Rather a fake story over no story? : storytelling theory, authenticity and brand attitude in a marketing context

(1)

Rather a fake story over no story?

Storytelling Theory, Authenticity

and Brand Attitude in a Marketing

Context.

Munise Can

6147372

Date of submission: 15-08-2014

MSc. In Business Studies – Marketing Track

Universiteit van Amsterdam

First supervisor: drs. J. Labadie

(2)

!

LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES

Figure 1: Elements of brand heritage (Urde et al 2007).

Figure 2: Authenticating objects, brands and experiences (Beverland 2010, p. 841) Figure 3: Product category involvement framework (Percy and Rossiter, 1992) Figure 4: Oliviano - Heritage

Figure 5: Oliviano - No Heritage Figure 6: Berrynade - Heritage Figure 7: Berrynade- No heritage Figure 8: Fotorano - Heritage Figure 9: Fotorano – No Heritage Figure 10: Modiano - Heritage Figure 11: Modiano – No Heritage Figure 12: Boxplot of outliers

Table 1: 3 Types of Authenticity cues in advertisement (Beverland 2008, p. 8) Table 2: Analysis mean Authenticity Scores per treatment

Table 3: Test of Normality

Table 4: Levene’s Test of Equality of Error Variances Table 5: Box’s Test of Equality of Covariance Matrices Table 6: Reliability and Item-Total Statistics Authenticity Table 7: Reliability and Item-Total Statistics Brand Attitude. Table 8 Tests of Within-Subjects Effects

Table 9: Between-subjects comparison Table 10: Univatiate test Condition Table 11: Univatiate test Involvement Table 12: independence of residuals Table 14: Moderated moderation model Table 15: Moderation model

Graph 1: Profile plot of differences in Authenticity Scores between product 1 (Olive Oil and Photo Camera) and product 2 (Lemonade and Fashion)

(4)

ABSTRACT

What happens when consumers realize that the story they love and believe is a carefully created concept? As more and more concept brands pop up, delivering a message instead of a product, the question remains what happens to this feeling of Authenticity consumers associate with a brand they know and love, when they find out that the story is part of the image. Consumers are in search for authentic brands and experiences. Storytelling creates this feeling of Authenticity. The aim of present study is to examine if the Perceived Authenticity of the product offering is stronger in case of true, fake or no heritage cues, based on the level of involvement. Theory lets to believe that consumers that are low involved would prefer a fake story over no story whereas consumers that are high involved would prefer no story over a fake story when assessing authenticity. Following theory, a true story would be the best option when trying to gain a sense of authenticity. One of the most important findings of this study is that low involved consumers score lower in perceived Authenticity when exposed to fake storytelling cues as opposed to no storytelling cues. Consumers that are high involved don’t significantly score lower in perceived Authenticity when exposed to fake storytelling cues as opposed to no storytelling cues. For both low as high involved consumers, it doesn’t make a difference if consumers are exposed to no or true heritage cues. This result implies it doesn’t matter if cues are provided in order to gain a sense of authenticity.

Keywords: Heritage, Storytelling, Concepting, Authenticity, Advertisement, Brand Attitude

(5)

(6)

TELLING THE STORY

Stories persuade us. Since the beginning of humankind, stories have been told from one generation to another and we are still listening. Following Woodside, Sood and Miller (2008), “people tend to think narratively rather than argumentatively or paradigmatically”. This section will elaborate on the use of storytelling within advertisements through concepting, and the effect on Authenticity and Brand Attitude, what is new about this notion and why this is of interest in a marketing context, the delimitations of this study and the following structure of this study.

COMMUNICATING THE BRAND VISION THROUGH STORYTELLING

We are all aware of the increase of exposure in branded messages, both online and offline, and this fog of advertisements will probably become even greater in the upcoming years. With all this information surrounding the consumer, marketers have to look for different ways to appeal to current and potential customers (Fournier and Avery, 2011). The penetration of digital media has changed nearly everything. It has changed viewing habits, challenged traditional media, forced brands to react to a crisis within hours, rather than weeks. What hasn’t changed is the necessity to understand what motivates a person to do this or that. To choose one object over another. To stay with one brand, or switch to a new one (Taylor, 2013).

Out of the 4 traditional marketing mix elements, communication has become the most important means to convey the meaning, vision or story of the brand to the consumer (Rijkenberg, 2005). Marketers have picked up on this trend and are increasingly adding storytelling elements in their communication efforts. In this we see a shift around us from new product development to new concept development (Rijkenberg, 2005). Brands are becoming visions of the way they would like the world to look like instead of a way to differentiate products from one another. Rijkenberg (2001) defines concepting as a different philosophical

(7)

approach, necessary to capture the imagination and the loyalty of consumers. In line with this view, Barnham (2008) argues that the successful brand is now expected to have a personality and a vision of the world; it needs to have Authenticity and substance. Due to these human characteristics, the brand gets separated from the product itself. Implying the brand and the product are not synonymous or an extension of one another.

Reynolds and Gutman (1984) argue that the personalized translation of the attributes in terms of consequences and personal values of a brand must be identified to tap into or understand the components of image. The brand concept becomes stronger by understanding linkages or connections between the levels that define the perceptual lens through which the consumer views the world and subsequently develops preferences for products. Through “concepting” the value of the underlying products becomes relatively irrelevant. Consumers don’t buy the product, they buy the vision of the brand. Storytelling becomes the way this brand essence and thus vision gets delivered to the customer.

“In traditional advertising, storytelling is used as part of the company's corporate branding strategy and as a sales promotional tool to generate recognition and identification” (Fog, Budtz, Munch and Blanchette, 2005). Nowadays, companies give their consumers an added-value experience that goes beyond the products they sell. The brands reflect a story that becomes the driving force behind their brand essence. Within this story a prominent spot is reserved for the heritage of the brand. Urde, Greyser and Balmer (2007) define brand heritage as “a dimension of a brand’s identity found in its track record, longevity, core values, use of symbols and particularly in an organizational belief that its history is important. Brand heritage differentiates from brand history as the brand heritage focuses on a contemporary context to place the history of the brand in where the history only focuses on the past of the brand.

This trend isn’t surprising. In times of uncertainty and turbulence due to financial and economical despair, consumers tend to choose brands with a heritage, as these brands are Perceived to be more ‘credible, trustworthy and reliable’ (Wiedmann, Hennings, Schmidt and

(8)

Wuestefeld, 2011) and a ‘cultural marker of Authenticity’ (Brown, Kozinets and Sherry, 2003).

STORYTELLING AND AUTHENTICITY

But what happens when consumers realize that the story they love and believe is a carefully created concept. As more and more concept brands pop up, delivering a message instead of a product, we can ask ourselves how consumers react to a story that is made up. Consumers are in search for authentic brands and experiences. Storytelling creates this feeling of Authenticity. But sometimes this is a feeling created by withy creatives, so what happens to this feeling of Authenticity consumers associate with a brand they know and love, when they find out that the story is part of the image.

To date, research focused solely on the influence of Authenticity on advertisement attitude through storytelling. Research is needed to examine what the influence of storytelling, or concepting, can be on brand Authenticity when consumers realize that the story is a created image within a marketing context. Is storytelling becoming a marketing trick that the consumer will become fed up with?

PROBLEM STATEMENT

Wiedmann et al. (2011) found that brand heritage is a positive driver of Brand Attitude. Their results show consumers search for authentic brands with genuine history. Brand Attitude is defined as “the perception about a brand as reflected by the brand associations held in consumer memory”

Heritage can be an important value driver as the early roots add Authenticity and differentiation to the brand (Aaker, 2004). Furthermore, a brand that claims a heritage creates expectations about past, current and future behavior that can add to consumer perceived value and minimize consumers risk. (Keller, 1993). Brown (2001) argues that the practice of modern marketing is increasingly characterized by a restrospective perspective,

(9)

where ‘make it old’ practices are the order of the day. This practice is nurtured by the demand for Authenticity by consumers and reflected in the purchase of a wide variety of market offerings, differing from food, art to more conventional consumer goods and services (Grayson and Martinec, 2004).

As Authenticity is often more contrived than real (Brown 2003), this research will focus on the influence of fake heritage through storytelling on the Perceived Authenticity of an advertisement message. In other words, what happens if one discovers that the story told is not authentic, even if the product satisfies the end-goals of the consumer.

The aim of present study is to examine if the Perceived Authenticity of the product offering is stronger in case of true, fake or no heritage cues, based on the level of involvement, and the influence on Brand Attitude.

EXAMINATION OF DIFFERENT CONSTRUCTS

Through concept development of marketers, advertisers or branding agencies consumers become part of the story of the brand. As consumers are becoming more critical they are becoming aware of this ‘makeable’ image of the brand. Does this influence their perception of the Authenticity of the brand or do they acknowledge that this is part of the game. The influence of sings of age, iconic cues, on assessments of Authenticity deserves further examination as these signs are not only found in product offerings whose Authenticity is related to history but as well in new product offerings that don’t have this connection to history (Grayson and Martinec, 2004). As marketers already make this extra effort to create offerings that exhibit simulations of these marks, they acknowledge the need for further research on the influence of these cues on Authenticity assessment.

This research will use heritage as the way a story is told within a total concept to deliver value to the consumer of a product offering. These stories are often shared through advertisement messages and therefore a marketing context is used to examine the effect of

(10)

storytelling cues on Authenticity. What happens to the Authenticity of the product offering if one discovers the story is fake and does it even mater? The focus will be on the effect of fake storytelling by creating all the elements that foster the sense of Authenticity and provide signals to the consumer that confirm Authenticity within the story. It will be interesting to see if consumers prefer a fake story, while acknowledging the fact that a story is made up and are aware of this, over no story at all.

MacInnes, Moorman and Jaworski (1991) propose that variations in advertising strategies and cues effect consumer processing-related activities. These activities mediate the impact of cues on the attitude towards the message, the product and intention to purchase. Building on this proposition this research focuses on the influence of Authenticity cues on the Brand Attitude.

DELIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

This research will focus on brands that are founded on the premise of the story that they tell making these brands pure concept-brand. Through storytelling the sense of Authenticity is created but there is a lack of proof. As this is one of the key elements of heritage this research will focus on the influence of this carefully created Authenticity of new brands on their overall brand image. Therefore non-existing brands will be used. Through the use of fake brands respondents do not have any prior knowledge and thus no brand associations with the product offering.

Advertisement in print will be used as the medium to test the hypotheses. Keller (1993) defines advertising as “any paid form of non-personal presentation and promotion of ideas, goods or services by an identified sponsor”. Advertising is often still a central element of a marketing communications program (Keller, 2009). However, it is usually not the only or most important element. Using just the advertisement as a means to convey the story is limiting to this research.

(11)

CONTRIBUTION

Storytelling isn’t something new. Neither is the influence of heritage on Brand Attitude. Though less is known about the effects of perceived insincerity of Authenticity on Brand Attitude. Consumers don’t like to be fooled. We think. Or maybe they don’t care. As one can imagine insincerity, due to the lack of history and thus heritage, will have a negative effect on brand image, it is interesting to examine if this is also the case if the feeling of Authenticity surrounding the product is of greater importance to the customer. Even if they know a product doesn’t have a history yet, they like the look and feel creating an authentic product more, so the missing history becomes of less importance. Even if heritage is something that’s been emphasized through storytelling.

Theoretical contribution

Current research point out the ways heritage can be used as a means to increase brand value. Research is needed to examine what the influence of storytelling through emphasizing brand heritage can be on brand Authenticity when consumers realize that there is no heritage. It will be interesting to see if there is a difference between product categories and the level of involvement, and if this involvement fits together with the idea of people caring about a fake story. If there is a significant relation between level of involvement and the story this would have further implications for research as now it is often thought to believe consumers don’t like to be fooled and therefore you shouldn’t dupe them.

