Brand Extension or Brand Pretension

Brand Extension or Brand Pretension Uncovering the difference

By Kirsty Fuller, Director, Flamingo James Parsons, Director, Flamingo

This paper explores the limitations and value of qualitative research in a brand extension programme. It calls for the qualitative research industry to move away from the role of ‘consumer mouthpiece’ and to engage fully in the strategic thinking underpinning the extension initiative. The paper goes on to present a model for exploring brand extension opportunities, in which strategic thinking and consumer understanding are combined. The application of the model is illustrated throughout with examples drawn from Levi’s, Sony, PlayStation and Lynx.

Brand Extension or Brand Pretension

Fuller and Parsons

2

INTRODUCTION THE MOTIVATION FOR WRITING THE PAPER

THE INCREASING SALIENCE OF BRAND EXTENSION STRATEGIES

Understanding brand elasticity and therefore brand extension opportunities has become a hot topic over recent years as the cost of creating and sustaining brands has increased and companies have been looking more and more to their existing brand portfolio to generate incremental volume. Moreover in a field such as technology the parameters of the sector are changing at such a rate that a degree of brand elasticity is not a luxury but a necessity for survival. Understanding brand elasticity and brand extension is therefore going to be an important aspect of brand management for years to come; reason enough to give the subject some serious thought.

Over the past decade there are probably more brand extension failures than successes. In many instances short term gain took precedence over long term brand health. Next year’s volume targets became the priority and, with no brand guardian, the brand’s equity was eroded and its future compromised. There have been some notable exceptions such as Unilever’s toiletry brand ‘Dove’ whose extension from soap into categories such as deodorant has been managed with discipline and with vision. But Dove is in the minority. Jon Morley, formerly of Unilever, sums up the situation as follows:

“There are more examples of it (brand extensions) being done badly than well for three reasons: (1) Rarely are brand extension offerings genuinely competitive within the category (2)Rarely are the resources there to properly support the new product and (3) Rarely is the impact on brand equity given serious thought.”

Surely then there is a real opportunity for the qualitative research world to carve out an important role for itself in the business of brand extension. There undoubtedly is but not without a serious reassessment of how the qualitative researcher’s skills are harnessed and applied. A competitor is already staking claim to the territory.

COMPETITION FROM THE WORLD OF CONSULTANCY Brand extension research is an area in which the research world is facing stiff competition from management and strategic consultancies. These consultancies are, we would argue, often weak in understanding consumers and the dynamics of brand relationships but strong in marketing theory and brand strategy. Experts in qualitative research are strong in consumer understanding but have often displayed a weakness in coherent strategic thinking. This thinking has not been asked or expected of the qualitative researcher. At the same time little has been done to buck the trend. Instead there has been a rather passive acceptance of the lowly status of ‘consumer mouthpiece’, culminating in simplistic research design and naïve recommendations.


Fuller and Parsons

3

Whilst the industry has resigned itself to a drop in status it has simultaneously promoted the mainstream consumer to the position of marketing guru. The result has been extension research in which the consumer is asked directly whether a brand should or should not enter a particular category, should or should not extend its range, should or should not abandon its original product roots; or worse still asking the consumer where the opportunities for a brand lie. If we as an industry continue down this route we can wave goodbye to the brand extension briefs. The management consultants will snap them up with relish.

RISING TO THE COMPETITIVE CHALLENGE At Flamingo we have found ourselves increasingly involved in extension projects across a wide range of brands. This involvement has led us to consider how best to harness consumer understanding within a strategic framework whilst encouraging

creativity and innovation. It has led us to identify the dual role we must fulfil of new category explorer and brand guardian. It has led us to think about the importance of brand vision as well as the nitty gritty of a category ‘opportunity’.

This paper presents a conceptual model for exploring brand extension opportunities bringing together strategic thinking and consumer understanding. It calls for qualitative researchers to use their skills in strategic thinking throughout the process rather than being merely the ‘consumer mouthpiece’. Thus a key theme in this paper is not just brand extension but also an extension of the very involvement and contribution of the qualitative researcher. The industry must change the compartmentalised thinking of clients who introduce the qualitative researcher at clearly defined stages in the brand development process and confine the thinking and learning to that stage only. We must demonstrate our credentials at all stages of the process. We must be ‘thinkers’ rather than just interviewers or moderators.

