Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Introduction
This study explores brand orientation and examines the success of a brand orientation
programme implemented through brand values. Brand orientation is a relatively
young paradigm (Louro & Cunha, 2001) which considers the brand as a resource
and the basis of increased performance. Brand orientation offers a source of strategic
competitive advantage (Urde, Baumgarth, & Merrilees, 2013), as it allows the firm to
differentiate itself from competitors and engage with customers by aligning strategy
with the brand. Urde (1999) defines brand orientation as ‘an approach in which
the processes of the organisation revolve around the creation, development and
protection of brand identity in an ongoing interaction with target customers with the
aim of achieving lasting competitive advantages in the form of brands’ (pp. 117–118).
From early inception (Urde, 1994), brand orientation research explored the processes
of the firm in creating and protecting brand identity to derive competitive advantage
from brands (Urde, 1999), when top management accord high relevance to branding
(Baumgarth, 2010).
Our study offers a contribution to the brand orientation concept, as it explores
brand orientation from the perspective of both managers and employees in
retail banking. The banking sector is of interest, as bank brands are uniquely
challenged in branding due to the intangibility of the bank offer and a lack
of product differentiation between competing brands (Bravo, Montaner, & Pina,
2010; O’Loughlin & Szmigin, 2005). These challenges have been compounded by
the damage to bank brands caused by the ongoing financial crisis. In 2012, the
© 2013 Westburn Publishers Ltd.
1008 Journal of Marketing Management, Volume 29
500 banking brands evaluated by Brand Finance (2012) saw their value fall by
US$94.78 billion. Strong brands will be critical to rebuilding consumer trust (Hensley,
2012). Specifically, we explore managers’ views in order to elicit the brand mind-set
in an industry challenged externally by economic tsunami. Further, we draw on the
market and brand orientation matrix (Urde et al., 2013) to illustrate managers’ views
about their brand strategies. We also offer insights into employees’ brand orientation
by exploring their attitudes about brand values, and we draw on quantitative findings
to cluster employees into three types according to their values adoption. These
findings may be helpful to managers in banking and related sectors seeking to embed
a brand orientation through brand values.
Our paper opens with a review of the brand orientation literature. We then
describe our research methodology. We present our findings from in-depth interviews
with managers, and the results of our large-scale survey of employees. We describe
the theoretical and practical applications of our findings, and conclusions are drawn.
Brand orientation
and the possibility of the two hybrid orientations, we explore the position of the
studied banks on the brand and market orientation matrix proposed by these authors.
The literature on brand orientation is often normative or prescriptive (Wong &
Merrilees, 2007). As explained earlier, this study examines the success of a brand
orientation programme implemented through brand values. To provide theoretical
support for our approach, we next describe the relationship between these two
constructs.
Methodology
This study explores brand orientation in retail banking in Ireland. From our review
of the literature, there is little exploration of brand orientation within the banking
sector. The rationale for exploring this sector is explained in part by economics.
In Ireland, 6% of all those in employment work in financial services (CSO, 2012),
and the Irish Financial Services Sector (IFSC) accounts for C22 billion or 35% of
Irish service exports (Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation, 2009). The
economic crisis has damaged the Irish financial services sector, and the literature
1010 Journal of Marketing Management, Volume 29
and permission was granted to record interviews using a Dictaphone. Each interview
was transcribed and compared with the recorded interview to ensure that the
transcriptions were accurate replications of the conversation (Miles & Huberman,
1994). Data analysis followed. Our data coding was supported by independent coding
provided by a senior Irish academic. Intercoder reliability was 92%, exceeding the
90% ideal recommended by Patton (2002).
Findings
Phase 1: In-depth interviews with managers
What is the brand mind-set of bank managers?
Brand-oriented firms start with the brand as a strategic platform, recognising the
brand as a strategic resource (Urde, 1999). In our study, both banks had long-
established brands, but managers revealed they were currently and actively involved
in brand development, using the existing brand name but with a new focus on their
brands. The focus on ‘brand’ as a strategic platform was evident across both banks.
Baumgarth (2010) also asserts that brand orientation is distinguished by the relevance
accorded by senior management. In our study, the impetus for ‘brand’ arose at a
senior level. Consistent with Evans, Bridson, and Rentschler’s (2012) findings, a new
brand orientation arose also at a time of leadership change:
We had a new head in our area, he saw the link between stronger bottom line
profits and a stronger brand. As far as he was concerned a strong brand would
set us apart from our competitors. . .customers would come to us first and give
us more of their business. . .its building the bottom line but building it with a
reason. (Brand Strategist 2)
their bank from its competitors, and they were striving to offer a brand to meet these
needs:
Customers were looking for outstanding, straightforward service and they said,
‘Nobody is doing that here in Ireland at the moment’. That was the rock we started
on, you can’t go beyond that. Unless you get that right, they won’t go any further
with you. (Brand Strategist 2)
Where is the banks’ strategic approach to brand located on the brand and market
orientation matrix (Urde et al., 2013)?
We sought to locate the banks’ strategies within the 2 × 2 brand and market
orientation matrix postulated by Urde et al. (2013). An initial review of our
findings would suggest that banks are adopting ‘image-driven branding’ or a market
orientation (Urde et al., 2013). For example, managers suggested that their brand is
a reaction or a response to an increasingly competitive marketplace, and part of a
battle for survival:
There is no plan B. If we don’t make ourselves different, if we don’t excel in our
customer service, we aren’t going to have a job, we are not going to be able to
handle the competition that is coming our way. (Customer Service Officer 2)
In both banks, consumer insight studies informed the brand design process:
We did a lot of research on our customer expectations. We have defined the brand
at a number of different levels with an overarching customer proposition. (Brand
Strategist 1)
We used an external agency to get us to the brand definition and we implemented
it ourselves (we asked), ‘What is our brand, what do our customers feel our brand
should be, and what have customers said they really want?’ (Brand Strategist 2)
However, managers recognised that an inside-out approach was also required, with
brand identity supporting customer experience. Thus, the mission, vision, and values
of the firm become the ‘guiding light’, and the organisation becomes vital to the
brand-building process (Urde et al., 2013):
There’s no point spending a fortune on brand identity and communication if the
customer experience doesn’t reflect the promise – they say a brand is a promise
delivered. (Brand Strategist 1)
Our findings suggest that the banks adopt a market and brand orientation, a
hybrid that relates to the market but recognises the importance of brand identity
(Urde et al., 2013). Brand strategists describe their brand development using words
such as ‘customer proposition’ and ‘customer value relationship’. Bank managers at
all levels insisted that their brands extend beyond the customer service/customer
experience concept. They highlighted the importance of employee brand adoption
for customer retention, as well as for employee loyalty and retention. Findings
support Wong and Merrilees (2005) who assert that brand orientation should be
a common goal and integrated effort across all aspects of the firm, as managers at
every level recognised the importance of brand identity. These comments from branch
managers are illustrative of this view:
1014 Journal of Marketing Management, Volume 29
We looked at the brand from two sides: one internally, our own people. And the
second one is the customer. And they go hand in glove, which is more important?
You can debate. The customer pays the salary but if we don’t have the right people
dealing with them you won’t have the customer for long. So it’s a chicken and egg.
(Branch Manager 2)
OUTSIDE-IN APPROACH
IDENTITY IMAGE
DRIVEN DRIVEN
BRANDING BRANDING
BANKING
INSIDE-OUT APPROACH
We’re a retail outlet – there’s no point in actually being under the table about
it. We have demanding objectives to achieve and satisfy shareholders. (Bank
Manager 1)
Even though we push and push and push the customer service part of it, if we
don’t make the mortgages, there is no point in having the customers because
we are not going to make any money. The boys up in head office are looking at
percentage profits at the end of the day. (Customer Service Officer 2)
[We] were delighted when the brand came out, as it said, ‘Look, we are customer
focused’, up to that we felt we weren’t answering our customers’ needs at all, we
were literally trying to flog products, you might as well have been standing in the
car park selling out of the boot of your car. (Customer Service Officer 2)
As these findings suggest that a market and brand orientation are both new
approaches in both banks studied, we sought to understand the process employed
to implement the brand concept in these firms, and to evaluate the success of brand
implementation among employees. In the second part of this section, we describe
findings from our quantitative study measuring front-line employees’ adoption of
their brand values. We first sought to identify the importance of brand values in
creating a brand orientation. Therefore, we explore managers’ views about their
brand values.
