Tóm tắt tiếng anh:Ảnh hưởng của tài sản thương hiệu đến phản ứng của khách hàng: Trường hợp thương hiệu VinaSoy tại thị trường sữa đậu nành Việt Nam.

THE UNIVERSITY OF DANANG
DANANG UNIVERSITY OF ECONOMICS


NGUYEN HOANG NGAN
DOCTORAL THESIS SUMMARY

EFFECT OF BRAND EQUITY ON
CUSTOMER RESPONSES: CASE OF
VINASOY IN VIETNAM’S SOY MILK
MARKET

Danang-2022


THE UNIVERSITY OF DANANG
DANANG UNIVERSITY OF ECONOMICS


NGUYEN HOANG NGAN

DOCTORAL THESIS SUMMARY

EFFECT OF BRAND EQUITY ON
CUSTOMER RESPONSES: CASE OF
VINASOY IN VIETNAM’S SOY MILK
MARKET
Major

: Business Administration

Code

:

62.34.01.02

Scientific instructors: Prof. Dr. Truong Ba Thanh
Assoc. Dr. Tran Trung Vinh

Danang-2022


3

CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION
1.1. Reason of research
Brand and brand equity has attracted much attention in
marketing since the 90s. Aaker (1991) argues that a brand only
makes sense when it is meaningful to consumers. Therefore, it is
important to evaluate the impact of brand equity on consumer’s
attitudes and behavior (Hoeffler & Keller, 2003). Today, more and
more interrelated forms of customer response are emerging in
dynamic and complex marketing environment. Consequently, the
relationship between brand equity and consumer responses has
received the attention of many domestic and foreign researchers
(Buil et al., 2013; Satvati et al., 2016; Ho et al., 2019). However,
most studies have focused on the relationship between brand equity
and one or a few consumer responses (Netemeyer et al., 2004; Ho et
al., 2019; Chatzipanagiotou et al., 2019; Buil et al., 2013; Naeini et
al., 2015). Combining multiple customer responses in the same

research model will yield more valuable results both in terms of
research and practice. On the other hand, these studies have not
addressed satisfaction - a very important customer response.
Satisfaction is one of the most studied topics among customer
responses (Huang & Sarigollu, 2014). At the same time, the
relationship between brand equity and satisfaction has become one of
the topics that have received much attention from researchers (Nam
et al., 2011; Huang & Sarigollu, 2014). Until now, very few studies
have examined the influence of brand equity on satisfaction and
other forms of customer response in the same research model.


It can be seen that brand equity, customer satisfaction and
responses are related according to the Cognition – Affection –
Conation model. However, very few studies have applied this basic
theoretical model to explain the relationship between brand equity
and customer responses.
At the same time, very few studies have examined the mediating
role of customer satisfaction in the relationship between brand equity
and customer responses.
The relationship between brand equity and customer responses is
important for many industries, especially the dairy industry. The
potential of Vietnam's soy milk market is still very large. As a result,
the competition in the industry is becoming more and more fierce.
Currently, Vinasoy leads the market share of branded soy milk in
Vietnam with nearly 84.5%, (Quoc Hai, 2019). Vinasoy's goal is to
actively expand and access untapped potential markets. Therefore, it
is necessary to study the relationship between brand equity and
customer responses to increase favorable responses to Vinasoy.
Stemming from the gap in theory and practical necessity as

mentioned above, the author chooses the topic "Effect of brand
equity on consumer responses: a case from Vinasoy in Vietnam’s
soy milk market”.
1.2. Research Objectives
Identify the direct effect of brand equity on customer responses
and indirect effect of brand equity on these responses through
satisfaction, thereby providing implications for managers to increase
favorable customer’ reactions to the brand.
1.3. Object and scope of the research


