A study of customer-based brand equity of the Grab company.

<span class="text_page_counter">Trang 1</span><div class="page_container" data-page="1">

<small> </small>

<b>OFF CAMPUS DIVISION </b>

<b><small>Course / Programme: Dissertation Module: BAM6001 </small></b>

<b><small>Tutor: Dr. David Racliffe Supervisor: Dr. Asma Begum </small></b>

<b><small>Project Title: A study of Customer-based Brand Equity of the Grab company. Assignment Length: 11795 words </small></b>

<b><small>Submission Deadline: May 1st, 2023 Cohort: 16 </small></b>

<small>Student’s name: Hoang Bich Khuyen Student ID: 2124791 </small>

<b><small>BA Bussiness Studies Bolton Bussiness School </small></b>

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 2</span><div class="page_container" data-page="2">

<b>Table of Contents </b>

<b><small>Abstract: ...4 </small></b>

<b><small>I. INTRODUCTION: ... 6 </small></b>

<small>1.1. Overview of the brand: ... 6 </small>

<small>1.2. Overview of technology companies related to transportation: ... 6 </small>

<small>1.3. Overview of the Grab company: ... 7 </small>

<b><small>II. LITERATURE REVIEW: ... 9 </small></b>

<small>2.1. Definition of brand: ... 9 </small>

<small>2.2. Definition of Brand Equity : ... 10 </small>

<small>2.3. Definition of Customer-based Brand Equity: ... 11 </small>

<small>2.4. Factor of Customer-based Brand Equity: ... 12 </small>

<small>3.5.2. Interview data collection: ... 26 </small>

<small>3.6. Reliability, Validity, and Triangulation: ... 26 </small>

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 4</span><div class="page_container" data-page="4">

<b>List of Figure:</b>

Figure 2.1. The Customer-based Brand Equity Model (Aaker 1991)... 13

Figure 4.1. Frequency of use of transportation services (e.g., ride-hailing, car sharing, public transit) ... 300

Figure 4.2. The frequency of use of food delivery services. ... 311

Figure 4.3. The frequency of use of digital payment services (e.g., GrabPay, GoPay, BeaminPay) <small>322 </small>Figure 4.4. The familiarity level of the Grab company among respondents ... 333

<b>List of Table: </b>

Table 4.1. Results of the surveys ... 28

Table 4.2. Gender ... 29

Table 4.3. Age range ... 29

Table 4.4. Reliability test ... 34

Table 4.5: Descriptive statistics of Customer-based Brand Equity factor ... 35

Table 4.6: Descriptive statistics of Brand Awareness factors ... 36

Table 4.7: Descriptive statistics of Brand Loyalty factors ... 37

Table 4.8: Descriptive statistics of Brand Image factors ... 38

Table 4.9: Descriptive Statistics of Perceived Quality ... 39

Table 4.10: Model summary ... 40

Table 4.11: ANOVA table ... 41

Table 4.12. Multiple regression results ... 41

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 5</span><div class="page_container" data-page="5">

<b>Abstract: </b>

<b>Purpose: Nowadays, competition is getting fiercer among technology companies in </b>

Vietnam. Besides, the penetration of foreign technology companies has also increased with various products and services. Thus, building brand equity with distinctive features, high identity, conveying unique values and corporate culture, and providing various products and services, are extremely important to the company (Chi, 2022). This study aims to determine the customer-based brand equity of the Grab company in Ho Chi Minh City. The study examines the effects of brand awareness, perceived quality, brand image, and brand loyalty on overall brand equity using the consumer-based brand equity model created by Aaker (1991).

<b>Design/methodology: Data from 235 consumers of Grab's services were examined using </b>

descriptive, correlational, and multiple regression methods utilizing the computer program Statistical Package for Social Sciences. The author employed qualitative data as a research strategy for this study.

<b>Research limitations: All the respondents live in the Ho Chi Minh City area; thus, they </b>

may not represent the entire population of Vietnam.

<b>Practical implications: Input on how brand equity among consumers is affected by </b>

brand awareness, brand loyalty, brand image, and perceived quality. This aids marketers and practitioners in creating strategies to build brand equity in order to gain an advantage over rivals and sustain a firm.

<b>Keywords: Grab, Brand image, Brand awareness, Brand loyalty, Brand equity, Brand </b>

association, customer-based brand equity.

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 6</span><div class="page_container" data-page="6">

<b>I. INTRODUCTION: </b>

<b><small>1.1. Overview of the brand: </small></b>

The management of intangible resources is becoming more essential in today's business environment due to the complexity of the changing markets, fragmented media and distribution channels, growing importance of networks, and focus on the co-creation of value between the organization and its customers. Organizational capabilities, skills, and knowledge, as well as brands, are some of the intangible resources that are widely used to differentiate firms (M' Zungu et al., 2010). The term "brand" has become increasingly common, and this issue interests many domestic and international researchers. The brand is one of the key elements in developing domestic and international markets for enterprises, advancing commercial civilization, and assisting in the fight against unfair competition. Building brands for a business's products and services is crucial because it helps consumers form an impression of the company and its offerings. Brand equity is another crucial issue to take into account. Brand equity influences the quality of the user experience and improves customers' ability to perceive and process information (Keller 1993). Additionally, brand equity may assist marketers in gaining an advantage over their competitors through the creation of a strong brand (Aaker, 1991). For instance, brand assets accounted for 90% of the $220 million total price Cadbury-Schweppes paid for Procter & Gamble's "Hires" and "Crush" product lines (Kamakura and Russell, 1991; Schlossberg, 1990). Therefore, brand equity is a factor that aids in the survival, sustainable growth, and maintaining the position of businesses in the market.

<b>1.2. Overview of technology companies related to transportation: </b>

Thanks to the rapid growth of information technology and telecommunications, mobile devices are not simply a common communication and information search tool, but they perform a variety of useful tasks for users, including entertainment, shopping, and education. Accordingly, smart service applications on mobile phones are also appearing more and more to meet people's needs for fast and convenient living. In particular, the well-known GPS-integrated technology applications, such as the following brands: Uber, Grab, Gojek... These service providers are constantly researching, developing, and keeping an eye on diverse types of transportation and services, suitable for many different travel purposes. In Vietnam, online

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 7</span><div class="page_container" data-page="7">

booking applications are making a big difference from traditional car services and are loved by most users. According to Q&Me (2018), in the technological-based motorbike market in Vietnam, Grab presently holds 60% of the market share, followed by Gojek (19%) and Be (18%). About cars, Grab had a 66% market share for vehicles, "Be" maintained a 22% market share, and the remaining 20% was split among other applications. Technological-based motorbike/car services bring convenience and provide multi-services, so more and more people are interested in them. In 2021, Vietnam's online motorbike/ car booking market has had a boom with more than 20 different platforms launched, along with 67,000 taxis, 90,000 registered business vehicles, and granted badges (Vu, 2022). Vietnam's online sector for booking cars and motorcycles generated roughly 2.4 billion USD in revenue in 2021, with an average annual growth rate of about 30% to 35% between 2015 and 2021 (Duy, 2021). Not only the motorbike taxi market but also the online food delivery market in Vietnam is being evaluated as having strong growth in recent years.

In addition, the introduction of Decree No. 10/2020/ND on cutting and simplifying 50% of conditions for business investment in transport services for both taxis and cars (Bao Anh, 2022). Under the contract, Decree 10 is expected to create favorable conditions for a business environment, transparent, healthy, and equal competition among entities engaged in the transport business, bringing many benefits to people and enterprises. In this study, the research subject chosen by the author is Grab- a technology company that provides transportation, delivery, and digital payment services.

<b>1.3. Overview of the Grab company: </b>

The Singapore-based technology business Grab Holdings Inc., also known as Grab, offers delivery, transportation, and digital payment services in Singapore as well as other Southeast Asian nations. Over the years, Grab has expanded its reach across Southeast Asia, providing delivery, transportation, financial services, business support, and more - all integrated within the platform as a super app (Grab, 2022). These services help connect diverse users, deliver exciting experiences, and meet the daily needs of millions of people across 480 cities and 8 countries.

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 8</span><div class="page_container" data-page="8">

In February 2014, Grab made its first appearance in the Vietnamese market with a connection service for taxicabs. After that, the platform continues to launch the GrabBike 2-wheeler service to fit Vietnamese people's lifestyles. Currently, besides the two traditional services, GrabBike and GrabCar, Grab has expanded to many other services such as delivery (GrabExpress), food delivery (GrabFood), and grocery shopping (GrabMart). The application now owns more than 200,000 driver partners, operating across 46 major cities and provinces in the country (Vietnamfinance, 2022).

Currently, Grab brand is facing intense rivalry between businesses on the Internet, not only for service costs but also for quality and service diversification. Therefore, creating a strong brand is not enough for the business; it is required to understand what consumers think and feel about the Grab brand, how Grab stands out from other brands in the market, and how they perceptions the value of Grab's services. This highlights the importance of building a solid basis that may encourage a favorable perception of a brand.

This research emphasizes the customer-based brand equity of the Grab company since it recognizes the value of customers to a company's brand equity. In this study, the author will concentrate on studies of variables influencing customer-based brand equity. In addition to examining how consumers perceive Grab's brand equity, the study also makes recommendations for how Grab can strengthen its customer-based brand equity.

<b>1.4. Research objectives: </b>

1. To study factors affecting customer-based brand equity.

2. To understand consumers' perception of the brand equity of Grab company.

3. To provide suggestions and recommendations to improve customer-based brand equity for the Grab company.

<b>1.5. Research contribution: </b>

The study will benefit three distinct sectors:

The literature: This study aims to determine how customer-based brand equity affects the business. As a result, the literature knowledge will be beneficial for other researchers.

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 9</span><div class="page_container" data-page="9">

The industry: The study's findings may help managers and other organizational makers better grasp the problems with customer-based brand equity and develop effective strategies.

decision-The company: By improving customer-based brand equity, the company could increase customer loyalty, improve brand image, and the ability to charge a premium price for products or services. Besides, building a strong brand that resonates with customers, companies can create a competitive advantage and develop long-term relationships with their customers.

<b>1.6. Research structure: </b>

There are five chapters in this study. First, chapter one starts off with a summary of the thesis and the motivations for the research, including the research context. Next, the study's contribution is described along with the research objectives.

Following the literature review, chapter two synthesizes the theories of customer-based brand equity. Accordingly, supporting them with commentary and critical analysis through in-depth research on the fundamental ideas, definitions, and components of customer-based brand equity.

The methodology of empirical research is covered in Chapter 3, where the research philosophy and strategy are first introduced. The research methodology, validity, reliability, and triangulation are also presented after that. Chapter three will be finished with the Research Ethics.

The findings from the quantitative survey will be reported in chapter four, along with a critical analysis to address the research objectives and questions.

The conclusion of chapter five will include a summary of all the important research findings. Along with recommendations for future studies, the study's limitations are also presented.

<b>2.1. Definition of brand: </b>

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 10</span><div class="page_container" data-page="10">

One of the company's most significant intangible assets is its brand. According to Philip Kortler (1995), “A brand is a name, slogan, sign, symbol, design, or combination of these features used to identify a seller's good or service and set it apart from those of rivals”. On the other hand, a trademark is a non-physical asset with a value that cannot be properly identified until it becomes the subject of a specific economic transaction, according to Nandan (2005). Aaker et al., (1991) further noted that brand has been widely regarded as a significant element in consumer choice, acting as a tool for consumers to evaluate the differences and uniqueness of the products. Businesses regularly use marketing tools like slogans, logos, and other well-known marks that they own to promote and market their products and services. These resources work together to create a brand identity that sets the company apart from its competitors.

