using two main discriminators on brand management literature Brand
Management Paradigmsby Louro and Cunha (2001). The final categorization of
brand approaches is How Brands Become Icons (2004) which is a comparison of
four practical branding models.
The role of brands
In ‘Divided by a common language: diversity and deception in the world of global
marketing’ Mary Goodyear (1996) investigates the marketing and branding
confusion in terms of linguistics and asks the question: how can branding be
defined if one does not consider the many different roles of brands in different
economies, time eras and phases of market maturation? Considering these macro-
level factors, Goodyear comes up with the definitions of the roles of brands shown
in table 11.1. The model reflects the different roles played by brands as markets
evolve. In that sense, the Goodyear framework reflects the life cycle of a brand –
how branding techniques become more sophisticated as consumers become more
and more accustomed to marketing techniques.
This categorization pivots around the evolution of branding techniques (and
hence, different brand roles) in the context of maturing market places. In a non-
industrialized economy, the majority of goods are unbranded and the mere fact
that goods are packaged may be a vehicle of consumer preferences. In low-
consumerized and undersupplied countries, the primary role of the brand is to
serve as a reference. The manufacturer need not apply sophisticated marketing
tools to selling his goods. This brand role is more or less comparable to the
economic approach.
In a more mature market, the marketer is faced with more competition and,
hence, has to apply other branding techniques in order to differentiate the
products. This situation requires the ‘three-dimensional brands’ where product
quality is supported by emotive advertising, where the brand’s most important
role is to act as a personality. As the branding techniques relate to emotions and
connotations, this role is comparable to the individualistic brand approaches of
our taxonomy (the consumer-based approach, the personality approach and the
relational approach).
In an even more saturated market place, the consumer becomes the main driver
in the branding process; the consumer ‘owns’ the brand and plays an active part in
endowing it with commonly held values, catapulting a few brands to iconic status
(as found in the cultural approach of our taxonomy).
In Goodyear’s categorization, she differs between classic branding and post-
modern branding. The postmodern consumer lives in a highly literate consumer
culture and is – through sophisticated brand literacy – able to see through the
classic roles of brands. The highly empowered postmodern consumer will demand
responsibility and identity from the corporation behind the brands; hence the two
latter roles of brands apply. The brand as organization is comparable to the identity
approach while the brand as policy is comparable to the CSR-related aspects of the
cultural approach
250 Taxonomy