D B S −０７−０４

科 研 費 「マーケティング移転研究」

日本・中国

アカデミック・シンポジウム−A Comparative Study: The Transfer to China of the Brands
Made in Japan, Korea, the US and Europe−

林 廣茂（同志社大学大学院ビジネス研究科）

2008年 1月

（要約）
自家用車、薄型テレビ、スキンケア化粧品の 3 分野について、2006 年と 2007 年に実施した中国の消費者調査（3 都市 200 人分×3 分野、計 1800 人のインターネット・モニター）のデータを、構造方程式モデルにより分析。国家ブランドと原産国ブランドの選好度
が、ブランドのイメージや選好度に深い影響を及ぼすことを、実証的に明らかにする。また、企業/ライン・ブランドそれ自体のブランド・エクイティ力が、国家ブランドと原産国
ブランドとは独立して、企業/ライン・ブランドの選好度を左右することを検証する。

・著者の許可なく、本ディスカッション・ペーパーからの転載、引用を禁じます。
・DBS ディスカッション・ペーパー・シリーズは、オムロン基金により運営されています。

科 研 費 「マーケティング移 転 研 究 」

日 本 ・中 国 アカデミック・シンポジウム 講 演 録
開 催 日 ： 2007 年 12 月 2 日 （日 ）場 所 ： 中 国 ・陝 西 省 西 安 市 西 安 交 通 大 学 管 理 学 院 311 会 議 室

A Comparative Study: The Transfer to China of theBrands Made in Japan, Korea, US and Europe（“日 韓 米 欧 ”発 ブランドの中 国 市 場 への移 転 ̶- 構 造 方 程 式 モデルによる国 家 ブランドと原 産 国 ブランドの企 業 ・ラインブランド選 好 度 への総 合 効 果 ）林

廣 茂 (同 志 社 大 学 )Hiroshige HAYASHI

Professor of Global Marketing
Doshisha University Graduate School of Business＜要 約 ＞
自 家 用 車 、薄 型 テレビ、スキンケア化 粧 品 の 3 分 野 について、2006 年 と 2007 年 に実 施した中 国 の消 費 者 調 査 （3 都 市 200 人 分 ×3 分 野 、計 1800 人 のインターネット・モニター）の データ を 、 構 造 方 程 式 モ デル に よ り 分 析 。国 家 ブ ラ ン ド と 原 産 国 ブラ ン ド の 選 好 度 が、 ブ
ラ ン ド の イ メ ー ジ や 選 好 度 に 深 い 影 響 を 及 ぼ すこ と を 、 実 証 的 に 明 ら か に す る 。 ま た 、 企 業/ライン・ブランドそれ自 体 のブランド・エクイティ力 が、国 家 ブランドと原 産 国 ブランドとは独立 して、企 業 /ライン・ブランドの選 好 度 を左 右 することを検 証 する。

＜講 演 録 ＞

Introduction
My presentation title is related to brand transfer, not only from Japan, but also
from Korea, the US and some European countries like France or Germany.
When you like Japan, do you think you will also like Toyota from Japan?

If

you like France then do you think you also like cosmetics from France? This iscalled psychological “halo effect”.
If you like or dislike a country, that association will be transferred to your1

西 安 シ ンポジ ウム講 演 録 林 廣 茂

preference of the product brand of the same country.
Today I will analyze how the preference of a nation or a state such as Japan,
US or France will affect your preference towards those brands from Japan, US or
France.
Another aspect of the study is that if you would like to buy a brand,
independently from the preference towards Japan, Korea or US, when you likethe brand itself, you would prefer to buy it.
There are 3 hierarchical areas of developing preference towards a specificproduct brand.

Firstly, your image about the country, and secondary, yourimage about the Country of Origin (COO), Japan as COO of cosmetics, COO of
automobiles, or COO of FPD (Flat Panel Display) TVs, and thirdly, the branditself.
I will talk about this subjec t in 4 phases; objectives of the study, finings, down
to management summary and marketing implications for branding strategies in
China for various multinational companies operating in this country.

