BRAND ORIENTATION AND MARKETING PERFORMANCE OF DOMESTIC AIRLINE OPERATORS IN NIGERIA - Paul M. Nadube and J.U.D. Didia

International Journal of Research and Development Studies

Volume 7, Number 2, 2016

ISSN: 2056 - 2121

BRAND ORIENTATION AND MARKETING PERFORMANCE OF DOMESTIC AIRLINE OPERATORS IN NIGERIA

Paul M. Nadube and J.U.D. Didia

Department of Marketing, Faculty of Management Sciences

Rivers State University of Science and Technology, Port-Harcourt, River State, Nigeria

Email: pnadube@yahoo.com

                                                           

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this study is to examine the association between brand orientation and marketing performance of domestic airline operators in Nigeria. The study adopted the structured questionnaire to obtain responses from both staff and customers of domestic airline operators. Retrieved copies of questionnaire were analyzed using both descriptive and inferential statistics. Descriptive statistics were used to determine the mean and standard deviation of the distribution, while Spearman Rank Order Correlation Coefficient was used to ascertain the association between brand orientation and the measures

of marketing performance of domestic airline operators in Nigeria. The results of the study shows that there is a significant association between brand orientation and the two measures of marketing performance namely: brand awareness and service quality. It is recommended that efforts should be made by domestic airline operators in Nigeria to encourage their employees to be brand oriented in order to build a strong and competitive brand that will project the image of the airlines.

Keywords: Brand orientation, brand awareness, service quality

INTRODUCTION

The Nigerian aviation industry had been a subject of controversy in the recent past. Prior to deregulation, the airline operators in Nigeria were characterized by irregular and ineffective services and were generally shambolic in nature (Ogunkoya, 2008). The consumers were left with “Hobson’s choice” as alternatives do not exist; there were limited participants and no options offered irrespective of the quality of services rendered (Adeniji, 2000). These were the prevalent features which characterized the airline services in Nigeria prior to deregulation. However after deregulation, the airline services in Nigeria witnessed a new era of growth and advancement (Adeniji, 2000). The deregulation administration offered an increased interest and investment in the Nigerian aviation industry. As more airlines entered the market, an enhanced investment in fleets of aircraft occurred with a view to retire the old and risky fleet and also to imbue confidence in the market. The services offered witnessed a turnaround as market driven innovations began to attract more passengers. In addition, the air service in the domestic terminal recorded tremendous changes as compared to the old. The domestic operations of airline services benefited from deregulation and privatization as consortium invested in terminal development. The improved facilities and amenities offered in the new terminal engendered improved services to the passengers. Indeed, the airline services in Nigeria after deregulation witnessed an improved, standardized services compared to the period before deregulation (Adeniji, 2000).

In spite of all the improvement and innovation accompanying the deregulation and privatization of airline services in Nigeria, many airlines customers are not still satisfied as there are many challenges prevalent in the system. Lawani and Eteghe, (2012) argued that Nigerian airlines open shops with funfair and before the travelling public gets to settle down to enjoy the services of these airlines, they are out of business. Many aviation analysts have tried to proffer solutions to the problem, but these solutions seem not to be sufficient to address the anomalies. These challenges include among others poor brand orientation and clearly indicate the relative absence of Integrated Marketing Communications (IMC). A detail manifestation of this anomaly relate to such prevailing challenges as ineffective booking procedures (online and offline), inadequate customer online self service, lack of schedule integrity and flight delay or outright cancellation

Brand Orientation and Marketing Performance of Domestic

Airline Operators in Nigeria

(Ogunkoya, 2008). It is worthwhile to argue that this dissatisfaction orchestrated by the above factor existed because of ineffective marketing communication programme to educate and re-orientate customers on the activities of the airlines. A concrete understanding of customer needs relating to value, choice, convenience, service and a pleasant purchasing experience is an essential starting point. This is highly underscored by the concept of brand orientation. Hence we empirically investigated how brand orientation affects marketing performance of domestic airline operators in Nigeria. The next section focuses on the theoretical foundation of the study.

Theoretical foundation of brand orientation

Brand communication is more than a name, term, sign, symbol, or any other feature within the context of IMC. Overton-de Klerk (1993) argued that a product or company becomes a brand through communication. Communication is the means through which value is added to the product or company, and the product or company is entrenched as a “symbol” within the mind of the consumer. According to Schultz and Barnes (1999) “the brand has become a part of the relationship between the marketing organisation and the consumer”. The brand represents the bond between the buyer and the seller and is a relationship that only the consumer can create.

Ratnatunga and Ewing (2005) outlined the potential role of IMC in enhancing brand equity. These authors provided a new construct called “brand capability” to indicate what one can actually achieve with the brand as asset. A brand, according to the global branding consultant Interbrand Schechter, is the promise of an experience (Moriarty et al. 1995). A powerful brand enhances awareness, differentiates the organisation and commands a premium in today’s highly competitive marketplace (Agundu & Nadube, 2016). Overton-de Klerk (1993) is of the opinion that a strong brand image can establish a “fund of goodwill” or “brand equity” from which future benefits can be reaped and further suggested that goodwill or brand equity is often equated in the industry with the term “communication stock”.

Urde (1999) presents Brand Orientation as another brand building model that focuses on brands as strategic resources. Brand Orientation is an approach in which the processes of the organization revolve around the creation, development, and protection of brand identity in an ongoing interaction with target customers with the aim of achieving lasting competitive advantages in the form of brands. Urde, (1999) argued that brand orientation focuses on developing brands in a more active and deliberate manner, starting with the brand identity as a strategic platform. It can be said that as a consequence of this orientation the brand becomes a total response to customer needs and wants (Nadube, 2010). This should be, however, considered carefully given that “what is demanded by customers at any given moment is not necessarily the same as that which will strengthen the brand as a strategic resource” (Urde, 1999). Following this reasoning, the wants and needs of customers are not ignored, but they are not allowed to unilaterally steer the development of the brand and determine its identity.

The brand orientation model posit that “the starting point for a process of brand building is to first create a clear understanding of the internal brand identity; the brand then, becomes a strategic platform that provides the framework for the satisfaction of customers’ wants and needs” (Urde 1999). The point of departure for a brand oriented company is its brand mission. Urde’s Brand Hexagon (1999), integrates brand equity and brand identity with a company’s direction, strategy and identity. The right side of the model reflects the reference function -product category and product, which are analyzed rationally-, while the left side of the model reflects the emotional function –corporate and brand name, which are analyzed emotionally. A brand is an experienced in its entirety which means that both emotions and rational thought are involved. The lower part of the model -mission and vision- reflects the company’s intentions towards the brand, while the upper part reflects the way that target consumers interpret the brand. At the centre of the model lies the core process of brand meaning creation, which includes the positioning and core values.

International Journal of Research and Development Studies

Volume 7, Number 2, 2016

In summary, in a brand-oriented organization, the objective is -within the framework of the brand- to create value and meaning. The brand is a strategic platform for interplay with the target group and thus is not limited to being a total response to what at any moment is demanded by customers (Nadube, 2010). Additionally, Urde (2003) maintained that the brand building process is two-part: internal and external. He defines the internal process as that used primarily to describe the relationship between the organization and the brand, with the internal objective being for the organization to live its brands. Conversely, the external process is that concerned with relations between the brand and the customer, with the external objective of creating value and forming relationships with the customer. Brand orientation emphasizes the significance of the brand identity (mission, vision, and values) as a guiding light and hub for organizational culture, behaviour, and strategy. The internal aspect of the brand — the organization — is seen as vital in the brand-building process. The perspective is from the inside out, while the needs and wants of consumers are recognized, the integrity of the brand is paramount. The concept of marketing performance is considered next

The concept of marketing performance

Marketing performance is the dependent variable of this study which is predicted by brand orientation. Marketing performance measurement is part of (business) performance measurement, a field that aims to support strategy execution by creating insights in company performance. Marketing performance measurement aims to assess “the relationship between marketing activities and business performance” (Clark & Ambler, 2001). Herein marketing relates to all activities conducted to stimulate, facilitate, and accelerate sales (Lee et al., 2000 & Alsem, 2007). Effective marketing practices result in success with winning and retaining customer preferences, which supports the achievement of long-term goals (Ambler & Kokkinaki, 2002). In this process marketing should not be conceived as a separate function within firms, but as shared responsibility of the business as a whole (Drucker, 1954 & Grönroos, 2007). Marketing performance measurement focuses on assessing (1) how well customer preferences are won and retained, (2) to which extent that contributed to the stimulation, facilitation, and acceleration of sales, and (3) how that impacted overall firm performance. Marketing performance evaluations can in these processes contribute to the following four functions: (1) annual-plan control, (2) profitability control, (3) efficiency control, and (4) strategic control. The first and last function differ from each other in the sense that annual-plan control attempts to evaluate if planned results are realized, while strategic control strives to assess if the best market, product, and channel opportunities are pursued (Kotler & Keller, 2006). Given the fact that a firm’s survival depends on its capacity to create value, and value is defined by customers (Day, 1990), marketing makes a fundamental contribution to long-term business success.  In spite of the importance of measuring marketing performance, there is little research on the measures used to evaluate marketing performance and effectiveness till now (Paulo et al, 2003). Ambler and Kokkinaki (1997) examined seven marketing magazines and surprisingly found that only 11.5 per cent of the articles analysed in their research dealt in one way or another with the evaluation of marketing results. Hence, the Marketing Science Institute made this question one of its research priorities since the year 2000 (Eusebio, et. al., 2006). When considering marketing performance and success measures it is noticed that there are many measures. Clark (1999) identifies about 20 measures, Ambler and Riley (2000) tested a total of 38 measures, Davidson (1999) considers ten important measures of marketing effectiveness and, Meyer (1998) notes many measures. However, Clark (1999) suggests that we should make a better use of the existing measures rather than formulating new ones. Recently, in an attempt to organize performance measures, Kokkinaki and Ambler (1999) have summarized and established six categories for marketing performance and success measures which are:- (1) Financial measures (turnover, contribution margin and profit), (2) Competitive market measures (market share, advertising and  promotional share), (3) Consumer behaviour measures (consumer penetration, loyalty  and customer gained). (4) Consumer intermediate measures (brand recognition, satisfaction and purchase intention). (5) Direct customer measures

Brand Orientation and Marketing Performance of Domestic

Airline Operators in Nigeria

(distribution level, profitability of intermediaries and service quality). (6) Innovativeness measures (products launched and their revenue).

