Factors affecting brand authenticity, in F and B industry , A case study of starbucks in Ho Chi Minh City 2021
THE STATE BANK OF VIETNAM HO CHI MINH BANKING UNIVERSITY ********** LE PHAM DANG KHOA FACTORS AFFECTING BRAND AUTHENTICITY IN F&B INDUSTRY IN VIETNAM – A CASE STUDY OF STARBUCKS IN HO CHI MINH CITY BACHELOR’S THESIS MAJOR: BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION CODE: 52340101 HO CHI MINH CITY, 09/2021 THE STATE BANK OF VIETNAM HO CHI MINH BANKING UNIVERSITY ********** LE PHAM DANG KHOA FACTORS AFFECTING BRAND AUTHENTICITY IN F&B INDUSTRY IN VIETNAM – A CASE STUDY OF STARBUCKS IN HO CHI MINH CITY BACHELOR’S THESIS MAJOR: BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION CODE: 52340101 SUPERVISIOR: MR TRAN VAN DAT HO CHI MINH CITY, 2021 ABSTRACT The main purpose of this study is to find out which factors affecting brand authenticity in F&B industry by concentrating on Starbucks For this purpose, a conceptual model was developed based on other research models The study had collected data by conducting 200 surveys online in Ho Chi Minh City The author use SPSS 20 software to analysises have show the results that Uniqueness, Scarcity, Longitudinal Consistency, Longevity, Brand legitimacy and Employee‟s passion are factors that have positive influence on brand authenticy of Starbucks This results study could be used as a reference for further research and for Entrepreneurs, Marketing managers, or businessman to have a concept about the brand authenticity therefore make plans to build authenticity to have a more competitive position DECLARATION I declare that the thesis "Factors affecting brand authenticity in F&B industry in Vietnam – A case study of Starbucks in Ho Chi Minh City" is the result of my research Except for the references to previous research papers mentioned in the thesis, the survey data and results of the thesis are genuine and have never been published before ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The first person I would like to thank is Ph.D Tran Van Dat who supported me directly He has given me lots of valuable advice and suggestions for me to complete the thesis I would like to thank the teachers of the Facility of Business Administration They gave me the knowledge and useful experience during the time I was learning at the university I would like to thank my friends from HQ5 – GE11 for sharing, helping me during my time at school I also express my attitude to all my friends who helped me directly or indirectly Who answered the survey for my data in this thesis Finally, I would like to thank my family, relatives for encouraging me during this thesis Table of Contents Chapter Overview of thesis 1.1 Introduction 1.2 Aim of research 1.3 Research object and Research cope 1.4 Methodology: 1.5 Research structure Chapter 2.1 Literature review Authenticity 6 2.1.1 Definition of Authenticity 2.1.2 Definitions of different perspectives of authenticity 2.2 Brand authenticity 2.2.1 Definition of brand authenticity 2.2.2 The concept of brand authenticity 2.3 Related research 10 2.4 Proposed model 13 2.4.1 Overview Starbucks case 13 2.4.2 Proposed model 14 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 19 Chapter 3.1 Research design 19 3.2 Research methodology 20 3.2.1 Qualitative method: 20 3.2.2 Quantitative method: 21 3.3 Adjusting model research 24 3.4 Building the scale 28 3.4.1 Scale of Uniqueness: 29 3.4.2 Scale of Scarcity 30 3.4.3 Scale of Longevity 31 3.4.4 Scale of Longitudinal Consistency 32 3.4.5 Scale of Brand Legitimacy 33 3.4.6 Scale of Employee‟s passion 34 3.4.7 Scale of Brand authenticity 35 3.5 Data processing methods: 35 3.5.1 Cronbach's alpha analyzing: 35 3.5.2 EFA analyzing: 36 3.5.3 Regression and ANOVA analyzing: 37 RESEARCH RESULT 39 Chapter 4.1 Sample descriptions 39 4.2 Reliability coefficients Cronbach‟s Alpha 42 4.2.1 Uniqueness (UQ) 42 4.2.2 Scarcity (SC) 43 4.2.3 Longevity (LG) 44 4.2.4 Longitudinal consistency (LC) 45 4.2.5 Brand Legitimacy (BL) 46 4.2.6 Employee‟s passion (EP) 47 4.2.7 Brand authenticity (BA) 48 4.3 Analyzing EFA (Exploratory Factor Analysis) 49 4.3.1 EFA of independent variables 49 4.3.2 EFA of dependent variable 52 4.4 Comparatives analysis 54 4.5 Analyzing Regression 55 4.6 Determining the difference by the characteristics of the research object 58 4.6.1 Gender differences 58 4.6.2 Age differences 60 4.6.3 Job differences 62 4.6.4 Income differences 64 Conclusion and managerial implications 67 Chapter 5.1 Conclusion 67 5.2 Managerial implications 68 5.2.1 Uniqueness 68 5.2.2 Brand legitimacy 69 5.2.3 Longitudinal Consistency 69 5.2.4 Employee‟s passion 70 5.2.5 Scarcity 70 5.2.6 