9789144116242 by Smakprov Media AB

Perspectives on brands and branding

Veronika Tarnovskaya & Jon Bertilsson (eds.)

Copying prohibited This book is protected by the Swedish Copyright Act. Apart from the restricted rights for teachers and students to copy material for educational purposes, as regulated by the Bonus Copyright Access agreement, any copying is prohibited. For information about this agreement, please contact your course coordinator or Bonus Copyright Access. Should this book be published as an e-book, the e-book is protected against copying. Anyone who violates the Copyright Act may be prosecuted by a public prosecutor and sentenced either to a fine or to imprisonment for up to 2 years and may be liable to pay compensation to the author or to the rightsholder. Studentlitteratur publishes digitally as well as in print formats. Studentlitteratur’s printed matter is sustainably produced, both as regards paper and the printing process.

Art. No 39374 ISBN 978-91-44-11624-2 First edition 1:1 © The authors and Studentlitteratur 2017 studentlitteratur.se Studentlitteratur AB, Lund Illustration: Lotta Bruhn Cover design: Jens Martin/Signalera Cover illustration: Ivaylo Ivanov/Shutterstock Printed by Lapaprint, Valmiera, Latvia 2017

CONTENTS

About the Authors 9 Introduction 13

Historical roots of brands and branding 14 The structure of the book – the tree of brand knowledge 17 References 22

Block I Brand Management Perspective

1 Brand Orientation: Managing Organizations from a Brand Perspective 25 C h r ist i a n Ko c h The brand orientation concept and its origins 25 Brand orientation frameworks 27 Key antecedents of brand orientation: Leadership and internal branding 30 Brand orientation in different contexts 32 Recent developments: Brand and market-oriented positioning 35 Conclusions 41 References 42

Contents

2 Corporate Brand Identity and Image: To Align or Separate – This is the Question 45 V e ron i k a Ta r novsk aya What is the best way to develop a strong corporate brand? 45 Corporate brand identity and image revisited 46 Theories of corporate brand alignment – it is all about gaps 49 Can misalignment be good for a brand? 53 Is a middle ground possible for a corporate brand? 56 Conclusions 60 Questions for discussion 60 References 61 3 Brand Equity and the Brand Value Chain: What it is and How to Use it in Practice 65 Joh a n A nse l m s s on a n d N i k l a s B on de s s on A growing interest in brand equity 65 The brand value chain 66 Three insights into the brand value chain 69 How the brand value chain can be used – 4 steps to a revenue-focused branding process 74 Conclusions 79 References 80 4 Loyalty-based Brand Management 83 Joh a n A nse l m s s on Understanding brand loyalty 83 Managing customer loyalty 89 Conclusions 103 References 103

Contents

5 Cultural Branding 107 C l a r a Gusta fs s on Cultural branding – the strategy of iconic brands 107 Cultural branding practices – what brands are doing this, and why? 108 Why study cultural branding – and why these two models? 110 Description of Holt’s (2004) structure of the myth market model 113 Description of Holt and Cameron’s (2010) cultural innovation theory model 117 Critique of cultural branding 123 Conclusions 124 References 125 6 Branding Strategies: A Stakeholder Approach 127 G a l i na Bi e de n bac h Branding strategies 127 Classical branding theories: A company-centered approach 129 Contemporary branding research: A stakeholder approach 133 Conclusions 138 References 140

Block II Consumer Perspective

7 Brands, Consumer Choice and Decision-making 145 K a r i n M . E k st röm a n d M a rc us Gi a n n e s c h i Everyday life with brands and choices 145 Three perspectives on brands and decision-making 146 The neoclassical perspective 146 The psychological perspective 151 The sociological perspective 153 Conclusions 159 References 161

Contents

8 Consumer-brand Relationships 165 Jon Be rt i l s s on The complexity of consumer-brand relationships 165 Consumer–company identification 166 The Brand Relationship Quality Model 173 Conclusions 182 References 184 9 Collective Consumer-brand Phenomena 187 Gry Høng sm a r k K n u d se n Theoretical roots of consumer collectives 188 Consumer tribes 191 Brand communities 192 Offline and online collectives – does it matter? 196 Conclusions 198 References 200 10 Brand Culture: In Search of Identity 203 M a rc us K l a s s on Identity within social theory 203 Brands and the construction of identity 207 Constructing identity: Four perspectives 209 Conclusions 218 References 219

