02 Whole
02 Whole
02 Whole
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
By
University of Adelaide
November 2014
1|Page
ABSTRACT
This thesis investigates the role of branded marketing events (BMEs) in facilitating
customers are seeking participation through unique experiences with brands (Vivek,
Beatty, and Morgan 2012), and hence customer engagement has emerged as an important
Ilić 2011a), however, there has been little research exploring the antecedents that facilitate
customer engagement. This thesis proposes that BMEs can be used as strategic tools to
facilitate engagement with an event, with engagement transferred to the brand and
A quantitative online survey was conducted in the South Australian wine industry to
behavioural intention of loyalty, and the moderation effect of experiential needs are
Results indicate that customer event engagement has a mediating effect on the relationship
between BME experiences and customer brand engagement. Sensorial, relational and
pragmatic experiences are found to only impact customer event engagement, while
cognitive experience has a direct impact on customer brand engagement. This highlights
that the heightened state of engagement can transfer between focal objects; from the event
to the brand. This provides further insight into the BME’s impact on customer brand
engagement and behavioural intention of loyalty. In addition, support is found for the
inclusion of a social dimension of customer brand engagement, and partial support for a
social dimension of customer event engagement. Therefore, results of this thesis suggest
i|Page
that BME experiences facilitate customer engagement and subsequent behavioural
intention of loyalty.
The moderating influences of the individual’s experiential needs, namely need for
cognition, need for affect, and novelty-seeking needs are also examined. There is evidence
that attendees with a strong need for cognition engage more strongly with relational BME
experiences, while attendees with low need for cognition engage more strongly with
sensorial BME experiences. However, few moderating effects are identified overall.
This research empirically demonstrates the strong and positive relationship between BMEs
and customer engagement, and advocates the use of BMEs as an effective brand-building
identifying engagement transfer between two focal engagement objects, and provides
support for the inclusion of a social engagement dimension. The findings provide support
for the BME activities that managers undertake with the intention of facilitating customer
ii | P a g e
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT............................................................................................................................I
TABLE OF CONTENTS..................................................................................................... III
LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................... VII
LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................ VIII
DECLARATION .................................................................................................................. X
PUBLICATIONS................................................................................................................. XI
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................................................................................. XII
KEY TERMS, DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS .............................................. XIV
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION .................................................................................... 1
1.1 Background to the Research ........................................................................................ 1
1.2 Research Problem and Propositions ............................................................................ 2
1.3 Justification for the Research ....................................................................................... 3
1.4 Research Context ......................................................................................................... 5
1.5 Research Method ......................................................................................................... 6
1.6 Delimitation and Scope of the Thesis .......................................................................... 7
1.7 Outline of the Thesis .................................................................................................... 9
1.8 Chapter 1 Summary ................................................................................................... 10
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ....................................................................... 11
2.1 Chapter 2 Introduction ............................................................................................... 11
2.2 Customer Engagement ............................................................................................... 14
2.2.1 Theoretical Foundations of Customer Engagement............................................ 14
2.2.2 Customer Engagement Conceptualisation .......................................................... 15
2.2.2.1 Different Perspectives of Customer Engagement ........................................ 18
2.2.2.2 Definition of Customer Engagement ........................................................... 19
2.2.2.3 Dimensions of Customer Engagement ........................................................ 20
2.2.2.4 What Customer Engagement is not: Related Concepts ............................... 22
2.2.2.5 Antecedents and Outcomes of Customer Engagement ................................ 26
2.3 Branded Marketing Events ........................................................................................ 28
2.3.1 Marketing Events ................................................................................................ 28
2.3.1.1 Defining Marketing Events .......................................................................... 30
2.3.2 Conceptualisation of Marketing Events .............................................................. 32
2.3.2.1 Branded Marketing Events - a Definition .................................................... 33
2.3.2.2 Investigating a Broader Conceptualisation of BMEs: Customer Experience
................................................................................................................................. 35
2.3.3 Customer Experience .......................................................................................... 36
2.3.4 Components of Experience within a BME ......................................................... 37
2.3.5 Outcomes of BMEs experiences ......................................................................... 39
iii | P a g e
2.4 Customer Engagement and BMEs: A Conceptual Framework ................................. 41
2.4.1.1 The role of Social Engagement within Customer Engagement ................... 44
2.4.2 Relationships between Experiential Components of a BME and Customer
Engagement ................................................................................................................. 47
2.4.2.1 Cognitive Experience ................................................................................... 50
2.4.2.2 Emotional Experience .................................................................................. 52
2.4.2.3 Sensorial Experience.................................................................................... 53
2.4.2.4 Pragmatic Experience .................................................................................. 55
2.4.2.5 Relational Experience .................................................................................. 56
2.4.3 The Interplay between Customer Engagement Objects ...................................... 59
2.4.3.1 Customer Engagement to Behavioural Intention of Loyalty ....................... 62
2.5 Experiential Needs ..................................................................................................... 66
2.5.1 Conceptualising Experiential Needs ................................................................... 66
2.6 Hypotheses Summary ................................................................................................ 74
2.7 Conceptual Framework .............................................................................................. 76
2.8 Chapter 2 Summary ................................................................................................... 78
CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHOD ......................................................................... 79
3.1 Chapter 3 Introduction ............................................................................................... 79
3.2 Research Design ........................................................................................................ 80
3.3 Unit of analysis .......................................................................................................... 81
3.4 Data Collection Method ............................................................................................. 82
3.4.1 Measurement Instrument .................................................................................... 82
3.4.2 Operationalistion of the Theoretical Constructs ................................................. 83
3.4.3 Measurement Scales ........................................................................................... 84
3.4.4 Questionnaire Design .......................................................................................... 92
3.4.4.1 Scaling ......................................................................................................... 93
3.4.4.2 Questionnaire Content ................................................................................. 94
3.4.4.3 Questionnaire Structure and Sequencing ..................................................... 94
3.4.5 Ethics and Information Confidentiality .............................................................. 97
3.4.6 Data Coding and Editing..................................................................................... 97
3.5 Pre-Test: University of Adelaide Orientation Week.................................................. 98
3.5.1 Overview ............................................................................................................. 98
3.5.2 Subjects ............................................................................................................... 98
3.5.3 Sample and Respondent Profile .......................................................................... 99
3.5.4 Data Collection Procedure ................................................................................ 100
3.5.5 Pre-test Data Analysis ....................................................................................... 100
3.6 Main Study: South Australian Wine Industry.......................................................... 103
3.6.1 Overview ........................................................................................................... 103
3.6.2 Subjects ............................................................................................................. 103
iv | P a g e
3.6.3 Selection of Participating Wineries .................................................................. 103
3.6.4 Selection of Individual Respondents ................................................................ 104
3.6.5 Respondent Profiles .......................................................................................... 105
3.6.6 Data Collection Procedure ................................................................................ 106
3.7 Preliminary Analysis................................................................................................ 108
3.7.1 Data Cleaning ................................................................................................... 108
3.7.2 Non-Response Bias ........................................................................................... 109
3.7.3 Construct Validity ............................................................................................. 111
3.7.3.1 Convergent Validity................................................................................... 112
3.7.3.2 Discriminant Validity and Reliability Testing ........................................... 126
3.7.4 Testing for Common Method Bias ................................................................... 131
3.8 Chapter 3 Summary ................................................................................................. 132
CHAPTER 4: RESULTS ............................................................................................. 133
4.1 Chapter 4 Introduction ............................................................................................. 133
4.2 Social Engagement as an Independent Engagement Dimension ............................. 134
4.2.1 Convergent Validity of Social Engagement Dimensions ................................. 134
4.2.2 Discriminant Validity and Reliability Testing of Social Event Engagement ... 137
4.2.3 Discriminant Validity and Reliability Testing of Social Brand Engagement ... 140
4.2.4 Discriminant Validity of Social Constructs ...................................................... 143
4.2.5 Structural Model of Customer Event Engagement ........................................... 146
4.2.6 Structural Model of Customer Brand Engagement........................................... 149
4.2.7 Discussion of Hypothesis 1............................................................................... 151
4.3 Path Model Analysis using Structural Equation Modelling .................................... 153
4.3.1 Path Model Analysis ......................................................................................... 153
4.3.2 Calculation of Composite Variables ................................................................. 154
4.4 Evaluating Path Models ........................................................................................... 158
4.4.1 Model Specification .......................................................................................... 158
4.4.2 Model Identification ......................................................................................... 158
4.4.3 Model Estimation.............................................................................................. 159
4.4.4 Model Re-specification ..................................................................................... 161
4.4.5 Discussion of Hypothesis 2............................................................................... 166
4.4.6 Discussion of Hypothesis 3............................................................................... 172
4.4.7 Discussion of Hypothesis 4............................................................................... 173
4.5 The Moderation Effect of Experiential Needs ......................................................... 176
4.5.1 Method for Multi-group Analysis ..................................................................... 176
4.5.2 Need for Cognition ........................................................................................... 178
4.5.3 Need for Affect ................................................................................................. 180
4.5.4 Novelty-Seeking Needs .................................................................................... 183
v|Page
4.5.5 Discussion of Hypothesis 5............................................................................... 186
4.6 Chapter 4 Summary ................................................................................................. 189
CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION .................................................. 191
5.1 Chapter 5 Introduction ............................................................................................. 191
5.2 Summary of Findings............................................................................................... 192
5.2.1 The Role of Social Engagement ....................................................................... 192
5.2.2 Experiential Components of A BME that Facilitate Customer Engagement ... 193
5.2.3 Engagement Transfer from Event to Brand ...................................................... 195
5.2.4 The Impact of Customer Engagement on Behavioural Intention of Loyalty ... 196
5.2.5 How the Individual’s Experiential Needs Moderate Event Engagement ......... 197
5.2.6 Updated Study Framework ............................................................................... 198
5.3 Contributions to the Academic Discipline ............................................................... 199
5.4 Managerial Implications .......................................................................................... 203
5.5 Limitations of the Research ..................................................................................... 205
5.6 Directions for Future Research ................................................................................ 207
5.7 Concluding Thoughts ............................................................................................... 210
APPENDICES ................................................................................................................... 212
REFERENCES .................................................................................................................. 220
vi | P a g e
LIST OF FIGURES
vii | P a g e
LIST OF TABLES
viii | P a g e
Table 4-4: Goodness of Fit Indices - Event Engagement .................................................. 137
Table 4-5: Reliability and Validity – Event Engagement .................................................. 139
Table 4-6: Goodness of Fit Indices - Brand Engagement .................................................. 141
Table 4-7: Reliability and Validity – Brand Engagement ................................................. 142
Table 4-8: Goodness of Fit Indices - Social Constructs .................................................... 144
Table 4-9: Reliability and Validity – Social Constructs .................................................... 145
Table 4-10: Goodness of Fit Indices – Event Engagement ............................................... 148
Table 4-11: Goodness of Fit Indices – Brand Engagement ............................................... 150
Table 4-12: Summary of Hypothesis 1 .............................................................................. 151
Table 4-13: Factor Loadings and Error Variances for Composite Variables .................... 157
Table 4-14: Goodness of Fit Indices for Identified Path Model ........................................ 160
Table 4-15: Regression Weights – Original Path Model ................................................... 161
Table 4-16: Goodness of Fit Indices for Re-Specified Path Model ................................... 164
Table 4-17: Regression Weights: - Re-Specified Path Model ........................................... 165
Table 4-18: Summary of Hypothesis 2 .............................................................................. 166
Table 4-19: Summary of Hypothesis 3 .............................................................................. 172
Table 4-20: Summary of Hypothesis 4 .............................................................................. 173
Table 4-21: Experiential Needs Groups - Value Classification ......................................... 177
Table 4-22: Nested Model Comparisons and Goodness of Fit Indices - Need For Cognition ...... 179
Table 4-23: Need for Cognition ......................................................................................... 180
Table 4-24: Nested Model Comparisons and Goodness of Fit Indices - Need for Affect........... 182
Table 4-25: Need for Affect............................................................................................... 182
Table 4-26: Nested Model Comparisons and Goodness of Fit Indices - Novelty-Seeking Needs .... 184
Table 4-27: Novelty-Seeking Needs .................................................................................. 185
Table 4-28: Summary of Hypothesis 5 .............................................................................. 186
ix | P a g e
DECLARATION
I certify that this work contains no material which has been accepted
written by another person, except where due reference has been made
in the text. In addition, I certify that no part of this work will, in the
those works.
the Library Search and also through web search engines, unless
period of time.
Signed: ___________________________________
x|Page
PUBLICATIONS
The following publications are based upon the research presented in this thesis, and may
Altschwager, T., Goodman, S., Conduit, J., Habel, C. “Branded Marketing Events: a
Proposed ‘Experiential Needs’ based Conceptual Framework” (forthcoming) Event
Management: an International Journal (accepted May 2014)
Altschwager, T., Conduit, J., Goodman, S. (2014) “Dinner or Music: Which Events
Enhance Customer Brand Engagement?” Australian and New Zealand Marketing Academy
Conference, Brisbane Australia
Altschwager, T., Conduit, J., Goodman, S. (2014) “Wine events: a way to engage
customers?” Wine and Viticulture Journal (forthcoming November-December issue)
Altschwager, T., Conduit, J., Goodman, S. (2013) “Branded Marketing Events: Facilitating
Customer Engagement” International Conference of the Academy of Wine Business
Research, St Catharines Canada
xi | P a g e
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
My PhD journey would not have been possible without the support of many people.
First, I wish to thank my supervisors, Dr. Steve Goodman and Dr. Jodie Conduit for their
research partners, which led to invaluable collaborations with Professor Tatiana Bouzdine-
Jodie, where do I even start! Thank you for everything. I feel truly honoured to be your
first PhD student to completion; you are an exceptional supervisor and a wonderful person.
I can never thank you enough for all of your guidance throughout this process.
The people I’ve met throughout this PhD have become my dear friends - thank you all for
being such wonderful support. Zubair Ali Shahid, Rebecca Dolan, Joanne Ho, Hande
Akman and Ervin Sim, your encouragement and friendship have meant the world to me.
Special thanks must also be given to Cibo, for being my second home.
I acknowledge the support of the University of Adelaide, which provided the scholarship
and funding that enabled me to complete my research and attend conferences. I also
acknowledge Ray Adam for his valuable help in proof-reading the abstract, introduction,
Last, but by no means least, thank you to my beautiful family. Thank you for believing in
me, even at times when I didn’t believe in myself. To Grace, Sonya, Ruby and Arch for
being my support crew. And finally, to Michael. You are brilliant, and I could not have
xii | P a g e
For Grace
xiii | P a g e
KEY TERMS, DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS
The definitions of selected terms are listed to provide clarity and to set certain
terminologies for the context in which they were utilised in this thesis;
Associative network theory: theory that customers retain information about events in
information can trigger thoughts about related information, in this case linked
platform for customers to interact with the brand and other actors (definition in this
this thesis are; the event (referred to as customer event engagement) and the brand
experiences between a customer and brand (Gentile, Spiller, and Noci 2007),
King, and Sparks 2012). (Definitions of each engagement dimension are provided
on pages 22 to 24).
xiv | P a g e
Event experience: The broader construct of brand experience is considered to encapsulate
including events (Brakus et al. 2009). This thesis focuses on brand-related stimuli
from a BME; therefore, the researcher refers to this as event experience instead of
brand experience.
Experiential components of a BME: the components of a BME utilised in this thesis are
Experiential needs: the need that an individual seeks to fulfil through experiences
Experiential needs investigated in this thesis are need for cognition, need for affect
Optimum stimulation level (OSL) theory: theory that individuals seek out stimulation
Baumgartner 1992).
Service dominant (S-D) logic: describes the shift in marketing over the past several
specialized skills and knowledge, and processes (doing things for and with)”, with a
Social engagement: the customer’s heightened level of interest regarding the focus of
engagement (i.e. the event or the brand) based on personal exchanges with other
actors (definition in this thesis, page 46). Focal objects investigated in this thesis
xv | P a g e
are; the event (referred to as social event engagement) and the brand (referred to as
Social exchange theory: argues that customers engage in activities that provide emotional
rewards including social approval and human contact (Abdul-Ghani, Hyde, and
Marshall 2011).
Theory of consumption values: states that various consumption values perceived by the
customer are focal in explaining consumer choice with regards to purchase (or not
xvi | P a g e
Introduction Chapter
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
In recent years, business environments have become more dynamic and interactive, with
customers seeking participation through unique experiences with the offerings and
activities of the organisation (Vivek et al. 2012). Customer engagement has emerged as an
al. 2011a), customer loyalty (Bowden 2009) and contributes to a firm’s financial value
(Bijmolt, Leeflang, Block, Eisenbeiss, Hardie, Lemmens, and Saffert 2010; Kumar, Aksoy,
facilitating engagement, both customer- and brand-initiated (Vivek et al. 2012). However,
despite the interest in customer engagement there have been few contributions that focus
The focus of this thesis is to investigate branded marketing events (BMEs); a brand-
initiated experience that serves as a platform for customers to interact with the brand and
other actors. Founded in marketing events and customer experience literature, a BME is
interactive in nature, unique to the individual, highly experiential and essentially brings the
brand to life (Wohlfeil and Whelan 2006). The characteristics of these events are
(Brodie, Ilic, Juric, and Hollebeek 2011b), and are expected to enhance behavioural
1|Page
Introduction Chapter
The central purpose of this thesis is to explore how BME experiences facilitate customer
How do BME experiences impact customer engagement, and what impact does
This research problem is further articulated in this thesis through the examination of
that conceptually, customers engage with the event itself and through this engagement with
the event their engagement transfers to the brand. An individual’s experiential needs
moderate this process in that the fulfilment of experiential needs strengthens the
developing the conceptual framework (Figure 1-1, and is discussed in Chapter 2), five
research questions are identified. These research questions are established in Chapter 2 and
frame the development of hypotheses which are empirically investigated in Chapter 4. The
2|Page
Introduction Chapter
Service-dominant (S-D) logic has changed the way marketing researchers think and
approach interactions with customers (Vargo and Lusch 2004). Customers are no longer
satisfied with passive communication with brands; they want to interact, customise, and
drive their own brand experiences (Vivek et al. 2012). It is the brand’s duty to provide a
platform for interaction and customer engagement to occur. A branded marketing event is
subjective in nature, whereby the perceived value is determined by the individual. Previous
marketing event studies have investigated event effectiveness (Weihe, Mau, and Silberer
2006; Whelan and Wohlfeil 2006); however, research in this area is yet to investigate
This thesis contributes to the overall understanding of customer engagement and the
interplay between engagement objects (the event and the brand). A general lack of
empirical quantitative enquiry into customer engagement is observed in Table 2-1 (Chapter
2). Further quantitative research, including this thesis, is required to contribute to the
starting to build with regards to understanding the various antecedents and outcomes of
does not yet investigate the strategic use of events to drive customer engagement.
This thesis makes several key contributions to theory and literature. First, it contributes to
BMEs. Various components of a BME experience are identified from customer experience
literature (Gentile et al. 2007), and used to investigate the relationship between BME
exchange theory (Möller 2013; Saks 2006), as resources are contributed by the brand and
3|Page
Introduction Chapter
the customer for mutual benefit; the brand provides a platform (BMEs) through which
unique and memorable experiences occur, and the customer in turn contributes through
their engagement with the event and with the brand. Social exchange theory also supports
Second, this thesis explores the interplay between two engagement objects; customer event
engagement and customer brand engagement. Using associative network theory (Smith
2004), this thesis postulates that customer engagement experienced with the event can also
replicate onto the associated brand, thus facilitating customer brand engagement. Extant
literature on customer engagement to date does not explore multiple focal engagement
becoming more common for brands to initiate experiences with customers that extend
beyond normal service interactions (for example, BMEs); in this situation it is unclear
whether the brand receives any benefit for undertaking such interactions.
S-D logic recognises that value is uniquely created and determined by the individual
(Vargo and Lusch 2008). Therefore, an understanding of the individuals’ needs within the
in the relationship between BME experiential components and customer event engagement
is examined. Optimum stimulation level theory (Steenkamp and Baumgartner 1992) guides
the hypotheses presented in this thesis, arguing that the relationship between customer
event engagement and BME experiences is enhanced when the individual’s experiential
needs are satisfied during the BME. Customer engagement literature recognises that the
individuals’ needs can moderate the level of customer engagement facilitated (Brodie et al.
4|Page
Introduction Chapter
The theoretical framework in Figure 1-1 highlights the focal constructs of interest and
presents them together to depict their relationships. A more detailed explanation and
The research context of this thesis is wine-related BMEs held in the South Australian wine
industry. The Australian wine industry is dominated by a small number of large wine
brands, with over two thousand small wineries competing for the remaining market
important strategy for wine brands to differentiate and create closer connections with their
customers.
Wine marketing studies recognise the impact of events and customer experience in the
wine industry (Hoffman, Beverland, and Rasmussen 2001; Pikkemaat, Peters, Boksberger,
and Secco 2009). Wine brands already host events and implement other activities to create
customer experience and engage customers (Barth 2007). However, the wine industry
Research has indicated that the individual’s hedonic attitudes tend to impact their
attendance of special events more so than utilitarian drivers (Gursoy, Spangenberg, and
(O'Neill and Charters 2000), related with leisurely activity and lifestyle (Jingxue,
Morrison, Cai, and Linton 2008) and therefore is deemed an appropriate context in which
Research on similar hedonic experiences (e.g. in tourism) have started to recognise and
adopt customer engagement strategies (So, King, Sparks, and Wang 2014). Therefore, the
wine industry provides a context in which a diverse range of events are available for
investigation in this thesis, where unique and memorable customer experiences are
anticipated, and where the individual’s experiential needs are expected to moderate the
This section provides an overview of the research method adopted in this thesis. A detailed
developed and pre-tested in the University sector and the main study is conducted in the
South Australian wine industry. The researcher attended many of the events to seek the
participation of event attendees; willing participants provided their email address and were
sent the online questionnaire. For a small number of events the participating wineries
Existing scales are selected to capture each of the constructs within the conceptual model,
and minor modifications made to wording when required to ensure their applicability to the
context. Items are assessed in the pre-test analysis for construct validity and reliability;
poor-fitting items are excluded from the main study to shorten the survey length.
6|Page
Introduction Chapter
Data analysis is conducted using SPSS 21 and AMOS 21, and structural equation
modelling (SEM) employed. Each latent construct and associated measured variables are
tested for construct validity and reliability using various measurement models before
structural models and path models are assessed. Composite measures are calculated to
analysis is conducted to identify the effects of moderators on each of the paths within the
model.
The managerial implications, limitations and future directions topics are discussed in
Chapter 5, and attest that the relationships identified in this thesis cannot be generalised
beyond the scope of this thesis. Further examination of the relationships among the key
The scope of this thesis is limited to wine-related BMEs held in the South Australian wine
industry. The findings of this thesis are relevant for related fields, particularly where the
extrapolate these relationships in the context of unrelated fields, for example for utilitarian
Data collection for this thesis was limited to South Australia. A broader national study
would have captured a greater variety of wine regions. However, while wine regions in
Australia carry some importance, the customer has been found to associate predominantly
with the individual wine brand (Rasmussen and Lockshin 1999). Therefore, data collection in
the main South Australian wine regions are not believed to be of detriment to the
7|Page
Introduction Chapter
In addition, the location-based boundaries imposed on this research mean that cultural
influences cannot be identified. This is particularly relevant to the wine industry, where
perceptions related to the wine industry (Overby, Gardial, and Woodruff 2004). Therefore,
account for cultural differences, particularly in ‘old world’ wine countries (e.g. France) as
Australia is considered a ‘new world’ wine country (O'Neill, Palmer, and Charters 2002).
within the platform of the event, and does not account for the various experiences and
interactions between the customer and brand beyond the BME. There is confusion in the
use of the term ‘experience’; experience can describe knowledge or expertise in retrospect
(for example I have experience in this topic) whereas an experience refers to living
through, undertaking or facing a specific event (Palmer 2010). The parameters of ‘the
experience’ in this thesis reflect the duration of the event; however, it is recognised that a
customer’s overall ‘experience’ (from a cumulative perspective) with a brand can extend
Finally, although other notions such as customer orientation, customer management and
engagement, they are emergent from the perspective of Goods-Dominant logic; S-D logic
has progressed these ideas with a greater emphasis on the customer’s central role in value
creation (Vargo and Lusch 2008). The various theoretical frameworks grounding customer
engagement is a likely cause of the varying perspectives that researchers in the area have
psychological mindset. Therefore, this thesis has set a demarcation of the research area and
8|Page
Introduction Chapter
The structure of this thesis follows the five chapter approach in Perry (1998); each chapter
CHAPTER 1 provides an introduction and background to this thesis. This chapter briefly
describes the research problem and subsequent propositions, justification for the research,
CHAPTER 2 reviews the literature regarding customer engagement, marketing events and
customer experience, and outlines the theoretical underpinning of the relevant research
propositions and hypotheses. The emergence of customer engagement and its theoretical
behavioural intention of loyalty toward the brand is discussed and its outcomes from
customer event engagement and customer brand engagement explored. Finally, this chapter
discusses the moderator variables that potentially influence the relationships between the
CHAPTER 3 describes the research method used to establish the relationships among the
key constructs. Details concerning sample size, data collection procedures, and
questionnaire design are presented and justified. This chapter has a focus on the
constructs. The pre-test data analysis is described and changes to the final questionnaire are
identified. This chapter concludes with an examination of the construct validity and
9|Page
Introduction Chapter
CHAPTER 4 addresses the main propositions and hypotheses of this thesis. Social
customer engagement constructs are examined with reference to the event and the brand,
and are tested for their applicability as an additional independent dimension of customer
engagement. Path model analysis investigates the influence of the BME experiential
engagement and customer brand engagement, and the outcome of behavioural intention of
loyalty. Finally, this chapter demonstrates the multi-group analysis used to investigate the
CHAPTER 5 integrates the key findings from the literature review and results chapters. It
chapter concludes with the study limitations and directions for future research.
This chapter laid the foundations for this thesis. It introduced the research problem,
research questions and hypotheses. Then the research was justified, the method was briefly
described and justified, the thesis was outlined, and the delimitations and scope were
given. On these foundations, the thesis can proceed with a detailed description of the
research. The next chapter presents a summary of extant literature, mainly in the research
10 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
between engagement subjects and objects (Brodie et al. 2011a; Hollebeek 2011a).
organisational behaviour (Brodie et al. 2011a). However, this concept has only recently
been adopted in the marketing discipline (Vivek et al. 2012). “Customer Engagement” as a
concept has emerged as a popular research area due to the changing perspective of
and more recently to service-dominant (S-D) logic. Focal to the S-D logic perspective is
the notion that marketing is customer-centric; this extends beyond customer orientation to
include collaboration, learning, and adapting to each customer and their dynamic needs
(Vargo and Lusch 2004). This perspective provides insights about the customer not
previously recognised, namely that there are far greater outcomes for companies who do
not just communicate ‘one-way’ to customers, but instead communicate interactively with
customers and recognise that those customers uniquely perceive value (Vargo and Lusch
2008).
For the past decade, the concept of customer engagement has been a key research priority
of the Marketing Science Institute; first appearing in the 2006-2008 Research Priorities to
establish a greater understanding of engagement (MSI 2006), it was again listed in 2010-
2012 to encourage further conceptual development (MSI 2010). The 2014-2016 report
investigation of the various marketing activities that may create engagement (MSI 2014).
11 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
Customer engagement has also strongly emerged as a concept of practitioner interest and
this is reflected in the abundance of engagement articles in Harvard Business Review (e.g.
Koehn 2011; Wang 2012), the Gallup Business Journal (e.g. O'Boyle and Fleming 2014;
Sorenson and Adkins 2014) and the Economist (e.g. Voyles 2007), as well as industry
conferences (e.g. the Annual Summit on Customer Engagement 2014). In recent years,
business environments have become more dynamic and interactive, with customers
seeking participation through unique experiences with the offerings and activities of the
This literature review focuses on the conceptual domain of customer engagement and
definition of customer engagement, dimensions that capture the construct, and how to
et al. 2011b). As common conceptualisations emerge, new research needs to shift its focus
through different platforms and in different contexts. This thesis explores customer
event experience and investigates which experiences customers choose to engage with.
Current literature considers customer engagement with a focal object, but there is little
acknowledgement of the multiple factors within a service system with which a customer
engages. This thesis considers customer engagement with both the event and the brand,
and argues that the focal direction of the engagement can project from the event to the
brand using associative network theory. In addition, this thesis contributes to the debate of
12 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
Finally, with the understanding that customers uniquely create and interpret value, this
thesis investigates the role that an individual’s experiential needs play in the facilitation of
customer engagement within an event experience. The moderating effect of the consumers’
Customers attending an event are likely to possess varying levels of cognitive needs, a
desire for novelty-seeking or excitement, and/or a need for affect. These needs are likely to
influence how the event is perceived and whether customer engagement is facilitated.
