Traditional Brands in a Modern Society:
how brands with a long history and heritage
survive and continue to be successful
in the Fashion industry:
A case examination of J. Barbour & Sons ltd
and Hunter Boot ltd
Supervisors:
Dr. Joanna Berry & Henk Ritsema
Student:
Louise Bagnall
Student Number:
010917471 / S2008548
Degree:
Advanced International Business
Management & Marketing (dual award)
Date:
December 2011
STUDENT NAME Louise BAGNALL
DEGREE Advanced International Business Management and Marketing (MSc / MSc Dual Award)
DISSERTATION SUPERVISORS Dr. Joanna Berry & Henk Ritsema
DISSERTATION TITLE Traditional Brands in a Modern Society: how brands with a long history and heritage survive and continue to be successful in the Fashion industry.
DATE 05/12/2011
KEYWORDS BRAND DEVELOPMENT
BRAND PERSONALITY BRAND MAPPING
BRAND REJUVENATION
TARGET MARKET PERCEPTIONS
ABSTRACT
In recent years two traditional British brands, namely Barbour and Hunter have seen a resurgence in their popularity. Whether it’s due to the renewed marketing efforts, the essence of traditional meets today, combined with practicality; or the realignment of target consumer markets; there is definitely something happening which has made these brands just as popular, if not more so, than ever. In an industry that is continually updating itself, how do brands with substantial longevity keep-up with the changing climate and trends?
I would firstly like to thank my family and fiancé whose continued support throughout the dissertation process, and also throughout my degree has helped me a great deal.
I would also like to thank my friends; who, at a time when we may not have all been studying, have showed patience, support and assistance.
Thirdly, thanks goes to my supervisors, whose guidance and supervision has enabled me to explore the topic further, and to develop my thinking.
Also my thanks goes to the two brands, Barbour and Hunter, who provided me with information and insight into the brands, to enable me to undertake the study.
Thanks should also be passed on to the participants of the focus groups, whose
Page
Title page 1
Abstract 2
Acknowledgements 3
Contents Page 4
List of figures and tables 6
CHAPTER1 – INTRODUCTION 7
1.1. Overview – focus 7
1.2. Aims 8
1.3. Research questions 8
1.4. Chapter summary 8
CHAPTER 2 – LITERATURE REVIEW 11
2.1. Strategic brand management 11
2.1.1. A resurgence of old 12
2.2. Brand personality 13
2.2.1. Brand authentication, history and heritage 15 2.2.2. Brand mapping & the associative network memory model 17
2.2.3. Brand associations & attributes 18
2.3. Brand equity 19
2.4. Brand development 20
2.4.1. Brand reinforcement, revitalization and rejuvenation 20
2.4.2. Long-term potential 21
2.5. Brand relationships 22
2.6. Brands and the fashion industry 24
CHAPTER 3 – RESEARCH QUESTIONS 26
CHAPTER 4 – COMPANY BACKGROUND 27
4.1. J. Barbour & Sons 27
CHAPTER 5 – METHODOLOGY 31
5.1. Qualitative or Quantitative? 31
5.2. Primary or secondary? 34
5.3. What are the available methods? 35
5.3.1. Focus groups 35
5.3.2. Interviews 38
5.3.3. Case study 39
5.4. Limitations to methods 40
CHAPTER 6 – ANALYSIS OF FINDINGS 42
6.1. Focus Group Results 44
6.1.1. Focus Group (a) 45
6.1.2. Focus Group (b) 47
6.1.3. Summary of focus group results 50
6.2. Company interview results 51
6.2.1. Barbour 52
6.2.2. Hunter 53
6.3. Summary 54
CHAPTER 7 – CONCLUSIONS 56
7.1. Discussion & Conclusion 56
7.2. Limitations 58
7.3. Future research 59
7.4 Summary 60
References 61
Appendix 64
A – Focus group (a) 65
B – Focus group (b) 66
C – Barbour: brand profile 67
D – Barbour: facts & figures 69
E – Hunter: questions 71
F – Hunter: timeline 74
LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES
Page
Table 5.1:
Distinctions between quantitative and qualitative data 32
Figure 5.1:
Research choices 32
Figure 5.2:
Forms of interview 35
Figure 6.1:
Brand map: Barbour (a) 46
Figure 6.2:
Brand map: Hunter (a) 47
Figure 6.3:
Brand map: Barbour (b) 49
Figure 6.4:
1. INTRODUCTION
In recent years two traditional British brands, namely Barbour and Hunter have seen a resurgence in their popularity. Whether it’s due to the renewed marketing efforts, the essence of traditional meets today, combined with practicality; or the realignment of target consumer markets; there is definitely something happening which has made these brands just as popular, if not more so, than ever. In an industry that is continually updating itself, how do brands with substantial longevity keep-up with the changing climate and trends?
1.1. Overview – focus
may shed some light on brand longevity and success within the fashion industry, particularly for brands that have a niche market.
1.2. Aims
The aims of this study are:
To identify the key characteristics that are needed for successful brand longevity, sustainability and rejuvenation
To provide an insight in the practical applicability of strategic brand management theories
To highlight the importance of brand mapping in the development of brand personality, and how this is communicated within the brand and also to customer segments
Evaluate how brand personality, and brand heritage can impact positively on how the brand develops and grows, and the subsequent impact this has on longevity.
1.3 Research Questions
1. What are the key characteristics for building brand longevity that are present in brands that have been able to develop overtime?
2. Are the key characteristics displayed by one brand, individual to that brand? Or are there similarities between brands, which share similar history and have a similar target market?
3. In terms of brand personality, are the key characteristics displayed by the brand interpreted in the same way by the customer target groups as the brand itself?
1.4. Chapter summary
Chapter 2 – Literature review
and the influence that this has on the brand will also be examined. Where appropriate results and findings from similar studies will also be discussed and adapted to the current study.
Chapter 3 – Research questions
In order to analyse the two brands, and to effectively evaluate target customer segment views and interpretations there will be a number of research questions posed. These questions will aid in the identification of the relevant information required for the study; thus allowing for in-depth analysis and conclusions to be drawn.
Chapter 4 – Company background
This section will detail general information about the two companies, which are the focus of the study, and will also include information about recent brand developments.
