Brand equity and the value given to a product are the major indicators of commercial success and are considered as the company's most valuable resource (Boukis and Christodoulides, 2020), while the literature has suggested that a value may be added by a variety of stakeholder groups, i.e., the bulk of published scientific studies and brand equity from customer or firm's perspective (Christodoulides and de Chernatony, 2010; Veloutsou and Guzman, 2017). Workers' importance in fulfilling the marketing goals to different customers (such as clients) is extensively established, especially in the context of services. Staff skills and expertise, for instance, have a crucial impact on consumers' brand experiences and overall brand perceptions (Wallace et al., 2013). However, insufficient research has been conducted on how to improve employee-based brand equity (EBBE) so employees may effectively execute their duty as endorsers (Baker et al., 2014; Helm et al., 2016; Morokane et al., 2016).

Brands are made up of a combination of practical and emotional characteristics. To put it another way, a brand blends practical and emotional values to make a commitment well about brand image. As a result, a brand's success is determined by how well it delivers on its promises. For hospitality, however, delivering value propositions is more difficult. For starters, hospitality services are often performances or experiences that are difficult to evaluate due to their intangible character. As a result, communicating brand benefits to consumers is more complicated (Erkmen, 2018; Dinçer et al., 2020). Furthermore, because consumption and production are inextricably linked, personnel who provide services are frequently mistaken for the service itself (Erkmen, 2018). Finally, uniformity in hospitality services is difficult to attain because service delivery is dependent on personnel performance.

It is well-understood that the contact between staff and customers is critical to the consistent supply of both emotional and functional values. As a result, branding hospitality services takes a different strategy than branding physical commodities. Because hospitality service firms rely significantly on their workers to fulfill the marketing goals, there is a growing worry about how to manage their brand-related behavioral patterns (Andaji Garmaroudi et al., 2021; Buhalis and Park, 2021; Robinot et al., 2021; Wu et al., 2021). Resultantly, internal branding has already been brought to the branding literature, which is concerned with matching staff activities with brand promise (Kaushal and Srivastava, 2021; Solakis et al., 2022). Companies may utilize brands as a tool to gain more customers. The value of brands and the need for investment in brands and customers have been acknowledged by business leaders (Lim and Brown-Devlin, 2021; Martillo Jeremías and Polo Peña, 2021).

Consumer-based brand equity is becoming more of a concern, but the role of workers is also becoming more prominent (Christodoulides and de Chernatony, 2010). Employees' capacity to execute client expectations is the foundation for building a strong brand and delivering perceived service excellence (King et al., 2013). As the focus of attention changes more and more to employees, experts argue that studying brand equity from the standpoint of employees, dubbed EBBE, is vital (Gounaris, 2006; Mo et al., 2021). Enhancing EBBE helps organizations recruit competent individuals, and workers' skills and experience provide them with a competitive edge. Professionals' identification with enterprises, in contrast, may add to client satisfaction since they connect directly with consumers or customers (Poulis and Wisker, 2016).

The EBBE, as defined by King, is “the unequal influence of brand knowledge on an employee's responsiveness to internal brand management.” Moreover, how employees become related to brand values remains a key subject of study. As a result, the notion of brand equity has grown in prominence as a prerequisite for effective internal brand management. In contrast, two widely accepted approaches on brand equity continue to dominate literary works: customer-based brand equity (CBBE) and financial-based brand equity. That is why King and Grace came up with the idea for the third point of view. The authors advocated EBBE in their groundbreaking study, which emphasizes brand expertise as the cornerstone to inside brand-building initiatives (King et al., 2013; Erkmen, 2018). Given the notion's inception and the trend toward that third perspective for brand equity, most research, at present, has focused on the idea theoretically or conceptually (King and Grace, 2005, 2008, 2009, 2010; King et al., 2012). Based on this gap, this research focused on identifying the role of brand knowledge on EBBE. Human resource management is becoming a competitive edge in today's business environment.

