- Email: [email protected]
Strategic brand management: New approaches to creating and evaluating brand equity
105
Book review
A tale of two gurus: Aaker and Kapferer on brands “Managing Brand Equity: Capitalizing on the Vaiue of a Brand Name”, by David A. Aaker. New York: The Free Press, 1991. 299 pages, g24.95 Strategk Brand Management: New Approaches to Creating and Evaluating Brand Equity”, by Jean-No21 Kapferer. London: Kogan Page, 1992. 218 pages, g28.00, ISBN 07494 067 6. Translated from “Les Myrques, Capital de L’Entreprise”. Paris: Les Editions D’Organisation, 1991. 367 pages, 185 FF, ISBN 27081-1296-l.
Both books broadly share an objective: the provision of a framework or structure which will aid in the better understanding of brands and brand equity. Both authors explicitly intend their books to provoke further thought on the part of the reader. Aaker aims to “raise questions and suggest issues that should be addressed by thoughtful managers who are trying to think strategically” (p. xi). Kapferer wants his framework to provide “comprehensive reflection and analysis, creating a rational means of finding answers” (p. 11) and thus declares his intention to present a “new means of thought and investigation.” (p. 12). Aaker is clear that his book is intended for a managerial audience having “either direct
Intern. J. of Research North-Holland
in Marketing
10 (1993) 105-111
0167-8116/93/$06.00
0 1993 - Elsevier
Science
Publishers
or indirect responsibility for brands and their equity” (p. xi). The clarity of his targeting allows him to address issues which are of direct interest to his audience: how brand equity provides value, and how to create it, manage it, and exploit it. He further hopes that his book will be useful in schools of management. Kapferer does not specify his target audience, although he at one point refers to “the experienced reader” (p. 57) and one may presume that he too intends his book to be read by both practitioners and business students. Given that they share the same basic subject matter (brands), similar objectives, and more or less the same target audience, it is intriguing to find two books so very different from one another. Their differences lie in both content and form: differences in the understanding of the term “brand”; and above all differences in the intellectual value systems which underscore the aims, mental frameworks, and styles of these two seasoned brand commentators. It would be too simplistic to describe Aaker’s book as “very American” and Kapferer’s as “very European” just because of the brand examples to which they refer, although this is an obvious difference. Rather the contrast lies in the assumed intellectual education of their readership. Aaker’s book is American not only in its references (both academic and business), but also in its matter-of-factness, its down-to-earth pragma-
B.V. All rights
reserved
106
Book review
tism. It asks rather simple questions in order to provoke its readers into thought and action, for example “who are your customers?” (p. 55). Kapferer’s book is European in its references, and very French in its philosophical traditions and questioning. Kapferer poses deeper and more challenging questions, such as “why does this brand need to exist?” and “what vision has the brand concerning the product category or the world itself?” (p. 59). While Aaker has presented us with something of a “work-book”, Kapferer presents us with a “think-book”. This last difference is manifest in the style of the language and presentation. Aaker’s book is an easy read: its language is simple and precise, and its structure soon becomes familiar and reassuring. Each chapter starts with a case story or two illustrating the subject matter. This is then followed by definitions of key terms and a brief description of relevant theories or research; the key issues, benefits and appropriate strategies are identified through bullet-points or check-lists. Each chapter ends with a section on “Questions to Consider.” Kapferer’s book is more a series of thought-provoking essays than the usual management texts with all their subheadings, checklists, and boxed inserts. Indeed it could benefit from more subheadings. It also seems in part to have suffered from the hands of the translator, and there are instances of clumsy and at times leaden translations. Even allowing for poor translation however, Kapferer’s use of language is nonetheless stimulating (although some might find it pretentious). To the Anglo-Saxon ear, it is both flamboyant and at times so unusual that it almost takes the reader unawares, forcing a pause for thought. For example, on the role of slogans, Kapferer writes: “It is no coincidence that slogans are voiced representing uocatio, the brand’s calling or vocation. The slogan is a commandment for internal and external relations. Through it,
the brand defines its behavioural guidelines, and these guidelines give the customer the right to be dissatisfied when they are transgressed.” (p. 28)
Aaker, writing on the same topic, is pragmatic, but perhaps less thought-provoking. He writes: “As with the name or symbol, a slogan is most effective if it is specific, to the point, and memorable for some reason - interesting, relevant, funny, catchy, or whatever. If also needs to be linked to the brand. Some brands have spent tens of millions, only to find that few shoppers can link the brand with the slogan.” (p. 205). These two extracts illustrate not only the stylistic difference between the two writers, but also a fundamental difference in brand conceptualisation. For Aaker, a slogan has a purely utilitarian function, it can be used to reinforce recall and associations. For Kapferer a slogan is a responsibility, which must be discharged by the brand’s owners. It is the essence of the brand’s contract with its buyers. It is not something to be taken lightly.
