Bargaining over the price of a product: delightful anticipation or abject dread?
| Published date | 01 June 1999 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/10610429910272538 |
| Pages | 232-244 |
| Date | 01 June 1999 |
| Author | Kenneth C. Schneider,William C. Rodgers,Dennis N. Bristow |
| Subject Matter | Marketing |
PRICING STRATEGY & PRACTICE
Bargaining over the price of a
product: delightful anticipation
or abject dread?
Kenneth C. Schneider
Professor of Marketing, Department of Marketing, College of
Business Administration, St Cloud State University, St Cloud,
Minnesota, USA,
William C. Rodgers
Professor of Marketing, Department of Marketing, College of
Business Administration, St Cloud State University, St Cloud,
Minnesota, USA, and
Dennis N. Bristow
Associate Professor of Marketing, Department of Marketing, College
of Business Administration, St Cloud State University, St Cloud,
Minnesota, USA
Keywords Assertiveness, Bargaining, Gender, Individual behaviour, Pricing,
Product management
Abstract The literature provides substantial evidence of gender differences in the level of
assertive and/or competitive traits an individual is likely to exhibit. Further, it has been
established that those individual differences are related to certain exchange strategies
employed by each gender. The primary research objectives in this study were, first, to
develop a reliable pencil-and-paper scale assessing consumers' propensity to employ
bargaining tactics in marketing exchange situations; and second, to investigate gender
differences in consumers' bargaining propensity. The results of the study showed that the
first research objective was successfully achieved in the form of the Bargaining
Propensity Scale, and that statistically significant gender differences in bargaining
propensity scores did occur. Managerial implications and avenues for future research are
discussed.
Introduction
While perusing the classified advertising section of the local newspaper, the
author's attention was drawn to an ad for a firearm. The author arranged to
meet with the seller and used several minutes to examine the firearm, testing
the action, looking for signs of use, wear, and/or abuse. With furrowed brow
and concern evident in his eyes and tone of voice, the buyer called to the
seller's attention slight imperfections in the product and began the
bargaining process.
After a bit of negotiation between buyer and seller, a bargain was struck and
the exchange was completed. The needs of both the parties of the exchange
were satisfied. The buyer added another pistol to his collection and the seller
increased his bank account by $200. But were other, less obvious needs
satisfied in the exchange?
Based on the first-hand experience described above, the authors can state
unequivocally that the exchange did satisfy additional needs. First, the
bargaining strategy allowed the buyer to obtain the product at the lowest
possible price, thereby preserving a finite resource ± disposable income.
Second, the ``give and take'' of the bargaining exchange allowed the buyer
to, in effect, compete against the seller. The buyer's goal was to buy the
pistol with the least cash outlay possible; the seller's objective was to obtain
the highest dollar amount possible for the product. From the buyer's
Slight imperfections
Bargain struck
232 JOURNAL OF PRODUCT & BRAND MANAGEMENT, VOL. 8 NO. 3, 1999, pp. 232-243 #MCB UNIVERSITY PRESS, 1061-0421
To continue reading
Request your trial