Graduate School of Communication Master’s programme Communication Science
MASTER’S THESIS
Corporate Branding in Social Media and its Impact on Corporate
Brand Image
A case study of Primark and Chanel on Facebook
written by: Karolina Kustusz 11105828 supervised by: Dr. Suzanne de Bakker 2nd February 2017
Abstract
This research aims at investigating how fashion companies brand themselves on Facebook fan pages and how that influences the corporate brand image. Distinguishing between Primark and Chanel as budget and luxury fashion companies, the moderating role of price-segment is also examined. It is argued that because corporate branding is usually treated as an extension of five key disciplines, namely marketing, visual identity, strategy, communication and organizational theory, corporate branding strategies are discipline-based rather than
integrated. Alongside the strategy, openness and interactivity are scrutinized as approaches to corporate branding on social media. Research is effectuated using a quantitative content analysis, which investigates corporate branding strategies, and an online experiment, which unveils the influence of strategy on image. The results show that corporate branding on Facebook has a significant positive effect on corporate brand image and that after exposure to Facebook corporate branding efforts participants have a significantly more positive image of Chanel than Primark. However, perceived-price segment does not moderate the effect of strategy on image. Furthermore, it is not the strategic holism of the content per se that
influences the image but rather whether the corporate branding effort is open and interactive. This study adds to the limited body of research about social media corporate branding, and practical implications and recommendations for future research are discussed.
Keywords: Corporate communications, corporate branding, corporate brand image, fashion branding, social media, Facebook
Corporate Branding in Social Media and its Impact on Corporate Brand Image A case study of Primark and Chanel on Facebook
“Fashion branding may be an ephemeral business, but it is a complex and endlessly fascinating one.” (Tungate, 2012, p. 4)
Brand presence on social media has been identified as the core of a thriving school of thought, which brings to focus corporate value co-creation with stakeholders online (Park & Kim, 2015). The way in which companies and consumers communicate has changed because social media provide a platform for consumers where they can choose corporate information and elaborate on it prior to any purchase decision (Floreddu, Cabiddu, & Evaristo, 2014). Because companies can interact with their customers in the social media environment, it has become an imperative topic in the current communications discourse and received substantial scholarly attention in regards to marketing related outcomes.
Research has shown that social media communications can influence purchase intention (Dehghani & Tumer, 2015; Kim & Ko, 2016), brand awareness (Labrecque, 2014) and return of investment (Fisher, 2009). Furthermore, scholars such as Tsai and Men (2013) and Sashi (2012) studied the impact of social media marketing strategies on consumer engagement and brand-customer relationships. Dolan and colleagues (2015) and Van Doorn (2011) amongst others identified antecedents of consumer engagement in social media brand interactions in general and Fan and Miao (2012) studied the positive impacts of electronic word-of-mouth. Researchers have also investigated social media brand communications as factors that impact brand loyalty (Labrecque, 2014).
Along these lines, there are also some studies in the existing literature that have examined the potential of social media for corporate communications. They include investigations of the impact social media can have on corporate communication outcomes, such as reputation (Dijkmans, Kerkhof, & Beukeboom, 2015; Floreddu et al., 2014), along
with studies that examined corporate brand value co-creation through social media (Holmgren Hjelm & Stamfjord Thall, 2012). However, there is a limited body of research on the potential of social media for corporate branding (Vernuccio, 2014), which is the focus of this thesis.
The limitations in the research body are partially caused by the fuzzy concept of corporate branding (Biraghi & Gambetti, 2015), which has undergone extensive revision over time and is defined differently by scholars and practitioners. This makes it difficult to study phenomena in the context of this concept, which in turn keeps the efforts of corporate branding by way of social media an understudied topic.
Current research on corporate branding suggests that, at least offline, it is capable of influencing and steering what consumers and stakeholders think of a corporation (M. Schultz, 2005). Their thoughts and emotions of the corporation are reflected in the corporate brand image (Da Silva & Alwi, 2008). Because there is a consensus in research that corporate brand image is an important intangible asset for corporations and that communication in the form of corporate branding is an important antecedent thereof (Tran, Nguyen, Melewar, & Bodoh, 2015), corporate brand image is investigated as the outcome of corporate branding in this research.
Studying the influence of corporate branding on corporate image in the context of social media is necessary, not only because corporate branding as a concept is understudied but also because social media are the future of corporate brand creation and maintenance. Research by Bruhn, Schönmüller & Schäfer (2012) confirms the idea that social media communications generally influence brand image to a great extent. Corporate communication outcomes such as image can be quickly and easily enhanced or permanently damaged in the social media environment, as the “visibility and interaction potential afforded by the internet magnifies the impact of corporate actions and messages, regardless of their intended purpose” (Floreddu et al., 2014, p.739).
Currently, the largest and most influential social medium is Facebook (Vernuccio, 2014), as it is frequently used by consumers and companies alike (Pletikosa Cvijikj & Michahelles, 2013). On Facebook, the format offering the largest number of interaction possibilities with consumers are fan pages (Pletikosa Cvijikj & Michahelles, 2013). Fan pages are interesting to study in the context of corporate branding because conforming to the current school of thought and according to Fourier and Avery (2011) the new approach to corporate branding is co-creation. “Co-creation is based on the premise that value is created in
interaction between the consumer and the organization” (Antorini & Andersen, 2005, p.87) On fan pages, like-minded brand enthusiasts can interact by sharing their brand stories and through that co-create a corporate brand (Gensler, Völckner, Liu-Thompkins, & Wiertz, 2013). Whilst corporate branding on corporate websites is easier to control for the firm, there is no space for the consumer to interact and co-create, whereas on Facebook, interaction and co-creation are facilitated (Gensler et al., 2013), which ultimately shapes the corporate branding and image formation process.
Thus, it is of paramount importance, both scientifically and practically, to investigate whether and how the corporation can influence their brand image through corporate branding in social media by engaging with consumers online. In other words:
Does corporate branding on Facebook have an impact on how consumers perceive corporate brand image? If so, which corporate branding strategy leads to a more positive corporate brand image?
In order to limit the present research, one specific organizational sector was chosen for the investigation: fashion. Research regarding the performance of fashion companies online is intriguing for three main reasons. First, they are ranked the highest among product categories on Facebook in regards to the number of brand page fans, followed by snacks and drinks, and consumer technology (Park & Kim, 2015). Per contra, the potential of social media for fashion is surprisingly uncharted, even though platforms, such as Facebook, are used
extensively by fashion brands (Kontu & Vecchi, 2015; Tungate, 2012). Considering that fashion brands could exploit the potential of social media (Phan, Thomas, & Heine, 2011), many of them, especially within the luxury sector, are still looking for ways to effectively implement social media for their businesses (Kontu & Vecchi, 2015). Lastly, with regards to fashion, the corporate brand image directly translates into product image. Studies have shown how attitudes towards a brand transform into monetary values: the better the image of the fashion brand, the more a consumer is willing to spend (Park & Kim, 2015) and vice versa. It follows logically that a research interest exists regarding fashion brands online and variations caused by different price segments. Consequently, not only will the influence of Facebook corporate branding strategies be investigated but also how the company’s price-segment moderates this influence. Two fashion companies are chosen, which differ in price-segment from budget to luxury, namely Primark and Chanel. In addition to the central research question, the following sub-question is presented:
To what extent does the price-segment impact the effect of corporate branding strategies on corporate brand image?
