700000. Both males and female

population contribute equally towards showrooming. Price savings is one of the reasons which encourages

showrooming activity. But this is not it. From the research conducted, we derived that better quality, good

deals, customer reviews, product knowledge, product availability in store and time availability all affect

showrooming. If the deals available online are good and also the quality available reaches that available in

store people opt for showrooming. Good deals followed by product information and time availability are the

factors that can result in the decision of showrooming. This saves both time and money. There also exists

factors that can affect showrooming in a negative manner. They are in store information, sales service,

shopping enjoyment, new to the brand, less internet connection, inadequate product knowledge and better

deals offline. If the product knowledge is less consumer will end up visiting stores wherein, he might receive

proper product information and also service along with best deals which might change his decision of shopping

online to offline. The products that are covered under showrooming are electronics, furniture, sports goods,

books and music and clothes and shoes. Out of these, clothes and shoes are majorly shopped both online and

offline followed by electronics who has a greater number of showroomers as compared to apparels because of

the best deals and warranties available in them. To come to a general consensus a mean of all the factors was

taken (factors affecting showrooming and refraining showrooming). Here we saw that the response was

neutral. Though many people prefer showrooming there can be more of such activity that can be conducted

by them future. There has been a rise in showrooming at an increasing rate. Store owners currently have two

choices: one they can expand their market offline and attract more customers by working hard or they can

expand their business by adding online portals along with their stores. In the study conducted by us, under

28
total variance explained, variance is 58.923% which is an ideal situation for factor analysis. With the help of

factor analysis, we divided the variances into 3 major components, pairing them on the basis of their

connection. The three components formed were: in-store value, showrooming exercise and in-store activity.

These makes the study easier and efficient for analysts. We received 0.868 KMO measure of sampling

adequacy. The closer it is to 1 the better it is. Hence the data used by us is properly structured. It is more likely

that showrooming will expand in the near future. With the fast pacing world there will be time crunch and also

plenty of choices available which will further result in instances where with the help of some window shopping

entire purchase will be made online, saving time, money and energy.

29
REFERNCES
Mehra, A., Kumar, S., & Raju, J. S. (2013). Showrooming’and the competition between store and online
retailers. Available at SSRN, 2200420.

Gensler, S., Neslin, S. A., & Verhoef, P. C. (2017). The showrooming phenomenon: it's more than just about
price. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 38, 29-43.

Mehra, A., Kumar, S., & Raju, J. S. (2017). Competitive strategies for brick-and-mortar stores to counter
“showrooming”. Management Science, 64(7), 3076-3090.

Daunt, K. L., & Harris, L. C. (2017). Consumer showrooming: Value co-destruction. Journal of Retailing and
Consumer Services, 38, 166-176.

Arora, S., Singha, K., & Sahney, S. (2017). Understanding consumer’s showrooming behaviour: Extending the
theory of planned behaviour. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 29(2), 409-431.

Terence A. Brown , , Douglas C. Friedman , , Zinaida Taran , (2017), Showrooming and the Small Retailer,
in Russell W. Belk (ed.) Qualitative Consumer Research

30
 APPENDIX

31
32
33
34