The formation of branding co-creation in online brand communities: Roles of social capital theory, transaction cost theory, commitmenttrust theory, and relationship theory

Nội dung text: The formation of branding co-creation in online brand communities: Roles of social capital theory, transaction cost theory, commitmenttrust theory, and relationship theory

1. Hội nghị Sinh viờn nghiờn cứu khoa học năm học 2018-2019 THE FORMATION OF BRANDING CO-CREATION IN ONLINE BRAND COMMUNITIES: ROLES OF SOCIAL CAPITAL THEORY, TRANSACTION COST THEORY, COMMITMENT- TRUST THEORY, AND RELATIONSHIP THEORY GVHD: ThS. Chu My Giang SVTH: Nguyen Thi Y Nhi, Phan Thi Kim Chi, Phan Thi Khanh Ly, Nguyen Tan Tai, Huynh Quang Thang The University of Da Nang – University of Economics nhinguyen6006@gmail.com ABSTRACT The advent of social media provides a range of new means to access, connect and interact consumers. Brands have established their brand communities on social networking sites like Facebook to promote, communicate, and advertise their new market offerings and to encourage customer participation. Gradually, online brand communities (OBCs) are providing a platform for consumers to interact and jointly contribute to branding co-creation which is the process of customer engagement in value creation as online consumers are changed from inactive to active consumers. The successful management of branding co-creation in OBCs maximizes the lifetime value of target customer segments, strengthens the relationships between customers and brands and helps firms enhance the process of identifying customers' demands. By integrating the social capital theory, transaction cost theory, commitment-trust theory and relationship theory, the study aim is to explore the formation of branding co-creation through brand trust and brand loyalty based on the effect of value co-creation practices (i.e., social networking, community engagement, impression management and brand use) on the relationships of consumer-brand and consumer-other consumers in OBCs on Facebook. The data via surveys collected from members of The Coffee House community on Facebook. A total of 493 valid completed surveys have been used for data analysis. The outcomes of the data analysis indicate several findings: (1) value co-creation practices in OBC significantly influence consumer-brand and consumer-other consumers’ relationships; however, community engagement, a dimension of value co- creation practices, is an insignificant variable influence on consumer-brand relationship; (2) the relationships of consumer-brand and consumer-other consumers in OBC significantly affect brand trust and brand loyalty; (3) brand trust has a significant impact on brand loyalty; (4) brand trust and brand loyalty are the important variables influence branding co-creation. The findings of this research provide insights for both academics and practitioners regarding the potential implications, which act as advantageous sources for researchers and managers to comprehend how branding co-creation might be formed via brand trust and brand loyalty based on the effect of value co-creation practices on consumer-brand and consumer-other consumers’ relationships in OBCs on Facebook. Keywords: social capital theory, transaction cost theory, commitment-trust theory, relationship theory, online brand communities, social networking sites (SNSs), branding co-creation. 71
2. Trường Đại học Kinh tế - Đại học Đà Nẵng 1. Research Motivation Social media are interactive computer-mediated technologies that facilitate the creation and sharing of information, ideas, career interests and other forms of expression via virtual communities and networks. Brands have established the brand communities on social networking sites as Facebook to communicate, promote, and advertise their new offerings and to encourage customer participation (Zaglia, 2013). Jang et al. (2008) has indicated that an online brand community (OBC) as a specialized, non-geographically bound community, based upon social relationships among admirers of a brand in cyberspace. Consumers can interact actively with others and can share the personal anecdotes about the brand on OBCs (Hajli, Shanmugam, Papagiannidis, Zahay, & Richard, 2017). Gradually, OBCs are providing a platform to consumers to interact and jointly contribute to branding co-creation (Zwass, 2010). Recently, branding co- creation plays the important role in the fields of marketing, especially in branding (Hatch & Schultz, 2010). Branding co-creation is a process in which a company and its consumers jointly contribute to co-creating brand value (Prahalad and Ramaswamy, 2004). In the context of SNSs, previous studies have explored that both brand trust and brand loyalty significantly affect branding co-creation (S. Kamboj et al., 2018). According to N. Hajli et al. (2016), the increased loyalty towards the brand fosters branding co-creation activities by customers participating in an OBC. Social networking sites (SNSs) participation motivations derived from consumer demand and different motivations result in specific participation behaviors and selections; for instance, information, entertainment, and friendship can foster customers to use social media (Chae et al., 2015). In a sense, M. Laroche et al. (2012) also indicated value creation practices in OCBs lead to brand trust and brand loyalty. Therefore, given that the literature exploring and explaining cumulative impacts of value co-creation practices on the relationships of consumer-brand and consumer-other consumers leads to the formation of branding co- creation through brand trust and brand loyalty in OBCs using stimulus-organism-response framework (S-O- R) is almost scarce. To fill this research gap in the brand literature, this paper is one of the pioneering studies that explores the formation of branding co-creation via brand trust and brand loyalty based on the effect of value co-creation practices on the relationships of consumer-brand and consumer-other consumers in OBCs on Facebook. The discussion above emphasizes the formation of branding co-creation in OBCs on Facebook. However, there have been few attempts to address how branding co-creation be established in the context of SNSs. Taken perspectives of S-O-R framework, social capital theory, transaction cost theory, commitment- trust theory, relationship theory as the whole, the study proposes a process model to explore the formation of branding co-creation. 