Defining A Brand PDF

Joumai otMarketing Management 1998,14,417-443
Chematonvand Defining A "Brand": Beyond The

S^T^ Literature Wim Experts'
StaoRUey interpretations
There are many dettnitions of tiie "brand", yet a
comprehensive theory of the brand constmct is still
Open Untversify missing. This paper is a step towards deveioping a
Business Schooi theory for the brand constmct Through analysis of
the literature and focused interviews with 20 ieading
Kingston Universify edge brand consuitants, we propose a concept of the
Business Schooi brand as a multidimensional constwct, matching a
firm's functionai and emotional vaiues with the
performance and psychosociai needs of consumers.
Introduction
In common with other areas of research in marketing (e.g. brand "loyalty"), there
is a plethora of definitions of the "brand". Apart from tiie lack of an established
terminology in marketing research, "so many dettnitions make it difficult and
hazardous to compare, synthesise, and accumulate findings, (KoUat et al., 1970
p. 329). Pss, a consequence, "incondusive, ambiguous or contradictory findings
are the mie rather tiian the exceptioif (Jacoby and Kyner, 1973). Additionally,
and in spite of Churchill's (1979, p. 67) plea that "the researcher must be
exacting in the conceptuai specification of the constmct and what is and what is
not inciuded in the domairf, authors have failed to fully develop the brand
construct and its boundaries. As a result a theory of the brand remains missing.
Specifying the domain and the boundaries of tiie constmct is the first step
towards developing a theory of the brand which satisfies Zaltman et al.'s (1973)
formal, semantical, methodological and epistemological sets of criteria for tiieory
evaluation.
Developing a theory for the brand and setting the boundaries of its constmct
is beneficial also from tiie point of view of evaiuating possible redundancy with
other constructs, e.g. witii the brand attitude construct as later discussed. Singh
(1991, p. 257) contends: "// is not usefui to have muitipie constivcts that tap a
similar underlying phenomenon witiiout explicitly understanding the nature and
extent of the redundancy between tiie competing constructs. In his view, if
redundancy issues are not addressed, substantial confusion can persist As a
first step towards redundancy evaluation, Singh advocates the need to integrate
previous research and posit precise definitions that represent tiie most
defensible view of the construct
On these premises, the aim of this paper is to lay the foundations for
establishing a theory of the brand. To satisfy this, we followed Churchill's (1979)
and Singh's (1991) recommendations, and undertook a comprehensive brand
definition literature review which this paper opens with. By next examining
ISSN0267-257X/98/050417+26 $12.00 ©Westbum Publishers Ltd.
418 Leslie de Chematony and Francesca Dall'Olmo Riley
these definitions for any similarities we were able to consider issues of
redundancy, enabling us to better define the brand construct and set what we
perceived as its boundaries. One of Zaltman et al's (1973) criteria for evaluating
a theory is the confirmatory criterion that the theory should cohere with facts.
As such the next part of the paper describes the focused interviews we
undertook to compare the interpretations from twenty leading-edge brand
consultants, whose daily activity is shaping tiie current and future agenda for
brands. This compiies with Hunt's (1990) contention that theories should "truiy
'say something' about the world' (p. 11). A shift in emphasis from a notion of
brands as logos to a more integrated view as the matching of a firm's functionai
and emotional values with the performance and psychosocial values sought by
consumers emerges from this analysis. We conclude by discussing the
implications for branding strategy.
Definitions in the Literature
We content analysed over one hundred articles from trade as well as from
academic joumals, providing a broad and rich perspective of the range of
definitions used. Over 8096 of the articles reviewed were published in the 1980s
and 1990s, refiecting not only the increased interest on brands as valuable
assets In the late 1980s-earIy 1990s, but also the debate on tiie "death of the
brand" in the mid-1990s.
As a result of the content analysis of this literature, we identified twelve main
themes which we thought were an accurate categorisation of the broad range of
definitions of the "brand" in the literature, i.e. as: i) legal instrument; iO logo; iii)
company; iv) shorthand; v) risk reducer; vi) identity system; vii) image in
consumers' minds; viii) value system; ix) personality; x) relationship; xi) adding
value; and xii) evolving entity. The categorisation into the twelve themes was
fairiy straightforward, since most authors used buzz words such as "personality"
or "relationship" either in the definitions themselves, or in the discussion of tiieir
view of the brand. As we discuss in more detaU in beiow, there is some overlap
among the elements of different definitions, which are therefore not mutually
exclusive. However, the twelve themes represent a categorisation of the most
important propositions in the branding literature. Various academic disciplines,
such as consumer behaviour (Assaei, 1995), strategy (Hamel and Prahalad,
1994) and marketing management (eg Kotier et al, 1996; Balmer, 1995)
underpin this literature.
1) Brand as a legal instrument

At its simplest branding could be defined as a legal statement of ownership
(Crainer, 1995), or as adopting a mark to designate legal ownership (Broadbent
and Cooper, 1987). This is the origin of the term "brand", as encapsulated in the
Oxford English Dictionary definition: "A particuiar sort or dass of goods, as
indicated by the trade-marks on them?
Branding represents an investment and consequently firms seek legal
ownership of title, as protection against imitators. For example, part of the
branding strategy for Absolute Vodka sti^esses the importance of continually
monitoring competitors' brand activity, to quickly stop any firm adopting this
Defining a "Brand" 419
name or bottie design.
Trade-marks are an important asset but their value depends on the abilify to
protect them from infringement (Simonson, 1994). Legislation offers some
protection (e.g. 1994 Trade Mark Act), but look-alike own labels (Kapferer, 1995)
are evidence of the limited scope of the legislation (Lea and Murphy, 1996).
if) Brand as a iogo.

The traditional deflnition of a brand, proposed by the American Marketing
Association (AMA) in 1960, derives from the concept of the brand's logo and
visual features as a basis for differentiation, i.e.:
'A name, term, sign, symbol or design, or a combination of them, intended to
identify the goods or services of one seiier or group ofseiiers and to ditterentiate
them from those of competitors?
Many (e.g. Watkins, 1986; Aaker, 1991; Dibb et al, 1994; Kotler et al, 1996)
strictly adhere to this definition. Others add variants on the theme of the brand's
visual features as differentiating devices (e.g. Koch, 1994). The distinctive
"golden arch" of McDonald and the "X" of Halifax pic. are notable examples of
brands instantiy identifiable through their logos.
Researchers have criticised the above definitions as too preoccupied with the
product (e.g. Crainer, 1995) and too mechanical (Amold, 1992). It is limiting
because it focuses only on the firm's input activify of differentiating by means of
a name and a visual identify. As Meadows (1983) observed, consumers are not
passive recipients of brand marketing activify, and thus branding is not
something done to consumers, but rather something they do things with. No
reference is made eitiier to the managers formulating any strategic thinking or
vision for the brand, or to it acquiring connotations in consumers' minds.
iii) Brand as a company.

It has been argued that due to growing competition from own-labels and
spiralling marketing costs, an instantly recognisable corporate identify is vital
(The Economist 1994). By "borrowing" the equify accmed by the corporate
name, product lines become an extension of the corporate personalify, as
Barclays exemplifies with its portfolio of financial services offerings which all
carry the Barclays name. This implies tiie CEO becomes responsible for the
health of the corporate brand (Vick, 1993).
The advantage of considering tiie company as the brand is the opportunify
for achieving a coherent focus across tiie brand portfolio and conveying
consistent messages to all stakeholders. However, any problems with the
organisation's reputation can taint the image of its products.
iv) Brand as a shorthand

For consumers, brands act as a shorthand device of functional and emotional
characteristics, enabling rapid recall of information in memory and speedier
purchase decisions. With grocery superstores typicaUy stocking 20,000 lines,
brands such as Mars succeed by displaying only a littie information on their
packaging, which enables consumers to rapidly recall associations with the
brand. For Brown (1992):
"a brand name is nothing more or iess than the sum of all the mental
connections peopie have around it"
As brand names provide memory shortcuts (Jacoby et al., 1977), time-
pressed consumers are more inclined to buy brands with names they recognise
(Chevan, 1992).
The interpretation of the brand as a shorthand device recognises how the
myriad of marketing activities are integrated in the consumer's mind to form the
brand entity. However, from a strategic perspective, this does not enable the
marketer to decide which particular attributes should be developed and strongly
associated with the brand's name.
v) Brand as a risk reducer

Consumers perceive risk when they buy products or services (Bauer, 1960).
An understanding of the dimensions of perceived risk enabtes marketers to
present their brands to instil consumer confidence (Assaei, 1995). For example,
acting as a guarantee of consistent quality, a brand reduces performance risk. A
Hewlett Packard press advertisement showing a man on a piank extended out
of the 40th story of a skyscraper with the caption: ''and for his next trick he'll
buy a PC without proper support sought to present this brand as a no risk PC.
This theme is related to the concept of the brand as a contract between the
organisation and the consumer (Staveley, 1987; Kapferer, 1995).
vf) Brand as an Identity system.

