International Journal of Commerce and Finance, Vol. 5, Issue 1, 2019, 79-91 79 INTERNAL BRANDING AND BRAND COMMITMENT: THE ROLE OF YEARS OF EXPERIENCE & MONTHLY INCOME Dr. Najwan Adileh Istanbul Okan University, PhD. Turkey Prof. Dr. Özgür Çengel Istanbul Commerce University, Turkey Abstract Employee brand commitment has a vital role in their brand supporting behaviors. Therefore, this study is investigated the effect of internal branding Mechanisms on employee brand commitment from the employees’ perspective. This study also is examined the differences in employees’ perspectives on internal branding mechanisms, and employee brand commitment depends on their years of experience & monthly income. This study is targeted the banking industry using a convenience sample that includes ten banks in Palestine. This study is explored the employees’ perspective, thus, the unit of analysis in this study is the banks’ employees. This study is employed a quantitative empirical causal research design, through a self-administered structured questionnaire. This study is used descriptive statistics tests, One-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA), post-hoc multiple comparisons, two-step SEM process, and the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Moreover, the data is analyzed using the “Analysis of Moment Structure” AMOS 20 program. The findings are shown a strong effect of internal branding Mechanisms on employee brand commitment. Also, the study found differences in employees’ perspectives on internal branding mechanisms and employee brand commitment depend on their years of experience & monthly income. Therefore, this research study may provide some benefits to the banking sector and the researcher in order to understand better the factors that will increase employee understanding of internal branding activities and enhancing employee brand commitment. Keywords: Internal Branding, brand Commitment, length of Experience, Income 1. Introduction Customers experience the brand value through their interaction with employees (Devasagayam et al., 2010). Also, brand values delivered to employees through various internal branding activities (Terglav, Konečnik Ruzzier and Kaše, 2016). While branding for goods and services aims to create brand equity and maintain the long relationship between the company and customers (Grace and O’Cass, 2002), service brands faced with different challenges. In contrast with goods, the risk of delivering inconsistent value increases in service brands because of the non-tangible nature of the service (King and Grace, 2005). Employees are the presenters of the brand to the other stakeholder. The alignment between their attitude and the brand values is crucial for a firm to have a successful brand in the market (Punjaisri, Evanschitzky and Wilson, 2009). Employee brand commitment and brand supporting behaviors are the keys for building brand equity (Burmann, Jost-Benz and Riley, 2009). On the other hand, for supporting the employees to deliver the brand value, they need to live the same values (Preez, Bendixen and Abratt, 2017). Thus, firms enhancing employees supporting behaviors by adopting effective internal branding activities, which increase employees brand knowledge and awareness (King and Grace, 2010). As a result, internal branding activities will develop employees psychological attachment and commitment with the brand (Terglav, Konečnik Ruzzier and Kaše, 2016). 2. Internal Branding Mechanisms Internal branding defined as “a means to create powerful corporate brands. It assists the organization in aligning its internal process and corporate culture with those of the brand, and its objective is to ensure that employees transform espoused brand messages into brand reality for customers and other stakeholders” (Punjaisri & Wilson, In te rn a ti o n a l Jo u rn a l o f C o m m e rc e a n d F in a n c e In te rn a ti o n a l Jo u rn a l o f C o m m e rc e a n d F in a n c e In te rn a ti o n a l Jo u rn a l o f C o m m e rc e a n d F in a n c e Najwan ADILEH & Prof. Dr. Özgür ÇENGEL 80 2007, p. 59-60). Also, various internal branding models have proposed in the literature. In the study of Punjaisri et al. (2008), they suggested that internal communication and training programs are the two principal mechanisms of internal branding. Moreover, an essential holistic