Paulo Matos Graça Ramos
Tânia Marisa Dias
Elsa Simões Lucas de Freitas
Porto, 2013
8th Global Brand Conference,
UCP, Porto...
Measuring brand equity: a comparison between a global and a national
brand.
Introduction:
The present study undertakes a c...
Measuring brand equity: a comparison between a global and a national
brand.
Ramos, Dias e Freitas (2013)
3
Research aim
To...
Measuring brand equity: a comparison between a global and a
national brand.
Ramos, Dias e Freitas (2013)
4
Literature revi...
Measuring brand equity: a comparison between a global and a
national brand.
Ramos, Dias e Freitas (2013)
5
Aaker (1991) wa...
Measuring brand equity: a comparison between a global and a national
brand.
Ramos, Dias e Freitas (2013)
6
The study by Yo...
Measuring brand equity: a comparison between a global and a
national brand.
Ramos, Dias e Freitas (2013)
7
However this sc...
Measuring brand equity: a comparison between a global and a national
brand.
Ramos, Dias e Freitas (2013)
8
Yoo and Donthu ...
Measuring brand equity: a comparison between a global brand and a
national brand.
Ramos, Dias e Freitas (2013)
9
Hypothese...
Measuring brand equity: a comparison between a global brand and a
national brand.
Ramos, Dias e Freitas (2013)
10
Hypothes...
Measuring brand equity: a comparison between a global brand and a
national brand.
Ramos, Dias e Freitas (2013)
11
Hypothes...
Measuring brand equity: a comparison between a global brand and a
national brand.
Ramos, Dias e Freitas (2013)
12
Hypothes...
Measuring brand equity: a comparison between a global brand and a
national brand.
Ramos, Dias e Freitas (2013)
13
Perc. Qu...
Measuring brand equity: a comparison between a global and a national
brand.
Ramos, Dias e Freitas (2013)
14
Table 1. Summa...
Measuring brand equity: a comparison between a global brand and a
national brand.
Ramos, Dias e Freitas (2013)
15
Sample:
...
Measuring brand equity: a comparison between a global and a
national brand.
Ramos, Dias e Freitas (2013)
16
 
SALSA LEVI’S...
Measuring brand equity: a comparison between a global and a
national brand.
Ramos, Dias e Freitas (2013)
17
  SALSA LEVI’S...
Ramos, Dias e Freitas (2013)
18
Results
•The Levi’s brand presents, in all its dimensions, higher
averages than Salsa. T t...
Ramos, Dias e Freitas (2013)
19
Measuring brand equity: a comparison between a global and a national
brand.
Ramos, Dias e Freitas (2013)
20
Discussion / C...
Measuring brand equity: a comparison between a global and a national
brand.
Ramos, Dias e Freitas (2013)
21
Conclusions:
•...
Measuring brand equity: a comparison between a global and a national
brand.
Ramos, Dias e Freitas (2013)
22
Conclusions:
•...
Measuring brand equity: a comparison between a global and a national
brand.
Ramos, Dias e Freitas (2013)
23
Limitations an...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Brand equity salsa vs levis

670 views

Published on

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

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
670
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
3
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Ser relaçõe de 2nd order entre as dimensões do B Equity para ver se elas estão relacionadas e são dimensões.
  • Some measures did’t work well
  • Melhores resultados quando feitas em separado
  • Basically a study form a master student that is moving for a PhD and wants to find the best approach
  • Brand equity salsa vs levis

