高科技企业品牌资产价值测量模型研究

发布时间：2018-06-06 12:51

本文选题：高科技企业品牌 + 品牌资产　；参考：《山东大学》2009年博士论文

【摘要】： 作为经济主导力量的高科技产业,发展品牌为主导的战略尤为重要。产品越趋向于高科技,越需要建立一套一致性且标准化的品牌。高科技产品附加值高,具有高复杂性,顾客购买时知觉风险大,因此品牌成为消费者购买产品时重要依据。由北京数字100市场咨询公司和搜狐公司合作进行的与电脑相关的品牌消费调查显示,消费者对电脑相关产品选择存在品牌趋优现象,同一类产品中对品牌信赖差距明显,这一现象表明品牌资产已经成为高科技企业重要的战略资产。有关品牌管理的文献表明,国外的品牌研究存在从局部到整体、从概念到结构,从分散到系统的发展规律。品牌早期研究主要集中在产品层次的品牌概念及要素的研究;逐步发展到品牌及绩效的概念和测量,从而基本形成了一条较为完整的研究脉络。但涉及到品牌资产测量与管理的研究仍存在很多不足。首先,现有文献的研究没有厘清品牌资产的不同构面,将品牌驱动因素、品牌资产表现因素等放在同一个层面进行探讨,势必导致研究结论的不统一。本研究在构建品牌资产价值测量模型时,首先探究品牌资产价值形成的逻辑框架,将企业品牌投入端、顾客表现端、产品市场端、企业财务绩效几个方面按照价值形成的系统模型理顺出来,形成一个反映品牌资产价值形成前后前因联系的品牌资产价值测量模型。其二,现有品牌资产价值测量模型存在很多不足。以Interbrand为代表的权威测量模型中有两个重要的变量:品牌作用指数——该指数直接决定了企业多大比例的财务绩效由品牌资产贡献;品牌强度——该数值直接决定了未来财务绩效的实现程度,这两个变量都存在很大的缺陷,导致该模型的可信性和有效性受到很多学者和实务界人士的质疑。因此,如何有效地测量高科技企业品牌资产的价值成为一个紧迫而棘手的课题。本研究期待在品牌财务绩效测量和品牌强度测量这两个方面做出有价值的探索研究。其三,目前大多数文献研究是基于顾客的视角展开。顾客对品牌资产的认识和评判,更多地取决于自身的认知水平、知识结构和个性偏好等方面的约束,导致该视角的结论犹如盲人摸象,因此并没有形成统一的品牌资产市场表现测量维度。本研究拟构建一全面的品牌资产市场表现测量维度。其四,目前有关品牌强度因子测量模型研究甚少。在现有的实证和理论研究中往往都将品牌强度因素作为平行的变量进行刻画,而忽略了其中的不同层次。这部分研究的缺乏使品牌强度研究成果对实践的指导缺乏系统性,从而导致广告战、价格战等基于某一局部品牌或营销理论的短视企业行为广泛发生。因此,需要对品牌强度因子与品牌价值内部的结构关系进行研究,构建合理的品牌强度测量模型。针对目前的研究现状,品牌资产研究有四大迫切需要解决的问题:一是建立高科技品牌资产价值测量的系统模型。二是对高科技企业品牌资产的市场表现进行不同维度的完整刻画;三是构建品牌资产作用指数测量模型,实现对品牌资产财务绩效测量;四是对高科技品牌资产强度因子进行分析、验证和测量。本文在综合归纳前人研究成果及专业访谈的基础上,以规范分析和实证分析相结合的方法,对高科技产业品牌资产价值测量进行了探索性研究。本文主要工作包括: 第一,对高科技企业品牌资产价值的相关理论和实证研究进行梳理和评述。第二,在文献研究的基础上,分析了高科技品牌资产市场表现测量维度。在该部分,本研究首先基于Porter竞争优势理论、价值链理论和利益相关者理论明确地刻画了高科技企业品牌的知识构面,解析了高科技企业的品牌资产市场表现构面:品牌资产市场绩效、品牌资产创新绩效和品牌资产扩张绩效。并采用品牌资产的三价值构面对品牌资产发展现状进行了剖析。第三,通过高科技企业品牌作用指数模型、品牌超额盈利能力测量模型和品牌扩张能力测量模型的构建,实现了品牌资产的财务绩效测量。使得企业不仅可以进行品牌资产日常的市场管理,也可以进行品牌资产的财务评价。第四,通过对高科技品牌部分企业进行访谈,提炼出品牌强度因子,构建了品牌强度的测量模型。品牌强度因子分为6个,该6个因子不是直接对品牌价值产生影响的,其内部存在一定的因果关系。其中,基础设施投资资本通过创新资本、营销支持资本和品牌管理流程资本对品牌价值产生作用。第五,建立了高科技企业品牌资产价值测量模型以衡量品牌资产价值的大小,并利用该模型测算了IT企业的品牌价值,以指导IT企业合理地分配品牌资源,并管理和优化品牌资产。本文在构建高科技企业品牌资产价值测量模型时,克服了以往品牌资产的研究局部的、割裂的缺陷,对品牌强度因子、品牌市场表现以及品牌资产财务价值作了整合研究,形成了具有逻辑层次、因果链条关系的结构模型。本文的研究主要创新成果如下: 第一,刻画了高科技品牌资产的市场表现维度。该维度由创新绩效、扩张绩效和市场绩效的三成分构成。通过对品牌资产市场表现测量,企业可以有效诊断和管理品牌资产。对于品牌资产的绩效强势方面加以引导和发展,识别出弱势维度,进行强化管理。第二,建立了高科技品牌资产财务绩效测量模型。在Interbrand测量模型中,一个很大缺陷是品牌作用因子无法确定。本文通过建立品牌作用指数测量模型、品牌超额盈利能力测量模型和品牌扩张能力测量模型实现了品牌财务绩效的测量与评估。第三,开发了品牌强度因子测量量表,并构建了高科技企业品牌强度因子测量模型。本研究首先利用企业能力优势和市场竞争优势建立了品牌强度因子:人力资本、品牌管理流程资本、品牌发展趋势资本、创新资本、基础设施资本和营销支持资本强度。继而通过SEM模型检验了6个品牌强度因子的品牌价值作用机理,开发了高科技企业品牌强度因子测量模型。本研究发现高科技企业的品牌强度因子不是直接作用于品牌资产价值的,而是存在一定的内部驱动关系。其中基础设施资本通过品牌管理流程资本、创新资本和营销支持资本影响到品牌价值。考虑到文献对高科技品牌资产价值理论和实证研究的缺乏,本文将品牌资产研究视角和实证对象定位于高科技产业市场,丰富了品牌研究的视角。但在现实中,不同行业、企业和顾客特征以及经济、技术、文化、社会环境的不同,导致各影响因素的作用水平和作用方式存在差异。因此,难以将所有影响因素都纳入研究视野。并且,受到样本数量、抽样方法的限制以及统计分析技术和横断面研究固有缺陷的制约,实证研究的结论不能确定是否适用于所有的高科技企业研究对象。本文属于探索性研究,进一步的验证和更广范围的应用还有待理论与实证研究地进一步深入。
[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.
【学位授予单位】：山东大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2009
【分类号】：F273.2

【引证文献】