Developments in the literature on branding have been reviewed in this chapter.
Brands have evolved to become dominant in the minds of consumers, the corporation and its varied stakeholders and they have acquired a place in the world which previously would have been considered unimaginable (Olins 2000). Of the many concepts and theoretical frameworks on branding which have been developed since the mid 1980s the focus here has been on the concepts of brand image and brand identity which underpin much of the literature on brand management. Because
of the focus of this study on premium/luxury brands, the branding literature which specifically addresses this area has been explored.
The central dimensions of the branding and luxury branding literatures, based on relevance to the research objectives, have been reviewed in this chapter. The main findings suggest that:
Brands have evolved from devices designed to differentiate products to consumer symbols which have considerable emotional attachment (2.4);
The academic consideration of branding has moved from its roots in product branding to brands becoming the central part of the corporate wide endeavour (2.4.5);
Brand image, based on concepts from cognitive psychology in particular information processing, is the perception of the brand in the minds of consumers.
The strategy of brand management from a brand image perspective is to ensure that consumers hold favourable and strong associations with the brand in their minds. COO is one of these associations (2.6.1);
The brand identity concept developed out of corporate identity studies and represents a supply side approach to brand management where the brand producer communicates what the brand stands for and what makes it distinctive (2.6.2). Identity precedes image in the brand management process (2.7.3);
Branding at corporate rather than at product level enables a corporate identity which conveys the company culture (i.e. the vision, mission and values) to be communicated to multiple stakeholders (2.7). The links which can be made between company culture, COO, heritage and the influence of the founder, are of particular relevance for luxury brands (2.7.2);
The identity concept lies at the heart of the corporate branding process, an approach which offers greater opportunities for differentiation based on the culture of the organisation than could be achieved using the earlier product focussed approach (2.7.2). For many brands, particularly in the luxury/premium sector, COO is an important part of this identity (2.8.4).
Luxury brands have specific emotional and symbolic dimensions which distinguish them from value brands (2.8.4) and important among these is the contribution made by the COO to the dimensions of authenticity and heritage (2.8.4);
Differences in national business cultures, based on historical legacies characterise different approaches to the development of luxury sectors in Europe (‘old’ luxury) and America (‘new’ luxury) (2.8.5);
The terminology used to classify luxury brands has been shown to be extensive and confusing (2.8.3). For this study the term premium/luxury has been selected to describe the Scottish high-end consumer goods sector (2.8.6).
The dimensions which have particular significance for this study are first, that as has been clearly established in this chapter, a brand is not the same as a product nor is it simply an adjunct to a product, considered by consumers along with other extrinsic cues like price in the decision making process (2.3). Brands perform a number of critical roles in a highly competitive marketplace. They help differentiate and provide reassurance, but the power of brands nowadays lies in the fact that they help people to define who they are. This is particularly the case for luxury/premium brands. This conceptualisation of brands has not been adopted in the COO literature.
Secondly, brands cannot only be about existing solely in the minds of consumers, conceptualised in the literature as brand image (2.5.1; 2.6.1). Image formation plays only a partial role in the branding process with the brand identity being the critical component which involves a wider range of stakeholders in the brand creation process (2.5.2; 2.6.2). Brand owners have to create a clear identity and communicate this to target stakeholders to encourage the creation of an image which is consistent with the core values of the brand. They need to manage the associations which link with the brand in line with the principles of the spreading activation model (2.5.1).
A key premise of this study is that in certain situations, part of the identity building process can be to associate the brand with relevant parts of a national identity and communicate these to the target market. Keller (1993) and Aaker (1991) both refer to COO as one type of association which may contribute to brand image, and COO appears in models of brand identity by Kapferer (1992); Aaker (1996), and de Chernatony (1999) and in corporate identity models including those by Melewar (2003) and Melewar and Karaosmanoglu (2006). Balmer (2001b) has however reflected that existing identity models have paid insufficient attention to the effects of the external environment, particularly “super and subordinate reputation types”
(p.274) which includes industry sector, corporate structure and COO. Other criticisms of existing models, particularly Hatch and Schultz’s 1997; 2000; 2002, have been made by Jack and Lorbiecki 2007 who draw attention to a lack of explanation of the processes of identity formation, in particular how identity is expressed, which they refer to as the “grammar” of identity (p.S80). A further weakness identified by Balmer is that most models assume that a single homogeneous corporate image will be held
by all stakeholder groups. This reflects Ailon-Souday and Kunda’s (2003) contention that much of the cross cultural management literature assumes a homogeneous national identity. This has been demonstrated as an over- simplification (Jack and Lorbiecki 2007).
