Exploring Brand Experience to Predict Consumer Behaviour - An Empirical Study of Red Bull

Transcription

1 Exploring Brand Experience to Predict Consumer Behaviour - An Empirical Study of Red Bull Introduction In 1955, Abbott stated that "what people really want are not products but satisfying experiences". This accounts for the importance of delivering more than just a product by staging experiences (Pine II & Gilmore, 1999). In recent years, the idea of experience gained ground in the academic literature but also in management and marketing practices. However, information on the impact of experience on consumer behaviour is still limited (Gentile et al., 2007). This paper is a contribution to the understanding of how brand experience can help in predicting consumer behaviour. Specifically, we use brand experience scale to study a well known energetic drink brand (Red Bull), with two main goals: on the one hand we try to identify clusters of consumers based on their experience with the brand; on the other hand we try to shed some light on the relation of brand experience, brand attitude and purchase intention. For this purpose, the authors use both quantitative (study 1) and qualitative (study 2) approaches in order to identify different experiential clusters and test the influence of brand experience on brand attitude and, consequently, on purchase intention, and to allow a deeper understanding of the experiential clusters and their relation with the brand. Brand Experience Brand experience can be conceptualized as a set of responses from consumers in the form of sensations, feelings, responses, cognitive and behavioural responses that arise as a reaction to a stimulus of the brand, which can be found in brand identity, packaging and communication and/or the environment in which the brand is marketed (Brakus et al, 2009; Schmitt, 1999; Smilansky, 2009). The concept of brand experience can be distinguished from other related concepts. In fact, Schmitt (2009, p. 417), one the main academic references in the subject, states that "brand experience captures the very essence of branding much more than analytically and cognitively oriented brand concepts such as brand equity, brand value, brand associations, brand attitudes and brand personality". By conceptualizing brand experience not as a general judgment about the brand, Brakus et al. (2009) argue that the attitude towards the brand represents only a small fraction of the total brand experience. Also, while involvement emerges based on the needs, values and interests that motivate the consumer for an object (Zaichkowsky, 1985), strong brand experiences are not always associated with brands with higher rates of involvement (Brakus et al., 2009). Brand experience has been considered an important predictor of several consumer behaviour related constructs, such as brand equity (Biedenbach & Marell, 2010; So & King, 2010; Xu & Chan, 2010), loyalty (Iglesias et al., 2010), brand relationship quality (Hee Jung & Myung Soo, 2012), among others. The importance of the construct relies on the basic assumption that the way consumers experience products, services and brands is determinant for their reactions. Thus, it can be said that the experience is what connects brands and consumers. Brand Attitude and Purchase Intention The concept of attitude has been widely studied in marketing and consumer research. Argyriou & Melewar (2011), in a recent review article, argue that there is a

2 considerable diversity in approaching the concept and the phenomenon. The main difference is based on the functional vs. constructivist approaches. Another prevalent difference in approaching attitude is the cognitive-affective debate. Despite the competing approaches, attitudes remain as "evaluative judgments measured via categorization on a continuum involving several attribute dimensions; however, their formation may stem from qualitatively different processes" (Argyriou & Melewar, 2011, p.444). Thus, within the frame of the present study, attitude toward the brand is defined as the predisposition to respond positively or negatively to a particular brand (Phelps and Hoy, 1996), that is, as a one-dimensional assessment of the brand that predictably encourages behaviour (Spears & Singh, 2004). The concept of attitude toward the brand has assumed a central role in marketing and consumer research studies, namely as an important variable in explaining sales promotion (Yi & Yoo, 2011), product attitudes (Lee et al., 2008), ads (Yoo, 2008; Coulter & Punj, 1999), brand extension (Nan, 2006), service quality (Hwang & Ok, 2013), retail and shopping (Leischnig et al., 2011), and private brands (Goldsmith et al., 2010). Several studies show that consumers attitudes have a strong predictive power over consumer behaviour. Thus, based on the assumption that attitudes are formed based on the processing and assessment of stimulus, we set the hypothesis that brand experience has a significant and positive influence on attitude towards the brand. Purchase intention can be understood as the probability of an individual to purchase a particular brand or product (Phelps & Hoy, 1996; Belch & Belch, 2004). Purchase intention has been considered a consequence of several consumer behaviour related dimensions and is widely studied, including online and offline purchase intentions (Verhagen & Dolen, 2009), ethical behaviour (Carrington et al., 2010), product quality and satisfaction and (Tsiotsou, 2006), product scarcity and need for uniqueness (Wu et al., 2012). In fact, the wide and recurrent concern with purchase intention contributed to the proliferation of different forms of measure the phenomenon. Nevertheless, Wright & MacRae (2007) have concluded in their meta-analytical study, purchase intention scales proved to be empirically unbiased and variability is much less than expected, which supports the use of such concept. Several studies have concluded that attitude towards the brand has a positive and significant effect on purchase intention (Mitchell & Olson, 1981; Shimp & Gresham, 1985; Batra & Ray, 1986; Yi, 1990; Brown & Stayman, 1992; Phelps & Hoy, 1996), even in the B2B setting (Biedenbach & Marell, 2010). Thus, we set the hypothesis that attitude towards the brand has a significant and positive effect on purchase intention. Zarantonello and Schmitt (2010) showed that the attitude of individuals towards the brand can predict the intention to buy a particular brand, and the relationship established between the attitude towards the brand and purchase intention varies with the experiential profile of the individual, which is higher in groups of individuals with a higher experiential profile. Accordingly, we also set the hypothesis that different experiential profiles have different reactions in attitudes towards the brand and purchase intention. Study 1 The first study has two objectives. On the one hand, define consumer profiles based on

