Consumer‐based brand equity: 
Comparisons among Americans and South 
Koreans in the USA and South Koreans in 
Korea
Authors: Jaehee Jung & Eunyoung (Christine) Sung
This is a postprint of an article that originally appeared in Journal of Fashion Marketing and 
Management on February 2008. The article can be found here 
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13612020810857925
Jaehee Jung, Eunyoung Sung, (2008) "Consumer‐based brand equity: Comparisons among 
Americans and South Koreans in the USA and South Koreans in Korea", Journal of Fashion 
Marketing and Management, Vol. 12 Issue: 1, pp.24-35, 
https://doi.org/10.1108/13612020810857925
Made available through Montana State University’s ScholarWorks 
scholarworks.montana.edu 
Consumer-based brand equity
Comparisons among Americans and
South Koreans in the USA and South Koreans
in Korea
Jaehee Jung
University of Delaware, Newark, Delaware, USA, and
Eunyoung Sung
Department of Apparel Merchandising and Interior Design, Indiana University,
Bloomington, Indiana, USA
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this study is to measure and compare the consumer-based brand equity of
apparel products by three consumer groups across cultures – Americans in the USA, South Koreans
in the USA, and South Koreans in Korea. Also examined was cross-cultural effects of brand equity on
purchase intention.
Design/methodology/approach – A total of 300 college students were recruited for the survey
from local universities and organizations in the USA and South Korea. The MBE and OBE models
were used to measure brand equity of the three apparel brands (i.e. Polo, Gap, and Levi’s).
Findings – Among the elements of brand equity, the perceived brand quality and brand
awareness/association reported by American college students were significantly greater than those
reported by South Koreans in the USA and Korea. For both South Korean groups, brand loyalty was
the most important element of brand equity. In the relationship between elements of brand equity and
purchase intention, brand loyalty showed positive correlation with purchase intention across all three
consumer groups.
Research limitations/implications – Further research might include more apparel brands in
different price points. An investigation of the prices of various apparel brands in different countries
will be useful for cross-cultural comparisons.
Originality/value – With a lack of brand equity studies on fashion products and even fewer studies
of cross-cultural comparisons in brand equity, this study should be valuable information for firms
branding their products and making marketing strategies from the global perspective.
Keywords Brand equity, Cross-cultural studies, Brands, Consumer behaviour, South Korea,
United States of America
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
Many companies develop marketing strategies in order to improve their sales and to
make their brands stand out among competitive ones. For most firms, the ultimate goal
of marketing success is to generate a brand, which can differentiate their companies
from others. A brand is:
. . . a name, a term, a symbol, or any other unique element of a product that identifies one
firm’s products and sets them apart from the competition (Solomon and Stuart, 2002, p. 270).
A brand has also been defined as a:
. . . distinguishing name and symbol (such as a logo, trademark, or package design) intended
to identify the goods or services of either one seller or a group of sellers, and to differentiate
those goods or services from those of competitors (Aaker, 1991, p. 7).
Many researchers have studied brand value for a long time because the value of a
brand can make a firm profitable in the long term.
The term, “brand equity” became one of the most important marketing concepts
since 1980s and it has been defined as:
. . . a set of brand assets and liabilities linked to a brand, its name and symbol, that add to or
subtract from the value provided by a product or service to a firm and/or to that firm’s
customers (Aaker, 1991, p. 15).
Solomon and Stuart (2002), for instance, explained brand equity as the value that a
brand has for a particular organization or company. As they put it:
. . . for a firm, brand equity provides a competitive advantage because it gives the brand the
power to capture and hold onto a larger share of the market and to sell at prices with higher
profit margins (Solomon and Stuart, 2002, p. 273).
Aaker (1991) equates brand equity with the following elements: brand loyalty, brand
awareness, perceived quality, brand association, and other proprietary brand assets.
According to Yoo and Donthu (2001), and Washburn and Plank (2002), however, brand
equity, specifically consumer-based brand equity, can be measured according to four
elements: brand loyalty, brand awareness, perceived quality, and brand association.
