Brand
A
brand is a collection of feelings toward an economic producer; more specifically, it refers to the concrete symbols for those feelings, such as a name and design scheme. Feelings are created by the accumulation of experiences with the specific product or service, both directly relating to its use, and through the influence of
advertising,
design, and media commentary. A brand is a
symbolic embodiment of all the information connected to a company,
product or
service. A brand serves to create associations and
expectations among products made by a
producer. A brand often includes an explicit
logo, fonts,
color schemes,
symbols, which are developed to represent implicit
values,
ideas, and even
personality.
The brand, and "branding" and
brand equity have become increasingly important components of
culture and the
economy, now being described as "cultural accessories and personal philosophies".
[Klein, Naomi (2000) No logo, Canada: Random House, ISBN 0676972829]Some marketers distinguish the psychological aspect of a brand from the experiential aspect. The experiential aspect consists of the sum of all points of contact with the brand and is known as the
brand experience. The psychological aspect, sometimes referred to as the
brand image, is a symbolic construct created within the minds of people and consists of all the information and expectations associated with a product or service.
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, as it demonstrates what the brand owner is able to offer in the
marketplace. The art of creating and maintaining a brand is called
brand management.
A brand which is widely known in the marketplace acquires
brand recognition. Where 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 Walt Disney's signature), which it used in the logo for go.com.
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.
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".
Consumers may look on branding as an important
value added aspect of products or services, as it often serves to denote a certain attractive quality or characteristic. From the perspective of brand owners, branded products or services also command higher prices. Where two products resemble each other, but one of the products has no associated branding (such as a
generic, store-branded product), people may often select the more expensive branded product on the basis of the quality of the brand or the reputation of the brand owner.
Advertising spokespersons have also become part of some brands, for example:
Mr. Whipple of
Charmin toilet tissue and
Tony the Tiger of
Kellogg's.
In economic terms the "brand" is, in effect, 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. However, 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.
There are a number of possible policies.
Company name
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").
Family branding
In this case a very strong brand name (or company name) is made the vehicle for a range of products (for example, Mercedes or Black & Decker) or even a range of subsidiary brands (such as Cadbury's Dairy Milk, Cadbury's Flake or Cadbury's Fingers in the United States).
Individual branding
Each brand has a separate name (such as Seven-Up or Nivea Sun (Beiersdorf)), which may even compete against other brands from the same company (for example, Persil, Omo and Surf are all owned by Unilever).
In this case the supplier of a key component, used by a number of suppliers of the end-product, may wish to guarantee its own position by promoting that component as a brand in its own right. The most frequently quoted example is Intel (in the PC market, with the slogan 'Intel Inside'), but the sweetener Aspartame used much the same approach (to lock in the soft drinks manufacturers who represented a major market for the product).
In terms of existing products, brands may be developed in a number of ways:
Brand extension
The existing strong brand name can be used as a vehicle for new or modified products; for example, after many years of running just one brand, Coca-Cola launched "Diet Coke" and "Cherry Coke"; although its subsequent change to its main brand and the retrenchment to 'Classic Coke' demonstrated some of the problems this may cause! Procter & Gamble (P&G), in particular, has made regular use of this device, extending its strongest brand names (such as Fairy Soap) into new markets (the very successful Fairy Liquid, and more recently Fairy Automatic).
Multi-brands
Alternatively, 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).
Cannibalism 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.
Small Business Brands
Branding a small business is essentially the same thing as a larger corporation, the only differences being that small businesses usually have a smaller market and have less reach than larger brands. Some people argue that it is not possible to brand a small business, however there are many examples of small businesses that became very successful due to branding. Starbucks is one company that used almost no advertising and over a period of ten years developed such a strong brand that the company went from one shop to hundreds.
With the emergence of strong retailers the "own brand", the retailer's own branded product (or service), also emerged as a major factor in the marketplace. Where the retailer has a particularly strong identity (such as 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.
Therefore the strongest independent brands (such as Kellogg's and Heinz), which have maintained their marketing investments, should continue to flourish. More than 50 per cent of United Kingdom FMCG brand leaders have held their position for more than two decades, although it is arguable that those which have switched their budgets to "buy space" in the retailers may be more exposed.
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, probably as an outgrowth of consumerism, "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.
Brands in the field of marketing originated in the
19th century with the advent of packaged
goods.
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, which is where the term comes from.
These factories, generating mass-produced goods, needed to sell their products to a wider market, to a customer base familiar only with local goods. It quickly became apparent that a generic package of soap had difficulty competing with familiar, local products. 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,
Aunt Jemima, and
Quaker Oats were among the first products to be 'branded', in an effort to increase the consumer's familiarity with their products. Many brands of that era, such as
Uncle Ben's rice and
Kellogg's breakfast cereal furnish illustrations of the problem.
Around
1900,
James Walter Thompson published a house ad explaining trademark advertising. This was an early commercial explanation 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, 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 continued to the
1980s, which have been described as "brand equity mania".
In
1988,
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.
Marlboro Friday
April 2,
1993 was marked by some as the death of the brand.
On that day, Phillip Morris declared that they were 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
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).
Attitude branding
Attitude branding is the choice to represent a large feeling, which is not necessarily connected with the product or consumption of the product at all. Marketing labeled as attitude branding include that of
Nike,
Starbucks,
The Body Shop,
Safeway, and
Apple Computer.
In the 2000 book,
No Logo, attitude branding is described as a "fetish strategy".
