The Influence of Brand Personality in the Relationship of Ambush Marketing and Brand Attitude

Table of Contents

List of Figures

Abstract

1. Introduction
1.1 Overview
1.2 Background to the Research
1.3 Research Problem and Issues
1.4 Objectives of the Research
1.5 Justification of the Research
1.6 Delimitations of Scope and Key Assumptions
1.7 Methodology
1.8 Definitions
1.8.1 Ambush Marketing
1.8.2 Brand
1.8.3 Clutter
1.8.4 Brand Personality
1.8.5 Brand Equity
1.8.6 Brand Attitude
1.9 Conclusions

2. Literature Review
2.1 Introduction
2.2 Marketing and Traditional Marketing Communications
2.2.1 Traditional Marketing Communications
2.2.2 Event Marketing and Sponsorship
2.2.3 Non-Traditional Marketing Communications
2.2.4 The Use of Non-Traditional Marketing Communications
2.3 Ambush Marketing
2.3.1 Ambush Marketing and its Classification
2.3.2 Tactics of Ambush Marketing
2.3.3 Reasons for Ambush Marketing
2.3.4 Forms of Ambush Marketing
2.4 Marketing Communications Seek to Maintain Brands
2.4.1 Advantages of Brands
2.4.2 Brand Attitude
2.4.3 Brand Personality
2.5 Theoretical Framework
2.6 Proposed Model
2.6.1 C1: The Construct of Ambush Marketing
2.6.2 C2: The Construct of Brand Attitude
2.6.3 C3: The Construct of Brand Personality
2.7 Conclusions

3. Methodology
3.1 Overview
3.2 Research Design
3.3 Type of Investigation
3.4 Time Horizon
3.5 Sampling
3.5.1 Sampling Design
3.5.2 Sample Frame
3.5.3 Sample Size
3.6 Experimental Design
3.6.1 Stimulus Material
3.7 Data Collection Instrument
3.8 Data Collection Procedure
3.9 Ethics in Data Collection
3.10 Measurement of Constructs
3.11 Conclusions

4. Data Analysis
4.1 Introduction
4.2 Reliability of the Research
4.2.1 Item Non-Response
4.2.2 Scale Reliability
4.3 Sample Characteristics
4.3.1 Demographic Characteristics and Distribution Among the Brand Personalities
4.4 Qualitative Responses
4.4.1 Objective 1 – General Understanding of the Acceptance of Ambush Marketing
4.5 Descriptive Statistics
4.5.1 General Data Analysis
4.5.2 Objective 2 – Does Ambush Marketing Create Positive Brand Attitude?
4.5.3 Objective 3 – Does Brand Personality Influence the Effectiveness of Ambush Marketing?
4.6 Hypotheses
4.7 Conclusion

5. Conclusions, Limitations and Implications for Future Research and Management
5.1 Introduction
5.2 Summary and Results and Findings
5.2.1 Research Objective 1
5.2.2 Research Objective 2
5.2.3 Research Objective 3
5.2.4 Conclusion about the Research Problem
5.3 Implications for Management
5.4 Limitations of the Study
5.4.1 Limitations of Brand Personalities
5.4.2 Limitations of Methodology
5.5 Implications for Future Research
5.5.1 Complete Investigation With Fewer Limitations
5.5.2 Personalities of Marketing Communication Options
5.5.3 Determination of the Brand Personality’s Impact
5.6 Concluding Remarks

References

Appendix

Declaration

Curriculum Vitae

LIST OF FIGURES

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Figures:

Figure 1: Marketing Communications Options by Keller (2008)

Figure 2: TOP Programme Evolution (IOC 2008)

Figure 3: A Systems Model of Brand Antecedents and Consequences from Keller and Lehmann (2006)

Figure 4: Brand and Brand Attitude Impacts on Brand Equity Adapted from Aaker (1991) and Keller (1993)

Figure 5: A Model for Predictive Measurements of Advertising Effectiveness by Steiner (in Lavidge and Steiner 1961)

Figure 6: Final Brand Equity Model from Faircloth, Capella and Alford (2001)

Figure 7: A Brand Personality Framework by J. Aaker (1997)

Figure 8: Conceptual Model

Tables:

Table 1: Measurement of Constructs

Table 2: Measurement of Constructs (continued)

Table 3: Multi-Scale Internal Reliability Measure

Table 4: Characteristics of Sample

Table 5: Results of Qualitative Questions by Brand Personality

Table 6: Recognizing the Treatments Brand Personality

Table 7: Independent Sample T-Test for Gender and Brand Personality

Table 8: Pre-Measure of Brand Attitude

Table 9: Post-Measure of Brand Attitude

Table 10: Spillover Effects of Brand Attitude

Appendix:

Appendix a: Demographic Distribution of Australia

Appendix b: Questionnaire

Appenix c: SPSS – Independent Samples T-Test Brand Personality by Gender

Appendix d: SPSS – ANOVA Gender by Brand Personality

Appendix e: SPSS – ANOVA Brand Personality by Brand Personality

Appendix f: SPSS – ANOVA Brand Attitude Pretest by Brand Personality

Appendix g: SPSS – ANOVA Brand Attitude Posttest by Brand Personality

Appendix h: SPSS – ANOVA Brand Attitude Difference (BApost – BApre) by Brand Personality

