Chapter 1 Introduction
1.1 Background and Research Motives
國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Chapter 1 Introduction
1.1 Background and Research Motives
Compared to extensively studied topics related to brand management (e.g., perception, associations, and extension), brand psychological ownership is a new construct that recently attracts the attention of practitioners and academics. Brand psychological ownership is extended from perspectives of organization psychological ownership. Pierce, Kostova, and Dirks (2001) assert that psychological ownership is regarded as the feeling of possessiveness making organizational members psychologically tied to tangible and intangible objectives. Van Dyne and Pierce (2004) argue that psychological ownership is the psychologically experienced phenomenon that makes employees produce possessive feelings toward the target. Avey, Avolio, Crossley, and Luthans (2009) assert that psychological ownership is a cognitive-affective construct defined as the state in which organizational members feel the targets as theirs and reflect their awareness, thoughts, and beliefs concerning the target. Extended from above-mentioned perspectives, brand psychological ownership is regarded as the psychologically experienced state in which organizational members feel they are psychologically tied to the brand of the organization. Organizational members feel the brand as their own brand, and reflect their awareness, thoughts, and beliefs regarding the brand.
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Brand psychological ownership is especially significant in the franchise organization, because the brand image, organizational reputation, and corporate name, which can be enhanced by practices of corporate branding (Souiden, Kassim and Hong, 2006), are important assets in the franchise organization. Based on Burmann and Zeplin (2005), employees’cognition (i.e., brand commitment) can be improved by branding practices, such as brand leadership, brand communication, and brand-centered HRM. Similarly, a franchisee organization may adopt practices of corporate branding (i.e., brand-centered HRM, brand leadership and brand communication) to make organizational members have feelings of brand psychological ownership, thus contributing to brand image, organizational reputation, and corporate name. For example, McDonald and Wang Steak adopt some practices of corporate branding (e.g., brand training and brand communication) to make employees feel they are closely connected with the corporate brand and then produce good service attitudes and behaviors, thus contributing to the brand image of Wang Steak. However, few researches have explored the construct of brand psychological ownership; there exists a large gap to improve in the field of brand psychological ownership. Organizational members who have psychological ownership produce the feeling of “ItisMINE!”towards tangible and intangible objects (Pierce, Rubenfeld, and Morgan 1991). That is, employees with brand psychological ownership have the
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
feeling of “ItisMINE!”toward tangible objects (e.g., product) and intangible objects (e.g., corporate brand). Van Dyne et al. (2004) argued that employees with organizational psychological ownership have three traits which include positive attitudes, self-concept, and sense of responsibility toward the target, all of which contribute to organizational citizenship behavior. Building on the argument, brand psychological ownership can make employees produce positive brand attitudes and behavior. From practical phenomenon of Wang Steak, employees who have brand psychological ownership produce feelings of ownership toward the corporate brand and feel effective in brand-related activities. For example, employees can participate in brand-related decision-making in “Awaking Lion Program”. However, the formation of brand psychological ownership has not yet been explored. Thus, the first motive of this research is to explore the key concepts and contents of brand psychological ownership.
Psychological ownership is profoundly related to altruistic spirit that contributes to organizational citizenship behaviors. Van Dyne et al. (2004) found that organizational psychological ownership is positively associated with organizational commitment, which further contributes to organizational citizenship behavior (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Paine and Bachrach, 2000). The factors that foster psychological ownership may be attributed to organizational support. As
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
demonstrated by Allen, Shore, and Griffeth (2003), organizational commitment is positively affected by perceived organizational support; employees who perceive organizational support may be encouraged to produce positive attitudes to reciprocate organizations (Blau, 1986), thus producing altruistic spirit which contributes to organizational citizenship behaviors. In addition, the organizational support (e.g., corporate branding) could evoke the feeling of psychological ownership as contended in the preceding paragraph. Extended from above-mentioned perspectives, this study argues that brand psychological ownership is positively associated with brand altruistic spirit that contributes to brand citizenship behavior. In the context of franchise organizations, employees who have psychological feelings of being closely connected with the corporate brand may produce brand psychological ownership that contributes to brand citizenship behavior. Similarly, Burmann et al. (2005) proposed that brand commitment can arouse brand altruistic spirit which contributes to brand citizenship behavior, yet, they did not further investigate the relationship between brand psychological ownership and brand citizenship behavior. This study argues that brand psychological ownership which can make employees produce brand altruistic spirit that contributes to brand citizenship behavior. Based on practical phenomenon of Burger King, employees with brand psychological ownership identify the corporate brand and feel effective in brand-related activities, contributing to employees’service
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
behavior. However, researchers have not yet investigated why brand psychological ownership contributes to brand citizenship behavior. Therefore, the second motive of this research is to explore the relationship between brand psychological ownership and brand citizenship behavior.
