branding and brand management – cos case study file[online subscription] available from:

BRANDING & BRAND MANAGEMENT

1 of 44


2 of 44

Karen Ryan

[email protected]

Senior Lecturer

BA (Hons) Fashion and BA(Hons) Fashion Branding and Communication

Arts University Bournemouth


3 of 44

Executive Summary

In this report the aim was to understand the brand strategy of Cos and the effect of

the brand strategy on customer experience, to look at any issues and how to create a

brand strategy to manage those issues in the future.

The introduction provides an overview of the fashion retail industry in today’s climate

and the areas of focus and discussion as widely shared in 2016.

Part I provides an introduction of the retailer Cos, its brand outline, brand market

environment and rationale for its brand issue. In order to understand the internal

structure of Cos an organisation structure hierarchy of the H&M Group is presented.

This section also addresses the brands position within the retail fashion industry and

looks at Cos’s key aims and values. A Pestel graph is used to justify the macro

environmental drivers for the issue/rationale and these issues are discussed with

further justification and explanation in the report.

The report explores in Part II the stages of brand resonance through Kapferer’s Brand

Identity Prism and Keller’s Brand Resonance Pyramid and how they correlate to Cos’s

brand experience V customer experience. In order to understand how the brand Cos

operates, section two uses these models to hi-light the current brand strategy and

where the brand issue emerges with reference to a SWOT in order to summarise and

justify the impact of market changes on the brand.

Part III looks at several academic models that have been developed and used as

indexes to measure and analyse the customer experience, and a Cos customer

journey map to explore the brands touchpoints and look at the customer experience

valued by consumers.

In Part VI of the report the discussion is around current issues faced by the brand and

gives recommendations to overcome them. The report also analyses and challenges

the current vision and mission of Cos based on their current strategy in today’s context.


4 of 44

Contents

Title Page……………………………………………………………………… Page 1 Executive Summary………………………………………………………..... Page 2 Contents………………………………………………………………………. Page 3 List of Figures………………………………………………………………… Glossary……………………………………………………………………..... Page 6 Introduction…………………………………………………………………… Page 7 Part I Justification for branding issue (rationale)…………………………. Page 9 Part II Assessment of impact on brand management approach……….. Page 15 Part III Evaluation of options for brand management approach……….. Page 21 Part VI Proposal and consideration of implementation issues…………. Page 25 Conclusion…………………………………………………………………… Page 29 References in Harvard referencing style…………………………………. Page 30 Appendices…………………………………………………………………... Pages 37 -41 Organisational overview……………………………………………………. Page 42 Additional supporting materials……………………………………………. Page 43


5 of 44

List of Figures

1.1 Brand Architecture: House of Brands. Ryan, K. (2016)

1.2 Cos Covent Garden UK Flagship Store (2016). [online image]. Available from:

http://www.kalory.co.uk/2016/04/shop-photographer-london/ [Accessed Sept

2016]

1.3 Cos Aims and Values Chart. Ryan, K. (2016)

1.4 Cos PESTEL analysis table. Ryan, K. (2016)

2.1 Cos Brand Identity Prism. Ryan, K. (2016) Adapted from Kapferer’s Model

2.2 Cos Brand Resonance Pyramid. Ryan, K. (2016) Adapted from Keller’s Model

2.3 Cos Customer Journey Mapping. Ryan, K. (2016). Adapted from b2b

International. Available from:

https://www.b2binternational.com/publications/customer-journey-mapping/

2.4 Cos SWOT Evaluation of Brand and Customer Experience. Ryan, K. (2016)

3.1 Customer Experience Strategy. Ryan, K (2016). Adapted from b2b International.

Available from: https://www.b2binternational.com/publications/customer-journey-

mapping/

3.2 Cos Customer Touchpoints. Ryan, K. (2016) Adapted from Allmond, A (2015).

Available from: http://www.allographics.com/brand-alignment-touchpoints/ [Accessed

18th October 2016]

3.3 Drapers multi-channel insight report chart. Knowles J (2016) Drapers Guides

[online subscription] Available from:




http://www.allographics.com/brand-alignment-touchpoints/


6 of 44

file:///Domain/business.aib.ac.uk/Users/kryan/Desktop/Multichannel%20Customer%2

0Insight%20Report%202016%20_%20Drapers%20Guides.htm [Accessed 11th

October 2016]

3.4 Drapers multi-channel insight report chart. Knowles J (2016) Drapers Guides

[online subscription] Available from:

file:///Domain/business.aib.ac.uk/Users/kryan/Desktop/Multichannel%20Customer%2

0Insight%20Report%202016%20_%20Drapers%20Guides.htm [Accessed 11th

October 2016]

4.1 Cos Brand Growth Strategy. Ryan, K. (2016)

4.2 Potential Future Mapping Experience for the brand Cos using an Omni-channel

Strategy (Karen Ryan 2016). Adapted from Aspect. Available from:

http://www.aspect.com/solutions/call-center/omni-channel-experiences [Accessed

12th October 2016]

4.3 Cos Brand Growth Strategy. Ryan, K. (2016)

/Domain/business.aib.ac.uk/Users/kryan/Desktop/Multichannel%20Customer%20Insight%20Report%202016%20_%20Drapers%20Guides.htm





7 of 44

Glossary

Aspirational group – Those whom one would like to compare themselves.

BCs – Brand communities attached to a product.

Brand Experience – Generates advocacy through consumer influence.

Bricks and Mortar – Physical presence of an organization through retail store.

CDJ - Customer Decision Journey, mapping the moment of purchase.

Critical Path – Sequence of activities to complete in a long term project plan.

CSR - Corporate Social Responsibility self-regulation integrated into business model.

CBBE - Customer Based Brand Equity Model

CEM - Customer Experience Management

CRM - Customer Relationship management

Demographics – Statistical data relating to the population

Differentiation – Differences between cultures.

Distribution – The process of getting goods to stores where they are sold.

Experience Marketing – create a closer bond between the customer and the brand.

Fast Fashion – Contemporary term to describe catwalk trends to store.

Flagship Store – Companies main store showcasing breadth of products/brands.

Gen – X - Generation X the generation born from the early 1960s to mid 1970s

Gen – Y - Generation Y the generation born in the 1980s and 1990s

House of Brands – Architecture focuses on multiple sub-brands.

Luxury Brand – Premium and high fashion brands.

Multi-channel – Interact on various platforms.

Omni-channel – Cross channel business model to increase customer experience.

OBCs – on-line brand communities

RRP - Recommended retail price

RTW - Ready-to-wear, factory made clothing ready to wear in a finished condition.

Segmentation (market segmentation) marketing strategy dividing a broad target

market

Sustainability –create a system that can be supported indefinitely without impact on

the environment and social responsibility.

USP - unique selling point a factor that differentiates your product from its

competitors.


8 of 44

Introduction

“As goods and services become commoditized, the customer experiences that companies

create will matter most.”

Pine et al. (1998) pp. 97-105 Fashion Retail is notoriously fickle, trends come and go, and fashion brands have

developed and discarded many different versions of brand and marketing strategies

over the course of their brand’s development. Many in order to become more profitable

and satisfy their stakeholders (a common misconception mistaking market share for

emotional share (Morrison, et al 2007), others to grow more sustainably (Aaker, DA.

2001), and the most recognised modern approach, to satisfy a brands customer needs

based on the experience the brand offers them. (Keller, KL. 2003). It is recognised

through academic studies that there is a clear relationship between customer

satisfaction and financial success (Fornell et al 2006).

