본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

Relationship between brand personality and the personality of consumers, and its application to corporate branding strategy

이용기|김영이|이정완
한국마케팅과학회 (Korean Scholars of Marketing Science)|2008.09|Journal of Global Scholars of Marketing Science(마케팅과학연구) (全球营销科学学报)|제18권 제3호|pp. 27-55

1

조회

0

다운로드

6

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

personalityconsumer behaviorBrand personalitymarketing strategybranding strategymarketing communicationscorporate brand
주제분류경영학

초록

Many consumers enjoy the challenge of purchasing a brand that matches well with their own values and personalities (for example, Ko et al., 2008; Ko et al., 2006). Therefore, the personalities of consumers can impact on the final selection of a brand and its brand personality in two ways: first, the consumers may incline to purchase a brand or a product that reflects their own personalities; second, consumers tend to choose a company that has similar brand personalities to those brands that are being promoted. Therefore, the objectives of this study are following: 1. Is there any empirical relationship between a consumer’s personality and the personality of a brand that he or she chooses? 2. Can a corporate brand be differentiated by the brand personality? In short, consumers are more likely to hold favorable attitudes towards those brands that match their own personality and will most probably purchase those brands matching well with their personality. For example, Matzler et al. (2006) found that extraversion and openness were positively related to hedonic product value; and that the personality traits directly (openness) and indirectly (extraversion, via hedonic value) influenced brand effects, which in turn droved attitudinal and purchase loyalty. Based on the above discussion, the following hypotheses are proposed: Hypothesis 1: the personality of a consumer is related to the brand personality of a product/corporate that he/she purchases. Kuksov (2007) and Wernerfelt (1990) argued that brands as a symbolic language allowed consumers to communicate their types to each other and postulated that consumers had a certain value of communicating their types to each other. Therefore, how brand meanings are established, and how a firm communicate with consumers about the meanings of the brand are interesting topics for research (for example, Escalas and Bettman, 2005; McCracken, 1989; Moon, 2007). Hence, the following hypothesis is proposed: Hypothesis 2: A corporate brand identity is differentiated by the brand personality. And there are significant differences among companies. A questionnaire was developed for collecting empirical measures of the Big-Five personality traits and brand personality variables. A survey was conducted to the online access panel members through the Internet during December 2007 in Korea. In total, 500 respondents completed the questionnaire, and considered as useable. Personality constructs were measured using the Five-factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) scale and a total of 30 items were actually utilized. Brand personality was measured using the five-dimension scale developed by Aaker (1997). A total of 17 items were actually utilized. The seven-point Likert-type scale was the format of responses, for example, from 1 indicating strongly disagreed to 7 for strongly agreed. The Analysis of Moment Structures (AMOS) was used for an empirical testing of the model, and the Maximum Likelihood Estimation (MLE) was applied to estimate numerical values for the components in the model. To diagnose the presence of distribution problems in the data and to gauge their effects on the parameter estimates, bootstapping method was used. The results of the hypothesis-1 test empirically show that there exit certain causality relationship between a consumer’s personality and the brand personality of the consumer’s choice. Thus, the consumer’s personality has an impact on consumer’s final selection of a brand that has a brand personality matches well with their own personalities. In other words, the consumers are inclined to purchase a brand that reflects their own personalities and tend to choose a company that has similar brand personalities to those of the brand being promoted. The results of this study further suggest that certain dimensions of the brand personality cause consumers to have preference to certain (corporate) brands. For example, the conscientiousness, neuroticism, and extraversion of the consumer personality have positively related to a selection of “ruggedness” characteristics of the brand personality. Consumers who possess that personality dimension seek for matching with certain brand personality dimensions. Results of the hypothesis-2 test show that the average “ruggedness” attributes of the brand personality differ significantly among Korean automobile manufacturers. However, the result of ANOVA also indicates that there are no significant differences in the mean values among manufacturers for the “sophistication,” “excitement,” “competence” and “sincerity” attributes of the corporate brand personality. The tight link between what a firm is and its corporate brand means that there is far less room for marketing communications than there is with products and brands. Consequently, successful corporate brand strategies must position the organization within the boundaries of what is acceptable, while at the same time differentiating the organization from its competitors.