Chapter 5 – Methodology
This chapter will discuss the methods used, both primary and secondary, to meet the study’s objectives and aims. Particularly focusing on interview types and styles, for gaining access to company information; and the use and suitability of focus groups. The advantages, limitations and why the methods used were chosen will also be listed.
Chapter 6 – Analysis of results
Chapter 7 – Conclusion
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1. Strategic brand management
The essence of strategic brand management in its simplest form has been part of management practices for many years. However, it wasn’t until recently that strategic brand management became an essential stand-alone component for managers and organisations. Today, it shapes and provides the backbone for everything a business does, and more importantly, what the business is, a brand.
“The best companies managing brands today recognize that brand, and what it represents, drives almost two-thirds of most customer purchases, impacting nearly every functional area within the organisation” (Davis & Halligan, 2002:8).
Carrol expands on this by identifying that “branding is a critical core component to success and requires a strategic, structured and integrated approach” (Carrol, 2009:148). Featuring as part of much academic research, whether as part of marketing or management, or as a stand-alone topic, strategic brand management has been researched extensively by many, but none more so than Kevin Keller, whose research and theory development have further strengthened the importance and understanding of brand management.
Companies and organisations may be responsible for a single brand, or a group of related or unrelated brands. But what is a brand? The American Marketing Association defines a brand as:
As previously mentioned brands form an integral part of everything that a business does; this, coupled with branding activities and overall brand management have become a prominent management priority for organisations regardless of size or type. Keller & Lehmann identify that the emergence of branding as a top management priority has been due to the increasing realization that brands form and integral part of the organisations and are one of the most valuable intangible assets for firms. Brands have several important functions, and “manifest their impact at three primary levels – customer market, product market, and financial market. The value accrued by these various benefits is often called brand equity” (Keller & Lehmann [a], 2006:740). Brand building especially that of powerful brands is co-produced by consumers and firms.
Due to the broad nature of strategic brand management, and the predefined focus of this research study, only certain aspects of brand management will be discussed. They are identified as follows:
Brand development, and rejuvenation
Brand personality and authentication
The importance of brand identity
Brand mapping & brand equity
Brand loyalty
Due to the focus of the study being on two companies and brands in a particular industry, the relationships that brands have within the fashion industry will also be examined and discussed.
2.1.1. A resurgence of old
The last ten years has seen one form of brand extension gain prominence and increasing popularity and application.
powerful management option (Brown 2001).” (Brown, Kozinets & Sherry Jnr, 2003:19).
In addition, one method of revitalising a brand, which is also seeing resurgence, is repositioning and rejuvenation. Brown, Kozinets & Sherry Jnr state, “the royal road to rejuvenation lies in the skilful exploitation of the associations linked to a brand's heritage” (Brown, Kozinets & Sherry Jnr, 2003:20). Brand Heritage has developed as one of the key elements for brand rejuvenation, and is becoming an important aspect for brands competing for attention in already cluttered and saturated marketplaces.
“Brand heritage is perceived as using marketing-mix variables that invoke the history of a particular brand, including all its personal and cultural associations” (Brown, Kozinets & Sherry Jnr, 2003:20).
2.2. Brand personality
The development of the identification of brand personality has increased in recent years. Aaker and Fournier define brand personality as: “the ’inner’ characteristics of a brand constructed by consumers based on behaviour exhibited by personified brands or brand characters” (Tan Tsu Wee, 2004:320). Put simply, brand personality can be described as the human characteristics expressed by, given to, and associated with, brands; and is seen as “a factor in increasing brand awareness and attachment, in much the same way as people related and bonded themselves to other people” (Tan Tsu Wee, 2004:319). De Chernatony develops this further, adding:
“by using the metaphor of the brand as a personality, manifested sometimes through a celebrity in brand advertisements, customers find it much easier to appreciate the emotional values of the brand” (De Chernatony, 2001:31).
Brands can be ‘born’ with a personality or can develop a personality as the brand itself develops, yet, no matter how old or young a brand, the personality will develop and evolve as the brand ages – either through strategic, internal changes, or external environmental market changes.
“The idea of brand personality is related to brand congruity in that it refers to the set of human personality characteristics associated with a brand” (Desmond & Stone, 2007:207).
Therefore creating distinguishable differences between brands which are similar in nature, with brands that “express clear and effective personalities should result in higher preferences and increased market share” (Desmond & Stone, 2007:207). Brands are complex and thus, can be interpreted in numerous different ways. De Chernatony (2001) describes three perspectives in which brands can be interpreted; input perspectives, output perspectives, or as dynamic entities.
“A brand is thus an amalgam of interpretations” (De Chernatony, 2001:52).
In consumer research, studies looking into brand personality often include questions such as:
“If the brand were to come alive as a person, what would it be like? What would it do? Where would it live? What would it wear?” (Keller & Richey, 2006:74).
Research undertaken by Aaker, found that the personality traits, which can be attributed to brands, described as the Brand Personality Scale, fall into five main clusters, containing fifteen facets:
1. sincerity (down-to-earth, honest, wholesome and cheerful), 2. excitement (daring, spirited, imaginative and up to date), 3. competence (reliable, intelligent and successful),
4. sophistication (upper class and charming),
Aaker’s original study only examined US brands, however later studies including Spanish and Japanese brands showed that this is also the case with slight alterations to key clusters, which can be attributed to cultural differences.
The development of brand personality and characteristics also extend into the marketing of the brand. This strategy of personality building is part of what Rodditer and Percy describe as “transformational advertising” (Tan Tsu Wee, 2004:321). The association between a brand and a distinct personality gives life to an innate product, making something that is intangible and inanimate into something which consumers feel that they can interact with and develop a relationship. A brand’s personality should be “distinctive, robust, desirable and constant” (Tan Tsu Wee, 2004:321). Tan Tsu Wee also states that:
“Considerations need to be given to all elements off the brand including its name, heritage, logo, symbols, consumer and corporate images, key benefits, price, distributions and communication”. (Tan Tsu Wee, 2004:327)
2.2.1. Brand authentication, history and heritage
authenticity to brands, and the significance of uniqueness to brand identity. They also discuss brand essence and the comparison to ‘marketing DNA’, stating, “brand essence is thus highly related to authenticity; it is composed of the brand elements that consumers perceive as unique” (Brown, Kozinets & Sherry Jnr, 2003:21).
