Bahan Kuliah Manajemen Pemasaran.

Menurut Susanto dan Wijanarko (2004), dalam menghadapi persaingan yang ketat, merek yang kuat merupakan suatu pembeda yang jelas, bernilai, dan berkesinambungan, menjadi ujung tombak bagi daya saing perusahaan dan sangat membantu dalam strategi pemasaran (p. 2). Keller (1993) juga menyatakan bahwa brand equity adalah keinginan dari seseorang untuk melanjutkan menggunakan suatu brand atau tidak. Pengukuran dari brand equity sangatlah berhubungan kuat dengan kesetiaan dan bagian pengukuran dari pengguna baru menjadi pengguna yang setia (p. 43). Beberapa pengertian brand equity adalah: 1. Susanto dan Wijanarko (2004), ekuitas merek adalah seperangkat aset dan liabilitas merek yang berkaitan dengan suatu merek, nama dan simbolnya, yang menambah atau mengurangi nilai yang diberikan oleh suatu barang atau jasa kepada perusahaan atau pelanggan (p. 127). 2. East (1997), “Brand equity or brand strength is the control on purchase exerted by a brand, and, by virtue of this, the brand as an asset that can be exploited to produce revenue” (p. 29). Artinya ekuitas merek atau kekuatan merek adalah kontrol dari pembelian dengan menggunakan merek, dan, kebaikan dari merek, merek sebagai aset yang dapat dimanfaatkan untuk menghasilkan pendapatan. 3. Kotler dan Armstrong (2004), “Brand equity is the positive differential effect that knowing the brand name has on customer response to the product or service” (p. 292). Artinya ekuitas merek adalah efek diferensiasi yang positif yang dapat diketahui dari respon konsumen terhadap barang atau jasa. Jadi brand equity adalah kekuatan suatu brand yang dapat menambah atau mengurangi nilai dari brand itu sendiri yang dapat diketahui dari respon konsumen terhadap barang atau jasa yang dijual. Menurut Soehadi (2005), kekuatan suatu merek (brand equity) dapat diukur berdasarkan 7 indikator, yaitu: 1. Leadership: kemampuan untuk mempengaruhi pasar, baik harga maupun atribut non-harga. 2. Stability: kemampuan untuk mempertahankan loyalitas pelanggan. 3. Market: kekuatan merek untuk meningkatkan kinerja toko atau distributor. 4. Internationality: kemampuan merek untuk keluar dari area geografisnya atau masuk ke negara atau daerah lain. 5. Trend: merek menjadi semakin penting dalam industri. 6. Support: besarnya dana yang dikeluarkan untuk mengkomunikasikan merek. 7. Protection: merek tersebut mempunyai legalitas (p. 147). Menurut Susanto dan Wijanarko (2004) yang mengadaptasi teori Aaker, brand equity dapat dikelompokkan ke dalam 5 kategori: a. Brand awareness Beberapa pengertian brand awareness adalah sebagai berikut: ° Brand awareness adalah kesanggupan seorang calon pembeli untuk mengenali

atau mengingat kembali bahwa suatu merek merupakan bagian dari kategori merek tertentu. ° Menurut East (1997), “Brand awareness is the recognition and recall of a brand and its differentiation from other brands in the field” (p. 29). Artinya brand awareness adalah pengakuan dan pengingatan dari sebuah merek dan pembedaan dari merek yang lain yang ada di lapangan. Jadi brand awareness adalah kemampuan konsumen untuk mengingat suatu brand dan yang menjadikannya berbeda bila dibandingkan dengan brand lainnya. Ada 4 tingkatan brand awareness yaitu: 1. Unaware of brand (tidak menyadari merek) Merupakan tingkat yang paling rendah dalam piramida kesadaran merek, dimana konsumen tidak menyadari akan adanya suatu merek. 2. Brand recognition (pengenalan merek) Tingkat minimal dari kesadaran merek. Hal ini penting pada saat seorang pembeli memilih suatu merek pada saat melakukan pembelian. 3. Brand recall (pengingatan kembali terhadap merek) Pengingatan kembali terhadap merek didasarkan pada permintaan seseorang untuk menyebutkan merek tertentu dalam suatu kelas produk. Hal ini diistilahkan dengan pengingatan kembali tanpa bantuan, karena berbeda dari tugas pengenalan, responden tidak perlu dibantu untuk memunculkan merek tersebut. 4. Top of mind (puncak pikiran) Apabila seseorang ditanya secara langsung tanpa diberi bantuan pengingatan dan orang tersebut dapat menyebutkan satu nama merek, maka merek yang paling banyak disebutkan pertama kali merupakan puncak pikiran. Dengan kata lain, merek tersebut merupakan merek utama dari berbagai merek yang ada di dalam benak konsumen. Ada 4 indikator yang dapat digunakan untuk mengetahui seberapa jauh konsumen aware terhadap sebuah brand antara lain: 1. Recall yaitu seberapa jauh konsumen dapat mengingat ketika ditanya merek apa saja yang diingat. 2. Recognition yaitu seberapa jauh konsumen dapat mengenali merek tersebut termasuk dalam kategori tertentu. 3. Purchase yaitu seberapa jauh konsumen akan memasukkan suatu merek ke dalam alternatif pilihan ketika akan membeli produk/layanan. 4. Consumption yaitu seberapa jauh konsumen masih mengingat suatu merek ketika sedang menggunakan produk/layanan pesaing. b. Perceived quality Didefinisikan sebagai persepsi pelanggan terhadap keseluruhan kualitas atau keunggulan suatu produk atau jasa berkenaan dengan maksud yang diharapkan. c. Brand association Adalah sesuatu yang berkaitan dengan ingatan mengenai sebuah produk.

Pilihan konsumen terhadap suatu merek dilandasi pada suatu asosiasi.Asosiasi ini tidak hanya eksis. jenis konsumen seperti ini suka berpindah-pindah merek atau disebut tipe konsumen switcher atau price buyer (konsumen lebih memperhatikan harga di dalam melakukan pembelian). translates into steady cash flow and a fantastic public image. karena terdapat perasaan emosional dalam menyukai merek. e. Para pelanggan mempunyai suatu kebanggaan dalam menemukan atau menjadi pengguna suatu merek. d. . Dengan demikian. Para pembeli pada tingkat ini disebut sahabat merek. The emotional attachment that links consumers to your product. brand equity meliputi 4 hal. dan brand awareness f you’re like most successful marketing executives. What follows here are the most widely used steps to build brand equity. Pada dasarnya. each advertiser takes a slightly different approach when it comes to launching a marketing campaign. rangkaian pengalaman dalam menggunakannya. merek memainkan peran yang kecil dalam keputusan pembelian. Loyalitas memiliki tingkatan sebagaimana dapat dilihat pada gambar di bawah ini: 1. baik dalam waktu. 2. as opposed to any other. terutama apabila pergantian ke merek lain memerlukan suatu tambahan biaya. tidak terdapat dimensi ketidakpuasan yang cukup memadai untuk mendorong suatu perubahan. 4. Para pembeli tipe ini dapat disebut pembeli tipe kebiasaan (habitual buyer). 3. perceived quality. you understand just how crucial it is to build brand equity. Tingkat keempat adalah konsumen benar-benar menyukai merek tersebut. Pada umumnya. While most advertisers would agree there are certain basic principles of product branding. Tingkat teratas adalah para pelanggan yang setia. maupun sebagai ekspresi mengenai siapa pelanggan sebenarnya(commited buyers). Kelompok ini biasanya disebut dengan konsumen loyal yang merasakan adanya suatu pengorbanan apabila melakukan penggantian ke merek lain. namun juga memiliki suatu tingkat kekuatan. 127-134). Tingkat ketiga berisi orang-orang yang puas. namun memikul biaya peralihan (switching cost). seperti simbol. Para pembeli tipe ini disebut satisfied buyer. Merek tersebut sangat penting bagi pelanggan baik dari segi fungsinya. Other proprietary brand assets Adalah hal-hal lain yang tidak termasuk dalam 4 kategori diatas tetapi turut membangun brand equity (pp. Tingkat loyalitas yang paling dasar adalah pembeli tidak loyal atau sama sekali tidak tertarik pada merek-merek apapun yang ditawarkan. citra merek. Tingkat kedua adalah para pembeli merasa puas dengan produk yang digunakan. atau kesan kualitas yang tinggi. antara lain loyalitas merek. two key ingredients that solidify your company’s position as a market leader. Brand loyalty Merupakan ukuran kesetiaan seorang pelanggan pada sebuah merek. atau minimal tidak mengalami kekecewaan. Keterikatan pada suatu merek akan lebih kuat apabila dilandasi pada banyak pengalaman atau penampakan untuk mengkomunikasikannya. uang atau resiko sehubungan dengan upaya untuk melakukan pergantian ke merek lain. Sedangkan menurut Kim dan Kim (2004). 5.

