Industrial brand equity in the cement industry: cognitive and relational drivers in a sustainability-transition context

1 Introduction

Resource-intensive industries are undergoing an unprecedented transition toward more sustainable production systems driven by climate change mitigation, increasingly stringent environmental regulations, and growing stakeholder expectations. Among these sectors, the cement industry occupies a particularly strategic position because it supplies the essential material for global infrastructure while simultaneously accounting for approximately 7%−8% of global anthropogenic CO₂ emissions due to the energy-intensive clinker production process and limestone calcination (Habert et al., 2020). As demand for sustainable infrastructure continues to increase worldwide, the decarbonization of cement production has become a strategic priority requiring technological innovation, resource efficiency, and the adoption of low-carbon production systems. This transformation is directly aligned with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure), SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production), and SDG 13 (Climate Action), which promote industrial innovation, sustainable manufacturing, efficient resource utilization, and greenhouse gas emission reduction (United Nations, 2015).

Recent studies identify several complementary strategies for reducing the environmental footprint of cement manufacturing, including clinker substitution through supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs), circular economy practices, alternative fuels, renewable energy integration, carbon capture, utilization and storage (CCUS), and environmental management systems based on internationally recognized standards such as ISO 14001. Likewise, Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs) and life-cycle assessment have become essential instruments for demonstrating environmental performance and supporting carbon-neutrality commitments across construction supply chains (Habert et al., 2020). Consequently, sustainability is no longer viewed solely as a regulatory obligation but increasingly represents a source of long-term competitiveness capable of influencing procurement decisions and organizational reputation in industrial markets.

As industrial buyers increasingly integrate environmental, social, and governance (ESG) criteria into supplier evaluation, sustainability has evolved into a strategic market signal that extends beyond operational performance. Environmental responsibility, climate commitments, and transparent sustainability communication contribute to reducing perceived risk while strengthening organizational legitimacy and stakeholder trust. Recent evidence indicates that sustainability-oriented brand equity and environmental reputation enhance organizational credibility and reinforce stakeholder responses (Opoku et al., 2023; Lee et al., 2025). In industrial markets, these sustainability signals complement traditional brand attributes by strengthening long-term customer relationships and supporting competitive differentiation under conditions of technical homogeneity.

In industrial markets characterized by high technical complexity and limited opportunities for product differentiation, firms increasingly face difficulties in achieving competitive advantages solely through functional product attributes. Under these conditions, intangible brand-related assets acquire strategic importance by enabling firms to differentiate their offerings and strengthen relationships with industrial customers (Mudambi, 2002; Leek and Christodoulides, 2011; Marvi et al., 2024). Accordingly, industrial brand equity represents a strategic resource through which firms strengthen their competitive positioning and support long-term organizational outcomes in B2B markets (Lee et al., 2025).

Unlike consumer markets, purchasing decisions in B2B industrial environments frequently involve substantial technical complexity, economic consequences, and operational risks. Consequently, industrial customers evaluate suppliers not only according to product characteristics but also through perceptions of quality, reliability, organizational reputation, environmental responsibility, and accumulated commercial experience (Mudambi, 2002; Bendixen et al., 2004; Rahman et al., 2023). From this perspective, brand-related attributes operate as informational signals that facilitate organizational evaluations under conditions of uncertainty and incomplete information. Signaling theory therefore provides a relevant theoretical foundation for explaining how observable organizational signals—including sustainability initiatives, environmental certifications, and corporate reputation—communicate otherwise difficult-to-assess organizational capabilities and facilitate complex supplier evaluation and selection processes (Connelly et al., 2025).

Within this framework, perceived quality constitutes a central dimension of brand equity because it reflects customers' overall evaluations of product performance and superiority relative to available alternatives (Zeithaml, 1988). In industrial markets, perceived quality acquires additional strategic relevance because purchasing decisions frequently involve technical requirements, operational consequences, and substantial economic commitments. Therefore, favorable evaluations of product performance and supplier reliability contribute to reducing uncertainty and strengthening customers' willingness to maintain long-term commercial relationships (Zeithaml, 1988; Raddats et al., 2024).

Customer Knowledge and Brand Equity represent complementary cognitive resources in industrial supplier evaluation. Customer Knowledge facilitates supplier recognition and familiarity during organizational purchasing decisions, whereas Brand Equity captures the broader set of perceptions and meanings associated with the supplier's brand (Keller, 1993; Yoo and Donthu, 2001). In industrial markets, these dimensions provide meaningful differentiation among suppliers whose products exhibit relatively similar functional characteristics (Mudambi, 2002; Leek and Christodoulides, 2011). Furthermore, corporate reputation, environmental responsibility, and sustainability-oriented business practices strengthen stakeholder evaluations and contribute to firms' competitive positioning, particularly in industries facing increasing sustainability pressures (Opoku et al., 2023; Rahman et al., 2023).

Alongside these cognitive dimensions, relational mechanisms play a critical role in the development of industrial brand equity. Trust, commitment, customer satisfaction, and service quality are particularly important in B2B markets because stable commercial relationships depend on repeated interactions and customers' perceptions of supplier reliability (Raddats et al., 2024). Positive service experiences and effective customer support reinforce behavioral intentions and contribute to the development of brand loyalty (Kosasih et al., 2024; Raddats et al., 2024). Consequently, brand loyalty represents an important strategic outcome of industrial brand equity because it contributes to relationship continuity and the development of enduring customer–supplier relationships.

The integration of these dimensions is particularly relevant to the cement industry. The relatively high degree of technical standardization characterizing cement products limits firms' ability to achieve sustained differentiation exclusively through functional product characteristics. Under these conditions, customers' evaluations increasingly incorporate intangible and relational attributes associated with perceived quality, organizational reputation, operational reliability, customer satisfaction, and accumulated supplier experience (Mudambi, 2002; Bendixen et al., 2004; Marvi et al., 2024). Industrial brand equity therefore represents an important intangible capability through which firms strengthen their competitive positioning while simultaneously responding to the increasing sustainability expectations of industrial markets (Lee et al., 2025).

Despite increasing academic attention to sustainability and branding, important research opportunities remain regarding the development of industrial brand equity in resource-intensive industries and B2B environments. Existing studies have examined sustainability, environmental reputation, and industrial branding separately, whereas empirical evidence integrating cognitive and relational dimensions of industrial brand equity remains limited in traditional manufacturing sectors. Recent systematic reviews have highlighted the need to advance both the conceptualization and empirical investigation of industrial brand equity across different industrial settings and institutional contexts (Castillo-Villar and Murillo, 2025; Marvi et al., 2024).

In response to this research gap, the present study proposes and empirically validates a structural model examining the relationships among customer satisfaction, Customer knowledge, brand equity, perceived quality, and brand loyalty in the cement industry. Through a mixed-methods research design and Structural Equation Modeling (SEM), the study investigates how cognitive and relational dimensions contribute to the development of industrial brand equity and long-term customer–supplier relationships. From a theoretical perspective, this study contributes to the industrial branding literature by integrating established brand equity dimensions with contemporary perspectives on industrial branding and signaling theory. From an empirical perspective, it provides evidence from the cement industry within a Latin American emerging economy, extending existing research to an industrial context that remains comparatively underexplored. Finally, from a sustainability perspective, the findings contribute to understanding how intangible organizational resources and stable customer–supplier relationships can support long-term competitive positioning and sustainable value creation in resource-intensive industries (Castillo-Villar and Murillo, 2025; Marvi et al., 2024; Lee et al., 2025).

2 Theoretical framework

2.1 Service quality in industrial B2B markets

Service quality constitutes a fundamental determinant of customer evaluations and long-term buyer–supplier relationships in business-to-business (B2B) markets. The SERVQUAL framework proposed by Parasuraman et al. (1988, 1991) identifies five dimensions of perceived service quality—tangibles, reliability, responsiveness, assurance, and empathy—that influence customers' overall evaluations of supplier performance. Although originally developed for service industries, these dimensions have been widely adapted to industrial settings where technical support, responsiveness, reliability, and relationship quality represent essential components of supplier performance.

In industrial markets such as the cement industry, customers generally evaluate suppliers based on their actual service performance rather than by comparing expectations with perceived performance. Consequently, the present study adopts a performance-oriented perspective consistent with SERVPERF while retaining the SERVQUAL dimensions as the theoretical foundation for operationalizing service quality. Within the proposed conceptual framework, these service quality dimensions contribute to customers' overall satisfaction with industrial suppliers.

2.2 Industrial brand equity as a strategic intangible resource in sustainability-sensitive B2B markets

Recent systematic and critical reviews demonstrate that industrial branding has undergone substantial theoretical development over the last decade, evolving from a predominantly product-oriented perspective toward multidimensional frameworks that integrate corporate reputation, relational value creation, stakeholder trust, and strategic intangible resources. Although brand equity was initially conceptualized within business-to-consumer (B2C) markets, contemporary research recognizes industrial brand equity as a distinct research domain shaped by the complexity of business-to-business (B2B) relationships, organizational purchasing processes, and long-term collaborative exchanges (Castillo-Villar and Murillo, 2025; Gutiérrez Gutiérrez et al., 2024).

