Even though the number of brands has strongly increased in recent years, only a few managed to endow themselves with significant brand loyalty. Besides the actual proprietary brand assets, such as patents and trademarks, other major elements like brand loyalty, perceived quality, brand associations, and others, underlie brand equity. A successful brand strategy must be based on creating brand loyalty. For achieving this goal consumers must be classified on a loyalty basis, while marketing strategies and mixes must be shaped accordingly.brand equity, brand loyalty, loyalty degree, brand strategy.

Gica Oana Adriana

Moisescu Ovidiu Ioan

English

Research Papers in Economics

 
  83 
Management – Marketing - Tourism 
AN ANALYSIS OF THE BRAND LOYALTY BASED CONSUMER TYPOLOGY 
Assist. Ph.D Student Moisescu Ovidiu Ioan  
Ph.D Student  Gic  Oana Adriana  
Babe -Bolyai University 
Faculty of Economics and Business 
Administration  
Cluj-Napoca, Romania 
 Abstract: Even though the number of brands has strongly increased in 
recent years, only a few managed to endow themselves with significant 
brand loyalty. Besides the actual proprietary brand assets, such as patents 
and trademarks, other major elements like brand loyalty, perceived quality, 
brand associations, and others, underlie brand equity. A successful brand 
strategy must be based on creating brand loyalty. For achieving this goal 
consumers must be classified on a loyalty basis, while marketing 
strategies and mixes must be shaped accordingly. 
Keywords: brand equity, brand loyalty, loyalty degree, brand strategy. 
The American Marketing Association defines brand loyalty as “the situation in 
which a consumer generally buys the same manufacturer-originated product or service  
repeatedly over time rather than buying from multiple suppliers within the category” or 
“the degree to which a consumer consistently purchases the same brand within a   
product class”. Trying to define the term, David A. Aaker considers that brand loyalty 
“reflects how likely a customer will be to switch to another brand, especially when that 
brand makes a change in price, product features, its communication or distribution 
programs” (Aaker, 1992). Brand loyalty represents the core of a brand’s equity. Daryl 
Travis considers that “creating customer loyalty is neither strategic nor tactic”, but 
rather “the ultimate objective and meaning of brand equity”, adding that “brand loyalty 
is brand equity” (Travis, 2000).  
A successful brand strategy must be based on creating brand loyalty. For 
achieving this goal, consumers must be classified on a loyalty basis and then the 
marketing mix must be shaped according to this classification. 
A first approach of classifying consumers considering their degree of loyalty is 
that of George H. Brown (Kotler, 2002), according to whom buyers can be divided into 
four groups: hard-core loyals (always buy the same brand), split loyals (loyal to two or 
three brands), shifting loyals (loyal to one brand for a period of time, but easily shifting 
from one brand to another, due to certain advantages offered by the new brand), and 
switchers (show no loyalty to any brand, switching the brand with almost any buying 
situation). Each market consists of a different number of these four types of buyers. For 
example, a brand-loyal market  has a high percentage of hard-core loyals. In such 
markets, entering or increasing market share are very difficult tasks. Still, brand loyalty 
must be carefully interpreted as it may actually reflect habit, indifference, a low price, a 
high switching cost, or the non-availability of other brands. 
A second approach is that of David A. Aaker (Aaker, 1991) who sees five 
levels of brand loyalty and groups customers accordingly into a loyalty pyramid (fig.1):  
  84 
Revista Tinerilor Economi ti 
a) The first level represents non loyal buyers who are completely indifferent to 
brands, each brand being perceived to be adequate if the price is accepted. 
b) The second level includes satisfied or at least not dissatisfied buyers with no 
dimension of dissatisfaction sufficient enough to stimulate a change, especially if that 
change involves effort. These customers can be vulnerable to competitors that can 
create a perceived benefit in the case of switching. 
c) The third level consists of satisfied customers with switching costs (loss of 
time, money, or acquired loyalty advantages, performance risks associated with 
switching etc.). In this case, competitors must create an inducement or incentive to 
switch by offering a benefit large enough to compensate the switching costs. 
d) The fourth level contains customers who truly like the brand and have an 
emotional attachment to the brand, based upon associations such as a symbol, a set of 
use experiences, or a high perceived quality. The emotional attachment’s reason is not 
clearly identifiable as sometimes just the fact that there has been a long term 
relationship can create a powerful affect. 
e) The fifth level represents committed customers, proud to have discovered and 
used the brand, and to whom the brand is very important both functionally a as an 
expression of their personality. The value of this category of customers stays in the 
impact they have upon others through their recommendations. 
 