Highly critical of the "deconstmctionist" perspectives of the brand as a legal
device and as a logo (McWilliam, 1993) is Kapferer (1992), who defines a brand
in holistic terms, i.e.:
"A brand Is not a product It is tiie product's essence, its meaning, and its
dtection, and it defines its identity tn time and space.... Too often brands are
examined through their component parts: the brand name, its logo, design, or
packaging, advertising or sponsorship, or image or name recognition, or very
recentiy, in terms of flnanciai brand valuation. Real brand management,
however, begins much earlier, with a strategy and a consistent, integrated
vision, its central concept Is brand identity, not brand image:" (p. 11)
The definition of brands as iogos and Kapferer's view represent two
extremes. The former is itemised, almost a check list of the elements necessary
to create a brand (e.g. Kotler et al, 1996), the latter emphasises the brand's
identity as a stmctured whole of six integrated facets of culture, personality, self-
projection, physique, refiection, and relationship. Whilst some of these elements
overlap with other definitions (e.g. personality), Kapferer's contribution is to
stress the importance of the concept of the brand as more than the sum of its
parts.
The new tail plane designs of British Airways is an example of the new
visual design reflecting the organisation's identity changing to become more
multi-culturally sensitive and striving to offer better customer service.
The role of brand identity as a means of developing brand positioning is a
theme frequentiy addressed by both practitioners (e.g. Olins, 1989; Smytiie et al,
1992; Bona, 1994; Burke, 1994; Haggin, 1994; Prinz, 1994; Wilson, 1994) and
academics (e.g. Balmer, 1995; Aaker, 1996). Developing an identity not oniy
protects against competitors, but also enables firms to reap economic gains
(Fombrun and Shanley, 1990). A carefully managed identify system helps
managers reinforce a meaning behind a brand for consumers. It also
communicates the essence of the brand to other stakeholders and encourages a
more strategic approach (Diefenbach, 1992).
The weakness of defining a brand as an identify system is being over-reliant
on the flrm's input activities, since identify relates to the desired positioning and
not how it is perceived, i.e. the brand's image.
vll) Brand as an Image In consumers'minds.

Boulding (1956) was one of the early authors drawing attention to the
commercial importance of image, arguing that people do not react to realify, but
to what they perceive as realify. This raises an interesting philosophical point
about "realify", which social theorists argue is socially constructed (e.g. Weick,
1979). While this issue was not explored in depth by Boulding, his contribution
draws attention to cognitive psychology, in particular perception theory, to
explain differing interpretations of the same stimulus. Building on this,
Martineau (1959) described brands as images in consumers' minds of functional
and psychological attributes. The evolution of a more consumer centred
perspective on the meaning of brands is exemplified by Newman's (1957)
definition of brand image as everything people associate with a brand, and
Pitcher's (1985) view that a brand is a consumer's idea of a product
Numerous examples can be found of authors adhering to the concept of
brands as associations in consumers' minds (e.g. Joyce, 1963; Amold, 1992;
Keller, 1993), succinctly expressed by Keeble (1991) as: "a brand becomes a
brand as soon as it comes in contact with a consumef (p. 170).
Adopting an image deflnition of a brand forces management to face the
challenge of perceptual filters changing consumers' opinions. As the disparify
between the brand identify and its image becomes notable, it triggers
management to change their strategy, as shown by Dutton and Dukerich's
(1991) analysis of the Port Authorify of New York and New Jersey. On the other
hand, managing a brand from an identify perspective addresses the problem of
all employees having to act in a coherent and consistent manner with each of
the firm's stakeholders. Yet effective brand management needs to balance
supplier activities with consumers' perceptions. Gardner and Levy's (1955)
definition is couched within a dyadic identity-image perspective, i.e.:
"A brand name is more than the label employed to ditterentiate among the
manufacturers of a product It is a compiex symboi that represents a variefy of
ideas and aUributes. It tells the consumers many things, not only by the way it
sounds (and its literal meaning Ifit has one) but, more important, via the body of
associations it has buiit up and acquired as a public object over a period of
timer (p. 35)
The strength of this deflnition is that hy balancing identify and image,
managers should be better able to avoid two pitfalls identified by Kapferer
(1992). These relate to either being over reliant on consumers' views about how
they would like their brand to evolve ("excess of democracy"), or restricting the
brand's evolution by not appreciating what aspects of the brand can be changed
("excess of code"). Park et al. (1986) clarify that the relationship between a
brand's concept and its image can be managed over its life, through a process of
selecting a general brand concept (functional, symbolic, or experiential) then
introducing, elaborating and fortifying the concept over time. The notion of
"brand concept" is akin to that of tiie brand as a "yalue system", as we discuss
below.
vill) Brand as a value system

Values are a subject of notable interest as shown by references to "core
brand values" in the trade (e.g Thrift 1997; Beckett 1996; Southgate, 1996) and
academic literature (e.g. Cook, 1995; Meenaghan, 1995).
The concept that consumers' decisions are influenced by personal and
cultural values is central to consumer behaviour theory (e.g. Reynolds and
Gutman, 1988; Engel et al., 1993). For example, Clark (1987) remarks that
consumers find value in the brand, in its heritage, in their personal experience
with it and in how it reflects what the individual stands for. One of the reasons
for the success of First Direct is its foundation on values such as customer
respect openness and getting it right first time.
Sheth et al. (1991) identify five possible values characterising brands and
influencing choice, showing that brand choice decisions are made with the aim
of satisfying specific consumer values. Under this perspective, individual brands
are representations of unique clusters of values.
The strength of this definition is that it challenges the organisation to take
into consideration not only the functional capability of the brand, but also the
relevance to consumers of symbolic vaiues and meanings imbuing the brand.
In Clark's (1987) words, "values provide the important link between consumers
and marketers^".
ix) Brand as a personality.

Since competitors are able to emulate or leapfrog brands' functional
advantages (Lambin, 1993; The Economist 1993), one way to sustain their
uniqueness is through stressing psychological values, using options such as
advertising and packaging. This differentiates brands in terms of their symbolic
values, such as association with tiie kind of people using them (e.g. Keeble,
1991). For example, a few years ago consumers were asked to personify the
Lurpak brand of butter. The descriptions given showed that it was equated to a
very successful, but too refined and stand-offish person, lacking immediacy and
friendliness. As a consequence, the packaging was changed to incorporate a
fine silver stripe and italic script to enliven it and add warmth. After the change,
consumers described the brand as a successful, intelligent healthy man in his
forties tofifties,who commands respect
This theme has given rise to a considerable volume of research defining
brands as symbolic devices with personalities that users value beyond their
functional utility (Alt and Griggs, 1988; Blackston, 1992; Arnold, 1992;
Goodyear, 1993). When choosing between competing brands, consumers assess
the fit between the personalities of the brands and the personality they wish to
project (Zinkhan et al., 1996). As evident from this review, the topics of
personality and vaiues are inter-related (Gutman, 1982), with personality being a
sub-set of value constellations.
Plummer (1985) raises the point of semantic confusion between personalify
and image. In his view, the brand's personalify is primarily the result of the
firm's communication, whilst image is the way consumers perceive the brand's
personalify.
In addition, as a strategic tool, Aaker (1996) describes brand personalify as a
metaphor which
"can help brand strategists by enriching their understanding of peopie's
perceptions of and attitude toward the brand, contributing to a differentiating
brand identify, guiding tiie communication ettori and creating brand equify!^ (p.
150).
x) Brand as a reiationship.
Having a respected personalify is a pre-requisite for a relationship between
consumers and brands (Duboff, 1986; Woodward, 1991). A brand relationship is
a logical extension of brand personalify (Blackston, 1992) and if brands can be
personified, then consumers would not just perceive them, but would also have
relationships with them (Kapferer, 1992; Blackston, 1993). In other words,
consumers would not just have an attitude towards a brand, but the brand
would have an attitude towards tiie consumer. The growing recognition of, and
respect for each otiier's personalify would lead to a strong bonding and attitude
reinforcement along wifli repeat-usage. American Express is an example of a
company which used this concept of the brand as a relationship to position itself
as tlie "not everybody's card". Its advertising portrayed American Express to be
offering //:? status, authorify and power to the card holder, by showing only well-
known and important people as the likely bearers of the card.
In view of the increasing importance of relationship marketing, Amold (1992)
rejects the AMA definition, arguing instead that the brand is the expression of a
relationship between consumer and product
Thus, within the perspective of relationship building, a successful brand
would be characterised as having a special relationship between the customer
and the company (McKenna, 1991).
)d) Brand as adding vaiue.

