Branding in a personal context:
Explorative study towards the applicability of existing branding theory
for personal branding
Ad Vrijsen
Student number: 10475710 February 9th , 2015
Executive Program in Management Studies – Strategic Marketing Management track Supervisor: Drs. R. Pruppers
ii
Statement of Originality
This document is written by Student Ad Vrijsen who declares to take full responsibility for the contents of this document.
I declare that the text and the work presented in this document is original and that no sources other than those mentioned in the text and its references have been used in creating it.
The Faculty of Economics and Business is responsible solely for the supervision of completion of the work, not for the contents.
iii
Acknowledgements
This Master thesis is the final assignment for my Master study at the University of Amsterdam. Completing this thesis and my study would not have been possible without the support of many people. I would like to express my feelings of gratitude for their help.
First I would like to thank my supervisor Roger Pruppers for his help on the topic of branding and the guidance in writing this thesis. It was a pleasure to work with you. Thank you for challenging me to go the extra mile and get the maximum out of this journey.
Special thanks for everyone involved in this research. The subjects willing to participate in this very personal research, all the respondents of the survey, and everyone who supported me during this period. I hope that the topic of personal branding will inspire you to achieve your personal goals.
Warm thanks to all students and teachers during the last 2,5 year. You made this study an experience to cherish for both educational and social reasons. I would never have missed this.
Finally I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my family for their support and understanding, especially my wife, Cynthia Vrijsen.
Life was not easy with a dedicated student, but now I am back!
Ad Vrijsen
iv
Abstract
A strong personal brand is a valuable asset in a world with a changing attitude towards lifetime employability. Personal branding literature is growing but is not yet aligned with existing academic branding theory, which is hardly tested for individuals. This explorative study confirmed the applicability of brand building theory to persons. Based on the Customer Based Brand Equity model of Keller the personal brand positioning of individuals was investigated and the effect on their personal brand image. 12 subjects were interviewed on their core values and their personal brand activities. Consequently approximately 35 referents for every subject were online questioned on their evaluation of the brand image of the subject via free associations. The findings support the current knowledge of branding where a brand image is defined as perceptions about a brand as reflected by the brand associations held in consumer memory. This is also valid in a personal context. Tools were created for depicting personal brand images stating subjects’ unique capabilities and traits, and for giving insights in the existing gap between brand identity and brand image. Next to similarities between product branding and personal branding some differences were found such as the dominance of personality traits over the capabilities, and the permanent effect of behavior as an unconscious brand building tool. Finally recommendations are given for further research.
v Contents Statement of Originality ii Acknowledgements iii Abstract iv 1. Introduction 1
1.1. Motive for Personal Branding 1
1.2. Personal Branding is hot 1
1.3. Personal Branding is process based and operational 2
1.4. Personal branding literature versus existing branding literature. 3
1.5. Gaps in branding literature. 3
1.6. Problem definition and research questions 4
1.7. Contribution 4
1.7.1. Theoretical contributions 4
1.7.2. Managerial contributions 5
1.8. Outline 5
2. Customer Based Brand Equity 6
2.1. Defining brand and branding 6
2.2. Brand Value Chain 7
2.3. Brand as an associative network memory model 8
2.4. Customer Based Equity Models 9
2.5. Brand Resonance Model 10
3. Brand Image and Brand Identity 12
3.1. Brand Image 12
3.2. Brand Identity 13
3.3. Measuring Brand Image 14
4. Positioning 15
4.1. Brand Positioning 15
4.2. Key components positioning 16
4.3. Criteria for the positioning of a brand 17
4.4. Tools for Brand Building 18
4.5. Interacting Brand Planning Models 19
vi
5.1. Brand Personality, the product seen as a person 20
5.2. Personal Branding, the person seen as a product 20
5.3. Branding in other contexts 21
5.4. Explorative research on personal branding literature 21
6. Conceptual model and research questions 24
6.1. Conceptual Model 24
6.2. Research questions 25
7. Research question 1: Building a positioning pattern for a person 28
7.1. General research setting 28
7.2. Methodology 29
7.2.1. Setting up a questionnaire 30
7.2.2. Questionnaire response 31
7.2.3. Categorization Key 31
7.2.4. Analyzing the questionnaire results 34
7.2.5. Computed variables 35
7.3. Results 36
7.3.1. Initial findings after categorizing free associations 36
7.3.2. Verification on data 37
7.3.3. Findings per subject derived from free associations 38
7.3.4. General pattern 43
7.4. Discussion 45
8. Research question 2: Determining the brand identity – brand image gap 47
8.1. Methodology 47
8.1.1. Interviewing subjects 47
8.1.2. Expanding the questionnaire 48
8.2. Results 49
8.2.1. Identity-image gap based on direct responses on claimed values 49
8.2.2. Identity-image gap based on free associations 55
8.2.3. Comparison of methods to measure identify-image gap 58
8.3. Discussion 59
9. Research question 3: Impact of brand building on brand image 61
vii
9.1.1. Measuring scale for positioning and marketing communication criteria 61
9.1.2. Interviewing subjects 61
9.1.3. Expanding the questionnaire 62
9.2. Results 65
9.2.1. Brand building activities 65
9.2.2. Brand building activities versus brand identity-image gap 65
9.2.3. Brand building activities versus favorable brand image 67
9.3. Discussion 68 9.4. Additional analysis 70 10. General discussion 73 10.1. General observations 73 10.2. Theoretical implications 74 10.3. Practical implications 77 11. Conclusion 80 11.1. Thesis recap 80
11.2. Limitations of the research 81
11.3. Recommendations for further research 81
12. References 84
Appendix A: Table of Contents famous Personal Branding Books 91
Appendix B: Interview script 93
Appendix C: Questionnaire 96
Appendix D: Strength of subcategories per subject 102
Appendix E: Image pattern based on free associations for all subjects 103
Appendix F: Scores on importance of the claimed values of all subjects 115
Appendix G: Image pattern based on claimed values for all subjects 116
1
1. Introduction
1.1. Motive for Personal Branding
Two years ago I was personally faced with a threat of unemployment after 27 years of working experience. In finding a new job I experienced the need for social networking, personal relations and seeing yourself as a brand. “What’s your mission, what are your goals, why are you special, why should people be interested in you?” In other words: “What is your personal brand and how do you brand yourself?” This made me very interested in the subject of Personal Branding.
