Personal brand equity: Scale development and validation

Abstract

Crafting a personal brand has become an important factor for career success. Despite the growing literature on topics associated with personal brands, the conceptualization and measurement of personal brand equity (PBE) have received little attention. By drawing upon and integrating the marketing and careers literatures on branding, we reconceptualized the definition of PBE and delineated its dimensions and conceptual boundaries. Furthermore, we developed a 12‐item scale to measure PBE. Among seven different samples (total N = 3,273), including two samples of employees, this study tested the construct and criterion‐related validity of the PBE scale. First, exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses supported a three‐dimensional structure of PBE (brand appeal, brand differentiation, and brand recognition). In two samples, the convergent and discriminant validity of the PBE scale was established. Finally, this study showed that PBE predicts perceived employability, career success, and job performance. The PBE scale offers new opportunities to understand and measure career behaviors by considering individuals’ personal brand positioning.

Employee time theft: Conceptualization, measure development, and validation

“…Specifically, we followed the example set by Djurdjevic et al. (2017) to compare the time theft subdimensions against only one related construct at a time (see also Gorbatov et al., in press), and evaluated discriminant validity based on chi‐square difference tests 8 . We compared a series of six‐factor measurement models in which the items for the five subdimensions of time theft and each related construct were loaded on separate factors against a series of five‐factor models in which each of the items for time theft subdimensions were alternately specified to load onto the related construct.…”

Evolving brand boundaries and expectations: looking back on brand equity, brand loyalty, and brand image research to move forward

“…Do stakeholders expect brands to be more purposeful (Iglesias and Ind, 2020) and demonstrate higher levels of commitment to CSR (Torres et al , 2012; Wang et al , 2015), sustainability (Baalbaki and Guzmán, 2016; Ishaq, 2021; Ishaq and Di Maria, 2020; Vesal et al , 2021) or corporate social activism (Bhagwat et al , 2020; Mirzaei et al , 2022; Schmidt et al , 2022)? Is the human aspect of a brand (Gorbatov et al , 2021; King and Grace, 2010; Machado et al , 2019) more important than before? Does brand equity, more than ever in these uncertain times, help mitigate risk (Rego et al , 2009)?…”

“…How has brand equity been measured and how should it be moving forward? Yoo and Donthu (2001), Pappu et al (2005) and Netemeyer et al (2004) are the most popular measures of brand equity; however, the inadequacy of the prior existing scales (Christodoulides et al, 2015) has sparked a recent increase of new brand equity scales (Baalbaki and Guzm an, 2016;El-Adly and ELSamen, 2018;Gorbatov et al, 2021;Hyun and Kim, 2020;Ishaq, 2021;Kristal et al, 2016;Wang et al, 2018). Scholars have begun to address the dynamic and pluralistic nature of the concept in search for a scale that captures the underrepresented intricacies of present times.…”

Marka osobista CEO: różnice w sposobach kreacji wśród kobiet i mężczyzn

“…Ich autorami są w większości praktycy udzielający wskazówek i porad, dzięki którym czytelnik (w wielu przypadkach aktualnie poszukujący pracy) będzie w stanie stworzyć silną markę osobistą (patrz: Peters, McNally i Speak; Montoya, Arruda, Nicolino, Spillane). Jednocześnie, w literaturze akademickiej wciąż brakuje badań mających na celu analizę elementów różniących proces kształtowania marki osobistej przez kobiety i mężczyzn [Gorbatov et al 2021;Thompson-Whiteside et al 2018]. Chociaż płeć jest postrzegana jako główny element różnicujący, zarówno w życiu prywatnym, jak i zawodowym, autorzy opracowań naukowych nie dokonują rozróżnienia pomiędzy sposobami tworzenia marki osobistej przez kobiety i mężczyzn.…”