How Employee-Brand Relationships and
Employee-Work Relationships Can Turn
Employees into Brand Champions through
Organizational Identification
Work-in-Progress Paper
2nd International Colloquium on Consumer-Brand Relationships
March 17 – 19 2011
Birgit Loehndorf and Adamantios Diamantopoulos
University of Vienna
Birgit Loehndorf and Adamantios Diamantopoulos
University of Vienna
1
Practical Motivation
Companies spend large amounts of money
on external marketing communication.
Aim: create favorable brand associations in
consumers’ minds. (Aaker 1991)
Very often, however, companies neglect
employees’ influence on the success of
their brands. (Businessweek 2009)
Each communication message carries a
brand promise.
 Influences expectations consumers hold
towards the brand. (Yaniv and Farkas 2005)
Birgit Loehndorf and Adamantios Diamantopoulos
University of Vienna
2
Practical Motivation
Service industry: Frontline employees are
responsible for delivering brand promise.
If employee does not fulfill brand
promise, customer expectations cannot
be met. (Scheys and Baert 2007)
Negative effect on brand perceptions &
relationship between customer and brand.
(Berry 2000; Burmann and Zeplin 2005)
 Key challenge: Make employees
“brand champions”, i.e., get them to
build and strengthen the brand image
of the organization. (Mohart et al. 2009)
Birgit Loehndorf and Adamantios Diamantopoulos
University of Vienna
3
Research Gaps & Purpose of the Study
1.
Focus so far: brand-congruent employee behavior (i.e. brand promise fulfillment)
This is not enough! (e.g., Mohart et al. 2009)
 Consider in-role and extra-role brand building behaviors.
•
•
2.
In-role: brand-congruent behavior
Extra-role: positive word of mouth, participation in brand-building
Only brand-related variables considered as direct antecedents of employee
brand-building behavior.
 Take organizational perspective: Does the work-environment matter – not
only internal branding efforts?
Birgit Loehndorf and Adamantios Diamantopoulos
University of Vienna
4
Relevant Research & Purpose of the Study
Internal Marketing: Influence of employees’ general work situation on desired
in- and extra-role behaviors. (e.g., Bell and Menguc 2002; Mukherjee and Malhotra 2006)
Organizational Identification (OI): powerful predictor of important employee
outcomes, e.g. performance, OCB. (e.g., Wieseke et al. 2009; meta-analysis Riketta 2005)
Also: consumers that identify with a company become champions of that
company and ist products. (e.g., Homburg et al. 2009; Lam et al. 2010)
 Jointly consider brand-related as well as work-related constructs as
antecedents of employee brand building behaviors.
 Incorporate OI as (partial) mediator.
Birgit Loehndorf and Adamantios Diamantopoulos
University of Vienna
5
Conceptual Model and Hypotheses
Employee-Work
Relationship
Employee-Brand
Relationship
+
In-Role BrandBuilding Behavior
•Brand Knowledge
+
•Brand
Involvement
+
+
•Brand-Congruent
Behavior
+
Extra-Role BrandBuilding Behavior
Organizational
Identification
+
•Task Significance
•Participation in
Brand-Building
•Organizational
Support
•Positive Word of
Mouth
+
Social Identity Theory
Social Exchange Theory
Birgit Loehndorf and Adamantios Diamantopoulos
University of Vienna
6
Methodology
Sample:
•
Paper-and-pencil survey conducted in a regional unit of a major German
bank.
•
132 employees (100% response rate), 124 usable questionnaires.
Data Analysis:
•
PLS structural equation modelling (SmartPLS 2.0).
•
Measurement assessment: CR > .84, AVE > .60, factor loadings > .64.
Birgit Loehndorf and Adamantios Diamantopoulos
University of Vienna
7
Results
Social Identity
Theory
Organizational Brand-Congruent Participation in Positive Word
Identification
Behavior
Brand-Building
of Mouth
Brand Knowledge
0.27 ***
Brand Involvement
0.19 *
Task Significance
0.25 **
Organizational Support
0.01 n.s.
