Received: 8 August 2019
Accepted: 30 September 2019
Brands are strategic prerequisites that help organizations to generate more value for customers and sustainable competitive advantage among competitors. Employee behavior is crucial for brand success because the service provided by employees is located in the interface between brand commitment and brand delivery. As a result, an increasing number of banks is encouraging their employees to be more competitive and improve the efficacy and stability of the banking sector. The main objective of this work is to investigate the relationships among brand commitment, brand trust, and brand citizenship behavior in private banks. The data were collected from 249 respondents from private banking companies in Indonesia. Structural equation modelling was used to test research hypotheses, and a highly reliable and valid model was developed. The findings indicate that brand commitment has a positive effect on brand citizenship behavior, while brand trust is not a predictor of brand citizenship behavior. Furthermore, there is a correlation between brand commitment and brand trust. These findings provide useful insight and suggestions for managers in the banking sector. Keywords: brand commitment, brand trust, brand citizenship behavior.
Keywords: brand commitment, brand trust, brand citizenship behavior.
JEL Classification: J24, G21, M32.
Una marca es un prerrequisito estratégico que ayuda a las organizaciones a generar más valor para sus clientes y una ventaja competitiva sostenible entre sus competidores. El comportamiento de los empleados es crucial para el éxito de la marca porque el servicio que prestan se encuentra en la interfaz entre el compromiso de la marca y el cumplimiento de la misma. Un número creciente de bancos ofrece la oportunidad de alentar a las empresas a ser más competitivas y mejorar la eficacia y la estabilidad de la banca. El objetivo principal de este artículo es estudiar las relaciones entre el compromiso de marca, la confianza en la marca y la ciudadanía corporativa de las marcas en bancos privados. Los datos fueron recolectados de 249 encuestados en compañías de banca privada en Indonesia. Se utilizó el modelado de ecuaciones estructurales para probar la hipótesis de investigación y se desarrolló un modelo con alta confiabilidad y validez. Los resultados indican que el compromiso de la marca tiene un efecto positivo en la ciudadanía corporativa de la marca, mientras que la confianza en la marca no es un predictor de dicha ciudadanía. Además, existe una correlación entre el compromiso de la marca y la confianza en la marca. Estos hallazgos proporcionan ideas y sugerencias útiles para la gestión corporativa en el sector bancario.
Palabras clave: compromiso de marca, confianza en la marca, ciudadanía corporativa.
Clasificación JEL: J24, G21, M32.
Brands can be built and used by managers, but they are also strategic prerequisites that help organizations to generate more value for customers and sustainable competitive advantage among competitors (
Internal branding activities focusing on increasing employee awareness of, knowledge of, and commitment to their corporate brand are central for the successful implementation of company policies, such as sustainability (
Employees of a service provider could create or crush the company’s brand. On the other hand,
An increasing number of banks is encouraging their employees to be more competitive and improve the efficacy and stability of the banking sector. Banking industry employees play vital roles, and their actions are evaluated based on certain features and the effectiveness of said actions. Hence, brand citizenship behavior should be considered to be the variable that determines customer experience in the banking industry (
Brand trust could be defined as the willingness of a customer to have confidence in the reliability and honesty of a specific brand (
Employee behavior is crucial for the brand’s success because the service they provide is located in the interface between brand agreement and brand delivery (
Under the category of employee characteristics,
Trust, which has been proposed to be an antecedent of commitment, exists when one party has confidence in the other party’s reliability and integrity (
H1: Brand trust has a positive impact on brand citizenship behavior.
H2: Brand commitment has a positive impact on brand citizenship behavior.
H3: There is a correlation between brand trust and brand commitment.
Generation Y individuals who work in some private banks in Indonesia
participated in this research. They are known as millennial workers, people
born between 1977 and 2002 (
|Years at current company||1–3||130||52.2 %|
|Educational attainment||High school diploma||21||8.43 %|
|Bachelor’s degree||204||81.92 %|
|Master’s degree||24||9.63 %|
|Doctoral degree||0||0 %|
In this study, brand commitment was measured as
The survey was administered by providing each participant with a package that contained a statement summarizing the objectives of the study written in simple language, a questionnaire, and a souvenir. The packages were delivered by the managers/supervisors of the participants, who are their employees. Inside the package, a reply-paid envelope was also provided so that participants could confidentially return the questionnaire to the researchers. A total of 300 questionnaires were distributed, and the response rate was as high as 89.3 %.
