Search results

The purpose of this paper is to examine the effects of brand familiarity and brand fit on purchase intention towards the offerings of co‐branded hotels.

Data were gathered from 198 respondents and two co‐branded hotels in Taiwan were assessed.

The findings showed that the fit between co‐brands mediate the relationship between brand familiarity and purchase intention. In particular, a well‐known co‐branded hotel with a high level of brand fit could directly or indirectly affect consumer decision‐making processes regarding purchase intention towards the co‐brand. Conversely, a less familiar co‐branded hotel had a positive effect on purchase intention only if respondents perceived a good fit between allied brands.

Brand fit could be a more important factor than brand familiarity in influencing the success of hotel co‐branding strategies. Future research to examine the co‐branding concept in different social and cultural contexts and also from different perspectives, such as owners or managers, is recommended.

Most hospitality studies focus on co‐branding between hotels and restaurants. This study empirically investigated the effects of co‐branding on consumer behavior in the hotel sector.

This paper aims to explore Chinese hoteliers' perspectives on co‐branding between hotels and products of other industries or sectors.

A survey with both structured and open‐ended questions was distributed to 300 Chinese hotel executive level hoteliers attending the 2009 International Forum on China Hotel Brand Development.

The results of the 72 surveys indicate benefits as well as drawbacks for both hotels and their potential co‐branding partners in the Chinese hospitality industry, the most important being the lack of brand awareness for both Chinese and Western brands.

The paper contributes to the existing literature by adding the Chinese hospitality industry context into the much studied Western industry context: the research is timely given the position and significance of the Chinese market in the world tourism arena.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the relationship among affective loyalty, perceived benefits, attitude towards co‐branded products and the intention to use such products.

In total, 433 valid responses were collected from active bank/department store co‐branded credit card holders, from four major Chinese cities. Regression and t‐test analyses were used to test the hypotheses.

The findings revealed that affective loyalty to the bank and the department store, as well as perceived credit card benefits, all positively influence consumers' attitude toward bank/department store co‐branded credit cards. Additionally, results showed a positive relationship between attitude and intention. Moreover, gender differences were also found to be significant in affective loyalty to the bank and the department store, as well as with the intention to use co‐branded credit cards.

The paper contributes to the co‐branding literature by gaining a better understanding of co‐branded partners in symbiotic marketing collaboration.

Co‐branding is an often used marketing strategy within the theme park industry and it has existed in one form or another since the 1930s. Notwithstanding the growing interest for co‐branding in the theme park industry academic research in a theme park context has not been found yet. Empirical research on co‐branding is limited to a relatively few studies that have typically examined product concepts or fictitious products rather than real instances of co‐branding. This article aims to present results of an experiment on the effects of co‐branding from a real‐life theme park perspective.

The article is based on a classical field experiment in which the IBRA‐method of measuring brand associations was used. The IBRA‐method does not influence the brand associations like many other research techniques do (by giving certain cues). It is an unaided, unbiasing research technique. The objective of the study is to investigate whether the relationship between theme park Efteling and WWF, resulting in the co‐branded attraction PandaVision, could have a negative effect on the strong brand associations of theme park Efteling.

Through the field experiment an insight has been given into the possible effects a respondent's perceived brand fit within a co‐branding situation can have on the average evaluation of core associations of one of the constituent brands. Even strong brands (Efteling is the strongest brand in The Netherlands) can be harmed by a wrong co‐brand strategy. Results also showed that the brand fit manipulation has resulted in a more negative image of Efteling without affecting the evaluation of the co‐branded attraction PandaVision. Only measuring whether guests like or dislike your attractions is thus not sufficient.

This research is presented as a preliminarily study and the results should be interpreted with caution. The sample size was limited to 70 respondents and the experimental design with only students may not necessarily represent the typical visitor to the Efteling. Because of the crude manipulation of the treatment it is unclear what precisely caused the established effect. Is the effect caused by the degree of elaboration (meaning, because the respondent is triggered to think deeply about the matter at hand) or by the substantive guidance? Supplementary research with several experimental groups is needed to answer this question.

Theme parks should be aware of the dangers of co‐branding. Pairing with a wrong partner can damage the brand; negative spillover effects, erosion, brand dilution and even negative bottom line effects for the participating brands are possible. If the results occur for strong brands, weaker brands should be even more aware of the dangers.

This article presents the first application of the effects of co‐branding in a specific theme park setting. It is also the first article to use the unbiased IBRA‐method for measuring brand associations of a co‐brand strategy. Negative effects of co‐branding for strong brands in a real‐life situation were never reported before.

This study aims to investigate drivers of co-branding, and the relative strength of these drivers within the Persian Gulf Pro League (PGPL). The study examines sport sponsorship, and specifically the relationship between professional football teams and on-field apparel sponsors.

Sixteen experts participated in semi-structured interviews and ranked the co-branding drivers. The expert opinions were organized into estimates and triangular fuzzy numbers were established before the Mamdani Fuzzy Inference System converted the fuzzy outputs into crisp output values using the Centroid method. Next, the rankings of the drivers by the same 16 participants were analyzed using the analytical hierarchy process (AHP).

The study identified four main factors with 19 indicators: brand management (i.e. enhancing brand value, utilizing the knowledge and experience of partner brands, brand position, brand identity, brand equity and brand image), partner relationships (i.e. satisfaction, mutual trust, commitment, common interest, product reliability and innovative strategies), marketing factors (i.e. marketing mix, market position, competitive advantage and entry into new domestic markets) and supporting factors (i.e. copyright, contracts and social media law). The AHP identified the most influential factors as marketing, partner relationships, brand management and support.

Based on the study’s findings, the authors recommend that PGPL teams adopt a partnership mindset, seek alignment of values and recognize the plurality of stakeholders to a sponsorship and their relationships to each other. The study highlights the challenges of co-branding activities in a developing country where trademark laws are not well developed.

Despite the fact that fit positively influences customers’ attitudes toward companies, previous research reveals differing roles of fit in the domain of corporate social responsibility (CSR) based on criteria and degree. Because the impact of fit between customers and service companies in the domain of CSR remains unclear in the hospitality context, this study aims to examine the effects of different CSR types on customer–CSR fit, attitude and behavioral intentions in hospitality settings.

A total of 219 usable hotel customer responses were collected and analyzed using SmartPLS software.

Results show that companies’ demonstration of CSR toward social/nonsocial stakeholders is most effective for increasing perceived fit by customers, followed by CSR toward employees and toward customers. Also, this study identifies perceived fit as an indicator of customers’ positive attitudes and revisit intentions. This study enhances our understanding of relationships among three dimensions of CSR activities and customers’ responses.

This study provides guidelines with which hospitality companies can create sustainable growth by engaging the welfare of communities, employees and customers.

The current paper describes various co‐branding methods that are available to franchisors and franchisees. The paper also presents an exploratory study that provides some insight into the activities in which franchisors in the food service industry may be willing to engage, in collaboration with other firms, when entering and maintaining co‐branding relationships. A sample of International Franchise Association (IFA) members was selected for the survey.

The aim of this study is to determine the effects of brand components (CBBE, brand fit, brand image, brand reputation, brand familiarity) on consumers brand portfolio attitude via perceived risk (for two main portfolio strategies).

The study used a structured questionnaire to collect primary data from 636 consumers who made purchases from companies using house of brand (318) and branded house strategy (318). By conducting reliability and validity analysis, the model of this study was tested with confirmatory factor analysis and path analysis methods, using structural equation modeling.

According to the results of the path analysis, the effects of CBBE and brand reputation on brand attitude were confirmed for both house of brand and branded house strategy. Moreover, the full and partial mediating effect of perceived risk was proven in the relationships.

One of the limitations of the study is determining a portfolio of brands for each strategy and collecting data for these brands. In addition, since the number of consumers using brand portfolios could not be reached in the study, data could be collected using the purposeful convenience sampling method. For this reason, it is thought that research conducted with the data obtained through systematic sampling methods can yield more reliable results.

Managers of companies with a brand portfolio should work on a main strategy that enhances CBBE and brand reputation regardless of the strategy they use. After these two variables, the variable that portfolio managers need to address is brand fit.

It will offer different perspectives in terms of understanding which portfolio strategy is needed, and which predecessors and outputs can be produced. Also, the findings of the research will produce important results to reduce the perceived risks of consumers and increase their positive attitudes toward brand portfolios.

The motivations behind co-branding alliances, the differences in performance between the paired brands and the emergence of “spillover effects” have been pillars of the marketing research agenda for almost three decades. We observe an extensive number of studies on co-branding alliances, combined with multiple theoretical perspectives and empirical approaches informing extant literature. The purpose of this paper is to summarize of the state of the art of this research.

The authors offer a systematic literature review of 190 papers on co-branding alliances. The authors portray a picture of the theories informing co-branding research and build a conceptual framework that summarizes the concepts and variables used in this literature. Finally, 11 interviews with managers and consultants of European firms help to reveal potential problems in practice and needs that are not captured by previous studies.

The authors develop a map of theories used to investigate co-branding alliances and build a conceptual framework linking motivations, co-branding alliance implementation and outputs. Finally, the authors propose a structured research agenda.

The main implication relies on the structured research agenda.

Practical implications include the identification of the variables and dimensions involved in a brand alliance to exploit the strengths and moderate the weaknesses of a brand.

This paper highlights how co-branding is embedded in different contexts and dimensions regarding both firms and consumers. The two maps presented in this study underscore the interdependence among such dimensions. The authors interview marketing experts to validate the conceptual framework and to help us extract the managerial implications that stem from it.