    1. 1. Paulo Matos Graça Ramos Tânia Marisa Dias Elsa Simões Lucas de Freitas Porto, 2013 8th Global Brand Conference, UCP, Porto Measuring brandMeasuring brand equity:equity: a comparison betweena comparison between a globala global and a national brand.and a national brand.
    2. 2. Measuring brand equity: a comparison between a global and a national brand. Introduction: The present study undertakes a comparative analysis of the brand equity between a Portuguese brand (Salsa) and a global brand of jeans (Levi’s) by means of the application and testing the brand equity scale developed by Yoo et al., (2000), which explores the relationships between the composite of marketing-mix and the creation of brand equity. Ramos, Dias e Freitas (2013) 2 Structure: 1.literature review 2.Hypothesis and conceptual model 3.Methodology 4.Data analysis 5.Discussion and conclusions
    3. 3. Measuring brand equity: a comparison between a global and a national brand. Ramos, Dias e Freitas (2013) 3 Research aim To investigate the relationships between the dimensions of brand equity (perceived quality, brand loyalty and brand awareness/brand associations) in the formation of brand value and the relationships of the marketing mix (price, shop image, intensity of distribution, advertising and promotions) in the formation of brand value as well as the relationships between the three dimensions of brand equity. The scale by Yoo et al., (2000) will be tested against the undertaking of a comparative study of the Salsa and Levi’s brands.
    4. 4. Measuring brand equity: a comparison between a global and a national brand. Ramos, Dias e Freitas (2013) 4 Literature review The main contributions comes from Aaker (1991) and Keller (1993), who define brand equity from the consumer perspective: it has to provide the same value for the company and for the consumer. For Aaker (1991), brand equity Brand equity is a set of assets (and liabilities) linked to a brand's name and symbol that adds to (or subtracts from) the value provided by a product or service to a firm and/or that firm's customers. The major asset categories / dimensions are: 1.Brand name awareness. 2.Brand loyalty. 3.Perceived quality. 4.Brand associations.
    5. 5. Measuring brand equity: a comparison between a global and a national brand. Ramos, Dias e Freitas (2013) 5 Aaker (1991) was the first to propose an evaluation model based on the consumer used as the basis of subsequent research (i.e. Yoo et al., 2000; Kim & Kim, 2004; Atilgan, et al. 2005). Although Aaker’s model is not the most recent one in the literature, some authors sustain that it is still the most comprehensive, covering all the criterion variables that directly and indirectly measure brand equity and that it also integrates the behavioural component of Brand equity (Trinta, 2008; Ruževičiūtė and Ruževičius (2010). This conceptualization allowed the development of the scale by Yoo et al. (2000) and by Yoo & Donthu (2001), which will be applied in the present analysis.
    6. 6. Measuring brand equity: a comparison between a global and a national brand. Ramos, Dias e Freitas (2013) 6 The study by Yoo et al. (2000) had the purpose of verifying the existence of relationships between the elements of the marketing mix and the creation of brand equity, by means of a conceptual model of the brand value, which seeks to represent an extension of the conceptual model by Aaker (1991). Yoo & Donthu (2001) perfected their earlier study (Yoo & Donthu, 1996) equally based on the dimensions of Aaker (1991, 1996) and Keller (1993), where the scale appears in its more consolidated version.
    7. 7. Measuring brand equity: a comparison between a global and a national brand. Ramos, Dias e Freitas (2013) 7 However this scale is not consensual. Grinberg & Luce (2000), Schultz (2001), and Washburn & Plant (2002) pointed out that that it could not be considered an universal Brand Equity scale. The Aaker’s Model (1992, 1996, 1998, 2001), and in Aaker and Joachims (2000) and in Keller (1993 and 1998) state a clear differentiation between brand awareness (awareness) of brand associations (associations/ image). Therefore, it is still necessary to undertake further studies in different sectorial and cultural contexts on this subject that apply the scale developed by Yoo et al. (2000) and Yoo & Donthu (2001).
    8. 8. Measuring brand equity: a comparison between a global and a national brand. Ramos, Dias e Freitas (2013) 8 Yoo and Donthu (2001) only identified three dimensions: brand loyalty, perceived quality, and associations/brand awareness confirmed by other researches (i.e. Washburn and Plant, 2002; Neto, 2002; Neto and Luce, 2006) where brand awareness and brand associations were found to be a single dimension. The study by Yoo et al., (2000) proposed relationships between the three dimensions of brand equity (perceived quality, brand loyalty and awareness / brand associations) in the formation of brand value and relationship marketing mix (price, store image, distribution intensity, advertising and promotions) on the formation of brand value.
