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

dc.contributor.authorVerster, Alet
dc.contributor.authorPetzer, Daniël Johannes
dc.contributor.authorCunningham, Nicole
dc.date.accessioned2020-07-11T13:21:31Z
dc.date.available2020-07-11T13:21:31Z
dc.date.issued2019-04
dc.description.abstractBACKGROUND: 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.departmentGordon Institute of Business Science (GIBS)en_ZA
dc.description.librarianpm2020en_ZA
dc.description.urihttps://sajbm.orgen_ZA
dc.identifier.citationVerster, 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.issn2078-5976 (online)
dc.identifier.issn2078-5585 (print)
dc.identifier.other10.4102/sajbm.v50i1.1372
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2263/75155
dc.language.isoenen_ZA
dc.publisherAssociation for Professional Managers in South Africaen_ZA
dc.rights© 2019. The Authors.Licensee: AOSIS. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution License.en_ZA
dc.subjectBrand equityen_ZA
dc.subjectBrand identityen_ZA
dc.subjectArchitectureen_ZA
dc.subjectBusiness-to-business (B2B)en_ZA
dc.titleUsing brand identity to build brand equity : a comparison between the South African and Dutch business-to-business architectural industryen_ZA
dc.typeArticleen_ZA

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Verster_Using_2019.pdf
Size:
617.45 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Article

License bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.75 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description: