BAVInsights BrandAssessment SampleReport

Insights
Brand Assessment Report

Principle Brand: Volvo
Additional Brands: Cadillac, Mercedes Benz + Lexus
Years Trended: 2010 – 2011
Country: USA
2010 - 2011
Insights 1
Table of Contents
Getting the Most from BAV Insights
§  The Model
§  Core Tracking Metrics
§  Brand Pillars
§  PowerGrid
Core Tracking Metrics
§  Awareness
§  Usage
§  Preference and Consideration
§  Rejection
Brand Performance
§  Brand Performance, Volvo vs. Select Competition
§  Brand Performance, Gender and Age Breakouts
Imagery Dimensions
§  Spectrum of Brand Images
§  Brand Imagery, Volvo vs. Select Competition
§  Imagery analysis using BAV’s Eight Global Factors
§  BAV Eight Global Factor mapping: Volvo vs. Select Competition
Appendix
Insights 2
Insights
Getting the Most from BAV Insights
Insights 3
Brand Asset Valuator Overview
Brand Development, Health & Imagery, In a Competitive Context
BAV has collected consumers’ brand perceptions via survey since 1993. This 20 year history allows BAV to provide
unprecedented insights into a brand’s performance, in over 50 countries.
Kevin L. Keller
E.B. Osborn Professor-Marketing §  BAV’s data and methodology was developed with the help of professors from
Columbia, Dartmouth and MIT/Sloan Business Schools, and has been
accepted by branding experts worldwide
§  Deliver brand insights via a systematic approach -- our processes and
Rajeev Batra methodologies have been rigorously tested and proven in the market
S.S. Kresge Professor-Marketing §  Brand data based on 48 imagery attributes, ranging from Sensuous to
Straightforward, are utilized to provide an unprecedented view of a brand’s
stature and strength as well as:
§  Brand health
Natalie Mizik §  Brand personality
Professor of Marketing
§  Usage, Preference, Consideration, and Loyalty
§  Data Tied to Financial Results
§  Current and Leading Indicators
Robert Jacobson §  Developmental model
Professor of Marketing
§  Not a static state of a brand but an accounting of a brand’s most
important elements: Energy, Differentiation, Relevance, Esteem, and
Knowledge
Insights 4
BAV Insights Methodology
Results and Insights based on a Global Model and Questionnaire
Never Heard Extremely
of Familiar
Familiarity 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Scalars
Herbal Essences o o o o o o o
Regard Miller Lite
Duracell
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Specifics about the BAV Insights survey:
Alfa Romeo o o o o o o o
Relevance Vidal Sassoon o o o o o o o
World Cup (soccer) o o o o o o o §  Fielded in the US (quarterly) and internationally
(annually or bi-annually)
Un
ap ynam
§  Measures brands in comparison to all brands
Hig in cti
Tru
Brand Attributes
pr o
Dis able
Au ality
D dly
h Q ve
stw
Fri hy
ac ic
t
the
rather than just brands in its “category”
en
u
or t
nti
c
48 Imagery Herbal Essences o o o o o §  Weighted by age, gender, region and in some
Attributes Miller Lite o o o o o countries socioeconomic class, making it
Duracell o o o o o
Alfa Romeo o o o o o nationally representative of the country
Vidal Sassoon o o o o o §  Adaptable to changes in the market – We have
World Cup (soccer) o o o o o
the flexibility to add new brands to the study and
to remove brands that no longer exist to ensure
Brand Consideration
Preference
the brand list is reflective of the current

Brand Preference environment
§  Includes a comprehensive list of brand imagery
Brand Rejection attributes which explain what a brand means to
consumers
§  Collects core brand tracking metrics such as
Demographics
Age usage, consideration, and knowledge

Gender
Insights 5
BAV Overview
A complete picture of your brand’s DNA and stage of development
Arrogant Friendly Kind Socially Responsible
Authentic Fun Leader Straightforward
Best Brand Gaining in Popularity Obliging Stylish
Brand DNA – Based on 48 Imagery Attributes Carefree Glamorous Original Traditional
•  What imagery do people associate with your brand? Cares About Customers
Charming
Good Value
Healthy
Prestigious
Progressive
Trendy
Trustworthy
•  What imagery should your brand own? Daring Helpful Reliable Unapproachable
Different High Performance Restrained Unique
•  What imagery provides a real competitive advantage? Distinctive High Quality Rugged Up to Date
Down to Earth Independent Sensuous Upper Class
Dynamic Innovative Simple Visionary
Energetic Intelligent Social Worth More
Brand Health
Differentiation
Knowledge
Relevance
•  Is your brand differentiated?

Energized
Esteem
•  Is your brand relevant?

•  Is your brand liked by consumers?
•  How well is your brand known?
Leadership
Brand Development & Lifecycle Curiosity
Brand Strength
•  What stage of development is your brand in? Mass Market
•  Are there early signs of decay or erosion present in your brand?
•  Is your brand at a different stage across gender or age groups?
•  How do key competitors compare? New/Unfocused Fatigue
•  Is your existing positioning effective?
•  Are there category trends you need to leverage to be successful?
Brand Stature
Insights April 23, 2013

BAV’s Four Pillars of Brand Health
Energized Differentiation is the basis for consumer choice: the essence of the brand and the source of
margin and pricing power. It is an attraction to something different, something intriguing — a look, an
attitude, a behavior— something that makes a person want to know more
Relevance drives usage and is the measure of what is personally appropriate to

consumers
Esteem is consumer respect, regard, reputation and is the fulfillment

of the brand’s promise – how well a brand fulfills its implied or
overtly stated consumer promise
Knowledge is the culmination of brand building

efforts and is the outcome of brand development,
The brand’s point through a consumer’s intimate relationship with
of difference the brand
How appropriate
the brand is to
consumers Leadership
How well the Curiosity
brand is Mass Market
regarded
An intimate New/Unfocused Fatigue

understanding
of the brand
Together, the four pillars start
the story of a brand’s lifecycle
Insights 7
The BAV Brand Lifecycle PowerGrid
Brand Strength vs. Brand Stature
Leadership
Curiosity/Niche
Energized Differentiation and Relevance
form Brand Strength—a brand’s ability to Mass Market
exist as a viable entry, defend itself from
competition and the source for margin and Brand Strength
earnings.
Brand Strength is a leading indicator as

New/Unfocused Fatigue/Commodity
brands develop this aspect first. When
brands start to fade, Brand Strength is lost Energized Relevance
first. Differentiation
Brand Strength Represents

Future Growth Value
Brand Stature
Esteem and Knowledge form Brand Stature, which captures a brand’s
familiarity and the extent a brand has succeeded in building Knowledge
and Respect.
Esteem Knowledge
These are lagging indicators, since brands tend to develop these after
Energized Differentiation and Relevance start to fade.
Brand Stature Represents
Current Operating Value
Insights 8
BAV’s Brand Lifecycle PowerGrid
Line of commoditization separates Leadership

brands from Mass Market brands
Curiosity: E_DIF REL EST KNO

Niche or
Unrealized Potential Leadership
Low volume, High volume, High
High margin - margin - MAXIMIZE
MAXIMIZE PROFIT MARGINS
RETURN ON CAPITAL
E_DIF REL EST KNO
Mass Market
High Volume, Competitive Brands tend to move clockwise
margin - MAXIMIZE around the PowerGrid in an
E_DIF REL EST KNO
DIVIDENDS
Brand Strength evolutionary lifecycle starting at
the lower left quadrant
They begin by building energized

E_DIF REL EST KNO E_DIF REL EST KNO
differentiation and relevance, to
become interesting niche brands.
New/Unfocused: Fatigue: Then a select few build Esteem
New, Unfocused or Unknown Commodity or Eroded and Knowledge to become
BUSINESS High volume, leadership brands
DEVELOPMENT low margin - MAXIMIZE
TRANSACTIONS
But if their difference and
momentum begins to fade, they
slip to mass market, commodity,
and finally to erosion
Brand Stature
Insights 9
Pillar Patterns Define the Motion & Direction of a Brand
Brands with greater Differentiation than Relevance are Brands with higher Relevance than Differentiation
viewed as having momentum and a point of difference. often define their categories. These brands can
They tend to be either new brands on the move, or luxury generate huge sales, but generally lower margins
brands with greater prestige than relevance. since they compete more on price.
DIF
Energized REL
Relevance DIF
Energized REL
Relevance
Differentiation Differentiation
Brands with more Esteem than Knowledge are better But brands with higher Knowledge than Esteem, well,
liked than known: a consumer is interested to learn it’s a lot like that song ‘the thrill is gone’….Existing
more. knowledge must be disrupted.
EST
Esteem KNO
Knowledge EST
Esteem KNO
Knowledge
Insights 10
Insights
Volvo Brand Performance

All Adults
Competitors: Cadillac, Mercedes Benz, Lexus, Custom
Luxury Auto Brand
Country: United States
Insights 11
The Volvo Brand and Category Averages
The Volvo brand is compared to a selection of automobile

brands aggregated in a category view called “BAV Autos.” BAV
Autos contains aggregate data for the following brands: Brand Lifecycle PowerGrid
§ Aston Martin
100
§ Audi
§ Cadillac Curiosity:
Niche or Leadership
§ BMW Unrealized Potential Benchmarks
§ Infiniti
(Differentiation/Relevance)
§ Jaguar BAV Autos Avg.
Brand Strength
§ Lexus Mass Market
§ Mercedes-Benz Volvo
50
The Volvo brand will also be compared to an aggregated view of