This conceptual evolution reflects important changes in industrial competition. Unlike consumer markets, industrial customers evaluate suppliers through multidimensional criteria extending beyond functional product performance. Organizational buyers increasingly consider supplier credibility, technological capability, accumulated experience, innovation capacity, corporate reputation, and relationship quality when making purchasing decisions involving considerable financial investments and operational consequences. Consequently, industrial brand equity has become a strategic intangible capability that facilitates supplier differentiation, reduces perceived risk, and strengthens long-term customer–supplier relationships (Marvi et al., 2024; Rahman et al., 2023).

Recent literature further suggests that industrial brand equity should be interpreted from a strategic and organizational perspective rather than exclusively through traditional marketing approaches. From this viewpoint, brands represent valuable intangible resources capable of generating sustained competitive advantage by integrating cognitive evaluations, relational capabilities, organizational reputation, and stakeholder legitimacy. Contemporary studies further argue that brand equity has evolved into a dynamic organizational capability through which firms create long-term value beyond traditional product differentiation, reinforcing competitive positioning in increasingly complex business environments (Marvi et al., 2024; France et al., 2025).

The transition toward more sustainable industrial systems has further expanded the strategic role of industrial branding. Growing stakeholder expectations regarding environmental responsibility, responsible governance, and sustainable value creation have progressively modified the criteria through which industrial customers evaluate suppliers. Consequently, industrial brands increasingly communicate not only product quality and technical competence but also environmental stewardship, organizational resilience, ethical behavior, and long-term commitment to responsible business practices. Recent evidence indicates that environmental reputation and sustainability-oriented brand equity enhance organizational legitimacy, strengthen stakeholder confidence, and reinforce competitive positioning in industries exposed to substantial environmental scrutiny (Opoku et al., 2023; Rahman et al., 2023; Lee et al., 2025; Nordin et al., 2023).

Importantly, sustainability-oriented brand equity should not be understood as replacing conventional industrial brand equity. Rather, sustainability represents the contemporary competitive context within which industrial brands evolve. Environmental responsibility, corporate reputation, and responsible governance enrich traditional dimensions such as Customer knowledge, brand equity, perceived quality, customer satisfaction, and brand loyalty by strengthening organizational credibility and reducing uncertainty during supplier evaluation. Sustainability therefore reinforces the strategic value of industrial brands while preserving the cognitive and relational mechanisms through which brand equity contributes to long-term competitive advantage (Rahman et al., 2023; Nordin et al., 2023).

Despite the expansion of industrial branding research, recent systematic and critical reviews continue to identify important theoretical and empirical limitations. Existing studies still rely substantially on customer-based branding frameworks originally developed for consumer markets, while comparatively limited research has examined integrated models of industrial brand equity within resource-intensive sectors. Evidence from emerging economies remains particularly scarce despite their distinctive institutional environments, competitive dynamics, and stakeholder expectations. Moreover, the mechanisms through which cognitive brand evaluations are transformed into long-term relational outcomes remain insufficiently integrated within sustainability-sensitive industrial contexts (Castillo-Villar and Murillo, 2025; Gutiérrez Gutiérrez et al., 2024; Sheth, 2011).

Accordingly, this study conceptualizes industrial brand equity as a multidimensional strategic capability through which cognitive and evaluative mechanisms - namely Customer Knowledge, Brand Equity, and Perceived Quality - interact with relational outcomes represented by Customer Satisfaction and Brand Relationship and Loyalty. By examining these relationships within the cement industry of an emerging Latin American economy, the proposed framework responds to recent calls for more integrated, context-sensitive, and theoretically grounded explanations of industrial brand equity in sustainability-sensitive B2B markets (Marvi et al., 2024; Rahman et al., 2023).

2.3 Signaling theory and uncertainty reduction in industrial markets

Signaling theory explains how decision makers evaluate alternatives when relevant information is incomplete, asymmetrically distributed, or difficult to verify. Under these conditions, observable organizational actions, attributes, and communications operate as market signals that enable stakeholders to infer otherwise unobservable qualities, including competence, credibility, reliability, and expected future performance. Recent developments in signaling theory emphasize that signal effectiveness depends not only on visibility but also on credibility, consistency, and the cost of imitation by lower-quality organizations (Connelly et al., 2025).

This theoretical perspective is particularly relevant in industrial markets because supplier selection generally occurs before product performance, operational reliability, and organizational capabilities can be fully verified. Consequently, industrial buyers frequently rely on indirect evaluative cues—including supplier reputation, organizational competence, country-of-origin image, and accumulated market experience—to infer expected product quality and relationship performance while reducing decision uncertainty (Raddats et al., 2024; Suh and Houston, 2010).

Industrial brands consequently function as strategic information structures that organize and communicate these evaluative signals. Rather than merely identifying suppliers, industrial brands summarize accumulated organizational experience, corporate reputation, previous performance, and expectations regarding future supplier behavior. Industrial brand equity therefore represents an integrated signaling mechanism through which buyers recognize suppliers, interpret organizational capabilities, and anticipate the quality of future exchanges (Castillo-Villar and Murillo, 2025; Marvi et al., 2024).

Within this signaling framework, the dimensions of brand equity perform complementary informational roles. Customer knowledge facilitates supplier recognition and increases the probability that a supplier will be included in organizational purchasing decisions. Brand equity communicate more specific meanings related to technological competence, organizational experience, innovation capability, corporate reputation, and responsible business conduct. Perceived quality subsequently represents buyers' integrated evaluation after interpreting these organizational signals and comparing expected supplier performance with competing alternatives. Consequently, perceived quality is shaped not only by objective product characteristics but also by accumulated organizational information communicated through the industrial brand (Castillo-Villar and Murillo, 2025; Raddats et al., 2024).

Supplier reputation constitutes one of the most influential market signals because it condenses previous stakeholder evaluations into expectations regarding future organizational behavior. Unlike interpersonal trust, reputation exists prior to direct interaction and enables buyers to infer supplier reliability and expected performance before commercial relationships are established. Consequently, a favorable organizational reputation contributes to reducing perceived uncertainty, facilitating supplier differentiation, and strengthening buyers' confidence in future exchanges (Suh and Houston, 2010).

Transparency further enhances the effectiveness of industrial signals. Consistent disclosure regarding organizational practices, product quality, sustainability initiatives, governance, and supply-chain management increases signal credibility, whereas inconsistent or ambiguous communication weakens organizational legitimacy and stakeholder confidence. Recent B2B research therefore identifies transparency as a critical mechanism for reducing information asymmetry and reinforcing buyer confidence in long-term supplier relationships (Nawaz and Wagner, 2025).

Accordingly, signaling theory provides a robust theoretical foundation for explaining the proposed research model. Customer knowledge and Brand Equity function as cognitive organizational signals that shape buyers' expectations, while perceived quality represents the integrated evaluation resulting from the interpretation of those signals. When subsequent experiences confirm these expectations, favorable quality evaluations contribute to customer satisfaction and ultimately strengthen long-term brand loyalty within industrial B2B markets (Castillo-Villar and Murillo, 2025; Connelly et al., 2025).

2.4 Customer satisfaction and brand loyalty in industrial relationships

Customer satisfaction constitutes a central relational mechanism in B2B markets because long-term industrial relationships are developed through repeated interactions and cumulative evaluations of supplier performance. Beyond individual transactions, satisfaction reflects customers' overall assessment of whether suppliers consistently meet operational, technical, and relational expectations. Sustained satisfaction contributes to relationship continuity and strengthens long-term buyer–supplier partnerships by reducing the perceived risks associated with future exchanges (Raddats et al., 2024; Nordin et al., 2023).

In industrial contexts, Customer satisfaction extends beyond product performance to encompass customers' experiences with technical support, service responsiveness, operational reliability, communication quality, and supplier commitment. These cumulative experiences reinforce confidence in the supplier and facilitate the development of stable commercial relationships, particularly where purchasing decisions involve high operational dependence and substantial financial commitments (Kosasih et al., 2024; Nordin et al., 2023).

Customer satisfaction also plays an important role in shaping subsequent quality evaluations. When suppliers consistently deliver reliable products and effective service, customers reinforce their perceptions of supplier competence and expected future performance. Consequently, perceived quality is progressively consolidated through accumulated relational experiences rather than isolated purchasing transactions, particularly within long-term B2B relationships (Kosasih et al., 2024; Raddats et al., 2024).

Satisfied customers are also more likely to maintain established commercial relationships and develop stronger loyalty toward industrial brands. Recent evidence demonstrates that superior service performance, continuous customer support, and positive relationship experiences reinforce customers' intention to continue collaborating with existing suppliers while reducing their propensity to seek alternative providers (Sheth, 2011; Troiville, 2024; Sohaib and Han, 2023).

These relational mechanisms become especially relevant in sustainability-sensitive industries such as cement manufacturing, where supplier reliability, operational continuity, and long-term collaboration are essential for organizational performance. As industrial firms increasingly integrate sustainability and responsible business practices into supplier evaluation, customer satisfaction strengthens not only relationship continuity but also confidence in the supplier's long-term capability to create value. Accordingly, customer satisfaction, perceived quality, and brand loyalty represent interconnected relational mechanisms through which industrial firms build enduring competitive advantage and sustainable customer relationships (Rahman et al., 2023; Nordin et al., 2023).

2.5 Research hypotheses and conceptual model

Building upon recent advances in industrial brand equity, signaling theory, and sustainability-oriented B2B branding, this study proposes an integrated conceptual framework that explains how cognitive and relational mechanisms jointly shape supplier evaluation and long-term buyer–supplier relationships in the cement industry (Castillo-Villar and Murillo, 2025; Rahman et al., 2023; Connelly et al., 2025). Rather than functioning as independent determinants, these dimensions operate as complementary organizational capabilities through which industrial customers interpret supplier competence, reduce information asymmetry and perceived risk, and develop enduring commercial relationships within increasingly sustainability-oriented industrial markets.

The proposed framework assumes that industrial customers simultaneously process two interrelated sources of information during supplier evaluation. The first comprises cognitive brand signals, represented by Customer knowledge and brand equity, which communicate organizational competence, accumulated experience, corporate reputation, and expected supplier performance. The second corresponds to relational evaluations derived from previous commercial interactions, represented by customer satisfaction. Together, these mechanisms shape customers' perceptions of supplier quality and reduce uncertainty associated with future purchasing decisions (Raddats et al., 2024; Connelly et al., 2025).

Within this framework, perceived quality occupies a central position because it integrates customers' interpretation of both cognitive signals and accumulated relational experiences. Rather than reflecting only technical product performance, perceived quality represents a comprehensive organizational evaluation through which industrial buyers assess supplier competence, reliability, and expected future value. Consequently, perceived quality functions as the principal mechanism linking brand-related evaluations with subsequent relational outcomes (Kosasih et al., 2024; Raddats et al., 2024; Rahman et al., 2023).

The framework further assumes that favorable evaluations of supplier quality reinforce customers' willingness to maintain stable commercial relationships over time. Accordingly, brand loyalty is conceptualized as the ultimate relational outcome of industrial brand equity, reflecting customers' long-term preference for suppliers capable of consistently delivering technical excellence, operational reliability, organizational credibility, and sustainable value creation (Rahman et al., 2023; Lee et al., 2025; Troiville, 2024).

Figure 1 presents the proposed conceptual model, while the following hypotheses specify the expected structural relationships among the latent constructs based on the theoretical arguments developed throughout the preceding sections.

2.6 Perceived quality and customer satisfaction

Customer satisfaction reflects customers' cumulative evaluation of suppliers based on repeated experiences with products, services, technical support, operational reliability, and overall relationship performance. In industrial B2B markets, these accumulated experiences provide the basis for evaluating supplier competence and expected future performance, thereby reducing uncertainty in subsequent purchasing decisions (Kosasih et al., 2024; Raddats et al., 2024).

As customers repeatedly confirm the supplier's ability to deliver consistent product quality, reliable service, and effective technical support, favorable experiences reinforce perceptions of supplier quality and organizational capability. Consequently, favorable perceptions of supplier quality strengthen customer satisfaction by confirming customers' expectations regarding product performance, service reliability, and organizational capability. This mechanism is particularly relevant in the cement industry, where product standardization limits physical differentiation and supplier performance increasingly depends on service quality, technical assistance, delivery reliability, and relationship management (Kosasih et al., 2024; Rahman et al., 2023).

Accordingly, the following hypothesis is proposed:

• H1: perceived quality positively and significantly influences customer satisfaction.

2.7 Brand relationship and loyalty and customer satisfaction

Emotional attachment and brand loyalty represent important relational assets that shape customers' post-purchase evaluations in industrial B2B markets. Customers who develop a strong emotional connection with a supplier and demonstrate a long-term commitment to maintaining the commercial relationship are more likely to evaluate their overall experience positively. These relational bonds emerge through repeated interactions characterized by product consistency, operational reliability, technical support, and mutual trust (Raddats et al., 2024).

Beyond behavioral continuity, emotional attachment strengthens customers' confidence in the supplier and reinforces favorable perceptions of organizational competence and relationship quality. Industrial customers who identify with a supplier and maintain long-term collaborative relationships tend to interpret subsequent service experiences more positively, thereby increasing their overall level of customer satisfaction (Troiville, 2024; Sohaib and Han, 2023).

In resource-intensive industries such as cement manufacturing, where technical product differentiation is relatively limited, emotional attachment and brand loyalty become important mechanisms through which suppliers strengthen customer satisfaction. Stable commercial relationships, accumulated trust, and positive relational experiences encourage customers to maintain favorable evaluations of supplier performance despite the standardized nature of the products offered (Kosasih et al., 2024; Rahman et al., 2023).

Accordingly, the following hypothesis is proposed:

• H2: brand relationship and loyalty positively and significantly influence customer satisfaction.

2.8 Customer knowledge and its role in brand relationship and loyalty

Customer knowledge refers to the extent to which organizational buyers recognize, understand, and recall a supplier's brand based on accumulated information and previous market exposure. Within industrial brand equity, customer knowledge extends beyond simple brand recognition by encompassing customers' familiarity with the supplier's capabilities, organizational reputation, and accumulated market experience. Recent systematic reviews identify customer knowledge as a fundamental cognitive resource that facilitates supplier differentiation and supports strategic decision-making in B2B markets (Castillo-Villar and Murillo, 2025; Marvi et al., 2024; Gutiérrez Gutiérrez et al., 2024).

From the perspective of signaling theory, customer knowledge reduces information asymmetry by increasing buyers' familiarity with supplier-related information before purchasing decisions are made. Greater knowledge enables industrial customers to interpret organizational signals more effectively, facilitating evaluations of supplier competence, credibility, and expected performance under conditions of uncertainty. Consequently, customer knowledge reduces perceived purchasing risk while improving customers' confidence in supplier selection (Connelly et al., 2025; France et al., 2025).

In industrial markets, customer knowledge also contributes to the development of long-term relational outcomes. Familiarity with a supplier's products, technical capabilities, organizational values, and market reputation reinforces customers' confidence in future exchanges and strengthens their preference for established suppliers. Contemporary B2B branding research therefore suggests that customer knowledge represents an important cognitive mechanism through which firms create relational value and promote enduring buyer–supplier relationships (Marvi et al., 2024; Rahman et al., 2023).

These mechanisms are particularly relevant in the cement industry, where technical product standardization limits opportunities for differentiation based solely on physical product characteristics. Under such conditions, customers increasingly rely on accumulated knowledge regarding supplier reliability, organizational competence, technical support, and market reputation when selecting among competing suppliers. Greater customer knowledge therefore strengthens both customers' emotional attachment and their willingness to maintain long-term relationships with suppliers that consistently demonstrate superior organizational performance and sustainable value creation (Rahman et al., 2023; Nordin et al., 2023).

• H3: customer knowledge positively and significantly influences Brand Relationship and Loyalty.

2.9 Perceived quality as the central axis of Brand Relationship and Loyalty in the cement sector

Customer knowledge refers to the extent to which organizational buyers recognize, understand, and recall a supplier's brand based on accumulated information and previous market experience. Within industrial brand equity, customer knowledge extends beyond simple Customer knowledge by encompassing familiarity with the supplier's capabilities, organizational reputation, and overall market presence. Recent studies identify customer knowledge as a fundamental cognitive resource that facilitates supplier differentiation and supports strategic decision-making in B2B markets (Castillo-Villar and Murillo, 2025; Marvi et al., 2024; Gutiérrez Gutiérrez et al., 2024).

From the perspective of signaling theory, customer knowledge reduces information asymmetry by enabling buyers to interpret supplier-related signals more effectively before purchasing decisions are made. Greater familiarity with a supplier enhances customers' ability to evaluate organizational competence, credibility, and expected performance under conditions of uncertainty, thereby reducing perceived purchasing risk and strengthening confidence in supplier selection (Connelly et al., 2025).

Beyond its cognitive role, customer knowledge contributes to the development of long-term relational outcomes. Customers who possess greater familiarity with a supplier's products, technical capabilities, and organizational reputation are more likely to develop emotional attachment and maintain enduring commercial relationships. Accordingly, customer knowledge represents an important mechanism through which firms strengthen customer commitment and foster long-term brand loyalty in industrial markets (Marvi et al., 2024; Rahman et al., 2023).

These mechanisms are particularly relevant in the cement industry, where technical product standardization limits opportunities for differentiation based solely on physical product characteristics. Consequently, accumulated knowledge regarding supplier reliability, technical support, organizational competence, and market reputation becomes a critical basis for supplier evaluation. Greater customer knowledge therefore strengthens customers' emotional attachment and their willingness to maintain long-term relationships with suppliers that consistently deliver superior organizational performance and long-term value creation (Rahman et al., 2023; Nordin et al., 2023).