13 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
employee engagement (Kahn 1990; Saks 2006), student engagement (Kahu 2013; Skinner,
Wellborn, and Connell 1990) and community engagement (Algesheimer, Dholakia, and
Herrmann 2005; Keener 1999). While there are some consistencies in engagement
conceptualisation across the various academic disciplines, for example the existence of
cognitive, emotional and behavioural dimensions of engagement (Kahn 1990; Kahu 2013;
Saks 2006), there are also considerable differences such as focal subjects (‘who’ is
engaging) and objects (with ‘what’ is the subject engaging) (Hollebeek 2011a). An
behaviour can be found in Brodie et al. (2011a). While research is gaining momentum in
this area, customer engagement within marketing academe is still a relatively recent
on service-dominant (S-D) logic. Vargo and Lusch’s (2004, pg 2) seminal paper on S-D
logic describes the shift in marketing over the past several decades from a goods-based
specialized skills and knowledge, and processes (doing things for and with)”, with a view
reorientation has implications for how marketers perceive and approach the customer,
exchange processes and markets (Vargo and Lusch 2004). Compared to the more narrow
focus of the ‘goods dominant’ perspective, in which one-way, mass communication was
considered an effective way to ‘market to’ customers (Vargo and Lusch 2004), S-D logic
14 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
experiences and co-creative environments (Brodie et al. 2011b). From this perspective, the
brand does not merely provide value, but instead value is unique to each individual and
The S-D logic provides a number of insights relevant to the understanding of customer
engagement. First, customers are co-creators of value (Vargo and Lusch 2014). They do
not passively receive information and value from organisations, but instead create value
that is unique and determined individually (Vargo and Lusch 2014). Therefore, interaction
interaction will allow them to create value. As a result, companies recognise that rather
than a focus on delivering value, they must focus on providing a platform and resources for
the customer to interact and create value (Vargo and Lusch 2008). The event experience is
the resource provided by the brand that customers draw from to facilitate engagement. This
thesis takes the perspective of S-D logic and considers customer engagement facilitated
theoretical development (Brodie et al. 2011b) and encourages researchers to focus on the
engagement construct (MSI 2010). While it is not the primary objective of this thesis to
contribute to overall construct definition and development, the fact that the literature on
before introducing contextual elements of the research. Table 2-1 provides a summary of
definitions of customer engagement and related engagement subjects from the literature.
15 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
(Bijmolt et al. “The behavioral manifestation from a Behavioural Word of Mouth, Conceptual
2010, pg 341) customer toward a brand or a firm Co-creation,
which goes beyond purchase behavior” Complaining
Behaviour
16 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
(So et al. 2012) Refers to Brodie et al. (2011a) customer Psychological Identification, Empirical
engagement definition Attention, Quantitative
Enthusiasm,
Absorption,
Interaction
17 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
studies and are highlighted in Table 2-1; customer engagement as a behaviour (Bijmolt et
al. 2010; van Doorn et al. 2010; Verhoef, Reinartz, and Krafft 2010), and customer
includes a behavioural dimension (Brodie et al. 2011a; Calder et al. 2013; Gambetti et al.
2012; Hollebeek 2011a; So et al. 2012; Vivek et al. 2012). While the behavioural
dimension is pivotal to the overall customer engagement construct and is the most easily
not entirely explain whether the customer is truly engaged (So et al. 2012). The
does not explain the intention or motivation causing the behaviour (So et al. 2012), making
multidimensional perspective allows this thesis to capture the complexity of the construct
(So et al. 2012) and therefore is utilised to ensure a comprehensive depiction of customer
engagement.
18 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
state that occurs by virtue of interactive, co-creative customer experiences with a focal
places an emphasis on the customer’s central role in the creation of the experience to
facilitate engagement (Brodie et al. 2011a). In addition, this definition follows the
A key element of the customer engagement definition is that engagement emerges “from
2011a, pg 787). The engagement subject refers to the person who facilitates the
engagement, i.e. customers, while the engagement object identifies to what the person’s
engagement is directed, i.e. the brand (Hollebeek 2011a). Customer engagement has been
described with regards to various engagement objects, for example media, advertising,
entertainment or brands (Abdul-Ghani et al. 2011; Vivek et al. 2012). This thesis extends
current literature as it considers how customer engagement is facilitated with an event and
the associated brand hosting the event (from here referred to as the host brand). This
19 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
behavioural engagement (Brodie et al. 2011a; Hollebeek 2011a; Taheri et al. 2014). So, et
al. (2012; 2014) extend this view and propose a five-dimensional conceptualisation;
extends, the discussion of customer engagement. The context in which the So et al. (2012)
measure has been utilised, engagement with tourism brands is closely aligned with the
Attention represents a “consumer’s attentiveness and focus on the brand” (So et al. 2012,
pg 6). This definition is consistent with cognitive engagement, or ‘immersion’, which is the
(Hollebeek 2011b, pg 566) as well as ‘vigour’ or the willingness to invest effort into an
activity (Salanova, Agut, and Peiró 2005). It represents the concentration or cognitive
resources a consumer commits in their interactions with the event or brand (Hollebeek
2011b). Customers with high levels of attention or cognitive engagement have a strong
focus on information related to the event and brand (So et al. 2012).
the focus of engagement, such as a brand” (So et al. 2012, pg 5; Vivek et al. 2012). This
definition is consistent with emotional engagement, using the terms ‘passion’ and positive
20 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
experience great excitement and emotional connection to the event and brand (So et al.
2012).
brand beyond traditional consumptive behavior” (So et al. 2012, pg 7). This is consistent
“energy, effort and/or time spent on a brand in particular brand interactions” (Hollebeek
participation in event or brand-related activities (Mollen and Wilson 2010; So et al. 2012).
absent from customer engagement research to date, they draw from employee engagement
to argue its applicability to the customer engagement space. Grounded in Social Identity
Theory, identification explains the relationship between customers and specific brands; if
an association with the brand can provide the consumer with a means of conveying self-
expression or self-definition, this will enhance the relationship between the consumer and
the brand (So et al. 2012). Identification in this context is defined as “an individual’s
identification occurs when the consumer sees his or her self-image as overlapping the
brand’s image” (So et al. 2012, pg 7). This construct is also consistent with Sprott, Czellar
& Spangenberg’s (2009) brand engagement in self-concept construct. Customers with high
levels of identification interact in an event and with a brand, as doing so enhances their
Absorption is a “pleasant state in which the customer is fully concentrated, happy, and
deeply engrossed while playing his role, and an absorbed customer interacting with the
brand or other customers perceives time as passing quickly” (So et al. 2012, pg 6). The
term is often associated with the concept of flow, an optimal experience, and is described
21 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
(Csikzentmihaly 1990). The concept of flow is also discussed in the marketing events
literature (Drengner, Gaus, and Jahn 2008), and is often associated with emotional
elements of the experience. As this thesis investigates customer engagement during events,
experience and losing sense of time (So et al. 2012; Vivek et al. 2012).
qualities that distinguish it from related concepts. This has been strongly emphasised in
(Brodie et al. 2011b). This need has arisen from various misconceptions of engagement.
engagement, using the term involvement as the cognitive motivation towards a product
offering. This perspective is inconsistent with other engagement research, which argues
that the engagement construct includes cognitive, emotional and behavioural elements
(Brodie et al. 2011a). Therefore, this literature review provides an overview of the
concepts. First, customer engagement is differentiated from related but clearly distinct
constructs which contribute to the understanding of engagement but are not exhaustive,
addressed.
22 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
customer engagement literature (Bowden 2009; Brodie et al. 2011b; Brodie et al. 2011a;
Mollen and Wilson 2010). The primary characteristic of engagement distinguishing it from
the relevance or interest a consumer may possess with regards to a brand or other focal
object, engagement requires interaction between the engagement object and subject
customer is considered to be committed when his or her values, self-image, and attitudes
are strongly linked to a specific choice alternative” (Bowden 2009, pg 70). While
commitment encompasses the ‘psychological state’ of engagement, it does not capture the
concept, and has been recognised as an outcome of engagement (Brodie et al. 2011b).
from brand-related stimuli (Brakus et al. 2009). Brand experience does not presume a
can include experiences in which the consumer shows little interest or connection with the
brand (Brakus et al. 2009). This thesis takes the perspective that a brand experience is a
context through which customer engagement can be facilitated, but it does not capture the
Engagement captures the active interactions and heightened psychological state within a
23 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
despite adverse situational influences or efforts from competitors (Oliver 1999). Loyalty is
considered an outcome that is partially driven or resulting from engagement, and reflects
The next series of concepts are considered to partially represent engagement or have
overlapping qualities, however are not exhaustive of engagement. These concepts are
Flow has been previously described as a distinct construct to engagement (Mollen and
which captures a psychological state similar to the notion of flow. While Mollen and
Wilson (2010) claim that flow is passive, and therefore distinct from engagement, it is
argued in this thesis that a state of flow is a highly active construct, to such an extent that
customers lose sense of everything else outside of that experience. Discussion of a flow
state uses words including ‘engrossed’, and a state of ‘optimal experience’ (So et al. 2012).
Customers in a state of flow display complete concentration, a feeling that the activity they
which the consumer feels engrossed in the activity causing them to lose sense of time,
however still feel in control of the activity (Drengner et al. 2008). This thesis takes the
perspective that flow is an active consumer psychological state and hence contributes to
the overall customer engagement construct. While the concept of flow is a heightened state
24 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
and is associated with emotional elements of the experience (Drengner et al. 2008), it is not
While the previous concepts encapsulate the psychological aspects of engagement without
consideration of the purpose or intent behind those actions. Mollen and Wilson (2010, pg
10) argue that “engagement differs from simple interactivity because it must include
engagement (Hollebeek 2011a), or one dimension of the engagement construct (So et al.
2012). The perspective taken in this thesis is that interactivity is one dimension of
Calder et al. 2013; Hollebeek et al. 2014; So et al. 2012). ‘Interaction’ is commonly used
including involvement (Brodie et al. 2011b; Hollebeek 2010; Hollebeek 2011a). However,
and must therefore consider interaction as one dimension to be utilised in combination with
customers produce and deliver service” (Brodie et al. 2011a, pg 261). Both definitions
imply action between the customer and the company, but do not capture the intention or
motivation driving these actions, and hence do not encapsulate the full notion of customer
engagement.
In summary, numerous variables have been confused with customer engagement due to the
relatively underdeveloped literature investigating it. Many of these concepts have now
25 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
been distinguished from customer engagement, but careful delineation is still required from
researchers to ensure accurate and consistent understanding. One cause of confusion is the
highlighted.
development including the investigation of the various antecedents that create engagement
and outcomes of customer engagement identified in extant literature, and contribute to the
previous research. Fehrer et al. (2013) provide an overview of the various antecedents and
antecedents and outcomes of customer engagement are shown in Table 2-2. Constructs are
categorised into three main groups; (i) identified antecedents of customer engagement
(loyalty, customer value, word of mouth, product innovation), and (iii) constructs that have
2013). This overview highlights that there is ambiguity in the customer engagement
addition, the overview demonstrates a narrow focus of constructs that largely capture
‘personal states of being’; very few papers investigate the strategic facilitation of customer
26 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
new platforms or activities that facilitate customer engagement require further exploration.
Customer Engagement
Identity Customer value
Hedonism Word of mouth
Product innovation
Satisfaction Satisfaction
Trust Trust
Commitment Commitment
Involvement Involvement
Interaction Interaction
Table based on Fehrer et al. (2013)
engagement; however, these authors adopt a different perspective of the term experience.
experience in this topic) whereas ‘an experience’ refers to living through, undertaking or
facing a specific event (Palmer 2010). This thesis investigates ‘an experience’, specifically
by the organisation with which customers can interact, create their own unique value, and
experience created through an engagement platform of BMEs and to identify that this
experience drives customer engagement. The next section explores the literature areas of
marketing events and customer experience to further understand how events drive
customer engagement.
27 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
A marketing event is an innovative tool for creating a customer experience, which has
recently received increased attention from researchers (Drengner et al. 2008; Wood 2009).
Marketing events seek to elicit active interaction between the consumer and the brand
using an experiential approach (Wood 2009). Adopting this view and working to facilitate
eliciting favourable consumer responses (Schmitt 1999). Marketing events elicit active
engagement between the customer and the organisation due to their interactive and
experiential nature, and are argued to have a far greater effectiveness than traditional
marketing (Holbrook and Hirschman 1982). Wohlfeil and Whelan (2006) identify four key
The key features of marketing events, in particular interactivity and self-initiation parallel
central elements of S-D logic and support the proposition that a marketing event can elicit
customer engagement, as the individual drives active experiences (Brodie et al. 2011a). It
is commonly understood in this literature space that the consumer drives the event
28 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
experience and has control over whether they chose to interact during an event and the
nature of that interaction (Close, Finney, Lacey, and Sneath 2006). Organisations provide
the event platform to initiate active customer engagement, with the objective of creating
studies, little research in this area explicitly refers to the customer engagement literature. A
number of marketing events papers incorporate the word engagement in the title (e.g.
Close et al. 2006; Whelan and Wohlfeil 2006); however these articles do not define or
conceptualise the engagement construct. It is the intent of this thesis to further develop the
marketing events literature and bridge the gap in knowledge between event experience and
customer engagement.
29 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
Table 2-4 provides a summary of definitions provided in the literature of marketing events.
evident, there is still a disconnect in terms of the language used or emphasis given to
(Close et al. “the practice of promoting the interests of an organization and its brands by
2006) associating the organization with a specific activity”
(Weihe et al. “Marketing-events are used as a channel to communicate a brand and as a platform
2006, pg 202) for a unique presentation of a brand”
(Whelan and “Brand-related hyperrealities whereby the brand message is turned into a ‘real-lived’
Wohlfeil 2006, multisensual brand experience, resulting in a strengthened emotional attachment to the
pg 327) brand. Event-marketing also facilitates voluntary dialogue and interaction between
highly targeted participants”
(Getz 2008, pg “a spatial-temporal phenomenon, and each is unique because of interactions among the
404) setting, people, and management systems – including design elements and the
program”
(Wood 2009, pg “any event that helps market a product/service, idea place or person; any event that
248) communicates with a target audience; any event which has the potential to
communicate”
(Crowther 2010, “A grouping that comprises a wide and rich variety of event types, termed ‘marketing
pg 371) event platforms’.... Each individual occasion is expressed as an ‘episode’, with
organisations likely to engage in a number of 'marketing event episodes' over a given
time period to achieve different objectives”
(Leischnig, “A communication instrument whose purpose is to promote the interests of a
Schwertfeger, company and its brands by associating the company with a specific activity. Events are
and characterized by three aspects: (1) events are typically offered on a discrete or
Geigenmueller intermittent basis; (2) events allow companies face-to-face contact with their target
2011, pg 621) audience by actively engaging customers with the company and the brand; (3) events
are primarily based on entertainment and thus creative exciting and pleasant
experiences”
30 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
Three points of interest regarding marketing event definitions emerge from Table 2-4.
First, there is confusion in the literature between marketing events and sponsorship (Sneath
et al. 2005). While sponsorship is often considered to be a type of marketing event, their
inclusion is debated on the basis that these events exist for some other purpose but are used
later for marketing, and sponsorship agreements generally lack control over event
operations (Wood 2009). Second, these definitions indicate the high level of interaction
that occurs through the platform of marketing events (Getz 2008; Whelan and Wohlfeil
2006). As a result, each event is unique due to the interactions of the customers with each
other and with the event (Getz 2008). Marketing events therefore have the capacity to
facilitate customer engagement, as interaction and unique experience are central elements
of customer engagement (Brodie et al. 2011a). Third, a dated lexicon is generally used in
marketing event definitions reflecting a goods-dominant logic as opposed to S-D logic. For
Leischnig et al. 2011) that promotes/communicates to customers (Close et al. 2006; Gupta
In the next section, these points are used to discuss the conceptualisation and redefinition
31 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
There is considerable debate among scholars regarding the conceptualisation and definition
of marketing events (Close et al. 2006; Drengner et al. 2008; Wohlfeil and Whelan 2006;
Wood 2009). A sponsorship agreement entitles the sponsoring brand to associate with an
event (Drengner et al. 2008); the sponsorship event is not created for the purpose of
lack of emphasis and the focus on the event itself, not the sponsor, customers at
sponsorship events may not interact with the brand in the event space (Drengner et al.
2008). In addition, within a sponsorship agreement the sponsoring brand generally lacks
control over event operations and distribution of brand-related information (Drengner et al.
2008; Mau, Weihe, and Silberer 2006). Multiple brands can sponsor the same event to the
detriment of each sponsor as the event becomes cluttered with conflicting brand messages
(Wood 2009). This results in a reduced ability for the event to translate to brand-related
Despite similarities to sponsorship events, marketing events are created specifically for the
purpose of marketing a brand (Wood 2009). This is a major benefit of a marketing event,
as the brand is the central focus and the event can be tailored to emphasise brand-related
information and encourage customer-brand interaction (Wood 2009). The host brand of a
marketing event maintains control over the marketing dialogue and event operations. The
differing attributes and subsequent brand outcomes are demonstrated in Mau et al. (2006),
who conclude that sponsored events and marketing events are not only different activities,
but that marketing events have the ability to be more effective in influencing customer
attitudes. The literature is clear that sponsorship and marketing events are separate
activities; sponsorship should not be considered within the definition of marketing events
(Wood 2009).
32 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
The term branded marketing event is introduced in this thesis and defined as follows:
platform for customers to interact with the brand and other actors.
The explicit purpose of a BME is to create a unique brand-related experience with the
customer. The term ‘branded marketing event’ more clearly positions an event as a
such as customer brand engagement. This definition builds on marketing events literature
(Drengner et al. 2008; Whelan and Wohlfeil 2006) but also captures the nature of dynamic
interactions, and hence recognises the principles of S-D logic (Vargo and Lusch 2008) and
in experiential activities” (Drengner et al. 2008, pg 138, emphasis added), the definition
proposed in this thesis removes words that imply a Goods-Dominant logic; e.g.
communication tool (see definitions from Gupta 2003; Leischnig et al. 2011; Weihe et al.
2006 in Table 2-4), promote or disseminate (see Close et al. 2006; Drengner et al. 2008;
Leischnig et al. 2011 in Table 2-4), and involving (see Drengner et al. 2008 Table 2-4).
alignment of the proposed definition to the S-D logic (Vargo and Lusch 2008). The
proposed definition also maintains a strong reference to interactions within the experience.
Interaction is recognised in marketing events definitions (see Getz 2008; Whelan and
Wohlfeil 2006 in Table 2-4) and is a central characteristic of customer engagement (Brodie
et al. 2011a).
33 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
(Brakus et al. 2009). Brand experience includes numerous brand-related stimuli, including
branding, communications, and the environments and situations in which the brand is
experienced, including events (Brakus et al. 2009). This thesis focuses on brand-related
stimuli from a BME; therefore, the researcher refers to this as event experience instead of
brand experience.
The proposed definition identifies that BMEs are a platform through which the brand and
customer can interact. This platform contains multiple touch points where the customer can
interact with the brand, specific event activities and/or other customers attending the event.
While this thesis does not examine customer engagement with each of these individual
Finally, as the term ‘branded marketing event’ is used in this thesis, it is acknowledged
that extensive literature exists around brands and branding. A brand is defined as “an
identifiable product, service, person or place augmented in such a way that the buyer or
user perceives relevant unique added values which match their needs more closely” (De
Chernatony and Dall’Olmo Riley 1998, pg 424). This research domain is broad in scope,
with various approaches including brand equity (Keller and Lehmann 2006), brand value
(Kamakura and Russell 1993), brand performance (Harris and De Chernatony 2001), brand
salience (Romaniuk and Sharp 2004) and brand perceptions (Romaniuk and Sharp 2003).
There are often conflicting perspectives within this body of literature; for example Sharp
and Sharp (1997) argue that brand loyalty has minimal impact on repeat purchase, while
Chaudhuri and Holbrook (2001) emphasise the considerable brand impacts resulting from
brand loyalty.
However, this literature area tends towards a goods-dominant logic perspective, in that
considered a dated and narrow-focused approach (Vargo and Lusch 2004). Researchers are
encouraged to ‘break free from the industrial age paradigm of branding’ and consider an
expanded view of brand-customer relationships, where brands connect with and are shaped
by customers (Christodoulides 2008). This thesis adopts this S-D logic perspective. It
recognises that customers do not passively receive information, but instead have an
perception of a brand (Vargo and Lusch 2014). Therefore, while the branding literature
body is acknowledged, it is not a central focus of this thesis. Instead, this thesis builds from
customer engagement, marketing events and customer experience literature, where direct
event types. Studies have typically highlighted the ability of events to have entertainment
or educational value (see Leischnig et al. 2011 Table 2-4). This dichotomy is based on the
notion that events target attendees on an emotional level, while at the same time engage
and interact with the consumer, creating the ability to strongly communicate brand-related
information (Drengner et al. 2008). Empirically, studies have taken a focus predominantly
on entertainment events, however researchers have identified the need for various ‘types’
of events to be considered (Leischnig et al. 2011; Packer and Ballantyne 2004; Whelan and
Wohlfeil 2006). This thesis consults customer experience literature to inform a broader
Many marketing events studies refer to the customer experience literature in developing
their understanding of event experiences and types (Crowther 2010; Leischnig et al. 2011;
Whelan and Wohlfeil 2006; Wohlfeil and Whelan 2006; Wood 2009). For example,
Whelan and Wohlfeil (2006) describe opportunities to gain customers’ attention through
35 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
events are highly experiential in nature, it is paramount that BMEs are informed from
customer experience in order to ensure their effectiveness (Crowther 2010). This thesis
practitioners seek alternative media that recognise consumers’ needs for novelty and
encompasses all interactions and experiences between a customer and a brand (Gentile et
al. 2007), including those outside of regular consumption activity. This concept is a
approach and captures the broad set of experiences that BMEs contain.
There is some confusion around the use of ‘experience’ as a verb or as a noun (Palmer
2010). This thesis adopts the perspective of experience as a noun; “a process of undergoing
and living through an event” (Palmer 2010, pg 197). This perspective aligns with Pine and
creates using their goods and services as central elements of that experience to engage
customers. This conceptualisation also makes the clear connection between events and
customer experience. It is widely recognised that an event falls within the plethora of
customer experiences (Gentile et al. 2007; Oh, Fiore, and Jeoung 2007; Schmitt 1999;
Yuan and Wu 2008), and as such, customer experience measures are used to capture a
BME experience. BMEs are conceptualised in this thesis as the platform in which customer
engagement occurs, and event experiences occur within this platform through various
customer interactions.
36 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
between a customer and a brand (Gentile et al. 2007) including those outside of regular
broad concept, capturing a wide diversity of interactions, and therefore requires a method
of classifying this diversity and simplifying an otherwise complex construct. While ‘BME
marketing events, events are provided by the host brand and are tailored to suit the brand’s
objectives (Wood 2009), demonstrating the highly unique nature of events. Therefore,
components that capture the totality of the experience. The experiential components
utilised in this thesis are Cognitive, Emotional, Sensorial, Pragmatic and Relational
(Gentile et al. 2007) and reflect the diversity and unique nature of experiences.
There are many commonly recognised dimensions of a customer experience, including the
sensorial, emotional and cognitive experience components (Brakus et al. 2009; Chang and
Chieng 2006; Gentile et al. 2007; Sahin, Zehir, and Kitapçı 2011; Schmitt 1999; Tynan and
pragmatic, lifestyle and relational aspects of the experience are also often proposed and
evaluated in academic studies (Chang and Chieng 2006; Sahin et al. 2011; Tynan and
McKechnie 2009). The conceptualisation of Gentile et al. (2007) takes the broadest
perspective of these studies and encompasses all of the commonly identified experiential
37 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
covering the social/relational elements (Chang and Chieng 2006; Schmitt 1999; Tynan and
2009; Chang and Chieng 2006; Sahin et al. 2011; Schmitt 1999). Given the diverse nature
of BMEs due to the varying objectives of the host brand and the unique interactions
created during events (Wood 2009), the components are considered applicable across
various types of experiences and therefore they are utilised within the context of BMEs in
this thesis.
Gentile et al. (2007) also include a ‘lifestyle’ component of experience, which is not
present in many studies (Brakus et al. 2009; Schmitt 1999; Yuan and Wu 2008) and is not
listed explicitly in the study by Chang and Chieng (2006), but was included as a survey
item within their measurement of pragmatic experience. Due to the ambiguity of the
components in previous studies, it has not been incorporated in this thesis. Table 2-5
Emotional Experiences that evoke an affective response or relation (with a company, brand or products), by
targeting moods, feelings and/or emotions
Cognitive Experiences that stimulate thought or conscious mental processes
Pragmatic Experiences that involve physical action – “the practical act of doing something”
Relational Experiences that provide social context and relationships with others
Gentile et al. (2007) apply a conceptual lens consistent with the S-D logic perspective
taken in this thesis. Gentile et al. (2007) recognise that customers actively create their
experience, rather than passively receive the experience from a company. BMEs may
38 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
comprise one, several or all of these components (Gentile et al. 2007) and in providing the
platform through which customers undertake these experiences, BMEs can facilitate
customer engagement.
is shaped to communicate a particular message about the brand (Whelan and Wohlfeil
2006). Events have the ability to build strong customer relationships and create an
association between the brand and the qualities of the event (Wood 2009). BMEs can
provide numerous benefits for brands; they can enhance awareness and familiarity of the
brand, create strong, positive brand images, influence consumer attitudes, and create
emotional brand attachment (Whelan and Wohlfeil 2006). Previous marketing events
studies have identified numerous outcome variables, most commonly event satisfaction
(Leischnig et al. 2011), influencing brand image (Drengner et al. 2008), creating positive
brand opinion (Close et al. 2006) and influencing customer attitudes (Martensen,
Gronholdt, Bendtsen, and Jensen 2007; Sneath et al. 2005). In addition, marketing events
can result in enhanced attitudes towards the brand (Leischnig et al. 2011; Weihe et al.
2006) and purchase intention (Close et al. 2006; Martensen et al. 2007; Whelan and
It is likely that customer engagement was facilitated during the interactions and
experiences of these events, and contributes to the relationships identified in these previous
studies (e.g. events leading to purchase intention) without specific inclusion in their
research. Introducing customer engagement into this framework can therefore provide a
engagement can provide insight into why certain BMEs lead to brand-related outcomes
39 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
while others do not; customer engagement must be facilitated in order for brand-related
outcomes to occur, which implies that engagement is a mediating variable within this
relationship.
This thesis identifies the pivotal relationship between BME experience and customer
engagement. Due to the highly personalised and interactive experience that both the
customer and the host brand uniquely create, this marketing approach has the ability to
create strong connections and facilitate engagement (Crowther 2010). Therefore, this thesis
posits that various components of experience can facilitate customer engagement. Brands
provide the resources that drive various experiences to occur through the BME platform;
the customer then contributes their own resources as they interact and create value through
this unique experience. It is therefore recognised in this thesis that BMEs are a suitable
platform in which to facilitate customer engagement; utilising the concepts from the
literature bodies of marketing events and customer experience informs further development
and understanding of how customer engagement is driven through the context of BMEs.
40 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
The central purpose of this thesis is to explore how BME experiences facilitate customer
engagement. Therefore, the following section draws from marketing event, customer
experience and customer engagement literature to outline the sources of similarity between
the constructs, and provide insight into how various BME experiences drive customer
principles of the S-D logic; specifically, the common perception taken in these literature
bodies that customers are drivers of their own unique experience (Calder et al. 2013; Close
et al. 2006) and their common emphasis on interaction (Brodie et al. 2011a; Whelan and
Wohlfeil 2006). Although S-D logic has been discussed as the theoretical underpinning to
customer engagement (Brodie et al. 2011a), the following discussion highlights its
relevance to the customer experience and marketing event literature and hence provide a
framework for understanding the relationships between BMEs and customer engagement.
facilitating engagement (Brodie and Hollebeek 2011; Gambetti et al. 2012; Mollen and
Wilson 2010). Vivek et al. (2012) introduce a classification of customer engagement foci,
experiences with a brand are described as unique and personal, and can result in a
Marketing events literature commonly refers to the ability of events to create unique
experiences, and uses customer experience literature to inform this element of events
(Crowther 2010; Leischnig et al. 2011; Whelan and Wohlfeil 2006; Wohlfeil and Whelan
2006; Wood 2009). Marketing events studies have also used the term engagement,
however do not conceptualise or explore engagement (Close et al. 2006; Whelan and
41 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
Wohlfeil 2006). This thesis further integrates these constructs and subsequently informs a
is evident through their applicability to S-D logic. First, S-D logic reiterates that customers
are the drivers of value creation (Vargo and Lusch 2008) and the company only provides
value propositions or platforms through which customers interact and create their own
value. This message is echoed in customer experience literature; companies provide the
context for the experience to occur that enables the customer to create their own unique
experiences (Gentile et al. 2007; Zomerdijk and Voss 2010). Customer experience
literature also recognises that events are highly subjective in nature (Brakus et al. 2009)
and therefore the individual perceives and determines the value in the experience. Research
in marketing events has also made the connection with S-D logic (Crowther 2010;
Crowther and Donlan 2011), particularly emphasising that customers drive their own
engagement is the interaction that occurs to create a heightened psychological state, and
thus is inherently subjective to the individual (Brodie et al. 2011a). A BME is therefore
subjective in nature, whereby the individual determines and perceives value. This
experience, personal and unique to the individual, leads to engagement (Gentile et al.
2007). A BME should elicit strong customer brand engagement, the mechanics of which
Second, S-D logic recognises that customers are not passive in their contact with firms;
rather they create value through extensive interaction to shape their brand experiences
(Vargo and Lusch 2004). Marketing events literature has primarily overlooked the active
2008). However, it is this aspect of the experience that makes BMEs a highly effective
42 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
means of eliciting customer engagement (Brodie et al. 2011a; Vargo and Lusch 2004).
