The Effect of Brand Image on Public Relations Perceptions and Customer Loyalty

The Effect of Brand Image on Public Relations Perceptions and Customer Loyalty. The present study seeks to contribute to the development of a conceptual framework that integrates customer perceived public relations, brand image and customer loyalty. Empirical findings based on a survey of 367 consumers with insurance experience in the Taiwan region demonstrate that Public relations perception is positively affects brand image, which in turn affects customer loyalty. Eurthermore, the direct effect of brand image on customer loyalty is stronger than that of public relations perception. Management implications of these findings and suggestions for future research are subsequently discussed. Introduction How to develop, maintain, and enhance customer's loyalty toward a firm's products or services is generally seen as the central thrust of marketing activities. Higher customer loyalty implies a higher market share and an ability to demand relatively higher prices as compared with those of competitors. This increased customer loyalty can also help lower marketing costs, solicit more customers, and effectively operate trading leverage (Aaker, 1997). Additionally, loyal customers foster positive word-of-mouth promotion and generate higher corporate profits. These results establish an organization's most reliable success indicators. However, what are the factors influencing consumer loyalty? The antecedent factors of customer loyalty have been discussed extensively in the service marketing literature (e.g., value, service quality, relationship marketing, corporate image, satisfaction, trust), but less empirical attention has been paid to the effects of public relations perceived by customer, this is especially valid in the service industry, because differentiation through the delivery channel is difficult and similarity increasingly, therefore this study aims to clarify the relationship between public relations and customer loyalty because environmental changes have led businesses to move through different orientations - from product to marketing to societal orientation (Kitchen, 1996), and thus highlighting the importance of public relations. The present study seeks to contribute to the development of a conceptual framework that integrates customer perceived public relations, brand image and customer loyalty. The purposes of this study are (I) to analyze the relationship between the practice of public relations and brand image, and (2) to analyze the relationship between brand image and customer loyalty, and (3) to assess the mediating effect of brand image in public relations perception (PRP) and customer loyalty. 238 International Joumal of Management Vol. 25 No. 2 June 2008 Literature Review and Hypotheses Figure 1 graphically displays the research model underlying our study. We propose three sets of relationships. First, there is a positively relationship between public relations perception and brand image. Second, there is a positively relationship between brand image and customer loyalty. Third this relationship is mediated by brand image. We present below the literature review and the hypotheses developed. Cutlip et al. (1985) defined public relations as "the management function that identifies, establishes, and maintains mutually beneficial relationships between an organization and the various public on whom its success or failure depends." Moreover, according to a summary of empirical results from several studies, consumer perception of these organization-public relationships would influence their satisfaction evaluations, behavioural intent and actual behaviour. Such a result is evident in school-student relationships and bank-customer relationship where the customers that stay possess a higher level of PR perception and satisfaction as compared with those that lead, in a study of different relationship dimensions (namely trust, openness, involvement, investment and commitment), noted that the consumer's awareness of organization-customer relationship could raise their loyalty toward the corporation, which would in turn increase company income, enhance market share, and achieve other corporate objectives. Coombs also proposed that when corporations have plans to cultivate public relations and fulfil commitment, consumer's loyalty to corporations would be higher. Although past scholars did not have consistent findings to date on the dimensions of establishing relationship quality, empirical results stated that the relationship between corporations and customers is increasingly intimate, which would benefit the enhancement of customer loyalty in the long run. Whether PR is a form of strategic relationship management as mentioned above or a tactical publicity function is still under scholastic debate. This study is oriented toward consumers' perception of PR and link public relations perception to outcomes such as enhanced corporate brand image. The reasons why we measure PR from customer perception are: (1) public relations messages may not have influence on consumers' knowledge, and (2) the influence of the messages might not be positive on consumer's attitude or behaviour; so in this study we measured PR from consumer perspective. Customers become aware of public relations practice often through diverse sources such as first-hand experience with the company, second-hand experience throughout social Figuni 1: Research Model Public relations perception Brand image Customer loyal, or mediated via the mass media, the more customer aware of PR messages, the more they will familiar with the company, business scholars often claim that familiarity of a company is one of the strongest factors to determine favourable image of the company. Thus, the first hypothesis is as follows. HI: Consumer perceptions of public relations will be positively related to brand image. Brand image has been a common term in marketing research and practice for half a century, being assigned somewhat varying meanings by different authors and in different contexts. Nevertheless, these definitions typically share the view that a brand image exists in the minds of consumers, as a result of how people perceive and interpret the brand and the marketing activities surrounding it, thus going beyond the actual product itself. Keller (1993) define brand image as "perceptions about a brand as reflected by the brand associations held in consumer memory". Clearly, consumers form an image of the brand based on the associations that they have remembered with respect to that brand. So the image of a given brand can differ among individuals, as people may hold somewhat different associations about the brand. Some scholars claim that brand image is associated with recent consumption experience, and the more favourable the image the higher is perceived quality, value, satisfaction and customer loyalty. Fishbein and AJ7xn (1975) argue that brand attitudes are functionally related to behavioural intentions, which predict actual behaviour. Therefore brand image as an attitude would in turn influence customer loyalty. Therefore, the Second hypothesis is as follows. H2: Brand image will be positively related to customer loyalty. Keller (2003) reported that in an increasingly networked economy, understanding the consumers' tendency of linking a brand to other entities such as another person, place, thing, or brand is crucial. In terms of linkage to a product, public relations' brand differentiation has a multiplying effect on brand knowledge. Public relations could establish brand awareness through recall and recognition, and further enhance the brand associations of brand image, draw brand emotions, and create brand attitude and experience. Moreover, customer loyalty is often viewed as the result of brand knowledge (Keller, 1993,1999). Therefore, public relations can affect consumer loyalty indirectly through brand image. Therefore, the third hypothesis is as follows. H3: The relationship between PRP and customer …

The Dangers of Being a Micromanager

You may wonder exactly why being a micromanager is bad for your business. On the surface, it seems wise to make sure that your staff is doing a good job, to pitch in and help with a project now and then. It seems to demonstrate a solid work ethic and set a good example for the team. What could be wrong with that?

Well, if you’re a manager, there’s a lot wrong with that.

Basically, micromanaging is involving yourself too directly in what your staff should be doing instead. By definition, a manager is tasked with — yes, you guessed it — managing. That involves coordinating projects, solving problems, dealing with other managers, and developing relationships with clients. The manager has to ensure that a certain quantity of work gets done, and normally that work is much more than one person could ever do alone. Therefore, the manager supervises a team of people to help them carry out that work.

However, if a manager’s time is consumed with micromanaging, there's no time for all the other managerial tasks on his or her plate. Quite simply, it is damaging to your business to micromanage. Here are some tips to keep in mind when tempted to manage to the nth degree:

* There’s more than one right way. As a supervisor, you need to prepare your employees to complete projects successfully, and to be clear from the beginning about the results you expect from them. Then you should stand back and let them carry out their designated tasks in the way they see fit, coming up with their own solutions. Remember that employees need to do things in a positive way, but not necessarily in the same way you would do them. This does not mean that communication is closed down — you still need to touch base from time to time, to see how projects are progressing, and to check if the person has any questions. But he or she needs freedom to work within an open framework, to learn and grow. The end result is a strengthening of your firm. There’s no way your staff can develop and the firm can flourish if you are always there to meddle in the project and demonstrate the “correct” way to accomplish a task.
* It’s about trust. Your employees have to believe that you trust them to do a good job. But how can they do that if you’re always hovering over their shoulders, diving in to rescue them from themselves? If it’s inevitable that your staff’s decisions will be second-guessed, they will begin to feel frustrated and powerless. In addition, your employees will learn that they will not be held accountable, and will soon stop trying to make any decisions at all.
* If something’s wrong, fix it. If you have an employee who is indeed constantly doing things incorrectly, it may be time to clean house and hire someone who can do the job properly. But first, see to it that your employees are fully trained and know everything they need to know to do their jobs well. Be certain you're communicating the duties of the job clearly. Finally, keep in mind that some employees want to be micromanaged. Just as you need to stay out of their way, your staff needs to remember the importance of making decisions on their own.
* Beware of burnout. If you insist on meddling in a project, creating frustration and lack of accountability in your employees, and still attempt to shoulder all your other managerial responsibilities, you’re going to get tired. Really tired. And eventually, tiredness will progress to exhaustion and complete burnout. At which point, you won’t care about micromanaging anymore. But at that point, of course, it will be too late. Don’t let events progress to that point.

The bottom line: a good manager is one who prepares, and then trusts employees, remembers that he or she is part of a team, and leads by example, not by doing everyone else’s work. Your staff will appreciate your efforts, and will feel a greater sense of personal accomplishment. And in the end, your business will thrive.