Accordingly, the following hypothesis is proposed:

• H4: perceived quality positively and significantly influences Brand Relationship and Loyalty.

2.10 Brand equity as an antecedent of perceived quality

Industrial brand equity represents a strategic intangible capability through which organizations create value beyond the functional characteristics of their products. Recent research conceptualizes industrial brand equity as an organizational resource that integrates customers' accumulated knowledge, corporate reputation, organizational credibility, and previous relational experiences to facilitate supplier differentiation and strengthen competitive positioning. Consequently, industrial brand equity has evolved from a traditional marketing construct into a strategic capability that shapes how organizational buyers evaluate supplier competence and expected performance (Castillo-Villar and Murillo, 2025; Rahman et al., 2023).

From the perspective of signaling theory, industrial brand equity reduces information asymmetry by providing credible signals regarding supplier capabilities, organizational reliability, and expected performance. In B2B markets, where purchasing decisions frequently involve considerable technical complexity, financial commitments, and operational risks, stronger brands increase buyers' confidence and facilitate favorable evaluations of supplier quality before and after commercial interactions (Connelly et al., 2025).

These mechanisms are particularly relevant in the cement industry, where product standardization limits opportunities for differentiation based solely on physical characteristics. Consequently, industrial buyers increasingly rely on organizational reputation, accumulated market credibility, previous supplier performance, and long-term relationship experience when assessing alternative suppliers. Within this sustainability-sensitive industrial context, stronger industrial brands reinforce customers' perceptions of supplier competence and reliability, thereby enhancing perceived quality and reducing uncertainty during supplier evaluation (Rahman et al., 2023; Martín-de Castro, 2021).

Accordingly, the following hypothesis is proposed:

• H5: brand equity positively and significantly influences perceived quality.

3 Methodology

3.1 Research design

This study adopted a sequential mixed-methods design with quantitative priority to examine the relationships among the cognitive and relational dimensions of industrial brand equity. The design comprised an initial qualitative phase followed by a cross-sectional quantitative phase. The qualitative phase was used to obtain contextual knowledge regarding supplier evaluation, purchasing practices, and customer–supplier relationships in the cement industry, whereas the quantitative phase tested the theoretically proposed relationships among the latent constructs. Sequential mixed-methods designs are appropriate when qualitative evidence is used to contextualize or inform a subsequent quantitative investigation, while methodological integration must be explicitly demonstrated across the design, implementation, and interpretation stages (Creswell and Plano Clark, 2018; Fetters et al., 2013).

The qualitative phase consisted of interviews with professionals possessing commercial or technical experience in the cement industry. Rather than functioning as an independent study, this phase provided contextual input for assessing the relevance and comprehensibility of the constructs within the industrial setting. Integration occurred through a building approach, whereby the qualitative findings informed the contextual adaptation of the quantitative instrument and the interpretation of the structural results. This integration strategy strengthens mixed-methods research by establishing an explicit connection between the qualitative evidence and the subsequent quantitative component (Fetters et al., 2013).

The quantitative component followed an explanatory, nonexperimental, and cross-sectional design. Data on the proposed constructs were collected from participants during a single study period, allowing the hypothesized associations to be examined within the selected industrial population. Because all variables were measured within the same temporal frame, the resulting structural paths should be interpreted as theoretically specified associations rather than definitive evidence of temporal causality (Wang and Cheng, 2020).

Covariance-based Structural Equation Modeling (CB-SEM) was employed to evaluate the proposed theoretical model. This approach was selected because the study sought to test a previously specified system of relationships among reflectively measured latent constructs, estimate measurement error, and assess the overall correspondence between the theoretical model and the empirical covariance matrix. CB-SEM is particularly appropriate for confirmatory research in which both the measurement model and the structural relationships require simultaneous evaluation through multiple goodness-of-fit criteria (Kline, 2023).

The analysis therefore involved two conceptually distinct but complementary stages. First, the measurement model was assessed to establish the reliability and validity of the latent constructs. Second, the structural model was estimated to evaluate the magnitude, direction, and statistical significance of the hypothesized relationships. This separation is important because meaningful interpretation of structural coefficients requires prior evidence that the constructs have been measured adequately (Kline, 2023).

The empirical study was conducted in the Peruvian cement industry, a technically demanding B2B environment characterized by repeated commercial interactions, substantial operational dependence, and products subject to standardized performance requirements. This setting is suitable for evaluating industrial brand equity because supplier differentiation depends not only on functional product characteristics but also on perceived quality, organizational credibility, accumulated customer experience, and relationship continuity. Examining these mechanisms in an emerging Latin American economy also extends the contextual coverage of industrial branding research beyond the developed-market settings that predominate in the literature (Castillo-Villar and Murillo, 2025; Sheth, 2011).

Accordingly, the mixed-methods design was not intended to establish two parallel bodies of evidence. Instead, the qualitative component supplied contextual understanding, while the quantitative component provided the primary empirical test of the conceptual model. The integration of both phases enabled the structural findings to be interpreted in relation to the commercial and relational characteristics of the cement industry, while maintaining the confirmatory orientation of the study. The integrated sequence of the qualitative and quantitative phases, together with the stages of methodological integration, is summarized in Figure 2.

3.2 Research context and sample

The empirical setting of this study was the Peruvian cement industry, a resource-intensive B2B sector characterized by standardized products, technically demanding purchasing processes, and long-term customer–supplier relationships. Because purchasing decisions typically involve multiple organizational actors with technical and commercial responsibilities, the study focused on professionals directly engaged in the specification, evaluation, procurement, and use of cement products within construction and industrial projects. This context provides an appropriate setting for examining industrial brand equity, as supplier differentiation increasingly depends on intangible organizational attributes rather than solely on functional product characteristics (Castillo-Villar and Murillo, 2025; Marvi et al., 2024; Rahman et al., 2023).

The target population comprised engineers, architects, procurement managers, project supervisors, construction managers, and other professionals actively involved in organizational purchasing decisions related to cement products. Eligibility was restricted to respondents with direct professional experience in evaluating, selecting, purchasing, or specifying cement products. This criterion ensured that participants possessed the technical knowledge and commercial experience necessary to provide informed assessments of customer satisfaction, customer knowledge, brand equity, perceived quality, and Brand Relationship and Loyalty within an industrial purchasing context.

A non-probability convenience sampling strategy was employed because no comprehensive sampling frame of industrial cement buyers was available. This approach is frequently adopted in industrial B2B research where access to organizational decision makers is limited and respondents must satisfy highly specific professional eligibility criteria. Although convenience sampling does not permit statistical generalization to the entire population, it is considered appropriate for theory-testing studies employing Structural Equation Modeling when respondents possess the knowledge required to evaluate the latent constructs under investigation (Kline, 2023; Wang and Cheng, 2020).

A total of 292 valid questionnaires were retained after data screening procedures and constituted the final analytical sample. The sample size exceeded the minimum recommendations for covariance-based Structural Equation Modeling and provided adequate statistical power for simultaneously estimating both the measurement and structural models (Kline, 2023; Wolf et al., 2013). Table 1 summarizes the demographic characteristics of the respondents.

Table 1. Demographic characteristics of respondents.

As shown in Table 1, most respondents were male (81.8%), between 35 and 44 years of age (43.8%), and held professional engineering degrees (52.1%). Most participants had more than 6 years of experience in the cement industry and were employed by medium-sized or large companies, supporting the suitability of the sample for evaluating industrial brand equity in a B2B context.

3.3 Measurement instrument

The measurement instrument was developed through a theory-driven adaptation of established measures from the brand equity, industrial marketing, customer satisfaction, and service-quality literature. Importantly, the study did not seek to reproduce the original scales in their entirety. Rather, the objective was to operationalize the focal constructs parsimoniously within the specific context of organizational purchasing in the cement industry. Accordingly, item retention was guided by conceptual representativeness, contextual relevance to B2B purchasing decisions, avoidance of semantic redundancy, and suitability for professional respondents. This theory-driven adaptation process was consistent with established recommendations for scale development and validation, which emphasize theoretical grounding, content validity, contextual appropriateness, pilot testing, and subsequent empirical psychometric assessment (Boateng et al., 2018).

Because several of the foundational measurement frameworks were originally developed in consumer or general service settings, direct transplantation of all original items was considered inappropriate for the present industrial context. The adaptation therefore followed a content-oriented procedure in which candidate items were examined according to their correspondence with the theoretical definition of each construct and their relevance to the supplier-evaluation process in the cement industry. Items that were highly context-specific to consumer environments, redundant in meaning, or not directly applicable to industrial supplier evaluation were not retained. The resulting instrument should therefore be interpreted as a contextually adapted and empirically revalidated measurement instrument rather than as an unmodified administration of the original scales.