2. Theory Background And Hypothesis Development 2.1. Branding co-creation In SNSs’ platforms, customers can co-create value when they take part in the online brand community (Hajli et al., 2017). With the development of new technologies (web-based and mobile), online members’ in various online brand communities can communicate, co- create and share user-generated content using various platforms (Kietzmann et al., 2011). These platforms are generally utilized for branding co-creation in an online environment, as contrary to put together two distinct brands to make a unique and separate brand (Park et al., 1996). The constant utilization of web-based platforms has changed the branding process online because of information sharing on a rapid basis (Chordes, 2009). Customer involvement and their participation on social media platforms is an essential angle of branding co-creation (Hajli et al., 2017). Thus, branding co-creation is the process of customers’ engagement in value creation (Prahalad and Ramaswamy, 2004) as online customers are changed from passive to active consumers (Vargo and Lusch, 2004). The following section addresses the formation of branding co-creation through brand trust and brand loyalty based on the effect of value co-creation practices (i.e. social networking, community engagement, 72
3. Hội nghị Sinh viờn nghiờn cứu khoa học năm học 2018-2019 impression management and brand use) on the relationships of consumer-brand and consumer-other consumers in OBCs on Facebook. 2.2. Value co-creation practices on consumer-brand and consumer-other consumers’ relationships Fig. 1. Research model Various researches have indicated that value co-creation practices promote the relationship among members of a brand community, which make members closer together and improve member affective association to the brand, and become vital in their brand selection (Carlson, Suter, & Brown, 2008; Lemon, Rust, & Zeithaml, 2001; Zaglia, 2013). Additionally, value co-creation is defined that the process of collective value creation in a brand community is principally made by a set of practices: social networking, community engagement, impression management, and brand use. These practices include a variety of specific activities, such as welcoming, empathizing, milestoning, documenting, evangelizing, justifying, customizing, commoditizing and so on (Schau et al., 2009). Through these practices in brand communities, members obtain the continuous interaction and in-depth understanding of the brand, which aids the formation of a triad consisting of consumers, brand and other consumers (Muniz & O’Guinn, 2001). Social capital theory indicates that frequent interpersonal interactions would be propitious to establish and strengthen the social networks and trustworthy relationships, and enhance the togetherness of brand communities (Chang & Chuang, 2011; Lee, Kim, & Kim, 2012; Lee, Xiong, & Hu, 2012); thus promoting the identification with the brand (Algesheimer et al., 2005). Thus, the author elaborates more on these issues. H1. Social networking practices are related to consumer-brand relationship. H2. Social networking practices are related to consumer-other consumers’ relationship. H3. Community engagement practices are related to consumer-brand relationship. H4. Community engagement practices are related to consumer-other consumers’ relationship. H5. Impression management practices are related to consumer-brand relationship. H6. Impression management practices are related to consumer-other consumers’ relationship. H7. Brand use practices are related to consumer-brand relationship. H8. Brand use practices are related to consumer-other consumers’ relationship. 2.3. Consumer-brand relationship, consumer-other consumers and brand trust The term consumer-brand is defined as the relationship and participation with the brand in the brand communities (Muniz & O’Guinn, 2001). Brand trust is the willingness of the average consumer to rely on the ability of the brand to perform its stated function (Chaudhuri & Holbrook, 2001, p. 82). According to transaction cost theory, special relationship investment cannot be reassigned effectively to different connections; that is, they make a lock- in circumstance for the consumers (Burnham, Frels, and Mahajan, 2003). Accordingly, customer participation in a community may support in the exchange of information, contribute to building long-term relationship of customer-brand, and thusly lead to brand trust formation (Flaviỏn, Guinalớu, & Gurrea, 2006). For example, a customer in the OBC claims that his brand never disappoints him because of its highest quality. 73
