Branding and Some Key Concepts

Prepared by Ezgi MerdinAD 644

Recognizing the plethora of definitions of the “brand”, authors conclude that there has not been a fully developed construct of the brand and its boundaries. Therefore, a theory of brand is also missing.

Mid 1990s is full of the debate on the “death of the brand”.

First, they content analyzed over 100 articles, dominantly from 1980s and 1990s and arrived at 12 main themes to cover accurately the definitions of the brand.

Second, they set out the boundaries of the brand construct as highlighting firm staff and consumers.

Third, they undertook 20 focused interviews with brand consultants, called “experience survey”, using a judgement sample of people to gather ideas and insights into the phenomenon of

defining brand.

2AD644 - Branding - Ezgi Merdin

Introduction to Branding

They undertook 20 focused interviews with brand consultants.

Proposition1: Due to the complex multifaceted nature of brands, practitioners draw on several themes to describe them, in particular brands as value systems.



20 focused interviews with brand consultants.

Proposition 2: The 1960 AMA's definition of brands is too restrictive, having insufficient regard for both intangible components and consumers‘ perceptions, which are essential aspects of the concept of the brand.

"A name, term, sign, symbol, or design, or a combination of them, intended to identify the goods or services of one seller or group of sellers and to differentiate them from those of competitors."

Proposition 3: A brand represents the matching of functional and emotional values devised by a firm with the performance and psychosocial benefits sought by consumers.

Proposition 4: The closer the match between the values of the brand and consumers' rational and emotional needs, the more successful the brand.



ENVIRONMENTAL PRESSURES ON BRAND MANAGEMENT

Globalization of Competition

- strategic alliances (vertical)

- collaborating with competitors (horizontal)

- product design for global acceptance

Technological Change

- product innovation

- blurred boundaries between product markets

- time-based competition (market entry timing)

Increased Distributor Power and Channel Evolution

- relationship management

- market research, discount etc.

Investor Expectations and Brand Equity

- justify marketing investments opposed to short-term cash expectations

Changing Consumer Markets

- learning and adoption of customers and competitors

- usefulness of brands in terms of awareness, quality perception, satisfaction and symbolic value

- the value imperative

- shifting sociodemographics (differences in tastes, cultural and economic diversity)7AD644 - Branding - Ezgi Merdin



Keller & Lehmann 2006, Marketing Science

Brands are built on - the product itself,- the accompanying marketing activity, - and the use (or nonuse) by customers as well as others.

kjk



Customer-based brand equity is defined as “the differential effect that brand knowledge has on consumer response to marketing activity (price, promotion, advertising etc) for that brand.” If it is positive, consumers react more favorably to marketing mix activity for the brand, compared to when the same marketing activity is attributed to an unnamed version.

It is an important area of study due to 2 reasons:

Financial motivation to value the brand for accounting purposes, for ex. in times of mergers & acquisitions.

Strategical motivation to improve marketing efforts’ productivity, show efficiency of marketing expenses.

Manipulating brand equity results in - the ability to command larger margins from consumers,- elicits increased consumer information search, - improves marketing communication effectiveness, - licensing opportunities - consumers' responsiveness to brand extensions.


BRAND KNOWLEDGE

Brand Awareness:

Strength of the brand node or trace in the memory. How well does brand identity serves its function?

Brand recall is the cosumer’s ability to retrieve the brand given product category or need.

Brand Image:

Types of brand assocations

- Attributes (descriptive features). They can be product- related or non-product related (price, packaging, user imagery, usage imagery)

- Benefits (personal value attached). They can be functional, experiential or symbolic.

- Brand Attitudes (consumer’s overall evaluation)


BRAND KNOWLEDGE

Brand Image:

Favorability of brand assocations (like speed or efficiency)

Strength of brand associations (encoding, storage, quantity and quality of information stored)

Uniqueness of brand associations (essence of brand positioning)

Interaction among brand characteristics of brand associations (due to level of abstraction and qualitative nature)

Congruence of brand associations (sharing content and meaning with other brand associations)



BUILDING BRAND EQUITY:

1.Choosing brand identity (brand name)

2.Developing supporting marketing programs (awareness and familiarity)

3.Leveraging secondary association (direct experience, information, WOM etc...)


