Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
http://mtq.sagepub.com
Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com
Additional services and information for Marketing Theory can be found at:
Email Alerts: http://mtq.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts
Subscriptions: http://mtq.sagepub.com/subscriptions
Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav
Permissions: http://www.sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
Citations http://mtq.sagepub.com/cgi/content/refs/7/4/407
articles
Lars Strannegrd
Stockholm School of Economics, Sweden
Abstract. How can one explain the phenomenon that a consumer is able to protest
against worker exploitation in the third world outside a Nike outlet and a day later
walk in and buy a pair of shoes from the same outlet? In this article we try to conceptualize how consumers handle the expressive and functional aspects of brands in a
moralized brandscape. By introducing the idea of de-coupling, we suggest that both
the production and the consumption of brands rest on a logic where the functional and
expressive values are separated from one and another. This implies that consumption
is not merely an expressive activity operating on the sign level, but rather that consumption must be understood as an intricate play where the relationship between
brand image and buying behaviour needs to be further explored. Key Words brands
buying behaviour de-coupling expressive values moral discourse
In 2002, two international market surveys on brands, corporate ethics and consumer behaviour (MTV, 2002; Research International Observer [RIO], 2002)
examined the relationship between buyer attitudes and buyer behaviour with
regard to global brands. Conducted in the aftermath of Naomi Kleins (1999)
influential book No Logo, the two surveys were presented as a response to Kleins
critique of the moral standards of global super-brands, and the two studies were
named respectively Yo Logo and Logo On. Whereas Klein demonstrated how
consumers and activists to an increasing extent criticize and even boycott brands
that do not live up to their moral claims, the surveys on the other hand suggest that
brands are indeed still embraced by consumers. The surveys also indicate that
although consumers might disregard and even take actions against a certain
brand, they are willing to consume products of that brand. This challenges both
407
Downloaded from http://mtq.sagepub.com by Luiz Eduardo Amaro on January 5, 2009
the idea of brands being causally related to purchasing behaviour and the postmodern suggestion that consumption is merely an expressive project. How is it
that brands at one and the same time can be criticized and consumed? How is that
consumers are perfectly able to protest against exploitation of the third world outside a Nike outlet, and a day later walk in and buy a pair of shoes from the same
outlet?
The results of the marketing surveys can be interpreted in a number of ways, but
above all they indicate that there is a need to get a deeper understanding of the
relationship between branding and buying behaviour. With the increasing focus
on brands in theory and practice, consumption has come to be understood as an
expressive activity. Whereas traditional marketing has put the focus on use-value
or exchange-value, the increasing importance of brands has rather shifted the
focus towards sign-value. This implies that consumption in a branded world is
increasingly regarded as an expressive activity where goods are consumed in terms
of their sign-value, rather than in terms of their functional characteristics. In the
form of images or signs, brands are being consumed as aesthetic expressions (see
e.g. Featherstone, 1994; Salzer-Mrling and Strannegrd, 2004).
While the functional values normally are regarded as a products physical or
material qualities, the expressive side of a brand generally refers to its immaterial
values and images. Even though it could be argued that the functional values are
expressive in some sense, and vice versa, a distinction between the two can be
made for analytical purposes (see e.g. Jansson, 2001). Hence, in a marketplace that
to an increasing extent is concerned with the production and consumption of
signs, the brand is not only a marker of identification, but also something that is
consumed in its own right. As Baudrillard (1983: 44) puts it, consumption has
become nothing but a signifying play. The product and its functions are thus not
as important as the brands expressive qualities.
In several studies it has been argued that strong brands create strong ties to the
customers (see Fournier, 1998; Sderlund, 2000). In fact, much of the branding
literature relies on the proposition that a positive attitude towards the brand leads
to positive purchasing decisions, and vice versa. The ultimate rationale behind
brand management is to establish a relationship with the customer and thus to
create loyal buyers (see e.g. Aaker, 1996; Kapferer, 1992). In an economy that
claims to revolve around the production and consumption of experiences, the
expressive values of goods are considered to be more important than ever. Hence,
rather than promoting functional values, brand strategies tend to be directed
towards the expressive side of consumption with a focus on the emotional and
aesthetic values embedded in the products aura and image.
