Abc2012.smits vanhemelen

Image is everythingPersonality and image of

financial banks during times of adversity

Tim SmitsKULeuven & Northwestern University

Natalie Van HemelenKULeuven

@ABCEurope2012: Personality - Image

Personality

@TimSmitsTim


Image

@TimSmitsTim


Personality vs. Image

Well debated issue if it concerns humans

Particularly focal during adolescence

Personality characteristics

Situational characteristics

@TimSmitsTim


Corporations?

They too have both a personality and an image (Konecnik & Go, 2008):– Identity – Personality = sender side– Image = receiver side~ Brand as a speech flowing from a sender to a

receiver (Kapferer, 2008)

Often tension between both (e.g., Keller 2008; Plummer 2000)

Interest in both constructs has a long history, but often conceptual confusion between them when it comes to empirical research

@TimSmitsTim


Conceptual confusion• In Psychology:

Personality is self-perceived, self-assessedImage is social perception by others

• In Marketing and Market Research:Brand personality is social perception by others; still intrinsically linked with sender identity but questionnaires focus on perceived personality

Brand personality assessment used as a market research tool; feedback loop to management to reposition

@TimSmitsTim

@ABCEurope2012: Personality - Image@TimSmitsTim

IMAGE(other-perceived)

PERSONALITY(self-perceived)

DESIRED PERSONALITY(self-perceived)

EXPLICIT Brand BehaviorIM

PLICI

T Bra

nd Beh

avior


Personality

Big Five (Costa & McCrae, 1992):– Five personality traits (underlying facets) fully

describing one’s personality– (Almost) universal (McCrae et al. 2005)– Assessment: questionnaires (NEO-PI-R 240 items …

Shortest Big Five questionnaire 10 or even 5 items)

1. Openness to Experience2. Extraversion3. Conscientiousness4. Neuroticism5. Agreeableness

@TimSmitsTim


Brand personality

• Definition: “the set of human personality traits that are both applicable and relevant for brands” (Azoulay & Kapferer, 2003)

• Measures:– Aaker (JMR, 1997): 44 item for five dimension1. Sincerity2. Excitement3. Competence4. Sophistication5. Ruggedness

@TimSmitsTim


– Aaker’s scale and other attempts recently criticized– Geuens, Weijters & Dewulf (IJRM, 2009, p.103)

@TimSmitsTim






PLICI

T Bra

nd Beh

avior


Research questions

• RQ1: Match between sender’s & receiver’s perceptions of personality?

CASE: Belgian financial banks

– Using Geuens et al measures among key informants

– Using the same measure to asses perceptions by others

@TimSmitsTim


• RQ2: Shouldn’t there be a 6th dimension/trait: regional versus international scope?– Adding to both instruments questions about this scope– Might be a decisive personality factor in specific market

circumstances: saturated markets; adverse markets; …

• RQ3: How do the personality measures and the tension between both relate to brand attitudes and expected brand attitudes?– Is personality predictive of overall value of brand? Which

dimension? – Do key informants have an accurate expectation of

attitudes in the target audience?

@TimSmitsTim



Measures

• 10 Belgian banks, ranging in size and sales volume; split into two subsets (each participant rated only 5 banks)

• Personality:15-item questionnaire; How much does [adjective] apply to X; 7 point Likert scale

• Attitude:4-item questionnaire bipolar semantic differential; 7 points

@TimSmitsTim


Results

@TimSmitsTim

• Factor analyses on brand image questionnaires– Differences between banks; factor structure not

fully robust, despite claims in Geuens et al. (2009)– Overall factor structure:

1. Responsibility2. Activity3. Emotionality, including the Aggression dimension4. Simplicity

– No contribution of regional character (RQ2)


Results (RQ1)Responsibility Activity Emotionality Simplicity

Pers Image Pers Image Pers Image Pers Image

Argenta6,00 4,58 3,67 3,70 2,50 2,80 4,50 4,81

Deutsche Bank 5,67 4,70 6,00 4,11 3,5 2,91 1,00 4,16

ING6,33 4,69 5,67 4,69 2,75 3,25 4,50 4,08

KBC5,33 4,93 5,00 5,07 3,00 2,97 2,50 4,00

Landbouw-krediet 7,00 4,49 6,00 3,46 3,50 2,78 4,50 4,89

Bank v Breda 6,67 4,50 5,67 3,87 2,25 2,98 4,50 3,98

BNP6,33 4,08 6,00 4,56 2,50 3,02 2,00 3,75

Citibank5,00 4,25 6,33 4,10 4,75 2,93 3,00 4,33

Dexia3,67 4,78 6,00 4,73 3,75 2,71 4,00 4,15

Keytrade5,33 4,36 7,00 3,85 4,00 3,44 4,00 3,97

@TimSmitsTim


Results

• Predicting respondents attitudes for banks (RQ3; regression analyses)– Best predictor, for all banks = responsibility image (seems rather obvious nowadays – adverse times)

– Possibly banks do know the importance of this dimension: Empirical relation between expected attitudes and self-assessed responsibility; r = .64; However, reverse relation between self-assessed responsibility and actual attitudes; r = -.45!

@TimSmitsTim






PLICI

T Bra

nd Beh

avior


Results

• Attitudes: sender vs receiver– Note: r = -.43 !

@TimSmitsTim

Expected attitude Attitude

Argenta 5,75 4,14

Deutsche Bank 5,00 4,24

ING 6,00 4,73

KBC 4,75 5,19Landbouwkrediet 6,00 3,70

Bank van Breda 4,75 4,15BNP Paribas Fortis 4,75 4,21

Citibank 5,00 3,92

Dexia 4,50 4,86

Keytrade 5,50 3,96


TAKE HOME MESSAGE

It seems as if banks knew what the key personality dimension was in adverse times

However, they did not manage to self-perceive their personality adequately

Procedure in this study is a tool to aid this introspective activity

@TimSmitsTim


Further project plans

• Apply more rigorously amongst different type of stakeholders:– Management– Actual customers– Potential customers– Non-customers

• Apply for different brands on the product – service continuum

• Apply in a B2B brand setting

@TimSmitsTim


Questions and suggestions?

and Thanks! for your attention

@TimSmitsTim


Answering research questions

• RQ1: Match between self- & other-perception– Low match– Too positive self-view on key dimension

• RQ2: Sixth dimension ~ regional focus?– No data supporting the necessity of this dimension

• RQ3: Personality predictive of attitudes?– Credibility was most predictive of attitudes– Seems as if key informants did have an idea about

this– Too positive attitude expectations

@TimSmitsTim

Business

Abc2012.smits vanhemelen