Branding and Charismatic Churches

www.theinternationaljournal.org > RJEBS: Volume: 01, Number: 11, September-2012 Page 38
Branding as a tool for enhancing choice of charismatic churches in Accra, Ghana
Alexander Kofi Preko, (PhD)(CE), Wisconsin International University College, Ghana
ABSTRACT
The study was to determine what makes people choose a particular charismatic church over the
other if it is assumed that worshiping the Supreme God does not depend on the name, logo and the
spiritual leader of a congregation. The purpose of the study is to throw light on how branding activities
have gained root in charismatic churches in Ghana. The study sampled 71 respondents from selected
charismatic churches in Accra. A convenience sampling technique was employed to administer and
collect data. Hypotheses were tested and data analyzed using IBM Statistical Package for Social
Science, version 20.
The study revealed that the sampled respondents attend church not because of the names and the
logos of the churches but the personality and the preaching style of the spiritual leaders. It is, therefore,
recommended that charismatic churches should implement the concept of branding accordingly so that
it does not conflict with the Laws of the republic of Ghana.
INTRODUCTION
A brand is a name, a symbol and a perception applied to a product or service in a manner that
adds value to the product. Branding is the management of the business reputation so that the opinion
people have of the business is positive and memorable (Kotler 1994, 444-445). Profit and nonprofit
organizations today, see branding as one of the most powerful tools that help in lifting the corporate
reputation of their companies high. Branding is described in several connotations and believes that it is
the tool that presents favorable image of every organization. Strong brands help establish the
organization’s identity in the market place, and develop a solid customer franchise (Aaker, 1996;
Kapferer, 1997; Keller, 1998). According to Kotler (2006), the real value of a strong brand is its power
to capture consumer preference and loyalty. Hence, a brand is more than just a name and a symbol. It is
the key element in the company’s relationship with consumers. There is a strong body of research
supporting the idea of brand as a way to boost patronage.
Svendson (2010) comments that the phenomenon of church branding has been gathering pace
over the past decade. Decades back, the whole concept of promoting church by using marketing
strategies such as branding, relationship marketing, customer relationship management, assessing
customers’ perception of choice of place of worship and others to build images among “church goers”
was a taboo, but now there has been a growing acceptance over time. Currently, people realize what it
means to apply concept of marketing to church programmes as done in the profit making organizations.
In Ghana, the charismatic movement began in the 1950s with the emergence of new
Pentecostalism. Nowadays, churches use different ways to build a brand image for themselves, by
buying air time on radio and television stations, text messages to acknowledge members etc. In spite of
the importance of branding, it appears not all non-profit organizations understand how best to brand
their services to the communities they serve. In a profit making organization, brand is identified as a
source of revenue generation, but in the case of churches brand may mean using a name, slogan or
symbol for recognition and easy identification with a particular religious body. The trend has changed
over time; church administrators now use brand not only as name or symbol for members to identify
their churches from other churches, but also to market their services like, my church is a place you can
get a wife or husband to marry, get visa to travel abroad and even get employment with reputable
organizations.

Indeed, branded churches make members to have a feeling of belongingness. Some members
even use possessive words like my church, our pastor etc. People are not ashamed of Christ, but of their
church. The brand creates a persona that the internal community is proud of. They become more
inspired and more effective at inviting others. In the end, it is the church members that make the brand
work. A church that wants to brand its services should look at the environment in which it operates and
how the branding element might add quality to the church members.
OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY
The overall objective is to examine how church members perceive branding that is the name,
logo, preaching and personality of the spiritual leader as influencing choice of a church. The researcher
formulated hypotheses based on the objectives stated.
RESEARCH HYPOTHESES
H1: There is no relationship between church name and the choice of church
H2: There is no relationship between church logo and the choice of church
H3: The name of church does not motivate one to attend a particular church but rather the
preaching style of the spiritual leader
H4: The name of church does not motivate one to attend a particular church but rather the
personality of the spiritual leader as a brand
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The purpose of the study is to throw light on how branding activities have gained root in charismatic
churches in Ghana. It also describes how the application of marketing tools could be used in nonprofit
making institutions. Marketing as a social science is applicable in every working environment. The
study would also serve as a platform for other researchers to criticize, extract materials for further study.
It could be used in policy making in churches and other organizations that might find it necessary. It has
also added knowledge to the existing one.
LITERATURE REVIEW
UNDERSTANDING OF BRAND
A traditional definition of a brand was given as “the name, associated with one or more items in
the product line that is used to identify the source of character of the item” (Kotler, 2000). The
American Marketing Association (AMA) defines a brand as “a name, term, sign, symbol, or design, or a
combination of them, intended to identify the goods and services of one seller or group of sellers and to
differentiate them from those of competitors (p404), that brands today are much more than that.
Aaker and Joachimsthaler (2000) mention that within the traditional branding model the goal
was to build brand image; a tactical element that drives short-term results. Kapferer (1997) mentions
that “the brand is a sign -therefore external- whose function is to disclose the hidden qualities of the
product which are inaccessible to contact”. The brand served to identify a product and to distinguish it
from the competition. ‘’The challenge today is to create a strong and distinctive image’’ (Kohli &
Thakor, 1997).
CUSTOMER PERSPECTIVE OF BRAND
According to Lassar, Mittal and Sharma (1995), five dimensions configure brand equity:
performance, value, social image, trustworthiness, and commitment. Aaker and Joachimsthaler (2000)
define brand equity as brand assets linked to a brand’s name and symbol that add to or subtract from a

