The meaning of a brand? An archetypal approach.
| Autor | Xara-Brasil, Duarte |
Introduction
Consumers identify themselves with specific brands, not for their promises, but rather for the purpose that the brand embodies (Adi et at, 2015). Strong brands are much more than a product or service, are a unique set of companies' promises and customers' perceptions, interactions and experiences, which affect long-term relationships. Large corporations must focus on brand reputation and the legitimacy of the purpose they serve (Crisan and Bortjun, 2017). And brand managers must track the impact of increased brand interactions and experiences across consumers, cultures and countries on customers' brand perceptions, especially those that relate to brand identity and personality, since consumers may not necessarily notice brand personality as intended (Malar et at, 2012).
A strong brand identity comprises the conceptualization and operationalization of a very sophisticated brand strategy that meets the challenges of the different environments where brands are present, particularly global brands. The approaches to define identity consider the personality traits of a brand, similar to those of a "person," as one of its components (Aaker, 1990), or as "Brand Identity Prism" (Kapferer, 1995).
Brand archetypes are part of brand personality. Marketing managers may use an archetypal approach to brand personality in order to define what a brand is, what it stands for, and the relationship with its consumers, thus providing a real meaning associated with their customers' desires and motivations (Mirzaee and George, 2016; Mark and Pearson, 2001). In an archetypal approach, the focus is on the customer's brand experience and brand meaning, and the products are merely secondary means to achieve the expected brand meaning (Hogstrom et al., 2015). Consumers' individual brand perceptions are influenced not only by their exposure to a marketer's brand stories, and to the media and pop culture, but also by personal experiences and word of mouth (Adi et al,, 2015). These external influences lead to different consumers' perceptions across cultures.
We conducted a quantitative research to examine brand archetype perceptions of three global brands--Facebook, Apple and Amazon--in four countries--Portugal, Brazil, Colombia and Peru. We analyzed: if consumers' perceptions of the archetypes of international brands are homogeneous in different countries; if the characterization of brands through words and archetypes is homogeneous and accepted by consumers; and whether the existing brand/archetype designations in the literature are still accurate, given the degree of innovation and growth of these brands and consumers' perceptions across countries. To reach these objectives we checked the words and sentences that respondents related to each brand, as well as the coherence of the associations with the archetype/brand and the homogeneity of the results in different cultural contexts. This analysis has a clear managerial and academic contribution, in the research areas of brand identity and brand personality, leading managers and researchers to a deeper understanding of consumer behavior patterns through brand archetypes, to a more effective marketing strategy and to new research tools. The study of consumers' perceptions of brand personality is a major research topic (Lam et al., 2013; Sichtmann and Diamantopoulos, 2013).
Literature review
A brand is not just a product or a company name, but rather a complex entity that shows the organization's commitment to the customer. It is the promise that a company makes to the customer, regarding what the product will provide and how it will fit into the consumer's business (Campell, 2002). A company's products should have a unique identity. In the eyes of consumers, brands communicate their own identities to society, to specific groups and/or to individuals (Strizhakova et al, 2008). Consumers may associate them with different meanings --such as perceived quality, self-identity, group identity, values, family traditions, national Traditions--, which may affect their functional, experiential and symbolic benefits (Siamagka et al, 2015). Not all brands develop a symbolic approach and try to tell a story. Consumers unconsciously prefer to tell and to hear stories, as they give life to others' experience or to their experience with the brand (Woodside, 2006). Compelling stories raise expectations about the brand, which will likely increase the positive emotion when trying it, especially if the relationship between the brand and the stories seems authentic (Hwang, 2017).
International firms may have a portfolio of local, international or global brands: local brands are present in just one country or region, international brands have global elements of their marketing strategy or mix, and global brands use the same marketing strategy or mix in all target markets (Schuiling and Kapferer, 2004). Although a global brand approach has important potential advantages--such as economies of scale, of communication costs and speed of new products' innovations--the use of centralized marketing strategies may lead to less intimate relationships with local markets, with the local competitive environment and with specific customers' needs (Schuiling, 2001).