Brand history, and especially brand stories need a setting, both time and place.
“The aura created by a brand’s authenticity – the miasma of meaning surrounding a brand – is a well established feature of branding, but not of marketing theory” (Alexander, 2009:552).
Currently minimal research exists regarding the creation and maintenance of brand auras. However, suggestions have been put forward to further expand the literature and research, particularly focussing on the development of case histories of brands, longitudinal research, and the importance of understanding brand authentication from strategic and managerial perspectives.
Brand heritage often forms a basis for the authenticity of brands, especially for brands that seek to establish iconic credentials, by weaving their heritage into their brand fabric and backbone (Alexander, 2009:551). Alexander highlights one prominent example within the fashion industry to highlight this case in point.
2.2.2. Brand mapping & the associative network memory model Till, Baack & Waterman state:
“One of the most fundamental tasks of brand managers is to understand and manage the set of associations around their brand. These associations (both intended and unintended) give meaning to the brand are an important component of brand equity” (Till, Baack & Waterman, 2011:92).
Given the fundamental importance of brand associations, it is not surprising that they are central to brand management. Recent research on the topic of brand equity has identified the need for “brand maps” and “richer, more comprehensive, and actionable models of brand equity” (cited from Keller, 2001:5) to be developed. With other academics noting that “barriers remain in making brand-mapping techniques more accessible to marketing practitioners” (Till, Baack & Waterman, 2011:93). Often when conducting brand research, either internally or externally, brand mapping is used as an essential component. The associations derived from brand mapping have been identified by Till, Baack & Waterman as “the heart and soul of the brand” (cited from Aaker, 1996:8), and “fundamental to the understanding of customer-based brand equity” (cited from Hsieh, 2004:33), adding to the fact that “the central role of brand associations in the creation and maintenance of brand equity is widely accepted” (Till, Baack & Waterman, 2011:92).
plays a vital role; further describing the importance and applicability of brand image in marketing:
“Brand image has long been recognized as an important concept in marketing. Although marketers have not always agreed about how to measure it, one generally accepted view is that, consistent with our associative network memory model, brand image is consumers’ perceptions about a brand, as reflected by the brand associations held in consumer memory. In other words, brand perceptions are the other informational nodes linked to the brand node in memory and contain the meaning of the brand for consumers. Associations come in all forms and may reflect characteristics of the product or aspects independent of the product” (Keller, 2008:51).
Brand mapping is also frequently used to “describe a set of techniques designed to represent brands and their similarities in a visual ‘brand space” (Asiamarketresearch.com, 2002). Brand mapping can be done in either a 2-dimensional or 3-2-dimensional context; with two-2-dimensional maps being “the most popular, as they are most easily understood and interpreted by clients”. (Asiamarketresearch.com, 2002). Similarly to the associative network memory model, “brand knowledge is conceptualized as consisting of a brand node in memory to which a variety of associations are linked” (Keller, 1993:1). Keller goes further to develop this, stating that: “understanding the content and structure of brand knowledge is important because they influence what comes to mind when a consumer thinks about a brand” (Keller, 1993:2).
2.2.3. Brand associations & attributes
personality and resulting from brand mapping are user and usage imagery. Keller details that “attributes can be formed directly from a consumer's own experiences and contact with brand users or indirectly through the depiction of the target market as communicated in brand advertising or by some other source of information” (Keller, 1993:4). Jevons, Gabbot & De Chernatony (2005) highlight previous research into brand impressions by Low and Lamb, who found that “brand image, perceived quality, and brand attitude are separate and distinct dimensions of a brand impression, but which in turn are entirely dependent upon customer determined rather than managerially determined meaning” (Jevons, Gabbot & De Chernatony, 2005:301). Often user imagery and the associated brand user may be based on a variety of factors; including demographic, and psychographic factors. Other associations, mainly based around the usage situation (i.e. time of day, week, or year, the location, and type of activity), also combine with the above characteristics. In addition, the personality or character of the brand also acts as components of brand image. Plummer (1985) found that brands “brands can be characterized by personality descriptors such as "youthful", "colorful", and "gentle" (Keller, 1993:4). Keller extends this to the emotions or evoked by the brands.
2.3. Brand equity
Lehmann [a], 2006). However, in the majority of studies a common core is shared.
“All typically either implicitly or explicitly focus on brand-knowledge structures in the minds of consumers – individuals or organisations - as the source or foundation of brand equity” (Keller & Lehmann [a], 2006:745).
Keller & Lehmann list five aspects, which capture customer-level brand equity; awareness, associations, attitude, attachment and activity (Keller & Lehmann [a], 2006:745). Two basic complementary approaches exist when measuring customer-based brand equity: indirect and direct.
“The "indirect" approach attempts to assess potential sources of customer-based brand equity by measuring brand knowledge (i.e., brand awareness and brand image). The "direct" approach attempts to measure customer-based brand equity more directly by assessing the impact of brand knowledge on consumer response to different elements of the firm's marketing program” (Keller, 1993:12).
The development of band equity by firms has been aided by the introduction of the brand equity model by David Aaker. This model contains five category dimensions, which are needed for the successful creation and maintenance of brand equity. Keller lists these as; brand loyalty, brand awareness, perceived quality, brand associations, and other proprietary assets (e.g. trademarks and patents) (Keller, 2008:670).
2.4. Brand development
2.4.1. Brand reinforcement, revitalization and rejuvenation
exclusive activities and can often be seen operating simultaneously” (Anon, 2007:11). When it comes to innovation, the small steps are just as important as the bigger, more externally noticeable changes; for example in product development. Brand rejuvenation can also include revitalisation, reinforcement and re-positioning. The later of these can be separated into two forms:
“The physical re-positioning of the brand in relation to current and potential future competitors; and
The re-positioning of the brand in the mind of the consumer. It is the consumer that has to be persuaded that the brand is right for them” (Anon, 2007:11-12).
Successful long-term brands and organisations are able to monitor and assess the ‘health’ of their brands in relation to its external environment. Brand innovations, re-positioning, rejuvenation and reinforcement can aid in the long-term life expectancy of brands. However, there is also a fine line between being able to extend the life expectancy of brands, and recognizing that a brand has genuinely come to the end of its life span. This poses a challenge for many companies – realizing and knowing when a brand has come to the end and “can no longer be resuscitated” (Anon, 2007:12).
