Consumer-Based Brand Equity of Finnish Fashion
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Consumer-Based Brand Equity of Finnish Fashion - Differences Between Genders, Generations X and Y and Questionnaires Mikaela Lång Department of Marketing Hanken School of Economics Helsinki 2011 HANKEN SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS Department of: Marketing Type of work: Master’s Thesis Author: Mikaela Lång Date: 19.9.2011 Title of thesis: Consumer-Based Brand Equity of Finnish Fashion – Differences Between Genders, Generations X and Y and Questionnaires Abstract: Stereotypical differences are existent between genders and generations X and Y. However, these differences have never been investigated for the consumer- based brand equity (CBBE) of Finnish fashion. Consequently, the purpose of this study was to investigate if, and how, the CBBE of Finnish fashion differs between Finnish men and women, generations X and Y, and two types of questionnaires distributed (one including a list of Finnish fashion brands, the other without). As well as to investigate which associations build up the CBBE of Finnish fashion. A quantitative approach was used to investigate the purpose of this study, analyzing responses to the questionnaires through t-tests, one-way ANOVAs and MANOVAs and two-way MANOVAs. The results showed a statistically significant difference on a considerable amount of dependent variables between genders, but very few between generations or surveys. The highest means of these variables all pertained to females. When analyzing combined groups (genders and generations, genders and surveys, generations and surveys), the largest number of differences between variables was found between genders and generations. The most positive variables building up the CBBE of Finnish fashion were: good quality, ethical, comfortable, natural image, good design, belief that Finnish fashion is of high quality, respect, and previous purchase of Finnish fashion, while the most negative variables were: that Finnish fashion is expensive, it is not better than foreign fashion, no feeling of security nor social approval is perceived, respondents do not buy Finnish fashion whenever possible, they do not love nor feel loyalty towards Finnish fashion, and they would not try to find it elsewhere if not available in the first shop visited. Keywords: Brand, Consumer-/ Customer-based brand equity, Finnish, Fashion, Awareness, Image, Response, Loyalty, Generation X, Generation Y, Gender CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………………………….. 1 1.1. Research Problem……………………………………………………………………… 2 1.2. Purpose of the Study………………………………………………………………….. 4 1.3. Delimitations…………………………………………………………………………….. 4 1.4. Structure of the Thesis……………………………………………………………….. 5 2 LITERATURE REVIEW…………………………………………………………………… 6 2.1. Strong Brands……………………………………………………………………………. 6 2.2. Brand Equity…………………………………………………………………………….. 7 2.2.1. Aaker’s Brand Equity…………………………………………………………….. 9 2.2.2. Keller’s Customer-Based Brand Equity…………………………………… 11 2.2.3. A CBBE Framework by Esch, Langner, Schmitt & Geus……………. 18 2.2.4. Measuring Brand Equity……………………………………………………….. 20 2.2.5. Effects of Brand Equity Assets on Each Other……………………..….. 23 2.3. Fashion Consumption Influences……………………………………………….. 24 2.4. Genders and Fashion…………………………………………………………………. 26 2.5. Generations X and Y and Fashion………..……………………………………… 28 2.6. Theory Summary……………………………………………………………………….. 29 2.7. Proposed Fashion CBBE Framework……………………………………………. 32 3 FINNISH FASHION………………………………………………………………………… 34 4 METHODOLOGY……………………………………………………………………………. 35 4.1. A Quantitative and Deductive Approach………………………………………. 35 4.2. The Questionnaire……………………………………………………………………… 37 4.2.1. Pretesting of the Questionnaire………………………………………………. 39 4.2.2. Data Sampling and Collection…………….………………………….………. 40 4.2.3. The Questions………………………………………………………………….…… 41 4.3. Validity and Reliability (Measurement Error)………………………………. 44 4.4. Assumptions and Pre-tests…………………………………………………….…… 46 4.4.1. Missing Data…………………………………………………………………….….. 47 4.4.2. Outliers…………………………………………………………………………….…. 47 4.4.3. Sample Size……………………………………………………………….……….… 49 4.4.4. Normality………………………………………………………………….…………. 50 4.4.5. Linearity……………………………………………………………………………… 50 4.4.6. Multicollinearity…………………………………………………………………… 51 4.4.7. Homogeneity of Variance and Homogeneity of Variance-Covariance Matrices………………………………………………………………………………. 51 5 RESULTS……………………………………………………………………………………….. 53 5.1. Descriptive Statistics………………………………………………………………….. 53 5.2. T-tests………………………………………………………………………………………. 59 5.2.1. Surveys………………………………………………………………………………… 59 5.2.2. Generations…………………………………………………………………………. 60 5.2.3. Genders……………………………………………………………………………….. 60 5.3. One-Way ANOVA………………………………………………………………………. 61 5.3.1. SexGen………………………………………………………………………………… 61 5.3.2. SexSur…………………………………………………………………………………. 