The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

https://www.emerald.com/insight/0025-1747.htm

MD
60,9 Effects of perceived brand
localness and perceived brand
globalness on consumer behavioral
2482 intentions in emerging markets
Received 4 October 2021 Asif Ali Safeer
Revised 18 November 2021
1 March 2022 Business School, Huanggang Normal University, Huanggang, China
Accepted 14 April 2022
Muhammad Abrar
Layallpur Business School, Government College, University Faisalabad,
Faisalabad, Pakistan
Hancheng Liu
Business School, Huanggang Normal University, Huanggang, China, and
He Yuanqiong
School of Management, Huazhong University of Science and Technology,
Wuhan, China

Abstract
Purpose – This study examined the effects of perceived brand localness (PBL) and perceived brand
globalness (PBG) on consumer behavioral intentions (CBIs) (PI – purchase intentions, PP – price premium and
WOM – word of mouth) via brand authenticity (BA). Additionally, this study considered the moderating impact
of uncertainty avoidance (UA) and the control variable brand familiarity (BF) in emerging markets (EMs),
specifically from China and Pakistan contexts.
Design/methodology/approach – This study scrutinized 1,638 responses (China, n 5 804 and Pakistan,
n 5 834) from consumers who used discussed local and global brands. The proposed hypotheses were
evaluated using the PLS-SEM technique.
Findings – The findings indicated that the PBL and PBG favorably impacted BA, which significantly affected
CBIs in both EMs. Specifically, PBL strongly influenced BA in China, whereas PBG strongly affected BA in
Pakistan. The direct effects of PBL and PBG supported CBIs (PI, PP and WOM) in Pakistan. Likewise, PBL was
significant on PP and WOM, whereas PBG was significant on PP in China. In Pakistan, UA had a significant
moderating impact on PBL and BA. Similarly, UA acted as a positive moderator between BA and CBIs (PI and
WOM) in Pakistan but was not supported in China.
Research limitations/implications – This study examined only two EMs. Future studies may examine
emerging vs developed markets. Theoretically, PBL and PBG are important brand signals associated with
brand authenticity that communicate to mitigate information asymmetry in EMs. Likewise, brand authenticity
was recognized as a positive signal that effectively corresponds to CBIs (in terms of their PI, PP, WOM) by
fulfilling brand promises in both EMs. Additionally, UA was proved an effective moderator, improving
consumer perceptions of brand authenticity about local brands and increasing PI and WOM toward perceived
authentic brands in Pakistan.
Practical implications – This research revealed important recommendations to help local and global
managers in developing and executing several branding strategies in EMs (China and Pakistan). Practically, by
improving the brand’s localness and globalness, local and global managers may successfully position their
brands to influence consumers’ perceptions in EMs. Similarly, brand authenticity is a vital positioning tool for
managers that favorably influence consumer behavior. Additionally, managers can segment and target their
markets by classifying high and low UA consumers, particularly in Pakistan.

Management Decision
Vol. 60 No. 9, 2022
pp. 2482-2502
© Emerald Publishing Limited Funding: This research was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China under the
0025-1747
DOI 10.1108/MD-10-2021-1296 Project #: 71772074.
Originality/value – Following signaling theory, this is the first study that contributes toward CBIs in EMs PBL and PBG
via brand authenticity and considering cultural factors (uncertainty avoidance) from the domestic and
international branding perspectives. on CBIs in EMs
Keywords Perceived brand localness, Brand authenticity, Perceived brand globalness, Consumer behavioral
intentions, Uncertainty avoidance
Paper type Research paper

1. Introduction 2483
Globalization has increased the accessibility and attractiveness of global brands in emerging
markets (EMs). As a result, many global brands continue to flourish, whereas local brands
have also emerged as competitors to global brands, allowing consumers to choose between
local and global brands (Dalmoro et al., 2015). EMs are expected to account for half of the
world’s population by 2025, with a consumption of 30 trillion dollars. These promising
prospects have resulted in the entry of numerous global brands into EMs (Srivastava et al.,
2020). As a result of this transformation, many multinational corporations are investing
heavily in EMs. Given this evolution, marketers must develop an effective strategy for EMs
that considers consumer perceptions of local and global brands. Thus, EMs provide
tremendous growth potential and are a vital part of the world economy, as well as a lucrative
area of research (Ahmad, 2021; Ahmad et al., 2021; Singh and Gaur, 2018).
Global brands are often well-known due to their availability and reach on a worldwide
scale. On the other hand, local brands are often perceived as symbols of authenticity (Halkias
et al., 2016), while integrating authenticity into global brands is still nascent from a
management perspective. As consumer fear continues to grow, the perception of brand
authenticity has been increasingly important in the modern age (Safeer et al., 2021a, b;
S€odergren, 2021). Similarly, consumers frequently consider domestic brands authentic due to
their association with the native culture, whereas global brands are considered favorably due
to their high quality and authentic communication. These contradictory perceptions
encapsulate the ambiguous link between brand globalness and brand authenticity. It is an
unexploited question about whether global brands provide benefits equally or less than
domestic brands. International brands are striving for market share in EMs by embracing
local characteristics, such as sourcing ingredients locally. Therefore, it is required to do more
research on domestic and international brands in order to evoke their perceived brand
localness (PBL) or perceived brand globalness (PBG) (Xie et al., 2015). Additionally,
positioning based on perceived brand authenticity may vary in degrees of its effectiveness in
influencing consumer behavior in EMs (Liu et al., 2021; Mandler, 2019; Safeer et al., 2021c).
Hofstede’s cultural dimensions are underrepresented in the literature, particularly in
consumers’ perceptions of homegrown and international brands (Liu et al., 2021). According to
Hofstede (2001), a comparison of China and Pakistan reveals that both countries share a similar
cultural pattern, mainly as measured by collectivism/individualism (20 and 14) and masculinity
index (66 and 50). However, there is a considerable difference in the uncertainty avoidance
index (30 and 70). Previous research has demonstrated the effect of uncertainty avoidance on
consumer responses to promotion framing for cross-cultural research between China and
Pakistan (Zeng and Hao, 2016). Thus, uncertainty avoidance is a critical cultural component
that may influence consumer behavior differently in China and Pakistan. Therefore, it is
relevant to this research because brand authenticity may influence consumer behavior to avoid
uncertainty. This research is not conducted purely from cultural perspectives but rather uses a
component of culture (i.e. uncertainty avoidance) to examine consumers’ perceptions in two
emerging countries. Consequently, given the importance of the existing state of knowledge and
the research gap, this study integrates uncertainty avoidance as a moderator.
Many researchers and marketing practitioners are increasingly focused on issues relating
to the strategic management of domestic and international brands (Sichtmann et al., 2019).
MD Previous research has investigated the impacts of PBL, and PBG on retail patronage
60,9 (Swoboda et al., 2012), behavioral intention (as a single construct) (Xie et al., 2015), brand
stereotype, and brand affect (Davvetas and Halkias, 2019) and consumer purchase intentions
(Halkias et al., 2016; Srivastava et al., 2020) through different concepts in various consumer
environments in a single country context. However, few studies have investigated the impact
of PBL and PBG on consumers purchase intentions across countries, including Denmark,
€
Turkey and Singapore (Ozsomer, 2012), Austria, Bosnia and Herzegovina (Kolbl et al., 2019),
2484 Bulgaria and Austria (Sichtmann et al., 2019), and consumers willing to pay price premium in
South Korea and Germany (Mandler et al., 2021).
There is a scarcity of research examining consumer perceptions of domestic and
international brands in cross-cultural EMs. Previous research indicated that brand familiarity
may affect CBIs and brand authenticity (Ilicic and Webster, 2014; Xie et al., 2015). Against this
backdrop, this research examines consumers’ perceptions of domestic and international brands
to predict consumer behavioral intentions (CBIs) (PI, PP, WOM) via brand authenticity. In
addition, this research considered the moderating impact of uncertainty avoidance (UA) and the
control variable brand familiarity (BF) in EMs. Accordingly, this research pursued the
following specific aims in EMs, specifically in China and Pakistan contexts:
(1) To gain a deeper understanding of brand localness and globalness perceptions and
their impacts on brand authenticity and CBIs (PI, PP, WOM).
(2) To understand the concept of brand authenticity and its effects on CBIs.
(3) To examine uncertainty avoidance as a moderator on the links between PBL, PBG
and brand authenticity, as well as on the relationships between BA and CBIs.
(4) To ascertain the effects of brand familiarity on CBIs (PI, PP, WOM) and brand
authenticity.
With the research gap mentioned above, this study contributes new knowledge to signaling
theory by analyzing the effects of the PBL, PBG and UA on CBIs via brand authenticity and
provides important managerial guidelines to local and global managers in EMs. To organize
this study, we begin by discussing the significance of EMs, the gap and the study aims. After
that, we develop a model and suggest associated hypotheses using signaling theory. Then,
we present the methodology, findings and conclusions of the research. Finally, we add
theoretical and managerial contributions to this research. In addition, we discuss some
research limitations as well as future directions for research.

