A synthesized retail brand personality framework: a cross-cultural study of Taiwan and the United States

Abstract

PurposeThe purpose of this study was to develop a synthesized retail brand personality scale (RBPS) framework across retail formats. This research also addresses cultural differences by applying an emic-etic approach to scale development with United States (US) and Taiwanese samples.Design/methodology/approachAfter two focus group interviews and a pretest were conducted in both Taiwan and the US, a main test was conducted on consumer samples in Taiwan (N = 412) and in the US (N = 411). Confirmatory factor analysis was used to develop a valid, reliable RBPS.FindingsThe results revealed that sincerity and sophistication are comparable dimensions to those in the brand personality scale (BPS), and unpleasantness, traditionalism, enthusiasm, antagonism and innovativeness were found to be unique dimensions for retail brands. The findings also indicated that sincerity, unpleasantness and traditionalism are common dimensions across cultures, whereas innovativeness, sophistication and antagonism are culture-specific dimensions in the US, whereas enthusiasm is a specific dimension in Taiwan.Originality/valueTo the best of authors’ knowledge, this study is the first to develop a synthesized scale of retail brand personality that compares the identified dimensions to Aaker's (1997) BPS and includes an emic-etic approach. This research contributes to the branding literature and international marketing field, and has implications for retail practitioners.

A Case Study on Brand Personality and Consumer Loyalty in India's Booming Dairy Industry

“…Brabd personality of four brands in India using Aaker scale with factor analysis tool and concluded that each brand should be treated separately while studying their brand personality [15]. Bejoy John Thomas and P C Sekar [16] in their study focused on measuring the brand personality of Colgate brand in the Indian context and explored the model validity of Jennifer Aaker's Brand Personality scale.…”

Grocery retailer's brand performances from brand personalities and marketing offerings

“…, 2017; Niazi et al ., 2021; Viet and Anh, 2021), as well as for metaphorical, symbolic and psychological brand attributes/positioning (e.g. brand personalities) (Kuo et al., 2022; Sindhu et al. , 2021; Willems, 2022).…”

“…Although Aaker's (1997) five brand personality dimensions have been widely studied, researchers (e.g. Kuo et al ., 2022; Sindhu et al. , 2021; Youn and Dodoo, 2021) warn that not all five dimensions are applicable for all product categories.…”

“…Consumers patronize retailers, especially grocery retailers for their utilitarian marketing offerings (price, distribution, promotion and product quality) (Anselmsson et al, 2017;Niazi et al, 2021;Viet and Anh, 2021), as well as for metaphorical, symbolic and psychological brand attributes/positioning (e.g. brand personalities) (Kuo et al, 2022;Sindhu et al, 2021;Willems, 2022). For example, and for the brand equity success of distribution companies and retailers, S anchez-Gonz alez et al (2022) contend that sustainable marketing offerings are important.…”

“…Although Aaker's (1997) five brand personality dimensions have been widely studied, researchers (e.g. Kuo et al, 2022;Sindhu et al, 2021;Youn and Dodoo, 2021) warn that not all five dimensions are applicable for all product categories. For example, Willems (2022) reports that utilitarian grocery retailers score high in competence and sincerity, while symbolic retailers like fashion retailers score high in excitement and sophistication dimensions.…”