Concepts such as "added value" are cited in the literature as means of
differentiating brands, achieving competitive advantage, and possibly charging a
premium price. For example, recent advertising campaigns for American
Express have majored upon the added value of their customer service staff, as
yet another benefit in addition to being a globally accepted charge card.
However, because this term has been used in so many different contexts, its
meaning has become rather elusive.
Jones (1986) and King (1973) define added value as the non functional
beneflts over and beyond a product's functional characteristics. This differs from
the economics perspective of the "added value chain model" (e.g. Durand,
1993). A further perspective is the consumer behaviour literature, for example
Hirschman and Holbrook (1982), whereby consumers imbue a product with a
subjective meaning in addition to the fUnctionai characteristics it possesses. As
such, new "layers of meaning" evolve (Hirschman, 1980) over and beyond
utilitarian attributes.
Jones (1986) argues that the added values are the most important part of the
deflnition of a brand, differentiating between a product (sometiiing witii a
functional purpose) and a brand: "A brand is a product that provides functionai
beneflts plus added values that some consumers value enough to buy {p. 29).
Similarly, others point out that brands are bought because consumers
perceive benefits through enhancement of core products or services, i.e. brands
are:
"an Identiflable product, service, person or place augmented In such a way
that the buyer or user perceives relevant unique added values which match
their needs more closely" {Ae Chematony and McDonaid, 1994 p. 18).
Thus, brands are said to add value to products (Murphy, 1992). The concept
of the "augmented-product" is not new. For example, almost 30 years ago Levitt
(1969) argued: "f The Manufacturer/ must surround his generic product with a
cluster of value satisfactions that differentiates his total offering from his
competi'tors" {p.2).
xii) Brand as an evolving entity.

Several writers (e.g. Young & Rubicam, 1994; Goodyear, 1996) categorise
brands according to their evolution. Goodyear (1996) bridges some of the
definitions of brands through her chronological categorisation. Specifically, she
sees brands evolving from "unbranded commodities, to "referenced where the
name is used for identification, akin to the AMA definition. This appears
particularly prevalent in business to business branding, especially for
"commodity like" products such as stationery. Brands then develop into a
"personality, offering emotional appeals besides product benefits, for example
the implied status of the Jaguar owner. At each stage, the emphasis of the brand
gradually shifts from the firm to consumers. At the fourth stage, the consumer
"owns" the brand, which acquires "icoif connotations, as in the case of Levi
jeans. A further progression is "brand as company, focusing on a distinct set of
corporate "brand values" that permeate organisations, for example Virgin. The
ultimate stage,"brand as pollcf, stands for social and political issues relevant to
consumers, as with the Body Shop.
This framework is useful for analysing the different brand definitions
reviewed. However, it suffers from:
(i) Lack of criteria marking transitions between stages;

(ii) The typology is underpinned by increasing consumer experience, but
does not explicitiy stipulate how to categorise this;
iii) The elements which are important at the earlier stages of a brand's
development do not cease to be relevant later. For example, the
functional characteristics of the brand are still important although they
might be taken for granted, at the final stage of "brand as policy \
iv) The evolution of the brand is lefl; too much to the initiative of the
consumer, suffering from Kapferer's "excess of democracy". Recognition
is needed of the organisation's role;
v) Empirical verification is not apparent
Emerging Brand Constract
We used the twelve themes identified in the literature as the starting point for
setting the boundaries of the brand constmct Our first step was to analyse the
definitions so we could identify any commonalities and differences regarding the
antecedents of the brand and its consequences for brand strategies. By drawing
on the discussion of such similarities and differences, we then considered issues
of redundancy with similar constructs. This enabled us to better deflne the
brand construct itself and set what we perceived to be its boundaries, based on
the analysis of the literature.
However, it should be realised that though comprehensive, no coverage of
the literature can ever be thoroughly exhaustive, hence additional literature
might have produced further themes. Moreover, the proposed constmct is based
on a necessarily subjective interpretation of the literature.
Antecedents and Consequences of the Brand Construct in the Literature

As already mentioned in the literature review, the twelve themes are not
entirely mutually exclusive and there is a certain degree of overiap among the
tangible and intangible aspects of the brand assumed by each deflnition. The
analysis that follows brings out the bases for such overlap.
Following Singh's (1991) approach, in Table 1 we summarise the antecedents
and consequences of the brand constmct as emerging from the deflnitions
reviewed in the previous section.
This highlights similarities and differences in the antecedents and
consequences of the extant deflnitions. These overlaps suggest definition
redundancy (Singh, 1991). For example, definitions such as "company, "identify
systenf, "imagff, "valuesystenf,"personaiitf, "reiationshiff and "added vaiud'
share the common antecedent of the brand's personalify. There are also
similarities in the consequences from various definitions. For instance, the
definitions of the brand as "company and as " identify systenf both refer to tiie
coherent message communicated to the brand's stakeholders.
The notions of the brand as a "iegai instrument!, a "iogd", a "company and
an "identify systenf also share a common orientation, in terms of a firm, or
"input" centred orientation (de Chematony, 1993). The first two definitions focus
on the brand name and on the logo as "antecedents" to legal and visual sources
of differentiation, devoid of deeper meanings. However, the consequences differ,
as the legal instmment enables prosecution of infringers, whilst the logo enables
recognition. The definitions in terms of "company" and "identity adopt a wider
perspective whereby, when considering antecedents, the organisation embeds
the brand's visual identify with meanings which have different levels of
abstraction. The "company" definition stresses the corporate name, and lower
and higher levels of brand meaning can be identified. At the iower end, firms
may promote their corporate name primarily to facilitate differentiation. In
contrast a higher level of abstraction results in managing specific associations,
such as the firm's culture, its value proposition, and particular customer
relationships (Aaker, 1996), enriching the decision and consumption experience.
Finally, the notion of the brand as an "identify systenf represents the highest
level of abstraction of these "input-based" set of definitions referring, as a
Table 1. Antecedents and Consequences to the Brand Construct
Brand
Antecedents Consequences
definition
\. Legal Mark of ownership. Name, logo. Prosecute infringers.
instrument design. Trademark.
2. Logo Name, term, sign, symbol, design. Identify, differentiate through
Product characteristics. visual idenflty and name. Quality
assurance.
3. Company Recognisable corporate name and Evaluate over long dme horizon.
image. Culture, people, programs Product lines benefit from
of organisation deflne corporate corporate personality. Convey
personality. CEO is brand consistent message to
manager. stakeholders. Differentiation:
proposition, relationship.
4. Shorthand Firm stresses quality not quantity Rapidly recognise brand
of information. associadon.
Facilitate information processing,
speed decisions.
S.Risk Confidence that expectadons Brand as a contract
reducer being fUlfllled.
6. idenaiy More than just a name. Holistic, Clarify direcdon, meaning,
system structured with six integrated stratfigic posidoning. Protective
facets, including brand's barrier. Communicate essence to
personality. stakeholders.
1. Image Consumer centred. Image in Firm's Input activldes managed
consumers' mind is brand "reality". using feedback of image to
change idendty. Market research
important Manage brand concept
over dme.
8. Value Consumer relevant values imbue Brand values match relevant
system the brand. consumer values.
9. Personality Psychological values, Differendadon from symbolism:
communicated through adverdsing human values projected. Stress
and packaging define brand's added values beyond functional.
personality.
10. Consumer has atdtude to brand. Recognidon and respect for
Relationship Brand as person has atdtude to personality. Develop reladonship.
consumer.
U. Adding Non funcdonal extras. Value Differentiate through layers of
value satisfier. Consumers imbue brand meaning. Charge price premium.
with subjecdve meaning they Consumer experience. Percepdon
value enough to buy. Aesthedcs. of users. Belief in performance.
Enhanced dirough design, mfr.,
distribudon.
12. Evolving Change by stage of development
entity
consequence, to the brand's holistic strategic direction as the source of brand
positioning.
The antecedents of the next seven brand definitions i.e. "shorthand", "risk
reducer", "imagff, "vaiue system", "personality, "relationship" and "adding
valuff blend the input of the firm with an "output" consumer perspective (de
Chematony, 1993). A common characteristic is that the brand's name and logo
are considered as more than mere legal and visual identifiers, and represent the
set of experiences and associations that consumers have acquired over time as
a result of organisations' activities. As Poiesz (1989) noted, increasing levels of
abstraction of brand meaning may be attributed to the notion of tiie brand as
"Image!" in consumers' minds, since there is no accepted deflnition of image.
Different authors refer to images in varying ways, ranging from holistic, general
impressions (Poiesz, 1989), to very elaborate evaluations of brands' attributes
(Keller, 1993). By blending an input/output perspective, the deflnition of the
brand as "Imag^ implies that the flrm's activity can be managed using feedback
of image to change identify. The highest level of abstraction among this set of
input/output definitions is achieved by the concept of the brand as "value
systenf which transforms the usage experience through the subjective
meanings the brand represents for consumers.
Another common antecedent of the Image", "value system", "personality",
"relationship" and "adding vaiud" definitions is the theme of tiie brand's
personalify. It was an antecedent also in two of the "input-based" definitions
reviewed eariier, i.e. it was one of the six facets of brand identify (Kapferer,
1992) and it personified the culture of the company brand. However, whilst in
the two input-based definitions the brand's personalify was considered as a
firm's creation, here it is consumer centred, resulting from consumers projecting
human values onto brands.
A common consequence of deflnitions numbered 6 to 12 in Table 1 is the
notion of differentiation through symbolism. However, the extent to which
symbolism is used as a means of differentiation depends upon the level of
abstraction of the brand antecedents. For example, whilst a consequence of the
brand as "personaiity perspective is the opportunify to achieve differentiation
through the human values projected onto the brand, the concept of the brand as
a "relationship goes one step further, implying a proactive role of the brand
towards tiie consumer, stipulating necessary characteristics of the brand's user
and developing a mutual relationship between the brand and the consumer.
The ultimate stage is the "value systenf definition, which refers to the body of
beliefs and group norms tiiat have been internalised by individuals (Engel et al.,
1993) and tiiat are expected to imbue the chosen brand.
Setting the Boundaries of the Brand Construct

