The Effect of Brand Equity on Customer Satisfaction

Anonymous
timer Asked: Dec 16th, 2017
account_balance_wallet $40

Question description

Regarding Tanveer and Lodhi (2016) article "The Effect of Brand Equity on Customer Satisfaction: An Empirical Study Based on David Aaker;s Brand Equite Model"

  • List the hypotheses found in the article.
  • Analyze the hypotheses, making sure to specify the independent and dependent variables.
  • State the level of significance required.
  • Discuss the stated statistical assumptions and limitations.

The following brainstorming questions may be useful as you write your post:

  • Are the variables clearly identified and labeled?
  • Are the hypotheses in null and alternative formats?
  • What statistical assumptions or limitations are discussed?
  • Are visual displays of data provided?
  • What additional strengths and weaknesses can you identify?

The Effect of Brand Equity on Customer Satisfaction: An Empirical Study Based on David Aaker’s Brand Equity Model Zoyia Tanveer* and Rab Nawaz Lodhi** Building brand equity in this competitive environment is a very challenging and difficult task. Companies are now focused on meeting customers’ imminent desires by providing appropriate experiences. This study explores the association between brand equity dimensions, overall brand equity and customer satisfaction based on David Aaker’s brand equity model, in the context of branded shoes market in Pakistan. The data obtained from 75 respondents through a survey was analyzed using multiple regression analysis. The results establish significant association between three dimensions of brand equity, customer satisfaction and overall brand equity. Introduction The concept of brand equity was brought to light initially in the late 1980s. Brand equity is an intangible asset which creates an association between the brand and its consumers. Brand equity can be viewed from three perspectives—financial, brand extension and the consumer. In this research, we focus on the consumer perspective. According to Keller (2003), “the power of a brand lies in what customers have learned, felt, seen, and heard about the brand as a result of their experiences over time.” One way of knowing how customers are familiar with the brand is through brand equity. According to David Aaker, brand equity has four dimensions—brand loyalty, brand awareness, brand association and perceived quality. He states that “brand equity helps the customer to interpret and process information about the product, and also affects the customer’s confidence in the purchase decision and the quality of user experience.” The branded shoes market in Pakistan is facing a challenging environment due to growing competition and increasing number of brands. A large number of branded shoes are competing in the market, and customers are showing increasing preference for branded shoes. Companies are therefore more focused on establishing a strong brand identity for their products in order to attract customers and build customer satisfaction. Brand equity research plays a vital role in helping brand managers to build brand equity and gain competitive advantage. This research studies the association between brand equity dimensions, overall brand equity and customer satisfaction. * MS Scholar, Institute of Business & Management (IB & M), University of Engineering & Technology (UET), Lahore, Pakistan; and is the corresponding author. E-mail: zoyiatanveer606@gmail.com * * Assistant Professor, Institute of Business & Management (IB&M), University of Engineering & Technology (UET), Lahore, Pakistan; and International Certified Licensed Trainer, NVivo Qualitative Research, QSR International Pty Limited, Melbourne, Australia. E-mail: rabnawazlodhi@uet.edu.p © IUPof . All Rights Reserved. The2016 Effect Brand Equity on Customer Satisfaction: An Empirical Study Based on David Aaker’s Brand Equity Model 43 Literature Review Brand Equity Many researchers like Kotler, Keller and Aaker have provided definitions and models about brand equity. David Aaker was the first to introduce the concept of brand equity (during the 1980s). Aaker (1991) described 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.” Farquhar (1989) stated that we can generate brand equity by ‘adding value’ to the product. Keller (1993) introduced the customer-based brand equity model. He defined brand equity as “the differential effect of brand knowledge on consumer response to the marketing of the brand” and highlighted four steps to build and manage a brand. Kapferer (1992) came up with the brand identity prism. Yoo et al. (2000) described brand equity as “the difference in consumer choice between the focal branded product and an unbranded product, given the same level of product features.” In conclusion, all the researchers agreed that added value can generate brand equity by enhancing consumer association and perception about a particular brand. According to Liaogang et al. (2007), generating brand equity and managing it is an important issue for the companies. Generating brand equity helps the companies in product differentiation and getting competitive advantage. According to Park and Srinivasan (1994), “brand equity is incremental utility and value endowed to a product or service by its brand name.” According to Chen and Tseng (2010), “it is considered as a source of competitive advantage by many firms.” Customer Satisfaction According to Howard and Sheth (1969), satisfaction is “the buyer’s cognitive state of being adequately or inadequately rewarded for the sacrifices he has undergone.” Oliver (1981) describes customer satisfaction as “the summary psychological state resulting when the emotion surrounding disconfirmed expectations is coupled with the consumer’s prior feelings about the consumption experience.” Vavra (1997) defined customer satisfaction as “a satisfactory