Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management

ISSN: 1936-8623 (Print) 1936-8631 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/whmm20

The consumer value-based brand citizenship

behavior model: Evidence from local and global
coffee businesses

Soon-Ho Kim, Minseong Kim & Seonjeong (Ally) Lee

To cite this article: Soon-Ho Kim, Minseong Kim & Seonjeong (Ally) Lee (2019) The
consumer value-based brand citizenship behavior model: Evidence from local and global
coffee businesses, Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 28:4, 472-490, DOI:
10.1080/19368623.2019.1528916

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/19368623.2019.1528916

Published online: 25 Oct 2018.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 610

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=whmm20
JOURNAL OF HOSPITALITY MARKETING & MANAGEMENT
2019, VOL. 28, NO. 4, 472–490
https://doi.org/10.1080/19368623.2019.1528916

The consumer value-based brand citizenship behavior model:

Evidence from local and global coffee businesses
Soon-Ho Kima, Minseong Kimb and Seonjeong (Ally) Leec
a
Cecil B. Day School of Hospitality, Robinson College of Business, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA, USA;
b
Department of Tourism, Recreation & Sport Management, College of Health and Human Performance,
University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA; cSchool of Foundations, Leadership and Administration, College of
Education, Health and Human Services, Kent State University, Kent, OH, USA

ABSTRACT KEYWORDS
In consumer behavior research, one of the well-documented outcomes of Brand citizenship behavior;
the globalization is the development of consumers’ personal values, feel- brand engagement;
ings, and behaviors. Based on local-global consumer values, this study local-global customer value;
examined a conceptual model that proposed the interrelationships across brand origin; coffee business
three dimensions of consumer value (i.e., global connectedness, cultural
identity, and consumer ethnocentrism), brand engagement, and three
dimensions of brand citizenship behavior (i.e., brand enthusiasm, brand
endorsement, and helping behavior). Results confirmed that global con-
nectedness and consumer ethnocentrism played critical roles in nurturing
brand engagement. Brand engagement further enhanced customers’
brand citizenship behaviors. Moreover, results identified that the brand
origin (i.e., local and global brands) moderated two of the hypothesized
relationships (i.e., the impact of consumer ethnocentrism on brand
engagement and the impact of brand engagement on brand endorse-
ment). This paper further provided implications to management in the
industry and hospitality researchers.

摘要
在消费者行为研究中，全球化的结果之一是消费者个人价值、情感
和行为的发展。本研究以本地全球消费者价值观为基础，检视概念
模型，提出消费者价值观的三个维度（全球联结、文化认同与消费
者民族中心主义）、品牌参与与品牌公民行为三个维度之间的相互
关系。IOR（即品牌热情、品牌认可和帮助行为）。结果证实，全
球连通性和消费者民族中心主义在培育品牌参与中起着关键作用。
品牌参与进一步增强了顾客的品牌公民行为。此外，结果确定品牌
起源(即，本地和全球品牌)调节了两种假设的关系(即，消费者民族
中心主义对品牌参与的影响和品牌参与对品牌认可的影响). 本文还
提供了管理的行业和酒店研究人员的启示。

Introduction
Due to accelerated globalization, a number of companies have shifted their strategies from
multi-local to global branding (Sichtmann & Diamantopoulos, 2013). Companies promote
their products internationally with minor modifications (if any) to local markets when a
global branding strategy is utilized (Özsomer, 2012). Globalization approach guarantees

CONTACT Minseong Kim minseong@ufl.edu

Color versions of one or more of the figures in the article can be found online at www.tandfonline.com/whmm.
© 2018 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
 JOURNAL OF HOSPITALITY MARKETING & MANAGEMENT 473

economic advantages by lowering costs through the economies of scale, related to the
research and development of new products, logistics, manufacturing processes, and
marketing (Douglas & Craig, 2011). In addition to economic benefits, a global branding
strategy enables a company to maintain a globally recognized brand image (Sichtmann &
Diamantopoulos, 2013). The coffee industry is a great example to apply a global branding
strategy, because coffee is one of the most traded commodities in the world (Burns, 2014;
Kim, Kim, & Lee, 2017). With the aim of brand expansion, coffee shop companies,
including Starbucks, Coffee Bean and Tea Leaf, and Caribou Coffee, pursue global
branding strategies. As globalization has progressed, customers are faced with choices
between global coffee shop brands and local coffee shop brands. Global coffee shop brands
are marketed under the same label in across the world, whereas local coffee shop brands
exist under a specific name in one geographic area or locality (Schuiling & Kapferer,
2004).
Even though prior research has emphasized the relationship between local and global
brands (Strizhakova & Coulter, 2015; Yoon & Lee, 2017), global and local coffee shop
companies need to establish strong brand management to be successful in the competitive
coffee shop business. Responding to this situation, this study aims to explore the moderating
role of brand origin on the relationships among consumer value, brand engagement, and
brand citizenship behavior. Specifically, this study seeks to explore the role of both local and
global brands in fostering brand citizenship behaviors (i.e., brand enthusiasm, brand
endorsement and helping behavior) among coffee shop customers. Even though brand
citizenship behaviors reflect employees’ perspectives on their company’s brand, the con-
struct can also be applied to a customer behavior context since customers tend to support
the brand with cooperative behaviors and extra-roles as well (Ahn, Kim, & Lee, 2016). For
example, customers who exhibit high brand citizenship behavior are more likely share
positive brand experiences with others (Ahn et al., 2016; Yi, Gong, & Lee, 2013).

Figure 1. A proposed model.

474 S.-H. KIM ET AL.

Customers’ values related to globalization and localization, such as global connectedness,

cultural identity, and ethnocentrism (Russell & Russell, 2010; Strizhakova & Coulter, 2015)
influence global or local brand preferences and choices (i.e., brand engagement and pur-
chases of brands) (Özsomer, 2012; Strizhakova & Coulter, 2015). In the context of this
study, customers’ perspective on self has been associated with services and products they use
(e.g., coffee shop or coffee) (Kim & Jang, 2014; Kim & Lee, 2017). Hence, through coffee
brand consumption, customers recognize their self-image, due to the coffee shop industry’s
symbolic nature (Kim & Lee, 2017). In other words, customers tend to exhibit a favorable
response to a particular global or local coffee shop brand when it is closely linked to their
self-identity in terms of global connectedness, cultural identity, or ethnocentrism.
In addition, this study investigates customers’ brand engagement as a core antecedent
of brand citizenship behaviors. It is important to examine coffee shop customers’ level of
brand engagement to better understand the relationship between a customer and a coffee
brand (Sprott, Czellar, & Spangenberg, 2009; Tuškej, Golob, & Podnar, 2013). Moreover,
this study investigates the moderating roles of both local and global coffee shop brands in
the nexus amongst local-global consumer values, brand engagement, and brand citizen-
ship behaviors. Results of this study provide suggestions on how to manage both local and
global coffee shop brands in enhancing customers’ brand citizenship behaviors.