select, competitive brands, which were determined by the Volvo New/Unfocused: Fatigue:
New, Unfocused or Commodity or Eroded
and defined as: Unknown
§ Cadillac
§ Lexus
50 100
§ Mercedes-Benz
Brand Stature
(Esteem/Knowledge)
All Adults 2011
Insights 12
Brand Position Against Category Averages -- 2011
Brand Health Pillars Brand Lifecycle PowerGrid
100
Curiosity:
Niche or Leadership
Unrealized Potential Benchmarks
100
BAV Autos Avg.
Brand Strength
80
Mass Market
Percentile rank
60 Volvo
50
40
20
New/Unfocused: Fatigue:
0
Unknown
DIF REL EST KNO
50 100
Brand Stature
(Esteem/Knowledge)
All Adults 2011
Insights 13
Brand Position Against Category Averages – Trended
Data 2010 – 2011
2010-2011 Volvo
100 100
80
Curiosity:
Percentile rank
60 Niche or Leadership
94 87 Unrealized Potential Benchmarks2010
40 78 76 79 76 BAV Autos Avg.2010
20
Benchmarks 2011
23 13 Volvo2010
0 BAV Autos Avg.2011
Brand Strength
DIF REL EST KNO
Mass Market
Volvo2011
2010-2011 Benchmarks 50
100
80
Percentile rank
60 New/Unfocused: Fatigue:
40
Unknown
20
0
DIF REL EST KNO
2010-2011 BAV Autos Avg. 50 100

100 Brand Stature
80 (Esteem/Knowledge)
Percentile rank
60
40
20
All Adults 2010 - 2011

0
DIF REL EST KNO
Insights 14
Brand Position Against Competitors -- 2011
Brand Health Pillars Brand Lifecycle PowerGrid
100
Volvo Cadillac
100 100
Leadership
80 80
Curiosity:
Percentile rank
Percentile rank
60 60 Niche or
96 87 86
Unrealized Potential
40 40
Brand Strength
20 20 43
Mass Market
0 0
DIF REL EST KNO DIF REL EST KNO 50
Lexus Mercedes-Benz
100 100
80 80
Percentile rank
Percentile rank
60 60 New/Unfocused: Fatigue:
40 40 New, Unfocused or Commodity or Eroded
Unknown
20 20
0 0
50 100
DIF REL EST KNO DIF REL EST KNO
Brand Stature
(Esteem/Knowledge)
All Adults 2011
Insights 15
Brand Position – Trended Data 2010 – 2011
100
Volvo Cadillac
Leadership 2010
100 100 2011
2010
80 80
Curiosity:
Percentile rank
Percentile rank
2011
60 60 Niche or
2010 2010
94 87 92 90 87 88 91 84 Unrealized Potential
40 78 76 79 76 40
Brand Strength
20 20 34 38
23 13 2011
0 0 Mass Market
DIF REL EST KNO DIF REL EST KNO 50
2011
Lexus Mercedes-Benz
100 100
80 80
Percentile rank
Percentile rank
99 98 90 86 81 84
40 40 New, Unfocused or Commodity or Eroded
Unknown
20 20
29 30
0 0
DIF REL EST KNO DIF REL EST KNO 50 100
Brand Stature
(Esteem/Knowledge)
All Adults 2010-2011
Insights 16
Magnified View of Leader/Mass Market Quadrant
100
100
Leadership
Brand Strength
2010
75
Brand Strength
Curiosity
Mass Market
50
2011
Fatigue 50 75 100
New/Unfocused Brand Stature
(Esteem/Knowledge)
50 100 100 100 100

Brand Stature
2010
(Esteem/Knowledge)
2011
2010
Brand Strength
Brand Strength
Brand Strength
75
75 75 2011
2010
2011
50 75 100 50 75 100 50 75 100

Brand Stature Brand Stature Brand Stature
(Esteem/Knowledge) (Esteem/Knowledge) (Esteem/Knowledge)
All Adults 2010-2011
Insights 17
Insights
Volvo Brand Performance

Gender and Age Groups
Competitors: Cadillac, Mercedes Benz, Lexus, Custom
Luxury Auto Brand
Insights 18
Brand Position – Gender -- 2011
100
100
Curiosity:
Niche or Leadership
80
Unrealized Potential
Mass Market
Percentile rank
Brand Strength
60
40 Women
50
20 Men
0
DIF REL EST KNO

Unknown
Brand Strength Brand Stature 50 100

Brand Stature
(Esteem/Knowledge)
2011 Men and Women
Insights 19
Brand Position – Men: Trended 2010 -- 2011
100
Curiosity:
2010
Niche or Leadership
100 Unrealized Potential
Brand Strength
80
Mass Market
Percentile rank
60
50
40 2011
20
0
DIF REL EST KNO New, Unfocused or Commodity or Eroded
Unknown
50 100
Brand Stature
(Esteem/Knowledge)
Men: 2010 - 2011
Insights 20
Brand Position – Women: Trended 2010 – 2011
100
Curiosity:
Niche or Leadership
100 Unrealized Potential
2010
Brand Strength
80
Mass Market
Percentile rank
60
50 2011
40
20
0
DIF REL EST KNO New, Unfocused or Commodity or Eroded
Unknown
50 100
Brand Stature
(Esteem/Knowledge)
Women: 2010 - 2011
Insights 21
Brand Position – Age Groups: 2011
100
Ages 18-29 Ages 30-44
100 100
80 80
Ages 65+
Percentile rank
Percentile rank
60 60
Curiosity:
Niche or Leadership
40 75 40 Unrealized Potential
Brand Strength
20 43 40 20 Ages 45-64
12
0 0 Mass Market
DIF REL EST KNO DIF REL EST KNO
50
Ages 45-64 Ages 65+

