How can green branding improve appeal for environmentally preferable product services in the fast food market? Brand Identity Management creates brand appeal

Matteo Fabbi

UNIVERSITY OF WESTMINSTER BA Global Marketing 2010/2011

1

AKNOWLEDGMENT

Writing this dissertation was both an exciting and very challenging task. Undeniably

I was confronted with an interesting concept – green brand appeal. The past three

months have been very intensive and to some extent exhaustive too, but working on

this project has taught me how to deal with a large amount of data and information

within a short period of time.

My major project for the Global Marketing degree program at the University of

Westminster in London has now finished and I would like to take this opportunity to

thank several people for their direct and indirect contribution.

First of all my tutor Nigel Bradley, Senior Lecturer in Marketing at Harrow Business

School, for being supportive and understanding while I was developing my project.

Finally I would like to thank my family for giving me the opportunity of studying here

in London at the University of Westminster, my brother in particular for inspiring me

to returning to study in the first place four years ago and Giulia who was close to me

during the most difficult moments while creating this work.

Matteo Fabbi

London 3rd of May 2011

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION 6

1.1 BACKGROUND 6 D 1.2 THE QUESTION IN CONTEXT 6

2. LITERATURE REVIEW 9

2.1 BRAND IDENTITY 9 2.2 THE BRAND IDENTITY SYSTEM 9 2.2.1 THE BRAND AS A PRODUCT 10 2.2.2 THE BRAND AS AN ORGANISATION 11 2.2.3 THE BRAND AS A PERSON 11 2.2.4 THE BRAND AS A SYMBOL 11 2.3 BRAND IMAGE 12 2.3.1 CONSUMER IMAGERY 12 2.3.2 CONSUMER IMAGERY IN FOOD 13 2.4 BRAND APPEAL 14 2.5 BRAND POSITIONING 15

3. METHODOLOGY 17

3.1 RESEARCH PHILOSOPHY 17 3.2 RESEARCH APPROACH 17 3.3 THE PURPOSE OF THE RESEARCH 17 3.4 THE RESEARCH STRATEGY 18 3.5 DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS PROCEDURE 18 3.6 SAMPLE COLLECTION 18 3.7 DATA COLLECTION 19 3.7.1 FOCOUS GROUP 19 3.7.2 QUESTIONNAIRE DESIGN 20 3.7.3 DEVELOPMENT OF A SCORING SYSTEM 22 3.7.4 GREEN BRAND APPEAL MEASUREMENT PLAN 22

3

4. RESULTS AND ANALYSIS 23

4.1 RESULTS FROM THE FOCOUS GROUP 23 4.1.1 CONSUMERS PERCEIVED GREEN VALUE 23 4.1.2 CONSUMERS PERCEPTION AND EXPECTATION 23 4.1.3 CONSUMERS ATTITUDE TOWARDS GREEN ADVERTISING 24 4.2 RESULTS FROM THE QUESTIONNAIRE 25 4.2.1 POPULATION PERSONAL VALUE IN LIFE 25 4.2.2 EXPECTATION TOWARDS A “GREEN” FAST FOOD 25 4.2.3 POPULATION LEVEL OF “GREENNESS” 26 4.2.4 AD1 PROFILE 28 4.2.5 AD2 PROFILE 26 4.2.6 AD3 PROFILE 28 4.3 ANALYSIS RESULTS 29 4.3.1 BRAND APPEAL ANALYSIS AD1 30 4.3.2 BRAND APPEAL ANALYSIS AD2 31 4.3.3 BRAND APPEAL ANALYSIS AD3 31 4.3.4 BRAND POSITION VERSUS LEVEL OF GREENNESS 32

5. DISCUSSION 33

6. CONCLUSION: IMPLICATIONS FOR MANAGERS 35

6.1 LIMITATIONS 36

7. REFERENCES 37

8. APPENDIX 39

4

LIST OF FIGURES

FIG 2.2 THE BRAND IDENTITY SYSTEM BY AAKER (1997) 9 FIG 2.3.1 THE PARADOXICAL NATURE OF CONSUMER RELATIONSHIP WITH FOODS 13 FIG 2.4 BRAND APPEAL ELEMENTS 14 FIG 4.2 SCREENING QUESTION 24 FIG 4.2.1 QUESTION 2 25 FIG 4.2.2 QUESTION 4 25 FIG 4.2.3 ANALYSIS QUESTION 3 26 FIG 4.2.4 QUESTION 4 28 FIG 4.2.5 QUESTION 5 28 FIG 4.2.6 QUESTION 6 29 FIG 4.3 BRAND APPEAL ANALYSIS 29 FIG 4.3.1 BRAND APPEAL ANALYSIS FOR AD1 30 FIG 4.3.2 BRAND APPEAL ANALYSIS FOR AD2 31 FIG 4.3.3 BRAND APPEAL ANALYSIS FOR AD3 31 FIG 4.3.4 BRAND APPEAL CONSUMERS GRENNESS LEVEL CROSSTABULATION 32

5

ABSTRACT

The aim of this dissertation is to explore how green branding can influence brand

appeal in relation to environmentally preferable products and services in the fast food

industry. This is important because the greening of business has now become an

essential factor for developing new business models that secure compliance with the

with the popular trends of today’s society. Furthermore, the investigation of green

brand appeal is a concept relatively undiscovered, yet interesting for its abstract and

ambiguous nature.

This dissertation is based on an exploratory and confirmatory study of the

main motivations of university students as consumers of green products within the

fast food industry. The research takes into consideration recent brand appeal

theories from Cramer and Koene (2010) and more classic branding concepts such as

the Identity System Model by Aaker.(1992).

Based on a target population of 120 university students from the UK, it

analyzed respondents’ perceptions of three different adverts each promoting a

different green brand identity, and measured green brand appeal among students.

The author created the Green Brand Appeal Survey (GBAS), thanks to the adoption

of a customized version of the 23plusone Identity Model by branding agency BR-ND

to measure “brand appeal”. This measurement tool was calibrated to measure

“green” brand appeal instead.

According to the findings, consumers are likely to be attracted by green

products when there are perceived benefits that are not exclusively seen or felt as

“green”. Values such as achievement and innovation were identified as the most

desirable benefits that, when associated with green branding, had the strongest

appeal for the target population. Furthermore, when considering adopting Aaker’s

Brand Identity model, green brand appeal is stronger if the brand is positioned within

a Symbolic Green Brand Identity, Consumer derive a symbolic benefit from green

brands because the “social approval” and “personal expression” feeling derived via

the brand use and display.

6

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. Background

Urbanization together with globalization and industrialization has shifted the

food system away from simply moving basic staples from the farms to the (local)

plate (Maxwell and Slater, 2003). Food is increasingly being produced by commercial

growers, who in turn implement long and complex supply chains. The trend is

pronounced and companies are managing and branding products with a view to

targeting mainly urban consumers (Garrett, 2000).

However, due to the great impact of environmental pollution – which is

directly linked to industrial manufacturing in the world – consumers have become

more willing to buy products perceived as environmentally friendly (Chen, 2009). This

public demand now includes the fast food sector, one of the main segments of

today’s urban society (Faulkner, 2011).

Because of the size and the enormous amount of resource consumption of

these companies, and because of the waste they produce fast food companies have

felt the need to change their behavior and to comply with society’s environmental

concerns (Weinberg and Parss, 2010). As a consequence, an increasing number of

companies are positioning their brand identities based on environmentally friendly

characteristics, functions, ingredients and benefits usually encoding their messages

with the term or color ‘green’ to communicate this new position (Pundit, 2010).

Yet the way in which consumers confront the ‘green’ concept varies from

person to person. According to Gordon (2006) each individual creates their own

beliefs, which are based on daily encounters with green products, issues, brands and

the behavior of others. Because of the ambiguous nature of the green concept, what

actually represents a green brand image to the consumer; it is somehow indefinite

(Parker et al, 2007).

Ottman et al (2010) investigated the green concept from a managerial point

of view and argued that over the last twenty years only a few green brands have

managed to create a significant green value for consumers. This is because of green

marketing myopia and managers focusing on ‘greening’ their product instead of

considering the broader expectations of their target audience (Ottman et al, 2006).

Although many studies have been conducted on green marketing, very few

have focused on the concept of green branding in the fast food sector.