For Brand Equity (BE), three indicators were retained to capture complementary manifestations of industrial brand value: market prestige, distinctive brand personality, and associations with reliability and superior industrial performance. These indicators synthesize dimensions derived from Keller (1993), Bendixen et al. (2004), and subsequent industrial-branding research (Castillo-Villar and Murillo, 2025; Marvi et al., 2024; Gutiérrez Gutiérrez et al., 2024). Their selection reflects the characteristics of B2B cement markets, in which organizational reputation, differentiation, and perceived supplier reliability constitute particularly relevant brand signals. Thus, the construct was operationalized using a focused set of indicators representing the aspects of brand equity most directly applicable to organizational supplier evaluation rather than reproducing broader consumer-oriented brand-equity batteries.

Customer Knowledge (CK) was operationalized using three indicators capturing familiarity with the supplier's brand, top-of-mind recall during cement purchasing decisions, and recognition of the supplier as a leading brand within the cement industry. These indicators were theoretically informed by Keller (1993), Yoo and Donthu (2001), Castillo-Villar and Murillo (2025), and Gutiérrez Gutiérrez et al. (2024). Within industrial markets, customer knowledge extends beyond simple brand recognition because organizational buyers accumulate information regarding supplier capabilities, reputation, market presence, and previous performance. The three retained indicators were therefore selected to represent complementary manifestations of accumulated brand knowledge that are particularly relevant to organizational purchasing decisions while avoiding unnecessary conceptual overlap.

Perceived Quality (PQ) was operationalized using two indicators representing overall perceived excellence and comparative superiority relative to competing suppliers. The indicators were theoretically grounded in Zeithaml (1988) and subsequently supported by research on B2B brand equity and industrial supplier evaluation (Bendixen et al., 2004; Kosasih et al., 2024; Marvi et al., 2024; Raddats et al., 2024). The use of two indicators was intentionally parsimonious because both items capture the global evaluative nature of perceived quality while avoiding overlap with technically specific product-performance attributes and with the relational dimensions modeled separately in the study. Rather than attempting to measure individual physical or technical characteristics of cement products, the indicators capture the organizational buyer's overall evaluation of the supplier's product quality and its perceived superiority relative to competing alternatives. Because two-item reflective constructs require particular attention to empirical identification and reliability, their adequacy was subsequently evaluated within the confirmatory measurement model rather than assumed solely on the basis of previous scale validation.

The treatment of service quality also requires clarification. The four service-quality indicators included in the study do not represent an abbreviated administration of the original 22-item SERVQUAL scale developed by Parasuraman et al. (1988, 1991). SERVQUAL served exclusively as the theoretical basis for identifying service-performance dimensions relevant to industrial supplier relationships; the study did not administer or claim to validate an abbreviated SERVQUAL scale. This distinction is important because the objective of the present research was not to replicate the complete SERVQUAL instrument but to identify service attributes that were conceptually relevant to the assessment of cement suppliers in a B2B setting.

Because respondents evaluated actual supplier performance rather than the expectation–performance gap underlying the original SERVQUAL formulation, the measurement approach was performance-oriented and therefore conceptually closer to SERVPERF. Four dimensions—tangibles, empathy, reliability, and responsiveness—were retained because they represent directly observable service attributes relevant to cement supplier–customer interactions. Tangibles captured the professional and physical resources supporting supplier service; empathy reflected the supplier's understanding of customers' specific requirements; reliability represented the ability to provide services dependably and accurately; and responsiveness captured the supplier's capacity to respond promptly to customer requests. Consequently, these four indicators should be interpreted as context-specific service-performance indicators theoretically informed by SERVQUAL rather than as a shortened SERVQUAL scale.

Customer Satisfaction (SAT) was directly captured through two global evaluative indicators: overall satisfaction with the cement supplier and the extent to which the supplier consistently met customer expectations. These indicators were derived from contemporary industrial and B2B Customer satisfaction research (Kosasih et al., 2024; Opoku et al., 2023). The service-performance indicators (SQ1–SQ4) were incorporated as complementary manifestations of supplier-service experience contributing to the Customer satisfaction domain; they should not be interpreted as a separate SERVQUAL latent construct. This operational distinction allows customer satisfaction to reflect both customers' overall evaluative judgment and the principal service experiences underlying that judgment within an industrial buyer–supplier relationship.

Brand Relationship and Loyalty (BRL) was operationalized through five indicators capturing emotional attachment, recommendation intentions, resistance to switching based on price, brand preference, and intention to maintain a long-term relationship. The indicators were derived from established B2B branding and loyalty research (Yoo and Donthu, 2001; Bendixen et al., 2004; Raddats et al., 2024; Troiville, 2024; Sohaib and Han, 2023) and were selected to represent complementary attitudinal and behavioral-intention manifestations of enduring industrial buyer–supplier relationships. This broader operationalization recognizes that loyalty in B2B markets cannot be represented exclusively by repeated purchasing behavior, as long-term supplier relationships also involve preference, recommendation, commitment, emotional attachment, and resistance to competitive alternatives.

The contextual adaptation and item-reduction process was additionally subjected to content validation before large-scale administration. Three experts with recognized experience in industrial marketing, brand management, and business administration independently evaluated the clarity, theoretical correspondence, and contextual relevance of the candidate indicators. Particular attention was given to whether the retained indicators adequately represented the intended constructs within industrial purchasing situations and whether any items exhibited conceptual redundancy, ambiguous wording, or inappropriate consumer-oriented content. This expert assessment provided an additional content-validity safeguard because the adaptation involved transferring established theoretical constructs to a specific industrial B2B context.

A subsequent pilot test was conducted with professionals possessing characteristics comparable to those of the target population. The pilot assessment examined item comprehensibility, response consistency, contextual interpretation, and practical applicability of the questionnaire within professional cement purchasing and supplier-evaluation situations. Minor linguistic refinements were incorporated following this process to improve clarity and contextual appropriateness without altering the underlying theoretical meaning of the indicators.

Importantly, the validity of the adapted measures was not assumed from the previous validation of the original scales. Because item selection, contextual adaptation, and item reduction can modify the psychometric behavior of an instrument, the resulting measurement structure was empirically reassessed using the study sample before testing the structural relationships. The measurement model was therefore evaluated through confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Indicator reliability was examined through standardized factor loadings, while internal consistency was assessed using Cronbach's alpha. Convergent validity was evaluated through the Average Variance Extracted (AVE), and discriminant validity was examined using the Fornell–Larcker criterion and the Heterotrait–Monotrait ratio (HTMT).

This procedure provided a sequential validation strategy in which theoretical grounding and contextual adaptation established the conceptual basis of the measures, expert assessment and pilot testing supported their content and contextual validity, and confirmatory measurement-model analysis provided empirical evidence regarding their reliability, convergent validity, and discriminant validity. Consequently, the validity of the measurement model rests on the combination of theoretical justification, expert-based content validation, contextual pretesting, and empirical psychometric assessment within the specific B2B cement-industry population examined in this study, rather than on the assumption that the psychometric properties of the original scales were automatically preserved after adaptation.

All items were measured using a five-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (“strongly disagree”) to 5 (“strongly agree”), a response format considered appropriate for evaluating latent perceptual and organizational constructs while maintaining respondent comprehension (Kline, 2023). The final measurement instrument comprised five latent constructs: Brand Equity (BE), Customer Knowledge (CK), Perceived Quality (PQ), Customer satisfaction (SAT), and Brand Relationship and Loyalty (BRL). Table 2 presents the final measurement structure, questionnaire items, and their corresponding theoretical foundations.

Table 2. Measurement constructs, questionnaire items, and original theoretical basis.

All items were measured using a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree. The instrument represents a contextually adapted measurement specification rather than a direct reproduction of the complete original scales. Item retention was guided by theoretical representativeness, relevance to industrial supplier evaluation, avoidance of semantic redundancy, expert assessment, and pilot testing. The SQ1–SQ4 indicators were theoretically informed by SERVQUAL (Parasuraman et al., 1988, 1991) but do not constitute an abbreviated SERVQUAL scale; instead, they represent selected service-performance attributes relevant to B2B cement supplier relationships and contribute to the Customer Satisfaction domain. The psychometric adequacy of the adapted measures was subsequently reassessed through the measurement model.

3.4 Qualitative phase

Before the quantitative survey, a qualitative exploratory phase was conducted to obtain contextual insights into supplier evaluation and brand-related decision-making within the Peruvian cement industry. A purposive sampling strategy was employed to recruit 10 key informants possessing extensive professional experience in commercial, technical, and managerial positions related to cement production, distribution, construction, and industrial procurement.

The participants included senior engineers, commercial managers, procurement specialists, technical advisors, and project supervisors with substantial experience in supplier selection and customer–supplier relationships. Their professional backgrounds enabled the collection of rich contextual information regarding the cognitive, functional, and relational mechanisms underlying industrial brand equity.

Semi-structured interviews lasting approximately 45–60 min were conducted individually. All interviews followed a common interview guide designed around the principal theoretical constructs of the study while allowing participants to elaborate on their professional experiences and perceptions of supplier evaluation in the cement industry.

The qualitative phase was not intended to generate an independent theory but rather to contextualize the quantitative findings, refine the interpretation of the proposed constructs, and strengthen the integration between qualitative and quantitative evidence within the mixed-methods design (Creswell and Plano Clark, 2018; Fetters et al., 2013).

