Upload
others
View
5
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
2009 AMA Winter Educators’ Conference
Marketing Theoryand Applications
EditorsKristy Reynolds, University of AlabamaJ. Chris White, Texas Christian University
Track ChairsDevon DelVecchio, Miami UniversityRui (Juliet) Zhu, University of British ColumbiaAshwani Monga, University of South CarolinaXueming Luo, University of Texas at ArlingtonCharles Blankson, University of North TexasSertan Kabadayi, Fordham UniversityPeggy Cunningham, Queen’s UniversityAlina Sorescu, Texas A&M UniversityOm Narasimhan, University of MinnesotaRaghunath Rao, University of TexasRaj Echambadi, University of Central FloridaGary Hunter, Case Western Reserve UniversityLiz Wang, University of DallasLauren Skinner, University of Alabama at BirminghamAngeline Close, University of Nevada, Las Vegas
Volume 20
311 S. Wacker Dr. • Chicago, IL 60606
Copyright © 2009, American Marketing Association
Printed in the United States of America
Publications Director: Francesca V. CooleyCover Design: Jeanne NemcekTypesetter: Marie Steinhoff, Southeast Missouri State UniversityISSN: 1054-0806ISBN: 0-87757-335-2
All rights reserved. No part of the material protected by this copyrightnotice may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means,including photocopying and recording, or by any information storageor retrieval system, without the written permission of the AmericanMarketing Association.
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS iii
PREFACE AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS xvi
BEST PAPERS AWARDS xvii
LIST OF REVIEWERS xviii
BRAND LOYALTY: DETERMINANTS AND CONSEQUENCES
Brand Attitudes and Brand CommitmentRonald E. Goldsmith, Leisa Reinecke Flynn, E. Craig Stacey 1
The Impact of Corporate Crises on Customer Loyalty: Does Corporate ReputationCushion the Fall?
Sabrina V. Helm, Julia Tolsdorf 10
Determinants of Loyalty Toward Reality Television Shows: An Exploratory StudyRajasree K. Rajamma, Audhesh K. Paswan, Jeffrey E. Lewin 12
INSIGHTS INTO THE MARKET DRIVEN ORGANIZATION
Under What Conditions Can Coopetition Develop?: An Investigation into CoopetitionFormation
Pilsik Choi, Rosanna Garcia, Colette Friedrich 13
A Critical Review of the Capabilities of Market-Driven OrganizationsJeannette A. Mena, G. Tomas M. Hult 15
Information-Based Imitation as an Alternative Link Between Market Orientation andFirm Performance
Daiane Scaraboto 17
Positioning Strategy and Impact on Firm Performance: A Qualitative ApproachCharles Blankson 19
MANAGING MARKETING OF SERVICES
Antecedents of Service Development Success: A Culture-Tools-Process ModelGary R. Schirr, Albert L. Page 27
B2B-Adoption of Interactive Remote ServicesNancy V. Wünderlich, Florian v. Wangenheim 29
Consumers’ Adoption of High-Tech Service BundlesOliver Schilke, Bernd W. Wirtz 31
Integrating Marketing and Information Services Functions for Higher OrganizationalCapabilities
Cheryl Nakata, Zhen Zhu, Elif Izberk-Bilgin 33
iv
NATIONS, CULTURE, AND CROSS-CULTURE COMPARISONS
A Cross-Cultural Comparison of Consumer Materialism and Compulsive Consumption:A Life Course Perspective and Test of Measurement Equivalence
Scott B. Friend, George P. Moschis, Kara Chan, Andrew M. Baker 35
A Cross-Cultural Examination of Third-Person Effect and Online Social Networking:Implications for Viral Marketing, Word-of-Mouth Brand Communications, andConsumer Behavior in User-Generated Context
Jie Zhang, Terry Daugherty 37
Country-of-Origin Effect: An Examination of the Bicultural ConsumerMohammad Ali Zolfagharian, Qin Sun 38
MARKETING AND SOCIETY: ISSUES AND PERSPECTIVES
Deception in Covert Marketing: From the Perspectives of Law and Consumer BehaviorSzu-Chi Huang 40
I Don’t Smoke, So I Ain’t Have to Listen? A Cross-Cultural Exploration of the Effects ofAntismoking Messages on Non-Smokers’ Elaboration
Gianfranco Walsh, Louise May Hassan, Edward Man Kee Shiu 49
Is Surprise Prior to the Activation of Negative Emotions? The Processing of a ShockingAd on Drinking and Driving
Imène Becheur, Hayan Dib, Pierre Valette-Florence 51
BRAND ASSOCIATIONS AND PERSONALITY
Eagle–Bird, Nokia–Phone: Understanding Brands as WordsT. Bettina Cornwell, Michael Humphreys, Anna Rachel McAlister, Emerald Quinn,Lynn Richard Kahle, Doug Nelson 52
Using Music to Create and Enhance Brand PersonalityJohannes Flecker, Thomas Foscht, Cesar M. Maloles III, Bernhard Swoboda 54
Key Success Factors in the Implementation of an Intended Brand Personality: A DyadicPerspective
Harley Krohmer, Lucia Malaer, Wayne D. Hoyer, Bettina Nyffenegger 56
CUSTOMER RESPONSE TO FIRM STRATEGIC ACTIONS
Thank or Blame the One You Are Familiar With: Alliance Satisfaction Attributionand Consumer Behavioral Response to Partner Firms
Ning Li 58
Company-Reputation Versus Division-Reputation: Which One Strikes Through? ACustomer Segments-Based Investigation
Florian Kraus, Michael Lingenfelder, Dominic Zimmer 60
Emotional Contagion in the Context of Downsizing: How Employee Uncertainty Leadsto Customer Uncertainty
Christian Homburg, Sabine Winkelmann, Martin Klarmann 62
Fight or Flight? Customer Response to CRM TacticsAndrew Baker, Naveen Donthu 64
v
EXPLORING NEW FRONTIERS IN TRUST AND CUSTOMER COMMITMENTIN THE RETAILING CONTEXT
Creating and Deploying Commitment: Linking Relationship Marketing Initiatives,Commitment, and Customer Value
Melchior D. Bryant, Maik Hammerschmidt, Hans H. Bauer 66
Intersection of Distance and Trust Theories at Retail LocationsRay L. Benedicktus III, Michael K. Brady, Peter R. Darke, Michael D. Hartline 68
Retailers and Private Label Brands: Current Knowledge and Directions for FutureResearch
James Mark Mayer, George M. Zinkhan 70
Investigating the Moderating Effects of Managerial Interventions on the Role Stress:Commitment Relationship
Anna-Lena Ackfeldt, Neeru Malhotra, Doris Fay 77
SALES LEADERSHIP, CONTROL, AND THE SALES-MARKETING INTERFACE
A Conceptual Integration of Sales Force Control and Sales Force Leadership Concepts:Bridging Three Chasms
Ove Jensen, Sven Mueller 79
Sales Leadership Effectiveness: Meta-Analysis and Assessment of Causal EffectsAlexander Haas, Harley Krohmer, Felix Weispfenning 90
Marketing Strategy Implementation Failure an Exploratory Investigation Through theSales-Marketing Interface Lens
Avinash Malshe, Ravipreet S. Sohi 91
CONSUMER INNOVATION AND SYMBOLISM
“I’ll Trade Ya!”: Exploring a Model of Consumer Collecting BehaviorMark Ligas 93
Social Identification, Social Representations, and Consumer Innovativeness in an OrganicFood Context: A Cross-National Comparison
Jos Bartels, Machiel J. Reinders 94
The Impact of Consumer Innovativeness on Shopping Styles: The Case of YoungChinese Consumers
Ji Eun Park, Jun Yu, Joyce Xin Zhou 96
When Innovativeness in Form Matters: The Joint Impact of Form Innovativeness andExpected Innovativeness Type on Product Evaluations Over Time
Michael W. Kroff 98
SOCIAL MARKETING AND ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Examining the Tension Between Rigor and Entertainment in the Classroom from aSocietal Marketing Perspective: Student Perceptions of, and Responses to, DesirableVersus Pleasing and Salutary Educational Products
Adam Nguyen, Joseph Rosetti 100
vi
Is There More Between Compliance and Exit? Response Strategies to Changes inEnvironmental Rules and Regulations
Frederik Beuk 102
The Evolution of Environmental Marketing/Management Research: A BibliographicAnalysis of the Period 1969–2008
Constantinos N. Leonidou, Leonidas C. Leonidou 104
CUSTOMER LOYALTY, SATISFACTION, AND COMPLAINTS
Cultivating Customer Loyalty: Why Businesses Do Not Have Complete Control?V. Kumar, Rolph Anderson, Srini S. Srinivasan 106
Catch Up with the Best: Relative Customer Satisfaction and Market Value of Firm EquityArmin R. Arnold, Florian v. Wangenheim 108
On the Importance of Complaint Handling Design and Customer Characteristics forShaping Complainants’ Judgment: A Multi-Level Study of Main and Moderating Effects
Christian Homburg, Andreas Fürst, Nicole Koschate 110
ONLINE CONSUMER BEHAVIOR
Comparing Trust and Credibility Perceptions of Online Health Information SourcesBrad Love, Michael Mackert, Harrison McKnight, Szu-Chi Huang, Adriana Garcia 112
Living Online: Consumer Behavior in Second LifeMichael Haenlein, Andreas M. Kaplan 121
The Impact of Internet Trust on the Adoption of Internet Banking and the ModeratingRole of Personality
Sonja Grabner-Kräuter, Rita Faullant 123
Reexamining Consumer Purchase Intention Impacted by C2C Online ResaleHsunchi Chu, Shuling Liao 134
INNOVATION IN SERVICE RESEARCH: AN EXAMINATION OF SERVICEINITIATIVES
A Profile Deviation Analysis of Top Performing Service Employees in Bank Branchesand Call Centers
Neeru Malhotra, Felix Mavondo, Avinandan Mukherjee 136
Deregulation Within Service Industries and its Impact on Buyer Behavior: A PricingPerspective
D. Eric Boyd, Willam T. Faranda 139
Service Innovation in the Service-Dominant Logic: In Search of a FrameworkAndrea Ordanini, A. Parsu Parasuraman 140
Will They Stay or Will They Go? Customer Intentions to Follow When Service Workers BoltDavid A. Gilliam, Tom J. Brown 154
SALES TECHNOLOGY AND CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIP MANAGEMENT
If One Steps Out of the Phalanx: Analyzing Leaders’ Influence on Sales Force AutomationAdoption with a Four Source Dataset
Christian Homburg, Jan Wieseke, Christina Kuehnl 156
vii
Managing Sales Technology-Related Change Mechanisms: A Commitment and CopingPerspective
Nikolaos G. Panagopoulos, Gary K. Hunter 158
CRM Software Use and Customer Service: Antecedents and OutcomesAbbie Griffin, G. Tomas M. Hult, Regina McNally 160
Customer Relationship Management Capability: Antecedents and its Impact on CRMPerformance
Oliver H. Arndt, Marcus Schoegel 162
“NEW” APPROACHES TO “OLD” PROBLEMS IN INTERORGANIZATIONALRESEARCH
Appraising, Predicting, and Preventing Business Customer Dissatisfaction and Disloyalty:Highlights and Impacts of a Marketing and Accounting Initiative
