crafting brand authenticity: the case of luxury wines

Crafting Brand Authenticity: The Case ofLuxury Wines*

Michael B. BeverlandUniversity of Melbourne

abstract Authenticity is one of the cornerstones of contemporary marketingpractice yet confusion surrounds the nature and use of authenticity in the brandarena. Examining the strategies of 26 luxury wine firms informs the authenticity ofspecific brands. Creating an impression of authenticity required creating a sincerestory consisting of a creative blend of industrial and rhetorical attributes. Sinceritywas achieved through the public avowal of hand crafted techniques, uniqueness,relationship to place, passion for wine production, and the simultaneous disavowal ofcommercial motives, rational production methods, and the use of modern marketingtechniques. For the wineries, appearing authentic was critical in order to reinforcetheir status, command price premiums and ward off competitors. Images ofauthenticity were accomplished by developing a sincere story that enabled the firmsto maintain quality and relevance while appearing above commercial considerations.This was achieved through the deliberate decoupling of their technical core fromtheir espoused communications.

INTRODUCTION

Increasingly marketers are turning to brand histories and historical associations assources of market value (Pe aloza, 2000) and a ‘cultural marker of legitimacy andauthenticity’ (Brown et al., p. 19). Authenticity is a core component of successfulbrands because it forms part of a unique brand identity (Aaker, 1996; Kapferer,2001; Keller, 1993). Consumers are also seeking out authentic brands and expe-riences (Fine, 2003; Holt, 1997; Pe aloza, 2000; Thompson and Tambyah, 1999).As Brown et al. state, ‘the search for authenticity is one of the cornerstones of con-temporary marketing . . .’ (2003, p. 21). Despite this, little is known about howfirms create and maintain images of authenticity (Fine, 2003; Jones et al., 2005).

n̆

n̆

Journal of Management Studies 42:5 July 20050022-2380

© Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2005. Published by Blackwell Publishing, 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford, OX4 2DQ,UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA.

Address for reprints: Michael B. Beverland, Department of Management, University of Melbourne,Alan Gilbert Building, 161 Barry St, Parkville, Victoria 3010, Australia ([email protected]).

Brand management and the projection of ideal images represent a form ofimpression management (cf. Elsbach et al., 1998). However, to date, impressionmanagement research has focused solely on responding to crises or challenges tolegitimacy (Elsbach and Sutton, 1992; Elsbach et al., 1998). In contrast, brandmanagement represents a positive and proactive form of impression managementthat builds market-based equity (and hence legitimacy; Elsbach and Sutton, 1992)for the firm through building and reinforcing a corporate reputation that ensuresfuture resource flows (Fombrun and Shanley, 1990; Heugens et al., 2004). Researchis needed to examine how firms build such reputations through careful impressionmanagement (Fombrun and Shanley, 1990). This article addresses these gaps byexamining the means by which luxury wine marketers create and maintain imagesof authenticity through their brand programmes.

Luxury wines potentially hold important insights for brand marketers becausethey represent some of the oldest brands still in existence – special reference wasmade in Pepys’ diary of a wine called ‘Ho Bryan’ (Haut-Brion). In 1707 the London

Gazette identified the ‘growths of Lafitt [Lafitte Rothschild], Margouze [ChateauxMargaux] and La Tour [Latour] . . . new Obrian [Haut-Brion]’ (Faith 1999, p. 26)as commanding significant price premiums, at a time when wines were not labelledby name but often blended by merchants. These wines have managed to commandlarge price differentials in the face of competition, war, scandal, fickle weather,and changing tastes. Importantly, luxury wine producers simultaneously embracedbasic marketing techniques (advertising, consumer research, relationship building,branding and brand endorsements) whilst also distancing themselves from imagesof industrial production and commerce (Faith, 1999; Guy, 2002; Phillips, 1994;Ulin, 1995). As a result they provide an intriguing context to study authenticitybecause they are seemingly so at odds with current market requirements.

The deliberate creation and management of authenticity presents several diffi-culties for brand managers. Creating authenticity involves a number of paradoxesbecause brands must remain true to an authentic core while also remaining rel-evant (Aaker, 1996; Kapferer, 2001; Keller, 2003). Brown et al. (2003) identify theneed to manage four components of allegory, arcadia, aura and antimony whenseeking to exploit the heritage of an established brand. Brand managers must con-stantly manage the paradox at the heart of strong brands by balancing actionsthat reinterpret (in response to changing tastes) symbolic stories involving moralconflicts and solutions, evoking aspects of an idealized past in brand imagery andcreating an aura which ‘pertains to the presence of a powerful sense of authen-ticity that original works of art exude’ (Brown et al., 2003, p. 21). This aura is acore brand component because it communicates a sense of authenticity anddirectly reflects the core values for which the brand stands. However, no researchreports exist on how firms create and maintain such auras.

The four elements identified by Brown et al. (2003) present some problems forthe extant brand management literature, given that it is overwhelmingly domi-

1004 M. B. Beverland

© Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2005

nated by a uni-directional top down view of creating brand image, whereby brandmanagers, through a planned process of marketing communications, position theirproducts around desired attributes with little consideration of how interactionsbetween consumers and brands may alter these images. The brand managementliterature also pays little attention to the importance of institutional and social con-texts, despite the fact that many brands are dependent on institutions for sourcesof authenticity and legitimacy. Brands are important cultural objects (Holt, 1997,2002) and possess significant symbolic value (Belk, 1988), an important artefact ofinstitutionalization (Scott, 2001). This article examines whether wider institutionaleffects occur that impact on the perceived credibility of brand related actions (suchas impression management) and symbols of authenticity – a theoretical areaignored by researchers (Handelman and Arnold, 1999).

Although brand managers play a critical role in developing authenticity, the per-sistence of authenticity also lies in the legitimacy of established institutions (Scott,2001), which is partly achieved through the constant use of classifications, rou-tines, scripts and schemas, much of which is derived from the day-to-day interac-tion in which society members construct mutually shared impressions (Douglas,1986; Fombrun and Shanley, 1990; Phillips, 2004; Powell and DiMaggio, 1991).To gain legitimacy, brands may ‘attempt to establish themselves as central to thecultural traditions of their societies in order to receive official protection’ (Meyerand Rowan, 1991, p. 49). Also, brand-related actions may be shaped by the pres-tige connected with a particular offering (Benjamin and Podolny, 1999; Carrolland Swaminathan, 2000; Peterson and Anand, 2004) and a shared industry culture(Anand and Watson, 2004; Carroll and Swaminathan, 2000; Phillips, 1994; Uzzi,1997). This suggests that brand development is similar to the production of cultureperspective that focuses on the ways symbolic artefacts (like brands) are shaped by the institutional environments that they inhabit (Anand and Watson, 2004;Benjamin and Podolny, 1999; Peterson and Anand, 2004; Peterson, 2005).

Understanding the relationship between management action and institutionalconstraints is important, particularly for understanding the sources of authentic-ity because authentic images need to be constantly adapted and updated as theyrepresent an interplay between creators, commercial interests, critics, competitors,and consumers (Carroll and Swaminathan, 2000; Fombrun and Shanley, 1990;Grazian, 2003; Peterson, 1997; Phillips, 1994). Peterson’s (1997) examination ofcountry music performance found that organizers managed the conflicting pres-sures of remaining true to perceived views of authenticity (in this case rustic hill-billy imagery and spontaneous informal amateurism amongst the players) and theneed to craft a viable commercial product. This is similar to the strategy of decou-pling (Meyer and Rowan, 1991), where performances were far more tightly pro-grammed and scripted than consumers were aware of (Peterson, 1997).

Empirically, this article examines how luxury winemakers create and re-createimages of authenticity. For our purposes luxury wine brands are wines selling at

Crafting Brand Authenticity 1005


over US$100 per bottle (Geene et al., 1999) with an established track record ofperformance (both in terms of quality and price premiums). These wineries wouldbe classified as specialists, and represent a fertile field for the study of creating andrenewing sources of authenticity in the face of increased competitive threats(Carroll and Swaminathan, 2000; Delacroix et al., 1989). This study contributesto the emerging research on the production of cultural value within high-statusindustry fields (Benjamin and Podolny, 1999; Fine, 2003; Peterson and Anand,2004; Uzzi, 1997).

This article has the following structure. First, a brief review of the nature andsources of authenticity including examples from the wine industry will be pre-sented. Following this will be a presentation of the qualitative research designemployed. This article focuses on the actions of producers for two reasons. Littleis known about the form and content of these brands and these brands are tightlycontrolled by producers who are reluctant to respond to short-term changes inconsumer fashions. The meaning of these brands is partly composed by marketersand brand owners through marketing programmes, endorsements, press activities,the retelling of historical stories, and the choice and use of historical imagery. Thefindings section focuses on the strategies used by luxury wine producers to craftimages of authenticity and maintain them over a period of time. The article closeswith a conclusion section.

