Fashion Brand Image Marketing: Brand Image and Brand Personality

T.S. Lee, C.S. Leung and Z.M. Zhang Institute of Textiles and Clothing, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University ABSTRACT Driven by the competitive environment in fashion business, marketers have realized that creating a favorable brand image is a key to win larger market share in its market niche. An understanding of brand image can provide better foundation for developing a more effective marketing program. However, the brand image literature in consumer marketing can be characterized as fragmented. Even the definitions of brand image lack consensus. This paper critically reviews the meaning of brand image and its related concept, brand personality, and discusses marketing implication for fashion marketers. Keywords: Fashion Brand Image Marketing, Brand, Brand Image, Image Congruity, Brand Personality. 1. INTRODUCTION

Benefit seeking is one of the driving forces for consumers to begin their buying process with. They may seek a product that can offer at least functional, symbolic or even expressive benefits to them in order to satisfy their needs or wants. Therefore, you may say a successful marketing program is not so difficult to create. It simply satisfies the target consumers needs and wants. Meanwhile, to know the consumers needs or wants is actually the most difficult task for the marketers to handle. In order to succeed in todays competitive environment, the fashion marketers must be able to formulate effective marketing strategies for their target markets. The success of a fashion brand depends upon how precise it is in understanding its target customers and their needs, so as to create wants. A purchase filled with meanings, especially a fashion purchase. It was because clothing in itself carries symbols and thats why clothing has been called a silent language. When people talk about the clothes they buy and why they buy them, they show a variety of logics. An understanding of why customers select one brand over another and what factors generate such kind of want is crucially important to fashion marketers. When insiders talk about this issue, the concept of brand image would be mentioned and useful to explain the phenomenon. McEnally and Chernatony (1999) also stated that brand concept was developed by the management while the consumer received the message from the management and form brand image in the memory. In this sense, the management sees the brand in one way, which is a perceived concept, and the customers also see the brand in their own way, which is also a perceived image. When there is substantial difference on these two perceptions, it indicates that the brand image marketing problem is present. In the fashion industry, an inappropriate brand image strategy could make a brand fail in that increasingly competitive business environment. A designer label, a private label or even a little brand name, they are different on the level of the product exclusivity, perceived quality and reliability; but they are all talking about image marketing, and would like to use brand as a tool to seize larger market share in their market niche.
RJTA Vol. 4 No. 2 60

Thus, brand image has been the focus of a large amount of important academic and field study in fashion industry. However, the terminology of brand image is quite confusing. To clarify the nature of the brand image, this article aims to discuss the different meanings of brand image (perceived by the consumer) from different sources. It is crucial for the fashion marketer to know the meaning behind the term, as it is the foundation of the brand image marketing. 2. 2.1 BACKGROUND OF BRAND IMAGE What is a brand?

Brand is derived from the old Norse word brand, meaning burn, and it was by this method that early man marked his livestock (Blackett, 1991). The traditional American AMA definition (American Marketing Association, 1960) of brand is, a name, term, sign, symbol, or design, or combination of them, which is intended to identify the goods or services of one seller or group of sellers and to differentiate them from those of competitors. And it can be defined, as an identifiable version of product can be perceived by a consumer as being distinctive from other versions of the product. (Watkins, 1986) In this sense, designer label (e.g. Ralph Lauren) or private label (e.g. Esprit) is also a brand. 2.2 From Brand to Brand Image

