research project on nestle

Welcome to the Research Center

At NNI we drive progress by sharing the breakthrough research conducted by Nestlé and world renowned experts, supporting the global scientific community and empowering healthcare professionals in their clinical practice.

There is over 50 years of continuous commitment to innovation, state of the art technology and expert thinking invested in Nestlé Research.

This has helped build the world's largest private food and nutrition research organisation, involving around 5,000 people located in around 30 R&D facilities worldwide.

Over 1,000 peer-reviewed papers on diverse topics - including nutrition and health, food science and analytical methods - have been published in the past five years.

Explore these publications and stay updated with the latest in nutrition science research in all the topics available to you in this section.

Human Milk Research

Cat Allergen Research

+41 21 320 33 51 | [email protected]

Nestlé Foundation

For the study of problems of nutrition in the world.

• Funding policy
• Research Grants
• How to apply
• Annual Reports
• Publications

Current funding policy

Thus, priority is given to projects which lead to sustainable developments with strong elements of capacity building, and the implementation of the results of a research project should be immediate and sustainable. Highly sophisticated nutrition research of mainly academic interest without public health relevance has lower priority for support as well as solely laboratory based studies or animal experimentation.

Research Topics

At present the Foundation's work is primarily concerned with human nutrition research issues dealing with:

• maternal and child nutrition, including breastfeeding and complementary feeding,
• macro- and micronutrient deficiencies and imbalances,
• interactions between infection and nutrition, and
• nutrition education and health promotion

The precise priorities and goals of the Foundation are modified from time to time to meet emerging public health and nutritional needs in the developing world.

Studies in other areas of human nutrition research might also be considered, as long as they are dealing with problems of malnutrition in eligible countries (see above). Other areas of research may be eventually considered for support if the applicant can offer specific and convincing evidence and justification for the choice of their research topic.

Funded projects are usually of one- to three-year duration. Projects with a high potential for effective and sustainable improvement of the nutritional status as well as a high capacity building component will be funded preferentially. The budget of the projects must be appropriate and reasonable and has to be justified in detail.

One of the Foundation's main aims is the transfer of scientific and technological knowledge to target countries. In cases where Foundation-sponsored research projects are realized in collaboration with scientists at universities and research institutes in high-income countries, at least 75% of the budget has to be earmarked for use within the low-income country.

Research grant applications from high-income countries are normally not considered except under rare and exceptional conditions.

The Foundation does not normally fund:

• projects with low public health relevance
• projects with doubtful sustainability
• projects lacking transfer of scientific, technical and educational knowledge, i.e. lacking a capacity-building component
• large budget projects i.e. – projects that exceed US$100,000 per year or US$ 300,000 over the total duration of a 3 year project
• nutrition surveys or surveillance studies
• research on food policy, food production and food technology except when linked to an intervention with high potential for sustainable improvement of the nutritional status
• in vitro and/or animal experiments.

Although obesity and related diseases are of emerging importance in several low-income countries, the Foundation does not generally support projects in this specific area unless the proposal demonstrates linkages with under nutrition, the protocol is innovative and exceptionally well justified.

Nestlé Foundation - Place de la Gare 4 - PO Box 581 CH-1001 Lausanne, Switzerland Phone: +41 21 320 33 51 | Fax: +41 21 320 33 92 [email protected]

© Nestlé Foundation |  Privacy Policy | developed by Dogbytes Websolutions GmbH

Nestlé: Corporate Rap Sheet

By Philip Mattera

Nestlé, the world's largest food company, is one of the most multinational of companies. With more than 450 manufacturing facilities in over 80 countries spread over six continents, the company seems determined to feed the entire human race. It likes to call itself the “world’s leading nutrition, health and wellness company.” It is also one of the world’s most controversial corporations. For more than two decades the Nestlé name was widely associated with a controversy, including a longstanding boycott, over its marketing of infant formula in poor countries. More recently, the company has been one of the primary targets of the global movement against the bottled water industry. The company’s hard-line labor relations practices in poor countries have made it a villain in the eyes of the international union movement.

Infant Formula Controversy  

During the mid-1970s Nestlé, then expanding steadily throughout the third world, was made the target of a campaign protesting the marketing of infant formula in poor countries. Activists from organizations such as INFACT and progressive religious groups charged that the aggressive marketing of formula by companies like Nestlé was causing health problems, in that poor mothers often had to combine the powder with unclean water and frequently diluted the expensive formula so much that babies remained malnourished.

