The Net Promoter Score (NPS) is widely used in industry to measure loyalty and predict revenue growth. The mechanisms underpinning this revenue growth are thought to be (i) positive recommendation from loyal customers to potential customers, and (ii) increased purchases from the existing base of loyal customers. These claims are controversial, with both the methodology and the performance of NPS being challenged by a number of researchers. The present study adds evidence to this debate through the analysis of a repeated cross-sectional data set (n = 2785) from a services company operating in a business to business context in the New Zealand primary sector. The data include recommendation scores matched to past, current and future revenue, at both the aggregate and individual level, over a five-year period. The analysis of this data provides directional support for the association between NPS and company revenue growth, and confirms that promoters do spend more in the current year. However, the analysis shows promoters to be a relatively minor and inconsistent source of same-customer revenue growth, with same-customer growth mostly arising from a general increase across the whole customer base.

Purpose Previous research on age-related loyalty is sparse, contradictory and suffers from methodological limitations and criticisms. This study aims to apply two methodological advances to fresh purchasing data to give a much clearer picture of age-related differences in brand loyalty. Design/methodology/approach An online brand choice survey (n = 1,862) is used to examine age-related loyalty within three low-involvement categories in New Zealand. The polarisation index (φ) is adopted as the measure of loyalty to control for confounding influences present in prior research. Results for chronological age are validated through comparison with results for measures of cognitive, biological and sociological age, as well as household life cycle. Findings Contrary to prior research, age-related differences in loyalty are detected in two of the three low-involvement categories studied. The third category does not show detectable loyalty for any age group. Although differences in brand loyalty are broadly present across all age measures, no alternative measure outperforms chronological age in detecting variations in age-related loyalty. Research limitations/implications To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first evidence that age-related brand loyalty is present in low-involvement categories. However, effects are small and easily obscured by confounding factors. More research is needed to determine how results vary by category. Practical implications Despite showing minor differences in loyalty, older consumers still purchase from a wide portfolio of brands and so should not be ignored by marketers. Future research can investigate loyalty for older consumers by adopting the method of analysing differences in polarisation (φ) for chronological age groups. Originality/value Previous contradictory findings and methodological concerns about measurement of age-related loyalty are resolved through use of the polarisation index (φ) as a measure of loyalty and by confirmation that chronological age performs as well as any other age measure.

Two very well-known empirical generalisations in marketing are Double jeopardy (DJ) and the duplication of purchase law (DoP). These generalisations provide impor-

This study explores how age influences the stages of the brand purchase funnel (awareness, consideration, and purchase) and the mechanisms associated with any age-related differences. Aggregated analysis of survey data (n = 1862) across five markets and four age groups shows a reduction in the proportion of brands recognised that subsequently enter the consideration and purchase sets of older consumers. Subsequent individual-level GLS regression analysis using age as a continuous variable reveals an inverse-U shape for brand recognition and in some cases for brand recall and consideration. Peak cognitive performance occurs at age 56. There is a linear decline for purchase set size across age. Therefore, age-related differences in brand awareness and consideration, and the mechanisms driving these changes, do not greatly impact age-related increases in loyalty. Instead, findings suggest age-related increases in loyalty result from a combination of accumulated experience, development of purchase habits, and declining category purchase rates.