Influence of merchandising and pricing strategies on consumer buying behaviour – a cross -sectional study of hypermarkets in Bangalore city

Chia sẻ: Huỳnh Ngọc Toàn | Ngày: | Loại File: PDF | Số trang:10

Thêm vào BST

Báo xấu

32
lượt xem 5
download

Download Vui lòng tải xuống để xem tài liệu đầy đủ

This paper, attempts to study empirically the extent to which merchandising and pricing strategies formulated, affect the consumer purchase decisions. A Survey of 366 valid data was examined using PLS-SEM (Partial Least Squares Structural Equating Modelling).

Chủ đề:

Bình luận(0) Đăng nhập để gửi bình luận!

Lưu

Nội dung Text: Influence of merchandising and pricing strategies on consumer buying behaviour – a cross -sectional study of hypermarkets in Bangalore city

International Journal of Management (IJM) Volume 8, Issue 3, May– June 2017, pp. 180–189, Article ID: IJM_08_03_020 Available online at http://www.iaeme.com/ijm/issues.asp?JType=IJM&VType=8&IType=3 Journal Impact Factor (2016): 8.1920 (Calculated by GISI) www.jifactor.com ISSN Print: 0976-6502 and ISSN Online: 0976-6510 © IAEME Publication INFLUENCE OF MERCHANDISING AND PRICING STRATEGIES ON CONSUMER BUYING BEHAVIOUR – A CROSS -SECTIONAL STUDY OF HYPERMARKETS IN BANGALORE CITY Shilpa Sarvani Ravi and Shikha Bhagat Assistant Professors, Faculty of Management Studies, PES University, Banashankari, Bangalore, India ABSTRACT India has occupied a third position among emerging and developed nations after China and Brazil in global retail rankings. India has moderate political risk, low economic risk and market potential. Country’s has quite significant net retail sales are among developed and emerging nations. The global retail business is evolving on a faster phase, it is essential for the retailers to opt the appropriate merchandising and pricing strategies in the Indian marketing scenario to avail the sustainable advantage in their market. This paper, attempts to study empirically the extent to which merchandising and pricing strategies formulated, affect the consumer purchase decisions. A Survey of 366 valid data was examined using PLS-SEM (Partial Least Squares Structural Equating Modelling). Results emphasised that the (1) Stock Availability (2) Promotional Signage (3) Standardized Discounts (4) Festival Sale factors have significant relationship with consumer buying behaviour. This paper has implications for both the retailers and the manufactures to take a note of these above variables, to formulate their strategies and tactics for delivering value to the consumers in Retail Outlets. Key words: PLS-SEM, Buying behaviour, Merchandising Strategies, Pricing Strategies. Cite this Article: Shilpa Sarvani Ravi and Shikha Bhagat, Influence of Merchandising and Pricing Strategies on Consumer Buying Behaviour – A Cross -Sectional study of Hypermarkets in Bangalore City. International Journal of Management, 8(3), 2017, pp. 180–189. http://www.iaeme.com/ijm/issues.asp?JType=IJM&VType=8&IType=3 http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.as 180 editor@iaeme.com
Shilpa Sarvani Ravi and Shikha Bhagat 1. INTRODUCTION The idea of 21st century consumer buying behavior is that consumers prefer products mostly for what they remain rather that for what they do. This concept drives that a functional purpose of the product is majorly considered than their actual utility. Belch and Belch (2007) characterized shopper behavior, to satisfy needs and desires consumers engage in activities like searching for, selecting, purchasing, using, evaluating, and disposing of products and services. Buyers have a tendency to build up an association with the products they like (Kumar.M, 2014) A hypermarket is a superstore joining a supermarket and a departmental store, carrying an extensive variety of items under one rooftop, including groceries and general merchandise. Hypermarkets enable consumers to fulfill all their regular shopping needs in one trip. In General, hypermarkets have more than 200,000 distinctive SKUs (Stock Keeping Units) of merchandise accessible at any given time (Vashishta&B.Balaji, 2016). 2. SIGNIFICANCE IN CONTEXT TO INDIAN MARKET Retail market in India has matured with retailers focusing on profitability rather than unconstrained growth. Progressive usage of Store-level promotions will help getting attention of consumers and furthermore to offer direct inducements. However, low penetration of modern retail in the overall market indicates significant room for growth and is expected to see strong double digit growth in the next 5-10 years. Even as India’s tier-2 cities are becoming saturated, there is immense scope for modern retailers to expand into tier-3 and semi urban towns and become first movers in untapped growth markets (Shukla&Banerjee, 2014). (Chandon et al. 2012) stated that the significance of consumer consideration. He also recommended that consumer price consciousness play as critical determinant of consumer consideration at the store level. (Shukla&Banerjee, 2014) identified that low price positioning for most of the brands are highlighted by store-level promotions. 