本文選題：高科技企業(yè)品牌 + 品牌資產(chǎn)��； 參考：《山東大學》2009年博士論文

【摘要】： 作為經(jīng)濟主導(dǎo)力量的高科技產(chǎn)業(yè),發(fā)展品牌為主導(dǎo)的戰(zhàn)略尤為重要。產(chǎn)品越趨向于高科技,越需要建立一套一致性且標準化的品牌。高科技產(chǎn)品附加值高,具有高復(fù)雜性,顧客購買時知覺風險大,因此品牌成為消費者購買產(chǎn)品時重要依據(jù)。由北京數(shù)字100市場咨詢公司和搜狐公司合作進行的與電腦相關(guān)的品牌消費調(diào)查顯示,消費者對電腦相關(guān)產(chǎn)品選擇存在品牌趨優(yōu)現(xiàn)象,同一類產(chǎn)品中對品牌信賴差距明顯,這一現(xiàn)象表明品牌資產(chǎn)已經(jīng)成為高科技企業(yè)重要的戰(zhàn)略資產(chǎn)。 有關(guān)品牌管理的文獻表明,國外的品牌研究存在從局部到整體、從概念到結(jié)構(gòu),從分散到系統(tǒng)的發(fā)展規(guī)律。品牌早期研究主要集中在產(chǎn)品層次的品牌概念及要素的研究;逐步發(fā)展到品牌及績效的概念和測量,從而基本形成了一條較為完整的研究脈絡(luò)。但涉及到品牌資產(chǎn)測量與管理的研究仍存在很多不足。 首先,現(xiàn)有文獻的研究沒有厘清品牌資產(chǎn)的不同構(gòu)面,將品牌驅(qū)動因素、品牌資產(chǎn)表現(xiàn)因素等放在同一個層面進行探討,勢必導(dǎo)致研究結(jié)論的不統(tǒng)一。本研究在構(gòu)建品牌資產(chǎn)價值測量模型時,首先探究品牌資產(chǎn)價值形成的邏輯框架,將企業(yè)品牌投入端、顧客表現(xiàn)端、產(chǎn)品市場端、企業(yè)財務(wù)績效幾個方面按照價值形成的系統(tǒng)模型理順出來,形成一個反映品牌資產(chǎn)價值形成前后前因聯(lián)系的品牌資產(chǎn)價值測量模型。 其二,現(xiàn)有品牌資產(chǎn)價值測量模型存在很多不足。以Interbrand為代表的權(quán)威測量模型中有兩個重要的變量:品牌作用指數(shù)——該指數(shù)直接決定了企業(yè)多大比例的財務(wù)績效由品牌資產(chǎn)貢獻;品牌強度——該數(shù)值直接決定了未來財務(wù)績效的實現(xiàn)程度,這兩個變量都存在很大的缺陷,導(dǎo)致該模型的可信性和有效性受到很多學者和實務(wù)界人士的質(zhì)疑。因此,如何有效地測量高科技企業(yè)品牌資產(chǎn)的價值成為一個緊迫而棘手的課題。本研究期待在品牌財務(wù)績效測量和品牌強度測量這兩個方面做出有價值的探索研究。 其三,目前大多數(shù)文獻研究是基于顧客的視角展開。顧客對品牌資產(chǎn)的認識和評判,更多地取決于自身的認知水平、知識結(jié)構(gòu)和個性偏好等方面的約束,導(dǎo)致該視角的結(jié)論猶如盲人摸象,因此并沒有形成統(tǒng)一的品牌資產(chǎn)市場表現(xiàn)測量維度。本研究擬構(gòu)建一全面的品牌資產(chǎn)市場表現(xiàn)測量維度。 其四,目前有關(guān)品牌強度因子測量模型研究甚少。在現(xiàn)有的實證和理論研究中往往都將品牌強度因素作為平行的變量進行刻畫,而忽略了其中的不同層次。這部分研究的缺乏使品牌強度研究成果對實踐的指導(dǎo)缺乏系統(tǒng)性,從而導(dǎo)致廣告戰(zhàn)、價格戰(zhàn)等基于某一局部品牌或營銷理論的短視企業(yè)行為廣泛發(fā)生。因此,需要對品牌強度因子與品牌價值內(nèi)部的結(jié)構(gòu)關(guān)系進行研究,構(gòu)建合理的品牌強度測量模型。 針對目前的研究現(xiàn)狀,品牌資產(chǎn)研究有四大迫切需要解決的問題:一是建立高科技品牌資產(chǎn)價值測量的系統(tǒng)模型。二是對高科技企業(yè)品牌資產(chǎn)的市場表現(xiàn)進行不同維度的完整刻畫;三是構(gòu)建品牌資產(chǎn)作用指數(shù)測量模型,實現(xiàn)對品牌資產(chǎn)財務(wù)績效測量;四是對高科技品牌資產(chǎn)強度因子進行分析、驗證和測量。 本文在綜合歸納前人研究成果及專業(yè)訪談的基礎(chǔ)上,以規(guī)范分析和實證分析相結(jié)合的方法,對高科技產(chǎn)業(yè)品牌資產(chǎn)價值測量進行了探索性研究。本文主要工作包括: 第一,對高科技企業(yè)品牌資產(chǎn)價值的相關(guān)理論和實證研究進行梳理和評述。 第二,在文獻研究的基礎(chǔ)上,分析了高科技品牌資產(chǎn)市場表現(xiàn)測量維度。在該部分,本研究首先基于Porter競爭優(yōu)勢理論、價值鏈理論和利益相關(guān)者理論明確地刻畫了高科技企業(yè)品牌的知識構(gòu)面,解析了高科技企業(yè)的品牌資產(chǎn)市場表現(xiàn)構(gòu)面:品牌資產(chǎn)市場績效、品牌資產(chǎn)創(chuàng)新績效和品牌資產(chǎn)擴張績效。并采用品牌資產(chǎn)的三價值構(gòu)面對品牌資產(chǎn)發(fā)展現(xiàn)狀進行了剖析。 第三,通過高科技企業(yè)品牌作用指數(shù)模型、品牌超額盈利能力測量模型和品牌擴張能力測量模型的構(gòu)建,實現(xiàn)了品牌資產(chǎn)的財務(wù)績效測量。使得企業(yè)不僅可以進行品牌資產(chǎn)日常的市場管理,也可以進行品牌資產(chǎn)的財務(wù)評價。 第四,通過對高科技品牌部分企業(yè)進行訪談,提煉出品牌強度因子,構(gòu)建了品牌強度的測量模型。品牌強度因子分為6個,該6個因子不是直接對品牌價值產(chǎn)生影響的,其內(nèi)部存在一定的因果關(guān)系。其中,基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施投資資本通過創(chuàng)新資本、營銷支持資本和品牌管理流程資本對品牌價值產(chǎn)生作用。 第五,建立了高科技企業(yè)品牌資產(chǎn)價值測量模型以衡量品牌資產(chǎn)價值的大小,并利用該模型測算了IT企業(yè)的品牌價值,以指導(dǎo)IT企業(yè)合理地分配品牌資源,并管理和優(yōu)化品牌資產(chǎn)。 本文在構(gòu)建高科技企業(yè)品牌資產(chǎn)價值測量模型時,克服了以往品牌資產(chǎn)的研究局部的、割裂的缺陷,對品牌強度因子、品牌市場表現(xiàn)以及品牌資產(chǎn)財務(wù)價值作了整合研究,形成了具有邏輯層次、因果鏈條關(guān)系的結(jié)構(gòu)模型。本文的研究主要創(chuàng)新成果如下: 第一,刻畫了高科技品牌資產(chǎn)的市場表現(xiàn)維度。該維度由創(chuàng)新績效、擴張績效和市場績效的三成分構(gòu)成。通過對品牌資產(chǎn)市場表現(xiàn)測量,企業(yè)可以有效診斷和管理品牌資產(chǎn)。對于品牌資產(chǎn)的績效強勢方面加以引導(dǎo)和發(fā)展,識別出弱勢維度,進行強化管理。 第二,建立了高科技品牌資產(chǎn)財務(wù)績效測量模型。在Interbrand測量模型中,一個很大缺陷是品牌作用因子無法確定。本文通過建立品牌作用指數(shù)測量模型、品牌超額盈利能力測量模型和品牌擴張能力測量模型實現(xiàn)了品牌財務(wù)績效的測量與評估。 第三,開發(fā)了品牌強度因子測量量表,并構(gòu)建了高科技企業(yè)品牌強度因子測量模型。本研究首先利用企業(yè)能力優(yōu)勢和市場競爭優(yōu)勢建立了品牌強度因子:人力資本、品牌管理流程資本、品牌發(fā)展趨勢資本、創(chuàng)新資本、基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施資本和營銷支持資本強度。繼而通過SEM模型檢驗了6個品牌強度因子的品牌價值作用機理,開發(fā)了高科技企業(yè)品牌強度因子測量模型。本研究發(fā)現(xiàn)高科技企業(yè)的品牌強度因子不是直接作用于品牌資產(chǎn)價值的,而是存在一定的內(nèi)部驅(qū)動關(guān)系。其中基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施資本通過品牌管理流程資本、創(chuàng)新資本和營銷支持資本影響到品牌價值。 考慮到文獻對高科技品牌資產(chǎn)價值理論和實證研究的缺乏,本文將品牌資產(chǎn)研究視角和實證對象定位于高科技產(chǎn)業(yè)市場,豐富了品牌研究的視角。但在現(xiàn)實中,不同行業(yè)、企業(yè)和顧客特征以及經(jīng)濟、技術(shù)、文化、社會環(huán)境的不同,導(dǎo)致各影響因素的作用水平和作用方式存在差異。因此,難以將所有影響因素都納入研究視野。并且,受到樣本數(shù)量、抽樣方法的限制以及統(tǒng)計分析技術(shù)和橫斷面研究固有缺陷的制約,實證研究的結(jié)論不能確定是否適用于所有的高科技企業(yè)研究對象。本文屬于探索性研究,進一步的驗證和更廣范圍的應(yīng)用還有待理論與實證研究地進一步深入。
