Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
DECLARATION
I hereby Aisha Mohammed Ali (003EHKL0610), declare
that this dissertation has not already been accepted in
substance for any degree and is not concurrently
submitted in candidature for any degree. It is the result of
my own independent research except where otherwise
stated.
Page 1
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I would like to express my gratitude to my supervisor Dr. Syed Kadir for
the useful comments, remarks and engagement through the writing
process of this dissertation.
Also, I like to thank the participants in my survey, who have willingly
shared their precious time during the process of interviewing. I would
like to thank my beloved family, my mother Sofia, My brother and sisters
who have supported me throughout the duration of my study, both by
keeping me harmonious and helping me putting pieces together. I will be
grateful forever for your love.
Special thanks go to my class mate, Ibrokhim Mirkodirov and all my
friends, who help me to assemble the parts and gave suggestion.
I have to appreciate the guidance given by other lectures as well as the
panels especially in my whole degree period that has improved my skills
thanks to their comment and advices.
P a g e |2
ABSTRACT
Companies across the globe are now increasingly recognizing the power of value of
brand as it provides high competitive advantage for business in competitive market
place. During the last three decades, the business world has undergone a paradigm
shift with the effect of brand as a concept getting attention and becoming an
effective tool for retainment and sustenance in the competitive world. Brands are
considered to be an asset for a company which increases the worth of the concern.
Like any other asset, brand generates revenues and value for the company.
The historical evolution of brands has shown that brands initially have served the
roles of differentiating between competing items, representing consistency of
quality and providing legal protection from copying. Apart from providing the
offering with the badge of its maker, there-by indicating legal ownership of all the
special technical and other relevant features that the offering may possess, the
brand can have a powerful symbolic significance.
Page 3
Table of Contents
ABSTRACT .........................................................................................3
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION .......................................................7
1.1
Overview ............................................................................................................... 7
Page 5
BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................. 57
APPENDICES .................................................................................. 62
P a g e |6
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1 Overview
Today, companys real value lies outside the business itself, in the minds of potential
buyers. This is reflected in the value of brands, which are the anchors of companys
value. Products are introduced, they live and disappear but brands endure (Kapferer,
1992).
The term brand holds multiple meanings. According to John Murphy, founder of
Interbrand (Ingham, 2003), a brand is not only an actual product, but also the
unique property of a specific owner. Brands are increasingly considered to be the
primary capital in many businesses.
Financial professionals have developed the idea that a brand has an equity which
exceeds its conventional asset value. This is supported by the fact that the cost of
introducing a new brand to the market has been approximated at $100 million with
a 50 percent probability of failure (Ourusoff, 1993). Therefore, the phenomenon of
brand and brand equity valuation became the centre of interest of both academic
and business experts. The main issues are how a company can build, nurture and
use a brand in order to obtain and sustain the competitive advantage in the
marketplace.
Page 7
Brand equity is a measure of the health of the brand. Thus, it can be used for
marketing decision-making. In addition, brand equity cannot be viewed only from
the companies perspective, but one must be concerned with the way customers
perceive product or service brands. In the marketing literature, operationalisation of
consumer-based brand equity usually falls into two groups (Cobb et al., 1995):
consumer perception (brand awareness, brand associations, perceived quality) and
consumer behaviour (brand loyalty, willingness to pay a high price).
The key sources of brand equity suggested by Aaker (Aaker, 1991), incorporate both
perceptual and behavioural dimensions in the definition, whereas Lassar et al.
strictly distinguish the perceptual dimension from the behavioural dimension, so
that behaviour is a consequence of brand equity rather than the brand itself (Aaker,
1995).
Brand equity as a concept has been developed over the last decade (Keller, 1998).
One of the main issues still to be resolved is how to value brands. Summarizing the
primary thrust of articles published in the Journal of Marketing Research during
1987-1997, Malhotra concluded that in the area of brand evaluation and choice,
future research should focus on further measurements of the brand equity construct
(Malhotra et al., 1999). They proposed that a generally accepted measure could
further the overall understanding of the strategic role of brand equity in extending
the brand and in financially benefiting the firm. While there are a number of
approaches available to managers, it is still uncertain which approach is best, and
the issues around the discount rate, growth rate and useful life have to be resolved
(Kapferer, 1997).
P a g e |8
The aim of the research is to prepare integrated brand valuation on theoretical layer
analysis and summary of brand valuation models.
