5 Master Thesis Branding for Startups
The influence of personality traits on brand communication activities within startups.
Master Thesis Branding for Startups
The influence of personality traits on brand communication activities within startups.
Author: Lieke Janssen
Student number: 11929456 Date of submission: 22 June 2018
Qualification: MSc. in Business Administration – Marketing Track Institution: Amsterdam Business School, University of Amsterdam First supervisor: Mr. Jorge Labadie
T
able of Contents
Statement of Originality ... 5
Abstract ... 5
Chapter 1. Introduction ... 7
1.1. Motivation of topic ... 7
1.1.1. General introduction of this research... 7
1.1.2. Research Gap ... 11
1.2. Problem definition leading to research question ... 11
1.2.1. Delimitations of the study ... 12
1.3. Contributions ... 12
1.3.1. Theoretical contributions ... 13
1.3.2. Managerial contributions ... 13
Chapter 2: Personality traits ... 13
2.1. Definitions of Personality Traits ... 14
2.2. History of Lexical Personality Trait Models ... 15
2.3. HEXACO Personality Traits ... 18
Chapter 3: Brand Communication ... 18
3.1. Classification of Brand Communication Activities & Types ... 19
3.2. Brand Communication Activities in SMEs and startups ... 20
Chapter 4. Product versus Market Orientation ... 22
Chapter 5. Hypotheses ... 23 5.1. Extraversion... 24 5.2. Conscientiousness ... 25 5.3. Openness to experience ... 25 5.4. Agreeableness ... 26 5.5. Emotionality ... 27 5.6. Honesty-humility ... 28 Chapter 6. Methodology ... 29 6.1. Methodological Approach ... 29 6.1.1. Research Philosophy ... 29 6.1.2. Research Approach ... 30 6.1.3. Research Design ... 31 6.1.4. Sampling ... 31 6.1.5. Data Analysis ... 32 6.2. Operationalization of Concepts ... 32
6.2.1. Personality Score Measurement ... 32
6.2.2. Level of Brand Communication Types ... 35
6.2.3. Control Variables... 36
Chapter 7. Results ... 40
7.1. Initial Look ... 40
7.2. Profile of the respondents ... 41
7.3. Pre-Analysis ... 41
7.3.1 Correlation and Multicollinearity analysis on Personality Dimensions ... 41
7.3.2 Validity and Reliability analysis on Personality Dimensions... 42
7.3.3. Validity and reliability analysis on brand communication activities. ... 43
7.3.4. Descriptives of personality dimensions and brand communication activities ... 44
7.3.5. Dummy variables... 47
7.3.6. Assumption of normality ... 47
7.4. Results of the hypotheses ... 49
7.4.1. Multiple regression model on Interactional Marketing ... 49
7.4.2. Multiple regression model on E-marketing ... 53
7.4.3. Multiple regression model on Transactional marketing ... 55
Chapter 8. Discussion and Conclusion ... 59
8.1. General discussion ... 59 8.2. Conclusion ... 65 8.3. Implications ... 66 8.3.1. Theoretical Implications ... 66 8.3.2. Managerial Implications ... 68 8.4. Limitations... 69 8.5. Further research ... 70 References ... 72
Appendix A – HEXACO-60 Full Scale ... 80
Appendix B – Blank Survey Framework ... 83
Appendix C – Results ... 96
1.1 Profile of Respondents frequency tables ... 96
1.2 Histogram Boxplot Age Data ... 97
1.3. Correlations between the HEXACO dimensions ... 98
1.4. Personality item frequencies ... 99
1.5. Multicollinearity results on HEXACO dimensions ... 100
1.6. Reliability analysis personality dimensions ... 103
1.7. Normality ... 108
1.8. Correlation Matrix ... 110
1.10. Regression Output: E-marketing ... 118 1.11. Regression Output: Transactional marketing ... 123
5
S
tatement of Originality
This document is written by Lieke Janssen who declares to take full responsibility for the contents of this document.
I declare that the text and the work presented in this document is original and that no sources other than those mentioned in the text and its references have been used in creating it.
The Faculty of Economics and Business is responsible solely for the supervision of completion of the work, not for the contents.
6
A
bstract
The aim of this study was to investigate how a startup owner’s personal character influences its brand communication process. For this, the relationship between six HEXACO personality dimensions (honesty-humility, emotionality, extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness and openness to experience) and three types of brand communication (interactional marketing, transactional marketing and e-marketing) were studied. In addition, several factors such as market orientation, field of study and budget were taken into consideration. The context was within startups, as the number of startups is increasing rapidly and research covering branding for startups is still in its early infancy. By means of a quantitative survey, a sample of 51 startup owners was reached. The results indicated that the personality traits conscientiousness and emotionality do not have any influence on any type of brand communication, which is contradicting the literature available. In addition, the personality traits honesty-humility and agreeableness also show no relationship with any brand communication type, however this was expected through existing literature. Extraversion was positively related to interactional marketing and transactional marketing. Openness to experience was negatively related to transactional marketing. No personality trait influences the level of e-marketing.
Furthermore, several factors have an influence on each brand communication type; a technical study and higher education increases the level of interactional marketing; market orientation increases the level of transactional marketing whereas budget increases the level of e-marketing. Startup owners should acknowledge the fact that several aspects of their personality can influence the level of brand communication implemented by their startups. This is not necessarily the best brand communication Thus, following your gut feel might not be the best marketing approach for your startup.
7
C
hapter 1. Introduction
Have you caught yourself daydreaming about finally opening that flower store or starting that blog? Of becoming the next Google or Facebook? Perhaps you have even thought about a name for your illusion. However, many people do not think about the effects of their personalities when beginning a startup. It would make sense that your personality affects certain branding choices, after all it is your startup and you are making the decisions. But being aware of the effect your personality has, is something different altogether. It requires a certain consciousness, that perhaps was absent. Until now! This thesis researches the personality traits of startup owners and its effects on branding.
This chapter provides a brief introduction of the topic and gives an overview of the dimensions that are researched: the role of the owners, startups, personality traits and brand communication. A short introduction to each of these dimensions will be given. A more extensive review will be provided in Chapters 2 through 4. In addition, this chapter states the research question, delimitations of this research as well as the contributions, both theoretically and managerially.
1.1. Motivation of topic
1.1.1. General introduction of this research
Imagine finally realizing that dream of a startup and becoming a CEO of your own company. And then single handedly ruining what you have built. You could even end up on Forbes’ ‘The worst CEO screw ups in 2016’ (Kauflin, 2016). Just like the CEO of Zenefits in Silicon Valley, Parker Conrad. Conrad was accused of “building a software tool that let insurance salespeople cheat on an online training course that’s required to receive state certification, and of presiding over a corporate culture characterized by drinking and sex in office stairwells”. Conrad resigned on April 9th of that year.