A key area of discussion at the Drapers Fashion Forum 2016 (Stocker, K. 2016), from

on-line discounters to luxury R-T-W brands was the importance of their company’s

brands ‘building on the customer experience’ and the growing significance of a brand

savvy, price savvy customer whose loyalty is based fundamentally on the brands

holistic approach to customer experience (Morrison, et al. 2007).

Therefore, many of the presentations were formed around how those retailers can

maximise their relationship between brand experience, the product and the customer

experience, growing existing business and providing a successful relationship for the

brand and customer in the future (Fornell,1992).

Of course there are many areas which are key to improving brand experience including

the successful integration of a brand across a number of channels (customer

omniscience) maximising customer data through integrated information technology

systems, targeted global expansion (on-line markets and stores), and the current

phrase amongst retailers, “local is the new global” ( Kapferer, 2008)


9 of 44

adopting the culture and communications in the area of expansion.

Many high street brands endeavour to provide a key customer experience through a

brand experience strategy. This report endeavour’s to explore the brand experience

in relation to the brand COS (The H&M Group), which psychological aspects and

marketing channels of the company support the brand experience, and how Cos’s

customer loyalty and satisfaction could be improved to encompass a more successful

customer experience and brand model for the future (Fornell,1992) by improving the

consistency across all marketing channels particularly digital.


10 of 44

Part I Rationale

Brand issue: How can Fashion Retailer Cos successfully improve their

customer experience for consumers when shopping for their brand across multi

channels?

Brand Outline

Cos (Collection of Style) launched in 2007 and sits within the house of brands of the

H&M Group, a successful Scandinavian fashion retailer. Cos as a standalone brand

has over 150 stores globally including London, Paris, Tokyo, Hong Kong and New

York and a formative on-line presence with 19 on-line markets. Their brand ethos

echoes the future of modern customers and retailers, valuing transparency,

sustainability, openness and simplicity.

In order to outline the business and relationship of COS it is important to also

acknowledge its parent company and the house of brands within the H&M Group.

The following table illustrates Cos’s positioning within its current brand architecture as

a brand within a house of brands (Fig.1.1). The H&M Group are looking at launching

a further two new brands in 2017 (H&M Annual Report 2015).

Figure 1.1 Brand Architecture: House of Brands (Ryan 2016)

Cos was originally conceived to provide affordable fashion that would offer an

aesthetic alternative to luxury brands such as Prada, Fillipa K and Acne and compete

on the high street alongside Zara/Massimo Dutti, Reiss, Whistles and on-line with

Finery. Whilst Cos’s image is akin to a luxury brand (Schroeder et al 2006) its price

structure falls well below the pricing of a luxury brand.

H&M Group

H&M& Other Stories

Cheap Monday

Cos Monki Weekday

H&M Group House of Brands

H&M Groups House of Brands consist of H&M, & Other Stories, Cheap Monday, Cos, Monki and Weekday.Each sub-brand operates independently and obtain separate market share and profits.


11 of 44

Attention to detail is everything for Cos and their stores are no exception. Across the

globe they find extraordinary buildings where they can maintain the traditional

elements and details whilst opening up the spaces through modern architecture and

design to create gallery-like spaces which act as backdrop to their collections creating

the ultimate customer experience in-store (Brakus et al 2009).

Since its launch in 2007 Cos has aimed its brand at a premium “older” customer

(spanning generation X and Y) and focusing on with a stronger online presence (Euro

monitor 2016 p.9). Heavily influenced by architecture, art and music and literature,

Cos regularly collaborate and curate with art venues such as The Serpentine Gallery

and the Guggenheim Museum, they create playlists on Sound Cloud and engage in

art, music and literature events creating a sense of community (Muniz et al 2001).

Collections are designed to bridge the gap between luxury and high street fashion,

and stories are created every 18 months. Cos are striving to be the antithesis of trend

driven, consumer driven fast fashion.

Figure 1.2 Cos Covent Garden UK Flagship Store (Cosstores.com)


12 of 44

Brand Market Environment

The H&M Group have consistently expanded the brand Cos and from 2009 to 2014

Cos grew from one percent to three percent of H&M Group’s total revenue, an increase

of $132 million to $625 million in sales according to estimates by Euro monitor (Euro

monitor 2016).

In recent months there have been a significant number of risk factors affecting fashion

retail and directly affecting Cos within the H&M Group, including the decision to leave

the European Union, fluctuating economies including the disparity between the value

of the dollar against the pound. And most recently the press has reported that the UK

arm of H&M’s profits after tax fell 19% to £36.4m for the year to 30 November 2015,

as the retailer continued its store expansion programme (Drapers Sept 2016). The

investment in bricks and mortar stores is having a negative effect on sales growth,

profit and margin, and in these economically uncertain times the H&M Group needs to

respond positively to this financial downturn and focus on its strengths and invest in

routes to maximise sales growth and customer equity.

The H&M Group reflect upon and address these risks regularly in their monthly

company reports (H&M Group 2016). In the H&M Hennes and Mauritz three-month

report (1st Dec 2015- 31st August 2016) they reported a number of risks and

uncertainties relating to fashion including: weather conditions, negative

macroeconomic changes, geopolitical risks, sustainability and external factors. But

more significantly the areas in which this report alludes are changes in consumer

behaviour and how the brand is managed consistently across all routes to market.

Brand Issue

This report looks to outline how Cos can successfully build on their customer equity

(Brakus et al. 2009), grow year on year sales across all channels of the business and

provide a positive customer experience for consumers when shopping for their brand

across multichannel. This relies on Cos implementing a successful integration of their

brand across a number of channels (customer omniscience) maximising customer

data through integrated information technology systems as outlined in the introduction.


13 of 44

Cos’s web site makes its aims and values clear that the customer is central to

everything the company does (Figure 1.3) and is concerned with the ‘brand

experience’. These aims and values align themselves closely to imitate the retail

strategy/footprint of the luxury sector (D'Arienzo, 2016). Cos aims to provide high

levels of brand experience from their modern, functional stores, to the attention to

detail with customer service.

Figure 1.3 Cos Aims and Values (Ryan 2016)

It is difficult to evaluate whether the customer is as aware of these values as a brand

strategist? However, Cos puts the emphasis of their brand DNA (Shaw, 2007), and

the importance of the brand and customer experience as their focus. The statements

sum up the brands ideology of wanting to promote loyalty, a lasting customer

experience and an emotional brand connection, similar to the model of emotional and

consumer behaviour (Brakus, et al. 2009) followed by many marketers and academics.

There has been a noticeable change in fashion retail in relation to consumer behaviour

and expectations across pre purchase, purchase and post purchase touch points

(Figure 3.2). This report seeks to identify the issue of improving the customer

experience across its multichannel operation using improved digital business

strategies to improve key customer touchpoints and address any negativity and

TheCosCustomer

Thecustomeriscentraltoeverythingwedo

Wewantourcustomerstoenjoyahigh

levelofserviceToprovideourcustomerswithagreat

shoppingexperienceeverytime

TheCosBrand

Thecollectionsreflectourcorevaluesoftimeless,modern,tactileandfunctional

design.

TimelessgarmentsforeverydaywearWeensureallCOSgarmentsarecomfortableandfunctional.

CosStores

WecreateanuncomplicatedatmospherethatallCOScustomerscanenjoy.

CosValues

Ourvaluesshouldberegardedasasupportandsomethingtoleanoninour

everydaywork.

Commonvaluesinspirecontentment,commitmentandhappiness.

Oursharedvaluesareopenness,simplicity,constantimprovement,beliefinpeople

andcostconsciousness.

CosResponsibilities

Weaimforsustainabilityineverythingwedo.

Sustainabilityisanintegralpartofour

culture.


