Corporate brands, diversity and brand image : the alignment of the corporate brand and brand image : looking into diversity and inclusiveness of brands on Instagram

The alignment of the corporate brand and brand image: Looking into diversity and inclusiveness of brands on Instagram

Yamela David

10562664

James Slevin Master’s Thesis

Master’s programme Communication Science

Graduate School of Communication

Abstract

Issues of diversity are not unknown of in society and in the fashion industry particularly. By not portraying a realistic reflection of society in their communications, brands are missing out on great opportunities to introduce their brand to a wider audience by not diversifying their customer base. Some brands claim to uphold these values, however this paper wanted to investigate how this was reflected in their communications. This paper examined how the corporate brand expressions on Instagram regarding diversity and inclusiveness were in line with the perceptions consumers had, in other words the brand image. To be more specific, the diversity of gender, race and body size was explored. The Instagram posts and comments of four major brands were analyzed, resulting in a sample of 165 Instagram posts and 1650 comments. Findings suggested that for H&M and Nike, there was misalignment between their values and corporate brand expressions. To a weaker extent, results revealed that images portraying Black models, female body size b, and female body size d, have a positive

influence on the brand image. Interestingly, the brand image for the diverse brands was lower than for the non-diverse brands. This paper provided an overall view of diversity and

inclusiveness for diverse and non-diversified brands. Furthermore, the learning points from this paper can help brands reflect on their organizational values, guide brands on what to improve in their communications on Instagram, and this research adds empirical evidence to the field of communications while shedding light on this important issue in society.

Diversity and inclusiveness have been major issues, in society in general and for brands in particular. Take for instance women rights, voter rights and the civil rights movement (Carey, 2010). However, inclusiveness and diversity have been major sticking points for brands as well. Brands have been criticized for how they implement diversity and for the lack thereof. A recent example of this are the accusations of racism surrounding the brand H&M. On their website, a green hoodie with the slogan ‘coolest monkey in the jungle’ was modeled by a Black child (see figure 1 in Appendix A). This advert caused a backlash from users on social media channels, with users labeling the advertisement as “racist” and “unacceptable” and calling to boycott the brand (Bulman, 2018). Other brands fail to

incorporate diversity at all, with only using White and thin models as part of the alleged ideal image for women. To illustrate, the diversity report of the fashion spot showed that out of the 9,539 models in the Fall 2015 fashion shows, 80% were White (Denardo, 2015). Likewise, the average female model is the United States is a size zero, whereas the average size of a woman in the United States is fourteen (Barry, 2014).

Brands are missing out on great opportunities to introduce their brand to a wider audience by not diversifying their customer base. Barry (2014) studied how Black and White women react to models in advertisements that reflect their own race. Results revealed that the purchase intention of Black women increased 2,5 times when seeing a model of their own race. In addition, the research of Bian & Wang (2015) showed that women preferred seeing average-sized models compared to models with size zero. As Charania (2017) argued:

“Fashion represents the political climate of the country, and this happens to be a pressing time for the industry to make an active step towards inclusivity”. Some brands do claim that they value diversity and inclusiveness and include these values in their vision and mission statements.For instance, Tommy Hilfiger claims to “embrace our inclusive and

diversity and adhering to human right standards” ("Tommy Hilfiger Global | Our 3 Principles," 2017).

The corporate brand is seen as the “expressions of an organization’s identity” and it is the core of values that define it (Abratt & Kleyn, 2012; Ind, 1997). Interactions with brand-associated stimuli, such as expressions on social media, enables stakeholders to form their perceptions of the brand. All these perceptions come together to become one single impression, the brand image (Abbratt & Klein, 2012). A platform where brands can continually express their values is through advertisements and campaigns on social media. Haboush, Warren, & Benuto (2011) argue that “social media is one of the strongest ways that ideals of appearance and values are communicated to society”. It has also revolutionized the way brands and consumers communicate with each other, consumers are now free to express their opinions and concerns through social media platforms (Stathopoulou et al., 2017; In Singh & In Duhan, 2016). A social media platform where corporate brand expressions can be perceived is Instagram. Because this platform is image based, the diversity of brands can be easily explored.

In practice, organizations far too often fail to see if their values are in line with the perceptions of stakeholders (Anisimova, 2010). Alignment between the corporate brand and brand image is essential because the strongest corporate brands develop from transparent, visible and consistently portrayed corporate identities (Van Riel & Fombrun, 2007). When the corporate brand and brand image are not in line, repercussions can be a decrease in purchase intention, brand loyalty, and global expansion of their brand (Nandan, 2005). Furthermore, misalignment can lead to a decline in the common meaning and values associated with the brand (Ind, 1997). In addition, from a consumers perspective when they do not feel included in an organization, they may take their business, revenue dollars, and patronization elsewhere.

To date, not a single study has investigated the effects of expressions on social media of the corporate brand on brand perceptions. Therefore, it appears that there is a gap in the literature concerning these effects that this research seeks to fulfill. It’s imperative that this issue is explored because organizations who fail to do this miss out on the opportunity to introduce their brand to a wider audience by not diversifying their customer base.

Organizations are potentially omitting a group of consumers and therefore missing out on a great branding opportunity. Insights from this research will provide an overall view of the diversity of different brands and help guide organizations in what to adjust in their

communications on Instagram. Furthermore, this research should encourage senior executives to reflect on their organization, and develop a sense of awareness of the organization’s

internal and external environment and if necessary revise certain organizational values (Thomas & McDaniel, 1990). It is crucial that organizations realize the importance of alignment of the corporate brand and brand image and consider their values when doing so.

Thus, the primary research question to be addressed by this study is:

RQ: How do the corporate brand expressions on Instagram regarding diversity and inclusiveness align with the perceptions consumers have of the brand (brand image)?

Theoretical Framework Diversity and Inclusiveness

Any definition of diversity “must be one that incorporates all citizens, White, Black, old, young, Christian, Muslim, gay, heterosexual and so on”. (Williams, Lee, Haugtvedt, 2004, p. 8). Brands, advertisers, and other major institutions in society must recognize that diversity includes everyone. The concept inclusiveness is “on the way to becoming a market leader because it includes variables such as personal style but also elements as age, culture and ethnic origin” (Cavanaugh, 2001). Barry (2014) explains that the lack of diversity in

fashion is mostly justified as a supposed consumer preference. It is claimed that all types of consumers look up to a white and skinny ideal and only want to associate with brands that portray this image. And even for the brands that want to cast diverse models, the budget only allows the execution of one global campaign (Barry, 2014).

As Haboush et al., (2011) stated, social media is one of the strongest ways that ideals of appearance and values are communicated to society. The social comparison theory

indicates that people are naturally driven to evaluate themselves, and do so by comparing themselves to others (Keh et al., 2016). Images of models displayed in media communicate values and ideals of appearance and serve as a reference point in which people can evaluate their themselves (Haboush et al., 2011). Because they are unrealistic, this comparison process mainly results in negative effects such as feeling discouraged, insecure, lower self-esteem and distanced from the brand (Keh et al., 2016).