8 Even CEO’s threatening to kill a future president online is what destroyed Packetsled, a San Diego-based cybersecurity startup. After the election, an intoxicated Matt Harrigan said on Facebook that he was going to kill Donald Trump. Then he added, “Getting a sniper rifle and perching myself where it counts. Find a bedroom in the White House that suits you…. I'll find you.” (Kauflin, 2016, p. 1). Harrigan resigned on November 16 of that year. These examples indicate that CEO’s should not underestimate the power and influence of their decisions as well as the power of communication.
The role of the CEO is crucial within large companies and especially in startups as well. Currently, more and more startups are rising from the grounds (Bort, 2017). This development indicates that more researching on the topic is necessary, especially because startups differ in many ways from larger (multinational) companies. 90% of startups fail (Patel, 2016), where the owner of the startup is the main driver in positioning and communicating the brand (Krake, 2005). Startups will disappear from the market within a relatively short amount of time if wrong decisions are being made (Timmons, 1999).
Research shows that the owner of the startup has a crucial position in the brand’s early development stages (e.g. Krake, 2005; Centeno & Hart, 2010; Merrilees, 2007), functioning not only as “key drivers of personal sales, but also as the main spokesperson of many brand communication activities” (Centeno & Hart, 2010, p. 446). This differs when compared to longer existing, larger firms, as these firms usually have a marketing department and specialized employees to develop their brand, making them less reliable on the owner. For instance, when McDonald’s engages in close and personal communication (Centeno & Hart, 2010), an employee rather than the CEO will engage in personal selling. In addition to the limited amount of resources (including employees and knowledge), the financial position of startups differs greatly from multinationals, resulting in simply less money to spend (Mitchell, Hutchinson & Quinn, 2013). These are just a few examples of the differences in startups versus multinationals
9 that will affect the marketing, and thus the branding of the company. Again, the role of CEO’s in companies, and in particular in startups cannot be stressed enough.
Startups
Before reading further, it is necessary to define what a startup entails, as the research revolves around startups situated in the Netherlands. Dave McClure, co-founder of 500Startups considers a startup to be “confused about -1. What its product is. 2. Who its customers are. 3. How to make money.” (Warren, 2013). A more academic definition of a startup lacks consistency. Bresciani and Eppler (2010) state that startups should no longer be in existence for over three years, whereas other authors look at the number of employees. However, the most general agreed upon definition of a startup is a company that has been in existence for a maximum of three years, has large growth potential, where innovation is key, run by few people and does not have lots of turnover (RTL Z, 2015; Keswiel, 2016). As can be imagined, it is hard to determine the specific number of startups situated in the Netherlands. Rabobank (2016), estimated a total of 400 startups in the Netherlands in 2015, with a growth of about 200 startups each year (Mosmans, 2016). However, only 5 to 10 percent succeed each year, leading to an estimated 420 startups that are currently active in the Netherlands.
Personality traits
As the role of the owner is crucial in startups, this research will delve into the personality aspects of the owners. Will a startup owner who is very curious use certain brand communication activities to a greater extent than a startup owner who is less curious? What about a spontaneous or cautious owner? Traits are stable over time and differ across individuals, influencing behavior (Roberts & Delvecchio, 2000) and thus choices such as brand communication activities. A lot of research has been conducted on how to measure personality
10 traits such as the Big Five Personality (Barrick & Mount, 1994) and HEXACO (Lee & Ashton, 2009). A more extensive review on the concept of personality traits can be found in Chapter 2.
Brand communication activities and types of brand communication
` A second construct in this research is brand communication activities. Do certain owner personality traits influence the choice and extent of brand communication activities and thus the type of communication?
“Communication is the human activity that links people together and creates relationships” (Azize, Cemal & Hakan, 2012). In the new millennium phase, marketing managers, as well as owners of startups have a massive variety of choices of brand activities through which to send its marketing communications to customers (Danaher & Rossiter, 2011). Implementing brand communication activities should increase brand awareness (Azize et al, 2012); an element much needed for the unknown brand of startups. Therefore, the owner of the startup should carefully choose its brand communication activities categorized in types of brand communication. The question is if certain personality traits influences brand communication activities. A review on the concept of brand communication activities and type of brand communication can be found in Chapter 3.
Product versus market orientation
The last construct is product versus market orientation. It should be noted that this construct serves as a control variable (explained in 1.2.1.). Does the type of orientation, market versus product, influence the level of brand communication activities? A company can focus on one or the other. The startup owner has the important decision on choosing which type of orientation is most present in its startup. A short review on the concept of product versus market orientation can be found in Chapter 4. It was decided to introduce this control variable in the introduction and include it in the theoretical framework as literature is needed to understand the
11 concept. It is not included in the research question and thus conceptual model, as it is a control variable.
1.1.2. Research Gap
As stated before, owners of startups play an incremental role in the choice of brand communication activities (Rode & Vallaster, 2005, Centeno & Hart, 2010). It is interesting “to understand how particular brand owner personality traits may influence the choice of brand communication activities” (Centeno & Hart, 2010, p. 455), forming the research gap addressed in current research. Extensive literature is available on branding communication activities, and about new small ventures and entrepreneurship. However, literature that covers both fields is still in an early stage (Rode & Vallaster, 2005). Since 2005, no new academic literature has been written combining these two topics.
In addition, lots of psychological research has been conducted on personality traits, also in connection to marketing. This is mostly researched in the perspective of the consumer (e.g. uses and gratification theory), or the brand, not the owner, which in the context of startups is a crucial element. Owners of startups should be aware of the fact that they might be making certain crucial decisions, such as which brand communication activities to invest in, based on the degree of certain personality traits. Therefore, this research is considered to be innovative.
1.2.
Problem definition leading to research question
It is clear that owners have a tremendous amount of influence in the brand communication of startups. Since there is little to no information available concerning personality traits and its relation to brand communication activities and thus type of brand communication in the context of startups, current research addresses the gap by answering the following research question: To what extent do personality traits of startup owners influence the level of brand communication types?
12 1.2.1. Delimitations of the study
This research will include startups where the owner is strongly involved in the branding of the company, making crucial decisions on the brand communication activities, rather than another employee of the marketing department. It will not address the brand personality traits as such. Of course, the human personality traits can transfer to the brand of the startups in the form of a brand personality, however that is not the focus of this research. The focus is whether the human personality traits of the owner results in different level of brand communication activities.
Another delimitation of this research is that it is hard to guarantee that solely the startup owner makes the brand communication decisions, without the influence of other personalities (e.g. another employee of the startup). This research took this into consideration by asking two control questions during the survey (see Chapter 6).
A third delimitation of this research concerns the variable of product versus market orientation. Out of existing literature it cannot be discovered what the relation is between concerning variable and level of brand communication. To the researcher, it would make a difference whether a startup is product or market orientated versus the level of brand communication. In other words, there is no scientific proof that there is a direct influence of the type of orientation on the level of brand communication. In this research an indirect influence is assumed and is therefore regarded as a control variable.
1.3. Contributions
The combination of the two concepts; personality traits and brand communication, in the context of startups will add to existing literature, theoretically and managerially.
13 1.3.1. Theoretical contributions
This research adds to academic literature in a few areas. Firstly, there is a lack of research on branding for startups in general. Insights will be gained into which brand communication activities are used the most in startups, categorized in a type of brand communication. Secondly, this research will provide theory on the influence of personality on the levels of brand communication activities, revealing new insights into branding for startups.
1.3.2. Managerial contributions
As for the managerial contributions, owners of startups should acknowledge that they are making crucial decisions concerning their brand communication activities based on their own personality traits. If one is not aware of something, one cannot change it consciously. Therefore, awareness of this topic should be raised. In addition, when the startup has grown in the upcoming years, and for instance another co-founder is appointed, it may be beneficial to look at that person’s personality traits as well, as it may influence his/her ‘new’ choice and level of brand communication activities, and thus type of communication.
C
hapter 2: Personality traits
Chapters 2, 3, and 4 can be viewed as the theoretical framework for this research. Each chapter discusses a different construct. This chapter will elaborate on personality traits. Firstly, the definitions of personality traits will be explored. Secondly, the history of personality trait models will be elaborated. This provides the basis for choosing a certain model that will be applied in this research.
14
2.1. Definitions of Personality Traits
The theory of personality traits spreads across different fields, namely biological and social psychological (Boyle, Matthews & Saklofske, 2008), which as a consequence leaves a very broad and gerrymandered (self-constructed) definition of personality traits. The definitions of personality traits dates back to the 1930’s. Many researchers (e.g. Lee & Ashton, 2008; Saucier, Ole-Kotikash & Payne, 2006; Pervin, 2002) describe personality in a slightly different ways leading to a broader definition of personality; “all of the relatively stable attributes, qualities, or characteristics that distinguish behavior, thoughts and feelings of individuals” (Boyle, Matthews & Saklofske, 2008a, p. 30). This is in line with Roback’s (1931) definition of personality involving all our cognitive, affective, conative and physical qualities. A trait can be described as “the filtering of experience through the self to impose a personal structure on the world” (Boyle, Matthews & Saklofkse, 2008a, p. 31). Most definitions of personality traits include attributes that are (1) ascribed to individuals, (2) stable over time, and (3) psychological in nature (Funder, 1997).
After time has passed, the definition has become narrower, excluding variables, in order to make the construct of personality traits more useable; “Personality is a pattern of behavior that are believed to reside within the individual and that cannot be disqualified as attitudes, temporary states, social effects or social roles” (Boyle, Matthews & Saklofske, 2008a, p. 35). The definition above excludes several variables belonging to the definition of personality, such as attitudes. Basically, it means that one can create their own definition of personality, meaning that boundaries need to be set to make the construct operationalizable.
The literature regarding personality traits in marketing books by Hooley, Percy & Nicouland (2001) and Solomon et al (2009), state that personality traits give insights about how marketing messages are processed, and that the personality of the consumers may be used as a base to segment the market. All that is said about personality or personality traits is written in the perspective of the target audience, and thus the consumers.
15 There has also been a debate concerning the extent to which personality concepts are evaluative, meaning clearly favorable or unfavorable (Goldberg, 1982). However, Benet-Martinez and Waller (2002) state that personality traits are indeed mostly evaluative in nature but containing a descriptive element as well. The evaluative element reflects the measurement of personality traits in many models, as discussed in more detail in Chapter 6.
To conclude on the definitions of personality traits, one needs to understand that it can go very far in the psychological jargon, including terms such as neurotransmitters, brain structures etcetera (Barros-Loscertales et al, 2006). However, that is not relevant in this research. In addition, it is a gerrymandered construct meaning that the researcher needs to set boundaries and exclude variables used in measuring personality traits. For instance, this research leaves out the in-depth neurotransmitters, beliefs or cognitive thinking connected to personality traits, referring back to the definition given by Boyle, Matthews and Saklofske (2008a, p. 35); “Personality is a pattern of behavior that are believed to reside within the individual and that cannot be disqualified as attitudes, temporary states, social effects or social roles”. Now that it is clear what personality traits are, the next step is to discover which personality traits there are and the existing models.
2.2. History of Lexical Personality Trait Models
The beginning of the history of personality traits starts with lexical studies, meaning the language used by people ‘that corresponds with the general importance of the attribute in real-world translations’ (Boyle, Matthews & Saklofske, 2008b). Allport and Odbert (1936) found about 18,000 words in Webster’s Second International Dictionary referring to characteristics that distinguishes individuals. As imagined there is a wide range of constructs and thus models, which calls for a short summary. In addition, diverse models will be compared and discussed.
The lexical approach has two main advantages; (1) the lexicalized concepts have a high social importance, and (2) it scores high on cross-cultural generalizability (as the models are
16 not derived from a limited sample of one population) (Boyle, Matthews & Saklofske, 2008b). A limitation of the lexical approach is that it involves a research approach that is very inherent or closely involved to the respondents.
Models have been derived ranging from one factor to seven factors, each model building of the previous one. For example, Big Two (two factors) is an elaboration of the Big One, where a factor is either good or bad. Yet, neither of these models have a widely used standard measure which is why they receive little attention. The Big Five model, however, is widely known and used in the field of personality traits. The five factors are: extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, emotional stability, and intellect/imagination (Aluja, 2013). The Six Factor model builds on this model by adding the factors honesty-humility and openness and deleting intellect/imagination. “Evidence has shown that the replicability of the six-factor structure exceeds that for the Big Five” (Boyle, Matthews and Saklofske, p. 60). In addition, it provides more information than the Big Five. A standard way to measure these six factors is through a questionnaire called the HEXACO Personality Inventory (HEXACO-PI) (Lee & Ashton, 2008). There are two versions of the HEXACO-PI, namely the long version of 100 statements and the shortened version of 60 statements. The properties of the shorter version were very similar to the longer version showing “only a modest loss in internal consistency reliabilities” (Lee & Ashton, 2009, p. 334). The final model consists of seven factors derived from the Inventory of Personal Characteristic (IPC); Conscientiousness, Negative Valence, Concern for others, Even temper, Self-assurance, Gregariousness and Originality. (Tellegen et al, 1991).
A common element in all models/structures is that personality attributes describe a continuum, resulting in dimensional classifications (Boyle, Matthews & Saklofske, 2008b). It must be stated that even though the models build on each other, this does not necessarily nor automatically imply that the Seven Factor model is the most adequate or relevant model.
Despite its maturity, personality research does not go without critique. One important critique is about the measurement of all models described above, namely whether numbers can
17 capture human personality (Pervin, 2002). A second critique concerns the measurement and assessment of traits (Barrett, 2005). In addition, the critique of traits revolves around the neglection of the individual in favor of group trends.
To conclude, the long history of lexical studies results in one, two, five, six and seven factor models that have all been derived from one another. Figure 1 shows the relations between the factors that have a substantial correlation of more than 0.35 in magnitude (Boyle, Matthews & Saklofske, 2008).
Figure 1. Relation between structures of one, two, five, six and seven factors of personality (Boyle, Matthews & Saklofske, 2008).
Big One Big Two Big Five Big Six /HEXACO Big Seven
18
2.3. HEXACO Personality Traits
In this research the HEXACO-PI Scale will be used to identify the personality traits of startup owners. “Evidence has shown that the replicability of the six-factor structure exceeds that for the Big Five” (Boyle, Matthews & Saklofske, p. 60). In addition, it provides more information than the Big Five and is updated yearly as opposed to the seven factor models. For these reasons, this model has been chosen to apply for current research. As mentioned before, HEXACO exists of a long version (HEXACO-100) and a short version (HEXACO-60). The HEXACO-60 is recommended where major dimensions of personality were to be researched on and where time is constraining (Lee & Ashton, 2009), which is very suitable within this research context. Ten items of each six scales were selected, resulting in 60 evaluative statements. It is beneficial to understand what each trait stands for and its meaning, as given by the authors Lee and Ashton (2009). This goes beyond theory and will therefore be explained in Chapter 6.
C
hapter 3: Brand Communication
This chapter discusses the second important dimension of this research: brand communication. It discusses the classifications of brand communication activities and relates it to startups only.
Brand communication activities, especially in small to medium-size enterprises (SMEs) and startups has been underdeveloped (Abimbola & Kocak, 2007; Krake, 2005). Brand communication activities include personal selling, word-of-mouth, sales promotions, advertising on TV and radio, e-mailing, public relations, radio talk shows, newspapers, newsletters, magazines, events, sponsoring and many more. As imagined, there is a need to classify the brand communication activities in this research as the list is exhaustive.
19
3.1. Classification of Brand Communication Activities & Types
There are various ways to classify the extensive amount of communication activities. The categorization of communication channels does not do communication activities justice, because channels are only a relative small part of activities. For instance, word-of-mouth and personal selling do not belong to a channel but are certainly considered a communication activity. One of the first classifications of communication activities is from Duncan and Moriarity (1998) who classify communication activities in transactional versus relationship marketing. Brodie et al (2008) goes beyond this classification, arguing that in the current marketing practices, “marketing approaches co-exist as a means to communicate differently and at different times with particular types of customers” (Coviello et al, 2001, 2002). Brodie et al. (2008) states that the different communication activities can be classified into three types of brand communication; interactional marketing, transactional marketing and e-marketing. In this research the classification of Brodie et al (2008) will be used, mainly because in today’s marketing the Internet has a huge impact. Therefore, e-marketing should be considered a separate type of communication. In addition, a study conducted in SMEs shows the same classification of brand communication activities, which shows similarities concerning the context of startups (more information in 3.2. Brand Communication Activities in SMEs).
Interactional marketing involves interactive relationship activities, such as face-to-face activities (Coviello et al., 2001). Sales people interact with customers at a close and personal level. Literature states that such relationships are usually based on trust, commitment and mutual cooperation (Coviello et al., 1997). Other activities categorized as interactional marketing include “personal sales activities in different contexts such as customer and trade shows, retailing spaces, sales promotions such as trial and product demonstrations and word-of-mouth” (Centeno & Hart, 2010, p. 251). Therefore, interactional marketing is considered a direct marketing approach (Hagel, 1999). Transactional marketing involves the more traditional approach to marketing. Companies use the marketing mix to attract a large target of
20 the population, resulting in impersonal contact with customers and a focus on product features and quality (Brodie et al., 2008). When it comes to transactional communication, there is no dialogue present as in interactional marketing, but it is spoken ‘to’ the customer through mass media vehicles (Centeno & Hart, 2010) and not ‘with’ the customer. Some brand communication activities within transactional marketing are advertising, publicity, public relations events and sampling.
E-marketing has been defined as “using the Internet and other interactive technologies to create and mediate dialogue between the firm and identified customers” (Coviello et al., 2001, p. 26). This includes brand communication activities such as emailing, chatbox, eWOM and the Web in general.
3.2. Brand Communication Activities in SMEs and startups
A study conducted by Centeno and Hart (2010) on the use of communication activities in the development of small to medium-sized enterprise brands, seems relevant for this study for four main reasons. Firstly, it classifies the main brand communication activities found in small to medium-sized enterprises, which when compared to startups show similar amount of resources and context concerning brand elements, such as a relatively small brand awareness. Secondly, the brand communication activities are classified into three types of brand communications, revealing more insights. Thirdly, the conducted communication activities are undertaken by the enterprises themselves and not in the perspective of what the customer prefers, as is usually the case. Fourthly, the methods used by Centeno and Hart (2010) show validity and trustworthiness in their qualitative approach. To conclude, this research can build on Centeno and Hart’s (2010) classification of the brand communication activities categorized into types of brand communication as it has been proven scientifically accurate and takes place in the same context. For an overview see Table 1 (p. 21).
21 When comparing the three marketing paradigms described above, SMEs do not invest much in transactional marketing activities and more on the remaining types of communication; interactional marketing and e-marketing. This is simply because SMEs do not have the financial resources and lack knowledge on using mass media vehicles (Bresciani & Eppler, 2010). In addition, SMEs usually have a short-term focus which might impact the use of brand communication activities (Centeno & Hart, 2010). This is the same for startups.
An activity that is missing in Table 1 that is of great importance in startups and SMEs is social media (Lagerstedt & Mademlis, 2016). Social media increases brand awareness in a relatively cheap and quick way through the Internet. That is why this research considers it a part of e-marketing.
Table 1. Brand Communication Activities divided into types of communication (Centeno & Hart, 2010).
22
C
hapter 4. Product versus Market Orientation
Before delving into the hypotheses, a short theoretical framework concerning product versus market orientation will be provided. Even though this construct is considered a control variable, some knowledge on product- and market orientation is required. This chapter elaborates on the definitions and thus the differences between the orientations.
Literature is contradicting as some say that whether a company is product or market orientated is often difficult to say, as the orientations often appear in a hybrid form (Bocconi, 2015), implying that companies can have both types of orientation. However, others (e.g. Deng & Dart 1994) state that a company is one or the other. In addition, in many academic articles the word ‘versus’ is present indicating an opposite position, causing confusion. In this research, the latter is the case, meaning a company is either product orientated or market orientated. The following paragraph explains the reasoning.
A fully product-oriented company focuses on the product. The entire organizational culture and strategy enhances the quality of the product (Majdak, 2016). A product orientated company has an ‘inside-out’ approach, focused on the inside of the company. A market-oriented company also focuses on delivering products, however includes customer’s desires and needs (Kaufman, 2017). The departure point concerning a market-oriented approach is exactly the opposite of a product-oriented approach, namely ‘outside-in’. The company is not the departure point, but the people. The customers’ needs are taken into account, and the product is adjusted to their needs. Simply said, a company is focused on the outside (market-orientated) or the inside (product-orientated). Both orientations focus on the product, however market orientation uses market insights, whereas product orientation does not.
23
C
hapter 5. Hypotheses
Hypotheses have been formed on four of the six HEXACO personality dimensions (Emotionality, Extraversion, Conscientiousness and Openness to experience) linked to which brand communication activities and thus type of communication startup owners would expect to use (Interactional marketing, Mass personalization, Mass communication and E-marketing). These hypotheses are derived from existing literature, especially using the users and gratification theory (U&G).
The U&G theory is an approach that focuses on what people do with media and their gratifications about it. Therefore, it is audience-centered (Ruggiero, 2000). The U&G theory revolves around mass communication. People use certain media to satisfy certain needs. It is worth mentioning this theory, as existing literature links it to the Big Five personality scale, forming a basis for the formulated hypotheses in this chapter. As previously stated, the Big Five personality traits show many similarities with the chosen HEXACO personality scale (see Chapter 2). It is also important to keep in mind that the U&G theory only focuses on mass media and is tested from the perspective of the audience. For example, Person A is introvert and prefers to watch television in his/her free time. This does not imply that when person A is situated in a work environment as a startup owner, he/she uses television to communicate its brand. Current research provides more insight into the latter aspect. So, the U&G theory can be used as a basis to make assumptions about the hypothesis that will be tested in this research.
For a visual representation of the explicit hypotheses see Figure 2 (p. 28). The hypotheses have been formulated per personality dimension to provide the reader with a clear overview of the structure. As a reminder, the context of startups has been chosen not only due to the researcher’s own interest but also the managerial and theoretically information to be gained in this new field. Since a startup often lacks resources, the decisions being made by the owners are impactful.
24
5.1. Extraversion
It has been established that when scoring high on the dimension of extraversion, one loves conversations and seeks direct social contact (Argyle & Lu, 1990). Due to a low level of cortical arousal, extroverts seek a high degree of sensory stimulation, as discovered within the U&G theory (Finn, 1997, p. 510). When linked to brand communication activities, conversations and social contact are mostly found in personal selling, word-of-mouth and sales promotions. These belong to the classification of interactional marketing. Therefore, the following hypothesis can be formulated:
Hypothesis 1: There is a positive relationship between the level of ‘extraversion’ and level of ‘interactional marketing’.
Lower levels of extroversion, also labelled introverts, seek communication where they have greater control over (Finn, 1997) such as advertising on television, print ads, as well as communication through the Internet. This has been established through the U&G theory, meaning in the perspective of the audience (Finn, 1997) and falls into the categorization of transactional marketing and e-marketing. It would be interesting to see if the same would apply from the perspective of the startup owner (work environment), rather than the consumer (private environment). However, since a startup does not have many resources (Bresciani & Eppler, 2010), the chance of obtaining transactional marketing, especially mass communication is low; simply because it costs more money. Therefore, hypothesis 2 is limited to the effects of extraversion on e-marketing. The effects on transactional marketing are neglected. This results in the following hypotheses:
Hypothesis 2: There is a negative relationship between the level of ‘extraversion’ and level of ‘e-marketing’.
25
5.2. Conscientiousness
According to Lee and Ashton (2008), persons scoring high on conscientiousness seek efficiency and accuracy, meaning that people work in an efficient way. Working in an efficient way means spending the least minimum amount of time for the highest gain. In addition, high scores reveal perfectionism. “Dependability, industriousness, and efficiency are the basic components of conscientiousness, and those high in this factor tend to be hardworking, achievement-oriented, and persevering” (Ciavarella, Buchholtz, Riordan, Gatewood & Stokes, 2004, p. 472).
When linking this to the different types of communication, persons scoring high on conscientiousness would not choose interactional marketing, as brand communication activities such as personal selling and product demonstrations relatively cost more time compared to e-marketing. In addition, brand communication activities such as word-of-mouth and sales promotions are not evaluative in nature, lacking hard data. As literature states, people with high scores on conscientiousness have a high tendency to be able to evaluate their activities to determine effectiveness (Lee & Ashton, 2008). Therefore, the following hypotheses is formulated:
Hypothesis 3: There is a negative relationship between the level of ‘conscientiousness’ and level of ‘interactional marketing’.
5.3. Openness to experience
People scoring high on openness to experience want to gain knowledge on various domains, use their imagination freely and favor unusual ideas or people (Lee & Ashton, 2008). The U&G theory states that people scoring high in openness to experience have preferences for imaginative aspects rather than conventional forms of entertainment (Dollinger, Orf, & Robinson, 1991).
26 When linking these characteristics to brand communication activities, emailing and the web page offer an extensive and broad amount of knowledge (Yan, Jiang, Zheng, Fu, Xiao & Peng, 2004), stimulate creativity (Eynon & Malmberg, 2011) and are considered a non-conventional medium that is fairly new compared to mass media. This categorizes to e-marketing. As such, this type of communication suits the characteristic of the openness to experience seeking the new and unconventional.
Hypothesis 4: There is a positive relationship between the level of ‘openness to experience’ and the level of ‘e-marketing’.
Characteristics of people scoring low on openness to experience avoid creative pursuits and favor conventional and non-radical ideas and aspects (Lee & Ashton, 2008). In addition, they do not favor innovativeness. When linking this to brand communication activities, it involves mass communication as “conventional media includes newspaper, television broadcasting companies and business magazines” (Yu, Duan & Cao, 2013, p. 919).