Literature review
Local-global consumer values: global connectedness, cultural identity, and
consumer ethnocentrism
According to identity theory, customers consume a brand for what they reflect their own
or desired identity (Strizhakova & Coulter, 2015). Compared to self-congruity theory,
which explains a customer prefers a brand with personalities congruent with his or her
own personalities (Usakli & Baloglu, 2011), identity theory is based on the notion that
customers’ self-concept consists of multiple role-identities. Also, identity theory postulates
that customers choose a particular brand in order to communicate desired aspects of their
identity (Guzmán & Paswan, 2009; Rather, 2018), whereas self-congruity theory assumes
how similar (or match/mismatch between a self and a brand) a customer’s perception of a
particular brand and the perception he or she as of himself/herself are (Boksberger,
Dolnicar, Laesser, & Randle, 2011). The evolution of globalization influences customers’
local or global brand identities (Steenkamp & de Jong, 2010). In particular, a global brand
is related to a range of identity meanings including global human values (Torelli,
Özsomer, Carvalho, Keh, & Maehle, 2012) and global consumer cultures (Steenkamp &
de Jong, 2010). Previous research shows observed brand international status could create
assessments of brand superiority (Kapferer, 2004). Research has also confirmed quality
and prestige of the global brands attract customers’ interest toward internationally known
brands (Steenkamp, Batra, & Alden, 2003). In contrast, a local brand reflects a deeper
understanding of local identity and heritage to local partialities, signaling feature of a local
culture (Özsomer, 2012). Local brands are usually well known among customers in the
local community and build strong relationships within local communities.
Customer values that are associated with globalization and localization are global
connectedness (Strizhakova & Coulter, 2015), cultural identity (He & Wang, 2015), and
 JOURNAL OF HOSPITALITY MARKETING & MANAGEMENT 475

consumer ethnocentrism (He & Wang, 2015; Strizhakova & Coulter, 2015). Global con-
nectedness is developed not through objective reality, but through customers’ perceptions.
Customers’ global cultural identity is viewed as the multi-dimensionality (i.e., alienated,
local and global) (Steenkamp & de Jong, 2010; Strizhakova, Coulter, & Price, 2012). From
customers’ perspective (Alden, Steenkamp, & Batra, 2006), global connectedness is estab-
lished through customer perceptions of brands using global symbols in marketing com-
munications (e.g. visual symbols, themes, brand logos, and names).
Culture is a critical element in developing individuals’ identity (Pratt, 2005). Clark
(1990) defines cultural identity as the degree to which individuals in a culture identify and
recognize a series of focal resources that distinguish it from other cultures. Cultural
identity is different from a national identity based on four fundamental structures (history,
social structure, custom, and religion) within the boundary of a nation (Keillor, Hult,
Erffmeyer, & Babakus, 1996). Cultural identity indicates a combination of cultural legacy
with a person’s self-awareness, which differs from birthplace, race, religion, and nation-
ality (Cleveland, Laroche, & Papadopoulos, 2009). Essentially, cultural identity shapes the
collective identification that binds people together based on a collective cultural and
historical legacy and the precipitous impacts of this legacy.
The concept of consumer ethnocentrism applies values related to more support for
local products and consumption of local brands. Thus, consumer ethnocentrism can
describe individuals’ disposition to exclude those from undesired-groups or other regions
based on a belief that the product is unpatriotic, decadent, or inappropriate (Sharma,
Shimp, & Shin, 1995). Consumer ethnocentrism reflects a prescriptive action policy or
external social norm. For example, some consumer ethnocentrism stems from a desire to
prevent negative influences on the country’s employment and national economic welfare
(Pecotich & Rosenthal, 2001). Consumer ethnocentrism is different from cultural identity
concerning psychological structures. Consumer ethnocentrism is based on a nationalistic
point of view, whereas cultural identity is based on a culture of collective identification
among individuals. Specifically, consumer ethnocentrism is expressed as negative emo-
tions directed at out-groups or other nations with an economic focus, whereas cultural
identity implies a positive sentiment toward an individual’s culture with a socio-psycho-
logical emphasis (He & Wang, 2015). This juxtaposition provides an important display of
the difference in consumer ethnocentrism and cultural identity. However, it is possible for
some degree of consumer ethnocentrism to be derived from the cultural identity of a
region or country.

Brand engagement
Brand engagement is a psychological procedure that customers become loyal to a brand
(Sprott et al., 2009). Customers become engaged with specific brands that they integrate
into their lifestyle (Keller, 2001; Romero, 2017). Brand engagement refers to customers’
propensities to embrace certain brands as part of their identity (Sprott et al., 2009). Brand
engagement explains customers’ general tendency to utilize brands, form their identities,
and convey that identity to their associates. At the lower scale of brand engagement,
customers are unlikely to perceive brands as significant components of their self-concept,
whereas, customers connect with brands at the higher levels of brand engagement. The
process of developing brand engagement leads to better customer-brand connection, such
476 S.-H. KIM ET AL.

as enhanced loyalty, an increasing level of trust, and higher purchase intentions (Gambetti,
Graffigna, & Biraghi, 2012). Therefore, customers’ brand engagement positively influences
their loyalty, frequent consumption, and positive word-of-mouth (Gambetti et al., 2012).
These outcomes of brand engagement represent essential measures of brand success.

Brand citizenship behavior

Brand citizenship behavior refers to a voluntary behavior that helps benefit a brand
(Morhart, Herzog, & Tomczak, 2009). Brand citizenship behavior research has included
a discretionary generic behavior to enhance brand consideration, self-development,
sportsmanship, brand enthusiasm, brand endorsement, and helping behavior (Xie, Peng,
& Huan, 2014). Prior research identifies brand citizenship behavior is represented with a
three-dimensional construct– (1) willingness to help, (2) willingness for further develop-
ment, and (3) brand enthusiasm (Burmann, Jost-Benz, & Riley, 2009). Based on the
internal and external aspects of brand citizenship behavior (Nyadzayo, Matanda, &
Ewing, 2015), this study advocates brand citizenship behavior comprises of brand enthu-
siasm, brand endorsement, and helping behavior (Xie et al., 2014).
Brand enthusiasm is related to engaging in additional brand developing initiatives, such
as involving in marketing actions through sponsorships or charity opportunities, sharing
customer opinions that reinforce first-rate branding options, and partaking in brand-
focused affairs (e.g., workshops and conferences). Brand endorsement is proposed to be
more crucial as favorable word-of-mouth communications can be very important in
competitive markets (Tuškej et al., 2013). Brand endorsement is associated with advocat-
ing a brand to family, friends and other consumers. Helping behavior is defined as positive
attitudes, helpfulness, exhibiting empathy and friendliness toward a brand (Nyadzayo
et al., 2015). Helping behavior is related to customers’ actions toward a brand.

Hypotheses development
Relationships among consumer values, brand engagement, and brand citizenship
behaviors
Based on prior local-global consumer value research, this study proposes three consumer
values, which are global connectedness, cultural identity, and consumer ethnocentrism.
Individuals in emerging markets tend to have a strong thirst for global consumption culture,
which strengthens their proposed identity-enhancing impact, as well as non-local brands
(Swoboda, Pennemann, & Taube, 2012). Kumar, Lee, and Kim (2009) study indicates that
customers’ preference for global products is motivated by their need to express their desired
unique, distinctive self-identities. Reed, Forehand, Puntoni, and Warlop (2012) state that,
“When identity information is deliberatively processed, its influence will be greatest on stimuli
that possess object relevance, symbolic relevance, goal relevance, action relevance or evalua-
tion relevance to the identity” (p. 316). Hence, global connectedness results in fulfilling
individuals’ needs for self-definition, which further contribute to enhanced brand engagement
(Kemp & Bui, 2011). Brand engagement is related to increased levels of psychological own-
ership of a particular brand as well as brand loyalty (Stokburger-Sauer, Ratneshwar, & Sen,
2012; Whan Park, MacInnis, Priester, Eisingerich, & Iacobucci, 2010). More specifically, when
 JOURNAL OF HOSPITALITY MARKETING & MANAGEMENT 477

the brand is considered global, the brand is related to positive attributes (e.g., status-enhancing
features, prestige, and quality), and it plays an essential role as a “passport to global citizen-
ship” (Bartsch, Diamantopoulos, Paparoidamis, & Chumpitaz, 2016, p. 3631). Therefore, we
propose the following hypothesis:

H1. Global connectedness positively influences customers’ brand engagement.