THE NATURE OF AUTHENTICITY

The term ‘authenticity’ remains problematic. Few authors define the term, nor isa generally acceptable definition available. What is often seen as authentic is ide-ologically driven or asserted arbitrarily (e.g. Boyle, 2003). Also, commentators dis-cussing the sources of authenticity ignore how consumers and marketers viewauthenticity (Holt, 2002; Postrel, 2003). These views are limited because researchhas shown that consumers with different levels of cultural capital search for dif-ferent cues to signal authenticity (Holt, 1998), and connotations of authenticityshift over time (Postrel, 2003). We hold that rather than representing competingsources of authenticity, marketers continually craft together these diverse sourcesto create rich brand meanings. These sources must constantly be renewed if thebrand is to remain relevant, although previous decisions also constrain the abilityof marketers to adopt just any claim of authenticity. The literature posits thatauthenticity can be inherent in an object, come from a relation between an objectand/or a historical period, an organization form, or nature, or be given to anobject by marketers and consumers. Authenticity can also be true and/or contrived.

At one extreme, authenticity is intrinsic to the object – what Postrel (2003) iden-tifies as the ‘objective ideal of authenticity’ that states authentic objects cannotinvolve alterations against history, quality or art. Other non-personal forms of



authenticity include: ‘authenticity as purity’, which condemns dilution and therebygrants authority to the natural and functional (form follows function); ‘authentic-ity as tradition’, and; ‘authenticity as aura’, which refers to objects/persons thatshow signs of history (that is, someone who ages without plastic surgery is authen-tic). In contrast, consumers and creators also impart authenticity to objects (Holt,1998; Lewis and Bridger, 2001; Peterson, 1997). Postrel (2003) proposes a numberof subjective forms of authenticity, including authenticity as formal harmony,balance or delight. Thus, updated styles of old brands such as the new VW Beetle

are authentic for some because they work and give pleasure, rather than being trueto the original (Brown et al., 2003). Also, authenticity as connection to time andplace is important for consumers because it affirms tradition (Postrel, 2003), whichmay be particularly important for low cultural capital consumers (Holt, 1998;Peterson and Anand, 2004). Finally, there was authenticity as self-expression. Herea brand is authentic because it is a genuine expression of an inner personal truth(‘I like this because I’m like that’; Postrel, 2003).

Brown et al. (2003), Peterson (1997) and Holt (2002) identify that authenticityis often more contrived than real. Small, specialist firms bolster claims of authen-ticity by strategically employing their identity in the marketplace, portraying them-selves as small craft producers that use (among other things) time honoured waysand natural ingredients as a means of competitive differentiation (Carroll andSwaminathan, 2000). While there may be some truth to aspects of this image,authenticity is often fabricated (Guy, 2002; Peterson, 1997; Ulin, 1995). Forexample, Guy’s (2002) examination of how ‘Champagne’ became synonymouswith the interests of France identified the importance of developing symbolic linksto nature to distance producers from the reality of what was (and remains) a veryindustrialized process of production. During the mid 19th century, respect for tra-dition became the defining criteria for a great Champagne House and pamphletsstressed, ‘authenticity of the products of the region created according to tradi-tional methods’ (p. 25). This implemented strategy was a critical means of differ-entiation during an age of mass production and helped position ‘true Champagne’in foreign markets (Guy, 2002).

Traditions associating with the production of fine wine are often stylized ver-sions of real events. Firms actively cultivate these myths, in order to create imagesof authenticity (Briggs, 1994; Faith, 2002; Olney, 1995; Ross, 2004; Ulin, 1995).A well-known example of this is the myth that Dom Perignon ‘invented Cham-pagne’. This myth is used to this day and celebrated in the high priced Cham-pagne of the same name. The Dom Perignon myth was not used until the 1860swhen certain producers attributed the discovery of Champagne to him. By theearly 20th century, the story was established fact. Guy (2002) describes him as alargely forgotten monk, but the story gained widespread recognition when the Syn-dicat du commerce used the story for commercial purposes. Pamphlets were pro-vided to visitors of the region as a souvenir and as a calculated means of spreading



the story. This story further entrenched the myth that Champagne was a naturalproduct because Dom Perignon was noted to have discovered Champagne by fol-lowing ancient traditions.

Ulin (1995) notes that by defining wine as a natural product, as opposed to anindustrial mass-produced product, social, cultural and historical claims of authen-ticity were naturalized. Critically, wineries make claims of authenticity based onthe widely used (even outside France) term terroir, defined as ‘the holistic combi-nation in a vineyard environment of soil, climate, topography, and the “soul” ofthe wine producer’ (Guy, 2002, p. 2). The idea of terroir was responsible for pro-viding products with uniqueness and allure that would be difficult for competitorsto replicate (uniqueness is an important form of authenticity; Lewis and Bridger,2001). By managing these claims of authenticity, brand owners have created sig-nificant sources of market value. For example, Chateau Latour sold its 2000 releaseat around $US500 a bottle whereas a neighbouring estate (80 centimetres fromLatour) Haut Paulliac receives around US$20.

The above review suggests that authenticity contains elements intrinsic to theproduct, production process, and/or links to place and historic style, and subjec-tive elements created by firm members, consumers and other stakeholders. Thesesubjective elements may include the use of myths and status classifications. Thatis, images of authenticity involve projecting an image that is partly true and partlyrhetorical. This combination of real and stylized attributes helps create an auraaround the brand (cf. Brown et al., 2003) that differentiates these brands frommass-market firms by allowing them to appear committed to values that are abovecommercial considerations. For our purposes, authenticity can be defined as a‘story that balances industrial (production, distribution and marketing) and rhetor-ical attributes to project sincerity through the avowal of commitments to tradi-tions (including production methods, product styling, firm values, and/or location),passion for craft and production excellence, and the public disavowal of the roleof modern industrial attributes and commercial motivations.’ This definition isbased on a review of the literature, and was used to guide the inquiry.

METHOD

A case study design was chosen for several reasons. Firstly, there is a lack ofresearch on the development of these brands, suggesting that a moreexploratory/theory building approach is appropriate (Eisenhardt, 1989; Straussand Corbin, 1994). Also, the long histories of each brand and the use of thathistory by the brand owners, means that each brand’s development is path depen-dent. To understand and analyse path dependent processes requires detailed casehistories (Holt, 1998; Phillips, 1994). Finally, understanding the development ofluxury brands requires surfacing participants’ ‘tacit knowledge’ that can only bereached by close interaction between the researcher and participant after signifi-



cant time in the field. Such approaches can also help marketers gain new insightsabout market behaviour, forcing them to reconstruct their views of market real-ities (Zaltman, 1997).

Because few studies have examined the positioning and strategies of luxury producers, I sought to conduct case studies to understand the philosophy and positioning of each firm. To do so, I had to address sample selection issues.Characteristics of luxury brands include high price, excellent quality, specializeddistribution channels, a prestige image associated with the brand, an element ofuniqueness or exclusivity, and a history of high performance (Kapferer, 2001). Iused these characteristics to avoid selecting wines on the basis of price alone, forfear of including a number of ‘cult wines’ with prices set high partly as a result ofpositive reviews by the influential wine critic Robert Parker. These firms have yetto establish a history of luxury positioning and their release and auction prices areless stable than those of established producers (MacDonogh, 2000).

Data were collected from 26 identified luxury wine producers (four from Aus-tralia, 14 from France, one from Lebanon, five from New Zealand, and two fromPortugal). The average age of the sampled firms was 131.1 years (range 14–400+).Two measures of size were used. The sampled firms had an average of 360.65employees (range 3–2,000), and an average vineyard size of 106 hectares (range3–270). A total of 53 interviews were conducted across these firms. Table I pro-vides details. Each case was selected following discussions with a number of agents,consumers, and wine experts. Each case was contacted via e-mail and given adetailed outline of the study. Interviews were conducted with case respondents attheir place of business, and on average lasted for three hours. Questions evolvedaround the firm’s history (when it was founded, early aims and decisions), guidingphilosophy, important events in the life of the brand, marketing practices (includ-ing knowledge of market, marketing activity, relationship use, promotional activ-ity), positioning, product quality (including a description of how the product wasproduced), and competitive pressures (future concerns and aims). The average timespent at each case was 4.85 hours (range 2–18 hours). All interviews were tapedand then transcribed. Over 120 hours of interview material was recorded.

At each winery, a tour of the production facilities was taken in order to carryout observations and ask further technical questions (each tour lasted one hour onaverage). Following this, interview data were integrated with secondary informa-tion from the general wine press, news media, specialist wine books, and secondarydata gained from the firms. Secondary data were analysed to provide further back-ground and help triangulate the data and identify the nature of the industry(Anand and Watson, 2004; Carroll and Swaminathan, 2000; Phillips, 1994). In all,over 200 sources were reviewed covering a period of 600 years. Three sources ofprimary data were used. A series of exploratory focus groups with regular Aus-tralian luxury wine consumers was carried out. In total, 11 groups of 10 consumerswere conducted. To identify marketing practices for these wines, eight