o o Design an advertisement in the form of a mailer or an e-mailer. You do this by getting consumers to notice that your product stands out from the rest. make sure you’re making a great first impression. Once again. Ads by Google Masters in Marketing& Advertising. Whichever form you choose.  For example. Design marketing materials that help consumers link to the brand by making them perceive special benefits in your product that they cannot find in others. Alternatively. Top London School Career Service. Here’s where a sound advertising strategy comes into play. The surest road to product failure is to try to be all things to all people. 4 Build a solid brand image. 2 Get the consumer’s attention.org. advertisements for costly designer handbags create the impression that consumers who purchase them will look like Hollywood socialites. high cost or reliability. 3. Visa Support. 4. Your goal is to create public awareness and then build on that brand. Apply LSBF. Consumers who view these advertisements accept that the distinctive feature of the handbags-high cost-creates added value that boosts the image of anyone who buys them. consider your product’s special feature. Combine these two factors to reinforce an image of the product that reflects favorably on its manufacturer or provider. Add to that the character of your company. 1 Target your audience. Your objective is to make consumers feel an emotional attachment to the brand.edit Steps 1. such as its authenticity.uk/Marketing-Advertising o Decide who are the most likely users of your product and develop marketing materials that speak exclusively to that group. 3 Make the public remember your brand. send out samples of a new product to a target group. . o o Plan your marketing campaign around the most distinctive feature of your product. 2.

creates equity or value in your brand. The good news is that the path to building brand equity is clear. It is the quality that motivates your customers to recommend their friends or colleagues to you. brand equity is how your customer recognizes why you are different and better than the alternative. even if they may not be able to define the idea. 5. Make sure employees at every level of your organization work and behave in a way that reinforces your brand image. But building it. Brand equity is what creates loyalty that carries beyond price or the occasional product or service bump in the road. Good positioning forces hard choices. can be a puzzle. Marketing-speak aside. 5 Reinforce the brand image within the company. . 500 rather than the Fortune 500. write an article in the company newsletter that showcases an employee who went beyond his stated job duties to assist a customer with an urgent request. a company intranet and corporate newsletters. Everyone wants brand equity. repeated over time. or Sony—hardly your peer set. Brand equity is built on that customer's direct experience with your product or service. This experience. Here are five simple steps you can take to get started: 1. Particularly when the role models for brand equity are global icons like Coca Cola. nstinctively. such as brochures. Volvo.o Pick one or two characteristics of your company and emphasize those in every advertisement.  For example. every small business owner understands the importance of brand equity. And it serves as a shorthand in the buyer's mind that separates you from everyone else. Clarify your position The first step to building brand equity is to define your positioning: the single thing your company stands for to your customers. o o o Design orientation programs that introduce new hires to your company’s brand image. Create incentives for employees at all levels who successfully communicate your brand image to the public. company executives who are renowned experts in a field or a commitment to social responsibility. Distinctive characteristics include excellent customer service. when you are more likely to qualify for the Inc. Single is the operative word here. Emphasize your brand image in all employee communications. employee manuals.

Bring it to life Once you have the story. You don't need an agency or consultant to get started. This might sound blindingly obvious. There are a couple of good exercises out there that you can do on your own. advantage. The real food story begins with the stories of the "real people. your retail environment. a small restaurant chain in Boston. This leads to questions about your corporate identity: Do the basics (starting with your name and logo) make the impression you want? And your broader system for communicating to the market: Web site. B. Z is the differentiation. Tell your story Clear positioning is critical.. 3. Your next job is to make it interesting. or service or other offering you've chosen to own. You're reminded of these stories when you're in the restaurant or checking store hours online. or the background behind the big product breakthrough.com). but positioning statements are internal touchstones. product. 2.To define your brand position. or key positive distinction you have over your competition. it is within every company's grasp to share these stories more broadly through rich-media video and audio. the times you went to extraordinary lengths to take care of a customer.bgood.Good (www. and a good way to get started is to document and share your best corporate stories: the founding insight of the company. you need to bring it to life. to imbue the rational positioning with emotion. get the key leaders in your company together. The good news is that with ubiquitous broadband access and Web-based applications. . not external expressions. All brands are stories. Y is the unmet need of your target audience. brochures. A simple one that I like is the Positioning XYZs: "We are the only X that solves Y problem in Z unique way. but most small businesses are too busy responding to customers or making payroll to do a lot of introspection. • • • X is the category of the company." positioning itself against the typical fast-food burger and experience." the founders whose corporate values are based on their experiences growing up at their uncle's restaurant. It's a burger joint that promises "real food." Where. Make sure that the way your company looks and feels to the outside world matches that truth. has done this well. Decide what makes you different and better than your competition..