model for internal brand management had presented by Burmann & Zeplin (2005). The theoretical framework of this research depends on its model. They stated that brand centered human resources activities, internal brand communication activities, and brand centered transformational leadership are the main three internal branding mechanisms. These mechanisms affect employee brand commitment and support the alignment between employees’ values and brand values. The brand centered human resources activities have a significant role in developing, promoting, and enhancing the internal branding activities in the organization (Alshuaibia and Shamsudinb, 2016). These activities support the process of hiring brand fit employees based on brand identity and brand values (Preez and Bendixen, 2015). Internal communication activities are critical to providing employees with brand knowledge (Punjaisri and Wilson, 2011; Shaari, Salleh and Hussin, 2012). Besides, according to previous studies, transformational leadership enhance the alignment of brand values with employees' values and develop employees’ supporting behaviors. Transformational leadership is the ideal leadership style for enhancing employees adopt the brand's values and to increase their brand commitment (Morhart, Herzog and Tomczak, 2009). Figure 1: Burmann & Zeplin (2005) Holistic Model for Internal Brand Management 3. Employee Brand Commitment Employees brand commitment is essential for enhancing the brand strength and for developing brand citizenship behaviors (Burmann, Zeplin and Riley, 2009). When employees identify themselves with the brand, this will enhance their organizational citizenship behaviors and increase their organizational commitment (O’Reilly and Chatman, 1986). Also, Employee Brand commitment defined as “the extent of psychological attachment of employees to the brand, which influences their willingness to exert extra effort towards reaching the brand’s goals, that is, to exert brand citizenship behavior and hence generate a new quality of brand strength” (Burmann et al., 2009, p. 266). Moreover, employees brand knowledge and brand rewards have a positive relationship with brand commitment and brand citizenship behavior. Also, internal branding activities enhance employees brand commitment and brand engagement and supporting behaviors (Shaari, Salleh and Hussin, 2012). 4. Personal Variables Personal variables play a moderating role between internal branding process and employee commitment. Personal variables include employees’ gender, age, marital status, educational level, income and length of service. In the study of Punjaisri & Wilson (2011), they found that employees whose age over 30 years old, expressed an intention to stay in the job more than those who were less than 30 years old. Also, Punjaisri et al. (2008) stated that the longer an Internal Branding And Brand Commitment: The Role Of Years Of Experience & Monthly Income 81 employee stayed in an organization, the higher the influence of internal branding activities on their brand citizenship behavior. According to Joiner & Bakalis (2006), while employee stays a more extended period in the firm, this will enhance the sense of belonging. Nevertheless, King, Murillo, & Lee (2017) argued that all employees regardless of their age or loyalty to the organization have to be fit with the brand values. Based on the studies above, the following hypotheses represented: H1: Brand-centered human resource activities positively affect employee brand commitment H2: Internal brand communication activities positively affect employee brand commitment H3: Brand-centered transformational leadership positively affect employee brand commitment H4: There is a significant difference in employees’ perspective on internal branding among employees according to years of experience in the bank. H5: There is a significant difference in employees’ perspective on brand commitment among employees according to years of experience in the bank. H6: There is a significant difference in employees’ perspective on internal branding among Employees according to monthly income H7: There is a significant difference in employees’ perspective on brand commitment among Employees according to monthly income About the literature presented above, the following is the prepared conceptual model: Figure 2: The Conceptual Model Najwan