Upload
luay-maani
View
36
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
The purpose of this study is to determine the effects of customer based brand equity dimensions that only generated through marketing communications on customer based brand equity in the Jordanian market for mobile phones. 471 self-administrative questionnaires were analyzed through structural equation modeling to test hypotheses. The results of the analyses showed that brand associations, brand awareness, brand loyalty, and perceived quality have significant effects on customer based brand equity. However, brand trust and brand attachments have no significant effects. This research contributes by developing a valid and reliable model of brand equity’s dimensions as and output of marketing communications and their effects on customer based brand equity, while also giving the opportunities for marketers to know how the consumers perceive the marketing communications. And also it opens doors for new researches to study why trust and attachments as an output of marketing communications do not actually affecting customer based brand equity.
Citation preview
7/17/2019 The Effect of Marketing Communications on Customer Based Brand Equity
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-effect-of-marketing-communications-on-customer-based-brand-equity 1/13
Mu’ ani L., 2015. The Effect of Marketing Communications on Customer Based Brand Equity. International Journal of Online Marketing Research, 1(1), pp.13-25
International Journal of Online Marketing Research |Volume 1| Issue 1 | September 2015 [13]
International Journal of Online Marketing Research
www.ijomr.org
ARTICLE
The Effect of Marketing Communications on
Customer Based Brand Equity
Asst. Prof. Dr. Lu ’ay Al- Mu’ani
Department of Marketing, Jadara University, Jordan
ARTICLE INFO
Doi: 10.5455/IJOMR.2015201695
Keywords:
Customer based brand equity,
CBBE,
Brand awareness,
Brand associations,
Brand loyalty,
Brand attachment,
Perceived quality,Brand trust,
Mobile phones,
Jordan
Article History:
Received | 20 July 2015
Accepted | 4 August 2015
Published | September 2015
Corresponding Author
Asst. Prof. Dr. Lu’ay Mu’ani
Department of Marketing,
Jadara University, Jordan
ABSTRACT
The purpose of this study is to determine the effects of customer based
brand equity dimensions that only generated through marketing
communications on customer based brand equity in the Jordanian market
for mobile phones. 471 self-administrative questionnaires were analyzed
through structural equation modeling to test hypotheses. The results of the
analyses showed that brand associations, brand awareness, brand loyalty,
and perceived quality have significant effects on customer based brand
equity. However, brand trust and brand attachments have no significant
effects. This research contributes by developing a valid and reliable model
of brand equity’s dimensions as and output of marketing communications
and their effects on customer based brand equity, while also giving theopportunities for marketers to know how the consumers perceive the
marketing communications. And also it opens doors for new researches to
study why trust and attachments as an output of marketing
communications do not actually affecting customer based brand equity.
INTRODUCTION
The role of brands has changed over the years; it is
no longer seen as just differentiation tool. It plays a
vital role for organization’s success. Market value
nowadays calculated by intangible values of the
brand (Ahmad & Thyagaraj, 2014).
Many scholars illustrated the importance of the
concept to the firms. (Farquhar, 1989) argues that
brand equity gives competitive advantage to firms; it
helps companies to get over turbulences they face. In
addition, it puts barriers for competitors to enter the
market. Also, brand equity the brand equity of a
successful brand secure the way for new brand
extensions with lesser costs (Chun el al., 2014; Pitta
& Katsanis, 1995). In addition, high brand equity
gives companies the ability to charge premium prices
for the products and services; communication efforts
7/17/2019 The Effect of Marketing Communications on Customer Based Brand Equity
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-effect-of-marketing-communications-on-customer-based-brand-equity 2/13
Mu’ ani L., 2015. The Effect of Marketing Communications on Customer Based Brand Equity. International Journal of Online Marketing Research, 1(1), pp.13-25
International Journal of Online Marketing Research |Volume 1| Issue 1 | September 2015 [14]
become more valuable (Bendixen, Bukasa, and
Abratt 2004).
The purpose of this study is to determine the effects
of brand equity dimensions as an output of marketing
communications on customer based brand equity for
different demographic groups in the Jordanian market
for mobile phones.
Research questions
Q1: Do trust, association, attachment, loyalty,
awareness, and perceived quality generated ONLY
through marketing communications (regardless of
any other factors) have an effect on the customer
based brand equity?
Perceived Quality
TMC
Brand Awareness
TMC
Brand Loyalty TMC
Brand Association
TMC
Brand
Attachment
TMC
Brand Trust TMC
Customer BasedBrand Equity
Figure 1 Research model
Notes: TMC abbreviation to (Through Marketing Communications)
Variable Description
Customer Based Brand Equity a, The value consumers hold to a brand, and the perception of the overall
advantage of a product holding a brand name comparative to other
brands
Brand awareness TMC a the capability of a consumer to recognize or recall that a brand is a
member of particular product category
Perceived quality TMC a The customer’s perception that the brand offers better quality for the
products and/or services, in comparative to competing brands
Brand association TMC a Everything related inside memory for the brand
Brand Loyalty TMCa
The connection that customers hold to the brand. It is the essence of a
brand’s equity
Attachment TMC b Developing an emotional affection with brands
Brand Trust TMC b The belief of consumers to rely on the brand to perform its stated
function
*TMC is abbreviation to (Through Marketing Communications)
Sources: Based on Literature review: a Aaker (1991); b Lassar et al. (1995)
Table 1 Conceptual framework for the study
7/17/2019 The Effect of Marketing Communications on Customer Based Brand Equity
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-effect-of-marketing-communications-on-customer-based-brand-equity 3/13
Mu’ ani L., 2015. The Effect of Marketing Communications on Customer Based Brand Equity. International Journal of Online Marketing Research, 1(1), pp.13-25
International Journal of Online Marketing Research |Volume 1| Issue 1 | September 2015 [15]
Hypotheses
H1. The dimensions (H1a) brand associations, (H1b)
brand trust, (H1c) brand attachment, (H1d) brand
awareness, (H1e) brand loyalty, (H1f) perceived
quality generated through marketing communications
positively affects customer based brand equity.
