Dynamics of Global Brand文档格式.docx

1、andC. Samuel CraigStern School of BusinessNew York UniversityApril 2002Paper presented at Research in International Marketing Conference.CIBER University of Connecticut; October 19, 2001.Contact Author:Stern School of Business, K-MEC 7-6744 West 4th StreetNew York, NY 10012-1126Phone: （212） 998-0418

2、Email: sdouglasstern.nyu.edu The authors wish to acknowledge support provided by the Unilever Foundation for this research.Abstract Brands play a critical role in a firms international marketing strategy. A coherent international brand architecture is a key component of the firms overall internation

3、al marketing strategy as it provides a framework to leverage strong brands into other markets, assimilate acquired brands, and rationalize the firms international branding strategy. This paper looks at the various components of international brand architecture and the different types of architecture

4、 found among a sample of large international consumer goods companies. Based on these initial insights, some key issues that need further research are identified. IntroductionBranding is a key element of a firms marketing strategy. Strong brands help establish the firms identity in the market place,

5、 and develop a solid customer franchise （Aaker, 1996; Kapferer, 1997; Keller, 1998）. Owning the number one or two brand in the product category provides manufacturers with a weapon to counter growing retailer power （Barwise and Robertson, 1992）. A strong brand name can also provide the basis for bra

6、nd extensions, which further strengthen the firms position in the marketplace as well as potentially enhancing the brands value （Aaker and Keller, 1990）. As firms move into international markets, branding plays an important role in its marketing strategy. In particular, a judicious branding strategy

7、 provides a means to enhance the firms visibility and integrate strategy across national markets （see Khermouch, Holmes and Ihlwan, 2001）. In markets outside the U.S., the concept of building strong brands in order to establish market position is relatively recent （Court et al. 1997）. Markets are of

8、ten fragmented, characterized by small-scale distribution, and lack the potential or size to warrant the use of heavy mass media advertising needed to develop strong brands （Barwise and Robertson, 1992）. In addition, firms have typically expanded the geographic scope of operations on a piecemeal bas

9、is by acquiring companies in other countries or entering into alliances across national boundaries. As a result they often acquire national brands or ones with limited visibility. Consequently, companies operating internationally need to identify opportunities for strengthening their position throug

10、h improved co-ordination and harmonization of brands across countries and building a cohesive and effective architecture for their brands.An international brand architecture provides a structure and a rationale for branding decisions at different levels of the organization and for different geograph

11、ic locations. In essence, this architecture provides the principles that guide the effective use of brands so as to develop a strong positional advantage in international markets. It should establish which brands should be emphasized at what level in the organization, i.e. corporate, product busines

12、s and product, how brands are used and extended across product lines and country, and how far branding is harmonized and coordinated across national borders. Without a well-conceived international brand architecture, the firm will be at a competitive disadvantage, suffering from inconsistencies in b

13、rand identity across national markets, lack of a strong corporate or product identity in international markets, and the inability to maximize the value of brands across national boundaries.The present paper develops a framework for understanding the design and composition of a firms international br

14、and architecture. Current perspectives on international branding and brand architecture are first examined. A conceptual framework identifying the elements of international brand architecture is developed based on the findings of a field survey of the international branding strategies of a number of

15、 large consumer goods companies in Europe. Each of its components and the typical patterns of brand architecture found in these companies are then discussed in more detail. Finally, some directions for future research are suggested, designed to provide improved understanding of this important area o

16、f research. Perspectives on International Branding Most discussion and research on branding, whether in domestic or international markets focuses on the equity or value associated with a brand name and the factors which create or are the underlying source of value （Aaker, 1996; Keller, 1998）. Consid

17、erable attention has, for example, been devoted to examining how the value embodied in a brand and its equity can be extended to other products without resulting in dilution of value （Aaker and Keller, 1990）. This interest has been stimulated in part by the increasing market power and value associat

18、ed with a strong brand and in part by the prohibitive costs of launching a successful new brand. In international markets, interest has been centered around global branding - defining the meaning of a global brand, discussing the advantages and pitfalls, and the conditions under which building a glo

19、bal brand is most likely to be successful （Roth, 1995a,b; Quelch, 1999）. While this focus is appropriate for a relatively few high profile brands such as Nike or Coca-Cola, it ignores the complexity of the issues faced by the vast majority of multinational firms who own a variety of national, region

20、al and international brands, at different levels in the organization, spanning a broad range of diverse country markets. Typically, these brands differ in their strength, associations, target market and the range of products covered, both within and across markets. Equally the use of brands at diffe

21、rent organizational levels may vary from company to company. Some firms such as Sony, IBM or Phillips emphasize branding at the corporate level. Others such as Beiersdorf mostly have brands at the product business level, such as Nivea and Juvena, while yet others such as P&G, have primarily product

22、level brands.In determining whether to emphasize branding at the corporate level as opposed to the product level or whether to adopt a hybrid structure, the firm needs to consider the role of corporate image as well as the diversity of its product businesses. Corporate brands provide strong identity

23、 for the firms products in the market place, but do not enable differentiation of specific product businesses or product lines. Equally, negative publicity relating to a specific product or the firms policies will affect all products and product businesses. Product-level brands facilitate differenti

24、ation from competing products, but may be less cost efficient and result in loss of potential synergies. The number of brands at each level of the organization and the range of product lines across which a brand is used, must also be considered. Parsimony in the number of brands helps to achieve cos

25、t efficiencies but may weaken brand strengthen if used across highly diverse product lines. Multiplicity of brands facilitates responsiveness to specific customer or segment needs and clear product differentiation, but may be cost inefficient and hamper building of a strong position in the marketpla

26、ce. As the firm expands in international markets, issues relating to brand architecture become even more complex. In addition to determining the number of levels in the hierarchy, another dimension, namely the degree of brand coordination or standardization across countries, needs to be assessed. Of

27、 key importance is whether to use the same brand name in different countries, leveraging brand strength across boundaries, or whether to focus on local brands responding to local customer preferences. Using the same brand name in different countries has the advantage of enhancing visibility and reac

28、h, but may have negative connotations in some markets or result in lack of adaptation to local market conditions and the competitive environment. Often the nature and cohesiveness of a firms international brand architecture depends on how it has expanded internationally, and how its international op

29、erations are organized. Some firms, such as P&G, have expanded through leveraging strong domestic brands in international markets. Consequently, as they seek to expand further, they have to consider whether to develop brands geared to specific regional or national preferences. Others such as Nestl a

30、nd Unilever have traditionally adopted country-centered strategies, building or acquiring a mix of national and international brands. Such companies have to decide whether to move towards greater harmonization of brands and integration of their brand architecture across countries, and if so, how to

31、do so. Furthermore, if the company expands through acquisition or strategic alliances, the question of whether and how brand architectures of different firms are merged, arises. In particular, how far and in what way branding structures are integrated or harmonized across countries has to be determi

32、ned. International Brand Architecture A field study of consumer goods company executives based in Europe （Douglas, Craig and Nijssen, 2001） was conducted to gain some insights into their international brand architecture, and how these were evolving. Of particular interest were the dominant patterns of international brand architect