The evaluation of marketing performance is recognized as a key task for management. However, measuring the impact and the value of marketing has been a long standing problem for senior marketing managers (Clark, 1999; Kokkinaki & Ambler, 1999; Marketing Week, 2001). In response to this pressure the Marketing Science Institute (MSI) placed accountability and return on investment of marketing expenditure at the top of its research priorities for 2008–10 (MSI 2008). Financial measures such as sales and profit provide only partial indicators of marketing performance due to their historical orientation and typically short term horizon (Mizik & Jacobson 2008). Intangible, market-based assets (nonfinancial measures), on the other hand, provide a richer understanding of marketing performance, reconciling short-and long-term performance (Ambler 2003) as well as bridging marketing and shareholder value (Srivastava et al. 1998). It is necessary to pay special attention to the consumer metrics, which is, regularly measuring the customer satisfaction level, consumer loyalty, new customer gained, customer retained or customer lost. For that managers have to give these consumer metrics priority in the way they assess their marketing performance. In with this understanding, Brand Awareness and Service quality are used as measures of marketing performance

Brand awareness

Awareness measures are used extensively in research as a gauge of brand performance and marketing effectiveness. The most commonly used are those relating to brand and advertising awareness. Brand awareness is considered one of the key pillars of a brand’s consumer-based brand equity (Aaker, 1991). Keller and Davey (2001) describe building brand awareness as the way of ensuring potential customers know the categories in which the brand competes. Rossiter and Percy (1991) claim that brand awareness is the essential first step in building a brand. Rossiter and Percy (1987) describe brand awareness as being essential for the communications process to occur as it precedes all other steps in the process. Brand awareness measures the accessibility of the brand in memory. Without brand awareness occurring, no other communication effects can occur. For a consumer to buy a brand they must first be made aware of it. Brand attitude cannot be formed, and intention to buy cannot occur unless brand awareness has occurred (Rossiter & Percy 1987). In memory theory, brand awareness is positioned as a vital first step in building the “bundle” of associations which are attached to the brand in memory (Stokes 1985). The brand is conceptualised as a node in memory which allows other information about the brand to be “anchored” to it (Aaker 1991b).

Brand awareness has been hypothesised to play a crucial role in determining the consideration set: the small set of brands which a consumer gives serious attention when making a purchase (Narayana & Markin 1975). A brand that is not considered cannot be chosen (Baker et al. 1986), and further, the probability of the brand being chosen is a function of the number of other brands in the consideration set. A brand that has some level of brand awareness is far more likely to be considered, and therefore chosen, than brands which the consumer is unaware of. Additionally, the strength of awareness of the brands within the consideration set can also be significant. Woodside & Wilson (1985) confirmed the importance of top-of-mind awareness in a study which found that the higher the position of the brand in the consumer's mind measured by unaided recall, the higher the purchase intention and the higher the relative purchase of the brand. In another study, increases in brand awareness were shown to increase the probability of choice even without any accompanying change in attitude or perceptions (Nedungadi 1990). Brand awareness can also affect decisions about brands within the consideration set (Hoyer & Brown 1990; Keller 1993). Consumers may employ a heuristic (decision rule) to buy only familiar, well-established brands (Roselius 1971). Consumers do not always spend a great deal of time making

International Journal of Research and Development Studies

Volume 7, Number 2, 2016

purchase decisions. A further way brand awareness may affect choice within the consideration set is by influencing perceived quality.

Brand awareness “relates to the likelihood that a brand name will come to mind and the ease with which it does so” (Keller, 1993,). It is based on both brand recognition and recall (Aaker, 1991 & Keller, 1993). There are three widely used measures of brand awareness: top of mind, spontaneous and aided. Top of mind, or the first brand recalled in response to the product category cue, was one of the first brand awareness measures to receive attention, emerging as one of the best ‘predictors’ of choice in Axelrod’s (1968) longitudinal study comparing different measures. Spontaneous awareness (i.e., unprompted recall of the brand name) and aided awareness (i.e., recognition of the brand name when prompted) are the other two commonly used measures. Some researchers have argued that particular measures are more appropriate in different situations. Rossiter and Percy (1991) argued that when options are present at the time of purchase (e.g., brands on a supermarket shelf) then aided awareness is relevant, when they are not, spontaneous awareness should be used. Likewise Lynch and Srull (1982) distinguish between memory based, stimulus based and mixed (both) situations where the ability to spontaneously recall or recognize something have differing importance. Dickson and Sawyer (1990) suggested top of mind awareness is more relevant when a choice between competing brands is made quickly; they argued this measure should be applied to low involvement impulse purchases such as most products in supermarket settings (Franzen, 1999).

