Unlock document.
This document is partially blurred.
Unlock all pages and 1 million more documents.
Get Access
Chapter 9
Measuring Sources of Brand Equity: Capturing Customer
Mind-Set
Chapter Objectives
1. Describe eective qualitative research techniques for tapping into
consumer brand knowledge.
2. Identify eective quantitative research techniques for measuring
brand awareness, image, responses, and relationships.
3. Pro"le and contrast some popular brand equity models.
Overview
To measure sources of brand equity, brand managers must understand
two key areas: how consumers shop for and use products and services,
and what consumers know, think, and feel about various brands. One
of the potential complications of pursuing this knowledge is that many
times consumers are unable or unwilling to access and report to
researchers their true beliefs and feelings about a brand. Qualitative
methods allow marketers to probe consumers either through direct
questions or through tasks that indirectly reveal perceptions and
attitudes. Such methods, which permit a relatively unlimited range of
verbal consumer responses, include free association tasks, projective
techniques, and descriptions of a brand’s personality and values,
among others. Data gathered through qualitative research generally
must be coded and aggregated before it is useful.
Quantitative methods, which typically use numerical rating scales or
rankings, include measures of recognition, aided and unaided recall,
beliefs, attitudes, intentions, and behaviors toward the brand. Image
measures, brand response measures such as purchase intentions,
brand relationship measures such as behavioral loyalty, and brand
sustainability can also be employed to measure consumer attitudes.
Data gathered through quantitative research can be entered directly
into "les and analyzed using a variety of statistical techniques.
Ultimately, the two types of research techniques enable marketers to
construct “mental maps” that model consumers’ feelings, beliefs, and
attitudes regarding a brand. Marketers can then employ the mental
maps to make decisions about their brands and develop strategies for
building brand equity.
Qualitative measures are best used to provide in-depth insight into
what speci"c brands, products, and services mean to consumers.
© 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall.
Quantitative measures, on the other hand, are particularly useful to
obtain general information about consumers.
Finally, this chapter concludes by presenting other customer-based
brand equity models designed by researchers and consultants, such as
the Millward Brown’s BrandDynamics model.
Brand Focus 9.0 discusses Young & Rubicam’s Brand Asset Valuator
(BAV). The BAV is the world’s largest database of consumer-derived
information on brands. The BAV evaluates brands on four key
measures, called the “Four Pillars”: dierentiation, relevance, esteem,
and knowledge. Also employed are a number of measures across a
broad array of perceptual dimensions. The BAV provides a brand
landscape by which marketers can see where their brands are located
relative to other prominent brands or with respect to dierent markets.
Science of Branding
THE SCIENCE OF BRANDING 9-1
UNDERSTANDING CATEGORICAL BRAND RECALL
A classic experiment by Prakash Nedungadi provides a compelling
demonstration of the importance of understanding the category
structure that exists in consumer memory as well as the value of
strategies for increasing the recallability or accessibility of brands
during choice situations. As a preliminary step in his research study,
Nedungadi "rst examined the category structure for fast-food
restaurants that existed in consumers’ minds. He found that a “major
subcategory” was “hamburger chains” and a “minor subcategory” was
“sandwich shops.” In an unaided recall and choice task, consumers
were more likely to remember and select a brand from a major
subcategory than from a minor subcategory and, within a subcategory,
a major brand rather than a minor brand.
Nedungadi next looked at the eects of dierent brand “primes” on
subsequent choices among four fast-food restaurants. Two key "ndings
emerged. Merely making the brand more accessible in memory
increased the likelihood that it would be chosen independent of any
dierences in brand attitude. Priming a minor brand in a minor
subcategory actually bene"ted the major brand in that subcategory
more. The implications of Nedungadi’s research are that marketers
must understand how consumers’ memory is organized and, as much
as possible, ensure that the proper cues and primes are evident to
prompt brand recall.
© 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall.
In sum, brand recall provides insight into category structure and brand
positioning in consumers’ minds. Brands tend to be recalled in
categorical clusters when consumers are given a general probe.
