PROJECT REPORT

ON
ACCOUNTING & ACCOUNTABILITY
OF A NON - PROFIT ORGANISATION
(INDIAN RED CROSS SOCIETY)
Submitted to Rama Devi Women's University
in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the Degree of Bachelor in
COMMERCE

Submitted by
Sasmita Sahoo
B.Com 3rd Year
College Roll No. - BC-19-057
Exam Roll no. – 71R0019137

Under the guidance of

Mrs. Saswati Mohanty
H.O.D, Department of Commerce
Kamala Neheru Women`s College, Bhubaneswar

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
KAMALA NEHERU WOMEN'S COLEGE
UNIT - 1, BHUBANESWAR
2020-2023
 CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that Sasmita Sahoo bearing Roll No-71R0019137 has prepared
the project entitled Accounting & Accountability of a Non-Profit
Organisation (Indian Red Cross Society) under my guidance. To the best of
my knowledge and belief no part of the project has been submitted to any other
institution or the University for Award of any Degree.

Mrs.Saswati Mohanty
H.O.D, Department of Commerce
Kamala Neheru Women’s College
Unit - 1, Bhubaneswar
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I sincerely express my deep sense of gratitude to my Guide, Mrs. Saswati
Mohanty for her extraordinary cooperation, invaluable guidance and
supervision. This dissertation paper work is the result of his painstaking and
generous attitude.
I would like to thank all the faculty members of Dept. of Commerce,
Kamal Neheru women’s College, Bhubaneswar for their valuable suggestions
and useful comments throughout this dissertation paper work.
I owe and respectfully offer my thanks to my noble parents for their
constant moral support and mellifluous affection which helped me to achieve
success in every sphere of life and without their kind devotion this dissertation
paper work would have been a sheer dream.
I am also thankful to my siblings and friends for their constructive
discussions, perseverance and encouragement during this research work.
I sincerely acknowledge the efforts of all those who have directly or
indirectly helped me in completing my dissertation paper work successfully. It
is the kindness of these acknowledged persons that this dissertation paper work
sees the light of the day. I submit this dissertation paper of mine with great
humility and utmost regard bearing the sole responsibility for any errors.

Sasmita Sahoo
B.COM 3rd Year
Roll No: 71R0019137
College Roll No. – BC19-057
Rama Devi Women’s University
Vidya Vihar, Bhubaneswar
 DECLARATION

I Sasmita Sahoo bearing Roll No-71R0019137 student of B.Com 3rd year

undertake to say that the project titled Accounting & Accountability of a
Non-Profit Organisation (Indian Red Cross Society) is a bonafied work done
by me under the guidance of Dr. Jayashree Jethy. Further I undertake to say that
no part of the project has been copied by me.

Date: Sasmita Sahoo

Place : Bhubaneswar B.COM 3rd Year
Roll No: 71R0019137
College Roll No. – BC19-057
Kamala Neheru Women’s College
Unit - 1, Bhubaneswar
 CONTENTS

Sl.No Topic Page No.

1 ABSTRACT

2 INTRODUCTION

3 LITERATURE REVIEW

4 OBJECTIVES

5 METHODOLOGY

6 FINDINGS OF THE STUDY

7 DISCUSSION

8 DATA ANALYSIS

9 CONCLUSION

10 BIBLIOGRAPHY
ABSTRACT

Consumer satisfaction is one of the prime objectives in present retail sector. With the
advent of different market players the inclination for usage of a particular brand has
increased. The present study aims at examining the consumer preference towards
brand and also investigating whether the consumers prefer branded product over the
unbranded product. For this study data was collected from both primary and
secondary sources. The data was analysed using factor analysis. The finding revealed
that people prefer to buy branded products. Another interesting finding is that the
purchase of branded products is significantly impacted by the level of income. This
asserts that higher level of income is more likely to contribute to the purchase of
branded products in comparison to the unbranded products.

The American Marketing Association defines a brand as “A name, term, sign, symbol
or design or a combination of them, intended to identify the goods and services of one
seller or group and to differentiate them to those for competitors”. A brand is thus a
product or service that’s adds a Dimension that differentiates it in some way from
other products or services designed to satisfy the same need. These differences may be
functional, rational, or tangible-relate to product performance of the brand.

How do you “BRAND” a product? Although firms provide the impetus to brand
creation through marketing programs and other activities, ultimately a brand is
something that resides in the mind of the consumers. A brand is a perpetual identity
that is rooted in reality but reflects the perceptions and perhaps even the ultimate
choice of the consumers.. Branding involves creating mental structures and helping
consumers organize their knowledge about products and services in a way that clarifies
their decision making and in process provides value to the firm.(J.S. shanmauganathan
and Vinod Kumar 2012)
INTRODUCTION

A brand is a name, term, design, symbol or any other features that identifies one seller’s
good or service as distinct from those of other sellers. Brands are used in business,
marketing and advertising for recognition and importantly to create and store value as brand
equity for the object identified to the benefit of the brands, customers, it owners and
shareholders.

Our society today is so much conscious about their status. People think that using branded
product show off their status symbol. Any business can enjoy the competitive edge by
providing branded products. It acts as a strong weapon to fight with your competitors.
Customers are more interested in buying branded products. Brand consciousness becomes
one of the major traits among youth. Lavish lifestyle is a rising trend now. The increasing
income of the modern educated youth make them willing to spend more for branded clothes,
gadgets, perfumes, eatables, shoes, accessories, perfumes and even lingerie. Not because of
the quality, but the craze of the brand and the need to flaunt amount in peer group. Both in
urban and rural area, the brand culture became a fast moving trend. Today purchasing power
and the affordability have increased. Buying branded products is no more a surprising task.
Not every time using brand has become the need, but it’s a general concept of moving with
the crowd.

The culture of using branded products is mainly because of media. Movies, advertisements
and television shows have a great impact on the common people. The main purpose of
marketing activities is to influence consumers. In global markets, war is not only about price.
Companies give great importance in customer satisfaction. Effective utilization of brands
ensures large number of customer and long term relation with customer. Maximum profit is
another advantage of brand name. Advertisements play as a driving force any business, which
can force people to change their behavior regarding your product in positive sense. It’s
attracts the customers towards your product. The impact of brand image on sales is very
high. It’s serves as a vital purpose in global market by helping companies to establish
stronger presence in market and generate leads.

FOUNDATIONS OF BRANDING

Before going further in the details with brand personalization and Adbusters influence on
this branding technique, a short description of brands is going to be given. It is important to
focus where brand personalization concept comes from, to go further in theory and define
those concepts. Therefore, this introduction of branding and brands in general will make a
greater understanding of what brand personalization really is.

WHAT IS A BRAND?

Most authors cannot agree upon the issue of the very beginning of the brand formation.
Some think that the brand dates back to the period of prehistory and drawings in caves. Even
then, people were trying to mark a certain way the space in which they live, as well as
tools, weapons and utensils that were used in everyday life. In Ancient Greek and Rome,
there were publications where people could find an address of a certain man who for
example makes dresses. The name behind the product was equally important as the product
or service that he or she was providing (Room, 1998).

Others think that the brand dates back to the period of Egypt and hieroglyphs. On interpreted
hieroglyphics on the walls of tombs, dating from 2000 BC can be seen how the Egyptians
branded cattle. In this way, they have marked that the cattle belong to them with a specific
symbol or signature. There are also other opinions that the history of the brand began from
the moment the manufacturer from Syria 200 years BC put his mark on the newly
manufactured sandals, in order to distinguish it from other brands and thus said, "This is my
...".

Nevertheless, American Marketing Association (AMA) defines a brand as a name, term,

sign, symbol or design, or a combination, thereby identifying the goods or services of one
seller or group of sellers and differentiates from the competitors (American Marketing
Association, 2016). Brand needs to be a label, to give consumers information about a
certain object.

Besides meeting the basic functional requirements of consumers, a brand also has added
values that fulfill consumer’s psychological needs (Kotler, 1996). Brands allow the
consumer to shop with confidence, and they provide a route map through a confusing variety
of choices (Clifton, Simmons & Ahmad, 2004). Brand is not just simple words, logos or
symbols. Brands are much more, they built certain images and emotions or people’s
opinions when they think about a product or a company. Their goal is to build a bridge
between the target consumer and the company. If they do not evoke these emotions, they are
not brands (Travis, 2000).

When it comes to fashion industry, fashion brands are defined as consumer brands, they are
products and services likely to be used personally by the purchasers or by those who receive
them as gifts. They are not used to produce or make anything else (Kendall, 2009). Fashion
brands have unique goal to encourage consumers to express themselves and make a
statement through a certain type of dress and appearance. The name, symbol, image of the
brand are the ones who make the fashion brand, and who put him on the highest levels
relevance and recognition. Brand recognition in fashion is crucial. Customers do not always
want to buy certain products because they are not "branded". Marketing experts have to
fight against this phenomenon in order to make their products sellable. The brand also
positions the product on the market. The way the consumers perceive fashion brands, the
degree of their identification with the brand, whether they are luxury or widely available
brands are of great importance for a company (Kapferer & Bastien, 2012).

When the brands are defined the next step is to define the process of branding that gives
the true power to the brand. Before starting with branding it is important to know “who is”
the product, “what” product does for his consumer and “why” the consumer needs to pay
attention to that specific product. Therefore, branding is a multifunctional process that
highlights value of a product and transforms it into a real consumer experience. Thus, we
can say that a brand starts with a concept, that is meant to solve a problem and add a
certain value to the consumer, the concept is transformed into a product whose features aim
to materialize the concept and the product is given an identity that distinguishes it and
reflect its values, which are communicated to the potential consumer (Hameide, 2011).
According to Gasovic (2011), famous international world brands have ten common
characteristics, namely:

 Brand offers benefits that consumers really want.

 Relevance of the brand is constant.

 Strategy and pricing are based on perceptions of value from the perspective of
consumers.

 The brand is well positioned.

 Consistent brand.

 Brand portfolio and hierarchy are consistent.

 Brand coordinates and use a variety of marketing activities aimed at building value.

 Brand managers know what brand means to consumers.

 Brand has adequate ongoing support.

 Company monitors the sources of brand value.

From the above discussion we can conclude that a brand is not just a name, symbol or logo,
it goes further and has dimensions of quality, image, status and lifestyle. Before examining
deeper brand personality aspect, we need to reflect more on brand attributes, benefits,
attitudes and emotions which define the brand persona.
REVIEW OF LITERATURE

1. (Bernard 1986) study concluded that conveying a brand image to a target market
is a fundamental marketing activity. The method for maintaining this concept
image linkage depends on whether the brand concept is functional, symbolic or
experiential.

2. (Belk 1988) observed that the consumption of goods and services by a consumer is
not his/her own choice. It is a source to maintain the identity that a person wants
to be in front of society.

3. (Levine 1997) explained that a lot of buyers “would slightly have a Rolex than a
household”. The outer and calculated ratio of the consumers of goods can relate
to the people who have that material identity and they feel good to announce their
personality which can appeal to people towards them.

4. (Pamela and Robert 1999) found that success of the strategy depends heavily on
the marketers understanding of the preference building and bonding. And the
relationship should be based on a strong bond between the buyer and the brand.

