The Internal Branding Practices and Employee Brand Citizenship Behavior: The Mediating Effect of Employee Brand fit

Journal of Environmental Treatment Techniques

2020, Volume 8, Issue 1, Pages: 99-106

J. Environ. Treat. Tech.

ISSN: 2309-1185

Journal weblink: http://www.jett.dormaj.com

The Internal Branding Practices and Employee

Brand Citizenship Behavior: The Mediating Effect

of Employee Brand fit

Lawi Adamu*, Noor Hasmini Abd Ghani, Maria Abdul Rahman

School of Business Management, UUM

Received: 28/07/2019

Accepted: 08/09/2019

Published: 29/09/2019

Abstract

This study integrates equity theory and social exchange theory to explore the impact of internal branding practices on employees’

brand citizenship behaviour (BCB) through the mechanism of employee-brand fit. Self-administered questionnaires were randomly

distributed to 377 employees in Nigeria’s telecommunication industry. However, only 254 were found to be useful in the present study

giving the response rate of 68%. The empirical results show that brand training and brand leadership have significant impact on employees’

BCB. In the same vein, significant relationship was revealed between brand leadership and employee-brand fit, but insignificant impact

was established between brand training and brand fit. Moreover, it was discovered that employee-brand fit has significant impact on

employees’ BCB. Employee-brand fit was found to mediate the relationship between brand leadership and employees’ BCB while it does

not mediate the relationship between brand training and employees’ BCB. Practically, our study has provided the management of

companies in the telecommunication industry with the importance of internal branding for employees’ outcome such as brand fit and BCB.

Therefore, the management of companies in the telecommunication industry should prioritise, promote, and improve their internal branding

management. Implications and directions for future study were discussed.

Keywords: internal branding, brand citizenship behavior, employee brand fit.

as prescribed behavior that is set up by organization for its

Introduction

employees to follow in order to achieve brand goals. Meanwhile,

extra role behavior is considered as non-prescribed behavior that

is not recognized by the formal reward system, which employees

voluntarily engage in to achieve brand goals (42). In particular,

the present study is on extra role and conceptualized it as brand

citizenship behavior (BCB) in line with the argument put

forward by Burmann and Zeplin (2005).The extra role is

considered because it is argued to be superior in achieving brand

differentiation as compared to the in-role behavior (9, 42).

Previous studies have provided empirical support on the impact

of internal branding practices on employee’s BCB (42, 9, 10, 13,

Organisations particularly the service brands type are

focusing on brand management in order to achieve long-lasting

competitive advantage. Traditionally, organisations focused

mainly on their external customers in building and managing

their brands (22). However, due to the need to balance internal

and external brand management, organisations are now focusing

on their internal customers, who are their employees in order to

sustain their brands’ competitive advantage (43). This is because

of the importance of employee’s brand consistent behaviors in

achieving competitive advantage particularly during service

encounter (43, 8). As employee’s brand behavior is considered

to represent the heart of the organization particularly service

brands (19). Punjaisri and Wilson (2007) have argued that the

delivery of brand promise to customers requires employees to

exhibit brand consistent behavior. Hence, brand consistent

behavior plays an important role for the success of the brand (9).

Despite the importance of employee’s brand consistent

behavior, few attempts have been made to analyze how to instill

the firm’s brand values and to encourage them to manifest

positive brand consistent behavior (9, 29, 10), leaving the

question on how to motivate employees to exhibit brand

consistent behavior unanswered (7, 20, 16). This study examines

how the adoption of internal branding practices can promote

employee’s brand consistent behavior both directly and

indirectly through the mechanism of employee brand fit.

26). However, limited research has been conducted on the

impact of practices such as brand leadership and brand training

on employee BCB. Specifically, the question on how

organization can use internal branding to enhance their

employee BCB is still unanswered. Moreover, the mediating

effect of employee brand fit on the relationship between internal

branding practices and employee BCB is still missing in

literatures.

Acknowledging these gaps in literatures, this study intends

to adopt a survey research design to draw evidence from both

frontline and backstage employees in the telecommunication

industry’s context in order to show the importance of internal

branding for enhancing employee’s level of brand fit and

encouraging BCB towards their brands. It is therefore expected

that this study will contribute by providing empirical support on

the impact of internal branding towards employee BCB.

Similarly, given that studies rarely encapsulate the importance

Brand consistent behavior is viewed to be either in-role

behavior or extra role behavior (43). In-role behavior is viewed

Corresponding author: Lawi Adamu, School of Business

Management, UUM; Email: lawiadamu1727@yahoo.com.

Journal of Environmental Treatment Techniques

2020, Volume 8, Issue 1, Pages: 99-106

of brand fit in internal branding studies, this study highlights the

importance of internal branding in enhancing employee brand

fit.