1. Indirect Approach (requires measuring brand knowledge, brand awareness and relationships etc.)

2. Direct Approach (by consumer response, for ex blind test...)


1. Adopt a broad view of marketing decisions (marketing affect sales).

2. Define the knowledge structures to be created in consumers’ minds.

3. Evaluate a number of tactical options and communication alternatives.

4. Take a long-term view of marketing decisions.

5. Track consumer knowledge structures over time.

6. Evaluate extension potential and candidates.

The authors report the results of a multistep study to develop and validate a multidimensional consumer-based brand equity scale (MBE) drawn from Aaker's and Keller's conceptualizations of brand equity. A total of 1530 American, Korean American, and Korean participants evaluated 12 brands from three product categories (athletic shoes, film for cameras, and color television sets).

Consumer-based means measurement of cognitive and behavioral brand equity at the individual consumer level through a consumer survey. In contrast, for firm-based measures, researchers collect financial market, accounting.

Brand equity consists of four dimensions:•brand loyalty (the attachment that a customer has to a brand, Aaker 1991)•brand awareness (the ability for a buyer to recognize or recall that a brand is a member of a certain product category, Aaker 1991)•perceived quality of brand (the consumer's judgment about a product's overall excellence or superiority, Zeithaml 1988)•brand associations (anything linked in memory to a brand, Aaker 1991)


Empirical scale generation study.

12 brands: six athletic shoes (Adidas, Asics,LA Gear, Nike, Puma, and Reebok), four films (Agfa, Fuji, Kodak, and Konica), and two color television sets (Samsung and Sony).

Sample of 460 undergraduate university students for pretest, 1530 students for actual.


It is an empirical study, looking at consumer attitudes towards brand extensions that have been done.

First phase is qualitative, analyzing reactions to 20 brand extension concepts belonging to 6 well known brands.

H1: Higher quality perceptions toward original brand – more favorable extension attitude (no direct link found)

H2: Transfer of a brand’s peceieved quality is enhanced when two product classes fit.

H3: Fit btw two product classes is positively associated with extension attitude

(only sig. For TRANSFER, similarity of manufacturing)

H4: When extension is perceived difficult, extension attitude is positive. (supported)

In the second phase, exact procedure repeated with a different sample and using 4 lowest rated extensions, with or without a quality cue (2X2).

Finding= cueing about negative or uncertain aspects is more beneficial than positive cues. It inhibits transfer of negative evaluations.



•Compared to Rao & Ruckert’s brand alliances article, they answer how consumers react to brand alliances.•They borrow Rao & Ruckert’s “brand alliances” concept, instead of many other terms like

co-branding, co-marketing, cross-promotion, joint branding, joint promotion, symbiotic marketing...•When combined with other brand names, they are synergistic, greater than its parts.

• When an individual brand is unable to signal quality by itself (Nutrasweet)

• Or when the presence of attributes make the jointly branded product more attractive (candy cookie dough)

brands go to alliances.


Empirically, they surveyed a sample of 350 of staff members and students, presenting alliance scenarios btw automobile and chip industries.

Defines brand loyalty simply as “biased choice behavior with respect to branded merchandise”.

Conducted an experiment of 12 successive consumer choices of bread from among 4 previously unknown brands, packaged and labeled identically.

n=42 women.

It is observed that something happens after the 4th choice:


Women vary greatly in terms of their susceptibility to brand loyalty:


3 Primary Philosophical Tensions of Brand Loyalty:

1.The stochastic versus purposive nature of repeat purchase processes. Those interested in modeling aggregate repeat purchase patterns formed one camp (cf. Ehrenberg, 1988), while a second group sought theoretical explanations of loyalty as a biased expression of individual preference (cf. Jacoby and Chestnut, 1978).