What is brand valuation and how does it affect the corporate value?
How does brand awareness influence corporate value?
What are the possible managerial implications of brand equity?
What is brand perceived quality, and how can it be determined?
How does brand loyalty impact corporate value?
These were what made the researcher go in for a research with a hope to find
something interesting, useful and value enough to be able to apply as strategic tools
one can practice to improve overall brand performance.
Page 9
Towards
enhancing:
- Corporate value.
- Consumer value.
Managerial Implications
1.7 Significance
The purpose of the research is to discuss and elaborate the main issues encountered
in evaluating brand equity models towards enhancing corporate value. In order to
achieve this purpose, the researcher analyse the concept of brand equity, provide a
comprehensive framework for managing brand equity, look into the aspects which
may influence corporate value as well and distinguish different ways to control and
measure brand equity.
Brand equity can be regarded as a managerial concept, as a financial intangible
asset, as a relationship concept or as a customer-based concept from the perspective
of the individual consumer. The main asset dimensions of brand equity can be
grouped into brand loyalty, brand awareness, perceived quality and brand
associations. Brand equity can create advantages and benefits for the firm, the trade
or the consumer.
P a g e | 10
Chapter 2: Covers the literature review related to the importance of this research
study as well as the research objectives identified in chapter one, such as brand
loyalty impacts on corporate value, brand valuation and brand perceived quality.
Chapter 4: This chapter presents the data, findings and analysis of the primary
research that had been gathered to answer the key questions proposed in this study.
It repeats research questions and answers each one using primary data collected,
supported by the literature review.
Page 11
1.10 Conclusion
As the global competition gets stiffer and industries in this business environment
are not sure of their survival, the brand is one of the few assets that can provide
long-term competitive advantage to the firm. Brand valuation today could become a
comprehensive instrument in decision making for the corporate houses. Many
established methodologies have been widely practiced for brand valuation by brand
consultancies, such as Interbrand and brand finance. Today, a number of alternative
brand valuation techniques are available and the wide range of alternative valuation
methods yield significantly different results
P a g e | 12
If we take into account the economic worth concept, we can discuss both the
discounted cash flows that are to be generated by the brand in the future, as well as
Page 13
the likelihood that these earnings will be generated. Generally speaking, Inter
brand's brand valuation methodology is comprised of four fundamentals (Yates,
1999):
Financial Analysis: used to identify business earnings and 'Earnings from
Intangibles' for each of the distinct segments being assessed.
Market Analysis: used to measure the role that a brand plays in driving demand for
services in the markets in which it operates, and hence, to determine what
proportion of Earnings from Intangibles are attributable to the brand.
Brand Analysis: used to assess competitive strengths and weaknesses of the brand
and hence the security of future earnings expected from that brand.
Legal Analysis: used to make sure that the brand is a true piece of property.
The value of every asset, whether tangible or intangible, can be estimated. Some
assets are easier to value than others, and some valuations are more precise than
others. Intangible assets, such as brands, often fall in the more difficult, less precise
valuation category. While the valuation of brands requires techniques that are quite
different from those used to value stocks or fixed assets, the basic principles are the
same.
First, from a shareholders perspective, the value of a brand is equal to the financial
returns that the brand will generate over its useful life. Second, any financial returns
attributed to a brand must be discounted to account for market uncertainty and
asset-specific risks. These two principles apply to the valuation of all assets, not just
brands.
Page 15
This model can be used to get to grips with brands equity and gain insight into the
relation between the different brand equity components and future performance of
the brand.
The four steps of the pyramid represent four fundamental questions that customers
will ask about your brand. It contains six building blocks that must be in place for
the company to reach the top of the pyramid, and to develop a successful brand.
Keller describes brand equity as the differential effect of brand knowledge on
consumer response to the marketing of the brand. As well he views CBBE as a
process, that occurs when the consumer is familiar with the brand and holds some
favourable, strong, and unique brand associations in memory (Keller, 1993). The
favourable, strong, and unique associations are termed as primary associations that
include brand beliefs and attitudes encompassing the perceived benefits of a given
brand (Keller, 1993). These beliefs and attitudes can be functional and experiential
such as perceived quality and value relative to other brands, or symbolic like
uniqueness. Primary brand associations of perceived quality, perceived value for the
cost, uniqueness, and the willingness to pay a price premium, are the strongest
predictors of purchase intent and purchase behaviour in Kellers framework.
