Received: April 21st, 2021 | Revised: August 17th, 2021 | Accepted: August 19th, 2021

DOI: 10.53106/102596272021120464003

The influence of brand positioning and event marketing on

brand loyalty–The mediation roles of brand identification and
brand personality: The case of spectator sport

Jin-Long Chen1 | Sheng-Wen Wang2

1
Associate Professor, Department of Leisure and Sport Management, National Taipei University
2
Corresponding author, Associate Professor, Department of Aquatic Sports and Recreation Management,
Taipei University of Marine Technology, k324066@tumt.edu.tw

ABSTRACT
This study investigates event marketing and brand positioning that influence brand attitudinal
loyalty and brand behavioral loyalty through brand identification and brand personality in the
field of spectator sport. The current study is one of the first to demonstrate the relationship
between brand positioning and attitudinal/behavioral loyalty in the spectator sport context. This
work conducted the survey method and collected 240 effective customer samples in professional
sport events in Taipei City. The findings showed that brand positioning substantially influences
both brand attitudinal loyalty and brand behavioral loyalty through brand identification and brand
personality. Therefore, a sports team should invest a long-term work of positioning its brand rather
than just hold a short-term event.

Keywords:
Spectator sport, Brand positioning, Event marketing, Attitudinal loyalty, Behavioral loyalty.

Journal of Business Administration, 2021; 46(4):47-66

48 | Journal of Business Administration
1 | Introduction
The industry of professional sport is
considered to be part of an extremely
competitive environment because sports
teams not only have been competing with their
counterparts but also competing for
consumers’ other entertainment dollars.
Recently, practitioners of various sport
organizations are engaging in efforts to
develop their brands that could enhance the
advantages of sport organizations (Giroux et
al., 2017; Kaynak et al., 2008). The trend in
spectator sports, especially professional sports,
is to operate teams as brands to be managed
(Ross, 2006).
Brand strategy is a set of integrated
strategies used by a brand owner to achieve
the brand owners’ objectives (Alamro &
Rowley, 2010). The objective of brand
strategy is to develop distinctive features of
various services or products provided by an
organization (Keller, 1998) in order to
differentiate the organization from its
competitors. Communications strategy is one
of tactical aspects of brand strategy (Alamro
& Rowley, 2010). Event marketing is to
develop brand-related themed events which
furnish the interactive communication of
brand values with consumers and which
develop consumers’ identification with a
brand (Wohlfeil & Whelan, 2006). In this
article, brand positioning is the other
significant tactical aspect of brand strategy to
study. Brand positioning refers to how
consumers perceive a specific brand relative
to competing brands (Romaniuk, 2001; Sarel,
1980). A basic function of brand positioning is
to provide an organization’s distinctive
offerings and image to differentiate the
relative position of a brand regarding its
competitors (McDowell, 2004). Kotler (2003)
suggests that “brand positioning is the act of
designing the company’s offer and image so
that it occupies a distinct and valued place in
the target customers’ minds” (p.308).
A growing number of researches have
examined the concept of loyalty in the sport
setting (Gladden & Funk, 2001; Mahony et al.,
2000). In sport industry, a sport team is
considered as a brand and the fans can be
regarded as consumers. Fan’s brand loyalty
toward a team demonstrates fans’ positive
attitude to a brand, fan’s brand attachment, and
fans’ purchasing and repurchasing intention in
the future (Javani et al., 2013). Brand loyalty
is important to sport teams because fans brand
loyalty brings constant competitive advantage
(Javani et al., 2013). Brand loyalty is
important to sport teams for three major
reasons; First, fans’ brand loyalty guarantees a
more stable following even when the
performance of the core product is not as
expected (i.e. the team has a losing season)
(Gladden & Funk, 2001). Second, as
suggested by Gladden and Funk (2001), brand
loyalty opens good opportunities to extend the
brand beyond core products to develop new
products. Third, a team supported by more
loyal fans means more constant incomes
generated through increasing market share
and attracting more sponsorship investment
(Javani et al., 2013). Thus, managers of sport
teams consider brand loyalty as an imperative
factor to achieve competitive advantage
(Bauer et al., 2008).
This study would like to help marketers
of sport teams to develop a marketing frame
work to enhance fans’ brand loyalty via the
two brand strategies: event marketing and
brand positioning. The current study also
examines the relationship between brand
attitudinal loyalty and brand behavioral
loyalty. Although prior research has widely
discussed the relevant issues about event
marketing and brand positioning, none
 Chen & Wang | 49

simultaneously explores them about spectator
sport issues. This article proposed six novel
constructs – event marketing, brand
positioning, brand identification, brand
personality, brand attitudinal loyalty and
brand behavioral loyalty – and develop a
research framework to further discuss their
relationships. This empirical research
hypothesizes that event marketing, brand
positioning, brand identification, and brand
personality are positively related to brand
attitudinal loyalty and brand behavioral
loyalty. In addition, the positive relationships
between event marketing, brand positioning
and brand loyalty are partially mediated by
brand identification and brand personality.
2 | Literature review and
hypothesis

H1 H5 Brand
Event Brand
Attitudinal
Marketing Identification
Loyalty

H2 H6
H9 H10
H3 H7

Brand
Brand Brand
H4 H8 Behavioral
Positioning Personality
Loyalty

Figure 1 The research framework

50 | Journal of Business Administration
2.1 Event marketing on brand
identification and brand
personality
Kotler defined event marketing as
“occurrences designed to communicate
particular messages to a target audience”
(2002, p. 576). Wohlfeil and Whelan (2006)
argued that the central theme of event
marketing is the interactive communication of
brand values by developing brand-related
themed events which actively involve
consumers on a behavioral level and which
create emotional attachment to a brand.
The concept of brand identification is
built on social identity theory, which has been
widely used in other disciplines. Social
identity theory emphasizes the importance of
social group membership to a person’s self-
image and social behavior (Tajfel, 1982; Tajfel
& Turner, 1979, 1986). Tajfel defined social
identity as “that part of an individual’s self-
concept which derives from his or her
knowledge of their membership in a social
group or group together with the value and
emotional significance attached to that
membership” (1981, p. 255). Social identity
theory can be used to frame consumer-brand
identification concepts, where consumers
identify with an organization without formally
interacting with the organization (Kuenzel &
Halliday, 2010). Therefore, brand
identification can be defined as a personal
commitment to and emotional involvement
with a brand which incorporates
psychological and behavioral aspects.
Event marketing aims to harness theme
events to enhance emotional bonds through
shared consumer experiences by providing
brand experiences, entertainment, and
education which consumers perceive as fun,
exciting, challenging, self-fulfilling, and
contributing to their enjoyment and quality of
life (Wohlfeil & Whelan, 2006). By
communicating brand value using ‘real-lived’
experiences, event marketing requires active
participation in leisure and entertainment and
experiential brand communications to draw
consumer attention. Therefore, consumers can
create brand identification by participating in
brand–related theme events where consumers
identify event subjects which imply brand
value.
According to brand theorists, brand
personality is “the set of human characteristics
and quasi-human traits that are associated with
a given brand” (Chang & Chieng, 2006, p.
932). The formation of brand personality is
based on consumer experience and any direct
or indirect contact between the consumer and
the brand (Aaker, 1997; Berry, 2000; Keller,
1993).
Marketing events can be designed to
create extraordinary experiences for
consumers which are congruent with their life
experiences. By engaging in brand-related
events, consumers establish positive attitudes
and preferences toward brands. Consumers
use brands to satisfy their needs and build
connections between their self-image and a
brand image. Because psychological benefits
are associated with brands, consumers can
construct and define their self-image and
present themselves to others in various social
contexts (Escalas & Bettman, 2003). Brand
personality is essential for providing self-
expressive or symbolic benefits to consumers
(Aaker, 1999) and consumers often use brands
to create and communicate their personalities
(Sung & Kim, 2010). These psychological
connections are important for creating and
maintaining stable, long-term consumer-brand
relationships which result in consumer
commitment to brands. Consumers consider
brand personalities as part of their own

personalities.
Sports teams can also use event
marketing strategies to improve consumer
brand identification and brand personality
associated with teams. These effects may
extend to team parent companies.
H1：Event marketing has a positive
impact on brand identification.
H2：Event marketing has a positive
impact on brand personality.
2.2 Brand positioning on brand
identification and brand
personality
Brand positioning refers to how consumers
perceive a specific brand relative to competing
brands (Romaniuk, 2001; Sarel, 1980).
Consumers attach a brand to a specific piece
of information in their minds (Lee & Liao,
2009). Brand positioning is based on
associative network theories of memory.
These theories propose that memory consists
of interlinked information nodes (Anderson &
Bower, 2014; Romaniuk, 2001). A strong
brand position encourages consumers to
perceive the uniqueness, strength, and
prevalence of a brand and shifts consumer
behavior (Aaker, 1991; Lee & Liao, 2009).
Brand positioning involves selecting
specific attributes which are desirable for
brand association. These attributes include
product category, price, perceived quality,
application, country of origin, and customer
service (Aaker & Myers, 1987; Romaniuk,
2001). These positioning attributes provide
consumers with functional or emotional
benefits and form part of the information
associated with a brand in consumer minds
which determines brand image (Romaniuk,
2001). While positioning attributes satisfy
Chen & Wang | 51
consumer requirements, consumer
perceptions of product attributes enable them
to distinguish a specific brand from
competitors, resulting in consumer brand
identification.
In the consumer behavior literature, the
notion of symbolic consumption (Levy, 1959)
proposes that consumer behaviors are not
functionally oriented, but significantly
influenced by the symbolic meaning of brands
or products. Brand positioning attributes
conform to consumer personalities, but
consumer behaviors are triggered by the
symbolic meaning of brands or products
because people believe that symbolic
meanings constitute their sense of self. Self-
concept theory (Roger, 1951) has been used to
explain symbolic consumption on the notion
that consumers are attracted to brands that
have a symbolic image most similar to their
own self-concepts (Kwak & Kang, 2009).
Thus, a well-positioned brand should have a
large impact on consumer brand personalities.
Sports teams use brand positioning to
distinguish their product or service attributes
from those of their competitors. When their
strategies successfully match their parent
companies’ operation missions, this positively
influences consumer perceptions of brand
identification and brand personality.
H3：Brand positioning has a positive
impact on brand identification.
H4：Brand positioning has a positive
impact on brand personality.
2.3 Brand identification on brand
attitudinal loyalty and brand
behavioral loyalty
The literature has acknowledged the
importance of brand loyalty for decades. For
52 | Journal of Business Administration

example, Aaker (1991) proposed that brand social values. For example, customers may
loyalty results in certain marketing advantages initiate loyal behavior, such as repeat brand
such as reduced marketing costs, more new purchase, when most of their jogging club
customers, and greater trade leverage. members wear the same brand of running
Anisimova (2007) suggested other brand shoes. Previous studies also suggest that there
loyalty related advantages, such as lower is a positive relationship between brand
consumer price sensitivity, decreased cost of identification and brand loyalty (Boenigk &
serving loyal consumers, and favorable word Helmig, 2013; Popp & Woratschek, 2017).
of mouth.
Brand attitudinal loyalty aims to capture H5：Brand identification has a positive
the affective and cognitive components of impact on brand attitudinal loyalty.
brand loyalty (Anisimova, 2007; Kumar & H6：Brand identification has a positive
Shah, 2004). Attitudinal loyalty reflects a
more long-term consumer commitment to a impact on brand behavioral loyalty.
unique value associated with a brand and
encourages favorable word of mouth 2.4 Brand personality on brand
(Anisimova, 2007; Chaudhuri & Holbrook,
attitudinal loyalty and brand
2001). Brand behavioral loyalty is usually
defined as repeat brand purchases (Chaudhuri behavioral loyalty
& Holbrook, 2001; Huber & Hermann, 2001).
Brand personality is an important strategic
Consumer value theory (Schwartz &
marketing tool that builds communication
Sagiv, 1995) suggests that “values are trans-
between brands and consumers. When
situational goals that serve the interest of
establishing a brand personality, a close
individuals or groups and that act as guiding
relationship between the intended brand
principles in consumers’ lives” (Hansen, 2008,
personality and consumer personality is
p. 129). People who identify with a brand,
essential for encouraging consumer attitudinal
identify with the attributes associated with the
and behavioral brand loyalty (Akin, 2011).
brand. When brand-related attributes have
Previous researches support that brand
functional or emotional value which conform
personality have a positive effect on brand
to consumer acquisition values, consumers
loyalty (Garanti & Kissi, 2019; Wahyuni &
have positive attitudes toward brands and are
Fitriani, 2017; Lin, 2010). Self-congruity
more likely to purchase brand products
theory (Sirgy, 1982) asserts that consumers
because the brand values satisfy their
compare their self-images with the product-
expectations. Therefore, brand identification
user image of a product. Based on this theory,
leads to consumer brand attitude loyalty.
consumers prefer brands with which they
Social values may have a strong
share personality characteristics. Congruence
influence on consumer behavior (Hansen,
between brand personality and consumers
2008). Hansen (2008, p. 129) defines “social
strengthens consumer attachment to a brand
values as desired behavior… for a society or
(Aaker et al., 2004). Therefore, if a consumer
group.” When consumers feel that a brand
perceives brand attributes as part of their
satisfies their acquisition values, social values
personality characteristics, brand personality
may trigger behavioral loyalty because
builds consumer intentions to purchase a
consumer acquisition values correspond with
brand, creating attitudinal loyalty. This may

also encourage consumer purchasing behavior.
When considering brand attributes as part of
personality characteristics, a consumer may
demonstrate strong intentions to purchase a
brand even if they encounter purchasing
obstacles.
Consumers sense the psychological
benefits of associating with brands because
brands allow them to formulate and define
their self-images and present them to others
(Sung & Kim, 2010). Therefore, brand
personality affects brand behavioral loyalty.
H7：Brand personality has a positive
impact on brand attitudinal loyalty.
H8：Brand personality has a positive
impact on brand behavioral loyalty.
2.5 Brand identification on brand
personality
The interaction between brand identification
and brand personality has also been
investigated. Kolbe and James (2003)
suggested that brand identification positively
affects brand personality because the
identification stage precedes the
internalization process. In the identification
stage, consumers associate with a brand and
have a distinct brand preference, however,
they have not yet made the brand part of their
selves. Nevertheless, through persistent
manifestations of identification, consumers
reach the internalization stage and establish
brand affiliation based on values, emotions,
and other psychological and sociological
elements that can be internalized into their
self-image (Kolbe & James, 2003). Therefore,
consumers who reach the brand personality
stage (internalization) consider a brand an
important aspect of who they are and who they
perceive themselves to be. The goal of brand
Chen & Wang | 53
identification is brand personality. Brand
identification positively affects brand
personality.
H9：Brand identification has a positive
impact on brand personality.
2.6 Brand attitudinal loyalty on brand
behavioral loyalty
Attitudinal loyalty reflects how much people
express that they like a brand, recommend a
brand, are committed to a brand, and have
positive beliefs toward it relative to
competitor brands (Uncles et al., 2003). The
intensity of these attitudes is a predictor of
behavioral loyalty, such as a brand purchase,
repeat patronage, and willingness to
recommend a brand. Consumers are
cognitively loyal to a brand when they prefer
a brand because it offers more benefits than
competing brands (Oliver, 1999). When
consumers wish to own a brand to satisfy their
expectations and values, they experience an
affective sense of loyalty. In this phase, people
prefer a brand and later intend or commit to
pursuing their preferred brand. Intention and
motivation lead to a desire to overcome
obstacles to purchase and patronize a brand.
Thus, behavioral loyalty is created.
H10：Brand attitudinal loyalty has a
positive impact on brand behavioral
loyalty.
3 | Research methods
3.1 Measurement and scale
The questionnaires adopted in this study refer
to research studies, and these six variables are
measured using a six-point Likert scale with
54 | Journal of Business Administration
items in questionnaires. The following
sections comprise the items and variable
constructs. Appendix shows the items that
measure the constructs.
Brand Positioning. This work employed
the conceptual structures of brand position
proposed by Park et al. (1986). Three
constructs are proposed: (1) distinctive style
(2) difference focus (3) unique value creation.
However, Park et al. did not provide items for
measuring the respective factors. An
important task has been to develop items to
measure the proposed factors. The nine items
obtained from literature review and the
author’s self-development were carefully
reviewed and edited by the researcher.
Event Marketing. The current work
utilized the theory work proposed by
Andreasen (1996) in developing eight items to
measure the constructs: (1) related-subject
promotion and (2) fund-raising.
Brand Identification. Three constructs
and their items were adopted and modified
from the works of O’Reilly and Chatman
(1986), Vandenberg et al. (1994) and Bosch et
al. (2006). The study proposed three factors:
(1) honor connection (2) success sensitivity (3)
active presentation. The nine items are
developed for measuring the constructs. Brand
Personality. The current research utilized the
structures of brand personality suggested by
Aaker (1997). According to Aaker’s
conceptual works, the researcher generated
nine items for measuring five factors of brand
personality: (1) sincerity (2) excitement (3)
competence (4) sophistication (5) ruggedness.
Brand Attitudinal Loyalty. The current
study adopted the structures and scales of
attitudinal loyalty proposed by Crosby et al.
(1990), using six items for measuring two
constructs: (1) trust (2) commitment.
Brand Behavioral Loyalty. The study
applied the conceptual works of behavioral
loyalty suggested by Jones and Sasser (1995)
to modify and revise the nine items from
literature of Zeithaml et al. (1996) and Lin
(2010). The items were employed for
measuring three factors: (1) customer repeat
purchase willingness (2) the willingness to
introducing the brand to others (3) price
tolerance.
3.2 Survey method
Due to the exploratory nature of this study, this
study adopted purposive sampling. Purposive
sampling method consists of random selection
of participants in a particular group within the
population of interest (Guarte & Barrios,
2006). As the current study aimed to
investigate fans’ brand loyalty, fans of
professional baseball were identified as being
representative of the intended population. The
number of questionnaires was first calculated
and then these 280 questionnaires were
distributed separately in two professional
baseball games in Taipei City. We send four
research team members to invite fans to fill
questionnaires in professional baseball games.
The sample was divided according to age and
gender statistics in each distinct. The medium
age was 34 years in Taipei City, thus the
sample was divided into two age groups, 18 to
34 years, and 35 to 55 years. The sample was
separated into male and female groups and the
sampling method was adopted to classify the
sample by marriage, age, education and
income.
4 | Empirical results
4.1 The result of basic statistic analysis
We send 280 questionnaires and 264 were
returned from 2018 fall. The ratio of
 Chen & Wang | 55

questionnaires return was 94%. In the 264 procedure, 240 formal questionnaires were
returned questionnaires, there were 240 valid distributed to guide the sample distribution to
and 24 invalid questionnaires missing values match the population distribution and to
or incomplete answers. The effective rate of control sampling error under plus or minus
response was 91%. Following this sampling five percent (See Table 1).
Table 1 Sample structure of quota sampling
SEX MARRIAGE
AGE
Male Female Total Unmarried Married Total
18-24 36 41 77 74 3 77
25-34 34 25 59 43 16 59
35-44 35 20 55 18 37 55
45-54 24 19 43 2 41 43
Above 55 3 3 6 0 6 6
Total 132 108 240 137 103 240

We conduct basic statistical analysis to difference between different demographics

overview the whole samples. We then conduct (i.e., gender, marriage, educational level and
one-way ANOVA to determine whether the income level) both in attitudinal and
demographics control variables are hold. behavioral loyalty. The result indicates that the
From the results of one-way ANOVA in Table sample is reasonably to control the
2, we find that there is no significant demographic variables.
Table 2 ANOVA analysis in formal-test
Education Income
Attitudinal loyalty Sex Marriage Age
level level
F-value 0.076 0.696 0.426 0.421 1.384
P-value 0.784 0.499 0.515 0.794 0.240
Education Income
Behavioral loyalty Sex Marriage Age
level level
F-value 0.007 0.175 0.619 0.650 0.474
P-value 0.935 0.840 0.432 0.627 0.755

& Bernstein, 1994). In our empirical study,

4.2 Reliability analysis and validity
Cronbach’s α coefficient of all dimensions are
analysis larger than 0.70.
Furthermore, we assess the reliability
We conduct the reliability analysis through
jointly for all items of a construct by
using Cronbach’s α coefficient to measure the
computing the composite reliability (CR).
consistency reliability of the constructs.
Fornell and Larcker (1981) recommend that
Scholars have suggested that a value at
the values exceeding .70 of composite
least .70 of Cronbach’s α. is sufficient
reliability is considered to represent
reliability coefficient for a research (Nunnally
56 | Journal of Business Administration
reliability is considered to represent
acceptable level of reliability. We find that CR
value of all dimensions are larger than .70.
In addition, we compute the average
variance extracted (AVE) to confirm the
discriminate validity (Fornell & Larcker,
1981). If AVE is larger than 0.5, it exhibits that
this questionnaire possesses the high
discriminate validity (Batra & Sinha, 2000).
The results show that all AVE are not smaller
than 0.5 which supported for the discriminate
validity of the hypothesized model (Fornell &
Larcker, 1981). Concerning evaluation of on
convergent validity, we can test it by
employing a confirmatory factor analysis
(CFA) model. From Table 3, we discover all
AVE are larger than 0.5, and our research has
the discriminate validity.
 57
Chen & Wang | 51

personalities. consumer requirements, consumer

Chen & Wang | 57

0.7697

0.6808

0.8505

0.6693

0.7851

0.8272
Average variance
extracted (AVE)
Sports teams can also use event perceptions of product attributes enable them
marketing strategies to improve consumer to distinguish a specific brand from
brand identification and brand personality competitors, resulting in consumer brand
associated with teams. These effects may identification.
extend to team parent companies. In the consumer behavior literature, the
notion of symbolic consumption (Levy, 1959)
H1：Event marketing has a positive proposes that consumer behaviors are not
0.8694

0.8640

0.9446

0.9098

0.8793

0.9347
Composite

impact on brand identification. functionally oriented, but significantly

reliability
(CR)

H2：Event marketing has a positive influenced by the symbolic meaning of brands

or products. Brand positioning attributes
impact on brand personality. conform to consumer personalities, but
consumer behaviors are triggered by the

0.94
0.94
0.85
0.93
0.82

0.73
0.85
0.89

0.88
0.95
0.94

0.79
0.81
0.87
0.86
0.85

0.84
0.93
2.2 Brand positioning on brand
Loading

symbolic meaning of brands or products

because people believe that symbolic
Table 3 Reliability and validity analysis of variables

identification and brand

meanings constitute their sense of self. Self-
personality concept theory (Roger, 1951) has been used to
0.893
0.754
0.695

0.945
0.880
0.910

0.885
0.885
0.871
0.876
0.896

0.881
0.844
0.933
---
---

---
---
Cronbach’s

explain symbolic consumption on the notion

α if item

Brand positioning refers to how consumers

deleted

that consumers are attracted to brands that

perceive a specific brand relative to competing
have a symbolic image most similar to their
brands (Romaniuk, 2001; Sarel, 1980).
own self-concepts (Kwak & Kang, 2009).
Consumers attach a brand to a specific piece
Thus, a well-positioned brand should have a
of information in their minds (Lee & Liao,

0.863
0.890
0.826
0.762
0.762

0.601
0.755
0.813

0.840
0.919
0.890

0.758
0.759
0.833
0.791
0.699

0.784
0.784
Item to total

large impact on consumer brand personalities.

correlation

2009). Brand positioning is based on

Sports teams use brand positioning to
associative network theories of memory.
distinguish their product or service attributes
These theories propose that memory consists
from those of their competitors. When their
of interlinked information nodes (Anderson &
strategies successfully match their parent
Bower, 2014; Romaniuk, 2001). A strong
0.855

0.849

0.941

0.904

0.870

0.918
Cronbach’s α

companies’ operation missions, this positively

brand position encourages consumers to
influences consumer perceptions of brand
perceive the uniqueness, strength, and
identification and brand personality.
prevalence of a brand and shifts consumer
behavior (Aaker, 1991; Lee & Liao, 2009). H3：Brand positioning has a positive
Brand positioning involves selecting
impact on brand identification.
Willingness to Introduce to Others

specific attributes which are desirable for

brand association. These attributes include H4：Brand positioning has a positive
Construct

Repeat Purchase Willingness

product category, price, perceived quality, impact on brand personality.

Related-subject promotion

application, country of origin, and customer

Brand Behavioral Loyalty
Brand Attitudinal Loyalty
Unique Value Creation

service (Aaker & Myers, 1987; Romaniuk, 2.3 Brand identification on brand
Active Presentation
Success Sensitivity
Brand Identification
Honor Connection

2001). These positioning attributes provide

Difference Focus
Brand Positioning
Distinctive Style

Brand Personality

attitudinal loyalty and brand

Price Tolerance
Event Marketing

consumers with functional or emotional

Sophistication

Commitment
Fund-raising

Competence

benefits and form part of the information

Ruggedness
Excitement

behavioral loyalty
Variable

Sincerity

associated with a brand in consumer minds

which determines brand image (Romaniuk, The literature has acknowledged the
Trust

2001). While positioning attributes satisfy importance of brand loyalty for decades. For
58 | Journal of Business Administration
4.3 Results of LISREL analysis
The results of the full model in this study are
shown in Figure 2. Table 4 displays the
structural model with the coefficient and
almost significant relationship between
variables and variables are followed the
hypothesized direction. Event marketing has
significant effect on brand identification and
brand personality (H1: β1= 0.14, t-value = 2.06;
H2: β2 = 0.2, t-value = 2.52). Brand positioning
has effect on brand identification (H3: β3 =
0.79, t-value = 9.94) but dose not affect brand
personality (H4: β4 = 0.22, t-value = 1.65).
Brand identification significantly affects both
brand attitudinal loyalty and brand behavioral
loyalty (H5: β5= 0.28, t-value = 2.34; H6: β6 =
0.26, t-value = 2.65). However, brand
personality significantly influences brand
attitudinal loyalty but does not affect brand
behavioral loyalty (H7: β7 = 0.64, t-value =
4.99; H8: β8 = 0.00, t-value = -0.02).
Furthermore, brand identification
significantly affects brand personality (H9: β9
= 0.54, t-value = 4.64). Finally, brand
attitudinal loyalty has influence on brand
behavioral loyalty (H10: β10 = 0.73, t-value =
5.62). According to the results, we make the
conclusion that the main paths are that brand
positioning affects brand attitudinal loyalty
and brand behavioral loyalty through brand
identification and brand personality.
We employ various fitness indices to
examine the validity of the model and fit
indices of the proposed measurement model
are shown in Table 4. Three types of fit indices,
absolute, comparative, and parsimonious fit
index, were recommended to assess overall
model fit (Kelloway, 1998). The root mean
square error of approximation (RMSEA) and
test were used to measure absolute fit; the
comparative fit index (CFI) was used to
measure comparative fit; and the
parsimonious normed fit index (PNFI) was
used to measure parsimonious fit. Browne and
Cudeck (1993) suggested that an RMSEA
value of .08 or less would indicate acceptable
model fit. In addition, Hu and Bentler (1999)
recommended that CFI values greater than .95,
and PNFI values greater than .60 are threshold
values for reasonable model fit. However,
because of statistics’ sensitivity to sample size,
the normed chi-square (/df) was
recommended as a measure of model fit (Kline,
2005). Bollen (1989) proposed that values of
normed chi-square (NC) of 2.0, 3.0 or even as
high as 5.0 has been considered as indicators
of reasonable fit.
In our study, the results of model fit for
the hypothesized model indicated acceptable
model fit to the data ( = 403.33, p＜.001; χ2/df
= 3.2527, RMSEA=.097; CFI=.98; PNFI=.79).
 Chen & Wang | 59

H1 Brand H5 Brand
Event
.14* Identification .28* Attitudinal
Marketing
Loyalty
H2
H6
.2* H9 .54* H10 .73*
.26*
H3 H7
.79* .64* Brand
Brand H4 Brand H8 Behavioral
Positioning .22 Personality .00 Loyalty

X²/df =3.2527, RMSEA=.097, CFI=.98, NFI=0.97, GFI=0.8

Figure 2 The results of the full model
Table 4 Results of research hypothesis (LISREL)
Hypothesized path Coefficient T-value Hypothesis

H1: Event marketing  Brand identification β1= 0.14 2.06 Accepted

H2: Event marketing  Brand personality β2= 0.2 2.52 Accepted

H3: Brand positioningBrand identification β3= 0.79 9.94 Accepted

H4: Brand positioning  Brand personality β4= 0.22 1.65 Reject

H5: Brand identification  Brand attitude loyalty β5= 0.28 2.34 Accepted

H6: Brand identification  Brand behavioral loyalty Β6= 0.26 2.65 Accepted

H7: Brand personality  Brand attitude loyalty β7= 0.64 4.99 Accepted

H8: Brand personality  Brand behavioral loyalty β8= 0.00 -0.02 Reject

H9: Brand identification  Brand personality β9 = 0.54 4.64 Accepted

H10: Brand attitude loyalty  Brand behavioral loyalty β10= 0.73 5.62 Accepted

Indicator

X²/df 403.33/124=3.2527
60 | Journal of Business Administration

Table 4 Results of research hypothesis (LISREL) (continued)

Indicator
Comparative fit index (CFI) 0.98
Non-normed fit index (NNFI) 0.97
Normed fit index (NFI) 0.97
Goodness of fit index (GFI) 0.8
Adjusted goodness of fit index (AGFI) 0.72
Parsimonious Normed Fit Index (PNFI) 0.79
Root mean square residual (RMSR) 0.054
Root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) 0.097

This study provides empirical evidence for a (Table 5). The results show that brand
brand loyalty operating mechanism and positioning influences attitudinal loyalty and
determines three critical paths that enhance behavioral loyalty more than event marketing.
fans’ brand attitudinal and behavioral loyalty

Table 5 Analyses of path coefficient

(a) Path coefficients from EM and BP to AL
Path Path coefficient To attitudinal loyalty Most effectively path
EM→BID→BAL 0.14*0.28 0.039
EM→BPE→BAL 0.2*0.64 0.13
EM→BID→BPE→BAL 0.14*0.54*0.64 0.048
BP→BID→BAL 0.79*0.28 0.22
BP→BPE→BAL 0.22*0.64 0.14
BP→BID→BPE→BAL 0.79*0.54*0.64 0.27 ※

(b) Path coefficients from EM and BP to BL

Most
Path Path coefficient To behavioral loyalty effectively
path
EM→BID→BBL 0.14*0.26 0.036
EM→BID→AL→BBL 0.14*0.28*0.73 0.029
EM→BID→BPE→BAL→BBL 0.14*0.54*0.64*0.73 0.035
BP→BID→BBL 0.79*0.26 0.21 ※
BP→BPE→AL→BBL 0.22*0.64*0.73 0.10
BP→BID→A L→BBL 0.79*0.28*0.73 0.16
BP→BID→BPE→BA L→BBL 0.79*0.54*0.64*0.73 0.20 ※
*
EM: Event marketing, BP: Brand positioning, BPE: Brand personality
BID: Brand identification, BAL: Brand attitudinal loyalty, BBL: Brand behavioral loyalty
 Chen & Wang | 61

