The development of a new CBE scale is justifiable based on the explanation of the relationship between antecedents, construct and consequences under a unique theoretical framework. In doing so, this study resulted in strong empirical evidence of the Expectancy Theory (ET) framework for explaining consumer brand engagement self-selected brands. The sequence of effort (cognitive, behavior and emotional), performance (consumer brand engagement) and outcomes (BRR & CBE-O) chain of effects was large and significant. The effort-performance (E-P) causal relation was operationalized by the effort based dimensions of CBE, namely Cognitive, Behavioral and Emotional. The performance-outcome (P-O) causal relation was operationalized by the consumer brand
…show more content…
First, the direct effect of the Emotional dimension on CBE-O, not foreseen in ET since the effort to outcomes relationship should be fully mediated by [brand] performance. The fact that a given effort is directly affecting outcome, regardless of brand performance, may reflect the fragmentation of meaning and the complexity in the consumer-brand relationships (Jevons et al., 2005). Brand building conceptual models (Ghodeswar, 2008) follows a sequential order to deliver consumers promised benefits and delivering brand performance is prior to influence brand equity that supports a full mediation perspective. This effect could be explained on a brand ambidexterity perspective (Beverland, Wilner, & Micheli, 2015; Melewar & Nguyen, 2014), when conflicting and opposing strategies are used to stimulate consumers, generating unexpected responses. The use of the Emotional dimension of CBE to evaluate outcomes could be based on the erratic consumer responses to premeditated (and unclear) branding strategy. In different aggregated levels of motivation (product level or category level), the consumer emotional disposition would vary and affect perceived brand rewards …show more content…
In addition, sampling from a consumer panel on-line may have biased to include respondents that are more likely to be highly engaged to specific product categories. Moreover, as previously described by Vivek et al. (2014) and Hollebeek et al. (2014), subjects are highly motivated to brands they choose, and including negative valenced enmeshed engagement (Hollebeek & Chen, 2014, De Villiers, 2015) is a challenge yet to be accomplished. Likewise, De Villiers (2015) passive engagement concept could be incorporated in the Expectancy Theory framework for CBE, once brand performance to brand-related outcomes varies “from + 1 (performance sure to lead to outcome) to 0 (performance not related to outcome)” (Nadler & Lawler III, 1989, p. 13). In addition, the theoretical foundations of the Cognitive dimension (based on equilibration processing) and the Emotional dimension (valenced affective reaction amassed over time) underlie a temporal-based perception, thus suggesting CBE time series modeling in future
First, the direct effect of the Emotional dimension on CBE-O, not foreseen in ET since the effort to outcomes relationship should be fully mediated by [brand] performance. The fact that a given effort is directly affecting outcome, regardless of brand performance, may reflect the fragmentation of meaning and the complexity in the consumer-brand relationships (Jevons et al., 2005). Brand building conceptual models (Ghodeswar, 2008) follows a sequential order to deliver consumers promised benefits and delivering brand performance is prior to influence brand equity that supports a full mediation perspective. This effect could be explained on a brand ambidexterity perspective (Beverland, Wilner, & Micheli, 2015; Melewar & Nguyen, 2014), when conflicting and opposing strategies are used to stimulate consumers, generating unexpected responses. The use of the Emotional dimension of CBE to evaluate outcomes could be based on the erratic consumer responses to premeditated (and unclear) branding strategy. In different aggregated levels of motivation (product level or category level), the consumer emotional disposition would vary and affect perceived brand rewards …show more content…
In addition, sampling from a consumer panel on-line may have biased to include respondents that are more likely to be highly engaged to specific product categories. Moreover, as previously described by Vivek et al. (2014) and Hollebeek et al. (2014), subjects are highly motivated to brands they choose, and including negative valenced enmeshed engagement (Hollebeek & Chen, 2014, De Villiers, 2015) is a challenge yet to be accomplished. Likewise, De Villiers (2015) passive engagement concept could be incorporated in the Expectancy Theory framework for CBE, once brand performance to brand-related outcomes varies “from + 1 (performance sure to lead to outcome) to 0 (performance not related to outcome)” (Nadler & Lawler III, 1989, p. 13). In addition, the theoretical foundations of the Cognitive dimension (based on equilibration processing) and the Emotional dimension (valenced affective reaction amassed over time) underlie a temporal-based perception, thus suggesting CBE time series modeling in future