Top 10 Management Mistakes

Managers come from different walks of life, possess various characteristics, and have their own philosophies regarding how to manage a business and employees. In a broad sense, there are common mistakes made by managers at different levels and in various types of businesses. The following are 10 of the most common management mistakes.


1. Putting policies ahead of people: The smaller the organization, the larger the mistake this is. Policies are made to be followed, within reason. Some flexibility with employees, particularly in a small company, is important. An even bigger mistake is standing behind policies at the expense of losing loyal customers. Weigh the significance of standing behind your policy in each situation. If it is a matter of physical safety or security, policies must be upheld. However, in many other instances, there are reasonable solutions that will not alienate the customer or create a strained relationship with your employee(s).

2. Lack of communication: In any industry, at any level, communication is key to being a successful manager. Employees need to know what is expected of them and when specific projects or tasks need to be completed. Communication needs to be clear, and any questions that arise need to be answered.

3. Failing to hear what your employees have to say: Managers make the mistake of listening but not always hearing what their employees are saying. To manage effectively, you need to understand the needs and concerns of your employees.

4. Not acknowledging that you do not have all the answers: A good manager does not make the mistake of trying to solve every problem. Seeking help from individuals with expertise in specific areas is a sign of strength, not weakness. In addition, a good manager must understand that his or her way is not the only way to do the job.

5. The glass is always half empty: Managers who continually focus on the negatives, without recognizing positive achievements or employee accomplishments, end up with employees who are not motivated and often have one foot out the door looking for a more positive work environment.

6. Not accepting responsibility: A common mistake made by managers is to either delegate blame or simply not accept responsibility for that which happens under their guidance. Eventually, avoiding responsibility will catch up with a manager and usually not bode well for his or her future. Being in charge means taking responsibility for whatever happens.

7. Favoritism. Once a manager has obvious favorites, he or she loses credibility and the respect of the rest of the team.

8. Just do it. The Nike slogan does not work when employees are trying to gain an understanding of the process or project. Rather than expecting your team to simply work blindly on tasks they do not understand, a good manager takes the time to explain what the project is all about and how the team's work is incorporated into the plan. Remember, the more the team is invested in a project, the better the results will be. To be continue

Three Effective Management Styles

Being an effective manager means knowing when to use the right management style. Some styles, for instance, are more people-oriented, while others tend to focus on a project or product. The management style you select will depend on your people’s skills and knowledge, available resources (like time and money), desired results, and, of course, the task before you.

Your job is to select the management style that works best for any given situation. Managing without a specific style geared to a specific set of circumstances can slow you down and even lead to costly mistakes.

Get your people to do their best work by using one or more of the following effective management styles:

1. Participatory Style
Here, it is critical to give each employee an entire task to complete. If that's not possible, make sure the individual knows and understands his or her part as it relates to the project or task. When people on your team know where they fit in the big picture, they're more likely to be motivated to complete the task.

Take the time to explain the details and why their role is important. Get their input on the task and its significance. This will give them a sense of value, and hopefully, encourage them to take ownership of their piece of the project. Do your best to make sure your employees understand the tasks. Ask questions that might seem obvious; the asking alone will reinforce an employee’s understanding of the work.

If your tasks are divided among groups, coordinate each group’s contribution so that everyone knows where and how they fit in. Make a concerted effort to minimize obstacles and difficulties that arise. Let people know that you’re happy to clear their paths so when a problem does arise, you are informed in a timely manner.

Reward not only jobs well done, but motivation as well. This will maintain the momentum and let people know that you have faith in their efforts.

2. Directing Style
Sometimes a situation will call for a direct style of management. Perhaps a tight deadline looms, or the project involves numerous employees and requires a top-down management approach. Here, a manager answers five questions for the employees: What? Where? How? Why? and When? Let them know what they need to do, how they’re going to do it, and when they must be finished.

This style may seem cold and impersonal, but you still have an opportunity to be a motivating and accessible manager. For example, when you assign roles and responsibilities, provide helpful tips or share experiences you encountered with a similar project.

With this style, don’t be afraid to set specific standards and expectations. Your communication, therefore, must be detail-oriented, unambiguous, and free of buzzwords and jargon. You also need to set clear, short-term goals like, “Your goal is to complete three reports a day.”