LITERATURE REVIEWBrand equity has been described as the added value
of the brand to the products (Farquhar, 1989). Price
competition and rivalry between companies have put
a pressure to managers to find better ways to increase
brand equity towards brands (Myers 2003).
(Farquhar, 1989) argues that brand equity gives
competitive advantage to firms; it gives the base for
developing new products, also helps companies to get
over turbulences they face. In addition, put barriers
for competitors to enter the market.
Brand equity has been illustrated in both marketingand finance literatures (Ahmad & Butt (2012); Wood,
2000). The driver to study brand equity from the
point of finance is to estimate the financial market
value of the company by pulling out the value of
brand equity from the value of a firm's other assets,
especially in the case for mergers and acquisition
(Keller, 1993). While from looking to brand equity
from marketing point, the goal is to increase
marketing productivity by understanding consumers’
behavior and what knowledge they have towards the
brand.
(Ahmad and Butt, 2012) argue that Financial BasedBrand Equity is the outcome of consumers’
perceptions on brands. As a result, identifying the
roots that produce positive brand related perception is
more important than measuring its financial
outcomes. Also Keller (1993) added that financial
valuation has little relevance if no value for the brand
has been created in consumers’ minds or when
managers don’t harvest brands’ value by developing
profitable brand strategies.
Therefore, the study focused on the Customer Based
Brand Equity as the main variable of the research by
illustrating the different definitions and dimensions
of CBBE.
Customer Based Brand EquityOver the last three decades, consumer based brand
equity (CBBE) still an important research topic for
academics and a practicing ground for brand
managers around the world (Ahmad & Butt 2012;
Ahmad & Thyagaraj ,2014). The roots of the concept
Customer based brand equity derived from the
psychology (Christodoulides and Chernatony, 2010).
Categorization of customer based brand equity fillsinto two categories: Customer perceptions -such as
awareness, brand associations, or perceived quality-
and the other category focus in -consumer behavior -
loyalty and word of mouth- (Ahmad & Butt, 2012).
However, the main driver of the behavioral actions of
the consumers is driven by their perceptions of the
brand. Hence, loyalty and purchase intentions
describe the existence of equity (Buil , Chernatony,
and Martínez, 2008).
Various studies described different aspects of
customer based brand equity. There is no agreeddefinition of brand equity in both financial and
marketing literature (Burmann et al. (2009);
Christodoulides & Chernatony, 2010). Table 2.3
illustrated the existing definitions of brand equity.
Author(s) Definition of Brand Equity
Farquhar (1989) “the added value with which a given brand endows a product”
Aaker (1991)
“A set of brand assets and liabilities linked to a brand, its name and
symbol, that add to or subtract from the value provided by a product or
service to a firm and/or to that firm’s customers”
Keller (1993)“The differential effect of brand knowledge on consumer response to the
marketing of the brand”
Lassar et al. (1995) “The enhancement in perceived utility and desirability a brand nameconfers on a product”
Burmann et al. (2009)“Present and future valorization derived from internal and external
brand-induced performance”
Table 2 Definitions of Brand Equity
There is no agreed definition among researchers on a
unified definition on brand equity. However, they all
sail in the sphere of adding (subtracting) value to
consumers or/and firms. Keller (1993) differentiates
the definition in pointing to consumer responses to
7/17/2019 The Effect of Marketing Communications on Customer Based Brand Equity
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-effect-of-marketing-communications-on-customer-based-brand-equity 4/13
Mu’ ani L., 2015. The Effect of Marketing Communications on Customer Based Brand Equity. International Journal of Online Marketing Research, 1(1), pp.13-25
International Journal of Online Marketing Research |Volume 1| Issue 1 | September 2015 [16]
marketing mix based on their knowledge about the
brand (awareness and brand image).Dimensions of Customer Based Brand Equity
Aaker (1991) is one of the pioneers whom
conceptualize the concept. His model is the bedrock
of the developing the measurement of most studies
for successor researchers.
Customer BasedBrand Equity
Perceived
QualityBrand
AwarenessBrand Loyalty
Brand
AssociationOther Proprietary
Brand Assets
Figure 2 Aaker (1991) Customer Based Brand Equity model
Aaker (1991) combined both of perceptions and
behavioral dimensions. He argued that customer
based brand equity is a component of: 1) awareness
2) associations 3) perceived quality 4) loyalty 5)
other proprietary brand assets such as trademarks and
patents. However, following researchers dropped the
fifth dimension, because it is not related to the
consumers’ perceptions (Buil et al., 2008). Therefore,
the fifth dimension of Aakers’ model has been
dropped for this research.
Customer Based
Brand Equity
Value PerformanceSocial Image Attachment Trustworthiness
Figure 3 Lassar et al. (1995) Customer Based Brand Equity model
Lassar et al. (1995) developed a customer based
brand equity model with five dimensions 1)
trustworthiness 2) attachment 3) performance 4)
social image 5) value. Two dimensions (Brand Trust
and Brand Attachment) were added to the dissertation
model taken from Lassar et al. (1995).