Certain brands are grouped together in memory because they share
certain associations and are thus likely to cue and remind consumers
of each other if one is recalled.
THE SCIENCE OF BRANDING 9-2
UNDERSTANDING BRAND ENGAGEMENT
There are several dierent ways to think of brand engagement:
Actual brand engagement is the activities with which the
consumer currently is engaged with the brand and is typically
what is measured with the brand resonance model.
Ideal brand engagement is the activities the brand consumer
wishes they could do with the brand.
Market brand engagement is the activities the consumer believes
other consumers are doing with the brand.
Market brand engagement will be closely related to measures of brand
momentum—how much progress the brand appears to be making with
consumers in the marketplace. Both sets of measures deal with
consumer perceptions of how other consumers are connecting to a
brand. Measures of actual brand engagement can take two forms—
more general, macro measures or more speci"c, micro measures. Micro
sets of measures focus on speci"c categories of brand-related
activities. These activities fall into three categories depending on
whether they relate to: 1) collecting brand information, 2) participating
in brand marketing activities, or 3) interacting with other people and
having a sense of community.
Branding Briefs
BRANDING BRIEF 9-1
DIGGING BENEATH THE SURFACE TO UNDERSTAND CONSUMER
BEHAVIOR
Useful marketing insights sometimes emerge from unobtrusively
observing consumers rather than talking to them. DuPont
commissioned marketing studies to uncover personal pillow behavior
for its Dacron polyester unit, which supplies "lling to pillow makers and
sells its own Comforel brand (now part of INVISTA). The researchers
found that people fell into distinct groups in terms of pillow behavior:
stackers (23 percent), plumpers (20 percent), rollers or folders (16
percent), cuddlers (16 percent), and smashers, who pound their pillows
© 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall.
into a more comfy shape (10 percent). The prevalence of stackers led
the company to sell more pillows packaged as pairs, as well as to
market dierent levels of softness or "rmness. Much of this type of
research has its roots in ethnography, the anthropological term for the
study of cultures in their natural surroundings. The intent behind these
in-depth, observational studies is for consumers to drop their guard
and provide a more realistic portrayal of who they are rather than who
they would like to be.
BRANDING BRIEF 9-2
ONCE UPON A TIME . . . YOU WERE WHAT YOU COOKED
One of the most famous applications of psychographic techniques was
made by Mason Haire in the 1940s. The purpose of the experiment was
to uncover consumers’ true beliefs and feelings toward Nescafé instant
coee. On the basis of consumer taste tests, however, Nescafé’s
management knew consumers found the taste of instant coee
acceptable when they didn’t know what type of coee they were
drinking. Suspecting that consumers were not expressing their true
feelings, Haire designed a clever experiment to discover what was
really going on.
Haire set up two shopping lists containing the same six items.
Shopping List 1 speci"ed Maxwell House drip ground coee, whereas
Shopping List 2 speci"ed Nescafé instant coee. Two groups of
matched subjects were each given one of the lists and asked to “Read
the shopping list. . . . Try to project yourself into the situation as far as
possible until you can more or less characterize the woman who
bought the groceries.” Subjects then wrote a brief description of the
personality and character of that person.
After coding the responses into frequently mentioned categories, Haire
found that two starkly dierent pro"les emerged. Haire interpreted
these results as indicating that instant coee represented a departure
from homemade coee and traditions with respect to caring for one’s
family. In other words, at that time, the “labor-saving” aspect of instant
coee, rather than being an asset, was a liability in that it violated
consumer traditions. Consumers were evidently reluctant to admit this
fact when asked directly but were better able to express their true
feelings when asked to project to another person.
Based on the projective test "ndings, it was obvious that there also
needed to be a point-of-parity on the basis of user imagery. As a result,
a successful ad campaign was launched that promoted Nescafé coee
as a way for housewives to free up time so they could devote
additional time to more important household activities.
© 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall.
BRANDING BRIEF 9-3
BRAND IMAGERY AT JOIE DE VIVRE
Joie de Vivre Hospitality LLC operates a chain of boutique hotels,
restaurants, and resorts in California, Arizona, and Chicago. Chip
Conley founded the company in 1987 when he purchased a rundown
motel in a seedy area of San Francisco and converted it into the
Phoenix, a fashionable destination popular among entertainment
celebrities. In establishing Joie de Vivre, Conley’s goal was “to create a
company with hip hotel concepts that appealed to a younger consumer
base.”
Since launching the Phoenix, the company has grown to a total of 34
hotels, the largest group of boutique hotels in California, and is now
going national. Each property’s unique décor, quirky amenities, and
thematic style are loosely based on a popular magazine.
Joie de Vivre hotels strive to combine style and Havor with comfort and
service. In addition to providing comfort considerations, Joie de Vivre
creates loyalty among its customers with a dedication to customer
service. The company condenses all pertinent service information onto
a small laminated card that all employees carry with them while they
work. The personal touches and unique personality oered by Joie de
Vivre hotels have helped the company build a loyal customer base.
BRANDING BRIEF 9-4
MAKING THE MOST OF CONSUMER INSIGHTS
Consumer research plays a signi"cant role in uncovering information
valuable to consumer-focused companies. David Taylor, founder of the
Brand Gym consultancy, de"nes an insight as “a penetrating,
discerning understanding that unlocks an opportunity.” Taylor
developed a set of criteria to evaluate insights:
Fresh: An insight might be obvious and, in fact, be overlooked or
forgotten as a result. Check again.
Relevant: An insight when played back to other target consumers
should strike a chord.
Enduring: By building on a deep understanding of consumers’
beliefs and needs, a true consumer insight should have potential
to remain relevant over time.
Inspiring: All of the team should be excited by the insight and see
dierent but consistent applications.
© 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall.
Insights can come from consumer research such as focus groups, but
also from using what Taylor describes as the “core insight drills.” A
sample of these drills follows:
How could the brand/category do more to help improve people’s
lives?
What do people really value in the category? What would they
not miss?
What conHicting needs do people have? How can these tradeos
be solved?
What bigger market is the brand really competing in from a
consumer viewpoint? What could the brand do more of to better
meet these “higher-order” needs?
What assumptions do people make about the market that could
be challenged?
How do people think the product works, and how does it work in
reality?
How is the product used in reality? What other products are used
instead of the brand, where the brand could do a better job?
These “drills” can help companies unearth consumer insights that lead
to better products and services, and ultimately to stronger brands.
Brand Focus
BRAND FOCUS 9.0
YOUNG & RUBICAM’S BRANDASSET VALUATOR
BrandAsset® Valuator (BAV), originally developed by Young & Rubicam,
is the world’s largest database of consumer-derived information on
brands. The BAV model is developmental in that it explains how brands
grow, how they get into trouble, and how they recover. BAV measures
brands on four fundamental measures of equity value plus a broad
array of perceptual dimensions. It provides comparative measures of
the equity value of thousands of brands across hundreds of dierent
categories, as well as a set of strategic brand management tools for
planning: brand positioning, brand extensions, joint branding ventures,
and other strategies designed to assess and direct brands and their
growth. BAV is also linked to "nancial metrics and is used to determine
a brand’s contribution to a company’s valuation.
BAV represents a unique brand equity research tool. Respondents
evaluate brands in a category-agnostic context. Brands are percentile
ranked against all brands in the study for each brand metric. Thus, by
comparing brands across as well as within categories, BAV is able to
© 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall.
draw the broadest possible conclusions about how consumer-level
brand equity is created and built—or lost.
Four Pillars
There are four key components of brand health in BAV, namely,
energized dierentiation, relevance, esteem, and knowledge. Each
pillar is derived from various measures that relate to dierent aspects
of consumers’ brand perceptions. Taken together, the four pillars trace
the progression of a brand’s development.
Relationship among the Pillars—Examining the relationships between
these four dimensions—a brand’s “pillar patterns”—reveals much
about a brand’s current and future status. Brands often strive to build
awareness, but if the brand’s pillars are not in the proper alignment,
then consumer knowledge of a brand becomes an obstacle that may
need to be surmounted before the brand can continue to build healthy
momentum.