Unsuitable employees can lead to business failure. Normal employees can keep the firm running and get it to the top, but exceptional employees may take even moderate enterprises to the top. To be successful in the future, corporations must not only hire the finest people but also make them loyal to the business to maintain them (Vardarlier, 2016; Alshraideh et al., 2017; Uzair et al., 2017). Three variables commonly determine organizational loyalty: affiliation with and conviction in the company's aims, values, and goals; proclivity to engage in activities that are profitable first and foremost to the organization; and proclivity to stay and work in the organization (Alshraideh et al., 2017). Walton was one of the first scholars to recognize the importance of loyalty (Walton and Limited, 2006). According to him, an effective performance increases when it shifts from a traditional influence strategy to a loyalty-based approach in employee management (Sokro et al., 2021; Hosseini, 2022).

Rightfully, the level of commitment is a set of techniques to analyze employee behavior and approaches with distinct gaps in the outcomes when used. To put it succinctly, organizational loyalty has a direct impact on occupational efficiency, resulting in lower employee turnover, more efficient resource use, and increased productivity (Armstrong and Kepler, 2018; Reus et al., 2019). The organizational culture component, which evolved from Hofstede's study in the 1970's and 1980's, is based on the conception of culture (Hofstede, 1980). It has become a contentious and significant topic in management study and practice. Organizational culture represents the shared values, conventions, and assumptions inside an organization, according to the concept of culture (Bharadwaj, 2014). Seemingly, organizational culture is ingrained in cultural identity, and in some cases, such as transnational corporations, it may be ingrained in many national cultures. These beliefs, attitudes, and actions of organizational personnel assist them to comprehend how the organization works are referred to as organizational culture (Schneider et al., 2012, 2017; Bataineh et al., 2017).

Organizational climate has been studied before in the context of organizations' performance, but it could have played a mediating role suggested by Schneider et al. (2017) in developing EBBE. Therefore, the author utilized it as a mediator for identifying the connecting link between brand knowledge, organizational loyalty, and EBBE. This research was based on several questions: What could be the antecedents of EBBE in the hospitality sector? How these factors, such as brand knowledge and organizational loyalty, could lead to EBBE? and What driving role, organizational culture could play between antecedents and EBBE? To address these questions, this study explored the relationships of brand knowledge, organizational loyalty, and EBBE. This study also contributed to identify the shaping role of organizational culture among the relationships of brand knowledge, organizational loyalty, and EBBE.

Brand knowledge is being used to develop overall brand recognition to the allocation of public consumption patterns, and it is also utilized to put workers' brand-related job behaviors in jeopardy. Similarly, EBBE refers to the employees' identification with the brand. In the literature, there are two viewpoints to describe the employer–employee relationship: social-exchange-based and organizational-identification-premised connections. The social exchange theory (SET), which describes workplace relationships via the trade of physical resources, has evolved into a social-exchange-oriented approach (Ashforth and Mael, 1989). In contrast, identification-based relationships are founded here on social identity theory (SIT), which explains employee relationships as a match among personal and corporate identities (Erkmen, 2018). SIT is the foundation of this research. The SIT was used in a variety of settings, including the psychology of consumers, information dissemination, and the connection between sports franchises and their supporters (Dimofte et al., 2014; Mckinley et al., 2014; Ambrose and Schnitzlein, 2017).

The SIT has also been used as the major conceptual framework in the study of a few hospitality researchers. SIT is a core theory in cognitive science that has been used to explain group psychology, interacting, and social perspectives, and it was proposed by Tajfel and Turner (2004). The component of one's self-concept that stems from social groups or groups to which someone belongs, as well as the significance and psychological value linked with affiliation to an organization, is referred to as social identity. It is the aspect of self-identity that is mostly generated from belonging to a group (Tajfel and Turner, 2004). People tend to associate and link themselves to diverse social groups as a way of selecting self-identity and a feeling of belonging, according to the SIT. The personal self has been founded on the importance and significance that employee puts on group identity, according to the theory. As a result, humans form a sense of social identity regarding the social characteristics of the groups to which they belong, such as race, ethnicity, gender, and political party (Chan, 2016).

The concept of social identity is crucial because it aids in understanding how inhabitants' culture and social identities impact their experiences and attitudes (Sharpley, 2014). The SIT emphasizes that a person's sense of belonging to a particular group motivates them to participate in a marketing context. This is relevant to this research, which shows the impact of organizational culture on EBBE in a hospitality solution provider. It is a concept that may be utilized to describe the themes that motivated employees must be committed to a certain brand. As a result, knowing this idea might be beneficial to hospitality sector professionals (González-Rodríguez et al., 2019; Kaur et al., 2020; Kumar and Kumar, 2020; Wang et al., 2021). Furthermore, comprehending the SIT's arguments improves one's capacity to assess the mediating impact of organizational culture in affecting EBBE. Based on the significant roles of SET and SIT in shaping EBBE, the following research evaluated the association of brand knowledge and EBBE along with the mediating role of organizational culture.

Keeping in view the complexity of the conceptual framework, the author has employed a multivariate data analysis tool based on the PLS approach. The most common and frequently used tool in this regard is Smart PLS, and the author has used this statistical software (Smart PLS 3.9) to assess the model (Sarstedt et al., 2014). One more reason in this regard was based on the data normality issue, as Smart PLS deals very well with the non-normal data, and the issue of normality does not influence the predictive capability of the model (Hair et al., 2017). Moreover, one other reason was based on the theoretical contribution of the study, because theory in case of EBBE is less developed, and thus, using the PLS approach provides benefits in this regard. PLS approach assesses the model in two dimensions: (1) assessment of the measurement model and (2) assessment of the structural model. The measurement model is assessed to confirm the quality criteria, based on reliability and validity (Hair et al., 2017).

To assess the measurement model, the statistics related to reliability and validity were checked, and it was found that all the indicators pertaining to the reliability and validity measures were intact (Table 1). Reliability statistics in terms of alpha range from 0.764 to 0.836. A higher level of reliability was observed for construct organizational loyalty while a lower level was observed in case of the brand-based equity. Similarly, the second measure of reliability analysis was also depicting a reasonable level of reliability (ranging from 0.774 to 0.843). The third measure of reliability statistics, i.e., composite reliability, was also depicting a good and reasonable level of 0.845–0.884. Thus, all the measures of reliability have indicated a satisfactory and sound level of reliability, while in case of validity, the first measure of validity was checked based on average variance extracted (AVE). In this regard, the AVE of all the study constructs was within the acceptable range (>0.50). Thus, a reasonable and sufficient level of convergent validity was explained (Table 1), and more than 50% of the variance in the study constructs was shared. The second measure of convergent validity relates to the outer loadings. For the assessment of convergent validity based on outer loadings, items with poor loadings were traced and were dropped from further analysis. One item from the construct brand knowledge was dropped (BI-1) due to weak and poor outer loadings (loadings <0.708) (Mela and Kopalle, 2002). Similarly, the second construct of this study organizational loyalty was checked for poor outer loadings, and item OL-3 was dropped due to less and poor loadings. One item from the study constructs EBBE was dropped (BBE-2) from the analysis due to poor loadings. No item was dropped from the study construct organizational culture (covered through dimensions, trust, and respect for the individuals; Table 2 and Figure 2).

The second measure of validity is related to discriminant validity, and for this purpose, it has been assessed through two criteria, namely, Fornell and Larcker (1981) criteria and heterotrait-monotrait (HTMT) ratios (Hair et al., 2017) as depicted from Tables 3, 4. Both criteria were met comfortably as the square root of the AVE of all variables was higher than the correlations in the respective row and column (Hair et al., 2011).

While assessing the discriminant validity through HTMT, both liberal and conservative recommendations were followed. From the perspective of liberal criteria, the value of HTMT ratios in Table 4 must be <0.90 while conservative criteria insist that it should be <0.85. Hence, both liberal and conservative criteria have been met (Table 4 to assess discriminant validity through HTMT ratio).

