THE PROCESSES OF BUILDING BRAND EQUITY This paper combines the conceptual framework of customer-based brand equity (Keller‚ 1993) and six-stage model of brand evolution (Goodyear‚ 1996) to develop the processes of building brand equity. Focuses of brand equity building are suggested for each stage. Key words: brand equity‚ brand knowledge‚ brand evolution INTRODUCTION Successfully building‚ managing‚ and tracking the brand equity of brands are main goals of brand management. The brand strategies
Premium Brand Brand management Branding
people‚ for human resource is the most valuable resource any organization has. Top management is identifying corporate core competencies and working to establish them throughout the organization. Human Resource Development builds competency based models that drive business results. Nucsoft recognises that the future of the organization depends on their competent employees than on any other resource. It is a major factor that determines success for nucsoft. Competencies are the inner tools for motivating
Premium Human resource management Competence The Work
CAPM is a model which enables investors to determine the expected return from a risky security. It observes the relationship between the risk of an asset (Mobil Oil) and its return. The model uses Beta as the main measure of risk. This model works under the following situations: • In a perfectively competitive market where they are many price-takers’ investors‚ who have a small market share each. • Investors behaviour is myopic • Also investments included in the model are publicly
Premium Regression analysis Variance Probability theory
the heuristics and biases approach) and the ecological approach advanced by Gigerenzer and others. We make a proposal of how to integrate Simon‟s approach with the main current approaches to decision making. We argue that this would lead to better models of decision making that are more generalizable‚ have higher ecological validity‚ include specification of cognitive processes‚ and provide a better understanding of the interaction between the characteristics of the cognitive system and the contingencies
Premium Decision making Decision theory Cognition
BUSINESS SCHOOL Unit of Study Outline Unit code CLAW 1001 Unit title Foundations of Business Law Semester 1‚ 2012 Pre-requisite units: There are no pre-requisite units for CLAW1001 Co-requisite units: N/A Assumed Knowledge and/or skills: There is no assumed knowledge as this is an introductory unit of study. Unit coordinator: Giuseppe Carabetta Room: Room 521‚ level 5‚ E&B Building (H69)‚ across from the Sydney University Sports and Aquatic Centre Email address: giuseppe.carabetta@sydney
Premium Law Common law
1. In what ways are the trait and behavior approaches to leadership similar? How does Fiedler’s contingency model differ from both? Even though these two approaches to leadership are very different in many ways‚ we have found that they are in fact very similar as well. We notice that the trait approach focuses on the leaders’ personal characteristics yet ignores the situation in which they try to lead. In a very similar way the behavior approach identifies the behaviors responsible for effective
Premium Leadership Management Fiedler contingency model
Limitations of the BCG model. The BCG model is criticised for having a number of limitations (Kotler 2003; McDonald 2003): ➢ There are other reasons other than relative market share and market growth that could influence the allocation of resources to a product or SBU: reasons such as the need for strong brand name and product positioning could compel resource allocation to an SBU or product (Drummond & Ensor 2004). ➢ What is more‚ the model rests on net cash consumption or generation as the
Premium Marketing Economics Cash flow
ServQual model of marketing The Service Quality Model or ServQual model is used to measure the differences between consumers’ perception and expectation of service quality. According to the servqual model there are five gaps: I Gap - refers to the difference between customers’ expected service and management’s perceptions of customers’ expectations. This gap means that management may not correctly perceive customer expectations. II Gap - refers to the difference between management perceptions
Premium Perception Mind Expected value
The PCS model (Thompson 2001) has three concentric rings (inside to outside: P-C-S). The "P" stands for personal prejudice or the personal‚ psychological level; the "C" stands for the cultural level- consensus‚ commonality‚ conformity; the "S" level stands for the structural level. (Ledwith 128) Apply: This model is useful for community development because it allows us to see how different levels of interaction and analysis from the personal to societal and structural affect life. Specifically in
Premium Psychology Prejudice Discrimination
I would explain that using the categorical model‚ their presentation would suggest a diagnosis of social phobia‚ for example. However‚ I would explain to my client that other mental health experts believe that it is more effective and appropriate to use a dimensional diagnostic model—which might view my client as‚ alternatively‚ very low on the extraversion continuum. Perhaps client knowledge of different views
Premium Mental disorder Diagnosis Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders