BRAND IMAGE IN MULTI-CHANNEL
FASHION COMPANIES
Thesis no. 2020.18.04
Thesis for One-Year Master, 15 ECTS
Textile Management
Linnea Lindstedt Sofia Kleist
Title: Brand image in multi-channel fashion companies
Publication year: 2020
Author: Linnea Lindstedt, Sofia Kleist
Supervisor: Sandhiya Goolaup
Abstract Branding has become increasingly important in order to distinguish a brand from numerous
competitors in the fashion industry. An effective way to differentiate the brand from others has
shown to be through the brand image, which is why managers should work on sustaining a
positive brand image. Managing brand image through different sales channels has become even
more important due to the rise of multi-channels. The integration and effort of offline and
online channels can result in both enhanced purchase intention and brand image. Previous
literature has shown how purchase intention can be derived from the level of congruity between
the consumer’s self-image and the brand’s image. Despite this, most previous research is
conducted from a company perspective, why this research intends to provide theoretical
contributions from a consumer perspective. This is particularly important for fashion brands,
as for the ever-changing and highly competitive characteristics of the fashion market.
Furthermore, an understanding of consumers’ perception of brand image in different sales
channels has been missing in previous research. Therefore, the aim of this research is to
investigate how consumers perceive brand image of multi-channel fashion companies for the
purpose of providing insight into how brand image should be managed through different
channels.
Using a qualitative perspective, this explorative research conducts ten semi-structured
interviews with women and men between the ages of 18 and 63, that are experienced within
fashion consumption in online and offline channels. Analysis of the research findings indicates
that there are 13 attributes that consumers consider as most prominent for brand image; six
offline attributes and seven online attributes. For the offline image, it emerges that the
surrounding environment, products and collections, price and value, store personnel and
service, reputation are prominent attributes. For online, easy access and navigation, design and
aesthetics, merchandise description, price and value, communication, services and reputation
are prominent. It is also found that interviewees find it highly important that the image is
consistent through different channels so that the brand conveys a holistic image.
Keywords: branding, brand image, multi-channel, store image, website image, fashion
Table of content 1. INTRODUCTION 6
1.1 Background 6
1.2 Problem discussion 7
1.3 Purpose 9
2. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK 10
2.1 Brand image 10
2.2 Channel image attributes 13
2.3 Offline image 15
2.3.1 Functional attributes of offline image 16
2.3.2 Psychological attributes of offline image 17
2.4 Online image 17
2.4.1 Functional attributes of online image 18
2.4.2 Psychological attributes of online image 19
3. METHODOLOGY 21
3.1 Research approach 21
3.2 Choice of context 21
3.3 Sample selection 22
3.4 Data collection 22
3.5 Interview coding and data analysis 24
3.6 Quality of the study 25
3.7 Reflection of the method 26
4. ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION 27
4.1 Connection between channels 27
4.2 How do consumers perceive brand image offline? 28
4.2.1 Surrounding environment 28
4.2.2 Products and collections 29
4.2.3 Price and value 30
4.2.4 Promotions and marketing 30
4.2.5 Store personnel and service 31
4.2.6 Reputation 31
4.3 How do consumers perceive brand image online? 33
4.3.1 Easy access and navigation 33
4.3.2 Design and aesthetics 34
4.3.3 Merchandise description 34
4.3.4 Price and value 35
4.3.5 Communication 36
4.3.6 Services 37
4.3.7 Reputation 37
4.4 Final discussion 38
4.4.1 Different characteristics of attributes 39
4.4.2 Overall perception of brand image 40
5. CONCLUSION 43
5.1 Theoretical and managerial implications 43
5.2 Limitation of the research 44
5.3 Future research 44
Reference list 45
Appendix 1 - Interview guide 52
6
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
Marketing and branding are increasingly important in today's fashion industry. The discipline
of marketing is a bridging function that connects the immaterial properties of fashion with the
concrete realities of fashion (Posner 2011). Marketing can form a holistic system, connecting
the goals of a firm with the desires, ideas, and actual needs of a consumer. As companies are
matching in their abilities to offer fashionable products at reasonable prices and quality, the
relevancy of branding as an important tool is increasing (ibid.). Fashion branding has changed
as the number of retailers has exploded. As a consequence, consumers have countless
alternatives to choose from. The right product, in the right place at the right time is according
to Kim and Sullivan (2019) no longer sufficient. Instead, they explain that consumers are
looking for something extra that is emotionally connecting, especially when it comes to fashion
brands (ibid.). That is where branding gets to shine.
The phenomenon of branding has been seen in several forms for centuries, serving as a tool to
distinguish goods of one producer to another. The Greeks and Romans, and probably even
others before them, used branding of products in trade as a means to make a name for
themselves (Room 1998). Bastos and Levy (2012) explain the early rise of branding activities
as the human desire to become a person of consequence, to create an identity, and to create a
context of inclusiveness while at the same time uniqueness. Despite this, branding has
historically not been considered a major academic marketing activity (Bastos & Levy 2012)
and thereby not been prioritized by managers, but as time has changed, so has the attention for
branding (Perrey & Spillecke 2013).
The companies’ focus on brands and branding has gradually increased during the 20th century.
Cherington’s (1920) early works on branding explain the concept as a rising phenomenon in
marketing and sales practice, effectuated by salesmanship, and advertising practices. He further
explains that the use of trademarks and labels, accompanied by quality, is essential in branding
and that proper and successful work with branding is the most prominent method of sale (ibid).
Clark (1927) further emphasizes the importance this implies for individual producers selling
standardized products as branding tends to establish an idea of quality and character among
potential customers. As the supply of retail products increased during the mid-20th century,
consumers were forced to make choices between brands offering similar products. Keller
(2002) argues that creating a strong brand can provide companies with several benefits, both
bottom-line and others. He further states that as a consequence, branding practices have been
applied in all kinds of settings ranging from retail stores to physical products or places (ibid.).
According to Keller and Lehmann (2006), brands serve as markers for the companies’ offer.
They argue that brands have a big impact on consumers as they can simplify choice, give
promises regarding quality, reduce risk and induce trust, and reflect the overall experience that
consumers have with the product (ibid). Keller (2002) acknowledges that creating a strong
brand has numerous positive effects on macro as well as micro levels. On a macro level, this
7
can entail market leadership, while a micro perspective might imply product-related effects
such as brand associations and familiarity, increasing consumer confidence, positive attitude
towards the brand, and purchase intention (ibid.).
Today, the intangible asset that is their brand is to many companies one of their most valuable
assets (Keller 2002). As a result, branding is more frequently seen as a potential source of
competitive advantage (Perrey & Spillecke 2013), and as a way to create brand equity. Brand
equity is defined as the consumer’s perceived added value that is associated with a product
offered by a company, accrued by the brand beyond the product’s functional or utilitarian value
(Aaker 1991; Ambler 2003; Keller 1993). Biel (1992) states that brand image is the most
important driver of brand equity. Brand image can be defined as how consumers think of a
brand, thus, the perception of the brand in the eyes of the consumers (e.g. Grubor & Milovanov
2017; Lee, James & Kim 2014). According to Lee et al. (2014), brand image is a highly critical
component of brand equity. They assert that brand image is the basis of making better and more
informed strategic marketing decisions. Further, they claim that brand image is an effective
way to differentiate one brand from another, why managers should put effort into seeking,
selecting, sustaining, and supporting a positive brand image (ibid.). For retail companies, this
can be argued to be especially important given the highly competitive nature of the industry
(Ailawadi & Keller 2004).
Previous literature has used brand image as a way to explain certain consumer behaviors
regarding motivations for purchase (Rehman & Ihsan 2017; Erdil 2015; Reza-Jalilvand &
Samiei 2012). Gardner and Levy (1955) suggested that products have a physical nature, but
also social and psychological, which can explain why consumers have certain feelings, ideas,
and attitudes towards a brand or a product. According to them, this is an indication of why
brand image is crucial in regard to the purchase decision process (ibid.). Dobni and Zinkhan
(1990) explain that the reason why some products are purchased or avoided can be derived not
from their physical qualities, but from the level of congruity between the brand’s image and
the ideal self-image of the buyer. The rise of online retailing has led to even further competition
in the retail industry, contributing to further implications for brand image. Landers, Beatty,
Wang, and Mothersbaugh (2015) claim that one issue of prevailing interest is how the
incongruence between online and offline channels affect outcomes such as attitudes towards
the brand. As consumers increasingly shop in multiple channels, this becomes more and more
important (Rangaswamy & van Bruggen 2005). Kwon and Lennon (2009a) acknowledge how
retailers therefore must understand how to manage brand image through both offline and online
channels.
1.2 Problem discussion
Since there are innumerable fashion brands, branding becomes both complex yet highly
important for companies in order to differentiate themselves and thus provide consumers with
an attractive offering. Išoraitė (2018) asserts that a product or a service can achieve recognition
in a saturated market only if it is accompanied by a strong brand image. She further highlights
that brand image can be perceived as an emotion, which itself is an intangible asset enabling
long term prosperity (ibid.). Consumers tend to make buying decisions that are formed by the
8
image consumers have regarding themselves (Onkvisit & Shaw 1987). The image individuals
want to convey and associate themselves with contributes to specific consuming behaviors
which is important to have in mind from a marketing perspective (Heat & Scott 1998).
Since 1950, the concept of brand image has occurred frequently in branding literature (Dobni
& Zinkhan 1990). It has been clarified that brand image is an effective way of gaining brand
equity within the branding practice (e.g. Zhang 2015; Lee et al. 2014). Despite this, the
definition of brand image has changed over time, and there seems to be no widely accepted
definition until today. As a consequence, the concept of brand image tends to be unclear and
misinterpreted in a way that is far from its original meaning (Lee et al. 2014). This has also
resulted in a lack of consensus on how brand image constructions will be operationalized
(Dobni & Zinkhan 1990).
Since online consumption has led to further increased competition in the retail industry and a
shift in the market structure, multi-channel retailing has almost become required (Kwon &
Lennon 2009b). In a highly competitive environment, this ought to put pressure on brands to
convey a consistent brand image through all channels. Research on multi-channeling indicates
that online and offline channels complement each other (Trotter 2016; Wang & Goldfarb 2017).
Gefen (2000) argues how the combined effort of offline and online activity and the integration
between them can enhance both customer loyalty and the brand image of a retailer. Landers et
al. (2015) further acknowledge that since the growth of multi-channels, it has become
considerably important to manage the brand image through different channels. Previous
research pertaining to brand image in multi-channels has largely focused on how offline brand
image has a clear impact on the online brand image (Kwon & Lennon 2009b; Hahn & Kim
2009). According to Palmer and Griffith (1998) the online channel function as an extension to
the image of the company. The perception of the online channel is depending on how consistent
it is with the offline channel (ibid.). Kwon and Lennon (2009a) argue that the brand image will
deteriorate if the operations are inconsistent through the different channels. They further
suggest that there is a reciprocal relationship between the different channels regarding brand
image. Despite the widely acknowledged interplay of online and offline brand image creation,
there are however limitations in previous studies regarding how this should be managed in
practice. The knowledge of how consumers perceive brand image and what they emphasize in
different channels are barely existing.
Little academic research has provided understanding into issues such as how consumers
perceive brand image in various types of channels of a multi-channel brand. This is also in line
with the rapid change in market dynamics due to the increased number of channels and changes
in consumption patterns that have resulted in lack of research on how brand image should be
managed in multi-channel companies (Landers et al. 2015). Nor does previous research provide
exhaustive insight into how consumers think that brand image in one channel might relate to
brand image in another channel. There is also a distinct lack of research on brand image in
fashion companies, as most previous studies are implemented in a general context. As
differentiation through branding is highly critical for fashion brands in today’s fashion market
(Kim & Sullivan, 2019), along with the lack of knowledge regarding brand image strategies
for multi-channel retailers, this research aims to provide further knowledge on the subject.
9
Increased knowledge of how consumers perceive and assess brand image in multi-channel
fashion companies can provide companies with valuable knowledge in the creation of future
brand image strategies.
1.3 Purpose
The objective of this study is to develop the existing knowledge of how consumers perceive
brand image of multi-channel fashion companies, by applying an explorative methodological
viewpoint. In order to do so, brand image will be reviewed from different perspectives in order
to analyze how consumers interpret the concept of brand image. The intent is further to identify
important constituents of brand image in the eyes of consumers. This will be done by analyzing
offline and online sales channels, which also gives rise to an analysis of whether those
channels’ images are interconnected and how the images are related. This will be done with
the purpose of providing insight into how multi-channel brands should manage brand image
through different sales channels.
The purpose has led to the following research question which is to be examined;
How do consumers perceive offline and online brand image of multi-channel fashion
brands?
10
2. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
2.1 Brand image
Brands are an integral part of consumers’ everyday life and play a big role in daily choices
(Grubor & Milovanov 2017). Consumers turn to brands they prefer in terms of the ideas
embedded in their image. Successful brands have numerous loyal customers and they have the
capability to influence and change consumers’ attitudes, behaviors, and lifestyles (ibid).
Having a strong brand has become crucial in the retail industry since it contributes to customer
loyalty and it drives store choice (Azad, Kasehchi, Asgari & Bagheri 2014). Companies further
need to know what attributes in regard to the store drives loyalty and satisfaction (Olsen &
Skallerud 2011), since brand loyalty is one of the main factors impacting the success of the
store (Azad et al. 2014). The associations consumers have to a brand are the reflection of the
brand image, which in turn represents the emotional feelings a consumer has towards a brand.
Authors have taken on different perspectives when defining brand image throughout the years.