Brand AwarenessWhen taking each dimension of CBBE; Awareness is
a key determinant identified in almost all brand
equity models (Y.L & Lee, 2011). Brand awareness
is the capability for consumers to recognize or recall
that a brand name is one of a specific product
category (Aaker, 1991; Keller 1993). It varies from
unrecognizing the brand, to thinking that it is the only
brand in that class (Aaker, 1991). Consumers are
easier to notice strong brands and the frequency of
advertising of strong brands may lead to favorable
associations in consumers’ mind (Hoeffler and
Keller, 2003).
Brand Associations
According to Aaker (1991) brand association is
anything in consumers’ mind linked to the brand.
And it has level of strength as well. That strength
increases by actual experience with a brand or
exposure to communications. The cumulative set of
associations will develop a brand image and meaning
in the consumers’ mind (Aaker, 1991; Keller, 1993).
These associations and image may not reflect a true
reality of a brand, but if they are favorable they can
gives advantages to the brand over other competing
brands. (Aaker, 1991).
Perceived QualityPerceived quality is one of the crucial dimensions of
brand equity (Aaker, 1996; Atilgan et al., 2009;
Lassar et al., 1995). It is important because it reduce
the perceived risk for consumers (Atilgan et al.,
2009). Also it gives consumers a reason to buy, and it
is associated with the purchase decision (Aaker,1991). Shabbir and Rehman (2013) state that
quality’s part for consumer’s buying decision making
process is vital when it comes to buy any branded
products or services. Brands with high perceived
quality can make marketing programs more powerful.
The likelihood of effective advertising and promotion
will be higher for brands with high perceived quality
(Aaker, 1991). (Keller, 1993) argues that perceived
7/17/2019 The Effect of Marketing Communications on Customer Based Brand Equity
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-effect-of-marketing-communications-on-customer-based-brand-equity 5/13
Mu’ ani L., 2015. The Effect of Marketing Communications on Customer Based Brand Equity. International Journal of Online Marketing Research, 1(1), pp.13-25
International Journal of Online Marketing Research |Volume 1| Issue 1 | September 2015 [17]
quality is the most important factor for consume rs’
attitudes towards the brands. Those attitudes
embodied in perceive value and consumers’
satisfaction.
Brand Loyalty
Customer loyalty plays a key role in an
organization’s long term success (Li & Green, 2010;
Nam, Ekinci, & Whyatt, 2011). Brand loyalty exists
as a dimension in many brand choice models (Shum,
2004). Furthermore, retaining current customers cost
five times less than acquiring new ones (Kotler &
Keller, 2006). Most research points to consumer
loyalty from two perspectives: behavioral loyalty and
attitudinal loyalty (Nam et al., 2011). Behavioral
loyalty refers to frequency of repeat purchase, while
attitudinal loyalty is psychological pledge from
consumers in the act of purchasing, such as the
intentions to purchase or be part of word of mouth
marketing by voluntary recommend the brand to
others without actually repurchase the brand.
Brand Trust
Brand trust is the “The willingness of the average
consumer to rely on the ability of the brand to
perform its stated function” Chaudhuri and Holbrook
(2001). Also shared the same essence from Burmann
et al. (2009) defines brand trust is “the willingness of
a buyer to rely on the ability of a brand to fulfill the
communicated functions and attributes.” (Burmann
el al., 2009). In other words, the consumers have
confidence that brands will not to exploit their
vulnerability. Therefore, consumers have high
expectancy that the experience with the brand will
have favorable results for them.
Taking into consideration that brand equity is adding
value for firms and consumers, consumers place a
high value in brands they trust. Additionally,
Ballester & Alema´n (2005) argue that brand equity
is a relational market based asset, implies that trust is
significant for brand equity. Thus, Low brand trust
reduces the likelihood of purchasing products or
services. On the other hand, high trust may convert a
satisfied customer into a loyal one.
Brand Attachment
One of the important drivers of brand equity is
believed to be the emotional and practical
associations with the brands (Park, Macinns and
Prester, 2006; Rafi et al., 2011). In the current era ofmarketing, Marketers are keen to enhance their
branding strategies by developing strong brand
relationships, by implanting attachment with
consumers (Schmitt, 2012). Park et al. (2010)
expresses the brand attachment is the strength of
emotional bonding between the self and the brand,
consumers establish cognitive associations that
connect the brand with the self.
Empirical Studies on Brand Equity Dimensions
Author(s) Dimensions of CBBE CountryProduct
Category
Atilgan et al . (2005) Loyalty, awareness, perceived
quality, associations.
Turkey Beverage
Li et al . (2010) Perceived risk, Information
costs saving, awareness,
image, credibility, Perceived
quality.
China Hotel
Hossien (2011) Attitude, associations,
Personality, Loyalty, Image.
Iran Chocolate
Lee & Leh (2011) Loyalty, awareness, perceived
quality, associations.
Malaysia -
Mishra & Datta (2011) Name, Communication,
Association, Personality,
Awareness, Image, Perceived
Quality, and Loyalty
India Mobile phones
Silva et al. (2012) functionality, image, perceived quality and brand
loyalty
Malaysia Internetservice
providers
Musekiwa et al. (2013) association, awareness,
loyalty, and quality
Zimbabwe Retailers
Shabbir & Rehman
(2013)
association, awareness,
loyalty, and quality
Pakistan Mobile phones
Table 3. Researches on Customer based brand equity dimensions
7/17/2019 The Effect of Marketing Communications on Customer Based Brand Equity
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-effect-of-marketing-communications-on-customer-based-brand-equity 6/13
Mu’ ani L., 2015. The Effect of Marketing Communications on Customer Based Brand Equity. International Journal of Online Marketing Research, 1(1), pp.13-25
International Journal of Online Marketing Research |Volume 1| Issue 1 | September 2015 [18]
Atilgan et al . (2005) applied Aaker’s model to test
brand equity in the Turkish culture for the beverage
market. They found that only loyalty has a significant
effect on BE while the other dimensions has no
significant effects.
