Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/78046
|
| Title: | 快速時尚品牌個性與品牌權益之關係— 以歐洲消費者之認知為例
The Relationship between Brand Personalities and Brand Equity - An Investigation on European Consumer Perception towards Fast Fashion Brands |
| Authors: | 王奕云
Wang, Yi Yun |
| Contributors: | 張愛華
Chang, Ai Hwa
王奕云
Wang, Yi Yun |
| Keywords: | 歐洲
快速時尚
品牌個性
知覺價值
知覺品質
整體品牌權益 |
| Date: | 2015 |
| Issue Date: | 2015-09-01 16:08:28 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 本研究旨在探討歐洲快速時尚產業的品牌個性，是否對知覺價值、獨特性、知覺品質有所影響，進而影響整體品牌權益。本研究以問卷調查方式進行研究，以法國里昂、法國巴黎等地區的年輕消費族群為主要對象，透過實際街頭訪查、網路問卷的方式發放，並採用里克特的五點量表衡量填答者的意向。發放時間於2015年1月初至4月30日止，總計獲得263份問卷，扣除無效問卷與年齡層分佈誤差，有效問卷為242份，本次研究選定ZARA、H&M、UNIQLO、MANGO、Forever21、TOPSHOP等在歐洲皆有經營零售店的知名快速時尚品牌作為調查對象。透過敘述性統計、探索式因素分析、信度分析、將58項品牌個性歸類為四項題項：分別為「優雅別緻」、「簡單自在」「有趣勇敢」、「外向開放」；再透過SEM結構方程模型的驗證性因素分析驗證假說模型因果關係，並透過結構模式分析，檢驗潛在變項之間因果關係模式的適配度。結果顯示「優雅別緻」對獨特性、知覺品質有正向影響；「簡單自在」對知覺價值、獨特性、知覺品質有正向影響，且影響性大；而「有趣勇敢」並沒有對上述觀察變項呈現顯著、「外向開放」對知覺品質呈現顯著，卻為負向影響。在知覺價值、獨特性、知覺品質中，對整體品牌權益影響最大的分別為獨特性，顯見獨特性對此模型的重要性。
接著透過單因子變異數分析探討不同性別、年齡與消費者最熟悉的品牌對品牌個性是否存在某種認知傾向與差異，在性別上，顯示出男性在選擇品牌個性「有趣勇敢」上多於女生；在年齡上品牌個性「外向開放」在各年齡層上呈現顯著，且21-30歲的年齡層最多。品牌上本研究選擇樣本數最多的三個品牌最分析，分別是H&M、ZARA、UNIQLO，在三個品牌中，H&M的消費者認為此品牌擁有最多「優雅別緻」的性格；UNIQLO則是在「簡單自在」最為突出；而消費者認為ZARA此品牌擁有相對多「有趣勇敢」的特質。應用結構方程模型分析(SEM)本研究發現某些品牌個性確實透過知覺品質、知覺價值、獨特性等觀察變項對整體品牌權益呈現正向影響，但「外向開放」卻對知覺品質呈負向影響，因此擁有「外向開放」要對消費者「知覺品質」的經營特別注意。
The purpose of this study was to investigate the relations among brand personality, perceived quality, perceived value and overall brand equity of fast fashion brands in European area. The survey chose six famous fast fashion brands which are ZARA, H&M, UNIQLO, Mango, Forever21 and TOPSHOP as the main targets of research. The questionnaire was distributed in Paris and Lyon French area from January to the end of April in 2015. There were 263 samples being successfully collected, and 242 are valid ones.
This thesis applied descriptive statistics, exploratory factor analysis, reliability analysis to categorize 58 brand personalities into four factors, which are named as “sophisticated and elegant”, “simple and comfortable”, “interesting and courageous” , and” outgoing and open-minded”. Afterward the research has applied ANOVA analysis to further investigate whether the differences of genders, age and brands would influence the preferences of brand personality. Ultimately, male customers are prone to be attracted to the brands with “interesting and courageous” personality; customers among 21-30 years-old prefer” outgoing and open-minded” brands; as the aspect of brands, customers consider each of the three brands having distinguished personalities.
