Powered by Max Banner Ads 

With the advent of Internet the marketing communications environment has changed profoundly and there is a recognised need of continuous conceptual addition to the existing branding theory. Some authors pronounced the advent of the “experience economy” and the “experience marketing”, while others have taken more extreme postmodern stance and have denied the validity of the traditional branding inferences. Encompassing all these perspectives and drawing on the traditional branding concepts from customer- based perspective this paper will concentrate on the construct of the online brand experience (OBE) as a central part of the contemporary branding strategy. In particular, building on the existing ideas, gathering insights from observation of contemporary online branding campaigns and conducting qualitative study among consumers, I am intending to explore the phenomenon of OBE. Central points in a future theoretical framework will be the notion of the brand as experience, the dimensions around which brand experiences are built online and the very

technology of OBE process.

The central theme of a future research is the challenges faced by companies in their decision-making about branding in online environment. The focal point of the research would be the creation of brand experience as the most important element of the firm’s online branding strategy. The first sub-question evolves around the definition of brand experience; to what extent is the notion of brand identical to experience and are there any grounds to believe that we are entering experience economy? The second sub-question refers to the main dimensions of the online brand experience. The last objective of the paper could be to create a theoretical model of the online brand experience in accordance with the above findings. The paper’s focus on the notion of online brand experience would be based on the view of the brand as “a cluster of functional and emotional values which promise a particular experience” (de Chernatony and Segal-Horn, 2003). The importance of the issue is underscored by the view of the brand not as an identifier, but as an experience (Schmitt, 1999). Since this shift of definition and focus of branding is triggered namely by the incessant technological and communication change, the importance of building a theoretical reference to brands as online experiences is exigent.

In view of the new communications environment there is a need of rebranding and more

importantly rethinking of the traditional branding concepts. A number of authors (Ibeh et al., 2005; Christodoulides and de Chernatony, 2004; Bergstrom, 2000) propose addition to the existing branding theory instead of replacement with the warning that Internet is not just another distribution and communications channel, but rather a branding tool with new unique features. The central in this paper notion of online brand experience is discussed from different perspectives by several authors. Ibeh et al. (2005) describe the “high-impact customer online experience” as “a key source of added value in the internet

economy”. Going even further, Pine II and Gilmore (1998, 2000) define the experience as the “fourth economic offering” in the “progression of economic value” after commodities, goods and services. Drawing on their ideas, Schmitt (1999) classifies five different types of experiences. For Cova (1996) the consumer is not only a target for, but also “a producer of experiences”. Furthermore, various authors discuss the importance of issues affecting brands online such as interactivity, connectivity, creativity, vividness, customisation, community, relevance, engagement (Cova et al., 2007; Coyle and Thorson, 2001; Christodoulites and De Chernatony, 2004). However, there is a need of systematising the primary dimensions of the OBE as perceived by the consumer. Hence, one of the primary tasks of the future paper is to reveal the most important dimensions around which brand equity is built online. The notion of online brand experience will be reviewed from the following perspectives: traditional branding theory from customer-based perspective (Keller,1993; Aaker, 1996), experiential marketing (Pine and Gilmore, 1998, 2000), and postmodern marketing (Brown, 1993; Firat and Venkatesh, 1993). The rationale behind this decision is the need of theoretical anchor in the research (traditional line), the focus on the experience (experiential perspective) and the need of an updated view of the contemporary consumer behaviour (postmodern marketing). The principal aim of a research paper would be to build an integrated conceptual model for the notion of online brand experience. In attempt to systematise the findings about the OBE and provide further theoretical clarity for branding managers and researchers the following objectives have been set:

- To explore the nature of the experience as a new notion for brand;

- To explore in detail the dimensions around which online brand experiences are built;

- To propose a theoretical model of online brand experience based on the above findings.

The exploration of the online brand experience and its main dimensions would be also the main object of the qualitative study to be undertaken as part of the future research. In accordance with the complexity of the explored area I am considering to employ the method of laddering interview. This qualitative technique has proven useful in allowing “the evaluation of ongoing experience” (Orsingher and Marzocchi, 2003) and “in uncovering insights related to the source and the nature of a brand equity” (Wansink, 2003). Furthermore, I have decided to use laddering since it allows in-depth research of the reasons for expressing certain attitudes. Unlike the factor analysis where the focus is more on the generalisation of gathered items as factors, successful laddering permits the discovery of the underlying values behind consumer behaviour. In order to thoroughly address the object of the study, a convenience sample of 20 respondents will be selected. One should keep in mind, that the purpose of the laddering method is not to be “representative of the population”, but rather to focus on the technique’s purpose – “to show how they [the respondents' answers] can be used to understand a brand’s equity” and to “find the root reasons for the consumer’s purchase” (Wansink, 2003).

The main question of the interview will refer to the dimensions around which online brand experiences should be built. In order to uncover the dimensions, the interviewers will probe according to the criteria recommended by Reynolds and Gutman (1988). Respondents will be asked to specify no more and no less than four dimensions. If fewer than four dimensions are given, questions such as “What other dimensions can you think of?” will be used for probing. Then, the respondents will be asked to state three reasons for each of the four dimensions. The result of this technique, known as hard laddering, will be 4 x 3 matrix of idiographic responses. During the hard laddering “[r]espondents are forced to fill a grid of predetermined dimensionality” (Orsingher and Marzocchi, 2003; Bagozzi and Edwards, 1998) and in this case each respondent will indicate up to 12 superordinate reasons and 6 linkages. After the content analysis of the results, these will be input in “Decision Explorer” and the formal output will be twenty individual causal maps. Additionally, a number of websites of renowned brands will be observed and a list of experience messages/promises will be compiled. In such a manner, the other side of the relation consumer-marketer will also be represented. As a result, dimensions and characteristics of the online brand experience will be gathered from three angles: literature review, consumer testimonials and observation of online branding campaigns.

A number of limitations would apply to such a research. One practical limitation of the hard laddering technique “is the forced directionality of the probing process: starting form the first level of stated attributes respondents cannot be probed downward (asking ‘what’) in addition to be probed upward (asking ‘why’)” (Orsingher and Marzocchi, 2003). Further obstacle to the generalisation of the qualitative results is the nature of the sample which could not be representative for the population. However, considering the purpose and the domain of the research it is unlikely that a statistically representative/reliable quantitative technique could be meaningfully used. Additionally, it is always possible that the respondents find it difficult to express their attitudes and feelings towards an issue.

Hence, unveiling the underlying values might prove a hard task. Another impediment is the different level of Internet awareness and usage among demographic groups. In other words, not everyone could be tagged as “Internet savvy”. Nevertheless, considering the fact that the awareness of Internet is higher among younger consumers, we may easily predict that the importance of the World Wide Web as marketing branding tool and communication channel will be even more significant in the future. In accordance with the set objectives I will select respondents who access Internet on a regular basis.

A potential conceptual obstacle could be the lack of agreed upon theoretical base for the notion of experience in the context of branding. Further impediment may be the fact that “the literature on internet branding ? is currently in a formative stage” (Simmons, 2007).

Another problem is the tendency of “[m]arketing communications in the e-business context” to go “beyond the traditional boundaries of marketing communications and marketing departments” (Rowley, 2004). In particular, we should bear in mind that the process of conveying brands as experiences is an anthropological phenomenon as much as it is a

technological one. Consequently, much broader view and an approach that accounts for the social, ethical, moral and philosophical shift in the contemporary western societies are required for the appraisal of the role of experience branding.

With regard to the ethical aspect of the research, I do not envisage any implicit pitfalls for the respondents participating in the survey. Nevertheless, the exploration of the notion of brand experience could entangle the issues of hedonism, narcissism, etc. and one should be careful during elicitation and translation of the results. The respondents will be informed about the purpose of the study and their responses will be anonomised so their identity is not revealed. I am aware of the political nature of the observed organisations and I will attempt to be unbiased and seek robust conclusions by the use of triangulation of data sources. In such a manner it will be more difficult for respondents to influence the results by inconsistent statements.