2. Theoretical context and research hypotheses

The primary objective of signaling theory is to minimize information asymmetry between
two parties (Spence, 2002). Sheth (2011) asserts that EMs are traditionally defined by poor
sociopolitical governance, inadequate infrastructure, unbranded competition and increased
market heterogeneity. These characteristics result in a higher level of imperfect and
asymmetrical information, which increases consumer uncertainty and impairing their
decision-making process (Erdem et al., 2006). Thus, firms rely on (domestic and international)
brands as critical signals to communicate important information about their brands’
performance (Erdem and Swait, 1998).
A brand can function as an authentic signal in the market, mitigating the uncertainty
associated with imperfect and asymmetric information. Firms must recognize that a
trustworthy brand serves as a signal that they must be authentic in their claims and deliver
€
on their commitments (Ozsomer and Altaras, 2008). As a result, perceived authentic brands as
signals are expected to reduce information uncertainty and asymmetry. We propose
hypotheses in EMs (China and Pakistan) using the theoretical research model (see Figure 1).
 Uncertainty Avoidance (High vs. Low) PBL and PBG
on CBIs in EMs

Perceived Brand Consumer Behavioral

Localness Intentions

Purchase Intention 2485

Brand
Authenticity Price Premium

Word of Mouth
Perceived Brand
Globalness

Brand Familiarity
Figure 1.
Theoretical
research model
Direct links Mediating links Moderating links Control links

2.1 Perceived brand localness, perceived brand globalness and brand authenticity
Dimofte et al. (2008) demonstrated that customers distinguish “local brands that are only
available in a specific geographical region.” Local brands strategically use authenticity to
influence consumer perceptions and compete with global brands based on their commitment
to quality, traditions and heritage (Napoli et al., 2014). Similarly, local brands are typically
classified as local icons due to their uniqueness and originality with local culture (Farıas and
€
Torres, 2022; Ozsomer, 2012). Prior research recognized various product attributes that
signal authenticity and generate diverse authenticity conceptualizations (Beverland and
Farrelly, 2010). According to signaling theory, PBL is a vital signal that favorably improves
brand credibility in globalized (German) and globalizing (South Korea) markets by keeping
brand commitments (Mandler et al., 2021). Likewise, brand credibility is a component
of brand authenticity (Morhart et al., 2015). According to Napoli et al. (2014), brand
authenticity (sincerity, quality commitment and heritage) is a powerful positioning tool that
affects consumer behavior. Thus, local brands harness authenticity to influence consumer
perceptions and compete with global brands based on their commitment to quality and
legacy by using the small business size. Nijssen and Douglas (2011) asserted that consumer
trends and perceptions of brand localness demonstrated a preference for product uniqueness
and authenticity.
PBG refers to the “consumer’s belief that a brand is marketed in multiple countries and is
generally recognized as global in these countries” (Steenkamp et al., 2003). Earlier research
discussed that consumers may be more receptive to global brands because of their genuine
communication. Similarly, multinational corporations use various signals to authenticate
their brands and mitigate competitive disadvantages. For example, Heineken maintains a
strong connection to their heritage by educating consumers about their traditional recipes
from 1873. Similarly, Starbucks uses authenticity by adding heritage narratives on their
paper cups. Thus, it demonstrates how brand authenticity may assist international brands in
MD influencing consumer behavior (Riefler, 2020). Similarly, consumers see international brands
60,9 as having greater quality, legacy and authenticity due to worldwide manufacturing and
€
distribution (Napoli et al., 2014; Ozsomer, 2012). Thus, empirical research on the effects of PBL
and PBG on brand authenticity is critical to clarify the ambiguous concept of authenticity in
EMs. Therefore, we anticipate that PBL and PBG will have more robust signals
communicating the brand’s authenticity in EMs. Therefore, it is assumed:
2486 H1. PBL has a favorable effect on consumer perceptions of brand authenticity in EMs.
H2. PBG has a favorable effect on consumer perceptions of brand authenticity in EMs.

2.2 Perceived brand localness, perceived brand globalness and consumer behavioral
intentions
PBL means the degree to which “a brand is being recognized as a local player and a symbol or
icon of the local culture” (Swoboda et al., 2012). In particular, local brands perceived as
cultural icons in domestic markets can be more positively appraised and influence consumer
€
behavior (Ozsomer, 2012; Steenkamp et al., 2003). Homegrown brands can be tailored to meet
local needs and tastes to satiate local preferences (Petison and Johri, 2008), which may have a
beneficial effect on CBIs. Similarly, PBL positively influenced consumers’ purchase intentions
in emerging and developed markets (Halkias et al., 2016; Ozsomer, € 2012). Thus, local
strategies may take advantage of price flexibility, and the more prospect of achieving
premium prices and high-quality authentic local brands may promote consumers’ WOM.
Mandler et al. (2021) argued that PBL is a vital brand signal that may assist in shaping
consumers’ perceptions of price premiums in globalized (German) and globalizing (South
Korea) markets. Thus, it is anticipated that increasing consumer perceptions of a brand’s
localness will have a beneficial effect on CBIs (PI, PP, WOM) in EMs. Therefore, we propose:
H3. PBL positively affects CBIs (PI, PP, WOM) in EMs.
H3a. PBL positively affects PI in EMs.
H3b. PBL positively affects PP in EMs.
H3c. PBL positively affects WOM in EMs.
Global brands allow consumers to participate in global consumer culture. These brands
frequently attract consumers and are accepted to signal membership, demonstrating their
identity in global segments. Similarly, with the growing trend of travel, media flows and other
symbols of global brands that represent belonging to the worldwide consumer community
along with all of its beneficial features (Steenkamp et al., 2003). PBG is a valuable signal that
reflects the firm’s present and past marketing strategies in developed markets (Erdem and
Swait, 1998). The consumers’ perceptions of a brand’s global availability indicate product
€
quality positively affects CBIs (Ozsomer, 2012). Similarly, brands’ global availability may
signal product prestige, which may result in positive perceptions of global brands. Due to the
product’s prestige and superior quality, PBG can generate a high level of demand. Global
brands value positive consumer responses, such as favorable behavioral intentions toward
global brands (Davvetas et al., 2015). Vuong and Khanh Giao (2020) discovered that PBG
positively affected CBIs (PI) in EMs (Vietnam). Thus, it is anticipated that boosting consumer
perceptions of a brand’s globalness will benefit CBIs (PI, PP and WOM) in EMs. As a result,
we propose the following:
H4. PBG positively affects CBIs (PI, PP, WOM) in EMs.
H4a. PBG positively affects PI in EMs.
 H4b. PBG positively affects PP in EMs. PBL and PBG
H4c. PBG positively affects WOM in EMs. on CBIs in EMs

2.3 The relationship of brand authenticity and consumer behavioral intentions

Consumer perceptions are critical in achieving brand differentiation. Likewise, consumer
perceptions are important when evaluating brands’ subjective authenticity (Dwivedi and
McDonald, 2018). Thus, it is demonstrated that an authentic brand has been perceived 2487
through consumers’ lenses and consistently fulfills its promises of what it claims clearly and
originally. Consumers may assess the authenticity of a brand based on its clarity and
consistency. According to Busser and Shulga (2019), authenticity sends a robust, consistent
signal to consumers that impact their ability to develop brand trust. Similarly, firms can
reduce brand ambiguity and uncertainty perceptions through effective brand
communication. Morhart et al. (2015) assert that consumers prefer authentic brands by
paying premium prices and spreading positive WOM. Previous research has demonstrated
that brand authenticity positively affects CBIs in developed (German) markets (Fritz et al.,
2017). Therefore, this study can make the following hypotheses:
H5. Brand authenticity positively affects CBIs (PI, PP, WOM) in EMs.
H5a. Brand authenticity positively affects PI in EMs.
H5b. Brand authenticity positively affects PP in EMs.
H5c. Brand authenticity positively affects WOM in EMs.

2.4 The moderating impact of uncertainty avoidance

“Uncertainty avoidance is the extent to which people feel threatened by unknown or
ambiguous situations” (Hofstede, 2001). It is necessary to follow the rules, regulations and
other formalities to organize life in high uncertainty avoidance culture. Similar to this, those
who have a high uncertainty avoidance culture are less likely than those who have a low
uncertainty avoidance culture to embrace change and innovation. These differences assist in
understanding why two cultures behave in such different ways when faced with innovation
(De Mooij and Hofstede, 2010). Given the role of brands as signals, it is rational to believe that
uncertainty avoidance is an essential cultural process (Erdem et al., 2006). As a result,
customers in cultures with high UA gravitate toward consistent, authentic and credible
brands. Erdem et al. (2006) asserted that avoiding uncertainty is a critical cultural dimension
associated with brand effects. They discovered that avoiding uncertainty assists in
promoting brand credibility and also helping to restore consumers’ positive brand behavior.
PBL and PBG are critical indicators that consumers utilize to assist them in evaluating
various brands (Mandler et al., 2021). Therefore, these perceptions lessen ambiguity
regarding domestic and international brands. Aside from that, domestic brands act as models
of authenticity, while international brands strengthen their authenticity by connecting with
€
consumers in developed and EMs (Ozsomer, 2012; Dwivedi and McDonald, 2018). According
to Hofstede (2001), China’s (low UA culture) uncertainty avoidance score is 30, but Pakistan’s
(high UA culture) UA score is 70. As a result, it is envisaged that reducing higher levels of
uncertainty (as opposed to lower levels of uncertainty) in EMs will have a favorable effect on
customer perceptions of authenticity toward domestic and international brands. Therefore,
this study hypothesizes:
H6a. Uncertainty avoidance acts as a positive moderator of the relationships between
PBL and brand authenticity, such that a high UA improves these relationships
while a low UA weakens them in EMs.
MD H6b. Uncertainty avoidance acts as a positive moderator of the relationships between
60,9 PBG and brand authenticity, such that a high UA improves these relationships
while a low UA weakens them in EMs.
According to Bruhn et al. (2012), authenticity is a fundamental human aspiration, a central
concern of contemporary marketing and a necessary component of a brand’s success in an era
of growing uncertainty. Authentic brands fulfill their promises and assist consumers in
2488 building trust and reducing uncertainty. Brown et al. (2011) asserted that brands serve as
critical signals that enlighten consumers with information, alleviate uncertainty and reduce
perceived risk. Thus, authenticity in brands is expected to have a favorable impact on CBIs.
The authenticity of a brand can act as a barometer of its quality. As a result, authenticity can
be considered the source of anticipated quality (Napoli et al., 2014).
Prior research recognized that when a brand is new or unfamiliar, a high amount of
uncertainty may exist. Therefore, consumers rely on extrinsic signals to determine a brand’s
quality (Moulard et al., 2016). Similarly, the impacts of brand consistency on clarity are more
significant in a culture of high UA, as consistency and clarity help consumers in reducing
their perceived risks and assist in decision-making (Torelli et al., 2009). Thus, it is expected
that uncertainty avoidance strengthens brand authenticity as a signal and that their
interactive effects will have a positive impact on CBIs by increasing their willingness to PI, PP
and WOM toward domestic and international brands in EMs. Hofstede (2001) assigned China
a score of 30 for being a low UA culture, whereas Pakistan received 70 score for being a high
UA culture. Hence, we propose:
H7. Uncertainty avoidance acts as a positive moderator of the relationships between
brand authenticity and CBIs (PI, PP, WOM) in EMs.
H7a. The positive relationships of brand authenticity and PI are stronger for high UA
consumers, and this relationship is weaker for low UA consumers in EMs.
H7b. The positive relationships between brand authenticity and PP are stronger for high
UA consumers, and this relationship is weaker for low UA consumers in EMs.
H7c. The positive relationships of brand authenticity and WOM are stronger for high UA
consumers, and this relationship is weaker for low UA consumers in EMs.

2.5 Controlling influence of brand familiarity

Brand familiarity is the ability to learn about a brand through product trials and
consumptions, WOM communication, advertising exposure and interactions with
salespeople (Tam Jackie, 2008). Prior research has recognized that brand familiarity as a
control variable positively influences CBIs and brand authenticity across different consumer
environments (Davvetas and Halkias, 2019; Ilicic and Webster, 2014; Mandler et al., 2021; Xie
et al., 2015). As a result, we anticipate that brand familiarity may affect CBIs and brand
authenticity in EMs (China and Pakistan). Additionally, brand familiarity is important in the
following contexts. First, it supports overcoming “the fear of the unknown.” Second, it
educates consumers to forgive a brand’s shortcomings. Thirdly, it alleviates intellectual effort
associated with consumer decision-making (Kolbl et al., 2020).

3. Methodology
This research is focused on two potential EMs (China and Pakistan). There are several
reasons for selecting these markets for this research. First, this research is lacking in these
EMs. Several authors recommended examining the PBL and PBG on brand authenticity and
consumer behavior in EMs, such as China and Pakistan (Mandler, 2019; Srivastava et al.,
2020). Second, these two markets have a diversified culture, with consumers having a range PBL and PBG
of preferences toward local and global brands. Third, these EMs are one of the world’s largest on CBIs in EMs
markets, like China is the first, and Pakistan is the 6th largest populous country in the world.
Likewise, these two countries vary in terms of Hofstede’s cultural dimensions, mainly in the
context of uncertainty avoidance. As a result, it is expected that this research will contribute
new insights in EMs contexts.
Following experts and consumers group discussions in China and Pakistan, we picked
three product categories (fast food, shoes and apparel) for further consideration, taking 2489
into account each category’s local and global brands (Mandler et al., 2021; Sichtmann et al.,
2019). In China, selected (global-local) brands included fast food: McDonald-Real Kungfu,
shoes: Nike-Li-Ning, and apparel: Levis-Septwolves. In Pakistan, brands were fast food:
McDonald-Fri-Chicks, shoes: Nike-Servis, and apparel: Levis-ChenOne. In order to increase
the generalizability and variance of findings, we picked non-durable and durable brands.
Similarly, we used the same global brands to lessen the brand effects. Using a seven-point
Likert scale, each respondent was asked to pick one product category (out of three) at
random and then respond to global and local brands (in a pair) within that specific category
(Mandler et al., 2021). This study used well-recognized scales. Three questions of each PBL
and PBG were modified from Swoboda et al. (2012) and Steenkamp et al. (2003). Six
questions of brand authenticity were derived from Schallehn et al. (2014), while CBIs (PI,
PP, WOM) contained nine questions that were adapted from Zeithaml et al. (1996). Finally,
uncertainty avoidance with three questions was derived from Erdem et al. (2006), and
brand familiarity with two questions was taken from Xie et al. (2015) for assessing its
effects.
We designed the questionnaire in two languages: English (for use in Pakistan) and
Chinese (for use in China). This study used only brand names and did not include any brand
logos in the questionnaire. The questionnaire was published on a leading Chinese survey
website (https://www.wenjuan.com) and distributed via social media in both countries,
including WeChat, WhatsApp and Facebook. This research applied the non-probability
(convenience) technique to collect data from mass intended consumers in China and
Pakistan. The previous research has demonstrated that non-probability (convenience)
sampling is a highly successful approach for efficient and timely data collection (Safeer
et al., 2021a). Finally, after a thorough assessment of the complete dataset, this study used a
total of 1,638 responses (n 5 804 for China and n 5 834 for Pakistan) for final analysis (see
Table 1).

4. Results
In recent years, PLS-SEM has been increasingly used in consumer behavior research (Hair
Joseph et al., 2019). The PLS-SEM technique enables the estimation of complicated models
with many variables, indicators and structural pathways without making assumptions about
data distribution. PLS is a method for predicting structural equation models with causal
reasons for their structure (Marko Sarstedt et al., 2017). Therefore, data analysis was
performed using the SMART PLS 3 version.
We applied different measures such as rotating questions among brands and removed
many biased responses to avoid the common method bias (CMB) in the data. However, biases
can still occur when people respond to various questions using Likert scales, which might
mislead the results (Hair et al., 2018). This study examined the CMB using Harman’s single-
factor analysis and discovered a variance of 34.98% in China and 36.04% in Pakistan. When a
single latent factor explains more than 50% of the total variance of the measures, common
method bias assumes a severe problem in data (Podsakoff, 2003). Thus, our findings revealed
no potential threats of CMB in the data.
MD Explanatory factors China Pakistan
60,9 Consumers responses 804 834
% %

Gender
Male 50.62 75.90
Female 49.38 24.10
2490 Age
20–27 85.07 77.22
28–35 11.19 9.11
36–43 3.74 13.67
Education
Bachelor 37.44 41.85
Master 46.64 41.12
Doctoral 15.92 17.03
Profession
Students 79.98 74.34
Government officials 7.71 8.75
Enterprise managers 9.83 9.95
Self-employed/Unemployed 2.49 6.95
Monthly family income
USD $1,000 – $2,000 30.47 41.37
USD $2,001 – $3,000 26.36 20.14
Table 1. USD $3,001 – $4,000 15.05 15.47
Consumers USD $4,001 – $5,000 11.32 8.03
information Above $5,000 16.80 14.99

4.1 Measurement model assessment

The model measurement, also known as outer model measurement, explains the relationships
between constructs and their respective indicators (Hair et al., 2014). This study followed the
(PLSc) PLS consistent approach (Dijkstra and Henseler, 2015) to run the algorithm and
calculate the reliability and validity of the reflective model. According to Hair et al. (2017),
reliability values between 0.70 and 0.90 are deemed appropriate. Following data analysis, it
was discovered that the indicator loadings values satisfied the threshold values in both EMs
(see Table 2).
To assess the discriminant validity, we applied the Fornell–Larcker criterion and
discovered that our results fulfilled the criterion in both EMs. Additionally, we employed the
Henseler et al. (2015) HTMT (Heterotrait–Monotrait ratio) method to examine the
discriminant validity. Table 3 revealed that our findings also satisfied the HTMT criterion
(all values were less < 0.90) according to the recommendation of Henseler et al. (2015). As a
result, this study also established discriminant validity by using the HTMT method.