As mentioned previous studies have proven the relationship between Authenticity and Brand Attitude. Unique about this research is the way Authenticity cues, by providing storytelling signals, are used between different groups of respondents, being either low or high involved. Making it possible to test the difference in Authenticity scores to see not only if it differs, but moreover when it differs.

(12)

Managerial contribution

There has been a shift in current management literature focusing on New Concept Development instead of New Product Development. This concept building asks for a different management philosophy regarding communication efforts (Rijkenberg, 2005). Marketers, advertisers and branding agencies as well as new concept/brand developers will gain from this research, as Authenticity has been proven to play a large role in the Brand Attitude and by creating brand value.

Practical relevance can thus be obtained by understanding on what level of consumer involvement a story influences the Authenticity of the product offering. Furthermore, Authenticity cues emphasizing heritage elements are used in this research in order to gain insights on consumers overall Brand Attitude regarding the product offering. It would be interesting to see if these queues indeed influence Brand Attitude through an in- or decrease in Authenticity.

STRUCTURE

This paper is structured as follows. First the existing literature on Brand Heritage, Authenticity and Brand Attitude will be discussed. What are the different elements and how do they relate to one another. Second, a conceptual model will be developed to focus on the different factors influencing Brand Heritage and their effect on Authenticity and Brand Attitude. Third, a methodology will be presented to measure the differences in product category involvement by the consumers and the influence of storytelling cues on Authenticity scores as well as the influence of Authenticity through storytelling on Brand Attitude, followed by the results of the empirical study. On the basis of this result a conclusion will be drawn and implication of the results will be given regarding future research and managerial implications.

(13)

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

The power of storytelling is discovered by many brands with the result of a story attached to every new product launch. For many brands this can even be the core reason of existence. When there are no storytelling signals in the advertisement, no signals can be picked up by the consumer. Furthermore, if product offerings, “any product, service or marketplace experience evaluated by a consumer (Grayson and Martinec, 2004)”, are not presented as being old or worn, people have a hard time assessing the offering as being authentic. Consumers often feel like old things should look old in order to be authentic.

The next sections will elaborate on the notion of Storytelling, Perceived Authenticity and Brand Attitude.

WHY BRANDS TELL A STORY Storytelling

People think mostly in terms of stories (Schank, 1990). By referring to previously understood stories, new events or problems are tackled. A large part of the information stored in and retrieved from memory is episodic, stories including experiences, summaries and relationships within specific context. By elaborating on these stories consumers are able to experience archetypal myths, “an original pattern of prototype in human mind” (Woodsides et al., 2008). These stories help consumers in their needs to find what makes them happy. Marketing enables this need in aiding consumers search for happiness. Through storytelling, consumers make sense of the meaning of events and evoke a sense of nostalgia.

Woodsides et al. (2008) propose in their study on storytelling that consumers often use product offerings as a way to enact story productions that reflect an archetypal myth. Storytelling includes connection between consumers and brands on unconscious and conscious levels of thinking. Brands enable consumers to enact the archetypal myths through the stories they tell to themselves and to others.

(14)

Following Bern (1994), storytelling persuades by entertaining and instructing audiences with representations or imitations of life. It pre-assumes a means-end relationship between a story and its audience, making advertisement a mixture of instruction, pleasure and persuasion. Fictive texts as poems, novels and advertisements are different from natural discourse, the spontaneous occurrence of everyday speech, as they are about imagined events.

Using storytelling to create brand resonance

Consumers becoming more individualistic and are in search for products that can foster their sense of own identity. By combining different brands they create their own world that stand for what they are. Products are bought due to their meaning for the consumer and not because of the particular product. Through storytelling brands generate fans instead of consumers and these fans are eager to share their activities and brand encounters with others, as they no longer promote a product but a way of life (Rijkenberg, 2005). By using proven facts within the brand story an aura of Authenticity can be communicated to potential and existing customers through different marketing channels (Keller, 2011).

In today’s more complex marketing environment, brands have to develop a different mind set as to how to build customer loyalty and establish brand resonance. Through technology consumers know more about the brand and form stronger opinions in regard to the brands they choose to purchase. Brand resonance is defined by Keller (2009) as “the nature of the relationship customers have with the brand and the extent to which they feel they are ‘in sync’ with the brand”. The relationship consumers form with the brand is reflected by brand resonance. Next to behavioral loyalty and active engagement, strong brand resonance is reflected by attitudinal attachment, when consumers view the brand as standing out compared to other brands, and can foster a stronger sense of community, as consumers feel like they are connected to other consumers making use of the brand (Keller, 2009).

(15)

Building this relationship

As marketing managers seek to create stronger brands, Authenticity has become an important dimension of brand identity (Alexander, 2009). Through emotional branding marketing managers convey their brand identity. “Emotional branding is a consumer-centric, relational, and story-driven approach to forging deep and enduring bonds between consumers and brands” (Roberts, 2004). No longer are the tangible benefits of a product important but an understanding of the inspirations, life circumstances and goals of the consumers generate value. This relational, communal, participatory, sensory and emotive view of consumer-brand relationships makes for a product to stand out from the crowd and creates a competitive advantage on the long run (Thompson, 2006). In a constantly changing landscape, brands need a clear strategic approach. In the digital age when consumers are more in control of the message, brands need a strong strategy to build a brand that people can trust. One that can withstand a crisis and rebuild that trust if necessary (Taylor, 2013).

The brand as a relationship partner

Brand relationships play an important role in consumers’ lived experiences. Consumers don’t only buy a brand because they like it or it works well but are also involved in relationships with the brand as they ad meaning to their lives. These meanings can be functional and utilitarian, others more psychosocial and emotional. Consumers in strong brand relationships can even feel like something is missing if they don’t use a particular brand for a while. Furthermore, when brands deliver on important identity concerns, tasks or themes they can express a significant aspect of self. A strong self-connection relationship with a brand often fosters a consumers feeling of uniqueness.