A collection of definitions on brand image is presented in table 1. Although not exhaustive, the
table presents a cross-section of definitions from 1957 onwards. Despite brand image still being
a hot topic for research within branding, recent literature tends to rely on definitions from past
literature rather than bringing new contributions. Thus, many of the definitions occurring in
today's literature are from 1960 to 1990. These definitions have been grouped in different
categories based on the conceptual nature of the definitions. Previous researchers have applied
categorization as a means to distinguish conceptual differences and variations (Dobni &
Zinkhan 1990; Lee et al. 2014), though, they are applying a broader definition of brand image
including brand identity, brand personality, brand experience, etc. However, even though this
review emphasizes a narrower meaning of brand image which has led to other definitions being
reviewed, the categorization suggested by Dobni and Zinkhan (1990) is still considered
applicable and relevant. The five categories, or perspectives, of brand image are symbolism,
meanings and messages, personification, cognitive or psychological and blanket definition
(ibid.).
11
Tabell 1 Definitions of brand image
Some authors tend to emphasize symbolism in brand image. Definitions that emphasize
symbolism is according to Dobni and Zinkhan (1990) and Levy (1958) used as a general term
explaining that things entail more ideas and feeling than the product actually do itself, as the
product express something beyond its proper purpose. One example of how this is applied in
brand image theory is provided by Summers (1964) who describes brand image as the meaning
that a product has perceived product symbolism. Pohlman and Mudd (1973) also describe how
12
the purchased item is conceptualized of two kinds of value; one that is functional and one that
is symbolic. Researchers applying a symbolic perspective seem to view brand image in a wider
perspective where there is added symbolic value to the product. In that way, the symbolic
perspective has similarities to the meanings and messages perspective. Instead of symbolic
value, this perspective is focused on meanings embedded in the product. It appears that the
interpretation of what meanings are varies among researchers (Dobni & Zinkhan 1990), as well
as the perceived meaning to consumers. Levy (1978) expresses that brands are more than just
physical attributes; consumers buy brands because of the meaning associated with it which is
the concept of brand image. Dobni and Zinkhan (1990) also clarify how brand image is the
meaning associated with the brand and further declare how the associations are based on
impressions, experiences, and perceptions or the benefits from the brand derived from
emotional and functional factors.
Previous perspectives differ from the third, emphasizing personification, in the sense that
advocates of personification mean that the product or the brand has its own personality, or that
the attributes of one product are tightly linked to the personality of the consumer (Dobni &
Zinkhan 1990). One example is provided by Sirgy (1985) who states that products are assumed
to have a personality image, just as people do. Other researchers are more detailed in their
personification, as to give the products human attributes. Debevec and Iyer (1986) for example,
explain that advertisers often work to create gender for a brand, while Bettinger, Dawson, and
Wales (1979) describe products as having an age image linked to the product.
The cognitive or psychological perspective is by Dobni and Zinkhan (1990) rather explained
as to how products stress a cognitive or mental process giving rise to the creation of brand
image. They argue that most researchers applying this perspective are influenced by Gardner
and Levy’s (1955) conceptualization of brand image, explaining that image consists of
cognitive and psychological elements that represent different feelings, ideas, and attributes.
The brand communicates the associations it has created as a public object during the time of
existence. Dobni and Zinkhan (1990) summarize cognitive and psychological definitions as
referring to ideas, feelings, attitudes, mental constructs, understandings, or expectations.
Martineau (1957) states that brand image consists of a set of attitudes and feelings and that
brand image is the halo of psychological meanings and the determined aesthetics of a brand is
more than just the physical qualities. Friedmann and Lessig (1987) are in line with Martineau,
as they state that brand image is a mental position, understanding, or evaluation of the product
that develops in a nonrandom way form interaction between perceiver and product stimulus.
Despite different definitions, what all cognitive or psychological explanations of brand image
seem to have in common is the fact that they link the product to the emotions of the consumer.
There are also some broad attempts made to define brand image. Herzog (1963) stands for one
of them, saying that brand image is the sum of total impressions the consumer receives from
many sources. Newman (1957) is another example, expressing that a brand can be viewed as a
composite image of everything people associate with it. Dobni and Zinkhan (1990) question
these definitions’ actual contribution to refined knowledge on brand image, as their definitions
are so broad and imprecise. Despite the critique towards them, their contributions are important
to acknowledge as they provide an initial understanding and a general sense of brand image.
13
However, there seem to be almost as many suggestions of definitions as there are numbers of
researchers within the area. Though, it can be interpreted that most definitions are different
ways of expressing similar information out of different viewpoints of the researcher and with
different levels of depth.
2.2 Channel image attributes
Several previous attempts to more deeply explain and evaluate customer perspectives of brand
image have turned to specific attributes that together make up the holistic image of the brand
(e.g. Marks 1976; James, Durand & Dreves 1976). As the definition and scope of brand image
have changed over time, the attributes or dimensions used as indicators adopted to influence
the overall brand image has changed too. There do not seem to be any generally valid
recommendations regarding the number of attributes used, as it varies between different studies
and research fields. The number of attributes used in previous research range from only five
(Ailawadi & Keller 2004; Doyle & Fenwick 1974) to as many as 42 (May 1971). Back in 1974,
Lindquist defined relevant attributes as merchandise, service, clientele, physical facilities,
comfort, promotion, store atmosphere, institutional and post-transaction satisfaction to analyze
brand image, while Doyle and Fenwick (1974) distinguished only five; product, price,
assortment, styling and location. A few years later, Schiffman, Dash, and Dillon (1977)
suggested the following; convenience of store location, price, and deal policy,
guarantee/warranty policy, salesmen expertise, and variety of merchandise. More recent studies
have suggested consumer preference, merchandising, store atmosphere, in-store service,
accessibility, reputation, promotions, facilities and post-transaction service (Thang & Tan
2003) while Ailawadi and Keller (2004) only proposed five; access, in-store atmosphere, price
and promotion, cross-category product/service assortment and within-category brand/item
assortment. Even though the attributes suggested varies slightly depending on the type of study,
the outcomes regarding characteristics of the perceived brand image can be argued to be fairly
consistent.
All of the mentioned studies are focused on store image and do not cover for multi-channel
brand image. However, based on a comprehensive literature review of previously suggested
attributes, Bezes (2014) suggests a measurement index that is common to both store and
website image, enabling a comparison to be made despite the differences in channel properties.
A common measurement can enhance multi-channel customer management, as a step towards
increased customer value and loyalty, as it helps managers to better evaluate and coordinate
their various channels (Bezes 2014; Neslin, Grewal, Leghorn, Shankar, Teerling, Thomas &
Verhoef 2006). The index presented by Bezes (2014) consists of ten channel image attributes;
merchandise/offering, price, layout/atmosphere, accessibility/convenience, promotions,
customer service, store personnel/advice, reputation, institution, and connections with other
channels. However, the frame of measure resulting in those attributes is created in a industry
general context, why the applicability of the measurement in the fashion industry can be called
into question. Tough, in the research of exploring how consumers perceive brand image in
different channels, the attributes presented in previous literature might be considered as
indicative of possible prominent areas.
14
Those attributes are in many aspects different from each other. This might entail difficulties in
the creation of general understanding regarding how consumers perceive the image companies
convey through different channels. Further grouping of attributes might be advantageous in
order to get an overall understanding of what attributes affect the image in different channels.
Previous literature has defined store image based upon different categorization of store
attributes. Park, Jarowski, and MacInnis (1986) explain how consumers create an image
associated with a brand based on different functional and symbolic attributes. Keller (1993)
agrees with Park et al. (1986) on how functional and symbolic attributes contribute to
establishing a brand image. He mentions how the associations individuals have towards a brand
are multidimensional and in addition to functional and symbolic attributes, he also addresses
experiential attributes as a dimension. He further explains how the functional benefits are
product-related attributes, the symbolic benefits are usually associated with needs such as
social approval while the experiential benefits are related to the feeling that arises when using
the products or services (ibid.). Thompson and Chen (1998) instead suggest classification based
on concrete and abstract attributes which lead to functional consequences such as time spent in
the store. The concrete attributes represent the physical features of the store such as layout and
price and the abstract attributes are subjective representations of the store, which include for
instance store atmosphere and value (ibid.).
Moreover, Martineau (1958) argues how the store image is based upon tangible and intangible
attributes. Those classification attributes seem to be used interchangeably with functional and
physiological attributes. Verhagen and Van Dolen (2009) acknowledge how there are many
existing classifications of attributes in regard to store image. Regardless of the differences in
classification suggested by different authors, Verhagen and Van Dolen (2009) argue that
tangible and intangible are the most appropriate categories for store attributes since they state
that all attributes are either tangible or intangible in character. They further mention how
tangible factors, also known as functional factors, can for instance revolve around price,
merchandise, and layout. The intangible factors, on the other hand, also known as the
psychological factors, evolves around factors such as the reputation and how attentive the staff
is (ibid.). Kent (2003) also recognizes how the construction of store image includes both
tangible and intangible attributes which are the combination of the functional store’s qualities
and the psychological attributes which the consumer relates to them.
As can be seen, there are multiple ways of classifications applied in previous research.
However, for this study, the classifications functional and psychological will be applied. This
is since this categorization of attributes has been widely used in previous research regarding
the particular subject researched in this study; store image (Kent 2003; Verhagen & Van Dolen
2009; Hu, Xin Liu, Wang & Yang 2012; Bèzes 2014). In addition, functional and psychological
categories are argued to hold most of the categories used in previous research. For instance,
Hu, Xin Liu, Wang and Yang (2012) explain how tangible image is connected to functional
attributes, while the symbolic image is associated with intangible and psychological attributes.
15
2.3 Offline image
The concept of store image was first defined by Martineau in 1958, saying that store image is
“the way in which the store is defined in the shopper's mind, partly by its functional qualities
and partly by an aura of psychological attributes” (p.47). Since then, several researchers have
come up with further developed contributions. James et al. (1976) defined it as “a set of
attitudes based upon evaluation of those store attributes deemed important by consumers” (p.
25). In 1998, Grewal, Krishnan, Baker, and Borin state that the store image is made up of the
store’s consuming environment, service level, and product quality.
Regardless of the many definitions, store image directly affects customer purchase intention
(e.g. Grewal et al. 1998; Wu, Yeh, Hsiao 2011). Martineau (1958) argues that retail companies
that succeed to project a store image that is close to the target customers’ self-perceived image,
would as a consequence benefit from increased loyalty towards the store. Dick, Jain, and
Richardson (1995) have observed that store image act as an important indicator of store brand
quality. Consumers seem to use small fractions reflecting the store image overall evaluation,
affecting the attitude towards the store and the brand as a whole (ibid.). Previous research
indicates that store image entails managerial and profitability implications for the brand as a
whole. Chowdhury, Reardon, and Srivastava (1998) assert that store image is highly relevant
from a strategic viewpoint. In regard to the impact store image has on profitability, they argue
that it has concrete and consequential managerial relevance (ibid.). Though, Lindquist (1974)
conclude that store image is a complex concept, difficult to manage, deduced from the fact that
it is created from a combination of tangible and intangible factors.
Some store image attributes can be classified as functional in the sense that they are somewhat
objective so that consumers can relatively easily compare attributes of one brand to another
(Myers 2003). This research takes on the same definition of functionality as Mazursky and
Jacoby (1986) suggested, saying that functional qualities of a product or brand refer to tangible
characteristics that can be somewhat objectively compared to competitors or measured.
Consequently, attributes with tangible characteristics such as accessibility/convenience,
layout/atmosphere, merchandise/offering, price, and promotions which can relatively easily be
measured are examples of attributes constituting the functional attributes. As for the
psychological attributes, Myers (2003) explain that those are comprised of more symbolic
meanings, intangible in nature as they originate from the personality image consumers have of
a specific store (ibid.). Saraswat, Mammen, Aagja, and Tewari (2010) explain how those
attributes rather refer to intangible feelings that the consumers experience by visiting the store,
such as a sense of belonging, feeling of excitement or feeling of warmth and friendliness.
Thereby, the intangible attributes of store image are argued to include customer service, store
personnel/advice, reputation, institution, and connections with other channels. Despite the
differences, both functional and psychological attributes are important factors to make up the
total brand image. A discussion on how those attributes have been justified in previous
literature and how they relate to offline image as well as online image will follow.
16
2.3.1 Functional attributes of offline image
Attempts to facilitate store image as a managerial tool has led to decomposition of store image
into multiple attributes. Previous research has concluded that accessibility and convenience are
critical makers of a store’s image (e.g. Lindquist 1974; Wu Petroshius & Newell 2004).
According to Samli, Kelly, and Hunt (1998), location affects the store image in the way that it
either enhance or detract the store image. Ailawadi and Keller (2004) disclose that the location
of the store and the distance that the consumer needs to travel to get there are basic criteria in
their store choice decision. Mitchell and Harris (2005) also assess convenience as an important
attribute, referring to the amount of time required to find the store and make a purchase. Bèzes
(2014) describes accessibility and convenience in terms of the impact of store proximity to
consumer nodes as well as ease of accessibility, for example by nearby parking facilities.
Since the first research on store image by Martineau (1958), the impact of layout and
atmosphere of the store have been widely studied. Samli et al. (1998) explain layout as an
important factor for consumers when evaluating a store. According to them, layout represents
the easiness of moving around in-store, the easiness of finding departments, and the
attractiveness of in-store displays (ibid.). Kwon and Lennon (2009a) explain the
interconnectedness between atmosphere and store environment, whereas Ailawadi and Keller
(2004) mention how different elements making up in-store environment affect the store
atmosphere which in turn affects whether or not a consumer visits a store, how much time and
money they spend there. Bèzes (2014) explains how layout and atmosphere can be assessed for
example through the interior and exterior design, product layout, width of aisles, perceived
disarray, and store lifecycle.