The brand can aid the business in communicating its message and might stir up feelings in its clientele. Customers have distinctive ties with businesses, enabling those companies to profit from their loyalty. Companies also depend on these clients to assist in attracting new clients, this promotes the credibility and confidence of businesses. Additionally, the brand makes the company's new products accessible to customers. Customers that are brand loyal are more willing to spend money when new products are introduced, even if they are more expensive, because they have developed a deep relationship and trust with the brands. For instance, because of intense brand loyalty, Apple's loyal clients are willing to ignore the high cost of an iMac, MacBook, iPad, or iPhone. When the company launches new devices, many of the company's existing consumers are willing to replace their current ones.

<b>2.2. Definition of Brand Equity : </b>

There are numerous definitions of brand equity in use today. According to Faircloth (2001), brand equity is “the intrinsic value that a brand brings to a product”. While Keller (1993) discovered the various impacts that the brand has on how customers react to its marketing programs, is known as brand equity. This is founded on the theory that consumer perceptions of a particular brand over time are influenced by what they have seen, heard, read, and felt about it. Aaker (1991) is most accurate when defining brand equity as “the collection of assets and liabilities associated with a brand, its name and logo that increase or decrease the value of

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 11</span><div class="page_container" data-page="11">

the services or goods offered by the company”. Brand equity has been defined and assessed in a variety of ways depending on how the brand is viewed. Accordingly, brand equity can be divided into two large groups: financial-based brand equity and perceived brand equity.

Previous studies about brand equity were more emphasized financial-based indicators such as cash flows, cost savings, sales, and prices (Kamakura and Russell, 1993). However, Swait et al., (1993) and Kim et al., (2003) have proven that successfully branded products outperform unbranded products in terms of consumer perceptions and long-term competitive advantage due to price premiums (actual prices), higher market shares, shareholder values, cash flows, as well as price elasticities. As a result, signals based on impressions from the perspectives of customers, and workers started to gain prominence in the 1990s.

<b>2.3. Definition of Customer-based Brand Equity: </b>

The theoretical basis for the customer-based brand equity framework was laid down by Aaker (1992) and Keller (1993), who defined customer-based brand equity as a group structure consisting of different emotional, cognitive, and image responses that customers have as a result of a company's branding activities. In other words, a brand's strength depends on consumers' thoughts and feelings. In agreement, Konecnik (2007) stressed that the difficulty for businesses in building customer-based brand equity is ensuring buyers have the right kinds of perceptions of goods and services and the marketing campaigns which encourage them in order for the desired feelings, thoughts, images, beliefs, perceptions, and experiences to be connected to the brand.

In short, brand equity is customer understanding of the brand, which refers to what they have been taught, experienced, seen, and told about the brand. Because of this, consumer reactions to various goods and services from various brands vary. In ultimately, these varied reactions add up to brand equity, which is reflected in attitudes, references, and actions related to all facets of brand marketing, such as, for instance, brand selection, remembering advertising copy, responding to sales promotions, and assessing suggested brand extensions. For instance, General Electric (GE) and Hitachi once shared ownership of a facility in England that produced identical televisions for the two businesses. The brand name on the screen was the sole

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 12</span><div class="page_container" data-page="12">

distinction. However, the Hitachi televisions were $75 more expensive than the GE televisions when they were sold. Furthermore, despite charging more, Hitachi sold twice as many sets as GE. In this instance, brand awareness has changed consumers' opinions about the merchandise. This demonstrates how consumers' opinions of a product's performance are strongly influenced by their perceptions of the brand that represents it.

When customers respond positively to the product and the way it is presented, a brand has strong customer-based brand equity (Kamakura et al., 1993). One well-known example of a business with favorable equity is Apple, which has some of the greatest customer-based brand equity in the entire globe. Before extending the brand to iPhones, the corporation established an excellent standing with Mac computers, which fulfilled the brand promise anticipated by Apple's computer customers. As a result, customers can be less sensitive to price raises and the termination of advertising support. Additionally, they might be more receptive to a new brand extension for strong customer-based brand equity organizations, and more interested to look for the organization in a new distribution channel. Conversely, if people respond less favorably to a brand's marketing initiatives than they do to a product with no name or a fictitious name, the brand has poor customer-based brand equity (Lassar et al., 1995).

<b>2.4. Factor of Customer-based Brand Equity: </b>

Keller (1993) asserts that "customer-based brand equity is the primary factor that impacts brand equity and consists of the two aspects of brand awareness and brand image". While Aaker (1991) presented a more thorough customer-based brand equity model that incorporates all five factors that affect an organization's brand equity including brand awareness, brand image, perceived quality, brand loyalty, and other properties assets. Aaker's paradigm of customer-based brand equity serves as the foundation for this study. However, to establish a measurement scale, Yoo and Donthu (2001) operationalized Aaker's (1991) CBBE model by using four of the five brand equity components. The fifth component of brand equity- other property assets, was considered unimportant by Washburn & Plank (2002) for their consumer-oriented measurement strategy. Thus, in the following parts of this study, the four dimensions are briefly covered.

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 13</span><div class="page_container" data-page="13">

<i>Figure 2.1. The Customer-based Brand Equity Model (Aaker 1991) </i>

<b>2.4.1. Brand awareness: </b>

According to Aaker (1991), brand awareness is “a customer's ability to recognize or recall that a brand is a member of a specific good or service category”. While Keller (1993) asserts that "customer-based brand equity occurs when the consumer is aware of the brand and has some positive, strong, and distinctive brand associations in memory". In short, brand awareness is the ability of consumers to recall, recognize, and distinguish one brand from others. Regarding the awareness component, there are various practices. Some researchers (Washburn et al., 2000; Yoo and Donthu, 2001) combined awareness with associations. However, the practice of mixing brand awareness with associations risks the separation of these elements, which when operationalized correctly, are distinct from one another. Washburn and Plank (2002) identified the necessity to segregate them in follow-up studies in order to improve results and match the theory. Another group of researchers (Boo et al., 2009; Tasci et al., 2007) favored familiarity over awareness. For instance, Tasci and Guillet (2011) found that brand familiarity is an important element in consumers' assessments of the fit and compatibility of brands. They utilized familiarity to measure different levels of brand awareness. In addition, several researchers (Horng et al., 2012; Tasci, 2011) included both awareness and familiarity in their conceptualizations of brand equity. However, given the natural connection between awareness and familiarity, this could result in redundancy, particularly in complicated model testing. Additionally, even

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 14</span><div class="page_container" data-page="14">

though other researchers named the component awareness, they still used "familiarity" in their scale items (Wang and Finn, 2013). For instance, Yoo’s (2001) awareness dimensions include "this brand is very familiar to me" and "the characteristics of this brand are unfamiliar to me". In addition, some of the researchers referred to familiarity in explanations of the function of awareness. For instance, Lee and Back (2008) identified familiarity as “the incremental levels of awareness that result in brand satisfaction through brand familiarity”.

Nowadays, businesses are now making use of effective marketing communication channels including television, mobile, and online advertising to raise brand awareness. These distribution channels offer assurance of product legality and quality, which reduces the risk involved in product evaluation and selection when making a purchase (Huang and Sarigollu, 2011).

From the above theories, hypothesis H1 has proposed: Brand awareness has a

<b>positive effect on overall brand equity in the Grab company. </b>

<b>2.4.2. Brand loyalty: </b>

In recent years, since brands are seen as a means of overcoming the difficulty of establishing lasting relationships with clients in business-to-business marketplaces, brand loyalty has received attention (Mudambi, 2002).

Consumers' attachment to a brand is measured by brand loyalty, which also indicates how likely they are to switch to another brand in the same category if their circumstances change or the product's price, quality, or features change (Aaker, 1991). Brand loyalty results in marketing benefits as consumers who are loyal to a brand continue to buy products from this brand because they believe it provides them with higher levels of satisfaction than the competition. This decreases the brand's susceptibility to competitive action (Nam et al., 2011). Both consumers and businesses can benefit from brand loyalty. Brand loyalty can result in comfort and familiarity for customers while also generating repeat business and higher profits for businesses.

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 15</span><div class="page_container" data-page="15">

Various implementations and explanations for brand loyalty are used in various studies. While some studies look at attitudinal loyalty, others focus on behavioral loyalty when measuring buying frequency and share of category standards (Romaniuk et al., 2013). Attitudinal loyalty was defined by Romaniuk et al., (2013) as a commitment that results in a preference for or attraction to the brand. The best ability to motivate customers and inspire a purchasing decision is demonstrated by this kind of loyalty (Samita et al., 2015). For instance, despite the fact that a cup of coffee at Starbucks can cost up to four times as much as coffee from a nearby convenience shop or deli, brand love and loyalty attitudinal toward the brand have led people to stand in line outside the store. On the other hand, behavioral loyalty describes the form of loyalty in which customers continue to buy goods or services from a particular brand out of habit or convenience, rather than because they have a deep emotional bond with the company (Esmaeilpour, 2015; Lee & Back, 2008). Instead of a strong relationship with the brand, behavioral loyalty can be based on elements like location, pricing, or accessibility. For instance, a businessman may frequently book flights with American Airlines because the airline flies to the locations the traveler must frequently visit. However, another airline with a cheaper fare or more convenient schedule might convince the traveler to switch to that company. Similar to this, there will be certain customers who make repeat purchases solely to take advantage of the rewards offered by the company program. Customers who don't care about brands or quality will therefore purchase anything based just on pricing.

Overall, behavioral and attitudinal loyalty are effective strategies for businesses to keep clients, but it's essential for them to also concentrate on developing emotional loyalty by offering superior goods and services and cultivating a strong brand identity (Russell-Bennett et al., 2007).

From the above theories, hypothesis H2 is proposed: Brand Loyalty has a positive effect on overall brand equity in the Grab company.

<b>2.4.3. Perceive quality: </b>

According to Aaker (1991), perceived quality is the opinion that customers have regarding the value and superiority of a good or service when compared to their competitors.

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 16</span><div class="page_container" data-page="16">

Since perceived quality is determined by customer reviews, which vary depending on the needs and preferences of each customer, it is impossible to evaluate perceived quality objectively (Keller, 1993).