The essence of a brand and its relationship to brand equity Aaker defines a brand as: “a distinguishing name and/or symbol (such as a logo, trademark, or package design) intended to identify the goods or services of either one seller or a group of sellers, and to differentiate those goods or services from those of competitors. A brand thus signals to the customer the source of the product, and protects both the customer and the producer from competitors who would attempt to provide products that appear to be identical.” (p. 7)
For Kapferer a brand is less to do with ownership and imitation, and more to do with meaning and vision: “A brand is not a product. It is the product’s essence, its meaning, and its direction, and it defines its identity in time and space.” (p. 11)
(uocare),
Kapferer believes that brand management starts with an understanding and manage-
Book review
ment of those meanings, of brand identity, which he distinguishes from brand image. There is an assumption that if brand identity is correctly managed, and importantly managed over time, in the context of brand portfolios, corporate structures, and competitive activity, then the rest - the shares, loyalties and financial values - will follow. Accordingly the book begins with three chapters devoted to an holistic understanding of what a brand is. Kapferer dislikes the deconstructionist tendencies of previous brand commentators: “ . . .Too often, brands are examined through their components parts: the brand name, its logo, design, or packaging, advertising, or sponsorship, or image and name recognition, or very recently, in terms of financial brand valuation. Real brand management however, begins much earlier, with a strategy and a consistent integrated vision. Its central concept is brand identity, not brand image.” tp. 11).
Aaker devotes much less space to describing what a brand is (about two pages). He concentrates rather on what a brand brings - in terms of its assets and their accruing value. He defines brand equity as “a set of assets and liabilities linked to a brand, its name and symbol, that add to or subtract from the value provided by a product or service to a firm and/or to that firm’s customers.” (p. 15). He states that there are. five such assets (loyalty, awareness, perceived quality, other associations, and other assets such as trademarks, patents, channel relationships). After an initial chapter which provides an overview of what brand equity is, and a very brief description of how one might value a brand, the book then deals with each “asset” in turn. Because Aaker does not present a conceptual framework to describe what a brand is, the resultant picture which he presents for brand management action is rather simple. In describing the various “assets” of a brand (awareness, loyalty, associations and the like),
107
and by the questions placed at the end of every chapter, Aaker conveys the impression that brand management is essentially a job of consumer research and measurement. And yet consumer research, measurement and even changing the product as a result is clearly not the answer to many brand’s problems. In the vivid story of Schlitz, Aaker tells us that Schlitz management were aware of their perceived quality problems as far back as 1975. In the ensuing five or six years, they undertook much research, changed the production methods, spent much money on advertising, publicly proved that the product had improved (they spent $4 million on five live taste tests, one of which took place at the 1981 Super Bowl), but despite all these heroic management efforts to save the brand “nothing would convince customers that Schlitz was back, even though the physical product had, since 1978, used the old formula and process.” (p. 83). Given that brand perceptions, and brand loyalty are thus portrayed as not entirely in the easy gift of brand managers, it is disappointing that Aaker does not say how brands need to be created and managed with understanding from their inception. The “Questions to Consider” at the end of the Chapter 4 on perceived quality (which the Schlitz story so dramatically opens), ask the manager-reader to consider whether perceived quality is measured, how it has changed over time, how it compares to competition, and how might it be strengthened. From the Schlitz story it appears that their management posed these questions in 1975 and still they failed. Readers are further asked about the internal and external bases for quality, how they might be credibly communicated, and how they could be delivered. At least by 1978 Schlitz appeared to understand these and have acted upon them, but to no avail. The answer to perceived quality does not then appear to lie in the answers to the
108
3ook review
questions at the end of the chapter. Rather it lies in some broken promise in the brand’s history, which the consumers were not prepared to forgive despite Schlitz’s rectifying efforts. In contrast, Kapferer sees a brand as primarily a contract with the consumer. He talks of brands having “relationships” with their buying public, of having characters which are as much a function of a history of management action as they of consumers’ interaction with them. For Kapferer brands are as, if “living” objects. Their reified existence throughout the book has the effect of emphasising the complex and changing nature of this contract and relationship. He argues that the manager’s understanding of the brand and its associations and meanings does not only come from consumer research and the measurement of brand facets. He believes that it is management’s role to create and nurture the core vision and meaning, the “pivotal force” or “kernel” of the brand, He believes that consumers and even managers are rarely aware of the “pivotal guiding force”. It has to be worked at by the managers, using consultants such as semioticians where necessary+ “Identity analysis is a matter of brand archaeology and delving in myths.” (p. 76). Kapferer conceptualises the brand in terms of a pyramid which has three levels: the apex is the “kernel”, the middle level is the brand’s style (its personality, language, culture) and at the base are its “themes”, the executional programmes in terms of advertising themes etc. This conceptualisation is not only at the heart of the brand, it is at the heart of Kapferer’s book, and having introduced it fully by Chapter 5, the rest of the book draws on the model in discussing extensions, management over time, global branding, and integrated corporate and brand communications. The pyramid structure is intended as a practical tool for managing a brand over
time; it helps in identifying what to change in the brand (so as to respond to fashions and changing competitive structures) and what to keep consistent. It also helps in managing international brands, insofar as the local “theming” may be perfectly acceptable provided everyone understands the “kernel” and the themes are always consistent with the kernel. Failure to understand this conceptual structure, according to Kapferer, results in two “classic pitfalls” which he describes as an “excess of democracy” and “excess of code”. In the former case the manager is too “democratic”, relying too much on the consumer to dictate the shape of the brand. Consumers are capable only of dealing with the present and past, and in any event can only deal with the brand according to their own experience of it: the experience of the brand Citroen will be different if the experiential entry point is a 2CV or an XM. Just relying on consumer research might lead to a fragmented, unfocused view of the brand, and it will lack a vision for the future. Conversely, an “excess of code” is, for Kapferer, equivalent to a self-imposed straitjacket, when. managers are scared to change, since they do not know what can be changed, and what must be kept constant.
