brand equity: dish home of nepal
TRANSCRIPT
Brand Equity: Dish Home Brand Equity: Dish Home of Nepalof Nepal
Dr. Dhruba Kumar Gautam Associate Professor, Tribhuvan University
Sajeeb Kumar Shrestha Ph.D. Research Fellow,
Teaching Assistant, Tribhuvan UniversityICMC 2015, Dec 3-4
Birla Institute of Management Technology, Greater Noida1
Background of the Background of the StudyStudy
Brand equity provides the value of brand to the product.
If customer-based brand equity becomes positive it can generate more revenue, reduce company's operations costs, build greater profit margins and impact on the company's marketing practices (Keller, 2003).
2
Dish HomeDish HomeEstablished in 2009.Digital satellite services to
individual homes of Nepal. (DTH)Without use of any wire, cables, or
cable infrastructure throughout the coverage in the region.
3
4
……DTH service all over Nepal. 87 distributors and nearly 2,000 sub
distributors.Strong content portfolio (various channels) Customer base: 1,25,000 in Kathmandu .Nationwide: 5 lakh, and in increasing trend.
5
Research Questions and Research Questions and ObjectivesObjectivesQuestions:What is the application of brand
equity model in Dish Home?
ObjectivesTo find the significance of brand
equity dimensions on Dish Home.
6
Figure 1: Research Framework7
Research Framework
PQQ
BAWWBLL
BASS
H3 = 3
H1=1
H2=2
H4 = 1
H5=2
H6 = 3
HypothesesH1(1) = Brand awareness has significant effect on
perceived quality. H2(2) = Brand awareness has significant effect on brand
association.H3(3) = Brand awareness has significant effect on brand
loyalty.H4(1) = Perceived quality has significant effect on brand
association.H5(2) = Perceived quality has significant effect on brand
loyalty.H6(3) = Brand association has significant effect on
brand loyalty. 8
MethodologyMethodologyResearch design: Descriptive and
Explanatory.Population: Dish Home users in
Kathmandu valley.Sample: 214 Dish Home users approached in
Kathmandu Valley. Sample Methods: Convenience Sampling. Data: Primary data.Instrument: Structured questionnaire. Tools of Analysis: SEM
9
AnalysisAnalysisExploratory Factor Analysis (EFA)Bartlett's test of Sphericity (Chi-square 1757.92; df
210; sig. 0.000) Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) = 0.85Sample were adequate and data were enough for
factor analysis. Four factors were extracted that cumulatively
accounted 56 percent of the total variance. All the statements with factor loadings greater
than 0.5 were grouped in the corresponding factor.
10
11
Table1: Rotated Component Matrix
Rotated Component Matrixa
Component1 2 3 4
0BL6 0.83BL5 0.817BL4 0.694BL3 0.676
BAS2 0.759BAW5 0.696BAS6 0.68BAS1 0.653BAW2 0.801BAW4 0.773
PQ5 0.67PQ3 0.824PQ4 0.757
BAW1 0.667Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.a Rotation converged in 6 iterations.
Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA)
12
Table 2: Model Fit Indices
Fit IndicesCMIN/DF CFI GFI RMSEA RMR
3-5 >.90 >.90 .1 .5
Final Measurement Model 1.66 0.941 0.921 0.56 0.033
Validity and Reliability of the Model
Discriminant Validity AVE should be greater than 0.50 (Fornell & Larcker,
1981). AVE should be greater than MSV AVE should be greater than ASV.
Convergent Validity:Construct Reliability (CR) should be greater than 0.7 CR should be greater than AVE.
13
Table3: Validity and Reliability of Table3: Validity and Reliability of ConstructsConstructs
14
CR AVE MSV ASV BAWW BLL BASS PQQ
BAWW 0.769 0.527 0.371 0.269 0.726
BLL 0.792 0.504 0.190 0.154 0.350 0.71
BASS 0.713 0.503 0.371 0.29 0.609 0.436 0.620
PQQ 0.729 0.516 0.314 0.257 0.560 0.386 0.556 0.690
Figure 2: Final Overall Measurement Model 15
Figure 3: Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) 16
Structural Equation Modeling (SEM)
17
Variance Explained by Structural Model
• Perceived quality (.313 or 31.3%), • Brand association (.438 or 43.8%) and • Brand loyalty (.223 or 22.3%).
18
Hypotheses Testing
Hypothesis From TOStandardized Coefficients
S.E. t-value Label
H1 BAWW PQQ 0.48 0.08 5.968 Supported
H2 BAWW BASS 0.439 0.117 3.759 Supported
H3 BAWW BLL 0.088 0.152 0.582 Not supported
H4 PQQ BASS 0.371 0.134 2.769 Supported
H5 PQQ BLL 0.277 0.169 1.642 Not supported
H6 BASS BLL 0.369 0.16 2.31 Supported
FindingsFindingsBrand awareness and perceived quality
had no effect on brand loyalty. Brand association has significant effect
on brand loyalty. Brand awareness affects perceived
quality and brand association and simultaneously these factors have combined affect on brand loyalty which leads the brand equity of Dish Home.
19
ConclusionConclusionThe study confirmed that proposed
model also exists in the Dish Home. The study is consisted with Koirala
and Shrestha (2015), Dua and others (2013); Tong and Hawley (2009).
The SEM model confirmed that brand awareness, perceived quality; brand associations and brand loyalty were the antecedent factors for brand equity for Dish Home.
20
……
Companies should focus on brand loyalty programmes to increase and retain brand loyal customers.
Dish Home is preferred due to various reasons - picture quality, brand name, valued monthly packages, more HD channels, and attractive price ranges.
21
22