4.2 Cross-national invariance measurement

Before comparing results between China and Pakistan, cross-national measurement
invariance is required. A lack of measurement equivalence across groups can result in
measurement errors in construct estimations, which can lead to misleading results (Hair et al.,
2018). Henseler et al. (2016) proposed a MICOM three-step procedure based on the PLS-SEM
method for measuring invariance across groups.
Step 1: Configural invariance is a prerequisite for all group analyses. It implies that a
composite that is equally identified by all groups appears as a one-dimensional entity within
 n 5 804 (China) n 5 834 (Pakistan)
PBL and PBG
Con Item LV CA CR AVE LV CA CR AVE on CBIs in EMs
BF BF1 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.74 0.86 0.85 0.85 0.74
BF2 0.87 0.86
PBG PBG1 0.83 0.86 0.86 0.68 0.84 0.89 0.89 0.73
PBG2 0.82 0.88
PBG3 0.82 0.83 2491
PBL PBL1 0.89 0.88 0.88 0.71 0.86 0.88 0.88 0.71
PBL2 0.86 0.86
PBL3 0.76 0.82
BA BA1 0.79 0.90 0.90 0.60 0.73 0.90 0.90 0.59
BA2 0.78 0.76
BA3 0.76 0.76
BA4 0.75 0.80
BA5 0.77 0.77
BA6 0.79 0.79
PI PI1 0.75 0.87 0.87 0.70 0.92 0.87 0.87 0.68
PI2 0.88 0.77
PI3 0.88 0.79
PP PP1 0.84 0.88 0.88 0.72 0.82 0.88 0.88 0.70
PP2 0.88 0.86
PP3 0.82 0.84
WOM WOM1 0.86 0.89 0.89 0.74 0.84 0.86 0.86 0.67
WOM2 0.85 0.80
WOM3 0.87 0.82
UA UA1 0.89 0.85 0.85 0.66 0.62 0.80 0.80 0.58
UA2 0.71 0.81
UA3 0.82 0.84 Table 2.
Note(s): Con. 5 Construct, LV 5 Loading value, CA 5 Cronbach’s Alpha, CR 5 Composite Reliability, Constructs reliability
AVE 5 Average Variance Extracted and validity

Construct 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

1. BA
2. BF 0.55/0.44
3. PBG 0.40/0.47 0.62/0.28
4. PBL 0.46/0.41 0.32/0.22 0.03/0.35
5. PI 0.55/0.61 0.66/0.40 0.42/0.47 0.34/0.47 Table 3.
6. PP 0.53/0.59 0.53/0.38 0.38/0.46 0.38/0.41 0.81/0.68 Heterotrait–monotrait
7. UA 0.23/0.48 0.23/0.39 0.05/0.24 0.13/0.35 0.26/0.40 0.22/0.45 ratio (HTMT) – China/
8. WOM 0.51/0.64 0.59/0.51 0.40/0.45 0.35/0.43 0.79/0.71 0.80/0.74 0.25/0.49 Pakistan

the same nomological network. Likewise, the same indicators, coding and data handling
should be used when analyzing across groups. This study met the criteria outlined above.
To examine the compositional invariance in step two, we used permutation analysis based
on bootstrapping with 5,000 subsamples at a two-tailed 0.05 significance level. We discovered
that the PI and UA constructs were significant across groups with a p-value < 0.05. We
removed indicator 1 from PI and UA for further analysis. After removing the indicators, we
performed analysis and found that all p values were greater than > 0.05 of all constructs, and
the original correlation values among constructs were also equal to or greater than 5%
quantile correlation values (Henseler et al., 2016). According to Hair et al. (2018), when the c
MD value is greater than 0.05 and the p-value greater than 0.05. It indicates that compositional
60,9 invariance has been established. Thus, this study also satisfied the criterion of step 2.
The third step is to establish the equivalence of mean values and variances across groups.
In step 3, we discovered some discrepancies in mean and variances values. As a result, the
third step did not meet the criteria, and thus this study was unable to establish full invariance
measurement. According to Henseler et al. (2016), step 1 (configural) and step 2
(compositional) invariance are required to properly compare standardized path coefficient
2492 evaluations for structural relations across groups. As a result, this study is capable for
conducting a multi-group analysis.

4.3 Structural model assessment

Many researchers recommended some guidelines for evaluating structural models, including
determining the model’s collinearity by examining variance inflation factor (VIF),
relationship path coefficients, R2, model fit and Q2 predictive relevance (Hair et al., 2018;
Hair Joseph et al., 2019). We checked the data for collinearity through the VIF and discovered
that there was no collinearity in data and all values of VIF were less than 3 (Hair Joseph et al.,
2019). We used bias-corrected and accelerated bootstrapping with 5,000 subsamples, two-
tailed at the 0.05 significance level (Chin, 1998; Hair et al., 2012).
This study discovered that PBL and PBG significantly influenced brand authenticity (BA)
in both EMs. However, PBL strongly impacted BA in China, while PBG strongly impacted BA
in Pakistan. Therefore, H1–H2 were supported. The direct impact of PBL was significant on
PI in Pakistan but was non-significant in China. Thus, H3a was partly supportive. The direct
effects of PBL on PP and WOM were significant in both markets. Therefore, H3b–H3c were
supported. The impact of PBG on PI was significant in Pakistan but non-significant in China.
Accordingly, H4a was partly supportive. The effect of PBG on PP was positively significant
in both markets. Therefore, H4b was also supported. In contrast, the impact of PBG on WOM
was significant in Pakistan but non-significant in China. As a result, H4c was partly
supportive. The effect of brand authenticity on CBIs (PI, PP, WOM) was significant in both
EMs. Thus, the H5a–H5c were supported. The findings reveal that brand familiarity had
substantial controlling effects on brand authenticity and CBIs (PI, PP, WOM) in both markets,
except PP in Pakistan.
The study discovered that the UA had a beneficial moderating influence between the
associations of PBL and brand authenticity in Pakistan but not in China. Therefore, H6a was
partly supportive. However, UA’s had no moderating influence between the associations of
PBG and brand authenticity in both EMs. Thus, H6b did not support it. This study
discovered that the UA’s moderating effects on the relationships between BA and PI were
favorable in Pakistan but not in China. Therefore, H7a was partly supportive. On the other
side, the UA’s moderating effects on the relationships between BA and PP had no effect in
China and Pakistan. Therefore, H7b did not support it. Finally, the UA had a positive
moderating effect on the relationships between BA and WOM in Pakistan but not in China.
Thus, H7c was partly supportive (see Table 4).
This research discovered that brand authenticity was partially mediated between PBL,
PBG and CBIs (PI, PP, WOM) in Pakistan. However, brand authenticity was fully mediated
between PBL and PI and partially mediated between PBL and PP, WOM in China. Similarly,
brand authenticity was fully mediated on the relationships between PBG and PI, WOM, and
partially mediated on the relationships between PBG and PP in China. Thus, full mediation
demonstrated that brand authenticity played a more significant role in China than in
Pakistan. Table 5 summarized the mediation and total effects on the relationships between
PBL, PBG and CBIs (PI, PP, WOM) in China and Pakistan.
We discovered that the R2 value for brand authenticity was 43.4%, whereas the R2 value
values for CBIs were ranged from 39.3 to 54.1% (for PI, PP, WOM) in China. Likewise, the R2
 China Pakistan
PBL and PBG
Hyp Associations Path coeff t–value Path coeff t–value Result support on CBIs in EMs
Direct effects
H1 PBL → BA 0.36*** 9.18 0.14*** 3.84 Yes
H2 PBG → BA 0.23*** 4.21 0.27*** 6.73 Yes
H3a PBL → PI 0.05 1.05 0.18*** 4.24 Partially
H3b PBL → PP 0.17*** 4.01 0.10* 2.22 Yes 2493
H3c PBL → WOM 0.14** 3.04 0.12** 3.04 Yes
H4a PBG → PI 0.04 0.64 0.18*** 3.85 Partially
H4b PBG → PP 0.14* 2.47 0.20*** 4.80 Yes
H4c PBG → WOM 0.10 1.68 0.14*** 3.63 Partially
H5a BA → PI 0.24*** 4.82 0.34*** 6.22 Yes
H5b BA → PP 0.25*** 4.95 0.34*** 5.87 Yes
H5c BA → WOM 0.19*** 3.65 0.36*** 6.83 Yes
Moderating effects
H6a PBL 3 UA → BA 0.02 0.43 0.13* 2.18 Partially
H6b PBG 3 UA → BA 0.04 0.85 0.08 1.44 No
H7a BA 3 UA → PI 0.06 1.61 0.09* 2.14 Partially
H7b BA 3 UA → PP 0.01 0.34 0.08 1.81 No
H7c BA 3 UA → WOM 0.02 0.45 0.08* 1.96 Partially
Control variable (brand familiarity)
BF → BA 0.27*** 4.35 0.21*** 4.87 Yes
BF → PI 0.50*** 7.61 0.10* 2.14 Yes
BF → PP 0.23*** 3.57 0.09 1.93 Partially
BF → WOM 0.36*** 5.36 0.23*** 5.32 Yes Table 4.
Note(s): “t > 1.96 at *p < 0.05; t > 2.58 at **p < 0.01; t > 3.29 at ***p < 0.001; two-tailed” Results of hypotheses