Findings from this study could deliver important managerial and scientific
implications. Firstly, social media is an important communications tool as 90% of companies use social media for their online communications (Johnson, 2016). Scientific insights by way of this case study on Facebook could facilitate their work, as they can indicate the right choice of content and tone in social media in general. Because the impact of different social media branding strategies is investigated in this research, practitioners will have a better
understanding of how to brand a corporation in social media. Current research emphasizes that conversing in a human manner is paramount online (Dijkmans, Kerkhof, Buyukcan-Tetik, & Beukeboom, 2015), and so this research could yield insights whether this is actually true or if users’ impressions of a corporation are mainly influenced by the content.
branding in general as well as help to fill the research gap that exists in terms of corporate communications online and contribute to the value discourse of social media communication efforts in general. Lastly, as social media is so rapidly changing, research in this field should be conducted continuously, in order to perpetuate timely insights and not let scientific findings become out-dated. Therefore, the angle of the present study will show a new and current side of social media potential for corporate communications.
The thesis is divided as follows: First, previous research and central concepts in this field are examined in order to hypothesize answers to the central research question and sub-question. Then, quantitative research is performed in order to find factual answers to the research questions. The quantitative research is divided into two parts: First, a quantitative content analysis of corporate postings on Facebook fan pages identifies different corporate branding strategies. Following, the impact of corporate branding strategies on the corporate brand image is investigated by testing the different approaches in an online experiment with Facebook users as participants. The experiment also assesses if price-segment moderates this proposed impact. Results are summarized, concluded and finally discussed in regards to what the research intended to find.
Theoretical Background Corporate Brand Image
“Every company can be said to have a corporate image” (Martineau, 2003, p.192). Although the corporate brand image is an abstract concept and many managers still feel that the product should speak for itself(Martineau, 2003), scholars argue that a positive corporate brand image is fundamental for the success of a corporation (Balmer & Greyser, 2003; Islam & Rahman, 2016; Martineau, 2003; Tran et al., 2015). When the consumer is faced with a purchase decision, it is not only the product that influences this decision but also the corporate
brand that stands behind the product. In that sense, the corporate image can ultimately determine the purchase (Martineau, 2003).
Corporate brand image is defined “as the additional brand values that are inherent in or associated with the corporation and its product and services” (Balmer & Gray, 2003, p. 973). It is a sum of values that represents the organization (Ind, 1997)or simply what comes to the consumer’s mind when they think, see or hear of a corporation (Tran et al., 2015).
According to Davies et al. (2004)there are two forms of corporate brands. Attitudes of internal stakeholders, such as employees, toward the brand are referred to as the corporate brand identity, whereas attitudes of customers or consumers are known as the corporate brand image. Da Silva and Alwi (2008)additionally point out that there are two perspectives on corporate brand image. Some scholars conceptualize corporate brand image with tangible assets, such as stores, services and clientele (Lindquist, 1974). Others conceptualize corporate brand image with intangible assets, such as affect and emotional feelings towards the brand (Da Silva & Alwi, 2008). In line with Balmer and Gray’s (2003) widely accepted definition of a corporate brand image, the concept here is understood as an intangible, rather than a
tangible, asset.
A common conceptualization of corporate brands as something intangible is the personification metaphor approach (J. Aaker, 1997; Spector, 1961). From this angle,
corporations are seen as people with human characteristics that evoke feelings similar to those in interpersonal relationships. This approach has a proven track record of understanding corporate brand image and reputations despite their intangibility. Using the metaphor approach in research helps to understand complex concepts such as corporate brand image better. In the case of personification in corporate branding, one can argue that a corporation has a personality, that external stakeholders attribute to the company, which then culminates in the corporate brand image (Davies, Chun, Da Silva, & Roper, 2001). Personality traits that previous research identified as valid descriptors of corporations are sincerity, agreeableness,
competence, sophistication or informality amongst others (J. Aaker, 1997; Davies, Chun, Da Silva, & Roper, 2004). These dimensions were inferred from Psychology and tested for applicability to corporate brand image. Thus, the intangible asset of a good corporate brand image will show in high scores on perceived human characteristics of the corporate brand.
In sum, it is argued that, because corporate image is an imperative intangible asset for corporations, it is necessary to examine variables that influence the corporate image formation process. Tran and colleagues (2015) point out two main antecedents of corporate image. First, it is influenced by interactions with the company, i.e. customer service, purchase of products or communication through various channels such as social media. Second, the perceived communication efforts such as advertising, public relations or corporate branding affect the corporate images consumers perceive. According to Park & Kim (2016) and Floreddu et al. (2014), an important environment to communicate a message and interact with consumers is social media. Therefore, the following research focuses on both antecedents in this
environment.
Social Media: Facebook Fan Pages for Companies
Amongst all current social media offerings, Facebook is the most relevant for companies in regards to their corporate branding efforts (Shen & Bissell, 2013; Vernuccio, 2014). Facebook was originally created to connect friends, but it has since grown to a multi-faceted online platform that can fulfil the need to engage with friends and contacts in addition to companies and brands (Yan, 2011). It has become a popular tool for PR & advertising to reach thousands or millions of people at once: “the increasing number of potential clients on Facebook, and their dedication to online surfing have equipped this social networking site with business and branding value” (Shen & Bissell, 2013, p.632). On Facebook the potential web presence and stakeholder reach exceed that of corporate websites or marketing emails
because the amount of users on Facebook quite frankly eclipses the number of people who engage with official websites and promotional emails (Jung & Kim, 2016).
Facebook provides five options for organizations to connect with their consumers: (1) Facebook ads, (2) social plugins, (3) sponsored stories, (4) Facebook apps and (5) Facebook brand pages (fan pages). The latter offers the largest number of interaction possibilities by direct two-way communication with customers, and is the entity analysed here. Facebook fan pages are operated by the organization and managed by undisclosed moderators, assigned by the company. A brand page can have an unlimited number of members, referred to as fans or followers. The contents corporations provide on their brand pages are called posts, which appear in the centre of the page. Depending on the customized interaction policies, followers of the page can like the post by clicking the ‘like’ button, or react to them by choosing one of the following: ‘love’, ‘haha’, ‘wow’, ‘sad’ or ‘angry’. They can engage further by
commenting on the post or by sharing it, and include user-generated content i.e. images in their comments, if the page settings allow so. These actions generate stories, which then display on the followers’ friends’ Facebook feed (Pletikosa Cvijikj & Michahelles, 2013, Facebook, 2016).