Longevity 71 5.3 Limitation and further research 71 5.3.1 Limitation of thesis 71 5.3.2 Further research 72 LIST OF ACRONYMS ANOVA Analysis of Variance EFA Exploratory Factor Analysis HCMC Ho Chi Minh City F&B Food and Beverage SPSS Statistical Package for Social Sciences LIST OF FIGURES, TABLES FIGURES: Figure 2.3.1 The research model of a journal titled "Authenticity in branding – exploring antecedents and consequences of brand authenticity" 10 Figure 2.3.2 The model research of journal titled “Brand Authenticity: Testing the Antecedents and Outcomes of Brand Management's Passion for its Products” 11 Figure 2.3 The model research of Mike Schallehn Christoph Burmann Nicola Riley, (2014) with journal titled "Brand authenticity: model development and empirical testing" 12 Figure 2.3.4 Proposed research model 16 Figure 3.1 Research design………………… ……………………………………18 Figure 3.3 Adjusted research model……………………………………………….26 Figure 4.1a Statistics by gender… …………………………………… ……… 39 Figure 4.1b Statistics by age.….… …………………………………… ……… 40 Figure 4.1c Statistics by job……… ………………… ……………… ……… 40 Figure 4.1d Statistics by income…… ……………… …………………… … 41 TABLES: Table 3.4.1 Scale of Uniqueness 29 Table 3.4.2 Scale of Scarcity 30 Table 3.4.3 Scale of Longevity 31 Table 3.4.4 Scale of Longitudinal Consistency 32 Table 3.4.5 Scale Brand Legitimacy 33 Table 3.4.6 Scale of Employee's passion 34 Table 3.4.7 Scale of Brand Authenticity 35 Table 3.2.2a Relationship between the hypothesis and brand authenticity of Starbucks 24 Table 4.2.1a Reliability Statistics of Uniqueness (UQ) 42 Table 4.2.1b Item-Total Statistic of Uniqueness (UQ) 42 Table 4.2.3a Reliability Statistics of Scarcity (SC) 43 Table 4.2.3b Item-Total Statistic of Scarcity (SC) 43 Table 4.2.3a Reliability Statistics of Longevity (LG) 44 Table 4.2.3b Item-Total Statistic of Longevity (LG) 44 Table 4.2.3a Reliability Statistics of Longitudinal consistency (LC) 45 Table 4.2.3b Item-Total Statistic of Longitudinal consistency (LC) 45 Table 4.2.3a Reliability Statistics of Brand legitimacy (BL) 46 Table 4.2.3b Item-Total Statistic of Brand legitimacy (BL) 46 Table 4.2.3a Reliability Statistics of Employee‟s passion (EP) 47 Table 4.2.3b Item-Total Statistic of Employee‟s passion (EP) 47 Table 4.2.3a Reliability Statistics of Brand authenticy (BA) 48 Table 4.2.3b Item-Total Statistic of Brand authenticity (BA) 48 Table 4.3.1a KMO and Bartlett‟s Test……………………………… ……… …49 Table 4.3.1b Total Variance Explained……………………………… ……….…50 Table 4.3.1c Rotated Component Matrix …………………………… ………….51 Table 4.3.2a KMO and Bartlett‟s Test…………………………………………….52 Table 4.3.2b Total Variance Explained…………………………………… …….52 Table 4.4 Pearson Correlations…………………………………… …………….54 Table 4.5a Model Summary…………………………………… …………….….55 Table 4.5b ANOVA Analysis……………………………………… ……………56 ANOVA Sum of df Mean Squares Between UQ 1.519 Within Groups 79.601 197 404 Total 82.639 199 405 203 Within Groups 106.883 197 543 Total 107.288 199 5.639 2.819 Within Groups 111.981 197 568 Total 117.620 199 3.229 1.615 Within Groups 83.562 197 424 Total 86.791 199 392 196 Within Groups 76.719 197 389 Total 77.111 199 657 328 Within Groups 87.581 197 445 Total 88.237 199 Between SC Groups Between LG Groups Between LC Groups Between BL Groups Between Groups EP Sig Square 3.038 Groups F 3.759 025 373 689 4.960 008 3.806 024 503 606 739 479 Table 4.6.3b ANOVA Comparing differences by job Source: Data processing results 63 The result of the table above shows the sig of these variables: Scarcity, Brand Legitimacy and Employee‟s passion are greater than 0.05 This proves that there are no statistically significant differences to those factors mentioned above However, the sig of these variable: Uniqueness, Longevity and Longitudinal consistency are less than 0.05, which indicates that there is statistically significant difference to this factor Because of that, the author can conclude that people with different Job have different evaluations in Longevity 4.6.4 Income differences Test of Homogeneity of Variances Levene df1 df2 Sig Statistic UQ 2.202 196 089 SC 1.647 196 180 LG 916 196 434 LC 1.199 196 311 BL 2.835 196 039 EP 255 196 858 Table 4.6.4a Compare differences in income Source: Data processing results Results Sig of these factors: Uniqueness, Scarcity, Longevity, Longitudinal consistency, Employee‟s Passion are greater than 0.05, however sig value of factor Brand Legitimacy is lower than 0.05 The author can conclude that the variance between the choices of job variables is different You can see the results of the ANOVA table: 64 ANOVA Sum of df Mean Square F Sig Squares Between Groups UQ 5.415 1.805 Within Groups 77.224 196 394 