According to Washburn and Plank (2002), the element of other proprietary brand
assets is not appropriate to measure consumer-based brand equity. Here,
consumer-based means that “cognitive and behavioral brand equity at the
individual consumer level through a consumer survey” (Yoo and Donthu, 2001, p. 2).
It is important to examine which of the brand equity elements is important for
consumers to recognize brand value and also, to make a purchase decision. Only a few
studies have examined fashion products to access brand equity of those brands.
Although a number of countries around the world have apparel companies that
manufacture high-quality apparel products and represent global fashion trends, to
what extent individuals across different cultures value a particular apparel brand as an
asset (i.e. brand equity) is unknown. There is a lack of studies on brand equity,
especially those based on consumers across different cultures. As individuals develop
different views within the cultural context and meanings of particular brands can
disseminate differently through social structure, consumers’ purchasing behavior is
likely to be influenced by social perceptions and values about products and/or services
that are linked to a brand.
Thus, the purpose of this study was twofold:
(1) To measure and compare the consumer-based brand equity of apparel products
by three consumer groups across cultures – Americans in the USA, South
Koreans in the USA, and South Koreans in Korea.
(2) To identify cross-cultural differences in relationships between brand equity of
apparel products and purchase intention.
Review of literature
Consumer-based brand equity
Keller (1993, p. 2) noted that consumer-based brand equity is the differential marketing
effect of brand knowledge on consumer response to the marketing of the brand, and it
arises from a brand that is familiar to customers and is associated in their memories. In
other words, brand equity has to do with:
. . . the fact that different outcomes result from the marketing of a product or service because
of its brand name or some other brand elements, as compared to outcomes if that same
product or service did not have that brand identification (Keller, 1998, p. 42).
Brand equity has been studied for two reasons. The first reason is to evaluate a brand,
especially to estimate the value of a brand for financial purposes or business
arrangements (e.g. mergers, acquisitions). The second reason is to be able to enhance
marketing output by understanding consumers’ the knowledge about the brand and to
develop appropriate brand strategies.
Consumer-based brand equity has four elements: brand loyalty, brand awareness,
perceived quality, and brand association. Brand loyalty is one of the most important
elements in marketing, which is “a measure of the attachment that a customer has to a
brand” (Aaker, 1991, p. 39). According to Keller (1998), brand loyalty is often measured
in a behavioral sense through the number of repeat purchases. If a customer prefers to
purchase Pep-ci instead of Coke, that is because the customer has brand loyalty
towards Pep-ci. Brand awareness is defined as “the ability of a buyer to recognize that
a brand is a member of a certain product category” (Aaker, 1991, p. 61). For example,
recognizing Este´e Lauder or Clinics as cosmetics companies is because a customer is
aware of those brands as a certain product category. Ideally, brand awareness should
occur regardless of environmental conditions such as time and locations. Perceived
quality, which is the third element of brand equity, is defined as the customer’s
awareness of products’ superior quality in relation to other products (Aaker, 1991). To
what extent a customer is aware of product quality of a particular brand would be
depending on past experiences from the actual use and/or possible
feedbacks/comments from others including those by well-known individuals (e.g.,
celebrities) or third-party organization endorsement of products (see Dean and Biswas,
2001). Finally, brand association is defined by Aaker (1991, p. 109) as “anything
‘linked’ in memory to a brand”. Keller (1998) noted that brand association can affect
consumers’ purchasing decisions based on the recall of brand information.
Previous studies on brand equity
Over the years, scholars have examined consumer-based brand equity using different
models/theories by incorporating various brand equity dimensions/elements. Also
brands of different product categories have been used to access consumer-based brand
equity. According to Aaker (1991), brand equity as a set of brand assets has five
dimensions: brand loyalty, brand awareness, perceived quality, brand associations,
and other proprietry brand assets. Cobby-Walgren et al. (1995) measured brand equity
based on Aaker’s (1991) theory and examined the effect of brand equity on purchase
intention and preference using brands of hotels and cleansers. They found that brand
equity was related to high brand preferences and purchase intentions. Another theory
known for brand equity is by Keller (1993) who focused on the differential effect of
brand knowledge. Keller (1993) has conceptualized brand knowledge with two
components, brand awareness and brand image (i.e. a set of brand associations). In
order to build a positive customer-based brand equity, consumer should be familiar
with a brand name and have a positive brand image with favorable, strong and unique
brand association.
