Search results

This research uses the distinction between communal relationships (based on mutual care and concern) and exchange relationships (based on the principle of quid pro quo) to propose a framework that predicts differences in the shape of consumer response function to increasing levels of brand transgressions.

The paper proposes a conceptual model based on insights from prior research on brand relationships.

The premise being proposed in this paper is that exchange-oriented consumers, being focused on the balance of inputs and outcomes, base their evaluations on an objective assessment of the final outcome, such that their response function will be relatively proportional to increasing levels of brand transgression. On the other hand, communally oriented consumers are concerned with whether or not the relationship partner cares for them, such that up to a point brand transgressions are overlooked while beyond a threshold there is a sudden negative shift in brand evaluations. These consumers thus exhibit a step-function response to brand transgressions.

This paper proposes a conceptual framework and leaves it to future researchers to test it empirically.

Managers now have a toolkit to better manage instances of product and service failure.

Findings from this model can be applied to better manage interpersonal relationships too.

This paper proposes a model that shows how and why consumers might differ in their response to brand transgressions. Further, this is a dynamic model in that it traces the response function of the consumers at increasing levels of transgressions.

We propose that brands with strong associations and dedicated customers may be vulnerable if customers perceive them as exploiting their relationship.

We start by reviewing the literature on brand meaning, brand attachment, brand relationships, and brand transgressions. The extant literature implies that as a result of their willingness to sustain their brand relationship, highly attached consumers will either discount negative information about a brand or attribute the responsibility for the negative information to some external factors. We propose, on the other hand, that when negative information dilutes the reason for brand attachment, the norm of the consumer–brand relationship is violated (brand transgression). Then we argue that highly attached consumers of that brand will react more negatively (when compared to consumers not feeling highly attached) toward the brand.

We introduce a typology of brand transgressions against the (1) expressive, (2) exclusive, (3) expert, and (4) empathic nature of brands. We discuss the possible effects of attachment levels on consumers’ reactions after such brand transgressions. Additionally, we articulate the moderating effects of four consumer motives (need for self-enhancement, need for uniqueness, need for risk avoidance, and need for justice) on consumer reactions.

Our reasoning counters the literature suggesting that highly attached consumers of a brand will engage in relationship-sustaining behaviors. We contribute to the brand-transgression literature by providing a more structured and detailed definition of brand transgressions by classifying them under four distinct types.

The purpose of this study is to investigate how brand communities collectively react towards brand transgressions, an area where previous research has been scant.

This study adopts a netnographic approach in studying the reactions of one particular brand community and its reactions to a marketer-initiated brand transgression.

Building on coping theory, we find evidence of brand community coping, a temporally bounded process in which the community seeks to come to terms with and even overturn the transgression. Overall, we define the brand community coping process as unfolding through three overlapping and temporally bounded stages of (1) making the problem communal, (2) exploring the problem’s meaning, and (3) co-creating responses.

Studies of consumer coping particularly in cases of brand transgressions have predominantly adopted an individualistic approach to coping, or have treated communities as coping resources for individual consumers. This study is the first study to truly look at brand communities’ collective coping endeavors. We also offer managerial implications by questioning the overtly positive tone of brand co-creation literature and underline potential threats to marketers when consumers decide to use their co-creative practices to punish the marketer.

The purpose of this study is to explore how the value of being global brands is experienced differently based upon foreign versus domestic origin of a brand. The conceptual framework is tested on samples from three countries – United States, India, and China. The data are analyzed using partial least squares structural equation modeling. The belief that global brands are of higher quality, more socially responsible, and deliver a sense of belongingness to a global community led to an orientation toward globally available consumption alternatives, or global consumption orientation (GCO). High GCO has been associated with preferences for global brands; however, we find that while this preference indeed extends to global brands based in foreign countries, it does not extend to global brands based in the home country. The study of global brands seldom distinguishes among types of global brands. This research examines global brands based on their foreign versus domestic origin; thus it offers a more nuanced understanding of the boundaries for the value of global brands.