Mãrci ºi strategii de marcã: consideraþii manageriale and Brand Strategies.pdfAceastã lucrare...

Daniel ªERBÃNICÃ76

Mãrci ºi strategii de marcã: consideraþii manageriale

Daniel ªERBÃNICÃAcademia de Studii Economice Bucureºti

Rezumat

În marketingul orientat spre consumatori, mãrcile oferã adesea elementele esenþiale pentrua face diferenþa între diferite oferte competitive ºi, din acest punct de vedere, ele suntesenþiale pentru succesul companiei. Aºadar, este important ca managementul de marcãsã fie abordat dintr-o perspectivã strategicã. Mãrcile joacã un rol fundamental înexpansiunea pe plan internaþional a oricãrei companii. Realizarea unei structuri de brandcoerente la nivel internaþional este o componentã cheie a întregii strategii de marketinginternaþional a companiei, deoarece ea propune o structurã la nivelul altor mãrci puternicepentru intrarea pe alte pieþe, pentru asimilarea mãrcilor achiziþionate ºi adaptarea strategieide marcã a companiei pe plan internaþional. Aceastã lucrare este o trecere în revistã aliteraturii de specialitate, cu scopul de a examina conceptele de marcã, aºa cum sunt eledezvoltate în management, dar ºi natura dinamicã a mãrcilor, din punctul de vedere alschimbãrii de strategie, þinând cont de pretenþiile din ce în ce mai mari ale consumatorilor.

Cuvinte cheie: branding, management de marcã, multi-branding, brand global

Introducere

Experþii în branding considerã cã mijlocul anilor 1980 a reprezentat un punct decotiturã, în momentul în care comunitatea financiarã a constatat cã mãrcile au devenitprincipala valoare a companiilor (Kapferer, 2004). Companiile nu mai erau achiziþionatepentru capacitatea operaþionalã sau pentru cunoºtinþele de management, ci pentru cãdeþineau un portofoliu de mãrci puternice. În acest context, marketingul a devenit,treptat, un marketing „centrat pe marcã” (Rust, Zeithaml ºi Lemon, 2004).

Odatã cu globalizarea pieþelor ºi creºterea competiþiei la nivel global, companiilepun tot mai mult accent pe expansiunea geograficã a operaþiunilor lor, înfiinþând sauachiziþionând companii în alte þãri, sau formând alianþe care depãºesc graniþele naþionale.În acelaºi timp, odatã cu rãspândirea mijloacelor de comunicare globale ºi regionale,dezvoltarea internaþionalã a vânzãrilor cu amãnuntul ºi deplasarea persoanelor, bunurilorºi organizaþiilor dincolo de graniþele naþionale trec printr-un profund proces de integrare

1-RRM 4-2007.pmd 3/14/2008, 9:00 AM76

RRM 4-2007 77

Brands and Brand Strategies: Managerial Considerations

Daniel ªERBÃNICÃAcademy of Economic Studies Bucharest

Abstract

In consumer marketing, brands often provide the primary points of differentiation betweencompetitive offerings, and as such they can be critical to the success of companies.Hence, it is important that the management of brands is approached strategically. Brandsplay a critical role in a firm’s international expansion. A coherent international brandarchitecture is a key component of the firm’s overall international marketing strategy asit provides a structure to leverage strong brands into other markets, assimilate acquiredbrands, and rationalize the firm’s international branding strategy. This paper is a reviewof the brand literature and his aim is to examine the brand concepts developed bymanagement and the dynamic nature of brands in terms of changing brand strategy andincreasing consumer sophistication.

Keywords: branding, brand management, multi-branding, global brand

Introduction

Brand experts pinpoint to the mid 80s as the turning point when the financialcommunity discovered that brands were becoming the firms’ key assets (Kapferer, 2004).Firms were not anymore acquired for their operations capacity or their managerialknow-how, but because they detained a portfolio of strong brands. In such a context,marketing progressively became “brand-centered” (Rust, Zeithaml & Lemon; 2004).

With the globalization of markets and the growth of competition on a global scale,companies are increasingly expanding the geographic scope of their operations, settingup or acquiring companies in other countries, or entering into alliances across nationalboundaries. At the same time, with the spread of global and regional media, thedevelopment of international retailing, and the movement of people, goods, andorganizations across national borders, markets are becoming more integrated (Aaker

1-RRM 4-2007.pmd 3/14/2008, 9:00 AM77



(Aaker, 1996b). Ca urmare, firmele trebuie sã acorde mai multã atenþie coordonãrii ºiintegrãrii strategiei de marketing pe pieþele internaþionale.

Un element important al strategiei de marketing internaþional a unei companii estepolitica sa de marcã. Mãrcile puternice consacrã identitatea firmei pe piaþã ºi au opoziþie solidã în rândurile consumatorilor (Aaker 1996, Keller 1998, Kapferer 1997) ºi,în plus, constituie un instrument de contracarare a forþei mereu crescânde a vânzãrilorcu amãnuntul (Barwise ºi Robertson 1992). Ele stau de asemenea la baza extinderii demarcã, în vederea întãririi pe mai departe a poziþiei firmei ºi a creºterii valorii sale(Aaker ºi Keller 1990). Pe pieþele internaþionale, companiile se confrunta cu o problemãmajorã – dacã sã foloseascã acelaºi nume de marcã în þãri diferite, întãrind astfel forþamãrcii dincolo de graniþe, sau sã menþinã mãrci locale, care sã rãspundã preferinþelorconsumatorilor din þara respectivã.

Dezvoltarea semnificaþiei de marcã ºi înþelegerea sa de cãtre consumatori esteimportantã pentru managerii de marketing din zilele noastre (Keller 2003).

Astãzi, orice student la marketing poate spune cã, pentru a avea succes, mãrciletrebuie sã fie relevante pentru pieþele lor þintã ºi sã fie diferite faþã de cele care aparþincompetitorilor. Dar existã numeroase dovezi ale faptului cã, în timp, marketingul ºi-apierdut în parte capacitatea de a crea ºi de a administra mãrcile diferenþiate. Aceastãincapacitate de diferenþiere determinã mãrcile sã intre în competiþie pe baza preþului,subminând însãºi motivaþia existenþei mãrcilor.

Incapacitatea de diferenþiere implicã faptul cã nereuºita pe piaþã se datoreazã lipseide gãndire originalã, lipsei de creativitate în probleme strategice. Diferenþierea arenevoie de o strategie de marcã originalã. Aºadar, creativitatea este esenþialã pentrudezvoltarea unei strategii de marcã plinã de succes (poziþionarea ori tema mãrcii, aºacum o denumim noi). Brandul este indisolubil legat de reputaþia produsului, a serviciuluisau a companiei cu care este asociat. Nu e doar un concept de marketing, cãci tot ceface acea companie îi poate afecta reputaþia (adicã, marca).

Crearea, dezvoltarea, implementarea ºi menþinerea mãrcilor de succes se aflã adeseaîn centrul strategiei de marketing. Brandingul de succes se bazeazã pe o perspectivãstrategicã (de Chernatony 1998) prin care structura mãrcilor puternice este prezentatãºi comunicatã unor segmente þintã bine definite, aceastã acþiune având ca efect creareaunei imagini favorabile pentru marcã, care sã reflecte identitatea acestuia (Gardner ºiLevy 1955, Reynolds ºi Gutman 1984, Kapferer 1997).

Numeroase tipologii de marcã (de ex. Chernatony ºi Dall’Olmo Riley 1997; Leahy1994) aratã modul în care strategii de marcã structureazã conceptual anumite mãrcicare, prin natura lor, sunt astfel unice (Gardner ºi Levy, 1955). De-a lungul timpuluiaceste concepte au acoperit o gamã largã, de la brandul privit ca simplã formulã deidentificare, la dezvoltarea unor identitãþi complexe, de mare valoare. Intenþiile

1-RRM 4-2007.pmd 3/14/2008, 9:00 AM78


RRM 4-2007 79

1996b). As a result, firms need to pay greater attention to coordinating and integratingtheir marketing strategy across markets.

An important element of a firm’s international marketing strategy is its brandingpolicy. Strong brands help to establish the firm’s identity in the market place, and developa solid customer franchise (Aaker 1996, Keller 1998, Kapferer 1997) as well as providinga weapon to counter growing retailer power (Barwise and Robertson 1992). They canalso provide the basis for brand extensions, which further strengthen the firm’s positionand enhance value (Aaker and Keller 1990). In international markets, an importantissue for the firm is whether to use the same brand name in different countries, leveragingbrand strength across boundaries, or whether to maintain local brands responding tolocal customer preferences.

Developing and understanding a brand’s meaning to consumers is important fortoday’s marketing managers (Keller 2003).

Now any student of marketing can tell you that brands need to be relevant to theirtargets and differentiated from their competitors to be successful. But there is ampleevidence that marketing has somehow lost the capacity to create and managedifferentiated brands. This lack of differentiation forces brands to compete on the basisof price and undermines the business reasons why brands exist in the first place.

The inability to differentiate suggests that our downfall as marketers is our lack oforiginal thought, a lack of creativity in strategic matters. Differentiation demands anoriginal brand strategy. Therefore, creativity is vital to developing successful brandstrategy (the positioning or brand theme, as we call it). A brand is akin to the reputationof a product, service or company with which it is associated. It is not just a marketingconcept, since everything a company does can affect its reputation (that is, the brand).

Creating, developing, implementing and maintaining successful brands is frequentlyat the heart of marketing strategy. Successful branding requires a strategic perspective(de Chernatony 1998) whereby strong brand concepts are presented and communicatedto well targeted segments resulting in favorable brand images which reflect the brand’sidentity (Gardner and Levy 1955, Reynolds and Gutman 1984, Kapferer 1997).

Various brand typologies (e.g. de Chernatony and Dall’Olmo Riley 1997; Leahy1994) show how brand strategists have plans for particular brand concepts whose natureis unique to the particular brand concept (Gardner and Levy, 1955). Over time thesebrand concepts have ranged from the brand acting as a simple identification device tothe development of complex, value-laden identities. The goals managers have for theirbrands must mesh with those of their target consumers. The goals consumers have for

1-RRM 4-2007.pmd 3/14/2008, 9:00 AM79



brandului, aºa cum este el gândit de manageri, trebuie sã se identifice cu intenþiileconsumatorilor þintã. Intenþiile consumatorilor þintã sunt numeroase (Gordon 1991),între ele numãrându-se, de exemplu, comunicarea unor aspecte specifice persoanei ºimodului ei de viaþã, prin intermediul folosirii brandului respectiv (Goffman, 1959; Grubbºi Hupp, 1968). Dacã intenþiile managerilor ºi cele ale consumatorilor nu coincid,consumatorii vor ignora, probabil, ceea ce le comunicã marca, sau îi vor acorda foartepuþinã atenþie; nu vor afla mai nimic, iar intenþiile managerilor nu se vor putea împlini.Aºadar, intenþiile celor douã pãrþi sunt indestructibil legate.

Stadiile mãrcii

Un model deosebit de util a fost conceput de Goodyear (1996); el aratã modul încare a evoluat, în timp, natura mãrcii. Modelul Goodyear se concentreazã mai mult penatura brandingului, în permanentã evoluþie în timp ºi mai puþin pe proiectul strategical conceptelor de marcã la un moment dat, sau pentru lansarea unui anumit brand.Goodyear nu urmãreºte dezvoltarea unui anumit brand în timp, ci reprezintã, maidegrabã, un model conceptual al stadiilor prin care ar putea trece un brand.

Cele ºase stadii se referã la schimbãrile apãrute în timp, în practicile de branding, lao categorie de produs, ºi nu la transformãrile suferite de un brand anume. Atunci cândun produs este nou, companiile încearcã sã explice exact ce este produsul, ce face ºi cebeneficii ar putea avea consumatorii din adoptarea lui; luând brandul ca element dereferinþã, aceasta este stadiul în care conducerea firmei încearcã sã scoatã în evidenþãpropriul brand în comparaþie cu altele cu aceleaºi atribute ale produsului. E posibil ca,atunci când un brand nu mai poate menþine avantajul competitiv pe baza atributelorprodusului, conducerea companiei sã treacã la construirea personalitãþii mãrcii. Pemãsurã ce brandul devine cunoscut pe plan mondial, el poate deveni un simbol, oimagine iconicã. În marketingul post-modern, marca poate fi compania însãºi, sau sepoate asocia cu cauze sociale. Astfel, pentru orice categorie de produs, mãrci diferitese pot regãsi într-una din cele ºase stadii; mãrcile îºi pot schimba strategia (de exemplu,de la element de referinþã la personalitate); în orice stadiu pot apãrea mãrci noi ºi, la felde bine, este posibil ca, pentru o anumitã categorie de produs, procesul de branding sãnu treacã niciodatã prin toate cele ºase stadii.

Modelul Goodyear poate fi folosit pentru a explica situaþii în care conducereacompaniei utilizeazã diferite strategii pentru acelaºi brand; în consecinþã, marca seregãseºte în mai multe stadii. Astfel, managerii pot percepe brandul ca aflându-se înmai multe stadii, în funcþie de stadiul ciclului de viaþã al mãrcii pe piaþa (pieþele) relevante.În secþiunile care urmeazã, se descrie relaþia dintre efortul de marketing ºi efortulconsumatorului, pentru fiecare stadiu.

1-RRM 4-2007.pmd 3/14/2008, 9:00 AM80


RRM 4-2007 81

brands are numerous (Gordon 1991) and include such things as communication ofparticular aspects of self and lifestyle through the use of specific brands (Goffman,1959; Grubb and Hupp 1968). If managements’ and consumers’ goals for specific brandsdo not coincide, consumers would ignore or pay minimal attention to brandcommunications; little learning would occur and the goals of management would notbe realized. Thus, the goals of the two are inextricably tied to each other (de Chernatony1993).

The stages of brand

A particularly helpful model has been devised by Goodyear (1996) showing howthe nature of branding has evolved over time. The Goodyear model focuses on theevolving nature of branding over time rather than on the strategic design of brandconcepts at particular times and for particular brand launches. Rather than a tracing ofan actual brand over time, Goodyear’s is a conceptual model of the possible stages thata brand might go through.

The six stages refer to changes in branding practices in a product category over timerather than changes in any specific brand. When the product is new, companies attemptto explain what the product is, does and how it can benefit consumers; this is the stage,brand as reference, in which management tries to distinguish its brand from othersusing product attributes. When a brand can no longer sustain a competitive advantageon the basis of product attributes, management may decide to build a personality forthe brand. As the brand becomes well-known, world-wide, it may become a symbol oricon. In post-modern marketing, the brand may be the company or align itself withsocial causes. Thus, in any product category, different brands may be in any one of thesix stages; brands may change strategies (for example, from reference to personality);new brands may enter at any stage and the branding process in a particular productcategory may never complete all six stages.

The Goodyear model can be used to explain situations in which management usesdifferent strategies for the same brand with the result that the brand is located in morethan one stage. Thus, managers can view any brand as being in multiple stages dependingon the stage of the brand life cycle in the relevant market(s).In the succeeding sections,the relationship between the marketing effort and consumer effort is described for eachstage.

1-RRM 4-2007.pmd 3/14/2008, 9:00 AM81



Stadiul 1: Bunuri care nu reprezintã un brand. În þãrile dezvoltate acest stadiu estede obicei trecut cu vederea, dar are o importanþã mai mare în economiile în curs dedezvoltare. Excepþie fac bunurile de larg consum, sau cazurile în care consumatorii nudoresc sã facã o distincþie între mãrci – de exemplu, scobitori sau bolduri. Chiar ºi îneconomiile în care mãrcile nu reprezintã un element obiºnuit (de exemplu, fosta URSS)acest stadiu poate fi scurtat, deoarece consumatorii folosesc elemente substitutive pentrua face diferenþa între bunuri despre care se presupune cã nu reprezintã un brand. Înaceastã fazã, multe organizaþii se poartã ca ºi cum nu prea ar fi nevoie de eforturipentru comercializare. În economiile occidentale, revoluþia industrialã a schimbataceastã stare de lucruri, pentru cã oferta a început sã depãºeascã cererea, iar producãtoriiau fost nevoiþi sã înveþe sã-ºi vândã produsele (de Chernatony ºi Dall’Olmo 1997). Înacest stadiu, scopul producãtorului este sã-ºi vândã, pur ºi simplu, bunurile, iar cel alconsumatorului, sã cumpere o parte din bunurile limitate. Scopul principal alconsumatorilor este acela de a obþine bunurile necesare, iar scopul managerilor esteacela de a produce ºi de a vinde bunurile respective. În acest stadiu, reþeaua mentalã aconsumatorului se constituie, în primul rând, din punctul nodal care identificã respectivacategorie de produs. Informaþiile despre produs sunt în general limitate la modul încare se utilizeazã acesta.