Block III Critical Perspective

11 Brand Co-creation – Consumer Empowerment and Exploitation 223 C e ci l i a C a s si nge r Co-creating brand meaning 223 The managerial perspective – designing the co-creation experience 224 The community perspective – negotiating brand meaning 228 6

Contents

The critical perspectives – labouring under the brand 230 Conclusions 234 References 235 12 Making Sense: A Practical Guide to Speaking About Brands 239 Se a n Du f f y What are we talking about? 239 The problem: Fuzzy terminology breeds fuzzy thinking 239 Solution: Steps towards a unified vocabulary 245 Broader implications: The brand in context 252 Conclusion: Coming to terms 260 References 264 13 Marketing Megalomania: The Madness of Brand Management 265 Pet e r Sv e ns s on Vagueness, irrationality, madness 265 From marketing myopia to marketing megalomania 267 Conclusions 275 References 279 14 Brand as Violence 281 S of i a U lv e r Can a brand be violent? 281 Brand as symbolic violence 282 Brand as vessel of violent relations 288 Conclusions 294 References 296 Epilogue 299

CHAPTER 3

Brand Equity and the Brand Value Chain: What it is and How to Use it in Practice Joh a n A nse l ms s on a n d N i k l a s Bon de s s on

Keywords: brand equity, price premium, brand image, brand management

A growing interest in brand equity Many brand managers have long since established the desired core values for their brand, but are still not sure whether they differentiate themselves enough from their most daunting competitors, and whether their brand actually helps to boost sales of their products. This chapter describes a basic brand equity framework for understanding how brand management can create customer value and shareholder value. The chapter starts by describing a conceptual framework and ends with four concrete issues and one case to demonstrate how the brand value chain can be used. These days, no one questions scientific research or other claims that point to the fact that strong brands grow faster, are more profitable, and enjoy better reputations than their weaker counterparts. These are some of the primary reasons why interest in brands has increased these past few years. Recent research also shows that strong brands boast higher stock prices and attract employees and leaders, along with boasting superior financial stability over time to weaker brands (Madden, Fehle, & Fournier, 2006; Simon & Sullivan, 1993; Tavassoli, Sorescu, & Chandy, 2014). Despite this knowledge, far from all companies work strategically and systematically towards connecting the branding process to revenues. And even fewer have a deeper understanding as to how their brand in particular creates value, and exactly what made their brand strong in the first place. And ultimately, what can make it even more valuable tomorrow. They may see the revenues, profitability, job applications, and the stock price, but not ÂŠ â&#x20AC;&#x2030;T h e au th o rs an d S t u d e ntlitt e rat u r

Block 1 Brand Management Perspective

quite understand how these come together. A major reason is that they lack the proper models of thought, systems, and analytical tools to tie the branding process to the business itself. This leads to a serious risk of losing their way and prioritizing the wrong things and building blocks in the branding process. In this chapter we present ”the brand value chain”, a model and working method for identifying business strengths and weaknesses in one’s own brand as well as threats and opportunities presented by competitive brands. The new, and unique, aspect of this system is that it connects the soft aspects of the branding process, such as image and emotions, with the harder aspects that matter at the end of the day: revenues and market share. Tied to this model we also present some key findings we believe to be intriguing to any company attempting to build a stronger brand, as well as a few mistakes and pitfalls we have noticed companies struggling with in the process of analyzing and managing their brands. The paper is founded on international research and a number of scientific projects on brand equity that have been conducted at Lund University since 2004. Consulting projects for more than 100 brands and companies such as Alfa Laval, Axis, Axfood, Procordia, and IKEA have been added into the mix. The work also rests on interviews with over 100 brand managers, and surveys of more than 30,000 consumers and business-to-business customers spread across 25 countries in four continents.

The brand value chain The brand value chain, sometimes called brand equity chain, is a model that has been developed over the past 15–20 years in research on the link between brand building and the bottom line (Feldwick, 1996; Keller & Lehman, 2003; Srivastava & Schocker, 1991; Wood, 2000). This particular version (Anselmsson & Bondesson, 2013, 2015) is one that we have found works best. It is simple, understandable and makes communication specialists, marketers, sales people, and strategic managers speak and think in the same way. From a theoretical point of view, it resonates well with traditional psychological models that attempt to understand the mind and the related behavioral effects. Brand image refers to specific customer perceptions related to a certain brand, ”the sources of influence of the brand” (Kapferer, 2004, p. 14), or ”the associations and beliefs the consumer has about the brand” (Feldwick, 66

3 Brand Equity and the Brand Value Chain: What it is …

BRAND

IMAGE

STRENGTH

VALUE

What target customers think

What target customers do

What the company gets back

Brand awareness and familiarity

Volume premium

Revenues

Brand associations

Price premium

Figure 3.1 Brand value chain.

