Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
242sij02.qxd
06/02/04
11:03
Page 15
L E S L I E d e C H E R N ATO N Y, F I O N A J . H A R R I S
and G E O R G E C H R ISTODOULI DES
242sij02.qxd
06/02/04
11:03
16
Page 16
T H E S E RV I C E I N D U S T R I E S J O U R N A L
242sij02.qxd
06/02/04
11:03
Page 17
17
242sij02.qxd
06/02/04
11:03
18
Page 18
T H E S E RV I C E I N D U S T R I E S J O U R N A L
METHODOLOGY
242sij02.qxd
06/02/04
11:03
Page 19
19
242sij02.qxd
06/02/04
11:03
Page 20
20
T H E S E RV I C E I N D U S T R I E S J O U R N A L
TABL E 1
HOW RE S E ARCHE RS CONCE P T U A LISE BR A N D EQ U ITY
Aaker [1991]
Keller [1993]
Sharp [1995]
Berry [2000]
Brand loyalty
Perceived quality
242sij02.qxd
06/02/04
11:03
Page 21
21
242sij02.qxd
22
06/02/04
11:03
Page 22
T H E S E RV I C E I N D U S T R I E S J O U R N A L
positive financial impact [Ittner and Larcher, 1998; Krishnan et al., 1999;
Yeung and Ennew, 2000]. Reflecting these benefits, there has been a notable
increase in consumer satisfaction studies [Piercy, 1997].
Satisfaction is conceptualised as an attitude-like judgement after a
purchase, or an interaction with a services provider [Fournier and Mick,
1999]. There has been much research into the antecedents of satisfaction,
i.e. expectations, disconfirmation of expectations, performance, affect and
equity [Szymanski and Henard, 2001]. Developments in the
operationalisation of consumer satisfaction include the American Customer
Satisfaction Index (ACSI), [cf Fornell et al., 1996]. According to ACSI,
consumer satisfaction has three antecedents: perceived quality, perceived
value and customer expectations. ACSI is a powerful indicator of future
performance, having sound psychometric properties as well as the ability to
predict economic returns [Anderson and Fornell, 2000]. Unfortunately,
possibly due to funding limitations, no university in the UK has embarked
on this, forcing us to discard this approach and search for an alternative
satisfaction measurement route.
Our multi-item measure of satisfaction followed that approach of other
services researchers [e.g. Crosby and Stephens, 1987; Westbrook, 1981]. A
gestalt approach was used [cf Oliver, Rust and Varkey, 1997], firstly asking
about overall satisfaction on a five-point semantic differential scale. This
reflects the van Montfort and colleagues [2000] work in financial services
directly asking if respondents were satisfied with the service of the bank as a
whole. Similarly, de Ruyter and Bloemer [1999] adopted the same approach
in extended service settings. Drawing an analogy with Grnroos [2000], that
service quality consists of person-person interactions, plus a technical
outcome, we again followed Crosby and Stephens [1987] and also asked
about consumers degree of satisfaction regarding the sales/service staff and
their purchase satisfaction, based on five-point semantic differential scales.
Both Aaker [1996] and Keller [1993] advocate incorporating brand
associations into measures of brand equity. Having an image component is
wise since when the gap between a brands identity and image becomes
notable, this triggers actions [Dutton and Dukerich, 1991]. However, image
relates to the most recent perception and fluctuates over time; by contrast
reputation is about perceptions of the brand over time and is more stable
[Fombrun and van Riel, 1997]. Image is overly focused on consumers, and
in view of the new models of brand management adopting a more balanced,
stakeholder perspective [e.g. Mitchell, 1997], brand reputation has the
further advantage that it addresses stakeholders views [Smythe, Dorward
and Reback, 1992]. As such we incorporate brand reputation into our
measurement scale.
A brands reputation is a perceptual asset in stakeholders minds about
242sij02.qxd
06/02/04
11:03
Page 23
23
242sij02.qxd
06/02/04
11:03
24
Page 24
T H E S E RV I C E I N D U S T R I E S J O U R N A L
Consumer-based equity
Conative brand loyalty: consider using other products
Conative brand loyalty: prepared to recommend brand to other people
Affective brand loyalty: liking for brand
Overall satisfaction with the brand
Satisfaction with staff
Satisfaction with the product(s)
Brand reputation
Component 1
0.107
0.167
0.211
0.211
0.188
0.195
0.183
242sij02.qxd
06/02/04
11:03
Page 25
25
for 60.8 per cent of the variance, a level acceptable in social sciences [Hair
et al., 1998]. Table 2 presents the component score coefficient matrix and
enables researchers to measure the consumer-based equity of financial
services brands. One simple way is by multiplying consumers assessments
of each characteristic by the relevant component score coefficient and
aggregating these across all seven items.