3. HYPER MARKETS GROWTH IN INDIA Hypermarkets, in India, contributed to almost 2.5% of the total organized retail sales and 21% of total retail space in 2016. In India, hypermarkets bring together the concept of modern retail format and reasonable price offering. Thus the retail format has a high appeal with the Indian middle and upper middle class which seek a higher level of experience from their shopping, along with the convenience of shopping for all their needs in one place (Vashishta&B.Balaji, 2016). India as a country compared itself favorably with its peers among foreign investors. The first half of 2016 showed the highest annual private equity (PE) with investments around US$ 511.76 billion in the retail sector (IBEF, 2017). Retail formats in India have evolved significantly in the last decade. With the retail industry finally coming of age, newer formats that mirror those found in western developed markets are taking precedence over older forms. Consumer’s lifestyles are continuously evolving and they are becoming more demanding and selective in terms of products as well as services. Retailers are likewise understanding this move and have been proactively redesigning furthermore, adjusting their current formats to serve them better, while dealing with their costs and profitability. http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.as 181 editor@iaeme.com
Influence of Merchandising and Pricing Strategies on Consumer Buying Behaviour – A Cross - Sectional study of Hypermarkets in Bangalore City 4. LITERATURE REVIEW Merchandising Strategies The essential purpose of retailing is to sell merchandise. Merchandising is the process of several activities executed by the retailer such as planning, buying, and selling of products to the consumers for their utility. It is also an inherent part of managing store operations. Merchandising control includes outlining the strategies and procedures to accomplish the predefined objectives. The objectives range from micro level to the corporate strategies with respect to merchandise assortment, stocking, and re-arrangement (Mann&Jha, 2013). Pricing Strategies As today's consumers are looking for good value, the significance of pricing decisions is growing in the purchase of goods and services. As price is the the simple and quick variable to alter because of its immediate association with a company's objective and its cooperation with other retailing elements (Mann&Jha, 2013). Retail outlets are loaded with in-store sensory stimuli, appealing promotion offers, including engaging displays, innovative advertising and flawless packaging. Unrecognized needs and goals are triggered by in-store stimuli and allure customers to buy more merchandise (Shankar et al., 2011). (Newman and Peter, 2008) explained that the printed dictions that communicate the in-store message to the consumers are the promotional signages. They are embodied in different structures and shapes, simple and elegant. Most of the store-level promotions appear beneficial, the outcomes identifying with their effect on sale are decidedly blended. In the previous research study emphasizing on US customers' food buying behavior, (Wu et al., 2011) discovered positive however non-significant relationship between store level promotions and store-level consumer purchases. In the prior research survey of 15 markets in South Africa, (Mihic et al., 2010) discovered consistent rates of in-store stimuli related with purchase. However, (Kalyanam et al., 2010) noted that consumer’s perspective of store-level and customers integrate stimuli like a store-level promotion into their buying behavior promotions had been less considered. Analyzing store-level promotions effect on consumer buying behavior had been also called for further research (Grewal et al., 2011). Conventional in-store promotions to out-of-store media advertisements, understanding their effect will help retailers and manufacturers in influencing consumers buying behavior (Chandon et al., 2012). (Suk et al., 2012), commented price consciousness as a buyer's unwillingness to pay a more or a concentrate on paying low price. Prior research related to price consciousness of consumers are conscious in the majority of their purchases and use diverse price reference focuses to take the final decision, including the last exchange cost or highest and lowest price(konuk, 2015). For price conscious shoppers, to get low cost for the selected item is more critical than other non-price conscious shopper. They also have tendency to participate in many price comparisons. (Palazon&Delgad, 2011) contended shoppers who are price-conscious, invest more energy thinking in purchase choices. The ratio of price paid to the quality of any product, the price conscious consumers have the strong desire. (Khare A,2014) observed, in contrast with other shoppers that tendency to be less impulsive and more discipline in buying behavior are the traits of price conscious shoppers. He also claimed that when additional efforts put in for price conscious shoppers in their process of purchase, their intention of purchase will diminish. http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.as 182 editor@iaeme.com
Shilpa Sarvani Ravi and Shikha Bhagat Decision sciences and marketing research in current trend proposes that while breaking down complex purchase information, shoppers attempt to streamline their general choice by concentrating on cues that can offer quick help (Durbach and Stewart,2012). Shoppers to simplify their final purchase decisions, store-level promotions are the strong cues. They also offer an extra chance to affirm the belief to get a good deal. Price conscious shoppers always focus on price factors and the effect of store-level promotion may be marked for such price conscious purchasers (Manzur et al., 2011). PLS-SEM Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) is a multivariate data analysis technique of second generation that is frequently utilized as a part of business research to test linear and addictive causal model (Statsoft, 2013). It can be utilized as a part of handling exploration issue to treat undetectable, difficult to-quantify latent variable (Wong, 2013). The basic approach is the majorly used covariance based SEM (CB-SEM) which has been vastly used in the field of social sciences since former decades, and is as yet the high rated data analysis technique today to confirm or dismissing hypothesis through testing of theory, especially when the sample size is huge, the data distribution is normal, and in particular, the model is accurately determined. That is, the right dependent and independent variables are picked and connected together to make a structural model from the theory available. (Hair et. al.., 2011). Research Gap Relevant research has not been done in exploring the concept of buying behavior of consumers of retail hyper markets especially in merchandising and pricing strategies. Problem Statement There is ambiguity in buying behavior of retail consumers majorly with retail hyper markets with respect to merchandising and pricing strategies. Objectives 1. To determine the influence of merchandising factors on buying behavior in hypermarkets. 2. To determine the influence of pricing strategies on buying behavior in hyper markets. Significance of the research This study alleviates the research gap by validating the proposed merchandising and pricing strategies of retail hyper markets in India by testing the buying behavior of consumers by the proposed model. This research attempts to benefit all the retail hyper markets to formulate the merchandising and pricing strategies by understanding the relationship of consumer buying behavior with each strategy proposed. This will strengthen the retailer’s competitive edge by formulating the best merchandising and pricing strategies. Research Model The Merchandising Strategies (Independent Variables) considered are Stock availability, Promo Talkers, Floor Stacking Units. The Pricing Strategies (Independent Variables) considered are the Standardized Discounts, Festival Sale, and Bench Marking Price. The Buying Behavior is the dependent Variable. http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.as 183 editor@iaeme.com
Influence of Merchandising and Pricing Strategies on Consumer Buying Behaviour – A Cross - Sectional study of Hypermarkets in Bangalore City Null Hypothesis 1. Ho1: There is no significant difference of stock availability on buying behavior. 2. Ho2: There is no significant difference of Promo-talkers on buying behavior. 3. Ho3: There is no significant difference of Floor stacking unit displays on buying behavior. 4. Ho4: There is no significant difference of standardized discounts on buying behavior. 5. Ho5: There is no significant difference of festival sale on buying behavior. 6. Ho6: There is no significant difference of competitive benchmark pricing on buying behavior. 5. METHODOLOGY This study conducted was descriptive in nature. The area chosen for the study is Bangalore city, South India, and is done during Dec 2016 and Jan 2017. The sampling frame comprises the customers shopping at the retail hyper markets (Big Bazaar, Reliance, Dmart and Spar).The sampling technique used is quota sampling. The data is collected through questionnaire survey (adopted). The sample size is 366 after excluding the rejections. The data was analyzed interpreted using smart PLS as data analysis tool. Explanation of target endogenous variable variance: R2, the coefficient of determination for the Consumer Behavior endogenous latent variable is 0.920. It means, the six latent variables (Festive Sales, Influence of Promotional Signage, Stock availability and Standardized discounts, Floor Stacking Units and Competitive Benchmarking) moderately explain 92% of the variance on consumer Buying Behavior (Shown in Fig 2). Indicator Reliability and Validity To complete the examination of the structural model, the reliability and validity of the latent variables is extracted. This below table shows various reliability and validity items which can be checked and analyzed while conducting a PLS-SEM (see Table 1). Table 1 Findings Summary for Reflective Outer Model Latent Variables Indicators Loadings Composite Reliability AVE SA1 0.786 Stock Availability 0.802 0.670 SA2 0.850 IPS1 0.788 Influence of Promotional Signage IPS2 0.728 0.736 0.510 IPS3 0.763 FSU1 0.757 Floor Stacking Units FSU2 0.797 0.702 0.508 FSU3 0.731 FS1 0.783 Festive Sales FS2 0.803 0.763 0.523 FS3 0.759 SD1 0.742 Standardized Discounts 0.764 0.619 SD2 0.829 BM1 0.889 Benchmarking BM2 0.808 0.741 0.518 BM3 0.723 CB1 0.833 Consumer Behavior 0.798 0.664 CB2 0.796 http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.as 184 editor@iaeme.com
Shilpa Sarvani Ravi and Shikha Bhagat The initial check was “Composite Reliability”. It is observed seen that all the values of indicators were showed more than 0.7, Thus internal consistency reliability have been observed very high when verified among latent variables. Convergent validity was checked and all latent variable’s AVE (Average Variance Extracted) was examined. It was identified that values of AVE are higher than the minimum acceptable level of 0.5, so the confirmation of convergent validity is done. Fornell and Laker (1981) model was followed to confirm the discriminant validity. This model suggested that if the AVE values are larger than other correlation values among the latent variables, the square root of AVE in each latent variable should be utilized to show the discriminant validity. The correlations between the latent variables were copied from the “Latent Variable Correlation” section of the default report which were placed in the lower left triangle of the table (see Table 2) Table 2 Fornell-Larcker Criterion Analysis for Discriminant Validity BM CB FS FSU IPS SA SD Benchmarking 0.720 Consumer Behaviour 0.544 0.815 Festive Sales 0.570 0.948 0.723 Floor Stacking Units 0.452 0.597 0.620 0.665 Influence of Promotional Signage 0.547 0.471 0.591 0.505 0.695 Stock Availability 0.523 0.823 0.821 0.598 0.458 0.819 Standardized Discounts 0.529 0.665 0.665 0.395 0.413 0.760 0.665 The latent variables AVE ware found smaller than the correlation values in that column. Same was also observed in the matrix for the latent variables. The findings emphasized that partial discriminant validity was established well. Structural Equation Modeling Findings T-statistics was generated by PLS for significance testing of both the outer and inner models, through bootstrapping. The Bootstrap process was used to analyse the result which approximates the normality of data. After the bootstrapping, Results were as the follows as in Table 3. Table 3 Result of PLS-SEM Standard Original Sample T Statistics Paths Sample (O) Mean (M) Deviation (|O/STDEV|) P Values (STDEV) Benchmarking->consumer Behavior 0.030 0.030 0.022 1.403 0.161 Festive Sales->consumer Behavior 0.904 0.902 0.035 26.032 0.000 Floor Stacking Units->consumer 0.026 0.025 0.022 1.178 0.239 Behavior Influence of Promotional Signage- 0.151 0.150 0.036 4.240 0.000 >consumer Behavior Stock Availability->consumer 0.107 0.109 0.034 3.119 0.002 Behavior Standardized Discounts->consumer 0.135 0.035 0.016 2.170 0.030 Behavior After inner model path coefficients were reviewed, The outer model was explored by checking the T-statistic in the “Outer Loadings (Means, STDEV, T-Values)” window. As represented in http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.as 185 editor@iaeme.com