Brand extensions Both books deal with brand extensions in some detail. For Kapferer, the greater the “philosophical’” depth (or pyramid height) of a brand, the more easily it can extend away from its originating product category. “At the final level of extension, similarity of value is the only source of identity for products of a widely differing nature. Physical products certainly are different, but the brand concept endows them with togetherness, with ‘fit’.” (p. 87). In contrast Aaker deals with brand extensions by way of a checklist of pros and cons,
109
Book review
benefits and dangers. Each point is further elaborated by the conditions under which brand extensions may or may not be successful (for example, whether it is complementary or a substitute, whether the image transfer is appropriate, whether the consumer perceives the manufacturer’s expertise as appropriate) and each is illustrated with an encouraging or cautionary tale of the attempts of various American brands to extend. It is perhaps in this section that the reader might feel particular frustration at the lack of a conceptual framework. The checklists are excellent as a means of remembering the issues which need to be considered when comtemplating an extension. But the anecdotes (e.g., the unsuccessful extension of Log Cabin from “griddle-oriented syrup” to pancake mix, contrasted with the successful extension of Aunt Jemima pancake mix to syrup) leave one with the feeling that all Aaker’s points could be considered in advance and it would still be a hit-and-miss affair whether the extension worked or not.
What’s in a name?
Both authors deal with the vexed issue of naming, although they come to somewhat different recommendations. In keeping with Kapferer’s belief that brands take on meaning throughout their lives, and that many of the “great” brands have some non-commercial, or non-consumer oriented rationales for their names (for example Adidas is a contraction of the name of its founder Adolphe Dassler), Kapferer states that you can make a name mean anything over time, and that its original meaning or sound associations can be forgotten (he suggests that no one in France thinks of “damned stupidity” when they hear the name Sean Connery, nor anyone in England think of “roofing” when they hear the name “Thatcher”!).
He does not, however, suggest that one can call a brand whatever one likes. He suggests that careful naming saves time, saves later problems when brands are to be extended or sold internationally (e.g. to a nonEnglish speaking audience the name Pampers loses much of its meaning), and it hinders competitive imitation (Burger King gave rise to Starburger and Quickburger). The names to avoid, Kapferer suggest, are those which are little more than product descriptors. “In 90 percent of cases, manufacturers
hope that the brand name will describe the product which the brand embraces. They love it when the name describes what the product does.. . . This search for name which denotes the product reflects a poor understanding of what a brand and its destiny really entail. As we have seen, the brand does not describe the product, its distinguishes it.” (p. 190)
Aaker is equally aware of the importance of naming, and recognises the name as the “core indicator” of the brand (p. 187). He provides a good deal of sound advice on naming research, choosing an appropriate name, sub-branding and the like. Interestingly Aaker does not see the dangers which Kapferer sees in product descriptive names. He suggests that names such as “Go Fly a Kite” “ Ticketron” and “Overnight Delivery Services” are good names insofar as they will have a high recognition/recall within their product class.
What’s in a global name?
If the space devoted to the issue of global branding in their respective books is an indication of their perceptions of its importance, then for Kapferer this is a major issue (he devotes twenty-one pages to this issue as opposed to Aaker’s six). But ,it is not just the quantity of space devoted to this topic, so
110
Book review
much as an attitude of mind which differentiates the two. According to Kapferer: “A brand can only survive if the product is kept permanently on its toes. Far from representing a source of unearned income, the brand has an obligation for perpetual endeavour. . . . In order to survive, and the honor its implied contract with the customer, a brand must strive constantly for better performance from the products which its embraces.” (p. 148)
Global branding, with its economies of scale, scope, and learning, is for Kapferer an example of such endeavour. Aaker does not deny the benefits of globalisation, and in his case stories, alludes to some of the dangers. But Kapferer takes the reader through a comprehensive list of benefits, dangers and pitfalls, and also step-by-step through each stage of the process from handling name transitions, to maintaining consistency. He details the conditions under which global branding works best, the appropriateness of a multi-domestic marketing mix, as opposed to a global mix, and he presents research which details the degree of centralisation and decentralisation which companies currently operate in their global brand management. He deals with the corporate barriers to having global brands, and the structural changes which corporations may have to undergo if they are fully to maximise the benefits of global branding. He presents in some detail the findings of research carried out by himself and Gilles Laurent into the perceived impact of the single European market on brands. Kapferer’s multi-country focus is not restricted to the chapter dedicated to global branding however. In his first chapter he deals with the effect of country of origin or “controlled origin” restrictions on brands. In one of the early chapters he deals at great length with the difference between luxury brands and “griffes” - long the preserve of the European (and particularly French) couturier houses, but increasingly non-European
(e.g. Kenzo). In his chapter on the financial evaluation of brands he compares the differing accounting procedures throughout Europe and in the USA and Japan and the effect this has on the viability of having brand valuations on the balance sheet. Kapferer’s view of the world of brands is not only deeper than Aaker’s, it is also much more cosmopolitan.
Brands as creators of value
One might expect Aaker’s book, with its central theme of managing brand equity and subtitle of “capitalizing on the value of a brand name” to devote rather more space than he does to the issue of brand valuation. But again, while Aaker devotes nine pages to this topic, Kapferer gives twenty-nine. Aaker is content to briefly describe the five main methods of valuing a brand, and note that “It is not coincidence that in England, where brand value has been placed upon the balance sheet, there is a less litigious environment.” (p. 28). Kapferer, on the other hand, undertakes a detailed examination of the main methods, indicating the benefits of the process of valuation, and the negatives of placing the resultant values on the balance sheet. That Aaker opts for simplicity and parsimony in his descriptions of brand valuation methods is reader-friendly, but the simplicity of some of his suggestions is misleading. At one point he suggests that: 1‘
one approach to valuation is to use the long-range plan of the brand. Simply discount the profit stream that is projected.. . . One firm that uses the brand’s plan to provide a value for brand equity adjusts the brand’s plan to provide a value for average rather than actual costs. The logic is that any above (or below) average efficiency should be credited to manufacturing and not to brand equity.” (p. 26, italics added). .
.
.
Book review
Even if brand planning were easy to do, the ease with which manufacturing effects might be separated from brand equity here appears deceptively simple, quite apart from the philosophical argument as to the desirability of so doing. Kapferer is clear that the separability of assets is not only complex, especially for companies which operate a portfolio of brands, but in many instances, including mono-brand companies, it is dangerous too. It puts the locus of brand management in the marketing department, and not in the entire company where it belongs. Unless everyone in the company feels a sense of brand responsibility and accountability, brands will always be victims to short-termism, fads, and synonymous with advertising hype.
An overall evaluation
Aaker’s book is attractive: it is beautifully written, well presented, full of telling and memorable stories, and easily accessible to the busy marketing manager. Aaker has also made good use of recent US academic research on brand equity. But in its simplicity, it remains something of a primer on branding. It is rather like a travel guide to a foreign country: full of pointers as to the various aspects of brands which ought to be examined, full of hints and tips about day-today brand living, with colourful anecdotes which bring the topics alive. But it lacks a
111
basic logic or argument. The chapters could be read in any order. The checklists are useful, but are no substitute for a generalisable conceptual framework which the manager can use whatever the type of brand, in whatever competitive context. Above all, it seems to close down on rather than to stimulate reflection and debate on brands and their strategies. And it is largely written for an American audience, although a French translation is in progress, and this version will contain a number of French and other European examples. Kapferer’s book is not an easy read. It is dense, with sometimes difficult language and concepts. But rather than reading like a conventional “brand-travel guide”, it deals with the very essence and culture of branding. It provides an overall philosophy of branding which embraces luxury branding, global branding, brand evaluation and so on with a coherence which stems from its basic conceptual framework. Nor does it shy away from tackling the complexity of managing brands and brand equity. Its conceptual platform makes it both practical and strategically sound. This is a book for experienced people who already know the basics, and wish to be stimulated to further interrogate their brands so that every last ounce of benefit is realised. Gil A4cWilliam London Business School London, UK
Book review
A tale of two gurus: Aaker and Kapferer on brands “Managing Brand Equity: Capitalizing on the Vaiue of a Brand Name”, by David A. Aaker. New York: The Free Press, 1991. 299 pages, g24.95 Strategk Brand Management: New Approaches to Creating and Evaluating Brand Equity”, by Jean-No21 Kapferer. London: Kogan Page, 1992. 218 pages, g28.00, ISBN 07494 067 6. Translated from “Les Myrques, Capital de L’Entreprise”. Paris: Les Editions D’Organisation, 1991. 367 pages, 185 FF, ISBN 27081-1296-l.
