Branding: Influences of the hierarchy and architecture in the perception of consumers

Transcription

1 Branding: Influences of the hierarchy and architecture in the perception of consumers Lucas Jusé Garcia 1, Julio MonteiroTeixeira 2, Eugenio Andres Diaz Merino 1,2, 1 Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC) Pós DESIGN - Programa de Pós- Graduação em Design e Expressão Gráfica, Centro de Comunicação e Expressão, Departamento de Expressão Gráfica, CCE, Bloco A, 1º Andar, Sala 108, Campus Universitário, Trindade, Florianópolis, SC, CEP Brasil lucasjose@gmail.com 2 Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC) - PPGEP - Programa de Pós- Graduação em Engenharia de Produção, Centro Tecnológico, Campus Universitário, Trindade, Florianópolis, SC, Caixa Postal 476, CEP Brasil juliomontex@gmail.com Abstract. In business, the extent and importance of the brand have been increasingly expanded, as it is considered a key element in the communication strategies, management and sale of products and services. The hierarchy of the brand portfolio of companies, also known as brand architecture, is a key means for this process. The idealized image of the company is not always in tune with the image formed in the mind of the consumer, so the evaluation of its image and positioning must be a frequent practice of the brand manager. The article aims to understand the branding in the aspects of hierarchy and brand architecture. This study can be characterized as theoretical, of systematic review, and aims to identify studies in the design and branding field, and also identify the need for future research. The procedures used were, in the first stage, literature review and in the second stage characterized by an external perception research through a questionnaire with consumers, conducted via the Internet. Statistical analysis was performed for data collected in order to obtain quantitative data, with central focus on the perception of consumer preference for certain products. The results demonstrate the perception of consumers on products in the same category according to models of different brand architecture. It is noticed that the brand architecture is part of branding, and contributes to the logic structuring of products and brands of an organization. Keywords: Branding, Brand architecture, Brand portfolio, Brand hierarchy, Design management 1 Introduction An inefficient branding can compromise the association of visual signature to other products of an organization. The brand plays a decisive role in the perception of the product, because consumers perceive the product molded by the brand [1]. By providing the planning and implementation of brand, branding helps to coordinate the

2 development and control of its various expressions. It also helps in organizing strategic actions of construction and projections for market [2]. The hierarchy of concepts related to branding can facilitate the alignment and positioning of elements that identify an organization or its products. The possession of many brands leads to expensive maintenance, and in some cases, it is necessary to reduce the repertoire and focus investments to strengthen the business [3]. Thus, [4] presents the strategy adopted by Unilever in 1999, which reduced its portfolio of 1,600 brands to 400. To [5], more than 90% of releases correspond to products derived from a main trademark. Therefore, this article aims to understand branding in the aspects of hierarchy and brand architecture, through the perception of consumers on products from the same category but in different models of brand architecture. 2 Management of Relationship Between Brands Organizations have recognized the importance of the relations established by their brands. For the consumer, as familiarity as satisfaction provide the distinctions between the products within each category. Thus, the brand provides a meaning and the story of the product and its organization, helping to form the emotional associations created in the mind of the consumer [6]. The construction of the consumer brand image, formed by means of a rational or emotional interpretation is related to brand positioning [7]. The positioning is related to identity and integrity of the brand [8]. The positioning is how the company wants the brand to be perceived by consumers, while the real positioning is in fact the actual perception and the position accepted by consumers [7]. 2.1 Brand Hierarchy The visual signature (Fig. 1) is a central element of a visual identity system. It has commercial, historical and legal functions, and its management can be a decisive factor for the success of an organization. Fig. 1. Visual signature. Source: adapted from Johnnie Walker 1 (2011). When a name or idea is visually represented in a particular way, we can say that it has an identity. The visual identity is the set of graphics that will formalize the visual personality of a name, idea, product or service [3]. 1 From Johnnnie walker s website: in: June 29, 2011.