ADILEH & Prof. Dr. Özgür ÇENGEL 82 5. The significance of the Study This study aims to contribute useful information for brand services as well as for the researcher. This study intends to understand the employees’ perspective on the effect of internal branding mechanisms on employee brand commitment. Moreover, this research will be significant in addressing the gap of the role of employee years of experience in the bank, and the monthly income, and these two variables effect on employees’ perspective on internal branding mechanisms and employee brand commitment. Therefore, this research study may provide some benefits to the banking sector and the researcher in order to understand better the factors that will increase employee understanding of internal branding activities and enhancing employee brand commitment. 6. Research Design This study targeted the banking industry in Palestine. According to The Palestine Monetary Authority (PMA), the Palestinian system as the end of June 2017, includes (15) regulated banks. However, 10 out of 15 banks accepted to be part of this research. This study explores the employees’ perspective on internal branding mechanisms and brand commitment. Thus, the unit of analysis in this study is the banks’ employees. This study targets employees from different departments and various job levels except for the VPs employees. Furthermore, some employees will have direct contacts with customers, while others will be from backline positions. Employees expressed their perspective through a self-administered structured questionnaire. Also, (627) surveys collected from employees and (614) surveys were identified as usable, as some of the questionnaires discarded due to response bias and non-response issues. 7. Measurements Respondents asked to assess their perceptions concerning the brand-centered human resources activities using a measure that adopted from the study of Aurand et al. (2005). This scale aims to have a better understanding of the different human resource branding activities effects and role in the working environment. For Internal Brand Communication, The measure adopted from Punjaisri & Wilson (2011). Moreover, three main broad categories of internal brand communication tools identified; 1) Mass method; like newsletter 2) Written memo; like logbooks 3) Face to face communication; which includes two main categories; the daily briefing and group meetings. The measure of brand-centered transformational leadership adopted by Morhart et al. (2011) and derived initially from the multifactor leadership questionnaire from 5X of Rowold (2005). Besides, This study measured employee brand commitment using the scale of Kimpakorn & Tocquer (2010) that was adopted previously by Cook & Wall (1980) and also used by several previous organizational commitment studies. Lastly, this study will investigate the difference between respondents from various personal variables including income and years of service in their jobs. In order to investigate these differences between employees, some demographic questions included in the questionnaire. 8. Data Analysis The univariate analysis performed for all the variables in the study. Furthermore, frequencies of demographic characteristic examined to investigate the demographic profile of respondents. For investigating the differences for demographic characteristics of respondents One-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) used in this study. Additionally, post-hoc multiple comparisons performed by using Tukey’s HSD test to analyze which groups are responsible for the differences. The data analyzed using the “Analysis of Moment Structure” AMOS 20 program. This study used the two-step SEM process. The confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) used to assess the measurement model fit and construct validity (Hair et al., 2014). Moreover, to assess the overall model goodness of fit, the study used stand-alone fit indices Table 1 shows the cut-off values for the fit indices that were used in this study as suggested by Hu & Bentler (1999). Internal Branding And Brand Commitment: The Role Of Years Of Experience & Monthly Income 83 Table 1: Fit Index and Cut-off Values Fit Fit Index Cut-off Criteria χ2(Chi-square goodness of fit) p>0.05 RMSEA (Root Mean Square Error of Approximation) RMSEA < 0.06 SRMR (Standardized Root