The brand value is based on a number of dynamic variables including differentiation,
competitiveness, category strength, corporate strategy, relevance, management
ability, existing intangible and tangible assets...etc. these variables doesnt only
Page 17
change regularly, but as well the core of companys attention changes depending on
the requirements of the business. Thus, the brand value is some sort of relative
measure, contingent on conditions and perspective. Eventually, the consumer is the
one that attaches value to a brand, not consultants, or the manager himself (Woods,
1998).
The organization which owns the brand enjoys the benefits not obtainable to other
organizations. First benefit is that an organization through brand acquires a good
communication tool, which is not one-way. That means enterprises are good
communicators, but only if they are good listeners of what consumers want to say.
On top, successful brands are the outcome of good communication. Loyalty is the
straight result of good communication between a company and a consumer.
It is an outcome of trust. Building trust requires long term attention. It takes cash,
knowledge, patience and the most important is time. Losing the trust will costs
much more net present value of all future net earnings from the brand (Yates, 1999).
Another benefit of branding is differentiation, the brand delegates a product or a
service as being different from competitors' products and services by indicating
positive key values specific to a brand. Consumers perception of brands is
recognized from and based on both emotional and rational reasons. This provides
the basis for the ongoing relationship between a supplier and a consumer, and
because of this, brands provide a security of demand that the supplier otherwise
would not enjoy (Abratt & Bick, 2003).
P a g e | 18
Page 19
create brand awareness, it is important to create reliable brand image, slogans and
taglines. The brand message to be communicated should also be consistent. Strong
brand awareness leads to high sales and high market share. Brand awareness can be
regarded as a means through which consumers become acquainted and familiar
with a brand and recognize that brand (Macdonald & Sharp, 2003).
Page 21
Third, consumers rarely have all the information necessary to make a rational and
objective judgment on quality and even if they do have the information, they may
lack the time and motivation to process it. As a result, they rely on one or two signs
that they associate with quality; the key to influencing perceived quality is
understanding and managing these signs properly. Thus, it is important to
understand the little things that consumers use as the basis for making a judgment
of quality.
P a g e | 22
The brand can add significant value when it is well recognized and has a positive
association in the consumers mind. This concept is called brand equity. Brand
awareness, brand loyalty, brand perceived quality and brand association leads to
brand equity.
Frequent brand advertising helps customer in developing a high level of brand
awareness and leads to a stronger association. It also imposes a better effect on
perceived brand equity in mind of the customer. The positively perceived brand
equity then leads to a higher level of brand equity.
The benefits of brand loyalty are longer tenure, and lower sensitivity to price. Recent
research found evidence that longer-term customers were indeed less sensitive to
price increases. According to Andrew Ehrenberg, consumers buy portfolios of
brands. They switch regularly between brands, often because they simply want a
change. Thus, brand penetration or brand share reflects only a statistical chance that
the majority of customers will buy that brand next time as part of a portfolio of
brands. It does not guarantee that they will stay loyal (Creamer, 2011).
By creating promotions and loyalty programs that encourage the consumer to take
some sort of action, companies are building brand loyalty by offering more than just
an advertisement. Offering incentives like big prizes creates an environment in
which customers see the advertiser as more than just the advertiser. Individuals are
far more likely to come back to a company that uses interesting promotions or
loyalty programs than a company with a static message of buy our brand because
we're the best.
Page 23
formally integrated into the internal accounting system. In this regard the
companies surveyed differed considerably (Guilding & Pike, 1994).
One implication is that the influence of equity of individual corporate brand on the
overall value of the company differs from one company to another. Corporate brand
of a company adds the largest value to the overall market value of the company. This
indicates that the overall value of company is the most sensitive to market
influences, and the success of its corporate brand.
Page 25
FIGURE 3: CBBE
P a g e | 26
Establishment of brand identity is based on the brand salience which refers to brand
awareness. Consumer is aware of the brand existence if he/she is able to recall and
to recognize the brand. The main criteria for brand identity, according to Keller, are
depth and breadth of brand awareness (keller, 2001).
The next step is the brand meaning which is divided into brand's performance and
brand imagery. Brand performance as one of the building blocks refers to the basic
purpose of the product itself, functionality, or the ability to satisfy customers needs.