Customers’ particular cultural identity influences their preferences for brands and pro-
ducts symbolically related to their culture (He & Wang, 2015). Interestingly, if people
immigrate to other countries, they may either lose their own nationality by switching their
purchasing behavior to be more in line with their new culture or retain their origin culture
by purchasing products that provide emblematic meanings associated with their primary
culture (He & Wang, 2015). As a brand or product providing the symbolic meaning of
individual’s cultural component will sustain his/her self-identity (Aaker, Benet-Martinez,
& Garolera, 2001) and cultural heritage will directly transform into brand or product
inclination toward domestic over imported products (He & Wang, 2015). Therefore, the
following hypothesis is developed:

H2. Cultural identity positively influences customers’ brand engagement.

Ethnocentrism is generally perceived as a purely sociological concept, distinguishing

between in- and out-groups (He & Wang, 2015). More specifically, the in-group tends
to be characterized by a feeling of favorability, pride, and superiority, whereas the out-
group tends to be featured by a feeling of bias (LiVine & Campbell, 1972). Hence, if a
customer perceives a particular brand as the in-group (or unique entity), he or she is more
likely to be emotionally engaged in the brand. However, if a customer views a certain
brand as the out-group, he or she treats the brand as another entity, negatively assessing it
without any exception (Bandhumasuta, 2017). The concept of consumer ethnocentrism
also indicates individual’s beliefs in the moral legitimacy and appropriateness of purchas-
ing local products while remaining reluctant to purchase foreign products (Shimp &
Sharma, 1987). A normative value of brand of origin may not only induce individuals’
amenability to nationalistic tendencies, but also affect consumer preference formation
(Pecotich & Rosenthal, 2001). Accordingly, the following hypothesis is developed:

H3. Consumer ethnocentrism positively influences customers’ brand engagement.

Goldsmith, Flynn, and Clark (2011) assert that brand engagement enables customers to
form psychological and social attachments to a company, which inspires them to assist in
reaching its objectives. Additionally, brand engagement affects customers’ brand behaviors
(Sprott et al., 2009) as well as attitudinal brand loyalty (Hollebeek, 2011). Based on the role
of brand engagement, it is expected that brand engagement contributes brand citizenship
behaviors among customers. Therefore, the following research hypotheses are proposed:

H4. Customers’ brand engagement positively influences their brand enthusiasm.

H5. Customers’ brand engagement positively influences their brand endorsement.

478 S.-H. KIM ET AL.

H6. Customers’ brand engagement positively influences their helping behavior.

Moderating roles of brand origin: local and global brands

In considering the interrelationships among consumer values, brand engagement, and
brand citizenship behaviors, it is predicted that the proposed relationships might be
contingent on the brand origin. The brand origin between local and global brands
depends on local-global consumer values (Özsomer, 2012; Torelli et al., 2012). The food
and beverage category have a stronger cultural grounding since local tastes and a stronger
emotion for cultural tradition support local brands, which might result in challenges to
promote global brands (Schuh, 2007), but is an important assessment when considering
the context of coffee shop customers.
Consumer ethnocentrism is based on an individual’s interest in a local brand, with a
moral element that suggests individuals would purchase more local brands, compared to
global brands (Xie, Batra, & Peng, 2015). For instance, Kumar et al. (2009) identify that
ethnocentric individuals tend to have more favorable perceptions toward the local brand,
regarding its quality and its emotional value. In contrast, global connectedness has
connected with global, status-oriented consumption (Strizhakova et al., 2012). The theo-
retical and empirical findings of local-global consumer values lead us to expect that local
brand engagement and citizenship behavior will be more fervent for the more ethno-
centric consumers, and likewise, those with higher level of cultural identity will be more
inclined to engage in and support a local brand relative to a global brand. On the other
hand, customers with stronger global connectedness will be more engaged in and support
a global brand relative to a local brand. Based on above discussion, the following
hypotheses are proposed:

H7 to H9: Brand origin moderates the relationship between consumer values (global
connectedness [H7], cultural identity [H8], and consumer ethnocentrism [H9]) and
customers’ brand engagement.

H10 to H12: Brand origin moderates the relationship between customers’ brand engage-
ment and their brand citizenship behaviors (brand enthusiasm [H10], brand endorsement
[H11], and helping behavior [H12]).

Method
Sample
The sample consisted of consumers who are frequent visitors of franchise coffee shops.
The coffee shop business in South Korea was selected as it has been sharply increasing in
the past 10 years in comparison to the global coffee shop industry (Kang, Tang, Lee, &
Bosselman, 2012; Kim, Kim, & Holland, 2017). Specifically, the total sales of coffee shop
industry in South Korea annually have consistently increased and ultimately broke annual
sales goals of $300 million in 2015. There are currently over approximately 15,000 coffee
shops including 2,700 branded coffee shops across the country. In South Korea, the
 JOURNAL OF HOSPITALITY MARKETING & MANAGEMENT 479

increased number of coffee shop brands explain a cultural transformation as well as

customers’ taste changes, indicating the openness to global trends among customers
(Kim & Jang, 2014). Coffee shop brands within South Korea have been viewed as an
example of symbolic consumption due to the fact that customers tend to be attached to a
particular coffee shop brand along with its products and express their identity through a
coffee cup (or brand symbol) (Kim & Lee, 2017).

Data collection
The data were collected between August and September of 2015 in South Korea, in districts
containing the major cities of Seoul, Daejeon, Busan, Daegu, Ulsan, Gwangju, and Incheon. A
paper format, cross-sectional, self-administered survey was administered at a total of two
global and seven local franchise coffee shop brands. The global coffee shop brands selected for
use in this study were Starbucks and Coffee Bean and Tea Leaf while the local coffee shop
brands selected for this study were Caffé Bene, Caffé Pascucci, Tom N Toms, Angel-in-Us,
Hollys Coffee, A Twosome Place, and Ediya Coffee. These coffee shop brand names are well
recognized among Korean customers and are representative of popular franchise branded
coffee shops found in the country. Previous research has shown that all of these coffee shops
carry unique brand images by offering symbolic value (Kim & Jang, 2017).
For randomization, every 10th customer who entered the shops were intercepted and
asked to participate in the survey. Participants were screened and included only customers
who visit more than three times a week. The survey was offered only after confirming the
potential participant was over 18 years old. The participants were offered a free beverage
or dessert menu item, along with a $10 gift certificate to be used in the coffee shop, to
avoid non-response bias. Among the 454 responses received, 22 responses were deleted for
excessive missing data. Thus, a total of 432 responses were used for data analysis.

Measures
Eight main constructs were measured using multiple items from previous studies to test
the suggested model empirically. Several bilingual Korean graduate students with profes-
sors repeated three rounds of back and forth translations, in Korean, being compared to
the original English version. Face validity and content validity were examined, and the
adopted measurement scales were approved by the two bilingual professors in the hospi-
tality discipline.
Each item was measured on a 7-point Likert-type scale anchored by “1 = strongly
disagree” and “7 = strongly agree” response options. Global connectedness was defined as
to the extent to which a brand’s target consumers perceive it to be a global player. This
dimension was measured with seven items first utilized by Strizhakova and Coulter (2015).
Cultural identity was referred to the extent to which people in a given culture recognize
and identify with a set of focal elements to set the culture apart from others. For this
construct, seven items were used from Strizhakova and Coulter (2015) study on global and
local brand preferences. Consumer ethnocentrism was defined as negative sentiment
toward out-group or other countries with an economic emphasis. This dimension was
measured with five items developed by He and Wang (2015).
480 S.-H. KIM ET AL.

Brand engagement represents the general tendency of consumers to use brands to shape their
identities and to express them to others. This construct was measured with eight items adapted
from Sprott et al.’s (2009) study. The brand citizenship behavior construct was measured with the
three-component model developed by Nyadzayo et al. (2015) including brand enthusiasm
(taking extra brand building initiatives), brand endorsement (recommending a brand to others),
and helping behavior (positive attitudes, friendliness, helpfulness, and empathy toward internal
and external customers). The list of measures used in this study is presented in Table 2.

Results
Sample characteristics
As shown in Table 1, over half of the participants were female (56%), while the largest age
group was 18–29 years of age (49%), followed by 30–39 years of age (29%). Approximately
two-thirds (65%) of the respondents had graduated from or was attending a two or four-year
college. Annual household income range was distributed across the categories of less than
$50,000 - $59,999 with 43% followed by less than $49,999 with 34%. There are a few more local
coffee shops (51%) than there are global coffee shop (49%) represented in the sample.

Measurement model
Reliability was assessed using Cronbach’s alpha coefficients, which ranged from 0.876 to
0.970. Coefficients exceeding 0.70 are considered acceptable (Nunnally, 1978). Hereafter,
all measures were subjected to confirmatory factor analysis for testing the validity of each
construct (Anderson & Gerbing, 1992), using AMOS 20.0. Twelve items, which had factor
loadings lower than 0.50, were dropped from further analyses to maintain an acceptable
level of convergent and discriminant validity. This means that the removed measurement

Table 1. Demographic characteristics.

Variables (N = 432) Characteristics Frequency (%)
Gender Male 186 (43%)
Female 242 (56%)
Missing 4 (1%)
Age 18–29 214 (49%)
30–39 128(29%)
40–49 59 (14%)
50–59 26 (6%)
60 above 3 (1%)
Missing 2 (1%)
Education High school 103 (24%)
2 or 4-year college 281 (65%)
Graduate school 44 (10%)
Missing 4 (1%)
Annual household income Less than $49,999 146 (34%)
$50,000 - $59,999 184 (43%)
$60,000 - $69,999 55 (12%)
$70,000 - $79,999 16 (4%)
$80,000 or above 24(6%)
Missing 7 (1%)
Brand type Global coffee shop brands 211 (49%)
Local coffee shop brands 221 (51%)
 JOURNAL OF HOSPITALITY MARKETING & MANAGEMENT 481

instrument might not adequately yield each construct’s psychometric properties due to
different countries and contexts from previous studies (Kim & Stepchenkova, 2018).
Measurements cannot always perfectly transfer the psychometric properties of each con-
struct from one cultural setting to another. Even if a measurement was proven to be
reliable and valid in one culture, it may be less valid and reliable in other cultures (Chen,
2008). After proceeding the purification step, the confirmatory factor analysis results
suggest good fits: χ2 = 744.972, d.f. = 278 (χ2/d.f. = 2.680), p < 0.001, NFI = 0.934,
TLI = 0.950, CFI = 0.958, and RMSEA = 0.062 (Hair, Anderson, Tatham, & Black, 1998).
In addition to the good fit indices, all standardized factor loadings exceeded 0.50
(p < 0.01), confirming the presence of convergent validity (see Table 2).
Discriminant validity was verified by evaluating the proportion of variance extracted
(AVE) across each construct to the square of the coefficients indicating its correlation with
other constructs (Fornell & Larcker, 1981) (see Table 3). Each construct showed an extracted
variance that was greater than the respective squared correlation estimate, confirming that
discriminant validity existed (i.e., global connectedness 0.130 ≤ Φ2 ≤ 0.271; cultural identity
0.017 ≤ Φ2 ≤ 0.147; consumer ethnocentrism 0.017 ≤ Φ2 ≤ 0.206; brand engagement 0.056
≤ Φ2 ≤ 0.403; brand enthusiasm 0.050 ≤ Φ2 ≤ 0.424; brand endorsement 0.081 ≤ Φ2 ≤ 0.423;
and helping behavior 0.083 ≤ Φ2 ≤ 0.424).
Re-estimating the structural model with the addition of a directly measured “single-
source” first-order factor added to the indicators of all the latent variables in the model
was done by controlling for the portion of the variance in the indicators attributable to
obtaining the items from the same source to test for common method bias. (Cadwallader,
Jarvis, Bitner, & Ostrom, 2010). The results of this analysis, known as the marker variable
technique, indicate the additional, stronger evidence of our assertion that the magnitude
of the standardized estimates and the overall pattern of significant relationships were not
influenced by common method variance (Podsakoff & Organ, 1986).

Structural model and test of hypotheses

AMOS 20.0 was used to test the proposed model. The overall model fit indices, which
suggests that the model fits the data well: χ2 = 819.691, d.f. = 287 (χ2/d.f. = 2.856),
p < 0.001, GFI = 0.862, AGFI = 0.831, NFI = 0.928, TLI = 0.945, CFI = 0.952, and
RMSEA = 0.066 (Hair et al., 1998). Maximum likelihood estimates for the parameters of
the model are explained in Table 4.
H1 to H3 predicted that local-global consumer values would affect brand engagement.
The results showed that brand engagement was significantly influenced by global con-
nectedness (coefficient = 0.347, t-value = 6.790, p < 0.01) and consumer ethnocentrism
(coefficient = 0.415, t-value = 8.515, p < 0.01); thus, H1 and H3 were supported. On the
other hand, cultural identity did not significantly influence brand engagement (coeffi-
cient = 0.011, t-value = 0.234, n.s.); thus, H2 was not supported.
H4 to H6 posited that brand engagement would affect brand citizenship behaviors. The
result showed that brand engagement significantly influenced brand enthusiasm (coeffi-
cient = 0.741, t-value = 17.369, p < 0.01), brand endorsement (coefficient = 0.789,
t-value = 18.894, p < 0.01), and helping behavior (coefficient = 0.726, t-value = 15.915,
p < 0.01), supporting H4, H5, and H6.
482 S.-H. KIM ET AL.

Table 2. Measurement model from CFA.

Standardized
Constructs and Variables a Loading t-value
Global connectedness (α = 0.899)
I have a strong attachment to the global world.* - -
I feel connected to the global world.* - -
I think of myself as a global citizen. 0.862 Fixed
It is important to me to feel a part of the global world. 0.688 16.357
Thinking about my identity, I view myself as a global citizen. 0.913 25.513
Feeling like a citizen of the world is important to me.* - -
I would describe myself as a global citizen. 0.870 23.636
Cultural identity (α = 0.876)
Koreans are proud of their nationality.* - -
Important people from Korea’s past are admired by people today.* - -
People frequently engage in activities that identify as “Korean”. 0.707 Fixed
One of Korea’s strengths is that it emphasizes events of historical importance. 0.696 13.531
A Korean possesses certain cultural attributes that other people do not possess. 0.875 16.695
Koreans in general feel that they come from a common historical background. 0.856 16.417
Korea has a strong historical heritage. 0.697 13.555
Consumer ethnocentrism (α = 0.902)
I believe that Koreans should buy Korean products first, last and foremost. 0.724 Fixed
Korean consumers who purchase products made in other countries are responsible for - -
putting their fellow Koreans out of work.*
We should purchase products manufactured in Korea instead of letting other countries - -
get rich off us.*
Purchasing foreign-made products in un-Korean. 0.943 19.475
It is not right to purchase foreign products because it puts Koreans out of jobs. 0.944 19.488
Brand engagement (α = 0.970)
I have a special bond with the brand that I like.* - -
I consider my favorite brand to be a part of myself.* - -
I often feel a personal connection between my brand and me.* - -
Part of me is defined by important brand in my life. 0.890 Fixed
I feel as if I have a close personal connection with the brands I most prefer. 0.946 33.024
I can identify with important brand in my life. 0.938 32.265
There are links between the brand that I prefer and how I view myself. 0.952 33.604
My favorite brand is an important indication of who I am. 0.927 31.232
Brand enthusiasm (α = 0.946)
Attend business events not required by the company that promotes the brand. 0.895 Fixed
Keep abreast with developments in the brand. 0.940 32.145
Offer ideas to improve the brand. 0.936 31.804
Brand endorsement (α = 0.905)
Defend the brand when other people criticize it. 0.900 Fixed
Support this brand through good and bad times. 0.913 29.112
Forgive negative experiences with this brand. 0.815 22.950
Recommend this brand to others.* - -
Helping behavior (α = 0.889)
Wear this brands or logos on my clothes.* - -
Promote this brand in my local area. 0.855 Fixed
Show genuine courtesy toward other people, even under the most trying 0.911 25.001
circumstances.
Share my resources to help other people who have work-related problems. 0.806 20.556
a 2 2
χ = 744.972, d.f. = 278 (χ /d.f. = 2.680), p < 0.001, NFI = 0.934, TLI = 0.950, CFI = 0.958, RMSEA = 0.062
* Items were deleted during the confirmatory factor analysis.

In addition, the indirect effects of local-global consumer values on brand citizenship

behaviors were analyzed through the bootstrapping method of AMOS with Bootstrap ML
and Monte Carlo. The results indicated that global connectedness and consumer ethno-
centrism had significant indirect impacts on brand enthusiasm, brand endorsement, and
helping behavior, respectively.
In order to test the moderating effect of local and global brands on the interrelationships
among consumer values, brand engagement, and brand citizenship behaviors, we utilized a
 JOURNAL OF HOSPITALITY MARKETING & MANAGEMENT 483

Table 3. Construct intercorrelations (Φ), mean, and standard deviation (SD).

Construct 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
1. Global connectedness 1
2. Cultural identity 0.383** 1
(0.147)
3. Consumer ethnocentrism 0.361** 0.132** 1
(0.130) (0.017)
4. Brand engagement 0.521** 0.236** 0.452** 1
(0.271) (0.056) (0.204)
5. Brand enthusiasm 0.476** 0.223** 0.454** 0.635** 1
(0.226) (0.050) (0.206) (0.403)
6. Brand endorsement 0.489** 0.285** 0.333** 0.616** 0.614** 1
(0.239) (0.081) (0.111) (0.379) (0.377)
7. Helping behavior 0.508** 0.288** 0.423** 0.630** 0.651** 0.650** 1
(0.258) (0.083) (0.179) (0.397) (0.424) (0.423)
Mean 4.347 5.071 3.326 3.713 3.351 3.957 3.361
SD 1.250 0.921 1.276 1.279 1.312 1.271 1.264
CCR a 0.903 0.878 0.907 0.970 0.946 0.909 0.893
AVE b 0.702 0.594 0.768 0.866 0.854 0.769 0.737
Note: Squared correlations are given in brackets.
**p < 0.01, *p < 0.05
a
Composite construct reliability
b
Average variance extracted

Table 4. Standardized parameter estimates.

Path Standardized estimates Standardized error t-value
H1 Global connectedness→Brand engagement 0.347 0.068 6.790**
H2 Cultural identity→Brand engagement 0.011 0.089 0.234
H3 Consumer ethnocentrism→Brand engagement 0.415 0.060 8.515**
H4 Brand engagement→Brand enthusiasm 0.741 0.043 17.369**
H5 Brand engagement→ Brand endorsement 0.789 0.039 18.894**
H6 Brand engagement→Helping behavior 0.726 0.046 15.915**
Indirect effects Standardized estimates p-value
Global connectedness→Brand enthusiasm 0.257 0.003
Global connectedness→ Brand endorsement 0.274 0.003
Global connectedness→Helping behavior 0.252 0.004
Cultural identity→Brand enthusiasm 0.008 0.780
Cultural identity→ Brand endorsement 0.009 0.772
Cultural identity→Helping behavior 0.008 0.776
Consumer ethnocentrism→Brand enthusiasm 0.308 0.002
Consumer ethnocentrism→ Brand endorsement 0.328 0.001
Consumer ethnocentrism→Helping behavior 0.302 0.002
Endogenous variables SMC (R2)
Brand engagement 0.403 (40.3%)
Brand enthusiasm 0.549 (54.9%)
Brand endorsement 0.623 (62.3%)
Helping behavior 0.527 (52.7%)
**p < 0.01, *p < 0.05
χ2 = 819.691, d.f. = 287 (χ2/d.f. = 2.856), p < 0.001, NFI = 0.928, TLI = 0.945, CFI = 0.952, RMSEA = 0.066

multi-group method using a chi-square difference test. The sample was divided into two
segments based on local and global coffee shop brands. The unconstrained model, which
permitted all coefficients to vary between the two groups, was evaluated comparing it to the
constrained model, where the hypothesized path coefficient was positioned to equal the two
groups (Jöreskog & Sörbom, 1993; Ro, 2012). Results revealed some significant differences in the
proposed relationships between the two groups (see Table 5). There were significant differences
484 S.-H. KIM ET AL.

in two of the six paths: consumer ethnocentrism to brand engagement (Δχ2 (1) = 12.877, p < 0.01)
and brand engagement to brand endorsement (Δχ2 (1) = 5.407, p < 0.05), thus supporting H7
and H11.
Specifically, the path from consumer ethnocentrism to brand engagement for local brands
(coefficient = 0.539, t-value = 8.745, p < 0.01) was significantly stronger than that for global
brands (coefficient = 0.303, t-value = 4.641, p < 0.01). However, the path from brand engagement
to brand endorsement for global brands (coefficient = 0.831, t-value = 14.680, p < 0.01) was
significantly stronger than that for local brands (coefficient = 0.736, t-value = 11.719, p < 0.01).

Conclusions and implications

This study examined the effects of diverse dimensions of consumer value on their brand-related
responses, focusing on Korean coffee shop industry as a study context. Scholars (He & Wang,
2015; Strizhakova & Coulter, 2015; Xie et al., 2015) suggest that understanding perceptions of
global connectedness and consumer ethnocentrism may better explain consumers’ extent of
brand preferences and behaviors to help develop a contingency approach to market segmenta-
tion. This study investigated relationships among three dimensions of local-global consumer
value, brand engagement, and three dimensions of brand citizenship behaviors. In addition, this
study identified the moderating role of brand origin in understanding the interrelationships
among consumer values and brand responses. In sum, this study revealed the critical role of
consumer value in generating brand engagement and brand citizenship behavior in coffee shop
consumers.