1.2. Personal Branding is hot
Having a strong personal brand is an important asset in today’s online, virtual, and individual age. It is becoming increasingly important and is the key to personal success (Rampersad, 2008). The world’s workforce is faced with a changing attitude towards lifetime employability. It is no longer considered a virtue to be loyal to your employer for several decades. More and more people need to be “Master of their own destiny” and take responsibility for their own employment. Many people of my age who were raised in a different era have difficulty in changing towards this new situation. In current times of economic relapse they are often the main victim of staff reductions. But also the generation of my children who are entering the market are facing a great challenge in finding employment. Even with academic education for many of them it is difficult to enter the workforce due their lack of experience. Today we all need a personal brand!
Personal branding is a booming business. This is illustrated by the huge amount of management books on this subject. On July 27, 2014 Amazon.com showed 2,058 results for Books on "personal branding". Books on personal branding have high ranks in their Best Sellers list of most popular products:
Table 1 Personal Branding titles listed on Amazon.com's best sellers list of most popular products based on sales. 4 Dale Carnegie How To Win Friends and Influence People
9 Tom Rath StrengthsFinder 2.0 (#1 Best Seller of 2014) 10 Malcolm Gladwell Outliers, The Story of Success
2
In the Dutch Management books Top 10 of July 2014 five titles are related to personal branding.
Table 2: Dutch Management books Top 10 of July 2014
2 Stephen R. Covey The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People 3 David Allen Getting things done
5 Ben Tiggelaar Dream Dare Do, Managing The Most Difficult Person On Earth: Yourself
8 Marcus Buckingham Now Discover Your Strengths 9 Berthold Gunster Yes-But What If It All Works Out?
A variety of seminars and trainings is available on this topic all over the world. Some examples from various Dutch organizations. Institutes for business training as LOI, Schouten & Nelissen provide trainings on personal branding, so are several commercial companies. The Tilburg University and the Hanze University of Applied Sciences in Groningen are providing workshops on personal branding to their students. The NIMA, the Dutch Institute for Marketing, provides a skills training on personal branding. With regard to the employability issue the UWV (Employee Insurance Agency), an administrative authority commissioned by the Dutch Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment to implement employee insurances and provide labor market and data services, is providing training for people currently unemployed. To illustrate the hype: Even the Libelle (a traditional woman’s magazine) academy is providing a Personal Branding course.
1.3. Personal Branding is process based and operational
Personal Branding is about marketing yourself as if you were a brand in order to create equity. While reading the literature on Personal Branding it comes to mind that these are very process oriented (what to do) and operational (how to do), where traditional branding literature is more fundamental (how does it work). The first book on personal branding was published in the thirties by Dale Carnegie and is still very popular (Carnegie, 1938) . Amongst others he teaches the reader Six Ways To Make People Like You, Twelve Ways To Win People To Your Way Of Thinking, Nine Ways To Change People Without Giving Offence Or Arousing Resentment, Seven Rules For Making Your Home Life Happier. In the book “Seven Habits of Highly Effective People” (Covey, 2005) world famous Stephen R. Covey describes subsequent steps to be effective: “Be Proactive; Begin with the End in Mind; Put First Things First; Think Win-Win” et cetera. From more recent date is “The Brand Called You” (Montoya & Vandehey, 2002): a step-by-step guide for professionals looking to develop a strong company brand, sold more than 65,000 copies worldwide and hit #3 on Japan's business bestseller list. On the cover
3
Montoya claims to offer a direct way to success: “If you want to be rich and famous, read this book”. In his book every chapter is enhanced with three boxes: Things you can do today, Things you can do in a week, and Things you can do in a month. In “You are a Brand”, a Top 10 Business Book in China Catherine Kaputa will “lead you through the steps you need to take to achieve success” (Kaputa, 2012). In general personal branding authors focus on a distinct number of “golden rules to become more successful”. To further illustrate the operational approach of personal branding the Tables of Contents of above mentioned books are included in Appendix A.
1.4. Personal branding literature versus existing branding literature.
Personal branding literature hardly ever refers to established branding theory and models to justify their propositions. It appears that these lessons learned are never used in the personal branding environment. Covey starts his book with acknowledging he was reviewing 200 years of success literature as part of a doctoral program. But in his book he appears to be more a self-made man who made up his own ideas out of his practical experience. He is generous in quoting inspirational celebrities but his references to academic research are scarce and not related to branding or marketing. Carnegie and Montoya do not make any references at all. Kaputa does, but only to other renowned personal branding authors. Further literature research confirms this tendency.
In general Personal Branding authors promise that following their “Golden Rules” is a ticket to success. But this promise looks very opportunistic. No proof other than role models and personal experience is given to support that proposition. Perhaps many people tried, but failed. Are there also many “Failure Stories” which have never been told? This is not clear and in my opinion would be interesting to investigate.
1.5. Gaps in branding literature.
In summary two important gaps can be identified:
Personal branding literature is not aligned with existing academic branding theory.
Existing branding literature is scarcely linked to individuals and hardly tested for individuals. Although it is recognized that an individual can be branded as a product, existing branding models are hardly linked to persons. Academic literature dealing with personal branding is still rare and mainly theoretical (Bendisch, Larsen, & Trueman, 2007). Both types of branding acknowledge the link, but
4
remarkably neither one describes this in more detail. Traditional branding literature is more fundamental and personal branding is process based and operational.
1.6. Problem definition and research questions
The central problem definition in this paper:
In what way are the proven academic models for (product) branding applicable to individuals and how effective is the application of traditional branding in a personal context?
Research questions
Research question 1: In what way does the application of fundamental branding theory in a personal branding context lead to a clear positioning pattern of an individual? Can we measure brand image using branding theory?
Research question 2: What is the most appropriate way to measure the gap between brand identity (claimed image) and brand image (real image) in a personal context?
Research question 3: What is the impact of personal brand building activities on a personal brand image?
Delimitations of the study
This study will use the traditional branding theories as a starting point to verify whether this is applicable in a personal context. It will not focus on the golden rules stated by many personal branding gurus since in general these lack an academic basis. It is not the aim of this study to verify whether these advices are right, nor that living up these rules is in fact a guaranteed way to success.
