Article

Act Like a Retailer, Think Like a Brand: Asia-Pacific Journal of Management

Research and Innovation

An Overview of Retailer Brand Equity

12(1) 67–84
© 2016 Asia-Pacific
Institute of Management
and Agenda for Future Research in SAGE Publications
sagepub.in/home.nav
Indian Context DOI: 10.1177/2319510X16647288
http://apjmri.sagepub.com

Rashmi1
Hamendra Dangi2

Abstract
There exists a vast body of literature on brand equity (BE). In comparison, research on its application to retailers is scarce and more
recent. This review brings together strands from the fragmented literature on BE of retailers. Active research on retailer’s equity
began only in the recent decade, though earlier scholars have hinted at the existence of the phenomenon previously. Therefore,
conceptualisation of retail equity is still in want of consensus. This article synthesises empirical evidence on operationalisation of
retailer brand equity (RBE), validation of its frameworks and its antecedent–consequent relationships. We reviewed 160 BE-related
papers, a majority of which focused on retail brands. The more relevant of these research articles were published during the years
2003–2014. Results of these researches have been distilled into an integrative model for RBE.

Keywords
Brand management, corporate branding, retailer brand equity, consumer-based retailer brand equity, retail equity

Introduction branding principles should be applied to retail firms

Retailers face an environment of increasingly stiff compe-
tition (Popkowski-Leszczyc, Sinha & Timmermans, 2000).
This is especially true of saturated markets. Two prominent
ways by which retailers can rise above their competitors
are differentiating the retailing experience offered by them
and looking for unsaturated markets. While the former can
be achieved through successful branding, the latter has
been made possible by the opening up of world economies
to the entry of foreign players.
Branding in Retailing
The concept of ‘brand’ is as applicable to retail firms as
it is to physical products and intangible services (Woodside
& Walser, 2007). There is a tendency to think of branding
in the context of tangible products. But brand cultivation
is equally critical for services (Berry, 2000). Therefore,
(Ailawadi & Keller, 2004), or ‘store formulas’ (Luijten &
Reijnders, 2009). Consumers form brand images of retail-
ers (Jacoby & Mazursky, 1984). This image can be based
on retailers’ product assortment, pricing, credit policy,
service quality, etc. (Keller, 1993). Constructs used in rela-
tion with product branding, such as brand personality, are
also applicable to stores (Martineau, 1958). A store is the
place where customers experience the retailer. Indeed, a
store is a retail product in itself (Floor, 2006; Kasulis &
Lusch, 1981; Porter & Claycomb, 1997). This shows the
way to the concept of retailer’s branding.
Retail industry is highly competitive. Branding of retail-
ers influences customer perceptions, and encourages store
choice and loyalty (Ailawadi & Keller, 2004; Hartman &
Spiro, 2005). Grewal, Levy and Lehmann (2004) promote
the emergence of the retailer as a brand as a key develop-
ment in retailing. This phenomenon has been most
commonly referred to as ‘retail branding’ (Ailawadi &

1 Research Scholar, Faculty of Management Studies, University of Delhi, North Campus, Delhi, India.
2 Assistant Professor, Faculty of Management Studies, University of Delhi, North Campus, Delhi, India.