ABSTRACT

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

This study seeks to investigate the relationship between ambush marketing and brand attitude and determines whether brand personality has an influence in this relationship. The concept of ambush marketing is relatively new. Therefore, research in this field is still rare. Ambush marketing is the practice whereby a company intrudes upon public attention surrounding the event, thereby deflecting attention toward themselves and away from the sponsors. This study describes the current state of research on ambush marketing. Most research seeks to determine the ethics of ambush marketing. In common, ambush marketing is related to the sponsorship of events. Due to this, traditional and non-traditional marketing communications are described and reasons for the uprise of ambush marketing are given. The importance of brands and brand equity is elaborated followed by a description of brand personality and brand attitude. In an experimental design, the named relationship and the influence of brand personality were explored. A survey with a pretest-posttest was conducted among students of Curtin University of Technology. In a self-administered questionnaire, an ambush marketing scenario at the FIFA World Cup was simulated. Prior and after the scenario, the brand attitude towards the brand was measured. According to the limitations, the brand attitudes sincerity, competence and excitement were tested. These were represented by the brands Target, Microsoft and Billabong. In addition, open questions asked for the respondent’s feeling about this ambush scenario and possible reasons for or against such an ambush. The results are ambivalent. The qualitative responses show three groups: opponents, supporters and those that lie in between. Most support for ambush marketing received Billabong while Target’s and Microsoft’s ambushes created rather negative feelings. Reasons against ambush marketing are its unfair nature and the loss of image. Supporting reasons are the increased awareness and the need in competition. Notably, Target should fear a loss of image, while Microsoft should use ambush marketing due to competition and Billabong because of increased awareness. This confirms that the dispute between the researchers mirrors the dispute in the public. The quantitative data shows different results. The agreement on the assigned brand personality was highest on Microsoft while Target received the lowest. According to the pretest-posttest, Target improved the most from the ambush while Billabong and especially Microsoft lost brand attitude. Possible reasons for this are that ambush marketing, in terms of brand attitude, supports brands with low brand personality. Another explanation is the type of brand personality, which implies that sincere brands should use ambush marketing while exciting and competent brands should avoid it.

This is dedicated to parents. Thank you for your support, which made this thesis possible.

I would like to thank Dr. Sonia Dickinson for her support and patience.

1. INTRODUCTION

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

1.1 Overview

This chapter will introduce the reader to “ambush marketing” together with identification of gaps in the current research. Further, this chapter will formulate resulting problems for managerial decisions and consequently propose research objectives. Finally, a brief overview of the methodology together with delimitations will be detailed.

1.2 Background to the Research

The increased use of ambush marketing in the last decade as a form of communication is widely acknowledged (Brewer 1993; McKelvey 1994; Meenaghan 1994, 1996 and 1998; O’Sullivan and Murphy 1998; Sandler and Shani 1989; Shani and Sandler 1998 and 1999). The reason for the increased activity relates to clutter in the marketing communications environment and increased prices for sponsorship. Ambush marketing can be defined as “the practice whereby another company, often a competitor, intrudes upon public attention surrounding the event, thereby deflecting attention toward themselves and away from the sponsor” (Meenaghan 1994, 1996 and 1998). To date, most literature on ambush marketing relates to whether ambush marketing is ethical or not (Brewer 1993; Ettorre 1993; Meenaghan 1994 and 1996; O’Sullivan and Murphy 1998). A clear answer cannot be given, as there is still a dispute between opponents (Brewer 1993; Ettorre 1993), supporters (Schmitz 2005; Welsh in Brewer 1993; Welsh 2007) and opinions that lie in between (Doust 1997; Meenhagan 1994 and 1996; O’Sullivan and Murphy 1998; Shani and Sandler 1998). In general, there is an agreement that the term “ambush marketing” was coined by Jerry Welsh in the 1970s (Brewer 1993; Welsh n.d.). In a marketing framework, ambush marketing is commonly placed among non-traditional marketing communication as opposed to traditional marketing communication (Meenaghan 1994, 1996 and 1998). A commonly acknowledged framework of these new marketing tools is not yet established, and the effects of ambush marketing have received limited attention. To date, the most reliable research relates to effectiveness of ambush marketing, as well as recall and recognition tests on sponsors and ambushing competitors (Sandler and Shani 1989). These tests compare official sponsors with the equivalent ambush companies of an industry. Research on image and sales has not yet been undertaken in relation to ambush marketing (Meenaghan 1998). However, there have been attempts to investigate the effects of ambush marketing on consumer attitudes. An example is research by the International Olympic Committee, which found out that consumers felt that it was wrong for companies to deliberately avoid paying for Olympic rights (IOC 1997; Meenaghan 1998). Regarding the interest of the IOC in this issue, the results are questionable. Shani and Sandler sought to determine consumer knowledge about the rights of sponsors and ambushers, the different levels and categories of sponsorship and consumer attitudes toward ambush marketing (Meenaghan 1998; Shani and Sandler 1998). Their findings suggest that consumers have limited support for ambush marketing as it is unethical or unfair. Meenaghan finally investigated the goodwill the sponsor gets and the changing attitude towards an ambusher based on the consumer’s involvement with the activity (Meenaghan 1994). Results indicate that the less consumer commitment is toward an event or event participant, the less consumer attitudes against the ambusher can be expected.

1.3 Research Problem and Issues

Ambush marketing is a strategic communication to ambush competitors. Therefore, it seems necessary for managers to understand the effects of this tool. What effect does ambush marketing have on a promoted brand? Are there different effects of ambush marketing depending on brand personality? And if so, what specific contexts may be more suited to ambush marketing? This study explores the effects of “ambush marketing“ on brand attitude. The research model and research objectives seek to investigate whether the outcomes of ambush marketing influences brand attitude. Thus, the research problem of this study is:

Does “Ambush Marketing” improve brand attitude? If so, what brand personality effects are there on this relationship?

1.4 Objectives of the Research

This research investigates the relationship between the application of ambush marketing by the company and its consequences on the attitude of the customer towards the brand.

The objectives of this research are:

1. to gain a general understanding of the acceptance of ambush marketing
2. to determine whether ambush marketing creates positive brand attitude
3. to determine whether brand personality influences the effectiveness of ambush marketing.

1.5 Justification of the Research

The term “ambush marketing” is relatively new, compared to traditional marketing means. When Jerry Welsh first used the expression he was Executive Vice President, Worldwide Marketing Communications at American Express in the 1980’s (Welsh n.d.). In the course of the past 20 years ambush marketing has been applied and therefore interpreted in many different ways. Especially sponsors and event owners have an interest in ambush marketing. Event organisers and sponsors alike want to defend themselves by discrediting ambush marketing as parasitic. Foundational research on the other hand is quite rare. Beside Meenaghan (1994, 1996 and 1998) who has numerous publications on this issue, only a handful of reliable researchers have devoted their interest to ambush marketing, and recognise that ambush marketing is a legitimate tool to promote brands. This thesis aims to understand the effects of applying ambush marketing, and conceptual variation whereby brand personality is examined.

1.6 Delimitations of Scope and Key Assumptions

It is acknowledged that five brand personalities exist – sincerity, competence, excitement, sophistication and ruggedness (Aaker 1995 and 1997; Freling and Forbes 2005; Haigood 1999). For the purpose of this research, just three have been selected due to time and cost considerations. For each of the brand personalities, 40 responses have been collected.

1.7 Methodology

This study uses an experimental design, specifically of a one-group pretest-posttest (Davis 1997), whereby students complete a self-report questionnaire. Respondent’s attitudes towards a brand are examined prior and post a treatment. The respondents are tertiary students, studying an undergraduate course at Curtin University of Technology. For the chosen three brand personalities different questionnaires will be used. These brand personalities are sincerity, competence and excitement.

1.8 Definitions

In the following definitions of ambush marketing, brand, clutter, brand personality, brand equity and brand attitude will be given.

1.8.1 Ambush Marketing

The definition of ambush marketing given by Meenaghan (1994, 1996 and 1998) is “the practice whereby another company, often a competitor, intrudes upon public attention surrounding the event, thereby deflecting attention toward themselves and away from the sponsor.” Further he offers a second interpretation of ambush marketing (1994), as “to also describe a whole variety of wholly legitimate and morally correct methods of intruding upon public consciousness surrounding an event.” Both definitions delivered by Meenaghan were confirmed by Doust (1997). McKelvey’s (1994) definition describes ambush marketing as “a company’s intentional effort to weaken – or ambush – its competitor’s official sponsorship. It does this by engaging in promotions or advertising that trade off the event or property’s goodwill and reputation, and that seek to confuse the buying public as to which company really holds official sponsorship rights.” In addition to Meenaghan, he adds how ambush marketing works. Sandler and Shani (1989) define ambush marketing as “a planned effort (campaign) by an organization to associate themselves indirectly with an event in order to gain at least some of the recognition and benefits that are associated with being an official sponsor.” The International Event Group (1997) defines ambush marketing as “a promotional strategy whereby a nonsponsor attempts to capitalize on the popularity or prestige of a property by giving the false impression that it is a sponsor.” Here, as slight evaluation of ambush marketing can be recognised. In addition to that Ettorre (1993) calls ambush marketing “advertising or other marketing tools to give the impression that the competing company is the official sponsor” while Bennett (in Ettorre 1993) proceeds that it “implies a connection to an event for which you have not compensated the owner – another word for it: stealing.” These definitions show that there is still a dispute over how to perceive ambush marketing.

1.8.2 Brand

Kotler and Armstrong (2001) define brand as “a name, term, sign, symbol, or design, or a combination of these intended to identify the goods or services of one seller or group of sellers and to differentiate them from those of competitors.” Kotler (2003) and Keller (1993 and 2008) acknowledge this definition. The American Marketing Association (AMA) defines brand very similar as “a name, term, design, symbol, or any other feature that identifies one seller's good or service as distinct from those of other sellers” (AMA 2009).

1.8.3 Clutter

Advertising clutter is usually perceived as the presence of a large amount of non-editorial content in an editorial medium. Media put large quantities of ads in one pod due to the high demand for advertising space; when the amount exceeds a consumer’s acceptance level in an editorial media vehicle, it is viewed as clutter and is often perceived as an undesirable phenomenon by both advertisers and consumers (Ha 1996).

1.8.4 Brand Personality

According to Aaker brand personality can be defined as a “set of human characteristics associated with a brand” (Aaker 1997, p. 347; Freling and Forbes 2005, p.404; Haigood 1999, p.149). Keller (2008) defines it similar as “the human characteristics or traits that consumers can attribute to a brand” (Olsen and Allen 1995 quoted in Keller 2008, p.369). The five brand personality dimensions are sincerity, excitement, competence, sophistication and ruggedness (Aaker 1995 and 1997; Freling and Forbes 2005; Keller 2008)

1.8.5 Brand Equity

The Marketing Science Institute (1989, quoted by Faircloth, Capella and Alford 2001, p.62) defines brand equity from a consumer’s perspective “as both a financial asset and as a set of favourable associations and behaviours”. A further definition states that brand equity is “the value of a brand, based on the extent to which it has high brand loyalty, name awareness, perceived quality, strong brand associations and other assets such as patents, trademarks and channel relationships” (Kotler, Brown, Adam and Armstrong 2004, p.409). Keller (1993, p.8) defines consumer based brand equity “as the differential effect of brand knowledge on consumer response to the marketing of the brand.” Kotler’s (2003, p.422) definition is similar as it is “the positive differential effect that knowing the brand name has on customer response to the product or service”. Aaker (2001, p.165) states that brand equity “is a set of assets and liabilities linked to a brand’s name and symbol that add to or subtract from the value provided by a product of service to a firm and/or that firm’s customers.”