Li et al. (2010) studied the customer based brand
equity dimensions in the Chinese hotel industry
context. Their model of CBBE consisted of
dimensions perceived quality, perceived risk,
information cost saving, and brand credibility. They
distributed questionnaire for the respondents whom
stayed at brand hotels from the 300 questionnaires
205 of them were usable for the analysis. Li et al.
(2010) found that Perceived risk has a negative effect
on brand equity, while brand awareness is the main
influencer of brand equity, and then came perceived
quality. Thus, suggested that hotels should focus
their marketing communications priority to increase
consumers’ recognition to the hotel and their ability
to recall information about it.
Another study on the dimensions customer based
brand equity was conducted by Hossien (2011). The
researcher’s model consisted of: brand attitude, brand
associations, brand personality, brand loyalty, and
brand image. The conducted study was on the
chocolate market in Iran. 417 completed
questionnaires were analyzed and the results show
that brand loyalty is the major influencer on brand
equity whereas brand attitude does not have any
influence on brand equity. Additional findings of the
study showed that brand loyalty played a foremost
mediating role for building brand equity especially inthe case of brand associations.
Lee & Leh (2011) studied the customer based brand
equity for the Malaysian brands in general regardless
of the product category. Their work was based on
Aaker’s model which consisted of brand loyalty,
brand associations, brand awareness, and perceived
quality. Their analysis showed that perceived quality
is major influence on brand equity with 47% of the
variance. On the other hand the rest of the
dimensions surprisingly show little explanation on
brand equity ranges from 3-5% only. One reason to
describe those results is the product category wasvague, because consumers differs their criteria when
judging different product categories. And the not
knowing the on which category they are talking about
maybe cause some confusion.
In a degree of similarity in the nature of this study’s
purpose, Mishra & Datta (2011) studied the
antecedents and the consequences of customer based
brand equity of in the Indian mobile market, limited
their study on just the Nokia brand. The sample size
was 818 consisted of people of the age 18 or older
that hold mobile phones. The model consisted of:
Brand Name, Brand Communication, Brand
Association, Brand Personality, Brand Awareness,
Brand Image, Perceived Brand Quality, and Brand
Loyalty. And the consequences are Brand Preference,
Purchase Intention. The results of the analysis
showed that brand communication doesn`t affect
brand equity directly. However, it affects it indirectly
due its effects on the dimensions of brand equity,
making its total effect on brand equity with path
coefficient β= 0.72. Additionally, brand
communications highly affect perceived quality β=
0.79, brand loyalty β= 0.74, and brand awareness β=
0.69. Brand association is the highest influencer on
brand equity β= 0.74 while also brand loyalty has
high effect with β= 0.65.
Silva et al. (2012) developed a customer based brand
equity model for the internet service providers in theMalaysian market. The model consisted of brand
functionality, brand image, perceived quality, and
brand loyalty. 400 questionnaires were analyzed and
the results show that perceived quality is the most
influencer factor that affects brand equity while brand
loyalty is the second most important factor.
Musekiwa et al. (2013) studied the customer based
brand equity in Zimbabwean retail market focusing
the study on “OK” supermarket. The model was
consisted of Retail: association, awareness, loyalty,
and quality as dimensions of brand equity. Only 100
questionnaires were analyzed. And the resultssurprisingly show that awareness and association are
highly correlated which came as a bit of strange.
Other results show that store awareness is the most
important factor when it comes to brand equity for
retailers. Store loyalty came second.
Shabbir & Rehman (2013) studied the customer
based brand equity dimensions on the mobile market
in Pakistan the dimensions were: association,
awareness, loyalty, and quality. 210 questionnaires
were analyzed and showed that the brand loyalty and
perceived quality is the most two important
dimensions in brand equity. Also the results showthat all the dimensions are associated with each other,
which means; despite that loyalty is the most
important factor but is associated with the other
dimensions thus neglecting one of those will surely
affect the loyalty levels and decrease the total brand
equity.
7/17/2019 The Effect of Marketing Communications on Customer Based Brand Equity
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-effect-of-marketing-communications-on-customer-based-brand-equity 7/13
Mu’ ani L., 2015. The Effect of Marketing Communications on Customer Based Brand Equity. International Journal of Online Marketing Research, 1(1), pp.13-25
International Journal of Online Marketing Research |Volume 1| Issue 1 | September 2015 [19]
METHODOLOGY
The research model for the research is presented in
figure 1. The dimensions of CBBE in the model were
inspired from the work of Aaker (1991) and Lasser et
al. (1995). Quantitative research approach using self-
administrative questionnaire was used in the research
to test the hypotheses.
The research use convenience sampling technique to
approach the intended sample, the survey conducted
in three main cities in Jordan whom have the highest
population. Amman, Zarqa, and Irbid. Mixed venues
utilized to reach for respondents. Two schools and
two universities were chosen to reach for the younger
age groups. And the questionnaire was also available
on 35 different retailers for mobiles. Furthermore, the
researcher randomly reaching participants on coffee
shops and the food courts section in malls.
700 questionnaires were distributed, 542 (77.4%)
were returned, and 39 of them had missing data morethan 10%, resulting to have 503 (71.8%) effective
questionnaires ready for further analysis.
A data screening for Non-engaged response to any
questionnaire that got a result of the standard
deviation of zero was deleted. This process result in
deleting 32 cases that has non-engaged responses,
resulting to have 471 questionnaires for final
analysis.