100 100 Ages 30-44
80 80
Percentile rank
Percentile rank
60 60
Ages 18-29
40 40 82
20 20 43 Unknown
0 0
DIF REL EST KNO DIF REL EST KNO 50 100
Brand Stature
(Esteem/Knowledge)
Age Groups: 2011
Insights 22
Insights
Volvo Brand Imagery Analysis

Competitors: Cadillac, Lexus, Mercedes Benz
Insights 23
BAV’s Brand Imagery
The underlying elements of Brand Health are 48 imagery attributes
Arrogant
Worth More Authentic
Visionary Best Brand
Upper Class Carefree
Up To Date Cares for Customers
Unique Charming
Unapproachable Daring
Trustworthy The foundation of the BAV model is a set of image, Different
Trendy performance and personality variables that have Distinctive
Traditional been co-developed with leading marketing Down To Earth
Stylish academics to quantify brand identity and brand Dynamic
Straightforward
health. This battery of attributes provides the Energetic
initial pool of potential brand drivers.
Socially Responsible Friendly
Social These 48 imagery attributes, along with measures Fun
Simple of appropriateness, regard and familiarity, Gaining in Popularity
Sensuous
combine to form the 4 pillars of Brand Health. Glamorous
Rugged Good Value
Differentiation
Knowledge
Relevance
Restrained Healthy
Energized
Esteem
Reliable Helpful
Progressive High Performance
Prestigious High Quality
Original Independent
Obliging Innovative
Leader Intelligent
Kind
Insights
24
15
20
25
30
0
5
10
High Quality
Reliable
Upper Class
Trustworthy
High Performance
Insights
Distinctive
Leader
Original
Prestigious
Stylish
Down To Earth
Intelligent
Trendy
Cares About Customers
Simple
Up To Date
Independent
Good Value
Authentic
Visionary
Innovative
Traditional
Rugged
Volvo 2011
Different
Unique
Socially Responsible
Dynamic
Friendly
Worth More
Volvo 2010
Progressive
Source: BrandAsset® Valuator USA All Adults 2011, 2010 PCT Scores
Straightforward
Fun
Best Brand
Gaining in Popularity
Energetic
Glamorous
Social
Daring
Arrogant
imagery -- Upper Class, Prestigious, Distinctive High Performance and High Quality.
Helpful
Restrained
Kind
Unapproachable
Obliging
Carefree
Volvo’s weakest characteristics included Customer Centric imagery such as Social, Helpful and Kind
Charming
Of the 48 attributes in the BAV model, Volvo’s strongest characteristics represented Superior and Chic
Healthy
Volvo’s Imagery Performance on the BAV Attributes, 2010 - 2011
Sensuous
25
Brand Imagery Analysis
Volvo’s Imagery Performance on the BAV Attributes,
Volvo’s Gains/Losses in Imagery 2010 vs. 2011

Leader
Independent
Gains: Prestigious
In 2011, was more…
Cares for Customers
Distinctive
Social
Worth More
Charming Losses:
Fun
In 2010, was more…
Trustworthy
-9% -7% -5% -3% -1% 1% 3% 5% 7% 9%

In 2011, the Volvo became slightly more associated with Leader, Independent, and Prestigious, but its
imagery association with Trustworthy, Fun, and Worth More was stronger in 2010.
Insights 26
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
0
5
10
High Quality
Reliable
Upper Class
Trustworthy
High Performance
Insights
Distinctive
Leader
Original
Prestigious
Stylish
Down To Earth
Intelligent
Trendy
Simple
Up To Date
Independent
Volvo
Good Value
Authentic
Visionary
Innovative, Dynamic and Leader

Innovative
Traditional
Cadillac
Rugged
Different
Unique
Lexus
Dynamic
Friendly
Worth More
Progressive
Source: BrandAsset® Valuator USA All Adults 2011 PCT Scores
Straightforward
Fun
Best Brand
Mercedes-Benz
Energetic
Volvo’s Imagery Performance on BAV Attributes vs. Benchmarks
Glamorous
Social
Daring
Arrogant
Helpful
Upper Class, Prestigious, and Distinctive in addition to a few other attributes such as
Restrained
Kind
In 2011, the Benchmarks performed well on many of Volvo’s top ranking imagery, such as
Unapproachable
Obliging
Carefree
Charming
Healthy
Sensuous
27
Brand Imagery
Performance on BAV’s brand imagery of Volvo vs. Cadillac reflecting the biggest
changes
2011 Volvo vs. Cadillac
Simple
Reliable
Down To Earth
Volvo is more…
Rugged
Straightforward
High Quality
Stylish
Prestigious Cadillac is more…