For a brand to be a relationship partner, partners must be interdependent, making the brand not a passive object of economic transaction but an active member of the relationship (Fournier, 1998). Storytelling empowers this feeling of the brand as a relationship partner by making the consumer think about brands as if they have human characters. Marketing plans

(16)

and tactics focusing on storytelling are constructed as behaviors performed by the brand acting in its relationship role. Relationships can add structure in consumers’ life (Hinde, 1995). Through relationship the self-concept can change or be reinforced through mechanisms of self-worth and self-esteem.

As person-object relationship research shows that consumers assign human characteristics to consumer goods (Fournier, 1998), this mechanism enables the relationship consumers can feel towards a product offering. In order to serve as a legitimate relationship partner, the product offering must signal personification qualifications. Although a brand can not think or feel, it can signal human characteristics through communication efforts.

Goal-Based Personal framework

Fournier (1998) stresses the notion of emotional branding by identifying an emotionally based consumer-brand relationship based on brands as relationship partners. The meaning consumers convey from a product offering are comparable with the meaning they give to personal relationships as friendship, love, trust and commitment. These meanings emerge only when brands become integrated into consumer’s lives. Following the Goal-Based Personal framework (Fournier, 1998), relationships can help resolve life themes, problems consumers encounter in their daily life. Furthermore, a relationship can play a key role in the concept of the self as the way the brand portrays itself reflects on the way the consumer would like to envision his or her character to be. Relationships can take different forms depending on the type of bonds that join consumer and brand. They could be either substantively grounded or emotionally based. The latter is the end stage marketers like to tap in when it comes to the motivation of storytelling, creating this friend or love like relationship.

Therefore, brands should tell stories that inspire consumers. These stories must show an understanding of a consumer’s lifestyle, dreams and personal goals and how the product can enrich their lives. “The strategic objective of emotional branding is to forge strong and meaningful bonds with consumers and, in so doing, become part of their life stories,

(17)

memories, and an important link in their social networks” (Thompson, 2006). The social connections with other consumers that share these meanings enable consumers to satisfy feelings of community.

Brand Concept Management Framework

Park, Bernard and MacInnis (1986) introduce in their paper on brand-concept image management the Brand Concept Management framework, defined as the planning, implementation and control of a brand concept throughout the life of a brand. Brand meaning is derived from consumer needs and selected prior to market entry. After the brand meaning is chosen the concept is managed through introduction, elaboration and fortification stage.

Consumer needs are an important factor influencing the brand concepts. Park et al. (1986) emphasize the importance of consumer needs in the selection of a brand, where they differentiate between functional, symbolic and experiential needs. Functional needs are fulfilled by product offerings that solve externally generated consumer problems. Symbolic needs on the other hand resolve internally generated consumer problems as self-enhancement, role position and group membership. The last need fulfillment role of a brand concept is the experiential needs, where the consumer desires products that provide sensory pleasure, variety and/or cognitive stimulation. A brand concept enables a firm in developing, maintaining and controlling the brand image strategy and builds a core personality of the brand.

The use of Heritage to foster the concept

In order to further examine the influence of storytelling the elements that create a heritage story should be clearly defined. Urde et al. (2007), Wiedman et al. (2011) and Brown et al. (2003) use the heritage quotient (HQ) as a means to establish the key concepts of brand heritage, namely; Track Record, Longevity, Core Values, Use of Symbols and History important to identity. These elements surround brand stewardess, a management

(18)

mindset for nurturing, maintaining and protecting brand heritage (Urde et al., 2007).

Figure 1. Elements of brand heritage (Urde et al 2007).

The influence of sings of age, iconic cues, on assessments of Authenticity deserves further examination as these signs are not only found in product offerings whose Authenticity is related to history but as well in new product offerings that don’t have this connection to history (Grayson and Martinec, 2004). As marketers already make this extra effort to create offerings that exhibit simulations of these marks, they acknowledge the need for further research on the influence of these cues on Authenticity assessment.

(19)

PERCEIVED AUTHENTICITY Different types of Authenticity

Although many studies in the sociology, anthropology and communication field have been conducted research on the notion of Authenticity it is not until recent that the focus on Authenticity has been brought into attention span of consumer research. One of the first attempts to define Authenticity in the market place was done by Grayson and Martinec (2004) where they use Peirce’s semiotic framework to distinguish between indexical and iconic Authenticity. Peirce (1998) links cues of product offerings consumers use to evaluate if a product offering is genuine or not.

Authenticity nurtures the story

Emphasizing the heritage of a brand adds the association of depth, Authenticity, and credibility to the brand’s perceived value (Wiedmann et al., 2011). Rijkenberg (2005) shows that as Authenticity is defined as being a story entailing rhetorical attributes and the communication of traditions there should be a direct influence of brand heritage on Perceived Authenticity. In the story, Authenticity comes forth out of a projection of sincerity through the avowal of commitments to traditions. Findings from Ross, Johnstone and Gazley (2010) suggest that perceptions of Authenticity can enhance cognitive message thoughts, affective message thoughts, source oriented thoughts and overall attitudes towards the ad. Therefore consumers’ perceptions of Authenticity can be positively related to favorable attitudes towards an advertisement and can therefore strengthen the advertisement message.

(20)

Beverland’s Authenticity cues

Beverland (2008) identifies in his study on beer consumers in Belgium and the Netherlands that the right way of advertising can successfully create or reinforce claims of Authenticity. They asked beer consumer questions regarding personal beer consumption, brand choice and place of consumption and choose among 45 images they associated with general perceptions of Authenticity.

Pure Authenticity cues

The findings of this study provided a framework of 3 types of Authenticity based on advertising cues: pure (literal) Authenticity, approximate Authenticity, and moral Authenticity, Pure Authenticity provides the consumer with a sense of unbroken commitments to the tradition and place of origin. This type of Authenticity is defined by Grayson and Martinec (2004) as indexical Authenticity where the product has a connection to history. A product offering has to have a connection to history. Consumers must believe that the product offering has the factual and spatiotemporal link that is claimed. As it is sometimes difficult for a consumer to distinguish real from fake they have to make use of some verification cues provided by the product offering.