Both books broadly share an objective: the provision of a framework or structure which will aid in the better understanding of brands and brand equity. Both authors explicitly intend their books to provoke further thought on the part of the reader. Aaker aims to “raise questions and suggest issues that should be addressed by thoughtful managers who are trying to think strategically” (p. xi). Kapferer wants his framework to provide “comprehensive reflection and analysis, creating a rational means of finding answers” (p. 11) and thus declares his intention to present a “new means of thought and investigation.” (p. 12). Aaker is clear that his book is intended for a managerial audience having “either direct
Intern. J. of Research North-Holland
in Marketing
10 (1993) 105-111
0167-8116/93/$06.00
0 1993 - Elsevier
Science
Publishers
or indirect responsibility for brands and their equity” (p. xi). The clarity of his targeting allows him to address issues which are of direct interest to his audience: how brand equity provides value, and how to create it, manage it, and exploit it. He further hopes that his book will be useful in schools of management. Kapferer does not specify his target audience, although he at one point refers to “the experienced reader” (p. 57) and one may presume that he too intends his book to be read by both practitioners and business students. Given that they share the same basic subject matter (brands), similar objectives, and more or less the same target audience, it is intriguing to find two books so very different from one another. Their differences lie in both content and form: differences in the understanding of the term “brand”; and above all differences in the intellectual value systems which underscore the aims, mental frameworks, and styles of these two seasoned brand commentators. It would be too simplistic to describe Aaker’s book as “very American” and Kapferer’s as “very European” just because of the brand examples to which they refer, although this is an obvious difference. Rather the contrast lies in the assumed intellectual education of their readership. Aaker’s book is American not only in its references (both academic and business), but also in its matter-of-factness, its down-to-earth pragma-
B.V. All rights
reserved
106
Book review
tism. It asks rather simple questions in order to provoke its readers into thought and action, for example “who are your customers?” (p. 55). Kapferer’s book is European in its references, and very French in its philosophical traditions and questioning. Kapferer poses deeper and more challenging questions, such as “why does this brand need to exist?” and “what vision has the brand concerning the product category or the world itself?” (p. 59). While Aaker has presented us with something of a “work-book”, Kapferer presents us with a “think-book”. This last difference is manifest in the style of the language and presentation. Aaker’s book is an easy read: its language is simple and precise, and its structure soon becomes familiar and reassuring. Each chapter starts with a case story or two illustrating the subject matter. This is then followed by definitions of key terms and a brief description of relevant theories or research; the key issues, benefits and appropriate strategies are identified through bullet-points or check-lists. Each chapter ends with a section on “Questions to Consider.” Kapferer’s book is more a series of thought-provoking essays than the usual management texts with all their subheadings, checklists, and boxed inserts. Indeed it could benefit from more subheadings. It also seems in part to have suffered from the hands of the translator, and there are instances of clumsy and at times leaden translations. Even allowing for poor translation however, Kapferer’s use of language is nonetheless stimulating (although some might find it pretentious). To the Anglo-Saxon ear, it is both flamboyant and at times so unusual that it almost takes the reader unawares, forcing a pause for thought. For example, on the role of slogans, Kapferer writes: “It is no coincidence that slogans are voiced representing uocatio, the brand’s calling or vocation. The slogan is a commandment for internal and external relations. Through it,
the brand defines its behavioural guidelines, and these guidelines give the customer the right to be dissatisfied when they are transgressed.” (p. 28)
Aaker, writing on the same topic, is pragmatic, but perhaps less thought-provoking. He writes: “As with the name or symbol, a slogan is most effective if it is specific, to the point, and memorable for some reason - interesting, relevant, funny, catchy, or whatever. If also needs to be linked to the brand. Some brands have spent tens of millions, only to find that few shoppers can link the brand with the slogan.” (p. 205). These two extracts illustrate not only the stylistic difference between the two writers, but also a fundamental difference in brand conceptualisation. For Aaker, a slogan has a purely utilitarian function, it can be used to reinforce recall and associations. For Kapferer a slogan is a responsibility, which must be discharged by the brand’s owners. It is the essence of the brand’s contract with its buyers. It is not something to be taken lightly.
The essence of a brand and its relationship to brand equity Aaker defines a brand as: “a distinguishing name and/or symbol (such as a logo, trademark, or package design) intended to identify the goods or services of either one seller or a group of sellers, and to differentiate those goods or services from those of competitors. A brand thus signals to the customer the source of the product, and protects both the customer and the producer from competitors who would attempt to provide products that appear to be identical.” (p. 7)
For Kapferer a brand is less to do with ownership and imitation, and more to do with meaning and vision: “A brand is not a product. It is the product’s essence, its meaning, and its direction, and it defines its identity in time and space.” (p. 11)
(uocare),
Kapferer believes that brand management starts with an understanding and manage-
Book review
ment of those meanings, of brand identity, which he distinguishes from brand image. There is an assumption that if brand identity is correctly managed, and importantly managed over time, in the context of brand portfolios, corporate structures, and competitive activity, then the rest - the shares, loyalties and financial values - will follow. Accordingly the book begins with three chapters devoted to an holistic understanding of what a brand is. Kapferer dislikes the deconstructionist tendencies of previous brand commentators: “ . . .Too often, brands are examined through their components parts: the brand name, its logo, design, or packaging, advertising, or sponsorship, or image and name recognition, or very recently, in terms of financial brand valuation. Real brand management however, begins much earlier, with a strategy and a consistent integrated vision. Its central concept is brand identity, not brand image.” tp. 11).
Aaker devotes much less space to describing what a brand is (about two pages). He concentrates rather on what a brand brings - in terms of its assets and their accruing value. He defines brand equity as “a set of assets and liabilities linked to a brand, its name and symbol, that add to or subtract from the value provided by a product or service to a firm and/or to that firm’s customers.” (p. 15). He states that there are. five such assets (loyalty, awareness, perceived quality, other associations, and other assets such as trademarks, patents, channel relationships). After an initial chapter which provides an overview of what brand equity is, and a very brief description of how one might value a brand, the book then deals with each “asset” in turn. Because Aaker does not present a conceptual framework to describe what a brand is, the resultant picture which he presents for brand management action is rather simple. In describing the various “assets” of a brand (awareness, loyalty, associations and the like),
107
and by the questions placed at the end of every chapter, Aaker conveys the impression that brand management is essentially a job of consumer research and measurement. And yet consumer research, measurement and even changing the product as a result is clearly not the answer to many brand’s problems. In the vivid story of Schlitz, Aaker tells us that Schlitz management were aware of their perceived quality problems as far back as 1975. In the ensuing five or six years, they undertook much research, changed the production methods, spent much money on advertising, publicly proved that the product had improved (they spent $4 million on five live taste tests, one of which took place at the 1981 Super Bowl), but despite all these heroic management efforts to save the brand “nothing would convince customers that Schlitz was back, even though the physical product had, since 1978, used the old formula and process.” (p. 83). Given that brand perceptions, and brand loyalty are thus portrayed as not entirely in the easy gift of brand managers, it is disappointing that Aaker does not say how brands need to be created and managed with understanding from their inception. The “Questions to Consider” at the end of the Chapter 4 on perceived quality (which the Schlitz story so dramatically opens), ask the manager-reader to consider whether perceived quality is measured, how it has changed over time, how it compares to competition, and how might it be strengthened. From the Schlitz story it appears that their management posed these questions in 1975 and still they failed. Readers are further asked about the internal and external bases for quality, how they might be credibly communicated, and how they could be delivered. At least by 1978 Schlitz appeared to understand these and have acted upon them, but to no avail. The answer to perceived quality does not then appear to lie in the answers to the
108
3ook review
questions at the end of the chapter. Rather it lies in some broken promise in the brand’s history, which the consumers were not prepared to forgive despite Schlitz’s rectifying efforts. In contrast, Kapferer sees a brand as primarily a contract with the consumer. He talks of brands having “relationships” with their buying public, of having characters which are as much a function of a history of management action as they of consumers’ interaction with them. For Kapferer brands are as, if “living” objects. Their reified existence throughout the book has the effect of emphasising the complex and changing nature of this contract and relationship. He argues that the manager’s understanding of the brand and its associations and meanings does not only come from consumer research and the measurement of brand facets. He believes that it is management’s role to create and nurture the core vision and meaning, the “pivotal force” or “kernel” of the brand, He believes that consumers and even managers are rarely aware of the “pivotal guiding force”. It has to be worked at by the managers, using consultants such as semioticians where necessary+ “Identity analysis is a matter of brand archaeology and delving in myths.” (p. 76). Kapferer conceptualises the brand in terms of a pyramid which has three levels: the apex is the “kernel”, the middle level is the brand’s style (its personality, language, culture) and at the base are its “themes”, the executional programmes in terms of advertising themes etc. This conceptualisation is not only at the heart of the brand, it is at the heart of Kapferer’s book, and having introduced it fully by Chapter 5, the rest of the book draws on the model in discussing extensions, management over time, global branding, and integrated corporate and brand communications. The pyramid structure is intended as a practical tool for managing a brand over
time; it helps in identifying what to change in the brand (so as to respond to fashions and changing competitive structures) and what to keep consistent. It also helps in managing international brands, insofar as the local “theming” may be perfectly acceptable provided everyone understands the “kernel” and the themes are always consistent with the kernel. Failure to understand this conceptual structure, according to Kapferer, results in two “classic pitfalls” which he describes as an “excess of democracy” and “excess of code”. In the former case the manager is too “democratic”, relying too much on the consumer to dictate the shape of the brand. Consumers are capable only of dealing with the present and past, and in any event can only deal with the brand according to their own experience of it: the experience of the brand Citroen will be different if the experiential entry point is a 2CV or an XM. Just relying on consumer research might lead to a fragmented, unfocused view of the brand, and it will lack a vision for the future. Conversely, an “excess of code” is, for Kapferer, equivalent to a self-imposed straitjacket, when. managers are scared to change, since they do not know what can be changed, and what must be kept constant.
