FINAL REPORT

BUSINESS REPORT WRITING

INSTRUCTOR: MAAM SAHAR QABOOL
YOUSMA SHAFI (11588)
SYEDA BANEEN FATIMA (12840)

CONTENTS
LETTER OF ACKNOWLEDEGEMENT………………………………………………..3
INTRODUCTION.....................................................................................................................................
.4

THEORY ABOUT EMPLOYER

BRANDING: .................................................................................................4

Maslow’s Hierarchy
Theory .....................................................................................................................4

FRAMEWORK .........................................................................................................................................
..5

LITERATURE
REVIEW: ...............................................................................................................................5

Employee Satisfaction..........................................................................................................................5

Employee Engagement........................................................................................................................5

Employee attraction ............................................................................................................................6

Employee Retention ............................................................................................................................6

HYPOTHESIS: .........................................................................................................................................
...6

Direct Hypothesis.................................................................................................................................6

Direct Hypothesis.................................................................................................................................7

Relationship between the variables: .......................................................................................................7

Relationship between the employer’s branding on employer satisfaction: .......................................7

Relationship between the employers branding on employee attraction: ..........................................7

Relationship between the employers branding on employee retention: ...........................................7

Relationship between the employers branding on employee engagement: ......................................7

References: ..............................................................................................................................................8

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I would want to convey my heartfelt gratitude to Maam Sahar Qabool, my
mentor, for his invaluable advice and assistance in completing my project. He
was there to assist me every step of the way, and his motivation is what
enabled me to accomplish my task effectively. I would also like to thank all of
the other supporting personnel who assisted me by supplying the equipment
that was essential and vital, without which I would not have been able to
perform efficiently on this project.
I would also want to thank the University of PAF Kiet for accepting my project
in my desired field of expertise. I’d also like to thank my friends and parents for
their support and encouragement as I worked on this assignment.
 INTRODUCTION
Today, businesses have realized how important emotional attachment to a brand is in forging positive
relationships with customers. The brands that can engender client loyalty are more successful in
outpacing their rivals and achieving long-term advantages (Roberts, 2006). Researchers in marketing
have looked into the idea of brand love (Ahuvia, 2005; Fournier, 1998). Consumers may form close
bonds with companies and feel a sense of affection for them, according to Fournier (1998). Higher
levels of brand loyalty and favorable word-of-mouth are correlated with brand love. Brand loyalty is
defined as "a strongly held tendency to persistently support a preferred brand or service in the
future, leading to repetitive same-brand purchasing despite situational influences and marketing
attempts having the potential to cause switching behavior” (Oliver, 1999, p.34).

The researcher is interested in examining the connections between brand love, brand loyalty,
and word-of-mouth utilizing the coffee shop industry as the setting, in accordance with these ideas.
Given the evidence of the current coffee shop owners opening more branches in new areas, the
Khon Kaen province's coffee shop sector has clearly experienced tremendous expansion. While
waiting for this market to mature, more Thai businesspeople and foreign investors are becoming
interested in the coffee shop industry. Additionally, the current suppliers and small to medium-sized
businesses in the restaurant and food service 106 Proceedings of the Universal Academic Cluster
International Summer Conference in Hokkaido, 2017 industry have continually entered the market.
Because possible rivals try to boost the market share, increasing the level of competition in this
market (National Food Institute of Thailand, 2015).

THEORY ABOUT BRAND LOVE:

There are a lot of brand love theories that explain about the brand satisfaction, brand image, brand
trust, and brand loyalty. In the study we have found some theories on brand satisfaction which effect
the brand image and organizational growth of brand.

Based on the relationship marketing theory (Aggarwal, 2004; MacInnis et al., 2009), we believe
that the expressive brand relationship is the primary motivator of brand love (Ahuvia and Ahuvia,
2006; Heinrich et al., 2012), brand trust (Chaudhuri and Holbrook, 2001), and brand loyalty
(Chaudhuri and Holbrook, 2001; Oliver, 2010) at the action level. In order to understand why the
three-path mediated impact between brand trust and brand love exists and how such an effect may
be created, a theoretical model is designed with Taiwanese tablet PC users as its focus (Taylor, 2008).
 FRAMEWORK

BRAND
BRAND LOYALTY
SATISFACTION

BRAND IMAGE COGNITIVE

BRAND LOVE ENGAGEMENT

BRAND TRUST WORD OF

MOUTH
BRAND LOYALTY:
Customer buying habits is not a reaction; instead, it is the result of a consistent emotional influence.
Customers will be psychologically loyal to a brand in addition to engaging in recurrent purchasing
behaviors. This means that in a cutthroat industry like the one for tablet PCs, brand loyalty not only
draws in new clients but also sustains repeat business. Brand loyalty should be measured in terms of
both attitude and behavior, according to the majority of empirical studies (Baldinger and Rubinson,
1996; Mukherjee and Nath, 2007; Sondoh et al., 2007; Chen and Hu, 2010; Deng et al., 2010; Alireza
et al., 2011; Chen et al., 2014; ChartonVachet and Lombart, 2018).