By using structural equational modeling analysis, the researcher finds that fast fashion brands with personalities as “sophisticated and elegant” and “simple and comfortable” have positive impacts on perceived value, uniqueness and perceived quality; however, brands that have personality as “interesting and courageous” need to take measures to enhance perceived quality due to potential negative effect of such brand personality. Last but not least, perceived value, uniqueness and perceived quality are proven to have positive significant effects on overall brand equity, especially uniqueness does.
謝誌...................................................ii
英文摘要..............................................iii
中文摘要...............................................iv
目錄...................................................v
圖目錄................................................vii
表目錄...............................................viii
第壹章 緒論..............................................1
第一節 研究背景與動機..................................1
第二節 研究問題與目的..................................3
第三節 研究流程.......................................4
第貳章 文獻探討..........................................6
第一節 快速時尚品牌....................................6
第二節 品牌相關構念...................................11
第三節 品牌權益與其他衍生構面.............................15
第參章 研究方法.........................................19
第一節 研究架構......................................19
第二節 問卷設計......................................20
第三節 研究樣本與資料蒐集..............................22
第四節 資料分析方法...................................22
第肆章 資料分析與結果....................................24
第一節 敘述性統計分析.................................24
第二節 探索式因素分析.................................26
第三節 品牌個性題項命名...............................27
第四節 信度分析(Reliability Statistics)..............28
第五節 SEM 結構方程模式..............................29
第六節 不同消費者之品牌形象差異分析....................39
第伍章 結論與建議.......................................44
第一節 研究結論......................................44
第二節 實務意涵......................................45
第三節 學術意涵......................................47
第四節 研究限制與未來研究方向.............................47
參考文獻................................................49
一、網路資料............................................49
二、英文文獻........................................... 49
附錄：問卷..............................................55 |
| Reference: | 一、 網路資料
1. ZARA資料來源：Inditex Official website https://www.inditex.com/home
2. H&M 資料來源：H&M官方網站 http://www.hm.com/tw/
3. MANGO資料來源: MBA智庫 http://wiki.mbalib.com/zh-tw/%E8%A5%BF%E7%8F%AD%E7%89%99Mango%E5%85%AC%E5%8F%B8
4. FOREVER21資料來源：維基百科 https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%B0%B8%E9%81%A021
5. TOPSHOP資料來https://www.arcadiagroup.co.uk/about-us/our-brands/topshop
6. 優衣庫資料來源：維基百科 https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%84%AA%E8%A1%A3%E5%BA%AB
二、英文文獻
1. Aaker, D.A.; Keller, K.L. (1990). Consumer Evaluations of Brand Extensions. Journal of Marketing, Vol. 54, No. 1, pp. 27-41.
2. Aaker, David A. (1991). Managing Brand Equity. New York: The Free Press.
3. Aaker, David A. (1996). Measuring Brand Equity across Products and Markets. California Management Review, 38(3), pp.102-120.
4. Aaker,J.L. (1997). Dimension of Brand Personality. Journal of Marketing Research, Volume 34, pp.347-356.
5. Aaker, J. L., Fournier, S., & Brasel, S. A (2004). When good brands do bad. Journal of Consumer Research, 31, pp.1–16.
6. Aaker, J. L., Benet-Martinez.V. & Garolera.J. (2001). Consumption Symbols as Carriers of Culture: A Study of 14 Japanese and Spanish Brand Personality Constructs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Volume 81, Issue 3, pp.492-508.
7. Batra, Rajeev, Donald R. Lehmann & Dipinder S. (1993). The Brand Personality Component of Brand Goodwill: Some Antecedents and Consequences. Brand Equity and Advertising , pp.83-96.
8. Bauldry. & Shawn G. (2009).Introduction to Structural Equation Modelling
Using SPSS and AMOS, The American Statistican,63(1),pp.95.