Returning to the two antecedents of corporate brand image argued for by Tran and colleagues (2015), Facebook is not only the context but also the platform for interaction and communication. It thus covers the first antecedent of corporate brand image, which is interaction with the company and communication through various channels.
Corporate Branding
The second antecedent is the perceived communication effort. In the present study corporate branding is chosen as the relevant communication effort and is thus investigated further.
The corporate brand defines the firm that stands behind the offering that stakeholders encounter (D. Aaker, 2004). A successful corporate brand means significant leverage for companies, as it can cultivate positive associations with the company (Biraghi & Gambetti, 2015; D. E. Schultz & Kitchen, 2004). When corporate brand experiences are positive, the brand images in the stakeholder’s mind can be influenced in a meaningful way, so that stakeholders then advocate and support the company (Abratt & Kleyn, 2012).
Corporate branding is about the “process of creating and maintaining a favourable image and reputation for the company by managing behaviour, communication and symbolism” (Juntunen, 2012, p.231). According to Schulz (2005), a central dimension of corporate branding is enhanced recognition through the provision of names, symbols and experiences. Also, expressing central ideas, promises and distinct characteristics towards the competition are central to corporate branding.
On a macro level, corporate branding is defined as a strategy itself where the
“corporate name is dominant in endorsing all of the firms product and service brands” (Rao, Agarwal, & Dahlhoff, 2004). On a micro level, corporate branding strategies entail corporate marketing, including corporate advertising (Balmer & Stephen, 2006) or communication of sustainability and good causes (Ko, Hwang, & Kim, 2013) amongst others. Furthermore, a corporation can brand itself visually, by highlighting the brand logo or symbols, (Foroudi, Melewar, & Gupta, 2014) or through storytelling and brand story strategies (Gensler et al., 2013). Heritage branding, which has the corporate identity and history as the core message (Balmer, Stuart, & Greyser, 2009) is yet another corporate branding strategy. These strategies all have the same goal: to gain valuable intangible assets, form corporate image and yield a competitive advantage by standing out against competitors.
Research shows that there is no best practice for corporate branding, however different approaches stem from different disciplines within the firm. As presented in Figure 1,
corporate branding often roots in one of five distinct key disciplines within a corporation. These are highly intertwined, which is why they must be disentangled for further analysis.
Figure 1
Key Concepts from Different Disciplines in a Corporate Branding Context (Adapted from: M. Schultz, 2005)
Marketing. Because the conceptual origin of branding lies in the marketing discipline, many organizations still treat corporate branding as an extension of product branding. According to M. Schultz (2005) the marketing discipline in the corporate branding context centres on the key concept of product branding. A marketing-based approach to corporate branding thus entails product branding and brand experiences, focussing on product brand image and consumer relations. According to this approach the product is the focus of the company’s communications, which are rather persuasive and unidirectional. The goal is to create a favourable image of the product, and through that of the corporate brand, seduce
consumers into buying the product and connect with them on POS level (Belch & Belch, 2015; M. Schultz, 2005).
Recent research in marketing emphasizes the connectedness of brands and consumers in social media, which has led to a new form of advertising, so-called consumer-generated advertising (Lawrence, Fournier, & Brunel, 2013). Because social media facilitates
exchanging and sharing between companies and consumers, the latter might take over the advertising task for the company by creating advertorial content (Lawrence et al., 2013) or by sharing brand experiences and stories (Gensler et al., 2013). A company can leverage that by connecting with the consumers over their consumer-generated content.
Visual Identity. Visual identity construction is important in the context of corporate branding as it provides the company with “enhanced stakeholder recognition and
associations” (Abratt & Kleyn, 2012, p.1653). According to M. Schultz (2005) the visual identity discipline entails a focus on brand symbols, style and aesthetics. More specifically, corporate visual identity “consists of the corporate name, logotype and/or symbol, typography and colour” (Melewar & Saunders, 1998, p. 281).
Communication. From a communication-based perspective, corporate branding is seen as a way to communicate “who” the organization is and how it contributes in society. It states its licence to operate by communicating corporate mission and vision (M. Schultz, 2005).
According to Shee and Abratt (1989), corporate mission is an expression of corporate purpose in the current societal environment. Corporate vision is more prospective and specifies the desired status of the company towards itself or society in the future (El-Namaki, 1992).
With the emergence of online media, corporate communications have moved towards greater transparency (M. Schultz, 2005; Vernuccio, 2014). From a communication
perspective, corporate branding is thus a way for a company to express social legitimacy by transparently documenting and reflecting corporate behaviour in areas such as environmental and social responsibility. Transparency on a more practical level also means that a corporation
reveals insights into corporate processes and systems (Vernuccio, 2014).
Another aspect of corporate branding that the communication discipline has
contributed to is the development of more narrative ways of communicating the central ideas of the organization (M. Schultz, 2005). Corporate storytelling is the process of using narration from inside the organization about people, practices and policies as well as the history,
mission and vision for the future (Dowling, 2006; Gill, 2015). Literature on storytelling and brand stories also confirms that narrative corporate communications are enhanced by new technologies and social media (Gensler et al., 2013; Wehmeier & Schultz, 2011).
Organizational Theory. The concept of organizational theory has contributed to corporate branding by emphasizing the importance of corporate identity, corporate culture and
employee branding.
According to M. Schultz (2005) organizational theory in a corporate branding context centres on how employees are involved in the construction of corporate identity and how culture is communicated to and through them, which conforms with recent scholarship that highlights how corporate identity is not given, but co-constructed with internal and external stakeholders (Cornelissen, Christensen, & Kinuthia, 2012). According to Abratt and Kleyn (2012), “corporate identity is expressed through the corporate brand in form of visual identity, the brand promise [and] the brand personality” (p.1053). Because visual identity is covered as a discipline itself, the focus here is on the promise and the personality of the corporate brand. Communicating brand promise entails communicating functional values of the brand such as price or quality, along with emotional values, such as experience (Morsing, 2006).
Brand personality is usually defined as the set of human characteristics that
stakeholders attribute to a corporation (J. Aaker, 1997). However, Plummer (2000) suggests that there are two sides of brand personality: the perceived brand personality and the brand personality statement. The perceived personality is simply the human characteristics that consumers attach to a brand, while the brand personality statement is an articulation of what a
corporation would like their consumers to feel about the brand over time. A corporate branding strategy implemented by the company can thus only control the brand personality statement.
Lastly, M. Schultz (2005) mentions organizational culture, which expresses the philosophy of the organization (Gray & Balmer, 1998). It includes the heritage, i.e. the historically embedded culture of the company (where do we come from?) and how it is manifested in the way employees feel about the company (M. Schultz, 2005). Moreover, organizational culture can also be expressed by communicating organizational development (M. Schultz, 2005).
Strategy. The last discipline that had an important influence on corporate branding is strategy. According to M. Schultz (2005), organizational strategy in the corporate branding context centres on positioning, which is the expression of uniqueness to increase recognition and valuation in order to differentiate the organization strategically. It also entails brand vision and the expression of expertise in the field the company operates in. Thus, the focus here is on positioning, organizational competence and expertise (M. Schultz, 2005), since brand vision is covered as part of the communication discipline.