Participants interact extensively with other participants and brand representatives during an
event experience (Wohlfeil and Whelan 2006). S-D logic is used in customer experience
Customer experience is argued to occur through interaction, and relies on the consumer
driving and uniquely creating their desired experience (Tynan and McKechnie 2009).
conducive to customer engagement (Vargo and Lusch 2004; Vivek et al. 2012; Wohlfeil
and Whelan 2006). Specifically, the BME is the platform through which customer
engagement is facilitated as customers interact and create their own unique and valuable
experiences (Zomerdijk and Voss 2010). Through high levels of interaction within this
platform, customers create a BME experience that is of most value to them, and therefore
gain the most value from the experience (Prahalad and Ramaswamy 2004).
logic. Studies that comprehensively bring these literature bodies together are scarce.
encompasses activities beyond the normal offering of the organisation. This thesis
43 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
other actors; however, its presence and conceptualisation within the overall customer
Malthouse, and Schaedel 2009; Gambetti et al. 2012; Sawhney, Verona, and Prandelli
2005; Vivek et al. 2012). While the three dimensional perspective (cognitive, emotional,
engagement (Gambetti et al. 2012; Sawhney et al. 2005). Others have a strong social focus
independent engagement dimension (Brodie et al. 2011b). This thesis argues that the
impact of social influences within the BME experience is substantial, and includes social
Social exchange theory argues that customers engage in activities that provide emotional
rewards including social approval and human contact (Abdul-Ghani et al. 2011).
Customers interactively establish value with organisations and, given the opportunity, will
engage in practices to create value (Schau, Muñiz Jr, and Arnould 2009). Practices dictate
what is necessary for engaging social actors in a meaningful way within a particular setting
(Schau et al. 2009). Organisations should encourage customers to interact in order to drive
engagement with the brand (Schau et al. 2009). Therefore, including a social dimension of
development, as it captures the heightened psychological state of the customer during their
unique and meaningful interactions with other actors either in context of, or directly
44 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
the focus of engagement (i.e. the event or the brand) based on personal exchanges with
other actors. In this regard social engagement is an important addition as it takes a holistic
perspective and captures interactions beyond the control of the brand, but which also
The definition of social engagement constructed for this thesis is consistent with So et al.’s
enthusiasm “represents an individual’s strong level of excitement and interest regarding the
focus of engagement, such as a brand” (So et al. 2012, pg 5). The social engagement
definition follows the same structure of identifying the engagement subject (the customer),
the engagement state (heightened level of interest), the engagement object (regarding the
focus of engagement i.e. the event or the brand) and an outline of the social nature of the
engagement (based on personal exchanges with other actors). A recent conceptual paper by
Kozinets (2014, pg 10) is the first to provide an in-depth conceptualisation and definition
between one consumer and one or more other consumers, using brands”. The Kozinets
(2014) definition is consistent with the social engagement definition constructed for this
thesis. The next section discusses customer social engagement with reference to the event
Research Question:
What is the role of social engagement within the overall customer engagement construct?
45 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
regarding the event based on personal exchanges with other customers. This form of
engagement occurs when the customer has a personal exchange with other customers
can occur with a provider-initiated activity or event (Kozinets 2014; Vivek et al. 2012). A
range of service encounters, including BMEs, are experienced either intentionally with
others, or in the presence of other customers (Tombs and McColl-Kennedy 2010; Zhang,
Beatty, and Mothersbaugh 2010). This has become considerably more important given the
current marketing trend of brands creating memorable experiences for their customers
(Zhang et al. 2010). Customers are constantly interacting both with brand representatives
and other customers in attendance of the event (Drengner et al. 2008). Therefore, whether a
person attends an event with others (friends, family) or interacts directly or indirectly with
others attendees unknown to the consumer but present at the event, personal exchanges are
abundant. The personal exchanges pertaining to the event can contribute to the customer’s
heightened psychological state with reference to the event, and hence build their level of
proposed;
engagement.
regarding the brand based on personal exchanges with other customers. This form of
engagement occurs when the customer has a personal exchange with other customers about
or with reference to the brand. This conversation builds the customer’s interest in the brand
due to the brand-related information exchanged between the customers. The host brand is
46 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
not directly in control of this social exchange, however can offer opportunities for
customers to interact (i.e. during a BME) and hence facilitate social brand engagement.
A number of the studies with a focus on social engagement are set in an online context
(e.g. Calder et al. 2009), which is considered to have a high level of customer-to-customer
as well as customer-to brand interactions within the virtual space (Abdul-Ghani et al. 2011;
2011b). This level of social interaction is equally applicable to BMEs, as they are
fundamentally a social activity (Kozinets 2014). The interactions with other customers
within the same experience can have a considerable impact on either enhancing or
damaging that customer’s experience with the associated brand (Zhang et al. 2010).
Therefore, social brand engagement is an important consideration within a BME due to the
large opportunity for personal exchanges between customers to occur, and for the brand-
related discussion within this exchange to contribute to the customer brand engagement
engagement.
events to facilitate customer engagement through their mutual applicability to S-D logic.
47 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
While social exchange theory (Möller 2013; Saks 2006) was discussed in the previous
section (2.4.1.1) in the context social engagement, it can also be used to explain the
relationship between BME experiences and customer engagement on a broader level. This
theory explores reciprocity between the brand and the customer, in which both parties
actively contribute to the relationship in order to receive mutual benefits or avoid potential
risks (Cropanzano and Mitchell 2005; Möller 2013). While social exchange theory has
been previously discussed in the context of employee engagement (Saks 2006), its
Stronger engagement results from both parties contributing resources, interacting and
abiding by the implied ‘rules of exchange’ (Saks 2006). The actions and reactions from
both parties over time are a process of building a mutually beneficial relationship, for
example increased customer trust and commitment (Cropanzano and Mitchell 2005). The
conclusion drawn from this theory is that extensive contribution from the consumer (i.e.
their engagement) and the brand (in this context the provision of a BME) will result in
The brand resources within this exchange are the provision of various components of
experience through the BME platform. Marketing events studies have identified categories
2007).
Research Question:
How do the experiential components of a BME facilitate customer engagement?
48 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
The following section identifies the ability for each experiential component to contribute to
customer event engagement and customer brand engagement outcomes are proposed. The
connections are proposed by identifying the brand-provided resources within the exchange
(BME experiential component) and the logical corresponding resources provided by the
The hypotheses identify the general relationship anticipated between the experiential
engagement in a general sense; however, this is beyond the scope of this thesis. Therefore,
customer engagement outcomes are considered from an overall perspective in this thesis,
not on particular engagement dimensions, as each should contribute to and enhance each
other and result in a general level of customer engagement (Brodie et al. 2011a). Future
research should investigate the more particular relationships concerning the dimensions of
49 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
knowledge (Gentile et al. 2007). In the context of the wine industry a wine education event
provided resources encompass information designed to make the customer think and
stimulating intrigue (Schmitt 1999). For example, wine education sessions involve
teaching the attendee about various topics including the winery’s history, blends or the
In order for customer engagement to occur, the customer must also provide resources
within the BME and contribute to the exchange (Saks 2006). Customers are anticipated to
elicit event attention, displaying attentiveness during the event (So et al. 2012; Tynan and
during the BME. Customer event engagement therefore occurs when the customer elicits a
willingness to invest mental effort into the cognitive experience (Salanova et al. 2005).
Learning through a cognitive experience requires active participation of the customer (Pine
and Gilmore 1998), for example thinking through ideas and asking questions during a wine
the fermentation process (Charters and Ali-Knight 2000; So et al. 2012). Customers could
therefore engage through event interaction, actively participating in the event experience
BME experiences with event enthusiasm (So et al. 2012). If the customer possesses a
50 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
strong interest in wine, they would find the experience of learning about wine enjoyable
(Packer and Ballantyne 2004), eliciting a heightened level of affect in response to the
The brand-provided resources in a cognitive experience also have the capacity to facilitate
customer brand engagement if the resources within the BME experience are brand-centric.
Wine education sessions are likely to focus on brand-related information, for example the
discussion is likely to be about the wine brand’s varietals or how their particular wine is
Cognitive experiences that involve thinking and mental processes directly related to the
brand (e.g. discussing the different processes of producing wine, different varietals) change
the customer’s perception of the brand and its products (Yuan and Wu 2008). Education
events are described as eliciting customer interaction, however the customer’s focus is not
necessarily on the event but rather the content shared during the event (Pine and Gilmore
1998). Customers can also respond to a cognitive experience with enhanced identification
with reference to the brand (So et al. 2012); the customer feels that the brand is a means of
self-expression (Sprott et al. 2009). For example, a wine connoisseur, having experienced a
cognitive event and learning more about a particular wine brand, would feel that their
knowledge related to that wine brand contributes to their wine lifestyle, hence causing
51 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
the wine industry is a winery picnic, where attendees are encouraged to relax and enjoy
live music. For an emotional experience, the brand-provided resources include the source
and provide emotional value (Yuan and Wu 2008). Emotional experiences therefore appeal
to the customer’s emotions by stimulating their excitement, joy and interest in the activity
(Schmitt 1999; So et al. 2012). For example, winery picnics or music events are run to
The anticipated customer resources contributed to this exchange include event enthusiasm,
displaying positive affect during the event (Hollebeek 2011b) and a heightened level of
excitement and interest regarding the event interaction in response to the source of
entertainment provided during the BME (So et al. 2012; Vivek et al. 2012). Customer
event engagement therefore occurs when the customer elicits enthusiasm and willingness
to further interact in the event activities (So et al. 2012). Depending on the intensity of the
experience, the customer can also elicit event absorption due to the strong emotional
qualities the event provides (Drengner et al. 2008; So et al. 2012). For example, during a
music event at a winery, the customer may feel such excitement and enthrallment in the
music that they experience a state of flow, becoming completely engrossed in the
experience and lose sense of time (Csikzentmihaly 1990; Vivek et al. 2012).
facilitate customer brand engagement if the resources within the BME experience are
brand-centric. Winery picnic events can have an emphasis on the brand, for example
serving the brand’s wines and providing tastings during the event. Emotional experiences
can also reflect or embody the image of the brand (Drengner et al. 2008), leading to
52 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
customer brand engagement; for example, a music event at a winery could emphasise the
brand’s youthful image by showcasing new bands with a younger following, or project an
evident in the emotional experience, the customer’s heightened interactions during the
BME can create a closer connection to the brand (Wohlfeil and Whelan 2006) and event
enthusiasm (So et al. 2012). Customers can also respond to an emotional experience with
enhanced identification with reference to the brand (So et al. 2012) if the customer feels
hearing, touch, taste and/or smell (Gentile et al. 2007). A wine industry example of a
sound, scent, taste, and touch (Yuan and Wu 2008) designed to provide sensory meaning
and stimulation (Gentile et al. 2007; Schmitt 1999). The customer-provided resources in
this exchange include event interaction, displaying participation in event activities (Mollen
and Wilson 2010) and a heightened level of energy toward the event interaction in
response to the sensorial elements provided during the BME (Hollebeek 2011b). The focal
element of a sensorial experience is sensory stimulation (Gentile et al. 2007); therefore the
experience inherently requires active participation from the customer (they must taste,
53 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
(Schmitt 1999) stimulating event enthusiasm (So et al. 2012). For example, wine
consumption is strongly related to leisure activity and aesthetic consumption (Charters and
Pettigrew 2005), in particular wine and food which trigger the human senses of taste
(Gentile et al. 2007). Event enthusiasm is facilitated by a sensorial experience when the
customer elicits feelings of pleasure, happiness, or a positive mood towards the event
(Hollebeek 2011b).
The brand-provided resources in a sensorial experience also have the capacity to facilitate
customer brand engagement if the resources within the BME experience are brand-centric.
For example, customers pay attention to brand-related information during a wine tasting
event (So et al. 2012), as tasting the wines or pairing wines with food provides sensory-
related information (e.g. what varietals of the brand’s wine the customer enjoys, or the type
of food that matches with particular wine products). Sensorial experience is therefore
posited to contribute to customer brand engagement as the customer gives their attention in
order to acquire new brand knowledge through learning wine tastes and smells, or
recognising the taste of appropriate food and wine pairings (Schmitt 1999). For the wine
connoisseur, the sensorial experience becomes a means through which customers learn
about the brand and gain knowledge in an area of interest to them (Charters and Ali-Knight
2000).
54 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
et al. 2007). This is likened to ‘escapist experiences’ conceptualised by Pine and Gilmore
(1998), and involves a high level of customer immersion in the activity. In the context of
experience.
designed to stimulate active customer participation (Mollen and Wilson 2010). For
include event interaction (Pine and Gilmore 1998), displaying considerable effort and
energy elicited during the event (Hollebeek 2011b) and a heightened level of behaviour in
the event interaction in response to the physical elements provided during the pragmatic
BME experience (So et al. 2012). Customer event engagement therefore occurs when the
customer elicits a willingness to participate and elicit energy into the pragmatic experience
Customers could also respond to the brand-provided resources during pragmatic BME
experiences with event attention (Pine and Gilmore 1998; So et al. 2012). If the customer
has a strong wine involvement, they would find the experience of participating in wine-
making engaging and elicit a heightened level of interest and focus in order to attain new
attention in response to the physical activity provided during the BME (So et al. 2012).
In addition, customers could elicit a heightened level of excitement and interest in response
to the pragmatic experience (Vivek et al. 2012) if they experience pleasure or novelty in
stomp or creating their own wine blend find great enjoyment, excitement, and novelty in
55 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
the experience, resulting in a heightened state of positive affect and interest in the BME
(Hollebeek 2011b; Vivek et al. 2012). A highly unique, novel or exciting pragmatic BME
experience could also elicit event absorption in which the customer experiences a
heightened state of flow, engrossment and complete concentration and happiness during
The brand-provided resources in a pragmatic experience also have the capacity to facilitate
customer brand engagement if the resources within the BME experience are brand-centric.
process of making their own unique wine blend based on the existing varietals on offer at
engagement as the customer gives their attention (So et al. 2012) in order to acquire new
brand knowledge through learning about the wine product process and blending of wine
others (Gentile et al. 2007). Events are typically public with many people in attendance,
and so the entire experience occurs within a social context (Zhang et al. 2010). Wine
dinner events or meeting the winemaker are examples of relational BME experiences in the
wine industry.
56 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
be experienced together with other people (Gentile et al. 2007); relational experiences
interest regarding the event based on these personal exchanges with other customers
(discussed in section 2.4.1.1) (Kozinets 2014; Vivek et al. 2012). For example, wine dinner
events involve large groups of people, either known or unknown to each other,
participating in a food and wine degustation; the customers are seated together, and
encouraged to mingle and socially interact during the dinner. These interactions can induce
a heightened sense of connectedness with other customers in the context of the event
BME experiences with event enthusiasm (So et al. 2012). Interactions with winemakers or
experiences due to the aesthetics and leisure associated with wine activities (Jingxue et al.
2008). Therefore, the customer would elicit a heightened state of excitement and emotional
connection to the event (So et al. 2012) in response to an experience that connects the
The brand-provided resources in a relational experience also have the capacity to facilitate
customer brand engagement if the resources within the BME experience are brand-centric.
Wine dinner events and ‘meet the winemaker’ events are likely to include brand-related
information, for example the winemaker talking about their experiences working at the
winery (Charters and Ali-Knight 2000). Therefore, while the brand-provided resources are
the activities that connect people (Schmitt 1999), the exchanges that occur during the
relational experience are cognitive in nature and specific to the brand (Yuan and Wu
2008). The customer therefore provides their focus and concentration to brand-related
57 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
In addition, a relational experience can also provide a means of affirming the customer’s
likeminded others in a social group (e.g. the ‘wine’ lifestyle) (Gentile et al. 2007). For
example, a wine dinner places the customer in a situation with other likeminded customers;
their shared interest in the wine brand reinforces the customer’s self-image and need to be
positively perceived by others (Schmitt 1999; So et al. 2012). Therefore, the customer
responds to the relational experience with a heightened sense of self-image and connection
toward the brand (So et al. 2012), as the brand is a focal element of the experience.
While the connections between the various components of event experience are proposed
unclear what relationship exists between the two customer engagement constructs. The
following section investigates the interplay between the two engagement objects.
58 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
with their customers and interact in a unique way to create value (Wood 2009). While it is
engagement (Vivek et al. 2012), a BME experience is beyond the normal interactions with
a brand. It is therefore important to investigate if and how the connection is made between
the event experience and the host brand, as this impacts whether organisations receive any
Customer engagement recognises that either the customer or the provider is the initiator of
engagement (Vivek et al. 2012) and highlights the need for an interaction between a focal
object and the customer (Brodie et al. 2011a; Hollebeek et al. 2014). In this regard,
customer event engagement occurs from the interactions during the BME (Vivek et al.
2012). Although Vivek et al. (2012) recognise that providers may initiate activities or
events to engage customers with the event, they do not explain how the nature of
The literature on customer engagement identifies that an interaction must occur between
the ‘engagement subject’ (e.g. the customer) and an ‘engagement object’ (e.g. a brand)
(Hollebeek 2011a), however, extant studies do not explore the relationship between
multiple engagement objects. Brodie et al. (2011b) identifies that customers can engage
with numerous engagement objects but these objects were in reference to ‘themes’ of
discussion with members of an online community. These multiple objects were not
described as having a causal relationship, but rather as specific ‘topics of interest’ in which
a community member may engage. Brodie et al. (2011b) also mentioned a possible
relationship between the online community engagement objects (themes), however this
59 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
It is proposed in this thesis that the engagement subject, the customer, will interact and
create value during an event experience and therefore will elicit customer event
range of brand-related stimuli, including environments in which the brand is present (e.g.
events) (Brakus et al. 2009), it is also posited that a relationship exists between customer
event engagement and customer brand engagement. The relationship between customer
event engagement and customer brand engagement is not explored in the customer
Research Question:
What is the relationship between the engagement with two focal objects; customer event
engagement and customer brand engagement?
There are a number of marketing events studies that investigate brand-related outcomes
resulting from events (Crowther 2011; Martensen et al. 2007; Weihe et al. 2006; Whelan
and Wohlfeil 2006). Marketing events are expected to create customer engagement with
the brand due to the high level of brand information and brand-related experiences within
the event (Whelan and Wohlfeil 2006). In addition, positive brand outcomes arise when the
event experience accurately depicts brand personality or desired brand images and values
(Crowther 2011). Therefore, a relationship between BMEs and host brand outcomes is
literature. This thesis contributes to the engagement literature by exploring customer event
engagement and its relationship with, and ability to further facilitate, customer brand
engagement.
theory in memory’ (Anderson 1983), and ‘semantic processing’ (Collins and Loftus 1975).
60 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
ANT provides an understanding of how memory operates and specifically the mental
process of connecting pieces of information in memory (Smith 2004). When two pieces of
produce transfer; the associations of the first piece of information are replicated with the
second (Smith 2004). Memory contains ‘nodes’, or individual pieces of information, that
are triggered or called to mind through a process of activation (Smith 2004). When a
person has an experience that triggers multiple nodes simultaneously, connections can be
ANT has been used to understand various phenomena in the field of marketing; for
example celebrity endorsement, brand extensions (Keller and Aaker 1992) and sponsorship
information can trigger thoughts about related information, in this case linked information
about the host brand (Smith 2004). Particularly within sponsorship literature, ANT is
described with reference to the concept of brand image transfer. Brand image transfer
event. When a brand is presented with this event and a perceived connection between the
two is established, the associations with the event can become linked and projected onto
the brand (Gwinner 1997; Gwinner and Eaton 1999). Brand image transfer is commonly
This thesis extends ANT into the context of BMEs and customer engagement. A recent
sponsorship paper has taken an initial step in bringing ANT into the customer engagement
domain, finding that more interactive or engaging brands benefit from enhanced brand
61 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
strong connection is anticipated for BMEs as these events are branded and tailored
specifically to relate to the host brand. As BMEs are proposed to facilitate high levels of
customer engagement, the benefit to the brand in hosting a BME is expected to increase.
This thesis further extends ANT into customer engagement literature and proposes that
spreading activation can also occur between engagement objects; from event engagement
to brand engagement. The customer first engages with the event and due to the strong
connection between the event and the brand, this state of engagement can also project onto
the brand. This relationship is yet to be investigated in customer engagement literature, and
satisfaction, loyalty, commitment and trust (Brodie et al. 2011b), however, relatively less
attention has been given to purchase intention outcomes; for example ‘brand usage intent’
(Hollebeek et al. 2014) and behavioural intention of loyalty (So et al. 2012). Given that
determine the brand-related outcomes. Particularly for engagement activities that do not
necessarily stimulate an immediate monetary outcome for the brand, such as a BME, it is
This thesis investigates behavioural intention of loyalty (BIL) toward the brand as an
62 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
outcome of service quality (Zeithaml et al. 1996), the BIL construct has been widely
Gwinner, and Gremler 2002) as well as engagement (So et al. 2012). Zeithaml et al. (1996)
and complaining behaviour. Service quality must surpass a certain satisfaction threshold in
order to impact BIL (Zeithaml et al. 1996); this is consistent with the idea of engagement
This thesis employs only two of the BIL categories proposed in Zeithaml et al. (1996);
word-of-mouth and purchase intention. The decision to adopt only two dimensions was
based on a number of considerations. First, results from Zeithaml et al.’s (1996) study
brand as their first choice to buy and do business with in the future. Second, word-of-
mouth and purchase intention are already identified outcomes in customer engagement,
variables in this thesis provides empirical support for these existing assertions in the
al. 2012) and do not necessarily involve a monetary transaction, it was debated whether the
in this context.
The theory of consumption values (Sheth et al. 1991) provides a general framework to
explain consumption behaviour; the theory states that various consumption values
perceived by the customer are focal in explaining consumer choice with regards to
purchase (or not purchase) as well as brand selection (Sheth et al. 1991). This theory is
consistent with S-D logic and customer engagement in that uniquely created and
63 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
individually perceived value is focal to the interactions between customers and brands
(Brodie et al. 2011a; Vargo and Lusch 2004). This theory has been applied to understand
experiences, and supports the link between customer engagement and brand-related
outcomes (Vivek et al. 2012); therefore, it provides insight into the relationship between
customer engagement (with the event and the brand) and behavioural intention of loyalty
The BIL dimensions of word-of-mouth and purchase intention have specifically been
(tourism brands). This thesis extends the research on BIL resulting from customer
engagement as it explores the impact from both an event and brand perspective. These
Research Question:
What impact does customer engagement have on behavioural intention of loyalty?
outcomes, for example increased brand purchase intention (Crowther 2010; Drengner et al.
2008; Leischnig et al. 2011; Martensen et al. 2007) and word of mouth (Crowther 2011;
Gupta 2003; Wood 2009). Similarly, customer experiences have been found to impact on
loyalty intentions and customer satisfaction (Klaus and Maklan 2013) as well as word of
mouth (Grewal, Levy, and Kumar 2009) and purchase intentions (Palmer 2010). The
relationship between customer event engagement and BIL is consistent with the extant
literature as it captures brand word-of-mouth and purchase intention (Zeithaml et al. 1996).
A BME experience that facilitates customer event engagement can have positive outcomes
for the brand because the unique customer-brand interactions during the BME allow the
customer to construct relevant meanings about the brand, leading to loyalty (Crowther and
Donlan 2011). In summary, these studies support the presence of a direct relationship
64 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
between customer event engagement and behavioural intention of loyalty toward the brand.
The notion that customer brand engagement enhances a customer’s predisposition towards
a brand and hence increases behavioural intention of loyalty has been espoused in recent
literature (Bowden 2009; Hollebeek 2011a). The heightened psychological state and
interactions that occur between customer and the brand is thought to predispose the
customer to future purchases (So et al. 2012). This relationship is also supported is
customer experience literature; the attitudes formed from a brand experience are expected
to predict brand purchase intention (Zarantonello and Schmitt 2010). Despite these
loyalty (So et al. 2012), there is little empirical examination of this relationship. Therefore
65 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
BMEs can facilitate customer engagement as they are unique customer-driven experiences,
creating significant customer value (Brodie et al. 2011a; Calder et al. 2013). Consistent
with this view, this thesis explores how individuals with varying experiential needs engage
with the event through different BME experiential components (cognitive, emotional,
sensorial, pragmatic and relational). It is expected that the fulfilment of experiential needs
will strengthen the relationship between BME experiential components and customer event
engagement.
lacking, and are categorised as utilitarian, means-to-an-end based needs, and expressive,
based on internal aspirations to fulfil a social or aesthetic need (MacInnis and Jaworski
1989). Within the category of expressive needs are experiential needs (MacInnis and
Jaworski 1989), the need that an individual seeks to fulfil through experiences based
broadly on their need for sensory or cognitive stimulation. People possessing a need for
sensory stimulation seek experiences that are novel, exciting and entertaining. They seek
variety, risk taking and adventure (Baumgartner and Steenkamp 1996; Orth and Bourrain
or curiosity; these people seek experiences that aid them in acquiring or enhancing their
knowledge in a particular area of interest (Baumgartner and Steenkamp 1996; Orth and
Bourrain 2005). MacInnis and Jaworski’s (1989) experiential needs have conceptual
activities for intrinsic pleasure gained from a unique experience rather than for extrinsic
outcomes (Baumgartner and Steenkamp 1996). These behaviours are motivated by a desire
66 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
for experiences that provide excitement, novelty, variety, or satisfy curiosity (Baumgartner
The influence of experiential needs is explained with optimum stimulation level (OSL)
theory; individuals seek out stimulation from particular environments in order to achieve
satisfaction (Steenkamp and Baumgartner 1992). Individuals differ in their perceived level
of ‘ideal’ stimulation, and will engage in exploratory behaviour in order to achieve their
ideal level of stimulation (Orth and Bourrain 2005; Steenkamp and Baumgartner 1992).
The role of experiential needs within this theory is in the delineation of the types of
stimulation and level of stimulation sought by the individual, as this will determine the
Baumgartner 1992). Therefore, the individual’s experiential needs are an important factor
Baumgartner 1992). The experiential needs of the individual have a moderating effect as
they influence the perceived relevance and attention given to certain stimuli, in this case
BME experiences (MacInnis and Jaworski 1989). The specific experiential needs
investigated in this thesis include need for cognition, need for affect and novelty-seeking
needs. These experiential needs were considered relevant to this thesis as each reflects key
1997; Csikszentmihalyi 2000; Leischnig et al. 2011; Whelan and Wohlfeil 2006; Wohlfeil
and Whelan 2006). In addition, these experiential needs were consistently identified in
various consumer needs studies (Calder et al. 2009; MacInnis and Jaworski 1989; Orth and
Bourrain 2005; Steenkamp and Baumgartner 1992; Wilson 1997). It is expected that each
of these constructs influences the types of BMEs in which customer’s find value, and
67 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
hence moderates the ability for event experiences to facilitate customer engagement. The
impact of consumer needs on customer engagement has not been empirically tested,
Research Question:
Does an individual's experiential needs moderate the relationship between BME
experiences and customer event engagement?
While the potential moderating effect of a customer’s needs on customer engagement has
been noted in previous customer engagement research, little is known about the value of
this influence (Hollebeek 2011a). Individual-specific variables, for example the customer’s
need for cognition, are identified as potential moderators of customer engagement, as this
reflects the central themes of customer engagement being contextual in nature and driven
by the individual (Brodie et al. 2011a). As the experience during a BME is customer-
driven (Wohlfeil and Whelan 2006), it follows that their personal interests or needs will
influence their propensity to interact and engage with the various experiential components
of BMEs. It is expected that individuals who possess a strong experiential need (for
cognition, affect, or novelty-seeking) are more likely to elicit event engagement from
particular experiential components that align with or fulfil those needs (Higgins and
Scholer 2009). A greater understanding of the role of the individual’s experiential needs
will provide insight into why some BMEs are more effective at building customer
engagement with some groups of customers than with others (Crompton and McKay
1997).
Experiential needs delineate the various experiences individuals seek (Laurent and
Kapferer 1985; MacInnis and Jaworski 1989; Park and Young 1986). The experiential
needs of the individual impacts the perceived relevance and attention given to certain
experiences (MacInnis and Jaworski 1989), and therefore moderates the strength of the
68 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
(Steenkamp and Baumgartner 1992). The moderating effect of experiential needs has not
thesis.
The broad framing of the following moderation hypotheses has been used because the
literature at this stage does not offer insight into particular moderator effects. Without a
clear theoretical foundation for such hypotheses, it was decided that an exploratory
Need for cognition is broadly described as “the desire to be informed” (Wilson 1997, pg
553). Individuals with a high need for cognition find learning and acquiring new
knowledge enjoyable, and find great benefit in experiences that satisfy their curiosity about
topics of interest (Calder et al. 2009). Therefore, individuals who have a high need for
Baumgartner 1992), and find greater relevance in BME experiences that satisfy their need
for further learning, self-education or general curiosity (Calder et al. 2009). Following the
idea that ‘thinking is fun’ (Hallahan 2009), these individuals are more likely to interact
during cognitive BME experiences that are thought provoking, informative or educational,
which will facilitate customer engagement during the event. Need for cognition is
Individuals with a high need for cognition are expected to elicit a stronger relationship
requires the participant to think and sparks interest through exchanging information and
knowledge (Gentile et al. 2007); individuals with a high need for cognition have a drive to
be informed, learn and acquire new knowledge (Calder et al. 2009), and therefore a
69 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
cognitive experience is expected to satisfy their need for cognition (Packer and Ballantyne
2004).
