Communicating brand identity through organizational vision : effects of vision statement configuration on consumers’ brand perceptions

(1)

1

Communicating Brand Identity through Organizational Vision:

Effects of Vision Statement Configuration on Consumers’ Brand Perceptions

Faculty of Economics and Business

Fons Jan van Workum 10662308

16-03-2015 Final version

M.Sc. Business Administration – Marketing Track Supervisor: dr. K. Venetis

(2)

2

Statement of originality

This document is written by Fons van Workum who declares to take full

responsibility for the contents of this document.

I declare that the text and the work presented in this document is original and

that no sources other than those mentioned in the text and its references have

been used in creating it.

The Faculty of Economics and Business is responsible solely for the supervision

(3)

3

ables and figures

Tables

Table 1: Number of respondents per experimental condition 46

Table 2: Means, standard deviations, and correlations 48

Table 3: Means, standard deviations and correlations per category 49 Table 4: Bootstrapped hierarchical regression of CSR beliefs and brand visionariness

on C-B identification

52

Table 5: Summary of hypothesis test results 60

Figures

Figure 1: Conceptual model including this study’s hypotheses. 35 Figure 2: Model of vision source as predictor of C-B identification, mediated by

brand visionariness and CSR beliefs.

56

Figure 3: Model of CSR type as predictor of C-B identification, mediated by brand visionariness and CSR beliefs.

57

Figure 4: Model of CSR type as predictor of C-B identification including multiple mediation of CSR beliefs and brand visionariness.

(6)

6

Acknowledgements

My gratitude goes out to several individuals that helped me set up and carry out this research. I would like to thank my supervisor Karin Venetis for her guidance throughout the process. She helped me give direction to the plethora of ideas that came to my mind and provided valuable feedback where needed. Also, I want to thank my mom Annelie, my dad Ruud, and my brother Stijn, for all three supported and encouraged me, even when I was at my worst. Lastly, I would like to thank Thabo for his feedback on my thesis.

(7)

7

Abstract

This study aims to analyze the influence of vision communication on consumers’ perceptions of how visionary and socially responsible the focal brand is, as well as the extent to which consumers identify themselves with the brand because of these brand traits. Vision statement manipulations were used to test the proposed relationships via an experiment using a 2 x 2 between-subjects design. Consumers’ perceptions were measured via an online questionnaire that was completed by 250 respondents. Results show consumers identify themselves to a greater extent with more visionary and more socially responsible brands, of which the latter brand trait has a substantially larger effect. A difference in vision source (CEO vs. the brand itself) does not affect consumers’ brand perceptions. A difference in the type of corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities enacted by the brand shows activities unrelated to the brand’s core business result in higher beliefs of socially responsible behavior (CSR beliefs) compared to activities related to the brand’s core business. It was found the influence of CSR type on C-B identification is mediated by consumers’ CSR beliefs, as well as by CSR beliefs and perceptions of brand visionariness in sequence (multiple mediation). This study is the first to bridge the gap between research on brand visionariness and research on CSR by empirically testing both constructs in one model, as well as the first to operationalize different types of CSR activities in an experimental study.

(8)

8

1. Introduction

“Consumers do not choose brands, they choose lives” (Fournier, 1998, p. 367). In today’s era consumer behavior is prone to influence of the image, personality, and identity of organizations. As a result consumers are more likely to engage in deep, committed, and meaningful relationships with some companies over others (Bhattacharya & Sen, 2003). For example, it is likely a Sisyphean task trying to convince a Harley-Davidson motorcycle rider that he/she will experience the same feelings of freedom and pride when riding on a Honda. To a Harley-Davidson rider, the brand feels like an extension of the self. Brewer (1991) explains that people typically go beyond their personal identity to develop a social identity with the hope of articulating their sense of self. Identification-based consumer-company relationships are a source of company-based value that consumers receive when they identify themselves with the focal company, also known as consumer – company identification (C-C identification) (Bhattacharya & Sen, 2003). Du, Bhattacharya and Sen (2007) describe C-C identification as an intense, significant psychological link, which aligns consumer’s self-concept with the organization’s identity. The more attractive the organization’s identity, the more likely it is for C-C identification to take place (Marin, Ruiz & Rubio, 2009). C-C identification can have a positive influence on various outcomes in the consumer domain, such as company loyalty and -promotion (Bhattacharya & Sen, 2003), willingness to pay (Homburg, Wieseke & Hoyer, 2009), and attitude and commitment to the company (Pérez, 2009).

Organizational identity is becoming intertwined with the corporate brand identity (Hatch & Schultz, 1997). When identification is based on consumers’ perception of the organization’s identity, the entity consumers identify themselves with is the corporate brand. This study aligns with Kuenzel and Halliday (2008) who extended the identification

(9)

9 framework by researching antecedents and consequences of consumer – brand identification (C-B identification).

Branding efforts are essentially implemented to increase the attractiveness of organizational images for stakeholders by promoting a favorable self-image and by increasing the perceived distinctiveness of the organization (Scott & Lane, 2000). De Chernatony (2001) proposes that one way for a company to communicate its intended identity is by sharing its organizational vision. A vision consists of core values and beliefs that evoke aspirations for the envisioned future (Collins & Porras, 1996). Realization of a vision depends on vision communication (Baum, Locke & Kirkpatrick, 1998; Kantabutra & Avery, 2007, 2010). The present research proposes and empirically tests a model aimed at increasing our understanding of the circumstances under which vision communication renders favorable results by increasing C-B identification.

This study introduces two constructs that can characterize the corporate identity: brand visionariness and corporate social responsibility. As favorable brand personality traits, these constructs are conceptualized to be of explanatory nature (i.e., function as mediators) regarding the relationship between vision communication and C-B identification. The two constructs are proposed to enhance C-B identification.

The first construct, brand visionariness, is a relatively new concept in branding literature and pertains to the degree to which stakeholders perceive a brand to be visionary. Brand visionariness is linked to visionary leadership theory (e.g., Berson, Shamir, Avolio & Popper, 2001). Based on characteristics of visionary leadership (Waldman, De Luque et al., 2006), a visionary brand is argued to distinguish itself by providing a sense of mission or purpose, articulating an inspirational vision, demonstrating determination, and questioning assumptions. Results of recent, pioneering studies regarding brand visionariness conclude that a brand’s level of visionariness can positively influence consumers’ purchase intentions

(10)

10 (Migge, 2013), consumer – brand identification (Horsch, 2013; Migge, 2013), and tend to gain greater preference, loyalty and commitment of consumers (Thissen, 2013). The strong influence of visionary leadership theory on the conceptualization of brand visionariness is reason to question whether a company leader as communicator of the vision statement yields more positive results than when the communicator is the brand itself. In line with Migge (2013), this study proposes the vision source (i.e., the communicator of the vision statement) to affect outcomes of vision communication.