Validity and Reliability Test Results
|Latent Variable||Items||Standard Factor Loading||CR||AVE|
|Brand Commitment||BC 1: When I chose this company as my workplace, I cared a lot about the company’s brand.||0.788||0.856||0.545|
|BC 2: This is the banking company with the best brand to work at.||0.76|
|BC 3: Most of the time, I tell my colleagues that this company is a great place to work at.||0.798|
|BC 4: I am pleased to work at this company compared to other banking companies.||0.661|
|BC 5: I am going to do a good job to be able to keep working at this company.||0.671|
|Brand Trust||BT 1: I trust the company’s brand.||0.788||0.859||0.605|
|BT 2: When I work, I depend on the company’s brand.||0.74|
|BT 3: This is an honest banking company.||0.762|
|BT 4: This is a reliable banking company.||0.818|
|Brand Citizenship Behavior||BCB 1: Most of the time, I talk about the good aspects of the company in my community.||0.686||0.865||0.618|
|BCB 2: I communicate to my manager any idea I have to consolidate the company’s brand image.||0.831|
|BCB 3: I communicate to my manager any idea I have to improve the company’s brand performance.||0.862|
|BCB 4: Most of the time, I provide feedback so that the company can improve its consumer brand experience.||0.753|
Goodness-of-Fit Test Results
A structural model was then designed using AMOS software. In that stage, several criteria were considered for assessing the structural model and ensuring it fit the data well. As shown in Table 3, the fit criteria of the structural model achieved the recommended values suggested by
|Goodness-of-Fit (GOF) units||Acceptable degree of compatibility||Estimated result||Test criteria|
|Absolute Fit indices|
|Normed Chi-Square (X2/DF)||(χ²/DF) < 3 is very good or 2 ≤ (χ²/DF) ≤ 5 is acceptable||2.156||Acceptable fit|
|RMSEA||RMSEA < 0.08||0.068||Acceptable fit|
|Incremental Fit indices|
|NFI||0 ≤ NFI ≤ 1, model with perfect fit would produce an NFI of 1||0.932||Acceptable fit|
|CFI||CFI ≥ 0.95||0.962||Acceptable fit|
|Parsimony Fit indices|
|PNFI||0 ≤ NFI ≤ 1, relatively high values represent relatively better fit||0.741||Acceptable fit|
Structural equation modeling (SEM) was used to test the model and the hypotheses. The hypotheses were analyzed using AMOS 22.0 software. The hypothesis test was conducted after the validity of the structural model was proven in order to test the structural theory in this study. To test the hypothesis regression, some output from the structural model was used.
As shown in Table 4, the findings indicate that brand trust is not a predictor of brand citizenship behavior (β = -0.019, t-value = -0.104, p > 0.05); hence, H1 is not accepted. In turn, the effect of brand commitment on brand citizenship behavior is positive and statistically significant (β = 0.773, t-value = 4.128, p < 0.05); consequently, H2 is supported. The results in the table above show that H3 is also supported because there is a correlation between brand trust and brand commitment (β = 0.384, t-value = 8.227, p > 0.05).
|Hypothesized effect||Std. Estimate||S. E.||C. R.||P||Decision|
|H1:||Brand trust has a positive impact on brand citizenship behavior.||-0.019||0.185||-0.104||0.917||Not Supported|
|H2:||Brand commitment has a positive impact on brand citizenship behavior.||0.773||0.187||4.128||***||Supported|
|H3:||There is a correlation between brand trust and brand commitment.||0.384||0.047||8.227||***||Supported|
This study shows that brand trust does not positively affect brand citizenship behavior. Such result contradicts the work by
A previous study by
The findings above show that there is a correlation between brand trust and brand commitment. This result supports those obtained by
A corporate leader should appropriately understand the culture, values, and norms a company has embraced. An honest, open-minded leader can inspire employees to develop brand trust. In an environment of trust and openness, employees can offer and take advice and opinions, and they can also use their aspirations to contribute to the company. When employees trust a company, the latter is expected to help them improve their work performance, which has a positive impact on the company’s brand image.
A transparent reward system is one of the demands of millennial workers. Rewards can be either financial or non-financial: bonuses, incentives, promotions, plane tickets, or even additional days off. Differentiated rewards are one of the reasons why millennial workers decide to move to another company. Therefore, equitable and transparent rewards could be a practical corporate approach to improve employee commitment.
The existence of a positive relationship between trust and commitment is essential. Moreover, in order to retain knowledgeable workers, organizations must focus on strengthening their employees’ commitment by offering rewards, recognition, better compensation, and also a better work environment. The participants in this study are employees of banking companies, and a few of them only meet each other online; therefore, their companies should provide opportunities to gather and interact face to face, not only for work-related purposes. This can promote organizational citizenship behavior among employees.
The limitation of this research is that one of the three hypotheses is not supported. Furthermore, the results show significant differences compared to a previous study by the author, where similar concepts were examined with different participants, i.e., generation Y individuals in state banking companies. It could be implied, from this study, that brand commitment positively influences brand citizenship behavior; nevertheless, further research could examine the connection between those two variables in other service industries, such as hospitality, education, or health care. This work is an attempt to find out more about the relationship between such variables.
The authors would like to thank Direktorat Riset, Pengabdian Masyarakat, Kementerian Riset, Teknologi, and Pendidikan Tinggi Republik Indonesia for providing financial support for this study under Research Contract Number 31/AKM/MONOPNT/2019 dated March 27th, 2019.