The first part of the paper is devoted to exploring the value and the limitations of consumer research in a brand extension programme. This is the backdrop to the strategic framework or ‘Brand Extension Model’ described in the section which follows. The second part of the paper is an explanation of the model itself and the theory behind it. Where appropriate the application of the model is illustrated with brand examples.

PART 1 THE VALUE AND LIMITATIONS OF THE CONSUMER RESPONSE

This section begins with the ‘limitations’ of consumer research. This helps place the ‘value’ in the appropriate context.


Fuller and Parsons

4

THE LIMITATIONS OF CONSUMER RESEARCH Mention was made above of the qualitative research industry’s tendency to deliver

simplistic research design and naïve recommendations. There is one main reason for this. In many studies the approach is built around the concept of consumer permission; and the way in which that permission is sought is via direct questioning. In this paper we argue strongly against this way of thinking. There are a number of reasons for this.

A focus on functional credentials Consumers tend to look at a brand’s expertise along practical lines rather than

considering its personality values and the emotional territory which it occupies. Put very simply there is a tendency to think in terms of ‘what a brand is good at making’ and granting or refusing permission accordingly. As will be illustrated in Part 2, it is increasingly rare that relevant product expertise is enough to sustain a successful extension. In the majority of brand extension projects it is the emotional values which will determine the success or failure of the initiative. Making those emotional values relevant and powerful in a different category requires some serious thought on the part of the brand team. It is not consumers who should be asked to do that work on their behalf. Why should they bother? Consequently if the extension is not an obviously logical one it is more likely to be criticised than endorsed in conventional consumer research.

The search for a precedent A second drawback of the ‘consumer permission’ approach is the inherently

conservative nature of the majority of consumers. Each brand extension idea is considered within the framework of what has gone before. In other words there is a search for a precedent. Expectations and rules about what is and what is not possible are already in place.

So, for example, fashion and clothing brands are expected to launch a fragrance

because so many brands before them have done so, from high end designers (Calvin Klein) to high street retailers (GAP). If ‘permission’ is simply about consumers telling you what other brands have already done then there is certainly a cheaper and quicker way to obtain to arrive at the same information.

The ‘anything goes’ response The ‘anything goes’ response is an extremely frustrating feature of extension research.

It can occur for two quite different reasons. The first of these is down to the weakness of the current consumer/brand relationship. If consumers do not have a strong relationship with a brand, there is a tendency to be blasé about its future direction. It is then difficult to obtain a meaningful response to a brand extension idea. “Yeah I suppose they could do that” is not the basis for sound strategic decision making.

Alternatively the reason for an ‘anything goes’ response can be down to the values of

the brand in question. A brand whose whole ethos is built around change and challenge to the accepted order will tend to obtain consumer ‘permission’ to do almost anything.


Fuller and Parsons

5

In this instance the real issue is to do with longer term brand vision rather than isolated brand extension initiatives. Thus consumer permission should be treated with caution.

Ignoring the category dynamics

This is perhaps the most serious issue ignored in a permission-led approach. A brand might well be allowed to enter a new arena but the crucial issue is whether it has anything to offer when it gets there. This means understanding fully the dynamics of the destination category and the players within it (here consumer research has a vital role to play) and then situating the extension offering in that context (this can often be more about analysis than consumer questioning.) Acknowledging the limitations of consumer research is not in any way to deny its valuable role in the extension process. It is about recognising where that role lies. THE VALUE OF CONSUMER RESEARCH There are three main areas in which consumer (although not exclusively consumer) research has a major role to play. The areas are:

1. Brand understanding 2. Destination category understanding 3. Refinement of extension offerings

Brand understanding An important start point for any brand extension project is a detailed understanding of the brand in question. This is fundamentally about consumer associations and relationships with the brand, together with the nature of their expectations for the future. Here qualitative research is in its element. Destination category understanding Exploring the dynamics of the category into which a brand is extending is crucial. This means identifying the functional and emotional pre-requisites of the category and the extent to which these are owned and defined by the key players. Consumer research may well sit alongside or follow a stage of semiotic analysis. Refinement of brand extension offerings At the point when a brand extension proposal can be presented in a relatively finished state and the positioning is well developed, consumers can aid in refinement of the execution. It is important to note that here the extension is being presented not as ‘theoretical’ but ‘real’. In other words this is about exploring the appeal of a fairly finished product offering rather than posing a question along the lines of ‘what if Brand X were to make a shampoo?’. Thus consumers are responding to the appeal of an offering within the appropriate destination category.