Joël Le Bon 164
Organizational Buyers’ Value Perception in Uncertain Purchasing Situations: AnEmpirical Study
Tao Gao, M. Joseph Sirgy 166
Knowledge Orientation: The Key Role Between Market Orientation and Innovation inthe Supply Chain
Haisu Zhang, Esi Abbam Elliot 168
The Effects of Pioneering Advantages in Business-to-Business Contexts: An AlternativeApproach Using Pioneer Perception
Sungwoo Jung 176
PERSPECTIVES ON MEASUREMENT ISSUES IN MARKETING RESEARCH
Triangulation of Survey Data in Marketing and Management Research: Concepts,Findings, and Guidelines
Christian Homburg, Oliver Schilke, Martin Reimann, Martin Klarmann 178
Comparing Reflective and Formative Measurement Models on the Same IndicatorsGeorge R. Franke, Nick Lee 180
Is Peer Review Reliable? It Depends on What We MeasureMartin Eisend 182
BRANDING POTPOURRI: MARKETING MIX, BRAND ALLIANCES, ANDWORD-OF-MOUTH
The Impact of Marketing Mix Efforts on Brand Equity: A Multilevel AnalysisHeiner Evanschitzky, David Woisetschläger 184
Effects of Branded Alliances on Consumer Attitudes: Does the Number of Allies Matter?Hongwei He, Guido Berens 186
Word-of-Mouth: Development of a Multiple Item ScaleJillian C. Sweeney, Geoffrey N. Soutar, Tim Mazzarol 188
Toward a Brand Values Scale: Concept and First Empirical StepsHansjoerg Gaus, Jan Drengner, Steffen Jahn, Tina Kiessling 190
viii
CUSTOMERS AND EMPLOYEES BEHAVING BADLY: AN EXAMINATION OFSERVICE FAILURES AND CUSTOMER COMPLAINTS
Consumer Racial Profiling in Retail Environments: A Longitudinal Analysis of theImpact on Brand Image
Jeremy J. Sierra, Robert S. Heiser, Harry A. Taute 192
Effects of Firms’ Pre-Complaint Handling Actions on Consumers’ Complaint ResponsesUtilizing a Goal-Driven Model
Chuanyi Tang, Sherry L. Lotz 194
Service Failures and Customer Forgiveness in the Healthcare SectorYelena Tsarenko, Yuliya Strizhakova 196
STRATEGIC INNOVATION AND NEW PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT
How Many and What Kind? The Role of Strategic Orientation in New Product IdeationJelena Spanjol, William J. Qualls, José Antonio Rosa 204
The Oracle of Technology in Marketing Practices: Literature Profiling on TechnologyResearch
Olivia F. Lee, Virginie Pioche Khare 205
The Polydextrous Effects of Peripheral Vision Capability, Proactive and ResponsiveMarket Orientation on New Product Program and Financial Performance
Yiannis Kouropalatis, Robert E. Morgan 207
What Drives Firms to Excellence in Innovation Management?Malte Brettel, Markus Sattler 217
B2B SALES AND MARKETING: SOCIAL CAPITAL THEORY, BRANDSTRENGTH, AND CUSTOMER ORIENTATION
Increasing Salesperson Performance with Social Capital: The Impact of Centrality,Tie Strength and Network Diversity
Danny Pimentel Claro, Gabriel R. Gonzalez 220
Brand Strength of Component Suppliers as a Driver of Their Market PerformanceStefan H. Worm, Rajendra K. Srivastava 222
Revisiting Salespersons’ Customer Orientation: What it Actually Means and When itIs Important
Abraham Koshy, Ramendra Singh 224
INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES IN CONSUMER BEHAVIOR – 1
An Investigation of External Locus of Control and Online Privacy ConcernDesmond Lam 226
Individual Social Responsibility Versus Relational Norms in Consumer Helping BehaviorVeronica Thomas, Jennifer Wiggins Johnson, Joann Peck 228
Need for Cognition and Humor Revisited: Why “It’s Funny” Doesn’t Always Mean“I Like It”
James Mark Mayer, Plamen P. Peev, Piyush Kumar 237
ix
Passionate Devotees or Knowledgeable Brand Experts: Who Drives Evangelism?Kurt Matzler, Elisabeth Pichler, Andrea Hemetsberger 239
CONTEMPORARY ISSUES IN MARKETING RESEARCH
Extending Festge and Schwaiger’s Model of Customer Satisfaction with Industrial Goodsto Account for Unobserved Heterogeneity
Marko Sarstedt, Christian M. Ringle, Manfred Schwaiger 241
Customer Targeting in Direct Marketing: An Accurate Prediction of Customer ResponseSubom Rhee 245
Determining the Attributes Affecting Consumer’s Perceptions of the SUV Product Classof the DaimlerChrysler Jeep Cherokee Using the Repertory Grid and the O-A-RClassification Methods
Angela Poulakidas 247
Consumer Behavior Research in the Aftermath of a Natural Disaster: Lessons LearnedRussell Lacey, Pamela Kennett-Hensel, Julie Sneath 259
GLOBAL MARKETING RESEARCH IN CHINA
An Empirical Investigation of the Market Orientation-Performance Relationship inEmerging Markets
Ahmet H. Kirca 261
How Foreign Firms Achieve Competitive Advantage in Emerging Economies:Managerial Ties and Market Orientation
Julie Juan Li, Kevin Zheng Zhou 262
Measuring the Effect of Country of Origin on U.S. Consumer’s Brand Perception ofChinese and Brazilian Beer
Daniel Galvez, Marc Fetscherin 264
PRICE DECISIONS
Organizational Price Processing TypologyGerald E. Smith, J. Chris White 271
Regular Price Reductions and Shareholder ValueChristian Homburg, Martin Artz, Tobias Stein 273
Antecedents of the Strategic Price Metric Decision: An Exploratory StudyNatasha Zaza, Stefan Michel 274
PRICING STRATEGIES IN SERVICES AND RETAILING
Antecedents of Overall Store Price Image in RetailingFelix Weispfenning, Dirk Weissbrich, Harley Krohmer 276
Payment Mode Choice, Usage, and Satisfaction: Who Uses Which and Why – Evidencefrom Austria
Thomas Foscht, Cesar M. Maloles III, Bernhard Swoboda, Swee-Lim Chia 277
x
Pricing of Experience Product with Individual Heterogeneity: A Hierarchical Bayes ModelAtanu Adhikari 279
UNDERSTANDING INNOVATION ADOPTION
Behavioral Differences of Customers Acquired by Word-of-Mouth or Marketing: AnEmpirical Assessment
David M. Woisetschläger, Alke K. Töllner, Gerald Schönbucher 281
How Do Innovators Adopt Radical Innovations from New Technology Ventures?Joost Wouters, Ed Nijssen 283
Managing Customers’ Adoption BarriersSabine Kuester, Silke C. Hess 292
Perceived Risk Upon Consumer Discovery of a Radical Innovation: The Role of Arousaland Emotion
Khaled Aboulnasr, Arjun Chaudhuri, Mark Ligas 294
MODELING FACTORS AFFECTING SALESPERSON PERFORMANCE ANDEMPLOYEE EXITING
Salesperson Goal Orientations as Determinants of Adaptation to Organizational ChangeMichael Ahearne, Willy Bolander, Son K. Lam, John E. Mathieu 295
A Sequence of Salespersons Responses to Salesperson-Employer Issues?Robert A. Ping 296
Examining Curvilinear Relationships of Salesperson Self-Efficacy and OrganizationalCitizenship Behaviors with Call Activity and Percentage-of-Quota
Adam A. Rapp, Raj Agnihotri, Kevin Trainor, Michael Ahearne 306
INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES IN CONSUMER BEHAVIOR – 2
Investigating Consumer Vanity: Framework Development and Identification of Vanity-Related Consumer Segments
Klaus-Peter Wiedmann, Nadine Hennigs, Astrid Siebels, Frank Bachmann 308
Personality and Performance on the Stock Market: The Mediating Role of Consumers’Financial Risk Taking
Martin Reimann, Brian Knutson, Richard Peterson 310
Uniqueness Motivation in Consumer BehaviorRonald E. Goldsmith, Ronald A. Clark 311
The Role of Interpersonal Orientation, Cognitive Endeavor, and Advertising inConsumer Ethnocentrism: A Conceptual Model
Marina Puzakova, Hyokjin Kwak, Trina Larsen Andras, George M. Zinkhan 317
MARKETING STRATEGY AND GLOBAL RESEARCH
Country-of-Origin: A Construct Past its Sell-By Date?Adamantios Diamantopoulos, Bodo B. Schlegelmilch, Dayananda Palihawadana 318
Managing Global Account in Dynamic MarketLinda Hui Shi, Fang Wu 329
xi
Getting a Grip on the Saddle: Cycles, Chasms, or Cascades?Deepa Chandrasekaran, Gerard J. Tellis 330
Within-Country Retail Format Diversification: Does Country Context Matter?Carol Finnegan, Linda Good 333
DESIRABILITY, EMOTIONS, AND MOODS
Gender Differences in Food Preferences: The Role of Emotional Intensity, Self-Regulation,and Appetitive Craving
David J. Moore, Jerome D. Williams 334
How the Order of Sampled Experiential Goods Affects ChoiceDipayan (Dip) Biswas, Dhruv Grewal, Anne L. Roggeveen 336
When Positive Is Painful: Aversion to Mood Transitioning as an Explanation for theAvoidance of Positive Hedonic Stimuli
Nancy M. Puccinelli Upton, Dhruv Grewal 345
PRICING
A Test of Alternative Mechanisms for the Psychological Impact of Price Bundling andImplications for When and Why Price Bundling Enhances or Derails ConsumerEvaluation
Adam Nguyen, Roger M. Heeler, Cheryl L. Buff 347
The Influence of Purchasing Goals on Consumers’ Perceptions of Price PromotionsLan Xia, Kent B. Monroe 349
The Use of a Concrete-Partitioned Message Frame: A Conceptual Cause-RelatedPerspective
Anthony H. Kerr, Neel Das 351
HOW TO IMPROVE ORGANIZATIONAL PERFORMANCE? ONE QUESTION,DIFFERENT ANSWERS
Alliance Structure and Success in the Global Airline Industry: An Empirical InvestigationUrsula Y. Sullivan, Anne T. Coughlan 353
Distribution Channel Choice of New Entrepreneurial VenturesOliver Schilke, Malte Brettel, Florian Heinemann, Thomas Müller 364
That’s Not Fair! A Social Exchange Theory Perpective on Fairness and Power inBuyer-Supplier Relationships
Jessica J. Hoppner 366
Hybrid Integration: When Third Parties Set the Agenda to Suppliers and RetailersFabrizio Zerbini, Sandro Castaldo, Monica Grosso 367
INNOVATION, CAPABILITIES, AND ORGANIZATIONAL LEARNING
Regulatory Focus and New Product Team Decision-MakingJelena Spanjol, Leona Tam, William J. Qualls, Jonathan D. Bohlmann 368
xii
Business Strategies of Treacy and Wiersema: The Impact of Marketing Capabilities andProduct Life Cycle
Silke Mühlmeier, Antonia Erz, Torsten Tomczak, Wolfgang Jenewein 369
The Impact of Market-Based Organizational Learning on Firm Performance: AResource-Based Approach
Jeannette A. Mena, G. Tomas M. Hult 371
A Configurational Perspective on Companies’ Innovation Orientation: A Triadic AnalysisRuth Maria Stock-Homburg, Nicolas Andy Zacharias 373
THE ROLE OF CULTURE AND ENVIRONMENT ON CONSUMER BEHAVIORIN SERVICES AND RETAILING
Couple-Shopping Behaviors: When and Why Do Shopping Partners Positively/NegativelyParticipate in a Joint-Shopping Trip?