Having developed this measure, we assessed its reliability and validity,
as next explained.
Assessing Reliability and Validity
The seven items scales reliability was assessed using Cronbachs alpha,
which with a value of 0.88 exceeded the accepted lower limit of 0.7
[Robinson and Shaver, 1973; Robinson, Shaver and Wrightsman, 1991).
Furthermore, the inter-item correlations were all 0.3 or above, as
recommended in the rule-of-thumb described by Hair and colleagues
[1998]. The consumer-based equity measure was therefore deemed to
demonstrate satisfactory reliability.
Hair and colleagues [1998] recommended that the results be validated by
performing a confirmatory factor analysis on either a split sample or a new
sample. Given that the principal components analysis suggested a single
factor solution, performing a confirmatory factor analysis was
inappropriate. Nevertheless, the stability of the factor model results was
tested by splitting the sample and performing a separate principal
components analysis on each. Comparison of the two factor matrices was
used to assess the robustness of the factor solution across the overall sample
[cf. Hair et al., 1998]. The sample was split into 299 and 301 respondents
TABL E 3
C O M PA R I S O N O F T H E C O M P O N E N T S C O R E C O E F F I C I E N T M AT R I X F O R
P R I N C I PA L C O M P O N E N T S A N A LY S I S O F T H E C O N S U M E R - B A S E D E Q U I T Y
ME AS URE BE T WE E N T HE COMBI NED A N D SPLIT SA MPLES
Consumer-based equity
Conative brand loyalty: consider
using other products
Conative brand loyalty: prepared
to recommend brand to
other people
Affective brand loyalty:
liking for brand
Overall satisfaction with
the brand
Satisfaction with staff
Satisfaction with the product(s)
Brand reputation
Component 1
(combined sample)
Component 1
(split sample A)
Component 1
(split sample B)
0.107
0.092
0.119
0.167
0.169
0.164
0.211
0.217
0.204
0.211
0.188
0.195
0.183
0.217
0.198
0.200
0.186
0.206
0.180
0.190
0.180
242sij02.qxd
06/02/04
11:03
26
Page 26
T H E S E RV I C E I N D U S T R I E S J O U R N A L
TABL E 4
C O M P O N E NT S CORE COE F F I CI E NT MAT R IX FO R TH E R E-RU N PRIN CIPA L
C O M P O N E NT S ANALYS I S OF T HE CONS UMER-BA SED EQ U ITY MEA SU RE WITH
OUT L I E RS OMITTED
Consumer-based equity
Conative brand loyalty: consider using other products
Conative brand loyalty: prepared to recommend brand to other people
Affective brand loyalty: liking for brand
Overall satisfaction with the brand
Satisfaction with staff
Satisfaction with the product(s)
Brand reputation
Component 1
0.094
0.159
0.217
0.217
0.194
0.203
0.192
242sij02.qxd
06/02/04
11:03
Page 27
27
personality characteristics were like (i) their ideal self-concept, and (ii) their
actual self-concept (measured on 5-point scales). This data was collected as
part of the survey. When forced with competing brands, consumers prefer
brands whose perceived personality match their personality since this allows
consumers to express their actual self [Belk, 1988] or ideal self [Malhotra,
1988]. One would therefore expect a positive significant correlation between
the consumer-based equity scores and the two measures of the corporate
brands personality characteristics. In both cases, significant correlations
were obtained. The consumer-based equity measure was significantly
correlated with consumers mean rating for ideal self-concept (r=0.942;
N=10; p=0.000). The better the consumer-based equity score, the more
consumers rated the corporate brands personality characteristics as being
similar to their ideal self-concept. Similarly, the consumer-based equity
measure was significantly correlated with consumers mean rating for actual
self-concept (r=0.942; N=10; p=0.000). These results suggest that the
measure demonstrated acceptable convergent validity.
The data collected did not enable the measures discriminant validity to
be assessed.