Tab

le I

.Su

mm

ary

ofet

hnog

raph

ic in

terv

iew

s an

d or

gani

zatio

nal c

hara

cter

istic

s of

the

sam

ple

Cas

eR

egio

nA

geSi

zeSo

urce

s of

info

rmat

ion

Hou

rs

spen

t

duri

ng

field

visi

t

NZ

1N

Z24

yea

rsH

ecta

res

82

inte

rvie

ws

with

ow

ner/

foun

der,

note

s ta

ken

duri

ng t

our

offa

cilit

ies,

14 m

agaz

ine

artic

les,

broc

hure

s3

Em

ploy

ees

16fr

om 1

985–

2002

,6 w

ine

book

s,19

85–2

002

revi

ews

ofw

ine

rele

ases

,auc

tion

reco

rds

NZ

2N

Z14

yea

rsH

ecta

res

302

inte

rvie

ws

with

ow

ner/

foun

der,

win

emak

er a

nd v

iticu

ltura

list,

tour

s of

faci

litie

s,7

mag

azin

e ar

ticle

s,3

Em

ploy

ees

12re

view

s of

win

e re

leas

es,b

roch

ures

from

199

0–20

02,3

win

e bo

oks,

auct

ion

reco

rds

NZ

3N

Z26

yea

rsH

ecta

res

532

inte

rvie

ws

with

ow

ner

foun

der,

tour

of

faci

litie

s,23

mag

azin

e ar

ticle

s,br

ochu

res

from

197

8–20

02,1

33

Em

ploy

ees

24w

ine

book

s,re

view

s of

win

e re

leas

es,a

uctio

n re

cord

sN

Z4

NZ

19 y

ears

Hec

tare

s 10

02

inte

rvie

ws

with

foun

der,

win

emak

ers

and

vitic

ultu

ralis

t,to

ur o

ffa

cilit

ies,

44 m

agaz

ine

artic

les,

3E

mpl

oyee

s 57

broc

hure

s fr

om 1

985–

2002

,32

win

e bo

oks,

revi

ews

ofw

ine

rele

ases

NZ

5N

Z22

yea

rsH

ecta

res

854

inte

rvie

ws

with

foun

der

and

win

emak

er,t

our

offa

cilit

ies,

35 m

agaz

ine

artic

les,

broc

hure

s fr

om

12E

mpl

oyee

s 45

1982

–200

2,18

win

e bo

oks,

revi

ew o

fre

leas

esA

1A

ustr

alia

100+

Hec

tare

s 65

2 in

terv

iew

s w

ith fo

unde

r an

d w

inem

aker

,tou

r of

faci

litie

s,1

bran

d sp

ecifi

c bo

ok,3

2 m

agaz

ine

artic

les,

4ye

ars

Em

ploy

ees

556

win

e bo

oks,

revi

ew o

f20

yea

rs o

fm

arke

ting

mat

eria

l,at

tend

ance

at

laun

ch e

vent

s,au

ctio

n re

cord

sA

2A

ustr

alia

52

Hec

tare

s n/

a1

inte

rvie

w w

ith w

inem

akin

g te

am,t

our

ofre

leva

nt fa

cilit

ies,

32 m

agaz

ine

artic

les,

1 br

and

spec

ific

2ye

ars*

Em

ploy

ees

120*

book

,17

win

e bo

oks,

revi

ew o

fre

leas

es,a

tten

danc

e at

vin

tage

laun

ch e

vent

s,au

ctio

n re

cord

sA

3A

ustr

alia

45 y

ears

Hec

tare

s 21

12

inte

rvie

ws

with

foun

der

and

win

emak

er,t

our

offa

cilit

ies,

12 m

agaz

ine

artic

les,

4 w

ine

book

s,re

view

of

3E

mpl

oyee

s 80

rele

ases

,auc

tion

reco

rds

A4

Aus

tral

ia19

yea

rsH

ecta

res

32

inte

rvie

ws

with

foun

der

and

win

emak

er,t

our

offa

cilit

ies,

9 m

agaz

ine

artic

les,

4 w

ine

book

s,re

view

of

3E

mpl

oyee

s 20

rele

ases

,auc

tion

reco

rds

L1

Leb

anon

77 y

ears

Hec

tare

s 78

6 in

terv

iew

s w

ith w

inem

aker

,mar

ketin

g te

am,v

iticu

ltura

list,

tour

of

faci

litie

s,re

view

of

20 y

ears

of

16E

mpl

oyee

s 75

rele

ases

,1 b

rand

spe

cific

boo

k,co

mpa

ny m

arke

ting

mat

eria

l,6

win

e bo

oks,

32 a

rtic

les

F1B

urgu

ndy

100+

Hec

tare

s 62

3 in

terv

iew

s w

ith w

inem

aker

,mar

kete

r,cu

rren

t ge

nera

tion

owne

r,to

urs

offa

cilit

ies,

1 br

and

spec

ific

5ye

ars

Em

ploy

ees

500+

book

,com

pany

mar

ketin

g m

ater

ial,

4 w

ine

book

s,16

art

icle

s,5

regi

onal

his

tori

esF2

Bur

gund

y37

Hec

tare

s 10

1 in

terv

iew

with

mar

ketin

g m

anag

er a

nd w

inem

aker

,tou

r of

faci

litie

s,co

mpa

ny m

arke

ting

mat

eria

l 17

3E

mpl

oyee

s 23

artic

les,

5 re

gion

al h

isto

ries

,auc

tion

reco

rds

F3B

orde

aux

400+

Hec

tare

s 90

2 in

terv

iew

s w

ith o

wne

r/m

arke

ting

man

ager

,est

ate

man

ager

/win

emak

er/v

iticu

ltura

list,

tour

of

faci

litie

s,18

year

sE

mpl

oyee

s 25

04

bran

d sp

ecifi

c bo

oks,

com

pany

mar

ketin

g m

ater

ial,

invo

lvem

ent

in lo

go d

esig

n de

cisi

on m

eetin

g,25

win

e bo

oks,

67 a

rtic

les,

15 r

egio

nal h

isto

ries

,auc

tion

reco

rds,

revi

ews

ofre

leas

es



F4B

orde

aux

400+

Hec

tare

s 11

32

inte

rvie

ws

with

man

ager

s,to

ur o

ffa

cilit

ies,

5 br

and

spec

ific

book

s,co

mpa

ny m

arke

ting

mat

eria

l,25

4ye

ars

Em

ploy

ees

240

win

e bo

oks,

33 a

rtic

les,

15 r

egio

nal h

isto

ries

,auc

tion

reco

rds,

revi

ew o

fre

leas

esF5

Bor

deau

x40

0+H

ecta

res

941

inte

rvie

w w

ith c

urre

nt o

wne

r,to

ur o

ffa

cilit

ies,

2 br

and

spec

ific

book

s,co

mpa

ny m

arke

ting

mat

eria

l,4

year

sE

mpl

oyee

s 24

025

win

e bo

oks,

43 a

rtic

les,

15 r

egio

nal h

isto

ries

,auc

tion

reco

rds,

revi

ew o

fre

leas

esF6

Cha

mpa

gne

200+

Hec

tare

s 27

01

inte

rvie

w w

ith c

urre

nt o

wne

r,to

ur o

ffa

cilit

ies,

1 br

and

spec

ific

book

,com

pany

mar

ketin

g m

ater

ial,

3ye

ars

Em

ploy

ees

1000

+20

win

e bo

oks,

14 a

rtic

les,

6 re

gion

al h

isto

ries

,rev

iew

of

rele

ases

F7C

ham

pagn

e15

0+H

ecta

res

200

2 in

terv

iew

s w

ith m

arke

ting

man

ager

,CE

O,t

our

offa

cilit

ies,

2 br

and

spec

ific

book

s,co

mpa

ny

4ye

ars

Em

ploy

ees

1000

+m

arke

ting

mat

eria

l,20

win

e bo

oks,

34 a

rtic

les,

6 re

gion

al h

isto

ries

,rev

iew

of

rele

ases

F8C

ham

pagn

e15

0+H

ecta

res

150

3 in

terv

iew

s w

ith c

urre

nt o

wne

r,m

arke

ting

man

ager

,win

emak

er,t

our

offa

cilit

ies,

2 br

and

spec

ific

6ye

ars

Em

ploy

ees

500+

book

s,co

mpa

ny m

arke

ting

mat

eria

l,20

win

e bo

oks,

45 a

rtic

les,

6 re

gion

al h

isto

ries

,rev

iew

of

rele

ases

F9C

ham

pagn

e15

0+H

ecta

res

421

inte

rvie

w w

ith c

urre

nt m

arke

ting

man

ager

,tou

r of

faci

litie

s,1

bran

d sp

ecifi

c bo

ok,c

ompa

ny

3ye

ars

Em

ploy

ees

200+

mar

ketin

g m

ater

ial,

20 w

ine

book

s,9

artic

les,

6 re

gion

al h

isto

ries

,rev

iew

of

rele

ases

F10

Cha

mpa

gne

150+

Hec

tare

s 14

02

inte

rvie

ws

with

cur

rent

ow

ner

and

mar

ketin

g m

anag

er,t

our

offa

cilit

ies,

1 br

and

spec

ific

book

,4

year

sE

mpl

oyee

s 50

0+co

mpa

ny m

arke

ting

mat

eria

l,20

win

e bo

oks,

24 a

rtic

les,

6 re

gion

al h

isto

ries

,rev

iew

of

rele

ases

F11

Cha

mpa

gne

150+

Hec

tare

s 20

02

inte

rvie

ws

with

cur

rent

ow

ner

mar

ketin

g m

anag

er,t

our

offa

cilit

ies,

1 br

and

spec

ific

book

,com

pany

4ye

ars

Em

ploy

ees

1000

+m

arke

ting

mat

eria

l,20

win

e bo

oks,

44 a

rtic

les,

6 re

gion

al h

isto

ries

,rev

iew

of

rele

ases

F12

Cha

mpa

gne

200+

Hec

tare

s 28

52

inte

rvie

ws

with

cur

rent

mar

ketin

g m

anag

er a

nd w

inem

aker

,tou

r of

faci

litie

s,1

bran

d sp

ecifi

c bo

ok,

4ye

ars

Em

ploy

ees

2000

+co

mpa

ny m

arke

ting

mat

eria

l,20

win

e bo

oks,

26 a

rtic

les,

6 re

gion

al h

isto

ries

,rev

iew

of

rele

ases

F13

Cha

mpa

gne

150+

Hec

tare

s 10

1 in

terv

iew

with

cur

rent

ow

ner/

mar

ketin

g m

anag

er,t

our

offa

cilit

ies,

1 br

and

spec

ific

book

,com

pany

2ye

ars

Em

ploy

ees

200+

mar

ketin

g m

ater

ial,

20 w

ine

book

s,14

art

icle

s,6

regi

onal

his

tori

es,r

evie

w o

fre

leas

esF1

4C

ham

pagn

e15

0+H

ecta

res

301

inte

rvie

w w

ith c

urre

nt o

wne

r/m

arke

ting

man

ager

,tou

r of

faci

litie

s,co

mpa

ny m

arke

ting

mat

eria

l,20

2ye

ars

Em

ploy

ees

100+

win

e bo

oks,

8 ar

ticle

s,6

regi

onal

his

tori

es,r

evie

w o

fre

leas

esP1

sPo

rtug

al23

yea

rsH

ecta

res

722

inte

rvie

ws

with

ow

ner/

mar

kete

r an

d w

inem

aker

,com

pany

mar

ketin

g m

ater

ial,

tour

of

faci

litie

s,re

view

4E

mpl