Prior research has acknowledged that consumer identification has a significant effect on consumer behaviors such as: brand preference, consumer loyalty, consumer satisfaction, purchase intention and positive word of mouth (Belén del Río et al., 2001; Bhattacharya et al., 1995; Sjödin & Törn, 2006). All types of consumers want to feel included by a brand, thus it is important that brands reflect and reach all of their customers, not just some of them. Barry (2014) explained that when Black women saw models of their own race, they felt connected to the brand and believed the brand upheld the values they aspired to, such as empowerment and inclusion. Furthermore, identification with a company can lead to some of the strongest relationships, by consumers identifying themselves as part of social categories such as gender, ethnicity or occupation (Bhattacharya & Sen, 2003).

However, even when diversity is included in the advertising campaigns of brands, it often feels as if it was an afterthought (Charania, 2017). For many brands, it seems like they develop a campaign and then afterward try to go back and “add on” a diverse aspect. This is

only a temporary solution and does not actually lead to an implementation of diversity. An example of this is creating a campaign and afterward switching the pictures to show people of different ethnicities. This is not an effective approach, and could eventually alienate diverse audiences even more (Suhrawardi, 2016).

Issues of diversity are not unfamiliar in the fashion industry. Allegations of racism have intensified in recent years. Simple excuses as “we already have a black girl” or “the customer isn’t ready yet” have been used as a justification. Furthermore, lack of body

representation and gender have been criticized issues. As Bian & Wang (2015) explain: “The use of thin models in the fashion industry has been a controversial issue and we have even seen France's parliament considering a ban”. There is a gap between what consumers are expecting to see and what designers are presenting, which results in significant commotion from the public (Bian & Wang, 2015). Even though diversity includes many elements, in this paper the focus will be on the diversity of gender, race, and male and female body sizes in the fashion industry.

Corporate brand. When looking into concepts such as corporate identity, corporate brand, image, branding and reputations, due to the size of literature, lack of consensus and the incomprehensible terminology it is difficult to find straightforward definitions of what these concepts actually entail. As Melewar & Jenkins (2002) explain, there are many different elements that compose the corporate identity mix. In traditional views of the corporate brand, there are a couple of generally accepted definitions. In these definitions, the objective of branding is aimed at creating a preference for a product of service for consumers and relates to product marketing (Knox & Bickerton, 2003). Authors refer to the corporate brand as “a symbol serving to distinguish the products and services of one company from another” or as “a product or service, which a customer perceives to have distinctive benefits beyond price and functional performance” (Kapferer, 1997; Knox, 2000; Knox & Bickerton, 2003).

However, these definitions focus too much on products and services of brands which encompass only one element of a corporation. The emphasis on products and services

inadequately explains the importance of the identities and values that shape a corporate brand in its totality (Alizadeh, Hoseini, Moshabaki, & Naiej, 2014).

Rather than only focusing on individual products or services, recent literature has illustrated the importance of the organization in the concept of the corporate brand. As Abratt and Mofokeng (2001) highlight, the organization has a strategic role in the process of

branding. Balmer et al., (2002) claim that in every corporation there are six critical identities present. These exist of the actual identity, the communicated identity, the conceived identity, the covenanted identity, ideal identity and the desired identity. These six facets together form the framework called the AC 3ID Test of corporate brand management. The covenanted identity is related to the concept of the corporate brand and is what the corporate stands for. The communicated identity depicts of what a corporation say they are and is seen as the expressions of the brand. Even though this framework successfully describes the different identities present in a corporation and adapts an identity focused approach of the corporation, this framework is not effective in illustrating how to actually strengthen the brand.

Alizadeh et al., (2014) explain that a corporate brand consists of tangible and

intangible properties such as values and behavior, the quality of products and the promise the brand holds for their customers. Furthermore, they explain that the corporate brand is “the central building block of everything an organization does” (p. 15). Hatch and Schultz (2003) describe a successful corporate brand as one that is formed through the interaction between organizational culture, strategic vision, and the image of stakeholders. The vision consists of top managements aspirations for the company, the culture consists of the values, behaviors and attitudes of the organizations, and the image is seen as the outside word’s overall

the interplay between different important elements, a limitation of this definition is the clarity of these constructs. Because this definition is so broad, it creates difficulties in establishing the specificity and validity in what these constructs suggest and entail (Cornelissen,

Christensen & Kinuthia, 2012).

Abratt & Kleyn (2012) provide a clear definition and define a corporate brand as the “expressions of an organizations identity” (p. 1053). The corporate expression consists of all mechanisms engaged by an organization to express its corporate identities to all stakeholder groups. Elements include the brand promise, the development of the visual identity, brand personality and the communication thereof. A corporate brand is more than just a name, logo or visual presentation. It is the core of values that define it (Ind, 1997). The communication of those values is crucial and a brand that can effectively communicate these values helps ensure that stakeholders know what it stands for. Based on the discussed literature, the values a brand upholds are expected to be incorporated in the communications of the brand. If a corporate brand values diversity, this should also be reflected in their corporate brand expressions. To specify to this research, brands that value diversity and inclusiveness are expected to have a high diversity of gender, race and body size in their corporate brand expressions. The following hypotheses are proposed:

H1a: Corporate brands that value diversity and inclusiveness have a higher diversity of gender in their expressions than corporate brands who do not uphold these values.

H1b: Corporate brands that value diversity and inclusiveness have a higher diversity of race in their expressions than corporate brands who do not uphold these values.

H1c: Corporate brands that value diversity and inclusiveness have a higher diversity of body size in their expressions than corporate brands who do not uphold these values.

Brand Image

Abratt & Kleyn (2012) define the brand image as the perceptions stakeholders have of an organization: interactions wish brand-associated stimuli, such as communication on social media, allows stakeholders to form their perceptions of an organization. Furthermore, Ind (1997) explains that just as we can read the character of an actor from their actions and looks, similarly we can ‘read’ a brand by their observable signs such as its advertisements and performance. Stern, Zinkhan, & Jaju (2001) argue that the brand image consists of the external world perceptions or impressions of stakeholders, that represent the overall

impressions of a brand. Furthermore, the authors claim that a brand image can mean different things: brand attitudes, brand association and the global total impression of memory and symbolic meaning of a brand.

Some researchers see the concepts of brand image and reputation as substitutes (Windsperger et al., 2015).Even though these concepts are undeniably related, a distinction between the two has to be made. Reputations are an outcome of the interactions between stakeholders and the organization over time, and thus are long-term in contrast to the brand image which is short-term in nature (Abratt & Kleyn, 2012; Martenson, 2007). Even though the concept of brand image has become well established, an important critique is that many frameworks see the consumer as passive and assume a one-way communication approach. This means that the communication is one-sided and that the organization is the sender whereas the consumer the receiver. It is important to acknowledge that consumers are active and that communication does not simply flow from the company to its stakeholders. This one-way approach fails to acknowledge the interpretative capabilities of the asserted receivers and as Cornelissen et al., (2012) explain “members of organizations creatively co-construct or de-construct the meanings of corporate messages in ways not intended by management” (p. 1098).