Influence of Merchandising and Pricing Strategies on Consumer Buying Behaviour – A Cross - Sectional study of Hypermarkets in Bangalore City table 3, four of the T-Statistics are greater than 1.96 which emphasized that the outer model loadings of Festive Sales, Influence of Promotional Signage, Stock availability and Standardized discounts are highly significant. So H01, H02, H04 and H05 null hypothesis are rejected. These results complete a the analysis of PLS-SEM in the study. It also showed that benchmarking and floor stacking units had no significant relationship on Buying Behaviour. Figure 2 Path Model and PLS-SEM Estimate 6. LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY There were few limitations of this research. This data is collected from only four major hyper market chains in Bangalore city and the other hyper markets are excluded from the sample size. The customers at the busy hyper retails in Bangalore were always in a hurry and were reluctant to spend some time to answer the questionnaire. Out of 400 responses 34 were considered invalid and resulting 366 responses were analyzed. There was a time constraint on completing the study with a large sample size within the given time frame. http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.as 186 editor@iaeme.com
Shilpa Sarvani Ravi and Shikha Bhagat 7. CONCLUSIONS • The study concluded that merchandising and pricing strategies plays substantial role in buying behavior of consumers. The merchandising strategies such as Stock availability and Influence of promotional signage have a high impact on the consumer buying behavior. The pricing strategies which have significant relationship with consumer buying behavior are Standardized discounts and festive sales. • The research findings demonstrated that Floor staking units had a less impact on consumer buying behavior. It also implied that floor stacking units may not be highly lucrative for retailers to grab attention and retain the customers and also non profitable for the manufacturers to improve sale. • The research illustrates that bench marking as a pricing strategy has also less direct impact on consumer buying behavior. As there is very minimum price difference between the hyper markets in retail industry, this factor of pricing strategy is not showing significant relationship with the buying behavior of consumers. • Merchandising and pricing strategies require modern, creative and presentation expertise, and also requires good planning. It gives a competitive advantage and facilitates in creating an overall image of the store. 8. SUGGESTIONS • The Study suggested that much consideration and emphasis should be given to stock availability in the store which also means the retail hyper store should have all the SKUs (Sock keeping Units) available on the shelf for the customer to choose and pick the products. The retail outlets should focus on placing regular purchase orders to the vendors and keep a track on the fill rates of the vendors for a right assortment. • Promotional signage should be given special importance. Promo talkers (rate cards) for all the products should be displayed on the shelf for the customer to easily compare the prices between the competitor’s SKUs. Responsibility should be given to the promoters inside the store for their respective departments. • The results also suggested that Standardized store level discounts should be given to make consumers think that they are getting a better bargain which attracts them to buy the products. This states that the consumers are more attracted to the stores like Dmart where 365 days minimum discount of 6% is run. • Attractive and detailed flyers/ pamphlets with special festive sale offers may be prepared and should distribute to the consumers which in turn helps them to take effective and efficient decisions. These flyers can have more impact if they are distributed just outside the store for the potential consumers to get an idea about the offers inside the store. 9. SCOPE FOR FUTURE STUDY Three factors of merchandising and three factors of pricing are tested with the consumer buying behavior of hyper markets. The other variables of emerging merchandising strategies like frontal presentation, tonnage merchandising, Cleanliness, Stock arrangements (planogram), unit planning, store layout, store design, share of shelf, atmospherics etc. can be variables for future study on consumer behavior. Few other strategies like advertising, fill rates of vendors, vendor relationships, credit system, retailers own label products, location of store, can be also studies to understand the consumers behavior towards buying the products in the retail outlets. http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.as 187 editor@iaeme.com