Service Quality

Service industry is playing an increasingly important role in the overall economies of both developed and developing countries. Gronroos (1983) defined service as: “An activity or series of activities of more or less intangibles nature that normally, but not necessarily, take place in interactions between the customer and service employees and/or physical resources or goods and/or systems of service provider, which are provided as solutions to customer problems". Service is any primary or complementary activity that does not directly produce a physical product - that is, the non-goods part of the transaction between customer and provider" (Payne, 1993). Whereas Kotler et al., (1999) defined service as any activity or benefit that one party offers to another which is essentially intangible and does not result in the ownership of anything, and it may or may not be tied to a physical product

In today’s competitive environment delivering high quality service is the key for a sustainable competitive advantage. Global competition has become a prime reality for today’s organisations and the aggressive environment that they operate in is even more challenging and dynamic (Solis et al., 1998). In such a competitive scenario only those companies which attempt to exceed their consumers increasing expectations will succeed in the highly aggressive environment that they operate in (Sinha & Ghosal, 1999). Kotler (2000) argued “It is not enough to satisfy customers. We must delight them”. In the light of this, organisations will succeed only by delivering valuable services to their customers (Zineldin, 2005). The superiority of providing valuable services is translated as quality in the customers’ eyes (Zineldin, 2006). Brown et al. (2005) opined that the ‘moments-of truth’ are critical for an organisation. Customers judge service quality relative to what they want by comparing their perceptions of service experiences with their expectations of what the service performance should be (Agundu & Nadube, 2016).

Quality in a service business has become a measure of the extent to which the service provider meets the customer’s expectations. Companies have found that in order to increase profits and market share, they should pay much attention to service quality. Service quality has become a key strategic factor for companies to differentiate their products and services from other competitors by using service quality as a process that customers evaluate. The search for service quality is with no doubt the most important consumer trend of the new era, as consumers now are

Brand Orientation and Marketing Performance of Domestic

Airline Operators in Nigeria

demanding higher quality in products and services than ever before. Delivering high service quality is a good strategy for businesses to succeed.

Quality has been defined differently by authors, Crosby, (1984), defined it as ‘conformance to requirements, Eaglier and Langeard (1987) defined it as ‘one that satisfies the customer’. Parasuraman et al. (1994) defined service quality as a “global judgment, or attitude, relating to the superiority of the service. Service quality presents ‘the consumer’s overall impression of the relative inferiority / superiority of the organization and its services”. Therefore, service quality is a key of survival to all servicing companies. Maintaining service quality at certain level and improving service quality must be life-time efforts to those companies who desire life-time prosperity in customers’ heart (Cronin & Taylor, 1992).

Gronroos (1992) in his argument defined service quality as a difference between customer expectations of ‘what they want’ and their perceptions of ‘what they get’. Several authors have argued about the importance of quality to service firms, and have demonstrated its relationship with profits, increased markets share, return on investment, customer satisfaction, and future purchasing intention. Thus, service quality has become a significant differentiator and the most powerful competitive weapon that organizations want to possess.

According to Parasuraman et al., (1988) service quality has three features which are unique to services: intangibility, heterogeneity, and inseparability of production and consumption. Therefore, they suggest that in the absence of objective measures, an appropriate assessment of the service quality of a firm is to measure consumers’ perceptions of quality. Production and consumption of many services are inseparable; as a consequence quality is not designed at manufacturing plants. Quality of services occurs during service delivery, during an interaction between a client and the service firm.

SERVQUAL is an instrument developed by Parasuraman et al., (1985), which centred on the notion of perceived quality. It is based on the difference between consumers’ expectations and perceptions of service. Exploratory research conducted in 1985 showed that consumers judge service quality by using the same general criteria, regardless of the type of service. Parasuraman et al. capture these criteria using a scale composed of 22 items designed to load on five dimensions reflecting service quality.  The SERVQUAL instrument has been the predominant method used to measure customers’ perceptions of service quality (Shahin, 2010). It has five generic dimensions or factors which are stated as follows:

(1) Tangibles: Physical facilities, equipment and appearance of personnel.

(2) Reliability: Ability to perform the promised service dependably and accurately.

(3) Responsiveness: Willingness to help customers and provide prompt service.

(4) Assurance: Knowledge and courtesy of employees and their ability to inspire trust and confidence; (Including competence, courtesy, credibility and security).

(5) Empathy: Caring and individualized attention that the firm provides to its customers; (Including access, communication, understanding the customer).

Each item is used twice: first, to determine customer’s expectations about firms in general, within the service category being investigated; second, to measure perceptions of performance of a particular firm. These evaluations are collected using a seven-point Likert scale. According to the authors, the service quality is then the difference between Customer’s perceptions and expectations (Hudson, et al, 2002). SERVQUAL is a concise scale, easy to use by managers, and is now referred to as a standard by other service researchers (Llosa, et al; 1998). The scale has been replicated in many different service categories so as to examine its general ability.

International Journal of Research and Development Studies

Volume 7, Number 2, 2016

The study

This is an explanatory study and we adopted correlational method of investigation to establish the association between brand orientation and marketing performance in a non contrived setting. The unit of analysis was the different units/departments of the five functional domestic airline operators in Nigeria and their customers. This study is a cross sectional survey with minimal interference with the process. The sample of this study consist of staff and customers of the five (5) domestic airline operators identified to be functional in Nigeria which includes Arik Air, Aero Contractors, Associated Aviation, Overland and Dana Air (Nigerian Civil Aviation Authority, 2013). For airline operators, we focused on the Communication Directors at the head offices of the airlines and station managers, supervisors and desks officers and any other staff of the organisations that indicated willingness to participate at Port-Harcourt destinations (Port-Harcourt International Airport and Air force Based), Lagos destination (Murhtala Muhammed International Airport), Abuja destination (Nnandi Azikiwe International Airport) and Kano destination (Mallam Aminu Kano International Airport) totalling one hundred and eighty (180) staff. For the customer, a sample size of two hundred and two (202) was randomly chosen from the four destinations identified in the study. This comprised sixty (60) taken from Lagos, fifty two (52) from Abuja, fifty (50) from Port-Harcourt, and forty (40) from Kano. In all, three hundred and eighty two (382) respondents, comprising one hundred and eighty (180) organizational members and two hundred and two (202) customers constitute our sample size to which copies of questionnaire were administered. In this study, we adopted the structured questionnaire for purpose of primary data collection. The justification for this method centred on the survey.

Reliability

The study instrument was designed and tested through academic examination and pilot study. The study instrument was further subjected to reliability test with the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 17.0 with a threshold of 0.7 Cronbach Alpha set by Nunelly (1978). Table 1 shows the reliability results of the study variable.

Table 1 Reliability test of brand orientation and marketing performance.

Variable	Cronbach Alpha
Brand Orientation	0.976
Marketing Performance	0.970

Source: SPSS Output Version 17.0

Table 1 show that the Cronbach’s Alpha coefficients of the study variables were all above 17.0 indicting high degree of reliability and therefore used for further statistical analysis. Hence, the internal consistency reliability of the measures used in the study was good.

Findings with Descriptive Statistics

Table 2 Brand Orientation

B	Items
		Mean	Std Dev.
1	Management knows that the brand is central to corporate decision making and involves a broadened perspective of the operations of the organization with strategic goals being directly related to the brand	4.1034	1.17817
2	The organisation recognizes that the brand is central to building customer loyalty in the market place, and all communication related to the brand is linked to appropriate competitive positioning and value.	4.0172	1.16537
3	Management recognizes that the brand has a strong emotional and symbolic appeal, and is an expression of customer’s personality and value.	4.0345	1.05292
4	The organisation recognizes that the brand facilitates differentiation from competitors by communicating specific functional attributes and benefits to customers.	4.1264	.98315

Brand Orientation and Marketing Performance of Domestic

Airline Operators in Nigeria

The results of the descriptive analysis on brand orientation based on responses from four items on the research instrument in Table 2 shows that management of domestic airlines know that the brand is central to corporate decision making and involves a broadened perspective of the operations of the organization with strategic goals being directly related to the brand. Hence, we have a high mean score (x) of 4.1. Respondents strongly recognized and agreed that the brand is central to building customer loyalty, and all communication related to the brand is linked to appropriate competitive positioning and value. We also have a high mean score (x) of 4.0. The third item demonstrates that respondents recognized the brand as a strong emotional and symbolic appeal, and is an expression of customer’s personality and value, with a high mean score (x) of 4.0.  On the fourth item, respondents also recognized and agreed that the brand facilitates differentiation from competitors by communicating specific functional attributes and benefits to customers. The mean score (x) of 4.1 which is also high.

Association between Brand Orientation and Marketing Performance:

The result of the Spearman Rank Order Correlation Coefficient for the association between brand orientation and marketing performance is presented in table 3. The table gives the result of the statistical test of significance (p-value).

			BRAND	BRDAWR	SERVQUAL
Spearman's rho	BRAND	Correlation Coefficient	1.000	.630**	.580**
		Sig. (2-tailed)	.	.000	.000
		N	174	174	174

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Source: Research Data and SPSS Output Version 17.0

The result of the correlation in table 3 shows that there is a significant association between brand orientation and brand awareness and service quality. Brand orientation is significantly correlated to brand awareness (r = 0.630, p = 0.000 < 0.01). Also, Brand orientation is significantly correlated to service quality (r 0.580, p = 0.000<0.01). The association that exists between Brand orientation and measures of marketing performance is thus significant at the 0.01 significance level.

The result of the correlation in table 3 indicates that there is a significant association between the brand orientation and the two measures of marketing performance namely: brand awareness and service quality. The result shows that there is a statistically significant association between brand orientation and brand awareness, (r = 0.630, p = 0.000 < 0.01). The correlation coefficient represents a moderate correlation indicating substantial relationship. Specifically, this means that the brand has become a part of the relationship between the marketing organization and the consumer. A powerful brand enhances awareness, differentiates the organization and commands a premium in today’s highly competitive marketplace. The brand represents the bond between the buyer and the seller and is a relationship that only the consumers can create when they are aware of the brand. In other words, when employees live the brand, relationship is developed between the brand and the customer, with the external objective of creating value and forming relationships with the customer.

 Table 3 also shows that there is a statistically significant association between brand orientation and service quality, (r 0.580, p = 0.000 < 0.01).The correlation coefficient represents a moderate correlation signifying substantial relationship. In other words, brand orientation enhances service quality. A brand is the promise of an experience.  From the outcome of the survey, it is apparent that there is significant association between brand orientation and service quality. From the foregoing we find in this study that:

International Journal of Research and Development Studies

Volume 7, Number 2, 2016

1.       Domestic airline operators in Nigeria understand and appreciate that when employees are brand oriented (live the brand); air travellers (customers) become aware of the brand and as the brand is differentiated from other operators and commands a premium in today’s highly competitive marketplace.  