Nestlé initially responded to the boycott of its products with a counter-campaign, which included donating money to a research center that funded Herman Nickel, a writer for Fortune magazine, to produce a critical report on the boycott campaign. That report was never written, but Nickel published an article in Fortune that served the same purpose. The piece, entitled “The Corporation Haters,” referred to the religious groups involved in the boycott as “Marxists marching under the banner of Christ.” Nickel was later pushed off the Fortune staff, but he was rewarded by the Reagan Administration by being named ambassador to apartheid South Africa.

Nestlé later changed its posture, agreeing to comply with a marketing code issued by the World Health Organization. As a result, the boycott was suspended in 1984. The protest campaign was, however, resumed in 1988 because of evidence that Nestlé was violating the WHO code by continuing to distribute large quantities of free samples to hospitals. In 1997 the Interagency Group on Breastfeeding Monitoring issued a report providing more evidence that Nestlé and other companies were violating the code.

In May 2007, the 30th anniversary of the original Nestlé boycott, the London Guardian published an investigation focusing on Bangladesh that found evidence that companies such as Nestlé were still engaging in questionable infant-formula marketing practices.

In April 2012 Nestlé deepened its involvement in the market by agreeing to purchase Pfizer’s infant formula business for more than $11 billion.

Environment and Product Safety 

Water Controversies. After entering the bottled water business by acquiring upscale brands such as Perrier and San Pellegrino, Nestlé began selling less expensive water in poor countries in the late 1990s. From the start, critics charged that the ready availability of bottled water, which the company sold under the name Nestlé Pure Life, would make the governments of those countries less inclined to invest in the infrastructure needed for reliable public water systems. A 2005 report published by the Swiss Coalition of Development Organisations and ActionAid raised questions about the purity of the Pure Life water sold by the company in Pakistan.

The company also faced challenges to its operations in the United States, including the Poland Spring, Arrowhead and Zephyrhills brands it acquired as part of the 1992 Perrier deal and the Deer Park brand it bought a year later.

For example, when Nestlé’s Ozarka subsidiary sought permission to extract water from Rohr Springs in the east Texas town of Eustace in 1995, local residents raised a stink. Eventually the company got permission from state agencies to proceed, but landowner Bart Sipriano, who charged that his well dried up after Ozarka began pumping nearby, took the company to court. The case went all the way to the state supreme court, which in 1999 ruled for Nestlé.

In 1998 the company found itself facing protests and a legal battle when it sought to increase the amount of water it was allowed to extract daily from the Crystal Springs Recreational Preserve in Florida (the source of Zephryhills) from 310,000 gallons to 2.6 million. Even after Nestlé sharply reduced the size of the increase, the local water district rejected the demand. Nestlé appealed but lost in court.

Nestlé again faced opposition when it sought a new water source in central Wisconsin. Residents of Coloma protested a plan to extract water from the Mecan River, and voters in two communities near an alternative location the company was considering voted overwhelmingly in 2000 against making their water available. When the opposition did not die down, the company finally announced in 2001 that it was giving up on the state.

The pattern repeated in 2001 when Nestlé sought permission to pump water and build a large bottling plant for its Ice Mountain brand in the central Michigan city of Big Rapids. The company got permission for the plant but opponents led by Michigan Citizens for Water Conservation mounted a legal battle over the water rights. In 2003 a county judge ruled against Nestlé and ordered that the operation be shut down, finding that it was causing environmental harm. The company appealed. As in Texas, the case went all the way to the state supreme court, which in 2007 ruled in favor of the company.

In 2003, Nestlé quietly negotiated a contract to extract water from three springs in the northern California town of McCloud near Mount Shasta. The company also planned to build the country’s largest water bottling plant in the area. The project was met with strong opposition which dragged on for years. In 2008 Nestlé offered to scale back it plans, but when that did not satisfy critics the company announced in 2009 that it was abandoning the project. An alternative site in Sacramento also faced active resistance .

The same was true in the Colorado town of Salida, where Nestlé proposed in 2007 to extract 65 million gallons of water per year to send to a bottling plant in Denver. In response to strong local resistance , the company took the unusual step of promising to replace the water extracted from Salida with water the company would obtain from the Denver suburb of Aurora. Chaffee County commissioners approved the Salida plan in 2009 but attached 44 conditions to the permit. Opponents vowed to keep up the fight.

An effort launched in 2009 by Nestlé to build a bottling plant in Oregon’s Columbia Gorge, drawing from a spring in the town of Cascade Locks, has faced opposition from local residents working with national groups such as Food and Water Watch and the Sierra Club.