- Object of the research: The relationship between brand equity and
consumer responses (satisfaction, willingness to pay a price
premium, attitudes toward brand extensions, brand preference,
purchase intention).
- The study period was in the period 2017-2019, the survey was
conducted from May to September 2018. In terms of space, the study
collected data by surveying consumers of Vinasoy soymilk products
concentrated in Hanoi, Da Nang and Ho Chi Minh City.
1.4. The research method
The research methods in this study are qualitative and
quantitative methodology.
1.5. Research implications
1.5.1. Contribution of the research in theory
Firstly, the thesis builds an integrated model to study the
relationship between brand equity and satisfaction, willingness to pay
a price premium, attitude towards brand extensions, brand preference
and purchase intention.
Second, the thesis is one of the first studies to evaluate the
mediating role of satisfaction in the relationship between brand

equity and responses: willingness to pay a price premium, attitude
towards brand extensions, brand preference and purchase intention.
Finally, with the research context of Vinasoy brand, the leading
company in the canned soy milk industry in Vietnam, the study of the
relationship between brand equity and customer response in the
Vietnamese soy milk market will play contribute the basis for
marketing strategies for Vinasoy in particular and the whole canned
soy milk industry in general.
1.5.2. The contribution of research in practical terms


The results of this study provide empirical evidences of the
benefits that brand equity can provide to the business. This study
provides managers with useful insights into the outcomes of
investing in brand equity. Brand equity is an important predictor of
positive consumer responses. Thus strengthening brand equity is an
important strategy for companies to improve their position in the
market. Building brand equity will create more value for businesses
because a more favorable consumer response can come from a
positive brand equity.
By understanding the relationship between brand equity and
customer intentions, administrators will be able to predict the effect
of the brand equity on customer satisfaction and behavioral intent. It
can also be used to understand customer choice behavior, which is
valuable information in strategy development.
In addition, the thesis also presented an integrated model,
demonstrating the mediating role of satisfaction with the relationship
between brand equity and customer responses, thereby providing
valuable information for business strategy building.
1.6. Structure of the thesis:

The thesis consits of five chapters:
Chapter 1: Introduction.
Chapter 2: Literature review and research model.
Chapter 3: Research methodology.
Chapter 4: Research results.
Chapter 5: Conclusions and implications


CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW AND THE RESEARCH
MODEL
2.1. Background theories
2.1.1. Cognition – Affect – Conation model
The Cognition – Affect – Conation model was proposed in the
Hierarchy of Effects Theory (Lavidge & Steiner, 1961). This model
is classified into three main stages of consumer behavior - cognition,
affection and conation, which involve human thought processes.
According to this model, consumers often have perceptions through
seeking information about products, then form emotions and lead to
consumer behaviors. Agapito et al (2013) propose the theory that
three components — cognition, affection and conation — make up a
hierarchical causal model. In particular, affection have a mediating
effect on the relationship between cognition and conation. This is
also the theory used by the author as the background theories to build
the research model of the thesis.
2.1.2. Brand value chain theory
The brand value chain model proposed by Keller and Lehmann
(2003) with the basis of customer-based brand equity. The four
stages of value include: Marketing Program Investment, Customer
Mindset, Market Performance, and Shareholder Value. The process
of creating brand value begins when a company invests in a

marketing strategy that targets its current and potential customers.
These marketing activities will influence the perception and affection
of customers, which in turn leads to certain market outcomes for the
brand. Finally, investors consider this market performance and
factors such as replacement cost and acquisition price to make an
assessment of shareholder value in general and brand value in
particular.


This thesis also focuses on the customer mindset stage,
examining the relationship between brand equity and customer
responses to marketing activities. In addition, this thesis also uses the
relationship between customer mindset and market performance as
the basis for selecting research responses.
2.2. Brand Equity
2.2.1. Definition of brand
Brand is a concept that receives a lot of research attention as one
of the main topics of marketing. Brand is defined by many
researchers from different points of view. According to the American
Marketing Association (1960), a brand is “a name, term, design,
symbol, or any other feature that identifies one seller’s goods or
service as distinct from those of other sellers”. Similarly, Sokolowski
(1989) argues that a brand is a distinctive sign that distinguishes one
thing from another. According to Davis (2002), a brand is considered
to include a product and is defined as "a set of expectations
associated with a customer's experience with a product (company)".
Brands create competitive differentiation among competitors, which
can appear in the form of solid, logical commitments or abstract and
symbolic messages (Keller, 2003).
2.2.2. Definition of brand equity