Corresponding author:
Rashmi, A-208 PrashantVihar, Rohini Sector 14, Delhi 110085, India.
E-mail: Rashmiphd@fms.edu
68 Asia-Pacific Journal of Management Research and Innovation 12(1)
Keller, 2004; Dennis, Murphy, Marsland, Cockett & Patel,
2002). Davies (1998) observed that retailers are becoming
more conscious of the value of branding. In order to
develop their own brand, retailers are imitating manufac-
turer’s brand and its image building process. Retail brand-
ing is evolving as an important strategy for modern retail
(Wileman & Jary, 1997). Its practice is already popular
among American and European retail sectors (Birtwistle &
Freathy, 1998). In fact, retailers are being involved in
branding issues, similar to consumer goods manufacturers
and business-to-business service providers (Davies &
Ward, 2005). Murphy (1990) distinguishes retailers as
‘branded services’. Many popular corporate brands are, in
fact, retail brands. Their retailer owners invest heavily in
brand building (Burt & Sparks, 2002; Martenson, 2007).
Retailers are no longer interested in merely selling prod-
ucts that have been pre-branded by manufacturers. They
now aim to offer products and services as a package which
can add value to customers’ transaction (Burt, 2000).
Retailers are developing and projecting their shops, private
merchandise and staff as brands (Burt & Sparks, 2002).
Quantification of Effectiveness of
Retailer Brands
Marketers in any industry are faced with severe competition
and pressures of budgetary accountability. Consequently,
marketers are pressed to report the returns on the invest-
ment they make in marketing activities, such as creation of
marketing assets (MSI, 2008; O’Sullivan & Abela, 2007).
Brand equity (BE) is one such marketing asset (Ambler,
2003; Davis, 2000). It has been researched vis-à-vis
development of financial, firm-based measures of BE
(Butterfield & Haigh, 1999; Farquhar, 1989; Farquhar,
Han & Ijiri, 1991; Kapferer, 1997; Shocker & Weitz,
1988; Simon & Sullivan, 1990; Swait, Erdem, Louviere &
Dubelaar, 1993). Its measurement against customer-based
contexts has also been explored (Keller, 1993). Given the
emergence of retailer’s branding, the idea of BE is being
increasingly applied to brands in retailing (Jinfeng &
Zhilong, 2009; Kramer, 1999; Pappu & Quester, 2006a).
Retailers are increasing their BE by developing their
formats and creating a ‘branded’ shopping experience for
the consumer (Lisanti, 2001; Smith, 2000). This ‘retail
equity’ may be viewed as the value a retail outlet is able to
add to the brand or to the products sold by it. In fact, in
some product categories, for example, the Indian jewellery
market, it was always the ‘retail equity’ which had drawn
consumer traffic.
The importance of using equity measures for retailers is
evident from four distinct aspects: the stores, the retail
chains, the customers and the manufacturers (who rely on
the retailer to sell their products). From the store’s perspec-
tive, building BE enables the retailer to use its name
for own-brand launches. This in turn adds to revenue and
improves profit margins. Insulation from competitors’
marketing activities is another benefit for stores (Ailawadi &
Keller, 2004). Stores oriented to think of themselves as
brands offer customers with unique and pleasurable shop-
ping experiences that lead to differentiation (Carpenter,
Moore & Fairhurst, 2005). From the standpoint of the cor-
porate management of a retail chain, retail equity is handy
during mergers and acquisitions as it indicates a target
retailer’s market performance (Pappu & Quester, 2006a).
From customers’ point of view, perceptions of equity
simplify purchase planning and execution in an increas-
ingly complex environment (Hansen & Solgaard, 2004).
As for the product brand manufacturers using the retailer’s
channel, retailer’s image can spill over to the manufacturer
brands being carried in the store (Yoo, Donthu & Lee,
2000). Therefore, manufacturers can chose to use retail
channels that contribute most to their product’s equity.
Retail Landscape of India
India is an unsaturated market on account of being an
emerging economy. It is experiencing political openness
and economic liberalisation in the retail sector. A 100
per cent foreign direct investment (FDI) in single brand
retail has been notified in 2012 (Press Note No. 4, 2012
Series, n.d.). Deliberations are on to increase the limit for
multi-brand retail (e.g., supermarkets) from the present 51
per cent FDI (Press Note No. 5, 2012 Series, n.d.). The
Associated Chambers of Commerce and Industry of India
(ASSOCHAM) predict 15 per cent year-over-year growth
in the Indian retail sector over the next 5 years through
2018. Store-based retailing is likely to witness a compound
annual growth rate (CAGR) of 7.6 per cent during 2011–
2016, and will grow by 44 per cent in absolute terms
during this period. Hypermarkets in India are likely to see
rapid growth between 2011 and 2016, registering a CAGR
of 13.4 per cent—87.4 per cent in absolute terms. On the
whole, modern grocery retailers are forecast to grow at
a CAGR of 11.7 per cent between 2011 and 2016 (The
Associated Chambers of Commerce and Industry of India
[ASSOCHAM] & Yes Bank, 2012). This outlook is shared
by A.T. Kearney’s Global Retail Development Index
(GRDI) Report (2013), which ranks India at 14th place
among developing markets. It projects India as a market
worth considering. Emerging retail formats in Indian
modern retail include supermarkets, discount supermarkets,
destination supermarkets, convenience stores, discount
stores, hypermarkets, warehouse clubs, department stores,
specialty stores and malls. The data highlight that there
exists ample scope for influx of foreign retailers operating
in saturated Western markets, development of newer indig-
enous retail names and the expansion of existing retail
chains to tier-II and -III cities in India.
The remaining article is structured as follows. We first
build a theoretical background to the origin and evolution
Rashmi and Dangi 69
of branding in a retailing context. Here, differences between
product and retail brands are outlined, and terminological
ambiguities are highlighted. This leads us to the literature
on conceptualisation of retailer’s BE. The need for research
on retailers’ equity and its measurement scale, separate
from those of products’ BE, is emphasised through opin-
ions in literature. The article then discusses research on
operationalisation of retailers’ equity into dimensions, and
on its sources and effects. These are followed by results
on the relationship of retail equity with other branding
constructs. This section closes with findings on the devel-
opment of indices of retailer brand equity (RBE). The
final part identifies possibilities for future research on
this subject, and concludes with a framework of RBE
suggested for an emerging market like India.
Theoretical Background
The worth of a brand is indicated by its BE. A brand’s value
can be measured from two standpoints—financial and cus-
tomer based (Lassar, Mittal & Sharma, 1995). Firm-based
measures focus on the financial/monetary asset value of the
brand for the franchise in the marketplace (Morris, 1996).
It is calculable by financial valuations, such as market-
to-book ratio, by measuring the price at which the brand
can be sold or by determining the price premium a brand
can command over an unbranded competitive product.
It basically measures the outcome of customer-based
BE. Accounting methods for assessment of the asset value
attached to a brand name have been proposed (Farquhar
et al., 1991; Simon & Sullivan, 1992).
The second perspective, based on market’s perceptions,
refers to a multidimensional concept. It measures the value
added to a product or service due to the perceptions that a
consumer associates with a brand name. This is conceptu-
alised as consumer-based BE (Aaker, 1991; Keller, 1993;
Shocker, Srivastava & Rueckert, 1994; Washburn & Plank,
2002; Yang & Jun, 2002). Customer-based BE has been
defined as the ‘differential effect of brand knowledge on
consumer response to the marketing of the brand’ (Keller,
2003). Here, BE is theorised from the viewpoint of an indi-
vidual customer. It is said to occur when the ‘consumer is
familiar with the brand and holds some favorable, strong,
and unique brand associations in the memory’ (Kamakura &
Russell, 1991).
In contrast to a consumer-oriented measurement, Samu,
Lyndem and Litz (2012) concentrate on the retailer’s per-
spective of a product brand’s equity. They define a retailer-
based BE as the retailer’s perception of the franchisor brand
(Baldauf, Cravens, Diamantopoulos & Zeugner-Roth, 2009).
Product Brands and Retailer Brands
Retailing is an important service industry. Building a case
for branding of retailers, Berry (2000) states that for service
organisations, the company is the primary brand. This is
unlike the packaged goods industry where the product is
the primary brand. He further argued that branding is not
meant for tangible goods alone; branding is as crucial for
service organisations. Jara and Cliquet (2012) confirm that
retail brands are really (service) brands. Their image is
founded on store dimensions.
A hint of branding has always been apparent in a
retailer’s name, and in the store through its fascia (Lury,
1998). Still, retailers have been less active in branding their
corporate identity and their product offerings, when com-
pared to product manufacturers (Kent, 2003). Retailers are
only now consciously starting to acknowledge the power
of branding (Feuer, 2005).
Retailers’ stores can be viewed as their ‘products’
(Zentes, Morschett & Schramm-Klein, 2007). Then, a retail
brand can be thought of as ‘a group of the retailer’s outlets
which carry a unique name, symbol, logo or combination
thereof’ (Zentes, Morschett & Schramm-Klein, 2008). It
identifies and differentiates the tangible and intangible
offerings of a retailer (Ailawadi & Keller, 2004).
Retail brands differ from manufacturer brands because
retailing is a service business (Berry, 2000). Since retailer
brands are inherently multi-sensory compared to product
brands, they can build their equity at the strength of rich
consumer experiences (Ailawadi & Keller, 2004). The
brand image of retailers is closely related with the image of
the store because any retail brand is essentially connected to
a physical store (Ailawadi & Keller, 2004; Burt, 2000; Burt
& Sparks, 2002; Fullerton, 2005). On the other hand, manu-
facturer brands are relatively insulated from the effects of
store image and in-store experience (Richardson, Jain &
Dick, 1996). Retailers have a wider pool of branding tools
to choose from. Brand managers of products use the tradi-
tional elements of brand identity (name, symbol, packaging
and advertising). In addition to these, retailers can also
avail of tools associated with store image—merchandise
(assortment, quality, brand mix and price), credit policy,
store (location, atmosphere, fascia and visual design),
service personnel, promotion (local community involve-
ment, in-store events), etc. (Ailawadi & Keller, 2004;
Davies & Ward, 2005). The diversity of attributes also
makes it more challenging to manage retail brands when
compared to product brands (Jary & Wildman, 1998).
A McKinsey report on building retail brands (Henderson
& Mihas, 2000) submits that creating a brand may be
harder for multi-brand retailers, compared to manufactur-
ers. But at the same time, branding exercise is as vital for
retailers. Some multi-brand retailers have been successful
in establishing a national brand identity. Yet, many retailers
still miss a brand which is distinctive of the brands being
