1
Wayne D. Hoyer, Harley Krohmer, and Lara Lobschat
10
SUCCESS FACTORS FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF AN INTENDED
BRAND PERSONALITY:
Conceptual Framework and Insights from the Swiss Luxury Industry
Wayne D. Hoyer, Harley Krohmer, and Lara Lobschat
Introduction
In today’s ever-changing digital and connected world, the importance of brands is more prevalent
than ever. Given that consumers nowadays have easy access to a nearly endless assortment of
products and services from all over the world, the need for brand managers to differentiate from
competing brands and increase customers’ brand commitment by carefully establishing
compelling brand identities and building close, emotional brand relationships with their
customers is steadily increasing (Sweeney and Brandon 2008). Brand personality captures a
major component of brand identity and has gained increasing interest both from researchers and
managers alike, also due to its important implications for brand performance (e.g., Aaker 1997;
Batra, Lenk, and Wedel 2010; Geuens, Weijters, and de Wulf 2009; Malär, Krohmer, Hoyer, and
Nyffenegger 2011; Staplehurst and Charoenwongse 2012).
According to Aaker (1997: 347), brand personality “refers to the set of human characteristics
associated with a brand.” Existing literature has identified a variety of brand personality
dimensions1 including Aaker’s (1997) initial set of dimensions (i.e., sincerity, excitement,
competence, sophistication, ruggedness), Geuens, Weijters, and De Wulf’s (2009) continuative
1
For an extensive review, see Geuens, Weijters, and De Wulf (2009).
2
Wayne D. Hoyer, Harley Krohmer, and Lara Lobschat
measurement scale based on personality traits (i.e., responsibility, activity, aggressiveness,
simplicity, and emotionality), and brand gender (Grohmann 2009; Lieven et al. 2004). While
product-related attributes often are becoming increasingly uniform and interchangeable across
brands, brand personality serves a symbolic, self-expressive function and, thus, provides a good
basis for building and strengthening a brand’s competitive advantage (Aaker 1997; Sweeney and
Brandon 2008).
The concept of brand personality has received considerable interest in many industries,
particularly in those where consumers’ brand preferences are closely related to self-expression
and self-presentation via a brand with a corresponding brand personality; this is particularly the
case in the luxury industry (Wilcox, Kim, and Seng 2009). While quality considerations certainly
play an important role for consumers of luxury goods and services, they also choose luxury
brands because of their specific brand personalities. They prefer and purchase a luxury brand
with a specific brand personality that enables them to present themselves to society in a certain
intended way, showing their actual or ideal self to others. A luxury brand with such a desired
brand personality enables its consumers to maintain or even enhance their self-image among
others (Kastanakis and Balabanis 2012; Wilcox, Kim, and Seng 2009). For example, the luxury
fashion brand Chanel offers “the reflection of an elegant woman, seductive, sophisticated who yet
loves to attract attention,” whereas Yves Saint Laurent represents an “imperative, provocative,
seductive, and inaccessible character” (Kapferer and Bastien 2009: 123). Hence, consumers will
choose one of the two luxury brands for the specific brand personality traits with which they are
associated.
3
Wayne D. Hoyer, Harley Krohmer, and Lara Lobschat
Brand managers in the luxury industry, therefore, strive to create an appealing brand personality
via product design, advertising, and other marketing activities, such as establishing an exciting
and sophisticated distribution environment (Perdis 2014). Their clear objective is to make
consumers perceive the luxury brand and its brand personality as intended so that it provides selfexpression value to them (Keller 2009).