[Abstract]:As the leading economy of the high-tech industry, the strategy of developing the brand is of particular importance. The more the product tends to high technology, the more we need to establish a consistent and standardized brand. The high value-added, high complexity of the high-tech products, the high perceived risk of the customers, so the brand becomes the important basis for the consumers to buy the products. The computer related brand consumption survey, conducted by the Beijing digital 100 market consulting company and the Sohu company, shows that the consumer's choice for computer related products has a brand preference phenomenon, and the difference in brand trust is obvious in the same kind of products. This phenomenon indicates that the brand assets have become the important strategic assets of the high-tech enterprises.
The literature on brand management shows that foreign brand research is from local to whole, from concept to structure, from decentralization to system development. Early brand research mainly focuses on the research of brand concept and elements at product level; gradually developed to the concept and measurement of brand and performance, which has formed a relatively complete article. However, there are still many deficiencies in the study of brand equity measurement and management.
First, the research of the existing literature does not clarify the different structure of the brand asset, and puts the brand driving factor and the brand asset performance factor into the same level, which will inevitably lead to the disunity of the research conclusions. The investment end of the industry brand, the customer performance end, the product market end and the enterprise financial performance are straightened out in accordance with the system model which is formed by the value, forming a brand asset value measurement model which reflects the relationship between the value of the brand assets before and after the formation of the former.
Secondly, there are a lot of shortcomings in the current brand asset value measurement model. There are two important variables in the authoritative measurement model represented by Interbrand: the brand action index - the index directly determines the financial performance contribution of the enterprise to a large proportion of the brand assets, and the brand strength directly determines the future financial performance. The two variables have great shortcomings, and the credibility and effectiveness of the model are questioned by many scholars and practitioners. Therefore, how to effectively measure the value of the brand assets of high-tech enterprises is an urgent and difficult topic. This study is expected to measure the brand financial performance and brand strength. Value these two aspects to make valuable exploration and research.