Total 82.639 199 2.568 856 Within Groups 104.720 196 534 Total 107.288 199 3.013 1.004 Within Groups 114.607 196 585 Total 117.620 199 4.143 1.381 Within Groups 82.648 196 422 Total 86.791 199 1.140 380 Within Groups 75.971 196 388 Total 77.111 199 2.108 703 Within Groups 86.130 196 439 Total 88.237 199 Between Groups SC Between Groups LG Between Groups LC Between Groups BL Between Groups EP 4.581 004 1.602 190 1.718 165 3.275 022 980 403 1.599 191 Table 4.6.4b ANOVA Comparing differences by income Source: Data processing results The result of the table above shows the sig of these variables: Scarcity, Longevity, Brand Legitimacy and Employee‟s passion are greater than 0.05 This proves that there are no statistically significant differences to those factors mentioned above However, the sig of these variable: Uniqueness, and Longitudinal consistency are less than 0.05, which indicates that there are statistically significant 65 differences to these factor Because of that, the author can conclude that people with different income have different evaluations in Uniqueness and Longitudinal consistency 66 Chapter Conclusion and managerial implications 5.1 Conclusion The object of this study have found the factors that affect brand authenticity of Starbucks in Ho Chi Minh city and access the impact intensity of each factor affecting brand authenticity of Starbucks through in-depth interviews with 10 participants who are experts, and common customers of Starbucks combine with 200 online surveys from different individuals with different gender, job, income, age Based on the results of this study, the initial model of six component factors which are Uniqueness, Scarcity, Brand legitimacy, Longitudinal consistency and Employee's passion with 19 observation variables and the brand authenticity scale with observed variables All the scales were Likert which present with Absolutely disagree and is Absolutely agree After addition and correction the scales reach the level of reliability and validity Cronbach alpha results shows the reliability of all the scales were > 0.7 therefore the author began to analyzing After using EFA analyzing method, the results of factors could explain 69,192% variation of the data KMO result was 0.810, Bartlett's test for the relationship of the observation variables with Sig have meaning (Sig = 0,000 < 0.05) After Pearson correlation analysis, the author found that the Sig value of the dependent variable and independent variables is less than 0.05, indicating that there is a strong correlation between dependent variable and independent variable When using the regression linear analyzes to quantify the relationship between the six factors that influence brand authenticity, six factors and the dependent variable were valid in reality therefore, the model did not remove any scale The most influential factor toward brand authenticity is Uniqueness and the least is Longevity The model successfully explained 54.9% the variation of brand authenticity All these six factors have positive effect on brand authenticity 67 Within the scope of this study, the results of the data analysis show that there are differences in the level of assessment Uniqueness, Brand legitimacy, Longitudinal consistency, Scarcity, Employee‟s passion, Scarcity, and Longevity 5.2 Managerial implications Based on the analysis of the results of the study in Chapter to improve brand authenticity of Starbucks in HCMC needs to concentrate on improving factors affecting brand authenticity in order of priority are: Uniqueness, Longitudinal consistency, Brand legitimacy, Employee‟s passion, Scarcity, and Longevity 5.2.1 Uniqueness According to the survey results, Uniqueness (beta=0.216) has a positive impact and strongly influences the brand authenticity Therefore, Starbucks needs to improve their own "uniqueness" which is a feature for their customers This could be done by creating more new drinks or food or even new events According to the author, Starbucks is one of a few brands that sell their own merch with cups, bags,… The author thinks this is a really unique method to keep the interest of customers, besides good drink and good food who not want a cute, quality, environment friendly to use at home The author suggests Starbucks to continue on selling their merch plus creating more versions of their famous goods To be more generalized, brands in the F&B industry should find for themselves a unique feature, a one and only that exists to attract customers and they should stick with it cause this is going to differentiate themselves in the industry 68 5.2.2 Brand legitimacy People nowadays not just looking for quality