    9. 9. Measuring brand equity: a comparison between a global brand and a national brand. Ramos, Dias e Freitas (2013) 9 Hypotheses investigated in the present study: Related with the relationship between the Brand Equity dimensions and the OBE   H1: The level of brand equity (OBE) is positively influenced by the quality of the brand displayed in the product. H2: The level of brand equity (OBE) is positively influenced by the brand loyalty displayed in the product. H3: The level of brand equity (OBE) is positively influenced by the brand associations and awareness displayed in the product.
    10. 10. Measuring brand equity: a comparison between a global brand and a national brand. Ramos, Dias e Freitas (2013) 10 Hypotheses (cont.) Related with the relationship between the Marketing mix and Brand Equity dimensions. H4: The perceived quality of the brand is positively related with the perception of high price. H5: The perceived quality of the brand is positively related with the distribution in stores with an upscale image. H6: The brand associations are positively related with the distribution in stores with an upscale image. H7: The perceived quality of the brand is positively related with the intensity of distribution in stores. H8: The brand loyalty is positively related with the intensity of the distribution in stores. H9: The brand associations are positively related with the intensity of distribution in stores.
    11. 11. Measuring brand equity: a comparison between a global brand and a national brand. Ramos, Dias e Freitas (2013) 11 Hypotheses (cont.) Related with the relationship between the Marketing mix and Brand Equity dimensions. H10: The perceived quality of the brand is positively related to the brand advertising investments. H11: Brand loyalty is positively related to brand advertising investments. H12: The brand associations are positively related to the advertising investments in the brand. H13: The perceived quality of the brand is positively related to the brand price promotions H14: The brand associations are positively related to the ​​ brand price promotions.
    12. 12. Measuring brand equity: a comparison between a global brand and a national brand. Ramos, Dias e Freitas (2013) 12 Hypotheses (cont.) Related with the relationship between the Brand Equity dimensions.   H15: There is a significant and positive relationship between perceived quality and brand loyalty. H16: There is a significant and positive relationship between perceived quality and brand associations. H17: There is a significant and positive relationship between brand loyalty and brand associations.  
    13. 13. Measuring brand equity: a comparison between a global brand and a national brand. Ramos, Dias e Freitas (2013) 13 Perc. Qual. Brand Loy. B.awa/ass B. Value Price Promotions St. image Dist. Intens. Adv. Inves. Conceptual model of the research:
    14. 14. Measuring brand equity: a comparison between a global and a national brand. Ramos, Dias e Freitas (2013) 14 Table 1. Summary of the methodology employed Geographical coverage Portugal Data gathering method Quantitative on-line questionnaire Survey Date of data gathering May 2010 – January 2011 Sample type and size Convenience sample 464 validated questionnaires Scale Used Yoo et al., (2000) and Yoo & Donthu (2001) 1-7 likert type scale. Constructs and dimensions measured Dimensions of brand equity: perceived quality, brand loyalty and brand associations/awareness. Composite of marketing mix: price, store image intensity of distribution, advertising and promotions. OBE (overall brand equity). Method and data analysis software Descriptive and Paired Comparisons T test: IBM SPSS© v.20. Due to the data constraints: inexistence of normal distribution of most variables, non homogeneous variances and missing values, the use of partial least squares (PLS) structural equations (SmartPLS 2.0© , Ringle et al., 2005) presented itself as the most adequate data analysis method (Albers, 2010). methodology
    15. 15. Measuring brand equity: a comparison between a global brand and a national brand. Ramos, Dias e Freitas (2013) 15 Sample: Gender •Women :70.3% •Males 29.7% Age •Range: 14 to 71 years •Average of 26 years. Marital Status: •Singles: 82.3% •Married 13.6% Education: •Higher education: 66.80% •Secondary education 32.3% •Basic education 0.9%. Occupation: •Students: 47,2%, •Workers 45,5%.
    16. 16. Measuring brand equity: a comparison between a global and a national brand. Ramos, Dias e Freitas (2013) 16   SALSA LEVI’S AVE Composite  Reliability R2   AVE Composite  Reliability R2   Perceived Quality  0,59 0,85 0,32 0,60 0,86 0,45 Brand Loyalty 0,73 0,89 0,27 0,79 0,92 0,23 Brand awareness/ associations  0,45 0,71 0,36 0,56 0,82 0,47 Price 0,63 0,51           0,67 0,44           Store Image 0,43 0,64 0,55 0,79 Distribution intensity 0,61 0,81 0,68 0,86 Advertising  0,47 0,62 0,60 0,82 Promotions 0,35 0,52 0,32 0,57 Brand value (OBE) 0,77 0,93 0,57 0,83 0,95 0,68 Table 2. AVE, Composite Reliability and R2 Some dimensions are below the reliability (price; promotion) and AVE critical values (promotion) The all R2 values are higher in Levi’s with the exception of Brand Loyalty. Data Analysis