This characteristic of a product is its intrinsic facet. The other building element,
brand imagery, is developed from the extrinsic property of a product itself and it is
connected to the possibility that the product will satisfy customer's psychological
and social needs. Brand meaning needs favourable, strong and unique associations.
The third step, i.e. brand responses step is defined as the way customers respond to
a brand. Responses are divided into brand feelings and brand judgments. Brand
judgment is the combination of brand imagery and brand performance in the minds
of the consumers. Brand feelings are customers emotional reactions to the social
currency brand evokes (keller, 2001). Brand responses lead to the positive and
accessible reactions of consumers.
Lastly, brand relationship is defined as the relationship between the customer and
brand, and it is related to personal identification of the customer with the brand.
Brand resonance as a building block of brand relationship is defined as the depth of
the psychological bond between the customer and the brand which results in loyalty.
Criteria are the intense and active loyalty.
A strong brand satisfies all the above-mentioned criteria. The most powerful block is
brand resonance. Therefore, the strongest brands will be those to which customers
become so attached that they, in effect, become evangelistic and actively seek means
to interact with the brand and eagerly share their experiences with others (Keller,
1993).
Page 27
2.9 Conclusion
As the global competition gets stiffer and industries in this business environment
are not sure of their survival, the brand is one of the few assets that can provide
long-term competitive advantage to the firm. Brand valuation today could become a
comprehensive instrument in decision making for the corporate houses. Many
established methodologies have been widely practiced for brand valuation by brand
consultancies, such as Interbrand and brand finance. As the importance of
intangibles to companies increases, managers should install more value-based
brand management system that can align the management of the brand asset with
that of other corporate assets.
Brand equity methods ought to give guidance to marketers that vary according to
the outcomes they want to influence. Brand positioning may need to be changed to
favour one outcome over another for a while, according to long-term brand strategy.
P a g e | 28
Page 29
P a g e | 30
Descriptive
Research
Exploratory
Research
Causal
Research
Page 31
details which concerns the What, Who and How Many rather than the Why in
Exploratory. Research tools used are questionnaire and highly structured interview
(Malhotra et al., 2004).
Causal research used to identify the cause and effect of the issue based on
experiment conducted in primary research. It is an investigative act which
determines which variable might be causing certain behaviour; the research helps to
identify the relationship between two variables and what happens to variable B
when variable A behaves in a certain manner.
work to test survey instruments, market research or when a complete and accurate
sampling frame cannot be complied. These include convenience sampling, judgment
sampling, quota sampling, and snowball sampling (Seale, 2004). For this study,
researcher has adopted the quota sampling as it is relatively quick which suitable for
the time constraint and help researcher meet the research objectives by easily
finding the respondents who fit specified criteria.
As the aims of this study are to identify the right corporate value of organizations,
the researcher has chosen group of working people both male and female 19years
old and over, as a quota sampling as they are considered familiar with the subject
and are the group that the finding strategy could be relevant to, also it is easily to
access and acquire by the screening questions.
Page 33
The primary data is needed to provide the exactly data that researcher needed in
order to solve the problem, though it might consider expensive comparing with
secondary research and time consuming which is the major problem for the author
who want as large as possible sampling size to provide as much accuracy data as
possible (Brassington & Pettitt, 2002).
There are various methods used to gather primary data such as survey, interview or
observation which depends on for example, the nature, purpose, approach, type of
each research.
A survey method, with the use of highly structured questionnaire was applied.
Although this method seemed to be the most appropriate in this research, there are
some disadvantages of the method, in terms that it is time consuming. The second
problem is the non-response. The third problem is the interviewers bias. In order to
mediate this problem, the questionnaire in this study was self-administered in the
presence of the interviewer. Interviewers involvement was limited to the
explanation of the purpose of the research and the instruction regarding the
questionnaire.
3.6.1 Questionnaire:
Questionnaire is in the form of formal questions that can be framed and written
down for respondents to provide answers. As a method for research instruments for
data collection, the questionnaire is an efficient method in the sense that many
respondents can be reached within a short time. More empirically, questionnaires
for research instruments come in two main forms; open-ended
questions and closed-ended questions.
The open-ended questions allow respondents to answer freely in their own words.
These questions are very good at exploring ideas but can be difficult to analyse. The
respondents can express themselves as fully as they wish.