Approximate Authenticity

With the second type of Authenticity, approximate Authenticity, consumers focus on symbolic or abstract impressions of traditions that are created by advertisements. Authenticity is still defined in terms of tradition but an absolute connection to history isn’t necessary as is the case with iconic Authenticity cues as defined by Grayson and Martinec (2004). Iconic Authenticity is present if a product offering is a representation of the original and therefore does not have to have a connection with history in order to be authentic. “Icons are associated with the phenomenological experience of attending to ones senses (Pierce, 1998)”. In order to assess the Authenticity of the offering consumers have to have some prior

(21)

knowledge about the offering in order to compare the verification cues to their preexisting knowledge and decide on the resemblance with the indexical Authenticity of the original product offering. It’s important to note that iconic and indexical Authenticity are not mutually exclusive and perceived cues have properties of both.

Moral Authenticity

Both indexical as iconic Authenticity acknowledge the subjectivity of Authenticity based upon the consumer perception but does not explicitly connect the way consumers perceive a product and relate the brand message and values to the social surroundings as the assessment of Authenticity by consumers is related to the personal goals consumers seek in their lives (Beverland, 2010).

This leads to the final form of Authenticity, moral Authenticity where brand history is relatively meaningless. Authenticity comes from the love and passion of the creator of the product. Judgments of moral Authenticity involve cues that show passion and creativity in the fabrication process and a sense of sincerity that reflect personal moral values, thus existential Authenticity as defined by Leigh et al. (2006). Due to this search consumers prefer brands and experiences that are in line with this identity. Products should convey a set of values that differentiate a product from commercialized brands (Beverland, 2008). Different personal goals by consumers make for different interpretations of Authenticity, as this is context and goal dependent (Beverland, 2010). The following framework provides an overview of the different types of Authenticity together with the purpose and function of the cues.

This research will make use of the HQ together with the Beverland framework in order to signal advertising cues that tell a story and through this story generate a sense of Authenticity. Thus, as heritage is an important means to communicate Authenticity cues to consumers these elements are used within advertisement messages as a signaling device (Beverland, 2005). Fake storytelling can be part of the concept, although a concept is not the

(22)

same as storytelling, rather storytelling is used to create an experience that goes beyond the initial product offering.

Table 1: 3 types of Authenticity cues in advertisement (Beverland 2008, p. 8)

The subjectivity of Authenticity.

Authenticity is associated with genuineness, reality and truth (Grayson et al., 2004) but these words all have a different meaning to different consumers depending on different contexts. Authenticity signs are based upon personal experiences and therefore not inherent to the attributes of a product. This makes it impossible to objectively assess whether an offering is authentic. The same offering can be authentic in the eyes of one consumer but inauthentic in the eyes of another based upon personal experiences, goals and values.

In their study on the meaning of Authenticity within subcultures, Leigh et al. (2006) found that Authenticity is based on personal investment that is tied to one’s identity and communicated to others. This personal investment goes beyond the financial investment in a product but has to do with devoting time in communicating with others within a subculture and defining what and why a product is authentic. They elaborate on the notion of existential

(23)

Authenticity, where the value of an experience makes for the Authenticity of a product instead of the originality of the product, as is the case with iconic or indexical Authenticity. These experiences represent the way consumers think about themselves. Two types of existential Authenticity are suggested by Wang (1999). Intrapersonal Authenticity, where physical and psychological aspects of a product define an individual and interpersonal Authenticity where a product is used to create relationships between like minded consumers. This is in line with the findings of Arnould and Price (2000) as they identify two means of appropriating Authenticity to achieve self-authentication. The first one is the co-creation of an experience as part of self-authentications. The second is the cultural display of what consumers deem important in life.

Personal goal empowerment through Authenticity

Authenticity is thus not only dependent on the product features but also on the interpretation of the product message by consumers and the way this message reflects personal goals. This sociocultural context between Authenticity cues and consumers personal goals is shown in following figure:

(24)

Feeling in Control relates to the desire of consumers to feel like they have a say over the environment. Control is sought in order to reaffirm identity and control over their surroundings and life in general. Participants in Beverland’s (2010) study associated their notion of what was real with “a conception of self associated with improvement and self-reliance through personal achievement and informed choices”. Authenticity is identified through the use of unique personal skills as knowledge, analysis and experience.

When consumers make a choice between product offerings they desire to feel as if the choices they make are controlled after deliberate consideration. “Consistent with this desire for independent judgment and empowerment, the informants focused on performance claims when assessing the Authenticity of a brand. In cases where functional claims could only be experienced through use, brands were judged authentic only after personal experience of the reputed benefits” (Beverland, 2010). When seeking control, consumers look for cues that convey benefits that can be verified. Due to the tempting nature of advertisement consumers look for further evidence through experience. Consumers search for independent decision-making that is not influenced by marketing driven messages.

Feeling connected makes consumers connect to others they deem important, to their community, place, culture or to society. Benefits associated with feeling connected are an idealization of community, personal enrichment and being close to like-minded others. This view is what Leigh et al. (2006) refer to as existential Authenticity, where the value of an experience makes for the Authenticity of a product instead of the originality of the product. Consumers feel like they are part of a community and this connection creates Authenticity.

Striking is the importance that is given by consumers to mass-market brands in their quest for connection as big brands reflect culture, place and time (Beverland, 2010). These brands are symbols that define the social landscape. Large brands are more visible within this social landscape and therefore are seen as glue to a community. As mass marketed product offerings are part of consumers’ social environment they are seen as authentic whilst being mainstream at the same time.

(25)

The last goal consumers seek to fulfill is feeling virtuous where consumers make judgments based on purity of motive. “Associated benefits included the feeling of virtuousness that comes with staying true to one’s morals and the spiritual enrichment that comes from seeing desired universal values” (Beverland, 2010). Brands are judged on their notion of honesty and a lack of ulterior motive. As soon as a brand is labeled as dishonest in the eyes of the consumer the product offering is judged against a moral standard. As consumers seek self-authentication through different contexts they relate benefits with personal goals and in this they give preference to certain type of information cues while ignoring others. In this way consumers create Authenticity rather than Authenticity being inherent to a product offering.