Fuller and Parsons

6

RESEARCH DESIGN AND TECHNIQUES A range of sample designs and approaches might be used at the stages outlined above and it is not the subject of this paper to review them in detail. Suffice to say that we would almost certainly propose a strong ‘leading edge’ bias (see our previous paper ‘Choose Change’ on this subject) and would also be involving expert interviews, client brainstormings and client consumer workshops. SUMMARY OF PART 1 In summary then, brand extension is not a problem which can simply be handed over to consumers. Brand extension programmes are about fitting together different pieces of a jig-saw to arrive at a strategic overview within which the brand extension(s) is situated. It is wrong to expect consumers to fit these pieces together for us. It is naïve to expect consumers to have a vision of the brand’s future. It is misguided to expect consumers to drive the direction of brands. Consumers should drive our understanding but not our strategy. This principle underpins the Brand Extension Model we have developed. PART 2 THE BRAND EXTENSION MODEL In order to be fully involved in the brand extension process we must be in at the start. This poses a major challenge for it is at the start that the competition from brand and management consultancies is toughest. Everyone wants to be in there. As Paul Gander wrote in an article in Marketing Week in December 2000: “Those involved in the first stage of this process are likely to have the strongest chance of maintaining influence throughout – and will try to claim at least some of the glory for the end result. So there is understandably intense competition to colonise this ground at the very start of brand development: the mapping of consumer attitudes and behaviour” We would agree with this point of view although in the specific circumstances of brand extension the ground at the very start of the process is not the mapping of consumer attitudes and behaviour. Indeed the focus is not on the consumer. FORMULATING THE BRAND VISION AND THE BRAND EXTENSION STRATEGY The focus at the start of a brand extension project is on the client and the clarity of his thinking. There are three questions which require careful consideration from the outset: 1. What is the motivation for the brand extension initiative? 2. What is the overall brand vision within which the brand extension sits? 3. What strategy or strategies are being considered to bring the extension to

fruition?


Fuller and Parsons

7

At the start of a brand extension initiative it may be that the answers to questions 2 and 3 are as yet unknown. In other words that thinking is still to be done; those decisions are still to be made. If this is the case then full account of this fact should be taken. Launching into a consumer investigation of brand extension opportunities without having established the brand vision and extension strategy is unlikely to be genuinely useful. Indeed the feedback could be seriously misleading. What should be clear, however, is the motivation for extending.

THE MOTIVATION FOR THE BRAND EXTENSION Client motivations can be broadly divided into two categories:

• Growth motivation • Survival motivation

Growth motivation The growth motivation can take two forms, one potentially more risky than the other. The first motivation can be attributed to a businessman’s brain. For example a category has been identified which is enjoying dramatic growth (or is extremely profitable or is just plain big) and the manager of ‘Brand X ‘ wants a slice of the action. In this instance little thought has as yet has been given to issues such as brand credibility and fit with category or more importantly the potential impact on brand equity. An alternative way in which a growth motivation can manifest itself is through the filter of the marketer’s brain. A manager of ‘Brand X’ can see how his brand could compete successfully in another category. This is a much more comforting state of affairs. The initiative is brand led rather than volume led and there is a sense of working with the brand’s equity rather than relying solely on current size and level of awareness. Survival motivation When the motivation for brand extension is survival the challenge takes a quite different shape. The focus is not protecting the current business but shifting focus into a new category or arena. This survival motivation might arise when the brand’s business is concentrated in a declining and increasingly peripheral category. In the past we have worked on the brand TDK. A leader in the cassette tape market, a format largely superceded, it was imperative that it successfully established its heartland elsewhere. This also required a redefining of its brand personality and values to ensure that it was resonating with the new generation of music lovers. Alternatively the need to extend in order to survive may be because the home category is simply too niche and, in order to achieve critical mass, the brand must extend into new fields.


Fuller and Parsons

8

No doubt there are many other permutations. It is certainly the case that in the field of technology boundaries between categories are blurring. Thus arguably a game console brand like PlayStation can no longer restrict its attention to other console brands but must compete against other gateways into a virtual world. In such a fast changing environment you can’t count on your product heartland remaining the same for a prolonged period of time. Extending your brand remit is an on-going part of managing the brand.

UNDERSTANDING EXTENSION MOTIVATIONS: WHAT DOES IT BRING? So what real benefit does this understanding of motivation bring? It is, we believe, crucial in understanding which extension strategy or strategies should be taken forward into research as well as understanding the extent to which there is a pre-existing vision of the total brand world within which the extension will sit. In other words it directly influences the answers to the second and third questions defined above. The motivation will influence the priority given to different aspects of the strategy going forward. For example, for a brand like Levi’s, with enormous strength and equity in one category, safeguarding its status in denim is of paramount importance. If, on the other hand you are TDK, the focus is on where you are going more than where you have come from.

BRAND VISION AND EXTENSION STRATEGIES Brand extension ideas should never be explored, certainly in consumer or even expert research, without a thorough understanding of the direction in which the brand as a whole is heading and of how the extension is intended to interact and contribute to the brand core. Without this vision and context, the brand management team is shirking its responsibility. It is asking the consumer to tell them what the brand should stand for. It is asking the consumer to be visionary. It is, as indicated earlier, asking the consumer to give the brand permission to move forward whereas what should be happening is that we proactively help clients to develop their vision and their extension strategies. In order to develop this brand vision there is a need to understand fully the brand in question and in particular the nature and extent of its elasticity. Armed with this understanding the brand team will be well placed to move forward to the brand extension exploration itself. As David Howard put it in an article for Admap in March 1997: “It is only by gaining a better understanding of the brand’s potential to stretch that those of us responsible for brand development and management will be able to distinguish genuine opportunity from genuine opportunism”

Brand extension or brand pretension? Brand elasticity is the key.

BRAND ELASTICITY Brand elasticity describes the extent to which a brand is able to operate credibly in new categories or is able to accommodate new product offerings whilst retaining a coherent brand identity. We have identified three salient themes pertinent to this issue, themes


Fuller and Parsons

9

which should be investigated fully in order to come to a view on the nature and extent of a brand’s elasticity. The three themes are:

• Brand history • Product world • Brand world

Brand history A contributory factor to elasticity is a brand’s historical development. Of particular importance is the length of time that a brand has been associated with one product or category prior to diversification. The term ‘associated with’ is highly significant here. This is not just about the reality of a brand’s portfolio, it is about perception of the brand’s portfolio, likely to be heavily influenced by the nature of a brand’s communication strategy over the years. The focus of a brand’s communication and product offering informs consumer understanding of the ‘philosophy’ and expertise of the brand. It influences the extent to which a brand’s credibility is affected by visible extension initiatives. An excellent example of a brand where history has played an important role in limiting elasticity is Levi’s, a brand we have been involved with on both sides of the Atlantic for many years. In Europe, until the launch of Levi’s Engineered Jeans (LEJ) last year, Levi’s have focused the majority of their communication efforts on extolling the virtues of the 501, the definitive and original jean. The reality is, of course, that an extensive range of jeans styles and cuts were available. However the 501 advertising was the brand voice. Levi’s cared about one product. It held originality and history close to its heart. It behaved like a mono product brand. The result of this single-mindedness was of course an incredibly successful iconic brand. But iconic brands with iconic products do not lend themselves readily to future brand extension. Andy Farr and Graham Page, in a recent paper based on a large scale quantitative study entitled ‘Do you have an elastic brand?’, cite Coca Cola as one of the most inelastic brands they investigated – another example of the effect of a mono-product history.

Interestingly this learning confounds the view that a brand’s strength in one category is permission enough to extend. Again Farr and Page: “Brand strength does have a role to play in setting expectations about new offerings. However, it is clear that brands which dominate, or which are closely associated with their home category will find it more difficult to stretch to new territory.” Returning to our Levi’s example and crossing the Atlantic we can illustrate further how brand history impacts on elasticity. For although we would by no means describe the brand in the States as elastic, we would suggest that it is more elastic than in Europe. Its communication history and to some extent the reality of its portfolio (although we

