_______________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________ Report Information from ProQuestMarch 19 2015 08:53_______________________________________________________________

Document 1 of 1 A Multidimensional Conceptualization of Brand Community: An Empirical Investigation Author: Devasagayam, P Raj; Buff, Cheryl L ProQuest document link Abstract: This research extends the study of brand community by conceptualizing and empirically investigatingmembership and integration in a brand community. A convenience-based random sample responded to surveyspertaining to brand community built around a basketball program on a small college campus in the Northeast.Empirical results provide valid and useful scales to measure brand community as a multidimensional constructbased on spatial, temporal, and exchange characteristics. Characteristics of the focal product and brandcommunity are discussed relative to the typology of membership proposed in the multidimensional brandcommunity model. [PUBLICATION ABSTRACT] Full text: Headnote Abstract This research extends the study of brand community by conceptualizing and empirically investigatingmembership and integration in a brand community. A convenience-based random sample responded to surveyspertaining to brand community built around a basketball program on a small college campus in the Northeast.Empirical results provide valid and useful scales to measure brand community as a multidimensional constructbased on spatial, temporal, and exchange characteristics. Characteristics of the focal product and brandcommunity are discussed relative to the typology of membership proposed in the multidimensional brandcommunity model. Introduction There is considerable information available regarding the use of branding by organizations for their productsand services. Building positive brand recognition for the company, as well as for individual products and/orservices, helps with marketing efforts and may improve the overall return of the organization. In addition tobranding efforts, some organizations have begun to develop communities around their brands resulting in anotable and growing body of literature that explores brand community (Algesheimer, Dholakia, &Herrmann,2005). Firms that are interested in building lifelong relationships with their customers and focusing on thestrategic lifetime value of a customer rather than their transactional worth could benefit from building communityaround their brand. This applies to "traditional" brands with tangible products such as automobiles, mp3 players,and motorcycles, as well "non-traditional" brands with largely intangible products such as sports teams and Websites. The main objective of this research is to extend earlier research in the area of brand community andsports marketing. Specifically, we plan to empirically investigate the multidimensional construct of brandcommunity using a sports team as the focal brand. Brand communities offer a way to enmesh the customer in a network of relationships with the brand and fellowcustomers, as opposed to the traditional brand loyalty-a one-to-one relationship between a brand and itscustomer. It is presumed that such an approach would strengthen the bonds with the customer in a clearlysuperior fashion. McAlexander, Shouten, and Koenig (2002, p. 39) define brand community as, " customer-centric, that the existence and meaningfulness of the community inhere in consumer experience rather than inthe brand around which that experience revolves." They extend both the traditional model of customer loyaltyand Muniz and O'Guinn's (2001) Brand Community Triad, from which they borrow the customer-brand-customerrelationship, to create a customer centric perspective of brand community. McAlexander, Kim, and Roberts(2003, p.2) further add to the discussion, " it is through consumer experience that the existence and benefits ofbrand community relationships unfold these relationships can develop synergistically, strengtheninginterpersonal ties, and enhancing appreciation for the product, the brand, and the facilitating marketers in ways

