A well-recognized and accepted brand image is one of the most valuable

assets a firm possesses. Brand managers and manufacturers are concerned

with managing brand equity and capitalizing on the value of a brand image
(Aaker, 1991). A product or retail establishment has many associations
which combine to form its total impression. Few would argue that
consumers form impressions of brands, and that these impressions later exert
a major influence on store choice decisions and shopping behaviors.
Favorable images of brands positively influence patronage decisions and
purchase behaviors, while unfavorable images adversely influence such
decisions and behaviors. In other words, the images associated with the
brands a store carries influence a stores image, which in turn, influences
consumers decision-making processes and behaviors. Consequently, brand
image and retail image are inextricably linked to one another.
If buyers do not possess complete information about a store, they make
inferences from available informational cues before forming perceptions of
the store (Monroe and Krishnan, 1985). Recently it has been suggested that
the inferences buyers make about the merchandise quality of a store directly
influence retail image (Baker et al., 1994). Brand image often serves as an
informational cue used by buyers to form inferences about a stores
merchandise quality (Olshavsky, 1985). Knowing that brand image helps
form merchandise quality inferences that influence buyers perceptions of
retail image, we propose that two informational cues help buyers form these
inferences. First, the awareness level of brands carried by a store helps
buyers form merchandise quality inferences that influence their perceptions
of retail image. Second, the presence of a brand(s) having strong awareness,
recognition, and quality perceptions an anchor brand influences
buyers inference-making and impressions of retail image. This perspective
suggests that brand and retail managers need to be concerned not only with
the influence that specific anchor brands images have on a retail stores
image, but also the effect that the overall image of the brand mix carried by a
store has on buyers perceptions of a retail stores image.
The purpose of the current research is to report on a study that examines
how brand image directly influences retail image. Specifically, we
investigate the influence of the presence of an anchor brand and the number
of recognizable name brands carried by a store on buyers perceptions of
retail image. A model is presented that depicts the proposed relationships.
Results of an exploratory study to test the propositions of the model are
discussed. Based on the findings, managerial implications and
recommendations for brand managers and retailers are provided.
JOURNAL OF PRODUCT & BRAND MANAGEMENT, VOL. 6 NO. 6, 1997 pp. 373-387 MCB UNIVERSITY PRESS, 1061-0421 373
The influence of brand
recognition on retail store image
Stephen S. Porter and Cindy Claycomb
An executive summary
for managers and
executives can be found
at the end of this article
Informational cues
Model
Figure 1 identifies the proposed relationships between merchandise quality
inferences formed from brand image and the buyers associated perceptions
of retail image.
Retail store image
The concept of retail store image first came of interest when Pierre
Martineau (1958) described the personality of the retail store. Since that
pronouncement, it has generally been acknowledged that, over time,
consumers form thoughts and feelings associated with stores, and that these
overall impressions strongly influence their shopping and patronage
behaviors. Retail store image is an overall impression of a store as perceived
by consumers (Keaveney and Hunt, 1992). One of the commonly accepted
formal definitions of retail store image is an individuals cognitions and
emotions that are inferred from perceptions or memory inputs that are
attached to a particular store and which represent what that store signifies to
an individual (Baker et al., 1994; Mazursky and Jacoby, 1986).
In addition to developing definitions of retail store image, researchers have
also identified multiple dimensions of the concept. Retail image is generally
described as a combination of a stores functional qualities and the
psychological attributes consumers link to these. While the exact dimensions
have varied over the years, the well-known categorizations of image
attributes have consisted of some combination of functional and
psychological attributes. For example, some of the more common
dimensions identified by researchers have been associated with: fashion,
selection, and quality of merchandise; customer services and sales
personnel; and the physical conditions and atmosphere of the store
(Lindquist, 1974-1975; Martineau, 1958; Zimmer and Golden, 1988).
374 JOURNAL OF PRODUCT & BRAND MANAGEMENT, VOL. 6 NO. 6 1997
Presence of an
anchor brand
Brand image
(merchandise quality inferences)
Buyer
perceptions
Number of
recognizable
name brands
Retail
store
image
Figure 1. Proposed relationships between brand image and store image
Personality of the retail
store
Brand image
A strong brand image offers an organization several important strategic
advantages. A brand distinguishes the goods and services of one seller from
those of competitors. A powerful brand identity creates a major competitive
advantage; a well recognized brand encourages repeat purchases. Thus, a
brand acts as a signal to consumers regarding the source of the product and
protects customers and manufacturers from me-too products that may
appear identical. Brand image consists of consumer knowledge and beliefs,
stored in memory as associations, about brand attributes and the
consequences of brand use (Peter and Olson, 1994). These associations are
usually organized in some meaningful manner (Aaker, 1991). Thus, Coke is
not just a set of ten strong associations and 20 weaker ones. Rather, the
associations are grouped in such a manner that it has meaning. There may be
a lifestyle cluster, a sponsorship cluster, and a variety of products cluster.
