2008
DOI: 10.1300/j054v19n01_04
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Concept of Brand Personality as an Instrument for Advanced Non-Profit Branding–An Empirical Analysis

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
35
0
2

Year Published

2010
2010
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
3
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 55 publications
(37 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
0
35
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…For example, Voeth and Herbst (2008) A limitation of this study relates to the data collection methodology, which utilised an online research panel. This approach afforded several advantages, such as the ability to collect a national sample, randomly order responses and ensure questions were answered correctly.…”
Section: Conclusion and Limitationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, Voeth and Herbst (2008) A limitation of this study relates to the data collection methodology, which utilised an online research panel. This approach afforded several advantages, such as the ability to collect a national sample, randomly order responses and ensure questions were answered correctly.…”
Section: Conclusion and Limitationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Second, positive associations related with nonprofit brand might be developed in the minds of the people, therefore products and services of nonprofit organizations becomes more likely to be accepted by the society and the needy. Furthermore, strong brands also function as a basis to create new programs and services that will serve the needy (Voeth & Herbst, 2008). As a result, nonprofit organizations might broaden their range of activities, which will contribute to the societies' welfare.…”
Section: Branding In Nonprofit Sectormentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The relations were examined with the following model: The Data presented in Table 1 shows that the "gender" distribution of the sample as 189 male (%80, 8) and 45 female (%19, 2) out of 234 subjects. And the sample"s distribution according to the "status" consists of 47 unit chief (%17,5), 5 Group president (%2,1), 48 Group member (%20,5) and 140 Other (%59,8)…”
Section: Research Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%