Hypothesis 5: There is a negative relationship between the level of ‘openness to experience’ and the level of ‘mass communication’.
5.4. Agreeableness
Characteristics related to higher scores on agreeableness relate to forgiveness, compromising, cooperation with others and can control their temper (Lee & Ashton, 2008). On the contrary, characteristics related to lower scores hold grudges against those who have harmed them, are stubborn and feel anger (Lee & Ashton, 2008). When linking this to brand communication activities and thus brand communication types, these characteristics do not rule out one of the brand communication types nor apply to one specifically. Scoring highly or lowly on agreeableness is not inherent to a certain type of brand communication activity. In addition, the U&G theory states that the dimension of agreeableness “does not offer a rich array of
27 media-related consequences” (Finn, 1997, p. 514). Therefore, no hypotheses are formulated concerning the personality dimension of agreeableness as there is no relationship to be found.
5.5. Emotionality
When scoring high on the personality dimension of emotionality the following characteristics apply; seeking emotional support from others, feeling a sentimental attachment with others, and sharing (Lee & Ashton, 2008). This creates a two-way communication stream, longing for dialogue (Grönroos, 2004). When linking this to the brand communication types, transactional marketing involves a one-way communication stream. A higher degree of dialogue is present in interactional marketing, concerning activities such as word-of-mouth, personal selling and sales promotions (Centeno & Hart, 2010). Therefore, the following hypothesis is formulated:
Hypothesis 6: There is a positive relationship between the level of ‘emotionality’ and level of ‘interactional marketing’.
A second hypothesis can be formulated concerning emotionality. Dialogue and
interaction is also very much present concerning e-marketing. Online communities and chats
offer online social interaction and online dialogue (Brown, Broderick & Lee, 2007). Therefore,
the following hypothesis is formulated:
Hypothesis 7: There is a positive relationship between the level of ‘emotionality’ and level of ‘e-marketing’.
28
5.6. Honesty-humility
Characteristics of people scoring high on this dimension include, avoid manipulating others, feel little temptation to break rules and do not find social status important (Lee & Ashton, 2009). On the contrary, characteristics of people scoring low on honesty-humility include breaking the rules, flatter others to get what they want, feel a strong sense of self-importance and material gain is important (Lee & Ashton, 2009). These characteristics do not rule out one of the brand communication types nor apply to one specifically. Therefore, no relationship is to be found between the personality domain of honesty-humility and the brand communication activities. As a result, no hypothesis is formulated.
Figure 2 provides an overview of the seven formulated hypotheses in relation to the personality score of each dimension and the level of brand communication types.
Figure 2. Conceptual Model PERSONALITY SCORE LEVEL OF BRAND COMMUNICATION TYPES Interactional Marketing E-marketing Transactional Marketing: mass communication Extraversion Conscientiousness Openness to Experience Emotionality H4 (+)
29
C
hapter 6. Methodology
6.1. Methodological Approach
The research philosophy, approach, design, sampling procedure and data analysis are examined in this chapter (6.1). On each dimension – personality trait and brand communication - both the chosen measures and data collecting techniques will be justified in the operationalization (6.2), as well as several control variables.
6.1.1. Research Philosophy Epistemological position
This research contains a positivistic philosophy as the research applies existing theories of personality traits and brand communication (Johnson & Duberly, 2000). In addition, the methods of natural science are applied to the study of social reality and beyond (Bryman & Bell, 2011). Some writers state that positivism is an explanatory category, as is this research. Positivists prefer methods such as questionnaires or surveys as they are perceived to be reliable and representative (Bryman & Bell, 2011). In addition, they hold the assumption that reality is ‘out there’; it exists independently and waits to be discovered, which is the case in this research. This applies to current research, because it is the aim of this research to ‘uncover’ the impact of personality on the brand communication activities controlling for several variables e.g. market orientation. This implies that the relation is there, waiting to be discovered. “Positivism holds that there is a knowable reality that exists independent of the research process” (Hesse-Biber & Leavy, 2006, p. 13). Positivism thus entails that “causal relationships between variables exist and can even be identified, proven and explained” (Hesse-Biber & Leavy, 2006, p. 13). This research aims to do just that: to identify the relationship between certain dimensions. It relies on “deductive logic and hypothesis testing” (Hesse-Biber & Leavy, 2006, p. 23), as does this research.
30 Ontological position
It could be stated that the ontological orientation of this research is based on objectivism, meaning that “social phenomena confront us as external facts that are beyond our reach or influence” (Bryman & Bell, 2011, p. 21). As seen in the Chapter 2, a personality trait is a stable and intangible concept held in people’s minds that society cannot influence directly. Hesse-Biber and Leavy (2006) sum it up quite nicely:
“Positivist epistemology assumes that there is an objective reality ‘out there’ which can be explained by objective value-free researchers though the use of objective replicable methods. In other words, reality is objective and can be empirically studied/tested” (Hesse-Biber & Leavy, 2006, p. 14). Objectivity is thus implied in both the research methods, anybody could redo this research if desired. But, objectivity is also implied in the researcher. The researcher should also be objective in their interpretation of the ‘reality’ that they are discovering (Hesse-Biber & Leavy, 2006).
6.1.2. Research Approach
This research presumes a deductive approach, as theories are used to reveal findings (Bryman & Bell, 2011). In addition, Bryman and Bell (2011, p. 13) state that a “deductive strategy is associated with a quantitative research approach”. An inductive approach is excluded as this research will not generate theory (Bryman & Bell, 2011), but rather state findings and confirm causal relationships. The measures of personality traits, brand communication and company orientation are used to conduct a survey and gather findings, which in addition have reliable and valid scales based on existing theories. For these reasons, the deductive stance is present.
31 6.1.3. Research Design
As a result of this research being positivistic, objective and deductive, the strategy that will be used to conduct this research is quantitative. A quantitative research strategy “emphasizes quantification in the collection and analysis of data” (Bryman & Bell, 2011, p. 37). In this research, hypotheses were formulated, and will be tested, in an objective way.
The means of data collection is a quantitative cross-sectional survey of which the measures used are reliable (Bryman & Bell, 2011). This research is not interested in gaining in-depth insight into individual’s meanings or feelings, but rather in determining the relationships between each personality trait scores and level of brand communication types, making the research explanatory and best conducted using surveys. There will be one survey available in both English and Dutch, which will be administered online. There is no experiment to be taken place, as constructs are not being manipulated nor are scenario’s created, justifying the choice of surveys.
6.1.4. Sampling
The population of interest in this research are startup owners situated in the Netherlands, with several managerial and academical implications (see 1.3. Contributions). The sampling frame is unknown and therefore non-probability sampling will be used. The survey will be distributed online through social media platforms. In addition, the researcher has made a list of about 250 startup owners and searched their personal email addresses online. This was before the new privacy rule was implemented on the 25 of May 2018. It took a lot of effort to email the startup owners personally, however since the target group is difficult to find, it was necessary.
With the help of a sample size calculator (Creative Research Systems, 2012), it was estimated that for a population of around 420 startups (the number of startups currently in the Netherlands) (Stegeman, 2016), and a confidence level of 95%, a confidence interval of 5%
32 and a standard deviation of 0.5, a sample size of 150 is needed to make generalizations about the population. However, that implies that almost half of all startups (50%) need to be contacted and fill in the survey. This is too optimistic and unpractical. Besides trying to get the most respondents, the aim was to have a minimum of 50 respondents. To test the hypotheses a regression analysis was needed. In order to run a proper regression analysis, 50 cases were needed. The response rate is difficult to predict, due to the several ways of distribution. The survey was made in the program Qualtrics.
6.1.5. Data Analysis
All hypotheses will be tested using the statistical analysis software IBM SPSS Statistics 25. It allows to calculate standard statistical measurements such as means and standard deviations. Moreover, with IBM SPSS Statistics 25, a regression analysis can be executed (Field, 2013), which is crucial to validate the hypotheses.
6.2. Operationalization of Concepts
When providing a measure of a concept, the concepts need to be operationalized (Bryman & Bell, 2011). The operationalization of concepts is of great importance as it validates the study. In this research there are two main concepts that need to be operationalized; personality traits and brand communication types (6.2.1 - 6.2.2). Moreover, the control variables are operationalized as well (6.2.3). Appendix B (p. 83) provides an overview of a blank survey framework.
6.2.1. Personality Score Measurement
The construct of personality traits has been elaborately discussed. The theoretical definition of personality traits used in this research is: “Personality is a pattern of behavior (including stable affective tendencies but generally not patterns of thinking excluding conative
33 qualities) that are believed to reside within the individual and that cannot be disqualified as attitudes, temporary states, social effects or social roles” (Boyle, Matthews & Saklofske, 2008a, p. 35). This way the construct is narrowed down and operationalizable.
As mentioned before the personality traits will be operationalized using Ashton and Lee’s (2009) scale called HEXACO-60 as it is a reliable and valid scale. A theoretical framework has been written on the HEXACO-60 (2.2. + 2.3). The HEXACO-60 consists out of 60 items measured on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from (1) strongly disagree to (7) strongly agree (see Appendix A, Table 1). Due to the length of the survey, 6 items per dimension will be measured rather than 10, as the threshold is 6-8 items per independent variable (Bryman & Bell, 2011). Table 2 below explains the meaning of scoring high and low on each dimension, which is crucial in order to severely understand the meaning of each personality dimension. It entails ten items per personality dimension (Honesty-humility, Emotionality, Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness and Openness to Experience). Even though no hypotheses were formed concerning the dimension of agreeableness due to lack of literature (see 5.4), it will be measured to see if the researcher can establish a relationship.
Table 2. Explanation HEXACO traits (Lee & Ashton, 2008)
Trait Explanation
Honesty-humility • High scores → avoid manipulating others for personal gain, feel little temptation to break rules, are uninterested in lavish wealth and luxuries, and feel no special entitlement to elevated social status.
• Low scores → flatter others to get what they want, inclined to break rules for personal profit, motivated by material gain and feel a strong sense of self-importance.
34 Emotionality • High scores → Experience fear of dangers and anxiety in response to life’s
stresses, need emotional support from others, feel empathy and sentimental attachments with others.
• Low scores → No physical harm, feel little worry even in stressful situations, little need to share concerns with others, feel emotionally detached from others. Extraversion • High scores → Positive vibes about themselves, feel confident when leading
groups of people, enjoy social gatherings and interactions, experience positive feelings of enthusiasm and energy.
• Low scores → Consider themselves unpopular, feel awkward when being the center of attention, indifferent to social activities and feel less lively than others. Agreeableness • High scores → People forgive the wrongs that they suffered, lenient in judging
others, willing to compromise and can easily control their temper.
• Low scores → Grudges are being held against those who have harmed someone, critical of others’ shortcomings, stubborn in defending their point of view and feel anger to mistreatment.
Conscientiousness • High scores → Organize time and their surroundings, disciplinary way of working, strive for accuracy and perfection and carefully make decisions. • Low scores → Unconcerned with orderly surroundings, avoid difficult tasks or
challenging goals, satisfied with work containing errors and make impulsive decisions.
Openness to experience • High scores → Absorbing the beauty of art and nature, use their imagination freely in everyday life, interested in unusual ideas or people.
• Low scores → Unimpressed by art, feel little intellectual curiosity, avoid creativity and feel little attraction towards ideas that seem radical.
35 Each personality trait is measured separately, with a Cronbach’s alpha ranging from 0.73 to 0.80 (see Appendix A, Figure 1) (Lee & Ashton, 2009). The construct of personality score consists out of five independent variables, as the variables have influence on the outcome variable, level of brand communication type. These five independent variables are classified as continuous, as the score will range from 1 till 7.
In addition, multicollinearity is not present, as the correlations are very low, ranging from .26 to -.11 (see Appendix A, Figure 2) (Lee & Ashton, 2009). The HEXACO–60 scales have high levels of internal consistency reliability which ranged from .88 to .91 in the college sample and from .87 to .90 in the community sample. Lee and Ashton (2009) conducted their survey in two groups; a college sample and community sample.
The question asked will be: ‘We are curious how you see yourself in relation to certain life situations. A series of statements will be shown to identify your personality. (Please read each statement and decide how much you agree or disagree)’.
6.2.2. Level of Brand Communication Types
The constructs of brand communication types have been explained in the theoretical framework (Chapter 3). This section focuses on the measurement of this construct.
Based on the research of Centeno and Hart (2010), the fourteen most common brand activities found in small-to-medium sized enterprises (SMEs) are narrowed down to three different types of brand communication (see 3.2. Table 1). This was based on a qualitative approach of interviewing 34 SMEs that had a brand, using the NVivo tool to secure trustworthiness and validation. Thematic coding was used for data analysis in order to develop a theory out of large amounts of data (Centeno and Hart, 2010). In addition, “concurrent use of data reduction, data displays, conclusion drawing, and verification were used as well for data analysis (Miles and Huberman, 2002)” (Centeno and Hart, 2010, p. 254). Social media was added as a brand communication activity, categorized into e-marketing as the type of brand
36 communication, as it has been proven to be relevant for SMEs and thus startups (Merrilees, 2007).