Glamorous
Upper Class
-20% -15% -10% -5% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20%

When looking at benchmark brands individually, Volvo maintained its position as leading in Simple,
Reliable, Down to Earth and Rugged, while Cadillac resonated with consumers as Upper Class,
Glamorous, and Prestigious.
Insights 28
Brand Imagery
Performance on BAV’s brand imagery of Volvo vs. Mercedes-Benz
2011
Simple
Down To Earth
Volvo is more…
Good Value
Rugged
High Quality
Glamorous
Mercedes-Benz is more…
Prestigious
Upper Class
-20% -15% -10% -5% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20%

It’s no surprise that the imagery differences between Volvo and Mercedes-Benz again reinforced
Volvo’s position as Simple, Down to Earth, and rugged, but compared to Mercedes Benz, Volvo was
also more associated with Good Value.
Insights 29
Brand Imagery
Performance on BAV’s brand imagery of Volvo vs. Lexus
2011 Volvo vs. Lexus

Simple
Down To Earth
Volvo is more… Rugged
Traditional
Reliable
Stylish
Glamorous
Lexus is more…
Prestigious
Upper Class
-20% -15% -10% -5% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20%

When comparing Volvo and Lexus, Volvo led in Traditional, Simple, and Down to Earth, while Lexus
was perceived as more Upper Class and Prestigious.
Insights 30
Insights

Leveragability of Brand Imagery
Insights 31
Quadrant Analysis for Imagery Association
Illustrates strengths, potential equity and weaknesses of a brand’s identity
Stronger than category
Competitive Advantage
Consumer Association with Brand A vs. Competitors
Potential Equity Core Imagery

Non-Core Imagery that the Brand
that is Stronger than the
Delivers Stronger than the
Competition
Competition
Weaker than category
Not Essential Imagery Weak Core Imagery

Brand Weaknesses that the brand under-delivers Not Strong Enough
relative to the Competition (Below Category Average)
to be Discriminating
Consumer Association with Brand A

Very Weak Association Very Strong Association
Insights 32
Volvo’s imagery strengths included Reliability, Trust, Simplicity, Caring, Down to Earth
Kind Straightforward Different Rugged Simple Down to Earth Reliable
Good Value Trustworthy
Independent Cares about Customers

Consumer Association with Volvo vs. Benchmarks
Restrained Friendly
Carefree
(Cadillac, Lexus, Mercedes-Benz)
Healthy
Traditional
Original
Gaining in Popularity Authentic

Obliging
Helpful
Unique
Intelligent
Daring Progressive
Unapproachable Arrogant Energetic Worth More Visionary Stylish
High Performance
SensuousCharming Glamorous Best Brand Fun InnovativeUp to Date Trendy Prestigious Distinctive High Quality
Social Dynamic Leader Upper Class
Consumer Association with Volvo

Weaker imagery Stronger imagery
Insights 33
Cadillac’s imagery strengths included Original, Traditional, Leader, Stylish, Prestigious,
and Upper Class.
Obliging Traditional Original
Social
Consumer Association with Cadillac vs. Benchmarks
Friendly
Leader
Glamorous
Stylish
Innovative Trendy Trustworthy
Distinctive
Unique Prestigious
(Volvo, Lexus, Mercedes-Benz)
Visionary Upper Class

Unapproachable Authentic Dynamic
Charming Independent
Fun
Helpful Socially Responsible
Sensuous Worth More High Quality
Rugged Progressive
Gaining in Popularity Good Value Best Brand
Different Intelligent
Arrogant
Daring
High Performance
Up To Date
Down To Earth
Energetic
Restrained Simple
Straightforward
Carefree
Reliable
Kind
Healthy
Consumer Association with Cadillac
Insights 34
Mercedes-Benz’s imagery strengths included High Performance, Distinctive, High Quality,
Upper Class, and Prestigious
Unique Authentic Intelligent
Carefree Daring
High Performance
Restrained Unapproachable Distinctive
Healthy
Energetic Worth More Arrogant
Dynamic
Sensuous High Quality
Consumer Association with Mercedes-Benz vs. Benchmarks
Upper Class
Fun Leader Prestigious

Best Brand Glamorous
Innovative
Charming
Independent
Up To Date Stylish
Social
Visionary
Straightforward
(Cadillac, Lexus, Volvo)
Progressive
Obliging
Trendy
Traditional Original Reliable
Kind
Different Trustworthy
Rugged
Simple Down To Earth