Brand extensions Both books deal with brand extensions in some detail. For Kapferer, the greater the “philosophical’” depth (or pyramid height) of a brand, the more easily it can extend away from its originating product category. “At the final level of extension, similarity of value is the only source of identity for products of a widely differing nature. Physical products certainly are different, but the brand concept endows them with togetherness, with ‘fit’.” (p. 87). In contrast Aaker deals with brand extensions by way of a checklist of pros and cons,
109
Book review
benefits and dangers. Each point is further elaborated by the conditions under which brand extensions may or may not be successful (for example, whether it is complementary or a substitute, whether the image transfer is appropriate, whether the consumer perceives the manufacturer’s expertise as appropriate) and each is illustrated with an encouraging or cautionary tale of the attempts of various American brands to extend. It is perhaps in this section that the reader might feel particular frustration at the lack of a conceptual framework. The checklists are excellent as a means of remembering the issues which need to be considered when comtemplating an extension. But the anecdotes (e.g., the unsuccessful extension of Log Cabin from “griddle-oriented syrup” to pancake mix, contrasted with the successful extension of Aunt Jemima pancake mix to syrup) leave one with the feeling that all Aaker’s points could be considered in advance and it would still be a hit-and-miss affair whether the extension worked or not.
What’s in a name?
Both authors deal with the vexed issue of naming, although they come to somewhat different recommendations. In keeping with Kapferer’s belief that brands take on meaning throughout their lives, and that many of the “great” brands have some non-commercial, or non-consumer oriented rationales for their names (for example Adidas is a contraction of the name of its founder Adolphe Dassler), Kapferer states that you can make a name mean anything over time, and that its original meaning or sound associations can be forgotten (he suggests that no one in France thinks of “damned stupidity” when they hear the name Sean Connery, nor anyone in England think of “roofing” when they hear the name “Thatcher”!).
He does not, however, suggest that one can call a brand whatever one likes. He suggests that careful naming saves time, saves later problems when brands are to be extended or sold internationally (e.g. to a nonEnglish speaking audience the name Pampers loses much of its meaning), and it hinders competitive imitation (Burger King gave rise to Starburger and Quickburger). The names to avoid, Kapferer suggest, are those which are little more than product descriptors. “In 90 percent of cases, manufacturers
hope that the brand name will describe the product which the brand embraces. They love it when the name describes what the product does.. . . This search for name which denotes the product reflects a poor understanding of what a brand and its destiny really entail. As we have seen, the brand does not describe the product, its distinguishes it.” (p. 190)
Aaker is equally aware of the importance of naming, and recognises the name as the “core indicator” of the brand (p. 187). He provides a good deal of sound advice on naming research, choosing an appropriate name, sub-branding and the like. Interestingly Aaker does not see the dangers which Kapferer sees in product descriptive names. He suggests that names such as “Go Fly a Kite” “ Ticketron” and “Overnight Delivery Services” are good names insofar as they will have a high recognition/recall within their product class.
What’s in a global name?