Social Exchange
Theory
Organizational Identification
0.25 **
0.55 ***
0.23 *
Task Significance
0.38 **
Organizational Support
0.13 n.s.
R2
29.8%
48.7%
32.8%
0.58 ***
-0.08 n.s.
0.31 ***
47.7%
Birgit Loehndorf and Adamantios Diamantopoulos
University of Vienna
8
Results: TOTAL EFFECTS
Brand Knowledge
Brand-Congruent Behavior Brand Involvement
(In-Role)
Task Significance
Participation in BrandBuilding (Extra-Role)
Positive Word of Mouth
(Extra-Role)
*** p < .001, ** p < .01, * p < .05,
0.397 ***
0.107 *
0.139 **
Organizational Support
0.005 n.s.
Brand Knowledge
0.064 *
Brand Involvement
0.045 n.s.
Task Significance
0.436 ***
Organizational Support
0.134 n.s.
Brand Knowledge
0.159 ***
Brand Involvement
0.112 *
Task Significance
0.066 n.s.
Organizational Support
0.319 ***
n.s.
In-role:
Higher influence of
brand-related variables.
Extra-role:
Higher influence of workrelated variables.
p > .10.
Birgit Loehndorf and Adamantios Diamantopoulos
University of Vienna
9
Key Conclusions & Implications
1) OI = powerful force to make employees brand champions.
2) Increase OI through internal branding programs.
 Benefits of internal branding that go beyond brand building!
3) Work environment highly relevant for internal brand building –
especially for extra-role behaviors.
 Internal branding not sufficient for brand building. Focus on work
environment necessary!
Birgit Loehndorf and Adamantios Diamantopoulos
University of Vienna
10
Future Research
1) Longitudinal Data:
Assess changes in internal branding efforts and work environment on
employee brand-building behaviors over time.
2) Customer Survey / Performance Measurement:
Relevance and relative impact of different brand-building behaviors on
customer outcomes and employee performance.
Birgit Loehndorf and Adamantios Diamantopoulos
University of Vienna
11
Thank you!
Birgit Loehndorf and Adamantios Diamantopoulos
University of Vienna
12
References
Aaker, David A. (1991), Managing Brand Equity. New York: Free Press.
Berry, Leonard L. (2000), “Building Service Brand Equity”,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 28 (1), 128-37.
Burmann, Christoph and Sabrina Zeplin (2005), "Building Brand Commitment: A Behavioural Approach to
Internal Brand Management," Journal of Brand Management, 12 (4), 279-300.
Businessweek, Bloomberg (2009), "Don't Neglect Internal Branding," (accessed 08.11.2010, [available at
http://www.businessweek.com/smallbiz/content/dec2009/sb20091210_167541.htm].
Homburg, Christian, Jan Wieseke, and Wayne D. Hoyer (2009), "Social Identity and the Service- Profit Chain,"
Journal of Marketing, 73 (3), 38-54.
Lam, Son K., Michael Ahearne, Ye Hu, and Niels Schillewaert (2010), "Resistance to Brand Switching When a
Radically New Brand Is Introduced: A Social Identity Theory Perspective," Journal of Marketing, 74 (6), 128-46.
Mohart, Felicitas M., Walter Herzog, and Torsten Tomczak (2009), "Brand-Specific Leadership: Turning
Employees into Brand Champions," Journal of Marketing, forthcoming.
Riketta, Michael (2005), "Organizational Identification: A Meta-Analysis," Journal of Vocational
Behavior, 66 (2), 358-84.
Scheys, Ann and Herman Baert (2007), "The Process of Internal Branding in Service Organisations: A ThreeStep Model and its Facilitating and Prohibiting Factors " in HUB Research Paper. Brussel.
