CUSTOMERS COGNIZANCE FACTORS INFLUENCING PURCHASING DECISION OF DESIGNATED DAIRY PRODUCTS

International Journal of Mechanical and Production Engineering Research and Development (IJMPERD) ISSN (P): 2249–6890; ISSN (E): 2249–8001 Vol. 10, Issue 3, Jun 2020, 3557-3568 © TJPR Pvt. Ltd.

CUSTOMERS COGNIZANCE FACTORS INFLUENCING PURCHASING DECISION OF DESIGNATED DAIRY PRODUCTS Dr. S. SENTHILKUMAR1, Dr. SUDHAKAR KOTA2, K. SRIVIDYA3, Dr. A. RADHIKA4 & Dr. B.JAYALAKSHMI5 1

Professor in Finance & Management, Skyline University, Nigeria 2 3

PhD Research Scholar in Statistics, Periyar University, India 4

5

Vice Chancellor, Skyline University, Nigeria

Assistant Professor in Statistics, Periyar University, India

Asst Prof in Business Administration, Mahendra Arts & Science College, India

ABSTRACT This study mainly deals with customer purchasing decision of leading dairy brands. The consumption pattern of dairy products in India has some contrasting contours that do not align with the western world. In India Consumption is primarily skewed towards traditional products: however, westernized products are gradually gaining momentum in the urban areas. The study also measures the product knowledge and purchasing decision factors. The researcher purchasing decision and to examine the essential information preferred by respondents while purchasing dairy products. This study will be highly helpful to the business entities can succinctly understand consumers’ needs and expectations towards leading brands of dairy products. The collected data was analyzed with hypothetical test by using statistical tools such as percentage analysis, Henry Garrett Ranking method, ANOVA and Factor Analysis was also used to find the respondents’ opinion towards the influencing factors on purchasing decisions of dairy products.

Original Article

presented this study to find the customer’s product awareness of dairy brands, key factors involved in customers’

KEYWORDS: Purchase decisions, Product knowledge, Marketing mix & Innovative dairy products

Received: Jun 10, 2020; Accepted: Jun 30, 2020; Published: Jul 15, 2020; Paper Id.: IJMPERDJUN2020338

INTRODUCTION Dairy industry inhabits an important place in Indian economy. It includes production of milk, its preparation for sale as well as manufacturing of dairy products. The growth of Indian dairy as a part of primary activities has been prodigious for the past three decades. The Indian dairy industry is not only a vital producer of an essential food item but it also is the largest employer in the country in both the rural sector and in the semi urban and urban regions as well. It gives an opportunity to about eighty million families in direct and indirect employment activities across India. Effective demand will come mainly from middle and high income consumers in urban and metro city areas in India. There are ways to mitigate the effects of unequal distribution of incomes. The researcher reviewed current Indian dairy scenario and based on the gap from review of earlier studies finds the fissure and select this title by connecting dairy product knowledge and factors behind for purchase decisions of dairy products.

METHODOLOGY A good research work requires a clear scientific methodology because only through the application of correct methodology in selection of sampling techniques, appropriate tools of data collection etc. the problem can be

www.tjprc.org

SCOPUS Indexed Journal

editor@tjprc.org

3558

Dr. S. Senthilkumar, Dr. Sudhakar Kota, K. Srividya, Dr. A. Radhika & Dr. B.Jayalakshmi

identified. So that the well founded conclusion can be drawn on the phenomena under consideration. In the present study though it an empirical format, the researcher collects the data through primary sources with the tool of structured questionnaires.

Research Design - Descriptive Research Design Sampling Design - Cluster sampling Design Sampling Area – Salem District of Tamilnadu, India

Tools used for Analysis Percentage analysis Henry Garrett Ranking Method

Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) Factor Analysis

Snapshot of Review of Literature 1. Maulik C. Prajapati and Ashish K. Makwana (2017) examine the impact of brand equity on purchase decision of dairy products in milk city Anand. The results suggest a remarkable relationship between brand equity and purchase decision.

2. Renata Hrubá (2016) deals with the problem of analysis of the attitudes toward food that influence the behavior and decision-making of consumer when buying food from particular processors. Study results, which were obtained by Logit Regression Models, thus indicate that intension of buying from a particular processor is positively associated with the place of origin of milk, safety, as well as with information about how food is produced.