There might also be one or more mental pictures that come to mind when
Coke is mentioned, such as the Coca-Cola logo, the Olympic Torch Relay, or
inevitably, a refreshing drink.
Brand images are important because they create value for manufacturers in
at least five ways (Aaker, 1991). First, brand images help consumers retrieve
and process information. For example, Pepsis development of the Pepsi
generation created a brand image that helped consumers process additional
information they received about Pepsi. Second, brand images provide a basis
for differentiation and positioning of a product. For example, the
combination of Gatorade and athletics has been a powerful association that
competitors initially found hard to attack. Third, brand images involve
product attributes and customer benefits that give consumers a reason to buy
and use the brand. For example, Crest toothpaste became a dominant brand
by positioning itself as a cavity fighter. The benefit of cavity prevention,
supported by a respected medical group, reinforces a consumers choice to
purchase Crest. Fourth, brand images create associations that produce
positive attitudes and feelings that are transferred to the brands. For
example, Metropolitan Life Insurance used the Charlie Brown characters to
create positive feelings toward an otherwise large and impersonal firm.
Finally, brand images provide the basis for product extensions, by creating a
sense of fit between the brand and the new product, or by giving consumers
a reason to buy the new product. For example, Sunkists association with
healthy outdoor activities has provided a basis for extensions such as fruit
bars, soft drinks, and vitamin C tablets.
The value brand images create for manufacturers is also projected on to the
image of retail stores that carry the brands. One way consumers describe
retail stores is in terms of their assessments of the brands carried.
Influence of brand image on retail store image
In a recent study, Baker et al. (1994) discovered that inferences that
consumers made about merchandise quality were direct determinants of
retail image. In other words, the merchandise inferences influenced
consumers thoughts and feelings about a store. Therefore, merchandise
quality can be viewed as a key variable that influences retail image;
however, consumers do not always possess complete information about the
merchandise quality of a store nor are they perfect information processors.
Consequently, consumers with incomplete information use various
JOURNAL OF PRODUCT & BRAND MANAGEMENT, VOL. 6 NO. 6 1997 375
A signal to consumers
Value of manufacturers
Determinants of retail
image
informational cues to make inferences about merchandise quality (Monroe
and Krishnan, 1985).
Consumers most heavily access brand name as a store information cue when
evaluating merchandise quality (Mazursky and Jacoby, 1986). Brand name
communicates a great deal of information an image to the potential
customer because it has become associated with a bundle of information
generated by advertising, word-of-mouth communication, and previous
usage of the brand (Stokes, 1985). The merchandise, whether perceived
favorably or unfavorably, projects an image not only of the brand itself, but
also of the store as a whole. Empirical findings imply that retail store image
could be improved by linking it with brands that are evaluated favorably and
damaged by association with brands that are evaluated less favorably
(Jacoby and Mazursky, 1984). Conversely, brand images may not be as
readily influenced by association with retail images. Brand images can be
negatively influenced by association with retailers having less favorable
images; however, when brand images are associated with retailers having
more favorable retail images, there is little change or influence to the brands
image (Jacoby and Mazursky, 1984). This suggests that brand image plays a
major role in the development of a consumers perception of retail image
(Zimmer and Golden, 1988). Furthermore, this indicates that brand image, as
a construct, is more stable than retail image across various situations. This
stability may be attributable to the fact that marketing specifically creates or
positions a brands image using a rather limited number of congruent
dimensions (e.g. quality, price, and sales communications activities). Thus,
brand image may be able to stand on its own as it calls to mind a list of
desired attributes and associations that provide value to a consumer in a
variety of ways regardless of the retailer carrying the brand (Aaker, 1991;
Ward et al., 1992). On the other hand, retail image appears to be a more
complex construct, and is therefore less stable than brand image. While
merchandise quality and brand image(s) are major predictors of retail image,
they are not the only predictors (Baker et al., 1994; Mazursky and Jacoby,
1986). This may help explain, for instance, the success of off-price retailers
and manufacturers outlets. The value provided to the customer, in terms of
the dimensions of low prices and favorable brand names, creates a retail
image that is positive in the consumers mind.
Based on the premise that brand image, as an informational cue, is heavily
accessed by consumers when evaluating stores, we suggest that merchandise
quality inferences based on brand image will directly influence retail image.
While a few studies have recognized the importance of brand image as an
informational cue of merchandise quality, brand image has generally been
studied by manipulating the presence or absence of brand names. As pointed
out by Stokes (1985), this is a purely academic exercise because few
products are marketed without brand names in todays marketplace.