1.8.6 Brand Attitude

Brand Attitude is defined as the evaluation of the brand with respect to its perceived ability to meet a currently relevant need (Kotler and Keller 2006; Percy and Rossiter 1992). Relevant brand needs may be negatively oriented (problem removal, problem avoidance, incomplete satisfaction, normal depletion) or positively orientated (sensory gratification, intellectual stimulation, or social approval) (Kotler and Keller 2006).

1.9 Conclusions

This chapter outlined ambush marketing, which is considered an alternative form of communication. Ambush marketing was first coined in the 1970s, however, most research relates to its ethical legitimacy and effectiveness. This chapter elaborated that research in this field is still incomplete. The research problem of this study is whether “ambush marketing” improves brand attitude? If so, what brand personality effects are there on this relationship? To achieve answers, this chapter set the objectives of this research as to gain an understanding of the acceptance of ambush marketing, to determine whether it creates positive brand attitude and to determine whether brand personality influences the effectiveness of ambush marketing. The following chapters can be outlined as follows:

Chapter 2 reviews available literature about marketing and marketing communications as well as give further information about ambush marketing, brand attitude and brand personality. Finally, it will explain the theoretical framework applied in this study. Chapter 3 gives insight in this study’s methodology. It will determine the research design and explain which type of investigation was used. Matters such as the study’s time horizon, sampling and the design of the experiment will be set. Finally, the applied data collection procedure and the compliance of ethics in data collection will be reported. In chapter 4 the analysis of the data will take place. This covers the reliability of the research, the sample’s characteristics, a summary of the qualitative responses and the descriptive statistics. Finally, chapter 5 will summarize the results and findings of this study. It will give implications for managerial decisions, name limitations connected to this study and suggest implications for future research.

2. LITERATURE REVIEW

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

2.1 Introduction

This literature review takes the following format. First, the concepts of marketing and marketing communications are discussed. This discussion covers traditional and non-traditional marketing communications. Second, ambush marketing as part of the latter, is elaborated including a classification, possible tactics, reasons for and forms of ambush marketing. Third, the role of marketing communications in building brands will be described. This includes an explanation of the brand equity concept, brand attitude’s and brand personality’s place in it. Finally, the theoretical framework and the proposed model of this research will be described.

2.2 Marketing and Traditional Marketing Communications

Marketing is defined as “a social and managerial process by which individuals and groups obtain what they need and want through creating and exchanging products and value with others” (Kotler, Brown, Adam and Armstrong 2004, p.919). The core activities of marketing include product development, research, communication, distribution, pricing and service. Each of these activities adds value for the consumer (Kotler, Brown, Adam and Armstrong 2004).

2.2.1 Traditional Marketing Communications

Marketing communications is defined as “the means by which firms attempt to inform, persuade, and remind consumers – directly or indirectly – about the brands they sell” (Fill 2005, p.16; Keller 2008, p.230). Further, it can be defined as “communications by means of promotion within a target audience or market to inform, persuade and remind prospective and existing consumers and customers of the firm, its products and services and how these are differentiated to appeal to and satisfy targeted needs, wants and desires of target markets” (Kitchen 1999, p.2). This includes one-way communication as well as a dialog between companies and their customers. Furthermore, this communication takes place during preselling, selling, consuming and postconsuming stages. Therefore, the fit of the used communications to the brand must be consistent regarding the message and the strategic position (Assael, Reed and Patton 1997; Kotler 2003).

Marketing communications can be divided into ten groups (see Figure 1, p.16); media advertising, direct response advertising, online advertising, place advertising, point-of-purchase advertising, trade promotions, consumer promotions, event marketing and sponsorship, publicity and public relations, and personal selling (Keller 2008). Firms make decisions about which promotion mix tools should be used, based on its ability to contribute to brand equity (Fill 2005; Keller 2008). Marketing communications contribute to brand equity in different ways. First, it creates brand awareness. This is important for the launch of a brand or a product. Second, marketing communications link the consumer’s points-of-difference and points-of-parity associations to the brand. Third, they can create positive brand judgements or feelings and therefore result in a stronger consumer-brand connection (Keller 2001 and 2008). The effectiveness of marketing communications depends on general factors. One factor is the influence of the communication source over the recipient. The greater the influence of the medium, the greater the effect in favour of the source. Another factor is whether the message is in line with the recipient’s opinions and beliefs. The competence of the recipient and the source is important as well. Marketing communications are most effective where the issue is not in core of the recipient’s value system or the source is believed to have an expertise, high status or objectivity regarding the issue (Fiske and Hartley 1980). Finally, the social context, group or reference group will mediate the communication and influences whether the message is accepted or not (Assael, Reed and Patton 1997; Fiske and Hartley 1980).