3. Krishna Sudheer et al., (2015) “An empirical determination of target consumer profile for dairy products” aimed to know the target group of dairy products which is an essential element in designing various marketing strategies for dairy farms. The findings of the study explore various factors that help the dairy firms to improve the consumption level of dairy products and to develop brand image in the dairy market.

4. Narges Delafrouz et al., (2014) prepared a study titled, “Analysis of Affective Drives on Consumers Green Purchase Decision” with the purpose of Analysis of affective drives on consumers green purchase decision of Dairy and meat products of Kaleh Company in Guilan province. In this regard, a sample of 384 consumers of this company were randomly selected and studied.

5. Bidyut Kumar Ghosh (2013) examined the impact and role of product packaging on the buying behaviour of consumers for the dairy of products of government owned Mother Dairy. The study also makes the conclusion that the visual appeal is more important than the qualitative aspect of packaging in the study area.

6. Bonaventure Boniface and Wendy Umberger (2012) “Factors influencing Malaysian consumers’ consumption of dairy products”, explains increasing demand for dairy products in Malaysia is driving government initiatives and structural change in the domestic dairy industry in order to increase competitiveness Impact Factor (JCC): 8.8746

SCOPUS Indexed Journal

NAAS Rating: 3.11

Customers Cognizance Factors Influencing Purchasing Decision of Designated Dairy Products

3559

and self-sufficiency. The results indicate that demographic variables such as age and ethnicity as well as other attitudinal variables significantly influence consumers’ increasing consumption of dairy products.

7. Iliriana Miftari (2009) “Kosovo consumer buying behavior preferences and demand for milk and dairy products” analyze the consumer buying behavior, preferences, attitudes, needs and wants toward dairy products.

The study was carried out in five Kosovo regions.

8. Santosh Singh Bais and Ramesh Agadi (2008) “Marketing of Branded Dairy Milk Products in Gulbarga District in Karnataka – A Survey of Consumers and Milk Vendors” analyzed the demand and supply of the dairy milk in Gulbarga. The result of the study shows Majority (59%) of the respondent preferred the home delivery for their milk required avoiding the inconveniences and they are ready to bear bit additional cost for home delivery.

9. Hannah Jane McKnight (2007) “Organic Milk: Consumers and their purchasing patterns”, designed to characterize consumer purchases of organic milk by differentiating consumers based on buying behavior. The results of identifying consumers based on their milk buying behavior can be used by marketers and educators to target individuals, based on group membership, for planning and guiding education and advertising campaigns and programs.

10. Kubendran and Vanniarajan (2005) “Comparative analysis of Rural and Urban Consumers on Milk Consumption” revealed that with a constant increase in disposable incomes among the strong middle-income class. It could be noted that the demand for milk and milk products depends on consumer's willingness and capacity to buy. Since the consumers are not homogeneous, the consumption pattern of milk like quantum of purchase, mode of purchase, source of purchase, brand preference etc., are changing from consumer to consumer.

Statement of the Problem The Indian dairy sector is categorized by high disintegration. The ever increasing rise in domestic demand for dairy products and a large demand-supply gap could lead India to be a net importer of dairy products in the near future. Further, purchasing decision also changes over a period of time, because of the change in age, income, occupation, education, family size and so forth. Unless the purchasing decision factors, product knowledge especially new arrivals and fulfilling the satisfaction are thoroughly understood from time to time, it would not be possible for the marketers and distributors to design appropriate marketing mix to appeal and influence the varied segmented consumers. Thus, this study becomes imminent for the marketers to withstand the onslaught from the competitors and survive in the market. Having reviewed relevant dairy marketing studies, the present study has made a broad objective to explore the customer’s cognizance factors influencing purchasing decision of designated dairy products in Salem district of Tamilnadu, India thereby enabling to arrive at a consensus on the marketing strategies to be followed in the dairy market. Hence, the present study focuses mainly on customers purchasing decisions of prominent dairy brands with position to product knowledge.

OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY 

To evaluate the applicable variables between socio economic statuses with level of awareness of customers about various brands of dairy products.



To identify and interpret the key factors involved in customers’ purchasing decision intricate in leading dairy product inclusions.



