The subject of branding is of interest to researchers and practitioners across domains because of its critical impact on an organization’s business performance. A successful branding tends to attract and retain consumers worldwide. In the higher education sector, the mobility of international students is a critical global issue. A study of university branding thus is timely and can help universities deal with this issue and attract and retain students for long-term financial viability. However, more in-depth studies on university branding are required. A review of relevant studies shows limited literature on branding efforts in the higher education sector and brand image and brand association in that sector. Researchers also criticize that the application of existing business branding models in higher education is questionable. In addition, there remains a lack of studies on branding that explore varied aspects in this sector.

This study aims to provide empirical insights into the branding of a university, linking it to student experience, value perception, and consumption journey; it explores the relations between these factors and their assistance to a university brand for tackling the global issue of international student mobility. Major research questions are: (1) What is the students’ experience of value from a university brand at different timelines during their consumption journey? and (2) how does the students’ experience of value from a university brand at different timelines during their consumption journey relate to branding of a university?

The study used the focus group interview (FGI) technique for data collection, by following the guidelines suggested in previous studies. Using purposive sampling to recruit undergraduate participants who have been international students at a university since their first year of study, data collection was completed when sampling reached a saturation point. In total, 110 students participated in the FGIs. This study used content analysis for data analysis and followed suggestions in previous studies for data validation.

Results of this study reveal the contents of university branding regarding student experience from varied sources, perceived value in different categories, and student journey at different timelines. They also uncover the association between these factors and the branding of a university in terms of brand image and brand association; and identify the similarity and difference between the elements of student’ experience of value in their consumption journey with regards to the branding of a university. Though extant studies on consumer behavior suggest the importance of factors consumer experience, customer value, and consumer journey in an organization’s business performance and competitiveness, there are few studies on university branding and the relations between the factors of consumer experience, customer value, and consumer journey with branding remain unclear in the context of higher education. This study thus theoretically contributes to research on branding by introducing the factors consumer experience, customer value, and consumer journey, and the relations between these factors and branding in the higher education sector. It also provides managerial implications for branding strategy, brand management, and consumer relationship management of a university to address the issue of global student mobility.

We are quickly moving to a review economy. Consumers continuously rate products, services, employees, and each other on quantitative, close-ended scales (e.g., 5-point scales). Prior work on this topic has predominantly investigated how one-time exposures to accumulated product ratings affect purchase decisions (e.g., average scores on Amazon). However, especially with the advent of online peer-to-peer platforms like Uber, AirBnB and Eatwith, consumers are increasingly exposed to sequences of ratings pertaining to the same entity (i.e., product, service, or individual) on the same platform – e.g., an individual receiving sequential ratings after each Uber ride.
The dominant pattern of ratings for a service or individual on these platforms can be characterized as “mostly very good-occasionally bad”. The sparse work conducted on sequential ratings does not explain how consumers respond to such sequences, nor investigates the effects of two popular presentation formats of ratings in these sequences: a cumulative system (i.e., each rating presents an updated summary score, like an average: 5 – 5 – 5 – 5 – 4.2) and an incremental system (i.e., each rating presents the most recent score: 5 – 5 – 5 – 5 – 1). This paper enters this unchartered territory and has three contributions. First, we add to the literature on online ratings; we build on theory based on salience and numerical cognition, and empirically document situations in which a seemingly innocuous choice of rating format affects consumer judgments of typical rating patterns. Second, we contribute to the broader literature on quantitative decision making. Much of this work has focused on single or simultaneous evaluations of attributes and neglected to focus on sequentially presented, quantitative information about the same focal entity. Third, we illustrate an easy-to-change factor which can be used as a managerial tool for consumer management and prioritization.
In a series of six (mostly preregistered) studies, we find that when a positively rated entity recently received a negative score, consumers display more positive evaluations merely because a cumulative rating system is used instead of an incremental system. We show that this effect is robust across a wide set of contexts and may even lead individuals to make counter-normative judgments. That is, changing the rating system may hurt consumers’ ability to distinguish an objectively better from a weaker overall performance. We further show that the effect reverses for less recent negative ratings. In such a situation, an incremental format yields more positive evaluations than a cumulative format. Finally, we find that the strength of the effect depends on whether the cumulative rating system pertains to averages (e.g., 5 – 5 – 4) or sums (e.g., 5 – 10 – 12).
Managerially, we show that merely by altering the presentation format of a one-time low score, companies can guard consumers against overly strong responses. From a business point-of-view, the format can equally be used to either prevent negative consumer reactions (i.e., churn) or stimulate positive responses (i.e., retention). This makes the presentation format a powerful tool to control consumers’ online experiences.