Consequently, few retail stores carry nonbranded merchandise. To remedy
this methodological issue, we suggest that the presence of an anchor brand
and the number of recognizable brands a store carries, rather than the mere
presence or absence of brand names, directly influence customers
perceptions of a stores image. A study designed to test these ideas is
explained in the next section.
376 JOURNAL OF PRODUCT & BRAND MANAGEMENT, VOL. 6 NO. 6 1997
Merchandise evaluation
An anchor brand
The study
A study was conducted using brands associated with the apparel industry to
investigate the hypothesized paths in our model. The first step of our
research consisted of a pilot study to discover the awareness of specific
brand names and a pretest of the descriptive scenarios that were to be used in
the main study. Finally, the main study was conducted to test the
hypothesized relationships (see Figure 1).
In the pilot study, apparel brand names were generated from two sources.
First, 50 marketing students at a large midwestern university in the USA
were given a sheet of paper divided into three equal sections with the
following headings: very high quality, high quality, quality. The students
were asked to list apparel brand names that they thought would fit into each
of the three categories. Table I displays the frequency distributions of brand
names that were generated.
In addition, a second source was used to develop a more complete list of
recognizable brands. Selected specialty stores, catering to the age group of
our sample population (18 to 23 years old), were interviewed in two US
cities in two midwestern states. The interviews yielded the following brand
names:
Cole-Hann
Eagle Eye
Gant
Izod
Knautic
Liz Claiborne
Perry Ellis
Polo
Ruff Hewn
By combining the frequency distributions from the two sources, a final list
of highly recognizable, high quality apparel brand names was generated.
JOURNAL OF PRODUCT & BRAND MANAGEMENT, VOL. 6 NO. 6 1997 377
Table I. Pilot study: eight most recognizable brands listed by 18-23 year old
sample
Percent reporting
Total number Very high quality High quality Quality
Brand of times listed (%) (%) (%)
Liz Claiborne
a
17 88 12 0
Cole-Haan 20 85 15 0
Polo 39 77 23 0
Calvin Klein 14 57 36 7
Reebok 22 50 41 9
Guess 18 22 67 11
Nike 26 31 69 0
Levi 31 0 39 61
Note:
a
Liz Claiborne was not used in the study because the brand represents a womens clothing
line only. It was felt that the male respondents would not recognize this brand
Apparel industry
Specifically, seven of the eight brands identified by the interviewed shoppers
as very high quality or high quality were chosen, along with two
additional brands that the interviewed retailers consistently identified as high
quality, recognizable brands among the target market (i.e. males and females
18-23 years old). This list is as follows:
Calvin Klein
Cole-Haan
Gant
Guess
Izod
Levi
Nike
Polo
Reebok
A second list of imaginary or created brand names was used to test the
propositions that brand names influence consumers perceptions of retail
image. The group of created brands is:
Antigua
Blue Shore
Gentry
Gulf Coast
Peacocks
The brand names were pretested with shoppers (18-23 years old); the brand
names were generally rated very low or unrecognizable.
The second phase of the pretest was conducted using 45 shoppers (marketing
students at a university located in the southern USA) to assess the clarity of
the research scenarios. The pretest subjects were given the following
scenario:
A new clothing store will be locating in town next spring. The store will be a
progressive retailer of young adults clothing and apparel. The owners have
indicated that the retail outlet will stock the following name brands.
One-third of the subjects was given a list of seven of the recognizable brands
from the pilot study; another third was given a list of three recognizable
brands and four created brands; the final third was given a list of two
recognizable brands and five created brands. All the shoppers were then
asked questions about brand image and retail image. The findings of the
pretest resulted in two changes before the main study was conducted. First,
the word progressive was removed from the scenario because it influenced
the respondents perceptions of retail image. Second, the lists of brands
presented to the shoppers were modified. It was found that there were no
significant differences in shoppers perceptions of image when evaluating
conditions with two versus three recognizable brands. Specifically, the list of
three recognizable brands and four created brands was eliminated because
there was no significant difference between this list and the list of two
recognizable and five created brands.
378 JOURNAL OF PRODUCT & BRAND MANAGEMENT, VOL. 6 NO. 6 1997
Recognizable brands
Manipulation checks during the pretest indicated that the brands chosen to
be recognizable were in fact recognized and perceived to be high quality
brands by the pretest shoppers. We chose the Polo brand as the anchor
brand (i.e. a brand having strong awareness, recognition, and quality
perceptions among the target group of shoppers) to be used in the main
study. This decision was based on post-interviews with pretest shoppers that
revealed Polo had high brand and quality awareness. (Interviews with the
specialty retailers during the pilot study also supported this decision.) In
addition, the post-interviews revealed an interesting finding; the pretest
shoppers assumed that if Polo was to be carried by the store, all the brands
carried by the retailer would be of high quality. This finding allowed us to
test our propositions about the effect of the presence/absence of an anchor
brand on retail image, as well as, the effect of the number (high versus low)
and the recognition of brands (high recognition versus low recognition). We
divided our experimental treatments into the following four levels:
(1) anchor brand present/high number of recognizable brands;
(2) anchor brand present/low number of recognizable brands;
(3) anchor brand not present/high number of recognizable brands;
(4) anchor brand not present/low number of recognizable brands.