14 of 44

feedback from customers surrounding poor customer experience particularly around

purchasing and delivery.

James Knowles, head of commercial projects, Drapers discusses “The multichannel

fashion shopper is focused on the product and is browsing on several devices and

apps, before drilling down to their preferred product and retailer. Services and

functions that support the shopping experience (including logistics and order fulfilment)

must be channel agnostic, and deliver a seamless purchasing and delivery

experience.” There is not currently an integrated digital system in place to harness

these areas within the Cos brand and the retail and online channels operate quite

separately which can lead to frustration for the customer in terms of purchasing and

returns.

Whilst the H&M Group have invested heavily in store expansion for Cos and the sub-

brand ‘& Other Stories’, the majority of Cos’s competitors have invested heavily in

digital strategies (All Saints (Stocker, K. 2016)) providing their customers with a

seamless shopping experience across all routes to market and an integrated and

managed approach of communication and social media.

In order to reflect the market changes in the fashion retail sector and use appropriate

methods to identify positive and negative impacts on Cos the latter part of this section

sums up the issues with a Pestel analysis to analyse and monitor the macro-

environmental factors that have had an impact on Cos and previously been discussed

in the brand outline, market environment and brand issues. Of the hi-lighted threats

the main two areas in the Pestel Analysis are technology and social.

The Pestel reflects the key technological issues which Cos have an opportunity to

address through the implementation of digital online and offline business models. Cos

will also need to invest in new ways of distributing fashion and engaging with their

customers. Cos has an excellent vertical manufacturing operation but distribution and

delivery could be addressed in the future. Cos could look at new ways of

communicating with customers using social media networking and e-store models as


15 of 44

there is currently no parity or control in some of these areas across sale channels

which again are reflected in some of the negative social media feedback (Appendix

III).

Looking at the Pestel, Cos is socially weak on integration between social media and

e-store. The H&M Group have also rapidly expanded Cos into new markets based on

mirroring the history of H&M’s brand footprint, predominantly with store formats and

fewer online formats following behind.

Figure 1.4 Cos Pestel Analysis (Ryan 2016)

In Part II the report begins to assess the impact on the brand Cos’s management

approach. The report endeavours to investigate the current interactions between

brand and customer and the opportunities to build brand personality, brand community,

brand trust and brand attachment to maximise the potential of branding and customer

experience in order to drive the success and growth of the brand in the future (Keller,

2003). The report further explores the brand issue of improving Cos’s customer

experience for consumers when shopping for their brand across multichannels

improving the consistency across all marketing channels particularly digital.

POLITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SOCIAL

TECHNOLOGICAL ECONOMIC LEGAL

• National and international tax legislation• Corporate tax, customs duties, income taxes

and indirectly via VAT

• Fluctuation in the US dollar/euro exchange

rate

• Action of UK leaving EU could impact on purchasing costs by decisions at a

national level on export/import subsidies,

customs duties, textile quotas,

embargoes, etc.

• Risks in global political climates

• Sustainable policy• Climate change

• Dwindling natural resources

• 78% renewable electricity in company

operations

• 56% less greenhouse gas since 2014• 31% cotton from sustainable sources 2015

• Animal rights groups/animal welfare policy

• 12k tons recycled clothing in 2015

• Environment awareness creates new

• market segments

• Ageing population• Aligning products to socio cultural diversity

• Weak integration between social media

and e-store

• Rapid expansion into new markets

• Vertical operation• On-line business models to compliment

bricks and mortar

• New ways of distributing fashion and

engaging with customers

• Communication with customers usingsocial media networking and e-store

• Abandoning the high street to on-line models

• Interest, currency and credit risk• GDP Growth

• UK unemployment at

• Median household disposable income

• Consumer spending growth

• Foreign currencies• Provisions for pensions

• Swedish Companies Act• Nasdaq Stockholm Rules for Issuers

• Swedish Corporate Governance Code

• Equal opportunities

• Minimum wage

• Zero hours contracts• Manufacture must adhere to

• Intellectual property

• Improved labour standards

Cos PESTEL Analysis


16 of 44

Part II Assessment of impact on brand management approach

“The most valuable brand building block, brand resonance, occurs when all the other brand building blocks are established. With true brand resonance, customers express a high degree of loyalty to the brand

such that they actively seek means to interact with the brand and share their experiences with others”

Kotler 2006 p.167

Following on from Part I and in response to the changing environment of customer

behaviour and shopping habits in fashion retail it is vital to look at the current brand

management approach to Cos and identify where it can improve in order to provide a

higher level of customer experience and brand resonance for the Cos customer of the

future with particular emphasis on the issue of improving the consistency of all routes

to market using seamless digital technology.

Kapferer has written widely about the importance of building communications between

the identity of a brand and its customer, by identifying the key facets in order to build

a relationship on constructive theory and not on a hollow identity (Kapferer 2008 p.158).

In this section the report looks at Kapferer’s Brand Identity Prism and identifies the six

key facets relating back to Cos’s brand identity in order to establish its strengths and

weaknesses.

Figure 2.1 Cos Brand Identity Prism (Ryan 2016) adapted from Kapferer’s Model

PICTURE OF RECIEVER

INT

ER

NA

LIS

AT

ION

PICTURE OF SENDER

EX

TE

RN

AL

ISA

TIO

N

COS BRAND IDENTITY PRISMBased on Kapferer’s Model

ReflectionTimeless,modern,confidentandconsidered

RelationshipThego-toworkwearwardrobeHighcustomeradvocacy

PhysiqueFashionbrandforwomenandmenRe-inventedclassicsWardrobeessentials

Self-imageIndividual,honest,openmindedandcostconscious

CultureTraditionalmethodsnewtechniques,diversity,sustainability

PersonalityTimelessUnderstated


17 of 44

This section of the report also cross references Cos’s data and information using

Keller’s Customer-Based Brand Equity Model (CBBE). Keller’s model uses goals

which translate well from Cos’s key aims explored in Part I (Fig. 1.3):

1. The first is to be logical and well integrated (which sits well with the assumption

that the H&M Group have created a premium price brand that sits apart from

their fast fashion offer house of brands).

2. The second is to be versatile (which is relevant to Cos’s product which offers

primarily workwear and key pieces on which the customer builds their

wardrobe).

3. And the third to be comprehensive (which encompasses their diverse customer

base, intellectually echoing Cos’s core aims and values).

Figure 2.2 Cos Brand Resonance Pyramid (Ryan 2016) adapted from Keller’s Model

Using both Kapferer’s Prism and Keller’s CBBE Models, (which brand strategists and

marketers’ widely used to identify their brands), it is possible to compare Cos’s stages

of brand identity and brand building and how Cos can clearly build on their brand and

customer experience, whilst identifying problem areas and looking at how to solve

these with positive strategies moving forward.

BRAND RESONANCE

PYRAMIDCBBE

RESONANCELoyaltyAttachment

Social NetworksCommunity

JUDGEMENTSDesign Quality

TimelessAffordable Luxury

FEELINGSConfidence

StylishSocial Approval

PERFORMANCEDesign Quality

FunctionalitySustainable

IMAGERYRetail Stores

Minimalist DesignMonochrome Palette

SALIENCEGlobal Brand

Womenswear. Menswear, Childrenswear, Lifestyle

Resonance

Judgements Feelings

Performance Imagery

Salience


18 of 44

In terms of what Cos does as a brand, Kapferer’s ‘physique’ (Kapferer 2008 p.182)

aligns to some extent with Keller’s model of brand salience (Keller, 2001 p.71). Cos

as a brand is known for providing stylish and affordable fashion for work and key items

for the wardrobe which include womenswear, menswear and childrenswear. These

are all knowns for the brand Cos and provide the product offer for which the brand is

most known and generates customer salience and a brand physique which is robust

and clear. One of the newer product areas that Cos has introduced is their ‘things’

range, this product area focuses on beautifully designed and crafted lifestyle items for

use at home and work. In terms of competition in this product area, Jigsaw recently

launched their first seasonless collection ‘A-Line’ with a significantly higher price

structure, this is an area where Cos could re-visit their pricing strategy based on

offering investment pieces and collectables as part of their extended product offer to

support their brand physique.