    17. 17. Measuring brand equity: a comparison between a global and a national brand. Ramos, Dias e Freitas (2013) 17   SALSA LEVI’S   Perceived  Quality  Brand  Loyalty Brand  awareness/  associations  Brand  value Perceived  Quality Brand  Loyalty Brand  awareness / associations  Brand  value Bootstrap Perceived Quality   13,76 7,34 3,94   10,10 7,96 2,63 Brand Loyalty     6,99 20,55   4,81 33,12 Brand awareness/ associations        0,37     1,86 Price 1,24       0,51     Store Image 15,35   0,76   19,76 0,65   Distribution intensity 0,63 2,21 0,42   0,16 7,17 2,63   Advertising  0,82 0,03 2,46   0,40 2,16 1,16   Promotions 0,63   1,03   0,32 0,91   Path Perceived Quality   0,52 0,40 0,17   0,49 0,44 0,07 Brand Loyalty     0,26 0,64     0,16 0,77 Brand awareness/ associations        0,01       0,05 Price -0,10       0,02       Store Image 0,55   -0,03   0,63   0,03   Distribution intensity -0,03 0,09 0,02   0,01 0,32 0,11   Advertising  0,04 -0,001 0,17   0,04 -0,09 0,10   Promotions 0,03   -0,05   0,04   0,08   Table 3. PLS bootstrap and Path coefficients. Data Analysis
    18. 18. Ramos, Dias e Freitas (2013) 18 Results •The Levi’s brand presents, in all its dimensions, higher averages than Salsa. T test: all averages are not significantly different (with the exception of Advertising investments). •The bootstrap analysis shows that the dimension brand awareness/associations, in both scales, does not present a significant relationship with brand equity. •The Confirmatory Principal Component Analysis showed some discriminant validity problems: only “brand loyalty” and “OBE” have, in all variables, values above the critical value of 0,70. It also gives indications that the Brand Association and Brand Awareness should be divided into 2 different dimensions. Measuring brand equity: a comparison between a global and a national brand.
    19. 19. Ramos, Dias e Freitas (2013) 19
    20. 20. Measuring brand equity: a comparison between a global and a national brand. Ramos, Dias e Freitas (2013) 20 Discussion / Conclusions: the present study has only confirmed positive and significant relationships between: All the Brand Equity dimensions (H1 and H2 and H15 to 17) and with the exception of brand awareness/associations with OBE H3 (in both brands). 1.Store image and perceived quality H5 (both brands), 2.intensity of distribution and loyalty to the brand H8 (both brands), 3.intensity of distribution and brand awareness/associations H9 (only in Levi’s) 4.and between advertising and brand loyalty H11(only in Levi’s). 5.advertising and brand awareness/associations H12 (only in Salsa)
    21. 21. Measuring brand equity: a comparison between a global and a national brand. Ramos, Dias e Freitas (2013) 21 Conclusions: •Has this study confirmed only five positive associations out of the 17 proposed hypotheses it challenges some of the model premises regarding the expected relationships between the dimensions. •These results contradict those from Yoo et al., (2000) who have obtained positive relationships in all dimensions in their research. •The Yoo et al. (2000) scale used seems to be more adequate for brands with higher notoriety (Levi’s) and may present problems with small and local brands.
    22. 22. Measuring brand equity: a comparison between a global and a national brand. Ramos, Dias e Freitas (2013) 22 Conclusions: •Unlike Yoo et al., (2000) the results do not allow us to conclude that the dimension brand awareness/associations is constitutive of brand equity. •The analysis of the results allows us to conclude that the OBE dimension is a valid measure of brand equity, whereas brand loyalty is the one that contributes the most the construction of the brand value. •Nevertheless the Yoo et al., (2000) Scale still needs to be perfected and adapted to specific sectors and cultural environments. •The Salsa brand held up very well against the global brand Levi’s. The major task is to reinforce its Advertising Investments.
    23. 23. Measuring brand equity: a comparison between a global and a national brand. Ramos, Dias e Freitas (2013) 23 Limitations and future research: •The results may suffer from the sample constraints and should be analysed under this conditions. •The responses had a great number of missing values that can be imputed to the scale used. When questions were perceived as similar respondents tended to skip one of the questions (considering them as redundant). •Future researches should try to use a more representative sample and try to adjust or develop a new scale. That could be applied to smaller / local brands.

    ×