Junsang Lim, Sharon E. Beatty 375
Cross-Cultural Differences in Customers’ Willingness to Co-Produce ProfessionalServices: Insights from an 11 Country-Study
Jan H. Schumann, Florian v. Wangenheim, Marcus Zimmer 377
Fitting In: Cognitive Community and Retail Clothing Shop Performance in BangkokClothing Clusters
Warin Chotekorakul, James Nelson 379
The Moderating Effect of Cultural on Inter-Group Attribution in the Service EnvironmentGary Daniel Futrell 387
CURRENT ISSUES IN MARKETING EDUCATION
Shared Responsibility and Student Learning: Ensuring a Favorable EducationalExperience
Jeremy J. Sierra 389
“Psst, About That Prof”: College Students’ Word-of-Mouth, Instructor Evaluation andCourse Selection
David G. Taylor 391
Non-Linear Grading: Inventory of Practices and Test of EffectsBirgit Leisen Pollack, Bryan Lilly 397
Uncertainty Reduction in the MBA Market: What to Learn from the Economics ofInformation Theory
Mario Rese, Annika Wilke, Buelent Goegduen 399
SELF REGULATION AND REGULATORY FOCUS
Keeping an Eye on the Prize: Ego-Conservation and Restoration in the Grocery StoreAubrey R. Fowler III, Jie Gao 401
Marketing of Risky Products: The Influence of Regulatory Fit and the Role of SocialIdentification
Machiel J. Reinders, Jos Bartels, Marieke L. Fransen 408
xiii
The Effect of Aging and Time Horizon Perspective on Consumers’ Response to PromotionVersus Prevention Focus Appeals
Camelia C. Micu, Tilottama G. Chowdhuri 410
The Fit Between Brand Personality and Consumers’ Self: The Importance of ActualVersus Ideal Self for Brand Performance
Harley Krohmer, Lucia Malaer, Wayne Hoyer, Bettina Nyffenegger 412
UNDERSTANDING ONLINE COMMUNITIES
An Elaboration Likelihood Perspective on Online Customer ReviewsSusan M. Mudambi, David Schuff 414
Consumers as Resellers in Online Secondary Markets: Taxonomy and MotivationsHsunchi Chu, Shuling Liao 416
Privacy, E-Commerce, and Virtual Property: Outlining a Lockean Theory of InternetConsumer Rights
Matt Hettche 425
Third-Person Effect and Online Social Networking: Implications for Viral Marketing,Word-of-Mouth Brand Communications, and Consumer Behavior in User-GeneratedContext
Jie Zhang, Terry Daugherty 432
THE EFFECTIVENESS OF CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITYINITIATIVES
Does Corporate Social Responsibility Pay Off for Retailers?Hanna Schramm-Klein, Joachim Zentes, Dirk Morschett, Bernhard Swoboda 433
Identical CSR Strategies, Different Marketing OutcomesAnnette Cerne, Adel El-Ansary 435
Is Carbon Labeling Effective? The Impact of Carbon Labels on Consumer Perceptionsand Purchase Intentions
Amy Stokes, Anna Turri, Andrea Heintz Tangari 437
Measuring and Maximizing Donor Lifetime Value Using Donor Selection and ResourceAllocation Strategies
J. Andrew Petersen, V. Kumar 439
NEW THEORIES IN GLOBAL MARKETING RESEARCH
A Case Analysis of Entrepreneurial Development in CubaJoseph L. Scarpaci 441
Cross-Cultural Differences in the Effect of Word-of-Mouth in Relational ServiceExchange: The Moderating Effect of Uncertainty Avoidance
Jan H. Schumann, Florian v. Wangenheim, Anne Stringfellow, Zhilin Yang,Vera Blazevic, Sandra Praxmarer, G. Shainesh, Marcin Komor, Randall Shannon,Fernando Jimenez 443
Culture’s Consequences on Foreign Market Entry: Are They the Same for U.S. Firmsand Firms from Emerging Countries?
Shavin Malhotra, K. Sivakumar, PengCheng Zhu 445
xiv
Incorporating Theory in International Marketing ResearchJeannette A. Mena, G. Tomas M. Hult 446
ANTECEDENTS OF FIRM PERFORMANCE AND GROWTH
The Financial Consequences of Service Quality and its Impact on AdvertisingEffectiveness
Donald J. Lund, Detelina Marinova 448
The Effects of Environmental Antecedents and Perceived Market Growth onEntrepreneurial Proclivity and Growth Leadership
Zhen Zhu, Ken Matsuno 450
The Marketing-Sales-Finance TriangleDirk Weissbrich, Harley Krohmer, Ove Jensen 452
SATISFACTION AND RETENTION: KEEPING CUSTOMERS SATISFIED ANDCOMING BACK
A Tale of Two Stories: The Impacts of Customer Satisfaction with Online Retailers’Customer Service and Content on Sales Performance
Anteneh Ayanso, Kaveepan Lertwachara, Narongsak Thongpapanl 454
Customer Referral Programs and Customer Retention: Do Rewards Undermine theRetention Effect?
Ina Garnefeld, Sabrina Helm, Steve Tax, Andreas Eggert 455
The Impact of Steering Measures on Customer Channel Migration and CustomerSatisfaction
Dennis Herhausen, Matthias Schulten, Marcus Schögel 457
Bonding Orientation: The Construct and Research PropositionsRuixue Zhang, Robert P. Leone, Dahai Dong 459
TECHNOLOGICAL AND CROSS-CULTURAL CHALLENGES IN TEACHINGMARKETING
Internet Marketing Resilience: New Thoughts for Curriculum and ResourcesKevin F. McCrohan, James W. Harvey 462
Motivations as Predictors of Value Generated from Marketing-Related Technology Use:Orientations, Moderators, and Outcomes
Michael Levin, Jared M. Hansen, Debra Laverie 470
A Blueprint for Cross-Cultural Marketing Communications Project: CombiningGlobalization and Sustainability
Iryna Pentina, Veronique Guilloux 472
TRUST, SUPERSTITION, DEVIANCE, AND RECIPROCITY IN SALESRELATIONSHIPS
The Impact of Relative Power and Information Within the Buyer-Seller Dyad: TheImportance of Honesty, Benevolence, and Competence
Scott B. Friend, Danny N. Bellenger, James Boles, Pam Scholder Ellen 474
xv
Deviance to Regulate Affects: A Motivation Model of Frontline Employees’ WorkplaceDeviance
Chuanyi Tang, Lin Guo 476
I Will Gladly Pay You Tuesday for a Hamburger Today: Personality and Propensity forReciprocity
David A. Gilliam 478
ADVERTISING AND WORD-OF-MOUTH
Audience-Tuning Behavior in Comsumer WOM Communication and its Effect on theSpeaker
Yu Hu 480
Exploring the Underlying Motivational Drivers of WOM Referral Behavior:Toward a Typology of Social Influencers
Klaus-Peter Wiedmann, Nadine Hennigs, Sascha Langner 482
Relevance: The Lifeblood of Search Ad? The Consumer’s PerspectiveQin Sun, Nancy Spears 484
AUTHOR INDEX 486
Correction Notice: The following paper was published and presented at the 2008Summer Educators’ Conference; due to an error by the typesetter, one of theauthors’ names was misspelled:
The Role of Self-Concept Congruency on Product-Brand Image and Store-BrandImage: Antecedents and Consequences
Joseph F. Rocereto, Hyokjin Kwak, Marina Puzakova 402
xvi
Preface and Acknowledgments
The theme of the 2009 Winter Educators’ Conference is “Excellence in Marketing Research: Striving for Impact.”Good marketing research should make an impact by changing what managers do, by sparking new intellectual insights,or by changing what is taught in the classroom. The editors of our major journals have indicated their desires not to allowthe past to constrain the future, to increase the impact of articles published, and to encourage truly innovative papersbecause they often have the greatest impact. We are proud of the innovative papers and special sessions in this conferencethat exemplify the goal of providing impact.
We have many people to thank for their involvement in the development and implementation of the conference. Weappreciate the efforts of the fine scholars who have offered their intellectual contributions. The conference would notexist without their stimulating input, whether in the form of papers, presentations, panel discussions, or othercontributions.
Without the tireless and conscientious efforts of the track chairs, this conference would not be possible. We owea huge debt of gratitude to the following track chairs whose work made our job so much easier:
Brand Marketing & Communications Devon DelVecchio, Miami University
Consumer Behavior Rui (Juliet) Zhu, University of British ColumbiaAshwani Monga, University of South Carolina
Global Marketing Xueming Luo, University of Texas at Arlington
Instructional Innovation Charles Blankson, University of North Texas
Interorganizational Issues Sertan Kabadayi, Fordham University
Marketing & Society Peggy Cunningham, Queen’s University
Marketing Strategy Alina Sorescu, Texas A&M University
Marketing, Technology, & Innovation Om Narasimhan, University of MinnesotaRaghunath Rao, University of Texas
Research Methods Raj Echambadi, University of Central Florida
Sales & Relationship Marketing Gary Hunter, Case Western Reserve University
Services & Retailing Liz Wang, University of DallasLauren Skinner, University of Alabama at Birmingham
SIG Sessions Angeline Close, University of Nevada, Las Vegas
More than 450 reviewers gave of their time and effort to evaluate the hundreds of papers and session proposalssubmitted to the conference. Thanks to all who were willing and able to help. We also thank the members of our “BlueRibbon” Award Selection Committee – Sharon Beatty (University of Alabama), Robert P. Leone (Texas ChristianUniversity), and Richard J. Lutz (University of Florida) – who had the daunting task of selecting the recipient of the “Bestof Conference” award from among a set of terrific papers.
