1st International Colloquium on the Consumer-Brand Relationship
Love Actually?
Investigating Consumers’ Brand Love
Daniel Heinrich
Carmen-Maria Albrecht
Hans H. Bauer
23 April 2010
Daniel Heinrich
1
Daniel Heinrich
2
LOVE
LOVE
LOVE
LOVE
LOVE
LOVE
Daniel Heinrich
3
Daniel Heinrich
4
Relevance from a managerial point of view (1/2)
Consumers
Brands
Marketers
 Consumers nowadays live in an
 Brands can provide such values
 Increasingly trend toward emotional
(hedonic value, prestige value,
symbolic values, etc.)
(e.g. Hirschman 1982;
Holbrok/Hirschman 1982;
Belk/Wallendorf/Sherry 1989)
advertising slogans , like McDonald‘s
„I‘m loving it“ or „Mini – is it love?“
almost demystified world of
consumption
 More and more people trying
to fill their lives with meaning
by consumption
 Thus the role of consumption
has changed over the last
decades: hedonic consumption,
self-expressivness, symbolism,
consumtion as status and
prestige (e.g. Lasslop 2002)
Daniel Heinrich
 Brands can become also an
important part of Individuals‘
lives. (e.g. Fournier 1998;
Belk 1988)
 Marketers try to anchor brands not
only in the mind of customers but
also in their hearts
 This so called „share of heart“ gets
more and more important in
marketing practice
 Emotions gain more and more
relevance in today’s brand
management and advertising
5
Relevance from a managerial point of view (2/2)
Marketers have already developed a model to meet the requirements…
High
Respect
BRANDS
LOVEMARKS
Low Love | High Respect
High Love | High Respect
Low
Love
High
Love
PRODUCTS
FADS
Low Love | Low Respect
High Love | Low Respect
Low
Respect
Daniel Heinrich
(Saatchi & Saatchi/Roberts 2004, 2006)
6
Relevance from a academic point of view (1/2)
… but also academic research is focusing on brand love and it’s consequences on consumers‘ behavior
“For marketers who want consumers to be attracted to, and loyal to their
products, love of products and brands is a topic of clear relevance.”
(Ahuvia/Batra/Bagozzi 2008)
“We believe that brand loyalty is merely a symptom or the result of a
deeper underlying relationship between the consumer and brand and that
relationship is love.”
(Kamat/Parulekar 2007)
“In its strong behavioral, emotional and psychological foundations,
satisfaction – as love – probably constitutes the most intense and profound
satisfaction of all.”
(Fournier/Mick 1999)
Daniel Heinrich
7
Relevance from a academic point of view (2/2)
Brand love even becomes relevant in the concept of relationship marketing…
REPUTATION
ANCHORED
Future
Reality
SHARE OF
HEARTH
(WHAT)
SHARE OF
WALLET
Past
Reality
PERSON
ANCHORED
(HOW)
Daniel Heinrich
Jagdish N. Sheth (2007)
8
Social psychology is providing applicable theoretical frameworks, e.g.:
Love Attitude Styles
Triangular Theory of Love
(Lee 1977)
(Sternberg 1986, 1988, 1997)
Intimacy
Ludus
Pragma
Mania
LOVE
Eros
Storge
Passion
Decission/
Commitment
Agape
Daniel Heinrich
9
Seite 10
Sternberg’s theory as basis for exploring consumer-object relations?
Triangular Theory of Love
Consumer-Object Relations
(Sternberg 1986, 1988, 1997)
(Shimp /Madden 1988)
Intimacy
Liking
LOVE
COR
Passion
Decission/
Commitment
Yearning
Decission/
Commitment
“A necessary next step is developing psychometric
scales to measure each of the components
comprising consumer-object relations .”
(Shimp/Madden 1988)
Daniel Heinrich
10
Step 1: Development of psychometric scales
Qualitative in-deph-interviews to shed light on how love toward brands can be characterized
Scales were developed by drawing on items used in interpersonal or psychological context
Items were captured by 7-point Likert scales
Pre-test for external and internal consistency
Main-study : self-administrated online questionnaire
5 weeks field study time (45.5% female, 54.5 % male); average age 38.8 (SD=12.8)
Evaluation of reliability and validity criteria
Fornell-Larcker test to ensure discriminant validity
Daniel Heinrich
11
Step 1: Results
Brand Love can be captured as a second-order construct, reflected by 3 facets…
Brand
Passion
Brand
Intimacy
Brand
Commitment
Factors
Items
Factor
Loading
Item-to-total
Correlation
Indicator
Reliability
I am very focused on this brand.