items to use, they are also looking for a place where they belong to This could be showed by the result of the study, Brand legitimacy is the second level factor that affect brand authenticity (beta=0.204) Starbucks should create an atmosphere where everybody feels welcomed and this is their specialty, their brand mission is to make people feel that they are at home Therefore, keeping the focus on this side as well as giving out more to the community by community event is not a bad option, they could use these opportunities to take their image closer to customers in HCMC, they could attempt to this by putting on a sale on those memorial days for a specific type of customers, example: when it is the First of June, they should put on a sale for kids, even though their customers often are grown-ups but they all have a family so they would take their children to Starbucks cause the benefit they would get If fortunate, they could make a community, when you have a loyal community, it would benefit the brand a lot This is still going well with every brand that in every industry, the consumer is the base of the success of the brand, building a connection with them is something that only benefits the brand Therefore, brands in the F&B industry should focus to build the foundation which is the loyalty of customers by making consumers feels that they are appreciated 5.2.3 Longitudinal Consistency A Brand which is being consistent with their image, their value create for customers a belief that the brand is authentic, this is showed in the result of this study Longitudinal consistency is the third level factor that affect brand authenticity (beta= 0.201) Starbucks have been always known for its consistency through out the years, they have not changed the core of the company which is bring to customers a place that they feel at ease with good quality food and beverage products Starbucks should continue to so, this make Starbucks a lot of loyal consumers To apply in F&B industry, brands should stay true to their value which create an image for customers that the brand is authentic by its stability This could 69 make the customers to use the products of your brand cause they know that your brand is consistent with your products, example: Your brand has a has an image as a vegeterian brand for a long time, your products are seen as natural friendly,good for the health of customers then they would choose you over other brands that did not have a reputation for its stability 5.2.4 Employee’s passion Employee indeed is a ruler for brands nowadays, the result of the study shows that Employee‟s passion is the fourth level affect Brand authenticity (beta=0.116) Consumers usually use the reaction of employees to judge the brand In order to attract more customers, skills and attitude are always a couple Consumers always want an employee who is energetic, funny, fast, a professional employee Starbucks should make their staff feel like they are cared for, their effort is considered, make an employee happier should be the brand's mission cause when your staff is happy they tend to work harder In general, brands in the F&B industry should invest in their employee, they are the ones who represent your face to the consumer, that is why brands should make them feel happy with being clear and transparent about their salary, create progress for them to be promoted this would make the staff have a target then work harder 5.2.5 Scarcity Starbucks is known for its rarity Starbucks is not the brand with the most stores in HCMC, but the quality of services is the common thing when people talk about it Only a few stores in specific districts does not limit the influnece of this brand This does show how customers see this brand as an authentic one, based on the study (beta = 0.125) this factors is the fifth level influnce the brand authenticity Starbucks should use this as an advantage to attract more customers, this could be explained like when the customer is in the specific location they would think about Starbucks cause it is not available everywhere People considered a brand to be authentic when it is rare, this could help new brands in the F&B industry which does not have the foundation of locations, they just only need a fews places with 70 good quality items for the customers to come and enjoy their products and people would think this brand is an authentic one due to its focus on quality of the products but the concentration on how much they could sell to the consumers 5.2.6 Longevity Longevity has the weakest influence on brand authenticity based on the result (beta=0,081) Due to this result, a majority of customers nowadays