2.4.2. Long-term potential
The long-term potential of brands extends past the type of products, and the industry or market in which the brand operates. For many, it is the understanding by the firm, which affects long-term brand value and potential leading to the importance of how well a firm capitalises on this potential. Thus “understanding the potential of a brand is critical in terms of corporate strategy and brand investment decisions” (Keller & Lehmann [b], 2006:7). Keller and Lehmann extend their statement by highlighting the importance of a good brand vision.
is and what it could become and to define the right series of steps to get it there” (Keller & Lehmann [b], 2006:8).
Keller and Lehmann also discuss the power of the brand, and where this lies – in the minds of the consumers and customers. Brand persistence and development involves striking a balance between consistency and change.
“Properly striking that balance necessitates a clear, comprehensive and continually up-to-date understanding of consumers and how they purchase and use products and services, as well as how they think and feel about brands” (Keller & Lehmann [b], 2006:11).
Keller and Lehmann also identify the importance of correct positioning, and particularly the positioning of a brand as ‘classic’, which is relevant to the context of this research, stating:
“Positioning a brand as a classic may appeal more to existing customers, whereas positioning a brand as modern, contemporary and exciting may be seen as more attractive to potential new and younger customers. Only when a brand is seen as ‘timeless’ – and thus both classic and contemporary – can it effectively appeal to both segments simultaneously” (Keller & Lehmann [b], 2006:13).
2.5. Brand relationships
Much research has been undertaken into the customer-brand relationship, and the importance of this relationship. However, “the effects of various techniques for establishing, modifying, and understanding relationships between brands are not clearly understood” (Jevons, Gabbot & De Chernatony, 2005:300). One academic who has undertaken research in this area is Fournier, who is quoted by Keller & Lehmann on the topic of brand-relationship quality. Fournier lists brand-brand-relationship quality as “multifaceted and consisting of six dimensions beyond loyalty or commitment along which consumer brand relationships vary” (Keller & Lehmann [a], 2006:741); listing the dimensions as follows:
commitment or nostalgic attachment,
behavioural independence,
love / passion,
intimacy, and
brand-partner quality.
Jevons, Gabbot & De Chernatony describe the interlinked relationship of understanding customer-brand relationships and communication; drawing on the Internet, which “accentuate the complexity of brand meanings” (Jevons, Gabbot & De Chernatony, 2005:300). Further drawing attention to the importance of understanding the forms of associations made by customers. The perspectives of these associations and interactions can be divided into two key perspectives; “the perspective of the customer and the perspective of the brand owner” (Jevons, Gabbot & De Chernatony, 2005:300). This adds complexity, and can cause a ‘drift’ in the organisation’s meaning, and the meanings interpreted by the user. Jevons, Gabbot & De Chernatony detail that in order to fully understand the meaning of a brand relationship, the total set of associations perceived by customers must be assessed, alongside the total set of relationships between other brands which there appears to be links through associations. Further extending this to include the collective analysis of all involved factors and associations, to establish the combined and aggregate effect on brand meaning.
Rundle-Thiele, 2005:255). Brands serve a variety of functions for both organisations and consumers. Particularly for consumers, brands are seen as a communication tool, and a means of portraying the aspirations, values, and goals of their owner to others around them. In addition, brands can be viewed as a variety of things: a product, an experience, a personality, or simply a set of values or a position that the brand occupies in peoples minds.
2.6. Brands and the fashion industry
The importance of brands is prominent in many industries – but none more so than in the fashion industry, where for many brand is everything – it’s what distinguishes you from others who sell similar, if not identical products. Fionda & Moore state that “within fashion, branding has become as much about branding the experience as the product” (Fionda & Moore, 2008:351). Carroll identifies the progression of brands, which now represent “much more than the traditional markers of quality, trust and reliability to consumers” (Carroll, 2009:146). Going further to describe that brands now offer consumers the opportunity for self-expression, and that this is particularly evident within the fashion industry. Kort et al. (2005:1363) highlight the trend that functionality is often less important than style and exclusivity when it comes to fashion. This may be the case within the high-end, luxury fashion market, but may not be at the fore within other sectors of an industry where image is everything. The fashion industry is an interesting case when examining brands, their development and the perceptions that consumers have of particular brands. It is often the case that external market and consumer pressures are what drive the industry trends and purchases. Kort et al. identifies this point, drawing attention to ‘conspicuous consumption’.
“The consumer decision to buy a “conspicuous” product depends not only on the product’s functionality, but also on social needs such as prestige” (Kort et al., 2005:1364).
recent repositioning outlined dimensions that need careful management in order to develop and create a successful brand. This study, although not defined as being universally applicable, identified key areas for further research in order to develop a greater understanding of fashion brands. A more recent study by Okonkwo, identified 10 core characteristics of the successful fashion brand (Fionda & Moore, 2009:349).
Brand heritage, limited production and scarcity, and powerful marketing communications have emerged as being important factors in creating successful fashion brands. Identified by Nueno and Quelch, and also by Oknkwo, limited production is “fundamentally linked to the maintenance of the brand exclusivity” (Fionda & Moore, 2009:351), scarcity also adds to the appeal. Fionda & Moore further highlight the importance of powerful marketing communications.
“Powerful marketing communications are considered key to building the luxury brand image. Relevant advertising can provide support in establishing the brand image, which consequently assists in creating identity and attraction, and generates awareness” (Fionda & Moore, 2009:352).
Prevalent in Alleres’, Beverland’s, and Moor and Birtwistle’s research is brand heritage. Many fashion brands, most notably those classified as luxury brands, have a long history, adding to the authenticity of the brand. Fionda and Moore extend this by stating, that the “retention of heritage has the ability to create nostalgia and credibility for a brand and is often correlated to the heritage of the country of origin” (Fionda & Moore, 2009:352).