The traditional concept of brand is always related to logo, sign or label for physical differentiation. Therefore the traditional AMA definition was criticized by others as too mechanical, too concerned with the physical product, too input oriented, with little reference to manufacturers strategic thinking or visions for the brand and failing to recognize that the brand acquires connotations in consumers minds through their experiences.(de Chernatony & DallOlmo Riley, 1997 P.90). There was a comparatively new concept of the brand introduced by de Chernatony, brand was defined as nine main themes, i.e. as a legal instrument, as a logo, as a company, as an identity system, as an image in consumers minds, as a personality, as a relationship, as adding value and as an evolving (ibid. 1997 P.90). From this point of view, a brand is more than a visual label for differentiation and it involved imagery matter. For example, Levis, a well-known jeanswear brand which is more than just an eye-catching red label; it has developed a core urban-hip user imagery in youngsters mind. The concept of brand image was not a product of the 90s. It was first introduced by a journal The Product and the Brand in 1955 (Gardner and Levy, 1955), i.e. A brand name is more than the label employed to differentiate among manufacturers of a product. It is a complex symbol that represents a variety of ideas and attributes. It tells the consumers many things, not only by the way it sounds (and it literal meaning if it has one) but, more importantly, via the body of associations it has built up and acquired as a public object over a period of time (Gardner and Levy, 1955 P.35). And that brand image concept was widely seized upon because it aptly summed up the idea that consumers buy brands not only for their physical attributed and functions, but also because of the meanings connected with the brands (Levy and Glick, 1973). Also, that classic article suggested that the brand image, which included, the sets of consumers feelings, ideas and attitudes of brand, were crucial to purchase choice. (Dobni and Zinkhan, 1990) Although the underlying idea and concept of brand image is not entirely new, it did inspire the marketers in the late nineteenth century concern with a brand
RJTA Vol. 4 No. 2 61

gestalt from the progressive developments in branding, advertising and marketing techniques that took place during that era (Murphy, 1987; Dobni and Zinkhan, 1990) 2.3 Brand Image

Herta Herzog suggested that brands, like product types, are perceived by the consumer in the form of brand images. And Brand images is the sum of total of impressions the consumer receives from many sources: from actual experience and hearsay about the brand itself as well as its packaging, its name, the company making it, the types of people the individual has been using the brand, what was said in its advertising, as well as from the tone, format, type of advertising vehicle in which the product story was told (Britt, 1966) Actually, many scholars have proposed numerous definitions of brand image and there is little consensus regarding its appropriate definitions (Keller, 1993). These definitions have been grouped into five broads categories include blanket definitions, and those which emphasize symbolism, meanings or messages, personification, and cognitive or psychological dimensions (Dobni and Zinkhan 1990). Keller (1993) defined brand image as perceptions about a brand as reflected by the brand associations held in consumers memory. This definition is consistent with Herzogs definition. In Kellers definition, brand association is divided into four types, which are 1) types of brand association (can be classified into three major categories: attributes, benefits, and attitudes); 2) favourability of brand associations: 3) strength of brand associations; and 4) uniqueness of brand associations. Howard (1994) defined brand image as the consumers total understanding of the brand. It consists of three components 1) Brand recognitionthe physical characteristics by which the customer recognizes the brand. 2) Attitudethe strength of the brand of each of the relevant benefits on a favorable-unfavorable scale as judged by the consumer; 3) Confidence the strength of the consumers feeling about his ability to determine accurately the quality of the brand. Actually, the first three components of brand association in Kellers model can be operationalized as the attitude component of Howards model, which uses the benefit-importance-performance measurement approach (Howard, 1994). Actually, after the first introduction of the concept of brand image in 1955, many imagery researches emerged. Many researchers investigated the relationship between brand image and the consumers self-image, and so many congruity studies of different products around. 3. SOME PREVIOUS RESEARCHES ON BRAND IMAGE AND SELF-IMAGE CONGRUITY STUDIES