The validity of the instrument was insured using
multiple methods (content – Face- validity &
construct validity), exploratory factor analysis, and
confirmatory factor analysis. Then, Structural
equation modeling used to test the hypotheses.
A pilot study was held to test questionnaire 60
respondents to analyze the reliability with
Cronbach’s alpha (α), and make the necessary
changes -if any- needed. The results of Cronbachs’
alpha for the pilot study showed the value of (0.95),
and all values were above the accepted level of (0.70)
(Sekaran, 2003) which is a reasonable values
indicating the tool consistency that enhanced its use
for the study.
Exploratory factor analysis (EFA)
According to (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2006), in the
goal of factor analysis is to extract items that are
highly correlated into variables while those items are
independent from other variables.
Four tests were used in EFA; Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin
(KMO), Bartlett's Test, Pattern Matrix, and factor
correlation matrix. The results of KMO and Bartlett'stests are 0.907 and .000 respectively, and they are
acceptable which indicate that the data are suitable
for factor analysis.
Convergent ValidityConvergent validity is to which amount of correlation
between the items that supposed to measure the
intended factors are correlated (Hair et al., 2010). The
minimum value of loading for each item in the
pattern matrix should exceed .30, and do not cross
load on another factors. A pattern matrix of all the
items was analyzed in table 4
ItemsFactor
1 2 3 4
Association 3 .861
Association 2 .842
Association 4 .830
Association 1 .787
Equity 4 .834
Equity 2 .829
Equity 3 .816
Equity 1 .807
Quality 2 .874
Quality 1 .835Quality 3 .821
Quality 4 .776
Trust 3 .896
Trust 2 .803
Trust 4 .794
Trust 1 .698
.
ItemsFactor
5 6 7
Attachment 2 .892
Attachment 3 .824
Attachment 4 .802
Attachment 1 .680
Loyalty 2 .820
Loyalty 3 .812
Loyalty 1 .778
Loyalty 4 .715
Awareness 1 .847
Awareness 4 .804
Awareness 2 .801
Awareness 3 .731
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.
Rotation Method: Promax with Kaiser Normalization.
Table 4. Pattern Matrix
7/17/2019 The Effect of Marketing Communications on Customer Based Brand Equity
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-effect-of-marketing-communications-on-customer-based-brand-equity 8/13
Mu’ ani L., 2015. The Effect of Marketing Communications on Customer Based Brand Equity. International Journal of Online Marketing Research, 1(1), pp.13-25
International Journal of Online Marketing Research |Volume 1| Issue 1 | September 2015 [20]
All items are loading above the minimum acceptable
value of .3 and doesn’t cross load on more than one
factor. Which indicate the scale does establish the
convergent validity in EFA.
Reliability Test
Variable Cronbach’s alpha value1. Brand Association TMC 0.857
2.
Brand Trust TMC 0.8513. Brand attachment TMC 0.854
4. Brand Awareness TMC 0.812
5.
Brand Loyalty TMC 0.821
6.
Perceived Quality TMC 0.864
7.
Brand Equity TMC 0.851
8.
Total Questionnaire scale 0.919
Table 5. Cronbach’s Alpha analysis
Table 5 shows that the alpha value for each variable
exceed the recommended value of 0.7 for Cronbach’s
alpha test, the values range from 0.812 – 0.864 for
the variables and the total scale scored 0.919 which
indicates that the questionnaire results are reliable.
Discriminant ValidityDiscriminant validity is to test whether or not the
factors which are supposed to be not correlated, are
actually not correlated (Hair et al., 2010). In the
factor correlation matrix, the value of the correlation between the variables should not exceed 0.7.
Factor Association Equity Quality Trust Attachment Loyalty Awareness
Association 1.000
Equity .345 1.000
Quality .448 .377 1.000
Trust .555 .298 .469 1.000
Attachment .604 .311 .451 .576 1.000
Loyalty .449 .383 .555 .415 .476 1.000
Awareness .079 .184 .062 -.046 .042 .126 1.000
Table 6. Factor Correlation Matrix
In table 6 all the correlation between the variables in the acceptable level below 0.7 which indicates that the scale
establish the discriminant validity.
Confirmatory Factor Analysis[[
Test Value Acceptable values
X2/DF 1.851 ≤ 3
RMSEA 0.043 < 0.05
SRMR 0.034 < 0.05
CFI 0.958 ≥ 0.95
Table 7 Model fit tests
In table 7 shows that the model is satisfying the entire model fit tests with values of X 2/DF, RMSEA, SRMR, and
CFI indicating that the model has a good fit.
7/17/2019 The Effect of Marketing Communications on Customer Based Brand Equity
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-effect-of-marketing-communications-on-customer-based-brand-equity 9/13
Mu’ ani L., 2015. The Effect of Marketing Communications on Customer Based Brand Equity. International Journal of Online Marketing Research, 1(1), pp.13-25
International Journal of Online Marketing Research |Volume 1| Issue 1 | September 2015 [21]
CR AVE MSV ASV Loyalty Association Equity Quality Trust Attachment Awareness
Loyalty 0.822 0.537 0.506 0.292 0.732
Association 0.857 0.600 0.540 0.295 0.568 0.774
Equity 0.853 0.592 0.237 0.164 0.487 0.421 0.769
Quality 0.865 0.615 0.506 0.268 0.711 0.520 0.464 0.785
Trust 0.851 0.589 0.542 0.293 0.558 0.671 0.379 0.553 0.768
Attachment 0.855 0.595 0.542 0.314 0.585 0.735 0.396 0.549 0.736 0.771
Awareness 0.815 0.526 0.056 0.018 0.175 0.104 0.236 0.086 -0.050 0.061 0.725
Table 8. Convergent & Discriminant validity and Reliability Note: CR: Composite reliability/ AVE: Average Variance Extracted /MSV: Maximum Shared Variance/ ASV: Average Shared
Variance
Table 8 shows the values of CR, AVE, MSV, and
ASV and the correlation between the variables. For
discriminant validity; the values of MSV and ASV
should be lower than the value of AVE (Hair et al.,
2010). For convergent validity the value of AVE
should be higher than 0.5. And for reliability thevalue of CR should exceed the value of 0.7. All
values were acceptable to insure the validity and
reliability of the model.