Closed - Ended Questions is followed by a structured response. All possible answers
are given with the question. In order to avoid irrelevant information and deviations,
the researcher also employed the close-ended questions, which are a more
restrictive type of question. This type of question provides options and thereby
limits the rate of deviation from responses.
Page 35
3.9 Conclusion
The sampling frame in this study was drawn from UAE and Malaysia population. The
sample size is 112 respondents. The sampling technique used was a sampling
without replacement which, by definition, refers to inclusion of all the sample
elements only once (Malhotra & Birks, 2012). At the same time, non-probability
quota sampling is utilized.
P a g e | 36
Page 37
Age Group
18%
43%
39%
SOURCE 1: AUTHOR
P a g e | 38
The Figure bellow Summarize the gender percentage of the respondents. 57% were
female while 43% were male.
Gender
43%
Male
Female
57%
SOURCE 2: AUTHOR
Looking at the occupation of the respondents, the highest response count were
employed (72%). Respondents of self employed and retired had the same
percentage of 14% as shown in figure bellow.
Occupation
14%
14%
72%
Salaried
Self Employed
Retired
SOURCE 3: AUTHOR
Page 39
Looking at the sector that the respondent were working in; Most respondent were
working in private limited companies (61%), and 36% were divided equally
working in public limited and government organizations while 3% were working in
other companies.
Employed with:
3%
18%
18%
61%
Private Limited
Public Limited
Government
Other
SOURCE 4: AUTHOR
Demographic Variable
Age group:
19-29 years old
30-39 year old
40-49 years old
50 years & above
Gender:
Male
Female
P a g e | 40
Response Count
Percentage
48
44
20
0
43%
39%
18%
48
64
43%
57%
Occupation:
Salaried
Self employed
Retired
Employed with:
Private limited
Public limited
Government
other
80
16
16
72%
14%
14%
69
20
20
4
61%
18%
18%
3%
SOURCE 5: AUTHOR
Page 41
4%
Yes
No
96%
SOURCE 6: AUTHOR
No
32%
Yes
68%
SOURCE 7: AUTHOR
P a g e | 42
For Q3, on a scale of 1 5, majority of the respondents rated their brand good and
excellent while 24 of the respondents rated their brand as fair and 4 as very poor as
shown in chart 3.
CHART 3: Q3: HOW DO YOU RATE YOUR BRAND VS. OTHER SIMILAR
CATEGORY BRANDS IN THE MARKET?
40
44
Very poor
Poor
Fair
Good
Excellent
24
4
SOURCE 8: AUTHOR
Mean
Scale (x)
1
2
3
4
5
Respondents (f)
0
0
24
48
40
=112
(fx)
0
0
72
192
200
= 464
Mean = fx / f
= 464 / 112
Mean = 4.1
Page 43
Looking at the Mean measurement, the average respondents answers of the scaling
is 4.1.
No
43%
Yes
57%
SOURCE 9: AUTHOR
By closely looking at chart 5, most respondents think that people are familiar with
their brands. The data in the previous question do show why they think so.
P a g e | 44
44
40
24
4
Not at all
familiar
Slightly
familiar
Moderately
familiar
Very familiar
Extremely
familiar
Out of the acquired respondents, 47% say that their brands appeal to be visual,
while 29% appeal to be auditory and 24% kinesthetic.
CHART 6: Q3: WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING SENSORY DRIVERS DOES YOUR BRAND APPEAL TO?
24%
47%
29%
Visual
Auditory
Kinesthetic
Page 45
11%
89%
Yes
Based on the data showed in chart 8, most respondents associated their brand with
high quality of products and services.
68
32
12
P a g e | 46
The Mean:
Scale (x)
1
2
3
4
5
Respondents (f)
0
0
12
68
32
=112
(fx)
0
0
36
272
160
= 468
Mean = fx / f
= 468 / 112
Mean = 4.1
Looking at the data obtained from the primary source, 71% of the respondents
would like to buy products or services from their companies, while 9% would not.
Some said they would buy because they are used to it, others because they got
special discounts and its affordable. And some because its their brand and they
know the quality of the products and believe in it. On the other hand, the reason why
the other 29% respondents wouldnt buy is because they feel the brand is not good
enough.
CHART 9: Q3. WOULD YOU LIKE TO BUY A PRODUCT
PROMOTED UNDER YOUR BRAND NAME?
