Towards a theory of conscientious corporate brand co-creation: the next key challenge in brand management
- PDF / 630,923 Bytes
- 11 Pages / 595.276 x 790.866 pts Page_size
- 58 Downloads / 173 Views
COMMENTARY
Towards a theory of conscientious corporate brand co‑creation: the next key challenge in brand management Oriol Iglesias1 · Nicholas Ind2 Revised: 24 July 2020 © Springer Nature Limited 2020
Abstract In this article we chart the evolution of corporate brand management from an organization-centric view based on control to one rooted in a participative cocreated perspective where multiple stakeholders help to build and enrich the brand. This shift challenges many of the traditional models of corporate brand management and recognizes the importance of meeting the needs and desires of stakeholders through the adoption of a conscientious approach built on responsibility and a commitment to fairness. We illustrate our argument with such examples as Danone, SAP, Tata, Unilever and Patagonia and conclude with a research agenda to explore further the nascent field of conscientious corporate brands. Keywords Corporate brands · Conscientious brands · Co-creation · Stakeholder perspective · Brand purpose
The evolution of the brand management academic field Academics first became interested in the brand construct in the early 1900s (Stern 2006), when they realized that brands were identifiers, that could help build recognition and link a product to its manufacturer (Merz et al. 2009), thereby potentially influencing consumer preference. This led to a growing body of research that aimed to understand the impact of branded goods versus unbranded goods in consumer decision-making processes (i.e. Copeland 1923). Researchers also soon realized that brands could generate positive perceptions and improve the firm’s competitive advantage (Welcker 1949). Not surprisingly, this realization spurred much research on how to create a strong and favourable brand image (i.e. Gardner and Levy 1955). Academics suggested that the key was to generate functional-benefit associations, related to the utilitarian needs of customers (de Chernatony and McWilliam 1989), such as product quality * Oriol Iglesias [email protected] Nicholas Ind [email protected] 1
Universitat Ramon Llull, ESADE, Av. Torre Blanca, 59, 08172 Sant Cugat del Valles, Barcelona, Spain
Kristiania University College, Kirkegata 24‑26, 0153 Oslo, Norway
2
(Dawar and Parker 1994). However, once the market became more crowded, and functional benefits were not enough to provide a relevant source of differentiation, scholars realized that brands should also promise symbolic benefits to customers (Park et al. 1986). Symbolic benefits are the meanings that the brand provides to customers (Levy 1959) connected to their ego, self-enhancement and position within a community (Park et al. 1986). Overall, the foundational branding literature focuses on product brands, conceiving them as a set of perceptions grounded in functional and emotional benefits (de Chernatony et al. 2006), that allow product differentiation (i.e. Aaker 1996) and the simplification of consumer choices (Jacoby et al. 1977). From this perspective, the obvious recommendation to
Data Loading...