Recent research has pointed to the necessity of recognizing cultural processes,
such as historical context and ethical concerns, in order to understand how brands
are perceived by consumers (Schroeder and Salzer-Mrling, 2005). As has been
witnessed by several authors, corporate branding often makes its presence in the
public sphere with a discourse characterized by ideological and political claims,
where brands compete by sometimes opportunistic invocations of almost any hot
ideological sign that has value at any given moment (Goldman and Papson, 1996:
408
Downloaded from http://mtq.sagepub.com by Luiz Eduardo Amaro on January 5, 2009
254). Values that traditionally have been confined to the political or private sphere
are today incorporated into the realm of advertising. Values such as equality,
justice or freedom are often communicated in ads and commercials as brands
strive to be positioned as morally sound personas. Ethics has become an important part of branding (e.g. Borgerson et al., 2005).
In sum, in current descriptions of the branded world it is generally held that
consumption is an expressive project: a signifying play where expressive signs
rather than material functions are consumed and produced. This expressive side
of consumption and production often also carries ideological and ethical claims;
and in the literature on branding and consumer behaviour it has been argued that
the brands ethical values clearly affect buying behaviour.
However, the results of the above mentioned surveys (MTV, 2002; RIO, 2002)
seem to be counter-intuitive to current literature. The surveys indicate that consumers might well hold a negative attitude towards a brand while still purchasing
its products. The moral discourse, it seems, is separated from the actual purchase
of products. How can we understand this incongruity? How do individuals cope
with the expressive and functional dimensions of brands? What is the relationship
between the brands expressive and moral values and the products material usevalue?
The aim of this article is to explore how the interplay between the functional
and expressive aspects of production and consumption of brands are dealt with in
buying behaviour. By challenging the idea that contemporary consumption is
nothing but an expressive game, we will in this article explore the expressive and
functional dimensions of consumption. By using the above mentioned surveys as
a problematization of the literature on branding and postmodern consumption,
we will discuss the way consumers and producers handle the expressive and
functional dimensions of the brand. In the following section we will describe the
theoretical framework that underlies much of the branding literature and the view
of consumption as an expressive project. We will thereafter present the two
empirical surveys that serve as a basis for discussing the problem arising in current
conceptions of branding and buying behaviour. In the final sections we will then
discuss how the expressive and functional dimensions of consumption can be
understood in the moralized brandscape.
409
Downloaded from http://mtq.sagepub.com by Luiz Eduardo Amaro on January 5, 2009
In the public space, there is thus an ongoing sign war (Goldman and Papson,
1996), where different images, symbols and logotypes struggle to stand out and
make themselves heard.
The idea that branding is a process primarily concerned with the creation of
values started to gain ground during the 1990s. Positive emotions and attitudes
have been considered to increase the value of the brand (e.g. Aaker, 1996; Jensen,
1999; Schmitt, 1999). Others have developed the brand definition into a conceptualization where branding cannot be reduced to a single factor, but needs to be
seen as a collection of factors, a set of consistent processes, aimed at a specific
purpose, that define, differentiate, and add value to the organization, (Blumenthal,
2004: 177). In the process of branding, the aim is to enchant or re-enchant
generic products or services by infusing them with positive images and meanings.
The ultimate rationale behind brand management is to establish a relationship
with the customer, to create loyal consumers who are to become frequent buyers
of the branded goods (see e.g. Aaker, 1996; Kapferer, 1992). Even though the clear
connection between brand awareness and buying has long been questioned within consumer behaviour theory (e.g. Wicker, 1969), the assumption dominates
within the branding field (Aaker, 1996; Kapferer, 1992). In the branding literature,
it is even suggested that the causal link between attitude and behaviour is stronger
than ever, since consumption on the expressive level is mainly a matter of attitude
(Aaker, 1996). By infusing products with emotional, aesthetic and ideological
values, the idea is to create brands that differentiate the products beyond their
immediate functional value. In line with most consumer behaviour theories,
branding is regarded as a strategy for creating positive attitudes that ultimately will
generate the desired outcome: a consumer purchase. Chaudhuri and Holbrook
(2001) argue that brand trust and brand affect determine purchase loyalty. This is
to say that consumers who trust brands are more prone to buying a product of that
brand. Brands thus carry value, and thereby they are to be regarded and managed
as equity. The reason that brands are conceptualized in economic terms is that
brand theory rests on the assumption that awareness, associations and loyalty ultimately leads to action in the form of purchase.
