Perceived Differentiation and Branding - Coursework Example

Perceived Differentiation and Branding Name Institution Name Date Differentiation is a strategy employed to distinguish a service or product from others that are available in the market so that it is made more attractive to a specified target market. Differentiation is not only making it different from competitors’ products but also those organizational products. Three forms of differentiation exist, which are vertical, horizontal, and simple. Simple is based on numerous characteristics; horizontal is based on a single characteristic without conclusive knowledge on the part of the customer while vertical differentiation has clear quality offerings and single characteristic. The major sources of differentiation include availability, sales promotion, and ignorance of buyers, functionality and quality. Different organizations develop specific brands, and the organization is known by that brand; for example, Toyota is a manufacture of Toyota brand of cars while Samsung is a producer of Samsung products. Hence, an organization is liked directly with the product. Therefore, the name organization and brand will be employed interchangeable to advance the requirements of the assignment. Perceived differentiation is important to both an organization and customers when it relates to branding. Perceived product differentiation makes the products seen, felt and other subjective methods of creating a memory in the customers’ minds. Branded companies employ different strategies for creating perceived differentiation (Gyrd-Jones, Bill and Dale 2013). For example, a brand company can use price, location, promotion and type of service in advancing the uniqueness of the product relative to the competitors (Hillenbrand et al., 2013). This aspect has played a crucial role in organizational marketing capabilities in which a single company produces numerous products and services for targeted markets (Lam et al., 2013). For example, Toyota produces different car models and the company champion’s quality, and it produces numerous cars under their brand. For instance, there is the Vitz, which is cheaper compared to the expensive Toyota Landcruiser VX. The pricing differentiation is based on the application or use of these models (Czinkota, Hans and Gianpaolo 2014). The Toyota Vitz is targeted to the female category while the Toyota Landcruiser VX is targeted to those customers who want luxury and frequently move across different terrains. In the case of perceiving, the customer is able to different the two products from the same company and determine, which one fulfills aimed objectives. Conversely, differentiation based on pricing as become an important component but there are challenges associated with the procedure (Hillenbrand et al., 2013). It is crucial to remember the purpose of using differentiation is creating a lasting image on a brand; it results in the creation of the right perceptions (Gyrd-Jones, Bill and Dale 2013). Those organizations that employ both service and price may not benefit in the long term because the argument that an organization offers superior services may make the customers access the product or service but since the organization would not deliver, the customers may not be convinced in future and ignore such claims (Lam et al., 2013). In addition, undercutting is a common component in the current business dispensation and a company can easily enter the market and offer a price that is lower that the organizational prices (Hillenbrand et al., 2013). The new organization can employ modern technologies that make production cheaper making obsolete organizations that have championed cheaper prices to be ignored (Czinkota, Hans and Gianpaolo 2014). To prevent such challenges, it is appropriate for an organization to employ alternative differentiation strategies. Another approach that companies create perceived differentiation is through a meaningful approach that reflects or matters to the customers (Hillenbrand et al., 2013). Customer requirements are different meaning the value factor also differs and the customers aim at obtaining an important and crucial product. A brand can use differentiation to create a relationship between the products and customers into integrating in their lives: the product holds some form of meaning (Gyrd-Jones, Bill and Dale 2013). Marketers are required to determine the factors contributing to the unique and the requirements of the customers so that they create messages that make the customers make a decision and affect the customers’ purchasing decisions. For example, numerous companies sell coffee and Starbucks receive numerous customers (Lam et al., 2013). The price of Starbucks’ coffee is higher, and consumers are willing to purchase the product because the brand experience is meaningful to the customer since it appeals to their respective emotions. Hence, may not buy from competitors such as Dunkin’ Donuts and decide to look for Starbucks outlet (Hillenbrand et al., 2013). Harley Davidson is another important example when it comes to strategic differentiation approaches. The Harley Davidson brand message is the experience of camaraderie and freedom. Customers are ready to purchase the Harley Davidson brand because of this unique messages and assurances of the benefits of the product relative to the expectations of the customers. In brand differentiation, distinctiveness is crucial for numerous reasons (Gyrd-Jones, Bill and Dale 2013). Distinctiveness helps in triggering brand associations and ensures recognition. It is important to understand distinctiveness is not a replacement for differentiation rather it is a complement (Hillenbrand et al., 2013). If a company such as Starbucks of Harley Davidson wants to sustain price that is premium and grow, it is important to create reasons why consumers justifying purchasing an alternative product (Czinkota, Hans and Gianpaolo 2014). The reasons may be the unavailability of first choice or because of moods; it means the customer is ready to continue purchasing from the normal brand (Lam et al., 2013). A brand needs motivational and aspiration force for customers, employees and other stakeholders. The brand principles should be an aspiration to assist in achieving change and aiming for the future (Czinkota, Hans and Gianpaolo 2014). The brand principles frequently employ the current strengths without understanding the current strengths fades with time. Through the use of current strengths, the brand heritage is appreciated providing platform that champions continuity and stability (Gyrd-Jones, Bill and Dale 2013). Furthermore, the brand inspirational elements mean that the brand is motivational and dynamic. The two components: heritage and aspiration are crucial because, with them, the brand may not change, or the brand exists without authenticity and roots (Hillenbrand et al., 2013). Products have been in existence for long periods and have continued to aspire and employ its strong heritage in advancing the future. For example, Ford Automobile has been in existence for a long time because it uses its historical heritage and using the current strengths to create products that span over time. Apple Company, since its incorporation has aimed at developing innovative and unique products and the company, has fulfilled the requirement (Lam et al., 2013). Hence, aspiration and heritage are important in sustaining the requirements of the brand, and the differentiation component outlives the current strengths (Hillenbrand et al., 2013). In differentiation, innovation is inherent. Brands usually attach “innovation” on the packaging of their products and marketing but sometimes they do not innovate to change with time (Gyrd-Jones, Bill and Dale 2013). The differentiation should integrate both the creativeness of the systems and the innovativeness (Czinkota, Hans and Gianpaolo 2014). Some organizations have reached a level where advertising and promotion do not change the marker size: increase or decrease the market size (Lam et al., 2013). Time and environmental requirements overtake some brands that are differentiated based on the targeted customer (Hillenbrand et al., 2013). For example, Blockbuster was an important company in video renting but did not counter the competitive strategies of its competitors such as Netflix. Netflix introduced a mail system to enable delivery of movies and later on added online streaming. Blockbuster did not acknowledge the change and did not introduce counteraction strategies resulting in the bankruptcy of Blockbuster. It illustrates that differentiation alone cannot last, but continuous innovation based on the historical aspects of the product or service advances the requirements of the organization (Lam et al., 2013). In brand and creating a perceived distinction, communication is integral (Hillenbrand et al., 2013). Engagement with customers should be capitalized in ensuring the customer understands how the company has improved its brand and the reasons why consumers are supposed to continue purchasing the product (Lam et al., 2013). A brand can be successful, but the communication process can negate the benefits and views of the consumers towards the product. Lack of communication may dent the image and reputation of an organization resulting in losses (Lam et al., 2013). For example, the Exxon Valdez oil spill in 1989 is an example of an organization that did not capitalize on communication when the disaster stroke. The 1982 Tylenol over counter medication incident showed the importance of retaining the image and reputation of an organization (Czinkota, Hans and Gianpaolo 2014). The two companies play an important role, many consumers know about them, and occurrence of any incident attracts the mass media. J&J Company that owns the Tylenol accepted the mistake and involved different stakeholders in solving the problem, and the company was not affected (Gyrd-Jones, Bill and Dale 2013). However, Exxon suffered in both reputation and incomes. Hence, communication is important in creating differentiation and sustaining the requirements of the differentiation strategy that was created. Differentiation is important to the customers (Lam et al., 2013). The customers can use the information the differentiation strategies to compare across different platforms (Hillenbrand et al., 2013). For example, Samsung and Apple are two companies that manufacture both mobile hardware and supportive software (Czinkota, Hans and Gianpaolo 2014). The business model of both companies because of the quality, and innovativeness; how the companies communicate with the targeted customers (Lam et al., 2013). Mostly the products of Apple are expensive when compared to Samsung but the differentiation information makes the customer to decide and choose a product based on emotions and economic attractiveness (Hillenbrand et al., 2013). Knowledge and understanding of the product are easier from the perspective of the customer because the customer can enumerate the features and benefits and create an easier comparison (Czinkota, Hans and Gianpaolo 2014). Moreover, a customer can make future decisions based on current decisions such as meeting the information based on their marketing directives and proposition (Gyrd-Jones, Bill and Dale 2013). In conclusion, perceived differentiation is important for the success of any organization. Organizations operate and succeeds based on the understanding of the market requirements and how these requirements can be fulfilled. Different customers are attracted by different components such as prices and quality of services. A brand can use such information for differentiation purposes, and some differentiation strategies are more important when compared to alternative approaches. Strategic different is important because the process outlasts other differentiation strategies that include pricing. For example, quality differentiation allows an organization to charge a premium for the product because it engages the emotions of the customer. Moreover, aspiration, heritage, and other components are crucial in reviewing innovation requirements to enable the brand to outlast current strengths. References Czinkota, Michael, Hans Ruediger Kaufmann, and Gianpaolo Basile. 2014. "The relationship between legitimacy, reputation, sustainability and branding for companies and their supply chains." Industrial Marketing Management 43, no. 1, pp. 91-101. Gyrd-Jones, Richard, Bill Merrilees, and Dale Miller. 2013. "Revisiting the complexities of corporate branding: Issues, paradoxes, solutions." Journal of Brand Management vol. 20, no. 7, pp. 571-589. Hillenbrand, Philipp, Sarael Alcauter, Javier Cervantes, and Fernando Barrios. 2013. "Better branding: brand names can influence consumer choice." Journal of Product & Brand Management 22, no. 4, pp. 300-308. Lam, Pong Yuen, Annie Chan, Hannie Gopaoco, Kevin Oh, and Tsz Him So. 2013. "Dual branding strategy for a successful new product launch in China." Business Horizons vol. 56, no. 5, pp. 583-589. Nordin, Fredrik, Ingela Lindahl, and Staffan Brege. 2013. "The applicability of integrated solutions offerings: differential effects of product complexity." Journal of Relationship Marketing 12, no. 1, pp. 59-78. Read More