Natalia Maehle a & Magne Supphellen b a Centre for Applied Research at NHH (SNF), Helleveien 30,

Transcription

1 This article was downloaded by: [Høgskolen i Bergen] On: 06 May 2015, At: 00:26 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: Registered office: Mortimer House, Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK Click for updates Journal of Marketing Communications Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: Advertising strategies for brand image repair: The effectiveness of advertising alliances Natalia Maehle a & Magne Supphellen b a Centre for Applied Research at NHH (SNF), Helleveien 30, Bergen, 5045, Norway b Department of Strategy and Management, Norwegian School of Economics, Helleveien 30, Bergen, 5045, Norway Published online: 17 Dec To cite this article: Natalia Maehle & Magne Supphellen (2013): Advertising strategies for brand image repair: The effectiveness of advertising alliances, Journal of Marketing Communications, DOI: / To link to this article: PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the Content ) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &

2 Conditions of access and use can be found at

3 Journal of Marketing Communications, Advertising strategies for brand image repair: The effectiveness of advertising alliances Natalia Maehle a * and Magne Supphellen b a Centre for Applied Research at NHH (SNF), Helleveien 30, Bergen 5045, Norway; b Department of Strategy and Management, Norwegian School of Economics, Helleveien 30, Bergen 5045, Norway Advertising alliances are an effective shortcut to increase brand awareness and improve brand image. However, few studies have compared the effectiveness of advertising alliances with traditional (single-brand) advertising. Thus, this study focuses on a specific type of brand beliefs namely, brand personality and compares the ability of advertising alliances and traditional advertising to strengthen positive traits and downplay negative traits for a real brand in need of image repair. The results show that the advertising alliance is considerably more effective in upgrading positive brand personality traits than single-brand advertising. Importantly, this superior effect remained one week after exposure. The choice of advertising strategy had no effect on negative brand personality traits. Implications for advertising management are discussed. Keywords: advertising strategy; advertising alliance; brand image; brand image repair; brand personality 1. Introduction Consumers choose brands on the basis of expectations. When choice is memory based, consumers activate a set of alternatives from long-term memory (the evoked set) and expectations about the potential for these alternatives to satisfy needs. When choice is stimulus based (i.e. consumers are exposed to an in-store offer), choice processes are usually faster and shallower, include fewer alternatives, but are still based on expectations about the brand (Oliver 2010). Brand images contain the building blocks of expectations, which helps explain why brand image enhancement is a major task for brand managers (Keller 1993, 2008). Image enhancement is a continuous effort because images are dynamic and change over time as a result of both external factors, such as the communication for competitors brands, and internal changes, such as in the marketing mix. The net effect of external and internal factors on brand image can be either positive or negative. Most brand managers experience downswings, in which important brand beliefs are seriously weakened or new and negative beliefs become linked to the brand name. For example, in 2011 Britain experienced serious problems with riots and public violence, and BlackBerry, the producer of smartphones, became associated with the gangs responsible for the riots (Cartmell and Luker 2011). In such situations, brand managers must act quickly to repair the brand image before the damage becomes permanent. Despite the importance of this issue, few empirical studies have addressed the effectiveness of alternative strategies for brand image repair. We contribute to the literature in three ways. First, we compare the image repair effectiveness of two alternative advertising strategies: *Corresponding author. natalia.maehle@snf.no q 2013 Taylor & Francis

