exploring brand personality congruence - K-REx - Kansas State ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

loyalty towards a brand is based on the information that one has access to about the brand. This can be a function of the brand’s image, product/service performance in the market, or a similar measure (i.e. “This restaurant chain is superior to other casual dining restaurants in its class”). Affective loyalty deals with the customer’s emotional like or dislike toward the brand, which is mostly attributed to past experience (i.e. “I have grown to like this restaurant chain more so than other casual dining restaurant chains”). Conative loyalty deals with behavioral intention, the customer’s desire to continue the brand relationship through continued patronage and positive word of mouth (i.e. “I intend to continue dining at this restaurant chain in the future”). In addition, Oliver (1997) and Yi and La (2004) also cited action loyalty, which refers to the transformation of the customer’s motivated intention into a readiness to act (i.e. “When I have a need to go to a casual dining restaurant, I dine only at this restaurant”). As more choices appear in the casual dining market, coupled with the rising propensity to eat meals away from home, capturing a truly loyal customer base is paramount. Because the market is continually growing and becoming more saturated, any individual restaurant brand may have difficulty in expanding that base of loyal customers. However, it is important to note that a small but deeply loyal base can still have a substantial contribution to the brand’s equity (Aaker , 2000). Hypotheses Development and Conceptual Framework Brand Personality Congruence Although the development of the brand personality congruence scale is exploratory in nature, it brings together two important areas of research that have been shown to be useful in business and marketing applications: brand personality and congruence. Moreover, marketing professionals will be provided information that may be useful in designing marketing strategies to maximize the leverage that a well established brand personality provides. When the personalities of the brand and the customer are congruent, the chances of a brand to succeed increase markedly (Temporal, 2001). Strong brand loyalty, trust, and high overall satisfaction contribute to competitive advantage, and thus warrants the need to study brand personality congruence as it relates to these constructs. 18
Research has shown that consumers tend to support brands and services whose personalities closely match their own (Batra, et. al, 1993; Kassarjian, 1971; Kotler, 2003; Sirgy, 1982; Temporal, 2001; Wee, 2004), thus allowing them to express themselves through the brands that they use (Aaker, 1997, Dolich, 1969, Fournier, 1994). Wee (2004) concurred by stating that consumers fulfill the need for identity through the brands that they choose to support. This reinforces Grubb and Grathwohl’s (1967, p.22) conclusion that self-congruity “links the psychological construct of an individual’s self-concept with the symbolic value of goods purchased in the marketplace.” Literature shows that there is a positive relationship between self-congruity and brand choice/preference, purchasing and repurchasing decisions, and postpurchase attitudes such as satisfaction and brand loyalty (Back, 2005; Birdwell, 1968; Dolich, 1969; Ericksen, 1996; Graeff, 1996; Sirgy, 1982; Sirgy & Samli, 1985; Sirgy et al., 1997). As previously mentioned, the terms “self-concept”, “self-image”, and “personality” have been used interchangeably in existing brand marketing and psychology literature. As yet, no research exists that explores the measurement of brand personality congruence specifically since previous research has focused more on self-concept/self-image congruence rather than personality congruence. Sirgy (1985) expressed image congruence as the match between the brand’s image and the self-image of the target customer(s). Past research has shown that congruence encourages the desire to maintain positive customer-brand relationships (Fournier, 1998) and that loyalty is a direct function of image congruence (Sirgy & Samli, 1985). For the purpose of this study, Sirgy’s (1985) framework was modified where congruence was operationalized as the level at which brand personality is congruent with customer’s personality traits as alluded to by Aaker (1999). This was measured as a gap score between the customer’s self-reported evaluation of his/her personality and their evaluation of the restaurant’s personality. The rationale behind using brand personality congruence rather than the traditional construct of self-congruity is that self-concept can vary between the private and public selves (how the consumer sees one’s self and how others see the consumer), while personality is more enduring and stable. Helgeson and Supphellen (2004) concluded that brand personality and self-congruity are discriminant constructs; where the former is more broad and the focus is the brand itself while the latter is more narrow and focuses on the self. It 19
Page 1 and 2: EXPLORING BRAND PERSONALITY CONGRUE
Page 3 and 4: elationship between BPC and satisfa
Page 5 and 6: Copyright AMELIA ESTEPA ASPERIN 200
Page 7 and 8: elationship between BPC and satisfa
Page 9 and 10: Survey Instrument..................