not consider how long the brand has been existing to be the most important factor that the brand would be authentic Despite that, longevity still affects the brand authenticity to others, brand in the F&B industry should try to survive as much as possible this created a familiar image to customers that might lead to loyal customers In the F&B industry, brands should focus on their target, this could reflect the passion of the brands which lead to the belief of customers about an authentic brand This could help brand to have more customers that have the same vision of the brand and the longer the brand survive the much more reputation the brand gets 5.3 Limitation and further research 5.3.1 Limitation of thesis During the survey, the author collected just 200 sample, so the number of group surveys obtained is limited The sample does not have a balanced distribution of age, job, income therefore it does not reflect the real market in ANOVA In the literature review, the author mentioned many conceptualizations affecting brand authenticity but the author only based on research model to propose the research model, this is one of the limitation of the study The result of regression analysis with adjusted R2 was 0.549, explain only 54.9% for the change in brand authenticity This shows that there are other components involved in brand authenticity of Starbucks but was not mentioned in the model The author is still lack of knowledge and capabilities therefore the factors are only measured in the same direction that is have positive effect on brand authenticity 71 5.3.2 Further research In order to overcome the above limitation, future research should make the scope bigger and the sample size should also be increased, and add more factors that affect the brand authenticity in the F&B industry The research in the future should be processed by more advanced data technique than SPSS 72 REFERENCES Beer, S (2008) Authenticity and food experience - commercial and academic perspectives* Journal of Foodservice, 19(3), 153–163 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-4506.2008.00096.x Beverland, M (2006) The „real thing‟: Branding authenticity in the luxury wine trade Journal of Business Research, 59(2), 251–258 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2005.04.007 Beverland, M., & Farrelly, F (2010) The Quest for Authenticity in Consumption: Consumers‟ Purposive Choice of Authentic Cues to Shape Experienced Outcomes Journal of Consumer Research, 36(5), 838–856 https://doi.org/10.1086/615047 Beverland, M., Lindgreen, A., & Vink, M (2008) Projecting Authenticity Through Advertising: Consumer Judgments of Advertisers‟ Claims Journal of Advertising, 37(1), 5–15 Beverland, M., & Luxton, S (2005) Managing integrated mar- keting communication (IMC) through strategic decoupling: How luxury wine firms retain brand leadership while ap- pearing to be wedded to the past Journal of Advertising, 34, 103–116 Brown, S., Kozinets, R.V., & Sherry Jr J (2003) Teaching old brands new tricks: Retro branding and the revival of brand meaning Journal of Marketing, 67(3) 19-33 https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.67.3.19.18657 Bruhn, M., Schoenm ller, V., Sch fer, D., & Heinrich, D (2012) Brand Authenticity: Towards a Deeper Understanding of Its Conceptualization and Measurement Advances in Consumer Research, 40(40), 567–576 Deci, E.L and Ryan, M.R (2000), “The “What” and “Why” of Goal Pursuits: Human Needs and the Self-Determination of Behavior”, Psychological Inquiry, Vol 11 No 4, pp 227- 268 Fine, G A (2003) Crafting Authenticity: The Validation of Identity in Self-Taught 73 Art Theory and Society, 32(2), 153–180 Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3108577 Fritz, K., Schoenmueller, V., & Bruhn, M (2017) Authenticity in branding – exploring antecedents and consequences of brand authenticity European Journal of Marketing, 51(2), 324–348 https://doi.org/10.1108/EJM-10-20140633 Gilmore, J., & Pine, J (2007) What consumers really want: Authenticity Harvard Business School Press Grandey, A.A., Fisk, G.M., Mattila, A.S., Jansen, K.J and Sideman, L.A (2005), “Is „Service with a Smile‟ Enough? Authenticity of Positive Displays During Service Encounters”, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol 96 No 1, pp 38-55 Grayson, K., & Martinec, R (2004) Consumer perceptions of iconicity and indexicality and their influence on assessments of authentic market offerings Journal of Consumer Research, 31(2), 296–312 https://doi.org/10.1086/422109 Guèvremont, A (2015) Brand authenticity: definition, measurement, antecedents, and consequences Retrieved from Concordia University website: https://spectrum.library.concordia.ca/id/eprint/979777/ Hair, J F (1998) Multivariate data analysis Upper Saddle River, N.J. : Prentice Hall ©1998 Heidegger, M (1996) Being and Time: A Translation of Sein und Zeit New York: SUNY Press Holt, D B (2002) Why brands cause trouble? A dialectical theory of consumer culture and branding Journal of Consumer Research 29(1), 70-90 74 Kates, S.M (2004), “The Dynamics of Brand Legitimacy: An Interpretive Study in the Gay Men's Community”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol 31 No 2, pp 455-464 Kernis, M H., & Goldman, B M B T.