3. RESEARCH QUESTIONS
This study will look to identify the characteristics that are present in brands that have stood the test of time. These characteristics may be brand specific, however, the underlying actions and background may be present in the brand strategies of many brands, either in the fashion industry or in other fast-paced markets. Brand personality, heritage, and authentication will also be examined from the view of the brands themselves, but also in the eyes of the target customers. Three research questions have been developed in order to obtain the relevant information from both data sources, so that the subsequent analysis can aim to satisfy the overarching objectives of the study. The research questions aim to examine each brand individually and together, and the potential transferability to the rest of the fashion industry. In general terms, the research questions aim to identify actions/decisions that have been made over time, by brands that have a long history. Rejuvenation will also be examined, looking at the characteristics displayed by brands, which have developed and undergone major changes; and to what extent these are company, or industry specific.
1. What are the key characteristics for building brand longevity that are present in brands that have been able to develop overtime?
2. Are the key characteristics displayed by one brand, individual to that brand? Or are there parallels between brands, which share similar history and have a similar target market?
4. COMPANY BACKGROUND
4.1. J. Barbour & Sons ltd
Founded in the mid 1890’s by John Barbour, the brand based in South Shields, has since gone on to become a highly successful British clothing manufacturer, famed for it’s waxed jackets and range of durable outdoor clothing. The company holds royal warrants, the first of which being awarded in 1974 (Bignell, 2008) supplying members of the Royal family including the Queen, the Duke of Edinburgh and the Prince of Wales (Barbour.com, 2011). The recent film ‘The Queen’ also “helped the label to enjoy a sudden surge in popularity, especially in the US” (Bignell, 2008). With a stereotypical wearer including “the country shooting set, pony-mad girls and ruddy-cheeked farmers at agricultural shows” (Bignell, 2008). As a company, which has a century-long history, the brand is no stranger to re-invention and development. From its beginnings “selling oilskin coats to dockyard workers” (Hosea, 2008) the brand has since become a “staple of the upper-class country set” (Hosea, 2008).
depictions of rugged, foul weathered landscapes to marketing that reflects more pleasant aspects of life in the British countryside, often featuring leisure-related activities, rather than the 'working life' depictions it has used in the past” (Hosea, 2008). Therefore reflecting the recent brand rejuvenation and updating. Thanks to the resurgence in ‘festival chic’ and practicality, combined with the awareness at the younger end of the brand’s target market; the “brand’s Beaufort waxed jacket became a must-have item on the music festival circuit” (Mirza, 2009), with popular fans and wearers including “Lily Allen, Peaches Geldof, Sienna Miller, Catherine Zeta-Jones, Rufus Wainwright, and Alexa Chung” (Bignell, 2008).
However, as a brand with a long history, and loyal customers, any changes to the brand should not loose sight of what has made the brand successful in the first place; for Barbour, this is heritage. Managing Director at Barbour, Steve Buck comments “We attempt to stay true to our heritage - we try to understand where we have come from, what we are about and not do anything, which clashes with that. A hundred-years-plus heritage and the British countryside are central to the brand identity" (Hosea, 2008).
4.2. Hunter Boot ltd
Nevertheless, due to cash flow problems and high production costs the company entered administration on 2006. Following a buyout “Hunter re-established itself as a major player in the traditional country and leisure footwear market in the UK” also moving to become a strong player in the US market. In the two-years after administration, Hunter made the decision to move production to Europe and the Far East, also moving the company headquarters to Edinburgh from Dumfries. Similarly to Barbour, Hunter, as a “traditional countryside business updated with a fashion twist in recent years” (Hosea, 2008), has enjoyed resurgence in popularity. Using the recent spell in administration, and the opportunity to re-invent the brand, Hunter has been able to alter the brand direction, transforming it into a lifestyle brand, enabling it to “move out of its niche area and appeal to a wider market” (Hosea, 2008), making its boots “hot fashion items” (Goodman, 2009).
“Another sign of the company’s new confidence is the way it is has forged collaborations with other fashion brands” (Goodman, 2009). In 2009, Hunter joined forces with Jimmy Choo, for a limited edition wellington boot.
“Today, Hunter remains the preferred welly brand for those who like to work hard and play hard - there's a great range of boots to suit welly wearers all over the world - from the Royal Family to festival-goers, working farmers and landed gentry alike.” (Hunter-boot.com).
In the UK, the combination of heritage, mixed with a strong fashion element has seen the brand appear “as the summer festival circuit celebrity boot of choice on such personalities as model Kate Moss” (Hosea, 2008).
5. METHODOLOGY
In terms of identifying the key characteristics for brand longevity in the fashion industry or any industry for that matter there has, so far, been very limited research. What makes brand successful over long periods of time, in terms of the brand itself and its personality traits has not been researched as much in the literature as for example, brand equity, and the development and growth of brands from a managerial perspective. The scope of research within this study, although precise, produces a wide variety of available methods and data types. For this reason it is important to determine what the research aims and questions are; and therefore what data is required, and subsequently which methods are most suitable in order to satisfy the research questions. As previously listed, the research questions discuss two distinct areas of research within this study – the views and perceptions of the brands from the brands themselves, and the views and perceptions of the brand from consumers and the target market of each of the two brands. This negates the need for at least two suitable approaches in order to obtain the relevant information from the appropriate groups.
5.1. Qualitative or Quantitative?
Data and research methods, to obtain such data, can be defined into two categories; qualitative and quantitative, both of which are widely used in management and business research. Table 5.1 highlights the three main differences between the two types of data. Saunders, Lewis & Thornhill distinguish the two methods:
analysis procedure (such as categorising data) that generates or use non-numerical data. Qualitative therefore can refer to data other than words, such as pictures and video clips”. (Saunders, Lewis & Thornhill, 2008:145)
Table 5.1 - Distinctions between quantitative and qualitative data
Quantitative data Qualitative data Based on meanings derived
from numbers
Collection results in numerical and standardised data
Analysis conducted through the use of diagrams and statistics
Based on meanings expressed through words
Collection results in non-standardised data
Analysis conducted through the use of conceptualisation (Source: Table 13.1 in Saunders, Lewis & Thornhill, 2008:472)
Saunders, Lewis & Thornhill further discuss the fact that individual methods do not exist in isolation, and can be used in research as a mono method, or as part of a multiple method research methodology. Also drawing upon the fact that within one single research study there may be qualitative and quantitative techniques used, in addition to both primary and secondary data.