2.In operationalizing the brand loyalty concept, behaviorist definitions valued for their measurement objectivity were built on proportions or sequences of purchase assumed to reveal underlying brand preference (e.g., Cunningham, 1966; Kahn et al., 1986). As these measures were criticized for their lack of explanatory power, a group recommending attitudinal or hybrid attitudinal/ behavioral construct definitions emerged (Day, 1969).

3.In terms of research orientations, psychological and anthropological/ sociological camps formed, with the latter interested in the meanings and hedonic/emotive aspects of brand loyalty, and the former concerned with the cognitive processes supporting the development of brand attitude strength.


Empirical study. Depth interviewing.

n= 8 coffee cosuming adults

3 part structured interview:

1. coffee category images, image amplification etc...

2. category usage (attitude & behavior)

3. informants’ brand relationship

RESULTS:

Theme 1: The diverse nature of brand loyal relationships

Wendy, the case of marital commitment

Pamela, the case of falling in love

Sara, the case of the adolescent best friendship

At the core of each of these strong relationships is a brand-self connection formed at the deeply-significant level of life themes.


RESULTS:

Theme 2: The hidden value of non-loyal relationships

Brands other than the pre-specified loyal brand add significant meaning to the everyday lives of consumers. Many of these ancillary relationships encompass category meanings that are not delivered by the designated 'loyal' brand.

Theme 3: The deceptive character of existing brand loyalty definitions

Locus of meaning lies not in specific brands per se. Instead, the rich relationships these informants have developed remain at the level of the coffee preparation process or product form. For informants like these, it is difficult to argue that valuable brand relationships of any type -- loyalty or not aside – truly exist.


Drawing on the Big Five Human Personality Structure, to develop a theoretical framework for brand personality and also a reliable, valid and generalizable scale.

Brand personality defined as “the set of human characteristics associated with a brand”, which is symbolic or self-expressive.

examples....


Empirical study for scale generation.

N=631 people returned the survey asking them to rate a group of brands in terms of the personality attributes they represent among a pool of 114 traits (purified before).

After factor analysis, five broad factors are identified:

Retests for generalizability. Its contribution is analyzing brand personality not in aggregate but in dimensions.


Brand personality literature has gained momentum by Aaker’s scale. This trend will continue since it is related with the task of crafting relationship by the brands.

Criticizing Aaker’s widely used scale, the authors argue that it doesn’t in fact measure brand personality but merges a number of dimensions of brand identity. Criticized the concept validity of brand personality because it has been defined too broad from the beginning, because it has been borrowed from personality in psychology.


kjk



Marketing activities have interaction effects among themselves as well as main effects and interaction effects with brand equity

Defining brand community from a customer-experiential perspective it is “a fabric of relationships in which the customer is situated”.

A broader view of brand community is employed by the authors, compared to Muniz & O’Guinn, treating it as dynamic temporally and geographically.


Brand Communities

The methodology employed is “situated-autoetnography” in which the authors visited brandfests, became renters of Jeep and later owners of it, supplemented by prolonged fieldwork of two years within brand communities of Jeep and Harley-Davidson.

During fieldwork, authors reported that all characteristics of brand community soon manifested themselves. Qualitative interviews were held.


Brand Communities

Second phase is quantitative triangulation, including hypothesis testing.

First they performed a post-event survey and second a one-group pretest /

posttest quasi experimental design.


Brand Communities

H1: Integration in the Jeep brand community is a function of the customers’ perceived relationships with their own vehicles, the brand, the company and other owners. (confirmed strongly)

H2: Customers will report more positive relationships with their own vehicles after participating in the brandfest. (confirmed strongly for less attached), negative result for more attached)

H3: Customers will report more positive relationships with the Jeep brand after participating in the brandfest. (confirmed strongly for less attached, slightly for more attached)

H4: Customers will report more positive relationships with Jeep as a company after participating in the brandfest. (confirmed strongly for less attached, no change for more attached)

H5: Customers will report more positive relationships with other Jeep owners after participating in the brandfest. (confirmed strongly for less attached, no change for more attached)

H6: Overall level of integration in the Jeep brand community will increase as a result of participation in the brandfest. (confirmed strongly)


Brand Communities

kjk



Several studies have demonstrated that leading brands can command large price differences (Simon 1979, Agrawal 1996, Park and Srinivasan 1994, Sethuraman 1996) and are more immune to price increases (Sivakumar and Raj 1997).