4 2 N. Maehle and M. Supphellen advertising alliance and traditional single-brand advertising. Second, we test the effects of advertising strategy on both positive and negative brand beliefs. Third, we also test the durability of advertising strategy effects in a follow-up study one week after exposure. In the following, we review relevant aspects of associative network theory and brand image theory. We then turn to advertising strategy and develop three hypotheses on the relative effectiveness of advertising alliances. We test the hypotheses directly after exposure to advertising stimuli and one week later. Finally, we discuss the implications of our findings for advertising management and for further research on image repair strategies. 2. The nature and dynamics of brand images Brand researchers have drawn on the associative network model of memory (Collins and Loftus 1975; Anderson 1983) to develop theory on the nature of brand images (Keller 1993, 2008). According to the associative network model, long-term memory consists of nodes that contain information connected by relational links (Collins and Loftus 1975; Anderson 1983). Nodes can represent any type of information, including verbal, emotional, olfactory, auditory, touch impressions, and visual imagery (Zaltman 1997). Links and nodes can be activated deliberately by the person or automatically by some internal memory cue or external stimulus (e.g. an advert). Activation means that the information carried by a node is revealed to the memory system. This may occur directly through external stimulation (e.g. activation of a brand name node when the name is mentioned in a commercial) or indirectly through the process of spreading activation to other nodes. Spreading activation theory (Collins and Loftus 1975) predicts that activation spreads out from the active node along the links connected with it (Collins and Loftus 1975). The strength of activation decreases gradually. The probability of a node being activated is positively related to the strength and number of links between this node and the first node activated. When a node is processed deliberately, more activation is released through the links than when the node is automatically activated (Craik and Lockhart 1972). Keller (1993) uses the term brand association for the network nodes and defines brand image as the set of brand associations linked directly or indirectly to a brand name in long-term memory. He suggests that brand images typically consist of three broad categories of brand associations: attitudes, benefits, and attributes. Brand benefits are particularly important because they contain information on the expected utility of using brands and thus influence attitudes and preferences. Keller s typology includes three types of brand benefits: functional, experiential, and symbolic. Functional benefits represent the problem-solving capacity of the brand, such as Tide s ability to remove stains. Experiential benefits refer to sensory pleasure (e.g. taste, feeling of comfort) or cognitive stimulation (e.g. learning, fantasies) derived from brand usage. Symbolic benefits represent psychological and social signals about the brand user, enhancing his or her selfconcept and providing desired social classifications (Escalas and Bettman 2005; Swaminathan, Page, and Gürgan-Canli 2007). For example, driving a Mercedes may convey signals of status, sophistication, and quality consciousness both to observers and to the self-concept of the driver. The symbolic benefits stem from such combinations of brand personality traits, or the human-like traits associated with brands (Aaker 1997). In this study, we focus on advertising strategies ability to repair this type of brand belief. While functional and experiential beliefs are mainly related to product attributes, brand

5 Journal of Marketing Communications 3 personality beliefs are influenced more by unstable, non-product-related factors, such as advertising (for own brand and competitors brands), media coverage, and consumer observations of brand users (Keller 2008). Thus, personality beliefs are more susceptible to fluctuations and thus more often in need of revitalization or repair than other types of beliefs. Brand personality problems can be due to either a weakening of positive traits or a strengthening of negative traits linked to the brand name. For example, Mercedes could experience a decrease in consumer ratings of the trait sophisticated (positive trait) or an increase in ratings on old people (negative trait). Research suggests that negatively and positively valued information is often stored at different places in the associative network, with few, if any, links between them (e.g. Cacioppo and Berntson 1994). This means that activation of negative traits may not be counterbalanced by the simultaneous activation of positive traits. Conversely, activation of positive traits may not involve negative traits. This research has implications for how to design effective brand personality enhancement strategies. 3. Advertising strategies for brand personality repair Research on strategies for image repair in general and personality enhancement in particular is limited (Simonin and Ruth 1998; Keller 1999; Supphellen, Eismann, and Hem 2004; Maehle and Supphellen 2011). In a study of revitalization of flagship products, Supphellen, Eismann, and Hem (2004) found that new products (in particular, brand extensions) help upgrade the brand personality of an established flagship product. However, two other strategies are more common and much faster. First, managers could launch an advertising campaign for the focal brand targeted at the personality dimensions in need of revitalization (single-brand advertising). This strategy is probably the most common. Second, managers could use an advertising alliance, in which the focal brand is linked to a partner brand with desirable personality traits. Which strategy is more effective? Several studies have exploited specific strategies (e.g. single-brand advertising), but we are not aware of any empirical comparisons across strategies. Comparison of relative effects of advertising strategies is complicated. Similar to previous research on the effects of joint advertising, we reduce complexity by focusing on a context in which the target group is moderately to highly involved in the processing of ads. Most image repair campaigns target high levels of processing involvement, at least at the beginning of the campaign period, because central processing is needed to obtain strong learning effects (Craik and Lockhart 1972; Petty and Cacioppo 1986; Tellis 2003). We also concentrate on established brands with negative brand personality traits. Established brands with negative personality traits will also have positive traits. Thus, such brands allow for testing of advertising strategy effects on both negative and positive brand personality dimensions. The advertising message may or may not include negative traits. Usually, advertisers choose to focus on positive personality traits even when their goal is to reduce the influence of negative traits. This is because addressing negative traits is risky even when such traits are based on misconceptions that can be countered by objective arguments. If the target group does not allocate enough cognitive resources to grasp the arguments, such ads will just remind consumers of the negative traits, making them more accessible (Tellis 2003). Thus, advertisers typically communicate positive traits with the goal to overshadow negative traits, rather than addressing negative traits directly. We follow this strategy and use a simple message focused on a major positive trait.