The final instrument consisted of a self-administered questionnaire
containing two sections. The first section presented the scenario of the retail
clothing store and asked specific questions concerning retail store image.
The second half of the questionnaire contained the brand image
manipulation checks. The modified scenario is presented below. The four
lists of brands, in the order presented to the subjects in each treatment, are
presented in Table II:
A new clothing store will be locating in town next spring. The store will be an
outlet for young adults clothing and apparel. The owners have indicated that the
retail outlet will stock the following name brands.
JOURNAL OF PRODUCT & BRAND MANAGEMENT, VOL. 6 NO. 6 1997 379
Table II. Brands used in main study
Scenario
High brands Low brands
(seven recognizable (two recognizable brands and
Brand list brands) five created brands)
Anchor brand present Polo Polo
Cole-Haan Guess
Guess Gentry
Nike Blue Shore
Levi Antigua
Reebok Peacocks
Calvin Klein Gulf Coast
Number of subjects 42 38
Anchor brand not present Izod Izod
Gant Guess
Guess Gentry
Nike Blue Shore
Levi Antigua
Reebok Peacocks
Calvin Klein Gulf Coast
Number of subjects 29 27
A multidimensional
concept
Measures
There is not a widely accepted measure of retail store image. Consequently,
we conducted a systematic review of the retail image and perceived quality
literatures as a basis for developing scale items for the retail store image
construct. Work by Zimmer and Golden (1988) indicated that retail image is
a multi-dimensional construct. Using the summary of image descriptors
(Zimmer and Golden, 1988, p. 285), 15 statements were developed to
measure dimensions of retail image that were hypothesized to relate to our
target population (18 to 23 year old shoppers). The scale items focussed on
the following dimensions of retail image: merchandise, service, and physical
facilities/atmosphere. Following the generation of the image questions, a
panel of experts (students the age of the sample population and academic
researchers) were asked to evaluate the questions for their wording and
appropriateness. The scale items, displayed in Table III, were measured
using five-point Likert type scales, ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to
5 = strongly agree. Means for each of the items are presented.
Sample and manipulation checks
The questionnaire was administered to 136 shoppers (18-23 year old college
students attending a university located in the midwest USA). The number of
subjects per treatment is shown in Table II. The respondents were asked to
evaluate the fictional clothing store based on the presence or absence of an
anchor brand and differing numbers of recognizable brand names carried by
the retail store. Prior to testing the model, manipulation checks were
conducted. We tested the name brands used in the treatments to ensure that
they were recognizable and considered high quality brands by the shoppers,
compared to the created brands. In addition, Polo, the chosen anchor brand,
was tested for its recognizability and perceived quality among the shoppers,
as compared to all other brands used in the study. The checks indicated that
the studys manipulations were successful.
380 JOURNAL OF PRODUCT & BRAND MANAGEMENT, VOL. 6 NO. 6 1997
Table III. Retail store image scale item means
Item Mean
*
(%)
1. This looks like the type of store where I would like to shop 3.62
2. I would like more information about this store 3.97
3. My wardrobe would be stylish and neat if I shopped at this store 3.69
4. I would tell my friends about this store 3.76
5. This store will carry the latest fashions and styles 3.83
6. The physical facilities of the store should be visually appealing 4.33
7. The interior furnishings in the store should give the shopper the
appearance and feeling of a quality retail outlet 4.20
8. The employees should be appropriately dressed and neat 4.32
9. The store should have a pleasant shopping environment 4.33
10. The employees should be able to give me fashion tips and advice 4.00
11. The store should offer a full line of services (tailor, credit, gift-wrapping) 3.93
12. The employees should be knowledgeable about fashion trends 4.16
13. The employees should be helpful and courteous 4.45
14. The sales help will be mature and helpful 4.19
15. If I had a question about clothing styles or fashions, I could get the answer
at this store 3.84
Note:
*
Items were measured using 5-point scale, with 1= strongly disagree and 5 = strongly agree
Manipulation checks
Purification of scale
The first step in our analysis was to conduct an exploratory analysis to
identify the dimensions of retail store image. The responses to the scale were
subjected to a principal components factor analysis with an orthogonal
rotation. The latent root criterion (i.e. only eigenvalues greater than 1.0 are
considered) indicated a three factor structure. In addition, to minimize the
cross-loadings in the factor matrix, items with loadings of 0.30 or higher on
two or more factors were eliminated (Hair et al., 1992). This resulted in six
items being eliminated from the scale. A reliability analysis (i.e. an
examination of the coefficient alphas) indicated an additional item should be
dropped from the scale. The final factor structure consisted of eight items
retained across three dimensions (see Table IV). These dimensions followed
previous categorizations of retail store image. The three dimensions were
labeled fashion, service, and atmosphere.
