Brand Equity and Brand Equity Scale Developments: A Literature Review

Brand equity is perhaps the most important marketing concept in both academia and practice (Christodoulides and de Chernatony, 2010; Keller and Lehmann, 2006). Academics want to understand how brand equity is measured and what it means for a company, while practitioners want to understand how to influence consumer decisions with respect to different brand purchases in order to increase their brand equity. The term came into use during the late 1980’s; and the importance of conceptualizing, measuring, and managing brand equity has grown rapidly in the eyes of practitioners and academics alike (e.g. Aaker, 1991, 1996; Aaker and Keller, 1990; Ailawadi et al., 2003; Erdem et al., 2006; Keller, 1993, 2003; Netemeyer et al., 2004). This has resulted in “several often-divergent view-points on the dimensions of brand equity, the factors that influence it, the perspectives from which it should be studied, and the ways to measure it” (Ailawadi et al., 2003, p. 1). “Brand Equity is nice – until you have to use it” (Amoroso and Kover, 1992). The authors comment, “the search for brand equity sometimes feels like whacking at a piñata. It is blind; it is hit or miss.” This is the current situation in the marketing literature—the brand equity scales are nice, until you have to use them. The problem is that the majority of research on brand equity has used the same conceptualization of the construct based on previously determined dimensions (i.e., based on the theoretical framework of either Aaker 1991 or Keller 1993). Therefore, we need a new approach of measuring CBBE by tapping into the minds of consumers. This literature review maintains that, given the importance of the concept of brand equity in marketing, as well as the need for the measurement of brand equity, the literature lacks an empirically based consumer-derived/perceived brand equity scale. Since the “brand is the consumer’s idea” (David Ogilvy), the consumer is an active participant or equity partner in the creation of equity for the brand (Blackston, 2000). Therefore, we need to delve inside consumers’ minds in order to understand and manage the intangible equity directly. This leads us to the need to unearth the secrets of the “intangibility” of brand equity. In understanding consumers’ real perceptions of brand equity, we will close the gap between what consumers perceive and what we currently measure as brand equity. Therefore, the aim of future research will be to develop and validate a consumer-perceived, consumer-based brand equity scale. This scale will provide a new conceptualization of brand equity (other than the Aaker’s (1991) and Keller (1993) conceptualizations). Future research will serve as a building block for measuring consumer-perceived, consumer-based brand equity, and will benefit brand research in several ways, such as providing practitioners with a robust CBBE scale derived from consumer minds

TThe Effect of Acculturation on Franchise Relationships

Buyer-seller relationships and franchisee-franchisor relationships, have been studied excessively in the past. One of the causes of the growing importance of research on franchising has been the increased reliance on the service sector in many developed countries. However, the role of the franchisee has not been adequately studied in the literature outside of the buyer-seller relational framework, and especially not in conjunction with the concept of acculturation. Interpersonal relationships are critical in a service industry, offering an important reason to undergo a study of culture and acculturation within this industry, specifically from the franchisee perspective. The purpose of this research is to identify whether franchisee satisfaction with the franchise depends on the acculturation level of the franchisee, and whether this will affect the franchisee’s perception of the franchise brand equity

Consumer Perception of Brand Equity Measurement: a New Scale

Brand equity is perhaps the most important marketing concept in both academia and practice. The term came into use during the late 1980s; and the importance of conceptualizing, measuring, and managing brand equity has grown rapidly in the eyes of practitioners and academics alike. This has resulted in several often-divergent view-points on the dimensions of brand equity, the factors that influence it, the perspectives from which it should be studied, and the ways to measure it. Many different definitions and ways to measure brand equity have been proposed, and most of them are based upon the definition: the added value with which a given brand endows a product. The two most influential conceptualizations of brand equity are Aaker and Keller. Aaker defines brand equity as a set of brand assets and liabilities linked to a brand, its name and symbol, that add to or subtract from the value provided by a product or service to a firm and/or to that firm’s customers. Keller defines consumer-based brand equity (CBBE) as the differential effect of brand knowledge on consumer response to the marketing of the brand. Currently, all research on brand equity has used the same conceptualization of the construct based on previously determined dimensions with no attempt to argue their validity. Given the importance of the concept of brand equity in marketing, as well as the need for the measurement of brand equity, the literature lacks an empirically based consumer-perceived brand equity scale. Since the brand is the consumer’s idea, the consumer is an active participant in the creation of equity for the brand. So if we want to understand and manage the intangible equity directly, we have to have the consumer’s help. This dissertation enriches and strengthens the current knowledge on brand equity by developing a new conceptualization and scale determined by dimensions that consumers perceive. The new Consumer-Perceived Consumer-Based Brand Equity Scale is made up of five dimensions: quality, preference, social influence, sustainability, and leadership. Previous conceptualizations of brand equity have discussed dimensions that are consumer descriptors. Since perceived brand equity is the value that consumers perceive in the brand, this conceptualization presents dimensions that are brand characteristics. The new robust scale contributes both to the theoretical understanding of consumer-based brand equity measurement, as well as assisting managers, or brand ambassadors, in measuring brand equity and developing successful brand strategies. The value of a consumer-perceived, consumer-based brand equity scale suggests a number of new directions for study and elaboration in what is certain to be a compelling stream of research with vast implications for both theory and practice

Is Lululemon Athletica’s Turnabournd Sustainable?

lululemon athletica, Inc. was founded in 1998 by Chip Wilson with a focus on comfortable, innovative athletic wear for women dedicated to a healthy, fit lifestyle. The company went public in 2007 and has been plagued with product and management issues ever since. Expected revenues for the future have been revised downward and growth in the women’s apparel industry is predicted to be -0.4% in the next five years. Can lululemon athletica, Inc. survive? While it has increased its gross revenue in the last two fiscal years, has it turned the corner on past mistakes

An Industry in Decline: Can U.S. Horse Racing Turn the Corner?

Horse tracks once were at the height of their popularity when it was one of the few options for disposable income and use of leisure time. However, horse tracks have declined in popularity, have seen decreased revenue, an aging target market, and are less attractive to younger generations who are tethered to their cell phones. Given the increasing regulation, market trends, and decreasing revenues can the industry turn the corner to a better home stretch

Toxicity and Positivity Across Genders: Feminine, Masculine, and Androgynous Consumer Characteristics

A research model is designed to assess toxic and positive consumer behavior based on masculinity, femininity, and androgyny. New definitions of androgyny are developed, resulting in two types of consumer androgyny – hypo-androgyny and hyper-androgyny. Also, the hypotheses of the research model are assessed using a snowball sample beginning with young consumers enrolled in upper-division marketing classes at a large U.S. university. Results show important insights on the toxicity of certain consumer characteristics not only in individuals who measure high in masculinity, but also those others included in this study who are more feminine or androgynous. Results also offer findings indicating positive consumer characteristics for all consumer classifications of this research

Cross-Cultural Quotient: A Conceptual Development

While much has been written about acculturation, little has been done to understand the factors that would help with this process of acculturation. We explore these factors and develop a measure to capture these factors which we believe determine people’s level of comfort with other cultures. Using a pilot study (N = 158) and main study (N = 444), this research attempts to fill this gap by developing and validating a cross-cultural quotient (CCQ) construct and scale. The results indicate that CCQ is made up of six factors, and these factors vary across behavioral and demographic variables such as proficiency with another language, ownership of a passport and gender. The implications of these findings are discussed in detail in our manuscript