6 4 N. Maehle and M. Supphellen 3.1. Advertising alliance versus single-brand advertising Will an advertising alliance be more effective than single-brand advertising in communicating a positive message intended to repair brand personality? We use associative network theory to explain how consumers would respond to single-brand advertising. If the message focuses on relevant positive traits contained in the brand image, and the consumer is highly involved during processing of the message, the likelihood of activating these traits in the future increases for two reasons. First, the links between the brand name and the positive traits are strengthened. Second, more links are formed between the positive traits and the brand name. This is because the new ad establishes a new node in the network and this node becomes linked to both the brand name and the positive traits. The new memory pathways between the brand name and the positive traits through the ad node increase the accessibility of the traits (Collins and Loftus 1975). The result is higher ratings of positive traits. Still, we expect the brand alliance to induce stronger upgrading effects on brand personality traits. When consumers have the ability and time to process ad alliances, previous research suggests that they spend time and effort on considering why the brands are featured together (e.g. Meyers-Levy and Tybout 1989). The consequence is deeper processing and stronger learning, which in turn lead to the formation of more links between the positive traits and the focal brand name than for single-brand advertising. The reason is that the images of the two brands become connected with links between salient beliefs of each image and a new attitude toward the alliance node. According to Simonin and Ruth (1998), the result of consumers efforts to determine the relationship between two brand names appearing in an alliance is the formation of a separate attitude toward the alliance node. In forming this node, consumers compare the brands, and salient associations for each brand become intertwined. Thus, a series of new memory pathways between the positive traits and the focal brand name become established: direct links from the traits of the partner brand, links through the partner brand name node, and links through the attitude toward the alliance node. All these links make the positive traits more accessible in memory. Another reason the advertising alliance is more effective rests on the premise that the positive traits are more typical of the partner brand. This means that the links between the partner brand name and the positive traits are stronger than similar links for the focal brand. Thus, when new links are formed between the two brand names, the positive traits become more accessible also because of stronger links between the focal brand name and the positive traits. H1: Advertising alliance is more effective than single-brand advertising in upgrading brand personality. Specifically, advertisements designed to strengthen positive brand personality traits are more effective when a partner brand with higher preratings of relevant personality traits is displayed together with the focal brand. Ideally, an ad alliance designed to revitalize a brand s personality should both strengthen positive traits and attenuate negative traits. However, previous research on how positively and negatively valenced information is organized in memory (Cacioppo and Berntson 1994) suggests that this is too much to attain. A central implication of this model is that negatively and positively valued information is often stored at different places in the associative network, with few, if any, links between them. While this direct link is weak or non-existent, the indirect route between positive and negative traits through other nodes in the network is long, and much activation power is lost along the way. Thus,

7 Journal of Marketing Communications 5 communication efforts that activate positive personality traits may fail to influence negative traits. When ads designed to revitalize brand personality focus on upgrading of positive traits, we expect no or marginal (attenuating) effect on negative traits. H2: The superior effect of the advertising alliance (H1) on brand personality ratings will materialize in terms of higher scores on positive brand personality traits with minor or no effect on negative traits. Advertising effectiveness refers not only to the kind and magnitude of effects, but also to the durability of effects. The goal is a maximum and lasting impact with as few exposures as possible. Previous research suggests that when more than one brand is displayed in an ad, consumers spend more time and effort on considering why the brands are featured together (e.g. Meyers-Levy and Tybout 1989). When consumers have ample time and opportunity to process, they will engage in extensive cognitive elaboration of advertising alliances, and many links between the information contained in the message (positive traits) and the brand name will be formed (Samu, Krishnan, and Smith 1999). Previous research has shown that even single exposures may have a lasting impact on the brand image if consumers engage in central processing of the message (Tellis 2003). Thus: H3: The superior upgrading effect of the advertising alliance on brand personality ratings will remain one week after exposure. 4. Method We conducted two pretests to develop the ads and identify a suitable partner brand for the advertising alliance. Next, we tested the hypotheses in a two-stage experiment. One group watched a print ad for the focal brand, and the other group was exposed to an ad alliance. After ad exposure, participants filled out a questionnaire. One week later, participants answered the same questionnaire again to test memory effects (H3). This second test was a surprise test (not announced). We used the well-established Scandinavian orange soft drink brand Solo as our study object. According to the brand manager of Solo, market research indicated high scores on taste, but qualitative research revealed negative personality traits, such as childish, nerdish, and lonely. These traits represented a serious problem and threat to brand equity, especially with respect to the main target group: teenagers. To confirm the need for personality repair, find a suitable partner, and design workable ads for the experiment, we conducted two pretests Pretest 1 The first pretest was designed to test the need for revitalization and find an optimal partner. An optimal partner would belong to a similar or complementary category (Samu, Krishnan, and Smith 1999). Because distributors typically have many soft drink brands in their portfolios, which are often displayed together in advertisements and promotions, we searched for a partner candidate among other soft drink brands. A partner from within the same category would also secure a high level of fit between the brands, an important condition for positive effects of ad alliances (Samu, Krishnan, and Smith 1999). In total, 110 respondents were recruited for the pretests and the main experiment. We randomly assigned 40 respondents to the pretesting (20 for each pretest) and the remaining 70 to the main experiment. Teenage participants were recruited from two high schools in Scandinavia because of their high interest in the soft-drink category and knowledge about the Solo brand.