(26)

BRAND ATTITUDE

Brand Attitude and advertising

Attitude is defined here as an individual's internal evaluation of an object (Mitchell and Olson (1981). Ross et al. (2010) find evidence in their study on the influence of Perceived Authenticity on attitudes towards the ad that subjects exposed to an authentic advertisement, as opposed to inauthentic advertisement, will generate a greater number of favorable cognitive message thoughts. If a consumer believes the message communicated by the advertisement is relevant the claims are more likely to be accepted. They also found that an individual will have more favorable attitudes towards an advertisement if it perceived to be a realistic and authentic depiction of society and the issue at hand.

They found that subjects exposed to the authentic advertisement as opposed to the inauthentic advertisement generated a greater number of favorable advertisement execution thoughts towards the advertisement. They propose that brands successfully representing “who we are’ can generate more favorable feelings as the advertisement is perceived to be as a realistic and authentic depiction of society where this “who we are” feeling is created through a range signals, such as pictures and color quality, visual effects and general feeling toward the advertisement.

Reynolds and Gutman (1988) suggest that the advertising function may be equated to the creation and management of product imagery, the set of meanings and associations that serve to differentiate a product or service from its competition. Advertising functions enhance physical attributes and their relative importance with respect to how the consumer sees him/herself essential providing psychological benefits through the image-creation process. A concept brand will understand types of cognitive representations consumers have with respect to their product offering and knows to what differentiating characteristics it is related and thus what linkages can be made to the personal lives of consumer to best maximize the products position.

(27)

This notion of meanings and associations as perceived by the consumer is further operationalized through the means-end chain as defined by Gutman (1982). A means-end chain explains the connections between product attributes, consumer consequences and personal values. Attributes are physical, measurable, and abstract, subjective, characteristics of a product offering. Consequences can be both functional as psychosocial as well as beneficial as undesirable. Values are important beliefs people hold about themselves and about their feelings concerning others’ belief about them. Values determine if and how important the consequences of using the product offering are. The levels of abstraction conceptualization represents a meaningful way of organizing the contents of memory about a particular product.

The MECCAs

The Means-End Conceptualization of the Components of Advertising strategy (MECCAs) is used in creating brand images within advertising to utilize the attribute-consequence-value connections (Reynolds and Gutmann, 1988). This model translates advertising strategy into five specific characteristics that correspond to the levels of abstraction conceptualization. Olson and Reynolds (1983) provide a clear definition of the five components of the MECCAs model. The MECCAs model starts with the notion of Message Elements, “the specific attributes, consequence or features about the product that are communicated verbally or visually”. A second layer of abstraction is Consumer Benefits, “the major positive consequences for the consumer that are to be explicitly communicated, verbally or visually, in the advertising”. Executional Framework follows and tells “the overall scenario or action plot, plus the details of the advertising execution”. The executional framework provides “the vehicle by which the value orientation is to be communicated, its overall tone and style”. The forth layer is the Leverage Point, “the manner by which the advertising will tap into, reach or activate the value or end-level of focus: the specific key way in which the value is linked to the specific features in the advertising”. The last and final layer

(28)

of abstraction is the Driving Force, “the value orientation of the strategy; the end-level to be focused on in the advertising”.

This model provides creatives with a framework to create advertising that taps into the notion of the self and relate this with the important consequences associated with product use. A concept provides a meaning for the consumer to connect the self with the product offering through relevant personalized meanings/associations with the product.

Level of involvement

Percy and Rossiter (1992) make a distinction between high involvement product offerings and low involvement product offerings where one’s involvement with a purchase decision reflects the affective or cognitive aspect of Brand Attitude. This model looks at the affective component of Brand Attitude, as is the case with low involvement. With low product category involvement (PCI) trial experience is sufficient opposed to high PCI where information search and conviction is required prior to purchase. With high PCI product offerings the perceived risk can be either economic or psychosocial, copy claims must not only be learned but believed and accepted as well before the purchase decision occurs, therefore a cognitive component of Brand Attitude.

They further distinguish between informational, negative drive reduction, and transformational, positive drive enhancement to satisfy a behavioral motivation associated with category need. Informational strategies are utilized when the advertised brand is linked to negatively originated motivations, where transformational strategies are used only when the advertised brand is linked to positively originated motives. Its important to note that within transformational strategies, emotional Authenticity in the execution of the advertising is critical, as a positive emotion is the only benefit that is associated with the advertised brand. Therefore informational strategy provides information whereas the transformational strategy provides an emotion.

(29)

Figure 3: Product category involvement framework (Percy and Rossiter, 1992)

The Elaboration Likelihood Model

This concept of low and high PCI is elaborated on through the Elaboration Likelihood model of Petty and Cacioppo (1981a). In their studies on Brand Attitude they propose two distinct routes, central and peripheral, to attitude change. The central route views attitude change as resulting from a diligent consideration of information that is central to what people feel are the true merits of the advocacy. The peripheral route views attitude change because the attitude object has been associated with either positive or negative cues or the person uses a simple decision rule to evaluate a communication. These cues and decision rules may shape attitudes or allow a person to decide what attitudinal position to adopt without the need for engaging in any extensive issue-relevant thinking.

The basic tenet of this model is that different methods of inducing persuasion may work best, depending upon whether the elaboration likelihood of the communication situation (that is, the probability of message or issue-relevant thought occurring) is high or low. High involvement messages have greater personal relevance and consequences or elicit more

(30)

personal connections than low involvement messages. When the elaboration likelihood is high, the central route to persuasion should be particularly effective, but when the elaboration likelihood is low, the peripheral route should be better.

! ! !

(31)

HYPOTHESES

Following previous chapter, people can be either low or high involved when it comes to a product offering, depending on the product category. When storytelling elements are provided in an advertisement, consumers form an attitude towards that product offering. Storytelling provides a vehicle for consumers to form an emotional attachment to the offering. Bringing the different concepts together leads to the following hypotheses.