1996). There are no behavioral or intentional components in the brand image concept; it captures only what customers are thinking or feeling. Keller (1993), who has provided the most detailed and widespread conceptualization of brand image, relies heavily on theories borrowed from psychology and, most importantly, on the ”associative network memory model” (see also Anderson, 1983; Collins & Loftus, 1975). According to Keller (1993) a brand functions as a node in the memory of the customer, to which a variety of other nodes (brand associations) are linked. Aggregating a certain brand’s associations among customers creates what is also commonly referred to as a brand’s image (Keller, 1993). Brand awareness and familiarity constitute the base of a brand’s image and, in addition, both functional performancerelated associations and more abstract or emotional associations matter. Brand strength has been defined as customers’ reactions or responses to the brand (Keller & Lehmann, 2003) and can, at a conceptual level, be seen as a global construct dealing with a brand’s overall health. Put very simply, brand strength deals with how customers behave or intend to behave, while image deals with how customers think. Brand strength is very much related to brand loyalty. On a more detailed level, there are various ways in which consumers evaluate and respond to brands (see Hoeffler & Keller, 2003), and a great number of specific elements and measures can therefore be found in extant research. Some of them reflect behaviors and other attitudes, and these other attitudes can be divided into purely affective responses and conative responses (or intentions to behave; Back & Parks, 2003). In the © T h e au th o rs an d S t u d e ntlitt e rat u r

Block 1 Brand Management Perspective

present model, brand strength is conceptually constituted by two major types of response: target customers’ willingness to buy (volume premium) and willingness to pay a price premium compared to other brands (see also Ailawadi, Lehmann, & Neslin, 2013). These two responses are fundamental for a brand’s ability to generate revenues and thus make the brand valuable. Brand value is here a conceptual term for the different forms of economic value a brand can create for a brand-owning firm (Persson, 2010). When it comes to specific measures of brand value, extant work is not very consistent; different writers have different suggestions (see Feldwick, 1996; Srivastava & Shocker, 1991). Anselmsson and Bondesson (2015) operationalized brand value as price premium actually paid by customers, sales per year, and sales growth per year in both volume and value. Anselmsson and Bondesson (2015) divide brand value into three dimensions: 1) Enhance, which is a factor of volume and price, 2) Accelerate, which is the growth pace in total sales, and 3) Sustain, which is about the ability to retain current customers and their sales. The point of the model is very simple: What the target group knows, feels and thinks about a brand (the sum of all the associations makes up the brand’s image) determines the extent to which they want to buy and are willing to pay a premium price for the brand (the brand’s strength), which in turn determines its economic value to the company owning the brand (in terms of revenues). That brands have a particular image and can be valuable is, of course, not news, but the unique aspect of this model is that it puts the spotlight on the two types of brand-related behaviors that create revenues: that the target group wants to purchase more (volume premium) and is willing to pay more (price premium). A brand is thus only strong when it helps a company to sell more units and/or command a higher price tag per unit. Being liked or famous, or having a positive image, can certainly contribute to this strength, but is in itself economically worthless. In contrast to many other brand models, the brand value chain has a clear focus on how brands can contribute to companies making more money by creating higher revenues. This is, no doubt, the reason it has been met with curiosity from business leaders and other key positions within companies (for example controllers, business developers, CEOs, heads of sales, and HR executives in the case of personnel-based industries) that are not directly involved in marketing and communication. The brand value chain works as a model of thought and a foundation for 68

3 Brand Equity and the Brand Value Chain: What it is …

further discussions. The greatest benefit will be derived from it, however, when it is used as an analytical tool to guide market research and analysis of different kinds. The challenge for businesses will be to figure out how the value chain will be applied to their specific brand and industry, yesterday, today, and tomorrow. In other words: What type of image will render our target market likely to buy and pay more, to leave us with higher revenues? Once the answer to this question has been figured out, making strategic decisions will be easier; not only in regard to brand positioning and advertising, but also to pricing, innovation, distribution, and even HR. From the research we have conducted and the consulting projects we have been through, taking the brand value chain as a central starting point, we could provide a long list of interesting findings. But we have chosen instead to focus on those aspects we feel have been most neglected and on how students and managers of the future can improve brand building.