Quality perception is a process in which consumers select the quality signals of the product. According to Ophuis et al., (1995), “products are assumed to be made up of a variety of signals (such as price, brand name, flavor, packaging, color, etc.), each of which can be used to anticipate the features of the product”. Steenkamp et al., (1990) proposed that product cues have a polarized nature. Some cues, according to their argument, are related to the product (internal cues), while others have external characteristics. Steenkamp et al., (1990) defined internal cues as product features that "cannot be changed or experimentally controlled without changing the physical characteristics of it", whereas external cues are defined as products-related cues that are distinct from the actual product. External cues may be more important to consumers than internal ones when they are operating with little understanding of the internal product attributes or lack the time to evaluate the internal cues (Zeithaml et al., 1988). In actuality, consumers find it challenging to assess internal indicators of quality. However, various articles (Hatch and Roberts, 1985; Bhuian, 1997) have examined which type of cue is more crucial for consumers to perceive quality. They have demonstrated that in several product categories, internal cues are more effective drivers of quality judgment and have higher predictive value than external cues. Hatch and Roberts (1985) discovered that consumers relied more on product information (internal cues) to judge a product's quality than they did on price and warranty/certification seals (external signals). Internal cues are typically given a greater significance until consumers judge internal cues to be insufficiently predictive or when they lose confidence in their capacity to evaluate and assess those cues (Agrawal and Kamakura, 1999). Actually, businesses have used internal cues extensively to differentiate their products for their utilitarian uses by focusing on market segments that place a high value on specific cues. Ophuis et al., (1995) examined consumers' preferences for private labels of orange juice by comparing intrinsic and extrinsic cues to existing national brands in recent research. They made it clear that external cues only play a small part in how consumers perceive quality variation and that internal cues are primarily responsible. Four primary external cues—price, brand name, retailer

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 17</span><div class="page_container" data-page="17">

reputation, and level of advertising—were regularly linked to perceptions of quality and value, and many other external signals were also helpful to customers (Zeithaml, 1988; Dodds et al., 1991). For instance, a number of research (Dodds et al., 1991; Völckner., 2007) have proven the significance of price in quality inference. When it comes to products and services for which precise information is difficult to obtain, the phrase "you get what you pay for" is especially important. Instead of a price premium, the consumer might receive a better value at a lower cost (Aaker et al., 1993). Despite having little impact on product quality, extrinsic cues have been found to significantly affect consumers' perceptions of product performance and quality (Veale and Quester, 2009). These extrinsic cues include things like cost, brand, retail location, and nation of origin.

From the above theories, hypothesis H3 has been proposed: Perceived quality has a positive effect on overall brand equity in the Grab company.

<b>2.4.4. Brand image: </b>

The brand image is defined by Faircloth (2001) as “the consumer's perceptions of a firm as expressed by the brand associations they have in their minds”. Besides, brand image, according to Aaker., (1991), is "the understanding consumers obtain from the total set of brand-specific operations engaged by the firm". Based on all of the definitions listed above, a brand image is the impression of the brand that consumers have created. Consumers give an image to a brand depending on their subjective assessments of a group of associations they have with it. For instance, in the consumer's perception, Lexus is associated with luxury and status, while Volvo might be associated with safety. Children may relate McDonald's to a place where they can have fun, or they may associate the fast food giant with a symbol like the Golden Arches.

The three components of brand image are attributes, benefits, and attitudes, according to Keller (1993). There are two types of attributes: specific and abstract. Size, color, and weight are specific features, whereas "brand personality" qualities like "youthful," "durable," and "rugged" are more abstract. According to Keller (1993), a’ttributes can also be divided into those that are related to products and those that are not. Product-related characteristics would

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 18</span><div class="page_container" data-page="18">

be specific to the kind of product or service, whereas non-product-related characteristics would include packaging, user imagery, and usage imagery. Benefits refer to how the consumer feels that their demands are being met. Functional, experiential, and symbolic are the three categories of fundamental customer demands that Faircloth (2001) articulated. Rangaswamy

(1993) alludes to this classification when he categorizes goods into three groups based on the issues they resolve: goods that meet practical needs, goods that are primarily hedonistic, and goods that fall into a third group that has considerable symbolic significance. Attitudes make up the third element of brand image. According to Bird (1970), an attitude is an accumulated propensity to act in a consistently favorable or negative way toward a certain object. Brand attitudes are the aggregate judgments of consumers toward a brand. According to the tri-component attitude framework proposed by Rangaswamy (1993), attitudes are composed of cognitive, affective, and conative components. The conative component describes the likelihood or propensity of the consumer to engage in a particular behavior (such as making a purchase) in relation to a brand. The consumer's knowledge or beliefs about the brand are referred to as the cognitive component. Emotions and sentiments are related to the affective component.

This study puts out hypothesis H4, which states that brand image has a favorable impact on overall customer-based brand equity in the Grab company.

<b>2.4.5. Previous study: </b>

In 2015, the study "Young Consumers Insights into Brand Equity" of Sasmita looked at the impact of brand awareness, brand loyalty, perceived quality, and brand image on consumer-based brand equity. Data from 200 young customers were collected using multiple, descriptive, and correlation regression analyses. Besides, in the study "Developing and validating a multidimensional consumer-based brand equity scale" published in 2001, Yoo and Donthu showed the outcomes of a multi-step study to validate the multidimensional consumer-based brand equity scale created using Aaker and Keller's concept of brand equity. The outcomes of the multi-step psychometric test demonstrate that the new brand equity metric is reliable, valid, affordable, and generalizable across multiple cultures and product categories. Regarding the brand loyalty component in customer-based brand equity, Back and Parks conducted a

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 19</span><div class="page_container" data-page="19">

study on "The brand loyalty model involving cognitive, affective and conative brand loyalty and customer satisfaction" in 2003. In this study, he investigated how brand attitudes can mediate the relationship between brand loyalty behavior and customer satisfaction. The results of this study showed that customer satisfaction had a significant indirect influence on brand loyalty behavior as attitudinal brand loyalty acted as a mediator.

According to these previous studies, the author will develop the research question based on a questionnaire developed by Sasmita (2015); Yoo and Dothu (2001); and Back and Parks (2003).

<b>III. METHODOLOGY: </b>

Research methodology is a fundamental concept that demonstrates the researcher's consideration and awareness of the possibilities available to employ various types of procedures to gather and analyze data in order to address an intriguing problem or issue. The components of the investigation are described using a variety of terminologies. They consist of research methodologies, research philosophies, research processes, research approaches, and research strategies. To better understand how to address the research problem, a researcher may combine different approaches.