The impetus for brand values coincided with the banks’ shift in strategy to a market
and brand orientation (Urde et al., 2013). Managers spoke of a brand ‘revamp’ in
both banks. Part of this ‘revamp’ illustrated a market orientation, as brand values
were defined by consumer research:
We tried to define what behaviours we should be exhibiting to our customers in
order to deliver service, so we picked our brand values from the research with
the customers. (Brand Strategist 2)
Managers also recognised the role of brand values in creating a brand identity that
supported customer experience:
Values are not simply for people on the front-line serving customers; it’s very
hard for a front-line employee to be able to deliver the customer experience if
the back office are not delivering what they need to. (Brand Strategist 1)
We built a brand pyramid with the customer up here [top], we developed action
plans around delivering better service from a branch perspective. There was a
commitment from head office to say we are here to serve the branches who serve
the branches and we have to commit to a certain level of service for the branches
to deliver. (Brand Strategist 2)
These comments suggest that brand values were designed to support the customer
experience. However, managers also recognised the importance of the employee
brand experience:
We don’t just live the values with our customers, we live them among ourselves
in terms of how we work together . . . the employee experience has to see that
happening all around them. (Brand Strategist 1)
We sought to understand the role of brand values in implementing a brand
orientation. Urde (1999) notes that ‘the concept of identity is central to a brand-
oriented organisation and provides an understanding of the lasting inner values’, and
cautions that employees of a firm should understand ‘what does the brand stand for?’
(p. 127). In our study, head office management were confident that local managers
understood the brand, and allowed managers latitude to interpret the values as
relevant to them:
You know, you have to give employees a certain amount of flexibility, you have to
trust them to be able to interpret the values in the appropriate circumstances.
(Brand Strategist 1)
They had to say, down at a local level, how they were going to live every one of
the values. (Brand Strategist 2)
We found that ownership of the brand identity was dependent on local managers’
interpretation of the values, but this was problematic:
There is little bit of unease . . . People are saying, on the one hand, there is too
much communication about them [the values] and, on the other, because of the
multi-locational nature of the organisation, we’ve been left off on our own to apply
them. (HR Director 2)
There is an awful lot of jargon with it. We have [the values] up on the wall, we get
bumf every couple of months from head office but at the end of the day, these are
Wallace et al. Brand orientation and brand values in retail banking 1017
just words really. I know you have to have something there to say ‘this is where
we are going’, but . . . this is where the brand falls down because each manager
will try and put his own little quirk on it. (Customer Service Officer 2)
However, at a local level, managers were moving towards a brand orientation,
albeit with their own interpretation of ‘brand’:
We get central stuff, we do have a whole load of brand stuff, you know, but if we
meet all the things off our staff survey, if we are doing all those things [we are
successful], we don’t bandy around the word brand, we don’t. (Branch Manager 2)
Urde (1999) emphasises that brand-oriented firms integrate and combine the brand
with the firm’s other resources. Our findings suggest that managers are passionate
about their brand, but recognise that it is manifested in different ways in the
organisation. Baumgarth (2010, p. 656) describes the ‘behavioural perspective’ of
brand orientation (Kohli & Jaworski, 1990), where brands are described in terms of
concrete behaviours, and the organisation’s ‘practices are oriented towards building
brand capabilities’ (Brïdson & Evans, 2004, p. 404). This approach contrasts with
the ‘cultural’ alternative, where the process of brand orientation takes more of an
organisational view (Baumgarth, 2010). In our study, we found that, although values
were defined, and senior managers asserted that the bank was striving towards a
values-driven culture, managers ‘on the ground’ adopted the behavioural approach.
Branch managers did not use the word ‘brand’. Instead, they translated brand
meaning into examples that had greater meaning for branch employees. These
comments from branch managers illustrate this perspective:
I’d have a question mark in my own head about standing up talking about brand
values, I think people would be looking at me saying, ‘What’s he on about?’
Whereas we can clearly identify [value supporting] behaviour with a mystery
shopping report that says, ‘A customer phoned and here is their experience’.