2.2.2 Event Marketing and Sponsorship

Event marketing is defined as sponsorship of events or activities related to sports, art, entertainment or social causes (Keller 2008). Companies consider sponsorship as a major communication tool due to today’s highly-clutter advertising environment (Carrillat, Lafferty and Harris 2005, Gardner and Shuman 1987). The intended effects of sponsorship vary. Sponsorship allows a company to identify with a particular target market or lifestyle. Further, it increases awareness of the company or product name (Keller 2008). Sponsoring an event creates or reinforces consumer perceptions of key brand image associations. In addition, it enhances corporate image dimensions, and creates experiences that evoke feelings for the audience (Keller 2008). Sponsorship expresses commitment to the community and social issues (Keller 2008). The event can serve to entertain key clients or reward key employees (Keller 2008). Finally, sponsorship permits merchandising and promotional opportunities (Keller 2008).

Figure 1: Marketing Communications Options by Keller (2008)

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

2.2.3 Non-Traditional Marketing Communications

Regarding the marketing communication options and their disadvantages it becomes obvious that the exploding costs for sponsorship motivate managers to search for alternative communication. Non-traditional communications such as ambush marketing become attractive to organizations. Besides ambush marketing, viral marketing, ambient marketing and ambient stunts are tactics that can be assigned to non-traditional marketing communications (Faatz 2006; Nufer and Bender 2008).

2.2.4 The Use of Non-Traditional Marketing Communications

Research on marketing communications has two purposes, to determine and understand its effects and to learn how to influence these effects (Ray and Webb 1986). These effects might be positive or negative. Negative effects can be clutter, audience fragmentation and receptivity. As a result, these effects lead to an increased attractiveness of available alternatives of marketing communications (Kitchen 1999).

Clutter is defined as the presence of a large amount of non-editorial content in an editorial medium. Media put large quantities of advertisements in one pod due to the high demand for advertising space; when the amount exceeds a consumer’s acceptance level in an editorial media vehicle, it is viewed as clutter and is often perceived as an undesirable phenomenon by both advertisers and consumers (Ha 1996). As clutter is audience related, perceived clutter is one’s belief that the amount of advertising in a medium is excessive (Elliott and Speck 1998). Clutter is a phenomenon resulting from several changes in media. This explanation takes television advertisements as an example, but the phenomenon can be applied to other media as well. Howard Gossage conducted the first research on clutter in the 1960s. At that time, the only advertisements on television were program sponsorship. These spots were 60 seconds long (Ray and Webb 1986).

Over time, technology provided the audiences with alternatives to commercial exposure. Pay-television and videocassettes were available and free of advertisement, while remote-control devices enabled zapping past television advertisements (Ray and Webb 1986). The companies reacted on the audience avoiding commercials and increased the number of advertisements. Commercial breaks got longer and the advertisements shorter, resulting in more spots per break (Rotfeld 2006). The high quantity of television spots becomes mass media spam. Finally, the audience will not notice the message in the advertisement. This chain of effects can be observed with most of the mass media, while the degree of clutter varies. Research showed that television and direct mail is perceived more cluttered than radio and magazines that are more cluttered than newspapers (Elliott and Speck 1998). The audience finds ways to avoid advertisements in newspapers, mail, e-mail or on the internet. These advertisement avoidances are all actions made by media users that differentially reduce their exposure to advertisement content. (Elliott and Speck 1998). Research has shown that adults switch stations during commercials 12% to 50% of the time and leave the room 20% to 36% of the time (Abernethy 1991; Heeter and Greenberg 1985; Kaplan 1985).

To communicate a message the company’s means of communication have to change. Regarding television advertisements, longer spots and fewer commercial breaks increase the impact of the message (Rotfeld 2006). Non-advertising parts of the marketing mix are another solution to the problem of clutter (Ray and Webb 1986).

Further, the problem of message reach compounded by audience fragmentation, which is defined as the division of audiences into small groups due to the wide spectrum of media outlets. Due to cable television consumers have access to a huge number of television stations. These television stations must not be in the same location of the audience. The increasing choice offers the viewers to watch multiple times as many television stations as in the past, resulting in a smaller audience size per station. Audience fragmentation becomes a problem for advertisers that need larger audiences due to cost-effectiveness (Audience fragmentation 2000).

2.3 Ambush Marketing

As mentioned before, ambush marketing is a term of non-traditional marketing communications. Ambush marketing is used by organizations for reasons outlined. First, companies use it to avoid clutter. Second, they apply ambush marketing to deal with fragmentation. Third, ambush marketing allows them to avoid high costs of promotion such as sponsorship. The following will explain ambush marketing and show how it and its tactics can by classified. Further, it gives reasons why companies use it and finally explains the forms of ambush marketing.

2.3.1 Ambush Marketing and its Classification

Ambush marketing is a form of guerrilla marketing. Both terms have their origins in warfare. Top managers and executives use military strategies, goals and ideology. Furthermore, universities take up this trend and use military terminology and principles (Assael, Reed and Patton 1997; Garsombke 1988). This is due to the fact that the war analogy delivers a strategic language and builds strategic thinking (Desmond 1997). Jay Conrad Levinson is commonly referred to as the inventor of guerrilla marketing. When asked what guerrilla marketing is, he notes that he is "referring to the soul and essence of guerrilla marketing which remain as always – achieving conventional goals, such as profits and joy, with unconventional methods, such as investing energy instead of money” (Levinson 2005, p.1). The analysis of the term “Guerilla Marketing” gives a more specific understanding. In military terms, guerrilla warfare “is one of the initial phases of warfare and will develop continuously until the guerrilla army in its steady growth acquires the characteristics of a regular army” (Guevara 1961, p.13). Here we see that guerrilla warfare is a phase in the strategy for achieving victory. “It is one strategic instrument used to inflict defeat on our enemy” (Mao Tse-tung 1937, p.50). Strategic decisions are long-term in nature. Considering this in the context of marketing, guerrilla marketing is a strategic choice in the early stages of a company, applicable until the company has reached a size to invest in more conventional marketing strategies. This is supported by the military objective of guerrilla warfare. “At the outset, the essential task of the guerrilla fighter is to keep himself from being destroyed” (Guevara 1961, p.15). In the beginning of a business, the entrepreneur has to fight with limited means. The established company’s chance to avoid competition is to destroy the new competitor in its early stages. The entrepreneur keeps himself from being destroyed by using unconventional ideas. This also complies with the maximization principle, where the entrepreneur has to maximise the result from his fixed funds or limited monetary resources.