Discussion of results
A one-way ANOVA was performed to determine the treatment effects on
retail store image. Findings indicated that brand image did significantly
influence overall retail store image (F
3,135
= 2.79; p < 0.0432). Thus, the
combined effect of the presence of an anchor brand and a relatively large
number of recognizable brands carried by a store positively related to
customers perceptions of retail store image. When investigating these
effects on retail store image (using LSD multiple comparison post hoc tests),
some interesting findings surfaced. First, the treatment containing the seven
recognizable brands (high number of recognizable brands), including the
anchor brand, had the highest retail store image scores (

X
1
= 4.14).
Likewise, the treatment containing the two recognizable brands and the five
created brands (low number of recognizable brands), excluding the anchor
brand, had the lowest retail store image scores (

X
4
= 3.82). The difference
between these scores (

X
1
and

X
4
) was statistically significant at the 0.05
level. Second, in the high number of recognizable brands treatment, the
influence of the presence of the anchor brand was significant (

X
1
= 4.14
(anchor brand present);

X
3
= 3.85 (anchor brand not present)). A summary of
the overall retail image scores for each of the treatments is displayed in
Table V.
The next step in the analysis was to collapse across the experimental factors
to identify the individual and combined effects. In other words, the intent
JOURNAL OF PRODUCT & BRAND MANAGEMENT, VOL. 6 NO. 6 1997 381
Table IV. Factor analysis results of retail store image measure
Dimension Items
Factor 1: fashion 1. My wardrobe would be stylish and neat if I shopped at this
store
2. I would tell my friends about this store
3. This store will carry the latest fashions and styles
Factor 2: service 4. The employees should be knowledgeable about fashion
trends
5. The store should offer a full line of services (tailor, credit,
gift-wrapping)
6. The sales help will be mature and helpful
Factor 3: atmosphere 7. The interior furnishings in the store should give the shopper
the appearance and feeling of a quality retail outlet
8. The employees should be appropriately dressed and neat
Retail store image scores
was to investigate if the presence of the anchor brand, the number of
recognizable brands, or the interaction between the two factors influenced
retail store image. It was discovered that, when controlling for the presence
of the anchor brand, the number of recognizable brands carried by a retail
store did not influence the stores image. In contrast, when controlling for
the number of recognizable brands, the presence of the anchor brand did
influence the retail stores image. Consequently, it appears that, in terms of
brand image, the presence of an anchor brand has a positive effect on the
retail stores image, while the number of recognizable brands does not
influence perceptions of a retail stores image.
Finally, the effect of brand image on each of the retail store image
dimensions was tested. These tests indicated that brand image was related to
perceptions of fashion (F
3,135
= 5.53; p < 0.0013), but not to perceptions of
service (F
3,135
= 0.65; p < 0.5871) and atmosphere (F
3,135
= 0.83; p < 0.4803).
Furthermore, the effects of brand image on fashion perceptions mirrored the
pattern of effects found for overall retail store image, with one exception. In
the low number of recognizable brands treatment, when the anchor brand
was present, the retail image fashion score (

X
2
= 3.83) was significantly
different than when the anchor brand was not present (

X
4
= 3.47).Scores for
the fashion dimension of retail store image are displayed in Table VI.
In summary, this study found that brand image influences perceptions of
retail store image. In particular, brand image influences customers
perceptions of fashion, but not of service and atmosphere. Thus, there is
strong evidence to suggest that a tactic for ensuring a favorable retail image
is a merchandise mix composed of a relatively high number of recognizable
brands, one of which should have strong brand awareness an anchor brand.
Of the two brand strategies high image versus number it is more
important to feature an anchor brand than it is to carry a large number of
recognizable brands when trying to enhance retail store image.
382 JOURNAL OF PRODUCT & BRAND MANAGEMENT, VOL. 6 NO. 6 1997
Table VI. Mean scores for fashion dimension of retail store image
Description Treatment Mean
*
(%)
Anchor brand present/high number of recognizable brands 1 4.06
a
Anchor brand present/low number of recognizable brands 2 3.83
a,b
Anchor brand not present/high number of recognizable brands 3 3.51
b,c
Anchor brand present/low number of recognizable brands 4 3.47
b
Note:
*Statistically significant differences ( p 0.05) in scores are indicated by different letters
Table V. Mean scores for overall retail store image
Description Treatment Mean
*
(%)
Anchor brand present/high number of recognizable brands 1 4.14
a
Anchor brand present/low number of recognizable brands 2 4.03
a,b
Anchor brand not present/high number of recognizable brands 3 3.85
b
Anchor brand present/low number of recognizable brands 4 3.82
b
Note:
*Statistically significant differences ( p 0.05) in scores are indicated by different letters
Perceptions of fashion
Managerial implications and recommendations
The data analysis in the current study confirms that there is a relationship
between brand image and retail image. From previous research (Jacoby and
Mazursky, 1984), it is known that brand image can substantially improve or
damage a retail store image, depending on how the brand is evaluated.