As a consequence of the above considerations, the "brand" is a
multidimensional constmct whereby managers augment products or services
with values and tiiis facilitates the process by which consumers confidentiy
recognise and appreciate these values. The likelihood of repeated use is
enhanced when consumers' feedback is monitored and used to better tune the
value constellations to consumers' needs.
Recognising that there are numerous stakeholders with an interest in a firm's
brand (e.g. govemment shareholders, suppliers, etc.), the above discussion of
the antecedents and consequences of the brand constmct highlights that two
key stakeholders are the firm's staff and consumers. While not all brand
definitions consider both stakeholders, every brand theme takes the perspective
of either the firm's staff or the consumers (or both) in determining tiie
antecedents and tiie consequences of the brand. Hence, the firm's activities
(input) and consumers' perceptions (output) emerge as the two main boundaries
of the brand construct setting the "sine qua noif condition for the very
existence of the brand itself The brand exists mainly by virtue of a continuous
process whereby the values and expectations imbued in the brand object
(product or service) are set and enacted by the firm's staff and interpreted and
redefined by the consumers, so that:
BRAND
FIRM'S INPUT CONSUMERS'

PERCEPTIONS
The model above is a simplified representation' of the cyclical process through

which the brand becomes the interface between the firm's activities and
consumers' interpretations. For example, the brand is positioned by the firm
through the elements of the marketing mix, which work together to convey a
pre-determined brand identity and personality. These are perceived by
consumers in ways which are coherent with their self-images, and their
functional and emotional needs. By monitoring consumers' perceptions of the
brand, the firm's input can be either rectified (to close any gaps with consumers'
perceptions), or reinforced, along the aspects which are more relevant to
consumers.
While the firm's input and consumers' perceptions are the two main and
necessary boundaries, a number of elements lie at each end of the boundaries
of the brand concept
For the firm, these elements are the features and beneficial attributes imbued
in the brand (see Leflcoff-Hagius and Mason, 1993). In addition, as encapsulated
by several of the earlier definitions, marketers may choose to stress symbolic,
experiential, social and emotional values (Park et at, 1986; de Chematony and
McWilliam, 1989; Sheth et at, 1991). Since these attributes and values are used
to characterise and differentiate the brand, they are inside the brand construct
By themselves, however, the attributes and values set by the firm are
insufficient to define the brand constmct which is at a higher level of
' A parallel can be seen in the iiterature on managerial sense making which shows how
managers are able to manage complexity through developing models which simplify
complex issues by reducing them into a smaller number of parts (Schwenk, 1988).
abstraction and also relates to qualify and values as perceived by tiie consumer,
as we next discuss.
From the consumers' side, central to the concept of the brand is the
constmct of brand image. Dobni and Zinkhan (1990, p. 118) define brand image
as: "iargefy a subjective and perceptuai phenomenon that is formed tiirough
consumer interpretation, whether reasoned or emotionai? Kirmani and Zeithaml
(1993) have a more precise perspective and describe it as a multidimensional
constmct incorporating perceptions of qualify, value, attitude as well as brand
associations and feelings. In their configuration, perceived qualify can affect
brand image eitiier directly or indirectly, through the mediators of brand attitude
and perceived value. Its antecedents are lower level attributes referring to
functional properties of the brand ("intrinsic cues") and atti-ibutes such as price,
brand name, level of advertising and warranfy which are extemal to tiie brand's
functional characteristics ("extrinsic cues") (Zeithaml, 1988). Perceived value is
tiie consumer's overall assessment of the "utilify" of a brand, based on
perceptions of what is received and what is given (Kirmani and Zeithaml, 1993).
As inputs to brand image, perceived qualify and perceived value are within the
boundaries of the brand construct They help deflne the brand constmct from
the consumer's peispective, and provide feedback enabling firms to fine tune
their brands' values.
With regards to brand attitude, Kirmani and Zeithaml (1993) regard it as a
mediator between perceived qualify and brand image. However, there appears
to be redundancy (Singh, 1991) between the constmcts of brand attitude and
brand image, since Kirmani and Zeithaml describe tiiem both as including
affective and cognitive interpretations of the brand. It is also not clear why, in
their configuration, perceived value should influence brand image and not
brand attitude. Indeed, many authors (e.g. Joyce, 1963 and 1967; East 1997)
make no distinction between the constmcts of brand image and brand attitude,
defining them both as the set of associations a brand has acquired for an
individual. Following Joyce (1967) we do not make any distinction between
brand attitude and brand image, which are redundant constructs.
Research Aim and Methods of Analysis
Our aim in this study was to contribute to the formation of a theory of the brand.
Among the set of epistemoiogicai criteria specified by Zaltman et al. (1973) for
evaluating theories, is the confirmation criterion, i.e. that the theory should
cohere with facts. Earlier we developed a theory of the brand grounded
partially in scholarly articles and books and partially in the management press.
We now needed to assess the coherence of such theory with current branding
realify. Reviewing the management press indicated that the evolution of new
pragmatic ideas in branding is predominantly led by consultants. Through their
daily activities, consultants are in touch with a wide variefy of branding
problems, thus tiieir knowledge of brands is broad and their thinking reflects
best brand management practice. In contrast relatively few brand managers
were cited in the management press as influentiai brand thinkers. In fact many
authors were critical of brand managers' lack of vision and understanding of
branding principies (Mitchelt 1994; Low and Fullerton, 1994; Freeling, 1994).
430 Leslie de Chematony and Ftancesca Dall'Olmo Riley
In view of their considerable branding expertise and knowledge, it is
appropriate to understand how leading-edge brand consultants, whose daily
activity is shaping the future agenda for brands, interpret them. To our
knowledge no previous research has undertaken a comprehensive and
structured analysis of tiie concept of the brand from tiie perspective of
"experts". Therefore, in the second part of the study we sought to explore:-
experts' understanding of brands, to contribute to the development of the theory
of the brand.
This stage of the research corresponds to Churchill's (1979) "experience
survey", whereby a judgement sample of people is used to gather ideas and
insights into the phenomenon.
As we wished to uncover as wide a perspective as possible, we followed
Gordon and Langmaid's (1988) suggestion and undertook 20 focused interviews.
To qualify, respondents had to be senior consultants in agencies which
specialise in advising clients about brand marketing issues. They needed to be
sufficiently well recognised for their brand consulting expertise that they
frequently present at management conferences on branding, or had written
books or papers on branding for management joumals, or be recommended by
other experts, albeit only two of the twenty respondents were chosen through
recommendation. The 20 consultants were either chairmen, partners, or
directors in brand consultancies (9), advertising agencies (7), market research
agencies (2) and corporate communications agencies (2). They were all involved
with branding projects on a national and intemationai scale. Interviews were
undertaken in or around London, mostly at tiie premises of each agency,
between January and March, 1996.
Given the nature of tiie research, the most appropriate approach was to
conduct qualitative focused (or semi-structured) interviews (Sampson, 1967).
This allowed us to elicit experts' views within their frames of reference, without
imposing any of our preconceptions. A topic guide was used to steer the overall
interviewing process, whereby at the beginning of the interviews all respondents
were asked: "How would you deflne a 'brand'?". We did not wish to taint
respondents thinking and thus deliberately kept the questions broad,
encouraging them to develop their own arguments. Respondents were
encouraged to talk as much or as littie as they wished, with no intermptions on
our part, except when we thought we needed clarification of what they meant
Their answers varied in length from a couple of lines of ti^anscribed text (1
respondent) to three pages (I respondent). The modal length of responses (10
experts) was less than one page of text
The focused interviews were recorded, then subsequently transcribed. Each
of the authors worked through the transcripts and, as recommended by Miles
and Huberman (1994), Independentiy analysed the contents of the Interviews by
developing coding frames to appreciate how each of the comments related to
the definitions identified in the literature review. Whenever an expert's
comment did not seem to reiate to any of tiie definitions in the literature, a new
category was added. After the two separate analyses had been undertaken, the
results between the two authors were compared and the coefficient of
agreement G.e. the total number of agreements divided by the total number of
coding decisions) was calculated as 8496. Where disagreements occurred these
were discussed and an agreed view adopted (cf Miles and Huberman, 1994). A
limitation that might have been introduced by the two authors analysing the
transcripts this way is that their preconceptions from the literature may have
influenced their coding frames. Ideally independent coders should have been
employed, however our approach is common practice in qualitative market
research (e.g. Gordon and Langmaid, 1988), not least because of time
limitations.
Experts' Definitions of the "Brand
While several experts had to pause for thought all were able to give definitions.
Below we report the main findings from the interviews, we compare them with
previous literature, and advance a series of propositions relating to the brand
construct
Relating Experts' Views to the Twelve Brand Theme Definitions