Construing an overall image of a brand is a result of a process in the minds of individuals. Thus, it is important to highlight that the image that an organization wants to portray is not simply accepted by consumers and that consumers are active in this process. The brand image is shaped by feelings, ideas and previous experiences with an organization (Yuille & Catchpole, 1977). Furthermore, the authors explain that a brand image is thus seen as an overall attitude or judgement about the brand, and is driven by cognitive and affective brand attributes. These attributes can be derived from direct brand experience, exposure to marketing stimuli or advertising and through observations from others (Yuille & Catchpole, 1977). Brand-consumer interactions influence the judgements stakeholders have of the brand, by considering to what extent they believe the brand has fulfilled the brand promise (Ind, 1997). Hence, it is essential that senior executives realize the importance brand image possesses and they should regard the consumer and other stakeholders in their corporate branding efforts. Based on the discussed literature, it is expected that including more diverse expressions on Instagram has a positive influence, and leads to consumers perceiving the brand as more diverse and inclusive. The following hypotheses are proposed:

H2a: Diverse expressions of gender has a positive influence on the brand image H2b: Diverse expressions of race has a positive influence on the brand image H2c: Diverse expressions of body size has a positive influence on the brand image

Alignment

Anisimova (2010) clearly describes the importance of alignment by explaining that “striving for coherent and consistent stake-holder perceptions is central to the idea of

corporate branding” (p. 493). In addition, Abbratt & Klein (2012) explain that it’s important that an organization is portrayed as a whole, that there should be one main message or value

of the organization. Organizations must ensure that there is adequate alignment between the identity of the organization and how it is communicated, and following, how this is perceived by external stakeholders (Hatch & Schultz, 2001). Van Riel & Fombrun (2007) suggest that visible, transparent and consistently portrayed corporate identities lead to the strongest brand images. In addition, Reddy (1979) argues that communication acts as the interface between the corporate brand and the brand image of the company. In addition, it is important for organizations to ensure that the values that they stand for, are sufficiently revealed to

stakeholders. Morsing & Schultz (2006) explain that the process of alignment can be complex because corporate brands should also be aware that stakeholders are involved in the

development of the corporate brand. This again highlights that consumers are active and this suggests that organizations need to take contributions of stakeholders in consideration while also striving for consistency (Anisimova, 2010).

As the importance of coherence of the corporate brand and brand image has been demonstrated, it is also important to explore the consequences of when these concepts are not in line with each other. When the corporate brand and brand image are on different terms and executing different things, there is misalignment (Balmer et al., 2009). Misalignment can lead to a decline in the common meaning and values associated with the brand (Ind, 1997).

Furthermore, it can lead to a decrease in brand loyalty and intention to purchase products form the brand. Alignment between corporate brand and brand image indicates that the consumer has a great understanding of the brand vision and values and is, therefore, likely to be loyal to the brand (Nandan, 2005). Organizations far too often fail to see if their values are in line with the perceptions of stakeholders. Ind (1997) argues that brands need to build a consensual image that is an accurate representation of what the brand stands for. This requires consistency of communication to all stakeholders.

Corporate Brand Expressions on Instagram

Social media is seen as “the production, consumption and exchange of information through online social interactions and platforms” (Marketo, 2010, p. 5). The popularity of social media is rising and brands are becoming aware of the use of social media for

communication (In Singh & In Duhan, 2016). Social media has changed the way information is exchanged and the way brands and consumers communicate and interact with each other (In Singh & In Duhan, 2016; Stathopoulou et al., 2017). Consumers can now express their opinions and concerns through multiple platforms such as Facebook, Twitter and Instagram and this allows brands and consumers to directly communicate with one another (In Singh & In Duhan, 2016; Hollebeek et al., 2014).

Singh (2017) explains that when properly utilized, social media is the most powerful tool to develop and enhance an organization’s brand image. The author argues that with “every post, like, share or comment, a certain message is being communicated by the brand”. In turn, these expressions are consecutively observed by consumers and allow them to form perceptions of the brand. For consumers, social media is the best platform to comment, exchange opinions and communicate with other consumers and brands (Colliander et al., 2015). Thus, social media has the power to influence how people view your brand. When successfully communicated, the expressions of brands can lead to increased brand awareness, brand liking, promote consumer engagement and loyalty, inspire consumer word of mouth communication and drive traffic to online and offline brand locations (Ashley & Tuten, 2014). However, negative consequences can occur as well. Due to its large reach, negative word of mouth about a brand can spread fast. This can ultimately lead to a negative brand image and loss of sales and profitability (Singh, 2017)

Literature concerning text-based platforms such as Facebook and Twitter have been studied frequently and within different perspectives for years now (Russmann & Svensson,

2016). However, there is increased evidence for the use and influence of images and pictures on social media (Cohen et al., 2017; Fardouly et al., 2015). Instagram is an example of such an image-based platform. Instagram has more than 800 million active users per month, and more and more people are using the platform to connect to brands they love ("Celebrating a Community of 25 Million Businesses," 2017). This means that Instagram provides huge

marketing opportunities for brands. Literature studying Instagram is scarce and the literature that is available focuses mainly on self-image and self-presentation. Thus, research from an organizational-consumer perspective is hardly examined. Based on the discussed literate, the following conceptual model for this research paper is proposed:

Figure 1: Preliminary Conceptual Model

Method

A quantitative content analysis was conducted to investigate to what extent expressions of a corporate brand on Instagram are in line with the brand perceptions

consumers have. More specifically, it addressed the following research question: How do the corporate brand expressions on Instagram regarding diversity and inclusiveness align with the perceptions consumers have of the brand (brand image)? In this research, Instagram will be

the interface of where the alignment between the corporate brand and brand image takes place. Instagram posts will be coded to analyze the diversity and inclusiveness of corporate brand expressions. Following, the comments on the post will be analyzed to establish the brand image of consumers.

A content analysis can be described as: "the systematic, objective, quantitative analysis of message characteristics" and it offers the opportunity to analyze images and text and through coding turn it into verifiable and measurable form (Neuendorf, 2017). The social media platform Instagram will be explored because Instagram is one of the most popular social media applications and it is entirely based on pictures. Instagram allows brands to reach a wide variety of people and because it is so visual, diversity can easily be portray and

assessed. Materials

As the context unit, Instagram posts from four brands will be selected as the sample for this study. Two broaden the scope of this research, two different type of brands were chosen. The selection criteria for two of the four brands is that in their vision, mission statement or annual report there has to be a mention of valuing diversity, equality or inclusiveness. The brands selected were ‘H&M’ and ‘Nike’. In the vision and mission document, H&M explains that “H&M’s advertising images do not aim to communicate any specific ideal, but rather a range of styles, attitudes and ethnic backgrounds” (p. 8). Accordingly, Nike was selected because Nike claims “worth should outshine color.” They continue to explain that sports should unite and empower us and it does not matter what you believe, how you look or what language you speak. The official Instagram page of H&M includes 3.957 posts and 23.7 million followers. The Instagram page of Nike includes 914 posts and 75.2 million followers.

and inclusiveness, however are also major fashion brands. The brands selected were ‘Topshop’ and ‘Calvin Klein’. The Instagram page of Topshop, has 5.306 posts and 9.1 million followers and Calvin Klein has 2176 posts and 10.7 million followers. For a visual representation of the Instagram pages, see Appendix A. For an equal distribution of posts between the brands, it was decided to use a systematic sample to reduce the number of posts to 50 posts per brand. To achieve this, on the Instagram page of the specific brand, every 3rd image was selected until 50 images were reached. Furthermore, as a result of the large amount of followers of a brand, there can be up to 1.000 comments under one post. Therefore, it is inevitable that a selection of comments has to be made. For simplification purposes, it has been decided to analyze the first 10 relevant comments under one post.