Brand Publics is a relatively new concept introduced by Arvidsson and Caliandro (2016) to understand brand-related consumer to consumer communication on the web. The concept was developed based on the argument that the concept of brand communities (Muniz and O’Guinn, 2001) is insufficient to understand consumer to consumer relations on the web (Arvidsson and Caliandro, 2016). This was because consumer to consumer brand-related communications on the web does not result in the formation of collective identity, as in the case of the brand community (Muniz and O’Guinn, 2001). However, these communications lead to consumer publicity. Most of the publicity is gained by the consumers through sharing celebratory brand-related content, however, some of the content used to gain publicity is also subversive. As brand publics paper focus is limited to the development of the concept of brand publics, it only mentions subversive content briefly and does not go into the intricate details of the subversive content. The focus of this study is to go into the details of subversive content on brand publics. It aims to view the subversive content on brand publics through the lens of brand hate literature.
The existing research on brand hate shows that the concept emerges from interpersonal theories of hate (Kucuk, 2016) and consumer-brand relationships (Fournier, 1998). Interpersonal theories of hate have been used to develop different typologies of brand hate (Kucuk, 2016). Furthermore, the consumer-brand relationships (Fournier, 1998), assist in specifying the dimensions based on which these typologies are developed. Other than the typologies of brand hate, the researchers have focussed on the causes and outcomes of brand hate(Hegner, Fetscherin and van Delzen, 2017). The limitation identified in the existing brand hate literature is that its focus is limited to typologies, cause and outcomes. The study proposes that viewing subversive content through the lens of brand hate can give an insight into the use of brand hate as a vehicle for consumer publicity and how it is used to redefine brand meaning on brand publics.
To explore brand hate as a vehicle for consumer publicity, and a device for redefining brand meaning, this study intends to use unobtrusive netnography, by focussing on consumer posts and comments on Instagram, YouTube and Twitter. The brand that is going to be the focus of this study is H&M, as it is involved in numerous controversies which result in the generation of subversive content on Twitter, YouTube, and Instagram(Shen, 2014). Overall the study contributes to brand hate literature by presenting it as a vehicle for publicity and a device for redefining brand meaning on brand publics.

Complex service experiences can sometimes make a customer feel that they are completing their service journey alone, with service agents seemingly ‘invisible’. Service blueprints provide an understanding of the customer journey via roles, tasks and actions that are both visible and invisible to customers (Bitner et al., 2008; Shostack, 1982). The current literature on customer journeys and service blueprints has largely focussed on personas (different types of users) as the organising structure, i.e. each persona has a customer journey and blueprint (Heuchert, 2019). However, for complex services where customer needs are about the task to be achieved rather than the user type, an alternative organising structure may be more useful for improving service experiences. One sector that has complex service experiences needing improvement is the energy sector, where even making a bill query can be a time-consuming process involving multiple service actors and systems resulting in mistrust and confusion (AEMC, 2018). Despite recognition that customer-centric service design is critical for the successful transition to alternative energy sources and practices, the sector remains dominated by a supplier-driven perspective (Russell-Bennett et al, 2021). Thus, the purpose of this paper is to understand how to organize customer journeys and blueprints for improved visibility and reduced confusion. The framework selected was the jobs-to-be-done framework, which characterises customer motivation as the need to “get a job done” using any combination of processes, products or services– importantly, journeys are defined by tasks, as multiple customers may have the same ‘job’ to do (Christensen, 1997).

The method was an abductive approach consisting of a rapid literature review resulting in 183 articles using search terms relating to energy, customers and trust. The literature review was supplemented by the observed experience of a major provider of electricity services undertaking a customer journey-mapping program, working with research and service design companies to develop a better understanding of their customers’ end-to-end experience. Insights were drawn on to explore the processes occurring beyond the line of visibility as well as consultation with five energy supply chain representatives. The findings revealed four distinct jobs-to-be-done that can be used to organise customer journeys and blueprints that create more visibility for the customer and reduce confusion: Moving Premises, Solving an Emergency/Crisis/Supply Interruption, Switching Retailers and Installing New Products/Services. The moments of truth across the four journeys indicated that there is a lack of transparency regarding roles, channels, and responsibilities (i.e., who to contact, how, and for what purpose). The complex and siloed approach of multiple actors increased the number of touchpoints for customers, inhibiting the successful fulfillment of their job-to-be-done. This study thus expands our knowledge of complex service contexts by organizing the customer journey and service blueprint around the job-to-be-done rather than personas. Personas can be developed within each journey and blueprint to address nuances. Clarifying the role of various service actors with a consistent focus of all actors on the job-to-be-done for the customer is likely to improve the customer’s experience in a complex service so they’re no longer journeying ‘blind’.