Impact of Brand Personality on Consumer Behavior

How Consumer Use Brand Personality

Consumer Behavior

The manufacturers and the retailers of goods and services require relevant information that is likely to lead to the effect of stimuli within the store on a given buyer or consumer and as thus influencing the buyers behavior when they are in the store. This information is of importance to the manufacturers since they need it to come up with decisions about the manner in which they are to go about their packaging of the goods, how they are to display the goods in the stores. They also need the information to be aware of the level in which the stimuli within the stores are likely to have effect on the purchasing behavior of the buyers when it comes to their products. Similarly, the retailers of the products need information about the in-store stimuli of the buyer’s behavior so as to come up with the efficient resources that they can use to stimulate the additional sales. They also need this information probably to enable them create a difference in their store as compared to other stores when it comes to impressions before the consumers. Finding this particular behavior about the buyers is the aim or rather what constitutes this study on consumer behavior.

According to Thongthip and Polyorat (2015), it is the five brand personality dimensions that result in building of identities for the manufacturers and service providers. The brand personality dimensions include: excitement, competence, sincerity, ruggedness and sophistication. The brand personality dimensions are responsible for the client’s perceived quality of service and the value of the service and as thus they are able to form opinions and perceptions about the service provider or the manufacturer. Marketers and manufacturers depend on the consumers perceived service value as well as the consumers perceived service quality as this information is vital for them in drawing guidelines and coming up with competitive marketing strategies for their various services and products.

The affective experiences of the consumers in the retail environments stretch past the obvious sales as they go all the way to bring impact on the future relations that will exist among the brand consumers and the particular brand. The emotional attachment of consumers is influenced by store-evoked effects, brand personality as well as human personality according to Orth, Limon and Rose (2009). According to them, store-evoked pleasure is a result of satisfaction and it is this satisfaction that mediates the pleasure and arousal of the consumer’s attachment to the particular brands. The result is that the brand loyalty of the said consumers and their willingness to raise more premiums for the given product is increased. The attachment from the consumers is higher when the positive affective environments are engaged along with the brand being associated with positive extents of brand personality. Despite all these, the effects recorded are a result of the consumer’s traits such as their openness, conscientiousness, extroversion as well as their agreeableness to the neuroticism (Orth, Limon & Rose, 2009).

Brand personality is the perception that relates the personality of individuals to the brands of products by coming up with basic behavioral, psychological traits, attitudes as well as beliefs that are directly linking the individuals to the brands. Brand personality is either direct or indirect. The manufacturer may opt to come up with imagery that entails the coming up with human traits that are linked to the consumers of that particular product. It can also be indirect in that the marketers can rely on product-related attributes, brand names, logos and symbols, price along with advertising techniques to form a personality for their brand without necessarily involving human aspects such as imagery (Thongthip & Polyorat, 2015).

There are a number of ways through which manufacturers can rely on brand personalities so as to come up with swaying advertising appeals. The effectiveness of advertising appeals relies upon the consumers and their inherent self-theories according to Park and John (2012). Signaling advertising appeals are considered to have impact on the buyers especially ones who believe that their personal qualities are fixed and as thus cannot be improved via their individual efforts and as thus have to rely on ad appeals. Park and John (2012) further in further discussing the implications for brand personality and adverts acknowledge that self improvement advertisement appeals are more efficient for the buyers who are believing that they are having individual qualities that are in a way or the other malleable and as thus can be improved.

Sundar and Noseworthy (2016) elaborate that consumers get to spontaneously associate disconfirmation to the brand personality. When the disconfirmation is negative then it is linked with the negativity of the post trial evaluations that are done by the buyers. When the negative disconfirmation is brought about by a brand that is exciting then there are probabilities that the source of the disconfirmation can be considered to be positive. The reason for this is that the clients in most cases consider disconfirmation as an authentic and interesting personality for the brand.

Kim, Han and Park (2001) explain the effects that brand identification has on brand personality by relying on variables such as charisma of the brand personality, its self expressiveness, any positive word about it, its distinctiveness as well as its brand loyalty. What they found out was that there relationships that are positive among the variables. It is these relations that have effect on the consumer’s identification with the brands.

Azoulay and Lkapferer (2003) acclaim that brand personality is flourishing and unchallenged on their validity. Brand personality is commonly a key feature of brand identity. They go ahead to acknowledge that brand personality merges a number of dimensions of brand identity and as thus they ought to be kept in separate theoretical grounds and only for practical uses (Azoulay & Lkapferer, 2003).