If the space devoted to the issue of global branding in their respective books is an indication of their perceptions of its importance, then for Kapferer this is a major issue (he devotes twenty-one pages to this issue as opposed to Aaker’s six). But ,it is not just the quantity of space devoted to this topic, so
110
Book review
much as an attitude of mind which differentiates the two. According to Kapferer: “A brand can only survive if the product is kept permanently on its toes. Far from representing a source of unearned income, the brand has an obligation for perpetual endeavour. . . . In order to survive, and the honor its implied contract with the customer, a brand must strive constantly for better performance from the products which its embraces.” (p. 148)
Global branding, with its economies of scale, scope, and learning, is for Kapferer an example of such endeavour. Aaker does not deny the benefits of globalisation, and in his case stories, alludes to some of the dangers. But Kapferer takes the reader through a comprehensive list of benefits, dangers and pitfalls, and also step-by-step through each stage of the process from handling name transitions, to maintaining consistency. He details the conditions under which global branding works best, the appropriateness of a multi-domestic marketing mix, as opposed to a global mix, and he presents research which details the degree of centralisation and decentralisation which companies currently operate in their global brand management. He deals with the corporate barriers to having global brands, and the structural changes which corporations may have to undergo if they are fully to maximise the benefits of global branding. He presents in some detail the findings of research carried out by himself and Gilles Laurent into the perceived impact of the single European market on brands. Kapferer’s multi-country focus is not restricted to the chapter dedicated to global branding however. In his first chapter he deals with the effect of country of origin or “controlled origin” restrictions on brands. In one of the early chapters he deals at great length with the difference between luxury brands and “griffes” - long the preserve of the European (and particularly French) couturier houses, but increasingly non-European
(e.g. Kenzo). In his chapter on the financial evaluation of brands he compares the differing accounting procedures throughout Europe and in the USA and Japan and the effect this has on the viability of having brand valuations on the balance sheet. Kapferer’s view of the world of brands is not only deeper than Aaker’s, it is also much more cosmopolitan.
Brands as creators of value
One might expect Aaker’s book, with its central theme of managing brand equity and subtitle of “capitalizing on the value of a brand name” to devote rather more space than he does to the issue of brand valuation. But again, while Aaker devotes nine pages to this topic, Kapferer gives twenty-nine. Aaker is content to briefly describe the five main methods of valuing a brand, and note that “It is not coincidence that in England, where brand value has been placed upon the balance sheet, there is a less litigious environment.” (p. 28). Kapferer, on the other hand, undertakes a detailed examination of the main methods, indicating the benefits of the process of valuation, and the negatives of placing the resultant values on the balance sheet. That Aaker opts for simplicity and parsimony in his descriptions of brand valuation methods is reader-friendly, but the simplicity of some of his suggestions is misleading. At one point he suggests that: 1‘
one approach to valuation is to use the long-range plan of the brand. Simply discount the profit stream that is projected.. . . One firm that uses the brand’s plan to provide a value for brand equity adjusts the brand’s plan to provide a value for average rather than actual costs. The logic is that any above (or below) average efficiency should be credited to manufacturing and not to brand equity.” (p. 26, italics added). .
.
.
Book review
Even if brand planning were easy to do, the ease with which manufacturing effects might be separated from brand equity here appears deceptively simple, quite apart from the philosophical argument as to the desirability of so doing. Kapferer is clear that the separability of assets is not only complex, especially for companies which operate a portfolio of brands, but in many instances, including mono-brand companies, it is dangerous too. It puts the locus of brand management in the marketing department, and not in the entire company where it belongs. Unless everyone in the company feels a sense of brand responsibility and accountability, brands will always be victims to short-termism, fads, and synonymous with advertising hype.
An overall evaluation
Aaker’s book is attractive: it is beautifully written, well presented, full of telling and memorable stories, and easily accessible to the busy marketing manager. Aaker has also made good use of recent US academic research on brand equity. But in its simplicity, it remains something of a primer on branding. It is rather like a travel guide to a foreign country: full of pointers as to the various aspects of brands which ought to be examined, full of hints and tips about day-today brand living, with colourful anecdotes which bring the topics alive. But it lacks a
111
basic logic or argument. The chapters could be read in any order. The checklists are useful, but are no substitute for a generalisable conceptual framework which the manager can use whatever the type of brand, in whatever competitive context. Above all, it seems to close down on rather than to stimulate reflection and debate on brands and their strategies. And it is largely written for an American audience, although a French translation is in progress, and this version will contain a number of French and other European examples. Kapferer’s book is not an easy read. It is dense, with sometimes difficult language and concepts. But rather than reading like a conventional “brand-travel guide”, it deals with the very essence and culture of branding. It provides an overall philosophy of branding which embraces luxury branding, global branding, brand evaluation and so on with a coherence which stems from its basic conceptual framework. Nor does it shy away from tackling the complexity of managing brands and brand equity. Its conceptual platform makes it both practical and strategically sound. This is a book for experienced people who already know the basics, and wish to be stimulated to further interrogate their brands so that every last ounce of benefit is realised. Gil A4cWilliam London Business School London, UK