Each brand communication activity will be measured on a Likert scale ranging from (1) ‘Not at all’ till (7) ‘To an extremely large extent’. Afterwards, the activities belonging to the type of brand communication will be selected and an average will be computed. The outcome will not be one of the three brand communication types, but rather the different levels of each brand communication type. Therefore, these three variables are continuous.
The following question will be asked, ‘To what extent does your startup use each brand communication activity’?
6.2.3. Control Variables
The most prominent control variables in this research are type of orientation (product versus market) startup industry and budget. Other control variables are age, gender, level of education and field of study. Control variables are variables which might influence the relationship examined in this research, but these are not the main focus (Field, 2013).
Product versus market orientation. The type of orientation, product versus market, is taken as a control variable as it could possibly influence the relationship between personality and brand communication, however no direct effect can be detected in existing literature. To illustrate an example: regardless of the personality of a startup owner, he/she might exclude certain brand communication activities due to the type of orientation. If a startup is market-orientated, the owner might conduct more sales promotions regardless of their personality, whereas a product-oriented startup might conduct more emailing. Therefore, it is interesting to see if the type of orientation has an influence.
The scale of Deng & Dart (1994) will be used to measure market orientation on a Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) till 7 (strongly agree). The original scale consists out of 23 items, divided into several facets namely, customer orientation, competitor orientation
37 and inter-functional coordination and has a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.80). Since product- and market orientation are treated as opposites in this research, an average score lower than 4 on the concerning scale implies that the startup is considered product oriented.
The 23 item-scale will be adjusted to fit this research by reducing the length of the scale, as the goal is to notify what type of orientation the startup is and not to provide detailed information within each facet of the orientation. In addition, the length of the survey will be far too long otherwise which might affect the response rate negatively. Therefore, 2 items per facet (customer orientation, competitor orientation and inter-functional coordination) with the highest eigenvalues will be measured, resulting in the following 6-item scale measuring market orientation.
Facet: Customer orientation
Item 1: We measure customer satisfaction on a regular basis. Item 2: We define product quality in terms of customer satisfaction. Facet: Competitor orientation
Item 3: We frequently collect market data to help direct our new product plans. Item 4: We respond rapidly to competitors' actions.
Facet: Interfunctional coordination
Item 5: In our company, marketing is seen as a guiding philosophy for the entire organization.
Item 6: In our company, the marketing people have a strong input into the development of new products.
38 Startup Industries. The startup industry could influence the personality of a startup owner and the level of brand communication types as industries such as Travel, Marketing, Tech, Construction and Health are quite different from one another in terms of product and service, as well as the market and therefore might use different brand communication activities.
According to the StartupDelta (www.startupdelta.nl), there are 45 industries that are present in startups. This is too many to measure in a survey, thus a selection was made based on the researcher’s knowledge, resulting in the following: Agency/Consultant, Energy, Hosting/Catering, Robotics, Sports, Travel, Agriculture, Chemical, Construction, Events, Food, Health, Tech, Music, Telecom, Education, Marketing, Jobs Recruitment, Semiconductors and Transportation. Again, the option Other will be available, not excluding any startup industry. The variable startup industries is a nominal variable.
Budget. It is possible that a startup owner makes certain decisions regarding the level of brand communication types due to its budget. For instance, a startup owner can be very introvert and would want to invest in mass communication due to the amount of control. However, if the startup owner does not have sufficient funds this will not be considered an option. Since this variable might involve more personal and sensitive information, it is highly recommended to treat this variable as an ordinal variable, rather than interval (Bryman & Bell, 2011). Important to note is that budget should be seen in the perspective of how much a startup can invest in brand communication activities, not the startup budget in general.
The question is formulated as follows; How much (€) will your startup invest in brand communication activities per year?
o < 1000 o 1000-3000 o 3000-5000 o 5000-7000 o 7000-9000 o > 9000
39 Level of education. It is possible that the level of education has an impact on the chosen brand communication activities purely based on knowledge and prior experience which is linked to field of study. According to the Nationaal Coordinatiepunt voor het Nederlands Kwalificatiekader (NLQF, 2014), the education in the Netherlands consists of the following levels; Vmbo/Mbo 1, Vmbo kb/Mbo 2. Mbo 3, Mbo 4/Havo, Vwo, Associate Degree, Bachelor, Master and Doctor. It can be assured that the categorization of education as given by this source is reliable as they provide a framework which includes all possible levels of education.
Field of study. Your educational background might have an impact on the level of brand communication activities. When having a technical background, one has more knowledge and experience with computers and might therefore use more e-marketing within the startup. Or someone who has a medical background might not even be aware of all the things possible within e-marketing. The most prominent fields of study as claimed by Nationale Beroepengids (www.nationaleberoepengids.nl) are included in the survey. As this list is not exhaustive, the choice of ‘other’ is included. The fields of study presented in the survey can be found in Appendix B.
Several requisites are needed to make sure the right respondents fill in the survey. The first is that the respondent must be the owner of a startup located in the Netherlands. Secondly, the startup owner must make decisions concerning the brand communication of the startup. This is important as this research aims to investigate the influence between the startup owners’ personality and the brand communication. These questions will be asked before the survey starts, in order to assure that the respondents meet these conditions.
40
C
hapter 7. Results
The following chapter will outline the results and key findings from the research in order to answer the overall research question. Some general descriptives are given regarding the respondent profiles, and analyses are conducted per personality trait dimension. These analyses take the form of both descriptive techniques and more inferential statistical techniques (i.e. multiple regressions).
7.1. Initial Look
For this study a total of 90 responses was collected. Only 62 out of the 90 responses fit the criteria of (1) being a startup situated in the Netherlands and (2) where the startup owner has the authority to make decisions on the branding activities. 7 surveys were not taken into account for further analysis for two reasons. Firstly, when scoring lower than 4 (out of 7) on the importance of innovation of the startup the data was not taken into account as innovation is an important criterion of the definition of a startup (as defined in 1.1.1). Secondly, when respondents do not make the decisions themselves concerning the brand communication activities and scored lower than 4 (out of 7) in case they would have made the same decisions themselves, were excluded as well. The reason for this is that the respondent (startup owner) should make the decisions on the brand activities without the influence of other personalities (as explained in 1.2.1). In order to guarantee similar samples sizes across all statistical tests the cases that provided partial data (3 surveys) were excluded from all analysis. 52 respondents delivered completed and useful surveys.