For decades, scholars of consumer behaviour have sought to refine models for
consumer decision making and consumer choice (e.g. Bettman, 1979; Holmberg,
1996; Holmberg, 2004; Howard, 1989). By focusing on relations such as: brand
recognition to attitude (Engel et al., 1990); involvement to purchase (Linderstam,
1989); and information to brand confidence (Howard, 1989), a theory underpinning the field of buying behaviour has emerged. The theory implies a hierarchy
of cause-effects where a particular behaviour, such as purchasing, is preceded by
information processing. Hence, the information processing ends in a result such
as brand recognition; an attitude to that brand; a confidence in it; an intention to
purchase; and finally the purchase itself.
The buying behaviour theory thus suggests that there is a match between the
information processed and the purchasing behaviour. For instance, negative
information about a company results in a more negative attitude to the brand,
which leads to a lower propensity to buy products of that brand. Conversely,
410
Downloaded from http://mtq.sagepub.com by Luiz Eduardo Amaro on January 5, 2009
411
Downloaded from http://mtq.sagepub.com by Luiz Eduardo Amaro on January 5, 2009
brands have become cultural icons that are detached from any physical need or
object (Holt, 2004; Schroeder and Salzer-Mrling, 2005).
While the functional value normally is regarded as a products physical or
material qualities, the expressive side of a brand is in general referring to the
immaterial properties and images that the brand carries. Featherstone (1991;
1994) has argued that everyday life is undergoing a process of aestheticization.
This is to say that the symbolic and aesthetic appearance of goods and services
become the primary means of everyday experience. Consumption in such a late
modern version is thus mainly an expressive activity where goods are consumed in
terms of their sign-value rather than functional characteristics. In the form of
images or signs, brands are being consumed as aesthetic expressions. Late modern
markets are thus first and foremost said to be arenas for the production and consumption of signs (Baudrillard, 1981, 1988).
Consumption can thus be understood as an activity on the expressive level,
where signs can be used and re-used in an expressive conversation detached from
the physical products (Salzer-Mrling and Strannegrd, 2004). The direct functions of objects cannot easily be changed. For instance, a football boot cannot be
replaced by a hamburger. But on the sign-value level, objects can be substituted
infinitely. Brands, no matter which object they denote, could be signs of prestige,
status or youth. Hence, consumption is no longer a matter of using substance
only, but also a hedonistic, expressive game (see e.g. Pavitt, 2000). This is to say
that production and consumption can be treated as flip sides of a coin. This in turn
leads to a new area for study: the relationship between expressive corporate brand
builders and the consumers or, rather, co-producers of the brands. Along
with Firat and Venkatesh (1995), it could be argued that when corporations are
turning into expressive brand builders, consumption and buying behaviour turn
expressive as well. And when corporations are producing a moralized discourse,
the co-producing consumers take part in that discourse.
A moralized brandscape
The branded landscape, or brandscape, can be regarded as a culture or a market
where brands and brand-related items such as signs and logos increasingly dominate everyday life. The idea of the brandscape is closely related to Appadurais conceptualization of the various flows of meanings and symbols that form the global
world (see Appadurai, 1996). As argued by Sherry (1998), the consumers take an
active part in the creation of meaning in the brandscape:
The brandscape is a material and symbolic environment that consumers build with marketplace
products, images, and messages, that they invest with local meaning, and whose totemic
significance largely shapes the adaptation consumers make to the modern world. (Sherry, 1998:
112)
With the term brandscape, we refer to the social, economic and cultural landscape where brands are produced and consumed, not only as markers of identifi-
412
Downloaded from http://mtq.sagepub.com by Luiz Eduardo Amaro on January 5, 2009
413
Downloaded from http://mtq.sagepub.com by Luiz Eduardo Amaro on January 5, 2009
414
Downloaded from http://mtq.sagepub.com by Luiz Eduardo Amaro on January 5, 2009
studies intriguing. Of particular interest for our analysis is how the studies results
can be interpreted as: illustrating consumers abilities to distinguish between
brands functional and expressive values; and questioning the assumed clear-cut
causal connection between branding and buying behaviour. In the next section we
will make a brief summary of the results in the two studies which will then be used
as a starting point for our theoretical discussion.