(Branch Manager 2)
I mean that’s all lovely jargon, ‘the brand’, but the bottom line is if you are not
being accurate, the word brand and all of this jargon that goes with it useless. It is
all very well [talking about brand], if people aren’t delivering on the ground . . .
we break [values] down [for employees] into what brand means to you in your
daily life. (HR Manager 1)
We suggest that this ‘behavioural’ perspective of brand orientation offers
advantages for banking, as the approach is more easily implemented in a ‘root and
branch’ structure than an abstract corporate ideal would be. We also suggest that the
‘behavioural’ perspective at branch level can coexist with the ‘cultural’ view of senior
management, as the ‘behavioural’ approach offers a pragmatic way for managers to
implement strategy in a meaningful way. In both cases, brand orientation remains
consistent, as managers are orienting goals and behaviours towards the brand. In this
approach, brand values help to implement the values. Local managers can adapt the
more ‘corporate’ brand values into behaviours that translate the brand for employees
at the local level, ensuring more successful dissemination of brand values.
Urde (1999) asserts that a brand-oriented approach can manifest itself in ‘. . .being
impassioned, seeing the brand as a mission and a vision. . .’ (p. 124). The findings
illustrate that branch managers have a positive attitude towards interpreting the
brand, and take pride and ownership in developing brand identity at the branch level:
1018 Journal of Marketing Management, Volume 29
Therefore, although head office and branch managers had different views about
brand implementation, the consistent comment from all interviewees was that ‘brand’
was about customer service and also about enabling employees to ‘live the brand’
(Ind, 2007). In Figure 2, we present a summary of our qualitative findings.
In summary, managers identified a number of factors that placed ‘brand’ at the
centre of their strategic agenda. These factors included an increasingly difficult
market place, a recognition of a need for differentiation, and a resulting shift from
a ‘selling’ to a ‘best service’ mind-set, with a drive for customer value relationships.
ORGANISATION'S
STRATEGIC STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT
APPROACH TO
IMPETUS IMPLEMENTATION DISSEMINATION
BRAND
Organisational
Internal and Hybrid: market & Driven by brand view with
external forces brand orientation values behavioural
approach
- Head office
disseminate brand
- Battle for - Customer - Customer communication
survival in difficult expectetions expectations
- Branch managers
market (New) inform values
define values in
- Need for - Customer - Customer and context
differentiation experience (New) brand values are - Branch writes
one own mission
- Shift from - Employee role in statement
'selling' to 'best creating customer - One set of values
- Word 'brand' is
service' mindset experience (New) for all
avoided, focus is
on behaviour
- Drive for - Employee role in - Values are
customer value supporting disseminated to all - Other metrics are
relationship colleagues (New) employees proxy for brand
supporting
performance
Wallace et al. Brand orientation and brand values in retail banking 1019
The banks operate a hybrid market and brand orientation strategy (Urde et al., 2013).
While customer expectations and customer experience drive their strategies, they are
cognisant of the need for employee performance to support the brand message. In our
study, managers suggested that both orientations were new and replaced a previous
‘selling’ approach that had little focus on the customer, on service, or on employees.
Managers view employees as internal customers who must ‘live the brand’ for
others. Senior strategists provided the example of one group of employees (head-
office support) offering ‘best service’ to another group of employees (front-line staff)
to enable them to live the brand for their customers. As Figure 2 also shows, the bank
uses values to implement a brand orientation. A hybrid market and brand orientation
approach drives values development; customer expectations inform the values, values
are also used to enhance customer brand experience and employee support for
the brand. While head office develops values, branch managers are permitted to
interpret those values within the context of their branch. Branch managers take a
‘behavioural’ approach to disseminating values. Those managers write their own
mission statements with their branch teams, and measure the success of values
adoption using ‘everyday’ metrics, such as mystery shopping. Those other metrics
are proxy metrics for branch employees’ brand orientation.
Managers recognise that the brand is communicated through branch-developed
interaction with employees, informed by brand values. The extant literature suggests
that brand values are the core of a brand orientation strategy (Urde, 1999) and
the critical first step in encouraging employees to ‘live the brand’ through brand-
supporting behaviours (Baumgarth, 2010). Therefore, we sought to elicit employees’
attitudes about their brand values. We present these findings next.
