George rossolatos seminar on branding, brand equity, brand semiotic models and research methods part 4

417 views

Published on

Seminar on Branding, brand equity, brand semiotic models and research methods
Tartu University, Estonia 13-14 May 2014
George Rossolatos MSc, MBA, PhD
//disruptiVesemiOtics// email: georgerossolatos123@gmail.com
http://uni-kassel.academia.edu/georgerossolatos

Published in: Business, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
417
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
15
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

George rossolatos seminar on branding, brand equity, brand semiotic models and research methods part 4

  1. 1. George Rossolatos MSc, MBA, PhD //disruptiVesemiOtics// email: georgerossolatos123@gmail.com http://uni-kassel.academia.edu/georgerossolatos Ref.ppt Date What is brand equity? The CBBE perspective • The differential effect that brand knowledge has on consumer response to the marketing of a brand (Keller 1998) • Knowledge of a brand • Establishment of a differential brand knowledge structure • Strong, favorable, unique brand associations • Consumer response is the outcome of a superior brand knowledge structure in terms of competitively superior associations
  2. 2. George Rossolatos MSc, MBA, PhD //disruptiVesemiOtics// email: georgerossolatos123@gmail.com http://uni-kassel.academia.edu/georgerossolatos Ref.ppt Date Brand knowledge structure Brand knowledge can be conceptualized in terms of a brand node in memory with brand associations, varying in strength, connected to it (Keller 1998) Brand knowledge structure Brand knowledge can be conceptualized in terms of a brand node in memory with brand associations, varying in strength, connected to it (Keller 1998)Brand knowledge is fundamentally a function of brand awareness and brand image Brand awareness is a threshold perceptual determinant of brand value and refers to consumers’ ability to identify the brand Brand image is the sum of perceptions about a brand as reflected by the brand associations held in consumer memory. Attributes, benefits and attitudes are key types of brand associations.
  3. 3. George Rossolatos MSc, MBA, PhD //disruptiVesemiOtics// email: georgerossolatos123@gmail.com http://uni-kassel.academia.edu/georgerossolatos Ref.ppt Date Brand knowledge structure Brand image attributes and dimensions are recognized by Keller as ‘sources’ of brand equity. If this is the case, then what are ad expressive elements that constitute a key source for the formation of brand associations? Ad expressive units ? Sources of brand equity or outcomes of sources of ad expressive units? Advertising expressive elements as sources of brand associations The missing links in Keller’s brand knowledge structure • In order to yield a more comprehensive account of the interrelationships amongst attributes, benefits and attitudes, both with regard to resulting associations, as well as the elements used for creating such associations, one needs an encompassing theory of signification and a way of accounting for transformations • “Although Keller (1993) and others assert that brand associations in a consumer’s mind are what a brand means, they do not examine in detail how associations are formed” (Escalas and Bettman 2000: 246) • The establishment of such a web of associations creates what Kapferer calls a ‘brand contract’ between brand and consumers (which echoes the Greimasian concept of communicative ‘contract’)
  4. 4. George Rossolatos MSc, MBA, PhD //disruptiVesemiOtics// email: georgerossolatos123@gmail.com http://uni-kassel.academia.edu/georgerossolatos Ref.ppt Date Advertising expressive elements as sources of brand associations The missing links in Keller’s brand knowledge structure • “The definition of consumer based brand equity does not distinguish between the source of brand associations and the manner in which they are formed” (Keller 1998: 51). • However, it is precisely the modes whereby expressive elements as sources of brand equity are transformed into brand associations that determine the level of potential equity erosion or the degree of sustainability of brand equity. • In essence, managing brand equity is indistinguishable from managing the transformative grammar from expressive elements to associations, with the aid of rhetorical semiotics. Advertising expressive elements as sources of brand associations The missing links in Keller’s brand knowledge structure • “The definition of consumer based brand equity does not distinguish between the source of brand associations and the manner in which they are formed” (Keller 1998: 51). • However, it is precisely the modes whereby expressive elements as sources of brand equity are transformed into brand associations that determine the level of potential equity erosion or the degree of sustainability of brand equity. • In essence, managing brand equity is indistinguishable from managing the transformative grammar from expressive elements to associations, with the aid of rhetorical semiotics. Insofar as “paradoxically, brand-building has to rely increasingly on non-rational, implicit communication” (Branthwaite 2002), unless brand related associations have been projected by relating associatively semes with manifest discursive elements, it is highly unlikely that the actually shaped and largely pre-conscious associative structures in consumers’ minds will be manageable, as there will be no blueprint against which such pre- conscious associations may be compared. Structuralist semiotics, which is concerned with structuring the imaginary, in the light of the propounded approach that emphasizes brand textual configuration alongside pro-filmic elements and figurative relata (i.e., rhetorical operations/figures and production techniques) is particularly apt for providing pathways whereby this task may be accomplished.