oyee

s 12

0of

20 y

ears

rel

ease

s,4

win

e bo

oks,

14 a

rtic

les,

6 in

dust

ry s

peci

fic h

isto

ries

P2Po

rtug

al20

0+H

ecta

res

250

2 in

terv

iew

s w

ith C

EO

,mar

ketin

g m

anag

er,t

our

offa

cilit

ies,

1 br

and

spec

ific

book

,com

pany

mar

ketin

g4

year

sE

mpl

oyee

s 10

00+

mat

eria

l,re

view

s of

rele

ases

,27

artic

les,

15 w

ine

book

s,6

indu

stry

his

tori

es,a

uctio

n re

cord

s

Not

es:

Rev

iew

of

rele

ases

ref

ers

to b

ooks

/mag

azin

es f

eatu

res

char

ting

the

qual

ity o

fth

e fir

m’s

rele

ases

and

the

ir s

ubse

quen

t de

velo

pmen

t.N

umbe

rs o

fin

terv

iew

s re

fer

to s

umm

ary

tota

ls at

firm

.The

ter

m ‘w

ine

book

’ref

ers

to s

peci

alis

t w

ine

book

s w

here

the

firm

und

er in

vest

igat

ion

was

feat

ured

.‘M

agaz

ine

artic

les’

are

mos

tly s

peci

alis

t w

ine

trad

e pu

blic

atio

ns fe

atur

ing

the

firm

.Reg

iona

l his

tori

es r

efer

to

hist

oric

alan

alys

es o

fth

e sp

ecifi

c re

gion

or

indu

stry

tha

t (a

lthou

gh t

his

was

not

nec

essa

ry) f

eatu

red

the

firm

s in

vest

igat

ed.

*Ref

ers

to a

ge o

ftw

o lu

xury

bra

nds

(and

the

tea

m r

espo

nsib

le fo

r th

em) i

n to

tal p

ortfo

lio o

nly.

Hec

tare

s fo

r C

ham

pagn

e V

iney

ards

and

Por

t H

ouse

s un

ders

tate

the

tru

e si

ze o

fpr

oduc

tion,

as t

he m

ajor

ity(o

n av

erag

e tw

o th

irds

) of

prod

uctio

n is

pur

chas

ed fr

om g

row

ers.

international luxury wine distributors/retailers/agents were interviewed. Thesesources and the secondary data enabled me to triangulate case material (Miles andHuberman, 1994).

Cases were analysed through within-case and cross-case analysis (Eisenhardt,1989). Copies of each case and a report were returned to each respondent. Wethen worked collaboratively over a period of three months on the report to furtherunderstand the findings and develop strategies for the future. Throughout thestudy, a number of methods for improving the quality of the research wereadopted. Firstly, experts were used to help select the cases, two researchers pro-vided independent interpretations of the findings, interviews were conducted overthree years, and respondents were given the opportunity to provide feedback oninitial findings, all of which reinforced reliability; and while colleagues performedindependent coding of the transcripts, long-term interviews were conducted bythe same interviewer, reducing the role of bias (Lincoln and Guba, 1985; Straussand Corbin, 1998).

FINDINGS

The findings are presented around a number of key themes. Table II identifies thelevel of support for each theme. Briefly, to attain and retain price premiums, thewineries needed to constantly ensure their status as the defining quality level fortheir product class. Status was ensured through the use of classification systems,real commitments to quality, and demonstration of historical quality and priceperformance and strategies to enhance perceptions of authenticity. The develop-ment of a sincere story was crucial to claims of authenticity. Sincerity was achievedthrough making links to place, using traditional production methods, ensuring stylistic consistency, using culture and history as referents, and appearing abovecommercial considerations through decoupling their business and productionpractices from their espoused philosophies and public persona.

Protecting Status

The core-differentiating factor of a luxury wine brand is their status-based posi-tioning. In 26 of my cases the issue of protecting brand status was mentioned, like-wise it was found in 12 sites during my field visits, and of the secondary sources Iconsulted, appeared in relation to 23 of the cases (see Table II for details). Thesebrands are the ultimate standard by which whole categories of products werejudged. For example, Champagne brands remains the standard by which allsparkling wines are compared. New entrants refer to production methods as beingtypical of a famous region such as ‘Burgundian’ or ‘Methode Champenoise’ in anattempt to leverage the status of these established regions (with region of originrepresenting an important brand attribute in wine; Benjamin and Podolny, 1999).Portuguese Port styles also represent the pinnacle of fortified wine production. The



producers from Australia and New Zealand have built an enviable reputation as‘new classic’ examples of red wine blends (A2, A3, NZ3), white wines (NZ1, NZ4,NZ5, A4), pinot noir (NZ1, NZ2), or single vineyard Shiraz (A1).

Kapferer (2001) proposes that luxury brands represent the highest stage a brandcan achieve in terms of value. The identification of this characteristic of luxurywine brands is important because it is this status-based positioning that must beprotected if the brands are to retain their equity. All the interviewees identified theimportance of maintaining status to the value of these wine brands (see Table II).In particular, wine writers and consumers identified that a decline in a winery’sstatus would be brought about by stylistic dilution and the need to be fashionable.The interviewees at the wineries also shared concerns about stylistic dilution. Forexample, the following quote is from a New Zealand pioneer worried about theneed to retain their prestige and quality leadership image in the face of new highprofile rivals.

I think we are dealing with one of our greatest challenges right now, which isto retain the popularity of our wine as it matures. A lot of people used to think



Table II. Summary of cross-case ethnographic evidence for themes

Case related Observations Secondary

interviews % (field notes) % Sources %

(F)# (F) (F)*

Protecting status 100% (26) 46% (12) 88% (23)Formal classifications 62% (16) 62% (16) 62% (16)Informal classifications 35% (9) 35% (9) 35% (9)Real commitments to quality 100% (26) 100% (26) 77% (20)Ability to demonstrate historical quality and 92% (24) 69% (18) 73% (19)

price performance

Sincerity of story

Using place as a referent 96% (25) 69% (18) 92% (24)Stylistic consistency 58% (15) 38% (10) 50% (13)Using traditional production methods 77% (20) 68% (17) 69% (18)Using culture and history as referents 81% (21) 73% (19) 77% (20)Appearing above commercial considerations 85% (22) 73% (19) 81% (21)

through decoupling

Notes:

Numbers in cells represent aggregated percentages across cases. Higher percentages and multiple responses acrosssources constitute strong evidence for an element of authenticity (adapted from Uzzi, 1997). These percent-ages/counts represent instances of each theme identified in the primary and/or secondary data relating to eachfirm.#Multiple interviews were conducted at each case (see Table I). Percentages and counts in this column repre-sent instances where the theme appeared in the final case summary (which was built up from multiple interviews).*Multiple secondary sources were consulted for each case (see Table I). Percentages and counts in this columnrepresent instances where the theme appeared in relation to each case mentioned in secondary sources (i.e. com-mitments to quality were mentioned in multiple sources, and these were aggregated for each case).

we were trendy, whereas now there are a number of ‘new boys on the block’,for example [a high profile local winery], so we have to manage our image. Wehave to project the fact that we are committed, we have integrity, we make greatwine, and we are passionate about it. We also have to continue to deliver thegoods and be relevant to today’s consumer . . . (NZ4)

The Role of Formal and Informal Classifications

In total 25 of the cases appealed to formal and informal classifications (theLebanese case was the one exception). The use of formal classifications by 16 ofthe cases was evidenced across all three forms of data sources in (see Table II fordetails). For example, status was further enhanced by the endorsement of an insti-tutionalized quality classification system.