all items was assured, as Cronbach’s alpha measures were greater than .7 for
each of the factors. This was followed by a confirmatory factor analysis using the
robust maximum-likelihood estimation method. Two items from the first factor were
dropped, as their standardised parameter estimates were below .5. After this deletion,
both factors comprised four items. The results yielded satisfactory fit statistics:
Satorra-Bentler (S-B) χ 2 (19) = 66.04, p < .001, comparative fit index (CFI) = .93,
incremental fit index (IFI) = .93, root mean square error of approximation
(RMSEA) = .07. Remaining factor loadings were above .5 and statistically significant,
demonstrating adequate convergent validity. Composite reliability indices exceeded
the recommended minimum standard of .7, and the average variance extracted for
each construct exceeded the minimum of .5. The confidence interval around the
correlation estimate between the two factors was examined, and it did not include
1.0. Likewise, the square root of the AVE for both constructs was greater than the
correlation estimate. These results provide evidence of discriminant validity.
The next step in the analysis involved examining whether employees fell into
meaningful groups according to their factors scores. Cluster analysis was performed.
Following the validation process, a single composite measure for each of the two
factors (i.e. strategy and planning) was calculated. These means were used as the
dependent variables in the cluster analyses. A two-stage analysis was followed to
determine the number of groups. First, a hierarchical procedure, Ward’s method,
using SPSS 17, and measuring the distance between cases using the square of the
Euclidian distance, was performed. We explored a three-, four-, and five-cluster
solution. According to the dendogram, the distances at which each cluster is formed,
and the profile of each cluster, the three-cluster solution was considered optimal.
Second, a K-means clustering analysis was performed for the three-cluster solution.
The initial centroids of the three clusters were used as the starting centres for the
analysis. The solution provided the greater contrast between the groups (Hair, Black,
Babin, Anderson, & Tatham, 2006). Finally, to confirm the existence of groups,
a discriminant analysis was performed. This analysis checks the robustness of the
cluster solution. The clustering characteristics were used as independent variables,
and the cluster memberships were represented by the dependent variables. The
solution showed that 98.8% of the original groups’ participants were classified
correctly, lending further support to the appropriateness of the three-cluster solution.
An ANOVA test was conducted to test for differences amongst the three clusters.
Table 1 shows the cluster means and the F-values. Post hoc multiple comparison
tests using Tukey’s HSD when variances were equal and Games–Howell for unequal
variances were conducted to investigate significant group differences amongst means.
The final step in the analysis involved testing for significant differences between
the three clusters in terms of their commitment and leadership (discussion of the
Cluster 1: ‘Champions’
To describe our clusters, we draw on the terminology of Ind (2007) who suggested
that employees who ‘lived the brand’ were ‘champions’, those who were ‘not involved
with the brand idea’ were ‘cynics’ (p. 74). We use this terminology for clusters 1 and
3 respectively. Champions have greater levels of agreement with both planning and
strategy values. They have higher levels of affective commitment and higher ratings of
leader behaviour than their colleagues. These employees are older than other groups,
with the longest length of service. However, this group also has greater levels of
normative commitment than their colleagues, which suggests they buy into their
values in part because they feel they ought to. We suggest more senior employees
express buy-in to set an example to junior employees.
Cluster 2: ‘Investors’
We also found a middle cluster. In his employee typology, Ind (2007) suggested the
existence of ‘agnostics’ who were ‘interested but not committed’ (p. 74). We do
not see evidence of this type, as we find employee commitment across all clusters.
Ind (2007) also proposed the ‘saboteur’ who actively works against the brand idea
(p. 74). In our study, all employees buy into the brand values, and we are therefore
avoiding the title ‘saboteur’ for any employee cluster. In our study, we call the middle
cluster ‘investors’. These employees buy into both strategy and planning values.
Although similar to champions with high levels of affective commitment and positive
attitudes about leadership, they are lower in normative commitment. Normative
commitment is a measure of ‘oughtness’. If an employee is high in normative
1022 Journal of Marketing Management, Volume 29
Cluster 3: ‘Cynics’
In contrast to cluster 1, ‘cynics’ have the lowest levels of agreement with planning
and strategy values. They also have the lowest level of affective and normative
commitment, which suggests that they are least likely to be emotionally attached
to the bank, and least likely to feel a sense of obligation to buy in. These employees
are the youngest group surveyed, with 56.3% of these employees aged 35 years or
Wallace et al. Brand orientation and brand values in retail banking 1023
younger. There are also more female employees in this cluster than in other clusters.