  5. 5. George Rossolatos MSc, MBA, PhD //disruptiVesemiOtics// email: georgerossolatos123@gmail.com http://uni-kassel.academia.edu/georgerossolatos Ref.ppt Date Customer-Based Brand Equity Pyramid (Keller & Davey) Resonance Judgments Feelings PerformanceImagery Salience Customer-Based Brand Equity Pyramid (Keller & Davey) Resonance Judgments Feelings PerformanceImagery SalienceThe level of awareness and relevance of a brand to a consumer User/Usage related figurative elements employed in brand communications •Brand-related opinions and evaluations The extent to which the use of a product/service meets customers’ needs •Emotional/Affective responses to a brand The extent to which a consumer identifies with a brand
  6. 6. George Rossolatos MSc, MBA, PhD //disruptiVesemiOtics// email: georgerossolatos123@gmail.com http://uni-kassel.academia.edu/georgerossolatos Ref.ppt Date Brand knowledge structural components (brand associations as outcomes of the decoding process of ad texts) • 3 major types of brand image components: attributes, benefits, attitudes • Product-related attributes: Ingredients necessary for performing the product or service function sought by consumers (e.g., wholegrain cereals) • giving rise to primary brand associations • Non-product related attributes: External aspects of the product or service that often relate to its purchase or consumption in some way (e.g., easy to use) • giving rise to secondary brand associations • Benefits: Personal value and meaning that consumers attach to a product or service (e.g., value-for-money) • Brand related attitudes: Generic background expectations influencing the receptivity to brand related cues (e.g., a brand’s heritage) The ‘mechanics’ of the formation of brand associations How is brand knowledge stored in memory? “Do consumers linguistically rationalize all brand-related information, that is, translate and store the information verbally? Or do consumers store information in the original format, for instance, as pictures or smells?” (Koll et al. 2010) • How stored brand knowledge is activated in the face of incoming stimuli or in the absence of directly elicited stimuli? • What kind of stimuli (cues) produce what kind of mental associations and behavioral responses? • Why the probability that certain cues will produce certain associations changes over time? (Janisweski & Osselaer) • In the consumer behavior related literature mostly brand names and product-related attributes have been employed as input cues in connectionist studies BUT NOT AD EXPRESSIVE UNITS, NOT TO MENTION MODES OF CONNECTIVITY AND TRANSFORMATION • Research output from studies on brand associations has been used for predictive modeling purposes
  7. 7. George Rossolatos MSc, MBA, PhD //disruptiVesemiOtics// email: georgerossolatos123@gmail.com http://uni-kassel.academia.edu/georgerossolatos Ref.ppt Date The ‘mechanics’ of the formation of brand associations • Aaker’s and Keller’s research and discussion of brand associations are rooted in the cognitive psychology theory of associative networks. “This model has been referred to as the human associative memory (HAM) model, the Hebbian model, the Bayesian model, the spreading activation model, and the connectionist model” (Praxmarer and Gierl). • The greater the number of links that emanate from a node, the greater the centrality of the node in consumers’ memory • Patterns of co-occurrence • “Associative networks are merely simplified representations of knowledge stored in the consumers’ minds and cannot be assumed to depict actual neural connections” (Teichert and Schontag). • They constitute a useful heuristic for iterative brand equity planning and ongoing management and not an epistemological panacea. • The majority of quantitative studies that measure consumer associations operate under the assumption that memory elicitation is a goal-oriented activity • The main source of embodied knowledge is vision, since more than 60% of the incoming information reaching the brain passes through the visual system (Zaltman & Zaltman,). The ‘mechanics’ of the formation of brand associations •Two main perspectives about the formation of brand associations • Direct associations (HAM/Human Associative Memory) models • Adaptive learning or connectionist models