Mean Residual Incremental) SRMR<0.08 CFI (Comparative Fit Index) CFI > 0.95 TLI (Tucker-Lewis Fit Index) TLI>0.95 Source: Hu & Bentler (1999) Then, convergent validity examined followed by assessing reliability through measuring the internal consistency and evaluating the discriminant validity. Then, the structural model and evaluating the significance of the relationships examined (Hair et al., 2014). After analyzing the structural model fit, the hypotheses tested and the path diagram used for estimation of the relationships. Primary Analysis conducted for the demographic characteristics of employees show the following results in Table 2 below: Table2: Demographic Characteristics of Respondents Research Demographic Characteristic Number % Years of Experience in the Bank Less than one year 56 9.1 From 1-4 years 192 31.3 From 5-8 years 121 19.7 From 9-12 years 146 23.8 More than 12 years 99 16.1 Total 614 100 Monthly Income Less or equal $1000 300 48.8 $1001-$2000 196 31.9 $2001-$3000 78 12.7 $3001- $4000 29 4.7 More than $4000 11 1.8 Total 614 100 The next step is to deliver data description for the study’s dimensions; the collected data are presented using descriptive statistical tools as shown below in Table 3. Najwan ADILEH & Prof. Dr. Özgür ÇENGEL 84 Table 3: Findings of the Descriptive Analysis of the Study’s Dimensions Dimensions N Mean Std. Skewness Kurtosis CI 95% for mean Lower bound Upper bound Human Resources 614 3.84 0.654 -0.954 2.007 3.791 3.895 Internal Communication 614 3.90 0.661 -0.993 1.393 3.853 3.958 Transformational Leadership 614 3.95 0.734 -0.967 1.656 3.893 4.010 Employee Brand Commitment 614 4.11 0.723 -0.828 1.775 4.058 4.173 As an interval scale used for collecting the data from the respondents, the parametric techniques specially T-test and ANOVA test used for analysis to compare the differences between the different demographic characteristics between respondents’ groups. Following are the study’s null hypotheses findings related to demographic differences between employees using T-test and ANOVA: Table 4: ANOVA-test Results for Employees According to their Years of Experience in the Bank for the Study Dimensions Dimensions Descriptive Analysis ANOVA Mean Std. G1 G2 G3 G4 G5 G1 G2 G3 G4 G5 P- value Post- Hoc Human Resources 3.98 3.81 3.75 3.77 4.05 0.53 0.71 0.74 0.61 0.50 0.002 ** G5>G2 * G5>G3 ** G5>G4 * Internal Commun- ication 4.01 3.84 3.87 3.86 4.08 0.60 0.70 0.76 0.62 0.51 0.026 * G5>G2 * Transfor- mational Leadership 4.13 3.91 3.85 3.90 4.14 0.69 0.78 0.89 0.64 0.52 0.009 ** G5>G3 * IB 4.04 3.85 3.82 3.84 4.08 0.53 0.64 0.72 0.53 0.44 0.002 ** G5>G2 * Internal Branding And Brand Commitment: The Role Of Years Of Experience & Monthly Income 85 G5>G3 * G5>G4 * Employee Brand Commit- ment 4.09 4.01 4.08 4.13 4.38 0.73 0.75 0.75 0.71 0.58 0.001 ** G5>G2 ** G5>G3 * Years of Experience groups: G1= Less than one years, G2= 1-4 years, G3= 5-7 years, G4= 8-14 years, G5= 15 or more years. *Significance level at 5%, **Significance level at 1%. The above Table 4 indicates that at 1% and 5% level there is a significant difference between employees according to years of experience in the bank for all the variables. Therefore, a further investigation conducted by using a post hoc test (Tukey HSD comparison) to understand which groups differ from each other. Mainly, the respondents of the fifth group (15 years or more) rated higher than the other four groups. Thus, the fourth and the fifth null hypothesis, both will be rejected. Table 5: ANOVA-test Results for Employees According to the Monthly Income Groups for the Study Dimensions Dimensions Descriptive Analysis ANOVA Mean Std. G1 G2 G3 G4 G5 G1 G2 G3 G4 G5 P-value Post- Hoc Human Resources 3.75 3.87 4.01 4.15 3.85 0.69 0.62 0.54 0.48 0.82 0.001** G4>G1* G3>G1* Internal Communication 3.84 3.92 4.05 4.07 3.98 0.68 0.66 0.63 0.43 0.72 0.066 - Transformational Leadership 3.86 4.01 4.11 4.17 3.87 0.81 0.65 0.57 0.55 1.13 0.013* G3>G1* IB 3.81 3.93 4.05 4.13 3.90 0.65 0.55 0.52 0.41 0.85 0.003* G3>G1* Employee Brand Commitment 4.00 4.20 4.27 4.18 4.55 0.79 0.63 0.69 0.64 0.42 0.001** G2>G1* G3>G1* Monthly Income: G1= less than or equal 1000, G2= 1001-2000, G3=2001-3000, G4= 3001- 4000, G5= 4001 and more. *Significance level at 5%, **Significance level at 1%. Najwan ADILEH & Prof. Dr. Özgür ÇENGEL 86 According to the Table 5. at 1% and 