Another aspect of organizational strategy entails corporate reputation (M. Schultz, 2005), which affects how a company is perceived amongst stakeholders, its trustworthiness and, therefore, its image in general. It is defined as the attributed values such as authenticity, honesty, responsibility and integrity (Dowling, 2001). Besides efforts of corporate social responsibility and involvement in good causes, already covered in the communication
discipline, an aspect of being honest and having a good reputation is the ability of a company to transparently communicate their actions and believably handle criticism by reacting to it in word or change (Floreddu et al., 2014; M. Schultz, 2005). It also entails to react and provide a solution in times of crises.
In sum, these diverse disciplines, as roots or extensions of corporate branding, can be argued as communication efforts and, therefore, precede corporate brand image (Tran et al., 2015). This aligns with several research findings: scholars who have studied the distinct disciplines found that visual identity through a memorable company logo has an effect on corporate image (Foroudi et al., 2014), and successful CSR communications enhance a positive corporate brand image (Du, Bhattacharya, & Sen, 2010; Huang & Lien, 2012).Also, studies have shown that, if companies make the effort to communicate their reputation, their corporate image will strengthen (Jones, Temperley, & Lima, 2009), and stories told by an organisation also determine corporate brand associations such as image (Gensler et al., 2013). Therefore, if the distinct disciplines have a positive impact on corporate image, it follows logically that a corporate branding strategy, which stems from at least one of those disciplines, will have a positive impact on corporate image. In line with the two antecedents of corporate image, i.e. communication effort and interaction (Tran et al., 2015), it is thus argued that corporate branding on social media, where the customer can interact with the organisation and perceive the communication effort, will have a positive impact on corporate brand image. The following hypothesis is proposed:
H1: Corporate branding on Facebook has a positive effect on corporate brand image.
Because corporate branding is often seen simply as an extension of the key disciplines within an organization (M. Schultz, Antorini, & Csaba, 2005), research and practice have placed an emphasis on the disciplines individually, rather than on corporate branding as a concept and discipline of its own. In practice, this has led to discipline-based approaches to corporate branding (Antorini & Andersen, 2005; M. Schultz, 2005), which focus mainly on one discipline in order to brand the corporation. This leads to the following hypothesis:
H2: Companies focus on one of the key disciplines in the organization when using
Shift in Corporate Branding Theory
In the last decade, there has been a shift in corporate branding theory (Hatch & Schultz, 2002). Before the shift, corporate branding was seen as a management function that should align strategic vision, organizational culture and corporate image (Balmer, 2001). In other words, managers would think of what the organizational culture is, how they want the organization to be perceived and what they want its image to be. They would project these ideas on their stakeholders through well-planned communication campaigns. But since communication has changed, corporate branding has changed too. In today’s online society, corporate branding is not merely a management function where the CEO defines his corporate brand and conveys it to his stakeholders. Today, corporate branding is an on-going process of corporate brand co-creation (Gensler et al., 2013; Juntunen, 2012) conforming with the
current school of thought regarding value co-creation. M. Schultz (2005) argues that corporate branding is not a one-way street but depends more on the ability of the company to express its distinct identity and heritage while simultaneously involving stakeholders and interact with them in order to make this differentiation engaging and meaningful.
Social media has enabled fast, boundary-spanning and time-independent
communication amongst consumers with and about the corporate brand (Biraghi & Gambetti, 2015) so that the individual consumer is empowered and through the connection with others becomes a creating player who can influence the company with the power of the group (Antorini & Andersen, 2005). This means that in practice a company cannot focus only on their marketing efforts for example, but should also integrate other disciplines, i.e. strategy or communications of legitimacy into their corporate branding, as they might otherwise neglect discourse and topics relevant to their consumers. This is coherent with the cross-disciplinary approach to corporate branding, argued for by Antorini, Andersen and Schultz (2005). According to them, the discipline-based approach applied in research and practice neglects the synergic outcomes of corporate branding, which can only appear when the distinct
concepts are cross-disciplinary integrated (Antorini & Andersen, 2005; M. Schultz, 2005). If corporate brands employ an integrated approach and actively engage consumers as
co-creators of the brand, they can achieve maximum impact and positive brand associations, such as image amongst consumers (Biraghi & Gambetti, 2015; Jones et al., 2009; D. E. Schultz & Kitchen, 2004). Thus, in light of the shift in corporate branding theory, it may be argued that the most effective branding strategy will be an integrated one, stemming from all different disciplines in a corporation and showing a holistic approach with a focus on the synergic outcomes, contrary to the separatist approach still employed by a lot of companies (D. E. Schultz & Kitchen, 2004; M. Schultz, 2005). Thus, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H3: An integrated approach to corporate branding on Facebook has a more positive
effect on corporate brand image than a discipline-based approach.
Corporate Branding in Social Media
One of the few studies on the use of social media for corporate branding by Vernuccio (2014) has revealed that because the environment of social media is regarded as dialogic, there are two closely interrelated imperative strategic approaches to corporate branding in social media: openness and interactivity. According to Vernuccio’s findings, combining openness and interactivity results in the most effective corporate branding strategy for social media, which calls for further analysis.
Openness in social media takes on several dimensions. An open brand lowers its boundaries and allows for participation, interaction and co-creation. “The ‘open’ brand is not the sole protagonist in the process of meaning generation” (Vernuccio, 2014, p. 217). In the context of Facebook brand pages, this means that a company allows for comments and shares as well as user-generated content to facilitate co-creation and engagement. Further, openness in social media entails participation, which means that followers become co-protagonists in the process of brand storytelling (Vernuccio, 2014). The brand can show this by asking for
their opinion and feedback and encouraging them to engage in brand content by liking, commenting and sharing, and uploading user-generated content.
Interactivity in the online context has been defined in two main ways, namely as functional interactivity, which refers to the technicality of online presence, such as page speed and navigation, and as perceptual interactivity. The former is not applicable to social media, because companies cannot control the technicality of the external pages that host their content, such as Facebook. Per contra, perceptual interactivity is controllable for the organization. It does not focus on the technological features of the site but refers to cues within the message itself that give users the impression of a dialogue (Labrecque, 2014). Labrecque calls this parasocial interaction, which refers to an imagined social interaction with someone or something by ways of a medium. According to Dijkmans et al. (2015) an
important feature of dialogue in the online environment is communication in a human style and use of a conversational human voice. The conversational human voice has been defined as “an engaging and natural style of organizational communication as perceived by an organization’s publics based on interactions between individuals in the organization and individuals in publics” (Kelleher, 2009, p. 177). An organization has a high level of conversational human voice if it enhances conversational communication, for example, by asking questions to the users. In addition, it is also demonstrated by openness for dialogue, by addressing criticism directly and providing immediate feedback. It also includes a sense of humour in content and human treatment of others (Kelleher, 2009).