To ascertain and examine the essential information preferred by respondents while purchasing dairy products.

www.tjprc.org

SCOPUS Indexed Journal

editor@tjprc.org

3560

Dr. S. Senthilkumar, Dr. Sudhakar Kota, K. Srividya, Dr. A. Radhika & Dr. B.Jayalakshmi

Analysis, Findings and Interpretation Table 1: Socio-Demographic Profile of the Sample Respondents Profile Particulars Frequency Male 146 Gender Female 190 Below 20 years 52 21-30 years 67 Age 31-40 years 67 41-50 years 80 Above 50 years 70 Illiterate 65 School level 68 Educational Diploma Level 74 Qualification Under Graduation 59 Post-Graduation 70 Agriculture 81 Business 69 Occupation Status Professional/Self Employed 63 Govt. / Pvt. Employee 66 House maker / Unemployed 57 Less than Rs.1000 39 Rs.1001-Rs.1500 46 Monthly Expenditure on Rs.1501 - Rs.2000 47 Dairy Product Rs.2001-Rs.2500 106 Above Rs.2500 98 Total for Each Segment 336 Source: Computed from Primary Data

Percent 43.45 56.55 15.48 19.94 19.94 23.81 20.83 19.35 20.24 22.02 17.56 20.83 24.11 20.54 18.75 19.64 16.96 11.61 13.69 13.99 31.55 29.17 100.00

Gender - The table-1 reveals the socio-demographic profile of the respondents. The result shows that out of selected 336 respondents, 146 respondents (43.45%) were male and the remaining 190 respondents (56.55%) were female. Thus the majority of the respondents were female.

Age - The age of the respondents were recorded into groups such as among the 336 respondents, a high of 80 respondents (23.81%) belong to the age category of 41-50 years and low of 52 respondents (15.48%) were below the age category of 20 years.

Educational Qualifications - With regard to the educational qualifications of the respondents, it was identified that out of 336respondnets, a high of 74 of them (22.02%) were having the educational qualification of diploma level and low of 59 respondents (17.56%) were under graduates. In this study the researcher found only 19.35% of them are illiterates which shows that Salem district is more than moderate in literacy rate.

Occupation - The occupational status of the respondents were classified as Agriculture, Business, Professional and Self Employed, Government and Private employee, House maker and Unemployed. The result shows that out of 336 respondent, a high of 81 respondents (24.11%) were engaged in agriculture and low of 57 respondents (16.96%) were house makers / unemployed.

Monthly Expenditure on Dairy Product - It can be noted from the above table, a high 106 (31.55%) of the respondents were spending Rs.2001-2500 and low of 39 (11.61%) of the respondents spending less than Rs.1000.

Impact Factor (JCC): 8.8746

SCOPUS Indexed Journal

NAAS Rating: 3.11

Customers Cognizance Factors Influencing Purchasing Decision of Designated Dairy Products

3561

Table 2: Respondents Preference on Dairy Brand Brands Total Score Mean Score Rank Aavin 43272 57.2 1 Arokia 42294 55.9 2 Cavin 41364 54.6 3 Sakthi 32471 42.9 4 Thirumala 31160 41.2 5 Source: Computed from Primary data The above portrays respondents’ preference to purchase dairy brands in that mostly classified as Aavin, Arokia, Cavin, Sakthi and Thirumala. The above table shows that out of the five brands listed; the mostly preferred brand of dairy products pinpointed by the respondents was “Aavin”, which was ranked first with a Garrett score of 43272 points. It is followed by “Arokia”, placed in the second rank with the Garrett score of 42294 points. The brands such as “Cavin”, “Sakthi” and “Thirumala” were ranked in the third, fourth and fifth places with the Garret scores of 41364, 32471 and 31160 points respectively. It was identified from the above analysis that majority of the respondents pinpointed to the brand that mostly preferred by the respondents was “Aavin” followed by “Arokia”.

Awareness of Customers about Various Brands of Dairy Products ANOVA was employed to determine whether there is a difference in the level of awareness among different bands of dairy products such as Aavin, Arokia, Cavin, Sakthi, Thirumala with reference to respondent’s profile (namely age, educational background, occupation and monthly expenditure on dairy products). The researcher selected only four variables which are unswervingly and intimately affecting the awareness of the respondents on dairy products.