Moreover, model fitness was assessed based on the coefficient of determination (R²) and effect size (F²). Model fitness has been found on the bases of these criteria. First, the value of R², in this case, is 0.568, indicating that both predictors (brand knowledge and organizational loyalty) along with mediating variable (organizational culture) are explaining 57% variation in the outcome variable (EBBE). Similarly, both predictors (brand knowledge and organizational loyalty) were explaining a 17% variation in mediating variable (organizational culture; Table 5 and Figure 2; Hair et al., 2017). While noting effect size, the value of F² has been observed good and depicts the good-quality criteria. Moreover, this study has also tested the model's predictive relevance as recommended by Geisser (1975). The value of Q² was assessed, and it has been found greater than zero, depicting a good level of predictive relevance.

In case of hypotheses testing, it has been performed based on the t- and p-statistics for each path (Table 7). This study anticipated a total of four hypotheses, out of which two were formulated to assess the direct impact while the remaining two were related to the mediation analysis based on mediating variable (organizational culture). The first hypothesis of this study which is related to the relationship between brand knowledge and EBBE has been found statistically significant. In this regard, the value of beta (coefficient) indicated that one unit change in brand knowledge will bring 0.267 unit change in the EBBE (values of t and p, in this case, were satisfactory, Table 7). This state of affairs indicates that brand knowledge has the potency to influence the EBBE positively. Similarly, the second hypothesis of this study is based on the relationship between organizational loyalty and EBBE. This path has been found significant as depicted by p- and t-statistics in this path (Tables 6, 7 and Figure 3). Thus, it has been found that organizational loyalty influences EBBE positively. Moreover, the coefficient for this path depicts that one unit change in organizational loyalty will bring 0.260 unit change in EBBE. An interesting outcome of this study indicates that both the predictors are sharing almost the same effect in predicting the EBBE. The premise of SET given by Blau (1964) supports these statistically tested hypotheses. Similarly, indirect effects related to mediation were tested based on the variance account for (VAF) approach. For this purpose, the indirect effect was divided through total effect, and the obtained value was multiplied by 100 to calculate the percentage. In case of H3 where it was supposed that organizational culture mediates the relationship between brand knowledge and EBBE, the statistical results indicate that organizational culture is partially mediating this path, which provides sufficient evidence to accept H3. Similarly, H4 was also tested through the VAF approach, and it has been proved that organizational culture mediates the relationship between organizational loyalty and EBBE. These findings are supported through the premise of SET proposed by Blau (1964). These findings are supported through the previous studies (Sekiguchi, 2007; Erkmen, 2018), and it can be safely drawn that employee brand based in firms can be developed through the promotion of knowledge and loyalty within organizational circuits.

A lot of research in the past has focused on different aspects of consumer-based brand equity, but very less attention has been given to real antecedents of EBBE. Consumer-based brand equity is becoming more of a concern, but the role of workers is also becoming more prominent (Christodoulides and de Chernatony, 2010). Employees' capacity to execute client expectations is the foundation for building a strong brand and delivering perceived service excellence (King et al., 2013). As the focus of attention changes more and more to employees, experts argue that studying brand equity from the standpoint of employees, dubbed EBBE, is vital (Gounaris, 2006; Mo et al., 2021). Enhancing EBBE helps organizations recruit competent individuals, and workers' skills and experience provide them with a competitive edge. Professionals' identification with enterprises, in contrast, may add to client satisfaction since they connect directly with consumers or customers (Poulis and Wisker, 2016). This research has focused on evaluating the impact of antecedents of equity on EBBE in the hospitality sector.