Individuals with a high need for cognition could also facilitate a stronger level of customer
event engagement from pragmatic or relational BME experiences; for example, a relational
experience such as the customer creating their own wine blend could teach them about
wine production. The individual’s need for learning and acquiring new knowledge is
satisfied from the information they receive through these relational and pragmatic
experiences (Calder et al. 2009), thus strengthening the relationship between these BME
Individuals with a low need for cognition are expected to display a weaker relationship
between cognitive BME experience and customer event engagement. These individuals do
not have a desire to learn and acquire new knowledge, and therefore will not elicit the
same level of interest or perceived the same relevance in experiences requiring them to
think, learn and exchange information (Gentile et al. 2007), and therefore the relationship
Hypothesis 5a: An individual’s need for cognition from an experience will moderate
the relationship between the BME experience and customer event engagement
Need for affect refers to an individual’s motivation to “approach or avoid situations and
activities that are emotion inducing for themselves and others” (Maio and Esses 2001, pg
585). People who possess a strong need for affect actively seek emotional experiences and
stimuli in various aspects of their lives (Sojka and Giese 1997). Therefore, customers
70 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
attending a BME who have a high need for affect are expected to engage to a greater extent
Individuals with a high need for affect are anticipated to have a stronger relationship
(Gentile et al. 2007), for example a winery picnic. For an individual with a high need for
affect, this type of event would fulfil their need for an emotionally-driven experience
providing entertainment, enjoyment and escape (Calder et al. 2009; Maio and Esses 2001)
and therefore facilitate a stronger relationship between emotional BME experience and
Individuals with a high need for affect could also exhibit a stronger relationship between
sensory stimulation, for example wine and food pairing, and wine is often considered a
form of aesthetic consumption (Charters and Pettigrew 2005). This experience could fulfil
the individual’s high need for affect through providing aesthetic enjoyment, positive mood
and entertainment (Sojka and Giese 1997), therefore strengthening the relationship
Individuals with a low need for affect are expected to demonstrate a weaker relationship
between emotional BME experience and customer event engagement. These individuals do
not actively seek emotional experiences (Sojka and Giese 1997), and while they may find
an emotional experience pleasant, it does not specifically fulfil any desired need they
possess. Therefore, an emotional experience would have less ability to elicit a heightened
state as the customer does not perceive unique value from the experience (Brodie et al.
71 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
2011a), and the relationship between emotional experience and customer event
engagement would be weaker for individuals with low need for affect.
Hypothesis 5b: An individual’s need for affect from an experience will moderate the
Novelty-seeking is “the desire of the individual to seek out novel stimuli” (Hirschman
1980). People with a high need for novelty-seeking have a desire for experiences that
provide a change from routine, and include excitement, surprise and adventure (Lee and
Crompton 1992). They are variety seekers (Steenkamp and Baumgartner 1992) and
consider new experiences as a means of escape or to alleviate boredom (Lee and Crompton
1992). Therefore customers with a high novelty-seeking need are anticipated to find
enjoyment in any BME experience that is different to their usual experiences in everyday
relationship between pragmatic and sensorial experiences and customer event engagement.
Pragmatic experiences involve physical activities or actions, and are likened to escapist
experiences (Gentile et al. 2007; Pine and Gilmore 1998), while sensorial experiences
provide sensory stimulation (Gentile et al. 2007). These experiences (for example a grape
stomp, or a wine and food pairing) are expected to involve activities that extend beyond the
individual’s normal day-to-day lives, and therefore fulfil the need for variety, novelty and
change from routine sought by individuals with a high novelty-seeking need (Lee and
Crompton 1992).
72 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
These individuals will perceive a high level of value and fulfilment in pragmatic and
sensorial experiences (Steenkamp and Baumgartner 1992), and therefore strengthen the
engagement.
Individuals with low novelty-seeking needs are expected to elicit a weaker relationship
between pragmatic and sensorial experiences and customer event engagement. These
individuals are referred to as ‘novelty avoiding’ (Lee and Crompton 1992), and prefer
which contain unfamiliar experiences extending beyond the individual’s normal activities
may be perceived by novelty avoiders as undesirable (Lee and Crompton 1992) or lacking
any perceived value. Therefore, a weaker relationship occurs between pragmatic and
sensorial experience and customer event engagement for individuals with low novelty-
seeking needs.
the relationship between the BME experience and customer event engagement
73 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
In summary, this thesis explores how experiential components of BMEs facilitate customer
engagement with the event and with the brand, and investigates the behavioural intention
of loyalty that result. The moderating effect of the individual’s experiential needs in the
also investigated.
The hypotheses presented in this chapter are summarised in the following Table 2-6:
3 There is a positive relationship between customer event engagement and customer brand engagement
4a There is a positive relationship between customer event engagement and behavioural intention of loyalty
4b There is a positive relationship between customer brand engagement and behavioural intention of loyalty
An individual’s need for cognition from an experience will moderate the relationship between the
5a
BME experience and customer event engagement
An individual’s need for affect from an experience will moderate the relationship between the BME
5b
experience and customer event engagement
An individual’s novelty-seeking needs from an experience will moderate the relationship between the
5c
BME experience and customer event engagement
74 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
These hypotheses capture how BME experiences facilitate customer event engagement and
customer brand engagement; the role of social engagement within the broader customer
engagement construct; the interplay between engagement objects (the event and the brand);
BMEs; and the moderation effects of experiential needs (need for cognition, need for affect
and novelty-seeking needs) on the relationship between BME experiences and customer
framework.
75 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
The hypotheses are summarised in a conceptual framework (Figure 2-1). This illustrates
the ability for a BME, comprised of various experiential components, to facilitate customer
engagement with the event and with the brand. The individual’s experiential needs are
project onto the host brand, and lead to increased behavioural intention of loyalty.
There are three main theoretical contributions to this thesis. First, social exchange theory is
used to identify the resources provided by the organisation (i.e. the experiential
76 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
components of the BME platform) and the reciprocated heightened psychological state of
engagement elicited by the customer as a result. This relationship has received little
objects, namely the event and the brand, is explored. Associative network theory is used to
inform the interplay between engagement objects, specifically that engagement with the
event will be projected onto the brand. Third, it is posited that an individual’s experiential
needs will moderate the relationship between BME experiences and customer event
engagement. Optimum stimulation level theory provides insight into the various types of
stimulation individuals seek from particular environments, suggesting that the relationship
In addition, this thesis explores the role of a social engagement dimension within the
broader construct of customer engagement, which has been the focus of significant debate
in customer engagement research to date. The findings of this study will enable
Managers can tailor their events to facilitate specific engagement outcomes and may
provide particular experiences that fulfil customer needs sought from an event.
Finally, this thesis contributes to customer engagement literature as it confirms and extends
previous research positing that customer engagement leads to BIL (So et al. 2012). This
relationship is supported by the theory of consumption values (Sheth et al. 1991), and
extends current knowledge through investigating the impact of the customer engagement
77 | P a g e
Literature Review Chapter
This chapter provided an overview of extant literature to inform this thesis and identified
contributions of the study. First, customer engagement was introduced as the central
Branded marketing events, based on marketing events and customer experience literature,
was explained as the context and platform through which this thesis will investigate
have an understanding of how organisations create a platform for customers to engage with
the organisation.
It was then posited that initial engagement with the BME would also trigger engagement
with the host brand. From this interplay between engagement objects it is expected that the
events that fulfil their need for cognition, need for affect and novelty-seeking.
Hypotheses were introduced and a conceptual framework outlined to explain the direction
of this thesis. The next chapter will explicate the data collection procedures and research
78 | P a g e
Research Method Chapter
This chapter outlines the methodological approach used to collect data and test the
hypotheses presented in this thesis. First, the research design and unit of analysis adopted
is outlined. A description of the data collection method follows, with a focus on the
operationalisation of constructs and measurement scales are discussed. Next, the pre-test
study including sample, data collection methods and procedures, and pre-test data analysis
are described. The main study follows, with an outline of participating winery and
Following data cleaning, the analyses undertaken to determine the reliability and validity
79 | P a g e
Research Method Chapter
A deductive research approach was taken to provide empirical evidence for proposed
relationships and causality between constructs (Neuman 2006). The research questions
established in the literature review were a result of identified gaps in theory; more
specifically gaps linking the constructs of BME experiential components, customer event
effects of experiential needs. Therefore the approach of this thesis was to examine causal
to obtain data at one point in time (post-event) by individuals who participated only once
in the study (Neuman 2006). A questionnaire was developed and distributed in two study
stages. Existing measures were used to represent each of the constructs, with minor
adaptation to suit the research contexts. A pre-test was conducted in the University sector.
This preliminary study served as a pilot study, and was used to conduct confirmatory factor
analysis and statistical testing of constructs. The questionnaire was modified on the basis
of these findings before the commencement of the next study. The main study was
conducted in the South Australian wine sector, from the McLaren Vale, Adelaide Hills and
This thesis employs causal research utilising structural equation modelling (from here
referred to as SEM) to verify predictions with the data. SEM is a widely used and accepted
particularly for those researching in the social sciences (Hooper, Coughlan, and Mullen
2008). SEM is also a widely used technique in leading marketing journals (Martínez-
López, Gázquez-Abad, and Sousa 2013). SEM takes a confirmatory approach to testing a
range of structural relationships simultaneously and, unlike other multivariate methods, can
estimate and correct for measurement error (Byrne 2001). In addition, this thesis includes
80 | P a g e
Research Method Chapter
latent (unobservable) and measured variables; SEM has the ability to incorporate both
SEM analysis is an effective tool for theory testing and developing marketing models
(Steenkamp and Baumgartner 2000). This approach was chosen because engagement has
only recently been adopted in marketing literature (Vivek et al. 2012). Research on
customer engagement generally lacks empirical quantitative enquiry (see Table 2-1 in
emerge, research must focus on empirically measuring the impact of customer engagement
As this thesis endeavours to understand the impact of event experiences on the individual
customer, the unit of analysis is the individual who attended the event. This distinction is
key in framing the entire thesis with regards to preferred respondents, sample size, and
frame of reference taken in the survey design (Neuman 2006). This unit of analysis is also
consistent with the theoretical underpinning of this thesis; the S-D logic, as it regards
and Lusch 2008). In addition, it is recognised that each experiential component of the BME
is not mutually exclusive; one event may include a number of different experiential
components, and again this perception is derived from the individual (Gentile et al. 2007).
Therefore, in conducting this thesis, it was paramount that the perceived experience and
administered using Qualtrics software. An online survey was deemed the most appropriate
for this thesis for a number of reasons. First, online surveys are a more time and cost
efficient data collection method (Denissen, Neumann, and Zalk 2010); once the survey is
can be obtained in a short amount of time, and with little manual work needed from the
researcher (Denissen et al. 2010). This was particularly important for this thesis as both the
pre-test and main study were conducted at various events. An online data collection
method enabled easy replication of the survey for different events, timely delivery of the
survey to respondents immediately following the event, and the elimination of transcription
errors, all of which save time in data preparation for analysis (Fricker Jr and Schonlau
2010).
Common limitations of online surveys, for example the perception of the survey being
‘spam’ leading to low response rate and problems with sample coverage (Denissen et al.
2010; Fricker Jr and Schonlau 2010; Vicente and Reis), is mitigated by the researcher
attending the majority of the events to obtain emails addresses from attendees. The
researcher was given the opportunity to explain the nature of the study, ask for consent
from the respondents, and provide information regarding survey distribution and incentives
to participate. This also ensured that surveys were only being sent to relevant respondents;
event; the data collection period was two weeks following the event, which allowed for
follow-up reminder emails to those who had not started the survey, and those who had only
82 | P a g e
Research Method Chapter
design after the event experience was made for a number of reasons. The surveys were
completed at the respondent’s convenience (Neuman 2006) and therefore did not interrupt
their event experience. This was also at the request of the host brands, who wanted
minimal disruption to attendees during the event. In addition, this method ensured the
researcher did not influence the results through social desirability bias (Neuman 2006).
Similar approaches of making contact with participants during an event and requesting
they complete the questionnaire post-event are common in a number of marketing events
studies (e.g. Crompton and McKay 1997; Lee, Sandler, and Shani 1997).
This section introduces the measures used to operationalise each construct from the
literature. Existing measures were used for all constructs; often there were a variety of
alternative measures within each body of literature, therefore the most appropriate and
existing scales to create linguistic style consistency and ensure their applicability to the
new research context (Brakus et al. 2009), while still maintaining their original meaning. A
number of existing scales, for example experiential components, had been previously
designed for studies that focused on the customer’s experience with a product (Gentile et
al. 2007) or with reference to experiential product-centric brands (Brakus et al. 2009).
However, as this thesis explored experience and engagement at events they were adapted
The survey was adapted for two different contexts; a pre-test held in the University sector
(a student-sample) followed by the main study held in the South Australian Wine sector.
Student samples are often argued to lack generalisability; however, when they encompass
samples are considered appropriate (Randall and Gibson 1990). The focus of this thesis
was to capture the experiences and perceptions of event attendees, and as the student
sample had all attended a University event, they were deemed an appropriate study sample.
(need for cognition, need for affect and novelty-seeking needs). Theoretical constructs
were operationalised for this questionnaire using established measures from literature
(Brakus et al. 2009; Calder et al. 2009; Chang and Chieng 2006; Hallahan 2009; Lee and
Crompton 1992; Maio and Esses 2001; So et al. 2012; Sojka and Giese 1997; Sweeney and
Soutar 2001).
determine whether engagement was achieved, and whether the type of experience aligned
with that individual’s experiential needs. A close examination of the literature suggests that
the main components of an experience are cognitive, emotional, sensory, pragmatic and
relational (Gentile et al. 2007). Many studies used various sub-sets and combinations of
these components, commonly reflecting the sensorial, emotional and cognitive components
of experience (Brakus et al. 2009; Chang and Chieng 2006; Gentile et al. 2007; Sahin et al.
2011; Schmitt 1999; Tynan and McKechnie 2009; Yuan and Wu 2008). However, it was
determined that Gentile et al.’s (2007) conceptualisation was robust and comprehensive,
with attention also given to social/relational elements (Chang and Chieng 2006; Schmitt
(Brakus et al. 2009; Chang and Chieng 2006; Sahin et al. 2011; Schmitt 1999).
84 | P a g e
Research Method Chapter
implemented in this thesis, their study context was highly product-centric and their
measurement items were difficult to replicate in the context of this thesis. Chang and
Chieng’s (2006) measures were used instead, as their study followed a similar
coffee stores, hence their items were easier to apply to the context of this thesis with only
minor rewording (from ‘coffee store’ to ‘event experience’). Chang and Chieng’s (2006)
experience measure only includes three items per experiential component. Three items
were reported as having item to total coefficient values below 0.5 in one study context,
which suggests that these items did not significantly contribute to the reliability of the
construct (Chang and Chieng 2006). Each of the experience measures were therefore
supplemented with additional items to account for any item quality issues, as a minimum
of three items per construct are required to run a congeneric measurement model (Hair,
Black, Babin, and Anderson 2012). The cognitive, sensorial, emotional and pragmatic
experiences were supplemented with items from Brakus et al. (2009), and relational
experience was supplemented with items from Sweeney and Soutar (2001).
elements of customer engagement are limited, for example ‘brand engagement in self-
concept’ (Sprott et al. 2009) and Calder, Isaac, and Malthouse’s (2013) measures for
customer engagement (Brodie et al. 2011a) and is not consistent with the conceptualisation
The five dimension conceptualisation of customer engagement from So et al. (2012) and
their subsequent measures were found most applicable to this thesis; these measures
capture the commonly accepted three dimensions of customer engagement (Brodie et al.
85 | P a g e
Research Method Chapter
2011a), while extending this view to investigate a broader and more comprehensive idea of
customer engagement. In addition, these measures were used in a hospitality and tourism
context of service encounters (So et al. 2012); therefore the measures were easily
A major contribution of this research is the investigation of engagement from both an event
and brand perspective, to explore the relationship between two engagement objects in the
one study. Gwinner and Eaton’s (1999) study on brand image transfer explored this
process by replicating the same set of items, first phrased to describe the particular events
and then reworded to describe the brand. Image transfer was confirmed when very similar
responses were indicated for event image and brand image (Gwinner and Eaton 1999).
Drengner et al. (2008) used the same technique, replicating the same items to identify
image transfer from the event to the brand. Therefore, for this thesis the same engagement
measures were used twice; first to reflect engagement during an event, and then reworded
to capture engagement with the brand. This required careful consideration of the rewording
of items so that the ‘event engagement’ items consistently referred to the ‘event’ or implied
engagement within the event experience, while the ‘brand engagement’ items were clearly
distinguished to capture engagement occurring with the brand (Brakus et al. 2009).
Respondent instructions were also included at the beginning of the customer event
engagement and customer brand engagement items to ensure that participants understood
and differentiated between the repeated questions (Hair, Lukas, Miller, Bush, and Ortinau
2008).
There is significant debate within the engagement literature of the existence and
dimension (Calder et al. 2009; Vivek et al. 2012), while others maintain that social
items from Calder et al. (2009) were included to capture social event engagement and
86 | P a g e
Research Method Chapter
social brand engagement. While social engagement has been introduced in other literature
areas, for example social psychology (Achterberg, Pot, Kerkstra, Ooms, Muller, and Ribbe
2003; Glass, De Leon, Bassuk, and Berkman 2006; Huo, Binning, and Molina 2009),
Calder et al. (2009) investigated customer engagement arising from experiences, and was
therefore utilised in this thesis. Calder et al. (2009) provide a different conceptualisation of
‘community’ and ‘participation and socialising’ are identified as the two dimensions of
social-interactive engagement (Calder et al. 2009). The majority of items for community
and participation and socialising were used in this thesis; however, three items were highly
specific to the online context investigated in Calder et al.’s (2009, pg 325) study and were
not applicable to the BME context, for example, “I often feel guilty about the amount of
The ‘behavioural intention of loyalty’ measure (So et al. 2012), encompassing word of
mouth and purchase intention was utilised in this thesis; these four key items implemented
in So et al.’s (2012) study is based on Zeithaml et al. (1996), an extensively cited and
replicated measure. The shortened version of this measurement scale from So et al. (2012)
was considered appropriate for this thesis due to the conceptual relevance of the included
constructs (word of mouth and purchase intention) with regards to customer engagement
literature; the additional constructs captured in Zeithaml et al.’s (1996) scale (price
sensitivity and complaining behaviour) were not consistent with expected customer
engagement outcomes (Fehrer et al. 2013) and hence were not included in this thesis.
The individual’s experiential needs were reported using well-established and highly
replicated measures, mainly from psychology literature. A consolidated version of the need
for cognition scale (Cacioppo, Petty, and Kao 1984) from Hallahan (2009) was used in this
thesis.
87 | P a g e
Research Method Chapter
Hallahan’s (2009) study investigated need for cognition as a moderator between the level
of thinking and attention a customer gives to information in advertising. The role of need
for cognition in Hallahan’s (2009) study is consistent with how the construct is considered
in this thesis; need for cognition is an individual differences variable (in this thesis,
experiential need) which moderates the amount of thinking (in this thesis, event attention)
a customer elicits towards particular information (in this thesis, cognitive BME
experience). Hallahan’s (2009) results indicated that, of the completed need for cognition
scale, one factor consisting of nine items emerged as the predominant factor influencing
the customer’s level of thinking and attention of advertising information; those items were
Elements of the novelty-seeking scale from Lee and Crompton (1992) were implemented
as the paper was conducted in a similar study context (tourism) and has been shown to be
robust. This paper investigated novelty from multiple dimensions; thrill, change from
routine, boredom alleviation and surprise (Lee and Crompton 1992). However, to reduce
the 21 item scale, only the change of routine dimension was implemented as these items
were perceived to have the most applicability to the context of this thesis. In addition, only
four of the change of routine items (of nine) were used, as the remaining items were not
easily transferable to this study context (for example ‘I want to experience customs and
adventurous places’), and also reported comparatively lower factor score weights
Finally, the individual’s need for affect was reported using measures from Sojka and Giese
(1997) and Maio and Esses (2001). There are varying perspectives and numerous scales to
measure affect (Sojka and Giese 1997); for this thesis items were selected that were
perceived to address situations or experiences where need for affect influenced the
individual’s perceptions (e.g. when I recall a situation, I usually recall the emotional
88 | P a g e
Research Method Chapter
aspects of the situation). Items with less applicability to the context of this thesis were not
included in the questionnaire (e.g. I’m good at empathising with other people’s problems; I
enjoy trying to explain my feelings – even if it’s only to myself) (Sojka and Giese 1997).
The four selected items were supplemented with an additional two items from Maio and
Esses (2001) that also made reference to emotional experiences or situations (I feel that I
In summary, the previous discussion highlights the process taken to select robust measures
to represent each of the constructs identified in this thesis, while also attempting to shorten
the survey length to avoid confusion or frustration among the participants (Hair et al.
2012). Each of the constructs and their related measures are described in the following
Table 3-1. Some measurement items were slightly modified to suit the context of the study;
this is a common method to achieve strong relevance and applicability of the measures
89 | P a g e
Research Method Chapter
90 | P a g e
Research Method Chapter
Social Brand SOC_BRAND1* X Winery does a good job of getting people to contribute or
Engagement provide feedback
(Calder et al. 2009) SOC_BRAND2* I like meeting other people who enjoy X
SOC_BRAND3 I’ve gotten interested in things I otherwise wouldn’t have
because of other X Winery consumers
SOC_BRAND4 I’m as interested in what others think about X Winery as I am in
more formal information about X
SOC_BRAND5 A big reason I like X Winery is what I get from talking to others
about the wine
SOC_BRAND6* I do quite a bit of socialising that relates to X Winery
SOC_BRAND7* I contribute to conversations about X Winery
Behavioural intention BIL_BRAND1 I would say positive things about X Winery to other people
of loyalty (So et al. BIL_BRAND2 I would recommend X Winery to someone who seeks my advice
2012) BIL_BRAND3 I would encourage friends and relatives to purchase X Wines
BIL_BRAND4 I would purchase X wines in the future
* item was removed during construct analysis and pre-testing
91 | P a g e
Research Method Chapter
development. The questionnaire is included in Appendix A-1. The questions were designed
to be easily understood by participants without assistance from the researcher. For this
reason, several measurement items were slightly modified to enhance understanding in the
context in which they were being completed. Detailed explanations and examples were
also included to accompany the questions and ensure understanding from the participants.
92 | P a g e
Research Method Chapter
3.4.4.1 Scaling
All constructs were measured using likert type scales, with seven response options. Likert
style questions are relatively easy to construct and administer and are readily understood
(Hair et al. 2008). All established measures utilised in this thesis had been previously
implemented using a likert scale structure (Brakus et al. 2009; Chang and Chieng 2006;
Hallahan 2009; Lee and Crompton 1992; Maio and Esses 2001; So et al. 2012; Sojka and
Seven point response formats are commonly used in well-developed measures as to ensure
sufficient scale variance, which is particularly important for conducting SEM (Noar 2003).
Scales that extend beyond seven points will provide little benefit for analysis or scale
variance (Noar 2003). A seven point scale was also common in the established measures
implemented in this thesis (Brakus et al. 2009; So et al. 2012; Sweeney and Soutar 2001).
Therefore, all constructs in this thesis were measured using a seven point likert scale
ranging from (1) strongly disagree, (4) neither agree nor disagree, to (7) strongly agree.
The inclusion of a neutral response choice in scale development is often debated (Hair et
al. 2008; Neuman 2006). A forced-choice scale, one that does not have a neutral response
option, may result in lower-quality data as some respondents may lack knowledge or
experience of a given topic and are unable to accurately respond to the question (Hair et al.
2008). However, a free-choice scale, one that includes a neutral response option, may
provide an easy option for respondents who are indecisive or do not want to reveal their
true feelings (Hair et al. 2008). Although there are arguments for and against providing an
odd number of response options (Neuman 2006), this thesis provided a neutral midpoint (4
– neither agree nor disagree) to allow for those who were genuinely undecided, as opposed
to forcing an opinion.
93 | P a g e
Research Method Chapter
The questionnaire was designed to capture the perceived experiences of the participant
during the BME and its ability to facilitate customer event engagement and customer brand
engagement. The questionnaire also created a profile of the respondent’s experiential needs
with regards to cognition, affect, and novelty-seeking. There were no qualifying questions
throughout the questionnaire; all respondents were asked to complete all sections.
had a high level of understanding (Hair et al. 2008). This is particularly important for
online surveys as they are self-administered and provide no way for respondents to ask
questions or clarify the requirements of the survey (Hair et al. 2008). The sequence in
which these concepts were presented to the respondents is outlined in the following
section.
Introduction – The introduction screen included a brief outline of the research project and
a summary of questionnaire content (Hair et al. 2008), and a description of the opportunity
(Denissen et al. 2010; Hair et al. 2008). Participants were instructed that questions pertain
to one specific event, not numerous events they may have attended. Included in the
introduction were explicit directions instructing respondents to answer all questions even if
some appeared similar or abstract. This was emphasised, as multi-item measures were used
for each construct; repetition may cause confusion for the participant (Hair et al. 2008). A
force-response logic was used on all questions with the online medium, to ensure
respondents did not skip over particular items. Screen breaks were also placed in the
questionnaire to limit the number of questions per screen; similar-sounding questions were
94 | P a g e
Research Method Chapter
not on the same page, reducing the level of confusion for the participant (Toepoel, Das,
were presented first to establish the perceived type of BME experience encountered by the
types were given to ensure items were understood. For example, the cognitive experience
items were introduced by explaining that this type of experience includes any components
of the event that made the participant think, intrigued them, or made them want to seek
further information.
Customer event engagement – items for each of the five engagement dimensions
capture the respondent’s level of engagement during the event experience. It was reiterated
throughout this section that the items related to the event in question, not about the
participant’s perceptions of this style of event in general, or previous events held by the
brand. The respondent instructions indicated that the questions referred to their interactions
and behaviours during the event, and were asked to answer the questions only about the
event in question.
Customer brand engagement - This section was sequenced to follow event engagement
measures as both originated from the same measure and therefore had very similar
wording. It was important to present the event-related questions first to establish event
engagement before investigating any engagement with the brand. In this section the
questions were framed towards the brand as opposed to the event experience – respondents
were notified that the questions would appear similar but that it was part of the design.
intention of loyalty, encompassing word of mouth and brand purchase intention were
95 | P a g e
Research Method Chapter
presented in this section. These items were the final brand-specific questions of the survey,
and were placed after the customer brand engagement measures while the reported
recollections of the brand were still in the participant’s mind and therefore easy to answer.
Experiential needs – measures capturing the respondent’s levels of need for cognition,
need for affect and need for novelty were included to determine the respondent’s levels of
experiential needs. This section required participants to answer questions directly related to
was considered appropriate to have these questions follow the event and brand constructs
as to not distract the respondent from thinking about their event experience. These
questions are also very specific to the individual, and more personal and self-reflective in
nature; therefore these items were placed towards the end of the survey to indicate a
‘transition phase’ (Hair et al. 2008). This communicated to the respondent that the nature
of the questions were about to change from brand focused to more individual-specific
Demographics – questions of age and nationality were included at the end of the
questionnaire. This section was included last as personal information can often be
anonymity (Hair et al. 2008). Events that ran on multiple days also included a question
asking them to specify the specific date/event they attended. Participants could choose if
they wanted to enter the prize draw by leaving their name and email address at the end of
the questionnaire; this was placed at the end of the survey to ensure only respondents who
96 | P a g e
Research Method Chapter
responses and personal information in the introduction to the survey. The nature and
purpose of the research was expressed to participants before asking for their consent to
participate; it was emphasised that the study was undertaken by a PhD candidate at
University of Adelaide to assure participants that the research was not a commercial
venture, nor would their information be given to any third party. The participants were
advised that their information (email address) would only be used to the purpose of
contacting them with the survey and to notify them if they won the completion incentive.
were automatically coded, and a response ID assigned to each participant. These codes
were later modified for readability. Non-responses were automatically coded in SPSS as a
full stop (Pallant 2010). A number of items were negatively worded in the original survey;
these variables were reverse-coded using SPSS21 before data analysis commenced.
97 | P a g e
Research Method Chapter
3.5.1 Overview
The main objective of the pre-test was to determine the length of time taken to complete
the survey online and to run preliminary factor analysis to assess the validity of the
selected measures. In particular, experiential components were measured using items from
Chang and Chieng (2006) and Brakus et al. (2009); factor analysis would identify
unnecessary items that could be excluded from the main study. The pre-test was conducted
in the University sector, the details of which are described in this section.
3.5.2 Subjects
The University of Adelaide Orientation Week (from here referred to as ‘O-Week’) was
considered an appropriate platform from which to run a pre-test of the study and validate
information sessions, University support lectures, social events, barbeques, which allowed
University of Adelaide students who attended an event during O-Week was determined as
different O-Week events to be surveyed. These students were from various disciplines,
postgraduate level. Respondents from a number of different events were approached (see
Table 3-2). Equivalent questionnaires were distributed to all respondents; participants were
asked to indicate the event they attended at the beginning of the questionnaire.
98 | P a g e
Research Method Chapter
for inclusion in the study (Neuman 2006). The researcher attended preliminary lectures,
information sessions, and the Student barbeque event and distributed fliers that outlined the
study and contained the online survey URL. The qualifying dimension relevant to survey
participants was attendance to an O-Week event, and these participants were approached
with survey fliers during an event, thus already achieving that qualifier.
The researcher attended 10 events held at O-Week which ran over five days, and obtained
a total of 223 responses. A limitation of this pre-test is the likelihood of students attending
more than one event, and this distorting their responses. To mitigate this, the participant
was instructed at the beginning of the survey to identify one event they had attended and to
answer all survey questions with reference to that event. They were reminded of this
throughout the survey. Also, respondents were asked to indicate the total number of O-
Week events they had attended. The following Table 3-2 indicates the types of events
attended by students, and the number of responses specifically on each event type.
