Two sides on branding - Essay Example

Two Sides on Branding Naomi Klein-No Logo: Taking Aim at the Brand Bullies Naomi Klein's book, as it implies is a criticism to the proliferation of branding strategies launched by business organizations in order to capture customers. The selection lifted from her book which will be briefly summarized in this essay outlined the evolution of branding-from its earliest beginning, downfall, recovery, and recent expansion. The concept of branding, according to Klein, began with the company's recognition that production is not the main core of their operations but marketing. The earliest proponents of marketing like Nike and Microsoft stated that manufacturing is only an "incidental" part of their operations and that they are not selling "products" but "images of their brands." This early beginnings started a new age of branding previously homogenous, mass-produced commodities replacing the old shopkeeper who traditionally scoops out generic products like sugar, flour, and cereal in barrels. The popularity of Dr. Brown, Aunt Jemima, Uncle Ben, and Old Grand Dad became synonymous with the ascent of branded generic commodities. However, the death of branding came one Marlboro Friday as Phillip Morris is threatened by the intense competition from lower priced unbranded competitors. With this happening, a dramatic shift in customers' buying behavior was illustrated-from prestige to price consciousness. The article concluded with the "rebirth" and expansion of branding. This phenomenon was lead by established companies like Body Shop and Starbucks which were able to safeguard and even expand their market share by investing in their brand images. These, together with other successful companies like Nike, began the more rapid proliferation of branded products which does not only market the attributes of the product by created a "concept" to establish an "emotional connection" with its clients. Naomi Klein concluded that with this age of branding, customers are easily manipulated by branding tactics as marketers can establish a good brand even with the lowliest products. She argued that instead of focusing on production and improving products, companies are embarking and spending time, effort, and money in creating a good brand for which they ask customers for a premium. The Economist-Who's Wearing the Trousers The article lifted from the Economist, hold an antagonistic position on Naomi Klein's book. Though it also recognizes the good arguments raced by Klein, the Economist offer a very different view on what the first author referred to as "brand bullies." Basically, the article presented in the Economist can be summed up into two points-the first one being the exaggeration of Naomi Klein's argument on the power of brands, and the second one on the manipulation of the customers by the branding strategies of the large corporations. The Economist recognizes the importance of brands in selling a company's products. However, it claims that Klien's article exaggerated the role of branding in the strategies of the large business organizations. The article proved this by citing the case of the companies who spent bulk of financial resources in creating a good brand only to fail. As the company treats a "brand" as one of its primary assets, a brand can also be regarded as liability as it makes a company highly responsible in the damages which it can give to customers. Customer loyalty is not only rooted on their perception on brand. This is evidenced by the recent research which shows that customers of all ages shift from brand to brand. This also strengthens the claim of the Economist claim that customers are not highly manipulated by company's branding tactics. It is also irrefutable that companies' are spending a lot of money to retain their customers and develop their products to safeguard their brand. Between the Two Articles Naomi Klein and the Economist hold two seemingly different arguments about branding, company's performance, and customers. The two articles summarized above show some same arguments and also different points. Both the Economist and Klein admit the importance of branding in this new age in bolstering the sales trend of business organization in this century. The two articles also show the increasing concern of marketers on creating not just products but "images" in order to capture a sizable portion of the market share. The main differences in the two articles, as discussed above are their treatment of the importance of branding tactics. Klein argues that branding strategies manipulate customers in buying a company's products while diverting a firm's attention on its crucial goal of developing new and more efficient products for its market. On the other hand the Economist sees that the role of brands in Klein's books are overstated and that a good brand is only one of the essential tasks of managers. Primarily, managers also need to launch developments in order to get and retain customers. I believe that both Klein and the Economist have stated reasonable arguments about branding. In this highly competitive business environment, companies should effectively position themselves in order to be patronized by consumers. Branding is a way to pursue company's strategies especially when differentiating from rivals. I am also strongly for the utilization of branding in order to cultivate customers trust. A good, establish brand name assures customers of the quality of products they purchase together with the company's responsibility to any damage. Brands do serve as intangible guarantees to purchasers. Like the Economist, I also believe that the establishment of good brands is not an easy task for companies. In order to safeguard their shares, firms do not only rely on the image created by their brands but also make various improvements in their products. Brand creation is not just portraying an image but keeping up to it. It's not just creating a concept in a customer's mind but living up to that concept. What will really matter is not the customers' perceived image but how the company delivers its "image" to buyers. This will determine the loyalty of customers and consequently, the downfall or success of a company. However, as Klein also notes we should not overlook other issues. Advertising do constitute a huge part of a company's expenses. As firms hire celebrity for product endorsements, it is irrefutable that buyers also pay a premium for a "non-value" adding activity. It is also notable that the success and proliferation of non-branded products is also a living evidence of that branding is not just the key to a company's success but most importantly, quality matters. References Klein, Naomi. (2001). No Logo: Taking Aim at the Brand Bullies. Harper Collins: United Kingdom Who's Wearing the Trousers. (2001). The Economist. Retrieved 23 March 2006, from http://www.economist.com/displaystory.cfmstory_id=770992 Read More