5% level, there is a significant difference between employees according to monthly income for internal Branding (IB), and employee brand commitment (EBC). Therefore, a post hoc test (Tukey HSD comparison) conducted to understand which groups differ from each other. For internal Branding (IB), the third group had a significant difference comparing to the first group. Also, the fourth group had the highest mean. Besides, for employee brand commitment, there was a significant difference between the second and third group comparing to the first group. Also, the fifth group had the highest mean comparing to all the other groups. Therefore, the sixth and the seventh null hypothesis, both will be rejected. According to Table 6, the results of the hypothesized model are relatively well fitting. Hence, when the sample size is more than 200, it is more appropriate to take the model fit decision based on other indices of fit, rather than the chi- square test (Boomsma, 1985; Boomsma and Hoogland, 2001). Therefore, the CFI and the RMSEA are considered more reasonable and applicable to assess the goodness of fit for this model (Hooper, Coughlan and Mullen, 2008). Table 6: Results of Measurement Model Fit Fit Index Measurement Model (CFA) Cut-off Criteria χ2 1426.264(0.000) p > 0.05 Df 591 CFI 0.952 CFI>0.95 TLI 0.967 TLI>0.95 RMSEA 0.051 RMSEA<0.06 SRMR 0.062 SRMR<0.08 Note. χ2 = chi-square; df = degree of freedom; CFI = comparative fit index; TLI = Tucker-Lewis fit index; RMSEA = root mean square error of approximation; SRMR = standardized root mean residual 9. Reliability & Validity The next step after consent the overall model goodness of fit was to analyze the variables for their reliability and validity. Thus, convergent validity was examined to ensure that the items of the study’s structure are converging a high proportion of variance in common. In order to examine the relative amount of convergent validity among item measures, the factor loading for each variable checked. The factor loading for each variable was statically significant and exceeding the critical t-value of (2.576) at (p<.01). Moreover, (0.5) or higher value of standardized loading estimates, and ideally (.7) or a higher value, refers to a high value of convergent validity (Hair et al., 2014). Furthermore, reliability also assessed including the composite reliability (CR) and the average variance extracted (AVE) (Hair et al., 2014). According to Fornell & Larcker (2018), an AVE of (.5) or higher and a CR of 0.7 or higher has recommended. According to Table 7, the standardized loading estimates for each indicator are higher than 0.5 and exceeding 0.7 for most of them. Also, the composite reliability (CR) result exceeds (0.7), and average variance extracted (AVE) result exceeds (0.5). Table 7: Construct Validity Assessment Latent Indicator Std. Loadings SMC CR AVE Α Human Resources 0.923 0.709 0.805 HR1 0.580 0.704 HR2 0.684 0.416 HR3 0.728 0.639 Internal Branding And Brand Commitment: The Role Of Years Of Experience & Monthly Income 87 HR4 0.783 0.614 HR5 0.800 0.530 Internal Communication 0.890 0.671 0.882 IC1 0.645 0.468 IC2 0.839 0.722 IC3 0.775 0.778 IC4 0.795 0.712 Leadership Behaviors 0.961 0.834 0.921 LB1 0.681 0.770 LB2 0.835 0.719 LB3 0.822 0.694 LB4 0.867 0.540 LB5 0.808 0.750 0.937 0.717 0.909 Employee Brand Commitment EBC1 0.674 0.752 EBC2 0.829 0.675 EBC3 0.910 0.698 EBC4 0.901 0.464 EBC5 0.872 0.633 EBC6 0.641 0.600 Note. SMC: Squared Multiple Correlation, AVE: Average Variance Extracted; CR: Composite Reliability; α: Cronbach Alpha After analyzing the Convergent validity, the discriminant validity also assessed. The Table 8 below, shows that for each pair of constructs the average of (AVE) value exceeds (0.5), and for all items, it exceeds the value of the Squared Multiple Correlation; which supports good evidence of discriminant validity in the model. Table 8: The Results of Discriminant Validity Pairs of Constructs Average of AVE Φ Φ2 Human Resources – Internal Com. 0.690 0.697 0.486 Human Resources – Leadership 0.772 0.641 0.411 Human Resources – Employee Brand Commitment 0.713 0.543 0.295 Internal Communication – Leadership 0.753 0.722 0.521 Internal Communication – Employee Brand Commitment 0.694 0.579 0.335 Najwan ADILEH & Prof. Dr. Özgür ÇENGEL 88 Leadership– Employee Brand Commitment 0.776 0.585 0.342 Note. AVE: Average