0,899
0,771
0,71
[…] would be my first choice.
0,921
0,815
0,75
I will not buy other brands if […] is
available at the store.
0,898
0,768
0,73
Most of the time I feel very close to
this brand.
0,944
0,871
0,86
There is a close connection
between me and this brand.
0,968
0,923
0,94
There is a certain intimacy
between me and this brand.
0,913
0,813
0,73
I am passionate about this brand.
0,923
0,831
0,73
[…] is a captivating brand.
0,934
0,810
0,79
0,884
0,903
0,75
Factor
Reliability
Alpha
0,89
0,888
0,90
0,936
0,90
0,897
I am enthusiastic about this brand.
Daniel Heinrich
12
Step 2: Investigating consequences of Brand Love
The second study tests our measurement scales for nomolgical validity and explores consumers’ behavior
 Partners in close relationships are more willing to accommodate and to forgive mistakes made by their partner
(Rustbulk et al. 1991; Wieselquist et al. 1999).
 Emotional bonds strengthen relationships even if dissatisfactions appears (Hazan/Shaver 1994).
 Consumers’ willingness to forgive mistakes made by a company or brand is affected positive by
consumer-brand relationship (Aaker/Fournier/Brasel 2004).
H1: Brand love has a positive effect on consumers’ willingness to forgive
 Brand equity literature highlights that consumers’ willingness to pay a higher price depends on perceived value
(Aaker 1996; Keller 2003; Vazquez/Belen del Rio/Iglesias 2002; Yoo, Donthu/Lee 2000).
 Consumers’ willingness to pay a price premium is affected positive by their emotional attachment to a brand
(Thomson/MacInnis/Park 2005).
H2: Brand love has a positive effect on consumers’ willingness to pay a price premium
Daniel Heinrich
13
Step 2: Results
Structural equation modeling shows the impact of consumers’ brand love on behavioral constructs…
consumers‘
willingness to
forgive
brand
intimacy
H1 +.64
brand
passion
consumers‘
brand love
H2 +.43
brand
commitment
willingness to
pay a price
premium
χ2/df=2.42 NFI=.97 TLI=.98 CFI=.98 RMSEA=.073 SRMR=.064
Daniel Heinrich
14
Step 3: Identifying Brand Love Styles
Finally we explored the data to identify different kinds of love relationships…
Component
Intimacy
Passion
Decision/
Commitment
Nonlove
-
-
-
Liking
+
-
-
Infatuated Love
-
+
-
Empty Love
-
-
+
Romantic Love
+
-
Companionate Love
+
+
-
Fatuous Love
-
Consummate Love
+
+
+
+
+
+
Love Style
Intimacy
LOVE
Passion
Daniel Heinrich
Commitment
15
Step 3: Results
Component
Brand Love Style
Nonlove
Liking
Infatuated Love
Empty Love
Romantic Love
Companionate Love
Fatuous Love
Consummate Love
∑
Daniel Heinrich
#
Brand
Intimacy
Brand Passion
Brand
Commitment
58
2
55
20
18
3
50
125












331
16
Conclusion
Development of a measurement scale reflecting consumers’ love for brands
Consumers’ love for brands is reflected by brand passion, brand intimacy & brand commitment
Brand love has a strong influence on consumers’ willingness to pay a price premium
Brand love has a strong influence on consumers’ willingness to forgive
Analogously to interpersonal love, different love styles can be identified
“Research is needed to expand the conceptual
model, identifying antecedents and outcomes of
brand love.”
(Carroll/Ahuvia 2006)
Daniel Heinrich
“Despite its growing popularity, consumer research on love is still in
its infancy and much of the work centers around the basic question
of what love is when applied to products and brands.”
(Ahuvia/Batra/Bagozzi 2008)
17
Daniel Heinrich
18
Daniel Heinrich
daniel.heinrich@bwl.uni-mannheim.de
University of Mannheim
Germany
Daniel Heinrich
19
Additional slide
Daniel Heinrich
20
“Overall results of the present fMRI investigation support the contention that consumers do not
process descriptive judgements of products in the same manner as those applied to humans.”
(Yoon et. al 2006, p. 36)
NOTE.—In each row, the same group activation is displayed from three different
perspectives (from left to right: sagittal, coronal, and axial) on an individual
participant’s normalized SPGR structural image. The displayed anatomy does not
represent the anatomical variation of all 19 participants. The region of interest in
which the contrast was tested is marked in white and the significant voxels (p <
.005 uncorrected at the individual voxel level) within that region are marked with
color, according to the t-scores.
Daniel Heinrich
21