The Effect of Naming Strategy and Packaging on Perceived Quality and Purchase Intention of Private Label Brands

  • Siddhartha SarkarEmail author
  • Dinesh Sharma
  • Arti D. Kalro
Part of the Springer Proceedings in Business and Economics book series (SPBE)


Over the past few years, private labels have gained larger share of grocery sales in the food retail sector. However, retail stores follow differing strategies in packaging and naming their private label brands. This study examines the effects of extrinsic cues (packaging and naming strategies) on determining consumers’ perception of private labels’ product quality and purchase intention in an experiment using a sample of 357 management students. Using observation method, the category of rice was selected for this study. Hypotheses are derived from previous literature positing the effects of these two extrinsic cues on perceived quality and purchase intentions. MANOVA results indicate that similarity in private label packaging with national brand has a significant effect on perceived quality and purchase intention. However, the effect of naming strategies is not statistically significant on perceived quality and purchase intention. The interaction effect of packaging and naming strategies, in turn, positively influences perceived quality.


Naming strategies Packaging Perceived quality Purchase intention 


  1. Aribarg, A., Arora, N., Henderson, T., & Kim, Y. (2014). Private label imitation of a national brand: Implications for consumer choice and law. Journal of Marketing Research, 51(6), 657–675.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Cudmore, B. A. (2000). The effect of store image, package and price similarity on consumer perceptions of store brand quality. South Carolina University.Google Scholar
  3. Dawar, N., & Parker, P. (1994). Marketing universals: Consumers’ use of brand name, price, physical appearance, and retail reputation as signals of product quality. Journal of Marketing, 58(2), 81–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Dodds, W. B., Monroe, K. B., & Grewal, D. (1991). Effects of price, brand, and store information on buyers’ product evaluations. Journal of Marketing Research, 28(3), 307–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (2013). Social cognition: From brains to culture. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Fitzell, P. B. (1992). Private label marketing in the 1990s: The evolution of price labels into global brands. New York: Global Book Productions.Google Scholar
  7. Grewal, D., Krishnan, R., Baker, J., & Borin, N. (1998). The effect of store name, brand name and price discounts on consumers’ evaluations and purchase intentions. Journal of Retailing, 74(3), 331–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hyman, M. R., Kopf, D. A., & Lee, D. (2010). Review of literature–future research suggestions: Private label brands: Benefits, success factors and future research. Journal of Brand Management, 17(5), 368–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kumar, N., & Steenkamp, J. B. (2007). Private label strategy: How to meet the store brand challenge. Cambridge: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
  10. Loken, B., Ross, I., & Hinkle, R. L. (1986). Consumer “confusion” of origin and brand similarity perceptions. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 5, 195–211.Google Scholar
  11. Monroe, K. B., & Dodds, W. B. (1988). A research program for establishing the validity of the price-quality relationship. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 16(1), 151–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Nielsen/PLMA. (2012). Annual international private label yearbook.Google Scholar
  13. Olson, J. C., & Jacoby, J. (1972). Cue utilization in the quality perception process. In M. Venkatesan (Ed.), Proceedings of the third annual conference of the association for consumer research (pp. 167–179). Iowa City, IA: Association for Consumer Research.Google Scholar
  14. Rao, A. R., & Monroe, K. B. (1989). The effect of price, brand name, and store name on buyers’ perceptions of product quality: An integrative review. Journal of Marketing Research, 26(3), 351–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Render, B., & O’Connor, T. S. (1976). The influence of price, store name, and brand name on perception of product quality. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 4(4), 722–730.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Richardson, P. S., Dick, A. S., & Jain, A. K. (1994). Extrinsic and intrinsic cue effects on perceptions of store brand quality. Journal of Marketing, 58(4), 28–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Saraswat, A., Mammen, T., Aagja, J. P., & Tewari, R. (2010). Building store brands using store image differentiation. Journal of Indian Business Research, 2(3), 166–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Schnaars, P. S. (2002). Managing imitation strategies. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  19. Sethuraman, R., & Gielens, K. (2014). Determinants of store brand share. Journal of Retailing, 90(2), 141–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Tversky, A. (2004). Preference, belief, and similarity: Selected writings. Cambridge: The MIT.Google Scholar
  21. Zeithaml, A. V. (1988). Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: A means-end model and synthesis of evidence. Journal of Marketing, 52(3), 2–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Siddhartha Sarkar
    • 1
    Email author
  • Dinesh Sharma
    • 1
  • Arti D. Kalro
    • 1
  1. 1.Shailesh J. Mehta School of ManagementIndian Institute of Technology BombayMumbaiIndia

Personalised recommendations