-A in E S P (2006) A Multicomponent Conceptualization of Authenticity: Theory and Research https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(06)38006-9 Kierkegaard, S (1985) Fear and Trembling: Dialectical Lyric Johannes de silentio, Penguin, UK Leedy, P D., & Ormrod, J E (2013) Practical research: Planning and design Boston: Pearson Leigh, T W., Peters, C., & Shelton, J (2006) The consumer quest for authenticity: The multiplicity of meanings within the MG subculture of consumption Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 34(4), 481–493 https://doi.org/10.1177/0092070306288403 Lewis, D., & Bridger, D (2001) The soul of the new consumer: authenticity -what we buy and why in the new economy Nicholas Brealey Publishing MacCannell, D (1973) Staged Authenticity: Arrangements of Social Space in Tourist Settings American Journal of Sociology, 79(3), 589–603 https://doi.org/10.1086/225585 Mason, J (2011) Aesthetic authenticity: Consummatory experience in the marketplace Oklahoma State University Moulard, J G., Rice, D H., Garrity, C P., & Mangus, S M (2014) Artist authenticity: How artists‟ passion and com- mitment shape consumers‟ perceptions and behavioral in- tentions across genders Psychology & Marketing, 31, 576– 590 Moulard, J G., Raggio, R D., & Folse, J A G (2016) Brand Authenticity: Testing 75 the Antecedents and Outcomes of Brand Management‟s Passion for its Products Psychology & Marketing, 33(6), 421–436 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.20888 Moulard, J G., Garrity, C P., & Rice, D H (2015) What makes a human brand authentic? Identifying the an- tecedents of celebrity authenticity Psychology & Marketing, 32, 173–186 Morhart, F., Mala r, L., Gue vremont, A., Girardin, F., & Grohmann, B (2015) Brand authenticity: An integrative framework and measurement scale Journal of Consumer Psychology, 25, 200–218 Muñoz, C L., Wood, N T., & Solomon, M R (2006) Real or blarney? A crosscultural investigation of the perceived authenticity of Irish pubs Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 5(3), 222–234 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.174 Riefler, P (2020) Local versus global food consumption: the role of brand authenticity Journal of Consumer Marketing, 37(3), 317–327 https://doi.org/10.1108/JCM-02-2019-3086 Rose, G.M., Shoham, A., Kahle, L.R and Batra, R (1994), “Social Values, Conformity, and Dress”, Journal of Applied Social Psychology, Vol 24 No 17, pp 1501-1519 Rose, R.L and Wood, S.L (2005), “Paradox and the consumption of authenticity through reality television”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol 32 No 2, pp 284-296 Sartre, J.-P (1992) Being and Nothingness: A Phenomenology Essay on Ontology Washington Square Press, New York Schallehn, M., Burmann, C., & Riley, N (2014) Brand authenticity: Model development and empirical testing Journal of Product and Brand Management, 23(3), 192–199 https://doi.org/10.1108/JPBM-06-2013-0339 76 Starbucks (2021) Starbucks Mission and Values Tran, V D., & Keng, C J (2018) The Brand authenticity scale: Development and validation Contemporary Management Research, 14(4), 277–291 https://doi.org/10.7903/cmr.18581 Wood, A., Linley, P., Maltby, J., Baliousis, M., & Joseph, S (2008) The Authentic Personality: A Theoretical and Empirical Conceptualization and the Development of the Authenticity Scale Journal of Counseling Psychology, 55 https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.55.3.385 77 ... STATE BANK OF VIETNAM HO CHI MINH BANKING UNIVERSITY ********** LE PHAM DANG KHOA FACTORS AFFECTING BRAND AUTHENTICITY IN F& B INDUSTRY IN VIETNAM – A CASE STUDY OF STARBUCKS IN HO CHI MINH CITY. .. journal titled "Authenticity in branding – exploring antecedents and consequences of brand authenticity" Brand Heritage Brand Nostalgia Brand Involvement Brand Commercialization Brand authenticity. .. 260 of which applied to fast-food brands and 250 to beer brands The research model of this journal has following factors affecting brand authenticity: Brand individuality, Brand consistency, Brand