Brand Extension or Brand

Fuller and Parso

10

Functional values PRODUCT/CATEGORY SPECIFIC VALUES

Product detail/style

would argue that here it is the communication which is the crucial factor) have embraced a broader product base. The focus has been less on one product over a prolonged period of time. For example there has been advertising for Silver Tab (baggier, more specifically youth oriented styles) and a campaign directed at women with a ‘Levi’s for Women’ range. The result is a brand less wedded to one product and which, at least within denim, has credentials in a level of diversity. Incidentally Japan lies somewhere between Europe and the States on the elasticity scale. There, consumers have perceived a focus on heritage and an aesthetic of the past – limiting but less so than the one product focus of Europe. Just a parting note before we leave the Levi’s example. As ‘Levi’s Engineered Jeans’ grow in stature and importance the brand is gaining a certain level of elasticity. Engineered goes beyond one product to a range idea. Product World and Brand World But understanding a brand’s history is only one input into the brand elasticity equation. The other two we have named ‘Product World’ and ‘Brand World’ which together represent the brand equity. It is helpful to look at this visually. Figure 1. PRODUCT WORLD On the left hand side are the values derivedwhich the brand is associated. These tend tcan encompass such characteristics as style such as innovation.

Emotional values PERSONALITY

Pretension ns

BRAND WORLD

directly from the product or products with o be more functional in nature although they and design and can feed higher order values

Status


Fuller and Parsons

11

On the right hand side are the values which together shape the brand personality and therefore emotional territory or world which the brand occupies. Of course looking at a brand in this way is nothing new. It is how we take this perspective forward in brand extension work which is where the interest lies. There has been much debate in the marketing press over whether a brand personality-led route is the only reliable brand extension route to be followed. In an article in ‘Brand Strategy’ in August last year a strategy consultant, David James, was quoted as saying: “The key issues in stretching a brand is looking at its core personality and seeing where it is appropriate to go.” And Giles Lury, also a brand consultant, wrote in another ‘Brand Strategy’ article: “Perhaps the most discussed approach is core personality led. Indeed last month’s piece in brand strategy seemed to suggest it was the only proper way to brand extend. I fundamentally disagree, there are many different routes along which you can extend a brand.” Lury then goes on in his article to quote Mars move into ice-creams and Hula Hoops move into frozen potato products as examples of a more functionally-based approach. Our feeling would tend more towards that of David James but with a qualification. In many instances it is from a brand’s functional or product values that it gains permission to enter a new category. In other words it is a first fundamental hurdle to overcome. However it is the minority of instances that the product world provides differentiation within a new category; and in mature, crowded markets a ‘permission to enter’ is simply not sufficient. Thus a strong and compelling brand world becomes a necessity for truly successful brand extension. Farr and Page again: “This seems similar to the process of screening a job applicant. Technical ability is a prerequisite (and weakness here would presumably mean that the candidate wouldn’t even get an interview), but personality, and the match between the company’s culture and individual’s values are also important in determining who is likely to be successful in a given role, and therefore who gets the job.” So prior to engaging in a brand extension exploration it is important to draw up the brand’s product and brand worlds and to consider the relative salience of the two components and the extent to which that balance fits with the category being considered as an opportunity. Brands vary enormously in the relative contribution to the brand whole of these constituent parts. Some examples are given below:

12

Figure 2. LEVI’S PRODUCT BRAND WORLD WORLD

Levi’s (1 year ago) hdenim and the 501 dextend.

Predictable Conservative Masculine

501 Tight fitting Unchanging Out of fashion Denim (jeans) Quality Well-made durable


Fuller and Parsons

ad a relatively weak brand world. Product values derived from ominated the product world. Levi’s was in a weak position to

Brand Extension or B

Fuller and P

13

Figure 3 LYNX PRODUCT WORLD Lynx in the UK has a very strong and sathree components : mass market fragranquality at an accessible price. Initial brafragrance heritage. The brand team usedwithin its core category of deodorant it iemphasis on fragrance. But trying to takfragrance-led categories has proved diffan ‘also ran’ in a category dominated by More recently the Lynx team has focusethe unique insight-driven relationship it entries into the shaving category (with rmale haircare category, are all about bria positioning has to date been an alien cquality products at parity with the majorby the power of the brand world.