Variance Extracted; Ф 2: Squared Multiple Correlation AVE computed as (AVE of the first construct+ AVE of the second construct)/2 The next step is testing the structural model and assessing the significance of relationships. Table 9 below presents the results of the structural model fit. All fit indices meet the cut-off criteria and show a robust structural model fit. Table 9: Results of Structural Model Fit Fit Index Measurement Model (CFA) Cut-off Criteria χ2 29.695 (0.055) p>0.05 Df 14 CFI 0.966 CFI>0.95 TLI 0.954 TLI>0.95 RMSEA 0.048 RMSEA <0.06 SRMR 0.022 SRMR <0.08 Note. χ2 = chi-square; df = degree of freedom; CFI = comparative fit index; TLI = Tucker-Lewis fit index; RMSEA = root mean square error of approximation; SRMR = standardized root mean residual Following Table 10 that shows the results of path analysis: Table 10: Results of Path Analysis Path to Path from H0 Std. Coeff. t-value Direct Effects Employee Brand Commitment Human Resources H1: Supported 0.55 10.240** Internal Communication H2: Supported 0.88 16.691** Transformational Leadership H3: Supported 0.83 15.828** Internal Branding H total: Supported 0.67 11.320** 10. Discussion and Conclusion The findings show a significant positive relationship between internal branding mechanisms and employee brand commitment. Many previous studies in the literature support the results of this study (Punjaisri, Evanschitzky and Wilson, 2009; Preez and Bendixen, 2015; Yang, Wan and Wu, 2015; Javid et al., 2016). Conversely, Kimpakorn & Tocquer (2009) demonstrated contradicted result. There are several possible explanations for the significant relationship found in this study between internal brand management and employees brand commitment. According to Punjaisri et al. (2008), internal branding mechanisms affect employees attitudinally; through brand identification, brand commitment, and brand loyalty. Besides, two of the most important objectives of this study was to explore if Internal Branding And Brand Commitment: The Role Of Years Of Experience & Monthly Income 89 there are some effects for the monthly income and years of experience among employees on their perspective on internal branding and employee brand commitment. An exciting finding appeared in this study. Employees with 15 years of experience or more in the bank, showed a more favorable perception for internal branding activities and brand commitment. These results are also consistent with the findings of previous studies (Salami, 2008; Amangala, 2013; Abdul-Nasiru et al., 2014). The results may be for the reason that as employees spent an extended period spent in the organization, might develop a sense of belonging by time (Joiner and Bakalis, 2006). According to employees’ income, employees with good to high income between $2000 and $4000 showed better perspective for all the variables. In this study, insight has gained about the internal branding mechanisms and process in order to create employees brand supporting behaviors. Furthermore, the study provides more knowledge for the role of brand-centered human resource activities, internal brand communication activities and brand-centered transformational leadership on enhancing employee brand commitment. Therefore, the present findings might suggest several courses of action. The organization has to hire the right applicant by select, recruit, and promote employees who have a high personal Identity-brand identity fit (Preez and Bendixen, 2015). Moreover, managers have to discover the employees’ favorite channel of communication in order to ensure the effectiveness of the internal branding activity in their organization. Besides, managers need to attend specialized training and courses that enable them to empower their leading transformational skills, motivate employees, deliver a clear vision, build a brand-oriented culture, and enhance trust- based relationships between employees, managers, and organization. The empirical findings in this study provide a new addition to the literature for the effect of demographic differences among employees on their varying perspectives about internal branding mechanisms in the service brands specifically in the banking industry. Besides, this study assesses the demographic differences among employees’ brand commitment and supporting brand citizenship behavior. However, this study stated that employees