Building customer-based-brand-equity through packaging

Abstract

A review of the literature indicated a lack of an acceptable definition for customer-based brand equity and lack of consensus regarding its measurement The literature also pointed to a lack of empirical evidence as to the ability of packaging to build customer-based brand equity. By defining customer-based brand equity as: ... those holistic objective and subjective qualities of a brand which consistently represent the benefits sought in that brand by consumers in satisfying their needs and wants, compared to other brands, and defining brand image in terms of brand favourability, strength, and distinctiveness, accordingly, the empirical part of this thesis aimed to investigate whether packaging builds customer-based brand equity, using a series of correspondence analyses.

The empirical study used three milk brands (Meadow Fresh, Anchor, Pam's) commonly available in Dunedin as a case study, and took the form of a questionnaire I interview administered to an Otago University student sample. A split sample was employed in which half of the respondents were given only the brand names as triggers, and the other half the brand packages as triggers. Ninety valid responses were received in total.

Results showed that packaging does build customer-based brand equity. In the case of Meadow Fresh, packaging appeared to contribute almost entirely to customer-based brand equity. For Anchor (the brand with the most favourable brand image as triggered by the package) and the private label Pam's, the other 4 P's holistically appeared to detract from the value triggered by packaging. The addition of a Plain Pack (generic package) to the package responses indicated that contrary to expectations, the Plain Pack triggered a more favourable brand image than did Pam' s.

All in all, given that packaging contributes positively to customer-based brand equity, marketing practitioners should pay particular attention to package design. From the Anchor and Pam's results, it is recommended that particular attention be paid to brand image consistency of the other 4 P's with the image conveyed by packaging. Tentatively, Pam's (and perhaps private labels in general) may be better off promoting itself generically (assuming private labels and generic brands target the same markets). One plausible explanation of the results appears to be the low-involvement nature of the milk category, with many consumers making decisions at the point-of-purchase using the package as a primary cue. Consequently, along with replication of this study, it is recommended that these results also be tested on a high-involvement product category.