5. (Dongdae and Ganesh 1999) study found out that overall image and product
specific image and three different types of familiarity product familiarity, brand
familiarity and country familiarity. It also states that the product specific image
plays a mediating role between overall country image and consumer evaluation with
product and brand familiarity moderate familiarity consumers utilize country of
origin information less than low or high familiarity consumers.

6. (Atilgan, Satak and Serkan 2001) study concludes that brand loyalty is the most
influential dimension of brand equity. Weak support is found for the brand
awareness and perceived quality dimensions.

7. (Benedict and Rajeev 2002) did a study on how brand creates value. It is
important to understand why some consumers prefer global brands. It is based on
the quality.

8. (Ravi, Pascale and Ray 2005) study found that brand awareness and brand
associations were found to be two distinct dimensions of brand equity ass
conceptualized in the market literature.

9. (Tsai 2005) explained that luxury products are a source of being unique, and being
unique is a source of self-satisfaction for an individual. It defines the social status
of individuals who use these products.

10. (Aaker Janniefer 2006) found that an understanding of the symbolic use of brands
has been limited in the consumer behavior literature. He identified five big
dimensions of personality.
11. (Neelam 2006) study found that the quality of foreign brands was perceived to be
generally higher and superior to local brands. Greater accessibility of foreign
brands in the Indian market with better quality at lower prices is also another
reason.

12. (Frank and Joseph 2006) The study explains the emerging construct of brand
relationship quality into self-congruity theory. The model posits that self-image
congruence positively affects brand loyalty directly and indirectly through
functional congruity, product involvement and brand relationship quality.

13. (Katherine and Darren 2008) study explores males have more negative
evaluation of and were less inclined to choose a product associated with a
dissociative that is female, reference group than a neutral product. The mechanism
underlying our effects is a desire to present a positive self-image to others.

14. (Fernandez P 2009) study focuses on the impact of branding on youth in choice of
clothing. He suggests that brand conscious is the right choice of clothing, which
helps them to create an image and identity for themselves. Advertising is an
important variable in conferring brand values and establishing an image for the
brand. Celebrity endorsements have a huge impact on this matter

15. (Khare A 2010) study found that in developing countries consumers are becoming
conscious of fashion brands. He did a research on Youths of Indian colleges to
understand the importance of fashion apparels in their lives. And it shows that
Indian youth is involved with branded fashion wear.

16. (Verma A P and Tiwari K 2010) study measures the segment values of some
brands those have achieve success in the Indian market. And it shows that people
are becoming mere brand conscious with the increase in income level.

17. (Xuemei and Luiz 2011) did research that is the first literature on counterfeits to
establish that perceived brand personality plays a more dominant role in explaining
consumer purchase intention based on profit and product attribute.

18. (Yin H S and Susan S 2012) study found that preferences towards foreign branded
apparels are related to the level of purchasing power and is not related to the
demographics variables. From that 58% of the students surveyed preferred
foreign branded apparel. So it's shows a positive relationship between media
influence and preferences towards foreign/ domestic branded apparel.

19. (Mittal P and Agarwal S 2012) in this study one can understand that the
consumer and his behavior is the cornerstone of success. Physical, mental and
emotional processes and concerned behavior which are observable before, during
and after each and every purchase of goods and services. The research report
presented is based on the Consumer Perception towards Branded Garments. This
study an attempt has been made to practically understand those emotional or
 rational appeals, which drive the purchase decision toward the branded garments.

20. (Rajput N and Kesharwani S 2012) article defines that the Modern era provides
high quality materials and lot of variety in Indian market to satisfy the desire of
customers. And the result confirms that Indian people have become highly brand
conscious presently. Brand image acts as the factor in choosing the product or
brand to buy. Other aspects like, quality, comfort, expectations and demographic
characteristics are also influence to the purchasing decision that dominate the
purchase decision of males and females.
OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

This study aimed to: (i) verify how preference for a product attribute changes in the presence
or absence of a brand, and

(ii) identify clusters of consumers on attributes of purchase and to verify how preference for a
product attribute changes in the presence or absence of a brand.
METHODOLOGY OF THE STUDY

The above-mentioned objectives were pursued in accordance with a mixed-method research

approach, divided into the following steps (Figure 1): a) an on-desk survey of the
managerial literature on the sector in question, and an in-depth qualitative investigation (by
means of the so-called “laddering” interview technique), both aimed at identifying
information about the product, i.e. attributes, benefits, and the value of the product making it
possible to pursue which, in turn, determine the consumer’s choice; b) compilation of a
questionnaire (with a pilot test conducted on 20 consumers) by 500 consumers (Note 1) (non-
probabilistic sample) who regularly buy jeans. The data was processed by descriptive and
multivariate statistical techniques (using SPSS software) in order to assess the role of the
various purchase attributes with reference to the two types of consumer identified.

Figure 1. Methodology

After having classified the motives for purchasing, based on an analysis of the literature, an
in-depth, qualitative investigation was conducted (Philips & Reynolds, 2009; Orsingher et al.,
2011). It entailed 40 interviews (20 for each of the two consumer categories, brand-devoted
and non-brand-devoted; the number being useful for the goals to pursue as indicated by
Reynolds et al., 2001), designed to confirm, or rather complement, the information obtained
from the above-mentioned review of the literature. For the objectives of this study, the so-
called “laddering” interview technique was used, which makes it possible to identify both the
items that constitute the above-mentioned variables and the causal relationship between them.
Specifically, the “hard laddering” technique (Botschen & Hemetsberger, 1998) was used,
which guides the respondent towards increasingly higher levels of abstraction. The “paper-
and-pencil” method was applied, which made it possible to minimise the respondents’
conditioning, allowing them to follow their own cognitive route (Grunert & Grunert 1995).
The interpretation of the information acquired by these methods made it possible to observe
and understand the deep and personal motives that determine the choice of the jeans product
(see, among others, Orsingher et al., 2011; Fu & Wu, 2013) and, thus, to gain a more direct
and effective understanding of the consumer’s behaviour.

Starting from the results of the on-desk qualitative investigation, the sample-based
investigation was performed by means of a questionnaire completed by 500 consumers who
regularly purchase jeans (for brand-devoted, top of the list were Diesel, Levis, and
Meltin'Pot), with the aim of measuring the impact of each item identified in the purchasing
intentions. The sample was mostly composed of young people (78% were between 18 and 35
years old) and two thirds were women. The interviewees purchased 1 to 4 pairs of jeans per
year. Specifically, 23% of the sample purchased the product once every 2-3 months, while a
further 32% purchased twice a year. With regard to the objectives of the present work, the
sample is divided into two equal parts (brand-devoted and non-brand-devoted).

The questionnaire used for data collection consisted of two sections. The first section
investigated participants’ behaviours regarding jeans. The second section asked
participants about the importance they assign to the product variants under consideration
(branded or unbranded). This entailed measurement of the importance of the analysis
variables (the motives for purchase and, thus, the attributes, benefits, and values) in the
purchase of the product, using a normal assessment scale (1 = not at all important; 5 = very
important). Specifically, SPSS software (version 20.0) was used to perform a multiple linear
regression analysis on the data obtained, in order to verify any relationships of dependency
between purchasing intention (a dependent variable) on the choice dimensions (attributes,
benefits, and values). A descriptive analysis was then conducted and the variables that
showed a link with purchasing intention (attributes and benefits) in order to assess their
importance to the consumer’s choice. Lastly, factor analysis was conducted in order to reduce
the variables, grouping them in macro-factors depending on the degree of correlation between
them, followed by a cluster analysis, which grouped the consumers in relation to the
classification of the same macro-factors.

THE CASE OF “BLACKSPOT UNSWOOSHER” SNEAKERS

“Blackspot” sneakers are created and designed to be a more sustainable eco-friendly and less
branded version of Nike sneakers. Their main goal is to raise awareness among consumers
on the consumerism side of Nike brand and their branding influence. They are an alternative
for consumers aware of the issues of cheap labor production and bad working conditions.
Blackspot shoes are made of hemp, recycled tires, vegan leather and produced in fair-trade
factories. They also sell only to independent retailers worldwide in order to cycle money
back into local economies (Adbusters Media Foundation, 2016). Whatsoever, “Blackspot”
sneakers have no printed logo or name on them.

Nevertheless, Adbusters “Blackspot” brand has no difference than a regular brand (Haiven, 2007). It
is also on the market to fulfill a gap and attract consumers interested in pushing away mainstream
brands and limiting themselves towards ecological vegan brands.
 Figure of Unswoosher Shoes

Figure of Blackspot Sneaker

Their advertisement and brand personalization for “Blackspot” sneakers can be perceived
same as every other commercial for a consumerism brand. According to Haiven (2007), as
it is a subvertisement it makes it unique and somehow different from others. Branding an
anti- consumerism organization is a brave idea but it can be viewed and criticized from
different angles. Klein (2000) explains that in these information-numb times, we are beyond
being abruptly awakened by a startling image, a sharp juxtaposition or even a fabulously
clever détournement. Furthermore, Adbusters while fighting with their enemies – corporate
companies, use the same tactics of branding and same commercial ads. With these actions,
they distance themselves from being an alternative brand. They got involved in the system of
branding, advertisement and consumerism (Klein, 2000).

The case of “Blackspot” sneakers is indicating the relevance of using branding and brand
personalization in making products more appealing to consumers. Even tough, Adbusters are
fighting against consumerism and the power of brands, they are in a way involved in this
branding system. By selling a collection of sneakers, they are having a brand with a clear
brand persona of their own. As a conclusion and relevance of this part, brands play important
role in the fashion and business world and branding can be seen as a powerful tool that even
anti-branding organizations are using.

CULTURE JAMMING

Culture jamming aims to liberate the mental environment from the powerful grip of market,
structured consciousness by reclaiming airwaves and public spaces to propagate ideas
instead of plugging products (Bordwell, 2002). Culture jammers build a new idea behind the
original commercial ad to attract consumer’s attention. They challenge consumerism that is
advertised to mass market and use it to send certain messages. Culture jamming is unique
because it uses brand’s own advertisement and turns it to an ad with a completely modified
meaning.

Mark Dery (2010) explains that culture jamming intrudes on the intruders, they invest ads,
newscasts, and other media artifacts with subversive meanings; simultaneously, they decrypt
them, rendering their seductions impotent. Culture jamming is a unique movement that is
using commercial ads from the company and turns it to their own ads to express critique
towards the brand. Parodies, subvertisements and uncommercialism became Adbusters
distinctive marks that are shown to public through their magazine or broadcasted on
television or radio. A great example of their parody commercials is American flag that
instead of stars have logos of famous brands. In this way they want to show how consumers
are led by brands and do not actually think what stands behind brands they buy. Adbusters are
using guerilla semiotics and their goal is not to be subtle. They want to attack the original
brand and attract as much as attention as they can. They are shocking, confronting and very
eye-catching.

Figure of Corporate America flag

Subvertisements are very successful because they use similar or the same logo of the brand
as on the original commercial. By using the power of the brand, they catch the eye of the
consumer. These logos are in consumer consciousness and recognized very easily. By
building a story behind the parody ad, their goal is to make consumers question
themselves and their relation to the brands they buy. For example, bellow we can see two
pictures. The left one is original McDonald’s product ad and the right one is from Adbusters
spoof ad “Big Mac Attack”. By using the same concept of promoting as original brand, they
want to send a deeper message and to make consumers rethink themselves. In this case,
Adbusters wanted to highlight the unhealthy ingredients used in McDonald’s products
comparing them to nucleon- active ingredients.

Figure of Speial ingredients

These examples are all with the same goal and have the same message behind them. Are they
influential enough to make consumers feel less connected with the brand and more aware
of the current issues of consumerism? And what happens when it comes to fashion industry
where brands and loyalty are the core elements which bring profit? This study is aiming to
examine these two questions.
FINDINGS OF THE STUDY :

CONSUMER PERCEPTION OF BRANDS

Consumers as individuals make their own choices but in most of the times they are exposed
to different kinds of stimuli. Those can be newspaper ad, billboards, television and radio
commercials, online ads. By looking at these commercials and being directed with these
sensations, consumers create their own perception of the commercial and following that,
own perception about the brand.

In this part of the study, perception needs to be explained in order to understand how
consumers see, feel and react to different types of stimuli created by brand personalized
commercials. Perception refers to the process by which sensations are selected, organized
and interpreted. It focuses on what we add to or take away from these raw sensations as we
choose which to notice, and then go about assigning meaning to them (Solomon and Rabolt,
2009). According to Solomon and Rabolt (2009), there are three separate categories of
consumer perception:

 Object perception – impression and image that consumers have about objects and
products at the marketplace

 Person perception – impression consumers form of people from viewing there

psychical appearance. These are the basis for forming an impression about person’s
characterictics and personality.

 Physical perception – is made through the senses such as smell, vision, sound,
touch and taste and it is related mostly to products and objects.

Today’s global market has different variations of products and different commercial ads.
Consumers always have several brands that they pay attention the most and they are
acceptable for them. Some of them they buy more often and some just on special occasions.
How they look upon these brands is clearly separated from brands they do not buy at all.
Consumers form certain buying patterns that are once created really hard to change.
Marketers with their campaigns, commercial ads and special techniques try to grab
consumers’ attention. With brand personalization they want influence consumers how to
perceive the brand.

When using brand personalization all three categories of consumer perception are involved.
Brand personalization is always focused on a product and making the human personality
for that product. So the main attention is on the object. This involves the perception of the
line, shape, form, color, pattern, weight, material and so on. Furthermore, it also involves
the persona perception because it directs consumers to see the object or the product as a
real person with real human characteristics. Those products can for example be perceived as
representing femininity, dominance, social power, autonomy. Owners of certain brands
such as for example Calvin Klein are perceived as more extravagant and conforming than
others. Physical perception in this case is mostly focused on vision. Meanings are
communicated on the visual channel through product’s color, size, styling and meaning
behind the personalized message (Solomon and Rabolt, 2009). Consumers always perceive
brand as a whole, looking at it, trying it out and making their own impression of it. They
do not view it separately, but they look at it as a unity made from different elements that
make the brand unique.

Nevertheless, consumer perception is selective and restricted to certain elements that

interest the consumer. But even when consumers build a picture of a brand, many factors
influence them subconsciously.

With concluding what is brand personality, how does it influence consumers, what is self-
concept of a consumer and what is their consumer perception of everyday stimuli, this study
continues with explaining the usage of brand personalization from a different Adbusters
perceptive and how is that influence strong among consumers and in fashion industry. Do
Adbusters change the consumer perception of a brand?

BRAND ATTRIBUTES

A strong brand stands out in a densely crowded marketplace. People fall in love with brands,
trust them, and believe in their superiority. How a brand is perceived by customers, affects
its overall success (Wheeler, 2012). Brand through his attributes has two strategic goals.
One is to bring the value to the consumer while satisfying a need and the other one is to
generate economic return to its owners (Hameide, 2011).

Brand attributes can be divided into product and non-product related attributes and they are
always standing for the product performance. Product related attributes are known also as
features and they explain the traits of a product. They can be certain type of material,
components, trimmings. Non-products related attributes are those concerning packaging,
price, identity of the products (Pitta & Katsanis, 1995). With brand personalization, brand
attributes are associated with human characteristics and they have a specific brand identity
identified from consumer point of view. Consumer experience the brand through their
attributes both product ones and humanized characteristics made through brand
personalization. Some of the examples for brand attributes can be trustworthiness, latest
technological updates, the feeling of safety, attractive, expensive and so on. Every brand
needs to have his attributes in order to be recognized by consumers. More explanation about
brand personalization is going to be mentioned later in this chapter.

BRAND BENEFITS

According to Aaker (1996), Keller (1993) and Park (1986) there are proposed three groups
of brand benefits functional, symbolic and experiential. Functional benefits refer to the
product attributes of a consistent and reliable quality in order to attain daily problem-
solving goals (Park, 1986). Symbolic benefits correspond to non-product attributes and
relate to intrinsic needs for emotional enjoyment, self-expression and social approval
(Aaker, 1996; Keller, 1993; Solomon, 1983). Experiential benefits relate to what
customers feel to use the product or service, and satisfy experiential needs, such as
sensory, variety and cognitive stimulation (Keller, 1993; Park, 1986).

Of a great importance is to decide which brand benefits should be emphasized. They need
to be precise, unique and stand for features and meanings that consumers appreciate. They
are well respected and searched by consumer when deciding between different brands.
Brand benefits can be the base of brand personality strategy. They are the cornerstones
which are emphasized and shown as of a great importance. Brand attitudes can also be
enhanced by brand benefits.

BRAND ATTITUDE

Thoughts that consumers have towards brands, their feelings about the brand, information
and knowledge and their experience with the brand, all formulates brand attitude (Percy,
2003). Brands have different meanings to different consumers and they are formulated
through the brand attitude. It is the outcome of a certain beliefs about brand benefits that
support the overall brand image (Faircloth, Capella & Alford, 2001).

The meaning of brand attitudes is conceptualized in a model of “multiattribute expectancy

value” developed by Fishbein and Ajzen (1975). Attitudes are defined by this model as
the sum of all the silent beliefs a consumer holds about a product or service, multiplied by
the strength of evaluation of each of those beliefs as good or bad (Pitta & Katsanis, 1995).
Brand attitudes are also automatic affective reactions and are very closely connected to
brand loyalty and perception of the brand (He, Chen & Alden, 2015). In a way brand
attitudes form the consumer perception of a brand.

BRAND EMOTIONS

Brand emotions can be a very powerful tool if they are used in a way to build the strong
connection between the brand and the consumer perception towards the brand. The
understanding of people’s emotional needs and desires according to Marc Gobe (2001) is
the key which leads to a successful brand. Brand emotions are also a part of brand
personalization used to make a strong connection between people and the brand. They
encompass feelings brands want to evoke, as well as those actually brought to the minds of
consumers when they encounter the brand (Wheeler, 2006). Brand emotions can be based
on brands heritage, positive experience, quality, excellent service. On the other hand, a
strong unbreakable connection is being made where consumers reflect their personality and
characteristics in products that they purchase. Consumers associate with brands they feel
reflect their identity and when a close emotional link to a brand is formed emotions can run
high (Gobe, 2010).

In conclusion, branding is a disciplined process used to build awareness and extend

customer relation to brands. Branding is about seizing every opportunity to express why
people should choose one brand over another. Branding is a way to position and build the
brand at the market. Brands are associations of brand attributes, attitudes, benefits and
emotions structured in one package to persuade consumers first to identify with them and
then to build a strong connection with them.

BRAND PERSONALITY

Personality, from ancient times, is studied from many different perspectives, within
psychoanalytic, behaviorism, cognitive psychology. Personality is a way that people differ
from each other and the way that people are unique. Personality defined by Plummer (2000)
is the way individuals react fairly consistently to a variety of of environmental situations.
The same is with the brands, they can also in certain ways differ from each other and
that is the main goal of marketers (Smit, Van de Berge & Franzen, 2003).

Brand personality theory is in a way based on the human personality theory which describes
personality as a set of different traits. They are based on individual behavior, appearance,
above mentioned attitudes, emotions and attributes. In order to define brand personality in a
right way, the best approach is to use the definitions from the most important authors and
writers in this field. There are several definitions:

 The extent to which consumers perceive a brand to posses various human

characteristics or traits (Alt and Griggs, 1988)

 The set of human characteristics associated with, which makes it unique,

compared to other brands (Aaker, 1996).

 Brand personality reflects how people feel about a brand, rather then what they
think the brand is or does (Keller, 1998)

 The consumer’s emotional response to a brand through which brand attributes are
personified and are used to differentiate between alternative offerings (Patterson,
1999)

These are just few of the definitions of brand personality that point out the similarities
between them. The main similarity is that they point out that brand personality is all about
the consumer perception of a brand, the perception of the image, attributes, associations,
symbols and values. It is also about the emotional connection with the brand that builds the
loyalty towards a certain brand.
Brand personality is just one tool that branding experts use to build a meaning for a branded
product. It exists as a part of brand image as a mentioned above and it is also a type of brand
associations (attributes, benefits, attitudes, emotions) as can be seen on the Figure 1.

Figure 1. Brand Personality based on Brand Knowledge (Khan, 2010)

Building brand personality is important in marketing because brand personality can be

equated to the public identification of the brand which can lead to strong brand loyalty and
emotional connection with consumers (Marconi, 2000). Brand personality is a well-
recognized contemporary marketing tool because the concept of personality reflects the
importance of relationship in the society (Khan, 2010).

Fashion marketers are responsible to create the emotional connection between the brand
and the consumers. The most important part is consumer personal reaction to a brand and
the symbolic meaning that they create in their mind. Plummer (2000) points out the two
aspects of brand personalization as input, that is what we want consumers to think and feel,
and out- take, what consumers actually do think and feel.

Aaker (1997) developed generalizable scale for measuring brand personality based on five
brand personality dimensions. Those dimensions are:

- Sincerity – down-to-earth, honest, wholesome, cheerful

- Excitement – daring, spirited, imaginative, up-to-date

- Competence – reliable, intelligent, successful

- Sophistication – upper class, charming

- Ruggedness – outdoorsy, tough.

Every brand can be categorized in some of these five dimensions or maybe couple of them.
It only depends of the consumer perception of the brand and did the company succeed in
their campaign to present the brand in the intended way. For example, when compared to
other brands, Calvin Klein is ranked high in brand personality dimension “excitement”, Nike
was ranked high in “rugged” and Tommy Hilfiger is ranked high in “sincere” (Choi, 2014).

SELF CONCEPT OF CONSUMER AND BRAND PERSONALITY

Brand personality is closely connected with consumer’s wish to attain their self congruency.
Grohman (2008) says that consumers relate to brands as they relate to friends because of
their use of brands as very similar to themselves. In this context we can see the consumer-
brand relationship. Consumers are individuals who like to identify themselves with certain
groups in the society, desirable social status and like to relate with their possessions. In a
way these things produce an extended self and become a part of who we actually are. The
main thing is to associate personality traits with brands and provide consumers the right
symbolic value. But how brand personality actually influence consumers?