In this study, the author will employ a range of methodologies, such as positivism and interpretivism, deductive and inductive processes, and quantitative and qualitative approaches.

<b>3.1. Research philosophy: </b>

One of the concepts that a researcher must comprehend and be able to employ in their research is research philosophy. Research philosophy can assist the researcher in three ways: (i) clarifying the research design; (ii) identifying which designs will be effective and which won't; and (iii) developing a research design that is relevant to the study topic.

Epistemology, ontology, and axiology are the three primary methods used in management research (Saunders et al.,2015). Epistemology which is dominates management research, consisting of positivism, interpretivism, and realism (Tsang, 2014). Epistemologies will influence how researchers approach data analysis, select methods, and see potential research areas. The

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 20</span><div class="page_container" data-page="20">

parts that follow include descriptions of the key relevant research paradigms, such as positivism, realism, and interpretivism.

<b>3.1.1. Positivism: </b>

According to Bryman (2007), positivism is a philosophical approach that can help a researcher perform objective research on social phenomena. The objective of the study, according to positivism, is to verify or disprove a hypothesis using statistical analysis, the methodology of science, and the generalizability of the findings (Clark, 1998). The basic objective of positivism is to establish causal or explanatory connections that finally result in the control and prediction of the relevant phenomenon (Crossan, 2003).

The strength of the positivist philosophy, according to Clark (1998), is that it may cover a broad range of situations when examining big samples. It might be quick and affordable. However, some of its shortcomings include inflexibility, ineffective knowledge acquisition, and difficulty in theory generation (Bryman, 2007).

Based on theories and models of customer-based brand equity, the author makes several assumptions on customer-based brand equity in the Grab company in Ho Chi Minh City. The author intends to test these hypotheses by gathering and examining data to show whether they are true or false.

<b>3.1.2. Interpretivism (Social constructivism): </b>

As opposed to positivism, interpretivism is an academic theory developed to comprehend and evaluate social and human reality. The idea that the social world is too complex to comprehend gives rise to interpretive techniques of research, which emphasize the importance of studying individuals and their social behavior (Bell et al., 2018). According to interpretivism, our understanding of reality is a social construction made by researchers and other humanitarian actors and is, therefore, subjective. Instead of focusing on statistical and objective approaches to dealing with complex situations, the interpretivism philosophy creates knowledge by emphasizing descriptive and subjective ways (Remenyi et al., 2005).

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 21</span><div class="page_container" data-page="21">

A study approach based on the interpretivism philosophy acknowledges the distinctions between natural occurrences and the subject meanings of social interaction (Bryman and Bell, 2007). The strength of the interpretivism ideology is that it offers the potential for altering procedures, addressing problems, and producing new theories. This theory, however, has linkages to qualitative research and can often be confusing and unreliable.

To evaluate customer-based brand equity in the Grab corporation, the author plans to combine two research theories- Positivism and Interpretivism. Both ideologies help to comprehend and explain the essential aims, also complementary research is conducted using.

<b>3.1.3. Realism: </b>

Similar to positivism, realism is a scientific method for establishing the values of knowledge through the collection of facts using both qualitative and quantitative methods as well as empirical assessments (Bryman, 2007). According to Saunders et al. (2015), categorizing realism into direct realism and critical realism makes it more understandable. The first is direct realism, which believes that reality can be comprehended when employing the right approach. On the other hand, critical realism contends that people's perceptions of their experiences, sensations, and images of the outside world are not always accurate and may confuse them (Novikov and Novikov, 2013). Direct realism is shown to be unchangeable, but critical realism contends that things are continually changing and that what people see is merely a small portion of the whole.

Each type of realism has a unique capacity to change how researchers perceive their study difficulties. Many researchers assert that critical realism is more frequently employed than direct realism since it allows for the complete and more accurate collection and analysis of data for the study's difficulties (Blumberg et al., 2008; Saunders et al., 2015). In studies of business and management, all research methodologies are crucial. To select the most effective research methods, it is important to thorough understanding of each research method, including how it operates and its advantages (Bryman, 2007).

<b>3.2. Research approach: </b>

The deductive approach and inductive approach are two categories of research methodology.

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 22</span><div class="page_container" data-page="22">

<b>3.2.1. Inductive approach: </b>

A bottom-up strategy is another name for the inductive method. It transitions from the particular to the broad. Data collection starts with a set of observations made by the researcher. Then, certain patterns or regularities will be developed when enough data has been gathered. Finally, the researcher clarifies the patterns and draws some conclusions. The inductive process involves using a qualitative approach and generating explanations and hypotheses based on observations (Gill and Johnson, 2002).

<b>3.2.2. Deductive approach: </b>

A top-down strategy is another name for a deductive approach. It progresses from broad to specific. Where a researcher will evaluate a theory related to the research study, generate a hypothesis, gather and analyze data to verify the hypothesis (Jahn, 2011). The researcher reads theories that other researchers have investigated. Then, some theories will start to form. To determine whether the hypotheses are valuable and appropriate to the setting of the research study, the researcher will employ a method of data collection. The creation of ideas or hypotheses, their operationalization, and their testing are the three stages of a deductive process, according to Gallaire et al., (1989). In this study, the author applies an interpretive approach to develop an overview of customer-based brand equity and factors that impact customers' perception of the brand equity of the Grab company.

<b>3.3. Research method: </b>

Qualitative and quantitative research are the two primary types of research method, which are developed based on the basis of research objectives to clarify the research problem. The qualitative technique is an inductive process and does not require a hypothesis, in contrast to the quantitative method, which is a deductive process and connects to theories (Saunders et al., 2015).

