brand value and branding

8/22/2019 Brand Value and Branding

1/5

Brand Value and Branding

The concepts ofbrand equity and brandingare necessarily intertwined, and they are

connected with both advertising and public relations. Lisa Wood (2000) indicated thatthere are several different meanings of brand equity: First, it may be construed as the total

value of a brand as a distinct asset. In other words, when the brand is actually sold in themarketplace or included on a balance sheet. Second, brand equity may be interpreted as a

measure of the strength of consumer attachment to a brand. Finally, it may be considered

a description of the associations and beliefs the consumer has about a particular brand.The distinctions in these various definitions primarily derive from accounting and

marketing.

In many cases, financial accountants (preferring the first definition) will use the term

brand value rather than brand equity. The brand's value, relative to the rest of the

marketplace, emerges as the overriding consideration. Advertising and public relationsprofessionals generally recognize this first definition, but they tend to be more interested

in customerbrand relationships and associations. These professionals will often build onthe brand equity concept with ideas such as brand identity orbrand image.

Brand image is aligned with the needs and desires of a target market by utilizing the four

P's (product, price, place, and promotion). The combined success of these factors

determines brand strength, the degree of loyalty or attachment customers feel toward thebrand. Because there are a number of related concepts, Max Blackston (2000)

summarizes them with the key principle of brand equity; a brand is necessarily

intertwined with a product(s), but it is different because there is a consumer investment

over time.

Brand equity consists of the incremental, addedvalue qualities that synergistically

combine in the minds of consumers. A brand may be a product, but it can also represent

an organization through the creation of a unique identity.

Blackston argued that the fundamental marketing variables (product, price, etc.) arecritical values but the added value concept is where the success of branding is truly

realized. However, this concept is difficult to define because of its intangible nature.

Generally, this idea is indirectly measured or inferred in terms of the consumer's idea ofthe brand. Even though such inferences will continue, Blackston posited that greater

understanding of brand equity may be achieved by recognizing that brand relationshipsare occurring, interactive processes involving both the brand and the consumer.Relationships are, of course, constructed through communication. The organization is

projecting an image, and consumers are providing meaning to the messages. Thus, a

relationship between the brand and the consumer flourishes or disintegrates. These brandrelationships comprise two key factors that are necessary for synergistic success: trust in

the brand and customer satisfaction with the brand. In other words, added value is

realized when these factors are maximized.


2/5

The brand's success depends on the creation of a personal link with each consumer, and

obviously, this objective is not easy to achieve, but when an organization moves from a

self-centered to an othercentered (customer-focused) stance, success in theserelationships may be eventually achieved. Blackston indicated that the brand relationship

concept has been applied to the development of advertising campaigns, but it can be

extended to all areas of marketing communication, including public relations. Anobjective for a desired relationship with the critical stakeholders (the consumers) may

provide a guide for the brand's communication transactions with each consumer.

Because behavioral consistency is essential for long-term relationship success, the salespromotion, packaging, and public relations that are associated with a brand must be

consistent. When the consumer is satisfied and trusts these consistent behaviors, he or she

is likely to continue the brand relationship and, thus, added value may be achieved over

time in the branding experience. Corporate branding (and brand equity) is the true markof a product or organization. In other words, it can be construed as a unique declaration

of identity, quality, trust, and value with the final judgment on those factors resting with

the individual consumer.

With the branding concept in public relations (and related areas of communication), four

process areas are often considered: (1) creating, (2) maintaining, (3) damaging, and (4)

repairing. Creating unique identities for products is challenging, considering the vast

array of information that consumers are exposed to in the marketplace. William Wells,John Burnett, and Sandra Moriarty (2003) provided the following suggestions for

advertising and public relations professionals as they create messages about their brands:

1. Make the brand distinctive by drawing attention to its qualities/strengths.

2. Utilize a design that aligns with the brand image that you wish to project and sendpublic relations and advertising messages that are generally consistent with other

mass media messages.3. Make the packaging as functional as possible.4. Product packaging, advertising, and public relations should dovetail. In other

words, consistency is repeatedly emphasized.

Organizations need to ensure that their resources are committed to brands that offer the

greatest likelihood of success, whether those brands are products or subunits of theorganizations with their own distinct identities. As Peter Sackett and Efstathios

Kefallonitis (2003) argued, creating a unique brand experience will reflect the

organization's advantages over its competitors. Thus, the organization will maintain itsexisting customer base and also attract other consumers.

Sackett and Kefallonitis also emphasized the importance of aligning the consistency,

originality, and relevance of the brand experience to the core brand value (i.e., quality or

durability) that is being communicated. If this alignment does not occur, organizationswill struggle to differentiate their brands in the vast consumer universe of information.

They posited that creating brands involves attention to consumers' perceptions of similar

brands in the marketplace and, then, designing product features that are not only distinct


3/5

but also add value to those perceptions. Thus, added value is created and potentially

sustained for consumers and organizations.

In many cases, organizations will conduct research (i.e, interviews and surveys) todetermine the likely importance of various attributes in brand choice processes. In short,

what is missing in the marketplace? What would consumers like to see as they perceiveit? Subsequently, a brand is developed that addresses these needs and perceptions, and

this data is aligned with information on the target market (i.e., senior citizens). Of course,not all organizations follow these procedures with brand creation, but in general,

sophisticated organizations in the modern business environment engage in these rigorous

market research activities.