I don't know all of what Igor measures. Start building brand before they buy Think beyond the transaction. and outlines a very clear process for naming. and (ideally) people who chose a competitor over you." and also incredibly shrewd. It has built a methodology—and a client list that rivals those of much-larger branding agencies. The principle is a simple one: Give away an artifact of your brand for free. Survey a subset of customers. Does your corporate identity reveal the best truth about your business.com) has shown that the willingness to recommend is the most important indicator of brand health. and vendor-rating Web sites (www. Measure your efforts Here are a few direct ways to measure the progress of your brand: • • • Ask your customers. detailed. bulletin boards. Check out what they're saying about you in blogs. not the paid ones on the top or side). and chances are you'll see Igor come up in the top three listings (the earned ones in the middle.com or www. This is an ingenious way to enable the fiercely loyal customers of Peet's to promote the brand themselves.com) is a naming consultancy based in San Francisco. In the professional services world. Monitor the social media conversation. You'll be surprised at how candid people will be about your strengths—and your weaknesses.netpromoter. Check your search rankings.surveymonkey." an email redeemable for a free cup of coffee. allows customers to send their friends an "eCup. The opportunity to create a brand impression starts long before the buying decision.com) or SurveyMonkey (www. Here are two creative examples: Igor (www.A client of mine talked about his Web site as a "corporate veil" that obscured what made the company special. the coffee retailer. but the brand experience goes much deeper.technorati. 5.yelp. in the spirit of Web content "wanting to be free.com). This research can be done quite cheaply online. That methodology is laid bare in a 100-page guide to naming that it gives away—without any registration requirements—on its Web site. In most categories. It doesn't have to be just IP. This move is both generous.keysurvey. or does it hide it? 4. but I do know it fares very well in what is perhaps the most important measure of them all: organic search results. . prospective customers.com are good places to start).peets. The naming guide is rich.igorinternational. Type "product naming" on Google.com). Igor understands that giving away IP (intellectual property) doesn't cost it business—but it is its lead business generator. Peet's (www. Brands begin at the transaction level. Make sure you ask the most important question in any customer research: Would you recommend us to a friend or colleague? Research (check out www. this means a taste of your service or your intellectual property. consumers are holding a very active and candid conversation about the brands they love and hate. using free or near-free tools like KeySurvey (www.

marketingprofs. The study of brand equity is increasingly popular as some marketing researchers have concluded that brands are one of the most valuable assets that a company has[7]. In other words. profit margins. Contents [hide] • • • • • • 1 Measurement 2 Positive brand equity vs. Elements that can be included in the valuation of brand equity include (but not limited to): changing market share. consumer recognition of logos and other visual elements. Because of the well known brand name the company some time charges premium prices from the consumer . Brand equity is one of the factors which can increase the financial value of a brand to the brand owner. although not the only one [8].com/articles/2008/2739/five-steps-to-building-brandequity-for-the-small-business#ixzz1I40CKKFj Brand equity refers to the marketing effects and outcomes that accrue to a product with its brand name compared with those that would accrue if the same product did not have the brand name. Read more: http://www. If you're skeptical. In fact.*** At the end of the day. They have built a special relationship with customers that extends far beyond the product. These are practices you don't need a billion dollar marketing budget to emulate. you can start today.[1][2][3][4]. And they exercise a fanatical discipline in how that brand position is communicated in the market. at the root of these marketing effects is consumers' knowledge. negative brand equity 3 Family branding vs. And. consumers' perceptions of quality and other relevant brand values. consumers' knowledge about a brand makes manufacturers/advertisers respond differently or adopt appropriately adept measures for the marketing of the brand [5][6]. These companies start with a clear. individual branding strategies 4 Examples 5 References 6 See also [edit] Measurement . focused position in the market. brand value is tangible. brand language associations made by consumers. take a look at Interbrand's annual survey of the world's most valuable brands.

In short. The discount rate is a subjective rate determined by Interbrand and Wall Street equity specialists and reflects the risk profile. Interbrand estimates brand value on the basis of projected profits discounted to a present value. is due to the brand[10]. assuming all things equal. such as a wide product recall or continued negative press attention (Blackwater or Halliburton. attitudes. . A second perspective is that negative equity can exist. Free association tests and projective techniques are commonly used to uncover the tangible and intangible attributes. For example. More recently a revenue premium approach has been advocated [4].the residual would be the brand equity. hypothesizing only positive brand equity is created by marketing activities such as advertising. Brands with high levels of awareness and strong. PR. the term "negative brand equity" may be used to describe a product or service where a brand has a negligible effect on a product level when compared to a no-name or private label product. due to catastrophic events to the brand. approximations. One perspective states brand equity cannot be negative. a calculation is made regarding how much the brand is worth as an intangible asset. if you were to take the value of the firm. [edit] Positive brand equity vs. Consumer Level: This approach seeks to map the mind of the consumer to find out what associations with the brand the consumer has. some at the product level. To do its calculation. favorable and unique associations are high equity brands[5].There are many ways to measure a brand. negative brand equity This article needs additional citations for verification. This approach seeks to measure the awareness (recall and recognition) and brand image (the overall associations that the brand has). There are two schools of thought regarding the existence of negative brand equity. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. Colloquially. Product Level: The classic product level brand measurement example is to compare the price of a no-name or private label product to an "equivalent" branded product. Please help improve this article by adding reliable references. stability and global reach of the brand[9]. for example). at best.and then subtract tangible assets and "measurable" intangible assets. and still others are at the consumer level.[7] One high profile firm level approach is by the consulting firm Interbrand. Firm Level: Firm level approaches measure the brand as a financial asset. as derived by its market capitalization . All of these calculations are. A more complete understanding of the brand can occur if multiple measures are used. (November 2009) A brand equity is the positive effect of the brand on the difference between the prices that the consumer accepts to pay when the brand known compared to the value of the benefit received. and promotion. Some measurements approaches are at the firm level. The difference in price. market leadership. and intentions about a brand[5].

38 (Spring).” Journal of Marketing. “Conceptualizing. ^ a b c Keller. C. [edit] References ^ Aaker. individual branding strategies The greater a company's brand equity. The Toronto Star quoted an analyst who warned that changing the name of the well known Windstar to the Freestar would cause confusion and discard brand equity built up. "Five Hundred" was recognized by less than half of most people. By 2007.” Journal of Consumer Research. 1-17 5. Lehmann. ^ Grannell.[edit] Family branding vs. “Brand Equity: The Halo Effect Measure. “Revenue Premium as an Outcome Measure of Brand Equity.” European Journal of Marketing. David A. B. all starting with "F". but an overwhelming majority was familiar with the "Ford Taurus". The aging Taurus.S. Mittal and A. ^ Chu. Kusum L. and Managing Customer-Based Brand Equity. CA : New Riders Publishing. and Scott A Neslin (2003). New York: The Free Press ^ Keller. 2. “Measuring Customer-Based Brand Equity. Chris (2009).. 29 (4).” Journal of Marketing. David A. ^ Lassar. the Ford Motor Company made a strategic decision to brand all new or redesigned cars with names starting with "F". Singfat and Hean Tat Keh (2006). 11-19 7. Measuring. W. The Brand Gap: How to Bridge the Distance Between Business Strategy and Design. L. the Five Hundred. Kevin Lane (2003). This aligned with the previous tradition of naming all sport utility vehicles since the Ford Explorer with the letter "E". and perception of quality . Freestar and Fusion.” California Management Review. [edit] Examples In the early 2000s in North America. The Five Hundred name was thrown out and Taurus was brought back for the next generation of that car in a surprise move by Alan Mulally. 12 (4).” Journal of Consumer Marketing. Brandchannel. Kevin Lane (1993). ^ a b Ailawadi. . 57-66. Managing Brand Equity. Value and Health".. ^ Aaker. “Brand Value Creation: Analysis of the Interbrand-Business Week Brand Value Rankings. 102-120. 323-331 10. Marty (2006). Kohli and K. This is because family branding allows them to leverage the equity accumulated in the core brand. ^ Leuthesser. 1. Fall 2008 9. Berkekley. the greater the probability that the company will use a family branding strategy rather than an individual branding strategy. the Freestar was discontinued without a replacement.R. (1991). 17. 4. 595-600 3. 29 (4). 8. ^ a b Neumeier. “Brand Synthesis: The Multidimensionality of Brand Knowledge. Sharma (1995). Aspects of brand equity includes: brand loyalty. 67 (October). “Measuring Brand Equity Across Products and Markets.. Harich (1995).” Marketing Letters. would be abandoned in favor of three entirely new names. while a marketing manager believed that a name change would highlight the new redesign. (1996). "Untangling Brand Equity. 57 (January) 1-22 6. Donald R. which became one of the most significant cars in American auto history. awareness. association.

