Riding Coattails: When Co-Branding Helps versus Hurts Less-Known Brands

Abstract

New brands often partner with well-known brands under the assumption that they will benefit from the awareness and positive associations that well-known brands yield. However, this associations-transfer explanation may not predict co-branding results when the expected benefits of the co-branded product are presented simultaneously with the co-branding information. In this case, the results of co-branding instead follow the predictions of adaptive-learning theory which posits that consumers may differentially associate each brand with the outcome as a result of cue interaction effects. Three experiments show that the presence of a well-known brand can weaken or strengthen the association between the less-known brand and the co-branding outcome depending on the timing of the presentation of product benefit information. When this information was presented simultaneously with co-branding information (at a delay after co-branding information), the presence of a well-known brand weakened (strengthened) the association of the less-known brand with the outcome and thereby lowered (improved) evaluation of the less-known brand.N ew brands face many obstacles including the need to generate awareness in an often crowded marketplace and to build unique brand associations that can help meaningfully differentiate the brand. To jumpstart the creation of these associations, new brands often leverage external entities (other brands, events, causes, countries, people, etc.) that already possess valued associations in the hope that these desired associations will transfer to the new brand (Keller 2003). The widely accepted explanation for why such secondary associations would transfer to the new brand is derived from associative network models of memory that

Working It: Managing Professional Brands in Prestigious Posts

“…In effect, organizations should regard their relationships with key personnel who hold prestigious posts as akin to a cobranding alliance (Parmentier and Fischer 2015) which both parties benefit from, even if the alliance is not a permanent one (Kupfer et al 2018). This strategy is consistent with cobranding research that highlights the high visibility of these alliances to stakeholder audiences (Cunha, Forehand, and Angle 2015), though they can vary in the degree of integration between the brands that ally, the duration of the alliance, and the exclusivity of the arrangement (Newmeyer, Venkatesh, and Chatterjee 2014). It would also be consistent with treating person brands such as celebrity endorsers as cobranding partners (e.g., Seno and Lukas 2007, Wilcox and Caroll 2011) and would recognize that an organization’s reputation is affected not only by the performance of the person while they hold a prestigious post, but also by that person’s standing in the broader institutional field after that particular post is over.…”

The added value of brand alliances in higher education

“…Subsequent empirical research draws from a number of different theoretical frameworks to explore how consumers form perceptions of a brand alliance; including composite concept formation (Park, Jun and Shocker, 1996), information integration theory and attitude accessibility (e.g., Simonin and Ruth, 1998), signalling theory (e.g., Rao, Qu and Ruekert, 1999), associative memory networks (e.g., Samu, Krishnan and Smith, 1999) and adaptive learning (e.g., Cunha, Forehand and Angle, 2015). As signalling theory, information integration theory, and associative memory networks represent the lion's share of empirical work on brand alliances, each domain is addressed briefly.…”

“…Associative network models assume that partnerships between brands disproportionally affect the less-known brand since it is relatively empty of associations and is primed to receive them from an established brand (Levin and Levin, 2000, Washburn, Till and Priluck, 2000). An alternative model of association development, adaptive learning, proposes that each partner brand may influence the degree to which the other brand is seen as responsible for the benefits the new co-branded product delivers, and could cause a dominant established brand to undermine the benefits of co-branding for the less-known brand (Cunha et al, 2015).…”

Factors affecting sportswear buying behavior: A comparative analysis of luxury sportswear

“…In this case, the interaction between the two brand cues tends to guide how people process the newly introduced brand (Sood & Keller, 2012). According to the "competitive cue interaction effects" in adaptive learning models, when one cue is present with greater salience or has already established associations, the association of the other cue becomes weaker (Cunha, Forehand, & Angle, 2015;Cunha & Laran, 2009;Kruschke, 2001;Pearce & Hall, 1980). In the case of a sports brand co-branded with a fashion designer, the sports brand possesses greater salience and established associations, because sports brands in general, relative to a fashion designer, have much wider appeal and popularity among the general public.…”