Quality

Fragrance

Products for men

Male fantasy

rand Pretension arsons

BRAND WORLD

lient brand world. Its product values have ce heritage, expertise in products for men and nd extension initiatives focused on the to talk of Lynx as a fragrance brand. True,

s differentiated from the competition via its e those fragrance credentials into other

icult. In male fragrance, for example, Lynx is fragrance experts.

d on the emotional territory of seduction and has forged with young men. Thus, its recent azors and shaving preparations) and into the nging seduction into categories for which such oncept. Sure the entries are supported by high competitors, but the extensions will live or die

Seduction

Masculinity


Fuller and Parsons

14

Sets the standard

Figure 4 SONY

PRODUCT BRAND WORLD WORLD SONY is a fascinating example of a brand whose braby the products it produces. It is interesting that in rpersonify the brand. The personality traits, to the exfrom products. Stylishness, innovation, modernity, ybrand because its product track record has delivered side and the ability to deliver target relevant producthas credibility across the technology spectrum. SONproduct differentiation. Very few brands have this a

Understanding this product world and brand world bof each is a vital input into defining the brand visionstrategies for extension. If the product world dominawhich exist over and above the products themselves,its product heritage to leverage. A decision might thregenerating the brand world, prior to investing in diextremely strong product values (owning a value sucexcellence’) it is likely that an extension would needworld. A good example of a brand whose extension strategya powerful brand world prior to diversification, is Gicampaign not only supported its core business of razwhich a male toiletries range could be launched. If irazor heritage it would have struggled to attract cons

Innovation Heritage

In touch with youth

Stylishnesss

nd world is almost totally defined esearch consumers struggle to tent that they exist, are derived outhfulness are attributed to the them. And with innovation on its s (Walkman, Discman etc.) SONY Y is able to shape its values via

dvantage.

alance and the relative importance and in identifying potential tes and the brand world, values is weak, then the brand only has en be taken to invest first in versification. Unless a brand has h as innovation or, in food, ‘taste to be taking with it the brand

began with defining and creating llette. The ‘Best a man can get’ ors but defined a territory into t had relied purely on its functional umer interest.


Fuller and Parsons

15

It is not enough, however, to have a strong brand world. Brand world values vary in their potential to open doors for diversification regardless of how strong and motivating they are in the brand’s core category. For example values such as Authenticity, Originality, Single-mindedness can be extremely limiting whereas Innovation, Sexiness, Stylishness, Exclusivity clearly lend themselves to diversification. So this is where brand vision comes into play. If a brand doesn’t currently own values which facilitate diversification, it has to set about acquiring them. Rarely is it possible to do this via extensions (unless product values can offer something genuinely differentiating in a new category). More usually these values have to be acquired whilst the brand remains in its home category. BRAND ELASTICITY AND BRAND EXTENSION STRATEGY It is clear from the above that a structured and disciplined analysis process should take place in order to develop a brand extension strategy. On evaluating the brand’s elasticity, understanding the relative strength of product versus brand values, it should be possible to draw up the brand vision and the extension strategy which is coherent with and able to make a positive contribution to that vision. Clearly consumer understanding plays an important role in this process. With this approach, however, that understanding is clearly situated within a strategic framework. Below is a summary, in diagram form, of the first stage of the Brand Extension Model. Figure 5

STAGE 2 EXPLORING THE BRAND EXTENSION OPPORTUNITY A guiding principle for exploring brand extensions is to begin with the category into which the brand is entering and not the brand from which the offering is stretching. The reason for this is simple. An extension may be credible and logical for a brand, building

Motivation for Extension

Extension strategy/ies Evaluation of Brand Elasticity

Formulation of Brand Vision and Extension Strategy


Fuller and Parsons

16

on its current values, but unless it is genuinely differentiating in the new category the extension will fail. So for example in 1986 Timotei, the haircare brand, launched a skincare range embodying the values of naturalness, simplicity and frequent use. It was not a success not because those values were not relevant in the sector but because they were already offered by brands such as Simple, Nivea and Body Shop. A second danger is that the values embodied by the range extension offering are differentiating but simply not relevant. Dove, on entering the deodorant category, was at pains to establish efficacy credentials rather than leading on a gentle moisturising platform. Without efficacy the other values are irrelevant. So in our structured approach to brand extension research and planning we must next explore fully the dynamics of the category of entry, gaining a clear understanding of the product pre-requisites and consumer needs; the brand map and the territories occupied; the levels of marketing activity and quality of communication support. This understanding of the status quo may well involve a variety of disciplines such as semiotic analysis, quantitative evaluation of media budgets set against volume sales and levels of profitability, expert workshops and of course consumer research. The objective of all this analysis is to ensure that the extension is evaluated in the right environment against meaningful benchmarks. For the questions at this point are: How competitive and differentiated is the brand extension proposed? How will it compete in the marketplace? What is it about this offering that will make people want to buy it? These are obvious questions but impossible to answer if the offering has only ever been looked at through the lens of the parent brand and out of the context of the harsh reality of the destination category. So what is called for here is a process of analysis and thinking which brings together category understanding, consumer understanding and an interrogation of the brand extension offering itself. Note what we are avoiding is a directionless questioning of the consumer along the lines of ‘what if Brand X were to enter this category, what would you think…’ Instead we would be exploring a defined product offering or offerings (depending on whether the previous stage 1 of the process had identified only one or a number of alternative extension strategies). Moreover at this stage we would not be asking consumers to reflect on the implications for the parent brand but rather to focus on the product’s desirability in its own right within the new category. At the end of this analytical process we would be seeking to answer a simple question: is this a viable offering in the category? As Lury said in his article: “It is a cliché, but asking yourself whether you are offering something better, different or cheaper is still a great way of avoiding expensive failures”