almost assuring future cash flows to the company.1 2008). The consumer will reward the brand owner with dollars. Knapp explained in an article for Risk Management . The first step in building brand equity is for the company to define itself and what it hopes to represent for consumers. Alan Mitchell of Marketing Week described brand equity as "the storehouse of future profits which result from past marketing activities. The less distinctive these impressions. Building a brand requires the company to gain name recognition for its product. Companies may spend vast sums of money and effort just to attain recognition of a new brand. a company must painstakingly strive to earn and maintain brand loyalty. When all of these elements support a distinctive image of the company and its products in the minds of consumers. and then convince the buyer that the brand is acceptable. symbol." Duane E. Only after those triumphs can the company hope to secure some degree of preference for its brand. In order to benefit from the consumer relationship allowed by branding. unwavering consumer perception of the distinctive emotional or functional benefits of its products and services. positive associations with the brand and its use in the minds of consumers. or passive agreement. to buy the brand. as long as his or her brand preference remains intact. In return for the buyer's brand loyalty. Consumers often rely upon brands to guide their purchase decisions. the brand. (12. "At the end of the day. the brand is the sum total of the consumer's impressions about the product and service. a company must instill a clear." BUILDING BRAND EQUITY The basis of brand equity lies in the relationship that develops between a consumer and the company selling the products or services under the brand name. Journal of Marketing p 23. or other feature that distinguishes the company's goods or services in the marketplace. and expected from. the company essentially assures the buyer that the product will confer the benefits associated with. from its product and service offerings to its marketing programs to its customer service policies. A consumer who prefers a particular brand basically agrees to select that brand over others based primarily on his or her perception of the brand and its value. get the consumer to actually try its brand. The buyer may even pay a higher price for the company's goods or services because of his commitment. Paul Kilburn ad Alfred Riachi Brands vs non Branded Strategies." Many companies structure their marketing programs around building and preserving their brand equity.10. . The next step is to make sure that all aspects of the company's operations support this image. Brand equity refers to the intangible value that accrues to a company as a result of its successful efforts to establish a strong brand. A brand is a name. But getting consumers to recognize a brand name is only half the battle in building brand equity. the company has established brand equity. Name awareness is a critical factor in achieving brand success. It is also important for the company to establish strong. The positive feelings consumers accumulate about a particular brand are what makes the brand a valuable asset for the company that owns it. "To be a strong brand. the greater the risk that a competitor's products or services may gain a stronger perception—and competitive advantage.

Customer loyalty decreases. In his Risk Management article. in some cases assessing consumer perceptions of product quality may provide the best indication of brand equity. many companies attempted to extend their brands into the field of electronic commerce. "That's because b-to-b [business-to-business] brands are built brick by independent brick with customer service. Successful online brands must deliver those same elements. and can get a much better feel of the dangers of short-termism. Knapp claims that managers must remain constantly vigilant to protect their brand equity. Knapp recommends that companies consider the impact of major decisions on consumer perceptions and brand equity. But doing business online proved difficult even for established businesses with popular brands. For example. Real business performance therefore equals short-term results plus shifts in brand equity. you're storing up trouble for yourself…. then the branded product becomes more like a commodity and must compete on the basis of price rather than value. "If brand equity is falling. or the decision to lay off employees or relocate a factory—should be assessed for its effect on brand equity. If a brand loses its distinctive image in the minds of consumers. since a declining brand image poses a significant risk to company earnings. It is also dangerous to assume that simply because its brand is well-known. Mitchell explained that the best way to measure brand equity depends on the particular company and its industry." Unfortunately. the most powerful brands can easily be diluted by company missteps or inconsistent marketing messages. measuring brand equity is not as simple as counting the number of people who recognize a brand name or symbol. support. In order to prevent this decline." . In the offline world. In fact. and more.MEASURING AND PROTECTING BRAND EQUITY Although measuring brand equity can be difficult. more traditional business measures such as customer satisfaction or market share may be more closely correlated with brand equity. and quality—and are cemented by personal relationships. Finding an appropriate measure of brand equity is vital in order for companies to ensure that they protect this valuable asset. TRANSFERRING BRAND EQUITY ONLINE Companies often seek to leverage their brand equity by transferring consumers'positive associations with a brand to a related product or service. through the use of technology." Rochelle Garner declared in an article for Sales and Marketing Management. it can also provide managers with a good indication of their company's future profitability. "Companies which develop good measures of their brand equity have an early warning indicator of likely future profit trends. even if it's not showing through in profits today. a company enjoys strong or growing brand equity. If brand equity is rising. In other cases. which has a corresponding negative effect on market share and profit margins." Mitchell noted. you're investing in future performance. "Think branding an offline business is tough? It's nothing compared with creating a brand for your company's electronic offshoot. those relationships are forged by a sales force that calls on customers face-to-face. Every action taken by management—including the introduction of new products or advertising strategies. In the late 1990s.

June-July 1998." Marketing Week. Overall. 2000. Spring 2000. Alan. creating new production efficiencies. "The Name of the Game: Managing Brands as Strategic Assets. "Brand Equity. according to Garner. September 1999. Read more: Brand Equity . the key to extending a brand online is using technology to enhance the buying experience for customers. Building brand equity. Yoo. Leonard L. the Internet offers sellers a number of new ways to service their customers' needs. moving the business online can only increase their brand equity." Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science.referenceforbusiness. and reducing order time and costs. Winter 2000.Garner outlined a series of steps for companies to take in creating a successful online brand." International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management." Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science. the company must decide whether or not to use its offline brand name in its new online venture. When companies can take advantage of Internet technology to improve their relationships with their customers. August 3. Mitchell. Garner says that companies should develop an understanding of the benefits they want to deliver through the online business and assess how technology can help in this mission.html#ixzz1I41Ugv9W . This strategy may prove effective in cases where the online business is a straightforward extension of the existing brand. offering instant electronic customer support. Duane E. Rochelle. FURTHER READING: Berry. First." Risk Management. "An Examination of Selected Marketing Mix Elements and Brand Equity. "Why Brand Equity Is the True Measure of Success.advantage. "Cultivating Service Brand Equity. but it may also have the effect of diluting the brand equity. Boonghee. and Sungho Lee. she emphasizes that companies should try to understand customers'expectations for the online business and the brand. October 2000. Knapp. including bringing together buyers and sellers from all over the world. Naveen Donthu. Garner. Third. Finally. "A Brand by Any Other Name." Sales and Marketing Management.com/small/Bo-Co/BrandEquity. she recommends that companies find ways to use Internet technology to create a rewarding shopping or purchase experience for their customers. Measuring and protecting brand equity http://www. benefits. Second. After all.