  8. 8. George Rossolatos MSc, MBA, PhD //disruptiVesemiOtics// email: georgerossolatos123@gmail.com http://uni-kassel.academia.edu/georgerossolatos Ref.ppt Date The ‘mechanics’ of the formation of brand associations: Direct associations (HAM) • When multiple predictive cues are connected to the same outcome, the total activation of the outcome is equal to the summed activation from the available predictive cues Janiszewski & Osselaer 2000 • Degree of spreading depends on the distance from the stimulus nodes. Henderson, Iacobucci, Calder 1998 The ‘mechanics’ of the formation of brand associations: Direct associations (HAM) • According to the classical spreading activation schema (Andersen) knowledge is stored in memory in the form of inter-connected nodes (nodes and links). • Activation of a node in long-term memory depends on information that is processed in working memory and the strength of the association between the node activated in working memory and the target node (Janiszewski & Osselaer) • What wires together, fires together (the Hebbian learning principle) • The more the same ad expressive elements appear to be directly correlated with particular semantic content, the more strongly they should be associated in long- term memory • But what happens when ad texts change constantly over time, and, moreover, when the semantic content that is correlated with distinctive ad expressive units changes as well across brands in a given product category? THE TEXTUAL SEMIOTIC CHALLENGE TO COGNITIVISM
  9. 9. George Rossolatos MSc, MBA, PhD //disruptiVesemiOtics// email: georgerossolatos123@gmail.com http://uni-kassel.academia.edu/georgerossolatos Ref.ppt Date The ‘mechanics’ of the formation of brand associations: Connectionist models • Adaptive learning, PDP (parallel distributed processing) or connectionist models differ from classical spreading activation in three primary ways: • Associations are asymmetric, viz., the strength of a link from one node to another in one direction is not necessarily equal to the strength of the link in the reverse direction. • People use feedback to update the association strength between cue and outcome. •The strength of certain associations is dependent on the frequency of co- occurrence between cues and outcomes (additivity rule), also dependent on the co- presence of other cues (Janiszewski & Osselaer) • THE GOAL OF A ROBUST BRAND KNOWLEDGE STRUCTURE: Attainment of first mover perceptual advantages by blocking competitive brand names from being associated with key image drivers. Levels of memory processing: Semantic/episodic (Koll et al.) • Another approach to consumer memory proposes a tripartite division of the mind into • a semantic/episodic system • a declarative/procedural system • an explicit/implicit system • The semantic memory system, in line with associative memory, contains mostly verbal, categorical, and conceptual knowledge consisting of abstract, context-free information and general facts about a brand. Semantic memory develops via rational thinking, implying that consumers encode reality in abstract symbols, words, and numbers. • THE PROVINCE OF BRAND IMAGE ATTRIBUTES • The episodic memory system contains more detailed, context-related, event-specific, and personal experiences with the brand. Episodic knowledge explains bonds between brands and consumers, providing insights into consumer self-identities, their motivations and goals in a temporally structured and context-sensitive manner.
  10. 10. George Rossolatos MSc, MBA, PhD //disruptiVesemiOtics// email: georgerossolatos123@gmail.com http://uni-kassel.academia.edu/georgerossolatos Ref.ppt Date Levels of memory processing: Declarative/procedural, Explicit/implicit (Koll et al.) •The declarative/procedural and the explicit/implicit memory systems account for the fact that consumers process and retrieve both verbal and nonverbal brand knowledge on a conscious as well as on an unconscious level. •The declarative/procedural dichotomy distinguishes between conscious and unconscious knowledge processing and retrieval, while the explicit/implicit dichotomy implies different levels of consciousness. •Declarative memory contains intentionally or consciously acquired, stored, and retrieved knowledge. Similarly, consumers draw on explicit memory to consciously exhibit certain behaviors. • Procedural knowledge, on the other hand, consists of skills or abilities consumers acquire non-reflectively (typically via prior experience) and apply without conscious effort. This is similar to implicit knowledge, which results from prior experiences with a brand and allows consumers to unconsciously perform certain behaviors. Levels of memory processing (Koll et al.)