Objectives
This study is a comparative study, multi-country analysis.
I would like to introduce the methodology of SEM (Structural Equation Model)
to analyze the factors and try to achieve the following objectives.
(1) To identify the total effects of state brand preference on the development of
the preference of corporate/ line brand.
How state brand will affect the preference of individual corporate line
brand?
State brand, by that I would like to mean the image about the county itself,such as Japan, US, Korea, France, Germany and so on, independently fromthe product. If you like Japan, you may like Toyota.
(2) To identify the total effects of COO brand preference on the development of
the preference of corporate/ line brandThink about Japan as a cosmetic country or Japan as an automobile country.
If you like France as an automobile country, then you might be very special,peculiar people in the world. If you do like Japan as an automobile country,
you are very clever and wise people, but unfortunately, Japan as a COO is
not liked in China.

2

西 安 シ ンポジ ウム講 演 録 林 廣 茂

(3) To disclose the indirect effect of corporate/ line brand perception,
independently from state and COO, on the development of the preference ofcorporate/ line brand.
The image of a brand, for example, what you think about Mercedes, will
influence your preference toward Mercedes. Then you would like to buy a
Mercedes, if you have money.
Those 3 objectives will be analyzed in combination to identify how muchinfluence each of state / COO / brand perception gives on the preference of eachindividual brand.

Methodology of the study
Direct / indirect effect
I will be talking about the state brand effect, the COO brand effect, and yourperception or image about each brand. If they affect perception and brandpreference, then here we call it direct effect. If you like Japan, you like Toyota,
this is direct effect.
If you like Japan, then you will have a favorable image toward Toyota brand,
and then this favorable image of Toyota will also influence your preference on
Toyota. This is indirect influence.
Take France as a COO of cosmetics, for example. If you like France as a COO
of cosmetics, then you will develop favorable image toward Lancôme. Then thisfavorable image will have an indirect effect on the preference of Lancôme.
Not many people know where Lancôme is from. Independent from state or COO
image, Lancôme itself has its own equity through their marketing activities in
China. That image will have a very good impact on the preference of Lancôme
and the purchase intension of Lancôme.
This is the conceptual model of this study (Figure 1). Along with this model, I
collected data in China.

Figure 1 The conceptual model of SEM

State Brand
Preference

Cor/Line
Brand(*) Free fromState/COO Brand
Preference

COO Brand
Preference

Cor/Line
Brand Perception
Dimension 1

3
Corp/Line Brand
Preference

西 安 シ ンポジ ウム講 演 録 林 廣 茂

Cor/Line
Brand Perception
Dimension N

(*)The Perception of the Corporate/Line Brand has its own effects on the preferenceof the Brand free from State Brand and COO Brand.

State brand preference and perception
The preference of state brand of the US, China, France, Japan and Korea ismeasured on the 5-point scale. Then, attribute rating is measured.

COO brand preference and perception
For the preference of COO brand of cosmetics, I measured US, China, France,
Japan and Korea. Attribute rating is also measured.

Corporate/line brand preference
For corporate line brands, I chose Avon, Dabao ( 大 宝 ), L’Oreal, Laneige,Lancôme, Aupres(欧 珀 莱 ), Olay, Shiseido, SK-II, Mininurse (小 護 士 ).
Attribute rating of the corporate/line brands is also measured.
By the same approach, I also measured Chinese consumers for cars and FPD(Flat Panel Display) TV (See the Table 1 for details).

Table 1

Measurement Design

Cosmetics

Cars

FPD TVs

US, China, France,

US, China, Germany,

China, Japan, Korea

Japan, Korea

Japan, Korea

US, China, France,

US, China, Germany,

Japan, Korea

Japan, Korea

Avon, Dabao (大 宝 ),Chery（奇 瑞 QQ)、

Changhong(長 虹 ）、

L’Oreal, Laneige,

Ford、Geely（吉 利 ）,Hitachi, Hisense (海Corporate/Line Lancôme, Aupres,

GM, Honda, BMW,信 ）, LG, Panasonic,

Olay, Shiseido,

Hyundai, Nissan,Samsung, Sony,

SK-II, Mininurse (小Mercedes-Benz,

Skyworth（創 維 ）,護士)

Toyota, VW

Sharp

State Brand

COO Brand

Brand

4

China, Japan, Korea

西 安 シ ンポジ ウム講 演 録 林 廣 茂The research was conducted from December 2006 to January 2007 in Beijing,
Shanghai and Guangzhou(広 州 ). The number of respondents was 600 for eachcity, 1,800 in total, all recruited from Searchina’s monitors in the three cities.
Characteristics of the respondents are shown in the table (Table 2).