Theoretical implications
This research provided significant contributions to the brand literature. First, this study is
the first study to develop and examine a hypothesized model accounting for key attributes
of local-global consumer values (i.e., global connectedness, cultural identity, and consu-
mer ethnocentrism) in the Korean coffee business industry. In addition, even though new

Table 5. Chi-square difference tests.

Local brands Global brands
(n = 221) (n = 211)
Standardized estimate
Path Chi-square statistic Chi-square difference (t-value)
Unconstrained model χ2 = 1281.711, df = 574 -
Global connectedness → χ2 = 1282.069, df = 575 Δ χ2(1) = 0.358, n.s. 0.276** (4.270) 0.412** (5.242)
Brand engagement
Cultural identity → Brand χ2 = 1282.522, df = 575 Δ χ2(1) = 0.911, n.s. 0.043 (.732) 0.026 (.356)
engagement
Consumer ethnocentrism → χ2 = 1294.588, df = 575 Δ χ2(1) = 12.877, p < 0.01 0.539** (8.745) 0.303** (4.631)
Brand engagement
Brand engagement → Brand χ2 = 1282.217, df = 575 Δ χ2(1) = 0.506, n.s. 0.765** (13.582) 0.706** (10.849)
enthusiasm
Brand engagement → Brand χ2 = 1287.118, df = 575 Δ χ2(1) = 5.407, p < 0.05 0.736** (11.719) 0.831** (14.680)
endorsement
Brand engagement → χ2 = 1281.901, df = 575 Δ χ2(1) = 0.190, n.s. 0.712** (11.200) 0.725** (10.886)
Helping behavior
**p < 0.01, *p < 0.05
The path was constrained to be equal across the two groups.
 JOURNAL OF HOSPITALITY MARKETING & MANAGEMENT 485

global coffee shop brands have penetrated into the Korean coffee shop market, only scant
research has investigated effects of global brands in the Korean coffee shop industry. To
better understand consumer value in the globalization situation, this study investigated the
effects of consumer value dimensions on customers’ responses, derived from Strizhakova
and Coulter (2015) and He and Wang (2015) studies. Previous branding research sup-
ported the multi-dimensional nature of local-global consumer value (perceived brand
global and brand localness from Xie et al., 2015; consumer ethnocentrism and global
connectedness from Strizhakova & Coulter, 2015; cultural identity and consumer ethno-
centrism from He & Wang, 2015). This study extended the use of these multi-dimensional
characteristics of local-global consumer values to the coffee shop industry.
Second, this study investigated three dimensions of brand citizenship behavior as
customers’ responses, capturing a broad range of customers’ brand citizenship behaviors
in the coffee shop context. The proposed research framework provided a deeper under-
standing of a variety of customers’ brand responses and allowed for more accurate
understanding of their brand citizenship behaviors. This study moved to the next step
by investigating the effect of brand engagement on three types of brand citizenship
behavior. This study contributed to the current brand engagement literature by investigat-
ing the distinct dimensions of brand citizenship behavior as outcomes of brand engage-
ment in the context of the Korean coffee shop industry.

Practical implications
Results from this study suggest practical implications for coffee shop brand managers for
the effective global and local brand management. Coffee shop brand managers should be
aware that both locally and globally perceived brands are appreciated for their ability to
facilitate customers’ expression of perceived value. In today’s competitive marketplace,
customers are concurrently faced with local and global worlds. To hold both a global
connectedness and consumer ethnocentrism in a global environment, customers continue
to keep their cultural value oriented products at the same time (Strizhakova & Coulter,
2015). Thus, findings of this study provide a good basis for expanding coffee shop brands’
globalization attempts in emerging markets.
It is well-known that perceived consumer values are strongly associated with brand
engagement (Batra, Ahuvia, & Bagozzi, 2012). Customers’ values seem to be emerging as
more important for both local and global coffee shop brands to stand out from the
competition and build brand engagement of customers in the increasingly competitive
coffee shop marketplace in South Korea. When coffee shop brands are credibly integrated
with either global connectedness or consumer ethnocentrism (e.g., local brands with a
global identity, global brands selling local products), they tend to build strong relation-
ships with consumers in the emerging markets. Although global connectedness and
consumer ethnocentrism can coexist, the dominant and accessible value probably fluc-
tuates depending on its seeming pertinence in various settings (Zhang & Khare, 2009).
Customers may moderate each value and prefer advertising/brands that reflect their
values, across different situations (Zhang & Khare, 2009). Given such customer flexibility,
we suggest that coffee shop brands stay in a consumer adaptable mode in terms of
promoting global connectedness or consumer ethnocentrism in advertising, reacting to
customers’ values in a particular context. However, coffee shop brand managers also need
486 S.-H. KIM ET AL.

to know how the effect of consumer ethnocentrism on customers’ brand engagement

varies depending on brand origin of the coffee shops.
Results of this study support that the stronger significant relationship between con-
sumer ethnocentrism and brand engagement for local coffee shop brands than that of
global brands. As our findings indicate, using consumer ethnocentrism-based marketing
efforts would be more effective in cultivating customers’ engagement in a coffee shop
brand. Coffee shop brand managers should use consumer ethnocentrism as a marketing
premise by adding Korean elements to beverage/dessert menus and brand symbols to
generate customers’ affective feelings toward brands. Additionally, ethnocentric marketing
messages can be developed that emphasize the morally correct way for a customer to face
the market. This approach of focusing on Korean aspects or cultural imprints facilitates
differentiation from leading import or global coffee shop brands by stimulating prideful
emotions based on indigenous cultural appeals to Korean customers.
Coffee shop brand managers need to promote customers’ brand engagement to develop more
effective brand strategies. Brand engagement is important as it creates customers’ brand citizen-
ship behavior; thus, coffee shop managers need to stimulate emotional connections among coffee
shop consumers. To create brand citizenship behaviors, brand managers are encouraged to
employ various philosophies and techniques including customer relationship management
programs, loyalty programs or relationships building (Goldsmith et al., 2011). Thus, brand
managers want customers to become engaged with their brands so that customers will be
enthusiastic, be likely to endorse the brand, and try to help the brands grow.