The PowerGrid
BrandAsset® Valuator has integrated the two macro dimensions of
Brand Strength (Energized Dierentiation and Relevance) and Brand
Stature (Esteem and Knowledge) into a visual analytical representation
known as the PowerGrid. The PowerGrid depicts the stages in the cycle
of brand development—each with its characteristic pillar patterns—in
successive quadrants.
Brands generally begin their life in the lower left quadrant, where they
"rst need to develop Relevant Dierentiation and establish their reason
for being. Most often, the movement from there is “up” into the top left
quadrant. Increased Dierentiation, followed by Relevance, initiates
growth in Brand Strength. The upper right quadrant, the Leadership
Quadrant, is populated by brand leaders—those that have high levels
of both Brand Strength and Brand Stature. Brands that fail to maintain
their Brand Strength—their Relevant Dierentiation—begin to fade and
move “down” into the bottom right quadrant.
Applying BAV to Google
Google is a dramatic example. Google achieved leadership status
faster than any other brand measured in BAV. Google built each brand
pillar, beginning with Energized Dierentiation, both quickly and
strongly. After rapidly establishing Energized Dierentiation, Google
built the other three pillars. It took only three years for Google’s
percentile-ranking on all four pillars to reach the high 90s. From the
© 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall.
BAV perspective, there are three main contributing factors: 1)
consistently strong brand attributes that translate into competitive
advantages; 2) successful brand extensions into new categories; and
3) successful expansion into global markets and the fast establishment
of brand leadership.
Competitive Advantages on Brand Attributes—Google’s leadership is
supported by competitive advantages on the factors that contribute to
the strength of the key pillars. Google is stronger than the competitive
average on the Cutting Edge (innovation) factor and the Bold
personality factor. Both of these factors build Google’s Energized
Dierentiation. Google’s advantage on the Dependability (trust) factor
helps keep the Relevance pillar strong, and Google’s strength on the
Superiority (best brand) factor supports both the Relevance and the
Esteem pillars.
Successful Category Extensions—Google has done a masterful job of
entering new categories with sub-brands. Most of the sub-brands also
have very high Brand Strength, which helps replenish the Brand
Strength of the Google corporate brand. In this way, the leadership of
the sub-brands helps support the parent brand, a common theme
among strong parent brands with sub-brands. The signi"cant strength
of Google’s image pro"le has made entrance into new categories
easier.
Successful Global Expansion—BAV shows global brands must build
consistently strong Brand Strength, Brand Stature, and power on key
factors that drive brand pillars and meaning in each market. Google
has achieved leadership status in global markets the same way it
achieved leadership status in the USA—by quickly “maxing out” on
Brand Strength and Brand Stature. In all countries recently surveyed,
Google is a super-leadership brand on the PowerGrid.
Summary
There is a lot of commonality between the basic BAV model and the
brand resonance model. The brand resonance framework maintains
that brand salience and breadth and depth of awareness is a necessary
"rst step in building brand equity. The BAV model treats familiarity in a
more aective manner—almost in a warm feeling or friendship sense—
and thus sees it as the last step in building brand equity, more akin to
the resonance component itself.
The main advantage of the BAV model is that it provides rich
category-agnostic descriptions and pro"les across a large number of
brands. It also provides focus on four key branding dimensions. It
© 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall.
provides a brand landscape in which marketers can see where their
brands stand relative to other prominent brands in many dierent
markets.
The descriptive nature of the BAV model does mean that there is
potentially less insight as to exactly how a brand could rate highly on
those factors. Nevertheless, the BAV model represents a landmark
study in terms of its ability to enhance marketers’ understanding of
what drives top brands and where their brands "t in a vast brandscape.
Discussion questions
1. Pick a brand. Employ projective techniques to attempt to identify
sources of its brand equity. Which measures work best? Why?
2. Run an experiment to see if you can replicate the Mason Haire
instant co"ee experiment (see Branding Brief 9-2). Do the same
attributions still hold? If not, can you replace co"ee with one brand
combination from another product category that would produce
pronounced di"erences?
© 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall.