We compared the experts' definitions with tiie twelve themes earlier
reviewed, to classify each expert's comments into tiie categories reported in
Table 2.
The top part of Table 2 shows the number of experts who mentioned
deflnitions concurring with the themes identified in the literature. All the themes
from the literature review were mentioned. It was rare for the experts to
mention just one theme. Some referred to different interpretations of brands,
such as the "naive-complex" spectmm which will be discussed in tiie next
section. Otiiers gave definitions that span several themes. Averaging across all
consultants, each mentioned 2.4 of the twelve literature branding themes.
The value system, personalify, image and logo themes were most commonly
mentioned. Interestingly, the former three themes encompass both the input and
output perspectives, depicting brands as recognition devices which evoke
values and images and acquire meanings through their unique personalities. For
example: "Brands in my definition are brands ilke Marmite, iike Benetton, iike
Virgn, that have got a reai understanding of tiie key associations that form
those Iconsumersl perceptions more powerfuiiy, that are what I wouid cail
values. That understand those values, that categorise tiiem appropriatefy, that
measure them and communicate them." (brand consultant). An advertising
consultant spoke about "peopie find it much easier to see a brand as a totai
personaiify, and use the analogy of a brand as like a persorT and another
advertising consultant explained that a brand "creates the Illusion, in tiie mind
of the consumer, tiiat I am dealing with one tiling, with which I can have a
relationship. When I am dealing with Bardaycard I am deaiing with one thing
caiied Bardaycard, for which the best anaiogyis a person, aithough I know it is
not a persorT.
In the boti:om of Table 2 three new themes emerged, relating to positioning
and to having a vision binding a brand's values, for example: "I Brands 1 aiso
have some kind of vision which binds those vaiues together, gves them
meaning, but aiso gives them impetus and direction" {hrand consultant). Finally,
a brand consultant mentioned the element of goodwill: "At the very bottom [the
brand/is Just tiie name... But of course the name carries with it a huge amount
ofgoodwill (brand consultant).
Table 2. Categorising Experts' Definitions of "Brand"

Themes from Number of experts Illustrative explanation
literature mentioning
Value system 11 "Real brands have an
understanding of values that
characterise them"
Personality 10 'The personality surrounding a
product or a service"
Image 9 "The way an object is perceived by
consumers"
Logo 8 "A set of visual features animated
by advertising"
Risk reducer 5 "It means that I know what I am
getting from one purchase to the
next"
Company 4 "The perception [off that the
organisation is trying to engineer
and maintain and achieve"
Adding value 4 "Added values, qualities beyond
product performance"
Shorthand 3 "Ail we know, leam, taste,
experience about the brand over a
long period of time"
Legal instmment 3 "A trade-mark in use"
Identity 3 "A form of identity"
Relationship 3 "A relationship with a customer or
a consumer"
Evolving 3 "Can mean different thing for
different people In different
scenarios"
Number of experts niustradve explanation
Additional themes mentioning
Positioning "The attributes which are made to
adhere to a product in order to give
it attractiveness"
Vision "[Brands! have vision and purpose
to give them meaning to
consumers"
Goodwill 1 "Accumulated weight ofgoodwill"
We attempted to apply Goodyear's framework of brands as evolving entities to

tiie experts' definitions but we found problems fitting every definition to the
specific stages in Goodyear's framework tiiat was reviewed in Section 2. Firstly,
Goodyear's spectmm does not explicitly stipulate how to categorise specific
levels of consumer experience or expectations. Secondly, we encountered
definitions that could be categorised at several points on this spectmm.
These findings lead us to postulate:
Proposition 1: Due to the complex multifaceted nature of brands,

practitioner draw on several themes to describe them, in particular brands
as value systems.
Whether All Experts hadthe Same Brand Definition
From the literature about the way people use mental models to help them
understand complex issues (e.g. Brown, 1994; Day, 1992; Morecroft 1992), and
in view of the complexify of brands, we expected brand consultants to have well
developed mental models to understand them From the multiplicify of
definitions in the literature, we thought it unlikely that every brand consultant
would have the same definition. However, in view of the fact that the brand is
consultants' common focus of interest they might adhere to similar brand
concepts. From the previous section, when examining the experts' responses, no
one identical definition emerged. However, we could identify some common
themes.
As discussed earlier, the twelve literature themes varied, among otiier things,
by the extent to which they focused on the brand's tangible (e.g. name, logo,
visual features) or intangible elements (e.g. personalify, symbolic elements,
added values beyond functional elements). As a consequence, one way of
characterising the experts' definitions is the extent to which they regarded
brands as being tangible or intangible entities. The most tangible perspective
was given by a brand consultant defining a brand as "a set of visuai features,
animated by advertising and promotion, which symboiise a product or service
and which are used in various ways to identify if. Tliis definition stops short of
imbuing the brand with any symbolic values, or "personality", beyond its
physical appearance. Indeed tlie same consultant continued: "branding /../ has
to do with the seiecti'on and biending of the various visuai elements of the
brand. In order to produce something which is attractive, distinctive and
ditterentiated from competitors'brands in that particular market place!" Another
brand consultant adopted a far more intangible perspective of the brand as a
cluster of values "with a vision that binds those values togethef. Virtually all
(18) stressed brands' intangible nature, and half of these linked the tangible
component to the intangible, e.g. "Trade-mark that has acquired a personalify
talt (brand consultant), "a badge or name..... that everything spins front
(advertising consultant).
These replies indicate that the brand's visual features are insufficient to
define the brand constmct While experts considered the brand's name and logo
as an antecedent they stressed that it is the intangible element -"a sori of net
accumulated weight ofgoodwill (brand consultant) - which gives brands "a sori
of forward momentum that keeps them going (same brand consultant).
This contention is reinforced by the finding that only one expert had a
definition that came close to the AMA 1960 interpretation of the brand as a
logo, Le. tiie "visual perspective in the tangible-intangible spectmm previously
reviewed. The others incorporated additional themes from table 2. This finding
indicates the restrictive and outdated nature of the AMA definition. An
adveriising consultant directly addressed this, stating that "the old deflnition
would be a product with a logo on it but really a brand now is something that
can be perceived by Its target to exist and to have both an Image and
personality.
However, several respondents gave examples of brands still being managed
as products with logos on them Specifically, experts referred to peti-ol retailers
and many of the financial services organisations having littie understanding of
the potential for branding, urging a need for radical changes in the way brands
in these sectors are managed. A brand consultant referred to a "nalve-complejt
spectrum of branding, with" trade-marks in usff reflecting tiie naive position stiil
adopted in some sectors. For example, with implicit criticism for the definitions
of the brand in terms of "a legal Instrument or "a logff, a brand consultant
remarked: "I think there are a lot of so called 'brands', in inverted commas, that
are nothing more than names, which happen to have an awfui iot of
awareness". By contrast some of the airiine firms (e.g. British Airways) and new
entrants into financial services (e.g. Virgin Direct and First Direct) were regarded
as having sophisticated brands, epitomised as "sets ofperceptions that live, exist
and breath in consumers' mindf (brand consultant). As a result of the
relationships firms were building with consumers, the experts spoke about
consumers having ladders of anticipations about brands, such that "brands
deflne peopie's expectation^ and that brands evolve as consumers gain more
"competitive experiences' (market research consultant). It appears that for the
experts "more sophisticated brands relate to definitions of the brand as "an
imag^," a personaiity or as "arelationshiif.
These remarks about a "naive-comple;^ spectrum of branding are
reminiscent of Goodyear's (1996) evolutionary view. However, whilst Goodyear
derives her view from the consumerisation of markets in different countries, the
experts' "naive-complex!' spectmm refers to different product fields or different
brands within the same product fieid. Furthermore, whilst Goodyear's spectmm
is underpinned by the notion of increasing consumer experience, the ejqierts'
"naive-compie^ spectmm refers to the way manners define and, consequently,
manage their brands in different sectors.
The experts' emphasis on brands' intangible elements is at odds with the
widely quoted AMA definition. Rather, the experts' views are more akin to the
recent academic literature (e.g. Jones, 1986; Kapferer, 1992) which advocates
brands as complex entities, blending both tangible and intangible elements.
Consistent with Kapferer's remark that the name, logo, design, or packaging are
a brand's component parts, whiie a consistent integrated vision make it "an
identity systenf, the experts have referred to the brand's intangible elements as
essential constituents of the brand construct beyond the brand's visual features.
The experts' definitions encompass severai themes in the literature, referring to
brands as sets of perceptions in consumers' minds (brand "as imagg' in the
literature), and to brands having acquired personality traits (brand "as
personality). Hence we posit:
Proposition 2: The 1960 AMA's definition of brands is too restrictive,