start branding. Before the customer gets to the cash register. that best reflect your positioning statement. is positioned to bring that old country feeling back to people. Cracker Barrel tells its story in text on its Web site and in everything. down to the old look of the labels on the candy and other products. Their Web site and their menus tell the story of how the first store and restaurant opened in Tennessee in the 1960s to give travelers a place to get a good meal and pick up candy for their kids on their way home. “One” is the important word here. Position statements are often internal statements that need to be made external. The way to do that is by telling a story. Build the brand before the transaction. in your brand. Your value to the customer is what separates you from your competition. or even to the store. These old time stores often had a barrel of saltine crackers that the community members would gather around to visit with friends. This is the one thing your company stands for in the minds of your customers. 2009 Small and large businesses alike know how important brand equity is in today’s overcrowded market. Define your positioning. Let everyone know your story and bring it to life. which are likely to come from the founder. 3. It is what makes customers loyal to your brand and motivates them to refer to their friends. 1. When a customer has used your product over and over again. It does not have to be something big. Brand equity stems from the customer’s experiences with your product or service. including the label printing. it could be a free notepad at the door or . It is the value of your brand to the customer. They know this even if they do not know exactly what it entails. Brand equity is the outcome related to how your customer would recognize your difference from competitors and why you are the better alternative.4 Steps to Create Brand Equity by Assistant on October 9. It does in its stores. Cracker Barrel. The easiest way to do this is to give something away that has your branding on it. or value. Document your best corporate stories. what is the one thing that makes you different and better than the competition? 2. Ask yourself and your employees. Web site and everything that is in the store. You must define your brand position with just one element. but it is not impossible. Therefore. Many try to create the level of brand equity those great companies like Coca-Cola and Sony have. that builds equity. It takes hard work to get to that level. especially when you implement the following steps in your marketing plan. Cracker Barrel was born and its story is told through the menus. a well-known restaurant that serves “old country” food and has “old country” stores that shelve nostalgic brands of candy in nostalgic wrappers. Everything about their restaurants and stores reminds people of a time long gone. You need to clarify your positioning in the market among your competitors.

As long as the coupon has your logo and elements of your brand on it. Herman (2000) and Yoo . Yoo . Lee (2000). Katie Marcus writes about the label printing technologies used by businesses for their marketing and advertising campaigns. Katie Marcus writes information about printing company and printing technologies.even an email coupon for a free item in customers’ email inboxes. Those are psychological advantages (defined by the consumer itself). it counts toward building your brand equity. Vendor-rating Web site Technorati and Yelp are great places to start. a concept that became a leading marketing .com/branding-articles/4-steps-to-create-brand-equity1321911. the road to building brand equity will be a lot smoother and a lot shorter. Donthu &. 2000). In addition. Donthu &. especially when they are unhappy about a product or service. Measure efforts. Farquhar 1989 Srivastava and Shocker 1991 & Lutz (2002) Moore. You can simply ask customers when they come into your store what they think of your brand. Lee (2000)are adding a new aspect by associating brand equity with all unreal benefits in a brand. This brand name gives the product its unreal benefits. This definition deals with two brands gaining the same utility benefits. 4. Many studies dealt with the need for brand equity.articlesbase.The difference the consumer experienced while tasting a glass of Coca Cola from a transparent glass. social advantages and even experience benefits. Those definitions are not contradicting and all of following definitions by Yoo . the great thing about these steps is that you can get started on that road today. blogs and chats. Herman gives an example by mentioning the Coca Cola test. brand name was exposed in one of the options. Herman ( 2001)as well defines brand equity as benefits that are above the products utilities. Many researches demonstrated that the glass poured from the Coca Cola bottle was tastier than the other (Herman. Consumers are quite active on forums. Donthu &. with a different brand name. Same drink. same glass. By implementing these steps. so check out what people are saying about you online.html Brand Equity Many researches tried to define the concept of Brand Equity. or you can do some research on your own. You can send out surveys to customers and prospects in the area or you can check the social media conversations going on about your brand. Lee (2000) defines brand equity as the equity differences between two similar products. Wilkie ). and the different experience they had while drinking from a Coca Cola bottle. Article Source:http://www. Initial definition characterized it as the added value the brand gains as a result of investing in a branded marketing (Aaker 1991. when the drinkers did not know the name of the drink.

2000). social status. Moore . in a study preformed in the USA. Vincent J. Steven N. The study showed that brand equity can sometime pass from on generation to another. this gives the distributor time to patch up things in case of market changes. but also by the advantages given by the brands equity benefits. Researches show that brand equity can be manipulative. Wee & Ming (2003)supported Myers (2003) and indicated that in a competitive world like ours. just like Myers (2003) study. it was found that symbolic values are more important than operative values of the product. the importance of unreal equity. done by the researches. Wilkie & Lutz (2002)studied whether brand equity can stay for long. This gives the brand the ability to be more than the product itself and justify a higher price and constant preference by consumers. Pascal (1999). For example: BMW is considered as a product that provides youthful and success values. Distributors can not relay on operational benefits any more. Capella & Alford (2001) analyses different aspects in brand equity while using empiric research and Aaker (1991) and Keller (1993) modules. all of those are contributing to the need in brand equity. New technologies and new marketing methods are giving the consumer a better access to knowledge. The study shows. and while doing so. "RELATING CONSUMERBASED SOURCES OF BRAND EQUITY TO MARKET OUTCOMES". According to Herman (2000). they preformed 2 researches. by using association elements and different signs that can influence the brand image.2000). expand the brand into new categories and build brand loyalty (Aaker & Joachimstahler. Myers studied the equity of nine leading brands in the soft drinks segment. and sometimes not. In order to study the subject. brand equity is based on symbolic values. they need to create symbolic benefit and experience to the brand. Brands that do not have future brand equity can suffer from lack of loyalty and a small target market (Schreuer. Also. Myers(2003) defines another important aspect . can you pass brand equity from one generation to another. This branding procedure creates in the consumer’s mind a personal relationship between him and the brand itself. Silverman. brand equity creates income steadiness. all in order to answer the question of how to create a positive image. and by doing so influence the brand equity. it was found that brand name is more important than brand’s utilities functions. In the empiric study. meaning. consumers satisfaction is not determined only by the real utilities the product has. work place. more options and less switching expenses. This result is due to changes in brand equity due to new influences in the consumer’s life cycle: environment. In light of multiple competitors in the market it was found that real equity and unreal equity was considered important for building brand image and acquisition intentions.Today. in Advances in .concept in the past 20 years. Those modules demonstrate viewpoint influence and brand image on brand equity. they become part of the consumer’s life. but. Sprott. The study findings demonstrate that brand equity is one of the most important factors that influence the consumer in each acquisition decision. Faircolth . etc. Distributors create brands with symbolic values and “personality”. David E.

