The fashion industry is one of the most criticized industries when it comes to their sustainability performance, where consumers have very high demands and expectations. This study aims to investigate how Swedish companies in the fashion industry use legitimacy strategies in their sustainability reports to repair their legitimacy after receiving negative publicity in the media. The study is based on negative publicity between the years 2016-2021. The researchers in this study have used a qualitative research method in the form of a deductive approach, as the study is based on theories. The data that was collected from the reports was relevant to the media incident. As the starting point was the media incident, the researchers were able to adapt the review of the sustainability reports to find relevant information in line with the negative publicity. Based on the results of the study, it was concluded that companies use at least one of Lindblom's four legitimacy strategies in order to repair their legitimacy. The results also showed that the more attention the negative publicity receives from society, the more the companies put emphasis on reporting the event in their sustainability report. / Modebranschen är en av de mest kritiserade branscherna när det gäller deras hållbarhetsarbete, där konsumenterna har väldigt höga krav samt förväntningar. Denna studie har som mål att undersöka hur svenska företag inom modebranschen använder sig av legitimitetsstrategier i sina hållbarhetsrapporter för att reparera sin legitimitet efter att ha fått negativ publicitet i media. Studien är baserad på negativ publicitet mellan åren 2016-2021. Forskarna i denna studie har använt sig av en kvalitativ forskningsmetod i form av en deduktiv ansats, då studien styrs av teorier. Datan som samlades in från rapporterna var det som var relevant till den mediala händelsen. Då utgångspunkten var den mediala händelsen kunde forskarna anpassa granskningen av hållbarhetsrapporterna till att finna relevant information i enlighten med den negativa publiciteten. Utifrån studiens resultat drogs slutsatsen att företagen använder minst en av Lindbloms fyra legitimitetsstrategier i syfte att reparera sin legitimitet. Resultaten visade även att ju mer uppmärksamhet den negativa publiciteten får av samhället, desto större vikt lägger företagen på att redogöra för händelsen i sin hållbarhetsrapport.

Titel: Hur påverkas varumärkesassociation och varumärkesattityd vid en co-branding kris - en kvantitativ studie Nivå: Examensarbete på grundnivå (kandidatexamen) i ämnet företagsekonomi Författare: Caroline Holmberg och Katja Stellmo Handledare: Peter Ek Datum: 2024 – Maj Syfte: Syftet med studien är att studera förändringen i varumärkesassociation och varumärkesattityd vid en co-branding kris.  Metod: I studien har en kvantitativ forskningsmetod använts. Den kvantitativa delen av studien utgörs av en enkätundersökning. Enkätundersökningen var webbaserad och bestod av ett bekvämlighetsurval av konsumenter och genererade 122 svar. Data analyserades av parat t-test och redovisades i en tabell.  Resultat och slutsats: Resultatet i studien visar att negativ publicitet kring den kända personen i ett co-branding samarbete, påverkar varumärkesassociation och varumärkesattityd mot alla varumärken som samarbetet involverar. Det visade dock att förändringen av associationer och attityder gentemot den kända personen var störst. Examensarbetets bidrag: Denna studie bidrar med ökad förståelse kring risker med ett co-branding samarbete, vilket kan ge stöd åt företag för att vidareutveckla krishantering och policys.  Förslag till fortsatt forskning: Vidare studier bör göras för att få en djupare förståelse omkring hur positiva samt negativa händelser kan spilla över inom co-branding samarbeten. Ett ytterligare förslag för forskning vore att undersöka påverkan av flera variabler som till exempel köpintention, vilket kan bidra till den företagsekonomiska forskningsansatsen.  Nyckelord: Co-branding, Varumärkesassociation, Varumärkesattityd, Kändisanknytning (Celebrity endorsement), Negativ publicitet. / Title: How does brand association and brand attitude change during a co-branding crisis - a quantitative study  Level: Bachelor's thesis in Business Administration Author: Caroline Holmberg and Katja Stellmo Supervisor: Peter Ek Date: 2024 – May Aim: The purpose of the study is to examine the change in brand association and brand attitude during a co-branding crisis.  Method: The study utilized a quantitative research method. The quantitative aspect of the study consisted of a survey. The survey was web-based and conducted with a convenience sample of consumers, generating 122 responses. Data was analyzed using paired sample t-tests and presented in a table. Results and conclusions: The results of the study indicate that negative publicity surrounding the celebrity in a co-branding collaboration, affects brand associations and brand attitudes towards all brands involved in the collaboration. However, the change in associations and attitudes towards the celebrity was the most significant. Cotribution of the thesis: This study contributes to an increased understanding of the risks associated with co-branding collaborations, which can support companies in further developing crisis management and policies.  Suggestions for future research: Further studies should be conducted to gain a deeper understanding of how positive and negative events can spill over within co-branding collaborations. Another suggestion for future research would be to investigate the impact of multiple variables, such as purchase intention, which can contribute to the field of business economics research.  Key words: Co-branding, Brand association, Brand attitude, Celebrity endorsement, Negative publicity.