product or service. According to them, these assets grouped into four dimensions: brand awareness,
perceived quality, brand associations, and brand loyalty.
These dimensions have been commonly used and accepted by many researchers (Keller 1993;
Motameni and Shahrokhi 1998; Yoo and Donthu 2001; Bendixen, Bukasa, and Abratt 2003; Kim,
Kim, and An 2003). Brand awareness affects perceptions and taste; “people like the familiar and are
prepared to ascribe all sorts of good attitudes to items that are familiar to them” (Aaker &
Joachimsthaler 2000, p. 17).
Perceived quality influences brand associations and affects brand profitability. Brand
associations are anything that connects the consumer to the brand, including “user imagery, product
attributes, organizational associations, brand personality, and symbols” (p. 17). “Brand loyalty is at the
heart of brand’s value. The concept is to strengthen the size and intensity of each loyalty segment” (p.
17). Any way that brand equity is considered, it can be understood as the incremental value a brand
name grants a product (Srivastava & Shocker, 1991).
The Customer-Based Brand Equity (CBBE) model was introduced, commenting on the
“approaches brand equity from the perspective of the consumer - whether it is an individual or an
organization” (Keller 2003a, p. 59). The model is based on the premise “that the power of a brand
lies in what customers have learned, felt, seen and heard about the brand as a result of their
experiences over time” (p. 59). He defines “CBBE “as the differential effect that brand knowledge has
on consumer response to the marketing of that brand” (p. 60), which emerges from two sources: brand
awareness and brand image.
According to Keller (2003a), brand awareness consists of brand recognition -the “consumer’s
ability to confirm prior exposure to the brand when given a brand as a cue” (p. 67) and brand recall the
“consumer’s ability to retrieve the brand from memory when given the product category, the needs
fulfilled by the category, or a purchase or usage situation as cue” (p. 67). On the other hand, “brand
image is created by marketing programmes that link strong, favorable, and unique associations to
the brand in the memory” (p. 70). These associations are not only controlled by the marketing
programme, but also through direct experience, brand information, word of mouth, assumptions of
the brand itself -name, logo-, or with the brand’s identification with a certain company, country,
distribution channel, person, place or event.
BRAND IN A CHURCH
Knowing the target audience is the first step of any marketing activity. The next step for a
church is to develop a strategy that will help shape the image that the organization wishes to project to
its target audience. Well, branding is not merely the choice of a name, a logo or design as (Kotler, et al.,
(2000) believe, but a much more intangible aspect, especially when being a service organization. “When
you are out in the community, delivering services, working with volunteers and raising support, you are
constantly creating an impression of your organization or the brand”. This impression is associated with
a certain value set in the minds of your audience. Values, trust, relationships, benefits and promises are
all associated experiences of your brand. Whether you are deliberate about your brand or not, you are by
the very fact of engaging with the community creating a brand for your organization and that brand
comes across in everything you do” (Hart, Greenfield & Johnston, 2005).
Branding is an emotional tool that can reinforce the loyalty of the consumer, adding value as
well as encouraging additional consumption. Therefore, a brand not only facilitates recognition, but also
makes a promise and must deliver on that promise in order to strengthen the brand that can ultimately
increase awareness. Not everyone thinks that branding necessarily is a good thing. Branding can,
meanwhile, function both outward and inward in creating identity, values and relationships. An