Table 3: Age and Level of Awareness (ANOVA) Source DF SS MS F S Between Groups 2 764.4 382.2 4.772 Significant at 5% Level Within Groups 12 961.2 80.1 Total 14 1725.6 462.3 Source: Computed from Primary data H0: There is no significant difference between age of the respondents and their level of awareness towards dairy brands.

It is highlighted from the above table that the calculated ‘F’ value is greater than the table value (4.772>3.885) and the result is significant at 5% level. Hence, we accept the alternative hypothesis (H1), “There is a significant difference between age of the respondents and their level of awareness towards Dairy brands”, holds well.

Table 4: Educational Qualification and Level of Awareness (ANOVA) Source DF SS MS F S Between Groups 2 764.4 382.2 4.041 Significant at 5% Level Within Groups 12 1135.2 94.6 Total 14 1899.6 476.8 Source: Computed from Primary data H0: There is no significant difference between educational qualification of the respondents and their level of awareness towards dairy brands.

It is highlighted from the above table that the calculated ‘F’ value is greater than the table value (4.041>3.885) and the result is significant at 5% level. Hence, we accept alternative hypothesis (H1), “There is a significant difference www.tjprc.org

SCOPUS Indexed Journal

editor@tjprc.org

3562

Dr. S. Senthilkumar, Dr. Sudhakar Kota, K. Srividya, Dr. A. Radhika & Dr. B.Jayalakshmi

between educational qualification of the respondents and their level of awareness towards Dairy brands”, does hold well.

Table 5: Occupation Status and Level of Awareness (ANOVA) Source Df SS MS F S Between Groups 2 716.4 358.2 8.002 Significant at 5% Level Within Groups 12 537.2 44.77 Total 14 1253.6 402.97 Source: Computed From Primary Data H0: There is no significant difference between occupation status of the respondents and their level of awareness towards dairy brands.

It is highlighted from the above table that the calculated ‘F’ value is greater than the table value (8.002>3.885) and the result is significant at 5% level. Hence, we accept alternative hypothesis (H1), “There is a significant difference between occupation status of the respondents and their level of awareness towards Dairy brands”, hold well.

Table 6: Monthly Expenditure on Dairy Product and Level of Awareness (ANOVA) Source DF SS MS F S Between Groups 2 98.2 181.07 22.127 Significant at 5% Level Within Groups 12 362.14 8.18 Total 14 460.34 189.25 Source: Computed From Primary Data H0: There is no significant difference between monthly expenditure on dairy product of the respondents and their level of awareness towards dairy brands.

It is highlighted from the above table that the calculated ‘F’ value is greater than the table value (22.127>3.885) and the result is significant at 5% level. Hence, we accept alternative hypothesis (H1), “There is a significant difference between monthly expenditure on dairy product of the respondents and their level of awareness towards Dairy brands”, hold well.

Factors Influencing the Purchasing Decision – Factor Analysis In this study, the researcher analyzed the factors influencing the purchasing decision of dairy product’s consumptionchoices.

By using factor analysis the researcher tries to find the nearest and close substantial purchasing factors

influencing consumption of dairy products. Based on the responses of respondents through structured questionnaires and outcomes obtained via statistical calculations, the following factor analysis model are depicted Table 7: Communalities – Before Removal of Low Loading Variables Variable Initial Extraction Quality 1.000 0.772 Quantity 1.000 0.799 Easy availability 1.000 0.771 Price 1.000 0.692 Convenience 1.000 0.631 Taste 1.000 0.521 Home delivery 1.000 0.61 Freshness 1.000 0.652 Special offers 1.000 0.559 Packaging 1.000 0.561 Hygiene factor 1.000 0.783 Keeping (shelf)life 1.000 0.537 Impact Factor (JCC): 8.8746

SCOPUS Indexed Journal

NAAS Rating: 3.11

Customers Cognizance Factors Influencing Purchasing Decision of Designated Dairy Products

Pleasant flavor Brand image Lack of alternative source Suitable packing Consistent Service Promotional Concessions Cronbach’s Alpha () = 0.8292

1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000

3563

0.541 0.692 0.574 0.653 0.417 0.618

The above table enumerates that the communalities of the selected 18 variables had reliability of 0.8292 as good, and are keenly checked that no variable had low loading. The appropriateness of the data for the factor analysis is discussed in the following KMO and Bartlett’s test.