3 the experience of the brand, and secondly, to assess the influence that brand experience has on brand attitude and purchase intention. The object of the study is the well known Red Bull energy drink brand. The sample consists of 452 individuals of both sexes aged between 16 and 40 years (according to the brand target). We applied a questionnaire with two distinct sections. The first section is intended to measure the "brand experience". We have resorted to the scale developed by Brakus et al (2009), composed of 12 items that assess the four dimensions of brand experience: the sensory, affective, intellectual and behavioural dimensions. The second section was used to measure "brand attitude" and "purchase intent". The questions were based on Brakus et al. (2009) and Zarantonello & Schmitt (2010). The constructs "brand experience" and "purchase intent" use a 7-point likert scale, while the "brand attitude" uses a semantic differential scale. To meet the first objective of this study, the creation of the typology of experiential consumers, we use cluster analysis. In order to calculate clusters, we used the hierarchical cluster analysis with the Ward method. For the second objective, which seeks to understand the influence of attitude towards the brand purchase intent of individuals according to their experiential profile, the procedure was the multiple regression analysis. The definition of the typology of consumers according to their experiential appeals is based on the results obtained for the four dimensions of the scale of the brand experience (sensory, affective, intellectual and behavioural), obtained from the average responses of respondents in each group of three items that make up each dimension. The number of clusters was defined from the agglomeration schedule and dendogram. Based on the results the best solution presented was the four clusters solution. The oneway ANOVA and the Tukey test were used to test the homogeneity of variances. The identification of each of the clusters was based on Zarantonello & Schmitt (2010), as well as its composition in terms of respondents and responses to various dimensions. Table 1 Clusters Scores by Brand Experience Dimension Cluster n Sensorial Affective Intellectual Behavioural Media(S.D.) Media(S.D.) Media(S.D.) Media(S.D.) ,976(0,614) 5,442(0,958) 4,995(0,859) 5,213(0,936) ,543(0,774) 3,417(0,827) 2,267(0,800) 3,658(1,040) ,913(1,114) 2,156(1,149) 2,299(1,080) 2,275(0,727) ,891(0,816) 4,351(0,836) 4,101(0,757) 3,781(0,983) Total 452 4,816(1,321) 4,111(1,490) 3,674(1,450) 3,954(1,378) Cluster 1 is the one that presents higher results in all dimensions of the brand experience scale, and are therefore identified as "Holistic Consumers." These consumers distance themselves from others by the high importance attributed to brand experiences as a whole. Cluster 2 is below mean scores in all dimensions, although the mean of the sensory dimension is very close to the overall mean. This group corresponds to "Sensory Consumers", in that the sensory dimension is the most recognized by the respondents. Cluster 3, labelled "Utilitarian Consumers", presents the lowest mean scores in all dimensions of the brand experience scale, thus focusing on rational and