In 2011 Nestlé abandoned plans to tap the headwaters of Florida’s Wacissa River in the face of opposition from local residents working with group such as Friends of the Wacissa. In 2012 the project remained in limbo.

Nestlé Waters Canada has faced opposition to its application for a renewal of a water-extracting permit for its bottling plant in Aberfoyle, Ontario. In October 2012 the company successfully pressured local officials in nearby Guelph to cancel a planned showing of the documentary film TAPPED , which is critical of the bottled water industry.

Nestlé’s water controversies have not all been at the local level. In 2003 a series of class-action lawsuits were filed against the company, charging it with false advertising for calling its Poland Spring brand natural spring water. Nestlé, apparently not eager to defend the integrity of its brand under oath, settled the disputes out of court for $12 million.

Nestlé has also been one of the prime targets of the Think Outside the Bottle Campaign launched in 2006 by Corporate Accountability International (which previously tangled with Nestlé on the infant formula issue when the group was known as INFACT).

Nestlé is so touchy about criticism of its water business in the United States that in 2008 it threatened to sue when Florida’s Miami-Dade County ran radio ads claiming that its tap water was cheaper, purer and safer than bottled water.

Product Safety. In June 2009 an outbreak of E.coli food poisoning in the United States was linked to Toll House refrigerated cookie dough produced by Nestlé at a plant in Danville, Virginia. The company recalled all Toll House products in the country, but it came to light that the plant had previously refused to give inspectors from the federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA) access to internal records relating to matters such as pest control and consumer complaints.

In December 2009 the FDA sent a warning letter to Nestlé alleging that the labels on some of the company's children's beverages contained unauthorized nutritional claims. In July 2010 the company, under pressure from the U.S. Federal Trade Commission over deceptive advertising, had to drop claims that its BOOST Kids Essentials drink prevented upper respiratory tract infections and protected against colds and the flu.

In 2011 thousands of consumers of Nestlé’s Poland Spring bottled water complained of an unpleasant taste and odor. The problem was traced to the company bottling plant in Framingham, Massachusetts, which was experiencing an elevated level of bacteria in its water source.  

In 2013 Nestlé had to remove beef products from sale in parts of Europe after it turned out they were adulterated with horse meat.

In 2021 Nestlé sold its North American bottled water business.

Palm Oil and Global Warming. In 2010 Greenpeace International began a campaign against Nestlé over the company's use of palm oil, the production of which the group linked to rainforest destruction in Indonesia and thus to the exacerbation of global warming. Greenpeace targeted Nestlé products such as Kit Kat bars (outside the U.S.). After two months the company caved in .

Nestlé has traditionally had good relations with unions representing its relatively small domestic workforce, but its foreign labor record is less harmonious. The company has had conflicts with unions in various countries, especially in the global South and the United States.

For example, during the late 1970s Nestlé's U.S. subsidiary Libby, McNeil, Libby was one of the targets of a campaign by migrant farmworkers in the Midwest. The workers, organized by the Farm Labor Organizing Committee (FLOC), were trying to win increased wages and improved working conditions from tomato growers operating under contract with companies like Libby and Campbell Soup. After conducting a campaign that ended up focusing mainly on Campbell Soup, FLOC managed to pressure the big food companies to be signatories to a set of unusual three-way collective bargaining agreements, thus putting significant pressure on the growers to treat the workers fairly.

Over the past decade, Nestlé has come under increasing criticism for its labor relations practices by the International Union of Food workers (IUF), a global federation of food-sector unions. In 2003 the IUF took the company to task for not observing consistently high standards in its labor practices around the world and accused it of taking advantage of countries with less rigorous regulations: “Where weak legislation sanctions union busting, Nestlé is not averse to busting unions.”

In 2006 the IUF charged that Nestlé was engaged in a “de-unionization” campaign in the Asia-Pacific region, through means such as increasing use of contingent labor and the “artificial promotion of workers into supervisory jobs that are classified as managerial positions and thereby excluded from union membership.” The IUF also accused the company of violating the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises in places such as South Korea and Britain by using the threat of moving plants offshore to intimidate unions during collective bargaining. In 2004 Nestlé sought to pressure French workers into accepting a downsizing plan by threatening to sell its Perrier water business or move it out of the country.

At a 2007 event sponsored by the International Labor Organization, IUF General Secretary Ron Oswald confronted Nestlé CEO Peter Brabeck over the company’s refusal to engage in a “structured relationship” with the federation, as other transnational companies have done.