Wieseke, Jan, Michael Ahearne, Son K. Lam, and Rolf Van Dick (2009), "The Role of Leaders in Internal
Marketing," Journal of Marketing, 73 (2), 123-45.
Yaniv, Eitan and Ferenc Farkas (2005), "The Impact of Person-Organization Fit on the Corporate Brand
Perception of Employees and of Customers," Journal of Change Management,
(4),
447- 61.Diamantopoulos
Birgit Loehndorf5and
Adamantios
University of Vienna
13
BACKUP: Latent Variables Correlations
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
1. Brand Knowledge
2. Brand Involvement
0.373
3. Task Significance
0.378
0.282
4. Organizational Support
0.313
0.420
0.266
5. Organizational Identification
0.443
0.370
0.411
0.242
0.491
0.378
0.275
0.192
0.662
7. Participation in Brand-Building
(Extra-Role)
0.377
0.215
0.508
0.289
0.419
0.363
8. Positive Word of Mouth (Extra-Role)
0.434
0.407
0.242
0.433
0.622
0.508
6. Brand-Congruent Behavior (In-Role)
0.430
Birgit Loehndorf and Adamantios Diamantopoulos
University of Vienna
14
BACKUP: Measurement
Construct
CR
AVE
Brand Knowledge
.88
.60
Brand Involvement
.86
.60
Task Significance
.84
.63
Organizational Support
.92
.70
Organizational Identification (OI)
.88
.54
Brand-Congruent Behavior (In-Role)
.89
.66
Participation in Brand-Building (Extra-Role)
.91
.77
Positive Word of Mouth (Extra-Role)
.89
.68
Birgit Loehndorf and Adamantios Diamantopoulos
University of Vienna
15
Extra-Role BBB
In-Role BBB
BACKUP: Constructs I
Brand-Congruent Behavior: degree to which an employee’s personal
communication with customers as part of his or her job as a brand representative
is in line with brand objectives. (adapted from Baumgarth and Schmidt 2010)
Participation in Brand-Building: degree to which an employee’s participation
in brand-building goes beyond his or her prescribed task. (Mohart et al. 2009)
Positive Word of Mouth: degree to which an employee engages in
recommending the brand to others apart from his or her job as a brand
representative. (adapted from Arnett, German, and Hunt 2003)
Organizational Identification: degree to which an employee defines himself or
herself in terms of the organizational membership and has a feeling of oneness with
or belongingness to the organization. (Mael and Ashforth 1992)
Birgit Loehndorf and Adamantios Diamantopoulos
University of Vienna
16
Employee-Work
Relationship
Employee-Brand
Relationship
BACKUP: Constructs II
Brand Knowledge: degree to which an employee has an understanding of
the brand values and knows what the brand promises to its customers.
(adapted from Baumgarth and Schmidt 2010)
Brand Involvement: degree to which the brand is appreciated by an
employee and considered to be important and relevant to the success of the
organization. (adapted from Baumgarth and Schmidt 2010)
Task Significance: degree to which an employee perceives his or her work as
meaningful and important to the organization and others. (Hackman and Oldham
1976, Job Diagnostic Survey JDS)
Organizational Support: degree to which an employee feels that the
organization cares about his or her well-being and values his or her
contributions. (adapted from Eisenberger, Fasolo, and Davis-LaMastro 1990)
Birgit Loehndorf and Adamantios Diamantopoulos
University of Vienna
17
BACKUP: Scales and Items I
Brand Knowledge (adapted from Baumgarth and Schmidt 2010 ; CR=.88, AVE=.60):
•
•
•
•
•
I am familiar with our brand communication (e.g., advertisements, web presence). (.77)
I am aware of the goals we try to achieve through our brand. (.87)
I am well informed about the values represented by the brand [name]. (.86)
I understand how customers benefit from our brand. (.64)
I know what is promised to our customers by the brand [name]. (.70)
Brand Involvement (adapted from Baumgarth and Schmidt 2010 ; CR=.86, AVE=.60):
• I am aware that the brand [name] significantly contributes to the overall success of our
company. (.72)
• I am convinced that the brand [name] allows us to achieve a higher price for our products and
services. (.64)
• I believe that our customers buy more products and services because of the brand [name]. (.87)
• I believe that of the brand [name] accounts considerably for the loyalty of our customers. (.86)
Loadings in Parentheses. Scales anchored by “strongly disagree” [1] and “strongly agree” [7].