1.7. Contribution
1.7.1. Theoretical contributions
Scholars have not paid much attention to applicability of branding concepts in the context of personal branding. First this research will show that traditional branding models are applicable to individuals as well. It will show that it is possible to depict a personal brand image of an individual based on existing marketing theory and provide a tool for doing so. Secondly it will show that the gap between personal brand identity and personal brand image best can be measured through free associations.
5
Thirdly it will show that a strong and favorable brand image will lead to positive attitudes and resonance towards an individual. Finally some clues will be given for further research on determining the effect of brand building activities on strengthening the personal brand image and reducing the personal brand identity-image gap. By doing this we will learn the similarities and differences of products and persons in branding and the influence the personal branding context has on brand image and positioning.
1.7.2. Managerial contributions
The results of this research can be beneficial in situations where employees or entrepreneurs are facing problems to distinguish themselves from competitors. They are faced with increased demands on capabilities and personality traits to satisfy the rapidly changing needs of their environment. Organizations are searching for means to help their employees to raise their employability. This research offers a toolset for analyzing a personal image, mapping the gap between personal brand identity and personal brand image, and gives clues for improving the latter.
1.8. Outline
Following this introduction the results of a literature study will be presented in four chapters. Chapter 2 investigates known customer brand equity models based on the premise that brand equity is best achieved via a favorable customer mindset. Chapter 3 explains the concepts of brand identity and brand image and the gap between them. Chapter 4 focuses on positioning, the way a value proposition is put in the mind of the customer. Chapter 5 discusses the results of the literature study on personal branding and the link with traditional branding literature. Chapter 6 is a description of the conceptual framework used in this exploratory research. The research setting, execution, analysis and interpretation of the three research questions are described separately in chapter 7 to 9 although in practice these activities took place at the same time. In chapter 10 the general findings and implications of the study are discussed. Finally the conclusions are given in chapter 11.
6
2. Customer Based Brand Equity
2.1. Defining brand and brandingSeveral brand definitions have been published with often a different perspective on brands. To shine some light on this variety Hankinson & Cowking made up a taxonomy of brand definitions where they identified six different dimensions: visual, personality, image, positioning, perceptual and added value (Hankinson & Cowking, 1995). Bendisch et. al. included a seventh: identity (Bendisch et al., 2007). These dimension give a broad view on the important concepts related to brands and branding.
The visual dimension leads to the brand definition given by the American Marketing Association: "a name, term, sign, symbol or design, or a combination of them intended to identify the goods and services of one seller or group of sellers and to differentiate them from those of competitors”.
Brand personality refers to “the set of human characteristics associated with a brand” (J. L. Aaker, 1997).
Brand identity is “a unique set of brand associations that the brand strategist aspires to create or maintain. These associations represent what the brand stands for and imply a promise to customers from the organisational members” (D. A. Aaker, 2002).
Brand image is “how a brand is perceived” (D. A. Aaker, 2002), and thus refers to the way in which the brand audiences decode all of the signals emanating from the product and its communication (consumer perspective) (Kapferer, 1997).
Positioning centers on the argument that all consumer choices are made on the basis of comparison (Kapferer, 1997).
Perception or awareness refers to the strength of a brand’s presence in the consumer’s mind.
The added value dimension refers to brand equity, which is a set of assets and liabilities linked to a brand that adds value to a firm and its customers.
Based on this classification the working definition of a brand and branding in this report will be:
Brand: a combination of various visuals with human characteristics together forming an identity which based on unique associations creates an image in consumer minds.
Branding is the deliberate use (positioning) of these associations to create strong and favorable perceptions (compared to competitors) by customers in order to gain equity.
7
These definitions are also valid in a personal context. Key constructs in a personal brand are brand personalities which differentiate a person from competitors and create a unique identity.
Personal branding means that via positioning a strong and favorable image of a person is made in the consumer’s mind leading to brand equity.
2.2. Brand Value Chain
The brand value chain shown in figure 1 is a means to trace the value creation process for brands to better understand the financial impact of brand marketing expenditures and investments. It assumes that the value of a brand ultimately resides with customers and that the brand value creation process begins when the firm invests in a marketing program targeting actual or potential customers. The marketing activity associated with the program then affects the customer mindset with respect to the brand – what customers know and feel about the brand. This mindset then results in certain outcomes for the brand in terms of how it performs in the marketplace leading to shareholder value.
8
Three sets of multipliers moderate the transfer between the marketing program and the subsequent three value stages: the program quality multiplier, the marketplace conditions multiplier, and the investor sentiment multiplier.
When applied to a personal context similarities and differences can be seen. Shareholder value in a product as a brand context refers to the financial equity of a firm in terms of stock price and price-earnings ratio. Figures indicating how interesting it is to invest in a firm, and what return of investment can be expected. Though people might consider themselves a corporation “Me Inc.” (Peters, 1997) investors cannot take a share of an individual. Market performance however can be applicable for people for instance by a person’s ability to create business and realize more than average wages or salary. Essential in the customer based approach is that this can only be reached via a favorable customer mindset, where brand awareness leads to positive brand associations, leading to favorable brand attitudes and even brand attachment to the person as a brand.
2.3. Brand as an associative network memory model
Cognitive psychologists have been studying associative networks for some time (Anderson & Bower, 1973); (Collins & Loftus, 1975); (Gentner & Stevens, 2014). In general, these researchers contend that knowledge is represented as “associative networks”' and that these basic structures are comprised of concept nodes and prepositional links. A network approach to the representation of brand associations can help provide a clearer understanding of the perceptions consumers have of brands, as well as the perceptions they have of people, places, and occasions of usage for brands (Henderson, Iacobucci, & Calder, 1998).
Keller considers brands as networks of nodes with associations (Keller, 1993). The customer mindset includes thoughts, feelings, experiences, images, perceptions, beliefs and attitudes. The resonance model captures a wide range of these aspects. Building brands is about creating favorable associations in the mind of the customer. Increasing the amount of and strengthening the nodes in an associative memory network between the brand and favorable and unique associations will lead to consideration and choice of a brand. Associations therefore are an important tool in brand building.
9
2.4. Customer Based Equity Models
The ultimate goal of branding is to create brand equity. This is achieved via favorable consumer perceptions. In a personal context this means that financial or non-financial revenues based on a person´s qualifications can only be gained after a successful transfer of the brand identity into the mind of the customer. This is known as Customer Based Equity. Various Customer Based Equity Models are described in academic and business literature. Some of them will be further discussed.