retailed by them. These latter multi-brand retailers have
concentrated more on the manufacturer brands, than on
their own banner.
Questioning the interpretation of retail businesses as
brands, Jary and Wileman (1998) find retail brands to be
70 Asia-Pacific Journal of Management Research and Innovation 12(1)
‘The Real Thing’. Jara and Cliquet (2012) corroborate
this—retail brands’ performance is influenced by factors
identical to those affecting product brands.
Kremer and Viot (2012) record the evolution of retail
branding conceptualisation. Initially, retailers had focused
their branding efforts on products (retailer’s in-house
private-label product) alone. Gradually, they widened their
branding horizon to include store and corporate aspects in
their retailer brand (Burt & Davies, 2010). Retail brands
began as generic, no-name versions of commodity-like
products manufactured, owned and marketed by retailers
to increase their margins. For instance, a supermarket chain
would sell pulses in non-labelled transparent packets.
Moving across generations, retail brands graduated to
named labels (same as or different from the retail chain’s
name). For example, Bharti Walmart Private Limited
sells spices in their Easyday stores under the name ‘Great
Value’. In their current generation, retail brands have moved
closer to corporate brands and are contributing to the retail
chain’s overall positioning (Burt & Sparks 2002; Laaksonen
& Reynolds, 1994). For the evolution of a mere private-
label product to a full-fledged retail brand, the retailer
should satisfy the four criteria elaborated by Davies (1992)—
differentiation, premium price, separate existence and
psychic value. For an evolved retail brand, the difference
between goods and services fades because the format turns
into a brand (Dawson, 2001). Burt and Sparks (2002)
submit that it is wrong to limit the scope of retailer’s brand-
ing to its ‘own-labels’ or ‘private labels’. Many retailers
have grown into a brand in its own right.
Ambiguous Nomenclature
In this article, ‘retail brand’ refers to a retailer/retail store
as a brand (Das, Datta & Guin, 2012a, 2012b; Moller &
Herm, 2013). For example, Big Bazaar is a nationwide,
Indian retail chain that operates stores under the (retail)
brand name Big Bazaar. We speak of retail(er) brand as
a holistic conceptualisation covering elements of corpo-
rate, store, service and item branding. The literature on BE,
though, has been ambiguous in terming this concept.
Traditionally, branding studies on retailing have concen-
trated on private-label products produced and sold by retail-
ers. Some authors have used retail brand in the sense of
these private-label product brands (Burt, 2000; Birtwistle &
Freathy, 1998). In this setting, retail brand refers to the
‘consumer products produced by or on behalf of, distribu-
tors and sold under the distributor’s own name or trademark
through the distributor’s own outlet’ (Morris, 1979). Some
scholars have used the term retailer brand for this purpose
(Grunert, Esbjerg, Bech-Larsen, Brunso & Juhl, 2006).
Others call it store brand (Luijten & Reijnders, 2009;
Martenson, 2007). These are also popularly referred to
as own-brand (Kremer & Viot, 2012). In this sense, these
terms (retailer brand, retail brand, retail product brand,
distributor brand or store brand) are being used to refer to
‘a brand owned by a retailer (a marketing chain or any
other typical retail structure) or by a wholesale distributor
(who owns the right to sell the brand exclusively in its
own retail outlets)’ (Burt & Davies, 2010; Chimhundu,
Hamlin & McNeill, 2010; Herstein & Gamliel, 2006, p. 307;
Leingpibul, Broyles & Kohli, 2013). For example, Indian
multi-category retail chain Easyday sells two store brands—
Easy Choice and Easy Maxx—along with the national
brands of manufacturers. Westside, a department store
chain, owns private brands Wardrobe, Gia, Nuon, L.O.V.,
Westsport and Wunder Love in the clothing category.
The next set of researchers is more in sync with this
article’s theme (e.g., Möller & Herm, 2013; Zentes et al.,
2008). Carpenter et al. (2005) use retail brand in the
sense of the ‘store as a brand’ (Martenson, 2007), or a ‘store
formula’ (Luijten & Reijnders, 2009). Morschett, Swoboda
and Foscht (2005) outline ‘retail brand’ as a characterisa-
tion of the ‘name of a retail company (or specific retail
channel) that develops as a brand in the consumers’ mind’.
Burt and Davies (2010) term this ‘retail-er as the brand’. In
summary, here, the retailer itself is seen as the brand
(Ailawadi & Keller, 2004; Swoboda, Haelsig, Morschett &
Schramm-Klein, 2009), for example, the brands Pantaloons,
IKEA or Aldi.
Kozinets, Sherry, DeBerry-Spence, Duhacheck and
Nuttavuthisit (2002) and Fullerton (2005) borrow from
services marketing to describe a ‘retail service brand’.
It includes not just the specific tangible products which are
sold in store but also the retail service experience. With an
aim to impart structure, Jara and Cliquet (2008) distinguish
between two strategies of retail branding. The first approach
uses service retail brands, which comprise store brands and
composite private labels. The other revolves around private
labels.
Steenkamp, Koll and Geyskens (2004) integrated the
two facets. Retail branding positions the store formula as
a brand to induce shopper loyalty. Private labels can assist
in this process. Similarly, Martenson (2007) combines
the effects of retailer-as-a-brand, manufacturer brands and
store brands to explain corporate (store) image. Collins-
Dodd and Lindley (2003) treat (private-label) store brand
as a brand extension of overall retailer brand. This treat-
ment is especially applicable when there is explicit mention
of a retailer’s name on product packages. For example,
Indian grocery retail chain Reliance Fresh owns private
labels Reliance Value and Reliance Select, which explicitly
use the retailer’s name in the store brands’ name. Though
Kremer and Viot (2012) distinguish between ‘store brand’
(own-brand as opposed to national brands) and ‘retailer
brand’ (shop formula positioned as brand), they suggest
that promotion of store brand also improves the chain-level
retailer’s brand if the two share a common name.
Clearing the air on terminological debate, Zentes et al.
(2008) differentiate between the terms ‘retail brand’ and
Rashmi and Dangi 71
‘store brand’ as follows. ‘Retail brand’ is at the level of
stores (e.g., Big Bazaar, Lifestyle and IKEA), while ‘store
brand’ is at the product (private- or own-label) level (e.g.,
Great Value grocery products by Easyday and Reliance
Select items at Reliance Fresh stores). Davies (1992) dis-
tinguished between the retail process brand and the retail
product brand as potentially independent. This distinction
was also upheld by Grewal et al. (2004) when they outlined
the separate roles of national brands, private labels and the
store itself as a brand in retail branding. Retail brand may
act as a label for store brands, though this cannot be gener-
alised as a universal practice (Wileman & Jary, 1997). For
example, Shoppers Stop, a clothing retail chain, labels its
own-brands ‘Stop’; Chroma, a retail chain that sells elec-
tronics labels its store brand as ‘Chroma’.
Research Objective
Primarily, the study’s objective is to gain insights into the
concept of retailer’s BE and its recent evolution in a
short span of the last decade. The secondary objective is to
propose a customer-based framework for RBE, derived
from literary investigation and our own views.
Literature Review
Retailers are witnessing a shift in power along the value
chain. They are increasingly taking over power tradition-
ally enjoyed by manufacturers. To capitalise on this shift,
retailers are moving their focus from merchandising
to marketing. They are moulding their store names into
brands. Treating the retail chain overall as a brand,
Hartman and Spiro (2005) termed a measure of its value as
customer-based store equity. Again focusing on consumers’
perspective, the term consumer-based retailer equity has
been coined (Pappu & Quester, 2006a) along the lines of
customer-based BE for (manufacturer) product brands
(Keller, 1993).
Swoboda, Berg and Schramm-Klein (2013a) measure
the phenomenon as store equity or retail store equity.
This nomenclature is justified because a retailer’s brand is
partially a service brand. A retail chain’s stores link the
retail brand to a product (Jara & Cliquet, 2012). Like any
service brand, a retailer’s brand has tangible (product-
related) and intangible (experience-related) attributes
(Berry, 2000; Blankson & Kalafatis, 1999; Brodie, Whittome
& Brush, 2009; De Chernatony & Riley, 1999; De
Chernatony, Drury & Segal-Horn, 2003; Padgett & Allen,
1997). Stores are the physical manifestation of the retail
company that owns the retailer brand. Hence, a store can be
thought of as the company’s product (Dicke, 1992). The
image of the store influences the image of the retail
chain (Ailawadi & Keller, 2004; Burt & Mavrommatis,
2006; Collins-Dodd & Lindley, 2003; Grewal et al., 1998;
Kozinets et al., 2002; Semeijn, VanRiel & Ambrosini, 2004;
Richardson et al., 1996; San Martin Gutierrez, 2006).
A powerful brand name of a retailing company causes
the boundary between retail brand and store to blur in
customers’ eyes (Grewal et al., 2004).
Beristain and Zorrilla (2011) develop a measure called
store brand equity, but specifically for private-label product
brands of retailers. Shopper-based mall equity is a measure
similar to store equity and has been applied in a related
retail context (Chebat, El-Hedhli & Sirgy, 2009; El-Hedhli &
Chebat, 2009). It has been used for retail spaces such as
shopping malls. Jara and Cliquet (2008) describe service
RBE as composed of three dimensions: retailed product,
in-store service and retail company.
Table 1 lists the research on conceptualisation of BE in
the context of retailers.
Need for Separate Research on
RBE and Its Measurement
Retailer brands and product brands share common brand-
ing principles. Yet, due to differences between the two,
actual application of branding insights varies (Ailawadi &
Keller, 2004). Conceptualisation of BE poses additional
challenges in the case of retailers. This is due to special
requirements and complexity of retailers as brands. For
instance, rating consumer preference for branded pro-
ducts vis-à-vis similar unbranded products is a common
technique for visualising BE of products (Aaker, 1996).
Researchers of product BE can use no-name (generic)
private labels as a point of reference (Ailawadi, Lehmann &
Neslin, 2003; Park & Srinivasan, 1994; Sethuraman, 2000).
But it is difficult to apply this technique for retailer brands.
It would be hard to find an unbranded, similar retailer for
comparison. The value of a product brand can be gauged
from the excess of its dollar-metric market value over its
volume-metric market share (Aaker, 1991). This approach
too is difficult to apply for valuing retailers. Unlike product
brands, retailer brands must manage multiple attributes
simultaneously (Jary & Wileman, 1998). Another potential
challenge is the lack of generality in defining BE for retailers
in terms of a price premium (case of discount retailers with
unique, strong and favourable branding, e.g., Walmart)
(Ailawadi & Keller, 2004; Davies, 1992).
Even so, majority of research has deemed it appropriate
to apply product BE models to retailing businesses. Like
product BE, retailer equity is also viewed as a multidimen-
sional construct (Arnett et al., 2003). Multidimensionality
aids managers in comprehending the contributions of each
