A brand in crisis. A cut-throat category. No money to spend. How do you rebuild a brand after it has made headlines for all the wrong reasons? Oi used emotion and smart research to wipe out marketing waste and begin the climb back to happiness.
A brand in crisis. A cut-throat category. No money to spend. How do you rebuild a brand after it has made headlines for all the wrong reasons? Oi used emotion and smart research to wipe out marketing waste and begin the climb back to happiness.
Want to get rid of costly brand image tracking and barometers? The Brand Mining tool leverages the network structure of social media and uncovers which perceptual dimensions are associated (or not) with your brand.
Many companies measure brand health from awareness, image and loyalty. These three variables are measured over time, but they do not really help manage brand growth and its contribution to business. We have created the Triple E model, which solves this problem. After a year of academic research involving reading and evaluating all the publications related to brand metrics, we have developed a new model consisting of 3 dimensions: Energy, Essence and Experience of the brand. With this type of model we can tell companies where their brand is, how improving this metric will help business, and how to achieve it - both in terms of content and in terms of the way the brand is experienced.
This presentation explores how Coca-Cola's culture of high brand execution performance in the point of sale and a tracking technological solution can leverage channel and trade strategy to the next level. It will showcase how transferring and operating a regional standardised brand execution model to the local level, generating actionable and proactive response to competence and the market on the go, provides full objectivity and visibility to channel administrators and executors, and creates a real link between execution and impact on sales.
ESIKA, the leading brand in DS (Direct Selling) in several countries in LA and the largest of Belcorp´s brands, has been facing a more aggressive competitive environment in the past two years due to: 1) a proliferation of beauty brands in DS, and 2) the fast expansion of Retail in LA with a better shopping experience. In this context, Belcorp needs ESIKA to win amongst their consumers through a differentiated and relevant value proposition, and a more enticing buying and user experience. Research companies offered partial solutions to monitor performance of each of the catalog roles, but never as a whole. INVERA established the goal of developing a methodology to achieve this integrated vision requested by Belcorp: to understand how an entire catalog worked from the more functional-rational side to the more emotional side with visibility and emotional indicators. From this challenge, Detector was developed to help Belcorp monitor key variables which provide a holistic understanding of the catalog performance.
Are we jumping on the brandwagon? That was the core question discussed at an ESOMAR event a decade ago in Berlin, at a time when brandology and brand management were fast rising in importance. At the end of the conference, it was stated that there was still a lot of room for improvement in the area of measuring product/brand performance. Measurements of images, value systems and loyalty were seldom consistently reliable and valid over the long term. This increased turbulence around the brand has probably not promoted the further accrual of a solid body of knowledge. Indeed, it seems as if the softies might have gained the upper hand, given the popularity of semiotics, small scale qualitative research and related approaches. But is this really the case? In this edition of Research World we look at the brand in today's context of rapidly changing competitive relations. Is the accent on short-term profit and market share still stronger than long-term brand building? We present a snapshot of a burgeoning conflict.
This story begins to indicate how brands work, and why the brand has become such a central concept in marketing. The brand name, or mark, is at its simplest a badge of origin. In most societies this identification is protected by trademark law. The buyers of goods or services develop associations with the mark which help them make their purchase decisions. Some brands will be associated with consistent quality, some less so. They may be associated with specific performance benefits, cleaning power or good taste. A brand thus offers reassurance, which not only helps the buyer make a safe decision, but actually adds value by creating good feelings of security and anticipation. Without brands, every purchase would be a gamble.
J.D. Power and Associates recently released its Vehicle Performance Study, the fourth of its five-phase owner satisfaction program. Other studies that comprise this program are the companys well-known Customer Satisfaction with Dealer Service and Product Quality Study (CSI), and the Vehicle Dependability Study (VDI), Initial Quality Study (IQS) and Sales Satisfaction Study (SSI). The Vehicle Performance Study looks beyond the other studies' satisfaction ratings to examine vehicle owner expectations with respect to product performance, eighty-eight specific features and operating systems are evaluated for each model. To hep summarize overall performance, an index was developed the Vehicle perfomance Index or VPI. While most of the public focus for J.D. Power and Associates studies is on the indices and their respective rankings, most of the Vehicle Performance syudy's value is in the underlying information. This specific information provides the means for manufacturers to target improvement. In the paper presented, specific examples are given to illustrate some of the findings, including an in-depth review o t e impact on customer expectations on one major automobile maker's manufacturing and design process. During the closing remarks, an overview is given of industry trends in the United States Consolidation of dealerships as an immediate economic measure is examine, as we what that trend portends for the rest of the industry worldwide.
The topic of this paper was given as The Value of Continuous Research. For any of you who may have doubts as to the value of continuous research, let me say that continuous research is the only type of research appropriate in brand development measurement. I could finish this talk within the next 60 seconds by suggesting to you that: "Since the marketplace is dynamic so should it's measuring device". Or, in other words, Manufacturer and Consumer Behaviour are continuous and as such its observation should be continuous. So, finished my paper and we can all go home! Not so. While Dynamics are a major justification for continuous research, the most important reason for continuity of brand measurement is that it gives us the ability to, finally, start building integrated marketing plans and to stop testing brand success or failure as a function of single determinants. All marketing and, therefore, market research revolved around the measuring of isolated variables with ever-increasing complexity in order to obtain the ultimate accuracy. Or so the analysts claimed. The more complex the technique, the more accurate the result. In this paper, I will attempt to show you that this is not necessarily so. I will further attempt to show that the assessment of a brand's performance cannot be restricted to measuring, however accurately, the performance of isolated variables. I will suggest to you that there are not absolute but only relative values. Marketshare on its own is no indication of brand success or failure. That a growing market share could mean a weaker brand and that a declining market share could mean a stronger brand. This might sound like heresy, particularly to those of you who represent marketing companies.