Factors that influence manufacturer and store brand behavioral loyalty

Dawes, John

doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2022.103020

Cited by 15 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 66 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Lastly, we found a non-significant association between the incidence of price promotion activity for a brand and excess/ deficit loyalty ( p = .37). While several past studies have found promotions are related to lower behavioral loyalty (Bhattacharya, 1997;Jung et al, 2010), one found a non-significant association (Dawes, 2022).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 90%

“…Lastly, we found a non‐significant association between the incidence of price promotion activity for a brand and excess/deficit loyalty ( p = .37). While several past studies have found promotions are related to lower behavioral loyalty (Bhattacharya, 1997; Jung et al, 2010), one found a non‐significant association (Dawes, 2022). We infer that price promotions induce both current brand buyers to buy the brand instead of a competitor, which could increase the brand's behavioral loyalty metrics, but they also induce some non‐current brand buyers to occasionally buy a brand they have not bought for some time.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 95%

“…Corroborating evidence for this idea comes from two studies of grocery goods. Jung et al (2010) and Dawes (2022) both found brands with larger than average volume per occasion tended to enjoy higher than expected SCR. Therefore, part of the effect of low price on behavioral loyalty is via encouraging larger quantity bought per occasion.…”

Section: Background and Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 95%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Patterns of buyer behavior and brand metrics in a “high loyalty” category: Liquor

Dawes

2023

J of Consumer Behaviour

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examines behavioral brand loyalty in a category that, based on industry evidence, is expected to exhibit high loyalty: liquor (distilled spirits). The study aims to extend knowledge of the factors that underlie behavioral loyalty, including brand characteristics of price level and promotion incidence, and buyer characteristics of age and income. Drawing on theory and evidence relating to prospect theory, the “smart shopper” concept, as well as literature pertaining to age and loyalty, we develop a series of hypotheses and test them using extensive consumer panel purchasing data for US households. The analysis confirms that liquor is indeed a high loyalty category in the context of consumer goods, evidenced via high share of category requirements (SCR). The study also identifies that liquor brands follow the double jeopardy pattern, whereby larger‐share brands enjoy somewhat higher loyalty, and that exceptions—brands with unusually high or low volume loyalty for their size—are related to high volume purchased per occasion. In turn, there is a strong negative association between brand price and high average volume purchased per occasion (i.e., cheaper brands are bought in larger quantity or volume than expensive ones). The study also finds that brands with a low price tend to be particularly attractive to low‐income households, and that, in turn, low‐income households exhibit higher brand loyalty. These new findings contribute to the literature on brand loyalty and the links between loyalty, brand characteristics, and demographics.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 90%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 95%

Section: Background and Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 95%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Patterns of buyer behavior and brand metrics in a “high loyalty” category: Liquor

Dawes

2023

J of Consumer Behaviour

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, when a brand grows, the brand purchase frequency also slightly increases following the double jeopardy pattern. That is, bigger brands have many more buyers who purchase from them slightly more often (Dawes, 2022; Ehrenberg et al, 1990; Klepek & Kvíčala, 2022; McPhee, 1963; Mecredy et al, 2022). This suggests that the purchase frequency distribution is slightly heavier for growing brands (i.e., everyone purchases slightly more, including the non‐buyers) than for stationary brands.…”

Section: Background and Research Questionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Valuing the contribution of ultra‐light buyers

Hossain,

Anesbury,

Driesener

et al. 2023

J of Consumer Behaviour

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ultra‐light buyers, those who, on average, buy a brand once a year or less, are important by number and their contribution to brand purchase occasions. The initial research, however, was limited in scope and did not measure the contribution of these buyers to sales volume or value. By examining over 850 brands in almost 60 categories, we identify that ultra‐lights make up 62% of a brand's buyer base over 5 years and contribute 32% of purchase occasions and 31% of sales volume and value. In line with previous findings that brands with higher loyalty exhibit more repeat purchases and thus fewer ultra‐light buyers and private label brands often exhibit higher than expected loyalty for their market share—we find the prevalence of ultra‐light buyers is higher for national brands than private labels, likely reflecting the higher loyalty often observed for private labels. We also find no difference in ultra‐light buyers' contribution between high and low‐price brands, indicating that price is not a significant factor affecting the contribution of ultra‐light buyers. Finally, we find that both growing and declining brands have fewer ultra‐lights than stable brands. As growth occurs via increasing penetration and loyalty, for growing brands, new buyers may be more ‘light’ than ‘ultra‐light’ in terms of their loyalty; while for declines, these findings imply that there are not enough ultra‐light buyers to maintain brand sales. A failure to recruit ultra‐light buyers may be very dangerous for brand health.

show abstract

“…Developing competitive advantages is a relevant goal for retailers (Arnett et al, 2010;Ghomi et al, 2021) and the retailer brand is one of the most valuable sources of competitive advantage (Su and Chang, 2018;Dawes, 2022). Consequently, understanding a retailer as a brand is one of the most crucial retailing trends (Anselmsson et al, 2017;Frasquet et al, 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

When manufacturer brands did not support retailer brand images

Roßmann¹,

Schade

Burmann

2023

IJRDM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeTo further improve the branding strategies between single-brand-retailers and multi-brand-retailers, the paper investigates the influence of multiple manufacturer brand images on retailer brand image. It considers the moderating role of the number of offered manufacturer brands.Design/methodology/approachThe research is conducted in the automotive retail context. Based on an online survey (383 respondents), a Partial-Least Squares Modeling, estimated using SmartPLS 3 and a classic partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) algorithm, is used to validate the hypotheses.FindingsThe results reveal that manufacturer brands did not influence the retailer's brand image in all cases since it is only influenced by the manufacturer brand when the retailer offers only one manufacturer brand.Practical implicationsFor retailers offering only one manufacturer brand, the most extensive possible adoption of the corporate identity (CI) specifications prescribed by the manufacturer brands is the prerequisite for a positive image effect. Retailers offering more than one manufacturer brand should create their image based on the retailer's identity. In this context, it is essential to position the retailer brand independently in the market.Originality/valueThis is the first study focuses on retailers with a small or limited number of offered manufacturer brands to answer the question of whether the number of provided manufacturer brands moderates the impact of manufacturer brand images on the retailer's brand image.

show abstract

Factors that influence manufacturer and store brand behavioral loyalty

Cited by 15 publications

References 66 publications

Patterns of buyer behavior and brand metrics in a “high loyalty” category: Liquor

Patterns of buyer behavior and brand metrics in a “high loyalty” category: Liquor

Valuing the contribution of ultra‐light buyers

When manufacturer brands did not support retailer brand images

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About