8 6 N. Maehle and M. Supphellen We first asked 20 respondents to evaluate the brand personality of various local and international soft drink brands, including Coca-Cola, Pepsi Cola, Fanta, and Solo. To prepare for a test of H2, we included evaluations of both positive and negative traits. From previous research made available by the brand manager, we included four negative traits: nerdish, lonely, asocial, and outdated. Participants rated all brands on the negative traits on five-point Likert scales (5 ¼ very descriptive, 1 ¼ not at all descriptive). Eight positive traits (antonyms of the negative traits) were identified from discussion with participants and the brand manager and examination of Aaker s (1997) brand personality scale: modern, creative, cheerful, outgoing, urban, attractive, leader, and exciting. Factor analysis (maximum likelihood with Varimax rotation) showed that all the positive traits loaded on one factor and the negative traits on another. Thus, we computed one index for positive traits and one for the negative traits. The pretest confirmed that the mean score on the positive personality dimension was significantly lower for Solo than for the international brands. The greatest difference occurred between Solo and Pepsi (M Pepsi ¼ 3.29, M Solo ¼ 2.40; F ¼ 38.05, p ¼ 0.001). Similarly, Solo scored significantly higher on the negative traits than Pepsi ( p, 0.05). Thus, Pepsi had a strong upgrading potential, and we used it in further pretesting. We then compared brand attitudes toward Solo and Pepsi. We measured attitude on three items adapted from Hastak (1990): I like this brand, This brand is high quality, and This is a good brand (5 ¼ very strongly agree, 1 ¼ very strongly disagree). If the brand ally has a more positive brand attitude, affect might transfer from the ally to the focal brand. In turn, this positive transferral of affect may lead to a positive halo effect on brand personality associations. To rule out this potential confound, attitudes toward Pepsi should not be significantly more positive than those for Solo ex ante. Indeed, we found that attitudes toward Solo were significantly higher than attitudes toward Pepsi, despite its less attractive brand personality (M Pepsi ¼ 2.92, M Solo ¼ 3.62; F ¼ 4.791, p ¼ 0.041). These results indicated that Pepsi had the basic characteristics we needed for an alliance partner, that is, a more positive brand personality but not a more positive brand attitude than Solo. Moreover, the higher score on brand attitude for Solo made it a relevant alliance partner for Pepsi Pretest 2 Next, we developed a simple print ad and tested it on another sample of 20 high school students. The print ad was designed to display the different aspects of the positive personality dimension and showed young, modern, and attractive people playing volleyball on the beach. The only text used in the ad was the word friends. A bottle of Solo (single-brand ad) or of Pepsi and Solo (alliance) appeared in large format under the image. Participants evaluated the print ad, the Solo brand, and the Pepsi brand on the same personality measures as in pretest 1. Comparisons of means showed that the print ad signalled significantly stronger positive traits and significantly weaker negative traits than the Solo brand itself ( p, 0.001). Thus, the ad had an upgrading potential. Finally, the mean difference between personality evaluations of the Pepsi brand and the print ad was not significant ( p. 0.4). We needed the enhancement potential of the print ad and the brand alliance partner (Pepsi) to be similar up front to allow for a valid comparison of the two strategies. Any observation of superior (inferior) effects of the ad alliance would then be due to the nature of the alliance per se and not to an ex ante advantage (disadvantage) related to the brand personality of the alliance partner.

