The Marketing Book 5th Edition

Gives

rise to

Providing

information that

enables matching

through fine-tuning

Brand

identity

Brand

reputation

Brand building 381

the five components of a brand’s identity and
the challenge for managers is to find ways of
blending these components to gain maximum
internal reinforcement.
This interpretation may help managers
reinforce a meaning behind a brand for con-
sumers, and also communicate the essence of
the brand to other stakeholders. The concept of
brand identity offers the opportunity to
develop the brand’s positioning better, and
encourages a more strategic approach to brand
management. A carefully managed identity
system also acts as a protective barrier against
competitors.
One of the weaknesses of this perspective is
that managers focus on the internal aspect of
branding, thinking predominantly about the
desired positioning. Thought also needs to be
given to the way customers perceive the brand,
since their perception (brand image) may be
different from the intended projection (brand
identity). One of the problems with seeking to
develop a brand through minimizing the gap
between brand identity and brand image is that
image refers to a customer’s perception at a
specific point in time and thus leads to short-
term fluctuations. By contrast, reputation relates
to perceptions about a brand over time and as a
customer-based measure is more stable. Thus,
brands could be managed by developing a
brand identity, then regularly fine-tuning the
brand identity components to minimize the gap
with the brand’s reputation amongst stake-
holders, as shown in Figure 15.6.

Brand as image

People do not react to reality but to what they
perceive to be reality. This perspective encour-
ages a more consumer-centred approach to
brands as the set of associations perceived by
an individual, over time, as a result of direct or
indirect experience of a brand. These may be
associations with functional qualities, or with
individual people or events. It is unlikely for
two people to have exactly the same image of a
brand (since no two people have the same

experiences), but their images may have com-

mon features. These features constitute, for

example, ‘the sociable image’ of a particular

brand of beer.

Adopting an image perspective forces

management to face the challenge of con-

sumers’ perceptions, i.e. due to their percep-

tual processes, the sent message is not

necessarily understood as was intended. It

therefore necessitates checking consumers’

perceptions and taking action to encourage

favourable perceptions.

Evaluating a brand’s image needs to take

into consideration customers’ levels of involve-

ment with the category (Poiesz, 1989). For those

categories where customers are actively

involved in spending time and effort seeking

out and processing brand information, it has

been argued (e.g. Reynolds and Gutman, 1984)

that brand image relates to a network of

information stored in memory that helps the

customer define his or her self. As customers

are so involved in the brand selection process it

is appropriate to use an involved procedure

when measuring brand image, for example

means-end chaining. In this approach, custom-

ers are first asked what they see as being the

difference between the brand in question and a

couple of competing brands in the category.

Figure 15.6 Brand management through

minimizing gaps