HYPOTHESES TESTINGAfter conducting several tests and alterations to reach
the final measurement model, the next step is to test
the research hypotheses using structural equation
modeling.
H1. Dimensions of brand equity (H1a) brand
associations, (H1b) brand trust, (H1c) brand
attachment, (H1d) brand awareness, (H1e) brand
loyalty, (H1f) perceived quality generated through
marketing communications positively affects
customer based brand equity.
Perceived
Quality
Brand
Awareness
Brand Loyalty
Brand
Association
Brand
Attachment
Brand Trust
Customer based brand
equity
.15*
(IS)
(IS)
.19**
.23**
.2**
R2 = .381
Figure 4. Standardized coefficients
Note: *p-value < 0.05; ** p-value < 0.01; (IS) insignificant
7/17/2019 The Effect of Marketing Communications on Customer Based Brand Equity
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-effect-of-marketing-communications-on-customer-based-brand-equity 10/13
Mu’ ani L., 2015. The Effect of Marketing Communications on Customer Based Brand Equity. International Journal of Online Marketing Research, 1(1), pp.13-25
International Journal of Online Marketing Research |Volume 1| Issue 1 | September 2015 [22]
Unstandardized Standardized
Hypothesis β Beta C.R. P Acceptance
H1a Association → Equity 0.129 0.152 2.288 0.022 √
H1b Trust → Equity 0.069 0.08 1.161 0.246 ×
H1c Attachment → Equity -0.025 -0.027 -0.363 0.716 ×
H1d Awareness → Equity 0.182 0.203 3.28 *** √
H1e Loyalty → Equity 0.176 0.193 4.997 *** √
H1f Quality → Equity 0.194 0.227 0.194 *** √
Table 9 Hypotheses testing
Two sub hypotheses were rejected H1b, H1c ; which
are the effect of trust and attachment generated from
marketing communications on brand equity, because
the critical value between paths of those variables are
insignificant under P<0.05. The rest of the sub
hypotheses were accepted.
DISCUSSION
The purpose of this study is to determine and
compare the effect of brand (Association, Trust,
Attachment, Awareness, Loyalty, and Quality) as an
output of marketing communications on customer
based brand equity in the Jordanian market for
mobile phones.
The effect of brand equity’s dimensions on brandequity
It is important to note that the wording of used in the
items that measure the dimensions are only capturing
the effect of marketing communications, not anyother factor including in effect, The results of
Hypotheses showed that not all the dimensions of
brand equity generated through marketing
communications do affect brand equity. Brand
attachments and brand trust does not significantly
affect brand equity. The most effect came from
perceived quality with Beta value of 0.227.
Awareness, loyalty and associations had Beta values
of 0.203, 0.193, and 0.152 respectively. Therefore,
the main factor that affects CBBE is perceived
quality in other words the perceived quality
consumers hold to mobile phones brands is the most
important factor that affects the brands’ equity.Awareness came in 2nd place, while loyalty and
associations came in 3rd and 4th places respectively.
Theoretical contribution
Customer based brand equity research largely
focused on the developing dimensions that measures
the brand equity from consumers’ point of view as in
general marketing terms. However, this study looked
at the dimensions of brand equity as a result of
marketing communications only. Also, same studies
can produce different results among different cultures
and even differ in the same culture when conducted
on different product categories (Parameswaran &
Yaprak’s, 1987). This leads to the assumption that
this study’s results may be inconsistent with the other
studies’ results from general marketing due to the
reason mentioned earlier. Also, due to the context of
the market may lead to different result than the
mobile phones market.
The result of this study showed that brand trust and
brand attachment that are generated only through
marketing communications for mobile phones have
no significant effect on brand equity. While in
comparisons to general marketing research, brand
trust has been found significant dimension on brand
equity in the milk sector for the study conducted by
(Tahnh, 2012). While also found a significant
predictor in the health food market in the researchconducted by (Tung et al., 2010). Additionally trust is
significant predictor for brand equity in the durables
goods (Rajasekar & Nalina, 2008). However the
results of this study for trust are consistent with the
results from the internet banking research. As
Loureiro (2013) found that internet banking trust has
no significant direct effect on internet banking brand
equity.
Another major finding from this study; that brand
attachments generated from marketing
communications for mobile phones don’t have a
significant effect on brand equity. It is inconsistentwith the results that Chen & Hung (2011) got in the
bicycle market as they found that brand equity and
brand attachment has a positive relationship, while
same results came from the study conducted by Rafi
et al. (2011). Also, Rajasekar & Nalina (2008) found
that attachment is antecedent of brand equity.
