Upload
khadija-nasir
View
221
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
8/2/2019 Articals Whole Group
1/11
8/2/2019 Articals Whole Group
2/11
Harvard University
Introduction and Objective of Session
The idea of a brand personality is familiar and accepted by most advertising practitioners (e.g., Plummer 1985) andmany marketing academics (e.g., Gardner and Levy 1955). For decades, researchers have argued that brandpersonality is an important topic of study because it can help to differentiate brands (e.g., Crask and Laskey 1990),develop the emotional aspects of a brand (e.g., Landon 1974) and augment the personal meaning of a brand to theconsumer (e.g., Levy 1959). However, although brand personality is intuitively appealing and, as a result, has receivedconsiderable academic attention, it has been criticized on a number of dimensions; conceptual, methodological andsubstantive. First, at the conceptual level, there is still some ambiguity over what a brand personality is. How should itbe defined and conceptualized? How (or when) is it different from brand image and/or user imagery? The answers tothese questions have important implications for managers and academics interested in understanding the largerquestions of why brand personality is important and how brand personality works.
Second, at the methodological level: how is brand personality best measured? While most researchers generally relyon qualitative methods, such as photo-sorts, free associations, psychodramatic exercises (cf. Levy 1985) these open-ended techniques are often dropped in the later stages of research as marketers look for more quantitative ways todetect and enumerate differences among their brands (Blackston 1993), the most common of which is the differentialsemantic scale (e.g. Birdwell 1968; Plummer 1985). However, studies using such scales are limited since the "right"way to compile the adjectives has not yet been determined. [Some researchers have used adjectives extracted from
personality inventories used for detecting emotional instability, schizophrenia or neuroticism (e.g., Maheshwari1974). Others simply use attributes most related to the products being tested (e.g., Birdwell 1968; Schewe and Dillon1978). Moreover, regardless of how the adjectives are selected, reliability and validity problems are generally notaddressed. (See Sirgy 1982 for a more complete review of these and other measurement difficulties).] Clearly, a brandpersonality research program should flow from the conceptual definition that guides it. Moreover, it would likelyinclude both qualitative and quantitative methodologies in order to retain the advantages of both. However, whatthose methodologies are, and how they work together to articulate the conceptualization remain unclear.
Third, at the substantive level: what does personality do for a brand? What are the implications of having a brandpersonality? What marketing activities create or alter it? In the past, researchers have suggested that brandpersonality is most important when used as a research tool to identify personal meaning for the consumer (King1989). Others assert that brand personality is needed as information for creatives when developing advertising(Lannon and Cooper 1983). Still others have suggested that brand personality should be seen as a more globalconstruct: a key determinant of brand equity (Aaker 1991; Biel 1993). In brief, brand personality, as a construct, hasmultiple uses. However little systematic research has been conducted to understand or classify these uses. Is brand
personality best used as a research tool, a clue for creatives or as a key element to brand equity? Or is the answer "D"?
The primary objective of this session is to address these three areas of ambiguity in brand personality research. Asillustrated by the set-up of the session, our goal is not to converge on one definition, conceptualization andmeasurement tool for brand personality. Rather, we draw on diverse literatures such as narrative theory, socialpsychology and psychometric theory, and illuminate their potential contributions to the study of brand personality.
The secondary objective of this session is to provide a platform for future research on brand personalities and relatedtopics. Upon reviewing the literature on brand personality, one gets the sense that each study does not receive theattention it may deserveCwheels are spinning yet brand personality research doesn't get very far. In order to give past,current and future studies some traction, solid theoretical frameworks and a sense of the topic's breadth are needed.By focusing on what brand personality is, how it can be measured and how it works, we hope to spur further researchto take one of these three perspectives and address other issues of brand personality. [Further areas of research mightinclude; to what extent does a brand take on a personality before vs. after use? What roles do brand names, logos and
symbols play in developing a brand personality? What impact does a brand personality have on loyalty? Under whatsituations is one brand personality preferred over another? What type of advertising (e.g., transformational vs.informational) is most effective in developing a brands with a strong personality? The three papers in this session willraise these and other ideas for future research.]
Orientation of Session and Topics Covered
As outlined above, the goal of the proposed special session, "A Brand as a Character, a Partner and a Person: Three
Perspectives on the Question of Brand Personality," is to serve as a forum to discuss current issues on brand
personality and suggest areas for future research within the domain of brand personality. All three papers will address
8/2/2019 Articals Whole Group
3/11
document Type Doctoral Thesis
Author Ndlovu, Joram
URN etd-09242009-225847
Document Title Branding as a strategic tool to reposition a destination: a survey of key tourism stakeholders in Zimbabwe
Degree PhD
Department Tourism Management
Supervisor Advisor Name Title
Prof E T Heath Supervisor
Keywords market segmentation destination marketing positioning destination branding image brand equity competitiveness brand communication brand identity
Date 2009-09-01
Availability unrestricted
AbstractThe main purpose of this study was to develop a destination branding andpositioning framework, with particular reference to the Zimbabweanexperience. The theoretical underpinnings and concepts used in this studywere destination marketing, destination branding and positioning, image anddestination competitiveness.To provide a strategic context to the study, branding as a key element of
destination marketing was clarified; the strategic role of branding /re-brandingin the positioning/repositioning of a destination was outlined; internationaltrends and best practices in branding and positioning were evaluated; and thedestination marketing situation in Zimbabwe, with particular emphasis on thestatus of branding and positioning, was determined.To determine key stakeholder attitudes, experiences and expectationsregarding the branding and positioning of Zimbabwe as a tourism destination,
8/2/2019 Articals Whole Group
4/11
8/2/2019 Articals Whole Group
5/11
8/2/2019 Articals Whole Group
6/11
Jennifer Aaker, Susan Fournier (1995), "A BRAND AS A CHARACTER, A PARTNER AND
A PERSON: THREE PERSPECTIVES ON THE QUESTION OF BRAND PERSONALITY",
in Advances in Consumer Research Volume 22, eds. Frank R. Kardes and Mita Sujan, Provo, UT
: Association for Consumer Research, Pages: 391-395.