Although we did not find significance between groups based on length of service,
we note that this group have worked with their bank for the shortest time. We also
note that the cluster has the largest number of employees who work in small teams
(fewer than three people), and have the least favourable attitudes about leadership.
Perhaps these employees feel isolated, or less involved with the organisation, and
therefore less likely to buy into the brand and its values. We observe that the levels
of continuance commitment for this group are higher than affective or normative
commitment. This finding suggests that these employees remain with the organisation
in part due to the ‘sunk costs’ associated with leaving (e.g. salary or pension benefits),
or were perhaps attracted to the bank due to favourable working conditions, rather
than admiration for the organisation and its brand.
Discussion
brand orientation in hierarchical ‘root and branch’ structures such as banking should
explore the role of the local manager in developing brand identity, and we advocate
research exploring the influence of the local leader and their team on branches’ value
adoption.
Our survey reveals three employee clusters in relation to values buy-in: champions,
investors, and cynics. While all groups buy into brand values, we find differences
across groups in their levels of commitment and attitudes about leadership, as well as
their age in particular. In line with Ind’s (2007) typology, we profile champions and
cynics. Champions are older, longer-serving employees with high levels of affective
and normative commitment. They have high levels of agreement with their brand’s
values due, in part, to their feeling of obligation to their employer. We suggest
that managers should harness such employees to ‘lead’ teams of employees in brand
adoption. Managers may achieve this by selecting long-serving employees as values
ambassadors within branches, creating values-supporting norms for colleagues.
We call our second employee cluster ‘investors’, as these employees have a strong
belief in the values but also greater continuance commitment and less normative
commitment. Therefore, they are motivated by avoiding sunk costs associated with
leaving the bank, rather than a sense of obligation to the bank. They buy into
the values to ensure high levels of performance that ultimately secure their own
positions. However, we question whether investors’ buy-in is any less genuine than
champions’ buy-in, as the latter group are motivated by normative commitment.
We suggest that future research should consider the relationship between types of
commitment, values buy-in, and outcomes such as front-line service performance to
determine whether ‘selfish’ motives such as job continuance have a different influence
on employee performance than employees’ sense of obligation to the firm.
Finally, we note cynics among younger employees. These employees buy into
the values but at a significantly lower level of agreement. We suggest that this is,
in part, due to their youth and relatively short service with the bank. We advocate
longitudinal research to explore values adoption as an employee extends their career
in an organisation. We note the lower levels of affective and normative commitment
among this cluster and higher levels of continuance commitment. These employees
may be a product of a changing environment where contracts are shorter term and
a ‘job for life’ is less guaranteed. This cluster may not see their future tied to the
future of the bank, and may be less engaged with values a consequence, focusing
instead on securing employment. Although the bank did not disclose the nature of
employee contracts, the current economic climate may create a feeling of uncertainty.
We advocate research to consider whether employees’ contracts or their perceptions
about longevity are changing in light of economic pressures, and if so, how these
changes in employee contracts might influence employees’ adoption of brand values.
As with all research, limitations arise. Our study explored brand orientation in
large retail banks. Further, our findings are limited to the banking sector and to Irish
banking in particular. Although the Irish banking sector is small, and we gained access
to two of the main players within the industry, we acknowledge that a survey or
interviews with employees and managers of other banks may have offered additional
insights. Further, although we interviewed managers across two banks, our employee
survey was conducted in one of the banks. Regrettably the other bank, Bank 1, would
not permit access to conduct an employee survey, and therefore we cannot make
comparisons between the two banks.
Wallace et al. Brand orientation and brand values in retail banking 1025
Although extant research advocates analysis at branch level (e.g. Moutinho &
Philips, 2002), the banks in our study would not allow us to differentiate between
branches, nor to identify branch managers in any way. Therefore, a comparison across
branches was not possible. Moreover, we acknowledge that our findings may not be
generalisable to other banks, or to countries where banking has a greater or lesser
role to the economy. Further, our findings may not be generalisable to other types
of firms. For example, our findings are limited to contexts where firms are large.