Brand ExtenFu

17

Figure 6.

STAGE 4 THE BRAND EQUITY BALANAssuming that the answer to the aanalysis process should continue tthe current brand equity. Consumpoint but ultimately the picture is intuition rather than consumer ans The inputs may be many and varie‘Brand Equity Profit and Loss’. Tthe information is rather more comBrand Core the extension draws odilution or weakening of the brandwhat the extension will potentiallyat a view of the resulting Brand Eqwould it be our recommendation tsort term volume is not a wise pat

THE BRAND EXTENSION MOWe have now worked through theentirety below.

Destination Category Evaluation

JUDGEMENT ON SUSTAINABILITY

Evaluation of strength of proposal

sion or Brand Pretension ller and Parsons

CE bove question is affirmative then the thinking and o the final stage re-introducing the brand vision and er research clearly does have a role to play at this once again completed by analysis, judgement and wers to a series of direct questions.

d but the aim is to draw up what we have termed the he concept is very simple indeed although arriving at plex. We seek to understand what values from the

n and whether that is likely to result in any sense of equity (Loss). We also come to an understanding of invest in the Brand Core (Profit). Finally we arrive uity Balance. Only if there is a positive balance

o proceed. Weakening brand equity for the sake of h to tread.

DEL IN SUMMARY entire Brand Extension Model illustrated in its

Brand Equity Balance STOP

If Positive If Negative

Brand ExtensiFulle

18

Figure 8.

Motivation for Extension

Extension strategy/ies Evaluation of Brand Elasticity

Formulation of Brand Vision and Extension Strategy

Destination Category Evaluation

JUDGEMENT ON SUSTAINABILITY

Brand EqProfit and

Brand Core Profit

Evaluation of Strength of Proposal

uity Balance Loss

STOP

If Positive

Brand Core Loss

If Negative

BRAND EQUITY BALANCE

on or Brand Pretension r and Parsons


Fuller and Parsons

19

IN CONCLUSION In presenting a model for exploring brand extension initiatives and emphasising the importance of strategic thinking and brand vision, the intention has not been to deny the importance of consumer qualitative research in the development process. Indeed without indepth consumer research it is impossible to come to an informed view about a brand’s elasticity. Similarly how can one gain a real understanding of category dynamics and the positioning of key competitors without consulting the consumer perspective? Indeed our intention has not been to undermine the qualitative researcher’s role. Rather it has been to enhance it by insisting that analysis and recommendations resulting from these studies do not take place in a strategic vacuum, thereby increasing their value and credibility. The truth is that qualitative researchers must demonstrate their strategic thinking if they want to become partners in the brand extension process. The piecemeal manner in which the qualitative contribution is currently ‘bought in’ makes it difficult for the industry to do justice to the quality of its thinking. Moreover in an age in which brand managers rarely work on the same brand for more than two or three years, qualitative researchers, who have worked consistently on the brand for a prolonged period of time, are most able to fulfil the role of brand guardian. They understand how an extension is likely to impact on brand equity and are well placed to insist that the brand equity equation is not overlooked in the rush to increase volume. Qualitative researchers should not be afraid to impress on clients this area of expertise born of consumer understanding. If the industry can just have the confidence to sell its thinking (informed by consumer understanding) rather than its doing (groups, depths etc.) it is well placed to play a central role in the brand extension projects of the future.