China Pakistan
Total Total
Relationships Indirect Direct Mediation effects Indirect Direct Mediation effects

PBL → BA → 0.09*** 0.05 Full 0.14** 0.05** 0.18*** Partial 0.23***

PI
PBL → BA → 0.09*** 0.17*** Partial 0.26*** 0.05** 0.10* Partial 0.15***
PP
PBL → BA → 0.07** 0.14** Partial 0.21*** 0.05** 0.12** Partial 0.17***
WOM
PBG → BA → 0.05** 0.04 Full 0.09 0.10*** 0.18*** Partial 0.28***
PI
PBG → BA → 0.06** 0.14* Partial 0.20*** 0.10*** 0.20*** Partial 0.30***
PP
PBG → BA → 0.04** 0.10 Full 0.14* 0.10*** 0.14*** Partial 0.24*** Table 5.
WOM Mediation and total
Note(s): “t > 1.96 at *p < 0.05; t > 2.58 at **p < 0.01; t > 3.29 at ***p < 0.001; two-tailed” effects

value for brand authenticity was 44.4%, whereas the R2 values for CBIs were ranged from
44.3 to 54.3% (for PI, PP, WOM) in Pakistan. Thus, the proposed model demonstrated
moderate to strong explanatory power in both EMs (Chin, 1998). Several researchers argued
that SRMR could be considered an approximation of model fit (Hu and Bentler, 1998; Hair
et al., 2018). However, the SRMR value less than 0.08 is considered a good model fit in PLS-
MD SEM (Hu and Bentler, 1998). This study discovered an excellent model fit in both EMs, with
60,9 SRMR values of 0.03 in China and 0.02 in Pakistan.
The blindfolding procedure is helpful for calculating the Q2 value, which is used to
determine the predictive accuracy (Geisser, 1974). A greater than zero value of Q2 indicates
that the theoretical model is meaningful and predictive (Hair Joseph et al., 2019). We found
that China’s Q2 value of brand authenticity was 0.23, whereas CBIs (PI, PP, WOM) Q2 values
were ranged from 0.25 to 0.34. Similarly, Pakistan’s Q2 value of brand authenticity was 0.22,
2494 while the Q2 values of CBIs (PI, PP, WOM) were ranged from 0.26 to 0.32. Thus, the results
revealed that Q2 values were greater than zero, indicating that the proposed model is
meaningful and has strong predictive relevance.

5. Discussions of findings
This study sheds new light on consumer behavior in China and Pakistan, illuminating
managerial implications for local and global branding strategies to address the growing
problems. Supporting hypothesis H1, our findings demonstrate that Chinese consumers
prefer local brands due to their authenticity. Local brands represent higher authenticity
€
(Ozsomer, 2012), which was enormously influential in Chinese consumer environments.
However, the magnitude of this impact was less in Pakistan than in China. H2 discovered that
PBG had a more substantial impact on brand authenticity in Pakistan compared to China.
Our findings corroborate previous research indicating that PBG was positively influenced
through perceived quality (Xie et al., 2015). Thus, the superior quality of a brand boosts its
authenticity (Napoli et al., 2014). Similarly, global brands experiences help to strengthen
brand authenticity in Asian markets, including Pakistan (Safeer et al., 2021a). As a result,
positive consumer perceptions of a brand’s globalness strengthen its authenticity in both
EMs. It was argued that global brand communication could affect consumers’ perceptions of
authenticity about global brands (Riefler, 2020). This study discovered that global brand
communication can influence consumer perceptions in EMs.
Hypotheses H3a–H3c findings corroborate previous research by Steenkamp et al. (2003)
and Sichtmann et al. (2019), who found that PBL had a direct positive impact on CBIs (PI) in
EMs (South Korea). However, our findings were consistent in Pakistan but inconsistent in
China, where the PBL had a non-significant effect on PI and significant effects on PP and
WOM. Additional research may be necessary in the future to discover consistent findings
across EMs. H4a–H4c revealed that the PBG had significant positive impacts on CBIs (PI, PP,
WOM) in Pakistan. In contrast, these findings were mixed in Chinese consumer settings,
where the PBG had non-significant impacts on PI and WOM but significantly influenced PP
in China. Thus, it explains that PBG as an essential signal directly affects consumers to
stimulate their PI, PP and WOM in Pakistan. Our findings are in line with previous research
of Kolbl et al. (2019), Son et al. (2013) and Vuong and Khanh Giao (2020), who discovered that
perceived global brands positively influenced CBIs (PI). However, the PBG as a brand signal
had weak direct effects on PI and WOM in China. While PP had a significant impact on
Chinese consumers, indicating that when Chinese customers observe a brand to be global,
they expect to pay a premium price for it.
H5a–H5c discovered that brand authenticity had a more powerful brand signal in both
EMs that positively affects consumers and reduces ambiguity in brand information. Earlier
research evidenced that brand authenticity significantly impacted CBIs (PI, PP, WOM) in
developed market contexts (Fritz et al., 2017; Morhart et al., 2015; Napoli et al., 2014). On the
other hand, brand authenticity research is rare from EMs perspective. The findings indicated
that brand authenticity has a greater effect on Pakistani consumer environments compared
to China. H6a discovered that UA and PBL’s moderating effects did not influence brand
authenticity in China but significantly influenced in Pakistan. Thus, it reveals that Pakistani
customers avoid uncertain circumstances by purchasing authentic domestic brands. The PBL and PBG
findings indicate that a high UA amplified the favorable association of PBL and BA and vice on CBIs in EMs
versa. The comparison of China and Pakistan demonstrated that our findings corroborated
Hofstede’s cultural values, with China receiving a score of 30 (low UA culture) and Pakistan
receiving a score of 70 (high UA culture) (Hofstede, 2001). Our findings suggest that Pakistani
consumers are conscientious and prefer authentic domestic brands to eliminate uncertainty
and ambiguity. Whereas Chinese consumers are adaptable and willing to deal with uncertain
and ambiguous situations. 2495
Hypothesis H6b indicates that consumers did not consider uncertainty avoidance toward
PBG and their effects on brands’ authenticity in both EMs. H7a demonstrated that UA and
BA’s interactive moderating effects significantly influenced PI in Pakistan, but no influence
was observed in China. Fritz et al. (2017) emphasized the importance of consistent and
authentic brands for consumers trying to lessen the uncertainty. Following Figure 2 indicates
that high UA consumers value authentic brands, which boosts their purchase intentions in
Pakistan. On the other hand, consumers with a low UA were influenced by brand
authenticity, which dampened their purchase intentions and weakened the relationship
between BA and PI in Pakistan.
H7b found that UA and BA’s interactive impacts did not influence PP in the Chinese and
Pakistani environments. Finally, H7c discovered that UA and BA’s interactive impacts
significantly influenced WOM in the Pakistani environment but not in the Chinese context.
The findings suggest that Pakistani consumers with a high uncertainty avoidance were more
convinced of a brand’s authenticity. Thus, authentic brands encourage them to share positive
WOM. Similarly, consumers’ positive WOM increases the brand’s worth. However, these
effects were opposite in the case of low UA consumers; a lesser preference for brand
authenticity had a detrimental impact on WOM, even it was expected to be negative WOM in
Pakistan. Interestingly, brand familiarity had shown favorable effects in both EMs, except for
Pakistan, where brand familiarity had no influence on PP (price premium). It demonstrates
that consumers in EMs (China and Pakistan) have more favorable perceptions of brands
when they are already familiar with them. Prior research has indicated that control factors
enhance the value of research and the confidence in its findings (Halkias et al., 2016; Kolbl

BA*UA-PI
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
PI

0.0
–0.1
–0.2
–0.3
–0.4
–1.00 –0.75 –0.50 –0.25 0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00
BA Figure 2.
H7a UA moderation
effects in Pakistan
UA at–1 SD UA at Mean UA at +1 SD
MD et al., 2020). Thus, this study reported the results after controlling the impact of brand
60,9 familiarity, which increased the trust in the findings.