dimension to equity separately. Empirical evidence of
structural similarities between the two has been reported.
Methods of product BE measurement have been extended
to retailer’s equity (Pappu & Quester, 2006a; Yoo &
Donthu, 2001).
Retailers’ BE is fast overtaking that of even leading
manufacturers (McGoldrick, 2002). We find discrepancies
Table 1. Conceptual Research on RBE
Authors
Arnett, Laverie and Meiers (2003)
Ailawadi and Keller (2004)
Hartman and Spiro (2005)
Pappu and Quester
(2006a, 2006b)
Christodoulides, De Chernatoni,
Furrer, Shiu and Abimbola (2006)
Decarlo, Laczniak, Motley and
Ramaswami (2007)
Swoboda, Haelsig, Morschett and
Schramm-Klein (2007, 2009)
Jinfeng and Zhilong (2009)
El-Hedhli and Chebat (2009)
Allaway, Huddleston, Whipple
and Ellinger (2011)
Jara and Cliquet (2012)
Das et al. (2012a)
Swoboda et al. (2013)
Swoboda, Berg, Schramm-Klein
Foscht (2013b)
Source: Authors’ compilation.
Definition of the Concept Abstraction Term Used
A set of brand assets and liabilities linked to a store brand (e.g., Walmart), Chain level Retailer equity
its name and symbol, that add to or subtract from the perceived value
of the store brand by its customers (or potential customers)
A retailer’s brand equity is exhibited in consumers responding more Chain level Retailer brand equity
favourably to its marketing actions than they do to competing retailers
Differential effect of store knowledge on customer response to the Chain level and channel of distribution level Customer-based store equity
marketing activities of the store (‘corporate retailers may have different store
equities for different retailing distribution outlets
including brick-and-mortar stores, catalogs, and
electronic storefronts’)
The value associated by the consumer with the name of a retailer, as Chain level Retailer equity
reflected in the dimensions of retailer awareness, retailer associations, Consumer-based retailer equity
retailer perceived quality and retailer loyalty
A relational type of intangible asset that is co-created through the Not available Online retail/service (ORS)
interaction between consumers and the e-tail brand brand equity
Prior impressions held in memory about retailers. Store level Retailer equity
Similar to store name strength, which provides the consumer with an Retail store name equity
inference about the retailer’s merchandise and service offerings
Agree with Keller’s (1993) well-known conceptualisation of brand equity Not available Customer-based retail brand
as being composed of brand awareness and brand image, focusing on equity
the latter
No explicit definition is mentioned in the paper
The incremental utility or value added to a retailer by its brand name Chain level Retailer equity
Store equity
The differential effect of mall knowledge on shoppers’ responses to Not applicable Shopper-based mall equity
a mall’s marketing activities (SBME)
A result of a supermarket chain’s total brand-building efforts over Chain level Customer-based retail brand
time, which involves the daily implementation of the marketing equity
message through numerous service, product, price and promotion
decisions which are experienced in the stores by consumers
Retail brand equity has elements similar to those in brand equity of any Chain level Retail brand equity
manufacturer brand, with an associated service component and a corporate
dimension including managerial values/symbols and retailer personality
Adopted Pappu and Quester’s (2006a) conceptualisation Not available Consumer-based retailer equity
Retail store equity is defined as consumer perceptions of a retailer’s store Chain level Retail store equity
as a strong brand in the local market, which is determined by local store Store equity of retailers
attributes
Retail brand equity is defined as a consumer’s associations of a focal or Chain level Retail brand equity
competing retail chain as a strong, unique and attractive brand
Rashmi and Dangi 73
as well as similarities between respective consumer-based
BEs of products and retailers. Hence, research specific to
retailers’ BE is required. Retailing environment is becom-
ing increasingly challenging due to mergers and acqui-
sitions, and multichannel shopping (Schoenbachler &
Gordon, 2002; William, 1997). This has necessitated accu-
rate measurement of retail equity, rather than approxima-
tions based on product equity approaches. In this light,
Arnett et al. (2003) have proposed the use of retailer equity
indices.
Methodology
The objective of the article was to understand literary
notions about RBE vis-à-vis its definition and structure.
Exploratory research was carried out to study the extant lit-
erature on RBE. For the purpose of meta-analysis, keyword
searches (Table 2) were conducted in databases such as
ProQuest, EBSCO (Business Source Premier), Taylor &
Francis Online, ScienceDirect, Emerald Insight, Indian
Journals, JSTOR, SAGE, Springer and Wiley Online
Library. Google Scholar was also searched for journals that
are not hosted on the above-mentioned databases.
Additionally, studies on retail/retailer/store branding in
general were reviewed. Research on related constructs,
such as store image, store personality, store loyalty, patron-
age behaviour, store commitment, customer satisfaction,
store attributes, corporate brand, private-label brand and
service brand, was appraised to an extent limited to the
constructs’ influence on or relationship with RBE. In total,
160 research works were analysed.
As evident by a comparable keyword search for (product)
‘BE’, research on BE specifically of retailers is much scarcer.
Table 2. Keyword Search Results
Search Results
(Number of journal
Keyworda publications)­­b
Retail/Retailer(s’) Brand Equity 22
Store Brand Equity  1 Table 3.1 enumerates RBE dimensions operationalised along
Retail Equityc  4
Store Equity  2 et al., 2003) assume an RBE structure parallel to that of
Retailer’s/Retailers’ Customer/  1 general BE. Culture is an important factor that influences
Consumer-based Brand Equity
Retailer Equity 15
Total 45
Source: Authors’ compilation.
Notes: aThe term can be a keyword, and/or appear in the title of the
journal article.
bSome publications could not be fully accessed due to limited
subscription; a number of these partially accessible articles
were Chinese.
cThe term’s usage in the research work in the field of finance
has been excluded.
Discussion
Retail brands start at an abstract level. This entails intangi-
ble or symbolic interpretations of the firm’s identity, its
reputation and heritage, and the retail brand’s imagery
(Mitchell, Hutchinson & Bishop, 2012). Through a reduc-
tive process, retail brand is then condensed to an opera-
tional level of functional components (store environment,
customer experience). In essence, this leads us from the
conceptualisation of RBE to its operationalisation.
Measurement of retail equity enables store managers
to assess efficacy of the implemented marketing pro-
grammes, obtain benchmarks and compare with competi-
tors. Retailers’ BE can be measured directly and indirectly.
The direct approach examines customer response to market-
ing exercises undertaken by the retailer, when they have
knowledge of the retailer brand (Keller, 1998). Direct
approach concentrates on consumers’ preferences (Park &
Srinivasan, 1994). Laboratory and blind tests and surveys
can be used. Direct approach can also be based on con-
sumer utilities (Kamakura & Russell, 1993; Swait et al.,
1993). For example, Hartman and Spiro (2005) suggest
measuring customer-based store equity by asking an exper-
imental group to respond to a real store’s marketing initia-
tives. Simultaneously, a control group should respond to
the same marketing initiatives, but which are ascribed to a
fictitious or nameless store of the same category as the real
store. This method assumes that respondents would react
to the unbranded retailer based on their views about that
retailer category as a whole. On the contrary, reactions to
the branded, real store would be based on their views about
that store in particular. This would estimate the real store’s
equity over and above the equity common to the category
to which this store belongs.
Indirect approaches identify potential BE sources by
tracing customers’ knowledge structure (Park & Srinivasan,
1994). Direct and indirect approaches are complementary
and may be used together (Keller, 1993). Tables 3.1 and 3.2
summarise the research on indirect measurement of RBE.
consumers’ perspective. Since retailer equity is neverthe-
less a type of BE, a number of researches (e.g., Arnett
marketing constructs (Aaker, Benet-Martinez & Garolera,
2001). Therefore, the user of RBE should know whether a
particular operationalisation is generalisable on account of
being culturally neutral (etic) or culture specific (emic).
Table 3.2 lists methods using intermediate measures.
The analysis in Table 3.1 is partially depicted in the
form of a frequency chart in Figure 1. Figure 1 exhibits
the occurrence of the more common of RBE dimensions
as a percentage of total number of RBE frameworks
reviewed here.
Table 3.1. Research on RBE Operationalisation/Measurement: Indirect Approach (based on consumer/marketing perspective)
Authors
Yoo and Donthu (2001)
Arnett et al. (2003)
Christodoulides et al. (2006)
Pappu and Quester (2006a)
Decarlo et al. (2007),
Levy and Weitz (2004)
Rios and Riquelme (2008)
Jinfeng and Zhilong (2009)
El-Hedhli and Chebat (2009)
Allaway et al. (2011)
Jara and Cliquet (2012)
Gil-Saura, Ruiz-Molina,
Michel
and Corraliza-Zapata (2013)
Dabija, Pop, and Szentesi
(2014)
Source: Authors’ compilation.
Dimensions of Retailer Brand Equity Statistical Method Context Emic/Etic Retailer Category
Brand awareness/associations (combined), Structural modelling South Korea, Etic Suggested extension of CBBE to
brand loyalty, perceived quality USA retail/chain equity
Name awareness, Retailer associations Partial least squares USA Emic Retail stores
(‘product quality’ and ‘perceived value’ (PLS) analysis
as two sub-dimensions), service quality,
store loyalty
Emotional connection, online experience, Factor analysis UK Not given Internet retailers
responsive service nature, trust, fulfilment
Retailer awareness, retailer associations, Structural equation Australia Emic Department stores (three) and specialty
perceived retailer quality, retailer loyalty modelling (AMOS) stores (three)
Store image, familiarity Confirmatory factor USA Not given Restaurants
analysis ANOVA
Brand awareness, brand value associations, Structural equation Australia Emic Online retailers: Amazon, eBay
brand trust associations, brand loyalty modelling
Retailer awareness, retailer associations, Structural equation China Emic Retail stores: 10 hypermarkets
retailer perceived quality, retailer loyalty model (five international
and five national
retailers)
Mall awareness, mall image (convenience, Factor analysis Canada Not given Two shopping malls
overall environment, services quality,
products quality)
Emotional loyalty, fanaticism Factor analysis USA Emic National, regional and specialty chain
brands of supermarkets
Retail brand awareness, retail brand image Structural equation France Emic Hypermarkets: Carrefour, E.Leclerc
(five sub-components: perceived quality, modelling with path-PLS and Intermarche´
price image, retail brand and retailer
personality, brand service, store service)
Store image, perceived store value, PLS Spain Emic Three retail chains: Carrefour (grocery),
store awareness Zara (clothing), IKEA (furniture)
Assortment, price, communication, AMOS structural Romania Emic Fashion retailers: clothing, sporting goods,
ambience, service, location equation modelling shoe stores
Rashmi and Dangi 75