Stadiul 2: Mãrcile ca element de referinþã. În acest stadiu, þelurile managementuluide marcã se îndreaptã spre poziþionarea mãrcii ca deþinãtor de beneficii funcþionaleunice, adicã spre identificarea beneficiilor funcþionale ale mãrcii sub un nume distinctiv,care astfel sã-l diferenþieze de alte mãrci (Copeland 1923; Jones 1986; Brown 1992).Aceste acþiuni asigurã firmei ºi managementului o serie de beneficii. Încercând, curãbdare, sã dea mãrcii un nume distinctiv potrivit, acesta poate fi protejat prinînregistrarea patentului, oferindu-i protecþie legalã împotriva imitatorilor ºi arãtând sursade proprietate (Fogg 1998). Într-adevãr, definiþia datã mãrcii de cãtre Asociaþia Americanãde Marketing, în 1960, este foarte apropiatã de brand ca element de referinþã, acestafiind definit ca „un termen, simbol sau design... care trebuie sã identifice bunurile sauserviciile unui producãtor... ºi sã-l diferenþieze de cele ale competitorilor”. Amintireaacestei percepþii cu privire la funcþia mãrci lor dominã ºi astãzi manualele de marketing(de ex. Kotler ºi Armstrong, 1996).

Diferenþierea se face cel mai simplu prin accentuarea atributelor produsului(funcþionalitate), deoarece consumatorii pot fi încã în faza în care aflã câte ceva despreprodus. Acum, consumatorii îºi pot îmbunãtãþi selecþia de produse/mãrci, deoarece potidentifica mãrcile ºi pot face deosebirea între ele (Hoyer ºi Brown, 1990).

1-RRM 4-2007.pmd 3/14/2008, 9:00 AM82


RRM 4-2007 83

Stage 1: Unbranded Goods In developed countries this stage is usually by-passedbut has more relevance to developing economies. Exceptions might be commoditygoods or cases where consumers are unwilling to make brand distinctions — for example,toothpicks or clothes pins. Even in economies where brands are not common (for examplethe former USSR) this stage can be short lived as consumers use surrogate cues todifferentiate between supposedly unbranded goods. In this phase, many organizationsadopt the attitude that there is little need for selling effort. In Western economies, theindustrial revolution changed this because supply began to exceed demand andproducers had to learn to sell their goods (de Chernatony and Dall’Olmo 1997). In thisstage the goal of the manufacturer is simply to sell goods and the consumer to acquiresome of the limited goods. The primary goal of consumers is to obtain the necessarygoods and the goal of management is to produce and distribute the good. In this stage,the consumer’s memory network consists primarily of a node identifying the productcategory. Information about the product is generally limited to product uses.

Stage 2: Brands as Reference In this stage, the goals of brand management are toposition the brand as having unique functional benefits, i.e. to identify the brand’sfunctional benefits with a distinctive name thereby differentiating it from other brands(Copeland 1923; Jones 1986; Brown 1992). Doing so provides the firm and managementseveral benefits. By taking time to give a brand an appropriate and distinctive brandname, the brand name can be protected through trademark registration, giving it legalprotection against imitators and denoting the source of ownership (Fogg 1998). Indeed,the 1960 American Marketing Association definition of a brand is very much akin to thebrand as reference, defining it as “a term, symbol or design.... intended to identify thegoods or services of one seller...and to differentiate them from those of competitors”.Remnants of this perception of the function of brands still dominate marketing textbooks(eg Kotler and Armstrong, 1996).

Differentiation is most readily achieved by stressing product attributes (functionality)because consumers may still be learning about the product. This is the beginning ofsecondary demand stimulation. Consumers can now improve product/brand selectionbecause they are able to identify brands and to distinguish between them (Hoyer andBrown 1990).

1-RRM 4-2007.pmd 3/14/2008, 9:00 AM83



Pentru identificare, nu e nevoie decât de conºtientizarea, de cãtre consumatori, anumelui de marcã; diferenþierea le cere mai mult, ºi anume sã acumuleze mai multeinformaþii despre marcã.

Aplicarea caracteristicilor funcþionale le permite consumatorilor sã catalogheze rapidmarca în propriile structuri mentale (Cohen ºi Basu, 1987). Mai precis, calitatea sigurãeste cheia cãtre un branding de succes (Doyle 1989). Diverºi autori pun în evidenþãfaptul cã marca reprezintã o garanþie pentru cumpãrãtorul potenþial (de Chernatony1989; Low ºi Fullerton, 1994; Irons 1996). Unul din modurile în care pot fi interpretatemãrcile este acela cã ele reprezintã valori în mintea consumatorilor (Southgate 1994).Acestea nu sunt doar valori funcþionale (Sheth, Newman ºi Gross 1991). Pe o piaþã cuconsumatori cu experienþã, se poate pune întrebarea dacã mãrcile adaugã suficientãvaloare, încât sã poatã fi deosebite de produsul de bazã (Southgate 1994).

În acest stadiu, în memoria consumatorilor se face legãtura între diferite mãrci ºicategoria respectivã de produse (Cohen ºi Basu 1987; Bousch 1993). Aceste conexiuniau o naturã extrem de categoricã (Mervis ºi Rosch 1981), prin faptul cã diferenþiereaîntre mãrci se face în principal pe baza atributelor fizice. Acest proces este descris deKeller (1993), care defineºte cunoaºterea mãrcii, pe baza a douã componente:conºtientizarea mãrcii ºi imaginea mãrcii. Aceste conexiuni relativ simple le permitconsumatorilor sã selecteze produsele rapid ºi sã evite anumite elemente de risc perceput.Fiecare marcã reprezintã un set de informaþii, fiecare set de informaþii fiind construit decãtre consumatori, pentru a evita, explicit, atributele multiple (de Chernatony ºiDall’Olmo 1998). Cea mai mare parte a eforturilor de marketing se concentreazã pedezvoltarea ºi accentuarea caracteristicilor funcþionale ale mãrcii, ca ºi pe comunicareaacestora cãtre consumatori. La rândul lor, aceste elemente le permit consumatorilor sãidentifice ºi sã deosebeascã marca de cele rivale, constituindu-se ºi într-o garanþie acalitãþii durabile. Astfel, producãtorii se angajeazã într-un proces de poziþionare a mãrcii,definit de Ries ºi Trout (1981) ºi care construieºte percepþia mãrcii prin comparaþie cumãrcile rivale.

Stadiul 3: Mãrcile ca personalitate. Ajunºi în stadiul 3, consumatorii se confruntãcu un mare numãr de mãrci – cu o mulþime de promisiuni funcþionale (Biel 1994). Daravansul tehnologic face dificilã menþinerea avantajului funcþional (Lambin 1997), ceeace face ca mãrcile care intrã în competiþie în aceeaºi categorie sã aibã calitãþi similaredin punct de vedere funcþional (de Chernatony 1997). Pentru a-ºi diferenþia mãrcile,specialiºtii în marketing se concentreazã pe incorporarea unor valori emoþionale înmãrcile lor, ilustrând acest lucru metaforic, prin personalitatea de marcã. Ei aleg anumitetrãsãturi de personalitate pentru marcã, astfel încât acestea sã fie în armonie cu valorileemoþionale ale mãrcii ºi cu stilul de viaþã al consumatorilor þintã (Aaker, 1996; Smothers

1-RRM 4-2007.pmd 3/14/2008, 9:00 AM84


RRM 4-2007 85

Identification requires only that the consumer be aware of the brand name;differentiation requires more of the consumer, e.g. that they acquire some knowledgeabout the brand.

Use of functional characteristics enables consumers to rapidly categorize the brandin their mental sets (Cohen and Basu 1987). In particular, consistent quality is a key tosuccessful branding (Doyle 1989). A variety of authors stress that the brand is a guaranteeto the potential customer (de Chernatony 1989; Low and Fullerton, 1994; Irons 1996).One interpretation of brands is that they are values in consumers’ minds (Southgate1994). These are not solely functional values (Sheth, Newman and Gross 1991). In amarket with experienced consumers some might question whether the brand adds enoughvalue to be distinguishable from the basic product (Southgate 1994).

In this stage, consumers are linking various brand nodes to the product category inmemory and expanding the network associated with each brand (Cohen and Basu 1987;Bousch 1993). These networks are mostly categorical in nature (Mervis and Rosch 1981)in that they differentiate brands primarily on physical attributes. This process is describedby Keller (1993) who conceptualizes brand knowledge as having two components:brand awareness and brand image. These relatively simple networks enable consumersto make product selections quickly and to avoid some elements of perceived risk. Eachbrand represents a chunk of information and each chunk of information is constructedby consumers to avoid explicitly multiple attributes. (de Chernatony and Dall’Olmo1998).Most marketing effort concentrates on developing and enhancing functionalcharacteristics of the brand and communicating these to consumers. This, in turn, enablesconsumers to identify and distinguish the brand from the competition and also acts as aguarantee of consistent quality. Thus, marketers are engaging in a brand positioning

process defined by Ries and Trout (1981) which builds perception of the brand vis-a-viscompetitive brands.

Stage 3: Brands as Personality By stage 3, consumers are faced with a variety ofbrands—all of which make functional promises ( Biel 1994). But advances in technologymake it difficult to sustain a functional advantage (Lambin 1997) with the result thatbrands competing in the same category have become functionally more similar (deChernatony 1997). To differentiate their brands, marketers focus on incorporatingemotional values into their brands, portraying this through the metaphor of brandpersonality. They select brand personalities consonant with the emotional values of thebrand and the target consumers’ lifestyle (Aaker, 1996; Smothers 1993; Shields 1992;

1-RRM 4-2007.pmd 3/14/2008, 9:00 AM85



1993; Shields 1992; Belk, 1988; Plummer, 1985), astfel încât consumatorul ºipersonalitatea mãrcii sã fie convergente (Malhotra 1988; Schiffman ºi Kanuk 1996).Din perspectiva interacþiunii sociale, indivizii îºi formeazã concepte despre ei înºiºi,reprezentând percepþia fiecãruia despre rãspunsul celorlalþi faþã de ei (Solomon 1983)ºi folosesc aceste concepte despre ei înºiºi pentru a le ghida comportamentul lacumpãrare (Dolich 1969, Grubb ºi Hupp, 1968).

În stadiul de brand considerat ca personalitate, marca ajunge sã reprezinte mai multdecât produsul (Southgate 1994). Ea reprezintã valorile care merg dincolo defuncþionalitatea produsului, pentru a deveni un mijloc eficient de comunicare apersonalitãþii proprietarului (Lanon 1993). Valorile mãrcii se modificã, de la instrumentalla simbolic, facilitând exprimarea sinelui sau ajutându-i pe oameni sã îºi reprezintepropria istorie trecutã (Csikszentmihalyi ºi Rochberg-Halton, 1981; Belk 1988).Capacitatea obiectului deþinut de a conferi o semnificaþie simbolicã a apãrut dintr-unlung ºir de cercetãri. De exemplu, obiectele deþinute le permit indivizilor sã se exprime,pe ei înºiºi ºi trecutul lor (Csikszentmihalyi and Rochberg-Halton, 1981; Belk, 1990;Dittmar, 1992); valorile personale sau credinþele religioase (Belk 1992) ; identitateaetnicã (Mehta ºi Belk, 1991) ; propria competenþã (Hirschman ºi LaBarbera, 1990) ;puterea socialã ºi statutul personal (Furby, 1978) ºi modul în care se diferenþiazã deceilalþi (Csikzentmihalyi and Rochberg-Halton, 1981).

În stadiul 3 este important ca managerii sã acorde o atenþie constantã pieþei, pentrua crea personalitatea cea mai potrivitã pentru marcã ºi pentru a o moderniza atuncicând este necesar. Personalitatea de marcã trebuie sã se schimbe constant, pentru a seconforma expresiei ºi imaginilor despre sine ale consumatorului, aflate ºi ele în continuãschimbare. Specialiºtii de piaþã încep prin a conferi mãrcii elemente de personalitatecare sã incorporeze caracteristici ºi valori umane, astfel încât marca sã devinã omodalitate de exprimare a propriului sine ºi a propriei identitãþi (de Chaernatony ºiMc Williams 1989) : Printr-un proces complex, în care consumatorii apeleazã la înþelesurisociale împãrtãºite, ei transformã, modificã, primesc ºi reflecteazã constant imagini ºiînþelesuri de marcã pentru a-ºi exprima propriul sine, stilul de viaþã, apartenenþa degrup, statutul ºi valorile în care crede, cum ar fi succesul. În acest proces, consumatoriisimt cã marca le aparþine, prin modul în care îl interpreteazã. Drept urmare, ei stabilesco relaþie cu mãrcile.

Stadiul 4 : Brandul ca imagine iconicã. În stadiul mãrcii ca imagine iconicã, înþelesuldiferitelor mãrci este acceptat pe o scarã atât de largã, încât brandul poate fi consideratrelevant pentru ceva ce trece dincolo de el, devenind un simbol. În aceastã privinþãGoodyear (1996) considerã cã, de fapt, consumatorii « deþin marca », deoarece ei înþelegºi folosesc proprietãþile simbolice ale acestuia. Imaginea mãrcii este suficient de puternicã

1-RRM 4-2007.pmd 3/14/2008, 9:00 AM86


RRM 4-2007 87

Belk, 1988; Plummer, 1985) so that consumer and brand personalities are brought intoalignment (Malhotra 1988; Schiffman and Kanuk 1996). From a social interactionistperspective, individuals form self concepts which are one’s perceptions of the responsesof others to one’s self (Solomon, 1983) and use these self concepts to guide purchasebehavior (Dolich, 1969, Grubb and Hupp, 1968).

In the stage of brand as personality, the brand has become more than the product(Southgate 1994). It represents values which go beyond the functional ones of its productform to act as an efficient communicator of the personality of the owner (Lanon 1993).The values of the brand change from instrumental to symbolic and facilitate expressionof self or help people represent their past history (Csikszentmihalyi and Rochberg-Halton,1981; Belk 1988). The ability of possession to confer symbolic meaning has been borneout by a long stream of research. For example, possessions enable individuals to expressthemselves and their past (Csikszentmihalyi and Rochberg-Halton, 1981; Belk, 1990;Dittmar, 1992); personal values or religious beliefs (Belk, 1992); ethnic identity (Mehtaand Belk, 1991); one’s competence (Hirschman and LaBarbera. 1990); social powerand status (Furby, 1978) and differentiation of one’s self from others (Csikzentmihalyiand Rochberg-Halton, 1981).

Stage 3 requires that management pay constant attention to the market to create theright personality for the brand and to update it when needed. The brand’s personalitymust constantly change to keep up with constantly shifting consumer self images andexpression. Marketers begin giving brands personalities that incorporate humancharacteristics and values so that the brand becomes a means of expressing one’s identityand self ((de Chernatony and McWilliams 1989). Through a complex process in whichconsumers use shared social meanings, they constantly transform, alter, receive andreflect brand images and meanings to express self, lifestyle, group membership, statusand values such as success. In this process, consumers are making the brand their ownthrough their interpretation of it. As a result, they form relationships with brands.

Stage 4: Brand as Icon In the Brand as icon stage, the meaning of various brands hasbecome so widely accepted that the brand can be used to stand for something beyonditself; in short, it has become a symbol. At this point Goodyear (1996) believes consumers“own the brand”, because they understand and use its symbolic properties. The brand’simage is strong enough to stand on its own in signifying values and consumers use it forthat purpose (Goffman, 1959; Gardner and Levy, 1955). The fourth stage usually results

1-RRM 4-2007.pmd 3/14/2008, 9:00 AM87



pentru a-ºi reprezenta propriile valori, iar consumatorii o folosesc tocmai în acest scop(Goffman 1959 ; Gardner ºi Levy, 1955). Cel de-al patrulea stadiu rezultã, de obicei,din utilizarea amplã ºi continuã, de cãtre management, a aceleiaºi valori, pe perioadeîndelungate de timp. Managerii decid sã asocieze marca cu o anumitã valoare ºi, deobicei, extind acea percepþie a mãrcii în întreaga lume. Astfel, pentru a avea succes,simbolul ales (fie cã e vorba de calitate, prestigiu sau faptul cã brandul respectiv este« beton ») trebuie sã reprezinte o valoare pentru consumatorii din întreaga lume.

Pentru a întãri latura lor simbolicã, mãrcile folosesc adesea anumite simboluri fizicerelevante pentru marcã. Mercedes foloseºte acelaºi ornament de pe capotã (steaua încerc) de câteva decenii ; Marlborough – pachetul roºu cu alb ; camioanele Mack –buldogul; Harley Davidson – vulturul, iar Coca-Cola – sticla în formã de clepsidrã.Aceste imagini iconice ajung un mod rapid de identificare a simbolurilor mãrci lor,indiferent în ce limbã sunt prezentate. În acest stadiu, conexiunile mentale aleconsumatorilor, reprezentând cunoaºterea, sunt bine dezvoltate, aºa cum aratã Keller(1993). Krishnan (1996) a explicat importanþa asocierilor primare ºi secundare înconstruirea echitãþii de marcã. Toate mãrcile trebuie sã determine asocieri mentalecomune, astfel încât sã fie clasificate împreunã cu acestea. Astfel, LA Gear, Adidas,Reebok ºi Nike sunt, toate, firme de încãlþãminte de sport, cu anumite caracteristicicomune. Conceptul de marcã se alege înainte de intrarea pe piaþã, cu o perspectivã petermen lung, astfel încât managerii sã se angajeze sã foloseascã acelaºi concept demarcã, fie el funcþional sau simbolic, pe toatã durata ciclului de viaþã al produsului. Înaceastã perioadã, mixtura de elemente de marketing are rolul de comunicare aconceptului de marcã cãtre pieþele þintã respective, ºi de înlesnire a activitãþilor detranzacþionare, de exemplu stabilirea punctelor de distribuþie corespunzãtoare (deChernatony ºi Daniels, 1994).

Stadiul 5 : Brandul ca organizaþie. Trecerea în stadiul 5 marcheazã tranziþia de lamarketingul clasic la cel post-modern, aºa cum este definit de Brown (1995). Atâtconsumatorii, cât ºi managerii trebuie sã aplice schimbãri majore. De partea cererii,consumatorii sunt mult mai rafinaþi, au o mai mare experienþã cu o gamã largã demãrci ºi sunt specialiºti atât în utilizarea computerului, cât ºi în studierea pieþelor ;drept rezultat, comunicarea nu mai este la fel de bine structuratã, dar este mai interactivãºi mai potrivitã pentru a rãspunde solicitãrilor individuale (Barwise, 1997). Folosirea pescarã din ce în ce mai largã a internetului permite tot mai multor consumatori sãdescopere ceea ce doresc ei sã ºtie despre mãrci, iar nu ceea ce specialiºtii de piaþãdoresc sã le spunã (Mitchell, 1997). Pe mãsurã ce compania/organizaþia devine unbrand, comunicarea trebuie sã se extindã pentru a prezenta acelaºi mesaj în toatepunctele de contact. Numeroºi acþionari interacþioneazã cu diferite secþiuni ale firmei.

1-RRM 4-2007.pmd 3/14/2008, 9:00 AM88


RRM 4-2007 89

from management’s extensive and continued use of the same value for long periods oftime. Management has chosen to associate the brand with a particular value and usuallyextended that perception of the brand around the globe. Thus, the chosen symbol(whether quality, prestige, or “coolness”) must be of value to consumers around theworld to be successful.

To reinforce the symbolism, brands frequently use some physical symbol to denotethe brand. Mercedes has used the same hood ornament (star in a circle) for decades;Marlborough its red and white packaging; Mack trucks its bulldog; Harley Davidson aneagle; and Coca Cola its hourglass bottle. These icons become shorthand means ofidentifying symbolic brands no matter what the local language. In this stage, consumernetworks of knowledge, as described by Keller (1993), are well developed. Krishnan(1996) has explained the importance of primary and secondary associations in buildinga brand’s equity. All brands must have some common associations so that they can becategorized together. Thus, LA Gear, Adidas, Reebok and Nike are all athletic shoeswith certain characteristics in common. The brand concept is chosen before entry witha long run perspective in mind so that management is committed to using the samebrand concept whether functional or symbolic throughout the product life cycle. In thisperiod, the marketing mix is charged with communicating the brand concept to theappropriate market targets and to facilitating transaction activities such as arranging forappropriate distribution outlets (de Chernatony and Daniels 1994).

Stage 5: Brand as Company Entry into stage five marks the transition from classicalmarketing to postmodern marketing as defined by Brown (1995). This necessitates majorchanges on the part of both consumers and management. On the demand side, consumersare far more sophisticated, have a greater experience of a broader array of brands andhave become computer as well as market literate with the result that communicationbecomes less structured, more interactive and better suited to answering individualqueries (Barwise, 1997). Growing penetration of the Internet allows more consumers tofind out what they want to know about brands, rather than what marketers want to say(Mitchell, 1997). As the company becomes the brand, communication must expand topresent the same message at all of the points of contact. Numerous stakeholders interactwith different parts of the firm. Any individual could be a consumer of the brand, amedia reporter about the company, an owner of the brand through stock purchase or aregulator of the company in an elected, regulatory capacity.

1-RRM 4-2007.pmd 3/14/2008, 9:00 AM89



Orice individ este un consumator potenþial al mãrcii, un reporter media despre companie,un deþinãtor al mãrcii prin cumpãrarea de acþiuni, sau un element de reglaj al companiei,în capacitatea sa electivã limitatã.

Pentru asigurarea unei comunicãri constante, firmele au ajuns la concluzia cã propriiangajaþi sunt la fel de importanþi ca ºi constructorii de marcã (de Chernatony 1996;King 1991): Firma trebuie sã se asigure cã toþi angajaþii înþeleg viziunea mãrcii, valorilelui inerente, ºi cã ilustreazã valorile mãrcii prin acþiunile de fiecare zi, devenind astfelo sursã cheie de personificare a mãrcii (de Chernatony ºi Dall’Olmo 1998, Riley 1998).Împlinirea acestui deziderat cere o pregãtire extensivã ºi explicarea detaliatã a înþelesuluiºi strategiei de marcã. Accentul pus în planul de comunicare a mãrcii se relevã maiîntâi prin prezentarea angajaþilor ºi a noii campanii; numai atunci când angajaþii înþelegºi sunt capabili sã respecte promisiunile poate începe comunicarea cu consumatorii.Angajaþii trebuie sã înþeleagã brandul propriu, sã fie motivaþi pentru a acþiona aºa cumo cere identitatea mãrcii ºi trebuie sã fie împuterniciþi sã ia mãsurile care se impunpentru creºterea importanþei acestuia. În acest stadiu, extinderea mãrci lor devine maidificilã. Mulþumitã brandingului umbrelã extinderea are un impact asupra modului încare este perceputã firma, dar ºi fiecare marcã în parte. Unele studii au demonstrat cãextinderea poate avea atât efecte pozitive, cât ºi negative asupra mãrcilor existente(Dacin ºi Smith, 1994; Aaker ºi Keller, 1990; Bottomley ºi Doyle, 1996; Broniarczyk ºiAlba, 1994; Bousch ºi Loken, 1991; Park, Milberg ºi Lawson, 1991; Reddy, Holak ºiBhat, 1994; dar ºi Keller ºi Aaker, 1992). Ca rezultat, este posibil ca înþelesul mãrcii sãse dilueze sau chiar sã devinã nesigur, deoarece valorile incorporate în marcã se potschimba. Aºadar, este esenþial ca tuturor acþionarilor sã le fie transmis acelaºi mesaj.Managerii trebuie sã stabileascã foarte clar care sunt valorile pe care doresc sã lecomunice, cum pot fi incluºi consumatorii în crearea de valoare adãugatã ºi cum sepoate menþine un mesaj stabil. Toate acestea încep cu dorinþa consumatorilor de a seimplica mai mult ºi cu dorinþa lor de a stabili o relaþie mai strânsã cu mãrcile ºi firmelecãrora acestea le aparþin.

Stadiul 6: Brandul ca politicã. În stadiul final, brandul ca politicã, marca ºi companiaau ajuns sã se identifice strâns cu problemele sociale, etice ºi politice (Goodyear 1996).Consumatorii îºi aratã ataºamentul faþã de aceste mãrci ºi faþã de companiile care leîmpãrtãºesc pãrerile.

Brandul global

Din ce în ce mai mulþi teoreticieni sunt de acord cã adevãrul despre globalizareamãrcilor se aflã undeva între extremele tezei omogenizãrii, postulate de Ted Levitt

1-RRM 4-2007.pmd 3/14/2008, 9:00 AM90


RRM 4-2007 91

To ensure consistent communication, firms find that staff become critically importantas brand builders.( (de Chernatony 1996;King, 1991) The firm must ensure that all itsstaff understand the brand’s vision, its core values and live the brand’s values throughtheir daily actions, thereby being a key source in the brand’s personification (deChernatony and Dall’Olmo Riley 1998). Achieving this requires extensive training anda comprehensive explanation of the brand’s meaning and strategy. The emphasis of thebrand communication plan shifts to firstly showing staff any new campaigns and onlywhen they understand and are able to deliver the promises, can consumercommunication commence. Staff must understand their brand, be motivated to performin a manner consistent with the brand’s identity and be empowered to take actions thatenhance it. In this stage, extending brands becomes more difficult. Thanks to umbrellabranding, the extension has an impact on the perception of the firm as well as theindividual brand. A number of studies have demonstrated that extensions can haveboth positive and negative effects on existing brands. (Dacin and Smith, 1994; Aakerand Keller, 1990; Bottomley and Doyle, 1996; Broniarczyk and Alba, 1994; Bouschand Loken, 1991; Park, Milberg and Lawson, 1991; Reddy, Holak and Bhat, 1994; andKeller and Aaker, 1992) The result can be a dilution of brand meaning or even aninconsistency of meanings as values incorporated into the brand can change. Thus, it iscritical that all stakeholders receive the same message. Management must explicitlyconsider what values they will communicate, how they can include the consumer inthe creation of added value and how they can maintain consistency of message. All ofthis begins with the desire of consumers to become more involved and the desire toform a closer relationship with brands and their firms.

Stage 6: Brand as Policy In the final stage, brand as policy, the brand and companybecome closely identified with social, ethical and political issues (Goodyear 1996).Consumers commit to those brands and companies who share their views.

The global brand

There is growing consensus that the truth about globalization of brands lies somewherebetween the extremes of Ted Levitt’s thesis of homogenization (Levitt, 1983) and NaomiKlein’s more recent prediction of a ‘no logo’ backlash (Klein, 2000). To move beyond a

1-RRM 4-2007.pmd 3/14/2008, 9:00 AM91



(Levitt, 1983) ºi predicþia mai recentã aparþinând lui Naomi Klein, cu privire la reacþianegativã de tip „fãrã forme de identificare” (Klein, 2000). Dincolo de dezbaterile sterile,abstracte, despre globalizare, strategii de marcã au nevoie de criterii strategice care sãse bazeze pe tipologia mãrci lor ºi mediilor în care se pot aplica acestea, pentru a fibine informaþi atunci când iau decizia dacã, unde, când ºi cum sã globalizeze sau sãlocalizeze un brand anume. Teza lui Ted Levitt despre globalizarea pieþelor afirma cãfirmele cu acoperire globalã ºi mãrcile lor urmau sã cunoascã o creºtere inexorabilã,oferindu-le consumatorilor globali o combinaþie imbatabilã de calitate, disponibilitate,siguranþã ºi preþ scãzut. El descria o Utopie de Brand în care gusturile ºi nevoile urmausã se omogenizeze tot mai mult, în vreme ce companiile de succes urmau sã seconcentreze pe ceea ce doreºte „toatã lumea”.

Unii autori (Quelch, Holt ºi Taylor, 2003) au definit patru tipuri diferite de brandglobal.

1. Mãrcile fundamentale cum sunt Nike, Sony ºi Coca-Cola îºi definesc categoria ºise construiesc pe baza unor mituri sau istorii puternice (de exemplu, tema independenþei,specificã pentru Levi’s, sau tema conectãrii la Nokia). Pentru aceste mãrci tocmaiuniversalitatea firului narativ ºi nu caracterul global însuºi stã la baza atracþiei pe careo exercitã. Adeseori, acestea sunt mãrcile „iniþiatoare”, care definesc o anumitã categorie.Cum astfel ele îºi pot influenþa moºtenirea, principala provocare cu care se confruntãspecialiºtii evoluþiei pe piaþã a mãrci lor fundamentale, în acest caz, este nevoia deface ca mitul sã rãmânã la fel de puternic pentru fiecare nouã generaþie. Coca-Cola aavut mare succes în acest sens; Levi’s – mai puþin. Aºa cum s-a dovedit în cazul Coca-Cola, mãrcile fundamentale pot trece dincolo de graniþele naþionale, fiind îmbrãþiºatede consumatori ca mãrci cu adevãrat globale. De aceea ele pretind – ºi permit – ungrad mic de specific local, pentru a nu-ºi periclita universalitatea sau aura miticã. Înplus, mãrcile fundamentale sunt mai puþin exclusive – ºi exclusiviste – decât mãrcile deprestigiu.

2. Mãrcile de prestigiu cum sunt Chanel, BMW, Rolex ºi Gucci atrag prin miturispecifice de origine culturalã, sau legate de provenienþa fondatorului sau a tehnologiei(de exemplu Mercedes ca întruchipare a excelenþei germane în proiectare ºi inginerie).Aceste mãrci se aflã mereu în centrul atenþiei ºi au o valoare înaltã de aspiraþie. Ca oamuletã magicã, marca de prestigiu determinã creºterea valorii celor care îl folosesc.Cu riscul de a-i exclude pe cei mulþi pentru a-i atrage pe cei puþini dar buni, mãrcile deprestigiu resping categoric specificul local. De exemplu, BMW ºi Mercedes din Japoniaºi Singapore vor evita, în general, folosirea unor simboluri iconice locale, pentru arãmâne o aspiraþie suficient de puternicã.

1-RRM 4-2007.pmd 3/14/2008, 9:00 AM92


RRM 4-2007 93

sterile debate about globalization in the abstract, brand strategists need decision criteriabased on a typology of brands and environments that they can apply to make informeddecisions about whether, when, where and how to globalize or localize a brand. TedLevitt’s globalization of markets thesis asserted that global companies and their brandswould grow inexorably, offering global consumers an unbeatable combination of quality,availability, reliability and low price. He described a Brand Utopia in which tastes andneeds would become increasingly homogenised, with successful companies focusingon what ‘everyone’ wants.

Some authors (Quelch, Holt and Taylor, 2003) revealed four different types of globalbrand.

1. Master brands like Nike, Sony and Coca-Cola define their category and are builton powerful myths or narratives (e.g. Levi’s theme of independence or Nokia’s themeof connection). For these brands it is this universality of their narrative rather than thefact of globalness itself that is at the heart of their appeal. Often, these are ‘first mover’brands that define a category. While they can thus leverage their heritage, thecorresponding key challenge facing marketers of Master brands is the need to keep themyth relevant to each new generation. Coca-Cola has been superbly successful at this;Levi’s has been less so. As Coca-Cola also illustrates, Master brands can transcend theirnational origins to be embraced by consumers as truly global brands. They thus require- and permit - little if any localization that might threaten to undermine their universalityor mythical appeal. Master brands are also less exclusive - and exclusionary - thanPrestige brands.

