Brand Loyalty at Smartphones Market: Linking Between Brand Passion, Hedonic and Utilitarian Values

Authors:
Tolga Yalçıntekin1, Metin Saygılı2
1. Sakarya University (Turkey)
2. Sakarya University of Applied Sciences (Turkey)
Pages:
274 - 284
Language:
English
Cite as:
Yalcıntekin, T., Saygili, M. (2020). Brand Loyalty at Smartphones Market: Linking Between Brand Passion, Hedonic and Utilitarian Values. Marketing and Management of Innovations, 1, 274-284. http://doi.org/10.21272/mmi.2020.1-23


Annotation

This paper summarizes the arguments and counterarguments within the scientific discussion on the factors that influence consumers' brand loyalty to smartphone brands. The main aim of the study is to analyze the relationship between hedonic value, utilitarian value, brand passion, and brand loyalty based on consumers' loyalty at the smartphones market. Accordingly, the study focuses on brand loyalty as a consequence of brand passion and reveals it in a holistic framework as it emphasizes the direct relationship between the two variables. In this context, this study is different from others in literature in a way that it focuses on smartphones, which are at the upper ranks of the technological product category. The fact that this study only deals with mobile phones makes it different and essential as studies on electronic and technological products often focus on the general situation. Researchers used positivist research as a quantitative research design in this study, which deals with factors that influence brand loyalty to smartphone brands. The study universe involves 18-year-old and older consumers with a purchase capacity. In this context, the study sample comprises smartphone users at or over the age of 18. The conceptual model and associated hypotheses are tested with a sample of 330 consumers. Researchers collected the study data with a convenience sampling method with the help of an online survey. In the study, data were analyzed through structural equation modelling. The results demonstrate strong relationships between the two antecedents (hedonic value and utilitarian value) and brand passion and between brand passion and its consequence (brand loyalty). Study results indicate that hedonic value (β=0,506; p<0,001) and utilitarian value (β=0,202; p<0,001) have a positive influence on brand passion. Study results also show that brand passion (β=0,683; p<0,001) has a positive influence on brand loyalty. On the other hand, the study also reveals that brand passion mediates the relationship between hedonic and utilitarian value and brand loyalty. Study results point out that hedonic value, utilitarian value, and brand passion have a positive influence on the development of consumers' loyalty to smartphone brands.


Keywords
brand loyalty, brand passion, hedonic value, smartphone, utilitarian value