Also the research finds that awareness, loyalty,
associations, and perceived quality as outcomes of
7/17/2019 The Effect of Marketing Communications on Customer Based Brand Equity
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-effect-of-marketing-communications-on-customer-based-brand-equity 11/13
Mu’ ani L., 2015. The Effect of Marketing Communications on Customer Based Brand Equity. International Journal of Online Marketing Research, 1(1), pp.13-25
International Journal of Online Marketing Research |Volume 1| Issue 1 | September 2015 [23]
marketing communications have a significant effect
on brand equity. This result is consistent with most
empirical studies in general marketing from various
cultures and product categories. Li et al (2010) found
that awareness and quality are strong influencers on
BE in the Chinese hotel market. Hossien (2011)
found that brand associations and loyalty are
affecting BE in the chocolate Iranian market. Also
(Mishra & Datta, 2011; Shabbir & Rehman, 2013)
found that all awareness, loyalty, associations and
quality dimensions are affecting BE for mobile
phones. Similar results found that quality and loyalty
are antecedents of BE in the Malaysian internet
service providers market (Silva et al., 2012). On the
other hand, the results are inconsistent with Atilgan et
al. (2005) study in the beverage market in turkey, as
they found associations, awareness, and quality are
not affecting BE.
Managerial implications
This study offers key implications for marketers inthe mobile phones market. For a starter, it gives a
valid a reliable ability for marketers to systematically
measure the effectiveness of dimensions though
marketing communication on brand equity from
consumers’ point of view.
Also, the results indicate that perceive quality that is
generated from marketing communications is the
most influencer factor that affecting brand equity. So
marketers should focus on communicating the
superior qualities that their phones have in order to
generate higher brand equity levels. Moreover, brand
awareness and loyalty are vital factors in generating brand equity. Thus, marketers should keep remind the
consumers with the features and importance of their
mobile phones to keep and increase the brand
position in the consumers’ minds and let them be
advocates to the brands by sharing and
recommending the brand to their social circles. Brand
association has the least significant effect on brand
equity between the 4 factors. Yet, it is still important
for marketers to increase the level for brand image
and memories for consumers through marketing
communications.
Marketing communications don’t achieve significantoutcome in letting consumers generate level of trust
and attachment with the brand to be effective in
creating brand equity. In other words even if
consumers hold high brand equity levels to the brand
this is not a result from trusting the brands’
communication nor the attachment that came from it.
It is really important for marketers to address this
deficiency, especially since the study is based on the
brand equity for consumers’ “favorite mobile phone
brand” as it is a sign of high brand equity. One
solution could be transparency between the brands
and its’ customers, acknowledging the issues with
their mobile phones. As a recent example may be
logical why consumers don’t trust brands
communications even if they grip high value to the
brand, Apple iPhone 6 has outstanding selling
performance but with major bending issues from
thousands of consumers reporting their experience on
social media stating that their mobile phone bends in
their pockets. Those reports create a huge buzz in the
media. However, Apple’s official response was
denying those issues.
Conclusion
This study expands the understanding of the
relationship between two important aspects;
marketing communications and brand equity to fill
the gap in the literature. The results indicate that
perceived quality, awareness, loyalty and associations
that are generated only through marketingcommunications are significantly affecting CBBE.
However, brand trust and attachment don`t have
significant effects on CBBE. Thus, marketers need to
find solutions to capture consumers’ trust in
marketing communication, and increase the level of
fond with the brands when exposed to marketing
communications.
Limitations
It is mandatory to point to the limitation that the
study faced. This study has limitations as follows:
A limitation related to the sampling. The
researcher used convenience sampletechnique to reach the sample. This
technique has its own limitation when it
comes to generalizability of the results
Lack of theories regarding the dimensions of
brand equity generated only through
marketing communications, leads the
researcher to make use of general theories
and apply it by changing the wording for the
items. That may lead to lose some of the
effectiveness of the scale. Therefore, the
researcher conducted a series of validity and
reliability procedures to minimize this issue
This study conducted on one market (mobile phones) in Jordan. The results of this study
maybe differ for other markets. Also,
different culture may lead to different results
even for the same market.
Directions for future researches
A follow up studies should be conducted to
investigate why and how brand trust and
attachments generated from marketing
7/17/2019 The Effect of Marketing Communications on Customer Based Brand Equity
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-effect-of-marketing-communications-on-customer-based-brand-equity 12/13
Mu’ ani L., 2015. The Effect of Marketing Communications on Customer Based Brand Equity. International Journal of Online Marketing Research, 1(1), pp.13-25
International Journal of Online Marketing Research |Volume 1| Issue 1 | September 2015 [24]
communications does not affect brand
equity. Therefore, using qualitative research
methods to precisely address the problem
Future researches shall be conducted on
different markets and different cultures to
measure and compare marketing
communications’ effectiveness among
markets and cultures. and If there is
possibility to use random sampling this will
lead to more concrete results that are
representative to the population
REFERENCES
Aaker, D. (1991). Managing brand equity:
Capitalizing on the value of a brand name.
New York, N.Y. : Toronto: New York, N.Y.:
Free Press.
Ahmad, A., & Thyagaraj, K. S. (2014). Brand
Personality and Brand Equity Research: Past
Developments and Future Directions. IUP
Journal Of Brand Management, 11(3), 19-56.Ahmad, S., & Butt, M. M. (2012). Can after sale
service generate brand equity? Marketing
Intelligence & Planning, 307 - 323.
Atilgan, E.; Aksoy, S.; Akinci, S.; Kaynak, E. (2009),
Customer-Based Brand equity for Global
Brands: A Multinational Approach, Journal of
Euromarketing, 18: 115-132.
Ballester, E., & Alemán, J. L. (2005). Does brand
trust matter to brand equity?. Journal of
product & brand management, 14(3), 187-
196.
Bendixen, M., Bukasa, K. A., & Abratt, R. (2004).
Brand equity in the business-to-businessmarket. Industrial Marketing
Management, 33(5), 371-380.
Buil, I., Chernatony, L., & Martínez, E. (2008). A
cross-national validation of the consumer-
based brand equity scale. Journal of Product
& Brand Management , 384-392.