that integrate customers into the brand community and that bear upon loyalty." Companies attempting toestablish a brand community need to understand the "values consumers find in brand communities and theadvantages that can come from attentiveness to the diverse relationships that build from product experiences"(Companies building brand communities). Subsequently, McAlexander et al. (2003) explore brand community integration and its importance to thecustomer loyalty equation. Their research offers evidence that "the accumulation of consumption experienceamong customers that express a willingness to engage in marketing relationships leads to a shift wherein otherforces, in their case brand community integration, become more powerful in building loyalty than does overallsatisfaction" (p.7). They suggest that more research is necessary to establish the boundaries of the brandcommunity conceptualization. Recent research in brand community includes Algesheimer, Dholakia, and Herrmann (2005); Andersen (2005);and, Muniz and Schau (2005). Algesheimer et al. (2005) propose a model of how various aspects of customers'relationships with the brand community influence their behaviors and intentions. They focus on the socialinfluence of brand community on consumers' finding, among other things, that the brand community's influenceis linked to customer behaviors that impact profitability, including membership continuance, recommendation,active participation, and loyalty to the brand (Algesheimer et al., 2005). Andersen (2005) suggests a conceptualmodel for linking relationship marketing and web-enhanced brand community activities in business-to-businessmarkets, extending the concept of brand community beyond business-to-consumer marketing where it is betterestablished. He suggests that brand communities offer another communication channel and linkage to faithfulusers. Muniz and Schau (2005) conducted research on brand community after the brand on which thecommunity is centered is discontinued, noting that members must now carry on the brand-sustainingexperience. They focus on the narratives members of the brand community share with one another, becausenarratives play a significant role in acts of consumption and may be used to sacralize, individualize, and buildcommunity (Muniz &Schau, 2005). Phase 1 of this research stream involved exploring the existing research in brand community and proposing anew model (Devasagayam &Buff, 2004). We proposed a comprehensive conceptual model that distinguishesthe various characteristics of a brand community and we discussed the strategic implications of thesecharacteristics upon the determination of a preliminary typology of brand community membership. We sharedpreliminary thoughts on possible marketing tactics and strategies that are mindful of the member characteristicsand their ensuing type. At that point the literature on brand community offered a rather simplistic view of thismultidimensional construct, although other conceptual models have since been proposed (Algesheimer et. al.,2005; Andersen, 2005). Phase 2 explored the generalizability of the McAlexander et al. (2002) scale in thearena of nontraditional brands (Devasagayam &Buff, 2005). We modified the McAlexander et al. (2002) scaleand measured brand community integration in a community of fans of a college basketball program. Empiricalresults revealed a scale that displays excellent psychometric properties, allowing us to conclude that the scalecan indeed be used for a non-traditional brand, such as a sports team. The purpose of Phase 3, the currentresearch, empirically investigates our multidimensional construct of brand community using a sports team asthe focal product. Phase 1-Dimensions of Brand Community The undergirding feature of earlier research in the area of community was a geographically constrainedconceptualization of community necessitated by psychological and sociological notions of sharedconsciousness and moral obligation leading to collective action (Gusfield, 1978; Ishwerwood, 1979). Theassumption has been that socio-psychological kinship would not be possible devoid of geographical proximityamong members. We propose that such a limited conceptualization of community may not be congruent withmodern technological advances that render geographical boundaries meaningless and find that sufficientexperi-ent evidence exists to support the notion that consumption communities are not bound by spatial

constraints. Communities may be conceived and nurtured in the physical world as well as the virtual world.While we are aware that the spatial dimension is a continuum, for ease of operationalization we propose twoextreme ends of the spatial characteristic of brand com-munity: physical (geographically bound) and virtual. Communities that interact in a predetermined physical location (Harley Davidson HOGS and Jeep Jamboree,for instance) fall into the physical category. The members of a physical brand community congregate and shareconsumption experiences in a predetermined location usually under the very identifiable auspices of the brandowner. The virtual brand community, on the other hand, meets in cyberspace to share consumption experiencesand this community might have either evolved on its own (Dean for President) or could have been facilitated bythe brand owner. The virtual community has rituals and mores of its own, often beyond the control of the brandowner (NFL.com, for example). Similarly, we find that sufficient observational and empirical evidence (McAlexander, Shouten, &Koenig 2002)exists to support the notion that consumption communities are not bound by temporal constraints. In fact, thenewfound freedom of interacting in a virtual community leads to a temporal freedom. In a similar fashion, onecould make a strong case for the notion that the virtual capabilities afforded by modern information technologymay have well led to the temporal freedom enjoyed by its participants. Either one of these relationships couldeventually lead to the underlying conclusion that there are clearly identifiable extremes of the temporaldimension of community: synchronous and asynchronous. The participants in brand community may choose toparticipate in the community at a predetermined time (chat rooms, conference calls, geographically boundevents) and interact in a temporally synchronous environment. Alternatively, communication technology (emails,blogs) offers the freedom to members of participating in the community in a temporally asynchronous fashion. Communities could also exhibit distinct characteristics based on the nature and frequency of participation. Forinstance, some geographically bound events are choreographed by the brand owner and necessitate infrequentgatherings due to the overwhelming logistics of organizing the event and extensive commitment of resources.Virtual participation usually is less resource dependent and might facilitate more frequent participation in thecommunity. The very nature of the brand, the characteristics of the product itself, and attendant consumerbehavior in terms of involvement and purchase cycles may also determine the frequency of memberparticipation. We conceptualize the two extremes of the exchange continuum as transactional and relational. The transactional brand community is characterized by low frequency of participation and low involvement onpart of the members. Thus, this community exhibits a low sense of belonging and a muted sense of collectiveaction. The transactional brand community will consist of members that have low levels of involvement in thebuying decision and longer buying cycles. A relational community, on the other hand, exhibits a more frequentlevel of participation in the community with a heightened sense of belonging and collective action. Members willtend to be more involved in the brand purchase decision and exhibit shorter purchase cycles. Interrelationships of Characteristics The three characteristics-spatial, temporal, and exchange-display interrelationships and often brandcommunities will have membership that draws from each of these dimensions (see Figure 1 below). Forinstance, a member that attends a geographically bound event (e.g., a Harley Davidson rally) might also chooseto participate in the community through an Internet portal (Harley Davidson Owner Groups-HOGS) betweenrallies. Such communication could be synchronous (chat rooms) or asynchronous (bulletin boards, blogs,emails, SIGs). They might also travel to the local dealership to purchase the latest model, resulting in atransaction that reinforces brand community. The nature and frequency of a member's participation might alsovary based on time constraints or the recency of an organized event. We acknowledge that in looking at a brand community in its entirety, there would be overlap in membershiptypes based on occasion of participation, mode of participation, and the frequency of participation. Further, anindividual member's participation in community will vary depending on the goal sought with each brand contact. Typology of Membership