Coding

This section details the measurement of the key registration units of this paper; 1) the image of the post; 2) the caption of the post; 3) the comments on the post. Before analyzing the post, instructions were to fill out descriptives of the post (brand number, date, number of likes and number of comments). The first registration unit, namely ‘Image’, consists of five questions. The image will be coded to analyze three different aspects of diversity: 1) gender; 2) race and ethnicity and 3) body size. The variables used for the coding instrument were adapted from previous research of physical appearance characteristics and body image (Webb et al., 2017). The first question asked what the perceived gender of the individuals in the image was and could be coded using the categories ‘male’ or ‘female’. The second question asked about the perceived race/ethnicity of the individuals in the image. Answer options included ‘Black/African American’, ‘White/European’, ‘Hispanic/Latino’, ‘Asian’, ‘Brown’ or ‘Other’.

‘Body Image Assessment for Obesity’ figure scale is a valid body image rating scale used in prior researchwhich features 18 different silhouettes which reflects different body sizes for men and women. A limitation of this scale is that due to the many options, it can be difficult to distinguish between the many silhouettes. Further, the figure does not depict real body’s but cartoon-like silhouettes. Therefore, this paper will use the ‘Body Size Guide’ based on the research of Harris et al., (2007). This scale depicts 10 images of real bodies of men and women ranging from underweight (BMI 18,5) to class 3 obese (BMI 40). For a more detailed representation of the codebook, see Appendix A.

The second registration unit, namely ‘Caption’, consisted of four questions. The caption of the accompanying image was selected as a registration unit because it is gives us substantial information about the context of the image.The caption of the post can be found directly under the image. The first question asked to fill in the number of words of the

caption. The second question asked about the tone of the caption and has been operationalized using seven items with 7 points scales ranging from 1 (Very Positive) to 7 (Very Negative). To capture the brand image of consumers, the third registration unit, ‘Comments’ was established. The first question asked about the number of words the comments consisted of. The second question asked about the sentiment of the comment and was also operationalized using seven items with 7 points scales ranging from 1 (Very Positive) to 7 (Very Negative). The third question asked if the comment referred to the values diversity and inclusiveness, with the options ‘yes’ or ‘no’. The fourth question asked if the comment referred specifically to the individuals present in the image. The answer categories in the codebook were sought to be made as simple and unambiguous as possible to increase validity and feasibility.

Results

A content analysis was conducted to explore diversity and inclusiveness of brands. By the way of descriptives and frequencies missing values were checked and deleted if necessary.

Out of the 200 Instagram posts selected for this study, 165 posts contained a person present in the image. Because the diversity of people are explored in this research, only images that include people are relevant. Thus, the final sample consisted of 165 Instagram posts and 1650 Instagram comments. The average number of likes on a post was 288.746 (SD = 69100) and the average number of comments on a post was 746 (SD = 746). Interestingly, 42 (25%) of the sample portrayed males compared to 123 (75%) females. Furthermore, 102 (62%) of the sample was White or European, 52 (32%) of the sample consisted of Black or African American models and 20 (12%) of the sample consisted of Hispanic or Latino models. A minor of 6 (4%) of the sample were Asians, 3 (2%) were Middle Eastern or Arab and only 1 (1%) model of the sample was Brown.

Diversity and Inclusiveness and Corporate Brand Expressions

To detect whether and how diversity had an influence on the corporate brand expressions on Instagram and answer the first hypothesis, crosstabs and Chi-square were calculated (see Table 1). We wanted to determine if there was a difference between non-diverse (0 = Calvin Klein and Topshop) and non-diverse (1 = H&M and Nike) brands in their corporate brand expressions. An alpha level of .05 was used for all statistical tests. There was a significant difference between the brands regarding the use of male(s) in their corporate brand expressions, χ2(1) = 4.47, p = .04. H&M and Nike used 33 (40%) males in their

Instagram posts whereas Calvin Klein and Topshop used 20 (24%) males. The strength of this relationship was quite weak (φ = .17) For female(s), there was also a significant difference, χ2

(1) = 7.92, p < .01. Surprisingly, H&M and Nike used 54 (65%) females in their Instagram posts compared to 69 (84%) of Calvin Klein and Topshop. The strength of this relationship was negative and weak, φ = -.22. Based on these results, hypothesis h1a can be confirmed.

Analyzing race, there was no significant difference between the brands regarding the use of Black or African American people, χ2(1) = 2.63, p > .05. For White or European people there was a significant difference between the brands, χ2(1) = 13.14, p < .01. The diverse brands H&M and Nike used 40 (48%) White models compared to Calvin Klein and Topshop who used 62 (76%) White models and there was a negative weak relationship φ = -.28. For Hispanic or Latino’s there was no significant difference between the brands, , χ2

(1) = 2.01, p > .05. Examining Asian people, H&M and Nike used 6 (7%) Asian people in their corporate brand expressions whereas Calvin Klein and Topshop did not use any 0 (0%). This difference was significant χ2(1) = 6.15, p = .01, and the strength of this relationship was negative and weak, φ = -.28. For Brown ( χ2(1) = 1.02, p > .05) and Middle Eastern (χ2(1) = 3.02, p > .05) people, there was no significant difference. Based on these results, hypothesis 1b can be confirmed.

For male body size a (χ2(1) = .63, p > .05), male body size b (χ2(1) = 1.67, p > .05), male body size c (χ2(1) = 1.31, p > .05), male body size d (χ2(1) = .33, p > .05) and male body size e (χ2(1) = .99, p > .05) there was no significant difference between the brands. This indicates that the brands H&M and Nike were not diverse in their use of male body sizes. For female body sizes, H&M and Nike had 9 (11%) people with body size a compared to 26 (32%) of Calvin Klein and Topshop. This difference was significant, χ2(1) = 10.74, p < .01, however the strength of this relationship was negative and weak φ = -.25. For female body size b (χ2(1) = .15, p > .05), female body size c (χ2(1) = .22, p > .05), female body size d (χ2(1) = .99, p > .05) and female body size e (χ2(1) = .99, p > .05) there was no significant difference between the brands which means that hypothesis 1c is rejected.

Table 1

Variable χ2 _{φ p} Male(s) 4.47 .17 .035* Female(s) 7.92 -.22 .005* Black 2.63 .13 .105 White 13.14 -.28 .000* Hispanic .20 .04 .654 Asian 6.15 .19 .013* Brown 1.02 -.08 .313 Middle Eastern 3.02 .14 .082

Male Body Size A .63 -.06 .427

Male Body Size B 1.67 .10 .196

Male Body Size C 1.31 .09 .253

Male Body Size D .33 .05 .567

Male Body Size E .99 .08 .319

Female Body Size A 10.74 -.25 .001*

Female Body Size B .15 -.03 .696

Female Body Size C .22 -.04 .640

Female Body Size D .99 .08 .319

Female Body Size E .99 .08 .319

Notes. Grouping Variable Brands, 0 = Calvin Klein and Topshop, 1 = H&M and Nike, * p < .05. The other body sizes were not selected and therefore not used in calculations.