As shown in Tables 5 (a) and (b), brand stadium positioning attributes, their
positioning influences brand attitudinal experiences of stadium attributes enabled
loyalty and behavioral loyalty more than event them to distinguish a specific brand from
marketing. competitors, resulting in consumer brand
identification (Underwood et al., 2001;
Wakefield et al., 1996). By owning a team, a
5 | Conclusion and discussion corporation can link its brand and product to
the strong feelings a consumer has toward a
The empirical results show that brand
team. Thus, consumer identification with the
positioning influences attitudinal loyalty and
team is positively transferred to the
behavioral loyalty more than event marketing.
corporation’s brand and product. Through
Therefore, managers of sport teams that intend
manifestations of identification, consumers
to improve their teams’ competitive advantage
reach the brand personality stage
should invest in long-term positioning of their
(internalization) and consider a brand an
teams rather than holding a short-term event.
important aspect of who they are and who they
The best method of achieving attitudinal brand
perceive themselves to be. Consequently,
loyalty is by using brand positioning to
brand personality is critical in forming
influence attitudinal brand loyalty through
consumer intentions to purchase a brand,
brand identification and personality.
which creates brand attitudinal loyalty.
Professional sports teams in Asian
Analysis results suggest that the two
countries are part of larger corporations that
strongest paths to developing consumer
use the teams to market and sell their products.
behavioral brand loyalty are similar to the path
The connection between corporations and
to attitudinal brand loyalty. Managers should
their sports teams provides considerable
concentrate on brand positioning to create
opportunities to redefine corporation brands
brand identification and brand behavioral
and core brand meanings (Alexander, 2009).
loyalty.
Thus, to establish consumer brand loyalty by
The findings of the research indicate that
using sports teams as a marketing strategy, the
the influence of brand positioning on brand
findings of this research suggest that
loyalty (attitudinal and behavioral) is stronger
corporations should invest in positioning their
than that of event marketing. A brand
own sports team. For example, physical sports
positioning strategy involves finding the right
facilities (i.e., stadiums or arenas) also play a
place for a brand in the market to distinguish
crucial role in providing consumers with a
it from competitors. Brand positioning
distinct brand characteristic of a team. A
strategies include product quality, attributes,
corporation could focus on enhancing the
price, application, and service (Aaker &
quality of a stadium’s: service offerings, such
Myers, 1987; Romaniuk, 2001). For
as restrooms, concession stands, and layout
successful brand positioning, managers
(Wakefield et al., 1996); aesthetic qualities,
should identify a reasonable strategy and
such as architecture (Wakefield et al., 1996);
invest long-term efforts in establishing a
and sense of community (Trujillo & Krizek,
unique position within consumer minds. This
1994). The characteristics of brand
connection between a brand and consumers
positioning activities are perceived
leads to long-term partnerships and loyalty.
uniqueness, strength, and prevalence. When
Event marketing involves using various
consumer requirements were satisfied by
62 | Journal of Business Administration
activities (e.g., promotional events, charity
fundraisers, and incentive events) to
communicate with attendees and add value to
their experiences. Events are opportunities to
engage consumers with a corporation brand.
Event marketing can create short-term and
long-term marketing effects (Sneath et al.,
2005). However, most events are time limited,
because marketing practitioners tend to
believe that events only have short-term
effects. This may explain why the brand
positioning effect is stronger than the event
marketing effect.
The results indicate that brand attitudinal
loyalty had a positive effect (path coefficient
= 0.73) on brand behavioral loyalty. Loyalty
toward a brand significantly affects the
chances of intention being translated into
actual purchases (Anisimova, 2007; Teng et
al., 2007). However, in the current
competitive environment, sports organizations
must consider their competitors. Sports fans
have many ways of spending their time and
money. Several entertainment options
compete for sports consumer attention, such
as other types of sports, restaurants, movies,
shopping malls, coffee shops, concerts,
interactive websites, and television channels.
In this crowded market, sports organization
managers should consider using incentives or
rewards as a strategy to motivate consumer
behavior.
The effects of brand attitudinal loyalty
on brand behavioral loyalty should apply to
the sports industry. People often invest
resources in participating in sports (e.g., time
and money) which require a significant level
of physical involvement. For example, to
regularly engage in golf, participants must
invest in golf equipment (e.g., clubs, trolleys,
apparel, and shoes) and dedicate time and
energy to practicing and playing. Participating
in a sport requires more personal involvement
than spectator sports. People who are more
personally involved are more motivated to
devote cognitive efforts to evaluating product
merits (Petty et al., 1983), thus their transition
from attitude to behavior is less likely. Future
research should replicate this study with
participation sports events to examine whether
corporations should use different brand
operation strategies for participation and
spectator events. Future studies should also
examine the process of consumer transitions
from attitudinal to behavioral loyalty. To test
generalizability, future study is suggested to
extend the research to various related sports,
such as professional basketball. The
generalizability of the results in the current
study is limited to participants merely from
the Taipei city. The future research is
recommended to recruit participants from
various locations.
Reference
Aaker, D. A., & Myers, J. G. (1987). Advertising
management. Prentice-Hall.
Aaker, D. A. (1991). Managing brand equity:
Capitalizing on the value of a brand name. The
Free Press.
Aaker, J. L. (1997). Dimensions of brand personality.
Journal of Marketing Research, 34(3), 347-356.
Aaker, J. L. (1999). The malleable self: The role of self-
expression in persuasion. Journal of Marketing
Research, 36(1), 45-57.
Aaker, J., Fournier, S., & Brasel, S. A. (2004). When
good brands do bad. Journal of Consumer
Research, 31(1), 1-16.
Akin, M. (2011). Predicting consumers’ behavioral
intentions with perceptions of brand personality:
A study in cell phone markets. International
Journal of Business and Management, 6(6), 193-
206.
Alamro, A., & Rowley, J. (2011). Brand strategies of
Jordanian telecommunications service providers.
Journal of Brand Management, 18(4), 329-348.
Alexander, N. (2009). Defining brand values through
sponsorship. International Journal of Retail &
Distribution Management, 37(4), 346-357.
Anderson, J. R., & Bower, G. H. (2014). Human
associative memory. Psychology press.