"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 Shultz (head of marketing for Starbucks and formerly Nike)
Business Week magazine publishes an annual "brand scorecard" of the
top 100 most valuable brands worldwide. Some results from the
2005 survey, which contained 53 American, 37 European, 7 Japanese, and 3 South Korean brands, are listed below.
The European breakdown is as follows: 9 German, 8 French, 5 Swiss, 4.5 British, 4 Italian, 3.5 Dutch, 1 Finnish, 1 Spanish, and 1 Swedish
United States Of America
*
Amazon.com (
Internet services)
*
America Online (
Internet services)
*
American Express (
credit card)
*
Apple (
computer)
*
Built NY (
Accessories) (
bags)
*
Caterpillar Inc. (
machinery)
*
Citi (
banking)
*
Coca-Cola (
soft drink)
*
Disney (
entertainment)
*
Ford Motor Company (
automobiles)
*
Gap (clothing retailer) (
apparel)
*
GE (
household appliances)
*
Global Gillette (
shaving accessories)
*
Goldman Sachs (
financial services)
*
Google (
internet)
*
Harley Davidson (
motorcycles)
*
H. J. Heinz Company (
food)
*
The Hershey Company (
food)
*
Hertz (
automotive)
*
IBM (
computer)
*
Intel (
computer)
*
Johnson & Johnson (
personal care health care)
*
KFC (
fast food restaurant)
*
Kleenex (
personal care)
*
Kraft Foods (
food)
*
Levi's (
clothing retailer)
*
Marlboro (
tobacco)
*
McDonald's (
fast food restaurant)
*
Microsoft (
software)
*
Motorola (
telecommunication equipment)
*
MTV (
entertainment)
*
Nike (
footwear)
*
Pepsi (
soft drink)
*
Pfizer (
pharmaceuticals)
*
Starbucks (
coffee)
Europe
*
Adidas (
footwear—
Germany)
*
BMW (
automobile—
Germany)
*
Mercedes-Benz(
automobile—
Germany)
*
Puma (
footwear—
Germany)
*
Volkswagen (
automobile—
Germany)
*
Virgin Group (
airlines,
entertainment—
UK)
*
BBC (
media—
UK)
*
British Airways (
airlines—
UK)
*
UBS (
banking—
Switzerland)
*
HSBC (
banking—
UK)
*
Philips (
electronics—
Netherlands)
*
NestlĂ© (food—
Switzerland)
*
Alessi (Home Accessories—
Italy)
*
IKEA (
furniture—
Sweden)
*
Louis Vuitton (
leather goods and luxury apparel—
France)
*
Chanel (fashion—
France)
*
Gucci (luxury apparel—
Italy)
*
Nokia (
mobile phones—
Finland)
*
Renault (
automobile—
France)
*
Total S.A. (
petroleum—
France)
*
BP (
petrol—
UK)
*
SAP (
software—
Germany)
*
Diesel (Apparel—
Italy)
*
Giorgio Armani (luxury apparel—
Italy)
*
Barilla (food—
Italy)
*
Volvo (
automobile—
Sweden)
*
Ferrari (
automobile—
Italy)
*
Manchester United (
football—
UK)
*
Vodafone (
mobile phone operator—
UK)
*
Siemens AG (
electronics—
Germany)
Japan
*
Sony (
electronics)
*
Panasonic (
electronics)
*
Toyota (
automobiles)
*
Canon (
photography)
*
Honda (
automobiles)
*
Nintendo (
video games)
*
Nissan (
automobiles)
South Korea
*
Hyundai (
automobiles)
*
LG (
electronics)
*
Samsung (
electronics and
mobile phones)
*
Logo*
Logo extraction puzzles*
Brand architecture*
Brand experience research*
Employer branding*
Brand loyalty*
Generic brand*
Interbrand*
List of oldest companies*Miller & Muir (2004)
The Business of Brands, ISBN 0470862599 - Examines how brands can create value for businesses
*Olins, W (2003)
On Brand, London: Thames and Hudson, ISBN 0500511454
*Schmidt, Klaus; Ludlow,Chris (2002) "Inclusive Branding: The why and how of a holistic approach to brands", Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, ISBN 0333980794
*Wernick, Andrew (1991) "Promotional Culture: Advertising, Ideology and Symbolic Expression (Theory, Culture & Society S.)", London: Sage Publications Ltd, ISBN 0803983905
*"Best of Branding" (2003) James Gregory presents eye-opening case studies that unveil results from the Corporate Branding Index. www.corebrand.com, ISBN 0071403299
*
BusinessWeek 2006 Global Brands Scorecard*
What Makes A Great Logo - Commentary on various logos and brands.
*
An Introduction to Branding - Introductory article on branding
*
Brandmarker - The art group
monochrom's attempt to evaluate the actual power of commercial brands by making people draw famous logos from memory.
*
Trade Names in
Webster's Online Dictionary - the Rosetta Edition
*
Introduction to Small Business Branding - An article about the specifics of branding a small business
*
Who's wearing the trousers? -
The Economist's defence of brands
*
Branding Greece - Branding a country: Greece
*
Brand Recognition Association Network*
Leading Consumer Brands from the Muslim World*
Financial Times 2006 Global Brand Ranking by Millward Brown Optimor (reg. req'd to see full tables)*
Brands That Don't Travel (Language Pitfalls)*
brandchannel - online exchange about brands from a global perspective
*
Branding Whitepapers by Interbrand*
History of Branding*
Stealing Share - Branding from a different perspective