Consumer‐based brand equity: improving the measurement – empirical evidence

Abstract

PurposeThe present research aims to improve the measurement of consumer‐based brand equity. Current measurement of consumer‐based brand equity suffers from limitations, including: a lack of distinction between the dimensions brand awareness and brand associations, the use of non‐discriminant indicators in the measurement scales and of student samples.Design/methodology/approachBased on the recommendations of extant research, the scale constructed to measure consumer‐based brand equity in this study included brand personality measures. Brand associations were measured using a different set of items. Unlike many of the previous studies that had used student samples, the present study used a sample of actual consumers from an Australian state capital city. Confirmatory factor analysis employing structural equations modelling was used to measure consumer‐based brand equity in two product categories and across six brands.FindingsResults support the hypothesised four‐dimension model of consumer‐based brand equity across two product categories and six brands. Brand awareness and brand associations were found to be two distinct dimensions of brand equity as conceptualised in the marketing literature. The present study contributes to the understanding of consumer‐based brand equity measurement by examining the dimensionality of this construct.Originality/valueThe principal contribution of the present research is that it provides empirical evidence of the multidimensionality of consumer‐based brand equity, supporting Aaker's and Keller's conceptualisation of brand equity. The present research also enriched consumer‐based brand equity measurement by incorporating the brand personality measures, as recommended by previous researchers. While earlier studies were conducted using US and Korean samples, the present study also used a sample of Australian consumers.

Brand Equity of Lahore Fort as a Tourism Destination Brand

“…Results reveal that 'brand quality' and 'brand attitude' positively contribute towards brand equity. These results are in line with previous studies where a positive 'brand association set' leads to forming positive opinions about a destination brand, ultimately working as a 'guard' against strong competition (Pappu et al, 2005). The path from destination brand loyalty to destination brand equity has been acknowledged in previous studies (Konecnik & Gartner, 2007;Pike et al, 2010).…”

“…These researchers also believed that visitors' satisfaction lead to positive attitude formation. On the other side, behavioral loyalty has been attributed to repeat purchase of a brand (Pappu et al, 2005). Loyalty has been extensively investigated in marketing studies; however, in destination branding, it is perceived as still in infancy (Pike et al, 2010).…”

“…Brand quality is interchangeably used as 'customer perceived quality' which is defined as "the consumer's judgment about a product's overall excellence or superiority (Zeithaml, 1988, p. 3). Perceived quality is an effective tool against strong competition and provides consumers with a reason to buy a certain brand (Aaker 1991;Pappu et al, 2005). Visitor perceptions of brand quality can generate a positive attitude that is pivotal for enhancing destination brand equity (Boo et al, 2009).…”

“…Brand associations assist consumers in organizing and retrieving brand-related information from their memory, leading to the realization of a reason to buy a specific brand (Aaker, 1996). Brand associations are attributed to benefits sought attitudes towards the product/ service/destination, the outlining of functional advantages, and brand personality, all of which contribute highly to enhance brand equity (Keller, 1993;Pappu, Quester, & Cooksey, 2005).…”

Valor de marca-país: uma investigação empírica em diferentes modelos operacionais e relações com imagem de país e percepção de cultura

“…Existem diversos modelos de avaliação de marcas na literatura acadêmica, seja de marcas de empresas (AAKER, 1991;KELLER, 1993;TOMIYA, 2010), ou também de países (ANHOLT, 2007;FETSCHERIN;TONCAR, 2010;COOKSEY, 2005; PAPPU; QUESTER, 2010).…”