4. Trường Đại học Kinh tế - Đại học Đà Nẵng The term consumer-other consumers are defined as the relationship and participation with other members in the brand communities (Muniz & O’Guinn, 2001). Through online brand communities, consumers build up enduring connections with the components of brand community and draw benefits from the enduring communications through value co-creation practices, which make them trust and love the brand (Zhou, Zhang, and Su, 2012; Stokburger-Sauer, 2010). OBCs also offer trusted, special and immediate connections with other members and can contribute to creating brand trust from others’ experiences via consumer-other consumers relationship (Drury, 2008). For instance, when one consumer has met wonderful people in the OBC, he will rely on the brand. Thus, this study proposes the following hypothesis: H9. Consumers’ relationships with the brand are related to brand trust. H11. Consumers’ relationships with other consumers are related to brand trust. 2.4. Consumer-brand relationship, consumer-other consumers and brand loyalty Brand loyalty is defined as a consumer’s preference to purchase a solitary brand name in a product class; it is an outcome of the perceived quality of the brand and not its price (Chaudri, 1999). The social connections established in a brand community can help customers come over barriers and keep up brand loyalty (Algesheimer, Dholakia, & Herrmann, 2005; McAlexander et al., 2002). Brand researchers agree that assembling and improving brand communities and consumer experiences within the framework of brand communities play a significant role in making consumers loyal to the brand (Brodie, Ilic, Juric, & Hollebeek, 2013; Jang, Olfman, Ko, Koh, & Kim, 2008; McAlexander et al., 2002; Muniz & O’Guinn, 2001). Further, the work of N. Luo et al., (2015) highlighted that consumer - brand relationship positively affected brand loyalty. For example, a customer in the OBC intends to keep purchasing the products of a brand because of its highest quality. A consumer’s continuous positive contact with a firm’s brand facilitates them to be more confident that their expectation level will be always met or beaten by a particular brand (Deighton, 1992). Consumer- other consumers' relationship established in an online brand community can support customers come over barriers and maintain brand loyalty (Algesheimer, Dholakia, & Herrmann, 2005; McAlexander et al., 2002; N. Luo et al., 2015). Accordingly, when a consumer feels a sense of kinship with other OBC members, he intends to keep purchasing the products of this brand. Consequently, the following hypothesis is proposed: H10. Consumers’ relationships with the brand are related to brand loyalty. H12. Consumers’ relationships with other consumers are related to brand loyalty. 2.5. Brand trust and brand loyalty Brand trust is the willingness of the average consumer to rely on the ability of the brand to perform its stated function (Chaudhuri & Holbrook, 2001, p. 82). As indicated by Morgan and Hunt (1994), trust can be characterized as when one party has confidence in an exchange partner’s reliability and integrity. Moorman, Zaltman, and Deshpande (1992) and Doney and Cannon (1997) both additionally stress that the notion of trust is just related to circumstances of uncertainty (e.g., when greater versus lesser contrasts among brands happen). According to commitment – trust theory, many researchers have considered trust as the vital antecedent of loyalty (Casalú et al., 2007) and a main factor in building customers’ relationships (Morgan and Hunt, 1994). Jarvenpaa and Staples (2000) featured the association among trust and loyalty and recommended that a high degree of customers’ trust results in buy intentions. Similarly, various researchers indicate that brand loyalty is related to brand trust (Casalú et al., 2007). Indeed, Lau and Lee (1999) explored relationship between trust and loyalty and found a critical impact. In the same way, Chaudhuri and Holbrook (2001) also gives support to uncover a positive connection among between trust and loyalty. For example, if a customer relies on the brand, he intends to keep purchasing the products of this brand. Based on all the above, the authors hypothesize: H13. Brand trust in online brand community is related to brand loyalty. 74
5. Hội nghị Sinh viờn nghiờn cứu khoa học năm học 2018-2019 2.6. Brand trust, Brand loyalty and branding co-creation Branding co-creation is the process of customer engagement in value creation (Prahalad and Ramaswamy, 2004) as online customers are changed from passive to active consumers (Vargo and Lusch, 2004). Apparently, to activate co-creation behaviour, the customer must be highly engaged with the brand and then the highly engaged customer has a strong attitude and a high level of brand trust (Bowden, 2009). Accordingly, customers trust and use the brand fanpages or groups on social media to collect product-related information and give their recommendations as comments, and then they will co-create the brand (Hajli et al., 2017). S. Kamboj et al. (2018) also highlighted that building superior trust among customers towards their brands, which might, in turn, result in branding co-creation by customers. For example, when a customer relies on the brand, he is willing to provide his experiences and suggestions when his friends on Facebook want his advice on buying something from the brand in the online brand community. In addition, from the perspective of relationship theory, the work of Fournier (1998) has affirmed that a high-quality active connection with the customer would expand the likelihood of more customer interactions which lead to the esta- blishing of brand loyalty, and then consumers with high loyalty are sure to contribute towards a brand and develop stability with the brand. Furthermore, S. Kamboj et al. (2018) confirmed the positive and significant impact brand loyalty on branding co-creation. For example, a consumer intends to keep purchasing the products of the brand, and then he is willing to provide his experiences and suggestions when his friends on Facebook want his advice on buying something from the brand in the OBC. Accordingly, the following hypotheses are proposed: H14. Brand trust in online brand community is related to branding co-creation. H15. Brand loyalty in online brand community is related to branding co-creation. 