2.       Domestic airline operators in Nigeria understand and appreciate that when employees are brand oriented (live the brand); it assured air travellers (customers) of high service quality since a brand is the promise of an experience.

Discussion

Significant Association between Brand Orientation and Marketing Performance:

We found in this study that employees of domestic airline operators in Nigeria have demonstrated strong brand orientation which enables them to be brand ambassadors. Urde (1994) argued that the link between IMC and brand orientation is related to the development of brand identity. We argue that to create successful brand identity, it is necessary to ensure that brand messages are strategically driven, with the synchronization of communication being identified as one of the most important aspects of the brand orientation process. This is because a product or company becomes a brand through communication and that communication is the means through which value is added to the product or company, and the product or company is entrenched as a “symbol” within the mind of the consumer. The brand has therefore becomes a part of the relationship between domestic airline operators and their consumers. We argue that in recognizing this need to use brands as a basis for competitive advantage, organizations are reaching beyond the traditional market orientation framework and are developing a brand orientation.

We note that the focus of brand orientation is also on creating brand distinctiveness. We argue that the distinctiveness of a brand in the eyes of consumers is not a property of the actual product, but a product of communication of the brand. We note that brand functionality (utility) is not an absolute attribute of a product or service because many products can potentially serve the same function. This leads us to suggest that brand functionality is heavily influenced by brand communication. Overton-de Klerk (1993) is of the opinion that a strong brand image can establish a “fund of goodwill” or “brand equity” from which future benefits can be reaped. This author suggests that goodwill or brand equity is often equated in the industry with the term “communication stock”. It is what while therefore to say that brand orientation leads to marketing performance.

Our study shows clearly that there is a strong association between brand orientation and brand awareness and this is in agreement with the view of Ul-Rehman and Ibrahim, (2011) who posits that integrated marketing communication is thus the voice of marketing creating brand awareness, deliver information, educate the market and make a positive image of the company. Confirming, the association between brand orientation and brand awareness, Aaker, (1991) posits that Brand awareness is considered one of the key pillars of a brand’s consumer-based brand equity. Keller and Davey (2001) describe building brand awareness as the way of ensuring potential customers know the categories in which the brand competes. Likewise, Rossiter and Percy (1991) claim that brand awareness is the essential first step in building a brand and argued further that awareness measures are used extensively in research as a gauge of brand performance and marketing effectiveness. Rossiter and Percy (1987) describe brand awareness as being essential for the communications process to occur as it precedes all other steps in the process. Brand awareness measures the accessibility of the brand in memory. Without brand awareness occurring, no other communication effects can occur. For a consumer to buy a brand they must first be made aware of it. Brand attitude cannot be formed, and intention to buy cannot occur unless brand awareness has occurred (Rossiter & Percy 1987; Rossiter et al. 1991).

Justifying further, the association between brand orientation and marketing performance, Urde (1999) presents brand orientation as another brand building model that focuses on brands as strategic resources.  He went ahead to say “brand orientation is an approach in which the

Brand Orientation and Marketing Performance of Domestic

Airline Operators in Nigeria

processes of the organization revolve around the creation, development, and protection of brand identity in an ongoing interaction with target customers with the aim of achieving lasting competitive advantages in the form of brands”. Brand orientation focuses on developing brands in a more active and deliberate manner, starting with the brand identity as a strategic platform. It can be said as a consequence of this orientation that the brand becomes an unconditional response to customer needs and wants. As found in this study, domestic airline operators in Nigeria are brand oriented and as such are ready to project and protect the brand and live the brand. This is in consonance with the view of Urde (2003) who maintained that the brand building process is two-part: internal and external. He defines the internal process as that used primarily to describe the relationship between the organization and the brand, with the internal objective being for the organization to live its brands. Conversely, the external process is that concerned with relations between the brand and the customer, with the external objective of creating value and forming relationships with the customer. This is in line with our findings that as domestic airline operators live the brand, this leads to brand awareness and service quality.

This study also shows that there is a strong association between brand orientation and service quality. When employees live the brand, it assured air travellers (customers) of high service quality since a brand is the promise of an experience. Having examined the association between brand orientation and marketing performance, we conclude that

1        As domestic airline operators in Nigeria become brand oriented, air travellers (customers) become more aware of their brands

2        As domestic airline operators in Nigeria      become brand oriented, service quality is significantly increased.

Recommendation

In view of the implications emanating from the study results, and conclusions there from, we recommend as follows that:

1.    Efforts should be made by domestic airline operators in Nigeria to encourage their employees are brand oriented in order to build a strong and competitive brand that will project the image of the airlines. In a brand-oriented organization, the objective is -within the framework of the brand- to create value and meaning. The brand is a strategic platform for interplay with the target group and thus is not limited to being an unconditional response to what at any moment is demanded by customers.

2.    Additionally, domestic airline operators in Nigeria should know that brand building process is in two-part: internal and external. Internal process as that used primarily to describe the relationship between the organization and the brand, with the internal objective being for the organization to live its brands. Conversely, the external process is that concerned with relations between the brand and the customer, with the external objective of creating value and forming relationships with the customer.

REFERENCES

Aaker, D. A. (1996). Building strong brands, New York: Free Press.

Aaker, D. A. (1991a). Are brand equity investments really worthwhile? Admap, 5(3), 14-17.

Aaker, D. A. (1991b). Managing brand equity: Capitalizing on the value of a brand name.      New    York: The Free Press.

Aaker, D. A. (1996). Measuring brand equity across products and markets. California Management Review, 38(3), 102–120.

International Journal of Research and Development Studies

Volume 7, Number 2, 2016

Aaker, D. A. & R. Jacobson (1994). The financial information content of         perceived quality.     Journal of Marketing Research, 31(5), 191-201.

Agarwal, M.K. & Rao, V.R. (1996). An empirical comparison of consumer-based measures    of brand equity, Marketing Letters, 7 (3), 237–247.

Agundu, P.U.C, and Nadube, P.M (2016). Integrated marketing communication and intra-Nigeria airline operations: A mix for profit driven fix. Proceeding of international conference on development studies, 1(8), 37-42

Ahiauzu, A. (2010). Advanced research methods in management sciences-       lecture notes for       PhD students, Rivers State University of Science          and technology, Port-Harcourt.

Ambler, T., Bhattacharya, C. B., Edell, J., Keller, K. L., Lemon, K.N. & Mittal V. (2002).        Relating brand and customer       perspectives on marketing management, Journal of        Service          Research, 5 (8), 13–25.

Ambler, T. & Kokkinaki, F. (1997). Measures of marketing success, Journal of           Marketing           Management, 5 (13), 665- 78.

Ambler, T. & Kokkinaki, F. (2002). Measuring marketing performance: which way is up? In: A.D. Neely (ed.), business performance measurement: theory and practice (pp. 225-243).         Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Ambler, T. (2003). Marketing and the bottom line: creating the measures of success. London:         Financial Times/Prentice Hall.

Ambler, T. & Puntoni, S. (2003).  Measuring marketing performance. In Hart, S (Ed.),          Marketing Changes, London, UK: Thomson learning, 289-     309.

Alsem, K.J. (2007). Strategic Marketing: An Applied Perspective. New York: McGraw-  Hill.

Clark, B. (2002). Measuring performance: The marketing perspective, In         Neely, A.D. (Ed.),     Business performance measurement: Theory and    practice Cambridge: Cambridge      University Press. 

Clark, B.H. & Ambler, T. (2001). Marketing performance measurement:          evolution of   research and practice. International Journal of Business Performance Measurement, 3(4), 231-244.

Clark, B.H. (1999). Marketing performance measures: History and        interrelationships. Journal     of Marketing Management, 15(8), 711-732.

CMO Council (2004). Measures and metrics: Assessing marketing’s value and impact, Palo     Alto, California: The CMO Council.

Cronin, J. & Taylor, S. (1992). Measuring service quality:  A reexamination and extension.     Journal of Marketing, 56(3), 55-68.

Cronin, J. & Taylor, S. (1994). SERVPERF versus SERVQUAL: Reconciling         performance based and perception-minus-expectations measurement of   service quality. Journal of    Marketing, 58(1), 125-31.

Crosby, P.B. (1984). Quality without tears: the Art of Hassle-Free Management. McGraw-      Hill, New York.

Brand Orientation and Marketing Performance of Domestic

Airline Operators in Nigeria

Day, G.S. (1990). Market-driven strategy: Processes for creating value, the Free        Press, New    York, NY.

Dickson, P. R. & Sawyer, A. G. (1986). Point-of-Purchase behaviour and price perceptions    of supermarket shoppers: Marketing Science Institute:      Cambridge, MA: 3(8), 12-15.

Doyle, P. (2000). Value-Based Marketing: New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Drucker, P.F. (1954). The practice of management: New York: Harper & Row.

Eiglier, P.  & Langeard, E. (1987). Servunction, Les marketing des services, Paris: McGraw-    Hill.

Eusebio, R., Andreu, J. L., & Belbeze, M. P. L. (2006). Measures of marketing performance:           A comparative study: Spain International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality    Management, 18 (2), 145-155.

Franzen, G. (1999). The brand response matrix, Admap 8(4), 19-21

Grönroos, C. (1983). Strategic management and marketing in the service sector. Marketing   Science Institute. Boston, MA.

Gronroos, C. (1978). A service-oriented approach to marketing of        services, European    Journal of Marketing, 12 (8), 588-601.

Gronroos, C., (1984). A service quality model and its marketing implications, European         Journal of Marketing, 18(4), 36-44.

Gronroos, C. (1988). Service quality: The six criteria of good perceived service quality.         Review          of Business, 9(2), 10-13

Grönroos, C. (2007). Service management and marketing: Customer management in service competition. West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons.

Hoyer W.D. & Brown, S.P. (1990). Effects of brand awareness on choice for a common,      repeat           purchase product. Journal of Consumer Research, 17(8), 141-148.

Hudson, S. & Shephard, G. (1998). Measuring service quality at tourist destinations: An        Application of Importance-Performance analysis to an Alpine Ski resort. Journal of     Travel and Tourism Marketing, 7(3), 61-77.

Keller, K. L. (1993). Conceptualizing, measuring, and managing customer-based brand          equity,           Journal of Marketing, 57 (1), 1–22.