This is the second conference in which we have used the new online conference management system and we wishto thank Tom Brown (Oklahoma State University) for his invaluable assistance in guiding us through the process.Finally, we appreciate the assistance of the American Marketing Association staff and volunteers without whom thisconference would not be possible. We wish to especially thank Lynn Brown and Marie Steinhoff for their enormouslypatient assistance in preparing the program and proceedings, respectively. The SIG members and leaders provided aterrific collection of SIG special sessions. We also thank the members of the AMA Academic Council, especially thecurrent president of the council, Peter Dacin (Queen’s University) who demonstrated great faith in entrusting us withthis conference and who provided sage counsel throughout the process. Finally, we express our appreciation to ourrespective universities for encouraging us to provide this service.
Kristy Reynolds J. Chris WhiteCulverhouse College of Commerce Neeley School of Business
& Business Administration Texas Christian UniversityThe University of Alabama
xvii
Best of Conference Award
“Service Innovation in the Service Dominant Logic: In Search of a Framework”Andrea Ordanini, Università Bocconi
A. Parsu Parasuraman, University of Miami
Best Reviewer Award
Co-Winners:Pravin Nath, Drexel University, and
Saim Kashmiri, University of Texas at Austin
Best Paper: Track Award Winners
Brand Marketing & Communications“Using Music to Create and Enhance BrandPersonality”
Johannes Flecker, University of GrazThomas Foscht, California State University,
East BayCesar Maloles, California State University,
EastBayBernhard Swoboda, Trier University
Consumer Behavior“How the Order of Sampled Experiential Goods AffectsChoice”
Dipayan (Dip) Biswas, Bentley CollegeDhruv Grewal, Babson CollegeAnne L. Roggeveen, Babson College
Global Marketing“Culture’s Consequences on Foreign Market Entry: AreThey the Same for U.S. Firms and Firms from EmergingCountries?”
Shavin Malhotra, Jacksonville UniversityPengCheng Zhu, Carton UniversityK. Sivakumar, Lehigh University
Instructional Innovation“Non-Linear Grading: Inventory of Practices and Test ofEffects”
Birgit Leisen Pollack, University of WisconsinOshkosh
Bryan Lilly, University of Wisconsin Oshkosh
Interorganizational Issues“Appraising, Predicting, and Preventing BusinessCustomer Dissatisfaction and Disloyalty: Highlights andImpacts of a Marketing and Accounting Initiative”
Joël Le Bon, ESSEC Business School
Marketing & Society“I Don’t Smoke, So I Ain’t Have to Listen? A Cross-Cultural Exploration of the Effects of Antismoking Mes-sages on Non-Smokers’ Elaboration”
Gianfranco Walsh, University of Koblenz-LandauLouise May Hassan, University of St AndrewsEdward Man Kee Shiu, University of Strathclyde
Marketing Strategy“Fight or Flight? Customer Response to CRM Tactics”
Andrew M. Baker, Georgia State UniversityNaveen Donthu, Georgia State University
Marketing, Technology, & Innovation“Perceived Risk upon Consumer Discovery of a RadicalInnovation: The Role of Arousal and Emotion”
Khaled Aboulnasr, Florida Gulf Coast UniversityArjun Chaudhuri, Fairfield UniveristyMark Ligas, Fairfield University
Research Methods“Triangulation of Survey Data in Marketing and Manage-ment Research: Concepts, Findings, and Guidelines”
Christian Homburg, University of MannheimOliver Schilke, Stanford UniversityMartin Reimann, Stanford UniversityMartin Klarmann, University of Mannheim
Sales & Relationship Marketing“If One Steps Out of the Phalanx: Analyzing Leaders’Influence on Sales Force Automation Adoption with aQuadratic Dataset”
Christian Homburg, University of MannheimJan Wieseke, University of MannheimChristina Kuehnl, University of Mannheim
Services & Retailing“Service Innovation in the Service Dominant Logic: InSearch of a Framework”
Andrea Ordanini, Università BocconiA. Parsu Parasuraman, University of Miami
xviii
2009 AMA Winter Educators’ ConferenceList of Reviewers
AFelix Abeson, Coppin State
UniversityKhaled Aboulnasr, Florida Gulf
Coast UniversityAtanu Adhikari, ICFAI UniversityRaj Agnihotri, Kent State
UniversityMichael Ahearne, University of
HoustonUlla Riitta Ahlfors, University of
JyvaskylaKirk Damon Aiken, Eastern
Washington UniversityMuhammad Aljukhadar, HEC
MontrealArthur Allaway, University of
AlabamaJeff Allen, University of Central
FloridaClinton Amos, Augusta State
UniversityJonlee Andrews, Indiana
UniversitySwee Hoon Ang, National
University of SingaporeIsmet Anitsal, Tennessee Tech
UniversityMelek Meral Anitsal, Tennessee
Tech UniversityKersi Antia, University of
WisconsinSyed Tariq Anwar, West Texas
A&M UniversityMark J. Arnold, Saint Louis
UniversityInigo Arroniz, University of
CincinnatiZeynep Arsel, Concordia
UniversityJoep Arts, Vrije Universiteit
AmsterdamChristy Ashley, East Carolina
UniversitySharmin Attaran, University of
Illinois at ChicagoDoug Ayers, University of
Alabama at Birmingham
BDaniel W. Baack, Ball State
UniversityBarry Babin, Louisiana Tech
UniversityFrank Bachmann, University of
HannoverCem Bahadir, University of South
CarolinaJulie Baker, Texas Christian
UniversityAnne Balazs, Mississippi
University for WomenArtur Baldauf, University of BernYongchuan Bao, Suffolk
UniversityVictor A. Barger, University of
Wisconsin-MadisonJos Bartels, Wageningen
UniversityMichael Basil, University of
LethbridgeSuman Basuroy, Florida Atlantic
UniversityMary Beck, McNeese State
UniversityTerry Beckman, Queen’s
UniversityJean-Francois Belisle, Concordia
UniversityNeil Thomas Bendle, University of
MinnesotaRay L. Benedicktus, California
State University, FullertonKatrina J. Bens, Pennsylvania State
UniversityJoseph Ben-Ur, University of
Houston, VictoriaDoris Berger, IMC FH Krems,
University of Applied Sciences,Austria
Barry Berman, Hofstra UniversitySundar Bharadwaj, Emory
UniversityPelin Bicen, Texas Tech UniversityVishal Bindroo, University of
Central FloridaEdward Blair, University of
Houston
Charles Blankson, University ofNorth Texas
Markus Blut, University ofDortmund
James Boles, Georgia StateUniversity
Paula Bone, West VirginiaUniversity
Maureen A. Bourassa, Queen’sUniversity
David M. Boush, University ofOregon
Doug Bowman, Emory UniversityS. Adam Brasel, Boston CollegeKarin Braunsberger, University of
South Florida, St. PetersburgSheri Bridges, Wake Forest
UniversityJames R. Brown, West Virginia
UniversityJim Burroughs, University of
VirginiaScot Burton, University of
Arkansas
CMargaret Campbell, University of
Colorado, BoulderJoe Cannon, Colorado State
UniversityMary Caravella, University of
ConnecticutLes Carlson, University of
NebraskaFrancois Anthony Carrillat, HEC
MontrealRussell Casey, Clayton State
UniversityDeepa Chandrasekaran, Lehigh
UniversityChiu-chi Angela Chang,
Shippensburg UniversityWei-Lun Chang, Tamkang
UniversityLan Nguyen Chaplin, University of
ArizonaAmar Cheema, Washington
University in St. Louis
xix
Cristian Chelariu, SuffolkUniversity
Yubo Chen, University of ArizonaPavan Chennamaneni, University
of Central FloridaJames Chien-Tao Cho, Golden
Gate UniversityPilsik Choi, Clark UniversityHsunchi Chu, MingDao UniversityAngeline Close, University of
Nevada, Las VegasKesha K. Coker, Southern Illinois
UniversityRobert Cosenza, University of
MississippiDeborah Cowles, Virginia
Commonwealth UniversityAmy E. Cox, Converse CollegeDavid Cranage, Pennsylvania State
UniversityVictoria Crittenden, Boston
CollegeWilliam W. Cron, Texas Christian
UniversityAnna Shaojie Cui, Rensselaer
Polytechnic InstitutePeggy Cunningham, Queen’s
University
DSujan Dan, Texas A&M UniversityRajiv P. Dant, University of
OklahomaPeter R. Darke, York UniversityRene Yves Darmon, ESSEC
Business SchoolBrad Davis, Wilfrid Laurier
UniversityFederico de Gregorio, University
of AlabamaTom DeCarlo, University of
AlabamaDawn Deeter-Schmelz, Ohio
UniversityGeorge Deitz, University of
MemphisJade Sturdy DeKinder, University
of Texas at AustinDevon DelVecchio, Miami
UniversityDebra M. Desrochers, University
of Notre DameRita Di Mascio, University of New
South WalesIrene J. Dickey, University of
Dayton
Naveen Donthu, Georgia StateUniversity
Michael J. Dorsch, ClemsonUniversity
Paul H. Driessen, RadboudUniversity Nijmegen
Rex Yuxing Du, University ofGeorgia
ERaj Echambadi, University of
Central FloridaAhmet Ekici, Bilkent UniversityKenneth Evans, University of
OklahomaNermin Eyuboglu, Baruch College
FAnn Fairhurst, University of
TennesseeDaniel von der Heyde Fernandes,
Universidade Federal do RioGrande do Sul
Linda Ferrell, University of NewMexico
O.C. Ferrell, University of NewMexico
Marc Fetscherin, Rollins College,Harvard University
Adam Finn, University of AlbertaKaren Flaherty, Oklahoma State
UniversityDale Fodness, University of DallasJohn B. Ford, Old Dominion
UniversityEllen R. Foxman, Bentley CollegeJonathan Freeman, Warwick
Business SchoolScott B. Friend, Georgia State
UniversityNancy Furlow, Marymount
UniversityGary Daniel Futrell, Florida State
University
GKatherine Gallagher, Memorial
University of NewfoundlandRajani Ganesh-Pillai, University of
Missouri, ColumbiaNitika Garg, University of
MississippiJule Gassenheimer, Rollins College
Gary Gebhardt, University ofSouth Florida
Esra F. Gencturk, Koc UniversityTansev Geylani, University of
PittsburghBikram Ghosh, University of South
CarolinaDavid I. Gilliland, Colorado State
UniversityMary Gilly, University of
California, IrvineAndrea Godfrey, University of
California, RiversideDaniel J. Goebel, Illinois State
UniversityJ. Tomas Gomez-Arias, Saint
Mary’s College of CaliforniaGautham Gopal, Texas A&M
UniversityMerlyn A. Griffiths, University of
North Carolina, GreensboroBianca Grohmann, Concordia
UniversityBarbara L. Gross, California State
University, NorthridgeThomas Gruen, University of
Colorado, Colorado SpringsGreg Gundlach, University of
North FloridaReetika Gupta, Lehigh UniversityPranjal Gupta, University of TampaFrancisco Guzman, University of
North Texas
HAlexander Haas, University of
BernMichael Haenlein, ESCP-EAP
European School of ManagementDena H. Hale, Georgia Southern
UniversityRebecca W. Hamilton, University
of MarylandJay Handelman, Queen’s
UniversityRichard C. Hanna, Northeastern
UniversityAndrew Wei Hao, University of
HartfordJames E. Harris, Saint Norbert
CollegeJudy Harris, Towson UniversityLouise May Hassan, University of
St. Andrews
xx
Angela Hausman, XavierUniversity
Jon M. Hawes, University ofAkron