having insufficient regard for both intangible components and consumer'
perceptions, which are essential aspects of the concept of the brand.
Input Versus Output TTieme
The branding process starts with managers devising brand plans, and results
in consumers choosing brands, based on their perceptions about the fit between
their values and their needs. As a consequence of consumers' choice
behaviour, the flrm's activities are either reinforced or necessitate fine tuning.
Within this context the tiiemes of the brand as a "iegai instrument", "iogd" and
"identity overly stress the supplier, or input perspective, on brands. On the
other hand, definitions such as "an imagff, "a personality, "a relationship and
"added vaiueS had a more balanced perspective encompassing both tiie firm's
and the consumer's considerations. As we are dealing with experts, we
anticipated a balanced definition, blending input with output
Only one brand consultant adopted an overly input stance, {"set of visual
featured), whereas four experts adopted a notable output stance:"/ would stari
with what people think of this thing (brand consultant), "it is something tiiat
exists in people's headf (advertising consultant), "it dettnes expectation^
(market research consultant), "something perceived by target market as iiaving
both an image and personaiity (advertising consultant). The remaining 15 had
a balanced perspective in their definitions, where botii Input and output
considerations are encapsulated. For example "its the Iconsumerlperception {of
whatf an organisation is trying to engneer" (corporate communication
consultant); "it is simply a badge or name or means of recognition ... and tiiat
badge then acquires certain meanings or associations for peopie over timd"
(advertising consultant).
A recurrent theme amongst those making output related comments (le. tiiose
solely adopting an output perspective and those having output and input
comments) is the concept of brands as perceptions in consumers' minds. This
point was made by nine respondents (e.g. "a brand exists in the mind, or not at
ail as a biend of botii tangble and Intangible elements - advertising consultant).
Within this theme, it is possible to discem rational as well as emotional aspects
of perceptions. For example, "a collection of things tiiat exist in peopie's heads
tiiat iead you to believe in some way that the product is superior to otiier
products ... then there is another coiiection of tilings which are to do with
emotion^ (advertising consultant). The emotional aspect (e.g. "are tiiey my kind
of peopieT - advertising consultant - and "if the product came to iife how
comfortable would I feefl. - advertising consultant) interacts with performance
perceptions to affect people's overall assessment These views are akin to the
definitions of the brand as "image!" and as "personaiity.
Consistent with our eariier configuration of the concept of the brand as the
interface of the firm's activities with consumers' perceptions, a dominant theme
in the experts' replies was that brands succeed when firms' marketing activities
have been so effectively enacted that marketers' intentions perfectly mirror
consumers' perceptions of brands' capabUities. This is summarised in the quote
from a corporate communications consultant: "The chaiienge to organisations is
to make sure that tiie extemal projection is consistent with the experience,
which requires that the intemal dimensions be quite carefully considered and
depioyed". With specific reference to the theme of brands as "vaiue system^",
and consistent with Kapferer's (1992) and Aaker's (1996) views of the essential
role of the flrm in building and sustaining brand identify, a brand consultant
436 Leslie de Chematony and Francesca Dail'Olmo Riiey
stated: "So values are hopeless unless they are guided and driven towards some
conclusion, and have some central purpose that wakes them Important and
relevant to consumers, otherwise they are not going to buy it"
Therefore, we postulate:
Proposition 3: A brand represents the matching offtmctional and emotional

values devised by a ffrm with the performance and psychosocial benettts
sought by consumers.
Proposition 4: Tfie doser the match between the values of the brand and
consumers'rational and emotional needs, the more successful the brand.
Discussion
From the literature review there are numerous definitions of tiie brand, which
can be synthesised into twelve themes. Using Singh's (1991) redundancy
analysis, we found several simiiarities between the antecedents and
consequences of these definitions, with considerable overiapping among some
themes. As such, this analysis indicates that when consultants and managers
talk to each other about brands, they may be broadly referring to the same
constmct albeit using altemative definitions. However, as different themes
imply different branding strategies, this lack of precision in terminology may
lead to the enactment of brand strategy being different to that anticipated by all
members of the brand's team (cf. Mintzberg and Waters, 1982). Through
analysis of the branding literature, the application of Singh's redundancy
analysis and the experts' comments, we have fulfilled the aim set in the
Introduction, laying the foundations for a theory for the brand.
To encourage better communication and more effective use of resources, we
propose a definition of the "brand", drawing on the extant literature. The brand
is a complex multidimensionai construct whereby managers augment products
and services with values and this facilitates the process by which consumers
confidently recognise and appreciate these values. The likelihood of repeated
use is enhanced when consumers' feedback is monitored and used to better
tune the value constellations to consumers' needs. Consequentiy, brands are co-
produced by firms and consumers. By incorporating knowledge about
consumers' interpretations of brands, the virtuous cyclical process above should
enable firms to build powerful brands.
Focusing on the brand's two key stakeholders, i.e. the firm's staff and
consumers, two critical boundaries help characterise the domain of this
construct From the firm's perspective, the pertormance attributes and values
developed by the firm are inherent constructs of the brand. Further constructs
emerge by considering the consumer's perspective, Le. the constructs of brand
image and value are centi:^l to the brand concept
By means of focused interviews with 20 leading edge brand experts, we were
also able to assess their interpretations of brands against the literature and
suggest several propositions for researchers to test Specifically, further
research should assess whether the propositions we put forward in the
preceding sections reflect best brand management practice.
In view of the complexify of brands, experts predominantly drew on several
brand themes. Possibly due, in part to the branding philosophies their
consultancies adhered to, no one definition was common amongst all
consultants interviewed. However, some pattems emerged in the themes of
their interpretations. A tangible - intangible spectrum encompassed all their
deflnitions, with a marked bias to intangible tiiemes. Since it is easier to
interpret an intangible concept when it is explained in tangible terms, some
experts referred to the logo theme epitomised by the AMA definition of the
brand. However, underpinning the majorify of experts' definitions is the notion
of brands as value systems, personality and image which is consistent with tiie
more recent branding literature. This more advanced view of brands allows for a
wider range of strategic brand growth options and resulted in the experts being
critical of the restrictive nature of the AMA definition. Failing to move beyond
the AMA definition, as shown by petrol retailers and many financial services
organisations, impedes brands capitalising on their potential
The experts' comments reinforced the appropriateness of defining the
domain of the brand construct in terms of firms' and consumers' perspectives.
The majorify of experts had a balanced interpretation of brands drawing on both
firms' and consumers' perceptions. Their comments lead us to suggest the
proposition that one of the discriminating characteristics between successful
and failed brands is that successful brands show a greater degree of congmence
between the values firms develop for their brands and the rational and
emotional needs of their consumers.
Researchers should consider testing the propositions advanced in tiiis paper,
not only amongst a larger group of brand consultants, but also amongst
managers and consumers.
Conciusions and Managerial Implication
In their interpretations of brands each consultant emphasised several aspects of

the twelve brand deflnition themes identifled in the branding literature.
However, there was considerable overlap in terms of the emphasis attributed to
the notion of the brand as a multidimensional construct whereby managers
augment products and services with value constellations matching consumer
needs. This is in contrast with the traditional, possibly dated, view of tiie brand
stressing the importance of branding to visually differentiate a firm's offering.
Goodyear's (1996) evolutionary spectmm and the experts' comments
indicate that the opportunities for branding are to be found in developing
consumer-relevant values, and then in the use of symbols and designs to
communicate these. If communicated effectively such values can become
strongly held perceptions in consumers' minds and through increasing brand
usage these values become respected.
Building brands as value systems necessitates going beyond short-term
promotions, increasing awareness and looking for temporary gains in market
share. It necessitates a longer term commitment buiiding on any iatent or
current values which are fine tuned to match consumers' needs. Pressure to
change these values because of changed competitor activities should be resisted
without assessing whether there are any changing consumer trends. The values
that are developed as the core of the brand must be bound together by a vision
which gives them meaning, impetus and direction.
In view of the different Interpretation of brands in the literature, it is not
improbable that managers will have different conceptualisations, leading to
differences in strategic emphasis. However, all employees in the firm need to
work together to ensure that the promises being made for the brand are
consistent with consumers' experiences. Particularly when a management team
is working togetiier to improve their brand's performance, it may be helpful to
get each manager to make explicit tiieir view about their interpretation of the
brand and if there are diverse views these should be exposed and a consensus
sought amongst the team. An open discussion will surface differing assumptions
and give the team greater confidence in their task. This is particularly Important
where the team consists of senior managers, since their diverse interpretations
will lead them to direct their staff in potentially conflicting directions. The
growth of corporate branding may indicate increasing awareness amongst firms
of the need to consider brands as value systems and to ensure a consistent
brand message, regardless of consumers' points of contact with the firm.
Finally, agencies and consultants working for the first time with a brand
management team would benefit from understanding how their client interprets
its brands. Without this knowledge tiiere is a danger of inappropriate
recommendations in the formative stages of the working relationship.
References
Aaker, David (1991), Managing Brand Equity: Capitalizing on tiie Value of a