In order to fully understand brand personality influence and to understand how consumers
react to it, self concept of a consumer needs to be involved. According to Lee (1990) self
concept of a consumer can be conceptualized as an organization of various identities and
attributes, and their evaluations, developed out of the individual’s reflexive, social and
symbolic activities. It tells a lot about the consumer, what, where, why and how he
purchased products. Components of the self concept are actual-self, ideal-self and social-
self. All three components refer to three different segments. Actual-self refers to how
consumer perceive himself, ideal-self refers to how consumer would like to perceive
himself and social-self refers to how consumer would like to others in the society to see
himself (Choi, 2014). These three components then lead to an influence how consumer
purchases items according to the identity that he wants to build for himself. The important
part is to find a connection between the brand personality and consumer’s self concept.
When they are equivalent consumer has reached self congruity which is guided by the need
for self-esteem and self-consistency (Kressmann, 2006). If there is a greater match between
consumer ideal-self and brand personality, consumer believes that there is a bigger chance
of increasing his self-esteem. Self-consistency influences consumers to behave in a way
that is consistent to their actual self. To conclude, self concept in great amount works as a
principle that influences the perceptions of self, others, products, services and brands in
general.

Brand personality also influences consumers in a way that it engages them both as an
individuals and groups to participate in the creation of brand persona and to build their own
connection with the brand. Once a consumer see the values in a brand and appealing
characteristics, he starts to like and follow the brand and eventually the brand becomes
something that he identifies himself with. Through their perception of themselves, they can
give the brand a “human face” and build loyal relationship with it. Individuals may consider
certain aspects of a brand’s personality to be of personal relevance and create individualized
impressions of brand personalities (Choi, 2014). Usually consumers by wearing certain
fashion brands want to symbolically communicate their self-concept. By choosing to
wear a particular brand, individuals are using the brand identity to communicate their
personal identity (Choi, 2014).

Discussion

INFLUENCE IN THE FASHION INDUSTRY

When looking through the Adbusters campaigns, magazines and website, there is a section
called Fashion Slashin and Unswooshing which are concerned with fashion industry. Since
fashion industry itself has a lot of unsolved issues like mass production, sustainability,
increased power of brands, health issues of current model scene, it is an easy target for
Adbusters to make subvertisements.

Fashion Slashin campaign is focused on fashion brands that promote American lifestyle like
Tommy Hilfiger, brands that promote underwear with perfect human body like Calvin
Klein. Commercial ads in Fashion Slashin campaign are all focused according to
Adbusters (2016) to reveal the side of the fashion industry where everything is about profit
and creating an attractive brand persona, without caring about consumers, their health and
what they get for the price they are paying.

While Fashion Slashin ads are concentrated on several brands Tommy Hilfiger, Calvin
Klein, Gap, Diesel, Bulgari, Unswooshing campaign is focused just on Nike, their logo
and slogan “Just do it”. Nike has been accused couple of times for using children labor,
underpaid labor and bad working standards in their factories across Asia. Adbusters wanted
to point out, that consumers need to think a bit more before making a simple purchase.
As we can see, Adbusters again used culture jamming and created an ad with the same
style as Nike is using in their original ads. With Nike, according to Adbusters (2016),
everything is about image and less about the quality. Nike build a strong image and brand
persona that many consumers relate to because most of them wants to be recognized as
strong, independent with a clear goal to become even better. This image is built by branding
experts and without that it would be just one of the sport brands with a Swoosh logo
(Sandalin and Callahan, 2009).

As mentioned before, in the whole series of Adbusters campaigns and magazines, Fashion
Slashin and Unswooshing are those concentrated on fashion brands. They have given up
on the contemporary lifestyle and they want to bring down the state of mind of fashion
consumers influenced by branding and consumerism. Nevertheless, consumers can also
question their actions with Blackspot sneakers. They may be perceived as an anti-brand,
blending with everybody else and using branding as a technique to be recognized (Klein,
2000).

LUXURY BRANDS

Luxury has been around since the beginning. Around 100,000 years ago, Stone Age women
were draping themselves in mollusc shells to indicate their status in the tribe; we’ve moved
forward a step or two, choosing to display our spending power by buying luxury products.
And while fifty years ago, only the wealthy could afford luxury brands, now they’re desired
and within the reach of most people.

So, you want to know how to create a luxury brand and what exactly makes luxury brands
so special? It’s down to half-a-dozen specific features:

1. Superb craftsmanship: Quality materials and high standards of hand-crafting that

is hard to reproduce by machine are the embodiment of true luxury. This artistry,
craftsmanship and durability appeal to the connoisseur and set it apart; it’s why
Louis Vuitton boasts that one of its suitcases or handbags goes through more than
1,000 stages before it ends up in your hand. And Ermenegildo Zegna runs their
own factories that weave the fabrics that they use in their suiting. Often luxury
brands started life with teams of skilled workers in small workshops, so artisan
craftsmanship becomes central to their identity. Gucci emphasized this in their 90th
anniversary advertising campaign, where they featured black and white photos of
their workshops from the 1950s, pointing to the consummate crafting knowledge
passed down from generation to generation.

2. A rich heritage: Luxury brands usually have a long history, emphasizing staying
power and the knowledge they’ve accrued along the way. Sometimes their
mystique revolves around an exceptional founder, such as Coco Chanel or
Salvatore Ferragamo. Often they’re firmly rooted in a country’s sense of self: so
Savile Row tailors and Rolls Royce play on their Britishness; Veuve Cliquot and
Cartier are unmistakably French; and Bulgari’s logo references ancient Rome in its
typeface. It explains why luxury brands often reinforce their founding date,
their history and what’s happened during their lifetime: so Wolsey underwear was
worn by both Captain Scott and the Norwegian Roald Amundsen on their race to
the South Pole in 1911 gives gravitas and legitimacy that newer brands can’t claim.
With no history to speak of, new luxury brands must rely instead on powerful and
captivating brand stories or brand positioning.

3. An element of scarcity: The point about luxury is that everyone shouldn’t be able
to afford it. so many high-end brands ration their products and accessibility. The
six- year waiting list for the Hermès Birkin bag is legendary: if it’s worth waiting
for, it’s worth having. At the other end of the spectrum is Pierre Cardin, a once
highly respected couture brand that flooded the market with more than 800 licenses
in 94 countries by 1990, losing control over quality and design, and ultimately
devaluing the brand’s reputation. The 2000s have introduced the idea of high-end
brands reaching new audiences by collaborating with high-street chains, producing
limited editions that customers fight to get their hands on for just a few weeks. It
combines scarcity with a mass approach that drives desire but safeguards the brand
from overexposure – and makes the product, service or experience seem more
valuable.
4. A strong brand identity: A luxury brand’s identity must capture its excellence, as
well as its unique personality, aura and attitude, so they are careful to ally
themselves with a specific cause or outlook. Tiffany has come to stand for the most
romantic symbol of love, Liberty as a collection of the exotic and eclectic,
Lamborghini as the playboy’s ultimate toy. Each tries to establish a personal
connection with their audience, reflecting their dreams, desires and need for
recognition. Sponsorship is popular, whether sports (Rolex alone sponsors tennis,
golf, sailing and motor sports), film (Omega, Aston Martin and Brioni are all
associated with James Bond; Chopard sponsors the Cannes Film Festival); and
Burberry reaches to young audience by giving a platform to young British bands.
Some establish their pre-eminence by creating a foundation (DvF and Zegna) or
allying themselves with high-brow pastimes (Chanel and art, Cartier and Polo);
Prada, Ferragamo and Rolls Royce have even opened their own museums. It’s
these associations that generate interest and create more depth and texture to a
brand’s story.

5. The use of public figures: Vivienne Westwood, Donatella Versace and Richard
Branson play an important role in communicating their brands through their own
personalities, but others rely on associating with carefully chosen public figures,
who transfer their qualities onto the brand – and drive attention and credibility. So
there’s widespread use of film stars (Keira Knightley for Chanel, Jude Law for
Dunhill), sporting figures (Rafael Nadal for Lanvin, David Beckham for Armani),
singers (Madonna for Smirnoff, Britney Spears for Virgin Mobile), designers,
brand owners and even politicians and royalty. Louis Vuitton did it with style: they
developed gravitas through using experts in their respective fields, such as Francis
Ford Coppola, Mikhail Gorbachev and astronaut Buzz Aldrin. It’s also interesting
the number of high-end brands that have moved into film-making. Chanel began
the trend in 2004 with a three minute film directed by Baz Luhrmann and starring
Nicole Kidman, costing a walloping $42 million to make. Tom Ford even directed
his own movie, A Single Man – where everyone wore his creations, naturally.

6. A superlative store experience: Luxury brands have always relied on exclusive

and exceptional shopping experiences to create a more intense connection with
consumers and leave positive associations. It’s why many struggled with the
concept of online shopping being non-personal and accessible to the masses.
Buying a ring from Cartier, a gown from Valentino or food from Fortnum &
Mason is not just transactional, but a way of brands providing a higher emotional
reason to buy. So Abercrombie & Fitch and Hollister hire topless male models,
Burberry installed state-of-the-art interactive technology in the Far East, and Alfred
Dunhill pioneered the gentleman’s-club-style brand home, with its private dining
room, cinema, barber and spa, allowing customers to immerse themselves
completely in the brand. It’s these features that provide the framework to give
luxury brands the weight and texture they need to command respect, attention –
and the ability to charge sizeable prices.
IMAGE AND BRAND:-

A person´s attitudes and actions towards an object are determined by what a person knows
or assumes to know about the object (Blunch 1996), in other words the person´s attitudes are
determined by their beliefs. The Fishbone model explains that there is a link between beliefs
and attitudes.

There are three kinds of beliefs:

• Descriptive

• Inferential

• Informational.

A study by Fishbein and Ajzen (1975) describes the descriptive beliefs as those that derive
from a direct experience with the product. “The informational beliefs are those influenced
by outside sources of information such as advertising, friends, relatives and so on…The
inferential beliefs are formed by making inferences (correctly or incorrectly) based on past
experience as this experience relates to the current stimulus” (Erickson etal. 1984 p695). In
marketing it is common to talk about an image. An image is “the set of beliefs, ideas
and impressions that a person holds of an object” (Kotler 1991, cited in Blunch
1996).According to Papadopoulus (1993) the image of an object results from peoples’
perceptions. Each perception occurs at an individual level and therefore each object has a
different image for each individual observer. A customer bases his actions on what he thinks
he knows (beliefs) therefore the image is very important to a company.The image is an asset
of the company in which the company has invested time and money (Blunch 1996).
Competent food technologists could replicate Coca Cola’s “secret formula”, but what
differentiates Coca Cola from all other cola beverages is its distinctive logo or brandand
packaging, which is the work of many years of promotion and advertising and also
supported by near-universal availability. (Baker and Ballington 2002)Brand names are very
important. There are some products where the brand image has
great significance, which is why choosing a brand name for a product is not easy. A word
can have a symbolic function arising from all the associations it produces in consumer´s
minds. Certain words derive their functional significance by being associated with particular
objects (Collins 2007) A brand is “a name, term, sign, symbol, or design, or combination of
them which is intended to identify the goods and services of one sellers and to differentiate
them from those of competitors” (Kotler 1992 p442; cited by Keller 1993 p2).Collins (2007)
concludes in her study that there are six to seven points what make a good brand name:

a) Be original and unique

b) Be distinctive, but possibly remindful of the product category it is to go in

c) Be easy to read in all the countries in which the brand is to be marketed

 d) Be easy to say in all the countries in which the brand is to be marketed

e) Be of such a verbal form as to have semantic and/or symbolic under

tones/overtones, to convey the intended “feeling tone” to the consumer, and so
elicit a consumer response, in line with the marketing objectives of the brand.

f) Have staying power (Collins 2007).