HERITAGE CUES

People want to believe in myths and stories (Jensen, 1999) and companies use this desire for narrative to provide meaning to their brands. Stories have heroes and companies turn the hero of the story to the hero of the consumer, making the outcome favor the company. Stories not need to be based on real events, people enjoy make-up tales as long as they can relate to the characters (Mossberg and Johansen, 2006).

Stories have the ability to add associations to the brand that make a brand unique and differentiating from its competitors. Therefore a compelling story can increase brand equity and become a value-adding asset. Through the story the brand becomes more interesting. A well-crafted story may create positive associations with the brand can even increase consumers’ willingness to pay for it (Lundqvist, Liljander, Gummerus and van Riel, 2012). Storytelling provides a framework to organize experiences and give them meaning. Narratives help consumers to interpret the meaning of brands. Through the story an emotional component is added to the product,

Cues are placed within the advertisement to tell a story. Brands develop a core personality and this is what the consumers are in search for when selecting a specific brand. The identification with the core values of the brand and the feeling that the brand stands for their core values differentiates a concept brand from a non-concept brand. As these values are context and goal dependent, they make for different interpretations of Authenticity.

(32)

The MECCA’s framework provides a means to create advertising that taps into the notion of the self and relates this notion with the important consequences associated with product use. Through personalized meanings/associations with the product offering the consumer gets to connect to the self and create a relationship between like-minded consumers. Consumers perceive a product and relate the brand message and values to the social surroundings as the assessment of Authenticity by consumers is related to the personal goals consumers seek in their lives (Beverland, 2010). Due to this search consumers prefer brands and experiences that are in line with this identity.

Consumers are involved in relationships with the brands they choose and these brands become part of their lives. Next to the fulfillment of functional needs these brands can offer psychosocial and emotional need fulfillment. Consumers in strong brand relationships can develop a relationship with a brand that has similarities with a love or friend relationship with another human person. Storytelling empowers the feeling of a relationship by making the consumer think of the brand as a brand that conveys human characteristics. These relationships change or reinforce the image consumers already have of themselves through mechanisms of self-worth and self-esteem.

Consumers blend fact and fiction to construct Authenticity as they are motivated to realize a sense of escape, perceive evidence of what they believe is real and get connected with the past (Grayson and Martinec, 2004). Such consumers construct Authenticity by using heritage cues that connect with their experiences and aspirations that inspire their imagination. In this Authenticity can be seen as a coproduction process between consumer and narrative where consumers view product offerings as authentic through a process of negotiation. Beverland and Farrelly (2010) demonstrate that consumers seek self-authentication through various context. Authenticity is related to positive identity benefits making it that some cues are given precedence while others are ignored. This processing involves the elaboration of certain pieces of information to use as evidence in determining what is authentic.

(33)

Following Campbell (1987) “in modern hedonism pleasure is not simply a quality of experience, but a self-illusioned quality of experience. Increasingly pleasure is a commodity associated with experiences which we have had a hand in constructing; something which we have ‘tailored’ to suit our own needs”. Daydreaming, imagination and pleasure is sought by consumers in their quest for self-relevant goals through entertainment (Rose and Wood, 2005).

People tend to think narratively rather than argumentatively or paradigmatically (Woodside et al., 2008). Stories help consumers to find happiness. Through storytelling, consumers make sense of the meaning of events and evoke a sense of nostalgia. When heritage cues are provided, everything else equal, consumers will score higher on perceived authenticity as when no cues are provided.

This leads to the following hypothesis:

H1: When heritage cues are provided in an advertisement, consumers will score higher in perceived authenticity as opposed to when no heritage cues are provided.

INVOLVEMENT AND HERITAGE CUES

The difference between fake vs no heritage cues under low involvement conditions

In case of low PCI, consumers follow the peripheral route to attitude change, where they assess either positive or negative cues to make a simple decision rule to evaluate the message. When heritage cues are provided by the advertisement, consumers are likely to make use of these cues in order to make Authenticity judgments.

With low PCI, trial experience is sufficient opposed to high PCI where information search and conviction is required prior to purchase. The notion of Authenticity subjectivity claims Authenticity is identified through the use of unique personal skills as knowledge, analysis and experience. When consumers make a choice between product offerings they desire to feel as if the choices they make are controlled after deliberate consideration. With

(34)

low involvement this type of Authenticity is absent. Consumers simply pick up pure and approximate Authenticity cues that link the product to the past. They believe that the product offering has the factual and spatiotemporal link that is claimed when assessing Authenticity.

Consumers will look for Authenticity cues within the advertisement when making the purchase decision. Brand Attitude strategy is seen as reflecting an interaction between a potential consumers involvement with the purchase decision and the underlying motivation to purchase. The Rossiter and Percy (1992) model looks at attitude as the buyers overall evaluation of a brand and the perceived ability of the brand to meet the consumers motivation. Brand Attitude consists of both a cognitive and affective component where the cognitive, or logical belief, component guides behavior and the affective, or emotional feeling energizes the behavior. Thus, low PCI implies low emotional feeling when consumers follow the peripheral route.

Although moral cues, leading to Authenticity subjectivity, can add to the notion of Authenticity they are not needed in order to perceive Authenticity as consumers follow the peripheral route and do not elaborate on the message claims. In case of low PCI, consumers focus on cues that provide a confirmation in the mind of the consumer about the pure (literal) and approximate heritage cues of the product offering. When consumers follow the peripheral route, they focus on heritage cues in order to assess the Authenticity of the product offering.

The peripheral route views attitude change because the attitude object has been associated with either positive or negative cues or the person uses a simple decision rule to evaluate a communication. These cues and decision rules may shape attitudes or allow a person to decide what attitudinal position to adopt without the need for engaging in any extensive issue-relevant thinking. Consumers often feel that in order for a product to be authentic, it has to look old and worn. Looking at pure and approximate heritage cues consumers generate a sense of Authenticity as these cues sign the product offering has a connection to the past.

(35)

If consumers are faced with cues of which they know they are not true, and they are low involved, it is expected they would still prefer a fake story over no story. As the narrative becomes of more importance than the facts (Woodside et al., 2008). Because there is low PCI consumers follow the peripheral route, they look at the cues and do not elaborate on these cues. They know the story is fake, but as the provided cues still convey a sense of heritage consumers would still assess the Authenticity of the advertisement higher then if no Authenticity cues are provided.

H2: Under low product category involvement conditions, the perceived authenticity of the product offering will be higher for consumers exposed to fake heritage cues compared to consumers exposed to no heritage cues.

The difference between fake vs no heritage cues under high involvement conditions

Opposed to low PCI, when consumers are highly involved, they look beyond the pure and approximate Authenticity cues that link the product to the past, and search for existential Authenticity cues. They elaborate on the heritage cues as provided by the product offering and look if these intrapersonal and/or interpersonal Authenticity cues are in line with the personal goals they seek in life. These goals are dependent on the social-cultural context and could link to the consumers goals, control, connection and virtue.

Cues are placed within the advertisement to tell a story. Brands develop a core personality and this is what the consumers are in search for when selecting a specific brand. By tapping into the notion of existential Authenticity brands generate value through the experience that makes for the Authenticity of a product instead of the originality of the

(36)

product. Iconic and/or indexical (moral) heritage cues, are used in creating this sense of Authenticity and therefore strengthen the notion of existential Authenticity.

With high PCI product offerings, the perceived risk can be either economic or psychosocial. Affect energizes the behavior and therefore the cognition, with high product category involvement products, implying high emotional feeling. Due to this higher product category involvement, opposed to low product category involvement, consumers tend to not just search for Authenticity cues but also elaborate on those cues by processing the message. The story that’s told needs to make sense and strengthens the Authenticity of the product offering. Consumers seek Authenticity in different product offerings to fulfill personal goals, these goals all have the search for real, true and genuine product offerings in common. As consumers are high involved, they will follow the central route and elaborate on the story that is told and see if this is in line with their personal goals.

Through moral heritage cues, consumers connect the product offering to the personal goals consumers seek in their lives. Through this form of Authenticity brand history becomes relatively meaningless. Cues that show a sense of sincerity that reflect personal moral values are used to evoke this sense of Authenticity in the consumer. These cues reflect brands that are in line with the identity of the consumer. Heritage cues should convey a set of values that differentiate a product from commercialized brands, as passion and creativity in the fabrication process or the love of the creator of the product.

Consumers love a good executed advertisement and would, in case of low product category involvement, prefer a good story over no story. However, with high PCI, consumers invest resources in order to make a considered decision. When the PCI is higher, emotional feeling is higher as opposed to low PCI, and the risk gets higher.

When storytelling cues are absent it will be harder for the consumer to assess the Authenticity of the product offering. However, a consumer can still connect to the product offering as it could fulfill psychosocial and/or emotional needs. Even if no heritage cues, evoking a sense of Authenticity, are provided, with high-involvement product offerings,

(37)

consumers can still feel connected to the product. Therefore the Authenticity scores when no storytelling cues are provided will be higher with high involvement as opposed to low involvement.

Through storytelling, emphasizing heritage, the consumer associates personalized meanings to the product offering and feel like the product offering is telling the consumer about themselves and about their feelings concerning others’ belief about them. Through personalized meanings/associations with the product offering the consumer gets to connect to the self. If consumers realize the story is fake this will generate a breach of confidence between the brand and the consumer. This research proposes that this breach of confidence through fake heritage cues will have a negative effect on Perceived Authenticity as opposed to providing no heritage cues, as with no heritage cues consumers can still generate a sense of Perceived Authenticity.

H3: Under high product category involvement conditions, the perceived authenticity of the product offering will be lower for consumers exposed to fake heritage cues compared to consumer exposed to no heritage cues.

INFLUENCE OF PERCEIVED AUTHENTICITY ON BRAND ATTITUDE

If the advertisement is perceived to be authentic, it will generate more favorable attitudes (Ross et al., 2010). True storytelling cues strengthen the message of the product offering as being authentic. Research has shown that subjects exposed to authentic advertisement as opposed to the inauthentic advertisement will generate a greater number of favorable overall attitudes (Ross et al., 2010). True storytelling cues will strengthen the story and will therefore result higher brand attitude.

Authenticity can be crafted through the advertisement cues. Consumers like to be entertained. In case of low involvement consumers prefer a fake story over plain information.

(38)

As affect is low consumers don’t perceive a high degree of involvement with the product offering. Emphasizing heritage cues within the advertisement provide a sense of Authenticity and consumers prefer this with low product category involvement as the story adds to this sense of Authenticity, even if they realize and know it is fake.

Research indicates that attitude is influenced by the strength of an argument through the cognitive thoughts that are formed. Storytelling cues within an advertisement can increase the likelihood that the story is being processed by the consumer. An authentic representation of the product offering is likely to influence cognitive message thoughts and message acceptance. If the consumer believes the story being told is authentic, the message is more likely to be accepted. The Perceived Authenticity will generate a greater number of favorable overall attitudes towards the brand.

As attitude is a function of the buyers overall evaluation of the brand and the perceived ability of the brand to meet the consumers motivation, the advertising functions play an important role in meeting this motivation. Through advertising the consumers get conveyed psychological benefits of the product offering and linkages are made to the personal lives of consumers. With high product category involvement consumers get a sense of psychological benefits through the image-creation process. This sense of benefits is energized by the higher degree of affect, as opposed to low product category involvement, thus high emotional feeling.

This leads to the following hypotheses:

H4a: Under low product category involvement conditions, fake heritage cues, as opposed to no heritage cues, are expected to increase the impact of Perceived Authenticity on Brand Attitude.

H4b: Under high product category involvement conditions, fake heritage cues, as opposed to no heritage cues, are expected to decrease the impact of Perceived Authenticity on Brand Attitude.

Rather a fake story over no story? : storytelling theory, authenticity and brand attitude in a marketing context