Brands can be a source of organizational differentiation and value creation for companies and customers. Regarding competitive advantage, a company can develop a consistent brand strategy, making sure that the brand keeps the promise, due to the relationship established with the customers. A successful brand provides a unique added value that meets customers' needs, such as familiarity, reliability, risk reduction and personality (Strizhakova et al, 2008). Added value provides intangible benefits, such as feelings, ideas and effects to the brands (Rodrigues, 2008). Brands are an important attribute of consumers' culture, not only for the utility value of the commodity, but also for its symbolic strength. It helps consumers to sustain their identity projects and symbolic meaning (Bengtsson, 2006; Elliott and Wattanasuwan, 1998).
The consumer-brand relationship involves processes of brand identification and product categorization, as well as sensorial, affective and cognitive experiences. These inputs will integrate the brand concept through individual and cultural signaling, and develop an attitude and a relationship (Schmitt, 2012). In addition, the centralization of organizational efforts and marketing teams is also important to reach a greater consensus and create synergies within the organization (Ceballos and Juliana, 2014). Therefore, archetypes mediate between products and customers' motivation, providing an intangible meaningful experience.
A company develops its brand identity from different assets and competencies, which leads to the creation of brand value through customers' unique experiences, and the creation of a brand-specific meaning. Ideally, brand identity is a valuable and unique experience that competitors cannot imitate. Therefore, brand can become a competitive advantage and the expression of an intention (Urde, 1999).
Brand identity is a central issue in marketing research, with two major approaches: Aaker (1991) proposed a preliminary approach that analyzes it under four different perspectives: the brand as a human, a product, a symbol and an organization. Kapferer (1995) claimed that the essence of brand identity is the organizational answer to central questions regarding brand's individuality, consistence, values and signs. This allows companies to specify their brands' meanings (Louis and Lombart, 2010).
Brand personality and brand archetypes
Brand personality is one of the main components of brand identity frameworks, and it is mandatory for brand managers to develop a systematic process to manage this central brand identity dimension. Although Aaker's brand personality scale has been successfully used in many studies, it has some relevant limitations in an international context and in some industries (Escobar-Farfan et al., 2016). In Chile, Rojas-Mendez et al. (2004) could not validate this scale in the automobile industry, and Ahmad and Thyagaraj (2014) called attention to validation problems of certain dimensions, in some countries. This led to the development of brand personality scales in local markets, such as in France (Ferrandi et al., 2000), USA (Austin et al., 2003), Germany (Hieronimus, 2003), and Russia (Supphellen and Gronhaug, 2003), among others.
As an alternative to Aaker's (1997) brand personality scale, some brand and marketing executives adopted the platform of archetypes to represent brands. In a marketing perspective, we use archetypes to interact with consumers' deepest motivations and give meaning to the products and brands associated with their conscious and unconscious desires (Mark and Pearson, 2001). The unconscious is divided in personal unconscious--images and impulses from an individual's life experiences -, and a collective unconscious that includes a big variety of shared cultural images and impulses, known as archetypes (Zehnder and Calvert, 2004). Marketing will further advance by understanding the collective unconscious, and how it affects consumers' perceptions and actions (Dominici et al., 2016).
Archetypes are universal topics of human existence, which are evident in the common traits of characters and storylines in myths, fairy tales, novels and films (Faber and Mayer, 2009; McPeek, 2008). Societies do not exist without communication and representation and, to a certain extent, they share their cultural archetypal articulations (Zehnder and Calvert, 2004).
Many brands are representations of "modern myths," containing cognitive elements, emotional elements, and unconscious processes. Brand archetypes and myths are considered allegories that support the construction of brand-consumer relationships (Muniz and Woodside, 2015). In this context, specific brands may play a...
Para continuar a ler
PEÇA SUA AVALIAÇÃOCOPYRIGHT GALE, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.