Abstract

Many consumers enjoy the challenge of purchasing a brand that matches well with their own values and personalities (for example, Ko et al., 2008; Ko et al., 2006). Therefore, the personalities of consumers can impact on the final selection of a brand and its brand personality in two ways: first, the consumers may incline to purchase a brand or a product that reflects their own personalities; second, consumers tend to choose a company that has similar brand personalities to those brands that are being promoted. Therefore, the objectives of this study are following: 1. Is there any empirical relationship between a consumer’s personality and the personality of a brand that he or she chooses? 2. Can a corporate brand be differentiated by the brand personality? In short, consumers are more likely to hold favorable attitudes towards those brands that match their own personality and will most probably purchase those brands matching well with their personality. For example, Matzler et al. (2006) found that extraversion and openness were positively related to hedonic product value; and that the personality traits directly (openness) and indirectly (extraversion, via hedonic value) influenced brand effects, which in turn droved attitudinal and purchase loyalty. Based on the above discussion, the following hypotheses are proposed: Hypothesis 1: the personality of a consumer is related to the brand personality of a product/corporate that he/she purchases. Kuksov (2007) and Wernerfelt (1990) argued that brands as a symbolic language allowed consumers to communicate their types to each other and postulated that consumers had a certain value of communicating their types to each other. Therefore, how brand meanings are established, and how a firm communicate with consumers about the meanings of the brand are interesting topics for research (for example, Escalas and Bettman, 2005; McCracken, 1989; Moon, 2007). Hence, the following hypothesis is proposed: Hypothesis 2: A corporate brand identity is differentiated by the brand personality. And there are significant differences among companies. A questionnaire was developed for collecting empirical measures of the Big-Five personality traits and brand personality variables. A survey was conducted to the online access panel members through the Internet during December 2007 in Korea. In total, 500 respondents completed the questionnaire, and considered as useable. Personality constructs were measured using the Five-factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) scale and a total of 30 items were actually utilized. Brand personality was measured using the five-dimension scale developed by Aaker (1997). A total of 17 items were actually utilized. The seven-point Likert-type scale was the format of responses, for example, from 1 indicating strongly disagreed to 7 for strongly agreed. The Analysis of Moment Structures (AMOS) was used for an empirical testing of the model, and the Maximum Likelihood Estimation (MLE) was applied to estimate numerical values for the components in the model. To diagnose the presence of distribution problems in the data and to gauge their effects on the parameter estimates, bootstapping method was used. The results of the hypothesis-1 test empirically show that there exit certain causality relationship between a consumer’s personality and the brand personality of the consumer’s choice. Thus, the consumer’s personality has an impact on consumer’s final selection of a brand that has a brand personality matches well with their own personalities. In other words, the consumers are inclined to purchase a brand that reflects their own personalities and tend to choose a company that has similar brand personalities to those of the brand being promoted. The results of this study further suggest that certain dimensions of the brand personality cause consumers to have preference to certain (corporate) brands. For example, the conscientiousness, neuroticism, and extraversion of the consumer personality have positively related to a selection of “ruggedness” characteristics of the brand personality. Consumers who possess that personality dimension seek for matching with certain brand personality dimensions. Results of the hypothesis-2 test show that the average “ruggedness” attributes of the brand personality differ significantly among Korean automobile manufacturers. However, the result of ANOVA also indicates that there are no significant differences in the mean values among manufacturers for the “sophistication,” “excitement,” “competence” and “sincerity” attributes of the corporate brand personality. The tight link between what a firm is and its corporate brand means that there is far less room for marketing communications than there is with products and brands. Consequently, successful corporate brand strategies must position the organization within the boundaries of what is acceptable, while at the same time differentiating the organization from its competitors.