In their research on SMEs, Wong and Merrilees (2005) identify a ‘brand barrier’
where small firms perceive a dearth of financial and temporal resources for branding
activities, and Baumgarth (2010) found that smaller firms were characterised by lower
brand orientation. As the banks in our study did not face these constraints, we
advocate further research on smaller banks or financial institutions may contribute
to brand orientation theory by taking firm size and resources into account. However,
the purpose of our study was not to test theory. Rather, we sought to add to the
existing knowledge about brand orientation. We do not claim generalisability, but we
hope that our findings prompt further investigation of the role of brand orientation
in banking and other sectors. Further, while our study provides important insights
into brand values adoption in a ‘job for life’ environment, the inclusion of brand
performance measures was outside the scope of our study. Moreover, our data are
limited to in-company interviews and survey findings, and we did not have access
to measures of brand image or brand equity. We also echo Baumgarth’s (2010) call
for research to explore the relationship between the variables identity, image, and
equity to understand better the impact of brand orientation on the success of an
organisation.
References
Aaker, D. (1996). Building strong brands. New York, NY: Free Press.
Aldlaigan, A., & Buttle, F. (2005). Beyond satisfaction: Customer attachment to retail banks.
International Journal of Bank Marketing, 23, 349–359. doi: 10.1108/02652320510603960
Allen, N. J., & Meyer, J. P. (1990). The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance
and normative commitment to the organization. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63,
1–18. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8325.1990.tb00506.x
Barrow, S., & Mosley, R. (2005). The employer brand, bringing the best of brand management
to people at work. London: Wiley.
Baumgarth, C. (2010). ‘Living the brand’: Brand orientation in the business-to-business sector.
European Journal of Marketing, 44, 653–671. doi: 10.1108/03090561011032315
Boyd, G., & Sutherland, M. (2006). Obtaining employee commitment to living the brand of
the organisation. South African Journal of Business Management, 37, 9–20.
Brand Finance. (2012). Banking 500. Retrieved from http://www.brandfinance.com/images/
upload/best_global_banking_brands_2012_dp.pdf
Bravo, R., Montaner, T., & Pina, J. M. (2010). Corporate brand image in retail banking:
Development and validation of a scale. The Service Industries Journal, 30, 1199–1218. doi:
10.1080/02642060802311260
Brïdson, K., & Evans, J. (2004). The secret to a fashion advantage is brand orientation.
International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, 32, 403–411. doi:
10.1108/09590550410546223
1026 Journal of Marketing Management, Volume 29
Colton, S., & Oliveira, P. (2009). Banking on it: The role of the corporate brand in
rebuilding trust. Interbrand: Creating and managing brand value. Retrieved from http://
www.interbrand.com
CSO. (2012). Employment and unemployment. Retrieved from http://www.cso.ie/en/statistics/
labourmarket/principalstatistics/
de Chernatony, L. (2010). From brand vision to brand evaluation. Oxford: Butterworth
Heinemann.
de Chernatony, L., & Cottam, S. (2009). Interacting contributions of different
departments to brand success. Journal of Business Research, 62, 297–304. doi:
doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2007.12.005
de Chernatony, L., Drury, S., & Segal-Horn, S. (2006). Communicating services
brands’ values internally and externally. Services Industries Journal, 28, 819–836. doi:
10.1080/02642060601011616
Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation (2009). Government highlights importance of
Ireland’s financial services sector with investment in strategic five-year industry/academic
research project. Retrieved from http://193.178.1.129/press/2009/20091014.htm
Evans, J., Bridson, K., & Rentschler, R. (2012). Drivers, impediments and manifestations of
brand orientation: An international museum study. European Journal of Marketing, 46,
1457–1475. doi: 10.1108/03090561211259934
Fram, E. H., & McCarthy, M. S. (2003). From employee to brand champion. Marketing
Management, 12, 24–29.
Gromark, J., & Melin, F. (2011). The underlying dimensions of brand orientation and
its impact on financial performance. Journal of Brand Management, 18, 394–410. doi:
10.1057/bm.2010.52
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2006). Multivariate
data analysis (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Hensley, D. (2012). Re-building trust in banks and banking. Brand Finance Banking
500 report, p. 56. Retrieved from http://www.brandfinance.com/images/upload/best_
global_banking_brands_2012_dp.pdf
Ind, N. (2007). Living the brand: How to transform every member of your organization into a
brand champion (3rd ed.). London: Kogan Page.
Ind, N., & Bjerke, R. (2007). Branding governance: A participatory approach to the brand
building process. Chichester: John Wiley.