4 functional aspects of consumption, devaluing the experiential connection that can be established with the brand. Finally, Cluster 4 shows above-mean results in all dimensions except the behavioural dimension and is therefore identified as "Inner- Directed Consumers". Consumers within this cluster are seeking inner experiences through thoughts, emotions and feelings, but value little action or some kind of physical commitment. To understand the influence of attitude towards the brand purchase intention and how this varied among different experiential groups, a regression analysis was performed for the total sample and for each of the clusters. The predictive ability of brand attitude is relatively strong and significant (R2 = 0.451, p <0.05), and the influence of attitude towards the brand purchase intention is positive and significant (β = 0.672, p <0.000). Table 2 Effect of Brand Attitude on Purchase Intention by Cluster Cluster Dependent Independent Standardized P-Value R2 F P-Value 1 0,385 0,000,142 24,710 0, ,472 0,000,215 28,151 0,000 3 PI BA 0,573 0,000,319 36,653 0, ,505 0,000,249 44,195 0,000 Total 0,672 0,000, ,696 0,000 Attitude toward the brand has a positive and significant impact in all clusters. However, and contrary to the literature, "Holistic Consumers" present a relatively weak effect (R2 = 0.142, p <0.05) in purchase intent when compared with other clusters, although positive and significant (β = 0.385, p <0.000). On the reverse, "Utilitarian Consumers" presents the higher effect of attitude towards the brand on purchase intention (R2 = 0.319, p <0.000), when compared with the other clusters, with a significant and positive influence (β = 0.573, p <0.000). Study 2 Based on the results of study 1 several focus groups were conducted, one for each experiential cluster, in order to understand how different brand experience profiles relate with the brand. The sample was made of 37 master students, which completed a brief survey with the brand experience scale. They were grouped according to the results from the survey in study 1. The criterion was to group participants according to their answers being below or above the mean of each brand experience dimension. The grouping followed clusters identified in study 1, namely holistic, utilitarian, sensorial and inner-directed consumers. According to the description, holistic consumers have high scores on all the brand experience dimensions. Although not all participants were customers of Red Bull, when asked to characterize the brand, they mentioned that Red Bull was bold, aggressive, young, provocative (creates impact), proactive, leader, fresh, energetic. The mix of different brand experience dimensions was common such as illustrated by the statement "the palate and effervescent convey a sense of dynamism and excitement" or "I do not need to drink it to recognize the attributes". According to another participant, this may be due to the fact that "even without being a customer, the brand has actions that transmit sensations and emotions, such as the structure of the events it sponsors".

5 Finally, holistic consumers associate the brand and its attributes with the consumption context when consuming Red Bull: "for those who surf comes to mind the smell of the sea; those who do all-terrain cycling comes to mind the smell of the earth". Utilitarian consumers, score low on all brand experience dimensions. The participants in this focus group denoted great difficulties in expressing opinions, and silence was most of the times the first reaction to the questions and topics raised, revealing a lack of response to the brand experience efforts, illustrated by one participant statement: "nothing is missing to the brand to be experiential; however, it does not mean anything to me". In fact, when faced with the question of which brand they relate with in an experiential way, the general answer was none; so it follows that this consumer segment reveals a lack of sensitivity to events or experiential activities. On the other hand, sensorial consumers reveal a high score on the sensorial dimension but low scores on all other dimensions. This means they are especially sensitive to sensorial experiences. The participants constantly revealed their sensibility to the sensory dimension of the brand experience. They referred many times the sensory aspects of the brand s marketing, such as "the way they move is very appealing. How often do we come across a mini with a giant can on top" or "when I go to a music festival, I always agree to meet friends at the Red Bull tent, because it is different from any other". However, and maybe due to the extreme sensory sensibility, there is also the idea that Red Bull s can "is too simple, and other brands have a more appealing can". Finally, inner-directed consumers score high on all dimensions, except the behavioural. This may mean that they experience the brand but do not react or exhibit behaviours as a consequence. In fact, when faced with the question of what behaviour does the brand induces, the first reaction was silence. One participant summarized this idea: "the sensations the brand causes me not affect me at all; I have an idea about the brand but that does not change my behaviour". Another interesting aspect is that participants seem to project images of the brand and themselves but without displaying any reaction. This was well illustrated in the following statement: "when we see [Red Bull Air Race] pilots do those things, we've all pictured ourselves doing the same thing; we find ourselves in that situation". Conclusion From Study 1 it can be concluded that regardless of the brand experience cluster, the attitude towards the brand has a positive and significant influence on purchase intention. In the same way it was found that brand experience influences the relationship between the attitude towards the brand and purchase intention. Based on Zarantonello & Schmitt (2010), the relationship between brand attitude and purchase intention would be supposedly stronger on groups with a focus on the brand experience. However, contrary to expectations, the cluster "Holistic Consumers" has the lowest score of relationship between brand attitude and purchase intention. Study 2 allowed the confirmation of the brand experience scale robustness. In fact, the participants on each of the four focus groups revealed the main characteristics pointed out by Zarantonelo & Schmitt (2010) for each cluster. All of the four experiential clusters agreed on the experiential dimension of Red Bull, but their behaviour was different, based on their experiential profile. This might raise the issue of brand experience to be perceived differently depending on consumers experiential profile.

6 References Aaker, J. (1997). Dimensions of Brand Personality. Journal of Marketing Research, 34, Abbott, L. (1955). Quality and Competition: an essay in economic theory. New York: Columbia University Press Argyriou, E. & Melewar, T.C. (2011). Consumer attitudes revisited: a review of attitude theory in marketing research, International Journal of Management Reviews, 13, Batra, R. & Ray, M. L. (1986). Affective responses mediating acceptance of advertising. Journal of Marketing Research, 13(2), Belch, G. & Belch, M. (2004). Advertising and Promotion: an Integrated Marketing Communications Perspective. New York: McGraw-Hill Brakus et al (2009). Brand Experience: What is it? How do we measure it? And does it affect loyalty?. Journal of Marketing, 73(3), Brown, S. & Stayman, D. (1992). Antecedents and consequences of attitude toward the Ad: A meta-analysis. Journal of Consumer Research, 19(1), Carrington, M.; Neville, B.; Whiwell, G. (2010). Why Ethical Consumers Don t Walk Their Talk: Towards a Framework for Understanding the Gap Between the Ethical Purchase Intentions and Actual Buying Behaviour of Ethically Minded Consumers, Journal of Business Ethics, 97, Coulter, K. & Punj, G. (1999). Influence of viewing context on the determinants of attitude toward the ad and the brand. Journal of Business Research, 45, Fishbein, M. & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, Attitudes, Intention and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Gentile, C.; Spiller, N.; Noci, G. (2007). How to Sustain the Customer Experience: An Overview of Experience Components that Co-create Value With the Customer. European Management Journal, 25(5), Goldsmith, R.; Flynn, L.; Goldsmith, E.; Stacey, C. (2010). Consumer attitudes and loyalty towards private brands, International Journal of Consumer Studies, 34, Hwang, J. & Ok, C. (2013) The antecedents and consequence of consumer attitudes toward restaurant brands: A comparative study between casual and fine dining restaurants, International Journal of Hospitality Management, 32, Lee, J.; Park, D.; Han, I. (2008). The effect of negative online consumer reviews on product attitude: an information processing view. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 7, Leischnig, A.; Schwertfeger, M.; Geigenmüller, A. (2011). Shopping events, shopping enjoyment, and consumers attitudes toward retail brands an empirical examination, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 18, Mitchell, A. & Olson, J. (1981). Are product attribute beliefs the only mediator of advertising effects on brand attitude?. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(3), Nan, X. (2006). Affective cues and brand-extension evaluation: exploring the influence of attitude toward the parent brand and attitude toward the extension ad. Psychology and Marketing, 23(7), Oliver, R. (1997). Satisfaction: A behavioral perspective on the consumer. New York: McGraw Phelps, J. & Hoy, M. (1996). The Aad-Ab-PI Relationship in children: the impact of brand familiarity and measurement timing. Psychology & Marketing, 13(1), Pine II, J.B. & Gilmore, J.H. (1999) The Experience Economy: Work is Theatre and every business a Stage. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press

7 Schmitt, B. (1999). Experiential Marketing. Journal of Marketing Management, 15, Schmitt, B. (1999). How to Get Customers to Sense, Feel, Think, Act, Relate. New York, The Free Press Schmitt, B. (2009). The concept of brand experience. Journal of Brand Management. 16, Shimp, T. & Gresham, L. (1985). Attitude toward the advertisement and brand attitudes: a classical conditioning perspective. Journal of Advertising, 14(1), Smilansky, S. (2009). Experiential Marketing A Practical guide to interactive brand experiences. London: Kogan Page Spears, N. & Singh, S. N. (2004). Measuring attitude toward the brand and purchase intentions. Journal of Current Issues & Research in Advertising, 26(2), Tsiotsou, R. (2006). The role of perceived product quality and overall satisfaction on purchase intentions, International Journal of Consumer Studies, 30(2), Verhagen, T. & Dolen, W. (2009). Online purchase intentions: A multi-channel store image perspective, Information & Management, 46, Wright, M. & MacRae, M. (2007) Bias and variability in purchase intention scales, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 35, Wu, W.; Lu, W.; Wu, Y.; Fu, C. (2012). The effects of product scarcity and consumers need for uniqueness on purchase intention, International Journal of Consumer Studies, 36(3), Yi, Y. (1990). Cognitive and Affective Priming Effects of the Content for Print Advertisements. Journal of Advertising, 19(2), Yi, Y. & Yoo, J. (2011). The Long-Term Effects of Sales Promotions on Brand Attitude Across Monetary and Non-Monetary Promotions, Psychology & Marketing, 28(9), Yoo, C. (2008). Unconscious processing of web advertising: effects on implicit memory, attitude toward the brand, and consideration set, Journal of Interactive Marketing, 22(2), 2-18 Zaichkowsky, J. L. (1985). Measuring the involvement construct. Journal of Consumer Research, 12(3), Zarantonello, L. & Schmitt, B. (2010). Using the brand experience scale to profile consumers and predict consumer behavior, Journal of Brand Management, 17(7), Acknowledgment The work reported in this paper was co-financed by FCT (PEst-OE/EME/UI4005/2011) and carried out within the research centre Centro Lusíada de Investigação e Desenvolvimento em Engenharia e Gestão Industrial (CLEGI).