Figure no 1: The loyalty pyramid 
 
Considering the level of involvement and that of perceived differences between 
brands, Henry Assael (Kotler, 2002) identifies four types of consumers (fig.2): 
a) Complex loyals firstly do research, then develop beliefs and attitudes about 
the brand, and finally make a thoughtful choice. Marketers should educate these 
consumers about the brand’s attributes, differentiate and describe the brand’s features, 
and motivate sales people to influence the brand choice. 
b) Dissonance loyals shop around and buy fairly quickly, as they may consider 
most brands in a given price range to be the same, even though expensive and self-
expressive. After buying, they experience dissonance noticing certain disquieting 
features or hearing favorable things about other brands, but seek information that 
  
Likes the brand 
Satisfied - with switching 
costs
Habitual - with no reason to change 
Switcher - price sensitive – indifferent - with no brand 
loyalty
Committed 
to the brand  
  85 
Management – Marketing - Tourism 
supports their choice. In the case of these consumers, marketers should supply 
evaluations that help them feel good about their brand choices. 
c) Habitual loyals make decisions based on brand familiarity. They keep 
buying the same brand out of habit as they are passive recipients of information 
conveyed by advertising. In the case of these consumers, marketers should try to 
dominate shelf spaces, keep shelves stocked, and run frequent reminder ads. 
d) Variety-seekers switch brands for the sake of variety rather than 
dissatisfaction. These consumers have some beliefs about brands, choose brands with 
little evaluation, and mostly evaluate them during consumption. In the case of these 
buyers, marketers could offer lower prices, coupons, free samples etc., but should 
constantly try to reconfigure the brand’s features so as to offer something new etc. 
 
    Involvement 
    High Low 
Many 
and/or 
significant 
Complex loyals  Variety-
seekers  Perceived 
differences  Few 
and/or not 
significant 
Dissonance 
loyals 
Habitual 
loyals 
Figure no 2: Involvement / perceived differences based loyalty types 
 
Brand loyalty has also been conceptualized as an interaction of attitude and 
behavior. Dick and Basu (Dick and Basu, 1994) argue that loyalty is determined by the 
strength of the relationship between relative attitude and repeat patronage. On the basis 
of attitude-behavior relationship, they propose four types of brand loyalty (fig. 3). The 
“spurious loyalty” and “no loyalty” categories occur under low relative attitude that 
might be indicative of a recent introduction and/or an inability to communicate distinct 
advantages, or may be due to the dynamics of a specific market, where most competing 
brands are seen as similar, and it may be difficult to create a high relative attitude. 
 
  Repeat  Patronage 
   High  Low 
High  Loyalty  Latent loyalty  Relative 
Attitude  Low  Spurious 
loyalty 
No 
loyalty 
Figure no 3: Attitude / behavior based loyalty types 
 