Brand Equity Model
Aaker defines brand equity as the set of brand assets and liabilities linked to the brand that add value to, or subtract value from, a product or service (D. A. Aaker, 2002). In his Brand Equity Model he identifies five brand equity components: brand loyalty, brand awareness, perceived quality, brand associations and other proprietary assets. The last four dimensions can enhance brand loyalty.
Customer-Based Brand Equity Model
Keller defines Customer-Based Brand Equity (CBBE) as the differential effect of brand knowledge on consumer response to the marketing of a brand (Keller, 1993). This is supported by two models. (a) the Brand Value Chain is a means to trace the value creation process for brands, (b) the Brand Resonance Model describes the dimensions that are particularly important measures of the customer mindset.
Brand Asset Valuator
The Brand Asset Valuator is a business oriented brand management instrument of advertising agency Young & Rubicam that measures the value of a brand in two dimensions, i.e. brand strength and brand stature, each being comprised of two factors: differentiation and relevance for brand strength, esteem and knowledge for brand stature. The Brand Asset Value Power Grid places the two dimensions against each other leading to four quadrants that can be considered stages/phases that a brand goes through during its development. A brand can only be successful by going through these stages in a given order. Young & Rubicam has set up a database of consumer perceptions of brands. This information enables firms to improve the marketing decision-making process and to manage brands better.
10
Given the afore mentioned equity models the CBBE model of Keller is the most suitable in a personal branding context. This well-known model has a clear structure and is an enhancement of Aaker’s Brand Equity Model. The components of Aaker are similar to the brand building blocks in the resonance model and the latter is moreover organized in a logical order. The business model of Young and Rubicam is especially valuable for its database of more than 44,000 brands in 49 countries, but this is not helpful in our study on personal brands.
In next paragraph the Keller’s Customer Based Brand Equity model is explained in more detail and is clarified why this model is an enhancement of Aaker’s Brand Equity Model.
2.5. Brand Resonance Model
The brand resonance model (figure 2) maintains that building a strong brand involves a series of logical steps: (1) establishing the proper brand identity, (2) creating the appropriate brand meaning, (3) eliciting the right brand responses, and (4) forging appropriate brand relationships with customers. Achieving these four steps involves establishing six brand building blocks: brand salience, brand performance, brand imagery, brand judgments, brand feelings, and brand resonance. This is achieved by dividing the second and third level of the pyramid in a rational left brain part and an emotional right brain part. E.g. brand image refers to the emotional associations customers have on the meaning of the product. These four steps represent a set of fundamental questions that customers invariably ask about brands, implicitly or explicitly: Who are you? What are you? What do I think or feel about you? What kind of association and how much of a connection would I like to have with you?
11
Figure 2: Brand Resonance Model (Strategic Brand Management - Keller)
On the right hand side of figure 2 the branding objective of each stage is mentioned. There is an obvious singularity between these objectives and the dimensions mentioned by Aaker.
Brand loyalty: related to resonance on the relational level (4)
Brand awareness: related to salience on the identity level (1)
Perceived quality: related to judgments and feelings on the response level (3)
Brand associations: related to performance and imagery on the meaning level (2)
Keller moreover states that there is an obvious ordering of the steps in his “branding ladder”, from identity to meaning to responses to relationships. As in a pyramid one level can only be constructed when the lower levels are there.
12
3. Brand Image and Brand Identity
3.1. Brand ImageMarketing literature has a long time history of stressing the importance of brand image next to brand performance. Gardner et al asserted that a brand name is more than a label employed to differentiate among the manufacturers of a product. It tells customers many things via the body of associations it has built up and acquired as a public object over time. This public image or personality may be more important for the over-all status and sales of a brand than many technical facts about the product. Products and brands have interwoven sets of characteristics and are complexly evaluated by consumers. (Gardner & Levy, 1955). Grubb et al. have developed a theory of consumer behavior based upon self-theory and symbolism stating that the consuming behavior of an individual will be directed toward the furthering and enhancing of his self-concept through the consumption of goods as symbols (Grubb & Grathwohl, 1967). Because of the important relationship between a brand’s image and its market performance Park et al presented a brand concept-image management framework for selecting, implementing and controlling a brand over time providing a long-term framework for the management of a brand image (Park, Jaworski, & Maclnnis, 1986). Bhat et al. showed that positioning should focus on hedonic as well as functional benefits since consumers can view a brand in both symbolic and performance terms (Bhat & Reddy, 1998). Keller defines brand image as perceptions about a brand as reflected by the brand associations held in consumer memory (Keller, 1993). When discussing brand image two views are important. Which types or associations can be distinguished and what characteristics do these associations have. These views are further discussed in following paragraphs.
Types of associations
Keller classified brand associations into three types: attributes, benefits and attitudes. Attributes are those descriptive features that characterize a product or service, what a consumer thinks the product or service is or has and what is involved with its purchase or consumption. Benefits are the personal value consumers attach to the product or service attributes, in other words what consumers think the product or service can do for them. Brand attitudes are consumers' overall evaluations of a brand. In the context of personal branding these categories are also valid though the terminology will differ on some aspects. Our focus will be more on competences and personality traits.
13
Characteristics of associations
The various associations can vary according to their strength, favorability, and uniqueness. Strength is influenced by both quantitative and qualitative factors. The more often a person is exposed to product information the stronger the associations will be. Associations are also strengthened when they are relevant to the customer and consistently presented over time. An association is favorable when consumers believe the brand has attributes and benefits that satisfy their needs and wants such that a positive overall brand attitude is formed. Uniqueness finally refers to the essence of brand positioning, that the brand has a sustainable competitive advantage or "unique selling proposition" that gives consumers a compelling reason for buying that particular brand. Together strength, favorability, and uniqueness play an important role in the customer response. Once an association is strong, favorable and unique the association will contribute to a strong brand image.