Helpful
Good Value Friendly
Consumer Association Mercedes-Benz
Insights 35
Lexus’s imagery strengths included Trendy, Stylish, High Quality, High Performance, and
Upper Class.
Helpful
Progressive Up To Date
Trendy
Visionary
Best Brand
Consumer Association with Lexus vs. Benchmarks
Charming
Energetic
Fun
Sensuous Stylish
Arrogant High Quality
(Cadillac, Volvo, Mercedes-Benz)
Innovative High Performance

Good Value Worth More Upper Class
Healthy Prestigious
Daring
Social Friendly Glamorous
Socially Responsible Dynamic Leader
Unapproachable
Kind
Reliable
Distinctive
Simple
Intelligent
Down To Earth
Carefree
Straightforward
Obliging
Unique
Rugged Different Authentic Original
Restrained
Traditional Cares About Customers
Independent Trustworthy
Consumer Association with Lexus

Insights 36
Brand Imagery Similar to Volvo and Benchmark Brands
Volvo resembled accessible, practical brands such as L.L. Bean, while the Benchmarks
resonated with upscale brands such as Saks and Bergdorf Goodman
Insights 37
Insights
Imagery Dimension Snapshots

BAV’s Eight Global Factors
Insights 38
Imagery Dimensions Using BAV’s Eight Global Factors
Cutting Edge Classic Superior Chic

Up To Date Best Brand Intelligent Glamorous
Progressive High quality High Performance Stylish
Gaining In Popularity Worth More Leader Upper Class
Daring Traditional Sensuous
Energetic Authentic Charming
Original Trendy
Good Value Prestigious
Customer Centric Outgoing No Nonsense Distant

Cares About Customers Restrained Unapproachable
Fun
Obliging Straightforward Arrogant
Friendly
Helpful Rugged Independent
Social
Socially Responsible Simple
Kind
Trustworthy
Carefree
Reliable
Down to Earth
Insights 39
Imagery Dimensions -- Competition
2011
Volvo Cadillac Lexus Mercedes-Benz
Cutting Edge
Cutting Edge
20
Distant Classic
Distant 15 Classic
10
5
No Nonsense
No Superior
0 Superior
Nonsense
Outgoing
Outgoing ChicChic
Customer
Customer-
Centric
Centric
Volvo trailed the Benchmark brands on all Imagery Dimensions, except for No Nonsense and
Customer Centric
* Data displayed are construct scores created by averaging the underlying attributes
Insights 40
Volvo’s Imagery Dimensions -- Gender
Men Women
2011
Cutting Edge
Cutting Edge
20
Distant Classic
Distant 15 Classic
10
5
No Nonsense
No Superior
0 Superior
Nonsense
Outgoing
Outgoing ChicChic
Customer
Customer-
Centric
Centric
Volvo had a similar performance among Men and Women on multiple dimensions.
It had a slight edge among Women on Leader, No Nonsense and Distant
Insights 41
Volvo’s Imagery Dimensions – Age Groups
18-29 30-44 45-64 65+

2011
Cutting Edge
Cutting Edge
20
Distant Classic
Distant 15 Classic
10
5
No Nonsense
No Superior
0 Superior
Nonsense
Outgoing
Outgoing ChicChic
Customer
Customer-
Centric
Centric
Superior, Customer Centric and Classic were dimensions where Volvo performed better among the
older age groups (Ages 45+). Its weakest performance was among the 18-29 Age Group
Insights 42
Insights
Brand Imagery: Lexus
Insights 43
15
20
25
30
35
40
0
5
10
Upper Class
High Quality
Prestigious
Stylish
High Performance
Insights
Reliable
Leader
Trustworthy
Distinctive
Glamorous
Trendy
Arrogant
Dynamic
Intelligent
Worth More
Best Brand
Up To Date
Visionary
Original
Innovative
Fun
Progressive
Lexus 2011
Authentic
Unique
BAV Insights – Brand Imagery Analysis
Good Value
Unapproachable
Friendly
Lexus 2010
Social
Daring
Down To Earth
Independent
Lexus’s Imagery Performance on BAV Attributes 2011 vs. 2010
Energetic
Different
Charming
Lexus lost some equity in Stylish, Glamorous, and Unique from 2010 to 2011
Simple
Helpful
Straightforward
Traditional
Rugged
Sensuous
Obliging
Restrained
Kind
Carefree
Healthy
44
BAV Insights Research
Performance on BAV’s brand imagery of Volvo vs. the competition
Lexus
Progressive
Intelligent
In 2011, Lexus was
more… Prestigious
Best Brand
Trendy
Different
Unique In 2010, Lexus was more…