The study is constructed in the following way. First, we

provide the theoretical background of hypothesized

relationships. Followed by conceptual framework, methodology

and present the findings of the study. Finally, discussions,

implications and some insight for future research were provided.

branding literatures has established that employee’s behaviors

and attitudes plays an important role in the success of the brand;

as it has great impact on the perception of customers toward the

brand (35, 28, 39, 9, 3). Punjaisri et al., (2008) assert that

organizations require their employees to behave in consistent

manner particularly during service encounter; hence,

organizations are focusing on internal brand building to ensure

that employees are attitudinal and behaviorally ready to deliver

the brand promise made to their customers. Therefore, internal

branding is seen as a doctrine to ensure that employee’s behave

in a consistent manner.

Research questions

RQ 1: What are the participants’ attitudes towards the

In particular, Wallace, Chernatony, and Buil, (2013) in their

study argued that the behaviors of the leaders in organization

have impact on the employees behavior and attitude. They

further asserted that when an employee perceives that the

leader’s support behavior is appropriate, he/she will reciprocate

with a behavior that will benefit the organization, hence

engaging in BCB. Moreover, Burmann and Zeplin (2005)

argued that certain types of leadership behavior enhance

employee brand commitment, and committed employees are

more likely to exhibit BCB. Similarly, brand training has been

considered as a means to encourage employees to live the brand

importance of stance taking and engagement in writing a

dissertation?

RQ 2: What challenges do participants encounter in stance

taking and engagement during writing their dissertations?

Literature Review (HEADING 1)

.1 Theoretical background

Our study integrates social exchange theory (5) and equity

theory (Adams, 1963) to provide the theoretical underpinnings

of our model. In particular, social exchange theory underlies our

model as it is considered as the most influential theory that best

explains workplace behavior of employees (41). It was further

argued to explain why employees engage in behaviors that are

not rewarded and not contractually enforceable, but yet such

behaviors are beneficial to the organization. Specifically, the

concept of social exchange theory provide the importance of

exchange relationships that exist between the organization and

individual employees (10). It is therefore argued that high social

exchange will exist where the employees have high levels of

trust, respect, loyalty and commitment with the organization

(

46). Therefore, providing employees with brand training has

been argued to influence their behaviors and attitudes towards

the brand (36). Furthermore, empirical evidence has shown that

brand leadership and brand training significantly affect

employee BCB (29, 44, 10). In addition, in line with social

exchange theory (5), employees who perceive that organization

has provided required training and appropriate brand leadership

such will encourage them to exhibit positive behavior such as

BCB in order to achieve organizational objectives. Hence, based

on these arguments, the present study formulates the following

hypotheses:

(

13). Moreover, employees that believe that reciprocal value

exchange may occur between them and the organization are

more likely willing to establish exchange relationship with the

organization.

H1 there is significant relationship between brand training

and employee’s brand citizenship behavior.

H2 there is significant relationship between brand leadership

and employee’s brand citizenship behavior.

Internal branding has been considered to be the process

through which organization promote the brand to employees,

providing them with brand knowledge and align their behavior

with the brand values (3, 46). Therefore, it is argued here that

when individual employee’s needs are satisfied through

exchange relationships, he or she will engage in a behavior that

is not rewarded (BCB) in order to achieve brand goals.

Furthermore, our study argued that through internal branding

practices such as brand leadership and brand training

organization align and empower the employee to behave in

consistent manner so as to deliver the brand promise made to

customers.

.3 Employee Brand Fit and Brand Citizenship Behavior

The concept of employee brand fit has been considered by

researchers to play an important role in determining the

perception of employee’s towards the organization and its brand,

hence affecting their attitudes and behaviors. Studies have

shown that employees that perceive a fit between their values

and the values of the brand; may be encouraged to have high

brand loyalty, identification satisfaction and brand commitment,

and hence encouraging them to exhibit brand consistent

behavior such as brand citizenship behavior (49, 25, 30). In

particular, employees who share values with the organization,

are likely to help its cause and more willing to exhibit extra

behaviors to achieve the objective of the organization (49, 11)

Similarly, Helm et al. (2016) argued that employees who are at

fit with their organization are more likely to exhibit positive

brand behavior such as brand citizenship behavior. Furthermore,

Lauver and Kristof-Brown, (2001) in their study argued that

higher employee brand fit leads to high employee BCB. It is

therefore argued in this study that employees that are fit with

their brand are more likely to be willing to engage in extra role

behavior (BCB). Therefore, based on these arguments the

present study formulates the following hypothesis.

In addition, our study stress the importance of equity theory

(

Adam, 1963) which underpin internal branding implementation

and is based on the notion that individuals evaluate their fit with

the brand by comparing their inputs with the corresponding

outputs (6, 2). Specifically, the theory was used in our study to

underpin the mediating role of employee brand fit on the

relationship between internal branding and employee BCB. It is

argued here that employees are at fit with brand if they perceive

balance between their inputs (effort, abilities, commitment,

compliance to brand policies) and outputs from the organization

(

such as reward, required training, appropriate leadership, and

communication) (34). Therefore, employees respond to this by

increasing their efforts, commitment and may likely engage in

extra role (BCB) in order to achieve brand goals.

H3 there is significant relationship between employee brand

fit and brand citizenship behavior.

.2 Internal Branding Practices and Brand Citizenship

Behavior

Internal branding practices such as brand training and brand

.4 Internal Branding and Employee Brand Fit

Aligning the attitudes and behaviors of employees with the

leadership have been argued to have great impact on the

behaviors and attitudes of employees (39, 4, 10, 44, 29). Internal

brand values has been argued to encourage employees to behave

100

Journal of Environmental Treatment Techniques

2020, Volume 8, Issue 1, Pages: 99-106

in consistent fashion so that the goals of the brand can be achieve

internal branding so as to produce higher fit with their brands

which in turn will manifest in brand consistent behavior such as

BCB. Moreover, in line with equity theory (Adams, 1963) when

the employees perceive equity between their inputs with the

corresponding outputs (such as required brand training, and

appropriate brand leadership) from the organization, then such

employees are said to be at fit and are motivated to exhibit BCB.

Hence, based on these arguments the following hypotheses are

formulated

H6 employee brand fit mediate the relationship between

brand training and employee BCB

H7 employee brand fit mediate the relationship between

brand leadership and employee BCB

(

36). As such, there is a need for the organization to encourage

high fit between the values of the brand and employee’s

personal values (24). Boukis and Gounaris, (2014) asserted that

while employees may engage themselves into jobs that best fit

their interests, skills, and abilities, but due to changes in the

environment they may find themselves in a state of mismatch or

misfit situation. They further argued that organization should

restore the fit through their internal brand building. Therefore, it

is argued here that such employees require more training and

appropriate brand leadership in order to achieve a good fit with

the organization. In addition, Chatman (1991) opined that

employees are provided with better understanding of their roles,

values, abilities and expected behaviors through practices such

as training. Hence, the more organizations attempt to influence

their employees, the more similar the employee’s values

becomes to the organization’s brand values.

Research Methodology

.1 Samples and Procedure

A total of 377 questionnaires were randomly distributed to

Moreover, it was argued that internal branding not only

improves employee’s brand knowledge, but also enhance their

brand fit (37). As such through internal branding management,

organizations are argued to develop and enhance shared values

between employees and the organization’s brand (48). Burmann

and Zeplin (2005) argued that brand fit can be achieved through

human resource activities such as brand training. Hence, our

study argues that organizations can enhance employee brand fit

through internal brand management to achieve brand goals. In

line with these arguments, the following hypotheses are

formulated:

both front line and back stage employees of telecommunication

industry in Nigeria. Specifically, 282 were returned and only

254 were usable while the remaining were rejected due to either

incomplete or several missing data or as a result of outliers. In

line with the argument of Sekaran and Bougie (2010) a sample

between 30 and 500 is appropriate for most studies; hence the

sample size in this study is considered sufficient. The

telecommunication industry has been chosen because it is

believed to be the best platform to test the model in this study.

Specifically, the industry is faced with high competition; which

requires encouraging employees to exhibit BCB in order to

deliver brand promise in a consistent manner so as to achieve

competitive advantage. Moreover, an empirical study has

revealed that employee brand behavior has been a major

problem faced by the industry (15). Similarly, Adeleke, and

Aminu (2012) in their study revealed that 70% of Nigeria

telecommunication are not satisfied with the behaviors of the

employees (40).

H4 there is significant relationship between brand training

and employee brand fit

H5 there is significant relationship between brand leadership

and employee brand fit

.5 The Mediating Effect of Employee Brand Fit

Based on inferences made in H1-H5, the study proposes a

correlation between internal branding, employee brand fit and

employee BCB. Studies have shown that employee brand fit can

be enhanced by organizations through internal brand building,

.2 Measurement Items

Brand Citizenship Behavior in our study is viewed as

(

7, 9, 8, 37). Employee brand fit is viewed as the compatibility

employee’s behavior exhibit on voluntary basis to project a

number of generic behaviors that enhance the brand identity.

The BCB construct was measured using 18 items adapted from

Shaari et al. (2012). In particular, BCB is measured as multi-

dimensional construct consisting of 4 dimensions. These

include:

Brand Helping Behavior is viewed to as the extent to which

employee have positive attitude, friendliness, and helpfulness

towards colleagues and customers of the brand (42). Brand

helping behavior was measured using 8 items from Shaari et al.,

between the employees and the organization when the

organization provides the employees with what they need (30).

It is therefore proposed that employee can be at fit with the

organization when they are provided with the required brand

training and appropriate brand leadership. Furthermore, research

evidence has shown that employee brand fit can evoke an

altruistic spirit within employee, motivating the employee to

exhibit BCB (19, 49, 25). It is therefore suggested that employee

brand fit contribute to brand citizenship behavior. Thus,

employees who perceive that the organization has provided them

with required brand training and appropriate brand leadership

such will enhance their brand fit, which motivate them to exhibit

brand citizenship behavior.

