engleski

Are private labels authentic? Insights from the qualitative study

Background: There is an evident and rising academic interest in studying authenticity in the context of branding in the last five years (Carsana & Jolibert, 2018 ; Fritz et al., 2017 ; Morhart et al., 2015). Broadly, authenticity can be defined as “a process of verifying whether (or the extent to which) entities are what they are purported to be” (Newman & Smith, 2016, p. 610). Although the definition of the construct depends on the context, in branding, authenticity can be defined as “the perceived consistency of brand's behaviour that reflects its core values and norms, according to which it is perceived as being true to itself, not undermining its brand essence or substantive nature (Fritz et al., 2017, p. 327).” Private labels, as a specific brand type, have witnessed considerable growth around the world and are present in almost every consumer- packaged goods category (ter Braak, Geyskens & Dekimpe, 2014). They have become an alternative brand choice available to consumers, usually at a lower price level (Calvo Porral & Lang, 2015). However, as their importance in the retailer’s assortment grew due to acceptance by consumers, retailers started to invest more in private label management through an increase in inconsistent quality (Apelbaum, Gerstner & Naik, 2003). Commitment to private label quality led to a change in consumer perceptions. Consumers increasingly state that there is no major difference in quality between private labels and manufacturer brands (Chaniotakis, Lymperopoulos, & Soureli, 2009). To strengthen the quality perception of private labels retailers are increasingly introducing premium private labels making them the hottest trend in private label management (ter Braak, Geyskens and Dekimpe, 2014). Premium private labels differ from other forms of private labels through the development of brand personality that does not strive to be similar to leading national brands but rather to offer innovative products of high quality (Kumar & Steenkamp, 2007). Anselmsson, Johansson, and Persson (2007) showed that the level of brand uniqueness is the most significant determinant of the higher brand value, expressed by the higher price consumers are willing to pay. In that sense, Kadirov (2015) is focusing on the perceived authenticity gap between national brand and private labels as a new approach for manufacturers to compete with private labels. However, there is little research available on the authenticity of private labels and how can retailers use that concept in successful private label management. Current branding literature offers different measurement scales of brand authenticity. The most comprehensive scale of perceived brand authenticity (PBA) was developed by Morhart et al. (2015), and it contains four dimensions: (1) continuity, (2) credibility, (3) integrity and (4) symbolism. Giving that private labels are usually sold exclusively in stores of their owner, retailer’s image can have an important implication on private label authenticity development ; therefore, it is included as a variable in this research. Purpose: In today’s highly competitive marketplace, a low price associated with private labels is no longer enough to attract consumers. Consumers want authentic brands, so retailers are slowly moving away from offering copycat brands towards offering unique private labels. The goal of the research is to validate elements of brand authenticity proposed in the literature in the context of private labels and to add retailer image as an additional element unavoidably linked to private labels. Additionally, the goal of this research is to explore whether consumers associate authenticity with private labels in the Croatian market. Design/methodology/approach: Qualitative research was carried out through two focus groups by using semi-structured focus group guide. Findings: Respondents distinguish between four dimensions of perceived brand authenticity, (1) continuity, (2) credibility, (3) integrity, and (4) symbolism as proposed in the literature. When it comes to private labels, a retailer’s image was verified as an important component of their authenticity. Perception of private labels is positive, and respondents have accepted them as a viable brand alternative, but they do not associate them with the notion of authenticity due to their focus on functional benefits and lack of promotional support. Research limitations: Limitations are related to the method used in collecting data (focus groups) where expressed opinions can depend on a social situation so some socially acceptable opinions can emerge. Practical and social implications: According to the research findings, retailers should make an additional effort in differentiating private labels from manufacturer brands and use marketing communication to increase perceived brand authenticity. Originality/value: This paper extends the previous findings on the private label authenticity by introducing a retailer's image as an additional authenticity component and offers insights into private label authenticity in the Croatian market through qualitative research.

brand authenticity ; private labels ; retailer ; Croatian market

nije evidentirano