Having discussed the dimensions that lead to a clearer understanding of brand communities, we thenunderlined the implications of our conceptual framework for strategy development. In doing so, we identifiedeight different brand community membership types (see Table 1 below). The typology is based on theinterrelationships of the various dimensions of the aforementioned characteristics of brand community and lendsitself to draw certain preliminary strategic recommendations regarding the targeting of members that exhibit acertain type of behavior at a given time. Phase 2-Understanding the Brand: An Overview of the Basketball Program The basketball program at a coeducational, independent, liberal arts college with a Franciscan and Catholictradition, located in the northeast United States, served as the focal point of the second phase of the brandcommunity research. The basketball program consists of Division 1 men's and women's basketball teams. Thenature of the college's basketball program, as well as the commitment of both the college community and thesurrounding community to the basketball program, have changed over time. The men's basketball program began with the 1938 1939 season. By the 1971-1972 season, the programmoved to the Division 2 level, and in 1976 the athletics program was elevated to NCAA Division 1 status(History of Siena athletics). This reflected the commitment of significant financial resources on the part of thecollege and an emphasis on "upgrading the program and making all teams competitive" (History of Sienaathletics). Today, there are numerous fan events and extensive networking into the surrounding community.Many of the home games are designed to be family friendly events, with games and activities for childrenprovided and family food packages offered. Junior basketball, travel basketball, and CYO (Christian YouthOrganization) basketball teams from the area are invited to attend games with attractive group discounts andopportunities to interact with the players. During the games, there are numerous fan involvement activities, suchas Tees for Threes (launching tee shirts into the stands for successful three-point shots), shot contests, fanraces, and other opportunities to win various prizes. There are also activities designed to build loyalty within the college community itself. The school has both adance team and a cheerleading squad; the dance team performs at each men's home game and the cheersquad performs at home and away games. Diehard fans can participate in The Dog Pound, wearing collegecolors and team logos, painting their faces and chests, and sitting in reserved, courtside seating to support theirteam. Efforts to build relationships with former players include alumni games, the hall of fame inductions, teambanquets, and alumni newsletters. Finally, the athletic department has specific programs for building basketball program awareness in Volume thecommunity surrounding the college. The Lil' Saints Club is designed for fans 14-years old or younger who wishto support the basketball teams throughout the season (Lil' Saints Club). Additionally, student-athletes give backto the community by participating in the Adopt-A-Player program. Players from the men's and women'sbasketball teams travel to various elementary schools, visiting with the classes that have adopted them for theseason, with the intent to motivate elementary students while learning the value of volunteering in thecommunity (Siena players give back). The athletic department created an extensive Web site to support theathletic programs on campus. The site provides detailed information about the men's and women's basketballprograms, players, statistics, news, camps, facilities, and schedules. Fans can buy tickets and logo apparel andthey can send FANcards with pictures of their favorite player. Further, fans can register for a wireless accountthat will permit wireless access, Siena Mobile, to scores and headlines. Looking at this basketball program, one notes the elements of a customer-centric brand community thatMcAlexander et al. (2002) proposed. Further, we can depict the basketball team in the context of McAlexanderet al.'s extended model of brand community (see Figure 2). Given the characteristics of the basketball programand the convenience of data collection, we selected this as the focal point of our initial brand communityresearch with a non-traditional brand. We use a modified version of the McAlexander et al. (2002) scale to assess the brand community of the