29%
Yes
71%
No
Page 47
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Cash
Discount
Free promotional gifts
Reward program
1
52
32
12
8
2
28
24
44
12
3
4
40
28
28
4
20
8
28
52
In chart 11, it shows how likely respondents think their customers may switch to
alternative brands; the data obtained vary from each scale.
CHART 11: Q2. HOW LIKELY DO YOU THINK WOULD IT BE FOR YOUR
CUSTOMERS TO SWITCH TO OTHER ALTERNATIVE BRANDS?
36
32
24
12
P a g e | 48
The Mean:
Scale (x)
1
2
3
4
5
Respondents (f)
36
12
32
24
8
=112
(fx)
36
24
96
96
40
= 292
Mean = fx / f
= 292 / 112
Mean = 2.6
The mean of Q2 will be 2.6, as there are various factors that affect customers buying
behaviour.
As in chart 12, more than 50% of the respondents agreed that their customers
mostly seek the quality of products they offer. Second is easy availability of products
and lastly affordable price and the brand image of products.
CHART 12: Q3. WHAT ARE IMPORTANT ELEMENTS YOU THINK THAT YOUR
CUSTOMERS SEEK IN THE PRODUCTS OF YOUR BRAND WHEN THEY PURCHASE?
64
36
28
20
Quality of products
Easy availability
Affordable Price
Brand image for products
Page 49
21%
79%
Yes
No
In Q2, most respondents 71% didnt make any suggestion to boost their brand
identity. Whereas 29% did so.
CHART 14: Q2. ARE THERE ANY SUGGESTIONS THAT YOU WANT TO MAKE IN ORDER TO BOOST
THE BRAND IDENTITY DESIGN OF YOUR COMPANY IN THE MARKET?
29%
Yes
No
71%
P a g e | 50
Looking at the data in figure 13, 46% of the respondents do know their company
vision, while 54% do not know.
CHART 15: Q3. DO YOU KNOW YOUR COMPANY VISION?
46%
54%
Yes
No
Page 51
It comes as no surprise that companies are shifting more of their marketing budgets
around social media messaging. Most are aggregating consumer posts through
analytical data gathering to better target advertising and others are using crowd
messaging via content blog posts.
As evidenced by the present study, both brand names and brand packaging do
influence the consumers quality evaluations. These are certainly not the only
extrinsic cues influencing the perception of product quality. In as managerial
perspective, the finding that brand and packaging images help the consumer in
differentiating the brands, accentuates the importance of the various firms
marketing efforts, and more particularly their interdependence.
The variety a brand offers positively inuences quality perceptions, even in a case
where it makes actual choice more difficult, underscores the effect of product
variety on perceived brand quality.
Brand loyalty as an independent variable significantly affected the brand image as a
mediator in equation one; brand loyalty as an independent variable significantly
affected the brand equity as a dependent variable in equation two; both brand
loyalty as an independent variable and brand image as a mediator considerably
impacted the brand equity as a dependent variable.
In most purchasing situations, customer activity decreases over time; once the initial
need has been satisfied, they have no reason to come back. Rewards programs are a
way to fight this downward curve, and motivate customers to maintain a steady
spending level.
Brand switching sometimes known as brand jumping, brand switching is the process
of choosing to switch from routine use of one product or brand to steady usage of a
different but similar product. It is not unusual for customers to build up a great deal
of brand loyalty due to such factors as quality, price, and availability. As corporate
social responsibility (CSR) becomes more important to business, managers will have
to formulate a coherent response that meets the needs of a number of other
stakeholders in addition to shareholders.
P a g e | 52
The researcher have experienced from the previous literature review that brand
equity can be approached from the perspective of the individual consumer. The basic
premise with customer-based brand equity is that the power of a brand lies in the
minds of consumers and what they have experienced and learned about the brand
over time. The advantage of conceptualising brand equity from the consumers
perspective is that it enables managers to consider specifically how their marketing
program improves the value of their brands. Though the eventual goal of many
marketing programs is to increase sales, it is first necessary to establish knowledge
structures for the brand so that consumers respond favourably to marketing activity
for the brand (Keller, 1993).
Brand loyalty represents a favourable attitude toward a brand resulting in consistent
purchase of the brand over time. It is the result of consumers learning that only the
particular brand can satisfy their needs. Two approaches to the study of brand
loyalty have dominated marketing literature. The first, a behavioural approach to
brand loyalty, views consistent purchasing of one brand over time as an indication of
brand loyalty. Repeat purchasing behaviour is assumed to reflect reinforcement and
a strong stimulus-to-response link. But, such loyalty may lack commitment to the
brand and reflect repeat buying based on inertia.
