|
In the first era of branding, the discussion of brand structures was limited to
product branding and the one brand promise discussion (Kapferer, 2001). These were the days
of the Ford Model T and the first product brands, developed by Procter and Gamble.
A 100 years later, the situation is very different and many brands in the marketplace
are in fact dual brands with mixed or dualistic brand structures (Saunders and
Grouqun, 1996). In addition, brand alliances have increased dramatically as a strategy option
for brand owners, and brand alliances add to the complexity of mixed brand structures,
since alliances represent mixed brands from different sources, a blend of internal and
external partner associations (Uggla, 2004a). Brand alliances can increase differentiation and
cut time to market (Aaker, 2004). A leading international academic scholar and
brand strategist has argued that new models and structures need to be developed that are
more sensitive to the emerging trend of co-branding and ingredient branding and the
changing levels of brand structures (Kapferer, 2001):
"Often brands that have been successfully positioned at ingredient brand level
may be tempted to change to a different strategic level and become the overall
product brand."
This change in the brand life cycle and alteration between different brand
roles requires more expansive models that internalizes co-branding into the brand
architecture frameworks, models that take into account and strategically adapt to the idea of
external brand drivers (i.e., Godiva) within the context of Slimfast Cakemix by
Godiva (Park et al., 1996). The urgent quest for a more integrative model is further endorsed
by a world leading professor of brand strategy, suggesting that brand alliances and
meaning transfer processes between brands are one of the most important research agendas for
the future (Keller, 2001). |