Brands are made up of a combination of practical and emotional characteristics. To produce a successful commitment to brand image, a brand combines practical and emotional values. As a result, the success of a brand is defined by how effectively it keeps its promises. Providing core competencies in the hotel industry, in contrast, is more challenging. For starters, due to their intangible nature, hospitality services are frequent performances or experiences that are difficult to measure. As a result, articulating the benefits of a brand to customers is more difficult (Erkmen, 2018; Dinçer et al., 2020). Additionally, since consumption and production are intricately intertwined, service providers are commonly misidentified as the service they supply (Erkmen, 2018). Finally, uniformity in hospitality services is difficult to attain because service delivery is dependent on personnel performance. This research evaluated the impact of brand knowledge which is an antecedent of brand equity on EBBE and found a significant relationship between both. This strengthened the previous understanding of brand knowledge in consumer-based brand equity.

It proved that if more attention is given to the brand knowledge of employees through training, then it could result in better developing EBBE. Even though the term “brand knowledge” refers to customers, the idea is also applicable to employees of hospitality services because brand awareness is the cornerstone for building brand equity. Similarly, employees who are familiar with the brand are more likely to grasp their responsibilities and execute the brand promise (Mangold and Miles, 2007; Erkmen, 2018). As a result, brand expertise combined with precise comprehension aids employees in overcoming ambiguity and committing to the brand (de Chernatony and Segal-Horn, 2001; Kumar and Kaushik, 2020; Liu et al., 2020; Osei-Frimpong et al., 2020). Another aspect of EBBE was also studied in this research to assess whether organizational loyalty leads to EBBE or not. The results were significant in identifying that there was a strong positive direct relationship between organizational loyalty and EBBE.

This kind of relationship was not previously studied; hence, it could give some novel insights about hospitality services across the globe for shaping effective EBBE. Few researchers described that loyalty is the most essential element of the ideal company culture and that a loyal employee stays a valuable workforce (Echchakoui, 2015). When companies focus on linking human resources with the company through internal branding, employee loyalty to the brand increases (Du Preez et al., 2017). Therefore, the outcomes of this research are valuable for the marketing practices of internal management in organizations. The last hypotheses were about the evaluation of the mediating role of organizational culture between brand knowledge, organizational loyalty, and EBBE. As supposed, the mediating link of organizational culture also proved to be significant between these antecedents and EBBE.

It suggested that if there is a direct relationship among antecedents with EBBE, then that relationship could be more strengthened by providing an organizational culture to the employees for developing brand equity among them. Every firm has its unique “environment,” which means that understanding organizational culture is crucial for any company seeking a competitive edge through product innovation (Xie et al., 2019). As a result, companies with strong cultural support are better equipped to produce significant advantages in terms of work performance, perspective, moral behavior, ethics, and work happiness, putting themselves in a better position for the long-term business success and competitiveness (Wahyuningsih et al., 2019). A few researchers (Alsheikh et al., 2018; Saleem and Ilkhanizadeh, 2021) have identified the mediating role of organizational culture in different perspectives, but no one has evaluated the mediating role of organizational culture between brand knowledge, organizational loyalty, and EBBE before, so this research would be a novel addition in the field.

The empirical findings of this study indicate that brand-based equity is influenced by brand knowledge and organizational loyalty. Both organizational loyalty and brand image have almost equal impacts on EBBE. Thus, it can be safely concluded that EBBE is positively influenced at the workplace when employees have a sense of loyalty and knowledge related to the procedures and policies of the firm. Additionally, the impact of organizational culture on EBBE is also positive. Thus, positive organizational culture at the workplace promotes EBBE (Shore et al., 2001, 2006). Furthermore, brand knowledge can also promote a positive culture at the workplace through promoting trust and respect for individuals at the workplace. The same pattern of results indicates that organizational loyalty can also promote a positive culture at the workplace within the organization which further promotes EBBE.

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/supplementary material, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author/s.

The studies involving human participants were reviewed and approved by the Shandong Academy of Art, China. The patients/participants provided their written informed consent to participate in this study. The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki.

XL conceived, designed the concept, collected the data, wrote the manuscript, and read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

The author declares that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

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.