Gender, Race, Body Size and Brand Image

To answer the second hypotheses, Mann-Whitney tests were calculated. The independent variables are not normally distributed, which indicates that the variance of the

residuals is not normally distributed. Consequently, non-parametric tests were used to answer our second hypotheses. All the results of these tests can be found in Table 2.

A Mann-Whitney test indicted that the brand image was higher for the brands Calvin Klein and Topshop (854.4) than for the diverse brands H&M and Nike (795.9). The Mann-Whitney value was found to be statistically significant U = 315765, z = -2.625, p < .05. Analyzing gender, results indicated that corporate brand expressions with no males (857.7) had a higher brand image than for males (5755.7). The results were significant, U = 259580, z = -4.272, p < .001. For females, the results were also significant: images with females (858.2) had a higher brand image than those with no females (727.5), U = 2216823, z = -4.272, p < .001. Based on these results, it can be determined that images with no males or females have a higher brand image, meaning hypothesis 2a is rejected.

Looking at the race of the people in the image, Mann-Whitney tests indicated that images with Black or African American (857.8) people in the image had a significant higher brand image than those without (810), U = 276228, z = -1.992, p = .046. For White or European people present in the image, the results were also statistically significant, U = 297993 z = -2.553, p = .011. Interestingly, images that showed White or European people (802.7) had a lower brand image than those that showed other races (861.2). For the Hispanic (U = 133219, p > .05), Asian (U = 44064, p > .05), Brown (U = 6539, p > .05), and Middle Eastern (U = 24197, p > .05) races, the results were not significant. Based on these results, hypothesis 2b is partially accepted.

To uncover whether male or female body sizes had an influence on the brand image, additional Mann-Whitney Tests were performed. Results indicated that images that displayed male body size a (U = 107700, z = 3.114, p < .001) and male body size b (U = 1210686, z = -2.213, p < .05) were statistically significant. Images that displayed male body size a (722.3) had a lower brand image than those that displayed other body sizes. Likewise, images with

male body size b (777.5) had a lower brand image than others (837.8). The other displayed male body sizes were not statistically significant.

Looking at female body sizes, images with female body size a (779.3) had lower brand image than those with other body sizes (837.3), the results were statistically significant U = 211332, z = -2.128, p < .05. Furthermore, images with female body size b (883.9) resulted in a higher brand image than those with other body sizes (763.9). This is also statistically

significant, U = 290344, z = -5.379, p < .001. Also, images that displayed female body size d (876.3) were statistically significant and resulted in a higher brand image than other body sizes (824.7), U = 3280, z = -3.444, p < .001. The other displayed female body sizes were not statistically significant. Based on these results, for males hypothesis 2c is rejected however for females hypothesis 2c is accepted.

Table 2

Mann-Whitney test results of Brand Image between groups

Variable Groups n Mean Rank Z Test p

DivBrands 0 = CK + TS 1 = H&M + Nike 820 829 854.42 795.90 -2.635 .009* Male 0 = No Males 1= Male(s) 1120 529 857.73 755.70 -4.272 .000* Female 0 = No Females 1 = Female(s) 419 1230 727.48 858.22 -5.106 .000* Black 0 = Other 1 = Black 1130 519 809.95 857.77 -1.992 .046* White 0 = Other 1 = White 629 1020 861.24 802.65 -2.553 .011*

Hispanic 0 = Other 1 = Hispanic 1449 200 816.94 883.40 -1.946 .052 Asian 0 = Other 1= Asian 1589 60 827.27 764.90 -1.048 .295 Brown 0 = Other 1= Brown 1639 10 823.99 990.55 -1.160 .246

Middle Eastern 0 = Other

1= Middle Eastern 1619 30 824.95 827.92 -.036 .972

Male Body A 0 = Other

1 = Body Size A 1480 169 836.73 722.28 -3.114 .002*

Male Body B 0 = Other

1 = Body Size B 1299 350 837.81 777.46 -2.213 .027*

Male Body C 0 = Other

1= Body Size C 1579 70 826.80 784.41 -.767 .443

Male Body D 0 = Other

1 = Body Size D 1619 30 823.80 889.80 -.791 .429

Female Body A 0 = Other

1 = Female Body A 1299 350 837.31 779.31 -2.128 .033*

Female Body B 0 = Other

1 = Female Body B 809 840 763.89 883.85 -5.379 .000*

Female Body C 0 = Other

1 = Female Body C 1599 50 824.84 830.27 -.084 .933

Female Body D 0 = Other

1 = Female Body D 1639 10 822.00 1316.50 -3.444 .001*

Female Body E 0 = Other

1 = Female Body E 1639 10 824.69 876.25 -.359 .720

Notes. N = 1649, * p < .05. The other Body Sizes were not selected and therefore not used in calculations.

Mediation

Looking at the conceptual model, it was also expected that corporate brand expressions on Instagram would positively mediate the relationship between diversity and brand image. The mediators in this analysis were gender diversity, race diversity and male and female body size diversity. To test this expectation, a mediation analysis was performed using process by Hayes (Hayes, 2017). Because gender is a dichotomous variable, it could not be used as a mediator in the process analysis, and it was therefore excluded from further analysis. The first step was to uncover whether diversity has an influence on the brand image. The overall model is statistically significant (F(1,1647) = 5.32, p = .02, R2 = .00), indicating that there is indeed a direct relationship between diversity and brand image. An increase on the brand diversity scale (0 = Calvin Klein and Topshop, 1 = H&M and Nike) leads to a decrease in the brand image of .18 units (b = -.18).

According to theory and prior research, it was also expected that the value diversity would have an influence on the corporate brand expressions on Instagram. To calculate this, multiple regression analysis was performed. Diversity does indeed predict the race diversity of the Instagram posts, F(1,1647) = 5.13, p = .02, R2 = .00. Furthermore, diversity also predicts the male body size diversity of the Instagram posts, F(1,1647) = 12.51, p < .01, R2 = .01. Finally, diversity predicts the female body size diversity of the Instagram posts, F(1,1647) = 103.80, p < .01, R2 = .06.

Next, we wanted to see if diversity together with the mediators would predict brand image. Female body size diversity had a significant influence, b = 2.97, t(1644) = -2.31 , p = .02 . Indicating that for every 1 unit increase on the female body size scale, the brand image rises with 2.9 units. When controlling for female body size, diversity was no longer a significant predictor of brand image, b = -.11, t(1644) = -1.30 , p = .19. It was found that female body size fully mediated the relationship between diversity and brand image, z =

-2.24, p = .03. None of the other variables provided significant results, indicating that neither race or male body size had an effect on the relationship between diversity and brand image.

Conclusion

The problem that this study wanted to shed light on was that brands are missing out on great opportunities to introduce their brand to a wider audience by not diversifying their customer base. This was done by exploring how diversity influences the expressions of the corporate brand on Instagram and consequently how these expressions influence the perceptions consumers have. By not incorporating diversity in their corporate brand expressions, brands are excluding a large group of consumers due to a lack of consumer identification. According to prior research, consumer identification with a brand has numerous positive effects on their behavior such as: brand preference, consumer loyalty, consumer satisfaction, purchase intention and positive word of mouth (Belén del Río et al., 2001; Bhattacharya et al., 1995; Sjödin & Törn, 2006).

First, it was expected that the values a brand upholds would be portrayed in the corporate brand expressions. The brands H&M and Nike that claim to value diversity, were expected to incorporate this more in their Instagram images than the non-diverse brands Calvin Klein and Topshop. Results revealed that H&M and Nike were more diverse in the use of males and females in their images compared to Calvin Klein and Topshop. Investigating race, there was only a significant difference for the White and Asian models, indicating that the H&M and Nike were more diverse in using these races. There was no significant

difference between the brands for Black, Brown and Middle Eastern races. For the non-diverse brands, 76% of the models were White and they had no Asian models in their images. Exploring the male body sizes, there was no significant difference between the brands,

female body sizes, there was only a significant difference between the brands in body size a, with the non-diverse brands using 32% underweight models compared to the 11% of the diverse brands.

There are a couple of points that brands learn from these insights. Despite the fact that on certain points H&M and Nike were more diverse, on many other points there was no difference. Thus, it appears that their values (i.e diversity) are not sufficiently incorporated in their corporate brand expressions. This suggests that their corporate identity is presented inconsistently and as Ind (1997) argued, can lead to a decrease in brand loyalty and purchase intention by consumers. A practical implication of this result is that the diverse brands ought to be more aware of incorporating diversity in their communications, because it appears that these values are not successfully reflected in their images on Instagram. Furthermore, the results indicated that the non-diverse brands indeed lack racial diversity. This demonstrates that issues of diversity are still present. A practical implication of this is that these brands should critically evaluate their corporate brand in totality and revise their organizational values. By not being more diverse, they are excluding a large group of diverse customers.

Next, it was expected that the diversity of gender, race and body sizes in the corporate brand expressions would have a positive influence on the brand image. Results revealed that overall, the non-diverse brands actually had a higher brand image than the diverse brands. This provides evidence that H&M and Nike are not successful in communicating the values that they stand for to their stakeholders (Reddy, 1979), which consequently leads to a lower brand image. This is a major learning point from this research and shows that consumers are not passive and continue to co-construct the brand image and be critical of brands

(Cornelissen et al., 2012). An implication of this result is that the diverse brands have to remain attentive of the implementation of diversity in their communications and be aware of

the proper execution of this. This remains an important issue because of the discussed consequences a negative brand image can have and because of the missed opportunities.

Looking specifically at races, results revealed that the portrayal of Black models led to a higher brand image, and likewise the portrayal of White models resulted in a lower brand image. Despite the fact that other races were used far less and thus provided weaker results, this is a major learning point for brands in illustrating that diversity of race does positively influence the brand image. A practical implication of this result is that brands should strive to use models from different races in their communications because this will have positive effects on their brand image.

Furthermore, portrayal of male body size a and female body size a resulted in a lower brand image. Examples of these negative comments were “Why is she so skinny? Please stop hiring these skinny models! or “Please give this guy something to eat!”. This is a learning point for brands and illustrates that using underweight models (body size a) is critically evaluated by the public and that the use of these models can negatively affect the brand image. Accordingly, results displayed that the portrayal of female body size b and female body size d positively affected the brand image. This is in line with the research of Bian & Wang (2015) that illustrated that using average-sized models in campaign images can actually lead to higher sales.A practical implication of this result is that instead of using underweight models, brands should use larger body sizes in their communications as this results in a higher brand image. Hence a learning point for brands is that alongside the psychological and health risks, using underweight models in images is undesirable.

Finally, results indicated that diversity does have a direct relationship with brand image, however only female body size had a significant positive mediation effect on this relationship. This again emphasizes the importance that brands should use female models

with larger body sizes in their images, as this has a positive influence on the relationship between diversity and brand image.

The main question of this research was: how do the corporate brand expressions on Instagram regarding diversity and inclusiveness align with the perceptions consumers have of the brand (brand image)? Based on the described results, it is clear that the corporate brand expressions and the brand image were misaligned for H&M and Nike. For Calvin Klein and Topshop the answer is not as straightforward. It can be argued that there was a degree of alignment between the corporate brand expressions and brand image, however these brands would certainly benefit from incorporating more diversity into their organization.

Discussion

This research paper attempted to bring additional empirical insights into the field of communication and corporate brands. This paper was original because it linked the relatively new platform Instagram with diversity while investigating the perceptions consumers have. As previously discussed in the theoretical section, the existing material on this subject was very poor and this research paper attempted to fill this gap. There are some key learning points this paper provided. First, this paper presented an overview of diversity and

inclusiveness for diverse and non-diversified brands. This paper successfully demonstrated that issues of diversity still exist in the fashion industry for both diverse and non-diverse brands. In line with this, a key point from this research is that the diverse brands need to adjust their Instagram presence because their values are not reflected in their corporate brand expressions. A general solution to this problem would be to hire a diversity and inclusiveness manager to ensure diversity is implemented, as H&M recently did after dealing with the controversy surrounding the hoodie (Bulman, 2018).

Generally, this paper provided evidence for the fact that consumers have a voice and co-construct the brand image. Through social media, consumers have the power to inform

brands of their opinions. Consumers now have insight to gauge whether or not branding campaigns are incorporating diversity and asking themselves if the brand realistically reflects their diversity.

Furthermore, this paper disputed the statement of “White and thin models being part of the ideal image for women”. Interestingly, using White and underweight models in fact resulted in a lower brand image. Hence, brands should recognize that implementing diversity does have positive effects. To improve their corporate brand expressions on Instagram, the first steps should be to incorporate more males, stop using underweight models and use models with average body sizes, and ensure a variety of models of different races.

However, there are also several limitations in this study that should be addressed. The first issue regards the method choice of this study. A content analysis is a favorable method to analyze images and text, however it is only descriptive. This research successfully

demonstrated the ‘what’ and ‘how many’, but it does not provide us with evidence of underlying motives of people. For future research, it would be recommended to also use methodology to examine the ‘why’, such as in interviews. In this research the brand image was determined through text-only analysis, however with highly criticized issues such as diversity it would be meaningful to explore the personal opinions people have as well.

Another methodological limitation were the unforeseen language barriers. Big international brands such as H&M and Nike have millions of followers from people all over the world. This means that only comments in English or Dutch could be analyzed, thus disregarding other (relevant) comments in other languages. Furthermore, this research used the ‘Body Size Guide’ based on the research of Harris et al., (2007). Despite the fact that this scale has been recognized as a proper representation of real bodies of men and women, several limitations exist. First, this guide does not provide a realistic representation for people from different ethnic backgrounds or with different body types. Nike for instance uses many

athletes in their images. Basketball players tend to be very tall with trained bodies and this body guide did not provide a perfect representation of this body type. In line with this, people from different ethnic backgrounds tend to have different body types as well, and this guide was based on White body types. For future research, it would be highly recommended to find body size guides that also incorporate silhouettes for people from different ethnic

backgrounds.

As Ind (1997) explained, brand-consumer interactions influence the judgements stakeholders have of the brand, by considering to what extent they believe the brand has fulfilled the brand promise. One of the major findings of this study was that the brand image of H&M and Nike was ultimately lower than that of Calvin Klein and Topshop. A convincing explanation is that consumers indeed believe that H&M and Nike have failed in delivering their promise regarding diversity, however other possibilities exist as well. This lowered brand image could also be a result of product complaints or poor customer service from the brand for instance. Thus, this paper could not preclude the influence of these factors.