3 Company's corporate identity is formed by the set of all its manifestations. This set holds the products, packaging, brochures, uniforms and service procedures, compounded with linguistic, sound, visual and behavioral texts, among others, that express the company s character and its brand, as well as its values, goals and commitments. [9] and [10]. Thus, corporate identity is the mental image proposed by the organization, planning can minimize distortions of the desired image by the company. The Brand Book serves as a guide for the significance of the institutional elements of the organization, directing people's perceptions about values, concepts and benefits associated with the elements of the mark. [2]; [4] and [11]. Through real and virtual experiences, objective or subjective, we assign values to specific brands [3]. The designer is responsible for the significance, the tangible and intangible elements, and the visual differentiation of the brands [4]. It can be assumed that a brand is the mental image formed by the set of values assigned by people with whom the organization relates somehow. According to [12], the hierarchical distribution of elements that identify an organization is provided through sets, as shown in Fig 2. Fig. 2. Brand Target. Source: Teixeira [12]. The Brand Target can facilitate the understanding of the set and subsets of the brand hierarchy, and clarifies how the hierarchy of the brand set is, since it enables the diagnosis of the current brand of a company, that is, how the hierarchical distribution of elements that identify the organization in the sets actually is, to only then devise strategies for repositioning.

4 2.2 Brand Architecture There is a growing attention from companies for managing the relationship between their brands. The decision for building a brand portfolio become complex as they involve brands with different capabilities and limitations [1]. Fig. 3 presents different examples of structuring a portfolio of brands. It is observed that decisions about a brand can have a direct influence on other brands, sub-brands and products. Fig. 3. Brand Portfolio. Source: The authors. The brand architecture refers to the hierarchy of brands of a company. The design of brand identity can help the company grow and sell more effectively through the visual order and differentiation [4]. According to [13], there is no only one model of brand architecture, and the authors differ on the number of levels and concepts. Wheeler [4] presents four scenarios for the brand architecture. Souza and Nemer (1993) present three strategies involving use of brands. The organization of concepts related to brand architecture proposed by [4], [6], and [14] were synthesized in three: company brand, product brand, and company brand and product brand, which were organized as shown Fig. 4. Fig. 4. Main layers of brand architecture. Source: The authors. This scenario has resulted three models of brand architecture. Fig. 5 presents these models with their strengths and weaknesses, thus allowing a comparison of the strategic model more relevant to each business reality.

5 Fig. 5. Organization of the concepts of brand architecture. Source: The authors. By Fig. 5, is possible realize that the brand architecture is an integral part of branding, and contributes to the structuring logic of brands and products of an organization. The organization of the concepts of brand architecture, along with their strengths and weaknesses, helping to identify the model adopted by a company to align with your goals, and proposing solutions for branding. 3 Research Methodology As to its nature, this research can be classified as basic. According to its objective, initially for [15] is classified as exploratory and later assumes a descriptive character. This study can be characterized as theoretical, of systematic review, and aims to identify studies in the design and branding field. The procedures used were, in the first stage literature review using the deductive method. In the second stage characterized by an external perception research by a questionnaire with consumers. 3.1 Description of Procedures With the objective of assessing the consumer's perception of the interest in food products a questionnaire to be answered via the Internet was used, applied in a period of 05 days. The invitation included a brief presentation and the Internet path access to the site where the questionnaire could be answered. The number of possible questions varied between 06 and 10, the variation in the number was linked to the type of response given by the sixth question where he was asked: "Do you see significant differences in the visual presentation of these two product groups that could influence your choice at the moment of purchase?" An image was shown below the question (Fig. 6). If the respondent answered "No" the questionnaire was finished, because all the subsequent questions were related to differences in perception between the groups in the picture.