Keller, K. L. (1998). Strategic brand management: Building, measuring, and managing           brand equity, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Kelly, P. (1991). Advertising research and decision making, proceedings of the Australasian   marketing educators' conference, University of South           Australia:       Adelaide.

International Journal of Research and Development Studies

Volume 7, Number 2, 2016

Kotler, P. & Keller, K.L. (2006). Marketing management:  Upper Saddle River. Pearson          Prentice-Hall.

Kokkinaki, F. & Ambler, T. (1999). Marketing performance assessment: An exploratory        investigation into current practice and the role of firm          orientation,    working paper          No. 99-114, Marketing Science Institute, Cambridge, MA.

Laurent, G., Kapferer, J.N., & Roussel, F. (1995). The underlying structure of brand    awareness scores. Marketing Science 14 (3), 170-179.

Llosa, S., Chandon, J.L. and Orsingher, C. (1998). An empirical study of         SERVQUAL’s   dimensionality: The Services Industries Journal, 18(2), 16-44.

Lynch, J. G. Jr. & Srull, T. K. (1982). Memory and intentional factors in           consumer choice:     Concepts and research methods.  Journal of Consumer Research 9(3), 18- 37.

MSI (2000). Research priorities: A guide to MSI research programs and procedures. Cambridge, MA, Marketing Science Institute, 22(10), 44- 46

MSI (2002). Research priorities: A guide to MSI research programs and procedures. Cambridge, MA, Marketing Science Institute.

MSI (2004). Research priorities: A guide to MSI research programs and procedures. Cambridge, MA, Marketing Science Institute.

MSI (2006). Research priorities: Cambridge MA, Marketing Science Institute.

Nadube, P. M. (2010). Marketing communication: Theory and practice: Port Harcourt:          TNDPRESS.

Narayana L.L. & Markin R.T. (1975). Consumer behaviour and product performance: an       alternative conceptualisation. Journal of Marketing, 39(8), 1-6.

Nedungadi, P. (1990). Recall and consumer consideration sets: Influencing choice without      altering brand evaluations. Journal of Consumer Research, 17(6), 263-276.

Nunnally, J. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.

O'Sullivan, D., Abela, A. V. & Hutchinson, M. (2009). Marketing performance   measurement           and firm performance: European Journal of Marketing, 43(11),     843-862.

Overton-de Kerk, N. (1993). Total communication: New buzzword or home     truth? Ecquid           Novi, 14(2), 179-192.

Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A. & Berry, L. L. (1988). SERVQUAL: A multiple-item scale      for measuring consumer perceptions of service quality, Journal of Retailing, 64 (1),    16.

 Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V.A. & Berry, L.L. (1985). A conceptual model of service quality           and its implications for future research, Journal     of Marketing, 49 (10), 41-50.

Payne, A. (1993). The essence of services marketing: Hemel Hempstead, UK: Prentice-Hall.

Brand Orientation and Marketing Performance of Domestic

Airline Operators in Nigeria

Ratnatunga, J. & Ewing, M.T. (2005). The brand capability value of integrated marketing       communication (IMC). Journal of Advertising, 34(4), 25-40.

Roselius T. (1971). Consumer rankings of risk reduction methods: Journal of Marketing, 35, 56-61.

Rossiter J.R. & Percy L. (1987). Advertising and promotion management:        Singapore:     McGraw-Hill.

Rossiter J. R., Percy L. & Donovan R.J. (1991). A better advertising planning grid:      Journal of Advertising Research, 5(2), 11-21.

Sasser W. E., Olsen R. P. & Wyckoff, D. D. (1978). Management of Service    Operations,    Allyn & Bacon, Boston.

Schultz, D.E. & Barnes, B.E. (1999). Strategic brand communication campaigns.         Lincolnwood, Illinois: NTC Business Books.

Shahin, A. (2010). SERVQUAL and model of service quality gaps: A framework for      determining and prioritizing critical factors in delivering quality services, Online     artilcle; access 13 Dec, 2012.

Shaw, R. (1999). Improving Marketing effectiveness: The methods and tools that work        best:   London: The economist Books.

Sinha, G. & Ghoshal, T. (1999). Quality customer service: Strategic advantage for the Indian steel industry, Managing SQ, 9 (1), 32-39.

Srivastava, R. K., Fahey, L. & Tasadduq A. S. (2000). Linking advertising to brand and         market-based assets: Admap, 2(1), 33–36.

Ul-Rehman, S. & Ibrahim, M. S. (2011). Integrated marketing communications and     promotion: Researchers world. Journal of Arts Science and   Commerce, 1(1), 144-148.

Urde, M. (1994). Brand Orientation: A strategy for survival, Journal of Consumer        Marketing, 11 (3), 18–32.

Urde, M. (1999). Brand orientation: A mindset for building brands into strategic resources,     Journal of Marketing Management, 15(4), 117–133.

Wells, W., Moriarty, S., Burnett, J. & Lwin, M. (2007). Advertising: principles and       effective imc practice. Singapore: Pearson/Prentice Hall- Asia.

Zineldin, M. (2006). The royalty of loyalty: CRM, quality and retention, Journal of       Consumer Marketing, 23 (7), 430-437.

Zineldin, M. (2005). Quality and customer relationship management (CRM) as competitive    strategy in the Swedish banking industry, the TQM           Magazine, 17(4), 329-344.