Search results

The purpose of this paper is to examine situations in which brand extensions are likely to dilute beliefs associated with family brands.

Hypotheses are developed and tested in a consumer survey that included experimental and control groups.

The findings show the congruity of the extension with the family brand is an important factor, the absence of which increases the chances of dilution of the family brand. Perceived success/failure of the extension is a more important factor that also enhances or dilutes the image of the family brand.

Brand names can be hurt by brand extensions, which contain attributes incompatible with or negating favorable family brand beliefs.

If managers feel the dilution is occurring because of an extension, they can increase perceptions that the extension is atypical of the family brand.

This paper identifies certain key attributes of extensions that, if ignored, may dilute the image of the family brand.

This chapter provides several up-to-date examples of failures in companies’ B2B operations and branding for the readers to learn from such mistakes and never repeat them. Usually managers look for best practices in order to develop their knowledge about a certain topic, but one should not disregard the value of learning from mistakes, which may be as useful if not more efficient than obtaining knowledge from best practices. The chapter examines what kind of B2B failures are likely to happen to companies in various industries and B2B branding situations and provides a detailed case of a blunder that occurred with the Finnish multinational IT services company Tieto. In addition to accentuating errors, the chapter goes further and tries to uncover the reasons why blunders occur and provides advices on how to avoid them and what to do when a mistake has already been made.

This paper aims to explore how brand relationship quality (BRQ) influences consumers’ perceived sense of justice in the context of service recovery situations.

The authors conducted a survey of 368 Brazilian consumers who experienced real-life automotive service recovery situations. The authors tested their model and underlying hypotheses using structural equation modeling.

Stronger BRQ led to higher levels of perceived justice (distributive, procedural and interactional), which in turn led to higher customer satisfaction of complaint handling. Ultimately, higher customer satisfaction led to lower complaining, lower retaliation and higher purchase intention. The authors' alternative model tested the effects of BRQ sub-dimensions on justice perception. Interestingly, trust produced a “love-is-blind” effect, while intimacy revealed a “love-becomes-hate” effect.

This study assessed BRQ and its sub-dimensions (self-connection, satisfaction, commitment, trust and intimacy) on sense of justice (distributive, procedural and interactional) within service recovery. Also, this study demonstrated the opposing effects of the brand relationship sub-dimensions trust and intimacy on perceptions of justice.

Drawing on signaling theory, the purpose of this study is to investigate the effects of the strength and framing of firm signals sent to repair relationships following relationship violations.

Three 2 × 2 scenario-based experiments (total n = 527) manipulate signal strength × violation type (Study 1); signal frame × violation type (Study 2); and signal strength × brand familiarity (Study 3) to examine their dynamic impacts on relationship recovery efforts.

Stronger signals are more effective at relationship repair and are especially important following integrity (vs competence) violations. Signals framed as customer gains (vs firm costs) lead to more favorable relationship outcomes. Finally, brands that are less (vs more) familiar see greater benefits from strong signals.

The three experiments were scenario-based, which may not replicate real-life behavior or capture participants’ actual emotions following a violation, thus future research should extend into real-world recovery efforts.

Managers should send strong signals (communicating the level of resources invested in the recovery efforts) framed as benefits to the customer, rather than costs to the firm. Strong signals are especially important when brand familiarity is low or an integrity violation has occurred.

This is the first research to directly apply signaling theory to the relationship recovery process and contributes to theory by examining the role of signal strength; framing of the signal as a customer gain vs firm cost; and the interplay of signal strength and brand familiarity on the relationship recovery effort.

This paper aims to understand how strong brand attachment can intensify the feeling of perceived betrayal, leading to brand hate after a negative experience with the brand. The study further investigates how consumers make causal attributions for negative experiences when strong brand attachment exists. The moderating effect of a narcissistic personality in the dissemination of negative electronic word of mouth (eWOM) following brand hate is also tested.

The study uses a within-the-subject repeated measures experimental design. A total of 202 college students were exposed to two treatments (high versus no brand attachment), involving a situation of product failure of a smart phone brand. A total of 135 responses were used to compare the outcomes of the two treatments using multivariate analysis. The data of high brand attachment treatment (N = 202) were used to test the proposed research model using partial least square-structural equation modelling.

The results suggest that having a strong positive relationship with the brand can generate stronger feelings of perceived betrayal and brand hate after the brand transgresses the consumer’s expectations. The results indicate that resentful customers can resort to eWOM after feeling betrayed, even though the prior relationship with the brand was strong.

This paper extends the work on perceived betrayal to study brand hate and proposes that brand hate can arise even if there is a strong brand attachment. It contributes to the growing body of literature on brand hate and its possible antecedents. Additionally, the study poses some crucial managerial implications for the brand managers by suggesting that strong brand relationships not always ensure loyalty or commitment and can lead to consequences that are damaging for the brand equity.

Brand extension strategies have become widespread since the early 1980s. However, a large proportion of brand extensions still fail, suggesting the need for methodologies that produce better predictions of success or failure of new products launched with a well‐known brand name. Although the symbolic fit between established brand names and brand extensions is considered as one of the most important determinants of brand extension success or failure, managers need more accurate tools to determine, from a symbolic point‐of‐view, which brand extensions are consistent with their brand. This paper proposes to use Kapferer's brand identity prism to define more acceptable brand extensions.