Yoo and Donthu (2001) examined brand equity scale items, which were based on
Aaker’s (1991) and Keller’s (1993) conceptualizations of brand equity. They developed
and validated the multidimensional consumer-based brand equity (MBE) model, which
is the scale for measuring brand equity. Yoo and Donthu used commercial brands from
three product categories (athletic shoes, camera film, and color television sets) for
evaluation among three consumer groups (American, Korean American, and South
Korean). They tested measure models for the ten items (i.e. four-, three-, and
one-dimensional) and validated the three-dimensional model of brand loyalty,
perceived quality, and brand awareness/associations. The lack of discriminant validity
between brand awareness and associations did not support the four-dimensional model
(Yoo and Donthu, 2001). Highly positive relationships were found between brand
equity and purchase intention and also between brand equity and brand attitude
across all consumer groups. As a rare example of cross-cultural studies on brand
equity, the scale was suggested to be limited to only three samples participated in the
study for its generalizability due to lack of cross-cultural equivalence.
In further studies, Yoo and Donthu (2002) tested Yoo et al.’s (2000) brand equity
formation process model across the US and Korean samples with the same product
categories used for Yoo and Donthu (2001). Based on the conceptual framework of
Aaker’s (1991) brand equity model, Yoo et al.’s (2000) structural model of brand equity
formation consists of three components: marketing mix elements (i.e. price, store
image, distribution intensity, advertising expenditures, and price promotion), brand
equity dimensions (i.e. perceived quality, brand loyalty, and brand
awareness/associations), and overall brand equity. Given the results of this study,
Yoo et al. (2000) suggested that managers need to display products with good images
and distribute products widely in order to serve convenience, save time, and access
service for customers. They also suggested that if managers want to improve brand
equity, they need to consider investing in advertising. Finally, if firms have frequent
price promotion like discounts, consumers will assume that they are being sold a low
quality product, so managers should be careful when they conduct price promotions.
Yoo and Donthu (2002), concerned with brand equity dimensions, found greater effect
of perceived quality on brand equity in Korean sample than in the US sample with
brand loyalty being the most important dimension of brand equity across samples.
Cross-cultural differences in clothing/shopping behavior
Consumers in different country/culture are expected to be different in terms of the way
they perceive international brands, e.g. attributes they associate with those brands in
their memories. It is because images and symbolic meanings attached to brands are
shaped by a local society/culture where economic and social values of a brand might
vary greatly based on collective ideas about the brand.
When examining cross-cultural differences in purchasing behavior, it is inevitable
to understand contrasting world views such as individualism versus collectivism.
Individualism is a dominant cultural concept in Western societies such as the USA and
Western Europe, whereas collectivism is a concept dominant in non-Western societies
such as South Korea and China (Hofstede, 2001). Individualistic values include being
independent from others and in control of surrounding environments. Thus, people in
an individualistic society are less likely to rely on others (e.g. family members, peers,
social groups) in their purchase decisions. In contrast, people in a collectivistic society
are more likely to rely on others for their purchase decisions and rely on reference
groups for making judgments about consumer products. In other words, people in a
collectivistic society would be more likely to seek social approval of others, especially
for highly visible products to others such as fashion products. According to Yoo and
Donthu (2002), perceived quality had a greater impact on the Korean sample than the
US sample in their purchase decisions, and such difference was attributed to cultural
differences in the level of uncertainty avoidance. Perceived quality was considered
more important for Korea as a society of strong uncertainty avoidance than the USA as
a society of weak uncertainty avoidance when making purchase decisions.