2. Prestige brands such as Chanel, BMW, Rolex and Gucci have an appeal built onspecific myths of cultural origin or the provenance of a founder or a technology (e.g.Mercedes as the embodiment of German design and engineering excellence). Thesebrands are nearly always in strong display categories with high aspirational value. Likea magic amulet, a Prestige brand increases the value of the one who uses it. At the riskof excluding many to appeal to the chosen few, Prestige brands actively rejectlocalization. For example, BMW and Mercedes in Japan and Singapore will usuallyavoid the use of local icons to stay sufficiently aspirational.

1-RRM 4-2007.pmd 3/14/2008, 9:00 AM93



3. Super-mãrcile sunt disponibile pentru toþi, la fel ca ºi mãrcile fundamentale. Spredeosebire de acestea, super-mãrcile se definesc mai degrabã prin categoria din carefac parte, decât prin imaginea miticã sau firul narativ. Între exemple se includ Gillette,Pepsi, McDonald’s, Shell, Philips ºi American Express (cardul obiºnuit). Ca atare, unsuper-brand poate avea destul succes ºi poate fi la fel de bun ca oricare altul din categoriasa, fãrã sã se diferenþieze pe baza unui mit sau fir narativ distinctiv pe care sã-l „deþinã.”În loc de asta, super-mãrcile încearcã sã devinã reprezentative printr-un oarecare gradde adaptare localã (de exemplu, McDonald’s adapteazã versiuni ale mâncãrurilor localela sistemul de servire rapidã) ºi rãmân relevante prin inovaþii constante ale produsuluiºi serviciilor (de exemplu, evoluþia „sistemelor de ras Gillette”).

4. Mãrci „global-locale” de tipul Dove, Nestle ºi Danone sunt disponibile la nivelglobal dar se distribuie local, adesea sub o întreagã varietate de nume de produs localesau regionale (sub-mãrci ). Chiar ºi acolo unde consumatorii sunt conºtienþi de aceastãdistribuþie globalã, brandul global-local rãmâne „apropiat”, fiind considerat „unulde-al nostru” – ºi tocmai aceastã trãsãturã îi creºte valoarea, în mai mare mãsurã decâtfaptul cã poate fi gãsit pretutindeni. Aceste mãrci pretind ºi permit cel mai mare grad despecificitate localã, aflându-se, de obicei, deºi nu întotdeauna, în categorii cu valoarede reprezentativitate micã, de exemplu alimente, produse gospodãreºti ºi de îngrijirepersonalã. (Ca atare, aceste mãrci au pragul cel mai scãzut pentru determinarea reacþiilornegative, atunci când consumatorii simt cã sãnãtatea sau siguranþa lor sau a familiilorlor sunt puse în pericol – vezi mai jos). De notat ºi faptul cã valoarea potenþialã deaspiraþie faþã de un produs dat depinde decondiþiile economice locale; în multe þãrimai puþin dezvoltate ºi în societãþile de consum mai noi, aceastã caracteristicã esteproprie bunurilor de consum în continuã miºcare.

Mãrcile fundamentale, de prestigiu, super-mãrcile ºi mãrcile „global-locale” maipot fi caracterizate ºi din punctul de vedere al aspectelor specifice de afinitate evidenþiatede fiecare dintre ele pentru crearea echitãþii de marcã. Modelul Equity EngineSM alcompaniei de cercetãri Research International considerã cã echitatea de marcã estereprezentatã de performanþa mãrcii (beneficiile sale funcþionale) la care se adaugãafinitatea perceputã faþã de marcã (beneficii emoþionale): Deºi aceastã definiþie acoperãtoate categoriile de produse ºi servicii, de obicei jumãtate, sau chiar mai mult dinechitatea de marcã decurge din afinitate, în mai mare mãsurã decât din performanþã.Afinitatea are trei dimensiuni de bazã, fiecare dintre acestea având, la rândul sãu, câtetrei coordonate.

1. Autoritatea reprezintã poziþia mãrcii între alte mãrci, pe coordonatele moºtenirii,încrederii ºi inovãrii.

1-RRM 4-2007.pmd 3/14/2008, 9:00 AM94


RRM 4-2007 95

3. Super brands are universally available like Master brands. Unlike Master brands,Super brands are defined more by their category than by a myth or narrative. Examplesinclude Gillette, Pepsi, McDonald’s, Shell, Philips and American Express (regular card).As such, a Super brand may be quite successful and as good as any other in the categorywithout being differentiated on the basis of a distinctive myth or narrative that it ‘owns.’Instead, Super brands try to become relevant by localizing somewhat (e.g., McDonald’sadapting versions of local foods to a quick service environment) and remain relevant byconstant product or service innovation (e.g., the evolution of Gillette’s ‘shaving systems’).

4. GloCal brands such as Dove, Nestle and Danone are available globally, butmarketed locally, often under a variety of local or regional product names (sub-brands).Even where consumers are aware of this global distribution, a GloCal brand may ‘feelclose’ and be seen as ‘one of ours’ - and it is this, rather than its universal availability,that enhances its equity. These brands thus require and permit the greatest degree oflocalization and are usually, though not always, in categories with weak display valuesuch as food, household products and personal care. (As such they are brands with thelowest threshold for triggering negative reactions if consumers perceive that their ownor their families’ health or safety are threatened - see below.) We should also note thatthe potential aspirational value of a given product is relative to local economic conditions;in many less-developed countries and newer consumer societies, a variety of fast movingconsumer goods can take on this character.

We can further characterize Master, Prestige, Super and GloCal brands in terms ofthe specific aspects of affinity that each leverages to create brand equity. ResearchInternational’s Equity EngineSM model of brand equity views brand equity as the sumof perceived brand performance (functional benefits) and perceived brand affinity(emotional benefits). While this ranges widely across product and service categories,typically half or more of brand equity derives from affinity rather than performance.Affinity has three basic dimensions, each of which in turn has three dimensions.

1. Authority is the brand’s standing among other brands on the dimensions ofheritage, trust and innovation.

2. Identification is the relationship of consumer and brand in terms of bonding (howthe consumer currently views the brand), caring (what the consumer believes the

1-RRM 4-2007.pmd 3/14/2008, 9:00 AM95



2. Identificarea reprezintã relaþia, mai precis apropierea dintre consumator ºi marcã(cum priveºte consumatorul brandul respectiv), grija (ce crede consumatorul cãsimte marca despre el sau ea) ºi nostalgia (relaþiile cu marca din trecut).

3. Aprobarea reprezintã evaluarea de cãtre consumator a mãrcii prin prisma societãþiiîn general ºi a unor grupuri specifice de referinþã, pe coordonatele de prestigiu,acceptabilitate ºi susþinere.

Mãrcile fundamentale sunt în general puternice în privinþa a cel puþin unul dintrecele trei coordonate de bazã ale afinitãþii. Deºi nu toate mãrcile fundamentale „semiºcã repede”, ele sunt puternice în zona autoritãþii ºi mai ales a inovaþiei ºi graduluide încredere.

Forþa super-mãrcilor stã, la fel ca ºi în cazul mãrci lor fundamentale, în încredere ºiinovare. Cum încrederea este un element esenþial al tuturor tipurilor de marcã,super-mãrcile încearcã sã se diferenþieze în principal în domeniul inovãrii – elementdefinitoriu, în mare mãsurã, pentru categoria în cauzã (ca ºi super-mãrcile însele). Cumnu relevã elemente mitice sau narative, aºa cum se întâmplã în cazul mãrci lorfundamentale, super-mãrcile sunt mai puþin puternice, totuºi, în ceea ce priveºtecoordonatele de bazã ale identificãrii ºi aprobãrii.

În concordanþã cu atracþia „elitistã” pe care o exercitã, mãrcile de prestigiu aratã orelaþie „amicalã” cu consumatorii – îºi permit sã fie iubite dar dau foarte puþin în schimb.De fapt, mãrcile de prestigiu fac apel, selectiv, la consumatorii care îºi imagineazã cãsunt „deasupra” cerinþelor comune ºi care sunt siguri de identitatea ºi valoarea proprie,demonstrate prin alegerea rafinatã a acestor mãrci.

În contrast cu celelalte trei tipuri de marcã (ºi mai ales cu mãrcile de prestigiu),mãrcile „global-locale” sunt exemplul tipic de identificare puternicã. Ele aratã „grijã ºipreocupare” faþã de consumatorii pe care îi ºtiu foarte bine ºi, în schimb, le trezescnostalgia despre ceea ce au însemnat aceste mãrci cu care, la propriu, „au crescutîmpreunã”. Ca ºi mãrcile de prestigiu, mãrcile global-locale sunt puternice pe bazamoºtenirii ºi încrederii, dar negociazã aprobarea pentru identificare.

Nemaifiind (doar) o problemã de relaþie directã personalã, aprobarea socialã estedin ce în ce mai mult mediatã prin intermediul „comunitãþilor virtuale” definite, parþial,prin experienþe împãrtãºite de marcã (Upshaw ºi Taylor, 2000).

Aºa cum s-a arãtat mai sus, încrederea este condiþia esenþialã pentru ca un brand sãaibã succes, dar fiecare tip de marcã poate câºtiga (sau pierde) aceastã încredere înmoduri oarecum diferite. Aºa cum Naomi Klein afirmã spre finalul teoriei despre mãrcile„fãrã forme de identificare”, mãrcile care sunt cele mai vizibile pentru consumatori ºicare se mândresc cu înalte valori morale au ºansele cele mai mari sã eºueze (Klein,2000).

1-RRM 4-2007.pmd 3/14/2008, 9:00 AM96


RRM 4-2007 97

brand currently feels about him or her) and nostalgia (past relationships with thebrand).

3. Approval is the consumer’s evaluation of the brand through the lens of society atlarge and specific reference groups in terms of prestige, acceptability andendorsement.

Master brands tend to be strong on at least one aspect of each of the three basicdimensions of affinity. While not all Master brands are in fact ‘first movers,’ they tend tobe strong on authority, particularly innovation and trust.

Super brands share with Master brands strengths in trust and innovation. Since trustis an essential element of all types of brands, Super brands attempt to differentiateprimarily on innovation - which is largely defined (like Super brands themselves) by thecategory. Because they do not engage a universal myth or narrative in the way thatMaster brands do, however, Super brands typically show less strength on the basicdimensions of identification and approval.

In keeping with their ‘elitest’ appeal, Prestige brands exhibit the ‘coolest’ relationshipwith consumers - allowing themselves to be loved, but reciprocating very little. In fact,Prestige brands may selectively appeal precisely to consumers who fancy themselvesto be ‘above’ such common demands and who are secure in their own identity and self-worth, displayed through their refined choice of such brands.

By contrast to the three other types of brands (particularly Prestige brands), GloCalbrands typically demonstrate the strongest identification. They project ‘concern andcaring’ for the consumers they know so well and elicit in return nostalgia about whatthese brands have meant to them as they literally ‘grow old’ together. Like Prestigebrands, GloCal brands thus tend to be strong on heritage and trust, but they trade approvalfor identification.

No longer (only) a matter of direct personal relationships, social approval isincreasingly mediated through ‘virtual communities’ defined in part by shared brandexperiences (Upshaw and Taylor, 2000).

As noted earlier, trust is the bedrock precondition of all successful brands, but eachtype can gain (or lose) this trust in somewhat different ways. As Naomi Klein herselfsuggests toward the end of No Logo, brands that are the most visible to consumers andpride themselves on their high moral ground, may be setting themselves up for thebiggest fall (Klein, 2000).

1-RRM 4-2007.pmd 3/14/2008, 9:00 AM97



Folosind tipologia personalitãþii de marcã conceputã de aceasta, Jennifer Aaker ºi S.Adam Brasel, de la Universitatea Stanford ºi Susan Fournier de la Harvard BusinessSchool au fãcut publice, de curând, rezultatele unor cercetãri care ar putea lãmuridiferenþele între capacitatea mãrci lor de prestigiu ºi a celor global-locale de a rezistaîn ciuda efectelor de recul ale lipsei semnelor distinctive ºi transparenþei (Aaker, Fournierºi Brasel, 2003). Experimentele aratã cã un brand considerat „sincer” de cãtreconsumatori poate avea dificultãþi mai mari în a se redresa dupã eºuarea unor servicii,decât un brand considerat a fi „interesant”. Printr-o analogie exactã cu relaþiileinterpersonale, s-ar pãrea cã se pune mai mult preþ ºi se aºteaptã mai mult de la orelaþie „sincerã”, de lungã duratã (Aaker 1997).

Strategii în managementul de marcã

Prea des se întâmplã cã specialiºtii de piaþã încearcã sã acopere strategia imitativã,care se bazeazã pe beneficiile de categorie, solicitând agenþiilor lor de publicitate sãcreeze reclame unice. Problema este cã o strategie obositã blocheazã orice încercarede originalitate, în orice aspect al execuþiei. Aceastã crizã de diferenþiere nu e o problemãde execuþie (Tait, 2004). Per total, specialiºtii de piaþã par sã-ºi fi pierdut capacitatea degândire creatoare atunci când dezvoltã strategii de marcã. Sau poate cã suntem constrânºide un sistem de gândire care lucreazã împotriva gândirii originale. Pentru ca mãrcile sãaibã succes, ele trebuie sã se bazeze pe strategii diferenþiate, necunoscute. Din pãcate,tocmai acestea sunt ideile care nu plac, cel puþin la început, nimãnui. Acesta estemotivul pentru care verificarea cantitativã a ideilor alternative de poziþionare are toateºansele sã omoare în faºã, sistematic, ideile mai originale, iar oamenii le preferã pecele care sunt mai apropiate de ceea ce cunosc deja.

Firmele îºi dezvoltã strategia de marcã pentru a realiza o analogie între identitateade marcã ºi imaginea de marcã. Aaker ºi Joachismsthaler (2000) definesc identitatea demarcã drept un set de asocieri mentale pe care strategul de marcã sperã sã le formeze,sau sã le pãstreze în mintea consumatorilor. Aceste asocieri mentale pe care consumatoriile fac cu marca au drept rezultat imaginea de marcã. Din punctul de vedere alconsumatorului, asocierile mentale joacã un rol important în evaluarea de cãtreconsumator a produsului, sau în alegerea acestuia, fiind esenþiale pentru echitatea demarcã (Keller 1993, Brown ºi Dacin 1997, Keller 1998, Berens et al. 2005). Elementulesenþial în toate aceste lucrãri este ipoteza conform cãreia consumatorii folosescasocierile mentale ca semnale de recunoaºtere, atunci când se informeazã despre marcã.Astfel, scopul strategic al firmei este acela de a forma legãturi afective puternice ºisemnificative între brandul sãu ºi consumatori, pentru ca astfel marca sã li se imprime

1-RRM 4-2007.pmd 3/14/2008, 9:00 AM98


RRM 4-2007 99

Using the brand personality typology she developed, Jennifer Aaker and S. AdamBrasel of Stanford University and Susan Fournier of the Harvard Business School haverecently reported research which may shed light on the differences between Prestigeand GloCal brands’ ability to resist transparency and ‘no logo’ backlash (Aaker, Fournierand Brasel, 2003). Her experiments indicate that a brand seen by consumers to be‘sincere’ may actually have a harder time recovering from a service failure than a brandseen to be ‘exciting.’ By precise analogy to interpersonal relationships, it appears thatconsumers put more into - and expect more out of - a ‘sincere’, long-standing relationship.(Aaker 1997).

Brand Management Strategies

Too often marketers try to cover up a me-too strategy based on the category benefitby asking their ad agencies to make unique ads. The problem is that a tired strategyanchors down everyone trying to be original in any aspect of execution. Thisdifferentiation crisis is not a problem of execution (Tait, 2004). Overall, marketers seemto have lost the ability to think creatively when developing their brand strategies. Orperhaps we are being constrained by a belief system that works against original thinking.If brands are to succeed they need to be based on differentiated, unfamiliar brandstrategies. Unfortunately, these are the exact same ideas that people initially dislike.That’s why quantitative testing of alternative positioning ideas will likely systematicallykill the more original ideas, and people will prefer the ones that are closest to what theyalready know.