Openness and interactivity are two closely interrelated approaches. According to Vernuccio (2014) the key elements of interactivity are “the social and relational dimensions of exchange (…) and the scope of self-expression” (p. 217) that are made available to the users. Openness, on the other hand, is related more to the accepted loss of control (Vernuccio, 2014). Therefore, it is argued that openness represents the options that a company provides to users online in order to loosen control, whereas interactivity relates more to the tone and
topicality of the content in order to enhance dialogue. However, both approaches go hand in hand and can be understood as one entity, because without openness, interactivity will not be conductive and vice versa.
Hence, corporate branding strategies must be examined in light of their interactivity and openness, because when the corporate branding strategy on Facebook is marked by openness and interactivity it can positively influence the corporate image (Vernuccio, 2014). It is expected that an integrated and holistic Facebook fan page branding strategy
communicated in an interactive and open manner will enhance a positive corporate image. Therefore, the following hypotheses are proposed:
H4a: An integrated approach to corporate branding on Facebook that is open and
interactive has the most positive effect on corporate brand image.
H4b: An integrated approach to corporate branding on Facebook that is not open and
not interactive still has a positive effect on corporate brand image.
H4c: A discipline-based approach to corporate branding on Facebook that is open
and interactive has the least positive effect on corporate brand image.
Fashion Brands and perceived price-segment
The Facebook fan pages of two fashion companies, precisely Primark and Chanel, are under investigation in this research. Although social media is used extensively by fashion brands (Kontu & Vecchi, 2015), luxury brands, such as Chanel, are facing the challenge of openness and meeting consumers’ online expectations of interactively engaging them, along with potential consumers, on a large scale. It is argued by fashion scholars that luxury brands try to stay exclusive and somewhat difficult to reach (Hennings, Wiedmann, & Klarmann, 2012) and that the myth and exclusivity of luxury brands are key attributes which add extra value (Kim & Ko, 2012). However, myth and exclusivity do not fit the social media context of openness and interactivity. Thus, the following additions to the hypothesis are proposed:
H5a: Luxury brands are less interactive in their corporate branding on Facebook
than budget brands.
H5b: Luxury brands are less open in their corporate branding on Facebook than
budget brands.
Furthermore, in the context of fashion brands, Islam and Rahmann (2016) argue that corporate image is especially important because it is more notable in fashion than in other corporate formats. In this context, the corporate image translates neatly into brand love and loyalty because it can work as the personification of the brand and serve consumers as a tool to express their self-image. Hence, a positive image will inspire passion and advocacy for these brands among consumers.
Research has found that the better the image of a fashion brand, the more a consumer is willing to spend (Park & Kim, 2015). Respectively, luxury brands are characterized by their high price (Dhaoui, 2014)whereas budget brands, such as Primark, should serve the mass market with relatively low prices. In that sense, being a luxury brand bears certain
competitive advantages. As mentioned above, the myth and exclusivity connected to luxury brands add extra value, such as an enhanced image (Kim & Ko, 2012).
As the price-segment is a key characteristic of fashion brands(Arora, 2013), it is argued that being a budget or a luxury brand will influence social media performance albeit the communication efforts. The same branding strategy can affect corporate image differently depending on whether the company is perceived as budget or luxury. It is expected that if a corporate brand is perceived as luxury, the corporate image will be more positive, regardless of whether the corporate branding strategy is integrated, open and interactive since, as mentioned above, myth and exclusivity enhance the image. Additionally, as fashion image is used to express self-image, it follows logically that a mythical and exclusive image is more desirable than a budget, mass-market image. Consequently, the corporate image of a budget
brand will be less positive, if not negative, even when applying a holistic, open and interactive approach to corporate branding. The following hypothesis is proposed:
H6: Price-segment moderates the effect of corporate branding on corporate image.
Method
The investigation of the impact of corporate branding on corporate image on Facebook is conducted using a multi-method approach studying two fashion brands, namely Primark as a budget brand and Chanel as a luxury brand. In order to test the hypotheses and answer the research questions, two studies are performed. First, a content analysis reveals how fashion brands use Facebook for corporate branding, testing hypotheses H2 and H4a and b.
Table 1
Hypotheses Tested in Content Analysis
H2: Companies focus on one of the key disciplines in the organization when using social media for corporate branding.
H5a: Luxury brands are less interactive in their corporate branding on Facebook than budget brands.
H5b: Luxury brands are less open in their corporate branding on Facebook than budget brands.
Then, an online experiment performed with Facebook users as participants shows how an integrated approach influences corporate image in comparison to a discipline-based
approach, and what the differences are if the company behind these approaches is Primark, Chanel or a fictional brand, testing hypotheses H1, H3, H4a-c and H6.
Table 2
Hypotheses Tested in Experiment
H1: Corporate branding on Facebook has a positive effect on corporate brand image.
H3: An integrated approach to corporate branding on Facebook has a more positive effect on corporate brand image than a discipline-based approach.
H4a: An integrated approach to corporate branding on Facebook that is open and interactive
has the most positive effect on corporate brand image.
H4b: An integrated approach to corporate branding on Facebook that is not open and not
interactive still has a positive effect on corporate brand image.
H4c: A discipline-based approach to corporate branding on Facebook that is open and
interactive has the least positive effect on corporate brand image.
H6: Price-segment moderates the effect of corporate branding on corporate image.
The Companies
CHANEL. Chanel is a French luxury goods brand founded in Paris in 1909 by Gabrielle ‘Bonheur’ Chanel. Today’s head designer and creative director is German designer and photographer Karl Lagerfeld. They sell apparel, shoes, accessories, jewellery, including watches, and fragrances. Interestingly, although CHANEL does not have an online shop, it is present on all major social media channels including Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn and Twitter, and is ranked the most popular luxury brand on social media (Wightman-Stone, 2016).
Chanel tries to create a myth around its founder and the brand itself. There is no “about” section on the corporate webpage. There is however an external site called “Inside Chanel”, where the life journey of Coco Chanel and of the company after her passing is portrayed in short films and interactive info boxes.
According to Chanel’s mission statement on Facebook and LinkedIn, the brand strives to inspire women of all ages all over the world with its timeless modernity. The look portrays an image of elegance, grace and style (“Chanel Facebook Page,” n.d., “Chanel LinkedIn Page,” n.d.; Reynolds, 2013a). Attributes of Chanel are heritage, perfectionism, elegancy, the minimalist ‘less is more’ approach, high-quality, luxury, sophistication and elite status (Anderson, 2015; Reynolds, 2013a; Wightman-Stone, 2016).
The philosophy behind Chanel is that “Chanel is above all style. Fashion passes, style remains” (“Chanel Facebook Page,” n.d.). The heritage of the brand revolves mainly around
its founder Gabrielle ‘Coco’ Chanel. She has “reinvented fashion by transcending its conventions, creating an uncomplicated luxury that changed women’s lives forever. She followed no rules, epitomising the very modern values of freedom, passion and feminine elegance” (“Chanel Facebook Page,” n.d.).
The company’s vision statement of 2008 is to be “the ultimate house of luxury, defining style and creating desire, now and forever” (Reynolds, 2013b, p. n.d.). This suggests that Chanel aspires to be trend setting and a desired role model luxury brand. Now and forever suggests that Chanel is ageless, constant and enduring, and that it will never follow trends but set them itself.
In sum, Chanel positions itself by heritage, pointing towards the myths around Coco Chanel at every opportunity, as well as by high-quality and timeless luxury.
PRIMARK. Primark is an Irish apparel retail chain founded in Dublin in 1969 by Arthur
Ryan. Today it operates 320 stores in eleven countries across Europe and the US. Primark offers a diverse range of products, including apparel for men, women, babies and kids, home ware, accessories, beauty products and confectionary. PRIMARK also does not sell online but has a presence on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, LinkedIn and Snap chat.
Primark’s mission statement is “Wear. Share. Inspire” (“Primark Facebook Page,” n.d.). According to the description on their corporate website, Primark is “adored by fashion fans and value seekers alike [and] established as the destination store for keeping up with the latest looks without breaking the bank” (Primark, 2016a, p. n.d.).
The philosophy behind Primark is that it provides clothes at affordable prices. The affordable prices are due to the fact that Primark does not own their factories, but shares them with other retailers (Primark, 2016b). Their outsourcing approach has caused negative press in the past due to accusations of unethical working conditions, safety issues and child labour (Dearden, 2014; Hopkins, 2008).
The company’s vision is, therefore, to continue offering cheap clothing to stay competitive, while having the ability to “take care of [their] people, being good neighbours and fostering ethical business relationships. [They want to] work hard to ensure that the products are made with respect for the environment, in good working conditions, and that workers’ rights are respected” (Primark, 2016b, p. n.d.).
In sum, Primark positions itself by value for money, the competitive price and looks that adhere to latest trends.
Method and Results – Study 1: Content Analysis
The first study was a content analysis of the Facebook brand posts of Chanel and Primark. The material was collected on their official Facebook fan pages on the 1st of
December 2016. For each brand the eighty most recent posts were collected, excluding double posts and shared posts. The codebook (see Appendix C) consisted of 48 coding questions.The first four documented the number of the post, the coder ID, the company and the post type. The remaining 44 questions were used to code the characteristics of the disciplines as described in the theoretical background. All discipline questions asked for presence or absence of the characteristic and were phrased as yes and no questions, resulting in binary variables valued either 0 or 1.
Measures (Codebook)
As outlined above, companies were expected to differ in terms of how open they are on their fan page on Facebook and how interactively they communicate with their page followers. Thus, the first two variables were openness and interactivity.
Openness and Interactivity. Openness consisted of five coding questions including
whether they were asked for feedback or opinions (OP.5_3), reactions, (OP.5_4) or uploads (OP.5_5) (Vernuccio, 2014).
Interactivity consisted of seven coding questions referring to how the consumers were treated by the company’s posts (Labrecque, 2014). They included the facets that show a conversational human voice, namely humour (INT.6_4), addressing criticism (INT.6_7) and providing feedback (INT.6_5-6) (Kelleher, 2009), as well as three coding questions for whether the post asked a question (INT.6_1), addressed the fans directly (INT.6_2) and showed human treatment of the followers (INT.6_3) (Dijkmans, Kerkhof, Buyukcan-Tetik, et al., 2015; Kelleher, 2009).
Corporate Branding. It was expected that companies focus on one of the disciplines in order to form their corporate brand. Thus, the variables for the content analysis were derived from each of the five disciplines, namely marketing, visual identity, communication,
organizational theory and strategy.
Each of the five different discipline-based approaches to corporate branding was operationalized separately. However, it was expected that a discipline-based approach would be determined by the statistical prominence of one of the disciplines. An integrated approach would be marked by an overall statistical average of a majority of the five concepts. Not every concept had to be present in each post but the average of all eighty analysed posts was taken.
Marketing. Facebook brand posts categorized as marketing-based are about one or
more products of the brand, sales-driven, meaning either promotional or advertorial and persuasive (Belch & Belch, 2015). This entails promotional attempts such competitions, rebates or sales announcements. Also, the content can be an advertising extension,
campaigning for the brand’s products. In order to connect with consumers, a Facebook post also creates awareness of consumer touch points such as events, stores or the corporate website or incorporate consumer-generated content.
Marketing was therefore coded with six coding questions covering product focus (MAR.7_1), promotional messages (MAR.7_2), sales activation (MAR.7_3), consumer touch point references (MAR.7_4) and user-generated content incorporation (MAR.7_5) (Belch & Belch, 2015; M. Schultz, 2005) as well as persuasiveness (MAR.7_6).
Visual Identity. On Facebook, companies are bound to the page aesthetics. Unlike on
corporate websites where they can control font type and design as well as layout, visual identity construction is limited on Facebook. However, the content can include the company name, as well as visuals in form of images or videos, hosting the corporate logo. Moreover, visuals can be kept in a particular corporate colour scheme. Another way of visual expression on Facebook is the use of emojis. Because the typography in the Facebook text cannot be customized, emojis offer another option to visually distinguish textual messages (Kayne, 2015).
Visual Identity was coded with five coding questions including visual (VI.8_1), name (VI.8_2), logo (VI.8_3), colour (VI.8_4) (Melewar & Saunders, 1998)and emojis (VI.8_4) (Kayne, 2015).
Communication. A communication-based Facebook post entails the mission of the
company, thus their corporate purpose and the corporate vision, namely what the company desires for itself and society (El-Namaki, 1992; Shee & Abratt, 1989). In order to code mission and vision of the companies, the coding instructions included the company descriptions as outlined above, which were collected from the companies’ own sources as well as magazines and blog articles about the companies. Additionally, the post includes insights into corporate processes and systems (Vernuccio, 2014), communicates the
company’s involvement in CSR activities (M. Schultz, 2005) or shows corporate storytelling and narration (Dowling, 2006; Gill, 2015).
Communication was therefore coded with six coding questions covering company insights (COM.9_1) (M. Schultz, 2005), mission and vision (COM.9_2-3) (El-Namaki, 1992;
Shee & Abratt, 1989), storytelling (COM.9_5-6) (Dowling, 2006; Gill, 2015) and CSR (COM.9_4) (M. Schultz, 2005).
Organizational Theory. Posts categorized as organizational theory based talk about
the company’s philosophy, heritage and development. They refer to the company’s employees and include them into their communication by mentioning them or their names in comments or message cues such as “us” and “we” or by communicating how it is to work for the
company. Posts also refer to functional and emotional values as part of their brand promise. In the case of fashion brands this can be quality of the product and a unique emotional asset, for example “feeling sexy”. As part of their brand personality companies articulate what they would like the consumers to feel about the company. In order to code identity, culture and heritage of the companies, the coding instructions included the company descriptions as outlined above.