The review of current empirical studies helped us to speculate on cross-cultural
differences in purchasing behavior for apparel products in relation to brand equity.
Particular brands are considered more valuable in one country than others is an
example how the brand equity can be viable depending on the target market. There is a
lack of studies on brand equity of fashion products and no published studies employed
the same category of fashion products (i.e. apparel) as stimuli to make comparisons of
brand equity across fashion brands. A few studies have used fashion products along
with other product categories. For example, Bristow et al. (2002) used blue jeans and
personal computers as stimuli to develop a scale for brand equity. In the findings, blue
jeans, as fashion products, showed significant brand dependence over personal
computers. They believed that brand name, as a predictive cue, should be considered
by marketers in establishing strategies because consumers depend on brand names in
their decision making.
Despite of some concerns over measures of brand equity (see Aaker, 1996), studies
on consumer-based brand equity have generated valuable information on consumer
perceptions and attitudes towards brands that can ultimately be used in establishing
marketing strategies. Not only a lack of brand equity studies on apparel products but
also a limited number of cross-cultural studies on brand equity demanded the present
study. Thus, this study attempted to measure consumer-based brand equity of apparel
products among three consumer groups across two cultures: Americans in the USA,
South Koreans in the USA, and South Koreans in South Korea. This study measured
consumer-based brand equity of Korean college students in the USA and South Korea
as compared to US college students’ perceptions of brand equity in regard to three
international US apparel brands – Polo, Gap, and Levi’s. Cross-cultural differences
were expected in brand equity of those three international brands and yet, it was not
clear to what extent those consumer groups would perceive three apparel brands
differently on elements of brand equity. It was focused on which factors related to
brand equity contributed to any differences in the perceptions across the three
consumer groups. Since the two groups were based on the same nationality, the
question was then whether the attitude of Korean students towards the brand equity of
these brands will become more or less like that of US students after the Korean
students have lived in the USA for a while.
The following hypotheses were proposed in this study in regards to three
international apparel brands:
H1. There are significant differences in brand equity elements of apparel products
as reported by Americans and South Koreans living in the USA and South
Koreans living in Korea.
H2. There are significant cross-cultural differences in the relationship between
brand equity of apparel products and purchase intention.
Method
Preliminary study
A preliminary study was designed to select three international apparel brands for the
present study. Participants for the preliminary study were volunteers who were
recruited from a large mid-western university in the USA. The 20 American college
students and the 20 South Korean college students in the USA were asked to list five
international apparel brands on a piece of paper. Among South Korean participants,
roughly 30 per cent were male and 70 per cent were female. Among American
participants, roughly 20 per cent were male and 80 per cent were female. Some students
recorded only three or four brand names instead of five. Approximately 100 brand
names from American students and 100 brands names from Korean students were
collected. The three brands most frequently mentioned on the questionnaire were
chosen as stimuli in the main study. These three apparel brands were Polo, Gap, and
Levi’s, which are well-known international brands of unisex clothes for young people.
Main study
Participants. A total of 300 participants were chosen for the current study: 100 South
Korean college students in Korea, 100 South Korean college students in the USA, and
100 American college students in the USA. Americans and South Koreans in the USA
were recruited from a large mid-western university and local ethnic organizations (e.g.
local Korean church) and South Koreans in Korea were recruited from a large
south-eastern university in Korea. Participants were either undergraduate or graduate
students in various disciplines. Of the South Korean participants in Korea, 51 per cent
were male and 49 per cent were female. Of the South Korean participants in the USA,
65 per cent were male and 35 per cent were female. Of the American participants in the
USA, 5 per cent were male and 95 per cent were female. The age range of the
participants was as follows: 18 to 24 for South Koreans in Korea (M ¼ 22), 18 to 25 for
South Koreans in the USA (M ¼ 23), and 17 to 23 for Americans in the USA (M ¼ 21).
All South Korean participants in Korea and the USA are ethnically Korean, while
American participants are predominantly Caucasians (94.7 per cent) with some of
African (3.2 per cent) and Asian (2.1 per cent) ethnic backgrounds. The South Koreans
in the USA were required to have nationality of South Korea and at least six months of
stay in the USA so that they had enough time to get exposed to new culture and to have
clothing shopping experiences during the two seasons.