Nomological validity was assessed by correlating the corporate brands
consumer-based equity scores with their increase in sales for 1998 and
1999, when the study was undertaken. We used this as a guide since we
excluded short-term financial measures, as earlier discussed, and were
measuring brand performance based on consumer-based equity. Thus if our
consumer-based equity measure has nomological validity, it should predict
increased sales. Sales data was obtained from the FAME financial database
and annual changes calculated. A significant correlation was obtained
between the measure of consumer-based equity and the increase in sales
(r=0.912; N= 10; p=0.004). This suggested the brand performance measure
provides satisfactory nomological validity.
D I S C U S S I O N A N D M A N A G E R I A L I M P L I C AT I O N S
The stimulus for this research was the challenge of designing a brand
performance measure suitable for a variety of unrelated categories of
financial services corporate brands. The article contributes to advancing
knowledge through showing the use of a process to design a brand
performance measure and also through providing details about the
measure. While the study was based on financial services brands, the
process is suitable when designing brand performance measures in other
services sectors. Furthermore, in view of the paucity of research on
services branding, it extends knowledge about services branding.
The starting point was realising that there is no standard measure of
242sij02.qxd
28
06/02/04
11:03
Page 28
T H E S E RV I C E I N D U S T R I E S J O U R N A L
242sij02.qxd
06/02/04
11:03
Page 29
29
We have shown how a valid and reliable brand performance measure has
been devised for financial services brands and how this process could be
used across other services sectors. Adopting Churchills [1979] paradigm
has provided a rigorous framework for developing this measure. Based on
242sij02.qxd
30
06/02/04
11:03
Page 30
T H E S E RV I C E I N D U S T R I E S J O U R N A L
this, three key variables, namely brand loyalty, consumer satisfaction and
reputation have emerged as indicators of brand performance.
REFERENC E S
Aaker, D., 1991, Managing Brand Equity, New York: The Free Press.
Aaker, D., 1996, Building Strong Brands, New York: The Free Press.
Aaker, D. and A. Biel, 1993, Brand Equity & Advertising: Advertisings Role in Building
Strong Brands, Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Aaker, D. and E. Joachimsthaler, 2000, Brand Leadership, New York: The Free Press.
Agarwal, M. and V. Rao, 1996, An Empirical Comparison of Consumer-Based Measures of
Brand Equity, Marketing Letters, Vol.7, No.3, pp.23747.
Ambler, T., 2000, Marketing and the Bottom Line, London: FT Prentice Hall.
Anderson, E.W. and C. Fornell, 2000, Foundations of the American Customer Satisfaction
Index, Total Quality Management, Vol.11, No.7, pp.S86982.
Barwise, P., 1993, Brand Equity: Snark or Boojum? International Journal of Research in
Marketing, Vol.10, No.1, pp.93105.
Barwise, P. and A. Ehrenberg, 1985, Consumer Beliefs and Brand Usage, Journal of the
Market Research Society, Vol.27, pp.8193.
Belk, R., 1988, Possession and the Extended Self Journal of Consumer Research, Vol.2,
No.2, pp.13968.
Berry, L.L., 2000, Cultivating Service Brand Equity, Journal of the Academy of Marketing
Science, Vol.28, No.1, pp.12837.
Blackston, M., 1992, Observations: Building Brand Equity by Managing the Brands
Relationships, Journal of Advertising Research, Vol.32, No.3, pp.7983.
Blattberg, R. and J. Deighton, 1996, Manage Marketing by the Customer Equity Test,
Harvard Business Review, July-August, pp.13644.
Chaudhuri, A. and M.B. Holbrook, B. 2001, The Chain of Effects from Brand Trust and
Brand Affect to Brand Performance: The Role of Brand Loyalty, Journal of Marketing,
Vol.65, No.2, pp.8193.
Chisnall, P., 2001, Marketing Research, Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill.
Churchill, G., 1979, A Paradigm for Developing Better Measures of Marketing Constructs,
Journal of Marketing Research, Vol.16, No.1, pp.6473.
Crosby, L. and N. Stephens, 1987, Effects of Relationship Marketing on Satisfaction,
Retention and Prices in the Life Insurance Industry, Journal of Marketing Research,
Vol.24, No.4, pp.40411.
Cyert, R. and J. March, 1963, A Behavioural Theory of the Firm, Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice-Hall.
DallOlmo Riley, F., A. Ehrenberg, S. Castleberry, P. Barwise and N. Barnard, 1997, The
Variability of Attitudinal Repeat-Rates, International Journal of Research in Marketing,
Vol.14, No.5, pp.43750.
Day, G. and L. Fahey, 1988, Valuing Marketing Strategies Journal of Marketing, Vol.52,
No.3, pp.4557.