The quantitative approach shifts focus from the broad to the narrow. This study strategy makes use of statistical data. The researcher frequently gathers data from a sizable sample. To identify correlations between variables, the gathered data is subsequently converted to numbers and evaluated (Steckler et al., 1992). The cause-and-effect relationship is connected to this logical

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 23</span><div class="page_container" data-page="23">

process. This connection demonstrates how strongly the variables are correlated. The results aid in testing hypotheses to determine the degree to which they are true. There are two types of hypotheses in a quantitative approach: null hypotheses and alternative hypotheses. The goal of the researcher's data collection and analysis is to disprove null hypotheses. Rejecting a null hypothesis means expressing the possibility that an alternative hypothesis is correct.

On the other hand, the qualitative approach shifts focus from the particular to the broad. Interviews and observations are used in the data collection process. This method is circular and iterative. The goal of the study is to identify any patterns or regularities that show up in the observations and interviews. The researcher can better comprehend the phenomenon by keeping track of behaviors and actions. The researcher can look deeply into the attitudes and viewpoints of the samples. Although this approach does not offer statistical data, it can offer a perception of how processes work. Bryman (2007) asserts that a qualitative approach enables a researcher to comprehend the difficulties or problems depending on the researcher's interpretation and points of view.

The use of quantitative or qualitative methodologies has a variety of benefits and drawbacks. The quantitative approach generates quantifiable, accurate data, frequently from a large sample (Bell et al., 2007). Nevertheless, it does not fully analyze the data and removes the event's context. The qualitative approach, however, offers more precise details on the attitudes and opinions of the participants. This approach is adaptable and can be changed as necessary. It is also less expensive because it frequently only calls for a pen and a notebook. While this method is reliant on the emotions and individual opinions of participants, one drawback is that it might not produce reliability.

To take advantage of the benefits and minimize some of the drawbacks, the author of this study used a variety of quantitative methodologies. The author plans to create and use surveys as part of the quantitative strategy to gather data. Reliable information should be produced with the assistance of many individuals. Accordingly, the factors affecting customers-based brand equity in the Grab company will be analyzed and the data collected will largely be numerical. Furthermore, research is done into how consumer-based brand equity may affect the business.

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 24</span><div class="page_container" data-page="24">

<b>3.4.2. Secondary data: </b>

Secondary data includes both quantitative and qualitative information. Previous studies, organizational records, market statistics, and official publications are a few examples of secondary data sources (Clark, 2013). Researchers can profit from using secondary data by preserving time and resources and supplying comparison data (Saunders et al., 2015). However, there are some drawbacks to using this kind of data, such as the fact that it was gathered for a reason unrelated to the study's goals. Additionally, secondary data might be outdated, and difficult to access (Bryman and Bell, 2007). As a result, the author has to access trustworthy material that can answer the research questions and provide high-quality information.

<b>3.5. Collection data technique: </b>

<small>Interviews and questionnaires are frequently used by researchers as a method of data collection. </small>

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 25</span><div class="page_container" data-page="25">

<b>3.5.1. Questionnaire: </b>

A common technique for gathering information from a wide sample of people is to utilize a questionnaire. A questionnaire suggests a method of gathering data in which participants respond to a set of questions (Saunder et al., 2015). A variety of methods, including structured interviews, telephone interviews, and Internet surveys, can be used to deliver the questionnaire. This method is evaluated on its capability to build a sizable sample size using the same set of questions used in common and practical procedures. Also, the questionnaire must be consistently understood by all respondents, and make sure that the answer choices are adequately aligned with the study questions and objectives (Crossan, 2003). As a result, the questionnaire differs from interview approaches, is frequently standardized, and has few open questions to collect substantial amounts of quantitative data. In order to obtain large amounts of quantitative data for this study, a self-completed questionnaire will be used through a web-based application.

Due to its advantages in gathering data from a large number of participants and the ability to present the data obtained via the questionnaire approach in numerical terms, the questionnaire method was chosen (Blumberg et al., 2008). In order to answer the research question and meet the study objective, it is essential that the questionnaire's design is effective and ensures the collection of relevant data (Saunders et al., 2015). Online messaging services will be used to send questionnaires in this study. This approach was chosen because it is simple to use on many various types of electronic devices, thereby reaching a larger population. Online surveys also have the benefit of encouraging more honest responses from respondents due to their secrecy. The link will be sent directly by the author to those who frequently utilize Grab services in Ho Chi Minh City. The distribution and carrying out of this online survey will take place over a period of one week in March.

The questionnaire consists of five parts: Brand Equity, Brand Awareness, Brand Loyalty, Brand Image, and Perceived Quality. There, several demographic questions were first asked of the participants. The main goal of this of the study, emphasizing the survey's confidentiality and anonymity as well as the respondents' voluntariness is also included in the research questionnaire. The questionnaire was to be finished by the participants in no more than 15

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 26</span><div class="page_container" data-page="26">

minutes. Before the official study is carried out, a pilot study is undertaken to verify this. The questionnaire and information sheet are attached as part of the study's Appendix section.

<b>3.5.2. Interview data collection: </b>

According to Saunder et al., (2015), among primary data collection methods, interviews produced the most accurate results since they relied on in-depth conversations between the interviewer and interviewees. In particular, the interview gives the researcher a chance to explain the study environment and the research topic to the respondent and to make sure they understand what they mean. There are three distinct interview formats, including structured, semi-structured, and unstructured interviews (Bell, 2018). First, structured interviews follow a similar format to the questionnaire approach, asking a set of questions repeatedly to various participants while adhering to a predetermined interview schedule. Second, the questions in semi-structured interviews can change depending on the conversational setting. The order of the questions is not fixed and can be changed. Finally, there is no need to prepare a list of questions in advance for unstructured interviews. This interview's objective is to provide the researcher the freedom to inquire about the respondents' areas of interest.