The second construct, corporate social responsibility (CSR), is defined as company efforts going beyond legal obligations and their own interests to address and manage the impact their activities have on society and the environment (Vallaster, Lindgreen & Maon, 2012). Bhattacharya, Korschun and Sen (2009) state that CSR has become an important component of the dialogue between companies and their stakeholders. Organizations’ efforts to portray CSR have become more popular since the trend of conscious consumption (Pérez, 2009). When CSR initiatives alter a company’s brand image in a way that consumers judge to be favorable, they will be more likely to identify with the company (Lichtenstein, Drumwright & Braig, 2004; Sen & Bhattacharya, 2001). Accordingly, a positioning strategy based on CSR (e.g., Ben & Jerry’s, Innocent Drinks) can positively influence outcomes in the consumer domain (Du et al., 2007). This study extends Du et al.’s (2007) research on CSR brands by focusing on communication of a vision that incorporates CSR. Effects of different types of CSR activities on C-B identification are researched by conceptualizing a dichotomous parsing of CSR activities based on the distinction made by Waldman, Siegel and Javidan (2006). The authors describe strategic CSR (activities that relate to the firm’s competitive strategy) and social CSR (concern for social issues not related to business practices). The extent to which consumers believe a CSR brand to be socially responsible (i.e., consumers’ CSR beliefs) is

(11)

11 proposed to vary between vision statements incorporating a CSR message based on either strategic- or social CSR.

This study applies an experimental research design using manipulations of a vision statement of a fictitious company. Besides researching the influence of vision source and CSR type independently, the research design allows testing for an interaction effect. Additionally, this study’s research design focuses on brand visionariness and CSR beliefs as explanatory factors by conceptualizing these constructs as mediator variables. This study’s main research question is:

When communicating organizational vision, what are the effects of vision source and CSR type on consumers’ perceived level of brand visionariness and consumers’ CSR beliefs, and to what extent do consumers’ perceived level of brand visionariness and consumers’ CSR beliefs influence C-B identification?

Theoretical relevance

Scholarly literature shows a paucity of research pertaining to the antecedents of- and factors influencing the attractiveness of corporate identity, and subsequently consumer identification with companies (Keh & Xie, 2009). Specifically, there is a need for research into the effects of vision content and vision communication as vehicle of corporate identity traits on external stakeholders’ perceptions of the corporate identity (Berson et al., 2001; Kantabutra & Avery, 2007). Simultaneously, the communication strategies companies use to present themselves as ethically concerned seem to be under-researched (Pollach, 2003).

This study attempts to contribute to the line of research on organizational identity management (a domain of public relations, see Hutton, 1999) by extending both Migge’s (2013) attempt to discover under which conditions vision communication evokes desirable responses in the consumer domain, as well as Du et al.’s (2007) research on the effects of a CSR positioning strategy. It does so by explicitly integrating the degree to which a brand is

(12)

12 perceived as visionary and the degree to which it is perceived as socially responsible in the conceptualization of vision communication and its impact on C-B identification. As a results, the scholarly literature on both brand visionariness and CSR is expanded.

Managerial relevance

By applying an experimental research design, this study yields a template regarding brand identity traits against which marketing decisions can be proactively considered for their developmental effects on the personality of a brand (Fournier, 1998). Accordingly, marketing managers and practitioners gain greater understanding of how they can create a more favorable value proposition for stakeholders by presenting an attractive brand identity through vision communication. Specifically, a vision’s phenotype based on the vision source (CEO vs. the brand) and the content of the vision’s CSR message (strategic vs. social CSR) are discussed, with results showing which vision configuration yields the highest degree of consumer identification with the brand.

Structure

The next chapter consists of a literature review describing the focal constructs of this study, as well as hypothesized relationships between these constructs. The literature review ends with this study’s theoretical framework consisting of the main research question, an overview of the hypotheses, and this research’s conceptual model. Chapter three contains a description of the used methodology, including the data collection method and sampling frame, measurement of variables, the pre-test, and the statistical procedure. Chapter four contains this study’s results, followed by a discussion of these results in chapter five. Lastly, chapter six will end with the conclusions that can be drawn based on this study, as well as multiple suggestions for further research.

(13)

13

2. Literature review and hypothesis development

The literature review incorporates a section on the identification process, a section defining vision and brand visionariness, and a section on what constitutes CSR. Next, a section on vision communication includes hypotheses formulation. Lastly, an overview of the theoretical framework consisting of this study’s research question, hypotheses, and conceptual model of the hypothesized relationships is provided.

2.1 The identification process

This paragraph starts by defining consumer – company identification, followed by a definition of consumer – brand identification. Third, the corporate brand and its role in the identification process is discussed.

2.1.1 Defining consumer – company identification

In business-to-consumer markets, consumers form a primary stakeholder group of organizations (Hillman & Keim, 2001). As such, consumers can directly influence organizations’ viability and survival. Building a better relationship with consumers could increase shareholder value by helping firms develop intangible, valuable assets that can lead to a competitive advantage (Hillman & Keim, 2001).

The construct of consumer identification helps explain the relationship between consumers and their consumed brands (Keh & Xie, 2009). The identification process builds on social identity theory (SIT): “Social identity theory (Brewer, 1991; Tajfel and Turner, 1985) posits that in articulating their sense of self, people typically go beyond their personal identity to develop a social identity” (Bhattacharya & Sen, 2003, p. 77). A person comes to view him- or herself as a member of a particular social entity (Brewer, 1991). The defining characteristics of a social category into which an individual falls (e.g., nationality, political affiliation, sports team), and to which he/she feels to belong to, provide a definition of who

(14)

14 he/she is, thereby specifying the self-concept (Hogg, Terry, & White, 1995). Bergami and Bagozzi (2000) report findings of their field study showing how SIT can explain members of an organization identifying themselves with their organization. However, the identification process is not limited to formal membership contexts (e.g., employee – organization relationships): organizations can be valid targets for identification to relevant consumers who are not members of the organizations by representing attractive, meaningful social identities (Bhattacharya & Sen, 2003; Homburg et al., 2009; Scott & Lane, 2000). Bhattacharya and Sen (2003) describe C-C identification as the primary psychological foundation for the deep, committed, and meaningful relationships that marketers are increasingly seeking to build with their customers.