Brand equity has been receiving a lot of attention from
researchers in various marketing studies. Most definitions of brand
equity are from the perspective of the consumer (Tran et al., 2019a,
Tran et al., 2019b). The thesis studies brand equity based on
customer perspectives, hereinafter referred to as brand equity. There
are many definitions of brand equity, but Aaker's definition is most
cited by later researchers and is applied for reality testing (Yoo et al.,
2000). Therefore, in this


thesis, the author uses Aaker's (1991) definition. Based on this
perspective, Aaker (1991) provides a definition of brand equity: “a
set of brand assets and liabilities linked to a brand, its name and
symbol that add to or subtract from the value provided by a product
or service to a firm and/or to that firm’s customers”.
2.2.3. Distinguish between brand equity and brand value
Brand equity and brand value are two completely different
concepts that are often confused. As mentioned above, from the
customer's point of view, brand equity exists in the customer's mind,
formed from the customer's perception, experience, emotions, and
relationship with the brand. Brand value is the financial value of the
brand in the market, which is the selling or replacement value of a
brand (Raggio & Leone, 2007).
2.2.4. Dimensions of brand equity
There is very little consensus on brand equity components
(Veloutsou et al, 2013). However, most studies agree that brand
equity is a multidimensional concept (Christodoulides & de
Chernatony, 2010). Through the process of synthesizing and
analyzing documents, the author selected Aaker's brand equity model
(1991) to study. According to Aaker (1991), brand equity is

composed of four main dimensions: brand awareness, perceived
quality, brand associations, and brand loyalty.
2.2.4.1. Brand awareness.
Brand awareness is “the ability of the potential buyer to
recognize and recall that a brand is a member of a certain product
category” (Aaker, 1991). Brand awareness is comprised of two
elements: brand recognition and brand recall (Keller, 1993).
2.2.4.2. Perceived Quality


The perceived quality is inconsistent with the actual quality of
the product. Zeithaml (1988) defined perceived quality as “the
consumer’s [subjective] judgment about a product’s overall
excellence or superiority”.
2.2.4.3. Brand associations
According to Aaker (1991), brand associations are anything
associated in the memory about a brand. Brand associations are
images and symbols associated with a brand or a brand’s benefits,
and thus can ultimately drive brand performances (He and Li, 2010).
2.2.4.4. Brand loyalty
From an attitudinal perspective, Aaker (1991) defined brand
loyalty as “the attachment that a customer has to a brand”. According
to Yoo et al (2001), brand loyalty refers to the tendency to be loyal to
a particular brand, expressed through this brand is always the first
choice when customers intend to buy.
2.3. Consumer Responses
2.3.1. Definition
Keller (1998) argues that customer response is a set of
perception, preference, and behavior.
2.3.2. Differential customer responses related to marketing

activities
Brand equity is defined by Keller (1993) as "the differential
effect of brand knowledge on consumer response to the marketing of
the brand". Therefore, this thesis focuses on customer responses
related to marketing activities.
2.3.3. Research customer responses
2.3.3.1. Customer Satisfaction


According to Oliver (1997), customer satisfaction is "a summary
of the psychological state due to the expected emotional satisfaction
associated with the emotional previous consumer experience".
Customer satisfaction is the key factor determining the success of
companies (Pappu et al., 2005).
2.3.3.2. Willingness to pay a price premium
Willingness to pay a price premium is defined as the amount of
money consumers are willing to pay for one brand in comparison to
other brands (Aaker, 1996). Buil et al. (2013) defined the willingness
to pay a price premium as something which “reflects the amount a
consumer is willing to pay for a brand in comparison with other
brands offering similar benefits”.
2.3.3.3. Attitude towards brand extensions
Attitudes towards brand extension can be described as a specific
form of purchase intention that reflects a customer's interest in a new
product or service sold under an existing brand name (Lehmann et
al., 2008; Keller & Lehmann, 2003).
2.3.3.4. Brand preferences
According to Sirgy et al. (1997), brand preference is the degree
of customer preference for a particular brand in comparison to other
brands.

2.3.3.5. Purchase intention
Crosno et al. (2009) argues that purchase intention is related to
the tendency to choose to buy a particular brand from similar brands.
It is also defined as the likelihood that the current customer will
repurchase the brand in the future (Cronin et al., 2000; Tolba and
Hassan, 2009). This thesis uses the definition of repurchase intention
by current consumers for research.