This study seeks to fill a research gap by suggesting a set of strategic tools

for marketing managers that will help to improve the appeal of “green”. Hence the

research objective is as follows:

7

RQ: How can green branding improve appeal for environmentally

preferable product services in the fast food market?

1.2 The question in context

The branding process is a way of thinking about how an organization aligns

its goals and abilities with the demands of its stakeholders (Aaker, 1997). When a

firm manages a brand in such a way that meets stakeholder demands and exceeds

expectations in doing so, people benefit and a value is created (Keller, 2007).

Currently, there is little doubt about the strategic importance of a well-defined

identity for delivering brand value (Aaker, 2000, Kapferer, 1997). This research takes

into account the Brand Identity System model by Aaker (1997) and considers its

implications for improving green brand appeal for fast food brands.

A green brand identity is defined by “the set of brand attributes and benefits

that relates to the reduced environmental impact of the brand and its perception as

being environmentally sound” (Hartmann et al, 2006, p.10). However, previous

studies on green marketing have revealed that in order for companies to deliver a

consistent and appealing green value, brands need to satisfy consumer needs and

interests beyond what is good for the environment (Grant, 2002).

Accordingly Ottman et al (2006) stressed that consumer motivations for

adopting green products are stronger when the green benefits satisfy more than just

perceived’ “environmental care”. When green brands are positioned to appeal to

consumer values, they are more likely to have additional appeal, especially in terms

of values related to efficiency and cost effectiveness; health and safety; performance;

symbolism, status and convenience (Ottman et al, 2006).

The research found similarities between the findings of Ottman et al (2006)

and recent theories of brand appeal advocated by Cramer and Koene (2010), which

state that the degree by which a brand feels good is linked to fundamental human

drives and the things people find important in life.

Cramer and Koene (2010) argued that besides their ability to fulfill

expectations; brands have to make a conscious choice as to which drives they want

to appeal to. The choice does not convey just one drive and the most appealing

brands touch many drives, which do not always seem to fit logically. As a

consequence of such a paradoxical mix of drives, brands with tension arise.

The right tension will contributes to a stronger brand appeal when more then

a drive is triggered at the same time and when a brand trigger unexpected’ drives,

8

deviating from category conformity (Cramer and Koene, 2010). Successful criteria for

brand appeal will be explained later in the literature section.

A classic theory of branding such as Aaker’s Identity System (1997) suggests

four different perspectives for managers to deliver brand values to their consumers

and these are (Aaker, 2002):

• a brand as a product,

• a brand as a company,

• a brand as a person and

• a brand as a symbol

Pundit (2010) has analyzed green concepts and argued that different perspectives

are meant to deliver different benefits. As such, the author suggests that managers

need to choose those that better resonate with their customers.

This research is an exploratory and confirmatory study of the consumer’s

main personal values and expectations of “green”, in relation to the fast food

industry. A survey was developed in order to test different brand identity perspectives

based on Aaker’s model against the principle of brand appeal revealed by Cramer

and Koene.

The survey was conducted online amongst a population of 112 students. It

adopted the brand appeal measurement scale from the 23plusone scientific study

and was customized for the purposes of this research. Although there are many

factors that may influence brand appeal such as price perceptions, quality, social

influences and availability (Ottman et al, 2006) this research only took into

consideration factors such as the brand positioning of the four different perspectives

and consumers levels of involvement. Consequently the research objectives are:

1. To explore the motivations of consumers who prefer environmental

brands in the fast food industry.

2. To measure the effects of green brand positioning on green brand

appeal.

3. To derive new insights into the green branding concept for the fast food

industry.

9

2. LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Brand identity

A brand identity is defined as the set of associations that brand managers

aspire to create or maintain (Aaker, 1992, p.202). The main purpose of branding is to

create those identities for the products and services that need to be sold and

marketed in the market place (Kotler, 1998). A well-implemented green brand identity

is believed to deliver benefits to mainly environmentally conscious consumers

(Hartmann et al, 2006), but also to those who can recognize “green” as something

significant (Gordon, 2006).

Chen (2007) argues that when people recognize such benefits as something

that can be worth their while and they are induced to provide something in return,

such as time, loyalty attention or money, then a relationship is created. However, in

the words of Ottoman et al (2006) the real challenge for managers today, is to make

those benefits recognizable to consumers.

2.2 The Brand identity System

This research looked at the Brand Identity System created by Aaker (1997) as

a potential tool for managing green value. Drawing from Aaker’s findings on brand

identity management (1997), brand value can be represented by functional,

emotional, and self-expressive benefits. With the Brand Identity Planning Model (see

Exhibit 1) brand strategists can consider different brand elements and patterns to

enrich and increase the depth of their identities (Aaker, 1997). As the model below

illustrates, these perspectives are the brand as a product, the brand as a company,

the brand as a personality and the brand as a symbol.

Fig. 2.2: The Brand Identity System by Aaker (1997).

10

2.2.1 The brand as a product

The most visible and common benefits for a value proposition are usually

functional product based (Aaker, 2002). These are designed to satisfy needs that

have emerged as a consequence of a problem. The product – related associations

are important to define a brand identity because they are linked directly to brand

choice decisions.

They can offer functional and sometimes emotional benefits for consumers and

can create a value proposition by offering added value (for instance special features),

or even just by offering something perceived as ‘better’ (Aaker, 1997). As Hartmann

et al (2006) suggest, this type of association is the most commonly used by green

brands, as they offer the additional feature of reduced impact on the environment.

An example of a brand that offers something ‘extra’ is the Coleman Meats

brand which claims that their beef is produced without antibiotics or growth

hormones (Aaker, 1997). Consumers usually perceive of green functional benefits

because of the “environmental care” they experience when using the product (Rios et

al, 2006).

However as Ottman et al (2006) have recognized, more personal benefits can be

perceived by green product brand associations such as for instance “health” in the

case of “organic food”. Parker et al (2007) classified green product brand attributes

as “organic”, “biodegradable”, “natural”, “healthy” and “recyclable” as the most

common used by brand managers for communicating “functional” types of green

product brand benefits.

Rios et al (2006) recognized various emotional benefits that derive from the

consumption of green products and services, which brand managers should take into

consideration when creating brand identities (Hartmann et al, 2006). More

specifically he argued that green product brand associations also deliver auto-

expressive benefits obtained from their socially visible consumption.

2.2.3 The brand as an organization

In this perspective the brand is set to convey the attributes of the organization

rather than those of the product or service. Examples include innovation and

concern for the environment that are created by the people, the culture, the values

and the programs of the company (Aaker, 1997).

Organizational attributes can contribute to a value proposition by articulating

associations such as customer focus, environmental concerns and technological

commitment and these can involve emotional and self-expressive benefits based on

admiration and respect (Aaker, 1997).

11

Previous studies have revealed that the most successful green brands were in

fact rather associated with alternative technology or with green corporate

philosophies (Ottman et al, 2006). According to Parker et al (2007) when green

brands are positioned by their organizational attributes, consumers perceive of

“experiential benefits” based on the satisfaction of contributing to “social welfare”.

2.2.4 The brand as a person

Various authors (Aaker, 1997, Keller, 2002, Kopfere, 2000, Dhār and

Upadhyay, 2008) suggest this identity perspective indicates the most powerful of the

perspectives and it is more interesting than any theory that is based on product

attributes. The most important feature of this perspective is that a brand personality

can create a very strong brand in a multitude of ways.

For instance it can create self- expressive benefits that become a medium for

customers to express their personalities. The most classic case is the example that

can be attributed to the Apple brand, which has transformed the reality of computers

and music into a lifestyle (Ottman et al, 2006).

A brand personality is ‘purely the result of communications because there is

rarely anything intrinsic to a brand that makes it lively or exotic or sophisticated’

(Keller, 2007). Hence, green brands can also be developed to create strong brand

personalities and take on personality traits such as ‘young-looking’,’ ‘friendly,’ ‘self-

esteemed,’ ‘caring,’ ‘responsible’ and they can even stand for ‘moral leadership” as

suggested by Dhār and Upadhyay (2008).

Another advantage if this perspective is that just as human personalities

influence relationships between people, brand personality can also be fundamental

2.2.5 The brand as a symbol

The final perspective is indicated by the brand as a symbol. There are many

academic studies that have analyzed the symbolic usage of brands. Meenaghan

quoted Levy (1959) who captured the essence of symbolism when arguing, “people

buy things not only for what they can do, but also for what they mean”.