5.1 Theoretical contributions

This research has contributed to the branding literature and signaling theory. This research
validated the theoretical model empirically by integrating PBL, PBG, BA, UA and CBIs in
2496 EMs (China and Pakistan). Additionally, it extends theory by incorporating PBL and PBG as
brand attributes that signal brands authenticity, thereby integrating novel variables and
providing meaningful findings of consumers’ responses to local and global branding
strategies. First, this research found that PBL and PBG are vital signals of brand authenticity
in EMs (China and Pakistan). However, PBL had a more significant signal influencing brand
authenticity in China compared to Pakistan. In comparison to China, PBG was a strong signal
affecting brand authenticity in Pakistan, indicating that PBL and PBG are necessary brand
signals associated with brand authenticity, which communicates to reduce asymmetric
information (Spence, 2002) in EMs.
Second, this research indicates that the PBL and PBG are effective signals for
communicating and positively influencing Pakistani consumers’ behavioral intentions (PI, PP,
WOM) toward domestic and international brands. In contrast, the PBL was a dominant signal
that certainly communicated and impacted the PP and WOM in China. Likewise, PBG was also a
strong signal that actively corresponded and impacted PP in China. Brands generally act as
signals for the product positioning (Erdem and Swait, 2004) and shape “how consumers learn,
encode and evaluate brand information” (Erdem et al., 2002, p. 1). Thus, these brand signals
influence consumer behavior and perceptions (Mandler, 2019). As a result, PBL and PBG are
more robust signals influencing CBIs (PI, PP, WOM) in Pakistan compared to China.
Third, brand authenticity was identified as a positive signal communicated effectively by
fulfilling brand promises to influence CBIs in both EMs (China and Pakistan). Brand
authenticity improves consumers’ perceptions in EMs positively by minimizing uncertainty
about perceived homegrown and foreign brands, with greater effects in Pakistan than China.
By supporting signaling theory, prior research sheds light on brand authenticity’s role in
enhancing consumers’ loyalty and trust in the American perspective (Busser and Shulga,
2019). Thus, our findings advance signaling theory by emphasizing the significance of brand
authenticity in influencing CBIs (PI, PP, WOM) in China and Pakistan (EMs) from a local and
global branding standpoint.
Fourth, this study demonstrated that the interaction effects of uncertainty avoidance
(Hofstede, 2001) and PBL amplified consumers’ perceptions of brand authenticity in Pakistan.
Signaling theory infers that a brand’s superior quality and higher utility reduce uncertainty,
information costs and perceived risk, thereby strengthening the brand’s credibility (Erdem
and Swait, 1998). Thus, our findings contribute by demonstrating that domestic brands are
role models of authenticity and are directly associated with indigenous culture, which reduces
uncertainty, information costs and risk, thereby increasing brand authenticity in Pakistan.
Similarly, UA and BA’s interactive effects significantly influenced CBIs in terms of their PI
and WOM in Pakistan. The theory suggests that a brand’s credibility boosts perceived
quality and reduces uncertainty, influencing consumers to purchase a brand (Erdem et al.,
2006). Thus, brand authenticity lessens uncertainty and perceived risk, influencing
consumers to develop favorable behavioral intentions for their PI and WOM in Pakistan.
Finally, this study discovered the significance of brand authenticity as a connecting
bridge between PBL, PBG and CBIs in China and Pakistan. The findings revealed that brand
authenticity mediated as a strong signal and effectively communicated to connect these
relationships in China and Pakistan. However, the mediating significance of brand
authenticity was more important between the relationships PBL and PI, PBG and PI,
WOM in China compared to Pakistan. On the other side, brand authenticity was also an PBL and PBG
equally important signal that assisted in strengthening the relationships of PBL, PBG and on CBIs in EMs
CBIs (PI, PP, WOM) in Pakistan. The theory demonstrated that brand credibility enhances
the association between PBL and price premium in globalized markets (Germany), as well as
the association between PBG and price premium in globalizing markets (South Korea)
(Mandler et al., 2021). Thus, our research contributed to the development of new perspectives.
2497
5.2 Managerial contributions
This research revealed several recommendations to domestic and international managers for
designing and implementing brand positioning, market segmentation and targeting
strategies in EMs (China and Pakistan). First, given PBL’s significant effect on brand
authenticity, global managers may concentrate on strengthening their brands’ localness by
incorporating local characteristics into their brand positioning strategies in EMs, particularly
in China. Additionally, global managers should embrace local culture and tailor their
products to represent it while developing positioning strategies (Alden et al., 1999). Similarly,
local managers can leverage competitive advantages by designing various communication
campaigns aligned with local culture, community and consumer benefits to strengthen their
brand localness.
Second, considering the impact of PBG on brand authenticity, the findings revealed that
perceived global brands have a more significant impact on improving consumer perceptions
of brand authenticity in Pakistan compared to China. Perceived brand prestige and quality
€
are important factors in strengthening a PBG (Ozsomer, 2012; Steenkamp et al., 2003). Thus,
global managers can position their brands by communicating the quality and prestige of
global brands to enhance Pakistani consumers’ perceptions of brand authenticity and
globalness to maintain that global brands fulfill their commitments and deliver on their
promises. Similarly, local managers may concentrate their efforts on communication
campaigns to improve the product’s quality, multi-market reach and authenticity to increase
consumers’ perceptions of globalness.
Third, the findings indicate that the PBL and PBG are significant brand signals in
Pakistan, connecting directly with consumers and influencing their behavioral intentions (PI,
PP, WOM). Local and global managers may target consumers by adopting the local and
global consumer culture positioning (Alden et al., 1999) in EMs (Pakistan). These hybrid
marketing strategies may assist them in competing successfully in local and global markets.
PBL communicates and positively influences consumer PI and WOM for local brands in
China, whereas PBG directly influences consumers’ willingness to pay PP for global brands
in China. Since China is the world’s largest EM and business managers have many
opportunities to target consumers through positioning by improving their brands’ localness
and globalness attributes.
Fourth, the greater influence and preference for authentic brands demonstrated that
Pakistani consumers are more inclined and prefer authentic brands than Chinese consumers.
Global managers can develop various branding strategies by integrating the brand
authenticity features to influence consumers’ behavior in EMs (China and Pakistan). Brand
authenticity is an essential brand attribute, especially in Asian EMs. Consumers search for
authenticity because authenticity has surpassed quality (Gilmore and Pine, 2007; Safeer et al.,
2021a). Similarly, local managers may position their local brands by incorporating
authenticity features to affect consumer behavior in China and Pakistan.
Fifth, the findings indicated that cultural aspects play a critical role in brand positioning
strategies, specifically in terms of targeting and segmentation of consumers. Managers may
segment high and low uncertainty avoidance consumers in the Pakistani markets and then
target them with brand localness and authenticity to reduce their uncertainty associated with
MD brands. Further, the interactive effects of UA and BA favorably influenced CBIs (PI, WOM) in
60,9 Pakistan. By focusing on low and high UA consumers in Pakistan, local and global managers
can develop a marketing strategy that incorporates authenticity attributes in order to
mitigate consumers’ perceived risks. Thus, such strategies may influence consumers and
stimulate their behavioral intentions (including PI, WOM) in EMs (Pakistan).
Finally, with PBG advantages in existing brands, global managers may enhance
consumers’ confidence in EMs (China and Pakistan). Additionally, multinational companies
2498 can also acquire well-established local brands to gain the benefits of brand authenticity and
localness, such as Lenovo (a Chinese company) acquired the IBM PC division. Similarly, by
leveraging existing brands’ localness advantages, local managers may position their brands
globally by harnessing authenticity attributes to increase brand awareness and multi-market
reach to achieve the benefits of PBG. PBG benefits can also be obtained by establishing
overseas subsidiaries, as Haier (a Chinese business) has successfully established a
manufacturing facility in Pakistan to produce its brands. Thus, they are achieving PBL
and PBG benefits in EMs (China and Pakistan), implying that brand authenticity is
strengthened in EMs. As a result of these strategies, consumers’ behavioral intentions (PI, PP,
WOM) will improve in EMs.