Gardner and Levy (1955) and Levy (1959) initiated the self-image and product image congruity research. The images of brands were crucial to the choice of purchase. Birdwell (1968) studied the brands of car and measured the extent to which self-image is congruent with purchase, he finally concluded that income is an enabling factor to the consumers ability to make purchase compatible with self-image. Other researchers, Grubb and Hupp (1968)s study was also supporting the self-congruity argument. Scheier (1980). It suggested that some consumers may be more concerned about the congruence between brands images and the private self, some may be more interested in this image congruence that are more visible to others. LaBarbera (1988), Mason (1984) got similar results. And discovered that consumers are affected by peer or social group when they were doing conspicuous consumption and they may use the branded product to
RJTA Vol. 4 No. 2 62

communicated with or impress others. Hong and Zinkhan (1995) used automobiles and shampoos as the testing object. Graeff (1997) studied consumption situations on the effects of brand image and consumer brand evaluations suggested that marketers can manage the effects of image congruence (between brand image and self-image) by promoting various consumption situations. The results of the studies are fruitful for researchers to further explore the imagery studies. However, at the same time, the meaning of brand image in such congruity studies is not the same as the aforesaid brand image. BRAND PERSONALITY AS BRAND IMAGE? Some pervious brand image studies seemingly use the term brand image but doing brand personality studies. They equated the image of a brand to a wide range of brand associations. They associate brand with a set of human characteristics, the personality traits of human being. Actually the researches compared the personality of the brand and the consumer to explain consumer behavior. However, the studies are with little explanation of the brand image and the components of it. Consequently, confusion of the term, brand image was found and the brand personality becomes brand image rather than just one of the inputs (e.g. brand association) to be considered. In fact, it does not mean that they used the term incorrectly, they just viewed brand image in another perspective. In Kellers and Howards definition, brand image related to brands more essential qualities rather than a reflection of brand. Actually, brand image should be much more than a set of psychological associations, the scope of a brand image should be broad rather than narrow. Unfortunately, most of us also think of the term brand image in a way that implies brand personality, since we tend to treat the projected image of a brand as the image of a person, and most of us used to equate brand image to brand personality. WHAT IS BRAND PERSONALITY? A brand personality can be defined as the set of human characteristics associated with a given brand. (Aaker 1997) Therefore it includes such characteristics as gender, age, socioeconomic class, as well as such classic human personality traits as warmth, concern, and sentimentality (Aaker 1996). We may wonder if brand personalities come from certain standard analysis or logic thought when the management building a brand. As a matter of fact, brand personalities are more emotion than logic-driven because they reflect the feelings people have about brands, and the way those brands transmit feelings back to them(Upshow, 1995) Anything related to the brand may contribute to the brand personality. Personalities can be derived from the founders of the brand, the spokesperson, the sponsors, the celebrity using the brand or even the users. Stable brand personality can offers competitive advantages to the company, and can sustain better brand loyalty. For example, a successful brand, Tommy Hilfiger, an American top three (in terms of sales) fashion label, which maintained a consistent brand personality that based on the association of the typical American who treasures the value of freedom and independence. CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS FOR FASHION MARKETING In consumer behavior research, researchers have focused on how brand personality with different variables affects brand preference. To measure the brand personality, some researchers tend to rely on ad hoc measurement scales which do not have enough theoretical support, and others may simply take measurement scales from personality psychology which are not validated in the context of brand and the product nature. A generalizable measurement
RJTA Vol. 4 No. 2 63