However, such formulation and implementation of an intended brand personality is challenging
as “strong brands do not just happen. Rather, they result from the creation of winning brand
strategies and brilliant execution from committed, disciplined organizations” (Aaker 1996: 58). A
brand’s personality is based on the involvement of both brand managers and customers (Johar,
Sengupta, and Aaker 2005). That is, whereas brand managers intend to convey a certain brand
personality through their marketing activities, customers might form different inferences from the
marketing stimuli to which they are exposed and, hence, perceive the brand’s personality
differently than intended, also referred to as “the two different faces of brand personality”
(Plummer 1985: 28). Therefore, the successful implementation of an intended brand personality
is key for brand managers. However, the scientific literature on drivers of brand personality
implementation is still scant, with the notable exception of research from Malär et al. (2012). For
this reason, this chapter deals with the managerial challenge of implementing an intended brand
personality. The key objective is to provide managers with insights on how to be more successful
with regard to the implementation of their intended brand personality.
For this purpose, we will first discuss the duality of the brand personality concept by accounting
for both the intended and the realized brand personality perspective and factors that influence the
fit between both perspectives. Subsequently, we will focus specifically on brand personality
4
Wayne D. Hoyer, Harley Krohmer, and Lara Lobschat
implementation strategies that involve the interplay between strategic considerations of brand
managers, the corresponding implementation activities, as well as the customer’s perspective. We
will integrate the results of an exploratory qualitative study that compiled interviews with luxury
marketing managers in Switzerland. Putting all this together, we hope to uncover new and
important implications for research and practice.
The Duality of the Brand Personality Concept
Prior research provides evidence that the creation of brand personality is not the sole achievement
of marketing activities implemented by brand managers, but rather “a dynamic process that is not
controlled solely by the marketer” (Johar, Sengupta, and Aaker 2005: 468). More specifically,
Malär et al. (2012) distinguish between the brand manager’s intended brand personality and how
brand personality is perceived by consumers (i.e., its realized brand personality). The authors
further present the calibration process of these two perspectives, and identify factors that
influence the fit level that ultimately determines the success of the brand personality
implementation. Hence, to accomplish a successful transformation of an intended to a realized
brand personality, brand managers not only have to focus on their own considerations and
resources, but also need to take other factors into account that influence the fit between the
intended and the realized brand personality. Based on Malär et al. (2012), we introduce a
conceptual framework that depicts the duality of the brand personality concept, as illustrated in
Figure 1. In addition, we discuss this framework in the context of the luxury goods industry in
which, as mentioned previously, brand selection is particularly related to self- expression.
5
Wayne D. Hoyer, Harley Krohmer, and Lara Lobschat
A variety of factors influence the calibration process research that we categorize into the
following subgroups: company-related factors, implementation-related factors, consumer-related
factors, and factors which deal with the social relationships among and influence from other
consumers. While we will discuss how companies can actively and successfully implement an
intended brand personality, focusing on implementation-related factors, our framework also
considers factors that influence consumers’ perceived brand personality beyond the direct control
of companies.
Prior research has shown that company-related factors, such as whether a company operates as a
for-profit or non-profit organization (Aaker, Vohs, and Mogilner 2010), its employees’ identities
and behavior (Wentzel 2009), as well as the brand’s reputation (Veloutsou and Moutinho 2009)
impact perceived brand personality. An interesting finding on the influence of product type on
perceived brand personality (particularly for the luxury industry) comes from Ang and Lim
(2005). The authors find that symbolic brands (i.e., those that provide consumers with added
social value beyond a brand’s functional attributes) are perceived as more sophisticated and
exciting, but less sincere and competent, relative to utilitarian products. Hence, the luxury
industry, in general, entails certain perceived brand personality traits that apply to all brands in
the category and that have to be taken into account when planning and executing an intended
brand personality strategy (Batra, Lenk, and Wedel 2010).
Moreover, consumer-related factors influence how consumers perceive a brand’s personality.
