Brand Management and Planning Skills - Coursework Example

SECTION A: History of branding What managers today can learn from the history of branding Branding, as understood today, started as far back as the 1800s. At the time, mass production had just taken shape, so individuals began branding their products in order to demonstrate ownership. However, this quickly became a mark of quality, which could fetch higher prices. In fact, companies like Coca Cola registered their trademarks in order to distinguish themselves from imitations. Value and function was thus a critical perception of branding (Bastos and Levy, 2012). As time went by, mass media became critical in the public; advertisers began shifting towards emotional appeals instead of functional ones alone. Soft drink companies began convincing customers how their products could make them feel good; such patterns commenced in the ‘60s and prevailed until the 1980s. By this time, companies had global reach while consumers had plenty of choice. Therefore, organisations had to use other strategies to build their brands. They introduced the concept of brand loyalty for company names. Consumers were persuaded to build relationships with companies far beyond specific product lines. This was possible through long-term strategies. It was at this time that unconventional entities like political groups adopted the branding concept. During the 1950s, successful brands were the ones that had their own identity. Organisation such as General Foods and Proctor and Gamble soon realised that their product were more or less similar to their competitors’. They subsequently chose to give an identity to their commodities. Likewise, managers today may learn from this approach by creating brand mixes, as well. They should work on their pricing. Product packaging, logos, and advertising need to echo clear positioning statements (Chen amd Green, 2009). Companies that came out ahead in the past were also the ones that effectively drew in both the emotional and functional aspects of production. By offering emotional value, organisations today can make up for similarities in quality of products. Consumers who perceive a product to have superior value will always be willing to bear the cost of accessing it. Firms like Tide and Lipton have been at the top of the game because they deliver the right brand mix. Managers today can also borrow a leaf from these institutions. They can work on delivering a price, logo, promotions and advertisements that combine function and emotion (Chaplin and John, 2005). Building the brand is a task that does not just involve contributions from top management. Companies like General motors have been successful at branding because building this image is something employees take ownership for. Their external stakeholders have also realised that they can control outcomes, so companies need to be aware of the brand story they convey to these parties. Overall, managers can learn from historically successful brands that building relationships with consumers and staying consistent about their identity is the key to success. 2. The key to a long-lasting brand Regardless of the strategy adopted or the period in time when a brand thrived, one thing is clear, an effective brand is one that builds a character in the eyes of the consumer. The company must attempt to associate the brand with certain principles, which possess peculiar features that merge their symbolic and functional components (Moore and Reid, 2008). In other words, long-lasting brands combine fiction and utilitarianism. Therefore, organisations need to refrain from merely stating facts about the item they are selling. Alternatively, they should not just focus on the great way the product can make consumers feel; it should be a combination of these two strategies. A public image or character is more important than anything else is (Stern, 2006). Most successful organisations in branding attempt to establish some sort of partnership with the client base. They often think of products as extensions of people’s personalities. Therefore, when people perceive brands in this way, then customers can build relationships with those brands. This thinking has fostered growth in relationship marketing. A brand should be perceived as a contract between the seller and his market. The purchaser is the ultimate decision-maker in this scenario, as this person will decide whether the organisation has breached terms of the contract. Companies that do not measure up to their position statements or contracts can lose substantial market share, since their competitors can poach these dissatisfied consumers. Strong values appear to be the common denominator among successfully branded companies. A company like Apple is one that constantly innovates; an organisation like Nike pushes its buyers to be active while Coca Cola refreshes. Therefore, if any company deviates from these core values, then it will not have strong consumer loyalty. A number of large organisations have failed to articulate their core values as fluently as the above-mentioned organisations. It is for this reason that a number of them lose membership. An institution like P&G admits that its products have high quality; however, marketers have not always been effective at articulating the company’s core values. Most of their competitors are better at building emotional connections with buyers, so people have faith in P&G but have given their hearts to its competitors. This organisation could learn from other successful peers by articulating its primary values and delivering that contract every time (Chen and Green, 2009). Effective branding companies are also quite good at building trust between themselves and their potential consumers. This implies acting responsibly and living according to an ethical manner. Failure to comply by these standards causes frustration among consumers who can lose faith in that brand completely. In the event that brand image has been tarnished through unethical behaviour, a company should attempt to rebuild this brand from the basics (Aaker, Brael and Fournier, 2004). Advertisements are never sufficient to fix this problem; therefore, it is best to embed effective practices in every action the company takes. Therefore, organisations should refrain from making empty promises to consumers. Successful companies should also refrain from exaggerating service offerings or showing inconsistencies in branding efforts. Any inconsistencies can be easily identified by the potential market. This would cause backlash from the latter group. It is imperative for companies to become transparent in their daily exercises. They must include elements of their brand promise in order to stay consistent (Yorkston, Nunes and Matta, 2010). SECTION B a) Comparison of two small growing brands Renowned author Kevin Keller established the CBBE model or the Customer Based Brand Equity model. It is supported by the idea that companies can shape consumer’s perceptions about their products. Organisations have the responsibility to build opinions and thoughts about their brand. People tend to purchase more when the brand equity of the organisation is powerful. This is also likely to cause them to refer other people to the organisation and to keep coming back. Four steps are in the model as shown in the figure below, and these steps will be used in a comparison of the two growing brands. Adopted from: http://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/keller-brand-equity-model.htm The first step refers to brand identity; a company ought to know who it is and should create knowledge of the brand. It needs to be sure that consumers’ perception of who they are is correct. Icebreaker appears to be doing a better job of creating its brand identity than Lululemon, the latter website appears to be selling sports merchandises. It has images of someone about to skydive and another man seems to be wearing a semi-formal t-shirt as he holds a bicycle. Another woman is running and an image of a gift card is right above her, one can also find information about the company history, order tracking, gift cards, internet apps and some company history. This brand identity is confusing because customers cannot be sure whether the company is selling sports products like bicycles and helmets or whether it sells only yoga clothes and running gear (Lulumemon, 2014). Conversely, Icebreaker appears to understand the notion of brand identity a little more clearly. Their website has images of hiking enthusiasts, runners, a travel bag and a sheep. It also has images of t-shirts, cotton jumpers, socks and other accessories for exercise, these illustrations make all the difference. A customer viewing them would know exactly what they are selling since they have it on display on the home page (Icebreaker, 2014). The subsequent step in the model is the brand-meaning phase, where an organisation needs to establish what its brand represents in terms of performance as well as imagery. Performance entails characteristics like style, durability and efficiency while imagery encompasses the psychological and social elements of the brand (Aghaei, Mosavi and Asadollahi, 2013). Organisations need to know consumers needs and then tailor their offerings to this. A comparison of the two websites indicates that once again, Icebreaker comes out on top. It has elements on its website that address issues of performance and imagery. The “Why Icebreaker” link talks about how their clothes perform, why their wool is superior and exactly what value they have. The imagery is also strong because it focuses on consumer outcomes; on the other hand, Lululemon scarcely highlights the characteristics of their clothing or their performance. Consumers would be hard-pressed to determine why this company’s merchandise would meet their needs. The website assumes that consumers already know this answer, so they simply want to initiate a transaction. The subsequent level of the pyramid is brand response, where an individual considers how well a brand is able to make them feel as well as meet their needs. They will often judge these abilities based on the credibility, quality, superiority and consideration of the brand (Keller, 2008). Typical responses include warmth, self-respect or security; the images on the Icebreaker website are likely to elicit responses of warmth and approval. Since clothes for working out ought to be comfortable, then this website induces feelings of warmth. Fun may also be part of the reaction because it has images of people in the outdoors. Likewise, Lululemon also induces such reactions owing to the running lady and jumping man. However, one would still not be certain about the brand’s ability to meet their specific exercise needs, as this is ambiguous. Finally, the deepest level of analysis in Keller’s model is brand resonance or relationships. One ought to determine whether the brand has established a bond with its target consumer. Sometimes this could be depicted through loyalty of the buyer. Alternatively, it may be the sense of community created by the brand or the propensity to actively engage with the company through events, social media or any other initiatives launched by the company (Keller, 2008). It is not possible to know for sure whether any of the two companies under analysis already have met these criteria. However, a quick perusal through the Lululemon site indicates that they have at least made efforts to engage with their clientele; the organisation already has e-cards. These cards are part of a loyalty program in the company as they are likely to persuade buyers to come back to the organisation for more purchases. It is not clear whether consumers have responded to this call to action but it is likely that any buyer will see the program as soon as they log in; they might even consider joining. In contrast, Icebreaker does not have any such program, so consumers can only connect with them through traditional outlets like email and telephone calls. A general oversight of the brand equity for the two companies illustrates that Icebreaker seems to have a stronger equity than its competitors do. It had more points for brand identity, meaning and responses than Lululemon. For this reason, the latter firm needs to work on improving its brand perception. It can start with the following brand mantra: Work out in style. The organisation has plenty of yoga clothing but also sells many other sports clothing and accessories, so its mantra should cover all these aspects. Icebreaker should consider the following mantra: comfort for outdoor fitness. The word comfort will demonstrate how the company’s products have material that makes consumers feel that way. The mantra must also show that these products are supposed to be used for exercise and training. Their unique suitability for the outdoors must also be captured in the position statement for the company. SECTION C a) Strength of Germany as a brand Germany is currently ranked second in the Nations’ brand index list (Treat, 2012); this survey involves an analysis of countries across a series of dimensions like tourism, investment, culture as well as governance (True, 2006). Only the United States tops Germany in this regard. Last year, Germany was ranked first in an international soft-power study. This list considers business appeal, infrastructure, and government standards, among other things that contribute towards a nations influence around the world. Clearly, Germany seems to be getting things right in this front. It has managed and changed its reputation from that of a stereotypically dull nation to one that is strong businesswise and culturally. The country has not always been in control of its national brand, as one would assume. German has a long and bitter history that has haunted it for generations to come. In 2004, the Prime Minister of Italy offended Germany at an EU meeting by intimating that the nation is full of Nazis. Shortly after, his tourism minister reverberated these sentiments by describing all Germans as monotonous blonds who had inflated perceptions of themselves. These assertions did little to solidify the country’s perceptions in the eyes of the world. In quick response, the German Chancellor terminated his planned visit to the country for leave. The country had fought so hard to nullify such stereotypes but they kept coming back to haunt them (Ugesha, 2007). Germans quickly assembled a team that would be responsible for reengineering their image in the eyes of the world. The group immediately realised that their past was too complicated and profound to be erased. Instead, what they would do would be to stress the positive aspects of the nation’s culture to the world. This would demonstrate to nations that certain things had been overlooked when understanding German culture. It was rather difficult for the country to wipe out deep-seated prejudices; initially, some people thought that Germans were humourless and boring. Others felt they were arrogant and highly egocentric. Conversely, others believed that the nation was politically progressive. They even admired it for its industriousness. The job of the brand-building team assembled in the early 2000s and many other subsequent years was to emphasise the last aspects. They knew that it was critical to sell certain ideals to the world but still deliver those ideals to its people. Once the rest of Germany bought the principles of branding exercises, then it would be relatively simple to convince the rest of the globe. The nation started with events that attract global attention such as the 2006 Football World Cup. Large sports events have the ability to change a country’s fortunes. Instead of thinking of Germany as simply an efficient manufacturing nation synonymous for the ‘made in Germany’ logo, people needed to perceive it as a holiday destination. The World Cup cast a positive light on the country because international bookings soared by 30% 3-5 years after the event. Almost 90% of the visitors who came for the World Cup in 2006 said that they would suggest Germany as a holiday destination (Treat, 2012). A number of things accounted for this change in perception. The World Cup exposed security conditions in the country, and showed that visitors could be safe in the country no matter where they chose to visit. Additionally, it became clear that there was much fun to be had in Germany after all. Fan festivals and several other celebrations were quite common in the nation. Citizens were in on the brand reengineering, as well. The engineering changes were successful because most of the population lived the World Cup Mantra daily. The World Cup was an opportunity to awaken a suppressed national pride in the people of Germany. Patriotism was evident everywhere from the way law enforces assisted the public to the friendly way shop attendants responded to clients. This country thus showed the marketing world that nation branding does work if it comes from a genuine place. People must move beyond slogans or superficial crusades, and really live the brand (Anholt, 2003). Aside from the World Cup, Germany has also sought to take advantage of more positive stereotypes of its character. The country has always been known as a meticulous nation; however, this had not been marketed to the world effectively. Germans have constantly demanded the highest standards from their manufacturers. Businesses are organised in a way that maintains such high precision. The nation has superior technical standards, a robust research environment and engineers who have mastered their trade. Money is to be made only as a result of making high quality goods and services. Many other nations already knew these aspects, but a number of them were not aware of the way wealth is distributed. Members of this nation believe that wealth should be shared equitably to those who participated in its creation. Therefore, workers are paid well and have some of the most family-friendly working hours in the world. This makes them highly engaged and able to continue with socially responsible activities. Therefore, the culture of hard work and reward trickles down to the very people who are responsible for these outcomes thus sustaining a full cycle of strong core values (Ugesha, 2007). These aspects of the country’s culture have been sold to the world, as well. People outside Germany are now aware of the work ethic and the employment practices that create such positive outcomes. There is now a story to the strength behind the BMW, Adidas, Porsche and SAP. Germany has succeeded in showing the world that efficiency and high quality does not just happen accidentally. It must be cautiously designed and communicated to the world; therefore, business practitioners should also epitomise these values in order for them to create a self-sustaining brand. Germany proves that marketing strategies are indeed applicable to nations. It illustrates that these entities are not too large or intricate for a branding exercise. This nation had plenty of demons to wrestle with in its past. However, it combined new and old perceptions to strengthen its brand image internationally. Germany told a story concerning why it is renowned for its superior manufacturing. It also used sporting events to revamp patriotic sentiments among the populace. Individuals genuinely felt adoration and pride for their state and exuded these qualities. The story of brand Germany is one that echoes the need for honesty and genuineness in branding. References Aaker, J., Brael, S. and Fournier, S., 2004. When good brands do bad. Journal of Consumer Research, 31(5), pp. 1-16. Aghaei, M., Mosavi, M. and Asadollahi, A., 2013. Developing brand equity model based on CBBE approach to establish customer satisfaction and loyalty in Tehran’s chain stores. Journal of Basic Applied Science Research, 3(7), pp. 956-965. Anholt, S., 2003. Brand New Justice: The Upside of Global Branding. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann. Bastos, W. and Levy, S., 2012. A history of the concept of branding: Practice and theory. Journal of Historical Research in Marketing, 4(3), pp.347-368. Chaplin, L. and John, D., 2005. The development of self-brand connections in children and adolescents. Journal of Consumer Research, 32(4), pp. 119-29. Chen, H. amd Green, R., 2009. Marketing mix and branding: Competitive hypermarket strategies. International Journal of Management and marketing Research, 2(1), pp. 45. Icebreaker, 2014. Homepage. [online] Available at: http://www.icebreaker.com/ Keller, K., 2008. Strategic brand management. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Lululemon, 2014. Homepage. [online] Available at: http://www.lululemon.com/ Manktelow, J., 2013. Keller’s brand equity model. [online] Available at: http://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/keller-brand-equity-model.htm Moore, K. and Reid, S., 2008. The birth of brand: 400- years of branding. Business History, 50(4), pp. 419-432. Stern, B., 2006. What does brand mean? Historical analysis method and construct definition. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 34(2), pp. 216-23. Treat, I., 2012. Nation Branding “Made in Germany.” [online] Available at: http://publicandculturaldiplomacy6.wordpress.com/2012/03/21/nation-branding-made-in-germany-13/ [Accessed 23 April 2014] True, J., 2006. Globalisation and identity. South Melbourne: OUP. Ugesha, J., 2007. The made in Germany champion brands: Nation Branding, innovation and the world export leadership. London: McMillan. Yorkston, E., Nunes, J. and Matta, S., 2010. The malleable brand: The role of implicit theories in evaluating brand extensions. Journal of Marketing, 74(1), pp. 80-93. Read More