Table 2

Characteristics of the respondents

Cosmetics

Cars

FPD TVs

Females

Males & females

Males & females

18-48 years old

20-49 years old

20-49 years old

Purchasing skincare

Having an owner car

Having a FPDTV atcosmetics for personal(62%) or intending to

home

use.

buy one within the next

600 respondents in total

600 respondents in total

2 years (48%)
600 respondents in total

Findings of the study
First, I explain how I present the results in the graphics.
Vertically, I present the power of the brand image that affects brandpreference.
Horizontally I present how state brand will affect individual brand, and put
average effect right in the middle. Horizontally, above zero, it represents positiveor strong effect, below zero means negative or weak effect.
Same goes for COO effect.
Thirdly, the bar chart on the right indicates brand perception. The perception
level is put vertically. And each individual brand is put horizontally.
The lines represent the image for brand 1, 2, 3 and 4. In this graph, fordimension 1, brand 4 is scored highest and brand 2 is the second highest.

5

西 安 シ ンポジ ウム講 演 録 林 廣 茂Figure 2 Total effect map of state/COO preference vs. brand preference

State

Average Effect0State Effect on
Corporate/Line Brand
Preference

Brand Perception Effect on
Corporate/Line Brand
Preference

Brand Perception Effect on
Corporate/Line Brand
Preference0

COO

Brand Perception
Perception
Dimension 1
Dimension 20

Average Effect0
Average

0
COO Effect on
Corporate/Line Brand
Preference

Each Corporate/Line
Brand

6

西 安 シ ンポジ ウム講 演 録 林 廣 茂Results
1 Skincare
Japan as a nation has a very weak, negative effect on Shiseido. America isalso disliked, which poses fairly strong negative effect on Olay and Avon. As for
Aupres, it is liked by Chinese skin care us ers, because not many ladies know that
this is from Shiseido, a Japanese company. Korea is very liked by Chinese ladies,much better than Japan. France is best liked. That strong affection has given
very positive effect on Lancôme and L’Oreal.

Figure 3

Skincare: Total effect map of state/COO vs. brand preference

A. TOTAL EFFECT MAP OF STATE/COO PREFERENCE VS. BRAND PREFERENCE 1

Skincare
State

COO

Average of 3 Cities

Average of
Averageof33Cities
Cities02_Dabao

0.40
0.20

07_Olay

07_Olay
06_Aupres
06_Aupres08_Shiseido
08_Shiseido
Average

05_Lancome
05_Lancome
03_Loreal
04_Laneige
04_Laneige

0.00
-0.20

01_Avon01_AvonAverage

10_Mininurse-0.40

03_Lorealenu rs
M in iII
SK - id oe
Sh isOla y sre
Au p o m ecLan ge
ei
Lan l
a
Lore
ao
Dab
n
Avo

03_Loreal
01_Avon Average 04_Laneige(Av=0)

08_Shiseido

06_Aupres 05_Lancome

Brand
Indirect
EffectBrand
Indirect
Effect(Av=0)

Brand Indirect Effect (Av=0)

07_Olay

Brand Perception

02_Davao

10_Mininurse

02_Da

10_Mininurse
bao

-0.60
-0.80

09_SK-II
09_SK-II

09_SK-IIState Preference Effect = Total Effect x
Deviation from Average / Country-1.00

COO Preference Effect = Total Effect x
Deviation from Average / Country

Advanced / Intellectual
SincereAupres and Shiseido arepositioned among the top
five brands and strong on
both dimensions. Aupres isslightly stronger thanShiseido.

Table 3

USA
China
FranceKorea
Japan

SkincareState/COO/brand

State

COO

Brand

+
+++
++
---

----+++
+
--

+++
-+++
±
(+++) 〜 (++)

Share
CD

18.36%

Shiseido

12.98%

Chanel9.84%

Lancome

6.13%

Source: 百度数据研究中心 Share : Premium Cosmetics (value)Q3/07

7

西 安 シ ンポジ ウム講 演 録 林 廣 茂

As COOs, Japan and the US are

Skincareleast liked as cosmetic countries.

