The impact of the social protest on brand commitment

Abstract

Purpose

This paper aims to present changes in customer brand commitment and its components in relation to the cellular and financial markets using three sets of data that were collected before, during and after the social protests of the Summer of 2011 in Israel.

Design/methodology/approach

The four data sets for this study were collected from an internet panel and represent the Hebrew-speaking segment of Israel’s population. The current study examines two markets; cellular provider companies and financial service companies. The surveys were carried out at different points in time which extended from April 2011 to March 2012. The first two surveys were carried out in March 2011 and May 2011, before the outbreak of the protests the Summer of 2011. A third survey was conducted in August 2011 during the protest. The last and the fourth survey was conducted in March 2012 after the wave of protests had died down.

Findings

The current research shows that as a result of the social protest movement, consumers have changed. They perceive brands as not being as good (perceived performance) as they were before the protest; they are less satisfied with the brands they used previously; and they are less loyal and committed to them.

Practical implications

The findings of this study signify a major change in marketing and in basic aspects of consumer behavior. Brands have become less important than before the protest. Testing two markets, cellular and financial, this research suggests that the social protest movement reduced the attachment of consumers to brands they most often bought.

Originality/value

No study has tested the impact over time of the social protest on several consumer behavior variables, including brand loyalty, brand involvement, satisfaction, consumer perceptions of their brands’ performance and brand commitment.

Citation

Shuv-Ami, A. (2016), "The impact of the social protest on brand commitment", Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 249-261. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEC-11-2013-0038