Furthermore, brand image tends to be more powerful than retail image, as
brand image is not substantially improved by being linked with a more
favorable retail image (but can be damaged by a less favorable retail image).
Therefore, retailers and brand managers must be concerned with the
interdependencies between retail store image and brand image.
The most favorable retail image perceptions were found when the retail store
carried both an anchor brand and a relatively large number of recognizable
brands (i.e. seven brands compared to two). This is not a particularly
surprising finding; however, the findings regarding the separate effects on
retail image of an anchor brand and the number of recognizable brands
carried by a retail store have implications for brand managers and retailers.
First, the influence of a strong anchor brand on customers perceptions of
retail store image was confirmed. This implies that one strategy for retailers
to enhance their images is to include a brand with strong brand image an
anchor brand in their merchandise mix. For brand managers who want to
be associated with retail stores that have favorable images, this implies that
they should take one of two actions. First, brand managers can, through their
marketing mix strategies, attempt to position their brand as an anchor brand
to offer retailers. Or second, brand managers can choose to distribute their
products through retail stores that possess a strong image and that carry at
least one strong anchor brand. Either of these tactics will ensure the brand
managers product is associated with an image retail store and product mix
that is favorable.
While the influence of an anchor brand on retail image was the main finding
of the study, other findings related to the combined effect of an anchor brand
and the number of recognizable brands carried by a retail store also have
implications for brand managers and retailers. One such finding was that if a
retailer carries a relatively high number of recognizable brands, adding an
anchor brand should increase customers perceptions of overall retail image;
however, if a retailer carries a relatively low number of recognizable brands,
the mere presence of an anchor brand will not enhance customers overall
perceptions of the retail image (compared to another store carrying a
relatively low number of recognizable brands, without an anchor brand).
This implies that if a retailer carries a relatively large number of
recognizable brand names, to enhance the customers perceptions of the
stores image, one of the brands should possess strong brand recognition and
quality awareness among the retailers target market. In other words, the
retailer needs to carry an anchor brand. On the other hand, for retailers that
do not carry many highly recognizable brand names, the inclusion of an
anchor brand will not necessarily enhance retail image. Rather, retail store
image can be improved or clarified by positioning the store using attributes
other than brand recognition. For instance, a store may decide that it wants
to create an image of low price-cost leadership. The product mix strategy
might focus on stocking brands that are low price leaders in their product
class. Moreover, the retailer may decide that stocking generic or private
label brands may be the best positioning strategy available.
JOURNAL OF PRODUCT & BRAND MANAGEMENT, VOL. 6 NO. 6 1997 383
Interdependencies
Marketing mix strategies
Number of recognizable
brands
A related finding of the study was that if a specialty retailer does not carry
an anchor brand, simply adding more recognizable brands that do not have
strong brand awareness will not improve customers perceptions of retail
image. In other words, it is more important for a specialty retailer to feature
an anchor brand than it is to simply carry a large number of recognizable
brands. The implications of this may be different for different retail formats.
For example, because specialty retailers typically carry a relatively narrow
variety and deep assortment they must allocate their limited resources to
securing one brand with strong awareness an anchor brand. This may limit
the inclusion of other lesser known brands in their merchandise mix. In
contrast, department stores have more flexibility in selecting brands to be
carried because of their wide merchandise variety and deep assortment.
While they must still concentrate on securing an anchor brand, they have the
flexibility and resources to also carry recognizable brands that may not
necessarily be anchor brands. From a strategic perspective, this finding
suggests that retailers (especially specialty retailers) may need to emphasize
other image attributes such as customer service and personnel or the
physical condition and atmosphere of the store to enhance the retail image.
In addition, brand managers who can offer an anchor brand to retailers have
a competitive advantage, as they can provide evidence that adding the
anchor brand should enhance the image of the store.
Brand image and dimensions of retail store image
In concert with earlier research, the results of the study indicated that retail
store image is a multi-dimensional construct. The findings suggested that
retail store image is composed of fashion, service, and atmosphere
dimensions. Of particular interest to brand managers is the finding that brand
image influences customers perceptions of fashion, but not of service and
atmosphere. This allows brand managers to focus their efforts with retailers
on the enhancement of customers perceptions of the retailers fashion
image. In other words, brand managers should emphasize the positive
influence their brands can have on customers perceptions of the retailers
fashion image, particularly if the brand manager has an anchor brand to
offer. This is a significant finding for retailers also, because they need to
recognize that while brand image serves as an informational cue to their
retail stores images, brand image may influence the fashion image of their
stores. They need to understand other factors that provide informational cues
related to customers perceptions of service and atmosphere, the other two
elements of retail image. For example, Baker et al., (1994) found that
ambient factors, such as music and lighting, design factors, such as color,
layout, and organization of merchandise, and social factors, such as the
number of salespeople, also influence retail store image. These factors, in
particular, may influence the service and atmosphere dimensions of retail
store image.
Conclusion
Brand image influences retail image; however, this study revealed several
additional aspects of this association of which brand managers and retailers
should be aware. First, the effects of an anchor brand on retail image were
highlighted by this study. Retailers and brand managers should be aware of
the implications of this finding. The measures of retail store image used in
this study show promise and potential in isolating the dimensions of retail
image. This is important because, as the study pointed out, determinants of
retail image may influence one dimension of image but not others. Brand
384 JOURNAL OF PRODUCT & BRAND MANAGEMENT, VOL. 6 NO. 6 1997
Variety and assortment
Additional aspects
managers and retailers should realize that the influence of brand image
relates to the fashion dimension of retail image, but not to the service and
atmosphere dimensions. Although there is considerable room for
improvement in these measures of retail store image, the identification of the
fashion, service, and atmosphere dimensions allows future research to
determine what additional factors influence the separate dimensions of retail
image. The creation of consumer perceptions concerning a brand is a crucial
strategic decision facing brand managers. It must be remembered that brand
managers and retailers are not merely promoting a physical good or service,
rather they promote an image. A brands image is a combination of a
consumers subjective perceptions of the products innate characteristics,
and the environment that surrounds a brand the retail setting. Ultimate
success of a brand and a retailer is determined by how closely the image of
the selling organization and the product meet the expectations of the
consumer.
References
Aaker, D.A. (1991), Managing Brand Equity: Capitalizing on the Value of a Brand Name, The
Free Press, New York, NY.
Baker, J., Grewal, D. and Parasuraman, A. (1994), The influence of store environment on
quality inferences and store image, Journal of Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 22
No. 4, pp. 328-39.
Hair, J.F. Jr, Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L. and Black, W.C. (1992), Multivariate Data
Analyses with Readings, 3rd ed., Macmillan Publishing Company, New York, NY.
Jacoby, J. and Mazursky, D. (1984), Linking brand and retailer images do the potential risks
outweigh the potential benefits?, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 60 No. 2, pp. 105-22.
Keaveney, S.M. and Hunt, K.A. (1992), Conceptualization and operationalization of retail
store image: a case of rival middle-level theories, Journal of Academy of Marketing
Science, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 165-75.
Lindquist, J.D. (1974-1975), Meaning of image: a survey of empirical and hypothetical
evidence, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 50 No. 4, pp. 29-37.
Martineau, P. (1958), The personality of the retail store, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 36,
January-February, pp. 47-55.
Mazursky, D. and Jacoby, J. (1986), Exploring the development of store images, Journal of
Retailing, Vol. 62, Summer, pp. 145-65.
Monroe, K.B. and Krishnan, R. (1985), The effect of price on subjective product evaluations,
in Jacoby, J. and Olson, J.C. (Eds), Perceived Quality: How Consumers View Stores and
Merchandise, Lexington Books, Lexington, MA, pp. 209-32.
Olshavsky, R. (1985), Perceived quality in consumer decision making: an integrated
theoretical perspective, in Jacoby, J. and Olson, J.C. (Eds), Perceived Quality: How
Consumers View Stores and Merchandise, Lexington Books, Lexington, MA, pp. 3-29.
Peter, J.P. and Olson, J.C. (1994), Understanding Consumer Behavior, Irwin, Boston, MA.
Stokes, R. (1985), The effect of price, package design, and brand familiarity on perceived
quality, in Jacoby, J. and Olson, J.C. (Eds), Perceived Quality: How Consumers View
Stores and Merchandise, Lexington Books, Lexington, MA, pp. 233-46.
Ward, J.C., Bitner, M.J. and Barnes, J. (1992), Measuring the prototypicality and meaning of
retail environments, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 68, Summer, pp. 194-220.
Zimmer, M.R. and Golden, L.L. (1988), Impressions of retail stores: a content analyses of
consumer images, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 54 No. 3, pp. 265-91.
(Stephen S. Porter and Cindy Claycomb are both Assistant Professors in Marketing and
Entreneurship at the W. Frank Barton School of Business, Wichita State University, Kansas,
USA.)