To distinguish guerrilla marketing from ambush marketing the military terminology helps again. As guerrilla warfare is a strategy, the ambush is one of many tactics in this strategy (Guevara 1961). Tactics are the operational means in a military strategy. They are short-term orientated. If guerrilla marketing is a long-term strategy, ambush marketing can be seen as a short-term operational marketing tool. Concluding these thoughts, we may distinguish guerrilla marketing as a long-term marketing strategy for the early stages of a company from the usage of ambush marketing within this strategy.

Classifying ambush marketing as one tactic among the strategy of guerrilla marketing other tools can be assigned as well. Viral marketing, ambient marketing (sensation marketing, guerrilla sensation), ambient stunt and ambush marketing are variations of guerrilla marketing (Faatz 2006; Nufer and Bender 2008). Concluding this thought, it can be said that ambush marketing is a managerial process aimed at creating brand awareness as a basis for profit and survival in the early stages of a company.

Jerry Welsh defines ambush marketing as “competitive assaults on ill-conceived and poorly implemented sponsorships” (Welsh n.d.). Here the element of sponsoring appears again. In relation to this definition, ambush marketing is the exploitation of promotion possibilities at events that an official sponsor does not use. Here it becomes clear that ambush marketing is not parasitic, as it is simply the result of competition. For example, there is the case of Adidas vs. Nike at the Olympic games 2008 in Beijing. Adidas made an investment of millions to become an Olympic partner. The sponsorship and trademark regulations were supposed to protect sponsors from ambush marketing. Unfortunately for Adidas, single people cannot be forced to agree to a contract with companies sponsoring the event. Nike secured sponsorships of some of the most visible athletes. That way Nike is not directly associated with the Olympic event but with its participants (Adidas’ Challenge: Sprinting Ahead in China 2008). This example shows that in ambush marketing it is about searching for idle marketing opportunities to have lower expenses than the event’s official sponsor. Combined this logical new definition results:

Ambush marketing is an unconventional managerial process that exploits the competitor’s negligence and capturing surprisingly marketing opportunities in an unconventional way to obtain brand awareness as a basis for profit in the early stages of the company.

Not only does this relate to sponsorship, but every promotional action of a competitor can be challenged. Further, while ambush marketing is associated with firms in the introduction of the product life cycle, this is not a true reflection of its use. I.e. it is also used by multi-national companies to achieve shock value. Only because a tactic like ambush marketing is the optimal tool for the early stages of companies does not mean it is not suitable for multi-national corporations as well.

To explain the legitimacy of ambush marketing Jerry Welsh gave the following example: “When you own and license Kermit you have only given the rights you own to one specific frog – not to all frogs, and maybe not even to all green ones“ (Welsh 2007, p.2).

2.3.2 Tactics of Ambush Marketing

The general definition of ambush marketing is “a company's intentional efforts to weaken – or ambush – its competitor's ‘official’ sponsorship. It does this by engaging in promotions and advertising that trade off the event or property's goodwill and reputation, and that seek to confuse the buying public as to which company really holds official sponsor rights“ (McKelvey 1994, p.20). Meenaghan further defines it as “the practice whereby another company, often a competitor, intrudes upon public attention surrounding the event, thereby deflecting attention to themselves and away from the sponsor” (Meenaghan 1994, p.79, 1996, p.106 and 1998, p.309).

These definitions fail short of the potential ambush marketing bears. Furthermore, it is not parasitic as often claimed, it rather exploits the insufficient usage of marketing possibilities of the competitor. To get a broader understanding of possible applications of ambush marketing the analysis of the terms gives a more precise definition. Ambush is defined as “a surprise attack from a concealed position on a moving or temporarily halted target” (U.S. Department of Defence 2000, p.78).

Ambushes are classified by category, type and formation. These characteristics are used in combination. By category the ambush can be either hasty or deliberate. By type it can be a point or area ambush. Classification by formation is not sensible from a marketing perspective. “A unit conducts a hasty ambush when it makes visual contact with an enemy force and has time to establish an ambush without being detected. […] A deliberate ambush is conducted against a specific target at a predetermined location. […] In a point ambush, soldiers deploy to attack an enemy in a single kill zone. […] In an area ambush, soldiers deploy in two or more related point ambushes” (U.S. Department of Defence 2000, p.79).

Applying these variations of ambushes to marketing the following application can be derived. Hasty ambush marketing campaigns can be undertaken when encountering a competitors campaign and improvising is possible. The sponsoring of the Dutch premiere of the James Bond movie “Casino Royale” was a unique opportunity for the online poker players community everestpoker.com (everestpoker.com 2006) and was announced only a few months in advance. Deliberate ambush marketing campaigns are possible when information about competitors campaign is available and an ambush can be prepared. Preparing an ambush for the 2012 Olympic games in London is possible as the location was elected in 2005. That offers a preparation period of seven years (IOC 2005).