According to social exchange theory, the ability to convey brand relationship depends on the contact
that takes place between the customer and the brand. This favorable relationship may establish
customers' loyalty to brands and enhance the identities of such brands (Lombart and Louis, 2016). A
personified expressive brand relationship can develop through time and based on interaction into
one that is more continuous, intimate, and stable (Aggarwal, 2004; Coelho et al., 2018).

COGNITIVE ENGAGEMENT:
Students must transition from superficial to meaningful cognitive processing in order to promote
cognitive engagement (Craik & Lockhart, 1972). These kinds of mental connections are made
possible by deep cognitive processes.

Deep processing promotes rote learning and knowledge elaboration, while shallow processing
encourages lower-level cognitive learning outcomes that are mostly brought about by a lack of
robust interaction with the learning materials (Christopher, Walker, Greene, & Mansell, 2005).

That a student's activities (such as moving from a misunderstanding to knowledge, talking with
classmates, taking notes, or processing recently provided material) can in fact be used to gauge a
student's cognitive involvement. Yet, there are few techniques available to measure cognitive
involvement in the particularly difficult context of the sciences, according to Greene in Measuring
cognitive engagement with self-report scales: Reflections from over 20 years of research (Greene,
2015).
WORD OF MOUTH:
WOM is defined as any opinion, whether favorable or unfavorable, that consumers have about a
brand or business that makes its way online or through offline channels (Hennig-Thurau et al., 2004).
Despite the fact that WOM behaviour is mostly.

Differences exist whether based offline or online. eWOM can take place in one-to-one, one-to-many,
or many-to-many forms (offline WOM often takes place in one-to-one form), and it mostly consists of
written communication (whereas offline WOM is mostly spoken). Compared to offline WOM, eWOM
is more susceptible to a cascade effect and may be easier for businesses to control (Huang et al.,
2011).). Additionally, Lastovicka and Sirianni (2011) contend that customers who have cherished
products could be selective in their offline WOM behaviour and engage in WOM only in specific
situations or with particular people. As a result, it is Whilst both are conceptualised as results of
brand love (Carroll and Ahuvia, 2006; Batra et al., 2012), it seems sense to differentiate between
offline WOM and eWOM. Speaking to others about a brand is viewed in relation to WOM as a crucial
component of a person's identity building (Holt, 1997). It is driven by the desire to do the other
person a favour (Steffes and Burgee, 2009), and it also satisfies social needs by bringing individuals
together (Sheth and Parvatiyar, 1995).

BRAND SATISFACTION:
In addition to being the outcome of an experience with a purchase or a particular consumption,
satisfaction has been defined as a form of cognition. It also involves a process of evaluation where
the consumer contrasts the performance expected with the actual performance (Johnson et al.,
1995; Mano and Oliver, 1993). Brand satisfaction is another term used by Bloemer and Kasper (1995)
to describe the result of the subjective assessment that the selected alternative (the brand) fulfils or
exceeds expectations.

BRAND TRUST:
Doney and Cannon (1997) emphasize that brand trust is the degree to which customers believe that
a brand can provide the required value (Chaudhuri and Holbrook, 2001; Charton-Vachet and
Lombart, 2018; Coelho et al., 2018). Doney and Cannon (1997) believe that brand trust plays an
important role in longterm customer relationships and that brand trust can reduce the uncertainty
customers feel about a product when finding it difficult to make a purchase decision (Charton-Vachet
and Lombart, 2018). Chaudhuri and Holbrook (2001) define brand trust as the customer’s belief that
a brand has the ability to perform its claimed functions. Chen and Hu (2010) also point out that trust
is an expectation or belief—i.e., customers’ belief that services purchased will provide reliable and
as-promised performance.
 HYPOTHESIS:

DIRECT HYPOTHESIS

H1: Brand satisfaction has a Positive impact on brand love.