Two studies were conducted. A first study aimed at developing a brand identity inventory (BII). In a second study, the BII's ability to predict brand extensions' success or failure was tested.

The second order structure of Kapferer's brand identity prism is confirmed. The paper then demonstrates that brand identity is useful to better predict acceptance of brand extensions.

In prior research, perceived fit was estimated by mono‐item measures or by few brand associations. Brand identity provides a more accurate estimation of the fit that can rely on attributes related to brand personality and brand values – the personal dimension of brand identity – or associations related to relationships and users' image – the social dimension of brand identity.

The findings can help managers to determine more consistent brand extensions when brands are already stretched.

This study aims to investigate the effect of brand transgression severity on different behavioral responses (BRs). In addition, the role of perceived brand betrayal (BB) is examined as a mediator between brand transgression severity and BRs.

A total number of 331 customers of Tehran travel agencies were recruited as the statistical sample. Partial least squares-structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) using SmartPLS 4 software was used to analyze the collected data.

The results showed that the severity of brand transgression significantly affects perceived BB and customer BR, including avoidance and retaliatory behaviors. Moreover, the results showed that perceived BB has a mediating role in the relationship between brand transgression severity and reparatory and retaliatory behaviors.

This study adds to the understanding of consumer behavior by demonstrating how customers react to brand transgression severity through perceived BB.

This study aims to examine how brand transgression (BT) affects brand relationship quality (BRQ). Brand forgiveness (BF) and brand evangelism (BE) are tested as mediators between BT and BRQ. This study advances knowledge in consumer behavior by showing how consumers offer to deal with their relationships with brands through BE and BF. This provides relevant information to managers to seek strategies to obtain forgiveness from consumers in case the unfortunate happens. Not only must they seek to obtain forgiveness but also seek ways to ensure BE of their brands. These act as buffers for the brands in case a transgression happens.

Using a survey approach, this study tests whether forgiveness mediated the relationship between BT and BRQ. Also, whether BE mediated the relationship between BT and BRQ was examined. The test was conducted using PROCESS bootstrapping method (Model 4 of Hayes [2018]).

Consistent with the predictions, this study finds that, following a BT, consumers engage in BE and BF to maintain the relationship they have already established with their brands.

This study extends the existing literature by showing that after a BT, response from consumers may take different forms. The consumer’s response or the relationship with the brand may be affected by whether the consumer forgives the brand or evangelizes about the brand. Based on the cognitive dissonance theory, the results of this study imply that, forgiveness and BE act as important mechanisms in understanding consumer-brand relationships after brands act unacceptably. Further, this study contributes to the social media brand management literature by investigating a real-world BT case of social media.

When apologizing for a brand crisis, self-attribution by a business inevitably affects consumer attitude and behavior. The purpose of this study is to draw from the dissonance-attribution model and investigate the effect of self-attribution in apologies on consumers’ brand attitude.

This study includes two scenario-based experiments of 2 × 2 design.

In the first experiment on product failure, the results show that internal attribution generates significant change in brand attitude in a positive direction, while external attribution leads to negative change in brand attitude. Dispositional attribution leads to significantly more positive brand attitude than situational attribution. Internal/dispositional attribution produces significantly more positive effect on consumer attitude than the other three types of attribution. Moreover, perceived risk is found to mediate the relationship between attributions and brand attitude, and such mediating effect is moderated by consumers’ corporate associations. However, in the second experiment on moral crisis, the mediating and moderating effects are not significant.

Clearly, how a company apologizes for a product crisis makes a big difference in the effectiveness of recovery strategies to restore consumer confidence. Sincere apologies based on internal/dispositional attribution are more effective to re-gain the respect of consumers and win them back.

This study is the first to examine consumer reactions to self-attributions by marketers apologizing for a brand crisis and the combined effect of self-attributions along the horizontal dimension (internal versus external attribution) and the vertical dimension (dispositional versus situational attribution).

This study aims to explore the role of consumers’ expectation violation in brands’ negative eWOM management on social media. The effects of brand feedback strategies (i.e. compensation and causal attribution) and brand type (i.e. full-service vs low-cost) in consumers’ expectation violations and the impact of such violations on consumers’ satisfaction and responses to a brand (i.e. brand love and brand hate) were examined.

This study used a 2 (causal attribution: external/brand) × 2 (compensation: present/absent) × 2 (brand type: low cost vs full service) × 2 (industry: airline and hotel) between-subjects experimental design.

Results indicated that the presence (vs absence) of compensation can result in positive consumer expectation violations, which can lead to consumer satisfaction and brand love. Alternately, the absence of compensation can result in negative consumer expectation violations, which can lead to consumers dissatisfaction and brand hate. Moreover, brand type (i.e. full-service vs low-cost) significantly interacted with the presence of compensation in influencing consumers’ responses. The attribution of the cause did not significantly influence consumers’ responses.

This study highlights the importance of knowing consumers’ expectations when responding to negative eWOM on social media. Offering compensation is an effective strategy for restoring consumer satisfaction. Specifically, for low-cost brands, offering compensation can lead to even more favorable responses.

This study pioneers in exploring the roles of different brand feedback strategies and brand type in influencing consumers’ responses to brands’ handling of negative eWOM. This study revealed the underlying mechanism through the theoretical lens of expectancy violation and examined the impact of expectation violations on consumer satisfaction and brand love and brand hate.