Rowley and Daves (Rowley and Daves, 2000) observe that in the previous 
loyalty typology, Dick and Basu’s category of no loyalty is seen to relate to customers 
whose repeat patronage and relative attitudes are low, but not necessarily negative, 
meaning that this category includes customers who make infrequent purchases or 
potential customers. Non-loyals may exhibit this trait as they have no particular interest 
in the brand, have a negative orientation towards a brand or have a positive orientation 
towards a competing brand. Thus, Rowley and Daves propose that non-loyal consumers 
be differentiated on the basis of: repeat patronage or intent to continue shopping, and 
relative attitude as demonstrated through recommendations made to others, from 
inertial (associated with behavior and attitude which is relatively passive, and not likely  
  86 
Revista Tinerilor Economi ti 
to influence others and which may or may not lead to purchase) to negative (concerned 
with strong negative attitudes, or behaviors which seek to undermine a brand) (fig. 4): 
a) Disengaged loyals are neutral and uninterested. They have never been 
customers because they have no awareness, the product is not relevant to them or the 
product is not within their perception of affordability. Yet, these circumstances may 
change and they may have potential for being customers in the future. 
Disengaged loyals need to be re-engaged with the brand. Marketing 
communications that are likely to be successful focus on promotion. Customer 
awareness may need to be enhanced by offering free samples, and other promotions 
which encourage these customers to sample the product again may be important. 
b) Disturbed loyals are existing and continuing customers, who are suffering a 
temporary perturbation in their loyalty status, and are in the state of questioning 
previously assumptions about a brand, because they had a negative experience with the 
brand, or have an unfavorable comparison with other brands, or were exposed to 
promotion of competitive brands, which tempt them to try alternatives. These customers 
could be encouraged or enticed to consider re-commitment to the brand, provided they 
are assisted to see past their negative experience. 
Disturbed loyals need to be re-captured. They are susceptible to promotional 
endeavors such as attractive packages and new products of competitors. Organizations 
should respond by benchmarking with competitors’ products. Recovery procedures 
such as complaints procedures, suggestion boxes, customer service and reimbursements 
may be appropriate.  
c) Disenchanted loyals are customers who used to be loyal, but who have 
become less so. Their behavior is such that they do not at present purchase the brand 
and are unlikely to do so in the future. Their attitude has ceased to be positive towards 
the brand but often remains neutral, rather than negative, due to previous positive 
experiences with the brand. Disenchantment arises because of a negative experience 
with the brand, a positive experience with a competitor, or changes in the match 
between customer requirements and the product range associated with the brand. 
Disenchanted customers are susceptible to strategies similar to those used for 
disturbed loyals, with the difference that the opportunity for addressing specific 
incidents has passed. 
d) Disruptive loyals are previous customers, who have strong negative attitudes 
and behaviors in respect of the brand. They maintain negative views on the brand and 
are likely to communicate these to others, possibly vociferously. 
Disruptive customers are not likely to be converted into loyal customers again. 
The focus must be on negating the effect of any negative aspect on brand image that 
these customers can achieve, either in the media, and through pressure groups, or by 
word of mouth. In order to be successful in this endeavor, a business needs to 
understand where any earlier major weaknesses or flaws in product performance and 
customer service lie, to eliminate these, and to demonstrate that any major problems 
have been eliminated. 
    Behavior 
   Inertial  Negative 
Inertial  Disengaged  Disenchanted 
Attitude 
Negative  Disturbed  Disruptive 
Figure no 4: Types of non-loyalty driven behavior  
  87 
Management – Marketing - Tourism 
Finally, it is useful from a marketing perspective to see how brand loyalty 
evolved along the time. Thus, Bennett and Rundle-Thiele (Bennett and Rundle-Thiele, 
2005) identify five distinct brand loyalty eras: 
1) The birth of brand loyalty (1870–1914), when products quality varied widely 
and brands made products clearly identifiable. Brands were initially introduced as a 
means of assisting consumers to distinguish between available products. 
2) The golden era of brand loyalty (1915-1929), when customers perceived 