Table 3.2. Research on RBE Operationalisation: Indirect Approach (via intermediate measures)

Statistical Context
Authors Dimensions of Retailer Brand Equity Method (Country) Retailer Category
Ailawadi and A cross-retailer hedonic regression. Conceptual Suggestion Suggestion
Keller (2004) For example, regressing retailer revenue or profit on analysis
various physical attributes such as location, square
footage, store timings, product/service assortment and
availability of private label. A retailer’s residual from this
regression, that is, the portion of its revenue or profit that
cannot be explained by physical attributes, can be
conceptualised as a measure of its retail brand equity
Swoboda et al. Attitude towards the retailer (Dimensions: Structural Germany Five retail sectors
(2007, 2009) likeability, commitment, willingness to recommend, equation (grocery, textiles, DIY,
trustworthiness, differentiation) modelling consumer electronics,
furniture retailing)
Source: Authors’ compilation.

In addition to the measurement dimensions tabulated

Figure 1. The Occurrence of the More Common of RBE
Dimensions, as a Percentage of Total Number of RBE
Frameworks
Source: Authors’ compilation.
above, Ailawadi and Keller (2004) suggested an indirect
approach that uses behaviour-based measures. Retailer BE
can be measured as the ‘resources premium’ that shoppers
are prepared to pay to be able to shop with the retailer.
These resources can include financial considerations, dis-
tance travelled, changes in brand or pack-size preferences
and compromise in services availed. The latter non-financial
factors assume importance in the equity measurement of
discount retailers such as Walmart.
Murphy (1990) reports the views of one director of
Tesco: ‘The shop itself, its location, its atmosphere, the
service it offers and the range of goods and prices can
become the Brand.’ This view of a number of interacting
factors contributing to a single retail brand is widely
held (Davies, 1992). Ryan (1989) hinted at antecedents of
retailer brands when he noted that retail brands should look
beyond the shop and the products sold, as these are only
ways to form a retail brand. The shop and the retailed
products alone are not the entire retailer brand. Table 4 lays
out the research on the sources of RBE.

Table 4. Research on Antecedents of RBE

Authors Antecedents of Retailer Brand Equity

Ailawadi and Keller (2004)
Pappu and Quester (2006b)
Swoboda et al. (2007, 2009)
Jinfeng and Zhilong (2009)
Allaway et al. (2011)
Source: Authors’ compilation.
Retailer image (access, in-store atmosphere, price and promotion, cross-category product/service
assortment, within-category brand/item assortment)
Consumer satisfaction with the retailer
Perceptions of retailer service, and perceptions of other retailer attributes (value/price,
assortment, advertising, store design)
Moderating variable: consumer involvement, shopping motive
Store image dimensions (convenience, perceived price, physical facilities, employee service and
institutional factors)
Service level, product quality and assortment, programmes for rewarding patronage, effort
expended in keeping customers, prices, layout, location, community involvement
76 Asia-Pacific Journal of Management Research and Innovation 12(1)

While many studies have provided evidence about the
effects of BE in products (e.g., Lassar et al., 1995; Taylor,
Celuch & Goodwin, 2004; Villarejo, 2003; Yoo et al.,
2000), a few results are available for store BE (e.g.,
Beristain & Zorrilla, 2011; De Wulf et al., 2005) (Table 5).
‘Retail brand’ as a construct is partially similar to ‘store
image’. However, in measuring retail brand (through its
equity), higher-level and long-term associations with the
retailer brand should be focused upon. Store image
measurement may concentrate on attribute-level percep-
tions of shoppers (Keller, 1993). Dennis et al. (2002)
accede that the term ‘image’ is used more commonly than
‘brand’ in shopping centre studies. Hartman and Spiro
(2005) credit customer-based store equity with higher pre-
dictive abilities than ‘store image’. Store equity includes
store awareness and secondary associations with the store
name as well. Some other constructs, with their reported
relationships with RBE, are listed in Table 6.