Figure 5.1 Research choices
(Source: Figure 5.4 in Saunders, Lewis & Thornhill, 2008:146)
will be used, with qualitative data being the predominant data type. Saunders et al. define mixed methods as:
“the general term for when both quantitative and qualitative data collection techniques and analysis procedures are used in a research design. … Mixed method research uses quantitative and qualitative data collection techniques and analysis procedures either at the same time (parallel) or one after the other (sequential) but does not combine them. This means that although mixed method research uses both quantitative and qualitative world views at the research methods stage, quantitative data are analysed quantitatively and qualitative data are analysed qualitatively” (Saunders, Lewis & Thornhill, 2008:145-146).
One of the main advantages of using mixed methods, particularly evident in this research is the ability for triangulation of data.
“Triangulation means combining several qualitative methods, but it also means combining qualitative and quantitative methods. Here the different methodological perspectives complement each other in the study of an issue, and this is conceived as the complementary compensations of the weakness and blind spots of each single method” (Flick, 2009:27).
will enable this in-depth analysis. Sekaran & Bougie also highlight the advantages of confidence associated with using mixed methods:
“…if data obtained from several sources bear a great degree of similarity, we will have stronger conviction in the goodness of the data” (Sekaran & Bougie, 2010:217).
5.2 Primary or secondary?
In order to collect comparative information, and to be able to fully analyse the communication of brand values; data and information will be collected from both company and consumer. This will be done through a range of methods, mainly using primary research. This is due to the fact that pre-existing studies which are similar in nature to the current study are not readily available; therefore much of the data will need to be collected by the researcher, and will come directly from the cases present in the study.
It is necessary to carry out both primary and secondary research in order to establish the relationship and perceptions consumers have to the two brands being investigated, and the interpretation and portrayal of the two brands by the two companies themselves. Primary research will include undertaking focus groups with consumers, and also contacting the companies involved, and where possible, department store buyers who stock the two brands. Pre-existing theory, regarding brand mapping, brand personality and brand revitalisation and rejuvenation will form the majority of the secondary research, and theory background for later analysis.
company history and a well-established market position); apply them in the day-to-day management and long-term development their respective brands.
5.3. What are the available methods?
There are a variety of methods for obtaining information through the use of interviews, which can be initially broken down by level of standardisation. There are a number of suitable interview methods that can be used within this study in order to obtain the relevant information required (see Figure 5.2); namely focus groups, as part of group interviews, and one-to-one interviews. Each will now be discussed in turn, detailing the suitability and applicability to this particular study.
Figure 5.2 Forms of interview
(Source: Figure 10.1 in Saunders, Lewis & Thornhill, 2008:313)
5.3.1. Focus groups
In contemporary social science, focus group work has two branches: psychotherapy and market research. It is the market research branch, which will form the consumer aspect of this study. Usually, consumers are “assembled for a one-off session to discuss their reactions to new products or advertising materials and these reactions are then used to inform and develop larger-scale surveys” (Crang & Cook, 2007:90). Focus groups, and information and data obtained from them, is described as valuable to ethnographic and associated qualitative research by Crang & Cook (Crang & Cook, 2007:91) due to its ability to illustrate and explore intersubjective dynamics of understanding, thought and speech. Ghauri & Grønhaug, describe the scope for interaction when undertaking focus groups, stating that focus groups differ “from other methods such as in-depth interviews, in the sense that here the interaction is not only between the interviewer and the respondent, but also among the respondents” (Ghauri & Grønhaug, 2010:108). Bryman and Bell (2007:512) draw upon the increasing popularity of focus groups as part of research, and in particular market research. The current research, although using focus groups as a basis for gather qualitative consumer information, thoughts and data, will be using focus groups as a method for consumers to create brand mapping, and mood boards for the two brands being investigated. The focus groups will therefore gather both verbal and visual information, using observation and mood boards to gather the necessary data and information need for analysis and comparison to the data obtained from the two companies.
market segments regarding one specific brand. This will then enable a full analysis of the consumer target market, creating one overall perception and interpretation ‘map’, which can then be compared to that of the company to highlight the differences, if any, in what the company sees in its brand and what the consumers in the target market see, and perceive the brand to be.
It is clear from the content of the focus group that, for the purposes of obtaining information and data from consumers, that other methods, i.e. interviews, would not be a suitable as participants within a group context can combine ideas and create a group idea. Whereas if the same was done using interviews and one-on-one discussions it would be more difficult to combine similar ideas during analysis, as individuals may use differing language when describing and interpreting brands than if they would in a group environment. The ability to obtain information in a short time frame from multiple participants also highlights the suitability of undertaking focus groups, for the purpose of obtaining information from consumers. This issue is highlighted by Morgan, who states that: “it is certainly true that the same people might say different things in individual interviews that they would in a group discussion, but that does not mean that one set of statements is distorted and the other is not” (Morgan, 2001 in Crang & Cook, 2007:90). In essence, focus group research, if applicable to the type of study being undertaken, although being fraught with difficulties, can be greatly valuable and add depth to research.
Sekaran & Bougie draw upon the form of data, which is often obtained, from undertaking focus groups:
Bryman and Bell highlight one of the most frequently identified issues of focus groups as part of research:
“Some researchers have suggested that it is a weaker method than, say, experiments or surveys. The most frequently mentioned problem is perceived lack of generalizability – results are not always a reliable indicator of the reactions of the wider population” (Bryman & Bell, 2007:512).
In addition, concerns have also been raised regarding the sampling of participants. Bryman and Bell draw attention to Sudman and Blair (1999):
“Sudman and Blair (1999:272) have suggested that, although the focus group method is an excellent tool for gaining insight about markets, it should be evident that a group of 10 or so people chosen haphazardly at a single location cannot be expected to reflect the total population of consumers” (Bryman & Bell, 2007:512).
For the purposes of the current study, and the high level of suitability for the type of information to be obtained and the ways in doing so, focus groups prove to be the best method in order to obtain perspective information which is qualitative in nature, quickly and simply; however also recognising that, on the whole, the results from such focus groups cannot be generalised to cover the whole consumer target market for each of the two brands in the study.
5.3.2. Interviews
Saunders, Lewis & Thornhill highlight the key types of interviews, relating to their level of structure and standardisation.
Structured interviews
Semi-structured interviews
Unstructured or in-depth interviews” (Saunders, Lewis & Thornhill, 2008:311-312).