Glamorous
Stylish
-3% -2% -1% 0% 1% 2% 3%

Lexus did not experience a large difference in imagery associations from 2010 to 2011, but those
that did decline were Stylish, Glamorous, and Unique
Insights 45
Insights
Brand Imagery: Cadillac
Insights 46
15
20
25
30
35
40
0
5
10
Upper Class
High Quality
Prestigious
Stylish
Distinctive
Insights
Leader
Glamorous
Trustworthy
High Performance
Reliable
Original
Trendy
Traditional
Dynamic
Intelligent
Worth More
Authentic
Visionary
Up To Date
Innovative
Unique
Best Brand
Cadillac 2011
Arrogant
Fun
Independent
Progressive
Social
Unapproachable
Friendly
Cadillac 2010
Down To Earth
Prestigious most strongly represent the Cadillac brand essence
Good Value
Different
Daring
Rugged
Cadillac’s Imagery Performance on BAV Attributes in 2011 vs. 2010
Energetic
Simple
Charming
Straightforward
Helpful
Cadillac’s strongest resonating imagery reflects that of Volvo: Upper Class, High quality, and
Obliging
Sensuous
Restrained
Kind
Carefree
Healthy
47
Performance on BAV’s brand imagery of Cadillac in 2011 vs. 2010
Cadillac
Prestigious
Dynamic
In 2011, Cadillac was
Innovative
more…
Unapproachable
Distinctive
Best Brand
Down To Earth
In 2010, Cadillac was
Trustworthy more…
Reliable
-4% -3% -2% -1% 0% 1% 2% 3% 4%

Cadillac experienced little change between 2010 and 2011; the attributes that did shift slightly in a
positive direction were Prestigious, Dynamic, and Innovative
Insights 48
Insights
Brand Imagery: Mercedes Benz
Insights 49
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
0
5
10
Upper Class
High Quality
Prestigious
High Performance
Distinctive
Insights
Stylish
Leader
Glamorous
Reliable
Trustworthy
Dynamic
Arrogant
Intelligent
Trendy
Worth More
Original
Authentic
Best Brand
Unique
Up To Date
Visionary
Unapproachable
Innovative
Mercedes-Benz 2011
Fun
Daring
Independent
Traditional
Progressive
Social
Down To Earth
Different
Mercedes-Benz 2010
Energetic
Friendly
Straightforward
Charming
Rugged
Good Value
Mercedes-Benz’s Imagery Performance on BAV Attributes 2011 vs. 2010
Simple
Sensuous
Helpful
Restrained
Obliging
The imagery associated with Mercedes-Benz in 2011 was Upper Class, High Quality, and Prestigious
Carefree
Kind
Healthy
50
Performance on BAV’s brand imagery of Mercedes-Benz in 2011 vs. 2010
Mercedes-Benz
Traditional
In 2011, Mercedes- Restrained
Benz was more…

Down To Earth
Distinctive
High Performance
Arrogant
In 2010, Mercedes-Benz
was more…
Trendy
Trustworthy
-6% -4% -2% 0% 2% 4% 6%

Mercedes-Benz’s brand attributes Trustworthy, Trendy and Arrogant decreased from 2010 to 2011.
Insights 51
Insights
1. Aided Awareness
2. Brand Usage
3. Brand Preference
Insights 52
Insights

Aided Awareness
Overall Knowledge
Insights 53
Brand Aided Awareness
General Population
Aided Awareness General Population

2010 2011
Volvo 94 % 94%
Cadillac 96% 96%
Lexus 94% 93%
Mercedes-Benz 94% 96%
Study Field dates

January 2010 – November 2010
January 2011 – December 2011
Insights 54
Brand Aided Awareness
Gender / Age Group
Aided Awareness of Volvo

Gender 2010 2011
Men 94% 94%
Women 94% 95%
Age Groups
Ages 18-29 92% 91%
Ages 30-44 97% 94%
Ages 45-64 94% 96%
Ages 65+ 93% 96%
Study Field dates

Insights 55
Insights

Brand Ownership History
Percentages of Users and Non Users
Insights 56
Brand Usage
General Population
Brand Usage -- General Population

Used to Own/Lease, but Don’t Anymore Never Owned/Lease
2010 2011 2010 2011
Volvo 4% 4% 85% 85%
Cadillac 10% 10% 77% 78%
Lexus 2% 2% 87% 88%
Mercedes-Benz 4% 3% 86% 87%
Study Field dates

Insights 57
Brand Usage
Gender / Age Group
Volvo Brand Usage – By Gender and Age Group

Used to Own/Lease, but Don’t Anymore Never Owned/Lease
2010 2011 2010 2011
Gender
Men 4% 4% 84% 84%
Women 3% 4% 86% 86%

Age Groups
Ages 18-29 3% 3% 87% 87%
Ages 30-44 4% 4% 87% 85%
Ages 45-64 4% 5% 85% 85%
Ages 65+ 4% 4% 82% 83%
Study Field dates

Insights 58
Insights

Brand Preference
Percentages of consideration
Insights 59
Brand Consideration
General Population/Age Group
Brand Consideration General Population

Only Buy/Lease if
One of Several I’d Buy/Lease
No Convenient Alternative
2010 2011 2010 2011
Volvo 18% 18% 15% 16%
Cadillac 20% 19% 16% 17%
Lexus 21% 19% 12% 14%
Brand Consideration Age Groups
One of Several I’d Buy/ Only Buy/Lease if