(

2012) instrument.

Sportsmanship is considered as the extent to which

employee engage for the brand without complaining even if such

may cause inconvenience and show willingness to engage for

the brand at high cost (42). The dimension was measured using

Review of literatures has shown that organizations through

internal brand management, promote

shared brand

items from Shaari et al., (2012) instrument.

understanding of brand values among its employees thereby

ensuring employees become better brand representatives (27,

Brand Endorsement this refers to the extent to which the

employees recommend the brand to others in non-job-related

situations (42). In particular, brand endorsement was measured

using 3 items from Shaari et al., (2012).

Self-development refers to employee’s willingness to

continuously enhance brand-related skills. It was also measured

using 5 items from Shaari et al., (2012).

Brand training in the present study was defined as the

systematic and planned effort by organization to develop and

provide employees with brand related understanding

6, 46, 20). Consequently, adoption of internal branding can

promote brand fit and help employees to exhibit brand consistent

behavior such as BCB in order to deliver brand promise to

customers. In particular, Burmann and Zeplin (2005) opined that

the fit with a brand is prerequisite for brand commitment and

this can be achieved through internal branding practices such as

brand leadership and brand training. They further argued that

brand commitment results in BCB when employees are provided

with more brand knowledge and effective leadership. In

addition, Boukis et al. (2014) opined that organizations are

focusing on satisfying the needs of their employees through

(

knowledge) and skills needed to enhance his or her brand-

consistent behavior (BCB) in order to achieve brand goals. The

101

Journal of Environmental Treatment Techniques

2020, Volume 8, Issue 1, Pages: 99-106

construct was measured using 4 items from Chang et al. (2012)

and Punjaisri, Evanschitzky, and Wilson (2009).

5.2 Evaluation of PLS-SEM Results

Based on the suggestion made by Hair Jr, Sarstedt, Hopkins,

and Kuppelwieser, (2014) both the outer model (measurement

model) and the inner model (structural model) evaluation were

conducted. All the constructs were measured with reflective

measurement models, suggesting that the latent variable caused

the measured variables (45). In order to assess the validity of the

scales, a confirmatory factor analysis was performed, leading to

some items deletions. Specifically, items with lower loadings

were deleted in order to increase the composite reliability and

the average variance extracted (18). Therefore, all the indicators

loadings loaded above the threshold of 0.60 as suggested by Hair

et al. (2010). In general, the results revealed that reliability and

the validity of the measurement instrument are good. In this

study composite reliability (CR) was used to evaluate internal

consistency of the constructs as it is argued to be more

appropriate Hair et al.(2014) and were found to be above the

threshold of 0.70 this indicates that they are satisfactory.

Convergent validity was assessed using average variance

extracted (AVE) and all values are higher than the acceptable

value of 0.50 (18). Specifically, in this study composite

reliability (CR) ranges from 0.807 to 0.929 and average variance

extracted (AVE) ranges from 0.524 to 0.819 as contain in table

1 below. Furthermore, using Fornell and Lacker (1983)

criterion, the discriminant validity was found to be satisfactory;

as the square roots of the AVE of all the constructs are higher

than the factor correlation as shown in Table 2 below.

Brand leadership is defined in this study as the approach or

style a leader used to motivate his or her followers (employees)

to engage or exhibit brand consistent behavior (BCB). It was

considered to consist of two dimensions namely transactional

brand leadership (TSL) and transformational brand leadership

(

TSF).

Transactional brand leadership is defined as leaders’

approach to motivate his/her followers to act on behalf of

corporate brand by emphasizing to a contingency rationale in

follower’s minds. It was measured using 10 items adapted from

Morhart et al. (2009).

Transformational brand leadership is defined as leader’s

approach to motivate his/her followers to act on behalf of

corporate brand by appealing to their values and personal

conviction. The dimension was measured using 20 items

adapted from Morhart et al. (2009).

Employee brand fit is viewed in this study as the

compatibility between individual and the organization or brand

that occurs when at least one entity provides what the other

needs or they share similar values or both. The variable was

operationalized as one-dimension construct with 4 items adapted

from Boukis and Gounaris (2014).

All responses to items are measured on seven-point Likert

scale, ranging from 1= strongly disagree to 7= strongly agree.