These include the consumer’s age (Chaplin and John 2005) and cultural background (Staplehurst
and Charoenwongse 2012), his/her individual brand experiences (Brakus, Schmitt, and
6
Wayne D. Hoyer, Harley Krohmer, and Lara Lobschat
Zarantonello 2009), as well as his/her attitude towards the brand (Malär et al. 2012). Further,
Malär et al. (2012: 36) explore the role of consumers’ self-concept, namely “the cognitive and
affective understanding of who and what we are” in the context of brand personality. Their
findings provide support for the notion that brands with actual self-congruence (the fit between
the actual self and the perceived brand personality) have a stronger impact on emotional brand
attachment than brands with ideal self-congruence do. They also show that this effect is even
more pronounced if consumers have a high level of public self-consciousness, a concept which is
closely related to the consumption of luxury products. Self-conscious consumers are particularly
concerned with the way in which they present themselves to others (Scheier and Carver 1985).
Through purchasing and consuming luxury brands in public, consumers can express themselves
in line with the luxury brand and, hence, transfer a certain image to society.
Turning to factors that deal with social relationships among and influence from other consumers,
research provides evidence for the influence of shared brand experiences (Chang and Chieng
2006), brand communities (Veloutsou and Moutinho 2009), and also non brand-related
communities (such as the gay community in Kates 2004) on the calibration process of brand
personality. The concept of user imagery (i.e., the typical brand user associated with a certain
brand) is of specific relevance for the luxury industry. For example, a typical Porsche driver can
be identified as a middle-aged man who owns his own business (Winkler 2012). Aaker (1997), as
well as Keller (1993), claim that the characteristics of these typical brand users serve as
antecedents for perceived brand personality. Hence, given its user imagery, Porsche is likely to be
perceived as a middle-aged, sophisticated, and successful male. For luxury brands, aspirational
user images play an especially key role (Keller 2009). Thus, brand managers try to implement
these types of user images through celebrity endorsements, for example. In the following section,
7
Wayne D. Hoyer, Harley Krohmer, and Lara Lobschat
we will go into more detail with respect to brand personality strategies and review how promising
they are in translating an intended into a perceived brand personality.
Brand Personality Implementation Activities
Malär et al. (2012) focus on specific success factors of brand personality implementation
referring to aspects such as the content of communication (e.g., credibility, singularity) and
consumer-related variables (e.g., self-consciousness, self-esteem) (see Figure 1). Accounting for
these factors can facilitate the implementation of an intended brand personality. However, direct
implementation activities such as creating a specific organizational design or changing
organizational processes have not been addressed. Research examining the role of all marketing
mix instruments for the implementation of an intended brand personality is still scant. Against
this background, the focus of this chapter is on the direct implementation activities required to
implement an intended brand personality; in addition, we illustrate these activities by providing
insights from a qualitative study in the Swiss luxury goods industry. In the time between March
and September 2014, we conducted 29 interviews with CEOs and chief marketing officers of 24
Swiss and five international luxury brands in Switzerland (from diverse product categories
including accessories, alcoholic beverages, fashion, food, handbags, hotel services, jewelry, and
watches) in which we discussed the implementation of brand personality, general success factors,
and specific marketing capabilities in luxury marketing.
A first category of direct brand implementation activities relates to the design of the
organizational structures and processes. A key organizational dimension to be designed in this
context is the specialization of the organization. In other words, which organizational unit is
responsible for the implementation of an intended brand personality? In the marketing literature,
8
Wayne D. Hoyer, Harley Krohmer, and Lara Lobschat
the specialization within marketing and sales units has been discussed. In several studies, it has
been shown that, in many companies, particularly in the consumer goods industry, specialized
organizational units are assigned to (corporate or product level) brand management (e.g., Günther
and Kriegbaum-Kling 2001). In these product and brand management organizational units,
product and brand managers are designated direct responsibility for a broad spectrum of tasks
related to a certain product or brand, including the development of brand strategies and the
corresponding coordination of the implementation activities (cf. Ruekert et al. 1985).
In our interviews in the Swiss luxury industry, we found the following with regard to the
organizational responsibility for the implementation of an intended brand personality. Similar to
the consumer goods industry, in many companies, there are specialized organizational units
responsible for the formulation and implementation of the intended brand personality. In
addition, for several of our examined luxury companies, we found a highly hierarchical approach.
