The strategic implications of clarifying how marketers interpret “brands”

Abstract

This paper is concerned with clarifying how brand strategies can be developed. By reviewing the evolution and rationale for manufacturer and distributor brands, it enables marketers to consider which branding route is most appropriate. Criteria to decide between being a manufacturer's brand or supplying distributor brands are addressed. To follow either of these routes the organisation must clarify its understanding of the brand asset and four broad interpretations are discussed. There would appear to be two key componenets characterising brands and through the use of a two dimensional matrix, a method to identify the type of brand and guide brand strategy development is presented. 157

The chasm between managers' and consumers' views of brands: the experts' perspectives

“…de Chernatony and McWilliam (1989) and McWilliam (1991) summarized four complementary, rather than alternative, views of brands that a consumer might hold.…”

“…This definition has been criticized by some as too mechanical (Arnold, 1992), too concerned with the physical product (e.g. Crainer, 1995), too input oriented, with little reference to manufacturers' strategic thinking or visions for the brand (de Chernatony and McWilliam, 1989) and failing to recognize that the brand acquires connotations in consumers' minds throught their experiences (Meadows, 1983). …”

The differences between branding a country, a region and a city: Applying the Brand Box Model

“…37 They argue that there are two key dimensions that could clarify the strength of a brand: representationality and functionality. The first dimension is built on the idea that consumers use brands to help them to express something about themselves.…”

Brand‐self identity narratives in the James Bond movies

“…Apart from the brand acting as a simple identification device, brands can potentially develop a distinct personality (Aaker, 1997) and even iconic status (Holt, 2002(Holt, , 2003, with a complex identity aligned with social and political issues. The semantic debate surrounding brands and branding continues (de Chernatony & McWilliam, 1989;Schutte, 1969;Stern, 2006), and, critically, Holt (2002 highlights that the understanding of what branding entails continues to evolve.…”