2.4. Relationship between research concepts
2.4.1. Relationships between Brand Equity Dimensions and
Overall Brand Equity
In this thesis, the author has approached to measure overall brand
equity from the point of view that considers brand equity as a firstorder factor. The purpose is to evaluate the impact of each
component on the overall brand equity.
2.4.1.1. The effect of brand awareness on brand equity
H1: Brand awareness has a positive impact on overall brand equity.
2.4.1.2. The effect of perceived quality on brand equity
H2: Perceived quality has a positive impact on overall brand equity.
2.4.1.3. The effect of brand associations on brand equity
H3: Brand association has a positive impact on overall brand equity.
2.4.1.4. The effect of brand loyalty on brand equity
H4: Brand loyalty has a positive impact on overall brand equity.
2.4.2. Relationships

between brand equity and consumer

responses
The relationship between brand equity and customer responses in
this thesis is formed from the Cognition – Affect – Conation model.

In this thesis, brand equity corresponds to the cognitive component.
Satisfaction corresponds to the affect component. Willingness to pay
a price premium, attitude towards brand extensions, brand
preferences and purchase intention corresponds to the conation
component.
2.4.2.1. The effect of brand equity on customer satisfaction
H5: Overall brand equity has a positive influence on customer
satisfaction.
2.4.2.2. The effect of brand equity on willingness to pay a price premium


H6. Overall brand equity has a positive influence on willingness
to pay a price premium.
2.4.2.3. The effect of brand equity on attitudes towards brand extensions
H7: Overall brand equity has a positive influence on attitudes
towards brand extensions.
2.4.2.4. The effect of brand equity on brand preference
H8: Overall brand equity has a positive influence on brand
preference.
2.4.2.5. The effect of brand equity on purchase intention
H9: Overall brand equity has a positive influence on purchase
intention.
2.4.3. The relationship between customer responses
According to the Cognition – Affect – Conation model, favorable
emotions of customers will lead to more favorable behaviors for the
brand. Satisfaction has been found to have a substantial impact on
behavioral intentions (Bigne et al., 2001; Castro et al., 2007; Chen &
Tsai, 2007).
2.4.3.1. The effect of satisfaction on willingness to pay a price premium
H10: Satisfaction has a positive influence on willingness to pay a

price premium.
2.4.3.2. The effect of satisfaction on attitude towards brand extension
H11: Satisfaction has a positive influence on attitudes toward
brand extensions.
2.4.3.3. The effect of satisfaction on brand preference
H12: Satisfaction has a positive influence on brand preference.
2.4.3.4. The effect of satisfaction on purchase intention
H13: Satisfaction has a positive influence on purchase intention.


2.4.4. The mediating relationships between brand equity and
customer responses through customer satisfaction
H14a. Customer satisfaction mediates the relationship between
brand equity and willingness to pay a price premium.
H14b. Customer satisfaction mediates the relationship between
brand equity and attitude towards brand extensions.
H14c. Customer satisfaction mediates the relationship between
brand equity and brand preference.
H14d. Customer satisfaction mediates the relationship between
brand equity and purchase intention.
2.5. Conceptual Framework
2.5.1. The proposed hypothesis
2.5.2. Conceptual Framework

Figure 2.1. Conceptual Framework


CHAPTER 3. METHODOLOGY RESEARCH
3.1. Research context
3.1.1. Vietnam’s soymilk market

3.1.2. Vinasoy
Vinasoy is a company specializing in soymilk and is currently the
market leader in Vietnam's soymilk market with 84% market share.
3.2. Research design
3.2.1. Research methodology
This study consists of two main steps: preliminary and formal.
Preliminary research is done by both qualitative methods and
quantitative methods. Formal research is also performed using
quantitative methods. This method is done to test the theoretical
scales and models.
3.2.2. Research process
3.3. Scale development
3.3.1. Brand awareness scale
The proposed brand awareness scale includes 5 observed
variables developed from the scale of Yoo et al. (2000), Boo et al.
(2009) and the scale of Tong and Hawley (2009).
3.3.2. Perceived quality scale
The proposed Perceived Quality Scale includes 4 observed
variables based on the scale of Tong and Hawley (2009), Yoo et al.
(2000).
3.3.3. Brand associations scale
Brand associations scale includes 4 observed variables developed
based on the scale of Yoo et al. (2000), Tong and Hawley (2009).
3.3.4. Brand loyalty scale