Advances in Consumer Research Volume 22, 1995 Pages 391-395
A BRAND AS A CHARACTER, A PARTNER AND A PERSON: THREE PERSPECTIVES
ON THE QUESTION OF BRAND PERSONALITY
Jennifer Aaker, Stanford University
Susan Fournier, Harvard University
Introduction and Objective of Session
The idea of a brand personality is familiar and accepted by most advertising practitioners (e.g.,
Plummer 1985) and many marketing academics (e.g., Gardner and Levy 1955). For decades,
researchers have argued that brand personality is an important topic of study because it can helpto differentiate brands (e.g., Crask and Laskey 1990), develop the emotional aspects of a brand
(e.g., Landon 1974) and augment the personal meaning of a brand to the consumer (e.g., Levy
1959). However, although brand personality is intuitively appealing and, as a result, has received
considerable academic attention, it has been criticized on a number of dimensions; conceptual,methodological and substantive. First, at the conceptual level, there is still some ambiguity over
what a brand personality is. How should it be defined and conceptualized? How (or when) is it
different from brand image and/or user imagery? The answers to these questions have importantimplications for managers and academics interested in understanding the larger questions of why
brand personality is important and how brand personality works.
Second, at the methodological level: how is brand personality best measured? While most
researchers generally rely on qualitative methods, such as photo-sorts, free associations,
psychodramatic exercises (cf. Levy 1985) these open-ended techniques are often dropped in the
later stages of research as marketers look for more quantitative ways to detect and enumerate
differences among their brands (Blackston 1993), the most common of which is the differential
semantic scale (e.g. Birdwell 1968; Plummer 1985). However, studies using such scales are
limited since the "right" way to compile the adjectives has not yet been determined. [Someresearchers have used adjectives extracted from personality inventories used for detecting
emotional instability, schizophrenia or neuroticism (e.g., Maheshwari 1974). Others simply use
attributes most related to the products being tested (e.g., Birdwell 1968; Schewe and Dillon
1978). Moreover, regardless of how the adjectives are selected, reliability and validity problems
are generally not addressed. (See Sirgy 1982 for a more complete review of these and other
measurement difficulties).] Clearly, a brand personality research program should flow from the
8/2/2019 Articals Whole Group
7/11
Two Keys to Brand Power
Developing Brand Identity and Brand Personality
Two of the key drivers to building brand strength are creating a distinct brand
identity and developing a unique brand personality. Unfortunately, semantics often
gets in the way of understanding how these two factors can influence brand power.
Brand identity, for example, is often used in a limited, graphic-centric manner or
used interchangeably with brand image. All too often, identity is seen as just the
graphics, logos, colors, and symbols that generally make up corporate identity.
Those elements are the appearance (which is very important) but not the substance
of a brand, just as the clothes you wear are an important, even distinguishing, part
of your identity, but not the substance of who you are as a person.
According to Jean-Noel Kapferer, author ofStrategic Brand Management, identity
precedes image: "An obsession with image tends to attach greater importance to
appearance than to inner reality. But brand identity is a richer, more substantial
concept to embrace."To help clarify how these concepts differ, Figure 1 presents a detailed comparison
of brand image and brand identity:
Figure 1 Brand Image Versus Brand Identity
Brand Image Brand Identity
Appearance Substance
More on the receivers side More on the senders side
Passive Active
Reflects superficial qualities Reflects enduring qualities
Backward looking Forward lookingTactical Strategic
Associations already there Associations aspired to
As the comparison illustrates, these two concepts are quite different. Theres also a
simple way to sum up and understand the essence of the two terms:
image is how the marketplace perceives you; identity is who you really are. We
recommend that companies focus on building brand identity as the driving brand-
strategy component. Brand image is not to be diminished at all. It is, after all is
said and done, how a company is perceived. But dont make the mistake of
thinking your brand image is your identity. The challenge for brand strategists and
champions is to align image and identity. That happens - and can only happen - by
careful, proactive management of your brand identity
8/2/2019 Articals Whole Group
8/11
8/2/2019 Articals Whole Group
9/11
8/2/2019 Articals Whole Group
10/11
8/2/2019 Articals Whole Group
11/11