METHODOLOGICAL APPROACHES TO GLOBAL ASSESSMENT OF BRAND VALUE IN INTERNATIONAL MARKETS
Abstract
In the context of globalization, accelerating digital transformation, and the growing dominance of intangible assets in corporate value creation, brands have become a critical strategic and economic resource for companies operating in international markets. However, assessing brand value at the global level remains methodologically complex due to cross-cultural differences in brand perception, regional economic disparities, regulatory heterogeneity, the increasing role of non-financial performance drivers. The purpose of this article is to analyze contemporary methodological approaches to brand value assessment in international markets, identify their advantages and limitations, and reveal methodological gaps related to the insufficient integration of financial and non-financial indicators, regional and cultural factors, digitalization, ESG considerations. Particular attention is given to income-based valuation methods, especially the Royalty Relief approach, as well as to brand strength assessment frameworks combining financial performance indicators with consumer-based measures of brand equity. The role of non-financial indicators, particularly the Net Promoter Score, is also examined as a complementary tool capturing consumer loyalty and brand perception aspects not fully reflected in monetary valuation models. The results indicate that although existing methodologies provide a multidimensional understanding of brand value, they remain fragmented and insufficiently adapted to global market conditions. Such fragmentation limits the comparability and strategic usefulness of brand valuation results in an international context. The study substantiates the need for an integrated approach to global brand valuation that combines financial metrics, consumer-based indicators, digital analytics, and ESG factors within a unified analytical framework. This integration would improve the accuracy, comparability, and strategic relevance of brand valuation outcomes and support more effective decision-making in international branding.
References
2. Keller K.L. Conceptualizing, Measuring, and Managing Customer-Based Brand Equity. J Mark. 1993. 57. С.1–22. URL: https://doi.org/10.1177/002224299305700101 (дaтa звернення 13.02.2026)
3. Kapferer J-N. The new strategic brand management: creating and sustaining brand equity long term. 4th ed., New ed. London; Philadelphia: Kogan Page; 2008. (дaтa звернення 13.02.2026)
4. Leite L. Brand valuation: how convergent (or divergent) are global brand rankings and how correlated is brand value to enterprise value? J Mark Anal. 2024. 12:3. С.75–89. URL: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41270-022-00201-7 (дaтa звернення 13.02.2026)
5. He J., Calder B.J. The experimental evaluation of brand strength and brand value. J Bus Res. 2020;115. С.194–202. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.04.035 (дaтa звернення 12.02.2026)
6. France S.L., Davcik N.S., Kazandjian B.J. Digital brand equity: The concept, antecedents, measurement, and future development. J Bus Res. 2025;192:115273. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2025.115273 (дaтa звернення 16.02.2026)
7. Paschina S. Brand Equity Measurement Models: A Systematic Review. Int J Bus Manag. 2025;20:1. URL: https://doi.org/10.5539/ijbm.v20n5p1 (дaтa звернення 17.02.2026)
8. Veloutsou C., Chatzipanagiotou K., Christodoulides G. The consumer-based brand equity deconstruction and restoration process: Lessons from unliked brands. J Bus Res. 2020. 111. С.41–51. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.12.029 (дaтa звернення 22.02.2026)
9. Chepelenko A., Tserkovnyy S., Danchenko L. Assessment of brand value. Sci Fruct. 2024. №5: C.89–104. URL: https://doi.org/10.31617/1.2024(157)07 (дaтa звернення 19.02.2026)
10. Kofman V. Methodology of assessment of the branding strategy. Dev Serv Ind Manag. 2025. №3 С.24–30. URL: https://doi.org/10.31891/dsim-2025-10(42) (дaтa звернення 12.02.2026)