Based on SIT and organizational identification, C-C identification sheds light on not only typically utilitarian values (e.g., high product value, consistency, convenience) that help form relationships between customers and companies, but also on a higher-order source of company-based value that consumers receive when they identify themselves with the company (Bhattacharya & Sen, 2003). Bhattacharya and Sen (2003) state that consumer identification with a company is an active and volitional evaluation of the degree to which consumers perceive an overlap between the company’s identity and the norms and values that reflect their self-concept. The identification process is motivated by consumers’ need to satisfy one or more key self-definitional needs (Bhattacharya & Sen, 2003). Marin and Ruiz (2007) summarize three basic self-definitional needs, originally linked to organizational identification by Dutton, Dukerich and Harquail (1994), as continuity, self-distinctiveness, and self-enhancement. Self-continuity is the need to judge the company’s identity similar to one’s own. Self-distinctiveness is the need to distinguish one’s self from others in social contexts, identifying with a company that has a distinctive culture, strategy, structure, or some other configuration of distinctive characteristics. Self-enhancement is the

(15)

15 need to feel associated with a company that has an attractive perceived identity to enhance one’s self-esteem through acquiring a more positive evaluation of the self. In line with the three self-definitional needs, Bhattacharya and Sen (2003) argue the company identity to be more attractive when (1) consumers perceive a high level of similarity between the company’s identity and their own, helping maintain a stable and consistent sense of who they are, (2) it is distinctive on dimensions consumers value, and (3) it is prestigious, enabling consumers to view themselves in the reflected glory of the company, which enhances their sense of self-worth and builds self-esteem.

Dutton et al. (1994) proposed that directionality of consumers’ evaluations of the object of identification is based on favorability: the more favorable consumers’ perceptions of a company’s characteristics (i.e., identity attractiveness), the stronger their identification with the company. Subsequent empirical studies found support for this proposition (e.g., Ahearne, Bhattacharya & Gruen, 2005; Marin et al., 2009; Pérez, Alcañiz & Herrera, 2009). C-C identification can have a positive influence on various consumer outcomes. Homburg et al. (2009) found empirical support for the relationship between C-C identification and customer loyalty and –willingness to pay, which in turn had a positive influence on the firm’s financial performance. Moreover, multiple empirical studies show that the identification process also has strong, positive consequences both in terms of consumers’ in-role (e.g., product utilization) and extra-role (e.g., word-of-mouth) behaviors (Ahearne et al., 2005; Kuenzel & Halliday, 2008). Lastly, Pérez (2009) adds that C-C identification influences purchase intentions through the mediator role of company attitude and company commitment. Consumers who identify more strongly with a company tend to purchase more and recommend both the company and its products more often, for they show a more positive attitude and more commitment towards the company. This study focuses on the cognitive component (i.e., consumers subjective sense of approval between both identities), for it

(16)

16 precedes other affective and/or evaluative outcomes of C-C identification (Ellemers, Kortekaas and Ouwerkerk, 1999; Pérez, 2009).

2.1.2 Defining consumer – brand identification

A consumer’s relationship with a company can differ from his/her relationship with one or more of its brands. Regarding the identification process, most scholars report on identification between a consumer and a company. Kuenzel and Halliday (2008), however, use the term consumer – brand identification to refer to the extent to which consumers identify themselves with the focal brand. This begs for clarity regarding the entity consumers identify themselves with: the company or the brand.

Hildebrand, Sen, and Bhattacharya (2011) describe corporate identity as the actual traits of the company; the company’s actual identity. The company’s brand, also known as the corporate brand (i.e., external stakeholders’ perception of the organizational identity as a whole), functions as an identifier of the maker or seller of a product/service for external stakeholders (Kotler & Armstrong, 2008). The corporate brand is becoming intertwined with the company itself (Hatch & Schultz, 1997). In the eyes of the consumer the corporate brand and the company are consequentially likely to be regarded as synonyms for the same entity. In this study the focal object of identification is defined as the corporate brand: it pertains to consumers’ perception of the company’s identity that will deliver and stand behind the offering. Therefore, in line with Kuenzel and Halliday (2008), the construct addressing consumers’ identification with the perceived identity of a company is referred to as consumer – brand identification (C-B identification).

2.1.3 Corporate brand characteristics

The corporate brand focuses on a well-defined set of values and has a higher strategic focus compared to product brands (Aaker & Joachimsthaler, 2000; Hatch & Schultz, 2001). Corporate brands are symbolic entities by nature (McEnally & De Chernatony, 1999) and

(17)

17 reflect the organization’s identity (Aaker, 2004).1 The brand pyramid model is useful when attempting to understanding consumer – brand relationships, for it reifies the various levels on which consumers can have a connection with a brand.2 De Chernatony (2001) delineates this hierarchical model, built in ascending levels of abstraction. It summarizes the nature of the brand promise, ascending from tangible assets to functional advantages over competitors and emotional rewards (i.e., consumers’ affective responses), manifesting in human characteristics of the brand (i.e., brand personality), and ultimately the essence of the brand (i.e., its core values). The brand personality and brand essence are a reflection of the organization’s identity (De Chernatony, 2001).

Brand personality is a key element of the brand’s image for many consumer brands, enabling positioning strategies that differentiate the brand from competitors (Park & John, 2010). Strong, favorable, and unique brand associations help build an attractive brand image (Keller, 1993). This increases customer-based brand equity, which refers to the added value consumers attribute to the brand. Keller (1993) states that brand personality can have a symbolic and/or self-expressive value for consumers, making it appealing for those who wish to express, affirm, or enhance their sense of self. Aaker (1997) adds that brand personality also helps reduce consumers’ information search and -processing by quickly recognizing the brand’s values through the personality metaphor. Through anthropomorphization, personification, or the creation of user imagery, the higher-order brand personality traits are relatively during and distinct, transcending ephemeral functional- and psychological consequences of product/service usage. Scott and Lane (2000) concur with this notion and add that the existence of shared values and shared personality traits plays an important role in the identification process. Brand values that characterize the brand personality and/or brand

1

For the sake of simplicity the corporate brand will be referred to as ‘the brand’ from here onwards.

2_{This model is based on Reynolds and Gutman’s (1984) Means-End Chain, which reveals consumers’}

motivations when purchasing a product/service by linking product knowledge to self-knowledge (for an empirical example, see Zanoli and Naspetti (2002)).