3.2. Brand Identity
Brand identity is a unique set of brand associations implying a promise to customers (Ghodeswar, 2008). One key to successful brand-building is to understand how to develop a brand identity – to know what the brand stands for and to effectively express that identity (D. A. Aaker, 2002). In a fundamental sense, the brand identity represents what the organization wants the brand to stand for. To be effective, a brand identity needs to resonate with customers, differentiate the brand from competitors, and represent what the organization can and will do over time (D. A. Aaker, 2000). To excel, a brand image must be well planned, nurtured, supported, and vigilantly guarded (Knapp, 2000). Brand identity originates from the company, i.e. a company is responsible for creating a differentiated product with unique features. Brand image refers to consumer perceptions and encompasses a set of beliefs that consumers have about the brand. Brand identity and brand image are related but distinct concepts. Both are essential ingredients of strong brands. A firm can enhance brand loyalty by ensuring that there is congruence between brand identity and brand image (Nandan, 2005). In order to create a favorable customer mindset a positive brand image has to be established. The brand image is not necessarily equal to the brand identity, since the view of customers on the brand can differ from the image the company tries to create. This brand identity – brand image gap is a both a challenge and a threat for building a brand. Measures are important to determine the gap and positioning is the means for closing the gap.
14
3.3. Measuring Brand Image
Although measuring brand image is very valuable in defining the brand identity – brand image gap, little academic research is done on this topic. In general the measures are done by confronting customers with the brand identity the company pursues and requesting to respond on this. In line with brand image as a associative network it would be applicable to use free associations to measure brand image.
15
4. Positioning
4.1. Brand PositioningIn modern marketing, Segmentation, Targeting and Positioning (STP) is a familiar strategic approach. Positioning refers to focusing on the value proposition you want to claim in people’s minds. It is the way a product is defined by consumers on important attributes – the place the product occupies in consumers’ minds relative to competing products (Armstrong, Kotler, & He, 2000). While positioning, marketing programs aim to differentiate a brand as superior to competitors on one or more determinant attributes (Dickson and Ginter 1987). Several definitions of differentiation exist. Chamberlin defined differentiation as distinguishing the goods of services from those of another on any basis that is important to the buyer and leads to a preference (Chamberlin, 1962). According to Kotler et. al. differentiation is the act of designing a set of meaningful differences to distinguish the company’s offer from competitors’ offers (Kotler, Ang, and Tan, 1996). Differentiation is when a firm/brand outperforms rival brands in the provision of a feature such that it faces reduced sensitivity for other features (Sharp & Dawes, 2001). Carpenter et. al. showed that brands can even successfully differentiate on irrelevant or meaningless attributes (Carpenter, Glazer & Nakamoto, 1994). A strong positioning can be characterized by a clear differentiation which distinguishes the brand from competitive brands.
In terms of the branding pyramid of Keller’s brand resonance model, positioning is mainly focusing on the second or association level. As discussed before this brand meaning level can be split in functional, performance-related associations and more abstract, imagery-related associations. Positioning is focusing on both brand performance and brand image as it is perceived by the customer. To support the positioning of the brand pyramid Keller has formulated a third model, the Brand Positioning Model. Positioning requires that similarities and differences between brands be defined and communicated.
16
4.2. Key components positioning
Four key components are distinguished to achieve a superior competitive positioning: a competitive frame of reference, points of difference, points of parity and brand mantra.
1. The competitive frame of reference defines which other brands a brand competes with and therefore which brands should be the focus of analysis and study.
2. Points of difference (PODs) are attributes or benefits consumers strongly associate with a brand, positively evaluate, and believe they could not find to the same extent with a competitive brand. Those properties that make a product more special than those of competitors are very useful in distinguishing from other products. Any attribute or benefit associated with a product or service can function as a point of difference for a brand as long as it is sufficiently desirable, deliverable, and differentiating. However, the brand must demonstrate clear superiority on an attribute or benefit for it to function as a true point of difference (Keller, Sternthal, & Tybout 2002).
3. Points of parity (POPs) are associations that are not necessarily unique to the brand. They may in fact be shared with other brands. These types of associations come in three basic forms: category points of parity are associations that consumers view as essential to a legitimate and credible offering within a certain product or service category. Competitive points of parity are associations designed to negate competitors’ points of difference. Correlational points of parity are those potentially negative associations that arise from the existence of other, more positive associations for the brand.
4. A brand mantra is an articulation of the “heart and soul” of the brand. Brand mantras are short, three- to five-word phrases that capture the irrefutable essence or spirit of the brand positioning (Keller, 1999).
The brand associations making up the brand image and meaning can be characterized and profiled according to three important dimensions – strength, favorability, and uniqueness – that provide the key to building a strong brand positioning and brand equity. Successful results on these three dimensions in the right frame of reference help the brand to achieve the proper positioning. Points of difference are those associations which are strong, favorable and unique. And therefore the most important lever for a strong brand image. Points of parity are associations that the customer expects to be there, when absent they can be considered as dis-satisfiers. They have to be present or else the product is not even taken into consideration. Therefore also an important ingredient of the brand image.
17
4.3. Criteria for the positioning of a brand
Keller distinguishes three perspectives on which a brand must be evaluated in order to be an effective point of difference: desirability, deliverability and differentiation. These positioning considerations are related to respectively the consumer, company, and competition perspective. If these three criteria are satisfied, the brand association should have enough strength, favorability, and uniqueness to be an effective point of difference. For every criterion two requirements must be met:
1. Desirability: potential consumers must experience relevance and importance towards the product. It must fit into their lives and needs and should matter to them. Does the brand matter to the customer, is it important? Is there a reason to believe for the customer that the brand benefit is present? During the internet bubble at the beginning of this century young companies went bankrupt because at that time their product did not satisfy the needs of the customers while fifteen years later buying via the internet became the standard.
2. Deliverability: the company should meet the feasibility and the communicability requirement. Is the organization capable of delivering the promised benefit? Is the brand promise clearly explained to the customer? Smit Tak Salvage successfully raised the Russian nuclear submarine 'Kursk' in 2001, but they only could do so after convincing the Russians with their track record that they were actually capable in doing so.
3. Differentiation: the points of difference should be really distinctive and sustainable. Does the positioning really set the brand apart? Can the proposition be defended over time? A trademark for instance can make a special medicine very valuable and distinct. But when the trademark is close to expiring it does not provide a sustainable advantage anymore and soon loses its distinctiveness when other companies copy the product.
Managing points of parity
Points of parity are characteristics which are strong and favorable but not unique. Therefore it is likely that competitors can provide the same benefits. However they are important because they can undermine the advantages of points of differences. When POPs are not satisfied, PODs may not even matter. Although POPs do not provide a competitive advantage they should be paid attention to. Questions to be asked to verify that points of parity are managed are: does the brand satisfy the basic conditions for brand choice? Can the brand negate competitors’ points of difference? Can the brand tackle possible negative associations that arise from other positive associations?
18
Criteria for the marketing communication
Marketing communication is an important tool in positioning. Keller distinguishes six criteria to measure marketing communication: coverage, contribution, commonality, complementarity, conformability and cost. In a personal setting especially commonality and complementarity are valuable, so is continuity. Since communication of a personal brand is not widely spread the intensity of the communication effort can be considered a relevant factor as well. These criteria should be taken into account when marketing communication is evaluated as a positioning tool.
4.4. Tools for Brand Building
Once the right positioning is clear, marketing activities can be performed to realize the desired customer perception of the brand. Three brand equity drivers can be distinguished as brand building tools: primary brand elements, secondary brand associations and marketing communication.
Brand elements
Brand elements are those trademarkable devices that serve to identify and differentiate the brand. The main ones are brand names, URLs, logos, symbols, characters, spokespeople, slogans, jingles, packages, and signage. The customer based brand equity model suggests that marketers should choose brand elements to enhance brand awareness; facilitate the formation of strong, favorable, and unique brand associations; or elicit positive brand judgments or feelings. These elements can also be applied in a personal branding context. E.g. the use of logos and slogans on business cards.
Secondary brand associations
Another way to build brand equity is to leverage indirect or “secondary” associations, to link the brand to an entity with its own associations (Keller, 2003). In essence, the marketer is borrowing other associations. Because consumers can identify the brand with another entity, they may infer the brand shares associations with that entity even if it does not directly relate to it. This is also valid for persons. For instance the country or place of origin and the ethnic group one belongs to can intentionally or unintentionally influence a personal image.
Marketing communication
Marketing communication is the means by which firms attempt to inform, persuade, and remind consumers about the brands they sell. Well known communication means are advertising, promotions,
19
interactive communication via social media, and sponsorship. In a personal context marketing communication is often performed in a different way. The main objective is to have some kind of exposure e.g. via blogs, speaking on seminars or socializing at network meetings.
4.5. Interacting Brand Planning Models
In figure 3 the three branding models of Keller are combined in an overview (Keller, 1993).
Figure 3: The Brand Planning Models (Strategic Brand Management - Keller)
The main goal of branding is to create brand equity. Ultimately this is measured by shareholder value which is the natural result of market performance. Customer based brand equity models recognize that brand equity can only be achieved via a positive customer mind-set towards the brand. Marketing program investments are the activities to realize this. The Customer Mindset can be seen as a pyramid with four levels which must be reached consecutively. Salience to create brand awareness, performance and imagery (meaning level) in order to create strong, favorable and unique brand associations, judgments and feelings (response level) to provoke positive accessible reactions to the brand and resonance to gain customer loyalty to the brand. Positioning focuses on the brand meaning level with the key components frame of reference, points of difference, points of parity and brand mantra.
20
5. Branding Literature – Personal Branding
5.1. Brand Personality, the product seen as a personIn previous chapters the focus was on existing literature on product branding. The importance of customer mindset to gain brand equity was explained and the important role associations have to gain this positive mindset. Two types of categories were distinguished on the association level of the CBBE. Brand Performance focusing on meeting customers’ functional needs and Brand Imagery influencing the way customers think of the product. In literature much attention is given to brand personality which is very close to brand image. Well known are the five dimensions of brand personality as defined by Jennifer Aaker: Sincerity, Excitement, Competence, Sophistication and Ruggedness each further divided in sub dimensions (J. L. Aaker, 1997).
Figure 4: Brand Personality Dimensions by J.L. Aaker, 1997.
In this classification brand personality refers to “the set of human characteristics associated with a brand”. The brand is viewed as if it were a person. By linking human characteristics to a brand the brand image can be built in accordance with the desired or factual characteristics of the consumer.
5.2. Personal Branding, the person seen as a product
With brand image and brand personality we have seen a strong tendency within traditional product branding to consider a product as a person. An interesting option is to look at this the other way and question what would happen when a person is considered to be a product which can be branded? In that case the knowledge from many decades of product branding experience can be used to market individuals.
21
5.3. Branding in other contexts
There is a wide consensus on Product Branding as a key marketing tool. In 1931 Neil McElroy wrote his famous 3 page Brand Management Memo for which he is credited for giving birth to the idea of brand management. Since then several papers on brands and branding have been published. At a first glance personal branding seems closely related to the overall branding phenomenon. Traditional branding literature emphasizes that its models are useful in various contexts. Branding is not only applicable for physical products and services but also for countries (Papadopoulos & Heslop, 2002), (Gilmore, 2002), (Florek, 2005), locations (Hankinson, 2001); (Kavaratzis, 2004); (Morgan, Pritchard, & Pride, 2004), B2B (Kuhn, Alpert, & Pope, 2008), non-profit organizations (Stride & Lee, 2007), universities (Gray, Fam, & Llanes, 2003), the monarchy (Balmer, Greyser, & Urde, 2004) or religions (Rein, Kotler, & Stoller, 1997), (Shepherd, 2004). Some authors have considered the potential for people as brands (De Chernatony, McDonald, & Wallace, 2011), (Keller, 1993) without however developing a robust conceptualization. Though it is recognized that an individual can be branded as a product existing branding models are hardly linked to persons. Academic literature dealing with people branding is still rare and mainly theoretical (Bendisch et al., 2007).
5.4. Explorative research on personal branding literature
Academic literature on Personal Branding is scarce but growing. Some research has been conducted on the variety of publications in academic literature and popular press (Lair, Sullivan, & Cheney, 2005), (Bendisch et al., 2007), (Shepherd, 2005).
Shepherd classified the existing personal branding literature on the basis of their source and distinguished four types of informal tribes: academic marketers, naïve marketers, self-help and personal development communities, and the self-styled gurus.
Academic marketers
These people provide propositions about marketing that are typically rooted in prior theory or that emerge from observation of marketing activities and consumer responses.
From an academic perspective the academic marketers are the most interesting but unfortunately members of this tribe are largely silent on the subject of personal branding.
