Viewpoint Article for the International Journal of Market Research

Customer Experience (CX), not Brands will be on the Iron Throne

Author:
Philipp ‘Phil’ Klaus
International University of Monaco, INSEEC Research Center
2, avenue Albert II, 98000 Monaco, Monaco
Email: pklaus@monaco.edu

Citation:

Klaus, Ph. (2019), “Customer Experience (CX), not Brands will be sitting on the Iron
Throne,” International Journal of Market Research, Vol. 62, No. 1, pp. 6–8.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1470785319858570 

1
Viewpoint Article for the International Journal of Market Research

Customer Experience (CX), not Brands will be on the Iron Throne

Abstract
The author will challenge the ancient 'brand-related' thinking, submitting that, somehow
companies are still in control of what consumers think, or even how customers act. As a
counterproposition the author highlights that the only thing companies can manage these days,
are the experiences customers have with them and their offerings. Supported by our research I
propose to end the chicken-and-egg question of if brands drive the CX, or vice versa. I suggest
researching the only thing that matters, how customer experience offerings, and how CX
influences the way customer search, collect, and evaluate information and behave. This
proposition leads into the implications for the market research community and CX management.
Keywords:
Customer Experience, Brands, Branding, Customer Experience Management, Brand Loyalty.

2
The notion of proclaiming that brands are dead once the internet arrives, is neither novel, nor
new (e.g., Shapiro and Varian, 1998). Researchers still propose that in a world where consumers
can assess product and service quality through more ‘trustworthy’ sources, such as their fellow
users, peers, social media, and experts, brands will become less important (Simonson and Rosen,
2014). This is contradicted by researchers highlighting that the digital brands, such as Google,
Amazon, or Apple are more valuable than ever, and that the product is the ultimate brand (e.g.,
Skibsted and Hansen, 2014). Others predict that new technologies, such as voice-bots like Alexa
and Siri will the change the face of brands and branding alike (e.g., Labecki et al., 2018).
Labecki et al. (2018) challenge the notion that products will be the focus of the brand for two
reasons. One, if voice-bots like Alexa will make decisions for your, an algorithm will evaluate
product quality and value based upon consumer preferences, independently of brand or
‘suggested’ brand value. Two, this limits the influence of emotive responses and brand loyalty,
possibly leading to a customer becoming loyal to Alexa rather than the brand the customer
purchases - the bot becomes the brand (Labecki et al., 2018).
All three perspectives deliver evidence for their viewpoint, but perhaps they are all missing the
point? I am not interested which one of these perspectives will prove correct over time, what I do
know is that brands per se won’t be disappearing. Brands will still have a role in our decision-
making process, no matter how we will be purchasing products and services in the future. What
are brands but a collection of direct and interactions that is manifested in our brain as an overall
perception. We can compare brands with a bird’s nest, carefully constructed from little sticks,
branches, feathers, and building material. The brand building materials are all the direct and
indirect interactions you had with a brand throughout your life. The brand is the evaluation and
overall perception of these interaction, your personal bird’s nest, so to say. And this is exactly
the point I am trying to convert; we evaluate brands based upon our (and others’) experiences
with the brand. It is not the advertising, marketing, persuasion, or even logos, colors, and brand
ambassadors that make us choose one brand over another. Do not get me wrong, I understand
that these traditional branding tools can be a part of the customer experience (CX), but their main
function is to stimulate interest. Regrettably, though, they often raise (high and false)
expectations on what the brand will deliver. We, as consumers then compare our expectations
with our customer experience, or the experience of others. Often the evaluation is not favorable,
leading to a decrease of these traditional branding tools as determinant of consumer behavior. In
layman’s terms, we do not trust what brands are saying. Instead, we move our evaluation and
trust in our (direct interactions) or other consumer’s (indirect interactions) evaluation of their
customer experiences. I believe that most of the readers, reflecting upon their own decision-
making processes will agree with this notion.
Subsequently, the old question of brand being the chicken or egg of the equation, can easily be
answered. Brands are the evaluation of our experiences. Therefore, brands, per se, cannot be
managed in the traditional way, because the traditional tools do not influence our behavior
anymore. The only thing companies can manage is what drives the brand perception – the
customer experience. Customer experience is the cause of why a brand is perceived positive or
negative, because we evaluate brands upon the experiences they deliver. Managers need to work
on the cause (CX), not the effect (brand) or the expectations raised by traditional branding tools.

3
Where does this leaves us, the market researcher community? Traditionally, with all due respect,
market research is seen as a tactical function in the firm. Market research either investigates
customer perceptions or collects data to support, and/or research for an initiative/project in the
firm. I believe that market research can use CX to move from a tactical level towards a strategic-
shaping function. Market research should not be reduced to examine if, how, and when branding
tools will or will not work. Instead, CX gives market research a unique opportunity to explore
what really drives customer behavior, and ultimately business performance. CX is, by definition,
a complex field and most companies are struggling to define what it is, how it can be measured,
and ultimately managed. We know that managers trying to determine CX’s possible scope,
objectives, and impact, fail in their vast majority to do so (Klaus, 2014). Why can’t market
researcher position themselves at the CX forefront and use their exploratory and analytical skills
to define and assist managers to understand CX and its crucial importance for their business? I
might go out on a limb here, but I know enough market researchers that have these capabilities,
so what is holding us back? Are we just to complacent in our comfortable and well-defined
tactical function? Do we lack the resources to make our case? Do we use and provide the right
tools to measure CX (see, e.g., Klaus and Maklan, 2013)? Or do we simply don’t talk the
language that will allow managers to understand the strategic value of market research (Klaus et
al., 2014)? CX is a great opportunity to increase the relevance and impact of market research,
and I hope we can take full advantage of this chance.
In summary, brands aren’t dead, but branding as we know it, is. Managers need to function on
the only thing they can control – how customers experience their product/services/offerings and
interactions. Managers are struggling to grasp CX, how to measure and to manage it - they need
help. And this is where market researchers can deliver the insights that managers are looking for.
By doing this, market research will earn a well-deserved seat on the strategic-decision- making
table.
In reference to the Game of Thrones title, thing of branding as the Lannisters, trying to hold on to
their power, no matter what, while CX is Jon Snow/Aegon Targaryen is the rightful heir to the
Iron Throne.

4
References:
Klaus, P. (2014). Measuring Customer Experience How to Develop and Execute the Most
Profitable Customer Experience Strategies. Springer.

Klaus, P., Edvardsson, B., L. Keiningham, T., & Gruber, T. (2014). Getting in with the “In”
crowd: how to put marketing back on the CEO's agenda. Journal of Service Management, 25(2),
195-212.

Klaus, P. P., & Maklan, S. (2013). Towards a better measure of customer experience.
International Journal of Market Research, 55(2), 227-246.

Labecki, A., Klaus, P., & Zaichkowsky, J. L. (2018, November). How Bots Have Taken over
Brand Choice Decisions. In Proceedings of the Future Technologies Conference (pp. 976-989).
Springer, Cham.

Shapiro, C., Carl, S., & Varian, H. R. (1998). Information rules: a strategic guide to the network
economy. Harvard Business Press.

Simonson, I., & Rosen, E. (2014). Absolute value: What really influences customers in the age
of (nearly) perfect information. New York: Harper Business.

Skibsted, J.M., & Hansen, R.B. (2014). Brands aren’t Dead, but Traditional Brand Tools are
Dying. Harvard Business Review, available at https://hbr.org/2014/02/the-brand-is-dead-long-
live-the-brand, accessed on May 13, 2019.