Crossroad: Brand Authenticity, Brand Equity and Luxury Brands

present thesis decided to consider the analysis made by Napoli et al. (2016), where the dimensions of authenticity are quality commitment, heritage and sincerity. In addition to these, also the dimension of craftsmanship (Napoli et al., 2014; Beverland 2005) has been taken into consideration because considered a relevant aspect in the luxury business (Kapferer et al., 2014).

Quality commitment shows a firm's dedication during the realization of the products.

Particularly, the aim is to offer a high quality of the products. Firms try to deliver attributes that can match consumers’ expectations in order to allow a pleasant experience. This has also the final scope to increase customer’s evaluation of the products. If the customer is satisfied, then there are more chances that he or she will purchase again that specific brand. For this reason, quality, as a dimension, could reinforce consumer-brand relationship (Fournier, 1998) and Brand Equity (Keller, 2003).

Heritage illustrates that brands care about following their history and pursuing their traditions and beliefs (Napoli et al., 2016). Particularly, this technique of “going back to the roots” gives the brand a special aura able to transmit to consumers a sense of authenticity and uniqueness that is difficult to imitate for competitors (Urde et al., 2007). This dimension helps to impart the feelings of stability, continuity and credibility that individuals search and deserve in these years characterised by uncertainty (Fritz et al., 2017). Moreover, the use of the various elements that constitute heritage (track record, longevity, core values, use of symbols and history) could help to enhance trust and customer loyalty, leading to reinforce Brand Equity.

Sincerity expresses consumers’ believes that the firm behave with integrity and is guided by a genuine love for the products (Napoli et al., 2016). Finally, craftsmanship is a dimension that helps to increase the feeling of authenticity, particularly in the luxury industry, because the realization of craft products enhances the value and image of the brand, also connecting it with past traditions (Beverland, 2005).

Furthermore, Brand Equity has also been increasingly studied in the past few decades. As analysed above, many constructs and dimensions exist about this topic, but most of them lack managerial usefulness (Martensen and Grønholdt, 2010).

Aaker and Keller are the main exponents of consumer-based Brand Equity, and specifically of the cognitive psychology perspective on Brand Equity, which is the line of thought considered in this research.

Taking Keller (2001)’s model of Brand Equity, which is the most recent and therefore relevant one, integrating it with some clarifications from Aaker, the authors of the present paper have delineated the six Brand Equity dimensions: Brand Salience, Brand Performance, Brand Imagery, Consumer Judgments, Consumer Feelings, Consumer Brand Resonance.

Brand Salience refers to brand awareness (Aaker, 1996b; Keller, 2001) and corresponds to the broader category of Brand Identity. Brand Performance relates to all the properties that a customer could attribute to a brand based on the product or the service itself; Brand Performance is identified with the product or service features, its reliability, effectiveness, efficiency and empathy, its style and design and its price. Brand Imagery, on the other hand, reflects the intangible aspects of a product or service, such as heritage, personality and values. This means that Brand Imagery is deeply connected to Brand Authenticity, through the dimensions of both heritage and sincerity, as sincere is one of the attributes of Brand Personality. Brand Imagery, together with Brand Performance, is included in the broader category of Brand Meaning.

Consumer Judgments deal with a customer’s personal opinion of the brand. Four sub-categories belong to it: quality, credibility, consideration, superiority. As it is clear, Consumer Judgments relate to Brand Authenticity through quality commitment, as quality is one of the way consumers can meet the expectations they have on the brand. Consumer Feelings correspond to customers’ emotional responses. This dimension, together with Consumer Judgements, belong to the wider category of Brand Responses. Consumer Brand Resonance is included in the Brand Relationship category and it corresponds to a psychological bond that customers have with brands. This category has been linked by the authors to all the authenticity’s dimensions, since each of those could have an impact on three attributes of Consumer Brand Resonance:

engagement, attachment and loyalty.

In addition, the researchers have linked craftsmanship with both Brand Performance, since craftsmanship could impact on the durability and reliability of the product, and Brand Imagery, since it could influence the way consumers see the brand, in addition to Consumer Brand Resonance.

3.1.2 Crossroad: Brand Authenticity and Luxury Brands

Based on the analysis of Brand Authenticity (see intra 2.2 Brand Authenticity) and the one on the luxury industry, a link between the two elements can be found.