Day, G. and P. Nedungadi, 1994, Managerial Representations of Competitive Advantage,
Journal of Marketing, Vol.58, No.2, pp.3144.
de Chernatony, L. and M. McDonald, 1998, Creating Powerful Brands, Oxford: ButterworthHeinemann.
de Chernatony, L., F. DallOlmo Riley and F. Harris, 1998, Criteria to Assess Brand
Success, Journal of Marketing Management, Vol.14, No.7, pp.76581.
de Chernatony, L., K. Daniels and G. Johnson, 1993, A Conative Perspective on Managers
Perceptions of Competition, Journal of Marketing Management, Vol.9, No.4, pp.37381.
de Ruyter, K. and J. Bloemer, 1999, Customer Loyalty in Extended Service Settings,
International Journal of Service Industry Management, Vol.10, No.3, pp.32036.
242sij02.qxd
06/02/04
11:03
Page 31
31
Deshpande, R. and F. Webster, 1989, Organizational Culture and Marketing: Defining the
Research Agenda, Journal of Marketing, Vol.53, No.1, pp.315.
Dick, A.S. and K. Basu, 1994, Customer Loyalty: Toward an Integrated Conceptual
Framework, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol.22, No.2, pp.99-113.
Dowling, G., 1994, Corporate Reputations, London: Kogan Page.
Doyle, P., 2000, Value-Based Marketing, Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
Drolet, A. and D. Morrison, 2001, Do We Really Need Multiple-Item Measures in Service
Research?, Journal of Service Research, Vol.3, No.3, pp.196204.
Dutton, J. and Dukerich, J. 1991, Keeping an Eye on the Mirror: Image and Identity in
Organizational Adaptation, Academy of Management Journal, Vol.34, No.3, pp.51754.
Dyson, P., A. Farr and N. Hollis, 1996, Understanding Measuring and Using Brand Equity,
Journal of Advertising Research, Vol.36, No.6, pp.921.
Farquhar, P.H., 1990, Managing Brand Equity, Journal of Advertising Research, AugustSeptember, RC7-12.
Feldwick, P., 1996, What is Brand Equity Anyway, and How Do You Measure It?, Journal
of the Market Research Society, Vol.38, No.2, pp.85104.
Fitzgerald, L., R. Johnston, S. Brignall, R. Silvestro and C. Voss, 1991, Performance
Measurement in Service Businesses, London: CIMA.
Fombrun, C., 1996, Reputation: Realizing Value from Corporate Image, Boston, MA: Harvard
Business School Press.
Fombrun, C., 1998, Indices of Corporate Reputation: An Analysis of Media Rankings and
Social Monitors Ratings, Corporate Reputation Review, Vol.1, No.4, pp.32740.
Fombrun, C. and V. Rindova, 1996, Whos Tops and Who Decides? The Social Construction
of Corporate Reputations, Working Paper, New York University, Stern School of
Business.
Fombrun, C. and C. van Riel, 1997, The Reputational Landscape, Corporate Reputation
Review, Vol.1, No.1, pp.513.
Fombrun, C., N. Gardberg and J. Sever, 2000, The Reputation QuotientSM: A MultiStakeholder Measure of Corporate Reputation, The Journal of Brand Management, Vol.7,
No.4, pp.24155.
Fornell, C., M.D. Johnson, E.W. Anderson, J. Cha and B.E. Bryant, 1996, The American
Customer Satisfaction Index: Nature, Purpose, and Findings, Journal of Marketing,
Vol.60, No.4, pp.718.
Fournier, S. and D.G. Mick, 1999, Rediscovering Satisfaction, Journal of Marketing,
Vol.63, No.4, pp.523.
Fryxell, G. and J. Wang, 1994, The Fortune Corporate Reputation Index: Reputation for
What?, Journal of Management, Vol.20, No.1, pp.114.
Gardberg, N. and C. Fombrun, 2002, The Global Reputation Quotient Project First Steps
towards a Cross-Nationally Valid Measure of Corporate Reputation, Corporate
Reputation Review, Vol.4, No.4, pp.303307.
Grnroos, C., 2000, Service Management and Marketing, Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
Hair, J.F., R.E. Anderson, R.L. Tatham and W.C. Black, 1998, Multivariate Data Analysis, 5th
ed., Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Hall, R. 1992, The Strategic Analysis of Intangible Resources, Strategic Management
Journal, Vol.13, pp.13542.
Harrison, T., 2000, Financial Services Marketing, Harlow: Financial Times/Prentice Hall.