This study uses brand loyalty scale includes 3 observed variables
based on the scale of Yoo et al. (2000).
3.3.5. Overall brand equity scale
Overall brand equity scale includes 4 observed variables which is

developed from the scale of Yoo et al. (2000), Tong and Hawley
(2009).
3.3.6. Customer satisfaction scale
Customer satisfaction scale includes 4 observed variables which
is developed from the scale of Oliver (1989), Cronin et al. (2000).
3.3.7. Willing to pay a price premium scale
Willing to pay a price premium scale includes 3 observed
variables which is developed from the scale of Netemeyer (2004).
3.3.8. Attitude towards brand extension scale
Attitude towards brand extension scale includes 3 observed
variables which based on the scale of Aaker and Keller (1990),
Martínez et al. (2010).
3.3.9. Brand preference scale
Brand preference scale includes 3 observed variables which
based on the scale of Sirgy et al. (1991).
3.3.10. Purchase intention scale
Purchase intention scale includes 3 observed variables based on
the scale of Cronin et al. (2000).
3.4. Group interview
This study conducted group interviews with soy milk consumers
to adjust, add observation variables or discover new ingredients for
draft scales. Most items of the scales were rated by consumers as
easy to understand and they were able to distinguish these observed
variables. However, according to consumers, for soy milk products,


delicious taste is an important factor in evaluating product quality.
Therefore, they suggested adding the item "Products of Vinasoy have
a delicious taste". At the same time, consumers are very concerned
with soy-based products because in Vietnam today, they import a lot

of genetically modified soybeans. With the current trend of not using
genetically modified organism foods (GMOs foods), consumers
recommend adding the observation variable "Products of Vinasoy do
not use GMO soy beans" to the perceived quality scale.
3.5. Preliminary testing
Preliminary testing is carried out to evaluate the reliability of the
scales designed and remove junk observeds. The survey was carried
out on March 2018 with the sample n = 98. Cronbach’s alpha and the
item-total correlation for all scales were used to assess the initial
reliability

of

the

measures.

Subsequently,

to

explore

the

dimensionality of each construct, exploratory factor analyses (EFA)
were performed. The results of Cronbach Alpha analysis shows that
Cronbach's alpha coefficients of all scales are satisfactory (> 0,6),
except for variable CS3. Remove CS3, continue to analyze EFA. The
results showed that the scales were satisfactory, eliminating BAW4

because it did not meet the requirements about factor. Thus, through
the preliminary testing, the scales are satisfactory, including 10 scales
with 36 observed variables.
3.6. Formal quantitative research
3.6.1. Sampling method
Formal research using the convenient sampling method. The
survey is conducted by direct survey with questionnaires in the form
of direct and online surveys through social networks Facebook.
3.6.2. Sample size


The study was conducted from May 2018 to September 2018.
The number of paper responses was 360 copies in Hanoi, Da Nang,
and Ho Chi Minh City. 312 copies were collected with the rate of
86,7%. After preliminary review of the incomplete information
sheets, the number of valid paper survey is 308. The number of valid
copies obtained from online survey via Facebook is 87 votes. A total
of 395 valid responses were collected.
3.6.3. Demographical profile
The descriptive statistics results show that, among 395
responses, there were 163 male (41,3%) and 232 female (58,7%)
respondents. The majority of the respondents were between 19 and
35 years old (accounting for 44,3%). Regarding income, there were
166 people within the income level below 48 million/year
(accounting for 42%); the remaining number of people with an
income of 48 million or more accounted for 58%. Most customers
responded to the survey live from Da Nang to the South at a rate of
64,6%. The last time customers bought Vinasoy soymilk less than 1
month previously accounted for 38,5%, and from one to less than
three months ago was 28,4%.

