BRAND PERSONIFICATION OF MOBILINK, U-PHONE, TELENOR, AND WARID
Abstract
The purpose of this study was review the concept of brand personification and its importance in marketing; review previously developed brand personality scales; develop brand personality scale that is brand- category and cultural specific; and use it for measuring the brand personality of Mobilink, Telenor, Warid and U-phone. Brand personification is an old concept; it evolved in early fifties when celebrities started to endorse brands. The use of famous peoples and their personalities not only helps marketers position their brands but it seduces those consumers to purchase the products who identify themselves with these stars. Aaker’s (1997) research “Brand Personality Dimensions†is considered as the pioneering research on brand personification. Three different studies on brand personality scales have been used in this research for developing a brand personification scale that is brand-category and Pakistani cultural specific. A sample of one hundred and twenty was drawn. Most respondents were in the age range of (16-25 years) as suggested by the mobile service providers. The questionnaire administered to the respondents was based on rating and nominal scale; it has 27 items including personal related items. The brand personification of Mobilink was found to be “competenceâ€, ufone it was “sincerityâ€, Telenor was “sophistication†and Warid was†excitementâ€. Standard deviation of the respondents on the four-brand personification ranged from .78 to .87. Negative skew nesses were found in all four-brand personification ratings. The hypothesis relating to the means of α of factor “A†being equal was rejected. Similarly the hypothesis relating to the means of β of factor “B†being equal was rejected. The hypothesis stipulating that the factors A and B do not interact to affect the mean responses was also rejected.References
Aaker, J. L. (1997) ‘Dimensions of brand personality’, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 24, pp. 347–concept and the closely related ones.
Aaker J. L., Maritnez, B. V., Garloera, J. (2001) “Consumption of symbol as carrier of cultures: A study of Japanese and Spanish Personality construct, Journal of Perosnoality and Social Psychology Vol.81, No.3, P(492-568)
Azoulay, A; Kapferer, J. (2003), “Do personality scale really measure brand personalityâ€, Henry Stewart Publication, Brand Management Volume 1.No.2, P-(143-155)
Aaker D. A. (1996) “Bulinding Strong Brandâ€, NewYork: The Free Press, 1996
Brand Personality: Making the Customer Connection
http://www.nfib.com/object/IO_18880.html
Kapferer, J. N. (1998) “ the role of branding in medical prescription “ An empirical investigation, HEC working paper, Jouyen Josas, Franc.
Kapoor, J. (2004) “Brand personality and personality brans, Http:www.decantrial.com
King, S (1970), “what is brand , J.Walter Thomson Company Limited, London.
Keller, G; Warrack, 2003, B. “Statistics for Management and Economics†Sixth Edition, Thompson, United States.
Levy, S.T. (1959), “Symbol for Sales “, Harvard Business Review , Volume 37, Summer.
McEnally, M., Chernatony, L, De, 1999, “The evolving Nature of branding: Consumer & Managerial Consideration†Academy of Marketing Science Review, Academy of Marketing Science.
Maiineau, P. (1958) “The personality of a retail storeâ€, Harvard Business Review, Volume 36, November, December.
Plummer, J. T. (1984–85) ‘How personality makes a difference’, Journal of Advertising Research,Vol.24, Dec–Jan, pp. 27–31.
Sekaran, Uma, “Resarch Methods for Business A skill building approach†(2003), Thrid Edition, Newyork City, John Willey & Sons, Inc.
Se´guela, J. (1982) ‘Hollywood Lave Plus Blanc’, Flammarion, Paris France.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
- Copyright of all the submissions to the Market Forces will remain to the contributors.
- Anyone is allowed to distribute, remix, tweak, and build upon his/her work, even commercially, as long as it is credited/cited to the original contributors of the Market Forces.