(the 5 dimensions of brand personality scale) was developed by Jennifer L. Aaker for brand personality in 1997. Actually this scale can be applied to the personality study of a particular industry or product and can generate a reliable result. For example, Siguaw, Mattila and Austin (1999) applied it to restaurant industry. The fashion market, which strongly depends on creating or maintaining a distinctive, desirable and constant image for adding value and brand differentiation, can also apply Aakers brand personality approach to identify key points of differentiation between brands within and across tiers of fashion brand. The clearly defined brand personality can help the marketers build and maintain brand image. Besides, Aakers personality scale can serve as a common language for fashion marketers and consumers and can act as the basis for the improvement in image communication. To conclude the above discussions in this paper, some implications for fashion marketing will be followed. There are four implications concerning fashion marketing as the result of the previous discussions in this paper. Firstly, in the fashion world, the market environment is increasingly competitive. Designer labels, for example Tommy Hilfiger, have found themselves competing with mass-market brands such as Gap and Banana Republic. At the same time, mass-market brands are looking for ways to hook consumers, as the lower price strategy cannot fully satisfy the consumers wants. When consumers buy an item they may evaluate brands in terms of their image. An appropriate brand image is crucial for fashion brand to succeed. But brand image in a broad sense (in Kellers and Howards definition) is very different from the brand image in a narrow sense which may just refer to brand personality. Therefore, a fashion firm should pay more attention on this aspect. Secondly, fashion marketers tend to use image elements on its marketing communication program. The marketing communication strategy can be categorized as the Image Strategy i.e. to build a personality for the product or create an image of the product user (Ogilvy, 1963). Actually it is a personality strategy used to create symbolic value to satisfy consumer psychological needs. Alternatively, it can be the Unique Selling proposition (USP) Strategy (Reeves, 1961) i.e. to inform consumers of one or more key benefits that are perceived to be highly functional. In the fashion industry, marketers would adopt Image strategy or USP strategy in their advertisements. For example a local brand, Giordano, used the USP strategy directly on its ads to promote the wrinkle-free pants. Also it did use Image strategy to convey a simple and friendly image to the public. Their advertisement with a slogan, World without strangers, was one of the best examples. Brand may interchange these two common approaches on different advertisements. However, most fashion firms would like to adopt the Image Strategy for building a desirable personality for their brand. It is because fashion has been regarded as an image product in the narrow sense of communicating a psychological to symbolic image. And such, they found an appealing image, say, an elegant personality, could really attract their target consumers. According to Malsows hierarchy of needs (Malsow, 1970), when the needs in lower level (physiological and safety needs) were satisfied, consumer would find ways (maybe a purchase) to satisfy his/her higher needs, such as esteem need or even self-actualization. This group of higher-level need consumers is relatively sensitive to the image/personality stimulus. And it also explains why this strategy is effective in many cases. Thirdly, the marketers of high tier fashion brands more frequently use Image Strategy than the medium to low tier brands. For instance, Celine projects elegant and mature personality while Dunhill projects a successful and upper class personality in their communication
RJTA Vol. 4 No. 2 64

programs. It may be because high tier brands possess relatively high level of perceived quality and reliability. This may not be necessary for marketers to use functional benefit(s) to persuade purchase. Actually other than functional and symbolic benefits, experiential benefits (Park et al., 1986; Keller 1993; Leung et al., 2000a) are also found relevant in the fashion purchase. Marketers can also create marketing communication programs to appeal to the consumer by the experiential approach. An experiential need is also a sort of hidden needs which can be essential for the consumer with high level needs. Finally, the individual in postmodern society is threatened by a number of dilemmas of the self (Giddens, 1991). Also, consumers use consumption as a process of searching selfidentity. Based on the concepts of postmodern marketing, the emotion driven model was developed (Elliott and Wattanasuwan, 1998). This model is very different from the traditional and rational models, such as the information-processing model which was suggested by Keller (1993) and Howard (1994). The emotion driven model is an alternative approach to understand consumer choice. It simply claims that emotion can direct consumers choice and preference. Maybe this model can shed some light on better explaining the fashion consumption behaviour in a recent study which uses a traditional information-processing model (Leung et al., 2000b). Nowadays the Generation X consumers, who were born in the wealthy era (i.e. the mid 60s to early 70s) appear to indulge in consumption, especially emotional consumption, as a means of psychological satisfaction. As such, it is expected that the emotion image stimuli can readily affect the fashion consumers purchasing behaviour, not to mention their brand choice.

