Analysis of Brand Personality Components in Higher Education with Emphasis on Technology

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 PhD Candidate of Educational Administration, Department of Educational Sciences, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran. Tel: +98-9134125740, Email: m_m2017@yahoo.com

2 Associate Professor, Department of Educational Sciences, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran. Tel: +98-9131268471, Email: b_shahtalebi2005@yahoo.com

3 Department of Educational Sciences, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran

10.5812/ijvlms.88743

Abstract

Background: Concerning increased competition among higher education institutions, there is a need for a proper lever such as brand personality. On the other hand, to maintain the sustainable advantageous competition, it is recommended to consider and use information and communication technology in the brand. Objectives: The present study aimed to provide a brand personality model in higher education with emphasis on technology in 2017 - 2018. Methods: Brand personality themes in higher education in the first (qualitative) phase of this study were identified using a thematic analysis. The statistical population was all articles and books listed on international databases in the field of “manager’s competencies in the future”, which were published between 1997 and 2017. In total, 69 articles and books were chosen. In the second (quantitative) phase of the study, 32 comprehensive universities with 10,840 faculty members were used as the statistical population. Then, using Kerjesian and Morgan tables, 373 faculty members were chosen using non-random convenience sampling as the sample. For analysis of the data, a confirmatory factor analysis method and Smart PLS software were used. Results: In this study, 10 organizing themes and 30 basic themes were identified. A 123-item researcher-made questionnaire was developed based on the identified themes. The reliability of the questionnaire was confirmed using Cornbrash’s alpha of higher than 0.80. The high reliability showed high internal correlations between basic themes. Also, based on the results of factor analysis for validating the model, the theme of information technology user with a factor of 0.72 had a high explanatory effect. According to all calculated high factor loads, the research model showed high reliability. Conclusions: The achieved results can be used as a model of brand personality to create a unique market. Moreover, they can increase market share, especially in the field of information technology, in today’s competitive business in research and academic centers.

Keywords

References

Louis D, Lombart C. Impact of brand personality on three major relational consequences (trust, attachment, and commitment to the brand). J Prod Brand Manag. 2010;19(2):114130. doi: 10.1108/10610421011033467.
Rauschnabel PA, Krey N, Babin BJ, Ivens BS. Brand management in higher education: The University Brand Personality Scale. J Bus Res. 2016;69(8):3077–86. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.01.023.
Watkins BA, Gonzenbach WJ. Assessing university brand personality through logos: An analysis of the use of academics and athletics in university branding. J Mark High Educ. 2013;23(1):15–33. doi: 10.1080/08841241.2013.805709.
Maehle N. The general framework for building brand personality. Norwegian institute of food, fisheries and aquaculture research. 2016.
Opoku Ankomah R. Communication of brand personality by some top business schools online [dissertation]. Luleå Tekniska University; 2005.
Attride-Stirling J. Thematic networks: An analytic tool for qualitative research. Qual Res. 2016;1(3):385–405. doi: 10.1177/146879410100100307.
Rutter R, Lettice F, Nadeau J. Brand personality in higher education: anthropomorphized university marketing communications. J Mark High Educ. 2016;27(1):19–39. doi: 10.1080/08841241.2016.1213346.
Austin JR, SiguawJA, Mattila AS. A re-examination of the generalizability of the Aaker brand personality measurement framework. J Strat Market. 2003;11(2):77–92. doi: 10.1080/0965254032000104469.
Amatyakul S, Polyorat K. City brand personality: The application of brand personality concept in the city context. Integr Bus Econ. 2016;5(4):108–21.
Heding T, Knudtzen C, Bjerre M, Knudtzen CF, Bjerre M. Brand management: Research, theory and practice. New York, NY: Routledge; 2008.doi: 10.4324/9780203996171.
Arora R, Stoner C. A mixed method approach to understanding brand personality. J Prod Brand Manag. 2009;18(4):272–83. doi: 10.1108/10610420910972792.
Aaker JL, Benet-Martinez V, Garolera J. Consumption symbols as carriers of culture: a study of Japanese and Spanish brand personality constructs. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2001;81(3):492–508. [PubMed: 11554649].
Kim YK, Shim SW, Dinnie K. The dimensions of nation brand personality: A study of nine countries. Corp Reput Rev. 2013;16(1):34–47. doi: 10.1057/crr.2012.22.
Kim CK, Han D, Park SB. The effect of brand personality and brand identification on brand loyalty: Applying the theory of social identification. Jpn Psychol Res. 2001;43(4):195–206. doi: 10.1111/1468-5884.00177.
Interdisciplinary Journal of Virtual Learning in Medical Sciences
Volume 10, Issue 2
June 2019
Pages 39-45

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics