The Company and the Product: Corporate Associations and Consumer Product Responses

Brown, Tom J.; Dacin, Peter A.

doi:10.2307/1252190

Cited by 1,946 publications

(1,120 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

1,031

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Although not specifically addressing corporate philanthropy, related marketing research indicates, in experimental settings, that corporate social responsibility often, but not always, leads to a positive effect on consumer attitudes (e.g., Brown and Dacin, 1997;Sen and Bhattacharya, 2001). Luo and Bhattacharya (2006) report that corporate social responsibility, as measured by Fortune's annual subjective ranking of the 'most admired companies,' is positively associated with customer satisfaction.…”

Section: Corporate Philanthropy and Revenuesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is doing good good for you? how corporate charitable contributions enhance revenue growth

Lev¹,

Petrovits²,

Radhakrishnan³

2009

Strategic Management Journal

773

618

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Corporate Philanthropy and Revenuesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is doing good good for you? how corporate charitable contributions enhance revenue growth

Lev¹,

Petrovits²,

Radhakrishnan³

2009

Strategic Management Journal

773

618

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…According to Turban and Greenging (1996) and Brown and Dacing (1997), consumers perceive a company by evaluating aspects such as the company's behavior and commitment to society (Higgins & Bannister, 1992). In this vein, Keller and Aaker (1992) highlighted the key role of innovation capacity, which influenced both the perceived quality and purchase intention of brands identified with the store's name.…”

Section: Store Social Imagementioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of Manufacturer Signature on Store Brands' Loyalty and Purchase Intention

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

With today's trend toward higher store concentration, building strong store brands has become a priority for many retailing companies. This study aims to analyze the differences in store brands' purchasing likelihood between store brands with a manufacturer identification - a manufacturer signature - and store brands with no information about the manufacturer, as well as the moderating role of the manufacturer signature on store brands' purchase intention. We carried out multiple group analysis through structural equation modeling. Our findings suggest that store brand image has the most significant influence on loyalty and purchase intention for both types of store brands. Moreover, and contrary to our expectations, we did not find empirical support for the moderating role of manufacturer signature on store brands' purchasing likelihood.

show abstract

“…Firms are especially concerned with their reputations with both employees and consumers. Firm reputational effects have an impact on corporate performance, particularly when negative consumer perceptions are formed (Brown and Dacin 1997). NGOs and watchdog groups track the moves of large corporations, monitoring instances of untoward or unethical behavior, or at least perceptions of such.…”

Section: Role Of Civil Societymentioning

confidence: 99%

Corporate Social Responsibility and Different Stages of Economic Development: Singapore, Turkey, and Ethiopia

Robertson

2009

J Bus Ethics

115

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The U.S. and U.K. models of corporate social responsibility (CSR) are relatively well defined. As the phenomenon of CSR establishes itself more globally, the question arises as to the nature of CSR in other countries. Is a universal model of CSR applicable across countries or is CSR specific to country context? This article uses integrative social contracts theory (ISCT) and four institutional factors -firm ownership structure, corporate governance, openness of the economy to international investment, and the role of civil society -to examine CSR in Singapore, Turkey, and Ethiopia. Field research results illustrate variation across the institutional factors and suggest that CSR is responsive to country differences. Research findings have implications for consideration of the tradeoff between global and local CSR priorities and practices. 2) corporate governance, 3) openness of the economy to international investment, and 4) the role of civil society. These institutional factors were chosen based on potential to affect the nature of CSR, with the expectation that country differences in these factors will lead to different characteristics of CSR.The following sections apply this conceptual framework to Singapore, Turkey, andEthiopia, ask what lessons can be learned from the CSR experiences of firms in these three countries, and conclude with implications for future research.4 Singapore, Turkey, and EthiopiaMethodology. Over the course of about a year I had the opportunity to spend approximately one week each in Singapore, Turkey, and Ethiopia (in that order) holding meetings and conducting interviews with academics, businesspeople, government leaders and members of NGOs. In both Turkey and Singapore I attended CSR conferences and spoke to fellow participants. My sample selection used a "snowball" technique to identify interviewees with one respondent leading me to another. My discussions followed an open-ended interview format with the basic structure of the interview contained in the Appendix. I took notes on these interviews and in some instances emailed respondents to collect more data. Where companies were named as exemplars of CSR, I gathered information on the companies' CSR initiatives from their websites.*************** Table 1 about here *************** These three countries were chosen because they presented opportunities for field research and because they are excellent examples of a well developed economy (Singapore), an economy that is rapidly growing (Turkey) and an underdeveloped economy (Ethiopia). Choosing such different countries allows for exploration of country differences in institutional factors and any resulting differences in CSR.Baseline Data. Turkey and Ethiopia are much larger countries than Singapore both in land mass and population (See Table 2). However, gross national income per person looks very different. Overall, the economic figures suggest that Singapore is vastly wealthier per capita and more developed than Turkey, and Turkey, in turn, is substantially more developed t...

show abstract

The Company and the Product: Corporate Associations and Consumer Product Responses

Cited by 1,946 publications

References 47 publications

Is doing good good for you? how corporate charitable contributions enhance revenue growth

Is doing good good for you? how corporate charitable contributions enhance revenue growth

Influence of Manufacturer Signature on Store Brands' Loyalty and Purchase Intention

Corporate Social Responsibility and Different Stages of Economic Development: Singapore, Turkey, and Ethiopia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About