Firms develop their brand strategy in order to achieve congruence between brandidentity and brand image. Aaker and Joachismsthaler (2000) define brand identity as aset of brand associations that the brand strategist aspires to create or maintain inconsumers’ minds. These brand associations in consumers’ minds result in a brandimage. From the consumer’s perspective, associations play an important role inconsumers’ product evaluations and choices and are fundamental to brand equity (Keller1993, Brown and Dacin, 1997; Keller, 1998; Berens et al. 2005). Essential to this literatureis the assumption that consumers use brand associations as retrieval cues for informationabout brand. Thus, the strategic aim of the firm is to form strong and meaningful affectivebonds between its brand and consumers and, in so doing, become part of their memoriesand an important link in their social networks (Thompson et al., 2006; Atkin 2004;

1-RRM 4-2007.pmd 3/14/2008, 9:00 AM99



acestora în memorie, devenind o legãturã importantã în reþelele lor sociale (Thompsonet al., 2006; Atkin 2004; Roberts 2004). Aºadar, cu cât brandul este mai puternic, cuatât este mai simplu pentru consumatori sã-ºi reaminteascã asociaþiile mentale respective.Acest set determinã creºterea valorii generale a mãrcii (Rust et al., 2004).

Ca punct de plecare al întregii strategii, este extrem de importantã stabilirea ºimenþinerea mãrcii. Astfel, se recomandã adoptarea unei abordãri holistice, sau a unei„strategii generale de marcã “. O astfel de strategie generalã de marcã trebuieimplementatã acceptându-se ideea cã marca ar putea traversa numeroase linii deproducþie ºi regiuni geografice diferite. Adoptarea unei strategii generale de marcã mainecesitã ºi recunoaºterea faptului cã mãrcile sunt importante atât pentru comerþultradiþional, cu amãnuntul, cât ºi pentru pieþele online.

Decizia cu privire la strategia de poziþionare a mãrcii este esenþialã pentru succesuluiunui brand (vezi, de exemplu, Pham & Muthukrishnan, 2002), deoarece are o influenþãputernicã asupra percepþiilor ºi a preferinþelor ulterioare (Carpenter, Glazer & Nakamoto,1994). Cum orice companie îºi poate poziþiona, teoretic, marca pe coordonate în numãrinfinit, strategiile de poziþionare sunt comentate, în literatura de specialitate, cu ajutorultipologiilor de poziþionare (vezi, de exemplu, Aaker & Shansby, 1982; Crawford 1985;Kotler et al., 2005; Wind 1982).

Realizarea unei strategii generale de marcã necesitã o strânsã coordonare între firmalicenþiatoare ºi cei care cumpãrã licenþa pe diferite pieþe. Trebuie sã existe un programsolid de protejare a mãrci lor ºi de monitorizare a modului în care se folosesc acestea.Trebuie sã se acorde atenþie ºi unor moduri potenþiale de utilizare a mãrci lor. Aici s-arputea include identificarea mãrci lor ce ar putea fi utilizate în viitor, ca ºi identificareanoilor produse ºi servicii împreunã cu care s-ar putea folosi noul brand.

Strategiile eficiente de management al mãrcii implicã ºi o atenþie sporitã la asigurareaarmoniei între strategia de acordare a licenþei de marcã ºi scopurile generale aleîntreprinderii (Keller 1998). Sunt necesare eforturi pentru ca firma sã fie sigurã cã marcase reflectã pozitiv asupra sa, cã nu scade din valoarea celorlalte linii de producþie ºi cãrãmâne profitabil pentru alte pãrþi ale companiei.

Importanþa stabilitãþii trebuie reflectatã ºi în selectarea partenerilor care primesclicenþa. Se pune accent pe partenerii de licenþã care iubesc afacerile sãnãtoase ºi careoferã produse inovatoare. În acelaºi timp, totuºi, se pune accentul ºi pe partenerii delicenþã cu culturi ºi scopuri de afaceri similare, deoarece astfel de poate ajunge lareducerea timpului petrecut pentru ajungerea la un acord. Companiile trebuie sãcreioneze un profil al partenerului ideal pentru licenþã, dar sã fie conºtiente cã, deºimulþi licenþiatori ºi firme deþinãtoare de licenþe pãstreazã relaþii de afaceri de lungãduratã, puþine dintre acestea sunt de fapt permanente (Craig ºi Douglas 1996).

1-RRM 4-2007.pmd 3/14/2008, 9:00 AM100


RRM 4-2007 101

Roberts 2004). Therefore, the more powerful the brand, the easier consumers recalledthe set of associations. This set increases the brand’s overall value (Rust et al., 2004).

As a threshold issue, it will be extremely important to establish and maintain thebrand. When doing so, the adoption of a holistic approach, or an “overall brand strategy”is recommended. Such overall brand strategy should be implemented with fullrecognition that the brand may traverse numerous different product lines and geographicregions. Adopting an overall brand strategy also requires recognition that brands aresignificant to both the traditional retail and the online market.

The decision about a brand’s positioning strategy is central to the success of a brand(e.g., Pham & Muthukrishnan, 2002), because it has a strong influence on consumers’brand perceptions and subsequent preferences (Carpenter, Glazer, & Nakamoto, 1994).Since a company can theoretically position its brand on an infinite number of differentdimensions, positioning strategies are discussed in the marketing literature with thehelp of positioning typologies (e.g., Aaker & Shansby, 1982; Crawford, 1985; Kotler etal., 2005; Wind 1982).

Accomplishing an overall brand strategy requires close coordination between thelicensor and licensees in different markets. There must be a consistent program forprotecting brands and monitoring the usage of brands. Focus should also be placedupon prospective uses of brands. This may include identifying brands that might beused in the future and identifying new products and services with which existing brandsmight be used.

Effective brand management strategies also necessitate emphasis on ensuringconsistency between the brand licensing strategy and the enterprise’s overall businessgoals (Keller 1998). Efforts should be undertaken to ensure that the brand reflectspositively on the company, does not detract from other product lines and remainsprofitable with other parts of company.

The importance of consistency should also be reflected in the selection of licensepartners. Focus should surely be placed upon license partners that enjoy healthybusinesses and that offer innovative products. At the same time, however, emphasisshould also be placed upon licensee partners with similar cultures and business goalssince doing so may help to reduce the amount of time that is expended on reaching thebasis business terms. Companies should develop a profile of the ideal license partnerbut recognize that while many licensors and licensees may enjoy long-term relationships,few of such relationships will be permanent (Craig and Douglas 1996).

1-RRM 4-2007.pmd 3/14/2008, 9:00 AM101



Un management de marcã de succes implicã neapãrat atenþia pentru creºterea lamaximum a influenþei mãrcii respectiv. Desigur, asta poate sã însemne lucruri diferiteîn contexte diferite. Totuºi, în orice circumstanþã, o judecatã raþionalã cu privire laplasarea mãrcii este esenþialã.

Exclusivitatea contractului de licenþã este un factor cheie în managementul de marcã.Faptul cã un contract de licenþã este exclusiv sau nu are implicaþii importante asupraîntregii afaceri. Atunci când se are în vedere exclusivitatea pentru oferta de licenþã, nutrebuie uitat faptul cã licenþa exclusivã se garanteazã o singurã datã. Ca atare, trebuiesã se acorde o atenþie deosebitã strategiilor ºi scopurilor în afaceri ale partenerilor delicenþã potenþial exclusivi.

Pe lângã înþelegerea intereselor ºi a strategiilor deþinãtorilor potenþiali de licenþãexclusivã, licenþa trebuie astfel structuratã încât sã se pãstreze angajamentul deþinãtoruluide licenþã faþã de marcã. Desigur, este în interesul firmei mamã sã se asigure cã interesulfaþã de marcã al deþinãtorului de licenþã este maxim ºi cã va rãmâne în continuareastfel. Existã multe soluþii în acest sens, de exemplu, solicitarea unor plãþi adiþionalesau a unei alte forme de compensare, pe durata licenþei, pentru menþinerea exclusivitãþiiconvenite.

Dacã, la acordarea licenþei pe bazã de exclusivitate, este extrem de important sã sestabileascã anumite norme, sã ne amintim cã ºi licenþele fãrã exclusivitate pot juca unrol important în afaceri. Aºadar trebuie acordatã mare atenþie, cu toate resursele existente,structurãrii contractelor fãrã exclusivitate, pentru ca ele sã devinã profitabile (Laforet ºiSaunders 1994).

Toate contractele de licenþã trebuie sã includã reguli de aplicare obligatorii.Majoritatea contractelor de licenþã se referã la probleme importante, cum suntstandardele de control de calitate ºi standardele de raportare. Totuºi, aceste standardeºi cerinþe nu sunt de prea mare folos dacã nu existã mecanismele potrivite pentruaplicarea lor. Mecanismele de aplicare potrivite depind de specificul fiecãrui contractde licenþã. Ca exemplu, totuºi, la contractele de licenþã cu exclusivitate, terminareaacestei exclusivitãþi poate reprezenta un remediu eficient în caz de încãlcare a anumitorprevederi contractuale.

Firma mamã nu trebuie sã adopte o atitudine de indiferenþã, lãsându-l pe deþinãtorulde licenþã sã se descurce singur cu produsele ºi serviciile. În fapt, trebuie depuse eforturipentru a garanta cã produsele deþinãtorului licenþei sunt apreciate ºi moderne. Clar,este în interesul licenþiatorului sã se asigure cã brandul sãu este legat de cele maipopulare produse ºi servicii (Berry 1998). Desigur, interesul consumatorului se poateschimba în timp, aºa cã este esenþial ca, periodic, sã se verifice schimbãrile ce potapãrea la cererea de produse ºi servicii pe licenþã.

1-RRM 4-2007.pmd 3/14/2008, 9:00 AM102


RRM 4-2007 103

Successful brand management will involve focus on the maximizing the leverage ofthe brand. Of course, this may mean different things in different context. However, inall circumstances, a considered judgment regarding brand placement will be crucial.

The exclusivity of the license agreement will be a key factor in brand management.Whether the license agreement will be exclusive or non–exclusive will have importantimplications for all of the business. When considering the exclusivity of a license grant,it must be recalled that the license can only be granted once as an exclusive license.Accordingly, particular scrutiny must be directed towards the strategies and businessgoals of potential exclusive licensees.

In addition to understanding the current interests and strategies of the prospectiveexclusive licensee, it is advisable to construct the license in such a way so as to maintainthe licensee’s commitment licensee to the brand. Clearly, it will be in the interest of thelicensor to ensure that the licensee’s interest in the brand is and will stay as high aspossible. This can be done in a number of ways including, for example, by requiringadditional payments or some other form of compensation during the license term inorder to maintain the exclusivity of the arrangement.

While exclusive licensing arrangements will be extremely important, it must berecalled that non-exclusive licenses can also play a role in the business. Accordingly,proper attention and resources should also be devoted to constructing such non-exclusivearrangements and ensuring that they are profitable (Laforêt and Saunders 1994).

All license agreements should include effective means of enforcement. Most licenseagreements will address extremely important issues including quality control standardsand reporting standards. However, such standards and requirements will not be of muchuse without effective enforcement mechanisms to back them up. The precise enforcementmechanisms that should be used will depend on the particulars of the licensingarrangement. As an example, however, in an exclusive licensing arrangement, thetermination of exclusivity may be an effective remedy for the breach of certain contractualrequirements.

Licensors should be not adopt a “hands off” approach when dealing with the licensee’sproducts and services. Rather, efforts should be undertaken to ensure that the licensee’sproducts are desirable and up-to-date. Clearly, it will be in the licensor’s interest toensure that its brand will be affixed to the most popular products and services (Berry1998). Of course, consumer interest can change over time so it will be essential toperiodically monitor changes in demand for the licensee’s product and services.

1-RRM 4-2007.pmd 3/14/2008, 9:00 AM103



Atunci când se stabileºte o relaþie de licenþã pentru un anumit brand, este importantãºi alocarea echitabilã a proprietãþii ºi controlului asupra bunurilor comune. Acesta esteun element important în orice tip de relaþie, dar cu atât mai mult în cazul unei relaþii petermen lung. În toate cazurile, licenþiatorul este cel mai interesat în menþinerea mãrcii,astfel cã el îºi va pãstra cea mai mare parte a controlului asupra acestuia (Caller 1996).Totuºi, anumite elemente ale afacerii pot avea un impact important, în cele din urmã,în împãrþire. Aici ar trebui sã se þinã seama de afacerea fiecãrei pãrþi ºi de impactul pecare aceasta l-ar putea avea asupra mãrcii. La alocare ar trebui sã se þinã seama ºi defaptul cã asocierea numelui cu anumite produse ºi servicii reprezintã cheia întregiiafaceri.

Angajaþii întreprinderii joacã un rol extrem de important în toate iniþiativele delicenþiere a mãrcii. Selectarea echipei care se ocupã de licenþã trebuie sã porneascã dela ideea cã membrii ei sunt chemaþi sã organizeze controlul ºi coordonarea tuturoractivitãþilor deþinãtorilor de licenþã. Alãturi de angajaþii cu un rol cheie în realizarealicenþei, trebuie pregãtiþi ºi alþi angajaþi care sã joace un rol activ în eforturile de licenþiereîn plan general.

Companiile trebuie sã fie active – ºi nu statice – ºi sã depunã toate eforturile pentruintegrarea strategiei de marcã în dezvoltarea produsului ºi lansarea unor activitãþi. Ostrategie clarã ºi pro-activã are cele mai mari ºanse de a-ºi primi rãsplata cuvenitã.

Dezvoltarea structurilor internaþionale de branding

Deºi multe cercetãri de pânã acum se referã la problematica factorilor de succes înextinderea de marcã (Völckner & Sattler, 2006; Echambadi, Arroniz, Reinartz & Lee,2006; Czellar, 2003; Bhat & Reddy, 2001; Park, Milberg & Lawson, 1991; Aaker &Keller, 1990) nu se cunosc totuºi prea multe despre resursele pe care companiile trebuiesã le deþinã în momentul în care începe extinderea de marcã.

Majoritatea dezbaterilor ºi a cercetãrilor despre branding, fie ele locale sauinternaþionale, se concentreazã pe echitatea sau valoarea asociatã cu un nume de marcãºi pe factorii care creeazã sau reprezintã sursa de bazã a valorii (Aaker 1996, Kapferer1997, Keller 1998). S-a acordat o deosebitã atenþie, de exemplu, cercetãrii modului încare valoarea personificatã de marcã ºi posibilitãþii extinderii echitãþii valabile pentrumarcã, la alte produse, fãrã ca aceastã acþiune sã aibã drept rezultat scãderea de valoare(Aaker ºi Keller 1990). Acest interes a fost stimulat, în parte, de creºterea puterii pieþeiºi valorii asociate cu un brand puternic, iar pe de altã parte cu costurile prohibitive alelansãrii unui brand nou de succes.

1-RRM 4-2007.pmd 3/14/2008, 9:00 AM104


RRM 4-2007 105

When undertaking a brand licensing relationship, it will also be important to allocateequitably ownership and control of the IP assets. While this will be an important issuein all relationships, it will be particularly important when a long-term relationship iscontemplated. In all instances, the licensor will have the stronger interest in the brandand will likely desire to retain the maximum amount of control (Caller 1996). However,particular business issues may impact the ultimate allocation. Such allocation shouldinclude consideration of each party’s business that impact power of the brand. Theallocation should also be conducted with recognition of the fact that the association ofthe name with particular products or services will be the key.

The enterprise’s staff will play an extremely important role in the company’s overallbrand licensing initiatives. Selection of licensing staff should be undertaken with therecognition that such staff members will be required to organize control and coordinateall the activities of the licensees. In addition to focusing on the key licensing staff, otherrelevant staff members should be trained and encouraged to take an active role in theefforts overall brand licensing efforts.

Companies should be active – and not static – when undertaking efforts to integratethe brand strategy into product development and launch activities. A clear and proactivestrategy is likely to generate the most reward.