basketball team. In order to properly validate the scale using a non-traditional brand, it was necessary to slightlymodify the questions used. We made contextual changes to ensure conformity to our non-traditional product, asports team. To be consistent with the McAlexander et al. (2002) scale, we also use a five-point Likert-typescale anchored by (1) (strongly disagree) and (5) (strongly agree). Results indicated that the modified scalecould indeed be used for a non-traditional brand. The scale provides considerable information about the brandcommunity integration. Further, results suggested that the men's and women's basketball teams may indeed betwo distinct communities. One recommendation for further research was to assess each team as an individualcommunity. We follow this recommendation in Phase 3, the current research. A non-traditional brand, such as asports team, can benefit from understanding how its brand is perceived and consumed. Phase 3-Multidimensional Construct Scale Development Based on our conceptualization of brand community as a multidimensional construct, our research of brandcommunity for a non-traditional brand, and our understanding of the community built around the men'sbasketball program, we propose the Multidimensional Product BrandComm Scale (see Table 2 below). Methodology A convenience-based random sample of the student community was selected at basketball games. Once astudent's willingness to participate was established, the researchers provided them with a survey. If a subjectdeclined to respond to the survey, the random sequence of selection was followed to pick the next possiblerespondent. A total of 111 completed surveys were obtained. Sample descriptive statistics are summarized inTable 3. The sample adequately approximates the gender breakdown on campus. Sixty-six of those sampled indicatedthat they attend games with friends, with another 8% indicating they attend with family. When asked why theyattend games, the overwhelming response was entertainment (53%). Thirty percent did not attend a game lastseason, whereas 43% attended 1 -3 games. Roughly 14% of the sample may be considered "rabid fans," asthey attended more than seven games last season. Seven games represent 50% of the home games playedduring the regular season, therefore fans that attend 50% or more of the regularly scheduled home games areconsidered rabid fans. It should be noted that five weeks of the basketball schedule is played during thecollege's winter break when students are off campus. In an average season, five of the 14 scheduled homegames are scheduled during break. Therefore, considering seven games attended out of a possible nineavailable when school is in session results in an attendance rate of 78%. Eighty-three percent check their e-maildaily, with another 12% checking every other day. With regard to radio usage, 15% never listen to the radio,while 40% listen once a week. Only 18% listen daily. Subjects were not asked specific questions about whatthey listen to on the radio; however, we did assess their preference to listening to a basketball game on theradio as part of the spatial dimension. Findings and Results An exploratory factor analysis was performed to ascertain Quarterly the various dimensions of the brandcommunity membership based on spatial, temporal, and exchange characteristics. A varimax rotation wasemployed and factor loadings of absolute 0.50 and higher were included in determination of factor membershipof individual scale items. Chronbach Alpha was used as a measure of the reliability of the measurement scales.Given the exploratory nature of the study with a limited sample size, alpha values of .7 and above were deemeddesirable. This is in line with prior research that based on Nunnaley's (1956) recommendations. The spatial dimension was conceptualized as a two-dimensional construct based on preference for seekingmembership and participating in brand community through (1) physical or (2) virtual interactions with the brand.Physical dimension was operationalized as a three-item scale. The scale demonstrated acceptable levels ofreliability with alpha value of .789. The virtual dimension was operationalized as a five-item scale; however,three items had to be dropped due to poor item-to-scale correlation, rendering it a two-item scale with an alphavalue of .550. Due to the poor reliability of this scale, further empirical investigations are suggested for future

research. We then proceeded to determine factor compositions, which rendered a two-factor solution (explainedvariance 70%) that confirmed the validity of a three-item physical scale and a two-item virtual scale. The temporal dimension was conceptualized as a two-dimensional construct based on preference for seekingmembership and participating in brand community through (1) synchronous or (2) asynchronous interactionswith the brand. Synchronous dimension was operationalized as a three-item scale. The scale demonstratedexcellent reliability with alpha value of .835. The asynchronous dimension was operationalized as a four-itemscale, rendering an alpha value of .763. We proceeded to determine factor compositions, rendering a two-factorsolution (explained variance 69.42%), which confirmed the validity of our theoretical conceptualization.However, one scale item in the asynchronous dimension relating to snailmail failed to load on either factor andis proposed to be dropped from future studies using this scale. The exchange dimension was operationalized as a two-dimensional construct based on frequency and natureof membership and participation in brand community. Level of participation based on exchange dimensions waslabeled as (1) transactional or (2) relational. The Transactional dimension was operational-ized as a three-itemscale. The scale demonstrated poor reliability with alpha value of .559. The relational dimension wasoperationalized as a three-item scale, rendering an alpha value of .812. We proceeded to determine factorcompositions, rendering a single-factor solution (explained variance 55.59%), which challenged the theoreticalconceptualization of a two-dimensional construct. We then performed a reliability test on the combined scaleand found that the alpha value demonstrated high internal consistency (.837) and further confirmed the findingsof the factor analytic solution. Discussion of Results While the results are not entirely those anticipated, they are nonetheless encouraging. The results support ourconceptualization of a two-dimensional construct for both the temporal and spatial dimensions. A two-dimensional construct was not supported for the exchange dimension. Essentially our results do not distinguishbetween a transactional or relational exchange. We believe it is possible to explain this finding in light of bothproduct characteristics and sample characteristics. In terms of product characteristics, the focal product is asports team. The transaction that customers will engage in is the purchase of a ticket and the viewing of agame. The product, the game being experienced, is largely intangible. As such, we suggest that consumersview the purchase and consumption of the product as more relational than transactional, because it is anentertainment product. With an entertainment product in general, one experiences the product, the delivery ofproduct, and is left with a memory and perhaps a ticket stub. If attending a basketball game, it is experienceddirectly or indirectly with others, further supporting our claim that entertainment products are more relationalthan transactional (directly would be those people that attend the game with you; indirectly would include thoseother fans in attendance, namely those in close proximity by virtue of seating and those in the arena at large). Inour sample, 66% indicated that they attend games with friends and 8% attend with family. Fifty-three percentattend for entertainment. Thus, the interaction with others seems to be an important part of the consumptionexperience and community experience. We offer that the presence or absence of others can significantly impactthe affect of the experience that the fan has. Muniz and Schau (2005, p. 746) draw conclusions about the types of brands that foster brand communities,noting that "clear examples of brand communities have been found in cars (Bronco, Jeep, Saab, Volkswagen),computers (Macintosh, Newton), and even fantasy and science fiction (Star Trek, Star Wars, Xena: WarriorPrincess, X-Files)All of these brand communities have been demonstrated to be capable of producingtransformative experiences in their con-sumers." Perhaps brand community is extensively about the relationshipwith the brand, the company, and other users, with the transaction or purchase of the product incidental, or atleast secondary. Or, perhaps the transaction itself is viewed as part of the relationship with the product orcompany. With a college basketball team, there is an element of community associated with the college itself.Although not all of our subjects are basketball fans or members of the team's brand community, they are

members of the college community. The college goes to great lengths to build relationships with the studentpopulation. This may also explain the findings for the exchange dimension. Another consideration would be the sample itself. We selected a convenience sample of students. Clearly thestudent population is an important part of the of the basketball team's brand community. However, it does notrepresent the team's entire brand community. The community we are attempting to evaluate is a largecommunity, and may naturally show "exchange" characteristics that are different from a small community. Insmaller communities, fewer than 50 members, individuals are likely to be more connected to the brandcommunity, which results in significantly higher levels of community identification, engagement, normativepressure, and brand relationship quality perceptions (Algesheimer, Dholakia, &Herrmann, 2005). There areother pieces that are not covered by our sample that perhaps should be in order to test the model morethoroughly. For example, the population surrounding the school in this study is an important aspect of theteam's brand community. Efforts are made to promote and advertise games and team events, inviting andencouraging members of the surrounding community to attend. As mentioned above, players go out into theschools in the area, making a connection with younger students. CYO and travel teams are encouraged toattend, with special pricing packages available. Further, there are efforts to involve alumni and former players inthe brand community, although many of these individuals do not live in proximity to the school. Our sample didnot include these components of the brand community. We chose instead to focus on the influential andperhaps strongest component of the men's basketball team's brand community: the student population. Looking at some of the individual items in the scale, we note that snailmail did not load on either thesynchronous or asynchronous dimensions. This could lead to the recommendation that the item be droppedfrom further studies when using the scale. Yet we believe these seemingly inconsistent results may beexplained by the sample. Frankly, we would not have expected this means of communicating with the brandcommunity to be something the current sample would expect or desire. It seems that snailmail, notably that sentby the college, is reserved for more formal content related to academics and billing. Snailmail from the athleticdepartment is sent to alumni, former players, and season ticket holders-not students. On the other hand, it ispossible that the factor would have loaded if the sample was one that was reached extensively with snailmail. Atthis point, we would recommend keeping this item for further investigation. Radio usage is also not extensive within our sample. Therefore, it is unlikely that these individuals wouldparticipate in the brand community by listening to the game on the radio when, as students, they could so easilyattend the game. It would be a substitute or backup means of participating in community, yet one that might notgive them the opportunity of experiencing the game in the company of others, which is clearly important to thesample. It is possible that they might choose to listen to an away game on the radio, especially those 14% of thesample we would consider rabid fans. Radio broadcast would be a way for community members to participate inbrand community when proximity makes participation difficult, namely away games. However, it is suggestedthat there may also be a small portion of the brand community who chooses to participate in this manner on aroutine basis, including those older who cannot easily attend games and those who do not like the arena crowdsor parking logistics. There are many reasons why it is important for a sports team to understand the concept of brand communityand the strategies that will allow them to reach their target audience most effectively. From a sports marketingperspective, the ability to understand the brand community of a team is an important part of understanding howto effectively develop strategies and tactics to reach the target market. Sports teams that take a customer-centric focus may experience the same benefits that McAlexander et al. (2002) note for more traditional brands,namely differentiation, increased customer loyalty, the ability to provide the context for relationships to develop,and customer forgiveness of product failures or lapses of service quality. Sports teams have the addedincentive of building community and brand awareness because of the sponsorship opportunities that may result."Companies have increasingly turned to sponsorship as a marketing communications vehicle in the hopes that

the goodwill that consumers feel toward an event, cause or sport team will rub off on their brands" (Madrigal,2001, p. 145) and to "increase brand awareness by exposing the brand to as many potential consumers aspossible" (Madrigal, 2000, p. 13). Professional teams "provide entertainment for spectators and are now sold tofour distinct groups: 1) fans who support leagues by attending games, following games on television and othermedia, and purchase league- and team-related merchandise; 2) television and other media companies whichpurchase the right to show games as a programming option; 3) communities which build facilities and supportlocal clubs; 4) corporations that support leagues and clubs by increasing gate moneys, purchasing teamsoutright, or providing revenues through sponsorships or other asso-ciations" (Mason, 1999, p. 1). Thus, non-traditional product brands, namely sports teams, have additional financial motivations for understanding thesense of community associated with their brand. Strategically we would recommend that efforts to build brandcommunity for the men's basketball team with the student population focus on the entertainment factor and thesocial factor of doing something with friends and/or family. Clearly the relational aspect of the exchangedimension is important. We would expect that "Passionates" are a key part of the team's brand community,represented by those attending four or more games last season, desiring fan events, and wanting interactionwith players and other fans. Conclusion and Future Research Avenues Further testing with the multidimensional construct is recommended. First, it would be beneficial to test themodel with a sample that represents the entire brand community of the men's basketball team-the core groupand various fringe groups who consider themselves members of the brand's community. We tested students,some who are brand community members, and some who are not. A sample of brand community members onlywould allow us to determine the shape of the community and the relative distribution of member types based onthe membership typology detailed above. It would be beneficial to test the model on a large sample from whichthe brand community of the men's basketball program is formed: students, administrators, alumni, andindividuals in proximity of the college and the arena. This sample would not be comprised solely of existingmen's basketball brand community members. Additionally, it would be valuable to test the model with a brandcommunity built around a tangible product. We could then begin to determine the "shapes" of various brandcommunities, with an understanding of the shape leading to strategic recommendations for marketing tactics. Sidebar "Firms that are interested in building lifelong relationships with their customers and focusing on the strategiclifetime value of a customer rather than their transactional worth could benefit from building community aroundtheir brand." Sidebar "...brand communities offer another communication channel and linkage to faithful users." Sidebar "Communities may be conceived and nurtured in the physical world as well as the virtual world." Sidebar "A non-traditional brand, such as a sports team, can benefit from understanding how its brand is perceived andconsumed." Sidebar "...non-traditional product brands, namely sports teams, have additional financial motivations for understandingthe sense of community associated with their brand." References References Algesheimer, R., Dholakia, U. M., &Herrmann, A. (2005). The social influence of brand community: Evidencefrom European Car Clubs. Journal of Marketing, 69(3), 19-34. Andersen, P. H. (2005). Relationship marketing and brand involvement of professionals through web-enhanced