  11. 11. George Rossolatos MSc, MBA, PhD //disruptiVesemiOtics// email: georgerossolatos123@gmail.com http://uni-kassel.academia.edu/georgerossolatos Ref.ppt Date Brand equity models and research methods • Quantitative • Brand Asset Valuator (Y&R) • Brand dynamics (Millward Brown) • Perceptual mapping techniques (e.g., correspondence analysis, PCA, MDS, associative networks) • Brand concept maps • Conjoint analysis •Structural equation modeling • Qualitative • Qualitative exploration of brand image dimensions • Free associations, stories, collages • Mixed methods •ZMET Brand Asset Valuator(Y&R) •The process of building brands is reflected through the progression of four (five) primary measures: • Differentiation • Relevance • Esteem • Knowledge • * Energy added to the model in 2005 •These measures (multi-attribute dimensions) are used to evaluate current brand performance and future potential.
  12. 12. George Rossolatos MSc, MBA, PhD //disruptiVesemiOtics// email: georgerossolatos123@gmail.com http://uni-kassel.academia.edu/georgerossolatos Ref.ppt Date Brand Asset Valuator(Y&R) •The process of building brands is reflected through the progression of four (five) primary measures: • Differentiation • Relevance • Esteem • Knowledge • * Energy added to the model in 2005 •These measures (multi-attribute dimensions) are used to evaluate current brand performance and future potential. Brand Asset Valuator(Y&R) • Differentiation: How different a brand is from its competitors. “A loss in differentiation is a strong sign that a brand is fading” (Aaker). • Relevance: Differentiation alone does not suffice. A brand must also be relevant. For example, as Aaker contends, Jaguar is recognized as highly differentiated, but low in relevance (predominantly due to price). • Brand strength: A brand’s relevance and differentiation viewed in relationship represent brand strength, which is a strong indicator of future performance.
  13. 13. George Rossolatos MSc, MBA, PhD //disruptiVesemiOtics// email: georgerossolatos123@gmail.com http://uni-kassel.academia.edu/georgerossolatos Ref.ppt Date Brand Asset Valuator(Y&R) • Differentiation: How different a brand is from its competitors. “A loss in differentiation is a strong sign that a brand is fading” (Aaker). • Relevance: Differentiation alone does not suffice. A brand must also be relevant. For example, as Aaker contends, Jaguar is recognized as highly differentiated, but low in relevance (predominantly due to price). • Brand strength: A brand’s relevance and differentiation viewed in relationship represent brand strength, which is a strong indicator of future performance. Brand Asset Valuator(Y&R) • Esteem: How much consumers like a brand and hold it in high regard; “largely based on perceived quality” (Aaker) • Knowledge: Not simply awareness, but intimacy with a brand (Aaker) • Brand stature: Brand Stature is discovered in the combination of Esteem and Knowledge.
  14. 14. George Rossolatos MSc, MBA, PhD //disruptiVesemiOtics// email: georgerossolatos123@gmail.com http://uni-kassel.academia.edu/georgerossolatos Ref.ppt Date Energy: The 5th pillar in the modified BAV BAV calculi and ‘Power Grid’ • Differentiation x Relevance= Brand strength • Esteem x Knowledge= Brand stature
  15. 15. George Rossolatos MSc, MBA, PhD //disruptiVesemiOtics// email: georgerossolatos123@gmail.com http://uni-kassel.academia.edu/georgerossolatos Ref.ppt Date BAV calculi and ‘Power Grid’ • Differentiation x Relevance= Brand strength • Esteem x Knowledge= Brand stature The process of growth starts with Differentiation, then Relevance, while the brand is not yet held in Esteem or is not widely known. Enough Strength boosts the brand into the upper left quadrant. This quadrant represents the potential for a brand. Strength is still building and the challenge here is to translate this Strength into Stature for the brand. Brands can stay in the upper left quadrant, establishing themselves as successful niche players. Alternatively, from this position a brand can compete for brand leadership. The upper right area is populated by the brand leaders. The strongest brands are here, those with megabrand potential and, in many cases, the megabrands themselves. The bottom right quadrant is the trouble spot for brands, and an indicator of eroding potential. These brands have failed to maintain their Relevant Differentiation, their core Strength. If unattended long enough, their stature will begin to fall and the franchise decline. The Brand Dynamics Pyramid (Millward Brown)
  16. 16. George Rossolatos MSc, MBA, PhD //disruptiVesemiOtics// email: georgerossolatos123@gmail.com http://uni-kassel.academia.edu/georgerossolatos Ref.ppt Date The Brand Dynamics Pyramid (Millward Brown) Five equity building blocks form a Brand Pyramid: • Presence: The extent to which a brand is TOM (measured through unaided awareness). • Relevance: The brand meets consumer needs at an acceptable price. • Performance: The functional aspects of a brand are at least in parity to the competition. • Advantage: Attributes that measure the softer side of branding, such as saliency, emotional appeal, personality and popularity. • Bonding: The more the consumer feels that the brand is the only one that offers key advantages within a brand-repertoire, the more loyal he is likely to be. • Consumers at each level of the Brand Pyramid can be targeted via advertising and other marketing tools. The Brand Dynamics Pyramid (Millward Brown) The second step, after collecting the relevant data for each pyramid stratum, consists in comparing between competitive brands’ pyramids. For example, Brands A and B have similar levels of presence, relevance and product acceptability, but Brand A has higher advantage and much higher bonding.