11. Gupta S., Gallear D., Rudd J., Foroudi P. The impact of brand value on brand competitiveness. J Bus Res. 2020; С. 112:2 С.10–22. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.02.033 (дaтa звернення 17.02.2026)
12. Brand Finance, Global 500, The annual report on the world’s most valuable and strongest brands. 2025. URL: https://static.brandirectory.com/reports/brand-finance-global-500-2025-preview.pdf (дaтa звернення 1.03.2026)
13. NICE Satmetrix, U.S. Consumer 2020 Net Promoter Benchmarks. 2020. URL: https://cincysc.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/2020_benchmarks.pdf (дaтa звернення 12.02.2026)
14. Oracle. How to Engage Customers Across Every Generation. 2020. URL: https://www.oracle.com/a/ocom/docs/dc/how-to-engage-consumers-across-every-generation.pdf (дaтa звернення 12.02.2026)
15. Comparably, Net Promoter Score. 2022. URL: https://www.comparably.com/brands/top-100-brands (дaтa звернення 12.02.2026)
1. Aaker D.A. Measuring Brand Equity Across Products and Markets. Calif Manage Rev. 1996. 38:102–20. URL: https://doi.org/10.2307/41165845 (date of application 12.02.2026)
2. Keller K.L. Conceptualizing, Measuring, and Managing Customer-Based Brand Equity. J Mark. 1993. 57. С.1–22. URL: https://doi.org/10.1177/002224299305700101 (date of application 13.02.2026)
3. Kapferer J-N. The new strategic brand management: creating and sustaining brand equity long term. 4th ed., New ed. London; Philadelphia: Kogan Page; 2008. (date of application 13.02.2026)
4. Leite L. Brand valuation: how convergent (or divergent) are global brand rankings and how correlated is brand value to enterprise value? J Mark Anal. 2024. 12:3. С.75–89. URL: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41270-022-00201-7 (date of application 13.02.2026)
5. He J., Calder B.J. The experimental evaluation of brand strength and brand value. J Bus Res. 2020;115. С.194–202. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.04.035 (date of application 12.02.2026)
6. France S.L., Davcik N.S., Kazandjian B.J. Digital brand equity: The concept, antecedents, measurement, and future development. J Bus Res. 2025;192:115273. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2025.115273 (date of application 16.02.2026)
7. Paschina S. Brand Equity Measurement Models: A Systematic Review. Int J Bus Manag. 2025;20:1. URL: https://doi.org/10.5539/ijbm.v20n5p1 (date of application 17.02.2026)
8. Veloutsou C., Chatzipanagiotou K., Christodoulides G. The consumer-based brand equity deconstruction and restoration process: Lessons from unliked brands. J Bus Res. 2020;111: 41–51. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.12.029 (date of application 22.02.2026)
9. Chepelenko A., Tserkovnyy S., Danchenko L. Assessment of brand value. Sci Fruct. 2024. №5: C.89–104. URL: https://doi.org/10.31617/1.2024(157)07 (date of application 19.02.2026)
10. Kofman V. Methodology of assessment of the branding strategy. Dev Serv Ind Manag. 2025. №3 С.24–30. URL: https://doi.org/10.31891/dsim-2025-10(42) (date of application 12.02.2026)
11. Gupta S., Gallear D., Rudd J., Foroudi P. The impact of brand value on brand competitiveness. J Bus Res. 2020; С. 112:2 С.10–22. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.02.033 (date of application 17.02.2026)
12. Brand Finance, Global 500, The annual report on the world’s most valuable and strongest brands. 2025. URL: https://static.brandirectory.com/reports/brand-finance-global-500-2025-preview.pdf (date of application 1.03.2026)
13. NICE Satmetrix, U.S. Consumer 2020 Net Promoter Benchmarks. 2020. URL: https://cincysc.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/2020_benchmarks.pdf (date of application 12.02.2026)
14. Oracle. How to Engage Customers Across Every Generation. 2020. URL: https://www.oracle.com/a/ocom/docs/dc/how-to-engage-consumers-across-every-generation.pdf (date of application 12.02.2026)
15. Comparably, Net Promoter Score. 2022. URL: https://www.comparably.com/brands/top-100-brands (date of application 12.02.2026)
Copyright (c) 2026 Людмила Цимбал, Поліна Фіцак
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