In response to the dynamic environment, organizations have to make strategies adapted to the environment and then enhance their competitive capability; therefore, an organization may adopt the strategy of differentiated position related to the organizational symbolized values such as corporate brands (Hatch and Schulz, 2003).
Several scholars proposed the concept of corporate branding to describe the branding efforts especially focused on corporate brands instead of building product brands.
According to Harris and de Chernatony (2001), corporate branding concerns the coordination of internal and external resources to contribute to a coherent brand reputation, and a favorable brand identity perceived and held by multiple stakeholders such as employees, customers, and managers. Employees as key stakeholders who provide the interface between internal identity and external expression may be expected to interact with other stakeholders (e.g., customers), and then enhance the corporate brand values (Brexendorf and Kernstock, 2007). As argued by Hatch et al.
(2003), an organization may communicate values, beliefs, basic assumptions of the corporate brand to organizational members through corporate branding, and make
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
organizational members have congruent cognitions which contribute to the success of corporate branding (Harris et al., 2001). Furthermore, Burmann et al. (2005) assert that the three levers including brand-centered HRM, brand communication, and brand leadership can affect employees’brand-related cognitions (e.g., brand commitment) which imply that practices of corporate branding can be considered as the antecedents of brand psychological ownership. Apparently, employees’passion for the corporate brand is the success of corporate branding efforts; those branding efforts like building corporate brand and empowerment of employees shall be important. According to the practical phenomenon of 7-Eleven, practices of corporate branding (e.g., brand-centered HRM) affect employees’cognitions and make employees feel responsible for brand-related activities. However, researchers have not yet investigated why practices of corporate branding can affect brand psychological ownership. Thus, the third motive of this research is to explore relationship between practices of corporate branding and brand psychological ownership.
As argued by Hatch et al. (2003), an organization can transmit vision, belief, value, and norm of brand toward employees in the process of corporate branding, and then make employees’behaviors transformed. Brand citizenship behavior is considered not only as one part of organizational citizenship behavior, but also the externally targeted behavior which contributes to perceptions of external stakeholders
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
(Burmann et al., 2005). The practices of corporate branding (e.g., brand-centered leadership) may foster followers’perception of variety and autonomy and then make employees produce positive behavior (e.g., brand citizenship behavior) (Piccolo and Coiquitt, 2006). From empirical evidence, transformational leadership is positively associated with organizational citizenship behavior (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Moorman and Fetter, 1990). Both transformational leadership and brand-oriented leadership are considered as effective leadership (Burmann et al., 2005). According to above-mentioned perspectives, this study argues that practices of corporate branding positively affect brand citizenship behavior. From practical phenomenon of 7-Eleven, practices of corporate branding (e.g., brand communication) make employees produce positive behavior, such as following brand guidelines before actions. However, few researches have investigated why practices of corporate branding affect brand citizenship behavior. Therefore, the fourth motive of this research is to investigate the relationship between corporate branding and brand citizenship behavior.
Based on prior research, practices of corporate branding (e.g., brand-centered HRM) can make employees be a good organizational agent, thus contributing to perceptions of customers. Supportive HRM may contribute to the employee’s role of a good organizational agent that enhances customers’perceptions (Sun, Aryee, and Law, 2007). Brand citizenship behavior is regarded as not only employees’voluntary
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
behavior that contributes to internal stakeholders but also service-oriented behaviors that improve brand equity (Burmann et al., 2005). Based on practical phenomenon of Wang Steak, customer-facing employees who have brand citizenship behavior (e.g., helping behaviors of corporate brand) can improve customers’perceptions toward the corporate brand. However, researchers have not yet investigated why brand citizenship behavior contributes to brand equity. The fifth motive of this research is to explore the relationship between brand citizenship behavior and brand equity.