The brand name is a commonly used cue to simplify the evaluation of a product or service.
Using a familiar word as a name is advantageous because it is easy to recall but using a
distinctive word is easier to recognize (Keller 1993). According to Graby, (1993) brand
image is the collection of ideas, feelings, emotional reactions and attitudes, which arise
from the evocation of the brand. Company image takes part in the brand image. Marion and
Michel (1986, cited by Graby 1993) exposed that there are three concepts of image that are
necessary to understand and can be applied to brands, companies or countries:

1. “Desired Image” refers to the target image that emerges from the strategic planning
process of the company.

2. “Diffused image” concerns the execution of plans by such actors as company

employees and associated agents (e.g., advertising agencies, retailers), and almost
always varies to a greater or lesser degree from the first.

3. “Registered Image” refers to the image actually held by consumers and other
publics. It is formed on the basis of actions of the company and the actors it controls,
but also of inputs from other actors in the general business environment (e.g.,
governments, trade unions, media)

4. The brand is very important for a company because the most valuable asset for a
company is perhaps the knowledge that has been created about the brand in consumer’s minds
through marketing. Brand awareness in general is when consumers think about a product
category and associate it with a brand. High levels of brand awareness and a positive brand
image increase the probability of brand choice. Brand awareness on people’s minds consists
of brand recognition and brand recall performance. Brand recognition is the ability of
consumers to confirm prior exposure to the brand when given the brand as a cue. Brand recall
is the ability of consumers to retrieve the brand when it is given a product category (Keller
1993).

Keller (1999) defines brand image as, “the perceptions about a brand as reflected by the
brand associations held in consumer memory.” Brand associations are divided into
attributes, benefits and attitudes. The attributes are the descriptive features that characterize
a product. There are the product-related attributes that are the ingredients necessary for
performing the service or product, commonly unknown by a consumer, and the non-
product-related attributes that are the external aspects of a product. The main types of
non-product-related attributes are the price information and packaging or product
appearance information. The benefits are what consumers think a product or service can do;
there are three kinds of benefits: functional benefits (what a product can do), experiential
benefits (what it feels like to use the product) and symbolic benefits (social approval or
personal expression) (Keller1993).

ATTITUDE TOWARDS THE BRAND:-

Mitchell and Olson (1981, p.318) define attitude toward the brand as an “individual’s
internal evaluation of the brand.” This is an excellent definition, in that it incorporates two
characteristics of attitude that, according to Giner- Sorolla (1999), have remained
fairly constant across 20 century definitions: 1) Attitude is centered or directed at an
th

object, in this case a brand, and 2) attitude is evaluative in nature, i.e., there is
“imputation of some degree of goodness or badness” to the attitudinal object (Eagly and
Chaiken 1993, p). 3) The third component of Mitchell and Olson’s definition internal
evaluation too, is noteworthy. It suggests that an attitude is an internal state. However,
following Eagly and Chaiken (1973, p.7), we add that an attitude is an enduring state “that
endures for at least a short period of time and presumably energizes and directs
behavior.” Thus, in our conceptualization, attitude toward the brand is a relatively
enduring, unidimensional summary evaluation of the brand that presumably energizes
behavior. In the above definition, following Machleit, Allen, and Madden (1993), we
conceive brand attitude as unidimensional, and like Zanna and Rempel (1988),we
treat attitude as a “summery evaluation” to distinguish it from the evaluation which is
“implicit in beliefs, feelings, behaviors and other components and expressions of attitudes”
(Giner Sorolla 1999, p. 443). For example, attitude toward the brand is not the same thing
as feelings elicited by the brand. Feelings are transitory, whereas attitudes are relatively
enduring. Feelings are self- referent; “they do not provide56 Journal of Current Issues and
Research in advertising information about the external world; rather they indicate how the
external world affects us” (Batra and Ray 1986, p. 235). Furthermore, feelings are
qualitatively different from cognitive or evaluative responses (or appraisals or semantic
judgments) that are a respondent’s statements of praise or criticism of the characteristics of
the message itself (Breckler and Wiggins 1989). The former is an appraisal, the latter a
phenomenological property of the person or a state engendered in the respondent (Gardner
1985).

ADVANTAGES OF BRANDS TO CONSUMERS

1. Brands provide peace of mind

Consumers want comfort, happiness, and satisfaction in their lives, and they get it in part
through the products they buy. If the brands they use consistently deliver a positive
experience, consumers form an opinion that the brand is trustworthy, which gives them
peace of mind when buying.

2. Brands save decision-making time

So you are in the market for a new HDTV and decide to search Amazon. You type in
“HDTV” and get 101,685 results. How do you cull the list down to a manageable number of
choices? You choose a brand. Type in “Samsung HDTV,” and you reduce your choices to
1,319. Picking a brand helps reduce the clutter, making it easier to find what you are looking
for.

3. Brands create difference

Any grocery store aisle has more product options than anyone can reasonably consider
purchasing. What allows us to select one peanut butter brand over another or over a generic
product? Branding helps define in an instant, with a minimum of thought what makes your
product different and more desirable than comparable products.

4. Brands provide safety

People, by nature, generally avoid risk and seek safety. Imagine you’re on a business trip in
an unfamiliar city, and you need to pick a restaurant for dinner. You’re most likely to pick a
national restaurant brand over a local one because you’re familiar with the national brand.
It’s the safe and predictable choice because you know what to expect. Brands offer safety
and reduce the risk of disappointment.

5. Brands add value.

Why do consumers pay higher prices for brands compared to unbranded or generic
products? Is it better quality, the look and feel, or is it the brand’s stature in society? It’s
probably a combination of each. Successfully branded products make more money for their
companies by commanding premium prices.

6. Brands express who we are.

What smart phone do you own? What car do you drive? What shoes do you wear? The
brands we use make a statement about who we are and who we want to be. People become
emotionally attached to the brands they use and view them as part of their self-image.
Apple’s classic “I’m a PC / I’m a Mac” campaign shows how brands can reflect the
personalities and self-perceptions of their users.

7. Brands give consumers a reason to share.

We all have opinions about the things we experience, and we like to share them with others.
Whether it’s a good book, a good movie, or a great meal, we become brand advocates when
we share positive brand experiences. In our increasingly social world, we have more
opportunities than ever to spread the benefit of our experiences. Strong brands give
consumers a reason to share their experiences.

DISADVANTAGES OF BRANDS TO CONSUMERS

1. Discourages from trying other products

Brand loyalty discourages the consumer from trying out other new brands which possibly
are more satisfying.

2. Leads to monopoly

It leads to some kind of monopoly known as brand monopoly. It is created by gradually

creating brand loyalty and image of the product and the manufacturer in the minds of
consumers.

3. Create confusion

Consumers are often confused in product selection on account of the methods of plethora
offered in the market. The situation becomes all the more difficult when all the brands carry
as Assurance of similar quality and value satisfaction.

4. Commands premium

The popularity of brands renders them out of the common man’s reach because they
command premium prices, such as Hercules Cycles, Crompton fans, etc.

5. Substandard goods

When the brand name becomes popular, manufacturers sometimes place in inferior and
substandard goods in the market.

6. Imposes responsibility

Brand imposes responsibility for maintaining consistent quality and delivering proclaimed
value satisfaction. It fails to do so. The customer will easily identify the brand owner and
file the complaint under the relevant law, such as the Consumer Protection Act.

7. Some products do not lend themselves to branding

Some products, such as raw materials, pins, fruits, and vegetables, do not lend themselves to
branding on account of their very nature.

8. Switch to another product

If the quality deteriorates or supply of adulterated goods is increased due to brand

popularity, the customer may switch over to other similar product.

9. Expensive

Building up brand reorganization and loyalty is very expensive. Particularly, small sized
companies cannot afford it. It might promote market monopolies also.

10. Increase cost

Branding needs heavy and widespread Advertising, attractive packaging and effective sales
and widespread Advertising, attractive packaging, and effective sales promotion. This raises
the retail prices of branded goods given by 22 to 30%. It affects the cost adversely.

11. Opposition of middleman

The retailers and the wholesalers may not be willing the stock the goods if the brand is not
popular. On the contrary, in the brand is very popular, they may refuse to stock and sell the
goods on the ground that their margin of profit has been reduced considerably due to an
increase in competition. They even prepare to sell adulterated and inferior goods at a lower
price.

BRANDED VERSUS NON-BRANDED: DIFFERENCES IN CONSUMER

PREFERENCES

Branding is a tool used by producers to increase consumer awareness and loyalty. The goal of
such marketing strategies is to convince consumers that the brand name is a substitute, or
proxy, for expected benefits. Raggio and Leone (2007) argue that brand equity, as the
perception that the brand, meets a promise of providing benefits to consumers. Also,
consumers may have an orientation hypothesis for satisfaction regarding consumption of a
product, to contact the same producer or brand in order to avoid the risk of a wrong choice.
This phenomenon is also referred as an “inertia value” of the brand (Keller & Lehmann,
2006). Therefore, branding may represent a mechanism to address this risk-averse behaviour
by providing a guarantee that the product consumed today will be essentially identical to the
one the consumer sampled on a previous occasion. Furthermore, a positive experience with a
brand may reduce the expected payoff of updating information about substitutes and
competition, thereby creating persistence in purchase.

In the process that leads to the purchase of a product, the consumer, guided by the reasons
for which he or she has decided to make the purchase (motivation), seeks information that
will be useful in making the best choice, minimising the associated risks (Erdem & Swait,
1998). The literature refers mainly to consumer behaviours founded on rational principles
(Kotler, 2012). Indeed, the product is understood to be the sum of a number of attributes that
enables it to meet the needs that prompted the purchase in the first place. Depending on the
weight accorded to each attribute (Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975), different market segments are
generated, reflecting different consumer behaviours. It, therefore, becomes indispensable for
companies to understand how each potential consumer evaluates a product’s attributes and
what role is played in this regard by the brand.

Although the behaviour of consumers cannot easily be schematised, given the specific
characteristics of each individual, it can be argued that the process of choosing a product
depends on the consumer’s preference for either branded or unbranded goods (Ubilava et al.,
2011; Hasan et al., 2012; Mohtar & Abbas, 2014; Spinelli et al., 2015). The expectations
developed by the consumer with respect to a brand, with the awareness of the characteristics
that it is able to provide, can modify the perception of the attributes and, thus, the preferences
that arise from the evaluation process. Although the literature contains examples of hostility
towards brands (Klein, 2010) and “unmarketing” (Stratten, 2010), it confirms the existence of
a positive relationship between the brand and the perception of quality that can increase trust
in it (Krishnan et al., 1989). Interestingly, after brand awareness is established, consumers
tend not to explore the additional informational attributes and purchase the known brand,
even if it is lower in quality (Hoyer & Brown, 1990). This is likely because the search cost
associated with updating product information across a set of competitors is greater than the
benefit that the consumer expects to receive as a result (Ubilava et al., 2011).