.3 Analysis Method

This study employed partial least square (PLS path

After achieving the measurement model, the next we

evaluate the structural model (inner model) results. Specifically,

the main and the mediating hypotheses were analyzed using

PLS-SEM bootstrap analysis based on the arguments by

researchers on its advantages over other methods of testing

mediation (18, 32, 50) as shown in Figure 2 below. In this study,

we followed the criteria suggested by Hair et al. (2014) to assess

the inner model. First we determine the path coefficient and the

results revealed significant relationship between brand training

and BCB at (β0.266, p<0.00), and between brand leadership and

BCB at (β0.558, p<0.00). In addition, significant relationships

was found between the mediator and the dependent variable at

(β0.664, p<0.00). On the direct relationship between the

mediator and the independent variables, brand leadership was

found to have significant relationship with brand fit at (β0.615,

p<0.00) while brand training was not significant with the

mediator (β0.066, p<0.279). Moreover, the indirect relationship

between brand training and employee BCB was not significant,

and hence, employee brand fit does not mediate the relationship

(β0.043, p<0.279). On the other hand, significant indirect

relationship was established between brand leadership and

employee’s BCB (β0.408, p<0.00), hence employee brand fit

mediates the relationship between brand leadership and

modeling) using smartpls 3.0 method to analyzed the results.

The technique was used as it was argued to be more appropriate

for real world application and more appropriate when dealing

with complex model (18). Furthermore, it was used to avoid any

problem of normality that may arise in the course of the data

analysis. In addition, it was considered to be more superior in

assessing mediation, hence the technique is suitable in our study

(

33).

.4 Common Method Variance

The data in this study were collected from one source that is

the employee, and therefore this creates potential for common

method variance (CMV). In accordance with Podsakoff,

MacKenzie, Lee, and Podsakoff, (2003) the study employed

both procedural and statistical measures to address the problem

of CMV. In particular, procedural measures eliminate item

ambiguity such as double barrel questions and allowing the

respondents anonymity. Furthermore, Harman’s single factor as

a statistical measure was also used and the result revealed that

no single factor accounted for more than 50% of the variance.

Hence, CMV is not a problem in our study.

employee BCB. This is containing in Figure 2 and Table 3 and

below. In addition, we determined the R which was argued to

Results

predict the accuracy of a model (18). Specifically, the R-square

for both direct and indirect relationships were determined. The

results revealed the R value of 0.42 and 0.61 for both brand fit

and employee BCB and are all considered moderate in line with

Chin, (1998). Moreover, using stone-Gesser criterion which

assume that inner model must be able to provide evidence of

predictive relevance of the endogenous variables indicators, we

.1 Descriptive Analysis

A total of 254 completed questionnaires from both frontline

and back stage employees were used in this study. Among these

employees, the demographic results revealed that 62% were

customer contact staffs, while 32% had a university degree.

Furthermore, majority of the respondents had quit long working

experience and about 50% were contract staff. And in addition,

the data obtained shows that about 27% of the respondents were

from the customer relations department/unit.

determined the predictive relevance Q of this model (21). In this

study, we used PLS-SEM blindfolding procedures to assessed

the relevance of the inner model to obtain the cross-validated

redundancy measure for endogenous variables (18). Based on

Henseler et al. (2009) suggestion our inner model is assumed to

have predictive relevance as contain in Table 5.

102

Journal of Environmental Treatment Techniques

2020, Volume 8, Issue 1, Pages: 99-106

Table 1: Convergent Validity

Variables

Items

0.725

0.845

0.774

0.852

AVE

BCB2

BCB6

BCB7

BCB8

BCB9

BCB10

0.641

0.877

BHB

S-P

0.793

0.851

0.677

0.807

BCB11

BCB13

BCB14A

BCB14B

BCB14D

BCB14E

TSF1

TSF2

TSF3

TSF9

TSF11

TSF12

TSF13

TSF14

TSF16

TSF17

TSF20

TSL5

TSL6

TSL7

TSL8

TSL9

0.900

0.910

0.838

0.731

0.655

0.658

0.700

0.830

0.702

0.741

0.734

0.845

0.738

0.781

0.693

0.667

0.830

0.729

0.865

0.735

0.842

0.644

0.681

0.822

0.883

0.825

0.853

0.819

0.524

0.901

0.814

B-E

S-D

0.545

0.929

TSF

0.568

0.716

0.886

0.910

TSL

TSL10

BT1

BT2

BT3

BT4

Note: (B-E=brand endorsement, BF=brand fit, BHB=brand helping behavior, BT=brand training, S-D=brand self-development,

SP=sportsmanship, TSF=transformational brand leadership, TSL=transactional brand leadership).

Table 2: Latent Variable Correlation (Discriminant Validity)

Construct

B-E

BHB

S-D

TSF

TSL

0.905*

0.422

0.467

0.26

0.813*

0.65

BHB

0.801*

0.602

0.679

0.586

0.581

0.523

0.386

0.527

0.487

0.636

0.528

0.847*

0.481

0.293

0.44

S-D

0.513

0.617

0.463

0.359

0.723*

0.425

0.528

0.325

0.823*

0.361

0.413

TSF

0.738*

TSL

0.517

0.56

0.754*

Note: *Square root of AVE explained (B-E=brand endorsement, BF=brand fit, BHB=brand helping behavior, BT=brand training, S-

D=brand self-development, SP=sportsmanship, TSF=transformational brand leadership, TSL=transactional brand leadership)

Table 3: Path Coefficient (Direct relationship)