참고문헌 (60)

  1. Aaker,D.A., "Building Strong Brand" (1996), The Free Press
  2. Aaker,J.L., "Dimensions of brand personality", Journal of Marketing Research, 34(3), pp.347~356 (1997)
  3. Aaker,J.L., "The malleable self: The role of self expression in persuasion", Journal of Marketing Research, 36(2), pp.45~57 (1999)
  4. Aaker, J.L., "Consumption symbols as carriers of culture: A study of Japanese and Spanish brand personality constructs", Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(3), pp.492~508 (2001)
  5. Anisimova,T.A., "effects of corporate brand attributes on attitudinal and behavioural consumer loyalty", Journal of Consumer Marketing, 24(7), pp.395~405 (2007)
  6. Arbuckle,J.L., "AMOS-Analysis of Moment Structures", Psychometrika, 59(1), pp.135~137 (1994)
  7. Austin, J.R., "An assessment of the Aaker brand personality framework: Method, measurement and conceptual issues", Journal of Strategic Marketing, 11(2), pp.77~92 (2003)
  8. Azoulay, A., "Do brand personality scales really measure brand personality?", Journal of Brand Management, 11(2), pp.143~155 (2003)
  9. Balmer,J.M.T., "The three virtues and the seven deadly sins of corporate brand management", Journal of General Management, 27(1), pp.1~17 (2001)
  10. Balmer,J.M.T., "Corporate identity, corporate branding and corporate marketing: Seeing through the fog", European Journal of Marketing, 35(3), pp.248~291 (2001)
  11. Beldona,S., "Putting the “brand” back into store brands: an exploratory examination of store brands and brand personality", Journal of Product & Brand Management, 16(4), pp.226~235 (2007)
  12. Bentler,P.M., "Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures", Psychological Bulletin, 88(3), pp.588~606 (1980)
  13. Bollen,K.A., "Structural Equations with Latent Variables" (1989), Wiley
  14. Bollen,K.A., "Uniqueness does not imply identification", Sociological Methodsand Research, 14(2), pp.155~163 (1985)
  15. Bosnjak,M., "Dimensions of brand personality attributions: A person-centric approach in the German cultural Context", Social Behaviorand Personality: An International Journal, 35(3), pp.303~316 (2007)
  16. Browne,M.W., "Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In;Testing structural equation models", pp.136~162 (1993), Sage Publications
  17. Caprara G.V., "Brand personality: How to make the metaphor fit?", Journal of Economic Psychology, 22(3), pp.377~395 (2001)
  18. 전태유, "레스토랑의 환경특성, 가치, 품질, 전반적 만족, 그리고 고객의 자발적 행위와의 구조적 관계", Journal of Global Scholars of Marketing Science(마케팅과학연구), 17(1), pp.77~100 (2007), 한국마케팅과학회
  19. Costa,P.T., "Validation of the Five-factor model of personality across instruments and observers", Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(1), pp.81~90 (1987)
  20. Costa,P.T., "Discriminant validity of NEO-PIR facet scales", Educationaland Psychological Measurement, 52(1), pp.229~237 (1992)
  21. Costa,P.T., "NEOPI-R Professional Manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources", ~ (1992)
  22. Efron,B., "The Jackknife, the Bootstrap and Other Resampling Plans, SIAM Monograph Number 38. Philadelphia: Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics (SIAM)", ~ (1982)
  23. Efron,B., "Better bootstrap confidence intervals", Journal of the American Statistical Association, 82, pp.171~185 (1987)
  24. Escalas,J., "Self-construal, reference groups, and brand meaning", Journal of Consumer Research, 32(4), pp.378~389 (2005)
  25. Filo,K., "Exploring the role of brand trust in the relationship between brand associations and brand loyalty in sport and fitness", International Journal of Sport Management and Marketing, 3(1), pp.39~57 (2008)
  26. Fornell,C., "Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error", Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), pp.39~50 (1981)
  27. Freling,T.H., "An empirical analysis of the brand personality effect", Journal of Product & Brand Management, 14(7), pp.404~413 (2005)
  28. Goldberg,L.R., "An alternative “description of personality: The Big-Five factor structure", Journa of Personality and Social Psychology, 59(6), pp.1216~1229 (1990)
  29. Govers,P.C.M., "Product personality and its influence on consumer preference", Journal of Consumer Marketing, 22(4), pp.189~197 (2005)
  30. Harris,F., "Corporate branding and corporate brand performance", European Journal of Marketing, 35(3), pp.441~456 (2001)
  31. Hayduk,L.A., "Structural Equation Modeling with LISREL: Essentials and Advances" (1987), Johns Hopkins University Press
  32. Hayes,J.B., "Looks matter in developing consumer-brand relationships", Journal of Product & Brand Management, 15(5), pp.306~315 (2006)