brand communities. Industrial Marketing Management, 34(1), 39. Companies building brand communities. Retrieved January 10, 2008, fromhttp://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?index=1&did=515750601&SrchMode=1&sid=1&Fmt=6&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName= PQD&TS=1199997034&clientId=21856. Devasagayam, R., &Buff, C.L.(2004). The multidimensional construct of brand community: Strategicimplications for marketers. International Business Trends Contemporary Readings - Academy of BusinessAdministration, 2004 edition, 277-282. Devasagayam, R., &Buff, C. L (2005). Exploring the generalizability of the brand community construct:Application in sports marketing. Exploring New Frontiers in Marketing: Annual Conference Proceedings ofMarketing Management Association, 63-73. Ehrenberg, A. (1988). Repeat-Buying, 2nd Edition, New York: Oxford University Press. History of Siena Athletics. Retrieved January 10, 2008, from http://siena-saints. cstv.com/ot/sien-history.htm. Jacoby, J., &Chestnut, R. (1978). Brand loyalty measurement and management. New York: John Wiley. Lil' Saints Club. Retrieved January 10, 2008, from http://sienasaints.cstv. com/boosters/sien-boosters-littlesaints.html. Madrigal, R. (2000). The influence of social alliances with sports teams on intentions to purchase corporatesponsors' products. Journal of Advertising, 29, 4, 13-24. Madrigal, R.(2001). Social identity effects in a belief-attitude-intentions hierarchy: Implications for corporatesponsorship. Psychology &Marketing, 18(2), 145-165. Mason, D. (1999). What is the sports product and who buys it? The marketing of professional sports leagues(Electronic version). European Journal of Marketing, 33, 402. McAlexander, J. H., Schouten, J. W., &Koenig, H. F. (2002). Building brand community. Journal of Marketing,66, 38-54. McAlexander, J. H., Kim, S. K., &Roberts, S. D. (2003). Loyalty: The influences of satisfaction and brandcommunity Integration. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 11(4), 1-11. Muniz, A. M., Jr., &O'Guinn, T. C. (2001). Brand community. Journal of Consumer Research, 27, 1-37. Muniz, A. M., Jr., &Schau, H. J. (2005, March). Religiosity in the abandoned apple newton brand community.Journal of Consumer Research, 27, 412-432. Siena players give back through adopt-a-player program. Retrieved June 22, 2004, fromhttp://www.fansonly.com/printable/schools/sien/sports/m-baskbl/spec-rel/011402aab.html? AuthorAffiliation P. Raj Devasagayam, PhD, is an associate professor of marketing at Siena College. His research interestsinclude marketing to vulnerable market segments, branding, and marketing education. Charyl L. Buff, PhD, is an associate professor of marketing at Siena College. Her research interests includebranding, e-commerce, ethics, and marketing education. Subject: Studies; College basketball; Brand identification; Discriminant analysis; Location: United States--US Classification: 8306: Schools and educational services; 9190: United States; 9130: Experiment/theoreticaltreatment; 7000: Marketing Publication title: Sport Marketing Quarterly Volume: 17 Issue: 1 Pages: 20-23,25-29

Number of pages: 9 Publication year: 2008 Publication date: Mar 2008 Year: 2008 Section: BRAND COMMUNITY Publisher: Fitness Information Technology, A Division of ICPE West Virginia University Place of publication: Morgantown Country of publication: United States Publication subject: Sports And Games, Business And Economics--Marketing And Purchasing ISSN: 10616934 Source type: Scholarly Journals Language of publication: English Document type: Feature Document feature: Diagrams References Tables ProQuest document ID: 227990330 Document URL: http://search.proquest.com/docview/227990330?accountid=149759 Copyright: Copyright Fitness Information Technology, A Division of ICPE West Virginia University Mar 2008 Last updated: 2010-06-10 Database: ProQuest Research Library

BibliographyCitation style: Harvard - British Standard

P, R.D. and CHERYL, L.B., 2008. A Multidimensional Conceptualization of Brand Community: An EmpiricalInvestigation. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 17(1), pp. 20-23,25-29.

_______________________________________________________________ Contact ProQuest Copyright 2015 ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. - Terms and Conditions