Over the past few years, there have been disputes between Nestlé management and unions in various countries. For example, in 2008 Nestlé workers in Russia protested for months over the company’s effort (which was ultimately unsuccessful) to limit the ability of their union to negotiate wage increases.

Also in 2008, workers at a Nestlé ice cream operation in Hong Kong staged a three-day strike to protest the company’s use of contingent labor.

During the same period, workers at a Nestlé coffee plant in Indonesia held public protests in response to the company’s refusal to bargain over wages.

In January 2009 Nestlé India went to court to get a ban on union meetings and rallies at or near its four unionized plants in the country. It took the step in response to union protests over the company’s policy of not negotiating wage increases.

In December 2009 Nestlé workers in Tunisia went on strike to protest the company’s decision to close an ice cream plant without informing or negotiating with the union ahead of time. Nestlé faced another strike in Tunisia in August 2012.

The International Labor Rights Forum named Nestlé one of the “five worst companies for the right to associate” because of its abuses in countries such as the Philippines, Colombia, Peru, Russia and Pakistan. In 2012 food workers in several countries held demonstrations under the banner of STOP NESPRESSURE to protest Nestlé’s suppression of labor union rights in Pakistan and Indonesia.

In 2006 Nestlé agreed to pay $4 million in back pay and $400,000 in penalties to employees at its bottled water operation in New Jersey who had improperly been denied overtime pay.

Human Rights 

In 2005 the International Labor Rights Fund (ILRF) brought suit against Nestlé and several other companies in U.S. federal court under the Alien Tort Claims Act, charging that they were involved in the abuse and forced labor of child workers in the West African cocoa supply chain. (In December 2009 Nestlé announced that its Kit Kat chocolate products in Britain would start to be sold with certification from the Fairtrade Foundation.) A 2012 report by the Fair Labor Association found numerous serious violations of Nestlé’s own child labor policies among its suppliers. In 2021 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Nestlé could not be sued in American courts for child slavery on the African farms run by its suppliers. 

In 2006 ILRF sued Nestlé again in U.S. court, accusing the company with complicity in the torture and murder of a Colombian trade union leader by paramilitary forces with which it allegedly had a long-standing relationship. In 2012 the European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights and the Colombian trade union SINALTRAINAL filed a complaint with Swiss prosecutors charging that Nestlé failed to take steps that could have prevented the murder of another labor activist.

Spying on Critics  

In 2008 a Swiss investigative news program reported that five years earlier Nestlé had used a private security company to infiltrate the anti-globalization group Attac. The undercover agent reportedly monitored the group’s research work on the company that led to the 2004 publication of a critical book entitled Attac Contre L’Empire Nestlé.

Other Information Sources

Violation Tracker summary page

Watchdog Groups and Campaigns 

Nestlé Critics

International Attac Network

International Baby Food Action Network

Baby Milk Action

Corporate Accountability International

Food and Water Watch

Stop Nestlé Waters

Save Our Springs

Michigan Citizens for Water Conservation

Greenpeace International

IUF (International Union of Foodworkers)

NestleWatch

International Labor Rights Forum

Key Books and Reports 

Assessment of Nestlé Cocoa Supply Chain in Ivory Coast by Fair Labor Association (June 2012)

Attac Contre L’Empire Nestlé (Attac, 2004)

Dirty Profits 2: Report on Companies and Financial Institutions Benefiting from Violations of Human Rights (Facing Finance, 2013).

Drinking Water Crisis in Pakistan and the Issue of Bottled Water: The Case of Nestlé’s “Pure Life” by the Swiss Coalition of Development Organizations and ActionAid Pakistan (2005)

Caught Red-Handed (Greenpeace, 2010)

Nestlé: The Secrets of Food, Trust and Globalization by Friedhelm Schwarz (2002)

Transformational Challenge: Nestlé, 1990-2005 by Albert Pfiffner (published by the company in 2007)

Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE

Note: This page draws from a corporate profile originally prepared by the author for the Crocodyl website in December 2009.

Last updated June 29, 2021.