.] ABSTRACT Among scholars and practitioners. however. Eric J. between customer-based and market-based measures of brand equity remains unclear (although Krishnan [1996] has studied the question). UT : Association for Consumer Research. and the Financial World’s measure of brand value). market-based brand equity). and evaluation). The present paper focuses on consumer-based sources of equity--a view modeled after Keller (1993). Study 2 then introduces a new method called affinity analysis to examine how brand imageCstrength. corporate structure. Recently.. Washington State University Vincent J. Arnould and Linda M. [There are many "sources" of brand equity (including consumer cognitions. favorability. Scott. and direct experienceCto market outcomes of brand value (annual sales. Pascal. Researchers have studied and measured "brand equity" from both the organizational (e.] The relationship. 1999 Pages 352-358 RELATING CONSUMER-BASED SOURCES OF BRAND EQUITY TO MARKET OUTCOMES Steven N. Washington State University David E. customer-based brand equity). management creativity.e. Advances in Consumer Research Volume 26.e. there is some agreement on the concept of brand equity. whereas the rich results of Study 2 are encouraging for both scholars and managers.. Washington State University [The authors thank the editors and three anaonymous reviewers for their thoughtful comments. familiarity. Keller 1993. and favorability of brand associations (Keller 1993)Cmay differentiate between two market-leading brands. Study 2 uses affinity analysis to examine how consumers’ brand associations differentiate market leaders from followers. Financial World ratings. etc.g. Sprott.g.. Keller (1998) used a customer-based definition of brand eqity to distinguish sources of brand equity held in consumer knowledge structures (i. usage. This paper presents two empirical studies that explore this issue. from marketplace outcomes of brand equity (i. Silverman.. Provo.e. Study 1 compares consumerbased measures of brand awarenessCincluding familiarity. uniqueness.) that may ultimately impact market-based outcomes. Study 1 compares market-based outcomes (i. Yet measuring this construct is less clear. This project considers how various measures of brand value relate to one another.. Pages: 352-358. Study 1 found a weak relationship between measures. Krishnan 1996) perspectives. eds. MEASURING BRAND EQUITY .e. Simon and Sullivan 1993) and customer (e. and annual sales) with consumer-based sources of brand value (i.Consumer Research Volume 26.

he clearly places the locus of brand equity within the consumer. For example.g. assets).e. 42).. evaluation approaches. These similar valuations first determine the earnings for a brand. His own definition captures this distinction: "customer-based brand equity is defined as the differential effect of brand knowledge on consumer response to the marketing of the brand. and then adjust that figure with a brand-strength multiplier consisting of seven brandrelated factors: leadership. Aaker 1991. hence their views must be included (Keller 1993). Relating Consumer Sources and Market Outcomes of Brand Equity . holistic methods [see Keller 1998]). objective. market environment. Our focus is on the latter.. and adapted by Financial World. Keller 1993. p. 3). product related attributes. As Keller (1998) notes.. Market Outcomes of Brand Equity Most market-based measures of brand equity are related to some aspect of market performance.g. and explore how they are related to one another.. Keller 1993). others have focused on the marketplace valuation of a brand (e. and legal protection (Ourusoff 1994). Kamakura and Russell 1993. We consider both of these approaches.g. a marketing consultng organization. trend. communications support.g. Others contend that for a brand to have value it must be valued by consumers. Brand awareness relates to the strength of a brand in memory. Much of the extant work has been aimed at defining and measuring brand equity. valuation approaches measure brand equity from brand-related financial data (e. Another financial method (used in the present research) was developed by Interbrand... or changes in stock price (Simon and Sullivan 1993). user and usage imagery. brand associations are the myriad nodes that are linked to the brand in memory (i. price.8). Alternatively. Consumer Sources of Brand Equity Conceptualizations of brand equity based on consumer sources typically fall into two categories: those involving consumer behaviors (e." (Keller 1993. and so on). Some researchers suggest that brand equity measures should rely on market-based. stability. This situation has led to the development of numerous measures of brand equity (e. Simon and Sullivan 1993).g.Brand equity has emerged as an important issue in marketing research (e. Keller 1998). comparative approaches.g. Following an associative network model of memory. measures because consumer attitude and preference measures are inherently subjective (Simon and Sullivan 1993). While Keller’s (1993) view recognizes the marketplace impact of brand equity. internationality. and the likelihood and ease with which the brand will be recognized or recalled under various conditions.. most discussions of brand equity consider it to be "the marketing effects uniquely attributable to the brand" (p. sales. Brand image is defined as "perceptions about the brand as reflected by the brand associations held in consumer memory" Keller (1993 pg. This view suggests that brand equity arises from the strength and favorability of the two components of consumer-based brand knowledge structures: brand awareness and brand image. Kamakura and Russell’s [1993] analyses using scanner data) and those involving consumer cognition (e.

as well as produce greater consumer (and retailer) loyalty and decrease vulnerability to marketing actions. the number of brands was reduced to only those targeted toward the population studied. if consumer perceptions of brands are reflected by purchase decisions. Results changed only modestly and primarily reflected lower variance in familiarity with brands. "Unpleasant" and "Pleasant"). Brand familiarity (i. . then the measures of those perceptions should also correlate with market-based outcomes.65 to 0. or NOT SURE to each question. STUDY 1: RELATING BRAND AWARENESS TO MARKET OUTCOMES The objective of Study 1 was to learn how brand awarenessCassessed by familiarity. Brands were included in the final set on the basis of their availability in stores directly on campus. Brands were randomly assigned to fourteen groups of fourteen brands each.93). The three-item scale was averaged to form a "favorability" measure for subjects reporting they had heard of the brand. [The final set of 92 brands included frequently purchased non-durable goods of which the target market included Study 1's student subjects. Respondents (361 undergraduate business students) were randomly assigned one of the fourteen brand groups to evaluate. NO. as would be expected. As Keller (1993) notes: "high levels of brand awareness and positive brand image should increase the probability of brand choice.e. "Dislike Very Much" and "Like Very Much". consumer-based sources of brand equity should relate to marketbased outcomes. Respondents were asked.Using Keller’s (1993) model." (p. Two measures were then calculated for the analysis: (1) "familiarity" is the percent of the sample indicating that they had heard of the brand. "How would you evaluate this brand regarding the following adjective pairs?" Responses were recorded on three. "Have you ever used this brand before?" Respondents answered YES. nine-point scales (anchored by "Bad" and "Good".. recognition) was measured by asking. Brand favorability was assessed by a three-item scale (Cox and Cox 1988). After the data were collected. this value was calculated for each brand (alphas ranged from 0. 92 (85) brands were used for the 1993 (1995) analyses presented here. usage and favorability (Keller 1993)Cis related to market-based outcomes of brand valueCmeasured by annual sales and Financial World brand ratings (Ourusoff 1994).99 for individual brands. 8). The brands (n=196) used in the study were among those included in Financial World (Ourusoff 1994) and spanned 19 product categories. The two market-based measures (for 1993 and 1995) were sales and brand valuation figures as presented by Financial World (Badenhausen 1996. Market-Based Measures. and (2) "usage" is the percent of the sample that reported hearing of the brand and had used it. Ultimately. In other words. "Have you ever heard of this brand name?" Brand usage was determined by asking.) Study 1 Method Sample and Procedure. For a detailed discussion see Keller 1998. This adjustment was made based on a suggestion by reviewers.] Consumer-Based Measures. (The Financial World and Interbrand valuations are quite similar to one another. Ourusoff 1994). average alpha=0. Brand names (four per page) were presented in a larger font with bold type.

