FASE DE REALIZACIÓN

Customer-mind set measures of brand equity include everything that relates to the brand which resides in the customers` memory (e.g. perceptions, images, experiences, feelings, thoughts, attitudes and beliefs (Keller & Lehmann, 2003). Keller (2013) suggested that customer mind set measures can be summarized into five important elements which include; brand awareness, associations, attachments, attitudes, and activity. These measures of customer- based brand equity have led to much of academic research (Keller, 1993; Yoo et al., 2000; Aaker, 1996; Pappu et al., 2005; Asif et al., 2016; Buil et al., 2013) and industry studies (Young and Rubicam Asset Valuator, Research International`s Equity Engine, Millward Brown Brandz) (Ailawadi, Lehmann, & Neslin, 2003).

The conceptualization of CBBE is built on cognitive psychology and focuses on buyers` memory-based brand associations (Keller, 1993; Aaker, 1991). For example, Keller (1993:2) discusses CBBE based on customer cognitive psychology and described it as “the differential effect of brand knowledge on customer response to the marketing of the brand”. The focus of this definition is on the individual buyer and the customer responses to the marketing activity of the product. Alternatively, Aaker (1991; 1996) identified four elements of brand equity that reflect customer perception and reaction to the brand; brand loyalty, brand association, perceived quality and brand awareness.

Brand Equity Customer-Based Measures Financial-Based Measures Hybrid-Based Measures

Cobb-Walgren et al. (1995) highlighted that researchers have operationalized CBBE on customer-buying behaviour (Kamakura & Russell, 1993) or customer perceptions (Pappu et al., 2005; Keller, 1993) or both (Aaker, 1991; 1996; Yoo et al., 2000; Yoo & Donthu, 2002). Similarly, Lassar et al. (1995:12) defined CBBE as “the enhancement in the perceived utility and desirability a brand name confers on a product”. In their view, brand equity is the customers` judgement of the superiority or excellence of a market offering due to the brand name compared to similar unbranded product. The authors suggested that social image, performance, trustworthiness, attachment/identification and value/price as the customer-mind set measures of brand equity.

Yoo et al. (2000:196) also proposed that brand equity is the difference in customer choice between a branded and an identical generic version. In their view, customer- based brand equity is seen as an extra value conveyed by the brand name of a product compared with an identical product without a brand name. Customer-based brand equity was operationalized as the differences in customer choice with respect to preference for or intention to buy a branded product in comparison with its generic version. The authors employed brand loyalty, perceived quality, brand awareness with strong associations of the dimensionality of Aaker`s (1996) model to measure brand equity. The authors further extended Aaker`s (1991; 1996) model by including another construct, known as overall brand equity. The overall brand equity measures how the individual dimensions of brand equity influence or contribute to enhance brand equity. The authors concluded that the value of a brand can be developed, managed and increased by fortifying the brand equity elements. Consequently, high brand equity suggests that customers have strong associations, perceived the brand to be of high quality and are loyal to the brand.

Dlaćic and Kezman (2014) also proposed perceptions of quality, brand awareness and trust as the brand equity dimensions when investigating how customer loyalty is affected by the brand equity of OTC orthodox pain killer drugs in the pharmaceutical market. Furthermore, Kapferer (2008) discusses CBBE along these elements: brand consumption, evoked set and brand awareness.

However, Erdem and Swait (1998) studied CBBE from a different viewpoint relying on signalling theory from information economics, explicitly focusing on the imperfect and asymmetrical information structure of the market. In this perspective, CBBE is defined as “the

value of a brand signal to the customers” (p.132). The authors suggested that clarity, content and credibility of a brand are the determinants of CBBE and emphasized that credibility is the most key dimension of CBBE. These dimensions of brand equity as a signal of a product`s position can enhance perceptions of quality, reduce information costs and customer`s perceptions of risk. These effects, in turn, can enhance CBBE.

Although, the dominant research approach to CBBE is grounded in cognitive psychology, the two perspectives are considered to be complementary (Christodoulides & de Chernatony, 2010; Erdem & Swait, 1998). Hence, Christodoulides and de Chernatony (2010:9) defined CBBE that encompasses the basic premises of both viewpoints, thus, “a set of perceptions, attitudes, knowledge, and behaviours on the part of customers that results in increased utility and allows a brand to earn greater volume or greater margins than it could without the brand name.”

Ailawadi et al. (2003) are of the view that perceptual measures of brand equity are significant in the sense that they offer numerous sources of brand equity, have good diagnostic power, and can serve as a tool to forecast the health of the brand. Customer-based brand equity also provides useful information to establish and also to evaluate the effectiveness of strategic marketing decisions as well as the tactical decisions of the company (Ailawadi et al., 2003; Keller, 1993). However, it is argued that this technique is typically based on customer surveys of preferences, attitudes, and intentions to buy. As result, the major drawback of CBBE approach is that it does not provide for any objective measure for transforming customer perceptions into reliable estimates of financial value for a company (Ailawadi et al., 2003; Simon & Sullivan, 1993).