99 | P a g e
Research Method Chapter
Both approaches have been implemented in previous event studies, e.g. post-event
(Crompton and McKay 1997; Lee et al. 1997) and during the event (Close et al. 2006;
Online surveys were preferred due to increased convenience for the participant who could
complete the survey in their own time (Neuman 2006), and easy replication of the survey
for different events (Fricker Jr and Schonlau 2010). In addition, this data collection
procedure was often at the request of the O-Week organisers, as there was available little
Self-complete paper surveys were also distributed to students to complete during the Hub
Day Out barbeque and at the end of the marketing introduction session (see Table 3-2).
The barbeque was an informal event running for two hours where students had enough
time to participate in the survey; the marketing introduction session finished ten minutes
early and willing participants were asked to stay and complete the survey sheet before
The questionnaire was expected to take approximately fifteen minutes to complete online,
and an incentive of one iPad Mini was provided to encourage participation (Denissen et al.
2010; Hair et al. 2008). All participants who completed the questionnaire went into the
online surveys take no longer than 15 minutes, as lengthier surveys may result in a
decreased completion rate and compromise response validity (Rea and Parker 2012).
100 | P a g e
Research Method Chapter
However, Qualtrics survey software reported a duration trimmed mean of 31 minutes for
participants to complete the online survey (a trimmed mean factors in respondents who had
left and re-entered the survey). Approximately 64 participants exited the survey part way
through, an approximate completion rate of 78% (223 completed responses from 287).
preliminary analysis.
Factor Analysis was conducted to establish validity and reliability of the measures included
in the pre-test survey. The pre-test included multiple measures for each experiential
component to ensure each construct was adequately captured; measures from Chang and
Chieng (2006) and Brakus et al. (2009) were used to investigate cognitive, emotional,
sensorial and pragmatic experience, while measures from Chang and Chieng (2006) and
Sweeney and Soutar (2001) explored relational experience (as Brakus et al. 2009 did not
Testing of constructs indicated that the additional items from Brakus et al. (2009) enhanced
the reliability of the emotional and pragmatic experiential constructs, and therefore all
items were included in the main study (see Appendix A-3). However, the Brakus et al.
(2009) measures did not enhance the reliability of the cognitive and sensorial measures,
and therefore only the Chang and Chieng (2006) items were included in the main study.
The relational experience items from Sweeney and Soutar (2001) achieved strong
reliability; inclusion of the two items from Chang and Chieng (2006) did not increase the
reliability of the construct and were therefore removed from the main study. A list of the
items changes in the pre-study versus the main study, and a summary of reliability values
So et al. (2012) identifies a five dimension construct; however, this thesis had originally
engagement (Brodie et al. 2011a). The pre-test survey only included items that aligned
with the three predominant dimensions of engagement; So et al.’s (2012) attention and
enthusiasm measures were used in the pre-test to capture cognitive and emotional
dimensions of engagement, while participation measures (Chan, Yim, and Lam 2010) were
exploration of the customer engagement literature, the researcher decided that the
expanded five dimension view of customer engagement had great applicability to the event
context, and provided an additional element to the study; to question and investigate the
dimensionality of customer engagement. This five dimension framework still included the
commonly used three dimensions of engagement, with an additional two elements; this
meant that the dimensionality of engagement could be compared in further research. The
(2012) interaction measures. In brief, the researcher recognised these oversights after the
pre-test, and decided that the benefit of making these changes to the main study
outweighed the limitations of having a consistent survey in the pre-test and main study.
Calder et al.’s (2009) social engagement measures, and the need for cognition, novelty-
seeking and need for affect measures all achieved reliability and remained in the survey for
outcome of engagement (Fehrer et al. 2013; Vivek et al. 2012); three word of mouth items
from So et al.’s (2012) behavioural intention of loyalty construct was used in the pre-test.
The fourth item in the BIL measure, purchase intention, was omitted as it did not logically
fit the context of the pre-test; i.e. ‘I would purchase the University of Adelaide in the
future’. However, for completeness of measure replication, the purchase intention item was
included in the main study (‘I would purchase wine X in the future’).
102 | P a g e
Research Method Chapter
3.6.1 Overview
The main study of this thesis was conducted at wine-related events in the South Australian
wine industry. Ten events from six wineries were used to collect data, with 274 complete
responses obtained. The objective of the main study was to assess the proposed
relationships and hypotheses explicated in Chapter 2. The details of the main study,
including the identification and selection of participating wineries and events, individual
respondent selection and profile, and data collection procedure are described in the
following section.
3.6.2 Subjects
The target population of the main study was Australian wine customers; the study subjects
were recent attendees of selected wine events held in the main South Australian wine
regions surrounding Adelaide; McLaren Vale, the Adelaide Hills and the Barossa Valley.
A focus on individual attendees allowed data to reflect the individual’s perspective of the
event experience, which is consistent with the theoretical underpinning of S-D logic
to take part in this research. Wineries that had recently conducted or were about to conduct
a relevant BME for their customers were sought. Research was conducted online to
identify wine events held in the wine regions surrounding Adelaide within the data
collection period (June to December 2013). Event information was obtained from winery
http://www.barossa.com, http://www.adelaidehillswine.com.au).
103 | P a g e
Research Method Chapter
Wineries were approached across a range of winery sizes and a known range of events.
The researcher contacted the marketing manager or director of each winery (via email) and
explained the nature of the study, and the participation requirements and outcomes for the
winery. Participating wineries were given a report on the nature of customer engagement
and perceptions of the experience specific to their event. Six of the thirteen approached
Respondents from ten different wine events (from six wineries) were contacted, providing
a broad range of particular types of event experiences. To examine the major constructs of
this thesis, it was important that the participating wineries were hosting their own BMEs
for customers. These events needed to be distinguished from joint events, sponsored
events, or community based events, to ensure emphasis was placed on the individual wine
brand during the event (Wood 2009). It was also important that the organisations included
in the study (i.e. cognitive, emotional, sensorial, pragmatic and relational; Gentile et al.
2007). The participating wineries and events are outlined in Table 3-3.
2006). The researcher attended various wine events run by the participating wine brands
104 | P a g e
Research Method Chapter
and approached all attendees to ask if they would be willing to participate in the study.
Willing participants provided their email to the researcher, with a link to the online survey
provided the following day. A self-administered survey minimised the impact of the
researcher on the respondent, for example social desirability bias (Neuman 2006).
The qualifying dimension relevant to survey participants was that the participant had
attended a branded-wine event; as these participants were approached during a given event,
this qualifier was already met. For multi-day events, participants were asked to identify the
particular event date they had attended at the beginning of the questionnaire, and were
instructed to answer all questions with reference to that specific event (not previous wine
event compared to the characteristics of the overall sample, based on number of responses
and age distribution. Country of residence was also investigated, however only 13
responses from the total response set of 274 resided in an interactional country (Austria 1;
105 | P a g e
Research Method Chapter
All age brackets were adequately represented (see Table 3-4), with minor variations in
respondent age for certain events; e.g. winery concerts. This may reflect the target market
consumption frequency. Table 3-4 outlines wine involvement means and standard
deviations from respondents from each event, as well as for the overall sample.
Attendees were approached during the event to seek their participation in the study. If they
agreed to participate, they were asked to provide their email so a survey link could be sent
to them after the event. An incentive of a chance to win a wine-related prize was provided
to increase participation rate (Denissen et al. 2010; Hair et al. 2008). The incentive was
negotiated with the winery, and was a wine-brand related prize; for example a bottle of
Shiraz Cabernet (for Auction C) and a two pack of La Biondina and il Briconne
The survey was emailed to participants within a day of the wine event. A second reminder
email was distributed a week later to those who had not yet participated, and a final email
was distributed a few days later indicating that the survey would close by the end of the
week. The survey included wine brand logos and event photos in order to present a
professional image, and to promote the collaboration of the winery. Online surveys were
intrusive than asking attendees to participate during the event. The participating wineries
insisted that attendees be disturbed as little as possible during the event; as well as this,
participation rate was expected to be considerably higher if the participant did not have to
complete the survey during the event. In addition, this protocol was followed to ensure the
106 | P a g e
Research Method Chapter
researcher did not influence the results through social desirability bias (Neuman 2006).
The data collection period was the two weeks immediately after the event.
In a small number of cases the wineries handled distribution of surveys on the researcher’s
behalf to avoid any negative customer perceptions resulting from their email information
being given to a third party. Therefore, the procedures undertaken in the collection of the
completed questionnaires varied slightly. This may have impacted on the relative response
rate of the respective events, but not on the nature of the responses; as indicated in Table 3-
5, the response rates for events in which the researcher was present (between 44% and
60%) were considerably higher than the events in which the researcher was absent
(between 11% and 40%). An approximate number of attendees are also listed in Table 3-5;
the researcher did not have access to the specific number of attendees of all events,
however could deduce an approximate value from email lists or a count of attendees at one
point during an event. Due to the public, non-ticketed nature of some events, the total
107 | P a g e
Research Method Chapter
potentially random or inattentive responses to ensure the quality of the data included in
analysis (Meade and Craig 2012). This is a particularly important process for online
surveys due to factors including anonymity and lack of environmental control with
unknown distractions and divided attention influencing the respondent (Meade and Craig
2012).
First, all incomplete data was identified. The researcher excluded responses with more than
10% of items missing (Hair et al. 2012). None of the incomplete responses met the
minimum missing values rule, with a total of 86 incomplete responses deleted. All of the
Survey duration was then examined, as a considerably short response time can indicate
lack of thought and attention given to survey items, while a considerably long response
time can indicate inattention or distractions experienced by the respondent (Meade and
Craig 2012). Responses falling in the 15% (less than 10 minutes) and 85% (39.5 minutes
and greater) percentiles were flagged for further quality control testing.
Data was then assessed for response patterns or responses with minimal variance, with 20+
responses in a row flagged for further quality tests; only three responses were flagged
interest questions, which provides respondents with the opportunity to provide feedback on
their boredom or decreased attention by the end of the survey (Meade and Craig 2012).
While this approach was not taken in this survey, there was a free response comments
section at the end of each survey; responses that included comments were checked for
108 | P a g e
Research Method Chapter
questionnaire.
As a result of data quality testing, three responses were deleted as the researcher could
seven-point likert scale), and fell within the 15% percentile on survey duration.
in responses between early and late respondents (Armstrong and Overton 1977). The early
respondents group included participants who completed the survey within a day of the
initial email invitation (n=117, 43% of respondents); the late respondents group included
those who completed the survey after receiving two reminder emails (n=30, 11% of
respondents). An independent sample t-test was conducted to assess the difference between
early and late respondents, and Levene’s test for equality of variances was observed to
indicate whether equal variances were assumed or not assumed, and reported accordingly
(Coakes, Steed, and Ong 2010). Relational experience was the only construct indicating a
significant difference between early and late respondents (see Table 3-6), indicating that a
109 | P a g e
Research Method Chapter
110 | P a g e
Research Method Chapter
dependence relationships (Hair et al. 2012). This technique is valuable for this thesis
because measured variables are used to observe latent constructs, and because customer
behavioural intention of loyalty. SEM analysis allows the testing of all of these
A latent construct refers to a construct that cannot be directly measured, but rather is
represented by multiple measured variables (questionnaire items) (Hair et al. 2012). Latent
constructs are beneficial are they are a more comprehensive approach of exploring a
complex construct; a number of measures are used to reflect the latent construct, and are
then tested for their contribution to that concept (construct validity) and only that concept
(discriminant validity) (Hair et al. 2012). In addition, SEM can estimate and account for
measurement error, which is the degree to which measured variables do not describe the
The first step of SEM is to define individual constructs through the investigation of
construct validity, which is the assessment of measurement variables and the extent to
which they represent the intended latent construct (Hair et al. 2012). This process assures
the quality of each construct implemented in the measurement model and subsequent path
diagram analysis (Hair et al. 2012). Construct validity is assessed through convergent
111 | P a g e
Research Method Chapter
convergent validity; that the measured variables predicted to contribute to each latent
construct share a high level of common variance (Hair et al. 2012). In addition, one-factor
congeneric measurement models produce factor score weights which are necessary to
calculate composite measures (Rowe 2002); the justification and process of calculating
It is recommended that a range of fit indices are considered for the analysis of models, to
account for any effects based on data non-normality, sample size, or model complexity
(Hair et al. 2012; Lei and Lomax 2005). There are a wide variety of fit indices available for
reporting, but as a general guide the range of indices selected should include; χ² value and
associated df; one absolute fit index (GFI, RMSEA); one goodness-of-fit index (GFI, CFI,
TLI); one incremental fit index (NFI, CRI, TLI); and one badness-of-fit index (RMSEA)
The only statistically based measure of model fit is the Chi-Square (Hair et al. 2012). If the
required non-significance is met (p-value > 0.05), it indicates that the proposed theory fits
reality (Hair et al. 2012). However, chi-square and its significance value are reported with
the knowledge that this value becomes less meaningful for more complex models with a
large number of observed variables tested (Hair et al. 2012). The Normed Chi-Square
reflects the Chi-Square adjusted by the degrees of freedom; the acceptable levels shown in
Table 3-7 include values between 1 and 3, with values below 1 representing an overfit of
the model and values over 3 indicating poor model fit (Hair et al. 2012).
Goodness-of-fit index (GFI) was one of the first fit indices to attempt to have less
sensitivity to sample size, with values greater than 0.90 supporting model fit (Hair et al.
2012). Normed Fit Index (NFI) is an incremental fit index, and reflects a ratio of the
112 | P a g e
Research Method Chapter
difference in chi-square of the model versus the null model (Hair et al. 2012). Values
nearing 1 indicate model fit. The Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI) compares the chi-square of the
specified model to the null model (Hair et al. 2012). In addition, TLI is not normed which
means that values can exceed 1 or fall below 0; a TLI value near 1 suggests good model fit
(Hair et al. 2012). Comparative Fit Index (CFI) is a similar index, however is normed and
therefore ranges between 0 and 1; values above 0.90 supporting model fit (Hair et al.
2012).
commonly reported with chi-square as it attempts to correct the shortfalls associated with
chi-square, namely sample size and model complexity (Hair et al. 2012). A low RMSEA
value indicates model fit; < 0.05 indicates best fit, however 0.05-0.08 is acceptable (Hair et
al. 2012).
In summary, this thesis reports the principal goodness-of-fit index (χ²/df), Goodness-of-fit
index (GFI), Root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) and Normed Fit Index
(NFI), Tucker Lewis Index (TLI) and Comparative Fit Index (CFI) (Hair et al. 2012;
Hooper et al. 2008; Martínez-López et al. 2013). Each construct model in this thesis was
tested against these fit indices and their related cut-off values as shown in Table 3-7:
113 | P a g e
Research Method Chapter
The following Figures 3-1 to 3-19 report the one-factor congeneric measurement models
and their corresponding fit indices for each construct investigated in this thesis. Factor
loadings between each measured variable and their latent variables were also observed,
with values above .07 indicating ideal convergent validity (Kline 2011) and values above
satisfactory goodness-of-fit with respect to the fit indices described in Table 3-7. Items 1
and 2 met the ideal threshold value of >0.70 supporting convergent validity of the model
0.50 (Hair et al. 2012). While item 3 did not reach the ideal threshold value, its inclusion
provided an additional theoretical nuance to the construct and was therefore kept in the
model.
114 | P a g e
Research Method Chapter
satisfactory goodness-of-fit with respect to the fit indices described in Table 3-7. Four
variables achieved the ideal factor loadings threshold of > 0.70, indicating convergent
validity (Kline 2011). Item 5 (EXP_EMO5 = 0.68) achieved an acceptable factor loading
of above 0.50 (Hair et al. 2012). While item 5 did not reach the ideal threshold value, it
115 | P a g e
Research Method Chapter
satisfactory goodness-of-fit with respect to the fit indices described in Table 3-7. All
variables achieved factor loadings > 0.70, indicating convergent validity (Kline 2011).
satisfactory goodness-of-fit with respect to the fit indices described in Table 3-7. All
variables achieved factor loadings > 0.70, indicating convergent validity (Kline 2011).
116 | P a g e
Research Method Chapter
satisfactory goodness-of-fit with respect to the fit indices described in Table 3-7. All
variables achieved factor loadings > 0.70, indicating convergent validity (Kline 2011).
The one-factor congeneric measurement model for event attention achieved satisfactory
goodness-of-fit with respect to the fit indices described in Table 3-7. All variables achieved
117 | P a g e
Research Method Chapter
The one-factor congeneric measurement model for brand attention achieved satisfactory
goodness-of-fit with respect to the fit indices described in Table 3-7. All variables achieved
118 | P a g e
Research Method Chapter
satisfactory goodness-of-fit with respect to the fit indices described in Table 3-7. All
variables achieved ideal factor loadings of > 0.70, indicating convergent validity (Kline
2011) with the exception of item 2 (ID_EVENT2= 0.66) which still achieved an acceptable
factor loading of > 0.50 (Hair et al. 2012). Item 5 also remained in the model because it
119 | P a g e
Research Method Chapter
satisfactory goodness-of-fit with respect to the fit indices described in Table 3-7. All
variables achieved factor loadings > 0.70, indicating convergent validity (Kline 2011)
The one-factor congeneric measurement model for event enthusiasm achieved satisfactory
goodness-of-fit with respect to the fit indices described in Table 3-7. All variables achieved
The one-factor congeneric measurement model for brand enthusiasm achieved satisfactory
goodness-of-fit with respect to the fit indices described in Table 3-7. All variables achieved
The one-factor congeneric measurement model for event absorption achieved satisfactory
goodness-of-fit with respect to the fit indices described in Table 3-7. All variables achieved
121 | P a g e
Research Method Chapter
The one-factor congeneric measurement model for brand absorption achieved satisfactory
goodness-of-fit with respect to the fit indices described in Table 3-7. All variables achieved
The one-factor congeneric measurement model for event interaction achieved satisfactory
goodness-of-fit with respect to the fit indices described in Table 3-7. All variables achieved
122 | P a g e
Research Method Chapter
The one-factor congeneric measurement model for brand interaction achieved satisfactory
goodness-of-fit with respect to the fit indices described in Table 3-7. All variables achieved
achieved satisfactory goodness-of-fit with respect to the fit indices described in Table 3-7.
All variables achieved factor loadings > 0.70, indicating convergent validity (Kline 2011).
123 | P a g e
Research Method Chapter
goodness-of-fit with respect to the fit indices described in Table 3-7. All variables achieved
The one-factor congeneric measurement model for need for affect achieved satisfactory
goodness-of-fit with respect to the fit indices described in Table 3-7. All variables achieved
124 | P a g e
Research Method Chapter
The one-factor congeneric measurement model for need for cognition achieved satisfactory
goodness-of-fit with respect to the fit indices described in Table 3-7. All variables achieved
125 | P a g e
Research Method Chapter
measurement model was analysed. This measurement model comprising all latent
constructs and their respective measured variables enables discriminant validity testing and
confirms (along with convergent validity) construct validity (Hair et al. 2012).
Measurement model testing is the first of the two-step SEM process, in which a
model fit and construct validity (Hair et al. 2012). The second step is assessment of the
structural model, in which hypotheses are tested and significance of relationships are
assessed (Hair et al. 2012). This second step is taken only after CFA has confirmed
construct validity and is described in Chapter 4; the first step is crucial in assuring the
quality of the measures used to calculate the structural model outcomes (Hair et al. 2012).
Discriminant validity ensures that the measured variables used to capture a particular latent
construct are contributing distinctly to that construct, and tests the extent to which each
construct correlates with other constructs; it measures whether a construct is truly distinct
from others (Hair et al. 2012). The average variance extracted (AVE) estimate is used to
measure discriminant validity, and should achieve a greater value than the squared
correlation estimate (HSC) which would indicate that the latent construct explains the
variance in its associated measured variables more than other constructs in the model (Hair
et al. 2012).
assesses the extent to which measured variables are internally consistent (Hair et al. 2012)
and free from random measurement error (Kline 2011). Cronbach’s coefficient alpha is the
most widely used measurement of reliability, however is criticised as construct weights are
constrained to be equal and therefore underestimates reliability (Peterson and Kim 2013).
The construct reliability measure is often used with SEM and allows construct weights to
126 | P a g e
Research Method Chapter
vary (Peterson and Kim 2013) and therefore is also included to determine reliability (Hair
et al. 2012). The key validity and reliability indices and analysis thresholds are summarised
The results of the overall measurement model are presented in Table 3-28. Results indicate
Cronbach’s alphas of at least 0.80 (De Vaus 2002) and high construct reliability scores all
exceeding the threshold of 0.7 (Fornell and Larcker 1981). Convergent validity is
confirmed with all average variance extracted values exceeding 0.5 (Hair et al. 2012) and
discriminant validity is examined with all average variance extracted scores exceeding the
The event absorption construct was the only variable to not achieve discriminant validity
(Table 3-28), as it was found to have high correlation with event enthusiasm. However, the
event absorption construct achieved reliability and convergent validity (De Vaus 2002;
Hair et al. 2012). Conceptually, event absorption (likened to flow) and event enthusiasm
(emotional engagement) have been identified as having similarities with their reference
heightened level of excitement and interest (So et al. 2012; Vivek et al. 2012), while
engrossment (Csikzentmihaly 1990; So et al. 2012). While the constructs share common
traits of happiness and positive emotion, the two remain distinct constructs; absorption is
127 | P a g e
Research Method Chapter
engrossment in the experience and losing sense of time (So et al. 2012; Vivek et al. 2012).
dramaturgy of the brand (Wohlfeil and Whelan 2006); these characteristics highlight the
as event absorption and event enthusiasm are conceptually related but distinct and are both
applicable to BMEs, it is argued that each remain in the model as separate constructs.
128 | P a g e
Research Method Chapter
129 | P a g e
Research Method Chapter
130 | P a g e
Research Method Chapter
bias. This method considers biases respondents have towards answering questions with
relation to various factors, including social desirability bias, scale formats, and item
context effects (e.g. scale length or context-inducted mood) (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Lee,
and Podsakoff 2003). All final items in the study were tested using the Harman’s single-
factor technique, to check that variance cannot be account for by a single general factor
(Podsakoff et al. 2003). Results indicated extremely poor fit for when all survey items were
considered part of one general factor, confirming that this survey does not have problems
131 | P a g e
Research Method Chapter
This chapter described the process undertaken to collect data for this thesis. A deductive,
quantitative research design was employed in this thesis to investigate causal relationships
through SEM. The unit of analysis was the individual; specifically, the event attendee.
A pre-test in the University sector revealed that the initial survey was too long and
assessed the selected measurement items. A number of event experience items were
removed, and customer engagement and behavioural intention of loyalty items were
The main study was conducted in the South Australian wine industry and included six
approached during each event and invited to participate in the study, providing their email
address for the online survey to be sent to them after the event.
Preliminary analysis was also described in this chapter. First, a number of data cleaning
and quality control tests were conducted, resulting in three responses being removed from
the sample collected for the main data analysis. One-factor congeneric measurement
models were run to assess the model fit of each construct. Reliability and validity was
The next chapter describes the main data analysis conducted in this thesis, and investigates
132 | P a g e
Results Chapter
CHAPTER 4: RESULTS
This chapter outlines each step of data analysis to address the research questions described
in Chapter 2. Data was analysed with SPSS21 and AMOS21 applying structural equation
modelling (SEM). The first section investigates the proposition that social engagement is a
Section two introduces the identified path model reflecting the conceptual model and
hypothesised relationships for this thesis. The section begins with a discussion of
composite variables, their applicability to path model analysis and the process of
composite variable calculation. The steps for SEM analysis are then discussed which
and customer brand engagement, the relationship between the two customer engagement
constructs, and the outcome of behavioural intention of loyalty are then discussed with
experiential needs. The model was tested comparing ‘low’ and ‘high’ groups of 1) need for
cognition, 2) need for affect and 3) novelty-seeking needs. An exploratory approach was
customer engagement literature. While results are described and briefly discussed in this
chapter, a detailed discussion of findings and their theoretical and managerial implications
is provided in Chapter 5.
133 | P a g e
Results Chapter
was tested for statistical fit from both a brand and event perspective. However, social
2009), social elements of engagement (Gambetti et al. 2012; Sawhney et al. 2005), or a
strong focus throughout their discussion (Abdul-Ghani et al. 2011; Algesheimer et al.
2005); however, there is no consistency in the literature on the presence or role of social
engagement. Therefore, this thesis aims to provide some clarity to this debate and
from Calder et al. (2009), however the social event engagement and social brand
engagement models were reduced to three items for the purpose of parsimony.
*the same items were replicated for social brand engagement; substitute the word ‘event’ for ‘brand’
134 | P a g e
Results Chapter
The three included items reflect the interactions the customer has with other actors with
respect to the event or brand; in particular the information and value received from other
attendees. In comparison, the excluded items had a common focus on the individual’s
reported contribution to social interactions. The included items share a common trait of
emphasising the customer’s level of interest and value from social reactions, whereas the
excluded items focus on the nature of the interaction. While the excluded items referred to
The process of reaching the final model involved running the original model with all seven
items and identifying those reporting low factor loading values (Kline 2011). The
following Figures 4-1 and 4-2 report the final one-factor congeneric measurement models
The social event engagement congeneric model achieved acceptable fit with the data,
although χ²/df > 3 extends beyond the threshold value required and RMSEA is above the
<0.08 (Hair et al. 2012). This model was deemed acceptable as factor loadings for each
indicator were above 0.70 which indicates convergent validity (Kline 2011). As this model
135 | P a g e
Results Chapter
The assertions regarding these final items were further supported as the social brand
engagement model implemented the same three items to achieve model fit (Figure 4-2 and
Table 4-3). The items capture the impact of social interactions regarding the brand in
The social brand engagement congeneric model achieved fit with the data, although χ²/df
<1 suggests model overfit (Hair et al. 2012). Factor loadings for each measured variable
were above 0.70 confirming convergent validity (Kline 2011). This model is a just-
identified model, therefore an equality constraint was imposed on the error terms of
In summary, the one-factor congeneric measurement models indicated that social event
engagement and social brand engagement achieved convergent validity. The next section
describes the discriminant validity and reliability testing of customer event engagement
and customer brand engagement with the inclusion of their respective social engagement
dimensions.
136 | P a g e
Results Chapter
social brand engagement, the social event engagement construct was included in a
confirmatory factor analysis model to investigate the discriminant validity of the construct.
137 | P a g e
Results Chapter
The event engagement measurement model (Figure 4-3 and Table 4-4) achieved
satisfactory fit with the data. A number of fit indices were below the desired threshold
increases the original GOF thresholds become unrealistic (Hair et al. 2012). All factor
loadings met the ideal threshold value of 0.70 (Table 4-3) supporting convergent validity
of the model (Kline 2011) with the exception of ID_EVENT2 = 0.66 which still achieved
The social event engagement construct demonstrated sound reliability and discriminant
validity (Table 4-5). Cronbach’s alpha and construct reliability threshold values were
achieved for all event engagement dimensions, indicating internal consistency (CA > 0.80
and CR > 0.7). Convergent validity was confirmed (AVE > 0.5) and discriminant validity
was achieved as the average variance extracted (AVE) exceeded the highest squared
correlation (HSC), demonstrating that social event engagement is a robust construct, and
distinct from the other customer event engagement dimensions (Hair et al. 2012). The
event absorption construct AVE value did not exceed HSC; however, as discussed in
Chapter 3 (section 3.7.3.2), event absorption and event enthusiasm have similarities with
138 | P a g e
Results Chapter
In summary, the social event engagement construct achieved satisfactory model fit, both as
within the broader measurement model of event engagement. Construct validity and
reliability were achieved with the exception of event absorption; however, this construct
remained in the model due to the conceptual recognition that it is closely related and yet
139 | P a g e
Results Chapter
social brand engagement was a discriminant and reliable construct (Hair et al. 2012).
140 | P a g e
Results Chapter
The brand engagement measurement model (Figure 4-4) achieved reasonable fit with the
data. While the significance value was not achieved (p <0.05), it is recognised that the
significance value becomes less indicative of model fit when model complexity increases,
particularly for a smaller sample size (Hair et al. 2012). The remaining fit indices suggest
model fit and all factor loadings were greater than 0.70, indicating convergent validity
(Kline 2011).
The results of this model provide initial support for social brand engagement as an
independent dimension of brand engagement. Additional testing from this model examined
the discriminant validity and reliability of the constructs, and is outlined in Table 4-7.
The results from the brand engagement measurement model (Table 4-7) indicate that social
dimension of the brand engagement construct; cronbach’s alpha is above 0.70 (De Vaus
2002) indicating reliability of social brand engagement, and a construct reliability (CR)
value above 0.7 indicating internal consistency (Hair et al. 2012). Convergent validity is
confirmed with the average variance extracted (AVE) exceeding 0.5 and discriminant
validity was achieved as the AVE score exceeded the square of the correlations between
141 | P a g e
Results Chapter
In summary, the social brand engagement construct achieved good model fit, both as a
within the broader measurement model of brand engagement. Construct validity and
reliability were achieved. Therefore, the social brand engagement construct is a worthwhile
addition to the brand engagement construct and is discriminant from other brand
engagement dimensions. The final test for discriminant validity and reliability was
conducted with social event engagement, social brand engagement and relational
142 | P a g e
Results Chapter
distinct, however share a common focus on social elements. Therefore, it was important to
demonstrate the empirical uniqueness of the relational experience, social event engagement
A relational experience is one that emphasises the social context and relationships with
Social event engagement is the customer’s heightened level of interest regarding the event
based on personal exchanges with other customers, and occurs when the customer has a
personal exchange with other customers about or with reference to the event.