Instrumentation and procedure. Two versions of the questionnaire, one in English
and the other in Korean, were distributed to volunteers who were recruited from
classes and social organizations. A bilingual graduate student in the USA who is fluent
in both Korean and English translated the questionnaire from English into Korean.
Then, the Korean version was back translated into the English version by another
bilingual graduate student in Korea. A bilingual researcher in the USA cross-examined
both versions and made minor adjustments.
The multidimensional brand equity (MBE) and overall brand equity (OBE) models
(Yoo and Donthu, 2001) were used to measure brand equity of the three apparel brands
– Polo, Gap, and Levi’s. Participants were given a questionnaire that included nine
questions on the MBE model and four questions on the OBE model. Scale items within
the MBE models include brand loyalty, perceived quality, and brand
awareness/association. In the present study, one item, “I have difficulty in imagining
X in my mind,” was eliminated from Yoo and Donthu’s ten items in the MBE model
because participants were more likely to be familiar with the three apparel brands
selected in the pilot study by their peers. Brand equity items were measured according
to a five-point Likert scale that ranged from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).
Remaining four items in the questionnaire were to examine participants’ brand
purchase experience and purchase intention. The OBE, a unidimensional measure of
brand equity, supported the convergent validity of the MBE based on the correlation
(Yoo and Donthu, 2001).
Results
Purchase experience and use/ownership of three brands
Participants were asked, “Have you ever bought brand Polo, Gap, or Levi’s?” In reply,
69 per cent of Koreans in Korea, 96 per cent of Koreans in the USA, and 83 per cent of
Americans have purchased Polo; 18 per cent of Koreans in Korea, 93 per cent of
Koreans in the USA, and 98 per cent of Americans have purchased Gap; 70 per cent of
Koreans in Korea, 85 per cent of Koreans in the USA, and 66 per cent of Americans
have purchased Levi’s. Thus, the most purchased brand for Koreans in Korea, Koreans
in the USA, and Americans was Levi’s, Polo, and Gap, respectively.
Participants were asked, “Do you currently use/own any brand of product category
Polo, Gap, or Levi’s?” In reply, 71 per cent of Koreans in Korea, 87 per cent of Koreans in
the USA, and 61 per cent of Americans use or have Polo clothes; 19 per cent of Koreans in
Korea, 76 per cent of Korean in the USA, and 81 per cent of Americans use or have Gap
clothes; 63 per cent of Koreans in Korea, 50 per cent of Korean in the USA, and 31 per
cent of Americans use or have Levi’s clothes. Thus, the most used/owned brand by
Koreans in Korea and the USA was Polo, while Americans used/owned Gap the most.
Multivariate analysis of variance
The result of the analysis of reliability was as follows: the reliability for perceived quality
was 0.68 for South Koreans in South Korea, 0.72 for South Koreans in the USA, 0.74 for
Americans in the USA; the reliability for brand loyalty was 0.69 for South Koreans in
South Korea, 0.72 for South Koreans in the USA, 0.68 for Americans in the USA; and the
reliability for brand awareness/association was 0.75 for South Koreans in the South
Korea, 0.78 for South Koreans in the USA, 0.82 for Americans in the USA; the reliability
for overall brand equity, which is one-dimensional, was 0.87 for South Korean in South
Korea, 0.76 for South Koreans in the USA, 0.82 for Americans in the USA.
Multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was used to test H1 with country as
an independent variable and three elements of brand equity as dependent variables
(perceived quality, brand loyalty, brand awareness/association). MANOVA revealed
significant effects for country on brand equity elements, F(3, 296) ¼ 28.54, p , 0.0001.
Separate univariate analyses of variance for each of the dependent variables revealed
that the effect for each of the brand equity elements on fashion brands mediated by
country was significant (all ps , 0.001; see Table I for means and standard
deviations). Results revealed that significant mean differences were found across three
consumer groups for perceived quality, brand loyalty, and brand
awareness/association. Thus, H1 was supported.
