Managing brand consistent employee behaviour: relevance and managerial control of behavioural branding

Abstract

Purpose -This study aims to show that brand success can be improved if the brand promise that is communicated through mass media campaigns is lived up to by each employee of a company. The paper terms such brand consistent employee behaviour behavioural branding and identifies managerial instruments for its implementation and management. Design/methodology/approach -The model in the paper explains the brand's contribution to company success by brand consistent employee behaviour, functional employee performance and brand congruent mass media communication. Brand consistent employee behaviour and functional employee performance in turn are modelled as determined by formal and informal management techniques as well as employee empowerment. The model is tested on a sample of 167 senior managers using partial least squares and finds empirical support. Furthermore, practical implications are provided based on additional top management focus groups. Findings -The paper finds that behavioural branding determines the brand's contribution to company success. Further, the results show that informal management and employee empowerment have a far stronger impact on the brand consistency of employee behaviour than formal management instruments. Practical implications -Managers should spend more time explaining and discussing targets of behavioural branding, and they should create an organisational environment that enables employees to find their own individual ways of articulating a brand to customers. Originality/value -The framework in the paper integrates personal and non-personal facets of interaction for a holistic explanation of brand performance. It provides a broader understanding of factors affecting the accruement of a customer's brand experience and enables researchers and practitioners to develop more consistent and promising brand management activities.

Engagement and Retention of the Millennial Generation in the Workplace through Internal Branding

“…Internal branding perspective helps employees develop congruent and compatible brand-oriented behaviors such that they accommodate feelings of commitment to the brand throughout their daily work activities (Özçelik & Fındıklı, 2014). Through internal branding, organizations can lead employees develop an internally and genuinely belief, such that their day-to-day activities and behaviors help build positive external outlook of their companies and help ensure external customer satisfaction (Khan, 2009;Punjaisri & Wilson, 2007;Henkel et al, 2007). Applying the IB perspective to the employees by treating them as the internal customers of the organization via implementing various human resources processes, policies and strategies help them develop a positive attitude towards the brand and brand values (Raj & Jyothi, 2011).…”

Internal brand co-creation: The experiential brand meaning cycle in higher education

“…Internal branding requires an integrative framework between human resource management and marketing in terms of internal marketing communication (Punjaisri & Wilson, 2011) to influence employees' brand promise delivery. Internal branding advocates two-way (formal and informal) communications between employees and management (Henkel, Tomczak, Heitmann, & Herrmann, 2007;Punjaisri & Wilson, 2007). Hence, internal branding encourages social interactions both between management and employees, and between employees to ensure a shared understanding of brand meaning within the internal market.…”

Internal brand management: introduction to the special issue and directions for future research

“…In addition, future research should explore the relationships between these dimensions (Piehler et al 2016). To expand knowledge about managerial instruments, previous IBM research calls for a more detailed investigation of specific instruments of brand-oriented human resource management, leadership, internal communication, and external communication that potentially affect employee-related IBM outcomes (Baker et al 2014;Baumgarth and Schmidt 2010;Henkel et al 2007;Kimpakorn and Tocquer 2010;Löhndorf and Diamantopoulos 2014;Piehler et al 2016;Xiong et al 2013). Finally, to better understand the relationships between employee-related IBM outcomes and between managerial instruments and outcomes, future research should consider moderators of these relationships (Baumgarth and Schmidt 2010;Hughes 2013;Punjaisri et al 2008).…”