3. Research Methodolody 3.1. Procedure Step 1: Qualitative research Qualitative research is conducted by referring to secondary sources through textbooks, scientific journals on the Internet, and through the academic advisor to acquire suitable information and model for research environment, and to establish a suitable scale. In particular, the authors had 05 in-depth interviews with 3 groups: 1) The Coffee House Manager, 2) Employees, 3) Customers at The Coffee House store in Da Nang. Questions regarding the scale have been integrated into the content of the conversations. However, almost respondents said that the concept of branding co - creation is too new to understand. Thus, it is essential to provide more explanations on branding co - creation. In addition, the authors also conducted pre- tests to adjust words that are easy to understand and suitable for respondents. Step 2: Pre – test Pre–test purpose is to exam the appropriateness of the scale with the actual market, and check the questionnaire, correct the sentence errors or the words that are too complex to understand, and lead to better survey results in formal research. Pre–test is conducted with 5 experts who are scholars in Marketing field or lecturers of Faculty of Marketing in University of Economics – The Danang University, and 30 respondents who are customers using products or services at TCH store in Da Nang city. This paper combined convenience sampling method and simple random sampling method to select elements for representative sample. The results obtained from the scale test are satisfactory. The final version of the questionnaire was used for survey after a slight change in design and statement of purpose. Step 3: Quantitative research The research team conducted a survey of 800 questionnaires within 3 months aimed at surveying users participating in The Coffee House community on Facebook. Data is encrypted and analyzed using SPSS 20.0 and Smart PLS 3.0. 75
6. Trường Đại học Kinh tế - Đại học Đà Nẵng 3.2. Measures All scale items were measured by using a five–point Likert scale ranging from one (“strongly disagree”) to five (“strongly agree”). Measurement items of nine constructs proposed in the research framework. Measurement items were adapted from the literature. This study used one-way translation from English into Vietnamese version and Vietnamese version also verified the conceptual rather than the literal equivalence between these versions. The items of social networking (five scale items), community engagement (four scale items), impression management (three scale items) and brand use practices (three scale items) were constructed from the definition given by Schau et al. (2009) and the scales developed by N. Luo et al. (2015). Consumer-brand (four scale items) and consumer-other consumers’ relationships (three scale items) came from McAlexander et al. (2002) and Habibi, Laroche, and Richard (2014), brand trust from Laroche et al. (2012, 2013) with three scale items, brand loyalty from N. Luo et al. (2015) with three scale items, and branding co - creation from Wang and Hajli (2014) with three items. 4. Results The data analysis was performed using Smart Partial Least Squares (PLS) version 3.0 software. Compared to the covariance-based approach that could be analyzed by AMOS, partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) is less sensitive to the normal distribution assumption. In addition, it is more suitable to evaluate estimated parameters in more complicated multivariate relationships between exogenous and endogenous variables (Ringle et al., 2014). All scales were measured reflectively. The PLS approach to structural modeling includes two stages, measurement model testing, and structural model testing. The former tests the reliability and validity of the research model, whereas the latter examines the significance of the path coefficient between the variables and evaluates the predictive ability of the proposed model. Testing the measurement model Before testing structural equation modeling to analyze structural relationships between measured variables and latent constructs, the measurement model was tested by using PLS to examine construct reliability, convergent validity, and discriminant validity of each of the variables included in the proposed model. 76
