Search results

Companies in all industries are searching for new sources of competitive advantage since the competition in their marketplace is becoming increasingly intensive. The resource-based view of the firm explains the sources of sustainable competitive advantages. From a resource-based view perspective, relational based assets (i.e., the assets resulting from firm contacts in the marketplace) enable competitive advantage. The relational based assets examined in this work are brand image and corporate reputation, as components of brand equity, and customer value. This paper explores how they create value. Despite the relatively large amount of literature describing the benefits of firms in having strong brand equity and delivering customer value, no research validated the linkage of brand equity components, brand image, and corporate reputation, simultaneously in the customer value–customer loyalty chain. This work presents a model of testing these relationships in consumer goods, in a business-to-business context. The results demonstrate the differential roles of brand image and corporate reputation on perceived quality, customer value, and customer loyalty. Brand image influences the perception of quality of the products and the additional services, whereas corporate reputation actions beyond brand image, estimating the customer value and customer loyalty. The effects of corporate reputation are also validated on different samples. The results demonstrate the importance of managing brand equity facets, brand image, and corporate reputation since their differential impacts on perceived quality, customer value, and customer loyalty. The results also demonstrate that companies should not limit to invest only in brand image. Maintaining and enhancing corporate reputation can have a stronger impact on customer value and customer loyalty, and can create differential competitive advantage.

In the literature on product branding, significant attention is given to brand equity in the consumer context, but relatively little attention is paid to the application of the concept in the business-to-business (B2B) context. Even less research exists on the role of brand equity in the retailing context. Retailers are often seen as irrelevant to the source of brand value, resulting in manufacturers not targeting retailers to help them build stronger brands. Potential occurs, therefore, for some channel conflict to exist between manufacturers and retailers. On the one hand, retailers tend to focus on building their own, private brands to differentiate themselves from other retail competitors and to increase their power in relation to manufacturer brands. At the same time, most retailers still need to create a good image in the consumer marketplace by selling famous, manufacturer-branded products. In other words, retailers often have to sell famous brands even if they would prefer to sell other brands including their own. Manufacturers tend to focus their brand-building efforts on the consumer market to entice consumers to insist that retailers stock their brands, rather than placing any real emphasis on building a strong and positive brand relationship with the retailer directly.

This chapter aims to shed light on the role that a sustainable orientation plays in strengthening the relationships between global consumers and online brands. Despite many previous studies about the importance of sustainability considerations for national consumers’ brand commitments and purchase intentions, there is a lack of empirical studies focussing on this relationship from a global consumer perspective. A pre-study (consisting of focus group discussions) and a widely distributed international survey with responses from 74 countries show mixed results. Whereas the results from the focus groups imply that a sustainable orientation influences both global consumers’ purchase intentions and brand commitments towards online brands, the survey results imply that global consumers’ sustainable orientations do not affect purchase intentions directly, even though they influence brand commitments. An implication of these results is that an international online brand’s possibility to portray a sustainable orientation plays an important role in strengthening the relationship with global consumers, especially regarding brand commitment.

Identifying the dimensionality of a construct and selecting appropriate items for measuring the dimensions are important elements of marketing scale development. Scales for measuring marketing constructs such as service quality, brand equity, and marketing orientation have typically been developed using the influential classical test theory paradigm (Churchill, 1979), or some variant thereof. Users of the paradigm typically assume, albeit implicitly, that items and respondents are the only sources of variance and respondents are the objects of measurement. Yet, marketers need scales for other important managerial purposes, such as benchmarking, tracking, and perceptual mapping, each of which requires a scaling of objects other than respondents such as products, brands, retail stores, websites, firms, advertisements, or social media content. Scales that are developed without such objects in mind might not perform as expected. Finn and Kayande (2005) proposed a multivariate multiple objective random effects methodology (referred to here as M-MORE) could be used to identify construct dimensionality and select appropriate items for multiple objects of measurement. This chapter applies M-MORE to multivariate generalizability theory data collected to assess online retailer websites in the early 2000s to identify the dimensionality of and to select appropriate items for scaling website quality. The results are compared with those produced by traditional methods.

This report investigates attitude towards complaining, societal benefits and probability of complaint success, with emphasis on complaint intentions and actions, in applying the theory of planned behaviour to complaint behaviour in Malaysia. On the basis of a sample of 834 respondents at the National Consumer Complaint Centre, the Tribunal for Consumer Claims Malaysia, and three shopping malls, the research findings suggest that complainers with a more positive attitude towards those three factors have a stronger tendency to make a complaint. However, consumers with positive perceptions of societal benefits and a higher probability of success are less likely to take action for seeking redress. Moreover, the influence of attitude, benefits, and probability of success on complaint actions is mediated by intention.