Organizational theory was coded with nine coding questions covering employee branding with three items (OT.10_1-3) (M. Schultz, 2005), identity with three items (Abratt & Kleyn, 2012), one for personality (OT.10_4) (Plummer, 2000) and two for promise (OT.10_5-6) (Morsing, 200(OT.10_5-6), and culture, heritage (Gray & Balmer, 1998) and organizational
development (M. Schultz, 2005) with one item for each (OT.10_7-9).
Strategy. On Facebook fan pages companies can communicate stand-alone attributes,
in order to express their uniqueness as well as their positioning by showing constantly where they stand: They can position by price, quality, use or the competition (Belch & Belch, 2015). The corporate content on Facebook should apart from that show competence by expressing expertise in the field the company operates in. Furthermore, if the companies were faced by complaint or criticism on their Facebook brand page they should react in an appropriate manner in order to express and strengthen their corporate reputation. In order to code
positioning of the companies, the coding instructions included the conclusion of the company descriptions as outlined above.
Strategy was coded with six coding questions covering reputation with two items (STR.11_1-2) (Dowling, 2006), uniqueness (M. Schultz, 2005) and positioning (Belch & Belch, 2015) with each one item (STR.11_3-4) and expertise (M. Schultz, 2005) with two items (STR.11_5-6).
Data Analysis
The collected material (N=180) was analysed by the author and a second coder in order to check codebook reliability: 12% (n=22) was double coded. The second coder was male, age 21, with no prior knowledge of fashion companies or corporate branding, and was thus trained before. A Krippendorff’s Alpha was taken for all variables (see Appendix A).
The Kalpha results showed that the codebook overall was reliable. Undefined results appeared when the Kalpha started overcorrecting when there was no single disagreement. Thus both, the percentage agreement and the Kalpha results were taken into account when choosing variables for the content analysis. Variables were retained when percentage agreement was above 75% and the according Kalpha result >0.4. Thus, brand personality (OT.10_4) and organizational development (OT.10_6) as well as uniqueness (STR.11_3) were taken out for further analysis.
Scale Development
In order to perform statistical tests on the data from the content analysis the variables were summarized in distinct scales representing the disciplines. Prior to scale development, principle component factor analyses (PCA) with extraction by a fixed number of factors (being 1) were conducted for each discipline in order to check factor loadings.
Openness and Interactivity. PCA showed that User-generated content did not load
analysis. The remaining four items explained 47.29% of the variance. The newly computed openness scale (M=0.28, SD=0.11) had a moderate reliability (α= .60).
For interactivity, all seven items loaded sufficiently on the factor and explained 40.39% of variance. The interactivity scale (M=0.23, SD=0.23) was reliable (α= .71).
Marketing. Promotional messages and UGC incorporation loaded negatively on
marketing (resp. factor loading = -.32, -.53). Consumer touch points did also not load
sufficiently on marketing (factor loading < .40). When trying to compute a scale regardless, it showed to be unreliable α= .46. Therefore, the marketing scale did not include promotional messages and consumer touch points but UGC incorporation was reversely recoded and included. The four items explained 55.19% of variance. A reliable scale (M=0.69, SD=0.31) was computed with a Cronbach’s alpha of α= .72.
Visual Identity. Emojis loaded negatively on visual identity (factor loading = -.58). Because it was counter-intuitive to include this variable into visual identity reversely coded, it was taken out for further analysis. The remaining four items explained 59.3% of the variance. A reliable scale (M=0.55, SD=0.31) was computed for visual identity with a Cronbach’s alpha of α= .70.
Communication. Mission did not load sufficiently on communication (factor loading = .23) and was thus taken out for further analysis. The remaining five items explained 57.93% of variance. The newly computed scale for communication (M=0.22, SD=0.26) was
moderately reliable with a Cronbach’s alpha of α= .69.
Organizational Theory. Employee related message-cues loaded negatively and insufficiently on organisational theory (factor loading = -.28) and was thus taken out for further analysis. Because brand personality and organizational development had a low Cronbach’s alpha result (see Appendix A) they were also taken out from the scale. The remaining six items explained 33.6% of the variance. The newly computed scale (M=0.27,
SD=0.21) was however less reliable with a Cronbach’s alpha of α= .47. Thus any further conclusions drawn were interpreted with due caution, because of rather low reliability. Strategy. The last PCA showed that competence: the business did not load sufficiently on strategy (factor loading = -.06) and uniqueness showed a low Cronbach’s Alpha result, which is why both variables were not included in the scale. The remaining four items explained 33.52% of the variance but the computed scale (M=0.32, SD=0.21) showed to be unreliable with a Cronbach’s Alpha of α= .29.
The newly computed scales were categorized as interval, ranging from 0 to 1, with higher scores indicating more focus on the discipline.
Study Results
To test H2 (Companies focus on one key discipline when using social media for corporate branding) independent sample t-tests for each discipline were executed first. Marketing. There was a significant difference in use of marketing for corporate branding on Facebook for Chanel (M= 0.57, SD= 0.22) and Primark (M= 0.81, SD= 0.34); t(134.53)= 5.26, p= .000 with this effect being quite large d= 0.84. Thus, Primark focused far more on marketing than Chanel.
Visual Identity. There was a significant difference in use of visual identity for Primark (M= 0.34, SD= 0.19) and Chanel (M= 0.76, SD= 0.25); t(158)= -11.58, p= .000. This effect was extremely large with a Cohen’s D of d= 1.89, indicating that Chanel was by far more focussed on visual identification than Primark.
Communication. There was a significant difference in use of communication as a corporate branding strategy for Primark (M= 0.06, SD= 0.12) and Chanel (M= 0.38, SD= 0.27); t(108.8)= -9.77, p= .000. This effect was also very large with a Cohen’s D of d= 1.53, indicating that Primark essentially did not use communication as a strategy in their corporate branding whereas Chanel made the occasional effort.
Organisational Theory. There was no significant difference in use of organisational theory for Primark (M= 0.27, SD= 0.16) and Chanel (M= 0.28, SD= 0.24); t(139.85)= -0.32, p= .746. Essentially, neither of the two companies expressed organisational theory in their Facebook posts.
Strategy. There was a significant difference in use of strategy for Primark (M= 0.4, SD= 0.2) and Chanel (M= 0.24, SD= 0.17); t(151.25)= 5.2, p= .000, with a large effect (d= 0.86), indicating that Primark focused more on strategy in their corporate branding than Chanel. Discipline Based Approach. In order to see whether Chanel and Primark focused on one of the key disciplines, two separate one-way repeated measures ANOVA tests were
conducted.