1. Japan as a state brand tends toThis is the effect of nation andgive “weaker negative” (from theCOO.

average)effects

preference

The vertical axis represents the

of

on

the

the

Japanesecosmetic brands.

image effect on the preference ofeach brand. Olay is most liked by

2. Meanwhile,

Chinese ladies, although the US is

Japan

as

a

COO

disliked. Olay as a brand is doing very

brand of the cosmetic industry isfinescored at being similar to China

despitetheunfavorable

and the US or positioned in theenvironment.
Sameapplies

Aupres.

to

Shiseido

Shiseido’s

image

tertiary group following France

andas

and Korea.

abrand is favorably ranked.
and

3. However the individual brands ofL’Oreal are among the top group. I

Shiseido and Aupres are highly

would say that Shiseido is doing fine,positioned in the top group and,

although it is working in the worst

separately from state/COO brandsituation.

effects, expected to exert strong

Aupres,

Shiseido,

Lancômepositive

effects

onthepreference of the brands.

Looking at the attribute rating, Olayis very strong on “sincerity”, although

4. The IMC strategy of Shiseido

the US is not considered “sincere” at
all.

Olay

is

also

and

considered

Aupreseffective“advanced” by Chinese ladies.

would

when

be

more

they

could

successfully improve the brand

Shiseido is also very strong on both

perception of being sincere and“advanced” and “sincerity”.

reliable in the minds of Chinese

Aupres is very good on “advanced”

consumers.

but weak on “sincerity”.

8

西 安 シ ンポジ ウム講 演 録 林 廣 茂

2 Cars
As a state brand, Japan is very miserable, followed by Korea, average USA,and strong China. The best state is Germany.

Figure 4

Cars: Total effect map of state/COO vs. brand preference

B. TOTAL EFFECT MAP OF STATE/COO PREFERENCE VS. BRAND PREFERENCE 2

Cars
State

COO

Average of 3 Cities

0.40

Average of 3 Cities

0.20
0.00

10_Toyota-0.20

05_Honda
02_Ford07_Hyundai
Averagel

08_Nissan

VW
ToyotaMercedesNissanHyundaiBMW

02_Ford07_Hyundai Average

06_BMW

Honda
GM
Geely
Ford
Chery

10_Toyota

09_Mercedes
Benz

Brand Indirect Effect(Av=0)

Brand Indirect Effect(Av=0)

09_Mercedes
Benz
06_BMW

05_Honda

Brand Perception-0.40

08_Nissan
04_GM
01_奇瑞 11_VW（Chery)

11_VW

03_吉利
(Geely)03_吉利（Geely)

State Preference Effect = Total Effect x
Deviation from Average / country

-0.60

04_GM
01_奇瑞
（Chery)

-0.80
-1.00
Trustworthy / Advanced
Sophisticated

COO Preference Effect = Total Effect x
Deviation from Average / country

The brand perceptions of
Toyota and Honda arehigh on both dimensions
only next to those of
Mercedes and BMW

Table 4

China
USA
Japan
Germany
Korea

Cars

State/COO/brand

State

COO

Brand

++
±
--+++
-

±
+++
-

(- -) 〜 (- - -)(+) 〜 (-)(++) 〜 (-)(+++) 〜 (- -)
+

Share
31%
13%
26%
18%
8%

Source: 自動車：蓋世汽車網（071707）
Share: First Half of 07 % Share Whole Year at 8.5M units（P）
As a COO, Korea is the worst, and Japan is the second worst.

China is thethird worst. The US is near the average. Germany is the only one winner as a
COO.

9

西 安 シ ンポジ ウム講 演 録 林 廣 茂

As a brand, every Chinese likes
Mercedes and BMW.

But not many

Chinesetocanafford

buy

Cars
1.

them,

like

a

German

car

as

a

state

brand

is

positioned lowest and tends to give

because they are very expensive.
You

Japan

“weaker”

andnegative

(from

the

German brand but don’t have money,

average) effects on the preference

thenof the Japanese car brands.

youswitchtoToyota,asareplacement. Toyota and Honda are inbe

2. Japan as a COO brand of the carachieving an 8 % share this year, andindustry tends also to give “weak”

Camry is almost sold out. It is gaining

negative effects on the preference

popularity.

of the Japanese car brands. The

thesecondgroup.

Toyotawill

Japan’s image as a country of car

Ford and Hyundai come in the third

origin should be improved jointly

group.

by

Unfortunately, Chinese Geely andtheindustry

andthegovernment.

Chery still lag behind, in terms ofbrand image and preference. But they
are selling from different reasons;

3. However, the Japanese individual“You like China, and buy a Chinese

car brands represented by Toyotacar,” or consumer patriotism. Also, theand Honda demonstrate “strong”

price is one third of that of Toyota, andpositivethepreference.

distributionisabundant.