I
JOURNAL OF PRODUCT & BRAND MANAGEMENT, VOL. 6 NO. 6 1997 385
Executive summary and implications for managers and
executives
Brands and the retailer: an uneasy alliance
To what extent do manufacturer brands influence your image of a retailer?
This question, I suspect, will receive the answer it depends from most
people. In this case (fashion clothing) the chances are that the brands
stocked are essential to image. In other retail sectors the impact of
manufacturer brands is less. Porter and Claycomb show support for the
relevance of brands to clothing retailing but we must treat any transfer to
other sectors with caution. Even in the apparel sector there are successful
outlets (Marks & Spencer for example) that do not stock named brands but
rely on their own powerful brand.
Assuming the importance of the brands we stock in our shop, we need to
consider the balance between creating our own image independent of those
brands and securing the right impression by reference to those brands.
Relying on the fickle nature of fashion brands could prove a risky strategy
over the long term. Three aspects to retail image management need
attention:
(1) Getting the right brand mix.
(2) Creating your own image independent of stock branding.
(3) Developing customer loyalty.
Its not all designer labels, is it?
The brand name provides reassurance to the consumer. In the case of
fashion this assurance extends beyond issues of product quality to issues of
personal image and style. For many people the brands worn are used as a
vehicle for impressing friends, displaying wealth and signaling style. The
man who buys a Rolex watch doesnt just buy the watch because its of top
quality. He wants to demonstrate a certain image plus his ability to afford
such an expensive item. The same goes for other fashion and luxury
products.
The shop that stocks the top designer brands wants to pass across the image
that those products demonstrate. And in using these brands to create that
classy image, the shop hopes that this sense of class transfers to other less
well-known brands in the shop. However, as Porter and Claycomb
demonstrate, this effect depends on the balance between the top brands and
other brands. You cannot use just one or two anchor brands to create the
right image, you have to have a range of top brands alongside the anchor.
A reminder that, as ever, consumers are not nearly so easily fooled as many
like to think.
Fashion retailers should consider:
Creating a core stock of top brands ideally those with proven
longevity.
Using this core in advertising, direct mail and PR activity.
Researching changes in consumer brand preference so as to manage
secondary brands.
Cooperation with brand owners in advertising and promotion.
386 JOURNAL OF PRODUCT & BRAND MANAGEMENT, VOL. 6 NO. 6 1997
This summary has been
provided to allow
managers and executives
a rapid appreciation of
the content of this
article. Those with a
particular interest in the
topic covered may then
read the article in tototo
take advantage of the
more comprehensive
description of the
research undertaken and
its results to get the full
benefit of the material
present
You need your own image too
While the right brand mix provides the core for retail image in the fashion
sector we must not ignore efforts to create a brand for the store itself. We
know that, over time, consumers relate to the store brand as much as they do
to the brands stocked by the shop. The retailer who relies on the big brands
for creating image runs the risk of losing out as fashion changes and other,
competing retailers establish their own independent brand franchise:
Deliver on quality and support remember top brands need top service
to go with them.
Make sure staff understand and appreciate the brands you stock
including the lesser names.
Dont let manufacturer brands dominate your advertising and
promotions.
Develop your shops image through PR activity.
Focus on your local target audience rather than general advertising.
Make sure you add value to the brands by helping people create the
right style.
Make them your customers not the designer labels
Anyone (well, almost anyone) can stock top labels in their shop. But not
everyone can produce the service, attention and care that goes to creating a
successful retailer. Your task is to make customers come to you out of
preference rather than to another store. This loyalty follows from hard work
at your image and service and cannot be taken for granted:
Go out of your way for customers and make sure your staff do likewise.
Involve your customers ask them about what to stock, get feedback
about service and, above all, speak to them regularly.
Open to match your customers needs not your convenience. Just
because you sell posh clobber doesnt mean making it hard to buy is
justified.
Find out about your customers; keep good records and use them for
stock planning and communications.
Remember, youre a service business
Stocking the right brands may be important but its not the be all and end all
of good retailing. Sticking the brands on your racks wont make you
successful in the long run. You have to be the customers friend, assistant
and guide through the frightening world of style and fashion. You are, to
most customers, the expert and they want you to help them make the right
choice.
Too often fashion retailers seem to think that they can employ any old dimwit
and, so long as the brand mix is right, make loads of money. It might work
with some but most customers want more from their shopkeeper. If you dont
offer that extra added value then someone else will and your shop will
decline and close. The days of piling it high and selling at obscene prices
are long gone (if they ever existed). If thats your attitude to fashion
retailing, go find something else to do.
(A prcis of The influence of brand recognition on retail store image.
Provided by Marketing Consultants for MCB University Press.)
JOURNAL OF PRODUCT & BRAND MANAGEMENT, VOL. 6 NO. 6 1997 387