Andreasen, A. R. (1996). Profits for nonprofits: Find a
corporate partner. Harvard Business Review,
74(6), 47-50.
Anisimova, T. A. (2007). The effects of corporate brand
attributes on attitudinal and behavioural consumer
loyalty. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 24(7),
395-405.
Batra, R., & Sinha, I. (2000). Consumer-level factors
moderating the success of private label brands.
Journal of Retailing, 76(2), 175-191.
Bauer, H. H., Stokburger-Sauer, N. E., & Exler, S. (2008).
Brand image and fan loyalty in professional team
sport: A refined model and empirical assessment.
Journal of Sport Management, 22(2), 205-226.
Berry, L. L. (2000). Cultivating service brand equity.
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,
28(1), 128-137.
Boenigk, S., & Helmig, B. (2013). Why do donors
donate? Examining the effects of organizational
identification and identity salience on the
relationships among satisfaction, loyalty, and
donation behavior. Journal of Service Research,
16(4), 533-548.
Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent
variables (Vol. 210). John Wiley & Sons.
Bosch, J., Venter, E., Han, Y., & Boshoff, C. (2006). The
impact of brand identity on the perceived brand
image of a merged higher education institution:
Part one. Management Dynamics: Journal of the
Southern African Institute for Management
Scientists, 15(2), 10-30.
Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways
of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen & J. S.
Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models
(pp. 136-162). Sage.
Chang, P. L., & Chieng, M. H. (2006). Building
consumer–brand relationship: A cross‐cultural
experiential view. Psychology & Marketing,
23(11), 927-959.
Chaudhuri, A., & Holbrook, M. B. (2001). The chain of
effects from brand trust and brand affect to brand
performance: The role of brand loyalty. Journal of
Marketing, 65(2), 81-93.
Crosby, L. A., Evans, K. R. & Cowles, D. (1990).
Relationship quality in services selling: An
interpersonal influence perspective. Journal of
Marketing, 54(3), 68-81.
Escalas, J. E., & Bettman, J. R. (2003). You are what they
eat: The influence of reference groups on
consumers’ connections to brands. Journal of
Consumer Psychology, 13(3), 339-348.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating
structural equation models with unobservable
variables and measurement error. Journal of
Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50.
Garanti, Z., & Kissi, P. S. (2019). The effects of social
media brand personality on brand loyalty in the
Latvian banking industry: The mediating role of
brand equity. International Journal of Bank
Chen & Wang | 63
Marketing, 37(6), 1480-1503.
Giroux, M., Pons, F., & Maltese, L. (2017). The role of
perceived brand personality in promotion
effectiveness and brand equity development of
professional sports teams. International Journal
of Sports Marketing and Sponsorship, 18(2), 180-
195.
Gladden, J. M., & Funk, D. C. (2001). Understanding
brand loyalty in professional sport: Examining the
link between brand associations and brand loyalty.
International Journal of Sports Marketing and
Sponsorship, 3(1), 67-94.
Guarte, J. M., & Barrios, E. B. (2006). Estimation under
purposive sampling. Communications in
Statistics-Simulation and Computation, 35(2),
277-284.
Hansen, T. (2008). Consumer values, the theory of
planned behaviour and online grocery shopping.
International Journal of Consumer Studies, 32(2),
128-137.
Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit
indexes in covariance structure analysis:
Conventional criteria versus new alternatives.
Structural Equation Modeling: A
Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1-55.
Huber, F., & Herrmann, A. (2001). Achieving brand and
dealer loyalty: The case of the automotive
industry. The International Review of Retail,
Distribution and Consumer Research, 11(2), 97-
122.
Javani, V., Ehsani, M., Amiry, M., & Kozechiyan, H.
(2013). The study of fans’ brand loyalty in Iranian
professional football league. International
Journal of Research in Business and Social
Science, 2(2), 38.
Jones, T. O., & Sasser, W. E. (1995). Why satisfied
customers defect. Harvard Business Review,
73(6), 88.
Kaynak, E., Salman, G. G., & Tatoglu, E. (2008). An
integrative framework linking brand associations
and brand loyalty in professional sports. Journal
of Brand Management, 15(5), 336-357.
Keller, K. L. (1993). Conceptualizing, measuring, and
managing customer-based brand equity. Journal
of Marketing, 57(1), 1-22.
Keller, K. L. (1998). Strategic brand management:
Building, measuring and managing brand equity
(1st ed.). Prentice Hall.
Kelloway, E. K. (1998). Using LISREL for structural
equation modeling: A researcher’s guide. Sage.
Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural
equation modeling (2nd ed.). The Guilford Press.
Kolbe, R. H., & James, J. D. (2003). The internalization
process among team followers: Implications for
team loyalty. International Journal of Sport
Management, 4(1), 25-43.
Kotler, P. (2003). Marketing management (11th ed.).
Person Education.
Kuenzel, S., & Halliday, S. V. (2010). The chain of
64 | Journal of Business Administration
effects from reputation and brand personality
congruence to brand loyalty: The role of brand
identification. Journal of Targeting, Measurement
and Analysis for Marketing, 18(3), 167-176.
Kumar, V., & Shah, D. (2004). Building and sustaining
profitable customer loyalty for 21st century.
Journal of Retailing, 80, 317-330.
Kumar, V. I. S. W. A. N. A. T. H. A. N., & Shah, D.
(2004). Building and sustaining profitable
customer loyalty for the 21st century. Journal of
Retailing, 80(4), 317-329.
Kwak, D. H., & Kang, J. H. (2009). Symbolic purchase
in sport: The roles of self‐image congruence and
perceived quality. Management Decision, 47(1),
85-99.
Lee, C. W., & Liao, C. S. (2009). The effects of
consumer preferences and perceptions of Chinese
tea beverages on brand positioning strategies.
British Food Journal, 111(1), 80-96.
Levy, S. J. (1959). Symbols for sale. Harvard Business
Review, 37, 117-124.
Lin, N. H., & Lin, B. S. (2007). The effect of brand
image and product knowledge on purchase
intention moderated by price discount. Journal of
International Management Studies, 2(2), 121-132.
Lin, L. Y. (2010). The relationship of consumer
personality trait, brand personality and brand
loyalty: An empirical study of toys and video
games buyers. Journal of Product & Brand
Management, 9(1), 4-17.
Mahony, D. F., Madrigal, R., & Howard, D. (2000).
Using the psychological commitment to team
(PCT) scale to segment sport consumers based on
loyalty. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 9(1), 15-25.
McDowell, W. S. (2004). Exploring a free association
methodology to capture and differentiate abstract
media brand associations: A study of three cable
news networks. Journal of Media Economics,
17(4), 309-320.
Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric
theory (3rd Ed.). McGraw-Hill.
Oliver, R. L. (1999). Whence consumer loyalty?.
Journal of Marketing, 63, 33-44.
O’Reilly, C. A., & Chatman, J. (1986). Organizational
commitment and psychological attachment: The
effects of compliance, identification, and
internalization on prosocial behavior. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 71(3), 492-499.
Park, C. W., Jaworski, B. J., & MacInnis, D. J. (1986).
Strategic brand concept-image management.
Journal of Marketing, 50(4), 135-145.
Petty, R. E., Cacioppo, J. T., & Schumann, D. (1983).
Central and peripheral routes to advertising
effectiveness: The moderating role of
involvement. Journal of Consumer Research,
10(2), 135-146.
Popp, B., & Woratschek, H. (2017). Consumer–brand
identification revisited: An integrative framework
of brand identification, customer satisfaction, and
price image and their role for brand loyalty and
word of mouth. Journal of Brand Management,
24(3), 250-270.
Romaniuk, J. (2001). Brand positioning in financial
services: A longitudinal test to find the best brand
position. Journal of Financial Services Marketing,
6(2), 111-121.
Roger, C. (1951). Client-centered Theory: Its current
practices, implications, and theory. Houghton
Mifflin.
Ross, S. D. (2006). A conceptual framework for
understanding spectator-based brand equity.
Journal of Sport Management, 20(1), 22-38.
Sarel, D. (1980). Product positioning-A reassessment. In
C. Lamb & P. Dunne (Eds.), Theoretical
Developments in Marketing (pp. 116-119).
American Marketing Association.
Schwartz, S. H., & Sagiv, L. (1995). Identifying culture-
Specifics in the content and structure of values.
Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 26(1), 92-
116.
Sung, Y., & Kim, J. (2010). Effects of brand personality
on brand trust and brand affect. Psychology &
Marketing, 27(7), 639-661.
Sirgy, M. J. (1982). Self-concept in consumer behavior:
A critical review. Journal of Consumer Research,
9(3), 287-300.
Sneath, J. Z., Finney, R. Z., & Close, A. G. (2005). An
IMC approach to event marketing: The effects of
sponsorship and experience on customer attitudes.
Journal of Advertising Research, 45(4), 373-381.
Tajfel, H. (1981). Human groups and social categories:
Studies in social psychology. Cup Archive.
Tajfel, H. (1982). Social psychology of intergroup
relations. Annual Review of Psychology, 33(1), 1-
39.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory
of intergroup conflict. In W. Austin & S. Worchel
(Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup
relations (pp. 33-48). Brooks/ Cole.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity
theory of intergroup behavior. In S. Worchel and
WG Austing (Eds.). Psychology of intergroup
relations. Nelson-Hall.
Teng, L., Laroche, M., & Zhu, H. (2007). The effects of
multiple‐ads and multiple‐brands on consumer
attitude and purchase behavior. Journal of
Consumer Marketing, 24(1), 27-35.
Trujillo, N., & Krizek, B. (1994). Emotionality in the
stands and in the field: Expressing self through
baseball. Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 18(4),
303-325.
Uncles, M. D., Dowling, G. R., & Hammond, K. (2003).
Customer loyalty and customer loyalty programs.
Journal of Consumer Marketing, 20(4), 294-316.
Underwood, R., Bond, E., & Baer, R. (2001). Building
service brands via social identity: Lessons from
the sports marketplace. Journal of Marketing
Theory and Practice, 9(1), 1-13.
 Chen & Wang | 65