important key factor then becomes the use of internal marketing through which they communicate their
brand values within the organization, which can ensure a more consistent behavior of the staff,
improved commitment and enthusiasm that can potentially expand externally through contact points. It
is, therefore, important to note that branding seems to optimally move in concentric circles, starting
from within and extending outwards.
As relationships are a cornerstone of branding and trust, the internal practices must deliver on
that promise. In this connection, the application of internal branding as opposed to internal marketing
should be discussed, and whether or not a distinction should be made between the two principles as
much confusion exists in connection with their application (Svendson, 2010). Within the church, the
members act as ambassadors to spread the good news of the church if the church has brand equity.
CHALLENGES IN BRAND BUILDING
Ethical Issues -: Ethics is a very complex subject. Marketing ethics is but a subset of business
ethics which itself is a subset of ethics (Martin, 1985). Research on marketing ethics has so far been
confined to general marketing issues, such as product safety, pricing, advertising and marketing
research (Laczniak, 1993; Smith, 1995 and Murphy, 1999); little attention has been paid to branding.
No business ethics book has been found to have reference to branding while leading branding texts have
made no reference to ethics (Aaker, 1991; Kapferer, 1997; Keller, 1998; de Chernatony and McDonald,
2003). A brand may be amoral, but there are ethical issues in branding. Ethical branding, as a subset of
ethical marketing, relates to certain moral principles that define right and wrong behaviour in branding
decisions. A brand needs to be evaluated not just by the economic or financial criteria but also by the
moral ones. An ethical brand should not harm public good; instead, it should contribute to or help
promote public good.
A vulnerable asset -: The image of a brand can also be affected by non-branding decisions that
are made at the marketing or business level. For example, sweatshop accusations, animal testing labour
disputes, etc. Most business decisions that might eventually affect the organization’s brand image are
made by people other than the brand manager on financial criteria with little consideration for ethical
issues. Whenever anything goes wrong, be it a small incident or a big crisis, it is the brand that takes the
blame; the brand image and corporate reputation are always the victim. Brands became the mistaken
identity in the debate between no logo and pro logo camps it is not the brand or logo, but the bad
corporate policies that are responsible for all the wrongdoings. “Brands are not guilty of social and
environmental damage – nor are they even a symbol of unethical working practice.
Corporate Social Responsibility -: Corporate social responsibility (CSR) and business ethics are
the two concepts that are often used inter-exchangeable but different. This area is further complicated
by the use of other terms such as corporate reputation, corporate image, and corporate citizenship, to
name but a few [for a comprehensive review on CSR, see Carroll (1999)].
HOW DO CHURCHES USE BRANDING?
As the market for churches is cluttered with choices, information and messages, branding helps in
reducing the noise, conveying credibility and helping the organization to distinguish itself and its
product from that of the competition as well as creating a lasting impression in the mind of the
prospective consumer. “Today Protestantism has become a commodity. The suppliers are redundant,
and church space is oversupplied. That’s why denominations need separation via branding” (Twitchell,
2004, p. 65).
Branding, therefore, becomes the tool with which the church can make their offerings more tangible and
ultimately easier to differentiate from competition and communicate it to the target audience. A brand is

perceived as an experience. According to Zyman (2002), “a brand is essentially a container for a
customer’s complete experience with the product” (p. 41)
Therefore, the satisfaction of the customer depends on both the product of the church, i.e. the service
and the small groups, as well as the interactions between the employees and the customers (Svendsen,
2010).
RESEARCH METHODS
The study adopted triangulation research design. This form of design allowed the researcher to
use both qualitative and quantitative research designs. The study made used of 71 church members from
selected charismatic churches in Accra. The charismatic churches sampled were Pure Fire, Miracle
Ministries, Mountain of Fire, Church of Paradise, Maximum Light Chapel International, Assemblies of
God, Church of Christ, Word Alive, Global Evangelism, Glorious Ministry International, Mount Horeb
Victorious Church and Run Missions. The above churches were selected due to the names and the
logos. It was intended to find out if the names and the logos influenced respondents to attend the church
for the first time. A total of 105 questionnaires were administered; only (71) questionnaires were
collected and analyzed. Convenience sampling technique was employed to collect data. The hypotheses
were tested and data analyzed using IBM Statistical Package for Social Science, version 20.
HYPOTHESES TESTING
HYPOTHESIS 1
H0: There is no relationship between church name and the choice of church one attends
HA: There is relationship between church name and the choice of church one attends
Table 1
Symmetric Measures
Value Asymp. Std.
Errora
Approx.
Tb
Approx.
Sig.
Nominal by
Nominal
Contingency
Coefficient
.395 .873
Interval by
Interval
Pearson's R .241 .077 2.059 .043c
Ordinal by
Ordinal
Spearman Correlation .174 .112 1.465 .148c
N of Valid Cases 71
Computerized from SPSS
Using the contingency coefficient of the p value of 0.395 > 0.05, hence the null hypothesis is accepted.
It means that there is no relationship between church name and the choice of churches one attends. It
indicates that people attend church not based on the name but rather the belief that God is everywhere
and could be served under any name. The church is a group and every group should have an identity.
The Spearman correlation of 0.174 indicated that there is a weak correlation between the two variables.
HYPOTHESIS 2
H0: There is no relationship between church logo and the choice of church one attends
HA: There is relationship between church logo and the choice of church one attends