There is a reason we have the classification in Bordeaux – it is true. For the last300 hundred years or more, certain pieces of land had produced better wines.No amount of work in the winery will change that. (F5)

Although the original 1855 Bordeaux declaration was built on previous perfor-mance, that performance related to price premiums rather than pure quality per-formance, and much debate at the time (and since) surrounded whether the systemrepresented one of merit. The original declaration was made to protect the cus-tomary order in Bordeaux when the 1855 Paris Exhibition wanted to show thewines, and undertake a blind tasting to identify levels of quality apart from his-torical status (Markham, 1998). Importantly, when questions are raised over theappropriateness of traditional status, these wineries have been able to counter thesechallenges by pointing to real investments in quality (classifications have sufferedreal challenges when quality has slipped seriously, and competitors could makevalid quality claims). These actual improvements often have little to do with thesuperiority of the region per se, but are a result of investments in productionprocesses, scientific prowess and stylistic evolution. Nevertheless these factors arenot communicated to the market; rather the output of these investments (improvedquality) is used to assert the validity of established status classifications. These clas-sifications provide some degree of legal legitimacy to the status position of incum-bents (Scott, 2001).

New World countries had yet to develop formal classifications but had startedto develop programmes to protect the status of established regions. The use ofinformal classifications by nine of the cases was evidenced across all three formsof data sources in Table II. In New World countries, recognition of the impor-tance of place has emerged in the past 20 years, with the producers interviewedbeing leading drivers in developing regional based authenticity programmes (thatare legally enforceable), and promoting these by allowing members who meet the



criteria to use names such as ‘Martinborough Terraces’, ‘Barossa Valley’, and‘Gimblett Gravels’ on their labels. These are informal classifications that arebinding only on those members who volunteer to use them and meet the criteria.The recognition that the value from this relationship is long term, provides a pointof differentiation from mere ‘winemakers’, and creates authenticity as identifiedin the following quote.

We’re committed to producing wines only in the Martinborough region andtherefore have no plans to source grapes from elsewhere. I think companiesevolve in different ways and I think we are likely to take a longer-term view thansome. There are successful companies that produce wine from a whole rangeof regions but to me, they are essentially winemakers whereas we are not. Weare Martinborough winegrowers, that’s absolutely critical to understand, it’swhat we are before all else. It is not just quality it’s authenticity if you like. Ithink what we do here and as we go on in time and we understand the regionbetter, we understand what our vines are doing in the soils so that we know howto work with them, then I think our own identity becomes clearer as a result.The risk of buying in fruit to meet volume requirements is that you can loseyour essential identity. (NZ5)

Real Commitments to Quality

Sincerity of story related directly to real commitments to production quality. Inall of my cases real commitments to quality were discussed in interviews, evidencedin all of the field visits, and of the secondary sources I consulted, appeared in rela-tion to 20 of the cases (see Table II for details). These wineries were often fanati-cal about detail. ‘We don’t pick by the bunch, we pick by the grape. This resultsin us gaining the best quality possible’ (F4). The use of hand harvesting wascommon to all the wineries. The wineries also integrated backward in a numberof areas believed to affect end product quality. A common example was in the pro-duction of wine barrels. Some wineries went as far to go into the forests with thesuppliers and select the actual trees for their barrels (F1–5). The majority of Euro-pean producers did this and often took ownership of curing and drying the wood,rather than leaving this up to very reputable suppliers. The use of French (pri-marily) or Californian Oak for barrels meant that Australasian producers couldnot undertake these actions (due to quarantine restrictions) and therefore part-nered only with the most reputable suppliers.

This commitment was also exemplified by the universal focus on detail. Forexample, one renowned Bordeaux producer contrasted his approach to planting,with that of New World producers. This came from an intuitive understanding ofthe vineyard, built up from experience, and records held by the winery.



There are parts of my vineyard that perform poorly. That might surprise youas many New World producers remove poorly performing vines and clones.However, I know that by itself those vines do not produce good quality wine,but when blended in with other components of the vineyard, add somethingspecial to the wine, that makes it what it is. (F3)

However, this understates the ongoing commitment to replanting and experimen-tation (with new clones) that occurs within this and other vineyards. Wineries con-tinuously examine their vineyards to seek quality improvements and replanted withbetter clones, allowing small ongoing improvements in quality. The wineries werecharacterized by this ongoing attention to detail, and understanding of how thesedetails came together to produce the product and the brand. The importance ofdetails was also borne out by consumer comments on the nature of luxury wines.

It’s got to have the works, as far as winemaking techniques goes, it’s got to haveeverything, really good oak, really vibrant fruit. (Consumer–John)

That’s the other thing – it’s the perceived value – you weigh up all the thingslike brand, vintage, style and so on and at the end of the day I know I’m goingto enjoy this bottle of wine. (Consumer–Sonja)

This attention to detail by the wineries and consumers saw them reinforce per-ceptions of high quality, and therefore sincerity of positioning by the release ofsecond and third labels, and the declassification of large percentages of the cropinto non-labelled wine that was sold to third parties. In Europe this practice wasestablished in the late 19th century as a way of responding to the problem of youngvines (brought about by replanting after phylloxera), which provide lesser qualitywine. These labels helped express two parts of the winery’s story – commitmentto place (greater understanding of each part of the vineyard) and dedication toquality, via greater selectivity in raw material. For example, the following quoterefers to how the firm Guigal (not interviewed here) releases a number of labelsfrom its best vineyard (Cote Rotie) and that this reinforces the brand’s commit-ment to place and quality, through becoming more selective in the material fromthe same vineyard site.

Guigal – best Cote Rotie single vineyard, and then they have all their otherlabels supporting it. This means they recognize the different levels of qualitywithin their vineyard, and gives them more credibility in my view. (Con-sumer–Angela)

Others (F8) have responded to questions over the integrity of their qualityprocesses, by undertaking public commitments. One of these was the development



of a Charter of Ethics and Quality by one of the Houses (which set the standardfor others), committing them to only producing wine sourced from the region,stringent levels of quality (relating to sourcing from a minimum number of GrandCru vineyards), and refusing to buy wines sur lattes, which involves purchasingunbranded wine from cooperatives (often sourced from outside Champagne),adding small amounts of their own stocks (dosage) to this wine when vintages arelow (this practice led to widespread claims that challenged the authenticity of theproduct in the late 1980s).

The Ability to Demonstrate Historical Quality and Price Performance

Being able to demonstrate actual ongoing product quality (including the ability toage) and the existence of price premiums (in primary and secondary markets) wascritical for protecting status. In 24 of my cases the ability to demonstrate histori-cal quality and price performance was discussed in interviews, evidenced in 18 ofthe field visits, and of the secondary sources I consulted, appeared in relation to19 of the cases (see Table II for details). All the wineries sought to keep librarystocks and have regular tastings of their back catalogue (known as ‘verticals’ in thetrade), released rare very old bottles onto auction markets, and retained a full cat-alogue of stocks going all the way back to firm founding. In this case, authentic-ity was enhanced by the fact these wineries had paid their dues (cf. Caves, 2000;Peterson, 1997). For example, consumers and distributors often identified theaudacity of many wine producers who ‘felt they could charge high prices for wineswith little track record, from young vines, with no story and little pedigree’ (Dis-tributor). The wineries also highlighted the proven ability of their wines to age, asjustification for their status.

Sincerity of Story

Throughout the interviews it was clear that the interviewees were intensely pas-sionate about their brands: ‘We feel we must live up to the brand that has beengifted to us, and pass it on to the next generation’ (F3). The extended encounterswith each firm and the development of cases using multiple methods identifiedthe constant desire to ensure a sincere brand story. Sincerity related to using placeas a referent, commitment to traditional production methods, stylistic consistency,using history and culture as referents, and appearing above commercial consid-erations. This was a key means of building brand authenticity, and therefore Ipropose that sincerity of story is critical to claims of authenticity.

Using Place as a Referent

Sincerity of story is reflected in relating the brand to a particular place. In 25 ofmy cases place as a referent was raised in the interviews, evidenced in 18 of the



field visits, and of the secondary sources I consulted, appeared in relation to 24 ofthe cases (see Table II for details). This was tied up in the realization that manyof the firms simply faced limitations to what they could produce and thus neededa form of differentiation with which to compete. Again, the creation of a sincerestory was critical, although this was often more selective when compared to theabsolute dedication to quality enhancements. The relationship to place reinforceda point of uniqueness, granting authenticity to the product, although this wasuseful only if the wines met a certain level of quality. This last point saw many wineries having to temper their commitment to authenticity as purity(expression of place) with the need to ensure consistency of quality (within certainboundaries).

This view of authenticity was expressed in the commitment to terroir, with winesexpressing differences due to seasonal variations being seen as ‘real’. For example,the following quote expresses this view, relating it to a sense of uniqueness and adefined positioning. This is contrasted directly with marketing or commerce.