However, the author did not use the interview data collection method in this study.

<b>3.6. Reliability, Validity, and Triangulation: </b>

Reliability is the degree to which data-gathering methods or analysis processes provide trustworthy results, according to Saunders et al., (2015). Reliability can be increased by examining the consistency of results across time, among different observers, and between test components (Clark, 2013). On the other hand, Mohamad (2015) asserted that in several cases, reliability will be threatened. The first is the subject or participant error, when they are in different mental states (tired, excited...), the survey results obtained will also be affected by those states. Another error may come from the participants' bias toward the surveyed subjects. Therefore, for an objective survey, these threats should be addressed.

Validity is also an important factor in ensuring research quality. Crossan (2003) claims that validity is a tool for evaluating the approaches that will be employed, such as data collecting and analysis, to assess the tool's level of correctness and the relationship between the concepts

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 27</span><div class="page_container" data-page="27">

involved and the research questions. Examining how well the findings accord with accepted theories and other measures of the same topic might help to determine whether the research is valid.

<b>3.7. Sampling: </b>

In order to assess a set of characteristics as a whole, sampling is frequently done (Bell, 2007). The essential need for sampling, according to Saunders et al. (2015), is that it should make it easier for the researcher to give an answer to the study's questions. In research, two primary types of sampling techniques are widely utilized. One type of sample is a probability sample, in which the likelihood of each component of the sampling frame being selected for the sample is equal. Non-probability sampling is the second sampling technique, in which the researcher chooses whether or not to include a certain component of the study based on his or her personal assessment of its likelihood. The use of evaluation criteria as a non-random foundation for selecting sample elements makes non-probability sampling stand out from other sampling methods (Bryman et al., 2007).

<b>3.8. Research Ethics: </b>

Following the regulations of research ethics, the author's professional and moral behavior must be suitable for the study's conception, design, and access to subjects or organizations for data collection, analysis, and reporting. At the introduction stage, the author will send respondents an information sheet outlining the study's expectations, objectives, confidentiality policy, and data collected for the study. Additionally, the data supplied by participants is only utilized for empirical research and not other commercial endeavors. The ethical standards of the University of Bolton are the foundation of this study.

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 28</span><div class="page_container" data-page="28">

<b>IV. FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS: </b>

To carry out the research, the author has distributed 300 online survey questionnaires for customers who have used the services of Grab company in Ho Chi Minh City. The results were obtained from 260 surveys. At the end of the survey, after conducting checking and removing the incorrect answer sheets due to customers filling in missing information, and answering wrong questions, the remaining 235 valid questionnaires were included in the analysis statistics accumulated.

<i>Table 4.1. Results of the surveys </i>

This chapter examines the customer-based brand equity in the Grab business using information gathered from questionnaire replies. The chapter began with a discussion of the 235 chosen respondents' demographic characteristics. In order to make conclusions about the respondents' impressions of various elements contributing to the level of brand equity, the reliability test was followed by a study of descriptive statistics. This information was then provided in the second and third sections. Additionally, regression analysis was used to show how various factors affect the Grab company's brand equity. Finally, some key findings and discussions that were in line with earlier studies were also produced.

<b>4.1. Democraphic: </b>

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 29</span><div class="page_container" data-page="29">

The demographic characteristics of the respondents looked at in the current study included gender, age range, frequency of use of transportation services (such as ride-hailing, car sharing, public transit), frequency of use of food delivery services (such as GrabFood, BeeFood, BeaminEats), frequency of use of digital payment services (such as GrabPay, GoPay, BeaminPay), and familiarity with the Grab brand.

<i>Table 4.2. Gender </i>

As shown in table 4.2, there are 94 males, 139 females, and 2 others. According to the Gender Descriptive Statistics table, men make up 40% of the total respondents, while women make up a significantly greater percentage at 59.1%, and the remaining 0.9% are other respondents. Regarding the second demographic factor, age range, it was found that 45.5% of respondents were between the ages of 18 and 25, and 40% were between the ages of 26 and 35. A total of 2.6%, 10.2%, and 1.7% of respondents were under the age of 18, between the ages of 36 and 45, and older than 46, respectively. These figures show that young people have a great need for using transportation technology services. A description of the age range is shown in the table below:

<i>Table 4.3. Age range </i>

Another important demographic feature explored in the current study referred to the frequency of use of technology transportation services (e.g., ride-hailing, car sharing, public transit). Figure 4.4 presented the respondents' answers:

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 30</span><div class="page_container" data-page="30">

<i>Figure 4.1. Frequency of use of transportation services (e.g., ride-hailing, car sharing, public transit) </i>

Figure 4.1 illustrates that 47% of respondents claimed that they use technology transportation services (e.g., ride-hailing, car-sharing, public transit) several times a week. The number of respondents who use technology transportation services several times a month was 78 respondents (33%), while those who rarely use technology transportation services were 8% (18 respondents). Only 29 respondents, representing 12%, used technology transportation services on a regular basis. There is no respondent who has never used a technology transport service. Furthermore, in the current research, the author also discussed how frequently people use food delivery services (see Figure 4.2):

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 31</span><div class="page_container" data-page="31">

<i>Figure 4.2. The frequency of use of food delivery services. </i>

As shown in Figure 4.2, the respondents who use food delivery services several times a week accounted for the largest proportion at 39%, followed by people who used food delivery services almost daily (35%). The proportion of respondents who occasionally uses food delivery services was 19%, and that of respondent who rarely uses food delivery services was 7%. There is no respondent who has never used food delivery services. Figure 4.3 showed the frequency of use of digital payment services (e.g., GrabPay, GoPay, BeaminPay):

</div>