Banerjee (2015) state that the marketers begin their dialogue with consumers via personality routes by coming down with brand personality in accordance with the personal characteristics of the buyers. Corporate personality is an instrumental aspect of corporate identity and it is responsible for gearing a corporate success. Banerjee (2015) acknowledges that a consumer’s preference for a given brand can be out of influence from brand personality along with the corporate personality. As thus, the role of brand personality, corporate personality together with personal personality need to be addressed strategically since they are all play a role in the consumer brand preference.

Branaghan and Hildebrand (2011) acknowledge that brand personality stems from self congruity by bringing together various brands along with self image into associative associations. Self congruity, as thus, is the quantity of associations that are available between self and every brand and this is predictive of the preference of the ideal brand. The approach of self congruity is vital for manufacturers and marketers as it brings about how self is associated with the various brands and the manner in which the brands interrelate.

Christodoulides (2009) brings together various ideas on brand equity and brand equity conceptualization and measurement by incorporating other literature. It is in this line that he acknowledges that consumer based brand equity can be grouped as either direct or indirect. He goes ahead to state that brand equity is multi faceted and requires one to capture it via numerous sets of measures and not a solitary measure.

Aaker (1997) carried out research on the consumer behavior in regards to brand personality and came up with a theoretical framework of the brand personality construct as she determine the quantity as well as the nature of the dimensions of brand personality. The framework she came up with assists in the measure of the five brand personality dimensions. She found out that brand personality has influence on buyer’s perception and has the ability to attenuate the perception of the brand attribute information with respect to motivation.

Lin and Huang (2012) acknowledge that brand personality is increasingly gaining attention from researchers and it is identified as a phenomenal aspect that is having effect on consumers. Lin and Huang (2012) go ahead to state that when the differentiation in brands in not much, the consumers start to view the brands as to be similar. The brand as thus needs to come up with a strong personality so that it gains symbolic attributes that are not readily imitated and thus create a basis of differentiation.

Grohmann (2009) states that despite being feminine and masculine being traits that are relevant to the brands, the extent of their contribution and measurement to the branding theory and practice needs to be looked into. Grohmann (2009) found out that it is the spokespersons who are in advertising who are altering the brand personality viewpoints in regards to femininity and masculinity. Brand personality and the buyer’s sex roles as well have positive influences on the brand related buyer responses.

Jooyoung, Hyun and Hugh (2010) in their study found out that there are news institutions that are always replying and reacting to competition by employing the usage of the branding principles withdrawn from the meadow of strategic media management. The brands include the terms, signs, and symbols along with other numerous identities that are employed by the news organizations so as to be able to differentiate themselves from their rivals. In the news organization, the marketing view point states that the creation of distinct brand that enables them to differentiate themselves from the other organizations and as thus create for the organization a competitive advantage.

Halonen (2013) carried out a research that was aiming to provide an understanding of whether the buyers were getting to evaluate the brands in line with the personality traits that are congruent with their characteristics as individuals other than the brands that are having incongruent personal characteristics. Brand personality as thus is one of the frequently utilized metrics that is used in the quantitative market research in regard to the inherent supposition that the buyers are having the desire to engage with the brands that they are considering being same to them in a way or the other. Irrespecctive of this, Halonen (2013) acknowledges that the brand congruency is vital to the unexplored market research as a tool for measurement. Brand congruency is good predictor of the levels of brand appeal and as thus brands with distinctive traits that are congruent with the clients self perceptions are seen to be receiving positive evaluation compared to the other brand with incongruent personality traits.

Cervera-Taulet, et al (2013) explores the relationship that there is between adverts and brand personality in regard to the Aaker’s model where they acknowledge that the brand personality forms the emotional section of brand image and it is a creation of entire experiences that are drawn from consumers of the particular brand. What Cervera-Taulet, et al (2013) suggests is that adverts have influence on the manner in which brand personality is formed and it is only in the dimension of sophistication. They further recommend that managers incorporate communication strategies that would distinguish them and grant them an attractive brand personality and as thus enhance their consumers.

In a study that employs all the five dimensions of brand personality, Reese (2000) found out that there has to be an understanding of the roles played by brand personalities in as far as involvement is entailed. This entails the understanding of concepts along with history of the organization in question. In the five dimensions, Reese (2000) noted that it is Ruggedness and Excitement that are the leading dimensions that define brand personality.

Blythe (2006) in investigating the sort of dialogue between manufacturers and the consumers considers a number of aspects that are affecting the personality of those who are developing and designing adverts. The personalities belonging to the creative’s are impacting on the brand personality prior and the end result is more or less the output that is reflective of the individual personalities. Blythe (2006) further acknowledges that consumers always pick brands that are having brand personalities that are same to their individual personalities.

Ross, Zainuddin and Magee (2016) demonstrate the utility of the branding theory particularly for the social marketing services. The brand personality and brand personality appeal are predictors that show the attitude of the consumers as well as their intentions whenever they get to engage with given brands. Bothe brand personality and brand personality appeal have both direct and indirect linkages to the attitudes of consumers as well as their behavioral intentions when it comes to social marketing services as well as commercial services.

