1 / 16

Self-Identity and Brand Choice: A Brand Relationship Perspective

First International Colloquium on Consumer Brand Relationships. Self-Identity and Brand Choice: A Brand Relationship Perspective. Hazel H. Huang Durham Business School, U.K. 24 April 2010. The Brand Relationship Myth. Does the brand relationship metaphor really exist?

bwisniewski
Download Presentation

Self-Identity and Brand Choice: A Brand Relationship Perspective

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. First International Colloquium on Consumer Brand Relationships Self-Identity and Brand Choice:A Brand Relationship Perspective Hazel H. Huang Durham Business School, U.K. 24 April 2010

  2. The Brand Relationship Myth • Does the brand relationship metaphor really exist? • Yes: Fournier (1998) and many others • No: Bengtsson (2003) and O’Malley and Tynan (1999) • How do we prove its existence if it exists?: the theoretical grounding • Close Relationships as Including Other in the Self by Aron, Aron, and Nelson (1991)

  3. Research Questions • To what extent do consumers use the relationship metaphor to describe their brands? • If the consumers are able to characterize a brand relationship, to what extent do consumers reflect the brand relationship to their self-identities?

  4. Research Design – RQ 1 • 11 in-depth interviews • British Caucasian undergraduate students aged 18-21 • Semi-structured interview • Talking about themselves • Talking about brands and brand personality • Talking about brand relationship

  5. Findings – In-Depth Interview • Most were able to describe their relationships with their brands. • It’s [Kellogg’s cornflakes] very temperamental. I think if we just had a friendship, it would be a friendship of convenience, where you would drop in and out. If you were going along fine and there were other things to do and other people to see then you wouldn’t go there. On the other hand, if you sort of thought, oh, I would really like to see this person again, then it would always be there to back you up. …I think Primark is like a new friend. It is the kind of friend where you would go there first and they would be able to give you the right sort of advice. It is a very exciting and new friendship, but it’s becoming more steady. … Yes, the relationship is settling down. [Katie] m

  6. Findings – In-Depth Interview • But some showed difficulties in articulating the relationship. Q: Would you think of your car as a person? A: My car is a he and he’s called Bob. Q: Why Bob? A: It’s just Bob. And I tend to say, hang on, where’s Bob, to my housemates. Q: So, your friends know about Bob? A: Yeah. They know I refer to it as Bob. Q: Why did you name your car? A: I don’t know… I don’t know… [Robbie]

  7. Findings – In-Depth Interview • A dramatic experience needed to trigger the relationship metaphor. • Yeah, [I found I was attached to the car] probably after it was crashed. I loved my car when I had it, but I didn’t realize I would miss it. [Lauren]

  8. Consumer-Brand Congruence Brand Relationship Quality Research Design – RQ 2 • H1: There is a positive relationship between consumer-brand congruence and brand relationship quality. • H2: The relationship between self-identity reflection and brand relationship is consistent across symbolic and utilitarian products.

  9. Thinking Feeling High Involvement Low Involvement Research Design – RQ 2 • Consumer-brand congruence = |consumer personality – brand personality| • Product pre-tests – the FCB grid • Randomly assigning one product to one participant • Each participant asked to rate their favourite or most-frequently-used brands • 468 questionnaires returned, 90 brands evaluated • Jeans: 112; Soft drinks: 116; Laptop computers: 114; Dish-washing detergents: 126

  10. Results: H1 was supported Consumer-Brand Congruence Brand Relationship Quality .12 (2.47) χ2=54.79, df=20, p<.01; SRMR=.03; RMSEA=.061, 90% C.I.: [.042, .081]; TLI=.98; CFI=.99

  11. Results: H2 is supported • H2: The relationship between self-identity reflection and brand relationship is consistent across symbolic and utilitarian products. • F(3, 460) = 2.23, p >.05

  12. Does brand relationship exist? • Meanbrand relationship quality < 2.5 (5-point Likert-type scale). • Meanbrand relationship quality < 4.5 (10-point Likert-type scale) (Park et al., 2002)

  13. Summary • Good Brand Relationships as Including the Brand in the Self • Significant brand experience is key to identity reflection (consumer-brand congruence), but being able to imagine a relationship with their brands and recognize them as favourite brands is critical to identify a relationship with the brands. • Brand relationship does exist, but weakly. • Methodologically: • Consumers’ difficulty in articulating a brand relationship or their lack of awareness • Does the current scale capture brand relationship quality successfully?

  14. Thank you!

More Related