INGREDIENT AND SYMBOLIC CO-BRANDING STRATEGIES IN THE SPORTS INDUSTRY
| dc.contributor.advisor | Lee, Donghun | |
| dc.contributor.committeeMember | Hawkins, Billy J. | |
| dc.contributor.committeeMember | Cottingham, Michael | |
| dc.contributor.committeeMember | Wang, Kitty | |
| dc.creator | Yu, HoYeol | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2020-10-12T19:47:24Z | |
| dc.date.created | August 2020 | |
| dc.date.issued | 2020-08 | |
| dc.date.submitted | August 2020 | |
| dc.date.updated | 2020-10-12T19:47:27Z | |
| dc.description.abstract | Co-branding tactic, which two or more brands are jointly presented on a product, has become a prevalent marketing strategy across multiple industries. In co-branding, two types of co-branding approaches have recently been suggested and studied: symbolic and ingredient co-branding (Kotler & Pfoertsch, 2010). Despite the increasing research on the impact of co-branding strategy in the marketing domain, it has not been well studied to understand the effect of co-branding strategy in the sport context. Moreover, the effect of symbolic and ingredient co-branding tactics has not been examined direct comparisons of differing effects on consumer behavior. Thus, knowing the impact of diverse co-branding strategies is crucial for brand managers to remain competitive in the market in the context of sport. Taken together, the goal of this research was to advance our knowledge of the co-branding strategies in the sports context. More specifically, main objectives are in twofold: (1) to gain a comprehensive understanding about what consumer perceptions of self-image congruence (SICCB), perceived product quality (PPQCB), and co-brand image fit (CBFCB) influence consumer behavior, such as consumer attitude (ATCB) and purchase intention (PICB) and (2) to understand how individuals differently perceive co-branded sports products under the two co-branding tactics—symbolic and ingredient co-branding. Data (n = 382) were collected from a varied population through Amazon’s Mechanical Turk. The results from multi-group structural equation modeling indicated that positive relationships among SICCB, PPQCB, CBFCB, ATCB and PICB were identified, while a significant group difference between a group with symbolic co-branding and a group with ingredient co-branding was identified on some relationships (i.e., SICCB → ATCB, PPQCB → ATCB, CBFCB → ATCB, and ATCB → PICB). Additionally, ATCB fully mediated the influence of PPQCB on PICB and partially mediated the influence of SICCB on PICB. The results from the current study confirmed the impact of co-branding and its diverse strategies (symbolic and ingredient co-branding), providing brand managers with potential implications for the use of various co-branding strategy in the sport industry, as well as leading the research to offer suggestions to enhance the success rate of launching co-branded sports products. | |
| dc.description.department | Health and Human Performance, Department of | |
| dc.format.digitalOrigin | born digital | |
| dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/10657/7026 | |
| dc.language.iso | eng | |
| dc.rights | The author of this work is the copyright owner. UH Libraries and the Texas Digital Library have their permission to store and provide access to this work. Further transmission, reproduction, or presentation of this work is prohibited except with permission of the author(s). | |
| dc.subject | Consumer behavior, Brand management | |
| dc.title | INGREDIENT AND SYMBOLIC CO-BRANDING STRATEGIES IN THE SPORTS INDUSTRY | |
| dc.type.dcmi | Text | |
| dc.type.genre | Thesis | |
| local.embargo.lift | 2022-08-01 | |
| local.embargo.terms | 2022-08-01 | |
| thesis.degree.college | College of Liberal Arts and Social Sciences | |
| thesis.degree.department | Health and Human Performance, Department of | |
| thesis.degree.discipline | Kinesiology | |
| thesis.degree.grantor | University of Houston | |
| thesis.degree.level | Doctoral | |
| thesis.degree.name | Doctor of Philosophy |
Files
Original bundle
1 - 1 of 1