The sheer question of our wine being – or not – a luxury product is – weirdlyenough – almost controversial for us . . . yes, we have a centuries-old trackrecord of fine wine production, and yes, we are at the top end of the winemarket. Still ours is a very special situation as, to make a long story short, thequality and the resulting prestige of our wine is due at first to a very French –albeit very real – concept of ‘terroir’ the meaning of which, as you surely know,is a combination of soil, micro-climate, grape varieties etc. I don’t need at thispoint to tell you about all the work that is being done to enhance even morethis quite unique situation. What I am trying to say is that we do not have atrue marketing approach, nor our own distribution channel for that matter. Icould not even give you accurate numbers concerning our export markets!!! Inview of those quick remarks, you may have some difficulties in selecting us as atypical case study. (F3)

The use of terroir as a positioning statement and guiding philosophy is expressedin a number of ways, and results in a number of strategies to create and protectauthenticity around this issue. Some identify themselves as merely stewards of theland, taking a great deal of care to emphasize that they are non-interventionist intheir approach, even though the actions to ensure consistency of quality in poorseasons requires quite a degree of intervention. For example, in poor years, wine-makers will gain more fruit concentration by heavy pruning of the vines, usinghelicopters to blow fog away from the grapes, and using reverse osmosis to removewater from under-ripe grapes, resulting in more flavour, and relatively loweralcohol levels. The following quote from a Burgundian winemaker evidences thisnon-interventionist perspective, and is reflected in the branding approach of Bur-gundian firms who market every high quality brand under a label that is a com-



bination of the village and quality rating of the vineyard – for example ‘GevreyChambertin [village] Premier Cru [formal vineyard status classification]’, anddownplaying the name of the house and winemaker (the grape type was not men-tioned at all).

The Bordelaise say to us Burgundians, ‘where is the art?’ For them, their wineis a blend of different parcels and varieties in a vineyard. For us, our wine comesfrom a single variety, and a single vineyard. Therefore we are hands off, lettingnature do her work. (F2)

Other approaches take a broader view of expression of place, identifying theimportant role of the individual, the efforts of previous owners and workers as anexpression of uniqueness and distinction. In contrast to the quote above, the rela-tion of the brand to a place is moderated by the need to create a blended product,undermining absolute claims to terroir.

The myth of [name] develops outside our control and we have no power overit. On the contrary, when people come here, we try and remove the mystery, weshow them what we have done openly: we show them that a great wine comesfrom a specific piece of earth and a lot of hard work. A great wine is not simplya gift of the Holy Ghost. It comes from a piece of soil which has perhaps beenblessed by the gods, but in any case has been chosen, assembled, worked on bythe hand of man over the centuries. And in the case of [name] we are talkingof parcels of land brought together between the thirteenth and seventeenth centuries. (F3)

As well as legal sanctions and educational campaigns, the wineries also reinforcetheir links with place by undertaking actions to enhance the strength and sincer-ity of their commitment to place. For example, many of the wineries have investedin integrated viticulture, which seeks to remove the use of pesticides from the pro-duction of wine, in an attempt to reinforce the naturalness and authenticity oftheir products. The New World firms in particular often enhance this with theadoption of formal, externally audited environmental standards (e.g. ISO stand-ards), and forming groups dedicated to natural production (the New Zealandwineries were part of a group called ‘Living Wine’). At one extreme, the commit-ment to place led one winery to run cattle on the property to provide fertilizer forthe vines.

Using Traditional Production Methods

The linking of the brand to place or traditional methods of production led thewineries to seek protection for the use of that name, and traditional expressions



associated with the production of wines from these areas. In 20 of my cases com-mitment to traditional production methods was raised in the interviews, evidencedin 17 of the field visits, and of the secondary sources I consulted, appeared in rela-tion to 18 of the cases (see Table II for details). Champagne producers have longsought to limit the use of the name ‘Champagne’ to wines produced in the area.Recent wine trade agreements signed between New World producers and the EUhave seen the use of terms such as ‘Port’ outlawed by non-Portuguese fortifiedwine producers, as well as attempts to limit traditional production expressions (e.g.Methode Champenoise), and force New World countries to also identify legallyenforceable geographic boundaries for their wine producing areas.

Firms often mixed generational winemaking teams, and encouraged siblings totake over their company role from their parents. For example, several of the toursI went on were taken by daughters of former tour guides (F3, F4, F5), and manyof the secondary sources identified the (usually) father–son transition in wine-making or estate management (A1, A3, L1, F1, F5, F6, F8, F10, F13–14). Thiswas reflected throughout the company (see quote below), and involved workers atall levels. Unlike many firms, these wineries were selective about the contract staffthey used to pick grapes, seeking to retain experienced pickers who knew the vine-yard intuitively, and the quality demands of the winemaking team (the usual prac-tice is to get whoever is available at the time).

Due to their unusual shape, the [brand name] Champagne bottles are posi-tioned on a special workbench and are riddled manually, according to the tra-ditional method still used by a very small number of specialists whose know-howhas been handed down from generation to generation. (F6)

Stylistic Consistency

The wineries all mentioned the difficulties associated with remaining true to paststyles (brand and region), while adapting to changing consumer tastes. In 15 ofmy cases the issue of retaining stylistic consistency was mentioned, likewise it wasfound in 10 sites during my field visit, and of the secondary sources I consulted,appeared in relation to 13 of the cases (see Table II for details). The importanceof continuity of style is borne out by cases that had undertaken revolutionary stylistic changes. For example, in Australia, a merger between two leading winer-ies saw questions raised about the style of the firm’s leading luxury brand (A2)with critics and consumers believing it had been diluted in order to encourageearly drinking and greater accessibility for the American market (the two Port pro-ducers sampled also vigorously defended themselves against this claim). Combinedwith the resignation of the winemaking team and heavy discounting of the 1995vintage (which led to widespread press claims that the wine in question had lostits status and that an ‘Australian icon was being destroyed for short term com-



mercial gain’) and a poor quality 1997, saw the firm undertake a major overhaulof its wine making practices for the brand, and invest heavily in communicationsfocusing on the return to traditional styles. The following quotes identify that dilu-tion of style, resulting in loss of status.

They forgot the great story of [brand]. They forgot that the wine’s intrinsicqualities were established over time, and involved a long term, and secretivecommitment by the winemaker to make a wine against the odds – the boardactually ordered [name] to stop making the wine and he made it in secretbecause he believed in it – and eventually it won people over. They forgot that, and attempted to change the taste of the wine for a few writers and theAmericans, and it destroyed the mystique . . . (A2)

Take the 1995 [name] for example. I’ve seen lots of it in the stores, and recentlyit’s been marked down by $125 a bottle. In my 20 years as a wine consumer,this has never occurred. Everyone knows the wine is not a good vintage, but in the past poor vintages were always downgraded into lesser labels.(Consumer–Caroline)

The cases studied managed to ensure authenticity through the slow evolution ofwine style in an attempt to retain a link to the past. For example, Houses that madea specific style of wine were keen to ensure that the style evolved but also remaineddistinctive. Port houses for example blended various parcels of wine into the finalblend for their vintage port. They used teams of three to five (to ensure a result ifa vote was required) tasters to put together the final blend. One taster was in their60s (the senior taster), one in their 40s and one in their 20s (P1, P2). This processmeant that the house style was retained over time, while also being open to newideas and influences.

History and Culture as Referents

Making links to the past also enhances sincerity. In 21 of my cases the use ofhistory and culture as a referent was discussed in interviews, evidenced in 19 ofthe field visits, and of the secondary sources I consulted, appeared in relation to20 of the cases (see Table II for details). The wineries often reinforced their linksto the past through rituals and ceremonies. New World producers would typicallyuse traditional public relations and marketing activities, or regional festivals tohighlight the release of new wines, and would have fairly fixed pricing policies.Other regions and wineries repeated historical ceremonies to establish pricing pat-terns for the vintage. For example, the price that wines fetch at Beaune Hospiceauction in Burgundy is an invaluable guide to the market. This event repeats estab-lished ceremonies and attempts to change it have met with resistance from the



trade. Based on my field notes the auctioneer takes bids but the end result remainsunknown until two candles have been lit and their light has died down withoutany further bid, during which time negotiations took place on future lots to ensurereasonable levels of prices for the vintage, which then were used as a quality signalto the marketplace. The publicity attached to any wine from the sale ensures thatthe lots go for between three to four times what they would fetch without the hospices label.

The importance of history to each of the firms was self-evident. All of the firmsinvolved were very old, with the French and Portuguese firms deliberately drawingupon their histories in their marketing. During the tours of facilities the historicallinks these firms had were made obvious. These tours focused exclusively on twothings – the historical events associated with the firm (many of which emphasizethe dedication to quality) and how the production processes led to enhancedproduct quality. These were selective stories that reflected a desired brand posi-tioning. Based on the field notes, one tour offered a flashy, hour long show retrac-ing the life of the founder, which as the tour guide noted, made champagne famousworldwide through innovative advertising. The show began with a film crammedfull of music, fireworks, popping champagne corks, and a grand human epic playedout to the ringing strains of a brass band. We then moved to a glass-sided eleva-tor, which descended some twenty yards or so. Once at the bottom, we boardeda little train and toured the cellars, which were filled with historical sculpturescarved in the limestone. Contrast this to a higher status brand established aroundpure quality, which celebrated the production of Champagne and the connois-seurship of consumers and the winemakers.

In Australia and New Zealand, the use of history is different. Younger winer-ies placed a greater emphasis on their pioneering history, focusing on how theywere the first to pioneer a regional style and/or varietal of wine. Others often told‘rags to riches’ stories of immigrant families, while others told stories of ‘beatingthe odds’, or ‘taking on the world and winning’, which were myths celebratedwidely in both countries. One brand started with one winemaker attempting todevelop a uniquely Australian, world-class wine, by blending the very best parcelsof fruit from the company’s vineyards. The results of the experiments were mixed,but after a few years the company’s directors ordered him to cease working on theproduct, which they felt was terrible. The winemaker carried on in secret. Whenthe wines had aged they were released and immediately captured the attention ofthe world’s wine press, becoming one of the world’s great wines. This story wascelebrated in a company published book on the brand and reflects the myth ofAustralians as entrepreneurial experimenters who challenge the powers that beand win out.