Standard

Deviation

(STDEV)

Decision

Original

Sample (O)

Statistics

Hypotheses/Path

BT -> BCB

BL -> BCB

BL -> BF

(|O/STDEV|)

P Values

Supported

Not supported

Supported

0.246

0.346

0.614

0.062

0.344

0.039

0.054

0.051

0.058

0.05

6.276

6.4

12.039

1.07

BT -> BF

0.285

BF -> BCB

6.912

Note *significant at 0.01

103

Journal of Environmental Treatment Techniques

2020, Volume 8, Issue 1, Pages: 99-106

Table 4: Mediation Results (Indirect relationship)

Standard

Decision

Original Sample Deviation

Statistics

Hypotheses/Path

BL ->BF ->BCB

BT ->BF ->BCB

(O)

(STDEV)

(|O/STDEV|)

P Values

Supported

0.211

0.021

0.041

5.194

1.071

Not supported

0.02

0.285

Table 5: Predictive Relevance (Q²)

Construct

BCB

SSO

SSE

Q²

3,048.00

1,016.00

2,363.14

760.228

0.225

0.252

Figure 2: Structural Model Results

King and So, (2013) which revealed insignificant impact of

brand training on employee brand-building behavior. This study

has further provided empirical support on the impact of brand

leadership towards employee’s BCB. This is also in line with

findings of previous studies (44, 29). Moreover, this study has

found insignificant impact of employee brand training on

employee brand fit. Our finding has contradicted the finding of

Matanda and Ndubisi, (2013). However the result is in line with

the finding of Chatman, (1991), that is training was found to

have insignificant impact on organization fit. Furthermore, the

findings of this study have revealed significant effect of brand

leadership on employee brand fit. Previously, the impact of

brand leadership on brand fit was not empirically tested, but

rather it was conceptually argued to have impact on brand fit

Discussion

Existing literatures has suggested the effect of internal

branding practices such as brand training and brand leadership

on employee’s BCB (9, 29, 44, 10). This study has further

redefined the existing literatures by investigating how internal

branding practices such as brand training and brand leadership

influence employee’s BCB through the mediating effect of

employee brand fit. In addition, the study has provided the

empirical support to the impact of brand leadership on employee

brand fit as other studies are basically augments (8, 46).

Moreover, the study has assessed the model from both frontline

and back stage employees’ perspectives.

This study provides empirical support on the impact of

internal branding practices towards employee’s BCB. The result

has shown that the organization can use internal brand building

to trigger employees to exhibit extra role behavior in order to

achieve brand goals. In particular, brand training was found to

have a great impact on employee’s BCB. This provides further

support to previous studies that argued that brand training exerts

certain degree of impact on employee’s BCB (10, 13, 14).

However, our findings contradicted the empirical finding of

(

46). Therefore, our study has provided empirical support to the

arguments of previous studies.

In addition, in line with previous studies (19, 7), this study

has further provided empirical support on the influence of brand

fit towards employee’s BCB. This has revealed that employees

that are fit with the brand are more likely to exhibit BCB that

may strengthen brand values. Similarly, the finding of this study

has revealed that employee brand fit does not mediate the

104

Journal of Environmental Treatment Techniques

2020, Volume 8, Issue 1, Pages: 99-106

relationship between brand training and employee BCB. Hence,

the result provides inverse empirical support to equity theory;

that is the employees perceive that there is imbalance between

their inputs and corresponding outputs, which demotivate them

to exhibit BCB. On the other hand, brand fit was found to

mediate the relationship between brand leadership and

employee’s BCB. This has empirically supported the equity

theory by Adams, (1963) which assume that as employee

perceive balance between their inputs and corresponding outputs

such employee will be motivated to exhibit BCB.

4. Baykalova ED, Artyna MK, Dorzhu NS, Ochur TK, Mongush DS.

Morphological interference in the process of mastering English

speech in conditions of interaction of Tuvan, Russian and English

as a foreign language. Opción. 2018;34(85-2):35-60.

Blau P. Exchange and power in social life. Wiley, p.352. 1964.

Boukis A, Gounaris S. Linking IMO with employees' fit with their

environment and reciprocal behaviours towards the firm. Journal of

Services Marketing. 2014 Feb 4;28(1):10-21.

7. Boukis A, Kostopoulos G, Katsaridou I. IMO and different fit types

as key enablers of employee brand-supporting behaviour. Journal of

Strategic Marketing. 2014 Feb 23;22(2):117-34.

Burmann C, Zeplin S. Building brand commitment: A behavioural

approach to internal brand management. Journal of brand

management. 2005 Apr 1;12(4):279-300.

Managerial Implications

The implication of this study to the management is that it is

9. Burmann C, Zeplin S, Riley N. Key determinants of internal brand

management success: An exploratory empirical analysis. Journal of

brand management. 2009 Jan 1;16(4):264-84.

important that internal branding be used to encourage positive

brand behavior. Therefore, this study has revealed the

importance of internal branding for employee’s outcome such as

brand fit and BCB. As such, management should attempt to use

internal branding to enhance employee’s BCB. Furthermore,

internal brand building can also be used to enhance employee’s

brand fit which in turn will motivate employees to exhibit BCB.