CHAPTER 4. RESULTS
4.1. Scale testing
4.1.1. Results of Cronbach's alpha
Cronbach's alpha results show that the factors are reliable
because all Cronbach’s alpha values are greater than 0,7 (Table 4.1).
The item- to-total correlations were all above 0,30, except variable
PQ4 (0,229). Therefore, PQ4 (Vinasoy has poor product quality) was
excluded. The remaining observed variables were further analyzed
by EFA.
4.1.2. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA)
The first EFA result shows that 10 factors extracted in the
eigenvalue are 1,346 and the total variance extracted is 74,912%.
However, the variable OBE3 has a factor load factor of 0,432 < 0,5,
so remove OBE3. Hence, run the EFA again.
EFA results (shown in Table 4.2) show that KMO = 0,772 is
satisfactory, and that the factor analysis is appropriate, Sig. of
Bartlett's test = 0,000 < 0,05 shows that observed variables are
correlated with each other in the whole, The results also show that
there are 10 factors extracted at eigenvalue = 1,332 and the total
variance extracted is 76,059% > 50%. 34 items with factor loadings
greater than 0,5 were kept. After EFA analysis, there are 34 observed
variables divided into 10 factors representing 10 variables in the
model.
4.1.3. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA)
This model has 482 degrees of freedom. CFA results show that
Chi-squared = 958,053 with p = 0,000, CMIN/df = 1,988 < 2, CFI =
0,932 (> 0,9), TLI = 0,921 (> 0,9), AGFI = 0,849 (> 0,8), RMR =
0,032 (< 0,08), and RMSEA = 0,050 (< 0,08) all qualified. Therefore,

the overall scale model is reliable and suitable for the survey data set.


The CFA results show that the standardized loadings of the
variables are all higher than 0,5, and p = 0,000. On the other hand,
construct reliability (CR) estimates are from 0,812 to 0,887, greater
than the minimum level of 0,6 (Bagozzi and Yi, 1988). In addition,
the AVE of all the constructs are from 0,591 to 0,702, greater than
the 0,5 suggested by Hair (1998). Therefore, the measurement items
have reliability and validity.
In addition, the square of the correlation coefficient is smaller than the
AVE of each pair of factors (see Table 4.6); as such, the concepts in the
model achieve discriminant validity (Fornell and Lacker, 1981). Table 4.6.

Discriminant validity of the measurement model
AVE/R2

BAW

PQ

PQ

0,016

0,588

BAS

0,170

0,002

BL

0,013

0,039

0,011

0,701

OBE

0,064

0,071

0,029

0,103

0,622

CS

0,176

0,000

0,043

0,003

0,025

0,695

PRI

0,011

0,001

0,000

0,017

0,003

0,007

0,669

BEX

0,046

0,002

0,014

0,001

0,058

0,080

0,025

0,701

BP

0,009

0,000

0,037

0,001

0,047

0,033

0,038

0,021

0,591

PI

0,057

0,036

0,029

0,007

0,056

0,085

0,023

0,001

0,054

BAS

BL

OBE

CS

PRI

BEX

BP

0,630

4.2. Testing theoretical models through Structural equation
modeling (SEM)

PI

0,702


4.2.1. Structural equation modeling

Figure 4.2. The SEM finalized model and results
The results of SEM analysis (Figure 4.2) show that the research
model has 514 degrees of freedom, with Chi-square = 1150,662 (p =
0,000). χ2/df = 2,239 (< 3) fits the standard (Byrne, 2010). Other
evaluation criteria such as CFI = 0,910; TLI = 0,901 (>0,9); AGFI =
0,835 (> 0,8); RMR = 0,072 and RMSEA = 0,056 (<0,08). From the
above statistical indicators, it can be confirmed that the research
model is highly consistent with market data.
4.2.2. Test the hypotheses
4.2.2.1. Direct relationships
The results show that hypotheses H1, H2, H4, H5, H7, H8, H9,

H11, H12 and H13 about the relationship between the concepts
proposed in the research model are to be accepted with statistical


significance (p < 0,05). The remaining hypotheses H3, H6, H10 are
rejected (p > 0,05).
Table 4.7. Hypothesis testing (direct relationships)
H

Std.

S.E.

C.R.

P

Results

OBE 0,200 0,057

3,593

***

Supported

H2

BAW 

PQ


OBE 0,199

3,584

***

Supported

H3

BAS 

OBE 0,078 0,049

1,414 0,157 Unsupported

H4

BL



OBE 0,264 0,055

4,733

H5

OBE 

CS

0,172 0,064

2,922 0,003

H6

PRI

0,055 0,069

0,921 0,357 Unsupported

H7

OBE 
OBE 

BEX 0,194 0,061

3,377

H8

OBE 

BP

0,193 0,063

3,142 0,002

Supported

H9

OBE 

PI

0,202 0,059

3,505

Supported

0,086 0,063

1,470 0,141 Unsupported

H1

Relationships

Es

0,056

***

***
***

Supported
Supported
Supported

H10 CS



PRI

H11 CS



BEX 0,248 0,056

4,357

H12 CS



BP

0,156 0,057

2,590 0,010

Supported

H13 CS



PI

0,255 0,054

4,462

Supported

***
***

Supported

4.2.2.2. Indirect relationships
The results show that satisfaction is a mediator in the relationship
between brand equity and attitude towards brand extensions, brand
preference and purchase intention. In contrast to that, the remaining
hypothesis H14a is rejected. There is no intermediate relationship
between the overall brand equity, satisfaction and willingness to pay

a price premium because satisfaction has no effect on it (according to
H10 test results). AVF value indicates that about 15.66% of the total
effect of overall brand equity on attitude towards brand extension and