While the dispersion of influence on branding strategy across functional boundaries within the
firm and across hierarchical levels has been found in the literature (cf. Krohmer, Homburg, and
Workman 2002), for the luxury industry, we mostly observed a strictly hierarchical responsibility
for brand personality definition and implementation. More specifically, in addition to the
organizational unit responsible for corporate brand management, top management was highly
involved in brand personality implementation. As the CEO of a leading Swiss luxury watch brand
put it:
This is a bit like in religion or a church. I am the high priest of our brand. Our
employees finally have to follow ‘my brand bible’. To make sure that they really fully
understand the message I have created for our brand, I walk around in our offices and
write ‘commandments’ for our brand with a permanent marker directly on the wall –
what is the message of our brand and how should it always be implemented? So, the
employees actually cannot walk five meters without reading my commandments.
9
Wayne D. Hoyer, Harley Krohmer, and Lara Lobschat
Thus, in addition to a strong specialization, we observed a control-oriented formalization and
standardization of the intended brand personality and the corresponding implementation rules.
This was especially the case for the highly successful, large luxury companies. In contrast, luxury
startups (that were certainly much smaller) seemed to be less hierarchical and much more
informal. As the CEO of a young luxury watch brand put it: “When we discuss the brand
personality and its implementation, our full team sits together. Even the accountant is invited to
join our round table, and sometimes she contributes with great ideas about brand personality
implementation.” While specialization and formalization certainly is a function of company size,
we argue that many successful luxury brands have CEOs and top managers that are highly
involved in brand personality formulation and implementation , and often take a high-control and
hierarchical approach in which top managers control even the smallest details of brand
personality implementation. When asked for the reasons behind such a high-control approach, the
CEO of a Swiss luxury hotel company said, for the consumers’ perception of his luxury brand,
every detail counts in every single customer contact: “We will only be successful, if we can
convey the same coherent brand message in every contact with each guest. Our high status image
can only be obtained, if we are able to avoid even the smallest mistake or incoherence.
Everything must be perfect.” The CEO of a Swiss luxury watch agreed:
The brand message always has to be the same, from product design to print advertising
to the consumer’s experience in the sales room. Our consumers are not buying a watch,
for reading the time they have their smartphones. Instead, our consumers are paying a
lot of money for buying a status symbol with a specific story and message to impress
others. To make this work, we have to be 100% consistent in our message and I am
finally responsible for this.
At the same time, several managers warned that too much control and formalization in the
context of brand personality implementation proved to not always be beneficial, and, at times,
10
Wayne D. Hoyer, Harley Krohmer, and Lara Lobschat
particularly in the context of luxury services, was problematic. As the executive director of a
leading Swiss luxury hotel put it:
In the past, we tried to standardize the customer experience in the direct interaction with
our service personnel in order to implement our brand personality strategy. We even
gave out handbooks with exact words and phrases to be used when interacting with our
guests. We realized that this took away some personal freedom from our employees and
reduced their motivation. We now explicitly train our service employees to use their
own words and to show their own personality, not just the brand personality of our hotel
brand. This is now perceived as much more authentic by our guests. What is more
important than perfect and standardized processes is a passion for our brand. That is the
most difficult task – to find people who already are and will stay passionate for our
brand and show authentic passion during their interaction with guests. Our guests have
already seen everything and can afford anything. What makes the difference is the true
passion combined with honest empathy of our personnel. To experience this human
factor, our guests will stay loyal to us and will always come back.
This example also clearly illustrates the important role of the customer in generating and
maintaining the brand personality. This involves a two-way interaction between the service
personnel and customers. Thus, these personnel need to be highly sensitive to and develop a deep
understanding of customer perceptions. In addition, management and any other groups within the
organization with responsibility for implementation of brand personality need to be sensitive to
the customer side of the equation. As we will discuss shortly, this involves the company setting
up mechanisms to actively monitor and input customer perceptions into the implementation of
brand personality.