Table 2
Symmetric Measures
Value Asymp. Std.
Errora
Approx.
Tb
Approx.
Sig.
Nominal by
Nominal
Contingency
Coefficient
.155 .781
Interval by
Interval
Pearson's R .106 .145 .885 .379c
Ordinal by
Ordinal
Spearman Correlation .065 .136 .540 .591c
N of Valid Cases 71
The p value of 0.155> 0.05, hence the null hypothesis is accepted. It indicates that there is no
relationship between a logo of church and the choice of the church by a member. The table further
explains that church logo is not significant to choice of the church. Using the approximate significant
level of 0.781>0.05 also reveal that the logo has nothing to do with choice of church. The spearman
correlation shows the correlation level of 0.065 which indicates that there is a weak correlation between
the two variables: church logo and choice of a church.
HYPOTHESIS 3
Ho: The name of church does not motivate one to attend a particular church but the preaching style of
the spiritual leader
HA: The name of church does motivate one to attend a particular church but the preaching style of the
spiritual leader
Table 3
Symmetric Measures
Value Asymp. Std.
Errora
Approx.
Tb
Approx.
Sig.
Nominal by
Nominal
Contingency
Coefficient
.487 .633
Interval by
Interval
Pearson's R .067 .116 .561 .577c
Ordinal by
Ordinal
Spearman Correlation .065 .124 .538 .593c
N of Valid Cases 71
The p value of 0.487 > 0.05, hence the null hypothesis is accepted. It indicates that the name of church
does not motivate one to attend a particular church but the preaching style of the spiritual leader.
Spearman correlation coefficient of 0.65 indicates there is strong correlation between the two variables.
HYPOTHESIS 4
Ho: The name of church does not motivate one to attend a particular church but rather the personality
of the spiritual leader
HA: The personality of the spiritual leader motivates one to attend a particular church not the name of
the church

Table 4
Symmetric Measures
Value Asymp. Std.
Errora
Approx.
Tb
Approx.
Sig.
Nominal by
Nominal
Contingency
Coefficient
.132 .938
Ordinal by
Ordinal
Gamma .067 .179 .371 .711
N of Valid Cases 71
The p value of 0.132 > 0.05, hence the null hypothesis is accepted. It indicates that the name of church
does not motivate one to attend a particular church but the personality of the spiritual leader as a brand.
The table also shows the significant level of the relationship between the two variables, which appears
to be significant at 0.938.
DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
In line with the first and the second hypotheses, it was indicated that there is no relationship
between church name, logo and the choice of church one attends. There are several explanations to
clarify the outcome of the hypotheses tested. But these explanations are limited to the sample used for
the study. It could be understood from this point that people attend church not based on the name or
logo but other factors like God is everywhere and could be served under any name or logo. A church is
a group and every group should have an identity. The outcome of the first and the second hypotheses
could be linked to works of Aaker, 1996; Kapferer, 1997; Keller, 1998), which state that strong brands
help establish the organization’s identity in the market place, and develop a solid customer franchise.
Furthermore, according to American Marketing Association (AMA) definition, states that a
brand is “a name, term, sign, symbol, or design, or a combination of them, intended to identify the
goods and services of one seller or group of sellers and to differentiate them from those of competitors”
The above researchers further comment that brand name is more than just name and symbol. From the
work of the scholars and the definition of the recognized institution in marketing, it is clear that brand
name or logo is there for identity and also assist people to easy identify members in the church. In
addition to this, name is one of the basic requirements for companies to be registered in Ghana. Once
again, according to Kotler, et al. (2000), branding is not merely the choice of a name, a logo or design
as believes, but a much more intangible aspect, especially when being a service organization. It means
that when churches are out in the community, delivering services, working with volunteers and raising
support, they are constantly creating a brand for organization. The outcomes of the first two hypotheses
tested justify the benefits of branding that is (identification and guarantee), mentioned by Kapferer
(1997) among the eight benefits of branding to customers.
The third and fourth hypotheses tested that the name of church does not motivate one to attend a
particular church but the preaching style and personality of the spiritual leader. It indicates that the
respondents sampled attended their various churches because they have perception that the preaching
and the personality of the spiritual leaders are more significant than the names and logos. People go to
churches to worship, speak to God, have their demands and needs attended to and these can be achieved
in certain ways by the help of the preaching and the spiritual leader. Branding is an emotional tool that
can reinforce the loyalty of the consumer, adding value as well as encouraging additional consumption.
Therefore, a brand does not only facilitate recognition, but also makes a promise and must deliver on
that promise in order to strengthen the brand that can ultimately increase awareness. In all the challenge
today is to create a strong brand and distinctive image (Kohli and Thako, 1997).