Judge, T. A., Piccolo, R. F., & Iles, R. (2004). The forgotten ones? The validity of consideration
and initiating structure in leadership research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 36–51.
doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.89.1.36
Kohli, A. K., & Jaworski, B. J. (1990). Market orientation: The construct, research
propositions and managerial implications. Journal of Marketing, 54, 1–18.
Kuehner-Herbert, K. A. (2009). Growing defection: More clients ready to switch as trust
wanes. American Banker: The Financial Services Daily. Retrieved from www.interbrand.
com/.../-1_AmericanBanker_May1409_Interbrand.pdf
Lankau, M. J., Ward, A., Amason, A., Ng, T., Sonnenfeld, J. A., & Agle, B. R. (2007).
Examining the impact of organizational value dissimilarity in top management teams.
Journal of Managerial Issues, XIX, 11–34.
Louro, M., & Cunha, P. (2001). Brand management paradigms. Journal of Marketing
Management, 17, 849–875. http://dx.doi.org/10.1362/026725701323366845
Macrae, C. (1996). The brand chartering handbook: How brand organizations learn ‘living
scripts’. London: Economist Intelligence Unit.
Meyer, J. P., Stanley, D. J., Herscovitch, L., & Topolnytsky, L. (2002). Affective, continuance
and normative commitment to the organization: A meta-analysis of antecedents, correlates
and consequences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 61, 20–52. http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/
jvbe.2001.1842
Wallace et al. Brand orientation and brand values in retail banking 1027
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, M. H. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook
(2nd ed.). London: Sage.
Moutinho, L., & Phillips, P. A. (2002). The impact of strategic planning on the competitiveness,
performance and effectiveness of bank branches: A neural network analysis. International
Journal of Bank Marketing, 20, 102–110. doi: 10.1108/02652320210424188
O’Loughlin, D., & Szmigin, I. (2005). Customer perspectives on the role and importance of
Branding in Irish retail financial services. The International Journal of Bank Marketing, 23,
8–27. doi: 10.1108/02652320510577348
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
Reid, M., Luxton, S., & Mavondo, F. (2005). The relationship between integrated marketing
communication, market orientation, and brand orientation. Journal of Advertising, 34,
11–23. doi: 10.1080/00913367.2005.10639210
Silverstein, B. (2009). What now for the money brands? Retrieved from http://www.
brandchannel.com/start.asp?fa_id=484
Somers, M. J. (2001). Ethical codes of conduct and organizational context: A study of the
relationship between codes of conduct, employee behaviour and organizational values.
Journal of Business Ethics, 30, 185–195. doi: 10.1023/A:1006457810654
Stogdill, R. M. (1963). Manual for the leader behavior description questionnaire form XII: An
experimental revision. Columbus, OH: Bureau of Business Research, Ohio State University.
Urde, M. (1994). Brand orientation – A strategy for survival. Journal of Consumer Marketing,
11, 18–32. doi: 10.1108/07363769410065445
Urde, M. (1999). Brand orientation: A mindset for building brands into strategic resources.
Journal of Marketing Management, 15, 117–133. doi: 10.1362/026725799784870504
Urde, M., Baumgarth, C., & Merrilees, B. (2013). Brand orientation and market
orientation – From alternatives to synergy. Journal of Business Research, 66, 13–20. doi:
10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.07.018
Wong, H. Y., & Merrilees, B. (2005). A brand orientation typology for SMEs: A
case research approach. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 14, 155–162. doi:
10.1108/10610420510601021
Wong, H. Y., & Merrilees, B. (2007). Closing the marketing strategy to performance
gap: The role of brand orientation. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 15, 387–402. doi:
10.1080/09652540701726942
front-line employee as brand champion, and the nature and management of brand sabotage.
She has published her research in international journals, including the Journal of Business
Research, European Journal of Marketing, and Journal of Marketing Management, supported
by funding from the Irish Research Council.
Isabel Buil is a senior lecturer in the department of marketing management at the University of
Zaragoza, Spain. She holds a PhD in Business Administration. She has been a visiting scholar
at Aston Business School and Birmingham Business School, UK. Isabel is a member of the
research group Generes recognised by the Government of Aragon. She has published research
papers in both local and international journals. She has attended and presented research papers
at national and international conferences.