A single ambush marketing campaign is feasible when the campaign of the competitor is at a single location. The NFL Super Bowl XLII took place in Glendale on February 3rd 2008. The Super Bowl is the largest single sports event in the U.S. (NFL 2008). Thinking of multiple ambush campaigns, the competitor sponsors events on two or more locations. The FIFA World Cup 2010 in South Africa takes place in eleven stadiums and ten cities all over the country (FIFA 2008). Concluding this part, a marketing ambush is a campaign that exploits the negligence of the competitor and surprisingly capture an unutilised marketing opportunity. The definition of an ambush described the potential of these tactics.

2.3.3 Reasons for Ambush Marketing

There are several reasons that organizations are using non-traditional marketing communications, specifically ambush marketing. A key reason for using ambush marketing relates to the escalating prices for sponsoring and category-exclusive sponsoring.

In the last decade, event marketing has seen an enormous development. Since mass media has lost its effectiveness due to the phenomenon of clutter, non-advertising means of marketing communication become more important (Rotfeld 2006). Therefore, sponsorship expenses increased dramatically. Global expenditures for sponsoring rocketed between 1984 and 1996 from USD 2 billion up to USD 16.47 billion (Meenaghan 1998). In 2009 the global expenses for sponsorship are forecasted on USD 44.8 billion in 2009 (IEG 2009). Especially at large events such as the Olympics, FIFA World Cup and FIA Formula 1 grand prix’. These events are beyond the budget of non-multinational firms. Examples of these escalating prices are the Olympiad 1985-1988 (see Figure 2, p.22) in Seoul and Calgary, which had revenues of USD 96 million from 9 participating companies (USD 10.7 million/partner). The Olympic games 20 years later 2005-2008 in Beijing and Torino surged up to USD 866 million for 12 partners (USD 72.2 million/partner). On the domestic level the tendency is similar (IOC 2008). Confronted with these amounts, companies search for alternatives to sponsoring. Ambush marketing is an alternative to traditional event marketing.

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Figure 2: TOP Programme Evolution (IOC 2008)

Category-exclusive sponsoring makes it impossible for companies of certain industries to become sponsors. In both cases, ambush marketing is the only way to benefit from an event for a non-sponsoring company. Another reason for the increased use of ambush marketing is the phenomenon of clutter. As explained before, companies try to use non-traditional marketing communication means like ambush marketing to stand out from advertising clutter.

2.3.4 Forms of Ambush Marketing

As mentioned before, ambush marketing has the stigma of being parasitic. Ambush marketing is creative in that it searches for unused marketing space, and develops a creative campaign. Even though creativity allows an infinite number of ambush possibilities, the most common forms will be explained. According to Meenaghan (1994, 1996, and quoted by Doust 1997, O’Sullivan and Murphy 1998) there are five methods of ambush marketing. Firstly, companies can sponsor the broadcast or more general the media coverage of the event. Secondly, the ambusher might sponsor subcategories within the event and exploit this investment aggressively. Thirdly, by purchasing advertising time around relays of the competitor’s event an ambush can be organised. Therefore, the company makes a sponsorship-related contribution to the “players’ pool”. The fourth possibility is to engage in major non-sponsorship promotions to coincide with the event. They plan advertising at the time and place of the sponsored event. Finally, there are other ambush strategies developing imaginative ambushes. The possibilities are therefore unlimited.

2.4 Marketing Communications Seek to Maintain Brands

A brand can be defined as “a name, term, sign, symbol, or design, or a combination of these intended to identify the goods or services of one seller or group of sellers and to differentiate them from those of competitors” (Kotler and Armstrong 2001, G1; also in McCroll-Kennedy and Kiel 2000, p.293). Regarding the definition it is a means to identify a good that is supposed to satisfy consumer needs. The brand is one of the most important assets of large companies. Brands have a high value and must be taken care of (Assael, Reed and Patton 1997). Building and maintaining a brand is therefore one of the major tasks of a company’s management (Keller and Lehmann 2003 and 2006). This maintenance of brands is executed by applying the marketing mix. Consumer’s responses increase or decrease the success of a brand. This depends on short-term marketing mix actions and what they know and remember about a brand (Keller 2008; McColl-Kennedy and Kiel 2000). “Brands are made, not born” (Keller and Lehmann 2006, p.752). The theory of the brand value chain describes the interrelationship between a manufacturer’s actions, its customer’s responses, which turn into customer behaviour and finally realize financial value (see Figure 3). It simply explains how managers’ actions turn into revenues and which factors have an influence on this process. This study is about ambush marketing as one possible company action and brand attitude as a part of what the customer thinks and feels about the company’s brand.

Figure 3: A Systems Model of Brand Antecedents and Consequences from Keller and Lehmann (2006)

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

2.4.1 Advantages of Brands

The function of a brand is the “creation and communication of a multidimensional character for a product, which is not easily copied or damaged by competitor’s efforts” (Fill 2005, p.394). Both consumers and marketers desire benefits from brands. To consumers brands offer benefits as follows. First, brands serve the consumer as a means for orientation. Knowing a brand enables customers to identify a good and reduces the risk of buying a good of low quality. Second, brands serve as a mean to distinguish goods from competitors. Third, this results in a reduced search time. Marketers benefit from brands as well. They can charge higher prices. The manufacturers gain increased access to distribution channels. Finally, a higher quality of their products is inferred. There are three ways how brands serve and add customer value. First, brands help to interpret and process information. By using a brand, product information associated with the brand can be recalled on later occasions. For example Toyota’s test-results in consumer safety magazines are associated with the brand. Secondly, brands provide confidence in the purchasing decisions. Even if customers have not previously consumed a brand product, they can be sure that the brand would not have survived in case of inferior quality. For example when having no experiences with cars, buying a Toyota bears a lower risk than that of an unknown brand. Finally, brands add meaning and feelings to the product. Associations of prior usage might change the nature and quality of a consumption experience. For example associating a good family-time as a child with a Toyota might change the experience in grown-up life (Aaker 2001).