In markets where this is common (e..e. On the face of it. This result suggests sales may. and usage) measures of brand equity. small.. Study 1 Analyses and Results Pearson correlation coefficients were calculated between all pairs of 1993 and 1995 marketbased (i. Keller 1998). it appears that Financial World measures offer minimal advantages over raw sales figures. Because the market-based measures are #holistic’ (cf. and significant relationships are found. Here. positive. one of the more interesting findings is the comparable performance of brand value and sales. Moreover. be a useful way of capturing brand value. Based on our study. In order to account for differences in brand values and sales across product categories.e. regardless of a brand’s sales or value it is known to the sample. is based on profits related to the brand adjusted for the brand’s strength (defined by Interbrand’s sevenfactors). Study 1 Discussion The findings of Study 1 suggest that favorability and usage are the consumer measures most closely associated to market-outcomes of brand equity. familiarity offers little insight.. gasoline. Hence. automobiles) familiarity may not be useful in relating consumer knowledge to market value. In both cases. at some level. further evaluation shows that on average. Our use of Financial World’s brand valuation is based on the availability of thedata and the overall acceptance and use of this measure (cf. Category Position . assessed by the favorability. familiarity. measuring brand familiarity is not recommended when subjects are familiar with most brands in a category. was not more highly correlated with marketplace success. and strength of brand associations). similar to the Interbrand formula. evaluation. uniqueness.g. it is somewhat surprising that familiarity. The results of the correlational analysis indicate that the focal measures of brand value are weakly correlated with one another (see Table). especially when considering the extent to which this measure is recommended for assessing brand value (cf. based on recognition.Financial World’s brand value formula (Keller 1998). brand value ratings and sales) and consumer-based (i. the fact that any significant correlation is found is encouraging and suggests the need for a deeper understanding of the relationships between consumer sources and market-based outcomes of brand equity. 95. However. STUDY 2: RELATING BRAND IMAGE TO MARKET OUTCOMES In Study 2 we examine the relationship between category position (a market-based distinction on whether the brand is first or second in a particular category) and brand image (the other component in Keller’s [1993] brand knowledge model. the data were standardized within product categories. Keller 1998). airlines.3 % of subjects had heard of each brand in the study. Finally. Keller 1998).

Badenhausen 1996). Affinity analysis is conceptually akin to a statistically-based cluster analysis or factor analysis. Study 2 Method The sample (n=119) included the same undergraduate business students from Study 1.. the diagram is created using groups of people (external coders or subjects). they are often unable to overtake the primary brands that they follow. Studying brand image among category leaders may help explain why they are so formidable. accrue to brand leaders." Subjects then rated the valence of each thought on a 7-point scale (-3 to 3). Tylenol and Advil) as identified by Financial World rankings (Ourusoff 1994. For present purposes. Yet as Collins and Porras (1994) point out. including long-term financial strength (Collins and Porras 1994). Because the result must be acceptable to all who are coding the data. TABLE RESULTS OF STUDY 1 -. market position (either first or second in a category) can be viewed as a dichotomous. however. Their visual organization is otherwise arbitrary.. and presumably in the minds of consumers. first in their product category. [It is important to note that these diagrams are neither mental maps (Zaltman. A mean of 143 brand associations were generated for each brand. Unlike cardsorting. base clusters) of verbal data based on the mutual affinity among the items. LeMasters. secondary brands are not failures by almost any measure. When viewed from this perspective. A range of 1 to 19 associations were provided by each subject (median=5). and Tylenol. . The focal brands for Study 2 included the first and second brands for soft drinks (i.PEARSON CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS AMONG MEASURES OF BRAND VALUE Study 2 Analysis Each brand was considered by 30 subjects (except one for which there were 29 subjects).Research and marketplace examples demonstrate the importance of being a market leader. or ideas of a complex nature using verbal data (Futami 1986. These associations were then analyzed by several coders using affinity analysis. and Heffring 1982) nor node-arc associative representations. CocaCola. assuming a correspondence between this market-based measure and consumer knowledge structures. Brand associations were obtained via a thought listing task asking participants to write down "all of the thoughts that come to mind when you think of the following brand..] The affinity methodCoriginally developed to study facts.e.e. Silverman and Silverman 1994)Callows one to form groupings (i. Coca-Cola and Pepsi) and over-the-counter medications (i. Nevertheless. and is functionally similar to card-sorting techniques. however. we would expect a high correspondence between consumers’ brand associations and market leadership. Nike. this method can generate additional insight that does not emerge from an individual level analysis. Study 2 data were collected two months later.e. They are cluster representations based upon jointly shared perceptions of affinity among the items presented. market-based measure of brand equity. a process which generates an "affinity diagram" (see Figures 1 and 2). Many benefits. opinions. hold a unique position in the marketplace.

First. Because base clusters emerge from the data. First. we counted the number of responses in a given base cluster. we turn to see how brand uniqueness is reflected in the affinity diagrams. These mid-level cluster values were then aggregated to create an "overall cluster value" (reported in the center of each diagram). Second. First. Study 2 Results . the unshaded boxes). and uniqueness (Keller 1998). and positive or negative values indicate associated valence. consumer beliefs and evaluations of those beliefs were used to calculate a strength x favorability product for each of the base clusters (i. when similar base clusters or mid-level clusters emerge for different brands one could compare the associated values to assess which brand has a relative. Each brand’s affinity diagram took approximately one hour to create (three to six human hours). the affinity diagram process proceeded as follows. "ad themes" in the Coca-Cola and Pepsi diagrams). Thus. strength. to which descriptive terms were then assigned. Using the brand associations and favorability ratings. differences between brands can emerge in two ways. Next. This calculation is designed to capture the relative "favorability" associated with the cluster.g. Although each brand in this study was analyzed separately by the researchers and several assistants.e. more aggregate indices of brand strength and favorability were calculated. strong associations are represented by larger numbers. the strength vlues in these unshaded boxes been have been aggregated and labeled (e. the Post-it7 notes were arranged by coding teams ranging from three to six members. Specifically. similar labels were then applied to midlevel clusters (where appropriate) to aid in cross-brand comparisons. Following silent organization of ideas. Next. we calculated the mean valence for all comments in a cluster. we have added a feature to allow for the assessment of brand favorability. Where meaningful. The groups worked in silence (a rule of this method) to create base clusters of participant responses based on the affinity of the ideas on the Post-it7 notes (represented by unshaded boxes in Figures 1 and 2). Finally.More specifically. A larger number of associations in a given clusterCand the underlying cognitive structure it presumably reflectsCsuggests greater strength. ideas associated with a given brand were transferred to Post-it7 notes and placed on the wall of the research lab. coding disagreements were discussed and resolved. consistent with basic multiattribute attitude models. and consistency by at least one additional coder. similar base clusters were grouped together to form mid-level clusters (represented by shaded boxes in Figures 1 and 2). Finally. These values representing favorability and strength are reported in the unshaded boxes in Figures 1 and 2 (strength figures are in parentheses). clarity. In our adaptation of the affinity diagram process. We interpret this value as an indication of the "strength" with which the associations in the cluster are present across the sample. possibly unique.. Each brand affinity diagram was later reviewed for completeness. similar mid-level clusters emerged for individual brands. certain base clusters and mid-level clusters may appear within one brand and not another. strength.. Using this approach. we calculated two measures for each of the base clusters (unshaded boxes). and thus identify an element of uniqueness (which can be further interpreted using the cluster values to assess strength and favorability). These values were then summed to form "mid-level cluster values" (reported in the arrows emanating from the center of each diagram). Next.