Tukey HSD tests were conducted to compare means across three consumer groups
in terms of their brand perceptions such as brand loyalty, perceived quality, and brand
awareness/association. Significant mean differences were found between Americans in
America and South Koreans in South Korea and also between Americans in Americans
in America and South Koreans in America (all ps , 0.0001) on perceived quality of
brand equity. Americans in America showed the highest score on perceived quality
followed by South Koreans in South Korea and South Koreans in America. Concerning
brand loyalty, significant mean differences were found between South Koreans in
South Korea and Americans in America and also between South Koreans in America
and Americans in America (all ps , 0.0001). South Koreans in South Korea revealed
the highest score on brand loyalty followed by South Koreans in America and
Americans in America. Finally, significant mean differences were found between
Americans in America and South Koreans in America and also between Americans in
America and South Koreans in South Korea on brand awareness/association. No
significant mean differences were found between South Korean consumers in South
Korea and South Korean consumers in America.
Relationship between brand equity and purchase intention
Multivariate analysis of variance for country revealed significant results on purchase
intention for all three apparel brand, F(3, 296) ¼ 9.82, p , 0.001 for Polo; F(3,
296) ¼ 42.62, p , 0.01 for Gap; F(3, 296) ¼ 15.99, p , 0.001 for Levi’s. South Korean
students in the USA reported the highest purchase intention toward Polo, American
students in the USA reported the highest purchase intention toward Gap, and South
Korean students in Korea reported the highest purchase intention toward Levi’s.
Brand equity elements SK in the USA
SK in South
Korea A in the USA F (1,298)
Perceived quality 3.44a (.52) 3.48b (0.50) 3.95a,b (0.48) 31.55*
Brand loyalty 2.97a (0.58) 3.16b (0.62) 2.54a,b (0.79) 22.07*
Brand awareness/association 3.74a (0.52) 3.70b (0.49) 4.25a,b (0.45) 39.52*
Notes: * p , 0.001. SK ¼ South Korean; A ¼ American. The same superscript in the row indicates
significant mean differences between groups
Table I.
Means and standard
deviations for country on
brand equity elements
To test H2, a multiple regression analysis was conducted to determine the relationship
between brand equity and purchase intention for each country (see Table II).. There was
a significant relationship between brand equity and purchase intention as reported by
South Koreans in the USA (F ¼ 13.513, p , 0.001). Among the brand equity elements,
brand loyalty and brand awareness/association exhibited positively significant
relationships with purchase intention in this group (brand loyalty: standardized
coefficient ¼ 0.421, t ¼ 3.955, p , 0.001 and brand awareness/association: standardized
coefficient ¼ 0.334, t ¼ 3.521, p , 0.001). Thus, brand loyalty revealed the strongest
correlation with purchase intention in this group.
There was a significant relationship between brand equity and purchase intention
as reported by South Koreans in Korea (F ¼ 13.558, p , 0.001). Among the brand
equity elements, brand loyalty exhibited the strongest positive relationship with
purchase intention (standardized coefficient ¼ 0.480, t ¼ 4.884, p , 0.001). Finally,
there was a significant relationship between brand equity and purchase intention as
reported by Americans in the USA (F ¼ 32.244, p , 0.001). Among the brand equity
elements, perceived quality and brand loyalty exhibited significantly positive
relationships with purchase intention in this group (perceived quality: standardized
coefficient ¼ 0.258, t ¼ 2.974, p , 0.01 and brand loyalty: standardized
coefficient ¼ 0.555, t ¼ 7.126, p , 0.001).
In short, brand loyalty was reported as one of the most important elements of brand
equity by all three groups of participants. Additional element reported to be important
for South Korean students and Americans in the USA was brand
awareness/association and perceived quality, respectively. Significant cross-cultural
differences in relationships between brand equity and purchase intention across all
three consumer groups partially supported H2.