Third, most of the literature research is based on the customer's perspective. The customer's recognition and evaluation of brand equity depends more on its cognitive level, knowledge structure and personality preference, which leads to the conclusion of this perspective as a blind man, and therefore does not form a unified brand asset market performance measurement dimension. This study intends to build a comprehensive brand equity market performance measurement dimension.
Fourthly, there is little research on the brand intensity factor measurement model at present. In the current empirical and theoretical studies, the brand strength factors are often depicted as parallel variables, and the different levels are ignored. The lack of this part makes the brand strength research results lack systematic guidance to practice, which leads to advertising. War, price war and other short-sighted enterprise based on some local brand or marketing theory are widely used. Therefore, we need to study the structure relationship between brand strength factor and brand value, and build a reasonable model of brand strength measurement.
In view of the current research status, there are four urgent problems to be solved in the study of brand assets: one is to establish a system model for the measurement of the value of high-tech brand assets. Two is a complete depiction of the market performance of the brand assets of high-tech enterprises; the three is to build the measurement model of the brand asset action index, and to realize the brand assets. Financial performance measurement; four is the analysis, verification and measurement of the intensity factors of high-tech brand assets.
On the basis of a comprehensive summary of previous research results and professional interviews, this paper makes an exploratory study on the measurement of the value of the brand assets of the high-tech industry by combining the method of normative analysis and empirical analysis. The main work of this paper is as follows:
First, comb and comment on the theory and empirical research on the value of brand equity of high-tech enterprises.
Second, on the basis of literature research, this paper analyzes the measurement dimension of high tech brand asset market performance. In this part, the research first based on the Porter competitive advantage theory, value chain theory and stakeholder theory clearly depicts the knowledge structure of high-tech enterprise brand, and analyzes the brand asset market performance of high-tech enterprises. Face: brand asset market performance, brand asset innovation performance and brand asset expansion performance, and use the three value of brand assets to face the status of brand asset development.
Third, through the model of the brand role index of high-tech enterprises, the measurement model of brand excess profitability and the construction of the measurement model of brand expansion ability, the financial performance measurement of brand assets is realized, which makes the enterprise not only can carry on the daily market management of brand assets, but also carry out the financial evaluation of brand assets.
Fourth, through interviews with some high-tech brand companies, the brand intensity factors are extracted and the brand strength measurement model is constructed. The brand intensity factor is divided into 6. The 6 factors are not directly affected by the brand value, and there are certain causality within the brand strength. Among them, the investment capital of the infrastructure is sold through innovative capital and marketing. Support capital and brand management process capital to play a role in brand value.