Hongwei He, University of EastAnglia
Xin He, University of CentralFlorida
Timothy Heath, Miami UniversityBill Hedgcock, University of
MinnesotaBob Heiser, University of Southern
MaineSabrina Verena Helm, University
of ArizonaTy Henderson, University of Texas
at AustinNadine Hennigs, University of
HannoverTanawat Hirunyawipada,
University of Houston, VictoriaCharles Hofacker, Florida State
UniversityMary Holden, Waterford Institute
of TechnologyBetsy Bugg Holloway, Samford
UniversityEarl Honeycutt, Elon UniversityMark B. Houston, Texas Christian
UniversityHaiyan Hu, Utah State UniversityYu Hu, Salem State CollegeStephanie Huang, University of
New South WalesJohn Hulland, University of
PittsburghJim Hunt, Temple UniversityGary L. Hunter, Illinois State
UniversityGary K. Hunter, Case Western
Reserve UniversityMichael David Hutt, Arizona State
UniversityMichael Hyman, New Mexico
State University
IChiharu Ishida, Illinois State
University
JHaeran Jae, Virginia
Commonwealth UniversityAnupam Jaju, George Mason
University
Ramkumar Janakiraman, TexasA&M University
Sandy Jap, Emory UniversityRama Jayanti, Cleveland State
UniversityMark Johlke, Bradley UniversityBabu L. John Mariadoss,
Washington State UniversityAllison Johnson, Queen’s
UniversityDevon S. Johnson, Northeastern
UniversityJennifer Wiggins Johnson, Kent
State UniversityChris Joiner, George Mason
UniversityMarilyn Y. Jones, Bond UniversityMichael A. Jones, University of
Tennessee ChattanoogaTim Darren Jones, Memorial
University of NewfoundlandAshwin Joshi, York UniversityYogesh Joshi, University of
MarylandSungwoo Jung, Columbus State
University
KSertan Kabadayi, Fordham
UniversityManish Kacker, Tulane UniversityAndrew M. Kaikati, University of
MinnesotaStavros P. Kalafatis, Kingston
University LondonKartik Kalaignanam, University of
South CarolinaMoon Young Kang, University of
Wisconsin-MadisonIngo Oswald Karpen, University of
MelbourneSaim Kashmiri, University of
Texas at AustinVishal Kashyap, Xavier UniversityJerry Katrichis, Hartford UniversityEvangelia Katsikea, Athens
University of Economics andBusiness
Carol Kaufman-Scarborough,Rutgers University
Peter Kaufman, Illinois StateUniversity
Jeremy Kees, Villanova UniversityCraig Kelley, California State
University, Sacramento
Karen Norman Kennedy,University of Alabama atBirmingham
Daekwan Kim, Florida StateUniversity
Hakkyun Kim, ConcordiaUniversity
MinChung Kim, University ofTexas at Austin
Stephen Keysuk Kim, Iowa StateUniversity
Yuna Kim, Indiana UniversityGurprit Singh Kindra, California
State University, SacramentoSunil Kishore, University of
MinnesotaRob Kleine, Ohio Northern
UniversityRick Klink, Loyola CollegeVirginija Kliukinskaite, University
of AgderTom Kramer, Baruch CollegeMichael Krush, University of
Nebraska, LincolnAtul Kulkarni, University of
Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignGanesh Kumar, Case Western
Reserve University
LGene Laczniak, Marquette
UniversityRuss Laczniak, Iowa State
UniversityDesmond Lam, University of South
AustraliaSon Kim Lam, University of
HoustonMichel Laroche, Concordia
UniversityHyunjung Lee, Kent State
UniversityMichelle Lee, Singapore
Management UniversityRuby P. Lee, Florida State
UniversityJames H. Leigh, Texas A&M
UniversityConstantinos N. Leonidou,
University of LeedsMichael Levin, Otterbein CollegeJeffrey Lewin, University of North
TexasLewis Lim, Nanyang
Technological University
xxi
Yuanfang Lin, University ofAlberta
Yong Liu, University of ArizonaYuping Liu, Old Dominion
UniversityRitu Lohtia, Georgia State
UniversitySofia Lopez-Rodriguez, INSEADTina M. Lowrey, University of
Texas at San AntonioMichael Luckett, University of
South Florida, St. PetersburgJason Lueg, Mississippi State
UniversityDonald J. Lund, University of
MissouriXueming Luo, University of Texas
at Arlington
MIsabel Maria Macedo, Universidade
do MinhoGerrard M. Macintosh, North
Dakota State UniversitySreedhar Madhavaram, Cleveland
State UniversityGirish Mallapragada, University of
North CarolinaAvinash Malshe, University of St.
ThomasSudha Mani, University of Texas at
ArlingtonKen Manning, Colorado State
UniversityHuifang Mao, University of Central
FloridaMelissa Markley, DePaul
UniversityLawrence Jeffrey Marks, Kent
State UniversityCarolyn Massiah, University of
Central FloridaMaggie Matear, Queen’s
UniversitySarah Maxwell, Fordham
UniversityMike McCardle, Western Michigan
UniversityMichael McCarthy, Miami
UniversityJoyce A. McGriff, Southern
Polytechnic State UniversityLindsay McShane, Queen’s
UniversityTimothy Meyer, University of
Wisconsin, Green Bay
Ronald Michaels, University ofCentral Florida
Stefan Michel, Thunderbird,School of Global Management
Camelia Codruta Micu, FairfieldUniversity
Chad Milewicz, University ofSouth Florida
Elizabeth Miller, Boston CollegeGeorge Milne, University of
Massachusetts, AmherstSoonhong (Hong) Min, University
of OklahomaSungwook (Sam) Min, California
State UniversityAlma Mintu-Wimsatt, Texas A&M
University at CommerceSaurabh Mishra, McGill UniversityAshwani Monga, University of
South CarolinaElizabeth S. Moore, University of
Notre DameFred Morgan, University of
KentuckyRobert Morgan, University of
AlabamaDirk Morschett, University of
FribourgNacef Mouri, George Mason
UniversitySayantani Mukherjee, California
State University, Long BeachAnirban Mukhopadhyay,
University of MichiganVenkatapparao Mummalaneni,
Virginia State UniversityNiklas Myhr, Chapman University
NCheryl Nakata, University of
Illinois at ChicagoOm Narasimhan, University of
MinnesotaPravin Nath, Drexel UniversityStern Neill, California Polytechnic
State UniversityNoelle Nelson, University of
MinnesotaSharon Ng, Nanyang
Technological UniversityBinh Hoa Nguyen, Oklahoma State
UniversityHieu Nguyen, California State
University, Long BeachCarolyn Nicholson, Stetson
University
Edwin Nijssen, EindhovenUniversity of Technology
Rakesh Niraj, University ofSouthern California
Edward Lorenzo Nowlin,University of Nebraska, Lincoln
OMatthew O’Brien, Bradley
UniversityA. Ben Oumlil, University of
DaytonTimucin Ozcan, University of
Rhode Island
PDibakar Pal, Civil Servant in India
& Independent ScholarRobert W. Palmatier, University of
WashingtonNikolaos G. Panagopoulos, Athens
University of Economics &Business
Photis Michael Panayides, CIIMBusiness School
Joseph Pancras, University ofConnecticut
Jeong-Eun Park, Ewha WomansUniversity
Ji Kyung Park, University ofMinnesota
Chirag Patel, Ecole deManagement Grenoble
Vanessa M. Patrick, University ofGeorgia
Iryna Pentina, University of ToledoLaura Peracchio, University of
Wisconsin, MilwaukeeA. Morys Perry, University of
Michigan-FlintRoss Petty, Babson CollegeNigel F. Piercy, Warwick Business
SchoolDeepa Pillai, Southern Illinois
University, CarbondaleChristopher Plouffe, Washington
State UniversityMichael Jay Polonsky, Deakin
UniversityNadia Pomirleanu, University of
Central FloridaNicole Ponder, Mississippi State
UniversityKate Pounders, Louisiana State
University
xxii
Jaideep Prabhu, Imperial CollegeLondon
Paulo Prado, Federal University ofParana
Carolyn Predmore, ManhattanCollege
Sonja Prokopec, ESSEC BusinessSchool
Sanjay Puligadda, MiamiUniversity of Ohio
Ellen Bolman Pullins, University ofToledo
Elizabeth F. Purinton, MaristCollege
QTianjiao Qiu, California State
University, Long Beach
RGirish Ramani, Drexel UniversityRosemary P. Ramsey, Wright State
UniversityRaghunath S. Rao, University of
Texas at AustinAdam Rapp, Kent State UniversityLopo L. Rego, University of IowaWerner Reinartz, University of
CologneSubom Rhee, Stonehill CollegeGlenn Richey, University of
AlabamaBob Robicheaux, University of
Alabama at BirminghamRichard K. Robinson, Marquette
UniversityAnne L. Roggeveen, Babson
CollegeAksel Ivar Rokkan, SNF, Research
in Economics and Business Adm.Jose Antonio Rosa, University of
WyomingWilliam Taylor Ross Jr.,
Pennsylvania State UniversitySubroto Roy, University of New
HavenJohn Maynard Rudd, Aston
University
SJoel Saegert, University of Texas at
San AntonioAmit Saini, University of
Nebraska, Lincoln
Laura Salciuviene, University ofManchester
Saeed Samiee, University of TulsaKare Sandvik, Buskerud University
CollegeMatthew Sarkees, Penn State Great
ValleyMarko Sarstedt, University of
MunichNancy Panos Schmitt, Westminster
CollegeHanna Schramm-Klein, Saarland
UniversityJan H. Schumann, Technische
Universitaet MuenchenCharles Schwepker, University of
Central MissouriBarbara Seegebarth, Leibniz
University of HannoverHamed M. Shamma, The American
University in CairoArun Sharma, University of MiamiSubhash Sharma, University of
South CarolinaVarinder Sharma, Indiana
University of PennsylvaniaChung-Chi Shen, National Dong
Hwa UniversityJeremy J. Sierra, Texas State
University, San MarcosDavid Silvera, University of Texas
at San AntonioRamendra Singh, IIM AhmedabadSanjay Ram Sisodiya, Washington
State UniversityEugene Sivadas, University of
WashingtonK. Sivakumar, Lehigh UniversitySubbu Sivaramakrishnan,
University of ManitobaAnuradha Sivaraman, University of
DelawareLauren Skinner, University of
Alabama at BirminghamRebecca J. Slotegraaf, Indiana
UniversityWillem Smit, IMDBrock Smith, University of
VictoriaKaren H. Smith, Texas State
University, San MarcosHarmeen Soch, Guru Nanak Dev
University, AmritsarReo Song, Texas A&M UniversityAshish Sood, Emory University
Alina Sorescu, Texas A&MUniversity
Jelena Spanjol, University ofIllinois at Chicago
Susan Spiggle, University ofConnecticut
Rosann L. Spiro, IndianaUniversity
Srinivas Sridharan, University ofWestern Ontario
Elizabeth Stammerjohan, JacksonState University
Andrea Stanaland, RadfordUniversity
Mark Staton, University ofWashington
James Stephens, University ofWestern Ontario
David Stewart, University ofCalifornia, Riverside
Rodney L. Stump, TowsonUniversity
Bharat L. Sud, University ofWestern Ontario
Ursula Y. Sullivan, University ofIllinois at Urbana-Champaign
Scott D. Swain, Boston UniversityJohn Swasy, American UniversityMichael J. Swenson, Brigham
Young University
THans Mathias Thjømøe, Norwegian
School of ManagementMert Tokman, James Madison
UniversityCarlos Javier Torelli, University of
MinnesotaJanell D. Townsend, Oakland
UniversityKevin J. Trainor, Kent State
UniversityPhilip Trocchia, University of
South Florida, St. PetersburgKapil Tuli, Singapore Management
University
UU.N. Umesh, Washington State
UniversityNancy Upton, Northeastern
University
xxiii
VJohan Van Rekom, Rotterdam