RJTA Vol. 4 No. 2 65

REFERENCES Aaker, J.L. (1997), "Dimensions of Brand Personality", Journal of Marketing Research, (August 1997), pp. 347-356. Birdwell, A.E. (1968), A Study of the Influence of Image Congruence on Consumer Choice, Journal of Business, 41, pp. 76-78. Blackett, T.(1991), Brand Valuation, (2nd ed.), Business Books Limited, London, Sydney, 2. Britt, S.H. (1966), Consumer Behaviour and the Behavioral Sciences: Theories and Applications, New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. de Chernatony, L. and DallOlmo Riley, F. (1997), "The chasm between managers' and consumers' views of brands: the experts' perspectives", Journal of Strategic Marketing, pp. 89-104. Dodni, D. and Zinkhan, G.M. (1990), In Search of Brand Image: a foundation analysis, Advance in Consumer Research, vol. 17, p. 110. Elliott,R. and Wattanasuwan, K. (1998), Brands as symbolic resources for the construction of identity, International Journal of Advertising, 17(2), pp. 131-144 Gardner, B.B. and Levy, S.J. (1955), "The Product and the Brand", Harvard Business Review, (March-April 1955), pp. 33-39. Graeff, T.R. (1997), Consumption Situations and the Effects of Brand Image on Consumers Brand Evaluations, Psychology & Marketing, Vol. 14(1), (January 1997), pp. 49-70. Giddens, A. (1991), Modernity and Self-Identity: Self and Society in the late Modern Age, Cambridge: Polity Press. Hong, J.W. and Zinkhan, G.M. (1995), Self-concept and advertising and effectiveness: The influence of congruency, conspicuousness, and response mode, Psychology & Marketing, Vol. 12(1), (January 1995), pp. 53-77. Howard, J.H. (1989), Buyer Behavior in Marketing Strategy, Second Edition, Prentice Hall, pp. 27-42. Keller, K.L. (1993), Conceptualizing, Measuring , and Managing Customer-Based Brand Equity, Journal of Marketing, Vol.57, (January 1993), pp. 1-22. LaBarbera, P. (1988), The nouveaux riches: conspicuous consumption and the issue of self fulfillment, Research in Consumer Behaviour, 3, pp. 179-210. Leung,C.S., Zhang, Z.M. and Lee, T.S.(2000a), Brand Image Marketing: Salient benefits Sought by Fashion Consumers for Needs Fulfillment, forthcoming in The Journal of Textile Institute.

RJTA Vol. 4 No. 2 66

Leung,C.S., Zhang, Z.M. and Lee, T.S.(2000b), Paper Under Preparation. Levy, S.J. (1958), Symbols by which we buy, Advancing Marketing Efficiency, American Marketing Association, pp. 409-416. Levy, S.J. (1959), Symbols for Sale, Harvard Business Review, 37, pp. 117-124. Levy, S.J. and Glick, I.O. (1973), Imagery and Symbolism, Marketing Managers Handbook, Steward H. Britt, Editor (Chicago, II. : Dartnell). Malsow, A.H. (1970), Motivation and Personality, 2nd ed., New York: Harper & Row . Mason, R. (1984), Conspicuous consumption: a literature review, European Journal of Marketing, 18(3), pp. 26-39. McEnally, M. and Chernatony L. de (1999), The Evolving Nature of Branding: Consumer and Managerial Considerations, Academy of Marketing Science Review, 02-99. Oglivy. D. (1963) Confessions of an advertising man. New York: Ballantine Books. Park, C.W., Jaworski, B.J. and Maclnnis, D.J. (1986), Strategic Brand Concept-Image Management, Journal of Marketing, Vol.50, October, pp. 135-145 Reeves, R. (1961) Reality in advertising, New York: Alfred A. Knopf. Scheier, M. (1980), Effects of public and private self-consciousness on the public expression of personal beliefs, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 19, pp. 205-222. Siguaw J.A., Mattila, A. and Austin, J.R. (1999) The Brand Personality Scale: An Application for Restaurants, Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, pp. 48-55. Upshow, Lynn B. (1995), Building Brand Identity, A strategy for success in hostile marketplace, John Wiley & Sons, Inc, pp. 15-16. Watkins, T. (1986), The Economics of Brand: A Marketing Analysis, New York: McGraw Hall, 3.

RJTA Vol. 4 No. 2 67