  33. Keller,K., "Strategic Brand Management, Upper Saddle River" (1998), Prentice-Hall
  34. Kim,Hyoung-Gil, "The Influence of Store Environment on Service Brand Personality and Repurchase Intention", Journal of Global Academy of Marketing Science, 7(4), pp.141~173 (2007)
  35. Kim,Joo-Ho, "Assessing the Perspective of Individual Consumers on Cosmetics Brand Purchasing According to Their Lifestyle of Young Consumers Living in the Metropolitan Areas of China", Journal of Global Academy of Marketing Science, 15(3), pp.1~30 (2005)
  36. 고은주, "A Cross Cultural Study of Antecedents of Purchase Intention for Sports Shoes in Korea and China", Journal of Global Scholars of Marketing Science(마케팅과학연구), 18(1), pp.157~177 (2008), 한국마케팅과학회
  37. 고은주, "패션 온라인 커뮤니티 특성이 브랜드 충성도에 미치는 영향: 라이프스타일 집단 간 비교", Journal of Global Scholars of Marketing Science(마케팅과학연구), 16(3), pp.87~106 (2006), 한국마케팅과학회
  38. Kuksov,D., "Brand value in social interaction", Management Science, 53(10), pp.1634~1644 (2007)
  39. Lee, J-W., "Young consumers’ perceptions of multinational firms and their acculturation channels towards western products in a transition economy", International Journal of Emerging Markets, (3), pp.212~224 (2006)
  40. Lee, Soo-Hyung, "The Relationship between Trust, Trustworthiness, and Repeat Purchase Intentions: A Multidimensional Approach", Journal of Global Academy of Marketing Science, 18(1), pp.1~31 (2008)
  41. Leitch,S., "Retooling the corporate brand: A Foucauldian perspective on normalization and differentiation", Journal of Brand Management, 15(1), pp.71~80 (2007)
  42. Matzler,K., "Individual determinants of brand affect: the role of the personality traits of extraversion and openness to experience", Journal of Product & Brand Management, 15(7), pp.427~434 (2006)
  43. McCracken,G., "Who is the celebrity endorser? Cultural foundations of the endorsement process", Journal of Consumer Research, 16(3), pp.310~321 (1989)
  44. 문준연, "Corporate Image Effects on Consumers’ Evaluation of Brand Trust and Brand Affect", Journal of Global Scholars of Marketing Science(마케팅과학연구), 17(3), pp.21~37 (2007), 한국마케팅과학회
  45. Nandan,S., "An exploration of the brand identity-brand image linkage: A communication perspective", Journal of Brand Management, 12(4), pp.264~278 (2005)
  46. Park,W.C., "Strategic brand conceptimage management", Journal of Marketing, 50(4), pp.135~145 (1986)
  47. Rajagopal, "Influence of brand name in variety seeking behaviour of consumers: an empirical analysis", International Journal of Management Practice, 20(4), pp.306~323 (2007)
  48. Ramaseshan, B., "Moderating effects of the brand concept on the relationship between brand personality and perceived quality", Journal of Brand Management, 14(6), pp.458~466 (2007)
  49. Ross,S.D., "Assessing the use of the brand personality scale in team sport", International Journal of Sport Management and Marketing, 3(1), pp.23~38 (2008)
  50. Shavitt,S., "The role of attitude objects in attitude functions", Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 26(2), pp.124~148 (1990)
  51. Siguaw,J.A., "The brand personality scale", Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 40(3), pp.48~55 (1999)
  52. Sirgy,M.J., "Assessing the Predictive Validity of Two Methods of Measuring Self-Image Congruence", Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 25(3), pp.229~241 (1997)
  53. Sirgy, M.J., "Self-congruity versus functional congruity: Predictors of consumer behavior", Journal of the Academy of Marketing Sciences, 19(4), pp.363~375 (1991)
  54. Smit, E.G., "Brands are just like real people! The development of SWOCC’s brand personality scale. In;Branding and Advertising", pp.22~43 (2003), Copenhagen Business School Press
  55. Steiger,J.H., "Structural model evaluation and modification: An interval estimation approach", Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25, pp.173~180 (1990)
  56. Stine,R.A., "An introduction to bootstrap methods: Examples and ideas", Sociological Methodsand Research, 18, pp.243~291 (1989)
  57. Sung,Y., "Brand personality structures in the United Statesand Korea: Commonand culture-specificfactors", Journal of Consumer Psycholog, 15(4), pp.334~350 (2005)
  58. Wang,X., "Does country-of-origin matter in the relationship between brand personality and purchase intention in emerging economies?: Evidence from China's auto industry", International Marketing Review, 25(4), pp.458~474 (2008)
  59. Wernerfelt,B., "Advertising content when brand choice is a signal", Journal of Business, 63(1), pp.91~98 (1990)
  60. Wysong,S., "An investigation into the brand personality construct, its antecedents, and consequences", American Marketing Association Conference Proceedings, pp.512~518 (2002)