Development of International Branding Structures

Although there is an extensive amount of research concerning the question of successfactors of brand extensions (Völckner & Sattler, 2006; Echambadi, Arroniz, Reinartz &Lee, 2006; Czellar, 2003; Bhat & Reddy, 2001; Park, Milberg & Lawson, 1991; Aaker &Keller, 1990) there is yet little knowledge concerning the underlying resources companiesmust have to succeed with brand extension.

Most discussion and research on branding, whether domestic or international, focuseson the equity or value associated with a brand name and the factors which create or arethe underlying source of value (Aaker 1996, Kapferer 1997, Keller 1998). Considerableattention has, for example, been devoted to examining how the value embodied in abrand and its equity can be extended to other products without resulting in dilution ofvalue (Aaker and Keller 1990). This interest has been stimulated in part by the increasingmarket power and value associated with a strong brand and in part by the prohibitivecosts of launching a successful new brand.

1-RRM 4-2007.pmd 3/14/2008, 9:00 AM105



Asemenea subiecte sunt cu deosebire incitante pe pieþele dinafara Statelor Unite,acolo unde conceptul de „putere” asociat cu branding-ul este relativ nou (Court et al.,1997). Pieþele sunt adeseori fragmentate, caracterizându-se printr-o distribuþie la scarãredusã ºi lipsa potenþialului, sa a dimensiunilor necesare pentru a garanta utilizareaamplã a reclamelor în mass-media, atât de necesare pentru dezvoltarea mãrci lorputernice (Barwise ºi Robertson 1992). Pe mãsurã ce aceste pieþe devin tot mai strânslegate ºi integrate, companiile care opereazã pe pieþele internaþionale trebuie sã identificeoportunitãþi de întãrire a structurii de marcã, printr-o coordonare ºi armonizare maibunã a mãrci lor dincolo de graniþele culturale.

Pe mãsurã ce firma se extinde pe piaþa internaþionalã, problemele legate de„arhitectura” sau structura de marcã devin din ce în ce mai complexe. Pe lângã numãrulnivelelor ierarhice, de care trebuie sã se þinã seama, este necesarã determinarea uneialte dimensiuni, ºi anume gradul de coordonare ºi standardizare a mãrcii dincolo degraniþele dintre þãri.

Un numãr restrâns dintre companiile studiate au o structurã de marcã foarte simplã,bazatã pe numele corporaþiei, aºa cum se întâmplã, de exemplu, cu Shell, Philips,Apple, Nike etc. În general, acestea erau organizaþii care desfãºurau afaceri direct(companie-la-companie) care puneau un puternic accent pe branding-ul corporatist,sau pe o linie de producþie relativ restrânsã ºi coerentã. Alte cazuri se referã la companiilede bunuri de consum orientate spre segmentul global, cum sunt Nike sau Bennetton.Principalul lor obiectiv era acela de a stabili, pentru marcã, o identitate globalã puternicãºi, abia în al doilea rând, de a rãspunde condiþiilor de piaþã locale (Piercy 1997). Înunele cazuri, emblema corporatistã ºi identificarea vizualã (Apple ºi Nike) a jucat unrol fundamental în identificarea mãrcii ºi în definirea imaginii acestuia în întreaga lume.

Alte companii, ca de exemplu P&G sau Best Foods, au folosit strategia unui produsdominant. Aceastã strategie a reprezentat ceva obiºnuit la firmele americane care s-auextins în strãinãtate, prin accentuarea mãrci lor „puternice”, aºa cum a fãcut, de exemplu,P&G cu Camay sau Pampers. Firmele cu structuri naþionale centrate dominant peproduse, ºi care s-au extins prin achiziþia unor companii naþionale, au preluat astfel unmare numãr de mãrci locale ºi naþionale, pe lângã produsele proprii de brand global ºiregional. Best Foods, de exemplu, are mai multe mãrci de produse internaþionale, cumsunt Hellmans, Knorr etc., alãturi de mãrci ale unor produse din þãrile respective, cumsunt cartofii Pfanni.

Unele companii aveau structuri de marcã hibride, reprezentând o combinaþie de mãrcicorporatiste ºi de produse. Coca-Cola, de exemplu, foloseºte numele Coca-Cola pe brandulsãu de cola din lumea întreagã, cu variante de produs cum sunt Cherry Coke, Coke Litesau Diet Coke, ori Coca fãrã cafeinã în unele cazuri, dar nu în toate þãrile. În plus, Coca-Cola are un numãr de mãrci pentru bãuturi rãcoritoare locale sau regionale, cum sunt Lilt

1-RRM 4-2007.pmd 3/14/2008, 9:00 AM106


RRM 4-2007 107

Such issues are particularly salient in markets outside the US, where the concept of“power” branding is relatively unknown (Court et al 1997). Markets are often fragmented,characterized by small-scale distribution, and lack the potential or size to warrant theuse of heavy mass-media advertising needed to develop strong brands (Barwise andRobertson 1992). As these markets become more interlinked and integrated, companiesoperating in international markets need to identify opportunities for strengthening brandarchitecture by improved co-ordination and harmonization of brands across countries.

As the firm expands in international market, issues relating to brand architecture orbrand structure become even more complex. In addition to considering the number oflevels in the hierarchy, another dimension, namely the degree of brand coordination orstandardization across countries, needs to be determined.

A few of the companies studied had a very simple brand structure based on thecorporate name, as for example, Shell, Philips, Apple, Nike, etc. In general, these werebusiness-to-business organizations with a heavy emphasis on corporate branding, or arelatively narrow and coherent product line. Other cases included consumer goodscompanies focused on a global target segment such as Nike or Benneton. Their primeobjective was to establish a strong global identity for the brand rather than respond tolocal market conditions (Piercy 1997). In some instances, the corporate logo and visualidentification (Apple and Nike) played a major role in identifying the brand and definingbrand image worldwide.

Other companies as, for example, P&G, or Best Foods used a product dominantstrategy. This strategy was common among U.S. firms who had expanded internationallyby leveraging “power” brands, as, for example, P&G with brands such as Camay, orPampers. Firms with domestic product dominant structures that had expanded byacquiring national companies often acquired a substantial number of national and localproduct brands, in addition to their own global and regional product brands. Best Foods,for example, has several international product brands such as Hellmans, Knorr, etc., aswell as national product brands such as Pfanni potatoes.

A number of companies had hybrid brand structures with a combination of corporateand product brands. Coca-Cola, for example uses the Coca-Cola name on its cola brandworldwide, with product variants such as Cherry Coke, Coke Lite or Diet Coke or caffeinefree Coke in some, but not all countries. In addition, Coca-Cola has a number of localor regional soft drink brands, such as Lilt in various fruit flavors in the U.K., TabXtra, asugar-free cola drink in Scandinavia, and Cappy, a fruit drink in East Europe and Turkey.

1-RRM 4-2007.pmd 3/14/2008, 9:00 AM107



cu diferite arome de fructe în Marea Britanie, TabXtra – o bãuturã rãcoritoare fãrã cola înScandinavia ºi Cappy, o bãuturã rãcoritoare în Europa de Est ºi Turcia.

Alte companii îºi structureazã diferit arhitectura de marcã pentru divizii de produsediferite. De exemplu, Unilever are o arhitecturã globalã de marcã pentru propria diviziede produse. Sectorul de produse din grãsimi animale constã mai ales din mãrci naþionale,dovedind o oarecare armonie în poziþionare sau numele mãrcii în diferite þãri, în vremece sectorul de îngheþatã constituie o combinaþie între mãrci de produse locale ºi globale,cum sunt Magnum, Cornetto ºi Solero. Acestea sunt susþinute de mãrci regionale, sauaparþinând þãrii respective, ca de exemplu Walls ºi Algida, toate având o etichetã comunãîn întreaga lume.

Multi-branding

Multi-brandingul este de departe cea mai popularã strategie de marcã, fiind folositãde multe companii în multe tipuri de afaceri (Van Sister, 2004). Este în general recunoscutpentru cã oferã excelente oportunitãþi de deschidere a unei afaceri, pur ºi simplu pentrucã un singur brand nu poate cu adevãrat sã acopere toate nevoile consumatorilor întoate segmentele pieþei. Multi-brandingul poate fi considerat, de fapt, una dintre celemai eficiente strategii de marcã, dar necesitã capacitãþi profesionale ºi preocupãriconstante din partea companiilor, în management ºi marketing.

Strategiile de marcã sunt întotdeauna de cea mai mare importanþã pentru companii,deoarece mãrcile sunt considerate o forþã motrice fundamentalã în business. Astãzi,toatã lumea este de acord cã mãrcile determinã rezultate mai bune, sustenabile, fiind osursã internã, dar ºi externã de inspiraþie care determinã recunoaºterea ºi stabileºterelaþii. Aºadar, multi-brandingul este strategia de marcã cea mai des folositã de multecompanii, specificã pentru multe categorii. Dacã studiem diferite portofolii multi-brand,mãrcile sunt adesea poziþionate cu roluri specifice, adicã marcã de prestigiu, marcã deflanc sau marcã de luptã. Cum multe pieþe sunt puternic fragmentate, e logic sã seintroducã mãrci suplimentare pentru a participa eficient la competiþie într-o anumitãcategorie. Între alte motive strategice pentru multi-branding se numãrã ºi acoperireadiferitelor canale de distribuþie, atunci când preþul pentru o anumitã categorie creºteprea mult, sau pur ºi simplu pentru împãrþirea diminuarea riscurilor pentru brandul-pilon.

Majoritatea pieþelor justificã apariþia operaþiunilor de multi-branding dar, desigur,mono-mãrcile sau mãrcile globale sunt în continuare foarte puternice; toate sunt activeºi au succes la penetrarea pe diferite pieþe ºi segmente. Un factor important careinfluenþeazã strategia de marcã în direcþia constituirii multi-brandingului este situaþiaeconomicã actualã din Europa. Cum dezvoltarea economicã din majoritatea þãrilor

1-RRM 4-2007.pmd 3/14/2008, 9:00 AM108


RRM 4-2007 109

Other companies had different brand architecture for different product divisions.For example, Unilever has a global brand architecture in its personal products division.The yellow fats division consists mostly of local brands with some harmonization inpositioning or brand name across countries, while the ice-cream division had acombination of local and global product brands such as Magnum, Cornetto and Solero.These are endorsed by a country or regional house brands such as Walls and Algida,and all shared a common logo worldwide.

The Multi-Branding

Multi-branding is by far the most popular brand strategy, and is used by manycompanies in all types of business (Van Sister, 2004). It is generally recognized thatmultibranding offers a fine opportunity to grow a business, simply because one brandcannot really cover all customer needs in all the various segments of a market. Multi-branding can, in fact, be considered as one of the most effective brand strategies, but itrequires professional skills and ongoing management and marketing focus fromcompanies.

Branding strategies are always highly important for companies, as brands are regardedas the ultimate business driver. Brands today are acknowledged as the driver for better,more sustainable results and as an internal as well as external source of inspiration,which creates both high recognition and relationships. So, multi-branding is the mostfrequently used brand strategy within many companies and categories. Looking at thevarious multi-brand portfolios, brands are often positioned with specific roles such asprestige brand, flanker brand or fighter brand. Since many markets are stronglyfragmented, it makes sense to introduce extra brands in order to compete effectivelyacross a category. Other strategic reasons for multi-branding are the coverage of variousdistribution channels, when the price range within a category becomes too wide, orsimply in order to spread risks for the bastion brand.

Most markets provide scope for multibranding operations but, of course, monobrandsor global brands are vividly alive as well; all are active and successful in penetratingdifferent markets and segments. One important factor influencing brand strategy towardsmulti-branding is the current economic situation in Europe. As economic growth inmost countries is negative or stable, we see in very many consumer markets a

1-RRM 4-2007.pmd 3/14/2008, 9:00 AM109



este negativã sau stabilã, se observã pe multe pieþe o dezvoltare, sau evoluþie cãtresegmentele de valoare ridicatã sau reducere. Multe dintre mãrcile existente nu îºi potpermite, sub nicio formã, din cauza poziþionãrii (deci a preþului) sã pãtrundã în acestesegmente, aºa cã asistãm la apariþia unui numãr mai mare de mãrci noi, aparþinândjucãtorilor existenþi pe piaþã, care pãtrund pe aceste segmente.

Cele mai importante motive pentru apariþia multi-brandingului sunt:

- brandul unic nu poate acoperi toate segmentele

- pieþele sunt puternic fragmentate

- oferte de dezvoltare a unui brand mai bine definit pentru nevoile mai clarfdiferenþiate ale consumatorilor

- creºterea diversitãþii canalelor de distribuþie

- gama de preþuri este prea largã la anumite categorii

- rãspândirea companiei ºi riscurile implicate de portofoliul de marcã

Mai existã ºi alte avantaje pe care le poate oferi o strategie de multi-branding:

• oportunitãþi mai mari pentru managementul relaþiei cu consumatorii (CRM), carele permite producãtorilor sã îndeplineascã mult mai exact nevoile consumatorilor(la nivel individual)

• ºansa de poziþionare mai clarã a mãrci lor, pentru construirea unor valori demarcã care sunt, în acelaºi timp, puternic identificate

• capacitatea de utilizare a strategiei pe pieþele segmentate în funcþie de preþ

• în cazul în care apare o problemã legatã de un anumit brand, care duce laretragerea unui mare numãr de produse de acel tip de pe piaþã, aceastã situaþienu are un impact direct prea mare asupra celorlalte mãrci din portofoliu

Rolul central al branding-ului în stabilirea identitãþii firmei ºi în construirea poziþieiacesteia pe piaþa globalã, legat de pãrerea consumatorilor, distribuitorilor cu amãnuntulsau altor participanþi la activitãþile de pe piaþã determinã creºterea importanþei stabilirii,de cãtre companii, a unei strategii de marcã foarte exacte (Schmitt ºi Simenson 1997).Un element cheie al succesului este structurarea unei arhitecturi de marcã armonioaseºi consistente dincolo de graniþele naþionale ºi de liniile de producþie, una care sãdefineascã numãrul de nivele, dar ºi de mãrci la fiecare nivel. Deosebit de importanteste accentul relativ pur pe mãrcile corporatiste, comparativ cu mãrcile de la nivelul deproducþie, ca ºi gradul de integrare pe pieþe diferite. Aceste elemente trebuie bine înþeleseºi împãrtãºite la toate nivelele organizaþiei, fapt care determinã consolidarea unei culturi/mentalitãþi care promoveazã dezvoltarea unor mãrci internaþionale puternice, care sã-ºi pãstreze forþa neºtirbitã de utilizarea exageratã sau de contradicþii.

1-RRM 4-2007.pmd 3/14/2008, 9:00 AM110


RRM 4-2007 111

development or evolution into value or discount segments. Many of the existing brandsreally cannot allow themselves, because of their (price) positioning, to enter thesesegments, and so we see more new brands from existing market players entering thesesegments.

The most important reasons for multi-branding are:

- a mono brand cannot cover all segments

- markets are strongly fragmented

- development of more defined brand offers to more differentiated consumer needs

- increase in variety of distribution channels

- price ranges within categories are often too wide

- spread company and brand portfolio risks.

There is a further range of advantages that a multi-branding strategy can offer:

• enhanced opportunities for customer relationship management (CRM), enablingmanufacturers to fulfill (individual) consumer needs more precisely.

• the opportunity to position brands more clearly and build strongly identified brandvalues at the same time.

• the ability to handle strategy in price segmented markets.

• given a brand problem requiring serious product recalls, this does not have toomuch direct impact on the other brands in the portfolio.

The central role of branding in establishing the firm’s identity and building its positionin the global marketplace among customers, retailers and other market participants,makes it increasingly imperative for firms to establish a clear-cut international brandingstrategy (Schmitt and Simenson 1997). A key element of success is the framing of aharmonious and consistent brand architecture across countries and product lines, definingthe number of levels and brands at each level. Of particular importance is the relativeemphasis placed on corporate brands as opposed to product level brands and the degreeof integration across markets. These should be clearly understood and shared throughoutall level of the organization, leading to a culture/mentality that promotes the growth ofstrong international brands without diluting their strength by over-use or inconsistencies.