9 Journal of Marketing Communications Main experiment The sample for the main experiment consisted of 70 teenagers at two Scandinavian high schools. We randomly assigned participants to one of the two experimental conditions (single-brand advertisement or advertising alliance). They were exposed to a series of four filler ads for various fast-moving consumer goods and the ad for Solo/Solo & Pepsi. The filler ads were the same in both conditions and had the same quality as the focal ads. We randomized the order of ads. Because there was only one word ( friends ) in the ads and no other text to read, a relatively short time of exposure was sufficient (10 seconds). After each ad exposure, participants answered questions about ad liking and ad believability. Ad liking and believability represent an alternative to our memory change explanation for the expected superior effect of ad alliances. Indeed, Simonin and Ruth (1998) suggest that when another brand with a more positive brand image is pictured with the focal brand, the partner brand may add believability to a message about positive brand beliefs. To test this alternative explanation, we included a three-item measure of ad liking adapted from Zinkhan, Locander, and Leigh (1986): I liked the ad, I enjoyed the ad, and I have a favourable impression of the ad (5 ¼ strongly agree, 1 ¼ strongly disagree). We adapted the ad believability scale from Beltramini (1988): This ad is believable, This ad is credible, and This ad is convincing (5 ¼ strongly agree, 1 ¼ strongly disagree). After all ads had been shown, participants answered a filler task about shopping habits. Next, they answered a questionnaire with the following measures: attitude toward the brand (same measure as in the pretests) and positive and negative brand personality traits (same as in the pretests). The reliability of all measures was satisfactory (all Cronbach s as were greater than 0.70). At the end of the questionnaire, participants noted their addresses, which we used for the follow-up study. We also included a suspicion probe. No participants guessed the true purpose of the study Follow-up study After one week, we distributed the same questionnaire, excluding measures of ad believability and ad likeability, again by to all participants in the main study. Participants were asked to fill out the questionnaire because we needed more information on their opinions toward soft drink brands. Five participants in each group failed to respond; thus, the final number of participants in the follow-up study was 30 in each group (N ¼ 60). 5. Results of main study 5.1. Test of H1 According to H1, the advertising alliance should induce greater effect on the positive personality traits than the single-brand advertisement. A comparison of mean scores on the positive brand personality dimension for the two experimental conditions confirms our prediction. Mean evaluations of the positive brand personality of Solo were significantly higher for participants exposed to the advertising alliance than for participants in the single-brand advertising condition (M alliance ¼ 3.496, M single ¼ 2.946; F(1, 69) ¼ 10.40, p ¼ 0.002). We conclude that in the short run, the upgrading effect of the advertising alliance is greater than the effect of the traditional single-brand advertisement Test of H2 Because negative and positive information is often stored at different places in the associative network, we expected that the superior effect of the advertising alliance would

10 8 N. Maehle and M. Supphellen mainly materialize in terms of higher scores on the positive brand personality traits with minor or no effect on the negative traits. The data also provide support to this hypothesis: there was no significant difference between the ad alliance and the single-brand conditions in terms of the effect on the negative personality traits (M alliance ¼ 1.933, M single ¼ 2.108; F(1, 69) ¼ 1.02, p ¼ 0.317) Test of alternative explanations Our hypotheses are based on arguments from associative network theory. The superior effects of the alliance are due to deeper processing and formation of more and stronger links between positive traits and the focal brand name. Alternatively, the superior effect of the alliance ad could stem from evaluations of the alliance ad as such. Adding a partner brand could make the ad more likable or believable. Thus, we included measures of these two variables and tested for differences between the two advertising strategies. We observed no significant differences between the ad alliance and the single-brand ad on mean ad likability (F(1, 69) ¼ 0.17, p ¼ 0.897). The difference in mean scores on ad believability was also not significant (F(1, 69) ¼ 1.278, p ¼ 0.263). Thus, we conclude that the superior effect of the advertising alliance in upgrading brand personality is not due to superior ad liking or ad believability. Finally, we also tested the effect of advertising strategy on brand attitudes. The mean score on brand attitude was somewhat higher in the ad alliance condition, but the difference was not significant (M alliance ¼ 4.011, M single ¼ 3.689; F(1, 69) ¼ 2.20, p ¼ 0.140). 6. Results of follow-up study 6.1. Test of H3 We predicted that the superior effect of the ad alliance would remain one week after exposure. To test this prediction, we repeated the analyses in Study 1 on the data from the follow-up study. H3 is confirmed. First, evaluations of the positive personality dimension of Solo were still significantly higher in the advertising alliance condition (M alliance ¼ 3.383, M single ¼ 2.967; F(1, 69) ¼ 10.70, p ¼ 0.002). Second, advertising strategy still had no effect on the negative personality dimension (F(1, 69) ¼ 0.49, p ¼ 0.487); see Figures 1 and 2. Means for both studies appear in Table Effect on brand attitude We also repeated the test for the effects of ad strategy on brand attitudes one week later. There was no effect of advertising strategy right after exposure (Study 1). However, one week later, brand attitude toward Solo was significantly higher in the ad alliance group than in the single-brand condition (M alliance ¼ 3.811, M single ¼ 3.356; F(1, 59) ¼ 8.68, p ¼ 0.005). We discuss explanations of this observation subsequently. 7. Discussion Previous research on brand image enhancement has mainly focused on how to exploit a given communication strategy. For example, research is abundant on how to design effective brand ads (see Tellis 2003 for an overview), and several studies have examined effects of advertising alliances (e.g. Shocker 1995; Simonin and Ruth 1998). However, empirical comparisons of alternative strategies are hard to find. We report the results of a