No description available.

Swedish property law, when it comes to acquisition of movable property, the transferee does not acquire ownership as such, instead, the sale is considered protected against the claim of the seller’s creditors (borgenärsskydd). This is achieved through the delivery principle (traditionsprincipen), meaning in its Swedish sense that movable property must not necessarily be delivered into the trans- feree’s possession, but rather that the transferor’s possibility to dispose over the movable is severed. This principle has been subjected to considerable alterations, mainly due to allowing situations where the delivery principle would otherwise be practically impossible. These alterations raise the question of how far these legal solutions can be detached from the fundamental principle. Therefore, it is relevant to ponder, if these solutions, which can merely be considered as artificial solutions to satisfy a formal requirement, are like the constitutum possessorium of civil law orders This thesis will attend to this issue, addressing the following three questions: Question (i): how does the concept of ownership apply to legal questions in relation to the delivery principle in Swedish property law and the Draft Common Frame of Reference respectively? Question (ii): does Swedish property law grant protection against the transferor’s creditors although the movable is detained with the transferor? Question (iii): is there any systematic compatibility in relation to the delivery principle in Swedish property law and DCFR respectively? Espe- cially when the movable is detained with the transferor. In relation to question (i), it has been found that in DCFR, ownership is closely linked with possession, which means that ownership follows the delivery of possession. This is not necessarily the case in Swedish property law. Question (ii) is answered in connection to a study of Swedish case-law, which results in that the movable can be detained with the transferor, provided that some require- ments are fulfilled, only if it is a result of a physical action and not solely due to a contract. However, case-law has evolved this general rule to be subjected to a propensity of looking past, or creating new, requirements in order not to create unnecessary complications of compliance as far as it concerns honest transac- tions. This has resulted in a kind of peculiar flexibility. In answer to question (iii), due to the new types of solutions created not to complicate certain transactions, the possibility of reaching similar results as the continental principle is more prominent than one might have thought. Despite certain resemblances, the sys- tematic compatibility must be seen as limited, due to the difference in the respec- tive rules’ aim.

Swedish property law, when it comes to acquisition of movable property, the transferee does not acquire ownership as such, instead, the sale is considered protected against the claim of the seller’s creditors (borgenärsskydd). This is achieved through the delivery principle (traditionsprincipen), meaning in its Swedish sense that movable property must not necessarily be delivered into the trans- feree’s possession, but rather that the transferor’s possibility to dispose over the movable is severed. This principle has been subjected to considerable alterations, mainly due to allowing situations where the delivery principle would otherwise be practically impossible. These alterations raise the question of how far these legal solutions can be detached from the fundamental principle. Therefore, it is relevant to ponder, if these solutions, which can merely be considered as artificial solutions to satisfy a formal requirement, are like the constitutum possessorium of civil law orders This thesis will attend to this issue, addressing the following three questions: Question (i): how does the concept of ownership apply to legal questions in relation to the delivery principle in Swedish property law and the Draft Common Frame of Reference respectively? Question (ii): does Swedish property law grant protection against the transferor’s creditors although the movable is detained with the transferor? Question (iii): is there any systematic compatibility in relation to the delivery principle in Swedish property law and DCFR respectively? Espe- cially when the movable is detained with the transferor. In relation to question (i), it has been found that in DCFR, ownership is closely linked with possession, which means that ownership follows the delivery of possession. This is not necessarily the case in Swedish property law. Question (ii) is answered in connection to a study of Swedish case-law, which results in that the movable can be detained with the transferor, provided that some require- ments are fulfilled, only if it is a result of a physical action and not solely due to a contract. However, case-law has evolved this general rule to be subjected to a propensity of looking past, or creating new, requirements in order not to create unnecessary complications of compliance as far as it concerns honest transac- tions. This has resulted in a kind of peculiar flexibility. In answer to question (iii), due to the new types of solutions created not to complicate certain transactions, the possibility of reaching similar results as the continental principle is more prominent than one might have thought. Despite certain resemblances, the sys- tematic compatibility must be seen as limited, due to the difference in the respec- tive rules’ aim.