  17. 17. George Rossolatos MSc, MBA, PhD //disruptiVesemiOtics// email: georgerossolatos123@gmail.com http://uni-kassel.academia.edu/georgerossolatos Ref.ppt Date The Brand Dynamics Pyramid (Millward Brown) The third step consists in looking at the conversion ratios from each stratum to the next on an intra-brand level and then by comparing conversion rates among brands in a category. The Brand Dynamics Pyramid (Millward Brown) The third step consists in looking at the conversion ratios from each stratum to the next on an intra-brand level and then by comparing conversion rates among brands in a category. Even though the overall profiles of Bank A and Bank B look quite similar, Bank A enjoys higher levels of Bonding. Bank B concentrated its communication on overall bank visibility leaving itself with fewer Bonded customers - current customers felt neglected by the communications. Is this important? Bank B has a much higher rate of past to present customers than Bank A, but it has been much less successful in keeping its customers.
  18. 18. George Rossolatos MSc, MBA, PhD //disruptiVesemiOtics// email: georgerossolatos123@gmail.com http://uni-kassel.academia.edu/georgerossolatos Ref.ppt Date The Brand Dynamics Pyramid (Millward Brown) Brand Dynamics may also be used for predictive purposes, by examining what is the impact of shifts in salient metrics of the pyramid on overall brand strength. Simulations may also be run against market-based data, e.g., market-share. The below chart shows the effects of a 4% increase in Presence across the pyramid, as well as the overall change in consumer value (which is expected to be reflected in MS). Voltage 2.0 (Millward Brown) •A measure of future brand potential •Calculated relative to the performance of other brands in the same category using three metrics •Current brand use and brand salience •Emotional attachment •Perceived differentiation •A brand with positive Voltage 2.0 is primed for growth. It is in a good position to gain share from its own marketing actions and to resist the actions of competitors. • A brand with negative Voltage 2.0 can still grow, but it will have to work harder to do so, and it will be more vulnerable to the actions of other brands.
  19. 19. George Rossolatos MSc, MBA, PhD //disruptiVesemiOtics// email: georgerossolatos123@gmail.com http://uni-kassel.academia.edu/georgerossolatos Ref.ppt Date Predicting market share growth based on Voltage 2.0 (Millward Brown) Brands in the upper-right quadrant tend to have high market shares and good growth prospects. Brands that dominate their product categories, such as Coke, Nike, and McDonald’s would fall into this quadrant. Clearly these brands should continue to maintain their high equity profiles. The brands in the lower left- hand corner, which have both low presence and low Voltage 2.0, face a relatively high failure rate. Many of these brands are new and face strong competition from incumbent brands. The key questions facing marketers responsible for these brands are: How do I disrupt the status quo? Brands in the upper-left quadrant have high potential but tend to be more volatile than the brands on the right- hand side of the map. Many do gain share, but a fair number decline. The brands in this region run the risk that as they work to grow their footprint, they may move away from the branding formula that made them successful. Perceptual mapping: CA, MDS, Associative networks • Perceptual mapping: Techniques for representing consumers’ brand-related associations / brand image attributes graphically in 2-dimensional space. • Determining where a brand is positioned versus its competitors in consumers’ minds. • Gauging image territories of similarity and difference and hence sources of perceptual differential advantage. • Based on the centrality of certain image attributes, determine key image drivers for entire product categories.