A brand’s value is termed “brand equity”, which “is a set of assets and liabilities linked to a brand’s name and symbol that add to or subtract from the value provided by a product of service to a firm and/or that firm’s customers” (Aaker 2001; Baldauf, Cravens and Binder 2003). These assets and liabilities can be grouped into the four categories perceived quality, brand awareness, brand associations and brand loyalty (Aaker 1992, 1996 and 2001; Baldauf, Cravens and Binder 2003; Longwell 1994).

Brand equity’s assets and liabilities stand in a direct relationship to brand image and brand attitude. Further, brand associations influence brand image and brand attitude. Therefore, brand associations have an indirect effect on brand equity. Additionally, brand attitude influences brand image and has higher impact on brand equity (see Figure 4, p.25) (Aaker 1991; Keller 1993). Concluding, brand equity and therefore brand attitude can be seen as a crucial element of a manufacturer’s success.

Figure 4: Brand and Brand Attitude Impacts on Brand Equity Adapted from Aaker (1991) and Keller (1993)

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

2.4.2 Brand Attitude

Brand Attitude refers to an evaluation of the brand with respect to its perceived ability to meet a currently relevant need (Kotler and Keller 2006; Percy and Rossiter 1992). Relevant brand needs may be negatively or positively oriented. Examples for negative orientation are problem removal, problem avoidance, incomplete satisfaction and normal depletion. Positively orientated needs are sensory gratification, intellectual stimulation, or social approval (Kotler and Keller 2006).

Attitude in general is a psychological term that can be also defined as a mental attitude or state of mind. “Mental attitude is a complex mental state involving beliefs and feelings and values and dispositions to act in certain ways” (Princeton University n.d.). There are three components of attitude; a cognitive, an affective and a conative dimension (Lavidge and Steiner 1961; Mason 2005; Matthes, Schemer and Wirth 2007; Morris, Woo, Geason and Kim 2002; Poczter 1987). These dimensions follow the decision making process (see Figure 5, p.26) of how a customer moves towards a purchase: awareness, knowledge, liking, preference, conviction and purchase (Lavidge and Steiner 1961).

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Figure 5: A Model for Predictive Measurements of Advertising Effectiveness by Steiner (in Lavidge and Steiner 1961)

The cognitive component is the intellectual, mental or rational state of attitude (Lavidge and Steiner 1961; Percy and Rossiter 1992). Customer attitudes rely on personal knowledge, intellectual capabilities and opinions. For example the customer knows that cars of Japanese origin produce lower CO2 emissions than American cars. The affective component is an important dimension of attitude. It is the emotional or feeling state (Lavidge and Steiner 1961; Percy and Rossiter 1992). The feelings of the customer influence his buying decision unconsciously. He might not have a specific reason for a decision but deliberately acts according to his feelings. As feelings might be positive or negative, the affective dimension of attitude must not only cause the purchase of a brand, but can also be a reason a customer does not buy a brand. Affect as a response has been found to be the dominant variable among the three dimensions. For judging their feelings on a scale, the affective state requires a cognitive processing (Morris, Woo, Geason and Kim 2002). For example the customer does not like American cars. The conative component is the striving state. The customer evaluates the buying decision as positive or negative (Lavidge and Steiner 1961). It is the choice whether to buy or not to buy. The conative dimension of attitude is the tipping point letting the consumer take action. For example the customer evaluates whether to buy a Japanese or an American car and is interested in CO2 emissions. He acts out of the cognitive and affective dimension and has finally the intention to buy the Japanese car.

As brand association directly influences brand attitude, a closer look at the definition of “brand association” provides a better understanding of factors influencing brand attitude. “A brand association is anything that is directly or indirectly linked in the consumer’s memory to a brand” (Aaker 2001, p.167; Koekemoer 2005, p.93). Brand associations can be product attributes, organizational intangibles, brand personality, symbols, emotional benefits or self-expressive benefits (Aaker 2001; Koekemoer 2005) Usually companies use a mix of these associations to make a brand interesting. For example McDonald’s can be linked to Ronald McDonald, the Golden Arches, having fun, fast service or the Big Mac.

Regarding a brand as an asset and following the concept of brand equity, maintaining the brand becomes important. Everything a company does has finally an impact on brand equity. Brand personality is a part of brand associations. Further, brand associations have an impact on brand attitude, which in turn has influence on brand equity (see Figure 6).

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Figure 6: Final Brand Equity Model from Faircloth, Capella and Alford (2001)

2.4.3 Brand Personality

Brand personality can be defined as a “set of human characteristics associated with a brand” (Aaker 1997, p. 347; Freling and Forbes 2005, p.404; Haigood 1999, p.149). These human characteristics can be divided into five brand personality dimensions (see Figure 7, p.28), which are sincerity, excitement, competence, sophistication and ruggedness (Aaker 1995 and 1997; Freling and Forbes 2005; Keller 2008). These are divided into underlying facets. Jennifer Aaker developed the framework of the five dimensions of brand personalities. In her study she allocated these traits representing brands if they were humans. Further, she developed a system of values to identify the brands’ personalities.

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Figure 7: A Brand Personality Framework by J. Aaker (1997)

[...]