Limitations and future research

Although the proposed conceptual model explains the variance in brand citizenship
behaviors between local versus global coffee shop brands, opportunities for further
research still remain. First, since this study focuses on three different aspects of consumer
values, it is possible that other potential factors might change the relative impacts of local-
global consumer values on brand engagement, such as the extent of globalization and
competition in a particular area.
Second, measurement items for local-global consumer values could be expanded and
improved. For instance, local-global consumer values need to be distinguished from social
influence, not only separating the influence of formal and informal sanctions from
intrinsic motivation but measuring the effects of extrinsic factors on the formation of
values. Third, results of this study limit the generalizability of research findings as the
research context is based on the Korean coffee shop industry and the data was collected
based on the convenience sampling method. The research findings might have been
affected by the nature of collective cultures in South Korea. While this is certainly a
limitation on the generalizability of this research on other samples, this does provide an
excellent opportunity for researchers to compare these results with other cultures.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.
 JOURNAL OF HOSPITALITY MARKETING & MANAGEMENT 487

References
Aaker, J. L., Benet-Martinez, V., & Garolera, J. (2001). Consumption symbols as carriers of culture:
A study of Japanese and Spanish brand personality constructs. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 81(3), 492–508. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.81.3.492
Ahn, Y. J., Kim, I., & Lee, T. J. (2016). Exploring visitor brand citizenship behavior: The case of the
‘MICE city Busan’, South Korea. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, 5(3), 249–259.
doi:10.1016/j.jdmm.2016.01.002
Alden, D. L., Steenkamp, J. B. E., & Batra, R. (2006). Consumer attitudes toward marketplace
globalization: Structure, antecedents and consequences. International Journal of Research in
Marketing, 23(3), 227–239. doi:10.1016/j.ijresmar.2006.01.010
Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1992). Assumptions and comparative strengths of the two-step
approach: Comment on Fornell and Yi. Sociological Methods & Research, 20(3), 321–333.
doi:10.1177/0049124192020003002
Bandhumasuta, K. (2017). The role of consumer ethnocentrism on the effects of domestic vs foreign
product failure on post consumption emotions and complaint behaviors. Doctoral dissertation.
Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VA.
Bartsch, F., Diamantopoulos, A., Paparoidamis, N. G., & Chumpitaz, R. (2016). Global brand
ownership: The mediating roles of consumer attitudes and brand identification. Journal of
Business Research, 69(9), 3629–3635. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.03.023
Batra, R., Ahuvia, A., & Bagozzi, R. P. (2012). Brand love. Journal of Marketing, 76(2), 1–16.
doi:10.1509/jm.09.0339
Boksberger, P., Dolnicar, S., Laesser, C., & Randle, M. (2011). Self-congruity theory: To what extent
does it hold in tourism? Journal of Travel Research, 50(4), 454–464. doi:10.1177/
0047287510368164
Burmann, C., Jost-Benz, M., & Riley, N. (2009). Towards an identity-based brand equity model.
Journal of Business Research, 62(3), 390–397. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2008.06.009
Burns, S. (2014). Top 10: Global coffee shop chains. available at: http://www.businessrevieweurope.
eu/leadership/340/Top-10:-Global-Coffee-Shop-Chains
Cadwallader, S., Jarvis, C. B., Bitner, M. J., & Ostrom, A. L. (2010). Frontline employee motivation
to participate in service innovation implementation. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,
38(2), 219–239. doi:10.1007/s11747-009-0151-3
Chen, F. F. (2008). What happens if we compare chopsticks with forks? The impact of making
inappropriate comparison in cross-cultural research. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
95(5), 1005–1018. doi:10.1037/a0013193
Clark, T. (1990). International marketing and national character: A review and proposal for an
integrative theory. Journal of Marketing, 54(4), 66–79. doi:10.2307/1251760
Cleveland, M., Laroche, M., & Papadopoulos, N. (2009). Cosmopolitanism, consumer ethnocentr-
ism, and materialism: An eight-country study of antecedents and outcomes. Journal of
International Marketing, 17(1), 116–146. doi:10.1509/jimk.17.1.116
Douglas, S. P., & Craig, C. S. (2011). Convergence and divergence: Developing a semiglobal
marketing strategy. Journal of International Marketing, 19(1), 82–101. doi:10.1509/jimk.19.1.82
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable
variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. doi:10.2307/
3151312
Gambetti, R. C., Graffigna, G., & Biraghi, S. (2012). The grounded theory approach to consumer-
brand engagement. International Journal of Market Research, 54(5), 659–687. doi:10.2501/IJMR-
54-5-659-687
Kim, D., & Jang, S. (2017). Symbolic consumption in upscale cafés: Examining Korean Gen Y
consumers’ materialism, conformity, conspicuous tendencies, and functional qualities. Journal of
Hospitality & Tourism Research. 41(2), 154–179. doi:10.1177/1096348014525633
Goldsmith, R. E., Flynn, L. R., & Clark, R. A. (2011). Materialism and brand engagement as
shopping motivations. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 18(4), 278–284. doi:10.1016/
j.jretconser.2011.02.001
488 S.-H. KIM ET AL.

Guzmán, F., & Paswan, A. K. (2009). Cultural brands from emerging markets: Brand image across host
and home countries. Journal of International Marketing, 17(3), 71–86. doi:10.1509/jimk.17.3.71
Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. E., & Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariate data analysis (5th
ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
He, J., & Wang, C. L. (2015). Cultural identity and consumer ethnocentrism impacts on preference
and purchase of domestic versus import brands: An empirical study in China. Journal of Business,
68, 1225–1233. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.11.017
Hollebeek, L. D. (2011). Demystifying customer brand engagement: Exploring the loyalty nexus.
Journal of Marketing Management, 27(7/8), 785–807. doi:10.1080/0267257X.2010.500132
Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1993). LISREL 8: Structural equation modeling with the SIMPLIS
command language. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Kang, J., Tang, L., Lee, J. Y., & Bosselman, R. H. (2012). Understanding customer behavior in name-
brand Korean coffee shops: The role of self-congruity and functional congruity. International
Journal of Hospitality Management, 31(3), 809–818. doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2011.09.017
Kapferer, J. N. (2004). The new strategic brand management: Creating and sustaining brand equity
long term. London and New York: Kogan Page.
Keillor, B. D., Hult, G. T. M., Erffmeyer, R. C., & Babakus, E. (1996). NATID: The development and
application of a national identity measure for use in international marketing. Journal of International
Marketing, 4(2), 57–73.
Keller, K. L. (2001). Building customer-based brand equity. Marketing Management, 10(2), 14–19.
Kemp, E., & Bui, M. (2011). Healthy brands: Establishing brand credibility, commitment and connection
among consumers. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 28(6), 429–437. doi:10.1108/07363761111165949
Kim, D., & Jang, S. (2014). Symbolic consumption in upscale cafes: Examining Korean gen Y
consumers’ materialism, conformity, conspicuous tendencies, and functional qualities. Journal of
Hospitality & Tourism Research, 41(2), 154–179. doi:10.1177/1096348014525633
Kim, M. S., & Stepchenkova, S. (2018). Examining the impact of experiential value on emotions,
self-connective attachment, and brand loyalty in Korean family restaurants. Journal of Quality
Assurance in Hospitality & Tourism, 19(3), 298–321. doi:10.1080/1528008X.2017.1418699
Kim, S. H., Kim, M., & Holland, S. (2017). How customer personality traits influence brand loyalty
in the coffee shop industry: The moderating role of business types. International journal of
hospitality & tourism administration. Published online: 19 Jul 2017. doi: 10.1080/
15256480.2017.1324340
Kim, S. H., Kim, M. S., & Lee, D. (2017). The effects of personality traits and congruity on customer
satisfaction and brand loyalty: Evidence from coffee shop customers. Advances in Hospitality and
Leisure, 12, 3–33. doi:10.1108/S1745-354220160000012001
Kim, S. H., & Lee, S. (2017). Promoting customers’ involvement with service brands: Evidence from
coffee shop customers. Journal of Services Marketing, 31(7), 733–744. doi:10.1108/JSM-03-2016-0133
Kumar, A., Lee, H. J., & Kim, Y. K. (2009). Indian consumers’ purchase intention toward a United States
versus local brand. Journal of Business Research, 62(5), 521–527. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2008.06.018
LiVine, A., & Campbell, T. (1972). Ethnocentrism: Theories of conflict, ethnic attitudes, and group
behaviour. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
Morhart, F. M., Herzog, W., & Tomczak, T. (2009). Brand-specific leadership: Turning employees
into brand champions. Journal of Marketing, 73(5), 122–142. doi:10.1509/jmkg.73.5.122
Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory. In McGraw-Hill. New York, NY.
Nyadzayo, M. W., Matanda, M. J., & Ewing, M. T. (2015). The impact of franchisor support, brand
commitment, brand citizenship behavior, and franchisee experience on franchisee-perceived
brand image. Journal of Business Research, 68(9), 1886–1894. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.12.008
Özsomer, A. (2012). The interplay between global and local brands: A closer look at perceived
brand globalness and local iconness. Journal of International Marketing, 20(2), 72–95.
doi:10.1509/jim.11.0105
Pecotich, A., & Rosenthal, M. J. (2001). Country of origin, quality, brand and consumer ethnocentr-
ism. Journal of Global Marketing, 15(2), 31–60. doi:10.1300/J042v15n02_03
Podsakoff, P. M., & Organ, D. W. (1986). Self-reports in organizational research: Problems and
prospects. Journal of Management, 12(4), 531–544. doi:10.1177/014920638601200408
 JOURNAL OF HOSPITALITY MARKETING & MANAGEMENT 489