Three insights into the brand value chain 1. Strong brands are founded upon both hard and soft building blocks Put simply, brand image (i.e. associations to the brand in target customer memory) can be divided into hard and soft, respectively (see also Keller, 2001, on brand performance and brand imagery). The hard entails quality-related aspects that meet the customer’s functional needs, and are often related to the core product or service. Examples include the shelf life of bread, the performance of cars, the durability of a TV, the formal competence of an audit firm, or the breadth of a supplier’s product line. The soft side is not specifically related to what the product or the service is expected to do for the customer, but rather about how the brand – or the company behind it – is perceived and appreciated in abstract terms. Or the personality it is seen as having – for example prestigious, amusing, caring, or inspiring. In almost all the studies we have conducted, it has become evident that the soft aspects have as big, if not bigger, an impact as the hard. In other words: They are more successful at persuading consumers to purchase and pay more for products from one particular brand than others. Some people find it strange that, to take an example, the quality of the core product is of no real importance. But in many markets, there is in fact no great difference in the quality of the physical product among the major brands, especially in © T h e au th o rs an d S t u d e ntlitt e rat u r

Block 1 Brand Management Perspective

mature markets. And it would in all probability be difficult for consumers to make any physical distinction. How many could actually determine whether the technology of an Electrolux dish washer is superior to a Miele – especially while standing in the store trying to make a choice? When all brands are deemed to be of equally good – or poor – quality, this is, quite simply, not crucial for the choice. Nevertheless, it is important to emphasize that brands in general, and image specifically, are about the subjective perceptions of the target group. Whether a product de facto possesses a superior physical quality or not is less important, which is why the brand perspective has such an inherently strong customer focus. Examples of soft aspects that have proved vital in our studies include ”energy and spirit”, that is shown to be the most revenue-driving in a particular travel industry. Or ”warm and caring” and ”inspiring and positive”, that are among the handful of strongest driving associations (out of 25) for a certain kind of food, trumping things like ”quality”, ”good value for money”, ”tasty”, ”healthy”, and ”fresh”. And for an industrial B2B company, ”fun to work with” was shown to have a larger impact on customers’ willingness to purchase, and willingness to pay, than perceived product and service quality. Over and over, we find, when studying both consumers and professional buyers, that decisions are driven by emotions, but motivated and justified by rational reasoning. However, when it comes to our studies on how companies work with brand building, we can only conclude that the soft characteristics tend to fade into the background. When asked about which building blocks are used to construct a strong brand, one in three brand managers says product quality, but only one in twenty mentions some form of emotional or soft aspect. The same goes for measurement and progress follow-up, where 64% measure perceived quality, but merely 45% measure any emotional association to the brand, and only 22% some form of brand personality (Anselmsson & Bondesson, 2013). One of the reasons why the softer characteristics are forgotten is that we have come to rely too much on asking the target group direct questions, such as ”What is important when you choose X?”. The replies are seldom ”social status” or ”the brand’s personality”, since few are aware of, or even want to admit, that they are influenced by that. Instead, projective methods of asking questions and statistical analyses of deeper explanations should be used. 70

3 Brand Equity and the Brand Value Chain: What it is …

2. The social role of brands is underestimated One particularly important, and often forgotten, soft building block in branding relates to the social role of brands, and it therefore deserves a thorough discussion. The social role, simply explained, can be expressed in two ways. Firstly, how we buy, use, or want to be associated with specific brands to signal a certain identity or status, towards ourselves or those in our surroundings (See also Belk, 1988; Elliot & Wattanasuwan, 1998). Generally speaking, this is most commonly associated with luxurious lifestyle brands, such as fashion, but our studies show that social status matters within all industries. Looking at everyday purchases, as an example, there are a number of retail chains that are perceived to be, to all intents and purposes, exactly the same in most regards. The only factor separating them, and explaining why a retail chain does not reach its anticipated market share, is social status. Or, rather, the lack thereof, as shopping in one of the chain stores would be seen as somewhat embarrassing. The same thing applies on product level: there are few brands of rice that will increase your status among your peers, but we know that some consumers avoid purchasing rice from, for example, Euroshopper, a retail brand that has now disappeared from the Swedish market, which did not resonate with the image customers wanted to hold of themselves, or to signal to others (which also explains why some people did buy Euroshopper rice, only to pour it over into a glass container) (Anselmsson, Bondesson, & Johansson, 2007). The point is that status matters not only in positive ways, but also in negative. It can be seen as a sort of ”embarrassment factor”. And brands that have been hit with such a stamp of embarrassment will have a very hard time swaying new customers to their cause, no matter what changes they make to the physical offering. Even in B2B settings, status matters. A study of suppliers of steel showed that it was more important for the purchasers to be associated with the prestige of a supplier, than what actual product quality, and expertise in steel, the supplier could offer. The other social role of the brand is to bring us together and create a sense of belonging. Apple, Mini Cooper, WB-40, and Harley-Davidson are common examples of brands that have spawned an explicit brand community. Members of such communities can meet up and associate face-to-face in real life, but a brand community can also have a more psychological character, in the form of a ”sense of belonging”. A study of mobile phone © T h e au th o rs an d S t u d e ntlitt e rat u r