Brian Wansink (1997) advanced some additional thoughts on the brand creation

discussion by talking about re-creating brands or providing a revised brand perspective

for consumers. Many marketing managers believe that brands, like many other natural

life cycles, observe the laws of positive entropy; they are created, they grow, they mature,

they decline, and they die. In some cases, brand sales and market share decline becausepeople have lost interest due to changing conditions in the marketplace (i.e., typewriters

and the advent of word processing) or because another brand becomes more salient forconsumers. Wansink illustrated this re-creation with the Arm & Hammer situation in

1969. The product's sales were declining because of reduced home baking and the

introduction of ready-to-bake packaged food products. In order to address these issues,the product re-emerged as a deodorizer for refrigerators, freezers, and kitchen sink drains.

The product's sales rebounded. Even though brand creation and re-creation are distinct in

terms of actual product existence, the same principle guides the success of these

processes: addressing the needs of consumers and their perceptions in relation to your

product or organizational niche.

Brand re-creation can also be considered, in some product cases, a natural maintenance

activity. In order to maintain a successful brand relationship (as in many other

relationships), some modifications may need to occur. Of course, there are cases wherelimited brand maintenance occurs because the product continues to address the needs of

consumers in its particular niche. However, ongoing communication campaigns are

always recommended so that consumers are consistently reminded about the attributesand strengths of the organization or product.

Typically, organizations have different brand maintenance strategies and tactics. For

example, some organizations focus on their brand name, making it synonymous with a

product class. These corporate brand names appear as the only brand identity. Corporatebrands are used when a company operates in a tightly defined market (e.g., Kellogg's

with breakfast cereal). Promoting related products is a brand maintenance strategy for the

organization as well as for the potential variety of brand names (e.g., Raisin Bran).Standardization strategies may also be employed when companies wish to associate

related products or names internationally. Additionally, corporate history can be

influential when brands are leveraged orextended. With this strategy, a corporate brand


4/5

name is maintained by association with new products. In other words, the brand name is

revitalized and recreated.

As the information age continues, dynamic brand maintenance strategies are necessary.Brand leverage is an example of such a strategy, along with the more general goal of

creativity. Maintaining an information-based context may also be useful. In other words,through a medium such as a Web site, people consume, communicate, and transact with

the organization or corporate brand. With Web site maintenance, the corporation'sidentity (and that of its associated brands) is preserved in the minds of consumers. Even

though some modifications may inevitably occur, the brand is still important because a

personal link to the consumer has been maintained. Brand maintenance and relationshipmaintenance are not distinct concepts; they are necessarily intertwined.

In some cases, damage to a brand name's reputation occurs. Malfeasance on the part of

managers or the mishandling of crisis situations may provide rationales for why such

damage occurs. Because organizations can be construed as brands, there are numerous

examples of brand names that have endured injurious circumstances. The debacles thathave plagued corporations such as Exxon (1989 oil tanker mishap) and MCI

(misappropriation of corporate funds in 2001 and 2002) have been documented in thepopular media. Typically, such an event creates a thriving environment for brand

damage, especially if stakeholders, such as customers, perceive that the organization does

not care or is mishandling the situation.

However, brand identity may also become poorly perceived in an incremental fashion.Over the course of time, without proper maintenance, brand damage will probably occur

and, eventually, the brand's image cannot be restored to its prior positive state. If brand

identity is perceived as poor (damaged), the brand experience that is created will be

unfavorable. Corporate brand names can also be damaged by claims from internal andexternal stakeholder groups, such as the media, that are inconsistent with the

organization's story. Such claims can damage brands. However, if the organization candistance itself from the claims and provide evidence of accountability on the part of other

parties, brand damage may be limited. On the other hand, social legitimacy and financial

stability may be permanently harmed.

The image restoration strategies that are employed by various organizations provideinsight into the subject of brand repair, rejuvenating a damaged brand name.

W. L. Benoit (1995) provided a typology of brand repair and image restoration strategies

for corporations: (1) denying, (2) evading responsibility, (3) reducing offensiveness, (4)

taking corrective action, and (5) mortifying (mortification). Each of these strategies maybe effective in particular circumstances. With the first two strategies, if the organization

can legitimately deny or not take responsibility for a potentially damaging situation, these

communicative stances may be appropriate. Benoit also provides the followingsuggestions for image repair discourse:

1. Avoid making false claims for brands and provide adequate support.


5/5

2. If your organization is responsible, admit this fact immediately.

3. Communicate plans to correct and prevent recurrence of the problem.

The final recommendation might be classified as goodwill, if such actions are designed toenhance a community or group of stakeholders beyond simple repair of brand damage. If

customers perceive that the organization is truly acting in their best interests, brand repairwill begin to occur. It should also be noted that restoration tactics may not involve a long

period of time, if the organization is honest with its' stakeholders about crises and claims.In these cases, brand damage is limited because the organization assumes responsibility

and provides evidence related to claims.

Audience perceptions are critical to brand repair and image restoration. In terms ofperceptions, if the organization reminds stakeholders of past good works and

relationships through bolstering communication strategies without addressing the critical

brand-damaging issue(s), brand repair may not even occur.

Customers may quickly reject the brand, or it may eventually fade from the public scenebecause such reminders fall into a communicative vacuum chamber.

Brian C. Sowa

Further Readings

Entry Citation:

Sowa, Brian C. "Brand Equity and Branding."Encyclopedia of Public Relations. 2004.SAGE Publications. 1 May. 2010. .
http://www.sage-ereference.com/publicrelations/FurtherReading_n46.htmlhttp://www.sage-ereference.com/publicrelations/FurtherReading_n46.html

brand value and branding

Documents