Conclusions
This study explored and compared consumer-based brand equity regarding
international apparel brands across three consumer groups: South Korean college
Dependent variable
Indep.
variable
Unstand.
coefficient Constant
Std.
coefficient t-value
Ad.
R-square F
PI: SK in SK PQ 0.053 1.137 0.046 0.439 0.276 13.558**
BL 0.448 0.480 4.884**
BWBA 0.126 0.109 1.147
PI: SK in the USA PQ 20.132 1.158 20.115 21.026 0.275 13.513**
BL 0.435 0.421 3.955**
BWBA 0.388 0.334 3.521**
PI: A in the USA PQ 0.393 0.091 0.258 2.974* 0.486 32.244**
BL 0.519 0.555 7.126**
BWBA 0.100 0.061 0.752
Notes: * p , 0.1; ** p , 0.001. Dep. ¼ dependent, Indep. ¼ Independent, Unstand. ¼
unstandardized, Std. ¼ standardized, Ad. R-square ¼ adjusted R-square, PQ ¼ perceived quality,
BL ¼ brand loyalty, BWBA ¼ brand awareness/association, PI ¼ purchase intention, SK ¼ South
Koreans, A=Americans
Table II.
Multiple regression
analysis by brand equity
elements on purchase
intention
students in South Korea, South Korean college students in the USA, and American
college students in the USA. In addition, this study examined cultural differences in the
relationship between brand equity and purchase intention. The results suggested that
the three consumer groups showed similarities as well as differences in their
perceptions of brand equity. In regards to each element of consumer-based brand
equity, the present study found the following characteristics across the three consumer
groups: Americans in the USA considered perceived quality the most important
element followed by South Koreans in South Korea and South Koreans in the USA;
South Koreans in South Korea considered brand loyalty the most important element
followed by South Koreans in the USA and Americans in the USA; Americans in the
USA considered brand awareness/association the most important element followed by
South Koreans in America and South Koreans in South Korea.
This general phenomenon was already suggested by previous researchers (Yoo
et al., 2000; Park, 1998). However, the first notable finding in the present study was that
South Koreans in the USA and South Koreans in South Korea were similar in their
attitudes toward brand equity compared to Americans in the USA. Even though South
Korean participants in the USA spent enough time to be exposed to daily advertising of
apparel brands used in this study, and the same promotional efforts (e.g. advertising)
were implemented to all consumers in the USA, brand perceptions of South Koreans in
the USA were more like those of peers living in South Korea. This implies that there is
more to be done than just adjusting promotional efforts to improve brand equity in a
particular market, especially when concerned with consumers of different
ethnic/cultural backgrounds. To create global brands that compete across countries
and cultures, it is necessary to build strong brands that can be demanded
internationally, which requires an understanding of how to develop and maintain
brand equity in the target market.
Second, in the relationship between elements of brand equity (i.e. perceived quality,
brand loyalty, and brand awareness/association) and purchase intention, brand loyalty
showed positively significant relationships with purchase intention across all three
cultural groups. This implies that the more consumers are loyal towards a particular
brand, the more likely they are to purchase apparel products from that brand. Also,
significant differences found across three groups in the relationship between elements
of brand equity and purchase intention could be used by marketers to set up more
effective marketing strategies that are culture specific. Both product attributes (e.g.
design, color) and non-product attributes (e.g. price, store image) should be carefully
examined to synchronize with local perceptions and values.
Consistent with the findings from previous studies (e.g., Cobby-Walgren et al., 1995;
Yoo et al., 2000), there was a significant relationship between purchase intention and
brand equity. Therefore, marketing managers should be concerned with creating
brand equity for consumers as it has direct relationships with sales volume. Using the
results of the South Koreans’ perceptions (in both Korea and the USA) toward brand
loyalty, which was the most important brand equity element in these groups with the
positive influence on purchase intention, firms should work on creating loyalty
towards their brands in these consumer groups. Investment in advertising and
improved services in retailing may help in building brand equity elements in the long
run. With heightened interest in the effects of marketing communications via the
internet, electronic commerce is considered as a significant retail business in building
brand equity for the apparel industry. Since building brand equity requires long-term
investments, firms need to set up marketing strategies for the extended period of time.
