Premium
Means–end chains as goal hierarchies
Author(s) -
Gutman Jonathan
Publication year - 1997
Publication title -
psychology and marketing
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.035
H-Index - 116
eISSN - 1520-6793
pISSN - 0742-6046
DOI - 10.1002/(sici)1520-6793(199709)14:6<545::aid-mar2>3.0.co;2-7
Subject(s) - laddering , action (physics) , hierarchy , psychology , goal setting , consumption (sociology) , outcome (game theory) , goal orientation , unit (ring theory) , social psychology , marketing , business , sociology , microeconomics , political science , economics , social science , physics , mathematics education , quantum mechanics , law
A means–end chain (MEC) has been defined as a hierarchy of goals that represents potential identities of the actions necessary for the person to reach his or her goal. Goals as ends in MECs can be grouped into three levels: action goals (concerned with the act itself), outcome goals (immediate effects of actions), and consequences (indirect effects stemming from outcomes). An action unit (AU) is defined as a planned sequence of acts directed toward goal achievement. AUs may be part or all of a MEC, thus the highest goal in a MEC may not be what the consumer has in mind when making a purchase or consumption decision. Data are presented that suggest that laddering takes respondents beyond the intended goals of their initial actions or choice. Goals beyond AU's which are part of a MEC may represent the underlying reasons why we strive for the goals we do. This seems to be one useful way to differentiate goals from values. Goals are what we want; values are why we want them. © 1997 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.