(18)

18 essence in a favorable way make the brand more attractive, increasing C-B identification (Kuenzel & Halliday, 2008).

2.2 Vision

The first section of this paragraph provides a definition of organizational vision. The second section makes a distinction between organizational visionariness and brand visionariness.

2.2.1 Defining organizational vision

Kotler and Armstrong (2008) stress the importance of a purpose for an organization; it exists to accomplish something. The authors propose several relevant questions: What is our business? Who is the customer? What do consumers value? What should our business be? Organizations often develop formal mission- and vision statements as guidance, which, according to Kotler and Armstrong (2008), can have a positive impact on organizational- and financial performance. A company’s mission explains who they are, its vision states where they want to go, and how they want to get there.

The latter two questions concerning an organization’s vision are broad, leaving room for discussion on what a vision really is. Collins and Porras (1991) attempt to clarify the construct that is an organization’s vision. Instead of mixing up various terms like values, goals, purpose, philosophies, and beliefs, the authors propose a framework that distinguishes a vision as an overarching concept consisting of two major components: a guiding philosophy and a tangible image. The first component, the guiding philosophy, is based on the organization’s core values and beliefs (e.g., ‘respect the individual’ and ‘contribute to society’), as well as its purpose (i.e., how the organization fulfils basic human needs). The second component, the tangible image, is a clear and compelling goal, unifying an organization’s efforts, as well as a vivid description that helps portray an engaging and exciting picture of what it will be like when the mission is accomplished. Yukl (2006)

(19)

19 reviewed relevant scholarly literature and summarizes essential qualities of a successful vision: it should be simple, idealistic, and realistic while simultaneously challenging. A vision should be focused enough to guide decisions and actions, but general enough to allow initiative and creativity in the strategies for attaining it. This implies that a vision should steer clear of complex plans with quantitative objectives and detailed action steps, and rather focus on ideological objectives.

Collins and Porras (1991, 1996) state that companies that enjoy enduring success have a vision that remains fixed while their business strategies and practices endlessly adapt to a changing world. An organization’s vision, based on a guiding philosophy comprising the organization’s core values and beliefs, projects its personality traits and the brand essence (De Chernatony, 2001). It defines the enduring character of an organization. Additionally, both Mintzberg and Quinn (1991) and Kantabutra and Avery (2010) underscore the importance of continuity in a vision, emphasizing enduring importance and consistent application throughout the organization.

2.2.2 Defining visionary organizations and visionary brands

Merely having a vision does not unequivocally lead to a visionary organization. Visionary organizations stimulate progress; its vision provides the context (Collins & Porras, 1996). Therefore, the distinctive characteristics of visionary organizations are defined. Collins and Porras (1991) argue that building a visionary organization does not require “the presence of a charismatic leader who is somehow blessed with almost mystical or super-human visionary qualities (p. 51)”. The leader should simply catalyze a clear and shared vision of the organization and secure commitment to and vigorous pursuit of that vision. Other scholars, however, do link organizational visionariness to developments in leadership theory (e.g., Baum et al., 1998; Berson et al., 2001; Kantabutra & Avery, 2007). Therefore, visionary leadership is discussed prior to the definition of a visionary organization.

(20)

20 Leadership theory traditionally involves understanding how leaders influence followers. Yukl (2006) describes how since the 1980s more attention has been devoted to the emotional and symbolic aspects of leadership by focusing on how leaders appeal to followers’ values and emotions. This resulted in theories of transformational leadership that contrasted traditional, transactional leadership. Transformational leadership appeals to the moral values of followers, while transactional leadership motivates followers by appealing to their self-interest and exchanging benefits (Burns, as cited in Yukl, 2006). In their literature review on the field of leadership Avolio, Walumbwa and Weber (2009) note how new-genre leadership theories emerged, that entail “leadership emphasizing charismatic leader behavior, visionary, inspiring, ideological and moral values, as well as transformational leadership such as individualized attention and intellectual stimulation” (Avolio et al., 2009, p. 428). However, the authors fail to provide a definition of visionary leadership isolated from other streams of leadership theory. Waldman, De Luque et al. (2006) describe that visionary leadership involves a relationship between an individual (leader) and one or more followers based on leader behaviors that engender intense, favorable reactions and attributions on the part of followers. Visionary organizations are described using traits similar-, arguably identical even, to those used to describe visionary leaders (e.g., Collins & Porras, 1991; Stengel, 2011). The definition of a visionary organization used in this study is based on characteristics used by Waldman, De Luque et al. (2006) to describe key behaviors of visionary leaders. A visionary organization (cf. leader) is an organization (cf. leader) that (1) provides a sense of mission or purpose, (2) articulates an inspirational vision that challenges the status quo based on powerful imagery and a sense of purpose, (3) demonstrates determination when accomplishing goals or change, and (4) questions assumptions.

Whilst closely related to each other, there is a distinction between organizational visionariness and brand visionariness. Hatch and Schultz (2001) explain how a vision can be

(21)

21 seen as top management’s aspirations for the organization, while brand visionariness is based on the brand image, which is the outside world’s overall impression of the organization. From a consumer perspective, brand visionariness depends on the extent to which consumers perceive a brand to be driven by its vision and to what extent this vision is perceived to show the four characteristics of a visionary organization. A visionary brand is therefore defined as an organization with a brand image that consumers perceive to be visionary. Concurrently, brand visionariness is proposed as a favorable brand personality trait.

2.3 Corporate social responsibility

First, a definition of CSR is provided and CSR is discussed as a brand image trait. Second, the role CSR can play in a brand’s positioning strategy is discussed and different types of CSR activities are outlined.

2.3.1 Defining corporate social responsibility

In order to gain insights into consequences of CSR efforts, a clear definition is needed. There are, however, various definitions of CSR: it is a nebulous concept (Strand, 2011). Vallaster et al. (2012) propose a generic definition that is adopted in this study, for it transcends the myriad of CSR phenotypes: “CSR is about companies going beyond legal obligations and their own interests to address and manage the impact their activities have on society and the environment” (p. 35). In their literature review Peloza and Shang (2012) categorize CSR activities prevalent in scholarly research into three broad categories: (1) philanthropy (e.g., charity donations tied to a commercial exchange, donations of cash, statements of support for charities, and promotion of a social cause), (2) business practices (e.g., environmental protection practices by the company via pollution levels and/or recycling), and (3) product-related features (e.g., product quality, organic products, and biodegradability).