Aaker (1997) argues that anything that represents a brand can be a symbol,

including programs such as for example the Ronald McDonald House for McDonald’s

or the McDonald golden arches. Barthes (1964) (cited in Kirby et al, 2000) argues

that symbols have enormous power and they are able to summarize an entire

culture, religion and even a country.

According to Aaker (1997) a strong symbol can be the foundation of a brand

strategy. “A logo stands for the company and for the lifestyle that the company sells

12

with the product” (Keller, 2002). Brand builders try to construct a symbol from the

signs they use; usually a universal symbol so that when people look at the logo they

will recognize immediately what it stands for (Kirby et al, 2000).

Green brands usually create a symbolic relationship with nature. Past

communication campaigns by Opel-GM and BP have associated their brands with

pleasant imagery of natural environments, with the scope of evoking natural

experience as emotional brand benefits (Hartmann et al, 2006).

2.3 Brand image

The set of benefits held about a particular brand is defined by Kotler (1998, p.197) as

“the brand image”. Furthermore, Park et al (1986) argue that brand image covers

functional benefits, experiential benefits and symbolic benefits. Based on the above

definition Chen (2008) defined a green brand image as “the set of perceptions of a

brand in a consumer’s mind that is linked to environmental commitments and

environmental concerns”.

When managers try to manage the brand image development process,

emphasis is placed on those elements that can control and create identity. As

stressed by Meenaghan (1995) “at the product /brand level the components of

identity are, in effect, the key elements of the marketing mix, with special attention

given to “advertising” which is accepted as the most powerful tool for delivering brand

image (Shiffman, 2008).

2.3.1 Consumer imagery

According to the literature on consumer behavior, there is agreement that

consumers have a number of enduring perceptions, or images that are relevant to

the creation of brand identity. According to Shiffman et al (2008), brands and

products signify something in the minds of consumers; they have a symbolic value

for them. Consumers in turn evaluate these on the basis of their consistency

(congruence) with their personal image of themselves.

For example identity seekers may paradoxically establish their identity based

on the fast food restaurant they go to, by thinking of themselves, as “Burger King

‘types’” or “Mac Donalds people”, and this is the case for computer users, when

people say “I am a Mac user” or “I am a Pc user”.

Consumers often attempt to preserve their self-image in their purchasing

decision and patronizing services they believe are congruent with their self-image

and avoiding those, which are not (Shiffman et al., 2008).

13

“ In order to be successful images and symbols must relate to, and indeed, exploit, the

needs, values and lifestyle of consumers in such a way what the meanings involved give

added values, and differentiate the brand from other brands” (Broadbent and Cooper, 1987,

p.3).

2.3.2 Consumer imagery in food

Biltejkoff (2010) suggests that people’s value, beliefs and aspirations are

significantly important in their eating habits. However more specifically, results from

motivational research into eating habits among UK students (2010), have revealed

that the idea of “health” expresses fundamental cultural values and complex

individual aspirations.

When students were asked to explain their reason for following a healthy diet,

responses included to live longer, to feel responsible, to feel sexy, to perform better

at work, and to do sports ; meaning that, for the students, “diary health is a means

to achieving goals that have nothing to do with the biomedical health of the body”

(Biltejkoff, 2010).

According to Beardsworth and Keil (cited in Biltejkoff, 2010), “humans eat with

the mind as much as the mouth” and are “immersed in the symbolic nuance of food”.

Drawing from a paper by Bitejkoff (2010), this research found three main paradoxes

with health and food that brand managers should take into consideration when

creating green brand identities for a fast food brand: pleasure and health, technology

and nature and innovation and nostalgia (see Fig 2.3.1).

Fig. 2.3.2 The paradoxical nature of consumer relationships with healthy foods.

(Biltekoff, 2010)

2.4 Brand appeal

Koene and Cramer (2010) investigated the science of brand appeal and

discovered that paradoxical tensions such those proposed by Biltekoff (2010) are

perceived by some as something desirable, when combining an ”interesting” set of

14

human drives. Cramer and Koene developed a measurement scale for assessing the

factors that influence appeal and with a team of designers, advertising experts and

psychologists they designed a set of 24 visual-verbal stimuli that represent the drive

domain; the world of human emotions, motivations and aspirations (see Exhibit 2).

When a brand triggers an interesting tension provided by a combination of two

or more of those drivers, consumers experience a level of well-being and happiness,

influencing significantly their brand preferences. Additionally, this feeling works as

heuristic, which in busy and time-limited situations can make the choice easier and

better (Cramer and Koene, 2010); this has been defined as brand appeal. The graph

below shows the main elements of BAP: BAW (brand awareness), BEX (brand

expectations), 23plusone identity (the set of human drives triggered by a brand).

Fig. 2.4: Brand Appeal elements

In their studies, Cramer and Koene (2010) suggests brand strategists to make

a conscious choice to which fundamental human drives their branding activities will

have to target. Though as stated in the article Brand Positioning: create brand appeal

(2010) the choice does not have to be limited on a “central” drive but on a

combination of drives. More specifically they argued that a “tension” between

category-generic and brand-specific drives is highly desirable.

“Brands that trigger drives deviating from category conformity increase in brand

appeal” (Cramer and Koene, 2010). This has to do mainly with the findings from Ries

and Trout, founders of strategic positioning (1969): a brand is successful when the

brand entered first a specific category; then creating a new category, one that is not

expected by its customers, is believed to lead to the same brand success. According

to Cramer and Koene (2010, p.6) “The challenge for creating higher brand appeal is

to identify those mix of drivers and activating them into consumers mind through a

set of branding activities.

Cramer and Koene (2010)

15

1.4 Brand positioning

Brand positioning is considered as a key tool for brand identity implementation

in highly competitive markets (Aaker, 1997). Since the invention of positioning as a

strategic discipline, rational thinking has been the main element for defining a brand

and emotions considered peripheral to the process simply identified as the brand

values (Cramer and Koene, 2011).

In green marketing programmes in particular, practitioners have often

emphasized the efficiency of cognitive persuasion strategies in their green

communication campaigns, supposing the consumer’s high-involvement concerning

environmental issues derived by the growing environmental consciousness

(Hartmann et al, 2005).

Indeed, the consumer’s level of involvement with a product, situation or action

influences their perception of the relevancy of the product to the self. Indeed, Celsi

and Olson (1988, p.211) note that “… a consumer’s level of involvement with an

object, situation or action is determined by the degree to which she perceives that

concept to be personally relevant… and the personal relevance of a product is

represented by the perceived linkage between an individual’s needs, goals and value

and their product knowledge”.

Rizer (2011) emphasizes fast food consumption is usually perceived of as a low

involvement activity. Hartman et al (2006) argue that when consumers are buying

green, than involvement may differ depending on their level of greenness.

Shiffman et al (2008) argued that the types of advertising that are based on

value expressive (images) or symbolic appeals have a greater effect on those

activities considered as low involvement activities. However, advertising based on

utilitarian (functional) appeals, has a greater effect on those that feel participating in

high involvement activities is important.

The image strategy involves creating a “personality” for the product, or building

an image of the product user (Meenaghan, 1995). On the other hand, utilitarian

appeal involves providing information with regards to the product benefits that are

perceived as functional and important to the consumers (Shiffman et al, 2008).

Cooper and Pawle in their beta-test for Lovemarks (2006), argued that in the

food market, emotions account for 75% of brand–person relationships Gordon (2006)

suggests green brands need greater personalities if they want to compete with other

mainstream brands.

Although it is believed that decision-making about brands strongly depends on

functional benefits, it all comes down to one question in the end: how will this make

me feel? Cramer and Koene (2010) argue that it is not just about what the brand

16

represents, but managers need to assess what is internalized as a desired feeling

linked to the brand.

3. METHODOLOGY 3.1 Research philosophy

According to Saunders et al (2007, p105) in order to underline the research

strategy and the methods used, it is important to comprehend the theory of research

philosophy. An interpretivist philosophy has been selected since it is essential for the

researcher to understand the difference between humans in their role as “social

actors”.

This underlines the difference between conducting research among people

instead of objects. The role of the social actor is very important here as is the way in

which people interpret the social role of others in accordance with their own sets of

meanings. Interpretivism is more suitable than positivism as brand appeal varies

depending on the values of people from country to country. In addition to this,

interpretivism also tries to explain why humans behave in certain ways.