3.5 Data collection procedure

Data collection was conducted between June and September 2025 using a structured online questionnaire administered through a secure digital survey platform. The survey link was distributed through professional networks, industry contacts, engineering and construction associations, and organizational contacts within the Peruvian cement and construction sectors. This approach facilitated access to respondents directly involved in organizational purchasing and supplier evaluation while improving the geographical coverage of the study population (Wang and Cheng, 2020).

Participation was restricted to professionals with direct experience in the evaluation, specification, procurement, or use of cement products. At the beginning of the questionnaire, respondents completed screening questions confirming their professional role and experience in construction or cement-related activities. Only participants satisfying the predefined eligibility criteria were allowed to complete the questionnaire, ensuring that the collected data reflected informed evaluations from relevant industrial decision makers (Wang and Cheng, 2020).

Before accessing the questionnaire, participants received an information sheet explaining the academic objectives of the study, the voluntary nature of participation, the confidentiality of the collected information, and the anonymous treatment of all responses. Electronic informed consent was obtained from every participant prior to data collection. No financial or material incentives were provided, thereby reducing the likelihood of participation motivated by external rewards and minimizing potential response bias.

The research protocol was reviewed and approved by the Research Ethics Committee of the Universidad Católica de Santa María. All procedures were conducted in accordance with the ethical principles of the Declaration of Helsinki for research involving human participants, ensuring respect for participant autonomy, confidentiality, and responsible data management.

Following data collection, the database underwent a systematic screening process before statistical analysis. Responses were examined for completeness, consistency, duplicate submissions, and compliance with the predefined eligibility criteria. Questionnaires containing substantial missing information, incomplete responses, or evident response inconsistencies were excluded from further analysis. After data screening, a total of 292 valid questionnaires were retained for the subsequent measurement and structural model analyses (Kline, 2023).

3.6 Data analysis

Data analysis was conducted using covariance-based Structural Equation Modeling (CB-SEM) implemented in IBM SPSS Statistics 26 and AMOS 24. CB-SEM was selected because the study sought to test a theoretically specified model, evaluate the psychometric properties of reflectively measured latent constructs, and examine the overall fit between the proposed theoretical framework and the observed covariance matrix. This approach is particularly appropriate for confirmatory research focused on theory testing rather than prediction (Kline, 2023).

Prior to estimating the structural model, the dataset was screened for missing values, response inconsistencies, and compliance with the predefined eligibility criteria. Descriptive statistics and preliminary diagnostics were performed to verify the suitability of the data for multivariate analysis. The analytical procedure followed the two-step approach recommended for covariance-based SEM, consisting of the sequential evaluation of the measurement model and the structural model (Kline, 2023).

The measurement model was first assessed to establish the reliability and validity of the latent constructs. Indicator reliability was evaluated through standardized factor loadings, whereas internal consistency was assessed using Cronbach's alpha. Convergent validity was examined using the Average Variance Extracted (AVE). Discriminant validity was subsequently evaluated using both the Fornell–Larcker criterion and the Heterotrait–Monotrait ratio (HTMT), thereby providing complementary evidence that the latent constructs measured conceptually distinct phenomena (Kline, 2023; Henseler et al., 2015).

Because all variables were collected from the same respondents using a single questionnaire, the potential influence of common method bias (CMB) was also assessed. Harman's single-factor test was performed by entering all measurement items into an unrotated exploratory factor analysis. The first unrotated factor accounted for 36.84% of the total variance, which was below the recommended threshold of 50%, indicating that common method bias was unlikely to substantially affect the results. In addition, procedural remedies were implemented during questionnaire design, including respondent anonymity, voluntary participation, and the use of previously validated measurement scales, following the recommendations of (Podsakoff et al. 2003).

After confirming the adequacy of the measurement model, the structural model was estimated to test the proposed hypotheses. Overall model fit was evaluated using multiple goodness-of-fit indices, including the chi-square to degrees-of-freedom ratio (χ²/df), the Comparative Fit Index (CFI), the Tucker–Lewis Index (TLI), and the Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA). The interpretation of these indices followed widely accepted methodological recommendations for covariance-based structural equation modeling (Kline, 2023; Schreiber et al., 2006).

Finally, the standardized path coefficients (β), critical ratios, and associated p-values were examined to determine the magnitude, direction, and statistical significance of the hypothesized relationships among Brand Equity, Customer Knowledge, Perceived Quality, Customer satisfaction, and Brand Relationship and Loyalty. This analytical procedure enabled the empirical evaluation of the proposed theoretical framework and the assessment of the cognitive and relational mechanisms underlying industrial brand equity within the Peruvian cement industry.

4 Results

4.1 Measurement model assessment

The measurement model demonstrated an adequate fit to the empirical data, supporting the consistency between the proposed factor structure and the observed covariance matrix. The goodness-of-fit indices reached acceptable values (χ²/df = 1.668; CFI = 0.928; TLI = 0.919; RMSEA = 0.048), providing empirical support for the adequacy of the measurement specification and allowing further evaluation of construct reliability and validity.

The constructs exhibited satisfactory internal consistency, with Cronbach's alpha coefficients exceeding the commonly accepted threshold for scale reliability. Together with the standardized factor loadings reported in Table 3, these results provide support for the internal consistency and indicator reliability of the measurement model.

Table 3. Integrating brand equity, service quality, and customer knowledge to explain customer satisfaction: evidence from a structural equation model.

Discriminant validity was assessed using the Fornell–Larcker criterion. As shown in Table 4, the square root of the Average Variance Extracted (√AVE) for each construct exceeded its corresponding inter-construct correlations, providing evidence of adequate discriminant validity. The diagonal values ranged from 0.74 to 0.85, with values of 0.78 for brand equity, 0.82 for Customer knowledge, 0.81 for perceived quality, 0.85 for brand loyalty, and 0.74 for customer satisfaction.

Table 4. Discriminant validity of the constructs according to the Fornell–Larcker criterion.

The correlations among the latent constructs ranged from 0.237 to 0.639, indicating moderate associations without evidence of excessive conceptual overlap. The strongest correlation was observed between Customer knowledge and brand loyalty (r = 0.639), followed by the relationships between brand equity and brand loyalty (r = 0.574) and between perceived quality and brand loyalty (r = 0.561). These results indicate that brand loyalty is meaningfully associated with the cognitive and evaluative dimensions of industrial brand equity while remaining empirically distinguishable from them. The weakest correlation was identified between perceived quality and customer satisfaction (r = 0.237), further supporting the empirical distinction between these constructs.

Discriminant validity was additionally examined using the Heterotrait–Monotrait ratio (HTMT). As shown in Table 5, all HTMT coefficients remained below the established threshold values, providing additional support for the empirical distinctiveness of the constructs. Furthermore, the cross-loading analysis showed that the measurement indicators loaded more strongly on their theoretically assigned constructs than on alternative constructs. Taken together, the results of the Fornell–Larcker criterion, HTMT assessment, and cross-loading analysis provide consistent evidence of satisfactory discriminant validity and support the adequacy of the measurement model.

Table 5. Discriminant validity assessment using the HTMT criterion.

All HTMT values were below the recommended threshold of 0.85, confirming adequate discriminant validity.

To assess the potential influence of common method bias (CMB), Harman's single-factor test was conducted by entering all measurement items into an unrotated exploratory factor analysis. The first unrotated factor accounted for 36.84% of the total variance, which is below the commonly accepted threshold of 50%, indicating that common method bias was unlikely to have materially affected the findings. This conclusion is further supported by the procedural remedies implemented during questionnaire design, including respondent anonymity, voluntary participation, and the use of previously validated measurement scales, following the recommendations of Podsakoff et al. (2003).

4.2 Structural model assessment

Following confirmation of the reliability and validity of the measurement model, the structural model was evaluated to examine the hypothesized relationships among the latent constructs. The results revealed statistically significant relationships among the cognitive, evaluative, and relational dimensions included in the proposed model. The final structural model, including the standardized path coefficients and relationships among the latent constructs, is presented in Figure 3.

Perceived Quality (PQ) had a significant positive effect on Customer Satisfaction (SAT) (β = 0.31, p < 0.001), while Brand Relationship and Loyalty (BRL) also had a significant positive effect on Customer Satisfaction (SAT) (β = 0.39, p < 0.001). These findings indicate that favorable quality evaluations and stronger relational bonds contribute positively to overall customer satisfaction in the industrial context analyzed.

Brand equity (BE) exhibited a significant positive effect on perceived quality (PQ) (β = 0.53), indicating that favorable brand-related perceptions contribute to customers' overall evaluations of product and supplier quality. Similarly, Customer knowledge (CK) showed a significant positive effect on Brand Relationship and Loyalty (BRL) (β = 0.57), suggesting that greater brand recognition and familiarity are associated with stronger customer loyalty.

Among the hypothesized relationships, perceived quality (PQ) exerted the strongest positive effect on Brand Relationship and Loyalty (BRL) (β = 0.64). This result highlights the central role of perceived quality within the proposed structural model and indicates that favorable evaluations of product and supplier performance are strongly associated with customers' willingness to maintain established commercial relationships.

