Managing Brand Portfolios: How Strategies Have Changed

Brand Portfolio Strategy and Firm Performance

“…In particular, it has been suggested that owning a larger number of brands enables a firm to attract and retain the best brand managers and enjoy synergies in the development and sharing of specialized brand management capabilities, such as brand equity tracking, market research, and media buying (e.g., Aaker and Joachimsthaler 2000;Kapferer 1994); to build greater market share by better satisfying heterogeneous consumer needs (e.g., Kekre and Srinivasan 1990;Lancaster 1990); to enjoy greater power than media owners and channel members (e.g., Capron and Hulland 1999;Putsis 1997); and to deter new market entrants (e.g., Bordley 2003;Lancaster 1990). Conversely, the literature also suggests that larger brand portfolios are inefficient because they lower manufacturing and distribution economies (e.g., Finskud et al 1997;Hill, Ettinson, and Tyson 2005;Laforet and Saunders 1999) and dilute marketing expenditure (e.g., Ehrenberg, Goodhardt, and Barwise 1990;Hill and Lederer 2001;Kumar 2003). In addition, brand proliferation has been identified as a potential cause of weakened brand loyalty and increased price competition across many markets (Bawa, Landwehr, and Krishna 1989;Quelch and Kenny 1994), suggesting more potential costs associated with larger brand portfolios.…”

“…On the one hand, the literature suggests several performance downsides, including lower price premiums from channel members and consumers (e.g., Aaker and Joachimsthaler 2000), lower "bang for the buck" in advertising expenditures as a result of demand cannibalization among the firm's brands (e.g., Kapferer 1994;Park, Jaworski, and MacInnis 1986), and lower administrative efficiency as a result of duplication of effort (e.g., Laforet and Saunders 1994). However, the literature also indicates several benefits from intraportfolio competition, including competition for channel resources and consumer spending creating an "internal market," leading to greater efficiency and better resource allocations (Low and Fullerton 1994;Shocker, Srivastava, and Ruekert 1994); creating a barrier to entry for potential rivals (e.g., Scherer and Ross 1990;Schmalensee 1978); and mitigating the negative effects of variety-seeking consumers' brand-switching behavior on the firm's performance (e.g., Feinberg, Kahn, and McAlister 1992).…”

Effective island brand architecture: promoting island tourism in the Canary Islands and other archipelagos

“…In the area of tourist destinations, Blain et al (2005), after a review of the literature, define destination branding as a set of activities that (1) support the creation of a name, symbol, logo, brand, or other graphic that easily identifies and differentiates a destination (Aaker, 2004;Keller, 2003); (2) constantly transmit the expectation of an unforgettable holiday experience that is only associated with the one destination (Laforet & Saunders, 1994); (3) serve to consolidate and reinforce the emotional connection between the visitor and the destination; and (4) reduce consumer search costs and perceived risk (Wernerfelt, 1988). Collectively, these activities create an image of the destination that has a positive influence on consumer choice (Araña et al, 2016).…”

B.A.S.E. - A Brand-Architecture Strategy Explorer

“…Aaker and Joachimsthaler, page 123; Kapferer, page 209), as more closely integrated brand architectures such as C-branding or F-branding generally offer a greater degree of efficiency and effectiveness (e.g. Sylvia Laforet and John Saunders 1999). This is because synergy effects derived through brand awareness, brand image and brand trust as well as through the transfer of customer loyalty lead to reduced costs of brand communication per unit sold.…”