1. D O A GREEABLE / PLEASANT BRANDS GENERATE MORE LOVE AND A FFECTIVE COMMITMENT ? A STUDY ON SEVEN GLOBAL BRANDS Imene Becheur, Wesford France Noel Albert, Wesford France Pierre Valette-Florence, I.A.E Grenoble, France 1

2. R ESEARCH CONTEXT Agreeableness has an impact on the feeling of love in an interpersonal context (White, Hendrick, Hendrick, 2004) Extraversion and agreeableness are the dimensions of the OCEAN model of brand personality most linked to feeling of love (Caralis and Haslam, 2004; Wiggins, 1979) Love is a mix of extroversion and agreeableness Schmitt and Buss (2000) Affection, one main love dimension is linked to agreeableness and devotion (Fehr and Broughton, 2001) 2

3. R ESEARCH OBJECTIVES Study the role of brand personality in creating strong brand relationships: Determine whether agreeableness, a brand personality dimension is an antecedent of brand love, and if brand love has an impact on emotional commitment to the brand. 3

4. T HEORETICAL FOUNDATIONS Based on interpersonal theories Triangular Love Theory from Sternberg (1986) Shimp et Madden (1988) Keh et al. (2007) Kamat et al. (2007) Colors of Love Theory from Lee (1977) revisited by Hendrick et Hendrick (1986) Whang et al. (2004) No reference to interpersonal theories Fournier (1998) Carroll et Ahuvia (2006) Albert (2009) 4

5. T HEORETICAL FOUNDATIONS Brand Love scale (Albert, 2009) Passion Idealization Dream Affection Pleasure Memory Intimacy Unicity 2 second order dimensions 6 first order dimensions 18 Items 5

6. Brand personality Pioneering work of Aaker (1997) Ambroise (2009) T HEORETICAL FOUNDATIONS 6 Introversion Agreeableness conviviality Seduction Creativity Consciousness Conscientious Sophistication Original Precious Fallacy Cheating Ascendant

7. H YPOTHESES & M ODEL 7 Agreeableness Brand personality Brand love Brand commitment H.2. The more the consumer feels in love with a brand, the more his affective commitment to it increases H1. The more a brand is agreeable, the more the consumer is in love with it

8. M ETHODOLOGY Sample: 210 people, including 141 women and 69 men, aged between 18 and 25 years Measures: Brand personality: Ambroise (2010) Brand love: Albert (2010) Affective commitment : Fullerton (2003) Brands: Seven global brands Coca Cola, Converse, Hello Kitty, Nina Ricci, Nutella, Playstation, and Starbucks (30 persons/brand) 8

9. PLS (Partial Least Squares) approach procedure of systematic Bootstrap (200 replications) Model adequacy with data: GoF (Goodness of Fit) index proposed by Tenenhaus and al. (2005) 0.995 for internal GoF and 0.872 for external GoF  Our model is satisfactory since GoF is close to 1 M ETHODOLOGY 9

10. R ESULTS Affective commitment EAF1, EAF2, EAF3, EAF4 Conviviality ATA, SYP, PLT Seduction CH, SEDC Creativity IMG, CRV Idealization Id1, Id2, Id3 Dream REV1, REV3 Pleasure PL1, PL2, PL3, PL4 Memory SO1, SO2, SO3 Intimacy IT1, IT2, IT3 Unicity UN1, UN2 Significant effect Non significant effect 10 Global model ++

11. R ESULTS Affective commitment EAF1, EAF2, EAF3, EAF4 Conviviality ATA, SYP, PLT Seduction CH, SEDC Creativity IMG, CRV Idealization Id1, Id2, Id3 Dream REV1, REV3 Pleasure PL1, PL2, PL3, PL4 Memory SO1, SO2, SO3 Intimacy IT1, IT2, IT3 Unicity UN1, UN2 Significant effect Non significant effect 11

12. R ESULTS Affective commitment EAF1, EAF2, EAF3, EAF4 Conviviality ATA, SYP, PLT S e duction CH, SEDC Cr e ativit y IMG, CRV Id e alization Id1, Id2, Id3 Dream REV1, REV3 Pleasure PL1, PL2, PL3, PL4 Memory SO1, SO2, SO3 Intimacy IT1, IT2, IT3 Unicity UN1, UN2 Significant effect Non significant effect 12

13. R ESULTS Affective commitment EAF1, EAF2, EAF3, EAF4 Conviviality ATA, SYP, PLT S e duction CH, SEDC Cr e ativit y IMG, CRV Id e alization Id1, Id2, Id3 Dream REV1, REV3 Pleasure PL1, PL2, PL3, PL4 Memory SO1, SO2, SO3 Intimacy IT1, IT2, IT3 Unicity UN1, UN2 Significant effect Non significant effect 13

14. R ESULTS Affective commitment EAF1, EAF2, EAF3, EAF4 Conviviality ATA, SYP, PLT S e duction CH, SEDC Cr e ativit y IMG, CRV Id e alization Id1, Id2, Id3 Dream REV1, REV3 Pleasure PL1, PL2, PL3, PL4 Memory SO1, SO2, SO3 Intimacy IT1, IT2, IT3 Unicity UN1, UN2 Significant effect Non significant effect 14

15. C ONTRIBUTIONS Results show links between the agreeableness dimension of personality, and all the love dimensions for a brand. These links differ from a brand to another depending on the brand characteristics (personality) In order to strengthen feelings of brand love among consumers, brands should communicate friendly characteristics (pleasant, attaching, funny, etc…) 15

16. L IMITATIONS & NEXT STEPS Our work focused on agreeable brands  Need to compare with brand relationships of exciting or sincere brands Use Aaker’s (1997) classification of brand personality (sincerity, excitement, competence, sophistication, Ruggedness) Collect more data on larger samples Study the effects of good or bad emotions on brand relationships 16

17. D O A GREEABLE / PLEASANT BRANDS GENERATE MORE LOVE AND A FFECTIVE COMMITMENT ? A STUDY ON SEVEN GLOBAL BRANDS Imene Becheur Noel Albert Pierre Valette-Florence 17

18. 18 Affective commitment EAF1, EAF2, EAF3, EAF4 Conviviality ATA, SYP, PLT Seduction CH, SEDC Creativity IMG, CRV Idealization Id1, Id2, Id3 Dream REV1, REV3 Pleasure PL1, PL2, PL3, PL4 Memory SO1, SO2, SO3 Intimacy IT1, IT2, IT3 Unicity UN1, UN2