post-purchase experience with a product or service given an existing purchase expectation.” According to these studies, customer satisfaction increases the purchase intent. Hypotheses Development Brand Loyalty and Brand Equity Sheth and Park (1974) concluded that loyalty has three dimensions. The first one is emotive dimension, which includes fear, respect and obedience. The second is evaluation dimension, which is based on basic usage benefits assessment. The third one is behavioral dimension. According to this theory, rational customers exhibit loyalty. According to Solomon (1992), the buying decision towards a product turns into a habit (loyalty) as a 44 The IUP Journal of Brand Management, Vol. XIII, No. 3, 2016 result of brand equity. Assael (1998) and Oliver (1999) describe brand loyalty as the situation wherein “consumers have deep commitment to re-buy and satisfy their past experiences with the use of the same brand and incur repurchase behavior.” Aaker (1991) states that brand loyalty “symbolizes a constructive mindset toward a brand leading to constant purchasing of the brand over time.” Based on the above discussion, the following hypothesis is formulated: H1: Brand loyalty has substantial impact on brand equity. Perceived Quality and Brand Equity Perceived quality is positively related to brand equity and is identified as one of its dimensions (Aaker, 1991; Kamakura and Russell, 1993; Feldwick, 1996; Motameni and Shahrokhi, 1998; and Yoo et al., 2000). Aaker (1991) defined perceived quality as “consumer’s perception of the overall quality or superiority of a product or service with respect to its intended purpose, relative to alternatives.” Boulding et al. (1993) claimed that “quality is directly influenced by perception.” Perceived quality has deep impact on decision making for purchasing. If the perceived quality among customers increases after using the product or service, then purchase intension will also increase (Rust and Oliver, 1994). According to Grunert et al. (2001) perceived quality is defined as “the estimation made by the consumer relying on the whole set of basic as well as outer dimension of the product or service.” Therefore, the following hypothesis is framed: H2: Perceived quality has substantial impact on brand equity. Brand Awareness and Brand Equity Awareness is a key determinant in the brand equity model (Aaker, 1991; Kapferer, 1992; and Keller 1993). According to Farquhar (1989) awareness is the accessibility aspect of brand equity, which relates to “how quickly a consumer can retrieve brand elements stored in his/her memory.” According to Keller (1993), “brand awareness affects consumer decision making by influencing the formation and strength of brand associations in the brand image.” Considering these aspects, the following hypothesis is formulated: H3: Brand awareness has substantial impact on brand equity. Brand Association and Brand Equity According to Aaker (1991), brand association is the foundation for purchase decision. Brand association represents customer’s thoughts, feelings, association, images and experiences. Cheng (2001) identifies two types of association. The first one is product association and the second is organizational association. If a brand does not perform its function properly, then it will have low brand equity. While customers evaluate a brand, they do focus on brand attributes (Lassar et al., 1995; and Pitta and Prevel, 1995). Bridges et al. (2000) state that “positive associations help to strengthen the brand and the equity that is carried into a leverage situation if affected by the types association made with the brand”. Therefore, the following hypothesis is formulated: The Effect of Brand Equity on Customer Satisfaction: An Empirical Study Based on David Aaker’s Brand Equity Model 45 H4: Brand association has substantial impact on brand equity. Overall Impact of Brand Equity on Customer Satisfaction According to Keller and Lehman (2006), customer satisfaction increases the willingness to pay for the product or service and also increases brand loyalty. According to Chen and Tseng (2010), strong brand boosts customer’s trust for purchasing a product. Researches prove that there is substantial relationship between brand equity and customer satisfaction. Based on the above discussion, the following hypothesis is formulated: H5: Brand equity has substantial impact on customer satisfaction. The conceptual model arrived at from the five hypotheses formulated so far, is depicted in Figure 1. Figure 1: Conceptual Model Brand Loyalty Perceived Quality H1 Brand Equity H2 H5 Customer Satisfaction H3 Brand Awareness H4 Brand Association Data and Methodology The target population for this study was mainly professionals in Pakistan, because they are more brand-conscious. A sample size of 87 was identified for this study, and usable data was obtained from 75 respondents. Aaker’s (1991) brand equity model is used in this study. The dimensions of this brand equity model are—brand loyalty, brand association, brand awareness and perceived quality. Closed format questions were used to collect the responses (see Appendix for questionnaire). Results and Discussion Demographic Analysis The demographic profile of respondents is summarized in Table 1. There were more female respondents (55%) than male respondents (45%). Further, a majority of the respondents (55%) were in the age group of 36 to 45 years. Almost half the respondents were graduates 46 The IUP Journal of Brand Management, Vol. XIII, No. 3, 2016 Table 1: Demographic Profile of Respondents Variable Gender Category Frequency Percentage Male 34 45.3 Female 41 54.7 7 9.3 26-35 8 10.7 36-45 41 54.7 46 and Above 19 25.3 5 6.7 Graduate 37 49.3 Postgraduate 31 41.3 2 2.7 11 14.7 18-25 Age (in years) High School Education Level Doctorate Student Occupation Annual Income (PKR) Marital Status Government Sector 6 8.0 Private Sector 49 65.3 Self Employed 9 12.0 Up to 3 lakh 31 41.3 3-6 lakh 35 46.7 6-9 lakh 8 10.7 9-12 lakh 1 1.3 Married 33 44.0 Single 42 56.0 (49%), followed closely by postgraduates (41%). Nearly two-thirds of the respondents were employed in the private sector (65%). 