with 15 years of experience or more in the bank, had more brand commitment comparing to the other employees. Therefore, this study encouraging organizations to take into consideration the employee years of experience while structuring specialized training programs for enhancing employee brand commitment. Moreover, the findings showed a favorable perspective for internal branding and a high level of employee brand commitment for employees with good to high income. Therefore, it is essential to review the income scale for the organization and its relationship with employee brand commitment and employee performance. References Abdul-Nasiru, I. et al. (2014) ‘Organisational Commitment in the Public Service of Ghana: An Empirical Study’, Developing Country Studies, 4(1), pp. 49–55. Alshuaibia, A. S. I. and Shamsudinb, F. M. (2016) ‘The Role of Human Resource Management Practices in Enhancing Internal Branding’, The European Proceeding ò Social & Behavioral Sciences, pp. 599–605. Amangala, T. . (2013) ‘The Effect of Demographic Characteristics on Organisational Commitment : a Study of Salespersons in the Soft Drink Industry in Nigeria’, European Journal of Business and Management, 5(18), pp. 109– 119. Aurand, T. W., Gorchels, L. and Bishop, T. R. (2005) ‘Human resource management’s role in internal branding: an opportunity for cross‐functional brand message synergy’, Journal of Product & Brand Management, 14(3), pp. 163– 169. doi: 10.1108/10610420510601030. Boomsma, A. (1985) ‘Nonconvergence, improper solutions, and starting values in LISREL maximum likelihood estimation’, Psychometrik, 50(2), pp. 229–242. Najwan ADILEH & Prof. Dr. Özgür ÇENGEL 90 Boomsma, A. and Hoogland, J. J. (2001) ‘The Robustness of LISREL Modeling Revisited’, Structural equation modeling Present and future, pp. 139–168. doi: 10.1007/BF02294248. Burmann, C., Jost-Benz, M. and Riley, N. (2009) ‘Towards an identity-based brand equity model’, Journal of Business Research. Elsevier Inc., 62(3), pp. 390–397. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2008.06.009. Burmann, C. and Zeplin, S. (2005) ‘Building brand commitment: A behavioural approach to internal brand management’, Journal of Brand Management, 12(4), pp. 279–300. doi: 10.1057/palgrave.bm.2540223. Burmann, C., Zeplin, S. and Riley, N. (2009) ‘Key determinants of internal brand management success: An exploratory empirical analysis’, Brand Management, 16(4), pp. 264–284. doi: 10.1057/bm.2008.6. Cook, J. and Wall, T. (1980) ‘New work attitude measures of trust, organizational commitment and personal need non‐fulfilment’, Journal of Occupational Psychology, 53(1), pp. 39–52. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8325.1980.tb00005.x. Devasagayam, P. R. et al. (2010) ‘Building brand community membership within organizations: A viable internal branding alternative?’, Journal of Product and Brand Management, 19(3), pp. 210–217. doi: 10.1108/10610421011046184. Fornell, C. and Larcker, D. F. (2018) ‘Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error’, Journal of Marketing Research, 18(February), pp. 39–50. doi: http://www.jstor.org. Grace, D. and O’Cass, A. (2002) ‘Brand associations: looking through the eye of the beholder’, Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 5(2), pp. 96–111. doi: 10.1108/13522750210423797. Hair, J. F. et al. (2014) Multivariate data analysis, Pearson. doi: 10.1038/259433b0. Hooper, D., Coughlan, J. and Mullen, M. R. (2008) ‘Structural Equation Modelling : Guidelines for Determining Model Fit’, The Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 6(1), pp. 53–60. Hu, L. and Bentler, P. M. (1999) ‘Cutoff Criteria for Fit Indexes in Covariance Structure Analysis: Conventional Criteria Versus New Alternatives’, Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), pp. 1–55. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118. Javid, H. et al. (2016) ‘Internal Brand Management Relationship with Brand Citizenship Behavior , Job Satisfaction and Commitment in Saipa Teif Company’, Procedia Economics and Finance. Elsevier B.V., 36(16), pp. 408–413. doi: 10.1016/S2212-5671(16)30053-3. Joiner, T. A. and Bakalis, S. (2006) ‘The antecedents of organizational commitment: the case of Australian casual academics’, International Journal of Educational Management, 20(6), pp. 439–452. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/MRR-09-2015-0216. Kimpakorn, N. and Tocquer, G. (2009) ‘Employees ’ commitment to brands in the service sector : Luxury hotel chains in Thailand’, Brand Management, 16(8), pp. 532–544. doi: 10.1057/palgrave.bm.2550140. Kimpakorn, N. and Tocquer, G. (2010) ‘Service brand equity and employee brand commitment’, Journal of Services Marketing, 24(5), pp. 378–388. doi: 10.1108/08876041011060486. King, C. and Grace, D. (2005) ‘Exploring the role of employees in the delivery of the brand: a case study approach’, Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 8(3), pp. 277–295. doi: 10.1108/13522750510603343. King, C. and Grace, D. (2010) Building and measuring employee‐based brand equity, European Journal of Marketing. doi: 10.1108/03090561011047472. King, C., Murillo, E. and Lee, H. (2017) ‘International Journal of Hospitality Management The effects of generational work values on employee brand attitude and behavior : A multi-group analysis’, International Journal of Hospitality Management. Elsevier Ltd, 66, pp. 92–105. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhm.2017.07.006. Morhart, F. M., Herzog, W. and Tomczak, T. (2009) ‘Brand-Specific Leadership: Turning Employees into Brand Champions’, Journal of Marketing, 73(5), pp. 122–142. doi: 10.1509/jmkg.73.5.122. Internal Branding And Brand Commitment: The Role Of Years Of Experience & Monthly Income 91 Morhart, F. M., Herzog, W. and Tomczak, T. (2011) ‘Turning Employees into Brand Champions: Leadership Style Makes a Difference’, GfK Marketing Intelligence Review, 3(2), pp. 35–43. Available at: http://esc- web.lib.cbs.dk/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=69636645&site=ehos t-live&scope=site. O’Reilly, C. A. and Chatman, J. (1986) ‘Organizational commitment and psychological attachment: The effects of compliance, identification, and internalization on prosocial behavior.’, Journal of Applied Psychology, 71(3), pp. 492–499. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.71.3.492. Preez, R. Du, Bendixen, M. and Abratt, R. (2017) ‘The behavioral consequences of internal brand management among frontline employees’, Journal of Product & Brand Management, 26(3), pp. 251–261. doi: 10.1108/JPBM-09- 2016-1325. Preez, R. Du and Bendixen, M. T. (2015) ‘The impact of internal brand management on employee job satisfaction, brand commitment and intention to stay’, International Journal of Bank Marketing, 33(1), pp. 78–91. Punjaisri, K., Evanschitzky, H. and Wilson, A. (2009) ‘Internal branding: an enabler of employees’ brand‐supporting behaviours’, Journal of Service Management, 20(2), pp. 209–226. doi: 10.1108/09564230910952780. Punjaisri, K. and Wilson, A. (2007) ‘The role of internal branding in the delivery of employee brand promise’, Journal of Brand Management, 15(1), pp. 57–70. doi: 10.1057/palgrave.bm.2550110. Punjaisri, K. and Wilson, A. (2011) ‘Internal branding process: key mechanisms, outcomes and moderating factors’, European Journal of Marketing, 45(9/10), pp. 1521–1537. doi: 10.1108/03090561111151871. Punjaisri, K., Wilson, A. . and Evanszchitzky, H. (2008) ‘Exploring the Influences of Internal Branding on Employees’ Brand Promise Delivery: Implications for Strengthening the Customer-Brand Relationships’, Journal of Relationship Marketing, 7(4), pp. 407–424. Rowold, J. (2005) ‘Psychometric properties of the German translation by Jens Rowold’, Mind Garden, pp. 1–24. doi: 10.1037/t03624-000. Salami, S. O. (2008) ‘Demographic and Psychological Factors Predicting Organizational Commitment among Industrial Workers’, Anthropologist, 10(1), pp. 31–38. Shaari, H., Salleh, S. M. and Hussin, Z. (2012) ‘Relationship Between Brand Knowledge and Brand Rewards , and Employees ’ Brand Citizenship Behavior : the Mediating Roles of Brand Commitment’, International Journal of Business and Society, 13(3), pp. 335–354. Terglav, K., Konečnik Ruzzier, M. and Kaše, R. (2016) ‘Internal branding process: Exploring the role of mediators in top management’s leadership-commitment relationship’, International Journal of Hospitality Management, 54, pp. 1– 11. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhm.2015.12.007. Yang, J.-T., Wan, C.-S. and Wu, C.-W. (2015) ‘Effect of Internal Branding on Employee Brand Commitment and Behavior in Hospitality’, Tourism and Hospitality Research, 15(4), pp. 267–280. doi: 10.1177/1467358415580358.