3. Pick a product category. Can you pro.le the brand personalities of
the leading brands in the category using Aaker’s brand personality
inventory?
4. Pick a brand. How would you best pro.le consumers' brand
knowledge structures? How would you use quantitative measures?
5. Think of your brand relationships. Can you 4nd examples of brands that
4t into Fournier’s di7erent categories?
Answers will vary. Students may be divided into groups where each
group may choose one category and come up with examples of
brands that "t their category. They may then be asked to compare
their list of brand examples to assess whether the same brand has
fallen into dierent categories.
Page: 322
Learning Objective: Identify eective quantitative research
techniques for measuring brand awareness, image, responses, and
relationships.
AACSB: Analytic Skills
© 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall.
Exercises and assignments
1. Ask students to conduct a modern-day version of the shopping cart
experiment described in Branding Brief 9-2: Once Upon a Time . . .
You Were What You Cooked. Update the list and choose a focal
product to vary across two versions. For example:
1 whole roasting chicken 1 whole roasting
chicken
1 package Thomas English muPns 1 package Thomas
English muPns
4 ears fresh corn 4 ears fresh corn
Jar of Grey Poupon mustard Jar of Kraft mustard
Breyer’s vanilla bean ice cream Breyer’s vanilla
bean ice cream
2 onions 2 onions
How could the managers of the focal brands use the results in their
marketing planning?
Page: 303
Learning Objective: Describe eective qualitative research
techniques for tapping into consumer brand knowledge.
AACSB: Analytic Skills
2. Tell students to conduct a focus group, using other students as
participants, to gain insights about attitudes, feelings, and
behaviors toward the school or program in which they all are
currently enrolled. What implications do the "ndings have for
marketing strategy?
3. Have students pick brands of their choice and conduct quantitative
research by employing various types of scale questions to draw
© 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall.
numerical representations and summaries. This activity will help
them assess the depth and breadth of brand awareness; the
strength, favorability, and uniqueness of brand associations; the
positivity of brand judgments and feelings; and the extent and
nature of brand relationships.
Page: 312
4. Assign the same sets of brands to the students and have them
adopt the BrandDynamics model to determine the strength of
relationship each student has with each brand. Students may place
themselves into one of the "ve levels depending on their brand
responses. By comparing the pattern across brands, this activity will
help them uncover relative strengths and weaknesses and see
where brands can focus their eorts to improve their loyalty
relationships.
Page: 325
Key take-away points
1. In general, measuring sources of brand equity requires knowing how
consumers shop for and use products and services, and what
consumers know, think, and feel about brands.
2. Since the sources of equity reside in the consumers’ associations,
attitudes, etc. toward the brand, measuring equity requires
consumer-focused research.
3. Consumer knowledge toward a brand may be uncovered using
either quantitative or qualitative methods, often in combination.
© 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall.
4. Qualitative measures are best for capturing speci"c consumer
insights about brands, products, and services, while quantitative
insights can be employed for more generalizable information.
5. The simplest and often the most powerful way to pro"le brand
associations is free association tasks.
6. Projective techniques are diagnostic tools to uncover the true
opinions and feelings of consumers when they are unwilling or
otherwise unable to express themselves on these matters.
7. The Zaltman Metaphor Elicitation Technique is a technique for
eliciting interconnected constructs that inHuence thought and
behavior.
8. Neuromarketing is the study of how the brain responds to marketing
stimuli, including brands.
9. Ethnographic research uses “thick description” based on participant
observation.
10. Quantitative research typically employs various types of scale
questions from which researchers can draw numerical
representations and summaries.
11. Quantitative measures of brand knowledge can help to more
de"nitively assess the depth and breadth of brand awareness; the
strength, favorability, and uniqueness of brand associations; the
positivity of brand judgments and feelings; and the extent and
nature of brand relationships.
12. The customer-based brand equity model provides a
comprehensive, cohesive overview of brand building and brand
equity.
13. Marketing research agency Millward Brown’s BrandDynamics
model oers a graphical model to represent the emotional and
functional strength of relationship consumers have with a brand.
© 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall.