7. Hội nghị Sinh viờn nghiờn cứu khoa học năm học 2018-2019 4.1. Constructs reliability The scale reliability was measured by using Cronbach’s alpha and composite reliability (CR). Cronbach’s alpha minimum acceptance value is 0.6 and CR is 0.7 (Nunnally, 1987; Peterson, 1994; Slater, 1995). In this research, the Cronbach’s alpha was valued from 0.673 to 0.86, the CRs was valued from 0.804 to 0.905, so the scale reliability was supported. 4.2. Convergent validity The convergent validity was assessed using two criteria. First, the item loadings on their corresponding constructs meet the acceptable standard value of 0.7 (Hair, Black, & Babin, 2006). Therefore, item CE4 was removed from the scale. Other items meet the required standards (table 3). Second, the average variance extracted (AVE) of all constructs exceed the threshold of 0.5 (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). In this research, the AVEs was valued between 0.509 – 0.758 (table 2). These results indicate convergent validity was established. 4.3. Discriminant validity Discriminant validity is considered to be achieved when the square root of the AVE is larger than its inter construct correlation coefficients (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). Table 6 shows that all constructs the values of square root of AVE are above the values of its inter-construct correlations. Therefore, the discriminant validity was established. In conclusion, both reliability and validity were confirmed in measurement model. 5. Discussion The findings and interpretations based on the empirical analysis are discussed below 77
8. Trường Đại học Kinh tế - Đại học Đà Nẵng FINDING 1: Value co-creation practices including social networking, community engagement, impression management, brand use are found to have significant effects on consumer-brand and consumer- other consumers relationships This paper found that value co-creation practices (i.e., social networking, community engagement, impression management, brand use) in OBCs on Facebook significantly affected consumer-brand and consumer-other consumers relationships. This result might be explained by previous researches which highlighted that value co-creation practices provide uninterrupted interaction and deep comprehension of brand via OBCs, and thusly brings about the formation of consumer-brand and consumer-other consumer relationships (Muniz & O’Guinn, 2001). Among four dimensions, social networking has the most significant effect on consumer-brand relationship (β = 0.701, p= 0.05). This finding is inconsistent with the prior study of Nuan Luo et al. (2015) which stated that community engagement has a significant and positive effect on the consumer-brand relationship. FINDING 2: Consumer-brand and consumer-other consumers relationships have significant effects on brand trust and brand loyalty This study discovered the effect of consumer-brand and consumer-other consumers relationship on brand trust and brand loyalty in OBCs on Facebook. According to Flaviỏn, Guinalớu, & Gurrea (2006), consumers' participation in an OBC may support the exchange of information and enhance the relationships of customer-brand and consumer-other consumers in turn leads to brand trust. Furthermore, customers participate in OBCs are also frequently self- motivated and enthusiastic in exchanging, sharing and discussing ideas of developing or modifying products and services, which play an important role in strengthening brand loyalty (Anderson & Weitz, 1992). Thus, the triad comprising of consumer-brand-other consumers contribute significantly towards brand trust and brand loyalty. This study indicated that the effect of consumer-brand relationship on brand trust (β= 0.468, p<0.01) and that of consumer-other consumers relationship (β=0.418, p<0.01) are equivalent. Thus, brand trust is explained by the relationship of consumer- brand and consumer-other consumers similarly. The coefficient on the path from consumer-brand relations to brand loyalty is 0.18 (p<0.01) which is less helpful to explain brand loyalty than consumer-other consumers relationship (β=0.347, p<0.01). The effect of consumer-brand relationship and consumer-other consumers relationship on brand loyalty is consistent with the prior study of Nuan Luo et al. (2015). FINDING 3: Brand trust has significant effects on brand loyalty Another finding of this search is that brand trust has significant effects on brand loyalty. According to Ng, 2013; S. Kamboj et al., (2018), brand trust in OBCs also a special key to maintain and enhance brand loyalty in OBCs. The work of Fournier (1998) has affirmed that a high-quality active connection with the customer would expand the likelihood of more customer interactions which lead to the establishing of brand loyalty, and then consumers with high loyalty are sure to contribute towards a brand and develop stability with the brand from the perspective of relationship theory. The coefficient on the path from brand trust to brand loyalty is 0.468 (p<0.01). The result shows that social brand trust is helpful for establishing brand loyalty. This finding is consistent with the work of S. Kamboj et al. (2018). FINDING 4: Brand trust and brand loyalty are significant variables affect branding co-creation The final finding is that both brand trust and brand loyalty significantly influence branding co- creation. Brand trust is a precondition of branding co-creation (Abela and Murphy, 2008; S. Kamboj et al, 2018) and brand loyalty also leads to branding co-creation in OBCs (Pentina, Gammoh, Zhang, & Mallin, 2013; S. Kamboj et al., 2018). Brand trust is a factor which has significant impact on branding co- creation with β=0.461 (p<0.01) while the coefficient on the path from brand loyalty to branding co-creation is 0.361 78
9. Hội nghị Sinh viờn nghiờn cứu khoa học năm học 2018-2019 (p<0.01). Thus, brand trust is more helpful to explain branding co-creation than brand loyalty. This finding is consistent with the study of Shampy Kamboj et al. (2018) that indicated the relationship between brand trust, brand loyalty and branding co-creation in brand communities based on social networking sites (SNSs). 6. Conclusion This research focused on exploring the formation of branding co-creation through brand trust and brand loyalty based on the effect of value co-creation practices (i.e., social networking, community engagement, impression management, and brand use) on the relationships of consumer-brand and consumer- other consumers in The Coffee House community (TCHC) on Facebook. The results of this research describe the average daily time spent on Facebook of TCHC’s members is 3 hours or more (32.7%). Most respondents have more than 3 years on Facebook using experience (86.6%). In addition, there are 70.4% respondents who have ever followed, liked or participated in online brand communities. The average daily time of the TCHC’s members spent on participating in activities of online brand communities is 3 hours or more (32.7%). The results find that TCHC on Facebook are very popular among young people and providing opportunities for exploring the formation of branding co-creation in TCHC on Facebook. Branding co-creation is the process of customer engagement in value creation (Prahalad and Ramaswamy, 2004) as online customers are changed from passive to active consumers (Vargo and Lusch, 2004). Thus, the successful management of brand co-creation in TCHC maximizes the lifetime value of desirable customer segments, strengthens the relationships between customers and brands and helps firms improve the process of identifying customers' needs and wants. By integrating the social capital theory, transaction cost theory, commitment-trust theory and relationship theory, the study explored the formation of branding co-creation through brand trust and brand loyalty based on the effect of value co-creation practices (i.e., social networking, community engagement, impression management and brand use) on the relationships of consumer-brand and consumer-other consumers in TCHC on Facebook. By using Smart PLS 3.0 the findings indicated that consumer-brand and consumer-other consumers’ relationships explain 70.3% of the variance in brand trust and 55.5% of the variance in brand loyalty. Accordingly, the effects of value practices on consumer-other consumers’ relationships which are indirect determinants significantly contributed to branding co-creation via direct determinants (brand trust and brand loyalty). This study's findings enrich the literature of online brand community on social networking sites, especially on Facebook. On the other hand, this paper highlighted that community engagement practices have an insignificant impact on consumer -brand relationship because the P value of the community engagement for the consumer-brand relationship is 0.123. There are some explanations for this finding such as the members in TCHC on Facebook may neither benefit from following the community’s rules nor get motivated to participate in the activities. For example, each customer has his own member card or TCH mobile application which can help him acquire The Coffee House products' information and company's programs without regularly participating in TCHC's activities. 6.1. Research implications This study proposes the following research implications. Firstly, this paper considered a multidisciplinary perspective with various theories from IT (social media, social networking sites, Facebook), marketing (branding, relationship marketing), and consumer behavior (co-creation). Thus, by applying multiple perspectives, this research assisted in setting up a conceptual background for the concept branding co-creation via Facebook with an S-O-R framework. Secondly, this study has explored the formation of branding co-creation through brand trust and brand loyalty based on the effect of value co-creation practices (i.e., social networking, community engagement, impression management, and brand use) on the relationships of consumer-brand and consumer-other consumers in OBCs on Facebook. Each of value co-creation practices positively influences consumer-brand and consumer-other consumers relationships. The relationships of consumer-brand and consumer-other 79
10. Trường Đại học Kinh tế - Đại học Đà Nẵng consumers also have strong positive impacts on brand trust and brand loyalty, and then lead to branding co- creation. Thirdly, given that the literature exploring and explaining cumulative impacts of value co-creation practices on the relationships of consumer-brand and consumer-other consumers leads to the formation of branding co-creation through brand trust and brand loyalty in OBCs using stimulus-organism-response framework (S-O-R) is almost scarce, present research adds to the extant literature by proposing and testing a theoretical model to explore the formation of branding co-creation through brand trust and brand loyalty based on the effect of value co-creation practices (i.e., social networking, community engagement, impression management, and brand use) on the relationships of consumer-brand and consumer-other consumers in OBCs on Facebook. Finally, with the emerging data on countries such as Vietnam, this study verifies the relationships of consumer-brand and consumer-other consumers with the latest viewpoints, such as branding co-creation, and Facebook enhances the usage of these concepts across cultures. 