For Chanel, Mauchly’s test indicated that the assumption of sphericity had been violated χ2(9)=47.45, p=.000. Therefore, degrees of freedom were corrected using Huynh-Feldt estimates of sphericity (ε=.79). The results show a significant effect for use of
disciplines for corporate branding F(3.15, 248.76)=94.71, p=.000. Post-hoc test (Bonferroni) revealed that all differences were statistically significant (p<.005), except for the difference between organisational theory and strategy. Moreover, Chanel scored the highest on visual identity and this score was significantly higher than of the second highest; marketing
(MDifference= 0.19, p=.000). Thus, Chanel significantly prioritized visual identity (see Table 3). For Primark, Mauchly’s test indicated that the assumption of sphericity was violated χ2
(9)=84.39, p=.000. Degrees of freedom were corrected using Greenhouse-Geisser estimates of sphericity (ε=.66). There was a significant effect for strategy F(2.63, 207.59)=135.27, p=.000. Post-hoc testing (Bonferroni) revealed statistically significant differences (p=.000), except for visual identity and organisational theory as well as strategy. Primark focused on marketing and this score was significantly larger than the score for the second most used strategy; visual identity (MDifference= 0.47, p=.000) (see Table 3).
Table 3
Mean Scores for Disciplines Primark & Chanel
Discipline PRIMARK (M) CHANEL (M)
Marketing 0.81*** 0.57***
Visual Identity 0.34 0.76***
Communication 0.06*** 0.38***
Organisational Theory 0.27 0.28
Strategy 0.4 0.24
Note. Minimum score = 0, maximum score = 1; highest scores are shown in bold,
***significantly different from all other scores at p<.005
H2, stating that companies focus on one of the key disciplines when using social media for corporate branding, was thus supported.
Integrated approach. After the distinct disciplines were tested individually as outlined above, the next step was to examine which of the two companies was more integrated in their overall corporate branding strategy on Facebook. A scale (M=0.39, SD=0.14) was computed from the mean of the 33 items that were used in the discipline-scales. This scale showed to be reliable for Chanel α= .76 and moderately reliable for Primark α= .61.
An independent t-test was again conducted in order to find a difference between the two companies. It showed that there was a significant difference between Primark (M= 0.35, SD= 0.11) and Chanel (M= 0.43, SD= 0.15); t(140.14)= -3.62, p= .000, with a medium to large effect of d= 0.61. Chanel was thus statistically more integrated in their approach to corporate branding on social media than Primark. However, looking at the two means, none of the two companies was truly integrated, because they both scored below the middle-point of the integrated approach scale, which ranged from 0 to 1 with 0.5 as the middle-point. This means, that even though statistically Chanel performed better, none of the two companies could be said to have a truly integrated approach.
In addition, both companies were analysed in regards to their interactivity and openness when communicating on social media in order to test H5 a/b.
Openness. An independent sample t-test was conducted in order to see differences
between the two brands. It showed that there was a significant difference in openness between Chanel (M= 0.25, SD= 0) and Primark (M=0.31, SD= 0.16); t(79)= 3.42, p= .001 and this effect was a moderate one d= 0.53. Thus, Primark appeared to be more open than Chanel.
Interactivity. An independent sample t-test showed a significant difference in interactivity
for Chanel (M= 0.13, SD= 0.13) and Primark (M= 0.32, SD= 0.26); t(118.29)= 5.66, p= .000 with this effect being quite large d= 0.92. Thus, Primark appeared to be far more interactive than Chanel in their social media corporate branding.
To conclude, Primark was more interactive and more open than Chanel in their corporate branding on social media. Thus, H5a and b, stating that luxury brands are less interactive and open than budget brands, were also supported.
Method and Results – Study 2: Experiment
The second study was an online experiment, which tested the effect of corporate branding on corporate image and the moderating effect of price-segment. The experiment was distributed on Facebook over the Christmas holidays via snowball sampling. It was available between the 21st of December 2016 and the 04th of January 2017 to Facebook friends of the author and her friends as well as various groups and pages within the social network.
Measures and Procedure
The experiment was divided in three parts (see Appendix E). It had a 3x3 design: There were nine conditions, three conditions per brand, namely Primark, Chanel and a fictional brand (see Appendix D). The conditions contained an image page, looking like the Facebook fan page of the brand, including three brand posts.
The first condition was the integrated and open/interactive condition. The content was manipulated to show topics from different disciplines (CSR, product marketing and employee
branding). The open and interactive characteristic was manipulated by showing fictional responses of the company to the user’s comments. The second condition was the integrated but not open/not interactive strategy, which consisted of the exact same content as the
previous one, with the difference that the subtitles of the images did not show an open manner or attempts to be interactive, such as a conversational human voice, and also user’s comments seemed unanswered. The third condition was discipline-based and open/interactive. Here, the content was manipulated to look strictly marketing-based and at the same time show a high level of conversational human voice and open manner as well as replies to user’s comments.
The conditions under the fictional brand were the control conditions, since no other factor but the corporate branding strategy should influence the corporate brand image here.
After exposure, participants were asked questions about how they perceived the image of the company.
Prior to material exposure, participants were briefed with a letter of consent and asked demographic questions about age, gender and nationality.
Then, they were asked company-specific questions, namely “Do you know company X?” (“yes”, “no”) and “Do you like company X?” (5-point Likert scale ranging from “like a great deal”, to “dislike a great deal”). These two questions served as control questions, because brand knowledge and brand liking would be controlled for in later analysis, since these factors can influence corporate brand image (D. Aaker, 1991; Bruhn, Schoenmueller, & Schäfer, 2012; Islam & Rahman, 2016). The last question was the manipulation check:
“Where would you place company X on a price-scale?” (“budget”, “I don’t know”, “luxury”). This question was supposed to test whether participants categorized the companies
accordingly: Primark as budget, the fictional company unknown and Chanel as luxury. In order to check the manipulation, 12 participants did a pre-test. 10 out of 12 categorized the companies correctly, indicating a successful manipulation.
The experiment was debriefed with a note on the randomization and a short explanation of the intentions of the study.
Corporate Brand Image. Turning to research methodology of corporate brand image
through personification, two scales have had some impact in the recent decades, namely the Aaker scale of brand personality (J. Aaker, 1997) and that of Davies et al. (2004) called the corporate character scale. J. Aaker includes five dimensions of corporate personality in her scale, namely excitement, sincerity, competence, sophistication and ruggedness consisting of 42 items. The corporate character scale by Davies et al. includes seven dimensions namely agreeableness, enterprise, competence, chic, ruthlessness, informality and machismo, consisting of 49 items. Da Silva and Alwi (2008, p. 126) argue that “both scales have contributed to a ‘generic’ personality scale, using the metaphor of brand as a person or personality traits”. However, none of these scales had been tested in an online environment, which is why Da Silva and Alwi reviewed the scales and adapted a scale for the measurement of online corporate brand image deriving from Davies et al.’s corporate character scale. Their scale includes five dimensions, namely agreeableness, enterprise, informality, chic and competence consisting of 20 items (see Table 4). They test the dimensions with a five-point Likert scale ranging from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree”.
Table 4
Items/Dimensions of Online Corporate Image (Da Silva & Alwi, 2008) Dimensions 20 Items
Agreeableness Pleasant, Friendly, Agreeable, Supportive
Enterprise Daring, Trendy, Exciting, Cool, Imaginative, Innovative, Technical
Informality Open, Easy-going, Simple, Straight-forward Chic Refined, Prestigious, Elegant