(22)

22 Brown and Dacin (1997) laid a foundation for research in the CSR domain by showing how CSR beliefs affect corporate associations held by consumers. CSR can have a positive influence on consumers’ purchase intention and -attitudes toward the company or brand (Pérez et al., 2009; David, Kline & Dai, 2005; Sen, Bhattacharya, & Korschun, 2006), product or service evaluations (Peloza & Shang, 2011), and longer-term loyalty and advocacy behaviors (Du et al., 2007). Additionally, Nan and Heo (2007) report findings showing how CSR initiatives can make consumers perceive the brand to embody certain desirable traits that elicit favorable consumer attitudes toward the company. These results demonstrate CSR to be a vehicle of value creation by being able to elicit company-favoring responses in consumers.

David et al. (2005) explain CSR practices capture the citizenship dimension (i.e., avoiding harm and improving society’s well-being) of corporate identity. Pérez et al., (2009) add that CSR is a privileged channel for expressing corporate personality by combining certain attributes of its identity (e.g., behavior, symbolism, and communication (Balmer, 2001)). Indeed, CSR can have a strong positive influence on the attractiveness of a company’s identity (Marin & Ruiz, 2007; Marin et al., 2009), showing the favorability of CSR as a brand personality trait.

2.3.2 CSR positioning and CSR types

A brand’s positioning seeks to emphasize the characteristics and attributes that make it unique (Nandan, 2005). A CSR-based positioning strategy can be an attractive alternative to give the brand symbolic value, building a strong and meaningful identity for the consumer (Du et al., 2007). This allows the brand to differentiate itself from its competitors and ensures that it has sufficient signaling capacity (Alcañiz, Cáceres and Pérez, 2010). Stanaland, Lwin and Murphy (2011) empirically researched CSR consequences (i.e., perceived corporate reputation, consumer trust and consumer loyalty) and conclude that a corporate identity based on a strong positioning pertaining to ethics and CSR-related values is one that consumers find

(23)

23 appealing. These results concur with Du et al. (2007), who report empirical findings regarding the role CSR plays in a competitive context. Du et al. (2007) compared the strategic benefits of a CSR-based positioning to a positioning strategy not based on CSR. A CSR-based identity results in higher levels of C-C identification. The authors allocate this result to a more distinctive identity and propose the following theoretical reasoning for the stronger level of identification:

[A CSR based identity is] not only more memorable but also more anthropomorphic, enabling consumers to identify with it more readily than with others based on more conventional positioning strategies. In other words, unlike other positioning strategies, CSR positioning humanizes a company or brand, encouraging consumers to not just like, respect or admire the company but actually identify with it (Du et al., 2007). p. 225

An example is Chiquita: the company widely known for their bananas and pineapples. Chiquita’s (2014a) self-proclaimed “unique and positive transformation . . . into one of the leading socially and environmentally responsible produce companies in the industry” (The Chiquita Story, para. 1) illustrates a value-laden positioning strategy based on CSR. This is even reflected in their slogan: “Live Better. Live Chiquita. Improving Lives, Loving our Planet, Leading our Industry. (Chiquita, 2014b, Meet Chiquita, para. 1)”. Chiquita (2014c) emphasizes the role of CSR values in how they do business:

Our Core Values of Integrity, Respect, Opportunity and Responsibility form the basis of our business performance and guide our everyday activities, including our giving programs. As part of our Core Values, Chiquita maintains a solid commitment to conducting business ethically, morally and in accordance with the law. (How we do business, para. 1)

Aguilera, Rupp, Williams and Ganapathi (2007) state that consumers, as an external stakeholder group, push for CSR out of morality-based motives or higher-order values.

(24)

24 Bielak, Bonini and Oppenheim (2007) inquired 90 CEOs and report that more than 90% of them are doing more than they did five years ago to incorporate environmental, social, and governance issues into their core strategies. Where more traditional organizations often portray CSR by setting up CSR projects unrelated to the business they are in (e.g., sponsorship of social causes), these new hybrid organizations show CSR as an ingrained part of their business model, creating a CSR-based identity (Du et al., 2007). This study focuses on whether a difference in the type of CSR activities enacted by a company influences consumers’ perceptions of brand image and ultimately C-B identification. Waldman et al. (2006) make a dichotomous distinction between different types of CSR activities based on the level of integration into the corporate culture and strategy. Strategic CSR embodies activities that relate to the firm’s competitive strategy and social CSR represents activities based on concern for social issues. Peloza and Shang’s (2012) CSR domains (business practices, product/service related features and philanthropy) can be related to Waldman et al.’s (2006) dyad regarding the integration of CSR in the company. Strategic CSR is typified by CSR initiatives that are incorporated in their core strategy, while social CSR to the more peripheral role of philanthropy. Strategic CSR is more likely to involve the company’s business practices and/or product related features than social CSR (Du et al., 2007; Galbreath, 2009; Porter and Kramer, 2006, 2011).

2.4 Vision communication

This paragraph starts by defining vision communication, followed by a section describing the influence of brand visionariness and CSR beliefs on C-B identification. Next, the influence of vision source and CSR type on consumers’ perceived level of brand visionariness and consumers’ CSR beliefs is hypothesized. Subsequently, the explanatory role of perceived brand visionariness and CSR beliefs is discussed. Lastly, this study’s research

(25)

25 question is posited, alongside an overview of the hypotheses and this study’s conceptual model.

2.4.1 Defining vision communication

Malleability of a brand’s external image encourages corporate branding efforts of self-presentation aimed at positively influencing the company’s brand image. Brand communication shows how the company wants external stakeholders to perceive it, which shows the company’s intended identity (Hildebrand et al., 2011). Brand communication conveying the company’s intended identity can elicit strong, favorable, and unique brand associations with consumers, building a distinctive and prestigious brand image. Stengel (2011) states that communication provides touch points with consumers, and articulating a sense of purpose that resonates with stakeholders’ beliefs and fundamental values positively influences stakeholders’ evaluation of the brand. Vision communication equips organizations with a vehicle via which brand personality traits and brand essence can be shared (De Chernatony, 2001). As such, it can increase consumers’ use of company identity perceptions in their similarity, prestige, and distinctiveness judgments about the company. Communication of a company’s vision is therefore an important step in achieving the desired brand identity and evoking cognitive consideration and -elaboration of consumers’ social identity via C-B identification (Scott & Lane, 2000).

