IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ate/journl/ajbev9i1-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Defending Against Copycat Packaging: The Role of Design from a Consumer’s Perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Ezgi Oguz
  • Jamie Marsden

Abstract

Copycat packaging involves a type of imitation strategy in which the appearance of a market leader’s packaging design is simulated by a low-cost alternative. Previous literature has focused on reactive strategies against copycat packaging, primarily involving litigation and packaging design changes; however, very little attention has been assigned to the role of packaging design as a proactive strategy for mitigating against copycat packaging. To address this issue, this study examined the role of design in mitigating copycat packaging from a consumers’ perspective. We conducted an exploratory study of 37 semi-structured interviews to understand how consumers respond to the design components on visually similar packaging across a range of FMCG products. We found that packaging design cues have the greatest impact on purchasing decisions in cases where consumers have no familiarity with a brand, but less influence when consumers are already familiar with a brand. Consumers rank the importance of packaging design features differently depending on the product category. For high-cost items, consumers rank structural design as the most important feature, whereas colour is considered the most important for low-cost products. We end the paper by discussing the implications for brand managers and outline strategies for minimising the occurrence of copycat packaging.

Suggested Citation

  • Ezgi Oguz & Jamie Marsden, 2023. "Defending Against Copycat Packaging: The Role of Design from a Consumer’s Perspective," Athens Journal of Business & Economics, Athens Institute for Education and Research (ATINER), vol. 9(1), pages 73-90, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:ate:journl:ajbev9i1-5
    DOI: 10.30958/ajbe.9-1-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.athensjournals.gr/business/2023-9-1-5-Oguz.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.30958/ajbe.9-1-5?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. da Silva Lopes, Teresa & Casson, Mark, 2012. "Brand Protection and the Globalization of British Business," Business History Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 86(2), pages 287-310, July.
    2. Mansfield, Edwin & Schwartz, Mark & Wagner, Samuel, 1981. "Imitation Costs and Patents: An Empirical Study," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 91(364), pages 907-918, December.
    3. Miceli, Gaetano Nino & Pieters, Rik, 2010. "Looking more or less alike: Determinants of perceived visual similarity between copycat and leading brands," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 63(11), pages 1121-1128, November.
    4. Jean-Noël Kapferer, 1995. "Brand Confusion: Empirical Study of a Legal Concept," Post-Print hal-00784110, HAL.
    5. Van Horen, Femke & Pieters, Rik, 2013. "Preference reversal for copycat brands: Uncertainty makes imitation feel good," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 54-64.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Wang, Yingjia & Fan, Di & Fung, Yi-Ning & Luo, Suyuan, 2022. "Consumer-to-consumer product exchanges for original fashion brands in the sharing economy: Good or bad for fashion knockoffs?," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    2. Suzuki, Mayu & Washida, Yuichi, 2021. "Measuring Negative Effects of Copycat Products in Emerging Consumer Markets," Hitotsubashi Journal of commerce and management, Hitotsubashi University, vol. 55(1), pages 1-13, October.
    3. Kelting, Katie & Berry, Christopher & van Horen, Femke, 2019. "The presence of copycat private labels in a product set increases consumers' choice ease when shopping with an abstract mindset," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 264-274.
    4. van Horen, Femke & Pieters, Rik, 2012. "Consumer evaluation of copycat brands: The effect of imitation type," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 246-255.
    5. Paul W. Dobson & Ratula Chakraborty, 2014. "How Do National Brands And Store Brands Compete?," Working Paper series, University of East Anglia, Centre for Competition Policy (CCP) 2014-07, Centre for Competition Policy, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
    6. Zha, Yong & Guo, Xiaowei & Chen, Huaping & Ling, Liuyi, 2022. "How does Store Branded Lookalike Packaging Affect Competition in a Dyadic Supply Chain: A Consumer Confusion Perspective," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 165(C).
    7. Anne-Sophie V. E. Radermecker, 2019. "Artworks without names: an insight into the market for anonymous paintings," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 43(3), pages 443-483, September.
    8. Sakakibara, Mariko, 1997. "Evaluating government-sponsored R&D consortia in Japan: who benefits and how?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(4-5), pages 447-473, December.
    9. Li, Xu & Vermeulen, Freek, 2021. "High risk, low return (and vice versa): the effect of product innovation on firm performance in a transition economy," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 120268, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    10. Diego Comin, 2004. "R&D: A Small Contribution to Productivity Growth," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 9(4), pages 391-421, December.
    11. Leonard F.S. Wang & Arijit Mukherjee, 2014. "Patent Protection, Innovation and Technology Licensing," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(3-4), pages 245-254, December.
    12. Iain M. Cockburn & Megan J. MacGarvie, 2011. "Entry and Patenting in the Software Industry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(5), pages 915-933, May.
    13. Oscar Afonso & Pedro Neves & Maria Thompson, 2014. "The skill premium and economic growth with costly investment, complementarities and international technological-knowledge diffusion," The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(6), pages 878-905, September.
    14. Marattin, Luigi & Marzo, Massimiliano & Zagaglia, Paolo, 2013. "Distortionary tax instruments and implementable monetary policy," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 219-243.
    15. Tether, B. S., 1998. "Small and large firms: sources of unequal innovations?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(7), pages 725-745, November.
    16. Barge-Gil, Andrés & López, Alberto, 2014. "R&D determinants: Accounting for the differences between research and development," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(9), pages 1634-1648.
    17. Çağatay Bircan & Ralph De Haas, 2020. "The Limits of Lending? Banks and Technology Adoption across Russia," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 33(2), pages 536-609.
    18. L. Lambertini & P. Tedeschi, 2003. "Sequential Entry in a Vertically Differentiated Duopoly," Working Papers 492, Dipartimento Scienze Economiche, Universita' di Bologna.
    19. Sternitzke, Christian, 2013. "An exploratory analysis of patent fencing in pharmaceuticals: The case of PDE5 inhibitors," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 542-551.
    20. Manca, Fabio, 2011. "Education, Catch-up and Growth in Spain," INVESTIGACIONES REGIONALES - Journal of REGIONAL RESEARCH, Asociación Española de Ciencia Regional, issue 20, pages 5-28.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ate:journl:ajbev9i1-5. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Afrodete Papanikou (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.athensjournals.gr .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.