Overall, the structural results show that Brand Relationship and Loyalty is positively influenced by Perceived Quality and Customer Knowledge, with Perceived Quality exhibiting the strongest standardized effect. Customer Satisfaction, in turn, is positively influenced by Perceived Quality and Brand Relationship and Loyalty, whereas Perceived Quality is positively influenced by Brand Equity.

Brand loyalty was primarily explained by perceived quality, From a global perspective, Brand Relationship and Loyalty was primarily explained by Perceived Quality and Customer Knowledge, with Perceived Quality representing the strongest predictor within the model. Customer Satisfaction, in turn, was positively explained by Perceived Quality and Brand Relationship and Loyalty, whereas Perceived Quality was positively explained by Brand Equity. Finally, a relevant indirect effect was identified in the relationship between Brand Equity and Brand Relationship and Loyalty through Perceived Quality. These findings suggest that the cognitive, evaluative, and relational dimensions of industrial brand equity operate in an interdependent manner, strengthening mechanisms of trust, commercial continuity, and uncertainty reduction in industrial markets characterized by high operational complexity.

4.3 Hypothesis testing

Table 6 summarizes the results of the hypothesis testing. All five hypothesized relationships were positive and statistically significant (p < 0.001), providing empirical support for the proposed structural model.

Table 6. Structural model results and hypothesis testing.

Perceived Quality had a significant positive effect on Customer Satisfaction (β = 0.31, p < 0.001), supporting H1. Although this relationship exhibited the smallest standardized coefficient among the hypothesized paths, the result indicates that favorable evaluations of product and supplier quality contribute positively to customers' overall satisfaction with the supplier.

Brand Relationship and Loyalty had a significant positive effect on Customer Satisfaction (β = 0.39, p < 0.001), supporting H2. This finding indicates that stronger relational attachment, preference, recommendation intentions, and relationship continuity contribute positively to customers' overall satisfaction with the supplier.

Customer knowledge showed a significant positive effect on brand Relationship and loyalty (β = 0.57, p < 0.001), supporting H3. The magnitude of this relationship indicates that brand recognition and familiarity constitute relevant antecedents of loyalty within the analyzed industrial context.

Perceived quality exhibited the strongest positive effect on brand Relationship and loyalty (β = 0.64, p < 0.001), providing support for H4. This result identifies perceived quality as the principal predictor of brand Relationship and loyalty within the proposed structural model and emphasizes the importance of favorable product and supplier performance evaluations in strengthening long-term customer relationships.

Finally, brand equity had a significant positive effect on perceived quality (β = 0.53, p < 0.001), supporting H5. This finding indicates that favorable perceptions and meanings associated with the brand contribute substantially to customers' overall quality evaluations.

Taken together, the results provide empirical support for all five hypotheses and reveal a differentiated pattern of relationships among the constructs. Perceived Quality emerged as the strongest predictor of Brand Relationship and Loyalty (β = 0.64), followed by Customer Knowledge (β = 0.57). Customer Satisfaction was positively influenced by Brand Relationship and Loyalty (β = 0.39) and Perceived Quality (β = 0.31), whereas Perceived Quality was positively influenced by Brand Equity (β = 0.53). Overall, these findings support the proposed theoretical configuration in which cognitive, evaluative, and relational mechanisms contribute differently to quality evaluations, customer satisfaction, and long-term Brand Relationship and Loyalty within the industrial cement market.

4.4 Integration of findings and contextual interpretation

The qualitative findings provided important contextual support for the structural relationships identified through SEM, strengthening the interpretation of industrial brand equity as an integrated system of cognitive, evaluative, and relational mechanisms rather than as a collection of independent constructs. Participants consistently described supplier evaluation as a multidimensional process in which Brand equity, Customer Knowledge, Perceived quality, Customer satisfaction, and Brand Relationship and Loyalty interact dynamically throughout long-term commercial relationships, reinforcing recent conceptualizations of industrial brand equity as a strategic organizational capability (Castillo-Villar and Murillo, 2025; Marvi et al., 2024).

Among these dimensions, Perceived Quality emerged as the principal evaluative mechanism connecting organizational capabilities with relational outcomes. Interviewees consistently associate high perceived quality not only with product performance but also with supplier reliability, technical assistance, responsiveness, operational consistency, and the ability to meet project-specific requirements. These qualitative insights converge with the structural model, confirming the central role of perceived quality in strengthening long-term emotional attachment and customer loyalty within industrial markets (Kosasih et al., 2024; Troiville, 2024).

The interviews further indicated that Customer Knowledge extends beyond simple brand recognition. Participants emphasized that accumulated familiarity with suppliers, previous commercial experience, organizational reputation, and knowledge of technical capabilities substantially reduced uncertainty during supplier selection. This finding is consistent with Signaling Theory, which proposes that accumulated organizational knowledge enables buyers to infer supplier competence before future performance can be directly verified (Connelly et al., 2025).

Likewise, respondents consistently linked Customer satisfaction with cumulative commercial experiences rather than isolated product evaluations. Reliable deliveries, effective communication, technical support, responsiveness, and fulfillment of contractual commitments were repeatedly identified as the principal sources of customer satisfaction. These accumulated experiences reinforced perceptions of supplier quality and strengthened customers' willingness to maintain long-term commercial relationships, supporting the structural relationships identified in the quantitative model (Sohaib and Han, 2023).

An additional finding concerns the increasing importance of organizational credibility and sustainability-oriented business practices. Although sustainability was not explicitly modeled as a latent construct, participants frequently associated reliable suppliers with environmental responsibility, operational stability, and long-term organizational commitment. These observations reinforce recent evidence suggesting that sustainability-sensitive industries increasingly incorporate broader organizational signals into industrial brand evaluations (Rahman et al., 2023; Lee et al., 2025).

Overall, the qualitative findings complement the quantitative results by explaining the organizational mechanisms underlying the observed structural relationships. Rather than operating independently, Brand Equity, Customer Knowledge, Perceived Quality, Customer satisfaction, and Brand Relationship and Loyalty form an integrated relational system through which industrial customers interpret supplier capabilities, reduce purchasing uncertainty, and develop enduring buyer–supplier relationships. The convergence of both methodological strands strengthens the explanatory capacity of the proposed model and illustrates the value of integrating qualitative and quantitative evidence in mixed-methods research (Fetters et al., 2013). The semantic network of the principal themes and interrelationships emerging from the qualitative analysis is presented in Figure 4.

5 Discussion

The findings demonstrate that industrial Brand Equity functions as a strategic organizational capability that integrates cognitive evaluations, accumulated customer experience, and relational mechanisms to reduce uncertainty and strengthen long-term buyer–supplier relationships. Rather than relying exclusively on symbolic brand attributes, industrial customers evaluate suppliers through perceptions of organizational competence, product consistency, technical support, and accumulated commercial experience. These results reinforce recent conceptualizations that position industrial brand equity as a multidimensional strategic resource capable of generating competitive advantage in complex B2B markets (Castillo-Villar and Murillo, 2025; Marvi et al., 2024; Rahman et al., 2023).

One of the principal contributions of this study is the confirmation that Perceived Quality constitutes the central mechanism linking strategic brand-related resources with long-term relational outcomes. The structural model demonstrated that perceived quality exerted the strongest direct influence on Brand Relationship and Loyalty, suggesting that industrial customers develop enduring commercial relationships primarily when supplier performance consistently satisfies technical requirements and organizational expectations. This finding extends previous B2B branding research by demonstrating that quality perceptions operate not only as evaluations of product performance but also as broader assessments of supplier reliability, organizational competence, and future transactional confidence (Kosasih et al., 2024; Raddats et al., 2024; Troiville, 2024).

The results further indicate that Customer Knowledge contributes directly to the development of Brand Relationship and Loyalty, highlighting the strategic importance of accumulated familiarity with suppliers in industrial purchasing decisions. Customers who possess greater knowledge regarding a supplier's capabilities, organizational reputation, and market experience appear more willing to maintain long-term commercial relationships. This finding supports Signaling Theory, which proposes that accumulated organizational knowledge reduces information asymmetry by enabling buyers to infer supplier quality and credibility before future performance can be fully verified (Connelly et al., 2025).

The complementary role of customer satisfaction also deserves attention. Although positive commercial experiences strengthened Brand Relationship and Loyalty, the results suggest that Customer satisfaction alone is insufficient to guarantee long-term relationship continuity. Rather, customer satisfaction reinforces relational outcomes when accompanied by consistently high levels of perceived quality and favorable evaluations of supplier competence. This observation is consistent with recent B2B relationship marketing research emphasizing that stable industrial relationships emerge through the interaction of cognitive evaluations, accumulated experiences, and organizational trust rather than through isolated transactional Customer satisfaction (Raddats et al., 2024; Sohaib and Han, 2023).