2.4.2 Brand visionariness and C-B identification

Based on characteristics of visionary leadership (Waldman, De Luque et al., 2006), a visionary brand is argued to distinguish itself by providing a sense of mission or purpose, articulating an inspirational vision, demonstrating determination, and questioning assumptions. These characteristics translate to positive brand personality traits. A brand that is perceived as visionary is inspirational, determined, and has a clear understanding of where it is heading in the future. A visionary brand is therefore argued to be distinctive and prestigious

(26)

26 compared to competitors, providing consumers with signaling power when they associate themselves with the brand. Identification with a visionary brand is more likely to evoke a sense of pride and build self-esteem. Prior studies empirically researched effects of brand visionariness in the consumer domain and found support for a positive influence of consumers’ perceived level of brand visionariness on C-B identification (Horsch, 2013; Migge, 2013; Thissen, 2013). This study attempts to corroborate these findings by hypothesizing brand visionariness to positively influence C-B identification:

H1. Consumers’ perceived level of brand visionariness positively influences C-B identification.

2.4.3 CSR beliefs and C-B identification

CSR actions, as opposed to actions in the product domain, reveal an organization’s character or identity (Bhattacharya & Sen, 2003; Marin et al., 2009). Results of a study by Pérez et al. (2009) show CSR leads to C-B identification by making the brand more prestigious and distinctive. The authors conclude that CSR is a privileged channel for expressing corporate personality: it provides a way of symbolizing or representing the aspiration to-, or possession of one or more pro-social values. CSR is particularly useful for triggering processes of approach and connection to individuals. The more CSR is able to provide value for the corporate brand, improving certain attributes of its identity, the more it becomes an instrument for satisfying consumers’ self-definitional needs and the more C-C identification takes place (Pérez et al., 2009). For example, consumers’ returns of using a product/service of a socially responsible company can manifest in feelings of altruism by contributing to the focal social cause, resulting in a feeling of well-being (a higher-order value) for the consumer (Bhattacharya et al., 2009). Both the company and the consumer portray altruism, the former through conscious and socially responsible production, and the latter through conscious consumption. The consumer feels associated with the company’s

(27)

27 socially responsible identity, which enhances his/her well-being and self-esteem through a more positive evaluation of the self. Indeed, results of various empirical studies show that favorable CSR beliefs are likely to be a key driver of C-C identification (Arendt & Brettel, 2010; Arikan & Güner, 2013; Du et al., 2007; Lichtenstein et al., 2004; Marin et al., 2009; Marin & Ruiz, 2007; Pérez, 2009; Pérez et al., 2009; Sen & Bhattacharya, 2001; Sen et al., 2006). In line with these studies consumers’ beliefs of how socially responsible a brand is, are hypothesized to influence the extent to which they identify themselves with the brand:

H2. Consumers’ level of CSR beliefs positively influences C-B identification.

2.4.4 Experimental condition: different vision sources

Vision communication has often been related to leadership theories that portray the leader as source of the vision (e.g., Bass, 1991; Berson et al., 2001; Conger & Kanungo, 1987; Kantabutra & Avery, 2007; Kirkpatrick & Locke, 1996). The majority of studies regarding leadership theory and vision focus on an organizational setting. Indeed, inspirational vision prevalence and vision communication in a CEO – employee relationship have positive effects on organizational performance (Baum et al., 1998). This study, however, focuses on brand associations that a vision can elicit when unilaterally communicated to consumers. This consumer – brand relationship bypasses any possible interaction between the consumer and the company. The source sharing this information (the communicator) can vary.

As described in paragraph 2.2.2 regarding the definition of visionariness, it is debated to what extent visionary leaders are of importance when it comes to organizational and brand visionariness. A review of Stengel’s (2011) top 50 visionary brands, as well as exploration of other brands showing visionary characteristics, brings inconclusive results by showing both visionary brands with a for consumers identifiable visionary leader (e.g., Apple and the late Steve Jobs, Facebook and Mark Zuckerberg), as well as visionary brands without such a figure (e.g., Coca-Cola). This study follows Migge’s (2013) research design by

(28)

28 conceptualizing the brand itself and the CEO as communicators of the vision. The aim is to assess whether communication of a vision statement is perceived different in the eyes of consumers when the vision source is either the leader in a spokesperson role or the brand itself. Whether the actual leadership characteristics, -qualities, and, -performance of a company’s CEO lead to organizational visionariness is irrelevant; the point of interest lies with consumers’ perception of the conveyed message.

2.4.5 Experimental condition: different types of CSR activities

Maignan and Ferrel (2004) notice a trend in leading companies openly profiling themselves as socially responsible and propose CSR communications to have a positive effect on stakeholder identification. Stanaland et al. (2011) add that companies that are serious in their commitment to CSR tend to signal this stance through corporate communications and regular disclosure to stakeholders. As a result, perceptions of CSR depend on effective company communication with external audiences.

Although there is discernible scholarly attention for CSR communication, less attention is paid to the influence of CSR content. Some scholars regard the initiatives a company supports and the behaviors it enacts as “the most important medium through which identity is expressed” (van Riel & Fombrun, as cited in Pérez & Del Bosque, 2012, p. 148), but few empirical studies make a distinction between various types of CSR activities (Strand, 2011). Arendt and Brettel (2010), for example, state that corporate image attractiveness and identification are positively influenced by strong CSR and claim to test under which conditions CSR leads to improved performance and competitive advantages. However, the authors fail to make a distinction between the plethora of CSR forms and measure CSR using a general scale based on Lichtenstein et al. (2004), leaving it open for debate what type of CSR initiatives drives ‘strong CSR’.

(29)

29 This study focuses on a company applying a positioning strategy based on CSR by incorporating a CSR message in its vision statement, thereby extending Du et al.’s (2007) research on CSR brands. Consumers’ CSR beliefs are proposed to be influenced by a difference in the type of CSR activities undertaken by the company. Two CSR types are compared based on Waldman et al.’s (2006) parsing of CSR in a strategic and social variant. A company can host several CSR initiatives simultaneously. However, for analytical purposes a dyadic interpretation is adopted in order to identify possible differences between the two categories. Strategic CSR is conceptualized to involve CSR activities related to the company’s business practices and/or product/service features only. Accordingly, social CSR is conceptualized to involve philanthropic CSR initiatives only.