improved quality of brands while retailers were enthusiastic about the increased sales 
resulting from brands. Brand recall was high and many consumers were loyal to a single 
brand of product. As consumers were able to access the brands more widely, familiarity 
and loyalty with the brands increased. Towards the end of this era, however, consumers 
became cynical towards advertising, which they perceived to be tasteless, manipulative 
and deceptive, while its costs were said to inflate prices.  
3) The latent brand loyalty era (1930-1945) was characterized by a scarcity of 
branded products. Brand scarcity meant that many consumers were either rationed or 
required to do without previously purchased brands. Despite the lack of availability, 
brand preference actually increased during this period. Consumers had high levels of 
brand preference, but were not able to actually buy the brand. 
4) The multi-brand loyalty era  (1946-1970), when brands became more 
available, and consumers returned to their old habits and continued to purchase their 
favorite brands. During this period there was an explosion in new products and discount 
retailers emerged changing distribution with a focus on price competition for brands, 
with many introducing private brands. This created great concern for the manufacturer 
brands  and, combined with increasing choice and high product quality, encouraged 
variety-seeking behavior. A common feature in many markets during this era was that 
customers were polygamous, buying several brands. Multi-brand loyalty emerged in the 
middle of the 20th century. Marketers realized that brand loyalty was not a personal 
disposition, but rather it was specific to certain product categories. 
5) The declining loyalty era (1971 – today), when the level of differentiation is 
declining, and hence competing brands are becoming more substitutable, as product 
quality increased and brands became more consistent, while consumers are increasingly 
price-sensitive. This similarity between competing brands, the increasing array of 
competing brands, combined with the increased cynicism towards advertising,  has 
resulted in consumers being both more price-sensitive and rarely loyal to a single brand. 
In markets with little differentiation, customers can be ambivalent towards brands and, 
as a result, they buy different brands. Today most customers include several brands in 
their preferred brand set. There are, however, some brands towards which consumers 
demonstrate intense sole-loyalty, and these brands often have brand communities. 
Brand communities are groups of consumers whose common theme is their usage of a 
particular brand, and the more integrated the consumer is into the brand community, the 
more loyal they are in consuming the brand. 
To conclude, we might say that any brand strategy must use several loyalty 
based consumer typologies in order to identify the appropriate marketing mix best 
shaped to each segment. Furthermore, certain rules generally apply when managing 
brand loyalty, along with specific tactics and strategies established after a detailed 
analysis of the particular situation a brand or its actual and potential clients has. 
Managing brand loyalty implies a periodical assessment of the results obtained through  
  88 
Revista Tinerilor Economi ti 
specific strategies and of the levels of brand loyalty among customers, considering both 
functional and emotional perceived aspects related to the brand. 
REFERENCES 
1.  Aaker, D. A.  Managing Brand Equity: Capitalizing on the Value of 
a Brand Name, The Free Press, New York, 1991 
2.  Bennett, R., 
Rundle-Thiele, S. 
The Brand Loyalty Life Cycle: Implications For 
Marketers, Journal Of Brand Management, Vol.12, 
No.4, 2005 
3.  Dick, A., Basu, K  Customer Loyalty: Toward an Integrated Conceptual 
Framework, Journal of Marketing Science, Vol.22, 
No.2, 1994 
4.  Kotler, P.  Marketing Management, Millenium Edition, Prentice 
Hall Inc., Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, 2002 
5.  Rowley, J., Daves, 
J. 
Disloyalty – A Closer Look at Non-Loyals, Journal of 
Consumer Marketing, Volume 17, No.6, 2000 
6.  Travis, D.  Emotional Branding: How Successful Brands Gain the 
Irrational Edge, Crown Publishing Group, 2000 
 

Customer Loyalty: Toward an Integrated Conceptual Framework,

Disloyalty – A Closer Look at Non-Loyals,

Emotional Branding: How Successful Brands Gain the Irrational Edge, Crown Publishing Group,

Managing Brand Equity: Capitalizing on the Value of a Brand Name,

Marketing Management, Millenium Edition, Prentice Hall Inc., Upper Saddle River,

The Brand Loyalty Life Cycle: Implications For Marketers,

AN ANALYSIS OF THE BRAND LOYALTY BASED CONSUMER TYPOLOGY

AN ANALYSIS OF THE BRAND LOYALTY BASED CONSUMER TYPOLOGY

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Research Papers in Economics