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

A Project On A Cooperative Study On CONSUMER PREFERENCE TOWARDS NESTLE AND CADBURY CHOCOLATES " SUBMITTED TOWARDS THE PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE DEGREE OF " MASTERS OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION " Affiliated To

nestle and cabury chocolates

Related Papers

Devanshi Agarwal

Commerce, for giving us the opportunity to work on this project by providing us all the facilities we needed for the study. We are highly obliged to our project guide Dr. Ramanathan for giving us the wonderful opportunity to work on this project that helped us to learn the inner core meaning of research and guided us to undertake the same in a practical manner. We would also like to thank our fellow students who played a vital role in assisting, supporting and guiding us without which this project would not have been materialized.

Uluslararası İktisadi ve İdari İncelemeler Dergisi

Assoc. Prof. Dr. Duygu HIDIROGLU

This paper provides analysis on Cadbury, Inc and confectionery industry. The paper analyzes the external and internal forces affecting the company, the industry it operates and its business level strategy. Further, it gives detailed information about the SWOT analysis of the company. Considering the situational features such as opportunities and threats when designing the environmental analysis and making realistic marketing plan is very crucial because a company will benefit from its own strengths, eliminate its weaknesses, benefit from environmental opportunities and protect itself from environmental threats. On the simple basis of product quality and taste, Cadbury proves to be superior to other commercially available chocolate even with the seeming similarities in texture. This paper deals with two main research flows: environmental analysis and situational factors which allows organizations to compose a realistic and effective marketing plan. This study provides a framework that implement a common consensus on these research flows by specifiying some important issues for future research and by making effective strategy analysis in the confectionery industry. ŞEKERLEME ENDÜSTRİSİNE YÖNELİK STRATEJİK PLANLAMA SÜRECİNDE DURUM ANALİZİ UYGULAMASI: CADBURY, A.Ş. ÖRNEĞİ Ö z Bu çalışma, Cadbury A.Ş. ve şekerleme endüstrisi analizlerini kapsamaktadır. Çalışma, SWOT analizi yardımıyla Cadbury A.Ş.'nin içinde bulunduğu sektörü ve işletme düzeyinde stratejileri etkileyen dış ve iç kuvvetleri analiz etmektedir. Çevrenin analizi ve şirketin pazarlama planı tasarlanırken durumsal faktörler göz önünde bulundurulduğu gözlenmiştir. Cadbury A.Ş.'nin örgütsel bağlamda sahip olduğu güçlü yönlerden faydalanırken; zayıf yönlerin olumsuz etkilerini en aza indirgemeye yönelik çeşitli stratejiler kurduğu görülmüştür. Şirketin bu stratejileri, pazar fırsatlarından yararlanmasına ve herhangi bir tehditten kaçınmasına fayda sağlayacağı için oldukça önemlidir. Cadbury A.Ş.'nin ürünleri yüksek fiyatla ithal edilen atıştırmalık ve yiyeceklere kıyasla daha uygun fiyatlı ve eşit derecede rekabetçi bir alternatiftir. Cadbury A.Ş.'nin şirket stratejilerinin aynı sektörde yer alan diğer şirketlerden daha üstün ve başarılı olduğu sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Çalışma, şirketi etkileyen dış güçleri, bulunduğu sektörü ve şirketin çevresini analiz etmektedir. Böylelikle şekerleme endüstrisinin geleceği hakkında gerçekçi öngörüler sunulmakta ve sektörün dinamikleri hakkında önemli bilgilere ulaşılmaktadır. Bu çalışma gelecekteki araştırmalara şekerleme endüstrisindeki firmaların çevresel analizi için önemli alanları vurgulayan kavramsal bir çerçeve sunmaktadır.

Angelica Berleze

Manish Dhakad

FELIZ ANN MIGUEL

This paper reviews the main marketing strategies applied by the European chocolate industry. It focuses on the role of country-of-origin, product diversification and scenarios, and provides a historical overview of the industry. This is followed by a discussion of the association between a brand and country-of-origin, before scrutinising the chocolate industry. The analysis of this study uses evidence gathered from the consumer chocolate ranking, company annual reports, consultant statistics, corporate websites and the newspaper archives. The analysis compares the marketing strategies of case studies selected; namely, Ferrero Rocher, Cadbury, Lindt and Sprüngli and Godiva. Moreover, emphasis is placed on the similarities and differences of these brands and other chocolate brands outside Europe. The study's existing literature and analysis suggests that historical context and business history play important roles over time.