The consumers in the study find brands helpful in the abundance of products and
services offered. The results show that consumers in many cases have formed a
personal relationship with the brand and are therefore willing to neglect transgressions that the brand may be guilty of. Negative issues such as child labour and
low wages can be put aside or forgotten. The study suggests that Consumers
prefer to forgive and forget and have the capability to disconnect the political self
from the consuming self. Bad corporate behaviour becomes an issue only in cases
when consumers are personally affected. An illustrative quote from an English
interviewee in the Research International Observer study reads:
I know of Nestl and their milk powder scandals. But after all, a Kit Kat does not change the
situation in the world.
415
Downloaded from http://mtq.sagepub.com by Luiz Eduardo Amaro on January 5, 2009
In short, the study suggests that young consumers are well aware that the brand
does not live up to its ideals. They may even have a negative attitude toward the
brand, but yet they buy products of that brand. The respondents demonstrate a
high awareness regarding the brands moral claims but seem to disconnect them
from the product they are buying (Baker and Sterenberg, 2002; Baker et al., 2003).
416
Downloaded from http://mtq.sagepub.com by Luiz Eduardo Amaro on January 5, 2009
417
Downloaded from http://mtq.sagepub.com by Luiz Eduardo Amaro on January 5, 2009
buying products of the brand. Exploitation of the third world, child labour and
environmental degradation are activities that consumers are aware go hand in
hand with some corporations business-as-usual. Many of the respondents are also
negative towards the brand. Yet this does not stop them from buying products of
that brand.
How is it that consumers might hold a negative attitude towards the brand and
at the same time buy products of the brand? One interpretation could be that the
consumers are hyper-loyal and thus forgive their brands mistakes or shortcomings
(compare with Sderlund, 2000). Another explanation that has been launched is
that super-brands are so dominant and omnipresent that there is little choice left
for customers who want to find alternatives (Klein, 1999). It could also be argued
that consumers are pragmatic, practical, indifferent or aesthetically reflexive in
their use of brands (compare with Lash and Urry, 1994). And finally, according to
postmodern marketing theory, the inconsistency between brand attitude and purchasing behaviour could be understood as an evidence of how consumers subvert
the market by being unpredictable (Firat and Venkatesh, 1995).
Even though all the reasons above might be true, our prime interest is to understand how the separation between buying behaviour and moral attitudes is
managed. So, despite all these explanations, and rather than speculating about
what goes on in the consumers minds, our intention here is instead to analyse
how consumers deal with the expressive and functional levels of brands in their
buying behaviour. How do consumers manage to separate the expressive features
of the brand from the functional dimension of the candy bar or the sneaker?
Through our reading of the surveys we have come to search for new ways to conceptualize consumer patterns in a moralized brandscape.
As has been argued above, the emerging brandscape implies a shift in many
corporations business focus: from function to expression. Corporations are in
many cases separating the manufacturing of material products from the creation
of symbols, and branding and production have become two separate activities
de-coupled from one another. The term de-coupling gained wide recognition within organizational sociology when Meyer and Rowan (1977) presented the argument that formal organizational structures may arise as a reaction to institutional
norms. They argue that institutional rules function as myths which organizations
incorporate in order to gain legitimacy. However, these formal structures are
de-coupled from from activities taking place in the organization. Their main argument is that imposed formal structures have very little to do with actual activity in
organizations, stating that:
Structural elements are only loosely linked to each other and to activities, rules are often
violated, decisions are often unimplemented, or if implemented have uncertain consequences,
technologies are of problematic efficiency, and evaluation and inspection systems are subverted
or rendered so vague as to provide little coordination. (Meyer and Rowan, 1977: 343)
Through the process of de-coupling, organizations are able to cope with external
demands while going on with their business-as-usual (Brunsson, 1989). Decoupling is thus a way to manage and legitimize moral and technical requirements.
418
Downloaded from http://mtq.sagepub.com by Luiz Eduardo Amaro on January 5, 2009
Hence, the brand is not only an imagery repertoire for attracting customers. It can
also be used more broadly as a corporate strategy for creating legitimacy not only
as a financially sound and effective organization on the functional level, but also as
a morally sound and attractive firm on the expressive level (see Salzer-Mrling,
2002). By communicating certain moral values, organizations ceremonially legitimate themselves as being part of the corporate world or the organizational field
(Meyer and Rowan, 1977). The ritual of moral branding can thus be interpreted
as a ceremony that has the objective of placing the organization in the reference
system of corporate signs, where all corporations more or less come to use the
same imagery repertoire in the construction of themselves as socially responsible
citizens.
419
Downloaded from http://mtq.sagepub.com by Luiz Eduardo Amaro on January 5, 2009
420
Downloaded from http://mtq.sagepub.com by Luiz Eduardo Amaro on January 5, 2009
Many interest groups demand that the brand should be ethical and socially
responsible. Even though the criticism of the super-brands generally is directed
towards the substantial level (working conditions, environmental damages, etc.),
corporate response seems to be primarily focused on the image level. The way
corporations respond to the mismatch between function and expression is, however, focused on branding. Negative attitudes, public criticism and mass medial
examinations of the corporate activities are met with new campaigns, more
advertising and better slogans on corporate citizenship, etc. The problem to be
handled is that of expression, not function. Hence, the super-brands are involved
in an escalating production of myths, where the increased criticism of the corporate moral standards is counteracted with more and more branding. The decoupling of function and expression thus appears to be so well established, that
reactions to the former level are handled on the latter.
Conclusions
We started this article by asking how one can explain the phenomenon that a consumer is able to protest against worker exploitation in the third world outside a
Nike outlet and a day later walk in and buy a pair of shoes from the same outlet.
Such misbehaviour challenges both the idea of brands being causally related to
purchasing behaviour, and the postmodern suggestion that consumption is
merely an expressive project. How is it that brands at one and the same time can
be criticized and consumed? The background to this question is the moralized
brandscape in which production and consumption takes place. The moralized
brandscape is a social, economic and cultural landscape where brands are infused
with meaning and ideology (compare with Sherry, 1998; Thompson and Arsel,
2004). It is a landscape where the main focus of production and consumption has
shifted: from function to expression, or from use-value to sign-value (see e.g.
Featherstone, 1994; Firat and Venkatesh, 1995).
Since consumption and production are more and more to be understood as
expressive activities, corporate branding is often regarded as an issue of improving
corporate reputation and asserting the corporations moral standards (see e.g.
Pruzan, 1998). Corporate social responsibility is for instance said to have a clear
impact on buying behaviour (see e.g. Mohr et al., 2001), and the brands ethical
standard has been found to affect the attitude towards the firm strongly (Folkes
and Kamins, 1999). When brands are intimately entwined with our culture and
our identities, any wrong-doings are bound to be met with criticism and protests.
As has been shown by Klein (1999), the double standards of many global companies are constantly subject to scrutiny and anti-corporate activities. On the
expressive sign-level, consumers and producers alike are increasingly engaged in a
moralized discourse.
As has been suggested in the literature on buying behaviour and branding, there
is a causal relationship between attitudes towards the brand and buying behaviour
(see. e.g. Aaker, 1996). However, the results of the two surveys discussed in this
421
Downloaded from http://mtq.sagepub.com by Luiz Eduardo Amaro on January 5, 2009
422
Downloaded from http://mtq.sagepub.com by Luiz Eduardo Amaro on January 5, 2009
References
Aaker, D.A. (1996) Building Strong Brands. New York: The Free Press.
Alvesson, M. (1990) Organization: From Substance to Image? Organization Studies
11(3): 37394.
Appadurai, A. (1996) Modernity at Large. Cambridge, MA: University of Minnesota
Press.
Arndt, J. (1976) Reflections on Research in Consumer Behavior, in B.B. Anderson (ed.)
Advances in Consumer Research 3, pp. 21321. Ann Arbor, MA: Association for
Consumer Research.
Baker, M. and Sterenberg, G. (2002) International Branding: How to Resolve the
Global-Local Dilemma, Market Leader. The Journal of The Marketing Society 19(2):
19.
Baker, M., Sterenberg, G. and Taylor, E. (2003) Managing Global Brands to Meet
Customer Expectations, paper presented at ESOMAR 56th Congress Management,
Accountability and Research. The Quest for the Objective Truth. Prague, September.
Baudrillard, J. (1981) For a Critique of the Political Economy of the Sign. St. Louis: Telos
Press.
Baudrillard, J. (1983) Simulations. New York: Semiotext(e).
Baudrillard, J. (1988) Simulacra and Simulations, in M. Poster (ed.) Jean Baudrillard,
Selected Writings, pp. 16684. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Bennett, P.D. and Kassarjian, H.H. (1972) Foundations of Marketing Series: Consumer
Behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, Inc.
Bettman, J.R. (1979) An Information Processing Theory of Consumer Choice. New York:
Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.