Several studies have highlighted the important role of product offering and merchandise in-
store image (e.g Lindquist 1974; Mazursky & Jacoby 1986). Schiffman et al. (1977) describe
the importance in terms of variety of brands, while Samli et al. (1998) add product quality,
width of assortment, and familiarity of the brands. Birtwistle, Clarke, and Freathy (1999) assess
merchandise based on price, quality and fashion, and style. Bèzes (2014) includes all of the
mentioned attributes with the extension of stock for sale. Promotion, addressed as the summary
grouping of sales promotion, advertising, display, trading stamps and symbols and colors
(Lindquist 1974) are also frequently occurring in assessing store image. Greenberg, Sherman,
and Schiffman (1983) state that promotions are one of the most prominent factors in
consumers’ decision making. Previous literature indicates a close relationship between
promotions and price, and how consumers witness the importance it has for the overall store
image. Schiffman et al. (1977) show that price and promotion are of great importance to the
majority of shoppers. Ailawadi and Keller (2004) claim that pricing and promotions are crucial
for retail brands and that it is tightly connected to other attributes of store image. The impact
of promotion is, for example, depending on the store atmosphere as the likeliness of promotion
leading to consumption is depending on the time spent in-store (ibid.). Samli et al. (1998)
suggest that customer perceived importance of price can be assessed from value, lowest
everyday price, and the lowest advertised price. Birtwistle et al. (1999) instead claim that price
solely reflects value for money, which is the most important factor when deciding where to
17
buy. According to Bèzes (2014), price and promotions are about maintaining competitive
prices as well as managing sales promotions, bonuses and happenings, and promotional events.
2.3.2 Psychological attributes of offline image
Reputation has in many studies been used as an attribute to understand perceptions of brand
image (e.g. Lindquist 1974; Schiffman et al. 1977; Samli et al. 1998). Thang and Tan (2003)
refer to reputation as the impression of stores in the minds of the consumers. They further
explain that reputable stores advantage from securing consumers’ trust as they entail a
phycological assurance of quality or worth. This also affiliates to a pride of ownership of the
products (ibid.). Bèzes (2014) denotes that reputation can be analyzed from safety, integrity,
reliability as well as policies for returns, exchanges, and warranty.
As presented previously, Bèzes (2014) presents advice or sales personnel as one attribute of
brand image. Samli et al. (1998) assert that sales personnel’s knowledge, helpfulness, and
friendliness enhance the customers’ responsiveness, assurance, and empathy during the retail
experience. Schiffman et al. (1977) consent and emphasize the importance of well informed,
knowledgeable salesmen in specialty stores. In-store service provided by salesmen is according
to Thang and Tan (2003) likely to have a strong impact on the consumers’ purchasing behavior.
Bèzes (2014) refers to advice as to the level of sales assistance, expertise, and ability to compare
alternatives. This differs from the next attribute, services, which comprise ease and speed of
transaction, after-sales services, deliveries, ease of credit, and extended partner offers (Bèzes
2014). Thang and Tan (2003) express that consumers consume the intangible merchandise
offered through in-store services, hence stores that provide good services infuse consumers
with a favorable perception, leading to repeated visits. Samli et al. (1998) assess service
policies as an important contributor to a store’s image, and propose the following attributes as
indicators; no-hassle return policies, replacement of defective items (under warranty), easy
cash checks and layaway policies.
The previous research on the connection with the other channels is inadequate as mentionings
in previous literature are few. Yet, Bèzes (2014) argues that the attribute is particularly
important in a multi-channel environment. Choi and Lee (2003) prove this by explaining that
the consumers’ perceived risk is reduced by the relationship between the store and the website.
Institution of the brand refers to the credibility of the source behind the channel (Bèzes 2014;
Korgaonkar & Karson 2007). According to Bèzes (2014), institution is evaluated through
information about the company and the history and record of the company.
2.4 Online image
There is a level of uncertainty when shopping online since the customer do not have the
possibility to physically inspect the products (Aghekyan-Simonian, Forsythe, Kwon &
Chattaraman 2012). Due to this, it is even more important to be able to rely on the image of a
brand (Chang & Tseng 2013), this is because customers tend to rely on the brand name when
it comes to assessing the quality of products online (Aghekyan-Simonian et al. 2012). Hence,
the company needs to establish a positive brand image to entice consumers to the online store.
18
It is imperative to offer good quality and reduce the customers’ costs and risks (Chang & Tseng
2013). Furthermore, various attributes have shown to have an influence on the perceived brand
image and the purchase intention (Van der Heijden & Verhagen 2004), one example being the
design of the website (Aghekyan-Simonian et al. 2012). Chang and Tseng (2013) argue that
the website image consists of tangible/functional and intangible/psychological attributes,
similar to the offline store. As there is no evidence that the functional and psychological
attributes of online image are different from offline image, Bèzes (2014) suggests that the same
classification is applicable for both channels, whose argument is applied in the current study.
Thereby, the functional attributes are argued to be accessibility/convenience,
layout/atmosphere, merchandise/offering price, and promotions, while the psychological are
argued to be customer service, store personnel/advice, reputation, institution, and connections
with other channels. In the section below, attributes that previous literature argues have an
impact on online brand image will further be addressed.
2.4.1 Functional attributes of online image
Accessibility and convenience are the basis of online websites since online shopping can be
done whenever and wherever. An important factor regarding convenience in online stores is
that it should be easy and not time-consuming to browse (Szymanski & Hise 2000). In order to
reach customer satisfaction, the content of a website must be carefully organized since
customers want to be able to navigate easily and quickly, for instance by categorizing the
different products logically (Katerattanakul & Siau 2003).
The layout and atmosphere of the website also concern with how organized the website is, the
ease of browsing, and navigation efficiency (Bèzes, 2014). Kwon and Lennon (2009a) address
how the atmosphere is important in regard to the design and aesthetic of the website, how
pleasing and inspiring it is to visit the website will ultimately affect the online store image. A
report presented by Kwon and Lennon (2009a) shows that the physical store might be affected
by the layout of the website, as 30 percent of the respondents stated that they would not visit
the offline stores of a specific brand if the design of the online store was unappealing. Bèzes
(2014) additionally mentions how the loading speed of the webpage is an imperative factor.
Further, the website should be consistent and have a clear explanation of the products (ibid.).
The merchandise offered on a website is also of great importance, as customers’ overall
perception could improve if the online merchandise is viewed in a positive way. Szymanski
and Hise (2000) mention product information and product offerings as important factors for
assessing merchandise. They state that companies should focus on offering exceptional product
assortment to get satisfied customers and improve the ratings of the online store. Meeting
customer needs is more likely if having a superior assortment, especially when the products
requested not are extensively distributed, for instance, limited products that are only available
online. Offering good quality products would according to Szymanski and Hise (2000) also
improve the assortment and customer attitude towards the online store. Since the search costs
are lower when consuming online, consumers are more likely to buy products with good
quality. In turn, failed products and the costs associated with that will decrease. Returning
merchandise and the loss of reputation when products are failing is an example of these costs
19
(ibid.). Katerattanakul and Siau (2003) mention how it is imperative to have a variety of
products, while Chen and Lee (2005) emphasize how websites should offer clear descriptions
and pictures of the products they offer. Information about delivery time and availability should
also be included (Katerattanakul & Siau 2003). Bèzes (2014) also highlights the importance of
the assortment range, both its width and depth. Features that are distinctive for the website
should also be considered as essential attributes in relation to brand image.
Price and promotion are also known to be important factors for an online store since good
prices will attract a bigger group of people (Katerattanakul & Siau 2003). Chen and Lee (2005)
also mention how special offers are an enticement for customers. Van der Heijden and
Verhagen (2004) continues by explaining how value for money concerns the customers’
decisions when consuming online. However, price and promotion are insignificant factors if
the design and atmosphere of the website are unpleasing (Katerattanakul & Siau 2003).
Though, Bèzes (2014) explains how specific offers and deals are a way of attracting consumers
to visit the website.
2.4.2 Psychological attributes of online image
In terms of the reputation of a website, people are reported to have more trust in a website with
a good reputation. Lim and Dubinsky (2004) mention how a good reputation is derived from
word of mouth by acquaintances. They further explain that brands that are internationally
recognized tend to have a good reputation even without the need for word of mouth or similar
marketing activities. The company should offer the customers reliability to enhance its
reputation (ibid). Furthermore, a secure transaction process and a safe way to maintain
customer privacy are highly crucial for companies in order to keep a good reputation
(Katerattanakul & Siau 2003). In addition, return and exchange policies, and the possibilities
to do it efficiently and seamlessly are factors that will affect the reputation (Bèzes 2014).
Since there is no physical communication in the online store, the meaning of store personnel
and advice differ noticeably from the offline store. However, it is always important to offer
customers advice even though there is no physical store personnel. Finding other ways of
communication is crucial, which can be done through detailed and appropriate information and
pictures of the products (Katerattanakul & Siau 2003). Bèzes (2014) further addresses the
importance of assistance and services, for example, the possibility to call and ask for advice.
The staff should be helpful, friendly, and of course knowledgeable to increase customer
satisfaction (Spiller & Lohse 1997). Further services on the website can involve specific search
functions that facilitates finding the desired products more efficiently (Spiller & Lohse 1997).
Bèzes (2014) also mentions that it should be easy to cancel an order and the return policies
must be easy and accommodating. Being able to track the shipment is further a favorable
function, as well as being able to choose among different delivery options such as picking up
the product in the store or at a pick-up point, or have it delivered to the home (ibid.).
It is further argued that the online channel should be connected to the other channels in the
company as well, the online store has the possibility to promote the offline store and vice versa.
Steinfield (2004) mentions the possibility to pick up or return a product in the offline store, in
20
turn, this will increase the visit streams to the store. The website should also offer information
about the online store, such as location, opening hours, and events (ibid.). Bèzes (2014) further
mentions easy access to phone-numbers and email-address and a map of the store locations as
useful functions to reduce the distance between channels. Lastly, in this case, the attribute
institution refers to information about the brand. Steinfield (2004) declares how the website
should offer information on the background and history of the brand to inform customers about
the company's journey.
21
3. METHODOLOGY
3.1 Research approach
For the present study, a qualitative method has been applied to generate a deeper understanding
of how consumers perceive brand image in offline and online sales channels. According to
Bryman and Bell (2007), qualitative research is engaging with words instead of numbers and
it is the primary choice when social phenomena and human behaviors are being analyzed. By
taking on an explorative methodological viewpoint, this study aims to gain an understanding
of the opinions, attitudes, experiences, and predictions that form the consumers’ perceiving of
brand image, and to understand how that perceiving might differ from different sales channels.
According to Rowley (2012), interviews are argued to be advantageous in research aiming to
gain insight into an unknown topic. She continues by explaining that interviews are a more
flexible way of gathering data than other options (e.g. questionnaires) why interviews are better
for understanding opinions in an area where the previous knowledge is insufficient (ibid.).
Therefore, in order to establish a true perception as possible on how consumers perceive brand
image in a fashion context, semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted. Dobni and
Zinkhan (1990) explain how in-depth interviews are typical techniques while trying to identify
important attributes. In-depth interviews enable the interviewer to step into the world of the
interviewee and thereby get to see and experience the world as the interviewee does
(McCracken 1988). In-depth interviews are described as one of the most powerful methods and
the most revealing one among qualitative methods (ibid.).
3.2 Choice of context
Kim and Sullivan (2019) state that branding strategies are particularly important to fashion
brands, as for the ever-changing and highly competitive characteristics of the fashion market.
It is also argued that the symbolism that is embedded in fashion clothing makes brand image
in a fashion perspective even more important to consumers (Bearden & Etzel 1982; Escalas &
Bettman 2005). Though, there is a lack of knowledge on brand image in a fashion context and
what attributes that are affecting it (e.g. Miller & Mills 2012; Cho & Fiore 2015; Khan,
Rahmani, Hoe & Chen 2015). Therefore, this study intends to investigate brand image through
a fashion brand perspective. Even though fashion companies’ brand image creation is compiled
by the companies’ total interaction with consumers, the focus of this study is narrowed to brand
image in sales channels, and more precisely through brands’ physical stores and webshops.
This is since the physical store and website of the brand are still the largest sales channels as a
percentage of sales, despite recent years new alternative channels for shopping (Amed,
Balchandani, Berg, Hendrich, Poojara & Rölkens 2019). This research will further be focused
on brand-owned channels such as brand store and brand webshop. Other kinds of retail
channels (so-called indirect retail channels) will thereby be left outside of the study. This is
done in belief that brand image is highly depending on the core of the brand and that other
kinds of retailing, such as third-part retailing, is creating noise from other brands’ image and
are thereby negatively affecting the clarity of this study.
22
3.3 Sample selection
For the selection of the sample, no attention was paid towards gender as there are no indications
of that perception of brand image are influenced by gender. Thus, the interviews were held
with both women and men where the ages ranged from 18 to 63. All participants were living
in Sweden. In order to participate in the research, all interviewees needed to consider
themselves as well-experienced in the area of fashion consumption in both online and offline
channels. In this way, it was assumed that the participants were (consciously or unconsciously)
familiar with attributes connected to shopping in multiple channels. The individuals that were
requested to participate were acquainted with the researchers, who considered that the intended
interviewee possessed good knowledge in the area covered by the interview and thereby
fulfilled the requirements for participation, hence the sample was a judgment sample. Marshall
(1996) reports how participants are actively chosen in a judgment sampling based on the sample
being the most productive to answer the research question. The researcher tends to evolve a
framework of different factors that may influence a participant’s contribution to the study. This
can be founded from the researchers’ insight into the research area and from existing literature
regarding the area of interest.
The ethical principle regarding anonymity have been followed and therefore fictitious female
names of the interviewees have been used throughout the study. In the table below the
interviewees, their age, and their occupation are presented.