Cos’s personality (Kapferer 2008 p.184) is expressed by how it communicates its

brand identity and unlike many brands does not rely on a muse or celebrity to convey

this message, but uses its store environment, staff recruitment and customer base to

reflect the personality and shared values (Fig. 1.3) of Cos. Cos’s image and

personality (Kapferer 2008 p.184. Keller, 2001 p.83) have a minimal yet distinct

monochromatic palette which transcends its products, stores and on-line web site

imagery. Defined by silhouette and architecture Cos aims itself at an older core

customer from the creative industries.

Cos’s culture and ethos (Kapferer 2008 p.184) are bound in sustainability and equality

values, which are fundamental to the H&M Way (H&M Way 2016).

Brands are often guilty of neglecting this facet of their brand identity and Cos could do

more to promote its sustainability culture in order to enhance an emotional connection

with its customers. Particularly in the wake of recent ‘seasonless’ collections (Burberry,

Erdem and Jigsaw. Cos already design their collections in-house (at the brands head

office in London) and work on an eighteen-month cycle with deliveries into store on a

weekly rather than daily basis. The Cos customer is excited by new stock in-store and

on-line, and would connect with more unique and collectable pieces. Cos could


19 of 44

emphasise a move away from the fast fashion culture (Zara, Primark) to a more

responsible consumer attitude which could strengthen their brand equity?

Cos’s brand relationship (Kapferer 2008 p.185) is of primary importance in this section

of the report in that it relates directly to the brand issue of connectivity and

communication channels between brand and consumer. And particularly in relation to

providing a positive customer experience for consumers when shopping for their brand

across multichannels in fashion retail. In order to develop this there are a number of

areas where the customer interacts currently with the stores, product and website that

could be improved and areas of community such as Cos’s social media platforms

where customer experience is currently lacking.

The following table illustrates the Cos Customer Journey which has a direct influence

on customer experience. Some of the key issues outlined in the report stem from the

lack of communication across channels for Cos and include opportunities to develop

online business models to compliment the bricks and mortar stores, looking at new

ways of distributing fashion and engaging with the customer, and communicating with

the customer using enhanced social media networking and e-store connectivity.

Figure 2.3 Cos Customer Journey Mapping. Ryan, K. (2016). Adapted from b2b

International.

AWARENESS RESEARCHPREPURCHASE

PURCHASE POSTPURCHASE

BRAND ADVOCACY

CoswebsiteCosstoresPersonalrelationships

CoswebsiteCosstoresPersonalreferrals

Competitors:ZaraMassimoDuttiJigsawFineryASOS

CoswebsiteCosstoreStaffinteraction

ReturnsExchangesQuality/satisfactionwithproductInteractionswithothercustomers

SocialmediaPersonalreferences

AccidentaldiscoveryBrandlikeability

BrowseonlineVisitstoreSignuptonewsletter

Comparepriceanddeliveryoptions

Lackofproductavailability

SurprisedeliverychargesReturnsonlytowherepurchased

MixedcustomerfeedbackBasedonexperience

Disappointment

andlackofFlexibilitywithreturns

Updateworkingwardrobe

Findaffordable,stylishkeypieces

Comparewithpreviousbrands

Proceeddependentonavailability,size,collection&delivery

SatisfiedpurchaseCanIreturneasily

PositivefeedbackV

NegativefeedbackBasedonthisexperience

OnlinepromotionSponsoredevent

ElectronicadsSearchadvertisingSocialmediaEmbraceCSR

KeypricingFreep&pandreturnsParticipationmarketing

ImprovedsalesCollectcustomerdataOppstopersonaliseFlexibleorder+collection

FreeP&PFlexiblereturnsOfferrelevantinfo

ManagesocialnetworksActiveengagementandinvolvementwithconsumers

COS CUSTOMER JOURNEY MAP


20 of 44

How Cos’s customers wish themselves to be perceived relates to Kapferer’s

reflection (Kapferer 2008 p.186) and also Keller’s judgements (Keller, 2001 p.88).

The Cos customer is aware of the aspirational personality of the brand and they view

Cos as a clean, minimal, stylish brand which contributes to their own personality and

overall lifestyle. Cos provides affordable luxury at high street prices and the

customer can rely on their intrinsic quality and detail and is prepared to invest in key

pieces which the customer can add to their wardrobe and enhance their perception

of performance (Keller, 2001 p.81).

In order to illustrate the key areas for improvement a SWOT provides a synopsis of

the areas previously discussed in this section with particular focus on the brand issue

of providing a positive customer experience for consumers when shopping for their

brand across multichannels and is discussed in greater detail in relation to Part III and

evaluating a range of strategic options for the Cos Brand. This includes opportunities

for Cos to develop online business models to compliment the bricks and mortar stores,

looking at new ways of distributing fashion and engaging with the customer, and

communicating with the customer using enhanced social media networking and e-

store connectivity.

Figure 2.4 Cos SWOT Evaluation of Brand and Customer Experience (Ryan 2016)

COS SWOT Evaluation of Brand and Customer Experience.

STRENGTHS OPPORTUNITIES

Own unique brand identity. Innovation opportunities.

Growing product offer including women’s, men’s, children and

things(lifestyle).

Expand product offer to include home & lifestyle(tapping into H&M home

products).

Brand largely promoted by customer advocacy/word of mouth

and the use of owned media.

To promote the brand using combined online/interactive/experiential

communications.

Planned investment and growth. Implement Omni-channel management systems to provide innovative

customer experience and to optimise stock and operational efficiencies.

H&M Groups Sustainable Practice Policy Promoting Sustainable Practice Policy

Promoting creative communities through collaborations and

events including art, music and literature.

Further engaging creative communities through collaborations and events

including art, music and literature, instore and on-line.

WEAKNESSES THREATS

Negative/lack of customer interaction social networks and

communities.

Lack of parity across social networks and communities.

Multi-channel management system not providing a seamless

experience for the customer, optimising stock and operational

efficiencies.

Competitor’s Omni-channel management systems to providing an

innovative customer experience, optimising stock and operational

efficiencies.

Delivery options not flexible. Shipping charge, items bought

online cannot be refunded or exchanged in any of the

stores. Stores not currently used as distribution centres.

Competitors offering free p&p, collection and returns in-store and on-line,

ordering, stock check and using stores as distribution centres.


21 of 44

Part III Evaluate a range of brand and brand management development

strategic options for the Cos Brand.

“Prior to digital,” says Andjelic, “brands used advertising as communication. Now that consumers can have contact with a

brand everywhere from mobile sites to social media, the broadcasting model no longer cuts it. In order to deal with an

infinitely more complex customer journey, brands need to shift from messaging to brand experience.”

Maiki, R. (2015).

In this section the report explores alternative strategies looking at the relationship

between brand experience and customer experience, the strengths and weaknesses

within the Cos brand previously explored through the PESTEL and SWOT analysis

and referencing justification for an approach to resolve the key issues going forward.

Figure 3.1 Customer Experience Strategy. Ryan, K (2016). Adapted from b2b

International.