관련 논문AI추천

브랜드 선택행동과 브랜드 개성 간의 관계 : 보유 브랜드와 구매고려 브랜드 간의 연관성을 중심 으로김상우, 장영혜한국전략마케팅학회 · 마케팅논집(Journal of Marketing Studies)2016 · 제24권 제2호소비자의 자아개념과 기업개성의 동일시가 브랜드 애착 및 충성도에 미치는 영향박귀정, 박소영, 정기한한국기업경영학회 · 기업경영연구2012 · 제19권 제1호항공사 고객의 성격 5요인이 항공사 브랜드 개성과 브랜드 자아동일시에 미치는 영향권지영관광경영학회 · 관광경영연구2021 · 제25권 제5호브랜드 개성과 소비자 유형간 적합성 연구: 위험성향과 자기해석을 중심으로이만홍, 이재진한국상품학회 · 상품학연구2015 · 제33권 제4호Exploring the Effect of Personality Congruencies on Brand Identification and Purchase IntentionsArora Nilesh, Parsad Chandan, Prashar Sanjeev, Vijay T. Sai한국마케팅과학회 · Journal of Global Scholars of Marketing Science(마케팅과학연구)2023 · 제33권 제2호소비자 중심의 브랜드 개성 특성 지각 구조에 관한 연구김준석, 김현철한국소비문화학회 · 소비문화연구2020 · 제23권 제2호

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (4건)

An Explorartory Study on Channel Equity of Elecronic Goods이은경, 서용구pp. 1-25Perceptional Change of a New Product, DMB Phone고덕임, 김주영pp. 57-84The Effect of AD Noises Caused by AD Model Selection on Brand Awareness and Brand Attitudes정재학, 이상미pp. 85-110Business Relationships and Structural Bonding: A Study of American Metal Industry김윤태, 한상린, 정재문, 오창엽pp. 111-127
원문 보기