The Notion and Concept of Brand Relationships, Case Study Example

Abstract

The paper discusses the notion and concept of brand relationships. The concepts of branding and positioning are discussed. The paper refers to Susan Fournier’s vision of how customers establish and maintain relationships with brands. The paper shows that brand relationships are not even possible, but even desirable, but the development and maintenance of such relationships is possible only under specific conditions.

In her 1998 paper Susan Fournier argues that customers have relationships with brands. Explain what Fournier means by ‘having a relationship’, and, using two brands chosen from the product categories below, explain whether or not you believe that customers have relationships with those two brands. Brands discussed: Levi Strauss and Callaway.

Introduction

Successful brands play an important role in how customers perceive, expect, and choose products, but large companies are shifting their attention toward how they can position customers and brands as the two parties of a continuous marketing relationship. Customers are no longer interested in being customers only; they want to be the direct participants of various exchange processes between them and the brands, which they choose. Consumers want to view brands as the objects of their affectionate attitudes. Consumers are willing to see brands as the sources of important social and cultural benefits, and as animate beings that are ready to respond to the most sophisticated consumer needs. This paper will use the two different brands – that of Callaway and that of Levi Strauss, to explore whether and how consumers engage in relationships with brands. The paper will show that these relationships are not only possible but even desirable, although the development and maintenance of such relationships can take place only under specific conditions.

Examining Branding and Positioning

A wealth of literature has been written about the meaning and significance of branding and positioning in modern marketing. More often than not, professionals and scholars in marketing studies merge the concepts of branding and positioning into one single definition, and show ‘brand positioning’ as one of the critical components of the product and services success in the market. Generally, brand positioning implies the need for companies to measure the perceptions that buyers hold about alternative products/ services; in other words, brand positioning requires that companies know what perceptions consumers hold about their and alternative brands (Crisp, 1997). However, as the number of competitors and companies grows and as marketing techniques and approaches are becoming more complex and unique, the concepts of branding and positioning gradually expand to cover a variety of new initiatives; in this context, brand relationships can be fairly regarded as the source of potentially large marketing benefits and a unique tool of establishing and popularizing new and existing brands.

Examining the Concept of Brand Relationships

Susan Fournier was probably the first to emphasize the relevance and importance of the so-called brand relationships: in her article, Fournier refers to brand as a relationship partner and underlines the importance of developing interdependent connections between brands and consumers. What seems the most important in Fournier’s work is in that she shows brand relationships as the direct result of animating, humanizing, and personalizing brands. Such animation and personalization are the necessary preconditions for facilitating interactions with the objects of the nonmaterial world (Fournier, 1998). As a result, brand relationships emerge whenever advertisers succeed in humanizing brands and showing them as the vital members of the relationship dyad (Fournier, 1998). Animating and personalizing brands is not easy, for brand is nothing else but a complex conjunction of perceptions the consumer’s mind (Fournier, 1998). The humanization of brands implies the need for turning a brand into a contributing relationship partner, and does not necessarily mean that a brand should have the vision of vitality: in many aspects, brand relationships resemble consumer relationships with god or other values that are neither animate nor mortal (Fournier, 1998).

Levi Strauss and Callaway

That brand relationships can turn into a unique tool of positioning and promotion is difficult to deny: consumers who perceive brands as a contributing relationship partner will be more willing to maintain these relationships by purchasing more. My research of the Callaway and Levi Strauss brands has confirmed Fournier’s assumptions about the need for consumers to engage in brand relationships. My research has also revealed the conditions necessary for these relationships to emerge and sustain.

To begin with, many consumers view brands as their relationship partners, but such perceptions about relationships and relationships themselves become real and grow only after consumers had a chance to confirm the quality and responsiveness of the brand to their (unique or general) needs. Such exchange process is possible only with brands, with which consumers contact on a regular basis: for example, only a few of my interviewees showed Callaway as a relationship brand simply because Callaway products are rather specific and are aimed to target narrow consumer categories. Everything was different with Levi Strauss: many colleagues, family members, and groupmates respect Levi for the quality and stability of its products and, as a result, its brand. Many interviewees perceive Levi Strauss as the brand that brings comfort and helps them preserve their uniqueness and individuality – in this sense, Levi Strauss is a contributing relationship partner, who is easy to recognize and who (I intentionally use WHO) gives consumers a sense of being valued. It would be fair to note, that brand relationships are possible only if consumers perceive the real benefits of such relationship: for example, many interviewees associate Levi Strauss with something that gives them discounts. In this sense, the action of ‘giving’ discounts is also associated with potentially animate features of brands.

Finally, consumers often see their interactions with brand as a dual exchange process: they contribute to brand popularity by purchasing its products, while the brand contributes to consumers’ confidence, uniqueness, comfort, and even reputation. However, brand relationships are not always associated with what we see as love: like Fournier, I have also realized that the quality of brand relationships may range from simple friendship to affection and passion.

Conclusion

The current research has confirmed the relevance of brand relationships: consumers do not deny that they often view preferred brands as the carriers of various animate features (like giving comfort, or giving benefits, or contributing to consumer comfort, individuality, uniqueness, etc.). However, relationships are only possible with brands, with which consumers contact often or regularly: it is difficult to perceive any animate features or to personalize a brand, with which consumers have come into a contact only once. Moreover, consumers should perceive real tangible benefits, in order to view brands as relationship partners. Finally, the feelings which consumers hold about brands may range from simple friendship to love and even affection.

References

Callaway. (2009). It’s One Huge Spot. Callaway. Retrieved February 4, 2010 from http://www.callawaygolf.com/Global/en-US.html

Crisp, R.D. (1997). Marketing Research. Tata McGraw-Hill.

Fournier, S. (1998). Consumers and Their Brands: Developing Relationship Theory in Consumer Research. Journal of Consumer Research, 24 (4), 343-373.

Levi Strauss. (2009). About the Levi’s Brand. Levi Strauss & Co. Retrieved February 4, 2010 from http://www.levistrauss.com/Brands/Levis.aspx