However, due to both time and access restrictions full in-depth interviews were unable to be carried out. Time restriction affecting both the researcher, and the interviewee made it unsuitable and inappropriate to carry out face-to-face or telephone interviews. Instead, so that the relevant data could be obtained, pre-defined questions, identical for both the respondents at the two brands, were emailed to the interviewee. This allowed for data collection that was convenient for both the responder and the sender. However, not one hundred percent ideal, it was the most suitable method given the situation. The data collected should not have been affected by the collection method; nevertheless, the opportunity for response development and clarification was lost.
5.3.3. Case study
“Case studies provide a systematic way of looking at events, collecting data, analysing information, and reporting the findings” (Hair, et al., 2007:290).
Case studies aid researchers in gaining an understanding of why an event occurred, how and why it occurred, and what be taken from this and applied to other situations that are similar in nature.
“Both Yin and Perry suggest that the case study method can assist in compensating for a lack of established theory and/or where accepted principles and constructs have not been established and are clearly inadequate” (Fionda & Moore, 2009:352).
As the current study examines the relationship and importance that brand personality has on its longevity, a longitudinal case study looking into both the subject brands, their brand development over a period of time, and the perceptions of target market consumers of the brand and its personality would enable the research questions and topic area to be satisfied to a higher degree. Thus cementing the results, and to some extent enabling the characteristics identified to be generalised and applied to similar brands within the fashion industry.
5.4. Limitations to methods
6. ANALYSIS OF FINDINGS
Currently there is limited research into what makes brands successful in the longer-term, particularly within the fashion industry, with the exception of only a select few studies that focus on the luxury fashion market. The key characteristics evident in brands within the fashion industry may, to some extent be limited to each individual brand; however, in an industry where many brands are similar and share basic characteristics, what can be termed as key ‘personality traits’, should be evident across the industry. Chosen for their similarities, in both brand style, target market and niche market products; Barbour and Hunter have both shown that a little bit of modern day, combined with the essence of tradition and heritage has proven a successful formula in the longer-term, helping both brands to enjoy and accumulate a brand life of over 100 years.
Often, in markets where the products available are so similar, buyers and consumers look for that something extra from the product, this usually takes the form of the brands own personality, history and attributes. Consumers often respond positively to brands, which they can relate to, and form relationships with. This is particularly evident when looking at member’s clubs and associations. For example, Harley Davidson, although not a fashion brand, the riders represents what the brand is all about, and the brand defines the riders. The relationship that riders have with the brand, and the characteristics shared, highlight how brand personality, and the subsequent relationships help to develop the brand further, and give the brand a personality that is its own, well-defined, and is understood in the same way by both the brand managers and consumers.
On the surface, particularly in a market where many brands are so similar and share characteristics in terms of consumers, markets and products the only thing that can distinguish one company from the rest is the brand. Companies spend thousands each year, not only advertising their product ranges, but also advertising and promoting the brand. This is especially evident in the fashion industry, where the primary product, the clothing lines and individual items are to a great degree, indistinguishable from the next company. This is where the brand, and what it means and represents, becomes so vital. Little has currently been established into what makes some brand successful in terms of brand characteristics and personality.
choice. Giving the two brands a relatively high exclusivity factor, owing to the availability and a retail price, that is also representative of this. That said, the target consumers and stereotypical wearer of such fashion products lends itself to the country image and the outdoors; where often it is durability and suitability which have a greater emphasis placed on them, then perhaps cost.
6.1. Focus Group Results
As previously defined, focus groups were chosen for their suitability for extracting and obtaining information from a group of participants, who may or many not share similar characteristics. As the main aim of this study was to establish the key characteristics displayed by two pre-defined brands that aid brand longevity, undertaking focus groups was the most suitable way to obtain such information in a short space of time from many respondents. Due to time restrictions, only two focus groups were undertaken. However, given the make-up of the two groups, the reduced number of focus groups undertaken should not affect the outcome of the results as the participants are representative of the wider market – particularly focusing on the two main markets for the two brands.
Within the focus groups the below listed questions formed the basis of discussion, allowing for open conversation between the participants, further enabling the development of ideas, and creating a group understanding of what the two brands mean to the individual participants, and also the group as a whole. The questions were also developed so that band maps could be developed by the participants as a whole group, in order to determine what consumers, or members of the target markets though of the brand itself, and what the brand represents. The questions used were:
What makes a brand traditional?
What features are represented by brands with a long history? Is there overlap with other brands?
What are the characteristics of a Hunter customer? What words and associations do you link to Hunter?
For purposes of further comparison between the responses of the two focus groups they will be referred to as focus group (a), and focus group (b) respectively.
6.1.1. Focus Group (a)
Undertaken with a group of participants, with an average age of 31, and a male to female ratio of 2:3, the first focus group enabled the views and perceptions of people who represent the consumer group as a whole for the two brands to be obtained and investigated further. The participants were asked the above listed questions and conversation developed as to what the participants thought of, and associated with each of the two brands, unprompted and when given particular aspects of character (including, age of typical consumer, what type of person was representative of the brand, and the colours and environments that the two brands evoked). Complete notes of the responses taken during the focus group can be found in Appendix A.
brand, whether in terms of the product offering, or in terms of the industry in which the company that owns the brand operates. The ‘anti-fad’ nature of the brand and the products included within the brand also helps to maintain the brand in the marketplace. Participants also drew upon the perceptions made by the consumers themselves, drawing attention to the quality and cost perceptions and associations made. The overall response was that yes, the characteristics and aspects of brands which have a long history are similar across industries and brands. Within this response the fact that some brand names have become synonymous with the product item itself shows the high level of acceptance by consumers, and the longevity of the product (examples listed included Hoover, which has now become a commonly used term for a vacuum cleaner). Moving on to discuss the two case brands, participants were asked to construct brand maps, detailing the key characteristics and associations represented by the individual brands. The results can be seen in figure 6.1 and 6.2. Participants were asked to include weathers, environments, and the typical consumer of the two brands, and other associations that they may have.