Advertising may play a role in decreasing price sensitivity (Kanetkar et al. 1992). Consumers who are highly loyal to a brand have been shown to increase purchases when advertising for the brand increased (Raj 1982, Hsu and Liu 2000).


Keller 2003, JCR

Defined as “specialized, non-geographically bound community, based on a structured set of social relations among admirers of a brand.”

An empirical study looking at 3 brand communities: (Ford Bronco, Macintosh and Saab).

First phase involved face-to-face interviews with four families in Fairlawn.

Second phase was analyzing computer-mediated environments (forums, websites not created by the company)


Brand Communities

Defined as “specialized, non-geographically bound community, based on a structured set of social relations among admirers of a brand.” marked by

1. Shared Consciousness (we-ness, being different or special.)- Legitimacy (differentiating true members of the community from

others – marginals)- Oppositionl brand loyalty (delienate what the brand is NOT and who

the members are NOT)

2. Rituals and Traditions (shared consumption experiences to maitain the culture)

- Celebrating the history of a brand- Sharing brand stories (storytelling, myths etc

3. Moral Responsibility (leads to collective action and group cohesion)- Assistance (helping in the use of a brand)


Brand Communities

Branding Conclusions:•It asserts that consumers are actively involved in the social brand creation process. •It further shows that brand community clearly affects brand equity.•Brand communities carry out important functions on behalf of the brand in terms of relationship marketing.

Still:•It should also be recognized that a strong brand community can be a threat to a marketer should a community collectively reject marketing efforts or product change


Brand Communities

kjk


Ramos & Franco 2005, Journal of Brand Management

Marketing effort of the companies (pricing behavior, distribution and communication) has influence onBrand Equity (perceived quality, brand loyalty, brand awareness)


Ramos & Franco 2005, Journal of Brand Management

kjk


Madhavaram et al. 2005, Journal of Advertising

IMC has become an integral part of brand strategy that requires extensive brand development activities.IMC is an integral part of a firm’s overall brand equity strategy.

Kitchen et al (2004) calls it integrated brand communications, actually.

kjk



Effective communication enables the formations of brand awareness and a positive brand image.



Since 1985, marketing researchers focused on and studied IMC, brand equity and brand identity. Though these three streams do cross-reference each other, no research explicitly conceptualized specific relationships among the three.IMC strategy strengthens the interface between firm’s brand identity strategy and its customer-based brand equity.



In 1994 special issue, Shocker et al. emphasized need for research in development and importance of brand identity.ANDIt is also extremely difficult for brand image to match perfectly with brand identity due to the complex nature of the communication system.

Brand equity is not merely built through independent communication forms (like PR or ads) but by brand equity contacts via IMC.

kjk


Capron & Hulland 1999, JM

Brand is one of the three key marketng resources, together with sales force and general expertise.

Brands with strong equities are both rare and have considerable value when extended.

Brand is an not easily imitable and not easily duplicated strategic resource.

There are problems of estimating the economic value of brands and inappropriate management of brands when transferred after acquisitions.

kjk


Capron & Hulland 1999, JM

Development of a strong brand typically is based on investiment in marketing communications (especially advertising).

This investment is substantial, expensive and historic.

kjk


Brodie et al. 2002, Marketing Theory

Effective communication enables the formations of brand awareness and a positive brand image.

kjk



There is increased brand competition, concentration of ownership of retail outlets and emphasis on retail price promotions BUT brands provide channel members benefits such as pre-established demand.

Compared to price, Yoo et al. 2000 found that store image and distribution intensity has a favorable effect on brand equity.

Challenges

X Marketing is losing influence at the senior management level.

X There is a need for a new marketing thinking and for a greater linkage between financial and marketing terms and concepts.