A second category of brand personality implementation activities relates to product management
as a component of the marketing mix. In the strategy implementation literature, it has been
argued that, generally, a key tool for strategy implementation is product management with
decisions and activities related to product design, product quality, or product innovation playing a
major role (cf. Slater and Olson 2001). This is surely also the case for the context of brand
11
Wayne D. Hoyer, Harley Krohmer, and Lara Lobschat
personality implementation, where a consistency of product design, product innovations, and
product features with the intended, as well as perceived, brand personality contribute to
implementation success. As the CEO of a luxury watch company emphasized, “The brand’s
personality and message provide guidance for all decisions related to product innovation. Our key
brand message of ‘fusion’ drives the development of all new watches and innovations. The
consistency between brand message and product design drives our credibility among our
distribution partners and customers.”
In our interviews in the context of luxury marketing, we observed an additional phenomenon that
goes beyond mere consistency between brand personality and product design. Many respondents
emphasized that the product features need to be in line with the brand personality, but, in
addition, that the product features not only deliver functional value to the customer but, as the
CEO of a Swiss producer of hard liquor stated, “need to tell a story, that the customer then can
tell others and actually makes the real difference.” This is consistent with a point emphasized by
Malär et al. (2011) in their empirical study on brand personality implementation that a successful
implementation of an intended brand personality results from the interaction of consumers with
the brand. This duality of brand intentions (as formulated by the brand managers) and brand
perceptions (as interpreted by the consumers) means that a successful implementation of an
intended brand personality is reflected in a good fit between intended and perceived brand
personality (see also Figure 1), and requires the joint efforts of both brand managers and
consumers. In other words, the brand personality is a result of both brand managers’ creativity
and consumers’ imaginations. This concept is in line with the observation that in many industries,
consumers become more and more empowered and take an increasingly active role in brand
personality creation and interpretation. Concepts and phenomena such as user generated content
12
Wayne D. Hoyer, Harley Krohmer, and Lara Lobschat
or crowdsourcing in innovation management support this idea. In the current context, consumers
take an increasingly active role in the creation of a brand personality. These activities have
proved useful in other areas, such as in new product development where customers are actively
involved in the generation of new product ideas through idea generation websites, group
discussions, and direct interactions with management. The key point, however, is that companies
must actively monitor and measure the brand personality as perceived by consumers in order to
determine whether it is consistent with the intended brand personality. This can involve active
monitoring of customer conversations in the social media, as well as conducting customer
surveys. It is only when this match occurs that implementation is successful. If the intended and
perceived personality are inconsistent, corrective action must be taken, which would involve
altering either the direct implementation activities or attempting to alter customer perceptions in a
direction more consistent with the intended brand personality.
Such joint shaping of brand personality in the context of product management can be illustrated
by two examples from our interviews. A first example refers to a Swiss hard liquor brand, which
is sold mainly to Chinese customers for around 15,000 USD per bottle. The CEO of this luxury
liquor producer claims that:
This is the most expensive hard liquor in the world. The high price results from the
inclusion of a valuable Swiss mountain-shaped berg crystal inside of the bottle. We
created this liquor especially for the Chinese market by referring to the Chinese legend
in which the hero became extremely rich after he found a well of liquid gold underneath
a berg crystal on a mountain at the end of a valley. So, we directly tell our customers
that the crystal has not yet been found but that maybe the one who buys the bottle will
be the one who found it. So, our brand personality of the mythic dream of affluence and
richness is based in our product design. The key point is that our customers do not buy
the liquor to really drink it, but to tell their guests in their house bar that they own the
most expensive liquor in the world and that they actually are the hero of this legend of
unlimited wealth. The beautifully shining berg crystal in the bottle supports this story.
13
Wayne D. Hoyer, Harley Krohmer, and Lara Lobschat
A second example can be found in a Swiss luxury mechanical golf watch, which has special
shock protection so that it can be worn during hitting a golf ball. This mechanical watch can also
be used for counting the handicap during golf. The CEO told us that:
We designed the product so that the customer can tell his friends in the golf clubhouse
about the functionality of the watch. However, it is not only about the functionality, it is
about the status symbol. Many of our customers also own a Rolex and a Patek, so
owning, in addition, our exclusive golf watch is a statement about their status and wealth
– they can afford this additional watch. You have to know that ‘regular’ mechanical
luxury watches should not be worn during golf. The vibrations of the golf club transfer
to the watch and can damage it. As a matter of fact, many of our customers put our
watch in their pocket and also do not use it to keep track of their handicap. They rather
put it on in the clubhouse after playing golf more or less to show off and to tell an
interesting story. Our brand is all about golf and exclusivity, and our customers who tell
their friends this story are our best brand ambassadors.
A third category of brand personality implementation activities relates to pricing as a component
of the marketing mix. Again, the rationale is that the pricing strategy should be consistent with
the intended brand personality. In our interviews among managers in the Swiss luxury industry,
we found clear support for this perspective. The Swiss CEO of one the world’s leading luxury
handbag and fashion brands stated that “our brand is all about exclusivity and superior quality.
To realize this brand idea, you have to keep up the prices. You will never ever find a price
discount for one of our products. Thus, we need full control of our prices, which we have, since,
in Switzerland, we only sell our products via our own luxury boutiques.” The importance of such
a no-discount policy to implement a brand personality of exclusiveness and luxuriousness was
also emphasized by the CEO of a Swiss luxury cosmetics brand that uses caviar as one of its
ingredients: “We need to keep up the prices all the time. Otherwise, we are not a luxury brand.
We might even attract the ‘wrong’ customers – bargain shoppers. This might then damage our
high-status image among our status-aware heavy users, women who spend about $12,000 a year
on our facial creams.”
14
Wayne D. Hoyer, Harley Krohmer, and Lara Lobschat
A fourth category of brand personality implementation activities refer to distribution and sales
management. Here, our interview partners emphasized the importance of the customers’ brand
experience in the luxury boutique shop. As the Swiss CEO of an Italian luxury jewelry brand put
it,
The brand personality may be written on paper on a highly abstract level, but what really
counts it that our brand’s personality comes really alive within our shops. The smell in
the shop, the light, the colors, the sounds, the behavior of our sales staff, all this together
transfers the brand personality to our customers. They experience in the shops what our
brand is all about. In luxury, this sometimes is often more important than print
advertising or digital marketing, where you cannot use all of your senses.
Another aspect was the role of the sales staff for the implementation of the brand personality. A
marketing director of a Swiss luxury fashion brand said that:
Our brand is all about authentic luxury and passion. Therefore, it is an absolute must that
our sales staff and external distributors fully incorporate this idea. The CEO has to be
400% passionate, then our own sales director will be still 200% passionate, so that he
can ignite 100% passion in the sales personnel of external distributors. Many decisions
are made at the point of sale; here, we need the authentic passion of the sales personnel
to make sure that our brand idea reaches the consumers.
Given that price plays such an important role in determining the intended brand personality, it is
also critical to clearly understand how customers perceive price in relation to the perceived brand
personality. Consistent with earlier points, successful brand personality implementation would
require a match between the intended price perception and the perceived price perception. Again,
this requires that monitoring and measurement systems be established to measure price
perceptions.
Conclusion
15
Wayne D. Hoyer, Harley Krohmer, and Lara Lobschat
In conclusion, the goal of this chapter was to highlight important issues in the implementation of
a brand personality. In particular, we focused on important direct implementation activities which
are needed to ensure the success of the implementation. A key point, however, is that success also
depends on a match between the intended brand personality and the brand personality as
perceived by the customer. Thus, for each of the direct implementation activities, customer input
is important and necessary. We highlighted some key activities that can aid in these efforts;
however, this is only a beginning. It is clear that more work is needed to identify strategies for
incorporating more customer input into the process. It is our hope that the initial ideas outlined in
this chapter provide impetus in this regard.