22
Naïve marketers
Naïve marketers practice marketing of an intuitive and largely self-taught kind. These include politicians, evangelists, sundry publicists of good causes and media savvy celebrities. Few members of this tribe record their ‘marketing’ techniques in a structured form, though something of their method may be gleaned from autobiographies, exhortational literature or accounts published by a celebrity hungry media. Examples are Barack Obama, Jamie Oliver, Oprah Winfrey, TV evangelists. In the Netherlands: Linda de Mol, Sonja Bakker. Members of the naïve marketer tribe may be used as role models for how to market and brand oneself as an individual, although few have committed subject to writing their thoughts on the in a cogent fashion.
Self help and personal development communities
These communities aim to assist individuals in realizing their full potential. Members of education and training sectors are involved in helping people to find a job or plan a career. Currently this tribe is responsible for a major publishing industry on personal branding.
Self-styled gurus
The self-styled gurus aspire to package their ideas into saleable products. Their books frequently include a magic number. What they write is laced with the language of marketing but is frequently case-based, anecdotal and often highly generalized. The target audience is mostly business executives and the message aimed on achieving greater business success. In articles and on websites discussing personal branding literature it appears that only a limited number of gurus is mentioned. Initiators of personal branding are considered: Dale Carnegie, Stephen Covey and Tom Peters. At the time of writing this paper established personal branding experts are Peter Montoya, David McNally, William Arruda, Catarine Kaputa, Stedman Graham and Dan Schawbel. In the Netherlands: Ben Tiggelaar, Remco Claassen. In general these authors have a commercial approach to the market of personal branding. Which is in fact both interesting as logical: using their personal commercial success as a speaker and author of bestsellers they emphasize the message they have for their audience.
It can be concluded that although there is a significant number of publications on personal branding there is little academic literature on this subject. Most literature is of a popular nature and gives practical hints regarding how a personal brand can be developed (Bendisch et al., 2007) without
23
research to back up their claims. No coherent statement of personal branding emerges from the literature. Not only are there gaps and missing elements, but there are also disquieting contradictions and logical failures (Shepherd, 2005). E.g. traditional branding has a tendency to adjust to customer needs while personal branding experts advise clients against trying to change themselves: “Work with what you’ve got! And make it special.” (Peters 1999). Also there may be a tension between representing one’s organization and selling oneself. This potentially can lead to a conflict of interest between the individual’s advancement and that of the organization by whom they are employed. Next to that the individualistic approach to branding largely ignores the potential for branding individuals as parts of a group.
24
6. Conceptual model and research questions
6.1. Conceptual ModelThe central problem definition in this paper was:
In what way are the proven academic models for (product) branding applicable to individuals and how effective is the application of traditional branding in a personal context?
In previous chapters traditional branding literature was explained and suggested that this was applicable for individuals too. We have seen that brand equity can only be reached via a positive customer mindset. When applying to a person, brand building starts with creating awareness of the individual and building up strong and favorable associations towards the person. These would lead to positive attitudes towards the person leading to resonance.
Like products personal brands can be considered a network of associations which can be strong, favorable and unique. Strong and favorable associations (points of difference and points of parity) can build a strong personal brand image. Strong associations which are perceived negative can jeopardize a personal brand image. Strong and favorable associations lead to positive attitudes towards the person and ultimately to resonance towards the person. As in traditional branding, a person using brand building techniques should be able to transfer a brand identity into the mind of the customer and create a positive brand image.
Brand Identity Brand Image Research Question 1 Research Question 2a & 2b Brand Building Research Question 3a Research Question 3b
Brand Attitude & Brand Resonance
25
6.2. Research questions
The aim of this research is to investigate the similarities and differences of personal branding compared to traditional or product brand building. For this purpose three research questions are defined.
1. Does the application of sound fundamental branding theory in a personal branding context lead to a clear positioning pattern of a human being?
Can we measure brand image using branding theory?
Traditional branding theory uses positioning to create positive associations in the mind of a customer with the aim to distinguish from competitors and gain a competitive advantage. These associations can focus on the perceived performance and image of the product. The latter is often translated in brand personality where a product is seen as a person. In personal branding the importance is the same. For a professional who wants to be employed, being skilled is not enough. It is important that both performance and personal image are positively evaluated by the customers. Measuring of this customer mindset is key for adjusting positioning activities. Performance in a personal setting are the competences and skills a person has, personal image are the person’s personality traits.
Brand characteristics can be strong, favorable, and unique. Translated to a personal branding context this means that a person’s competences and personality traits can be considered a point of difference when they are strong, favorable and unique. They should represent the personal characteristics of an individual which can be considered key success factors, traits with which a person can distinguish from competitors. Knowing these differentiation points can help an individual in strengthening a personal image and ultimately gain brand equity.
Next to similarities between products and people also differences exist. First a product is something a customer takes into consideration to spend money for. The customers will expect some personal profit for investing in the acquisition. In a personal setting this is often not the case. Many times persons have to deal with other persons while doing their job. Only in a hierarchical relation financial investments must be made by the consumer in terms of salary or fee. While employed the relation with other people is not based on a decision to buy but on cooperation. Secondly a product can be judged
26
solely on the specific characteristics in usage for a special purpose. For a person this is different while next to the professional relation there is often a private relation influencing the evaluation by other people. Thirdly a person is often a member of a team. And therefore evaluated on the contribution in the team. For this reason a person not always has to meet all the requirements associated with a role or function since the team can compensate insufficient qualities when these are combined with special traits. Given these differences it is valuable to explore the positioning patterns as perceived by consumers in the personal context. The first step in this research therefore was to investigate the possibility of determining the points of difference and points of parity of a person in a professional context.
2. Can the gap between brand identity (claimed image) and brand image (real image) in a personal context be measured using branding theory?
Measured based on the subjects claim core values (2a) and via free associations (2b).
In branding theory positioning is an important instrument in transferring a brand image into the mind of a customer. The better the identity is transferred to the customer the smaller the gap will be between the customer´s perception of the brand and the way the producer wants the product to be perceived. This is also valid in a personal branding context where a identity-image gap is neither desirable. When the actual capabilities and personality of a person are not as such perceived by customers a professional will face difficulty in gaining preference above competitors.
Next to that some differences exist. In a personal context the producer and the product are in fact the same entities. The brand identity is the very personal judgment of an individual of his/her competences and personality traits which will actually influence the behavior of the person. An individual is more than products capable in adjusting behavior and changing the perception of people in their environment. Next to that it is clear that an individual has personal characteristics not relevant in the professional setting which cannot be hidden and will influence people’s perception.
