Introduction The fashion business is known as one of the major industries that is suffering from rising concerns about the consumption of its product, which led to a reorganization of the fashion supply chain to become more sustainable three decades ago. The interest in the concept of sustainability and demand for sustainable marketing activities is gradually growing in the fashion industry due to the negative image and press it receives. Within the luxury fashion segment, the three main themes that are recognized to contribute to sustainability are exclusivity, craftmanship and limited production. However, luxury brands are increasingly shifting their attention and commitment towards environmental and social issues to be incorporated in the concept of sustainability. Yet, the majority of consumers has little understanding or misunderstands the concept of sustainable fashion and marketing, which leads to a gap between attitudes towards sustainability and actual behavior. As a result, fashion brands are trying to leverage their brand by making sustainability a key marketing strategy to raise awareness about social, environmental, economic and cultural issues. Extant research has not explored this recent trend to understand how consumers evaluate fashion brands with a sustainable marketing communication, especially in the context of luxury brands. This study investigates how luxury and mass fashion brands can utilize sustainable marketing contents in social media communication to reach their target group and enhance their equity with sustainability associations. Theoretical Development Associative network models of memory have served as a fundamental framework for a wide range of studies related to the formation and transfer of associations. According to associative network theory, brand knowledge is represented in form of an associative network of memory nodes connected to each other. Nodes are activated when cues, such as advertising, are presented. Mere exposure to cues was shown to be sufficient to active associations and facilitate association transfer. While brands are continuously attempting to make use of associative power to leverage brand equity, extant research has provided compelling reasons to accept that association transfer can also result in brand dilution when a retrieval of conflicting or negative associations occurs. Especially in the context of luxury brands consisting of very unique associations and being different from mass brands in many regards, managing the brand’s associative network is a crucial task in order to send the right signals to consumers and maintain exclusivity. This study investigates how social media communication of different sustainability dimensions affects brand attitude and how it ultimately impacts behavioral outcomes in an attempt to build brand equity for mass and luxury fashion brands. Method and Data The hypotheses are tested with 273 respondents who participated in an online experiment. They were first asked to state their involvement with the category fashion. Subsequently, subjects were presented with a brand post either for the mass or luxury brand including claims related to one of the four sustainability dimensions or no claims for the control group respectively. The experiment consisted of a 2 (brand: mass or luxury) x 5 (sustainability dimensions: none, cultural, economic, environmental, social) factorial design. The measures that followed included attitudinal as well as behavioral constructs related to the brand, sustainability as well as social media use. Analysis of covariance is applied to test for main effects and interaction effects. Summary of Findings This study provides evidence that social media communication of a sustainable brand affects the purchase intention of consumers. The findings indicate a significant difference between the mass and the luxury brand used for this study. The mass brand exhibits the potential to leverage associations with cultural, economic, and environmental sustainability. However, the results only reveal a marginally significant higher purchase intention when cultural sustainability is communicated compared to when the brand does not provide any sustainable associations. In contrast, the luxury brand suffers from significant brand dilution across all four sustainability dimensions resulting in a decline in purchase intention. Key Contributions The findings reveal that sustainability communication exerts a diverging influence depending on the type of brand that is involved. This study suggests that mass brands are able to benefit from sustainability communication in an attempt to leverage brand equity. However, for a luxury brand this type of associations rather presents a liability that might dilute the brand. The findings of this study provide important insights for brand managers. Since mass brands are currently increasing efforts into sustainable communication in the fashion industry, the results suggest that this might be a promising investment. However, luxury brands are advised to carefully manage the communication of salient content related to sustainability as it might harm the invaluable and unique associations inherent in a luxury brand.

Introduction The concept of brand equity has been receiving considerable interest from academia and practice in the past decades. While mutual understanding exists on the importance of establishing high-equity brands, less agreement among academics and practitioners prevails regarding its conceptualization and operationalization. Many approaches have been proposed to measure brand equity in academic literature and numerous competing companies such as Millward Brown, Interbrand, or Young & Rubicam offer commercial metrics and brand evaluations, which are likely to estimate different values to a specific brand. This study reflects a consumer-based perspective on brand equity, which resides in the heart and mind of the consumer and captures the value a brand endows beyond the attributes and benefits its products imply. Growing calls for the accountability of marketing has resulted in increasing interest in marketing metrics, which includes mind-set metrics to address the “black box” between marketing actions and consumer actions in the market. Theoretical Development One of the most prominent conceptualizations of brand equity is based on the premise that brand equity is “the differential effect of brand knowledge on consumer response to the marketing of the brand” consisting of brand awareness and brand image as the predominant dimensions that shape brand knowledge. In this model, a crucial role is ascribed to consumer’s associations with a brand as a reflection of its image. Accordingly, brand building and differentiation is based on establishing favorable, strong, and unique associations. Human associative network theory is a widely accepted concept to explain the storage and retrieval of information and has been largely applied in the context of brands. Associative network theory suggests that brand information is stored in long-term memory in a network of nodes that are linked to brand associations such as attributes, claims or evaluations. Consumers use brand names as cues to retrieve associations. Once cues activate corresponding nodes and consumers retrieve information from memory, the activation spreads to related nodes. Consequently, a transfer of associations can also occur through associative chains in a process of attitude formation. Consumer response to a brand can be of attitudinal and