Country of origin has not been identified consistently as an important dimension of luxury brands in spite of a clear origin association with many brands in this sector (Jackson 2004). The brand dimensions of history, heritage and authenticity, all of which are recognised as important dimensions of luxury brands, have recently been the subjects of further elucidation (Beverland 2006; Urde et al. 2007; Alexander 2009; Balmer 2009b; Blombäck and Brunninge 2009) but this has not been the case with COO. In addition, the branding literature provides little further guidance to brand owners as to how they can use and communicate origin associations most effectively as part of their brand/corporate identity.
Moore and Birtwistle (2005) stressed the importance of consistent communication of the associations which form a luxury brand’s identity, yet studies which examine how these images and symbols are communicated e.g. Brioschi’s (2006) study of magazine advertising, are scarce. This picks up on deficiencies of existing identity models identified above (e.g. Jack and Lorbiecki 2007). There is a lack of understanding of the processes used to compile a brand/corporate identity using the many possible associations available, also on the processes used to communicate that identity most effectively.
Djelic and Ainamo (1999) and Kapferer (2006) provide the only insights into organizational structures used by companies in the luxury sector. Given that Balmer (2001b) has highlighted the important (and under researched) roles of both corporate structure and industry sector on corporate identity, this requires being included in future studies. Djelic and Ainamo (1999) have recommended that further studies to test their models of organizational structures of luxury fashion sectors using other industry contexts be carried out.
The next chapter reviews relevant COO literature to examine how the COO cue has been conceptualised and to seek further guidance on how COO can be used as an effective part of a brand/corporate identity.
CHAPTER 3
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ON COUNTRY-OF-ORIGIN IMAGE AND IDENTITY
Chapter Summary
‘Unmistakeably German.*Made in France’ (http://www.citroen.co.uk/ microsite/ citroen-c5/) This chapter reviews the treatment of the concepts of image and identity in the general COO literature before examining how Scotland’s image and identity have been portrayed. This is followed by an analysis of extant knowledge on the means by which COO cues are communicated by brand producers.
3.1. INTRODUCTION
The high profile Spring 2008 advertising campaign by the French car manufacturer Citroёn featuring different plays on the tag line ‘Unmistakeably German’ clearly illustrates how the market positioning strategies used by international firms recognise the effect of stereotypical national images on consumer product evaluations, attitudes, buying intentions and behaviour. Country of origin information, presented in the context of general information about a product’s specific attributes has been demonstrated to have an impact on consumer perceptions or evaluations of products, known as “the COO effect” (Samiee 1994).
Given the large amount of COO related literature and the diverse conceptualisations of the COO effect, this chapter represents a selected rather than a comprehensive review of that literature based on relevance to the research objectives. The COO construct is analysed and the terms used in COO literature defined and clarified. The conceptualisations of COO image and identity are examined before exploring the COO literature for examples of studies which either take a business perspective or which focus on the luxury sector. Insights into the mechanisms used to communicate COO in brand marketing are examined before finally examining COO in the specific Scottish context of the study. The chapter ends by identifying and discussing the research questions which will inform the research phase of this study.
The important differences between the concepts of product and brand were explained in the previous chapter, but much of the COO literature does not recognise this distinction, with the terms frequently being used as synonyms. Thakor and Kohli (1996) note that the emphasis on country as the major exogenous variable in COO studies has lead to analysis being conducted at the product, rather than the brand level. In most COO literature, the brand (if mentioned) represents a separate
extrinsic cue for product evaluation, just like price, and is manipulated independently of COO information (Klein et al. 1998). Because this is the primary focus of most COO research, and existing research on brand effects is rarely referred to, studies have either omitted brand names entirely, used fictitious names, or have failed to control for the confounding effects of COO and real brand names (Thakor and Kohli 1996; Thakor and Lavack 2003). Country of origin has normally been manipulated through the ‘made-in’ label (Liefeld 1993; Mohamad et al. 2000) which is given equal prominence to any other cue being considered. Where brands have been considered, they are from the classical line branding perspective rather than the corporate brand (e.g. d’Astous and Ahmed 1993; Tse and Gorn 1993; Okechuku 1994).
3.2 THEORETICAL APPROACHES TO COUNTRY-OF-ORIGIN RESEARCH