2.4.6 Vision source and brand visionariness

When considering the brand as vision source, it can be ‘humanized’ based on anthropomorphization (i.e., assigning personality qualities to inanimate brand objects) (Fournier, 1998). When consumers accept marketers’ attempts to humanize a brand they are likely willing to view the brand as vital member of the consumer – brand relationship. It is therefore possible for consumers to identify themselves with the brand, for the brand shows personality traits. The CEO, on the other hand, represents the company’s leader and is therefore likely to be seen as the provider of the vision (Bass, 1991; Baum et al., 1998). Avolio et al. (2009) describe, based on transformational leadership theory, how leaders are likely to raise followers’ aspirations and activate their higher-order values such that followers identify with the leader and his or her mission and/or vision. This is argued to fit visionary leadership as well, for transformational leadership positively predicts the inspirational strength of the leader’s vision statement (Berson et al., 2001). Kantabutra and Avery (2007) show how a visionary leader can act as a role model, resulting in empowerment and motivation amongst followers. The use of a spokesperson that has a strong fit with the brand

(30)

30 delivers the spirit of the endorser (Fournier, 1998). The CEO can therefore become a symbol and/or personification of the brand’s identity. Yukl (2006) adds that an attractive agent (i.e., the CEO) may help the follower (i.e., the consumer) to satisfy his/her need for esteem from other people and help maintain a more favorable self-image through personal identification. Positive outcomes of identification with the leader can spill over to the brand. As a results, positive consumer perceptions of the boundary spanning agent as representative of the brand can increase C-C identification (Ahearne et al., 2005), as well as positively influence company evaluations (Kerin & Barry, 1981). Lastly, using the CEO, an internal agent to the firm, as spokesperson in brand communication to stakeholders can increase the credibility of the conveyed message (Goldsmith, Lafferty & Newell, 2000).

The CEO as communicator of the company’s vision statement is argued (1) likely to be seen as the provider of the vision, (2) to increase the inspirational strength of the vision statement, and (3) to positively influence consumers’ evaluations. The CEO as vision source is therefore hypothesized to have a stronger positive relationship with the favorable brand personality trait visionariness than the brand itself:

H3. Consumers’ perceived level of brand visionariness is higher for the company’s vision statement when the vision source is the CEO than when the vision source is the brand itself.

2.4.7 CSR type and brand visionariness

CSR type is related to brand visionariness based on the influence of CSR on characteristics of the brand image projected by the vision statement. Developments regarding the prevalence, salience, and importance of CSR efforts among businesses can arguably lead to a relationship between CSR and the proposed higher-order brand personality trait brand visionariness. Over the last decade there has been a tremendous increase in the amount of attention consumers have for (environmental) sustainability, empowering local communities, and overall conscious, responsible production- and consumption behavior (Banerjee, 2007).

(31)

31 Du et al. (2007) even state that it is no longer a question of ‘whether’, but ‘how’ companies show good corporate citizenship, which Pomering and Johnson (2009) reinforce by stating that projecting a CSR-based corporate personality is the line companies should be working nowadays. Vallaster et al. (2012) conclude that from a brand strategy perspective a CSR positioning aimed at establishing a CSR brand must be based on an overall brand value or theme that connects with all relevant stakeholder groups. Strategic CSR is likely to be perceived by consumers as more deeply ingrained in the company’s strategy (Galbreath, 2009) and brand essence (Vallaster et al., 2012), thereby positing CSR more strongly as a trademark personality trait that is permeated throughout the focal company than its social counterpart. The CSR activities are embedded within business practices and product/service features, showing the brand’s determination, as well as how it incorporates CSR into its mission or purpose. This is argued to result in a stronger association between CSR and the brand. By directly relating CSR to the way a company does business, strategic CSR is argued to demonstrate more thought has gone to how the company shapes its core business responsibly, bringing up new ideas for sustainability in the future. Therefore, strategic CSR is proposed to relate stronger to characteristics that make up the brand personality trait ‘visionary’ than social CSR and is therefore hypothesized to evoke stronger perceptions of brand visionariness amongst consumer:

H4. Consumers’ perceived level of brand visionariness is higher for the brand’s vision statement when the brand’s CSR type is strategic CSR, compared to social CSR.

2.4.8 Vision source and CSR beliefs

Vision source is related to consumers’ CSR beliefs about the brand based on the communicator’s influence on the projected brand image. Although scarcely found, some researchers do report on the role of leadership in CSR (see Van Velsor, 2009; Strand, 2011). Waldman, De Luque et al. (2006) report results supporting that visionary leadership is

(32)

32 predictive of the extent to which CSR values are being internalized by stakeholders (including consumers). For example, the leader’s vision can be a driver in how subordinate managers view the importance of CSR in their decision-making. Waldman et al. (2006) add that intellectually stimulating leaders realize that by presenting their own vision they are likely to stimulate followers’ thinking about how socially responsible outcomes can be achieved. Ferns, Emelianova and Sethi (2008) help translate these findings regarding CEO leadership and CSR to the field of brand communications through examination of executive messages used in corporate non-financial reports (e.g., CSR-sustainability reports). The authors conclude stakeholders to view the CEO as corporate spokesperson representing the company’s values and are eager to listen to the CEO as the face of the company, as a master of specific knowledge (the professional), and as someone possessing superior professionalism. As spokesperson for the entire company, the CEO’s conduct and level of commitment to ethical principles contributes to a large extent to the overall image of the company. Therefore, the CEO as communicator is hypothesized to positively influence consumers’ beliefs of the brand’s level of CSR, compared to the brand itself:

H5. Consumers’ CSR beliefs are more positive for the brand’s vision statement when the vision source is the CEO than when the vision source is the brand itself.

2.4.9 CSR type and CSR beliefs

In line with the hypothesized favorability of strategic CSR over social CSR regarding brand visionariness, consumers are hypothesized to perceive a brand that engages in strategic CSR activities as more socially responsible than a brand that portrays social CSR activities. Studies in cause-related marketing (CRM) found results showing that a higher fit, based on similarity and compatibility between the brand and the social cause to which the brand’s CSR efforts contribute, positively affects consumers’ evaluations of the brand (Alcañiz et al., 2010; Nan & Heo, 2007). Strategic CSR activities are more closely related to the organization’s core

(33)

33 business by affecting business practices and product/service features, while social CSR portrays little relationship to the company’s core business (Galbreath, 2009; Porter and Kramer, 2006, 2011). Compare, for example, a car manufacturer minimizing waste in the production process and increasing fuel efficiency of its models, thereby showing concern for the environment, with a car manufacturer making donations to fight breast cancer. Strategic CSR is argued to lead to consumers perceiving a higher fit between the social cause and the brand’s CSR initiatives than social CSR. As a result, consumers are argued to have stronger beliefs of socially responsible behavior for companies portraying strategic CSR efforts than those involved in social CSR activities. This leads to the following hypothesis:

H6. Consumers’ CSR beliefs are more positive for the brand’s vision statement when the brand’s CSR type is strategic CSR, compared to social CSR.