Figure 6.2 Brand map: Hunter (a)
The results show that although the product offering from the two case brands is different, there are many similarities within the characteristics that are perceived by target market consumers. Key similarities include durability, the outdoors nature of both the products, and the brands themselves. Other associations include ‘farming’, ‘posh’, ‘heritage and roots’ and the international appeal and availability. ‘Innovation’, ‘brand leader’ and ‘market leader’ were also key aspects linked to both the brands. As for the stereotypical consumer, both brands share the common stereotype associated with the products offered. Whether this is solely down to the type of products, or also intrinsically linked to how the brand is marketed and portrayed to the market is difficult to determine. Nevertheless, the responses given by participants match closely to the ideas and perceptions of the brand itself; Thus indicating that the communication of the brand and its personality is effectively portraying and communicating the essence and personality of the brands.
6.1.2. Focus Group (b)
two brands forming the basis of the research. The participants were asked the same questions as the first group (listed above), and conversation and discussion resulting from the prompting questions, enabled further insight into the views and opinions of the student population. Complete notes of the responses taken during the focus group can be found in Appendix B.
Moving on to discuss the two case brands, participants were asked to construct brand maps, detailing the key characteristics and associations represented by the individual brands. The results can be seen in figure 6.3 and figure 6.4. Participants were asked to include weathers, environments, and the typical consumer of the two brands, and other associations that they may have.
Figure 6.3 Brand map: Barbour (b)
Figure 6.4 Brand map: Hunter (b)
fact more closely linked, in terms of brand personality, and other associations made when comparisons are made. This is particularly evident in the case of descriptors, such as country, the outdoors, and durability. Further associations are also made including those pertaining to fashion, heritage, and the colours that come to mind when thinking about the brands. Links are also made which identify social class, and status with the two brands. When thinking about the brand itself, associations were made to the two brand’s rise to become brand leaders within their respective market segments. Evidence obtained through the information provided by the focus group participants also points to the fact that the brands are very similar in terms of characteristics and additional associations. However, it is interesting to note that, even though ‘becoming increasingly fashionable’ and ‘fashion status’ are present on both brand maps, the words ‘young’ and ‘student’ do not appear, and ‘festival’ only appears once. However, on the whole, the associations made by the participants, do match those, which are communicated and understood by the brands themselves.
6.1.3. Summary of focus group results
doing it well; stating that it is these characters that help brands to be though of as traditional, and increase the longevity of brands. Customer loyalty, and relationships with the target market also featured in both focus groups. Interesting to note was the fact that broad appeal was mentioned in the first focus group. The brands chosen for this study, in terms of traditional target market segment are not thought of to have a broad appeal historically, however this has changed over recent years, and could therefore be a vital component in the increased success of both brands. Overall, the thoughts and perceptions of the two brands were very similar between the two groups. Nevertheless, there were also some interesting omissions or differences of opinion between the groups. However, the perceptions and thoughts on traditional brands (the first two questions) were almost identical.
6.2. Company interview results
In order to establish what the two organisations that feature in this research thought of their brands, in terms of development and personality a list of questions were developed. Contact was made with the marketing departments of the brands, and following a brief introduction into the background of the study, the questions were sent to them. This process needed to be done through email, as owing to lack of time on the part of all involved, personal face-to-face interviews were impractical and could not be undertaken.
The questions were as follows:
1. What have been the key developments within brand targeting within the last five years, and looking forward to the next five years? (please include areas such as changes in primary target market, and changes in availability)
2. Define your primary customer market, using approximately 10 key characteristics
4. Has there been any dramatic changes in market / brand: a) Since the beginning of the brand, and
b) In the last 10 years
5. Have the core principles of the brand remained the same over time? 6. How do you, as both a company and a brand, keep up-to-date with
trends, and be seen by the market as an on-trend brand, whilst still maintaining the brands’ traditional ‘aura’, personality and heritage? A seventh question was added, which was specific to the brand.
6.2.1. Barbour
Due to time constraints during a busy period, on the part of the organisation, the questions posed were unable to be answered in a concise manner. However, further information received from the brand allowed for in-depth secondary research to be carried out in order to appropriately answer the questions, rather than undertaking primary research.
wardrobe’ of pieces, comprising of everything from socks, scarves, bags and hats to shirts, trousers, tailored jackets and, of course, the famous wax jackets. With one of the four design collections being ‘heritage’ the brand ensures that what made it successful, and what consumers associate the brand to be is never lost. Barbour continues to evolve as a lifestyle brand while staying true to its sporting core.
6.2.2. Hunter
The answers given to the above listed questions gave an insight into the brand developments over the last five years and also more recently. As a company who has recently come out of administration, it was noted that this was a great opportunity for the brand to re-invent itself a little, without loosing the tradition and heritage which has helped to give the brand its long-term success. Full responses in Appendix E, and a timeline of the brand’s history in Appendix F. Defined by the company; the brand personality is defined by the following list of characteristics.
Fun Innovative Unique Stylish Confident Protection Traditional Technical Quirky
From the responses to the questions, it is clear that there are several important factors to note that have helped Hunter maintain their sense of tradition and style, and have ultimately aided their ability to sustain their longevity, even in the face of administration. These include
The rise of festival chic
The growth of the product range
Development of partnerships (Royal Horticultural Society and Jimmy Choo)
Changes in communication focus, introduction of advertising in the UK
Key responses include:
“Prior to the administration, brand communications had been very B2B focussed. Afterwards, the brand understood the importance of enhancing this with B2C communications, and PR became a strong part of the brand development. To this day, PR continues to be the strongest part of the marketing mix.”
“In the UK, the brand is advertising for the first time in 2011, and this will develop in 2012. The brand will continue to push boundaries and innovate, while remaining true to its heritage and core values.”
“Hunter may be seen as a fashion item, but Hunter will never been ‘the fashion’. This is key to the brand and its future, as although we acknowledge trends, we don’t follow them to the extent that we could become a fad, and quickly fall out of favour.”
“Remaining true to the brand’s principles has enabled it to survive to this day.”
6.3. Summary
For Hunter, the understandings that both consumers and the company have of the brand are more or less equal. Again, the characteristics established from information obtained from the brand, and also from the focus group define and reflect a traditional brand, which has moved with the times without losing its core personality and heritage. Key events in the history of the company, particularly the period in administration, emphasised the significance of doing the important things well, and not to loose sight of what the brand truly is, and what it represents.