Block 1 Brand Management Perspective

brands showed that sense of belonging was more important for the choices of the target group than an array of functions such as camera, flash, music player and touch screen. This psychological feeling of belonging has proved to be important within B2B as well, where, on a tactical level, it can be built on everything that can be offered to customers, from golf tournaments and other customer events, to newsletters, seminars and formal education. Caterpillar, as an example, has been successful in building a community that both customers and employees alike want to be a part of. When it comes to our studies, extensive research into suppliers of packaging material and office furniture has shown that this aspect has far greater importance when professional purchasers choose products from one particular brand than aspects such as delivery capability and guarantees. All in all, the social role of brands is somewhat underestimated. It is not merely relevant for lifestyle products and brands with extreme loyalty, such as Apple and Harley-Davidson, but is often an unexploited opportunity for positioning. Nevertheless, our studies show that only about three in ten companies systematically measure and evaluate what social role their brand plays. In comparison with international firms, Swedish brands are even further behind the curve, boasting only one in ten (Anselmsson & Bondesson, 2013). 3. Volume and price premium have different driving forces – it is often diverse things that lead customers to purchase and pay more for a brand Ever since we started discussing brands some 30 years ago, it has been clear that the sign of a strong brand lies in its ability to allow for premium pricing over competitors. Nonetheless, and even though issues of price tend to be part of everyday life in most companies, they are often left outside the strategic analysis and decision making of the brand. Talk such as ”if we increase prices, we will lose customers”, or ”we can’t raise prices since it is the trade or our suppliers who ultimately decide upon final prices and price premiums”, is prominent. In many cases, this is of course true to a certain extent, but this does not take away from the significance of creating an understanding of what customers are willing to pay for the brand, and most importantly, what can influence them to pay more – never mind if a brand can, or intends to, command a higher price. If they can influence customers to be willing to pay more, yet refrain from increasing prices, they have charged their brand with more value for money. 72

3 Brand Equity and the Brand Value Chain: What it is …

As our studies show, completely distinct associations cause customers to choose and pay more for a brand, respectively. Also, aspects driving price premium in most industries are of the softer character. What typically influences customers to be willing to pay more is that brands are cool (mobile phones), sophisticated (travel), inspiring, fun (foods), creative and exciting (steel suppliers), or that they produce advertising that resonates with the target group. The willingness to buy (volume premium), on the other hand, is more often driven by factors closer to the core product or service function, and has to do with reliability and risk reduction. Or being perceived as good value for money (mobile phones), genuine (foods), down-to-earth, having a good market reputation (steel suppliers), or radiating ”you-know-whatyou-get” (travel). Being perceived as too unique, on the other hand, can be negative from a volume perspective, which is interesting considering how valued the term differentiation is. Depending on the business and branding strategy the company has adopted, different aspects may need to be brought up to the surface – which is a unique and vital point in the brand value chain, where brand strength is defined as the ability to sell volume (volume premium) and command price (price premium). And those who want to both sell more and charge higher prices need to charge their brand not only with an aura of reliability and risk reduction, but also with excitement and inspiration. One brand that succeeds with this is Nike. The problem, however, is that most brand managers tend to ignore price premium, or view it as inferior to volume premium. Branding or customer surveys regularly show what influences customers to prefer a specific brand (measures such as consideration set, purchase intention, and preference) but rarely touch upon the willingness to pay of target customers (Anselmsson & Bondesson, 2014). In one of our studies of brand managers, only four out of ten stated that they measure and evaluate the willingness to pay for their particular offerings (Anselmsson & Bondesson, 2013). Our experiences as consultants tell us that even fewer Swedish companies really do this, as none of the companies we have been in contact with is working with a strategic and systematic analysis of the brand price premium. Not only do they risk ending up with an incomplete understanding of what drives revenues in the market, but they also risk losing out on attractive opportunities for revenue growth. One of the benefits of price premium, in particular, is that it essentially © T h e au th o rs an d S t u d e ntlitt e rat u r

Block 1 Brand Management Perspective

comes ”free”, meaning that it does not cost more to command a higher price tag in the same sense that it is more expensive to produce or distribute larger volumes.

