Information about Brand

Marketing

Key concepts

Product / Price / Promotion Placement / Service / Retail Marketing research Marketing strategy Marketing management

Promotional content

Advertising / Branding Direct marketing / Personal Sales Product placement / Public relations Publicity / Sales promotion Underwriting

Promotional media

Printing / Publication / Broadcasting Out-of-home / Internet marketing Point of sale / Novelty items Digital marketing / In-game Word of mouth

This box:  •  • [ edit]

A brand includes a name, logo, slogan, and/or design scheme associated with a product or service. Brand recognition and other reactions are created by the use of the product or service and through the influence of advertising, design, and media commentary. A brand is a symbolic embodiment of all the information connected to the product and serves to create associations and expectations around it.

History

Brands in the field of marketing originated in the 19th century with the advent of packaged goods. According to Unilever records, the world's first registered brand was Pears Soap. Industrialization moved the production of many household items, such as soap, from local communities to centralized factories. When shipping their items, the factories would literally brand their logo or insignia on the barrels used. These factories, generating mass-produced goods, needed to sell their products to a wider market, to a customer base familiar only with local goods, and it turned out that a generic package of soap had difficulty competing with familiar, local products. The fortunes of many brands of that era, such as Uncle Ben's rice and Kellogg's breakfast cereal, illustrate the problem. The packaged goods manufacturers needed to convince the market that the public could place just as much trust in the non-local product. Campbell soup, Coca-Cola, Juicy Fruit gum, Aunt Jemima, and Quaker Oats were among the first American products to be 'branded', in an effort to increase the consumer's familiarity with the products.

Around 1900, James Walter Thompson published a house ad explaining trademark advertising, in an early commercial description of what we now know as branding. Companies soon adopted slogans, mascots, and jingles which began to appear on radio and early television. By the 1940s, Mildred Pierce manufacturers began to recognize the way in which consumers were developing relationships with their brands in a social/psychological/anthropological sense. From there, manufacturers quickly learned to associate other kinds of brand values, such as youthfulness, fun or luxury, with their products. This began the practice we now know as branding, where it is felt that consumers buy the brand instead of the product. This trend arose in the 1980s into what has been described as "brand equity mania".^[1] In 1988, when Phillip Morris purchased Kraft for six times what the company was worth on paper, it was felt that what they really purchased was its brand name.

April 2, 1993, labelled Marlboro Friday, was marked by some as the death of the brand.<ref name="nologo" /> On that day, Phillip Morris declared that they were going to cut the price of Marlboro cigarettes by 20%, in order to compete with bargain cigarettes. Marlboro cigarettes were notorious at the time for their heavy advertising campaigns, and well-nuanced brand image. On that day, Wall street stocks nose-dived<ref name="nologo" /> for a large number of 'branded' companies: Heinz, Coca Cola, Quaker Oats, PepsiCo. Many thought the event signalled the beginning of a trend towards "brand blindness" (Klein 13).

Concepts

Marketers engaged in branding seek to develop or align the expectations behind the brand experience, creating the impression that a brand associated with a product or service has certain qualities or characteristics that make it special or unique. A brand image may be developed by attributing a "personality" to or associating an "image" with a product or service, whereby the personality or image is "branded" into the consciousness of consumers. A brand is therefore one of the most valuable elements in an advertising theme. The art of creating and maintaining a brand is called brand management.

A brand which is widely known in the marketplace acquires brand recognition. When brand recognition builds up to a point where a brand enjoys a critical mass of positive sentiment in the marketplace, it is said to have achieved brand franchise. One goal in brand recognition is the identification of a brand without the name of the company present. For example, Disney has been successful at branding with their particular script font (originally created for Walt Disney's "signature" logo), which it used in the logo for go.com.

"DNA" refers to the unique attributes, essence, purpose, or profile of a brand and, therefore, a company. The term is borrowed from the biological DNA, the molecular "blueprint" or genetic profile of an organism which determines its unique characteristics.