Social brand engagement is the customer’s heightened level of interest regarding the brand
based on personal exchanges with other customers, and occurs when the customer has a
personal exchange with other customers about or with reference to the brand.
Conceptually these constructs differ as relational experience reflects the ‘nature’ of the
experience in which social interactions are abundant; it does not encompass any motivation
exchanges with others, which can either reflect on the event or the brand.
A measurement model (Figure 4-5) containing the relational experience, social event
engagement and social brand engagement constructs was assessed for discriminant
validity.
143 | P a g e
Results Chapter
The social constructs model achieved fit with the data. Significance was not achieved;
however, model fit was still concluded as significance value becomes less indicative of
model fit of complex models, particularly with a smaller sample size (Hair et al. 2012). In
addition, standardised factor loadings for each indicator were above 0.70 confirming
144 | P a g e
Results Chapter
Table 4-9 highlights that social brand engagement, social event engagement and relational
experience are empirically distinct constructs. The social brand engagement and social
event engagement constructs, although having a covariance of 0.52 (Figure 4-5) achieved
discriminant validity (AVE > HSC) (Hair et al. 2012). Furthermore, although social brand
engagement and social event engagement latent constructs indicated strong covariance
with relational experience (0.31 and 0.41 respectively) discriminant validity was also
Reliability and internal consistency was achieved for each construct (CA > 0.80 and CR >
0.7 respectively), and convergent validity (AVE > 0.5) (Hair et al. 2012). These results
indicate that social event engagement, social brand engagement and relational experience
have achieved construct validity. Support is provided for each construct as empirically and
conceptually distinct; the following structural models and path models include these
145 | P a g e
Results Chapter
and measured variables included the analysis, however measurement models identify
covariances between latent constructs and assess discriminant validity and reliability (Hair
et al. 2012). A structural model instead includes paths from each latent variable to a
higher-order latent construct, which allows the model to estimate the strength and
significance of the impact each latent variable (e.g. social engagement) has on the higher-
The purpose of running these models was solely to assess how well a six dimension model
of customer engagement (event and brand) including social engagement fitted the data;
therefore, a confirmatory modelling strategy was employed (Hair et al. 2012). This strategy
is the most direct utilisation of SEM in which the conceptual model, founded in the
relevant literature, is assessed for model fit without investigation of competing models
order latent construct of customer event engagement was assessed. The findings of this
structural model would provide support that social event engagement is an important
engagement.
146 | P a g e
Results Chapter
147 | P a g e
Results Chapter
The event engagement structural model (Figure 4-6 and Table 4-10) revealed questionable
fit with the data. Due to the complexity of the model and the relatively small sample size, it
is unrealistic to expect fit indices to reach their original thresholds (Hair et al. 2012).
However, low standardised factor loadings were found for event interaction (0.36) and
social event engagement (0.31) which are less than commonly accepted levels of 0.7 or
0.50 to confirm convergent validity (Hair et al. 2012; Kline 2011). Event identification
(0.51) was also lower than the ideal 0.70 value, however was greater than 0.5 and therefore
To achieve reasonable model fit, an error covariance was placed between event interaction
and social event engagement. While it is recognised that event interaction and social event
engagement have common traits, they are conceptually distinct constructs. Interaction
encompasses the energy or effort the customer exerts in order to actively participate in
event activities (So et al. 2012). Social event engagement is the customer’s heightened
level of interest regarding the event based on personal exchanges with other customers, and
occurs when the customer has a personal exchange with other customers with reference to
the event.
While the error covariance may suggest that the social event engagement and event
interaction constructs are distinct from the other customer event engagement dimensions,
the two constructs were maintained in further analysis for a number of reasons. First, the
element of customer engagement; the results provide partial support for this hypothesis.
Second, the social event engagement construct achieved discriminant validity, reliability,
and convergent validity as reported in sections 4.2.1 and 4.2.2. Third, support is found for
148 | P a g e
Results Chapter
the inclusion of social brand engagement (discussed in section 4.2.6); social event
engagement and event interactions should remain for the purpose of complete replication
of the customer engagement measures with regards to the brand and the event. It is
engagement were assessed for their relationship with the higher-order latent construct of
149 | P a g e
Results Chapter
150 | P a g e
Results Chapter
The brand engagement structural model (Figure 4-7 and Table 4-11) achieved acceptable
fit with the data. Standardised factor loadings for each indicator were above 0.70
confirming convergent validity (Kline 2011) with the exception of brand identification
(0.64) which achieved an acceptable (>0.50) although not ideal value (Hair et al. 2012).
The findings of the structural model support the proposition that social brand engagement
loading of 0.76 (Figure 4-7). The personal exchanges between customers have a strong
impact on the brand, as brand-related discussion can impact the overall interest the
customer has in the brand. Social brand engagement is therefore an important dimension
Convergent validity, discriminant validity and reliability of each of the customer event
interaction and social event engagement. These results support social event engagement as
distinct from the other dimensions of customer event engagement. However, the structural
model of customer event engagement only achieved satisfactory fit. A covariance was
placed on the error terms of social engagement and interaction dimensions in the event
engagement construct model. The social event engagement and event interaction constructs
remained in the model despite their potential distinction from the other customer event
151 | P a g e
Results Chapter
engagement dimensions. This structure of customer engagement has been used by Calder
et al. (2009), who identify two broad engagement constructs; personal engagement and
further in Chapter 5, directions for future research. Therefore, H1a was partially
supported.
A measurement model confirmed the discriminant validity and reliability of each of the
interaction and social brand engagement. The findings confirm that social brand
engagement holds as a unique dimensions and not a subset of an existing element of brand
engagement. The second-step involved structural model testing, in which social brand
brand engagement. This structural model achieved fit, and therefore H1b was supported.
152 | P a g e
Results Chapter
relationship between constructs, assessed through the strength of paths illustrated in the
path diagram (Hair et al. 2012). A path diagram is a visual representation of the complete
conceptual model and includes the complete set of hypothesised relationships among the
Path model analysis was used to investigate hypotheses H2, H3 and H4;
H2a-j: Cognitive, emotional, sensorial, pragmatic and relational event experiences contribute to
H3: There is a positive relationship between customer event engagement and customer brand
engagement
H4a-b:There is a positive relationship between customer event engagement (and customer brand
Each of these hypotheses are assessed using the complete path model as this allows the
nature of the relationships among the antecedents (BME experiential components), event
simultaneously and their combined effects considered (Hair et al. 2012). In this regard,
independent variables and considers the direct and indirect effects on the dependent
variables (Kline 2011). The relationships between experiential components and customer
engagement (H2a-j), in particular, benefit from path model analysis as each experiential
component is assessed for its contribution to event engagement and brand engagement, and
test the relationship between event engagement and brand engagement. Overall, this
represents two relationships between experience and brand engagement; directly and
153 | P a g e
Results Chapter
indirectly through event engagement. The latter is referred to as an indirect effect (Kline
2011).
SEM requires a large sample size to ensure statistical stability. A rule of thumb is that the
ratio of sample size to the number of model parameters should be at least 5:1, preferably
10:1 (Hair et al. 2012; Kline 2011). An even greater ratio is required in situations where
data does not conform to assumptions of multivariate normality (Hair et al. 2012), as is
common in research practice (Byrne 2001). It is recommended that sample sizes of above
200 be implemented to ensure accuracy (Hair et al. 2012). The achieved sample size of
274, although an acceptable size for simple models (e.g. one-factor congeneric
measurement models), was not deemed sufficient for the analysis of the proposed complex
models if latent and observed variables were included (Rowe 2002). Therefore, composite
variables were calculated based on the results of the one-factor congeneric measurement
model, and the path model constructed using these composite measures.
2002), and enable a more accurate evaluation of complex models despite a limited sample
size. The use of composite variables includes firstly creating the variables using factor
score weights through AMOS 21 (Rowe 2002). Second, the factor loading and error
variance value for each composite variable is computed to remove additional complexity
from the overall model, hence providing greater stability and accuracy of the path model
results. The resulting composite variables and their respective factor loadings and error
Factor score weights were derived from each one-factor congeneric measurement model
and were used to calculate the composite variables (Rowe 2002) once each construct had
154 | P a g e
Results Chapter
satisfied construct validity and reliability. The values estimated from a single one-factor
congeneric measurement model are likely to be more stable than values desired from an
overall measurement model as the model is far less complex; this is particularly important
when using a relatively small sample size. This ensures reliability and validity of the
allows for differences in the degree to which each individual measure contributes to the
overall composite scale, thus providing a more realistic representation of the data (Rowe
2002). In addition, fitting a one-factor congeneric measurement model takes into account
the measurement error associated with the measurement of the indicator variables.
The factor score weights were transferred into EXCEL 2010 and used to calculate a sum of
weights for each construct. The factor score weight for each item were divided by the sum
scale score for each item (Rowe 2002). The final composite scores were then computed in
SPSS 21.
Path models can investigate the relationships amongst the latent variables underlying these
composite scales rather than the original observed variables. An extra step was also taken
to further reduce the amount of paths to be estimated, hence decreasing the complexity of
the model and creating greater stability in the path model results; this involved computing
the factor loadings and error variances for each composite variable and including this
information in the path model (Politis 2001). This approach is beneficial as the structural
parameter estimates are more stable; instead of using a large number of raw indicator
variables to measure the latent constructs in the full model, a much smaller number of
composite indicators are computed. Each latent variable was therefore measured by a
single composite variable in which the composite scale variance, standard deviation and
reliability were used to fix the composite variable factor loading and measurement error
variance (Politis 2001). These values were calculated from the standard deviation of the
155 | P a g e
Results Chapter
composite variable and the reliability of the composite variable, which is calculated using
have been used to develop the composite variable (Mueller and Hancock 2008). Therefore,
composite reliability.
The final step, reported in Table 4-13, is calculating the factor loading (λ = sx*√ rx) and
error variance (Ɵ = sx2 [1-rx]) values for each composite variable (Politis 2001). The
resultant values are built into the path model to account for the known amount of error
156 | P a g e
Results Chapter
157 | P a g e
Results Chapter
The process of path model analysis follows the following basic steps of SEM; specify the
model, evaluate model identification, estimate the model and re-specify the model (Kline
2011). These steps are common and followed in most analyses (Kline 2011). This thesis
between constructs of interest which enables testing of hypotheses (Kline 2011). The
specified model utilised in this thesis is theory-driven and reflects the conceptual model
introduced in Chapter 2. It is important that the model is grounded in theory because SEM
is a confirmatory technique; the program cannot suggest path relationships but rather
assesses the accuracy of predicted relationships against the data (Hair et al. 2012).
model parameters; if the requirements of identification are not met, the model is ‘not
identified’ and analysis cannot be conducted or output is meaningless (Kline 2011). Two
requirements must be met in order for the path model to be identified; first, the number of
observations must equal or be greater than the number of free model parameters; second,
all latent variables must have an assigned scale (Kline 2011). The specified model created
158 | P a g e
Results Chapter
(Kline 2011). As previously discussed in Chapter 3, a variety of fit indices were utilised in
this thesis to assess how well the data fit the theoretical model; the principal goodness-of-
fit index (χ²/df), Goodness-of-fit index (GFI), Root mean square error of approximation
(RMSEA), Normed Fit Index (NFI), Tucker Lewis Index (TLI) and Comparative Fit Index
(CFI) (Hair et al. 2012). The fit indices and their respective threshold values are outlined in
Table 3-7.
The estimation technique utilised throughout this thesis is maximum likelihood estimation
as it is a flexible approach, has proven robust even when the data does not meet normality
assumptions, and therefore is the most widely used approach and the default estimation
Parameter estimates are then examined to assess each of the relationships proposed in the
model. Parameter estimates must be statistically significant and in the predicted direction;
standardised loading estimates are reported in Table 4-15 (Hair et al. 2012).
Figure 4-8 shows the identified path model, consisting of the composite variables
representing the five experiential components, event engagement, brand engagement and
159 | P a g e
Results Chapter
Results from the identified path model indicate poor fit with the data (χ²/df =4.60, p=0.00,
GFI=0.80, NFI=0.81, TLI=0.80, CFI =0.84, RMSEA =0.12), with no fit indices reaching
their respective thresholds as outlined in Table 3-7. It is very common for specified models
to not achieve fit (Kline 2011); a poor fitting model indicates that some hypotheses
reflected by the paths may not have empirical support, or a relationship exists between
constructs or error variables that have not yet been accounted for in the model. Parameter
estimates are observed to identify insignificant and problematic paths contributing to poor
model fit.
160 | P a g e
Results Chapter
Regression weights output (Table 4-15) shows a number of insignificant paths; cognitive
and emotional experiences did not have significant relationships with event engagement;
emotional, sensorial and relational experiences did not have significant relationships with
brand engagement; finally, the relationship between event engagement and behavioural
intention of loyalty was also insignificant. This led to model re-specification, which is
parsimonious model (Hair et al. 2012; Kline 2011). However, manipulations to the model
should not occur without justification; re-specification should adhere to the same principles
followed in model specification (Kline 2011). The re-specified model must also achieve
161 | P a g e
Results Chapter
First, insignificant paths were eliminated (Hair et al. 2012). A number of insignificant
paths between emotional, sensorial and relational experience leading to brand engagement
customers initially with the event, which then translates into brand engagement through the
event engagement was also removed; therefore, the emotional experience construct was
events literature (Leischnig et al. 2011; Packer and Ballantyne 2004; Whelan and Wohlfeil
2006). Conceptual justification for the removal of this construct is in detailed the following
section 4.4.5.
In addition, the path between cognitive experience and event engagement was removed;
the remaining significant path indicated a direct relationship between cognitive experience
and brand engagement. Events with a strong cognitive experience are likely to be highly
brand-centric, with discussion and information based on the brand itself. Further
Finally, the insignificant path between event engagement and behavioural intention of
loyalty was removed. This finding supports the notion of engagement transfer, as it
demonstrates how brand outcomes do not occur directly from event engagement; brand
engagement must be facilitated through its relationship with event engagement in order for
Following the elimination of insignificant paths, modification indices (MI) were identified
in AMOS 21 (Hair et al. 2012). Modification indices estimate the level of model
improvement achieved if an additional path was entered into the model, with values of 4.0
162 | P a g e
Results Chapter
parameter changes are also consulted as it indicates the estimated positive or negative
A modification made to the model was to place covariances on the error terms for each
event and brand engagement counterpart. The nature of the measurement items for event
and brand engagement was described in Chapter 3; the same items were replicated for both
engagement objects with rewording to reflect either ‘event’ or ‘brand’. This technique has
been implemented in previous studies (Drengner et al. 2008; Gwinner and Eaton 1999),
with similar responses giving support of image transfer. However, repeated measures can
experience issues of auto-correlation error and therefore error covariances were placed
between each event and brand engagement dimension to account for this error (Kline
2011); i.e. between event attention and brand attention; event and brand identification;
event and brand enthusiasm; event and brand absorption; event and brand interaction;
The re-specified model, accounting for each of the identified modifications, is now
discussed.
163 | P a g e
Results Chapter
* Covariances between e6 and e12 = .24; e7 and e13 = .61; e8 and e14 = .17; e9 and e15 = .14; e10 and
e16 = .24; e11 and e17 = .27 not shown on diagram.
Reasonable model fit is established for the re-specified path model (χ²/df =2.58, p=0.00,
GFI=0.89, NFI=0.90, TLI=0.91, CFI =0.93, RMSEA =0.08), based on the threshold values
of fit indices. Although the p-value was not significant and a number of fit indices only
came close to their threshold values, the values obtained were deemed sufficient due to the
complexity of the model which can weaken the overall fit and therefore cause the original
parameter estimates (Table 4-17) it is found that all included paths achieved significance.
164 | P a g e
Results Chapter
In brief, the conceptual model was re-specified based on statistical and theoretical
considerations with the aim of achieving a more parsimonious model. Insignificant paths
were removed and covariances were placed between a number of error terms.
Rationalisation of each of these modifications was provided and led to a re-specified model
The following section details the implications of the path model findings for hypotheses 2,
165 | P a g e
Results Chapter
engagement. It was proposed that due to the nature of BMEs with regards to their high
level of interaction, and the unique and customer-driven experience created, that BMEs
could facilitate customer engagement (Crowther and Donlan 2011). Support of these
hypotheses would advocate the use of BMEs as a strategic driver of customer engagement.
The re-specified path model (Figure 4-9) indicated significant relationships between
sensorial, pragmatic and relational BME experiences and event engagement, while
direct negative relationship with customer brand engagement, but this will be argued to be
due to a suppressor effect. The hypotheses and associated outcome obtained from data
analysis are outlined in Table 4-18. Each hypothesis is then briefly addressed in the
following paragraphs. Emphasis is given to results which do not support the hypotheses
developed in Chapter 2, while supported hypotheses have already been described and will
166 | P a g e
Results Chapter
The results revealed an insignificant relationship between cognitive experience and event
an area of interest (Gentile et al. 2007). Education events are described as eliciting
customer interaction, however the customer’s focus is not necessarily on the event but
rather the content shared during the event (Pine and Gilmore 1998).The experience sparks
attention and interest towards the brand specifically, and not with the event activity. The
event is brand-centric, with discussions and information focused specifically on the brand;
therefore, the focal object of engagement is the brand, not the event. Consequently, H2a
A significant direct relationship was found between cognitive experience and brand
engagement. This was the only significant direct relationship between a BME experience
and brand engagement; the other BME experiences impacted on event engagement, and
centric nature of a cognitive experience provides the rationale for a strong direct impact on
brand engagement (Pine and Gilmore 1998). Cognitive experiences involve thinking and
mental processes regarding the brand specifically, which impacts the customer’s
perception of the brand (Yuan and Wu 2008). Therefore the cognitive experience affects
engagement toward the brand, as opposed to being transferred from the event through to
167 | P a g e
Results Chapter
The results showed that the relationship between emotional experience and event
event is strongly emphasised in marketing events literature (Leischnig et al. 2011; Packer
and Ballantyne 2004; Whelan and Wohlfeil 2006). However, this finding is explained as
emotional experiences may create pleasant experiences or feelings of excitement but not
necessarily evoke the level of interaction or psychological state with regards to the event
required to achieve engagement (Pine and Gilmore 1998); customers can enjoy an
emotional BME experience while remaining passive in that experience. Therefore, H2c
The relationship between emotional experience and brand engagement was insignificant,
H2d was not supported; this finding led to the removal of the emotional experience
construct from the re-specified model as neither of the hypotheses regarding emotional
include the source of entertainment designed to generate customer enjoyment (Tynan and
McKechnie 2009). However, this experience may not provide sufficient emotional value
(Yuan and Wu 2008) that would encourage customers to contribute to the exchange with
their engagement. This is an important finding of this thesis, and is discussed with
The parameter estimate highlighting the relationship between sensorial experience and
event engagement was significant, leading to the support of H2e. The brand-provided
168 | P a g e
Results Chapter
resources in a sensorial experience, including sources of sight, sound, scent, taste, and
touch (Yuan and Wu 2008) provide sensory meaning and stimulation (Gentile et al. 2007;
The relationship between sensorial experience and brand engagement was insignificant,
emphasising that sensorial experiences only have an indirect impact on brand engagement
through the event engagement construct. H2f was not supported. The focal element of a
sensorial experience is sensory stimulation (Gentile et al. 2007); therefore the experience
inherently requires active participation from the customer in the BME activity. Customer
engagement occurs with the event as the focus of the participation is on the event activity,
The results showed that pragmatic experience had a significant relationship with event
activities designed to stimulate active customer participation (Mollen and Wilson 2010),
Although a significant relationship was indicated between pragmatic experience and brand
engagement, the parameter estimate reported a strong negative relationship. This finding
contradicts the hypothesised relationship established from literature, and is in conflict with
the other paths identified in the model, for example pragmatic experience has a negative
169 | P a g e
Results Chapter
It is argued that this construct has experienced a suppression effect (Kline 2011).
Suppressor variables are relatively common in SEM, however are often met with problems
value is significant (>0.05), a suppressor variable does not have a relationship with the
dependent variable, but instead has correlations with one or more independent variables.
The commonalities between the suppressor and other independent variables are irrelevant
to the identified dependent variable (Maassen and Bakker 2001). Therefore, the suppressor
variable (pragmatic experience) enhances the predictive power of the related independent
and other independent variables are positively correlated with regards to an aspect
irrelevant to the dependent variable (brand engagement), the relationship in the path model
between the suppressor (pragmatic experience) and the dependent variable (brand
Conceptually, this phenomenon illustrates that pragmatic experience has relationships with
the other components of experience; cognitive, sensorial and relational. Together these
constructs have strong predictive power on ‘something’ other than brand engagement; this
could reflect their combined impact on event engagement, or it could refer to something
not captured in the path model. As identified in the conceptual discussion of pragmatic
experience (Section 2.4.2.4, Chapter 2), pragmatic experiences can vary greatly and
include cognitive or emotional elements, depending on the activity (Pine and Gilmore
1998). Therefore, the customer may not perceive the experience as purely ‘pragmatic’, but
rather as pragmatic and emotional (e.g. a grape stomp) or pragmatic and cognitive (e.g.
creating your own wine blend). The combined effects of these perceived experiences
170 | P a g e
Results Chapter
contribute to the path model but do not reflect a relationship between pragmatic experience
and brand engagement, hence the suppression effect resulting in a negative path estimate.
This path was maintained in the model as it achieved significance and therefore has
(Maassen and Bakker 2001). Instead, it is recognised that the pragmatic experience
construct contributes to the other independent variables (BME experiences) and together
The relationship between relational experience and event engagement was significant, and
therefore H2i was supported. The interactions during a relational event induce a heightened
sense of connectedness with other customers in the context of the event (Kozinets 2014),
The results did not support the relationship between relational experience and brand
through event engagement which reported a significant relationship. Therefore, H2j was
not supported.
be experienced together with other people (Gentile et al. 2007). Therefore, because the
other attendees and relational activity in which they interact are focal to the experience,
engagement.
171 | P a g e
Results Chapter
Overall, the findings are in support of BME experiences facilitating customer event
engagement. The sensorial, pragmatic and relational experiences during a BME facilitate a
heightened psychological state in the customer, resulting in engagement with the event;
however, these experiences do not have a significant relationship with customer brand
engagement. Cognitive experience facilitates customer brand engagement, but does not
have a significant relationship with customer event engagement. This finding reflects the
highly brand-centric nature of cognitive experiences. The next section discusses hypothesis
3; the relationship between customer event engagement and customer brand engagement.
focal engagement objects; specifically does customer event engagement further facilitate
customer brand engagement. The re-specified path model (Figure 4-9) indicated a
significant relationship between the event engagement and brand engagement constructs,
supporting hypothesis 3.
A strong and significant relationship was evident between customer event engagement and
customer brand engagement, and H3 was supported. The customer interacts and creates
value during an event experience and therefore elicits customer event engagement. Then,
due to the strong connection between the event and the brand, this state of engagement also
172 | P a g e
Results Chapter
Additionally, the results support a notion of engagement transfer. It was found that BME
largely not with customer brand engagement (with the exception of cognitive experience).
It could therefore be argued that customer engagement does not generally occur directly
with the brand, but rather customer event engagement is facilitated as a result of the BME
of loyalty. The re-specified path model (Figure 4-9) indicated a significant relationship
between brand engagement and brand behavioural intention of loyalty. The relationship
The direct relationship between event engagement and behavioural intention of loyalty was
not significant, and therefore H4a was not supported. Although BME experiences
generally had a relationship with customer event engagement, not customer brand
engagement, the customer event engagement construct did not contribute to behavioural
173 | P a g e
Results Chapter
intention of loyalty. Marketing event research that take an associative network theory
perspective advocate that brand-related outcomes are a direct result of brand attitudes, not
event attitudes (Martensen et al. 2007). These brand attitudes are the drivers of brand-
The re-specified path model showed a strong and significant relationship between brand
psychological state that occurs between customer and the brand impacts the customers
future purchase intentions and word of mouth, two key dimensions of BIL (Sheth et al.
1991; So et al. 2012).This supports the notion that customer brand engagement must be
facilitated in order for brand-outcomes to occur, as customer brand engagement is the only
These findings provide support for a notion of engagement transfer. BME experiences
generally have a relationship with event engagement, not brand engagement. However,
event engagement does not directly contribute to behavioural intention of loyalty, which
indicates that an additional construct (brand engagement) must provide a mediation effect
between event engagement (an outcome of BME experiences) and behavioural intention of
loyalty toward the brand. This relationship is consistent with the process of spreading
activation within associative network theory (Smith 2004). Customer event engagement is
first facilitated, which is then projected onto customer brand engagement. The results
justify the inclusion of both customer event engagement and customer brand engagement
constructs; BME experiences generally result in customer event engagement (Vivek et al.
2012), while only customer brand engagement results in behavioural intention of loyalty
(Zarantonello and Schmitt 2010). A significant relationship exists between event and brand
174 | P a g e
Results Chapter
engagement (Smith 2004). Therefore, strong support is found for the transfer of the
engagement effect from the focal object of the event to the brand as the focal object.
Following model re-specification, multi-group path analysis was conducted to test whether
model parameters vary between high and low experiential needs samples. The results are
175 | P a g e
Results Chapter
respondents who are likely to exhibit different experiential needs. Chapter 2 identified the
potential for an individual’s experiential needs to moderate the extent to which particular
Steenkamp and Baumgartner 1992 ; Wilson 1997). This research question of moderation is
This thesis utilised multi-group analysis to consider moderation effects. This particular
analysis technique allowed the calculation of moderation in the complete path model and
the investigation of its effects on individual paths, providing a holistic view of the
moderation impact (Kline 2011). Multi-group analysis was deemed valuable to identify
whether the final model replicated well for each sub-sample, or whether different impacts
were found. Using the group analysis feature in AMOS 21, parameters were constrained
and the model-re-estimated. Nested model comparisons tests (Chi-Square difference test)
assessed whether values of the model parameters varied across groups (Kline 2011;
Vandenberg and Lance 2000). Nested models involved the estimation and comparison of
two different models. First, a baseline model was calculated by simultaneously estimating
the final generic path model across both groups (Byrne 2001). Structural regression
weights were then constrained and set equal across the groups, followed by a re-estimation
of the model. To show the existence of moderators, the analysis must show that the
equality constraint is not reasonable, and that the two parameters significantly differ from
each other (Byrne 2001). Comparison of models was conducted using chi-square change
and significance values (Byrne 2001), with a p-value < .05 indicating that the constrained
model has significantly worse fit, and therefore the unconstrained model can be assumed as
correct.
176 | P a g e
Results Chapter
High and low groups were created by calculating the mean value of each construct,
splitting the sample into high and low groups, and removing the mean value to two decimal
The high and low groups for each experiential need were then categorised within the path
model, which allowed the output to reflect the entire sample, the ‘low’ needs group and the
‘high’ needs group. The results for each experiential need are shown on a replicated path
model; one indicating the path estimates and relationships present for the high needs group
and the other reflecting the results from the low needs group.
Due to the complexity of the model, and the limited sample size per group, it was deemed
appropriate to further create composite measures for both brand engagement and event
engagement as a means of data reduction (Rowe 2002). This would allow more accurate
The results of the chi-square difference test (∆χ²) were then presented, measuring
invariance of the unconstrained and constrained models (Vandenberg and Lance 2000).
This test observed the change in goodness-of-fit when cross-group constraints were
imposed upon the model (Cheung and Rensvold 2002). In addition, the critical ratios for
differences between parameters was reported as this clearly indicates the specific
relationships of significant difference between high needs and low needs groups.
177 | P a g e
Results Chapter
path model is calculated using only the low need for cognition group (Figure 4-10) and the
178 | P a g e
Results Chapter
The chi-square difference test (∆χ²) (Vandenberg and Lance 2000) indicated that the
unconstrained and constrained models were significantly different (p=0.01) and the
equality constraint is not reasonable; therefore, high and low need for cognition groups
179 | P a g e
Results Chapter
An examination of the individual hypothesised relationships (Table 4-23) showed that the
relationship between sensorial experience and event engagement was significantly stronger
for individuals with low need for cognition (0.55) than high need for cognition (0.20). In
addition, the relationship between relational experience and event engagement was
significantly stronger for individuals with high need for cognition (0.42) than low need for
cognition (0.08). The remaining five relationships did not achieve a significant critical ratio
value (<1.96), indicating that high and low need for cognition groups do not differ in their
engagement resulting from pragmatic and cognitive experiences. Conceptual support for
need for affect. The path models were then tested for differences in standardised estimates
between the low need for affect group (Figure 4-12) and the high need for affect group
(Figure 4-13).
180 | P a g e
Results Chapter
181 | P a g e
Results Chapter
The chi-square difference test (∆χ²) (Vandenberg and Lance 2000) indicated that the
unconstrained and constrained models were not significantly different (p=0.67) and the
equality constraint is reasonable; therefore, high and low need for affect groups do not
significant path differences for high need for affect versus low need for affect groups, as all
critical ratio values were below 1.96. Therefore, there is no difference between individuals
with high and low need for affect with regards to the influence of BME experiences on
hypotheses section.
182 | P a g e
Results Chapter
following path models outline the differences in standardised estimates between the low
novelty-seeking needs group (Figure 4-14) and the high novelty-seeking needs group
(Figure 4-15).
183 | P a g e
Results Chapter
The chi-square difference test (∆χ²) (Vandenberg and Lance 2000) revealed that the
unconstrained and constrained models were not significantly different (p=0.16) and the
equality constraint is reasonable; therefore, high and low novelty-seeking needs groups do
184 | P a g e
Results Chapter
This finding of invariance was further confirmed from the individual hypothesised
relationships outlined in Table 4-27; no significant path differences were present for high
In summary, there was little evidence to suggest that the individual’s experiential needs
moderated the relationship between BME experiential components and customer event
engagement. Significant difference was found for need for cognition; however, the
moderation only impacted two relationships. The next section provides a discussion of
hypotheses.