3.2 Research approach

This research will start with collecting data first and then theories will be

developed based on the results of the data analysis. Furthermore this study is more

concerned with the context in which the events are taking place, with a major interest

in understanding why something is happening, rather than being able to explain what

is happening (Saunders et al, 2007). For these reasons the researcher adopted an

inductive approach rather than a deductive one.

1.3 The purpose of the research

Saunders et al (2007) argue that “exploratory studies are an available means of

finding out what is happening, to gain new insights, to ask questions and to assess

phenomena in a new light” (p.132). Explanatory research focuses instead on the

study of a problem or situation by explaining relationships between variables. In line

with the main objective of exploring and testing the dimensions of green branding

positions and the effects of these on brand appeal, this study is both an exploratory

and explanatory piece of research.

17

1.4 The research strategy

According to Saunders a survey strategy allows the researcher to collect

quantitative data, which can be analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics.

In addition data collected can be used to suggest possible reasons for relationship

between variables and to produce models of this relationship. Brand appeal is a

result of different variables that combined together makes people to feel good about

something. For the purpose of this research then the author decided to adopt a

survey strategy. In order to understand the relationship among the various factors

influencing green and appeal, the author has created the Green Brand Appeal

Survey (GBAS).

1.5 Data collection and analysis procedure

The research strategy adopted a mixed-methods approach, as this allows for

triangulation (Saunders et al, 2009). Triangulation is defined as the use of two or

more independent sources of data or data collection methods in one study, this will

help to ensure that “data are telling me what I believe are telling me” (Saunders et al,

2007). For example focus groups maybe a valuable method for triangulation data

collected by questionnaires.

However, sometimes-qualitative results are speculative and usually not

generalizable for a larger population. Saunders et al (2007) suggests conducting

qualitative surveys in an attempt to evaluate the extent to which the opinions and

views of the respondents in the focus group are representative of a larger population.

The research has taken these findings into consideration and decided to carry out a

focus group first and then use the results to adapt and formulate questions for a

larger survey.

1.6 Sample selection

Saunders et al (2007) suggests that: “the probability of each case being

selected from the population is not known and it is impossible to answer the research

question or to address objectives require that the author makes statistical inferences

about characteristics of population” (p.221). As suggested by Saunders et al (2007)

studies in this category need to apply a non – probability or judgmental sampling

technique.

Therefore the researcher has chosen a non-probability sampling technique,

which will allow the sample to be purposively selected (Saunders et al, 2009). The

sample chosen for the focus group were undergraduate students from the University

18

of Westminster in London (UK). Two out of four were British citizens and the rest

were international students, however they had been living in the UK for more than 3

years.

Although it is acknowledged that the use of students in marketing research is

controversial (Hartmann et al, 2006), students are also one of the core target

markets of the UK fast food sector. More specifically, those aged between 17 and 25

years of age are fast food customers (Pundit, 2009), so a convenience sample of

students can be justified for this exploratory study. Furthermore according to Kraus

(1995 cited in Hartmann et al, 2006), “a student sample is more homogeneous than a

non-student sample, resulting in less “extraneous variation”.

The questionnaires were distributed online to approximately 200 British email

addresses that the author obtained from the portals of the Universities of

Westminster Keele, Manchester and Liverpool through a subscription to their mailing

list. Therefore the questionnaire was sent to the people in the UK.

According to Cooper and Beta in their test of Lovemarks (2006), computer self-

completion interviewing gives the great advantage that without the presence of an

interviewer, respondents feel more honest and willing to explore sensitive issues.

1.3 Data collection

This study has used primary and secondary data sources. The literature review

was written based on the collection of secondary data. Then primary data was

gathered through the use of focus groups and then the construction of the research

framework (GBAS) based on the literature and the focus groups. This allowed the

research to quantitatively validate the results and to respond to the research

question. Secondary data was obtained from journals, databases such as Mintel,

Emerald Insight, books and periodicals from the University of Westminster library.

3.7.1 Focus group

In designing the questions for the focus group, the author had three main

objectives in mind:

1. to identify the perceived green value of students which will help to identify

the motivations that would lead students to buy green fast food (research

objective 1)

2. to design a student expectation profile for a green fast food, which to

measure the brand appeal, addressing objective 2 and also

3. to identify the perceptions of green advertising amongst students, which

would help the author to answer objective 3.

19

The first part of the focus group explored student perceptions of green value,

through open questions, while the second part was designed to interpret perceptions

and feelings through visual stimuli. Here the author asked students to brainstorm

visual stimuli, which were then extrapolated into the online survey (see Exhibit 2).

The images were taken from the 23plusone scientific study on brand appeal (Cramer

and Koene, 2010), and students in the focus group were asked to select those that

they thought or felt would fit an environmentally friendly fast food the best and

discuss their choices. The focus group took place in the University of Westminster

and was attended by four participants. Participants were picked at random from the

library and asked to participate through a consent form (see Exhibit 3).

3.7.2 Questionnaire design

To design the questionnaire the researcher used ‘keysurvey.com’. Data from

the survey were collected automatically. In line with the main objective of exploring

and measuring the green brand appeal generated by different green brand identities,

the questionnaire was divided into three main sections. The first part of the

questionnaire allowed the author to identify the respondents profile in terms of three

main characteristics:

• Target population personal values in life (Q.2)

• Population’s level of “greenness” (Q.3)

• Population’s expectations for an environmentally preferable fast food restaurant

(Q.4)

The second part of the questionnaire measured perception responses from

three different advertisements, while the third part gathered additional demographic

information about the population. In order to identify the student profile, the survey

made use of the drivogrms, a set of visual and verbal stimuli, created by branding

agency BR_ND in a study called: the 23plusone scientific study of brand appeal.

Students were asked to express their most important values in life by selecting a

maximum of five from the list of drivograms: “the things we find important in life”

(Cramer and Koene, 2010).

In order to identify the level of “greenness” respondents had to score six

statements from 1 = “strongly disagree” to 7 = “strongly agree” and these were based

on the Green Consumer Values measurement scale suggested by Haws et al (2010).

In question 4, student expectations for a green fast food brand were also

assessed through drivograms, using those chosen in the focus group as being

representative for a green fast food sector.

The second part of the questionnaire consisted of showing students three

20

different adverts each recognized by the author as representatives of three different

green brand identities from the Aaker’s model. At this point students were asked to

score on a five point scale 1 = “neutral” - 5 = “fits very well” how strongly they would

associate the brand with a set of 12 drivograms (the same ones used to assess

expectations) (see Exhibit 13).

Although brand positioning involves the whole marketing mix, consumers can

often develop brand perceptions and appeal mainly or even exclusively through

advertising exposure (Cramer and Koene, 2010). This is the main reason why the

author has chosen to base the survey on three different adverts.

The author has identified the first advert, AD1 (see Exhibit 7 – 8), as a suitable

visual stimulus representing a green brand identity with functional green attributes,

as the copy in the advert highlights attributes such as “free range” and “organic”.

The second advert AD2 was representative of the Aakers’ organization-brand

perspective identity as the copy communicate companies programs and values such

as “improving the environment sustainability of our business”…”we support people

development” (see Exhibit 9 – 10), those believed by Aaker (2002) to represent an

organizational brand identity perspective (see contents 2.2.3).

The significant cues that helped the author to link the third advert (AD3) with

the personality/symbolic Aaker’s brand perspective were given by the McDonals’s

green logo (see Exhibit 11 – 12). Based on the literature, symbolic benefits can also

derive from the strategic management of the logo (see contents 2.2.4/2.2.5).

To avoid order bias, the author has set a rotation for all the visuals. Also the survey

distributed two types of adverts for each brand identity perspective, as to reduce the

risk of assessing the graphics of the adverts instead of the identity.

3.7.3 Development of a scoring system.

In order for the researcher to measure brand appeal a scoring system had to

be developed. Respondent’s answers to the questionnaire will measure each of the

three adverts brand appeal. Based on the theories of Cramer and Koene (2010), the

successful criteria are as follows:

1. A first criterion for measuring brand appeal is the TOTAL SCORE OF DRIVERS. Each

advert total score of adverts based on respondents perceptions.