From a sustainability perspective, the findings should be interpreted within the broader context of the cement industry's transition toward more sustainable production systems rather than as direct evidence of sustainable brand equity. Although sustainability-related constructs were not explicitly operationalized in the proposed model, the results indicate that industrial brand equity constitutes an important intangible organizational capability for firms operating in sustainability-sensitive industries. As environmental regulations, decarbonization strategies, and stakeholder expectations increasingly influence organizational purchasing decisions, industrial buyers are expected to evaluate suppliers not only according to product quality and technical performance but also according to organizational credibility, transparency, environmental reputation, and long-term reliability. In this context, stronger industrial brands may facilitate trust, reduce perceived risk, and support long-term buyer–supplier relationships during the sustainability transition of the cement industry (Lee et al., 2025; Martín-de Castro, 2021).

The study also contributes to the growing literature on industrial branding in emerging economies. Most empirical evidence regarding industrial brand equity originates from developed markets, whereas comparatively limited research has examined these relationships within Latin American B2B industries. By validating the proposed structural model in the Peruvian cement industry, this study responds to recent calls for more context-specific investigations capable of explaining how industrial customers develop brand-related evaluations under conditions of technical complexity, institutional heterogeneity, and increasing sustainability demands (Mudambi, 2002; Castillo-Villar and Murillo, 2025; Marvi et al., 2024).

Overall, the findings suggest that Brand Equity, Customer Knowledge, Perceived Quality, Customer satisfaction, and Brand Relationship and Loyalty should not be interpreted as isolated constructs but rather as complementary components of an integrated relational system. Together, these dimensions enable industrial firms to reduce customer uncertainty, strengthen organizational credibility, and consolidate enduring buyer–supplier relationships. From a managerial perspective, the findings indicate that competitive advantage in resource-intensive B2B industries depends not only on superior product performance but also on firms' ability to develop strong intangible organizational resources that foster customer confidence and long-term business relationships. Although the present study did not directly measure sustainability-oriented brand equity, the findings provide a foundation for future research examining how environmental reputation, ESG practices, decarbonization initiatives, and sustainability-related brand equity interact with traditional industrial brand equity dimensions to strengthen competitive positioning in sustainability-sensitive markets (Lee et al., 2025; Nordin et al., 2023).

6 Limitations and future research

Despite the theoretical contributions and empirical robustness of the proposed model, this study presents several limitations that provide opportunities for future research in industrial branding and B2B marketing.

First, the study employed a cross-sectional research design, which captures relationships among the latent constructs at a single point in time. Although this approach is appropriate for theory testing using covariance-based Structural Equation Modeling (CB-SEM), it does not permit causal inference or the examination of changes in customer perceptions over time. Future longitudinal studies could investigate how Brand Equity, Customer Knowledge, Perceived Quality, Customer satisfaction, and Brand Relationship and Loyalty evolve throughout long-term buyer–supplier relationships, particularly in industrial sectors characterized by repeated commercial interactions and strategic partnerships.

Second, the empirical evidence was obtained exclusively from professionals operating within the Peruvian cement industry. Although this context represents an important resource-intensive sector in an emerging economy, institutional conditions, competitive structures, and purchasing practices may differ across countries and industrial settings. Future studies should validate the proposed model in other manufacturing industries and geographical regions to examine its cross-cultural robustness and improve the generalizability of the findings.

Third, the study relied primarily on perceptual measures obtained through self-reported survey responses. While this approach is consistent with contemporary industrial branding research, future investigations could complement subjective evaluations with objective organizational indicators, including supplier performance metrics, delivery reliability, quality certification, environmental performance indicators, or operational efficiency measures. Combining perceptual and objective data would strengthen the external validity and managerial applicability of industrial brand equity research.

An additional limitation concerns the treatment of sustainability within the proposed framework. Although the study was theoretically grounded in the concept of sustainable industrial branding, sustainability was incorporated as the strategic context rather than as an explicitly measured construct. Consequently, the empirical model does not directly evaluate environmental, social, and governance (ESG) practices, corporate decarbonization strategies, circular economy initiatives, environmental innovation, or corporate legitimacy influence the development of industrial Brand Equity (Rahman et al., 2023; Lee et al., 2025; Nordin et al., 2023). Future research should explicitly integrate sustainability-related constructs into structural models to advance the empirical understanding of Sustainable Brand Equity in industrial markets.

Likewise, future studies could expand the proposed framework by incorporating additional organizational and relational variables, such as corporate reputation, organizational trust, supplier transparency, innovation capability, digital transformation, and customer value co-creation, all of which have recently been identified as strategic antecedents of industrial competitiveness and long-term relationship development (Marvi et al., 2024; Opoku et al., 2023; Connelly et al., 2025).

Finally, the present research focused on explaining industrial brand equity from the perspective of customer evaluations. Future studies adopting multi-level or multi-informant research designs could simultaneously examine customers, suppliers, distributors, and organizational decision-makers to obtain a more comprehensive understanding of how industrial brand equity is created, communicated, and sustained across the entire value chain.

Overall, these research directions provide a comprehensive agenda for advancing the theoretical development of industrial branding while strengthening the empirical understanding of how Brand Equity contributes to sustainable competitive advantage, organizational legitimacy, and long-term value creation within resource-intensive B2B industries.

7 Conclusions

This study examined the cognitive and relational mechanisms through which Brand Equity contributes to the development of long-term customer–supplier relationships in the Peruvian cement industry, a resource-intensive B2B sector characterized by high technical complexity, standardized products, and increasing sustainability expectations. The findings demonstrate that industrial brand equity should be understood as a multidimensional strategic capability in which Brand Equity, Customer Knowledge, Perceived Quality, Customer satisfaction, and Brand Relationship and Loyalty interact to reduce purchasing uncertainty and strengthen enduring commercial relationships.

Among the examined relationships, Perceived Quality emerged as the principal mechanism linking strategic brand-related resources with relational outcomes. The results indicate that industrial customers develop stronger emotional attachment and long-term loyalty when suppliers consistently demonstrate technical reliability, product consistency, operational competence, and service quality. These findings reinforce the strategic importance of perceived quality as the central evaluative dimension through which industrial customers assess supplier performance in technically demanding B2B markets.

The study also confirms the strategic relevance of Customer Knowledge as a cognitive mechanism supporting relationship continuity. Greater familiarity with suppliers, accumulated market experience, and knowledge of organizational capabilities contribute to reducing uncertainty during supplier evaluation and facilitate the development of long-term commercial relationships. These findings provide additional empirical support for Signaling Theory, demonstrating that industrial brands function as credible organizational signals that communicate supplier competence and reliability before future performance can be directly verified.

Although Customer Satisfaction was positively explained by Perceived Quality and Brand Relationship and Loyalty, its role within the model was complementary rather than dominant. The results suggest that customer satisfaction in industrial markets reflects the combined influence of favorable quality evaluations and established relational bonds.

From a theoretical perspective, this study contributes to the industrial branding literature by proposing and empirically validating an integrated model that combines Brand Equity, Customer Knowledge, Perceived Quality, Customer satisfaction, and Brand Relationship and Loyalty within a single explanatory framework. The findings extend previous industrial branding research by providing empirical evidence from a Latin American emerging economy, thereby responding to recent calls for greater contextual diversity in B2B branding research. Furthermore, the study strengthens the application of Signaling Theory to explain how industrial customers interpret brand-related signals under conditions of information asymmetry and technical complexity.

Methodologically, the research demonstrates the value of integrating covariance-based Structural Equation Modeling (CB-SEM) with qualitative thematic analysis and network visualization using ATLAS.ti and Gephi. The convergence between quantitative and qualitative evidence provided a richer contextual understanding of the mechanisms through which industrial customers evaluate suppliers and develop enduring buyer–supplier relationships, thereby strengthening the robustness and interpretability of the proposed model.

Finally, the study contributes to the broader discussion on sustainability in industrial markets. Although sustainability was not incorporated as an explicit latent construct, the findings indicate that industrial Brand Equity acquires increasing strategic relevance within business environments characterized by growing environmental expectations, ESG requirements, and pressure for responsible industrial practices. In this sense, sustainability should be understood as the organizational context within which industrial brand equity generates long-term value, organizational legitimacy, and competitive advantage. Consequently, strengthening industrial brand equity may indirectly support corporate initiatives aligned with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, particularly SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure) and SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production), by reinforcing innovation, responsible business relationships, and sustainable value creation throughout industrial supply chains (United Nations, 2015; Rahman et al., 2023; Lee et al., 2025).

Generative AI statement

The author(s) declared that Generative AI was used in the creation of this manuscript. Artificial intelligence-assisted tools were used exclusively to improve the language editing and the graphical presentation of selected figures. All scientific content, study design, data analysis, interpretation of the findings, and final conclusions were developed, verified, and approved by the authors, who assume full responsibility for the content of this manuscript.

Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.

Publisher's note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Footnotes

Edited by: Sady Mazzioni, Regional Community University of Chapecó, Brazil

Reviewed by: Sandra Gomes, Instituto Português de Administração de Marketing, Portugal

Siti Sumiati, Sultan Agung Islamic University, Indonesia