185 | P a g e
Results Chapter
needs in the relationship between BME experiences and customer event engagement. The
current literature does not offer insight into the effect of individual needs in the
analysis was employed to test for moderating effects between high and low experiential
needs groups based on need for cognition, need for affect and novelty-seeking needs. The
overall moderation of the model (chi-square difference test) and the identification of
H5a: An individual’s need for cognition from an experience will moderate the
Partial supported was found for a moderating effect of the individual’s need for cognition
on the relationships between BME experiences and customer event engagement. While the
chi-square difference test indicated model variance, only two paths were significantly
Sensorial experience had a stronger impact on event engagement for individuals with low
need for cognition, indicating that individuals with a desire to be informed did not engage
strongly with events providing sensory stimulation (Wilson 1997). Sensorial experience
186 | P a g e
Results Chapter
did not fulfil the need for information and knowledge sought from the individual, and
Relational experience had a stronger impact on event engagement for individuals with high
need for cognition, indicating that individuals found relevance and fulfilment of cognitive
needs from experiences with a focus on social interaction (Calder et al. 2009). Relational
individuals (Charters and Ali-Knight 2000), and these interactions could provide insight or
H5b: An individual’s need for affect from an experience will moderate the
Results from the multi-group analysis did not reveal a significant moderating effect of the
individual’s need for affect nor novelty-seeking needs in the relationships between BME
experiences and customer event engagement. Therefore, H5b and H5c were not supported.
While the results may accurately reflect that no moderation effect exists for need for affect
or novelty-seeking needs, these findings could also indicate a limitation of the study. The
influence of the individual’s experiential needs could occur during their decision making
process of whether to attend the event. Therefore, individuals attending BMEs are more
likely to already find interest in the activity. Further discussion of this finding is reported in
Chapter 5.
The effects of experiential needs could have occurred during the individual’s decision
making process of whether to attend the event, therefore limiting the attendees (and survey
attendance of that particular event. According to optimum stimulation level (OSL) theory,
event would have sought that particular experience as they believed it would fulfil their
experiential needs and achieve their desired level of stimulation. This explanation provides
support for the impact of experiential needs, albeit not captured within the parameters of
this thesis. This limitation also provides an avenue for future research, and is discussed in
Chapter 5.
188 | P a g e
Results Chapter
The results of the quantitative research for this thesis were detailed in this chapter, and
were outlined in three sections. First, reliability and validity testing was run to investigate
concluded that the social brand engagement was a unique and independent dimension
within the customer brand engagement model, and was therefore included for the
remaining analysis. Social event engagement was also implemented throughout the
analysis, despite some weaknesses observed in the customer event engagement structural
model.
In section two, path model analysis was conducted which captured the hypothesised
customer engagement with the event and the brand (Hypotheses 2a-j), the existence of
engagement transfer reflected in the relationship between customer event engagement and
customer brand engagement (Hypothesis 3), and the behavioural intention of loyalty
toward the brand resulting from customer engagement with the brand (Hypotheses 4a and
The justification for the calculation of composite variables was made, and the process of
path model analysis was outlined. With the aim of achieving a higher level of parsimony,
the specified model was re-specified based on empirical and theoretical considerations.
The re-specified model achieved sound model fit, and goodness of fit indices and
individual paths were presented. The findings indicated support for BME experiences
leading to customer event engagement, with the exception of cognitive experience which
had a direct relationship with brand engagement. There was support for the existence of the
engagement and brand engagement, BME experiences mainly led to event engagement and
not brand engagement, while brand engagement was the only construct to directly impact
189 | P a g e
Results Chapter
the relationship between event experience and customer brand engagement, it is argued
that the focus of the engagement transfers from the event to the brand.
Finally, a multi-group analysis was conducted to compare high and low experiential needs
groups based on need for cognition, need for affect and novelty-seeking needs. The results
indicated that generally a moderation effect was not present. Need for cognition was found
to have a partial moderation effect, with only two relationships impacted by moderation.
The following Chapter 5 is the discussion and conclusion of this thesis. The findings and
their implications for theory and practice are discussed, as well as managerial implications,
190 | P a g e
Discussion and Conclusion Chapter
The primary objective of this thesis was to explore the role of branded marketing event
(BME) experiences in the facilitation of customer engagement. It was proposed that the
would facilitate customer event engagement and customer brand engagement. Experiential
needs (need for cognition, need for affect and novelty-seeking needs) were posited to
moderate the extent to which BME experiences facilitate customer event engagement. It
was also proposed that the BME experience would directly and indirectly impact customer
loyalty (BIL) was hypothesised as being the result of customer engagement. A conceptual
model was developed which drew from the literature on customer engagement, marketing
events and customer experience. This conceptual model was tested empirically and support
was found for the majority of the hypotheses, however some distinct and interesting
divergent results were also found. The analysis for five key research questions and
This chapter identifies and summarises the main findings and conclusions of this thesis.
The theoretical contributions to academic knowledge arising from this thesis are
highlighted. The practical applications of these results are then outlined in a discussion of
the managerial implications. Finally, the chapter concludes with the limitations of the
191 | P a g e
Discussion and Conclusion Chapter
event engagement (H1a), and support for a social dimension within customer brand
Vivek et al. (2012) and Calder et al. (2009) is consistent with the results of this thesis.
Social brand engagement fits within the customer brand engagement measurement model,
holds as a distinct construct and not a subset of another engagement dimension, and
significantly contributes to the higher order construct of total customer brand engagement.
Social brand engagement has gained traction in recent customer engagement research, as
(Kozinets 2014).
event engagement. The structural model for customer event engagement reveals a
covariance between social event engagement and event interaction constructs. Social and
interactions with others (Calder et al. 2009; Kozinets 2014). Therefore, social event
engagement is an important inclusion of customer event engagement due to the high level
results from this thesis are consistent with Calder et al. (2009), and is an avenue for future
research.
192 | P a g e
Discussion and Conclusion Chapter
experiences to contribute to either the event (Drengner et al. 2008; Pine and Gilmore 1998)
or the brand (Brakus et al. 2009; Whelan and Wohlfeil 2006); therefore, hypotheses were
developed to capture the impact that each experiential component had on both customer
event engagement and customer brand engagement. The findings indicate that sensorial,
engagement (H2e, H2g and H2i) but not directly to customer brand engagement (H2f, H2h
and H2j). In addition, the findings reveal that cognitive experiences do not have a
significant impact on customer event engagement (H2a), but rather have a strong direct
processing and experiences providing mental stimulation for the participant (Gentile et al.
2007). BMEs are a brand-initiated activity, and therefore it is expected that a cognitive
experience would relate directly to the brand (Pine and Gilmore 1998). A common
experience, attendees are provided information about the wine brand including the
different wine varietals on offer and appropriate wine and food pairing. Therefore, it is
plausible that a cognitive BME experience would not necessarily facilitate customer event
engagement; i.e. encouraging feelings of wanting to learn more about the event,
contributing to discussions and paying attention to information regarding the event, but
instead would facilitate customer brand engagement (Pine and Gilmore 1998). Attendees
of a cognitive BME experience gain a higher propensity to seek brand information, learn
more about the brand, and facilitate discussions regarding the brand, hence exhibiting
customer brand engagement (Hollebeek 2011b; Salanova et al. 2005; So et al. 2012).
193 | P a g e
Discussion and Conclusion Chapter
Findings indicate that the emotional component of experience does not facilitate
engagement with the event or the brand. This is an unexpected and important finding as the
(Leischnig et al. 2011; Packer and Ballantyne 2004; Whelan and Wohlfeil 2006). While
or value from this experience is not enough to facilitate customer engagement with the
event or brand (Pine and Gilmore 1998). From a social exchange theory perspective, the
resources contributed by the brand are not perceived as enough value to warrant the
Results of this thesis show that the sensorial, pragmatic and relational experiential
provides sensory meaning and stimulation for customers (Schmitt 1999), for example a
wine and food pairing event, resulting in the customer’s participation and heightened
interaction in event activities (Mollen and Wilson 2010). Focal to a sensory experience is
sensory stimulation (Gentile et al. 2007), which inherently requires customer interaction
with the activity; for example tasting the wine and food and identifying wine fragrances.
Wine has a strong connection with aesthetic consumption (Charters and Pettigrew 2005),
and therefore wine events with a sensorial focus were predicted heighten the customer’s
excitement and event enthusiasm through aesthetics (Schmitt 1999; So et al. 2012).
(Gentile et al. 2007) is also expected to stimulate customer event engagement through the
active customer participation inherent in the experience (Mollen and Wilson 2010). A
wine-blending event requires the customer to participate in the wine production process;
their engagement is apparent from their considerable interaction effort elicited toward the
activity (Hollebeek 2011b), and their heightened level of attention given to the activity
194 | P a g e
Discussion and Conclusion Chapter
A relational experience, for example wine dinner events or meeting the winemaker, is
designed to be experienced with other people (Gentile et al. 2007). Relational experiences
therefore appeal to customers through social event engagement and event enthusiasm
(Kozinets 2014; Vivek et al. 2012), and facilitate customer event engagement.
and customer brand engagement through customer event engagement (H3). The findings
are consistent with associative network theory in that event related information is projected
onto the brand (Smith 2004). The findings demonstrate that the engagement experienced
with reference to the event is also replicated onto the brand, suggesting that event
The results of this thesis suggest that overall customer event engagement has a strong
through customer event engagement, while cognitive experience has a direct relationship
with customer brand engagement (H2b). The researcher considers this a process of
‘engagement transfer’, where the psychological state facilitated towards the event has a
Finally, the notion of engagement transfer is further relevant, because although customer
brand engagement has a significant relationship with BIL (H4b), there is not a significant
direct relationship between customer event engagement and BIL (H4b). Therefore, for BIL
to occur, the BME must facilitate customer brand engagement. BME experiences have a
195 | P a g e
Discussion and Conclusion Chapter
strong mediating effect on customer brand engagement only through customer event
literature regarding whether BIL results directly from customer event engagement
(Crowther 2010; Drengner et al. 2008; Leischnig et al. 2011), or customer brand
predominantly focuses on the brand as the focal object of the engagement, leading to
brand-related outcomes (e.g. Gambetti et al. 2012; Hollebeek et al. 2014; So et al. 2012;
Wirtz, Den Ambtman, Bloemer, Horváth, Ramaseshan, Van De Klundert, Canli, and
Kandampully 2013). However, these studies are not conducted in the context of BMEs and
do not investigate the interplay between two engagement objects. An expanded view of
associative network theory provides insight into the relationships between two engagement
objects, and their brand-related outcomes (Smith 2004). Associative network theory
suggests that a direct relationship exists between the brand-related associations and BIL
outcomes (Smith 2004). This means that the associations the customer has with the event
are not the direct cause of BIL; these associations must replicate onto the brand, and it is
the brand associations originating from the event experience that have an effect on BIL
(Smith 2004). Marketing event research that takes a brand image transfer perspective also
advocates that brand-related outcomes are a direct result of brand attitudes, not event
attitudes (Martensen et al. 2007). Through brand image transfer (Gwinner and Eaton 1999)
the event attitudes are transferred onto the brand. These brand attitudes are the drivers of
196 | P a g e
Discussion and Conclusion Chapter
engagement. Individuals with high need for cognition find relational experiences more
because the opportunity to discuss and share information with likeminded others can fulfil
the individual’s need for cognition (Calder et al. 2009; Steenkamp and Baumgartner 1992).
knowledge with others. Relational experiences provide these individuals with a platform
for showcasing their knowledge to others, sharing opinions and ideas about wine, and
learning more about wine from other knowledgeable individuals, hence encouraging
Individuals with high need for cognition are less likely to facilitate event engagement
which does not fulfil the individual’s desire to be informed or gain information and
knowledge on an area of interest (Gentile et al. 2007; Wilson 1997). While an individual
with high need for cognition would still find pleasure in a wine-related sensorial
experience as it is consistent with their wine lifestyle (Charters and Ali-Knight 2000), their
level of engagement is likely to be weaker than if they had experienced an event that
satisfied their need for learning and general curiosity (Calder et al. 2009).
These moderation effects are consistent with optimum stimulation level (OSL) theory
which has been used to explain exploratory consumer behaviour (Steenkamp and
Baumgartner 1992). OSL theory states that customers actively seek out environments that
provide their desired level of stimulation; the level of stimulation and type of stimulation is
derived from the customer’s inherent needs (Steenkamp and Baumgartner 1992). The
individual’s needs influence the perceived relevance of event experience and can result in
197 | P a g e
Discussion and Conclusion Chapter
heightened engagement when the experience fulfils their needs (MacInnis and Jaworski
1989).
The impact of cognitive and pragmatic BME experiences on event engagement does not
significantly differ for individuals with high need for cognition versus those with low need
for cognition. It was suggested in Chapter 4 that limitations of the research may have
impacted these findings, and are discussed in the limitations of the research section. There
is little evidence to suggest that the individual’s need for affect (H5b) or novelty-seeking
needs (H5c) moderate any of the relationships between BME experiences and customer
event engagement.
A number of modifications have been included in the study framework, highlighting key
First, the updated framework captures the sensorial, relational and pragmatic BME
experiential components leading to customer event engagement (H2e, H2g and H2i), and
experience has been removed from the framework entirely. This indicates that experiential
components may have a different impact on customer engagement and subsequent BIL
depending on the focal object of engagement. Sensorial, relational and pragmatic BME
experiences require customer engagement with the event as the focal object; customer
event engagement will then replicate onto the brand and contribute to BIL. Conversely,
cognitive BME experiences require direct customer engagement with the brand in order to
lead to BIL outcomes. This particular finding has important managerial implications,
suggesting that a BME with a strong cognitive focus will have strong direct brand
198 | P a g e
Discussion and Conclusion Chapter
The updated study framework also captures the process of engagement transfer from
customer event engagement to customer brand engagement (H3), and the outcome of BIL
resulting from customer brand engagement (H4b). While conceptual arguments could be
established from the literature (Section 2.4.3.1, Chapter 2) for customer event engagement
and customer brand engagement to both directly impact BIL, the results of this thesis
favour the notion of engagement transfer. The relationship between customer event
engagement and BIL was fully mediated through customer brand engagement; a significant
between BME experiences, customer event engagement and customer brand engagement.
with little empirical support (Calder et al. 2009; Vivek et al. 2012). This thesis
demonstrates that the sensorial, pragmatic and relational components of BME experiences
facilitate customer event engagement, and that cognitive experiences facilitate customer
199 | P a g e
Discussion and Conclusion Chapter
experiences and customer engagement on both an event and brand level, which is
customer engagement operationalisation and its brand-related outcomes, namely BIL. This
the nature of customer engagement research is still heavily conceptual (discussed in Table
2-1, Chapter 2) (Brodie et al. 2011b). This thesis implements the measures of engagement
provided by So et al. (2012), and extends the construct with the inclusion of a social
engagement dimension. Support is found for the operationalisation of the customer brand
provides further support for the integration of the bodies of literature pertaining to
marketing events, customer experience and customer engagement, all grounded in S-D
logic. This thesis empirically examines BMEs as comprising various customer experience
components; sensorial, emotional, cognitive, pragmatic and relational (Gentile et al. 2007).
however, they are often inconsistent with regards to the dimensionality of customer
experience (Brakus et al. 2009; Chang and Chieng 2006; Gentile et al. 2007; Sahin et al.
2011; Schmitt 1999; Tynan and McKechnie 2009; Yuan and Wu 2008). In addition, often
research focused on the customer’s experience with a product (Gentile et al. 2007) or
experiential product-centric brands (Brakus et al. 2009). Never before has this
engagement, and therefore is a central contribution of this thesis. The measures from
200 | P a g e
Discussion and Conclusion Chapter
Chang and Chieng (2006) were implemented in this thesis, and extend the applicability of
Previous research in customer engagement has primarily focused on the brand as the focal
object of the engagement (e.g. Fehrer et al. 2013; Gambetti et al. 2012; Hollebeek et al.
2014; So et al. 2012; Wirtz et al. 2013). Although Vivek et al. (2012) classify various foci
activities (i.e. BMEs), customer event engagement has not been examined empirically.
This thesis was the first to examine customer engagement with two focal objects in one
study, and investigate the relationship between engagement objects (Brodie et al. 2011b).
Customer event engagement and customer brand engagement were both explored as
outcomes of a BME experience. The interplay between customer event engagement and
brand engagement provides support for associative network theory (Smith 2004) in
explaining how customer engagement is facilitated through BME experiences. This thesis
is the first to extend associative network theory in the area of customer engagement and
advocates the investigation of multiple engagement objects and their interplay in reaching
brand outcomes.
This thesis extends the knowledge of the relationship between customer engagement and
BIL; while BIL has been identified as an outcome of engagement (So et al. 2012), this
thesis is the first to explore BIL as an outcome of customer event engagement and
customer brand engagement. Confusion exists in the marketing event and customer
engagement or brand engagement (Bowden 2009; Crowther 2010; Drengner et al. 2008;
Hollebeek 2011a; Leischnig et al. 2011). This thesis provides clarity on this issue by
investigating the impact of both customer event engagement and customer brand
201 | P a g e
Discussion and Conclusion Chapter
engagement on BIL. The results suggest that customer event engagement does not have a
direct relationship with BIL, but instead contributes to customer brand engagement.
Customer brand engagement has a direct and significant relationship with BIL.
This thesis provides empirical evidence to support the inclusion of a social dimension
within customer brand engagement, and partial support for social engagement as part of the
engagement literature regarding the presence and role of a social element of engagement
(Calder et al. 2009; Gambetti et al. 2012; Sawhney et al. 2005; Vivek et al. 2012). This
finding of this thesis are consistent with social exchange theory (Abdul-Ghani et al. 2011)
and demonstrates that customers can achieve a heightened psychological state of social
connection and human contact with reference to the brand (and similarly, the event).
network of customer engagement was further identified (Brodie et al. 2011a). Further
support was found for customer brand engagement leading to BIL (So et al. 2012). This
investigates the impact of both customer event engagement and customer brand
engagement on BIL.
The conceptualisation and outcomes of customer engagement have been the central focus
of customer engagement literature to date (Brodie et al. 2011b). This thesis is the first
The findings from this thesis have broader application to related disciplines given the
engagement and employee engagement would also benefit from the greater understanding
202 | P a g e
Discussion and Conclusion Chapter
objects, and further insights provided in this thesis. In addition, the insights on event
experience would have great value in retail, service and tourism industries, where special
As the respondents of this thesis were drawn from attendees of South Australian winery-
hosted events, the results will have use for managers in similar settings. While implications
can be drawn for managers in different environmental settings, further investigation should
For managers and event organisers, a notable finding to emerge from this thesis is the
importance of structuring BMEs to facilitate customer engagement for the event and the
brand. The findings show that relational, pragmatic and sensorial experiences have a direct
relationship with event engagement, while cognitive experience has a direct relationship
with brand engagement. This means that practitioners should consider designing BMEs
with a cognitive focus to engage customers with the brand specifically. Wine education
seminars with a direct focus on the wine brand (rather than a ‘generic’ wine education
session) will have a direct impact on customer brand engagement, and result in BIL.
However, managers and event organisers are advised that if a cognitive experience is
implemented, emphasis on the brand is pivotal. Cognitive experience does not contribute to
customer event engagement, and therefore the event must contain brand-related
203 | P a g e
Discussion and Conclusion Chapter
sensorial experiences, and these BMEs should focus on the event experience as the focal
engagement object, not the brand. Meet the wine maker events (relational), wine-blending
sessions (pragmatic) or wine and food pairing (sensorial) should be designed to allow
attendees to interact, become excited and feel socially or emotionally connected with the
event experience. As customer event engagement has a strong relationship with customer
brand engagement, it is inferred that these experiential components also have an indirect
impact on BIL. Therefore, the relational, pragmatic and sensorial experiences should aim
to facilitate engagement with the event specifically, because through engagement transfer,
this event engagement will also impact brand engagement and subsequent behavioural
intention of loyalty.
All event experiences should have some reference or focus on the brand, as it is brand
engagement that leads to behavioural intention of loyalty toward the brand. The fact that
only customer brand engagement and not customer event engagement leads to BIL
reiterates the need for managers to have a branded marketing event mindset. It is through
engagement transfer from event to brand that brand-related outcomes occur; therefore, the
In addition, as experiential needs do not have a major impact on the types of experiences
leading to customer event engagement, managers are advised to plan BMEs that include a
Emotional experience was the only experiential component that did not have a significant
relationship with customer engagement. This finding is particularly relevant for managers,
as many marketing event studies emphasise the emotional elements of the experience as
having an impact on brand outcomes (Leischnig et al. 2011). While emotional experiences
create pleasant experiences or feelings of excitement, the intensity or value from this
204 | P a g e
Discussion and Conclusion Chapter
experience is not enough to facilitate customer engagement with the event or brand (Pine
and Gilmore 1998). Creating an emotional experience is a common strategy for many
event organisers, and is particularly emphasised in the wine industry, as wine lifestyle is
often associated with leisure, hedonism and aesthetic consumption (Charters and Pettigrew
2005; O'Neill and Charters 2000). It is recommended that marketing managers should not
invest on predominantly emotional experiences as they are not found to have a significant
with other experiential components (e.g. cognitive, pragmatic, sensorial, and/or relational),
as these BME components have a significant impact on customer engagement. This finding
within the wine industry. However, replication of the study is required to determine
This section addresses some of the limitations of this thesis. From these limitations,
The results of this thesis do not examine the change in BIL as an outcome of the BME
experience, but rather establish associations between the two constructs. A pre- and post-
event survey would have provided more insight into the level of BIL felt by the customer
before experiencing the BME as well as after. In addition, a longitudinal research design
engagement pre- and post-event, and captured the impact of multiple moments of
engagement over time (Brodie et al. 2011a). It has been suggested that customer
engagement is cyclical, and that reciprocal effects between antecedents and outcomes
205 | P a g e
Discussion and Conclusion Chapter
could be present (Fehrer et al. 2013; Hollebeek et al. 2014). However, this was not
In addition, it is recognised that the individual’s experiential needs could impact their
decision to attend a BME, which could explain the limited impact experiential needs had
probable that those who attended (and who participate in the survey) were limited to
attendees who already found interest in the activity. This provides an explanation for
The individual’s experiential needs would have impacted their decision to attend the event,
and therefore the respondents captured in this thesis study would more generally find value
or fulfilment of their needs with the event they have chosen to attend.
A number of method limitations are present in this thesis. First, there is a lack of
consistency between the pre-tested items and those used in the main study. Upon further
reflection and exploration of the customer engagement literature, the researcher decided
that So et al.’s (2012) expanded five dimension view of customer engagement had great
applicability to the event context, and allowed the investigation of the dimensionality of
customer engagement. The researcher also decided that for completeness of replication of
with So et al.’s (2012) interaction measures. The researcher recognised these oversights
after the pre-test, however decided that the insights gained from changing a number of the
items in the main study would outweigh the limitations of having a consistent survey in the
pre-test and main study. Second, a relatively small sample size and participation of a small
number of South Australian wineries meant that event type or brand bias could not be
examined individually. A larger scale study with a greater diversity of events and larger
response rates for each individual event is required in order to control for any biases that
206 | P a g e
Discussion and Conclusion Chapter
outcomes were considered from an overall perspective with support from customer
engagement literature that each engagement dimension should contribute to and enhance
the others, and result in a general level of customer engagement (Brodie et al. 2011a). This
were not investigated with reference to each customer engagement dimension, and
facilitated.
Furthermore, this thesis considers the impact of each experiential on customer event
event can include multiple or all experiential components, and this was not accounted for
experiential component (Gentile et al. 2007; Pine and Gilmore 1998); however, it was not
This section highlights areas for future research. The discussion focuses on opportunities
that emerge from the limitations of this thesis and future research directions identified from
Chapter 2 and 3.
In examining the role of social engagement within customer event engagement and
customer brand engagement, this thesis took the perspective that social engagement would
have equal applicability for both engagement objects. However, there is evidence in this
207 | P a g e
Discussion and Conclusion Chapter
thesis to suggest that social engagement has a different effect within customer event
engagement versus customer brand engagement. In particular, the social event engagement
and event interaction elements had a strong connection that indicated they may be distinct
from the other customer engagement dimensions. In the BME context, which is inherently
social, respondents may find less disparity between a heightened state encompassing the
as part of their engagement (social). Future research should further investigate different
et al. 2009), three dimensions of engagement (Brodie et al. 2011a) or five dimensions of
As identified in the limitations of the research, a single survey implemented shortly after a
BME has limited ability to capture drivers to attend the BME, identify pre-event customer
brand engagement or BIL, or examine the extended effects of customer brand engagement
after the event. Different research/survey methods could provide a more comprehensive
view of the impact of customer engagement. Two such examples include pre- and post-
event surveys and longitudinal research. A longitudinal approach could explore the
endurance of customer engagement over time. Previous research has recognised the
potential for customer engagement to have enduring qualities, as well as the ability over
time to exhibit varying levels of engagement intensity (Brodie et al. 2011b). However,
little research to date has explored in detail the customer engagement construct over time.
Future research featuring a longitudinal design should investigate the enduring brand-
capture varying experiential needs and test the moderating impact on customer engagement
when these individuals are exposed to experiences that do not satisfy their experiential
208 | P a g e
Discussion and Conclusion Chapter
research approach provide a different direction for future research. In situ approaches such
as a diary study would provide insight into the unique, personal and momentary
experiences of BME attendees. Interviews or focus groups could further investigate the
experiential needs of the individual that may drive attendance to a BME. A qualitative
approach provides the researcher with the opportunity to discover additional factors
impacting an individual’s BME experience that may have otherwise gone unnoticed or not
captured in a survey. For example, an attendee may feel a sense of engagement with an
additional object other than the event or the brand (perhaps with the service staff, the wine
Another avenue for future research is further exploration of the different elements of
customer engagement to identify their individual impact on BIL and similar brand-related
outcomes. The concept of engagement intensity, and the ability for individual engagement
2011b) but not investigated. The interplay between engagement dimensions has the ability
to generate various levels of engagement intensity, and single engagement dimensions may
have the ability to influence the other engagement dimensions (Brodie et al. 2011b). For
behavioural engagement (Brodie et al. 2011b). In addition, future research could integrate
209 | P a g e
Discussion and Conclusion Chapter
components are unique, and so the same event may be perceived as including different
unfold.
Finally, future research needs to extend into different contexts in which customer
engagement may occur. This thesis focused on the wine industry; an offline and hedonic
context. Similar studies should investigate utilitarian contexts, different industries and
engagement construct. For example, trade-show and industry events are a common form of
customer interactions.
As a result of this thesis there is further knowledge of how brands can strategically
facilitate customer engagement. Greater insight into the nature of customer engagement,
namely its dimensions (social engagement), antecedents (BME experience) and moderators
Incorporating the research areas of customer engagement, marketing events and customer
experience, consistent in their applicability to S-D logic (Vargo and Lusch 2014), has
allowed a more strategic investigation of customer engagement. The findings from this
thesis have provided a framework for understanding the experiential components of BMEs
(Gentile et al. 2007) and their impact on customer event engagement, customer brand
engagement and BIL (So et al. 2012). This thesis provides support for social exchange
210 | P a g e
Discussion and Conclusion Chapter
theory (Cropanzano and Mitchell 2005; Saks 2006) as a predictor of the resources
contributed in the form of BME experiences from the brand and customer engagement
The process of engagement transfer is a central contribution of this thesis, justifying how a
BME, an activity extending beyond the normal customer-brand interactions (Vivek et al.
2012), has the capacity to lead to BIL for the host brand. Engagement facilitated with the
event, which facilitates engagement with the brand, demonstrates that BMEs are a unique
While customer engagement literature has for a short time reached an understanding of
experiential needs that influence their ability or willingness to engage with the event.
Continual development regarding the dimensions, platforms and antecedents that facilitate
a prominent and impactful research area of marketing, and ensuring its broad applicability
211 | P a g e
APPENDICES
212 | P a g e
213 | P a g e
214 | P a g e
215 | P a g e
APPENDIX A-2: ETHICS APPROVAL
216 | P a g e
217 | P a g e
APPENDIX A-3: ADDITITONAL ANALYSIS FROM PRE-TEST
218 | P a g e
Relational Experience
Chang and This event offered me a sense of group -
Chieng belonging
(2006) I could relate to other people through this -
event
Sweeney and Attending this event helped me to feel Attending this event helped me to feel
Soutar accepted accepted
(2001) Attending this event improved the way I am Attending this event improved the way I am
perceived perceived
Attending this event made a good Attending this event made a good
impression on other people impression on other people
Attending this event gave me social Attending this event gave me social
approval approval
Attending this event created a favourable Attending this event created a favourable
perception of me among other people perception of me among other people
This event had a positive social image This event had a positive social image
Reliability:
The 6 Sweeney and Soutar (2001) items received a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.91, while the Chang and Chieng
(2006) items received a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.79. In the interest of parsimony only the 6 Sweeney and
Soutar (2001) items were used in the main study.
Pragmatic Experience – no changes from pre-test to main study
Emotional Experience – no changes from pre-test to main study
219 | P a g e
REFERENCES
Abdul-Ghani, Eathar, Hyde, Kenneth F., & Marshall, Roger. 2011. Emic and etic
interpretations of engagement with a consumer-to-consumer online auction site.