Brand equity measures the total value of the brand to the brand owner, and reflects the extent of brand franchise. The term brand name is often used interchangeably with "brand", although it is more correctly used to specifically denote written or spoken linguistic elements of a brand. In this context a "brand name" constitutes a type of trademark, if the brand name exclusively identifies the brand owner as the commercial source of products or services. A brand owner may seek to protect proprietary rights in relation to a brand name through trademark registration.

Brand energy is a concept that links together the ideas that the brand is experiential; that it is not just about the experiences of customers/potential customers but all stakeholders; and that businesses are essentially more about creating value through creating meaningful experiences than generating profit. Economic value comes from businesses’ transactions between people whether they be customers, employees, suppliers or other stakeholders. For such value to be created people first have to have positive associations with the business and/or its products and services and be energised to behave positively towards them—hence brand energy. It has been defined as "The energy that flows throughout the system that links businesses and all their stakeholders and which is manifested in the way these stakeholders think, feel and behave towards the business and its products or services."

Attitude branding is the choice to represent a feeling, which is not necessarily connected with the product or consumption of the product at all. Marketing labeled as attitude branding includes that of Nike, Starbucks, The Body Shop, Safeway, and Apple Inc..<ref name="nologo" />

"A great brand raises the bar – it adds a greater sense of purpose to the experience, whether it's the challenge to do your best in sports and fitness, or the affirmation that the cup of coffee you're drinking really matters." — Howard Schultz (CEO, Starbucks Corp.)

The act of associating a product or service with a brand has become part of pop culture. Most products have some kind of brand identity, from common table salt to designer clothes. In non-commercial contexts, the marketing of entities which supply ideas or promises rather than product and services (e.g. political parties or religious organizations) may also be known as "branding".

Brand monopoly

In economic terms the "brand" is a device to create a monopoly—or at least some form of "imperfect competition"—so that the brand owner can obtain some of the benefits which accrue to a monopoly, particularly those related to decreased price competition. In this context, most "branding" is established by promotional means. There is also a legal dimension, for it is essential that the brand names and trademarks are protected by all means available. The monopoly may also be extended, or even created, by patent, copyright, trade secret (e.g. secret recipe), and other sui generis intellectual property regimes (e.g.: Plant Varieties Act, Design Act).

In all these contexts, retailers' "own label" brands can be just as powerful. The "brand", whatever its derivation, is a very important investment for any organization. RHM (Rank Hovis McDougall), for example, have valued their international brands at anything up to twenty times their annual earnings. Often, especially in the industrial sector, it is just the company's name which is promoted (leading to one of the most powerful statements of "branding"; the saying, before the company's downgrading, "No-one ever got fired for buying IBM").

Brand extension

An existing strong brand name can be used as a vehicle for new or modified products; for example, many fashion and designer companies extended brands into fragrances, shoes and accessories, home textile, home decor, luggage, (sun-) glasses, furniture, hotels, etc. Mars extended its brand to ice cream, Caterpillar to shoes and watches, Michelin to a restaurant guide, Adidas and Puma to personal hygiene.

There is a difference between brand extension and line extension. When Coca-Cola launched "Diet Coke" and "Cherry Coke" they stayed within the originating product category: non-alcoholic carbonated beverages. Procter & Gamble (P&G) did likewise extending its strong lines (such as Fairy Soap) into neighboring products (Fairy Liquid and Fairy Automatic) within the same category, dish washing detergents.

Multi-brands

In a market that is fragmented amongst a number of brands a supplier can choose deliberately to launch totally new brands in apparent competition with its own existing strong brand (and often with identical product characteristics), simply to soak up some of the share of the market which will in any case go to minor brands. The rationale is that having 3 out of 12 brands in such a market will give a greater overall share than having 1 out of 10 (even if much of the share of these new brands is taken from the existing one). In its most extreme manifestation, a supplier pioneering a new market which it believes will be particularly attractive may choose immediately to launch a second brand in competition with its first, in order to pre-empt others entering the market.

Individual brand names naturally allow greater flexibility by permitting a variety of different products, of differing quality, to be sold without confusing the consumer's perception of what business the company is in or diluting higher quality products.

Once again, Procter & Gamble is a leading exponent of this philosophy, running as many as ten detergent brands in the US market. This also increases the total number of "facings" it receives on supermarket shelves. Sara Lee, on the other hand, uses it to keep the very different parts of the business separate—from Sara Lee cakes through Kiwi polishes to L'Eggs pantyhose. In the hotel business, Marriott uses the name Fairfield Inns for its budget chain (and Ramada uses Rodeway for its own cheaper hotels).

Cannibalization is a particular problem of a "multibrand" approach, in which the new brand takes business away from an established one which the organization also owns. This may be acceptable (indeed to be expected) if there is a net gain overall. Alternatively, it may be the price the organization is willing to pay for shifting its position in the market; the new product being one stage in this process.

Abercrombie & Fitch is a multi-brands company, rolling out Lifestyle Brands.

Small business brands

Some people argue that it is not possible to brand a small business. However, many small businesses have become very successful due to branding. For example, Starbucks used almost no advertising, yet over a period of ten years developed such a strong brand that the company expanded from one shop to hundreds.

Own brands and generics

With the emergence of strong retailers, the "own brand", the retailer's own branded product (or service), emerged as a major factor in the marketplace. Where the retailer has a particularly strong identity, such as, in the UK, Marks & Spencer in clothing, this "own brand" may be able to compete against even the strongest brand leaders, and may dominate those markets which are not otherwise strongly branded. There was a fear that such "own brands" might displace all other brands (as they have done in Marks & Spencer outlets), but the evidence is that—at least in supermarkets and department stores—consumers generally expect to see on display something over 50 per cent (and preferably over 60 per cent) of brands other than those of the retailer. Indeed, even the strongest own brands in the United Kingdom rarely achieve better than third place in the overall market.

The strength of the retailers has, perhaps, been seen more in the pressure they have been able to exert on the owners of even the strongest brands (and in particular on the owners of the weaker third and fourth brands). Relationship marketing has been applied most often to meet the wishes of such large customers (and indeed has been demanded by them as recognition of their buying power). Some of the more active marketers have now also switched to 'category marketing'—in which they take into account all the needs of a retailer in a product category rather than more narrowly focusing on their own brand.

At the same time, generic (that is, effectively unbranded goods) have also emerged. These made a positive virtue of saving the cost of almost all marketing activities; emphasizing the lack of advertising and, especially, the plain packaging (which was, however, often simply a vehicle for a different kind of image). It would appear that the penetration of such generic products peaked in the early 1980s, and most consumers still seem to be looking for the qualities that the conventional brand provides.

See also

• Individual branding
• Personal branding
• Emory Brand Institute
• Aspirational brand
• Brand architecture
• Brand community
• Brand engagement
• Brand loyalty
• Brand implementation
• Brand management
• Brand orientation
• Branding Faith
• Designer label
• Employer branding
• Integrated marketing communications
• Generic brand
• List of oldest companies
• Logo extraction puzzles
• Name generator
• Naming firms
• Trademark

Bibliography

• Birkin, Michael (1994). "Assessing Brand Value," in Brand Power. ISBN 0-8147-7965-4
• Gregory, James (2003). Best of Branding. ISBN 0-07-140329-9
• Kotler, Philip and Pfoertsch, Waldemar (2006). B2B Brand Management, ISBN 3-540-25360-2.
• Miller & Muir (2004). The Business of Brands, ISBN 0-470-86259-9.
• Olins, W (2003). On Brand, London: Thames and Hudson, ISBN 0-500-51145-4.
• Schmidt, Klaus and Chris Ludlow (2002). Inclusive Branding: The Why and How of a Holistic approach to Brands. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, ISBN 0-333-98079-4
• Wernick, Andrew (1991). Promotional Culture: Advertising, Ideology and Symbolic Expression (Theory, Culture & Society S.), London: Sage Publications, ISBN 0-8039-8390-5
• Cooke, Phil (2008). "Branding Faith: Why Some Churches and Non-Profits Impact the Culture and Others Don't". ISBN-10: 0830745637

References

External links

• FindOwnerSearch
• Publications
• Brand Packaging
• Brandchannel
• Brandweek