Soeffects

on

their

own

IMC,

the

more

despite the image factor, Chinese arebuying Geely and Chery with different

4.

In

terms

of

reasons.

emphasis on and the increased
acceptance of the “Sophistication /Strangely,

although

Dynamism” dimension would help

Volkswagen

keeps the highest share in China, it

Toyota

and

Honda

boost

the

has a very low image. It is because

preference level of the Chinese

they sell cars for taxi. The car must be

consumers. Nissan’s weakness onquite cheap, but is dirty in the taxi

both dimensions would have to be

operation. So the image is very low,

fundamentally remedied.

but Chinese are buying them in big
numbers.
Looking at the attributes, “trustworthy” and “sophisticated” are very high for
Mercedes, followed by BMW.
Nissan is in the poor position. Volkswagen is in a very miserable position for abiggest seller brand in China. They need to revitalize their brand image.

10

西 安 シ ンポジ ウム講 演 録 林 廣 茂

3. FPD TV
As for FPD TV, this is interesting.
Looking at the COO of Japan for FPD TV, it is positive. But Korea is ranked thebest as the COO for FPD TV.

Figure 5

FPD TVs: Total effect map of state/COO vs. brand preference

C. TOTAL EFFECT MAP OF STATE/COO PREFERENCE VS. BRAND PREFERENCE 3

FPD TVs
Brand Perception

State

COO

Average of 3 Cities

Average of 3 Cities

07_Samsung

Average
04_LG 01_Changhong
02_Hitachi

Skyworth

08_Sony
07_Samsung
05_Panasonic

03_Hisense

10_Sharp
03_Hisense)

0.00
-0.20
-0.40

Average
01_Changhong

0.20

ar p
Sh orthyw
Skny
So sungmc
Sa soni
na
Pa
LG e
enc
His hig
ac
Hit ghonanCh

05_Panasonic

Brand Indirect Effect(Av=0)

Brand Indirect Effect(Av=0)

08_Sony)

0.40

04_LG
02_Hitachi-0.60

10_Sharp-0.80

Skyworth-1.00

Advanced

State Preference Effect = Total Effect COO Preference Effect = Total Effect x
Deviation from Average / countryx Deviation from Average / country

SincereSony enjoys a highest image
closely followed by Samsung.
Panasonic comes third.

Table 5

China
Japan
Korea

FPD TVs

State/COO/brand

State

COO

Brand

+++
--±

--++
+++

(±) 〜 (- - -)(+++) 〜 (--)(+++) 〜 (+)

Share(Unit)(Value)
60.2%
48.0%
21.3%
29.2%
12.1%
15.9%

Source: Display Search
Share: First Half of 07. % Share. Whole Year at 8.1M units vs. Japan’s 8M units (P)11

西 安 シ ンポジ ウム講 演 録 林 廣 茂

In

terms

of

the

brand,Sony

andFPD TV

Samsung are among the top group,
followed by Panasonic. The third group

1. Japan as a state brand tends togive “weaker” negative (from theincludes LG, Hitachi and Sharp.

average) effect on the
Chinesebrands

are

in

the

fourthgroup, but they are selling like bananas.

preference of the Japanese FPD
TV brands.

There is strong consumer patriotism for2. However Japan as a COO brand“Made in China” products.

of FPD TVs demonstrates strong
Imagewise, Sony and Samsung are
among

the

top.

Still,

they

need

to

positive effect on the preferenceof the Japanese individual
Corporate/ Line brands. Japan is

improve the “sincerity” attribute.

positioned second, next toKorea.
3. By brand, Sony is preferred most,closely followed by Samsung.
Panasonic comes third. Hitachi
and Sharp are still on the long way
toward developing their brandacceptance in China.

12

西 安 シ ンポジ ウム講 演 録 林 廣 茂Implications for the Japanese brands
Cosmetics
The IMC strategy of Shiseido and Aupres in the future could be more effec tive
if they could develop the image of sincerity and reliability in the minds of Chinese
consumers.

Cars
Toyota and Honda need to improve the image of being sophisticated or
dynamic vis-à-vis German cars, and they will be better off and will be gettingstronger acceptance of Chinese consumers.
Nissan needs to do something from scratch.

FPD TV
Although Sony and Panasonic are receiving consumer support, they need tostrengthen “sincerity” attribute toward stronger support in China.