In order to look at how Cos’s consumer responds and how brand experience occurs

(Parkes et al 2016), several factors including: pre-purchase / browsing, purchase /

Assessneedsandsegmentcustomers

Mapthejourneyforcustomersegments

Identifythedesired

experience

Designthebrand

experience

Structurethe

customertouchpoints

Measureand

develop


22 of 44

shopping, post purchase / receiving and consumption of the Cos product must be

taken into account (Brakus et al 2009).

Figure 3.2 Cos Customer Touchpoints (Ryan 2016) based on A. Allmond 2015

COS Product and Brand experience (pre-purchase touch point)

In 2009 Brakus Schmitt and Zarantonello published their Brand Experience Scale and

asked; “What is It? How do We Measure It? And Does It Affect Loyalty?”. Their model

looks at sensation, feeling, cognition, and behavioural responses evoked by brand-

related stimuli that are part of a brand's design and identity, packaging,

communications, and environment. Brakus et al proved that several dimensions of

brand experience positively impact brand loyalty. To put Cos’s pre-purchase

advertising into perspective, Cos operate a lean advertising marketing approach and

use predominantly owned media to advertise the brand and little to no above the line

advertising.

Cos offer a multichannel approach that provides the customer with the options to

browse and purchase their products online or instore however at the decision making

process, purchase and post purchase the system is not integrated or monitored

effectively across platforms the customer experience is compromised and causes

significant negative customer feedback through social media channels (Appendix III)

COS BRAND TOUCHPOINTS

CUSTOMER EXPERIENCE

PRE-PURCHASE POST-PURCHASEPURCHASE

WORD

OF

MOUTH

WEBSITEBROWSING

SALES

ADS

EMAIL

PRESS

SOCIAL MEDIA

WEBSALESASST

EVENTS

STORE

VM

SOCIAL MEDIA

CUSTOMERSERVICE

EMAIL

PACKAGING

DELIVERY

INVOICE


23 of 44

which are currently un-managed in terms of regulating feedback. Most of these

responses can be attributed to lack of communication surrounding availability and

stock levels across stores and online and unexpected delivery costs.

There is some evidence that Cos core customer browses online and then purchases

instore and this is experience studied in relation to activities (Chang et al 2010) what

happens according to where experiences occur (online) and where they take place

(instore).

These experiences affect the decision making process based on product judgement,

attitudes, preferences, purchase intent and recall (Zarantonello et al 2010). This is a

pre-purchase touchpoint and interactions that drive awareness and differentiation

(Parkes et al 2016).

3.3 Drapers multi-channel insight report chart (Knowles J 2016)

COS shopping and service experience (purchase touch point)

In 1992 Claes Fornell established a Customer Satisfaction Barometer (CSB) to

measure the customer experience in Sweden (Fornell 1992) it was a survey based on

data from customers of 100 companies in about 30 industries and established a link

between productivity and quality of product leading to customer satisfaction. Whereas

previous studies had focussed more on productivity and quantity. The survey data was


24 of 44

considered extremely valid and reliable and bore a direct correlation to customer

satisfaction and company market share.

In the past shopping and service experience were attributed to a stores physical

environment (Brakus et al 2009) but in the digital age with instore and online

experience’s the customer’s feelings, attitudes and satisfaction toward the brand must

also be clearly attributed to the virtual shopping environment. Cos has a strong visual

aesthetic which enhances the customer experience through their architecturally

designed store environment. Whilst it is difficult in web design to include the

personality of a store/staff environment and the many other dimensions of brand

personality (Aaker, 1997) within a virtual site, a brand must use its brand identity

cohesively to create a parity of customer experience through areas such as customer

engagement, ease of use and competence to result in a sensory and intellectual

experience.

Proactive customer services and the use of invisible technology would improve how

the customer interacts with the brand. Morrison suggests that “a successfully executed

brand experience encourages loyalty in the long term by creating emotional

connections, through creating an engaging, compelling and consistent content”

(Morrison et al. 2007 p.). This is a post purchase touchpoint, an interaction that builds

confidence (Parkes et al. 2016) and could be advocated through social engagement

at local and transactional levels to engage the customer and create a stronger

relationship between the brand and the customer.

COS consumption experience (post purchase touch point)

This is the satisfaction phase or feel good factor after the research and buying phase

has been completed the customer leaves a store or receives a parcel and a number

of feelings can be experienced in response to this phase (Brakus et al 2009). Sharon

Morrison’s study (Morrison et al 2007) looks at emotional brand experience, customer

selection and customer loyalty and references several academic models including the

Model of Emotion and Human Behaviour by O ’ Shaughnessy and O ’ Shaughnessy

(2003) as an example of how the following experiences are linked emotionally to an


25 of 44

outcome of decision or choice of the product based on the consumers value system,

the emotive stimuli or object of emotion, the appraisal of the object of emotion, the

beliefs and desires and the emotional response. In JDA and Centiro’s Customer Pulse

report 2015 the need for personalisation at the delivery and returns stage is outlined

as “this could be returning goods to a store or specifying a location and/or time for a

courier pick up. By capturing this information, retailers can start to personalise the

returns experience and create more value for the consumer and themselves.” JDA

and Centiro also outline the importance of “Retailers looking at returns as a further

opportunity to enhance the customer experience. In the same way that today’s omni

channel environment is allowing consumers to buy items where and when they want,

they would like the same flexibility when it comes to returns.” (JDA 2015). In Drapers

Multi Channel Insight Report 41% of 45-to-54-year-olds are most likely to abandon a

purchase because of unexpected delivery charges being added. This was the number

one reason for basket abandonment across all ages and Cos’s key demographic.

3.4 Drapers multi-channel insight report chart (Knowles J 2016)

The next section of the report reflects on the negative outcomes of Cos’s brand

touchpoints which have been assessed previously and the key implementation

requirements to improve the customer experience for consumers for the brand Cos.


26 of 44

Part IV A coherent proposal, which addresses the issues and considers the

key implementation requirements for the brand Cos.

“Building on this base, we can now continue to develop and

strengthen the shopping experience within a number of

different areas such as continued integration of stores and

online, expanded and faster delivery options and mobile

payment solutions.”

Karl-Johan Persson

H&M Nine Month Report 2016 p.2

This chapter seeks to propose a strategy based on the key implementation issues that

need to be addressed for the future, reflecting on the analysis and evaluation

previously discussed. In the above quote, Karl-Johan Persson, CEO of the H&M

group acknowledges a need to build on the existing base which is currently a

multichannel operation and hints that H&M are looking to optimise their continued

integration across store and on-line including payment solutions which would give

customers greater flexibility and answer some of the issues raised in this report.

In order to provide a greater customer flexibility, the report reflects on the three key

customer touchpoints: Firstly, the COS product and brand experience (pre-purchase

touch point). The main issues are lack of communication surrounding availability and

stock levels across stores/on-line and unexpected delivery costs which hinder

purchases.

Secondly the COS shopping and service experience (purchase touch point), there is

a lack of customer interaction and engagement at point of purchase which could be

addressed through social and community initiatives and the use of invisible technology

to improve how the customer interacts with the brand instore and online and to

optimise stock and operational efficiencies.


27 of 44

And thirdly the COS consumption experience (post purchase touch point) return and

exchange (items bought online cannot be refunded or exchanged in stores)

addressing the flexibility and cost of post purchase. In order to put these in perspective

the report looks at the key actions: “What are the challenges?”, “What are the solutions”

and “What are the key benefits” to propose a coherent strategy.

Figure 4.1 Cos Brand Growth Strategy. Ryan, K. (2016)

What are the Challenges?