6.2. Managerial implications Based on our findings, this study offers the following practical suggestions with aims to exploring the formation of branding co-creation in TCHC on SNSs (Facebook) via a triad relationship comprising of consumer-brand-other consumers and value co-creation practices. Firstly, both brand trust and brand loyalty directly affect branding co-creation. Therein, the effect of brand trust is higher than that of brand loyalty. Brand trust also has a positive significant impact on brand loyalty. Therefore, firms should live up to consumers’ expectations through positive experiences with products or services over time and make them rely on brand. As for The Coffee House (TCH), managers should focus on building brand trust that refers to the willingness of the average consumer to rely on the ability of the brand to perform its stated function (Chaudhuri & Holbrook, 2001, p. 82). Thanks to realizing the change in the way of enjoying Vietnamese coffee: going to drink coffee is not only to enjoy coffee but also to meet and chat with friends, enjoy the space experience, TCH has chosen quality services make their difference, build brand trust. Quality of service at TCH is reflected through the optimization of customer experience, customer-centered, expressed through: People & Physical Evidence: The space of TCH is designed as a home. Promotion: Content of TCH always takes the story of the customer, instead of placing attention on the product. Price: The given price strategy of TCH based on placing yourself in the role of the customers. Product: Besides coffee products, the brand also develops a range of products such as milk tea, ice-blended, etc. That gives many alternatives for customers when coming to TCH, which contributes greatly to retain consumers. Place: Not only did it make a mark through the dense appearance in big cities, the brand also earned points by choosing a place that is very suitable for the target audience. The stores of TCH are always located in easy-to-find locations, easy to park, the central facades of the districts. Secondly, indirect determinants of value co-creation practices including social networking, community engagement, impression management, and brand use have substantial impacts on branding co-creation. Hence, OBC managers on SNSs can assist the company in understanding how importantly value co-creation practices influence users’ social media participation and what context is important in online brand communities. The managers should focus on creating, enhancing, and sustaining ties among online brand community members by welcoming, empathizing, and governing. They should foster interaction and communication among consumers by encouraging them to share photos or videos of their positive experience related to the firms’ offerings on social media. Additionally, they should keep in touch with consumers by posting interesting messages or valuable suggestions in the online community. OBC managers on SNSs also should bring benefits (e.g. greetings, awards, vouchers, coupons, etc.) to consumers when they follow online community’s rules including using words, sharing illegal information, spam, etc. With The Coffee House, storytelling is chosen 80
11. Hội nghị Sinh viờn nghiờn cứu khoa học năm học 2018-2019 as a key point to create, enhance, and sustain ties among online brand community members. TCH not only share stories related to humans of TCH, way to make a cup of coffee, but also consumers’ experience with products. 6.3. Limitations and future research Despite these above contributions, the authors acknowledge the limitations of this research and accordingly propose new avenues for research. Firstly, this study may not be representative of all online brand communities developed on the social networking sites because of the massive numbers of OBCs. The Coffee House community on Facebook is only one of the most popular social networking sites. Thus, it would be a smart thought for future studies to analyze the distinctive attributes of other OBCs founded on Facebook, Wechat, Twitter, Reddit, or other social networking sites. Secondly, the potential respondents are members of The Coffee House community. Thus, the elements of this study's sample may not be representative for the larger population. Future studies should conduct with adequate and appropriate sample due to OBCs are rapidly increasing in quantity. In addition, future researches should expand the scope of the survey and diversify the survey form to have a richer and more diverse source of data about branding co-creation. Thirdly, branding co-creation is still a new concept in Vietnam which leads to the lack of previous studies on the topic of branding co- creation. Additionally, few Vietnamese firms have succeeded in branding co-creation. It is essential for many companies in Vietnam to develop a completely new research typology in the future. Discovering a limitation can be considered as an important opportunity to identify new gaps in the prior literature and to present the need for further development in the area of study. Finally, another avenue for future research is to explore the dynamics of OBCs. For example, the results of value co-creation practices change over time (Schau et al., 2009). Thus, longitudinal research will facilitates researchers to comprehend the changes in the OBCs and support them to compare the findings at different times in the future. REFERENCES [1] Abela, J. R., & Hankin, B. L. (Eds.). (2008). Handbook of depression in children and adolescents. Guilford Press. [2] Algesheimer, R., Dholakia, U. M., & Herrmann, A. (2005). The social influence of brand community: Evidence from European car clubs. Journal of marketing, 69(3), 19-34. [3] Anderson, E., & Weitz, B. (1992). The use of pledges to build and sustain commitment in distribution channels. Journal of marketing research, 29(1), 18-34. [4] Bowden, J. L. H. (2009). The process of customer engagement: a conceptual framework. Journal of marketing theory and practice, 17(1), 63-74. [5] Brodie, R. J., Ilic, A., Juric, B., & Hollebeek, L. (2013). Consumer engagement in a virtual brand community: An exploratory analysis. Journal of business research, 66(1), 105-114. [6] Burnham, T. A., Frels, J. K., & Mahajan, V. (2003). Consumer switching costs: a typology, antecedents, and consequences. Journal of the Academy of marketing Science, 31(2), 109-126. [7] Casalú, L., Flaviỏn, C., & Guinalớu, M. (2007). The impact of participation in virtual brand communities on consumer trust and loyalty: The case of free software. Online information review, 31(6), 775-792. [8] Chae et al., 2015). The affective and cognitive impacts of perceived touch on online customers' intention to return in the web-based eCRM environment. Journal of Electronic Commerce in Organizations (JECO), 5(1), 69-91. [9] Chang, H. H., & Chuang, S. S. (2011). Social capital and individual motivations on knowledge sharing: 81
