Consumer‐based brand equity: improving the measurement – empirical evidence
| Date | 01 May 2005 |
| Pages | 143-154 |
| Published date | 01 May 2005 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/10610420510601012 |
| Author | Ravi Pappu,Pascale G. Quester,Ray W. Cooksey |
| Subject Matter | Marketing |
Consumer-based brand equity: improving the
measurement – empirical evidence
Ravi Pappu
New England Business School, University of New England, Armidale, Australia
Pascale G. Quester
School of Commerce, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia, and
Ray W. Cooksey
New England Business School, University of New England, Armidale, Australia
Abstract
Purpose – The present research aims to improve the measurement of consumer-based brand equity. Current measurement of consumer-based brand
equity suffers from limitations, including: a lack of distinction between the dimensions brand awareness and brand associations, the use of non-
discriminant indicators in the measurement scales and of student samples.
Design/methodology/approach – Based on the recommendations of extant research, the scale constructed to measure consumer-based brand
equity in this study included brand personality measures. Brand associations were measured using a different setof items. Unlike many of the previous
studies that had used student samples, the present study used a sample of actual consumers from an Australian state capital city. Confirmatory factor
analysis employing structural equations modelling was used to measure consumer-based brand equity in two product categories and across six brands.
Findings – Results support the hypothesised four-dimension model of consumer-based brand equity across two product categories and six brands.
Brand awareness and brand associations were found to be two distinct dimensions of brand equity as conceptualised in the marketing literature. The
present study contributes to the understanding of consumer-based brand equity measurement by examining the dimensionality of this construct.
Originality/value – The principal contribution of the present research is that it provides empirical evidence of the multidimensionality of consumer-
based brand equity, supporting Aaker’sand Keller’s conceptualisation of brand equity. Thepresent research also enriched consumer-based brand equity
measurement by incorporating the brand personality measures, as recommended by previous researchers. While earlier studies were conducted using
US and Korean samples, the present study also used a sample of Australian consumers.
Keywords Consumers, Brand equity, Brand awareness, Brand identity, Quality, Brand loyalty
Paper type Research paper
An executive summary for managers and executive
readers can be found at the end of this article.
Introduction and background
Building brand equity is considered an important part of
brand building (Keller, 1998). Brand equity is supposed to
bring several advantages to a firm. For example, high brand
equity levels are known to lead to higher consumer
preferences and purchase intentions (Cobb-Walgren et al.,
1995). Firms with high brand equity are also known to have
high stock returns (Aaker and Jacobson, 1994).
Developing further insights into the measure ment of
consumer-based brand equity is important in the face of the
prominence of branding. Branding is a powerful means of
differentiation. Differentiation is one of the key competitive
positioning strat egies suggested b y Porter (1990). The
strategic impact of branding is duly recognised in the
marketing literature (see Aaker, 1991, 1992; de Chernatony
and McDonald, 1998; Kapferer, 1994; Keller, 1999). Brands
might develop sustainable competitive advantage for firms
(Aaker, 1989). That is, if consumers perceive a particular
brand favourably, then the firm may have a competitive
advantage. Hence, it becomes vital for brand managers to
have access to valid and reliable consumer-based brand equity
instruments.
Further, brand management is considered useful in fully
exploiting the assets of an organisation and in generating
additional value from the investments already made into
brands. The high costs associated with the launching of new
brands and the high failure rates of new products (Crawford,
1993; Ourusoff, 1992) as well as increasing costs of
advertising and distribution (Aaker, 1991) are some of the
reasons for the growing interest in brand management. Brand
building is considered the best way of doing business because
of the constant changes in the marketing environment (Aaker,
1996a, b; King, 1991; Lannon, 1993). Successful brand
building could strengthen a producer’s competitive position to
withstand the increasing power of retailers (Park and
Srinivasan, 1994). Brand building can also bring advantages
such as defending against competitors and building market
share (Adams, 1995). Hence, a better understanding of brand
The Emerald Research Register for this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregister
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/1061-0421.htm
Journal of Product & Brand Management
14/3 (2005) 143–154
qEmerald Group Publishing Limited [ISSN 1061-0421]
[DOI 10.1108/10610420510601012]
143
To continue reading
Request your trial