6 Fig. 6. Groups x and y. Source: The authors. The initial questions were meant to identify socio-demographic data of respondents. The following six questions had as function identify some items that could influence the choice of a particular product. The last question was asked for what reason the respondent indicated having more interest in consuming the products of a group or for what reason had no preference. The questionnaire was structured by JotForm from Interlogy LLC, a free model questionnaire, which automatically organizes and concatenates the data collected. To the intersection and processing of data was used a spreadsheet software, with tools for calculating and graphing. 4. RESULTS / FINDINGS A total of 101 people answered the survey, with age between 15 and 70 years. From this total, 55 were female (54,46%) and 46 male (45,54%). Considering educational level, the results can be found on Fig. 7. Fig. 7. Educational level. Source: The authors After the preliminary social-demographic questions, the questions focused more on survey objective. When questioned about the influence of advertisement and publicity on product choice, 15 people answered No (14,86%) and 86 answered Yes (85,14%). It was also asked how much does brand and producer impact on product choice, as shown on Fig. 8. The following answers were possible: producer,

7 brand, knowledge of other products from the same brand and knowledge about products from the same producer. Fig. 8. Influence of advertising and publicity when choosing a product. Source: The authors. The next question was about the perceived relevant difference on visual product presentation between two groups. The results are shown on Fig. 9. Fig. 9. Perception of significant of significant differences between two groups of products presented. Source: The authors. The survey was finalized when the respondent answered "No" to the previous question, because was relevant to know the percentage of people who did not perceive differences in the visual presentation of both groups, however, if the respondent answered yes, further questions were made, being the intention of finding out what were the interest of those respondents about possibility of choice. Those who answered "Yes" to previous question (Q6) was asked: "Imagine you tasted and enjoyed one of the flavors in both groups, if you had to try another flavor of juice, from which group would you choose, the one which has a single brand or the one that has various brands?" 46 people reported having a preference for the single brand group of products, while 15 opted for the different brands group. After this, the same 61 respondents answered the following question: "Now imagine you've tasted one and did not like one of the flavors in both groups, if you had to try another juice flavor from which group would you choose? The one with a single brand or the one with various brand?" 50 respondents chose the group products of various brands, while 11 had a preference for the single brand group of products (Fig. 10).

8 Fig. 10. Preference for a product group after a satisfying experience (Q7) and an unsatisfactory experience (Q8). Source: The authors. The last question asked to the respondent was: Between the two groups of products, from which one you would be interested in consuming? From the group that has products of a single brand? Or from the group that has products of different brands? The respondent could also answer that he is not interested in consuming products of any of the groups (Fig. 11). Fig. 11. Preference for one product group. Source: The authors. After data collection, focused on the intersection of the issues most relevant to the purpose of the research: Question 6 (Q6): Do you perceive significant differences in the visual presentation of the product groups that could influence purchase your choice at the moment? Question 7 (Q7): Imagine that you tasted and enjoyed in one flavor juice both groups, if you were to prove another flavor of juice, you will choose the one which has a single brand or what it has Various brands? Question 8 (Q8): Now imagine you have tasted and not enjoyed one juice flavor in both groups, if you were to prove another flavor of juice, will you choose the one which has a single brand or what it has various brands? Question 9 (Q9): Between the two groups of products below, would you like to taste which one? The one with single brand, that one which has several brands or you would not want to taste one? To correlate the data from these questions the respondents were divided into two streams from question 6 (Q6), they are: flow I and II. The question 7 (Q7), evaluated the preference of respondents to a group, assuming that they had experienced and enjoyed a taste of juice each group. Then, in question 8 (Q8) asked the respondent