1-RRM 4-2007.pmd 3/14/2008, 9:00 AM111



Concluzie

Rolul central al brandingului în stabilirea identitãþii unei firme ºi construirea poziþiei salepe piaþa globalã, în rândul consumatorilor, distribuitorilor cu amãnuntul ºi altor participanþila activitãþile de pe piaþã determinã importanþa stabilirii unei strategii internaþionale demarcã clare de cãtre firme. Un element cheie pentru succes este structurarea unei arhitecturide marcã armonioase, de încredere, în þãri diferite ºi pe linii de producþie diferite, care sãdefineascã numãrul de nivele ºi mãrcile existente la fiecare nivel. Este foarte important cafirmele sã punã accentul pe mãrcile corporatiste, în comparaþie cu mãrcile de la nivelul deproducþie, ca ºi pe gradul de integrare pe diferite pieþe. De exemplu, atunci când firma Nikea fost acuzatã (pe drept sau pe nedrept) de folosirea mâinii de lucru ilegale pentru fabricareaproduselor sale, brandul respectiv a avut de suferit din cauza unei decizii de fabricaþie.Acest exemplu ilustreazã necesitatea ca misiunea unei companii sã fie în perfectã armoniecu poziþionarea doritã pe piaþã. Marca are nevoie sã se bazeze pe principii de organizaregeneral valabile, deciziile luate în toate aspectele afacerii fiind verificate din punct devedere strategic. Aceste decizii trebuie sã fie clar înþelese ºi acceptate la toate niveleleorganizaþiei, ceea ce duce la structurarea unei culturi/mentalitãþi care sã promovezedezvoltarea unor mãrci internaþionale puternice, fãrã ca forþa lor sã aibã de suferit dincauzã cã sunt folosite excesiv sau contradictorii.

Bibliografie

Aaker, D. (1996), Building Strong Brands, New York: The Free Press.Aaker, D. A. (1996), Measuring Brand Equity Across Products and Markets, California

Management Review, 39 (3), 102-120.Aaker, D. A (1997), Should You Take Your Brand to Where the Action Is?, Harvard

Business Review, September-October, 135-143.Aaker, D. A. & Keller, K. L. (1990). Consumer evaluations of brand extensions. Journal

of Marketing, 54 (1), 27-41.Aaker, D. A. and Keller, K. L. (1990), Consumer Evaluations of Brand Extensions, Journal

of Marketing, 54 (January), 27-41.Aaker, D.A.& Joachimsthaler, E. (2000), Brand Leadership. New York: The Free PressAaker, D. A., & Shansby, G. J. (1982). Positioning your product. Business Horizons, 25

(3), 56-62.Aaker, J. (1996), Dimensions of Brand Personality, Journal of Marketing Research, 34

(August), 347-356.Aaker, J., Fournier, S. and Brasel. S. A. (2003). When Good Brands Do Bad. Paper

presented to the Marketing Science Institute Board of Trustees Meeting in Washington,D.C., March 6, 2003.

1-RRM 4-2007.pmd 3/14/2008, 9:00 AM112


RRM 4-2007 113

Conclusion

The central role of branding in establishing the firm’s identity and building its positionin the global marketplace among customers, retailers and other market participantsmakes it increasingly imperative for firms to establish a clear-cut international brandingstrategy. A key element of success is the framing of harmonious and consistent brandarchitecture across countries and product lines, defining the number of levels and brandsat each level. Of particular importance is the relative emphasis placed on corporatebrands as opposed to product level brands and the degree of integration across markets.For instance, when Nike was accused (fairly or unfairly) of using sweatshop labour tomake its products, the brand suffered because of a manufacturing decision. This exampleillustrates the necessity that a company’s mission be in complete lockstep with thepositioning desired in the marketplace. The brand needs to be an over-arching organisingprinciple and strategic filter for decision-making in all aspects of the business. Theseshould be clearly understood and shared throughout all level of the organization, leadingto a culture/mentality that promotes the growth of strong international brands withoutdiluting their strength by over-use or inconsistencies.

References

Aaker, D. (1996), Building Strong Brands, New York: The Free Press.Aaker, D. A. (1996), Measuring Brand Equity Across Products and Markets, California

Management Review, 39 (3), 102-120.Aaker, D. A (1997), Should You Take Your Brand to Where the Action Is?, Harvard

Business Review, September-October, 135-143.Aaker, D. A. & Keller, K. L. (1990). Consumer evaluations of brand extensions. Journal

of Marketing, 54 (1), 27-41.Aaker, D. A. and Keller, K. L. (1990), Consumer Evaluations of Brand Extensions, Journal

of Marketing, 54 (January), 27-41.Aaker, D.A.& Joachimsthaler, E. (2000), Brand Leadership. New York: The Free PressAaker, D. A., & Shansby, G. J. (1982). Positioning your product. Business Horizons, 25

(3), 56-62.Aaker, J. (1996), Dimensions of Brand Personality, Journal of Marketing Research, 34

(August), 347-356.Aaker, J., Fournier, S. and Brasel. S. A. (2003). When Good Brands Do Bad. Paper

presented to the Marketing Science Institute Board of Trustees Meeting in Washington,D.C., March 6, 2003.

1-RRM 4-2007.pmd 3/14/2008, 9:00 AM113



Atkin, D. (2004), The Culting of Brands: When Customers Become True Believers. NewYork: Portfolio.

Barwise, P. (1997), Brands in a digital world. The Journal of Brand Management 4(4),220-223

Barwise, P. and Robertson, T. (1992), Brand Portfolios, European Management Journal,10, 3 (September), 277-285.

Belk, R. W. (1990), The Role of Possessions in Constructing and Maintaining a Sense ofPast, in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 17, ed. Marvin E. Goldberg et al.,Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, 669-676.

Berens, van Riel C.B.M., van Bruggen G.H. (2005), Corporate Associations and consumerproduct responses: the moderating role of corporate brand dominance, Journal of

Marketing, 69Berry, N. (1998), Revitalising brands. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 5(3), 15-20Bhat, S. & Reddy, S. (2001). The impact of parent brand attribute associations and affect

on brand extension evaluation. Journal of Business Research, 53 (3), 111-122.Biel, A. (1994), The Brandscape, Admap, 26 (Oct), 41-6Bottomley, P. A. and Doyle, J. R. (1996), The formation of attitudes towards brand

extensions: Testing and generalising Aaker and Keller’s model, International Journal

of Research in Marketing, 13, 365-377.Bousch, D. (1993), Brands as catagories. In (ed) D.Aaker and A. Biel (1993) Brand

Equity and Advertising, Hillsdale, Lawrence Erlbaum AssociatesBousch, D. M. and Loken B(1991), A Process-Tracing Study of Brand Extension

Evaluation, Journal of Marketing Research, 28, (February), 16-28.Broniarczyk, S. M. and. Alba J. W (1994), The Importance of the Brand in Brand Extension,

Journal of Marketing Research, 31 (May), 214-228.Brown T.J., Dacin P.A. (1997), The Company and the Product: Corporate Association

and Consumer Product Responses, Journal of Marketing, 61Brown, M. (1992), How it all began, Otley, Smith SettleBrown, Stephen (1995), Postmodern Marketing, London, RoutledgeCaller, L. (ed.) (1996), Researching Brands, Amsterdam: ESOMAR.Carpenter, G. S., Glazer, R., & Nakamoto, K. (1994). Meaningful brands from meaningless

differentiation: the dependence on irrelevant attributes. Journal of Marketing Research,31 (3), 339-350.

Cohen, J. and Basu, K(1997), Alternative models of categorization: toward a contingentprocessing framework. Journal of Consumer Research, 13(March), 455-472

Copeland, M. (1923), Relation of consumers’ buying habits to marketing methods,Harvard Business Review, 1, April pp. 282-289.

1-RRM 4-2007.pmd 3/14/2008, 9:00 AM114


RRM 4-2007 115

Atkin, D. (2004), The Culting of Brands: When Customers Become True Believers. NewYork: Portfolio.

Barwise, P. (1997), Brands in a digital world. The Journal of Brand Management 4(4),220-223

Barwise, P. and Robertson, T. (1992), Brand Portfolios, European Management Journal,10, 3 (September), 277-285.

Belk, R. W. (1990), The Role of Possessions in Constructing and Maintaining a Sense ofPast, in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 17, ed. Marvin E. Goldberg et al.,Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, 669-676.

Berens, van Riel C.B.M., van Bruggen G.H. (2005), Corporate Associations and consumerproduct responses: the moderating role of corporate brand dominance, Journal of

Marketing, 69Berry, N. (1998), Revitalising brands. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 5(3), 15-20Bhat, S. & Reddy, S. (2001). The impact of parent brand attribute associations and affect

on brand extension evaluation. Journal of Business Research, 53 (3), 111-122.Biel, A. (1994), The Brandscape, Admap, 26 (Oct), 41-6Bottomley, P. A. and Doyle, J. R. (1996), The formation of attitudes towards brand

extensions: Testing and generalising Aaker and Keller’s model, International Journal

of Research in Marketing, 13, 365-377.Bousch, D. (1993), Brands as catagories. In (ed) D.Aaker and A. Biel (1993) Brand

Equity and Advertising, Hillsdale, Lawrence Erlbaum AssociatesBousch, D. M. and Loken B(1991), A Process-Tracing Study of Brand Extension

Evaluation, Journal of Marketing Research, 28, (February), 16-28.Broniarczyk, S. M. and. Alba J. W (1994), The Importance of the Brand in Brand Extension,

Journal of Marketing Research, 31 (May), 214-228.Brown T.J., Dacin P.A. (1997), The Company and the Product: Corporate Association

and Consumer Product Responses, Journal of Marketing, 61Brown, M. (1992), How it all began, Otley, Smith SettleBrown, Stephen (1995), Postmodern Marketing, London, RoutledgeCaller, L. (ed.) (1996), Researching Brands, Amsterdam: ESOMAR.Carpenter, G. S., Glazer, R., & Nakamoto, K. (1994). Meaningful brands from meaningless

differentiation: the dependence on irrelevant attributes. Journal of Marketing Research,31 (3), 339-350.

Cohen, J. and Basu, K(1997), Alternative models of categorization: toward a contingentprocessing framework. Journal of Consumer Research, 13(March), 455-472

Copeland, M. (1923), Relation of consumers’ buying habits to marketing methods,Harvard Business Review, 1, April pp. 282-289.

1-RRM 4-2007.pmd 3/14/2008, 9:00 AM115



Court, D. C., Freeling, A, Lerter M. C.and Parsons A. J. (1997), If Nike Can ‘Just Do It’Why Can’t We, McKinsey Quarterly, No. 3, 25-34.

Craig, C. S. and Douglas S. P. (1996), Responding to the Challenges of Global Markets:Change, Complexity, Competition and Conscience, Columbia Journal of World

Business, 31, 6-18.Crawford, M.C. (1985). A new positioning typology. Journal of Product Innovation

Management, 2 (4), 243-253.Csikszentmihalyi, M. and Rochberg-Halton E(1981), The Meaning of Things: Domestic

Symbols and the Self, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Czellar, S. (2003). Consumer attitude toward brand extensions: An integrative model

and research propositions. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 20 (1),97-115.

Dacin P. A. and Smith D. C (1994), The Effect of Brand Portfolio Characteristics onConsumer Evaluations of Brand Extensions, Journal of Marketing Research, 31 (May),229-242.

de Chernatony, L. (1989), Understanding Consumers’ Perceptionsof Competitive Tiers—Can Perceived Risk Help?, Journal of Marketing Management, 4 (3), 288-299.

de Chernatony, L. (1993), Categorizing Brands: Evolutionary Processes Underpinnedby Two Key Dimensions, Journal of Marketing Management, 9, 173-188.

de Chernatony, L. (1998), Developing on effective brand strategy. In C. Egan and M.Thomas (ed), The Chartered Institute of Marketing Handbook of Strategic Marketing,

Oxford: Butterworth Heinemannde Chernatony, L. and Dall’Olmo Riley F(1997), An Assessment of the ‘Atomic Brand

Model, In Academy of Marketing Conference Proceedings, pp 289-300 (Manchester:Academy of Marketing)

de Chernatony, L. and Dall’Olmo Riley F(1997), The chasm between managers’ andconsumers’ views of brands: the experts perspectives. Journal of Strategic Marketing,5(2), 89-104.

de Chernatony, L. and Dall’Olmo Riley F(1998), Experts views about definning servicesbrands and the principles of services branding. Journal of Business Research

de Chernatony, L.and McWilliam, G (1989), The Strategic Implications of Clarifying HowMarketers Interpret ‘Brands, Journal of Marketing Management, 5 (2), 153-171.

de Chernatony, L. and Kevin D., (1994), Developing a more effective brand positioning,Journal of Brand Management, 1 (6), 373-379.

de Chernatony, L, (1996),2001—The Brand Management Odyssey, Journal of General

Management, 21(4), 15-30Dittmar, H (1992), The Social Psychology of Material Possessions: To Have is To Be,

Harvester Wheatsheaf, St. Martin’s Press.

1-RRM 4-2007.pmd 3/14/2008, 9:00 AM116


RRM 4-2007 117

Court, D. C., Freeling, A, Lerter M. C.and Parsons A. J. (1997), If Nike Can ‘Just Do It’Why Can’t We, McKinsey Quarterly, No. 3, 25-34.

Craig, C. S. and Douglas S. P. (1996), Responding to the Challenges of Global Markets:Change, Complexity, Competition and Conscience, Columbia Journal of World

Business, 31, 6-18.Crawford, M.C. (1985). A new positioning typology. Journal of Product Innovation

Management, 2 (4), 243-253.Csikszentmihalyi, M. and Rochberg-Halton E(1981), The Meaning of Things: Domestic

Symbols and the Self, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Czellar, S. (2003). Consumer attitude toward brand extensions: An integrative model

and research propositions. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 20 (1),97-115.

Dacin P. A. and Smith D. C (1994), The Effect of Brand Portfolio Characteristics onConsumer Evaluations of Brand Extensions, Journal of Marketing Research, 31 (May),229-242.

de Chernatony, L. (1989), Understanding Consumers’ Perceptionsof Competitive Tiers—Can Perceived Risk Help?, Journal of Marketing Management, 4 (3), 288-299.

de Chernatony, L. (1993), Categorizing Brands: Evolutionary Processes Underpinnedby Two Key Dimensions, Journal of Marketing Management, 9, 173-188.

de Chernatony, L. (1998), Developing on effective brand strategy. In C. Egan and M.Thomas (ed), The Chartered Institute of Marketing Handbook of Strategic Marketing,

Oxford: Butterworth Heinemannde Chernatony, L. and Dall’Olmo Riley F(1997), An Assessment of the ‘Atomic Brand

Model, In Academy of Marketing Conference Proceedings, pp 289-300 (Manchester:Academy of Marketing)

de Chernatony, L. and Dall’Olmo Riley F(1997), The chasm between managers’ andconsumers’ views of brands: the experts perspectives. Journal of Strategic Marketing,5(2), 89-104.

de Chernatony, L. and Dall’Olmo Riley F(1998), Experts views about definning servicesbrands and the principles of services branding. Journal of Business Research

de Chernatony, L.and McWilliam, G (1989), The Strategic Implications of Clarifying HowMarketers Interpret ‘Brands, Journal of Marketing Management, 5 (2), 153-171.

de Chernatony, L. and Kevin D., (1994), Developing a more effective brand positioning,Journal of Brand Management, 1 (6), 373-379.

de Chernatony, L, (1996),2001—The Brand Management Odyssey, Journal of General

Management, 21(4), 15-30Dittmar, H (1992), The Social Psychology of Material Possessions: To Have is To Be,

Harvester Wheatsheaf, St. Martin’s Press.

1-RRM 4-2007.pmd 3/14/2008, 9:00 AM117



Dolich, I J. (1969), Congruence Relationships Between Self Images and Product Brands,Journal of Marketing Research, 6 (February), 80-4.