  20. 20. George Rossolatos MSc, MBA, PhD //disruptiVesemiOtics// email: georgerossolatos123@gmail.com http://uni-kassel.academia.edu/georgerossolatos Ref.ppt Date Perceptual mapping: MDS • MDS enables brand mapping spatially, so that the relative positions in the mapped space reflect the degree of perceived similarity between the objects (the closer in space, the more similar the brands). • Unlike other PM methods (CA, PCA), in MDS exercises respondents are requested to rate brands on overall similarity, not individual attributes. Perceptual mapping: CA • Correspondence Analysis examines the relationships and co-variance levels between categories of nominal data in a contingency table (brands X image attributes). • Identification of a category’s association with other categories by their proximity on the perceptual map. • Accounts for “inertia” or measurement of explained variation as eigenvalue.
  21. 21. George Rossolatos MSc, MBA, PhD //disruptiVesemiOtics// email: georgerossolatos123@gmail.com http://uni-kassel.academia.edu/georgerossolatos Ref.ppt Date Perceptual mapping: Associative networks DEWARS FAMOUS GROUSE JWRL CUTTY SARK A BRAND FOR PEOPLE LIKE ME FOR SOPHISTICATED STYLISH PEOPLE FOR PEOPLE WHO LIKE HAVING GOOD TIME A BRAND WHICH IS GROWING IN POPULARITY A BRAND WITH REAL CHARACTER A MASCULIN BRAND A DYNAMIC BRAND Research methods in eliciting and portraying brand associations: Brand-concept maps • Roedder-John et al. (2006) propounded a brand-concept mapping approach for managing brand associations with managerial orientation that did not require knowledge of advanced statistical analysis, as a simpler alternative to Zaltman’s (1997) ZMET technique, and a more representative portrayal of interconnections among brand associations than MDS. • They accounted for overall brand associative strength by combining individual with consensus maps, based on frequency tables and aggregate scores by following a 5-step procedure, which involved selecting brand associations, selecting first-order brand associations, selecting core brand association links and non-core brand association links and finally selecting the number of connecting lines among links in brand association maps. • They presented their brand concept mapping method as an iterative process with long- term orientation for evaluating brand-related perceptions in the light of the implementation of brand communications programs and competitive activities.
  22. 22. George Rossolatos MSc, MBA, PhD //disruptiVesemiOtics// email: georgerossolatos123@gmail.com http://uni-kassel.academia.edu/georgerossolatos Ref.ppt Date Research methods in eliciting and portraying brand associations: Brand-concept maps Roedder-John et al. 2006 Research methods in eliciting and portraying brand associations: Brand-concept maps Roedder-John et al. 2006 Number of connecting lines (single, double, triple) represent strength of connection Solid line= core association Dashed line= non- core association
  23. 23. George Rossolatos MSc, MBA, PhD //disruptiVesemiOtics// email: georgerossolatos123@gmail.com http://uni-kassel.academia.edu/georgerossolatos Ref.ppt Date Why indirect measures are more pertinent for gauging brand strength?  Why indirect measures are more pertinent for gauging brand strength?  Unclear product hierarchy in consumers’ minds (esp. in low- involvement categories) and hence low discrimination in consumer responses to direct ranking questions.  Social constraints may affect responses (e.g., not wanting to come across as ‘cheapo hunters’).  Consumers cannot easily quantify what is important.  Direct ranking of brands non-feasible in instances of wide salient sets. Gauging brand strength through conjoint analysis  Conjoint analysis is apt for measuring brand strength indirectly by gauging at what price point consumers would switch to cheaper alternatives.  Respondents are presented with different combinations of brands/price-points.  Requested to state their preference for each combination.  Each combination is attributed a part worth/utility score (0-1).  Summing part worths per brand across brand/price combinations yields an indirect measure of brand strength, while considering the effect of price on consumer choice.
