Q. Explain the Family Decision Making?

Individual members of families frequently serve different roles in decisions that ultimately draw on shared family resources. A number of individuals are information gatherers/holders who seek out information about products of relevance.

These individuals frequently have a great deal of power because they may selectively pass on information that favours their chosen alternatives. Influencers don't ultimately have the power decide between alternatives however they may make their wishes known by asking for specific products or causing embarrassing situations if their demands aren't met. The decision maker(s) have the authority to determine issues such as:

• Whether to buy;
• Which product to buy (pick-up or passenger car?);
• Which brand to buy;
• Where to buy it; and
• When to buy.
• Note however that the role of the decision maker is separate from that of the purchaser. From the point of outlook of the marketer this introduces some problems since the purchaser can be targeted by point-of-purchase (POP) marketing efforts that cannot be aimed at the decision maker. As well note that the distinction among the purchaser and decision maker may be somewhat blurred:
• The decision maker may identify what kind of product to buy but not which brand;
• The purchaser may perhaps have to make a substitution if the desired brand is not in stock;
• The purchaser may perhaps disregard instructions (by error or deliberately).

It must be noted that family decisions are often subject to a great deal of conflict. The actuality is that few families are wealthy sufficient to avoid a strong tension between demands on the family's resources. Conflicting pressures are particularly likely in families with children and/or when only one spouse works outside the home. Note that a variety of decisions inherently come down to values and that there is frequently no objective way to arbitrate differences. One spouse may suppose that it is important to save for the children's future the other may perhaps value spending now (on private schools as well as computer equipment) to help prepare the children for the future. Who is right? There is no clear respond here. The circumstances become even more complex when more parties-such as children or other relatives-are involved.

Some family members may perhaps resort to various strategies to get their way. One is bargaining and one member will give up something in return for someone else. For instance the wife says that her husband can take an expensive course in gourmet cooking if she can buy a new pickup truck. On the other hand a child may promise to walk it every day if he or she can have a hippopotamus. One more strategy is reasoning-trying to get the other person(s) to accept one's view through logical argumentation. Note that still when this is done with a sincere intent its potential is limited by legitimate differences in values exemplifies above. As well note that individuals may simply try to 'wear down' the other party by endless talking in the guise of reasoning (this is a case of negative reinforcement as we will see subsequently). Various manipulative strategies may as well be used. One is impression management where one strives to make one's side look good (example argue that a new TV will help the children see educational TV when it is really mostly wanted to see sports programming or else argue that all 'decent families make a contribution to the church'). Authority engages asserting one's 'right' to make a decision (as the 'man of the house' the mother of the children or the one who makes the most money).

Emotion engages making an emotional display to get one's way (example a man cries if his wife will not let him buy a new rap album).