MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407540230 · doi:10.1016/j.jretai.2025.01.007

The impact of brand equity on vertical integration in franchise systems

2025· article· en· W4407540230 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Retailing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFranchising Strategies and Performance
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityBishop's University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaPennsylvania State UniversityUniversity of Pennsylvania
KeywordsFranchiseBrand equityBusinessEquity (law)MarketingVertical integrationBrand managementAdvertisingPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

• In franchise systems, higher brand equity leads to less forward vertical integration. • The effect is stronger in franchise systems with more resources and weaker in systems with international presence. • Brand equity is a safeguarding asset that bridles partner opportunism through contractual self-enforcement. • Findings advise against forward vertical integration in franchise systems with strong brand equity. • Brand investments are dual investments, directly in the brand and indirectly in the channel. Brand equity and vertical integration are focal, strategic elements of a franchise system that can profoundly influence franchise performance. Despite the recognized importance of these two strategic levers and the longstanding research interest in the topic, our understanding of the interplay between brand equity and vertical integration (company ownership of outlets) in a franchise system remains incomplete. In this study, we revisit the five-decade-old question of how brand equity affects vertical integration in a franchise system and present some novel, nuanced insights into the topic. Evidence from a Bayesian Panel Vector Autoregressive model on a large panel data set shows that brand equity has a powerful, lagging inverse effect on vertical integration, such that higher brand equity leads to less downstream vertical integration in a franchise system. Reverse causality analyses identify a less pronounced but present reciprocal effect. Boundary conditions analyses reveal that the negative effect of brand equity on vertical integration is weaker in franchise systems with international presence and in retail-focused (vs. service-focused) franchises, and stronger in franchise systems with more financial resources. These findings (a) challenge traditional views (e.g., transaction cost theory, resource-based view, ownership redirection hypothesis) on the topic by demonstrating a negative effect for brand equity on vertical integration in franchise systems and showing that greater financial resources amplify this effect, and (b) shed new light on the intricate dynamics (temporal causation, reverse causation) and contingencies of this debated effect. Managerially, this research draws attention to the underrecognized strategic benefit of brand equity in mitigating channel governance issues and advise against unnecessary vertical integration, especially when brand equity is robust.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.340
Threshold uncertainty score0.184

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.287 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it