88% of the respondents had an annual income of less than 6 lakh per annum, and lastly, 56% of the respondents were single and 44% were married. Reliability Cronbach’s alpha was used to measure reliability of the scale used in this study. While the acceptable value for reliability should be greater than 0.7, a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.909 was obtained for the 26-item scale used here. This shows that the data is reliable and consistent. Regression Analysis Regression analysis was done to test the hypotheses. Table 2 provides the findings of regression analysis. The results reveal a significant relationship of brand awareness, brand The Effect of Brand Equity on Customer Satisfaction: An Empirical Study Based on David Aaker’s Brand Equity Model 47 association and perceived quality with brand equity. Further, there also exists a significant relationship between brand equity and customer satisfaction. The beta coefficients ( ) shows the intensity of impact the dimensions of brand equity have on overall brand equity, and the impact of brand equity on customer satisfaction. Based on the findings presented in Table 2, the hypotheses from H2 to H5 are accepted. Table 2: Regression Results Hypothesis Beta Coefficient ( ) Sig. Durbin-Watson H1 0.017 0.886 2.270 0.144 H2 0.475 0.000 2.268 4.614 H3 0.496 0.000 2.329 4.883 H4 0.708 0.000 2.122 8.557 H5 0.952 0.000 1.898 26.622 t-Value Note: t-value should be greater than 1.96; the significance values should be less than 0.05 (p < 0.05); Durbin-Watson statistic of around 2 or more indicates there is no autocorrelation. Conclusion Marketers of branded shoes in Pakistan are facing challenges due to brand conscious environment and increasing competition in the market. The aim of this research was to verify the applicability of David Aaker’s brand equity model in this context. This study confirms that in the context of the branded shoes market in Pakistan, the three dimensions—perceived quality, brand awareness and brand association—have a positive impact on brand equity, which in turn has a positive impact on customer satisfaction. The coefficient is highest for overall brand equity (0.952), indicating that brand equity has a strong influence on customer satisfaction. Among the dimensions of brand equity, brand association ( = 0.708) has the strongest impact on brand equity, followed by brand awareness ( = 0.496) and perceived quality ( = 0.475). The implication is that marketers should increase overall brand equity, and in particular focus on brand association, brand awareness and perceived quality in order to increase customer satisfaction. The limitations of this research is that it is confined to a single country, Pakistan and deals with only one product, branded shoes. Wider applicability can be explored by conducting the study taking other countries into consideration and for different product categories. References 1. Aaker D A (1991), Managing Brand Equity: Capitalizing on the Value of a Brand Name, The Free Press, NY. 2. Assael H (1998), Customer Behavior and Marketing Action, Cincinnati, South-Western College Publication, Ohio. 48 The IUP Journal of Brand Management, Vol. XIII, No. 3, 2016 3. Boulding W, Kalra A, Staelin R and Zeithaml V A (1993), “A Dynamic Process Model of Service Quality: From Expectations to Behavioral Intentions”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 30, No. 1, p. 7. 4. Bridges S, Keller K L and Sood S (2000), “Communication Strategies for Brand Extensions: Enhancing Perceived Fit by Establishing Explanatory Links”, Journal of Advertising, Vol. 29, Winter, pp. 1-11. 5. Chen C F and Tseng W S (2010), “Exploring Customer-Based Airline Brand Equity: Evidence from Taiwan”, Transportation Journal, pp. 24-34. 6. Cheng-Hsui Chen A (2001), “Using Free Association to Examine the Relationship between the Characteristics of Brand Associations and Brand Equity”, Journal of Product & Brand Management, Vol. 10, No. 7, pp. 439-451. 7. Farquhar P H (1989), “Managing Brand Equity”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 1, pp. 24-33. 8. 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. 85-105. 9. Grunert K G, Lähteenmäki L, Nielsen N A et al. (2001), “Consumer Perceptions of Food Products Involving Genetic Modification — Results from a Qualitative Study in Four Nordic Countries”, Food Quality and Preference, Vol. 12, No. 8, pp. 527-542. 10. Howard J A and Sheth J N (1969), The Theory of Buyer Behavior, Vol. 14, Wiley, New York. 11. Kamakura W A and Russell G J (1993), “Measuring Brand Value with Scanner Data”, International Journal of Research in Marketing, Vol. 10, No. 1, pp. 9-22. 12. Kapferer J N (1992), Strategic Brand Management, Kogan Page, London. 13. Keller K L (1993), “Conceptualizing, Measuring, and Managing Customer-Based Brand Equity”, The Journal of Marketing, Vol. 57, No. 1, pp. 1-22. 14. Keller K L (2003), Strategic Brand Management: Building, Measuring and Managing Brand Equity, 2nd Edition, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. 15. Keller K L and Lehmann D R (2006), “Brands and Branding: Research Findings and Future Priorities”, Marketing Science, Vol. 25, No. 6, pp. 740-759. 16. Lassar W, Mittal B and Sharma A (1995), “Measuring Customer-Based Brand Equity”, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 12, No. 4, pp. 11-19. 17. Liaogang H, Chongyan G and Zian L (2007), “Customer-Based Brand Equity and Improvement Strategy for Mobile Phone Brands: Foreign versus Local in the Chinese Market”, International Management Review, Vol. 3, No. 3, p. 76. 