Brand Name, New York, The Free Press
Aaker, David (1996), Building Stong Brands, New York, The Free Press
Alt Michael and Griggs, Steve (1988), "Can a Brand Be Cheeky?", Maiketing
Intelligence and Planning, 6, 4, pp. 9-26
American Marketing Association (1960), Marketing Definitions: A Glossary of
Marketing Terms, Chicago, American Marketing Association
Arnold, David (1992), The handbook of brand management. Century Business,
The Economist Books
Assaei, Henry (1995), Consumer behavior and marketing action, Cincinnati,
South-Westem College Publishing
Balmer, John M.T. (1995), "Corporate branding and connoisseurship", Joumai of
General Management, 21, 1, pp. 24-46
Bauer, Raymond (I960), "Consumer Behavior as risk taking". In: Dynamic
Marketing for a Changing World (SA') Hanckok, Robert S., Chicago, American
Marketing Association, pp. 389-398
Beckett Edwin (1996), "TPhe relevance of brands cannot be underestimated".
Marketing, August 1st p. 19
Blackston, Max (1992), "Observations: building brand equity by managing tiie
brand's relationships", Joumai ofAdvertising Research, 32, May/June, pp. 79-
83
Blackston, Max (1993), "A brand with an attitude: a suitable case for treatment",
Joumai of the Market Research Society, 34, 3, pp. 231-241
Bona, Joe (1994), "From retail identity to brand image". National Petroleum
Defihing a "Brand" 439
News, 86,9, pp. 52
Boulding, Kenneth E. (1956), The Image, Ann Harbour, Universify of Mitchigan
Press
Broadbent Kay and Cooper, Peter (1987), "Research is Good for You",
Marketing Intelligence and Planning, 5, 1, pp. 3-9
Brown, Gordon (1992), People, Brands and Advertising Warwick UK, Millward
Brown Intemationai
Brown, Lowell C. (1994), "New 'mental models' for credentialing and peer
review". Health Systems Review, 27, pp. 37-39
Burke, Bill Sr. (1994), "Brand identify's new math". Advertising Age, 65, 14, pp.
32
Chevan, Harry (1992), "What's in a namer, CataiogAge, 9,9, pp. 28
Churchill, Gilbert A Jr. (1979), "A Paradigm for Developing Better Measures of
Marketing Constructs", Joumai of Marketing Research, 16, pp. 64-73
Clark, Harold F. Jr. (1987), "Consumer and Corporate Values: Yet Another View
on Global Marketing", Intemationai Joumai ofAdvertising 6,1, pp. 29-42
Cook, William A (1995), "You don't have to be schizophrenic...", Joumai of
Adveriising Research, 35, 1, pp.5-6
Crainer, Stuart (1995), The Reai Power of Brands: Making Brands Work for
Competitive Advantage, London, Pitinan Publishing
Day, George S. (1992), "Continuous Learning About Markets", Pianning Review,
20, pp. 47-49
de Chematony, Leslie (1993), "Categorizing Brands: Evolutionary Processes
Underpinned by Two Key Dimensions", Joumai of Marketing Management,
9, pp. 173-188
de Chematony, Leslie and McDonald, Malcom(1994), Creating powerful brands,
Oxford, Butterworth-Heinemann
de Chematony, Leslie and McWilliam, Gill(1989), "The Strategic implications of
Clarifying How Marketers Interpret 'Brands'", Joumai of Marketing
Management, 5, 2, pp. 153-171
Dibb, Sally, Simkin, Lyndon, Pride, William M. and FerreU, O.C. (1994),
Marketing Boston, Houghton Miffiin
Diefenbach, John (1992), "The Corporate Identify as the Brand". In: Branding: A
Key Marketing Tool (Ed.) Murphy, John, Basingstoke, MacMillan, pp. 155-
164
Dobni, Dawn and Zinkhan, George M. (1990), "In search of brand image: A
foundation analysis". In: Advances in Consumer Research (Eds.) Goldberg,
Marvin E., Gom, Gerald J. and PoUay, Richard W. Provo, UT, Association for
Consumer Research, 17, pp. 110-110.
Duboff, Robert S. (1986), "Brands, Like People, Have Personalities", Marketing
News, 20, 1, pp. 8
Durand, Thomas (1993), "Economy of scope, added value chain and cost
dynamics - A tentative otpimization model", Intemationai Joumai of
Production Economics, 29, pp. 237-247
Dutton, Jane E. and Dukerich, Janet M. (1991), "Keeping an Eye on the Mirror",
Academy of Marketing Joumai 34, pp. 517-554
East Robert (1997), Consumer Behaviour Advances and Appiications on
Marketing London, Prentice Hall
Engel, James F., Blackwell, Roger D. and Miniard, Paul W. (1993), Consumer
Behavior, Fort Worth, The Dryden Press
Fombrun, Charies and Shanley, Mark (1990), "What Is in a name? Reputation
building and corporate strategy". Academy ofManagement Journal 33, 2, pp.
233-258
Freeiing, Anthony (1994) Marketing is in crisis - can market research help?
Journal of the Market Research Society, 36, 2, pp. 97-104
Gardner, Burteigh B. and Levy, Sidney J. (1955), "The Product and the Brand",
Harvard Business Review, 33, March-April, pp. 33-39
Goodyear, Mary (1993), "Reviewing the concept of brands and branding".
Marketing and Research Today, 21,2, pp. 75-79
Goodyear, Mary (1996), "Divided by a common language", Joumai of the Market
Research Society, 38, 2, pp. 105-122
Gordon, Wendy and Langmaid, Roy (1988), Quaiitative Market Research,
Aldershot Gower
Gutman, Jonathan (1982), "A means-end chain model based on consumer
categorisation processes", Joumai of Marketing, 46, Spring, pp. 60-72
Haggin, Jeff (1994), "Brand identity". Catalog Age, 11, 10, pp. 113-118
Hamel, Gary and Prahalad, C.K (1994), Competing for the future, Boston,
Harvard Business School Press
Hirschman, Elizabeth C. (1980), "Innovativeness, Novelty Seeking and
Consumer Creativity", Joumai of Consumer Research, 6, pp. 283-295
Hirschman, Elizabeth and Holbrook, Morris B. (1982), "Hedonic consumption:
emerging concepts, methods and propositions", Joumai of Marketing, 46,
Summer, pp. 92-101
Hunt Shelby D. (1990), "Tmtii in Marketing Theory and Research", Joumai of
Marketing 54, pp. 1-15
Jacoby, Jacob and Kyner, David B. (1973), "Brand Loyalty Vs. Repeat
Purchasing Behavior", Journal of Marketing Research, 10, pp. 1-9
Jacoby, Jacob, Szybillo, George J and Busato-Schach, Jaqueline (1977)
"Information acquisition behaviour in brand choice situations", Joumai of
Consumer Research, 3, pp. 209-216.
Jones, John P. (1986), What's in a name, Aldershot Gower
Joyce, Timothy (1963), "Techniques of brand image measurement". In: New
Developments In Research. London, Market Research Society, pp. 45-63
Joyce, Timothy (1967), "What do we know about how advertising works?"
London, J. Walter Thomson Co. Ltd.
Kapferer. Jean-Noel (1992), Strategic Brand Management, London, Kogan Page
Kapferer, Jean-Noel (1995), "Stealing brand equity: measuring perceptual
confusion between national brands and 'copycat' own labels". Marketing and
Research Today, 23, May, pp. 96-103
Keeble, Giles (1991), "Creativity and tiie Brand". In: Understanding Brands by
10 people whofl'o(Ed.)Cowley, Don, London, Kogan Page, pp. 167-182
Keller, Kevin L (1993), "Conceptualizing, Measuring and Managing Customer-
Based Brand Equity", Joumai of Marketing, 57, pp. 1-22
King, Stephen (1973), Developing New Brands, Batii, Pitman Publishing
Defining a "Bi^nd" 441
Kirmani, Amna and Zeithan^l, Valarie (1993), "Advertising, Perceived Qualify
and Brand Image". In: Brand equify and advertising: Advertising's roie in
building sti-ong brands {EAs) Aaker, David and Biel, Alexander, Hillsdale, N.J.,
Lawrence Eribaum Associates
Koch, Richard (1994), The Mnandai Times A-Z of Management and Finance,
Pitman, London
KoUat David T., Engel, James and Blackwell, Roger D. (1970), "Current
Problems in Consumer Behavior Research", Joumai of Marketing Research,
7, pp. 327-332
Kotier, Philip, Armstrong, Gary, Saunders, John and Wong, Veronica (1996),
Principles of Marketing, Hemel Hempstead, Prentice Hall Europe
Lambin, Jean-Jacques (1993), Strategic Marketing, London, McGrawHill
Lee, Julian and Murphy, Clair (1996), "Cracking the lookalike code". Marketing
29 February, pp. 12
Leficoff-Hagius, Roxanne and Mason, Chariotte R (1993), "Characteristic,
Beneflcial and Image Attributes in Consumer Judgments of Similarify and
Preference", Joumai of Consumer Research, 20, pp. 100-110
Levitt Theodore (1969), The marketing mode. New York, McGraw-Hill Book
Company
Low, George S. and Fullerton, Ronald A (1994) Brands, brand management and
the brand management system: a critical historical evaluation. Joumai of
Marketing Research, 31, May, pp. 173-190
Martineau, Pierre (1959), "Sharper focus for the corporate image". Harvard
Business Review, 3S, 1, pp. 49-58
Meadows, Rod (1983), "They consume advertising too", Admap, July/August pp.
408-413
Meenaghan, Tony (1995), "The role of advertising in brand image development",
Joumai of Produd and Brand Management, 4, 4, pp. 23-34
Miles, Matthew B. and Huberman, A Michael (1994) Qualitative Data Analysis.
Thousand Oaks, CA SAGE Publications
Mintzberg, Henry and Waters, James A (1982), "Tracking strategy in an
entrepreneurial firm". Academy ofManagement Joumai 25,^^. A&5-A99.
Mitchell, Alan (1994) Marketing's new model army. Management Today, March,
43-49
Morecroft John D.W. (1992), "Executive Knowledge, Models and Leaming",
European Joumai of Operational Research, 59, pp. 9-27
Murphy, John (1992), "What is Branding?". In: Branding, a key marketing tool
(Ed.) Murphy, John, London, Macmillan, pp. 1-12
McKenna, Regis (1991), "Marketing is Everything", Harvard Business Review,
69, January/February, pp. 65-79
McWilliam, Gill (1993), "A tale of two gurus: Aaker and Kapferer on brands",
Intemationai Joumai of Research in Marketing, 10, pp. 105-111
Newman, Joseph W. (1957), Motivation research and marketing management,
Norwood, The Plimpton Press
Olins, Wally (1989), Corporate Identify, London, Thames and Hudson
Park, C. Whan, Jaworski, Bernard J. and Maclnnis, Deborah, J. (1986), "Sti-ategic
Brand Concept-Image Management", Joumai of Marketing, 50, pp. 135-145
Pitcher, AE. (1985), "The role of branding in intemationai advertising".
intemationai Joumai ofAdvertising, 4, pp. 241-246
Plummer, Joseph T. (1985), "How Personality Makes a Difference", Joumai of
Advertising Research, 24, 6, pp. 27-30
Poiesz, Theo B.C. (1989), "The Image Concept Its Place in Consumer
Psychology", Journal of Economic Psychology, 10, 4, pp. 457-472
Prinz, Jonathan (1994), "Extending your brand? Consider what's at stake",
Brandweek, 35, 14, pp. 17
Reynolds, Thomas J. and Gutman, Jonathan (1988), "Laddering theory, method,
analysis and interpretation", Joumai of Advertising Research, 28, Feb -
March, pp 11-31
Sampson, Peter M.J. (1967), "Commonsense in qualitative research", Joumai of
tiie Market Research Society, 9, 1, pp. 30-38
Schwenk, Charies (1988), The Essence of Strategic Decision Making, Lexington,
Lexington Books
Sheth, Jagdish N., Newman, Bmce 1. and Gross, Barbara L (1991), "Why We
Buy What We Buy: A Theory of Consumption Values", Joumai of Business
Research, 22, pp. 159-170
Simonson, Itamar (1994), "Trademark infringement from the buyer perspective:
Conceptual analysis and measurement impiications", Joumai of Public Policy
and Marketing, 13, 2, pp. 181-199
Singh, Jagdip (1991), "Redundancy in Constructs: Problem, Assessment and an
Illustrative Example", Joumai ofBusiness Research, 22, pp. 255-280
Smythe, John, Dorward, Colette and Reback, Jerome (1992), Corporate
Reputation, London, Century Business
Southgate, Paul (1996), "Revolution behind the scenes". Marketing March 14,
pp. 16-17
Staveley, Nichoias (1987), "Advertising, marketing and brands", Admap, 23, pp.
31-35
The Economist (1993), "Shoot out at tiie check-out", 5 June, pp. 81-83
The Economist (1994), "BSWho?", 14 May, pp. 100
Thrift Julia (1997), "What's in store for brands". Marketing Feb. 27, pp.25-29
Vick, Edward H. (1993), "The corporation as a brand". Directors and Boards, 17,
4, pp. 57-58
Watkins, Trevor (1986), The economics of the brand. Maidenhead, McGraw Hill
Book Company (UK)
Weick, Kari E. (1979), The Social Psychology of Organizing Reading, MA
Addison Wesley
Wilson, Marianne (1994), "The magic of brand identity". Chain Store Age
Executive, 70, pp. 66
Woodward, Stephen (1991), "Competitive Marketing". In: Understanding Brands
by 10 people who do (Ed.) Cowley, Don, London, Kogan Page, pp. 119-134
Young & Rubicam (1994), Brand Asset Valuator, London, Young and Rubicam
Zaltman, Gerald, Pinson, Christian RA and Angelmar, Reinhard (1973),
Metatheory and Consumer Research, New York, Holt Rinehart and Winston,
Inc.
Zeithami, Valarie A (1988), "Consumer perception of price, quality and value: A
means-end model and synthesis of evidence", Joumai of Marketing, 52, pp.
2-22
Zinkhan, George, D. Haytko and A Ward (1996), "Self-concept theory", Joumai
of Marketing Communication, 2,1, pp. 1-19

Defining A Brand PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Defining A Brand PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Defining A Brand PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Joumai otMarketing Management 1998,14,417-443

Chematonvand Defining A "Brand": Beyond The

Definitions in the Literature

1) Brand as a legal instrument

if) Brand as a iogo.

iii) Brand as a company.

iv) Brand as a shorthand

v) Brand as a risk reducer

vf) Brand as an Identity system.

vll) Brand as an Image In consumers'minds.

vill) Brand as a value system

ix) Brand as a personality.

)d) Brand as adding vaiue.

xii) Brand as an evolving entity.

(i) Lack of criteria marking transitions between stages;

Antecedents and Consequences of the Brand Construct in the Literature

Setting the Boundaries of the Brand Construct

FIRM'S INPUT CONSUMERS'

The model above is a simplified representation' of the cyclical process through

Research Aim and Methods of Analysis

Relating Experts' Views to the Twelve Brand Theme Definitions

Table 2. Categorising Experts' Definitions of "Brand"

We attempted to apply Goodyear's framework of brands as evolving entities to

Proposition 1: Due to the complex multifaceted nature of brands,

Proposition 2: The 1960 AMA's definition of brands is too restrictive,

Proposition 3: A brand represents the matching offtmctional and emotional

Conciusions and Managerial Implication

In their interpretations of brands each consultant emphasised several aspects of

Aaker, David (1991), Managing Brand Equity: Capitalizing on tiie Value of a

You might also like