Hence, it is important for the management to be informed that

appropriate brand leadership and brand training programs need

to be conducted. This is to ensure that employees are provided

with better skills and understanding of brand roles and their

responsibilities so that they will behave as expected particularly

during service encounters.

0. Chang A, Chiang HH, Han TS. A multilevel investigation of

relationships among brand-centered HRM, brand psychological

ownership, brand citizenship behaviors, and customer satisfaction.

European Journal of marketing. 2012 May 25;46(5):626-62.

1. Chatman JA. Improving interactional organizational research: A

model of person-organization fit. Academy of management Review.

1989 Jul 1;14(3):333-49.

12. Chatman JA. Matching people and organizations - selection and

socialization in public accounting firms. Administrative Science

Quarterly. 1991;36(3):459–484.

3. Chen G, Klismoski RJ. The impact of expectations in teams As

mediated by work performance social exchanges, characteristics,

and empowerment. Management. 2003;46(5):591–607.

4. Chiang H-H. et al.. Corporate branding, brand psychological

ownership and brand citizenship behaviour: Multilevel analysis and

managerial implications. Journal of General Management.

Directions for Future Research

The present study adds to the current knowledge that internal

013;39(1):55–80.

branding has great impact on employee’s BCB. While most of

the existing studies focused on only customer contact

employees, this study has considered both frontline and

backstage employees who are considered to play important role

towards achieving competitive advantage. The study has also

provided the empirical evidence by showing the link between

internal branding practices and employee’s BCB through the

mediating effect of employee brand fit. Furthermore, this

provided empirical support to the link between brand leadership

and employee brand fit, which was previously based on the

assumption that leaders exert great influence on employees

behaviors.

Nevertheless, it is acknowledged that this study only focused

on the telecommunication industry, which is one out of many

industries in the service sector. This has limited the

generalization of the study’s findings as other industries may

have specific natures that are not shared by others. Therefore,

future research may consider other industries within the service

sector. Similarly, the study is cross-sectional and hence ignores

time-lag effects. As such, longitudinal data may improve the

empirical findings and the understanding of the mechanism

through which employee’s BCB can be enhanced. Furthermore,

it is suggested that future studies should consider other

determinants of employee’s BCB such brand reward, rand

communication and brand recruitment.

5. Egene O. The impact of service quality on customer loyalty in the

Nigerian mobile telecommunication industry. Nigerian Journal of

Mnangement Sciences. 2013;3(1):81–90.

6. Haghshenas S, Iravani MR, Nasrabadi HAB. Study of Effective

Factors on Job Satisfaction of Omid Hospital Staff in Isfahan City.

UCT Journal of Management and Accounting Studies.

2015;3(1):15-17.

17. Hair JF. et al. Multivariate Data Analysis 7th ed., New Jersey:

Pearson Prentice Hall. 2010.

8. Hair Jr, F.J. et al.. Partial least squares structural equation modeling

PLS-SEM) An emerging tool in business research. European

(

Business Review. 2014;26(2):106–121.

9. Helm VS, Renk U, Mishra A.. Exploring the impact of employees’

self concept, brand identification and brand pride on brand

citizenship behaviors. European Journal of Marketing.

2016;50(1/2):58–77.

20. Henkel S. et al. Managing brand consistent employee behaviour:

relevance and managerial control of behavioural branding. Journal

of Product & Brand Management. 2007;16(5):310–320.

1. Henseler J, Ringle CM, Sinkovics RR. The use of partial least

squares path modeling in international marketing. New challenges

to international marketing advances in international marketing.

009;20:277–319.

22. Keller KL. Building strong brands in

communications environment. Journal

Communications. 2009;15(2-3): 139–155.

modern marketing

of Marketing

3. King C, So KKF. Enhancing hotel employees’ brand understanding

and brand-building behavior in China. Journal of Hospitality

&Tourism Research, XX(X). 2013:1–25.

References

4. Lauver KJ, Kristof-Brown A. Distinguishing between employees’

perceptions of person–job and person–organization fit. Journal of

Vocational Behavior. 2001;59(3):454–470.

5. Lꢀhndorf B, Diamantopoulos A. Internal branding: Social identity

and social exchange perspectives on turning employees into brand

champions. Journal of Service Research. 2014;17(3):310–325.

6. Martiana AM. Motivation and Obstacles Faced by Women Halal

Fashion Entrepreneurs and Role of The Business on Women’s

Economic Empowermentin Yogyakarta Indonesia. Humanities &

Social Sciences Reviews. 2018;6(2):106-110.

Adeleke A, Suraju AA. The determinants of customer loyalty in

Nigeria's GSM market. International Journal of Business and Social

Science. 2012 Jul 1;3(14):209–222.

Ameen AM, Ahmed MF, Hafez MA. The Impact of Management

Accounting and How It Can Be Implemented into the

Organizational Culture. Dutch Journal of Finance and Management.

018 Jun 14;2(1):02.

Aurand TW, Gorchels L, Bishop TR. Human resource

management's role in internal branding: an opportunity for cross-

functional brand message synergy. Journal of Product & Brand

Management. 2005 May 1;14(3):163-9.

7. Matanda MJ, Ndubisi NO. Internal marketing, internal branding,

and organisational outcomes: The moderating role of perceived goal

105

Journal of Environmental Treatment Techniques

2020, Volume 8, Issue 1, Pages: 99-106

congruence. Journal of Marketing Management. 2013;29(9-

0):1030–1055.

8. Melo R, Bezerra MC, Dantas J, Matos R, de Melo Filho IJ, Oliveira

AS, ... Maciel PRM. Sensitivity analysis techniques applied in cloud

computing environments. In 2017 12th Iberian Conference on

Information Systems and Technologies (CISTI) 2017 (pp. 1-7).

IEEE.

9. Morhart FM, Herzog W, Tomczak T. Brand-specific leadership:

Turning employees into brand champions. Journal of Marketing.

009;73(5):122–142.

0. Morley MJ. Person-organization fit. Journal of managerial

Psychology. 2007;22(2):109–117.

1. Podsakoff PM. et al. Common method biases in behavioral research:

a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies.

Journal of Applied Psychology. 2003;88(5):879–903.

2. Preacher KJ, Hayes AF. Asymptotic and resampling strategies for

assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator

models. Behavior research methods. 2008;40(3):879–891.

3. Preacher KJ, Hayes AF. SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating

indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior research

methods, instruments, & computers. 2004;36(4):717–731.

4. Pritchard RD. Equity theory: A review and critique. Organizational

Behavior and Human Performance. 1969;4(2):176–211.

5. Punjaisri K, Evanschitzky H, Rudd J. Aligning employee service

recovery performance with brand values: The role of brand-specific

leadership. Journal of Marketing Management. 2013;29(9-10):981–

006.

6. Punjaisri K, Evanschitzky H, Wilson A. Internal branding: an

enabler of employees’ brand-supporting behaviors. Journal of

service management. 2009;20(2):209–226.

7. Punjaisri K, Wilson AM. Internal branding processꢁ: Key

mechanisms, outcomes and moderating factors. 2011;45(9): 1521–

537.

8. Punjaisri K, Wilson AM. The role of internal branding in the

delivery of employee brand promise. 2007;15(1):57–70.

9. Punjaisri K, Wilson A, Evanschitzky H. Exploring the influences of

internal branding on employees’ brand promise delivery:

Implications for strengthening customer-brand relationships.

Journal of Relationship Marketing. 2008;7(4):407–424.

0. Sekaran U, Bougie R. Research methods for business. A skill

building approach 5th ed., UK: John Willey. 2010.

1. Settoon RP, Bennett N, Liden RC. Social exchange in

organizations: Perceived organizational support, leader-member

exchange, and employee reciprocity. Journal of Applied

Psychology. 1996;81(3):219–227.

2. Shaari H, Salleh S, Hussin Z. Relationship between brand

knowledge and brand rewards, and employees’brand citizenship

behavior: the Mediating roles of brand commitment. International

Journal of Business & Society. 2012;13(3):335–354.

3. Shaari H, Salleh S, Hussin Z. World review of business research

exploring the dimension of internal brand citizenship behavior in

Malaysiaꢁ: A Case of Northern Malaysia hotel. World Review of

Business Research. 2011;1(1):25–33.

4. Shaari H, Salleh SM, Hussin Z. The effect of brand leadership styles

on employees’ brand citizenship behavior. Asian Social Science.

015;11(18):86–92.

5. Thien LM, Shafaei A, Rasoolimanesh SM. 2017. Specifying and

assessing a multidimensional friendship quality construct. Child

Indicators Research.

6. Vallaster C, De Chernatony L. Internal brand building and

structuration: the role of leadership. European Journal of Marketing.

006;40(7):761–784.

7. Wallace E, de Chernatony L, Buil I. Building bank brands: How

leadership behavior influences employee commitment. Journal of

Business Research. 2013 Feb 1;66(2):165-71.

8. Yang J-T, Wan C-S, Wu C-W. 2015. Effect of internal branding on

employee brand commitment and behavior in hospitality. Tourism

and Hospitality Research: 1–14.

9. Yaniv E, Farkas, F. The impact of person-organization fit on the

corporate brand perception of employees and of customers. Journal

of Change Management. 2005;5(4):447–461.

0. Zhao X, Lynch JG, Chen Q. Reconsidering Baron and Kenny:

Myths and truths about mediation analysis. Journal of Consumer

Research. 2010;37(2):197–206.

106