Tabell 2 List of interview participants
3.4 Data collection
Semi-structured in-depth interviews were carried through with the participants. Five interviews
were conducted face to face and five were conducted through phone calls. Due to the fact that
some of the participants were short of time, five interviews were conducted through phone-
calls since it was the most effective solution. Rowley (2012) explains how telephone interviews
have become more frequently used since it is both time and cost-effective. Bolderston (2012)
23
advices how telephone calls should not last more than 30 minutes since the possibility of
inattention might affect quality. In accordance with this, the telephone calls did not last as long
as the face to face interviews, however, all interviews lasted between 30 to 40 minutes and the
quality of the different interview methods felt equally strong. A perceived advantage with the
phone calls was that the interviewee had some distance to the interviewer which could have
reduced the risk of being influenced by the interviewer in some way and it also allowed the
participant to be more open about some topics. In line with this observation, Bolderston (2012)
states that telephone calls might open up for a more honest and richer discussion about certain
topics. Although there are several advantages with telephone calls, a small connection
disturbance was experienced during one of the calls, which interfered with the flow of the
interview slightly which naturally was excluded in the face to face interviews. Another
advantage with the face to face interviews is the possibility to pay attention to facial expressions
and reactions. For instance, if any question felt uncertain there was a possibility to rephrase the
question. It was also easier to see if the interviewee felt very strongly about something.
Bolderston (2012) expresses how it is advantageous to be able to encourage the interviewee
with non-verbal cues, such as smiling, during interviews.
The interviews were based on an interview guide (see Appendix 1) highlighting the main topics
of the interview. The guide was made up of questions that were asked in order to gain an
understanding of the research question. The initial part of the interview guide was made up of
three questions regarding the interviewee and his/her relation to fashion consumption. The
following section of the questionnaire was divided into two parts (offline, online stores) in
order to analyze potential differences in channels. The first part concerns offline stores while
the second part concerns online stores. Those sections are made up of two major questions,
supported by four guiding questions.
Before initiating the data gathering, the interview guide was tested in two pilot-interviews.
Changes (mainly formulations) were made in accordance with the ambiguities expressed by
the interviewees. For instance, it emerged that questions about how the interviewee perceived
the image in either channel became a bit overwhelming for the interviewee, why this was
replaced by simplified terms in order to bypass certain words. Instead, questions like “what do
you like about shopping in the physical stores of the brand” were asked. After the pilot
interview, ten interviews were held which contributed to relevant information and were used
as a basis for the analysis. All interviews were held in Swedish as that was the native language
for all of the interviewees and was therefore believed to instill convenience for them. All
interviews were recorded, and the interviewers were taking support notes along the interviews.
After conducting the interviews, the need for data was considered to be saturated as there were
few new contributions that came up through the later interviews. The interviews were arranged
so that the interviewees got to choose one company that he/she felt they have good knowledge
and experience in shopping from, both from their online and offline store. This was motivated
since there was no aim of examining a particular company’s brand image that was to be
suggested by the interviewers. Instead, it was considered very important that the interviewees
had good knowledge of the brand. This is in order to get access to reflections made by the
participants during actual shopping experiences and not just those that emerge during an
24
interview situation. The interviews followed structured topics, but there were also room left for
the interviewees to talk freely about different interests which made the interview flexible. Once
the interview was done, the interviewer accounted for the answers made so that the
interviewees were given the opportunity to change their statements if they felt misunderstood.
3.5 Interview coding and data analysis
After conducting the interviews, the data was carefully analyzed. Rowley (2012) states that
there are a few generally accepted steps to be followed during the analyzing process which are
organizing the data set; getting acquainted with the data; classifying, coding, and interpreting
the data; and, presenting and writing up the data. Spiggle (1994) explains that there are many
possible ways to process data and proposes that the processing should be done systematically
in order to uncover all possible leads and minimize potential distortion. Rowley (2012) states
that the processing of data should start as soon as the interviews are conducted in order to
become familiar with the material. In accordance with this, the organization of data started as
soon as the interviews were held with translation and transcription of the recorded material.
Cresswell (2007) states that the process of analyzing data from qualitative research is a spiral,
meaning that you need to go through the material several times before reaching the center. This
was particularly distinct in the coding process, as new codes emerged for the researchers the
more the material was processed. Therefore, the coding was conducted in several steps, starting
by reading through all transcriptions. The material was then reviewed a second time and certain
words were highlighted as codes. Rowley (2012) describes codes as the main areas in which
insight has been generated, which are formed depending on the questions asked and the
previous literature. Spiggle (1994) explains categorization as a means of identifying data that
belongs to, represents, or is an example of a more general phenomenon. In this study, codes
were made up of words that were expressed as particularly important by the interviewees, were
mentioned several times, or were in some way expressed as important attributes. Other parts of
the text that did not contribute with interesting information remained uncoded in accordance
with suggestions by Spiggle (1994). In the third round of review, all codes were collected and
grouped into themes out of synonyms, similarities, and connections. At this step, the codes
were also divided into groups connected to online image, offline image, and a third group
covering both. This was collected in three separate coding schemes, where grouped codes made
up columns while interviewees made up rows. All sayings relating to codes were collected in
schemes to easily access and overview the data. This is also an effective way of keeping record
of the data along the entire process of study, which is highly advocated by Spiggle (1994).
Some codes, that were only mentioned occasionally and irrelevant in brand image context were
seen as non-representative and were therefore sorted out. The themes and the codes connected
were then analyzed based on existing knowledge presented in the theoretical framework, which
is to be presented in section four.
25
3.6 Quality of the study
Reliability and validity are important factors in order to maintain a high level of research
quality. However, there is a discussion about the relevancy of the concepts regarding qualitative
studies. Sandberg (2005) discusses how it is complex to assess the reliability and validity in
qualitative studies since the study is an interpretation of the experienced social reality. He
explains the issue with grasping positivistic criteria when defending the results of interpretive
approaches since it is not in accordance with ontology and epistemology. For this reason,
reliability and validity need to be adapted to qualitative research, in order to validate the
knowledge about something as true.
The chosen interviewees are argued to be highly relevant for the study because of their previous
experiences with online and offline shopping. This experience was assessed as the primary
knowledge needed to have an understanding of brand image, which was required for
participation in the study. The interviewees were also firmly informed about the purpose of the
study before being interviewed. This is according to Sandberg (2005) one way to establish the
communicative validity of a study. Sandberg (2005) highlights communicative validity as one
criterion when trying to achieve truth in qualitative studies. The interviews were conducted
according to the interview guide, which consisted of quite few questions. However, the
questions in the interviews were substantiated with follow-up questions such as “Can you
elaborate further?” and “Why is that so?” in order to gain a deeper and more elaborated
understanding of the interviewees' experiences. Sandberg (2005) explains how follow-up
questions are another advantage when aiming for communicative validity, the interviewer gets
involved in a deep discussion with the interviewee to gradually reach a deeper understanding
by asking further questions.
After conducting the interviews, the material was carefully examined and analyzed in order to
make sure the material was interpreted correctly. The material has been handled thoroughly as
the interviews were recorded and carefully transcribed. Careful handling of the material will
according to (Bryman & Bell 2007) contribute to a more accurate analysis of the material. They
further mention the advantages of listening to the recordings several times and how it enables
the interviewer to pay more attention to the interviewees during the interview. Lapadat and
Lindsay (1999) also highlight the importance of transcribing the interviews thoroughly. Since
the researchers are able to listen to the interviews several times and reviewing them, a deeper
understanding regarding the matter will be derived (ibid.). The interviewees were able to
validate the result of the study in order to confirm that the results agree with reality. Having a
dialogue with the participants so the participants will be able to confirm that the findings are
valid, is according to Sandberg (2005) another way to establish communicative validity. Lather
(1993) explains how the analysis of material should be about searching and finding
contradictions, and not only about looking for consistent and similar interpretations of the
social world. This is a way to establish transgressive validity, hence truth in interpretive
approaches (ibid.).
Complete records of all stages have been held during the process, so everything can be
reviewed continuously throughout the process. The study has been carefully reviewed several
26
times by the researchers and the supervisor which according to Bryman and Bell (2007)
indicate a level of dependability. Sandberg (2005) explains how it is favorable to analyze the
transcripts several times, which is another way to justify the knowledge within interpretive
approaches. Furthermore, the researches have acted in good faith when not letting personal
values or beliefs affecting the result. Bryman and Bell (2007) mention this as a level of
confirmability which parallels objectivity.
3.7 Reflection of the method
As there are several ways of gathering data for qualitative research, each with advantages and
disadvantages, there is no consummate method. However, this section will discuss the risks of
deficiencies with the chosen method.
A judgment sample was chosen for the interviews based on the fact that chosen interviews were
assessed to possess the knowledge that was relevant for the study. However, Holme and
Solvang (1997) acknowledge the issues with interviewing acquaintances since certain
expectations can arise. Although, no issues emerged while interviewing the participants since
all interviewees gave detailed responses and seemed eager to express their feelings and
experiences. Although, since the interviewees are friends and familiars with the interviewers,
most with similar socio-cultural conditions, this aspect might impact the findings leading to
similar answers. For this reason, it would be interesting to interview people with different
socio-cultural backgrounds and examine if there are distinguishable differences. Another
reflection made regards the age range of the sample. It is an advantage to have a large age range
because it does not exclude anyone, however, the perception and importance of image may
differ significantly between an 18-year-old compared to a 63-year-old. For this reason, it is
difficult to apply the study to specific companies that may have a narrower target group.
Furthermore, the interviews were conducted in Swedish with the idea that the interviewees
would have easier to freely elaborate on certain feelings and opinions. However, Filep (2009)
acknowledges how there are some challenges when analyzing and translating data. For
instance, the meaning of certain words and phrases might differ in different countries. For this
reason, it is important to make sure the meaning of the phrases do not get “lost by translation”,
why both researchers took part in carefully translating all material step by step.
Suffering from disadvantages connected to qualitative methods, the result of the study cannot
be generalizable to any specific population but solely relevant to the purpose of the study.
However, this is according to Bryman (2012) common in qualitative studies. The study is also
hard to replicate since the purpose is to get a deeper subjective understanding, which again,
applies to all qualitative studies.
27
4. ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION
Analysis of the findings shows that there are several attributes that form an important part of
the interviewees' perception of brand image. Ten interviewees provided their view of brand
image based on their previous experience when shopping from a self-selected brand, which
indicated that the interpretation and perception of brand image are unique to each person, as
the responses varied. How the interviewees valued different characteristics of brand image also
varied, with the result that the meaning of brand image varied depending on the interviewees’
values and subjective experience of what are the most valuable constituents of their chosen
brand. Though, the findings include several similarities regarding important elements brought
up by the interviewees, although highlighted in different lights. Through analysis, those
emerged as the attributes affecting brand image the most; six offline attributes and seven online
attributes that will be presented in the following sections.
4.1 Connection between channels
It emerges from the analysis that fashion brands should mediate a holistic feeling through all
channels in order to enhance the brand image. The interviewees believe that the feeling
obtained when visiting an offline store should be consistent with the feeling in the online store.
Palmer and Griffith (1998) explain how the perception of the online store depends on the
consistency with the offline store. The interviewees explain their positive impression towards
the brands that create a holistic concept that feels trustworthy through all channels. This is how
Julie express her opinion about consistency through both channels:
“I often use the website to get a first impression and to arise interest that makes me want to visit the store.
So, they are surely connected. Therefore, it is important that they provide the same feeling and garments
that I have seen online. They must be coordinated and tightly connected, in an omni-perspective” - Julie
Julie tends to get her first impression from the website, but some interviewees are in line with
Palmer and Griffith (1998) who state that the online store function as an extension to the image
of the company. Some interviewees expressed that they probably would not appreciate the
website of a brand if they did not like the offline store in the first place. Although, it seems like
there are certain criteria a website must follow, such as having an easily navigable website to
not deteriorate the brand image. The analysis implies that the interviewees to some extent take
the consistency between channels for granted and would not reflect on the consistency until
encountering a website that is perceived as significantly worse in comparison to the offline
store or vice versa. Michelle explains how she feels;
“I assume that I will be met by the same information, products, and artistic expressions regardless of the
channel I decide to visit” - Michelle
However, it also emerges that the website of a brand can improve the brand image even if the
physical store is viewed in a negative light. Helen explains how the website of a specific brand
has improved her overall perception of the brand image. She explains her opinion as follow:
28
“Many companies usually fail in one (channel) or the other. H&M for example, I think it is easy to
navigate there but I think the stores are a bit messy… On H&M, I would prefer to shop online because I
do not like the store. It is very individual from brand to brand” - Helen
The findings indicate that the consistency and interaction through both channels are important.
Some services offered by the brand through connections between the channels will contribute
to a positive idea about the brand. Steinfield (2004) mentions the possibility to pick up and
return orders in the offline store. It is also stated that consumers appreciate and value these
services. This will in turn increase the visit streams to the store, which is favorable for the
brand. It is also common that consumers tend to either browse online and buy the products in-
store or vice versa. The analysis shows that fashion brands must focus on interactions between
the channels and conveying a consistent brand image through both channels.
4.2 How do consumers perceive brand image offline?
The analysis indicates that store image is a construct of several attributes. The number of
attributes one interviewee regards as affecting the image of a physical store is varying between
the interviewees, as it seems to be based on the valuations of each individual. Regardless of the
variety of attributes that are highly valued by any specific participant, what they all have in
common is the feelings and thoughts about what is expected from an appealing image. The
following section will discuss the answers provided, where functional and psychological
attributes of store image have been discussed by interviewees in regard to fashion brands.