CONCLUSION
The results obtained from the study revealed that respondents sampled attend church not because
of the name and the logo but rather the preaching style and personality of the spiritual leaders. The last
two hypotheses tested induced the researcher to conclude that today in Ghana, most people attend
church because of what a particular pastor is going to preach or the pastor is a powerful person. If the
outcomes of the last two hypotheses are to be generalized, then it is true that spiritual leaders are buying
air time on radio and televisions in order to brand themselves and also sell their products to the
Ghanaian community.
RECOMMENDATIONS
First, the concept of branding in churches should be well understood and structured so that it
does not conflict with the Laws of the Republic of Ghana. Spiritual leaders should market only what
they have and capable of doing and not add services that are not in existence. The basis of the concept
of branding is to deliver values of your products and services to the final consumers.
REFERENCES
1. Aaker, D. A. & Joachimsthaler, E. (2000). Brand Leadership. London: Free Press.
2. Andreasen, A. R.& Kotler, P. (2008). Segmentation, Positioning, And Branding. Strategic
Marketing For Nonprofit Organizations. (7th Ed., Pp. 137-165). Prentice-Hall.
3. Bendixen,M. Bukasa, K. A., & Abratt, R. (2003). Brand Equity In The Business-To-Business
Market. Industrial Marketing Management, 33, 371-380.
4. Carrigan, M. & Attalla, A. (2001). The Myth Of The Ethical Consumer - Do Ethics Matter In
Purchase Behaviour? Journal of Consumer Marketing, 18(7), 560-77.
5. Carroll, A. B. (1999). Corporate Social Responsibility. Business and Society, (38)3, 268-295.
6. Cryer, E. H. & Ross, W. T. (1997). The Influence Of Firm Behaviour On Purchase Intention: Do
Consumers Really Care About Business Ethics? Journal of Consumer Marketing, 14(6), 421-33.
7. Dalman (2005). Branding for Church Planters,First Edition, Published in the US
8. De Chernatony, L. (2006). —Journal of Brand Management Vol. 13, No. 6, pp 418-428,
9. Lancaster, G. & Reynolds, P. (2002). Marketing: The One-Semester Introduction New Delhi:
Butter Worth Heinemann (Bh)
10. Gobé, M. (2001). Emotional Branding: The New Paradigm For Connecting Brands To People.
New York: Allworth Press.
11. Goodyear, M. (1996). Divided By A Common Language: Diversity And Deception In The
World Of Global Marketing. Journal Of The Market Research Society, 38 (2), 105- 122
12. Hart, Ted; Greenfield, James M, Johnson, Michael (2005). Nonprofit Internet Strategies: Best
Practices for Marketing Communication and Fundraising Success.
13. Kojok(2007). “The Birth and Effects of Charismaticism in Ghana (ii), article published at
www.ghanaweb.com, Wednesday, 5, 2007
14. Kapferer(1997). Strategic Brand Management “Creating and Sustaining Brand Equity Long
Term”, Publishing House, Kogan Page Limited, UK.
15. Kevin Lane Keller (1993), "Conceptualizing, Measuring, and Managing Customer-Based Brand
Equity," Journal of Marketing, 57 (January), 1-22
16. Kevin Lane Keller (2008). Strategic Brand Management, 3rd Edition, Upper Saddle River,
New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
17. Kim, Hong-Bumm, Woo Gon Kim, & Jeong A. A (2003). The Effect Of Consume Based Brand
Equity On Firms’ Financial Performance. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 20
(4), 335-351.