Paul Harrison , Kathryn Chalmers

"Integrated Marketing Communication (IMC) is a relatively new concept in marketing and corporate strategy and is arguably the major communication development of the last decade of the 20th century. Until the late 1980s, promotion was mostly confined to advertising, sales promotions, direct marketing and public relations. IMC incorporates every form of communication to customers and includes the price of the product (that might create the perception of quality and exclusiveness), where the product is located or purchased, how attractively it is displayed, advertising across multiple platforms, how the product is labelled and packaged, direct marketing, sponsorship and public relations. It also includes what the company’s employees say about the product via sales pitches, telephone conversations, internal communications, and even what is said at parties. Rather than a single factor, it is the cumulative effect of IMC that works to persuade children to make particular brand choices. Three brands were investigated for this study viz., McDonald’s, Freddo Frog (Cadbury), and Nutri-Grain (Kellogg’s). Of the three brands in the study, McDonald’s have the most sophisticated, extensive, and integrated communication strategy targeted at children. In 2007, McDonald’s spent almost USD2.5 million a day on its marketing activities in the US market. They use a range of tactics to reinforce the brand amongst target markets, including outdoor advertising, sponsorship, menu design, store layout, visual shortcuts (e.g., Heart Foundation tick), characters, online promotions, interactive websites, brand associations and connections (e.g., Blue Ribbon Day, McHappy Day), product placement, and charities. Cadbury uses the visual image of the “friendly frog” (Freddo) as a means of recognition very early in a child’s cognitive development. Promotional characters act as cues that invoke visual brand recognition and are essential due to young children’s limited reading abilities, and they have also been shown to be associated with children’s positive attitudes towards food. The Freddo character is used as an alternative to showing the actual product in much promotion, as a means to reinforce the brand, without showing the chocolate. Freddo also use branded activities in their online interactive games targeted at young children. Nutri-Grain is a cereal targeted specifically at teenage boys, primarily with the use of sports themes. Nutri-Grain is positioned as an energy food for power, strength and performance. Nutri-Grain uses sophisticated visual imagery, and links with sportspeople and events to reinforce the sport theme. The IMC also targets mothers of teenage boys, tapping into anxiety around parenting and adolescence."

Morven McEachern

Businesses are increasingly embracing corporate citizenship strategies. However, the empirical literature surrounding consumer responses to such practices, features many contradictions concerning their impact. As a result, many businesses are uncertain about the extent to which they should commit resources to these activities to influence a positive response from consumers. Therefore, this paper seeks to address this gap by exploring consumers’ awareness of varying levels of corporate citizenship activities and assess their moral responses to such efforts. Using a combination of qualitative methods and projective techniques with a broad cross-section of twenty consumers, the results help to shed light on the impact of corporate citizenship activities upon moral recognition, consumer decision-making and choice.

Gabriela Küsters

The aim of this research is to provide a thorough understanding of children as consumers and their relationships towards brands. As children are still developing as social and economic actors, and due to the fact that most research on consumer behaviour is based on adults, it is important to contribute to the study of children’s consumer behaviour and relationships with brands, in order to understand the differences between consumer behaviour in children and adults. This dissertation contributes to the academic knowledge surrounding child psychology, branding and consumer behaviour, and provides a practical foundation for marketers and managers in the corporate world. The research is based on grounded theory, through which observations lead to the recognition of patterns, which are then processed and used in order to create a theory. Throughout the research, the following questions emerged: How do children act as consumers? How are children attracted to brands? How do children develop relationships towards brands?, and Child loyalty towards brands is a myth. This study combines qualitative research in the form of in-depth interviews and a focus group, with a questionnaire as quantitative research. The qualitative research was designed in order to observe children’s behaviour and gain insights into the rationale behind their thinking and decision-making. The quantitative research gathered data from parents regarding their opinions and observations of their child’s behaviour. After processing all data, the main findings were divided into four codes: brand, purchase decisions, source of information, and decision-making process. The major finding was that Brand Loyalty amongst children does not exist, as children proved to be eager to switch brands when opportunities presented themselves, even when Brand Preference and Brand Love existed. Other findings included that the main factors that influence children’s purchase decision-making are the curiosity to try something new, packaging, pricing, advertising and influences by others. The purchase process was found to consist of nagging, list writing, negotiation and persuasion, and online shipping. Finally, it was established that the main sources of information regarding brands and products are adverts, friends and family, and online research. The final recommendations to managers include not focusing solely on advertising, as more factors influence purchase decisions. Because repeat purchases are not secured through achieving Brand Loyalty, managers are recommended to continuously make an effort to provoke a reaction from the elements that determine the decision-making process, for only then can they build a strong and lasting relationship with children. Keywords: Child Consumer Behaviour, Child Branding, Brand Loyalty

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024