Birgit Loehndorf and Adamantios Diamantopoulos
University of Vienna
18
BACKUP: Scales and Items II
Task Significance (Hackman and Oldham 1976, Job Diagnostic Survey JDS; CR=.84, AVE=.63):
• The way I do my work influences many people. (.89)
• My job is arranged so that I have an understanding of how it relates to the business mission. (.78)
• My job influences day-to-day company success. (.70)
Organizational Support (adapted from Eisenberger, Fasolo, and Davis-LaMastro 1990; CR=.92,
AVE=.70):
•
•
•
•
•
The organization values my contribution to its well-being. (.80)
The organization strongly considers my goals and values. (.87)
The organization is willing to help me when I need a special favor. (.81)
The organization cares about my general satisfaction. (.89)
The organization tries to make my job as interesting as possible. (.82)
Loadings in Parentheses. Scales anchored by “strongly disagree” [1] and “strongly agree” [7].
Birgit Loehndorf and Adamantios Diamantopoulos
University of Vienna
19
BACKUP: Scales and Items III
Organizational Identification (Mael and Ashforth 1992; CR=.88, AVE=.54):
•
•
•
•
•
•
When someone criticizes [name of organization], it feels like a personal insult. (.81)
I am very interested about what others think about [name of organization]. (.75)
When I talk about [name of organization], I usually say “we” rather than “they”. (.68)
This organization’s successes are my successes. (.70)
When someone praises this organization, it feels like a personal compliment. (83)
If a story in the media criticized this organization, I would feel embarrassed. (.65)
Brand-Congruent Behavior (In-Role) (Mohart, Herzog, and Tomczak 2009; CR=.89, AVE=.66):
• In customer contact situations, I make no statements that are inconsistent with our brand
communications in the media (e.g. advertising or the web presence). (.70)
• In customer contact situations, I emphasize the functional, technical (e.g. quality, reliability) as
well as the emotional aspects (e.g. trust, friendliness) of our brand. (.87)
• In customer contact situations, I underline the advantages of our brand in comparison to our
competitors’ brands. (.85)
• In customer contact situations, I pay attention that my personal appearance is in line with our
corporate brand's appearance. (.83)
Birgit Loehndorf and Adamantios Diamantopoulos
University of Vienna
20
BACKUP: Scales and Items IV
Participation in Brand-Building (Extra-Role) (Mohart, Herzog, and Tomczak 2009; CR=.91, AVE=.77):
• I let my supervisor know of ways how we can strengthen our brand image, even when I am not
rewarded for doing so. (.90)
• I make constructive suggestions on how to improve our customers' brand experience, even when
I am not rewarded for doing so. (.87)
• If I have a useful idea on how to improve our brand's performance, I share it with my supervisor,
even when I am not rewarded for doing so. (.86)
Positive Word of Mouth (Extra-Role) (adapted from Arnett, German, and Hunt 2003; CR=.89,
AVE=.68):
• I bring up [corporate brand name] in a positive way in conversations I have with friends and
acquaintances. (.77)
• I 'talk up' [corporate brand name] to people I know. (.91)
• In social situations, I often speak favorably about [corporate brand name]. (.89)
• I encourage friends and acquaintances to buy the products and services of [corporate brand
name]. (.90)
Loadings in Parentheses. Scales anchored by “strongly disagree” [1] and “strongly agree” [7].
Birgit Loehndorf and Adamantios Diamantopoulos
University of Vienna
21