2. The second criterion is the TOTAL NUMBER OF DRIVERS: only counting those drivers

that scored more then neutral.

3. The third criterion is the TOTAL NUMBER OF UNEXPECTED DRIVERS: only counting

those drivers that were scoring more then neutral but not selected in Q4.

21

4. RESULTS AND ANALYSIS In this section all the main results from the questionnaire and the focus group

are reported. The results were analyzed using SPSS software in the form of

crosstabs or descriptive statistics through Excel tables and charts.

4.1 Results from the focus group

As explained in the methodology chapter, the focus group was conducted to

explore perceived green values, expectations of green fast food and attitudes

towards green advertising amongst students.

4.1.1 Consumers perceived green value

Participants were very prepared as regards the concept of green and

quite confident when talking about it, suggesting wide concern about green in

general. The green value was identified mostly as something positive and mainly

associated with attributes related to the environment, to health, to innovation and

technology, but participant also expressed consideration of the social and self-

expressive benefits of being “green”.

Most of the associations with the green concept were attached to “recycling”,

“going green for the planet”, “organic”, “animal welfare”, “fare trade” and respondents

have also identified a more holistic trait for the green concept, saying that it is more

than just business related “…green products have a meaning for giving something

back to the Earth…it’s all a cycle”.

Green values were categorized as something to do with status, “sometimes is

considered luxury…”. When participants were asked to state brands that were

believed to be green, they mentioned brands such Apple, Ikea and Body Shop. Apple

was associated with green for being “forward thinking” and “innovative”, Ikea with

being “Swedish” and “environmentally friendly” The Body Shop with its pesticide free

ingredients and for its innate “green culture”. These considerations confirmed the

great complexity of evaluating what is a green value for consumers.

22

4.1.2 Consumers perception and expectations

Expectations about a green fast food restaurant were of fun and happy

places where to meet like-minded people, drinking and eating healthy and nutritional

food. Going to a green fast food would definitely be a pleasurable experience both for

your body and for your mind, a unique experience in a very relaxed place that will

make you feel good about yourself and the rest of the world.

On the other hand there is also reluctance for going to a green fast food, as it

was perceived as something for elders, for married people and upper class families.

One of the participants had previously been in one, they have experienced it as

something “just for vegetarian” and therefore out of their prefeerences “it was really

good, but it’s not the same as going to the Burger King man...it was boring…“. Some

have just said that fast food is not really about health “I’d rather go to a vegetarian

place, fast food is not really about health.”

4.1.3 Consumers attitude towards green advertising.

The participants were skeptical about green advertising and one noted “I think

they are too pushy sometimes; they want to say they are green for everything”

however when asked if they remembered any past green adverts, their attitudes

were positive if they liked the advert “I liked the Heineken campaign about the

recycling, where all the pictures where from the fifties.”; “Prius, Toyota Prius, that

was cool”.

4.2 Result from the questionnaire

The target population that took part at this survey consisted of 112 UK

university students. Of the respondents, some 58% were women and 41% were

men. The majority of the respondents were between the ages of 18 and 24 years

(57% of the sample), whilst 39% were aged between 25 and 34 years.

4.2.1 Population personal values in life

In order to define the profile of respondents in terms of personal values,

students were asked to select the five most important things in their life, represented

by 24 visual images (the drivograms). The chart below illustrates the response.

23

Fig. 4.2.1: question 2

Health and Nutrition (29% of the tot population) was the value that received the

highest score, followed by the sense of achievement and Innovation (28.13%), being

relaxed and having Fun, respectively 28%, 27%.

4.2.2 Expectations towards a “green” fast food

In order to idenitfy the level of expectation for a green fast food students were

asked to select the drivers that they would attribute to a green fast food the most.

The resuls are shown below.

24

Fig. 4.2.2: question 4

As can be seen from the graph, the majority of the respondents think Health

and Nutrition would fit a green fast food brand; 60% of the respondents felt that a

green fast food would deliver values such as a better world and idealism. 44% of the

respondents felt that a green fast food would deliver feelings of safety and order,

while also being innovative and high tech. The least expected drivers were play and

fun, relaxed and carefree, uniqueness and materialism (possess and collect).

Surprisingly Loyal and Moral was only considered by 39% of the respondents.

4.2.3 Population level of “greenness”

For a better representation of the findings the author has labeled the responses

as low – medium – high in relation to their level of greenness. Tot score of each

student in relation to the six questions was categorized as low if the average score

was below 33%, as medium if the average was in between 33% and 66%, and as

high for those scoring over 66%.

As shown by the graph below the highest percentage is represented by high

green consumers, which represent 49% of the students’ responses. 39.3% were

categorized as having a medium green profile, while only 11% a low green profile.

25

Fig. 4.2.3: analysis question 3

A deeper analysis on the population’s level of greenness identified that the

majority of the population had stronger green values related to the statement in q4 “I

am concerned about wasting the resources of the planet” (64%) (see Fig.4). The

second most relevant green value is given by the product usage and their effect on

the environment (57%), whilst the least sensitive green value considered by the

population was commitment to green purchases in relation to their shopping habits.

Fig.4.2.3: analysis question 3

26

4.2.4 AD1 profile

The graph below illustrates the AD1 perspective profile based on the students

responses. The four drivers that received the highest score by this identity

perspective are highlighted on the right: Health and Nutrition (12%), Idealism (11%),

Loyal and Moral (10%) and Safe and Secure (9%).

Fig. 4.2.4: question 4

4.2.5 AD2 profile

AD2 represented the position based on the organization – brand perspective.

As can be seen from the responses, the drivograms triggered by this position relates

for the majority on Achievement and Innovation (12%), Idealism (11%) and

Individualism and Loyal and Moral (9%).

Fig. 4.2.5 question 5

27

4.2.6 AD3 profile

AD3 is the advert that has generated the highest green brand appeal among

the target population, highlighting drivers such Individualism and Uniqueness,

together with Play and Fun (12%), Connected Together and Relaxed and Carefree

(10%).

Fig. 4.2.6: question 6

4.3 Questionnaire analysis

According to the table below, 20% of the population perceived of higher brand

appeals from the position based on the product - brand perspective (AD1), while 36%

received higher appeal from AD2 and the majority of the target population, about

43% were found by this research to be more likely to perceive a higher green brand

appeal by AD3.

Fig. 4.3: brand appeal analysis

The results have shown that green brand positions based on the three different

identity perspectives have different effects on the green brand appeal. A green brand

positioned by its product - brand identity perspective has lower green brand appeal

than a green brand positioned by its organizational or symbolic perspective.

28

Fig. 4.3.1 Brand appeal analysis

As can be seen from the graph above, the brand perspective that generated

the highest green brand appeal on the target population was the personality green

brand perspective, with 5177 business points followed by the Organizational

perspective that scored 4932.

4.3.1 Further analysis and discussions

Fig. 4.3.1: analysis brand appeal for AD1

AD1 brand position based mainly on green product attributes such being

“organic” and offering “free range eggs” (see exhibit 21), has triggered mainly

feelings related to health and nutrition with a score of 500 business points. As it

can be seen from the top five scores, Health also matched with the students most

important values in life, but missed to score in those drivograms that would have

represented the “unexpected factor”.

29

4.3.2 Brand appeal analysis AD2

Fig. 4.3.2: analysis brand appeal for AD2

As can be seen from the graph above the AD2 has triggered attributes such as

Innovation and Concern for the environment, have scored the highest for

Achievement and Innovation with a total score of 603 business point. However the

mix of the other drivers has kept this position as the second most appealing among

the total population, after AD3.

4.3.3 Brand appeal analysis AD3

Fig. 4.3.3: brand appeal analysis for AD3

As can be seen from the graph above, the AD3 has triggered the most

appealing profile in general. The human driver that was triggered by this

perspective the most was Individualism, with an appeal score of 596 business points;

just a few points less that the Achievement and Innovation from AD2. Even though

Individualism was not part of the population’s main important personal values in life,

it scored high in appeal because it is perceived as highly unexpected. Also Play and

Fun, had a significant role in this perspective, because this was highly unexpected

and also part of the population personal value, two of the most important criteria for

increasing in brand appeal.

30

4.3.4 Brand position versus level of greenness

Following the theories of involvement derived from the literature, the author

analyzes possible relationships between level of greenness and brand appeal

generated by the three different positions. It was considered important to assess if

appeal for a certain brand position changes depending on the student’s level of

greenness. The researcher has not found a statistical relationship between the

variables, however interesting associations were found.

