Conceptual model and hypothesesThe

Conceptual model and hypotheses

The theory of marketing control

As mentioned above, we believe that a company can achieve superior brand performance if its employees live up to a unique and distinguishing brand promise at each and every customer touch point. Thereby, companies need to realise that managing customer contact employees includes not only educating employees to act socially conform (e.g. friendly, open or courteous), but also promoting those complex employee behaviours that provide a highly distinguishing brand image (Bendapudi and Bendapudi, 2005; Burmann and Zeplin, 2005; Mitchell, 2002; Berry, 2000; Van Scotter and Motowidlo, 1996). Several structural and procedural mechanisms within the company must come into alignment before effective dissemination can occur (Hartline et al., 2000; Jaworski et al., 1993). One appropriate theoretical framework to clarify how management-initiated and employee-initiated control mechanisms can be employed effectively in order to ensure that customer contact employees act brand consistently is the theory of marketing control (Jaworski, 1988). Marketing control refers to management’s attempts to influence the behaviour and activities of marketing personnel in order to achieve desired outcomes (Jaworski, 1988; Jaworski et al., 1993). The control device is designed to affect individual action, which, in turn, is expected to influence performance. More specifically, Jaworski (1988) distinguishes two types of control, namely formal and informal control. Formal control activities are defined as “written, management-initiated mechanisms that influence the probability that employees or groups will behave in ways that support the stated marketing objectives” (Jaworski, 1988, p. 26). In contrast, informal control is characterised through personal interaction between managers and employees and can be initiated by employees as well as by managers (Jaworski, 1988). In addition, employee empowerment has been modelled as another control instrument in recent studies (e.g. Hartline et al., 2000; Hartline and Ferrell, 1996). Employee empowerment refers to a situation in which employees are authorised by managers to make day-to-day decisions autonomously in order to enable situation adequate acting (Huselid, 1995; Bowen and Lawler, 1992).

Research model and hypotheses

Acting brand consistently necessitates specific brand-related skills but also the flexibility to perform situation adequately (Hartline et al., 2000; Hartline and Ferrell, 1996; Kelley et al., 1996; Bowen and Lawler, 1992; Conger and Kanungo, 1988). To achieve brand consistent employee behaviour, we hypothesise, a combination of formal and informal management instruments (H1a/H1b and H2a/H2b) as well as employee empowerment (H3a/H3b) is required.

Hasil (Bahasa Indonesia) 1:

Model konseptual dan hipotesisTeori pemasaran kontrolAs mentioned above, we believe that a company can achieve superior brand performance if its employees live up to a unique and distinguishing brand promise at each and every customer touch point. Thereby, companies need to realise that managing customer contact employees includes not only educating employees to act socially conform (e.g. friendly, open or courteous), but also promoting those complex employee behaviours that provide a highly distinguishing brand image (Bendapudi and Bendapudi, 2005; Burmann and Zeplin, 2005; Mitchell, 2002; Berry, 2000; Van Scotter and Motowidlo, 1996). Several structural and procedural mechanisms within the company must come into alignment before effective dissemination can occur (Hartline et al., 2000; Jaworski et al., 1993). One appropriate theoretical framework to clarify how management-initiated and employee-initiated control mechanisms can be employed effectively in order to ensure that customer contact employees act brand consistently is the theory of marketing control (Jaworski, 1988). Marketing control refers to management’s attempts to influence the behaviour and activities of marketing personnel in order to achieve desired outcomes (Jaworski, 1988; Jaworski et al., 1993). The control device is designed to affect individual action, which, in turn, is expected to influence performance. More specifically, Jaworski (1988) distinguishes two types of control, namely formal and informal control. Formal control activities are defined as “written, management-initiated mechanisms that influence the probability that employees or groups will behave in ways that support the stated marketing objectives” (Jaworski, 1988, p. 26). In contrast, informal control is characterised through personal interaction between managers and employees and can be initiated by employees as well as by managers (Jaworski, 1988). In addition, employee empowerment has been modelled as another control instrument in recent studies (e.g. Hartline et al., 2000; Hartline and Ferrell, 1996). Employee empowerment refers to a situation in which employees are authorised by managers to make day-to-day decisions autonomously in order to enable situation adequate acting (Huselid, 1995; Bowen and Lawler, 1992).Penelitian model dan hipotesisBertindak merek secara konsisten memerlukan keterampilan khusus yang berhubungan dengan merek tetapi juga fleksibilitas untuk melakukan situasi memadai (Hartline et al., 2000; Hartline dan Ferrell, 1996; Kelley et al, 1996; Bowen dan Lawler, 1992; Conger dan Kanungo, 1988). Untuk mencapai perilaku karyawan konsisten merek, kita hypothesise, kombinasi instrumen pengelolaan formal dan informal (H1a H1b dan H2a H2b) serta pemberdayaan karyawan (H3a/H3b) diperlukan.