How the brand value chain can be used – 4 steps to a revenue-focused branding process 1. Understand the revenue-driving associations of the market The first step the company can take is to create an understanding of all customer perceptions that drive revenues, in the form of volume and price premium, in the market. The goal is to identify all the individual associations that influence the target group to choose to buy and pay more, respectively, for a particular brand in the market (Fig. 3.2), and which of these are owned by different brands in the market. This can be done through various market research methods and analyses, such as interviews, focus groups, and surveys. When consumerbased data of this kind is combined with sales or market share data, it is called econometrics, a method that is fairly unusual among Swedish companies.

Drives price premium (makes customers pay)

Local presence

Delivery performance

Personal service

Inspires its customers Exciting

Friendly

Product expertise Product quality

Which brand owns the position? Brand A Brand B No brand (free)

Works closely together with its customers

Trustworthy

Drives volume premium (makes customers buy)

Figure 3.2 Brand image drivers of volume and price premium on a given market.

3 Brand Equity and the Brand Value Chain: What it is …

Indeed, most companies carry out market research, but what distinguishes a sound and relevant analysis is that it (1) creates a complete understanding, and (2) has a clear connection to real-life revenues. This can be done only by identifying both hard and soft image building blocks, alongside insight into what drives choice (volume premium) and willingness to pay (price premium) for brands in the market. It is not enough to include the kind of hard aspects that often tend to be the focus of customer satisfaction and quality surveys – that leaves us in possession of only half the map. Softer characteristics such as brand personality, social status, a sense of community, or emotional associations have to be included in order to make the map complete. Neither is it sufficient to rely on rules-of-thumb or general models that claim to have all the right answers for all markets; the company must recognize exactly what matters to their unique market and brand. After all, we do not buy rice in the same way as we purchase a TV, or choose a hotel. Fortunately, there are statistical tools, such as the multiple regression analysis, that can assess the extent of the understanding, on a scale from 0–100% (Fig. 3.3) that they capture in their traditional brand survey. The brand-owning company should understand how many percent of their revenues they can explain. In our experience, many companies have a misunderstanding regarding what drives their sales. They tend to listen to their sales people or market researchers who hear from customers every day that it is all about price and quality. If we ask a customer, would they say that they purchase a car based on what their neighbor has, or would they state quality and price, or even the combination of the two? Would they ever say that it is all about the brand? 2. Identify the revenue-driving assets of the brand Having created an understanding of the type of image that normally drives the revenues in the market, for all brands, one must distinguish the strengths and weaknesses of the specific brand. This may also sound like something that most companies already do, but the point is to identify the strengths and weaknesses that drive and restrict real revenues – not just how they are perceived in general. One would hope the brand enjoys some form of unique asset that drives revenues today – and by that we mean that the brand has a unique position in the marketplace that drives the willingness to purchase and willingness to pay in the right direction. Whether some © T h e au th o rs an d S t u d e ntlitt e rat u r

Veronika Tarnovskaya, associate professor and researcher in corporate branding and marketing strategy at School of Economics and Management, Lund University. Jon Bertilsson, PhD, lecturer in marketing and consumer researcher at School of Economics and Management, Lund University. Book chapter contributors: Christian Koch, Johan Anselmsson, Niklas Bondesson, Clara Gustafsson, Galina Biedenbach, Karin M. EkstrĂśm, Marcus Gianneschi, Gry HĂ¸ngsmark Knudsen, Marcus Klasson, Cecilia Cassinger, Sean Duffy, Peter Svensson, and Sofia Ulver.

BRAND THEORIES Perspectives on brands and branding Brand Theories offers a multifaceted understanding of brands and branding. The purpose of the book is to provide the reader with a more advanced knowledge, by treating brands and branding from three different perspectives: a brand management perspective, a consumer perspective, and a critical perspective. By allowing readers to shift perspectives, the book offers the unique opportunity to analyze and understand brand phenomena/branding practices from several angles at the same time. It thereby encourages a more reflective and nuanced approach, compared to many traditional brand management text books. Brand Theories primarily targets bachelor and master students in marketing, but would also be most interesting and useful to marketing and branding practitioners.

Art.nr 39374

studentlitteratur.se