15.74% of the total impact of overall brand equity on brand
preference is explained by the mediating effect of customer
satisfaction. Similarly, the mediating effect of satisfaction explained
26.66% of the total impact of overall brand equity on purchase
intention.
Table 4.9. Hypothesis testing (indirect relationships)
H
H14a
H14b

Relationships

Mediation

OBE  CS  PRI
OBE  CS  BEX

No mediation
Partial
Indirect
mediation
effect
Direct
effect
Total

effect
Partial
Indirect
effect
mediation
Direct
effect
Total
effect
Partial
Indirect
mediation
effect
Direct
effect
Total
effect

OBE  CS  BP

H14c

H14d

OBE  CS  PI

SEs

0.034

AVF
(%)

Test results

15.66

Unsupported
Supported

15.74

Supported

26.66

Supported

0.183
0.217
0.034
0.182
0.216
0.068
0.187
0.255

4.3. Testing theoretical models through Bootstrap
The absolute CR value is small compared to 1,96, so it can be
said that the bias is very small, not statistically significant at the 95%

confidence level. So it can be concluded that the estimates in the
model as shown in Figure 4.2 can be reliable.


CHAPTER 5. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS
5.1 Conclusions
Firstly, the results show that brand awareness, perceived quality,
brand loyalty have a positive impact on overall brand equity. In
which, brand loyalty has the greatest influence on brand equity.
However, the relationship between brand association and brand
equity is not significant in this study.
Secondly, the results of the study also show that brand equity has
a positive effect on satisfaction, attitude towards brand extensions,
brand preference, purchase intention. However, the relationship
between brand equity and willingness to pay a price premium is not
significant in this study.
Third, satisfaction has a positive impact on attitudes towards
brand extensions, brand preference and purchase intention. However,
the relationship between satisfaction and willingness to pay a price
premium in this study is not significant.
Fourth, satisfaction is shown to act as an intermediary to the
relationship between the overall brand equity and consumer
responses. Specifically, brand equity has an indirect effect on attitude
towards brand extensions, brand preference and purchase intention
through satisfaction.
5.2. Contribution of the research
5.2.1. Contribution of the research in theory
Firstly, the thesis builds an integrated model to study the
relationship between brand equity and satisfaction, willingness to pay
a price premium, attitude towards brand extensions, brand preference

and purchase intention. The thesis adds to the theoretical void when
studying the effects of brand equity on these responds and the effect


of satisfaction to the remaining responses in the same model. At the
same time, the thesis is one of the few researches on the impact of
brand equity on customer satisfaction. The thesis also additionally
demonstrates the relationship between customer satisfaction and
responses.
Second, the thesis is one of the first studies to evaluate the
mediating role of satisfaction in the relationship between brand
equity and responses: willingness to pay a price premium, attitude
towards

brand

extensions,

brand

preference

and

purchase

intention.With the increase in customer satisfaction, the company
will increase the influence of the brand equity on the positive
responses of consumers. By demonstrating the mediating role of
satisfaction in the relationship between brand equity and consumer

responses, this study has shown a new mechanism to increase
positive consumer responses for brand.
Finally, with the research on Vinasoy brand, a leading brand in
the soymilk industry in Vietnam with 84% market share, the thesis
will contribute the basis for marketing strategies for Vinasoy in
particular and the canned soymilk industry in general.
5.2.2. Contribution of research in practical terms
The results of this study provide empirical evidences of the
benefits that brand equity can provide to the business. This study
provides managers with useful insights into the outcomes of
investing in brand equity. Brand equity is an important predictor of
positive consumer responses. Thus strengthening brand equity is an
important strategy for companies to improve their position in the
market.
By understanding the relationship between brand equity and
customer intentions, administrators will be able to predict the effect