12. Trường Đại học Kinh tế - Đại học Đà Nẵng Participant involvement as a moderator. Information & management, 48(1), 9-18. [10] Chaudhuri, A., & Holbrook, M. B. (2001). The chain of effects from brand trust and brand affect to brand performance: the role of brand loyalty. Journal of marketing, 65(2), 81-93. [11] Chordes, Lachniet, J., Afanasev, A., Arenhửvel, H., Brooks, W. K., Gilfoyle, G. P.,Higinbotham, D., & Adhikari, [12] Deighton, J. (1992). The consumption of performance. Journal of consumer research, 19(3), 362-372. [13] Doney, P. M., & Cannon, J. P. (1997). An examination of the nature of trust in buyer–seller relationships. Journal of marketing, 61(2), 35-51. [14] Drury, Crawley, D. B., Hand, J. W., Kummert, M., & Griffith, B. T. (2008). Contrasting the capabilities of building energy performance simulation programs. Building and environment, 43(4), 661-673. [15] Flaviỏn, C., Guinalớu, M., & Gurrea, R. (2006). The role played by perceived usability, satisfaction and consumer trust on website loyalty. Information & Management, 43(1), 1-14. [16] Fornell, C. & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of marketing research, 39-50. [17] Fournier, S. (1998). Consumers and their brands: Developing relationship theory in consumer research. Journal of consumer research, 24(4), 343-373. [18] Gan, L., Shang, S., Yuen, C. W. M., Jiang, S. X., & Luo, N. M. (2015). Facile preparation of graphene nanoribbon filled silicone rubber nanocomposite with improved thermal and mechanical properties. Composites Part B: Engineering, 69, 237-242. [19] Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2006). Multivariate data analysis 6th Edition. Pearson Prentice Hall. New Jersey. Humans: Critique and reformulation. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 87, 49-74. [20] Hajli, N., Shanmugam, M., Papagiannidis, S., Zahay, D., & Richard, M. O. (2017). Branding co- creation with members of online brand communities. Journal of Business Research, 70, 136-144. [21] Hatch & Schultz, M. (2010). Toward a theory of brand co-creation with implications for brand governance. Journal of Brand Management, 17(8), 590-604. [22] James, Gareth; Witten, Daniela; Hastie, Trevor; Tibshirani, Robert (2017). An Introduction to Statistical Learning (8th Ed.). Springer Science+Business Media New York. [23] Jarvenpaa, S. L., & Staples, D. S. (2000). The use of collaborative electronic media for information sharing: an exploratory study of determinants. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 9(2-3), 129-154. [24] Kietzmann, J. H., Hermkens, K., McCarthy, I. P., & Silvestre, B. S. (2011). Social media? Get serious! Understanding the functional building blocks of social media. Business horizons, 54(3), 241-251. [25] Laroche, M., Habibi, M. R., Richard, M. O., & Sankaranarayanan, R. (2012). The effects of social media based brand communities on brand community markers, value creation practices, and brand trust and brand loyalty. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(5), 1755-1767. [26] Lau, Lee, Nah, F. F. H., J. L. S., & Kuang, J. (2001). Critical factors for successful implementation of enterprise systems. Business process management journal, 7(3), 285-296. [27] Lee, W. Xiong, L., & Hu, C. (2012). The effect of Facebook users’ arousal and valence on intention to go to the festival: Applying an extension of the technology acceptance model. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 31(3), 819-827. [28] Luo, N., Zhang, M., & Liu, W. (2015). The effects of value co-creation practices on building harmonious brand community and achieving brand loyalty on social media in China. Computers in Human Behavior, 48, 492-499. [29] Moorman, C., Zaltman, G., & Deshpande, R. (1992). Relationships between providers and users of 82
13. Hội nghị Sinh viờn nghiờn cứu khoa học năm học 2018-2019 market research: the dynamics of trust within and between organizations. Journal of marketing research, 29(3), 314-328. [30] Morgan, R. M., & Hunt, S. D. (1994). The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing. Journal of marketing, 58(3), 20-38. [31] Muniz, A. M., & O'guinn, T. C. (2001). Brand community. Journal of consumer research, 27(4), 412- 432. [32] Nunnally, S. W. (1987) Construction Methods and Management. Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, N.J. [33] Park, C. L. (1998). Stress‐related growth and thriving through coping: The roles of personality and cognitive processes. Journal of social issues, 54(2), 267-277. [34] Peterson, R. A. (1994). A meta-analysis of Cronbach’s coefficient alpha. Journal of Consumer Research, 21, 381 [35] S. Kamboj, Sarmah, B., Gupta, S., & Dwivedi, Y. (2018). Examining branding co-creation in brand communities on social media: Applying the paradigm of Stimulus-Organism- Response. International Journal of Information Management, 39, 169-185. 83