Limitations and recommendations for further research
Despite the significant contribution made by the present study in the area of brand
equity, some elements of the present study should be considered for improvement in an
attempt to replicate this study. First, the number of males and females in the American
sample was very unbalanced (95 per cent were female and 5 per cent were male)
compared to two South Korean samples. Thus, responses by this group were based
mostly on females’ perception. This means that if more males participated, the result
may well be different. Second, although it is possible for South Koreans in the USA to
have changed perceptions of brand equity due to being acculturated in the USA, no
such consideration was made when making comparisons between South Koreans in
South Korea and South Koreans in the USA. Because there was no data from the South
Koreans living in the USA that establishes their brand equity prior to coming to the
USA, conclusions about changes due to living in a new country could not clearly be
established. Also, South Korean students who are studying in the USA may have
different economic backgrounds; for instance, they may be from wealthy families, and
this may affect their perceptions of brand equity. Therefore, their purchasing behavior
for apparel brands in the USA might be different from South Korean students who
have studied only in South Korea. However, South Koreans in the USA and South
Koreans in Korea are of the same nationality and more importantly, they share similar
cultural buying views than Americans. Thus, further research is recommended to use
the level of acculturation as a variable factor in accessing brand equity when studying
the same nationality samples residing in different countries.
Finally, further research might compare price points of well-known apparel brands
across different countries. An investigation of the prices of various apparel brands in
different countries will be useful for cross-cultural comparisons such as this study
because the price of well-known American apparel brands is often higher in other
countries.
References
Aaker, D.A. (1991), Managing Brand Equity, Simon & Schuster, New York, NY.
Aaker, D.A. (1996), “Measuring brand equity across products and markets”, California
Management Review, Vol. 38 No. 3, pp. 102-20.
Bristow, D.N., Schneider, K.C. and Schuler, D.K. (2002), “The brand dependence scale: measuring
consumers’ use of brand name to differentiate among product alternatives”, The Journal of
Product & Brand Management, Vol. 11 No. 6, pp. 343-56.
Cobby-Walgren, C.J., Ruble, C.A. and Donth, N. (1995), “Brand equity, brand preference, and
purchase intent”, Journal of Advertising, Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 25-40.
Dean, D.H. and Biswas, A. (2001), “Third-party organization endorsement of products: an
advertising cue affecting consumer pre-purchase evaluation of goods and services”,
Journal of Advertising, Vol. 30 No. 4, pp. 41-57.
Hofstede, G. (2001), Culture’s Consequences, 2nd ed., Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Keller, K.L. (1993), “Conceptualizing, measuring, and managing customer-based brand equity”,
Journal of Marketing, Vol. 57, pp. 1-22.
Keller, K.L. (1998), Strategic Brand Management: Building, Measuring and Managing Brand
Equity, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Park, S. (1998), “A comparison of Korean and American gift-giving behaviors”, Psychology &
Marketing, Vol. 15, pp. 577-93.
Solomon, M.R. and Stuart, E.W. (2002), Marketing: Real People, Real Choice, 2nd ed.,
Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Washburn, J.H. and Plank, R.E. (2002), “Measuring brand equity: an evaluation of a
consumer-based brand equity scale”, Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, Vol. 10,
pp. 46-62.
Yoo, B. and Donthu, N. (2001), “Developing and validating a multidimensional consumer-based
brand equity scale”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 52 No. 1, pp. 1-14.
Yoo, B. and Donthu, N. (2002), “Testing cross-cultural invariance of the brand equity creation
process”, The Journal of Product and Brand Management, Vol. 11 Nos 6/7, pp. 380-99.
Yoo, B., Donthu, N. and Lee, S. (2000), “An examination of selected marketing mix elements and
brand equity”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 28 No. 2, pp. 195-211.
Corresponding author
Jaehee Jung can be contacted at: jajung@udel.edu