11 Journal of Marketing Communications Advertising alliance Single-brand ad Time 1 Time 2 Figure 1. Effects of advertising alliance and single-brand advertising on positive brand personality dimension at Times 1 and 2. comparison of the relative effectiveness of two major brand image repair strategies: advertising alliance and single-brand advertising. The experimental evidence suggests that advertising alliance is more effective than single-brand advertising in strengthening brand personality. The upgrading effect pertains to positive personality traits only, with no effect on the negative traits. The effect on positive traits remained one week after exposure. Finally, we observe a delayed positive effect of the ad alliance on brand attitude one week after exposure. The findings have implications for advertising management and theory Advertising alliance Single-brand ad Time 1 Time 2 Figure 2. Effects of advertising alliance and single-brand advertising on negative brand personality dimension at Times 1 and 2.

12 10 N. Maehle and M. Supphellen Table 1. Effects of advertising alliance and single-brand advertising at Times 1 and 2. Time 1 (main experiment) Time 2 (follow-up one week later) Advertising alliance Singlebrand ad Advertising alliance Singlebrand ad Mean Standard deviation Mean Standard deviation Mean Standard deviation Mean Standard deviation Positive brand personality Negative brand personality Brand attitude Theoretical implications The explanation most consistent with our findings is that greater cognitive learning occurred in the ad alliance condition (Meyers-Levy and Tybout 1989; Samu, Krishnan, and Smith 1999). Because the partner brand possessed positive brand personality associations that were relevant to the focal brand and because participants were highly involved in processing the ads, more and stronger links were formed between the positive traits and the focal brand name. Alternatively, the addition of a partner brand could have made the alliance ad more interesting or believable. We explicitly tested and rejected this alternative explanation. Our findings suggest that the associative network model is not only useful for explaining how advertising strategies work separately (e.g. Samu, Krishnan, and Smith 1999), but also is relevant for development and testing of hypotheses on the relative effects of alternative strategies. The finding that only positive brand personality traits were upgraded, with no effect on negative traits, provides support to the prediction that negatively and positively valued information is often stored at different places in the associative network, with few, if any, links between them (Cacioppo and Berntson 1994). Notably, the positive traits that were upgraded by the ad alliance ad (e.g. modern ) were antonyms to the negative traits (e.g. outdated ). Still, only positive traits were affected: the ad alliance made the brand more modern but not less outdated. The brand was rated as more outgoing but not less asocial. This apparent paradox is noteworthy and has important implications for advertising management. We find that the superior effect of the ad alliance on brand personality does not influence brand attitude immediately after exposure. However, one week later, brand attitude ratings were significantly higher in the ad alliance condition. At first glance, this observation could be due to a sleeper effect (see Kumkale and Albarracín 2004 for a review). The classical sleeper effect refers to a process in which the impact of a message increases with the passage of time. The immediate impact of a message is inhibited because of its association with some discounting cue. This could be any cue in the context or triggered in memory, which conflicts with or casts doubt about the message. Over time, the message becomes dissociated from the discounting cue, resulting in increased message influence. However, in our study, there is no increase in attitude ratings of the focal brand from Time 1 (main experiment) to Time 2 (follow-up study). To the contrary, attitude ratings decline in both conditions (see Table 1). Instead, we observe that the difference in brand attitude scores between the ad alliance and the single-brand ad conditions increases over time. We suggest that this observation is due to a combination of two factors:

13 Journal of Marketing Communications 11 different levels of learning and different measurement contexts at Times 1 and 2. When consumers were exposed to the alliance ad, they actively searched for useful information for evaluating the fit between the brands and forming an attitude toward the alliance. Although positive and negative traits are mainly stored in different areas of the brand image, the positive message probably activated very salient negative traits that were linked directly to the brand attitude node. This could explain why we observed no effect of the alliance on brand attitude, only positive effects on evaluations of positive traits. The negative traits served as discounting cues. This probably occurred to a lesser degree in the single-brand ad condition because of shallower processing of the message. However, the positive effect on positive traits was also weaker in this condition. Thus, the net effect on brand attitude was similar in the two groups. However, at Time 2, participants were not exposed to ads but rather just instructed to answer questions on personality traits and brand attitudes, which is a less demanding task than processing and evaluating advertisements. In this situation, because survey respondents are moderately involved (see Tourangeau, Rips, and Rasinski 2000), only the most salient nodes surrounding the brand attitude node would be activated. Thus, the stronger learning effects of the alliance ad (Samu, Krishnan, and Smith 1999) resulted in a higher score on brand attitude in this condition Implications for advertising management The effects we report in this study have important implications for advertising management. Consumers choice of brand partly depends on the kind of personality the brand has. Consumers desire personalities that are congruent with their actual or ideal selfconcept. This is why brands with unfavourable personalities lose market share (Keller 2008). Therefore, the ability to design effective strategies for repairing damaged brand personalities is of major importance to brand managers. The superior effects of advertising alliance observed in this study suggest that managers should consider this strategy when there is a need to revitalize brand personality. In addition to the superior upgrading effect on positive traits, advertising alliances are less expensive than traditional single-brand campaigns because, in the case of an alliance, partners share the costs involved. Notably, we obtained significant effects using a very simple ad and only 10 s of exposure. The ad was not very different from the ones typically used in point-of-purchase or outdoor advertising. While these kinds of advertising often focus on simple selling points, other vehicles such as magazine ads and television commercials are preferred for image enhancement purposes. Our findings indicate that by adding a partner brand and designing the right background, even simple ads or boards may have significant image enhancement effects. The finding that positive traits were upgraded, with no effect on negative traits, is in line with theory and important for advertising managers. Although managers can succeed in strengthening positive established traits or linking new and positive traits to a brand, negative traits may still be fairly salient. Care must be taken not to activate these negative traits in communication messages. There is a high risk for this to occur if the creative people are not aware of this issue. For example, refutational arguments are sometimes used to counter negative associations with a brand (Tellis 2003). This type of argument first presents a negative claim against the brand and then destroys the claim (e.g. Do you believe that Solo is outdated? Take a close look at these images.). Such a message may strengthen the links to outdated even if the audience accepts the positive argument. The delayed effect on brand attitude we observed in this study is also relevant to advertising managers. We found that the effect of the ad alliance on brand attitude was not

14 12 N. Maehle and M. Supphellen significantly stronger than the effect of the single-brand ad immediately after exposure, but after one week, the difference was significant, in favour of the ad alliance. This finding suggests that tests of the relative impact of alternative advertising strategies for image enhancement should include delayed measurements of brand attitudes. If the effectiveness is only compared immediately after exposure, relative advantages of strategies that materialize over time could be missed Limitations and future research directions Several limitations of this study represent avenues for further research. First, the participants were moderately to highly involved in processing the ads. Under conditions of low involvement, other effects may occur (Petty and Cacioppo 1986). The ad alliance may confuse the consumer and lead to poorer performance than the single-brand ad. Alternatively, because of limited attention, only the most familiar brand may be noticed, with no effect on the less familiar partner. Single-brand advertising would be a better strategy for the less familiar brand, possibly for both brands. Further research should compare ad alliances with single-brand advertising under low- and high-involvement conditions to test these speculations. Second, the alliance brands in this study came from the same product category (soft drinks). This may have increased the effect of the ad alliance because the participant could decide quickly on the similarity between the brands (and form a positive attitude toward the alliance). Conversely, the simplification of the similarity judgment may also have led to less cognitive elaboration and, thus, weaker effects than would have been observed with less similar alliance partners. This is a question for further research. Third, we did not assess the effect of the two strategies on the partner brands. To obtain agreements on advertising alliances, there must be an upward potential for both brands. We used two well-known soft-drink brands, which are quite commonly featured together in point-of-purchase advertising. Pepsi had a more positive brand personality, Solo scored higher on taste perceptions, and both saved advertising costs. Thus, we believe that both had an upward potential from joint advertising. Still, further research should explore the characteristics of ad alliances that benefit both parties and test predictions in controlled experiments. Notes on contributors Natalia Maehle, PhD is a postdoctoral researcher at the Centre for Applied Research at NHH (SNF). Dr. Maehle s research interests and expertise include brand management, advertising, consumer behavior and social media marketing. She has been teaching courses in social media marketing, brand management and consumer behavior. Dr. Maehle is a regular presenter at international conferences and has a number of publications in international journals. Magne Supphellen, PhD is a professor of marketing at the Norwegian School of Economics, where he teaches and conducts research in the areas of brand management, entrepreneurship and market research methods. He has published widely in international journals and has served as a consultant to a number of Scandinavian and international companies on branding and market research issues. References Aaker, J. L Dimensions of Brand Personality. Journal of Marketing Research 34 (3): Anderson, J. R The Architecture of Cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

15 Journal of Marketing Communications 13 Beltramini, R. F Perceived Believability of Warning Label Information Presented in Cigarette Advertising. Journal of Advertising 17 (1): Cacioppo, J. T., and G. G. Berntson Relationship Between Attitudes and Evaluative Space: A Critical Review, With Emphasis on the Separability of Positive and Negative Substrates. Psychological Bulletin 115 (3): Cartmell, M., and S. Luker BlackBerry Image Damaged by Riots, as Cameron Pinpoints Brand in Commons. PRWeek, August BlackBerry-image-damaged-riots-Cameron-pinpoints-brand-Commons/ Collins, A. M., and E. F. Loftus A Spreading-Activation Theory of Semantic Processing. Psychological Review 82 (6): Craik, F. I. M., and R. S. Lockhart Levels of Processing: A Framework for Memory Research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 11 (6): Escalas, J. E., and J. R. Bettman Self-Construal, Reference Groups, and Brand Meaning. Journal of Consumer Research 32 (3): Hastak, M Does Retrospective Thought Measurement Influence Subsequent Measures of Cognitive Structure in an Advertising Context? Journal of Advertising 19 (3): Keller, K. L Conceptualizing, Measuring, and Managing Customer-Based Brand Equity. Journal of Marketing 57 (1): Keller, K. L Managing Brands for the Long Run: Brand Reinforcement and Revitalization Strategies. California Management Review 41 (3): Keller, K. L Strategic Brand Management: Building, Measuring and Managing Brand Equity. 3rd ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall. Kumkale, G. T., and D. Albarracín The Sleeper Effect in Persuasion: A Meta-Analytic Review. Psychological Bulletin 130 (1): Maehle, N., and M. Supphellen In Search of the Sources of Brand Personality. International Journal of Market Research 53 (1): Meyers-Levy, J., and A. M. Tybout Schema Congruity as a Basis for Product Evaluation. Journal of Consumer Research 16 (1): Oliver, R. L Satisfaction: A Behavioral Perspective on the Consumer. 2nd ed. New York: M.E. Sharpe. Petty, R. E., and J. T. Cacioppo Communication and Persuasion: Central and Peripheral Routes to Attitude Change. New York: Springer-Verlag. Samu, S., S. Krishnan, and R. E. Smith Using Advertising Alliances for New Product Introduction: Interactions between Product Complementarity and Promotional Strategies. Journal of Marketing 63 (1): Shocker, A. D Positive and Negative Effects of Brand Extension and Co-Branding. In Advances in Consumer Research, edited by F. R. Kardes, and M. Sujan. Vol. 22, Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research. Simonin, B. L., and J. A. Ruth Is a Company Known by the Company It Keeps? Assessing the Spillover Effects of Brand Alliances on Consumer Brand Attitudes. Journal of Marketing Research 35 (1): Supphellen, M., Ø. Eismann, and L. E. Hem Can Advertisements of Brand Extensions Revitalise Flagship Products? An Experiment. International Journal of Advertising 23 (2): Swaminathan, V., K. L. Page, and Z. Gürgan-Canli My Brand or Our Brand: The Effects of Brand Relationship Dimensions and Self-construal on Brand Evaluations. Journal of Consumer Research 34 (2): Tellis, G. J Effective Advertising: Understanding When, How, and Why Advertising Works. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Tourangeau, R., L. Rips, and K. Rasinski The Psychology of Survey Response. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Zaltman, G Rethinking Market Research: Putting People Back In. Journal of Marketing Research 34 (4): Zinkhan, G. M., W. B. Locander, and J. H. Leigh Dimensional Relationships of Aided Recall and Recognition. Journal of Advertising 15 (1):