The possibility of determining the gap between brand identity and brand image in a personal context was investigated. This was done in two ways. First based on the core values claimed by 12 individuals. Secondly based the free associations given by the people in their environment.
27
3. What is the impact of personal brand building activities on a personal brand image?
The first and second research question focus on depicting an image and measuring the brand identity-image gap. These steps can help to get a clear picture of the current situation. The next question that arises is how to influence these. What means are available to adjust the brand image? The modern marketer can use various instruments to position a brand and influence the customer’s perception of the brand. In chapter 4 the brand elements, secondary brand associations and marketing communication were discussed. So were the criteria for positioning a brand: desirability, deliverability, differentiation, and managing points of parity. The underlying motives are to close the gap between the brand identity and the brand image, and to get a more positive brand image. In a personal context this is also valid, since persons need instruments to improve their brand image when necessary. The two target motives are separated into two sub questions.
3a. In what way can brand building activities close the personal brand identity–image gap?
An important difference in brand building for persons compared to products is that the latter needs deliberate activities to create awareness for the product. Individuals integrate their brand building activities in their behavior. Any behavior is in fact a brand building activity, which makes it impossible to abstain from brand building. However this can be on unconscious process difficult to recognize and therefore to measure. Since the brand building activities are different for persons it is valuable to investigate the influence of these activities towards the brand identity-image gap.
3b. In what way can brand building activities lead to a more favorable personal brand image?
Ultimately the goal of brand building is to create a more positive brand image since this will lead to brand attitude and brand resonance. In a personal context next to the professional relation also the personal relation influences the brand image. This will have impact on the attitudes and resonance towards the person. Therefore the influence of brand building in a professional setting on brand attitude and resonance is investigated.
28
7. Research question 1: Building a positioning pattern for a person
7.1. General research settingThe general idea of the research was to interview a group of subjects on the personal image they wanted to transfer to their environment and the way they were actually doing that. This resulted in core values claimed by the subject and information on their brand building activities. Following this qualitative study the actual brand image was investigated by questioning at least 30 referents of each subject using an online application (Qualtrix). In a questionnaire referents were asked to give free associations towards the subject and responses on the core values as were claimed by the subjects. During data analysis we examined whether a clear positioning pattern of each subject could be formulated based on the associations given by the referents (research question 1), at what level the desired image was successfully transferred to the referents by matching the subjects’ claimed values with the referents’ direct responses on these values (research question 2a) and the referents free associations on the subject (research question 2b). Finally it was determined whether brand building activities could decrease the gap between brand identity and brand image (research question 3a) and could lead to a positive image (research question 3b).
Sample description interviewees
Criteria for selecting subjects was that they had at least moderate but preferably high working experience and were able to come up with a list of referents large enough to realize a sufficient referent sample. Since finding a pattern among different subjects was an objective of this study a minimum of 10 subjects was considered. In order to be able to do statistical analysis a minimum of 30 referents was needed. To mitigate the risk that some subjects were not able to find at least 30 referents to participate the group of subjects was enlarged to 12. All subjects were
currently employed, eight subjects worked with a permanent contract for a firm, two were owner of a company and two subjects were self-employed. Six subjects owned an academic master degree, the other six a bachelor degree. Five of them were female, consequently seven were male. Ages varied from 25 to 59. Mean = 41,25, Std Dev 10,01.
Sample description referents
29
Referents were selected by the subjects. Criterion was the ability to give valuable feedback on the professional image of the subject. No screening of referents was done by the author. Five subjects worked for the same firm, which caused a partial overlap in the referents selected.
From the referent group of 433 persons 302 were male (69,7%) and 131 female (30,3%). Age varied from 22 to 85 with a mean of 43,48; SE = 0,48996: Std Dev = 10,19531. Referents had a mean of 7,53 contact moments per month with the subject, SE = 0,63890; Std Dev = 13,29455.
7.2. Methodology
The aim of research 1 was to measure personal brand image using branding theory. According to branding theory a brand image consists of associations that are significantly strong, favorable and unique (points of difference) or strong, favorable but not significantly unique (points of parity). Strong associations can have a negative effect on the brand image when they are significantly unfavorable. When significant unique these become a brand problem, if not a category problem.
Unique \ Favorable Significantly positive Neutral Significantly negative Significantly positive Point of difference - Brand problem Neutral Point of parity - Category problem Significantly negative Point of parity - Category problem Table 3: Categorization of strong associations based on favorability and uniqueness
Figure 8: Referents ordered by intensity of contact. Figure 7: Referents ordered by age.
30
7.2.1. Setting up a questionnaire
Following the reasoning of the associative network model the most obvious way for collecting data for defining points of difference and points of parity was to use free associations. By doing so, the risk of priming or influencing referents with predefined possible associations was minimized. Spontaneous given associations are considered the best way to understand how a referent really thinks about a subject.
In the questionnaire three questions were supporting this approach:
1. Please write down any thoughts you have according to <name of subject>? (Free text) 2. In what way do you consider these thoughts as positive? (1-7 Likert scale)
3. In what way do you consider these characteristics as unique? (1-7 Likert scale)
The complete questionnaire is available in Appendix C.
Referents were asked to write down each individual association on a separate input field. To encourage referents to limit their answers to the strong associations they have, only ten input fields were available. It was presumed that in practice this would be enough to write down all relevant associations. After a questionnaire try out it was decided to exclude the button for scrolling back in pages. In following pages the referents were confronted with the claimed values from the subjects and it was not desirable that they would change their initial associations after reading the claimed values. This approach introduced the risk that people who skipped the question out of curiosity would not be able to go back to answer the question. Therefore the associations were made mandatory and a minimum of three associations was implemented based on the assumption that anyone should be able to give at least this amount of different associations. This approach was justified since finally 89,38% of the referents gave at least four associations and only 7,39% used the maximum of ten associations. The average turned out to be 5,94 associations per referent.
The questionnaire was set up as a closed access survey, referents could only participate on invitation. This made it a challenge to reach a group of referents of sufficient quantity. Referents should be familiar enough with the subject to be able to give reasonable feedback in a professional environment. Simply asking all LinkedIn connections to participate was not an option. Therefore it was important to realize an above average response level. To facilitate this the subjects were asked to personally invite the referents to participate prior to sending out the survey. Reminders were sent two times to