Based on previous research, corporate branding has been discussed by many scholars (e.g., de Chernatony, 1999; Urde, 2001; Leitch and Richardson, 2003;
Balmer, 2001; Harris et al., 2003; Knox and Bickerton, 2003; Balmer and Gray, 2003;
Hatch et al., 2003; Martin, Beaumont, Doig and Pate, 2005; Vallaster and de Chernatony, 2006; Uggla, 2006; Balmer, 2008), indicating corporate branding is an important issue. However, few researches have investigated the dimensions of corporate branding, which represents there exists a gap to improve the scale development of corporate branding. Although Souiden et al. (2006) proposed four dimensions of corporate branding, which include corporate name, image, reputation, and loyalty, to investigate interrelation among four corporate branding dimensions, and examine effects of their joint effect on customers’product evaluation, these four dimensions focusing on customers’perceptions, are not comprehensive enough.
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Scholars have revealed important components of corporate branding, such as vision, culture, and image (Hatch et al., 2003), brand-centered HRM (Burmann et al., 2005), interaction with multiple stakeholders (Leitch et al., 2003), brand leadership (Kay, 2006), brand communication (Harris et al., 2001), and departmental coordination (de Chernatony, 1999). These aspects of corporate branding should be included in the dimensions of corporate branding. From empirical phenomenon, practices of corporate branding adopted by franchise organizations, such as Burger King, Wang Steak, McDonald and 7- Eleven, indeed contain the activities of transmitting vision, mission, and values toward organizational members through various kinds of communication channels, such as meetings between departments, training and interaction with colleagues. However, researchers have not yet utilized a comprehensive perspective of scale development of corporate branding that can contribute to academics and practitioners in further understanding and using the construct. Therefore, the sixth motive of this research is to conduct the scale development of corporate branding.
Brand psychological ownership is as important as psychological ownership in the organization which has to enhance competitive advantage in dynamic environments.
According to previous research, many scholars have investigated organizational psychological ownership (e.g., Pierce et al., 2001; Van Dyne et al., 2004; Chi and Han,
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
2008; Pierce Jussila and Cummings, 2009; Avey et al., 2009), revealing organizational psychological ownership is an important issue. Building on theory of psychological ownership, four dimensions of psychological ownership proposed by Avey et al.
(2009) include self-efficacy, accountability, belongingness, and self-identity. Compare to organizational psychological ownership, few researches have explored brand psychological ownership, representing there exists a large gap to explore the concepts and contents of brand psychological ownership. From practical phenomenon of Wang Steak, employees with brand psychological ownership may have positive cognitions, such as responsibility for brand-related activities. However, researchers have not yet conducted the scale development of brand psychological ownership that can help academics and practitioners clearly clarify and utilize the new construct. Thus, the seventh motive of this research is to conduct the scale development of brand psychological ownership.
According to Podsakoff et al. (2000), seven dimensions of brand citizenship behavior are asserted by Burmann et al. (2005) which include helping behavior, brand consideration, brand enthusiasm, brand sportsmanship, brand endorsement, self-development, and brand advancement, all of which contribute to the brand strength. Brand citizenship behavior is regarded as brand-oriented behavior that includes not only intra-organizational behaviors (OCB) but also externally targeted
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
behavior (Burmann et al., 2005), indicating employees with brand citizenship behavior can both help internal stakeholders (i.e. newcomers) to enhance organizational effectiveness and solve the problems of external stakeholders (i.e.
customers) to foster the brand equity. From empirical phenomenon of McDonald, employees with brand citizenship behavior (e.g., helping behaviors of corporate brand) contribute to brand equity. Although the construct of brand citizenship behavior is first proposed by Burmann et al. (2005), the extant literature has not yet documented the scale development of brand citizenship behavior. Therefore, the eighth motive of this research is to conduct scale development of brand citizenship behavior.