X The notion of brand equity emerged in 1980s because marketing needs financial values, too.



While it is tempting to use brand equity as a vehicle to represent the value of everything associated with marketing we consider its use needs to be restricted.

Wesuggest that the term marketplace equity is a more useful to represent the value of all market-based assets. The marketplace equity for an organization comes from the broader network of relationships with channels, brands, and other marketing entities and can be linked to the core business processes that create shareholder value.

Thus brand equity is a subset of the market-based assets.

•Aaker, D.A., Keller, K.L. (1990), "Consumer evaluations of brand extensions", Journal of Marketing, Vol. 54 pp.27-41. •Aaker, J. L. (1997), “Dimensions of Brand Personality,” Journal of Marketing Research, 34, pp.347-56. •Azoulay, Audrey and Jean-Noel Kapferer (2003), “Do Brand Personality Scales Really Measure Brand Personality?” Journal of Brand Management, 11 (November), 143-55.•Brodie, Roderick J., Mark S. Glynn, and Joel Van Durme (2002), "Towards a Theory of Marketplace Equity: Integrating Branding and Relationship Thinking with Financial Thinking,"Marketing Theory, 2 (1), 5-28.•Capron, L., Hulland J. (1999) Redeployment of Brands, Sales Forces, and General Marketing Management Expertise Following Horizontal Acquisitions: A Resource-Based View The Journal of Marketing, Vol. 63, No. 2 pp. 41-54 •de Chernatony, L., Dall’Olmo Riley, F. (1998), "Defining a ‘brand’: beyond the literature with experts’ interpretations", Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 14 pp.417-43•Fournier, S., Yao, J. (1997), "Reviving brand loyalty: a reconceptualization within the framework of consumer-brand relationships", International Journal of Research in Marketing, Vol. 14 No.5, pp.451-72. •Keller, K.L. (1993), "Conceptualizing, measuring, and managing customer-based brand equity", Journal of Marketing, Vol. 57, pp.1-22. •Keller, K. (2003). Brand synthesis: the multidimensionality of brand knowledge. Journal of Consumer Research, 29(4), 595–600•Keller, K, Lehmann, D., (2006) Brands and Branding: Research Findings and Future Priorities, Marketing Science, v.25 n.6, p.740-759,

58

http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1235712&dl=GUIDE&coll=GUIDE&CFID=89869513&CFTOKEN=31493455

•Madhavaram, S; Badrinarayanan, V; McDonald, R. (2005) Integrated marketing communication (IMC) and brand identity as critical components of brand equity strategy: a conceptual framework and research propositions. Journal of Advertising; 34.4. pp 69-80.•McAlexander, J.H., Schouten, J.W., Koening, H.F. (2002), "Building brand community", Journal of Marketing, Vol. 66 No.1, pp.38-54•Muniz, A., O'Guinn, T.C. (2001), "Brand communities", Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 27 No.4, pp.412-32•Park, C. W; Milberg, S and Lawson, R. (1991), "Evaluation of Brand Extensions: The Role of Product Feature Similarity and Brand Concept Consistency," Journal of Consumer Research, 18 (September), 185-193.•Rao, A.R., Ruekert, R.W. (1994), "Brand alliances as signals of product quality", Sloan Management Review, pp.87-97•Simonin, B.L., Ruth, J.A. (1998), "Is a company known by the company it keeps? Assessing the spillover effects of brand alliances on consumer brand attitudes", Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 35 No.1, pp.30-42.•Tucker, W. T., "The development of brand loyalty," Journal of Marketing Research, 1964, 1, pp. 32-35.•Ramos, A.F.V., Franco, M.J.S. (2005), "The impact of marketing communication and price promotion on brand equity", Journal of Brand Management, Vol. 12 No.6, pp.431-44.•Yoo, B and Donthu, N. (2001) Developing and validating a multidimensional consumer-based brand equity scale, Journal of Business Research 52 (2001) (1), pp. 1–14

59

Branding and Some Key Concepts

Marketing

Transcript of Branding and Some Key Concepts