behavioral character and research on attitudes supports the general notion that both, affective and cognitive structures, explain attitude formation. The predictive properties of attitudes regarding actual behavior have been acknowledged by prior research and the attitude-behavior relationship has been established. Research Design Operationalization of Brand Equity This study distinguishes between attitudinal and behavioral measures of brand equity. The behavioral measures of brand equity should reflect the attitudinal brand equity components in predicting product-market outcomes. High brand equity should lead to a willingness to pay a price premium, purchase intention and willingness to recommend. Survey Brand equity measures are tested with two waves of data collection2 from online surveys conducted in 2015 and 2016. Respondents were recruited from a professional panel provider to ensure that the same respondents participated in wave two after a year from the first wave. Participants were selected according to a quota regarding age and gender to increase representativeness and were then randomly assigned to one of the three industries beer, insurance, and white goods capturing brand equity from different perspectives and allowing for a more holistic view. Sample The sample for the first wave consists of 2.798 respondents. The sample was matched with the response from wave two and only those respondents were selected who participated in both waves. Given the panel mortality rate, the final sample size for longitudinal analysis is 1.292 observations. The respondents’ age ranges from 18 to 74 with 52 percent being male and 48 percent female. Analysis Panel regression is used to estimate models assessing the relative importance of various brand equity metrics regarding the three outcome variables for the three categories included. The results suggest that no universal brand equity metric dominates that can be applied to predict behavioral outcomes across categories. Yet, category-specific brand equity metrics prevail across outcomes. Consumers seem to evaluate a strong brand as an entity they can personally connect to in the insurance category. In the beer category, consumers’ evaluation of strong brands reflects deep affect and the perception of product quality. High equity brands relate to loyal consumers with strong affective evaluations in the category of durable household products. Moreover, the results indicate that brand equity measurement can be simplified to a small subset of metrics without risking loss of model fit and predictive power. Discussion While a plethora of brand equity metrics exists, the results of this study suggest that brand managers can apply a small subset of available metrics to track their brands’ equity and predict behavior without implementing long surveys that require considerable time and effort from increasingly overloaded consumers. Yet, adjustments to the composition of brand equity metrics might be inevitable in light of category-specific effects. Moreover, the results reveal that a consideration of metrics capturing affective components such as brand self-connection and deep feelings such as brand love is indispensable for brand equity measurement. Including emotional measures and extending established brand equity metrics that are deeply rooted in extant research might provide a considerable advantage when it comes to measuring brand value in different product categories. References are available upon request.

Introduction Brand equity has been receiving utmost attention in academia and practice over the past decades and continues to be of significant interest. Brands have been identified as one of the most valuable assets and firms try to leverage brands in increasingly complex brand portfolios. A large body of literature exists on spillover effects with regard to brand extensions. However, little is known about how corporate branding within product brand communication impacts brand equity. Therefore, this study examines to what extent product brand attitudes spill over to corporate brands. Furthermore, it investigates how corporate branding affects corporate brand attitude. Finally, the role of product brand familiarity, corporate brand familiarity and involvement in brand leverage and dilution is assessed. Method and data Answers to these questions are provided with a sample of 407 subjects that participated in an online experiment and were presented with a print ad either for brands in the FMCG or pharmaceutical category. The experiment included a 2 (corporate brand familiarity: high or low) x 2 (product brand familiarity: high or low) x 2 (category involvement: high or low) x 2 (corporate brand presence: yes or no) factorial design. Measures included brand attitude, attitude towards the ad, brand familiarity and category involvement. Analysis of covariance is employed to test for main effects and interaction effects, pairwise comparisons to test for group differences and multigroup analysis by means of structural equation modelling and path analysis to test for differences in effect sizes for the spillover between product brands and corporate brands. Summary of findings The study provides evidence that corporate brand presence in product brand communication affects corporate brand attitude and that a significant effect is observed for the affective component of corporate brand attitude. No significant effect is found for the cognitive component. Other than expected, the findings demonstrate that corporate brand presence of familiar corporate brands in the high-involvement category (FMCGs) leads to affective corporate brand dilution. Consistently and irrespective of category, the results indicate that corporate brand presence leads to affective corporate brand dilution when corporate brand familiarity and product brand familiarity are low or when product brand familiarity and corporate brand familiarity are high. A tendency for affective brand leverage is indicated for unfamiliar corporate brands when product brands are familiar, which however requires further investigation. Moreover, the findings indicate that the degree of spillover effects differs for the two categories as hypothesized. Stronger positive effects occur in the high-involvement category of FMCGs. Key contributions The findings reveal that corporate brand presence affects corporate brand attitude while differentiating between an affective and cognitive component. Such a differentiation is indispensable as affective effects prevail. Furthermore, this study sheds light on category-specific effects. While corporate brands in the FMCG category evoke stronger positive spillover, the negativity effect of corporate brand presence supersedes and results in brand dilution irrespective of product brand familiarity. Independent of category, when product brands and corporate brands are either low in familiarity or high in familiarity, corporate brands suffer from brand dilution. However, brand dilution is not observed when unfamiliar corporate brands appear with familiar product brands indicating potential for brand leverage. The findings of this study provide new insights into the interplay between product brands and corporate brands and offer valuable guidance for brand communication in both categories. Although corporate branding within product brand communication is increasingly being practiced, these results should encourage brand managers to carefully consider whether corporate brand presence enhances brand equity or presents a liability.