Pratt, N. (2005). Identity, culture and democratization: The case of Egypt. New Political Science, 27
(1), 69–86. doi:10.1080/07393140500030832
Rather, R. A. (2018). Investigating the impact of customer brand identification on hospitality brand
loyalty: A social identity perspective. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 27(5),
487–513. doi:10.1080/19368623.2018.1404539
Reed, A., Forehand, M. R., Puntoni, S., & Warlop, L. (2012). Identity-based consumer behavior.
International Journal of Research in Marketing, 29(4), 310–321. doi:10.1016/j.ijresmar.2012.08.002
Ro, H. (2012). Moderator and mediator effects in hospitality research. International Journal of
Hospitality Management, 31, 952–961. doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2011.11.003
Romero, J. (2017). Customer engagement behaviors in hospitality: Customer-based antecedents. Journal
of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 26(6), 565–584. doi:10.1080/19368623.2017.1288192
Russell, D. W., & Russell, C. A. (2010). Here or there? Consumer reactions to corporate social
responsibility initiatives: Egocentric tendencies and their moderators. Marketing Letters, 21(1),
65–81. doi:10.1007/s11002-009-9082-5
Schuh, A. (2007). Brand strategies of Western MNCs as drivers of globalization in central and Eastern
Europe. European Journal of Marketing, 41(3/4), 274–291. doi:10.1108/03090560710728336
Schuiling, I., & Kapferer, J. N. (2004). Executive insights: Retail differences between local and
international brands: Strategic implications for international marketers. Journal of International
Marketing, 12(4), 97–112. doi:10.1509/jimk.12.4.97.53217
Sharma, S., Shimp, T. A., & Shin, J. (1995). Consumer ethnocentrism: A test of antecedents and
moderators. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 23(1), 26–37. doi:10.1007/BF02894609
Shimp, T. A., & Sharma, S. (1987). Consumer ethnocentrism: Construction and validation of the
CETSCALE. Journal of Marketing Research, 24(3), 280–289. doi:10.2307/3151638
Sichtmann, C., & Diamantopoulos, A. (2013). The impact of perceived brand globalness, brand
origin image, and brand origin–Extension fit on brand extension success. Journal of the Academy
of Marketing Science, 41(5), 567–585. doi:10.1007/s11747-013-0328-7
Sprott, D., Czellar, S., & Spangenberg, E. (2009). The importance of a general measure of brand
engagement on market behavior: Development and validation of a scale. Journal of Marketing
Research, 46(1), 92–104. doi:10.1509/jmkr.46.1.92
Steenkamp, J. B. E., Batra, R., & Alden, D. L. (2003). How perceived brand globalness creates brand
value. Journal of International Business Studies, 34(1), 53–65. doi:10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400002
Steenkamp, J. B. E., & de Jong, M. G. (2010). A global investigation into the constellation of
consumer attitudes toward global and local products. Journal of Marketing, 74(6), 18–40.
doi:10.1509/jmkg.74.6.18
Stokburger-Sauer, N., Ratneshwar, S., & Sen, S. (2012). Drivers of consumer-brand identification.
International Journal of Research in Marketing, 29(4), 406–418. doi:10.1016/j.ijresmar.2012.06.001
Strizhakova, Y., & Coulter, R. A. (2015). Drivers of local relative to global brand purchases: A
contingency approach. Journal of International Marketing, 23(1), 1–22. doi:10.1509/jim.14.0037
Strizhakova, Y., Coulter, R. A., & Price, L. L. (2012). The young adult cohort in emerging markets:
Assessing their glocal cultural identity in a global marketplace. International Journal of Research
in Marketing, 29(1), 43–54. doi:10.1016/j.ijresmar.2011.08.002
Swoboda, B., Pennemann, K., & Taube, M. (2012). The effects of perceived brand globalness and
perceived brand localness in China: Empirical evidence on western, Asian, and domestic retailers.
Journal of International Marketing, 20(4), 72–95. doi:10.1509/jim.12.0105
Torelli, C. J., Özsomer, A., Carvalho, S. W., Keh, H. T., & Maehle, N. (2012). Brand concepts as
representations of human values: Do cultural congruity and compatibility between values matter?
Journal of Marketing, 76(4), 92–108. doi:10.1509/jm.10.0400
Tuškej, U., Golob, U., & Podnar, K. (2013). The role of consumer-brand identification in building
brand relationships. Journal of Business Research, 66(1), 53–59. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.07.022
Usakli, A., & Baloglu, S. (2011). Brand personality of tourist destinations: An application of self-
congruity theory. Tourism Management, 32, 114–127. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2010.06.006
Whan Park, C., MacInnis, D. J., Priester, J., Eisingerich, A. B., & Iacobucci, D. (2010). Brand
attachment and brand attitude strength: Conceptual and empirical differentiation of two critical
brand equity drivers. Journal of Marketing, 74(6), 1–17. doi:10.1509/jmkg.74.6.1
490 S.-H. KIM ET AL.

Xie, L. S., Peng, J. M., & Huan, T. C. (2014). Crafting and testing a central precept in service-
dominant logic: Hotel employees’ brand-citizenship behavior and customers’ brand trust.
International Journal of Hospitality Management, 42, 1–8. doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2014.05.011
Xie, Y., Batra, R., & Peng, S. (2015). An extended model of preference formation between global and
local brands: The roles of identity expressiveness, trust, and affect. Journal of International
Marketing, 23(1), 50–71. doi:10.1509/jim.14.0009
Yi, Y., Gong, T., & Lee, H. (2013). The impact of other customers on customer citizenship behavior.
Psychology and Marketing, 30(4), 341–356. doi:10.1002/mar.20610
Yoon, S. J., & Lee, H. J. (2017). Does customer experience management pay off? Evidence from local
versus global hotel brands in South Korea. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 26
(6), 585–605. doi:10.1080/19368623.2017.1281192
Zhang, Y., & Khare, A. (2009). The impact of accessible identities on the evaluation of global versus
local products. Journal of Consumer Research, 36(3), 524–537. doi:10.1086/598794