Table 8: KMO and Bartlett Test Kaiser-Meyer-Oklin Measure of Sampling Adequacy Approx. Chi-Square DF Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity Sig.

0.881 7244.671 136 0.000

The Kaiser-Meyer-Oklin (KMO) Measure of Sampling Adequacy (MSA) and Bartlett test of Sphericity are applied to verify the adequacy or appropriateness of the data for factor analysis. In this study, the value of KMO for overall matrix is found to be excellent (0.881) and Bartlett test of Sphericity is highly significant (p < 0.001). The results thus indicate that the samples taken are appropriate to proceed with the factor analysis. Also, the Bartlett Test of Sphericity, the KMO measure of sampling adequacy and communality values of all the variables are observed. Further, to define the factors clearly, it is decided to delete any variable that has loading below ± 0.50. With this criterion, a series of factor analysis is performed on the data.

Total Variance Explained The following table depicts the total variance explained with rotation. The Eigen values for the factors 1, 2, and 3 are different and they are 7.145, 1.939 and 1.338 respectively. Percentage of variance after the rotation for the factors 1, 2 and 3 are 23.131, 22.045 and 16.127 respectively. Cumulative percentage for the factors 1, 2 and 3 after the rotation are 23.131, 45.176 and 61.303 respectively. It indicates that the 3 factors extracted from the total 18 factors have a cumulative percentage up to 61.303% of the total variance.

Component 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

www.tjprc.org

Total 7.145 1.939 1.338 1.127 0.844 0.704 0.586 0.552 0.499 0.462 0.396

Table 9: Total Variance Explained Extraction Sums of Squared Initial Eigen values Loadings % of Cumulative Total % of Cumulative variance % variance % 42.029 42.029 7.145 42.029 42.029 11.406 53.435 1.939 11.406 53.435 7.869 61.303 1.338 7.869 61.303 6.632 67.935 4.966 72.902 4.144 77.046 3.449 80.494 3.249 83.744 2.934 86.678 2.619 87.519 2.332 89.010

SCOPUS Indexed Journal

Rotation Sums of Squared Loadings Total % of Cumulative variance % 3.932 23.131 23.131 3.748 22.045 45.176 2.742 16.127 61.303

editor@tjprc.org

3564

Dr. S. Senthilkumar, Dr. Sudhakar Kota, K. Srividya, Dr. A. Radhika & Dr. B.Jayalakshmi

12 0.358 2.103 91.113 13 0.339 1.996 93.109 14 0.290 1.703 94.813 15 0.260 1.527 96.340 16 0.230 1.354 97.694 17 0.218 1.282 98.976 18 0.174 1.024 100.000 Extraction Method: Principal Component Ana Rotated Component Matrix After obtaining the factor solutions, in which all the variables have a significant loading on a factor, the researcher attempted to assign a meaning to the pattern of factor loadings. Variables with higher loadings are considered more important and have a greater influence on the name or the label selected to represent a factor. Researchers have already examined all the variables for a particular factor and placed greater emphasis on those variables with higher loadings to assign a name or a label to a factor that accurately reflects the variables’ loading on that factor. All the 3 factors are given appropriate names on the basis of the variables represented in each case.

S. No. 1 2 3 4

Table 10: Rotated Component Matrix Component Factors F1 F2 Quality 0.688 Taste 0.593 Freshness 0.502

F3

Hygiene 0.575 5 Keeping life 0.585 6 Consistent Service 0.673 7 Brand Image 0.588 8 Price 0.717 9 Quantity 0.704 10 Special offers 0.693 11 Promotional Concessions 0.612 12 Easily availability 0.604 13 Convenience 0.545 14 Home Delivery 0.694 15 Packaging 0.764 16 Pleasant flavor 0.607 17 Lack of alternatives 0.556 18 Suitable packing 0.536 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. , Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization., Rotation converged in 6 iterations.