Herbig, P. and J. Milewicz, 1993, The Relationship of Reputation and Credibility to Brand
Success, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol.10, No.1, pp.510.
Ittner, C. and D. Larker, 1998, Are Nonfinancial Measures Leading Indicators of Financial
Performance? An Analysis of Customer Satisfaction, Journal of Accounting Research,
Vol.35, pp.135.
Jacoby, J. and D.B. Kyner, 1973, Brand Loyalty Versus Repeat Purchasing, Journal of
Marketing Research, Vol.10, No.1, pp.19.
Jacoby, J. and R. Chestnut, 1978, Brand Loyalty, New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Kamakura, W.A. and G.J. Russell, 1993, Measuring Brand Value with Scanner Data,
International Journal of Research in Marketing, Vol.10, No.1, pp.922
242sij02.qxd
32
06/02/04
11:03
Page 32
T H E S E RV I C E I N D U S T R I E S J O U R N A L
242sij02.qxd
06/02/04
11:03
Page 33
33
Sharp, B. 1995, Brand Equity and Market-based Assets of Professional Service Firms,
Journal of Professional Services Marketing, Vol.13, No.1, pp.313.
Simon, C J. and M.W. Sullivan, 1993, The Measurement and Determinants of Brand Equity:
A Financial approach, Marketing Science, Vol.12, No.1, pp.2852.
Smythe, J., C. Dorward and J. Reback, 1992, Corporate Reputation, London: Century Books.
Srivastava, R. and A. Shocker, 1991, Brand Equity: A Perspective on its Meaning and
Measurement, Marketing Science Institute Working Paper, Cambridge, MA, pp.91124.
Srivastava, R., T. Shervani and L. Fahey, 1998, Market-Based Assets and Shareholder Value:
A Framework for Analysis, Journal of Marketing, Vol.62, No.1, pp.218.
Stewart, T., 1997, A Satisfied Customer is not Enough, Fortune, 21 July, pp.11213.
Szymanski, D. and D. Henard, 2001, Customer satisfaction: A Meta-Analysis of the
Empirical Evidence, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol.29, No.1,
pp.1635.
van Montfort, K., E. Masurel and I. van Rijn, 2000, Service Satisfaction: An Empirical
Analysis of Consumer Satisfaction in Financial Services, The Service Industries Journal,
Vol.20, No.3, pp.8094.
van Riel, A., J. Lemmink and H. Ouwersloot, 2001, Consumer Evaluations of Service Brand
Extensions, Journal of Service Research, Vol.3, No.3, pp.22031.
Vazquez, R., A. del Rio and V. Inglesias, 2002, Consumer-Based Brand Equity: Development
and Validation of a Measurement Instrument, Journal of Marketing Management,
Vol.18, No.12, pp.2748.
Venkatraman, N. and V. Ramanujam, 1986, Measurement of Business Performance in
Strategy Research: A Comparison of Approaches, Academy of Management Review,
Vol.11, pp.80114.
Wartick, S.L., 1992, The Relationship between Intense Media Exposure and Change in
Corporate Reputation, Business and Society, Vol.31, pp.3349.
Weigelt, K. and C. Camerer, 1988, Reputation and Corporate Strategy: A Review of Recent
Theory and Application, Strategic Management Journal, Vol.9, No.5, pp.44354.
Westbrook, R.A., 1981, Sources of Consumer Satisfaction with Retail Outlets, Journal of
Retailing, Vol.57, No.3, pp.6885.
Woods, R.J., 1998, Can there Be a Common Definition for Brand Equity?, Journal of
Modern Business, available from: <http://www.dcpress.com/jmb/page16.HTML>
(accessed 25 March 2002).
Yeung, M. and C. Ennew, 2000, From Customer Satisfaction to Profitability, Journal of
Strategic Marketing, Vol.8, No.4, pp.31326.
Yoo, B. and N. Donthu, 2001, Developing and Validating a Multidimensional Consumerbased Brand Equity Scale, Journal of Business Research, Vol.52, pp.114.
Yoon, E., H.G. Guffey and V. Kijewski, 1993, The Effects of Information and Company
Reputation on Intentions to Buy a Business Service, Journal of Business Research,
Vol.27, pp.21528.
Young & Rubicam, 1994, BrandAssetTM Valuator, London: Young & Rubicam.
Zeithaml, V. and M.J. Bitner, 1996, Services Marketing, New York: McGraw Hill.