The second, a cognitive approach to brand loyalty, underlines that behaviour alone
does not reflect brand loyalty. Loyalty implies a commitment to a brand that may not
be reflected by just measuring continuous behaviour. A family may buy a particular
brand because it is the lowest priced brand on the market. A slight increase in price
may cause the family to shift to an-other brand. In this case, continuous purchasing
does not reflect reinforcement or loyalty. The stimulus product and reward links are
not strong. The researcher can conclude that some of the apparent limitations of the
strictly behavioural approach in measuring brand loyalty are overcome when loyalty
includes both attitudes and behaviour (Assael, 1992).
Brand awareness plays an important role in consumer decision making for three
major reasons. First, it is important that consumers think of the brand when they
think about the product category. Raising brand awareness increases the likelihood
that the brand will be a member of the consideration set. Second, brand awareness
can affect decisions about a brand in the consideration set. For example, some
Page 53
consumers have been shown to adopt a decision rule to buy only familiar, wellestablished brands. In low involvement decision settings, a minimum level of brand
awareness may be sufficient for product choice, even in the absence of a well-formed
attitude. Finally, brand awareness affects consumer decision making by influencing
the formation and strength of brand associations in the brand image.
P a g e | 54
Page 55
P a g e | 56
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Aaker, D.A., 1991. Managing Brand Equity. Free Press.
Aaker, D., 1991. Managing Brand Equity: Capitalization on the Value of Brand Name.
New York: The Free Press.
Aaker, D.A., 1995. Building Strong Brands. Free Press.
Aaker, D., 1995. Measuring Brand Equity Across Products and Markets. Management
Review, 38(3), pp.102-18.
Aaker, D., 1996. Measuring Brand Equity Across Products and Markets. California
Management Review, 38(3), pp.102-18.
Abratt, R. & Bick, G., 2003. Valuing Brands and Brand Equity: Methods and
Processes. Journal of Applied Managementand Entrepreneurship, 8(1), pp.21-39.
Ailawadi, K.L., Neslin, S.A. & Lehmann, D.R., 2003. Revenue Premium as an Outcome
Measure of Brand Equity. Journal of Marketing, 67(4), pp.1-17.
Assael, H., 1992. In Consumer behavior and marketing action. Boston: Kent
Publishing Company.
Babbie, E.R., 2012. The Practice of Social Research. 13th ed. Cengage Learning.
Bekmeier, F.S., 1998. Marktorientierte Markenbewertung: eine konsumenten- und
unternehmensbezogene Betrachtung. p.410.
Page 57
Brassington, D.F. & Pettitt, D.S., 2002. Principles of Marketing. 3rd ed. Prentice Hall.
Cobb, W., C, R. & Donthu, N., 1995. Brand equity, brand preference, and
purchaseintent. Journal of Advertising. 24, pp.25-42.
Collis, J. & Hussey, R., 2009. Business Research, a practical guide for undergraduate &
postgraduate students. 3rd ed. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Creamer, M., 2011. Do Popularity and Penetration Trump Loyalty? [Online] Available
at: http://adage.com/article/news/ehrenberg-s-theories-influenced-today-smarketers/148828/ [Accessed 20 July 2013].
Dillman, D.A., 2006. Mail and Internet Surveys: The Tailored Design Method. 2nd ed.
New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
Farquhar, P.H., Herr, P.M. & Fazio, R.H., 1990. A Relational Model For Category
Extensions of Brands. pp.856-60.
FollowBlurtit, n.d. What Are The Advantages And Disadvantages Of Face-to-face
Interviews? [Online] Available at: http://www.blurtit.com/q734868.html [Accessed
13 Augustus 2011].
Guilding, C. & Pike, R., 1994. An Exploratory Study of the Managerial Implications of
Valuing Brand. British Journal of Management, 5(2), p.101.
Howard, J.A. & Sheth, J.N., 1969. The Theory of Buyer Behavior. New York: John Wiley
and Sons.
Hutt, M.D. & Speh, T.W., 2004. Business Marketing Management. p.714.