Fig. 4.3.4: brand appeal analysis for AD3

As can be seen from the table the majority of the students that felt into the low

greenness category are more likely to feel attracted by the AD3, however because

the sample for low green consumers is too small, this analysis only takes into

account the students with medium and high level of greenness. From the results, it

can be seen that among those who have scored medium green, the majority of them

have also scored higher appeal for AD2. On the other hand the students that have

highest green values, have scored higher for AD3.

31

5. DISCUSSION Results from the last analysis of brand position versus level of greenness were

the most unexpected from the whole study. According to the findings from the

literature regarding theories of involvement, consumers with a stronger green value

were found being more attracted by the perspectives AD1 and AD2, which have

adopted a more utilitarian type of advertising appeal.

The assumption was made considering the conventional beliefs held by green

marketers where consumers with strong green values, usually face high involvement

type of activities when considering green purchases. Because high involvement

purchases are more sensitive to advertising with utilitarian appeals, then the

research wanted to test the validity of these findings to see if green values are

identified against the fast food market.

This research rejected those assumptions because there was not such a

match in the results and approves on Coopers findings in relation to the strong

emotional relationship that people have with food. Drawing from the findings, AD3

profile was identified as the perspective with the best full-drive profile among the

other three proposed in the survey, leading the research to assume that green

brands based on a Symbolic and Personality Green Identity have greater appeal on

the target population.

As stressed by Cramer and Koene (2010), when managers develop brands

they need to make a conscious choice when targeting the human drives, however

“the choice does not have to be limited on a “central” drive but on a combination of

drives”, “...a brand with a full drive profile is more appealing than a brand with a

single focus on one drive” (see chapter 2.4).

In fact even though the human drive with the highest score among all adverts

was Achievement and Innovation with 603-business point triggered by the AD2, the

most interesting mix was triggered by the AD3 profile, thanks to the highest

combination score of drivers such Individualism, Play and Fun, Connected together,

Relax and Carefree and Idealism.

So combining the findings from the focus group and looking at the most

appealing human drivers that emerged from the survey, it can be argued that green

appeal is more of a social concept than something related to the green

characteristics of food, such being organic and using free range eggs. Although the

green attributes found in the adverts are not representative for all the other attributes

that can be related to a product – brand identity perspective, the literature have found

32

that those communicated in the adverts are the most common functional product

related attributes that are associated with the green food, such to be considered by

the researcher as representative of that brand identity.

If looking at each individual human drivers score, then this research has also

identified the most appealing motivations for adopting environmentally preferable

product service in the fast food market. The highest score was for Achievement and

Innovation, meaning that students are more willing to increase their appeal for green

when a fast food brand make them feel as they are achieving something in their life.

Rios et al (2007) suggested that consumers perceive green experiential

benefits contributing to their satisfaction for achieving “social welfare”. Furthermore

according to the paradoxical nature of consumer relationships with healthy food

suggested in the literature by Biltekoff (2010) consumers seek solutions to a health

problem through technology innovation, or health promotion, meaning that other

main motivations for students to adopt green products in fast food are probably

related to Health and Nutrition, as confirmed in the students most important things in

life profile (Q2), in which the health drivers scored as the highest.

Technology and Innovation are therefore important drivers that must be used

by managers to associate with green brand identities in order to make consumers

choices for green in the fast food industry, easier and better (consequence of high

brand appeal, Cramer and Koene, 2010). Furthermore the driver with the second

highest score was Individualism, which suggests that students are likely to feel in

tune with a green fast food, when it makes them feel they are doing something

unique and special.

Green brands are more likely to appeal to students when associated with

attributes that make them feel different and unique and allow them to express their

personality. As stated in the literature by Rios et al (2006) usually green identity

seekers feel satisfied when they meet expressive green benefits that match their

needs for being “cool” and “trendy”. So when consumers feel cool and trendy when

using the brand or by being exposed to the brand, appeal is higher.

33

6. CONCLUSION: IMPLICATIONS FOR MANAGERS

This research contributes to an understanding of the factors that influence

green brand appeal amongst fast food customers and it suggests a set of desirable

brand associations with ‘green’ that managers can use for creating and

communicating green brand identities with greater appeal for their audience.

In relation to the first objective, the research has found that consumers tend to

adopt preferable environmental products in the fast food market, because of the

health benefits they perceive from using green products, where green was

associated with functional attributes such as “free range” and “organic”.

Another main motivation for adopting green products in the fast food market

derived from the personal satisfaction of contributing to social welfare, often

perceived by consumers when acknowledging the organizational values and

programmes in relation to technology and innovation (Parker et al, 2007).

Furthermore, motivations for buying green also derive from the symbolic green

benefits delivered by a green brand, where ‘green’ is perceived as something unique

and as a means of self-expression.

However, the main desirable benefit that would increase appeal for an

environmentally preferable product service in the fast food market was been

identified by the sense of achievement and innovation that consumers perceive from

a green brand. Hence managers need to associate their green brands with

Innovation and Technology if they want to make green brands more appealing to

their target audience.

Green fast food restaurants should use the latest technology and deliver

innovative ideas if they want to capture the imagination of the market. I In some

cases, technology can also be representative of healthy products, as suggested by

the findings from Biltekoff (2010) on The paradox of food and health.

On the other hand in relation to the second objective, the results find that a

green brand using a perspective that is entirely focused on the organizational value

and its characteristics, may lack personality and uniqueness and these are important

factors for influencing brand appeal amongst the target population. In fact the

perspective that scored the highest in the online green brand appeal survey was the

personality one.

Results from the test of the three perspectives have shown that a well-

implemented green brand identity based on symbolic and personality green brand

34

attributes and benefits can lead to higher green brand appeal than organizational and

product brand identity perspectives.

However a key recommendation for managers is to use more than one

perspective at once, eventually merging the organizational and personality or

symbolic perspective to give consumers a mix of motivations, which according to

Cramer and Koene’s theories of brand appeal (2010) is likely to provoke a desirable

tension and therefore even higher green appeal.

There was a no statistical relationship between the level of greenness of the

population and the perception of brand appeal generated by the different position.

However population preferences for the symbolic perspective suggests that

consumers opting for green fast food are facing a low involvement type of purchase

and therefore ready for persuasive techniques and perspectives that goes further

than just stating the functionality of green attributes.

According to the findings in this research ‘green’ is ready to embrace a more

symbolic and personality perspective, at least within the fast food segment. Avoiding

green marketing myopia in the fast food market means marketers need to consider

green as something more social rather than functional. Mangers need to consider

how people want to feel when going green and target the motivations, needs and

aspirations of those people outside the green sphere.

People attracted to green fast food do not want to feel like ordinary people,

they like to feel unique and special. They do not want to be in a place that only

represents health conscious people or vegetarians. Green is much more than that.

People going for a green fast food want to identify themselves as being cool and

trendy and innovative. They value places that make them feel relaxed and happy.

Focusing exclusively on the health functional attributes may lead to green

marketing myopia. When targeting consumers with strong green values such as the

case of the target population in the survey, marketers need to focus on the

‘unexpected factor’ if they want to make green to spark. Green marketing managers

need to focus on the personal values of their target audience as suggested by

Ottman et al (2006).

6.1 Limitations

Although the research was carefully prepared, there are certain limitations that

need to be taken into account. This paper was an attempt to develop a new green

branding concept and to break through the abstract and indefinite concept of “green”.

The green brand appeal was only measured against factors such as positioning and

35

levels of involvement. Other factors that influence appeal such as price perceptions,

availability, and also awareness of the brand taken into analysis, were not assessed.

The perceptions and attitudes of the McDonalds brand held by consumers

before the test may have influenced the validity of the results. The graphics used by

the advertisements may have influenced the score of the drivograms, whereby

students may have assessed their preferences depending on the advert design,

instead of the perceptions of the green value derived by the position.

The online survey was distributed to people in different parts of the UK to

ensure a high response, however the conditions in which the respondents have

conducted the survey were unknown, so external factors could not be isolated.

However the research had to accept this limitation because of time restrictions and a

low response rate.