First of all, it is clear that both concepts hold the attributes of history and heritage (Keller, 2009;

Napoli et al., 2016). As a matter of fact, heritage is one of the four major dimensions of authenticity underlined in this paper, based on the Napoli et al. (2016)’s line of thought, and history is an element underneath it (Urde et al., 2007). As already mentioned (see intra 2.2.3 Brand Authenticity dimensions), history and heritage must not be mixed and confused, since the former cannot stand by itself, but it is part of the heritage of a brand. In the same way, Keller (2009) underlines the importance of heritage and history when talking about luxury. He states that these two elements are typically present in luxury brands, because they endorse the brand with a stronger aspirational component.

Secondly, craftsmanship is another dimension addressed to both authenticity and luxury (Napoli et al., 2014; Amatulli et al., 2018; Keller, 2009). As assessed in the above section, craftsmanship is one of the main point of differentiations between luxury and non-luxury brands (Amatulli et al., 2018). It is also a dimension of authenticity (Napoli et al., 2014) ad it is one of the main topics about authenticity in the luxury industry (Hitzler and Müller-Sterwens, 2017).

Moreover, another element that concerns both authenticity and luxury is quality (Napoli et al., 2016; Keller, 2009). Quality is the first cited dimension of authenticity by Napoli et al. (2016) and it is divided in experienced and evaluated quality (Golder et al. 2012). This difference in quality can be also used in the luxury sector, with a distinction among current and prospect customers: evaluated quality can be assessed by both prospect customer, while experienced quality can only be judge by current customers. Keller (2009) states that high quality is pivotal for luxury firms because consumers in this context are more demanding and quality should be aligned with customers’ expectations if not even exceed them.

3.1.3 Crossroad: Brand Equity and Luxury Brands

A deep link between luxury brands and Brand Equity can also be found, first and foremost in Keller’s literature.

To start with, Keller attributes to both Brand Equity (2001) and Luxury Brands (2009) the concept of Brand Imagery as a measure (see intra 2.3.4 The Brand Equity pyramid). As a matter

of fact, he states that “much of the equity with luxury brands is intangible, and resides in its brand imagery” (Keller, 2009, p. 295). He also defines these intangible elements in the same way he defines the Brand Imagery’s sub-dimensions: user profiles, purchase and usage situation, personality and values and history, heritage and experience (Keller, 2009; Keller, 2001). All these aspects are made more specific regarding luxury brands (Keller, 2009):

o user profiles: the image that users have of themselves tend to be more aspirational and idealised when dealing with luxury brands;

o purchase and usage situation: luxury brands usually have strong and specific usage associations, and they tend not to be used frequently enough;

o personality and values: out of the five dimensions of brand personality (see intra 2.3.4 The Brand Equity pyramid), sophistication tends to be the most used to position luxury brands, followed by competence and excitement;

o history, heritage and experiences: usually the associations with these dimensions is very strong for luxury brands, and these associations tend to be shared by many people.

Another pivotal link concerns “feelings”. What Keller call “Consumer Feelings” dealing with Brand Equity (2001) and “Consumer Feelings” regarding luxury brand (2009) can be compared, since he defines them both as “customers’ emotional responses and reactions with respect to the brand” (p. 14). In both cases, the feelings that Keller identifies are: warmth, fun, excitement, security, social approval and self-respect. Luxury brands are more likely to create experiential feelings (warmth, fun and excitement).

3.1.4 Overall crossroad and Research Gap

The researchers have presented above the links between each of the variable analysed in the present study.

However, as of today, no research exists on how Brand Authenticity could impact Brand Equity in the context of luxury. As a matter of fact, the three constructs have some common dimensions, but no researcher has already pointed it out. The three main dimensions of authenticity are in fact also present in the conceptualization of Brand Equity and all of them are pivotal in the luxury industry. Specifically, quality is a sub-dimension of Brand Equity under Consumer Judgments in the Brand Responses block; heritage, instead, is present as a

sub-dimension of Brand Imagery, which is part of the Brand Meaning block; lastly, sincerity is an attribute of Brand Personality in Brand Imagery. Craftsmanship is not directly considered in Keller (2001)’s Brand Equity model but the authors of the present paper believe that its analysis is crucial in the context of luxury brands, where craftsmanship is one of the main attributes.

All in all, in the literature review it has been pointed out how the three dimensions of Brand Authenticity (quality, heritage and sincerity) are linked with Brand Equity, but also that in Brand Equity scholars hardly ever cited Brand Authenticity directly. With this research, the authors of the present paper aim at finding out whether Brand Authenticity could influence Brand Equity. Moreover, few connections have been made between craftsmanship and Brand Equity and with this analysis the two constructs could be linked more directly, considering the importance of craftsmanship in the luxury industry. In figure 10, the research gap of the present study is graphically shown.

Figure 10. Graphic illustration of the research gap and the research question

Source: own representation