Burmann, C., Marc, J.-B., & Nicola, R. (2009).
Towards an identity-based brand equity
model. Journal of Business Research, 390 –
397.
Chen, Y. T. L. S. C., & Hung, C. S. (2011). The
impacts of brand equity, brand attachment,
product involvement and repurchase intentionon bicycle users. African Journal of Business
Management, 5(14), 5910-5919.
Christodoulides, G., & Chernatony, L. (2010).
Consumer-based brand equity
conceptualization and measurement : a
literature review. International journal of
research in marketing , 43-66.
Chun-Chen, H., Szu-Wei, Y., Cheng-Yi, L., & Te-
Pei, C. (2014). THE RELATIONSHIP
AMONG BRAND EQUITY, CUSTOMER
SATISFACTION, AND BRAND
RESONANCE TO REPURCHASE
INTENTION OF CULTURAL AND
CREATIVE INDUSTRIES IN
TAIWAN. International Journal Of
Organizational Innovation, 6(3), 106-120.
Farquhar, P. (1989). Managing Brand Equity.
MARKETING RESEARCH , 24-33.
Hair, J. F., Tatham, R. L., Anderson, R. E., & Black,
W. (2010). Multivariate data analysis (Vol. 7).
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice
Hall.
Hoeffler, S., & Keller, K. (2003). The marketing
advantages of strong brands. Brand
Management , 10(6), 421-445.
Keller, K. L. (1993). Conceptualizing, Measuring,
and Managing Customer-Based Brand Equity.
Journal of Marketing, 1-22.
Kotler, P., & Keller, K. L. (2009). Marketing
management . Upper Saddle River, N.J:Pearson Prentice Hall.
Lassar, W., Mittal, B., & Sharma, A. (1995).
Measuring customer-based brand equity. The
Journal of Consumer Marketing, 11-19.
Lee, G. C & Leh, F. C. Y. 2011. Dimensions of
Customer -Based Brand Equity: A Study on
Malaysian Brands. Journal of Marketing
Research and Case Study,1-10.
Li, B., Gu, H., & Yang, H. (2010). Study of the
Dimensions of Customer-Based Hotel Brand
Equity. Journal of China Tourism
Research, 6(1), 2-21.
Li, M. & Green, D. R. (2010). A mediating influenceon customer loyalty: The role of perceived
value. Journal of Management and Marketing
Research, 1-12.
Loureiro, S. M. (2013). THE EFFECT OF
PERCEIVED BENEFITS, TRUST,
QUALITY, BRAND
AWARENESS/ASSOCIATIONS AND
BRAND LOYALTY ON INTERNET
BANKING BRAND EQUITY. International
Journal Of Electronic Commerce
Studies, 4(2), 139-158.
Mishra, P. & Datta, B. (2011). Perpetual asset
management of customer-based brand equity-the PAM evaluator. Current Research Journal
of Social Sciences, 3(1), 34-43.
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
7/17/2019 The Effect of Marketing Communications on Customer Based Brand Equity
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-effect-of-marketing-communications-on-customer-based-brand-equity 13/13
Mu’ ani L., 2015. The Effect of Marketing Communications on Customer Based Brand Equity. International Journal of Online Marketing Research, 1(1), pp.13-25
International Journal of Online Marketing Research |Volume 1| Issue 1 | September 2015 [25]
Myers, C. A. (2003). Managing brand equity: a look
at the impact of attributes. Journal of Product
& Brand Management , 39 - 51.
Nam, J., Ekinci, Y., & Whyatt, G. (2011). Brand
equity, brand loyalty and consumer
satisfaction. Annals of Tourism
Research, 38(3), 1009-1030.
Parameswaran, R., & Yaprak, A. (1987). A Cross-
National Comparison of Consumer Research
Measures. Journal of International Business
Studies, 18, 35 – 49.
Park CW, Macinns DJ, Prester J (2006). Beyond
attitudes: Attachment and consumer behavior.
Seoul National Journal, Vol. 12, No. 2, pp. 3-
36
Pitta, D. A., & Katsanis, L. P. (1995). Understanding
brand equity for successful brand
extension. Journal of consumer
marketing , 12(4), 51-64.
Rafi, A., Ahsan, M., Saboor, F., Hafeez, S., &
Usman, M. (2011). Knowledge metrics of brand equity: critical measure of brand
attachment and brand attitude strength. Asian
Journal of Business Management, 3(4), 294-
298.
Rajasekar, N., & Nalina, K. G. (2008). Measuring
Customer-Based Brand Equity in Durable
Goods Industry. Journal Of Marketing &
Communication, 4(1), 48-58.
Schmitt, B. (2012). The consumer psychology of
brands. Journal of Consumer
Psychology, 22(1), 7-17.
Sekaran, U. (2003). Research methods for business:
A skill-building approach (4th ed.). New
York: J. Wiley.
Shabbir, J., & Rehman, K. (2013). Impact of
Perceptual Dimensions and Behavioral
dimension on brand equity in Pakistan.
Information Management and Business
Review, 5(7), 347-359.
Shum, M. (2004). Does Advertising Overcome Brand
Loyalty? Evidence from the Breakfast-Cereals
Market. Journal of Economics & Management
Strategy, 13, 241-271.
Silva, S., Nikhashemi, S. R., Haque, A., Yasmin, F.,
& Khatibi, A. Critical Factors for Developing
Brand Equity: An Empirical Investigation In
Malaysia. IOSR Journal of Business and Management, 1 (4), 13-20
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2006). Using
multivariate statistics. New York: Harper and
Row.
Wood, L. (2000). Brands and brand equity: definition
and management. Management Decision, 662
- 669.