Drawing on historical associations and building links to cultural events wasanother means of ensuring authenticity. Authenticity was communicated throughheritage and links with past events. This selective focus on historical production



centres has resulted in the continuance of myths regarding the productionprocesses of certain wine styles. For example, the common view of the labourer’shand turning individual bottles of Champagne is a far cry from the reality ofmodern production where most of this is carried out by machines, or of Portworkers stomping the grapes with their feet and sailing the barrels of Port in traditional, 17th century boats (these boats are only used for new vintage ceremonies).

Appearing Above Commercial Considerations

The wineries downplayed their actual scientific and marketing prowess and con-formed to the expected rules of craft production, hand made methods, intuitiveexpertise, historical continuity, conservative attitude to change, and as being ‘abovecommercial considerations’. In 22 of my cases appearing above commercial con-siderations was discussed in interviews, evidenced in 19 of the field visits, and ofthe secondary sources I consulted, appeared in relation to 21 of the cases (seeTable II for details). Observations revealed that these firms had a very high degreeof scientific and technical proficiency, and are quick adopters of modern practicesand technology – although tours of the firms focused on the historical productionequipment, it was clear that there was also state of the art equipment at each ofthe wineries, which was confirmed by interviews with wine experts and secondaryanalysis on each of the firms. Even the New World producers, where emphasis onscientific excellence and marketing prowess is seen as critical to the success of theseindustries, downplayed this expertise in favour of discussing the use of traditionalmethods, dedication to quality, and the importance of place.

The practice of using modern production methods, while publicly downplay-ing their role in production is a necessary component of authenticity. The adop-tion of new production techniques helps ensure quality leadership, which thenenhances status and price premiums. The downplaying of modern productionmethods in favour of images of traditional hand crafted methods and intuitiveexpertise helps create a powerful image of commitment to past traditions, whichhelps convey a sense of authenticity. This was despite the fact that only a smallpart of the production process involved true handcrafted methods (due to the highcost of such practices). The wineries adopted practices (being on industry boardsand judging at wine shows) and systems (such as the intergenerational wine teammentioned earlier) to ensure consistency of style and adaptation to new trends. Assuch, the firms could downplay the extent to which they adapted to market needsby denying they made adaptations based on formal market research.

These firms also describe their philosophy in product terms (itself at odds withmodern marketing theory) – ‘I do not make a wine for a consumer. I make a winethat best expresses the vineyard and the vintage. I do not change it to suit a par-ticular segment’ (F3). This enabled them to downplay their marketing prowess and



business acumen, instead claiming they were protecting the region, producingnatural products, or making links with historical images of craftsmanship and tra-ditional production methods. This was partly out of necessity, and partly repre-sentative of decoupling, whereby the owners actually practiced targeted marketing(evolving the style over time and constantly getting feedback through private tast-ings and customer exhibitions) that was in contrast with their espoused statements.The primary and secondary research revealed a constant evolving of style toaccount for consumer trends, social changes, and changes in quality of peers. Thedifference was that these firms did not highlight this as their policy, instead openlydenigrating such changes as being false, and inauthentic. The quote below reflectsthis, referring to the example of two other Champagne Houses who sought toattract younger consumers at nightclubs through developing highly branded, sweetproducts that could be drunk in a 200ml bottle through a straw.

Putting Champagne in a small bottle with a straw is false marketing. My cus-tomers do not drink anything out of a straw! Doing this is not going to get themto drink and appreciate the top wines. (F6)

However, although many of the producers here did not openly adopt the languageof brand marketing, there were real commercial motives to production. This wasbest exemplified in the desires of New World producers, who often had openlystated commercial desires as one part of their positioning (although this was alwaysdownplayed for public consumption), although historical analysis of all the Euro-pean firms revealed that real commercial goals drove early actions, and involvedadaptation to consumer tastes, usually communicated to the winemaker via anEnglish merchant who often had a strong hand in the development of the wine’sstyle, production quantity, and brand marketing, the development of brands viapublicity and advertising, and the manipulation of prices through either deliber-ate increases as a means of displaying or capturing status, and/or reducing per-ceived supply.

Although the firms reported ‘we do no marketing’, when pressed, all of the firmsadmitted to deliberately cultivating brand awareness, either through endorsementfrom the press or through promotion and experiential strategies (cellar door salesor ‘wine by the glass’ in up-market restaurants). Many of the wineries had budgetsthat allowed them to sponsor high profile sporting and cultural events, and runmass marketing campaigns, which helped establish the positioning of the product.This strategy was believed to create a mass awareness, even among novice wineconsumers, that this brand was special and something to aspire to, which of coursegave the brand widespread social approval. Also, marketing prowess was demon-strated through the deliberate creation of perceptions of scarcity. Part of thisscarcity was real, based on the need to keep yields per hectare low because vineyield has a direct impact on product quality, although the firms also deliberately



managed perceptions of scarcity to give the impression that the product was avail-able in smaller amounts than it really was.

CONCLUSION

Achieving desired brand positioning is typically projected as something marketersdo, without reference to the wider institutional environment. However, drawingon research in low and high status industries demonstrates that brand manage-ment is an interactive process that occurs within a wider institutional environment.Authenticity was central to the maintenance of luxury wines’ core distinctiveness– in that luxury wines continued to need to define the standard for the category.Authenticity was identified from the literature as having a number of sources,including industrial and rhetorical attributes. Based on this we developed a defin-ition of authenticity whereby authenticity is projected via a sincere story thatinvolves the avowal of commitments to traditions, passion for craft and produc-tion excellence, and the public disavowal of the role of modern industrial attrib-utes and commercial motivation. In essence, the wineries denied their productswere commercial artefacts (when they were) and that their claims of authenticitywere rhetorical (when in fact they were part myth and part truth). This definitionof authenticity represents the first contribution of this article.

These elements of authenticity were borne out in the findings. Firstly, deliber-ate marketing activity did create and recreate images of authenticity. This wasachieved through a protection of status and the projection of a sincere story. Statuswas protected through the use of formal and informal classification systems, realcommitments to quality, and demonstrated ongoing price and quality leadership.Sincerity involved using place as a referent, commitment to traditional productionpractices, ensuring stylistic consistency, using history and culture as referents(through the use of rituals and ceremonies) and appearing above commercial con-siderations. The wineries appeared above commercial considerations through thedeliberate decoupling of day-to-day operations, marketing and strategy from out-wardly presented images of craft production, hand made techniques, dedicationto traditional methods, and opposition to mass marketing, branding and commercialism.

Meyer and Rowan (1991) proposed that the more an organization is derivedfrom institutionalized myths, the more organizations maintain elaborate cere-monies to display confidence to external and internal publics. Holt (2002) and Fine(2003) identified how creative artists or authentic brands risked devaluing them-selves by being perceived as too commercial, or too effective at understanding andexploiting their franchise. Instead they must to some extent appear disinterestedor distant from commercial considerations. One way of achieving this is to decou-ple formal structures and day-to-day work activities in order to maintain legiti-macy and support, whilst also conforming to institutional norms. These predictions



are supported in the findings with the wineries outwardly downplaying their realscientific and business expertise to appear above commercial considerations.

Nevertheless, the sampled firms communicated knowledge of these practicesthrough internal systems and communications, to ensure core components of thebrand remained fresh and performed without changing too rapidly and too much(persistence). This enables them to adapt to trends without losing legitimacy withlong-time consumers or other stakeholders such as the wine press. This view sitsin direct contrast with brand marketing theory that calls for a tight integrationbetween espoused brand values, external communications and brand relatedstrategies (Aaker, 1996; Hackley, 2003; Kapferer, 2001; Keller, 2003). It also con-tributes to our understanding of the development of corporate reputations andimpression management by identifying proactive practices that ensure ongoinglegitimacy.

The findings have a number of limitations. Further research is needed to repli-cate these findings and extend them in other industries to identify other sourcesof authenticity, providing the basis for a more comprehensive view of the con-struct. Furthermore, although consumers were interviewed for this research, andtheir comments supported aspects of authenticity raised by the wineries, moreresearch is needed to examine the differences between perceptions of authentic-ity held by consumers (including the differences in construction of authenticity bylow and high cultural capital consumers; Holt, 1998) and producers, including howboth generalist (e.g. Nike) and specialist (e.g. Billabong) producers produce authen-ticity and the limitations that strategy plays on creating such images (Carroll andSwaminathan, 2000).

Despite these limitations, this research advances work of the actions of identityspecialists (Carroll and Swaminathan, 2000; Delacroix et al., 1989), the emergingresearch on the production of cultural value in high and low-status industry fields(Benjamin and Podolny, 1999; Blumer, 1969; Caves, 2000; Fine, 2003; Grazian,2003; Peterson, 1997; Peterson and Anand, 2004; Uzzi, 1997), and the produc-tion of culture perspectives (Peterson and Anand, 2004). This research also iden-tifies a number of ways firms build organizational reputations through carefulimpression management (Elsbach and Sutton, 1992; Elsbach et al., 1998). Futureresearch could extend these findings in ‘lower realms’ (Holt, 1998) in examininghow strong iconic mass marketed brands (e.g. Nike or Coca Cola) manage to buildauthentic images, and whether or not the management of such brands is qualita-tively different from those of specialist high culture brands.