9. Biel, A. (1992). How brand image drives brand equity. Journal of Advertising Research, 32, pp.6–12.
10. Borgatta, E. F. (1964). The structure of personality characteristics. Behavioral Science, 9,pp.8–17.
11. Bentler, P. M. & Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness-of-fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88, pp.588-600.
12. Bollen, K.A. (1988). A new incremental fit index for general structural equation models. A paper presented at 1988 Southern Sociological Society Meetings, Nashville, Tennessee.
13. Cuieford, J. P. (1965). Fundamental statistics in Psychology and Education, New York: McGraw Hill
14. Devellis, R. F. (1991). Scale development: Theory and applications. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
15. Dhar, R. & Steven J. S. (1996). The Effect of Common and Unique Features in Consumer Choice, Journal of Consumer Research, 23(December): pp.193-203.
16. Dodds, B. W., Monroe, K. B. & Grewal, D. (1991). Effect of Price, Band, and Store Information on Buyers Product Evaluation. Journal of Marketing, Research, 28(3) , pp.307-319.
17. Doyle, P. (1990). Building successful brands: The strategic options. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 7(2), PP. 5-20.
18. Escalas., Jennifer E. & James R. B. (2005). Self Construal, Reference Groups, and Brand Meaning. Journal of Consumer Research, 32 (3), pp.378-389.
19. Farquhar, P. (1990). Managing Brand Equity. Journal of Advertising Research, 1990:4, RC7–RC12.
20. Farquhar, P.H., Han J.Y & Ijiri, Y. (1991). Recognizing and Measuring Brand Assets. Marketing Science Institute, Cambridge, MA.
21. Ferdows, K., Lewis, M. A., & Machuca. J. A. (2004).11,Rapid-Fire Fulfillment. Harvard Business Review.
22. Felipe C. & Martinez-de-Albeniz,V. (2014). Fast Fashion: Business Model Overview and Research Opportunities
23. Freling , Traci,H., & Lukas, P. F. (2005). An Empirical Analysis of the Brand Personality Effect. The Journal of Product and Brand Management, Vol. 14, No. 7, PP.404-413.
24. Shaoling Fu, Jiawei Huang*, Yanmei Yan and Yangjun Ou.(2014). Research on undergraduates’ continuous using behaviors of WeChat: data from China. Journal of Chemical and Pharmaceutical Research, 2014, 6(6):125-130
25. Shaoling Fu, Jiawei Huang*, Yanmei Yan and Yangjun Ou
26. Gardner, B.B., & Levy, S.J. (1955). The Product and the Brand. Harvard Business Review, (March-April 1955), pp. 33-39.
27. Garretson, J. A. & Clow, K. E. (1999). The Influence of Coupon Face Value on Service Quality Expectations, Risk Perceptions and Purchase Intentions in the Dental Industry. The Journal of Services Marketing, 13, No.1, pp.59-72.
28. Hair, J. F.,Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C., (1998). Multivariate Data Analysis, 6th Ed., Prentice-Hall Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
29. Henson, R. K., (2001). Understanding internal consistency reliability estimates: A conceptual primer on coefficient alpha. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, vol.34, pp.177-189.
30. Hines, A. (2004). Supply Chain Strategies. Elsevier Butterworth Heinemann, Oxford.
31. Joreskog, K. G. & Sorbom, D. (1981). LISREL V: Analysis of linear structural relationships by the method of maximum likelihood. Chicago: National Educational Resources.
32. Keller, K. L. (1993). Conceptualizing, Measuring and Managing Customer-based Brand Equity. Journal of Marketing, 57(1):pp.1-22.
33. Kim, P., (1990). A perspective on Brands. Journal of Consumer Marketing, pp.20-30.
34. Kirmani, A. & Baumgartner, H. (2000). Reference Points Used in Quality and Value Judgements. Marketing Letters, Vol. 11, No. 4, pp. 299-310.
35. Knapp, D.E. (2000). The Brand Mindset, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY, pp. 33, 36, 103.
36. Kron, J. (1983). Home-Psych: The Social Psychology of Home and Decoration, New York: Potter.
37. Kotler, P. (1996). Marketing Management: Analysis, Planning, Implementation and Control, 9th ed., NJ: Prentice-Hall.
38. Lee, M.M. (2003). Fashion victim: Our love-hate relationship with dressing, shopping and the cost of style. New York, NY: Lee Broadway Books.