In addition, be willing and able to make decisions quickly. Midway through a task, for example, you may direct someone to switch from doing one thing to another. Let your people know from the outset that this may occur; it will help them transition more smoothly. Make sure, as well, to reward and recognize jobs well done.

3. Teamwork Style
If you want to expedite a project and optimize a process for completing that project, managing by teamwork is the way to go. When you motivate people to pool their knowledge, the results may exceed your expectations. Often, teams can tackle problems more quickly than what you can accomplish on your own. The give-and-take can create a process that you can replicate in other projects.

Remember that successful teamwork depends on coordinated efforts among the staff, as well as solid communication skills. Reports must be clear and concise. Presentations must convey information that leaves nothing unanswered. Understanding logistics is critical, too. Probably most important, however, is your willingness to credit the team for its success and independence, rather than your savvy management skills.

Indeed, when you get around to employee evaluations, remember to recognize those who were able to collaborate and maintain a team spirit, especially under pressure.

Adejuyigbe Francis A.: Quality and Productivity

Adejuyigbe Francis A.: Quality and Productivity: "Official Google Reader Blog: Folder and tag renaming Quality and Productivity Introduction All businesses have process flows in which a..."

Quality and Productivity

Official Google Reader Blog: Folder and tag renaming

Quality and Productivity


Introduction
All businesses have process flows in which a product is designed or manufactured or in which a service is rendered. An on-going goal is to achieve the maximum possible throughput at the lowest possible cost while meeting all the requirements of the product or service.
Inventory Benefits

A certain minimum amount of in-process inventory is always necessary. This level is defined by Little's Law:
I = R x T

Where I = inventory, R = flow rate, and T = flow time, all of which are average values.

The actual amount of inventory in the process will be greater than the theoretical amount because some inventory always will be in-transit between different locations. Furthermore, the actual levels usually are planned to be even higher.

There are four possible reasons that firms intentionally plan excess inventory levels:

1. Economies of scale
• Quantity discounts offered by suppliers.
• Fixed ordering costs and fixed setup costs are lower if spread across more units.
2. Production and capacity smoothing
• Rather than vary processing rate to match varying demand, it may be more economical to process at a constant rate and use inventory as a buffer.
3. Protection against supply disruptions and demand surges
• Supply disruptions may result in process starvation, downtime, and throughput reduction.
• Demand surges can result in delayed deliveries, lost sales, and customer dissatisfaction.
4. Profiting from price changes
• Speculative inventories can be used to protect and profit from sudden price changes.
• Inflows and outflows can be managed in order to optimize the financial value of the inventory.


Inventory Costs (Disadvantages of a large inventory)
• Increased response time to changes in market demand.
• Increased time to change to new products.
• Delay in detection of quality problems
• Decouples stages of the process flow, discouraging teamwork
• Holding costs (physical holding cost and cost of capital)
• Physical holding costs include operating costs and losses due to spoilage, obsolescence, pilferage, etc. Expressed as a fraction h of the variable cost C of one flow unit of inventory. So the physical holding cost for one unit of inventory for one time period is equal to h x C.
• Cost of capital is the opportunity cost of foregone returns on the amount invested in inventory that could have been invested in other projects. Cost of capital per flow unit is expressed as r x C where r is the cost of capital and C is the variable cost of one flow unit.
• Total holding cost is: H = (h + r) x C.

When counting average inventory in a process, the steps prior to the process bottleneck will be full, and those afterwards will be occupied by a ratio of the throughput rate of those steps to that of the bottleneck.

Conveyor Belts
When changing a production system from a long conveyor belt to a production cell system, with each cell producing the full product with fewer workers, one method to determine the optimal place to break the line is:
1. Add the total labor time and divide by the number of workers in a cell.
2. Add the tasks for the first worker's steps until this average time is exceeded.
3. Drop the last task and determine if the resulting average for the remaining workers is greater than or less than that for the first with that time included.

Inventory in Queue with Variable Arrival

II = [ ρ x ρsqrt(2(c+1)) – 1 / 1 - ρ ] x ( Ci2 + Cp2 ) / 2

where II = inventory
ρ = capacity utilization
C = std. dev / mean

When calculating average wait time, divide average inventory in the queue by the arrival rate, not by the processing rate. This is because the system throughput is determined by the incoming rate, not the processing rate (capacity utilization < 1).

Some Quality Experts
Deming: statistical process control
Juran: modeled cost of quality as U-shaped curve
Crosby: quality is free

Glossary

Process Capacity equals maximum flow rate in units per time period.