Blumenthal, D. (2004) For the End of Brand Balderdash and the Beginning of a Real,
Journal of Brand Management 11(3): 17781.
Borgerson, J., Magnusson, M.E. and Magnusson, F. (2005) Branding Ethics:
Negotiating Benettons Identity and Image, in J. Schroeder and M. Salzer-Mrling
(eds) Brand Culture, pp. 17185. London: Routledge.
Brunsson, N. (1989) The Organization of Hypocrisy. Talk, Decision and Actions in
Organizations. Chichester: Wiley.
Chaudhuri, A. and Holbrook, M.B. (2001) The Chain of Effects from Brand Trust and
Brand Affect to Brand Performance: The Role of Brand Loyalty, Journal of Marketing
65(2): 8193.
Christensen, L.T. and Cheney, G. (2000) Self-Absorption and Self-Seduction in the
Corporate Identity Game, in M. Schultz, M.J. Hatch and M.H. Larsen (eds) The
Expressive Organization, pp. 24670. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ellen, P., Webb, D. and Mohr, L. (2006) Building Corporate Associations: Consumer
Attributions for Corporate Socially Responsible Programs, Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science 34(2): 14757.
Engel J.F., Blackwell, R.D. and Miniard, P.W. (1990) Consumer Behavior. Fort Worth:
The Dryden Press.
Fan, Y. (2005) Ethical Branding and Corporate Reputation, Corporate Communication
10(4): 34150.
Featherstone, M. (1991) Consumer Culture and Postmodernism. London: Sage.
Featherstone, M. (1994) Kultur, kropp och konsumtion [Culture, Body and Consumption].
Stockholm: Brutus stlings Bokfrlag Symposion.
Firat, A.F. and Venkatesh, A. (1995) Liberatory Postmodernism and the Reenchant-
423
Downloaded from http://mtq.sagepub.com by Luiz Eduardo Amaro on January 5, 2009
424
Downloaded from http://mtq.sagepub.com by Luiz Eduardo Amaro on January 5, 2009
RIO (2002) The 2002 Research International Observer (RIO) Study on Global Brands.
Rotterdam: RIO Netherlands.
Ritzer, G. (1993) The McDonaldization of Society. Newbury Park, CA: Pine Forge Press.
Robertson, T. and Kassarjian, H. (1991). Handbook of Consumer Behavior. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Salzer-Mrling, M. (2002) Expressivt ledarskap, in R. Lind (ed.) Ledning av fretag och
frvaltningar [Expressive Leadership, in Management in Private and Public Organizations]. Stockholm: SNS.
Salzer-Mrling, M. and Strannegrd, L. (2004) Silence of the Brands, European Journal
of Marketing 38(1/2): 22438.
Schroeder, J. and Salzer-Mrling, M. (2005) The Cultural Codes of Branding in J.
Schroeder and M. Salzer-Mrling (eds) Brand Culture, pp. 316. London: Routledge.
Schmitt, B. (1999) Experiential Marketing. New York: The Free Press.
Sen, S., Bhattacharya, C. and Korschun, D. (2006) The Role of Corporate Social
Responsibility in Strengthening Multiple Stakeholder Relationships: A Field
Experiment, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 34(2): 15866.
Sherry, J.F. (1998) The Soul of the Company Store: Nike Town Chicago and the
Emplaced Brandscape, in J.F. Sherry (ed.) ServiceScapes: The Concept of Place in
Contemporary Markets, pp. 30536. Chicago: NTC Business Books.
Sderlund, M. (2000) Den hyperlojala kundenn [The Hyper-loyal Customer], in M.
Sderlund (ed.) I huvudet p kunden [Being the customer], pp. 4669. Malm: Liber.
Thompson, C.J. and Arsel, Z. (2004) The Starbucks Brandscape and Consumers
(Anticorporate) Experiences of Glocalization, Journal of Consumer Research
31(December): 63142.
Wicker, A.W. (1969) Attitudes versus Actions: The Relationship of Verbal and Overt
Behavioural Responses to Attitude Objects, Journal of Social Issues 15(4): 4178.
Windell, K. (2006) Corporate Social Responsibility under Construction. Ideas,
Translations, and Institutional Change. Uppsala University.
425
Downloaded from http://mtq.sagepub.com by Luiz Eduardo Amaro on January 5, 2009