H2: Brand image has a Positive Impact on brand love.
H3: Brand trust has a Positive Impact on brand love.
H4: Brand love has a Positive Impact on brand loyalty.
H5: Brand love has a positive impact on cognitive engagement.
H6: Brand love has a positive impact on word of mouth.

INDIRECT HYPOTHESIS
H7: brand love mediates brand satisfaction and brand loyalty.
H8: Brand love mediates brand image and brand loyalty.
H9: Brand love mediates brand trust and brand loyalty.
H10: brand love mediates brand satisfaction and cognitive engagement.
H11: Brand love mediates brand image and cognitive engagement.
H12: Brand love mediates brand trust and cognitive engagement.
H13: brand love mediates brand satisfaction and word of mouth.
H14: Brand love mediates brand image and word of mouth.
H15: Brand love mediates brand trust and word of mouth.
 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN VARIABLES

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BRAND SATISFACTION ON BRAND LOVE

AND BRAND LOYALTY:
Brand love mediated between brand satisfaction and brand loyalty because if
people love brand so they satisfied and when they satisfied, they are become
loyal.

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BRAND IMAGE ON BRAND LOVE AND

GOGNATIVE ENGAGEMENT:
Brand love mediates the relationship between brand image and cognitive
engagement because brand love is working as a spoil between brand love and
cognitive engagement

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BRAND TRUST ON BRAND LOVE AND

WORD OF MOUTH:
Brand love mediates the relationship between brand trust and word of mouth
because if people love. The brand so they will trust the brand and ultimately
trust the word of mouth.

REFERENCES
Baldinger, A. L., & Rubinson, J. (1996). Brand loyalty: the link between attitude and behavior. Journal
of advertising research, 36, 22-36.
Mukherjee, A., & Nath, P. (2007). Role of electronic trust in online retailing: A re‐examination of the
commitment‐trust theory. European journal of marketing.
Walker, C. O., Greene, B. A., & Mansell, R. A. (2006). Identification with academics, intrinsic/extrinsic
motivation, and self-efficacy as predictors of cognitive engagement. Learning and individual
differences, 16(1), 1-12.
Lepper, M. R., & Greene, D. (2015). The hidden costs of reward: New perspectives on the psychology
of human motivation. Psychology Press.
Hennig-Thurau, T., Gwinner, K. P., Walsh, G., & Gremler, D. D. (2004). Electronic word-of-mouth via
consumer-opinion platforms: what motivates consumers to articulate themselves on the
internet? Journal of interactive marketing, 18(1), 38-52.
Zhao, D., Huang, Z., Umino, N., Hasegawa, A., & Kanamori, H. (2011). Structural heterogeneity in the
megathrust zone and mechanism of the 2011 Tohoku‐oki earthquake (Mw 9.0). Geophysical
Research Letters, 38(17).
Ahuvia, A., Bagozzi, R. P., & Batra, R. (2014). Psychometric vs. C-OAR-SE measures of brand love: A
reply to Rossiter. Marketing Letters, 25, 235-243.
Holt, D. B. (1997). Poststructuralist lifestyle analysis: Conceptualizing the social patterning of
consumption in postmodernity. Journal of Consumer research, 23(4), 326-350.
Steffes, E. M., & Burgee, L. E. (2009). Social ties and online word of mouth. Internet research, 19(1),
42-59.
Sheth, J. N., & Parvatiyar, A. (1995). The evolution of relationship marketing. International business
review, 4(4), 397-418.
Johnson, M. S., Garbarino, E., & Sivadas, E. (2006). Influences of customer differences of loyalty,
perceived risk and category experience on customer satisfaction ratings. International Journal of
Market Research, 48(5), 601-622.
Robertson, E., Grace, S., Wallington, T., & Stewart, D. E. (2004). Antenatal risk factors for postpartum
depression: a synthesis of recent literature. General hospital psychiatry, 26(4), 289-295.
Mishra, P., & Datta, B. (2011). Perpetual asset management of customer-based brand equity-The
PAM evaluator. Current Research Journal of Social Sciences, 3(1), 34-43.
Zhang, S., Peng, M. Y. P., Peng, Y., Zhang, Y., Ren, G., & Chen, C. C. (2020). Expressive brand
relationship, brand love, and brand loyalty for tablet pcs: Building a sustainable brand. Frontiers in
psychology, 11, 231.
Charton-Vachet, F., & Lombart, C. (2018). Impact of the link between individuals and their region on
the customer-regional brand relationship. Journal of retailing and Consumer Services, 43, 170-187.