  24. 24. George Rossolatos MSc, MBA, PhD //disruptiVesemiOtics// email: georgerossolatos123@gmail.com http://uni-kassel.academia.edu/georgerossolatos Ref.ppt Date Measuring antecedents and outcomes of BE with SEM • A method for measuring the hypothesized causal interactions among the variables of a structural model • Antecedents = causal drivers for building brand equity (e.g., perceived performance and quality) • Outcomes = results of brands with high equity (e.g., enhanced purchase intent) • A method for demonstrating causal relations among unobservable/latent variables based on observed variables • Latent variable: Brand personality • Observed variables whereby a latent variable is measured (its instrumentation)= ‘a brand for young people’, ‘an outgoing brand’ • “indicators of the underlying construct which they are presumed to represent” (Byrnes) • Mainly used for confirmatory purposes: Examination of regression weights from observed to latent variables and between latent variables • 2 key sets of measurements • Examination of the model’s validity and reliability • Examination of the model’s goodness of fit Sketchmap of the conceptual model by indicating paths and their direction among the model’s constructs • Previous literature and reasoned logic were employed to identify potential relationship paths between the various constructs, and whether these construct relationships are expected to exhibit positive or negative influence (Schumann and Leingpibul) recursive model (=1 way causal relations)
  25. 25. George Rossolatos MSc, MBA, PhD //disruptiVesemiOtics// email: georgerossolatos123@gmail.com http://uni-kassel.academia.edu/georgerossolatos Ref.ppt Date SPSS Amos interface SEM output (Amos) 1: Examining the model’s validity and reliability Schumann and Leingpibul
  26. 26. George Rossolatos MSc, MBA, PhD //disruptiVesemiOtics// email: georgerossolatos123@gmail.com http://uni-kassel.academia.edu/georgerossolatos Ref.ppt Date SEM output (Amos) 1: Examining the model’s validity and reliability Construct reliability (CR) = Cronbach’s a > 0.7 (how internally consistent are the constructs of the model) Construct validity = convergent validity, discriminant validity, nomological validity and face validity. Convergent validity = the extent to which indicators of a specific construct ‘converge’ or share a high proportion of variance in common. 1. Parameter weights= Factor loadings of observable variables on latent constructs (>0.5) 2. AVE (average variance extracted) > 0.5 Discriminant validity = the extent to which a construct is truly distinct from other constructs. Face validity = the extent to which the content of the items is consistent with the construct definition, based solely on the researcher’s judgment. Nomological validity = is tested by examining whether or not the correlations between the constructs in the measurement theory make sense. The covariance matrix Phi (Ф) of construct correlations is useful in this assessment. Schumann and Leingpibul SEM output (Amos) 2: Examining the model’s goodness of fit Schumann and Leingpibul Regression weights OR factor loadings
  27. 27. George Rossolatos MSc, MBA, PhD //disruptiVesemiOtics// email: georgerossolatos123@gmail.com http://uni-kassel.academia.edu/georgerossolatos Ref.ppt Date SEM output (Amos) 2: Examining the model’s goodness of fit Schumann and Leingpibul CFI >.9 how adequately the hypothesized model fits the sample data (Byrne) RMSEA <.10 how well the model would fit the population covariance matrix if it were available, with unknown but optimally chosen parameter values (Byrne) X2 Researchers have addressed the X2 limitations by developing goodness-of-fit indices that take a more pragmatic approach to the evaluation process. These criteria, commonly referred to as subjective, practical, or ad hoc indices of fit, are typically used as adjuncts to the X2 statistic (Byrne) Regression weights OR factor loadings Three types of meaning in SEM (Bagozzi & Yi 2012) • Theoretical meaning, empirical meaning spurious meaning
  28. 28. George Rossolatos MSc, MBA, PhD //disruptiVesemiOtics// email: georgerossolatos123@gmail.com http://uni-kassel.academia.edu/georgerossolatos Ref.ppt Date Research methods in eliciting brand associations: Qualitative exploration of brand image dimensions Grace and O’Cass 2002 Research methods in eliciting and portraying brand associations: Free associations/storytelling/collages (Koll et al.)