For this reason, the objective of this study is to understand the factors that determine the
purchase of a product by two categories of consumer, i.e. brand-devoted and non-brand-
devoted, verifying the importance of the features of the product (attributes) and the benefits
associated with it, as well as the values that the consumer seeks to achieve through their
consumption behaviour. Recent research has addressed the issue with reference to the food
sector (Ubilava et al., 2011; Spinelli et al., 2015), or when purchasing green products
(Schuitema & De Groot, 2015).

This study aimed to: (i) verify how preference for a product attribute changes in the presence
or absence of a brand, and (ii) identify clusters of consumers on attributes of purchase to
verify how preference for a product attribute changes in the presence or absence of a brand.

Investigating the emotions elicited by a product considering only its intrinsic characteristics or
both its intrinsic characteristics and branding, can give a deeper insight into product
perception and can help companies in the design and optimisation of products that meet
consumers’ expectations. This was conducted with reference to the jeans sector, given both its
intrinsic characteristics (variety of production, orientation to differentiation, growth in
consumption) and the frequent and specific attention paid to it by the managerial literature
dealing with consumer purchasing processes (Delong et al., 2002; Vrontis & Vronti, 2004;
Wu & Delong, 2006; Jin et al., 2010).

PURCHASE DECISIONS

Theories of consumer behaviour (Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975; Ajzen, 1991) place great emphasis
on the role of the product’s characteristics, tangible and otherwise, in order to understand the
motives for the consumers’ choices. A number of recent studies have examined the
possibility of better explaining the loyalty structure of brands based on various product
attributes or variants (Trinh et al., 2009). Seen from this perspective, any product category
comprises subcategories formed around product attributes, and that each of these
subcategories performs differently in terms of loyalty, obtaining its own attribute-based
loyalty level (Krystallis & Chrysochou, 2010). In this respect, managing customer loyalty
involves working with a bundle of attributes, with the brand name being only one of them
(Jarvis et al., 2007). Some studies have tried to explain the relationship of consumption based
on the attributes of the product (Ubilava et al., 2011; Jegethesan et al., 2012; Krystallis, 2013;
Hahnel et al., 2014; Schuitema & De Groot, 2015).
The appreciation manifested by the consumer is not exclusively linked to the product’s
characteristics (tangible and intangible attributes) and expected benefits. Some authors
(Maslow, 1987; Rockeach, 1973; Kahle, 1983) have placed particular emphasis on the
importance of values in individuals’ behaviours, i.e. the deeper needs which such
characteristics can help to meet. The model most frequently used (Kotler, 2012) for analysing
consumers’ reasons for purchase is the so-called “means-end chain”, which represents the
logical sequence of motivations undertaken by the consumer. The sequence entails the
consideration of the concrete aspects (the product’s attributes) associated with the expected
benefits (the consequences of its use), and the values that guide the behaviour of the
individual (Gutman, 1982; Reynolds & Gutman, 1988). A mental association between the
individual and the product is also assumed by self-image congruence models (Kressmann et
al., 2006; Sung et al., 2012). The basic assumption of self-image congruence models is that
consumers use products to express their self-images. Self-congruity refers to the matching
between consumers’ self-images (i.e., actual, ideal, social, and ideal social self-images) and
value-expressive attributes of the product.

Exploring the consumer’s decision-making process is useful because the thoughts arising
from one’s most personal and private values are often sub-conscious and consumers are rarely
able to identify and reveal them. For marketing managers, it is important to know the
consumer’s perception of the product’s characteristics and, accordingly, adopt specific
communication and positioning strategies. The theoretical background of this research is
based on the approach that supposes that the properties or characteristics of the goods are the
sources of consumer utility. Therefore, the consumer, with specific preferences for each of
the product characteristics and a budget constraint, will choose the bundle of attributes
(product in total) that maximises his/her utility.

BRAND IMAGE

Brand is the incorporation of all impressions received by consumers which will lead to a
distinctive position in their mind based on perceived emotional and functional benefits (Raj
& Jyothi, 2011). In particular, an image is the mental construct developed by the consumer on
the basis of a few selected impressions (Reynolds, 1988). Keller (1993) argued that the value
of the brand should be attributed to the “differential effect of brand knowledge on consumer
response to the marketing of the brand”. In other words, brand equity is the difference
between the marketing effects accruing to branded and non-branded products (Farquhar,
1989; Aaker, 1996; Ailawadi et al., 2003). In some circumstances, the “inertia value” of the
brand (Keller & Lehmann, 2006), i.e. aversion to the risk of changing brand on the part of
the consumer, can also affect the perception of a product’s or brand’s attributes, which
generates trust and thus repeat purchases of the brand. Keller (1993) and Aaker (1991)
considered brand image as a set of perceptions or associations that are activated in the
memory of the consumer thinking about a brand. Biel (1992), however, defined brand image
as “a cluster of attributes and associations that consumers connect to the brand name”.

Hsieh, Pan & Setiono (2004) argue that “a successful brand image enables consumers to
identify the needs that the brand satisfies and to differentiate the brand from its competitors,
and consequently increases the likelihood that consumers will purchase the brand”.

Indeed, the presence of a brand affects the reputation of a company and its products,
becoming a proxy for trust. For this reason, the varying degrees of credibility accrued by a
brand can determine different perceptions among consumers of the information obtained,
leading them to make distinctions both between one branded product and another, and
between branded and unbranded products. What distinguishes a branded product from an
unbranded product—and gives it value—is the overall perception developed by consumers
regarding its characteristics, the name it bears, and its meaning, as well as the company
associated with that brand (Achenbaum, 1993).

It is seen that the consumer’s perception of a product’s attributes when assessing the
alternatives can be modified depending on the consumer’s propensity to purchase branded or
unbranded products (Hasan et al., 2012; Mohtar & Abbas, 2014). The expectations from a
brand, with the awareness of the characteristics that it is able to “guarantee”, can modify the
perception of the product’s attributes and the consequent purchasing preferences. For
example, some authors (Krishnan et al., 1989; Ubilava et al., 2011) have verified the
existence of positive relations between a brand and the perception of quality that can increase
confidence in it.

In consumer psychology, understanding of how consumers respond to a brand (positive,

favourable perception, and willing to commit to positive word-of-mouth) begins with attitudes
(Franzen & Bouwman, 2001). The most common approach adopted in consumer brand
research was the three component model (Zanna & Rempel, 1988; Shiffman & Kanuk, 2007):
cognitive, affective, and conative. In line with this, the current study approaches corporate
brand image as an overall attitude judgment of an object (jeans or corporate brand), and this
overall attitude judgment is based/formed through dual attitudinal components (cognitive and
affective brand attributes). In this paper, cognitive brand attribute is defined based on the
functional characteristics of product, related to tangibles, such as product or service offered.
The definition of affective brand attribute is based on intangible and emotional criteria, such
as the personality attributes/traits of a corporation (Keller & Richey, 2006).

For unbranded products, the absence of a brand makes it necessary for the consumer to pay
attention to the characteristics of the same, as well as the benefits that they can generate.
Several studies have investigated the emotions that are elicited by unbranded products
(especially food products) within a product category, showing that products elicit emotions
for their specific sensory characteristics in absence of any other information (Porcherot et al.,
2013; Spinelli et al., 2014; Thomson & Crocker, 2014). The literature includes some studies
of the role of product attributes in the assessment of the alternatives when purchasing jeans
(Jegethesan et al., 2012, Son et al., 2013).
DATA ANALYSIS

ON DESK ANALYSIS

The on-desk analysis made it possible to identify the content of the information requested and
assessed by the consumer before purchasing the product in question, which was
subdivided into the two above-mentioned conceptual categories, i.e. attributes and benefits.
The analysis also identified the values that the consumer pursues by means of the product.

The attributes affecting the choice of the product in question are: comfort, fit (how flattering it
is for the consumer’s physique), fabric quality, colour, type of wash/treatment (stonewashed,
etc.), trim, design/model, originality of the model, how fashionable the model is, versatility of
use, brand, price, and originality of wash/treatment. The choice to include the brand and its
values among the attributes of the product serves the purpose to receive confirmation of the
irrelevance of brand in the purchase of unbranded products.

The benefits expected by the consumer were subdivided into functional (tangible effects) and
psycho-social. For the former, the items identified were: practicality/ease of use and duration
over time. The psycho-social consequences were linked to perceptive and emotional processes
resulting from feeling: suitable for all contexts (“feeling global”), fitting in with the crowd,
non-conformist, easy-chic, sexy, physically attractive, independent, fashionable, part of a
group, gratification, close to the image of a celebrity who wears it, brand values. To these
may be added expressing a spirit of adventure and creativity. For a brand product, affective
brand attribute corresponds to intangible and emotional criteria that can be found in the above
expected benefits from the consumption of jeans.

The values were identified by reviewing studies of “consumer values” and measurement
hypotheses. Particularly relevant in this case was the literature based on the “Rokeach value
survey” (Rokeach, 1973) and the “List of Values” (Kahle, 1983). They were: social
admiration, confidence, affirmation of one’s identity, reliability, personal affirmation,
tranquillity, social well-being, self-gratification and being a point of reference in matters of
style.

QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS

The description of the phenomenon, i.e. identification of the purchasing motives of brand-
devoted and non-brand-devoted consumers, required qualitative research, which is useful for
confirming or complementing the results of the on-desk analysis. The model adopted is the
so-called “means-end chain”, which is used to investigate the cognitive links between a
product’s characteristics and the individual consumer’s sphere of values. The mental
associations (memory networks) between the product’s attributes and the individual sphere
were verified by means of the “laddering” technique, prompting interviewees to: 1) list the
attributes/criteria that they use to assess/differentiate a product; 2) associate them with the
advantages that they expect to obtain and with the values to which they aspire; 3) make
explicit the links that generate their cognitive networks.

The processing of the data required, first of all, content analysis in order to link similar
responses to a common set of meanings and, thus, to standard concepts that express the three
categories being studied (Note 2). The next step was the analysis of the cognitive connections
between the concepts, i.e. the implications, the sequence of which determines the cognitive
map. An implication is defined as the perception of a causal or instrumental relationship
between the due concepts.

The results are represented in the “Hierarchical Value Map” (HVM), drawn for both brand-
devoted and non-brand-devoted consumers (each group is made up of 20 interviewees), which
shows graphically the content of the thoughts, concepts and relative links provided by the
interviewees. The variables for each level were selected by considering those that were
indicated by at least a third of the respondents (the threshold value).

Figure 2. Hierarchical value map for “brand-devoted” consumers

 Figure 3. Hierarchical value map for “non-brand-devoted” consumers

The reconstruction of the HVM for the two categories of consumer made it possible, as
expected, to identify certain conceptual categories that are useful for establishing the
determinants of consumers’ purchasing choices, substantially confirming what emerged from
the on-desk analysis. In addition, this analysis provided some initial insight into consumers’
different attitudes to buying branded or unbranded products. Indeed, the results highlighted
that purchasing motives linked to the pursuance of the same values, albeit by different routes.