01. These associations might also be important with respect to the development of person-brand relationships." "ad ." By contrast. this dimension can be considered a point of "uniqueness. a 42." "endorsers and spokespeople. Specifically. Only a "miscellaneous" category in the Pepsi affinity diagram distinguishes the two." and "good times and fun. the strongest indication of uniqueness is found in the "consumer-related" mid-level cluster where Coke receives a 32.07.60. t=4. there are almost no differences. we will present "highlights" of the analyses. To the extent that one has a great strength on a dimension where another has none. This difference is significant (t=4." "non-usage. This might be expected given the headto-head strategies used by these competitors. Due to space limitations.52) are consistent with the overall market performance of those brands. suggesting similar strength. Starting with the midlevel clusters. Uniqueness in each brand can be assessed using the two perspectives described earlier.60. p<. Here. Pepsi has the greatest strength in the advertising and promotion mid-level cluster. the presence of uniqueness with the leading brand is consistent with Keller’s (1993) model. The subcomponents of this dimension include "advertising themes.94 billion. The results considered here are based on Figures 1 and 2. A comparison for mid-level clusters is instructive and shows that the strength x favorability calculation gives Coca-Cola dominance on every dimension except for that labeled "competitors.Brand affinity diagrams were used to generate the assessments of brand image strength and uniqueness of association within each brand. respectively. CocaCola clearly has uniqueness. Each brand was analyzed and interpreted by several researchers.79 point spread. First.50) and Pepsi(83. p>. Overall cluster values for Coca-Cola (199.99 mid-level cluster value compared with a -9." "my feelings. Affinity analysis also shows that the sheer number of associations is not very different between the two brands. Pepsi’s diagram contained mentions of "negative personal effects." "family and others.63. In this sense there are no obvious points of uniqueness between the brands. Base clusters appearing on the Coke diagram and not on the Pepsi diagram included "fulfillment. Yet. Hence. First we look to identify associations that are held in one brand and not another." and "loyalty. n=25) and Pepsi(x=7. This category represents thoughts that describe the relationship between the brnd and consumer’s own life and experience.80 for Pepsi. as suggested by Fournier (1998). t=." The nature of these ideas is quite different.01). the additional specificity provided by the affinity analysis offers insight not available from a global favorability measure. Again." "my behavior. additional analyses taken from Study 1 show that global brand favorability measures are not different between Coke (x=7. While Coca-Cola has many personal associations. Pepsi appears not to have any such relationship. we find that in this pair of brands." A closer examination of the "competitors" mid-level cluster finds that the Pepsi associations are actually positive statements about Coke. and are significantly different from one another." Using this definition. this dimension also reflects a relative strength and preference for Coke.95 billion and $4. Soft Drinks." "promotions. Next we look for uniqueness in the extent to which a given brand "clearly dominates" the other. p<. Coca-Cola and Pepsi clearly have different brand market values for 1993 as reported by Financial WorldC$35.55.27 n=26).

t=-1. the greatest Tylenol differential appears to be found on the consumer-related mid-level cluster. Study 2 Discussion Affinity analysis was used to study Keller’s (1993) concept of brand image and relate it to a brand position measure of market performance. p<. the large number of "product-related" comments for Advil (76) suggests that this mid-level cluster may be a point of uniqueness for that brand. particularly with the affinity analysis. whereas the affinity process did.01. only a few results are spotlighted.81. n=21) and Advil (x=7. the mid-level cluster value is higher for Coke. . and significantly different. The results provide a first step toward understanding (1) how consumer-based sources are related to market-based outcomes of brand equity. Further work on this issue will help to better inform researchers as well as practitioners about the relationship between market.13. As with the soft drink analysis. and uniqueness are also found to be consistent with brand positions suggesting the potential value of these measures as assessments of brand performance. the overall cluster values for Tylenol and Advil (148. while uniquely strong.22. this strong association is not helpful to the brand relative to Coke on the same dimension. global analysis of brand favorability did not show differences between Tylenol (x=7. Evidence of relative strength. the findings of these studies support Keller’s conceptualization of brand equity and its components.16. accurate reflections of brand performance in the marketplace. though response numbers are too small for analysis. p<.12. respectively) were consistent with market-values ($1. p<.83. Alternatively.and consumer-based measures of brand equity.themes.44. DISCUSSION This paper has examined several different measures related to brand equity.] Like Coke. t=-. One interpretation of these data is that while Pepsi has built its image on a strong sense of advertising. Again. Over the Counter Medicines. at least to some extent. The overall implications for consumer research suggest that measures of consumer-based bran perceptions are. An analysis similar to that just presented was conducted for Tylenol and Advil. global favorability measures did not show differences between brand favorability. The only point of uniqueness for Tylenol may be price. [The "product usage" category is a special case as it represents inherently negative ailments. t=3. Strength and favorability domination for Tylenol was found on all but the "product-related" mid-level cluster." and "commercials.30. and (2) which elements of consumer-based knowledge structures may be most closely associated with market-based outcomes. The analyses presented here show that Keller’s concept of brand image is consistent with the first and second positions of brands in two categories.805 billion." Yet. more of which are associated with Advil. Moreover.98 billion and $0. Generally. The affinity diagrams themselves offer a vivid description of how a brand is held in consumers’ minds based on associations they have with the brand. n=22). some of which have not been presented elsewhere before. favorability. respectively). however the difference is not significant. Given space limitations.73 and 72.

"Consumers and Their Brands: Developing Relationship Theory in Consumer Research. 50-65." International Journal of Research in Marketing. An Overview of Seven Management Tools for QC. 9-22. Kurt (1996). Badenhausen. Built To Last-Successful Habits of Visionary Companies. 111-16. Krishnan. Cox (1988). David (1991). Kevin L. Kamakura. Managing Brand Equity. 57 (January). Keller. Porras (1994). 343-373. (1996). H. Ryoji (1989). New York: Harper Collins Publishers. Chicago. "Brands: What’s Hot. and Lori L. Measuring. 1-22. Keller. 13." Journal of Consumer Research. 165 (July 8). New York: The Free Press. "Characteristics of Memory Associations: A Consumer-based Brand Equity Perspective.FIGURE 1 AFFINITY DIAGRAMS: COCA-COLA AND PEPSI FIGURE 2 AFFINITY DIAGRAMS: TYLENOL AND ADVIL REFERENCES Aaker. Collins. 10 (March)." Journal of Consumer Research. 163 (August 2). Silverman. 389-405. James C." Journal of Marketing. 40-56. Measuring. 24 (March). Wagner and Gary Russell (1993). Englewood Cliffs. IL: American Marketing Association. 15 (June). (1998).S. Cox. and Jerry I. "Blind Faith. Strategic Brand Management-Building. Tokyo. "Measuring Brand Value With Scanner Data. Susan (1998). "What Does Familiarity Breed? Complexity as a Moderator of Repetition Effects in Advertisement Evaluations. Japan: Union of Japanese Scientists and Engineers. Futami. "Conceptualizing. "Using Total Quality Tools for Marketing Research: A Qualitative Approach for Collecting." International Journal of Research in Marketing. Silverman (1994)." Financial World. and Managing Customer-Based Brand Equity. . Organizing. Steven N." in Advanced Research Techniques Forum. Alexandria (1994). What’s Not. and Analyzing Verbal Response Data. NJ: Prentice Hall. Inc. Kevin L. Fournier. Ourusoff. (1993). and Managing Brand Equity. Dena Saliagas and Anthony D." Financial World.

Simon. Theory Construction in Marketing. Gerald. and Mary Sullivan (1993). Karen LeMasters. "The Measurement and Determinants of Brand Equity: A Financial Approach. . New York: John Wiley and Sons. and Michael Heffring (1982)." Marketing Science. 28-52. Zaltman. Carol J. 12 (Winter).