18. Motameni R and Shahrokhi M (1998), “Brand Equity Valuation: A Global Perspective”, Journal of Product & Brand Management, Vol. 7, No. 4, pp. 275-290. The Effect of Brand Equity on Customer Satisfaction: An Empirical Study Based on David Aaker’s Brand Equity Model 49 19. Oliver R L (1981), “Measurement and Evaluation of Satisfaction Processes in Retail Settings”, Journal of Retailing. 20. Oliver R L (1999), “Whence Consumer Loyalty?”, The Journal of Marketing, Vol. 63, Special Issue, pp. 33-44. 21. Park C S and Srinivasan V (1994), “A Survey-Based Method for Measuring and Understanding Brand Equity and its Extendibility”, Journal of Marketing Research, pp. 271-288. 22. Pitta D A and Prevel Katsanis L (1995), “Understanding Brand Equity for Successful Brand Extension”, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 12, No. 4, pp. 51-64. 23. Rust R T and Oliver R W (1994), “The Death of Advertising”, Journal of Advertising, Vol. 23, No. 4, pp. 71-77. 24. Sheth J N and Park C W (1974), A Theory of Multidimensional Brand Loyalty, College of Commerce and Business Administration, University of Illinois, Urbana Champaign. 25. Solomon M R (1992), Consumer Behavior: Buying, Having and Being, Allyn and Bacon, Boston. 26. Vavra T G (1997), Improving Your Measurement of Customer Satisfaction: A Guide to Creating, Conducting, Analyzing, and Reporting Customer Satisfaction Measurement Programs, ASQ Quality Press. 27. Yoo B, Donthu N and Lee S (2000), “An Examination of Selected Marketing Mix Elements and Brand Equity”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 28, No. 2, pp. 195-211. 28. Zeithaml V A (1988), “Consumer Perceptions of Price, Quality and Value: A MeansEnd Model and Synthesis of Evidence”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 52, No. 3, pp. 2-22. 50 The IUP Journal of Brand Management, Vol. XIII, No. 3, 2016 Appendix Questionnaire 1. Gender: Male Female 2. Age: 18-25 years 26-35 years 36-45 years 46 years and above 3. Education Level: High School Graduate Postgraduate Doctorate 4. Occupation: Student Government Sector Private Sector Self-Employed 5. Annual Income (PKR): Up to 3 lakh 3-6 lakh 6-9 lakh 9-12 lakh 6. Marital Status: Single Married 7. Which brand of shoes are you purchasing: _________ Brand Loyalty: 1) I intend to buy other products of this brand. Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly disagree 2) I say positive things about this brand to other people. Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly disagree 3) I have or would recommend it to other people or someone who seeks my advice. Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly disagree The Effect of Brand Equity on Customer Satisfaction: An Empirical Study Based on David Aaker’s Brand Equity Model 51 Appendix (Cont.) 4) If this brand raises its price, I would continue to buy its products. Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly disagree Brand Awareness: 1) Which of the following attributes do you associate with the brand? Affordable Modern Stylish Durable Other 2) Where have you seen advertisements of this shoe brand? Billboard Magazine Internet TV Any other 3) Overall, how would you rate the quality of this shoe brand? Very high High Average Low Very low 4) Of your last three purchases, how many were from this brand? 1 2 3 4 5 Brand Association: 1) Do you tend to purchase the same brand repeatedly? Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly disagree 2) Were you aware about the mentioned brand? Yes, very much aware Yes, to some extent Not Sure No, just have some idea No, not at all 52 The IUP Journal of Brand Management, Vol. XIII, No. 3, 2016 Appendix (Cont.) 3) Will you prefer to buy the products of that brand which is famous for its ethical business practices or its activities that affect society? Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly disagree 4) Will you be disappointed if you hear that your favorite brand is involved in unethical business practices? Yes Yes, to some extent Not sure No, to some extent Not at all Customer Satisfaction: 1) Overall how satisfied or dissatisfied are you with our company? Very satisfied Somewhat satisfied Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied Somewhat dissatisfied Very dissatisfied 2) How well do our products meet your needs? Extremely well Very well Somewhat well Not so well Not at all well 3) How responsive have you been to the questions or concerns about our products? Extremely responsive Very responsive Somewhat responsive Not so responsive Not at all responsive 4) How would you rate the value for money of the product? Excellent Above average Average Below average Poor Perceived Quality: 1) Compared with your expectations, how do you rate the quality of the products supplied? Poor Fair Average Good Excellent The Effect of Brand Equity on Customer Satisfaction: An Empirical Study Based on David Aaker’s Brand Equity Model 53 Appendix (Cont.) 2) What is the likelihood of your recommending it to others? Poor Fair Average Good Excellent 3) How do you rate the delivery performance? Poor Fair Average Good Excellent 4) Overall, how do you rate Weir & Carmichael as a supplier? Poor Fair Average Good Excellent Brand Equity: 1) How frequently do you purchase or use this brand? Buy or use regularly Buy or use occasionally Will not buy or use anymore Never bought or used 2) Would you prefer buying or using this brand in future? Yes, would prefer to buy or use One of several I would consider I would consider only if no other convenient alternative is available I would never buy or use 3) Rank the consumer perception in the context of brand equity. Familiarity Uniqueness Relevance Popularity Quality 4) I have a strong relationship with or affinity for this brand. Yes No Reference # 25J-2016-09-03-01 54 The IUP Journal of Brand Management, Vol. XIII, No. 3, 2016 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