The qualitative analysis enabled two extra benefits (“saving money” and “image”) and two
extra values (“self-esteem” and “individualism”) to be added. Although the first three value
objectives for both consumer sets are the same, the route by which they pursue them is
different, as is the frequency of responses given. In the case of brand-devoted consumers, the
first objective is “social admiration”, pursued via the brand, although “price” and
“wash/treatment/colour” are also considered. In the case of non-brand-devoted consumers,
“self-esteem” is the main objective, pursued mainly by the “model”, “fit” and “price”
attributes. The analysis conducted highlights a different attitude in the path adopted to achieve
the objective, dictated in the first case essentially by a precise tendency to purchase branded
products, and in the second case, by the search for attributes that make it possible to improve
one’s image while limiting the costs. In fact, the analysis showed that brand-devoted
consumers also seek to lower costs, since price is the second purchasing attribute in terms of
frequency of responses.

QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS

The first step in the quantitative processing of the data focused on the analysis of multiple
linear regression between the purchasing intention (dependent variable) and the macro-
categories identified, i.e. attributes, benefits, and values (independent variables), which can be
considered potential “predictors” of the purchase of a product by the two categories of
consumer being studied. It should be pointed out that the analysis was conducted on the
average values of the three independent variables considered as a whole. The first step was to
verify the goodness of fit of the model used by calculating the linear coefficient of
determination R2 (which represents the portion of the variance of the dependent variable that
is explained by the independent variables). R2 was found to be >0.9 for all interviewees and
for each of the two groups, confirming that the model is useful for explaining the relationships
being observed. Fisher’s test and the analysis of residuals (i.e. the difference between the real
and estimated values of the dependent variable) also confirmed the adequacy of the regression
model used and, thus, the presence of a linear link between the dependent variable and the
individual independent variables.

The results of the analysis (Table 1) show that it is the attributes and benefits that determine
the purchasing intention regarding the product in question (p<0.01 for both of them).

Table 1: Regression Indicators

Non-standardised coefficients Standardised t p
coefficient
B Standard Beta
Error
Brand-devoted Attributes 0.196 0.011 0.665 17.531 0.000 Supported
Benefits 0.112 0.015 0.328 7.273 0.000 Supported
Values -0.001 0.010 -0.002 -0.070 0.944 Not supported
Non-brand-devoted 0.206 0.014 0.694 14.329 0.000 Supported
Attributes
Benefits 0.110 0.022 0.323 5.104 0.000 Supported
Values -0.008 0.015 -0.025 -0.546 0.585 Not supported

This is valid for both consumers sets (the standardised coefficient provides a measure of the
capacity of a variable to determine the purchase of the product). The standardised coefficient
column also highlights the greater importance of the attributes variable compared to the
benefits for both categories of consumer. On the basis of the results shown above, the next
step was a descriptive analysis of the importance assigned by the respondents to the various
determinants of purchasing choices. This entailed calculating, for each variable, both the
average value and the standard deviation, the latter being useful for understanding the level of
dispersion of the responses with respect to the average value. Table 2 highlights the results for
the variables pertaining to the attributes category.

Table 2. Attributes and benefits characterising the choice of product by brand-devoted and
non-brand-devoted consumers
 Brand- Non-brand- Brand- Non-brand-
devoted devoted devoted devoted
Average st. dev. Average st. dev Average st. dev. Average st. dev
Comfort 3,89 1,19 4,21 1,10 Feeling global 2,51 1,234 2,44 1,302
Fit 3,95 1,16 4,22 1,10 Fitting in with the 3,87 1,172 4,04 1,198
crowd
Quality 3,61 1,11 3,65 1,07 Not conformist 2,28 1,201 2,12 1,227
Colour 3,55 1,15 3,76 1,14 Easy-chic 2,51 1,274 2,37 1,300
Wash/treatment 3,21 1,20 3,19 1,23 Sexy 2,49 1,259 2,38 1,334
Trim 3,31 1,13 3,29 1,20 Independent 2,60 1,271 2,44 1,317
Design/ 3,83 1,10 4,00 1,15 Fashionable 2,84 1,235 2,88 1,344
model
Originality of 2,99 1,22 2,92 1,18 Part of a group 2,23 1,276 1,95 1,154
model
Fashionable 3,15 1,23 3,15 1,29 Spirit of adventure 2,37 1,278 2,17 1,197
Versatility 3,49 1,15 3,72 1,15 Expressing 2,63 1,303 2,59 1,228
creativity
Brand 2,51 1,20 2,04 1,20 Physically 3,62 1,284 3,73 1,253
attractive
Price 3,64 1,18 3,98 1,15 Celebrity image 2,02 1,229 1,71 1,101
Originality of 2,73 1,26 2,50 1,24 Duration 3,73 1,151 3,96 1,238
wash/ treatment
Practicality 3,99 1,158 4,23 1,211
Gratification 3,24 1,325 3,31 1,422
Brand values 2,73 1,19 2,34 1,27

The results highlight the greater average importance assigned to the attributes by the non-
brand-devoted consumers. The determinant attributes for this category of consumer are fit,
comfort, design, and price. Brand-devoted consumers also assign importance to the above-
mentioned product characteristics, albeit to a lesser degree. It should also be considered that
the presence of a famous brand does not appear to be important for either of the categories,
meaning that for brand-devoted consumers, the presence of the brand they habitually purchase
plays a key role, regardless of its fame and the values it represents. Two further attributes had
importance levels below 3 (and therefore fell within the area of non-importance) for all
consumers: the originality of wash/treatment, and originality of the model.

Similar conclusions can be drawn for the benefits variable. Greater average importance is
assigned by non-brand-devoted consumers, especially to those benefits that play a major role
in the choice process, which for both sets of consumers are: practicality, fitting in with the
crowd, duration over time, and feeling physically attractive.

FACTOR AND CLUSTER ANALYSIS

Factor analysis was conducted in order to identify factors that could express groups of product
attributes that were correlated with each other and, therefore, linked. It was decided to focus
the analysis on the attributes alone because they represent the characteristics of the product
itself. Thus, they constitute the first information on which the consumer’s assessment of
whether to purchase is based, although this assessment is linked to other objectives in terms of
benefits and values, as the qualitative investigation showed. Bartlett's sphericity test made it
possible to verify the existence of any correlation between the variables, while the Kaiser-
Meyer-Olkin (KMO) test made it possible to compare the observed correlations with the
partial correlations. Both these tests confirmed the value of the factor analysis. The extraction
was performed by “Varimax” rotation, an orthogonal rotation method that minimises the
number of variables that exert a strong weight on each factor.

The analysis identified the following 4 factors (shown below), the composition of which is the
same for both sets of consumers. Thus, the four factors identified by the factor analysis were
treated as four new macro-variables to which the multivariate technique of cluster analysis
(a non-hierarchical K-means method) was applied (Figure 4). This technique was used to
identify groups of respondents who manifest similar behaviours with respect to the factors
considered in their choices. The Anova results (the F test) highlight significant differences
among groups, as expected, given that cluster analysis is designed to identify groups of
subjects with similar behaviours within each group and different behaviours between one
group and another. The statistical significance (p) was below 0.01 for all F values, meaning
that they can be considered reliable.

Regarding brand-devoted consumers, Cluster 1 is associated with expert (or “detail-oriented”)

consumers, for whom attention to detail plays a key role in the choice of product. Table 3,
which shows the average importance of each attribute for each cluster, and for the total,
provides further information on the characterisation of the clusters. For the cluster in question,
it shows higher average values for the comfort, fit, fabric quality, and model attributes.
 Figure 4: Factor & Cluster Analysis

Cluster 2, associated with “branded” (or “fashionable”) consumers, is characterised by

attention to the fame of the product. Specifically, leaving aside the importance assigned to
design (4.01; see Table 3), the remaining attributes for this cluster have modest average
values, confirming the role played in this case by the brand, which is the key element
determining the choice of the product.

Cluster 3, associated with “Perfectionist” (or “Wearability-oriented”) consumers, shows

greater attention to fit and comfort, not neglecting the role of price as a factor determining
purchase.

The clusters associated with non-brand-oriented consumers show a somewhat different

composition with respect to the four factors. Cluster 4 highlights greater attention to the
model and the connection to the present. This cluster is associated with “Modern”
consumers, who pay attention to fit, design and comfort, as well as price and versatility.

The “undemanding” consumers (Cluster 5) are those who do not assign great importance to
the indicated attributes. Although the cluster is characterised by the greater importance of the
brand, Table 3 shows the low importance of the attributes in purchasing decisions.

The “demanding” consumers (Cluster 6) are those who show a higher total average level of
importance of the attributes. Indeed, a high level of importance is seen in six attributes,
including comfort and fit, which are practically indispensable. The price, as with Cluster 4, is
the key distinguishing element with respect to the first three clusters, for which the value
assigned is not very high.

The cluster analysis showed that in the choice processes of Cluster 1, a relatively minor role is
played by the brand (understood as an element that facilitates relationships with the consumer
by developing trust over time).

Indeed, for expert consumers, there are numerous important attributes, regardless of the
specific role of the brand. Regarding non-brand-devoted consumers, there is a propensity to
assign importance in the choice process to various attributes, except for the “undemanding”
cluster, whose consumers do not see any element as important.

RESULTS

First and foremost, the research conducted confirmed the utility of the “means-end chain”
model by identifying the deeper motives for purchasing a product. It is only by means of this
model that the values can be identified, since they were not detected by quantitative analysis
alone. Indeed, linear regression analysis highlighted the dependence of the purchasing
intention only on attributes and benefits.

As well as serving to identify the purchasing motives of jeans’ consumers, the reconstruction
of the Hierarchical Value Map highlighted some tendencies in the choice processes of the two
consumer categories being studied. Indeed, the main ladders for brand-devoted and non-
brand-devoted consumers were identified, as shown in Figures 2 and 3.

The two groups of consumers seek similar values. The difference between them is the way in
which they pursue these values. It should be pointed out that price is an important attribute for
all consumers. In addition, Figures 2 and 3 show that the values indicated by the most
frequent responses are shared by the two groups of consumers; what varies is the route by
which each group seeks these values, depending on their sensitivity or otherwise towards the
brand.

Findings 1: how preference for product attribute changes in the presence or absence of a
brand.

The quantitative analysis, as already noted, shows that there is no link between the purchase
intention and the values sought. Regression analysis highlights that brand-devoted and non-
brand-devoted consumers choose the product considering both attributes and benefits. Both
types of consumer attach greater importance to the attributes than the benefits (factor t of the
regression analysis and average of the descriptive analysis).

The descriptive analysis shows that non-brand-devoted consumers seem more insecure and
put greater importance on the observed variables. Brand-devoted consumers do not attach
importance to famous brands or to the values associated with the brand. This can be explained
through reference to the observation that the strength of the brand lies in the consumer’s
previous consumption experience (Keller, 2003), which simplifies the choice process as the
consumer is guided by the trust which has built up over time.

The factor analysis confirms the important role exercised by the attributes “fit”, “design
model”, “comfort”, and “price”, falling under the factor “model” to which both consumer sets
pay more attention. This dimension represents the attributes of the product, representing the
need for a trial.