The Brand Experience through omnichannel retailing is an area in which many

companies have and are investing into heavily based on seamless integration and

keeping the focus on your most important asset ‘the customer’. Cos as a brand still

refers to its strategy as multichannel in a number of reports, press and telephone

conferences (H&M, reports and presentations). If Cos is to succeed in the future, it is

clear that they must embrace future technology to bring a clear message and parity

across channels to deliver a consistent customer experience.

Cos’s core structure is primarily most successful in terms of capturing their customer’s

emotional connection and encouraging future purchases customer advocacy (Smith

et al. 2002) and customer loyalty (Brakus et al. 2009). There is currently some

dissatisfaction reflected through the store experience and the online experience being

COS BRAND GROWTH STRATEGY 2020

Further build Cos’s operational strength to enable key strategy implementation

Build omnichannel todrive own retail online

and offline

Elevate the Cos Brandby engaging consumers

experientially

Strengthen communitiesengage audiences and

create effective sales channels


28 of 44

used in separation with regards to payment methods and returns policy (Appendix III).

Figure 4.2 Cos Future Mapping Experience (Ryan 2016, adapted from Aspect)

There are numerous retailers currently employing a successful omnichannel business

strategy (Burberry, All Saints, M&S, Next), the example above maps the potential of

future customer interaction within the brand Cos based on an omnichannel strategy

(Fig. 4.2).

What are the Solutions?

If Cos were to implement the strategy to move from a multichannel to an omnichannel

business they would offer customers seamless integration of online and offline sales,

improve communication between channels, stock and customer and heighten their

overall customer experience and satisfaction levels.

As a recommendation Cos could look to implement a retail management system with

industry specific fashion solutions including customer relationship management

solutions (organisational buy in), the shortlisted suggestions would be: JDA Software

(Ikea), GS1 UK (boohoo.com) and Hso (Add. Supp. Mat. p.43).

Cos’s future brand strategy must also include managed control of its external and

Social Media

Web

Store

Customer Service

Mobile/tablet

Browse Community Forum

Browse Facebook Page

Browse Website

Email aService Agent

Tweet

Navigate an IVRVia a Smartphone

Transfer to aCustomer Advisor

Visit aStore

Receive InformationVia SMS

PotentialmappingexperienceforthebrandCosusingaonmi-channelstrategy.


29 of 44

internal online communications (OCs) including social media and community platforms

(Wirtz, 2013), which currently reflect some negative customer feedback (Appendix III)

and should be providing parity across channels focussing on turning customer

dissatisfaction into loyalty.

The H&M Group as the parent company of Cos would be ideally placed to pilot and

test the strategy within its established clothing brand H&M before rolling it out to their

house of brands including Cos (Fig. 1.1). The H&M Group already test and pilot

company expansion strategies when moving into new global on-line and store markets

(H&M Report 2016).

What are the benefits?

The benefits of a technical solution are to bring consistency across the business and

would enable a system to support growth and innovation in the future. Successful

implementation would bring a much improved customer service experience that is

seamless across all channels by ensuring communication across all channels. Cos

would have a greater understanding of its customers and be able to nurture its

customers and personalise its responses in reaction to better quality data and analysis.

An omnichannel system would give greater insight across operations and manage

stock more efficiently and long term stores could look at becoming distribution centres

to improve availability and delivery.


30 of 44

Conclusion

Without an omniscient view of the business Cos’s ambitious growth plans will be

constrained by inadequate systems. And consequently unreliable management and

customer information which will impact on the brands equity (Aaker, 2001) and the

overall customer experience. How Cos implements these changes across platforms

will impact on the overall brand equity in the future (Chan-Olmsted, 2011).

The global fashion retail landscape is always changing and as retailers seek to

integrate and align various channels to provide shoppers with a seamless shopping

experience, omnichannel retailing is at different phases in different geographic regions.

The demand for omnichannel retailing is unlikely to slow down, and retailers operating

in different regions of the world will need to overcome various challenges to achieve

omni-channel proficiency and satisfy their sustainable credentials alongside the desire

for their customers purchasing immediacy.

If Cos want to remain a future player they will need to fuse the capabilities of their

ecommerce site, and bricks-and-mortar stores into one simple shopping experience.


31 of 44

References in Harvard referencing style

Aaker, D.A. & Joachimsthaler, E. (2000). The Brand Relationship Spectrum: The Key

to the Brand Architecture Challenge. California Management Review, Vol.42 No.4.

pp. 8-23.

Aaker, J.L. (1997). Dimensions of Brand Personality. Journal of Marketing Research,

Vol.34 No.3. pp. 347-56.

Aaker, DA. (2001). Developing Business Strategies n.p: New York; Chichester:

Wiley, 2001., Bournemouth University Library Catalogue, EBSCOhost [Accessed 11

October 2016]

Albarran, A., Chan-Olmsted, S. and Wirth, M. (2006). Handbook of media

management and economics. Mahwah, N.J.: L. Erlbaum Associates. ProQuest

ebrary. [Accessed 24 September 2016]

Besharat, A, and Langan, R (2014). Towards the formation of consensus in the

domain of co-branding: Current findings and future priorities. Journal of Brand

Management, Vol.21. No.2. p.112-132. Scopus®, EBSCOhost, [Accessed 24

September 2016]

Brakus, J., Schmitt, B. and Zarantonello, L. (2009). Brand Experience: What Is It?

How Is It Measured? Does It Affect Loyalty? Journal of Marketing, Vol.73 No.3. pp.

52-68. Business Source Complete, EBSCOhost [Accessed 7 October 2016]

Chan-Olmsted, S (2011). Media Branding in a Changing World: Challenges and

Opportunities. The International Journal On Media Management, Vol.13 No.1, pp. 3-

19. [Accessed 7 October 2016]

Chang, T-Y and Horng, S-C (2010). Conceptualizing and measuring experience

quality - the customer's perspective, the Services Industries Journal, Vol.30 No.14

pp. 2401-2419.


32 of 44

De Chernatony, L. (2009). Towards the Holy Grail of Defining Brand. Marketing

Theory, Vol. 9 No.1 pp. 101-105.

Chuah, G (2008). Igniting the Brand: Marshall Cavendish. ProQuest E-book Central.

Web. [Accessed 6 September 2016]

Cos Stores Available from: http://www.cosstores.com/gb/ [Accessed 14 September

2016]

D'Arienzo, W. (2016). Brand Management Strategies: Luxury and Mass

Markets. New York: Fairchild Books.

Edelman, DC. (2010). Branding in The Digital Age. Harvard Business Review, Vol.

88 No. 12 pp. 62-69, Business Source Complete. [Accessed 24 September 2016]

European Institute for Brand Management (EURIB) Available from:

http://www.eurib.org/en/knowledge-resource-

centre/kenniscentrumeurib/brandexperience/ [Accessed 25 October 2016]

Euromonitor (Passport) H&M Hennes & Mauritz AB in Apparel and Footwear (World)

July 2016 [PDF]. Available from:

http://www.portal.euromonitor.com/portal/analysis/tab# [Accessed 5th October 2016]

Fornell, C. (1992). A National Customer Satisfaction Barometer: The Swedish

Experience. Journal of Marketing, Vol.1 p. 6. [Accessed 11 October 2016]

Fornell, C., Mithas, S., Morgeson, F. and Krishnan, M. (2006). Customer Satisfaction

and Stock Prices: High Returns, Low Risk. Journal of Marketing, 70(1), pp. 3-14.