2.4.10 Brand visionariness and CSR beliefs as mediators

Organizations can use vision communication as a marketing tool to increase the attractiveness of the brand image to stakeholders by promoting a favorable self-image and the perceived distinctiveness of the brand (Dommermuth, as cited in Scott & Lane, 2000). As favorable, higher-order brand personality traits consumers’ perceptions of brand visionariness and consumers’ CSR beliefs are argued to enhance a brand’s image by making it more distinctive and prestigious. When a company communicates a vision statement that shows characteristics of a socially responsible or visionary brand, it is argued to increase C-B identification. Also, this study argues a difference in vision source to affect consumers’ CSR beliefs and –perceptions of brand visionariness. Similarly, a difference in the type of CSR activities the company undertakes is proposed to influence brand visionariness perceptions and CSR beliefs. As favorable brand personality traits brand visionariness and CSR beliefs are proposed as explanatory factors regarding the indirect effect of both vision source and CSR type on C-B identification, resulting in hypotheses 7 and 8:

(34)

34 H7. The relationship between the vision source of the vision statement and C-B identification is mediated by (a) consumers’ perceived level of brand visionariness, and (b) consumers’ CSR beliefs.

H8. The relationship between the CSR type communicated in the vision statement and C-B identification is mediated by (a) consumers’ perceived level of brand visionariness, and (b) consumers’ CSR Beliefs.

2.5 Main research question, hypotheses, and conceptual model

This study attempts to determine the relationship between an organization’s vision statement, consumer–brand identification, consumers’ perceived level of brand visionariness, and consumers’ CSR beliefs.

The main research question is:

When communicating organizational vision, what are the effects of vision source and CSR type on consumers’ perceived level of brand visionariness and consumers’ CSR beliefs, and to what extent do consumers’ perceived level of brand visionariness and consumers’ CSR beliefs influence C-B identification?

Figure 1 shows how the individual constructs coalesce into the conceptual model. The hypotheses are:

H1. Consumers’ perceived level of brand visionariness positively influences C-B identification.

H2. Consumers’ level of CSR beliefs positively influences C-B identification.

H3. Consumers’ perceived level of brand visionariness is higher for the company’s vision statement when the vision source is the CEO than when the vision source is the brand itself. H4. Consumers’ perceived level of brand visionariness is higher for the brand’s vision statement when the brand’s CSR type is strategic CSR, compared to social CSR.

(35)

35 H5. Consumers’ CSR beliefs are more positive for the brand’s vision statement when the vision source is the CEO than when the vision source is the brand itself.

H6. Consumers’ CSR beliefs are more positive for the brand’s vision statement when the brand’s CSR type is strategic CSR, compared to social CSR.

H7. The relationship between the vision source of the vision statement and C-B identification is mediated by (a) consumers’ perceived level of brand visionariness, and (b) consumers’ CSR beliefs.

H8. The relationship between the CSR type communicated in the vision statement and C-B identification is mediated by (a) consumers’ perceived level of brand visionariness, and (b) consumers’ CSR Beliefs.

(36)

36

3. Methodology

This chapter contains a paragraph on this study’s research design, followed by a description of the population of interest, the sampling frame, and the process of data collection. Third, vision statement configurations are discussed, including the pre-test that was carried out. Fourth, a description of the measurement scales used in this study is provided. The closing section pertains to the statistical procedure applied while analyzing the acquired data.

3.1 Research design

This study’s research design is experimental. It uses a 2 (CEO vs. Brand) X 2 (Strategic CSR vs. Social CSR) between-subjects design that divides the sample into four treatment groups. An online questionnaire confronts respondents with a vision statements of a fictitious company in the form of a Belgian bank (BDF Bank). Respondents were randomly allocated to an experimental group. After exposure to the vision statement each respondent was asked to answer questions concerning this study’s three variables of interest: brand visionariness, CSR beliefs, and C-B identification. The experimental design allows other variables that might distort the outcomes of the study to be kept at a constant, thereby eliminating as much extraneous variance as possible. This maximizes the ability to detect the effect of the manipulations on the outcome variables one is testing (Saunders & Lewis, 2012). By using a fictitious brand the influence of established brand attitudes –associations was avoided.

I chose the banking sector, for banks often show low levels of product differentiation (Pomering & Dolnicar, 2009) and often have a damaged public image due to crises in international markets (Pérez & Del Bosque, 2012). Corporate image and –identity management is therefore of importance to this sector. Also, it is a very active business sector with respect to CSR: many institutions in the banking industry involve themselves in the

(37)

37 development and implementation of CSR initiatives and behaviors (Pérez & Del Bosque, 2012). However, Pérez and Del Bosque (2012) show that although various banks in the Spanish banking sector incorporate CSR values into their corporate values, external CSR communications are less common and references to CSR in corporate vision statements are scarce, which consumers possibly perceive as a lack of social ambition.

Vision communication is operationalized via corporate self-presentation of a vision statement on the company’s website, for the internet is increasingly replacing all traditional media as a tool for information disclosure (Pollach, 2003) and consumers use a bank’s website most often as source of information about the bank (Pomering & Dolnicar, 2009). This study focuses on the impact of a single, immediate mental perception of the focal brand. By doing so, it measures outcomes pertaining to the brand image, for the brand image is based on the most recent brand impression (Balmer, 2001; Balmer & Soenen, 1999).

3.2 Population, sample and data collection

The focal population of this study consisted of consumers over the age of 18, for these consumers are assumed to make independent consumption decisions. An online questionnaire was constructed using software for web-based surveys by Qualtrics. The sample frame consisted of Dutch individuals. Therefore, the questionnaire was presented in Dutch. The measurement scales that were used were converted to Dutch via translation, back-translation procedure. A small number of changes was made to the final Dutch version based on differences between the original items and the back-translated items.

This study used a convenience sample, partially based on self-selection. The questionnaire was distributed via e-mail and social network sites (Facebook and LinkedIn). Individual invitations were sent via e-mail and via direct messaging on social network sites. Self-selection took place by sharing generic questionnaire invitations via postings in several groups on social network sites, as well as via postings on the researcher’s personal profile

Communicating brand identity through organizational vision : effects of vision statement configuration on consumers’ brand perceptions