Kim and Sung (2013) looks into brand personality and the regulatory focus interplay where they are portraying the manner in which it is having effect on the advertising message and its persuasiveness. Promotions that are having advertising messages that are framed are having higher persuasive ability particularly for fictitious exciting brands as compared to the messages that are prevention framed. At the end of it, it is the prevention framed advert messages that come out to be effective for the competent brands. Individuals get exposed to the sophisticated brands as they get to show positive attitudes when the brand messages are promotionally framed. Consumers who are exposed to the sincere brands get to react in ways that are better placed when the brand in question is presented in a prevention framed advert message.

Maehle, Otnes and Supphellen (2011) look into the factors that are deemed to be shaping the perceptions of brand personality. So as to establish these factors, the study herein ventured into understanding the manner in which the consumers were coming up with there perceptions in line with the varied dimensions of the brand personality. It went ahead to bring out the aspects of brand traits that were seen to be influencing the perceptions. The outcome elaborated that brand personality dimensions are linked with the individual product categories where the brands who were seen as strong on the personality dimension front are having commonalities that are way past the category. Further, the brands that are consumers perceive them as not having given personalities get to share similar attributes.

Toldos-Romero and Orozco-Gómez (2013) state that several regression analyses has exposed that the brand personality dimensions are having notable predictions of the intention to purchase. The specific dimensions that are deemed to be having positive effects are: Success, Sophistication, Sincerity and Vivacity whereas emotionality and professionalism are associated with negative impacts of the purchase intentions. Further, Toldos-Romero and Orozco-Gómez (2013) acknowledged that the users and the non-users of the brands rated them differently. The users of the brands rate them higher when compared to non-users of the said brands across the brand personality dimensions.

Niros and Pollalis (2016) acknowledge that brand equity entails the market value of the particular brand and it is also driven by the consumers. Service brands are seen to be requiring that varied brands strategize and practice in line to comparing the said products. There are service attributes such as heterogeneity, inseparability and intangibility that are demanding for sensitive strategies so as to order to stimulate viewpoints concerning the brand quality that are facilitating the image of the brand and then minimize the consumer’s efforts for search. It is in this line that it is acknowledged that brand personality is vital to the service brands as it reinforces the brand image and as thus the buyers get to have an established, strong and endurable relation with the said brand. The service brands get to met client expectations and as thus get to have effect on the consumer behavior and the brand attachment. The work herein gets to define the brand personality and get to show the associations that bring together consumer equity and the theoretical framework.

Glynn and Widjaja (2015) bring out that the private label brands are vital to the viewpoint of the retail offering within marketing sector. The study carried out by Glynn and Widjaja (2015) elaborates on the risk factors that are associated with the private label purchasing and that there has been minimal research when it comes to exploration of the management of the brands. It is in this regard that they state that the five brand personality dimensions are relevant to the private label brands if not for sophistication which is hardly evident. All the private label personality dimensions are influential to the private label quality measure with the confidence as well as sincerity dimensions that are associated with having the greatest impacts.

Yao, Chen and Xu (2015) investigated the effect that the consistency among the consumers personalities and the brand personalities on emotional brand attachments. The study herein found out that the structural equation model was suggestive of the fact that consistency in the personality dimensions are having significant positive effects on the consumers and brand attachments as compared to the consistency that are contained in dimensions such as competency, reliability and sensitivity. Individuals get emotional attachments to the brands that are matching their personality and reflective of what they believe in or what they tend to believe they actually are.

Klipfel, Barclay and Bockorny (2014) bring out that self-congruity as well as brand personality are vital concepts, for instance, self congruity is seen as a determinant brand personality owing to the fact that it is actually a product of brand personality. Klipfel, Barclay and Bockorny (2014) bring out two concepts such as congruity and real-ideal image discrepancy which are basically introductory factors that are expounding on the self congruity role in the imagined brand personality. Prior to launching a particular brand, the manufacturers need to have considerations that ascertain that the untimely users of the brand are the targeted consumers. The brands that are in existence should as well be monitored for brand personality alterations to watch out for false congruity, creative consumer behavior or real-ideal image discrepancies.

Sung and Kim (2010) elaborates that considering the potential utility of the brand personality for the manufacturers the current researches are conceptualizing and investigating the relations that there exists among the brand personality dimensions and brand trust along with the brand effects. There are brand personalities dimensions that are able to relate with brand trust than they can with the brand affect. Sincerity and Ruggedness as brand personality dimensions are most probable to have influence on the extent of brand trust and not brand affect whereas sophistication and excitement are relating more to brand affect as compared to brand trust. The final dimension, competence, has same effects on the brand affect and the brand trust.