Doyle, P. (1989), Building successful brands: the strategic options. Journal of Marketing,

5(1), 77-95Echambadi, R., Arroniz, I., Reinartz, W. & Lee, J. (2006). Empirical generalizations

from brand extension research: How sure are we? International Journal of Research

in Marketing, 23 (3), 253-261.Fogg, J. (1998), Brands as intellectual property. In S. Hart and J. Murphy (ed), Brands:

the new wealth creators, Basingstoke, MacmillanFurby, L. (1978), Possessions: Toward a theory of their meaning and function throughout

the life cycle. In P. B. Baltes (ed.), Life Span Development and Behavior, Vol. 1, pp.297-336. New York: Academic Press.

Gardner, B B. and Levy S J. (1955), The Product and the Brand. Harvard Business Review,33, (March-April), 33-9.

Goffman, E (1959), The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life, Garden City, N.Y.:Doubleday and Co., Inc.

Goodyear, M (1996), Divided by a common language: diversity and deception in theworld of global marketing, Journal of the Market Research Society, 38 (2), 105-122.

Gordon, W (1991), Assessing the brand through research. In D. Cowley (ed)Understanding brands. London, Kogan Page

Grubb, E L. and Hupp, G (1968), Perception of Self, Generalized Stereotypes, andBrand Selection, Journal of Marketing Research, 5 (February), 58-63.

Hirschman, El and LaBarbera P (1990), Dimensions of Possession Importance, Psychology

and Marketing, 7 (Fall), 215-233.Hoyer, W and Brown S (1990), Effects of brand awareness on choice for a common

repeat purchase product. Journal of Consumer Research, 17(2), 141-148Irons, K (1996), The Marketing of Services: A Total Approach to Achieving Competitive

Advantage, McGraw Hill Companies, London.Jones, J (1986), What’s in a name? Lexington, Lexington BooksKapferer, JN (1997), Strategic Brand Management: Creating and Sustaining Brand Equity

Long Term, Kogan Page, London.Kapferer, JN. (2004). The New Strategic Brand Management: Creating and Sustaining

Brand Equity Long Term, Kogan Page.Keller, K.L. (1993) Conceptualizing, measuring, and managing customer-based brand

equity, Journal of Marketing, 57(1), 1–17.Keller, K.L. (1998) Strategic Brand Management: Building, Measuring, and Managing

Brand Equity, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Keller, K (1998), Strategic Brand Management, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

1-RRM 4-2007.pmd 3/14/2008, 9:00 AM118


RRM 4-2007 119

Dolich, I J. (1969), Congruence Relationships Between Self Images and Product Brands,Journal of Marketing Research, 6 (February), 80-4.

Doyle, P. (1989), Building successful brands: the strategic options. Journal of Marketing,

5(1), 77-95Echambadi, R., Arroniz, I., Reinartz, W. & Lee, J. (2006). Empirical generalizations

from brand extension research: How sure are we? International Journal of Research

in Marketing, 23 (3), 253-261.Fogg, J. (1998), Brands as intellectual property. In S. Hart and J. Murphy (ed), Brands:

the new wealth creators, Basingstoke, MacmillanFurby, L. (1978), Possessions: Toward a theory of their meaning and function throughout

the life cycle. In P. B. Baltes (ed.), Life Span Development and Behavior, Vol. 1, pp.297-336. New York: Academic Press.

Gardner, B B. and Levy S J. (1955), The Product and the Brand. Harvard Business Review,33, (March-April), 33-9.

Goffman, E (1959), The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life, Garden City, N.Y.:Doubleday and Co., Inc.

Goodyear, M (1996), Divided by a common language: diversity and deception in theworld of global marketing, Journal of the Market Research Society, 38 (2), 105-122.

Gordon, W (1991), Assessing the brand through research. In D. Cowley (ed)Understanding brands. London, Kogan Page

Grubb, E L. and Hupp, G (1968), Perception of Self, Generalized Stereotypes, andBrand Selection, Journal of Marketing Research, 5 (February), 58-63.

Hirschman, El and LaBarbera P (1990), Dimensions of Possession Importance, Psychology

and Marketing, 7 (Fall), 215-233.Hoyer, W and Brown S (1990), Effects of brand awareness on choice for a common

repeat purchase product. Journal of Consumer Research, 17(2), 141-148Irons, K (1996), The Marketing of Services: A Total Approach to Achieving Competitive

Advantage, McGraw Hill Companies, London.Jones, J (1986), What’s in a name? Lexington, Lexington BooksKapferer, JN (1997), Strategic Brand Management: Creating and Sustaining Brand Equity

Long Term, Kogan Page, London.Kapferer, JN. (2004). The New Strategic Brand Management: Creating and Sustaining

Brand Equity Long Term, Kogan Page.Keller, K.L. (1993) Conceptualizing, measuring, and managing customer-based brand

equity, Journal of Marketing, 57(1), 1–17.Keller, K.L. (1998) Strategic Brand Management: Building, Measuring, and Managing

Brand Equity, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Keller, K (1998), Strategic Brand Management, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

1-RRM 4-2007.pmd 3/14/2008, 9:00 AM119



Keller, K L (2003), Brand Synthesis: The Multidimentionality of Brand Knowledge, Journal

of Consumer Research, 29 (March), 595-601.Keller, K L and. Aaker D A (1992), The Effects of Sequential Introduction of Brand

Extensions, Journal of Marketing Research, 29 (February), 35-50.King, St (1991), Brand-building in the 1990s, Journal of Marketing Management, 7, 3- 13.Klein, N (2000). No Logo. St, Martins Press.Kotler, P., Wong, V., Saunders, J., & Armstrong, G. (2005). Principles of marketing. (4th

European ed.) Harlow: Pearson Prentice Hall.Kotler, Ph and Armstrong G (1996), Principles of Marketing, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle

River, NJ, USA.Krishnan, H.S. (1996), Characteristics of memory associations: A consumer-based brand

equity perspective, International Journal of Research in Marketing, 13, 389-405.Laforêt, S and Saunders J (1994), Managing Brand Portfolios: How the Leaders Do It,

Journal of Advertising Research, September/October, 64-76.Lambin, J-L (1997), Strategic Marketing Management, Maidenhead, McGraw HillLanon, J (1993), What do people do with advertising?,Leahy, T (1994), The emergence of retail brand power. In P. Stobart. Brand Power,

Basingstoke, Macmillan.Levitt, T. (1983). The Globalization of Markets. Harvard Business Review.

Low, G S. and Fullerton R A. (1994), Brand, Brand Management, and the Brand ManagerSystem: A Critical-Historical Evaluation, Journal of Marketing Research, 31 (May)173-190.

Malhotra, N (1988), Self concept and product choice: an integrated perspective, Journal

of Economic Psychology, 9, 1-28.Mehta, R and. Belk R W (1991), Artifacts, Identity, and Transition: Favorite Possessions

of Indians and Indian Immigrants to the United State, Journal of Consumer Research,

17 (March), 398-411.Mervis, C and Rosch E (1981), Categorization of natural objects, Annual Review of

Psychology, 32, 89-115Michell, A, (1997) Brand strategies in the information age, London, FT Management Report.Park, C. W., Milberg, S. & Lawson, R. (1991). Evaluation of brand extensions: The role

of product feature similarity and brand concept consistency. Journal of Consumer

Research, 18 (2), 185-193.Pham, M. T., & Muthukrishnan, A. V. (2002). Search and alignment in judgment revisions:

implications for brand positioning. Journal of Marketing Research, 39 (1), 18-30.Piercy, N (1997) Market Led Strategic Change, Oxford, Butterworth HeinemannPlummer, J T. (1985), How Personality Makes a Difference, Journal of Advertising

Research, 24 (6), 27-31.

1-RRM 4-2007.pmd 3/14/2008, 9:00 AM120


RRM 4-2007 121

Keller, K L (2003), Brand Synthesis: The Multidimentionality of Brand Knowledge, Journal

of Consumer Research, 29 (March), 595-601.Keller, K L and. Aaker D A (1992), The Effects of Sequential Introduction of Brand

Extensions, Journal of Marketing Research, 29 (February), 35-50.King, St (1991), Brand-building in the 1990s, Journal of Marketing Management, 7, 3- 13.Klein, N (2000). No Logo. St, Martins Press.Kotler, P., Wong, V., Saunders, J., & Armstrong, G. (2005). Principles of marketing. (4th

European ed.) Harlow: Pearson Prentice Hall.Kotler, Ph and Armstrong G (1996), Principles of Marketing, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle

River, NJ, USA.Krishnan, H.S. (1996), Characteristics of memory associations: A consumer-based brand

equity perspective, International Journal of Research in Marketing, 13, 389-405.Laforêt, S and Saunders J (1994), Managing Brand Portfolios: How the Leaders Do It,

Journal of Advertising Research, September/October, 64-76.Lambin, J-L (1997), Strategic Marketing Management, Maidenhead, McGraw HillLanon, J (1993), What do people do with advertising?,Leahy, T (1994), The emergence of retail brand power. In P. Stobart. Brand Power,

Basingstoke, Macmillan.Levitt, T. (1983). The Globalization of Markets. Harvard Business Review.

Low, G S. and Fullerton R A. (1994), Brand, Brand Management, and the Brand ManagerSystem: A Critical-Historical Evaluation, Journal of Marketing Research, 31 (May)173-190.

Malhotra, N (1988), Self concept and product choice: an integrated perspective, Journal

of Economic Psychology, 9, 1-28.Mehta, R and. Belk R W (1991), Artifacts, Identity, and Transition: Favorite Possessions

of Indians and Indian Immigrants to the United State, Journal of Consumer Research,

17 (March), 398-411.Mervis, C and Rosch E (1981), Categorization of natural objects, Annual Review of

Psychology, 32, 89-115Michell, A, (1997) Brand strategies in the information age, London, FT Management Report.Park, C. W., Milberg, S. & Lawson, R. (1991). Evaluation of brand extensions: The role

of product feature similarity and brand concept consistency. Journal of Consumer

Research, 18 (2), 185-193.Pham, M. T., & Muthukrishnan, A. V. (2002). Search and alignment in judgment revisions:

implications for brand positioning. Journal of Marketing Research, 39 (1), 18-30.Piercy, N (1997) Market Led Strategic Change, Oxford, Butterworth HeinemannPlummer, J T. (1985), How Personality Makes a Difference, Journal of Advertising

Research, 24 (6), 27-31.

1-RRM 4-2007.pmd 3/14/2008, 9:00 AM121



Quelch, J, Holt D and Taylor. E (2003). Managing the Transnational Brand: How GlobalPerceptions Drive Value. Paper presented at the Harvard Business School’sGlobalization of Markets Colloquium (May 28-30, 2003).

Reddy, K., Holak S L. and Bhat S (1994), To Extend or Not to Extend: SuccessDeterminants of Line Extensions, Journal of Marketing Research, 31 (May), 243-262

Reynolds, T J. and Gutman J (1984), Advertising as Image Management, Journal of

Advertising Research, 24, (February-March), 27-38.Ries, Al and Trout J (1981), Positioning: The Battle for Your Mind, McGraw-Hill, New

York, N.Y.Roberts, K. (2004), Lovemarks: The Future Beyond Brands. New York: Powerhouse

Books.Rust R.T., Ambler T., Carpenter G.S., Kumar V. & Srivastava R.K., (2004), Measuring

Marketing Productivity: Current Knowledge and Future Directions, Journal of

Marketing, 68 (October). 76–89Rust, R.T, Zeithaml, V.A. & Lemon, K.N. (2004). Customer-centered Brand Management.

Harvard Business Review 82 (9), 110-118.Schiffman, L. G. and Leslie Kanuk (1996), Consumer Behavior, Prentice-Hall.Schmitt, B H. and Simenson A (1997), Marketing Aesthetics: The Strategic Management

of Brands, Identity and Image. New York: The Free Press.Sheth, J, Newman, B I. and Gross B L. (1991), Why We Buy What We Buy: A Theory of

Consumption Values, Journal of Business Research, 22, 159-70.Shields, R. (ed) 1992, Lifestyle shopping: the subject of consumption, London, RoutledgeSmothers, N. (1993), Can products and brands have charisma?. In D. Aaker and A. Biel

(ed) Brand equity and advertising. Hillsdale, Lawrence Erlbaum AssociatesSolomon, M R. (1983), The Role of Products as Social Stimili A Symbolic Interactionism

Perspective, Journal of Consumer Research, 10 (December), 319-329.Southgate, P (1994), Total branding by design, London, KoganTait, B (2004), How ‘Marketing Science’ Undermines Brands, Admap Magazie, Issue

454 (October)Thompson C.J., Rindfleisch A., & Arsel Z. ( 2006), Emotional Branding and the Strategic

Value of the Doppelgänger Brand Image, Journal of Marketing, 70 (January), 50–64Upshaw, L and Taylor. E (2000). The Masterbrand Mandate. John Wiley & Sons.Van Sister, L (2004), The Secret of Multi-Branding, Admap Magazine, Issue 455

(November)Völckner, F. & Sattler, H. (2006). Drivers of Brand Extension Success. Journal of

Marketing, 70 (2), 18-34.Wind, Y. (1982). Product policy: concepts, methods and strategy. Reading: Addison

Wesley.

1-RRM 4-2007.pmd 3/14/2008, 9:00 AM122


RRM 4-2007 123

Quelch, J, Holt D and Taylor. E (2003). Managing the Transnational Brand: How GlobalPerceptions Drive Value. Paper presented at the Harvard Business School’sGlobalization of Markets Colloquium (May 28-30, 2003).

Reddy, K., Holak S L. and Bhat S (1994), To Extend or Not to Extend: SuccessDeterminants of Line Extensions, Journal of Marketing Research, 31 (May), 243-262

Reynolds, T J. and Gutman J (1984), Advertising as Image Management, Journal of

Advertising Research, 24, (February-March), 27-38.Ries, Al and Trout J (1981), Positioning: The Battle for Your Mind, McGraw-Hill, New

York, N.Y.Roberts, K. (2004), Lovemarks: The Future Beyond Brands. New York: Powerhouse

Books.Rust R.T., Ambler T., Carpenter G.S., Kumar V. & Srivastava R.K., (2004), Measuring

Marketing Productivity: Current Knowledge and Future Directions, Journal of

Marketing, 68 (October). 76–89Rust, R.T, Zeithaml, V.A. & Lemon, K.N. (2004). Customer-centered Brand Management.

Harvard Business Review 82 (9), 110-118.Schiffman, L. G. and Leslie Kanuk (1996), Consumer Behavior, Prentice-Hall.Schmitt, B H. and Simenson A (1997), Marketing Aesthetics: The Strategic Management

of Brands, Identity and Image. New York: The Free Press.Sheth, J, Newman, B I. and Gross B L. (1991), Why We Buy What We Buy: A Theory of

Consumption Values, Journal of Business Research, 22, 159-70.Shields, R. (ed) 1992, Lifestyle shopping: the subject of consumption, London, RoutledgeSmothers, N. (1993), Can products and brands have charisma?. In D. Aaker and A. Biel

(ed) Brand equity and advertising. Hillsdale, Lawrence Erlbaum AssociatesSolomon, M R. (1983), The Role of Products as Social Stimili A Symbolic Interactionism

Perspective, Journal of Consumer Research, 10 (December), 319-329.Southgate, P (1994), Total branding by design, London, KoganTait, B (2004), How ‘Marketing Science’ Undermines Brands, Admap Magazie, Issue

454 (October)Thompson C.J., Rindfleisch A., & Arsel Z. ( 2006), Emotional Branding and the Strategic

Value of the Doppelgänger Brand Image, Journal of Marketing, 70 (January), 50–64Upshaw, L and Taylor. E (2000). The Masterbrand Mandate. John Wiley & Sons.Van Sister, L (2004), The Secret of Multi-Branding, Admap Magazine, Issue 455

(November)Völckner, F. & Sattler, H. (2006). Drivers of Brand Extension Success. Journal of

Marketing, 70 (2), 18-34.Wind, Y. (1982). Product policy: concepts, methods and strategy. Reading: Addison

Wesley.

1-RRM 4-2007.pmd 3/14/2008, 9:00 AM123

Mãrci ºi strategii de marcã: consideraþii manageriale and Brand Strategies.pdfAceastã lucrare...

Documents

Transcript of Mãrci ºi strategii de marcã: consideraþii manageriale and Brand Strategies.pdfAceastã lucrare...