  29. 29. George Rossolatos MSc, MBA, PhD //disruptiVesemiOtics// email: georgerossolatos123@gmail.com http://uni-kassel.academia.edu/georgerossolatos Ref.ppt Date Research methods in eliciting and portraying brand associations: Zaltman Metaphor Elicitation Technique (ZMET) • A set of qualitative methods for eliciting metaphorically brand related consumer associations and quantitative methods for transforming insights into actionable input for marketing mix decisions and segmentation strategies. • Favoring the term ‘mental model’ rather than ‘cognitive structure’, as the method purports to be all-encompassing, that is not being restricted to eliciting conscious ‘knowledge’ (cognitive meaning), but also deeply laden feelings, attitudes, values (‘affective meaning’). • Repertory grids, laddering, content analysis and visual dictionaries are integral components of ZMET, as are visual (photographs) and other sensory materials that consumers provide. • The elicited brand associations are aggregated into consensus maps, which represent brand image facets. • Consensus maps portray diagrammatically the linkages among elicited constructs. • The linkages, which are drawn by consumers, constitute consumers’ own representations of their brand knowledge structures which, in ZMET language, are equivalent to causal models. Research methods in eliciting and portraying brand associations: Zaltman Metaphor Elicitation Technique (ZMET) Two theoretical assumptions underlying ZMET are particularly important: Unconscious tacit content: Much of the content of consumers' mental structures is unconscious or tacit (below the surface-level thinking of conscious awareness). Thus such meaning is difficult to access directly . Methods for eliciting such knowledge and bringing it to the surface where it can be interpreted and mapped are needed. Zaltman (1997) notes that metaphors are an important tool for eliciting such hidden knowledge. ZMET uses metaphor as a research tool to elicit deep meaning. Images in mental models. Much of the current thinking in cognitive science is sympathetic to the view that thoughts are image-based and language is a tool humans use to try and convey their mental images to others. If thoughts are indeed image based, then the content of cognitive structures necessarily are images. Thus, ZMET asks respondents to select several pictures that express their thoughts and feelings. (Christensen and Olson)
  30. 30. George Rossolatos MSc, MBA, PhD //disruptiVesemiOtics// email: georgerossolatos123@gmail.com http://uni-kassel.academia.edu/georgerossolatos Ref.ppt Date Research methods in eliciting and portraying brand associations: Zaltman Metaphor Elicitation Technique (ZMET) Step 1 Storytelling: Customer describes the content of each picture. Step 2 Missed images: Customer describes the pictures he/she was unable to obtain and explains their relevance. Step 3 Sorting task: Customer sorts his/her pictures into meaningful piles. Step 4 Construct elicitation: A modified version of the Kelly Repertory Grid technique and the laddering technique are used to elicit basic constructs and their relationships. Customers’ pictures serve as stimuli. Step 5 Most representative picture: Customer indicates the picture that is most representative. Step 6 Opposite images: Customer describes pictures that represent the opposite of the task, for example, what “is not Nike”. Step 7 Sensory images: Descriptions are elicited of what does and does not describe the taste, touch, smell, sound, color and emotion of the concept being explored. Step 8 The mental map: Customer creates a map or a causal model using the constructs that have been elicited. Step 9 The summary image: Customer, with assistance from a technician, creates a summary image using digital imaging techniques. Zaltman and Coulter 1994 Research methods in eliciting and portraying brand associations: Zaltman Metaphor Elicitation Technique (ZMET) Christensen and Olson 2002: Aggregate consensus map (mental model) for 15 highly involved mountain bikers This aggregate map represents the main concepts identified by consumers and the linkages between the concepts as reflected in their interviews. As a consensus map, it identifies the dominant (most frequently mentioned) concepts (those connected to another concept by at least 4 of the 15 respondents).
  31. 31. George Rossolatos MSc, MBA, PhD //disruptiVesemiOtics// email: georgerossolatos123@gmail.com http://uni-kassel.academia.edu/georgerossolatos Ref.ppt Date Differences between analytical tools employed in ZMET and the connectionist approach to the brand generative trajectory of signification proposed in this thesis • Obviously, the proposed conceptual model and methodology are concerned first and foremost with projecting an equity structure, prior to putting a trajectory to the test and hence it does not include consumer data (at least in its current form) • Key and crucial difference: Incorporating an arsenal of rhetorical figures that are absent from ZMET which focuses on metaphor. • The application of visual rhetorical figures in advertising research is still at an embryonic stage, not to mention verbo-visual figures. The brand generative trajectory constitutes a massive advancement compared to the strictly focused on metaphor orientation of ZMET • ZMET, as amply evidenced, suffers from sample size constraints (N=15 -20 respondents per project). The brand generative trajectory features s ample size of at least N=300 filmic segments • This is the first time that a segment-by-segment analysis is suggested, and moreover linked with the semantic content of ad texts. •The brand generative trajectory considers conceptual issues of brand textual configuration that have not been addressed by Zaltman • It also addresses issues of rhetorical literacy and figurative literacy that are not addressed by Zaltman. ZMET works on the untested assumption of a semantic isomorphism between pictures and metaphorical verbal semantic content. Moreover, if associations may be elicited metaphorically, why not in the form of any other rhetorical figure? • It tackles the meaning of ‘unconscious’ more elaborately from a psychoanalytic POV than merely positing it as ‘innate depth structure of the mind’, an innatist fallacy that plagued Jungian psychoanaklysis. It allies with Lacan in viewing the unconscious as language, rather than innate mental structure.

×