Investigating Key Antecedents and Outcomes of Employee‐based Brand Equity

Abstract

A wealth of research examines firm or consumer-based brand equity but largely ignores internal stakeholders' perceptions of the brand asset. The present study focuses on service employees who affect both internal (i.e. other employees) and external (i.e., customers) stakeholders through their interactions. The study draws on cognitive psychology and social identity theory to develop and empirically test an integrated model of antecedents and consequences of employee-based brand equity (EBBE) that distinguishes between a cognitive and an affective route for its development via brand knowledge and brand identification respectively. The research extends the limited work on EBBE by examining how perceptions of employees about their supervisors' brand leadership behaviors and their supervisors' focus on their subordinates significantly drive employees' responses to the internal brand. The proposed model also highlights the significant role of EBBE vis-à-vis two citizenship behaviors, namely brand value dissemination and customer orientation.

From brand identity to brand equity: a multilevel analysis of the organization–employee bidirectional effects in upscale hotels

“…Methodologically, although the branding process involves cross-level interactions (e.g., between organizations and employees, employees and customers, and organizations and customers), limited studies have investigated such phenomena from a multilevel perspective with appropriate analysis techniques (Wong, 2016). Although certain branding studies have explored the effect from organizations to employees (e.g., Xie et al, 2016;Boukis and Christodoulides, 2018), few have considered the effect from employees back to organizations. Even fewer have simultaneously considered the bidirectional effects to provide a comprehensive view.…”

Exploring the implications of blockchain technology for brand–consumer relationships: a future research agenda

“…Digitalization and the dominance of social media have brought technological advancements to the forefront of research around how companies can build their corporate brand image or co-create their brand meaning online (e.g., Fuchs and Diamantopoulos, 2010;Gammoh et al, 2011;Ramaswamy and Ozcan, 2016). Given the real need for brands to build direct and authentic interactions with internal and external stakeholders through technologymediated communication, adopting new technologies that can register a brand's unique features has changed their brand positioning channels and strategies (Laroche et al, 2013;Keller, 2017;Boukis and Christodoulides, 2018). For instance, recent work explores how new interactive technologies could affect corporate brand positioning and how consumers experience brand image through them (e.g., Scholz and Duffy, 2018;Dacko, 2017).…”

“…Consumer awareness about social and environmental issues has increased in the past few decades and brands are held increasingly accountable for their actions while being expected to step up their corporate social responsibility (Christodoulides, 2009;Rea et al, 2014;Kang and Hustvedt, 2014). As consumers require more detailed and transparent information about how brands impact third-parties (e.g., local communities), a major challenge for firms has been to make their value chain more transparent and consistently deliver their brand promise to its external stakeholders (Boukis and Christodoulides, 2018). Nevertheless, limited work examines "what exactly constitutes transparency in the eyes of customers" (Liu et al, 2015; p. 451) and how consumers respond to the lack of brand transparency (Lin et al, 2017).…”

Internal brand management in the public sector: the effects of internal communication, organizational practices, and PSM on employees’ brand perceptions

“…In general, internal branding efforts may result in cognitive, affective, and behavioural responses among employees (Boukis and Christodoulides 2020;Piehler, Grace, and Burmann 2018;Piehler et al 2016;King and Grace 2010). It is commonly accepted that affective responses are a necessity, because employees that are emotionally committed to the brand are more likely to support it behaviourally (Xiong, King, and Piehler 2013;King and Grace 2012;Burmann, Zeplin, and Riley 2009).…”