Links
  1. Aaker, D. A. (1991). Managing brand equity: Capitalizing on the value of a brand name. New York: Free Press.
  2. Albert, N., Merunka, D., & Valette-Florence, P. (2013). Brand passion: Antecedents and consequences. Journal of Business Research, 66(7), 904–909. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1998). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two‐step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 411–423. [Google Scholar]
  4. Astakhova, M., Swimberghe, K. R., & Wooldridge, B. R. (2017). Actual and ideal-self congruence and dual brand passion. Journal of Consumer Marketing. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Babin, B. J., Darden, W. R., & Griffin, M. (1994). Work and/or fun: measuring hedonic and utilitarian shopping value. Journal of consumer research, 20 (4), 644–656. [Google Scholar][CrossRef]
  6. Bauer, H. H., Heinrich, D., & Martin, I. (2007, December). How to create high emotional consumer-brand relationships? The causalities of brand passion. In 2007 Australian & New Zealand Marketing Academy Conference Proceedings (pp. 2189-2198). [Google Scholar] []
  7. Berthon, P., Ewing, M. & Hah, L. L. (2005). Captivating company: dimensions of attractiveness in employer branding. International Journal of Advertising, 24(2), 151-172. [Google Scholar][CrossRef]
  8. Carroll, B. A., & Ahuvia, A. C. (2006). Some antecedents and outcomes of brand love. Marketing letters, 17(2), 79-89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. de Kervenoael, R.D., Schwob, A., Palmer, M. & Simmons, G. (2017). Smartphone chronic gaming consumption and positive coping practice. Information Technology & People, 30(2), 503-519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Doll, W. J., Xia, W. & Torkzadeh, G. (1994). A confirmatory factor analysis of the end-user computing satisfaction instrument. MIS Quarterly, 453-461. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement errors. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. [Google Scholar][CrossRef]
  12. Fournier, S. (1998). Consumers and their brands: Developing relationship theory in consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 24(4), 343–373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Gurbuz, S. (2019). Sosyal bilimlerde araci, duzenleyici ve durumsal etki analizleri. Ankara: Seckin Yayincilik.
  14. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E. & Tatham, R. L. (2010). Multivariate data analysis. New Jersey. Pearson Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River.
  15. Hemsley-Brown, J. & Alnawas, I. (2016). Service Quality and Brand Loyalty: The Mediation Effect of Brand Passion, Brand Affection, and Self-Brand Connection. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 28 (12), 2771-2794. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Hirschman, E. C., & Holbrook, M. B. (1982). Hedonic consumption: emerging concepts, methods, and propositions. Journal of marketing, 46(3), 92-101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Huber, F., Meyer, F., & Schmid, D. A. (2015). Brand love in progress–the interdependence of brand love antecedents in consideration of relationship duration. Journal of Product & Brand Management. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Jones, M. A., Reynolds, K. E., & Arnold, M. J. (2006). Hedonic and utilitarian shopping value: Investigating differential effects on retail outcomes. Journal of Business Research, 59(9), 974–981. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Kemp, S. (2019). Digital 2019: global internet use accelerates. Retrieved from https://wearesocial.com/blog/2019/01/digital-2019-global-internet-use-accelerates.
  20. Kemp, S. (2020). Digital 2020: Turkey. Retrieved from https://datareportal.com/reports/digital-2020-turkey?rq=digital%202020%20turkey
  21. Kesari, B. & Atulkar, S. (2016), Satisfaction of mall shoppers: A study on perceived utilitarian and hedonic shopping values. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 31, 22–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Kline, R. B. (1998). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. NJ: The Gilford Press.
  23. Kotler, P. & Keller, K. L. (2016). A framework for marketing management (6th Edition). Global Edition, Pearson Education.
  24. Kotler, P., & Keller, K. L. (2012). Marketing management (14th Edition). Pearson Education.
  25. Mishra, P., & Datta, B. (2011). Perpetual asset management of customer-based brand equity-The PAM evaluator. Current Research Journal of Social Sciences, 3(1), 34-43. [Google Scholar]
  26. Moorman, C., Zaltman, G., & Deshpande, R. (1992). Relationships between providers and users of market research: The dynamics of trust within and between organizations. Journal of marketing research, 29(3), 314-328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Mukherjee, K. (2019). Social media marketing and customers’ passion for brands. Marketing Intelligence & Planning. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Okumus, B., & Bilgihan, A. (2014). Proposing a model to test smartphone users’ intention to use smart applications when ordering food in restaurants. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Technology, 5(1), 31-49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Overby, J. W., & Lee, E. J. (2006). The effects of utilitarian and hedonic online shopping value on consumer preference and intentions. Journal of Business Research, 59(10-11), 1160-1166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Ozturk, A. B., Nusair, K., Okumus, F., & Hua, N. (2016). The role of utilitarian and hedonic values on users’ continued usage intention in a mobile hotel booking environment. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 57, 106–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Pourazad, N., Stocchi, L., & Pare, V. (2019). The power of brand passion in sports apparel brands. Journal of Product & Brand Management. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Simon, J. L., & Bruce, P. (1991). Resampling: A tool for everyday statistical work. Chance, 4(1), 22-32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Smircich, P. (2012). Smartphones: New user paradigms and behaviors. Mind Commerce. Retrieved from https://www.academia.edu/26641405/Smartphones_New_User_Paradigms_and_Behaviors?auto=download
  34. Sternberg, R. J. (1986). A triangular theory of love. Psychological Review, 93 (2), 119. [Google Scholar]
  35. Swimberghe, K. R., Astakhova, M., & Wooldridge, B. R. (2014). A new dualistic approach to brand passion: Harmonious and obsessive. Journal of Business Research, 67(12), 2657-2665. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. TAKMA, C., & Hulya, A. T. I. L. (2006). Bootstrap metodu ve uygulanisi uzerine bir calisma 2. Guven araliklari, hipotez testi ve regresyon analizinde Bootstrap metodu. Ege Universitesi Ziraat Fakultesi Dergisi, 43(2), 63-72. [Google Scholar]