Table 5. Research on Consequents of RBE

Authors Consequents of Retailer Brand Equity

Arnett et al. (2003)
Swoboda et al. (2007)
Decarlo et al. (2007)
Gil-Saura et al. (2013)
Martenson (2007)
Swoboda et al. (2013b)
Chebat et al. (2009)
El-Hedhli and Chebat (2009)
Das (2014)
Source: Authors’ compilation.
Shopping intentions
Share of spending in the specific retail sector at the retailer analysed
Receiver’s attributional processing and attitudes towards negative received word-of-mouth
communication
Consumer satisfaction–store loyalty chain
Customer loyalty
Store loyalty
Mall loyalty (generated by ‘Shopper-based mall equity’)
Mall patronage
Purchase intention

Table 6. Research on Relationships of RBE with Other Constructs

Authors Construct Relationship with RBE

Pappu and Quester (2006a)
Pappu and Quester (2008)
Hernández-Espallardo and
Navarro-Bailón (2009)
Jara and Cliquet (2012)
Das et al. (2012a, 2012b)
Swoboda et al. (2013a)
Swoboda et al. (2013b)
White, Joseph-Mathews and
Voorhees (2013)
Pennemann (2013)
Choi and Huddleston (2014)
Source: Authors’ compilation.
Sales revenue
Store category
Retailer’s economic satisfaction (Buying group’s) retailer equity is positively related to the
with the buying group
Consumer’s response
(retail brand choice and
intention to buy)
Retailer (department stores)
personality (dimensions:
sophistication, empathy,
dependability, authenticity,
vibrancy)
Corporate reputation
Consumer perceptions of
store accessibility
e-service quality
Perceived brand globalness
Private (product) brands of
the retailer
Positive, strong, significant
Retailer brand equity levels vary between store categories (e.g.,
department store brands yielded significantly higher ratings for all
the retailer brand equity dimensions than specialty store brands)
retailer’s economic satisfaction with the buying group membership
Retail brand equity positively and directly influences the
consumer’s response (retail brand choice and intention to buy)
towards the retail brand
Three department store personality dimensions, sophistication,
empathy and dependability, have positive, significant (5%)
impacts on each dimension of consumer-based retailer equity.
Two department store personality dimensions, authenticity
and vibrancy, have negative, non-significant (5%) impact on all
consumer-based retailer equity dimensions
Positive reciprocal relationship
Positive
Offline service quality and online service quality have direct,
positive effects on multichannel retailer’s brand equity
Positive (moderated by the retailer’s country of origin)
Retailer private (product) brands with retailer’s own name have a
stronger, positive impact in the formation of retailer brand equity
than generic (no name) products
Rashmi and Dangi 77
An index is a metric that tracks the performance of an
entity. Construction of RBE indices involves measuring
consumers’ perceptions regarding the information that retail-
ers’ names communicate (Arnett et al., 2003). Proprietary
measures of BE such as Young & Rubicam’s Brand Asset
ValuatorTM are widely used in industry, though these are not
retailer specific. The literature on RBE index development
is sparse; two parsimonious indices are enumerated in
Table 7.
A number of inadequacies were noticed in the RBE
frameworks reviewed above. The most accepted composi-
tion of retailer equity is seen to have four dimensions:
retailer awareness, retailer associations, service quality and
retailer loyalty. We present analytic arguments based on this
structure. It can be proved that BE dimensions interrelate
(Buil, Martinez & Chernatony, 2013). For example, brand
awareness could have positive influence on brand associa-
tions and perceived quality. Brand loyalty can be influenced
by brand associations. This is of concern because formative
measurement models of RBE and RBE index are obtained
through multiple regressions. The stability of itemised indi-
cators in such models is influenced by inter-correlations
between indicators (Diamantopoulos & Winklhofer, 2001).
It can also be argued that retailers’ perceived quality is
just one, albeit very important, of many brand associations
that consumers attach to the retailer.
We reviewed index measurement scales formulated on
the basis of the above dimensions. Scale items for retailer
loyalty, retailer awareness and service quality can be
consistent among different categories of retailers. But
the itemised indicators for retailer associations should be
adapted to the characteristic features of each retailer cate-
gory. Consumers develop certain associations which are
unique to a retailer, such as discount supermarkets (price
and value associations dominate), online retailers (transac-
tional security associations), neighbourhood mom-&-pop
retailers (accessibility associations) and premium price
retailers (associations of exclusivity).
Many retail chains derive their brand power from their
parent company. For example, Reliance Fresh Limited,
Reliance Digital and Reliance Hypermart retail in fruits
and groceries, consumer electronics and general merchan-
dise, respectively. Reliance Trends, Reliance Footprint and
Reliance Living sell apparel and clothing. All these sub-
sidiaries of Reliance Retail Limited in India have been suc-
cessful in leveraging the well-established name of Reliance.
Reliance Jewels is an Indian retailer of gems and jewellery,
a hedonic product whose purchase carries considerable
consumer-perceived (social, financial) risk. In this context,
the store has been able to instantly draw shoppers due to
the use of its parent company in its branding. Similar is the
case with Tata’s retail ventures in India, which derive part
of their equity from the heritage and trust enjoyed by the
corporate house in its home country. Yet, none of the
studies have included corporate identity of the retailer
as part of the retailer equity framework. Its parent firm’s
corporate social responsibility (CSR) activity may prove to
be practicable source of equity for the retailer.
The customer-based RBE framework (Figure 2) sug-
gested by the authors comprises four RBE dimensions—
retailer awareness, retailer associations, retailer perceived
quality and retailer loyalty—proposed to have hierarchical,
causal relations. Retailer BE has been modelled as a forma-
tive construct.
Shoppers need to be aware of the existence of the retailer.
Customers’ ability to recall and recognise the retailer brand
depends on how strongly the retailer’s presence is rooted
in their minds. Since retailer awareness is a (insufficient)
prerequisite for value creation, it is proposed to be an indi-
rect formative indicator of RBE. It influences RBE through
retailer associations and retailer perceived quality. Retailer
awareness causes shoppers to develop favourable, unique
and strong associations about the retailer.
Retailer associations can be classified as organisational,
product and store associations. Organisational associa-
tions relate to the retail chain’s corporate identity and the
heritage endowed by its parent business house. Customers
can derive such associations, for instance, from community
involvement of the company and other CSR activities
attached to the retailer’s brand name. For example, Western
retailer brands, especially of lifestyle products such as
clothing (e.g., Zara), often generate positive associations of
‘exclusivity’ and ‘globalness’ among the Indian masses due
to their foreign identity. Product associations include cus-
tomers’ impressions about merchandise assortment, pricing,
display, etc. Associations attached to the retailer’s stores
may include store design (layout, fixtures, physical facili-
ties, etc.), ambient conditions (noise, lighting, air quality,
etc.), symbols, shopper crowd (e.g., elite, masses) and
so on. We propose to study the strengths of organisational
associations–retailer associations and store associations–
retailer associations relationships separately. This can be
helpful in marketing decisions, such as allocation of mar-
keting budget, marketing communications, etc. For instance,
the retailer would focus more on promoting the company’s
name in its marketing communications if organisational
associations–retailer associations link is stronger than the
store associations–retailer associations relationship. If store
associations are contributing more heavily to retailer asso-
ciations, then the retailer would dedicate more resources to
the promotion of each physical store individually. In this
case, the store manager may undertake promotion campaigns
locally and independently of sister stores. Marketing com-
munications may then talk about the accessibility, location,
cleanliness, parking facilities and other features of a store
as a standalone unit. We expect retailer associations to
vary with retailer type (e.g., discount store, luxury retailer,
cash-&-carry retailer and specialty retailer)
Retailer perceived (as opposed to objective) quality is
the customer’s judgement about the overall quality of the
Table 7. Research on RBE Indices

Authors RBE Index Scale Items Industries Applicable to

Arnett et al. Retailer equity index Retailer loyalty: One item adapted from Yoo et al. General illustration on
(2003) (= average of the (2000) (I will not buy from other clothing retailers if clothing retailers in USA
mean values of the five I can buy the same item at [store name] Stores)
indicators of retailer Name awareness: One item adapted from Yoo
equity) et al. (2000) (I can recognise [store name] stores
among other competing stores)
Service quality: One item adapted from Dabholkar,
Thorpe and Rentz (1996) ([store name] stores
perform service right the first time)
Retailer associations: Two items adapted from
Dodds, Monroe and Grewal (1991) (When shopping
at [store name], I expect to see high quality merchandise;
The prices at [store name] stores are acceptable)
El-Hedhli and Parsimonious SBME Mall awareness: Three items (I am aware of [mall Shopping malls
Chebat (2009) measure name] mall; I can recognise [mall name] mall among
other competing malls; Some characteristics of
[mall name] mall come to mind quickly)
Convenience: Two items (It is easy to get to the
[mall name] mall; It is easy to park near the
[mall name] mall)
Overall environment perception: Six items
(uncomfortable–comfortable; depressing–cheerful;
drab–colourful; unlively–lively; dull–bright;
uninteresting–interesting)
Perceived products quality: Three items (Merchandise
at [mall name] mall is of a very good quality; There is
a high likelihood that items bought at [mall name]
mall will be of extremely high quality; Overall,
[mall name] mall sells high-quality merchandise)
Perceived services quality: Two items
([mall name] mall provides excellent services
to its customers; [mall name] is known for its
excellent services)
Source: Authors’ compilation.