16
Wayne D. Hoyer, Harley Krohmer, and Lara Lobschat
FIGURE 10.1 Conceptual framework of brand personality implementation
17
Wayne D. Hoyer, Harley Krohmer, and Lara Lobschat
References
Aaker, D.A. (1996) Building Strong Brands, New York: The Free Press.
Aaker, J.L. (1997) “Dimensions of Brand Personality”, Journal of Marketing Research, 34 (3):
347-56.
Aaker, J.L., K.D. Vohs, and C. Mogilner (2010) “Nonprofits Are Seen as Warm and For-Profits
as Competent: Firm Stereotypes Matter”, Journal of Consumer Research, 37 (2): 224-37.
Ang, S.H. and E.A.C. Lim (2005) “The Influence of Metaphors and Product Type on Brand
Personality Perceptions and Attitudes”, Journal of Advertising, 35 (2): 39-53.
Batra, R. and P.M. Homer (2004) “The Situational Impact of Brand Image Beliefs”, Journal of
Consumer Psychology, 14 (3): 31 8-30.
Batra, R., P. Lenk, and M. Wedel (2010) “Brand Extension Strategy Planning: Empirical
Estimation of Brand-Category Personality Fit and Atypicality”, Journal of Marketing
Research, 47 (2): 335-47.
Brakus, J.J., B.H. Schmitt, and L. Zarantonello (2009) “Brand Experience: What Is It? How Is It
Measured? Does It Affect Loyalty?”, Journal of Marketing, 73 (3): 52-68.
Chang, P.L. and M.H. Chieng (2006) “Building Consumer–Brand Relationship: A Cross-Cultural
Experiential View”, Psychology and Marketing, 23 (1): 927-59.
Chaplin, L.N. and D.R. John (2005) “The Development of Self‐Brand Connections in Children
and Adolescents”, Journal of Consumer Research, 32 (1): 119-29.
Chernev, A., R. Hamilton, and D. Gal (2011) “Competing for Consumer Identity: Limits to SelfExpression and the Perils of Lifestyle Branding”, 75 (3): 66-82.
Geuens, M., B. Weijters, and K. De Wulf (2009) “A New Measure of Brand Personality”,
International Journal of Research in Marketing, 26 (2): 97-107.
Grohmann (2009) “Gender Dimension of Brand Personality”, Journal of Marketing Research, 46
(1): 105-19.
Günther, T., and C. Kriegbaum-Kling (2001) “Brand Valuation and Control: an Empirical
Study”, Schmalenbach Business Review, 53 (4): 263-94.
Johar, G.V., J. Sengupta, and J.L. Aaker (2005) “Two Roads to Updating Brand Personality
Impressions: Trait versus Evaluative Inferencing”, Journal of Marketing Research, 42 (4):
458-69.
Kapferer, J.N. and V. Bastien (2009) The Luxury Strategy Break the Rules of Marketing to Build
Luxury, London: Kogan Page.
Kastanakis, M.N., and G. Balabanis (2012) “Between the Mass and the Class: Antecedents of the
“Bandwagon” Luxury Consumption Behavior”, Journal of Business Research, 65: 13991407.
Kates, S.M. (2004) “The Dynamics of Brand Legitimacy: An Interpretive Study in the Gay
Men’s Community”, Journal of Consumer Research, 31 (2): 455-64.
18
Wayne D. Hoyer, Harley Krohmer, and Lara Lobschat
Keller, K.L. (1993) “Conceptualizing, Measuring, and Managing Customer-Based Brand
Equity”, Journal of Marketing, 57 (1): 1-22.