9 which was your choice, assuming he had not tried and liked a product. In question 9 (Q9) responses were sorted according to their answers to previous questions. Based on data generated in this cross is the diagram below (Fig. 12). Fig. 12. Responses details given by respondents. Source: The authors. Flow I - In question 7 (Q7), 46 out of 61 respondents selected the single brand products. Of these 46 respondents, after a negative experience, preferably in 37 would have to test products of different brands. In this case the inversion is evident preferably before the users of these two situations mentioned. Flow II - Among the 15 that after a positive experience decided by the group of various brands, 13 respondents kept their preferences in question 8 (Q8). In this sense, the data Flow I align with the characteristics indicated in the model Brand Company presented in Section Brand Architecture and summarized in Figure 6, so that the research reinforces the model according to their strengths and weaknesses, because initially the Group of one brand got preferably, the strengthening of the Company Brand, but after a bad experience with a company's product, other products were affected. Flow II indicates that respondents maintained their preferences, reinforcing a potential model mentioned in the Product Brand also summarized in Figure 6, the model explains that problems with a specific brand of product may not interfere with the image of the corporation, enabling the development of value each brand. 5. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS In business, the extent and importance of the brand have been increasingly expanded, viewed as a key element in the communication strategies, management and sale of products and services. The brand is not devalued by the use; unlike other property assets, it is strengthened when its use is appropriate. Thus, the branding is influenced by the hierarchy of the brand set, and by management of the relationship between the brands of an organization. An inefficient brand management may hinder, for example, the association of the product with the visual signature, other products of a company, or even bring product

10 families to a given market or an established brand company. It may not reach the desired results if the distribution of institutional elements is not well-planned, thus confusing people about the company's positioning and the positioning of their products. Thus, hierarchy and architecture may enhance the management of brands when they are worked upon in a complementary way, assigning synergy, consistency, and clarity to and between the products and the organization. 6. RESEARCH CONTINUITY After the research, the authors diagnosed needs to ascertain consumer perception about other kinds of products other than food, then, to continue the research is intended to deepen about drinking habits in relation to products and brands, checking the degree of knowledge among consumers about the concept of brand architecture. References 1. Tybout, A. M.; Calkins, T. (Org.). Branding: Fundamentos, estratégias e alavancagem de marcas: implementação, modelagem e checklists: experiências de lideres de mercado. São Paulo: Atlas, Aaker, D. A. Construindo marcas fortes. Porto Alegre: Bookman, Strunck, G. Como criar identidades visuais para marcas de sucesso: um guia sobre o marketing das marcas e como representar graficamente seus valores. 3. Ed. Rio de Janeiro: Rio Books, Wheeler, A. Design de identidade da marca: um guia completo para a criação, construção e manutenção de marcas. Porto Alegre: Bookman, Ries, A; Trout, J. Posicionamento: a batalha por sua mente. São Paulo: M. Books do Brasil, Mozota, B.. Design Management: Usign Design to Build Brand Value and Corporate Innovation. New York: Allworth Press, Fuchs, C.; Diamantopoulos, A. Evaluating the effectiveness of brand-positioning strategies from a consumer perspective. European Journal of Marketing. Vol. 44. Nº 11, p Kotler, P. Marketing 3.0: as forças que estão definindo o novo marketing centrado no ser humano. Rio de Janeiro: Elsevier, Perassi, R. L. S. A visualidade das marcas institucionais e comerciais como campo de significação. (Tese) Curso de Comunicação e Semiótica, Pontifícia Universidade Católica, São Paulo, 2001, Martins, J. R. Branding: um manual para criar gerenciar e avaliar marcas. São Paulo: Negócio Editora, Gimeno, J. M. I. La gestión del diseño en la empresa. Madrid: McGraw Hill, Teixeira, J. M. Identificação e Proteção: o Design valorizando Grupos Produtivos de Pequeno Porte p. Dissertação (Mestrado em Design Gráfico) - Programa de Pós-Graduação em Design e Expressão Gráfica, UFSC, Florianópolis, Chailan, C. Brand architecture and brand portfolio: a clarification. EuroMed Journal of Business. Vol. 4. Nº 2, pp Souza, M. G.; Nemer, A. Marca e distribuição. São Paulo: Makron Books, Gil, A. C. Métodos e técnicas de pesquisa social. 6. ed. São Paulo: Atlas, 2008.