Page 11 and 12: References.........................
Page 13 and 14: List of Tables Table 3.1 Mailing li
Page 15 and 16: CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION As the num
Page 17 and 18: on relational variables such as sat
Page 19 and 20: models, there was a need to reasses
Page 21 and 22: References Aaker, J. L. (1997). Dim
Page 23 and 24: Upshaw, L.B. (1995). Building brand
Page 25 and 26: linked to the brand that consumers
Page 27 and 28: standing (Temporal, 2001), and cons
Page 29 and 30: emotional stability (i.e. stability
Page 31: eferent restaurant chain is Applebe
Page 35 and 36: once trust is built, this reliance
Page 37 and 38: satisfaction with the current dinin
Page 39 and 40: Figure 2.1 Conceptual framework of
Page 41 and 42: Azoulay, A., & Kapferer, J. (2003).
Page 43 and 44: Hennig-Thurau, T., Gwinner, K.P., &
Page 45 and 46: Onkvisit, S. & Shaw, J. (1987). Sel
Page 47 and 48: CHAPTER 3 - METHODOLOGY The overall
Page 49 and 50: espondents to evaluate the focal re
Page 51 and 52: Figure 3.2 Modified Tailored Design
Page 53 and 54: otation (SPSS, v.13) was then perfo
Page 55 and 56: Direct Personality Comparison. A si
Page 57 and 58: y-invitation only panel as the samp
Page 59 and 60: Figure 3.5 Phase II data analysis f
Page 61 and 62: Sobel, M. E. (1982). Asymptotic con
Page 63 and 64: Introduction As global competitiven
Page 65 and 66: depressed), openness to experience
Page 67 and 68: purchased in the marketplace.” Li
Page 69 and 70: Based on the pilot test, a response
Page 71 and 72: Indicators (Aaker, 1997) Brand Pers
Page 73 and 74: unique .68 young .66 original .64 i
Page 75 and 76: Table 4.4 Standardized Factor Loadi
Page 77 and 78: Table 4.5 Factor Loadings, Eigenval
Page 79 and 80: personality dimensions among casual
Page 81 and 82: References Aaker, J. L. (1997). Dim
Page 83 and 84:
Keller, K. L. (1998). Strategic bra
Page 85 and 86:
CHAPTER 5 - EXPLORING BRAND PERSONA
Page 87 and 88:
BPC, defined as the gap between the
Page 89 and 90:
marketing practitioners should expl
Page 91 and 92:
was modified where congruence was o
Page 93 and 94:
match their own (Kassarjian, 1971;
Page 95 and 96:
Survey Instrument Because the sampl
Page 97 and 98:
Baltimore, Denver, Pittsburg, Portl
Page 99 and 100:
Table 5.1 Demographic Characteristi
Page 101 and 102:
Table 5.2 Means, Standard Deviation
Page 103 and 104:
ehavior rather than only the direct
Page 105 and 106:
Theoretical Model Testing Using a s
Page 107 and 108:
Table 5.5 Standardized correlations
Page 109 and 110:
Mediating Effect of Trust and Satis
Page 111 and 112:
Figure 5.4 Structural model testing
Page 113 and 114:
ecause satisfaction has no signific
Page 115 and 116:
ehavior. Additionally, image, conce
Page 117 and 118:
directly and indirectly through tru
Page 119 and 120:
Back, K. J. (2005). The effects of
Page 121 and 122:
Graeff, T.R. (1996). Consumption si
Page 123 and 124:
O’Shaughnessy, J., & O’Shaughne
Page 125 and 126:
CHAPTER 6 - SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Page 127 and 128:
loaded on the customer personality
Page 129 and 130:
XYZ as a person, please indicate a
Page 131 and 132:
help managers determine what is imp
Page 133 and 134:
The BPC framework presented in the
Page 135 and 136:
References Aaker, J. L. (1997). Dim
Page 137 and 138:
Dear Faculty/Staff member: Appendix
Page 139 and 140:
125
Page 141 and 142:
127
Page 143 and 144:
129
Page 145 and 146:
131
Page 147 and 148:
Document version for non-HTML email
Page 149 and 150:
135
Page 151 and 152:
137
Page 153 and 154:
139
Page 155 and 156:
141
show all

exploring brand personality congruence - K-REx - Kansas State ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?