18. Kohli, C. & Mrugank, T. (1997). Branding Consumer Goods: Insights Form Theory And
Practice. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 14 (3), 206-219.
19. Kotler, P. (1994, p444-445), Marketing Management, Analysis, Planning, Implementation and
Control. Prentice Hall: Engle wood Cliffs.
20. Kotler, P. (2000). Marketing Management. (10th
Ed.). New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
21. Kotler P. & K. L. (2006). Marketing Management. New Jersey: Pearson
22. Kotler,P. A., G. Saunders,J. Wong,V. (2001). Principles of Marketing. England: Pearson
Education Ltd.
23. Kotler P. & Gary Armstrong (2006). Principles Of Marketing 12th
Ed.New Jersey,Pearson.
24. Kozinets, Sherry, John F., Jr., Robert V., Adam Duhachek, Benét DeBerry-Spence,
KrittineNuttavuthisit and Diana Storm (2004). “Gendered Behavior in a Male Preserve: Role
Playing at ESPN Zone Chicago,” Journal of Consumer Psychology¸ 14 (1 & 2), 151-158.
25. Motameni , R. & M. Shahorkhi (1998), “Brand Equity Valuation: A Global Perspective”,
Journal of Product and Brand Management, 7 (4), 275-290.
26. Laczniak, GeneR. (1993) “Marketing Ethics: Onward Toward Greater Expectations”, Journal Of
ublic Policy And Marketing, 12:1, 91-96.
27. Laczniak, Russell N. and Darrel D. Muehling (1993). "The Relationship Between Experimental
Manipulation and Tests of Theory in an Advertising Message Involvement Context," Journal of
Advertising, Vol. 22 (3), 59-74.
28. Lassar,Mittal B,& Sharma A (1995). “Measuring Customer-Based Brand Equity”, Journal of
Consumer Marketing, 12 (4), 11-19.
29. Martin, T. R. (1985). “Ethics In Marketing: Problems And Prospects”, In Laczniak, G. R. &
Murphy. P. E. (Eds), Marketing Ethics: Guideline For Managers, Lexington Books,Ma
30. Svendsen (2010). Branding and Religion,Master thesis, Copenhagen Business School,
Cand.Ling. Merc., Intercultural Market Studies
31. Motameni, R. And M. Shahorkhi (1998). “Brand Equity Valuation: A Global Perspective”,
Journal Of Product And Brand Management, 7 (4), 275-290.
32. Muniz Albert M. Jr. and Thomas C. O’Guinn (2001). Brand Community, Journal of Consumer
Research, 27 (March), 412-32
33. Sherri Brown (2008). Branding Your Church: Issues Involved In Branding Existing Churches.
Inc Georgia, Leadership Network (Pp 1-14)
34. Smith, J. A. (1995). Semi-structured interviewing and qualitative analysis. In J. A. Smith, R.
Harre, & L. van Langenhove (Eds.), Rethinking methods in psychology (pp. 9–26). London:
Sage.
35. Srivastava, R.K And A.D. Shocker (1991). Brand Equity: A Perspective On Its Meaning And
Measurement, Report 91-124, Marketing Science Institute, Cambridge, Ma.
36. Ted Hart, James M. Greenfield, Michael Johnston (2005). Nonprofit Internet Strategies: Best
Practices For Marketing, Communications, And Fundraising Success John Wiley & Sons,
37. Thakor, M.V. And Lavack, A.M. (2003). “Effect Of Perceived Brand Origin Associations On
Consumer Perceptions Of Quality”, Journal Of Product And Brand Management, Vol. 12(6),
Pp.394-407.
38. Yoo, B. & N. Donthu (2001). “Developing and Validating A Multidimensional Consumer-Based
Brand Equity Scale”. Journal of Business Research, 52, 1-14.
39. Zyman, S. (2002). The End Of Advertising As We Know It. Hoboken, Nj: John Wiley & Sons,
Inc.

Branding and Charismatic Churches

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Branding and Charismatic Churches

Similar to Branding and Charismatic Churches (20)

Branding and Charismatic Churches