The findings suggest that between brand-devoted and non-brand-devoted consumers, there is
no change in the preferences of attributes but more the importance attached to them.
Moreover, it appears that consumers do not merely use specific product cues to judge the
concrete/functional aspects of a product (e.g., comfort, design), but also link various cues to
higher or abstract values, such as psychological and social values, sensory pleasure, and
symbolic meaning.

Findings 2: how characteristics of a cluster change in the presence or absence of a brand.

The foregoing observations are confirmed by the cluster analysis. Indeed, the difference
between the groups of consumer lies in the lesser importance assigned to the attributes in the
purchasing choices. For the non-brand-devoted group, since there is no previous
“structured” relationship with a brand, there is greater attention paid to certain features of
the product. This emerges for both the “modern” and the “demanding” consumers.

The most consistent cluster of brand-devoted is “branded”, which is characterised by the

importance assigned to brand components and up-to-date components, being originality, style
and versatility. The second is that of “experts”, for which there are several attributes showing
a high importance in the process of choice. For non-brand-devoted consumers, the largest
cluster is “demanding”, representing the consumers who consider various attributes are
important. The absence of a brand makes the choice of jeans more complex; there is a
preliminary understanding of the product that one buys (in terms of expectations) and,
therefore, there are more variables that are evaluated. The element of the product that is
viewed with great importance concerns the model; comfort, fit, design/model, and versatility
attributes are considered very important, in particular by the not brand-devoted consumers. In
addition, price is an important variable for both consumers (Table 3).
Table 3: Average importance of each item for the total and for each for cluster

Clusters clusters

Average 1 2 3 Average 4 5 6

Comfort 3.89 4.47 3.47 4.06 4.21 4.44 2.79 4.64

Fit 3.95 4.41 3.74 3.87 4.22 4.58 2.63 4.65

Fabric quality 3.61 4.26 3.49 3.13 3.65 3.31 2.74 4.19

Colour 3.55 4.21 3.46 2.98 3.76 3.56 2.74 4.27

Wash/treatment 3.21 3.99 3.27 2.20 3.19 2.25 2.92 3.80

Trim 3.31 3.97 3.47 2.26 3.29 2.96 2.87 3.62

Design/model
3.83 4.22 4.01 3.01 4.00 4.46 2.74 4.24
Originality of
the model 2.99 2.45 3.80 2.04 2.92 3.35 3.05 2.63

Fashionable
3.15 2.63 3.78 2.48 3.15 3.90 3.13 2.76
Versatility
3.49 3.53 3.61 3.19 3.72 4.12 2.82 3.86
Famous brand
2.51 1.99 3.01 2.11 2.04 1.85 2.74 1.87
Price
3.64 3.83 3.38 3.92 3.98 4.27 2.87 4.27
Originality of
wash/treatment 2.73 2.57 3.07 2.25 2.50 1.94 2.92 2.62

The findings indicate that there is a different characterisation (result of the different
importance of the factors) of the cluster between the two types of consumers. Only Clusters 1
and 6 appear to be similar, as confirmed by the description (Table 3).
 CONCLUSION

Brands are valuable assets that companies use to attract consumers and develop their
relations. Consumers are nowadays exposed to wide range of brands. They need
brands as part of their lives. Brands differentiate the products but they also differentiate the
consumers. Long term relationships with consumers can be built through brand
personalization. It involves identification with the brand. In this study, consumer and brand
personality relationship is considered as possibility to be influenced by anti-consumerism
organization Adbusters Media Foundation.

In order to give basics for examining consumer perception of brand personalization, the
primary intent of this study was to find out if consumers comprehend and relate to different
brands and brand values. Therefore Research Question One “How consumers within
different age groups, with different educational level and educational background relate to
brands and their values?” was formed. The focus is then turned to consumer perception of
brands and comparing do consumers perceive the brand as the brand wants to be seen. Thus,
Research Question Two “Do consumers perceive a brand in the same way the brand
wants to be seen” is formed to investigate this topic. Finally, a special interest was given to
Adbusters and their subvertisement ads to see if they can change the initially created
perception of brand persona. Research Question Three “What influences Adbusters have
towards brand personality created by original fashion brand” was addressed to detect brand-
specific variations.

The theoretical background was mostly relied on Aaker (1996) and Kotler (1996) as the
founders of branding and marketing theoretical definitions and Travis (2000), Plummer
(2000), Kendall (2009) and Wheeler (2012) as later contributors within this field. They
described the dimensions and concepts of brand personality. All three questions are
answered and interesting findings additionally appeared. They are classified into categories
in accordance to research questions as the main criteria.

In general, it was found that level of consumer’s relation to brands and their values varies.
For some consumers brand attributes, attitudes and emotions are more important than what
the product. Another interesting finding is that consumers are easily related to brands in
general but when looked to a specific brand it is still very brand oriented and varies from
case to case. This was especially noticeable within consumers aged from 20-24 with
Marketing or Fashion background. In conclusion, the brand relation depends on the type of
the brand, how consumers perceive the brand and do they want to identify with that brand.
Brands are perceived in most of the cases as they want to be seen but there are always
exemptions. Small details may lead consumers to experience the brand persona in a
different way. There needs to be stated a clear and consistent use of brand persona which
also makes consumers consistent in their perception of brand personas.

Concluded from this study, brand personalization is not an easy task to complete. Every
detail within branding strategy is important and crucial for developing consumer-brand
connection. As we saw in the Nike case, their use of athletes complied with motivational
logos seemed to some consumers exaggerated and aggressive and they did not want to relate
to Nike brand. Adbusters with their readers and followers are quite influential if they have
strong argumentation behind the parody ad. In the same Nike case, Adbusters in their ads
are involving the problem of underpaid labor that this company is accused of using in their
production. This resulted with changes within perception of Nike’s brand persona.
Nevertheless, consumers can have a connection with a brand but it can be changed if
connection is not strong enough. If consumers are attached to quality of the product, retail
experience and on top of that, to brand persona, not much influence can be involved.

Through branding, stories behind the brand are made. This accompanied with brand
personalization makes brands alive and part of consumer’s society whatever they wanted it
or not.

This study is relevant for both managers and marketing and branding professionals within
fashion industry. Since the study also has focus on the anti-consumerism and anti-branding
organizations, implications can be found also in this field. The study has focus mainly on
brand personalization and how this brand persona can be perceived by consumers and
thus, the main implication of this study provides a starting point for researching and
strengthening the casual interrelationship of consumer and brand relation. For the
practitioners within the field of brand personalization, the study is giving a theoretical
approach to the problem of consumer perception of brand personas and on what they need to
pay attention to when developing a branding strategy. It gives the consumer point of view
towards perceiving brand personas and how these personas can be changed, in the case of
this study, by Adbusters Media Foundation.
 REFERENCES

Aaker, D.A., 1996. Building strong brands. New York: The Free Press – A Division of
Simon & Schuster Inc.

Aaker D.A., 1996. Measuring brand equity across products and markets. California
Management Review. 38, pp.102–120.

Aaker, J. L., 1997. Dimensions of Brand Personality. Journal of Marketing Research,

34(3), pp.347-356.

Adbusters Media Foundation, 2016. About. [online] Available at:

<https://www.adbusters.org/> [Accessed 30 April 2016].

Adbusters Media Foundation, 2016. Our campaigns. [online] Available at:

<https://www.adbusters.org/campaigns/> [Accessed 29 April 2016].

Alt, M. and Griggs, S., 1988. Can a brand be cheeky. Marketing Intelligence and
Planning, 6(4), pp.9-26.

American Marketing Association, 2016. Definition of Brand. [online] Available at:

<https://www.ama.org/resources/Pages/Dictionary.aspx?dLetter=B> [Accessed 13 April
2016].

Azoulay, A., Kapferer, J. N., 2003. Do brand personality scales really measure brand
personality?. Journal of Brand Management, 11(2), pp.143-155.

Bordwell M., 2002. Jamming Culture: Adbusters Hip Media Campaign against
Consumerism. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Calvin Klein, 2015. About Calvin Klein. [online] Available at:

<http://explore.calvinklein.com/en_US/corporate> [Accessed 15 May 2016].

Choi T. M., 2014. Fashion Branding and Consumer Behaviours. New York: Springer.

Clifton, R., Simmons, J. and Ahmad, S., 2004. Brands and Branding. 2nd ed., London:
Bloomberg Press.

Faircloth J. B., Capella L. M. and Alford B. L., 2001. The Effect of Brand Attitude and
Brand Image on Brand Equity. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice. 9(3), pp.61-75.

Fishbein, M. & Ajzen, I., 1975. Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction
to Theory and Research. New York: Addison-Wesley.

Gasovic M., 2011. Product management. Subotica: University of Novi Sad.

Gobé, M., 2001. Emotional Branding: the new paradigm for connecting brands to People.
New York: Allworth Press.

Grohmann, B., 2008. Gender Dimensions of Brand Personality. Journal of Marketing

Research, 45, pp.1-59.

Haiven M., 2007. Privatized Resistance: AdBusters and the Culture of Neoliberalism. The
Review of Education, Pedagogy, and Cultural Studies, 29, p.88.

Hameide K. K., 2011. Fashion Branding Unraveled. New York: Fairchild Books.

Hankinson, G. and Cowking, P., 1993. Branding in Action. Cambridge: McGraw-Hill

Marketing for Professionals Series.

He Y., Chen Q., and Alden D. L., 2015. Time will tell: managing post-purchase changes in
brand attitude. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science. 9(3), pp.1-15.

Kapferer J. N. and Bastien V., 2012. The Luxury Strategy: Break the rules of marketing to
build luxury brands. 2nd ed. London: Kogan Page Limited.

Keller K.L., 1993. Conceptualizing, measuring, and managing customer-based brand

equity. Journal of Marketing. 57(3), pp.1–22.

Keller, K.L., 1998. Strategic brand management: Building and measuring and managing
brand equity. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

Kendall, G. T., 2009. Fashion Brand Merchandising. New York: Fairchild Books.

Khan, B. M., 2010. Brand personality and consumer congruity: Implications for
advertising strategy. The IUP Journal of Business Management, 7(1&2), pp.7–24.

Klein N., 2000. No Logo. Great Britain: Flamingo.

Kotler, P. T., Armstrong, G., 2013. Principles of marketing. 15th ed. Hertfordshire:
Prentice Hall Europe.

Kressmann, F., Sirgy M. J., Herrmann A., Huber F., Huber S., and Lee D. J., 2006. Direct
and indirect effects of self-image congruence on brand loyalty. Journal of Business
Research, 59, pp.955–964

Lee, D. L., 1990. Symbolic interactionism: Some implications for consumer self-concept
and product symbolism research. Advances in Consumer Research, 17, pp.386–393.

Levy, J. S., 1959. Symbols for Sale. Harvard Business Review, 37(6), pp.117-124.

Marconi, J., 2000. The brand marketing book: Creating, managing, and extending the
value of your brand. Lincolnwood: NTC Business Books.

Mark Dery, 2010. Culture Jamming: Hacking, Slashing, and Sniping in the Empire of
Signs. [online] Available at: <http://markdery.com/?page_id=154> [Accessed 29 April
2016].