The sample comprised of UK students so the results are not indicative of the

wider population. Another major limitation was the fact that the advertisements were

not based on the same persuasive technique. Indeed, AD1 and AD2 adopted a more

utilitarian type of appeal whereas AD3 projected a symbolic image appeal. However

the persuasive techniques are usually chosen in relation to the different brand

perspectives.

Often product brand identity perspectives use a utilitarian appeal to inform their

audience about the functional benefits of the product, as in the case of the AD1 in the

current study. Assessing green appeal when the three identity perspectives are

communicated by the same persuasive technique, would overweight the concept of

this limitation.

Further research could emerge from this limitation. Would a green brand

positioned on the symbolic/personality - product identity perspective still generate

higher appeal than the other two perspectives – if adverts were using all the same

persuasive technique? Would a green brand based on a product brand perspective

deliver higher brand appeal if using transformational advertising when

communicating their green benefits?

36

7. REFERENCES

Bibliography

Aaker, D. et al. (2006). Marketing research. 9th edition. (USA): John Wiley & Sons

Aaker, D (2002). Building strong brand. (UK): Simon & Shuster

Bearden, W. et al (2010). Marketing Scales. Multi – Item Measures for Marketing and

Consumer Behavior Research. 3rd edition. (USA): Sage

Bradley, N. (2010). Marketing research. Tools and techniques. 2nd edition. (USA)

Oxford University Press.

Charter, M., Polonsky, J. (1999). Greener Marketing. Sheffield (UK): Greenleaf

Publishing Limited.

Kapferer, J. (2005). The new strategic brand management. Creating and sustaining

brand equity long term. 4th edition Bodmin (UK): MPG Books Ltd.

Kotler, P., (2000). Marketing Management Millennium Edition, 10th ed. [online] New

Jersey: Prentice-Hall. Available from: top-pdf.com. <http://top-pdf.com> [Accessed

15th November 2010].

Ritzer, G. (2001). Explorations in the Sociology of Consumption. Fast food, Credit

Cards and Casino. London (UK): Sage Publication.

Roberts, K. (2006). The lovemarks effect: winning in the consumer revolution.

(UK): PowerHouse Books.

Saunders, M. et al. (2009). Research methods for business students. 5th edition. Edinburgh Gate (UK): Pearson Education Limited.

37

Shiffman, G. et al (2008). Consumer behavior. A European outlook. Edinburgh Gate

(UK): Pearson Education Limited.

E-journal article accessed via a full text database

Biltekoff, C. (2010) Consumer response: the paradoxes of food and health. Annals of

the New York Academy of Sciences. 22 (1), 174-178. [online] Available from:

Emerald Management Extra <www.emeraldinsight.com> [Accesses 14th of March]

Chang, N. and Fong, C. (2010). Green product quality, green corporate image, green

customer satisfaction, and green customer loyalty. African Journal of Business

Management. 4 (13), 2836-2844. [online] Available from:

<www.academicjournals.org> [Accessed 18th of January]

Chen, S. (2010) The Drivers of Green Brand Equity: Green Brand Image, Green

Satisfaction, and Green Trust. Journal of Business Ethics. 93 (2), 307-319. [online]

Available from: Emerald Management Extra <www.emeraldinsight.com> [Accesses

14th of March]

Hartmann, P et al. (2005) Green branding effects on attitude: functional versus

emotional positioning strategies. Marketing Intelligence and planning 23. (1), 9-29.

[online] Available from: Emerald Management Extra <www.emeraldinsight.com>

[Accesses 14th of March]

Hartmann P. and Ibanez, V. (2009) Green advertising revisited – Conditioning virtual

nature experiences. International Journal of Advertising. 28 (4), 715-739. [online].

Available from: <www.warc.com> [Accessed 18th of January]

Maxwell, S. and Slater, R. (2003) Food Policy Old and New. Development Policy

Review. 21 (5), 23-24. [online] Available from: ODI Briefing Papers <www.odi.org.uk>

[Accessed 23rd of March]

Rios, F. et al (2006) Improving attitudes toward brands with environmental

associations: an experimental approach. Journal of Consumer Marketing. 23 (1), 26-

33. [online] Available from: Academic Journals <www.academicjournals.org>

[Accessed 18th of January]

38

Meenghan, T. (1995) The role of advertising in brand image development. Journal of

Product & Brand Management. 4 (4), 23-34. [online] Available from: Emerald Extra

<emeraldinsight.com> [Accessed 18th November 2010]

Peattie, A. and Crane, A. (2005) Green marketing: legend, myth, farces or prophesy?

8 (4), 357-370. [online] Available from: Emerald Management Extra

<www.emeraldinsight.com> [Accesses 17th of January]

Sirgy, J.M. and Lee, D., (1996). Setting social responsible marketing objectives. A

quality-of-life approach. European Journal of Marketing. 30 (5), 20-34. [online]

Available from: Emerald Extra <emeraldinsight.com> [Accessed 18th November

2010]

Sillanpää, M., (1998). The Body Shop Values. Report – Towards Integrated

Stakeholder Auditing. Journal of Business Ethics 17 (3), 1443-1456. [online]

Available from: Springer Link <www.springerlink.com> [Accessed 27th February]

E-journal article accessed via website on the open Internet

Bee, P., (2005) It's not what you do, it's what you wear. [online] Guardian.co.uk

Available from:

<http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2008/feb/19/thegear.petabee#history-link-box>

[Accessed 25th November 2010].

Cramer, K. and Koene, A. (2011) Brand positioning: Create brand appeal. [online]

Available from:

<http://www.brnd.com/Brand_positioning_Create_brand_appeal.pdf> [Accesses 14th

of March]

Cramer, K. and Koene, A. (2010). 23plusone. A scientific study of brand appeal.

[online] Available from: <http://issuu.com/br-nd/docs/23plusone> [Accesses 14th of

March]

Faulkner, Z. (2010) Can Fast-Food Companies Really Go Green? [online] Available

from: <http://www.divinecaroline.com/22355/71998-fast-food-companies-really-go-

green/print> [Accessed 28th of March]

39

Gordon, W. (2002) brand green: mainstream or forever niche? [online] Available

from: <http://www.greenlliance.org.uk/uploadedFiles/Publications/BrandGreen.pdf>

[Accessed 18th of January]

Kotler et al., (2005) The marketing Audit Comes of Age [online] Cambridge: Hamilton

Consultant Available from: <http://www.hamiltonco.com/features/hampub/SMR.html>

[Accessed 18th November]

Miller, C. et al (2011). Catching brand butterflies with reaction times. A new method

to measure brand appeal. [online] Available from:

<http://issuu.com/alexanderkoene/docs/artikel_reactietijdentaak> [Accesses 14th of

March]

Ottman, A. et all (2006) Avoiding Green marketing myopia: ways to improve appeal

for environmentally preferable products. 48 (5), 22-36. [online] Available from:

<www.greenmarketing.com> [Accessed 18th of January]

Parker, B. et al (2005). What it means to go green: consumer perceptions of green

brands and dimensions of “greenness”. Proceedings of the Conference of the

American Academy of Advertising [online] Available from: <www.aaasite.org>

[Accessed 18th of January]

Parrs C., Weinberg, I., (2010) The Why Before You Buy. [online] Available from:

<http://www.fastcompany.com/blog/alissa-walker/designerati/top-ten-worst-green-

brand-names> [Accessed 18th of January]

Pundit, T. (2010) ENN: Environmental News Network -- Know Your Environment.

[online] Available from: <http://www.enn.com/top_stories/article/40185/print>

[Accessed 20th of April]

40

8. APPENDIX Exhibit 1: Brand Identity Model

Exhibit 2: The drivograms

41

Exhibit 3: Consent form for the focus group

42

Exhibit 5: Topic guide focus group Topic guide for the focus group (Duration: approximately 35 minutes) Key questions

1. What are the perceptions and feelings about green? 2. What are the expectations for a “green” in the fast food restaurant? 3. What are the perceptions on green advertising?

1. Introduction

Thanking everyone for participating at the focus group. Explanation of the research study. 2. Opening

Participants introduce themselves, by telling their name, age and major interests. Drinks are provided and some snack. 3. Introductory question: What does green mean to you?