School of ManagementWouter Vanhouche, University of
Central FloridaChander Velu, Cambridge
UniversityRaj Venkatesan, University of
VirginiaLeslie Vincent, University of
KentuckyMadhu Viswanathan, University of
MinnesotaMadhubalan Viswanathan,
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Douglas W. Vorhies, University ofMississippi
Kevin E. Voss, Oklahoma StateUniversity
WTillmann Wagner, Texas Tech
UniversityKirk Wakefield, Baylor UniversityDavid Wallace, Illinois State
University
Gianfranco Walsh, University ofKoblenz-Landau
Guangping Wang, PennsylvaniaState University
Liz Wang, University of DallasQiong Wang, Pennsylvania State
UniversitySijun Wang, California State
Polytechnic UniversityJames Ward, Arizona State
UniversityJudith Washburn, University of
TampaStevie Watson, Rutgers UniversityRick Whiteley, Calabash
Educational SoftwareNancy Wong, Georgia Institute of
TechnologyStefan Worm, Emory UniversityNancy Viola Wuenderlich,
Technical University of MunichStefan Wuyts, Tilburg University
XLan Xia, Bentley CollegeGuang-Xin Xie, University of
OregonBing Xu, New Mexico State
University
YManjit Yadav, Texas A&M
UniversityChun-Ming Yang, National Sun
Yat-Sen UniversityKenneth C.C. Yang, University of
Texas at El PasoSengun Yeniyurt, Rutgers
UniversityNeslihan Yilmaz, Kent State
UniversityEden Yin, Cambridge UniversityHong Yuan, University of Illinois
ZHaisu Zhang, University of Illinois
at ChicagoLixuan Zhang, College of
CharlestonYinlong Zhang, University of
Texas at San AntonioGuangzhi Zhao, University of
KansasRui (Juliet) Zhu, University of
British Columbia
American Marketing Association / Winter 2009 1
BRAND ATTITUDES AND BRAND COMMITMENT
Ronald E. Goldsmith, Florida State University, TallahasseeLeisa Reinecke Flynn, Florida State University, Tallahassee
E. Craig Stacey, MarketShare Partners
ABSTRACT
Three hundred twenty-two U.S. consumers partici-pated in a telephone interview devoted to purchase anduse of grocery store products. They reported how commit-ted they were to seven brands of single serving frozendinners as well as their perceptions of these brands’familiarity, uniqueness, relevance, quality, trust, and re-spect for the company. All six brand perceptions werepositively related to brand commitment and three of them,uniqueness, quality, and particularly relevance, were con-sistently important.
INTRODUCTION
Brand loyalty is a major research topic in marketingbecause it is so important to company profitability. Loy-alty adds value to the brand, thereby mitigating pricesensitivity and staving off the negative effects ofcommoditization (Schultz 1989). It is well known thatloyal customers are among the most profitable and thatcompanies increase profitability by developing brandloyalty among their customers using a variety of promo-tional tools (O’Brien and Jones 1995). Satisfaction withthe brand is the chief driver of brand loyalty (Heskett et al.1997). But satisfaction alone is insufficient to explainloyalty because satisfied customers often defect (Reichheld1996; Skogland and Siguaw 2004). Thus, marketers andconsumer researchers seek additional concepts that canprovide deeper insights into the brand loyalty phenom-enon.
Brand loyalty is conceptualized and operationalizedin two primary ways. Behavioral brand loyalty describesrepetitive purchase of the same brand or the percent ofcategory purchases devoted to a single brand, and attitu-dinal brand loyalty describes the thoughts and feelingsthat consumers have about brands (Baldinger and Rubinson1996; Dick and Basu 1994). Although both concepts areuseful in the study of brand loyalty, each assesses differentaspects of the concept and therefore provides differentinsights into this phenomenon (Bennett and Rundle-Thiele2002). Because attitudinal brand loyalty appears to bothprecede behavioral brand loyalty and to partially explainpatterns of behavioral brand loyalty, the study of brandattitudes can be used to both predict future brand purchasebehavior and explain why consumers exhibit consistentpurchasing patterns or defections (Applebaum 2007;
Baldinger and Rubinson 1996; Bennett and Rundle-Thiele2002; Reichheld 1996).
Managerial discussions and empirical studies of brandloyalty abound, but although their accounts of the sourcesor determinants of behavioral brand loyalty are remark-ably consistent in identifying perceptions and attitudinalelements that predispose consumers to buy the samebrands repeatedly, the relative importance of these ele-ments is less clear. Arguments are made in favor ofdifferent perceptions, but there is little empirical evidencebearing on this issue. The purpose of the present study,therefore, was to confirm whether six attitudinal brandelements [familiarity, uniqueness, relevance, quality, trust,and respect for the company] of brands of single servicefrozen dinners, a low involvement packaged good, wererelated to commitment to the brand, and if so, which hadthe strongest influence on brand commitment.
LITERATURE REVIEW AND HYPOTHESES
A complete discussion of brand loyalty is too exten-sive to present here, but some key issues can be high-lighted. Customers essentially are loyal to brands thatprovide value and with which they are satisfied. Althougheach consumer defines value differently, there are enoughcommonalities in consumer needs and wants to enablemarketers to target a limited number of consumer seg-ments based on these commonalities. Brands are posi-tioned specifically to have a specific value (a brandpromise) and a unique image, which is why differentbrands appeal to different consumer segments (Dawar2004). Brands that do not deliver some value to consum-ers or which fail to satisfy do not engender loyalty.Beyond these minimal requirements, however, loyaltycomes from a variety of cognitive and emotional reactionsto a brand forming the relationship consumers have withit that go “beyond the loyalty generated by any objectiveassessment of a brand’s value” (Joachimsthaler and Aaker1997, p. 45). “That customers now expect to be highlysatisfied is the norm, and any business wishing to securea stronger bond with their customers must do a great dealmore than satisfy. Instead, they must secure an emotionalor attitudinal preference or attachment via the consumers’feelings” (Robinson and Etherington 2006, p. 3). Thepresent study tests hypothesized relationships betweenbrand commitment and important cognitive and emo-tional brand perceptions prominent in the literature. The
2 American Marketing Association / Winter 2009
framework is consistent with the model described by thetheory of reasoned action, in which beliefs about objectsact as drivers of attitudes toward the object (Ajzen 2008).In keeping with this model, the dependent variable is“brand commitment,” an important conceptualization ofattitudinal brand loyalty: “Brand loyalty refers to thetendency to purchase a particular brand repeatedly, to staywith a familiar brand used in the past rather than switch toa new brand, or to psychological commitment to a brand”(Ajzen 2008, p. 540). Brand commitment is an essentialelement of attitudinal brand loyalty (Quester and Lim2003). Moreover, brand commitment has been shown tobe an important predictor of repurchase intentions forretail service brands (Fullerton 2005). It is defined as an“emotional or psychological attachment to a brand withina product class,” (Coulter, Price, and Feick 2003, p. 153).
Brand Commitment and Brand Familiarity
A prominent theme in advertising and promotion isthe need to create brand awareness as an essential precur-sor to consumers’ trial, purchase, and commitment tothem. Advertising and promotion texts abound with thismessage (e.g., Clow and Baack 2007), based as it is on thepervasive hierarchy of communication effects models(Clow and Baak 2007, pp. 165–167. Joachimsthaler andAaker (1997) argue that companies can make consumersfamiliar with new brands even without using mass media,provided they employ creative and unique alternativecommunications strategies. In his influential book, Man-aging Brand Equity, Aaker (1991, pp. 64-65) not onlymakes brand awareness a central feature of brand equity,he reinforces the message that familiarity with a brand isessential to its equity because “people like the familiar,”especially for low-involvement products. Davis (1995)reports a study verifying this theme. Consequently, ourfirst hypothesis is based on this essential component ofconsumer behavior. We reason that familiarity with abrand is a predictor and precursor of brand commitment.Thus,
H1: Brand commitment is positively related to brandfamiliarity.
Brand Commitment and Brand Uniqueness
That brands should be unique is the central messageof many marketing management recommendations. FromRosser Reeves’s (1961) concept of the “unique sellingproposition,” to recent discussions of new product failureowing to lack of differentiation (Curewitz 2007), oneimportant reason new products fail is because they are“me too” products rather than unique market offerings.Thus, brand managers are urged to determine what theirbrands’ unique essence, identity, or promise is. Thesefeatures give their brands unique positions in consumers’minds, thereby distinguishing them from competitors
(Joachimsthaler and Aaker 1997; Keller 2000) and match-ing them to the characteristics of the chosen target seg-ment. Consumers often use brands that reflect their iden-tity (Reed and Bolton 2005). To promote affective, andthus “real” loyalty, marketers are often encouraged to usethe brand to “make each client believe that he or she isutterly unique” (Kapferer 2005). Consequently,
H2: Brand commitment is positively related to perceivedbrand uniqueness.
Brand Commitment and Brand Relevance
The literature on branding consistently emphasizesthe need for brands to deliver utilitarian benefits, that is,to solve consumer problems and to satisfy their wants(e.g., Foxall 1999; Keller 2000). But brands do more forconsumers than solve their problems. Brands also permitconsumers to express their personalities or identities(Fournier 1998). Moreover, Keller (2000) argues that oneof the most important traits of successful brands is how“relevant” they are to consumers’ lives in the sense thatthey express what the consumer thinks is important.Chaplin and John (2005) show that this process of usingbrands to express self begins in adolescence. Thus,
H3: Brand commitment is positively related to perceivedbrand relevance.
