Behind the “specialty”: personal values that influence the behavior of specialty coffee consumers

Abstract

Purpose This study aimed to describe the cognitive associations existing among specialty coffee consumers through the means-end chain theory and personal values. Design/methodology/approach The research follows a descriptive qualitative study that used in-depth interviews and laddering, to collect data among 40 interviews with regular consumers of specialty coffees in Brazil. The interviews were transcribed, and from the content analysis, the attributes, consequences and values that emerged in the discourse of consumers of specialty coffees were found. The categories were later classified – according to the level of abstraction – and inserted into the LadderUx® software to generate the implication matrix and the hierarchical map of values. The interpretation of results occurred in a descriptive way. Findings Based on a hierarchical value map, the following personal values were identified: universalism, self-directed action, accomplishment, tradition and personal security. These values can be considered guides for consumption behavior. They are also related to consumption behavior that values technical attributes, such as roast level, packaging, aroma and flavor, and the relationships between these values and personal improvement, social relationships and recognition are relevant factors involved in decision-making. Originality/value This study presents the cognitive structure of Brazilian specialty coffee consumers. The coherent use of this information enhances the development of marketing actions involving communication actions, relationships with internal and external customers, new farm management strategies, direct trade with consumers and sustainable improvements in the production chain. These are the factors that can motivate the purchase of food, thus attracting new consumers to this emerging market.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 18 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.