One of my first immediate actions will be a review of the major ideas in the field from all the aforementioned perspectives (traditional, experiential and postmodern). I will look for common threads which might help in achieving the objectives of the paper. I will also immediately begin the compilation of a list with URLs of major brands in several industries. Simultaneously with the compilation I will commence observation of the websites of the selected brands with the goal of eliciting and grouping messages/promises of particular experiences which are currently used in branding campaigns. These initial steps, along with the qualitative study, will aim at analysing the phenomenon of experience branding as: a new firm offering (the emotional core of the offer); a new notion for brand (reinforcing the brand effects beyond name and symbol); and a new process (executed online). The context of the exploration will be further defined by two general considerations: the possible substitution of the widely proclaimed marketing goal “to add value” (in order to win the customer) with a new one, i.e. “to deliver experience”; and the future role of the marketer – a screenwriter who “designs” the experience and leaves the

“directing” to the consumer.

Please help this research by completing the short survey.

http://boboxjordan.com/publicfolder/obesurvey/obe.htm



By: Boyan Yordanof

About the Author:

Caffeinated Content

Brand name,in a nutshell,is the essence of your business.If we follow the dictionary of business management brand is “a name, sign or symbol used to identify items or services of the sellers and to differentiate them from goods of competitors”.Simply speaking,brand is the image of the company developed in the mind of consumers.It helps customers to identify the company’s products or services from the others.

In this highly competitive business world it is essential to develop good marketing strategies and follow them religiously.Therefore,brand identity marketing is an essential part of the business.But there is a thin line between brand identity and corporate identity that one needs to understand in order to develop effective branding strategy.

Differentiate between Brand Identity and Corporate Identity

Brand identity is the total proposition that include the performance quality,services and support along with the promisesthe company makes to its customers.The brand can be perceived as a set of values that helps to acquire a place in people’s mind.Brand image is how people see the brand while brand identity is very much what the company wants their brand to be perceived by the consumers out there.

Corporate identity,on the other hand, can be translated into the visual aspects of a company’s existence.Building or reviving corporate identity entails modifying and modernizing logo,image designs and security aspects while keeping the core of the brand– that is,the name and image to its customers as it is.Unfortunately many companies get lead astray by various business consultancies while building their corporate identity.It is a misconception that changing logos,posters,advertisements and outlet designs of the company will help in popularizing brand.

Develop Brand Identity

There are several aspects of building and marketing brand identity.Systematic and practical approach can definitely earn you a good name to stand out in the constantly varying consumer world.To promote brand identity you can buy ‘brand kit’ that comprises logo,business cards,letterhead,envelope,brochure and most importantly website.All are uniquely designed to create distinct identity of your company.

Create a Personality

Branding can be given a personality to represent the business.If you are the sole owner of your business your brand name could reflect the positive sides of your personality while for joint ventures focus would be on consumer psychology and the quality of products and services.

Identify Unique Qualities

While exercising brand identity development find out and highlight some unique qualities of your products or services that will make you stand out in the crowd.

Remind Customers

Branding strategy implies creating an impression of your company with consumers and potential customers.Repeated use and display of the brand name definitely helps in constantly reminding consumers about your company and might kindle the desire to buy your products.Internet branding opens up multiple avenues to reach target audience and convey your product message in a cost-effective way.

Professional Approach

Apart from the creative side the brand needs to maintain corporate professionalism.Professionalism entails quality.Quality is the ultimate thing that the customers look for in your products and services.So,there is no better alternative to good service and quality products.

In reality,brand is that intangible association between company and the consumers that develops with time and creates a difference to the customers’ view towards the company.Changes to visual aspects of the business are not enough to change customers’ opinion regarding quality of products and services of a company.Such changes can only increase awareness and assure people about the company’s concern about it looks and presentation.Therefore,the key factor behind the success of brand is evolution and not revolution.



By: Steve McMains

About the Author:

Website content

Adidas + Yohji Yamamoto, Intel Inside + Compaq Personal Computer, D&G + Motorola, British Airways and Citibank, Adidas + McCartney, Mercedes and Swatch, Bacardi and Coca Cola, Danone and Quick, GOME and Motorola, Industrial and Commercial Bank of China and American Express…these are only few among the most famous examples of co-branding we have seen emerging in the latest years.

Is co-branding a new phenomenon? Not really. There are classic examples of this sort of branding strategy adopted by detergents and white goods brand as well as by oil brands and car manufacturers starting in the early nineteen sixties.

Until the eighties, however, since the value of a company had just been measured on the bases of its revenues and tangible assets, not many companies had really paid attention to any sort of branding strategy, not to mention co-branding strategy. It is only in the last thirty years that companies have understood that the real value of a business resides in the minds of its consumers: in the brand.

But how can co-branding enhance this value? Why do brands invest in interlocking their identities to create co-branded products?

Co-branding, as it has been defined by Tom Blackett and Bob Boad in their book (Co-Branding: the Science of Alliance, St Martin’s Press, 1999) is:

“…used to encompass a wide range of marketing activities involving the use of two (and sometimes more) brands. Thus co-branding could be considered to include sponsorships, where Marlboro lends its name to Ferrari or accountants Ernst and Young support the Monet exhibition.”

The ultimate objective of any co-branded strategy would be to combine the strengths of involved parties to increase respective brands value.

In order to be successful, the co-branding effort needs to be directed to:

1. Increase brands distinctiveness by capitalizing on the values embedded in the cooperating brands.

Product and services life cycle shorten by the day, and distinctive products and services features and innovations are easily copied among brands in the same industry. This is a reality of today’s business that co-branded products can withstand to. By merging values and identities of brands originally engaged in different industries, co-branded products and services can gain consumer choices, loyalty and ultimately make the brand unique and distinctive.

In this category Labbrand includes:

Loyalty programs co-branding, where the involved parties share the cost of customer loyalty programs or other CRM marketing programs to deliver extra benefits and eventually strengthen the relationship among consumers and the two brands

British Airways and Citibank, for instance, co-branded a credit card allowing the owner to automatically become a member of the British Airways Executive Club.

Trade marketing co-branding, where the involved parties cooperate in designing co-branded products made specifically for a certain distributor or facility. Danone provides a good example in this sense as it has produced a special yogurt for Quick, the European fast food chain.

By increasing their distinctiveness, involved brands get to occupy a unique place in consumers minds and eventually gain customer loyalty by providing them with merged benefits.

2. Deliver consumers greater value by creating highly relevant products or services:

Due to the increasing amount of choices available and in order to cut through all other offerings brands have to custom design added value products and services to meet variable individual needs.

As brands research and uncover these specific customers’ needs, they also find that a single brand may not be able to meet the demands of such profoundly segmented market.

In this category Labbrand includes:

Usage extension co-branding. Bacardi and Coca Cola, for instance have co-branded Bacardi Mixers range to demonstrate and spur other ways to consume the two brands.

Multiple sponsors co-branding, where more than two companies unify their effort to form a strategic alliance and create a specific co-branded technologically enhanced product.

Market niche co-branding.

Take for instance the cooperation between Adidas and Stella McCartney. This brought about a women-oriented, stylish and casual sport design collection: Adidas by Stella McCartney. This co-branded line manages to satisfy the demand of female buyers looking for sportswear that blends functionality and style while being able to deliver “products that both perform and look great”1

Moreover, having a high end designer create a sport range for women translated into practical benefits for both the collaborating parties: new consumers, willing to pay a premium to get the “special” sportswear, and buzz advertising around a range of products that was, back in 2004, the first ever sportswear collection signed by a high-end designer.

Look also at Smart car: a joint creation of Mercedes and Swatch designed especially for young consumers of big metropolis. In this case signatures of cooperating brands do not even appear on the car but in fact this is the result of each company’s specific expertise.

3. Increase the esteem consumers have toward participating brands

As consumers became ever more environmental and social aware it becomes essential for brands to create new touch points and build images consistent to the brand promise in consumer’s mind while aligning participating brand values.

In this category Labbrand includes:

Image reinforcement co-branding. A very good example to explain this form of co-branding can be seen in companies getting involved with NGOs to direct a percentage of their revenue toward a worthy cause. P&G and the National Association for Blinds, Starbucks and the African Wildlife foundation are just a few examples of companies cooperating with charities and fundraising organizations to align their brand values in consumers mind.

Co-branded in the luxury industry, Motorola mobile phone designed by D&G merges the image of the Italian luxurious brand with the high quality technological brand promise of the American mobile phone manufacturer.

Complementary brands co-branding, refers to brands in the same or complementary industries that cooperate to strengthen respective brand images in consumers’ mind. Credit cards such as Visa and Mastercard are a perfect example of complementary alliances as they merge the customer service skills of payment services franchisers with the image of reliability of banks.

Danone and Motta, both in the food industry, co-branded a yogurt ice-cream called Yolka that successfully satisfied the desires of healthy conscious gourmand and avoided direct competition to their respective brand portfolio.

Global co-branding, consisting mainly in alliances among MNCs and local players. Typically, the local player will provide an already established distribution network and local brand image while the MNC will bring technical know-how and international brand attachment.

For example, in 2004 Industrial and Commercial Bank of China and American Express Co. co-branded a credit card issued by the bank and bearing the American Express logo designed to sustain the nation’s effort to build a national credit-card system.

4. Increase the knowledge consumers have toward cooperating brands through the merger of each other’s strength in the respective domains.

In this category Labbrand includes:

Ingredient co-branding,whose appellation refers to the fact that a material,adding value ingredient is created by the cooperation of the two involved brands. This greatly increases the ultimate products value for consumers, and consequently the brand value in consumers’ minds.

Intel and Compaq Personal Computer, for instance, represent a perfect example of synergy in this sense as the value created in their cooperation is great and without it the ultimate value of the product will be tremendously diminished. .

Coopetition, as this has been defined by Brandenburger and Nalebuff in their homonym book (1996, Co-Opetition : A Revolution Mindset That Combines Competition and Cooperation), which dictates that in order to dominate the market companies may need to cooperate with and compete against the same company.

Examples in coopetion are found in the co-branded city cars Toyota Aygo, Peugeot 107, and Citroen C1 by Peugeot and Citroen launched in direct competition to the Ford Ka, the Volkswagen Lupo and the Mercedes/Swatch Smart

The direction co-branding takes should not be considered unambiguous but rather as a comprehensive value creation process that might combine one or all of the four co-brand equity enhancement process aforementioned.

Very often the value pursued by each party may be different from one other, and the benefits that are likely to be achieved by the parties are usually in more than one field.

Adidas and the Japanese designer brand Yamamoto, for instance, have successfully created Adidas Y3 by matching very different goals. In this cooperation Adidas benefits in brand image from the “coolness” of Yamamoto and steps into the style arena while Yamamoto benefits from the size and network of Adidas to increase brand awareness.

That being said, crossover branding cannot represent an easy made strategy for every brand. Such kind of cooperation needs careful coordination among the parties involved and attentive care in realization. In fact over 90% of co-branding ventures fail.

Co-branding must, indeed, create equal value for both cooperating brands. No cooperation based on an unequal relationship has proved to be successful.

Moreover, no co-branding strategy can be feasible if the brands involved do not share core values and brand belief with each other.

Interlocking two brands identities can indeed be tricky as you need to look at your brand message and make sure that its perception will not be diluted in consumers’ minds.

Otherwise, the brands original consumer can be lost and disputes may arise between the partners.

Co-branding needs careful coordination, attentive communication among parties and detailed performing analysis. This complicates day to day operations and can cause one or both brands to under perform and fail to meet each others standards.

Respective brand goals and objectives being brought to the cooperation should clearly coincide with each others ultimate partnership strategies.

With the increased sophistication of today’s consumers it becomes vital for brands to understand their audiences’ needs and desires as consumers decide, in fact, the life or death of a brand. Consumers in the 21st century have become increasingly aware of the quality of the products and services they seek and now search for added value in these items.

Crossover branding, if rightly conceived and managed, can provide an attractive 1+1>2 formulas which creates added value for both participating brands and consumers.

1.Bill Sweeney, Project Leader and Head of Apparel at Adidas Sport Performance Division.



By: Vladimir Djurovic

About the Author:

Caffeinated Content