P a g e | 58
Ingham, S., 2003. Cool Britania? New Business Week. [Online] Available at:
http://www.newbusiness.co.uk/cgi-bin/showArticle.pl?id=388 [Accessed June
2013].
Kapferer, J.N., 1992. Strategic Brand Management: New Approaches to Creating and
Evaluating Brand Equity. London: Kogan Page.
Kapferer, J.N., 1997. Strategic Brand Management: Creating and sustaining brand
equity long term. 2nd ed. London: Kogan Page.
Kar, G., 2013. The Importance of Brand Awareness. [Online] Available at:
http://www.smallbusinesscan.com/the-importance-of-brand-awareness/ [Accessed
20 July 2013].
Keller, K.L., 1993. Conceptualizing, Measuring, and Managing Customer Based Brand
Equity. Journal of Marketing, 57(1), pp.1-22.
Keller, K.L., 1998. Strategic brand management: building, measuring, and managing
brand equity. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
keller, k.l., 2001. Building Customer-Based Brand Equity. lane , 10(2), pp.14-19.
KOTLER, P. & Keller, K., 2011. Marketing Management. 14th ed. Prentice Hall.
Macdonald, E. & Sharp, B., 2003. Management Perceptions of the Importance of
Brand Awareness as an Indication of Advertising Effectiveness. Marketing Bulletin,
14(2).
Page 59
Malhotra, N.K. & Birks, D.F., 2012. Marketing Research: An Applied Approach. 4th ed.
Pearson.
Malhotra, N.K., Birks, D.F. & Wills, P., 2004. Marketing Research: An Applied Approach.
USA: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Malhotra, N.K., Peterson, M. & Kleiser, S.B., 1999. Marketing Research : A State-ofthe-Art Review and Directions for the Twenty-First Century. Journal of the Academy
of Marketing Science, 27(2), pp.160-83.
Ourusoff, A., 1993. Whats in A Name? Financial World. 161, pp.81-85.
Pierce, L.L., 2009. Twelve Steps for Success in the Nursing Research Journey. The
Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 40(4), pp.154-62.
Pitta, D.A. & Katsanis, L.P., 1995. Understanding Brand Equity for Successful Brand
Extension. Consumer Marketing, 12(4), pp.51-64.
Satter, H., 2001. Praxis von markenbewertung und markenmenagement in deutschen
unternehmen.
Saunders, M., Thornhill, A. & Lewis, P., 2009. Research methods for business students.
5th ed. Pearson education: Essex.
Seale, C., 2004. Researching society and culture. 2nd ed. London: SAGE.
Simon, C.J. & Sullivan, M.J., 1993. The Measurement and Determinants of Brand
Equity: A Financial Approach. Marketing Science, pp.28-52.
Srivastava, R.K. & Shocker, A.D., 1991. Brand Equity: a perspective on its meaning
and measurement. Marketing Science Institute, pp.1-31.
P a g e | 60
Page 61
APPENDICES
1.
3.
Salaried
Self Employed
Retired
4.
2.
Occupation:
2.
Would you recommend any changes that would make your brand better?
___________________________________________________________
3.
How do you rate your brand VS. Other similar category brands in the market?
(1=Poor , 5=Excellent)
1
Do you know where your customers get their information about the services you
provide? Yes______ No______.
If yes, where? _________________________________________________________
2.
P a g e | 62
Which of the following sensory drivers does your brand appeal to?
Visual
Auditory
Kinesthetic
2.
How strong the brand does associates your customers to high quality of products & services?
(1= poor, 5= very strong)
1
2
3
4
5
3.
Would you like to buy a product promoted under your brand name?
Yes
No
Why? _____________________________________________
Please rank the type of rewards that your brand could offer customers, in order of preference:
(Please rank from 1 to 4: 1 being the reward you would prefer the most)
____ Cash
____ Discount
____ Free promotional gifts
____ Reward Program
2.
How likely do you think would it be for your customers to switch to other alternative brands?
(1= Very unlikely, 5= very likely)
1
2
3
4
5
3.
What are important elements you think that your customers seek in the products of your brand when they
purchase?
Quality of products
Easy availability
Affordable Price
Brand image for products
Page 63
Do you think the price of the products manufactured by your company is reasonable?
Yes
No
2.
Are there any suggestions that you want to make in order to boost the brand identity design of your
company in the market?
___________________________________________________________________________
3.
P a g e | 64