Influence of Merchandising and Pricing Strategies on Consumer Buying Behaviour – A Cross - Sectional study of Hypermarkets in Bangalore City REFERENCES [1] C. Fornell., & D. F. Larcker.(1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50. [2] Chandon, P., &Wansink, B. (2012). Does food marketing need to make us fat? A review and solutions. Nutrition reviews, 70(10), 571-593. [3] Durbach, I. N., & Stewart, T. J. (2012). Modeling uncertainty in multi-criteria decision analysis. European Journal of Operational Research, 223(1), 1-14. [4] Grewal, D., Ailawadi, K. L., Gauri, D., Hall, K., Kopalle, P., & Robertson, J. R. (2011). Innovations in retail pricing and promotions. Journal of Retailing, 87, S43-S52. [5] Hair Jr, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C., &Sarstedt, M. (2016). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Sage Publications [6] Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., &Sarstedt, M. (2011). PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet. Journal of Marketing theory and Practice, 19(2), 139-152. [7] Kalyanam, K., Lal, R., & Wolfram, G. (2010). Future store technologies and their impact on grocery retailing. In Retailing in the 21st Century (pp. 141-158). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. [8] Khare, A., Achtani, D., &Khattar, M. (2014). Influence of price perception and shopping motives on Indian consumers' attitude towards retailer promotions in malls. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 26(2), 272-295. [9] Konuk, F. A. (2015). The effects of price consciousness and sale proneness on purchase intention towards expiration date-based priced perishable foods. British Food Journal, 117(2), 793-804. [10] Krishnakumar, M. (2014). The role of visual merchandising in apparel purchase decision. IUP Journal of Management Research, 13(1), 37. [11] Mann, P. W., &Jha, M. (2013). Impact of Various Situational Factors on" Store Environment, Merchandising and Consumer Behavior"--A Study on Furniture Bazaar. Journal of Marketing & Communication, 9(2). [12] Manzur, E., Olavarrieta, S., Hidalgo, P., Farías, P., & Uribe, R. (2011). Store brand and national brand promotion attitudes antecedents. Journal of Business Research, 64(3), 286-291. [13] Mihić, M., &Kursan, I. (2010). Assessing the situational factors and impulsive buying behavior: Market segmentation approach. Management: Journal of Contemporary Management Issues, 15(2), 47-66. [14] Mohan, G., Sivakumaran, B., & Sharma, P. (2013). Impact of store environment on impulse buying behavior. European Journal of Marketing, 47(10), 1711-1732. [15] Palazon, M., & Delgado-Ballester, E. (2011). The expected benefit as determinant of deal-prone consumers' response to sales promotions. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 18(6), 542-547. [16] Shankar, V., Inman, J. J., Mantrala, M., Kelley, E., &Rizley, R. (2011). Innovations in shopper marketing: current insights and future research issues. Journal of Retailing, 87, S29-S42. [17] Shukla, P., & Banerjee, M. (2014). The direct and interactive effects of store‐level promotions on impulse purchase: Moderating impact of category familiarity and normative influences. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 13(4), 242-250. http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.as 188 editor@iaeme.com
Shilpa Sarvani Ravi and Shikha Bhagat [18] Suk, K., Lee, J., & Lichtenstein, D. R. (2012). The influence of price presentation order on consumer choice. Journal of Marketing Research, 49(5), 708-717. [19] Vashishta, D. S., &Balaji, B. (2016). Retail Service Convenience In Hypermarkets of India and Indonesia. ”I J A B E R, 14(8), 5581-5593. [20] Wong, K. K. K. (2013). Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) techniques using SmartPLS. Marketing Bulletin, 24(1), 1-32. [21] Wu, P. C., Yeh, G. Y. Y., & Hsiao, C. R. (2011). The effect of store image and service quality on brand image and purchase intention for private label brands. Australasian Marketing Journal (AMJ), 19(1), 30-39. [22] Dr. Mehal Pandya, Consumer Buying Behaviour For Children Apparel: A Critical Review. International Journal of Management, 7(5), 2016, pp. 188–199. [23] Hanna Joseph and Dr. David T Easow, Study on Impact of Akshaya Tritiya on Consumer Buying Behaviour of Gold. International Journal of Management, 7(7), 2016, pp. 128–133. [24] Vijay.R.Kulkarni, A Factorial Study Of Consumer Buying Behavior Of Laptops Of Post Graduate Students In Pune, Volume 4, Issue 2, March- April (2013), pp. 09-21, International Journal of Management. [25] StatSoft, I. (2013). Electronic Statistics Textbook. StatSoft, Tulsa, USA. [26] Newman A J and Peter C (2008), Signage: Retail Marketing Operations, Retailing Environment & Operations, 3rd Indian Report, Cengage Learning, Australia, pp. 264 [27] https://www.ibef.org/industry/indian-retail-industry-analysis-presentation http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.as 189 editor@iaeme.com