5.3 Conclusion
This research concluded that PBL and globalness (PBG) are essential factors of brand
authenticity (BA) and important brand signals that positively influence CBIs in EMs (China
and Pakistan). PBL was identified as a critical brand signal in China, whereas PBG was
recognized as a vital brand signal in Pakistan. However, brand authenticity served as a
dynamic mediating signal, reducing consumers’ ambiguity and stimulating consumers’
behavioral intentions (PI, PP, WOM) in EMs (China and Pakistan). Additionally, uncertainty
avoidance (UA) played a significant moderating role on the relationships between PBL and
BA in Pakistan. Similarly, the interaction effects of UA and brand authenticity significantly
influenced consumers’ behavioral intentions (PI, WOM) in Pakistan, whereas no comparable
influence was observed in China. EMs are a highly attractive segment in the world. Firms
may employ PBL, PBG and brand authenticity as brand attributes to positively influence
consumer behavior in order to retain existing and attract new consumers in EMs.
Additionally, firms may target consumers with high and low uncertainty avoidance to
effectively grab niche market segments in EMs (Pakistan).

5.4 Limitations and future research scope

This study highlighted some shortcomings. First, this study concentrated on China and
Pakistan. Whereas all EMs vary in terms of political, economic, social, legal and cultural
aspects. Thus, additional data collection from several EMs will be required to generalize the
findings. Second, this research incorporated uncertainty avoidance only as a moderator.
While all of Hofstede’s values are important in EMs. Thus, the future study may examine all
of Hofstede’s cultural values in local and global branding contexts. Finally, this research
investigated consumer perceptions of domestic and international brands. The combined
phenomena of global/local branding research focus on consumers who prefer both brands for
consumption are called “glocal brands.” This phenomenon may prove to be an intriguing area
of inquiry for future research.