Another discussion point is the choice options for the variable gender. This research paper only used the “male” and “female” options in the codebook. Some could argue that these options fails to incorporate people that are “transgender” or “gender-neutral” for example. However, due to the short nature of this research and for simplification purposes it had been decided to stick with these two options. Nonetheless, this is another interesting aspect of diversity that could be explored in future research.

This paper tried to shed light on an important issue in society, which is diversity and the lack thereof by corporate brands. Despite the weakness of some results, I hope that at the end of this paper the reader realizes that society and corporate brands still have a long way to go. This paper presented the benefits of using diversity and inclusiveness, by provided key learning points and practical implications for corporate brands.

References

Abratt, R., & Mofokeng, T. N. (2001). Development and management of corporate image in South Africa. European Journal of Marketing, 35(3/4), 368-386.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/03090560110382075

Abratt, R. & Kleyn, N. (2012). Corporate Identity, corporate branding and corporate reputatio ns. European Journal of Marketing, 46(7/8), 1048‐1063.

Alizadeh, A., Moshabaki, A., Khodadad Hoseini, S. H., & Naiej, A. K. (2014). The Comparison of Product and Corporate Branding Strategy: a conceptual framework. IOSR Journal of Business and Management, 16(1), 14-24. doi:10.9790/487x-16141424

Anisimova, T. (2010). Corporate brand: The company-customer misalignment and its performance implications. Journal of Brand Management, 17(7), 488-503. doi:10.1057/bm.2010.7

Ashley, C., & Tuten, T. (2014). Creative Strategies in Social Media Marketing: An

Exploratory Study of Branded Social Content and Consumer Engagement. Psychology & Marketing, 32(1), 15-27. doi:10.1002/mar.20761

Balmer, J.M.T. and Greyser, S.A. (2006), “Corporate marketing: integrating corporate identity, corporate branding, corporate communications, corporate image and

corporate reputation”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 40 Nos 7-8, pp. 730-41. Balmer, J.M.T., Stuart H. & Greyser, S.A. (2009). Aligning identity and strategy: corporate br

anding at British airways in the late 20th century. California Management Review, 51( 3), 6-23.

Balmer, J. M. (2012). Strategic corporate brand alignment. European Journal of Marketing, 46(7/8), 1064-1092. doi:10.1108/03090561211230205

Barry, B. (2014). Why Reflect Reality? an Exploratory Study on the Effectiveness of

Traditionally Attravive Models (Tams) and Reasitically Attractive Models (Rams) in Fashion and Beauty Advertising. Proceedings of the 2008 Academy of Marketing Science (AMS) Annual Conference, 214-218. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-10963-3_123 Belén del Río, A., Vázquez, R., & Iglesias, V. (2001). The effects of brand associations on

consumer response. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 18(5), 410-425. doi:10.1108/07363760110398808

Bhattacharya, C.B. and Sen, S. (2003), “Consumer-company identification: a framework for understanding consumers’ relationships with companies”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 67 No. 2, pp. 76-88.

Bian, X., & Wang, K. (2015). Are size-zero female models always more effective than average-sized ones? European Journal of Marketing, 49(7/8), 1184-1206. doi:10.1108/ejm-08-2013-0414

Brown, T. J. (2006). Identity, Intended Image, Construed Image, and Reputation: An

Interdisciplinary Framework and Suggested Terminology. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 34(2), 99-106. doi:10.1177/0092070305284969

Bulman, M. (2018, January 8). H&M faces huge backlash over 'racist? ad. Retrieved from http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/hm-apology-racist-image-website-child-model-backlash-twitter-monkey-jumper-black-a8147641.html

Carey, A. C. (2010). On the margins of citizenship: Intellectual disability and civil rights in twentieth-century America. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.

Cavanaugh, C. (2001). The effectiveness of interactive distance education technologies in K-12 learning: A meta-analysis. International Journal of Educational

Chambers, J. (2011). Madison Avenue and the Color Line: African Americans in the Advertising Industry. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

Charania, S. (2017). Retrieved from https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/moving-fashion-forward-exploring-the-lack-of-diversity_us_5907ed83e4b05279d4edbf45

Christensen, L. T., & Cornelissen, J. (2013). Bridging Corporate and Organizational Communication: Review, Development and a Look to the

Future. Organisationskommunikation und Public Relations, 43-72. doi:10.1007/978-3-531-18961-1_3

Colliander, J., Dahlén, M., & Modig, E. (2015). Twitter for two: investigating the effects of dialogue with customers in social media. International Journal of Advertising, 34(2), 181-194. doi:10.1080/02650487.2014.996197

Cornelissen, J., Thøger Christensen, L., & Kinuthia, K. (2012). Corporate brands and identity: developing stronger theory and a call for shifting the debate. European Journal of Marketing, 46(7/8), 1093-1102. doi:10.1108/03090561211230214

Denardo, M. (2015, February 25). Diversity Report: New York Fashion Week Fall 2015 - theFashionSpot. Retrieved from

http://www.thefashionspot.com/runway-news/547137-diversity-report-for-new-york-fashion-week-fall-2015/

Fardouly, J., Diedrichs, P. C., Vartanian, L. R., & Halliwell, E. (2015). Social comparisons on social media: The impact of Facebook on young women's body image concerns and mood. Body Image, 13, 38-45. doi:10.1016/j.bodyim.2014.12.002

Haboush, A., Warren, C. S., & Benuto, L. (2011). Beauty, Ethnicity, and Age: Does Internalization of Mainstream Media Ideals Influence Attitudes Towards Older Adults? Sex Roles, 66(9-10), 668-676. doi:10.1007/s11199-011-0102-6

Harris, C. V., Bradlyn, A. S., Coffman, J., Gunel, E., & Cottrell, L. (2007). BMI-based body size guides for women and men: development and validation of a novel pictorial

method to assess weight-related concepts. International Journal of Obesity, 32(2), 336-342. doi:10.1038/sj.ijo.0803704

Hatch, M.J. and Schultz, M. (2001), “Are the strategic stars aligned for your corporate brand?”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 79 No. 2, pp. 128-34.

Hatch, M. J., & Schultz, M. (2002). The dynamics of organizational identity. Human relations , 55(8), 989‐1018.

Hayes, A. F. (2017). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach.

Hollebeek, L. D., Glynn, M. S., & Brodie, R. J. (2014). Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development and Validation. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 28(2), 149-165. doi:10.1016/j.intmar.2013.12.002

Ind N. (1997) The Corporate Brand. In: The Corporate Brand. Palgrave Macmillan, London In Singh, A., & In Duhan, P. (2016). Managing public relations and brand image through

social media.

John M.T. Balmer, (2012) "Strategic corporate brand alignment: Perspectives from identity based views of corporate brands", European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 46 Issue: 7/8, pp.1064-1092,https://doi.org/10.1108/03090561211230205


Kapferer, J. (1997). Managing luxury brands. Journal of Brand Management, 4(4), 251-259. doi:10.1057/bm.1997.4

Keh, H. T., Park, I. H., Kelly, S., & Du, X. (2016). The Effects of Model Size and Race on Chinese Consumers’ Reactions: A Social Comparison Perspective. Psychology & Marketing, 33(3), 177-194. doi:10.1002/mar.20864

Knox, S., & Bickerton, D. (2003). The six conventions of corporate branding. European Journal of Marketing, 37(7/8), 998-1016. doi:10.1108/03090560310477636

Marketo (2010). The Definitive Guide to B2B Social Media: A Marketo Workbook. San Mateo, CA Retrieved from http://docs.cdn.marketo.com/Guide-B2B-Social-Media-Part2.pdf

Martenson, R. (2007). Corporate brand image, satisfaction and store loyalty. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 35(7), 544-555.

doi:10.1108/09590550710755921

Melewar, T. C., & Jenkins, E. (2002). Defining the Corporate Identity Construct. Corporate Reputation Review, 5(1), 76-90. doi:10.1057/palgrave.crr.1540166

Morsing, M., & Schultz, M. (2006). Corporate social responsibility communication: stakeholder information, response and involvement strategies. Business Ethics: A European Review, 15(4), 323-338. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8608.2006.00460.x Nandan, S. (2005). An exploration of the brand identity–brand image linkage: A

communications perspective. Journal of Brand Management, 12(4), 264-278. doi:10.1057/palgrave.bm.2540222

Neuendorf, K. A. (2017). The content analysis guidebook.

Reddy, M. J. (n.d.). The conduit metaphor: A case of frame conflict in our language about language. Metaphor and Thought, 164-201. doi:10.1017/cbo9781139173865.012 Riel, C. B., & Fombrun, C. J. (2010). Essentials of corporate communication: Implementing

practices for effective reputation management. Abingdon: Routledge. Russmann, U., & Svensson, J. (2016). Studying Organizations on

Instagram. Information, 7(4), 58. doi:10.3390/info7040058

Sjödin, H., & Törn, F. (2006). When communication challenges brand associations: a framework for understanding consumer responses to brand image

Stathopoulou, A., Borel, L., Christodoulides, G., & West, D. (2017). Consumer Branded #Hashtag Engagement: Can Creativity in TV Advertising Influence Hashtag Engagement? Psychology & Marketing, 34(4), 448-462. doi:10.1002/mar.20999 Stern, B., Zinkhan, G. M., & Jaju, A. (2001). Marketing Images. Marketing Theory, 1(2),

201-224. doi:10.1177/147059310100100203

Suhrawardi, R. (2016, May 23). Diversity in Fashion: Are Millennials and Social Media the Answer To Changing Beauty Ideals? Retrieved from

https://www.forbes.com/sites/rebeccasuhrawardi/2016/05/23/diversity-in-fashion-are-millennials-and-social-media-the-answer-to-changing-beauty-ideals/#74390dbdb594 The 2015 Instagram Industry Report | Simply Measured. (n.d.). Retrieved from

https://simplymeasured.com/blog/the-2015-instagram-industry-report/#sm.0000g7tpt8usjeuoqbj10shqlrh2v

Thomas, J. A., & McDaniel, R. R. (1990). INTERPRETING STRATEGIC ISSUES: EFFECTS OF STRATEGY AND THE INFORMATION-PROCESSING STRUCTURE OF TOP MANAGEMENT TEAMS. Academy of Management Journal, 33(2), 286-306. doi:10.2307/256326

Tommy Hilfiger. (2017). Tommy Hilfiger Global | FAQ. Retrieved December 2017, from http://global.tommy.com/int/en/about/corporate-responsibility/faq/15

Webb, J. B., Vinoski, E. R., Bonar, A. S., Davies, A. E., & Etzel, L. (2017). Fat is fashionable and fit: A comparative content analysis of Fatspiration and Health at Every Size ® Instagram images. Body Image, 22, 53-64. doi:10.1016/j.bodyim.2017.05.003 Williams, Lee & In Haugtvedt (2004). Diversity in advertising: Broadening the scope of

research directions.

Windsperger, J., Cliquet, G., Ehrmann, T., & Hendrikse, G. (2015). Interfirm Networks: Franchising, Cooperatives and Strategic Alliances. Cham: Springer.

Yan, Y., & Bissell, K. (2014). The Globalization of Beauty: How is Ideal Beauty Influenced by Globally Published Fashion and Beauty Magazines? Journal of Intercultural Communication Research, 43(3), 194-214. doi:10.1080/17475759.2014.917432 Yuille, J. C., & Catchpole, M. J. (1977). The role of imagery in models of cognition. Journal

Appendix A

Figure A1: Coolest monkey in the jungle image H&M

Figure A3: Instagram page of Nike

Appendix B

Codebook: Diversity of Instagram posts Context Unit:

 Each Instagram post should be considered individually, not influenced by previous posts.

 Coders should consider all aspects of the post as a whole rather than individually when answering questions about any of the three.

Registration Units:

 Each individual Instagram image

 Each individual caption

 Each comment

Coding Instructions:

 Carefully look at the post, before beginning coding process.

 Save the post and copy the image and text into a Google Doc file.

 Only code what is present in the post. Do not code your own biases or assumptions. The context units should provide enough information for coding.

Administrative. Brand Number 1. H&M 2. Nike 3. Topshop 4. Calvin Klein Publication Date

Register the publication date of the post that you are coding as follows: DD/MM/YY. […]

Likes

Fill in the amount of likes of the post […]

Comments

Fill in the amount of comments on the post […]

Image. People

The visibility of a person/people in the photo. Are there people present in the photo?

0 No. 1 Yes

If the answer is yes, move on to the next question. How many people are present in the photo?

[…] Gender.

What is/are the character’s gender?

Fill in the amounts of the genders of the characters present in the image. 1. Male […]

2. Female […] 3. Other […] Race.

What is the race of the person/people you see?

Try your best to identify the race of the people visible in the image, and fill in the amount. When a person seems to have multiple ethnicities, choose the race that is most apparent.

1. Black/African American […] 2. White/European […]

3. Hispanic/Latino […] 4. Asian […]

5. Brown […]

Brown is identified as people who are from South Asia; India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Pakistan etc. ("Urban Dictionary: brown people," 2005)

Body Size.

Fill in the body size of the individuals based on the image below Male A [...] B [...] C [...] D [...] E […] F [...] G [...] H [...] I [...] J [...]

Female A [...] B [...] C [...] D [...] E […] F [...] G [...] H [...] I [...] J [...] Caption.

The caption of an Instagram post is the title which can be directly found under the Image

What is the number of words of the caption? […]

What is the general tone of the caption? 1. Very Positive 2. Moderately Positive 3. Slightly Positive 4. Neutral 5. Slightly Negative 6. Moderately Negative 7. Very Negative

Does the caption say something about diversity/inclusiveness? 0. No

Does the caption refer to the people present in the image? 0. No

1. Yes Comments.

What is the number of words of the caption? […]

What is the general tone of the comment? 1. Very Positive 2. Moderately Positive 3. Slightly Positive 4. Neutral 5. Slightly Negative 6. Moderately Negative 7. Very Negative

Does the comment say something about diversity/inclusiveness? 0. No

1. Yes

Does the comment refer to the people present in the image? 0. No