Using brand identity to build brand equity : a comparison between the South African and Dutch business-to-business architectural industry

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Verster, Alet
dc.contributor.author Petzer, Daniël Johannes
dc.contributor.author Cunningham, Nicole
dc.date.accessioned 2020-07-11T13:21:31Z
dc.date.available 2020-07-11T13:21:31Z
dc.date.issued 2019-04
dc.description.abstract BACKGROUND: Existing research in the B2B field focuses on relationship marketing and not the importance of building brand equity. By focusing efforts on building brand equity B2B service firms have the opportunity to develop a long-term competitive advantage. OBJECTIVE: This study explores how Dutch and South African business-to-business architectural firms compare in their development of brand equity and use of brand identity dimensions. These groups were selected because one (Dutch) holds a favourable brand equity position, while the other (South African) is perceived less favourably. Providing a direct comparison allows the South African business-to-business architectural industry to obtain knowledge and be in a better position to develop their brand equity and identity. METHOD: The research was qualitative in nature, where 13 semi-structured interviews were conducted with participants. These respondents were senior partners or marketing specialists in architectural firms in South Africa and the Netherlands. RESULTS: Differences were observed in the approach to the building blocks of brand equity. South African participants were more focused on internal measures (i.e. personal credibility, previous projects) influencing judgement, while Dutch respondents focused on external measures (i.e. awards, competitions). Dutch individuals developed partnership solutions with their communities, whereas their South African counterparts were reluctant to do so. Differences in the utilisation of brand identity dimensions were also observed among these dimensions: employee and client focus, brand personality, corporate visual identity and consistent communication. CONCLUSION: This article provides a direct comparison of brand equity positions showing how those with less favourable brand equity positions can improve their positions. en_ZA
dc.description.department Gordon Institute of Business Science (GIBS) en_ZA
dc.description.librarian pm2020 en_ZA
dc.description.uri https://sajbm.org en_ZA
dc.identifier.citation Verster, A., Petzer, D.J. & Cunningham, N., 2019, ‘Using brand identity to build brand equity: A comparison between the South African and Dutch business-tobusiness architectural industry’, South African Journal of Business Management 50(1), a1372. https://doi.org/10.4102/sajbm.v50i1.1372. en_ZA
dc.identifier.issn 2078-5976 (online)
dc.identifier.issn 2078-5585 (print)
dc.identifier.other 10.4102/sajbm.v50i1.1372
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/2263/75155
dc.language.iso en en_ZA
dc.publisher Association for Professional Managers in South Africa en_ZA
dc.rights © 2019. The Authors.Licensee: AOSIS. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution License. en_ZA
dc.subject Brand equity en_ZA
dc.subject Brand identity en_ZA
dc.subject Architecture en_ZA
dc.subject Business-to-business (B2B) en_ZA
dc.title Using brand identity to build brand equity : a comparison between the South African and Dutch business-to-business architectural industry en_ZA
dc.type Article en_ZA


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record