Luxury wine brands represent an interesting paradox for marketers. Many ofthese cases are some of the oldest brands still existing, yet they publicly downplaytheir marketing expertise and commercial motivations. Despite such behaviour,they remain very valuable brands, and have retained their allure over very longperiods. This study suggests that luxury wine brands create and recreate imagesof authenticity through their day-to-day actions, and their internal processes. They



also adapt to their institutional environment and indeed co-opt members of thatenvironment for protection, which then further reinforces the perceived authen-ticity of the brand. These images of authenticity represent a mixture of the realand the imagined, in that product distinctiveness, although somewhat a result oflocal climatic and topographical conditions is also a creation by winemakers, mar-keters, governments, consumers, critics, and other relevant stakeholders. This crea-tion and re-creation is necessary for the continued persistence of the brand andrequires firms to decouple their philosophies from the reality of their commercialprowess. It also suggests that brand management is an interactive process ofmeaning construction and reconstruction, rather than a one-way, top down processwhereby brand authenticity is infused in a product by marketers.

NOTE

*The author thanks Arch Woodside, Chris Dubelaar, Francis Farrelly and Steve Kates, the anony-mous reviewers and guest editors for their constructive comments on earlier drafts.

REFERENCES

Aaker, D. A. (1996). Building Strong Brands. New York: The Free Press.Anand, N. and Watson, M. R. (2004) ‘Tournament rituals in the evolution of fields: the case of the

Grammy awards’. Academy of Management Journal, 47, 1, 59–80.Belk, R. W. (1988). ‘Possessions and the extended self ’. Journal of Consumer Research, 15, September,

139–68.Benjamin, B. A. and Podolny, J. M. (1999). ‘Status, quality, and social order in the wine industry’.

Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 563–89.Blumer, H. (1969). ‘Fashion: from class differentiation to collective selection’. Sociological Quarterly, 10,

Summer, 275–91.Boyle, D. (2003). Authenticity: Brands, Fakes, Spin and the Lust for Real Life. London: Harper Collins.Briggs, A. (1994). Haut-Brion. London: Faber and Faber.Brown, S., Kozinets, R. V. and Sherry, J. F. Jr (2003). ‘Teaching old brands new tricks: retro brand-

ing and the revival of brand meaning’. Journal of Marketing, 67, 3, 19–33.Carroll, G. R. and Swaminathan, A. (2000). ‘Why the microbrewery movement? Organizational

dynamics of resource partitioning in the U.S. brewing industry’. American Journal of Sociology, 3,November, 715–62.

Caves, R. E. (2000). Creative Industries: Contracts between Art and Commerce. Cambridge, MA: HarvardUniversity Press.

Delacroix, J., Swaminathan A. and Solt, M. E. (1989). ‘Density dependence versus populationdynamics: an ecological study of failings in the California wine industry’. American SociologicalReview, 54, 2, 245–62.

Douglas, M. (1986). How Institutions Think. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press.Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). ‘Building theories from case study research’. Academy of Management Review,

14, 4, 532–50.Elsbach, K. D. and Sutton, R. I. (1992). ‘Acquiring organizational legitimacy through illegitimate

actions: a marriage of institutional and impression management theories’. Academy of Manage-ment Journal, 35, 4, 699–738.

Elsbach, K. D., Sutton, R. I. and Principe, K. E. (1998). ‘Averting expected challenges through antici-patory impression management: a study of hospital billing’. Organization Science, 9, 1, 68–86.

Faith, N. (1999). The Winemasters of Bordeaux: The Inside Story of the World’s Greatest Wines. London: PrionBooks.

Faith, N. (2002). Burgundy and its Wines. London: Duncan Baird Publishers.



Fine, G. A. (2003). ‘Crafting authenticity: the validation of identity in self-taught art’. Theory andSociety, 32, 153–80.

Fombrun, C. and Shanley, M. (1990). ‘What’s in a name? Reputation building and corporate strat-egy’. Academy of Management Journal, 33, 2, 233–58.

Geene, A., Heijbroek, A., Lagerwerf, A. and Wazir, R. (1999). The World Wine Business. Amsterdam:Rabobank International.

Grazian, D. (2003). Blue Chicago: The Search for Authenticity in Urban Blues Clubs. Chicago, IL: Univer-sity of Chicago Press.

Guy, K. M. (2002). When Champagne Became French: Wine and the Making of a National Identity. Baltimore,MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Hackley, C. (2003) ‘ “We are all customers now . . .” Rhetorical strategy and ideological control inmarketing management texts’. Journal of Management Studies, 40, 5, 1325–52.

Handelman, J. M. and Arnold, S. J. (1999). ‘The role of marketing actions with a social dimension:appeals to the institutional environment’. Journal of Marketing, 63, July, 33–48.

Heugens, P. M. A. R., Van Riel, C. B. M and van den Bosch, F. A. J. (2004) ‘Reputation manage-ment capabilities as decision rules’. Journal of Management Studies, 41, 8, 1349–77

Holt, D. B. (1997). ‘Poststructuralist lifestyle analysis: conceptualizing the social patterning of con-sumption on post-modernity’. Journal of Consumer Research, 23, March, 326–50.

Holt, D. B.(1998). ‘Does cultural capital structure American consumption?’. Journal of ConsumerResearch, 25, June, 1–25.

Holt, D. B. (2002). ‘Why do brands cause trouble? A dialectical theory of consumer culture andbranding’. Journal of Consumer Research, 26, June, 70–90.

Jones, C., Anand, N. and Alvarez, J. L. (2005). ‘Guest Editors’ introduction: Manufactured authenticity and creative voice in cultural industries’. Journal of Management Studies, 42, 5,893–9.

Kapferer, J. N. (2001). Strategic Brand Management: Creating and Sustaining Brand Equity Long Term, 2ndedition. Milford, CT: Kogan Page.

Keller, K. L.(1993). ‘Conceptualizing, measuring and managing customer-based brand equity’.Journal of Marketing, 57, 1, 1–22.

Keller, K. L. (2003). Strategic Brand Management: Building, Measuring, and Managing Brand Equity, 2ndedition. Sydney: Prentice Hall.

Lewis, D. and Bridger, D. (2001). The Soul of the New Consumer: Authenticity – What We Buy and Why inthe New Economy. Naperville, IL: Nicholas Brealey Publishing.

Lincoln, Y. S. and Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.MacDonogh, G. (2000). ‘Wine, politics & economics’. In Brook, S. (Ed.), A Century of Wine: The Story

of a Wine Revolution. London: Mitchell Beazley, 24–37.Markham, D. (1998). 1855 A History of the Bordeaux Classification. New York: Wiley.Meyer, J. W. and Rowan, B. (1991). ‘Institutionalised organizations: formal structure as myth and

ceremony’. In Powell, W. W. and DiMaggio, P. J. (Eds), The New Institutionalism in OrganizationalAnalysis. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 41–62.

Miles, M. B. and Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis, 2nd edition. Thousand Oaks,CA: Sage Publications.

Olney, R. (1995). Romanee-Conti: The World’s Most Fabled Wine. New York: Rizzoli.Pe aloza, L. (2000). ‘The commodification of the American West: marketers’ production of cultural

meanings at the trade show’. Journal of Marketing, 64, October, 82–109.Peterson, R. A. (1997). Creating Country Music: Fabricating Authenticity. Chicago, IL: The University of

Chicago Press.Peterson, R. A. and Anand, N. (2004). ‘The production of culture perspective’. Annual Review of Soci-

ology, 30, 311–34.Peterson, R. A. (2005). ‘In search of authenticity’. Journal of Management Studies, 42, 5, 1083–98.Phillips, M. E. (1994). ‘Industry mindsets: exploring the cultures of two macro-organizational set-

tings’. Organization Science, 5, 3, 384–402.Postrel, V. (2003). The Substance of Style: How the Rise of Aesthetic Value is Remaking Commerce, Culture, &

Consciousness. New York: HarperCollins Publishers.Powell, W. W. and DiMaggio, P. J. (1991). The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis. Chicago,

IL: University of Chicago Press.Ross, R. (2004). ‘Cognac chalk link based on 19th-century joke’. Wine International, April, 10.Scott, W. R. (2001). Institutions and Organizations, 2nd edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

n̆



Strauss, A. and Corbin, J. (1994). Basics of Qualitative Research, 2nd edition. Newbury Park, CT: SagePublications.

Thompson, C. J. and Tambyah, S. K. (1999). ‘Trying to be cosmopolitan’. Journal of Consumer Research,26, December, 241.

Ulin, R. C. (1995). ‘Invention and representation as cultural capital: Southwest French winegrow-ing history’. American Anthropologist, 97, 3, 519–27.

Uzzi, B. (1997). ‘Social structure and competition in interfirm networks: the paradox of embed-dedness’. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42, 1, 35–67.

Zaltman, G. (1997). ‘Rethinking market research: putting people back in’. Journal of Marketing Research,35, November, 424–37.



crafting brand authenticity: the case of luxury wines

Documents