retailer. To infer retailer quality, shoppers can use quality
attributes of the products retailed and of the service
rendered in the retailer’s stores. Retailers carry national
(manufacturer) brands, whose images or BEs can spill over
the retailer’s quality image. Retailers’ own-brands will also
be assessed by customers vis-à-vis their quality. Customers
will perceive service quality through pointers such as staff,
shopping assistance, crowd management and transactional
ease. It is necessary to study product quality and service
quality as separate contributors to shoppers’ quality percep-
tions. If, for example, the product quality–retailer perceived
quality link is stronger than the service quality–retailer
perceived quality link, the retailer should pay more atten-
tion to its merchandise quality. It indicates that the shoppers
put more stress on buying the product of their choice, and
less on the services offered in the store.
Positive associations and high levels of perceived quality
result in loyalty to retailer. Loyal or committed customers
react favourably to the retailer. Each of the retailer
associations and retailer perceived quality is proposed to
influence a retailer’s equity, directly as well as indirectly
through retailer loyalty. Loyal customers continue to shop
at their favoured retailer, even if other stores with compara-
ble attributes and identical product offerings exist.
We propose to employ resource premium, shopping
intention and customer satisfaction as reflective measures of
retailers’ equity. Most (product) BE models measure the
product’s BE from the price premium that the brand name
allows the brand to command. Many retail chains compete
on price, especially the subset of discount supermarkets.
Hence, price premium is not generalisable to retailers.
Instead, we suggest measurement of the ‘resources premium’
that a retailer is able to command from its shoppers who
hold the retailer’s brand in high esteem. Resources premium
refers to the extra resources that shoppers are willing to
expend in order to shop at the retailer. This includes increased
travel time, greater distance covered and more money
spent in reaching a distant retailer which is preferable to a
Rashmi and Dangi 79
Organisational
Associations
Product Retailer
Associations Associations
Store
Associations
Recall
Retailer
Awareness
Recognition
Product
Quality
Retailer
Perceived
Service Quality
Quality
Figure 2. The Customer-based RBE Framework
Source: Authors’ compilation.
proximate one. It can also account for compromises in pur-
chased products’ brand or variant preferences, in accordance
with the retailer’s product assortment. Shoppers may also be
ready to buy in bulk, and to advance/postpone their pur-
chases in order to shop with their favoured retailer.
We propose that retailer equity is reflected by shopping
intention. Customers are more likely to shop at, and recom-
mend to others, stores that enjoy high equity. High retail
equity is also reflected by the level of customer satisfaction
with the purchase experience. While shopping intention can
be measured for actual as well as prospective shoppers,
customer satisfaction will be measured for current shoppers.
Conclusion
Researchers are increasingly starting to focus on BE
of retailers. Literature concurs that retailers’ brands are suf-
ficiently different from product brands to deserve a sepa-
rate study of their equity measurement. Even so, most
scholars treat RBE as similar, if not same, to product BE,
in terms of their structures. A few studies also aim to
develop a model to index or score different retailers on
their equity. These RBE indices provide an absolute
measure of retailer’s equity that can be employed for inter-
retailer (cross-sectional) and temporal (benchmarking over
time) comparisons.
Resource
Premium
Retailer
Retailer Shopping
Loyalty
Brand
Intention
Equity
Customer
Satisfaction
It was observed that a majority of RBE measures are
developed and validated in the US. In fact, most branding
theories have been shaped with developed countries as
their background. Future research should assess their con-
ceptual and psychometric equivalence across cultures.
There appears to be scant confirmation from emerging
economies (China: Jinfeng & Zhilong, 2009; Zimbabwe:
Musekiwa, Chiguvi & Hogo, 2013). In particular, evidence
from transitional economies, such as India, is scarce.
Dynamically expanding international retailers, such as
Walmart, Zara, Carrefour, H&M and Starbucks, are shifting
their attention to emerging, distant markets, motivated by
high growth rates, expanding middle class and low concen-
tration rates in these economies (Goldman, 2001). Since
India belongs to this class of markets, studies on RBE spe-
cific to it are pertinent. Even the indigenous retailing chains
need to assess their equity as retailing services. This can
prepare them to pre-empt foreign acquisitions. Modern
retailing is relatively recent in India. The level of awareness
among Indian consumers about the different retail brands
needs to be gauged first. Store environmental factors and
convenience factors of importance to Indian retailers in
building store loyalty may differ from those of Western
retailers. This knowledge will be helpful in obtaining the
sub-dimensions of ‘store loyalty’ (if the researcher chooses
to validate the common RBE model for the Indian culture).
80 Asia-Pacific Journal of Management Research and Innovation 12(1)
The need to replicate research in each market may
be contained through an etic approach. Almost all the scale
development studies reviewed in this article take an emic
approach, that is, a scale is developed in one culture and
replicated in other cultures. A notable exception is Yoo and
Donthu’s (2001) etic approach, which sought a universal
measurement structure by using multiple cultures simulta-
neously. An etic approach yields a scale with functional,
conceptual, linguistic and metric equivalence across cul-
tures. Future research on RBE indices should use this
approach. Retailer BE index so obtained can prove to be
additionally useful as a basis for generating valid cross-
cultural comparisons, say, for mergers and acquisitions.
A number of studies endorse the use of Aaker’s (1991,
1996) and Keller’s (1998) framework for (product) BE in
the context of retailers’ BE. Transposing the BE structure
onto RBE raises important questions: Are there any other
dimensions that are important in the formation of RBE?
Which dimension, amongst the currently accepted dimen-
sions, produces the maximum effect for retailers? What are
the retailer-specific sub-dimensions of BE dimensions?
Respective dimensions of RBE may interact with one
another. For instance, a dimension may act as an anteced-
ent to other sister dimensions.
Even if the general BE framework proves to be valid for
retailers, it may need to be varied by the type of retailer. For
example, in developing retailer equity index, Arnett et al.
(2003) use Aaker’s (1991) dimensions. They take three
of these dimensions (store loyalty, name awareness and
service quality) to be constant from retailer to retailer.
But they agree that one of the dimensions (retailer associa-
tions) needs to be adapted to the characteristics typical
of certain retailers (e.g., discount stores). We suggest that
equity dimensions specific to the following be obtained:
retail category (e.g., single brand retail vs. multi-brand
retail, general merchandise retail vs. specialty retail, such as
fashion, food retailing vs. non-food retailing), retail format
(department stores, supermarkets, hypermarkets, etc.), retail-
ers’ geographic scope (international, national, regional),
retail channel (brick-and-mortar retailing, catalogue retail-
ing, online retailing) and level of customer loyalty (commit-
ted vs. casual). For instance, RBE framework for interna-
tional retailers may give significant weightage to the role
of country of origin (Pennemann, 2013). As another illus-
tration, BE may vary by the loyalty level of shopper.
Customers in underdeveloped markets may be more oppor-
tunistic and less loyal. In this sense, RBE framework
especially adjusted for economically backward markets is
needed.
Even though we could find (limited) literature on
conceptualisation and operationalisation of RBE, research
on antecedents/consequence relationships for RBE was
scarcer. Future work can validate source–effect relations in
a retail branding context, as picked up from BE research
(Broyles, Schumann & Leingpibul, 2009). Relating RBE
to other retail branding phenomena, such as store image, is
also important. For example, researchers can compare the
predictive abilities of RBE and store image to find out
the more effective of the two.
A majority of the researchers measure RBE as an aggre-
gate score. Customers exist as clusters along the lines of
gender, loyalty levels, etc. These groups may vary consid-
erably on BE. Hence, there is a need for individual RBE
scores.
Only the research literature subscribed by the University
of Delhi was accessible as search outputs. Selection of ter-
minology influences search results of any keyword. This
issue is amplified due to the nature of the subject under
study. Retailer BE has been termed and defined variably in
different contexts, such as country, retail format (shopping
malls, hypermarkets, online retailers, etc.), retail categories
(departmental stores, specialty stores, clothing stores,
restaurants, etc.) and timing of the study. While some
authors have been found to use terms such as ‘retail brand’,
‘store brand’ and ‘retailer brand’ for the product brand of
the retailer, others use these to refer to the retailer or store
as a (service or corporate) brand in itself. A consensus still
eludes the literati. This forced us to employ umbrella terms
such as ‘retail equity’, ‘retailer equity’ and ‘store equity’
for the purpose of searches.
References
Aaker, D.A. (1991). Managing brand equity: Capitalizing on the
value of a brand name. New York, NY: Free Press.
———. (1996). Measuring brand equity across products and
markets. California Management Review, 38(3), 102–120.
Aaker, J.L., Benet-Martinez, V., & Garolera, J. (2001).
Consumption symbols as carriers of culture: A study of
Japanese and Spanish brand personality constructs. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(3), 492–508.
Ailawadi, K.L., & Keller, K.L. (2004). Understanding retail
branding: Conceptual insights and research priorities. Journal
of Retailing, 80(4), 331–342.
Ailawadi, K.L., Lehmann, D.R., & Neslin, S. A. (2003). Revenue
premium as an outcome measure of brand equity. Journal of
Marketing, 67(4), 1–17.
Allaway, A.W., Huddleston, P., Whipple, J., & Ellinger, A.E.
(2011). Customer-based brand equity, equity drivers, and
customer loyalty in the supermarket industry. Journal of
Product & Brand Management, 20(3), 190–204.
Ambler, T. (2003). Marketing and the bottom line: Creating the
measures of success. London: Prentice Hall.
Arnett, D., Laverie, D., & Meiers, A. (2003). Developing par-
simonious retailer equity indexes using partial least squares
analysis: A method and applications. Journal of Retailing,
79(3), 161–170.
Baldauf, A., Cravens, K.S., Diamantopoulos, A., & Zeugner-
Roth, K.P. (2009). The impact of product-country image
and marketing efforts on retailer-perceived brand equity: An
empirical analysis. Journal of Retailing, 85(4), 437–452.
Beristain, J., & Zorrilla, P. (2011). The relationship between
store image and store brand equity: A conceptual framework
Rashmi and Dangi 81
and evidence from hypermarkets. Journal of Retailing and
Consumer Services, 18(6), 562–574.
Berry, L. (2000). Cultivating service brand equity. Journal of the
Academy of Marketing Science, 28(1), 128–137.
Birtwistle, G., & Freathy, P. (1998). More than just a name above
the shop. International Journal of Retail and Distribution
Management, 26(8), 318–323.
Blankson, C., & Kalafatis, S. (1999). Issues and challenges in the
positioning of services brands: A review. Journal of Product
and Brand Management, 2(2), 106–108.
Brodie, R., Whittome, J., & Brush, G. (2009). Investigating the
service brand: A customer value perspective. Journal of
Business Research, 62(3), 345–355.
Broyles, S.A., Schumann, D.W., & Leingpibul, T. (2009).
Examining brand equity antecedent/consequence relationships.
Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 17(2), 145–161.
Buil, I., Martinez, E., & Chernatony, L. (2013). The influence of
brand equity on consumer responses. Journal of Consumer
Marketing, 30(1), 62–74.
Burt, S. (2000). The strategic role of retail brands in British
grocery retailing. European Journal of Marketing, 34(8),
875–890.
Burt, S., & Davies, K. (2010). From the retail brand to the retailer
as a brand: Themes and issues in retail branding research.
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management,
38(11/12), 865–878.
Burt, S., & Mavrommatis, A. (2006). The international transfer
of store brand image. The International Review of Retail,
Distribution and Consumer Research, 16(4), 395–413.
Burt, S., & Sparks, L. (2002). Corporate branding, retailing and
retail internationalisation. Corporate Reputation Review,
5(2/3), 194–212.
Butterfield, L., & Haigh, D. (1999). Understanding the finan-
cial value of brands. London: Institute of Practitioners in
Advertising.
Carpenter, J.M., Moore, M., & Fairhurst, A.E. (2005). Consumer
shopping value for retail brands. Journal of Fashion
Marketing and Management, 9(1), 43–53.
Chebat, J.-C., El Hedhli, K., & Sirgy, M.J. (2009). How does
shopper-based mall equity generate mall loyalty? A concep-
tual model and empirical evidence. Journal of Retailing and
Consumer Services, 16(1), 50–60.
Chimhundu, R., Hamlin, R.P., & McNeill, L. (2010). Impact
of manufacturer brand innovation on retailer. International
Journal of Business and Management, 5(9), 10–18.
Choi, L., & Huddleston, P. (2014). The effect of retailer private
brands on consumer-based retailer equity: Comparison
of named private brands and generic private brands. The
International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer
Research, 24(1), 59–78.
Christodoulides, G., De Chernatoni, L., Furrer, O., Shiu, E., &
Abimbola, T. (2006). Conceptualising and measuring the
equity of online brands. Journal of Marketing Management,
22(7/8), 799–825.
Collins-Dodd, C., & Lindley, T. (2003). Store brands and retail
differentiation: The influence of store image and store brand
attitude on store brand own perceptions. Journal of Retailing
and Consumer Services, 10(4), 352–354.
Dabholkar, P.A., Thorpe, D.I., & Rentz, J.O. (1996). A measure
of service quality for retail stores: Scale development and
validation. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,
24(1), 3–16.
Dabija, D., Pop, N., & Szentesi, S. (2014). A customer-oriented
perspective on retail brand equity in the fashion industry.
Industria Textila, 65(1), 37–46.
Das, G. (2014). Linkages of retailer awareness, retailer associa-
tion, retailer perceived quality and retailer loyalty with
purchase intention: A study of Indian food retail brands.
Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 21(3), 284–292.
Das, G., Datta, B., & Guin, K. (2012a). From brands in general to
retail brands: A review and future agenda for future agenda
for brand personality measurement. The Marketing Review,
12(1), 91–106.
———. (2012b). Impact of retailer personality on consumer-
based retailer equity. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and
Logistics, 24(4), 619–639.
Davies, B.J., & Ward, P. (2005). Exploring the connec-
tions between visual merchandising and retail branding.
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management,
33(7), 505–513.
Davies, G. (1992). The two ways in which retailers can be brands.
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management,
20(2), 24–34.
———. (1998). Retail brands and the theft of identity.
International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management,
26(4–5), 140–146.
Davis, S. (2000). Brand asset management. San Francisco,
California: Jossey Bass.
Dawson, J. (2001). Is there a new commerce in Europe?
International Review of Retail Distribution and Consumer
Research, 11(3), 278–299.
De Chernatony, L., & Riley, F. (1999). Experts’ views about
defining services brands and the principles of services brand-
ing. Journal of Business Research, 46(2), 181–192.
De Chernatony, L., Drury, S., & Segal-Horn, S. (2003). Building