[Accessed 14 October 2016]

Fournier, S, and Lee, L. (2009). Getting Brand Communities Right. Harvard Business

Review, 87(4) pp. 105-111. [Accessed 7 October 2016]

http://www.portal.euromonitor.com/portal/analysis/tab


33 of 44

Fournier, S (1998). Consumers and Their Brands: Developing Relationship Theory in

Consumer Research. Journal of Consumer Research, 24 (4) pp. 343-373. [Accessed

7 October 2016]

Geoghegan, J. (2016). H&M UK Profits and Margins Slump. Drapers Record.

Available from: https://www.drapersonline.com/news/hm-uk-profits-and-margins-

slump/7011874.article [Accessed 28th October 2016]

Goodall, S. (2016) Client Director/Partner. Interview with OPX Brand Strategist. 26

October.

Hancock, I., Joseph. (2016). Brand/story: cases and explorations in fashion

branding, Second edn, Bloomsbury Publishing, New York.

Hines, T. and Bruce, M. (2012). Fashion marketing: contemporary issues. 2nd edn.

Oxford: Routledge.

H&M. Reports and Presentations. [online] Available from:

http://about.hm.com/en/investors/reports.html [Accessed 18th September]

H&M. H&M Nine Month Report 2016 [pdf] Sweden: H&M. Available from:

http://about.hm.com/content/dam/hmgroup/groupsite/documents/en/cision/2016/178

9234_en.pdf [Accessed 18th September]

H&M. H&M Annual Report 2015 [pdf] Sweden: H&M. Available from:

http://about.hm.com/content/dam/hm/about/documents/en/Annual%20Report/Annual

%20Report%202015_en.pdf [Accessed 18th September]

H & M. H&M Telephone Conference six-month report 22 June 2016 [pdf] Sweden:

Available from:

http://about.hm.com/content/dam/hmgroup/groupsite/documents/en/Presentations/20

16/Telephone%20conference%20presentation%20Q2%202016_en.pdf [Accessed

18th September]

http://about.hm.com/en/investors/reports.html


34 of 44

Jackson, T. & Shaw, D. (2009). Mastering Fashion Marketing. Basingstoke: Palgrave

Macmillan. (Palgrave master series).

Kapferer, J. Noel. (2008). New Strategic Brand Management, the: Creating and

Sustaining Brand Equity Long Term. [online]. Kogan Page. Available from:

http://myilibrary.com?ID=122897 [Accessed 15 October 2016]

Keller, K.L. (1993). Conceptualising, Measuring and Managing Customer-

based Brand Equity. Journal of Marketing, 57 (1) pp. 1-22.

Keller, K.L. (2011). Brands that transcend: How to Navigate the Future of Brand

Management. Marketing Management, summer 2011 pp. 37-43.

Keller, KL. (2001). Building Customer-Based Brand Equity: A Blueprint for Creating

Strong Brands. Report- Marketing Science Institute Cambridge Massachusetts, 107,

p. ALL, British Library Document Supply Centre Inside Serials & Conference

Proceedings, EBSCOhost, [Accessed 15 October 2016]

Keller, KL. (2003). Strategic Brand Management: Building, Measuring, And

Managing Brand Equity. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice Hall.

Keller, K and Lehmann, D. (2009). Assessing long-term brand potential. Journal

of Brand Management, 17(1) pp.6 -17. Business Source Complete, EBSCOhost,

[Accessed 24 September 2016]

Knowles, J. (2016). Multi-Channel Customer Insight report 2016. Drapers Record.

Available from: http://guides.drapersonline.com/4296.guide [Accessed September

18th 2016]

Kotler, P. (2006). B2B Brand Management. Berlin: Springer

LS: N Global. New Consumer Summit Report 2016. [pdf] London: The Future

Laboratory. Available from:

http://guides.drapersonline.com/4296.guide


35 of 44

http://shop.thefuturelaboratory.com/collections/reports/products/copy-of-new-

consumer-summit-report-2016 [Accessed 20th September 2016]

Maiki, R. (2015). Ana Andjelic: Experiential Retail, LS: N Global. Available from

https://www.lsnglobal.com/opinion/article/17377/ana-andjelic-experiential-retail

[Accessed 20th September 2016]

Moore, G. (2012). Fashion promotion: building a brand through marketing and

communication. Lausanne: AVA. (Basics Fashion Management, 2).

Morrison, S, and Crane, F (2007). Building the service brand by creating and

managing an emotional brand experience. Journal of Brand Management, 14(5) pp.

410-421. Business Source Complete, EBSCOhost, [Accessed 7 October 2016]

Muniz, J, and O’Guinn, T (2001). Brand Community. Journal of Consumer Research,

4, p. 412. JSTOR Journals, EBSCOhost, [Accessed 7 October 2016]

Nysveen, H., Pedersen, P.E. & Skard, S. (2013). Brand experiences in service

organizations - Exploring the individual effects of brand experience dimensions,

Journal of Brand Management, 40, pp. 404-423.

O'Shaughnessy, J, and O'Shaughnessy, N (2003). The Marketing Power of Emotion,

n.p: Oxford: Oxford University Press, Bournemouth University Library Catalogue,

EBSCOhost, [Accessed 9 October 2016]

Parkes, L and Timms, R. (2016). Rufus Leonard Brand Experience Index

2016. [pdf] London: Rufus Leonard. Available from:

http://www.rufusleonard.com/brand-experience-index [Accessed 14th

October 2016]

https://www.lsnglobal.com/opinion/article/17377/ana-andjelic-experiential-retail

http://www.rufusleonard.com/brand-experience-index


36 of 44

Pawle, J, & Cooper, P (2006). Measuring Emotion - Lovemarks, The Future

Beyond Brands. Journal of Advertising Research, 46(1) pp. 38-48. Business

Source Complete, EBSCOhost, [Accessed 7 October 2016]

Payne, A. (2016). Inspiration sources for Australian fast fashion design: tapping into

consumer desire. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 20 (2) pp.191-

207.

Peirson-Smith, A., Manlow, V., Muratovski, G. & Hancock, J. (2014). Global fashion

brands: style, luxury & history, Intellect, Bristil.

Pine, I, & Gilmore, J (1998). Welcome to the Experience Economy. Harvard

Business Review, 76 (4) pp. 97-105. Business Source Complete, EBSCOhost,

[Accessed 7 October 2016]

Schroeder, J, Salzer-Mörling, M, & Askegaard, S (2006). Brand Culture. [Electronic

Resource], n.p.: London; New York: Routledge, 2006., pp. 60-69. Bournemouth

University Library Catalogue, EBSCOhost, [Accessed 14 October 2016]

Smith, S, & Wheeler, J (2002). Managing The Customer Experience: Turn

Customers into Advocates, n.p: London: Financial Times Prentice Hall, 2002.,

Bournemouth University Library Catalogue, EBSCOhost, [Accessed 14 October

2016]

Stocker, K. (2016). Theme: Fit for the Future. Drapers Fashion Forum Conference,

4th October 2016, 30 Euston Square, London NW1. Available:

https://fashionforum.drapersonline.com/

Wirtz, J., den Ambtman, A., Bloemer, J., Horváth, C., Ramaseshan, B., van de

Klundert, J., Gurhan Canli, Z. and Kandampully, J. (2013). Managing brands and

customer engagement in online brand communities. Journal of Service

Management, 24(3), pp.223-244. [Accessed 7 October 2016]

https://fashionforum.drapersonline.com/


37 of 44

Zarantonello, L, and Schmitt, B (2010). Using the brand experience scale to profile

consumers and predict consumer behaviour. Journal of Brand Management, 17 (7)

pp. 532-540. Business Source Complete, EBSCOhost, [Accessed 7 October 2016]


38 of 44

Appendix I

Interview

Goodall, S. (2016) Client Director/Partner. Interview with OPX Brand Strategist. 26

October.

Q: When working with clients on new or re-brand development do the brands

incorporate the importance of the customer experience into their brand

strategy?

A: Yes - they certainly should. We generally think about two big drivers - business

goals and customer needs. If you meet both in a balanced way you are usually in a

good place. Every business should have a clear set of goals and priorities - without

that there's no direction or momentum but if you want success you have to be very

clear about customer needs too and that means the whole customers experience.

We'd see customer experience covering the total interaction with the brand, from big

things like how a shop/website is designed or what the products are like, to small

details like how someone greets you when you walk in or answers a query online. It

all matters. Also worth bearing in mind that for many businesses the experience their

customers want won't be uniform. Understanding who different types of customer

are, what they each need and what factors they have in common is really important.

Q: Would you say customer experience has become more of a fashion/focus

for branding and advertising agencies in recent times than in the past?

A: I think it's always been important to success but the way it's done has changed -

principally because of digital. It's introduced new ways of thinking about customers

through things like customer personas and user journeys, all of which are

underpinned by access to data and analytics. In the past agencies often relied on

what their clients told them about their customers alongside some standard market

research input. Now there's a constant feed of data that can be broken down and

looked at in different ways. It's much more nuanced, with greater opportunity to

develop, test and refine customer experiences based on clear data not best-guess

work.


39 of 44

Q: Have you found digital integration important to brand building in terms of

communicating effectively B2C?

A: Yes as mentioned above its key now. You have to think about the total customer

experience across every channel - online and offline. The challenge is that you can't

control it all as tightly now. Pre-digital when most branding was expressed via print it

was possible to achieve very tight consistency. These days, when much of your

brand is expressed across channels you can't fully control (like Twitter or Instagram)

what you are aiming for is coherence rather than tight control. That means having a

clear, distinctive thread running across all channels, with enough flex for customers

to engage in the ways they want to.

Q: How important is it that a brands social media and sales channels work

effectively?

A: Really important for B2C, particularly for areas like fashion where there is a

changing visual product. Social offers a chance to build a dialogue with customers,

providing them with content they are interested in and inviting them to discover more.

You do have to be careful though not to just sell, sell, sell, offering a mix of content

that engages your audience is much better. Cycle cafe/ bar Look Mum No Hands! is

a good example. They sell branded merchandise (cycle caps, t-shirts, pants etc.).

They do feature these products on social but mix this up with stuff about events,

comments about cycling issues, funny stuff their customers have shared with them etc.

Getting that mix right is what turns social into an effective sales channel.

Q: How effective do you think customer focus groups are in the development of

a new brand?

A: They are useful but they aren't the whole solution. They are best when you have

something more complex to explore that can't easily be covered through quantitative

surveys etc. So as an example – we asked to create a new brand and name for a

scheme rating the quality and sustainability of new homes. Our initial instinct (and

the client's) was to go for a name that felt fresh and digitally-savvy like 'Hoot'.

However, when the scheme was discussed and explained during customer focus

groups they fed back that they didn't want that at all. They wanted something simple


40 of 44

and authoritative that they could trust. On that basis we ended up going with the

'Home Quality Mark'. It's been a big success and getting that feedback was really

important to getting things right.

One other point on this. I think this kind of research is useful if you are trying to

introduce something that is a development or an improvement on something people

know. So if you are wanting input on a nicer tasting instant hot chocolate it works really

well. If on the other hand you are really breaking new ground with something people

aren't familiar with or know they want, then focus groups aren't much use. I suspect

for example that if before its launch you'd asked people for their reaction to the i-Pod

you have got a very mixed reaction. Henry Ford's words on this subject are still really

true. “If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses.”

What can brands do to eliminate negative feedback?

I'm not sure they should eliminate negative feedback; I think they should just deal with

it really well. The truth is no brand is perfect and sometimes things go wrong. If a

customer takes time to complain about something, it’s an opportunity to put it right and

potentially build strong customer loyalty. If you think about times when you've

complained about something those companies whose staff respond quickly, take

responsibility, do what they say they are going to do and ultimately resolve your

problem (and perhaps offer you something to say sorry too) generally end up in a

stronger position than they were in before you brought anything at all. Training and

empowering staff is the key thing here. Waitrose are brilliant at this.


41 of 44

Appendix II

Survey Monkey Questionnaire on Customer Retail Experience using the Likert scale.

“The company (the H&M Group) announced increased long-term investment in its online presence in

January 2015, but its digital business looks under supported; it

takes the position that the internet is a “complement” to its stores, which may be imprudent in the long term.”

(Euro Monitor 2016 p.9)

“Secondly the COS shopping and service experience (purchase touch point), there is a lack of customer

interaction and engagement at point of purchase which could be

addressed through social and community initiatives and the use of invisible technology to improve how

the customer interacts with the brand instore and online and to

optimise stock and operational efficiencies.” (K, Ryan.2016 p.25)

“These experiences affect the decision making process based on product judgement, attitudes,

preferences, purchase intent and recall (Hoch et al 1989; Hoch et al

1986; Huffman et al 1993; Brakus et al 2008; and Holbrook 2000). This is a pre-purchase touchpoint and

interactions that drive awareness and differentiation (Parkes et al

2016).” (K, Ryan.2016 p.22)

Cos Survey Monkey Overview


42 of 44

Appendix III

Negative examples of Cos uncontrolled social media customer feedback


43 of 44

Cos Organisational overview

Based in London - the first COS store opened on Regent Street in 2007, followed

by the launch of the online store in 2011. The brand is now available in select

locations across Europe, Asia, North America, the Middle East and Australia.

From 2009 to 2014, Cos grew from one percent to three percent of H&M Group’s total

revenue, an increase of $132 million to $625 million in sales according to estimates

by Euro monitor (Euro monitor 2016).

• Sales SEK 54,341 million including VAT – increase of 2% in SEK; +5% in local

currencies

• Profit after financial items SEK 7,002 million (8,435)

• Continued substantial long-term investments within IT, online and new brands

• Continued focus to grow through physical stores and e-commerce – integration

between stores and e-commerce

(H & M Tele-conference 2016)

In 2016 the H&M group majorly focussed on expanding COS opening an additional 39

stores and moved into four new markets: Bahrain (via franchise), Luxembourg,

Hungary and Canada, with COS stores opening in both Toronto and Montreal. With a

current total of 177 stores, 32 Store Markets and 19 on-line markets in 30 countries,

COS is a globally established fashion brand.

Global brand valuation leader Interbrand identified the H&M Group 21 amongst its

2016 top 100 global brands with a higher brand value than Facebook and Ikea

(Interbrand).


44 of 44

Additional supporting materials

Reflective Blog:

http://hellomastudy.tumblr.com/

Pinterest link:

https://uk.pinterest.com/thegirlguide/aub-ma/

Drapers Multi Channel Customer Insight report 2016


Databases

Euro Monitor http://www.euromonitor.com/

Mintel http://www.mintel.com/

Interbrand http://interbrand.com/

WARC http://www.warc.com/

Film:

JDA Software – Powering the Seamless Customer Journey

https://jda.com/#

GS1 – Delivering Seamless Efficiency for the Apparel Market

https://youtu.be/UsjggApTGf8

Hso – Microsoft for retail are you ready for what’s next?

https://youtu.be/2PnyGm7C_sA

http://hellomastudy.tumblr.com/

https://uk.pinterest.com/thegirlguide/aub-ma/


https://jda.com/

https://youtu.be/UsjggApTGf8

https://youtu.be/2PnyGm7C_sA

branding and brand management – cos case study file[online subscription] available from:

Documents