The table above explains the rotated component matrix, in which the extracted factors were assigned and a new name related together. Based on the fixing criteria, it was noted that all the loading factors that were having the loading value greater than 0.5.were fixed 

Factor 1 was the most important factor which explains 23.131% of the variation. The factors Quality (0.688), taste (0.593), freshness (0.502), hygiene (0.575), keeping life 90.585), reliable service 90.673) and brand image (0.588) were highly correlated with each other. These factors reflected the quality aspects of the dairy products; hence, the researcher named this segment as quality seekers.

Impact Factor (JCC): 8.8746

SCOPUS Indexed Journal

NAAS Rating: 3.11

Customers Cognizance Factors Influencing Purchasing Decision of Designated Dairy Products

3565

The Cronbach’s Alpha value is 0.938. 

Second kind of factor explains 22.045% of the variances. In this segment, the researcher took another four important variables, price (0.717), quantity (0.704), special offers (0.693) and promotional discounts (0.612).

These statements reflected the price related aspects of the products and hence the researcher named this segment of competitive price seekers.

The Cronbach’s Alpha value is 0.927. 

The third factor explains 16.127% of the variations. In this factor, the researcher took the seven important variables - easy availability (0.604), convenience (0.545), home delivery (0.694), packaging (0.764), pleasant flavor (0.607), lack of alternatives (0.556) and suitable packing (0.536). These statements reflected the convenience aspects of the products; hence the researcher named this segment as convenience seekers.

Table 11: Information preferred to examine while Purchasing Dairy Products Factors Total Score Mean Score Rank Special offers and discounts 41911 55.4 1 Maximum retail price 38213 50.5 5 Quality eminence components 40844 54.0 3 Date of manufacturing 40848 54.0 2 Date of expiration 37327 49.3 8 Ingredients combination 37824 50.0 6 Directives usage manual 37503 49.5 7 Name of the company 33198 43.9 10 Quantity in gram or liter 40320 53.3 4 Place of manufacturing 36833 48.7 9 Source: Computed from Primary data The above table revealed that out of the ten factors related to information preferred by respondents while

purchasing dairy products, “Special offers and discount”, which was ranked first with a Garrett score of 41911 points, It was followed by “Date of manufacturing” and “Quality eminence components”, placed in the second and third rank with the Garrett score of 40848 and 40844 points respectively. The factors such as “Quantity in grams or liter”, “Maximum retail price” and “Ingredients combination” were ranked in the fourth, fifth and sixth places with the Garret scores of 40320, 38213 and 37824 points respectively. Further required information are, “Directives usage manual”, “Date of expiation” and “Place of manufacturing” were ranked as seven, eight and ninth places with the Garret scores of 37503, 37327 and 36833 points respectively. Lastly, “Name of the company” was ranked in the tenth place with a Garrett score of 33198 points.

SUGGESTION AND RECOMMENDATION 

During the survey, the researcher found that all most all age groups are consuming milk and dairy products, so the company can introduce a bunch of pioneering products like baby milk, added nutrition for school children, auxiliary nutrition for sports persons, diet milk for expectant mothers, Calorie conscious milk for patients and aged persons.



Today in market variations of milk available in the market such as whole milk, skimmed milk, and toned milk and double toned milk. The knowledge of the awareness of these products is very much essential to the consumers to take a buying decision on his / her own rather than depending on the seller. Hence this education should be

www.tjprc.org

SCOPUS Indexed Journal

editor@tjprc.org

3566

Dr. S. Senthilkumar, Dr. Sudhakar Kota, K. Srividya, Dr. A. Radhika & Dr. B.Jayalakshmi

imparted through mass media and advertisements. 

Awareness of the availability of different types of dairy products in the selling point alone is not sufficient, so the distributor can take initiative to spread the information and product description by social media and broad casting channels.



Company can increase dairy products sales through milk supplier or agent who are very close the buyers and lot of chances to interact with them which results creating new customers for dairy products too.



Some of the customers requesting the distributors of dairy product to inform the company to introduce packaged instant food which may leads to greater value addition to the dairy product mix.



Taking the advantage of recent developments in E-Commerce, the distributors can try for alternative channels of distribution to explore the possibilities of marketing the dairy products through new networks to reach the customers in time.



The current study showed that the consumers give more priority to quality and taste. Hence, it is recommended that the manufacturer should take due care on adding different flavours to milk and dairy products in organic way.