References
Ahmad, M. (2021), “Does underconfidence matter in short-term and long-term investment decisions?
Evidence from an emerging market”, Management Decision, Vol. 59 No. 3, pp. 692-709.
Ahmad, M., Shah, S.Z.A. and Abbass, Y. (2021), “The role of heuristic-driven biases in entrepreneurial PBL and PBG
strategic decision-making: evidence from an emerging economy”, Management Decision, Vol. 59
No. 3, pp. 669-691. on CBIs in EMs
Alden, D.L., Steenkamp, J.-B.E. and Batra, R. (1999), “Brand positioning through advertising in Asia,
North America, and Europe: the role of global consumer culture”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 63
No. 1, pp. 75-87.
Beverland, M.B. and Farrelly, F.J. (2010), “The quest for authenticity in consumption: consumers’
purposive choice of authentic cues to shape experienced outcomes”, Journal of Consumer 2499
Research, Vol. 36 No. 5, pp. 838-856.
Brown, B.P., Zablah, A.R., Bellenger, D.N. and Johnston, W.J. (2011), “When do B2B brands influence
the decision making of organizational buyers? An examination of the relationship between
purchase risk and brand sensitivity”, International Journal of Research in Marketing, Vol. 28
No. 3, pp. 194-204.
Bruhn, M., Schoenm€uller, V., Sch€afer, D. and Heinrich, D. (2012), “Brand authenticity: towards a deeper
understanding of its conceptualization and measurement”, Advances in Consumer Research,
Vol. 40, pp. 567-576.
Busser, J.A. and Shulga, L., V. (2019), “Involvement in consumer-generated advertising: effects of
organizational transparency and brand authenticity on loyalty and trust”, International Journal
of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 31 No. 4, pp. 1763-1784.
Chin, W.W. (1998), “The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling”, Modern
Methods for Business Research, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, pp. 295-336.
Dalmoro, M., Pinto, D.C., Borges, A. and Nique, W.M. (2015), “Global brands in emerging markets: the
cultural antecedents of global brand preference”, Journal of Brand Management, Vol. 22 No. 9,
pp. 721-736.
Davvetas, V. and Halkias, G. (2019), “Global and local brand stereotypes: formation, content transfer,
and impact”, International Marketing Review, Vol. 36 No. 5, pp. 675-701.
Davvetas, V., Sichtmann, C. and Diamantopoulos, A. (2015), “The impact of perceived brand
globalness on consumers’ willingness to pay”, International Journal of Research in Marketing,
Vol. 32 No. 4, pp. 431-434.
De Mooij, M. and Hofstede, G. (2010), “The Hofstede model: applications to global branding and
advertising strategy and research”, International Journal of Advertising, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 85-110.
Dijkstra, T.K. and Henseler, J. (2015), “Consistent partial least squares path modeling”, MIS Quarterly,
Vol. 39 No. 2, pp. 297-316.
Dimofte, C.V., Johansson, J.K. and Ronkainen, I.A. (2008), “Cognitive and affective reactions of US
consumers to global brands”, Journal of International Marketing, Vol. 16 No. 4, pp. 113-135.
Dwivedi, A. and McDonald, R. (2018), “Building brand authenticity in fast-moving consumer goods
via consumer perceptions of brand marketing communications”, European Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 52 Nos 7/8, pp. 1387-1411.
Erdem, T. and Swait, J. (1998), “Brand equity as a signaling phenomenon”, Journal of Consumer
Psychology, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 131-157.
Erdem, T. and Swait, J. (2004), “Brand credibility, brand consideration, and choice”, Journal of
Consumer Research, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 191-198.
Erdem, T., Swait, J. and Louviere, J. (2002), “The impact of brand credibility on consumer price
sensitivity”, International Journal of Research in Marketing, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 1-19.
Erdem, T., Swait, J. and Valenzuela, A. (2006), “Brands as signals: a cross-country validation study”,
Journal of Marketing, Vol. 70 No. 1, pp. 34-49.
Farıas, P. and Torres, L. (2022), “The role of market and product category characteristics in local
versus foreign language branding in Latin America”, Management Decision, Vol. 60 No. 5, pp.
1492-1510, doi: 10.1108/MD-10-2020-1414.
MD Fritz, K., Schoenmueller, V. and Bruhn, M. (2017), “Authenticity in branding – exploring antecedents
and consequences of brand authenticity”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 51 No. 2,
60,9 pp. 324-348.
Geisser, S. (1974), “A predictive approach to the random effect model”, Biometrika, Vol. 61 No. 1,
pp. 101-107.
Gilmore, J.H. and Pine, B.J. (2007), Authenticity: What Consumers Really Want, Harvard Business
Press, Boston, MA.
2500
Hair, J.F., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C.M. and Mena, J.A. (2012), “An assessment of the use of partial least
squares structural equation modeling in marketing research”, Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science, Vol. 40 No. 3, pp. 414-433.
Hair, J.F. Jr, Sarstedt, M., Hopkins, L. and Volker, G.K. (2014), “Partial least squares structural equation
modeling (PLS-SEM): an emerging tool in business research”, European Business Review,
Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 106-121.
Hair, J., Joseph, F., Hult, G.T.M., Ringle, C. and Sarstedt, M. (2017), A Primer on Partial Least Squares
Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM), Sage Publications, Los Angeles.
Hair, J.F. Jr, Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C.M. and Gudergan, S.P. (2018), Advanced Issues in Partial Least
Squares Structural Equation Modeling, SAGE Publications, Los Angeles.
Hair Joseph, F., Risher Jeffrey, J., Sarstedt, M. and Ringle Christian, M. (2019), “When to use and how
to report the results of PLS-SEM”, European Business Review, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 2-24.
Halkias, G., Davvetas, V. and Diamantopoulos, A. (2016), “The interplay between country stereotypes
and perceived brand globalness/localness as drivers of brand preference”, Journal of Business
Research, Vol. 69 No. 9, pp. 3621-3628.
Henseler, J., Ringle, C.M. and Sarstedt, M. (2015), “A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity
in variance-based structural equation modeling”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,
Vol. 43 No. 1, pp. 115-135.
Henseler, J., Ringle Christian, M. and Sarstedt, M. (2016), “Testing measurement invariance of composites
using partial least squares”, International Marketing Review, Vol. 33 No. 3, pp. 405-431.
Hofstede, G. (2001), Culture’s Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions and
Organizations across Nations, Sage Publications, London.
Hu, L.-T. and Bentler, P.M. (1998), “Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: sensitivity to
underparameterized model misspecification”, Psychological Methods, Vol. 3 No. 4, pp. 424-453.
Ilicic, J. and Webster, C.M. (2014), “Investigating consumer–brand relational authenticity”, Journal of
Brand Management, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 342-363.
 Arslanagic-Kalajdzic, M. and Diamantopoulos, A. (2019), “Stereotyping global brands: is
Kolbl, Z.,
warmth more important than competence?”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 104, pp. 614-621.
 Diamantopoulos, A., Arslanagic-Kalajdzic, M. and Zabkar, V. (2020), “Do brand warmth and
Kolbl, Z.,
brand competence add value to consumers? A stereotyping perspective”, Journal of Business
Research, Vol. 118, pp. 346-362.
Liu, H., Schoefer, K., Fastoso, F. and Tzemou, E. (2021), “Perceived brand globalness/localness: a
systematic review of the literature and directions for further research”, Journal of International
Marketing, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 77-94.
Mandler, T. (2019), “Beyond reach: an extended model of global brand effects”, International
Marketing Review, Vol. 36 No. 5, pp. 647-674.
Mandler, T., Bartsch, F. and Han, C.M. (2021), “Brand credibility and marketplace globalization: the
role of perceived brand globalness and localness”, Journal of International Business Studies,
Vol. 52, pp. 1559-1590.
Morhart, F., Mal€ar, L., Guevremont, A., Girardin, F. and Grohmann, B. (2015), “Brand authenticity: an
integrative framework and measurement scale”, Journal of Consumer Psychology, Vol. 25 No. 2,
pp. 200-218.
Moulard, J.G., Raggio, R.D. and Folse, J.A.G. (2016), “Brand authenticity: testing the antecedents and PBL and PBG
outcomes of brand management’s passion for its products”, Psychology and Marketing, Vol. 33
No. 6, pp. 421-436. on CBIs in EMs
Napoli, J., Dickinson, S.J., Beverland, M.B. and Farrelly, F. (2014), “Measuring consumer-based brand
authenticity”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 67 No. 6, pp. 1090-1098.
Nijssen, E.J. and Douglas, S.P. (2011), “Consumer world-mindedness and attitudes toward product
positioning in advertising: an examination of global versus foreign versus local positioning”,
Journal of International Marketing, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 113-133. 2501
€
Ozsomer, A. (2012), “The interplay between global and local brands: a closer look at perceived brand
globalness and local iconness”, Journal of International Marketing, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 72-95.
€
Ozsomer, A. and Altaras, S. (2008), “Global brand purchase likelihood: a critical synthesis and an
integrated conceptual framework”, Journal of International Marketing, Vol. 16 No. 4, pp. 1-28.
Petison, P. and Johri, L.M. (2008), “Localization drivers in an emerging market: case studies from
Thailand”, Management Decision, Vol. 46 No. 9, pp. 1399-1412.
Podsakoff, N.P. (2003), “Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature
and recommended remedies”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 885 No. 879, pp. 10-1037.
Riefler, P. (2020), “Local versus global food consumption: the role of brand authenticity”, Journal of
Consumer Marketing, Vol. 37 No. 3, pp. 317-327.
Safeer, A.A., He, Y. and Abrar, M. (2021a), “The influence of brand experience on brand authenticity
and brand love: an empirical study from Asian consumers’ perspective”, Asia Pacific Journal of
Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 33 No. 5, pp. 1123-1138.
Safeer, A.A., He, Y., Lin, Y., Abrar, M. and Nawaz, Z. (2021b), “Impact of perceived brand authenticity
on consumer behavior: an evidence from generation Y in Asian perspective”, International
Journal of Emerging Markets, pp. 1-20, doi: 10.1108/IJOEM-09-2020-1128.
Safeer, A.A., Yuanqiong, H., Abrar, M., Shabbir, R. and Rasheed, H.M.W. (2021c), “Role of brand
experience in predicting consumer loyalty”, Marketing Intelligence and Planning, Vol. 39 No. 8,
pp. 1042-1057.
Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C.M. and Hair, J.F. (2017), Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling,
Springer International Publishing, Heidelberg.
Schallehn, M., Burmann, C. and Riley, N. (2014), “Brand authenticity: model development and
empirical testing”, Journal of Product and Brand Management, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 192-199.
Sheth, J.N. (2011), “Impact of emerging markets on marketing: rethinking existing perspectives and
practices”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 75 No. 4, pp. 166-182.
Sichtmann, C., Davvetas, V. and Diamantopoulos, A. (2019), “The relational value of perceived brand
globalness and localness”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 104, pp. 597-613.
Singh, S.K. and Gaur, S.S. (2018), “Entrepreneurship and innovation management in emerging
economies”, Management Decision, Vol. 56 No. 1, pp. 2-5.
S€odergren, J. (2021), “Brand authenticity: 25 years of research”, International Journal of Consumer
Studies, Vol. 45 No. 4, pp. 645-663.
Son, J., Jin, B. and George, B. (2013), “Consumers’ purchase intention toward foreign brand goods”,
Management Decision, Vol. 51 No. 2, pp. 434-450.
Spence, M. (2002), “Signaling in retrospect and the informational structure of markets”, American
Economic Review, Vol. 92 No. 3, pp. 434-459.
Srivastava, A., Dey, D.K. and Balaji, M. (2020), “Drivers of brand credibility in consumer evaluation of
global brands and domestic brands in an emerging market context”, Journal of Product and
Brand Management, Vol. 29 No. 7, pp. 849-861.
Steenkamp, J.B., Batra, R. and Alden, D.L. (2003), “How perceived brand globalness creates brand
value”, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 34 No. 1, pp. 53-65.
MD Swoboda, B., Pennemann, K. and Taube, M. (2012), “The effects of perceived brand globalness and
perceived brand localness in China: empirical evidence on Western, Asian, and domestic
60,9 retailers”, Journal of International Marketing, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 72-95.
Tam Jackie, L.M. (2008), “Brand familiarity: its effects on satisfaction evaluations”, Journal of Services
Marketing, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 3-12.
Torelli, C., Ozsomer, A. and Carvalho, S. (2009), “A measure of brand values: cross-cultural
implications for brand preferences”, ACR North American Advances, Vol. 36, pp. 41-44.
2502
Vuong, B.N. and Khanh Giao, H.N. (2020), “The impact of perceived brand globalness on consumers’
purchase intention and the moderating role of consumer ethnocentrism: an evidence from
Vietnam”, Journal of International Consumer Marketing, Vol. 32 No. 1, pp. 47-68.
Xie, Y., Batra, R. and Peng, S. (2015), “An extended model of preference formation between global and
local brands: the roles of identity expressiveness, trust, and affect”, Journal of International
Marketing, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 50-71.
Zeithaml, V.A., Berry, L.L. and Parasuraman, A. (1996), “The behavioral consequences of service
quality”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 60 No. 2, pp. 31-46.
Zeng, H. and Hao, L. (2016), “Cross-cultural examination of the effects of promotional framing on
consumers’ responses: a comparison of China and Pakistan”, International Business Review,
Vol. 25 No. 5, pp. 1020-1029.

About the authors

Dr Asif Ali Safeer is a passionate Certified Professional Marketer (Asia), having over 13 years of
diversified experience in International Marketing, Customer Relationship Management and Corporate
Branding in a multinational corporation. He has also more than five years of teaching experience at the
university level. His work has been published in several prestigious journals. Currently, he is an
Associate Professor of Marketing at Business School, Huanggang Normal University, Huanggang,
China. His research interest includes Brand Management, Consumer Behavior and International
Marketing.
Dr Muhammad Abrar is an Associate Professor at Lyallpur Business School, Government College
University Faisalabad, Pakistan. He is also a member of the International Advisory Council for the
Marketing Profession of IIMPTM. He has many international and national research publications and
several conference papers, which make him a distinctive name in the field of Business Administration.
His research interest includes Consumer Behavior, Brand Management, Innovation, Niche markets and
Services Marketing.
Dr Hancheng Liu is a Professor and Dean at the Business School, Huanggang Normal University,
Huanggang, China. He is involved in various scientific research projects and published many research
papers in well reputed international journals. He is a distinctive professor and won many awards. His
research includes rural economic development, business management and consumer behavior.
Dr He Yuanqiong is a Professor at the School of Management, Huazhong University of Science and
Technology, Wuhan, China. Currently, she is also a consultant of different public corporations. She has
published several research papers in prestigious journals. Her research interest includes Service
innovation and service management, Corporate social responsibility, Brand Management, Consumer
Behavior, Customer value and business model innovation. Professor Yuanqiong is a corresponding
author of this research article. He Yuanqiong is the corresponding author and can be contacted at:
heyuanqiong@mail.hust.edu.cn

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com