Well we're talking about brands and the importance of branding, creating a branding relationship with all the customers of an institution. We are here in Piazza San Marco (St. Mark's Square), we are in Fondazione Musei Civici di Venezia where the characteristic of this institution is to provide a coördinating the brand the activity, the branding policy all over the city in order to convey a unique message to the customer. Starting from this point we now concentrate a little on the state of the relationship of the customer mainly in cultural institutions. For sure in this moment, in these museums, we have a different customers, different visitors, and different profiles of them. In any moment of time, we have people that have knowledge and are very fond of this kind of architecture, people for whom it's the first time that they are coming to Venice, people that have just hopped off a cruise ship and the people that are coming here with their schoolmates for their "year tour." So, it’s important to understand what the level of their relation is, the level of attachment of each of the customers with the company itself. Michele Costabile developed a model, The Dynamic Model of Customer Loyalty that is very helpful for this reason. It's very simple, it started from the consideration that at the basis of the first purchase every is driven by them customer's expectation. We expect a value of the product that we eventually buy. The first time we enter this place we expect to live an experience that maybe is fulfilled or not fulfilled. What happens after the first purchase? We compare what is the customer’s expectation with the customer's perceived value, what the customer actually perceived. We compare what is the customer’s expectation with the customer's perceived value, what the customer actually perceived. If the perception is better than the expectation, of course, we are satisfied. If we expected something too high and the perception is lower, we have not satisfied. In the case of satisfaction we can move up to the stronger relation, so after the first purchase, we have the second repurchase properties because we had a satisfactory moment and day after day, time after time, we are situation that is different from the original the comparison. And we move eventually to the stock situation of trust. Therefore in the satisfactory moment we have the comparison between benefits and sacrifices perceived by the consumer and repurchase is nothing else but a sedimented level of happiness, pleasure, and satisfaction that creates a stock relation, something that is not no longer a comparison but we are talking about a stock attitude, a prejudice. This prejudice is trust. So trust, stock; satisfaction, comparison. What happens after the trust relation. After the trust relation the consumer is more connected and engaged with the relation with the company and after the first repurchase, there is the second, the third, and the fourth and the behavioral activity and approach of the customer is what we call behavior loyalty. It means that somebody is behaving as a loyal customer. But still according to Michele Costabile, this is not loyalty. We have something more to develop. What is the next step? The next step is when, after a repeated repurchase of a satisfactory moment the customer realizes that the experienced value lived in the past, the ten times they came to this museum and the ten times they were so satisfied and happy of the exhibition and be event I compare this experience value with what is present on the market. Is there any alternative that offers something higher to me? If yes I move on from behavior loyalty to mental loyalty. This analysis is called by Costabile the monadic value analysis because it conceives of the monode the isolated offer and value offered by the institution in this case we did the other present in the market the other competitors. But it is not the first purchase, it's the moment of the repurchase when I have experienced the prejudice of considering this product as the best one on the market, and if this element that will keep on being the same I will behave in a loyalty way and I will turn my relation from behavior loyalty to mental loyalty. We are at the end now and we need to move forward from mental loyalty to loyalty. It means that the consumer is comparing not only the benefits and sacrifices, but he or she compares them with the regular costs that were generated and rewarded for the company. they did the cashflow in a way that the customer always provided to the company itself in the last period. So, the customer starts wondering I gave so much money in this relationship and put so much effort. What is the company giving back to me? is the relationship equal? Equity is the key point of considering the relation of loyalty. This analysis that is called Dyadic value is the relationship between the consumer and company. In the last step, the consumer is considering the benefits and sacrifices on his or her side with revenue and cost of the company. What the consumer had given to the company is in a way going to be given back to him or not. If yes, the relationship is equal. There is a move to an acknowledgement of the importance of each other. If not, the relationship cannot be considered as a loyal relation. Given this framework, cannot be considered as a loyal relation. Given this framework, now we can consider the state of the relationship of the customer so the customer in the very moment of time can be considered belonging to four different segments. Considering the monadic value and the dyadic value analyses. If a consumer has a high monadic value result and a dyadic value result, we arrive to the ideal relationship of loyalty, the purest, the best relationship that a company can have with a customer. On the opposite side, low monadic value, it means that the company is still not the best on the market but there are others that are competing and low dyadic value that means that the company is not acknowledging it's not giving something back to the customer after his or her effort, in this case with low monadic and dyadic value we have situations that are forced meaning that the consumer is a step behind abandoning the relationship. He or she's not looking to establish any kind of relation with the company itself. The final steps are in-between, so a high monadic but a low dyadic value, the company is still the best one on the market but it's not acknowledging the relationship with the customer. The customer doesn't feel rewarded, nurtured that the company is still performing very well but, at the same time, the consumer is in a way risking the moral result. That means that the customer in a risky situation because whenever he or she understands that there is another company in the future that is performing better, providing better service, So the monadic venue is not so high their relation is going to quit because of the already low dyadic value. The final one is when we have a high dyadic but a low monadic value, it means that we have a hopeful relationship. We have not the best on the market but at the same time we nurture, that we relate so well with the customer that at the end we can hope to increase and reinforce the relationship in order to put the position of the customer from the position of hopeful relationship to loyal relationship which is all in all the end and final goal the only knowledge the end than the final goal of analyzing and studying the state of the relationships of all the customers in a precise moment.