Fifth, the value measurement model of brand assets of high-tech enterprises is established to measure the value of brand asset value, and the brand value of IT enterprises is measured by this model, so as to guide IT enterprises to allocate brand resources reasonably and to manage and optimize brand assets.
In the construction of the model of the value measurement of brand assets of high-tech enterprises, this paper overcame the defects of the previous research on brand assets, and the integration of brand strength factor, brand market performance and the financial value of brand assets, and formed a structural model with logical level and causality chain relationship. The results of the innovation are as follows:
First, it depicts the market performance dimension of high-tech brand assets. This dimension consists of three components of innovation performance, expansion performance and market performance. By measuring the performance of the brand asset market, enterprises can effectively diagnose and manage brand assets. Strengthen management.
Second, the financial performance measurement model of high tech brand assets is set up. In the Interbrand measurement model, a great defect is that the brand action factor can not be determined. By establishing the brand action index measurement model, the brand excess profitability measurement model and the brand expansion ability measurement model, the measurement of brand financial performance is realized. And assessment.
Third, the brand intensity factor measurement scale is developed, and the brand intensity factor measurement model of high-tech enterprises is built. First, brand intensity factors are established by using the advantages of enterprise ability and market competitive advantage: human capital, brand management process capital, brand development trend capital, innovation capital, infrastructure capital and Marketing Branch. The SEM model has been used to test the brand value mechanism of 6 brand intensity factors and develop a measurement model of the brand strength factor of high-tech enterprises. This study finds that the brand strength factor of high-tech enterprises does not directly affect the value of brand assets, but has a certain internal driving relationship. Facility capital affects brand value through brand management process capital, innovative capital and marketing support capital.
Considering the lack of literature on the value theory and empirical research of high tech brand assets, this paper focuses on the perspective of brand equity research and empirical research in the high-tech industry market, enriches the perspective of brand research. However, in reality, different industries, enterprise and customer characteristics, and the differences in economic, technical, cultural and social environment have led to various shadows. There are differences in the effect level and mode of action of the factors. Therefore, it is difficult to incorporate all the factors into the field of study. Moreover, the number of samples, the restriction of sampling methods, and the constraints of the inherent defects of statistical analysis techniques and cross-sectional studies are restricted. The conclusions of the empirical study can not be used to determine whether it is suitable for all high-tech enterprise research. This article is an exploratory research, and further verification and wider application still need further theoretical and empirical research.
【學位授予單位】：山東大學
【學位級別】：博士
【學位授予年份】：2009
【分類號】：F273.2

【引證文獻】

相關(guān)博士學位論文 前1條

1 叢陽;大型供電企業(yè)績效結(jié)構(gòu)及其影響機理研究[D];武漢大學;2011年

相關(guān)碩士學位論文 前1條

1 范維蓮;廚具產(chǎn)品商標品牌化投資分析與案例研究[D];山東大學;2013年

，

本文編號：1986581