- 1) Green perceptions and feelings - What does the green brand concept evoke to you? - Is green just related to environmental issues? - Are there brands you can recall that you think are very green? Why? - 2) Fast food perceptions and feelings - Can you list three things you like the most about fast food and three things you like the least? - Do you mind about health when going for a fast food? - 3) Perceptions of green in the fast food sector - Do you think a fast food can be green? How? - Do you buy fast food that is environmentally friendly? - 4) Perception of green advertising. - How do you feel about the green advertising? - Do you remember any green advertising? 4. Third part – Stimulus

a) Provide candidates with the 24 cards representing the 24 human drives (the things people retain important in life).

- Discuss which cards would best describe a green fast food restaurant the best.

5. Closing – are there any questions that would like to be asked to the group?

43

Exhibit 6: Excerpt from the focus group discussion. Transcript focus group, conducted on the 10th of March, 2011.

M: Hi everyone, and welcome to my focus group. First of all - thank you for coming here today and to participate at my discussion group. My name is Matteo Fabbi and I am a final year marketing student. In this 35 minutes session I will ask you a few questions about green brands, and what green represent for you. The aim of my study is to improve the appeal of green brands in the fast food market, so I will really appreciate if you can just say whatever comes to your mind, because there is no right or wrong answers to this matter. Can you introduce yourself, and tell five seconds about yourself?

Everyone introduce themselves.

M: my first question today for you is: what does green mean to you?

G. Green is echo- friendly

R. Green means that something is recyclable and is good for the

environment.

S. It’s organic – fresh and sustainable.

T. It means awareness and being responsible.

M: - What feelings does the green brand concept evoke to you?

G. When I think of green brands I usually think that they are something good for

the environment somehow.

S. The whole point of going green is to keep our planet clean

T. I feel there is something more than just business stuff… I feel like that by

using green products I give something back to the Earth what has been

given to us for using the product. It is all a cycle.

M: - Is green just related to environmental issues?

R. Very often, but sometimes green also means that the product is better

than the competition. That’s why costs more, sometimes is considered

luxury.

S. Innovation and technology are often very related, big companies invest in

technologies for going green, that’s not too bad

T. What about Fair trade and animal welfare… are they considered green?

M - Yes, if you say so…

44

M - Are there brands you recall that you think are very green? Can you

tell me why if any?

S. The Body Shop. It has the whole green culture behind it….the products are

made with natural ingredients and fare trade.

R. Apple…. because is innovative and forward thinking.

T. Ikea, because they are caring and they are fare….they are Swedish!

M - So would you say that green is associated with technology or

country of origin?

S. Yes, but it is expensive when it is so.

T I just think that in Sweden everything is greener …they wouldn’t do

anything bad for the environment…

M: What are three things that you like the most about the fast food and

three things you dislike?

R. Is good for you – save time and money and you know it has always the

same “freshness”.

S. The food is heavy, it is usually associated with the multinationals and

sometimes the there are things on the TV and on the magazines, that do not

make you to go to the fast food for a while, then you go back though….

M: Like what? Can you state some?

S. ….well things like the ingredients that are usually not mentioned in the

advertising and the resources they use; but you can only read that type of

information through other sources, not from their advertising

T. I enjoy going to Starbucks, it’s one of those place you can go and never feel

alone, it makes me relax and I love the cheesecakes

G. I like going to the fast food because make me not have to think about

what to eat.

M. Do you mind about health when going for a fast food?

T. No, when going to McDonald, otherwise I’do go to a vegetarian place, fast

food is not really about health. It depends what are you looking for, but I

make sure I do not go very often; I know is bad for me.

R. Everyone goes to the fast food; it cannot be that bad and it does taste

good. I do care about health in fact I always get the Tropicana with the

menu instead of the Coke I think Coke is probably the worst of the

45

products for your health…much worst than the burgers, those are more

controlled.

M. Do you think a fast food can be green?

G. Everyone can be green, they can recycle and then if they really want to be

green they can even use organic products.

R. I was in the States last summer and I went to an organic fast food chain, it

was really good, but it’s not the same as going to the Burger King man...

M Why?

R. Well first of all it was for elders. I went for a couple of time because my

sister is vegetarian and they did some sort of veg burger, but in the end is

boring and it wasn’t open until late, it was just for a daily meal.

G. Organic is not the same as going to a fast food like Burger King or

McDonald; I think organic is more for girls.

M. How do you feel about green advertising?

R. I think they are too pushy sometimes; they want to say they are green for

everything. Everyone now wants to be green and those who can afford

more money to do green adverting can also say more about what they do.

G. I think that if companies do lots of green advertising is because they have

something to say, those who do less, is because they don’t do much.

M. Do you remember any green advertising?

T. BP is doing very well in making the brand look green; I think the big

companies do more, than the small one.

G. I liked the Heineken campaign about the recycling, where all the pictures

where from the fifties.

R. Prius, Toyota Prius, that was cool.

M - Now we can skip to the other part of the focus group. Take a look at

the cards and discuss which cards would best describe a green

fast food restaurant

M – Please now select five only related to the fast food and explain me

why?

TGRS. Health and Nutrition, Play and fun, Possess and Collect, Connected

Together, Relax and Carefree (fast food).

46

T. A fast food makes me think at Play and Fun, because it is a casual place,

where you can go and don’t mind about how to behave, how to eat, it’s a bit

like when you are a kid.

G. Connected together because since when I was a kid I used to go with my

friends and be at McDonald for hours! It was a gathering point for my

friends.

R. Relax and Carefree because you really don’t have to think even at the

menu, it is always the same. Health and Nutrition, because in the end is a

primary need for us to survive.

S. Possess and collect because the fast food represent modernity, the

modern and busy society, with the main value of wealth and

possession…I don’t know, that’s what it makes me think about.

T. Plus it saves me money, McNuggets for £3.

M - Please now select those which best represent green and tell me

why?

TGRS Health and Nutrition, Safe and Secure, Idealism, Loyal and Moral, Connected

together, Status, Individualism, Achievement and Innovation, Warm and

Caring (green).

G. Health and Nutrition that come to my mind, also security. Especially for

food, I guess is important to know where does the food come from and

what you are actually eating. In the end you are what you eat!

R. Individualism and uniqueness because sometimes green is trendy and it

tells that you are doing something like everyone else but in a different

way!

G. Innovation and technology because the most of the green initiatives come

from the development of innovation.

R. Loyal and Moral because, green means integrity and a green fast food is

good for the society as a whole, it’s a moral choice

47

Exhibit 7: AD1

48

Exhibit 8: AD1 – survey 2

49

Exhibit 9: AD2

50

Exhibit 10: AD2 – survey 2

51

Exhibit 11: AD3

Exhibit 12: AD3 – survey 2

52

Exhibit 13: The drivograms selection from the focus group.

Exhibit 14: question 8

Exhibit 15: question 9

53

Exhibit 16: Q3 – a) Exhibit 20: Q3 – e)

Exhibit 17: Q3 – b)

Exhibit 18: Q3 – c)

Exhibit 19: Q3 – d)

54

Exhibit 21: crosstab green value a) * Brand appeal

Exhibit 22: crosstab green value b) * Brand appeal

Exhibit 23: crosstab green value c) * Brand appeal

55

Exhibit 24: crosstab green value d) * Brand appeal

Exhibit 25: crosstab green value e) * Brand appeal

Exhibit 26: crosstab green sex* Brand appeal

56

Exhibit 27: crosstab green age* Brand appeal

57

The online survey

Exhibit 28: Screening question

Exhibit 29: Q.2 – Personal values

58

Exhibit 30: Q.3 – Level of “greenness”

Exhibit 31: Q.4 – Expectations

59

Exhibit 32: Q.5 – AD1

Exhibit 33: Q5 – AD1 survey 2

60

Exhibit 34: Q6 – AD2

Exhibit 34: Q6– AD2 survey 2

61

Exhibit 35: Q7 – AD3

Exhibit 35: Q5 – AD3 survey 2

62

Exhibit 36: Q.8 – Q.9 – Q.10 – Q11

Exhibit 37: The Brand identity model in the creation of brand appeal

Green brand Image 

  

1.  Personal values in life  

2.  Expecta6ons for “green” 

 

Green brand appeal  

 

1.  + unexpected drivers from category conformity 

2.  + personal values match 

3.  + simultaneously touch  (tot n. of drivers ) 

4.  + beDer touch  (tot score of drivers) 

 

` 

Green brand iden/ty  

63

Exhibit 37: The Brand identity model in the creation of brand appeal

64

65

66