4.2.1 Surrounding environment
The analysis of the findings shows that physical stores advantage from many touchpoints with
the consumer as consumers are affected by several impressions from physical attendance in
stores. This also involves interaction with most senses, such as touch, sight, smell, and hearing
which extends the impressions received. One of the participants, Michelle, explains it like this;
“The store is important for the image since it allows all the senses to be involved. Other channels do not
have the ability to touch you in that many ways” - Michelle
A majority of the interviewees describe that the surroundings are of great importance for how
the image of the store is perceived. The physical attributes of the store, such as interior and
store layout are expressed to be of great importance. The interviewees further describe the store
image to be affected by a range of dimensions, such as the arrangement of products, interior,
music, staff and other consumers, as well as cleanliness and organization. Several interviewees
state that colors and the degree of trendiness are affecting the perception of the store
atmosphere. Likewise, providing a spacious store layout is considered to contribute to many
benefits. Several interviewees describe that there is a relation between a spacious layout and
increased perceived accessibility of the products. Avoidance of narrow spaces and tightly hung
racks are expressed to improve the ability to easily see the products, whereas crowded spaces
in the store are repeatedly described as having a negative impact on the image. Several
interviewees also describe that a store layout with clear departments is perceived to increase
the convenience of shopping. This is in accordance with previous statements by Samli et al.
29
(1998), who claim that the layout represents the ease of moving around in-store. Though Samli
et al. (1998) and Bèzes (2014) argue for layout as an attribute on its own, this analysis shows
that there are several other dimensions tightly connected to the ease of moving around and the
level of thriving in store, why it is argued that the attribute favorably should represent a greater
extent. For example, it emerged that convenience is highly affected by the cleanliness of the
store and the sorting and structure of products. While Samli et al. (1998), Ailawadi and Keller
(2004) as well as Mitchell and Harris (2005) rather emphasize the location of the store as crucial
for the convenience of the store, this analysis however indicates that the actual convenience is
found within the physical space. The definition of the surrounding environment thereby
encompasses the structure of products, cleanliness, layout, convenience in-store, and
atmosphere.
4.2.2 Products and collections
The analysis indicates that the products offered in-store are important contributors to the
perception of the brand. Yet, it was found that consumers’ perception of store offered products
as appealing was considered a prerequisite for the consumer to visit the store, rather than
something enhancing the brand image. Most of the interviewees mentioned the importance of
an appealing product offering in passing, rather implicit than spoken. However, it turned out
that certain preferences were highlighted regarding product offerings. A majority of the
interviewees expressed a desire for appealing products. Among the emerging terms that were
used for describing appealing products were “simple yet fashionable” (Angelina), “made of
good quality and materials” (Michelle), “trendy” (Sarah), “cool streetwear clothes” (Lisa).
Previous literature establishes the quality of the products as influencing factors of brand image
(Samli et al. 1998; Birthwistle et al. 1999). Though, this analysis indicates that what products
a customer finds desirable is influenced by other factors as well, depending on the valuations
of the consumer. As Michelle highly values quality, her desire for the product offering is
formed accordingly. For Angelina on the other hand, it is more important that the products
offered are simple and fashionable in accordance with her interests. Though, what they all
expressed is a desire for the products to match their expectations and requests. Hollie explains
how this is rather a prerequisite for visiting the store, which is representative of all of the
interviewees;
“The products itself are most important of course. The items offered are what makes me decide on where
to go in the first place“ - Hollie
Besides the design and attributes of products, the interviewees also emphasize the width and
depth of the collection. This was uttered as the importance of a thoughtful width of collection,
as well as a reasonable number of products. Some interviewees expressed that the width of
assortment could be favorable in some cases, while in other cases could be perceived as
unspecialized. This has previously been mentioned by Samli et al. (1998) who establish the
width of assortment as one factor affecting image. For the reason mentioned, the attribute of
products comprises the width and depth of collection as well.
30
4.2.3 Price and value
The importance of pricing of products was by most interviewees presented in a similar way as
the importance of products itself; to many, reasonable pricing is a prerequisite for deciding on
where to shop in the first place. Regardless of the occupancy, the interviewees expressed certain
preferences regarding price. Though, this was not mentioned in terms of monetary funds, but
rather of how much one was willing to pay in relation to the perceived value of the product.
This might be explained by Birthewistle et al. (1999) suggestion that price solely reflects value
for money. From that perspective, the price might be an attribute that should not be disregarded
from any segment. Though, the scope of the research is too small to generate reflections beyond
the group of interviewees making up the basis for analysis. Furthermore, based on the analysis,
it appears like the pricing narrates something about the image which can either be in line with
or contradicting the overall image of the store. Julie explains it as;
“Price creates expectations of a certain image. The price strengthens the trustworthiness of what image
they try to communicate” - Julie
It is also stated that price leads the consumers’ expectations of the product they are about to
purchase. In the same way, the assessment of price in relation to value seems to be reflecting
the surrounding experience containing service and quality of the purchase. This emerged as
interviewees expressed flexibility in the valuation of products in regard to other dimensions
affecting store image. It also appears that interviewees were willing to expand the price limit
offline compared to online since they benefit from the service to be able to bring home the
product immediately.
4.2.4 Promotions and marketing
The analysis shows that the meaning of promotion according to most interviewees was different
from the meaning presented in previous literature on store image. Promotions in the context of
sale promoting actions were not at all mentioned as a factor affecting the perceived brand
image, as Bèzes (2014) argues. Though, according to the interviewees, promotion in the sense
of marketing and advertising is claimed to impact the overall image of the brand. Promotion in
this scene was suggested as a means to improve the image, where interviewees gave examples
of how brands transformed their image to the better or worse as a result of successful or
unsuccessful promotions. Helen gave an example of how she experienced a positive
transformation as a result of influencer marketing and different collaborations. She explains it
like;
“For example Gina Tricot, it felt like they a couple of years ago were on their way out of the market,
they felt very untrendy. They had a lot of products that I did not like at all. Buy now I feel like they have
rebranded totally, by investing a lot in influencers, design-collabs, and different collaborations. I can feel
that when I enter their stores now, the stores look very different from before. They have changed a lot
and I feel `wow what a difference´ “ - Helen
Several interviewees stated that they appreciated promotions involving influencer marketing,
designer collaborations, and other collaborations such as crossover store activities. This seems
to not only affect the perception about promotion itself, but also other attributes constituting
31
store image. This conclusion is reinforced by Ailawadi and Keller (2004) statement that
promotions are tightly connected to other attributes of brand image. The interviewees
experience that the surrounding environment can be improved by successfully managed
crossover activities, as it contributes to an unexpected happening. It also emerged that products
might be perceived as more appealing once they can be associated with influencers or famous
designers.
4.2.5 Store personnel and service
The analysis indicates that the interviewees emphasize the role of store personnel, though, their
expectations on the staffs’ role varied. It appeared that even though the interviewees were not
in need of or wanted advice, they still had a perception and expectation of how the store
personnel would behave. It also emerged from the analysis that several of the interviewees’
expectations of the store personnel were set in relation to the previous perception of the brand
image of the store they visited. Visiting a store where you have a positive relation to the brand
image would increase the expectations of the service provided by store personnel in that
specific store. This is captured in a quotation provided by Julie, saying that;
“I expect a certain level of service. I want to be met by nice personnel and I want to feel that there is a
higher degree of love and consideration in the things I buy. If I buy a nice shirt at (& Other) Stories, I
expect it to be carefully wrapped in tissue paper, which I won’t do at for example H&M “ - Julie
This indicates that store personnel are included as contributors to the image. When the store
personnel’s role fulfilled the expectations of the interviewees, they would strengthen the image
and the opposite would occur when they did not meet the expectations. It appears as the
perception of what is expected from the personnel was very individual. One example of this is
as some interviewees mentioned the impact of the degree of sales orientation as one factor
affecting store personnel image, where too high or too low degree would harm the image. The
perception of what is too high or too low though seems to vary depending on interviewee and
occasion. This is also argued by Bèzes (2014) as an important factor in assessing how well
store personnel contribute to the store image. Beyond that, Samli et al. (1998) highlighted that
friendliness enhances the shopping experience, which is also indicated in this study. This was
substantiated through the analysis, as interviewees multiple times confirmed the positive value
contribution from friendly personnel. Though, is also emerged from the analysis that the store
personnel should preferably act like helpful acquaintances rather than focusing only on sales,
which desirable behavior has not been stated in previous literature. It also appeared as the store
personnel at the same time are expected to possess high knowledge about the brand and their
products. For some of the interviewees, the importance of sales personnel was less palpable, as
they did not have any expectations regarding the service provided by staff. Those interviewees
had a more objective attitude towards products, its function, and design, why they did not
consider store personnel or advice as influencing factors.
4.2.6 Reputation
A majority of the interviewees witness that the reputation of the store and the brand provides
psychological security when they are about to purchase and carry a brand. Reputation seems to
32
serve as a reassuring contribution to consumers’ brand decisions. This is indicated as
interviewees explain that the image surrounding a brand creates a desire to shop that specific
brand and creates an endeavor to be a part of that brand society. This is captured in a quote by
Hollie, who expresses this in the following sentence;
“They are good at creating a desire for their products by creating a concept surrounding their clothes,
this is something you want to be a part of” - Hollie
What creates this desire seems to be derived from “current trends” (expressed by Sarah) and
“an idea of what is considered socially accepted” (expressed by Helen). Some interviewees
also describe that they are more likely to tell their friends about purchases from a brand that
has a good reputation. This is in line with Thang and Tan’s (2003) statement about reputation
positively affecting the pride to own certain products. Thang and Tan (2003) further claim that
reputable stores advantage from securing trust and higher perception of quality or worth in the
minds of the consumer. This is as well indicated in the analysis where Lisa was asked if she
thought that she is affected by a specific brand's reputation. Her response indicated that
uncertainty or unclear own opinion could be backed up by a generally known view, as she
replied;
“I think so. I mean, I think they have a good reputation, it is a very well-known brand worldwide, so they
must be doing something right” - Lisa
The analysis also indicates that a bad reputation could negatively impact the interviewees’
purchase intention of that brand. One interviewee expressed how she felt ashamed of buying
clothes from a brand that had a negative reputation, while another interviewee refuses to go to
a certain brand since they had a reputation for treating their staff unpleasantly. Thereby, the
reputation seems to affect the credibility of the brand in one way or another. Negative
reputation as the examples provides seem to negatively affect the interviewees previewing of
the brand’s credibility and what values that characterizes the brand. The analysis further
indicates that knowledge about the company behind the brand is guiding the consumers in the
choice of store. Some interviewees mentioned the history and core values of the brand as factors
affecting the brand image and the reliability of the store. Julie provides one, saying that;
“(& Other) Stories are very good at driving their storytelling. They create a concept that is reliable“
- Julie
Reliability seems to be an important matter affected by brand history and brand beliefs. Some
interviewees seem to link reliability to the level of communication provided by the company.
One example is how transparency regarding sustainability concerns could either enhance or
diminish the reliability of the image. Michelle described the importance by saying;
“The brand must be concerned with sustainability and mediate their beliefs to the consumer” - Michelle
Though, she continues by directing criticism towards stores’ way of providing information that
she considers necessary for making informed decisions.
“I think I know much about the values of the stores I regularly visit. But much of such information is
more easily available online. I think that should be made available also in stores. The beliefs of the brand
33
should be more considered by all consumers in my opinion and then it has to be more transparent in all
steps“ - Michelle
As the influence of history and record is rather weak through previous literature, this analysis
provides extended information regarding how positive or negative information about the
history and values of the brand affects the brand image. It also provides an indication of how
reputation, or institution as previous literature refers to (Bèzes 2014; Korgaonkar & Karson
2007), relates to credibility and how it is affected by reputations. It appears as the interviewees’
view of the institution of a brand is mostly concerned with getting to know the brand in order
to increase the knowledge of it and enhance reliability towards it.
4.3 How do consumers perceive brand image online?
Based on the interviewees’ responses, online browsing seems to be a daily occupation to the
majority which puts more pressure on companies in succeeding with conveying brand image
through several channels. The easy access to online websites implies being, in accordance with
the interviewees’ reflections, one of the foremost reasons to frequently visit online websites.
Chang and Tseng (2013) explain how people tend to rely on the brand name when visiting a
website since there is a lack of physical contact with the products. However, if the website does
not meet the expectations based on the brand name, the image might diminish. The analysis
shows how several online attributes are required to create a good consumer perception of the
website and in extension, an appreciated brand image.
4.3.1 Easy access and navigation
It is clear that one of the main reasons the majority of the interviewees visit a brand’s website
over the store is because of the easy access to it. It appears that online websites function as an
inspiring platform where the visit does not always end up in a purchase. However, it appears
enjoyable scrolling and searching for inspiration and new trends. Paula explains how browsing
on fashion websites is a repeating occupation of hers:
“I go to different websites a lot to see all the clothes, but I do not always buy anything, but it is interesting
to see what is out there and find inspiration” - Paula
Easy access seems to be a reason why consumers would choose the website above the physical
store. One of the most prominent opinions, which all interviewees agree upon, regarding
important elements on the website is that it should be easy to navigate. This corresponds to
Szymanski and Hise (2000) statement about the great importance of an easily navigable
website. It emerges from this analysis that navigation and categorizing the products are
important elements on websites which is in accordance with Katerattanakul and Siau (2003)
who propose to logically categorize the products to keep the website organized and easy to
navigate on. The interviewee Angelina describes her view of an easily navigable website of a
brand that she likes as follows:
“It is easy to navigate. It is very important that I find the categories that I am interested in. They also
have a reasonable amount of merchandise which is good, since it eases the navigation” - Angelina
34
This statement further shows that a reasonable amount of merchandise is an important factor
in order to keep it easy to navigate on the website. It appears from the analysis that several of
the interviewees, in accordance with Angelina, believe that an abundance of products gives an
overwhelming feeling and affects the ease of navigation. To keep the website easy to navigate
on, having a carefully selected assortment appears to be a good approach in addition to
categorization, to facilitate easy navigation. The importance of an easily navigable website
agrees with several studies, Katerattankaul and Siau (2003) and Bèzes (2014) also highlight
how crucial it is to have a website that is easily navigable in order to reach consumer
satisfaction.
4.3.2 Design and aesthetics
The design and aesthetics of a website appear to be important factors for the majority of
participants, it can apply to everything from the choice of colors and structure of the website.
These aspects have an impact on how inspiring the website feels and have the ability to make
the overall experience more satisfying. It appears that the color choices should be consistent in
all associations with the brand. Colors that are easy on the eye like white and pastel colors are
mainly viewed positively according to the interviewees. Another attribute that is brought up as
an important element is that the website, as well as the physical store, should look modern and
uncluttered to enhance the experience of the website. What is viewed as a nice design and
aesthetics are presumably highly individual. However, the analysis shows how modern design
has a positive impact on the feeling of the website and the overall perception of the brand. It
emerges for instance from the interview with Sarah, while she explains the most important
elements of a website, that modernity is meaningful:
“They also have a lot of editorials, they are putting a lot on effort in that. They have the most popular
models and they have really nice campaigns. It feels trendy and modern” - Sarah
She further explains in regard to the physical store:
“They do not feel modern and not luxurious at all. The website is more modern” - Sarah
Based on Sarah's statement, it is arguable that a reason for why she mostly buys clothes online
is because the website feels more modern. Hence, a trendy and modern feeling affects her
opinion about a brand, and “nice campaigns, with popular models” seem to be further ways to
inspire consumers, which once again can be linked to trendiness and modernity. Furthermore,
not solely Sarah mention luxury in a positive light, several interviewees explain a desire
towards a luxury feel, which brands can express through a luxurious design. The participants’
opinions agree with Kwon and Lennon (2009a) who mention the importance of the design of a
website since this will ultimately affect the image of the brand.
4.3.3 Merchandise description
The findings further show that all participants highly value clear descriptions and pictures of
the products because the website does not allow the consumer to clearly see and feel the
products. The pictures should clearly show the products from different angles, so the consumer
35
will not get disappointed when receiving them. Two of the interviewees also believe that videos
that show the garments in movement add value to the experience. The findings correspond to
Chen and Lee (2005) who acknowledge that a website should offer a clear description and
pictures of the products to strengthen the image of the online channel. Furthermore, the pictures
may also serve as inspiration if photographed in a nice environment, sometimes the pictures
show how to wear the garment in different ways which can create value through inspiration or
digital advice on matching. However, Helen clarifies how websites sometimes can have a
messy impression if they are focusing on mainly having an inspiring website since she believes
it makes it harder to find the desired garment. She explains her view as follows:
“I do not understand that website. Where is the list with everything? It is just a lot messier [...] They want
it to feel like a fashion magazine, which I believe can be the wrong approach. It can be nice too, but it
should be an option; “Would you like to visit the inspiration page or the online shop?” - Helen
This statement shows how there is a fine line between keeping the website inspiring but at the
same time keeping it simple enough for the customers. The interviewees also testify that a
wider range of merchandise offered online is an additional reason to consume online which is
in accordance with Szymanski and Hise (2002) who clarify that focus on the assortment is
important to reach customers satisfaction. Bèzes (2014) also advocates a wide range of products
in order to enhance the experience. The interviewees’ statement, however, contradicts the
findings in regard to easy access and navigation, where the participants state that they prefer a
reasonable number of products. Therefore, it is possible to argue that companies need to pay
attention to keeping a balance in many aspects in regard to the website. For instance, the
participants describe how websites often offer more products and more sizes which enhance
the overall idea about the website. However, there should be a reasonable amount of
merchandise since too many offers will affect the customer negatively because it takes too
much time to view everything, leaving convenience and navigability suffering.
4.3.4 Price and value
The literature argues for the importance of price and promotion, though, it does not seem to be
any significant differences in price criteria when it comes to the offline versus online store.
Therefore, most of the analysis regarding price offline is also applicable in an online context.
However, several participants mention reasonable and good prices as something they consider
when consuming. The participants explain their view in regard to price as follows:
“You can get something very trendy for a good price” - Sarah
“I believe they have a bit more luxury products, but the price is still reasonable” - Michelle
Once again, words such as “trendy” and “luxury” occur and can be argued to be important
when consuming. However, price also has an impact on the purchase decision even though the
clothes should be trendy and luxurious with reference to the statement above. It can be argued
that consumers may perceive the image of a brand as positive, but the products of the brand
might not be in the price range accessible to the consumer, hence the consumer turn to a brand
that fits his/her budget but also lives up to special expectations that will positively affect the
brand image. This is in line with Heijden and Verhagen (2004) who explain that value for
36
money is a consideration when consuming and Katterattanakul and Siau (2003) who mention
that price is an important factor since it attracts people to the stores.
4.3.5 Communication
A common perception among the interviewees seems to be that if there is enough information
about the products on the website, the lack of direct contact with staff is insignificant.
Katerattanakul and Siau (2003) state that communication on a website is crucial to enhance the
brand image, it can be done with detailed information and pictures of the products, which ones
again clarifies the importance of clear descriptions and communication as the interviewees call
attention to. However, it emerges from the analysis that some purchase decisions seem to
demand knowledgeable and friendly help, for instance when buying shoes or luxury items. But
overall, the lack of direct contact with staff does not seem to affect the majority of the
interviewees’ perception of a website even though some would prefer to visit a physical store
because of the possibility to ask for help. Instead, other communication and facilitating
functions can favor the visit of the online store, such as the search functions. Spiller and Lohse
(1997) explain that specific search functions that facilitate the finding of desired products more
efficiently can be valuable when lacking personal help. Paula explains her view of search
functions;
“I think that as long as there is a search function it is fine. The search function is almost like the staff
online, so I would not say that I miss it online. But I would say on a more luxury website, they might
lose the luxury feeling since they often mediate that feeling through their staff in the physical store”
- Paula
Once again, this shows that depending on what product one is looking for, the need for direct
contact with staff varies. Furthermore, some of the interviewees even think the brands
communicate better online, even though there is no staff. This has been described in the
following ways:
“The website can actually be better at the information parts than stores can. They might be better at giving
information about garments, sustainability, and history than stores are, even though stores have personnel
which websites do not” - Samantha
And;
“It is easier to get to know the website online since it is easier to communicate with the customer. It is
easier to get information there, so they (online channels) are good at those parts“ - Julie
This shows that several brands put a lot of emphasis on communicating since there is a lack of
direct contact on the website. Good communication will ultimately lead to a positive opinion
regarding the brand’s website according to the findings. The communication through the
website serves to give advice and compensate for the lack of physical and direct contact on the
website. The search function is an example mentioned as a supplement to compensate for the
absence of staff, other services have also shown to have great importance on the online store
and will be further addressed.
37
4.3.6 Services
Various services are a huge part of the online store, it appears from the analysis that services
are highly important when consuming online. Services such as easy payment methods are
mentioned as important factors by many of the participants when shopping online. It also
occurs from the analysis that the interviewees value a secure payment method. Klarna is one
example brought up that is perceived as an easy and well-known payment method that can be
decisive in regard to the purchase decision. Angelina mentions a number of different services
that she considers to be important:
“It is important that it is easy, and that I can use Klarna or other easy methods of payment. It also must
be several methods of shipment available, so it does not get more tiresome to shop online than offline. It
is also important that the package arrives looking nice, so it corresponds to my expectations” - Angelina
In accordance with Angelina’s statement, the services should above all work to facilitate the
entire process and make it as smooth as possible as the word easy is mentioned two times.
Bèzes (2014) also mention that different shipment methods are supportive and appreciated
service. A majority of the participants also highlighted the importance of easy return policies.
Preferably, according to two of the interviewees, the brand should offer the possibility to return
the clothes in-store and being able to pick the package up there as well, which is in accordance
with Bèzes (2014) who explains that the store should work as a pick-up point and also offer the
possibility to return the garments in store. Lisa explains her opinion about online services;
“But in general, I feel like the information about the clothes is very important, videos are also helpful to
clearly see the products in addition to the pictures. But what I also value when I shop online is the easiness
of returning the clothes, I want it to be simple. Preferably returning the clothes in-store” - Lisa
Bèzes (2014) mentions how return policies should be accommodating, just as the participants
require. In the statement of Lisa, she also addresses other services such as videos of the
garments, to further ease the process and reduce uncertainty when shopping for clothes online.
However, Patricia mentions how it is a bit of a hassle to return clothes when shopping online
which is a reason to visit the physical store instead: Patricia explains how she feels: “I am a bit
tired of returning clothes that I have bought online”. This shows how the return policies have
become more important to compensate for the lack of direct contact with the products and once
again, ease the process. As shown under communication, search functions are also important
services according to the participants, which correspond to Spiller and Lohse (1997), who argue
that search functions facilitate finding the desired products more efficiently. Compared to the
offline store, services are a much more important attribute in turns of the online store. The
findings show that it is important that brands focus on delivering services that ease the process.
4.3.7 Reputation
It emerges from the analysis that reputation is a crucial factor when assessing a brand. The
findings regarding the importance of reputation in an online context are the same as the offline
context, however, there are some attributes in the online context that will enhance the overall
perception of the brand image. As mentioned in regard to services, a secure transaction process
is a crucial factor for the online store. This is in accordance with Katerattanakul and Siau (2003)
38
who clarify how this is especially important if wanting to maintain a good reputation (ibid.).
The previously mentioned easy exchange policies as interviewees regard as important, are
further aspects that according to Bèzes (2014) will have an effect on the reputation. It can be
assumed that these aspects, which are claimed to lead to improved reputation, also will lead to
improved trust towards the brand’s online store. According to Lim and Dubinsky (2004) a
website with a good reputation also advantage from being viewed as more trustworthy.
Furthermore, a brand with a good reputation seems to be a brand that is well recognized. Emma
explains how her perception of a brand is influenced by the knowledge provided by others
about brands, as she explains her viewpoint as follows:
“I think it is because of my daughters that I have more knowledge about different brands. A lot of my
friends also like the store” - Emma
In accordance with the statement of Emma, Lim and Dubinsky (2004) mention how a good
reputation often is derived from word of mouth by friends and family. Angelina also indicates
that her friends’ opinions are significant in the context of consuming clothes.
“I perceive that they are high in trend. That makes it fun to shop there as well, it is fun to tell friends that
any garment is from ARKET when they ask” - Angelina
Angelina’s and Emma’s statements show how friends and family have an impact on their
purchase decision. Angelina’s description further suggests that she want to be perceived in a
special way in front of her friends. It is possible to assume that the reputation of the brand has
an impact on the individual's perceived reputation too and consuming from a specific brand
seems to be about social acceptance. Even though various services are prominent in literature
in regard to the reputation of an online store, presumably all attributes ultimately have an
impact on a brand’s reputation, hence the brand image.
4.4 Final discussion
It appears that fashion companies’ different channels possess different strengths and
weaknesses in their ability to convey brand image as they possess different practical conditions.
This differs from previous literature in multi-channel brand image in a general context, as
previous literature is based on the assumption that the same attributes are valid for both offline
and online brand image as suggested by Bèzes (2014). This research rather indicates that where
one channel seems to burst in ability, the other one tends to see its strength. One example is the
lack of store personnel in online channels due to practical conditions. Though the interviewees’
reflections suggest that the online channel attempts to compensate for the absence of personnel
advisory and interaction with the consumer which seem to have led to a well-developed
communicative ability, that implies some advantages that the physical store personnel do not
possess. It also seems to differ in what consumers consider important attributes depending on
what channel they use. One example is services, which is perceived important in online
shopping as it fulfills the purpose of supplementing for functional deficiencies like trying out
products or bringing them home immediately. Regarding offline shopping, services do not
seem to be considered as equally important to enhance the brand image. Despite those
39
differences, the findings reveal that it is important that the entire image is encompassed by both
channels.
4.4.1 Different characteristics of attributes
The analysis indicates that the attributes that consumers find prominent in brand image offline
and online are varying depending on channels. Though some attributes are found for both
channels, the factors through which they are perceived seem to differ. Not unlike suggestions
by previous researchers (e.g. Kent 2003; Verhagen & Van Dolen 2009; Hu, Xin Liu, Wang &
Yang 2012; Bèzes 2014) all attributes are functional and/or psychological in nature. Though
most attributes are more functional or psychological, there is no clear line defining the
difference, hence several attributes possess both functional and psychological characteristics.
The offline attribute surrounding environment is considered functional as this attribute involves
the physical store’s involvement of senses affecting the experience of the store visit. This also
refers to the physical appearance of the store. There are though examples where physical
dimensions can be argued to involve psychological elements. One example is the layout which
is argued to affect the convenience of the visit and atmosphere of the store, which by itself can
be considered a more psychological attribute. However, as it is affected by how the physical
space is arranged, it can still be argued to be mostly connected to physical characteristics. As
for the offline attributes products and collections are considered functional with reference to
Mazursky and Jacoby’s (1986) definition that functional qualities can be referred to as tangible
characteristics. They further state that functional attributes can be objectively compared to
other brands (ibid.), why price is argued to be functional both online and offline.
Regarding easy access and navigation, there is conflicting evidence of whether it is of
functional or psychological nature. One can argue that the layout of the website is reflecting
the layout of a store, and thereby should be considered functional if the assumption that the
same attribute has the same classification regardless of channel is true. There is though
evidence from the analysis indicating that this is done to affect how the consumers feel when
visiting the website, which according to Saraswat et al. (2010) is significant for psychological
attributes. With a base in those conflicting arguments, it can be encouraged to look more deeply
into the relationship in future research. The categorization of merchandise descriptions can be
argued in a similar manner as easy access and navigation. The merchandise of an online store
is functional, yet the description is a way of communicating and giving advice to the customers
which are psychological in its nature.