Vandenberg, R. J., Self, R. M., & Seo, J. H. (1994). A
critical examination of the internalization,
identification, and compliance commitment
measures. Journal of Management, 20(1), 123-
140.
Wahyuni, S., & Fitriani, N. (2017). Brand religiosity
aura and brand loyalty in Indonesia Islamic
banking. Journal of Islamic Marketing, 8(3), 361-
372.
Wakefield, K, L., Blodgett, J. G., & Sloan, H. J. (1996).
Measurement and management of the sportscape.
Journal of Sport Management, 10(1), 15-31.
Wohlfeil, M., & Whelan, S. (2006). Consumer
motivations to participate in marketing-events:
The role of predispositional involvemement.
European Advances in Consumer Research, 7,
125-132.
Zeithaml, V. A., Berry, L. L., & Parasuraman, A. (1996).
The behavioral consequences of service quality.
Journal of Marketing, 60(2), 31-46.

Appendix 1 Questionnaire items

Constructs/Questionnaire items
Brand positioning
BP1 The team provides higher quality product and service than competitors.
BP2 The team provides innovational product and service to satisfy consumers’ need.
BP3 The team provides convenience sale channels and prompt service.
BP4 The team provides a clear vision, where we go, fit into my life principle.
BP5 The team transmits a clear focus, what we do, fit into my life principle.
BP6 The team presents a clear opinion, what we promise, fit into my core value.
BP7 The team creates a new opinion; provide an uplifting experience and daily inspiration.
BP8 The team creates a novel direction; indicate a brand influence and consumers’ unmet demand.
BP9 The team can extend to its sponsors’ managing axis which fit into my personal belief.
Event marketing
EM1 The team often promotes related sports activities.
EM2 The team often promotes healthy living habits.
EM3 The team often promotes and advocates social causes.
EM4 The team often promotes social causes that people need.
EM5 The team often sponsors funds or related products to junior sports teams.
EM6 The team often sponsors funds or related products to charities.
EM7 The team often sponsors funds or related products to disadvantages groups.
EM8 The team will raise funds to charity for an emergency (such as an earthquake).
Brand identification
BID1This honor team really inspires the very best in my life.
BID2 I am extremely glad that I chose this team over others.
BID3 For me this is the best of all possible teams for which to work.
BID4 I really care about the success and fate of the team.
BID5 I am willing to put in a great deal of effort beyond that expected in order to help this team be
successful.
BID6 Whether the team wins or loses, I support it.
BID7 I feel like a part of the team, not just a spectator.
BID8 I actively talk up the team to my friends as a great team.
BID9 I am proud to present and tell others that I am a part of this team.
Brand personality
BPE1 I feel that the team is a family-oriented brand.
BPE2 I feel that the team is an honest and sincere brand.
BPE3 I feel that the team is a cheerful brand.
BPE4 I feel that the team is a daring and excitement brand.
BPE5 I feel that the team is a cool and young brand.
BPE6 I feel that the team is an imaginative brand.
BPE7 I feel that the team is a competitive and reliable brand.
66 | Journal of Business Administration

Appendix 1 Questionnaire items (continued)

Constructs/Questionnaire items
BPE8 I feel that the team is an intelligent brand.
BPE9 I feel that the team is a successful brand.
Brand attitudinal loyalty
AL1 I trust the management of the team.
AL2 I’m very sure that every time the service I receive from the team is the same.
AL3 When the employees from the team give some commitments, I’m sure that they can fulfill the
commitments.
AL4 I prefer the team very much.
AL5 I’d like to consume the team’s products again.
AL6 Although I can choose other teams, I still like to consume the team.
Brand behavioral loyalty
BL1 I’d like to purchase the team’s other products.
BL2 If I need related products, I will choose the brand(team) at first.
BL3 I’m willing to buy the products of the team.
BL4 I will recommend the team to my family and friend.
BL5 If someone asks for my advice, I will recommend the team.
BL5 If someone asks for my advice, I will recommend the team.
BL6 I will encourage my friends purchasing in the team’s products.
BL7 Although there are promoting activities in other teams, I will still choose the team.
BL8 Although the price of the tickets is more expensive, I will still choose the team.
BL9 If the price of the tickets is higher than before, I will still consume in the team.
Brand attitudinal loyalty
AL1 I trust the management of the team.
AL2 I’m very sure that every time the service I receive from the team is the same.
AL3 When the employees from the team give some commitments, I’m sure that they can fulfill the
commitments.
AL4 I prefer the team very much.
AL5 I’d like to consume the team’s products again.
AL6 Although I can choose other teams, I still like to consume the team.
Brand behavioral loyalty
BL1 I’d like to purchase the team’s other products.
BL2 If I need related products, I will choose the brand(team) at first.
BL3 I’m willing to buy the products of the team.
BL4 I will recommend the team to my family and friend.
BL5 If someone asks for my advice, I will recommend the team.
BL6 I will encourage my friends purchasing in the team’s products.
BL7 Although there are promoting activities in other teams, I will still choose the team.
BL8 Although the price of the tickets is more expensive, I will still choose the team.
BL9 If the price of the tickets is higher than before, I will still consume in the team.
Brand attitudinal loyalty
AL1 I trust the management of the team.
AL2 I’m very sure that every time the service I receive from the team is the same.
AL3 When the employees from the team give some commitments, I’m sure that they can fulfill the
commitments.
Reproduced with permission of copyright owner. Further
reproduction prohibited without permission.