References Edwards, Paul. “The age of the trust brand” (Market Leader, 1998) Feldwick, Paul. “Do we really need Brand Equity?” (ESOMAR, 1996) Fuller, Kirsty & Collier, Maggie. “Choose change: forward-looking research at its best”

(ESOMAR, 1998) Gander, Paul. “Decision Maze” (Marketing Week, December 2000) Hall, Mike. “The nature of brands in the New Era” (Admap, April

2000) Howard, David. “Stretching a Point” (Admap, March 1997)


Fuller and Parsons

20

Lury, Giles. “Extension leads: are brands elastic?” (Brand Strategy, March 2000)

Page, Graham & Farr, Andy. “Do you have an Elastic Brand” (ARF Week of

Workshops, New York, November 2000) St-John, Catherine. “Putting brands on the rack” (Brand Strategy, August

2000) Acknowledgements Thanks to Maggie Collier of Flamingo for her contribution to the thinking contained in this paper.


Fuller and Parsons

21

Brand Extensions or Brand Pretensions Uncovering the difference

James Parsons - Director, Flamingo

Kirsty Fuller – Director, Flamingo

Introduction At Flamingo we have found ourselves increasingly involved in brand extension related issues

and have become sensitised to how the changing dynamics of brands and the branded

marketplace have implications for research. Brand extension or brand stretch is a field where

the research world is facing stiff competition from management and strategic consultancies, all

too keen to lay claim to this business. These consultancies are often weak in understanding

consumers and the dynamics of brand relationships but strong in marketing theory and brand

strategy. In qualitative research we are strong in consumer understanding but in the past have

been guilty of an absence of coherent strategic thinking leading to simplistic research design

and ‘solutions’ based solely on consumer feedback i.e. consumer as jury.

The heart of the matter This paper will set out to explore the complex issues surrounding the extension of brands into

new categories. In the past evaluation of brand extension opportunities has focused on

functionality and proximity ( David Howard, Admap March 1997). With the move from a

brand paradigm of product differentiation to one of emotional differentiation (BBH) we need to

think about brand stretch in a different way. The paper will consider the role of qualitative

consumer research; its value, its limitations and the importance of strategic thinking and

analysis. We will outline an approach to brand extension research in which the issue of long

term brand health takes pride of place and where there is recognition of what is within and

what is outside the consumer remit.


Fuller and Parsons

22

There are 3 main components to our approach:

• The category of interest

Dynamics

‘Brandedness’

Salient imagery

• Brand’s positioning and contribution within the category

Premiumness

Point of difference

Relevance/compellingness of emotional/personality values

• Impact on mother brand

Extent to which positively contributes/enhances

We will emphasise the need to evaluate brand extension opportunities within the context of a

brand vision rather than in the context of the here and now - one of the key reasons why

consumer input must feed into the analysis rather than dictate the outcome. We must be the

visionaries not the consumer. If we become slaves to ‘what consumers said’ then we can wave

goodbye to the major brand extension briefs. The management consultants will snap them up

with relish.

The paper will be based on work we have conducted for a number of clients across the globe

and will allow us to illustrate how brand stretch can vary by geography.

Levi’s (Global) Global Licensing Research

Lynx Brand extension into shaving

Magnum (Europe) Extension into snack products


Fuller and Parsons

23

Cross pens (globally)

New product opportunities

PlayStation (Europe) From hardware to software

We would also interview a number of high profile clients and planners on both sides of the

Atlantic and integrate their thoughts and ideas with relevant published material.

References to date Howard, David Stretching a point Admap march 1997

Feldwick, Paul Do we really need brand equity ESOMAR 1996

Edwards, Paul The age of the trust brand Market Leader 1998

Hall, Mike The nature of brands in the new era Admap , April 2000

Authors James Parsons and Kirsty Fuller are both directors of Flamingo, an international qualitative

research specialist.

Kirsty has worked on the Levi’s brand in Europe and across the globe for the past 10 years.

She presented a paper at the 1998 Esomar congress ‘Choose change:forward-looking research

at its best’ and has spoken at a number of ESOMAR and AQR seminars.


Fuller and Parsons

24

James Parsons presented a paper at a recent ESOMAR seminar, ‘ Me nuh ‘ave nuh time fe nuh bag a chat (I have no time for any nonsense)’ which was nominated for the Goodyear award. He is a global research specialist working across Europe, Latin America, Asia and Africa. His brands include Magnum, Red Stripe beer and Cross Pens.

Brand Extension or Brand Pretension

Documents

Transcript of Brand Extension or Brand Pretension