63 5.3.3. GenSur………………………………………………………………………………… 64 5.4. One-Way MANOVA…………………………………………………………………… 65 5.4.1. Surveys………………………………………………………………………………… 65 5.4.2. Generations…………………………………………………………………………. 65 5.4.3. Genders………………………………………………………………………………. 65 5.4.4. SexGen………………………………………………………………………………… 66 5.4.5. SexSur…………………………………………………………………………………. 68 5.4.6. GenSur………………………………………………………………………………… 69 5.5. Two-Way MANOVA…………………………………………………………………… 69 5.5.1. Genders and Generations………………………………………………………. 69 5.5.2. Genders and Surveys…………………………………………………………….. 72 5.5.3. Generations and Surveys……………………………………………………….. 73 5.6. Result Summary ……………………………………………………………………….. 74 6 DISCUSSION………………………………………………………………………………….. 76 6.1. Fashion-Consciousness, -Interest and Domestic Preference…………… 76 6.2. Finnish Fashion CBBE between Surveys……………………………………… 77 6.3. Finnish Fashion CBBE between Generations……………………………….. 78 6.4. Finnish Fashion CBBE between Genders……………………………………… 79 6.5. Finnish Fashion CBBE between Genders and Generations…………….. 79 6.6. Finnish Fashion CBBE between Genders and Surveys…………………... 81 6.7. Finnish Fashion CBBE between Generations and Surveys………………. 81 6.8. CBBE Assets of Finnish Fashion………………………………………………….. 82 7 CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS………………………………………………. 86 7.1. Limitations and Future Research…………………………………………………. 87 SVENSK SAMMANFATTNING……………………………………………………………. 90 REFERENCES……………………………………………………………………………………. 101 APPENDICES APPENDIX 1 Questionnaire in English - own view………………… 107 APPENDIX 2 Questionnaire in English – given view……………… 110 APPENDIX 3 Questionnaire in Finnish – own view......………….. 114 APPENDIX 4 Questionnaire in Finnish – given view……………… 117 APPENDIX 5 Questionnaire in Swedish – own view......…………. 121 APPENDIX 6 Questionnaire in Swedish – given view…………….. 124 APPENDIX 7 Total means on all variables…………………………….. 128 APPENDIX 8 Means for Surveys, Genders & Generations………. 129 APPENDIX 9 Means for SexGen, SexSur & GenSur……………….. 131 TABLES Table 1 “Role That Brands Play”………………………………………………..….. 29 Table 2 Questions/statements, abbreviations and type……………………. 42 Table 3 Assumptions of statistical techniques…..................................... 46 Table 4 Outliers…………………………………………………………………………… 48 Table 5 T-test between Genders…………………………………………………….. 60 Table 6 ANOVA between SexGen…........................................................ 62 Table 7 Post hoc results of ANOVA for SexGen………………………………. 62 Table 8 ANOVA between SexSur…………………………………………………… 63 Table 9 Post hoc results of ANOVA for SexSur……………………………….. 64 Table 10 Post hoc results of ANOVA for GenSur………………………………. 64 Table 11 One-Way MANOVA between Genders……………………………….. 66 Table 12 One-Way MANOVA between SexGen…………………………………. 67 Table 13 One-Way MANOVA between SexSur………………………………….. 68 Table 14 Two-Way MANOVA between Genders and Generations………. 71 Table 15 Two-Way MANOVA between Genders and Surveys…………….. 73 Table 16 Results of all statistical analyses………………………………………… 74 Table 17 CBBE associations for females and males, sorted by mean…… 85 FIGURES Figure 1 Customer-Based Brand Equity Pyramid & Subdimensions of Brand Building Blocks (Adapted from Keller 2008)………………………. 12 Figure 2 CBBE model. (Adapted from Esch et al. 2006)……………………. 19 Figure 3 “The Brand Equity Ten” (Aaker 1996)………………..................... 21 Figure 4 Compilation of three CBBE frameworks……………………………… 30 Figure 5 Consumer-Based Brand Equity Pyramid…………………………….. 32 Figure 6 “The three different research approaches” (Kovacs & Spens 2006)……………………………………………………………………………… 36 Figure 7 Wanted distribution of respondents…………………………………… 41 Figure 8 Example of scatterplots between variables on two different scales………………………………………………………………………………. 51 Figure 9 Dispersion between Genders and Generations combined…….. 53 Figure 10 Dispersion between Genders and Surveys combined…………… 54 Figure 11 Dispersion between Generations and Surveys combined……… 54 Figure 12 Awareness of Finnish Fashion Brands………………………………… 55 Figure 13 Number of Finnish fashion brands recognized per person……. 56 Figure 14 Total Means of General Variables………………………………………. 57 Figure 15 Total Means of Image Variables…………………………………………. 57 Figure 16 Total Means of Response Variables……………………………………. 58 Figure 17 Total Means of Loyalty Variables…............................................ 59 Figure 18 Finnish Fashion CBBE Associations – Positive & Negative…… 84 1 1 INTRODUCTION “Fashion is a driving force that shapes the way we live”. (Solomon & Rabolt 2004:xi) The fashion industry is an extremely efficient, dynamic and prosperous global business. It is in the vanguard of emerging industries, and because of fashion’s short lifecycle, it unceasingly grows, develops and reinvents itself within the international retail industry (Doherty, cited in Wigley & Moore 2006;