References;

• Aaker, J. L. (1997). Dimensions of brand personality. Journal of marketing research, 347-356.
• Azoulay, A., & Kapferer, J. N. (2003). Do brand personality scales really measure brand personality?. Journal of Brand Management, 11(2), 143-155.
• Banerjee, S. (2016). Influence of consumer personality, brand personality, and corporate personality on brand preference: An empirical investigation of interaction effect. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 28(2), 198-216.
• Blythe, J. (2007). Advertising creatives and brand personality: A grounded theory perspective. Journal of Brand Management, 14(4), 284-294.
• Branaghan, R. J., & Hildebrand, E. A. (2011). Brand personality, self‐congruity, and preference: A knowledge structures approach. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 10(5), 304-312.
• Cervera-Taulet, A., Schlesinger, M. W., & Yagüe-Guillen, M. J. (2013). Influence of advertising on brand personality in the airline sector: The case of Spain. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 30(5), 445-454.
• Christodoulides, G., & De Chernatony, L. (2010). Consumer-based brand equity conceptualization and measurement: A literature review. International journal of research in marketing, 52(1), 43-66.
• Glynn, M. S., & Widjaja, T. (2015). Private label personality: applying brand personality to private label brands. The International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research, 25(4), 362-378.
• Gordon, R., Gordon, R., Zainuddin, N., Zainuddin, N., Magee, C., & Magee, C. (2016). Unlocking the potential of branding in social marketing services: utilising brand personality and brand personality appeal. Journal of Services Marketing, 30(1), 48-62.
• Grohmann, B. (2009). Gender dimensions of brand personality. Journal of marketing research, 46(1), 105-119.
• Halonen, E. (2013). ‘Mirror, mirror on the wall, which brand is like me most of all?’Integrating consumers into brand personality measurement.
• Kim, C. K., Han, D., & Park, S. B. (2001). The effect of brand personality and brand identification on brand loyalty: Applying the theory of social identification. Japanese Psychological Research, 43(4), 195-206.
• Kim, D. H., & Sung, Y. (2013). Gucci versus Old Navy: Interplay of brand personality and regulatory focus in advertising persuasion. Psychology & Marketing, 30(12), 1076-1087.
• Kim, J., Baek, T. H., & Martin, H. J. (2010). Dimensions of news media brand personality. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 87(1), 117-134.
• Klipfel, J. A., Barclay, A. C., & Bockorny, K. M. (2014). Self-Congruity: A Determinant of Brand Personality. Journal of Marketing Development and Competitiveness, 8(3), 130.
• Lin, Y. C., & Huang, P. W. (2012). Effects of the big five brand personality dimensions on repurchase intentions: Using branded coffee chains as examples. Journal of Foodservice Business Research, 15(1), 1-18.
• Maehle, N., Otnes, C., & Supphellen, M. (2011). Consumers’ perceptions of the dimensions of brand personality. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 10(5), 290-303.
• Niros, M. I., & Pollalis, Y. A. (2012). BRAND PERSONALITY AND CONSUMER BEHAVIOR: STRATEGIES FOR BUILDING STRONG SERVICE BRANDS. Journal of Marketing and Operations Management Research, 2(2), 101.
• Park, J. K., & John, D. R. (2012). Capitalizing on brand personalities in advertising: The influence of implicit self-theories on ad appeal effectiveness. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 22(3), 424-432.
• Reese, J. (2015). RUGGED AND EXCITING: EXAMINING THE PERSONALITY OF A MIXED MARTIAL ARTS BRAND. Journal of Contemporary Athletics, 9(2), 101.
• Sundar, A., & Noseworthy, T. J. (2016). Too Exciting to Fail, Too Sincere to Succeed: The Effects of Brand Personality on Sensory Disconfirmation.Journal of Consumer Research, 43(1), 44-67.
• Sung, Y., & Kim, J. (2010). Effects of brand personality on brand trust and brand affect. Psychology & Marketing, 27(7), 639-661.
• Thongthip, W., & Polyorat, K. (2015). The influence of brand personality dimensions on perceived service quality and perceived service value. The Business & Management Review, 6(4), 22.
• Thongthip, W., & Polyorat, K. (2015). The influence of brand personality dimensions on perceived service quality and perceived service value. The Business & Management Review, 6(4), 22.
• Toldos-Romero, M. D. L. P., & Orozco-Gómez, M. M. (2015). Brand personality and purchase intention. European Business Review, 27(5), 462-476.
• Yao, Q., Chen, R., & Xu, X. (2015). Consistency between consumer personality and brand personality influences brand attachment. Social Behavior and Personality: an international journal, 43(9), 1419-1427.