Consumer–Company Identification: A Framework for Understanding Consumers’ Relationships with Companies

By C. Bhattacharya, Sankar Sen. 2003

3,433 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Marketing, Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management, Strategy and Management

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/8495598419ec09318fd6a7d228bbe0b2a38331f5

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Marketing

In Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

In Strategy and Management

Citations in the corpus

Corporate Social Responsibility: A Corporate Marketing Perspective (2011, neutral): “…of identification has traditionally been restricted to formal membership contexts that are more germane to internal stakeholders, we and others (Bhattacharya and Sen, 2003; Simmons, 2009; Polonsky and Jevons, 2009; Berrone et al., 2007; Scott and Lane, 2000) have argued that in today’s…”
Reputation, subjective well-being, and environmental responsibility: the role of satisfaction and identification (2018, background): “…service firms, a variety of customer behaviors (i.e. loyalty to the organization, promoting the firm, recruitment of new customers, resilience to negative information) have been identified where the influence of identity attractiveness is mediated by C-C identification (Bhattacharya & Sen, 2003).”
Consumer participation in the design and realization stages of production: How self-production shapes consumer evaluations and relationships to products (2014, methodology): “In addition to the person-object literature, quantitative research from organizational theory (Bergami & Bagozzi, 2000; Bhattacharya & Sen, 2003) suggests that identification (the extent to which the individual sees the focal object as part of one‟s self-identity) leads to affective commitment…”
Consumers’ identification with corporate brands: Brand prestige, anthropomorphism and engagement in social media (2017, background): “, 2011) and consumers (Bhattacharya and Sen, 2003; Ahearne et al., 2005) with a company represents a psychological bond that underlies deep, voluntarily and long-term relationships with the corporate brand.”
Toward the Model of University Image: The Influence of Brand Personality, External Prestige, and Reputation (2008, background): “Research findings in a variety of fields—marketing, advertising, management, and public relations—have shown that companies with a good corporate image are likely to have a good record of sales and market share (Shapiro, 1982 ), a loyal customer relationship (Andreassen & Lindestad, 1998 ), a posi”
Do Employee Citizenship Behaviors Lead to Customer Citizenship Behaviors? The Roles of Dual Identification and Service Climate (2017, background): “Customers are also more likely to identify with a company that has a prestigious identity, because it enables them to view themselves in the reflected glory of the company and fulfill their self-enhancement needs (Bhattacharya and Sen 2003).”
Should luxury brands say it out loud? Brand conspicuousness and consumer perceptions of responsible luxury (2017, background): “However, perceptions of self-congruity with a brand also include various inferences that people make about a brand's perceived personality (Bhattacharya & Sen, 2003)—or the perceived “set of human characteristics associated with a brand” (Aaker, 1997, p. 347)—which constitutes a key component of a…”
Perceived value, customer attitude and loyalty in retailing (2008, background): “In this sense, loyal customers increase the volume of sales of the company ( Gwinner et al ., 1998 ), reduce the communication costs of attracting new customers ( Payne and Frow, 2005 ) and create brand equity ( Bhattacharya and Sen, 2003 ).”
Leveraging customers’ multiple identities: identity synergy as a driver of organizational identification (2012, background): “Previous research has shown that organizational identification is positively affected by increases in perceived support (McAlexander et al. 2002), value congruence ( Bhattacharya and Sen 2003 ), and identity affirmation (Drigotas et al. 1999).”
A multinational examination of the symbolic–instrumental framework of consumer–brand identification (2011, positive): “…identity, promotion behavior is the result of consumers’ vested interest in the success of the social identity as their own, and the need to ensure that their affiliation to the identity is perceived by and communicated to others in the most positive light possible (Bhattacharya & Sen, 2003).”