Brand Commitment and Brand Quality
Perceived quality is so crucial to brand equity and tocustomer commitment that Aaker makes it one of the fivebuilding blocks of his brand equity model. Aaker (1991,p. 85) defines perceived quality as “the customer’s per-ception of the overall quality of a product or service withrespect to its intended purpose, relative to alternatives”and argues that this overall perception of the brand and it’sappropriateness to satisfy specific needs and wants drivesseveral important customer responses. It gives a reason tobuy, it differentiates the brand, it permits a price premium,it stimulates channel interest, and it facilitates brandextensions (Aaker 1991, p. 86). Robinson and Etherington(2006) describe how important the quality guarantee orsignal was to the development of many of the first brands,Davis (1995) describes quality as a prime driver of loy-alty, and Holt et al. (2004) report that the brand as a qualitysignal is very important in consumers brand choice for“global” brands. Thus,
H4: Brand commitment is positively related to perceivedbrand quality.
Brand Commitment and Respect
Consumers want to buy brands from companies theyrespect. Keller (2000) argues that the consumer’s “per-
American Marketing Association / Winter 2009 3
ceptions of a company a whole” are integral to buildingbrand equity. Aldlaigan and Buttle (2005) found thatcustomer brand loyalty for retail banks depended heavilyon three factors, (1) faith in organizational competence,(2) mutually aligned and congruent values, and (3) posi-tive social bonds that deliver high levels of relationalvalue. The organizational competence dimension of at-tachment incorporates measures of customer confidence,trust, respect, as well as the bank’s perceived ability todeliver a proper it services that presented value for money.Consequently,
H5: Brand commitment is positively related to respect forthe company.
Brand Commitment and Trust
Trust in the brand is akin to respect for the companyand is an essential feature of any relationship betweenconsumers and brands (cf., Fournier 1998). In this con-text, trust signifies that consumers trust a brand to deliverthe brand promise and to do the consumer no harm.Delgado-Ballester and Munuera-Aleman (2001, p. 1242)propose that brand trust is similar to interpersonal trust sothat it is a “feeling of security held by the consumer thatthe brand will meet his/her consumption expectations.”Trust reduces risk and gives the consumer confidence inmaking the brand choice (Applebaum 2007). This themeis implicit in Fournier’s (1998) description of consumers’relationships with their brands, and Delgado-Ballesterand Munuera-Aleman (2001) provide strong empiricalsupport for the positive trust-commitment relationship fordisposable diapers, a packaged good similar to our prod-uct. Thus, our last hypothesis is,
H6: Brand commitment is positively related to trust in thebrand.
Our literature review provides both theoretical andempirical bases for proposing hypothesized relationshipsbetween brand commitment and six possible antecedentsor drivers. What remains to be seen, however, is howimportant these six antecedents are to forming brandcommitment. While none should be neglected, whichdeserve special attention by managers? This last concernforms a research question for this study: Which of the sixantecedents of brand commitment are most important tocommitment?
METHOD
Sample Selection and Questionnaire Administration
The sample was gathered via a phone interview froma large advertising research firm’s online panel limited toconsumers 18 years and older. The sampling plan matchedU.S. demographics as closely as possible. Panel members
completed the survey in order to participate in a drawing.The interview covered 21 categories of packaged goods.We chose single serving frozen dinners as the focalcategory because it is a widely consumed product. Eachparticipant was asked qualifier questions and then wasrandomly assigned to one or more of the 21 productcategories. Consequently, from the original sample of5,389 participants, 322 answered questions about frozendinners. The interview presented the respondents withseven brands of single serving frozen dinners (see Table 1)and asked them to respond to several questions (seeTable 1). The order of the brands was randomized for eachrespondent.
Subjects
The sample (n = 322) consisted of 257 (80%) womenand 65 (20%) men. The mean age was 39.2 years (sd =12.3). Two hundred one (87%) were white, 13 (4%) wereblack, and the remainder 26 (8%) were “other.” House-hold size varied from one (51 or 15.8%), two (94 or29.2%), three (66 or 20.5%), to four or more (111 or34.5%). Household incomes ranged from less than $5K to$250K or more, with $55K as the median category. Onehundred thirty (40.4%) lived in the South, 78 (24.2%) inthe Midwest, 64 (19.9%) in the West, and 50 (15.5%) inthe Northeast.
Measures
The survey assessed basic demographics, and eachrespondent was asked a series of questions about theproduct category and the individual brands (see Table 1).The focal variables in the present study, brand commit-ment and perceptions of familiarity, uniqueness, relevance,quality, respect, and trust, were measured by single itemstatements using a 10-point response format (1 = AgreeLess and 10 = Agree More). Table 1 shows the meanscores for each statement for each brand and in total.Evidence that the commitment measure is a valid indica-tor of loyalty is found in its significant correlations withanother item: “How likely are you to purchase [this brand]in the future?” (where 1 = Definitely will not buy it and 5 =Definitely will buy it). Consistent with Fullerton (2005),these correlations ranged from .47 to .57.
Analysis
Analysis of variance was used to assess differences inmean scores for all seven variables across the sevenbrands. Correlation assessed the relationships among themeasures separately for each brand. OLS regression wasused to assess the relationship between brand commit-ment and the six perceptions for each brand separatelywith the demographic variables, age, sex, household size,and household income used as control variables.
4 American Marketing Association / Winter 2009
TABLE 1Brands of Single Serving Frozen Dinners Means and ANOVA Results
Brand Attitudes
Brand Name Commitment1 Familiarity2 Uniqueness3 Relevance4 Quality5 Respect6 Trust7
Lean M = 4.5 7.35 5.83 5.94 6.66 6.83 6.73Cuisine n = 320 321 321 321 319 322 319
sd = 3.116 2.379 2.383 2.845 2.348 2.467 2.423
Healthy 4.06 7.01 5.65 5.55 6.36 6.58 6.49Choice 320 321 320 320 321 322 319
2.944 2.481 2.392 2.737 2.434 2.47 2.465
Smart 3.94 6.51 5.28 5.26 5.97 5.92 5.92Ones 158 157 157 156 157 155 158
2.791 2.7 2.298 2.78 2.415 2.512 2.469
Michelina’s 3.69 5.58 4.98 5.02 5.49 5.55 5.6Lean 321 320 321 320 319 319 318Gourmet 2.84 2.977 2.392 2.748 2.462 2.65 2.574
Weight 3.66 6.59 5.53 5.26 6.29 6.84 6.53Watchers 163 164 163 163 163 162 164Smart Ones 2.829 2.822 2.415 2.871 2.444 2.532 2.556
South Beach 2.66 4.29 4.8 3.92 4.94 4.81 4.88Diet 163 163 163 162 163 161 160
2.355 2.942 2.746 2.712 2.49 2.708 2.719
Kraft South 2.44 3.18 4.49 3.38 4.71 5.66 5.38Beach Diet 157 158 159 157 157 157 159
2.188 2.764 2.756 2.355 2.563 2.886 2.714
Total 3.72 6.05 5.3 5.09 5.89 6.11 6.041602 1604 1604 1599 1599 1598 15972.881 3.001 2.495 2.848 2.525 2.665 2.609
ANOVA Results
df = 6/1595 6/1597 6/1597 6/1592 6/1592 6/1591 6/1590F = 14.36 63.76 8.74 21.91 19.69 17.98 15.59p = < .001 < .001 < .001 < .001 < .001 < .001 < .001eta = 0.226 0.44 0.178 0.276 0.263 0.252 0.236eta2 = 0.051 0.193 0.032 0.076 0.069 0.064 0.056
1 This is the only brand for me.2 I am familiar with and understand what this brand is about.3 This brand has unique or different features, or a distinct image other brands in this category don’t have.4 This brand is appropriate and fits my lifestyle and needs.5 This brand has consistently high quality.6 This brand is made by a company I respect.7 This brand can be trusted completely.
RESULTS
The mean scores of each brand for each variableappear in Table 1 and Figure 1. Although these valuesshow that on average all the brands were rated somewhat
positively for the independent variables, the dependentvariable, commitment, was consistently the lowest ratedperception for each brand. This finding suggests that thebrands were generally perceived in a positive manner bythe participants, but that the consumers were only com-
American Marketing Association / Winter 2009 5
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Commitment Familiarity Uniqueness Relevance Quality Respect Trust
Lean CuisineHealthy ChoiceSmart OnesMichelinaWeight WatchersSough BeachKraft SB
FIGURE 1Means of All the Variables
mitted to a few of them. That is, while consumers might beaware of brands, respect their quality, and trust the com-panies, they discriminate among the brands when it comesto loyal purchasing. This interpretation is entirely consis-tent with the notion that consumers of packaged goods areloyal to sets of brands in which they alternate purchases,termed “multibrand purchasing” (Foxall 1999).
One-way ANOVA compared the means across thebrands (see Table 1 and Figure 1). The results showsignificant differences (p < .05) for all the variables. LeanCuisine achieved the highest mean commitment score(4.50), followed by Healthy Choice (4.06), Smart Ones(3.94), Michelina (3.69), Weight Watchers (3.66), SouthBeach Diet (2.66), and Kraft (2.44).
The perception ratings were correlated with commit-ment for each brand. These 42 Pearson correlations arenot shown because of the extensive space the tables wouldrequire; however, all the correlations between brand com-mitment and the perceptions of familiarity, uniqueness,relevance, quality, respect for the company, and trust inthe brand (ranging from .27 to .72) were uniformly posi-tive and significant for all the brands, providing supportfor all six hypotheses for all brands. Brand commitment is
positively related to perceptions of familiarity, unique-ness, relevance, quality, respect for the company, andtrust in the brand. Thus, the findings support the manyassertions in the literature that these are essential elementsof brand image that predispose consumers to brand loy-alty.
To assess the effect of common method variance(CMV) on the results, we followed the procedure de-scribed by Lindell and Whitney (2001) and illustrated byMalhotra et al. (2006). An additional brand perceptionmeasure was included in the questionnaire that read: “Thisbrand costs more than I expect to pay for single servingfrozen dinners.” The same 10-point response format wasused. This variable served post hoc as the “marker vari-able.” It should be theoretically unrelated to at least one ofthe other variables of interest, although in this instance, itcould be related to any of them as they are all sharedperceptions of the brand. Thus, our test is an especiallyconservative one. The smallest positive correlation be-tween the marker variable and the other variables servedas an estimate of CMV (we also used the second smallestcorrelation with the marker variable as suggested byLindell and Whitney with similar results). This correla-tion is used to calculate an adjusted correlation between
6 American Marketing Association / Winter 2009
TABLE 2Correlation and Regression Results
Brand Name
Michelina’s Weight South Kraft SouthLean Healthy Smart Lean Watchers Beach Beach
Cuisine Choice Ones Gourmet Smart Ones Diet Diet
Model Summary
F 34.23 29.82 12.53 29.82 18.99 14.45 7.73df 10/300 10/301 10/140 10/298 10/147 10/147 10/139p < .001 < .001 < .001 < .001 < .001 < .001 < .001R .73 .705 .687 .707 .751 .704 .598
Adj R2 .517 .481 .435 .483 .534 .461 .311
IndependentVariablesa Standardized Regression Coefficientsb
Familiarity
Uniqueness β = .295 .181 .164partc = .216 .128 .120
Relevance .438 .520 .512 .369 .559 .517 .198.307 .369 .347 .246 .373 .388 .377
Quality .227 .186 .216 .187.144 .116 .129 .120
Respect .164.089
Trust .239.129
a Dependent variable = Brand Commitment
b Only the standardized regression coefficients significant at p < .05 are shown.
c The part coefficient assesses the unique effect of the independent variable on the dependent variable. This statisticis shown because so many independent variables were correlated.
two other variables sharing the same method and yields anadjusted t-statistic of its significance (see Lindell andWhitney for the formulas). We applied this procedure tothe correlations for each brand. The adjusted t-statisticsshowed that common method variance did not account forour results.
To assess the combined influence of the brand per-ceptions on brand commitment, we first regressed com-mitment across the four demographic variables, age, gen-der, household size, and household income to control fortheir effects. Next, we added the six perceptual variablesto the model (see Table 2). The results showed extremelyminimal effects for the four demographic variables; butthe brand perceptions had a sizable influence on brand
commitment. Importantly, only perceived relevance ofthe brand (“This brand is appropriate and fits my lifestyleand needs.”) was significantly related to commitment forall the brands. The standardized regression coefficientsand part correlations show that relevance was by far themost important perception influencing brand loyalty. Per-ceptions of quality were related to commitment for four ofthe brands, and perceptions of uniqueness were related forthree of them. Being familiar with the brand was unrelatedfor any brand, and respect and trust were only related toone brand each.
Our interpretation of the results is that the correla-tions verify that all six brand perceptions are important toforming brand commitment, just as the literature argues,
American Marketing Association / Winter 2009 7
but the determining factor in brand loyalty could be howrelevant consumers see the brand as a reflection of lifestylesand needs. Of note is the fact that throughout the analysis,the demographic variables had little or no relationshipwith brand commitment, arguing for the success of exam-ining perceptual variables in this regard.
DISCUSSION
The purpose of the present study was to expand ourknowledge of consumer brand loyalty by testing litera-ture-based hypotheses regarding its sources or drivers.The literature suggests the hypotheses that higher levelsof brand familiarity, brand uniqueness, brand relevance,quality, trust in the company, and respect for the brand arepositively correlated with commitment to the brand, anoperationalization of attitudinal brand loyalty. A tele-phone survey queried 322 adult grocery store buyers.These consumers were asked to report their opinionsregarding seven different brands of single serving frozendinners. The findings showed that levels of commitmentto the brands differed significantly, as did the otherperceptions, but the results supported all six hypotheses.All six consumer perceptions of all seven brands werepositively correlated with consumer reports of commit-ment to the brands. Moreover, regression analysis showedthat the relevance of the brand to the lifestyles and needsof the consumers was consistently the strongest influenceon brand commitment, followed in impact by evaluationsof quality and uniqueness.
The results support the advice frequently given tomarketers in search of brand loyalty; they should payattention to the key consumer perceptions that seem todrive commitment to the brand. They should promote thebrand to make it familiar to consumers (share of mind)thereby keeping it in the consumer’s evoked set; and theyand their companies should strive to earn the trust and therespect of consumers. It seems to be especially importantthat they should ensure high levels of product quality andreinforce this perception in their integrated marketingcommunications with consumers. Moreover, brand com-mitment appeared to be especially linked to perceptions ofthe uniqueness of the brand and to its relevance. Thesefeatures appear to be essential to acquiring commitment.Create a unique brand image or personality that targetconsumers find personally relevant. Make the brand asspecial as the consumers are.
Doing so will likely limit the number of consumers towhom the brand is relevant, but you cannot be all thingsto all people. Better to have a strong commitment by someconsumers than weak associations. It is possible that thisphenomenon is behind the double jeopardy effect, inwhich brands with lower levels of penetration have less
loyal consumers. They likely do not have unique imagesthat consumers can relate to. Strong brands do.
Familiarity, uniqueness, quality, trust, and respectappear to be the “price of admission” to the brand loyaltycontest. Brands lacking any of these important featuresare not likely to succeed. To gain loyalty, it appears thatbrands must have differentiated images that are relevant toconsumer needs and lifestyles so that consumers see themas part of their lives. An important question arises regard-ing private label brands. In many product categories,private labels are growing in share. Do consumers seethem as equivalent in relevance to national brands? Canprivate brands be relevant the same way as nationalbrands? Exploiting this avenue might be a way for na-tional brands to defend share from their private labelcompetitors.
The study findings are limited in several ways. Firstof all, the single category of frozen dinners limits thegeneralizability of the findings to this product field and topackaged goods. Although the sample was intended to berepresentative, it is necessarily restricted to the advertis-ing agency’s panel. Single item indicators operationalizedthe variables, obviating assessments of reliability. Fi-nally, there are likely additional drivers of brand loyaltythat were not considered in the present study. The study,however, had several strengths, and future studies cancorrect its limitations. Studies of additional packagedgoods as well as durables and services would extend thescope of the findings. Samples of other consumers wouldtest the generalizability of the findings to different popu-lations. Alternative measures, especially multiple indica-tors would permit the assessment of internal consistencyof the new operationalizations. Additional variables couldbe added to the “mix” of potential drivers to develop amore complete model of the drivers of brand loyalty.
One important avenue for future research is to delveinto the specifics of how brands are relevant to lifestylesand needs. That is, what specific aspects of the brandimage make it relevant? What does relevance mean totarget consumers? Possible candidates could be a closematch-up between the brand’s benefits and consumerwants. Does the brand specifically fit a need that theconsumer feels keenly? Another could be how well thebrand fits with the consumer’s self-image. “Which brandfits me?” Or, “Which brand is me?” These questions maynot be easy to answer, either for the company or for theconsumer. Perhaps “relevance” is a verbalization of somebrain function that most people cannot easily explain.
Clearly, there is a vast array of issues to be studied andquestions to be answered. Expanding this study to includemore categories and more drivers of loyalty and usingphysiological measures are the next steps.
8 American Marketing Association / Winter 2009
REFERENCES
Aaker, David A. (1991), Managing Brand Equity. NewYork: The Free Press.
Ajzen, Icek (2008), “Consumer Attitudes and Behavior,”in Handbook of Consumer Psychology, Curtis P.Haugtvedt, Paul M. Herr, and Frank R. Kardes, eds.New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 525–48.
Aldlaigan, Abdullah and Francis Buttle (2005), “BeyondSatisfaction: Customer Attachment to Retail Banks,”International Journal of Bank Marketing, 23 (4),349–59.
Applebaum, Michael (2007), “One Tough Customer,”Brandweek, 48 (12), 18–24.
Baldinger, Allan L. and Joel Rubinson (1996), “BrandLoyalty: The Link Between Attitude and Behavior,”Journal of Advertising Research, 36 (6), 22–34.
Bennett, Rebekah and Sharyn Rundle-Thiele (2002), “AComparison of Attitudinal Loyalty Measurement Ap-proaches,” Journal of Brand Management, 9 (3),193–207.
Chaplin, Lan Nguyen and Deborah Roedder John (2005),“The Development of Self-Brand Connections inChildren and Adolescents,” Journal of ConsumerResearch, 32 (1), 119–29.
Clow, Kenneth E. and Donald Baack (2007), IntegratedAdvertising, Promotion, and Marketing Communi-cations. Upper Saddle River: NJ: Pearson Prentice-Hall.
Coulter, Robin A., Linda L. Price, and Lawrence Feick(2003), “Rethinking the Origins of Involvement andBrand Commitment; Insights from Postsocialist Cen-tral Europe,” Journal of Consumer Research, 30(September), 151–69.
Curewitz, Barry (2007), “Want New Products That GetNoticed? Change the Process,” Advertising Age, 78(39), 24–25.
Davis, Scott (1995), “A Vision for the Year 2000: BrandAsset Management,” Journal of Consumer Market-ing, 12 (4), 65.
Dawar, Miraj (2004), “What are Brands Good For?” MITSloan Management Review, 46 (1), 31–37.
Delgado-Ballester, Elena and Jose Luis Munuera-Aleman(2001), “Brand Trust in the Context of ConsumerLoyalty,” European Journal of Marketing, 35 (11/12), 1238–58.
Dick, Alan S. and Kunal Basu (1994), “Customer Loy-alty: Toward an Integrated Conceptual Framework,”Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 22 (2),99–113.
Fournier, Susan (1998), “Consumers and Their Brands:Developing Relationship Theory in Consumer Re-
search,” Journal of Consumer Research, 24 (March),343–73.
Foxall, Gordon R. (1999), “The Substitutability of Brands,”Managerial & Decision Economics, 20 (5), 241–57.
Fullerton, Gordon (2005), “The Impact of Brand Commit-ment on Loyalty to Retail Service Brands,” CanadianJournal of Administrative Sciences, 22 (2), 97–110.
Heskett, James L., W. Earl Sasser, and Leonard A.Schlesinger (1997), The Service Profit Chain. NewYork: The Free Press.
Holt, Douglas B., John A. Quelch, and Earl L. Taylor(2004), “How Global Brands Compete,” HarvardBusiness Review, 82 (9), 68–75.
Joachimsthaler, Erich and David A. Aaker (1997), “Build-ing Brands Without Mass Media,” Harvard BusinessReview, 75 (1), 39–50.
Kapferer, J.N. (2005), “The Roots of Brand LoyaltyDecline: An International Comparison,” Ivey Busi-ness Journal, 69 (4), 1–6.
Keller, Kevin L. (2000), “The Brand Report Card,”Harvard Business Review, 78 (1), 147–57.
Lindell, Michael K. and David J. Whitney (2001), “Ac-counting for Common Method Variance in Cross-Sectional Research Designs,” Journal of AppliedPsychology, 86 (1), 114–21.
Malhotra, Naresh K., Sung S. Kim, and Ashutosh Patil(2006), “Common Method Variance in IS Research:A Comparison of Alternative Approaches and a Re-analysis of Past Research,” Management Science, 52(12), 1865–83.
O’Brien, Louise and Charles Jones (1995), “Do RewardsReally Create Loyalty?” Harvard Business Review,73 (3), 75–82.
Quester, Pascale and Ai Lin Lim (2003), “Product In-volvement/Brand Loyalty: Is there a Link?” Journalof Product and Brand Management, 12 (1), 22–38.
Reed II, Americus and Lisa E. Bolton (2005), “TheComplexity of Identity,” MIT Sloan ManagementReview, 46 (3), 18–22.
Reeves, Rosser (1961), Reality in Advertising. New York:Knopf.