Concluding Discussion

There is an extensive body of emerging literature highlighting the importance of brand experience for modern marketing communication (e.g., Lemon and Verhoef 2016;

Zarantonello and Schmitt 2010) and emphasizing the outstanding role of experiential stores in the form of flagships to drive brand experience (e.g., Borghini et al. 2009; Dolbec and Chebat 2013; Manlow and Nobbs 2013; Nierobisch et al. 2017). The results of our study contribute to the understanding of what drives and dilutes brand experience in flagship stores.

Quantitatively comparing pre-existing brand experience with post-visit brand experience attests that flagship store visits do not increase brand experience per se. We validate the possible negative effect of visiting a flagship store that McGrath, Sherry, and Diamond (2013) postulate in their qualitative study of the House of Barbie. However, we also reveal which in-store attractions drive brand experience to higher levels than prior to the flagship in-store visit.

In particular, we find that engaging with interactive attractions drives brand experience (H2).

Interactive attractions were characterized with the benefit of consumer co-creation, meaning that consumers take part in the value creation to receive a personally tailored product or service (Tynan, McKechnie, and Chhuon 2010). Such a customized product or service – in the form of massages, product packaging, ingredients and taste, or the composition of an enjoyment through a café in our case – enables the consumer to experience the brand differently than they would through traditional advertisements and retailers. A potentially stronger identification with the brand or simply the perception that the brand better satisfies one’s needs evokes one’s sensual and emotional, intellectual, and behavioral experience components more intensively, therefore increasing the whole brand experience. Our result are consistent with existing assumptions and propositions about the positive influence of co-creation and consumer engagement with a brand in driving brand experience (van Doorn et al.

2010; Nysveen and Pedersen 2014; Prebensen, Kim, and Uysal 2015; Tynan and McKechnie 2009).

Surprisingly, we found no direct influence of informative attractions (i.e., brand history, information about sourcing and manufacturing, or product use) on brand experience (H1).

Given that informative in-store attractions represent an important differentiation aspect of flagship stores from other store types (e.g., Dolbec and Chebat 2013) these results are surprising. Information, such as brand history or transparent sourcing and manufacturing techniques, is expected to evoke positive emotions, due to increased functional and symbolic value assessment, which inherently affect the consumer’s experience with the brand, as it can be better assessed with internal needs references (Bhat and Reddy 1998; Dion and Borraz 2015; Rose et al. 2016). It appears that consumers do not process the information displayed in the flagship store in such a way that it alters their brand experiences. Hypothetically, the information might not be as new or special as consumers would have expected.

A similar result applies to the effect that special products displayed in flagship stores have on brand experience (H3): Although exclusive and limited products are part of stimulating the consumer’s affective and emotional resonance on brand perception in flagship stores (Dion and Borraz 2015; Manlow and Nobbs 2013) and should therefore transform brand experience (Brakus, Schmitt, and Zarantonello 2009), we found no significant direct influence.

Hypothetically, a nonsignificant effect could be explained by further analysis of the consumer’s interest in the products displayed and the extent to which these differ from competing brands’ offers. For instance, in luxury fashion, consumers often visit flagship stores to engage with limited products, as their brand involvement is so high that ordinary products no longer satisfy their needs (Kapferer 2014; So, Parsons, and Yap 2013).

Although in our study the direct effects of engaging with informative in-store attractions and special products were not significant, we demonstrated the potential of such engagement to

enhance the consumer’s brand experience gain from interactive in-store attractions. Given the significant three-way interaction (H4), we can conclude that joint engagement with interactive and informative in-store attractions as well as special products boosts the creation of brand experience. It is likely that the information gain from informative in-store attractions and special products enables consumers to process, assess, and connect the experience made by engaging with interactive in-store attractions more profoundly to the brand. Given the co-creating nature of interactive in-store attractions, the knowledge gain can be applied immediately by receiving a co-created service or product (Nysveen and Pedersen 2014; Park, Feick, and Mothersbaugh 1992). Hence, the finding appears to be plausible.

However, there is a dark side of our finding regarding brands that operate flagship stores: In our sample, about six percent of visitors engaged with interactive attractions alone, while roughly ten percent of visitors engaged with all attractions and special products. This implies that only a small number of visitors engage with the in-store attractions that drive brand experience; the remaining visitors interact with in-store attractions that do not influence their brand experience. This might explain why brand experience was diluted significantly over the whole sample: Consumers do not engage enough with the interactive in-store attractions that drive brand experience and enable a boost through informative in-store attractions and special products.

Lastly, the significant covariate service quality must be addressed. It is widely documented that well-executed service stimulates and drives the consumer’s brand experience (e.g., Grace and O’Cass 2004; Ismail 2011; Nysveen, Pedersen, and Skard 2012; Verhoef et al. 2009).

However, in our setting, service is not the core product nor elsewhere delivered from the brand to consumers, as the flagship store is the only store-based direct brand touch point. At retailer shelves or other third-party distributors, the service is not conceptualized, provided, and monitored by the brand. Hence, the finding highlights that brands should emphasize

well-executed service alongside well-implemented interactive attractions when designing flagship stores.