CONCLUSIONS It is suggested that the manufactures affianced in producing dairy products should analyze their marketing mix components to improve the marketing efforts so as to maintain loyal customer base and towards achievement of their targets. Supplier and distributors should take additional responsibility to create awareness of new arrival of present dairy brands this will improve the market/consumer result oriented purchasing decision. This study will help the manufactures to bridge the gap between strategic change and market complexity in the next coming challenging environment. Consumers buy dairy products including milk out of their functional, inspirational and nutritional benefits conveyed by the product. It is a wellknown from the current study that almost all consumer buying habits are influenced by the preference and expectations.

However the dairy products image is formed out of the knowledge the consumers have about the perceived benefits the product offers and the value it delivers or other aspects of the products such as price, quality, availability and accessibility.

REFERENCES 1.

Maulik C. Prajapati and Ashish K. Makwana (2017), “Impact of Brand Equity on Consumer Purchase Decision of Dairy Products”, Vol.4, Issue 1, June 2017.

2.

Karale, Sheetal S., and MAYUR M. Suryavanshi. "Dairy wastewater treatment using coconut shell activated carbon & laterite as low cost adsorbents." Int. J. Civil, Struct. Environ. Infrastruct. Eng. Res. Dev 1 (2014): 9-14.

3.

Renata Hrubá (2016), “Behavior of agents at food market, especially asymmetric information on the Dairy Market”, Journal of Applied Economics and Business Research (JAEBR), Vol.6, No.1, pp.36-54.

4.

Krishna Sudheer, A., Krishna Karthik, E., & Seetha Mahalakshmi, M., (2015), “An Empirical Determination of Target Consumer profile for Dairy Products”, EPRA International Journal of Economic and Business Review, Vol.3, Issue 12, pp.213-220.

5.

Narges Delafrouz, Mahdieh Momenpour, Armin Goli & Fatemeh Momenpour, (2014), “Analysis of Affective Drives on Consumers Green Purchase Decision”, Indian Journal of Fundamental and Applied Life Sciences, Vol.4, Issue 1, pp.11171124.

6.

Bidyut Kumar Ghosh (2013), “Impact of Packaging on Consumers’ Buying Behaviour: A Case Study of Mother Dairy,

Impact Factor (JCC): 8.8746

SCOPUS Indexed Journal

NAAS Rating: 3.11

Customers Cognizance Factors Influencing Purchasing Decision of Designated Dairy Products

3567

Kolkata”, Parikalpana - KIIT Journal of Management, Vol.2, No.2, pp.27-34.

7.

Al Hamed, S. G. K. "Dairy wastewater treatment using microalgae in Karbala city–Iraq." IJEEFUS 4 (2014): 13-22.

8.

Bonaventure Boniface and Wendy Umberger (2012), “Factors influencing Malaysian consumers’ consumption of dairy products”, Contributed paper prepared for presentation at the 56th AARES annual conference, Fremantle, Western Australia, February7-10, 2012.

9.

Iliriana Miftari (2009), “Kosovo Consumer Buying Behavior Preferences and Demand for Milk and Dairy Products”, Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, Department of International Environment and Development Studies, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, 2009.

10. Santosh Singh Bais and Ramesh Agadi, (2008), “Marketing of Branded Dairy Milk Products in Gulbarga District in Karnataka – A Survey of Consumers and Milk Vendors”, Journal of Contemporary Research in Management, Special Issue, pp.1-27.

11. Hannah Jane McKnight (2007), “Organic Milk: Consumers and their purchasing patterns”, Unpublished Dissertation submitted to Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia.

12. Kubendran, V and T.Vanniarajan (2005), “Comparative analysis of Rural and Urban Consumers on Milk Consumption”.

Indian Journal of Marketing, Vol. XXXV, No.12, pp.67-74.

13. C.R.Kothari, Research methodology – Methods & Techniques, “Research Design”, New Age International, 2004, Page No.37 14. http://www.stat.yale.edu/Courses/1997-98/101/chigf.htm 15. http://www.biostathandbook.com/twowayanova.html 16. http://www.theanalysisfactor.com/factor-analysis-1-introduction

www.tjprc.org

SCOPUS Indexed Journal

editor@tjprc.org