Tutor Answer

ephykam
School: University of Virginia

Attached.

Surname 1
Student’s Name
Professor’s Name
Date
Course
Article Review
The discourse evaluates various statistical aspects used in the article The Effect of Brand
Equity on Customer Satisfaction: An Empirical Study Based on David Aaker’s Brand Equity
Model by Tanveer and Lodhi (2016).
List of the Hypotheses Found In the Article
H1: Brand loyalty has substantial impact on brand equity
H2: Perceived quality has substantial impact on brand equity
H3: Brand awareness has substantial impact on brand equity
H4: Brand association has substantial impact on brand equity
H5: Brand equity has substantial impact on customer satisfaction
Analysis of the Hypotheses
The author utilized the...

flag Report DMCA
Review

Anonymous
Thanks, good work

Similar Questions
Hot Questions
Related Tags

Brown University





1271 Tutors

California Institute of Technology




2131 Tutors

Carnegie Mellon University




982 Tutors

Columbia University





1256 Tutors

Dartmouth University





2113 Tutors

Emory University





2279 Tutors

Harvard University





599 Tutors

Massachusetts Institute of Technology



2319 Tutors

New York University





1645 Tutors

Notre Dam University





1911 Tutors

Oklahoma University





2122 Tutors

Pennsylvania State University





932 Tutors

Princeton University





1211 Tutors

Stanford University





983 Tutors

University of California





1282 Tutors

Oxford University





123 Tutors

Yale University





2325 Tutors