Management summary
The graphical image represents how the 3 hierarchies of brand perception, i.e.,
state, COO and individual corporate/ line brand, are affecting brand preference(Figure 6).
In the area of cosmetics, France enjoys the most favorable position in China;
strong state effect, strong COO image effect and very favorable brand image.
From the latest data of the premium cosmetics market, all those French brands,
such as Lancôme and Chanel, are doing well in China.
Meanwhile, despite this unfavorable situation, Shiseido is doing well.
As for cars, Germany is in the best choice in every aspect. German car ’s shareis 18 %. Japanese cars have 26% share and Chinese cars hold a share of 31%.
Despite the unfavorable brand image and COO perception, the share ofChinese car is increasing because of the “Buy Chinese” mentality.
In the field of FPD TV, Chinese companies have 60 % unit share. It is
incredible. If you think brand image is the only motivator of purchase, you would
be misled. Chinese consumers are buying Chinese products, although they don’t
like the image of Chinese brands, but love “Made in China”.
The Japanese brands hold a total share of 21% and Korea has 12% share.

13

西 安 シ ンポジ ウム講 演 録 林 廣 茂Figure 6

State/COO/Brand/share
Share

State

COO

Brand

Skincare USA
China
France
Korea
Japan

+
+ + +
+ +
- - -

- - - - + + +
+
- -

+ + +
- + + +±(+++) 〜 (++)

Car

+ +
±
- - + + +
-

±
+ + +
-

(- -) 〜 (- - -)(+) 〜 (-)(++) 〜 (-)(+++) 〜 (- -)
+

FPDTV

China
USA
Japan
Germany
Korea
China
Japan
Korea

+ + +
- - ±

- - + +
+ + +(±) 〜 (- - -)(+++) 〜 (--)(+++) 〜 (+)

Source: 自動車：蓋世汽車網（071707）、薄型テレビはDisplay Search、 化粧品は百度数据研究中心

Premium Cosmetics (value)Q3/07
CD

18.36%

Shiseido

12.98%

Chanel9.84%

Lancome

6.13%

31%
13%
26%
18%
8%

First Half of 07% ShareWhole Year at 8.5M
units（P）(Unit)(Value)

60.2%

48.0%

0.80

21.3%

29.2%

1.37

12.1%

15.9%

1.31

First Half of 07. % Share
Whole Year at 8.1M units
vs. Japanʼs 8M units (P)Q &A
Q.(Professor Guijin) How do you measure preference?
A. In terms of preference, I asked to measure the level of preference on a 5 point
scale. Same goes for COO brand preference, and corporate brand preference.
The image is measured on a 5 point scale on 7 image attributes; sincere,advanced, sophisticated, intellectual, dynamic, etc.
By comparison, COO has a stronger and more significant effect on preference
than state brand.
If you like Japan as a COO of Toyota, they you tend to be more influenced bythat. COO is more important than state brand.
As you remember in the presentation in the FDP TV area, Japan as COO, isranked positively, although Japan is rated negatively as state brand. Now thisstarts working.
Q. (Professor Ueda) The situations must be different between low-priced carsand high-priced cars.
A. Your next presentation will be covering that topic, I know. I wanted to develop
the “overall” image of car marketing in China, because of time and money
constraints.

14

西 安 シ ンポジ ウム講 演 録 林 廣 茂

Q. Do you think a country can improve the state image effect?
A. It is a touchy subject. I would like to avoid to be trapped by political questions
between China and Japan, because I like China very much.
About the state brand, there is nothing that any single company can do. But as
for COO images, the government and Toyota should be doing something to
influence Chinese consumers in more favorable ways towards Japan as a COO of
the car.
In other words, now China is in the transition period from a brand-freemarketing society to a more brand-oriented and consumer-oriented marketing
society.
As I observed, for instance, in developed countries like the US and Japan,
COO effect does not mean anything except an only minor, final, summary effect.
The US consumers, if they like Sony or Toyota, they don‘t care where thosebrands come from.
When the brand-oriented society comes to a reality in China, then this kind of 3
hierarchical brand study will become useless. I believe that China is in transition.
Q. Why do you use the SEM?
A. It is simply because SEM (Structural Equation Modeling) is the most useful
methodology to analyze those relationships between brand preference andvarious factors, for example, brand perception, state image, COO image,corporate image or whatsoever.

You may think it useful to analyze influential

factors to brand purchase.
Thank you very much.

15

西 安 シ ンポジ ウム講 演 録 林 廣 茂