Lease No Convenient Alternative
Age Groups 2010 2011 2010 2011
Ages 18-29 20% 20% 16% 17%
Ages 30-44 20% 21% 17% 18%
Ages 45-64 18% 18% 14% 17%
Ages 65+ 14% 13% 12% 13%
Insights 60
Brand Consideration
Gender
Brand Consideration Male
Only Buy/Lease if
No Convenient Alternative
2010 2011 2010 2011
Volvo 18% 18% 15% 16%
Cadillac 20% 19% 16% 17%
Lexus 21% 19% 12% 14%
Brand Consideration Female

Only Buy/Lease if No Convenient
Alternative
2010 2011 2010 2011
Volvo 18% 18% 15% 16%
Cadillac 20% 19% 16% 17%
Lexus 21% 19% 12% 14%
Insights 61
Brand Preference
General Population/Gender /Age Groups
Brand Preference Brand Preference General Population
The One I’d Prefer to Buy/Lease The One I’d Prefer to Buy/Lease
Gender 2010 2011 2010 2011
Men 4% 3% Volvo 5% 4%
Women 5% 5% Cadillac 5% 6%
Lexus 6% 7%
Age Groups Mercedes-Benz 7% 6%
Ages 18-29 5% 2%
Ages 30-44 5% 5%
Ages 45-64 4% 4%
Ages 65+ 5% 5%
Insights 62
Brand Rejection
General Population/Gender /Age Groups
Brand Rejection Brand Rejection General Population
Would Never Buy/Lease Would Never Buy/Lease

Gender 2010 2011 Brand 2010 2011
Men 39% 37% Volvo 40% 38%
Women 41% 40% Cadillac 33% 33%
Lexus 36% 36%
Age Groups Mercedes-Benz 38% 39%
Ages 18-29 41% 37%
Ages 30-44 38% 35%
Ages 45-64 39% 39%
Ages 65+ 45% 46%
Insights 63
Insights
Sample Size
Insights 64
Appendix & Study Methodology
Sample Size General Population Base

2010 2011
Volvo 1360 2044
Cadillac 1336 1986
Lexus 2727 3615
Mercedes-Benz 1359 2077
Study Field dates

Insights 65
Appendix & Study Methodology
Sample Size Targeted Bases

Gender 2010 2011
Men 619 1024
Women 741 1024
Age Groups
Ages 18-29 124 222
Ages 30-44 286 396
Ages 45-64 612 917
Ages 65+ 338 509
Study Field dates

Insights 66

BAVInsights BrandAssessment SampleReport

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

BAVInsights BrandAssessment SampleReport

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Insights

Brand Assessment Report

Getting the Most from BAV Insights

the brand list is reflective of the current

Age usage, consideration, and knowledge

• Is your brand differentiated?

• Is your brand relevant?

Brand Development & Lifecycle Curiosity

Insights April 23, 2013

Relevance drives usage and is the measure of what is personally appropriate to

Esteem is consumer respect, regard, reputation and is the fulfillment

Knowledge is the culmination of brand building

How well the Curiosity

brand is Mass Market

An intimate New/Unfocused Fatigue

Brand Strength is a leading indicator as

Brand Strength Represents

Line of commoditization separates Leadership

Curiosity: E_DIF REL EST KNO

They begin by building energized

Volvo Brand Performance

The Volvo brand is compared to a selection of automobile

The Volvo brand will also be compared to an aggregated view of

All Adults 2011

DIF REL EST KNO

All Adults 2011

2010-2011 BAV Autos Avg. 50 100

All Adults 2010 - 2011

Brand Health Pillars Brand Lifecycle PowerGrid

All Adults 2011

All Adults 2010-2011

50 100 100 100 100

50 75 100 50 75 100 50 75 100

All Adults 2010-2011

Volvo Brand Performance

DIF REL EST KNO

Brand Strength Brand Stature 50 100

2011 Men and Women

Men: 2010 - 2011

Women: 2010 - 2011

Ages 45-64 Ages 65+

Age Groups: 2011

Volvo Brand Imagery Analysis

Volvo’s Gains/Losses in Imagery 2010 vs. 2011

-9% -7% -5% -3% -1% 1% 3% 5% 7% 9%

Innovative, Dynamic and Leader

Prestigious Cadillac is more…

-20% -15% -10% -5% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20%

-20% -15% -10% -5% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20%

2011 Volvo vs. Lexus

Volvo is more… Rugged

-20% -15% -10% -5% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20%

Brand Imagery Analysis

Potential Equity Core Imagery

Not Essential Imagery Weak Core Imagery

Consumer Association with Brand A

Independent Cares about Customers

Gaining in Popularity Authentic

Consumer Association with Volvo

Cares About Customers

Consumer Association with Cadillac vs. Benchmarks

Visionary Upper Class

Fun Leader Prestigious

•  Is your brand differentiated?

•  Is your brand relevant?