Supporting new product commercialization through managerial social ties and market knowledge development in an emerging economy

University of Tasmania, Australi

Brand champion behaviour: Its role in corporate branding

yesBrand champions are responsible for encouraging employee commitment to the corporate brand strategy. They strongly believe in and identify with the brand concept—the company’s selected brand meaning, which underpins corporate brand strategy implementation. We conducted research to explore why and how brand champion behaviour operates within companies implementing a new corporate brand strategy. Against a backdrop of growing interest in brand champion behaviour in corporate branding research, we grounded our study in social identity theory and rhetorical theory from change management literature. Our findings show that articulating a compelling brand vision, taking responsibility, and getting the right people involved are the most widely used strategies by brand champions. We uncover how rhetorical strategies within brand champion behaviour generate employee commitment to a new corporate brand strategy. The dimension of brand champion behaviour that is effective depends on the type of brand evolution, involving shifts in the brand concept. We make suggestions for further studies underpinned by social identity theory and rhetorical theory to investigate brand champion behaviour processes within companies introducing a new corporate brand strategy

Service employee burnout and engagement: the moderating role of power distance orientation

Studies show that service employees are among the most disengaged in the workforce. To better understand service employees’ job engagement, this study broadens the scope of the job demands-resources (JD-R) model to include power distance orientation (PDO). The inclusion of PDO enriches the JD-R model by providing a key piece of information that has been missing in prior JD-R models: employees’ perceptions of the source of job demands (i.e., supervisors) or employees’ views of power and hierarchy within the organization. Study 1 uses a survey-based field study to show that employees with a high (compared to low) PDO feel more burnout due to supervisors when they are closely monitored by their supervisors. Study 1 further supports the finding that employees with high (compared to low) PDO feel less disengagement despite burnout due to supervisors. Study 2, using a lab experiment, and Study 3, relying on a survey-based field study, unveil why these effects were observed. Stress and job satisfaction emerge as mediators that explain the findings from Study 1. Implications of the role of PDO are discussed to improve the current understanding of how job engagement can improve customer service performance

Brand-self connections and brand prominence as drivers of employee brand attachment

Past research reveals that customers can attach meanings to brands that create strong connections between the brand and the self. When they do, and when the brand is prominent in their minds, they become psychologically attached to the brand, and display strong brand loyalty and advocacy behaviors. We use a grounded theory framework to ask if employees develop similar brand-self connections and regard the brand as prominent in their lives based on the meaning they attach to the brand they work for. This question is important because employee’s attachment to the brand can have critical equity-driving implications for the brand’s marketplace success and the employee’s commitment to the organization. We also ask what drives such outcomes. Beyond identifying novel drivers of employees’ brand attachment, we find that employees’ attachment to a brand is conceptually and empirically different from attachment or commitment to the organization. Specifically, we observe employees who are not attached to the organization but who are still attached to the brand, and who engage in difficult-to-enact pro-brand and pro-organization behaviors. Finally, our findings contribute to a broader knowledge base on organizational commitment and attachment by identifying brand meaning-related drivers of employees’ organizational commitment/attachment. Prior research has studied non-brand related drivers of these organizational outcomes