Keller, K.L. (2009) “Managing the Growth Tradeoff: Challenges and Opportunities in Luxury
Branding”, Journal of Brand Management, 16 (5/6): 290-301.
Krohmer, H., C. Homburg, and J.P. Workman (2002) “Should Marketing Be cross-functional?
Conceptual development and international empirical evidence”, Journal of Business
Research, 55 (6): 451-65.
Lieven, T., B. Grohmann, A. Herrmann, J.R. Landwehr, and M. van Tilburg (2014) “The Effect
of Brand Gender on Brand Equity”, Psychology and Marketing, 31 (5): 371-85.
Lim, E.A.C. and S.H. Ang (2008) “Hedonic vs. Utilitarian Consumption: A Cross-Cultural
Perspective Based on Cultural Conditioning”, Journal of Business Research, 61 (3): 22532.
Malär, L., H. Krohmer, W.D. Hoyer, and B. Nyffenegger (2011) “Emotional Brand Attachment
and Brand Personality: The Relative Importance of the Actual and the Ideal Self”, Journal
of Marketing, 75 (4): 35-52.
Malär, L., B. Nyffenegger, H. Krohmer, and W.D. Hoyer (2012) “Implementing an Intended
Brand Personality: A Dyadic Perspective”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,
40 (5): 728-44.
Perdis, N. (2014) “Making the Retail Experience a Luxury in Its Own Right,” Huffington Post,
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/napoleon-perdis/making-the-retailexperie_b_5398821.html, accessed July 26, 2014.
Plummer, J. (1985) “How Personality Makes the Difference”, Journal of Advertising Research,
24 (6): 27-31.
Ruekert, R.W., O.C. Walker Jr., and K.J. Roering (1985) “The Organization of Marketing
Activities: A Contingency Theory of Structure and Performance”, Journal of Marketing,
49 (4): 13-25.
Scheier, M.F. and C.S. Carver (1985) “The Self-Consciousness Scale: A Revised Version for Use
with General Populations”, Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 15 (8): 87-99.
Slater, S. and E.M. Olson (2001) “Marketing's Contribution to the Implementation of Business
Strategy: An Empirical Analysis”, Strategic Management Journal, 22 (11):
1055-68.
Staplehurst, G. and S. Charoenwongse (2012) “Why Brand Personality Matters: Aligning Your
Brand to Cultural Drivers of Success”, Millward Brown: Point of View,
http://www.millwardbrown.com/Libraries/MB_POV_Downloads/
Millward_Brown_POV_Brand_Personality.sflb.ashx, accessed July 26, 2014.
Swaminathan, V., K.M. Stilley, and R. Ahluwalia (2009) “When Brand Personality Matters: The
Moderating Role of Attachment Styles”, Journal of Consumer Research, 35 (6): 9851002.
Sweeney, J. and C. Brandon (2006) “Brand Personality: Exploring the Potential to Move from
Factor Analysis to Circumplex Models”, Psychology & Marketing, 23 (8): 639-63.
19
Wayne D. Hoyer, Harley Krohmer, and Lara Lobschat
Veloutsou, C. and L. Moutinho (2009) “Brand Relationships through Brand Reputation and
Brand Tribalism”, Journal of Business Research, 62 (3): 314-22.
Wentzel, D. (2009) “The Effect of Employee Behavior on Brand Personality Impressions and
Brand Attitudes”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 37 (3): 359-74.
Wilcox, K., H.M. Kim, and S. Sen (2009) “Why Do Consumers Buy Counterfeit Luxury
Brands?”, Journal of Marketing Research, 46 (2): 247-59.
Winkler, M. (2012) “Cars Says as Much About a Person as Their Clothing and House, Professor
Says”, Herald Sun,http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/cars-says-as-much-about-aperson-as-their-clothing-and-house-professor-says/story-e6frf7jo1226518386974?nk=f777d28587f13d46b8ce392025f09c34, accessed July 16, 2014.