a services brand: Stages, people and orientations. The Service
Industries Journal, 23(3), 1–21.
De Wulf, K., Odekerken-Schröder, G., Goedertier, F., & Van
Ossel, G. (2005). Consumer perceptions of store brands
versus national brands. Journal of Consumer Marketing,
22(4), 223–232.
Decarlo, T., Laczniak, R., Motley, C., & Ramaswami, S. (2007).
Influence of image and familiarity on consumer response to
negative word-of-mouth communication about retail entities.
Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 15(1), 41–51.
Dennis, C., Murphy, J., Marsland, D., Cockett, T., & Patel, T.
(2002). Measuring image: Shopping centre case studies.
International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer
Research, 12(4), 355–373.
Diamantopoulos, A., & Winklhofer, H. (2001). Index construc-
tion with formative indicators: An alternative to scale devel-
opment. Journal of Marketing Research, 38(May), 269–277.
Dicke, T. (1992). Franchising in America: The development of a
business method 1840–1980. Chapel Hill, NC: The University
of North Carolina Press.
Dodds, W.B., Monroe, K.B., & Grewal, D. (1991). Effects of
price, brand, and store information on buyer’s product evalu-
ations. Journal of Marketing Research, 28(3), 307–319.
El-Hedhli, K., & Chebat, J.C. (2009). Developing and validating
a psychometric shopper-based mall equity measure. Journal
of Business Research, 62(6), 581–587.
82 Asia-Pacific Journal of Management Research and Innovation 12(1)
Farquhar, P. (1989). Managing brand equity. Journal of Marketing
Research, 1(3), 24–33.
Farquhar, P.H., Han, J.Y., & Ijiri, Y. (1991). Recognizing and
measuring brand assets. Cambridge, MA: Marketing Science
Institute,.
Feuer, J. (2005). Retailing grows up, looks to image-building.
Adweek, 16(9), 8.
Floor, K. (2006). Branding a store. London: Kogan Page.
Fullerton, G. (2005). The impact of brand commitment on loyalty
to retail service brands. Canadian Journal of Administrative
Sciences, 22(2), 97–110.
Gil-Saura, I., Ruiz-Molina, M.E., Michel, G., & Corraliza-
Zapata, A. (2013). Retail brand equity: A model based on its
dimensions and effects. The International Review of Retail,
Distribution and Consumer Research, 23(2), 111–136.
Goldman, A. (2001). The transfer of retail formats into develop-
ing economies: The example of China. Journal of Retailing,
77(2), 221–242.
Grewal, D., Krishnan, R., Baker, J., & Borin, N. (1998). The
effect of store name, brand name and price discounts on
consumers’ evaluations and purchase intentions. Journal
of retailing, 74(3), 331–352.
Grewal, D., Levy, M., & Lehmann, D. (2004). Retail branding
and customer loyalty: An overview. Journal of Retailing,
80(4), ix–xii.
Grunert, K.G., Esbjerg, L., Bech-Larsen, T., Brunso, K., & Juhl,
H.J. (2006). Consumer preferences for retailer brand architec-
tures: Results from a conjoint study. International Journal of
Retail and Distribution Management, 34(8), 597–608.
Hansen, T., & Solgaard, H. (2004). New perspectives on retail-
ing and store patronage behavior: A study of the interface
between retailers and consumers. Norwell, MA: Kluwer
Academic Publishers.
Hartman, K., & Spiro, R. (2005). Recapturing store image in
customer-based store equity: A construct conceptualisation.
Journal of Business Research, 58(8), 1112–1120.
Henderson, T.A., & Mihas, E.A. (2000). Building retail brands.
Chicago, IL: McKinsey & Company.
Hernández-Espallardo, M., & Navarro-Bailón, M.A. (2009).
Accessing retailer equity through integration in retailers-
buying groups. International Journal of Retail & Distribution
Management, 37(1), 43–62.
Herstein, R., & Gamliel, E. (2006). The role of private brand-
ing in improving service quality. Managing Service Quality,
16(3), 306–319.
Jacoby, J., & Mazursky, D. (1984). Linking brand and retailer
images: Do the potential risks outweigh the potential ben-
efits? Journal of Retailing, 60(2), 105–122.
Jara, M., & Cliquet, G. (2008). Retail brand equity: A concep-
tual and differentiated approach. 14th EAERCD Conference.
France: European Association of Education and Research in
Commercial Distribution.
———. (2012). Retail brand equity: Conceptualisation and
measurement. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services,
19(1), 140–149.
Jary, M., & Wileman, A. (1998). Managing retail brands. In
S. Hart & J. Murphy (Eds), Brands: The new wealth creators
(pp. 152–160). Basingstoke: Macmillan Business.
Jinfeng, W., & Zhilong, T. (2009). The impact of selected store
image dimensions on retailer equity: Evidence from 10
Chinese hypermarkets. Journal of Retailing and Consumer
Services, 16(6), 486–494.
Kamakura, W.A., & Russell, G.J. (1991). Measuring consumer
perceptions of brand quality with scanner data: Implications
for brand equity. Cambridge, MA: Marketing Science
Institute.
———. (1993). Measuring brand value with scanner data.
International Journal of Research in Marketing, 10(1), 9–22.
Kapferer, J. (1997). Strategic brand management: Creating and
sustaining brand equity long term (2nd ed.). London: Kogan
Page.
Kasulis, J., & Lusch, R. (1981). Validating the retail store image
concept. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 9(4),
419–435.
Keaveney, S., & Hunt, K. (1992). Conceptualisation and opera-
tionalization of retail store image: A case of rival middle-
level theories. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,
20(2), 165–175.
Keller, K.L. (1993). Conceptualizing, measuring, and managing
customer-based brand equity. Journal of Marketing, 57(1),
1–22.
———. (1998). Strategic brand management: Building meas-
uring and managing brand equity. Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Prentice-Hall.
Keller, K.L. (2003). Strategic brand management: Building,
measuring, and managing brand equity. New Jersey: Pearson
Education Inc.
Kent, T. (2003). 2D23D: Management and design perspec-
tives on retail branding. International Journal of Retail &
Distribution Management, 31(3), 131–142.
Kozinets, R., Sherry, J., DeBerry-Spence, B., Duhacheck, A.,
& Nuttavuthisit, K. (2002). Themed flagship brand stores in
the new millennium: Theory, practice, prospects. Journal of
Retailing, 78(1), 17–29.
Kramer, J. (1999). Marxism to marketing. Progressive Grocer,
(September), 6.
Kremer, F., & Viot, C. (2012). How store brands build retailer
brand image. International Journal of Retail & Distribution
Management, 40(7), 528–543.
Laaksonen, H., & Reynolds, J. (1994). Own brands in food retail-
ing across Europe. Journal of Brand Management, 2(1),
37–46.
Lassar, W., Mittal, B., & Sharma, A. (1995). Measuring customer
based brand equity. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 12(4),
11–19.
Leingpibul, T., Broyles, S.A., & Kohli, C. (2013). The com-
parative influence of manufacturer and retailer brands on
customers’ purchase behavior. Journal of Product & Brand
Management, 22(3), 208–217.
Levy, M., & Weitz, B. (2004). Retailing management. New York,
NY: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
Lisanti, T. (2001). Multifaceted brands are the future. DSN
Retailing Today, 40(20), 11.
Luijten, T., & Reijnders, W. (2009). The development of store
brands and the store as a brand in supermarkets in the
Netherlands. International Review of Retail, Distribution &
Consumer Research, 19(1), 45–58.
Lury, G. (1998). Brand watching: Lifting the lid on the phenom-
enon on branding. Dublin: Blackhall.
Rashmi and Dangi 83
Martenson, R. (2007). Corporate brand image, satisfaction and
store loyalty: A study of the store as a brand, store brands
and manufacturer brands. International Journal of Retail &
Distribution Management, 35(7), 544–555.
Martineau, P. (1958). The personality of the retail store. Harvard
Business Review, 36(January–February), 47–55.
McGoldrick, P. (2002). Retail marketing (2nd ed.). Maidenhead:
McGraw Hill.
Mitchell, R., Hutchinson, K., & Bishop, S. (2012). Interpretation
of the retail brand: An SME perspective. International Journal
of Retail & Distribution Management, 40(2), 157–175.
Möller, J., & Herm, S. (2013). Shaping retail brand personality
perceptions by bodily experience. Journal of Retailing, 89(4),
438–446.
Morris, B. (1996). The brand’s the thing. Fortune, 133(1), 28–38.
Morris, D. (1979). The strategy of own brands. European Journal
of Marketing, 13(2), 59–78.
Morschett, D., Swoboda, B., & Foscht, T. (2005). Perception
of store attributes and overall attitude towards grocery
retailers: The role of shopping motives. The International
Review of Retail, Distribution & Consumer Research, 15(4),
423–447.
MSI. (2008). Research priorities: Guide to MSI research pro-
grams and procedures. Retrieved from www.msi.org/pdf/
MSI_RP08-10.pdf
Murphy, J.M. (1990). Brand strategy. Cambridge: Director
Books.
Musekiwa, A., Chiguvi, D., & Hogo, H. (2013). Customer based
retail brand equity (RBE) dimensions effect on retail brand
equity for OK supermarket in Bindura. International Journal
of Business and Management, 8(19), 45–54.
O’Sullivan, D., & Abela, A. (2007). Marketing performance
measurement ability and firm performance. Journal of
Marketing, 71(2), 79–93.
Padgett, D., & Allen, D. (1997). Communicating experiences:
A narrative approach to creating service brand image. Journal
of Advertising, 26(4), 49–62.
Pappu, R., & Quester, P. (2006a). A consumer-based method for
retailer equity measurement: Results of an empirical study.
Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 13(5), 317–329.
———. (2006b). Does customer satisfaction lead to improved
brand equity? An empirical examination of two categories of
retail brands. Journal of Product and Brand Management,
15(1), 4–14.
———. (2008). Does brand equity vary between department
stores and clothing stores? Results of an empirical investi-
gation. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 17(7),
425–435.
Park, C.S., & Srinivasan, V. (1994). A survey-based method
for measuring and understanding brand equity and its extend-
ibility. Journal of Marketing Research, 31(1), 271–288.
Pennemann, K. (2013). Study 1: Building retailer brand equity
based on perceived brand globalness: The role of country of
origin. In Retail Internationalization in Emerging Countries
(pp. 23–55). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien.
Popkowski-Leszczyc, P., Sinha, A., & Timmermans, H. (2000).
Consumer store choice dynamics: An analysis of the competi-
tive market structure for grocery stores. Journal of Retailing,
76(3), 323–353.
Porter, S., & Claycomb, C. (1997). The influence of brand rec-
ognition on retail store image. Journal of Product & Brand
Management, 6(6), 373–387.
Press Note No.4 (2012 Series). (n.d.). Department of Industrial
Policy and Promotion, Ministry of Commerce and Industry,
Government of India. Retrieved 9 August 2014, from http://
dipp.nic.in/English/acts_rules/Press_Notes/pn4_2012.pdf
Press Note No.5 (2012 Series). (n.d.). Department of Industrial
Policy and Promotion, Ministry of Commerce and Industry,
Government of India. Retrieved 9 August 2014, from http://
dipp.nic.in/English/acts_rules/Press_Notes/pn5_2012.pdf
Richardson, P., Jain, A., & Dick, A. (1996). The influence of
store aesthetics on evaluation of private label brands. Journal
of Product and Brand Management, 5(1), 19–28.
Rios, R.E., & Riquelme, H.E. (2008). Brand equity for online
companies. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 26(7),
719–742.
Ryan, C. (1989). Brand building—the retailers’ secret weapon.
In Adding value to retail offerings (pp. 149–160). Edinburgh:
ESOMAR.
Samu, S., Lyndem, P.K., & Litz, R.A. (2012). Impact of
brand-building activities and retailer-based brand equity on
retailer brand communities. European Journal of Marketing,
46(11/12), 1581–1601.
San Martin Gutierrez, S. (2006). A model of consumer relation-
ships with store brands, personnel and stores in Spain. The
International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer
Research, 16(4), 453–469.
Schoenbachler, D.D., & Gordon, G.L. (2002). Multi-channel
shopping: Understanding what drives channel choice. Journal
of Consumer Marketing, 19(1), 42–53.
Semeijn, J., VanRiel, A., & Ambrosini, B. (2004). Consumer
evaluations of store brands: Effects of store image and
product attributes. Journal of Retailing and Consumer
Services, 11(4), 247–258.
Shocker, A.D., Srivastava, R.K., & Rueckert, R.W. (1994).
Challenges and opportunities facing brand management:
An introduction to the special issue. Journal of Marketing
Research, 31(May), 149–158.
Shocker, A.D., & Weitz, B. (1988). A perspective on brand
equity principles and issues. Report No. 88-104, pp. 2–4.
Cambridge, MA: Marketing Science Institute.
Simon, C.J., & Sullivan, M.W. (1990). The measurement and
determinants of brand equity: A financial approach (Working
Paper). Chicago, Illinois: Graduate School of Business,
University of Chicago.
———. (1992). A financial approach to estimating firm-level
brand equity and measuring the impact of marketing events.
Cambridge, MA: Marketing Science Institute.
Smith, B. (2000). The store as a brand. DSN Retailing Today,
39(23), 19–20.
Steenkamp, J.B., Koll, O., & Geyskens, I. (2004). Understanding
the drivers of private label success: A western European per-
spective 2004. Dongen, The Netherlands: AiMark, Tilburg
University, Europanel and GfK Panel Services Benelux.
Swait, J., Erdem, T., Louviere, J., & Dubelaar, C. (1993). The
equalization price: A measure of consumer-perceived brand
equity. International Journal of Research in Marketing,
10(1), 23–45.
84 Asia-Pacific Journal of Management Research and Innovation 12(1)
Swoboda, B., Berg, B., & Schramm-Klein, H. (2013a). Reciprocal
effects of the corporate reputation and store equity of retail-
ers. Journal of Retailing, 89(4), 447–459.
Swoboda, B., Berg, B., Schramm-Klein, H., & Foscht, T. (2013b).
The importance of retail brand equity and store accessibility
for store loyalty in local competition. Journal of Retailing
and Consumer Services, 20(3), 251–262.
Swoboda, B., Haelsig, F., Morschett, D., & Schramm-Klein,
H. (2007). An intersector analysis of the relevance of service
in building a strong retail brand. Managing Service Quality,
17(4), 428–448.
———. (2009). Moderating role of involvement in building a
retail brand. International Journal of Retail & Distribution
Management, 37(11), 952–974.
Taylor, S. A., Celuch, K., & Goodwin, S. (2004). The importance
of brand equity to customer loyalty. Journal of product &
brand management, 13(4), 217–227.
The 2013 Global Retail Development Index. Global Retailers:
Cautiously Aggressive or Aggressively Cautious? (2013).
Retrieved 9 August 2014, from http://www.atkearney.com/
documents/10192/1315829/Global+Retailers-+Cautiously+
Aggressive+or+Aggressively+Cautious.pdf/b8f528f4-cb6f-
411d-8ae6-7afb7fbc7b7e
The Associated Chambers of Commerce and Industry of India
(ASSOCHAM) and Yes Bank. (2012, October). FDI in retail:
Advantage farmers. ASSOCHAM Conference on FDI in
Retail, New Delhi.
Washburn, J.H., & Plank, R.E. (2002). Measuring brand
equity: An evaluation of a consumer-based brand equity
scale. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 10(1),
46–62.
White, R.C., Joseph-Mathews, S., & Voorhees, C.M. (2013). The
effects of service on multichannel retailers’ brand equity.
Journal of Services Marketing, 27(4), 259–270.
Wileman, A., & Jary, M. (1997). Retail power plays: From
trading to brand leadership. New York, NY: New York
University Press.
William, R. (1997). Retailing trends in the USA: Competition, con-
sumers, technology and the economy. International Journal of
Retail and Distribution Management, 25(8), 244–254.
Woodside, A., & Walser, M. (2007). Building strong brands in
retailing. Journal of Business Research, 60(1), 1–10.
Yang, Z., & Jun, M. (2002). Consumer perception of service-
quality: From internet purchaser and non purchaser perspec-
tives. Journal of Business Strategy, 19(41), 19.
Yoo, B., & Donthu, N. (2001). Developing and validating a
multidimensional consumer-based brand equity scale. Journal
of Business Research, 52(1), 1–14.
Yoo, B., Donthu, N., & Lee, S. (2000). An examination of
selected marketing mix elements and brand equity. Journal of
the Academy of Marketing Science, 28(2), 195–211.
Zentes, J., Morschett, D., & Schramm-Klein, H. (2007). Strategic
retail management—text and international cases. Gabler:
Wiesbaden.
———. (2008). Brand personality of retailers—an analysis of its
applicability and its effect in store loyalty. The International
Journal of Review of Retail Distribution and Consumer
Research, 18(2), 167–184.