Retail Buyers' and Manufacturers' Sales Representatives' Perceptions of Market Show Services in Small Apparel Markets

Abstract

This paper explores apparel retail buyers' perceptions of (a) the importance of and (b) satisfaction with services available at market shows. We also measured manufacturers' sales representatives' perceptions of the importance of the market services. Respondents were 161 apparel retail buyers and 146 manufacturers' sales representatives who attended a local midwest market show. Multivariate analysis of variance revealed that apparel retail buyers and manufacturers' sales representatives differed regarding the importance of five market show services. As compared to retail buyers, manufacturers' sales representatives attributed more importance to help for new retailers, show books, and timing of the markets. As compared to manufacturers' sales representatives, retail buyers attributed more importance to the number of lines available and to parking arrangements. Results of a multiple regression analysis revealed that retail buyer satisfaction with (a) timing of markets, (b) number of lines available, (c) buyer's lounge, and (d) the provision of help for new retailers accounted for 74% of the explained variance in satisfaction with overall market services. Suggestions are offered for improving market services.

Chinese Consumers' Attitudes Toward U.S.‐ and PRC‐Made Clothing: From a Cultural Perspective

“…Other researchers have investigated attitudes toward shopping in general (Fuller & Blackwell, 1992;Haynes, Pipkin, Black, & Cloud, 1994) and attitudes toward fashion and apparel shopping in particular (Summers, Belleau, & Wozniak, 1992). Researchers have also studied attitudes toward catalog apparel purchasing (Eastlick & Feinberg, 1995;Shim & Drake, 1990), apparel advertising (Witter & Noel, 1984, apparel imports (Morganosky & Douglas, 1989), clothing coupons (Cho & Kang, 1998), and apparel markets and their services (Fairhurst, Lennon, & Yu, 1996;Hathcote & Schulte, 1996). From an applied perspective, a number of researchers have examined attitudes toward the use of protective clothing (DeJonge, Vredevoogd, & Henry, 1983-1984Nelson et al, 1988;Perkins et al, 1992;Rucker et al, 1988) by agricultural and lawn care workers.…”

Diversity of Research in Textiles, Clothing, and Human Behavior: The Relationship Between What We Know and How We Know

“…Survey research has been used to study consumer behavior related to dress (e.g., Abraham-Murali & Littrell, 1995;Dickson & Littrell, 1?96;Huddleston, Ford, & Bickle, 1993; Lee & Bums, 1993) and to textiles (e.g., Kelley, Gray, & Blouin, 1980;Schutz & Phillips, 1976). Survey research has also been used to study the behavior of industry professionals, such as retail buyers (e.g., Fairhurst, Lennon, & Yu, 1996;Hathcote & Schulte, 1996;Shim & Kotsiopulos, 1994;Yu, Fairhurst, & Lennon, 1996), manufacturers (e.g., Huddleston & Oliver, 1995;Kincade, 1995;Lin, Kincade, & Warfield, 1995), retail managers (e.g., Shim & Kotsiopulos, 1994), and manufacturers' sales representatives (e.g., Fairhurst, Lennon, & Yu, 1996). In addition, pesticide use by commercial cattle feeders (Munson & Huck, 1993) and quiltmaking practices (Crews & James, 1996) have also been studied through the use of survey research.…”

“…In textile science, individual data are collected in fabric hand research (e.g., Kim & Winakor, 1996;Wilson & Laing, 1995a) or in any research that measures consumers' attitudes about or perceptions of textiles (e.g., Crown, 1978; Wylie, Crown, & Morris, 1976). Finally, the nature of survey research is such that data collected in that manner are typically individual in origin (e.g., Dickson & Littrell, 1996;Fairhurst, Lennon, & Yu, 1996; Lee & ). However, it should be noted that whereas survey data are individual in origin, a larger unit than the individual, such as a household (Norum, Weagley, & Norton, 1998) or an educational unit (Laughlin & Kean, 1995;Rudd, 1981) such as a textiles and clothing program area might be reflected.…”

“…Such instruments have been widely used to elicit data regarding consumer behavior and dress (e.g., Abraham-Murali & Littrell, 1995; Baugh Dickson & Littrell, 1996;Huddleston, Ford, & Bickle, 1993;Lee & Bums, 1993) and consumer behavior and textiles (e.g., Johnson & Workman, 1990; Kelley, Gray, & Blouin, 1980). Self-administered questionnaires are also commonly used to elicit data from industry professionals (e.g., Fairhurst, Lennon, & Yu, 1996; Hathcote & Schulte, 1996;Huddleston & Oliver, 1995;Kincade, 1995;Lin, Kincade, & Warfield,1995;Shim & Kotsiopulos, 1994;Yu, Fairhurst, & Lennon, 1996). Research on social perception as a function of dress also frequently uses self-report measures (e.g., Clayton, Lennon, & Larkin, 1987;Johnson & Workman, 1992; Workman & Johnson, 1989).…”

Improving the crystal ball: harnessing consumer input to create retail prediction markets

“…Buyers are also thought to rely heavily on their intuition in making buying decisions (McIntyre et al, 1993). Although retail buyers sometimes utilize suggestions from manufacturers' sales representatives in making their decisions (Shim and Kotsiopulos, 1991;Fairhurst et al, 1996;Kincaide et al, 2002), the most frequently cited information source for buying decisions is typically the retail buyer's own knowledge (Hirschman and Mazursky, 1982;Kline and Wagner, 1994). Additionally, other research indicates that the most important external source of information used by retail buyers is customer requests (Kline and Wagner, 1994), suggesting that buyers might indeed welcome direct and immediate consumer input into their buying decisions and sales forecasts.…”