39. Leuthesser, L., Kohli, C.S. and Harich, K.R. (1995). Brand Equity: The Halo Effect Measure. European Journal of Marketing, 29, 4, pp. 57-66.
40. Barnes, L., & Gaynor Lea‐Greenwood. (2010). Fast fashion in the retail store environment. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 38 Iss: 10, pp.760 – 772.
41. Mathur, Pragya., Shailendra, J. & Durairaj M. (2012). Consumers’ Implicit Theories about Personality Influence their Brand Personality Judgments. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 22(4), pp.545-557.
42. Monroe, & Krishnan, R. (1985). The Effect of Price on Subjective Product Evaluation, In Perceived Quality: How Consumers View Stores and Merchandise. Eds. Jacob and Jerry C. OlsonLexington. MA: Lexington Books, pp.209-232.
43. Mullen, M. & Mainz, A. (1989). Brand Bids and Balance Sheet: Putting a Price on Protected Products. Acquistions Monthly, Vol.24, pp.26-27.
44. Netemeyer, R. G., Krishnan, B., Pullig, C., Wang, G. P., Yagci, M., Dean, D., Ricks, J.& Wirth, F. (2004). Developing and validating measures of facets of customer-based brand equity. Journal of Business Research, 57(2), pp.209-224.
45. Okonkwo, U. (2007). Luxury fashion branding : Trends, tactics, technique. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
46. Kotler, P. (1999). Marketing Management─Analysis, Planning, Implementation and Control,NJ: Prentice Hall.
47. Plummer, J. T. (2000). How Personality Makes a Difference. Journal of Advertising Research, 40 (6), pp.79-83.
48. Priest, A. (2005). Uniformity and differentiation in fashion. International Journal of Clothing Science and Technology, Vol.17(No.3/4), pp.253-263.
49. Ravald, A., & Grönroos, C. (1996). The value concept relationship marketing. European journal of marketing, 30(2), pp.19-30.
50. Simon, C. J. & Sullivan. W. (1993). The Measurement and Determinants of Brand Equity: A Financial Approach. Marketing Science, 12 (1):pp.28-52
51. Sirgy, M. J. (1982). Self concept in consumer behavior: A critical review. Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 9, pp.287-300.
52. Snyder, C. R. & Fromkin H. L., (1977). Abcdrmality as a positive characteristic: the development and validation of a scale measuring need for uniqueness. Journal of Abcdrmal Psychology, Vol. 86.
53. Steenkamp, J. B. (1990). Conceptual Model of the Quality Perception Process. Journal of Business Research, 21(4): pp.309-333.
54. Sweeney, J. C., & Brandon, C. (2006). Brand personality: Exploring the potential to move from factor analytical to circumplex models. Psychology & Marketing, 23(8), pp.639-663.
55. Tian, K. T., Bearden, W. O. &Hunter, G. L. (2001). Consumers’ Need for Uniqueness: Scale Development and Validation. Journal of Consumer Research, 28(1), pp.199-214.
56. Tversky, A. (1972). Elimination by Aspects: A Theory of Choice. Psychological Review, pp. 281-299.
57. Woodruff, R. B. (1997). Customer Value: The Next Source of Competitive Advantage. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 25, No. 2, pp. 139-153.
58. Zeithaml, V. A. (1988). Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: A means-end model and synthesis of evidence. Journal of Marketing, 52(July), pp.2-22
59. Zaltman, G., & Burger P. C. (1975). Marketing research: Fundamentals & Dynamics. Stanford: International Thomson Publishing |
| Description: | 碩士
國立政治大學
企業管理研究所
102363089 |
| Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0102363089 |
| Data Type: | thesis |
| Appears in Collections: | [企業管理研究所（MBA學位學程）] 學位論文
|
Files in This Item:
| File |
Size | Format | |
|---|
| index.html | 0Kb | HTML2 | 1148 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