The attribute promotion and marketing offline is argued to be an attribute of psychological
character, as it concerns actions aiming to affect the customers’ feelings and emotions about
the brand. This differs from previous literature suggestions of promotion as a functional
attribute, as the inherent meaning of the attribute differs from the one explained for promotion
and marketing. The psychological characteristics are indicated in the findings where
interviewees express that marketing actions contribute to the feeling of association with, for
example, influencers. This is further strengthened by Saraswat et al. (2010) definition of
psychological attributes as referring to the feelings of the consumers. They further derive the
consumer sense of belonging, warmth and friendliness as well as excitement to psychological
40
attributes. Several interviewees indicated that they expect store personnel to not only be sales-
oriented but rather act like “helpful acquaint”. For that reason, store personnel and services are
argued to be a psychological attribute. The same accounts for reputation, which both online
and offline substantially refers to how the consumers think of the brand both derived from their
own experiences and others, working as an assuring contribution to the consumers’ own
thoughts and feelings towards a brand.
The online attribute design and aesthetics can be considered as a psychological attribute since
it affects the feeling one gets in terms of how inspirational the website feels, and the overall
experience derived from the website. The attribute communication, that somewhat refers to the
offline attribute store personnel, are argued to be psychological. This argumentation is derived
from the intangible characteristics of communication, aiming to provide knowledge and
security in the purchase situation. Services are argued to be psychological for the same reason
as communication. There are however functional aspects of services as well, with regards to
the practicalities mentioned by interviewees such as delivery and payment options. Though
services, in general, are considered intangible and thereby psychological.
The attributes presented in sections 4.2 and 4.3 are the ones that the interviewees of the study
found most prominent and they are compiled in the following table.
Tabell 3 Compilation of what interviewees believe are the most prominent attributes of brand image
It appears as both functional and psychological characteristics are significant for both offline
and online brand image as the number of attributes relating to them are somewhat evenly
distributed. The distinction between functional and psychological attributes can also be argued
more diffuse as the functional attributes possess many psychological dimensions as well.
Defining functional and psychological attributes of online brand image is more difficult and
somewhat unclear as most attributes possess many intangible characteristics. Furthermore, the
previous research provided on characteristics of online image attributes is very limited which
makes the classification rather arbitrary.
4.4.2 Overall perception of brand image
The analysis of the findings demonstrates how the image brands convey is of great importance
to consumers in the purchase decision process. Even though it was not directly pronounced by
41
the interviewees, various statements showed evidence of how the participants carefully choose
what brand they wanted to be associated with. The brand choices seem to have an effect on
consumers’ own self-perception of why consumers consume from brands that share the same
values as one does. Brand choices also seem to be affected by the perception of what is socially
accepted when trying to obtain a certain image to the surroundings, such as being perceived in
a special way in front of friends and family, which was clearly expressed. Julie communicated
her thoughts on brand image and her wish to be perceived in a certain manner in front of her
friends:
”They have succeeded to create an image so that it is desirable to shop there. Therefore, it is fun to tell
friends that you shop there and leave the store with a bag” - Julie
Social acceptance is recurrent in the findings, for instance, the brands that are appreciated by
the interviewees are repeatedly mentioned in conjunction with words such as popular, trendy,
and modern. The analysis shows evidence of how important brands are in consumers’ lives,
which is in accordance with Grubor and Milovanov (2017) who mention that brands have a big
impact on the everyday life and daily choices made. It was also evident in the analysis that the
interviewees had similar opinions on which brands were perceived in a positive light. This
appeared since several of the participants mentioned the same brands with regard to
appreciation. Grubor and Milovanov (2017) mention how successful brands have several loyal
customers, which seem to agree with the fact that many of the participants were thinking about
the same brands. A strong brand also drives store choice in accordance with Azad et al. (2014).
The five perspectives discussed in connection to brand image; symbolism, meanings and
messages, personification, cognitive or psychological, and blanket definition (Dobni &
Zinkhan 1990), all seem somewhat evident in the findings. However, there are no clear
distinctions between them and the findings do not clearly state what definition is more relevant
based on the interviewee’s responses. However, there seems to be both a functional and
symbolic value when consuming clothes which agrees with Pohlman and Mudd (1973) who
state that both functional and symbolic value is evident when purchasing items. Even though
clothes originally have a functional purpose, it turns out that all participants except one buy
clothes for hedonistic reasons, which can be both linked to symbolism and meanings.
Furthermore, the findings indicate that buying clothes can be a way for consumers to express
themselves. Samantha communicates her opinion as follows:
”I think it is important to wear clothes that give you energy, that expresses who you are as a person and
that strengthens you. So I usually shop as a means to do those things, and not primary to cover my needs”
- Samantha
The statement made by Samantha shows how personification is evident in terms of brand
image. Dobni and Zinkhan (1990) mention how a product can have its own personality and
how the attributes of a product can be linked to the consumer’s personality. This is also evident
in the findings whereas the interviewees talk about values and sustainability for instance, which
can be connected to their own personal values. It is further clear that the perception of brand
image is derived from previous experience and reputation which have led to cognitive and
psychological ideas which Dobni and Zinkhan (1990) mention regarding the consumers’
42
feelings, ideas, attitudes, and understandings about the brand. There cannot be seen that some
interviewees tend to favor one perspective, but rather that all or many definitions appear under
different circumstances during the interviews. It can therefore be argued that the blanket
definition is highly relevant as their conception of a brand’s image is the sum of impressions
from several different attributes and approaches, similar to Herzog’s (1963) description of how
brand image is the total impression derived from many sources. It emerges that the interviewees
have arrived at a perception of a brand, based on many different dimensions, which in this
study are captured in 13 attributes.
43
5. CONCLUSION
The aim of the study was to, through a qualitative research method, provide an understanding
of how consumers perceive brand image offline and online. This is done by reviewing the
concepts and different perspectives of brand image and examining what attributes consumers
find most prominent as makers for the brand image offline and online of multi-channel fashion
companies.
5.1 Theoretical and managerial implications
The research contributes to theoretical and managerial implications in terms of attributes that
are suitable for the evaluation of fashion companies’ brand image offline and online. The
research shows that the perception of brand image and what are important constituents varies
between interviewees as it is based on personal experiences and evaluations, but there are
several prominent similarities as well. The research also indicates that for fashion companies,
the attributes that are considered most prominent by consumers are varying depending on the
channel and can therefore not be adopted equally for different channels as previous research
on brand image in general suggests. This research gave rise to six attributes constituting the
interviewees’ perception of brand image offline, and seven constituting the perception of brand
image online. The surrounding environment, products and collections, price and value,
promotions and marketing, store personnel and services, and reputations are the attributes
suggested for future use for evaluating brand image offline, while it is suggested that easy
access and navigation, merchandise description, price and value, design and aesthetics,
communication, services, and reputation are used for assessing online brand image. Those
attributes are also suggested to be considered by managers in the work of strategically building
brand image on stores and websites.
It is further found that consumers find it very important that the brand image conveyed offline
and online is consistent in the sense that it provides a holistic brand image. There are indications
that the degree to which companies provide a holistic image affects the reliability of the brand,
as well as the overall impression of the brand.
The research also shows that the different perspectives on brand image suggested in previous
literature are all present in one way or another in the consumers’ view of brand image. It is
based on this research not possible to establish one perspective as the proper one, as
interviewees refer to different perspectives in different situations and in relation to different
attributes.
In conclusion, this research contributes to new insights regarding indications of what attributes
are prominent for brand image in multi-channel fashion companies. It is further indicated that
the attributes are varying depending on the channel. This points out directions where further
research is needed in order to provide better understanding and explanations within the
researched area. It also provides indicative references for marketing practitioners who can
benefit from knowing what attributes consumers find important. It is also indicated that it is of
great importance that the different channels are providing a similar image.
44
5.2 Limitation of the research
There are some limitations to the research that should be taken into consideration. The small
number of interviewees making the base for analysis must be taken in regard when evaluating
the theoretical and managerial implications of the study. Findings from ten interviewees
constitute limited generalizability beyond the specific research group without validation from
a larger sample. Even though the results are not meant to be generalizable, this should be
reflected upon when acquiring the results. The reflection should also cover for how the
interviewees were selected. As discussed in section 3.7, deliberated selection of interviewees
might cause selection bias.
There might also be limitations of the research in regard to the choice of method, as a
complementary method of data gathering might have contributed with further, deeper or
broader findings. For example, using focus groups as a complement to interviews could
possibly contribute to further findings if the discussion forum had attracted reflections that the
respondents did not think of themselves regarding the abstract subject brand image.
5.3 Future research
The present study has given rise to suggestions for future research. Based on the limitations
presented in section 5.1, the attributes provided in the analysis should be quantitatively
established in order to be considered applicable for a larger selection. It is further indicated in
the analysis that the previous research on the functional and psychological classification of
attributes is limited and inadequate. There are previous assumptions that the same
classifications can be applied for offline attributes and online attributes. Though, the analysis
indicates that the current assumptions are not accurate; one attribute that is functional offline
might be of psychological character as an online attribute. Faulty classification might lead to
misconceptions about the attributes impact and how it should be managed. It is therefore
suggested that future research investigate this in order to make more accurate conclusions
regarding attributes in multi-channel companies.
It is also suggested to investigate more thoroughly how institutions constituting history and
credibility of brand are affecting other attributes and brand image. Previous literature on
institution is insufficient and there are few theoretical or managerial implications provided. It
is though indicated in this analysis that its meaning in multiple ways affects both other
attributes of brand image and brand image directly.
45
Reference list
Aaker, D.A. (1991). Managing brand equity. The Free Press: New York, NY.
Aghekyan-Simonian, M., Forsythe, S., Kwon W-S., Chattaraman V. (2012). The role of
product brand image and online store image on perceived risks and online purchase intentions
for apparel. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services. 19, 325-331.
Ailawadi, K. & Keller, K. (2004) Understanding retail branding: conceptual insights and
research priorities. Journal Of Retailing. [Online] 80 (4), 331–342.
Ambler, T. (2003). Marketing and the bottom line: The marketing metrics that will pump up
cash flow. Pearson Education.
Amed, I. Balchandani, A. Berg, A. Hedrich, S. Poojara, S. & Rölkens, R. (2019) The State of
Fashion 2020: Navigating uncertainty. McKinsey & Co. [Retrieved 2020-04-05]
Azad, N., Kasehchi, H., Asgari, H. Bagheri H. (2014). An exploration study on detecting
important factors influencing brand loyalty in retail stores. Decision Science Letters, 3(1),
117-120.
Bastos, W. & Levy, S. J. (2012) A history of the concept of branding: practice and theory.
Journal of Historical Research in Marketing, 4(3), 347–368.
Bearden, W.O. and Etzel, M.J. (1982), Reference group influence on product and brand
purchase decisions. Journal of Consumer Research, 9(2), 183-194.
Bettinger, C. O., Dawson, L. E. Jr, & Wales, H. (1979). The impact of free sample
advertising. Journal of Advertising Research, 19(3), 35-40.
Bèzes, C. (2014). Definition and psychometric validation of a measurement index common to
website and store images. Journal of Business Research, 67(12), 2559-2578.
Biel, A. L. (1992). How brand image drives brand equity. Journal of Advertising Research,
32(6), 6-12.
Birtwistle, G., Clarke, I., & Freathy, P. (1999). Store image in the UK fashion sector:
consumer versus retailer perceptions. The International review of retail, distribution and
consumer research, 9(1), 1-16.
Bolderston, A. (2012). Conducting a Research Interview. Journal of Medical Imaging and
Radiation Sciences, 43(1), 66–76
Bryman, A. and Bell, E. (2007). Business Research Methods. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Bryman, A. 2012. Social Research Methods. 4th ed. New York: Oxford University Press.
Chang, E. C. & Tseng, Y. F. (2013). Research note: E-store image, perceived value and
perceived risk. Journal of business research, 66(7), 864-870.
Chen, W. J. & Lee, C. (2005). The impact of web site image and consumer personality on
consumer behavior. International Journal of Management, 22(3), 484–496.
46
Cherington, P. T. (1920), The Elements of Marketing, Macmillan, New York, NY.
Cho, E., & Fiore, A. M. (2015). Conceptualization of a holistic brand image measure for
fashion-related brands. Journal of Consumer Marketing. 32(4), 255-265.
Choi, J. & Lee, K. H. (2003). Risk perception and e-shopping: A cross-cultural study.
Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 7(1), 49–64.
Chowdhury, J., Reardon, J., & Srivastava, R. (1998). Alternative modes of measuring store
image: An empirical assessment of structured versus unstructured measures. Journal of
Marketing Theory and Practice, 6(2), 72-86.
Clark, F.E. (1927), Principles of Marketing, Macmillan, New York, NY.
Cresswell, J.W. (2007), Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five
Traditions, 2nd ed., Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Debevec, K., and Iyer, E. (1986). The Influence of Spokespersons in Altering A Product's
Gender Image: Implications for Advertising Effectiveness. Journal of Advertising, (15)4, 12-
19.
Dichter, E. (1985). What's in an image? Journal of Consumer Marketing, 2(1), 75-81.
Dick, A., Jain, A., & Richardson, P. (1995). Correlates of store brand proneness: some
empirical observations. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 4(4), 15-22.
Dobni, D., & Zinkhan, G. M. (1990). In search of brand image: A foundation analysis. In
Advances in Consumer Research. 17, 110-119.
Doyle, P., Fenwick, I., & Savage, G. P. (1981). A model for evaluating branch location and
performance. Journal of Bank Research, 12(2), 90-95.
Durgee, J. F., & Stuart, R. W. (1987). Advertising symbols and brand names: That best
represent key product meanings. The Journal of Consumer Marketing, 4(3), 15-24.
Erdil, T. S. (2015). Effects of Customer Brand Perceptions on Store Image and Purchase
Intention: An Application in Apparel Clothing. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences,
207, 196–205.
Escalas, J.E. and Bettman, J.R. (2005), “Self-construal, reference groups, and brand
meaning”, Journal of Consumer Research, 32(3), 378-389.
Filep, B. (2009). Interview and translation strategies: coping with multilingual settings and
data. Social Geography, 4(1), 59-70.
Friedmann, R., & Lessig, V. P. (1987). Psychological meaning of products and product
positioning. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 4, 265-73.
Gardner, B. B., & Levy, S. J. (1955). The product and the brand. Harvard business review,
33(2), 33-39.
Gefen D. (2000). E-commerce: the role of familiarity and trust. The International Journal of
Management Science, 28(6), 725–37.
47
Greenberg, C. J., Sherman, E., & Schiffman, L. G. (1983). The measurement of fashion
image as a determinant of store patronage. Patronage behavior and retail management, 151-
163.
Grewal, D., Krishnan, R., Baker, J., & Borin, N. A. (1998). The effect of store name, brand
name and price discounts on consumers' evaluations and purchase intentions. Journal of
retailing, 74(3), 331.
Grubor, A., Milovanov, O. (2017). Brand strategies in the era of sustainability.
Interdisciplinary Description of Complex Systems. 15(1), 78-88.
Hahn, K. H., & Kim, J. (2009). The effect of offline brand trust and perceived internet
confidence on online shopping intention in the integrated multi‐channel context.
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management. 37(2), 126-141
Heat, A. & Scott, D. (1998). The self-concept and image congruence hypothesis: An
empirical evaluation in the motor vehicle market. European Journal of Marketing, 32(11),
1110-1123.
Herzog, H. (1963). Behavioral science concepts for analyzing the consumer. Marketing and
the Behavioral Sciences, 3(1), 76-86.
Holme, I. M., & Solvang, B. K. (1997). Forskningsmetodik : om kvalitativa och kvantitativa
metoder. Lund: Studentlitteratur.
Hu, J., Liu, X., Wang, S., & Yang, Z. (2012). The role of brand image congruity in Chinese
consumers' brand preference. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 21(1), 26-34.
Išoraitė, M. (2018). Brand Image Theoretical Aspects. Integrated Journal of Business and
Economics. 2, 116-122.
James, D. L., Durand, R. M., & Dreves, R. A. (1976). Use of a multi-attribute attitude model
in a store image study. Journal of Retailing, 52(2), 23-32.
Katerattanakul, P., & Siau, K. (2003). Creating a virtual store image. Communications of the
ACM, 46(12), 226–232.
Khan, N., Rahmani, S. H. R., Hoe, H. Y., & Chen, T. B. (2015). Causal relationships among
dimensions of consumer-based brand equity and purchase intention: Fashion industry.
International Journal of Business and Management, 10(1), 172.
Kim, Y. K., & Sullivan, P. (2019). Emotional branding speaks to consumers’ heart: The case
of fashion brands. Fashion and Textiles, 6(1), 1-16.
Keller, K. L. (1993). Conceptualizing, measuring, and managing customer-based brand
equity. Journal of Marketing, 57, 1-22.
Keller, K. L. (2002). Branding and brand equity. Weitz, B. A. Wensley, R. (Ed.) Handbook
of marketing, 151.
Keller, K. L. (2008) Strategic brand management : building, measuring and managing brand
equity. 3rd ed. New Jersey: Pearson.
48
Keller, K. L. Lehmann, D. (2006) Brands and Branding: Research Findings and Future
Priorities. Marketing Science. [Online] 25 (6), 740–759
Kent, T. (2003). 2D23D: Management and design perspectives on retail branding.
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management. Vol 31(2),131-142.
Korgaonkar, P., & Karson, E. (2007). The influence of perceived product risk on consumers'
e-tailer shopping preference. Journal of Business and Psychology, 22(1), 55–64.
Kwon, W-S. & Lennon, S. (2009a). Reciprocal Effects Between Multichannel Retailers’
Offline and Online Brand Images. Journal of Retailing, 85(3), 376-390.
Kwon, W-S. & Lennon, S. (2009b). What induces online loyalty? Online versus offline brand
images. Journal of Business Research, 62(5), 557-564.
Landers, V. M., Beatty, S. E., Wang, S., & Mothersbaugh, D. L. (2015). The effect of online
versus offline retailer-brand image incongruity on the flow experience. Journal of Marketing
Theory and Practice, 23(4), 370-387.
Lapadat, J.C., Lindsay, A.C. (1999). Transcription in research and practice: From
Standardization of technique to interpretive positionings. Qualitative Inquiry, 5(1), 64-86.
Lather, P. (1993). Fertile obsession: Validity after poststructuralism. Sociological Quarterly,
4, 673-693.
Lee, J. L., James, J. D., & Kim, Y. K. (2014). A reconceptualization of brand image.
International Journal of Business Administration, 5(4), 1-11.
Levy, S.J. (1958), Symbols by which we buy. Advancing Marketing Efficiency. American
Marketing Association, December, 409-416.
Levy, S. J. (1978). Marketplace behavior - its meaning for management. New York:
Amacom.
Levy, S. J., & Glick, I. O. (1973), Imagery and Symbolism. Marketing Manager's Handbook,
Stewart H. Britt, Editor (Chicago, II. :Dartnell) 961-69 in Dobni, D. and Zinkhan, G.M.
(1990). “In Search of Brand Image: A Foundation Analysis”, Advances in Consumer
Research, Volume 17.
Lim, H., & Dubinsky, A. J. (2004). Consumers' perceptions of e-shopping characteristics: An
expectancy-value approach. Journal of Services Marketing, 18(7), 500–513.
Lindquist, J.D. (1974) Meaning of image, Journal of Retailing, 50(4): 29–38, 116.
Marks, R. B. (1976). Operationalizing concept of store image. Journal of Retailing, 52(3),
37-46.
Marshall, M. N. (1996). Sampling for qualitative research. Family Practice, 13(6), 522–525.
Martineau, P. (1957). Motivation in advertising: Motives that make people buy. New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Martineau, P. (1958) The personality of the retail store. Harvard Business Review. 36 (1)
May, E. G. (1971) Image evaluation of a department store. Marketing Science Institute. na.
49
Mazursky, D., & Jacoby, J. (1986). Exploring the development of store images. Journal of
retailing, 62(2), 145-165.
McCracken, G. (1988). The long interview (Vol. 13). Sage.
Miller, K. W., & Mills, M. K. (2012). Contributing clarity by examining brand luxury in the
fashion market. Journal of Business Research, 65(10), 1471-1479.
Mitchell, V.W. & Harris, G. (2005) The importance of consumers’ perceived risk in retail
strategy. European Journal of Marketing. [Online] 39 (7/8), 821–837.
Myers, C. A. (2003) Managing brand equity: a look at the impact of attributes. Journal of
Product & Brand Management, 12(1), 39–51.
Neslin, S. A., Grewal, D., Leghorn, R., Shankar, V., Teerling, M. L., Thomas, J. S., et al.
(2006). Challenges and opportunities in multichannel customer management. Journal of
Service Research, 9(2), 95–112.
Newman, J. W. (1957). New Insight, New Progress, For Marketing. Harvard Business
Review, 95-102.
Noth, W. (1988). The language of commodities Groundwork for a semiotics of consumer
goods. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 4(3), 173-186.
Olsen, S. & Skallerud, K. (2011). Retail attributes’ differential effects on utilitarian versus
hedonic shopping value. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 28(7), 532–539.
Onkvisit, S. & Shaw, J. (1987). Self-concept and image congruence: Some research and
managerial implication. The Journal of Consumer Marketing, 4(1), 13-23.
Palmer. W, J, & Griffith. D (1998). An Emerging Model of Web Site Design for Marketing.
Communications of the ACM, 41(3), 45–51.
Park, C.W., Jaworski, B.J. and MacInnis, D.J. (1986), “Strategic brand concept-image
management”, Journal of Marketing, 50, 135-45
Perrey, J. & Spillecke, D. (2013) Retail marketing and branding a definitive guide to
maximizing ROI. Second edition. Chichester, West Sussex: Wiley.
Pohlman, A., & Mudd, S. (1973). Market image as a function of group and product type: A
quantitative approach. Journal of Applied Psychology, 57(2), 167-71.
Posner, H. (2011) Marketing fashion. London: Laurence King Pub.
Rangaswamy, A., & Van Bruggen, G. H. (2005). Opportunities and challenges in
multichannel marketing: An introduction to the special issue. Journal of Interactive
Marketing, 19(2), 5-11.
Rehman, H. I., & Ishaq, Z. (2017). The Impact of Brand Image on Purchase Intention:
Moderating Role of Store Image in Pakistan’s Retail Sector. IUP Journal of Brand
Management, 14(3), 54–66.
Reza-Jalilvand, M. and Samiei, N. (2012), "The effect of electronic word of mouth on brand
image and purchase intention: An empirical study in the automobile industry in Iran",
Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 30(4), 460-476.
50
Room, A. (1998). History of branding. In Brands (pp. 13-23). Palgrave Macmillan, London.
Rowley, J. (2012). Conducting research interviews. Management research review. 35 (3),
260-271.
Samli, A. C., Kelly, J. P., & Hunt, H. K. (1998). Improving the retail performance by
contrasting management- and customer-perceived store images: A diagnostic tool for
corrective action. Journal of Business Research, 43(1), 27–38.
Sandberg, J. (2005). How Do We Justify Knowledge Produced Within Interpretive
Approaches? Organizational Research Methods, 8(1), 41–68.
Saraswat, A., Mammen, T., Aagja, J. P., & Tewari, R. (2010). Building store brands using
store image differentiation. Journal of Indian Business Research, 2(3), 166-180.
Schiffman, L. G., Dash, J. H., & Dillon, W. R. (1977). The contribution of store-image
characteristics to stereotype choice. Journal of Retailing, 53(2), 3–16.
Sirgy, M. J. (1985). Using self-congruity and ideal congruity to predict purchase motivation.
Journal of Business Research, 13, 195-206.
Sommers, M. S. (1964). Product symbolism and the perception of social strata. In
Proceedings of the American Marketing Association, 22, 200-216.
Spiggle, S. (1994) Analysis and Interpretation of Qualitative Data in Consumer Research.
Journal of Consumer Research. 21(3), 491–503.
Spiller, P., & Lohse, G. L. (1997). A classification of Internet retail stores. International
Journal of Electronic Commerce, 6(2), 29–56.
Steinfield, C. (2004). Does online and offline channel integration work in practice? Workshop
on e-commerce impacts revisited, DIW-Berlin, 1–16.
Szymanski, D. M., & Hise, R. H. (2000). E-satisfaction: An initial examination. Journal of
Retailing, 76(3), 309–322.
Thang, D. C. L., & Tan, B. L. B. (2003). Linking consumer perception to preference of retail
stores: An empirical assessment of the multi-attributes of store image. Journal of Retailing
and Consumer Services, 10(4), 193–200.
Trotter, C. (2016) Why Physical Retail Matters More Than Ever. Retail Next.
(https://retailnext.net/en/blog/why-physical-retail-matters-more-than-ever/) [Retrieved: 2020-
04-04]
Van der Heijden, H., & Verhagen, T. (2004). Online store image: conceptual foundations and
empirical measurement. Information & management, 41(5), 609-617.
Verhagen, T., Van Dolen, W. (2009). Online purchase intentions: A multi-channel store
image perspective. Information and Management, 46(2), 77-82.
Wang, K. & Goldfarb A. (2017). Can Offline Stores Drive Online Sales?. Journal of
Marketing Research. 54(5), 706-719.
51
Wu, B., Petroshius, S., & Newell, S. (2004). The impact of store image, frequency of
discount, and discount magnitude on consumers' value perception and search intention.
Marketing Management Journal, 14(1), 14–29.
Wu, P. C., Yeh, G. Y. Y., & Hsiao, C. R. (2011). The effect of store image and service
quality on brand image and purchase intention for private label brands. Australasian
Marketing Journal (AMJ), 19(1), 30-39.
Zhang, Y. (2015). The Impact of Brand Image on Consumer Behavior: A Literature Review.
Open Journal of Business and Management, 58-62.
52
Appendix 1 - Interview guide
Can you tell a little about yourself?
Do you consider yourself a frequent shopper in online and offline contexts?
What is the main reason for you to shop clothing? (Need, hedonistic etc)
For the following questions, think of a brand you believe have a positive brand image. The brand should operate
both online and offline (though own channels) and you should consider yourself experienced interacting with it.
What brand do you have in mind?
Why did you choose this brand?
Segment 1 - Store brand image
Tell me what you like about shopping in the physical stores of the brand.
Tell me what image you have of the brands physical store.
Support issues:
- What do you believe are the most important elements of a physical store?
- Mention important factors in a store environment that have a positive impact on your visit
- Do you think that the way you perceive the physical store affect your opinion of the brand?
- Do you think the image you have of a brand’s physical store affect how you view the same brand’s online
store?
Segment 2 - Online brand image
Tell me what you like about shopping in the webshop of the brand.
Tell me what image you have of the brands webshop.
Support issues:
- What do you believe are the most important elements of a website?
- How does the overall perception of a website influence your opinion about a brand?
- How does your perception about the online store influence your perception about the offline store?
- Is it important that the brand image is consistent through both channels?
Visiting address: Allégatan 1 · Postal address: 501 90 Borås · Phone: 033-435 40 00 · E-mail: [email protected] · Webb: www.hb.se