Journal of Business Research, 64(10): 1060-1066.
Achterberg, Wilco, Pot, Anne Margriet, Kerkstra, Ada, Ooms, Marcel, Muller, Martien, &
Ribbe, Miel. 2003. The effect of depression on social engagement in newly
admitted Dutch nursing home residents. The Gerontologist, 43(2): 213-218.
Algesheimer, René, Dholakia, Utpal M., & Herrmann, Andreas. 2005. The Social
Influence of Brand Community: Evidence from European Car Clubs. Journal of
Marketing, 69(3): 19-34.
Anderson, John R. 1983. A spreading activation theory of memory. Journal of Verbal
Learning and Verbal Behaviour, 22(3): 261-295.
Armstrong, J Scott, & Overton, Terry S. 1977. Estimating nonresponse bias in mail
surveys. Journal of Marketing Research: 396-402.
Barth, JE Joe. 2007. Customer engagement and the operational efficiency of wine retail
stores. International Journal of Wine Business Research, 19(3): 207-215.
Baumgartner, Hans, & Steenkamp, Jan-Benedict E. M. 1996. Exploratory consumer
buying behavior: Conceptualization and measurement. International Journal of
Research in Marketing, 13(2): 121-137.
Bijmolt, Tammo HA, Leeflang, Peter SH, Block, Frank, Eisenbeiss, Maik, Hardie, Bruce
GS, Lemmens, Aurélie, & Saffert, Peter. 2010. Analytics for customer engagement.
Journal of Service Research, 13(3): 341-356.
Bowden, Jana. 2009. The process of customer engagement: A conceptual framework. The
Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 17(1): 63-74.
Brakus, J., Schmitt, B., & Zarantonello, L. 2009. Brand experience: what is it? How is it
measured? Does it affect loyalty? Journal of Marketing, 73(3): 52-68.
Brodie, R.J., & Hollebeek, L.D. 2011. Response: Advancing and Consolidating
Knowledge About Customer Engagement. Journal of Service Research, 14(3):
283-284.
Brodie, R.J., Hollebeek, L.D., Jurić, B., & Ilić, A. 2011a. Customer Engagement:
Conceptual Domain, Fundamental Propositions, and Implications for Research.
Journal of Service Research, 14(3): 252-271.
Brodie, Roderick, Ilic, Ana, Juric, Biljana, & Hollebeek, Linda. 2011b. Consumer
engagement in a virtual brand community: An exploratory analysis. Journal of
Business Research.
Byrne, Barbara M. 2001. Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts,
applications, and programming. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,
Publishers.
Cacioppo, John T, Petty, Richard E, & Kao, Chuan Feng. 1984. The efficient assessment
of need for cognition. Journal of personality assessment, 48(3): 306-307.
Calder, B.J., Isaac, M.S, & Malthouse, E.C. 2013. Taking the Customer's Point-of-View:
Engagement or Satisfaction? Marketing Science Institute Working Paper Series.
Calder, B.J., Malthouse, E.C., & Schaedel, U. 2009. An experimental study of the
relationship between online engagement and advertising effectiveness. Journal of
Interactive Marketing, 23(4): 321-331.
Chan, Kimmy Wa, Yim, Chi Kin, & Lam, Simon SK. 2010. Is customer participation in
value creation a double-edged sword? Evidence from professional financial
services across cultures. Journal of Marketing, 74(3): 48-64.
Chang, Pao-Long, & Chieng, Ming-Hua. 2006. Building consumer–brand relationship: A
cross-cultural experiential view. Psychology and Marketing, 23(11): 927-959.
220 | P a g e
Charters, Steve, & Ali-Knight, Jane. 2000. Wine tourism—A thirst for knowledge?
International Journal of Wine Marketing, 12(3): 70-80.
Charters, Steve, & Pettigrew, Simone. 2005. Is wine consumption an aesthetic experience?
Journal of Wine Research, 16(2): 121-136.
Chaudhuri, Arjun, & Holbrook, Morris. B. 2001. The chain of effects from brand trust and
brand affect to brand performance: the role of brand loyalty. Journal of Marketing,
65(2): 81-93.
Cheung, Gordon W, & Rensvold, Roger B. 2002. Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for
testing measurement invariance. Structural equation modeling, 9(2): 233-255.
Christodoulides, George. 2008. Breaking free from the industrial age paradigm of
branding. Brand Management, 15(4): 291-293.
Close, A.G., Finney, R.Z., Lacey, R., & Sneath, J. 2006. Engaging the consumer through
event marketing: Linking attendees with the sponsor, community, and brand.
Journal of Advertising Research, 46: 4.
Coakes, Sheridan J, Steed, Lyndall, & Ong, Clara. 2010. SPSS: analysis without anguish:
version 17 for windows (Version 17.0 ed.): John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd
Collins, Alan M, & Loftus, Elizabeth F. 1975. A spreading activation theory of semantic
processing. Psychological Review, 82(6): 407-28.
Crompton, John L, & McKay, Stacey L. 1997. Motives of visitors attending festival
events. Annals of Tourism Research, 24(2): 425-439.
Cropanzano, Russell, & Mitchell, Marie S. 2005. Social exchange theory: An
interdisciplinary review. Journal of Management, 31(6): 874-900.
Crowther, P. 2010. Marketing space: a conceptual framework for marketing events. The
Marketing Review, 10(4): 369-383.
Crowther, P. 2011. Marketing event outcomes: from tactical to strategic. International
Journal of Event and Festival Management, 2(1): 68-82.
Crowther, P., & Donlan, L. 2011. Value-creation space: The role of events in a service-
dominant marketing paradigm. Journal of Marketing Management, 27(13-14):
1444-1463.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. 2000. The costs and benefits of consuming. Journal of consumer
research, 27(2): 267-272.
Csikzentmihaly, Mihaly. 1990. Flow: The psychology of optimal experience:
HarperPerennial New York.
De Chernatony, Leslie, & Dall’Olmo Riley, Francesca. 1998. Defining A “Brand”: Beyond
The Literature With Experts’ Interpretations. Journal of Marketing Management,
14(5): 417-443.
De Vaus, David. 2002. Analyzing social science data: 50 key problems in data analysis:
Sage.
Denissen, Jaap J.A., Neumann, Linus, & Zalk, Maarten van. 2010. How the Internet is
Changing the Implementation of Traditional Research Methods, People's Daily
Lives, and the Way in Which Developmental Scientists Conduct Research. SAGE
Internet Research Methods. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
Drengner, Jan, Gaus, Hansjoerg, & Jahn, Steffen. 2008. Does Flow Influence the Brand
Image in Event Marketing? Journal of Advertising Research, 48(1): 138-147.
Engagement, Centre for Customer. 2014. 2014 Summit on Customer Engagement.
Fehrer, Julia , Woratschek, Herbert , & Germelmann, Claas Christian 2013. Antecedents
and Consequences of Customer Engagement – A literature review. Paper
presented at the ANZMAC 2013 Conference, University of Auckland, New
Zealand.
Fornell, Claes, & Larcker, David F. 1981. Evaluating structural equation models with
unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research,
18(1): 39-50.
221 | P a g e
Fricker Jr, Ronald D, & Schonlau, Matthias. 2010. Advantages and Disadvantages of
Internet Research Surveys: Evidence from the Literature. SAGE Internet
Research Methods. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
Gambetti, Rossella C, Graffigna, Guendalina, & Biraghi, Silvia. 2012. The Grounded
Theory approach to consumer-brand engagement. International Journal of Market
Research, 54(5): 659-687.
Gentile, Chiara, Spiller, Nicola, & Noci, Giuliano. 2007. How to Sustain the Customer
Experience:: An Overview of Experience Components that Co-create Value With
the Customer. European Management Journal, 25(5): 395-410.
Getz, D. 2008. Event tourism: Definition, evolution, and research. Tourism Management,
29(3): 403-428.
Glass, Thomas A, De Leon, Carlos F Mendes, Bassuk, Shari S, & Berkman, Lisa F. 2006.
Social engagement and depressive symptoms in late life longitudinal findings.
Journal of Aging and Health, 18(4): 604-628.
Grewal, Dhruv, Levy, Michael, & Kumar, V. 2009. Customer experience management in
retailing: an organizing framework. Journal of Retailing, 85(1): 1-14.
Gupta, Seema. 2003. Event Marketing: Issues and Challenges. IIMB Management Review
(Indian Institute of Management Bangalore), 15(2): 87-96.
Gursoy, D., Spangenberg, E.R., & Rutherford, D.G. 2006. The hedonic and utilitarian
dimensions of attendees' attitudes toward festivals. Journal of Hospitality &
Tourism Research, 30(3): 279.
Gwinner, K.P., & Eaton, J. 1999. Building brand image through event sponsorship: The
role of image transfer. Journal of Advertising: 47-57.
Gwinner, Kevin. 1997. A model of image creation and image transfer in event sponsorship.
International Marketing Review, 14(3): 145-158.
Hair, Joseph F, Black, William C, Babin, B.J., & Anderson, Rolph E. 2012. Multivariate
data analysis (7 ed.): Pearson.
Hair, Joseph F, Lukas, Bryan, Miller, Ken, Bush, Robert, & Ortinau, David. 2008.
Marketing Research (2 ed.). Australia: McGraw-Hill Australia.
Hallahan, K. 2009. Need for Cognition as Motivation to Process Publicity and Advertising.
Journal of Promotion Management, 14(3-4): 169-194.
Hancock, Gregory R, & Mueller, Ralph O. 2001. Rethinking construct reliability within
latent variable systems.
Harris, F., & De Chernatony, Leslie. 2001. Corporate branding and corporate brand
performance. European Journal of Marketing, 35(3/4): 441-456.
Hennig-Thurau, Thorsten, Gwinner, Kevin P, & Gremler, Dwayne D. 2002. Understanding
relationship marketing outcomes an integration of relational benefits and
relationship quality. Journal of Service Research, 4(3): 230-247.
Herbig, P., O'Hara, B., & Palumbo, F. 1994. Measuring trade show effectiveness: an
effective exercise? Industrial Marketing Management, 23(2): 165-170.
Higgins, E Tory, & Scholer, Abigail A. 2009. Engaging the consumer: The science and art
of the value creation process. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 19(2): 100-114.
Hightower, Roscoe. , Brady, Michael K., & Baker, Thomas L. 2002. Investigating the role
of the physical environment in hedonic service consumption: an exploratory study
of sporting events* 1. Journal of Business Research, 55(9): 697-707.
Hirschman, Elizabeth C. 1980. Innovativeness, novelty seeking, and consumer creativity.
Journal of consumer research: 283-295.
Hoffman, D., Beverland, M., & Rasmussen, M. 2001. The evolution of wine events in
Australia and New Zealand: A proposed model. International Journal of Wine
Marketing, 13(1): 54-71.
222 | P a g e
Holbrook, Morris B., & Hirschman, Elizabeth C. 1982. The Experiential Aspects of
Consumption: Consumer Fantasies, Feelings, and Fun. The Journal of Consumer
Research, 9(2): 132-140.
Hollebeek, L.D. 2011a. Demystifying customer brand engagement: Exploring the loyalty
nexus. Journal of Marketing Management, 27(7-8): 785-807.
Hollebeek, Linda. 2011b. Exploring customer brand engagement: definition and themes.
Journal of Strategic Marketing, 19(7): 555-573.
Hollebeek, Linda D. 2010. Consumer engagement across differentially service-oriented
wine outlets: Moving beyond consumer involvement to predict loyalty.
Hollebeek, Linda D, Glynn, Mark S, & Brodie, Roderick J. 2014. Consumer Brand
Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development and
Validation. Journal of Interactive Marketing.
Hooper, Daire, Coughlan, Joseph, & Mullen, Michael R. 2008. Structural equation
modelling: Guidelines for determining model fit. Electronic Journal of Business
Research Methods, 6(1).
Huo, Yuen J, Binning, Kevin R, & Molina, Ludwin E. 2009. Testing an integrative model
of respect: Implications for social engagement and well-being. Personality and
Social Psychology Bulletin, 36(2): 200-212.
Jingxue, Yuan, Morrison, Alastair M., Cai, Liping A., & Linton, Sally. 2008. A model of
wine tourist behaviour: a festival approach. International Journal of Tourism
Research, 10(3): 207-219.
Kahn, William A. 1990. Psychological conditions of personal engagement and
disengagement at work. Academy of management journal, 33(4): 692-724.
Kahu, Ella R. 2013. Framing student engagement in higher education. Studies in Higher
Education, 38(5): 758-773.
Kamakura, Wagner, & and Russell G.J. 1993. Measuring brand value with scanner data.
International Journal of Research in Marketing, 10(1): 9-22.
Keener, Marvin S. 1999. Strengthening institutional engagement: Addressing faculty issues
to facilitate change. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement,
4(1): 29-36.
Keller, Kevin L, & Aaker, David. 1992. The effects of sequential introduction of brand
extensions. Journal of Marketing Research, 29(1): 35-50.
Keller, Kevin L, & Lehmann, Donald R. (2006). Brands and Branding: Research findings
and future priorities. Marketing Science, 25(6): 740.
Klaus, Philipp 'Phil', & Maklan, Stan. 2013. Towards a better measure of customer
experience. International Journal of Market Research, 55(2): 227-246.
Kline, Rex B. 2011. Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (Third ed.):
Guilford press.
Koehn, Nancy. 2011. Starbucks' Logo Debate Shows Customers' Engagement. Harvard
business review.
Kozinets, Robert V. 2014. Social Brand Engagement: A New Idea. GfK Marketing
Intelligence Review, 6(2).
Kumar, V, Aksoy, Lerzan, Donkers, Bas, Venkatesan, Rajkumar, Wiesel, Thorsten, &
Tillmanns, Sebastian. 2010. Undervalued or overvalued customers: capturing total
customer engagement value. Journal of Service Research, 13(3): 297-310.
Laurent, Gilles, & Kapferer, Jean-Noël. 1985. Measuring Consumer Involvement Profiles.
Journal of Marketing Research, 22(1): 41-53.
Lee, M.S., Sandler, D.M., & Shani, D. 1997. Attitudinal constructs towards sponsorship:
Scale development using three global sporting events. International Marketing
Review, 14(3): 159-169.
Lee, Tae-Hee, & Crompton, John. 1992. Measuring novelty seeking in tourism. Annals of
Tourism Research, 19(4): 732-751.
223 | P a g e
Lei, Ming, & Lomax, Richard G. 2005. The effect of varying degrees of nonnormality in
structural equation modeling. Structural equation modeling, 12(1): 1-27.
Leischnig, A., Schwertfeger, M., & Geigenmueller, A. 2011. Do shopping events promote
retail brands? International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 39(8):
619-634.
Maassen, Gerard H, & Bakker, Arnold B. 2001. Suppressor variables in path models
definitions and interpretations. Sociological Methods & Research, 30(2): 241-270.
MacInnis, D.J., & Jaworski, B.J. 1989. Information processing from advertisements:
Toward an integrative framework. The Journal of Marketing: 1-23.
Maio, Gregory R., & Esses, Victoria M. 2001. The Need for Affect: Individual Differences
in the Motivation to Approach or Avoid Emotions. Journal of personality, 69(4):
583-614.
Malhotra, Naresh K. 2009. Marketing Research: An Applied Orientation, sixth edition (6,
Global Edition ed.): Pearson Education International.
Martensen, A., Gronholdt, L., Bendtsen, L., & Jensen, M.J. 2007. Application of a Model
for the Effectiveness of Event Marketing. Journal of Advertising Research, 47(3):
283-301.
Martínez-López, Francisco J, Gázquez-Abad, Juan C, & Sousa, Carlos MP. 2013.
Structural equation modelling in marketing and business research: Critical issues
and practical recommendations. European Journal of Marketing, 47(1/2): 115-
152.
Mau, G., Weihe, K., & Silberer, G. 2006. Attitudinal Effects of Event-Marketing and
Event-Sponsorship: A Comparison. Paper presented at the 35th EMAC Annual
Conference Proceedings, Athens, Greece.
Meade, Adam W, & Craig, S Bartholomew. 2012. Identifying careless responses in survey
data. Psychological methods, 17(3): 437.
Mollen, Anne, & Wilson, Hugh. 2010. Engagement, telepresence and interactivity in
online consumer experience: Reconciling scholastic and managerial perspectives.
Journal of Business Research, 63(9): 919-925.
Möller, Kristian. 2013. Theory map of business marketing: Relationships and networks
perspectives. Industrial Marketing Management, 42(3): 324-335.
MSI. 2006. Marketing Science Institute, 2006–2008 Research Priorities: A Guide to MSI
Research Programs and Procedures: Cambridge, MA.
MSI. 2010. Marketing Science Institute 2010–2012 Research Priorities. Cambridge, MA.
MSI. 2014. Marketing Science Institute, 2014–2016 Research Priorities.
Mueller, Ralph O, & Hancock, Gregory R. 2008. Best practices in structural equation
modeling, Best practices in quantitative methods: 488-508.
Neuman, William L. . 2006. Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative
Approaches: Pearson Education Inc, Boston, MA.
Noar, Seth M. 2003. The Role of Structural Equation Modeling in Scale Development.
Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 10(4): 622-647.
O'Boyle, Ed. , & Fleming, John H. 2014. How the Best Companies Engage Their
Customers. the Gallup Business Journal Online.
O'Neill, M, & Charters, S. 2000. Service quality at the cellar door: implications for
Western Australia's developing wine tourism industry. Managing Service Quality,
10(2): 112-122.
O'Neill, M, Palmer, A, & Charters, S. 2002. Wine production as a service experience-the
effects of service quality on wine sales. Journal of Services Marketing, 16(4): 342-
362.
Oh, Haemoon, Fiore, Ann Marie, & Jeoung, Miyoung. 2007. Measuring experience
economy concepts: tourism applications. Journal of Travel Research, 46(2): 119-
132.
224 | P a g e
Oliver, RL. 1999. Whence consumer loyalty? The Journal of Marketing, 63: 33-44.
Orth, U.R., & Bourrain, A. 2005. Optimum stimulation level theory and the differential
impact of olfactory stimuli on consumer exploratory tendencies. Advances in
consumer research, 32: 613.
Overby, Jeffrey W, Gardial, Sarah Fisher, & Woodruff, Robert B. 2004. French versus
american consumers’ attachment of value to a product in a common consumption
context: a cross-national comparison. Journal of the Academy of Marketing
Science, 32(4): 437-460.
Packer, Jan, & Ballantyne, Roy. 2004. Is educational leisure a contradiction in terms?
Exploring the synergy of education and entertainment. Annals of Leisure
Research, 7(1): 54-71.
Pallant, Julie. 2010. SPSS survival manual: A step by step guide to data analysis using
SPSS: McGraw-Hill International.
Palmer, A. 2010. Customer experience management: a critical review of an emerging idea.
Journal of Services Marketing, 24(3): 196-208.
Park, C.W., & Young, S.M. 1986. Consumer response to television commercials: The
impact of involvement and background music on brand attitude formation. Journal
of Marketing Research: 11-24.
Perry, Chad. 1998. A structured approach for presenting theses. Australasian Marketing
Journal (AMJ), 6(1): 63-85.
Peterson, Robert A, & Kim, Yeolib. 2013. On the relationship between coefficient alpha
and composite reliability. Journal of applied psychology, 98(1): 194.
Pikkemaat, Birgit, Peters, Mike, Boksberger, Philip, & Secco, Manuela. 2009. The staging
of experiences in wine tourism. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management,
18(2-3): 237-253.
Pine, B.J., & Gilmore, J.H. 1998. Welcome to the experience economy. Harvard business
review, 76: 97-105.
Podsakoff, Philip M, MacKenzie, Scott B, Lee, Jeong-Yeon, & Podsakoff, Nathan P. 2003.
Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature
and recommended remedies. Journal of applied psychology, 88(5): 879.
Pokrywczynski, James, & Brinker David L. 2014. Congruency and Engagement Test in an
Event Marketing Sponsorship Context. Journal of Promotion Management, 20(3):
345-357.
Politis, John D. 2001. The relationship of various leadership styles to knowledge
management. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 22(8): 354-364.
Prahalad, C. K., & Ramaswamy, Venkat. 2004. Co-creation experiences: The next practice
in value creation. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 18(3): 5-14.
Randall, Donna M, & Gibson, Annetta M. 1990. Methodology in business ethics research:
A review and critical assessment. Journal of Business Ethics, 9(6): 457-471.
Rasmussen, Michelle, & Lockshin, Larry. 1999. Wine choice behaviour: the effect of
regional branding. International Journal of Wine Marketing, 11(1): 36-46.
Rea, Louis M, & Parker, Richard A. 2012. Designing and conducting survey research: A
comprehensive guide: John Wiley & Sons.
Romaniuk, Jenni, & Sharp, Byron. 2003. Measuring brand perceptions: Testing quantity
and quality. Journal of Targeting, Measurement and Analysis for Marketing,
11(3): 218-229.
Romaniuk, Jenni, & Sharp, Byron. 2004. Conceptualizing and measuring brand salience.
Marketing Theory, 4(4): 327-342.
Rowe, K. 2002. "The Measurement of Latent and Composite Variables from Multiple
Items or Indicators: Applications in Performance Indicator Systems". Paper
presented at the Proceedings of the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology
Seminar Series, Melbourne.
225 | P a g e
Sahin, Azize, Zehir, Cemal, & Kitapçı, Hakan. 2011. The effects of brand experiences,
trust and satisfaction on building brand loyalty; an empirical research on global
brands. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 24: 1288-1301.
Saks, Alan M. 2006. Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement. Journal of
Managerial Psychology, 21(7): 600-619.
Salanova, Marisa, Agut, Sonia, & Peiró, José María. 2005. Linking organizational
resources and work engagement to employee performance and customer loyalty:
the mediation of service climate. Journal of applied psychology, 90(6): 1217.
Sawhney, Mohanbir, Verona, Gianmario, & Prandelli, Emanuela. 2005. Collaborating to
create: The Internet as a platform for customer engagement in product innovation.
Journal of Interactive Marketing, 19(4): 4-17.
Schau, Hope Jensen, Muñiz Jr, Albert M, & Arnould, Eric J. 2009. How brand community
practices create value. Journal of Marketing, 73(5): 30-51.
Schmitt, B. 1999. Experiential marketing. Journal of Marketing Management, 15(1): 53-
67.
Sharp, Byron, & Sharp, Anne. 1997. Loyalty programs and their impact on repeat-purchase
loyalty patterns. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 14(5): 473-486.
Sheth, Jagdish N, Newman, Bruce I, & Gross, Barbara L. 1991. Why we buy what we buy:
a theory of consumption values. Journal of Business Research, 22(2): 159-170.
Skinner, Ellen A, Wellborn, James G, & Connell, James P. 1990. What it takes to do well
in school and whether I've got it: A process model of perceived control and
children's engagement and achievement in school. Journal of educational
psychology, 82(1): 22.
Smith, G. 2004. Brand image transfer through sponsorship: a consumer learning
perspective. Journal of Marketing Management, 20(3): 457-474.
Sneath, J.Z., Finney, R.Z., & Close, A.G. 2005. An IMC approach to event marketing: The
effects of sponsorship and experience on customer attitudes. Journal of
Advertising Research, 45(04): 373-381.
So, K.K.F., King, C., & Sparks, B. 2012. Customer Engagement With Tourism Brands:
Scale Development and Validation. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research.
So, Kevin Kam Fung, King, Ceridwyn, Sparks, Beverley A, & Wang, Ying. 2014. The
Role of Customer Engagement in Building Consumer Loyalty to Tourism Brands.
Journal of Travel Research: 0047287514541008.
Sojka, J.Z., & Giese, J.L. 1997. Thinking and/or feeling: an examination of interaction
between processing styles. Advances in consumer research, 24: 438-442.
Sorenson, Susan, & Adkins, Amy. 2014. Why Customer Engagement Matters So Much
Now. the Gallup Business Journal Online.
Sprott, David , Czellar, Sandor, & Spangenberg, Eric. 2009. The Importance of a General
Measure of Brand Engagement on Market Behavior: Development and Validation
of a Scale. Journal of Marketing Research, 46(1): 92-104.
Steenkamp, J.B.E.M., & Baumgartner, H. 1992. The role of optimum stimulation level in
exploratory consumer behavior. Journal of consumer research: 434-448.
Steenkamp, Jan-Benedict EM, & Baumgartner, Hans. 2000. On the use of structural
equation models for marketing modeling. International Journal of Research in
Marketing, 17(2): 195-202.
Sweeney, Jillian C. , & Soutar, Geoffrey N. 2001. Consumer perceived value: The
development of a multiple item scale. Journal of Retailing, 77(2): 203.
Taheri, Babak, Jafari, Aliakbar, & O'Gorman, Kevin. 2014. Keeping your audience:
Presenting a visitor engagement scale. Tourism Management, 42(0): 321-329.
Toepoel, Vera, Das, Marcel, & Soest, Arthur van. 2009. Design of Web Questionnaires:
The Effects of the Number of Items per Screen. SAGE Internet Research
Methods. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
226 | P a g e
Tombs, A.G., & McColl-Kennedy, J.R. 2010. Social and spatial influence of customers on
other customers in the social-servicescape. Australasian Marketing Journal
(AMJ), 18(3): 120-131.
Tynan, Caroline, & McKechnie, Sally. 2009. Experience marketing: a review and
reassessment. Journal of Marketing Management, 25(5-6): 501-517.
van Doorn, Jenny, Lemon, Katherine N, Mittal, Vikas, Nass, Stephan, Pick, Doreen,
Pirner, Peter, & Verhoef, Peter C. 2010. Customer engagement behavior:
theoretical foundations and research directions. Journal of Service Research,
13(3): 253-266.
Vandenberg, Robert J, & Lance, Charles E. 2000. A review and synthesis of the
measurement invariance literature: Suggestions, practices, and recommendations
for organizational research. Organizational research methods, 3(1): 4-70.
Vargo, Stephen L, & Lusch, Robert F. 2014. Inversions of service-dominant logic.
Marketing Theory: 1470593114534339.
Vargo, Stephen L., & Lusch, Robert F. 2004. Evolving to a New Dominant Logic for
Marketing. Journal of Marketing, 68(1): 1-17.
Vargo, StephenL, & Lusch, RobertF. 2008. Service-dominant logic: continuing the
evolution. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 36(1): 1-10.
Verhoef, Peter C, Reinartz, Werner J, & Krafft, Manfred. 2010. Customer engagement as a
new perspective in customer management. Journal of Service Research, 13(3):
247-252.
Verhoef, Peter C., Lemon, Katherine N., Parasuraman, A., Roggeveen, Anne, Tsiros,
Michael, & Schlesinger, Leonard A. 2009. Customer Experience Creation:
Determinants, Dynamics and Management Strategies. Journal of Retailing, 85(1):
31-41.
Vicente, Paula, & Reis, Elizabeth. 2010. Using Questionnaire Design to Fight
Nonresponse Bias in Web Surveys. SAGE Internet Research Methods. London:
SAGE Publications Ltd.
Vivek, S. , Beatty, S. , & Morgan, R. 2012. Customer Engagement: Exploring Customer
Relationships Beyond Purchase. Journal of Marketing Theory & Practice, 20(2):
122-146.
Voyles, Bennett. 2007. The engaged constituent: Meeting the challenge of engagement in
the public sector, Part 1. The Economist Intelligence Unit.
Wang, Ray. 2012. How to Engage Your Customers and Employees. Harvard business
review.
Weihe, K., Mau, G., & Silberer, G. 2006. How do marketing-events work? Marketing-
events and brand attitudes, International Advertising and Communication: 199-
216: Springer.
Whelan, S., & Wohlfeil, M. 2006. Communicating brands through engagement with lived
experiences. The Journal of Brand Management, 13, 4(5): 313-329.
Wilson, Thomas Daniel. 1997. Information behaviour: an interdisciplinary perspective.
Information processing & management, 33(4): 551-572.
Winetitles. 2013. Australian and New Zealand Wine Industry Directory (31st ed.).
Australia: Winetitles.
Wirtz, Jochen, Den Ambtman, Anouk, Bloemer, Josée, Horváth, Csilla, Ramaseshan,
Balasubramanian, Van De Klundert, Joris, Canli, Zeynep Gurhan, & Kandampully,
Jay. 2013. Managing brands and customer engagement in online brand
communities. Journal of service Management, 24(3): 223-244.
Wohlfeil, M., & Whelan, S. 2006. Consumer Motivations to Participate in Event-
Marketing Strategies. Journal of Marketing Management, 22, 5(6): 643-669.
Wood, Emma H. 2009. Evaluating Event Marketing: Experience or Outcome? Journal of
Promotion Management, 15(1): 247 - 268.
227 | P a g e
Yuan, Yi-Hua, & Wu, Chihkang Kenny. 2008. Relationships among experiential
marketing, experiential value, and customer satisfaction. Journal of Hospitality &
Tourism Research, 32(3): 387-410.
Zarantonello, Lia, & Schmitt, Bernd H. 2010. Using the brand experience scale to profile
consumers and predict consumer behaviour. Journal of Brand Management,
17(7): 532-540.
Zeithaml, Valarie A, Berry, Leonard L, & Parasuraman, A. 1996. The behavioral
consequences of service quality. The Journal of Marketing, 60(2): 31-46.
Zhang, J., Beatty, S.E., & Mothersbaugh, D. 2010. A CIT investigation of other customers'
influence in services. Journal of Services Marketing, 24(5): 389-399.
Zomerdijk, Leonieke G, & Voss, Christopher A. 2010. Service design for experience-
centric services. Journal of Service Research, 13(1): 67-82.
228 | P a g e